quote: If the majority of Palestinians came out tomorrow and yelled "PEACE" at the top of their lungs, but one crazy bomber took out a busload of people in Tel Aviv, the Israeli military would still launch a blood missile attack, or tank attack, or some kind of attack on the terrorist group that supported it. A dozen innocent people would be killed, and they'd probably miss the leader they were aiming for.
You have absolutely no idea of what is going on here. Your ignorance is shining through. You're speculating.
The IDF, for a start off, would break in to Gaza and hunt the people down individually in such a case. That is even if there would be an attempt of hunting them down. And that's assuming an impossible situation in which the simple people would want peace so powerfully that they would scream it out but not hunt down the terrorists.
Another thing: the IDF does not miss the people they're hunting for. They get them and another 117 people, but they get them. So you get that, and please be a little more careful about your elaborate speculations.
quote: Every argument you make against Palestine and for Israel can be turned right back around and used the other way.
In 1929 the local Arabs, who became "Palestinians" later on, atarted attacking the Jews in Hebron who were, mind you, very friendly with the locals. Some extremist group came and butchered the Jews. There was no provocation on the Jews' side "justifying" that for years before. Nothing "justifying" such a response.
So no, not everything can be turned the other way. Neither on this side, nor the other side.
Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
There is one distinction worth making, though. The attacks on Palestinians are largely carried out by the government that supposedly rules them (until the recent creation of the PA as a supposedly quasi-autonomous governing entity) whereas the attacks by Palestinians on Jews have been largely the acts of a lunatic fringe with varying degrees of support from within the Palestinian populace in general.
I think its absolutely insane for the Israeli government to expect anyone to control the terrorists when they couldn't do it with superior weapons. Figuring that Palestinians are going to rat out the Hammas members in their midst is ignoring two very important things: 1) Collaborators are killed and their families become pariahs. 2) Israel (the government) hasn't given the average Palestianian much reason to suspect that turning informer is going to be rewarded.
I think the problem is that things REALLY need to change in the hearts and minds of everyone. And the rule of law has to become the standard, not the exception.
And, retaliation needs to stop for good.
Unfortunately, I see that the religions include extremists bent on destruction, and the governments on both sides are too bloody-minded to have that be a reality any time soon.
(btw, Jesus was a lot like Ghandi too... the people in power engineered his death rather than lose control of the local government)
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ghandi was killed three years ago by a Palestinian. Isn't that ironic...
Named Ghandi not for his ideology but because of a costume he wore in Purim (a Jewish holiday) as a kid.
Ghandi was a right-wing extremist, and nasty on personal terms: my grandmother grew up with him and said that he was always a cruel bully, hitting kids smaller than him, and ripping flies' wings off while they were still alive and tying them to his pencil so they would drag it like horses with a carriage.
However, he contibuted a lot to Israel and devoted his life to the country in the way he believed to be true, and he did not commit in person any crime against innocents. I'll credit him for that.
Posts: 803 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
Yes, you're quite correct. More Palestinian civilians are dead than are Israeli, and I know there are arguments that mean they are the more greatly wronged party, but I don't agree with those arguments. Because the Israelis don't murder civilians just to be murdering civilians.
I'd like to see a report, Lyrhawn, of when the last time it was that Israel launched missiles into an apartment complex full of families to kill one terrorist.
If you can do so, well then I can just point out that while such is not the norm for Israelis, it is commonplace for Palestinians.
quote:Why have so many more Palestinian civilians died than Israeli? I fully expect you to come back with either the "it's their own fault" defense, or the "they were in the wrong place at the wrong time" defense. Both are crap, sorry to say.
Thanks, but I don't need you to make my statements for me. So many more Palestinian civilians have died than Israelis because Israel is hampered by having to respond with a conventional military force, which cannot be as surgical in its avoidance of civilian casualties as can the Palestinians in their targetting of civilians. Also because of their perhaps incorrect unwillingness to do nothing in response to terrorism from a military standpoint-which is what you'd apparently prefer, because that's about the only way they could avoid civilian death in their conflict.
I'm not 'blinded' by what the Palestinians have done. Like you, I support one side more than another. Just 'more'. That doesn't mean I sign on the dotted line or anything.
And as for your fantasy...let's bring it back to reality. First of all, the majority of Palestinians don't yell things like that. What they're yelling is things like, "Death to Israel!" And after they've yelled that and another busload is murdered, well then they'd be cheering that in the streets too. And then when the IDF comes in, like JH says, they'd throw stones and bottles and shoot at and throw molotov cocktails at the troops.
So no, I'm sorry, not every argument I'm using can be 'turned around the other way'. Palestinians have decided to endorse or at least permit the deliberate, targetted murder of exclusively civilian targets to achieve their goals. Israel has not. Thus Israel has more of my support. Motive means something to me, but I realize it is just 'semantics' to some.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As in neither group of people are the majority carrying out the killings, I tend to care little for reasons. Most of the people killed by the Israeli military weren't terrorists. Most of the people killed by the Palestinian terrorists weren't Israeli military. The notion on both sides is that it is acceptable to kill among the large population of non-combatants, regardless of any "intent" behind their efforts.
And even considering the reasons for carrying out the killings -- the notion that an institution killing more civilians than the terrorists it attempts to flush out because it doesn't care enough to choose methods that, while less sure, preserve civilian lives isn't just as wrong as those terrorists frightens me.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jonathan Howard: Why would Germany and Great Britain be held responsible? Britain should be held responsible more critically about Africa, and why are you blaming Germani? For the Nazi regime?
If so, you'd be surprised at what Nazis' grandsons and granddaughters do - they come here, to Israel, and help the old Holocause survivors.
But it's a different government now, why blame it?
Why is Great Britain responsible?
quote:In an interview with a British magazine, the New Statesman, Mr Straw spoke of quite serious mistakes made, especially during the last decades of the empire.
He said the Balfour Declaration of 1917 - in which Britain pledged support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine - and the contradictory assurances given to Palestinians, were not entirely honourable.
"The Balfour declaration and the contradictory assurances which were being given to Palestinians in private at the same time as they were being given to the Israelis - again, an interesting history for us, but not an honourable one," he said. BBC
As for Germany, I was under the impression that the Holocaust was one of the main motivations for the large wave of Jewish immigration to Israel in the 1940s and 50s.
In fact, you once stated that:
quote:The Scroll of Independence, Tom, says that the nation of Israel is a Jewish nation, and a nation of the Jewish people - refugees of the Holocaust;
The German government does pay reparations to Holocaust victims (although not always voluntarily and not always without the threat of litigation). Therefore, it is recognized that Germany is still responsible for its actions in WWII.
[ August 21, 2005, 12:20 PM: Message edited by: Beren One Hand ]
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Expanding a bit: I think your point would hold more weight if Israel looked like it was taking serious efforts to minimize civilian casualties over the years.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Name a method that both apprehends and kills terrorists yet minimizes civilian casualties, fugu. Please. The terrorists go out of their way to shield themselves with civilians. They strike from civilian neighborhoods and return there.
I think the fact that Israel-the one with all the guns and tanks-hasn't killed vastly more civilians than it has is indicator enough that, unlike Palestinians, it cares at least a little about preventing civilian death.
And that Israel cares at all when its own innocent children are being targetted just because they're innocent children-not because some Israeli general is at Career Day at school-is a pretty weighty point to me.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Most of the people killed by the Israeli military weren't terrorists.
Isn't it factual that the Israeli military does not intentionally kill Palestinian innocents, that most of the civilian deaths are accidental? That the terrorists and their supporters intentionally hide themselves in the middle of civilians?
Isn't it also true that the terrorists intentionally kill innocent civilians?
edit: Wow, it's like I don't read the whole thread or something before posting. :/
posted
I agree with you, Storm Saxon (*gasp!* ). But I think they're taking issue with the choice of words, 'accidental'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That terrorists hide themselves among civilians does not reduce the Israeli military's moral responsibility towards those civilians.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'd like to see a report, Lyrhawn, of when the last time it was that Israel launched missiles into an apartment complex full of families to kill one terrorist.
It happened once, I remember, and it was regarded as such a vile move (17 killed) and the [then] head of the airforce, who's now the Marshall, is still hated for it. Ever since then they assasinated pople in person (destroying Rantisi's car, for instance - not blowing up his building).
quote: The German government does pay reparations to Holocaust victims (although not always voluntarily and not always without the threat of litigation). Therefore, it is recognized that Germany is still responsible for its actions in WWII.
True, but remember that it was a German-initiated move. The government or whoever felt bad for what the previous regime did, but by no means was it responsible for the predecessor's actions!
quote: Ghandi was a right-wing extremist, and nasty on personal terms: my grandmother grew up with him and said that he was always a cruel bully, hitting kids smaller than him, and ripping flies' wings off while they were still alive and tying them to his pencil so they would drag it like horses with a carriage.
Vicious, as he was in the army, but such perception! How could he grab those flies so rapidly?
The bottom line is that neither side is perfect; Lyrhawn is a little too affected by the media (in my opinion) - both sides are vastly different and incomparable; and now that Israel is out of the territories, finally Jewish fanaticism might be significantly down and both sides can start controlling themselves - going towards peace in the long term.
But Israel is only one of the frontiers...
Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not think they have a moral responsibility to those civilians greater than they do towards their own citizens.
After all, terrorists often hide themselves among civilians with the collusion of those civilians-who could anonymously turn them in, as well-although to be fair not without some danger to themselves.
I don't think Israel's moral responsibility includes, "Do nothing if it will result in civilian death." I mean, it's a cliched and often horribly used statement, but by doing so, terrorists win. Because terrorists are always willing to sacrifice civilian life in exchange for their goals, in a one-for-one trade.
Israel has to do something, or else the people who mastermind suicide bombings will return to do it again.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those civilians use Israel's infrastructure, live on land Israel protects, and work in Israeli businesses. They are for intents and purposes Israeli nationals.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regardless of your slant on the issue, this slideshow from LeMonde is pretty moving.
Personally, I find the images of Israeli tanks bulldozing their own settlements in the name of peace pretty admirable and awe-inspiring.
Posts: 67 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know about you, Annie, but I'm not awe-inspired by destroying a settlement that the locals set on fire before they evacuated - in front of 18 year-olds' faces.
But hey, that's just me.
Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, Rakeesh, Israel protects that land from the few terrorists among them. Most of them just live there and are protected.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Apparently my point was missed, though I blame myself for not articulating it well enough. My point was not that the majority of Palestinians in fact would come out tomorrow, my point was about Israel's response. Fringe crazies kill innocent Israelis and Israel's government feels forced to reply in kind every time, and thus the cycle of violence continues.
And my apologies JH, I was referring to the current argument over Palestine vs. Israel and who has more right to be there, and who does more or less or what not to further or ruin the cause of peace. If you want to go back in time, then yes, you can find arguments on both sides that cannot be used for the other. I guess I was speaking in more of generalities and not specifics, in which case nothing would be reversible.
Rakeesh -
It's hard not to reply vehemently to your replies, as yours are so vehement themselves. But anyway, as JH stated, Israel has done, at least once, as I claimed. Not that it matters, because you never really cared if I could prove it or not, you just wanted to be able to call me a liar. But that's fine.
quote:So no, I'm sorry, not every argument I'm using can be 'turned around the other way'. Palestinians have decided to endorse or at least permit the deliberate, targetted murder of exclusively civilian targets to achieve their goals. Israel has not. Thus Israel has more of my support. Motive means something to me, but I realize it is just 'semantics' to some.
You say Palestinians have endorse or permit. Again I really want to know what you personally would do. You don't have the power to stop them yourself, so you what, support the Palestinian Authority? Well, if the IDF can't stop the terrorists, the PA wouldn't have a chance at regulating a rowdy soccer match. So then what? What is your solution Rakeesh? You don't seem to care about the Palestinians all that much. You refer to them as if one terrorist represents the entire people. As if Bush represented all of America, which I'm sure half of America resents.
I don't live in a fantasy land, and I'm not as ignorant as you think, though I freely admit I don't know as much as I could about the situation, but I doubt it's that much less than most people here.
quote: I think the fact that Israel-the one with all the guns and tanks-hasn't killed vastly more civilians than it has is indicator enough that, unlike Palestinians, it cares at least a little about preventing civilian death.
And what is that based on? Where are your figures on what an army who didn't care would do in the way of civilian casualties? You're creating arbitrary, fictional amounts to make what has already happened sound reasonable, or at least excusable.
You're not so thinly accusing me of supporting Palestinians and terrorism, and all that they do, while being blind to the evil that comes out of their cause. I'm not. You however seem the opposite, you're supporting Israel, and seemingly defend Israel on every issue, regardless of what that issue is, so long as you don't end up supporting the other side of the argument.
quote: Lyrhawn is a little too affected by the media
Perhaps, but what other outlets for information are there? I look on the internet, I read TIME magazine, I watch CNN, in other words, I try to stay informed. But short of actually flying to Gaza, what do you think I should do to stay informed on the subject?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
I got through today praying silently for the situation there to be the start of something better for everyone in the region, and, by extension, a lesson for the entire world.
I have nothing left but prayer.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well...basically, I just am worried. From what I heard, they've left the most difficult settlements for last. And the confrontations are getting worse. Apparently today (earlier today) the protesters threw stuff at the military, including some flammable liquids. I don't know if that's true, but it just sounds like things are not going to be as peaceful as I hope.
And then, there's the question of what Israel expects once the pullout is complete. Will one bad action by a small group of Palestinians make Israel react violently with LESS restraint because the risk of local retaliation is less?
I'm just worrying a lot.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: Apparently today (earlier today) the protesters threw stuff at the military, including some flammable liquids. I don't know if that's true, but it just sounds like things are not going to be as peaceful as I hope.
They've been doing that from Day One at Neveh Dekalim.
Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And what's so surprising? They're not called "youth of the hills" for nothing. For the past ten years they've been doing whatever they wanted to.
Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
). But I think they're taking issue with the choice of words, 'accidental'.
