Links With Your Coffee - Thursday
Avoid waiting for your comments to be approved register using TypeKey
If you leave a comment please follow the rules. Criticize ideas. Do not criticize people. Repeated abuse of the rule will result in your commenting privileges being revoked.
Did you know that if you click on the word Archives at the top of the list of monthly archives you'll see a list of all the posts at onegoodmove. There are two ways to search the site. The search box top right and the Google Search at the bottom of the page.
WILLY WONKA DEMANDS FAIR SHARE OF HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDS
Mentos and Diet Coke Perhaps you've tried it. Do you know why it works, you soon will.
Lewis Black Demands CNN removes the scroll during interview.
Israel’s Two-Front Battle
Israel has a right to protect itself and to respond when attacked. The problem comes when they fail to act proportionately. Initial actions in Gaza were justified, but their efforts soon went from legitimate to illegal and counterproductive. The most obvious example was the unnecessary blowing up of the Gaza Power Plant. An action that had nothing to do with threats from Gaza but was in my opinion taken to punish not only Hamas but the civilian population. Now they have a similar problem with Lebanon will they make the same kind of mistakes they've made in Gaza. Initial reactions don't look promising. As the times points out calling the attacks an "act of war" was not a good idea.
It is too soon to judge how well Israel is hewing to this standard in Lebanon. The political context there is different from that in Gaza. Hezbollah, whose militia is to blame for the kidnappings and rocket fire, has deputies in Lebanon’s Parliament and ministers in its cabinet. But it is not the main party of government, as Hamas is in the Palestinian territories. And Lebanon, unlike Gaza and the West Bank, is a legally sovereign state. A great deal of international effort has been invested in trying to free it of foreign military and political meddling, and restore real content to its sovereignty.Obviously, that effort has not been fully successful. Hezbollah’s role as an autonomous militia controlling the international border with Israel makes that painfully clear, and Israel cannot be expected to put up with it. But in responding, it needs to make careful distinctions between Hezbollah guerrillas and Lebanese civilians; calling the rockets an “act of war” by Lebanon’s government was not a good idea.
Comments
See, now I think that's more fairminded. I don't totally agree, but I'm not looking to. It doesn't even have to be "balanced". I just appreciate seeing a nod to both sides. Thanks.
The characterisation of Israel as "protecting itself" is both grotesque and absurd. The occupation is illegal and an obstacle to peace itself. Saying the Palestinians should not resist occupation simply reverses the relationship altogether. The occupier, the colonist, is by definition the initiator of violence, which consequently and very logically leads to resistance from the occupied, the colonized. The Palestinians are defending themselves from a ruthless and very violent 38+ year occupation. Depicting Israel as victims of Palestinian aggression here is one of the crudest and most humiliating expressions I have ever heard. The Palestinian struggle against the expropriation of their own land is an anti-colonialist struggle to restore to the Palestinians their national rights in their country. The only future that occupation and illegal settlement offers the Jewish population of Palestine is endless war, and rightly so.
For what's it's worth, and at the risk of opening up a new can of worms, here's my take on the Lebanon issue. While I do think Israel is overdoing this, I think the issue for that country is if Lebanon can't or won't control these pseudo-sovereign militias like Hezbollah and enforce its territorial sovereignty, then Lebanon isn't functionally sovereign, at least not on its southern border.
This should be a pretty easy one. If someone was repeatedly launching missiles from Windsor, Ontario, and making incursions to kidnap or kill citizens of Detroit, and the Canadian government wasnt doing anything to shut this down, one couldn't exactly blame the US for sending in a swat team to take the guy out.
So the answer for Israel should be, send in a highly targeted force to take these guys out. But I think part of the problem is they're scattered everywhere in Southern Lebanon. So of course, as with everything in this region, it's not that easy.
I agree with Zak.
Hezbollah does whatever they want from southern Lebanon, and the the Lebanese government does nothing to stop them.
When the Israelis pulled out of Southern Lebanon, they did so only after making an agreement with the Lebanese government that stipulated that Lebanon would work to dismantel Hezbollah.
The Lebanese government agreed to this proposal, and now we see the fruits of their labours.
Like I said in the other thread, if Israel cannot defend itself from these Hezbollah lunatics, who will?
It's quite evident that the Lebanese are either too impotent to do it themselves, or they just dont care to try.
It would be stupid for Israel to sit idly as they're bombared by katyusha rockets and mortars, and while Hezbollah snipers take pot shots at their soldiers.
At this point, I agree with Israel's decision to strike back.
Thanks Lewis Black. I did feel much better when CNN removed the scroll albeit too briefly.
I'm not sure what "proportional response" really means. Does it mean that if you capture two of my soldiers/people, send missiles into my communities or launch an incursion over a recognized border (either de-facto or de-jure) that I can do the same?
Seriously, while I'm not sanguine about a quick -- let's say within my lifetime -- resolution to the conflict, it would go a long way if the rest of the world would actually be evenhanded in their criticism and sanctions; i.e. condemn both sides for their 'inappropriate' behavior(s) with equal vehemence. However, I won't hold my breath waiting for Israel to be treated fairly in the world court.
Specific to the current conflagration, Israel is doing the right thing -- inflict specific damage on the social structure to convince (how successfully is a matter of conjecture) the civilian body to cease supporting terrorist and terrorism within its community. Lebanon must IMMEDIATELY disarm ("decommission" in Northern Ireland parlance) the Hezbollah as deliniated in recent UN resolutions, and the PA/Hamas must reign in the rejectionist/militaristic components within its society. Only then, is there any chance of establishing a viable and stable governing structure in the Palestinian areas and Lebanon and with it, a sense of real order within its boundaries.
Israel is in no position (its current administration/occupation has created enough hassles) to force its neighbors to get their acts together, she must, however, protect her citizen/residents. As long as the current military engagement is limited -- no more than several months -- there's still hope for a resolution. Should it became indefinite, it'll become a complete mess and counterproductive to creating a momentum for either regional peace or stability.
"Like I said in the other thread, if Israel cannot defend itself from these Hezbollah lunatics, who will?"
Kind of like that family of nine in Gaza whom Israel killed yesterday when Israel dropped a quarter-ton bomb on their home, killing all five daughters and two sons? Five of the dead children were between 4 and 11, and the other two in their teens. But this does not matter to you, of course. The plight of two armed Israeli soldier combatants, supersedes the plight of an entire nation. Or what of the 40 Palestinian civilians, many of them children, killed by Israel in missile and shell attacks in recent days? If Palestine cannot defend itself from these Israeli lunatics, who will?
So, according to the Zionist brigade here, the plight of two Israeli soldiers becomes more important that the plight of a whole nation. Arabs, after all, belong to the cheaper human beings, right? Israelis, fortunately for them, are the expensive human beings. But watch what cheap people can do.
I'm not enitrely familiar with the history of the conflict. But, it seems a bit slippery--rhetorically--to refer to Israel as the occipation. The British were the occupiers and opened the Jewish immagration (funny how immigration pisses people off). It seems like, to me, since, it's been a bomb with a slow fuse, exploding--God forbid--when all out war breaks. It seems like the redline has been crossed. With Hamas at the helm, the hard feelings are less likely to be assuaged.
I think this is a perfect example of how useless it is to be so touchy-feely about these subjects. It's war, folks. People are blowing each other up and kidnapping and beheading and all that. Each time you say the Red team did something bad, they come back with something the Blue team did that is supposedly worse, and so on and so on.
This is why life was so much easier when we hadn't convinced ourselves that everybody is okay and everything is justified and 'walk a mile in their shoes' and all that bullshit. You just picked your side and won or lost.
Now we can't even pick sides because we're too busy talking about how awful war is. Of course it's awful. It's war. And nobody's stopping it by crying about it, holding hands, or writing poems (or country songs for that matter).
This war has been ongoing for decades, simmering and flaring up, then dying down, then simmering and flaring up. The more we try to broker an unwanted peace, the more we talk about treaties and roadmaps, the longer the continuing war goes on. The only real hope is that somebody wins, decisively, and puts the whole thing to rest.
Ignoring, of course, that Israel was a huge supporter of Hamas in its infancy.
It's not only an occupation, it's a genocide. Pure and simple.
It's not a legal nation, it's an illegal invasion.
The world would be better off without Israel. The US would be much, much better off without Israel. AIPAC, supported by the vast majority of Jews here, has had a corrosive effect on our democracy and rights. Just look at their love affair with the right wing (Murdoch, Abramhoff, Pearle, Wolfowitz, etc.) -- and why not? Both delight in oppressing the powerless. It's a match made it h*ll.
The only moral position for an illegal invasion and genocidal occupation is to repell the invaders. And it is not up to the world in general nor the responsibility of the victims of the invasion to find homes for the invaders.
To call for the Lebanese government to disarm the Hezbollah is pointless. The peace in Lebanon is, and always has been, fragile and there's a lot of internal tension...Politicians in Lebanon are walking on egg shells so to speak...Sunni muslims, Druze, Christians have formed a fragile coalition against pro-Syrian shiite's and Hezbollah. Mind you...Hezbollah is quite powerful in Lebanon and the coalition does not want do fall out with Hezbollah. Also...Syria is still quite influencial and as we all know the Hezbollah is to some degree controlled by Iran. In short: The Lebanese government is in a dire situation to say the least.
Only Hezbollah/Iran...and maybe Syria can stop the attacks on Israel. What should Israel do? Hard to say. Today more than 120 Katyusha rockets ("Stalin Organ") were fired at populated areas in Israel,- which of course is unacceptable. Short-term solution: Kick Hezbollahs back-side soo hard they'd wish they never were born...Obviously Israel has to defend themselves right now. Long-term: ?...As long as Hamas is in power it's difficult to see a solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, - Hamas won't recognize Israels right to exist as a nation (they've actually sworn to wipe Israel off the map). Hamas needs to change their stance and Israel must acknowledge Palestine as a nation....Sounds easy doesn't it :-/
Great thread, Zak!
http://zakdegrassi.blogs.com/zakdegrassi/2006/07/when_antiisrael.html#comment-19723534
:-)
db cooper, "Specific to the current conflagration, Israel is doing the right thing -- inflict specific damage on the social structure to convince (how successfully is a matter of conjecture) the civilian body to cease supporting terrorist and terrorism within its community."
first off, i think thats the definition of terrorism: inflicting damage indiscriminately upon a civillian population to convince them of something. you mention some doubt about if its working. surely they are just not going far enough. a real genocide would convince the palestinians not to mess with israel maybe. of course, that disgusting logic only makes sense if you dont have a problem with terrorism.
"Israel is in no position (its current administration/occupation has created enough hassles) to force its neighbors to get their acts together"
israel doesnt want palestine to get its act together. thats why theyve withheld funds, refused to negotiate, and psychotically escalated the conflict.
hamas was even about to accept a platform that implicitly recognized israel's legitimacy, and theyve shown they are quite capable of holding to truces.
unfortunately, israel has all the power, so none of that matters.
the conservative jim pinkerton made the point a while ago that if you immigrate into another's society and take over, you either have to have a two state solution with reconcilliation, or you have to have an all-out genocide (like the american one). it doesnt work to go the middle-ground with prolonged subjugation as israel has done.
Typist, nothing is 'pure and simple' in this conflict. And if you think it is, you're a fool.
And really the 'genocide' whining is tired. It insults the memory of the real victims of genocide, Jews, Armenians, Cambodians, Rwandans. If you can't see the difference between those genocides and what's happening to the Palestinians, again, you're a fool. Go read some books.
israel is a terrorist state..., you say that Hezbollah does whatever they want and Lebanon don't care, i say israel does whatever they want and usa protect him...without usa support israel will fall...more one thing, ask me: why israel is in war with all their neighbors?
The genocide "whining" insults the memory of Jews? Actually, Israel's racist and genocidal policy towards the Palestinians. , and your disgusting attempts to seal off the Zionist state from any criticism of its regular and consistent brutality against the Palestinians does nothing less than desecrate the memory of those Jewish victims of the Holocaust, whose death is meaningful only in as much as it serves as an eternal warning to humankind against ALL kinds of discrimination, racism, and genocide.
I wish there were more comment spaces. My silly comments on how nice it was to lose the CNN crawl don't seem to fit with the whole arab/jew debate.
Well, just as soon as Jebus gets back here, things'll really shape up, I'm sure!
The incident you refer to is indeed a great tragedy. I have no problem admiting that, and I dont understand why you would try to imply that I 'dont care' about the deaths of innocent Palestinians. But now I propose a question to you.
Had Palestinian forces (Hamas) not taken that Israeli soldier hostage, would these bombings have taken place at all?
Garbage.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sgsm10539.doc.htm
Mr. Annan's statement speaks for itself.
Hamas and Hezbollah initiated this current situation by killing Israeli troops, and by taking others hostage. They say that the only way these people will be released is by Israel opening direct negotiations with these groups, and by agree to a prisoner exchanged.
Israel cannot except this proposal, nor should they in my opinion. Hamas and Hezbollah do not ask for the release of any one or two individuals, but rather for the release of thousands of people, of which many are known terrorists and are identified as such by multiple groups. These people are known killers, while many others are known to support these people. How could anyone ever expect Israel to accept such a deal?
Not only would it put these people back into a position where they could strike against Israel, but it would set a precident in the region that would encourage further kidnappings. If Israel would release X number of prisoners when only 3 people are taken hostage, how many would they release when 30 people are taken hostage. What about when it is 300 israelis being held hostage?
I feel that the Palestinians CAN defend themselves. They can defend themselves by disconnecting any support for the groups who are perpetrating terroist attacks against Israel. If there were no attacks, what justification would Israel have for attacking Gaza and Lebanon? If there were no hostage takings, no shootings, no suicide bombings, no rocket attacks, do you really think anyone would support Israel's "colonial" actions?
Like some of you have said, the reason so many people support Israel is becasue they see Israel as the victim. But if the Palestinians stopped commiting violent acts against Israel, the Israelis could no longer be seen as victims. If the attacks stopped, their would be no more victims, and there would be no more aggressors.
I'm curious about one other thing, and I'd like to direct this next question to TheTypist. When you speak of the occupation, are you referring to just Gaza and the West Bank, or do you refer to Israel as a whole?
I'm curious because I see that on one hand, we have a state of mind where peace could perhaps be achieved by Israel pulling out of both the West Bank and Gaza. While on the other hand we have a situation where peace would be impossible, because the world will never agree to dismantle the state of Israel.
I agree with your definition of terrorism. However, I would also like to point out that some hours ago, prior to the beginning of airstrikes in southern beirut, the Israeli Airforce dropped leaflets to ask that civilians stay in their homes, and to warn them about the airstrikes against Hezbollah facilities. Tell me, is this the action of a nation that is committing "indiscriminate" attacks against civilians?
The answer seems to be clearly, "No".
When Israel pulled out of southern Lebanon, under the condition that the Lebanese government would take a proactive role in cleaning up its southern border, was that the act of a colonial nation?
Again, the answer seems to be "No."
Lebanon is recognized across the world as a soverign nation. Part of being a soverign nation is that you accept responsibility for what goes on inside your territory. Southern Lebanon is being used by Hezbollah to attack Israelis. Period. Some of the attacks target the IDF, which some people argue is legitimate, while at the same time there are other attacks that are clearly aimed at the Israeli civilian population.
The Israelis cannot accept this situation. They cannot sit by and continue to do nothing while this violence continues.
These attacks have be going on for years. The hostage taking was simply the last straw for Israelis.
The violence will only end when one side decides that they really want it to end.
The incident you refer to is indeed a great tragedy. I have no problem admiting that, and I dont understand why you would try to imply that I 'dont care' about the deaths of innocent Palestinians. But now I propose a question to you.
Had Palestinian forces (Hamas) not taken that Israeli soldier hostage, would these bombings have taken place at all?
Garbage.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sgsm10539.doc.htm
Mr. Annan's statement speaks for itself.
Hamas and Hezbollah initiated this current situation by killing Israeli troops, and by taking others hostage. They say that the only way these people will be released is by Israel opening direct negotiations with these groups, and by agree to a prisoner exchanged.
Israel cannot except this proposal, nor should they in my opinion. Hamas and Hezbollah do not ask for the release of any one or two individuals, but rather for the release of thousands of people, of which many are known terrorists and are identified as such by multiple groups. These people are known killers, while many others are known to support these people. How could anyone ever expect Israel to accept such a deal?
Not only would it put these people back into a position where they could strike against Israel, but it would set a precident in the region that would encourage further kidnappings. If Israel would release X number of prisoners when only 3 people are taken hostage, how many would they release when 30 people are taken hostage. What about when it is 300 israelis being held hostage?
I feel that the Palestinians CAN defend themselves. They can defend themselves by disconnecting any support for the groups who are perpetrating terroist attacks against Israel. If there were no attacks, what justification would Israel have for attacking Gaza and Lebanon? If there were no hostage takings, no shootings, no suicide bombings, no rocket attacks, do you really think anyone would support Israel's "colonial" actions?
Like some of you have said, the reason so many people support Israel is becasue they see Israel as the victim. But if the Palestinians stopped commiting violent acts against Israel, the Israelis could no longer be seen as victims. If the attacks stopped, their would be no more victims, and there would be no more aggressors.
I'm curious about one other thing, and I'd like to direct this next question to TheTypist. When you speak of the occupation, are you referring to just Gaza and the West Bank, or do you refer to Israel as a whole?
I'm curious because I see that on one hand, we have a state of mind where peace could perhaps be achieved by Israel pulling out of both the West Bank and Gaza. While on the other hand we have a situation where peace would be impossible, because the world will never agree to dismantle the state of Israel.
I agree with your definition of terrorism. However, I would also like to point out that some hours ago, prior to the beginning of airstrikes in southern beirut, the Israeli Airforce dropped leaflets to ask that civilians stay in their homes, and to warn them about the airstrikes against Hezbollah facilities. Tell me, is this the action of a nation that is committing "indiscriminate" attacks against civilians?
The answer seems to be clearly, "No".
When Israel pulled out of southern Lebanon, under the condition that the Lebanese government would take a proactive role in cleaning up its southern border, was that the act of a colonial nation?
Again, the answer seems to be "No."
Lebanon is recognized across the world as a soverign nation. Part of being a soverign nation is that you accept responsibility for what goes on inside your territory. Southern Lebanon is being used by Hezbollah to attack Israelis. Period. Some of the attacks target the IDF, which some people argue is legitimate, while at the same time there are other attacks that are clearly aimed at the Israeli civilian population.
The Israelis cannot accept this situation. They cannot sit by and continue to do nothing while this violence continues.
These attacks have be going on for years. The hostage taking was simply the last straw for Israelis.
The violence will only end when one side decides that they really want it to end.
So zak says, "And really the 'genocide' whining is tired."
Imagine how tiring the genocide must be for the Palestinians. They're actually being killed outright or sufferring a slow death through malnutrition and Israel's control of water sources. I'm sure the victims of the Zionistic genocide called Israel were much more tired of it way in advance of your being tired of hearing about it.
valkesh, you are right israel deserves some credit for not firebombing gaza until it was uninhabitable. however, i agree with norm's characterization of israel's actions as "collective punishment", for example attacking the power station, and i believe this qualifies for the definition of terrorism i used.
a couple other points: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060627/tsafp/mideastpalestinianpolitics060627123347;ylt=Aho2OW5iyfpjRBSSqTx6Zous0NUE;ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY- "Tue Jun 27, 8:38 AM ET
GAZA CITY (AFP) - All Palestinian factions except Islamic Jihad have reached an agreement on a statehood initiative that implicitly recognises Israel's right to exist, sources in Fatah and Hamas said."
israel still refuses to negotiate with hamas.
valkesh, i think you overestimate the power of the palestinian government (and probably also that of the lebanese, i dunno). they dont have the ability to completely end terrorism anymore than they have the ability to completely end crime. however, hamas has shown they are eager to do what they can, and their successful truce with israel lasted something like a year.
'truth'seeker, again, you keep using the word 'genocide' but you are unable to defend that word.
please explain to the class how what Israel has done to the Palestinians that even remotedly approaches the definition of 'genocide.'
Yes, unfortunately attrocities have been committed. If you're going to throw Sabra and Shatilla at us, don't go there. I could just as well throw the murder of Israel's Olympic team in 1972. Those are not instances of genocide. They're murder for sure, even war crimes. But genocide suggests a concerted and systematic attempt to wipe a race or people off the map. While Arabs have endlessly talked about driving the Jews into the sea (attempted genocide), Israel has never remotely attempted such a thing.
Except for a fringe element in Israel (the long dead Rabbi Kahane) the only people that froth at the mouth about genocide in the middle east are the Arabs and Muslims in their dreams about Jews, Kurds and Armenians.
zak wants someone to defend what is plainly in front of him.
Zionists are great -- they distort and lie and deny the obvious -- and long after you've refuted them, like conservatives they continue to repeat the distortions and lies long after.
Thanks for the Lewis Black video.
I actually met him last night at a book signing and he's a genuinely nice guy.
I'm definitely a bigger fan now.
Post a comment