Reading through the document exposed in the previous post, as well as through the Israeli blogosphere, I found another bunch of arguments that need to be refuted. Some fresh debunking coming your way!
(I like this word, ‘debunking’! It has this vague onomatopoeic metallic resonance.. )
Previous debunking post is found here. (and a belated nota-bene on these two posts is here).
1/ This is a war of self-defense. The major argument of the war, really. "No country in the world would allow its citizens to be made the target of rocket attacks without taking vigorous steps to defend them".You’ve heard that. A lot.
As Fisk said, “when the IRA were firing mortars over the border into Northern Ireland, when their guerrillas were crossing from the Republic to attack police stations and Protestants, did Britain unleash the Royal Air Force (RAF) on the Irish Republic? Did the RAF bomb churches and tankers and police stations and zap 300 civilians to teach the Irish a lesson? No, it did not. Because the world would have seen it as criminal behaviour. We didn't want to lower ourselves to the IRA's level.”
The fact that
2/ The War is a reaction to Hamas’ rockets - Pretending that this war is a direct repercussion of the increase in Qassam rockets after the end of the ceasefire in mid-December is a lie. Reports leaking from the Israeli government state that the offensive was prepared long before the end of the truce. It was only awaiting a trigger, which was promptly provided by Hamas’ stupid and predictable rockets. Yes, Hamas fired rockets; but
3/ Proportionality of the Israeli attacks. Condemned by much of the civilized world,
This pseudo-legalistic defense usually begins like this:
“Proportionality isn’t about killing the same number of people. No country provoked to war set out to kill the same number of people it lost.”
So far, okay. Then the argument is either one of these two:
a) Proportionality is with respects to the goals of the war. (a.k.a. The Smart-Ass Argument). Hence, a war would be disproportionately violent if it used more force than necessary, leading to unnecessary civilian deaths, than it should to fulfill its goals in this war.
By that argument, if the purpose is to eliminate a certain threat, or to cause the fall of a government, or whatever, the perpetrator must minimize civilian casualties in the frame of realising their goal.
Of course, if the goal is open-ended - wiping-out Hamas? Sheer impossibility, as everyone with half a brain - including the Israeli government - knows. Getting rid of them as the government? We’ll only know if that happens until after the dust settles.
This argument is a blanket approval of all civilian deaths, whom are (and I remember Madeleine Albright’s response to when she was told that the embargo on
b) Military vs. averted civilian deaths (a.k.a. The Cute-but-Dumb Argument). This argument considers that the use of force is not considered to be disproportionate if the collateral civilian deaths do not outnumber the number of civilians potentially saved by the killing of military or armed persons.
Confused? Basically, it’s okay if the number of Palestinian civilians killed is below the number of Israelis saved by the actions of the Army as they target military/Hamas persons.
The idea is nice - remarkable, even - insofar as it puts all civilians on the same footing.
But you see the obvious logical flaw in the reasoning: no one knows HOW MANY Israelis would be saved and hence how many Palestinians are “okay to kill” to save them. Of course, if you put the “potentially saved” Israeli civilians to be the population of Sderot - 20,000 people...
4/
To avoid massacres of the kind currently ongoing, we, mankind, have developed the Laws of Armed Conflict.
The United States has been, is much criticised, for not giving a fair trial to the people it arrested overseas, whom it declared “unlawful combatants”. (you know, the guys in orange jumpsuits?) This criticism finds its roots in these Laws; in this case, that every accused shall have the right to a fair trial, with adequate legal representation.
It is very important to understand, underline, and condemn
This is a violent transgression of international law.
5/ Our war is with Hamas, not the Palestinians. We have nothing against the Palestinians! We love them!
Also known as the “I-think-I’m-the-only-who-read-newspapers-during-the-Lebanon-war-Argument”.
I love this argument. It’s so deliciously dishonest... and often inadvertently so. So let’s assume an ounce of sincerity here.
Whatever happened to the ‘targeted assassinations’ (which were never really targeted anyway, but yalla)? Nah, a couple of dozen deaths per months is not sufficient.
The all-out war defeats the "war is just against Hamas" argument.
It also goes back to the definition of “Hamas” in Israeli eyes: anyone affiliated with the Government, any government employee, anyone on their payroll.
Hence, the 40-50 young people who were graduating from the
How about, anyone who is accused of sympathizing with Hamas? Anyone who owns a green Hamas flag?
By the Israeli logic, they are terrorists, too: and
Of them and their children.
6/ Hamas people hide among civilian populations/Hamas takes human shields.
Hmm, hello?
They live in
Look at the hypothetical opposite case: if the Hamas people were to try to hit the house of Ehud Barak or Ehud Olmert, they’d hit in the centre of Tel Aviv. Is Olmert hiding amongst civilians? Nope. He just lives there!
The killing of Nizzar Rayyan, the Hamas leader whose death has been much feted by the Israelis (and whom I had never heard of) took place in the Jabalya refugee camp. In a refugee camp. Does anyone see the moral, ehemm, grey zone here? Plus, anyone who has seen a Palestinian ‘refugee camp’ knows how densely populated they are. Anyone who claims the possibility of a ‘strategic strike’ in a refugee camp is either delusional or a liar.
As for the human shields: oh peu-lease. The Israeli army is the one that takes Palestinian human shields, which has included, in the past, tying Palestinian children to the windshield of their jeeps, or shoving Palestinians when searching houses so they would get the bullets first.
Right now, I'm following the trickle of news regarding the ground invasion, which has begun.
20 comments:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051015.html
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1052260.html
Hi Mohamed-while I do not agree with everything you write and question how any of us could know what others are thinking or intending (like military or political leaders), I respect how you express your opinions and the tone you take. You have given me a few things to think about and question.
I am curious to know: many people (understatement) around the world are criticizing Israel's actions but they usually do not suggest alternatives. What do you think Israel should do and should have done since the beginning of the rocket attacks?
That was beautiful. You gave us the most cynical view of every aspect of the Israeli attack on Hamas and used language to manipulate the actual circumstances so that all 300 dead Palestinians are now "civilians" and a 60 year old UN-suppported "refugee camp" is actually treated by you as a refugee camp. Even Hamas and PA control of Gaza apparently don't stop "refugees" from being "refugees." Brilliant!
Fine.
But here's the question. Why did you ignore the reason for the Israeli offensive?
You actually pretend that this is all driven by political considerations of Barak and Livni, not acknowledging the broad support among the Israeli public for this offensive.
You actually claim that the rocket attacks are not the reason for the offensive because Israel had been planning this offensive for months. Um, that's because there were rocket attacks then too. And Israel made plans for the future, just as Hamas used the cease fire to arm itself and build fortifications for tunnels. Both sides can think strategically, not just the Palestinian refugees. Besides, this assertion contradicts your Barak/Livni political considerations argument.
In your pristine world where Gazans - who had one of the Arab world's highest standards of living prior to their attacks on Israel in the war they launched after Camp David, even higher than Egypt's - have nothing to do with anything. This is despite electing a terror organization into office and supporting that organization in its attacks on random Israeli civilian targets.
Well, you reap what you sow. The Palestinians, according to many polls, have long supported the rocket attacks against Israel just as they used to support the suicide bombings. The Palestinians' elected government has chosen to use this unprovoked war crime of randomly firing rockets at civilian centers for tactical leverage against Israel and to simply perpetrate violence against the people, Jews and Zionists, whom their charter attacks in vicious and unconscionable ways.
Israel has watched quietly and patiently for 3 years. Three years!!! For three years, a total of over 4500 rockets have been fired at Israel in an effort to disrupt normal life and to intimidate civilians. The cease fire was broken by Hamas, not Israel. And when Israel finally responds to three years of rocket attacks, they target security personnel and buildings used for these purposes. For a small example of the ethics involved here, read yesterday's Erlanger article in the NY Times where he speaks to tunnel smugglers on the Egyptian side and one of them admits that the Israelis only attacked tunnels used to smuggle weapons but entirely left alone the tunnels used for smuggling civilian products. What other country or army would make this distinction and fight accordingly?
Despite ample evidence such as this, apologists like you feel perfectly comfortable writing lengthy diatribes attacking Israelis...and completely ignoring that huge elephant sitting right there in the center of your blog.
That elephant is scratching its backside languidly as it wonders when you'll get around to discussing it. It knows that as long as you dance around it with misleading attacks against the Israelis, nothing will improve or change. To improve the situation, you need to address the elephant - you and many other apologists for Hamas and Palestinian attacks against Israelis in general.
Benji: I am grateful you took the time to comment, despite - i am sure! - disagreeing with a lot of what's in there.
As for the alternative: I don't know. Really. I wish I did. How do you stop harm without causing massive bloodshed? I don't know what it is, but I do know that what is happening right now - is not the solution. Not only because of the civilian deaths: but because, by the very nature of Hamas and their methods, this operation will fail to achieve its goals.
So no security for the Israelis, massive destruction for the Gazans, lots of bloodshed everywhere (primarily Palestinian).
I condemn that. This invasion is a really, really bad idea.
Anonymous 02:03: Thank you for your comment - which will allow me, I hope, to clarify a number of points.
first: the elephant! A question, though. How many times do I have to condemn Hamas (again, and again, and again) before I stop being accused of being an "apologist"? Re-read part 1.
In any event, this post and the previous had a very precise purpose: to address the Israeli arguments to justify this war and show they are bogus. Because most of them are, really.
I find this task particularly important given the incredible - and very unusual - lack of critical thought that the Israeli society has been exhibiting, giving a complete free pass to the Army to pass on its version of things.
(on that note, btw, the Army said it was "surprised for the better" with the "fair coverage". And when a warring party, the strong one moreover, finds the coverage to be "fair", then there MUST be something wrong with this coverage. :)
Perhaps the lack of reporting from the ground, as Israel refuses access to foreign journalists, in a case reminiscent of Jenin?)
Anyways.
I'm sorry I sound cynical. But I have become so.
- Regarding the reasons: I didn't mean for the political considerations to be the only reason, but they surely are important. Shortly pre-elections, by the parties tailing the polls? Before the end of the Bush mandate? Come on. Politics must have something to do with it.
Of course part of the reason has to do with the Hamas rockets. But the Hamas attacks might justify some sort of reponse, no THIS kind of massive response. No way.
- On numbers: well, over 420 dead, +-100 women and children. Check UN stats. I am assuming that there are at least as many men as there were women and children; because men are a bigger part of the active (working) population and therefore would be the ones in the streets hit, the offices bombed, the Uni, etc.
I am adding at least 100 whom Israel would consider as "Hamas" but any reasonable person wouldn't. These include the 50 young civilian police academy grads. People working in the ministries. Etc.
So, yes, that would add up to 300 out of 420; I'm being conservative.
- Refugee camp: my focus was on the urban setting of a refugee camp. Have you seen one? It's a goddamn urban mess, and is ultra crowded. There's no way a "surgical strike" or any such thing would take place without causing massive damage and loss of life.
- Tunnels: incorrect. Reports are that the 'commercial' or 'food replenishment' tunnels are bombed as well, and as such Gaza is running out of everything, even flour. No bread!
Besides, if Israel knew which tunnels were which, wouldn't they have bombed the weapons tunnels earlier? Or did they tolerate the rockets shot on Sderot on purpose?
- Again: please don't give me the "watched quietly and patiently" speech. Strikes never stopped, incursions happened regularly, and Gaza has been under blockade for the past two years, occupation for the past 41. So seriously. It's not as if Hamas woke up one morning and decided it was going to start hitting the town across the fence for no reason, right?
The elephant is being addressed. A lot. That's actually what everyone talks about. I chose to discuss something else. Simple as that.
Anonymous 00:50: Thanks for the articles - i'll add though that allowing aid is an obligation, not a gift. Humanitarian aid must be allowed safe passage, by the creation of "humanitarian corridors".
As for the phone calls.. well, that's a positive thing - and i hope they work. I have read however that hospitals - Al-Shifa hospital, for example, has been getting so many hoaxes saying "get out, we'll bomb in ten" that they can no longer believe them...
Erlanger is no friend to Israel. Read the article because it's very clear about the tunnels.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/world/middleeast/01rafah.html?_r=1
---
Of course Barak is thinking about his political future, but that isn't what drove the timing of this campaign. What drove it is Obama. The Israelis probably felt that it would be imprudent to launch this type of attack in the early days of a new administration and they were probably worried that Obama does lean in the direction of Agha and Malley to a degree that would preclude US gov't consent to attacks such this. I believe this determined the timing far more than any upcoming election. Not even the most cynical Israeli politician would send Israeli soldiers to potentially die for the sake of an election.
----------
"Refugee camp" in this context is still not a refugee camp. You're right that bombing anything in there can cause serious damage to surrounding buildings, as can a ground offensive as you will recall from Jenin in 2002. What's worse is that the Israelis learned in Jenin that being all nice and caring for the local population and their homes results in the deaths of Israeli soldiers. I doubt they will make this mistake again. If they go into refugee camps, I suspect they will go in with bulldozers.
-------------
Do the Israelis have a choice in all of this? 4500 rockets is enough. The rockets aren't stopping and Hamas is becoming better and better entrenched. They now have rockets that reach the largest cities in Israel's south and they're clearly unafraid to use them.
It is this that is driving the Israelis to risk their own soldiers - because everybody is anticipating a tough fight here - to enter Gaza.
And they did wait patiently. The incursions were minor and temporary. Attacking rocket launchers and their operators after attacks doesn't count when compared to the size of the current campaign. The size of this campaign tells you what they were able to do years ago but didn't. They have been patient and relatively quiet even if not entirely quiet.
--------
I don't believe your numbers because I have read 38 women and children as of yesterday and that was among 350 dead. Either way, no civilians should be killed, but security personnel employed by Hamas are not civilians. The death of civilians is unavoidable, but to suggest the Israelis haven't been cautious and haven't done their best to avoid such casualties is false.
-------------
This campaign was inevitable because Hamas wanted to engage Israel. They got their wish. Israel can't be expected to fight by lobbing Kassem rockets into Gaza. Israel is going to use their military superiority and will do what it can to win this war. That addresses your question of proportionality. There is no halfway for Israel as it learned in Lebanon. It must win and it must cause severe damage to Hamas. That dictates the force they use and will use and if the thinking on your end is that 3 or 10 daily rockets don't merit this sort of response, then think about 4500 rockets and more coming - with greater range and accuracy - without end in sight.
Hey, at least I'm considered "inadvertently dishonest"... whatever that means... hmmmm... somehow that just doesn't sound like a compliment ;)
Anyways, to the point - yes, you do bring up some valid points there. It may come as a surprise to you, but I don't really like massive killings and all-out bloodshed. Now, during the Lebanon war in 2006, I supported the war at first, but when the massive bombings of civilians began, I was very much against them.
However, looks like that nasty blow given to HA in the summer of 2006 was effective? So they say, anyway, and lo and behold, while there's a lot of speeches coming from Mr Nassaralla, I don't see any rockets flying in the air...
I don't know, honestly, anymore than you do, what will bring us a stable solution. Judging from the Lebanon war of 2006, this current operation might just bring a few years of relief from rockets in southern Israel.
So, what do I as an Israeli want? A long lasting peace with the Palestinians. A two-state solution where each country will have open borders, a strong economy and the best possible quality of life for its citizens. For now, I guess we'll settle for a quite border for a few years instead. Judging by the Lebanese case, maybe a strong painful blow will get us there. Or not.
Anon:
"Do the israelis have a choice in all of this?" Of course they do. The purpose of this post and the one before were precisely about that: this war is based on bogus claims. Israel DID NOT wait patiently but was actively hostile and violent all throughout; Israel DID NOT have to murder - what's the death toll now? 480 dead, 2400+ wounded? - that many people. Come on.
As for the numbers - well, you need to read something else but Arutz7. In debunking post 1, I linked to an quote of the UN Undersecretary General for Humanitarian affairs who was saying that the numbers announced as 'civilians' are ONLY WOMEN AND CHILDREN. At the time, it was 62 women and children out of 320.
"there is no halfway" for what? Do you even know what the purpose of this war is? "Severe damage", "destruction of the terrorist infrastructure", what exactly? Fact is, you have no idea. None of us does.
Israeli Mom: Oww, Now I feel bad.:)
Well, you sounded genuine and honest (and that's good!) but the arguments you were using, despite your sincerity, were the wrong ones, the ones that everyone is supposed to use. (and that's, hmmm, less good :) So rather than criticising you, it was your arguments I disliked. 'we cool? :)
Okay. So peace is what you claim you want. Awesome. Now how does bombing the living crap out of Gaza going to get you that?
How does mass-murder gain you that?
This excellent description of the situation in Gaza by a psychiatrist should be an eye-opener. This, I can assure you, is no way to find peace!
As for Lebanon - the local developments, the presence of other political forces there, the existence of, yeah, an army!, are all factors that have come to play in the past two years and that go against the simplistic assumption of "we killed 1250 people in Lebanon --> we got a quiet northern northern border". I will remind you that Hezbollah actually engaged in a couple of displays of force within Lebanon itself - in Beirut, particularly - proving that they still hold at least a decent chunk of their military capacity. Hezbollah has refocused its efforts on the local scene, capitalising on its perceived 'success' (i don't believe it was one) in 2006.
This war will not 'end Hamas' or any such bellicose statement coming from the Gov these days. Israelis will, I fear, realise that sooner than later. First because they are bound to lose soldiers during a ground invasion. and second, because of immediate, and delayed reactions.
Finally - I have a big problem with your idea of a 'strong painful blow'. I mean, sure. Mass-annihilation will surely take care of the problem. Well, why don't you nuke them? That'll get rid of Gazans once and for all. Not that Israelis give a damn about Palestinian lives anyway, do they.
I don't read Arutz 7. I read Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, NY Times, my local papers, New Yorker, Slate, Atlantic. And Sports Illustrated and Architectural Digest.
In other words, you're wrong about the profile.
Israel has sent warnings to the homes of people who are in range of attacks. They focused on security facilities in their initial aerial bombardment. They have targeted Hamas operatives as we know from some successful hits. They hit armament tunnels and not the civilian tunnels. And they have done this after 4500 rockets were launched at them including an average of 15-20 a day once Hamas broke the cease fire.
I think you expect some bloodless war but such things don't exist. The side that wanted a war and has been baiting for one for years has gotten their war. Every death and every injury is the fault of Hamas and those who elected them.
FISK??! Yes, it's true that Great Britain didn't use the Royal Air Force...instead they sent in their army, complete with tanks and APCs, declared martial law, built 'apartheid walls' to ghettoize the Catholic minority, suspended civil liberties, arrested Catholic suspects without cause, held them without trials and without charges, often for years, engaged in torture, co-opted the Ulster racists to do their murdering for them (and that's probably the ONLY reason they didn't use the RAF--they might have hit their Ulster accomplices in those close quarters), and gunned down Catholic civilians who were holding a civil rights march in broad daylight....yeah, THAT Fisk! So unctiously, morally superior, "God-Is-An-Englishman" colonialist-in-his-colony, lording it over all of us primitive Middle Easterners....sorry, but his smug moral superiority is vastly misplaced.
As for the other points you make....I respect you and like you tremendously so I am not going to argue about what are clearly very different perceptions of what has happened and is happening. I can only express what I see and feel here in Israel.
We each have our opinions which are shaped by our environments. Israelis have been angry, frightened and outraged for a long time over the intermittent rocket attacks from Gaza. However much certain quarters minimize them, Palestinian rockets cause deaths, maiming and life-long injuries.
Whatever the Kadima government's motivation (and I suspect, as many, that politics is part of it, just as I suspect that Hamas needed to start a war to regain declining popular support), most of us in Israel feel that 80 rockets a day aimed at civilian targets, coupled with Palestinian intransigence about a cease-fire, needed a military response. Clearly a diplomatic solution wasn't forthcoming.
Hamas had already said, "No more cease-fire," so where do you go with that when the missiles start falling? Hamas in essence announced that they were firing at us and had no intention of stopping.
We're not going to open our borders with Gaza--we don't want their exported suicide bombers and sleeper cells. (I hope you checked the link I sent you).
Need supplies? Need jobs? Need to catch a plane? Go to Egypt. Why should Israel be the destination for people inculcated with a murderous hatred for us from mosques, from children's television, from school texts, from nearly every source of media?
You and other writers have often decried "collective punishment" but isn't there also a collective responsibility? If the majority of the population knowingly votes for a war-mongering party, why are they surprised when that party, once in power, brings about war? "Jihad" is the Hamas platform. The non-recognition of Israel, the destruction of Israel, and war against Israel are all part of the Hamas platform. The Palestinians voted that platform into office. They've danced in the streets and handed out candies when Israelis have been killed in 'martydom' operations. Bad enough to have neighbors who want to kill you--why would I open the door and invite them inside?
I don't have an answer. My opinion, for whatever its worth, is that Gaza, instead of lobbing missiles, could have renounced jihad, recognized Israel's right to exist, and insisted on statehood and sovereignty rather than trying to out-war and wear out Israel.
We're not going to get worn out. We have no choices. I think sometimes too many people in the Arab world believe the propaganda lie that all Israelis are European exports who just got off the boat from Vienna or Moscow. This is so far from the truth. We say here, "Ainli eretz acheret" -- "I have no other country." For the vast majority of the Jews in Israel, there is no place to go. It's stand your ground and fight, or be annihilated by an Arab world that wants you dead.
"I will play music and celebrate what the Israeli air force is doing." Those chilling words were spoken on al-Jazeera on Saturday by Ofer Shmerling, an Israeli civil defence official in the Sderot area adjacent to the Gaza Strip. (The Guardian)
If i were using the same logic you are, that man would 'deserve to die'. How about the Israeli children, writing death wishes for Lebanese children ? Kids playing? and their racist parents?
No. Supplies, plane, jobs, they shouldn't need to go to Egypt: they should be able to have that where they are.
They used to have an airport: Israel bombed it. They used to have jobs: Israel killed the local economy by blockading anything in and out. They used to have supplies, and guess what: yes, Israel is not allowing it.
Israelis need to stop contradicting themselves, really. They cannot go on a 'we feel sorry for the Palestinians and we want peace' while going with a "they elected Hamas, therefore they deserve to die" justification,
Israel never wanted peace! It never renounced its expansionist claims, Aliyah06, and as we discuss there is land grab taking place in the West Bank.
As for the truce - Israel was very clearly not interested in renewing it. Naaaah. Israel was eagerly waiting for the 'truce' - so much of a truce, really, with both side hitting each other - to implement this nice little campaign in Gaza. Diplomacy is something that Israeli has consistently rejected. Let's face it, Israel can shove any agreement they want down the Palestinians' throats. They are strong enough to do that. (and it almost worked in Camp David, despite the ridiculous, utterly ridiculous plan submitted).
Why can't Israelis admit to the simple fact that this war is a bloody massacre, and that it is strategically and morally WRONG?
The "stand your ground and fight" discourse is out of place here. This isn't 1949 anymore. Anyone who tells you that Israel is facing an 'existential threat' is either lying or really wrong.
Anonymous 20:59:
"Every death and every injury is the fault of Hamas and those who elected them."
Is that what you tell yourself to clear your conscience?
Is it actually working? Really?
Everything else you said - well, except your list of readings, I can't tell - is wrong.
The 'warnings'. The 'security facilities' (did you read about the market bombed today?). The tunnels, which are widely destroyed with no distinction of purposes, proven by the acute shortages in Gaza.
Then, the good ol' "AFTER 4500 rockets were fired" claim, as if Israel was quietly knitting in its rocking chair when it was hit by those barbarian whom Israel never harmed.
But hey. Every death is the fault of those who voted Hamas, right?
Good for you, my friend. good for you.
Hi again, it's the same Anon who is supposed to be lying to himself to clear his conscience.
Today, the house of a friend in Sderot was hit by a Qassem rocket. It was partially destroyed. The home owners, parents and children, were hiding in a "safe room" and suffered minor harm.
They have been living with the fear of this eventuality for years now. Their second worst fears have come to pass - the primary fear being that they won't see somebody again after they drop him off at work or school in the morning.
This house's destruction took place not because of the Israeli offensive because this could have happened two weeks ago or two years ago. It happened because the elected government of Gaza, a terrorist organization that seeks nothing less than the destruction of Israel and the absolute denial of a Jewish connection to this ancient homeland, has a strategy of firing thousands of rockets into Israeli civilian centers.
They are not targeting military facilities but civilian ones.
Now, maybe you can clear your conscience that this terrorist organization - the very definition of terrorist since they target and attack civilians in order to further their ideological aims - is somehow a separate entity from the Gazan population. That would be a lie. Just as it was proven that a good portion of UNWRA's workers are related or part of Hamas, you can't deny that this group was elected into office and has a vast level of support among their populace.
You make the laughable claim that these terrorists should have an airport and have open access to passages out of Gaza. Why, they didn't smuggle enough arms for you? You'd like a bigger conflagration? You want them to have rockets that can hit Tel Aviv?
You make the false claim that Israel has targeted the civilian population despite an article from a NY Times reporter who is there on the scene and writes that the civilian tunnels have remained unhit. Supplies are low? Israel is allowing passage of humanitarian supplies - when Hamas fighters aren't shooting at Gaza crossings.
You claim that Israel targets civilians despite the vast preponderance of security personnel that have been hit. You say this despite the warning telephone calls that residents of high risk buildings have received.
No, nothing will satisfy you. You want Israel to accept more rocket attacks, more potential kidnappings, more anti-semitic television and schools, more hate with a view to destroy Israel, and while they are at it, you want Israel to open borders and passageways so they can facilitate the military build-up of a terrorist organization that now has the resources of a government at its disposal. And if they dare to respond to any of this, it's because of their "expansionist" goals or their leaders' political motives, or whatever other excuses you can invent.
As long as it's not the real reason of a terrorist militia sitting in government and launching daily rocket attacks at Israel. Apparently that's not enough. I'm sure that if Canada was shooting thousands of rockets at Dearborn, you would recommend that the US open further delivery passages to Canada.
I'm sorry, but the case you make is absurd.
4500 rockets and more coming with better range and accuracy. It was time to act and it is right and just that Israel acted. As our Sderot friends, who have lived for years now under regular bombardment of their town, will tell you, "It is impossible to live here, but where can we go when this is our home?" I guess they are lucky, they can leave now because they no longer have a home. Surely Israel should stand by quietly and allow this to continue to happen to its citizens. After all, who wants those pesky "expansionist" Jews to fight back?
By the way, before I conclude. The offer in 2000 was exceptionally good and the offer at Taba was spectacularly great. Had the Palestinians opted for peace instead of launching a war, they would have been in their own state for years now, raising their children in peace, working hard (probably with Israelis) to attain affluence and grow their economy, enjoying the reparation money that was offered, and really enjoying the fruits of being a nation in a state for the first time in thier history.
Nope, they decided to go all out and launch a war instead. They are still tasting the bitter fruits of that war today and folks like you are encouraging them to keep suffering instead of grabbing the chance for peace. It's funny that I support this Israeli campaign because in many respects I believe you are the warmonger here.
Hello Anon,
Yes, I guessed that was you, yep!
Glad to know your friends are safe. I am, really.
Hence a fundamental difference between us. I want this war to end. You don't seem mildly bothered by the destruction and loss of life. And why would you, really: with few images trickling out of Gaza, since Israel still does not allow for foreign journalists to enter the strip - thus violating a supreme court order - and the beautiful coverage done by the Israeli media, it's easy to pretend that only buildings - bad guys buildings! - are falling in Gaza.
(Your NYTimes reporter is in Egypt, by the way.)
Do you people really think that the people of Gaza wake up every morning, saying to his children, "kids, let's think of ways to absolutely deny a Jewish connection to their ancient homeland"?
Trust me, they have better things to worry about. Read this to get a quick idea of what life in Gaza - pre-war - was like.
And worry is what they've been doing for quite a while now. Worry that they'll find food to feed their kids, worry that they will have a job, worry that their children will not be killed by a random Israeli army incursion.
Because, newsflash: Israel occupies Gaza. (and the West Bank. And East Jerusalem. And the Golan Heights. Does it not bother you at all that Israel is the last colonial power on earth?)
Which renders your 'Canada shooting at Dearborn' comparison completely irrelevant: the USA isn't occupying Canada, last time I checked. (checking again... hmmm, nope, still not occupying it!)
For you to justify the mass-murders because of "large support in the populace" is unfair, dishonest, and very destructive.
Dishonest, because you have no idea. And you have no idea who supported whom when: and most probably, if you were a Gazan, were being starved by a foreign occupier who wishes to see you and your children dead, you'd probably take a fancy to the only people giving them a bit of a hard time.
Unfair, because even if they did support Hamas, that wouldn't justify their murder. Would it? Would it? I'd actually love to read an answer from you on that one. A yes or a no. Would it?
And destructive, because by the same logic, any civilian on the other side, anyone who supports the IDF should be considered an enemy. Or should be considered an IDF soldier and become a 'fair target'. I suppose you don't want that? Yeah? I don't either.
I am yet to see proof of those phone calls (because, honestly, they sound a little illogical - are they calling every apartment in the block to warn them? If they are, aren't they tipping off their target and losing the element of surprise? Highly unlikely...). I know there are telephone calls, especially going to places like hospitals and stuff: prank calls. Soldiers having fun, calling hospitals and telling them to evacuate everyone because they're bombing the hospital in 10 minutes. These phone calls, you mean? Yeah, very helpful.
Your "terrorist organization that now has the resources of a government at its disposal" made me laugh... What resources? Seriously, what resources does Gaza have?
And let's not kid ourselves, shall we? The Palestinian territories are, de facto, still under the boot of the IDF, governed by its 'civilian administrators'. So don't give me the 'government resources' nonsense.
I don't get why Israelis tend to consider that history began in mid-december, with the end of a truce you showed no interest in renewing. Can we get some context here? You know. Blockade? Occupation?
Yes, Palestinians must get their freedom. They must have access to the rest of the world. They must be able to walk safely in their streets. They must have playgrounds for their kids. They must be able to live a life of dignity.
Which your country denies them.
There is a warmonger among us, but I can assure you, sir (madam?), it is not me. I seek an end to the blooshed, you seek more blood. I seek a peaceful resolution, you seek the illusion of stability that will be brought, while the Palestinians lick their wounds.
Chances are, not that large but decent chances really, that this war will give you quiet for a little while. And then?
Why not seek something more stable with the Palestinians? Something that involves both-sides making concessions, rather than asking one side to bow and kiss the other's proverbial boot?
And who are you voting for in February?
I voted in November and don't vote in Feb. Sorry.
------
"You don't seem mildly bothered by the destruction and loss of life."
I am extremely bothered by the loss of lives if they are civilians. I am not bothered by military or security personnel who are killed because this is a war started by these very people.
I don't want this offensive and I support it only because it is necessary. However, it has to be won and Hamas has to be beaten down to a useless pulp. I hope - and I say this with all sincerity - that not another Palestinian civilian gets hurt in this campaign.
-----
"And worry is what they've been doing for quite a while now. Worry that they'll find food to feed their kids, worry that they will have a job, worry that their children will not be killed by a random Israeli army incursion."
As I told you already, the per capita income in Gaza was higher than Egypt's before the Palestinians launched their war against Israel in 2000. It could be again if they stopped bombing Israel or sending suicide terrorists through crossings when they are open.
Israel would rather live in peace with Gaza. Gaza does not wish to live in peace with Israel. The rockets are not the result of "incursions" or "occupation." We know this because every single Jew was made to leave Gaza. The rockets are the result of one side seeking to keep the flame of war going precisely because they don't wish to live in peace side by side but to try to destroy Israel.
-----
"Do you people really think that the people of Gaza wake up every morning, saying to his children, "kids, let's think of ways to absolutely deny a Jewish connection to their ancient homeland"?"
Do you mean Jews? Who do you mean by "you people?"
He may not say to his kids what you wrote but he elected a government that does and that provides schools and tv programming that says precisely that over and over.
------
"Because, newsflash: Israel occupies Gaza. (and the West Bank. And East Jerusalem. And the Golan Heights. Does it not bother you at all that Israel is the last colonial power on earth?)"
Israel is entirely out of Gaza. The Palestinians want this to be called "occupation" but actually have their own government inside Gaza and could be entirely disengaged from Israel...if it weren't for the rocket attacks. The border crossings could be open and there could be open trade between Israel and Gaza. But the Gazans prefer to attack and attack and attack. Then you cry that it's occupation because Israel shutters its borders.
Jerusalem is entirely annexed by Israel. There is no East Jerusalem, there is east Jerusalem. In 2000 and 2001, the Palestinians were offered control over this part of the city save for the Jewish Quarter, the Armenian Quarter and shared control over the Temple Mount. The Palestinians rejected this compromise. That leaves east Jerusalem in Israeli hands.
Israel is not a colonial power. There are more Jewish Israelis born inside Israel, including the areas you mention, than Arabs or Palestinians. Don't start with the speeches about European Jews either because the majority of Israelis are actually Sephardic or from Arab countries.
-----
"Which renders your 'Canada shooting at Dearborn' comparison completely irrelevant: the USA isn't occupying Canada, last time I checked. (checking again... hmmm, nope, still not occupying it!)"
Actually, my comparison is entirely valid. There isn't a single Israeli soldier or civilian left in Gaza. Not one. Not a single one. Just like the US and Canada share borders, Israel shares a border with Gaza and just as the US has the ability to shut those borders, Israel has the same ability.
Which brings us back to the comparison you deftly evaded: if Canada were bombarding Dearborn with thousands of rockets - regardless of any justification, such as the recent incursions by the US into Canadian territorial waters in the North - you would not suggest that the US open up supply lines to Canadians in response.
Come on, let's have some honesty here.
-----
"For you to justify the mass-murders because of "large support in the populace" is unfair, dishonest, and very destructive."
It's not mass murder. It's war and there are victims in war. Israel is carefully adhering to international law with respect to wartime, not withstanding your bloated rhetoric.
"Dishonest, because you have no idea. And you have no idea who supported whom when:"
A larger portion of the population voted for Hamas and over 50% show support for Hamas and its policies in polls.
I guess you are right though. Israel should just keep getting rocketed because if they fight back and hurt civilians in the process, then this is immoral. Oh wait, that is precisely the logic Hamas and Hizbullah use when they shoot or store their weapons inside civilian centers.
"and most probably, if you were a Gazan, were being starved by a foreign occupier who wishes to see you and your children dead, you'd probably take a fancy to the only people giving them a bit of a hard time."
What a pack of lies. Israel closes the borders when there are pending attacks or attacks. Nobody in Israel wishes Palestinians dead and its certainly not government policy. It is very simple: Israel left Gaza entirely. Despite this, they have been attacked for years from Gaza.
"Unfair, because even if they did support Hamas, that wouldn't justify their murder. Would it? Would it? I'd actually love to read an answer from you on that one. A yes or a no. Would it?"
Murder? It's not murder unless you are targeting them. Israel is not targeting civilians, unlike Hamas and Fatah and all the other Palestinian groups which are supported by the vast majority of Palestinians when considered collectively.
This is a war. A war started by the Palestinians against Israeli civilians. Israel is doing its best to avoid civilian casualties among the Palestinians and any deaths of any civilians is regrettable and highly unfortunate. It will happen, though, and can only be stopped in one way. You know how? Stop bombing Israeli civilians. Simple, isn't it? Like I said, every death and every injury in this war is the fault of Hamas and their supporters.
------
"Unfair, because even if they did support Hamas, that wouldn't justify their murder. Would it? Would it? I'd actually love to read an answer from you on that one. A yes or a no. Would it?"
See above. I don't give yes or no answers to complex questions. No civilians should die but ask Hamas to fight outside civilian areas and this is more likely to transpire.
"And destructive, because by the same logic, any civilian on the other side, anyone who supports the IDF should be considered an enemy."
But that is the logic of Hamas.
"Or should be considered an IDF soldier and become a 'fair target'."
So is that.
I never claimed or said that any civilian should be targeted. I have said the opposite. I believe the opposite. However, it's not as if Israel can cause a groundswell of people trying to remove Hamas from power when the majority supports Hamas. Israel is really left with no choice but to attack.
"I suppose you don't want that? Yeah? I don't either."
If you don't put words in my mouth, you won't end up with statements that don't represent my views.
--------------
You wrote, "Yes, Palestinians must get their freedom. They must have access to the rest of the world. They must be able to walk safely in their streets. They must have playgrounds for their kids. They must be able to live a life of dignity.
Which your country denies them."
"My country" is the US. Sorry.
However, I quote you because we are in complete and full agreement. Had the Palestinians not gone to war in 2000 and negotiated in good faith without attacking Israel, they would have all those things you wish for and that I wish for.
Of course, if you think that Israel can be over-run with Palestinians so that it becomes "Palestine," then you are not seeking peace. It seems that this was and is the Palestinian strategy and it seems you support it. That is why I call you a warmonger. Your vision of people living in peace seems to remove the concept of Jewish self-determination because you think it's colonialism or that things just automatically belong to the Palestinians.
East Jerusalem, just as an example, is not occupied. The history of the city after Ottoman rule is that it was under British mandatory rule (intended to establish a Jewish state in the region) and then Jordanian occupation. In other words, no one side has superior claim to this part of Jerusalem, certainly not the Palestinians who have never had a state.
---
" are they calling every apartment in the block to warn them? If they are, aren't they tipping off their target and losing the element of surprise? Highly unlikely"
Well, you are wrong again. This points, yet again, to the ethics of the Israeli military.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24855309-2,00.html
They did the same in Lebanon.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/israel-warns-hezbollah-by-phone-before-bombing
-----
"Your "terrorist organization that now has the resources of a government at its disposal" made me laugh... What resources? Seriously, what resources does Gaza have?"
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/print.php?template=C05&CID=2969
"Despite the recent successes in efforts to disrupt Hamas's financing, the group is still able to raise substantial funds. As the governing party in Gaza, Hamas has access to new sources of funding, including taxes and customs fees. The European Union, for example, halted fuel shipments to Gaza in August 2007 over concern that Hamas would tax Gazans to fund its government and military arm. Hamas also began to impose large taxes on companies operating in Gaza, in addition to taxing specific commodities, many of which have been smuggled into the area.
Hamas also initiated fees for the registration of vehicles, licenses, and birth certificates. The group imposed heavy fines for the failure to license or register cars in Gaza, and opened customs offices near several border crossings to collect customs duties on incoming goods. These duties also apply to smuggled goods. Hamas reportedly patrols the network of underground tunnels in Gaza and shuts down those whose operators fail to pay these charges.
Due to Hamas's position, the group also gained full control over Gaza's zakat (charity) committees. While some zakat committees have long been associated with Hamas, they all require government registration and some operate independently of the group. Under the Hamas government, zakat funds have been channeled into the government budget -- to fund whatever Hamas deems necessary."
This doesn't even list the millions of dollars provided by Iran along with all that free training and arms gifts they provide Hamas.
------
"And let's not kid ourselves, shall we? The Palestinian territories are, de facto, still under the boot of the IDF, governed by its 'civilian administrators'. So don't give me the 'government resources' nonsense."
Uh, we are talking about Gaza which is not under Israeli rule. Israel is entirely out of Gaza and has been for years.
De facto governance is still taking place by the PA which received at least $7.4 billion in assistance from the international community last year, not including UNWRA support. Abbas still pays the salaries of 50,000 civil employees in Gaza with that money, by the way.
-----
"I don't get why Israelis tend to consider that history began in mid-december, with the end of a truce you showed no interest in renewing. Can we get some context here? You know. Blockade? Occupation?"
Americans consider this too. Actually, we are in agreement. I go back several years to when the rockets began and consider every day of these past years as prelude to the current Israeli offensive. It is long overdue because all they've done is enable Hamas to become better prepared and entrenched.
"Yes, Palestinians must get their freedom. They must have access to the rest of the world. They must be able to walk safely in their streets. They must have playgrounds for their kids. They must be able to live a life of dignity.
Which your country denies them."
My country is the US. But Israel doesn't deny them a life of dignity, Hamas does. Just as Hamas could use the taxes it raises to build arms tunnels instead of...playgrounds. Stop the attacks on Israel and promise to live in peace and the borders will re-open, Palestinians will prosper again and they will enjoy this under the rule of other Palestinians. You don't have a leg to stand on because the Palestinians have not been peaceful for too many years now, even after Israel departed Gaza. It's not hard to be peaceful when you try.
-----
"I seek a peaceful resolution, you seek the illusion of stability that will be brought, while the Palestinians lick their wounds.
Chances are, not that large but decent chances really, that this war will give you quiet for a little while. And then?
Why not seek something more stable with the Palestinians? Something that involves both-sides making concessions, rather than asking one side to bow and kiss the other's proverbial boot?"
No, I seek a real peace and have a template for it in the Taba talks. You seek endless war because even that extremely fair compromise is considered "laughable" to you. Well, if that's laughable, then clearly your intention when you speak about "real peace" is the type of concessions by Israel that would eliminate its Jewish character and turn it into yet another Arab country. Sorry again but Israelis have a right to self-determination, and that is the only foundation for peace that is acceptable.
Mohammed, I recommend you to consider talking with a fellow arab from western sahara about who is
the last colonial power on earth. It might be a fellow arab country as well.
Dear Anonymous: welcome back!
What do you do in life, may I ask? You seem to have an awful lot of free time on your hands.. but hey, that's great. Quite entertaining really. But I mean, over 5 MS Word pages of response?
On the assumption that your per capita income assertion is true (can't be bothered to check, really) - well it's not very difficult to be higher than Egypt. :) Plus there's more to life than GDP/Cap (otherwise, KSA and Kuwait would've been classified as developed countries: they weren't.) Other factors, together forming the Human Development Index.
Add to this that - really, you're trying to justify occuption by saying "oh, but they shouldn't be complaining because they're better fed than their neighbours?" You do have a colonialist mindset indeed.
Going through your long list of accusations, in which you try to throw as many accusations as possible to hit the largest number of Palestinians as possible, it becomes quite obvious that your sole purpose is to come to the conclusion: "they deserved it".
"they voted Hamas" (you assume). "they didn't evacuate when the *phone calls*" warned them. (because the article you cite actually mentions one of the hoaxes i described).
The fact that you refused to answer whether you think this justifies killing them says more about you than any answer would. You clearly favour the killing of civilians - because they voted fro the wrong guys! - but don't have the courage to admit it. Come on, let me hear it: "Kahane was right! Kahane was right!"
And regarding your "Israel goes out of its way to respect international law" (ha!) read this article by Richard Falk, United Nations special investigator on human rights in the Palestinian Territories:
"The magnitude of Palestinian suffering and the deliberate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel are indefensible. They should be addressed forcefully by the international community."
Worthy of noting that the man was denied entry to Israel - a UN special envoy. I wonder what Israel is trying so hard to hide, i wouldn't allow foreign journalists - and the UN special envoy - to see?
A bloodbath, perhaps?
You're still holding on to the Dearborn comparison, despite me proving it ridiculous earlier. Now the only comparison you can find would be "incursions in the canadian territorial waters"? Surely you're not comparing the occupation of Gaza - and the rest of Palestine - to 'incursions in the canadian territorial waters". (oh. You are. Well, in this case, then your argument fully holds! Clearly!)
More Jews in the occupied Palestinian territories than Arabs? You are very mistaken. There are 200,000 settlers in EJ; 250,000 settlers in the West Bank. God-know-how-many in the Golan, but still less than the natives.
Israel is a perfect colonial state. Add to it that is breaches laws
Oh, and yes, East Jerusalem is occupied, by international law. It is not part of Israel, as much as people like you love to wave their "Yerushalaym meouchedet" banners. It's still occupied. Dude, even the Israeli leadership is discussing splitting Jerusalem. So where the heck do you come from with such extremist ideas?
Your mention of the ottoman empire not only grossly overlooks everything that happened since WW1 (from Sykes-Picot 1915, to Sevres, all the way to WW2, the establishment of the state of Israel, etc) but also shows that you are, still, rehashing the same good old arguments you've been taught.
Borders: have been completely sealed for the past 18 months, and closed most of the time for the 6 years before. You're even contradicting yourself here. You were just earlier informing me about Israel is gentle enough to not bomb the food tunnels. Which is complete bullshit - read anything regarding the situation in Gaza now. (like this one here).
If you're asking whether by "you people" I am referring to Jews, if you really mean it, then this conversation becomes moot. I am unwilling to discuss with someone who's looking for an excuse to throw a racism accusation.
I believe you owe me an apology.
And no. By you people, i referred to war-mongers like yourself, the people trying blindly to defend the bloodbath in Gaza, by resorting to pre-packaged arguments and the occasional downright lie. The people with selective memories, who remember events when they suit them. This is what i meant by "you people".
Happy?
Alright. You are obstinate enough to repeat the same arguments ad nauseam. It's been fun really but now it's getting repetitive and rather time-consuming, and your clear anti-peace position - unless it comes under exclusively Israeli terms, clearly - so I will enjoy my privilege as blog owner and end the conversation here.
If you have something to add, email me. I may reply.
(oh, and Western Sahara: seen either as an occupation or as secessionist movement, depending on who you talk to. A UNSC resolution gave the Sahraouis the right to self determination by referendum (which was never implemented).
A right which Palestinians never got; and which becomes more difficult everyday as Israel places more and more settlers in the WB and EJ.
Israel is indeed the last colonial force in the world.
Good night!
"so I will enjoy my privilege as blog owner and end the conversation here"
How convenient.
Isn't it.
Post a Comment