I did answer your crapola rhetorical question. Judaism does not teach that Jewish lives are more important than others’.
You post is a disgraceful attack on another poster, based purely on false and inflammatory generalizations about Judaism, using the thin justification that apparently a banned poster once spouted such stuff in the past. Yuck.
I’m no fan of Sharon, but I think this is a most unlikely outcome - the current Sharon policy appears to be to clear out of Palistine (having taken some of it outside the 1967 borders), seal it off, and leave it to its own devices - using military force to assasinate leaders and (presumably) intimidate the rest, as required.
I don’t really believe that the Palistinians are capable of doing much more than they are doing already in terms or retaliation.
The good news for Palistinians is, I predict that the Israelis will be out of their territory (except of course for the bits they took) in the reasonably near future.
The bad news is that the Israelis will no doubt strike at them with relative impunity thereafter, in retaliation for terrorism; the Palistinian leadership is divided, ineffectual, and corrupt; and Palistinians, as a whole, are still dependant on either jobs in Israel (which will be gone) and foreign aid (mostly under the control of Arafat and his cronies).
For Israel? Yes, it’s a good policy. Why? Because they’re continuously seeking international support for their 55-year (and counting) illegal and bloody occupation of Palestine. Will this assassination have any negative effect on the billions of dollars in aid the US annually pours into Israel? Hardly. “Look,” Sharon is saying, “we’re with you in this war on terror; see how effectively we can deal with the fundamentalist Islamic threat in our own backyard!” More Apache helicopters, more financial aid, and another round of condemnations in the UN that get swatted away like annoying flies by the Big Five on the Security Council.
Is it good from any other perspective besides Israel’s narrow focus on its own self-preservation? No, of course not. All they’re demonstrating to the world is that they can be just as much a bully as the US, and that they have no compunction about using far superior force to crush the opposition. It may not be suicidal, but it’s certainly goddamned stupid.
Those Dopers in Israel, I certainly hope that you and yours remain safe over the next few weeks. But you need to remember that if your country safeguards your existence at the expense of others’ existence, those people are going to fight back, and rightly so. Your government’s continued reliance on brute force to quash that fightback only serves to shame you in the eyes of those in the world whose concern is true justice.
Btw; another quality remark.
But I won’t hold my breath in expectation of Gaudere doing anything about it.
Malthus - I think you must be lying or misinformed. I think I’ll wait for someone with better knowledge to come along as december was to certain in his view.
[QUOTE=Bibliovore]
…I believe that assassination should not be considered an acceptable political tool by any nation claiming to be a civilised democracy…
[QUOTE]
You would have thought it unacceptable for the British or French to kill Hitler during ww2?
Try the Op the other way round:
“Hamas leader left to his own devices: Good policy for Israel?”
Wow.
There are quite legitimate arguments as to why the attack on that Hamas leader was a bad idea, but “you have no right to fight back when attacked” surely is not among them.
I note you are posting from Washington, and describe Israel as acting as much the bully as the US. Is it fair to assume that your response to the September 11 attacks on the US was “We had it comming?”.
London Calling - leaving alone the ongoing pissing match between Malthus and yourself, I was personally rather taken aback by your reaction to my assertion that I value my own life and those of my loved ones more than the lives of any anonymous person in the world. How you turned that around into a moral attack on Alessan and myself - not to mention all of Judaism - is beyond me. Not least of all because I’m an atheist and thus couldn’t care less what Judaism as a religion may have to say on the matter :rolleyes: - but I do mind your putting words that I never said in my mouth, whether or not the Jewish Religion echoes them.
If you misunderstood our argument - which has been put forward multiple times with multiple explanation both in this and in other threads - then OK, how about admitting it? If you stand by your claim that we are preaching Jewish Superiority here, then I’m afraid you’ve earned Malthus’ scorn, as well as mine.
Dani
It really seems like a tactical error on the Israeli side. How old was he? Why not just wait for him to die of natural causes? Instead, Israel has made a martyr.
I don’t even remember him saying that, but if he did, not to speak ill of the banned, December wasn’t even religious…he wouldn’t have been the best person to talk about the relative worth of Jewish vs non-Jewish lives in Judaism.
And I’ve never heard that, and I think you might be the misinformed one. Judaism does teach that the reason God created Adam as one person, instead of creating a lot of people is so that no one can say, “My ancestry is better than yours”. Judaism affirms that all people are equal in God’s sight, and that He doesn’t love them based on who their parents are or what country they come from, but whether they love and obey Him. Judaism also teaches that a righteous gentile is as good as the High Priest.
vibrotronica – You think it was about the Hammas guy – you’re kidding, right. It was about Sharon and his personal popularity, or lack thereof (at the moment). As Israeli policy so often is; policy is his personal tool as much as Palestinian policy is Arafat’s personal tool.
Noone Special – I know nothing about you, have never seen you before on this board and have never read any of your posts, except for this last one where your bolding of my user name caught my eye. So I’m sure you’re a nice person but I haven’t been addressing you.
Btw, I didn’t start a “pissing match”. I posed a question to ** Alessan** because in the past, specifically in Pit threads, he has had no problem supporting **december’s **much-repeated assertion that Judaism says Jewish lives are more valuable than any others.
** Alessan** has said exactly that, he believes it and makes no apologies for it.
All that being said, whatever Judaism might teach, I realize that Israelis worry more about Israeli lives than non-Israeli lives, just like I worry more about American lives than non-American lives. I think that’s a universal settlement. I’m sure most Britons worry more about British lives than non-British lives, and that seems to be a valid thing for a government to consider, also.
That seems to be what Israelis say about the Palestinians, to be honest. Yet from what I’ve read about the history of the country, the violence to which the Zionists resorted both before and after 1948 clearly marks them as the original aggressor. I have as much sympathy for Israel as I would a schoolyard bully who finally gets a black eye from one of his intended targets. And on that note:
It would be fair to assume that only if I explicitly stated as such, which of course you’ll find I haven’t. I have a co-worker here in the office who lost her husband - and her infant daughter’s father - in the crash at the Pentagon that morning. Do you honestly believe I think that little girl deserves to grow up without her daddy because of US foriegn policy in the Middle East? Do you honestly believe I think my co-worker deserves the unimaginable pain and loss she endured because of the US’ reprehensible conduct in its quest for oil? Do you honestly believe I feel absolutely nothing - or worse, some sort of satisfaction or joy - when I read of Israeli citizens dying in another attack? Do you really, truly, honestly believe I think Israeli children deserve to lose their parents, and Israeli parents their children, because of the abhorrent tenets and actions of Zionism? I cannot fathom why you would posit such an absurd and disgusting straw man unless your own position is so weak that this is the best you could do.
I think that such an assertion simply begs for a cite. Back it up or back off.
Moreover, whatever a couple of people (one now banned) have to say on the matter, it simply isn’t true - although it makes your otherwise quite bizzare post a little more understandable.
Okay, you hate Israel because of its history of aggression.
Why you seem to think that blowing up kids in a pizza parlour is a “black eye for Israel” unworthy of your sympathy is beyond me.
It is kids being killed randomly at stake, not some sort of metaphorical schoolyard licking.
Well, considering that you just said in this very post: “I have as much sympathy for Israel as I would a schoolyard bully who finally gets a black eye from one of his intended targets”, I must admit to being honestly confused at what your position is.
Sounds, if not like satisfaction, than something very close to it. How can you feel that targets of terrorism deserve no sympathy, because of the history of the country?
You know, L_C, I’d like to second that request for a cite. Seems to me, if you want to put words in my mouth, I should at least know where those words came from. It’s just a matter of basic hygene.
Alessan - You need a cite for your own views ??? God damn.
Show me where the hell the search function has gone and I’ll do my best to help you overcome this sudden bout of denial – hope it’s not too painful.
Put up or shut up, L_C. What matters is not what I think, it’s what you think I think, and if you think I said something - and I’m not saying I didn’t, I just don’t have your phenomenal powers of memory - then prove it.
Put up or shut up . . . with what ? The phrase doesn’t seem to make an awful lot of sense in the context . . . ?
You can’t remember your own views and you need me to remind you of what they are. That seems to be a fact. Mind you, you’re not saying I’m actually wrong to ascribe those views to you, so maybe you do recall some of what it is you think. And wrote.
And btw, this tough guy on the Internet thing just doesn’t cut it, I’m afraid. Kind of sweet, in a way; I feel like patting you on the head.
Where the hell has the search function gone ?
I guess that makes Israeli policy much like American policy, eh?
FTR, the best guess of the shiek’s age I could find was 68. He looked a lot older. I don’t know what kind of health he was in (I’m guessing not very good), but 68 means he could probably have lived a good while longer, which sort of undercuts my earlier argument. But I still maintain it was a bad move to make him a martyr.
I figured I’ll spare you both the trouble.
I did a search on Alessan and the words “jewish lives.” The engine came back with three results.
The first is this thread, where Alessan never said what London_Calling is claiming he said.
The second thread is here here. Alessan made no such claim here either.
The last thread is a one-post thread by Alessan here. Also no claim by Alessan that Jewish lives were worth more than non-Jewish ones.
I think you owe Alessan an apology London_Calling.
Zev Steinhardt