ISRAEL;WHEN WILL THE WEST DO SOMETHING... PART II

[UCM]

Here goes....

Yes I agree hub, it's all too black and white.
However when it comes to the Shatila massacres I think it was very black and white.

There are several prominent human rights orgs. and international lawyers who put the blame on Mr Sharon's shoulders. Interestingly even an investigation by the Israeli army has come to the conclusion that Mr Sharon was in charge, therefore the security of the camp was his responsibility.

The current state of affairs both in the occupied territories and in Lebanon constitute serious breaches of the Geneva Convention and the UN Charter on Human rights.

Of course I am not naive enough to believe that Israel's leaders will ever face a trial at the ICC.

Thanks bj. I'm not trying to inflame. TBH, I don't 'do' politics and have little knowledge and interest in the historical background, and am not on this thread to represent or debate either side, merely to try and ensure that readers appreciate there are two sides to the discussion, and that the present situation in the MIddle East is a complex one.

mimo, from the 'indirect responsibility' phrase in wiki are two source hyperlinks which support that assertion. (Which, I repeat is not necessarily mine ).

Again, from my scant understanding, it is possible to accuse both sides of failing to respect Human Rights conventions and prior UN directives.

h2d

If you read the whole article on Sabira and Shatila, you will find that the Israeli army planned the entry and stay of the Phalangists, surrounded the camps, turned back those Palestinians who tried to escape the massacre, set up posts on high ground around the camp, sent flares all nights over the camp for Phalangists to continue their work,

isn't that complicity in your book?

The situation has been complex from the beginning, justifying the Stern and Irgun Gangs. Here is something for you to read:

Avraham Stern crystalized the ideology of his organization in what was called the "18 Principles of Rebirth":

1. THE NATION The Jewish people is a covenanted people, the originator of monotheism, formulator of the prophetic teachings, standard bearer of human culture, guardian of glorious patrimony. The Jewish people is schooled in self-sacrifice and suffering; its vision, survivability and faith in redemption are indestructible.

2. THE HOMELAND The homeland in the Land of Israel within the borders delineated in the Bible ("To your descendants, I shall give this land, from the River of Egypt to the great Euphrates River." Genesis 15:18) This is the land of the living, where the entire nation shall live in safety.

3. THE NATION AND ITS LAND Israel conquered the land with the sword. There it became a great nation and only there it will be reborn. Hence Israel alone has a right to that land. This is an absolute right. It has never expired and never will.

4. THE GOALS 1. Redemption of the land. 2. Establishment of sovereignty. 3. Revival of the nation. There is no sovereignty without the redemption of the land, and there is no national revival without sovereignty.

These are the goals of the organization during the period of war and conquest:

5. EDUCATION Educate the nation to love freedom and zealously guard Israel's eternal patrimony. Inculcate the idea that the nation is master to its own fate. Revive the doctrine that "The sword and the book came bound together from heaven" (Midrash Vayikra Rabba 35:8)

6. UNITY The unification of the entire nation around the banner of the Hebrew freedom movement. The use of the genius, status and resources of individuals and the channeling of the energy, devotion and revolutionary fervour of the masses for the war of liberation.

7. PACTS Make pacts with all those who are willing to help the struggle of the organization and provide direct support.

8. FORCE Consolidate and increase the fighting force in the homeland and in the Diaspora, in the underground and in the barracks, to become the Hebrew army of liberation with its flag, arms, and commanders.

9. WAR Constant war against those who stand in the way of fulfilling the goals.

10. CONQUEST The conquest of the homeland from foreign rule and its eternal possession.

These are the tasks of the movement during the period of sovereignty and redemption:

11. SOVEREIGNTY Renewal of Hebrew sovereignty over the redeemed land.

12. RULE OF JUSTICE The establishment of a social order in the spirit of Jewish morality and prophetic justice. Under such an order no one will go hungry or unemployed. All will live in harmony, mutual respect and friendship as an example to the world.

13. REVIVING THE WILDERNESS Build the ruins and revive the wilderness for mass immigration and population increase.

14. ALIENS Solve the problem of alien population by exchange of population.

15. INGATHERING OF THE EXILES Total in-gathering of the exiles to their sovereign state.

16. POWER The Hebrew nation shall become a first-rate military, political, cultural and economical entity in the Middle East and around the Mediterranean Sea.

17. REVIVAL The revival of the Hebrew language as a spoken language by the entire nation, the renewal of the historical and spiritual might of Israel. The purification of the national character in the fire of revival.

18. THE TEMPLE The building of the Third Temple as a symbol of the new era of total redemption.

and finally, a justification of Jewish Terrorism:

An article titled "Terror" in He Khazit (The Front, a Lehi underground newspaper), Issue 2, August 1943, argued as follows. The full text of the article is available at Wikiquote.

Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can negate the use of terror as a means of battle.
...
We are quite far from moral hesitations on the national battlefield. We see before us the command of the Torah, the most moral teaching in the world: Obliterate - until destruction.[1] We are particularly far from this sort of hesitation in regard to an enemy whose moral perversion is admitted by all.
But primarily terror is part of our political battle under present conditions and its role is large and great.

It demonstrates, in clear language, to those who listen throughout the world and to our despondent brothers outside the gates of this country of our battle against the true terrorist who hides behind his piles of papers and the laws he has legislated.
It is not directed against people, it is directed against representatives. Therefore it is effective.
If it also shakes the Yishuv from their complacency, good and well.
Only so will the battle for liberation begin.

Don't want to get involved in current argument, just wanted to say that it was patently clear even before you arrived hub2dee that there were two sides to the discussion.

and also rather obvious that the situation in the Middle East is a complex one.

hub - quite right. There is no doubt in my mind or in my heart that suicide bombings or any other violent killing practiced against Israeli civilians constitute a horrific act of terror and a breach of human rights.

What we haven't heard so far from the pro-Israeli's lobby here is an acceptance that the current invasion of Lebanon ALSO constitutes a serious breach of international law and human rights.

I have to reiterate, I have absolutely no problem with Israelis and Jews in general who are open minded and intelligent and above all HUMAN enough to condemn the actions of Israel, no matter how many suicide bombings they have heard of or seen. The actions of Israel's enemies do not justify Israel's behaviour.

Equally, neither 9/11 nor the bombs in London in any way justify what WE are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan nor our support of Israel to go into Lebanon.

I think if I had heard this condemnation of Israel and its illigitimate invasion and destruction of Lebanon LOUD AND CLEAR from all the pro-Israel posters here I would have waved goodbye and left this thread several days ago !

I'm so pleased you have no problem with 'Jews in general' that's very magnaminous of you to say

so my best friend who lives in Leeds but is married to a CofE bloke is totally safe is she, I'll let her know you have no problem with her. As she often (please excuse the paraphrase) says "Judaism is a religion, I am Jewish and British. Israel is a country I know a number of Israelis who are christian. Get your facts straight you ignoramus"

I am so pleased that all Jews are brought into this debate because patently they are as one with Israel (that's sarcasm in case it is not recognised)

I shall also let my best friend know this too

mimoyello I am not a coward nor am I a zionist. this may come as a shock byt I'm also not Jewish not that its any of your business.

"me and my friends" pass me the conspiracy theory book I'll have to note that one down alongside Israel is a facist state and we've heard enough of the holocaust comments

PMSL

LOL ruty, complex and two-sided indeed. I told you I am simple wrt politics and history. I think my point though is that it can be easy to only see that which we wish to see, and further, I didn't feel the debate was very even-handed (perhaps because many people feel Israel's actions very OTT, which is fair enough), but I felt the debate was not being conducted in a fair (and correct) manner.

pd - I've stated why I'm on this thread, to highlight the fact that there are two sides to the debate and to express my upset at some of the sentiments that had been expressed. I have no wish (nor a deep enough understanding) to attempt to argue a position for either side.

I challenged you on your 'for Israel the justification is that Jews suffered a holocaust' statement which I felt over-simplified things in a non-helpful way, but I can't read any response.

I have read what you cut and pasted and don't really understand the background to it, nor really why it is significant, or what the intent is. There are propaganda and hate web sites available for both sides which, IMHO, do very little to work towards cessation of hostilities and casualties. I certainly won't be turning to them for inspiration.

mimo - will reply to your post in a mo.

i agree hub2dee, it was extremely difficult to keep the debate fair, even handed and correct, but the fault lay on both sides of the argument for that, and there were many inflammatory remarks made on again, both sides. No one had the moral high ground, however much it was proclaimed.

Mud - you sound like a very sad, disturbed, paranoid individual. I suggest a series of therapy sessions (thanks for the suggestion PD !)

I don't care what your religion is. Stupidity rears its ugly head among all religions and cultures I am afraid.

i really think Caligula and Saadia's last posts on this subject were the furthest we were all going to get to middle ground on this subject, can we all just leave it at that?

Oh, I am glad you mentioned Christian Israeli's

A friend of mine is a Jewish Israeli of Morrocan decent (an Arab in case you didn't know).

I won't say what she says about the way Arab Jews are treated in Israel. You may be offended Mud !

h2d: pd - I've stated why I'm on this thread, to highlight the fact that there are two sides to the debate and to express my upset at some of the sentiments that had been expressed. I have no wish (nor a deep enough understanding) to attempt to argue a position for either side.

pd> I thought it was obvious there are at least two sides to the debate. It does not take a rocket scientist (not that rocket science is much complex) to decipher that.

h2d: I challenged you on your 'for Israel the justification is that Jews suffered a holocaust' statement which I felt over-simplified things in a non-helpful way, but I can't read any response.

pd> My response was earlier, even before this post, in which I quoted an article by a Jewsih American Professor for the complexity of reasons. Fear of the Holocaust is indeed one of the major reasons given here. Reading from this thread one can discern that the argument of the pro-Israelis is that Israel is threatened by terrorists, that it was founded because the Holocaust made the Jews realise they have to have a sovereign state of their own, and that they would live peacefully but for the terrorists. And that any criticism of Israeli policy re the Arabs is anti-Semitic and the next step could be the Holocaust once again.

h2d: I have read what you cut and pasted and don't really understand the background to it, nor really why it is significant, or what the intent is. There are propaganda and hate web sites available for both sides which, IMHO, do very little to work towards cessation of hostilities and casualties. I certainly won't be turning to them for inspiration.

pd: The copy-paste is to show the roots of terrorism and the aims of the founders of those who "won" freedom for Israel, and who went on to become its PMs and Presidents. The intent is so that Israel and pro-Israelis cannot take the holier-than-thou attitude. The site from which this is taken is wikipedia, with sources to the original. I am sure you will agree that wiki is not a hate site.

Does that answer your queries?

mimo - I wouldn't assume a pro-Israel lobby, and wouldn't go around attempting to label those who do not self-label. Further, I think it is possible to have sympathy with both sides - indeed that is probably what is most important in all this - the loss of life on both sides is horrific.

Personally, I do not have adequate understanding of international law nor of human rights conventions (nor infact access to unbiassed reporting) to try and rule on whether Israel's military campaign will be deemed a breach... IIRC there were some links earlier to claims that it had, but I presume the ceasefire delay and the lack of sanctions etc. mean that the response has some grounds / justification IYSWIM (certainly at commencement of hostilities). Also, from what I gather, both sides can / do (and indeed should !) be hauled up on their failiure to adhere to UN directives.

I think if you want to condemn, we must condemn those who perpetrate violence on both sides. You have done so, and I have no problem doing that too. What I do want to point out, though, is that each side feels, to some extent, justified in their behaviour, and it is this justification that needs to be examined. For example, how many attempted or actual suicide attacks are 'acceptable' before any response is deemed 'fair' ? The Israeli rocket / bomb attacks on civilians are decried, but rockets are also being set off (2000 or so IIRC) against Israel too. FWIW, when the IDF c0ck things up and bomb in error, they seem to at least regret that / investigate it. Conversely, I think it's accepted that the Hezbollah rockets are aimed solely at civilian areas. I appreciate, btw, that there have been challenges to the 'aiming at insurgents' claim...

I agree with ruty's emoticon of sadness btw. Not sure what this toing and froing can really achieve.

pd - If the multi-facetted nature of the debate is so obvious, perhaps you would then care to couch your posts with a little more balance and operate from a position where you can express empathy with those who suffer regardless of homeland or religion... As you said before "both Jews & Muslims do need to look at new ways to address each other's perceptions, and to educate themselves out of their own cul-de-sacs."

Re - your holocaust phrase and reference to the American prof. I read your linked article (twice). If I'm looking at the right text, it mentions the word 'holocaust' once. It does not put forward a hypothesis that Israel's actions are because they suffered a holocaust. The author goes into a lot more depth than that, referring to thousands of years of struggle, much of it in conflict. I am really not sure your phrase can be deemed a fair summation of the thrust of the article tbh.

Re - the wiki stuff - I would agree it's not a hate site, though I note that certain contentious articles have flags acknowledging their content to be disputed. Again, if you would post a source so I could read some background it would be useful.

I think what you say is very fair hub2dee. however, when you say - 'If the multi-facetted nature of the debate is so obvious, perhaps you would then care to couch your posts with a little more balance and operate from a position where you can express empathy with those who suffer regardless of homeland or religion' I would like to add that I felt [and I think some others might too]that this could as easily have been directed at lisalisa's posts as some of the posts on the other side of the debate.

Without going back and reading all of lisalisa's posts to see how correct you are, I completely appreciate your point ruty.

Perhaps she will return later to comment ? I imagine though she felt (as indeed I did prior to entering the thread) somewhat offended, attacked, upset and angry by some of the posts on the thread IYSWIM.

it seems that way hub2dee, which i am very sorry about. Mind you, it hasn't been a very pleasant thread for anyone.

This debate keeps coming back to the same point. There are some points which are so obvious to some of us that they do not need to be said. But I will say them again.

I believe that the way that Israel came about was unjust. I guess that Israel and its supporters cannot concede even an inch on this as it would be seen as calling into question Israel's right to exist. But Palestinian and Arab hostility to Israel is not just mad random anti-Semitism. Their opposition is based on their belief that they have been wronged.

Personally I have accepted Israel's existence and do not want to see any more bloodshed on either side. I would like to see all sides sitting down in a civilised manner and sorting out the problem so that more innocent people do not have to lose their lives.

But I would like to point out that indeed many of us, on all sides, have been angered, upset and offended by other posts on this thread.

Most countries are founded upon injustice. The very nature of a nation-state is that people get power over others for no reason other than a line drawn on a map, usually by the winners of fighting.

These lines usually cost blood, and are almost invariably for the convenience of those in power, rather than the people on them.

Almost all land everywhere has been stolen, at some ponit in the past, and almost all "owners" ultimately paid the theives.

So I don't see that "Israel" has the right to exist any more than the USA or Belgium. A nation is legitimate if it serves the interests of those who happen to live there.

Those who see states as some sort of sacred entity, usually end up suporting the sort of things that Israel, Nazi Germany or Moslem countries do as part of "serivng their country".

Israelis have the same right as anyone else to live in peace, and choose some sort of government.
However this is not the same as the right to torture people who happen to live in land they capture by force of arms.

It is sad that religious people often join in this faulty model of cuntries as "sacred", rather than a framework worth keeping if useful, but scrapped if defective. Israel as a country sort of works.
It's neighbours don't. Iraq didn't work, and the mess we put in it's place doesn't either. Bush & Blair (both religious types) want to keep Iraq as a single country even through that does not serve the interests of those unfortunate enough to live there/
Iraq should be choped into 3 or 4 bits, and Israel should be stopped from screwing it's neighbours, who should be stopped from lobbing rockets at them.

hub - I do not self-label myself an anti-semite racist and nor do I appreciate any one here hinting that I am. If you are going to accuse me of lables, please be at least fair enough to point out that I have been accused of worse things than just saying "Israel lobby", a term which I meant to mean people who are pro-Israeli (I wasn't talking about THE Jewish LOBBY in the USA, which is another thing altogether).

It is fair enough that not every one has studied politics or international law, but do you need to do this in order to have an intelligent debate re. this region ? All you have to be able to do is READ and have a sufficiently large brain, not a degree.

What I have noticed is that several posters here can't even get very BASIC facts right, i.e "Iran is Arab, it attacked Israel, etc" . To me it is an indication that it is ignoranace and lack of reading, knowledge, etc that is causing misunderstanding. Indeed isn't the root cause of all racism IGNORANCE ?

Wrong end of the stick, mimo, or else a mis-understanding. I have not posted that you are an "anti semite racist".

I was referring to your post "What we haven't heard so far from the pro-Israeli's lobby here.."

May I offer an opinion re, getting historical/political info. on Wiki or any where else on the web ?

It is convenient, like a dictionary, to look something up quickly while on the net. But many such websites are not a reliable source for informed debate.

hub - you have wrong end too ! I wasn't saying YOU have said this. But several posters have referred to racism and then referred to my posts, either directly or indirectly hinting that I am one.