Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The war in Gaza
Jason
God EmperorArrakis Moderator
As the Israeli invasion of Gaza is expected to intensify, putting more innocent civilians into harms way, I am surprised that there is little to no re... Continue reading
0
Comments
Palzang
Palzang, you've hit it on the head, I couldn't have said it better.
To whom are you referring, Simon? In the words of Eugene V. Debs: "I have no country to fight for; my country is the earth; I am a citizen of the world."
One of the main reasons I am speaking out about this is that too many people are afraid to criticize Israel's actions for fear of being labelled "anti-semitic" or a terrorist sympathizer. Nobody in the United States seems to be afraid of saying that the war in Iraq is stupid and wrong, but few in the United States seem to be willing to say that the war in Gaza is stupid and wrong. In my opinion, the Palestinian people deserve just as much compassion as the citizens of Israel. My feelings mirror those of Rep. Farr, who said, "I feel like I'm a strong supporter of Israel, but I'm not a cheerleader under every circumstance" (Farr breaks with Congress over support for Israel). In the same vein, yes, I live in the United States, but that does not mean I support everything we do.
Sadly, it was only until last year, partially due to reading Marcus Aurelius, Ralph Nader and a biography of Eugene Debs, that I even became remotely interested in politics. As a matter of fact, last year was the first time I voted, and to be honest, I wish that I was more politically active in the past so that my voice could have been heard sooner, such as in the case of the war in Iraq. I have never supported the United States' decision to invade Iraq, and I specifically voted for representatives who do not support our occupation. I think that we have not only damaged our image in the world by such actions, but we have damaged our own moral values as well. My fear is that between the 2006 war in Lebanon and the present siege in Gaza, the same will happen to Israel.
Jason
http://www.treeleaf.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1295
Crazy. Chaotic. In the end, of course, their battles will ennoble them and chrismate them with all manner of righteousness and, on the other hand, only compound multiple damnations on all that stand opposed to them.
All craziness. A whirlpool to stay away from. The only solution is for their God to do his miracles and subjugate their enemy with his mighty hand. Do the math. If I say my Guy is the only answer, that might say something about my proclivity to be unreasonable also.
I am so thankful that we do not have in America these terrible traditions of internecine conflict. There is no way out without great destruction. It's the simple truth. If someone's heart cells all want to be the pacemaker, there comes a time when the surgeon must order the electric current to quell the heart. That done, one can only hope that from the low-flung line resting on the floor of the monitor the right peacemaker/pacemaker will be seen to arise to new, regular peaks and beat a holy beat that brings new life.
There is no effective human response to bombardment, other than flight, than to take the issue right back to the troublemakers. There is no resolution possible till something has been completely destroyed.
I'm hoping that it's the whole mythology.
When two groups decide that it is in their mutual interests to kill each another, there is little anyone outside can do to stop it. Both sides want it and they don't care about the price.
Complete madness. Shows what anger can do if left unchecked.
There was a large demonstration in Philadelphia recently, both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian. The police had to keep them apart. Fortunately it ended without incident. This conflict is nothing less than a tragedy with both sides being the loser.
What can we say or do when it is obvious that none of the combatants gives a flying f*ck for the slaughter of the innocent? And when our governments appear too pusillanimous to do more than mouth platitudinous cr*p?
What signal are we sending out when the biggest contributor to funding and arming this massacre abstains when the international community calls for a cease-fire? Are we to assume that it has some covert interest in the fighting continuing? What is the point of being a 'superpower' if we permit this to go on?
From where I sit, it seems yet another argument that the whole myth of the "nation state" is a dangerous and unskillful delusion which leads to war. It is 40 years since that wonderful picture of the Earth from space was published. No frontiers on that.
That is why we, the citizens, must speak up and petition our representatives for more decisive actions.
My congressman, Earl Blumenauer, released a statement that said:
"I voted "present" on H. Res. 34 because words matter and this resolution did not express adequately the scope of the humanitarian crisis. To that end I am joining other colleagues in urging the administration to work to meet the immediate humanitarian needs while we work for a ceasefire.
"Any country facing such attacks would wish to respond firmly and decisively, yet it is frustrating to witness the region locked into a downward spiral of conflict. This path will give neither side what it wants, but will continue to destabilize the situation and further impede efforts at a resolution.
"This cycle of violence must be broken. Yet, nearly a decade of failed Bush policies has left America in a weakened position at the table, less able to help deliver peace or improve the humanitarian situation on the ground. At least the administration declined to vote against a January 8 United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
"Forceful U.S. diplomatic re-engagement now is critical. Though a secure Israel and an independent Palestinian state living side by side seems remote today, I have high hopes that the new Obama administration will exhibit a strong reversal of course and re-engage the region. Our efforts here today are inadequate to this task. We must not only work for a ceasefire that halts this backslide into chaos, but move forward toward an ultimate solution that recognizes the legitimate needs of both Israelis and Palestinians. We know where we need to go, we must have the will to achieve it."
More and more, I am glad that I voted to reelect Earl Blumenauer.
Nevertheless, for the United States to start acting on the will of the people, that will must first be heard.
Jason
Sounds like a man with his head screwed on right, Jason. Of course, it is the paradox and challenge of democracy that Gaza voted for Hamas - and the 'democracies' don't like it when the democratic process elects the 'wrong' people. The lesson. I think, is that the electoral model will not be effective if the voting population has grievances which are being expressed in terrorist violence. we saw this happen when Bobby Sands or Bernadette Devlin were elected to Westminster by Northern Irish Catholics.
In the end, the 'terrorist' leaders will become the peacetime leaders, just like Jomo Kenyatta, Archbishop Makarios, George Washington and Nelson Mandela. But it will only happen when all sides talk to each other.
Although there are some anti-US Brits (and, I imagine, a few Republicans) who won't admit it but we would still be in the Ulster mess had it not been for the statesmanship of President Clinton as honest broker. We can hope that President Obama will grow into a dimilar role in the Middle East - because ex-Prime Minister Blair is as much use in this crisis as a chocolate teapot.
Um, not killing the innocent civilians in those schools and neighborhoods would have been a good start.
You really believe that the Israeli military intentionally targets civilians? The IDF bends over backwards to insure that civilians are not killed. They have in the past, even sent text messages and calls to civilians' cell phones who are in the area that is going to be bombed, naturally giving away the position of their next attack. What exactly does Israel have to gain by killing civilians? It only gives more sympathy to Hamas, who curiously enough, seems to benefit in the media war whenever their own people are killed. Does it strike anyone as just a coincidence that they should launch rockets from places filled with innocent civilians?
As I have already said, I realize that Hamas is little more than a terrorist organization that fires home-made rockets indiscriminately into Israel, and that Hamas deliberately stores their weapons in heavily populated areas so as to assure civilian casualties; but, does that fact alone justify the bombing of homes, schools, shelters and other civilian locations? I certainly do not think so. Of course, if my city were being bombarded with rockets, I would want my government to do what it could to prevent such attacks; but, on the other hand, if those rockets were beings fired from my neighborhood, I would not want my house destroyed and my family killed when I had nothing to do with it. The question is whether there a better solution.
Unfortunately, this is not the type of conflict that can be won with violence. For one thing, violence of this sort only perpetuates more violence in the form of retribution, and worse, it creates a more fertile ground for extremism to take root. As you have said, it only gives more sympathy to Hamas. In addition, the civilians have nowhere to run. They are trapped. What would you have them do to not be in harm's way? It is a no-win situation for either side, but they are both too stubborn to back down. That is why I think a true and lasting peace can only be reached through diplomatic negotiations that continuously strive for peace, negotiations that are set within a broader political process involving the entire international community.
Jason
I'm not gonna stand on the sidelines assessing the rights and wrongs occurring between drunken sailors, nor do I see any wisdom in getting involved either.
I have one inclination only: To exclude the lot from the set of all things tenable. Enough! True enough, there will always be troublemakers, but that is not my concern. I turn away and say that nothing of any consequence can be done in this generation. The old models have to crumble and die and people focussed on a different paradigm of reverence and awe for what is real and sustainable must rise up and condemn the current arrogant attitudes of their leaders.
The only way that warring between peoples can end is with inculcation in our children of the need for positive regard for and interest in other cultures different from our own. Only when our hearts will carry the following sentiment will there be peace and goodwill among and between the peoples:
My heritage is not worth two cents if it would contribute to harming or exploiting the innocent people of any tribe or league or nation.
Crazy. It just makes me so mad thinking about it. But, I'm sorry, so many of those dudes just get their joy out of keeping the rage alive.
It's too bad. Really it is. But I don't think we should be rewarding bad behavior with too much attention. The more coverage, the worse it gets. Let's turn our attention instead to termites and anaerobic bacteria and offensive statements made by people whose families own ten percent of the country. Or better yet, just turn off the news entirely. News I can't afford to follow since it gets my goat.
JUST STOP IT, I say. Try not to assess blame. If they don't stop I'll just throw up my hands and say they can go take a leap. Hey, there are cliffs over there. Cliffs do have some kind of purpose.
I give up...
1. an attack on a refugee camp (because that is what the Gaza Strip has been since 1948);
2. Disproportionate: 1000 Palestinians killed and 4500 wounded vs a dozen or so Israelis;
3. A breach of international agreements and UN resolutions;
4. Unilateral;
5. A propaganda disaster;
6. IMO a barbaric bullying.
It is certainly true that Hamas weaponry, including rockets, are in 'civilian' areas - because there is nowhere else in what is one of the most crowded bits of land on earth. And the US must find it problematic to criticise a nation (which Palestine is) with an armed citizenry.
We must never forget that the economic and geographic isolation of Gaza has been strengthened over the past few years, linked to a refusal to engage in a political dialogue. A city or a nation under siege, being starved and impoverished, will react violently.
As the son of a Jew and cousin to some who disappeared in the Shoa, I am ashamed that a state created as a refuge for a remnant is now behaving like its own oppressors. There are no rights in these attacks - from either side - only wrongs.
We took direct action in the former Yugoslavia to put a stop to the fratricidal 'ethnic cleansing' but, here, we sit on the sidelines going "tut! tut!"
Maybe it is time to ask for a non-Jewish, non-Islamic, non-Euro/Us-centric peace-keeping force (China? India?) to stand between the murderous bastards on both sides - and to convene the International Criminal Court to arraign the leaders of both sides to explain their actions at the criminal bar. But it won't happen because .... because..... because....
Always 'reasons', 'justifications', 'excuses' but, even tho' we can explain the conflict and its roots but nothing can explain away the deaths, injuries and terror.
My personal view is that the weak and ineffective words from our governments arise from guilt and fear: guilt at our having permitted, by inaction in the '30s and '40s, the Nazi genocides; and fear of being accused of 'antisemitism' despite the fact that both sides are Semitic. It is, IMO, time for the international community, led by the US and UK as sponsors of Israel, to declare, very loudly, that the secular State of Israel does not represent or speak for the whole Jewish community. It is a secular State, not the whole of the Chosen People. Let's put an end to the poisonous pan-Israel propaganda.
One side in this ugly, endless conflict needs to grow up, take some responsibility, and decide it's going to end. They need to realize that terrorist acts and acts of vengance are what keeps the ball rolling. There will never, ever be peace until the seeds of violence are no longer being sown. It's really that simple, but how do you convince these hardheads of it?
Palzang
What is going on today is eerily similar (with more lethal force) to the conflict between the returning Babylonian exiles and those who had not been deported. 2500 years later and no lessons learned.
I believe, quite seriously, that the real keystone is Jerusalem, both as a national/religious symbol and as a seat of government. The city should be declared an 'open city', and all institutions of and aspirations to making it a 'capital city' should be renounced by all sides. Perhaps the UN could make it a sort of UN 'Vatican City', thus relieving the US of the burden of ignoring an international institution on its soil LOL, I think)
And since when did the idea of "proportions" become a judge of oppressor or victim in warfare? The Americans killed more Germans than the Germans killed Americans in World War II, but nobody says the Americans were oppressors or complained about the disparity in losses.
The same is true of the Korean War. South Korea and the UN forces killed more communist forces than the other way around, but nobody (except North Korea) says that the South was the aggressor. It's simply absurd.
The mythical, so called "cycle of violence" between Israel and Gaza would have ended when Hamas stopped firing rockets into Israel.
"Unable to bear the suffering of sentient beings without doing something about it, you generate strong compassion and love, wishing beings to be rid of suffering and possess happiness. Then, seeing that to accomplish this purpose there is no way but to attain Buddhahood, you generate the altruistic intention to achieve enlightenment. This intention to attain the omniscience of a Buddha in order to be of service to others is called the altruistic mind of enlightenment (bodhicitta)"
H.H. the Dalai Lama, from "Kindness, Clarity & Insight"
Well, I think a really big stupa would look nice in the middle of Jerusalem (not to mention that it might help foster peace there).
Palzang
I was not alive during those wars, and I do not know when the idea of "proportions" became a "judge of oppressor or victim in warfare." All I do know is that, according to yesterday's paper, more than 940 people have been killed in Gaza, half of them civilians. In today's paper, it said that 40% of those civilian casualties are children. To me, that is more than absurd, it is outrageous.
Certainly the rocket attacks by Hamas are criminal violations of international law, but as former Princeton University law professor Richard Falk notes, "...such Palestinian behavior does not legalize Israel's imposition of a collective punishment of a life- and health-threatening character on the people of Gaza" (Israel Is Foolishly Breeding the Next Generation of Islamic Militants in Gaza).
And one could just as easily argue that the mythical, so called "cycle of violence" between Israel and Gaza would have ended when Israel ended their blockade of Gaza. It is easy to play the blame game, but what really matters to me is the suffering of the civilian population, especially the children. Too many innocent children are dying or being scarred for life, and I will not support it.
Jason
Let me ask you a question:
Do you consider that the war in Gaza is just?
Do you understand that there are certain conditions which must be fulfilled to be able to describe a conflict as a just war?
I'm not going down the route of supporting the Roman Catholic view from which the notion of just war is derived. If you are genuinely interested, you may want to spend time reading this excellent article from the Stranford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy:
War
This is what it says about proportionality, one of the six conditions of just war:
I would also refer you to the passage on jus in bello concerning the conduct of the war itself and ask you to consider the deliberate shooting (as reported) of individual Gazan civilians by individual Israeli soldiers (single bullet wounds to the head, etc., as witnessed by hospital doctors).
I would add that this is not some "flaky European nonsense" but is enshrined in U.S. army law:
I believe the effort to incapacitate, if not destroy Hamas, is just, yes.
I believe that when an independent political authority launches rockets indiscriminately into another nation, then that constitutes a declaration of war.
And I can't help but add, where was all the sympathy for Israel over the past few years as thousands and thousands of rockets were launched into the country? Where were the threads on this forum decrying the rocket attacks?
And look at the two cultures. Israel allows for progressive women's rights, freedom of the press and speech, and freedom of religion. What has the progressive Hamas been doing? They recently approved of crucifixion for people who essentially blaspheme. :-/
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c36_1230898247