Why Israel

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
"But they still don't deserve to be killed for it, which is what you suggested."

Just because someone "doesn't deserve to be killed" for something, doesn't mean they have the right to carry on doing it regardless, does it? Sheesh. OK, taking you up on your point about combatants and non-combatants, I think it is fair to say that people who have been put in a desperate situation are going to act in a desperate way, and may feel that they have no choice but to become combatants. Understanding why people might feel compelled to commit acts of terror does not morally equate to condoning terrorism (at least, I firmly believe this).
 

vimothy

yurp
"But they still don't deserve to be killed for it, which is what you suggested."

Be fair Mr Tea. You said:

I think a lot of Palestinians would say, with some justfication I think, that Israelis who've built settlements on illegally occupied land don't count as civilians.

Meaning, in this context, that targetting settlers is justified because they are settlers and so not civillians (even though that has nothing to do with being a civillian).

Just because someone "doesn't deserve to be killed" for something, doesn't mean they have the right to carry on doing it regardless, does it? Sheesh.

But that's much more moderate - it isn't what you said originally. I'm not trying to have a go, just to point out that such extreme views of the Israelis are very common. They are very common. Think of how easy you found it. I can find loads of "respectable" people saying similarly extreme things. And it's not because the Israelis deserve it per se (though obviously they do to some extent), but because of the different things we have been discussing on this thread so far.

OK, taking you up on your point about combatants and non-combatants, I think it is fair to say that people who have been put in a desperate situation are going to act in a desperate way, and may feel that they have no choice but to become combatants. Understanding why people might feel compelled to commit acts of terror does not morally equate to condoning terrorism (at least, I firmly believe this).

Fine - but it is not acceptable to deliberately kill civillians, whether or not they are settlers, and this is an explicit aim of the Palestinian "resistance" organisations - and they are not limiting attacks on civillians or children, specifically, to the settlements either.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I think it is justified to think of someone who has settled on land that you were unlawfully kicked off as something other than a 'civilian', exactly. Whether this justifies killing them is another matter, but I think it's less unjustified than, say, committing suicide bombings in Haifa or something, where victims are chosen purely on the basis of being Israelis, rather than the Promised-Land Zionists who have settled on Palestinian land.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
I think it is justified to think of someone who has settled on land that you were unlawfully kicked off as something other than a 'civilian', exactly. Whether this justifies killing them is another matter, but I think it's less unjustified than, say, committing suicide bombings in Haifa or something, where victims are chosen purely on the basis of being Israelis, rather than the Promised-Land Zionists who have settled on Palestinian land.

That sounds like fair comment to me. Settlers might be civilians, but they're not innocent civilians.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Even little girls?

Obviously they are below the age of criminal culpability, and presumably didn't take the decision to occupy other peiople's land, but then I'm not apologising for their murderers. I would support Tea's contention that their parents, while not deserving to be murdered, are a lot less undeserving than shoppers getting a bus into Tel Aviv.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Even little girls?

Even little angelic blonde girls, who had a favourite teddy called Mister Chuckles? :(:(:(
*insert standard Maddie pic here*

Interestingly, this links in with the inheritance tax thread: namely, if it's OK for children to inherit the wealth of their parents without paying any tax on it, why is it not OK for them to inherit the animosity of the people their parents have dispossessed? Didn't the Children of Israel (the old Israel) wander in the desert for a whole generation because of their parents' sins? (Not that I necessarily think people should be 'punished' for what their parents have done, it just struck me as a rather germane mythico-historic precedent.)
 
Last edited:

vimothy

yurp
Even little angelic blonde girls, who had a favourite teddy called Mister Chuckles? :(:(:(
*insert standard Maddie pic here*

Interestingly, this links in with the inheritance tax thread: namely, if it's OK for children to inherit the wealth of their parents without paying any tax on it, why is it not OK for them to inherit the animosity of the people their parents have dispossessed? Didn't the Children of Israel (the old Israel) wander in the desert for a whole generation because of their parents' sins? (Not that I necessarily think people should be 'punished' for what their parents have done, it just struck me as a rather germane mythico-historic precedent.)

Do you have kids, Mr Tea?
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Do you have kids, Mr Tea?

How is this at all relevant? I was (perhaps somewhat irreverantly) pointing out that by mentioning little girls you've gone for the obvious, heart-string-wrenching manipulative-language thing, "will somebody please think of the children". I could retaliate by searching the BBC News website for reports of half-a-dozen instance of Palestinian children being shot by IDF troops - not terrorists, mind, but the professional soldiers of a democracy! - but I really don't want to have to stoop to that level. And I bet that happens a lot more often than the killing of children of (illegal) settlers, which it goes without saying I deplore.
 

vimothy

yurp
How is this at all relevant? I was (perhaps somewhat irreverantly) pointing out that by mentioning little girls you've gone for the obvious, heart-string-wrenching manipulative-language thing, "will somebody please think of the children". I could retaliate by searching the BBC News website for reports of half-a-dozen instance of Palestinian children being shot by IDF troops - not terrorists, mind, but the professional soldiers of a democracy! - but I really don't want to have to stoop to that level. And I bet that happens a lot more often than the killing of children of (illegal) settlers, which it goes without saying I deplore.

Does it happen more often? I don't know if it does.

In any case it is relevant because killing little children, women and civilians is a stated, explicit weapon in the Palestinian arsenal. (But of course, the Palestinians know best what's best for them, eh)? This is, of course, rightly condemed by all right thinking people, when it is brought up. Mostly, however, people just write it off as "hey, they do live under Israeli occupation, and that's clearly all the Israelis' fault, so it's kind of the Israelis fault that the their kids are getting killed as well", even though the occupation isn't clearly the Israelis fault (back to the other actors again). Do the Israelis deliberately target woment and children? Of course they don't - even if you think them merciless killers, it wouldn't make sense strategically - look at the stats, or find some non-suspect ones and refer me to them.

Can you not see this difference between to ways of fighting? Professional soldiers on one side targeting combatants and protecting their people, and terrorists, hiding amidst the protection of their fellows, targeting unarmed civillians.

You will never see Israelis crowding round a Palestinian target to try to stop them from attacking it, but you will probably have seen Palestinians doing exactly that. How come?

The Palestinians don't even care for the lives of their own children - it's all grist for the intifada / jihad against the jews and crusaders - otherwise they'd have realised how counterintuitive fighting an asymmetrical enemy is if you are seeking to protect yourself. Why not deescalate and save the lives of your children? Why not stop turning them into human bombs? Oh yeah - I forgot - revenge is more important...
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
The Palestinians don't even care for the lives of their own children -

Umm, I think that's a little bit of sweeping generalisation, don't you? Or is 'Palestinian' now identical to 'Hizbullah/Islamic Jihad' or what-have-you?

Anyway, if the only future you can realistically see for yourself (and your children) is one of poverty, powerlessness, dispossession and endless discrimination, you're likely to value your own life (and even those of your children) rather less than someone in a rich, developed country with a big well-equipped army to protect it.
 

vimothy

yurp
Umm, I think that's a little bit of sweeping generalisation, don't you? Or is 'Palestinian' now identical to 'Hizbullah/Islamic Jihad' or what-have-you?

Yeah - fair enough. Since everyone else makes sweeping generalisations about Israel, I thought I'd have a go too.

So what is the "proud that my son became a human bomb who killed Jews" thing about then - that's hardly rational and understandable, is it?
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Well this is just what I'm saying: it's easy to be rational when you aren't living in a refugee camp, relying on barely-adequate food aid, being stopped and pointlessly interrogated wherever you go, etc. etc. etc.

As I said above, I am not condoning suicide bombings, shooting of children and so on but I can see why people are driven to it. And I think it's rather self-deluding of you to exonerate the IDF so sweepingly: wasn't there a video clip posted on here not so long ago of Israeli troops using Palestinian children as human shields?
I mean, seriously, isn't that terrorism however you look at it?
 

gek-opel

entered apprentice
Yeah - fair enough. Since everyone else makes sweeping generalisations about Israel, I thought I'd have a go too.

So what is the "proud that my son became a human bomb who killed Jews" thing about then - that's hardly rational and understandable, is it?

Perhaps not rational (meaning here perhaps "the best choice obtained through reason") but definitely understandable, by which I mean that such decisions do not arise (and of course you would not claim that they do either vim) ex nihilo as from no originating factors. There are reasons as to why the suicide bomber mother feels proud. These reasons may not be ones which ultimately from a third person perspective we view to be rational, but we can identify the factors which lead her to come to such a conclusion, and understand how such factors might bring her to such an opinion. As such this proposition is understandable.

Similarly (although the two factions are not equivalents politically) one may understand (but not view as rationally optimal choices) various decisions and pronouncements made by the Israeli state.

What is key is that understanding remains open, rather than viewing any human act as so monstrous as to be literally outside of comprehension, which amounts to intellectual cowardice, and usually serves to bolster some underlying prejudice or position.
 
Last edited:
Even little girls?

Settler Parents (ie those who collude in invading, plundering and robbing the land of others by lethal force] who intentionally and pre-meditatively expose their own children to possible injury or death ... this is what we usually term criminally irresponsible child abuse. In a normal civil society such children would be removed from such assholes and placed into care or adopted ... But all of this completely misses the point: those whose lands, livelihoods, and homes have been criminally invaded have every legitimate right BY LAW to use whatever means necessary to defend themselves, including killing the invaders ... just as you have the right to defend yourself by whatever means against someone who invades your home using lethal force, just as any country has a legitimate right to use violence against war criminals who lethally invade their country. It's really very simple, but you're so terminally blinded by white-racist colonialist and capitalist ideology ... next you'll be 'arguing' that those British who defended Britain against Hitler's invasions by violent means were a bunch of 'fascist terrorists' slaughtering countless pretty little German girls ...

Heil Vomithy!

Amira Hass: Israel has turned the Gaza Strip into a zoo:

A zoo. This is one of the ways that Palestinians describe the conditions under which nearly 1.5 million of them have been living: in an area of some 360 square kilometers, closed in on three sides by sophisticated barbed-wire fences, concrete walls and military lookout towers, and to the west by Israeli navy ships that seal them off from the sea. Overhead, in the sky, unmanned aircraft and hot air balloons continually photograph whatever happens inside this closed cage.

===

Gazans barred from treatment in Israel:

Six Gazans, including a 16-year-old girl and two women in their early 20s, suffering from cancer and other serious ailments and who desperately need treatment in Israel are being prevented from entering the country by the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), the organization Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) told The Jerusalem Post Thursday.

===

UN expert rails at Quartet policies :

He also, tellingly, strays to the very limit of his mandate by saying that the Quartet is hampering the Palestinian right to self-determination.

He compares the actions of Palestinian militants to those of the French Resistance during World War II.

I put it to Mr Dugard that that comparison in particular would be very difficult for some to stomach. He was unabashed.

"History is replete with examples of populations that have resisted military occupation," he said.

"I can't see why one shouldn't draw these analogies."


===

Envoy urges UN to quit Quartet over lack of regard for human rights :

The United Nations should pull out of the Quartet of Middle East mediators unless the group starts taking Palestinian human rights seriously, a UN envoy said on Monday.
 

vimothy

yurp
Well this is just what I'm saying: it's easy to be rational when you aren't living in a refugee camp, relying on barely-adequate food aid, being stopped and pointlessly interrogated wherever you go, etc. etc. etc.

There are reasons for that as well.

And why not stop the war with Israel and build Palestine? The there will be no Israeli check points. The economy wil be the domain of Palestinians. The government will be chosen by the people. Of course it's easy to be rational from here, but it's also easy to see that peace will never happen while the Palestinians don't want it to happen.

As I said above, I am not condoning suicide bombings, shooting of children and so on but I can see why people are driven to it.

Can you really? Doesn't it strike you as rather deluded and self-defeating to kill yourself as well as a few Jews of no military value? Don't you think that a shaheed is a monstrous figure, and that the mothers who encourage their young to become these bombs that kill Jews in senseless exersises are twisted and unworthy of motherhood?

And I think it's rather self-deluding of you to exonerate the IDF so sweepingly: wasn't there a video clip posted on here not so long ago of Israeli troops using Palestinian children as human shields?
I mean, seriously, isn't that terrorism however you look at it?

No, it's not terrorism, but it is exceptionally fucked up. I am not exonerating the IDF, but there is no moral equivalence between the IDF (protecting their people and attacking military targets) and Palestinian terrorists (endangering their people and attacking civilians of no military value).
 

vimothy

yurp
next you'll be 'arguing' that those British who defended Britain against Hitler's invasions by violent means were a bunch of 'fascist terrorists' slaughtering countless pretty little German girls ...[/I]

Didn't we invade Germany? Didn't we declare war with them? Weren't the colonial, capitalist, neo-liberal Brits the invaders? (While brave Ireland stood with the Nazis). In fact if you are consistent you would say that the Germans have every right to kill British children, just as the Saddamite resistance has every right to murder the children of those who cooperate with the MNF, murder US soldiers trying to bring democracy, murder Iraqi soldiers trying to maintain it. Germany took France like Saddam took Iraq. They had equal amounts of legitimacy. Following your logic Germany was perfectly justified in fighting back against the Allies, even at Normandy. Just as the USSR was perfectly justified in its own imperialism. Anything as long is it hurts America or Britain or capitalism or democracy.

But I don't doubt that you do think that. You have no moral high-ground from which to lecture me on opposing fascism - everying I have ever seen written by you on this board has been written against free democracies - the countries whose struggle bought you the freedom that you use to insult them - disparaging their status and continued battle against tyranny. You are soft on fascism today (you cannot even recognise it when it is staring you in the face and waving a dead baby) and you would not have recognised it then.

But all of this completely misses the point: those whose lands, livelihoods, and homes have been criminally invaded have every legitimate right BY LAW to use whatever means necessary to defend themselves, including killing the invaders

Exactly - and this from the man who accuses everyone and anyone of fascism - listen well, "even little girls..."

And what about when they kill each other, which happens regularly, just as it happened regularly in NI? And what about when they just pick people off the street and murder them for reasons that are wholly imaginary, as happened regularly in NI? Paramilitary violence is not the answer. If these people have a burning desire to run their own country, they only need to stand for election and convince enough of their compatriots to vote for them. It's pretty simple.

just as any country has a legitimate right to use violence against war criminals who lethally invade their country.

And the Kurds and the Shia - what of their rights? Why have you become a cheerleader for Arab national socialists like Saddam and the Ba'ath, with no thought for those who were under their knives? Oh yeah, that's right - because of who the Ba'ath, the Republican Guard Officer Corps and Saddamite Fedayeen are fighting right now: America.
 
Last edited:
But I don't doubt that you do think that. You have no moral high-ground from which to lecture me on opposing fascism - everying I have ever seen written by you on this board has been written against free democracies

The whole history of Western intervention in the Middle East, as elsewhere, is one of actively suppressing the development of indigenous democracies. The CIA's overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953, its facilitation of Saddam's rise to power in the 1970s, the list [you already know it, from numerous posts at Dissensus] is endless and without exception or variation.



- the countries whose struggle bought you the freedom that you use to insult them - disparaging their status and continued battle against tyranny. You are soft on fascism today (you cannot even recognise it when it is staring you in the face and waving a dead baby) and you would not have recognised it then.

It is you, as ever, who is the anti-Arab racist, consistently supporting fascist Western policies against Middle-Eastern countries.

I like the bit about the God-like West 'bringing freedom', though usually you say 'bringing democracy', in the form, of course, of bombs and bullets, unprovoked invasions, attacks, military coups ...

And why not stop the war with Israel and build Palestine?

Because Israel is causing it, started it, and won't stop until Palestine and Palestinians are destroyed.

The government will be chosen by the people.

The people have chosen (in Gaza): Hamas. But democracy for Palestinians is anathema for Western racists, and so must be brutally suppressed, in keeping with long-standing POLICY.

Of course it's easy to be rational from here, but it's also easy to see that peace will never happen while the Palestinians don't want it to happen.

Oh, those devilish Palestinians, always up to no good! They can't help it, it's in their 'nature'. Damn savages! Hangin's too good for 'em! Smoke 'em out!!

[Yawn]
 

vimothy

yurp
The whole history of Western intervention in the Middle East, as elsewhere, is one of actively suppressing the development of indigenous democracies. The CIA's overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953, its facilitation of Saddam's rise to power in the 1970s, the list [you already know it, from numerous posts at Dissensus] is endless and without exception or variation.

Western activities in Iran are certainly nothing to be proud of. (Although it's true that the Islamic Revolution made Iran's situation worse). "Facilitation" of Saddam is misleading, "support" is more appropriate. Anyway, Saddam's dead, captured by US soldiers and executed by the democratic government of Iraq.

It is you, as ever, who is the anti-Arab racist, consistently supporting fascist Western policies against Middle-Eastern countries.

No, that's not true, since I am explicitly pro any pro-liberal-democracy Arab group or faction or institute or individual anywhere. I am anti dictators who murder Arabs in great numbers, who squash their potential, who ruin their economies, who feed them lies and useless hatreds, who steal their resourse wealth and hide it in Swiss bank accounts. I am anti reactionary murderous terrorists, who kill all those who fall short of their twisted and medievil vision of Islam and ensnare the Middle East in yet more stupid violence. I am pro-pluralism and so pro the ignored Arab & Mid Eastern minorities, the Shia, the Copts, the Kurds, the Christians, the Yazidi, etc ad absurdam.

You are for the status quo in the Middle East and not against it. You complain that the West installed dictators, and now they are toppling them you are complaining still. You want to protect the rights of illegitimate power-grabbing thugs and you support them when they use violence against their enemies, and of course their enemies are not only Western but, mostly, other Arabs and Muslims.

I like the bit about the God-like West 'bringing freedom', though usually you say 'bringing democracy', in the form, of course, of bombs and bullets, unprovoked invasions, attacks, military coups ...

Would you have been free to espouse your own political opinions in Nazi Europe? No. Would Nazi Europe have developed the internet and other free media to provide you with a platform to espouse your political views from? No. Are we free-er under Pax America than we would have been under Pax Germanica? Yes, I think that's pretty obvious. Pax USSR? Yes, I think that's pretty obvious too.

What secured this freedom? Bombs, guns, bullets, invasions, military coups, etc. Anyway, don't pretend that you're opposed to these things. You have already mentioned upthread that indeginous third world dictatorships have every right to use them.

Because Israel is causing it, started it, and won't stop until Palestine and Palestinians are destroyed.

One sided as usual. If Israel really wanted to destroy Palestine and kill all the Palestinians, they would have done so already. And, as you know if you've followed this thread, they would be ignored by liberals who only criticise liberal countries. They certainly have the military capabilty to end this now in a storm of bloodshed. Why don't they?

The people have chosen (in Gaza): Hamas. But democracy for Palestinians is anathema for Western racists, and so must be brutally suppressed, in keeping with long-standing POLICY.

Oh - you are in favour of democracy when it is a stick to hit the west with! Hardly suprising. In any case, Hamas are not democrats, they are theocratic reactionaries and murderous terrorists, not totally dissimilar to Fatah (whose name literally means "the opening", the theological term for the expansion of the House of Submission into the House of War). Hitler was elected and used his power to shut down democracy in Germany. Hamas will do the same. They kill Palestinians because they belong to the wrong political faction. What do you have to say about that?

Oh, those devilish Palestinians, always up to no good! They can't help it, it's in their 'nature'. Damn savages! Hangin's too good for 'em! Smoke 'em out!!

Obviously you're not paying attention. I've been saying that we should stop patronising the Palestinians and treat them like grown-ups. I'm not saying that they're incapable of rational action. If I thought that, I wouldn't be having this conversation at all. Of course they're capable. It's the rest of the people on this thread, who think that suicide-murder is perfectly explicable and often justified, that you should be shouting this at, not me. The Palestinians are indeed capable of stopping the rolling intifada / jihad against Israel. They don't and it's their fault that they don't.
 
Top