pageok
pageok
pageok
Hamas Attack on Gaza Crossing:

"The crossing is used for agricultural produce and to send humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip." There have been several attacks recently by "militants" on the crossing used to send fuel and food into Gaza. They are playing a "heads we win, tails you lose game." Keep the crossings open, and we'll kill Israelis. Close them, and the wrath of the "international community" will come down on Israel for a "humanitarian disaster" in Gaza. Whether or not the people of Gaza suffer and starve appears to be of much greater concern to the Israeli government than to Hamas.

Fub:
Whether or not the people of Gaza suffer and starve appears to be is of much greater no concern to the Israeli government than to Hamas.
Fixed that for you.
4.19.2008 3:45pm
EH (mail):
Just a reminder: the exception doesn't prove the rule. I only ever see cherry picking with I/P issues and each side highlights only those stories that support their interpretation of the conflict. The entire debate is disingenuous.
4.19.2008 4:12pm
elim:
what exactly would one expect from the Palestinians? would it be news if a cobra bit someone or a crocodile ate a zebra? these are folks so pickled on jew hatred that they would rather kill them than live like decent human beings.
4.19.2008 4:26pm
elim:
what exactly would one expect from the Palestinians? would it be news if a cobra bit someone or a crocodile ate a zebra? these are folks so pickled on jew hatred that they would rather kill them than live like decent human beings.
4.19.2008 4:26pm
PC:
Our reign of terror, by the Israeli army

The birds are singing as he describes in detail some of what he did and saw others do as an enlisted soldier in Hebron. And they are certainly criminal: the incidents in which Palestinian vehicles are stopped for no good reason, the windows smashed and the occupants beaten up for talking back -- for saying, for example, they are on the way to hospital; the theft of tobacco from a Palestinian shopkeeper who is then beaten "to a pulp" when he complains; the throwing of stun grenades through the windows of mosques as people prayed. And worse.
...
Or using a 10-year-old child to locate and punish a 15-year-old stone-thrower: "So we got hold of just some Palestinian kid nearby, we knew that he knew who it had been. Let's say we beat him a little, to put it mildly, until he told us. You know, the way it goes when your mind's already screwed up, and you have no more patience for Hebron and Arabs and Jews there.

"The kid was really scared, realising we were on to him. We had a commander with us who was a bit of a fanatic. We gave the boy over to this commander, and he really beat the shit out of him ... He showed him all kinds of holes in the ground along the way, asking him: 'Is it here you want to die? Or here?' The kid goes, 'No, no!'

"Anyway, the kid was stood up, and couldn't stay standing on his own two feet. He was already crying ... And the commander continues, 'Don't pretend' and kicks him some more. And then [name withheld], who always had a hard time with such things, went in, caught the squad commander and said, 'Don't touch him any more, that's it.' The commander goes, 'You've become a leftie, what?' And he answers, 'No, I just don't want to see such things.'
4.19.2008 4:38pm
ithaqua (mail):
"Whether or not the people of Gaza suffer and starve appears to be of much greater concern to the Israeli government than to Hamas."

It's of greater concern to the Israelis than to the "international community" as well. You have to feel a little sorry for the few decent Palestinians that must statistically exist; both their own leaders and the world in general are happy to sacrifice them as pawns for the sake of Israel's annihilation (statistically, people "pickled by Jew hatred" are in the majority. I can't think of a single country, besides the United States, that has an actual pro-Israel foreign policy, and the vast majority actively work to undermine its very existence), and the only governmental organization that shows any concern for them whatsoever - the Israeli government - is, eventually, going to be forced into the Roman solution ("where they make a desert, they call it peace") by the constant Palestinian provocation.
4.19.2008 4:42pm
neurodoc:
EH: Just a reminder: the exception doesn't prove the rule. I only ever see cherry picking with I/P issues and each side highlights only those stories that support their interpretation of the conflict. The entire debate is disingenuous.
Thanks for the reminder. Now, so we may see its application here, would you tell us what you see as "the exception" and what "rule" it doesn't prove. You can do that, can't you?

And so we may skip past disingenuity, would you give us your ingenuous perspective on "I/P issues."
4.19.2008 4:44pm
ithaqua (mail):
PC:

If you turn your children into terrorists, you can expect them to be treated like terrorists. The commander in your story had the moral courage to protect Israeli lives. I consider him a hero.
4.19.2008 4:44pm
EIDE_Interface (mail):
neurodoc:

I'm sure his ingenuous perspective is that the Pals are good and Israelis are evil.
4.19.2008 4:52pm
EIDE_Interface (mail):
Waiting for the avalanche of trolls accusing DB of "obsessing about Israel" too much. Well, when will the MSM stop obsessing, then?
4.19.2008 4:53pm
elim:
rock throwing-try this experiment. take a large stone and chuck it out of, let's say, a second or third floor window onto someone. when you are done serving your murder sentence, explain to me again how harmless this quaint palestinian practice is again. given what the response could be by israelis, the amount of actual restraint exercised is puzzling.
4.19.2008 4:54pm
PC:
The commander in your story had the moral courage to protect Israeli lives. I consider him a hero.


It does take a "unique" moral compass to consider threatening to kill a 10 year old heroic. Or tossing grenades into houses of worship heroic. Perhaps you think the guy in Florida that was planning to blow up mosques is a hero too?

By the way, it's not my story. It's the story of ex-IDF members.
4.19.2008 4:55pm
neurodoc:
PC, your man Donald MacIntyre and his newspaper The Independent are among the most reliably anti-Israel English language media sources. But I expect you already knew that, unless you are entirely credulous with respect to all reporting that portrays Israelis as evil and Palestinians as innocent victims.
4.19.2008 4:56pm
JB:
Blah blah blah, Israel's occupation is brutal, Hamas is holding the Palestinians hostage, the international debate is driven by financial interest rather than morality, there are some decent people on both sides, but not enough...

This is exactly how things were 20 years ago, and the only thing that will stop them from being that way in 20 more years is that the region will run out of water.
4.19.2008 4:59pm
PC:
neurodoc, are you calling Yehuda Shaul a liar?
4.19.2008 5:01pm
Zacharias (mail):
The State of Israel is one of the worst ideas ever to befall mankind. I have had to hear of the misery inflicted by Israel on its neighbors for my entire life, and I still have no hope of outliving the that misery.

I so wish that Amerikans had given Europe's Jews the chance to immigrate to a place like Arizona or Nevada, where they and their descendants and other persecuted Jews could grow their oranges without fostering an eternal state of warfare.

Of course, if they were in Arizona or Nevada, they might have to hew to Amerikan ideas of human rights, like granting their women and religious minorities equal rights, terminating the Orthodox monopoly on marriage and refraining from putting babies' peckers in their mouths.
4.19.2008 5:01pm
elim:
it takes a troll or a psychopath to put Israel on a lower moral plane than its neighbors, who put the 10 year old on the firing line. what misery, other than self inflicted (also by losing wars) are you talking about other than having the poor grace to not bare their throats? fostering an eternal state of warfare/human rights-I guess I lean toward psychopath.
4.19.2008 5:12pm
neurodoc:
PC:By the way, it's not my story. It's the story of ex-IDF members.
Yes, it purports to be "the story of ex-IDF members" as told to Donald MacIntyre. Can you share with us any of Mr. MacIntyre's stories told him by Palestinian "militants" with the blood of Israeli children on their hands? Hard for me to believe that he couldn't find any to chat with if he cared to, since they are so numerous and boastful of what they have done with the encouragement of so many other Palestinians.

But tell us why you think the Palestinians in Gaza are not blameworthy for these murderous efforts to prevent the delivery of supplies to them? Or do you think "Palestinians in Gaza" is over-inclusive, the fault being only that of the "bad" Hamas ("militants"), none of the "good" Hamas (schools, hospitals, social work, relief efforts, anti-corruption, etc.) and rest of the populace?
4.19.2008 5:12pm
ithaqua (mail):
Zacharias:

I'm sorry. I think you're confusing Jews with your BFFs the Islamofascists.

PC:

'Enhanced' interrogation techniques like the ones in your story - excuse me, in the story you posted - are both effective (as the story shows) and moral; in fact, as they are effective, it would be morally wrong not to use them where they are useful, ie, against terrorists. The rock-throwing 15-year-old is (hopefully was, heh heh) a terrorist and an attempted murderer; the 10-year-old who picked up a few bruises was concealing him from the authorities, and so was a terrorist himself and an accessory to attempted murderer; he deserved what he got. If you want to blame someone for this 'inhumanity', blame the Palestinians who train their children to murder Israelis, hide bombs and rocket launchers in their places of 'worship', and so on.
4.19.2008 5:13pm
Nessuno:
Zacharias, thank you for reminding me of the type of people who support Hamas.

You are a disgusting human being.
4.19.2008 5:13pm
neurodoc:
Zacharias: ...refraining from putting babies' peckers in their mouths.
Spoken like a true and proud antisemite.
4.19.2008 5:15pm
ithaqua (mail):
"Or do you think "Palestinians in Gaza" is over-inclusive, the fault being only that of the "bad" Hamas ("militants"), none of the "good" Hamas (schools, hospitals, social work, relief efforts, anti-corruption, etc.) and rest of the populace?"

And if you think that, tell me; how much charity work would the Manson Family have to do before you started defending their human rights record?
4.19.2008 5:15pm
PC:
neurodoc: I'm not claiming that Hamas is a good organization. As a general rule I think Hamas is a corrupt organization that is incredibly damaging to the Palestinians. I would call it a terrorist organization, but as someone pointed out yesterday, governments can't be considered terrorists (according to the American Heritage Dictionary).

ithaqua: Your stance is morally corrupt. I would not live in a country where kicking 10-year-olds is an acceptable form of questioning. But maybe that's just me and my crazy "no beating children" way of thinking.
4.19.2008 5:22pm
elim:
if the Manson's killed jews while engaging in the charity work, we can be certain that he would be in the forefront of defending that poor misunderstood and downtrodden group.
4.19.2008 5:22pm
neurodoc:
PC: neurodoc, are you calling Yehuda Shaul a liar?
What you quoted were not the words of anyone with a name, but rather Donald MacIntyre's account of what he says he was told by an unidentified former IDF soldier.

Now, so we might judge MacIntyre's reliability as a reporter, assuring ourselves that he does not willfully misrepresent or otherwise distort his reports to conform to his own biases and the those of The Independent's readers, can you share with us any of Mr. MacIntyre's stories told him by Palestinian "militants" with the blood of Israeli children on their hands?
4.19.2008 5:25pm
PC:
And if you think that, tell me; how much charity work would the Manson Family have to do before you started defending their human rights record?


Straw men are fun, AMIRITE?
4.19.2008 5:26pm
elim:
if the alternative to kicking a 10 year old is to simply call in the airstrikes and flatten the area, I would say the moral choice is to kick away. further, if your opponent places the 10 year old on the front line, what rule of morality do you follow which gives them the upper hand and urges surrender?
4.19.2008 5:26pm
PC:
if the alternative to kicking a 10 year old is to simply call in the airstrikes and flatten the area, I would say the moral choice is to kick away.


If you think air strikes are a proportional response to a kid throwing rocks, then I guess kicking a 10 year old is no big deal. Again, I'll stay on the no-beating-children side of the equation.
4.19.2008 5:28pm
neurodoc:
PC: I would call it a terrorist organization, but as someone pointed out yesterday, governments can't be considered terrorists...
Wow, that is among the worst sophistry I have ever come across. But then maybe it isn't really "sophistry," but rather sheer stupidity.
4.19.2008 5:30pm
Zacharias (mail):
Yes, I am a proud and intact male who has convinced Jewish mothers that bris is a form of child abuse. Furthermore, being able to speak, read and write Hebrew gives me an understanding of the superstition and stupidity that has led to past and present Jewish and Israeli practices.

Sorry, but I can't countenance the idea of Rabbi's passing on herpes or aids justified by "metzizah b'peh." Indeed, if the resettled Jews in Arizona or Nevada kept doing that, I have to fake being an 8-day-old boy and call the Texas Rangers to come and take away 400 of their kids.
4.19.2008 5:34pm
PC:
Wow, that is among the worst sophistry I have ever come across. But then maybe it isn't really "sophistry," but rather sheer stupidity.


That was my initial reaction too, but who am I to argue with the brilliant Volokh commenters?
4.19.2008 5:37pm
neurodoc:
Zacharias: Yes, I am a proud and intact male who has convinced Jewish mothers that bris is a form of child abuse. Furthermore...
Thanks. The more you say, the clearer a picture we get.
4.19.2008 5:40pm
Zacharias (mail):
Neurodoc:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah

I rest my case. Those who have eyes to see, let them see.
4.19.2008 5:43pm
neurodoc:
PC, why make people click on that link in order to learn that you count the US government a "terrorist" organization? But like Zacharias, you have managed in relatively few words to give us a good idea of who you are.
4.19.2008 5:47pm
PC:
neurodoc: I'm the type of person that thinks governments engage in horrific practices to further their agendas. "Their" meaning the government's, not the peoples' interests. That includes at times the US government, the Palestinian "government" and the Israeli government.

If you want to argue otherwise, feel free.
4.19.2008 5:51pm
neurodoc:
Zacharias, for nosologic purposes, would you just tell us whether you are a commonplace antisemite or the more singular Jewish antisemite?

Anyway, I have other things to do now, so must go. I trust you, PC, and the others of your ilk who are sure to show up here will enjoy chatting.
4.19.2008 5:51pm
Zacharias (mail):
Sorry Nero Doc:

I was just paraphrasing what the world's most famous Jew said (cf Matt 11:15).
4.19.2008 5:53pm
PC:
I trust you, PC, and the others of your ilk who are sure to show up here will enjoy chatting.


Off to kick some 10 year olds? Or do broad brushes only apply when you do it?
4.19.2008 5:56pm
TerrencePhilip:
I can't think of a single country, besides the United States, that has an actual pro-Israel foreign policy, and the vast majority actively work to undermine its very existence), and the only governmental organization that shows any concern for them whatsoever - the Israeli government - is, eventually, going to be forced into the Roman solution ("where they make a desert, they call it peace") by the constant Palestinian provocation.

ithaqua, what exactly would this "Roman solution" consist of?
4.19.2008 6:58pm
e:
Yes, war is ugly. Especially so when the side which blocks any resolution trains children to use force. The parents and leaders of those children are the ones to blame when an opposing army has to face their dear little soldiers. Please stop the moral equivalency games.

If Palestinians and Israel's neighbors let Israel be, the cycle of violence would stop. If Israel disarmed, it would not be left alone. It would not continue to exist (yes I realize that many think that is the best prospect). My question: What percentage of Jews from Israel's neighbors have been allowed to immigrate into Israel? What percentage of displaced Palestinians have been allowed refuge by Israel's neighbors?

As an aside on houses of worship losing some protected status, did anyone catch the article this week on a munitions accident in an Iranian mosque? It made me wonder if armories are an essential design element of some mosques.
4.19.2008 7:00pm
neurodoc:
So Zacharias, you are a Christian antisemite. Arab or of Arab descent, perhaps Lebanese?

OK PC, you have convinced me, I accept that it wasn't sophistry but rather the other.
4.19.2008 7:03pm
neurodoc:
e, I too was going to note that suicide bombing which turned out not to be a suicide bombing but rather the accidental explosion of munitions being stored in that mosque. Mosques in those parts as armories or military staging areas is nothing very exceptional, though. Does anyone recall any reports of curches or synagogues put to that use?
4.19.2008 7:11pm
MyGod...:
Maybe I'm just reading the wrong blog, even though I find this one amusing from time to time, and interesting from time to time. But I can't believe some of the things I've read on this thread...

I don't really have an opinion about the I/P conflict. I state that up front. I think both sides should be free of violence and hatred towards the other.

But the way people talk about Palestinians... it's shocking. They're human beings, people. Just like you. Yes, antisemites say horrible things about Israelis/Jews. I would address this same horror at them.

I guess it's easy to trade sharp barbs by keyboard. It's easy to erect that ideological edifice any time this conflict is mentioned, to fire all your intellectual and rhetorical weapons at anyone not agreeing with you b/c if you're not with us you're against us.

Yes, this probably will be the state of things in 20 years. Only all of you, so full of vitriol, will be 20 years older, if not dead, still full of vitriol. Yes, yes, I know, it's an intractable problem b/c the other side keeps provoking us. Whoever the other side is. Both sides will make the same point, point their fingers in the same way. "Not me! Not us! You're the problem!"

Ladies and gentlemen, you are the problem. I'm sure there will be snarky, clever, ever-witty responses at the ready. You are the problem.

These are all human beings, people. Human beings.

You are the problem.
4.19.2008 8:11pm
Al Goreski:
My solution? Park Jimmy Carter at the crossing. Heads we win, tails we win...
4.19.2008 8:18pm
BGates:
Yes, yes, I know, it's an intractable problem b/c the other side keeps provoking us. Whoever the other side is. Both sides will make the same point, point their fingers in the same way. "Not me! Not us! You're the problem!"

Ladies and gentlemen, you are the problem.

There will also always be the erudite condescending few to explain that both sides are the same. The German invasion of France? Both sides had legitimate arguments. Pol Pot's extermination of the eyeglass-wearing-intellectuals? Both sides say they were provoked. There will always be people who tut tut, argue all sides are beneath them, and repeat calls for dialog until the killers have either been stopped or have run out of victims.

And yet some are worse:
As a general rule I think Hamas is a corrupt organization that is incredibly damaging to the Palestinians.

PC, care to make a stand on whether Hamas is also damaging to Jews? -and if so, if that bothers you at all?
4.19.2008 8:32pm
EH (mail):
And so we may skip past disingenuity, would you give us your ingenuous perspective on "I/P issues."

How about that the P's are not as bad as all that and the Israelis are not as good as all that, and vice versa? I find it curious that this is a major issue in which people feel no compunction about being kneejerk. Not only is the debate disingenuous by oversimplification, but also fairly predictable. When was the last time there was anything new brought to the table by those who deem themselves so educated on the issues?

Apologies to Matt Groening, but from where I sit the debate invariably devolves into "There go those clowns in Palestine/Israel again. What a bunch of clowns."
4.19.2008 8:53pm
Rock On (www):
Ugh.
4.19.2008 9:32pm
PC:
PC, care to make a stand on whether Hamas is also damaging to Jews? -and if so, if that bothers you at all?


Yes and yes.
4.19.2008 9:35pm
Redlands (mail):
Damn you Goreski, beat me to it!
4.19.2008 9:56pm
ithaqua (mail):
"ithaqua: Your stance is morally corrupt."

A truly morally courageous person is one who is willing to sacrifice his private morality for the public good.

"ithaqua, what exactly would this "Roman solution" consist of?"

If the Palestinians refuse to make peace with Israel - and, remember, Israel has been holding out the olive branch for literally decades - and continue to shelter and support terrorists and child murderers within their civilian population, eventually it will be necessary to take steps to dispose of that civilian population, one way or the other. Think Native Americans versus American settlers. If the Muslims insist that the only acceptable peace is one where the Jews are driven into the sea, then somebody's getting driven into the sea - and I'd bet on one of the most advanced militaries in the world against a hate-crazed rabble of medieval barbarians. No offense meant to any Muhammedans who might be reading this :)

"If Palestinians and Israel's neighbors let Israel be, the cycle of violence would stop."

Exactly so. The fact is, though, that the Palestinians won't let Israel be, and the cycle will spiral on to its obvious conclusion.

"You are the problem."

I shouted out, "Who killed the Kennedys?" when after all, it was you and me Muslim fanatics.
4.19.2008 10:37pm
Matt_T:
Zachariass Amerikans

You lost any point you may have had right there. Please return to the cocoon of your critical theory class and resume complaining about "the man".
4.20.2008 1:23am
Jimmy Carter (mail):
This one was really a new low, top to bottom. All of you should be ashamed.
4.20.2008 7:17am
A. Zarkov (mail):
Israel has not closed the Gaza-Egypt border. Why don't the Egyptians take care of their Arab brothers in Gaza?

BTW what would the US do if Mexico lobbed missiles into San Diego on a regular basis?
4.20.2008 8:12am
Elliot Reed (mail):
"ithaqua: Your stance is morally corrupt."

A truly morally courageous person is one who is willing to sacrifice his private morality for the public good.
This is not moral courage, but moral depravity. It is taking good and evil and inverting them.
4.20.2008 12:10pm
Zombie Richard Feynman (mail) (www):
ithaqua

A truly morally courageous person is one who is willing to sacrifice his private morality for the public good.


wow. That's the philosophy of the suicide bomber, you know. Once someone ignores his moral compass, everything becomes allowed.
4.20.2008 12:26pm
Thoughtful (mail):
I read a post by David Bernstein that stated it was wrong for an agent of Israel, a member of the Israeli army, to torture and threaten death to a 15 year old Palestinian boy, himself not found guilty of any crime or violent action. That no matter what provocations might be imagined, or what wrongs other Palestinians were guilty of, nothing could justify this. That it was a moral crime. That it was a smear on Judaism.

The next post was by Neurodoc, who agreed.

Then I woke up.
4.20.2008 12:53pm
Elliot Reed (mail):
Zombie Richard Feynman—it also reminds me of the way the Communist hardliners in the West would tell people who supported Communism but opposed Stalin's atrocities that the problem was their bourgeois morality, which had to be sacrificed for the common good. You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs, you know. . .
4.20.2008 12:58pm
Gaius Marius:
BTW what would the US do if Mexico lobbed missiles into San Diego on a regular basis?

Well, if Barack Hussein Obama is President, he will consult with his spiritual Sith Lord, Jeremiah Wright, who will advise President Obama that those redneck crackers clinging to their guns and bibles in San Diego deserve to have more missles fired at them from Mexico.
4.20.2008 1:34pm
EIDE_Interface (mail):
The burden of "behaving nicely" is on the Pals after so many decades of atrocious behavior. Stuff like sending kids to the front lines to throw rocks and Molotov cocktails. Apparently the Pal-apologists think that's perfectly ok, and the IDF should just take the rocks and bombs with a smile.
4.20.2008 2:03pm
EIDE_Interface (mail):
Gauis Marius:

If that happens, it's Civil War II on baby!
4.20.2008 2:07pm
Elliot Reed (mail):
The burden of "behaving nicely" is on the Pals after so many decades of atrocious behavior. Stuff like sending kids to the front lines to throw rocks and Molotov cocktails. Apparently the Pal-apologists think that's perfectly ok, and the IDF should just take the rocks and bombs with a smile.
Absolutely. After all, it's not like there are any options between taking it with a smile and a brutal occupation, closing the borders, torturing ten-year-olds (which I doubt actually happened given the dubious nature of the source but you seem to be arguing that it would have been OK if it did), killing large numbers of innocent civilians as "collateral damage", etc.

The conduct of the Palestinian terrorists (including their "government") is much, much worse than the Israeli government's conduct. That, however, is not a justification for wrongful acts by the Israeli government. "What they did is worse!" is schoolyard reasoning. I'm particularly concerned because wrongful acts by Palestinian terrorists do not justify attacks against the vast majority of Palestinians who are not terrorists. (They do seem to be sympathetic to terrorism, and no doubt the vast majority are virulently anti-semitic, but those are thought crimes. The same goes for anti-Arab racists on the Israeli side, though there seem to be fewer of those.)

I would be much less concerned about both sides if they were making a serious effort to limit their attacks to military targets. The Israeli government frequently (but not always) makes a fair bit of effort (not nearly enough IMHO), while the Palestinian terrorists (including their "government") make none.
4.20.2008 2:42pm
A. Zarkov (mail):
"The Israeli government frequently (but not always) makes a fair bit of effort (not nearly enough IMHO)..."

Not nearly enough! Come on. What other country in similar circumstances would go to the lengths Israel does to protect civilians? Let's remember that the Arabs use civilians as a political and military shield. Those launching rockets from Gaza will take their children with them to the launcher.

The world also seems to have a double standard. Russia has certainly not held back in its attacks against civilians in Chechnya. Yet we hear no (or very few) pious speeches in the UN against Russia. We see no demonstrations in Berkeley against Russia over the atrocities in Chechnya. Somehow everyone seems to get a pass but Israel. I suppose if Israel was a big oil exporter things would be different.

Finally the West as whole are a bunch of hypocrites when it comes to collective guilt. The Allies killed more German civilians after WWII then they did during WWII. All justified with notions of collective guilt.
4.20.2008 3:45pm
EIDE_Interface (mail):
Elliot Reed:

Your protestations about "schoolyard reasoning" are irrelevant. The Palis should thank their lucky stars the Israelis don't just genocide their asses.
4.20.2008 3:54pm
hattio1:
Ithaqua says;

and, remember, Israel has been holding out the olive branch for literally decades -


How many settlements ago was that? Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely NOT pro-Palestinian. I suppose I have close to Elliot Reed's view but a little more negative. A pox on both their houses...
Yes, the Palestinians are more brutal, more corrupt, less moral, more racist etc. But, unfortunately the Israeli government acts in unacceptably brutal, corrupt, immoral and racist ways.
The taking of land IS an issue...not one that folks should be blowing up citizens for, but, war is going to continue to happen as long as Israel sees no problem with continued expansion.
4.20.2008 4:41pm
Ryan Waxx (mail):

Again, I'll stay on the no-beating-children side of the equation.


Which puts you on the side of using children as soldiers, because no matter what acts they perform, you would grant them immunity, making them the perfect soldier... the one that cannot be touched.

There is a difference between righteousness and self-righteousness that you appear to have missed.
4.20.2008 5:46pm
Phaedrus (mail):
Heard an interesting point made by someone else when venturing into the P/I morass - if you can't name 3 atrocities on each side then you are probably an irrational ideologue.
The absolute blindness on this is always educational to me. It opens a window into how people rationalized horrid actions on the "other".
4.20.2008 6:07pm
neurodoc:
Phaedrus: Heard an interesting point made by someone else when venturing into the P/I morass - if you can't name 3 atrocities on each side then you are probably an irrational ideologue.
Can you name any war in which it would not be possible to identify a great many atrocities on each side, even in so morally asymmetric a war as WWII, with the Allies versus the Axis? The Korean war? Unless you can, I fail to see how this amounts to an insight.

Oh BTW, how is this bien apercu supposed to relate to the subject of this particular thread, "Hamas Attack on Gaza Crossing"?
4.20.2008 6:53pm
ALGORESKI:
Jimmy Carter, "This one was really a new low, top to bottom. All of you should be ashamed."

We are ashamed of you Jimmy for sucking up to terrorists. And your poetry sucks.
4.20.2008 8:06pm
TerrencePhilip:
I read a post by David Bernstein that stated it was wrong for an agent of Israel, a member of the Israeli army, to torture and threaten death to a 15 year old Palestinian boy, himself not found guilty of any crime or violent action. That no matter what provocations might be imagined, or what wrongs other Palestinians were guilty of, nothing could justify this. That it was a moral crime. That it was a smear on Judaism.

The next post was by Neurodoc, who agreed.

Then I woke up.


I think it only fair to point out that DB's post did not address this story, but rather a different subject entirely, and he shouldn't have to weigh in on anything someone chooses to put in a comment thread. It strikes me as unfair for you to then make the leap that he implicitly approves these actions.

Like almost everyone, I am disgusted at the thought of someone beating a 10-year-old and threatening his life to find someone who threw rocks, and have nothing but contempt for the notion that this would be a defensible act. IF something like this did happen, or if it ever does happen, a decent commitment to justice requires that it be punished. Fortunately the Israeli government agrees, for the Independent's story, while seeming to doubt the Israeli government, dutifully reports their response: The military said that Israeli Defence Forces soldiers operate according to "a strict set of moral guidelines" and that their expected adherence to them only "increases wherever and whenever IDF soldiers come in contact with civilians". It added that "if evidence supporting the allegations is uncovered, steps are taken to hold those involved to the level of highest judicial severity". It also said: "The Military Advocate General has issued a number of indictments against soldiers due to allegations of criminal behaviour ... Soldiers found guilty were punished severely by the Military Court, in proportion to the committed offence."

You may argue that allegations against Israeli soldiers are under-investigated and under-prosecuted by Israeli authorities. Yet you cannot deny that several Israeli soldiers have been prosecuted by their own government for criminal acts against Palestinians. How many Palestinians have been prosecuted by their own people for criminal acts against Jews?
4.20.2008 8:34pm
neurodoc:
Terrence Philip, do you have in mind something I actually posted, or are you just addressing yourself to your own dreams and what you imagined in them ("Then I woke up.")? If it is the former, kindly make clear exactly what I wrote that you disagree (or agree?) with and I might have something to say in response. As it is, I really don't know what views you are imputing to me.
4.20.2008 10:57pm
neurodoc:
Terrence Philip, sorry. Now I see those weren't your words in italics, they were those of the so unThoughtful radiologist, who greatly admires Ron Paul and echos much of his wackiness. Please forgive me for mistaking you as the speaker of that nonsense.

unThoughtful, if you are awake now, and no longer confused about what you have dreamed and what is in fact real, make clear your differences with what I have said in the course of this thread and I will respond to you. But I'm not a Freudian and I don't do dream analysis.
4.20.2008 11:11pm
Phaedrus (mail):
NDoc -
Of course there are atrocities in most every conflict - the question is, is the arguer aware of them. If not, that is usually a good indication of mindless support of an idealogical position - a bad thing, I hope you will agree.
Many of the comments above seemed to show an ignorance that neither side (P/I) can claim to be the "good guy". If a person is unable to identify the major issues on each side, how can their argument be considered credible or anything more than propoganda?
4.20.2008 11:45pm
TerrencePhilip:
It's all good, neurodoc. :> I am often wrong but rarely incomprehensible. I respect your intellect too much to ever communicate with you without precision, especially if I think we might disagree!
4.21.2008 12:58am
neurodoc:
Phaedrus, are you demanding that David Bernstein, or any other person posting to this thread, "name 3 atrocities on each side" or be dismissed by you as a "mindless support(er) of an idealogic [sic] position"? Why don't you engage with what individual poster's have to say here rather than demand they first prove themselves according to your criterion? Because you seem disinclined to engage with substance, you allow the impression that you have no opinion to express about "Hamas Attack on Gaza Crossing," or your opinion amounts to no more than "a pox on all of you."

I trust that if this thread were about the Allies versus Nazi Germany, you would be willing to state a position in favor of one or the other, even if other posters to the thread had not proven themselves as other than "irrational" or "mindless" (which is worse?) by reciting at least 3 atrocities on each side. You would, wouldn't you?

(Recently, in another DB thread that dealt with charges of antisemitism, one person kept posting to object again and again to any discussion of the matter because they insisted "antisemitism" had lost its meaning through misuse and abuse. I thought that nonsense the first time it was said, and a nuisance when it was repeated several times over. Instead of advancing the conversation in any way, it effectively demanded an abandonment of it. Phaedra, you may conclude that any or all of us are "irrational" or "mindless" ideologues, but saying that and nothing more is no contribution, in my opinion.)
4.21.2008 1:12am
neurodoc:
Phaedra: ...neither side (P/I) can claim to be the "good guy".
If we granted that en arguendo for the moment, it would not mean that both sides were equally culpable, "bad," or even evil, right? It seems obvious to me that it wouldn't, but I ask because you have not said if there has ever been a conflict which you see as a very morally asymmetric one. (I have a couple of times now suggested the Allies versus Nazi Germany as decidedly lopsided in terms of "good vs evil," nothwithstanding that there were surely atrocities committed by the Allies. You haven't said whether you accept even that one, though.)
4.21.2008 1:22am
Phaedrus (mail):
Chill out, Neuro. I was passing on a useful tool that has worked well for me when I'm working things out for myself. Do I understand the other position? Thought I'd pass it on. If you feel you understand both positions, good on you.

Talking about the Gaza Crossing attack in a vacuum is pointless, without the context of what has gone on before. And talking about what has gone on before without recognizing the valid claims of each side is pointless and leads to discussions.... much... like... what.... I'm... typing now. Damn! Drawn in again - when will I learn.

I'll leave on this note. People here have expressed their support for torturing a 10 year old boy and or for removing the Palestinians the way the Native Americans. That is sick, and it needs to be pointed out and condemned.
4.21.2008 1:37am
Thoughtful (mail):
Neurodoc: You keep bringing up the fact I'm a radiologist, as if that's somehow relevant. Your field is closer to psychiatry than mine--and your comments often suggest your need of such services--but I can't help wondering if your very deep hostility is somehow related to the fact that radiologists in this country are compensated at a much higher level than neurologists, and you feel this is unfair. This is understandable, but repression, as we see, leads only to irrational outbreaks.

My initial "dream" comment related not to this particular post of DB's, but to the constant refrain from both Neurodoc and DB that suggests it is impossible for either of them to find (or imagine) an act done by an Israeli to a Palestinian that is not justifiable. One might have thought torturing an innocent 15 year old could have been the sort of thing to qualify, but, it seems....no. Willingness to torture 15 year old Palestinians is, apparently, the only thing that prevents an invincible army of Palestinian 15 year old soldiers from casting Israel into the sea.

It's really quite hard to take someone so ethically blunted seriously, especially neurodoc, who with an amazing level of hysteria can't let one critical comment about Israel go without response, his effort, I guess, to prevent the 4th most powerful military force on earth (with nuclear weapons) from being pushed into the sea by people throwing rocks.
4.21.2008 6:26am
ejo:
how about bombs killing schoolchildren. how about missiles flying. are those "rocks". it takes someone morally blunted to not mention them. why do you justify the Palestinians putting their children on the front lines? teaching them hatred of jews from the cradle? what justification can you dream up, given your dream powers, for that?
4.21.2008 10:25am
ejo:
I would add, on the issue of morality, that condoning acts that will make it more likely that children will be put on the firing line wll make it more likely they will be placed there. Much like arguing for greater rights on behalf of non-uniformed combatants (ie. terrorists) will result in more such activity. Is that the moral end you are trying to achieve?
4.21.2008 11:17am
wfjag:
Neurodoc asked:
"Does anyone recall any reports of curches" (sic, churches) [being used for military purposes?]

Yes -- Monte Cassino -- Response: We bombed it into rubble.
4.21.2008 1:51pm
EKGlen (mail):
So where is the post about the signed statement that Carter obtained from Hamas recognizing the right of Israel to exist?
4.21.2008 3:43pm
ejo:
right next to the quote from Hamas, "no we didn't." And you'll find that next to the signed statement from Hitler which ended WWII in the 1930's, something about peace in our time.
4.21.2008 5:01pm
DavidBernstein (mail):
EK, I haven't heard of any such statement from the news reports I read. Indeed, I read that Hamas explicitly made clear that whatever else it might agree to, it would NOT recognize Israel's right to exist.
4.21.2008 9:01pm
neurodoc:
Thoughtful: My initial "dream" comment related not to this particular post of DB's, but to the constant refrain from both Neurodoc and DB that suggests it is impossible for either of them to find (or imagine) an act done by an Israeli to a Palestinian that is not justifiable.
Point to any post of mine in this thread or elsewhere that you think suggests I can't "imagine an act done by an Israeli to a Palestinian that is not justifiable" and we can discuss it. Otherwise, go back to sleeping and dreaming.

The rest of it about average incomes and your "psychiatric" musings is too silly for me to respond to at the moment, but I'll try to get back to it at some other time. Then we talk about such things as your principled philosophical objections to Medicare, the ones that do not keep you from participating in the program and enjoying the income it provides you.
4.21.2008 9:31pm
neurodoc:
So Phaedrus, based on your understanding of both sides, what do you have to say about the subject of this particular thread ("Hamas Attack on Gaza Crossing")? Nothing, I take it.
4.21.2008 9:34pm