Some joyous tidings from Israel

[Marshal Murat]

It didn't help that the new state was also based on a religion which had a long feud dating century's with the religion already established in the region.

Actually, the Jewish people have had the best relations with Islamic nations. When the Spanish Catholics persecuted Jews, they fled to the Ottomans or Mamlukes. Islamic nations have always previously been Jewish havens from Christian persecution.

The only problems have arisen when the surrounding Muslim nations attacked Israel and, as you can tell by this thread, Jews in general. The wars became religious, fighting over "Jerusalem" and the "Holy Land" rather than about who will live where, peacefully. With the rise of extremist Muslim sects, this war has been taken to a new and disgusting level of death, killing, and murder.
Especially in Lebanon.
Lebanon was supposed to be a Christian haven, but the result was the polygot nation, with Christian, Druze, Jewish, and Muslim militias fighting it out, butchering one another for no other purpose than religion and land.

[Hooahguy]

thank you Marshal Murat. my thoughts exactly.

[Jolt]

The only problems have arisen when the surrounding Muslim nations attacked Israel and, as you can tell by this thread, Jews in general.

Wrong. The attacks were a consequence, not a cause. The problems began when the UN created a country where it shouldn't have created, and illegitimately, because by doing so, they'd have to create a bucketload more of countries whose people also want independence. If, instead of Israel, there had been a joint Arab-Jew Palestine, then there would have been no attack. But the jews wanted a country of their own, where they wouldn't have to share power with the arabs.

[Idaho]

Israel is an apartheid state founded on ethnic cleansing. On top of which it is aggressive and expansionist and has killed over 3000 Palestinians in the last few years. It isn't that suprising that it gets a hundred or so casualties from Palestinian attacks. They are just lucky in their enemies. The Palestinian strategy is stuck in a losing rut.

[rvg]

Israel is an apartheid state founded on ethnic cleansing. On top of which it is aggressive and expansionist and has killed over 3000 Palestinians in the last few years...

Maybe so. I would argue though that Israel cannot afford to have a less aggressive stance given past and present actions of its neghbors and the Palestinians. Arab states ganged up on Israel in 3 separate wars and 3 times they went home crying. It's time to stopthe stupid and pointless violence (aka rocket attacks) and start building a peaceful future. Fatah is led by the pragmatists and technocrats who understand that, while Hamas is ruled solely by warmongers who only understand the most widely understood language on Earth. And Israel is more than happy to speak that language whenever the opportunity presents itself. Regardless of its origin Israel is here to stay. The sooner Hamas stops the violence the better off its people would be.

[Tribesman]

Fatah is led by the pragmatists and technocrats who understand that

That has to be the funniest thing written so far .

[Fragony]

That has to be the funniest thing written so far .

More true for Fatah then it is for Hamas and these two are the only flavour

[Idaho]

Maybe so. I would argue though that Israel cannot afford to have a less aggressive stance given past and present actions of its neghbors and the Palestinians. Arab states ganged up on Israel in 3 separate wars and 3 times they went home crying. It's time to stopthe stupid and pointless violence (aka rocket attacks) and start building a peaceful future.

Hmmm... last Arab instigated Israeli war was over 30 years ago. You think they may be dining out a little long on that scare story? Since the 1970s the picture has been one of Arab diplomacy. Hizbollah were created by Israel doing some regional powerplay in Lebanon. Take a look at what happened in the Palestinian refugee camps in that country. Perhaps they don't teach that in American text books.

As for stupid and pointless rocket attacks - I agree they are stupid and pointless. They draw attention away from the drastically greater number of Palestinians killed by state-of-the-art US military equipment given free to Israel by the US - but as someone has said - what has this got to do with the US

Did you hear the latest US spokesman? "Hamas has to declare a ceasefire that we can believe in... er.. not we, I mean Israel can believe in".

[Fragony]

Since the 1970s the picture has been one of Arab diplomacy.

You have got to be kidding me. There is the region and there is the world around it.

[rvg]

Hmmm... last Arab instigated Israeli war was over 30 years ago. You think they may be dining out a little long on that scare story? Since the 1970s the picture has been one of Arab diplomacy. Hizbollah were created by Israel doing some regional powerplay in Lebanon. Take a look at what happened in the Palestinian refugee camps in that country. Perhaps they don't teach that in American text books.

Arab diplomacy? Man, those words don't even go together, it's like saying "Israeli democracy". I mean, Sadat got killed for being diplomatic with Israel. Now Abbas is catching fire from every corner of the Arab world for not unilaterally condemning Israel. I'm not trying to sugarcoat what Israel does, but the Palestinian side has definitely shot itself in the foot on numerous occasions by refusing to acknowledge the objective reality.

[Idaho]

Arab diplomacy? Man, those words don't even go together, it's like saying "Israeli democracy". I mean, Sadat got killed for being diplomatic with Israel. Now Abbas is catching fire from every corner of the Arab world for not unilaterally condemning Israel. I'm not trying to sugarcoat what Israel does, but the Palestinian side has definitely shot itself in the foot on numerous occasions by refusing to acknowledge the objective reality.

I agree the Pals have made a mess of the crap hand they have been played. But the Israelis are the ones with the most blood on their hands. They have control of the best weapons and best media - and still they aren't winning.

[tibilicus]

Israel is an apartheid state founded on ethnic cleansing. On top of which it is aggressive and expansionist and has killed over 3000 Palestinians in the last few years. It isn't that suprising that it gets a hundred or so casualties from Palestinian attacks. They are just lucky in their enemies. The Palestinian strategy is stuck in a losing rut.

That's some of the best input in this thread. well said.

[Furunculus]

That's some of the best input in this thread. well said.

odd, i thought rvg's response to that statement to be far closer to the truth:

Maybe so. I would argue though that Israel cannot afford to have a less aggressive stance given past and present actions of its neghbors and the Palestinians. Arab states ganged up on Israel in 3 separate wars and 3 times they went home crying. It's time to stopthe stupid and pointless violence (aka rocket attacks) and start building a peaceful future. Fatah is led by the pragmatists and technocrats who understand that, while Hamas is ruled solely by warmongers who only understand the most widely understood language on Earth. And Israel is more than happy to speak that language whenever the opportunity presents itself. Regardless of its origin Israel is here to stay. The sooner Hamas stops the violence the better off its people would be.

[rory_20_uk]

Interesting. A state who'se borders are controlled by a foreign, hostile power, who'se resources are sinilarly controlled and who continue to take parcels of land should just unilaterally play nice - and hope that Israel stops chocking the life out of the place. If they're lucky the military incursions, illegal fences, artillery and missile attacks might also stop!

Israel has all the cards. The rocket attacks due next to nothing. Unlike the Palestinians they have radar and alarms. They could open the borders, let food and supplies into the territories, hell, even give the land back that even their courts state is stolen. This would neither destabilise Israel, but it would give palestinians a future to live for, and stop them being seen as a bully. Rockets are getting though with the embargo of almost everything. it's not like Hamas are going to get sent Stinger missile batteries or the odd nuke, is it?

[Hooahguy]

The rocket attacks due next to nothing.

but is it the right of a country to defend its citizens? the rockets dont do nothing. they terrorize, destroy property, and kill. i doubt where you live, rockets fall every day or bombs drop from planes. you cant say they do nothing. they do something. living in fear is horrible. but of course its easy for us to say israel should absorb it, but how do you think that makes the people of Sderot, who are under rocket attacks daily, feel? i think right now they feel great becasue the IAF is doing something.
it is the right of every country to defend its citizens from acts of aggression, no matter what.

[Hooahguy]

No its not by anyone outside of israel.

fixed it for ya. but realize that saying "anyone" you mean governments, not people. im sure there are many all over the world who say that jeruslaem is the capital of israel.

I'm pretty sure Tel Aviv is meant to be that capitol of Israel but after the war Israel decided to keep the city as their little war trophy. In reality as the original partition suggests Jerusalem should be a U.N administrated neutral city but hey, Israel just thought they'd keep it. Jerusalem shouldn't even be in their hands but hey as the ruling Israelis would say "land, land , land."

not a trophy. in jerusalem is the holiest site in judaism, the western wall. considering the UN is pretty inept, do you think that they would keep it an international city? i think not. most likely jews and arabs would be shooting at each other while the UN peace keepers would stand down, since they havent been fired upon. at least thats what they did in Rwanda, AFAIK.

Of course we don't think it belongs to Israel, Palestinians had to go through metal detectors to enter the second holiest mosque in Islam. Not only that, but they were massacred in it.
Frankly, I don't put the whole blame on Israel due to what happened recently, just most of it. I admire the fact that a single Israeli is enough for them to go crazy. At least they're not sitting on their asses while their brothers are being massacred.

you forget that before israel was established jews, to visit THE HOLIEST site in Judaism they had to pass through hostile arabs neighborhoods, and one Rosh HAshanah, the jewish new year, they were massacred by arabs at the Western Wall. btw i thought the Masjid Al-Aqsa was the THIRD most holy site to islam.

Hey man, give peace a chance.

let hamas give peace a chance first.

Wrong. The attacks were a consequence, not a cause. The problems began when the UN created a country where it shouldn't have created, and illegitimately, because by doing so, they'd have to create a bucketload more of countries whose people also want independence. If, instead of Israel, there had been a joint Arab-Jew Palestine, then there would have been no attack. But the jews wanted a country of their own, where they wouldn't have to share power with the arabs.

how could it be joint-arab jew if a bit before that there were riots on both sides against the other? the people at the UN recognized this. it wasnt as if they were living in peace only until Israel was created. the result was that former Palestine was split up into two, and jordan was given as a whole to the palestinians.

Israel is an apartheid state founded on ethnic cleansing. On top of which it is aggressive and expansionist and has killed over 3000 Palestinians in the last few years. It isn't that suprising that it gets a hundred or so casualties from Palestinian attacks. They are just lucky in their enemies. The Palestinian strategy is stuck in a losing rut.

really? i idnt see any death camps for palestinians.
nor do i see them aggressively expanding as of now. if they were, wed have syria, lebabnon, jordan and id wager much of egypt.

and if the palestinians were in a losing rut, wouldnt it make sense for them to lay down their arms. oh wait- thats unreasonable to ask of hamas.
i guarantee you that if the palestinians would lay down their arms, israel would to. they would live peacefully together if the arabs stopped aiming for our destruction.

[rory_20_uk]

The West bank is a concentration camp: borders sealed, little food in. Random deaths from outside with no warning. I imagine that when the ground offensive starts for many it will be a death camp.

[Hooahguy]

The West bank is a concentration camp: borders sealed, little food in. Random deaths from outside with no warning. I imagine that when the ground offensive starts for many it will be a death camp.

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

[rory_20_uk]

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

Concentration camps happened elsewhere you know. South Africa, Cuba, Russia to name a few. People are being concentrated in an area

Are you referring to the extermination camps? This is a comparison I did not make.

Your indignation doesn't alter that this IMO is a fair comparison. I'm not going to let past events influence how I react to todays occurences. Israel / Jews don't get carte blanche based on one terrible episode under the one regime however horriffic it was.

[rasoforos]

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

Imagine how offensive Israel's actions are to the people who gave their lives so your ancestors were able to survive to have descendants.

With closed borders, restriction in water electricity etc the palestinian areas are concentration camps. There is no escape from Gaza.

A few days ago a ship carrying aid, doctors and journalists was rammed by the Israeli navy in international waters just because it was heading for Gaza. Israel makes a point about maximizing the suffering of civilians.

The current state of Gaza does draw Holocaust parallels. Denying it is happening draws its own parallels too.

[tibilicus]

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

If you don't want to call it a concentration camp call it the worlds largest cesspool. What you have to remember is that most of the people in Gaza aren't originally from Gaza but more people thrown of their land and people who have been evicted from their homes all because of the influx of Israeli immigrants who needed that land.

If you look at what hamas are doing they're simply performing the basic task by any organization to have their homeland restored to them these are;

1: A war of attrition against enemy personnel based on causing as many deaths as possible so as to create a demand from their people at home for their withdrawal.

2: A bombing campaign aimed at making the enemy's financial interests in our country unprofitable while at the same time curbing long term investment in our country.

3: To make the territories ungovernable except by military rule.

4: To sustain the war and gain support for its ends by National and International propaganda and publicity campaigns.

5:By defending the war of liberation by punishing criminals, collaborators and informers

I know if I had my house taken of me by some Israeli and was thrown into this cesspool I would happily pick up an AK 47 and attack the people who took my house.

Do you honestly blame hamas for this?

[seireikhaan]

let hamas give peace a chance first.

That's just being lazy. As Israel holds about 97% of the chips in this, the onus is on them to be the better man and "give peace a chance". If Israel adopted a pacifist, ultra-defensive approach, not launching air strikes, not blockading some one million people into a tiny little patch of utterly undesirable land, and the Palestinians continue their rocket attacks for a prolonged period, THEN you can say that Hamas must give peace a chance.

[rvg]

That's just being lazy. As Israel holds about 97% of the chips in this, the onus is on them to be the better man and "give peace a chance". If Israel adopted a pacifist, ultra-defensive approach, not launching air strikes, not blockading some one million people into a tiny little patch of utterly undesirable land, and the Palestinians continue their rocket attacks for a prolonged period, THEN you can say that Hamas must give peace a chance.

Nah. Israel is not in the business of being "a better man". Israel is in the business of defending its citizens, since unlike Hamas, Israel actually values the lives of its people. If being a "better man" means sitting dily and letting Hamas cause trouble, then screw it. Toothless morality is worthless morality. Let Hamas cry victim and wait out the offensive in bunkers. They can have that moral high ground (if one indeed could call it that), while Israel will be satisfied with having the land and the power. The bottomline is that Hamas does not care about the lives of the people it rules over. To Hamas, the Gazan population is merely expendable cattle that can be sacrificed for perceived political gains. Israel might be the regional boogeyman, but at least it cares about its own people, something that Hamas would be wise to replicate.

[FactionHeir]

Nah. Israel is not in the business of being "a better man". Israel is in the business of defending its citizens, since unlike Hamas, Israel actually values the lives of its people. If being a "better man" means sitting dily and letting Hamas cause trouble, then screw it. Toothless morality is worthless morality. Let Hamas cry victim and wait out the offensive in bunkers. They can have that moral high ground (if one indeed could call it that), while Israel will be satisfied with having the land and the power. The bottomline is that Hamas does not care about the lives of the people it rules over. To Hamas, the Gazan population is merely expendable cattle that can be sacrificed for perceived political gains. Israel might be the regional boogeyman, but at least it cares about its own people, something that Hamas would be wise to replicate.

Actually, as I said previously, the "international" community and Israel boycotted and blockaded Gaza once Hamas won their democratic elections because of their social institutions and because they cared for the people. They didn't even fire a rocket at that time until no aid came in and attacks on them continued.

Besides, they kept the 6 month cease fire fairly well and did what they could to enforce it. Read the wiki article I linked to.

[seireikhaan]

Nah. Israel is not in the business of being "a better man". Israel is in the business of defending its citizens, since unlike Hamas, Israel actually values the lives of its people. If being a "better man" means sitting dily and letting Hamas cause trouble, then screw it. Toothless morality is worthless morality. Let Hamas cry victim and wait out the offensive in bunkers. They can have that moral high ground (if one indeed could call it that), while Israel will be satisfied with having the land and the power. The bottomline is that Hamas does not care about the lives of the people it rules over. To Hamas, the Gazan population is merely expendable cattle that can be sacrificed for perceived political gains. Israel might be the regional boogeyman, but at least it cares about its own people, something that Hamas would be wise to replicate.

Whoever said ANYTHING about morality, about rights, or any of the such? I'm talking about results. Tribes nailed the problem. What about Israel's tactics have successful in dissolving this conflict? NOT A THING. The conflict continues to spiral even further into tit-for-tat life trading despite Israeli air strikes, blockades, and property destruction. As Seamus quite accurately noted, the only alternative to a pacifist resolution to this conflict is all out ethnic cleansing of more than a million people, and maybe far more depending on what the reaction to said efforts is by the Arab/Islamic community. Tell me, which is a more appealing option to you? A few (ten?) thousand dead, or millions?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Logistics, not tactics.....Israel is doomed to a slow spiral into dissolution.

1. They are grossly outnumbered and the native resources of the arab states around them are greater than those Israel can bring to bear. This places Israel in a long-term "behind the 8-ball" situation. To date, Israel has maintained an "edge" anyway by leveraging other factors.

2. Part of the edge Israel maintains despite this inequity of native resources is a result of US support. Efforts by various political elements throughout the West and throughout much of the Muslim world to decouple the US and Israel will bear increasing fruit as America's demographics change. Dwindling support will leave Israel on its own and that is a losing game in terms of resources.

3. Another part is the Israeli hyper-patriot doctrine coming out of the kibbutz era. This sense of patriotism and its "us" mentality is being eroded from within. Israel's "force multipliers" vis-a-vis the resource inequity are fading -- without a replacement on the horizon.

4. Palestinian motivation shows little signs of wavering or atenuating itself.


Suggested implications:


A. Removing US resources will result in the destruction of Israel, though not quite so quickly nor cleanly as Rory implies. The Israeli will to win is the component that can counteract this.

B. Israel itself is losing the will to win in the face of the horrific cost of victory -- terrorism is working in that it has shifted the primary focus of warfare onto the civilian populations -- and Israel is held to a different standard of behavior than is its opposition (by the Western media, by common morality).

C. Israel is progressively being placed into a forced choice scenario by its terror-tactic opponents: Lose or butcher everybody in the opposition (and I mean everybody -- a desert called peace).



As I don't believe that Israel is capable of eradicating the Palestinians, I must conclude that Israel will dwindle and, ultimately, dissolve. The Jews will be a minority ruled by arabs and there will be no uniquel Jewish state.




Stray thoughts:

The warlords are winning this one. One more joyous step towards barbarism.

[rvg]

...C. Israel is progressively being placed into a forced choice scenario by its terror-tactic opponents: Lose or butcher everybody in the opposition (and I mean everybody -- a desert called peace)...

So, they'll just butcher everyone. If Israel ever gets backed to the wall, nukes will fly (or drive, or even walk, doesn't matter), and the region will light up like a christmas tree. Jews didn't get their country through timidity, they conquered it and will fight to the last man to protect it. If that means that they'll have to kill millions to ensure their own survival as a state, so be it. Desperate times would call for desperate measures.

[FactionHeir]

and if the palestinians were in a losing rut, wouldnt it make sense for them to lay down their arms. oh wait- thats unreasonable to ask of hamas.
i guarantee you that if the palestinians would lay down their arms, israel would to. they would live peacefully together if the arabs stopped aiming for our destruction.

Except that it doesn't work. If all Palestinians laid down their arms, they wouldn't be welcomed into Israel because then Jews would be the minority rather than the majority. And they don't exactly want that last I checked. So the Palestinians would for the most part be deported off their rightful land and a few integrated as second class citizens.

[Guildenstern]

but countries have a duty to protect their citizens, no?

I think it is correct to say that Hamas's failure to cause significant Israeli casualties should not be a reason against Israel's military response. Hamas's rocket attacks, however ineffectual, are not merely hypothetical or potential. No nation should be expected to wait for an enemy's attacks to pass some threshold of deadliness before a response is warranted.

That said, I do not think it is utterly senseless to speak of the "proportionality" of Israel's response. In my opinion, Israel's response is "disproportionate" because it results to be more forceful than necessary to achieve its (justifiable) goal, which here is the defense of its territory. This sense of "disproportionality", I think, remains in the criticisms of these attacks, even after we reject the argument that the attacks are disproportionate because Hamas has generally been unable to kill many Israelis. In other words, I think the subject still needs to be addressed.

I think critics against the Israeli raids here are also responding to the sense that Israel's "military necessity" here seems largely the product of a situation Israel is substantially responsible for. Israel has turned Gaza into something resembling a prison camp, so that now even the entry of humanitarian aid into the country is a newsworthy event, to say nothing of regular economic activity or the remittance of money owed to Palestinians living there. This fact may or may not justify Hamas's violent resistance, but it certainly does suggest that Israel is not without non-violent alternatives to resolving this crisis.

Another factor here that makes the Israeli attacks unseemly is that they're probably substantially the product of electoral politics in Israel. Tzipi Livni in particular has an interest in casting herself as a strong leader ready to use military force against the Palestinians, since her main rival for the PM spot is Netanyahu. Given Israeli public frustration with perceived governmental inaction against the rocket attacks, it seems a particularly difficult time for a figure like Livni to urge restraint. So in my opinion critics, in calling Israel's attacks "disproportionate", are also responding to a perception that the attacks are in some sense politically motivated, as well.

I can not accept the argument that your ineffective military campaign against me prevents me from responding in an effective away against you. But I think the argument about "proportionality" here is really about many aspects of the conflict besides that illogical and unacceptable bit of reasoning. The "wisdom" or "long-term effectiveness" of Israel's action is not just an ancillary consideration. As far as I am concerned, it really lies at the center of the criticism.

[Jolt]

how could it be joint-arab jew if a bit before that there were riots on both sides against the other? the people at the UN recognized this. it wasnt as if they were living in peace only until Israel was created. the result was that former Palestine was split up into two, and jordan was given as a whole to the palestinians.

What did you expect? Arabs dominated and populated Palestine for more than 1000 years, and the jewish population in Palestine was minimal and suddenly in five decades (1950), the jewish population grows something like starts swelling like crazy, and were there were a few dozen thousand jewish, a very clear minority in Palestine, more than half a million jewish immigrants migrated to Palestine. Obviously the Arabs, who weren't even in control didn't like the jewish invasion and arabs and jews started to clash. In five decades, the Arab majority now had to deal with an increasingly radical jewish community, who because of their recent numbers now had the distinct nerve of asking for a nation of their own, on a ground which was ruled by arab kin for millenia. It is obvious that with the growth of Jewish migrants, so grew their boldness and their confrontation of the Arab population.