Hafrada is worse than Apartheid

[volatile]

I don't care if 1 person dies, or if 100 do.

I do.

 

[TriskettheKid]

I am only talking about the reaction I have heard from some of my fellow Jews. They talk about the rockets on S'derot as if it is a 2nd Holocaust.

I don't agree.

There is some hyperbole, and quite a bit of rhetoric.

However, a sovereign nation being attacked, regardless of amount of fatalities, has a right to defend itself. This is a concept going as far back as John Locke.

I may not agree with the way things have been going over there. To be sure, the Palestinians haven't exactly pushed enough to rid themselves of the scum among them that are hampering attempts at a solution. There are also Israelis who, for some reason, we cannot shake. Seriously, why the **** did one of those scumbags have to kill someone like Rabin?

But that's besides the point.

A sovereign nation was attacked. That nation has a right to defend itself.

 

[TriskettheKid]

I do.

I'm sorry, was it too much trouble to keep that quote in context?

 

[volatile]

I'm sorry, was it too much trouble to keep that quote in context?

What do you mean? You expressed that sentiment. I wholeheartedly disagree, whatever the context.

If you hate indiscriminate violence so much, do you think the puny Hamas rockets deserve such an indiscriminate response?

Of course the militants should be hunted down and punished. Bombing schools and mosques full of civilians is not the way to do it, though. It matters that over 400 Palestinians are dead due to the actions of a few of their neighbours. It matters a great deal.

 

[volatile]

A sovereign nation was attacked. That nation has a right to defend itself.

When Britain was bombed by the IRA, would it have been within its rights to strafe bombers over Catholic churches?

What Israel is doing is far above and beyond "defending itself". The manner and extent of the response is testament to that.

 

[Thunder]

Yeah. Imagine the international outcry if the British Army of the Ulster Royal Constables destroyed Roman Catholic churches in order to attack the IRA.

But when Israel destroys Mosques..its okee dokee.

 

[a_unique_person]

I don't agree.

There is some hyperbole, and quite a bit of rhetoric.

However, a sovereign nation being attacked, regardless of amount of fatalities, has a right to defend itself. This is a concept going as far back as John Locke.

I may not agree with the way things have been going over there. To be sure, the Palestinians haven't exactly pushed enough to rid themselves of the scum among them that are hampering attempts at a solution. There are also Israelis who, for some reason, we cannot shake. Seriously, why the **** did one of those scumbags have to kill someone like Rabin?

But that's besides the point.

A sovereign nation was attacked. That nation has a right to defend itself.

An adverse military occupation of the Palestinians, such as they have endured for 40 years now, is of itself an act of war. Every year, many more Palestinians died. Every year, Palestinian children died. That is an act of war, and it hasn't stopped for 40 years.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article394547.ece

TO DEFEND Israel today is to be either callous or wilfully ignorant. Had Julie Burchill bothered during her visit there to cross the few miles from Israel to Gaza or the West Bank, she would have seen such human suffering as to disturb even her frenetic adulation of Israel. She might have seen the daily lot of nearly three million Palestinians as they battle with army checkpoints, curfews, random shootings, arbitrary arrests and air raids. She might have found that the “superJews” she so admires humiliate and oppress Palestinians at a whim: last year, at the Nablus checkpoint, a middle-aged man was made to strip, get down on all fours and bark like a dog before he could enter his city. Women in labour routinely wait at checkpoints until some give birth there and see their babies die. Those that survive live a blighted childhood. Since September 2000, Israel has killed more than 660 Palestinian children and wounded 9,000 — such as little Iman, sprayed with bullets when walking to school in Rafah last month, even after she died. Thousands of children are traumatised by the daily horrors they witness. For a Palestinian child, life under Israeli occupation means turning 15 and seeing the army come to arrest you if you are male, or seeing your friends bleed to death because no ambulance is allowed to rescue them.

 

[Thunder]

I have to agree. Every day that goes by I am finding it harder and harder to defend Israel.

They sure know how to over-react.

 

[volatile]

Yeah. Imagine the international outcry if the British Army of the Ulster Royal Constables destroyed Roman Catholic churches in order to attack the IRA.

But when Israel destroys Mosques..its okee dokee.

The parallels are quite apparent. Lots of people in Northern Ireland even voted for Sinn Fein.

I draw my conclusions to the Israel/Palestine conflict based on a level of empathy for the civilians caught in the crossfire... and based on the parallels with how I'd have felt had the terrorist situation in my own country been dealt with similarly.

Israel has the right to defend itself. Of course it does. And Hamas need to be stopped. But the way to do that must not involve killing civilians, or destroying civilian lives and livelihoods. Of course the Middle East is hardly analogous to Northern Ireland, but it does give one some sense of perspective to imagine how an Israeli-type response may have been greeted in Britain.

 

[RandFan]

In the current conflict, the Palestinian death-toll stands, currently, at 402, with over 2,000 injured. The number of Israeli casualties? FOUR.

It seems as if the real threat isn't from being in the path of Hamas rockets. It's being under the flightpath of the Israeli air force.

Recrimination and escalation. It's the language of war. Diplomacy by other means.

 

[RandFan]

Yeah. Imagine the international outcry if the British Army of the Ulster Royal Constables destroyed Roman Catholic churches in order to attack the IRA.

But when Israel destroys Mosques..its okee dokee.

So why do the Palestinians put weapons in Mosques? Who ultimatly bears responsibilty?

 

[volatile]

So why do the Palestinians put weapons in Mosques? Who ultimatly bears responsibilty?

There have long been suspicions of links between some churchmen and the IRA (eg http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/21/1040174437915.html) -- does that justify the bombing of churches?

No.

Punish the guilty, not their neighbours.

Imagine if someone dropped missiles on your house because your next-door neighbour was up to no good... It's unthinkable, shameful and horrific. Have some empathy for the dead civilians and children. Put yourself in their shoes. Imagine living their lives. Imagine how you'd feel.

 

[volatile]

Recrimination and escalation. It's the language of war. Diplomacy by other means.

So 402 dead is an appropriate, proportional and measured response to the death of 4 people?

 

[TriskettheKid]

So 402 dead is an appropriate, proportional and measured response to the death of 4 people?

There's a shocking lack of nuance in your post.

Pray tell:

Using your metric, what should the US have done in retaliation for the Japanese attack on the fleet at Pearl Harbor? Should they have stopped once they had inflicted a proportional number of fatalities on the Japanese?

 

[IDB87]

Punish the guilty, not their neighbours.

How should they be punished? Should the IDF march into Gaza to arrest Hamas militants?

So 402 dead is an appropriate, proportional and measured response to the death of 4 people?

Out of those 402 dead, how many of those are Hamas militants?

 

[RandFan]

So 402 dead is an appropriate, proportional and measured response to the death of 4 people?

I cannot justify Israels actions. I've not tried to and nothing in my post should lead you to that conclusion.

A harms B.
B in turn harms A and escalates the violence.
A in turn harms B and escalates the violence.

That was my point. It was my only point. I don't state who is A and who is B. That's been lost to history and it wouldn't solve anything.

Given the last conflict, from a military perspective, the response would make sense.

 

[volatile]

There's a shocking lack of nuance in your post.

Pray tell:

Using your metric, what should the US have done in retaliation for the Japanese attack on the fleet at Pearl Harbor? Should they have stopped once they had inflicted a proportional number of fatalities on the Japanese?

If anything "lacks nuance", it is strafing mosques, refugee camps and schools with bombers.

What has Pearl Harbour got to do with anything? The situation is, as I explained, more analogous to the situation in Northern Ireland. Would the British have been justified in dropping bombs on Catholic churches?

Bloody Sunday was called "bloody" for a reason, and only 13 people died there. It's an outrage that has haunted the British for 30 years, and rightly so. There can never be justification for the indiscriminate killing of civilians.

And yet Israel carry out dozens of "Bloody Sundays" every single day. How can you stand behind that with a straight face? If anything similar was happening anywhere else in the world, you'd be outraged. Why not now?

 

[Thunder]

i think what we are trying to say is...if Hamas had better aim and was able to kill more Israelis, we may be a little more comfortable with Israel's current actions.

its not Israel's fault that Hamas can't triangulate proper trajectory for their mortars. those things can be very precise...if you do it right.

but what they are doing now..seems waaaaay overboard.

they may kill Hamas leaders and destroy weapons..but the next generation of Hamas terrorists is now a sure thing.

 

[volatile]

How should they be punished? Should the IDF march into Gaza to arrest Hamas militants?

Yes.

Out of those 402 dead, how many of those are Hamas militants?

62 women and children, and an unknown number of men.

Four Israelis.

 

[IDB87]

Yes.

Like these airstrikes, would arresting them cease the rocket attacks? No.

unknown number of men.

Four Israelis.

How many of these men were fighters?