Israel continues to spit in the face of international law

[bush_cheney2004]

Then you keep bulldozing your way throgh, no doubts no questions asked. And keep your fingers crossed that it won't hit you back; and it wouldn't be logical to count on universal sympathy when it does, not like you'd be an innocent victim of vicious aggression, right? What else can be added to the troglodyte politics? One side will emerge.. the other will be beaten to ... (yes that). Which one, we'll just have to see; if we live long enough.

There are no innocent victims....just innocence.....like Rachel Corrie.

But on the other side of things, even calling things their own names will make its way, eventually. Remember South Africa, all the traditional friendships and positive engagements? Then calling it apartheid. Then, universal condemnation. Then, the change.

Big change....first there was no official apartheid. Don't forget the commies too!

The same is coming to this conflict, just watch it. The unspoken conventions, dirty little secrets, elephants in the room, behind the door politics won't cut it anymore. When the world sees each act for what it is, without preconceptions and prejudged excuses, the realization that just brute force won't do it all may finally come to Israel - and its international sponsors. Which is just as well, because that would be their only chance to have long term future in that region, as all the history shows us the will to fight tooth and nail won't run in a society forever and both the time and demographics aren't exactly on their side.

Of course...we have already subjugated our "PalestIndians" and the land...Israel wasn't so "fortunate". Israel can laugh at your condemnations, just as South Africa did.

[myata]

Israel can laugh at your condemnations, just as South Africa did.

They did laugh, for a while. Not so long while, in history's terms. Now look where it's got them.

BTW with its gratuitous killings of civilians, collective punishments, persistent brazen bullying, unabating blatant landgrab, pretending to be a law onto itself, preventing any independent scrutiny, Isreal indeed appear to be moving in that same direction as the forementioned regime. Shortly before desperation of these policies has become obvious to everybody. I hope for their own sake that they'll manage to come to the same eventual result as South African minority has managed to secure, because other long term alternatives could be worse, perhaps much, much worse. And the clock is ticking.

[jbg]

Yeah when youre the subject of a brutal military occupation the result is that political militants and hardliners get populist support. Israels policies of expansionism, collective punishment, and theft make it pretty much impossible for moderates to get anywhere in the occupied territories. And thats not an accident.

Maybe the military occupation would become less brutal or would cease altogether if the "militants" would quit "fighting".

[dre]

Maybe the military occupation would become less brutal or would cease altogether if the "militants" would quit "fighting".

Theyve tried that... before this latest round of violence started there were almost no attacks for a period of a couple of years and the PLO was able to reign in its militants. The occupation didnt end, and settlement building INCREASED.

Nothing the Arabs do or dont do will end the occupation, end of story. The reason its gone on is because Israel is dependant on resources in the occupied territories for its survival. Israel wont give up any territories with substancial water resources PERIOD. And in Israels defense no other country on earth would either if they were in that position.

[bush_cheney2004]

They did laugh, for a while. Not so long while, in history's terms. Now look where it's got them.

Yes, it's gotten them to be the regional superpower.

BTW with its gratuitous killings of civilians, collective punishments, persistent brazen bullying, unabating blatant landgrab, pretending to be a law onto itself, preventing any independent scrutiny, Isreal indeed appear to be moving in that same direction as the forementioned regime.

Then surely it would have fallen by now with so many bleeding hearts on the watch. Maybe all that hot action in Iraq or Afghanistan has distracted the attention of Glinda the Good Witch.

Shortly before desperation of these policies has become obvious to everybody. I hope for their own sake that they'll manage to come to the same eventual result as South African minority has managed to secure, because other long term alternatives could be worse, perhaps much, much worse. And the clock is ticking.

LOL! How much worse could it get than what they have already seen before?

[myata]

Yes, it's gotten them to be the regional superpower.

Yes but of a different kind than those perpetrating apartheid have foreseen. I sincerely hope that is the fate of Israel. Because the alternatives could be much worse.

LOL! How much worse could it get than what they have already seen before?

Hold your laugh for a sec. Let's say due to universal condemnation of aggressive and beligerent policies, a major power finds it impossible to massively sponsor agressor's military undertakings any longer. How much longer would it be able to persist with those policies? Things tend to change, remember. There're historic precedents to that.

[dre]

Most recently, in Gaza around 1000 civilians were killed, including over 300 children. Not to mention the devastating destruction of an already fragile land. Most Israelis have cheered for their government and have tried to excuse this, despite reports and conclusions from reputable and respected organizations, that Israel has committed war crimes. What does this say about Israeli people?

I dont think it says much really. Governments generally know how to push the buttons of their own people, and its usually not too tough to get the drums of war beating. You denounce dissent as unpatriotic, exxagerate security concerns, and draw from whatever imagery you have available.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes but of a different kind than those perpetrating apartheid have foreseen. I sincerely hope that is the fate of Israel. Because the alternatives could be much worse.

Israel will be fine, and by many metrics is superior to anything seen in South Africa. There is no alternative to self-determination, the same thing desired by Palestinians. Advantage Israel......

Hold your laugh for a sec. Let's say due to universal condemnation of aggressive and beligerent policies, a major power finds it impossible to massively sponsor agressor's military undertakings any longer. How much longer would it be able to persist with those policies? Things tend to change, remember. There're historic precedents to that.

Agreed...see American Revolutionary War.

Edited June 5, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[myata]

Israel will be fine, and by many metrics is superior to anything seen in South Africa. There is no alternative to self-determination, the same thing desired by Palestinians. Advantage Israel......

But self determination which oppresses the other people will have the opposite effect. And in the situation Israel finds itself, that excludes possibility of total domination a la settlement of North America, it'd end up paying for every belligerent and aggressive act, possibly in the same way as South Africal apartheid elite has lost all its power and influence.

[Argus]

They did laugh, for a while. Not so long while, in history's terms. Now look where it's got them.

BTW with its gratuitous killings of civilians, collective punishments, persistent brazen bullying, unabating blatant landgrab, pretending to be a law onto itself, preventing any independent scrutiny, Isreal indeed appear to be moving in that same direction as the forementioned regime.

Gratuious? Who decides that? You? With your massive font of inside knowledge? Bullying? Against collective groups which have themselves declared their every intent to attack Israel, and have done so continually for years?

Israel tried giving up land for peace, in Lebanon and the territories. Did that get them anything but showers of rockets across their borders? And when they respond people like you gnash their teeth and whine about how Israel is being "disproportionate"! As if a nation of 6-7 million people can be disproportionate when faced with 500 million!

I wonder you aren't out screaming at the police and their SWAT teams whenever they surround some violent criminal.

"He only had a pistol and there are ten of you with automatic weapons! All he did was shoot someone in the leg, yet you killed him! You horrible, horrible people!"

The fact is your sort won't accept ANY defense by Israel as legitimate.

The goal; Leave Israel defenseless

[Argus]

But self determination which oppresses the other people will have the opposite effect. And in the situation Israel finds itself, that excludes possibility of total domination a la settlement of North America, it'd end up paying for every belligerent and aggressive act, possibly in the same way as South Africal apartheid elite has lost all its power and influence.

It's really quite funny, the collective amnesia of the Left. You bring up "south african" apartheid again and again and again. Yet NO ONE ever brings up Rhodesia. Why is that, I wonder? For Rhodesia is actually a far more likely comparison given what a Palestinian "nation" is likely to resemble.

Ahh, I remember all the Lefties, swooning with delight, teary eyed as the Rhodesian flag came down and a new era of FREEDOM rang out for the new democratic state of Zimbabwe. That didn't work out so well, now did it? Mind you, even as Mugabe brought in North Korea to train his security battalions, even as he slaughtered his opponents, the Left was mute, still filled with self-congratulation at is great "victory" over the oppressive white regime of Ian Smith. The Left was never really willing to admit that all it had accomplished was to replace one semi-dictatorial regime with another completely dictatorial one, and make the lives of the ordinary people WORSE.

[bush_cheney2004]

But self determination which oppresses the other people will have the opposite effect. And in the situation Israel finds itself, that excludes possibility of total domination a la settlement of North America.....

I'm glad you mentioned North America, because there are no better examples of what is possible when "oppressing" the "other people" than in Canada or the US of A.

[eyeball]

The Left was never really willing to admit that all it had accomplished was to replace one semi-dictatorial regime with another completely dictatorial one, and make the lives of the ordinary people WORSE.

It appears this is what happened alright but the more important point is that next time there is a regime change in Zimbabwe it will be a self-determining change from within instead of being imposed from outside. This is what Lefties should be proud of. If you Righties had your way the West or some Western right-wing proxy would be calling all the shots.

[myata]

I'm glad you mentioned North America, because there are no better examples of what is possible when "oppressing" the "other people" than in Canada or the US of A.

As I said that option isn't very feasible due to sheer numbers of demographics. Huge military superiority of Israel won't do anything about demographics and the time will only exacerbate this situation against Israel. I hate to make predictions but as I see it, Isreal doesn't have a very long window to start making genuine approaches to peace, continuing confrontation may lead to serious and even catastrophic developments in the future.

To Argus:

It saddens me that you aren't reading before clicking reply button but it isn't something I can do much about. Anyways I did say and on multiple occasions that I accept defense of Israel proper as legitimate and necessary, as well as I see any attack on Isreal proper as an act aggression (just as Israel's settlement of occupied lands is an obvious act of aggression in its own right). If we acted with will and determination on each and every such act regardless of who perpetrated it and with what justification, we could see much more certain progress toward resolution of this conflict than what was ever achieved with that dubious and incredible "friendly mediation" that seems to be so much about friendly whitewashing and so very little - genuine and objective mediation in the conflict.

[Bonam]

As I said that option isn't very feasible due to sheer numbers of demographics. Huge military superiority of Israel won't do anything about demographics and the time will only exacerbate this situation against Israel.

On the contrary, a salvo of nuclear weapons can change demographics in the wink of an eye ;p

On a more serious note, in terms of demographics, Israel has longer to work something out than Europe does. Israeli Jews are still being born at well above replacement rates and Israel has a young and growing population, whereas Europe is far below replacement rates, aging rapidly, and is importing hostile immigrants by the millions.

[jbg]

If you Righties had your way the West or some Western right-wing proxy would be calling all the shots.

If the West is supplying aid, even through the filter of the U.N. the West should be calling the shots.

[jbg]

Huge military superiority of Israel won't do anything about demographics and the time will only exacerbate this situation against Israel. I hate to make predictions but as I see it, Isreal doesn't have a very long window to start making genuine approaches to peace, continuing confrontation may lead to serious and even catastrophic developments in the future.

On a more serious note, in terms of demographics, Israel has longer to work something out than Europe does. Israeli Jews are still being born at well above replacement rates and Israel has a young and growing population, whereas Europe is far below replacement rates, aging rapidly, and is importing hostile immigrants by the millions.

The real problem with Myata's approach is that there is absolutely no evidence that the Arabs want to accept any Israeli "genuine approachs to peace". Israel has little choice in view of hte murderous intentions of its enemies.

[Bonam]

The real problem with Myata's approach is that there is absolutely no evidence that the Arabs want to accept any Israeli "genuine approachs to peace". Israel has little choice in view of hte murderous intentions of its enemies.

Nor should they really want to accept them if Myata was right. If Israel really had a "short window" of time remaining, it would be to the Arabs advantage simply to wait it out, until these "catastrophic developments" he predicts happen.

I think that is pretty much the Arab's view of it as well, that they can wait Israel out, until its international support fades, its military edge becomes less pronounced, and the population's will to persevere dissipates. Unfortunately for them, they apparently haven't learned from history: the Jews have persevered for thousands of years even when the whole world was against them.

[myata]

On the contrary, a salvo of nuclear weapons can change demographics in the wink of an eye ;p

And thus, cause the third, and final exodus?

On a more serious note, in terms of demographics, Israel has longer to work something out than Europe does. Israeli Jews are still being born at well above replacement rates and Israel has a young and growing population, whereas Europe is far below replacement rates, aging rapidly, and is importing hostile immigrants by the millions.

Israel doesn't find itself in Europe, though.

BTW jbg statement here is patently false. The Arab League comprehensive plan Arab Peace proposal has many positive points. As of now (2010) Israel has yet to formally respond to it (from 2002). While its settlements program is jamming full steam, as ever. Not exactly an attitude for peace, by any objective look.

[Argus]

It appears this is what happened alright but the more important point is that next time there is a regime change in Zimbabwe it will be a self-determining change from within instead of being imposed from outside.

You mean like the regime changed the world imposed on Rhodesia in order to get Mugabe into power?

And you think whatever revolution tosses him out and whatever new dictator replaces him will be a positive sign of "self determination"?

[Argus]

It saddens me that you aren't reading before clicking reply button but it isn't something I can do much about. Anyways I did say and on multiple occasions that I accept defense of Israel proper as legitimate and necessary, as well as I see any attack on Isreal proper as an act aggression

And what actions would you approve Israel taking as a means of defense?

If we acted with will and determination on each and every such act regardless of who perpetrated it and with what justification, we could see much more certain progress toward resolution of this conflict

If we acted with will and determination? In what way? Define "act". Do you mean if the UN passed a resolution condemning Hamas every time a rocket goes over the border that would get them to stop?

[jbg]

And what actions would you approve Israel taking as a means of defense?

Charles Krauthammer answers that question here (link). Excerpts below:

By Special to the National Post June 5, 2010 – 9:50 am

By Charles Krauthammer in Washington

The world is outraged at Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Turkey denounces its illegality, inhumanity, barbarity, etc. The usual UN suspects, Third World and European, join in. The Obama administration dithers.

But as Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, writes, the blockade is not just perfectly rational, it is perfectly legal. Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel — a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself with still more rockets.

In the Second World War, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded (“quarantined”) Cuba. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: Impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.

************

Israel has already twice intercepted weapons-laden ships from Iran destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?

But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israel’s fallback as the world systematically delegitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself — forward and active defence:

Forward defence: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, adopted forward defence — fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.

********************

Active defence: Israel then had to switch to active defence — military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat (to borrow President Obama’ s description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.

The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the UN Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel’s defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli — the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war — effectively delegitimized any active Israeli defence against its self-declared terror enemies.

Passive defence: Without forward or active defence, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defences — a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international delegitimation.

But, if none of these are permissible, what’s left?

Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defence.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, six million — that number again — hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists — Iranian in particular — openly prepare a more final solution.

Well, any substantive responses to Krauthammer's or Argus' questions? Or more charachter assassination?

[bloodyminded]

Charles Krauthammer answers that question here (link). Excerpts below:

By Special to the National Post June 5, 2010 9:50 am

By Charles Krauthammer in Washington

The world is outraged at Israels blockade of Gaza. Turkey denounces its illegality, inhumanity, barbarity, etc. The usual UN suspects, Third World and European, join in. The Obama administration dithers.

But as Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, writes, the blockade is not just perfectly rational, it is perfectly legal. Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself with still more rockets.

In the Second World War, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded (quarantined) Cuba. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: Impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.

************

Israel has already twice intercepted weapons-laden ships from Iran destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?

But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israels fallback as the world systematically delegitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself forward and active defence:

Forward defence: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, adopted forward defence fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.

********************

Active defence: Israel then had to switch to active defence military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat (to borrow President Obama s description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.

The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the UN Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israels defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war effectively delegitimized any active Israeli defence against its self-declared terror enemies.

Passive defence: Without forward or active defence, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defences a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international delegitimation.

But, if none of these are permissible, whats left?

Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defence.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, six million that number again hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists Iranian in particular openly prepare a more final solution.

Well, any substantive responses to Krauthammer's or Argus' questions? Or more charachter assassination?

How about both?

Character assassination (or, perhaps, plain reportage): Krauthammer is a servile, dishonest little squeaker.

Now, for a more substantive response:

Krauthammer is using pretty greasy logic here: he takes it as a given--one with which everyone should agree--that Israel's military actions are always defensive.

Of course, every nation, up to and including outright aggressors like the expansionist Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany--claimed self-defense.

That is always the case, in the modern/contemporary era. Without exception, to my knowledge.

So ok, that in itself doesn't prove such actions are not self-defense, I understand that (and am anticipating this response). However, it does prove that the assertion of self-defense, in and of itself, carries zero information, and zero inherent credibility.

We tend to be way too credulous whenever we or our allies engage in military action. That's not loyalty to an ally--it's a weakness of character, and intellectual and moral cowardice.

However:

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Krauthammer is correct about the attack on Gaza, that it was wholly and legitimately an act of self-defense.

That is still an argument of intent; but not of execution.

It in no way demonstrates some irrefutable logic that Israel conducted itself properly during that war. And Israel's conduct is far more controversial than the matter of its "right" to attack anyway.

But what's most absurd, foolish, and downright chickenshit about the Hammer's little puff-piece is his final, very explicit admonition that the criticism, at bottom, is all about anti-semitism. Once again, there can't be any principled objections or principled criticism of Israel.

There can't even be well-intentioned, but mistaken criticism. No, it's all about old-fashioned Jew-hatred.

No principles, ever.

No, no. That's unthinkable. As usual, Krauthammer sighs in his world-weary manner, "the world [the world!] is tired of these troublesome Jews, six million--that number again--...."

Please. Only the most pantywaisted coward, or moral degenerate who will sully the memories of the Holocaust's victims, will try to make this kind of argument.

It's a type of rhetoric that can be truly harmful, as it misuses anti-semitism for rhetorical purposes, thus undermining the seriousness of it.

For those who actually do believe it (unlike Krauthammer, I suspect, who is simply using the political correctness card in order to demonize all who criticize Israel...and he dares talk about demonization!)...well, those who honestly believe he's correct are being fooled, and are making fools of themselves in the sorry process.

Edited June 7, 2010 by bloodyminded

[jbg]

Of course, every nation, up to and including outright aggressors like the expansionist Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany--claimed self-defense.

That is always the case, in the modern/contemporary era. Without exception, to my knowledge.

*************

However:

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Krauthammer is correct about the attack on Gaza, that it was wholly and legitimately an act of self-defense.

***************

But what's most absurd, foolish, and downright chickenshit about the Hammer's little puff-piece is his final, very explicit admonition that the criticism, at bottom, is all about anti-semitism. Once again, there can't be any principled objections or principled criticism of Israel.

There can't even be well-intentioned, but mistaken criticism. No, it's all about old-fashioned Jew-hatred.

So what defensive matters can Israel take without inciting your ire?

[bloodyminded]

So what defensive matters can Israel take without inciting your ire?

I certainly don't object to Israeli defense. It's not only a right, but is the duty of the Israeli leadership.

We're talking about the execution of this, not the very existence of it.