Israel's insanity

But "colored" and "negro" is referring to a race. If you're going to use a term in an insulting manner in reference to an entire race, I can understand the problem.

Zionism is not referring to the state of a person as a Jew. It's referring to their political/philosophical leanings in the context of Israeli-Palestinian relations. If someone is using the term Zionist, and they're doing so with derision, how does the equate to an attack on Jews?

 

See Tom, Uncle

 

For the record, as a jewish person, I am not offended by the words zionist/zionism, but I also do not live in israel.

 

I think "communist" is a better comparison. Its frequently used in a pejorative manner here, but its not an inherently insulting term (like "Uncle Tom" is). I can say someone is a communist or he has communist leanings, and I could be right. Should I refrain from using the term, because I might hurt his feelings?

 

I don't.

As far as I am concerned, calling someone a "Zionist" in the typical Arab way is the same as calling them an "uppity Jew-boy", as opposed with the acceptable, less offensive Jew, the "Uncle Tom Jew", who is happy to live as a second class subjugated and properly deferential dhimmi.

The character of Uncle Tom actually was very positive character in the book. Harriet Beecher Stowe was a strong abolitionist and Tom was a very positive character from the white viewpoint at the time - an example of why it was wrong to enslave such a nice, agreeable civilized black man. It didn't become a pejorative until black people stopped putting up with subjugation to white people.

 

We're not living in the 19th century or early 20th century any more. In current times, the term "Uncle Tom" is universally a pejorative and for good reason. "Zionist" is not. Zionism is a political movement, like communism, that may be controversial in certain mainstream circles, but is also accepted and embraced by many.

You're right in that if a person is constantly calling anyone who defends Israel's actions a "Zionist" that it might indicate some deep-seeded resentment towards Jews, or at least Jewish nationalism at the expense of Palestinian autonomy. I just prefer not to leap to the conclusion that someone is a racist unless they actually express an opinion or argument that is racist.

 

That sounds reasonable. Perhaps less time getting sidetracked by "labels," and more time spent on what is actually the "cause and effect" of this tragedy would be more worthwhile. I think you both have good points. As has been pointed out in this thread before, (I think! I just skimmed it... I've been busy and not doing much on the BBS, except quietly moaning about the Rocks), if some fastasy regime in Mexico were "randomly" lofting missiles and mortar shells into Texas' towns and cities, because they believed we occupied, illegally, a part of Mexico, would we put up with it for a moment? Imagine Texas stayed a Republic, so the tale is on a smaller scale. Does anyone seriously believe Texas would put up with it for a day? A week? Six months? Three years? When we retaliated, however long that retaliation were put off, and it continued, does anyone seriously believe we wouldn't take measures that would escalate until those attacks ended?

And from the other side... if the retaliation were so massive that civilians were being killed and wounded in the hundreds, does anyone really believe the world's reaction wouldn't be highly critical? That those deaths and injuries wouldn't spur ever increasing numbers of attacks on Texas, if those attacks were at all possible? That the number of those wanting revenge wouldn't increase, making more attacks inevitable?

Where does it end? When does it end? It has to, someday, or the region will be pulled into even more madness. The very, very long conflict in Northern Ireland has finally found an accommodation between the warring sides, so we can hope reason will prevail here, someday. One must admit it is interesting that Britain never found the need for massive air strikes and a military invasion in Northern Ireland of the scale we have seen before by Israel in the occupied areas. Of course, apart from the efforts of France two centuries ago to give Irish revolutionaries material support, as well as troops on the ground (which didn't work out for them, but they tried), to force Britain to put resources into the island, there is little that compares with Hamas and its support by Iran.

Geez, this is so damn complicated!

 

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01012009/news/columnists/bam_stirs_fears_in_israel_146762.htm

Despite the frankly anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish reporting of this conflict in the global media, Israel's military performance not only has been technically superb, but has been as humane as possible under such difficult circumstances.

From earlier briefings in Israel, I know the IDF takes an almost absurd degree of care in its targeting. The questioning doesn't stop with "Is that the right building?" it then asks, "What should be our angle of attack to ensure any rubble falls into the street, not atop the primary school next door?" (Hamas consistently embeds terror facilities among innocent civilians.)

Hitting a terrorist hideout in an apartment building, for example, an F-16 would be armed with the smallest warhead that could do the job. If the terrorists are tucked into rooms on the fourth floor, targeting officers evaluate which window the guided missile should go through to kill the terrorists, while minimizing harm to civilians living below.

Any military veteran can tell that the Israelis are taking enormous care to spare civilians. Given the number of airstrikes thus far and the hundreds of tons of bombs dropped, it remains remarkable that so few innocents have been injured in such a dense urban environment.


-------

Hamas wants innocent palestenian lives to be lost during this war, its a shame more people don't realize that. They use women/children as shields and its disgusting. Is it israels fault that Egypt wont let them enter? The rockets have been going on for 8+ years. Israel has had enough, and I hope they continue the airstrike/ground attack until they make sure it can't happen again. I don't know how they will accomplish that, but anyone who says they aren't trying to avoid innocent lives being lost is naive.

Would any other country that is being attacked by terrorists do what they are doing? They send text messages/make phone calls alerting people about bombs about to be dopped. They drop letters letting innocent civilians know about incoming air strikes. Who else would do that?

I pray for the safety of the IDF army and any civilians stuck in the middle.

 

What else could israel have done besides not attack? They sent warning texts/phone calls/flyers to as many as possible. Why is hamas not held responsible for setting up rockets next to hospitals/schools/residential areas?

Hamas' goal is to destroy israel and they have brought this upon themselves.

 

The world is becoming sickened by the deadly brutal blockade of Gaza and Israel is slowly losing support even in the US. The blockade is an act of war at least as morally reprehensible as the Hamas's rockets.

Israel deserves a repeat of their last Lebanon adventure, though as in the Iraq War, the young soldiers don't deserve to die for the visions of their neo-con leaders.

From Uri Avery an ex-Israeli politician.

As a matter of fact, the cease-fire did not collapse, because there was no real cease-fire to start with. The main requirement for any cease-fire in the Gaza Strip must be the opening of the border crossings. There can be no life in Gaza without a steady flow of supplies. But the crossings were not opened, except for a few hours now and again. The blockade on land, on sea and in the air against a million and a half human beings is an act of war, as much as any dropping of bombs or launching of rockets. It paralyzes life in the Gaza Strip: eliminating most sources of employment, pushing hundreds of thousands to the brink of starvation, stopping most hospitals from functioning, disrupting the supply of electricity and water.

Those who decided to close the crossings – under whatever pretext – knew that there is no real cease-fire under these conditions.

That is the main thing. Then there came the small provocations which were designed to get Hamas to react. After several months, in which hardly any Qassam rockets were launched, an army unit was sent into the Strip “in order to destroy a tunnel that came close to the border fence”. From a purely military point of view, it would have made more sense to lay an ambush on our side of the fence. But the aim was to find a pretext for the termination of the cease-fire, in a way that made it plausible to put the blame on the Palestinians. And indeed, after several such small actions, in which Hamas fighters were killed, Hamas retaliated with a massive launch of rockets, and – lo and behold – the cease-fire was at an end. Everybody blamed Hamas.

http://counterpunch.org/avnery01022009.html

 

That's quite the act of graciousness. Now where are Gazans supposed to go exactly?

 

From the same article

"As seen by Arabs, one fact stands out above all others: the wall of shame.

For the million and a half Arabs in Gaza, who are suffering so terribly, the only opening to the world that is not dominated by Israel is the border with Egypt. Only from there can food arrive to sustain life and medicaments to save the injured. This border remains closed at the height of the horror. The Egyptian army has blocked the only way for food and medicines to enter, while surgeons operate on the wounded without anesthetics.

Throughout the Arab world, from end to end, there echoed the words of Hassan Nasrallah: The leaders of Egypt are accomplices to the crime, they are collaborating with the “Zionist enemy” in trying to break the Palestinian people. It can be assumed that he did not mean only Mubarak, but also all the other leaders, from the king of Saudi Arabia to the Palestinian President. Seeing the demonstrations throughout the Arab world and listening to the slogans, one gets the impression that their leaders seem to many Arabs pathetic at best, and miserable collaborators at worst.
"


------

Even egypt has its border blocked....I wonder why... ...

but lets blame israel!!! if egypt wont accept the people of gaza, why should israel open its border? Are there rockets being sent into egypt? Nope. But its easier to blame israel for trying to protect their own citizens

 

countercurrents


Also, I'm curious as to how you think bombing a mosque is a way for Israel to 'protect it's citizens'?

 

Whose bright Idea was it to put Israel in the middle of a bunch of Arab states. I can't believe people can honestly support Israel in what they are doing. Lobbing rockets into Israel by Hamas isn't right, but its like a big kid beating up the annoying little pesky kid.

 

And I can't believe people honestly support allowing Hamas to shoot the rockets into israel without retaliation. Enough is enough, the people of gaza have embraced hamas and expect israel to allow them into their country to work/get food? Hamas' goal is to destroy israel, yet the palestenians need israel for food/work???? Can't have it both ways.

 

source

[rquoter]
As a hardliner, Nizar Rayan supported suicide attacks and sent his own 17-year-old son on a suicide mission. That made him a symbol of personal sacrifice among the Palestinians.

Rayan also initiated the 'human shield' tactic in 2005 when Israel started targeting the homes of Hamas activists after warning the residents and neighbours in advance. Rayan used to take women and children to the roofs of the threatened buildings to prevent Israeli bombardments, and managed to save dozens of them.

[/rquoter]

That is a pretty good example of what not to do.

If I tell you I am about to bomb a building, and you climb out on the roof and dance around, is it really my fault that you are dead?

If you hide weapons and rockets in mosques and hospitals I blow up the mosque as a military target, whose fault is it that the mosque and hospitals became targets and eventually were blown up?

If you really want to know where to go, the simple place to go is to the building next door. Or if you really don't want your house to be blown up, you can plan ahead and not store an arms cache in the basement or use your living room for the weekly Hamas town hall meeting.

The rational calculation is that women and children and mosques and hospitals are worth sacrificing if you can get a PR victory and make westerners scream with outrage. As far as I can tell, Hamas actually wants women and children and mosques and hospitals to be blown up. They love it. They can't get enough of it. And apparently their calculation is correct. It is public perception manipulation, and people don't seem to care they are being manipulated. In fact, many people are more than willing to be knowing co-conspirators. They want another reason to hate the 'Zionist Entity'. Who cares if it is fabricated or not?

In the 1970's, the IRA used to bomb the crap out of England. But when they set the bombs they would call ahead of time to warn people. These people would leave. The bombs would go off. If the English used Hamas tactics, would the IRA have gotten the same treatment that the IDF is, or would people rightly lay the blame for excessive carnage on the British Army? I am positive people would have blamed the British for not heeding the warnings. But apparently Hamas is like the handicaped kid. People feel sorry for them so just say, "but look, he's handicaped, its not his fault, I can't be mad at him" when he throws a temper tantrum.