A View From the Sears Tower's Ledge
Illinois Is Getting Fatter
Mayor Blames Violent Holiday Weekend On Booze, Heat
Kuma's Pats Itself On Back With Block Party
Chicagoan Involved In Mount Rushmore Ruckus
As the Israel/Hamas conflict continues to escalate, a large number of people from 30 different groups (reports vary on the number of protesters, from hundreds to thousands) gathered yesterday at Pioneer Court along Michigan Avenue and ended in front of the Israeli consulate to protest Israel's recent military actions in the Gaza Strip.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
I understand the frustration of these people but ask yourself this: If just ONE rocket came across the US border from Mexico or Canada, what do you think the United States' response be? Think about it. No one would be talking about disproportionate responses. Israel has a right to defend itself. Period.
I understand the frustration of these people but ask yourself this: If just ONE rocket came across the US border from Mexico or Canada, what do you think the United States' response be? Think about it. No one would be talking about disproportionate responses. Israel has a right to defend itself. Period.
I understand the frustration of these people but ask yourself this: If just ONE rocket came across the US border from Mexico or Canada, what do you think the United States' response be? Think about it. No one would be talking about disproportionate responses. Israel has a right to defend itself. Period.
@bagel33h:
That's an invalid comparison. If the US invaded Canada, siezed a province and then cut the people there off from family and friends, harassing even the red cross and Doctors without borders trying to render aid and proceeded to put up "security barriers" all around population centers, and then the canadians started firing rockets, well...that's a different story.
Israel is not blameless here. Both sides have fanatics and militants who want to drive the others into the sea. In the middle, civilians, children, innocent palestinians and Israelis who are simply living out their lives.
Israel has the right exist as a free and soveriegn state and to defend itself, and Palestine has a right to exist as a free and sovereign state and defend itself. Tell me how any of the bombs being tossed about right now are accomplishing either of these goals?
No American would tolerate the situation that Israel (and their supporters) have put upon Palestinians were the situations reversed and *we* were the victims of it. Fuck Israel's sick policy. I'm sickened and ashamed that my tax money goes to support apartheid and mass murder.
Can someone please explain to me WHY the Palestinians would even allow a terrorist organization like Hamas to take over their country? Why can't the Palestinians band together and get rid of Hamas...who are the REAL enemy?
And why don't I see any picket signs saying, "HAMAS, THE REAL ENEMY" or "HAMAS, THE PUPPET MASTER"
^^And speaking of disproportionate responses
Whoa, this was definitely directed at bagel33h's triple post, and was definitely not submitted at 4am. Guess there was some kind of glitch there.
Israel is in the right. Brave. Strong. Fair. And when they allow the Palestinians the opportunity for self-government, the Palestinians respond with a shower of rockets targeting Israeli civilians. As they commit this terrorism, the Palestinians use women and children as human shields. In that situation, created solely by the Palestinians, civilian casualties are inevitable.
Some of the group that protested in Chicago on Friday might be well-meaning, but they are terrorist symapthizers. Let them protest all they want. And let us continue to aid Israel.
Here is the conundrum, if I were to speak of Israelis in the same pejorative way that you did about Palestinians I'd be accused of being "against Israel" at best and a flat-out anti-semite at worst.
The US refuses to have a rational conversation about many things, Israel is one of them. To see this horrible situation as simply a "brave" and "fair" nation swatting terrorists down is as naive and incorrect a view as the "arab street" decrying Israel's every move with torches and effigies.
Israel is in the right. Brave. Strong. Fair
Sickening and cowardly is more like it. Can you imagine Chicago police responding by killing *hundreds* of innocent men women and children each time a cop gets killed on duty? Israel's creating hundreds (thousands) of NEW terrorists as we speak. They're a great recruiter.
It's tough to feel sorry for people when they elect a government that lobs rockets at a nuclear power.
Yeah, I don't understand Americans much either.
Oh, we we'rent talking about Cuba, China and endless pissing matches with Russia over the last 60 years?
My bad.
albany is correct.
there are extremists on both sides - the zionists and hamas. and in between are the innocent palestinians and israelis caught between the crossfire.
should have england invaded northern ireland and bombed the republican neighborhoods for the actions of the IRA? would that have stabilized that conflict? I dont think so - I think it would have made things far, far worse.
we should look back how the northern ireland/england conflict was defused - many lessons can be learned.
What does Hamas want?
To drive the Jews into the sea. That is a stated goal of Hamas, which the people in Gaza elected to leadership a couple of years ago.
Israel has problems: Settlements in the West Bank, for instance, and a creeping apartheid, and a domestic political situation that encourages its politicians to want to act tough against Hamas. And by no means is Israel the 51st state, as many of our Dem and GOP leaders would like to pretend.
But I support Israel in its current fight against Hamas, a group of nihilistic militants with medieval cultural values. I don't know how Israel will defeat this group--probably impossible--but I hope Israel kills as many Hamas members as possible and hobbles the group. It's sad about the dead innocents, but that's war. Life sucks. Perhaps Hamas leadership shouldn't hide behind innocents.
Supporting the Palestinians just because they are underdogs, as some on the left love to do, is naive. Screw the Palestinian-independence movement, which would result in a useless country without means of supporting itself in any case. The Israelis have as much historical right to the land as anyone else, and I'd rather be on the side of the only real democracy in the area than the glorified tribal kingdoms.
Absolutely!
Hamas are terrorists. They are cowards who hide behind innocent people.
Israel has made many concessions in recent years, but nothing is good enough for Hamas because they deny Israel's right to exist.
I wholeheartedly support Israel.
Hamas are terrorists.
Well, what do you expect? They don't exactly have tanks or F-16s. I denounce Hamas because of their stated goals/aims, not because of the tactics they use, no matter how distasteful those tactics are*. We in the West can't exactly expect our enemies from the Third World to meet us on some classical battlefield out on the open as though it were a rerun of Word War II, can we**?
*Dresden circa Feb 1945, Tokyo circa March 1945, et al, would give you reason to accuse the West of using terrorist tactics when it suited us.
** which is why the "War on Terror" is a stupid way of looking at things. It should be the "War Against Militant/Nihilistic Islam."
So, if they had more noble goals you wouldn't denounce them?
Because they don't have the war technology that Israel does, then it's ok for them to continue their terrorist actions?
So, if they had more noble goals you wouldn't denounce them?
Because they don't have the war technology that Israel does, then it's ok for them to continue their terrorist actions?
No, I would not denounce Hamas if I agreed with the goals, and yes, they can use whatever tactics they need. War is always ugly, always brutal, and the West, often seen as the good guy, has used terrorism many times, even in so-called good wars. That the West may engage in terrorism less often than it enemies speaks more to the technological powers of the West than its morality during war.
For you: Do you denounce the goals/ideals of Hamas, or their tactics?
-Do you denounce the goals/ideals of Hamas, or their tactics?
Their goal is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.
Over the years, I have never been able to wrap my head around the fact that Hamas thinks they can deny the very existence of the Jewish people. This kind of hatred terrifies me.
Because of this, I denounce both the goal and the tactics.
If, say, there were a group of prisoners at Aushwitz who got together and planned a terrorist activity against the nazi regime, I would support that.
But this war that Hamas is fighting is not a righteous war. They needed to stop with the bombing and sit down and talk. Israel has made many concessions over the years. What did Hamas think they were going to accomplish with the constant bombing?
"My book of dodgy scripture says this land belongs to me!"
"No, my book of dodgy scripture says it belongs to ME!"
"You're a terrorist!"
"You kill civilians"
Ad infinitum.
Look, make the whole "holy land" into a UN-held protectorate. No one can live there, only visit and it's run by the Chinese who could give a damn if you're a Muslim, a Jew or an Indian Chief.
If you cannot share your toys, they will be taken away.
Look, make the whole "holy land" into a UN-held protectorate. No one can live there, only visit and it's run by the Chinese who could give a damn if you're a Muslim, a Jew or an Indian Chief.
Yeah, give the UN, whose peacekeeping forces fail more often than they succeed, the job of dislodging Arabs and Jews off land held for centuries; that should be fun to watch, as your average Jewish housewife, or Palestinian clerk, probably has enough courage and will to drive off a battalion of blue-hatted saviors. And China doesn't care about Muslims or other religious people? I betcha some Muslims in Western China, or Buddhists in Tibet, or some Christians in Shanghai, would offer a different view.
I think your idea needs another round at the drawing broad, Albany. I suspect this was tongue-in-cheek, but even if it was, it shows a bit of unrealistic thinking about reality, one I'd expect from a member of the hopeless far left, not you.
Listen, nothing will change there until enough warmongers on both sides have been killed off and enough pacifists, diplomats and others gain more influence. That may never happen. It took two massive wars in Europe, with millions dead, for leaders in Western Europe to work harder for peace.
"I suspect this was tongue-in-cheek"
Well, yes.
My truthful assessment is that, sooner rather than later, some enterprising young fanatic from either side of the conflict, will lay hands on some really heavy firepower, of the radioactive variety, and "solve" the problems in the region with some degree of finality.
It's tough to feel sorry for people when they elect a government that lobs rockets at a nuclear power.
I guess we aren't really interested in "Democracy" unless the people elect the puppets we want.
medieval cultural values
Values like wanting self determination and an end to an abusive occupation that's turned their land into a starvation wracked prison camp? I would share those values with them. Israel has no moral high ground, plain and simple. I'd say (as you mentioned) that there are a whole lot of people with dead loved ones who see our governments actions as "medieval". If anything Israels 1 casuality for us equals 500 for you mentality is medieval.
My truthful assessment is that, sooner rather than later, some enterprising young fanatic from either side of the conflict, will lay hands on some really heavy firepower, of the radioactive variety, and "solve" the problems in the region with some degree of finality.
And you are probably right. Fun times for all.
The 2006 election in Palestine that brought Hamas to power was pushed by the Bush administration because, as we all know voting makes a democracy. (/sarcasm) The leadership of Fatah knew that Hamas was likely to win the election and asked/pleaded for the election to be postponed. Bush kept pushing for the election and in 2006 it happened and Hamas was elected. Bush was shocked. Bush then supported a violent uprising lead by a Fatah militants to over throw Hamas (apparently voters can be wrong, see Flordia 2000).
Hamas was attempting to become the peaceful leadership of Palestine until their leadership was threatened through force supported by the US. This civil war destabilized Hamas and the radical elements regained control. Now Fatah is has been defeated militarily and the radical elements of Hamas are fully entrenched. Rocket attacks were on the decline until the US supported Fatah offensive.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804
Israel has employed the method of massive retaliation for decades now and it has not lead to peace. It is time for a change in strategy. One that evolves some kind of third party force in BOTH Israel and the Gaza Strip. With the rise of the internet as a communication tool the terrorist can spin any Israeli military action as killing of women and children. As the United States learned in Iraq, it is not a war for bombs, guns and WMD. It is a fight to win hearts and minds. Israel will always loose that war using its current tactics.
Crap, I left out my main point:
The election in Palestine was forced by outsiders. Then the outsiders tried to change the elected leaders. This is after decades of relying on outsiders for basic freedoms. Is it any wonder that Hamas is so popular in the Gaza strip? They are the only group viewed as really fighting for the people and independent from outsiders. I have never supported George W. Bush and his administration, but if another country started trying to depose the leader of the United States I would fully support taking up arms against that outside influence.
Crap, I left out my main point:
The election in Palestine was forced by outsiders. Then the outsiders tried to change the elected leaders. This is after decades of relying on outsiders for basic freedoms. Is it any wonder that Hamas is so popular in the Gaza strip? They are the only group viewed as really fighting for the people and independent from outsiders. I have never supported George W. Bush and his administration, but if another country started trying to depose the leader of the United States I would fully support taking up arms against that outside influence.
Good points, even if we do disagree about the proper course of action. The stupid policies of Bush keep paying dividends.
Navin: Israel does not abide by an official government policy of wanting to drive the Arabs to the sea. Prove me wrong.
Israel also has granted citizenship to Arabs, many of them, showing more inclusion than most of its neighbors. And despite being a Jewish state, Israel is not a militant theocracy, as some of its enemies are, and what Hamas aspires to be in Gaza, and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
If anything Israels 1 casuality for us equals 500 for you mentality is medieval.
No, that's just war. And let's be honest: If Israel really wanted to, it could wipe out half the population or more in Gaza within a week without using its nukes (not saying that would be wise, only possible). I would say Israel, for all the carnage it has caused, has shown restraint in most of its recent wars. Indeed, Israel even allows aid to be trucked into Gaza despite the current war.
Finally, the cultural and religious values promoted by Hamas--one small example is how the Hamas leader who was killed last week had four wives--are from the Middle Ages, or even earlier. Perhaps you like such values. Fair enough; we are all groovy and multicultural these days, aren't we? But they are hardly modern or secular values, or anything that shows a respect for feminism, free speech, religious freedom or other basic human rights, and they are not values I will support.
Now Fatah is has been defeated militarily and the radical elements of Hamas are fully entrenched. Rocket attacks were on the decline until the US supported Fatah offensive.
So what? The rocket attacks increased, and what reasonable government would not respond?
I agree there needs to be another way--even if Israel wins this war on points, Israel will not really win the war, for reasons you state and others--but what should Israel have done in the meantime, simply ignore the rocket attacks? As I stated above, Israel has shown considerable restraint in this war.
No Matilda Israel should not ignore the attacks but they could allow a UN force into Israel to police both parties in the conflict. That worked in Bosnia, why not Israel-Palestine?
If someone's house is bombed or their relative killed try and convince that person that "considerable restraint" was shown. The problem is that war is planed on the macro scale but its effects are felt on the micro. Try explaining how the Chicago Police exert considerable self control and sobriety when off duty to the bartender Anthony Abate beat the crap out of.
Navin, like it or not, territory disputes have historically been decided by killing each other. You can go on and on about some moral high ground, but if Israel wanted, it could wipe the remainder of the middle east off the map. That's just the reality of it, and it's the reason you shouldn't shoot rockets into its territory. If you're dumb enough to do it, you've got to face the consequences of your actions, morality be damned.
Excellent post dopplerd!
Once again I think you're the most informed user on Chicagoist.
Hey Matilda,
I think that people around the world should have the cultural values that suit them best and be allowed to evolve naturally as their own culture sees fit. Nobody gave a shit about Arab values in the past. I imagine people see Americans cultural values as questionable too: Materialism, ghetto fabulous lifestyles funded on credit and debt, preaching freedom and democracy while murdering people and installing dictators around the world etc.
Hypocrisy.
You are to kind.
Jimbo,
You don't think Israel and the rest of the world (us included) would suffer serious consequences for such a wholesale slaughter? Well, worse than what we have now anyway. Even Israel, with it's unbelievable short sightedness and self-fulfilling violent policy, can see that they can't just bomb it completely to bits. You want to go around murdering innocent people around the world be prepared to live like a prisoner (to security) yourself.
What should the retaliation be then?
Israel is in the position of power (both physically and politically) - so there is no reason why it should have to take concessions to appease Palestinians. I hope that this is a reality check for those in Gaza, that they should be electing officials that will work to live harmoniously with the greater power, rather than shoot missiles at it to piss it off. For some reason, I doubt that the ignorant electorate that put Hamas in power will see this for what it is.
Navin: Fair points, but I refuse to speak any good of cultures, like some in the Middle East, that still stones women for kissing the wrong men, or which make illegal the spread or discussion of other beliefs. While all cultures have their problems--and you note some negative values that harm us--all cultures are NOT created equal. Seriously, would you prefer, for example, the cultural values of Stalinist Russia or of Gilded Age (late 1800s) America? Both had major problems, but one crushed human dignity with more force than the other.
I think you need to grow up a bit, too, and leave the cheap leftist propaganda behind. Everyone person, and every culture, demonstrates double-standards. It's human nature. You set an impossible bar in your superficial striving for cultural equivalency.
No Matilda Israel should not ignore the attacks but they could allow a UN force into Israel to police both parties in the conflict. That worked in Bosnia, why not Israel-Palestine?
Sort of worked in Bosnia, if you overlook the massacres the UN failed to prevent before the Dayton Accords. Remember all that led up to Dayton. (AND also know that the war in Bosnia is in danger of restarting this year.) Is not working in Dafur with the African multinational force, nor did the UN do any good in Rwanda. Given that the Mid-East is at least as bloody as though encounters, you have much more faith in the blue helmets than I do.
Not saying I don't like your idea, only that I doubt it would work given the the UN--and, to be fair, NATO and the EU--are pretty weak militarily when one looks at recent examples.
You're confusing policy with cultural values. Some people when stepped upon will retreat to old cultural values too. Just like you see now in Iraq, which was formerly very secular. Funny that eh?
If you promise to stop using the same old right wing canards and grow up yourself I'll be right there with you. Yes, it's sad but true, you're foreign policy beliefs in this case are basically rooted in right wing cliches: Israel has a right to defend itself.. snooze...
Israel to Palestinians:
Why do you keep resisting this rape and making us defend ourselves? If you'd just lay back and try to enjoy it things would be so much better...
The rocket attacks increased, and what reasonable government would not respond?
When I am stung by a mosquito I don't grab a flamethrower and drain the nearby lakes.
Israel has been so well-armed by the US over the past few decades they almost can't help but over-respond to even the most minor threat.
I'm sorry, I really don't see 21st century military force like the IDF "threatened" by hamas and their piddling rockets.
We don't have rational discussions about this. Politicians in the US just parrot the line "Israel has a right to defend itself" as if that is some kind of plenary indulgence for the IDF to do anything it likes. Mearsheimer and Walt's "The Israel Lobby" is a cogent look at the issue. And the second it came out they were decried as Anti-Semites who hate Israel.
There's a discussion to be had about Israel and it's neighbors that does not involve accusations, recriminations and fear-mongering.
Oh, I don't know Albany...you may decide to use the flamethrower and drain the lakes if you knew that the mosquito had West Nile.
Navin: But according to your own words, you are implying that, in essence, all cultural values are the same. If I am too stupid to understand what you really meant--and this is a big possibility with me--I apologize for mangling your ideas.
Why do you keep resisting this rape and making us defend ourselves? If you'd just lay back and try to enjoy it things would be so much better...
This is complete bullshit, though. Again, what does one do when faced with an enemy that actively works for your removal from your little corner of the world? Hell, the Israelis don't even have the best land in the Middle East. Remember, Israel is not saying the Palestinians should be exterminated, nor is Israel working toward that goal.
Ever hear the expression: If Israel laid down its weapons, it would cease to exist. If the Palestinians laid down their weapons, there would be peace.
The Palestinians want to erase Israel and the Jews from the earth, and I could imagine that happening if Iran gets into the picture.
"If Israel laid down its weapons, it would cease to exist. If the Palestinians laid down their weapons, there would be peace."
Yes, and it's completely inaccurate and cruelly simplistic.
The notion that the Israelis are the "good guys" is just as much a misnomer as the perception of the Palestinians as "underdogs".
You have two sides in a conflict with deep historical and religious claims to a very small strip of land. The leadership on both sides is trying very hard to look "strong" and succeeding only in increasing body counts.
Stop mouthing "wipe Israel from the face of the earth" or "drive the jews into the sea". With what forces? With what army? Yes, they have rockets. The Israelis have F/A 18 superhornets, the most advanced air-fighting platform ever constructed. Israelis aren't getting marched into the Mediterranean by refugees and people so desperate they detonate women and children as a means of war.
Ingrid, if Iran gets involved, it can kiss its nuclear weapons program goodbye. Even they're not dumb enough to do that.
your little corner of the world
Which Palestinians were driven from by force, all for happening to have been there. Israel will have to learn to share and play nice and end it's apartheid (or worse) like policies. If not it'll end in tears just like all brutal regimes do. Of course as long as the U.S. continues to fund them and turn a blind eye to any injustice they'll not change their ways. Let Israel alone fund it's policies and we'll see if it's citizens change their tune over time.
Again regarding "little corner of the world", take a look at a map of Israel circa 1948 and one now... laffs..
What do you call for, then? Withdrawal to '67 borders? '48 borders? Something else? Even if that happens, what do you do about groups such as Hamas that want all the Jews completely out (even though Jews have been living there since Old Testament days, like it or not)? And how do you support a Palestinian that likely would be split in two--West Bank and Gaza--and not have much beyond a few fig and olive trees to subsist on?
You seem willing to blame Israel for this problem, but while I admit Israel has a good amount of blame for this, so do the Arabs. All but two Arab countries still officially denounce the existence of Israel; so does, of course, Iran.
You talk about the '48 map, and the smaller size of Israel, but fail to note that 1) Israel was attacked within minutes of declaring itself a state; and 2) Most of these territorial gains came from Israel defeating attacking Arab forces in various wars. At least you could be honest about this. There is a reason, for instance, that Israel still retains the Golan Heights--the country has been burned before.
How dare you use history as a justification for policy! We only use feeling and religion around here Sir!
My god is left-handed; your god is right-handed. Therefore, you must die :)
How dare you use history as a justification for policy! We only use feeling and religion around here Sir!
Ingrid,
Are your entire views on the complex situation there gleaned from bumper stickers? Do you think Dopplerd's points are legitimate?
If we lived under the hardships that Palestianians do we'd all be saying stuff like "Drive Israel into the sea" as well even if we didn't really believe we could do it.
I see this situation as comparable to manifest destiny in the early U.S. and in the way one claimed it had a 'right by God' to take land for themselves, murder, and drive people on to reservations.
You might think that that is bumper-stickerish, but I have never thought of it in that way.
Of course I realize that it's a complicated situation. I'm not an idiot. I am able to see both sides of the issues. I feel anger when I read about Israeli atrocities toward Palestinians. But the whole issue boils down to one simple fact and that is that the Palestinians have as their core belief the total destruction of Israel.
I am not Jewish, but if I were, I would feel so angry, and fearful, knowing that there are people who are living right next door to me who feel that I have no right to exist.
If we lived under the hardships that Palestianians do we'd all be saying stuff like "Drive Israel into the sea" as well even if we didn't really believe we could do it.
I see this situation as comparable to manifest destiny in the early U.S. and in the way one claimed it had a 'right by God' to take land for themselves, murder, and drive people on to reservations.
But Israel is not trying to exterminate the Palestinians, so I'm not sure the analogy is the best. As well, the Jews were there for centuries, too, even after various exiles and immigration--why do you not understand this?
Even if you are right, a call to drive the Jews into the sea can reasonably bring about violent counter-action, especially with rockets being lobbed into your country.
Stop mouthing "wipe Israel from the face of the earth" or "drive the jews into the sea". With what forces? With what army? Yes, they have rockets. The Israelis have F/A 18 superhornets, the most advanced air-fighting platform ever constructed. Israelis aren't getting marched into the Mediterranean by refugees and people so desperate they detonate women and children as a means of war.
So, if a hostile population merely launches rockets into your territory, you should simply ignore them because they don't have more advanced weapons? That makes little sense unless one is already ideologically biased toward the perceived underdog.
Matilda,
You act as if the state of Israel has any right to be there in the first place. Oh, but ancient *stories* in The Bible say so. Nevermind who's there now and who had nothing to do with the real hardships Jews had faced in modern times. Hopefully nobody more powerful than us will invade the U.S. making the same bullshit claims. BUT, the die is cast as they say. Israel will have to learn to respect and share and give back some land and hopefully ultimately share it. Either way the onus is on Israel. They (and the western superpowers) created this mess. Such are the problems for being so cavalier with other nations and their cultures.
1)Israel was attacked within minutes of declaring itself a state
Name me anybody who'd tolerate having a state imposed on them? I wonder what would happen if China and Russia arbitrarily created/imposed Tibetan, Chechen (or whatever!) states inside U.S. borders. Texas is big, I'm sure Americans would tolerate that....How about if a Russian, Chinese and Indian alliance thought that all of Texas and most of California should go back to its *traditional* owners, Mexico?
Navin: No, the reason I think Israel has as much right to be there as anyone else is because Jews have lived there since Old Testament times. It has nothing to do with "stories," but rather evidence provided through archeology and other sources. Do you not agree that Jews have lived there for centuries, up and including the British occupation?
The state was not "imposed" on anybody, at least not how you imply. Israel was merely carved from the British occupation; the Jews had begun to flood into the land before this happened. The Arabs got a share of land, too. The Arabs wanted it all, however, and therefore attacked.
You are starting to swing wildly here, my friend, and your accuracy and fair-mindeness is giving way to your passion and ideology.
"The state was not "imposed" on anybody"
That is, simply, a lie.
Are you familiar with the history of the Etzel? It was a militant group responsible for bombings, shootings and rocket attacks on British in Palestine in the days after World War II.
And it was made up of Jews.
The history of the creation of Israel has been white-washed, largely because of the guilt many western nations (perhaps deservedly) feel because of the Shoah. But it was a bloody, violent takeover of territory.
The Palestinians who fled the region after the creation of Israel were wealthy. You have generational poverty among Palestinians, who have become increasingly desperate as the decades roll on.
The history of the creation of Israel has been white-washed, largely because of the guilt many western nations (perhaps deservedly) feel because of the Shoah. But it was a bloody, violent takeover of territory.
Again, so what? This his how most of history works. If you don't like it, give back your little slice of Chicago to the Indians, or whomever else was ripped off or perhaps killed for the land.
And you again fail to acknowledge that Jews, like Arabs, have claims to the land that go back centuries. That's a whitewash, too.
"But Israel is not trying to exterminate the Palestinians"
No, but they're doing a damn fine job of making them poor, desperate and miserable. The disparity on either side of the "security wall" is 21st century/19th century. The policy of "containment" has annihilated the Palestinian economy. Impoverished people, unable to better their lot, will follow a fanatic into hell.
"So, if a hostile population merely launches rockets into your territory, you should simply ignore them because they don't have more advanced weapons?"
Not at all, but stop framing the argument as if this is a fair fight and not one overwhelmingly powerful opponent. It's ideologically disingenuous. This is a modern nation state with massive military prowess rolling tanks and air-cav on people who don't even have radar. And that's the crux of the issue.
This situation will not be solved by more tanks and bombs and rockets. America blocks any attempt by the UN or other international bodies to do anything of substance about the matter, unless the action is completely one-sided in favor of Israel. It's ridiculous really.
Look at Israel in 1948 and Israel today. It's a nation that has, with US support, expanded itself quite to its neighbors detriment for nigh on 60 years. This is a lopsided expansion being sold as a war. We've been here before.
"That makes little sense unless one is already ideologically biased toward the perceived underdog."
I don't have a dog, under or otherwise, in this fight. Outside of the human tragedy of dead Israelis and Palestinians, the whole damn place can be turned to black irradiated glass for all I care.
And so, to sum up the last 50 years:
Britain in 1948 decides to get out of the colony business and uses that as an excuse to resolve their conflicting feelings of Auschwitz guilt and their embedded antisemitism by giving the Jews a homeland that roughly corresponds to someplace they lived a couple thousand years ago. Unfortunately, another group of people already lives here. These other people get mad at being kicked out of their homes and start bombing stuff. Israel responds by killing some of the people who bombed stuff. Relatives of the people Israel killed respond by bombing more stuff. The pendulum swings back and forth for a half-century until nobody remembers why it all started but everybody vows to fight it until the end.
Personally, I think Israel is no less a terrorist organization than Hamas, it just has better weapons and a recognized government sanctioned, oddly enough, by the Christian Bible (which is really the true motivation for U.S. involvement.) They have no more interest in peace than the Palestinians, as is evidenced by the right-wing Israeli who killed Yitzhak Rabin for seeking it. They will fight this war to history's very last breath, and they will be no better off than they are right now.
The only "peace" we, as Americans, will ever see in the region will come when we no longer see ourselves required to defend Israel against the original Armageddon. Then maybe we and can settle into ignoring the region just like we do most places permanently wracked by tribal warfare. And you know, I look forward to that day.
Britain in 1948 decides to get out of the colony business and uses that as an excuse to resolve their conflicting feelings of Auschwitz guilt and their embedded antisemitism by giving the Jews a homeland that roughly corresponds to someplace they lived a couple thousand years ago.
I agree: No Holocaust, no Israel. That said, the Jews have been there for a long, long time as well.
Then maybe we and can settle into ignoring the region just like we do most places permanently wracked by tribal warfare.
What, like Afghanistan, or India-Pakistan, or Sunni-Shia? I think your view is a bit rosy on this matter. Tribal warfare will continue to involve us for quite some time.
I should have said places permanently wracked by tribal warfare that don't have oil. Aside from a few television specials, we've managed to ignore places like Rwanda, Sierra Leon, and, for the most part, Darfur. Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots have been killing each other since the early 1970s, though most Americans don't know it. The same sort of thing's been going on in Sri Lanka, Burma/Myanmar, and several dozen more places I can't think of at the moment. Tribal warfare only involves us when we choose to be involved.
Orly,
So why was a separate state needed? Ancient history has never been taken into consideration in any other situation so you can drop that strawman. It's the "biblical stories" that create the justification for some kind of exceptionalism.
the Jews had begun to flood into the land before this happened.
A good example of why arbitrarily creating a state was unecessary. Like I said what about all the people who have ancient claims to the U.S.?
Israel cannot be the law enforcer in Gaza. It just doesn't work. Any action regardless of how justified or necessary is viewed/construed to be a hostile action. First step is a cooling off period. A third part multinational force polices the border and has troops in both Israel and Gaza. Once open hostilities have stopped a dialog can open. Very low level at first. This is something that always gets screwed up in the peace meetings. It is always the leaders that get together (Begin-Sadat, Rabin-Arafat) and talk and come up with some agreement, but then the agreement never filters down to the masses. After a time, likely years with the border maintained by the third party (no one said this would be quick or easy) normalization of the formal relationship can begin.
While it is the Israelis and the Palestinians whom are pointing spears at each other it is outside influences that are applying pressure on the spears. Israel relies on support from the US and EU while Hamas exists through support from other Arab counties. This fact makes bringing peace a multinational effort not an Israeli/Palestinian one.
Side note: When I wrote Rabin's name above I was reminded of the details surrounding his assassination. He was killed not by a Palestinian radical, but a Jewish extremist who did not want peace. There are radicals on both sides, as there are moderates as well. The international community needs to get the moderates together to build peace if it is to last.
Excellently summed up Blue Fairlane.
No, but they're doing a damn fine job of making them poor, desperate and miserable.
Hamas and its allies also are doing a good job by insisting that the Jews leave. Hamas also loves it when media plays up the "poor Palestinian" angle, and has an interest in pictures of dead and suffering kids, old ladies, etc. You fail to note this in your rush to blame all of this on Israel.
Not at all, but stop framing the argument as if this is a fair fight and not one overwhelmingly powerful opponent.
Uh, I never did such a thing. This is not a fair fight; wars rarely are, especially those since 1945. War is not boxing, with weight classes and a point system.
his is a modern nation state with massive military prowess rolling tanks and air-cav on people who don't even have radar. And that's the crux of the issue.
So what? They have other means of fighting. Your argument is that bigger, Western states should not pick on the poor misunderstood people of the Third World--no matter how destructive their ideology--until those poor misunderstood people have the means to fight back harder? Good luck with that line of thought.
This situation will not be solved by more tanks and bombs and rockets.
I think we all agree on that, though, so far, people like you, while bitching about Israel, have offered little in the way of solution.
Look at Israel in 1948 and Israel today. It's a nation that has, with US support, expanded itself quite to its neighbors detriment for nigh on 60 years. This is a lopsided expansion being sold as a war. We've been here before.
Your simplicity is so overwhelming I wonder if you have an axe to grind here. Israel's expansion, in nearly all cases, has been a direct result of the country being attacked--or about to be attacked--by its enemies. Israel did not grab the Golan because Jewish generals liked to hike there for recreation.
don't have a dog, under or otherwise, in this fight. Outside of the human tragedy of dead Israelis and Palestinians, the whole damn place can be turned to black irradiated glass for all I care.
Then why argue with such force if you really don't care? That's odd.
Israel's expansion, in nearly all cases, has been a direct result of the country being attacked--or about to be attacked--by its enemies. Israel did not grab the Golan because Jewish generals liked to hike there for recreation.
That is true but as a signatory to the Geneva conventions Israel should not occupy any territory gained through war.
Yet Israel continues to allow for Israeli settlements throughout the West Bank.This is not to say that all Palestinian action is justified, just that the Israelis are not without fault as well.
Yet Israel continues to allow for Israeli settlements throughout the West Bank.
This is not to say that all Palestinian action is justified, just that the Israelis are not without fault as well.
I agree, though I give Israel some wiggle room on Geneva, given how many times its enemies have attacked Israel. What do you expect Israel to do? Aside from the USA, it has few reliable allies, and certainly few at the UN or in the EU.
Listen, I used to be much more pro-Palestinian, but then I saw how often Hamas, Hezballoh and other groups scuttled the various attempts at peace. No, Israel is not blameless--those West Bank settlement need to stop now--but I think the Arabs share more blame.
Your simplicity is so overwhelming I wonder if you have an axe to grind here.
Do not intimate. Again, this is why conversations about Israel and Palestine turn into brawls even among the literati.
Israel's expansion, in nearly all cases, has been a direct result of the country being attacked--or about to be attacked--by its enemies. Israel did not grab the Golan because Jewish generals liked to hike there for recreation
The logic being "We are attacked for occupying territory, let us occupy more territory so that we will no longer be attacked."
These "buffer zones" are often little more than squalid refugee camps, short on resources and long on resentment. Israel protects itself right into another conflict.
while bitching about Israel, have offered little in the way of solution.
"Bitching" about a democracy and ally of the US invading another country? I believed we were having a discussion.
The roadmaps to peace have been laid out time and again. Go with Oslo, go with any of the dozen or so plans out there, just go with something that gives Israelis a sense of security and peace and doesn't further radicalize the Palestinians or drive them to extremes.
The US has lost the political capital to lead matters, Europe can't be bothered which leaves no one to intercede with any real authority.
We're having a discussion to have a discussion here.
The roadmaps to peace have been laid out time and again. Go with Oslo, go with any of the dozen or so plans out there, just go with something that gives Israelis a sense of security and peace and doesn't further radicalize the Palestinians or drive them to extremes.
The US has lost the political capital to lead matters, Europe can't be bothered which leaves no one to intercede with any real authority.
I agree. I guess where we part ways is I think Israel lately--even with the refugee camps and West Bank settlements--has worked much harder toward peace than its enemies, which is why I have become much less pro-Palestinian since the mid 1990s. One of huge mistakes the US has made, especially since 2001 but certainly starting before then, was to treat Israel as the 51st states, which ruined any credibility we might have had on the part of the Arabs on this issue. Israel can and does much that is wrong, despite what our leaders like to tell us as they pander to Jewish voters.
If my earlier words implied a fiery attitude toward you, I apologize. I didn't mean to spoil a good discussion, and the fault is mine.
No harm done. I agree, the Palestinians, and "arab street" in general does itself no favors.
But there's a big difference between what the governments of Egypt and Saudi Arabia say about Israel and what they do. Saudi military forces had ongoing information sharing about Iraq under Saddam and there's a great deal of back channel sharing about Iran's nuclear program. The old saw in the IDF is "they will burn you in effigy in the courtyard, while taking your coin in the office".
I don't see it as a binary situation. The US could dercy Israels tactics, even demand they stop (the assault on Lebanon should have been halted) and yet still support their "right to exist". A more nuanced approach to Israel would help win not only Arab minds, but also moderate Israelis, who often feel isolated by the extremism of the IDF.
We should all pat ourselves on the back, if only for the fact that the "A***-S*******" bomb hasn't been dropped yet.
Indeed.
The father of a very good friend of mine sat on the board at his congregation. When he disagreed, politely, with regards to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon he was decried, in front of the whole congregation, as being anti-semitic.
It does a disservice to those who have seen real anti-semites to toss the term around as a cheap slam when arguments run dry.
Indeed, Navin. Though we disagree, I would never think you dislike Jews, a hard-right tactic that pisses me off immensely. Hell, Jews in Israel can be pretty vocal critics of their government and its wars, as you know.
Yeah, Navin, Albanyparkour, and matilda group hug!!!
Seriously, this is the type of disagreement-with-respect that does not exist in any type of discussion in the middle east. To many people believe that to disagree on this issue is to hate or worse.