General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[Par]

You know, the folks here who just can't figure out whether the terrorist who stabbed the babies multiple times in their sleep is to blame, or perhaps the victims are to blame for being there in the first place...

Look at the sheer horror of the depravities to which Israeli policy has driven these otherwise pious and noble people*.

* Yes. I mean the murder(s), not Palestinians.

 

[bikerdruid]

So am I: what made them let their little whore go out with such a leg-showing dress? No daughter of mine would be allowed to do that! It's all their fault she got raped.

if you took her, while she was dressed that way, and dropped her off in the middle of a very rough neighbourhood, in the middle of the night, then yes, you would share responsibility for her rape.

 

[Par]

parents are ultimately responsible for the safety of their children.
if i took my children for a holiday to kandahar province in afghanistan, i would be in dereliction of that responsibility.
if my children or i were killed while on that holiday, i must concede that i was somewhat responsible for their deaths.

If they were killed by falling rocks or malaria, then you are. If they were murdered by another moral agent, then you are not.

 

[Par]

if you took her, while she was dressed that way, and dropped her off in the middle of a very rough neighbourhood, in the middle of the night, then yes, you would share responsibility for her rape.

Again, Bikerdruid, I would be very grateful if you could directly address my partition proposal above. I believe it will iron out our differences. This is, after all, the second time I have reminded you.

 

[bikerdruid]

Again, Bikerdruid, I would be very grateful if you could directly address my partition proposal above. I believe it will iron out our differences. This is, after all, the second time I have reminded you.

????

 

[bikerdruid]

If they were killed by falling rocks or malaria, then you are. If they were murdered by another moral agent, then you are not.

ridiculous.
if i take my children to the middle of a war zone, i am indeed responsible for their safety.
if they are killed, i must share the blame for putting them in harms way.
are you that dense?

 

[Par]

this is a very complex issue. the murder of the innocents is a great tragedy, no one is disputing that.
that said, the west bank, by treaties signed by israel, is palestinian land.
the parents who took their children to live on confiscated land, put their children in harm's way.
they at least must have known that they were settling their children on disputed land, in an area that is a hot spot of problems.

the parents acted irresponsibly and put their children in danger.
the parents, the government of israel as well as the murderer are all responsible for this horrible tragedy.

I think you were going very well until right at the end there; I have to take issue with your last sentence. The parents indeed accrue moral responsibility, but not for the murder. I propose we partition the event into two separate crimes.

1. The gross dereliction of parental duty inherent to using one’s children as pawns in a game of LandTheft.
2. The brutal murder of a whole family.

The parents are entirely culpable for 1, but not at all culpable for 2. The Palestinian in question are entirely responsible for 2, but not at all responsible for 1. Some support for this idea comes when we reflect on the fact that many settler families commit 1, but through sheer luck are not murdered. The fact they ended up dead in this case does not make the parents any guiltier of anything. They did the precise same thing as the luckier settlers. It took a completely different moral agent and his/her personal decision to butcher them for them to end up dead.

I suggest, Bikerdruid, that it would be a mistake to continue this line of argument before clarifying whether you accept my partition proposal above or reject it (and, if so, on which grounds).

Again, Bikerdruid, I would be very grateful if you could directly address my partition proposal above. I believe it will iron out our differences. This is, after all, the second time I have reminded you.

????

Indeed.

 

[bikerdruid]

Indeed.

dude...you can partition the crime all you wish.
however, the children are still dead.

equivocate away.....

 

[Par]

dude...you can partition the crime all you wish.
however, the children are still dead.

Shall I take that as a refusal to address the proposal?

equivocate away.....

Equivocation is shifting between different meanings of the same word over the course of the same argument. We all make mistakes. If you can specify precisely where I have done this, I would be interested.

 

[bikerdruid]

Shall I take that as a refusal to address the proposal?




Equivocation is shifting between different meanings of the same word over the course of the same argument. We all make mistakes. If you can specify precisely where I have done this, I would be interested.

do you deny that israel signed treaties in which they acknowledged that the west bank is palestinian territory?

that is the issue here.

 

[Par]

do you deny that israel signed treaties in which they acknowledged that the west bank is palestinian territory?

that is the issue here.

You must have this thread confused with a related one: this thread is about the settler family who were butchered in their sleep recently.

 

[WildCat]

Why does the first imply the second? And what has that to do with boots on the ground?

Because for Israel to fit that definition it means that Hamas serves Israel.

Lots of things seem easy when you don't do them properly.

List of military occupations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_occupations

ctrl-F to find where Iraq is listed, you'll find two occurences:
Occupation of Kuwait by Iraq during the Gulf War, 1990–1991
Occupation of Iraq by the United States, United Kingdom, Poland and others: (2003–2004)

America didn't BEGIN an occupation of Iraq in 1991, so it couldn't have ended one.

Care to try again? Or do you want to admit that you don't know as much about this as the CIA?

Wow, did that point fly right over your head!

If Israel now occupies Gaza, then the US occupied Iraq from 1991-2003. Because the situations are very close.

I think the CIA knows enough to get the answer right. And so does the state department.

I also think you don't know enough to get it right, or to guess the motivations of the State dept.

I know the motivations of the State Dept., they cannot have relations with a terrorist group (Hamas), so they pretend that Fatah actually excercises authority over Gaza. And since they consider the PA the authority in the WB and Gaza and would like a final peace agreement that doesn't exclude Gaza it makes sense to clump them together. They're basically hoping that Gaza will be brought back into the fold.

Now go ponder the difference between "Occupied France" and "Vichy France". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:France_map_Lambert-93_with_regions_and_departments-occupation.svg

 

[applecorped]

do you deny that israel signed treaties in which they acknowledged that the west bank is palestinian territory?

that is the issue here.

Wrong. See Par's reply above.

 

[Skeptic]

When Israel left Gaza in 2005, the optimists said it would prove to the world Israel can end the occupation. The pessimists, or perhaps the realists, said it won't work: the blame-Israel-first crowd would just redefine "occupation" in a way that somehow includes not having a single Israeli soldier or civilian in the "occupied" area, and continue to blame Israel. The same, of course, will happen if Israel withdraws from the WB.

 

[bikerdruid]

You must have this thread confused with a related one: this thread is about the settler family who were butchered in their sleep recently.

you must have your head in the sand.

 

[Par]

you must have your head in the sand.

But I’m opening up; I’m a Glasnostrich.

 

[applecorped]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4041106,00.html

"Gaza residents from the southern city of Rafah hit the streets Saturday to celebrate the terror attack in the West Bank settlement of Itamar where five family members were murdered in their sleep, including three children.

Residents handed out candy and sweets, one resident saying the joy "is a natural response to the harm settlers inflict on the Palestinian residents in the West Bank."



Parky - did you get your share of candy?

 

[Thunder]

the blame-Israel-first crowd would just redefine "occupation" in a way that somehow includes not having a single Israeli soldier or civilian in the "occupied" area, and continue to blame Israel.

ah, so you consider the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations to be part of the "blame-Israel-first" crowd?

fascinating.

you know...when ten people disagree with you...its possible you are right.

but when billions of people disagree with you...its likely YOU are wrong.

not that numbers decides truth, but when it comes to matters of politics and NOT science, yes having billions of people disagree with you suggests that YOU are wrong..and they are right.

 

[Thunder]

Parky - did you get your share of candy?

did you?

 

[Thunder]

ridiculous.
if i take my children to the middle of a war zone, i am indeed responsible for their safety.

indeed you are

if they are killed, i must share the blame for putting them in harms way.

you should have at least known better, yes.

its just like my flood analogy. living in a known flood-prone area is invited disaster, just like living in illegal Israeli settlements.

I cry for your loss, but shake my head at your poor decision.