Jump to content

Harper refuses to budge on support for Israel


jbg

Recommended Posts

Harper refuses to budge on support for Israel (link)

PM unwavering in support despite appeals to moderate stand

JANE TABER

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

ST. PETERSBURG — Prime Minister Stephen Harper refused Monday to budge in his support for Israel and its response to the deepening crisis in the Middle East, despite criticism from opposition MPs and Lebanese Canadians that he should have appealed for restraint and moved faster to evacuate Canadians from Lebanon.

Mr. Harper said the conflict is the result of the fact that there is no Middle East peace process because "the current Palestinian government is not committed to a peace process.

"Secondly, there is an immediate crisis because of the actions of Hamas and the actions of Hezbollah," he said, referring to the radical Islamic movement that controls the Palestinian Authority and the Shia Muslim group that controls much of southern Lebanon.

At last Canada has a PM willing to stand up for the values of civilization that have made us a great country, and will again make us great. For too long, mealy-mouth moral equivalence has ruled. Even now, Bob Rae, a great Premier has suggested that the right path to follow is the one laid by Lester Pearson as a "peace broker", and to follow the UN right down the line.

This is the same UN where Kofi and his son have enriched themselves at the expense of taxpayers of the contributing countries, and that funds kleptocratic dictators worldwide. While Harper (and for that matter leaders of similar quality such as Bush, Blair and Howard) have not withdrawn from that sinkhole on New York City's East Side (the UN), they are wise not to follow its lead. Imploding the UN building, or turning it into housing for New York's poor can await another day.

Hezbollah and Hamas, quite frankly, have no plan whatsoever for the economic development of the Israeli land they covet. While the Israelis have been busy at work making the desert bloom (remember, they could easily have played "victim" in the wake of WW II), they have chosen to farm, develop hi-tech industry, and create a civil culture and a democracy. Israelis do not strap bombs onto their children for the sake of maximizing the death toll of Arabs. Even now, you're not hearing of Beirut going up in flames.

Contrast tactics of Hezbollah and Hamas. Indiscriminate pizza parlor bombings, attacks on religious ceremonies (a Bar Mitzvah in Turkey comes to mind), attacks on discoteques (sp). Israel's tactics are lightning and precision. Civilian casualties, while they occur, are truly minimal. Can you imagine Israel imitating the tactics of a suicide bomber in Iraq, where he detonates himself under a gasoline truck making a delivery near a mosque's religious school. Do these people know, or care, who they're killing?

For once, Harper is on the side of Western democracies. The question should not even be a close one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For once, Harper is on the side of Western democracies. The question should not even be a close one.

We'll have to see how it plays to Canadians. Some polls should be coming out shortly. The length of time it takes to evacuate citizens out of Lebanon may have an impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For once, Harper is on the side of Western democracies. The question should not even be a close one.

We'll have to see how it plays to Canadians. Some polls should be coming out shortly. The length of time it takes to evacuate citizens out of Lebanon may have an impact.

You mean the Lebanese who hold passports that come in handy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean the Lebanese who hold passports that come in handy?

If other Canadians agree with you, then he should stay steady or rise in the polls. There are a lot of dual citizens in the country. Who knows how they will respond.

Also, more Canadian deaths won't play well, especially children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"At last Canada has a PM willing to stand up for the values of civilization that have made us a great country, and will again make us great. For too long, mealy-mouth moral equivalence has ruled."

"Moral equivalence" is a meaningless term--and overused, at any rate.

this is not a simp,e matter of Good Israel vs. Bad enemies--an obedient stance, and a conveniently simple one, but not too wise to hold to this dogma. That Israel is itself a terrorist entity should also be great cause for concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At last Canada has a PM willing to stand up for the values of civilization that have made us a great country, and will again make us great. For too long, mealy-mouth moral equivalence has ruled. Even now, Bob Rae, a great Premier has suggested that the right path to follow is the one laid by Lester Pearson as a "peace broker", and to follow the UN right down the line.

This is the same UN where Kofi and his son have enriched themselves at the expense of taxpayers of the contributing countries, and that funds kleptocratic dictators worldwide. While Harper (and for that matter leaders of similar quality such as Bush, Blair and Howard) have not withdrawn from that sinkhole on New York City's East Side (the UN), they are wise not to follow its lead. Imploding the UN building, or turning it into housing for New York's poor can await another day.

Harper is simply toeing the Bush line, which is the Israel line. Like Israel itself, the western leaders don't seem to have any plan on how to end the conflict, let alone what all this is supposed to accomplish. So, in the abscence of vision or leadership, we get... well, stuff like the above: empty posturing and self-congraulatory back slapping for doing absolutely nothing.

Hezbollah and Hamas, quite frankly, have no plan whatsoever for the economic development of the Israeli land they covet. While the Israelis have been busy at work making the desert bloom (remember, they could easily have played "victim" in the wake of WW II), they have chosen to farm, develop hi-tech industry, and create a civil culture and a democracy. Israelis do not strap bombs onto their children for the sake of maximizing the death toll of Arabs. Even now, you're not hearing of Beirut going up in flames.

What, are we suppossed to be congratulating Israel on not being genocidal maniacs now? Call me crazy, but I always figured "not being genocidal" was a prerequisiste for a country to be considered a liberal democracy, not something any democratic state should have to work at.

Contrast tactics of Hezbollah and Hamas. Indiscriminate pizza parlor bombings, attacks on religious ceremonies (a Bar Mitzvah in Turkey comes to mind), attacks on discoteques (sp). Israel's tactics are lightning and precision. Civilian casualties, while they occur, are truly minimal. Can you imagine Israel imitating the tactics of a suicide bomber in Iraq, where he detonates himself under a gasoline truck making a delivery near a mosque's religious school. Do these people know, or care, who they're killing?

It's interesting that Israel's "percision" attacks tend to cause more civilian casualties and destruction than anything Hamas could ever cook up. Interesting too, that Israel restraint when it come sto picking who it kills has evolved as its technological abilities have advanced. Israeli groups like the Stern Gang and the Irgun set the standard for regional terrorism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean the Lebanese who hold passports that come in handy?

Right, because all Canadians were born here, right?

What a jackass. Say that to a Lebanese-Canadians face, coward.

No. But I am sickened by the fact that both the US and Canada have large numbers of "immigrants" that detest our countries, and whose goal in life is our death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll put this detail here:

In Geneva, the top UN human rights official warned that the scale of civilian casualties inflicted in the current conflict could constitute war crimes, though she did not make specific accusations.

"The scale of the killings in the region, and their predictability, could engage the personal criminal responsibility of those involved, particularly those in a position of command and control," said Louise Arbour, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Boston Globe

So, Louise Arbour thinks Israeli leaders could be accused of war crimes. (I somehow doubt that she's referring to Hizballah although if she means it, she should openly say so.)

Louise Arbour is a product of the Liberal Party. She was named to the Supreme Court of Ontario by David Peterson and then to the Supreme Court of Canada by Chretien. She went to the UNHCHR under PM PM.

Like the Liberal Party and the UN, it's all bark and no bite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. That Israel is itself a terrorist entity should also be great cause for concern.

I don't think many people around the world worry that crazy Jews will be poisoning their water supply, setting off bombs on their trains, or blowing themselves up in crowds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harper is simply toeing the Bush line, which is the Israel line. Like Israel itself, the western leaders don't seem to have any plan on how to end the conflict, let alone what all this is supposed to accomplish.

Why is it our responsibility to even care about this conflict? Why is it up to Western leaders to resolve every world conflict?

So, in the abscence of vision or leadership, we get... well, stuff like the above: empty posturing and self-congraulatory back slapping for doing absolutely nothing.

How very Canadian. That's been the route our governments have taken on almost every international crisis over the last forty years.

What, are we suppossed to be congratulating Israel on not being genocidal maniacs now?

Perhaps not, but it's interesting the Left spends about fifty times more effort cursing them than they do the real genocidal maniacs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it our responsibility to even care about this conflict? Why is it up to Western leaders to resolve every world conflict?

Well, if you want to swear unyeilding support for one party in that conflict, you'r emaking the conflict your business. As for the second point, this whole mess is, ultimately, the west's problem. the west created Israel, the west is thus responsible for the fall out.

How very Canadian. That's been the route our governments have taken on almost every international crisis over the last forty years.

You must be proud the traduition is being upheld today.

Perhaps not, but it's interesting the Left spends about fifty times more effort cursing them than they do the real genocidal maniacs.

Not only is this a falsehood (the left has always carried the torch of global human rights, evenin cases where the right was cheerleading and facilitating some of the worst crimes in recent history) it overlooks a number of considerations. First: some acts are so self-evidently vile that no condemnation is necessary. In other words, silence does not equal support. Second: unlike Israel, where every action, from occupation to individual acts to terrorism is enthusuisatically endorsed by apolgists largely from the right, no one (sane) ever defends Iran, or Egypt, or Myanmar, or China. Thus there's no conflict over morality or justification. Third: the west funds and supports Israel's actions, which means the west is respopnsible for their actions more so than those of, say, Kim Jong Il. Israel and its supporters can't expect to get the support of the west and not have their actions scrutinized. Related to that is the fourth point, which is Israel's alignment with the west means it's easier to affect change in their policy when compared to rogue or non-aligned states and non-state actors. You pick the battles where you can be effective: it doe sno good to tilt at windmills. Finally, condemnation is not a zero-sum game. Just because many people are repulsed by Israel doesn't mean there's no one patying atention anywhere elese. Some people and organizations can walk and chew gum at the same time (incidentally, how many threads have you started lately on other genocidal maniacs?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll have to see how it plays to Canadians. Some polls should be coming out shortly
I'm not sure what polls have to do with this situation, and I could care less. I'm glad to see that one can hold true positions on issues without worrying about what the polls have to say. Sticking up ones finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing isn't real leadership. Bravo Mr. Harper! Bravo!
Harper is simply toeing the Bush line
Too funny. I could have predicted this unsubstancial response. Apparently, one cannot have an opinion similar to Mr. Harper's without being a "Bush toady". That seems to be very convenient for those with an opposing view. Well, in if that's the case, I'm hear to call those on the other side of the debate "Hezbollah toadies". All of you.
Israel's actions are way out of proportion.
Complete nonsense. This is just another example of the United Nations being an abject failure. Various U.N. resolutions have been passed requiring the terrorist group Hezbollah to disarm. Have they? Nope. Apparently some of you feel as though Israel must wait until a terrorist group, illegally existing in a country, who's primary purpose is to destroy Israel, must wait until said terrorist group is capable and/or sucessful in launching greater and greater attacks, in order to respond with "equal" force. That's idiotic. Hezbollah is not suppose to be where they are. Hezbollah is not suppose to be armed. It's Goddamn time something was done about it. Israel withdraws from Lebanon, and withdraws from Gaza, and what happens? Those lands are used as staging grounds for future attacks. How do these people think this is going ot help Israel finally withdraw from the West Bank?

I'm sick of Iran and Syria using other countries and other terrorist groups as their proxies. This is the primary reason why Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is so dangerous. Sure, the Iranian "government" may not use them. But their proxies may. It's a clever little game they've got going.

the left has always carried the torch of global human rights
Well, the age of the Kennedy-Democrat is long gone. Unfortunately, the left has now become the isolationists/protectionists of the present.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too funny. I could have predicted this unsubstancial response. Apparently, one cannot have an opinion similar to Mr. Harper's without being a "Bush toady". That seems to be very convenient for those with an opposing view. Well, in if that's the case, I'm hear to call those on the other side of the debate "Hezbollah toadies". All of you.

I can point to other countries who's leaders have adopted neutral stances. Only the United States, Canada and the UK have come out on Israel's side here. Now tell me: of those three, which one is the most likely to set the agenda? This is not difficult stuff.

Complete nonsense. This is just another example of the United Nations being an abject failure. Various U.N. resolutions have been passed requiring the terrorist group Hezbollah to disarm. Have they? Nope. Apparently some of you feel as though Israel must wait until a terrorist group, illegally existing in a country, who's primary purpose is to destroy Israel, must wait until said terrorist group is capable and/or sucessful in launching greater and greater attacks, in order to respond with "equal" force. That's idiotic. Hezbollah is not suppose to be where they are. Hezbollah is not suppose to be armed. It's Goddamn time something was done about it. Israel withdraws from Lebanon, and withdraws from Gaza, and what happens? Those lands are used as staging grounds for future attacks. How do these people think this is going ot help Israel finally withdraw from the West Bank?

The comparison between Israel's last withdrawl from southern Lebanon and the unilateral Gaza pull out are apt, but opt for the reasons you think. In both instances, it was Israel's unwillingness to work with any other party that created a vacuum of authority that was quickly filled by the only parties willing and able to do so: Hizbullah and Hamas.

Well, the age of the Kennedy-Democrat is long gone. Unfortunately, the left has now become the isolationists/protectionists of the present.

Whereas the right has never wavered from its "bomb the fuckers!" stance: only now it comes under the tattered banner of "humanitarian intervention".Because god knows, if you're not bombing somebody, you're just like Neville Chamberlain. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if you want to swear unyeilding support for one party in that conflict, you'r emaking the conflict your business. As for the second point, this whole mess is, ultimately, the west's problem. the west created Israel, the west is thus responsible for the fall out.

Yes, the conflict is Canada's business as well as the business of all English-speaking people. The Palestinians are in the business of incinerating helpless and innocent civilians. The Israelis fight wars much the way Canadians and Americans fight them. In short, we have much in common with Israel, nothing in common with the Arab world.

Not only is this a falsehood (the left has always carried the torch of global human rights, evenin cases where the right was cheerleading and facilitating some of the worst crimes in recent history).....

Not since the early 1980's when Reagan first forced right-wing dictatorships in Central America and Argentina to yield, and took down the Iron Curtain.

....it overlooks a number of considerations. First: some acts are so self-evidently vile that no condemnation is necessary. In other words, silence does not equal support. Second: unlike Israel, where every action, from occupation to individual acts to terrorism is enthusuisatically endorsed by apolgists largely from the right, no one (sane) ever defends Iran, or Egypt, or Myanmar, or China. Thus there's no conflict over morality or justification. Third: the west funds and supports Israel's actions, which means the west is respopnsible for their actions more so than those of, say, Kim Jong Il. Israel and its supporters can't expect to get the support of the west and not have their actions scrutinized. Related to that is the fourth point, which is Israel's alignment with the west means it's easier to affect change in their policy when compared to rogue or non-aligned states and non-state actors. You pick the battles where you can be effective: it doe sno good to tilt at windmills. Finally, condemnation is not a zero-sum game. Just because many people are repulsed by Israel doesn't mean there's no one patying atention anywhere elese. Some people and organizations can walk and chew gum at the same time (incidentally, how many threads have you started lately on other genocidal maniacs?)

Sometimes the obvious must be stated, lest we forget.

Shady, move out of your moms basement and I'll try to educate you.

The first step is the hardest.

Your personal attack on Shady shows that you don't have a good response to his/her points.

The comparison between Israel's last withdrawl from southern Lebanon and the unilateral Gaza pull out are apt, but opt for the reasons you think. In both instances, it was Israel's unwillingness to work with any other party that created a vacuum of authority that was quickly filled by the only parties willing and able to do so: Hizbullah and Hamas.

Who was Israel expected to work with? Abbas had and has no power. Since he represents nobody, what good are negotiations with him. And Hamas? Since when has Hamas said they'd sit down at the table with Israel?

Whereas the right has never wavered from its "bomb the fuckers!" stance: only now it comes under the tattered banner of "humanitarian intervention".Because god knows, if you're not bombing somebody, you're just like Neville Chamberlain. :rolleyes:

Neville Chamberlain is a great analogy. He tried to "bargain" with those who had no interest in a compromise deal. Ditto Hamas/Hezbollah. They do not want a "bargain" with Israel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the conflict is Canada's business as well as the business of all English-speaking people. The Palestinians are in the business of incinerating helpless and innocent civilians. The Israelis fight wars much the way Canadians and Americans fight them. In short, we have much in common with Israel, nothing in common with the Arab world.

Lies, lies and stinking lies. The Palestinians dont have a military and during the entire, 38 year Occupation, the vast majority of the killing has been done by Israelis to Palestinians, to an order of at least 4:1.

You might have something in common with Israelis - your willingness to justify evil actions by the intended result. Well, I know where good intentions lead and I do NOT support Israel. Let's cut off the 100$ billion in military aid and let them fight their own wars. In fact, let me pull a page from your playbook - since you like it so much, why don't YOU move there.

Not since the early 1980's when Reagan first forced right-wing dictatorships in Central America and Argentina to yield, and took down the Iron Curtain.

Actually, my friend, economics broke the back of the Soviets. Nothing Reagan did really could have altered it. What was he going to say, no, keep the wall up? I do remember he managed to fly down for a photo-op though.

Your personal attack on Shady shows that you don't have a good response to his/her points.

Actually, I'm just sick of dealing with a monolithic, ill-informed viewpoint. I only have so much unpaid time to waste trying to change indoctrinated minds. Also, some just are'nt worth it. People who talk about 'liberal bias' in the media, for starters.

Also, at his age, is'nt it time he got his own place? /snark

Who was Israel expected to work with? Abbas had and has no power. Since he represents nobody, what good are negotiations with him. And Hamas? Since when has Hamas said they'd sit down at the table with Israel?

Um - I don't know, for weeks? Hamas also, prior to this whole imbroglio, recognized Israel. These facts however are not constantly blared from on high into your TV screen.

I guess your argument is - since the Palestinians have nobody Israel WANTS to talk to, they dont have to talk. Instead, lets keep them in their ghettos and move the tanks in. Real lesson Israel is trying to teach: dont vote for people we dont like.

Neville Chamberlain is a great analogy. He tried to "bargain" with those who had no interest in a compromise deal. Ditto Hamas/Hezbollah. They do not want a "bargain" with Israel.

And the innocent people who just happen to live in the wrong place? Too bad, you'll say? When the shoe is on the other foot I'll remember.

This is the lack of humanity I detest. People who dont care if many, many innocents are slain so long as punishment is meted out. You call this an appropriate response?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not since the early 1980's when Reagan first forced right-wing dictatorships in Central America and Argentina to yield, and took down the Iron Curtain.

Uhm...you know, Reagan supported right-wing regimes in central America and Agentina against leftist/Marxist groups. And the west still turns a blind eye to many of their partners' sins.

Who was Israel expected to work with? Abbas had and has no power. Since he represents nobody, what good are negotiations with him. And Hamas? Since when has Hamas said they'd sit down at the table with Israel?

And why did Abbas have no power? In addition to corruption and mismanagment here was the not-so small matter of Israel's destruction of whatever security infrastructure the PA had during the second intefada. IOW, Israel undercut Fatah and the PA and then was surprised when Hamas filled the void. And it looks like they are doing the same thing in Lebanon by undermining the Lebanese government in hopes of weakening Hizbullah. What's that definiton of insanity, again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lies, lies and stinking lies. The Palestinians dont have a military and during the entire, 38 year Occupation, the vast majority of the killing has been done by Israelis to Palestinians, to an order of at least 4:1.

They had the ability to send hormone-fueled adolescents, anxious for dalliance with 72 virgins, in to blow up buses, pizza parlors and discoteques.

Actually, my friend, economics broke the back of the Soviets. Nothing Reagan did really could have altered it. What was he going to say, no, keep the wall up? I do remember he managed to fly down for a photo-op though.

Economics only became a force when we ratcheted up our military spending and they couldn't.

Actually, I'm just sick of dealing with a monolithic, ill-informed viewpoint. I only have so much unpaid time to waste trying to change indoctrinated minds. Also, some just are'nt worth it. People who talk about 'liberal bias' in the media, for starters.

Also, at his age, is'nt it time he got his own place? /snark

You mean views that disagree with yours?

Um - I don't know, for weeks? Hamas also, prior to this whole imbroglio, recognized Israel. These facts however are not constantly blared from on high into your TV screen.

Never unequivacolly. (sp)

I guess your argument is - since the Palestinians have nobody Israel WANTS to talk to, they dont have to talk. Instead, lets keep them in their ghettos and move the tanks in. Real lesson Israel is trying to teach: dont vote for people we dont like.

If the people vote in a government that wants to make war, the people make themselves part of the war. There's no longer the excuse that war was forced on them by a dictator.

And the innocent people who just happen to live in the wrong place? Too bad, you'll say? When the shoe is on the other foot I'll remember.

This is the lack of humanity I detest. People who dont care if many, many innocents are slain so long as punishment is meted out. You call this an appropriate response?

I care, but "humanity" is not a suicide pact. If Hezbollah hides out among civilians, they don't get a free pass.

Uhm...you know, Reagan supported right-wing regimes in central America and Agentina against leftist/Marxist groups. And the west still turns a blind eye to many of their partners' sins.

Initially maybe. But he rapidly supported democratic left wingers such as José Napolean Duarte in El Salvador against the rightist thugs in ARENA. And he supported Alfonsin over the right-wing junta Alfonsin replace.

And why did Abbas have no power? In addition to corruption and mismanagment here was the not-so small matter of Israel's destruction of whatever security infrastructure the PA had during the second intefada. IOW, Israel undercut Fatah and the PA and then was surprised when Hamas filled the void. And it looks like they are doing the same thing in Lebanon by undermining the Lebanese government in hopes of weakening Hizbullah. What's that definiton of insanity, again?

Israel didn't tell the Palestinians to mount the Second Intifada, or Arafat and Abbas to be corrupt. They did that on their lonesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They had the ability to send hormone-fueled adolescents, anxious for dalliance with 72 virgins, in to blow up buses, pizza parlors and discoteques.

Do you know who uses car bombs? Israel. They confiscate vehicles then use them in assassination attempts. I guess you cannot understand why these people might be angry - I attribute that to your lack of education, honestly.

Economics only became a force when we ratcheted up our military spending and they couldn't.

No, capitalism's free markets strangled the Soviets because we generated far more wealth than they did. Our military spending, my oh-so-unlearned friend, had remained high throughout the Cold War.

You mean views that disagree with yours?

No, I mean opinions like yours that are unsupported by any fact. Every schmuck from here to Islamabad has an opinion, but what makes it matter is the validity of the argument. Here, you wade into a discussion you clearly have no background in.

Never unequivacolly. (sp)

First, try googling spelling - you know, it might help. It would also help if you did some basic reasearch on this topic before attempting to argue. Since you cant be bothered to look up 'unequivocally' I doubt you bothered to look up much more, besides maybe Little Green Footballs.

If the people vote in a government that wants to make war, the people make themselves part of the war. There's no longer the excuse that war was forced on them by a dictator.

They didnt vote in a government that wanted war. In case you missed it, they have no military. The war was forced on them, but by Israel. These people are STATELESS living in REFUGEE CAMPS - capiche?

I care, but "humanity" is not a suicide pact. If Hezbollah hides out among civilians, they don't get a free pass.

I truly hope some 'political dissident' decides to purchase a home next to yours in the coming decade.

In fact, this is the logic behind 9/11 - if those Americans hide out amongst civilians, they don't get a free pass.

Initially maybe. But he rapidly supported democratic left wingers such as José Napolean Duarte in El Salvador against the rightist thugs in ARENA. And he supported Alfonsin over the right-wing junta Alfonsin replace.

Notice how quick you are to whitewash the crimes that led us into this mess? The United States has a long history of oppressing or even overthrowing leftist South American governments. Argentina is most prominent in mind. This is beyond arguement.

Israel didn't tell the Palestinians to mount the Second Intifada, or Arafat and Abbas to be corrupt. They did that on their lonesome.

No, Israel started building the second Berlin wall - through Palestinian buildings and through Palestinian land, which they held valid title to. You expect people to have everything taken from them and to sit on their hands?

Again, your rabid bias can only be the product of limited reading, or intellectual dishonesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course with the usual anti-Israeli diatribe comes the selective memory attached to the conflict that when Israel does what it does it is in response to a terrorist attack and when innocent Palestinians die it is precisely because terrorists hide behind civilians, make a mockery of the Geneva Convention, use children, pregnant women and geriatrics, ambulances, hospitals, animals and what-ever else they can, to engage in attacks.

The death of countless Palestinians is the direct result of terrorists from its society deliberately choosing to refuse to wear a uniform, engage in conventional war, and most importantly, engage in non violent communications.

This continuous nonsense to try infer Israel is morally wrong to defend itself for killing innocent Palestinians is about as logical as saying someone being strangled to death should not fight back and should show restraint.

I would like to take just one of these posters who feel Israel is a terrorist nation and have them experience what it is like to live through or witness a terrorist bomb going off.

It never fails that the people who criticize Israel as being terrorist and immoral are selective as to terrorism and feel terrorism is justified.

I will end this discussion with this easy point- how could the Israel Defence Force possibly be germaine if Palestinians refused to engage in violence.?

Does anyone think if Palestinians used Ghandi's approach Israel would have sent its army or in to hunt down terrorists?

Israel has always had an open and extensive peace network trying to reach out to moderate Palestinians who do not believe in violence. The tragedy is that moderate Palestinians do not feel they can express themselves because of the terrorists in their midst.

You posters that are quick to piss in Israel's direction-are you equally as quick to criticize the terrorists within Palestinian society and lament the absence of moderate peaceful representatives from that same society?

And before you spin the usual social injustice breeds terrorism, remember this - it is an insult to the vast majority of Palestinians or anyone who has lived through war and terror and have NOT chosen to engage in violence to try legitimize terrorism as an understandable consequence of injustice.

But then it is always the fault of Israel. How dare Jews want to live in a country and defend themselves from extinction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The death of countless Palestinians is the direct result of terrorists from its society deliberately choosing to refuse to wear a uniform, engage in conventional war, and most importantly, engage in non violent communications.

Silly me. I thought it was because they were kept stateless in the modern equivalent of concentration camps. These are ghettos.

This continuous nonsense to try infer Israel is morally wrong to defend itself for killing innocent Palestinians is about as logical as saying someone being strangled to death should not fight back and should show restraint.

Right, because the 4th most powerful military in the world's just purpose is to oppress a people that don't own the land they live on, in Israel's eyes.

I would like to take just one of these posters who feel Israel is a terrorist nation and have them experience what it is like to live through or witness a terrorist bomb going off.

I'd like to move you to Lebanon. Bombs are bombs, whether its a 'terrorist' setting them off or your friendly neighbourhood Israeli.

It never fails that the people who criticize Israel as being terrorist and immoral are selective as to terrorism and feel terrorism is justified.

Terrorism is not justified, but to win a war, you must understand your enemy. Critical analysis leads me to believe that these kinds of punitive attacks on mostly innocent people actually help the extremists recruit.

I will end this discussion with this easy point- how could the Israel Defence Force possibly be germaine if Palestinians refused to engage in violence.?

When there are no rocks left to throw at tanks maybe the IDF will stop shooting bullets.

Does anyone think if Palestinians used Ghandi's approach Israel would have sent its army or in to hunt down terrorists?

How disingenous - the Palestinians have been trying to win a fair shake for 38 years. This included peaceful, nonviolent resistance. You, apparently, think Israel really is blessed by god, and the Arabs deserve to live in squalour.

Israel has always had an open and extensive peace network trying to reach out to moderate Palestinians who do not believe in violence. The tragedy is that moderate Palestinians do not feel they can express themselves because of the terrorists in their midst.

Not because they live in ghetto with little control over their own lives? No, because of the 'terrorists'. Consider if you were born there - what makes a terrorist different from another frustrated Palestinian?

You posters that are quick to piss in Israel's direction-are you equally as quick to criticize the terrorists within Palestinian society and lament the absence of moderate peaceful representatives from that same society?

Right - there are no moderate peaceful representatives! BS. Israel uses this mantra as an excuse to talk to noone, while in fact there are many moderates in Palestinian society and they are well respresented.

Perhaps you should ask yourself why Israel refuses to allow a UN peacekeeping force into the Occupied Territories, or why Israel's ally the US uses its veto even now to block a UN deployment to southern Lebanon.

Or why Israel remains in contradiction of more UN orders than any other nation on earth. Not something you hear about on CNN.

And before you spin the usual social injustice breeds terrorism, remember this - it is an insult to the vast majority of Palestinians or anyone who has lived through war and terror and have NOT chosen to engage in violence to try legitimize terrorism as an understandable consequence of injustice.

Of course not. That doesnt make it any less of the driving factor for those that do. Do you think a Palestinian raised in Canada would become a terrorist? Is there terrorist DNA? What makes people go to extremes? Please, the floor is yours. I'd love to hear your analysis of why people join the varied extremist organizations - usually with specific aims, such as 'Free Gaspe!'.

But then it is always the fault of Israel. How dare Jews want to live in a country and defend themselves from extinction.

Herein lies your great fallacy - is it about Israel, or about Jews? Because certainly Israel does not speak for all Jews, and more than Jews have a home in Israel, right? Oh wait - one little contradictory bit - Jews in Israel carry a identity card that marks them as different from all other religious denominations based on 'Hebrew Date of Birth' - which does not appear on other cards. Jews are the only ones who can hold many public offices, and private companies are free to hire 'Jews Only'. No, its not like in Canada.

I suppose you need a cite for that:

In 2002, the Supreme Court of Israel instructed the Ministry to list people who underwent a Reform conversion as Jews. The Minister at the time, a member of an Orthodox party, decided he would rather drop the nationality listing altogether, rather than list as Jews people whom he considered non-Jews. In 2004 the Supreme Court denied a citizen's petition to reinstate this listing, stating that the field in the document was meant for statistical collection only, and not as a declarative statement of Judaism. Currently, the only way to determine whether an Identity card belongs to a Jew is to check whether the Hebrew date of birth appears in addition to the civil date.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teudat_Zehut - Teudat Zehut is the name of the identity documentation.

Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Arab - see the section on discrimination for further sources.

Sounds like a real free society to me.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know who uses car bombs? Israel. They confiscate vehicles then use them in assassination attempts. I guess you cannot understand why these people might be angry - I attribute that to your lack of education, honestly.

You've got to be kidding. Israel does not use car bombs targetted at random civilians.

No, I mean opinions like yours that are unsupported by any fact. Every schmuck from here to Islamabad has an opinion, but what makes it matter is the validity of the argument. Here, you wade into a discussion you clearly have no background in.

I know nothing about the Middle East?

They didnt vote in a government that wanted war. In case you missed it, they have no military. The war was forced on them, but by Israel. These people are STATELESS living in REFUGEE CAMPS - capiche?

Again, they seem to have plenty of explosives and other armaments. Why isn't there money to build decent housing?

No, Israel started building the second Berlin wall - through Palestinian buildings and through Palestinian land, which they held valid title to. You expect people to have everything taken from them and to sit on their hands?

Again, your rabid bias can only be the product of limited reading, or intellectual dishonesty.

They started building the wall when the Palestininan Authority could not or would not stop the terror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel didn't tell the Palestinians to mount the Second Intifada, or Arafat and Abbas to be corrupt. They did that on their lonesome.

Leaving aside Israeli provocations that led up to the second intifada , what is your point? Because Fatah was riddled with corruption, then Israel was justified in cutting them off at the knees? Well, they did, and handed a golden opportunity to Hamas. Israel has never shown the faintest interest in determining what kind of society exists outside the wall, despite the fact it is within their ower to shape it. It's almost as if they want civil society in Palestine and now Lebanon to fail in order to justify their territorial ambitions.

Of course with the usual anti-Israeli diatribe comes the selective memory attached to the conflict that when Israel does what it does it is in response to a terrorist attack and when innocent Palestinians die it is precisely because terrorists hide behind civilians, make a mockery of the Geneva Convention, use children, pregnant women and geriatrics, ambulances, hospitals, animals and what-ever else they can, to engage in attacks.

Don't even try to pretend that Israel has never mounted any provocations. Your black and whit evision belongs ina old tiem western movie, not the situation in the Middle East.

The death of countless Palestinians is the direct result of terrorists from its society deliberately choosing to refuse to wear a uniform, engage in conventional war, and most importantly, engage in non violent communications.

"I say! Most unsporting of thse chaps, wot?"

Tell you what: you want to make the fight fair, then let's start shipping tanks, Apaches and F-16s to hamas and Hizbullah. :rolleyes:

This continuous nonsense to try infer Israel is morally wrong to defend itself for killing innocent Palestinians is about as logical as saying someone being strangled to death should not fight back and should show restraint.

Strawman alert! he argument isn't about Israel's right to self defence. It's about the proportinality of its response. And, given the obvious fact that Israel's existenc eis in now way threatened by anything in Hamas or Hizbullah's bag of tricks, a better analogy would entail someone responding to spitballs with machine gun fire.

I would like to take just one of these posters who feel Israel is a terrorist nation and have them experience what it is like to live through or witness a terrorist bomb going off.

What a silly appeal to emotions when the opposite is equally true: put yourself in the shoes of an innocent bystander when an Israeli missile hits a "terrorist" target.

It never fails that the people who criticize Israel as being terrorist and immoral are selective as to terrorism and feel terrorism is justified.

Actually, it seems the people who are calling Israel's actions terorism are operating from a unifoprm definition of terrorism. For example, I would say Hamas' taid on IDF positions is not terrorism, but the launching of rockets into civilian areas is. By the same token, a search-and-destroy mission against Hizbullah artillery positions is not terrorism, but bombing civilian areas in Beirut is.

It is Israel's apologists who are being selective; ie: anything done to Israel=terrorism, anything done by Israel=self-defence.

I will end this discussion with this easy point- how could the Israel Defence Force possibly be germaine if Palestinians refused to engage in violence.?

Does anyone think if Palestinians used Ghandi's approach Israel would have sent its army or in to hunt down terrorists?

Removing Palestinian resistance from the equation would make israel's expansionist ambitions harder to justify, but I doubt it would curb them. There are factions in each society who depend on the state of conflict.

You posters that are quick to piss in Israel's direction-are you equally as quick to criticize the terrorists within Palestinian society and lament the absence of moderate peaceful representatives from that same society?

Yes. Next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...