the point being, a sovereign nation need not fall to the standards of terrorists, or behave like them as well. Both seek vengeance with little regard for civilian lives and wonder why it is they are hated. Netanyahu ( i think thats how you spell it?) is possibly one of the worst case scenarios for the situation over there. The guy doesn't use his head and shows how big of a proponent for the peace talks he is when he announces "New settlements" on the day the sec of state was going there for peace talks.
The only two countries to immediately benefit from this are Israel and Syria. Israel because it will carry out military operations with a carteblanche in Palestine. It also strengthens the conservative's platform. Syria gains because the people will feel closer to Assad in retaliation to Israel's response and this will distract them from the violence occuring in the south. I would guess that this attack was carefully calculated and was probably funded by Syria.
Thank God they did not get hurt, that's at least some good news. As for what they have to gain, there are so many dimensions and you have to look at it from all angles. - One of them was mentioned by Azadre - neighbouring leaders have much to gain by rallying their troops against Israel. - Israeli extremists have much to gain from this, though I don't know that they are involved or turning a blind eye. - For the Israeli government, there is a conflict of interest in that every one of these attacks will support their lobbyists' requests for funding, and reduce the scrutiny they face for future actions. - The individual terrorists are bigots, and they hate Jews. These are typically Arab Islamists. For them, this is awesome. They believe that it's a win-win. If they die, they go to heaven. If they get tortured/injured, they are racking up plus points in God's judicial system. If they do it without dying, they killed the people they hate. If they fail the mission, it's the thought that counts. Obviously, they will use any excuse to do this, and they are just waiting for something to happen for them to spill their hatred in a warped "justified" way. The only solution is to not give them an excuse, and to re-humanize Jews to them. Ultimately they think that they are aiding Palestine politically, and aiding themselves religiously. They don't realize that they are pawns in a largely secular game.
Great points. Don't forget Iran and Hizbollah (not a country) also benefit from this stuff given the current political climate in Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain and Iran.
In the last 3 days over 70 missiles were fired into Israel. A bomb was strapped to a phone booth at a Jerusalem bus station, killing one and seriously injuring 3 others. Last week a Palestinian terrorist walked into the house of the Fogel family and murdered Rabbi Fogel, his wife and 3 of his 6 children with a kitchen knife. None of this has been given media coverage.
Very interesting to read[/quote] You should have stopped there, because obviously you didn't read what I wrote. I never once blamed anyone but the terrorists for what happened, and said that terrorism was always wrong. Better luck next time.
I am absolutely disgusted and sickened by your attempts to assign blame for a terrorist, murderous act, to the victims of the terrorist act.
If its my responsibility to keep someone safe, I knowingly do something that makes her less safe, and as a result she is put in a situation where she is killed by a murderer -- I have nothing to regret? Nothing to feel sorry for? I should feel like I did nothing wrong? Would you? Feeling some sense of responsibility in no way diminishes the crime itself or has any bearing on the punishment that the murderer should receive. The crime is "100%" the murderer's, but I would certainly be responsible for putting that person in a situation that exposes her to such a crime.
That is a great analogy and it cuts to the point. Israel could provide better security to its citizens by stopping the settlements, occupation, oppressive laws that aren't geared around protecting anyone but only in denying rights to people because of their ethnicity. If Israel did those things, there citizens would be safer. At some point they have to think about that.
By your logic, one should always bow to terrorists' demands, because not doing so makes people less safe. Bin Laden has made all kinds of demands and threats, and said "if you do this and that, we will not bomb you". By not catering to his demands, Western governments made people in their country "less safe". But they did nothing wrong by doing so. Again, the blame for the actions is 100 % the murderers', their puppet masters', and their ideology's. One can still be critical of Israel's government's settlement politics and to some extent of the way they treat the Palestinians, but in absolutely no way should blame for this terrorist act be assigned to the victims' side (Israel). Edit: Interestingly, some people like Mathloom and FranchiseBlade always do this when Israel is the victim. However, if Israel attacks Palestine, they never say "why do Palestinian people not get rid of Hamas, then this would not happen" or "why doesn't Hamas change their policies of indoctrinating children with hate against Israel, and of smuggling weapons so they can attack Israel, then this would not happen", etc. - they always attack Israel for it when it happens and demonize one side, and one side only. When Israel attacks, they are the evil ones. When Israel gets attacked, they are the evil ones, and the "root cause". Very telling. See above.
Let me get this straight, because it sounds too ridiculous to believe: The "terrorist demand" in this case is "Don't steal land that doesn't belong to you by building settlements" and Israel should continue doing it because doing otherwise is bowing to terrorists's demands. I suppose if the terrorists told Israel not to bomb civilians, Israel now needs to bomb civilians so they aren't viewed as bowing to the demands of terrorists. Is this your logic? The "demands" in this case are not simply coming from terrorists. It is coming from moderates in Israel, from the Palestinian people, and from virtually the entire international community minus some extremist wackos in Washington.
I know you are not dumb, so I am not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding: In no way did I say that the demand is only coming from terrorists. What I am saying is: It does not matter what the demand is and who it is coming from, not following it never justifies a terrorist attack against civilians. When you and others, however, lay blame for a terrorist attack against civilians on Israel "because it did not follow the demands", then you do absolve the terrorists of a part of the blame, even if you say at the same time "it's 100 % the terrorists' fault". It does not matter how much of a presumably just cause they are pursuing and how wrong the government of the state they are fighting against is on some cause, it never justifies terrorist murder against civilians.
First of all you need to go back and search my posts on the matter, because I've been critical of Palestinian leadership throughout. However, nobody is arguing that blame isn't on the terrorists. The problem comes from you trying to accuse people of saying the terrorists aren't to blame for terrorism. You either believe that our statements mean that or you would rather just paint our arguments as believing that. However, I know my arguments don't absolve terrorists of responsibility. You can pretend they do if you'd like, but that doesn't make it accurate. However, Israel could take steps like I mentioned above and it would make their citizens safer. Bottom line is that Israel's policies of aggression oppression, and discrimination make their citizens less safe. Sorry if that bothers you.
I don't think anyone who posted in this thread disputes this. You can ask each person you're arguing with: were the terrorist attacks justified? Everyone will answer "No". Moral responsibility is not a mathematical quantity that can be broken up like that. If I ask a friend to walk through a neighborhood I know to be dangerous to come see me late at night, and she gets raped on the way over, I have some responsibility for that. I should have been more considerate for her safety. That does not in any way take way from the heinous act itself or make the rapist any less guilty or blameworthy. Its not like the rapists responsibility went from 100% to 85% or something. It doesn't even make sense to think about it in those terms. And, again, I don't see anyone in this thread justifying it.
The difference between your example and the Israel/Palestina situation is that in your example, the rapist is a random attacker that has nothing to do with you. In the Israel/Palestina situation, you are the one getting attacked. There is an antagonistic situation where the attacker justifies the attack by pointing at something the victim did - and you and others do follow the same line of thinking. Therefore, in this case, at least in the logic of the attacker, his responsibility is greatly reduced (in their own mind, totally) because he feels that he is justified because of something the victim did. That is different from your example.
BREAKING NEWS: Family in Texas massacred in their sleep, bomb hits bus #74 outside D.C. convention center injuring dozens and killing at least one; over 50 rockets and missiles continue falling in Fairfax, Virginia. Do I have your attention? Is this completely insane and far fetched? Then why is it allowed to be commonplace in Israel?
