Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

For those who believe that Israel are not the good guys

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
SensibleAmerican Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:25 PM
Original message
For those who believe that Israel are not the good guys
I meant to post this as a reply in a GD thread but the thread was locked before I could reply. I don't mean this as flamebait, but this is my take:

Let's flash back into history. Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, to the chagrin of the Likud party, said Israel will pull out of areas where there are Arab majorities. The Israeli citizens that lived in the affected settlements were extremely displeased. However, with the election of President Abbas, peace between Palestine and Israel seemed within reach.

Then came the Palestinian parliament election. Hamas won overwhemingly against the Fatah party. The main reason for this was because the Fatah had a poor track record in taking care of the well-being of the Palestinian people, and Hamas would build houses and roads for the poor. At ay rate, Hamas controlled the Parliament whilst Abbas was still President.

It was only a matter of time before Hamas resumed their attacks against Israel. Abbas tried to rein in Hamas, but was unsuccessful. Since Hamas now controlled the Palestinian government, their attacks were now considered an act of war.

Whilst Israel and Palestine resumed fighting, Hizbollah used this as an opportunity to resume terroristic attacks in northern Israel. And though Hizbollah does not control Lebanon de jure, like Hamas controls Palestine, the Lebanese government is powerless to control Hizbollah. So Israel decided to fight Hizbollah on their own.

Now, it's not Israel's fault if Hizbollah or Hamas uses human shields. It adds a complicated query in what the Israelis should do, but Israel's only goal is to root out the terrorists. Hizbollah is the side that is putting civillians in danger, not Israel.

Just like Janet Reno was not responsible for David Koresh using human shields in Waco, Israel is not responsible here. Israel cannot be kicked into the Mediterranean as Hizbollah, Hamas, and Iran want to have happen just so there will be a guarantee against any civillian casualties. Thus, I pray that Israel can beat Hizbollah into submission and do it quickly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tin Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. Let's flash forward - what will have changed after the shooting is over?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SensibleAmerican Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I see what you're saying
Israel will maintain its territory as well as it may maintain the safety for the Israeli citizens temporarily.

But the point I think you're trying to make is that the terrorist attacks won't ever stop in the long run ... And I believe that's true unless the nature of the Middle East changes (i.e poverty, religion).

But on the flip side, is it fair for Israel to be wiped out of existence in the Middle East if they won't defend itself? Because this is what will happen if Israel does not continue to defend itself like it has in the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. There will be greater anti-Israel sentiment.
As the families of the innocent are converted to the anti-Israel cause due to their outrage. You will now have siblings, cousins, mothers, fathers, aunts, and uncles join in extreme hatred.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tuvor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:33 PM
Original message
Why must one side be "the good guys"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Like my mother used to tell me
You can't control what the other kids do but you certainly CAN control how you choose to react to what the other kids do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SensibleAmerican Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. The Jews were non-violent in Nazi Germany
Look how that turned out.

I don't believe non-violence works unless the other side values non-violence. Would Hamas and Hizbollah value non-violence?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
5. Sharon/Olmert plan was to annex much of the West Bank to Israel
That was a peace plan? That still is the "convergence" plan.

It takes large chunks of the West Bank and divides it up. There will continue to be Jewish-only settlements. There will be Jewish-only roads. The Annexation Wall will seperate Palestinian farmers from their crops.

The answer for peace is for Israel to withdraw completely from land it took during the '67 war, as per UN resolutions and international law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. There are two sides to most stories. You've given an Israeli
perspective. Here is a different one:

As FAIR noted in a recent Action Alert (7/19/06), the portrayal of Israel as the innocent victim in the Gaza conflict is hard to square with the death toll in the months leading up to the current crisis; between September 2005 and June 2006, 144 Palestinians in Gaza were killed by Israeli forces, according to a list compiled by the Israeli human rights group B'tselem; 29 of those killed were children. During the same period, no Israelis were killed as a result of violence from Gaza.

In a July 21 CounterPunch column, Alexander Cockburn highlighted some of the violent incidents that have dropped out of the media’s collective memory:


Let's go on a brief excursion into pre-history. I’m talking about June 20, 2006, when Israeli aircraft fired at least one missile at a car in an attempted extrajudicial assassination attempt on a road between Jabalya and Gaza City. The missile missed the car. Instead it killed three Palestinian children and wounded 15.

Back we go again to June 13, 2006. Israeli aircraft fired missiles at a van in another attempted extrajudicial assassination. The successive barrages killed nine innocent Palestinians.

Now we're really in the dark ages, reaching far, far back to June 9, 2006, when Israel shelled a beach in Beit Lahiya killing eight civilians and injuring 32.

That's just a brief trip down Memory Lane, and we trip over the bodies of twenty dead and forty-seven wounded, all of them Palestinians, most of them women and children.

On June 24, the day before Hamas' cross-border raid, Israel made an incursion of its own, capturing two Palestinians that it said were members of Hamas (something Hamas denied—L.A. Times, 6/25/06). This incident received far less coverage in U.S. media than the subsequent seizure of the Israeli soldier; the few papers that covered it mostly dismissed it in a one-paragraph brief (e.g., Chicago Tribune, 6/25/06), while the Israeli taken prisoner got front-page headlines all over the world. It's likely that most Gazans don’t share U.S. news outlets' apparent sense that captured Israelis are far more interesting or important than captured Palestinians.

The situation in Lebanon is also more complicated than its portrayal in U.S. media, with the roots of the current crisis extending well before the July 12 capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah. A major incident fueling the latest cycle of violence was a May 26, 2006 car bombing in Sidon, Lebanon, that killed a senior official of Islamic Jihad, a Palestinian group allied with Hezbollah. Lebanon later arrested a suspect, Mahmoud Rafeh, whom Lebanese authorities claimed had confessed to carrying out the assassination on behalf of Mossad (London Times, 6/17/06).

Israel denied involvement with the bombing, but even some Israelis are skeptical. "If it turns out this operation was effectively carried out by Mossad or another Israeli secret service," wrote Yediot Aharonot, Israel’s top-selling daily (6/16/06; cited in AFP, 6/16/06), "an outsider from the intelligence world should be appointed to know whether it was worth it and whether it lays groups open to risk."

In Lebanon, Israel's culpability was taken as a given. "The Israelis, in hitting Islamic Jihad, knew they would get Hezbollah involved too," Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a professor at Beirut’s Lebanese American University, told the New York Times (5/29/06). "The Israelis had to be aware that if they assassinated this guy they would get a response."

And, indeed, on May 28, Lebanese militants in Hezbollah-controlled territory fired Katyusha rockets at a military vehicle and a military base inside Israel. Israel responded with airstrikes against Palestinian camps deep inside Lebanon, which in turn were met by Hezbollah rocket and mortar attacks on more Israeli military bases, which prompted further Israeli airstrikes and "a steady artillery barrage at suspected Hezbollah positions" (New York Times, 5/29/06). Gen. Udi Adam, the commander of Israel’s northern forces, boasted that "our response was the harshest and most severe since the withdrawal" of Israeli troops from Lebanon in 2000 (Chicago Tribune, 5/29/06).

This intense fighting was the prelude to the all-out warfare that began on July 12, portrayed in U.S. media as beginning with an attack out of the blue by Hezbollah. While Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers may have reignited the smoldering conflict, the Israeli air campaign that followed was not a spontaneous reaction to aggression but a well-planned operation that was years in the making.

"Of all of Israel’s wars since 1948, this was the one for which Israel was most prepared," Gerald Steinberg, a political science professor at Israel's Bar-Ilan University, told the San Francisco Chronicle (7/21/05). "By 2004, the military campaign scheduled to last about three weeks that we’re seeing now had already been blocked out and, in the last year or two, it’s been simulated and rehearsed across the board." The Chronicle reported that a "senior Israeli army officer" has been giving PowerPoint presentations for more than a year to "U.S. and other diplomats, journalists and think tanks" outlining the coming war with Lebanon, explaining that a combination of air and ground forces would target Hezbollah and "transportation and communication arteries."

Which raises a question: If journalists have been told by Israel for more than a year that a war was coming, why are they pretending that it all started on July 12? By truncating the cause-and-effect timelines of both the Gaza and Lebanon conflicts, editorial boards at major U.S. dailies gravely oversimplify the decidedly more complex nature of the facts on the ground.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrPrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
8. Drivel n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
9. Why is it you Israeli apologists NEVER mention that 'fence' that
surrounded all the arable land and the water supplies? Or the settlers that wouldn't leave 'Palestinian' territory. Or the continued incursions of the IDF into so-called Palestinian territories. Or the truth that there never was an honest plan to leave the occupied territories because the Israelis only intended to give the Palestinians the land that they didn't want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
10. no matter what -- now and in the future
arab countries are gaining militarily on israel.

hizbullah is the proof of that pudding.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undergroundrailroad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-06-06 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
11. Locking per I/P Guidelines
Not based on a recent article or op-ed.

For future reference, please review the posting guidelines when starting a new thread in the Israeli/Palestinian Forum.

If you have any further questions, please contact myself or Lithos.

Thank you.

Undergroundrailroad
DU Moderator
Israeli/Palestinian Forum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC