News Israel bombing Gaza again

[rainforests1]

Why Don’t I Criticize Israel? : Sam Harris

Too long to post the whole thing here, but hard to pick just a few key parts. I like it because it pretty much mirrors my opinion, and comes from a non-religious non-zionist perspective that, nonetheless, doesn't follow the intellectual fad of automatically demonizing Israel.

I personally think both sides have blood on their hands. The difference, in my mind, is that Israel has a building block worth starting with.

From freedom of religion to gay rights, Israel's neighbors have got absolutely nothing on Israel. It is okay to practice Judaism yet proclaim that you do not believe in God. Try that as either a Muslim or Christian.

It is also okay to be gay in Israel, and has been for quite some time. Gays in military service, gay adoption, all accepted. Israel does not perform gay marriage, but it recognizes those performed elsewhere.

Practicing male homosexuality in Gaza? 10 years prison sentence.

Just a few examples that came to mind... I don't need to list 50 more to make the point.

I'm not a fan of what's going on, but I'm trying to look at the endgame, not just the next few years. In Iraq and Syria, for example, the culprit is obvious. ISIS needs to be destroyed. Palestine is not as simple. There, the culprits, whether you blame Israel or Palestinian Gaza, are entrenched within the government. Israel has a democratic, secular (in spite of being defined as a Jewish state) structure in place that is worth building on. The same cannot be said for its neighbors or almost anyone else in the region.

I'd rather work with Israel's issues than risk seeing it destroyed and overrun by a bunch of fruitcakes, which Hamas and any of the prospective allies it has in the region most certainly are. In order to do that,

I will also state, just for clarity, that I don't give a damn about historic rights or prophecy based boundaries. If we went by those standards, most of the countries in the world would be illegal. I want a secular system that recognizes human rights, and my opinions and actions are going to be chosen based on that stated agenda.

And I believe Israel has a nuclear arsenal while Palestine doesn't. We could talk about each countries' animal rights or environmental policies. Go on and on and on with this. Since I don't know the facts it's hard for me to say much about who really is better. I can just judge them based on the conflict, and Palestine behaves themselves much better between the two.

 

[Spang]

It is also okay to be gay in Israel, and has been for quite some time. Gays in military service, gay adoption, all accepted. Israel does not perform gay marriage, but it recognizes those performed elsewhere.

So, it's okay to slaughter a people, so long as the people doing the slaughtering are more pro-gay than the people being slaughtered?

 

[yakherder]

So, it's okay to slaughter a people, so long as the people doing the slaughtering are more pro-gay than the people being slaughtered?

No. But if the end goal is a place where nobody is being slaughtered, it is more rational to back up an already stable state with secular laws in place and improve on it than to allow that state to become weakened and produce a catastrophic power vacuum waiting to be filled by people to whom those values are non-existent.

I do not agree with everything Israel does. If anyone has a realistic solution that doesn't involve the false assumption that Hamas would simply get along if left to do so, I'm all ears.

 

[FortyTwo]

But it's not! About! Secular laws! Or even ideology!

It's about one nation mercilessly killing the citizens of another without regard for human life!

I don't know how to deal with Hamas. Counter-terrorism isn't a skill of mine. But I think it's not unreasonable to say that the solution is NOT to kill tons of citizens who aren't involved in Hamas whatsoever.

 

[yakherder]

Well that's an interesting problem isn't it? It's one thing to sit and empathize from half a world away. It's quite another thing to be in the middle of it and expected to solve it, your own country's citizens on one hand and another country's plus the condemnation of the world on the other.

The past hundred years has seen everyone from Picasso to Martin Luther King rallying behind the Israeli cause, organizing rallies and protests to push an otherwise uninterested government into action. Every self proclaimed human rights activist, liberal, free thinker, and intellectual wannabe saw to the creation of an Israeli state, condemning anyone against it as heartless bastards. A half century and a few wars later we realize it's not quite that simple, end everyone changes their mind. Israel doesn't have that option. It's not any more likely to pack up and leave than we are to go back to Europe, and as long as it's there this fight is going to continue until someone capitulates and suffers the consequences. Don't get mad at me, I didn't create this situation. I'm merely trying to figure out where best to go given that it exists. I'm no expert either, but I've spent more time in the middle of it than I would have liked to. I've trained with IDF and found them to be good people with no real desire to do harm but a strong desire to protect their country. I've also scrapped with fanatics and been put in difficult positions that I won't forget, and seen others put in worse positions that left no option but to make a choice that would permanently ruin them either way. Knowing what it's like, I'm not going to hold it against either side for becoming hardened and making those decisions.

I don't hold anything against anyone for having a different opinion either. I know we're all good people. The difference isn't whether or not we approve of slaughter, so don't even accuse me of that. The difference is where we place the blame. I have my perspective and you have yours. But... an opinion without a realistic solution to back it up is pointless.

 

[Clueless Git]

In any case the choice was made, and the question is what to do now?

Options for dealing with Hamas are very limited.

Simple and so ridiculous that it's totaly unthinkable.

Israel would need to become an overwhelming source of benefit to it's Arab neighbours.

Enough so that there would be no place for those who want to destroy Israel left amongst them.

Not my idea that, btw. It came from Gandhi.

But if they must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs. They should seek to convert the Arab heart.
The same God rules the Arab heart who rules the Jewish heart... They will find the world opinion in their favor in their religious aspiration. There are hundreds of ways of reasoning with the Arabs, if they will only discard the help of the British bayonet. As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.

Let the Jews who claim to be the chosen race prove their title by choosing the way of non-violence for vindicating their position on earth. Every country is their home, including Palestine, not by aggression but by loving service.

Mahatma Gandhi On Palestine, Written In 1938

 

[rainforests1]

Well that's an interesting problem isn't it? It's one thing to sit and empathize from half a world away. It's quite another thing to be in the middle of it and expected to solve it, your own country's citizens on one hand and another country's plus the condemnation of the world on the other.

The past hundred years has seen everyone from Picasso to Martin Luther King rallying behind the Israeli cause, organizing rallies and protests to push an otherwise uninterested government into action. Every self proclaimed human rights activist, liberal, free thinker, and intellectual wannabe saw to the creation of an Israeli state, condemning anyone against it as heartless bastards. A half century and a few wars later we realize it's not quite that simple, end everyone changes their mind. Israel doesn't have that option. It's not any more likely to pack up and leave than we are to go back to Europe, and as long as it's there this fight is going to continue until someone capitulates and suffers the consequences. Don't get mad at me, I didn't create this situation. I'm merely trying to figure out where best to go given that it exists. I'm no expert either, but I've spent more time in the middle of it than I would have liked to. I've trained with IDF and found them to be good people with no real desire to do harm but a strong desire to protect their country. I've also scrapped with fanatics and been put in difficult positions that I won't forget, and seen others put in worse positions that left no option but to make a choice that would permanently ruin them either way. Knowing what it's like, I'm not going to hold it against either side for becoming hardened and making those decisions.

I don't hold anything against anyone for having a different opinion either. I know we're all good people. The difference isn't whether or not we approve of slaughter, so don't even accuse me of that. The difference is where we place the blame. I have my perspective and you have yours. But... an opinion without a realistic solution to back it up is pointless.

If my brother is correct, the Israeli government uses drugs to get their soldiers to do what they do. I don't blame the troops for much of what is going on. My understanding is 700,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed in the 1940's(10,000 deaths) by Israel to create their territory. Jewish leaders were looking at a Jewish homeland in Palestine long before Hitler became leader. Every problem going on was chosen voluntarily by the Israeli government. One side is to blame for this, and it's obvious which one.

 

[yakherder]

Jewish leaders were looking at a Jewish homeland in Palestine long before Hitler became leader..

This part is true. The move that eventually resulted in the creation of a Jewish state was started in the 1800's. It didn't gain enough support for it to happen, however, until after the holocaust. Part of the reason the world did not sympathize with Palestine at the time was because it aligned itself with Hitler during the holocaust (arguably understandable) with this guy leading the charge.

the Israeli government uses drugs to get their soldiers to do what they do.

This part is not true. There is a drug problem within the IDF (not exactly a rare thing among militaries), but it is a problem that is penalized when discovered, not encouraged by the government.

My understanding is 700,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed in the 1940's(10,000 deaths) by Israel to create their territory.

The decade leading up to Israeli statehood was violent for everyone involved. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria also suffered heavy losses, as did Israel. I don't think ethnically cleansed is the right word. It was a war, and it happened to be between people of different ethnic groups. But that all depends on how you define ethnic cleansing I guess, and which historians you decide to agree with, as there is nothing resembling consensus.

I wish I could go back a century and tell both sides to go to hell Not that I can or that it would have mattered. I'm so tired of the concept of ethnicity or religion based countries.

Everything from the conflict between Gaza and Israel to the Muslim fanaticism we see today is a byproduct of bad decisions that were made before most of us were born.

On a side note, the first time Palestine was screwed over it had a majority Christian/Jewish population and was taken by the Fatimids. Fast forward a few years, and the Palestinians are Muslim.

 

[Second Summer]

Why Don’t I Criticize Israel? : Sam Harris

Too long to post the whole thing here, but hard to pick just a few key parts. I like it because it pretty much mirrors my opinion, and comes from a non-religious non-zionist perspective that, nonetheless, doesn't follow the intellectual fad of automatically demonizing Israel.

His mother was Jewish though, so with that background he can't be considered entirely unbiased / objective in this conflict. It's particularly evident in this article/podcast where he differentiates between different groups and interests within Israeli society, and say that sure, he doesn't support the crazy lunatics, but when it comes to the other side (Arabs / Palestinians), he treats them as one homogeneous group, and picks the views of Hamas as representative of the majority on that side.

It's interesting that he says he don't think Israel should be a Jewish State though.

Here are a couple of questions for those who say they support Israel in this thread:

• Do you support the US's unconditional political, military, and financial support of Israel, regardless of what the Israeli government and military do, as has always been tradition in DC?
• Do you support Israel's government-supported settlement program to gradually annex Palestinian land?
• Do you think the methods used by Israel in their current war against Hamas are justified?
• Do you agree with Sam Harris that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish State?

If you answer "no" to any of these questions, then maybe we don't disagree as much as you thought.

 

[yakherder]

Do you support the US's unconditional political, military, and financial support of Israel, regardless of what the Israeli government and military do, as has always been tradition in DC?

Unonditional, no. Continued as things stand now, yes. I know this is where a lot of disagreement exists, but I don't believe Israel as a whole is intentionally targeting innocents. I place most of the blame on Hamas for choosing its positions based on the concept that it will win the PR campaign if Israel cannot attack it without causing massive collateral damage against innocents.\

Do you support Israel's government-supported settlement program to gradually annex Palestinian land?

No. Again I don't agree that the reactions of Hamas should be accepted as justified, even though those reactions are rationally predictable in this situation. I don't believe Israel should be making moves that are bound to provoke them, though.

Do you think the methods used by Israel in their current war against Hamas are justified?

There are essentially two options.

• One is to attack from a position of relative safety using long range weapons such as artillery or aircraft, which decreases the risk to Israeli troops while greatly increasing the chance of collateral damage.

• The second is to send in troops to go door to door which, depending on tactics used and the level of training the troops have received, can reduce collateral damage. At the "safer for troops" end of the spectrum, you basically blow a hole in the wall of a suspected combatant holdout and/or drive a tank through it, then provide cover fire while fire teams enter to secure it. At the "safer for civilians" end of the spectrum, you approach the building in stealth and attempt a surprise breach, the intent being to quickly enter the room, assess the situation, and kill or arrest the combatants before they get a chance to take a defensive position while making sure to avoid firing on those who are unarmed. This is, obviously, extremely dangerous to the troops, as it leaves them open to ambush by either combatants who ambush them at the entry point or booby traps put in place in anticipation of a breach. It's worth noting that soldiers repeatedly placed into this position are, predictably, more likely to snap and go berzerk.

Neither option completely eliminates the risk of civilian deaths.

Personally, if given the option, I'd rather die than make a move I knew was likely to kill innocents, especially kids. But to answer the question, yes. Their methods are rationally justified. They have chosen to take the safer of the routes and blow their enemies up from a distance. We tend to make the same call when we can't get public support for large scale boots on the ground.

Do you agree with Sam Harris that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish State?

I don't think Israel should be a Jewish state, I don't think Palestine or any other country in the area should be a Muslim state, and I don't think the U.S. should be a Christian state. I wish they'd come to an agreement that would result in the two becoming one single country under the framework of the government that is already in place which is, on paper, secular. Call it Palestisrael, I don't care. But you know what they say. Wish in one hand **** in the other and see which fills up first.

 

[rainforests1]

Gaza, Egypt and Syria: a Common Thread of Genocide, War Crimes, and Wars Against Humanity » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
Apparently 8 out of 495 in Congress voted against emergency military aid for Israel(4 Democrats, 4 Republicans). You have to give them some credit for having courage.

The decade leading up to Israeli statehood was violent for everyone involved. Egypt, Jordan, and Syria also suffered heavy losses, as did Israel. I don't think ethnically cleansed is the right word. It was a war, and it happened to be between people of different ethnic groups. But that all depends on how you define ethnic cleansing I guess, and which historians you decide to agree with, as there is nothing resembling consensus.

I've read plenty of history books in my life. I've never read anything about others suffering much. It's the Palestinians who get singled out because they went through the worst suffering during that time period. One group chooses to take over territory to the detriment of another, and later on extremist groups pop up such as Hamas. If Jews had returned to Europe under better circumstances(possibly 12 million Germans were ethnically cleansed so Germany could have taken in a lot of people if we had chosen to treat them well) or they had chosen another area(the French were looking at Madagascar) this never would have happened. If you acknowledge the suffering the Palestinians went through, how do you possibly blame the Palestinians on this? You may as well not blame World War 1 on causing World War 2. That's right, we do.

 

[ledboots]

His mother was Jewish though, so with that background he can't be considered entirely unbiased / objective in this conflict. It's particularly evident in this article/podcast where he differentiates between different groups and interests within Israeli society, and say that sure, he doesn't support the crazy lunatics, but when it comes to the other side (Arabs / Palestinians), he treats them as one homogeneous group, and picks the views of Hamas as representative of the majority on that side.

It's interesting that he says he don't think Israel should be a Jewish State though.

Here are a couple of questions for those who say they support Israel in this thread:

• Do you support the US's unconditional political, military, and financial support of Israel, regardless of what the Israeli government and military do, as has always been tradition in DC?
• Do you support Israel's government-supported settlement program to gradually annex Palestinian land?
• Do you think the methods used by Israel in their current war against Hamas are justified?
• Do you agree with Sam Harris that Israel shouldn't be a Jewish State?

If you answer "no" to any of these questions, then maybe we don't disagree as much as you thought.

I don't think his mother being Jewish has squat to do with whether his opinion is valid or not. Shall we discard opinions from anyone with a Palestinian background, or any muslims, or any coptic Christians? 'Cause they may be biased. Jews are just people like anyone else.

My heart breaks at the world coming down on Israel, a nation the size of New Jersey, surrounded by countries who want Israel and its people annihilated. And now much of the rest of the world is accusing Israel of purposely killing civilians by responding to the thousands of missiles that are launched into its country.

If Israel did not have its protection against missiles and an army strong enough to protect itself, many of their civilians, including children, would have been killed. One place the rockets are often aimed at is a kindergarten in Israel near the border. The children quietly go to shelter when the rockets fall; they are accustomed to it. The Israelis, on the other hand, warn the opposition of where they will be bombing in hopes the civilians evacuate.

And the tunnels? Israel has to eliminate them to protect its people.

Any of you met a WW2 holocaust survivor? Seen the tattoos from the camps? Heard them speak about how this would happen again? I'm not Jewish, but grew up in a town with many Jews and have tons of Jewish friends, I always thought, oh no, not in my lifetime, people's memories are not that short.

Wrong again.

 

[beancounter]

Who cares about the Palestinians?

Certainly not Hammas.

They use the Palestinians as human shields and place military assets next to hospitals and schools hoping that those buildings will be hit.

Just to win the PR war...

To Hammas, Palestinians civilians are just cannon fodder used to further their agenda...the destruction of Israel, and the extermination of the Jews.

To support Hammas is to support their terrorist activites, including the use of Palestinians civilians as expendable pawns.
Or to put it another way. If you support Hammas, you don't really care about the Palestinian people..and to say you do is hypocritical.

The sad thing that many of you don't realize is that if Israel disappeared tomorrow, and the US pulled out all of its interest, there would still be endless Arab on Arab violence. From the Sunni and Shiit to Hammas and ISIL, they would continue to kill each other over the last remaining grain of sand. And they would recycle the same argument. "But it's our historical homeland" or "we want to create a pure Islamic state". Then how would you choose sides once you could no longer blame the Great Satan?

 

[yakherder]

The children and grandchildren of the Palestinians who fled to Lebanon in 1948 still haven't been granted status, and live as refugees not allowed to own land or work most jobs. The Muslim Shias in Iraq and Syria who are currently being persecuted and massacred have been persecuting the Palestinians for quite some time. Jordan has repeatedly denied entry to Palestinian refugees fleeing from all of the above. Egypt has engaged in Gaza tunnel demolition operations not unlike those of Israel.

I agree that the Palestinians have had a shitty time. But I don't agree that it's all Israel's fault. If Palestine had their own country tomorrow, I don't have any reason to believe its neighbors wouldn't turn on it the second they got a chance. I do not condone everything Israel has done, but I still believe that the best chance for overall peace in the region is to support the stable governments currently in place. I wish they could realize that the persecution they have faced is something they have in common... but people aren't rational. Especially after being in the middle of a century of near constant conflict.

 

[Second Summer]

I don't think his mother being Jewish has squat to do with whether his opinion is valid or not. Shall we discard opinions from anyone with a Palestinian background, or any muslims, or any coptic Christians? 'Cause they may be biased. Jews are just people like anyone else.

I didn't say his opinion wasn't valid because of his background, I said he couldn't be considered entirely objective. And I provided an example of how his podcast/article indeed comes off as biased.

My heart breaks at the world coming down on Israel, a nation the size of New Jersey, surrounded by countries who want Israel and its people annihilated. And now much of the rest of the world is accusing Israel of purposely killing civilians by responding to the thousands of missiles that are launched into its country.

Let's be fair, their reaction goes way beyond "responding". Also, the missiles are coming as a response to Israel's actions, not the other way around.

If Israel did not have its protection against missiles and an army strong enough to protect itself, many of their civilians, including children, would have been killed. One place the rockets are often aimed at is a kindergarten in Israel near the border. The children quietly go to shelter when the rockets fall; they are accustomed to it. The Israelis, on the other hand, warn the opposition of where they will be bombing in hopes the civilians evacuate.

I think it would be helpful to the discussion if you provided a source for this claim.

And the tunnels? Israel has to eliminate them to protect its people.

I think what people are reacting to is the incredible carnage and destruction Israel has caused in Gaza in order to reach this objective.

Any of you met a WW2 holocaust survivor? Seen the tattoos from the camps? Heard them speak about how this would happen again? I'm not Jewish, but grew up in a town with many Jews and have tons of Jewish friends, I always thought, oh no, not in my lifetime, people's memories are not that short.

Wrong again.

The Israelis are not being holocaust'ed. However, the Palestinians are victims of a campaign of ethnic cleansing and oppression that has been ongoing since at least the late 40s.

 

[Second Summer]

To support Hammas is to support their terrorist activites, including the use of Palestinians civilians as expendable pawns.
Or to put it another way. If you support Hammas, you don't really care about the Palestinian people..and to say you do is hypocritical.

"If you're not with us, then you're against us." Who in this thread is supporting Hamas? Not me.

In the same way that Hamas is using human shields (to the extent this is true), Israel has their own version of human shields in their settler program, which started even before Israel was created, and several decades before Hamas was started. The settlement program is a way to use Israeli civilians as pawns, often voluntary pawns, to annex occupied land.

 

[FortyTwo]

Ah, yes. Weep for poor Israel, with its dramatically huge military presence.

But not the meanie Muslims because some of them are terrorists so we don't have to worry about anything else.

 

[beancounter]

Ah, yes. Weep for poor Israel, with its dramatically huge military presence.

But not the meanie Muslims because some of them are terrorists so we don't have to worry about anything else.

Wow you took what I said way out of context.

Way up near the beginning of the thread, I said Israel should use surgical strikes and real time intel to go after the leaders of Hammas to avoid casualties.

And in my post above, I squarely place the blame on Hammas, not the Palestinian people, and not "Meanie Muslims" in general.

But don't let that stop you from painting me as being some monster blind to the Palestinian suffering, to further your position. You're using one of those sneaky debate tactics..but I forget what it's called.

Nonetheless, congratulations, you've passed Propaganda 102.

 

[beancounter]

"If you're not with us, then you're against us." Who in this thread is supporting Hamas? Not me.

In the same way that Hamas is using human shields (to the extent this is true), Israel has their own version of human shields in their settler program, which started even before Israel was created, and several decades before Hamas was started. The settlement program is a way to use Israeli civilians as pawns, often voluntary pawns, to annex occupied land.

I think you've made it clear earlier in this thread that you want to see Israel dissolved.
And you also agree with Hammas's use of human shields ("because Israel does it".)

So it appears that you do support Hammas.

 

[Spang]

On human shields:

Since the assault on Gaza began, Israeli leaders and their supporters have repeatedly accused Hamas of using Palestinian civilians as human shields in an attempt to absolve Israel of responsibility for deliberately killing more than 1,600 Palestinian civilians in the besieged Gaza Strip.

Despite there being no evidence to prove this libelous claim, it has been unquestioningly echoed in major media outlets and invoked by US officials to blame Palestinians for their own slaughter. It has even been used to justify genocide against Palestinians in a newspaper ad created by anti-Palestinian extremists Shmuley Boteach and Elie Wiesel.

But the available evidence demonstrates that it is the Israeli army, not Hamas, that has been using Palestinians as human shields in Gaza.