SPEAKOUT: Israel must respond to global criticism
By Dr. Neil G. Dobro, Special to the Rocky
Published January 2, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.
Updated January 2, 2009 at 1:24 a.m.
Hamas terrorists have gone to new lows in illegally hiding among the civilian population. In order to deter the Israeli air force from bombing them during the current conflict in the Gaza Strip, some are now to be found camped out in maternity wards in hospitals. Online videos show laser-guided Israeli bombs taking out rocket launchers firing their missiles only a few yards from homes.
Even in the face of these cowardly tactics by Hamas, the ratio of civilians killed in Gaza is remarkably small. Nevertheless, cries of "disproportionate response" have almost instantly arisen from President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey.
As their pronouncements were made in their native tongues, a more accurate translation is needed. What these world leaders are really saying is:
"The rockets and mortars that Hamas has been firing are low-intensity weapons and part of a long-term strategy to bleed Israel to death slowly. They are militarily ineffective in the short term, but great over time as instruments of terror. We have had little or nothing to say about this. We wouldn't care much if Israel were responding to terror now in some similar, proportionate (low-intensity) way, as long as it was militarily ineffective in stopping Hamas.
"It is obvious that Israel's goal is not to terrorize Gaza. In fact, when it withdrew in 2005, Israel never wanted to have anything to do with Gaza again. It only wants to stop those 5,000 rockets and mortar rounds that have been fired since the withdrawal. To accomplish that objective, Israel needs a decisive operation carried out over a short period. To be effective, it must overcome Hamas' efforts and break its will to terrorize. If, however, Israel were to only exert 'proportionate' force, in any way similar to Hamas' intensity, Israel's neutralization efforts would totally fail . . . and that, in truth, is what we want."
It's not that hard to understand these leaders, once you understand their language. So, for those who support the right of a nation to defend her citizens from rockets and mortars, the response to these admonitions should be something direct, succinct and easily translated such as: "So what? This is what needs to be done."
Unlike the original founders of Israel, though, the current leadership has had a tendency to make the defense of its own people secondary, and make the pronouncements of world leaders primary.
Israeli has so far made a good start militarily, but if Hamas is to be stopped, Israel will at least have to reassert control over the Philadelphi corridor separating Gaza from Egypt. Under that strip of land an estimated 600 tunnels have been dug to smuggle lethal weapons to Hamas. The smuggling might already include chemical or biological weapons from Iran or Syria.
In order to finish its job of securing safety for its citizens, Israel's leaders will have to be willing to respond directly to other nations' claims of "disproportionate" response by saying: "So what? This is what needs to be done."
Dr. Neil G. Dobro is chair of Americans Against Terrorism. He is a resident of Denver.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
January 2, 2009
6:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
denverrose15 writes:
I would say that Israel has spoken out mightly to global criticism. Without words she has said she will no longer allow Hamas to send rockets daily in to her country. Apparently the global community that is criticizing, isn't listening.
January 2, 2009
6:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
The restraint the Israeli's have shown over the years is super-human. Ditto the IDF for its meticulous care in minimizing civilian casualties, despites Hamas' cowardly tactics of hiding behind burkas. The IDF should be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for its restraint and care.
Although despite the best efforts of the IDF there have been some women and children killed, the difference if that Israel laments and minimizes civilian deaths, whereas the Islamists celebrate and maximize same.
Go Israel....get the Hamas girlymen......
January 2, 2009
6:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
Anybody admire the Palestinians, including Hamas, for their persistence and for their bravery in the face of certain and overwhelming odds? Does anybody wonder what fuels this persistence and bravery? Wouldn't it be easier for the Palestinians just to knuckle under, roll over on their backs, wave their arms and legs in the air and cry for mercy?
A flaw in the American, and principally conservative, view is that Palestinians are viewed first and foremost as terrorists or Muslims rather than as human beings. What we are seeing here, principally, is the reaction of human beings to what they probably consider as a simultaneously threatening and unjust situation. Just as the British proclaimed that they would fight the Nazis on the beaches and the North Vietnamese would never give in to massive bombing, would never, in other words, give in to an adversary, the Palestinians, apparently, will not give in to their adversary.
This is a human reaction. This author, also, is imbued with "stateism," an outlook that says violence should be conducted between two Europeanized States according to certain rules. What is often overlooked is that the original Zionist emigrants to Palestine were European and probably very comfortable with the European notion of colonization, and with the idea that indigenous groups who were not organized as a State were backward people
and a European type State had an obligation to Europeanize them. As one Zionist said during the 1930s, paraphrased:
"There are now two groups of people in Palestine, one group with numbers and another group with quality. As soon as the group with quality becomes the more numerous we will take over Palestine."
What this author calls "cowardly" is simply the response of a backward, weaker people toward a conquering Europeanized State. Just as Israel may have some right to protect its people from from rockets the Palestinians may have some right to protect their human dignity and right of self-determination from a Europenized colonialism which started at the turn of the 20th century and persists to this very day.
January 2, 2009
7:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
liberalsrising:
"Does anybody wonder what fuels this persistence and bravery?"
It's Islam. And it's not bravery in the sense we know the word. According to their cult, the ONLY GUARANTEED way to gain paradise is to die fighting the infidel, die fighting for Islam. Since they really believe that (you and I may not believe that, but rest assured they completely believe that), being killed fighting infidels is really in their self interest and therefore doesn't qualify as "brave" - it is purely and narrowly self-serving. By this belief the 9/11 killers and the butchers of Mumbai are now in paradise (except that one guy who was captured alive).
BTW - this means that the IDF should be **thanked** for helping these guys get the only guaranteed entrance to paradise that there is.
January 2, 2009
7:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
Sheik: Thanks for proving my point, that Americans view the Palestinians first and foremost as Muslims rather than as human beings. That said, you have chosen to completely ignore Zionism as a cause - one of many - of this present predicament. You have chosen to ignore the fact that the Zionists in Palestine chose terrorism as a means to make the price of staying in Palestine too high for the British, that four of their Prime Ministers were former terrorists.
Here's a story you may not be familiar with. In 1946 three masked gunmen stopped an automobile with a Swedish diplomat and a French colonel. I know they killed the diplomat. The story is that everyone in Israel knew who the terrorists were, including Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion. Ben Gurion is supposed to have struck a deal with the terrorists, who were members of The Irgun. He would not prosecute them for murder if they would disband the Irgun, which they did and he did, the Irgun being folded into the Israeli military.
I tell you this story to illustrate the relativity of the situation between the Palestinians and the Israelis.
January 2, 2009
7:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike_In_Hartsel writes:
Yo, Lib - just what adversary? Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and turned it over to the "human beings" whom you praise. During this last six-month truce, which you seem to ignore, these "human beings" fired over a thousand rockets at Israel who was adhering to the truce. During this rocket attack Israel maintained open border routes for supplies and aid to Gaza and the "human beings" firing rockets at it. These "human beings" you admire agreed to a truce that they quickly ignored.
Their problem isn't with Israel but with their hatred of Israel. Lib, that appears to be your problem as well.
January 2, 2009
7:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Oh_Wise_One writes:
Liberalrising- a question for you. If the Palestianians held the military, politcal and economic power over Israel, would they be as tolerant or would they wipe all of the Jews off the face of the earth as some of the Palestinian leadership has vowed?
January 2, 2009
7:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Liberalsrising writes:
Sheik: Thanks for proving my point, that Americans view the Palestinians first and foremost as Muslims rather than as human beings."
You have no data on that because it simply states your preception only. I completely reject that, but I will posit that Islam is one of the most inhumane and **dehumanizing** ideological cancers ever inflicted on mankind. That its strict adherents (9/11 bombers, Iraqi beheaders, Mumbai goons, Bali bombers, Madrid bombers, London bombers, Baslan butchers, killers of Thai Buddhists and Philipino Christians, etc, etc, etc) might come to be seen as "inhuman" or "non-human" wouldn't surprise me.
Zionism is little more than resistance to dhimmitude. In which case, we should ALL be Zionists.
January 2, 2009
8 a.m.
Suggest removal
Aaron writes:
Liberalsrising Writes: "Just as Israel may have some right to protect its people from from rockets the Palestinians may have some right to protect their human dignity and right of self-determination..."
Israel has SOME right to protect itself? We all have a complete right to protect ourselves from those who want us to cease to exist and who act out on their wants.
The Gazans' right of self-determination has been theirs for two years now, since Israel pulled out of Gaza. What have the Gazans built, other than rockets and suicide belts for their women and children to wear?
Neil - well written article. Yasher Coache. To further paraphrase what I hope the Israeli leadership has the baytsim to say, "Screw the UN and likewise to France. We are defending ourselves. Period."
January 2, 2009
8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Aaron writes:
...relativity of the situation between the Palestinians and the Israelis.
Liberalsrising - I truly do not understand how you and your relativistic ilk navigate your way through life with such a clouded mindset. You applaude and praise the "courage" of the Hamas murderers who fire their rockets and guns from behind the skirts of their women, from inside their mosques and from the playground areas of their children. This is bravery to you?
There is no more to be written in response to your lack of clarity. When the hidden and patient cells of Hamas, Hezbullah and Al-Quaida come knocking on your door to demand that you wear a burka and stop listening to popular music, I pray that a conservative with a gun is in the neighborhood to come and save your fanny. Yes, even a liberal like you we would come to save. That is one glaring difference between your ilk and mine.
January 2, 2009
8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Aaron - Point of information - Women in Sharia societies don't wear skirts. They are bundled into burkas and niquabs.
January 2, 2009
8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Aaron writes:
Niquabs? Thanks for the fashion information, Sheik. I am somehwat fashion unconscious. Gotta scoot. Time to leave the politics aside and take care of daily stuff.
Good day to all.
January 2, 2009
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
I do appreciate all these responses.
Sheik: What is "dhimmitude?" Secondly, bombers are human beings.
The concepts of human rights and dignity may be relatively new in human culture. The Turks are interesting. I read once about how the Turks positioned people with a spear just touching their anus and put them in a position where as they grew tired and could not keep themselves upright any more they would slowly sink and eviscerate themselves. Also, so I read, the best sex ever for Turks is anal sex with a dying enemy combatant. These attitudes toward others are probably more common in human history than our more recent "bleeding heart" views of others.
Wise One: If the Palestinians held the power how would they behave? Don't know. Perhaps the same as the Israelis.
Aaron: You've done something that I pointed out yesterday as a consistent conservative technique. You say the Gazans have had self determination for two years and then find fault with their accomplishments. That's Monday morning quarterbacking, in which you can't lose. Also, didn't Israel impose one or more blockades on Gaza? And, what do you know about what it's like to live in Gaza? Maybe you know a great deal from first hand experience. If so, I'd like to hear about your experience with living in Gaza.
Mike: I have no hatred of Israel, though I suspect you cannot bring yourself to believe that. I simply read "Oh Jerusalem" many years ago, which gave me some perspective on the Arabs of Palestine whose families had lived in the same house/village for hundreds or thousands of years. I followed up, eventually, with reading some of the "revisionist" Israeli historians as well as trying to read Moshe Dyan and Abba Eden, but found them lacking in objectivity. The facts are, Mike, that the Zionists came to Palestine with the aim of usurping that land from the people who lived there and this act led to a lot of grief.
My own view is that the Christians who persecuted the Jews for 2000 years should have found a better solution to their finally realized guilt than by giving Jews Muslim land. Which is why I mention Texas from time to time. The Zionists actually considered a homeland in other places than Palestine, such as Brazil.
January 2, 2009
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
liberalsrising:
http://www.dhimmitude.org/index.html
It is a state of second-class, right-deprived existence of non_Muslims living under Sharia. It is comparable to the state of slaves in the anti-bellum south: if you accept your diminished status, keep your head low, avert your eyes, don't complain or get uppity and know your place, you could get by.
Note that no other religion, for all their faults, has a concept analogous to "dhimmi" and "dhimmitude" - it is Islam alone that has created the formal concept of how to deal with subjugated populations. It reminds one of the Nazi plans for the lands and peoples conquered in their quest for "Lebensraum." Think "Ghetto" as in "Warsaw Ghetto."
January 2, 2009
9:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
jsharf writes:
Israel would have been - and still would be - perfectly happy for Gaza to turn into Dubai. The Palestinians have rejected that course, instead turning themselves into Somalia.
January 2, 2009
9:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
Thanks Sheik: I finally, this morning, googled Jabotinski, never having gone to the source before and turns out to be two articles published in 1923 in Russia. The source I read said that Ben Gurion and Shamir held Jabotinski in contempt and probably never read anything by him; yet another source says that Jabotinski was a mentor of Begin.
"There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs. Not now, nor in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority.
My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries. I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population. There is no such precedent.
The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage."
I think there is certainly room to consider that Jabotinski was right and that the "native population" is to this day stubbornly resisting the colonists. I'm not anti-Israel. I just think that Americans do not consider the history of the problem and, perhaps, are not well educated in this area.
January 2, 2009
9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
jsharf writes:
The Jews spent hundreds of years in Europe being non-European in law and society, yet suddenly find themselves, "European." No doubt after Iran has its way, they'll be considered, "Middle Eastern," in precisely the same way.
January 2, 2009
10:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
ABernal writes:
Neil: Nice article, and well written.
Liberalrising: It seems obvious that you've bought the lies of liberalism. Also, if your resource is "Oh Jerusalem," then you may want to destroy that book because it has obviously abandoned the truth to convince you otherwise.
Prior to the State of Israel, Palestine was comprised of many peoples, including Jews. "Palestine" has always had a remnant of Jews within its borders. To call it "Muslim Land" for the appeasement of Christians is not knowing the facts.
Here's a few facts to ponder:
1. Jordan's population is 53+% so-called "Palestinians," which are in fact, Jordanians! Confusing? It shouldn't be. Palestinians already have their State--it's called Jordan.
2. 80 million+ Arabs were not willing to absorb the "Palestines" into the own lands, but rather used them as political pawns to discredit Israel.
3. It is Israel that extends her hand to feed, cloth, and heal these "Palestinians" only to get rockets sent back as a "thank you." Without Israel's help, "Palestine" would still not be using the modern refrigerator. The "human" Arab countries would have left them there to starve.
4. 2,000,000 "Palestinians" live in Israel in relative peace with Israelis; however, how many Jews could claim the same in Gaza or in any surrounding Arab country.
5. The term--Palestinian--is a political ploy to shame Israel. It's a farce!
If the Palestinians want relative peace, then they should cease their attacks, move to their home land, Jordan (which is who they really are--Jordanians), and begin to build their homes, lives, and families without America's and Israel's financial helps. Millions of our's and Israel's tax dollars go to the "Palestinians" each year.
It's like taking care of a friend that comes into your house, eats your food, destroys your furniture, plugs up your toilet, breaks your dishes, uses your bank account to create knives, and then uses you as the cutting block.
Wake up!
ABernal
January 2, 2009
10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
JS: I'd forgotten if I knew this until dipping once again into "The Making of the Atomic Bomb."
"The fantasy of Jews as a brotherhood of evil was invented during this era when Christianity fought its missionary way to dominance...In the disorder of the Dark Ages the Jews lost even their vestigial Roman citizenship...The Lateran Councils of 1179 and 1215 (denied) Jews authority over Christians, denying them Christian servants...officially sanctioning the establishment of ghettos...The fantasy of Jews as a brotherhood of evil swelled in medieval times to a full-blown demonology...tens of thousands of Jews were burned, drowned, hanged or buried alive in retaliation (for the plague)...The English were the first to expel the Jews entirely...They crossed to France, but expulsion from that country followed in 1392; from Spain, at the demand of the Inquisition, in 1492; from Portugal in 1497...The Jews expelled from Western Europe fled to Poland...they dispersed up and down the long eastern Polish frontier and lived in relative peace for two hundred years."
It's easy to see why Jews would want a homeland of their own and to "return" to Palestine.
January 2, 2009
10:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
rcop writes:
Liberalsrising is a clear example of the crippling self-serving pseudo-intellectualism of modern liberals.
Armchair quarterbacking always from the safety and sanctity of a suburban home, sipping organically grown tea wondering why the rest of the world is so less enlightened.
January 2, 2009
10:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
rcop: Your post reminds me of an article the other day on the deaths of two different scholars (I think they were both scholars). The author was lavish in his praise of their dedication to inquiry and truth.
Quite refreshing in this day when Horowitz and his acolytes daily besmirch the life of the mind. It's a shame that so many people have so much dis-respect for the life of the mind.
(BTW: Having read a number of articles, etc. by conservatives dissing intellectuals and college professors I once did some research, looking up the staff of the Heritage Foundation and the AEC. They both had scads of Ph.Ds on their staffs. Guess intellectuals, like everything else, are relative).
January 2, 2009
11:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
MGD writes:
liberal,
I don't think anyone expects 'Gazans' to roll over on their backs, wave their arms and legs in the air and cry for mercy. Maybe a better start would be to stop firing rockets into Israel. Just stop it, say "we are done with rockets and suicide bombers and roadside bombs, etc. and are seeking diplomatic avenues".
Tell me why they wont try this. Tell me why stopping the rocket attacks is not something they will do voluntarily? Who came out of the cease-fire firing? Who did not want to re-new the cease-fire?
January 2, 2009
12:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"Maybe a better start would be to stop firing rockets into Israel. Just stop it, say "we are done with rockets and suicide bombers and roadside bombs, etc. and are seeking diplomatic avenues"."
they've tried it numerous times, with still no concessions on some of the occupied lands still under israeli control, mdg.
must be just as frustrating as being attacked by rockets or being bombed by planes, no?
israel does, however, need to address the near unanimous global criticism of their recent actions.
might do their cause little good.
January 2, 2009
12:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
There will be a cease fire only when the Gazans are disarmed. Hence this episode...
January 2, 2009
12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
MGD: Didn't I read that Israel was the first to break the truce by doing something, like smash in a tunnel? But no matter.
It certainly makes sense for Hamas to quit firing rockets and say "no mas." They'd also have to give up their pledge (or goal) to drive Israel into the sea. So, they acknowledge Israel's right to exist. This is certainly admitting that the Palestinians are a defeated people and Israel gets to keep the land the UN gave them. Now what happens?
The Palestinians will want to build a State of their own, secure and prosperous, with self-determination. How does that get accomplished? From what I understand Palestine is now a failed State, with unemployment running at 50%, with Israel having control over all entrance and exit to Palestine.
I recall the Camp David Accord which, if it had been agreed to, a Palestinian would have left his house and have had to go through an Israeli checkpoint before he could leave his neighborhood. Not exactly a sovereign State. The real test is whether Palestine gets to have its own army and navy like any other self-determined State. I don't recall every hearing a proposal which would allow the Palestinians an army for their self defense. If Israel and the rest of the world isn't ready to let Palestine have its own army then it's not really a sovereign State.
One thing I might suggest. Since the UN felt that it had the authority to dish and dice conquered lands in 1946, which established the legitimacy of an Israeli State, that the UN should re-enter the fray and exercise its authority to specify structure of a two State division of Palestine.
January 2, 2009
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
Liberalsrising writes: "Anybody admire the Palestinians, including Hamas, for their persistence and for their bravery in the face of certain and overwhelming odds? Does anybody wonder what fuels this persistence and bravery?"
I can't say I "admire" them, but since I understand that violence usually begets more violence, I am not surprised by their wish for revenge. As I've said in a few other posts, the trouble is this feud is so longstanding, it's difficult at this point to know "who started it." Seriously, this has been going on for eons.
Liberalsrising writes: "Wouldn't it be easier for the Palestinians just to knuckle under, roll over on their backs, wave their arms and legs in the air and cry for mercy?"
In a way, I think this would be the hardest thing for them to do. We're talking about a region with an extremely violent history. It's in their blood now, and probably in the Israelis' blood at this point, too.
It seems the hardest thing for the ADULT LEADERS in either country to do is actually say, "Enough. No more bloodshed. What will it take for us to forge a lasting peace? What does our side need to do to make this happen?"
I would imagine one reason it's so hard for either side to do this is because they mistakenly construe it as "knuckling under and rolling over on their backs." As with so many other human problems, unrelenting pride is once again the culprit here.
January 2, 2009
1:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
MGD writes:
Liberal,
I agree that the real work would start after a real cease fire. If Hamas would stop the attacks then eventually Israel would loosen it's grip. If there were no more terror attacks from Gaza then the entire world would push Israel very hard to let go of Gaza all together. Maybe they would and maybe they wouldn't but they certainly wont until the rockets and suiciders stop.
As for any sumggling tunnel that was destroyed, I think that is part of border security. Apparently Israel destroyed an illegal tunnel which I don't take issue with. I don't take issue with it when the US does the same on the Mexican border.
January 2, 2009
1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
I suggest that everyone should watch the short comedy musical film called "West Bank Story". In it two competeing restaurants, The Falafel King and The Hummus Hut, battle it out in true middle eastern fashion. If only humor were more universal...
January 2, 2009
1:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Hank, sorry to burst your bubble but:
"Ayatollah Khomeini, 1979
"Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious."
http://granitegrok.com/blog/2006/12/n...
January 2, 2009
2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
Curious, my Islamic friends all have a sense of humor and fun. They also don't listen to the Ayatollah.
More on the movie:
http://www.westbankstory.com/
BTW, it was the Kosher King that was one of the restaurants. It's also a love story...
January 2, 2009
3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
Liberalsrising writes:
Anybody admire the Palestinians, including Hamas, for their persistence and for their bravery in the face of certain and overwhelming odds? Does anybody wonder what fuels this persistence and bravery?
I got here way late, but, are you serious? I'm amazed at a quote I heard this morning from a news source that accused Israel of using "disproportionate force" against the Palestinians. That's the kind of Liberal PC logic that caused us to stay in Iraq for all these years. We should have wrapped that up in the first year, but we had to play by the PC book. Israel does not.
January 2, 2009
4:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
jjez writes:
A little (Biblical) history: Sarah was barren and disobeyed God who told her that in time she would have a son. She got tired of waiting. She wanted her husband, Abraham, to have a son. So she gave her handmaiden, Hagar, to him and Hagar had a son. Then Sarah finally got pregnant, had a son and then they tossed Hagar and her son out. Now those of you who are anti-religion don't get all up in arms over this history, because the Muslims believe it. It is the history of the creation of their race. Now, after Hagar and her son were thrown out, they wandered in the desert. Near to dying Hagar prayed for a miracle, and was given one. God caused a spring to open before her and so she and her son survived. She was told, by God, that from her a great nation would be created. The Muslims believe that they are favored of God above all others and thus they are the only correct religion in the world. Jews were the "chosen ones" because from that race God's son (Jesus) would be born. But the Jews were also told they would be persecuted throughout time because of that. Muslims believe they are superior to any others, especially Jews. But language studies have been done that prove they have a common base language. People use the term "anti-Semitism" without realizing that Arabs are also Semites. So, on that evidence and the "mythos" of the creation of their peoples, Arabs and Jews are brothers. They had the same father. One was loved more by the father, so the other hates his brother for being loved. Just as our news media can be biased and not report all the facts, unless we live in Israel or Gaza, we can't know the absolute truth. Unless we have watched the bombs fall from the sky and counted them, we can't know who has launched more. Unless we have been to the funerals on both sides, we can't truly know how many have died. We can opinionate as much as we want, but majority wins. Unless a majority of people tell their Congressmen that we don't want to support Israel anymore, then nothing here will change.
January 2, 2009
5:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
VeryOpinionated writes:
Lots of informative posts. I appreciate the tone of the posts (in spite of differences in opinion) and the lack of name calling. SYB, I especially liked your points of view and the information you provided.
January 2, 2009
5:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Hank - your Muslim friends are likely "cultural" or "social" Muslims, and are not particularly pious. This characterises most Muslims IMHO.
Thanks VO - don't encourage me :)
January 2, 2009
5:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
Sheik,
Here we go assuming again.
An example is my friend from Lybia. He is not non-chalant about his beliefs. He tells of his religion to educate me. He is a political dissident from the 70s/80s against Khadafi. If he were to return to his country, they would kill him. I have recently helped him to achieve US citizenship. I am proud to consider him one of my fellow countrymen.
January 2, 2009
6:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Hank - I said "likely"
Nice anecdote. Point???
I am happy that you are proud. I'm sure he's a swell fellow.
January 2, 2009
7:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
taoistblockhead writes:
Until the fanatical Zionists, Muslims, and Christians realize that they are not "God's chosen people" this type of religious-inspired killing will go on without end... Proof that they are worshipping a book of lies and are living hypocrites. Just ask the African slaves brought to America and the Native Americans wiped out in the New World genocide/ecocide. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is racist as well.
January 3, 2009
6:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
blockhead - Jews and Christians don't kill people in the name of their religions. Neither do Buddhists, Hindus, Shintoists, Taoists, pagans, wicans, atheists, etc.
Only Muslims (not ALL Muslims!!) do this. Why?? Because it is mandated by their "religion." Indeed, it is a sacrament within Islam (not a pillar of Islam, but a sacrament).
January 3, 2009
7:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
AplombDenver writes:
"So what? This is what needs to be done." Hopefully Israel will say the same.
As for Hamas, let them speak for themselves as they have already responded to world criticism: On 25 January 2006, after winning the Palestinian elections, Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar gave an interview to Al-Manar TV denouncing foreign demands that Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.[55] After the establishment of Hamas government, Dr Al-Zahar stated his "dreams of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it...I hope that our dream to have our independent state on all historic Palestine (including Israel). This dream will become real one day. I'm certain of this because there is no place for the state of Israel on this land". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas
Hamas is a terrorist organization. Thousands of rockets relentlessly being fired at Israel is the evidence that backs up their charter which calls for a Holy War against Israel. At the present time, with Hamas winning the election and having the recognized elected political power, it is an act of war for Hamas to continue to engage in such acts. There is less criticism this time around toward Israel for defending herself and that is why. This is a response to an act of war. And the whole world knows it.
The Hamas Charter is here: http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm . Here's a quote: "This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement."
Hmmm...Moslems can conquer land by force and then it is forever theirs, consecrated to Moslem generations. That is the law. And that is the revelation right to the bottom line in this mess. Israel has no right to exist and yet she does. This must not only drive the Muslims crazy, but it also puts them on world display as losers right along with that holy book of lies about the might of the god allah.
I have to wonder if Israel ever does cease to exist what the world will have to say as Fatah and Hamas and Hizbollah war to the death against one another having no common infidel people of the book enemy to target.
Oh, but then again, Israel will always be there for them--not just as a target and a reminder to Muslims that they are merely the dust of the earth just like all the rest of us, but also to bring them humanitarian aid even during wartime. That's more than these brothers would even do for one another.
January 3, 2009
8:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
taoistblockhead writes:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?co...
Dear George W. Bush,
Congressman Barney Frank said recently that Barack Obama's declaration that "there is only one president at a time" over-estimated the number. He was referring to the economic crisis. But where are you on the Gaza crisis where the civilian population of Gaza, its civil servants and public facilities are being massacred and destroyed respectively by U.S built F-16s and U.S. built helicopter gunships. …
Gideon Levy, the veteran Israeli columnist for Ha'aretz, called the Israeli attack a "brutal and violent operation" far beyond what was needed for protecting the people in its south. He added: "The diplomatic efforts were just in the beginning, and I believe we could have got to a new truce without this bloodshed.....to send dozens of jets to bomb a total helpless civilian society with hundreds of bombs-just today, they were burying five sisters. I mean, this is unheard of. This cannot go on like this. And this has nothing to do with self-defense or with retaliation even. It went out of proportion, exactly like two-and-a-half years ago in Lebanon."
Apparently, thousands of Israelis, including some army reservists, who have demonstrated against this destruction of Gaza agree with Mr. Levy. However, their courageous stands have not reached the mass media in the U.S. whose own reporters cannot even get into Gaza due to Israeli prohibitions on the international press. …
There are no rockets coming from the West Bank into Israel. Yet the Israeli government is still sending raiders into that essentially occupied territory, still further entrenching its colonial outposts, still taking water and land and increasing the checkpoints This is going on despite a most amenable West Bank leader, Mahmoud Abbas, whom you have met with at the White House and praised repeatedly. Is it all vague words and no real initiatives with you and your emissary Condoleezza Rice?
Peace was possible, but you provided no leadership, preferring instead to comply with all wishes and demands by the Israeli government-even resupplying it with the still active cluster bombs in south Lebanon during the invasion of that country in 2006. …
The least you can do in your remaining days at the White House is adopt a modest profile in courage, and vigorously demand and secure a ceasefire and a solidly based truce. Then your successor, President-elect Obama can inherit something more than the usual self-censoring Washington puppet show that eschews a proper focus on the national interests of the United States.
Sincerely,
Ralph Nader
January 3, 2009
10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
David_R writes:
Interesting observations: "An honourable warrior"
Alan M. Dershowitz | January 03, 2009
Article from: The Australian
ISRAEL's actions in Gaza are justified under international law, and Israel should be commended for its self-defence against terrorism. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter reserves to every nation the right to engage in self-defence against armed attacks. The only limitation international law places on a democracy is that its actions must satisfy the principle of proportionality.
Since Israel ended its occupation of Gaza, Hamas has fired thousands of rockets designed to kill civilians into southern Israel. The residents of Sderot - who have borne the brunt of the attacks - have approximately 15 seconds from launch time to run into a shelter. Although deliberately targeting civilians is a war crime, terrorists firing at Sderot are so proud of their actions that they sign theirweapons.
When Barack Obama visited Sderot last year and saw the remnants of these rockets, he reacted by saying that if his two daughters were exposed to rocket attacks in their home, he would do everything in his power to stop such attacks. He understands how the terrorists exploit the morality ofdemocracies.
In a recent incident related to me by the former head of the Israeli air force, Israeli intelligence learned that a family's house in Gaza was being used to manufacture rockets. The Israeli military gave the residents 30 minutes to leave. Instead, the owner called Hamas, which sent mothers carrying babies to the house.
Hamas knew Israel would never fire at a home with civilians in it. They also knew that if Israeli authorities did not learn there were civilians in the house and fired on it, Hamas would win a public relations victory by displaying the dead. Israel held its fire. The Hamas rockets that were protected by the human shields were then used against Israeli civilians.
These despicable tactics - targeting Israeli civilians while hiding behind Palestinian civilians - can only work against moral democracies that care deeply about minimising civilian casualties. They never work against amoral nations such as Russia, whose military has few inhibitions against killing civilians among whom enemy combatants are hiding.
The claim that Israel has violated the principle of proportionality - by killing more Hamas terrorists than the number of Israeli civilians killed by Hamas rockets - is absurd. First, there is no legal equivalence between the deliberate killing of innocent civilians and the deliberate killings of Hamas combatants. Under the laws of war, any number of combatants can be killed to prevent the killing of even one innocent civilian.
For the complete article, please see:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/...
January 3, 2009
10:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
rg writes:
It is so abundantly clear: Hamas creates rain over Israel in the form of rockets. What would you do if a rocket landed on your house that killed your baby? Richard Grimes: Deicide.
Deicide Corner: Earth's first sentient life form dropped his load and from the manure rise all gods.
January 3, 2009
1:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
rcop writes:
Liberals who ponder political theory in the laboratory of their minds and ignore what is happening on the ground each day really have no place preaching their tenured drivel.
I think that the Mideast war(s) is(are) the result of clashing ideologies and the long memory each side has. Certain facts remain - Israel is an island of formerly persecuted minorities who have to defend themselves constantly against the sea of murderous religious ideologues that surround them on all sides.
January 5, 2009
12:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
SJones writes:
There ain't really nuthin' Israel kin say in response t' global criticism. Disproportionate response is disproportionate response. Killin' innocent civilians is killin' innocent civilians. 'N-att's th' nub of it, right thar, Mr. Dobro:
http://coloradoconfederatarian.square...
January 5, 2009
1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
jvb writes:
Allah creates rain that comes down as water; Hamas creates rain that comes down as rockets over Israel. I can't fathom the sentiment of those who side with Hamas. How long must Israel wait until it defends itself. Each day, Hamas adds payload to its rockets and increases its distance. How long would America endure rockets on its soil from a foreign nation?
January 5, 2009
1:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
SJones writes:
Justin Raimondo ainswers ye here, jvb:
We all know the rationalization for Israel's brutal invasion of the Gaza Strip. After all, it's been reiterated endlessly over the airwaves by official and unofficial spokesmen for the Israeli government, on all channels, and with no rebuttal or skeptical perspective from Palestinians or, indeed, from anyone vaguely sympathetic to their plight. Their argument goes like this: if rockets were coming from Mexican territory and landing in San Diego, posing a threat to the life and safety of American citizens, we all know what would happen.
This is supposed to settle the question of the morality of the invasion, but it doesn't. Because what we are seeing in this argument is a variation on the old cherry-picking technique of the neocons in the Bush administration, who utilized "talking points" that were very selective in their presentation of the facts to make the case for invading Iraq.
What the rationalizers leave out, of course, is the ongoing blockade of Gaza, imposed after Hamas took control in the wake of its overwhelming election victory – and an attempted (and partially successful) coup d'etat by the losers of that election, the Fatah organization of the late Yasser Arafat (now headed up by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas). The blockade itself was an act of war, by which the Israelis struck the first blow.
With this correction made, then, let's revisit – and reverse – the Israeli argument, putting all the known facts in their proper context. If Mexico – in an attempt to regain its lost territory, the promised land of California – invaded California, drove the residents of San Diego from their city, cooped them up in, say, Death Valley, and wouldn't let anything but a basic minimum of consumer goods and medical supplies either in or out, well, we all know what would happen.
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articl...
January 6, 2009
11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
rg writes:
Sewards folly in purchasing Alaska, Jefferson (is it Jeff) in the Louisiana purchase: Was it less than $millions given to Mexico for the Southwest? What if Russia lobs rockets into Alaska wanting it back? what if France lobs rockets into New Orleans (Well, that one you can give back to France since it is below sea level and costs America $billions in upkeep). It is a nightmare living in Israel waiting for the words: "Code Red" to send citizens running towards shelter. Enough of Hamas. Richard Grimes: Deicide.
Deicide Corner: Heretics may be justly slain, says St. Thomas Aquinas
January 6, 2009
8:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
tajuddin writes:
Regarding the op-ed comment that "the ratio of civilians killed in Gaza is remarkably small>, I find "remarkable" the author's narrowmindedness.
In comparison, the ratio of civilians killed by Hamas rockets is "remarkably" smaller.
And in another comparison, the ratio of dead Gazans to dead Israelis is lopsided on the Gazan side.
In any case, it's hard to fathom the definition of "Israeli defense" as meaning "kill the enemy 100 times over"...
Taj Ashaheed