“In the contemporary world, the world of human rights, when you call a person a right-winger, this is the first step toward his or her delegitimization. “
Fiamma Nirenstein;
The Left blessed the Jews as the victim “par excellence,” always a great partner in the struggle for the rights of the weak against the wicked. In return for being coddled, published, filmed, considered artists, intellectuals and moral judges, Jews, even during the Soviet anti-Semitic persecutions, gave the Left moral support and invited it to cry with them at Holocaust memorials. Today the game is clearly over. The left has proved itself the real cradle of contemporary anti-Semitism.
Read the whole thing.
ET.
Keep dancing baby!! It’s not a mystery, you have the analytical down pat, but you just jump to the “RIGHT” conclusion with “deliberate” missing logic.
Yes it is a hopeless cause because the solution is dynamically opposed to the interest of both parties. A pointed stick or ridicules hope from outside sources just keeps the music playing.
ME! I think the dark Ages had a Purpose!
The Globe and Mail web site “reports”—10 to 1 for the pro-Palestinian side—on anti-Israel demonstrations across Canada, apparently 800 in Toronto. See:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081228.wisraelprotests1228/BNStory/Front
“Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon has expressed concern about the escalating violence but has made clear the federal government believes Israel has a right to defend itself.” BRAVO Mr. Cannon and Canada’s Conservative government.
Also in the article: “Ismail Zayid, who joined dozens of protesters at a downtown Halifax park in condemning the ‘massacre’ [at least that word is in quotation marks] of Palestinians, was incredulous at Mr. Cannon’s statement.”
That’s 800 demonstrators!
Stephen it doesn’t require that ALL Israel’s enemies act irrationally for there not to be peace. It only requires that some of her enemies act irrationally for there to be war.
To be honest, why should any westerners give a rat’s ass what goes on between Israel and the Palestinians?
The whole thing stinks of propaganda and manipulation of the west on both sides. I believe all peoples have a right to their own countries or place in the world, but I also think that we should as with everything else in the world butt out and let them have at it.
I’m sick and tired of turning on Canadian television and listening to the bleeding hearts, lobbyists and terrorist fund raisers, spew their filth seeking our support and of course financial assistance. We need to kick them out of our countries if they continue to use them as their political toilets while creating their own mini states within our midst. They make this issue ours and it’s not. If we fall prey to their propaganda as we so often do, before long it will be on our doorstep, or in our streets.
“Certainly Islamic fascism has tried to merge its agenda with the I-P situation but only as a red herring to turn the gaze of their own people away from the REAL CAUSE of Islamic fascism, which is the political and economic dysfunctionality of the Arab states.” – ET
Political and economic, not to mention social dysfunctionality of the Arab states is an effect, ET.
The Islamic ideology, based, as they believe it is, on the uncreated and unmitigated word of Allah is the root cause.
It has always worked extremely well as a political and war ideology to manipulate the Ummah.
Jew hatred is ingrained and visceral. And the prophet – the perfect man; the one Muslims are commanded to emulate – hated the Jews with a passion.
To understand this hatred, just look at how it’s programmed into the heads of Palestinian children on TV programs and in the classroom. It’s programmed into the heads of Muslim children in the US, Europe and elsewhere and continues through college.
Until recently, the website and printed material from the MSA included the Hadith:
“The Hour [Resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews,
and kill them. And the Jews will hide behind the rock and tree, and the rock and
tree will say: oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, this is a Jew behind me, come and
kill him!”
No Islamic people, let alone the so-called Palestinians, will ever be at peace with Israel. Giving them their own country will not solve the issue.
Stephen…you just made my point.Now you and ET answer some of the direct questions put to you here by many posters.
ebd – I disagree that Israel wants ‘peace’ because this peace that it wants includes those West Bank settlements. That means – no Palestinian state.
I remind you that I separate Islamic fascism from the I-P conflict; the two are not related. The first uses the latter for its own cynical purposes but the Arab world is not interested in the well-being of the Palestinians. It is a mistake to lump all Arabs as ‘one’; they are not and don’t consider themselves as such.
Palestinian anger at Israel is caused, in my view, by Israel. It is not a product of Islamism.
Your comparison of Mexico and aboriginals is weak. Palestine has no nation of its own; Mexico has a nation of its own; its lost territory was not a territory that was politically defined for it as its ‘right’ – as was the Palestinian territory defined for the Palestinians as theirs, by the UN. Same with the aboriginals..
Palestine wants a state and Israel is both refusing to recognize that they have such a political (not ‘natural’) right, and is settling the land base of that potential state. Therefore, how can you expect that the Palestinians should not be angry at these actions?
I do excise the Islamic fundamentalist hatred of infidels – which includes not merely Jews but Christians, Hindus, anyone who is not Islamic, from this I-P situation. As I’ve said before, those analyses which merge Islamic fascism with the I-P situation are profoundly incorrect in my view. I believe that the root cause of the I-P situation is Israel’s refusal to permit a Palestinian state and its settlement of the lands set aside for that state.
me no dhimmi – we’ve been through this argument before. I maintain that Israel’s continued occupation of the Palestinian lands is indefensible, and that includes any notion of a requirement for ‘defensible geography’.
The ‘right of return’, as a metaphor of a claim to a land base, can be realized by financial compensation for the Palestinian loss of homes, farms and belongings. No, the ‘right of return’ doesn’t mean any destruction of Israel. No Arab State is that naive and the gap between their public rhetoric and their knowledge of reality remains – a gap.
As for a unitary state, by which I assume you mean ONE state with both Palestinians and Jewish people as citizens on this ONE state – I’m sure you know that Israel rejects this. Because it would end the Jewish religious majority in Israel, and Israel was set up to maintain such a majority. Therefore, one state is impossible. It has to be two states – and Israel is taking all the land for that second state.
What do you mean by a ‘preternatural inability’? What is the cause? Surely you can’t mean a genetic cause, and after all, Jews and Muslims lived for centuries with each other without hatred, understanding each as ‘people of the book’. Again, don’t mix up Islamic fascism into this; it’s a 19th phenomenon emerging as a result of dysfunctional industrialization in the ME.
As for Israel’s opponents being rational or irrational – they are the same as Israel people. That is, we are all human. Would you define the settlers, who can be the most fundamentalist and militant people around – as rational opponents of the Palestinian farmers in the area? Is it rational for a settler to burn the neighbour’s farm to the ground to get him to abandon the farm?
Is it rational to claim that land is yours because god gave it to you?
Is it rational to insist that the Palestinians shouldn’t be angry and yes, violent, when it’s one generation on, and they still aren’t getting that promised state, and are forced to watch that land being settled by someone else…and to watch it as outsiders, because they are not allowed to even walk in the same fields as the settlers? Is that rational?
What is the solution? To insist that, a priori, ALL Arabs are constitutionally unable to interact with Jews is a fallacy, a psychological generalization that can’t be maintained as a truth because it provides no causality for this conclusion.
To insist that ALL Arabs are against the state of Israel…just because..is irrelevant to a future agenda because it rejects change and therefore, rejects history and the capacity of all people to think and reason.
To state that the only actions that Israel engages in are purely defensive, ignores the occupation which has lasted a generation, ignores that such an action in itself generates hatred and resentment; ignores those massive settlements on land promised to the Palestinians, ignores the loss of farms by settler violence, ..and so on.
What is the solution – if there is one? Hoping that the Palestinians will disappear is not a solution. The only solution is to acknowledge that the Palestinians aren’t going to disappear; that they were, as was Israel, granted a political solution by a land base, a nation – and Israel ought to clear out the settlements, and enable such a Palestinian state.
But to expect a people who are living without land, without being in control of their own economy and land resources – not to be angry, hostile and vicious – is naive.
The settlements are an impediment to peace
– Stephen
Frankly, I’m conflicted on this facet of the conflict. However, it amazes me to hear liberals gush over pluralism and inclusiveness, multiculturalism, open borders, “no human is illegal” etc. etc. etc., while arguing that the “occupied territories” must be — let’s use the german — judenrein. Sp? AND, there are 100s of Arab settlements in Israel.
Conflicted, but on balance, with reference to EBD, Vitruvius (someday I’ll learn to be this cryptic!) , Tenebris, lookout, et al, I can’t quite buy the argument that they are an “obstacle to peace” ‘cos I know with absolute certainty that absent all the settlements the conflict would not be resolved, nay, it would be inflamed with triumphalism.
Reminder: all the Jews in Gaza were forcibly, violently removed from their homes by the anti-zionist jewicidalists running Israel.
Therefore, if you agree with me that there is absolutely no difference between Fatah and Hamas, surely you must agree that the presence of Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) cannot be “obstacles to peace”.
ET, the hatred of the Jews in that region far, far precedes the establishment of the state of Israel.
The Palestinian displacement is a red-herring.
I think ET’s analysis would be correct if Israel’s opponents
were rational actors, but they are not, so it is not correct.
Posted by: Vitruvius at December 28, 2008 7:08 PM
Indeed. Why someone as intelligent as ET would presume the “Palestinians” to be rational actors escapes me. Just watch them act irrationally over and over and over again.
ET, the core problem with the “Palestinians” is that they’ve been programmed to be irrational, ie, indoctrinated with lies. We know this. Not that it’s their fault- it’s the fault of those who programmed them with such hateful indoctrination, propaganda, etc. This is the reality.
Until this programming of the “Palestinians” is halted, and, probably via generational change and reeducation, reversed, then it’s not logical to presume the “Palestinians” will react rationally to rational offers and moves from Israel. After all, the 2000 offer was rational, and irrationally rejected. The peace offering of Gaza was used merely as a rocket launching pad… see where it’s going?
More coverage from LGF which the complicit leftist MSM dares not touch:
“Another Pallywood Production?
Associated Press Palestinian photographer Khalil Hamra seems to be the AP’s inside man when it comes to pictures of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and this photo (shown below) that he filed yesterday has all the marks of being staged. Were these apparently unhurt children deliberately arranged on a stretcher next to a wounded man for propaganda purposes? Notice that the caption is vague about whether the children are injured. (Click the thumbnail image for a larger version.)
…-
“Swastikas in Madrid
This is the scene outside the Israeli embassy in Madrid, where Palestinian supporters are carrying openly antisemitic banners:”
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
it must just suck big time to be palestinian . . . talk about being born behind the 8 ball and destined to a life of hatred, mass psychosis and self inflicted misery.
“…and after all, Jews and Muslims lived for centuries with each other without hatred, understanding each as ‘people of the book’.” -ET
When and where exactly did this take place? Surely you don’t mean the ‘golden age’ of Andalusia? Maimonides might have a thing or two to say about that.
In fact, the only time Jews lived more or less peacefully with Muslims in an Islamic state was when they accepted dhimmi status.
There already is a Palestinian state – it’s called Jordan. The Brits carved it off for them exclusively and left the Jews with their own small unequal portion.
Another red herring or two: ET writes, “But to expect a people who are living without land, without being in control of their own economy and land resources – not to be angry, hostile and vicious -is naïve”.
Then why, in all the Arab lands “in control of their own economy and land resources”* are the Muslims there still “angry, hostile and vicious”?
And no one here has suggested that the “Palestinians” have no cause to be angry. (But, even if they didn’t have cause—see *—they’d still hate the Jews.)
ET – see my 7:30pm post. My dear colleague – Are you ducking the question?!
(Do note that the framing of the question conveys nothing of my position on the subject)
Our Western mindset causes us to assume Palestinians want a state, because it’s what we would want. We know it’s the precursor to stability and prosperity. They play along with this fiction because it sells well to the left and other well meaning people.
In reality the only land they wish to control is Israel, everything else is just a strategic gain to use for the greater struggle.
“The only solution is to acknowledge that the Palestinians aren’t going to disappear.” — ET
This is a bad dream. It’s *the Palestinians* who refuse to acknowledge that the Jews aren’t going to disappear. The disappearance of Jews from the map in the ME is the stated goal, it’s part of Hamas’ charter. It was a stated goal of Arafat and all the rest, all along, and the idea that the Jews will be driven from Israel — not Palestinian territories — continues to be taught in Palestinian schools, and posited as a day-to-come, the glorious end result of their struggles.
Meanwhile, for the Jews in Israel, who have never refused to acknowledge the existence of their Arab neighbours — it would be an insane thought — you….prescribe for them, the Jews, that they acknowledge the existence of Palestinians.
The direct question I asked you, ET, and which was more thoroughly restated by Tenebris — I’ll use his question, and elaborate a bit, is this: IF Israel fully acknowledged that a Palestinian state should exist, and that it should be comprised of 100 percent of the West Bank and all of Gaza, without any oversight from Israel, and with all water rights, freedom of movement, etc., guaranteed, and they made all of those concessions, do you think that the Palestinians would accept that and cease hostilities?
“But to expect a people who are living without land, without being in control of their own economy and land resources – not to be angry, hostile and vicious -is naïve”.
No its not.
Who amongst us can say that they do not have grievance against another for some real or imagined slight. What separates the civilized from the uncivilized is the ability to forgive and move on, to work for the good of your enemy not his ill.
That the Palestinians lack self determination is in the main their own doing and it is certainly within their grasp to stop inflicting wounds on themselves at the time of their choosing.
No this is not to excuse Israel’s actions it is simply to point out that while Palestinians can not control their enemy, they can control their action/reaction.
I concur with EBD @8:32PM.
“IF Israel fully acknowledged that a Palestinian state should exist, and that it should be comprised of 100 percent of the West Bank and all of Gaza, without any oversight from Israel, and with all water rights, freedom of movement, etc., guaranteed, and they made all of those concessions, do you think that the Palestinians would accept that and cease hostilities?
The answer is simply NO!
It was tried,and Arafat himself said that Israel must be driven into the sea.
What ET,stephen,et al fail to realize in their “academic” world is that these people want nothing more,or less,then complete domination.When Et,and et al come live,or visit the real world,they may,just may, wake up.Until then,us plebes will save their useless asses.But we will demand payment.
“They were ordered to wear black turbans. The Christians had to wear a cross the length of a cubit and weighing five ratls around their necks; the Jews were obliged to wear a block of wood of similar weight … ”
“In the regions under stable Islamic control, subjugated non-Muslim dhimmis – Jews and Christians – like elsewhere in other Islamic lands, were prohibited from building new churches or synagogues, or restoring the old ones. Segragated in special quarters, they had to wear discriminatory clothing…”
“No … Jew or Christian may be allowed to wear the dress of an aristocrat, nor of a jurist, nor of a wealthy individual; on the contrary they must be detested and avoided… A distinctive sign must be imposed upon them in order that they may be recognized and this will be for them a form of disgrace.”
– all from Andrew Bostom’s The Legacy of Jihad, plus this little poem by Abu Ishaq which it is claimed likely incited the Granada pogrom
“Bring them down to their place and
Return them to the most abject station.
They used to roam around us in tatters
Covered with contempt, humiliation, and scorn.
They used to rummage amongst the dung heaps for a bit of filthy rag
To serve as a shroud for a man to be buried in . ..
Do not consider that killing them is treachery.
Nay, it would be treachery to leave them scoffing.”
And ET stupidly writes “Jews and Muslims lived for centuries with each other without hatred, understanding each as ‘people of the book'”
ET … you have been consistently wrong about the nature and the status of the Israeli state for so long it must have become a habit with you.
The so called Palestinians have been the willing tools of those neighboring Arab states whose ambition is the destruction of Israel.
The ARABS who act as willing tools and the bloody minded Islamists deserve no sympathy when the consequences of their deliberate and unceasing provocations come back to them.
There is no compromising with totalitarian ideologues.
irwin daisy, we’ve had this discussion before. You maintain that the ‘root cause’ is the Islamic ideology. I reject that, because my analytic view of societies is that the ideology is a ‘superstructural expression’ of a deeper infrastructure – the economic..and the economic is related to the ecological reality of the domain. The political and legal systems enable the economic system to function. The ideological expresses this deeper infrastructure.
The Islamic ideology, I also maintain, is one that is based on a tribal and pastoralist agriculturalism. Defining the societal structure as a religious ideology has meant that the Muslims have found it almost impossible to change their ideology as their economy changed..and also..to change their economy by themselves (rather than have the West move in and process the oil)…and change their political and legal system.
So – I strongly disagree with you. The ideology is NOT the basis of either Islamic fascism or the I-P conflict. And I don’t merge the two. I disagree with your view that ‘no Islamic peoples’ will ever be at peace with Israel.
In reply to EBD – yes, I do believe that IF the Palestinians got their own state, the full West Bank and Gaza – as a state, AND were assisted in setting it up as a democracy AND enabled to exist with economic ties to Israel..then, hostilities would cease.
me no dhimmi – I wish I knew conclusions with your ‘absolute certainty’. I can’t state anything with such certainty. You state that you know ‘with absolute certainty’ that even if there were no settlements, the conflict would continue. Do you mean without the settlements AND the land declared as a Palestinian state? Or not?
Because one is not a zionist does not mean one is anti-Jewish..and that word you use..jewiscidilists – is inflammatory. Why shouldn’t the settlers in Gaza have been removed? The fact that they resisted is not relevant.
lookout – I disagree with your generalization that All Palestinians hate Jews. That is, as I’m sure you know, invalid. Societies, or collectives don’t hate/love. Only individuals do; therefore, some hate Jews and some like them.
As for the problems in the Arab countries, I’ve written about this endlessly – the tribal dysfunctionality….which emerges when you have a population imbalance, and a political and economic system that is suited to a tribal rather than an industrial size population. The people in these countries are NOT in control of their economy and political system; the elite tribe is. There is no middle class in control – and that’s the problem. And this situation has nothing to do with I-P. Nothing. It’s far deeper, it’s located within the infrastructure of these Arab countries and not within I-P.
No, Jordan is not ‘the Palestinian state’ and was most certainly not defined as such by the UN resolution which set up the West Bank/Gaza as the Palestinian state.
Again, there is no such thing as an ‘Arab mentality’ just as we cannot say that ALL Germans are fascists; or ALL Canadians are tolerant. We can indeed say that:
Palestinian children are taught hatred of Israel. I consider this a result of the generation long occupation and the encroachment by the settlers and the settlements.
The settlers themselves believe and teach their children that the land base is Jewish only and that the Palestinians/Arabs are without rights to that land. So, we have both sides teaching the next generation mythic narratives about each other.
We can also say that the Islamic ideology – turned into dogma by defining it as a religion and immutable, rejects the rights of other religions. This ideology has hardened into fascism with the inability of the tribal political system to transform into a democratic system. This has nothing to do with I-P.
By the way, irwin daisy, there was a long tradition in Iran of a Jewish community.
Again, a people’s way of thinking is not genetic, it is not ‘set in stone’. All people have the ability to reason and debate – if allowed to, if encouraged to. It took the West 400-500 years to fight its ‘frozen mentality’ period; it took people like Abelard who insisted that he had the right to question and doubt. There is no reason to assert that Arabs have ‘frozen minds’ so to speak.
So – IF Israel would recognize that original UN resolution, and both allow and enable a Palestinian state – then, that would cease that conflict. I’d bet that a democratic nation of Palestine would play an important role in moving the other Arab states into democracy. At the moment, that’s the role of Iraq but it’s not an easy road.
“Did Israel Use “Disproportionate Force” in Gaza?”
Dore Gold – The Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs
Israeli population centers in southern Israel have been the target of over 4,000 rockets, as well as thousands of mortar shells, fired by Hamas and other organizations since 2001. Rocket attacks increased by 500 percent after Israel withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip in August 2005. During an informal six-month lull, some 215 rockets were launched at Israel.
The charge that Israel uses disproportionate force keeps resurfacing whenever it has to defend its citizens from non-state terrorist organizations and the rocket attacks they perpetuate. From a purely legal perspective, Israel’s current military actions in Gaza are on solid ground. According to international law, Israel is not required to calibrate its use of force precisely according to the size and range of the weaponry used against it.
Ibrahim Barzak and Amy Teibel wrote for the Associated Press on December 28 that most of the 230 Palestinians who were reportedly killed were “security forces,” and Palestinian officials said “at least 15 civilians were among the dead.” The numbers reported indicate that there was no clear intent to inflict disproportionate collateral civilian casualties. What is critical from the standpoint of international law is that if the attempt has been made “to minimize civilian damage, then even a strike that causes large amounts of damage – but is directed at a target with very large military value – would be lawful.”
Luis Moreno-Orampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, explained that international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court “permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur.” The attack becomes a war crime when it is directed against civilians (which is precisely what Hamas does).
After 9/11, when the Western alliance united to collectively topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, no one compared Afghan casualties in 2001 to the actual numbers that died from al-Qaeda’s attack. There clearly is no international expectation that military losses in war should be on a one-to-one basis. To expect Israel to hold back in its use of decisive force against legitimate military targets in Gaza is to condemn it to a long war of attrition with Hamas.
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=378&PID=0&IID=2808&TTL=Did_Israel_Use_“Disproportionate_Force”_in_Gaza?
The blatant anti-semitic racism of the “palestinian” people is revealed in this concept: They insist that palestinian lands be “judenrein”.
Now here’s the rub: can we call Muslims moving to Toronto “settlers” as well? Note there may be a great many Canadians (Thais, Hindus, Coptic Egyptians) who don’t want them here.
As I’ve said many times before on this matter, in particular in the excellent discussion you, CGH, and I had here on January 25, 2008, I agree with your general analysis in theory, ET. Yet I do not see how it can be implemented in practice, by Israel backing away from its opponents, at this time; not while Israel’s opponents are lobbing shells on it’s citizens without regard. In theory, in the long term, we face an Anthropological problem. In practice, at this time, Israel faces a Sun Tzu problem.
ET,
“…which emerges when you have a population imbalance, and a political and economic system that is suited to a tribal rather than an industrial size population. The people in these countries are NOT in control of their economy and political system; the elite tribe is.”
What exactly is this political and economic system in Islamic countries? Could it be Shariah? The elites and clergy use the Islamic ideology to control the people, it’s always been this way. The Islamic ideology informs everything within society, their world view and the individual’s life.
The Cairo Declaration on ‘Islamic’ Human Rights is based on Shariah, as stated in articles 22 and 23.
“Palestinian children are taught hatred of Israel. I consider this a result of the generation long occupation and the encroachment by the settlers and the settlements.”
Then how about American Muslim schoolchildren? Or Pakistani children? Or…
As you like to say so often, ET, we’ll have to agree to disagree. However, history and common sense disagrees with you on this issue as well.
Ah yes. The fairness and enlightenment of Dr. Dawg.
He just banned me as a “troll” for the crime of echoing his own comments.
marky mark said
“Reasonable people can have this debate without accusing people on one side or the other of monstrous lies.”
I responded by pointing out Dawg’s monstrous accusations…
” So you are proposing, then, a “Final Solution to the Palestinian problem,” Mr. Dost?”
“Meanwhile, one of Kate’s regulars calls for genocide.”
“Palestine is occupied territory, and its people have been under Israel’s iron heel for decades.
Let Israel return to its 1967 borders, and let the Arab world–indeed, the security of those borders. No settlements outside them. No shooting olive harvesters, shelling children’s zoos, or guzzling 80% of the water in the West Bank. ”
3rd time lucky.
From Flea,
“Furthermore:Switzerland, Brazil and the usual laundry list of suspects condemn a disproportionate Israeli response to attacks from Gaza. Normally I would say the Swiss and the Brazilians can rot in hell but on this occasion I agree; a proportionate response is called for.
I demand Israel launch two hundred attacks per week at random on densely populated civilian areas in the Arab occupied territories then hand out candies in the streets when Arab children die. This would be exactly proportionate.”
Exactly right.
ET rarely misses the point. But always when it concerns Israel.
Hamas Charter
1st Line: “In The Name Of The Most Merciful Allah”
Paragraph 2: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).”
Article Eleven: “The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day.”
Article Thirteen: “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with. As in said in the honourable Hadith”
Article Twenty-Seven: “Secularism completely contradicts religious ideology. Attitudes, conduct and decisions stem from ideologies. That is why, with all our appreciation for The Palestinian Liberation Organization – and what it can develop into – and without belittling its role in the Arab-Israeli conflict, we are unable to exchange the present or future Islamic Palestine with the secular idea. The Islamic nature of Palestine is part of our religion and whoever takes his religion lightly is a loser.”
Now, is there any doubt the Pals are driven by Islam ‘In The Name Of The Most Merciful Allah’?
From Common Sense Political Thought, this excellent summary which I believe Vitruvius will appreciate:
Excerpt ====
The foreign policy scholars and collegiate experts and seasoned diplomats have written millions, if not billions, of pages about this half-century long, seemingly insoluble problem, but it’s really far simpler than they think. There are two, and only two, problems, and they are diametrically opposed:
1. The Israelis want to live in peace and security, in a Jewish state that they control, in part of the Levant, a part which must contain Jerusalem; and
2. The Palestinians believe that they have an ancient and modern right to live in and control all of the Levant.
That’s it, that’s all there is to it. In our liberal Western concept, we see a natural split-the-differences solution: the Israelis pull back from the land that they seized in the 1967 war, and the Arab nations grant the Israelis peaceful recognition. Makes perfect sense, right?
Except to the Arabs, that is defined as losing! That kind of rational-in-Western-minds two-state solution means that Israel wins on goal number one, which means, necessarily, that the Palestinians and the larger Arab community have lost on goal number two. It doesn’t matter where the compromise line is set, it still winds up an Israeli victory as far as the Arabs are concerned.
End of excerpt ====
Joe,
I agree, that is implication of the point.
Vitrvius,
There is no opponent is the point. You cannot class all of Israels opponents into a single box. There are many who would cut a deal, and many who cut no deal. This isnt unknown in other situations, often it means you have to let things play out until there is a force that can coalesce and enforce a settlement.
Analogy, I am aware of an Indian band in the Yukon, every time the government strikes a deal another faction wins the next band election and overturns or refuses to honour the agreement. So who do you negotiate with. it isnt that there arent “rational actors” they just dont hold enough power.
Similar political situation with the Palestinians. there are those you can deal with. The problem is those you that you cannot, for the moment, have guns, money and backing in significant amounts. In other words you cannot cut one Palestinian deal. This was why thy allowed Gaza and th West Bank to be run by different authorities.
The long run hope is to show the futility of protest in Gaza and ideally the West Bank group will be courted and brought into a deal. It could be argued that here are two Palestines forming, we will see.
Hezbo to the north is different. Once again what are they, they represent a quasi stae within Lebanon. Do you hold the Lebanese government responsible for them? or is a hezbo a common problem for the central government and for the Israeli’s?
Israel has a right to defend itself, so dont get me wrong I think Israel is correct in what it is currently doing. The cease fire was ended by Hamas first, if I remember correctly. So Israel maitains the important high ground, morally and legally speaking, and Hamas kept firing rockets, an unacceptable situation.
But the settlements, which are a secondary issue to the current flare up, were a long term mistake and they will be sacrificed at some point in time. Israel cannot defend them ultimately. I dont believe the settlement movement even enjoys majority support within Israel. Some may be kept as part of final settlement.
I agree with you, Stephen, that, as you put it, “Israel maintains
the important high ground, morally and legally speaking”.
ET
one question for you
was the fact that Isreal didn’t recognize a Palistinian state the cause of the slaughter of thousands (about 10,000, as I recall) of Jews outside of Heberon in the mid thirties?
It is completely understandable that Israel has responded militarily to the indiscriminate use of rocket artillery by Hamas. But I can’t help but think that Israel is doing exactly what Hamas and other Islamic militants want.
As they have shown repeatedly in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, Jihadists are perfectly willing to sacrifice their own people to achieve a broader strategic goal. The ongoing rocket attacks (more than 2000 in the past year) despite repeated warnings from Israel, Egypt and other countries appears to be a deliberate provocation. Hamas had to know what was coming. So why do it?
The answers seems obvious:
1. Derail peace talks: done
2. Turn the international PR war against Israel: done
3. Isolate Israel diplomatically: done
4. Inflame Arab opinion: done
5. Demoralize Israeli civilians: done
6. Increase support for militant Islam in the Arab world: done
7. Provoke a bloody ground assault? Not yet.
Hamas and other militant groups are thinking long term. They know they will be clobbered and pay a heavy price in Israeli attacks, but are willing to see hundreds or even thousands of their own people die in order to further their long-range strategic goals.
Israel needs to re-think its strategy. Right now they seem lost, unsure of how to deal with the threat beyond massive reprisals. It isn’t working, and their enemies are gaining in strength. They need to find a better way and soon. An idea of how they want all of this to end would be a good place to start. Hamas has a clear goal in mind. Israel must do the same.
And your proposed course of action,
Belisarius, would be: what, exactly?
Belasarius,
You rais an interesting point hat I have been wondering as well. The last conflict into Lebanon was generally deemed to be ill planned, off startegy and badly executed…there were successes but the internal recriminations within Israel were evidence that this didnt go well.
This leads us to today. I highly doubt the Israelis are making two mistakes in a row. This appears better planned and a looks more like a proper catspaw…they will strike at what they need to, if they invade, and then pull back.
I dont know if what is hapening now is what Hamas or Hezbo wanted, especially the timing of it. This appears to be on Israeli timing and initiative, a good sign. The lack of co-ordinated response from Hamas’ allies indicate that this might be a surprise.
I cannot help but think that this is a training exercise for the Israelis to prepare them for their real ultimate target and major threat….Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon. The IDF will definitley want some payback for last time.
Like an in division NHL opponent, you dont need to rush the retaliation since you know you are going to be seeing these opponents again soon.
But I am convinced this is about trying to show the futility of Hamas’ course of action.
je other danger will be if Iran really does send a supply ship to Gaza. Do the israeli’s board it? do the sink it? You have to believe that they’ll have a pretty good idea what is on that ship…which may be medical supplies and food, daring the israelis to do something.
But good question, glad to know I wasnt the only one thinking about it.
joe, your benign suggestion that the Palestinians ‘forgive and forget and move on’ is naive. They are an occupied people; there is nothing to move on to.
irwin daisy – I’ve outlined the societal structure many times before – I’ve explained the political and social system – which is tribalism. Sharia is merely a particular legal system found in this particular tribal system, but all tribal systems have regulations defining kinship, male and female behaviour, legal rules etc. The pastoral tribal system usually separates men and women quite strictly…I won’t go into it all here. Again – an ideology is never a ‘root cause’; you have to search out the origin of the ideology and examine its role in the economic and political system.
sounder – no, the Palestinians are not ‘driven by fascist Islam; Hamas as an ideological set is driven by fascist Islam.
me no dhimmi – such a simplistic reductionism is, in my view, completely invalid. It reduces everything to the Good Guys and the Bad Guys and I disagree with such a view.
stephen – I agree with your points, and particularly the settlements. But I don’t think that Israel will give them up though there are many Israelis who do promote giving them up. But the settlers themselves are often intense fundamentalists – on a par with the fundamentalist Islamists – and they won’t accept any Palestinian on ‘their land’.
Belisaurius – yes, I’d agree with you, the Hamas attacks were part of a long term strategy. Islamic fascism has moved into the I-P situation and uses it for its own fascist agenda. Again, Islamic fascism in my view has nothing to do, basically, with the I-P situation; Islamic fascism in I-P is a tactic of diverting the Arab people from wanting change in their own Arab nations.
I think that if Israel made a decision to vacate the West Bank, hand it and Gaza over to the Palestinians as a nation (not municipal governance)..then, the Palestinians would be delighted. Who would NOT be delighted? The Islamic fascists.
Right, vitruvius – there’s the anthropological or societal reality, and the ‘high energy conflict’ or military reality. But I don’t think that you can deal in only one OR the other. Israel focuses primarily on the military, but the other reality has to be dealt with as well. And peace talks aren’t the method of doing it. The only way to deal with the societal reality..is to pave the way for a Palestinian state. That means removing the settlements from the West Bank instead of, as Israel is even now doing, expanding them. And recognizing a Palestinian nation. And helping them to set it up as a democracy and with economic links to Israel.
Now – who would object to this? As I said, the Islamic fascists would. Not the Palestinians, and frankly, except for the settlers and their kind, most Israelis would welcome it. Would the Arab States? Some – such as Jordan, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, maybe Egypt. But Syria and Iran? And Al Qaeda? Nope – they want that conflict kept up; it’s useful to hide behind.
So, my own view, unpopular as it may be here, is that Israel has to work ‘both sides of the coin’. It has to move towards a Palestinian state, and again, peace talks are, as are all bureaucratic agendas, useless. It has to be practical actions with that wall and those settlements. And that, to my knowledge, isn’t on any Israeli agenda.
No one would object to it in theory, ET, yet I still don’t see how you’re going to get from here to there in practice, at least not while once side is lobbing shells on the other, pace the settlers. As Steven den Beste once noted, “Pious aphorisms and intensive omphaloskepsis are not a plan”.
Vit And your proposed course of action,
Belisarius, would be: what, exactly?
First, determine the end-state you (Israel) want.
Second, create the strategy to achieve it.
Israel needs a clear strategic goal. Today, they are obviously conflicted between a desire to incorporate as much of the west bank into Israel proper and the need to co-exist with a viable Palestinian state.
I can see your hands waving, Belisarius. And your
proposed course of action, would be: what, exactly?
vitruvius – I would consider peace talks an example of both your pious aphorisms and benign omphaloskepsis – both carried out with a glass of the best whisky at hand.
Therefore, I am suggesting action – with regard to removing the settlements, and the written statement of acknowledgement of a Palestinian state; and assistance in setting up a democracy and economic collaboration. AS WELL – there is the military action against Islamic fascism. That has to be maintained. And for the umpteenth time, I differentiate between the Israeli-Palestinian situation and Islamic fascism. They are two completely different agendas and peoples involved.
Most Palestinians and Israelis would be totally in favour of such a decision to enable a Palestinian state. It would cut the ground out beneath the feet of the Islamic fascists who are cynically using the I-P situation for their own agenda. And as I’ve said before, the Islamic fascists don’t give a hoot about Palestinians and certainly don’t want them to set up a democratic state.
So, Israel has to focus on both actions – and enabling a Palestinian state would confront the Islamic fascists right in ‘the eye’ so to speak.
You have outlined some aspects of an action plan for Israel, ET. Now, what would your concomitant action plan for Palestine be, and, importantly, do you think it is achievable: in practice, not just in theory?
You are right ET Palestine is an occupied land and so is North America, South America, Australia, large parts of Asia, Africa. In fact I would have great difficulty naming a place that at some point or other has not been or continues to be ‘occupied’. I remember speaking to my aunt who was forbidden to speak her native Welsh while attending school. Should there then be conflict in Wales because England ‘occupied’ the land? After all the Welsh have no where else to go after all its not like the Scots or the Irish would have welcomed the refugee Welsh with open arms.
In other word ET my naive suggestion is actually the only viable option on the table. The Israelis and the Palestinians have to do exactly that. Forgive and move on. Until that happens there shall remain interminable conflict with each side seeking to claim the moral high ground of merely resorting to violence as a form of self defense.
All our attempts at justification of one position or the other is the simple mind game of the ineffectual.
When speaking of the Middle East conflicts I prefer to use the words of the pretend psychiatrist Bob Newhart. “STOP IT”.
There will come a day when “Palestinian nationalism”, “victims of Zionism”, will be seen as just another variation of “the Jews are Christ killers”. It is simply this generation’s bat with which to bash Jews. The ETs of the world seem to forget that Jews accepted the UN partition plan of 1948 and the Arabs did not. They could be celebrating their 60th anniversary of statehood. Jew hatred is inherent in Islam – Islam maintains that Abraham was asked to sacrifice Ishmael not Isaac so it will always maintain that the Jews lied in their book. Islam plunked its Dome of the Rock right on the spot of the two Jewish Temples on purpose. Islam has seen Jews as second class dhimmis with no rights before the law long before there was ever a single “obstacle to peace settler”.
Keep in mind, Joe, that Mr. Newhart only charged $5 for his, arguably correct, “Stop It” advice. Meanwhile, it remains the case that there is no end to the shysters, of various persuasions, who are charging billions of dollars to keep it going. One can see how this exasperates the problem.
Too right Vit LOL
“All our attempts at justification of one position or the other is the simple mind game of the ineffectual.”
you have to pick a side or the side will be picked for you. No Jews in Gaza – check. that worked our well. Instead of lobbing rockets at the Jews in Gaza they now just lob them at the Jews a little farther north. No Jews in Judea, sure – but what about those “settlements” of Haifa and Tel Aviv? Let’s make it binational and just return non-Muslims to dhimmi status.
If we don’t pick a side, our indecision is aid to the anti-Western civilization forces.