Israel vs Hamas thread.

[DFO]

IMHO, the only justified war in the last 100 years was the IIWW. One side
was the incarnation of evil, and had to be stopped.

[ezodisy]

Excuse me, what?

I'm always amazed by how innocuous all sorts of bad things can be made to sound in favour of making other bad things sound even worse.

There is no possible justification for matching a death toll of 13 with 1200. End of story for me, perhaps because I'm not a Jew, or an Arab. When civilians get relegated to collateral and you need to come up with justifications of why you've bombed a school, it's already too far.

That is my personal, politically/racially-neutral view. I was going to ignore this thread, but I thought I might as well contribute some neutrality.

I am, however, still impressed by how often it seems to be the case that Hamas' is the side one is challenged to prove innocent, rather than Israel (also) guilty. Setting aside the fact that these conclusions are distinct, what makes any side in a conflict a priori "right" as such?

well said.

So who here has actually known someone who has lived in the Gaza strip? Last year for several months I lived with a guy and his family who had just come back from several years there. Without going into detail I'll just say that whatever sympathy I once had for Israel declined greatly. The stories of open gunfire and restrictions were horrific. Yeah you could say he was biased, but he's also a man who lived in a place that seemed to be intentionally trampled on. Forgive the term but I think the current campaign has somewhat unmasked Israel, and the opposition to it in papers and among higher profile campaigners has been quite admirable. The US stats were good to see.

[aquablob]

IMHO, the only justified war in the last 100 years was the IIWW. One side
was the incarnation of evil, and had to be stopped.

I agree with you that WWII was a "justified war."

But I stand by my assertion that in war, there is virtually never a clear-cut dichotomy between right and wrong, good and evil. The US dropped two atomic bombs on Japan in WWII, for heaven's sake—certainly not a "moral" action in my book, but arguably not an unjustified one, either (not necessarily my stance on the issue, by the way).

But when has war ever been about morality?

My point is that declaring the current situation in the Middle East "unjustified" without proper consideration of the issues/events surrounding and leading up to it is rather unfair. And when one does consider those issues and events, one is unlikely to find that there is a "right side" and a "wrong side," but one may still find justification for certain militaristic acts.

By the way, I have never said anywhere in this thread that Israel's recent offensive is justified. I'm just saying that A) you can't view the offensive as though it exists in a vacuum, and B) justification for military action is far more complex than a simple question of right versus wrong (despite, may I add, what George W. Bush would have us believe!).

[orbital]

well said.
So who here has actually known someone who has lived in the Gaza strip?

Me  I know people form both sides. One on side was the Palestinian driver of my ex-boss with whom I had plenty of opportunities to converse. His family had a miserable life there and he was blaming Israel for all their misfortunes (rightly so, from a civilian stand point). On the other side is the family of my grandfather who live in northern Israel who assert that they are bombarded with rockets while going about their business. Thus, when you talk with them separately, it is really really difficult to assert any kind of wrong/right distinction to this affair.

It would be way too oversimplifying to put the blame solely on Israel. In these recent events Hamas gets most of the blame IMO. In the middle is Israel, and the victims are Palestinian civilians, as usual. Don't forget that Hamas is flying rockets into Israel territory with the intent to kill as many civilians as they can. Just because their rocket systems are not sophisticated enough to cause as much harm as they would like does not make them innocent. If they had any respect for their fellow citizens they would have ceased making those pointless provocations long ago.

I am clueless as to suggest what Israel should do. I don't know how any other country would react under similar circumstances (we have recently seen Russia act in a situation that resembles this one, and we've all seen the results).

Now that there is a ceasefire, what will happen next? A few months of relative calm then it will start all over again. Not surprising, since both sides have made conflicts a raison d'eitre for themselves.

[Homo Aestheticus]

I myself, locked that previous thread. Since I started that thread, I was able to lock it anytime that I wished to do so.  And I chose to do so because I didn't want to read anymore anti-semitic diatribes from Josquin De Prez and his ilk.

How is he being anti-semitic ?

Your comment reminds me of this nauseating piece:

"It is not Israel's action, but the vitriolic reaction to it that has been disproportionate. There's only one explanation: antisemitism"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/16/elizabeth-wurtzel-antisemitism-israel-gaza

[Bulldog]

How is he being anti-semitic ?

Your comment reminds me of this nauseating piece:

That piece isn't nauseating; as usual, your views are ignorant.

[Herman]

well the Wurtzel piece isn't exactly a brilliant well-thought out piece either. And it is getting a little tiresome to hear Americans say they haven't been in Europe for ten years (if ever) and call all Europeans antisemetic in the same breath. It's like freedom fries all over.

[Bulldog]

well the Wurtzel piece isn't exactly a brilliant well-thought out piece either.

True, but it does express the opinions of many American jewish folks.

[Iago]

How is he being anti-semitic ?

Your comment reminds me of this nauseating piece:

"It is not Israel's action, but the vitriolic reaction to it that has been disproportionate. There's only one explanation: antisemitism"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/16/elizabeth-wurtzel-antisemitism-israel-gaza

I don't read the "Guardian". In fact from the few excerpts from it that you have referred to, I wouldn't line the bottom of my birds cage with it.






[/quote]

[Herman]

True, but it does express the opinions of many American jewish folks.

ergo "the opinions of many American jewish folks" aren't very well thought out?

I thought we had just established Jews had cornered the IQ market?

[Florestan]

Let's face it: Hamas' publicly stated goal is to destroy Israel; they've been firing rockets in Southern Israel for eight years; they don't give a damn for the lives and properties of their fellow Palestinians, their propaganda notwithstanding; they overthrew the legitimate Fatah government in Gaza in a bloody coup d'etat.

What is Israel to do in such situation? Is it not allowed to protect its citizens manu militari?

As for the civil casualties on both sides, they are regrettable, of course, but Israel cannot be blamed alone for them. Hamas' constantly and mindlessly provoking Israel was bound to attract a reaction, sooner or later, and the Israeli army is not particularly famed for kindness and restraint.

IMHO this conflict, of which the ongoing war is just an episode, has no solution. Hatred and resentment have been accumulated on both sides for too much time and with too much bitterness. Only a miracle of God can bring peace in the Middle East.

[ezodisy]

heartbreaking

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7838465.stm

[lisa needs braces]

The trouble with Israel is that it exists. It should not have been created--people already lived there. The British/UN shouldn't have handed the land over to a people they felt where somehow wronged. It's funny how the Brits and every single UN nation that voted for Israel to come to existence weren't themselves willing to bear any burden for that choice--it was the Palestinians who were made to do so. Asking the Palestinians to recognize Israel's so called "right" to exist is absurd as asking Native Americans to recognize America's "right" to exist--in other words, to justify their own dispossession.

There's two things that keeps America utterly in support of Israel: Evangelicals and Zionist influence/lobbying. The former embrace Israel because they think its existence means the apocalypse is near.
The way the latter operates is obvious: If a media outlet is owned by a Zionist...or has Zionists in top positions...then all underlings know not to be too critical of Israel or their career is finished. AIPAC/ACLU and countless other organizations take care of the political front.

[Bulldog]

ergo "the opinions of many American jewish folks" aren't very well thought out?

I thought we had just established Jews had cornered the IQ market?

That was before my IQ was added to the equation.

[Bulldog]

The trouble with Israel is that it exists. It should not have been created--people already lived there. The British/UN shouldn't have handed the land over to a people they felt where somehow wronged. It's funny how the Brits and every single UN nation that voted for Israel to come to existence weren't themselves willing to bear any burden for that choice--it was the Palestinians who were made to do so. Asking the Palestinians to recognize Israel's so called "right" to exist is absurd as asking Native Americans to recognize America's "right" to exist--in other words, to justify their own dispossession.

Too bad that your empathy for the Palestinians is not matched by equal concern for Jews.

[lisa needs braces]

Too bad that your empathy for the Palestinians is not matched by equal concern for Jews.

Perhaps that's because in this situation the Palestinians are the victims of the Jews.

[Bulldog]

Perhaps that's because in this situation the Palestinians are the victims of the Jews.

Do you have a recommendation to solve or mitigate the current turmoil?

[Homo Aestheticus]

Do you have a recommendation to solve or mitigate the current turmoil?

How about a return to how they lived for hundreds of years before 1948... as one people living on the same piece of land.

[Bulldog]

How about a return to how they lived for hundreds of years before 1948... as one people living on the same piece of land.

Ah, the "going back in time" solution.  Do you think it's realistic?

[Bulldog]

Let's face it: Hamas' publicly stated goal is to destroy Israel; they've been firing rockets in Southern Israel for eight years; they don't give a damn for the lives and properties of their fellow Palestinians, their propaganda notwithstanding; they overthrew the legitimate Fatah government in Gaza in a bloody coup d'etat.

What is Israel to do in such situation? Is it not allowed to protect its citizens manu militari?

As for the civil casualties on both sides, they are regrettable, of course, but Israel cannot be blamed alone for them. Hamas' constantly and mindlessly provoking Israel was bound to attract a reaction, sooner or later, and the Israeli army is not particularly famed for kindness and restraint.

IMHO this conflict, of which the ongoing war is just an episode, has no solution. Hatred and resentment have been accumulated on both sides for too much time and with too much bitterness. Only a miracle of God can bring peace in the Middle East.

That about sums it up nicely, and miracles do happen. 0:)