quote:Rakeesh, as I waqas quite clear in my condemnation of both sides of the conflict, your anti-militant rhetoric, no matter how justified, can do no damage to my argument as I have never defended terrorist attacks. Your claim that the IDF does not systematicly target civilians is laughable:
Yes it can, because your argument is based primarily in statements like these:
quote:Alright, I admit that was unfair. The actual history of Israel would be to say that they took what they were suposed to share as their own and then proceeded to invade neighboring territories.
Yeah, and without any provocation they invaded!
How liberating to know that theft and murder arn't wrong, just unpopular.
This is a criticism of the Israelis, not of both parties-however you try to spin it after the fact.
The war between the two states is not only tragic in the way which all wars are but made more tragic by the fact that both sides openly and willingly target civilians as much as or more than military targets.
And here's the real bulls*@! right here. The IDF does target civilians, but it does not target civilians for murder and maiming nearly to the extent its enemies do. Or is somehow bulldozing Palestinian homes equivalent to murders its occupants?
I have often been ashamed of my country's actions, but the immorality of the U.S. and other western powers pales in comparision to the tactics used by Israel in its war against Palestinian militants. No other Western industrialized democracy has, in the post-Cold War era, displayed the same flagrent disregard for international standards on human rights as has Israel.
Yeah, this is a real overall criticism of both parties for sure.
So! In conclusion, Pelegius, don't put words into my mouth, and address your defense to the actual statements you have made here. Not the ones you thought of after they were criticized.
Your assertion that the IDF targets civilians just as thorougly and just as harshly as does its enemies was then and is now complete, hypocritical nonsense, obvious to anyone who understands what kind of casualities a First World military force can truly inflict.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Voting Hamas into a leadership position, and into any sort of position that implies legitimacy is risky.
If Hamas does nothing to change, and really shows to the world that they, and their constituents are really just out for murder and mayhem, then they've shot themselves in the foot, and given Israel all the moral authority it needs to do whatever necessary to protect itself.
They're gambling, that when Hamas is in charge, it will have to grow up, more or less, and that if the will of the people really is, as a majority, peaceful, that Hamas will have to conform to that. Mahmoud Abbas is hoping so too. He's trying to keep all the groups from flaring into outright civil war, and Israel appears to be giving him some leeway, but not much. Calling for the referendum on recognizing Israel is a good move. If/when the people vote for recognition, Hamas' moderates will have the power they need to push for change. They are like any other political organization, in that they have their hardliners and their moderates, and all the rest.
If he gets the vote, and if the people vote the right way...it backs Hamas into a corner, and they'll have to change, or go against the people, and we'll be in uncharted waters. If they concede, it changes the nature of the game a bit.
It's a lot of ifs, but it could be good.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh. Forgive for not adopting a posistion so relativist that I am willing to state that "target[ing] civilians for murder and maiming [less that] its enemies do" makes Israel a paragon of moral virtue.
Perhaps I must remind you of how civilized countries behave when they are faced with militants within their borders. The record of the British in Northern Ireland has been less than ideal, I do not deny that by any means. However, Britian, when faced with the same problem as Israel did not engage in a systematic, racialy based, pogrom designed to punish the Irish "nation" for the acts of IRA militants, nor did they, for that matter, ever even deny the right of self-determenation, a right which the U.N., your sworn enemy I know, has declared universal. Israel's behaviour is unworthy of any state, much less one that wishes to be know as a liberal democracy.
The irony is that I like Israel, quite a bit actualy, I have great respect for the ability of the early Israelis to recover from one of the greatest tragidies of the 20th century, a century filled with great sorrow in which the sorrow of the European Jews managed to stand out. I admire the kibbutzim, as quixotic as they were. I even admire the ability of Israel to repel attacks by larger states.
I cannot, however, make apologies for the tactics used against Palestine which cause an excessive degree of suffering to the ordinary people living there who, above all, desire peace. With every house bulldozed, with every child shot, Israel amasses an army that will destroy it, unless they learn to beat their swords into plaughshares.
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!" How can any nation which has, for so long, lived under opresion, be so willing to opress? In the end, has the nation of Israel progressed beyond the killing of the Caananites? But, I speak falsly, for I know that Israeli bombs and bulldozers speak no more for the people of Israel than suicide bombers do for Palestine.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Rakeesh. Forgive for not adopting a posistion so relativist that I am willing to state that "target[ing] civilians for murder and maiming [less that] its enemies do" makes Israel a paragon of moral virtue.
You're dodging and twisting yet again. You must be a contortionist in meatspace, because you know I have never said that Israel is a 'paragon of virtue' nor have I asked you to accept such a position.
I have, however, insisted that you drop the stupid, unsupported claim that the IDF targets civilians for death and injury to the extent its enemies do, i.e. nearly exclusively. You have yet to do this, first equating bulldozing homes and other property rights violations (serious and deeply harmful, yes) with outright murder. That's why I keep using the word 'stupid', by the way. Then you insist that Israel is no paragon of virtue.
quote:However, Britian, when faced with the same problem as Israel did not engage in a systematic, racialy based, pogrom designed to punish the Irish "nation" for the acts of IRA militants, nor did they, for that matter, ever even deny the right of self-determenation, a right which the U.N., your sworn enemy I know, has declared universal. Israel's behaviour is unworthy of any state, much less one that wishes to be know as a liberal democracy.
First of all, let's get real: IRA terrorism was never nearly as serious a problem for Britain as Palestinian terrorism is for Israel. The IRA never said, "We want to utterly destroy Britain and won't be happy until we do!" So your comparison falls flat on that count. Second, the IRA didn't kill nearly as many British civilians as Palestinian terrorists have Israeli. Third, if you asked the Irish, they might have a very different perspective on how nobly the British treated then. Fourth, the UN is not my 'sworn enemy'.
quote:The irony is that I like Israel, quite a bit actualy, I have great respect for the ability of the early Israelis to recover from one of the greatest tragidies of the 20th century, a century filled with great sorrow in which the sorrow of the European Jews managed to stand out. I admire the kibbutzim, as quixotic as they were. I even admire the ability of Israel to repel attacks by larger states.
Sure you do. Somehow, I don't buy it. It seems like a smokescreen to me. "Early Israelis were great. These Israelis are scumbags, though." Whatever. Anyway, it's ironic you mention their ability to repel attacks by larger states as something you admire.
You do know the circumstances under which Gaza was seized, don't you? And the West Bank? And you do know how exactly most Palestinians came to be evicted, right? You couldn't possibly be so ill-informed to not know that the areas were seized after a failed war of conquest by its neighbors-which was nearly lost-and that many Palestinians were 'evicted' because they left voluntarily in order to not be there when their buddies the neighboring Arab states wiped out Israel, so they could return later?
quote:I cannot, however, make apologies for the tactics used against Palestine which cause an excessive degree of suffering to the ordinary people living there who, above all, desire peace. With every house bulldozed, with every child shot, Israel amasses an army that will destroy it, unless they learn to beat their swords into plaughshares.
You not only don't apologize, you lie about what their real tactics are. 'Not apologizing' is something I can respect. And no one who has examined Palestinian culture for more than about three-and-a-half minutes can so blithely say they desire peace 'above all else'. While I do believe the majority of Palestinians do desire peace-and not necessarily with the destruction of Israel-there is another desire right next to that one. A desire you're ignoring in favor of castigating the Israelis, whom you 'admire'.
quote:But, I speak falsly, for I know that Israeli bombs and bulldozers speak no more for the people of Israel than suicide bombers do for Palestine.
Israel does not cheer when a Palestinian child is killed the way Palestinians do when an Israeli child is killed. So, Palestinian suicide bombers do speak more for them than Israeli bulldozers and bombs do for Israelis. You know how I know? Because Israelis protest against such things, many of them. There are factions within the Israeli government which openly and repeatedly express a less hard-line view. Show me where that is with the Palestinians.
I dare you.
But no, you'll merely ignore and contort and skip away from everything. Maybe even using some nice Biblical quotes, while you're at it!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Israel will always need swords. Well maybe not always, but I don't see a time in the next hundred years when one of the Arab or Persian nations won't unleash on Israel if they show even the slightest of dulled swords.
It's their vigilance and their reputation that has kept their enemies at bay for so long. Their problem is that the Palestinian militants leave them few outs. They can't do nothing, or the Israeli people will protest, loudly, and either way, the will of the people should move a democracy, and the people demand action.
But whenever they actually do something, it always involves a strike from afar, or a massive military incursion. Personally I think they'd be better off using all special forces to abduct militants and then try them, but that would be a bloody business. And then the option that Lisa often espouses, and I'm not putting words in her mouth here, is to ship them all off to wherever, so long as it isn't in Israel. That option isn't really viable, politically, or realistically. No one would take them, so Israel would have to either force someone to take them, or just dump them at the border and shoot anyone who tries to come back in. It'll never work, the business of forcing them out alone would involve a massive amount of deaths from people refusing to leave, or fighting back.
Their restraint over the years is admirable, but in recent years has looked a lot like overkill without a looming international threat, without them just being in their infancy in terms of nationhood. And until recently they have rarely, if ever, ever done something to blatently hurt the Palestinian civilians. With the changing face of the situation over there, I think they would do better to promote Mahmoud Abbas, and make him appear as their only real hope for peace, which they have been doing a bit. With Arafat gone, one of the major impediments to peace is gone. I also think Israel should help enforce his decisions, like calling for the election.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Which is more imporant, the moral authority of the Jewish people, or the safety and security of Israel?
I think this question is extremely important because while I believe Jews can be a shining light unto the world (or however you would prefer that the call as G_d's chosen people be phrased), I don't believe that this status will survive the kind of program you espouse with respect to removing the Palestinians from the areas in/near Israel.
I am, of course, assuming that this plan could not be accomplished without violence, since the Palestinians would not go willingly.
I submit that if Israel does embark on that kind of program, the end result will be:
1) large scale war in the Middle East 2) possible destruction of Israel 3) possible World War
Whatever else Israel decides to do to be secure in its state, kicking out the Palestinians is not going to be a reasonable solution that leads to long term peace and security, IMO.
I may be wrong, but even from the most hawkish perspective I can imagine, I don't see this as a solution that will go from a brief period of unpleasantness to peace and security for Israel.
I think there's at least some reasonable expectation of a world wide anti-Jewish backlash as well -- depending on just exactly how draconian the treatment of the Palestinians becomes.
Whatever else it has going for it, Israel doesn't really have the wherewithal to make it without support from other countries and from people living outside of Israel.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Whatever else it has going for it, Israel doesn't really have the wherewithal to make it without support from other countries and from people living outside of Israel.
I think part of Lisa's (or, actually, the person she's quoting) argument is that thinking that Israel needs the support of other countries is causing much of the problem. Israel is supposed to rely on God - not in the sense of doing nothing for themselves, but in the sense of not putting faith in things other than God and God's word. That is, stopping the attempts to gain the world's favor and starting to do live as God has commanded is all that is necessary to ensure preservation of Israel.
I'm not venturing an opinion one way or another on the core concept, but I don't think your contention that Israel needs the good will of the world is really relevant to the underlying premise.
However, your question as to how Israel can "illuminate[] the world with its morality and G-dly conduct" while undertaking forced relocation is very relevant and very well put.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm wondering where the US fits into that scenario Bob.
With the US having such a large force in the area, I'm betting Israel feels a bit more ballsy, but at the same time, the US could NEVER back that move, ever. If we simply stepped back and let whatever happens happen, then I think Saudi Arabia moves into the picture, and that's where Israel runs into trouble. They are arguably the strongest most heavily armed Arab power in the Middle East. Israel would be hard pressed to fight off their US trained and armed air force AND their tank force. Especially not with Egypt, Jordan and Syria probably joining in. It's not the same situation it used to be. The only way I see them coming through an all out war is with US assistance, and after one bloody war in the Middle East, I find it hard to believe that the US will plunge into another one with the ENTIRE Middle East for the sake of a nation that is forcibly expelling a million and change people to whatever fate that fortune might hold for them.
How long do you think it will take for people to start calling this the 21st century of the Trail of Tears? The US already has it's history of forced exodus, we cannot repeat it again.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Lisa, why don't we all stop worrying about what others "think" and do whatever we please. How liberating to know that theft and murder arn't wrong, just unpopular.
Theft and murder are very wrong. I hope you aren't going to stoop to what Lyrhawn did the other day and try and claim that I'm saying something other than what I'm really saying.
If you're going to call me a liar behind my back, the least you could do is quote me.
Please point out where I misrepresented you.
You claimed that I think Palestinians are subhuman, and that killing them is therefore not murder. That was disgusting, and I pointed it out to Papa Janitor. The thread was locked shortly afterwards.
And it wasn't behind your back, Lyrhawn. This is a public forum. And in that thread (which was afterwards deleted), I called you one quite explicitly. I'm willing to accept an apology, though.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Rakeesh, it is by no means held to a different standard than the Palestinian State. The war between the two states is not only tragic in the way which all wars are but made more tragic by the fact that both sides openly and willingly target civilians as much as or more than military targets.
It's a shame that you'd make such an obviously false statement like this, and even worse that you'd emphasize it. Israel has sent ground soldiers in to fight door-to-door, resulting in heavy casualities on our side, when it would have been so much easier to soften the area up with shelling. And why? To avoid unnecessary civilian casualties on the other side.
Israel's policy is never to target civilians. Commissions of inquiry are held when civilians are hurt unnecessarily. The Arabs, on the other hand, name streets and schools after those who deliberately set out to massacre innocent civilians.
Only a moral leper could compare the two, let alone equate them.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Lisa, why don't we all stop worrying about what others "think" and do whatever we please. How liberating to know that theft and murder arn't wrong, just unpopular.
Theft and murder are very wrong. I hope you aren't going to stoop to what Lyrhawn did the other day and try and claim that I'm saying something other than what I'm really saying.
If you're going to call me a liar behind my back, the least you could do is quote me.
Please point out where I misrepresented you.
You claimed that I think Palestinians are subhuman, and that killing them is therefore not murder. That was disgusting, and I pointed it out to Papa Janitor. The thread was locked shortly afterwards.
And it wasn't behind your back, Lyrhawn. This is a public forum. And in that thread (which was afterwards deleted), I called you one quite explicitly. I'm willing to accept an apology, though.
You have repeatedly called Palestinians animals, and at best, a multimillion man band of murderers.
I'll apologize for saying that you said it behind my back, because you're right, it IS a public forum.
But I won't apologize for apparently misrepresenting your views. You've called them animals in the past, you've espoused them being removed from Israel by any means necessary. You treat them like, and talk about them like rats or vermin, and that's how I portrayed you. If you don't like it, then stop acting like you don't give a damn one way or another if they live or die.
And report me and email me to PJ all you want. You've never given me any indication that you think otherwise from what I stated, so I don't feel I owe you an apology, and I don't feel I was wrong.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Dag, it is very much that simple. Under the British/U.N. mandate the idea was very clear that Israel was suposed to be a place where Jews could come from all over the world, but not a soley Jewish state, which would involve deporting an Arab majority and an Armenian minority. Israel had every right to counter-attack during various wars, but not to hold territory for decades after the peace treaty had been signed.
What peace treaty? Are you in some parallel universe where a peace treaty was signed regarding the land taken from Jordan, Syria and Egypt in 1967? There was one with Egypt, and Israel gave back land that was twice as big as what's left.
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Your claim that the IDF does not systematicly target civilians is laughable:
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Rakeesh. Forgive for not adopting a posistion so relativist that I am willing to state that "target[ing] civilians for murder and maiming [less that] its enemies do" makes Israel a paragon of moral virtue.
Oh, it's not that, Pelagius. Is that you'd refer to demolishing the homes of terrorists as "targeting civilians for murder". I want to know your justification for that. Do you think those houses are demolished with bombs from the air, or something? Because they aren't. They're demolished like any house would be demolished. With a wrecking crew. That's murder?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Which is more imporant, the moral authority of the Jewish people, or the safety and security of Israel?
I think that's a false dichotomy, Bob. And it presupposes that what we're doing to protect our safety and security is somehow lacking in moral authority. You'll need to rephrase the question, or I'll simply treat it like any "Is it true you've stopped beating your wife" question.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I think this question is extremely important because while I believe Jews can be a shining light unto the world (or however you would prefer that the call as G_d's chosen people be phrased), I don't believe that this status will survive the kind of program you espouse with respect to removing the Palestinians from the areas in/near Israel.
Oh, I think it will. I think that if we're serious about carrying out God's will, and if we are consistent in doing so according to God's law, the world, while it will certainly be hysterical at first, will become accustomed to it. After all, you've grown accustomed to terrorist atrocities in only a few decades. Growing accustomed to determined and moral action shouldn't be that hard.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I am, of course, assuming that this plan could not be accomplished without violence, since the Palestinians would not go willingly.
I understand. I gathered that you were assuming that. You understand, though, that you could be wrong about that. Right? Who thought the Soviet Union would disappear without WWIII? History has a way of surprising us, Bob.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I submit that if Israel does embark on that kind of program, the end result will be:
1) large scale war in the Middle East 2) possible destruction of Israel 3) possible World War
Yes, Bob, I really do understand that you think this. I disagree.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Whatever else Israel decides to do to be secure in its state, kicking out the Palestinians is not going to be a reasonable solution that leads to long term peace and security, IMO.
On the contrary. It is the only solution that will lead to long term peace and security. And not just for us, but for the Arabs as well. They aren't happy there, Bob. They need to go somewhere where they can live their lives, be happy and fulfilled, and learn to have something other than hatred and murder in their hearts.
I don't want to be a hypocrite, and sound like I'm overflowing with concern for them and for their wellbeing. I'm not. But I will get pleasure, the kind that's the opposite of schadenfreude, from seeing them building positive lives for themselves wherever they wind up. I don't think they're bad people by nature.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I may be wrong, but even from the most hawkish perspective I can imagine, I don't see this as a solution that will go from a brief period of unpleasantness to peace and security for Israel.
Well, see, Bob, I don't look at things from a perspective of hawks and doves. I look at them from a perspective of what's right and wrong. And maybe I'm an optimist despite myself, but I really think that if we do the right thing, things will work themselves out in a positive way. And that that needs to be our guiding path, and not predicitions of gloom and doom from politicians and others.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I think there's at least some reasonable expectation of a world wide anti-Jewish backlash as well -- depending on just exactly how draconian the treatment of the Palestinians becomes.
Oh, Bob. I don't think anything is going to be "draconian". They'll just go to the other side of the border, that's all. And I'm sure we'll see to it that they get compensated for the loss of anything they own that gets lost along the way. At least after reparations are taken out for the crimes that have been committed against us. We don't want to hurt them. Honestly, we don't. But we can't allow them to continue trying to destroy us. That would be foolish on our part.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Whatever else it has going for it, Israel doesn't really have the wherewithal to make it without support from other countries and from people living outside of Israel.
I suspect you're wrong there, Bob. I really do. I think we have a source of support that's far more important and useful, at least so long as we do the right thing.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for not taking offense. I didn't intend any -- the 2nd paragraph was intended as part of the first thought and I didn't think how offensive separating the two might be, so thank you for not taking it that way.
If there were a peaceful way to get the majority of Palestinians to go elsewhere, I think the world would cheer. Mainly because the world in general probably doesn't give a hoot about anyone's claims to a place as "homeland" but rather much more about not having to deal with constant threat of violence -- and that mainly because it makes it harder to sell stuff in that locale.
And that same kind of mercenary attitude might extend to forgiving forced expatriation, or even genocide -- just so long as companies can sell their wares in the newly pacified territories.
As for terrorism -- I think it's a stretch to say that I'm used to it or accepting of it in any way (well, any way short of calling for the wholesale annihilation of everyone who shares the same ethnic background as the terrorists.)
I realize my response to terrorism may not rise to the level that yours does (as I can still empathize with the people who are genetic close relatives of terrorists), but I don't think that means I don't see "what's right." In fact, I think the RIGHT response to racial hatred is not more racial hatred.
But, hey, as long as you're advocating this "new" plan without a call to achieve it by "whatever means necessary" I'm at least thinking that we don't have to disagree much.
Re: history's surprises -- history could surprise us by having Arabs and Jews living peacefully inside Israel too. Do you leave open that possibility?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, the voice of Palestine, the voice of any country, is not found in its government. Heaven forbid that Hamas should speak for Palestine, or Bush for the U.S. The voice of nation is found in its children, in its old women and its poets.
quote: [terrorism] Involves serious violence against a person, endangering the lives of others, risks the health or safety of the public, serious damage to property, or serious interference with an electronic system designed to influence a government or intimidate the public in order to advance a political, religious or ideological cause
quote:Rakeesh, the voice of Palestine, the voice of any country, is not found in its government. Heaven forbid that Hamas should speak for Palestine, or Bush for the U.S. The voice of nation is found in its children, in its old women and its poets.
Unfortunately, the voice of Palestine seems to be including a lot of suicide bombers and people who applaud them.
Why are you willing to blame Israel as a whole for lesser crimes, yet excuse the Palestinians as a whole for celebrating and rewarding terrorists with their votes, their money, and their acclaim?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are factions within the Israeli government which openly and repeatedly express a less hard-line view. Show me where that is with the Palestinians.
There was an 18-month cease fire that Hamas called. It lasted until Israel fired on some beach-goers.
Hamas and Fatah agreed on a compromise deal to recognize Israel (On the Daily Show last Tuesday(?) Jon Stewart highlighted how this headline was an inch and a half away from the "Israeli jets attack Gaza targets" headline)
There are moderates and radicals in each camp. I just have trouble believing that the people of either side truly want war.
quote:Rakeesh: Why then should international standards be a moral compass? You're essentially saying, "Enough people are saying it so it's good." I believe there's a term for that.
I believe in the mission of the Human Rights Council, for example, not because most members of the UN support it, but because I believe there are some priviledges and immunities that we should protect for every human being. I don't trust any one state to act morally, because many states see reacting to perceived threats to national security as a valid excuse to violate human rights.
quote:
quote:Also, The Mossad motto is, "By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War
Is it possible you are so naive that you believe the Mossad is somehow unique in this? Especially in that region in the world?
no, I'm just saying that's not my motto.
On a separate issue, I just noticed this:
quote:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/733326.html The detention of Hamas parliamentarians in the early hours of Thursday morning had been planned several weeks ago and received approval from Mazuz on Wednesday. The same day, Shin Bet security service Director Yuval Diskin presented Prime Minister Ehud Olmert with the list of Hamas officials slated for detention.
Israel planned to arrest these people weeks ago? Before the kidnapping incident that they cited as provocation? Do I read this correctly?
quote:Rakeesh: I have a very difficult time refraining from heaping scorn on such nonsense, as you can see. Maybe when you truly apply a level standard of judgement, I'll find it easier.
I think terrorism sucks and that people who resort to it do not have the proper level of respect for their fellow human beings. I hate to hear reports of rockets being fired into Israel, at civillians. I hate it just as much when Palestinian civillians suffer for the actions of the terrorists among them. I think the public on either side of the fence/wall needs to renounce violence. I will try to hold Palestinian actions to the same standard that I judge Israeli actions by, but I do believe that the Israeli military is (much like the US) creating more terrorism by putting the Palestinian people in a state of constant desperation and uncertainty. I truly hope that the Israeli soldier is returned soon and that Israel will recognize this by repairing the power plant and infrastructure it has destroyed in these raids. Denying an enemy's civillian population water is a war crime, and I think this fits the bill. (On the other side of the issue, firing Qassam rockets into Israel is terrorism, and very wrong).
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dagonee, I hope that I have not come across as blaming Israel as a whole while excusing Palestine as a whole, although I am afraid that I may have.
So, let me be perfectly clear: the states of Israel and Palestine have both commited terrible crimes, as have many private citizens of both countries, particularly Palestinians. I do not deny this, no one can deny this if they value the truth. I do deny, must deny, that entire nations are guilty for the actions of governments. I have often seen this point made, and it is deeply repulsive to me.
The Nazis murdered millions, but we do not, can not, must not, hold the entire German nation culpable, but, rather, judge indviduals as they are, for the actions they have personaly commited, and not as Germans, Jews or Arabs.
This is the only argument I have ever made on this issue, other than to state my vague surport for a two state solution.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It lasted until Israel fired on some beach-goers.
This is, of course, proven.
quote:I hate it just as much when Palestinian civillians suffer for the actions of the terrorists among them.
Hey! How's that 18 month 'cease-fire'? Can I hear some more about that, and how it was the Israelis who broke it?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nato: On a separate issue, I just noticed this:
quote:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/733326.html The detention of Hamas parliamentarians in the early hours of Thursday morning had been planned several weeks ago and received approval from Mazuz on Wednesday. The same day, Shin Bet security service Director Yuval Diskin presented Prime Minister Ehud Olmert with the list of Hamas officials slated for detention.
Israel planned to arrest these people weeks ago? Before the kidnapping incident that they cited as provocation? Do I read this correctly?
It would be nice to think that this was true. I know I was not alone in my frustration over the refusal of the Israeli government to take any action in response to the constant shelling of Israeli towns from Palestinian-controlled territory. If this account is true, I might just be willing to consider Olmert a little less odious.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Destineer, thanks for the recommendation. When my people are being killed, my concern for the ethics of preventing it pretty much goes out the window.
I'm continually stunned at the fact that this should be a cause for astonishment, or even disagreement. I can only conclude that it's the ivory tower syndrome. I assure you that if your children were on the front line simply for existing, you would take a very different view.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Destineer, thanks for the recommendation. When my people are being killed, my concern for the ethics of preventing it pretty much goes out the window.
I'm continually stunned at the fact that this should be a cause for astonishment, or even disagreement. I can only conclude that it's the ivory tower syndrome. I assure you that if your children were on the front line simply for existing, you would take a very different view.
I don't consider myself to have a "people" the way you do, so you're right that I can't understand that part of your view. All humans except for my family and friends have about the same standing with me.
Are any of your literal children at risk, or is that a metaphor?
Would I commit moral wrong to protect those I care about? Definitely. But I would recognize that it was the wrong thing to do, even though I couldn't help myself because of how I felt. And I'd recognize that other people without the same personal feelings at stake would have every reason to resist me.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Dagonee, I hope that I have not come across as blaming Israel as a whole while excusing Palestine as a whole, although I am afraid that I may have.
So, let me be perfectly clear: the states of Israel and Palestine have both commited terrible crimes,
And your "proof" of this has been home demolitions. The destruction of physical buildings is, to you, comparable to murdering innocent civilians.
That's apparently what passes for "moderation" in your view. I hope that when you get older, you learn some perspective.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Destineer, thanks for the recommendation. When my people are being killed, my concern for the ethics of preventing it pretty much goes out the window.
I'm continually stunned at the fact that this should be a cause for astonishment, or even disagreement. I can only conclude that it's the ivory tower syndrome. I assure you that if your children were on the front line simply for existing, you would take a very different view.
I don't consider myself to have a "people" the way you do, so you're right that I can't understand that part of your view. All humans except for my family and friends have about the same standing with me.
People who support the indiscriminate murder of innocents going about their lives have the same standing with you as people who risk their own lives to minimize civilian casualties. Got it. I just wanted to make sure we were clear about things.
I disagree.
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: Are any of your literal children at risk, or is that a metaphor?
Would it matter? No, it's not a metaphor, but would it matter if it had been?
quote:Originally posted by Destineer: Would I commit moral wrong to protect those I care about? Definitely. But I would recognize that it was the wrong thing to do, even though I couldn't help myself because of how I felt.
See, that's two differences between us. I wouldn't commit a moral wrong to protect those I care about. I would hope that those I care about wouldn't want me to. I know I wouldn't want anyone to commit a moral wrong on my behalf.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:See, that's two differences between us. I wouldn't commit a moral wrong to protect those I care about. I would hope that those I care about wouldn't want me to. I know I wouldn't want anyone to commit a moral wrong on my behalf.
quote:When my people are being killed, my concern for the ethics of preventing it pretty much goes out the window.
Um... please explain how these two statements are consistent.
quote:Would it matter? No, it's not a metaphor, but would it matter if it had been?
Yeah, because I sympathize with those who would do anything to protect their biological children, but I have little sympathy for people who would do anything to protect those who share their nationality, religion or ethnic background.
Sorry to hear about your children.
quote:People who support the indiscriminate murder of innocents going about their lives have the same standing with you as people who risk their own lives to minimize civilian casualties.
Obviously I didn't mean that. What I did mean is that no other relationship, besides friendship or family, has any moral significance for me. For example, I don't care more about the lives of Americans than I do about Israelis, just because they're Americans.
quote:The consistency lies in what she deems to be a moral wrong.
That wouldn't make the two statements consistent. It would just mean that she does, in fact, care about the ethics of protecting her people.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:See, that's two differences between us. I wouldn't commit a moral wrong to protect those I care about. I would hope that those I care about wouldn't want me to. I know I wouldn't want anyone to commit a moral wrong on my behalf.
quote:When my people are being killed, my concern for the ethics of preventing it pretty much goes out the window.
Um... please explain how these two statements are consistent.
I think you need to explain why you see them as inconsistent.
quote:Originally posted by Destineer:
quote:People who support the indiscriminate murder of innocents going about their lives have the same standing with you as people who risk their own lives to minimize civilian casualties.
Obviously I didn't mean that. What I did mean is that no other relationship, besides friendship or family, has any moral significance for me.
Whereas I see a family relationship between all Jews. You don't have to agree, but that's where I'm coming from.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think you need to explain why you see them as inconsistent.
Well, in the first passage you say you wouldn't do anything immoral to protect your people. In the second, you seem to be saying that when your people's safety is at stake, you will act to protect them whether or not this involves doing something unethical. So according to your second statement, you would do something immoral to protect your people.
Have I misunderstood what you were trying to say?
(EDIT: I am assuming you think that "ethical" and "moral" are synonymous.)
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the issue is that there are levels of morality. For example, I don't consider that I have a moral imperative to give money to every panhandler that I pass on the street. But I do consider giving money to someone needy to be a moral act.
I do not think it would be immoral to bomb the entirety of Gaza back into the stone age right now. If I were in charge, we'd carpet bomb the hell out of them until they cried uncle. I don't think that's immoral. But that's because of the situation right now. If they were not shelling our cities, I might not go that far, even though it would not be immoral if I did.
Do you see? There's a wide range of morally acceptable behaviors available. If an Arab from a certain town commits an attack, I would probably not obliterate the entire town. But not because they are deserving of that restraint; restraint of that sort is on the level of charity. Nice to do, but not mandatory.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK. I guess at this point I can only urge you once more to read some of the fine books and articles that have convinced me that there is no "level of morality" at which punishing people for wrongs they haven't committed is acceptable.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what happens in war. That's why war sucks. The moral of the story is, don't commit war.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If an Australian is murdered in a foreign land, I feel it. If a LGB person gets beaten or murdered for being gay, I feel it - despite not being LGB. When a muslim gets murdered for being muslim, I feel it.
Or at least I should.
As for the article, there is nothing at all new in using a "high moral purpose" or invoking the name of God to justify doing whatever we want to those who are getting in our way. I believe that here we referred to it as "manifest destiny."
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I think I do. I certainly think I should.
I'm not sure I agree with that. For one, it presupposes a level of control over one's feelings that I don't think is morally necessary or possible. I think it is possible to truly value human beings equally yet to feel more intensely the loss of someone one knows, or can picture as oneself or one's loved ones, or sees in person as opposed to reading about.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that is, of course, true of people one knows personally and I think that one feels more when one knows more about the person or circumstances. My response was to the degree of feeling depending on whether or not the victim shared membership in a particular group.
I don't think that I should feel the murder of an african american person less because I am white or a gay person because I am straight.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I said (perhaps not clearly enough) that I was not addressing what one feels when one knows the victim personally. I would know my own child personally.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I think that is, of course, true of people one knows personally and I think that one feels more when one knows more about the person or circumstances. My response was to the degree of feeling depending on whether or not the victim shared membership in a particular group.
I don't think that I should feel the murder of an african american person less because I am white or a gay person because I am straight.
I don't see other Jews as mere members in a common group with me. They are my family.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't think that I should feel the murder of an african american person less because I am white or a gay person because I am straight.
I don't think I should, either, but I do. Or rather, I feel the murder more of someone who's more like me. The more things we have in common, the more I personalize it and can empathize with the way they or their family must feel. So if it's a woman, I feel it more. If she's a mother, I feel it more. If she's an American, white, Mormon, married, stay-at-home mother with young children, I ache. Because it's easier to put myself in her shoes.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Levels of Morality." And I am supposed to be the dreadful relativist. I am, of course, also an anti-Semite/Nazi/Communist/Traitor to my country/Terrorist-lover/idiot/hypocrite/"Cultural Nihilist" (I still don't know what the last one even means), at the very minumum. I am also, almost certainly, a Blasphemer/corrupter of the youth/ Jesus killer.
I am very popular.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: "Levels of Morality." And I am supposed to be the dreadful relativist. I am, of course, also an anti-Semite/Nazi/Communist/Traitor to my country/Terrorist-lover/idiot/hypocrite/"Cultural Nihilist" (I still don't know what the last one even means), at the very minumum. I am also, almost certainly, a Blasphemer/corrupter of the youth/ Jesus killer.
posted
No, you need to "grow up." You deliberetly dichotomize your world into "us" and "them" in an infantile manner based on your patently false assumption that becouse A. "Some Arabs attack Israelis" is true then B. "All Arabs hate Israelis" must also be true. If your enemies spoke Hebrew and were fair and called their God Yahweh, would you then attack them as a group, or do you reserve such treatment for those who speak a different, though related, language practice a different, though related, religion and have dark hair and eyes? You remind me, yes I who am young and am called foolish and naïve, of an exceptionaly violent child fighting with an exceptionaly violent sibbling over toys, not caring who is destroyed in the process.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
