Is Obama Going to Go Bush When He's Prez?Follow

Palestine can't be censured, but it can be blown to the ground. I think that's having more to lose than Israel, who risks half hearted UN Resolutions. After 2 weeks of fighting.



Yes, but Palestine still doesn't exist as a country. It is still technically under Israeli occupation. Illegal settlements are still being built on its land. De facto annexations of its territory are still being done by Israel. How can they be anything but aggrieved and militant?

Second, you can't just dismiss the Palestinian narrative of the last 60 years.

The problem is that people assume only one version of History is correct. Your either believe the Israeli story: persecuted all over Europe, and rightfully given back your biblical piece of land, you settle this shining democracy in the desert. Still, neighbouring states attack you, and you defend yourself while taking some land to create a buffer zone. Since then, you've won more wars, and had to do everything to survive in a hostile region.

Or you believe the Palestinian version: Your people have lived in some place for 3000 years, and one day, after having been colonised, they are told to make way for some Jewish people that some Austrian guy in Europe had persecuted. While war breaks out between the new Israeli state and Arab states, you're forced to flee, either in fear or because you are told too. Your village probably gets burned down, and when the war is over, you are barred from ever returning home. Israel wins more wars thanks to America's financial help and technology. And you, ever since that day in 1948, you and the next 3 generations of your family, you've grown up and spend your lives living as a refugee in a refugee camp. Unless you were one of the "lucky" ones, those that actually stayed in what is now an occupied territory, you are an occupied people. By the very people who took your land. And are still taking it now. While imposing an embargo on you. And killing members of your family occasionally. With the tacit support of the Western world.

Both are just as accurate. Just as real. Both reflect the true experiences of two different people.

So, if for just one second you try to see things from the Palestinian point of view, how could you morally be anything other than a "militant"? Would you sit idly by while your family gets blown to bits in Gaza? Would just drink your tea and think "Damn those Hamas militants fighting near my house, what unfortunate luck, oh well"? Not that you would have any tea to drink, of course.

Or imagine you're a 13 year old kid in Gaza today, and survive this onslaught. What are you gonna grow up thinking? How many of those kids are going to become "militant", do you think? How many will hold a sense of grievance and revenge all their lives? And you know what? Over half of the population in Gaza is under 16. Think about it. This place Israel is blowing to the ground, the majority of its inhabitants are under 16.



********* Hamas never was an existential threat to Israel. Israel has nukes and some of the best military technology in the world. It has some of the most effective intelligence agency in the world. How on Earth could some bearded fundamentalist wackos with 20 1970s mortar launcher pose an existential threat to it? That's not what this war is about.

I'm guessing you mean Dec 4th or something? I know they had begun airstrikes prior to Christmas but I thought it was around the 18th or so.

Edit: and you used your 17,000th post on this topic, FYI.

Edited, Jan 16th 2009 8:28pm by Jophiel

...Yep.

That's certainly the case.

...

...

Yep.

...

You know, EVEN IF THAT WERE THE CASE (which is so blatantly isn't), this current war is making Israel look worse in the eyes of foreign powers, so how is it moving toward actually solving that problem? It isn't. It's exacerbating that problem and solving the small problem of a few whackjobs with rocket launchers. Wait, it isn;t solving that, either. Woops.

Perhaps some tit-for-tat would be in order-- particularly since I like tits, but that's a thread for another time. Maybe Israel should just launch an unguided rocket straight into Gaza for every one that Hamas launches into Israel. That'd be fair, right? Economy of scale, a de-escalation of tensions, and no more whining from the left wing about how Israel is swatting a fly with a bazooka. And they could do it only in response to rockets fired into Israel, thus placing the responsibility for all attacks on the Palestinians.

Redd, you onboard with this?

Totem

Nonsense. The rest of the world doesn't really care either way, and a large majority of the world actually believes in Israel's right to exist, it's sovereignty, legitimacy, etc... The only countries that actively oppose Israel are Iran and Syria. Israel's existence is not at risk.



It doesn't have the "right" to do that. It's response is completely disprortional, they're hitting unlegitimate targets, densle populated civilian centres, what they've been doing for the last few weeks has been completely illegal in international law. Just like the Wall, the settlements, the embargos, the destruction of Arab property, the land grabs, etc...

So no, it doesn't have that particular "right". Not that anyone really gives a **** about international law, but in theory it would still be illegal.

You would have to reverse that analogy for it to fit. Mexico isn't in a position of absolute military superiority over the USA, so the Texans would never have to go so low as terrorism.

While decimating the infrastructure of the area, killing thousands of people and blockading the area, thus ensuring that the area remains poor and full of anti-Israeli feeling. I don't know if you're a historian, but I doubt it. Bombing has a pretty **** record when it comes to breaking civilian morale. Now, assuming you're not a ******, you'd argue that these air strikes are neccesary to soften up the Gaza strip for the land invasion taking place. Actually, that's probably as stupid as the other option, but let's go on. The Israeli army is easily superior to the Hamas forces, who have but two advantages - the home advantage, and the support of ordinary people. While the bombing weakens the resources of Hamas, it greatly increases the latter of these two advantages. Bombing (especially of infrastructure) achieves a small immediate military gain, but causes long term military and administrative difficulties. Oh, and lots of civilians die, too. It's not a good strategy.

What should Israel do? It seems that you are suggesting that there are only two courses of action, do nothing or bomb absolutely anything that might be a target, regardless of whether it's a UN school which the UN have vouched for, or a hospital, or a mosque. What Israel should have done is to remove their blockade, moved for a UN patrolled buffer zone to keep them out of the range of rocket attacks and tried to remove the causes of radicalism in Gaza, such as poverty - or at least stop directly contributing to them. If Israel needs to retaliate to be taken seriously it does not have to go absolutely balistic and thus lose the support of moderates in their borderland (as they did in Lebanon, nice job there) and the international community. The only real explanation for them doing this is a) political pressure and/or b) stupidity. I think most people would agree that Versailles was a bad idea, despite the political pressure to punish the Germans from Britain and France.

That's a terrible similie. I'm sure you thought it was quite clever, because no one would hold a bear accoutnable in the same way they would a human, but it was actually pretty stupid. It essentially equates Israel witha creature that most people see as violent and irrational, relying on base instincts rather than logic. I appreciate the inadvertent help.

Edited, Jan 17th 2009 3:36pm by Kavekk

LOL, come on...don't go insulting because somebody else has a different point of view. You may not like the comparision, but it's true. I PERSONALLY can't put the blame on Israel when this has been going on for so long. Israel uses force, we know that. Defending themselves IS their inherient right. If you stand idly by while your neighbors attack them, then you are putting you, your family, and your friends at risk. Again, I know that a lot (if not most) of the innocents killed had no knowledge of the continuing attacks, and I DO feel bad for those individuals. But for the region as a whole...I believe you reap what you sow...

Just to clarify this, the war started at the 27th of December.

Also, the Israeli Prime Minister just declared a cease fire and apologised to a lot of people.

So where's the gain? Looks like they are pretty much where they started.

I see. So your argument is, essentially, that while what Israel is doing isn't a good idea to achieve their aims, because it's not the worst possible idea it's OK? I guess that works. I suppose this means that if I hold off on shooting up an underperforming school I can shoot one really stupid kid and that'll be OK. Your argument is also that what Israel is doing is OK because if they escalate it to the point where they kill a few hundred thousand people, peace might occur? Even though you admit peace could come from a far less bloody route?

O...K.

Edited, Jan 17th 2009 6:52pm by Kavekk