Let me get this straight: a nation’s only concern for life is for that of its own citizens. No amount of damage to other human life is of any concern in a case where citizen lives are in peril, regardless of degree.
It would therefore be satisfactory to you to launch nuclear weapons into densely populated areas or Mexico, killing thousands – or, heck, millions – if there was a credible threat to only a handful, nay, even a single American life caused by persons in those areas of Mexico?
If a disease in one nation threatened to spread to another, it would be OK for the uninfected nation to firebomb areas where people tend to migrate over the border to negate this foreign threat?
This obviously doesn’t make sense. Why would we send soldiers abroad on peacekeeping missions (where there is a threat to their life), for one? Also, isn’t this ignoring any sense of morality or even the basic value of human life?
Nice post. Not much substance, but one of the best uses of innuendo, hysteria, and irrelavancies I’ve seen this week.
The PLO has publically & repeatedly stated that Israel has no right to exist. As has Hamas.** Both** have stated that they will fight until Israel is destroyed.
Isreal has, for decades, offered reasonable & sincere terms for peace. It is the Palestinians militants who have chosen war.
Since there are only two options in this world, fight or negotiate, & since the position that the PLO & Hamas have taken invalidates any possible negotiations, there is nothing left but war or death for the Israelis.
As for the whining about the means, that’s utter rubbish. All war is about killing. And it is the leadership of the Palestinian people who choose to hide themselves behind women & children. I remind you of the fact that thousands of Israeli civilians have been massacred in the same way. With bombs. This is, at worst, reprisal in kind.
As a point of order, I wish to remind you that the PLO drove out or murdered the Palestinians moderates who wanted peace years ago. You defend men with the mindsets of mobsters, sir.
Finally, Efrem , I note that your own personal behind is safe in lovely Nova Scotia. It is dammed easy to be self-rightous when nobody is shooting at your @ss! :mad:
Well, the Israeli bombing had a strategic military value, that is, taking out a commander of opposition forces, because they are “at war”. Unfortunately, civilians were killed in the process. After taking much heat from the international community and admiting that it was a bad thing to kill civilians in the bombing, the Israelis relaxed some of their martial laws and were promptly attacked by the Palestinian radical groups.
Per their standard MO, the Palestinians directly attacked civilians as targets, trying to continue to strike terror in the populace. The latest I heard was a university cafeteria. These are the types of “acts of terrorism” that come to my mind. I don’t think the dictionary could define it any better.
I wish there was a diplomatioc solution to be had for the whole mess. But IMHO the radical (I stress radical) Palestinians have too many rival factions and militias to make that possible. The Israelis could strike peace with one, and another will come from the sewer and blow up more kids on a city bus, then expect me to feel sorry for their plight. I don’t think so.
Forgive me, this cracks me up. And where exatly is your self-righteousness stemming from, Bosda? I’m guessing here you aren’t living in the Occupied Terrirories.
I don’t agree with Efrem’s hyperbole, but I do think that there is a tremendous volume of double standards displayed here.
What happened appears to me to be the willingness to kill large numbers of civilians because it was expedient to do so. Reminds me of something else: “suicide morons” (good term, Tars and a lot more logical a piece of propaganda than “homicide bombers” - surely all terrorist bombers are homicide bombers?).
Look at the appalling death total on both sides, and note in whose ‘favour’ the death toll is.
If you think it’s appalling wanton murder (as I do), then condemn the murder of civilians on both sides as abhorrent.
Otherwise, just declare your partisanship and have done with it.
This is what happens when terrorists manage to get a whole society demonised. You feel sorry for the Israeli Scholl kids but not the Palestinian kids ?
Israel cannot kill all of the terrorists. Nobody sensible is saying that Israel cannot protect itself or conduct aggressive ops to get their enemies. The fact is that they have gone beyond the pale on some occasions. When they do this they play into the other sides hand. International opinion goes against Israeli administration, as it is a government and not a bunch of terrorists.
All well and good but I could imagine a terrorist saying the same thing and they’d actually believe it.
I’ve no answer to this fucked up situation but unquestioning support for either side isn’t going to help anyone. Israel as a democratic country has shown themselves to not be as innocent as some of you might want to believe. The Palestinian terrorists are … well terrorists and no more need be said really. Both sides believe they are fighting the good fight and both sides have a point when the situation is looked at honestly IMO.
Not quite so. The PA Foreign Minister has stated ‘they’ are prepared to accept Bush’s proposal (24 June speech) of a provisional Palestinian State as the basis for negotiation and based on the border as of 4th June 1967: Implicit and explicit acceptance of the right of Israel to exist – I’ve heard it three times in interview situations since 24th June…make of that what you will.
Blalron - At least there is a purpose and a method to Israel’s use of force. Hamas and the other Palestinian terror groups deliberately target civilians in strategically important targets like schools, cafes and shopping malls.
Mabey we should outfit our soldiers in Afghanistan with court orders instead of rifles.
There is no moral high ground to be had in the Middle East until the Palestinians stop targeting Israeli civilians or Israeli tones down its military aggression. Yassir Arafat can’t control his own people and Ariel Sharon is a warmongerer whose tactics anger even a good number of Israelis.
Yojimbo, you misquoted me and left out the first few words of the first sentence. I definitely do not think the Palestinian people are just a bunch of terrorists. It’s the splinter radical groups that support and create terrorists that are the friggin problem on their side.
No civilians should be getting killed at all, on either sides. In fact, no one should be getting killed period.
But like you said, and I agree wholeheartedly with you, it’s gone completely FUBAR.
Of corse not - I only said that obligation is the most important factor, not the only one. Morality, long-term consequences and the global view also play an important part. Extreme measures are justified as a last resort.
No, for several reasons: first of all, there could be many other much less violent ways to solve the proble. Second, I don’t think the American public will stand for killing a million Mexicans to save 1 American. Killing 1000 to save 100, probably yes - morality is not a precise science. Lastly, killing a million Mexicans would seriously damage long-term U.S. political interests.
**
Yes - if the disease was dangerous enough, if there was no other way to stop it, if there was a reasonable chance that it would work. It the real world it’s almost impossible to totally seal a border, so trying to stop a disease - even by extreme measures - is largely pointless
Listen, I’m not giving governments carte blanche. I’m just saying morality is not the most important consideration. It’s unfortunate, but history teaches us that the only way a nation can exist is by occasionaly acting like a son of a bitch.
**
Arrest him? Since when does the Israeli Police have jurisdiction in Gaza? Arresting him would be no more legal than bombing him, not to mention virtually impossible. Jenin, incidentally, was spin - the IDF was taking militants into custody not as part of a legal process, but because enemies are better off captured than dead. If the IDF could have siezed Shehada they would have, if only for intelligence purposes.
And yes I can defend Israel, if only because the civilian deaths in Gaza were an accidental side effect of a legitimate military attack, and the Palestinian attacks - like the one today at Hebrew U. - are just killing for killing sake. For fuck’s sake, the Palestinians gloat over killing Israelis. I agree that the government should have made a greater effort to apologize for the killing, and that the IDF should make a serious review of its operating methods - something I believe is already happening. Still, did you see any Israeli act like they were proud of the deaths?
A desperate grab to capture the fear and anger from the Americans on this board. Remind them that they are should be scared and angry, then unleash them on a common ‘enemy’. Now that they are scared and angry they can think clearly, right.
For th same reason Palestinians would deal with a ‘nation’ that uses: ‘counter-terrorism’, torture, assassination, colonization, oppression, deportation, economic strangulation, home razing as a tool of national policy. A ‘nation’ that since conception has been systematically chasing Palestinians from the entire area of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. With methods not unlike past European colonial campaigns in NA, SA, Africa, Asia.
I did not know self government was a preresiqute for self government. BTW if you are looking for self governance please tell WTF was the Palestinian Authority.
Hyperbole to the highest degree. If the only thing that unites Palestinians is genocidal removal of Judaism, how come during each and every peace negotiation for an independent Palestine, the destruction of Israel was never a sticking point. Hell, with an agenda like that ANY negotiation would be close to impossible.
Acts of poverty driven crime that outlaws commit are not in any way a national agreement of Turkish support. I will have to see a credible cite showing that the majority of Palestinians supported the Ottoman Turks in WWI. BTW for the record, the British didn’t liberate Palestine after WWI, they conquered it from the Turks. Thanks to the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement, the Arab world was carved up between France and Britain. Palestine was given to the British who allowed massive Jewish immigration, carved it up to create Israel, then left. What great ‘liberators’.
Of course, it’s not like the Palestinians had a f*ckin say in things.
One thing we can agree on, of course I find this clear disregard for Palestinian rights as an injustice.
Cite?
The Balfour Declarationwas a testament to the carving and splitting of Palestine, just so foreigns could come from overseas and settle on their land. WTF, why in hell should they have agreed to that!
Lets see, after the Balfour Declaration (which committed to create an Israel in then Palestine) in the 1930’s the British had allowed over 100,000 Jewish settlers move in. Of f*cking course they would have a uprising.
On one hand they had a firm commitment to creating an Israel, on the other hand massive immigration of Jewish settlers bent on ‘retaking’ their land. Did you expect rejoicing?
Can some one say Godwin? How the hell is this important to anything that has to do with the current Middle East conflict? Half of f*cking Europe had Nazi support. Do you hate Germans now?
Destroy the Israelis or rightfully take back their conquered and then sold off land?
Israel was constantly and unquestionablysupplied with all the weapons (and money) it could ever need to conquer and control Palestine by the USA. Who the f*ck else is going to help Palestinians.
Unlike like Israeli attempts to fill the West Bank and Gaza with Jewish setters and effectively create an Arab landless minority.
Yet more hyperbolic garbage that was already discussed.
Forget that for the last Yassir Arafat has been a symbol of Palestinian peace and cooperation with Israel for the past decade. Yes, they are ALL terrorists. The Men and Women… TERRORISTS! The civilians… TERRORISTS! Rock throwers… TERRORISTS! Children… TERRORISTS!
They deserve far more. For they past 100 years ‘Jack shit’ is all they were getting.
I would refute this, but all one has to do is look at the Native American crises in America to agree.
Now that I have addressed your feelings for my position, allow me to underscore my contempt for your position. Your posts smacks of arrogance, ignorance, and bigotry. You constantly appeal to the SDMB that Palestinians are the scum of the earth, you plead this idea with such ferocity that it boggles the mind.
With your posts second thoughts should never be considered on ANY issue when dealing with Israel’s handling of Palestinians. Palestinians always had it coming. Their deaths can always be justified, after all they ARE Palestinians. This disregard for Palestinian life makes me sick. I am quite surprised that you can post such filth on the SDMB without being flamed.
First of all, could people please stop using articles from the BBC? It has hardly shown itself to be unbiased. Now then, need I remind all of you of the reaction to Jenin, when Israel actually endangered its troops to minimize civilian casualties. They could have bombed Jenin from the air. They did not. However, it made no difference. There was still an outcry over Israel’s “terrible action.” Quite frankly, if I were on the Israeli side, I might adopt the attitude that trying to minimize civilian casualties does not make things any better, so why bother? However, aside from that, could someone post Israel’s other options for dealing with this person? I can’t recall why they were so eager to take him out, either…maybe someone could remind me. I know Israel would have to have a good reason, does anyone here really think that Israel would risk an outcry over its military actions if there is no good reason for taking them?
