Man wtf are you all talking about? Does the world hate The Jews and I just don't know about it?
Yes.
Please back up your statements with some facts, Paul.
Facts? I'll let you be the judge. Although, at your request, here are some informed "opinions" on Human Rights Watch that a simple google search came up with (this one from Wikipedia). Since we're talking about an "opinion" in the first place (one held by HRW in regards to what ultimately happened to a Palestinian family on a beach), I'd say one good opinion deserves another...
Human Rights Watch has been criticized by various human rights activists, non-governmental organizations, politicians, and media as having an anti-Semitic or anti-Israel bias. This includes the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, the Anti-Defamation League, Honest Reporting, NGO Monitor, the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), Abraham Cooper, Anne Bayefsky, Gerald Steinberg, Isi Leibler, Shimon Peres, Elihai Braun, and Ana Palacio. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America ran an article on their website in 2005 titled ???What is Human Rights Watch's Agenda???? In this article CAMERA stated that Human Rights Watch is ???A self-appointed arbiter of human rights abuses around the world??? and that, ???This would be a noble and worthy mission if it were carried out objectively, without regard to political or ideological agenda. Regrettably, this is not the case.???[4] CAMERA has also stated, ???AI and another "voice of international appeasement" ??? Human Rights Watch ??? have consistently directed their righteous ire at Israel, sparing the real human rights abusers.???[5] In a 2006 communiqu?? Honest Reporting wrote, ???Human Rights Watch, along with many other organizations which claim to focus solely on human rights without a political agenda, have hardly proven themselves to be an "unbiased" source.??? Furthermore, the communiqu?? asserted, ???HRW is not held accountable to anybody but its own staff??? and, ???The organization's bias against Israel is hardly new.???[6] The Anti-Defamation League, in response to coverage of the Jenin Massacre, stated that Human Rights Watch was among the groups that, ???Pre-judged Israel's behavior.??? The Anti-Defamation League also wrote, ???Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch charged Israel with violations of international law and war crimes. Neither discussed the international law violations involved in arming a refugee camp, or demanded the United Nations be held in any way accountable for its lack of oversight in the camp. While Human Rights Watch acknowledged in a May 3 report that there was no evidence of a massacre and that Palestinian gunmen had contributed to endangering Palestinian civilians, they continued to emphasize that there was prima facie evidence Israel committed war crimes.???[7] The Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council concluded an anti-Israel bias in the 2002 article titled, ???Israel???s critics and their war with the truth.??? Regarding an apparent double standard, this article questioned, ???It is hard to explain why victims of slavery and slaughter are virtually ignored by American progressives. How can it be that there is no storm of indignation at Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch, which, though they rushed to Jenin to investigate false reports of Jews massacring Arabs, care so much less about Arab-occupied Juba, South Sudan's black capital? How can it be that they have not raised the roof about Khartoum's black slaves????[8] An NGO Monitor Summary in 2006 commented, ???While NGO Monitor's analysis shows a significant reduction in Human Rights Watch's disproportionate focus on Israel in 2005, compared with 2004, clear evidence of systematic political bias remains.??? NGO Monitor added, ???Many HRW publications continue to reflect what can be described as gratuitous political attacks against Israel, often based on unverified media reports, and reflecting a hostile political agenda. Similarly, as found in NGO Monitor's 2004 report, HRW's use of language to condemn Israel is highly politicized, especially when compared to reports on other countries in the Middle East, such as Iran, Egypt, Syria, and Libya, and continues to deny Israel the right to self-defense under international law.???[9] A quantitative study carried out by NGO Monitor asserted an anti-Israel bias as well.[10] Anne Bayefsky concluded that there was an anti-Semitic agenda at Human Rights Watch based on her observations at the 2001 World Conference against Racism. Bayefsky wrote, ???When it comes to anti-Semitism and anti-Israel bias, Human Rights Watch still has a lot of explaining to do ?? notwithstanding Executive Director Ken Roth's umbrage at criticism.??? As a participant at the World Conference against Racism, Anne Bayefsky also commented on how she was excluded from the meeting due to her participation with The International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, ???As we arrived at our meeting the chief Durban representative of Human Rights Watch, advocacy director Reed Brody, publicly announced that as a representative of a Jewish group I was unwelcome and could not attend.???[11] Abraham Cooper, another participant at the 2001 World Conference against Racism, reiterated Anne Bayefsky???s conclusions when he wrote, ???Contrary to the May 27 letter by the executive directors of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International U.S.A., Anne Bayefsky (Ending Bias in the Human Rights System, Op-Ed, May 22) was correct to criticize those two groups for their roles at the United Nations conference against racism in Durban, South Africa, last year.??? Cooper added regarding the forum document, ???The concerns of one group of victims -- the Jewish people -- were left off that document, with the silent acquiescence of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.??? Abraham Cooper also recounted, ???Like many other Jewish delegates at the conference, I was subjected to physical intimidation and threats.???[12] Gerald Steinberg is one of the more vociferous critics of Human Rights Watch. In a 2006 National Review article titled ???Human-Rights Schizophrenia??? Steinberg wrote, ???During the height of the terror attacks against Israel, HRW focused one-third of its entire Middle East effort on condemnations directed at Israel. This went far beyond legitimate criticism, and suggested an obsession.??? Steinberg asserted further, ???The most infuriating instance of HRW???s bias came in 2004, when Roth went to the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem to promote ???Razing Rafah,??? a one sided denunciation of Israeli policy. Its contents were based primarily on unsubstantiated reports of Palestinians, selected journalists, and so-called experts on tunneling.??? He concluded with, ???So either it is I, along with other critics of HRW, who blindly oppose legitimate criticism of Israel (it might be dismissed as part of a neoconservative ideology), or it is Roth and HRW who apply different and unique criteria that single out Israel unfairly. The evidence shows that it is the latter.??? [13] Isi Leibler, a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, stated that Human Rights Watch is among the groups that, ???Have long track records of bias and employing double standards in relation to Israel.???[14] Elihai Braun wrote an entry for the Jewish Virtual Library regarding the 2001 World Conference against Racism. While not explicitly criticizing Human Rights Watch, Braun claimed that it was among the groups that endorsed a resolution containing anti-Jewish terms. Braun wrote, ???Major human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Lawyers for Human Rights, and Physicians for Human Rights also expressed criticism of the anti-Jewish language of the NGO resolution, but raised their concerns two days after the conclusion of the NGO conference. Overall, they endorsed the resoluti
on.???[15] In an address to the Anti-Defamation League, a former Foreign Minister of Spain, Ana Palacio, asserted that Human Rights Watch ignored anti-Semitism as an issue of importance over other human rights issues, such as gay or refugee rights. In this address she stated, ???Disinterested NGOs like Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International pay little attention to anti-Semitism.???
Claiming that Human Rights Watch and Amnesty are anti-Semitic because they don't place anti-Semitism at the top of their campaigning agendas smacks of spin and paranoia. The corroborating elements in this piece would appear to all come from pro-Israeli organisations or in dividuals so not exactly starting off with a non-partisan perspective. speaking out against the actions of the Israeli state does not make one an anti-Semite, it's just unfortunate that Israel seems incapable of dealing with external criticism. The current government's standpoint seems to be that either you're 100% with them or 100% against - no in between. One either blithely accepts Israel's actions without question or one is an enemy of the state and the Jewish peoples. Get a little balance.
I have a friend in BEIRUT. Here are a few words from him.
Man these bombs are really bassy... I can't sleep day & night! Your heart will beat very fast & your strenght will go weak in time, these bombs are really huge, it make a great hole about 10 meters long & 5 meters underground.
WE'RE FUCKED UP NOW, i feel that we don't rule our country, hizbullah do, anyway i can hear the bombs very very near from my town, i don't know what to do, we're in a bad situation here, we're surrounded and all road has been cut off, sea, land and the air, i hope Israel don't hit us as they r hittin' now only the hizbullah positions and towns. Peace to all the world. No music i guess at this moment after i'm in a very good progress i hope we don't get back to the stone age. Pray for us; John, boardline of Beirut city.
I recognize that by my tone, I sound condescending, and for that, I apologize as this diminishes you and makes you look bad. Again, sincere apologies.
I'm certainly no Middle Eastern scholar... all I can tell you is that i've read a plethora of papers, studies, analysis', books (my favourite being "A Modern History of Jerusalem" by the celebrated NON-jewish Cambridge scholar, Sir Martin Gilbert), etc. over the last number of years, from both sides. My feelings certainly don't extend to me being an outright racist, as i've dated arab girls and muslim women. It is only after the vast amounts of information i have consumed, analyzed and came to a conclusion on that I have chosen a definite side.
The estimates on Israel's nuclear arsenal range from 5 warheads to greater than 200, 100 being a very fair estimate. However, Pakistan, India and North Korea all have nuclear arsenals, and it's not really appropriate to call them superpowers, is it? I understand your rationale, and certainly, if push to comes to shove (and who knows what will happen), Israel has the ultimate upper-hand, but that arsenal, just like NK, has been built at great expense to a people who already suffer daily.
Bottom line is this, man... most people get their information from liberal media sources, sources that are liberal because they want to report news fairly. If they were too leftist, or too far to the right, we would have right to believe that the news is biased... (which most of us already believe, anyway). However, there is a well-defined, well-characterized, and what's becoming an even more acute, progressive deterioration of reporting news on Israel fairly.... if you get your news from CNN or BBC, of the > 1000 rockets those inhabiting the Gaza strip have launched over the last year, maybe 2 or 3 made headlines since disengagement. Imagine if a rocket hit Chicago? Dallas? Denver? G*d forbid, New York? What would the news agents say then? The U.S. would have full support over *any* action it chose. However, as soon as Israel goes after the perpetrators of those INFINITELY numerous terrorist acts, the liberal media reports it as "ISRAEL LAUNCHING MASSIVE OFFENSIVE AGAINST CIVILIANS".. and that's the reality, man, and has been so for many, many years. For example, those children (teenagers mostly around 18) and women in Israeli jails the terrorists have roused world sympathy for? Suicide bombers who were caught before successfully detonating themselves, for the most part... 800 in the past number of years!!!! 800!!!!!!! Others are guilty of stbbing Yeshiva students, beatings of innocent civilians just because they're Jewish, etc. However, few get to hear the other side because the news has already made up your mind for you in it's own condescending tone towards Israel... This is compounded by virtually all governments world-wide then simultaneously condemning those real-world moves to get the bad guys because of political reasons which I don't have energy to elaborate upon.... ultimately, Israel's actions are perpetually damned, which others in this thread have already stated. What's even worse is that this same mentality lives WITHIN Israel ! PM Olmert's own daughter HATES Israel and calls the IDF Nazis... no breaks seem to ever be caught.
To be frank, I have personal reasons to take such interest in this part of the world's activity... my mother and sister, for instance, were last year at the very train station that Hezbollah bombed this morning and killed 8 people in Haifa... and in terms of 'deep time', their being there was missed by only a fraction of a second. However, if you don't have a personal reason to follow this conflict to the depths that I do, then I accept and fully understand why a person may have the views they do, based on the information that they recieve. That is fully comprehensible, and I too am a victim of the same lack of knowledge in certain domains, and have been called on it several times, to my utter embarassment.
I appreciate you posting those BBC links, man... I actually had the misfortune of seeing them both the day(s) they were published, and it caused me to take time away from studying so I could check their developments with regularity. What was probably NOT reported was the IDF's very handsome and willing cooperation with that group despite their vehement anti-Israeli propoganda, and how impressed they were with the IDF. However, BBC is still better than CNN...
Anyways, dude, my comment was not directed toward you in such a way as to imply your ability to process the information you recieve and come to a conclusion on is below that of my own or anyone else's, and for my condescending tone, once again, my most sincere apologies. With certainty, I would not appreciate it either! As I have said already, I too have been totally unaware of certain sides of the coin regarding various issues, and I've been horrified by my ignorance afterwards. Additionally, I want to make it clear that it was not at all my perception you were being anti-semetic, so rest assured, I don't think of you as a Jew hatter (I don't even know you dude!). However, I think in this particular instance, it's important to penetrate a little further into these matters, since unbeknownst to many (or most) people, there is a serious propoganada war going on, and honestly, though I am fully aware of it, I still don't quite understand why it exists or how it's being won so well.
speaking out against the actions of the Israeli state does not make one an anti-Semite, it's just unfortunate that Israel seems incapable of dealing with external criticism. The current government's standpoint seems to be that either you're 100% with them or 100% against - no in between.[/b]
sound familiar?
it's sad because this is what it comes down to. either your with your state, or against it. black or white. no grey matter. the problem is that we all exist in the grey matter. there isn't one side that is more correct than the other, but due to our regional differences, we are FORCED to take sides even if all we want is some peace and quiet. so what do we do? we get on that bandwagon, whether it be through pain, through passed on bias or hatred, or from bloodshed.
but at the end of the day, we're all right, we're all wrong, praise Jesus, praise Allah, we are all in some form to blame.
Ron, thank you for taking the time to write that. There's definitley a lot I have to learn. This whole thing has been an eye opening experience, and in some respects, some good has come of it in the form of an open dialogue and communication. Again, I genuinely appreciate your reply.
It saddens me to think that after all these years human beings still can't get it together. Hopefully we won't all kill each other before our children get a chance to make a better world.
Day, it's my pleasure man... thank you for reading it and recognizing what it is was I was trying to say... but you know, irrespective of what I write.. peace - a real, tangible and long-lasting peace - is what I and everyone else who is sane ultimately wants... peace for everyone in that region to live happily, and learn from each other and boost their economies, make dollars, make babies, send me records they find in the no longer necessary bomb shelters, etc...
Peace.. but when, how and at what cost, I don't know.
All the best, Day... look forward to seeing more of your posts around this board again I've been on here more this weekend then in all the preceding 4 months!
Hey y'all I have a question (mind you I don't too much about the middle east and I'm not trying play devil's advocate, but i'm just asking a serious question):
How can Israel not be viewed as the strongest force in that region, aren't they not back/supported by the United States Government? How can that not make them the strongest power in the middle east.
How can Israel not be viewed as the strongest force in that region, aren't they not back/supported by the United States Government? How can that not make them the strongest power in the middle east.
Israel has a population of less than 7 million compare that to the 69 million in Iran alone. Now add in Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Palestine, and every other country in the reigon that has a probable shot at warring with Israel.
Israel is far from the strongest force, its really more like one country versus a conglomerate of nations.
But regardless of who is at fault, what the hell is the point of escalating violence? How is mad bombing runs going to quell foreign aggression against Isreal? You cant just bomb people into liking you.
I think Saudi arabia are actually the big dogs with the most guns in the middle east though.
How can Israel not be viewed as the strongest force in that region, aren't they not back/supported by the United States Government? How can that not make them the strongest power in the middle east.
Israel has a population of less than 7 million compare that to the 69 million in Iran alone. Now add in Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Palestine, and every other country in the reigon that has a probable shot at warring with Israel.
Israel is far from the strongest force, its really more like one country versus a conglomerate of nations.
Israel is still the strongest military force in the region, period. Israel's defense forces have modern weapons, plus they're backed by a nuclear arsenal. All of those Arab governments, plus Iran are using basically 1970s equipment. Even during the 1967 War, Israel's leaders thought they were going to win. U.S. intelligence also believed that Israel was going to wipe the Arabs out during that conflict. During a meeting between Meir Amit, the Mossad director, and U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, Amit said that Israel would prevail in the 1967 war in seven days, which was only 1 day off. Also, by the 1990s, the Israeli military came to a consensus that the neighboring Arab governments were not going to launch another war against Israel. That's one of the reasons why the military supported withdrawing from Gaza, and parts of the West Bank. They didn't need that land anymore as a buffer area in a major land war anymore.
Plus, out of all those countries Guzzo listed the Palestinians, Syria, and Iran are the only countries in the region still hostile towards Israel. Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, the Saudis, etc. are not going to go to war with Israel any time soon. They'll give lip service to the Palestinians, and give them some money, but the governments would never go for a war.
My fundamental premise is that America needs to stay out of this mess and deal with our own longstanding issues.
I keep being called ignorant, idiotic, misinformed and even anti-Semitic. Some of that from a self professed zionist neocon and others who seem to view the world simply in terms of anti-Semites, self-hating Jews and those with unconditional unwavering support for anything and everything Israel does. I recognize the emotion that is behind these views.
But, as an American, I have to ask what my government is doing with the money they keep taking from me and what are the positive outcomes from this expenditure that benefit society as a whole?
I'm sure my opinion is widely represented on this board as well as in the general population.
Israel has every right to claim their stake and defend it, but they need to pay for that shit themselves.
That doesn't dispute my main point that Israel's neighbors are NOT going to go to war anytime soon.
True, but it belies the overall tone of your post, which is that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and others are not involved in the conflict at all; in fact, they are financially supportive of the groups at war with Israel.
That doesn't dispute my main point that Israel's neighbors are NOT going to go to war anytime soon.
True, but it belies the overall tone of your post, which is that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and others are not involved in the conflict at all; in fact, they are financially supportive of the groups at war with Israel.
Egypt is another country that receives way too much foreign aid from the US.
That doesn't dispute my main point that Israel's neighbors are NOT going to go to war anytime soon.
True, but it belies the overall tone of your post, which is that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and others are not involved in the conflict at all; in fact, they are financially supportive of the groups at war with Israel.
There are a couple general currents that run through almost all of the Arab governments. Arab nationalism is still around although mostly discredited. Islamism is the new flavor of the month. Israel is still a constant however. All of those governments have to give lipservice to the Palestinian cause to maintain their credibility with their people. I'm not sure if there's an Arab government that does not give aid to the Palestinians of some sort. That being said, most of them are not pushing for war. They're not really pushing for the actual overthrow and destruction of Israel. Egypt has been playing a mediating role in the last ten years or so to try to rein in Hamas. Jordan has had a basically peaceful relationship with Israel for decades, etc. It's a matter of degrees. Yes, they give money, but I'm not sure Israel considers that a real "threat." The problem is that the Palestinians can't get their shit together and have this fantasy that they can actually win an armed struggle with Israel.
I think Vitamin was trying to say the same thing in a previous post when he said:
Yes this is true. The leading Saudi state run paper ran a quote from a "senior Saudi official" putting Hezbollah on blast. And Mubarak and King Abdullah of Jordan have said publicly how reckless and unhelpful Hezbollah is. Hezbollah are Shiites and Mubarak, House of Saud and Hashemite dynasty look over at Iraq and fear a Sunni-Shiia civil war. And even though these leaders are basically despots and can do whatever they want, they have to worry about the Muslim Brothers. When Hezbollah hits Haifa, the rest of the Ummah basically asks the rest of the Arab leaders why some punks with a militia in southern Lebanon have more cahones than the great Arab league. This is a situation very similar to when Paul Castellana had to deal with an out of control John Gotti, who was potentially going to fuck up the whole family business. Iran and Hezbollah--Shiites--and Sunni Hamas, are kind of like Gotti. The Saudis, which are fine with Hezbollah in the 1990s when they are fighting an invading and occupying Israeli army, are basically like Castellana. The five families talk shit about the cops, but in the end they co-exist. Same with the Arab states and Israel. Saudi, Egypt, Jordan the Gulf states--all live under the yoke of American protection, just like Israel. They raise some cash on the side for Hamas, they say a bunch of shit about how terrible the zionist entity is, but that's posturing. They aint doin anything.[/b] Hezbollah, Iran on the other hand. It's totally different.
I know - I'm not arguing that any of those countries are threats or targets for Israel. Just pointing out that Hamas and Hezbollah don't operate in a vaccum. Moreover, you hit the nail on the head, the popular opinion is that Israel should be annihilated. How do you deal with that??
You also nailed it when you said that many people foolishly believe that they can win an armed conflict - so how should Israel respond? By ducking and dodging as many bullets and bombs as they can? Or by granting the armed conflict that the people want and demonstrating (yet again) that they are superior?
I know - I'm not arguing that any of those countries are threats or targets for Israel. Just pointing out that Hamas and Hezbollah don't operate in a vaccum. Moreover, you hit the nail on the head, the popular opinion is that Israel should be annihilated. How do you deal with that??
You also nailed it when you said that many people foolishly believe that they can win an armed conflict - so how should Israel respond? By ducking and dodging as many bullets and bombs as they can? Or by granting the armed conflict that the people want and demonstrating (yet again) that they are superior?
so basically you don't think America should be sending any aid to the middle east.
not that much. there should be tangible outcomes associated with our expenditures. especially that much money. RON argues that Israel is not that well off. But it still ranks among the top 20 wealthiest countries on this planet. Yet, it receives 30% of the total US foreign aid budget.
I gotta ask. For all of you here who criticise Israel's action these past few days, where have you been during the last year since Israel completely pulled out of Gaza and the only Arab/Palestinian response has been to lob over ONE THOUSAND missiles into Israel since that time? Where was your condemnation over that during this whole year? That's right. Quiet as a fucking mouse.
are you talking about the media or this board? either way you are wrong. i applauded the gaza pull-out on many occasions on this baord. (we paid for that too!) as far the media, i was mostly reading the NYT during that period and remember lots of positive things being written about that effort.
I know - I'm not arguing that any of those countries are threats or targets for Israel. Just pointing out that Hamas and Hezbollah don't operate in a vaccum. Moreover, you hit the nail on the head, the popular opinion is that Israel should be annihilated. How do you deal with that??
You also nailed it when you said that many people foolishly believe that they can win an armed conflict - so how should Israel respond? By ducking and dodging as many bullets and bombs as they can? Or by granting the armed conflict that the people want and demonstrating (yet again) that they are superior?
Sorry to be a pessimist about this, but I'm not sure there is anything to be done about either of those problems right now. I do feel strongy that Israel using force is not going to solve the problem. It just makes the Arabs feel more oppressed. You can win a strategic battle, but you're not going to win the war IMO.
What will ultimately end the struggle is not changing the opinion of the "Arab street" in other countries, but having the Palestinians themselves change, but I don't see that happening any time soon either. I think this younger generation coming up on the Palestinian side is very radicalized and that means violence. They are just so factionalized you can't do anything with them right now.
Until this recent flare up, I think the Israelis had basically decided that they were going to hunker down behind the wall and let the Palestinians screw themselves and take the missiles. Like I said in an earlier post, the Israelis were getting missiles while they were in the Occupied Terroritories, so pulling back behind the wall wasn't going to change that.
But what does that have to do with Hezbollah? Their pandering to the Palestian cause seems to be just lip service though there might be some funding thrown in, but ultimately, their mission, as an organization, isn't about Palestinian sovereignty.
I know - I'm not arguing that any of those countries are threats or targets for Israel. Just pointing out that Hamas and Hezbollah don't operate in a vaccum. Moreover, you hit the nail on the head, the popular opinion is that Israel should be annihilated. How do you deal with that??
You also nailed it when you said that many people foolishly believe that they can win an armed conflict - so how should Israel respond? By ducking and dodging as many bullets and bombs as they can? Or by granting the armed conflict that the people want and demonstrating (yet again) that they are superior?
Sorry to be a pessimist about this, but I'm not sure there is anything to be done about either of those problems right now. I do feel strongy that Israel using force is not going to solve the problem. It just makes the Arabs feel more oppressed. You can win a strategic battle, but you're not going to win the war IMO.
What will ultimately end the struggle is not changing the opinion of the "Arab street" in other countries, but having the Palestinians themselves change, but I don't see that happening any time soon either. I think this younger generation coming up on the Palestinian side is very radicalized and that means violence. They are just so factionalized you can't do anything with them right now.
Until this recent flare up, I think the Israelis had basically decided that they were going to hunker down behind the wall and let the Palestinians screw themselves and take the missiles. Like I said in an earlier post, the Israelis were getting missiles while they were in the Occupied Terroritories, so pulling back behind the wall wasn't going to change that.
Comments
Claiming that Human Rights Watch and Amnesty are anti-Semitic because they don't place anti-Semitism at the top of their campaigning agendas smacks of spin and paranoia. The corroborating elements in this piece would appear to all come from pro-Israeli organisations or in dividuals so not exactly starting off with a non-partisan perspective. speaking out against the actions of the Israeli state does not make one an anti-Semite, it's just unfortunate that Israel seems incapable of dealing with external criticism. The current government's standpoint seems to be that either you're 100% with them or 100% against - no in between. One either blithely accepts Israel's actions without question or one is an enemy of the state and the Jewish peoples. Get a little balance.
in the last 3-4 years they are....
I recognize that by my tone, I sound condescending, and for that, I apologize as this diminishes you and makes you look bad. Again, sincere apologies.
I'm certainly no Middle Eastern scholar... all I can tell you is that i've read a plethora of papers, studies, analysis', books (my favourite being "A Modern History of Jerusalem" by the celebrated NON-jewish Cambridge scholar, Sir Martin Gilbert), etc. over the last number of years, from both sides. My feelings certainly don't extend to me being an outright racist, as i've dated arab girls and muslim women. It is only after the vast amounts of information i have consumed, analyzed and came to a conclusion on that I have chosen a definite side.
The estimates on Israel's nuclear arsenal range from 5 warheads to greater than 200, 100 being a very fair estimate. However, Pakistan, India and North Korea all have nuclear arsenals, and it's not really appropriate to call them superpowers, is it? I understand your rationale, and certainly, if push to comes to shove (and who knows what will happen), Israel has the ultimate upper-hand, but that arsenal, just like NK, has been built at great expense to a people who already suffer daily.
Bottom line is this, man... most people get their information from liberal media sources, sources that are liberal because they want to report news fairly. If they were too leftist, or too far to the right, we would have right to believe that the news is biased... (which most of us already believe, anyway). However, there is a well-defined, well-characterized, and what's becoming an even more acute, progressive deterioration of reporting news on Israel fairly.... if you get your news from CNN or BBC, of the > 1000 rockets those inhabiting the Gaza strip have launched over the last year, maybe 2 or 3 made headlines since disengagement. Imagine if a rocket hit Chicago? Dallas? Denver? G*d forbid, New York? What would the news agents say then? The U.S. would have full support over *any* action it chose. However, as soon as Israel goes after the perpetrators of those INFINITELY numerous terrorist acts, the liberal media reports it as "ISRAEL LAUNCHING MASSIVE OFFENSIVE AGAINST CIVILIANS".. and that's the reality, man, and has been so for many, many years. For example, those children (teenagers mostly around 18) and women in Israeli jails the terrorists have roused world sympathy for? Suicide bombers who were caught before successfully detonating themselves, for the most part... 800 in the past number of years!!!! 800!!!!!!! Others are guilty of stbbing Yeshiva students, beatings of innocent civilians just because they're Jewish, etc. However, few get to hear the other side because the news has already made up your mind for you in it's own condescending tone towards Israel... This is compounded by virtually all governments world-wide then simultaneously condemning those real-world moves to get the bad guys because of political reasons which I don't have energy to elaborate upon.... ultimately, Israel's actions are perpetually damned, which others in this thread have already stated. What's even worse is that this same mentality lives WITHIN Israel ! PM Olmert's own daughter HATES Israel and calls the IDF Nazis... no breaks seem to ever be caught.
To be frank, I have personal reasons to take such interest in this part of the world's activity... my mother and sister, for instance, were last year at the very train station that Hezbollah bombed this morning and killed 8 people in Haifa... and in terms of 'deep time', their being there was missed by only a fraction of a second. However, if you don't have a personal reason to follow this conflict to the depths that I do, then I accept and fully understand why a person may have the views they do, based on the information that they recieve. That is fully comprehensible, and I too am a victim of the same lack of knowledge in certain domains, and have been called on it several times, to my utter embarassment.
I appreciate you posting those BBC links, man... I actually had the misfortune of seeing them both the day(s) they were published, and it caused me to take time away from studying so I could check their developments with regularity. What was probably NOT reported was the IDF's very handsome and willing cooperation with that group despite their vehement anti-Israeli propoganda, and how impressed they were with the IDF. However, BBC is still better than CNN...
Anyways, dude, my comment was not directed toward you in such a way as to imply your ability to process the information you recieve and come to a conclusion on is below that of my own or anyone else's, and for my condescending tone, once again, my most sincere apologies. With certainty, I would not appreciate it either! As I have said already, I too have been totally unaware of certain sides of the coin regarding various issues, and I've been horrified by my ignorance afterwards. Additionally, I want to make it clear that it was not at all my perception you were being anti-semetic, so rest assured, I don't think of you as a Jew hatter (I don't even know you dude!). However, I think in this particular instance, it's important to penetrate a little further into these matters, since unbeknownst to many (or most) people, there is a serious propoganada war going on, and honestly, though I am fully aware of it, I still don't quite understand why it exists or how it's being won so well.
Sincerely,
RON
sound familiar?
it's sad because this is what it comes down to. either your with your state, or against it. black or white. no grey matter. the problem is that we all exist in the grey matter. there isn't one side that is more correct than the other, but due to our regional differences, we are FORCED to take sides even if all we want is some peace and quiet. so what do we do? we get on that bandwagon, whether it be through pain, through passed on bias or hatred, or from bloodshed.
but at the end of the day, we're all right, we're all wrong, praise Jesus, praise Allah, we are all in some form to blame.
can I get a yay for humans?
It saddens me to think that after all these years human beings still can't get it together. Hopefully we won't all kill each other before our children get a chance to make a better world.
Peace.. but when, how and at what cost, I don't know.
All the best, Day... look forward to seeing more of your posts around this board again
Take care...
RON
How can Israel not be viewed as the strongest force in that region, aren't they not back/supported by the United States Government? How can that not make them the strongest power in the middle east.
Israel has a population of less than 7 million compare that to the 69 million in Iran alone. Now add in Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Palestine, and every other country in the reigon that has a probable shot at warring with Israel.
Israel is far from the strongest force, its really more like one country versus a conglomerate of nations.
But regardless of who is at fault, what the hell is the point of escalating violence? How is mad bombing runs going to quell foreign aggression against Isreal? You cant just bomb people into liking you.
I think Saudi arabia are actually the big dogs with the most guns in the middle east though.
Israel is still the strongest military force in the region, period. Israel's defense forces have modern weapons, plus they're backed by a nuclear arsenal. All of those Arab governments, plus Iran are using basically 1970s equipment. Even during the 1967 War, Israel's leaders thought they were going to win. U.S. intelligence also believed that Israel was going to wipe the Arabs out during that conflict. During a meeting between Meir Amit, the Mossad director, and U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, Amit said that Israel would prevail in the 1967 war in seven days, which was only 1 day off. Also, by the 1990s, the Israeli military came to a consensus that the neighboring Arab governments were not going to launch another war against Israel. That's one of the reasons why the military supported withdrawing from Gaza, and parts of the West Bank. They didn't need that land anymore as a buffer area in a major land war anymore.
You kind of gloss over this.
I keep being called ignorant, idiotic, misinformed and even anti-Semitic. Some of that from a self professed zionist neocon and others who seem to view the world simply in terms of anti-Semites, self-hating Jews and those with unconditional unwavering support for anything and everything Israel does. I recognize the emotion that is behind these views.
But, as an American, I have to ask what my government is doing with the money they keep taking from me and what are the positive outcomes from this expenditure that benefit society as a whole?
I'm sure my opinion is widely represented on this board as well as in the general population.
Israel has every right to claim their stake and defend it, but they need to pay for that shit themselves.
That doesn't dispute my main point that Israel's neighbors are NOT going to go to war anytime soon.
Also, I suspect what gets many folks so riled up about this is that Israel simply can't take care of themselves without US support.
True, but it belies the overall tone of your post, which is that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and others are not involved in the conflict at all; in fact, they are financially supportive of the groups at war with Israel.
Egypt is another country that receives way too much foreign aid from the US.
There are a couple general currents that run through almost all of the Arab governments. Arab nationalism is still around although mostly discredited. Islamism is the new flavor of the month. Israel is still a constant however. All of those governments have to give lipservice to the Palestinian cause to maintain their credibility with their people. I'm not sure if there's an Arab government that does not give aid to the Palestinians of some sort. That being said, most of them are not pushing for war. They're not really pushing for the actual overthrow and destruction of Israel. Egypt has been playing a mediating role in the last ten years or so to try to rein in Hamas. Jordan has had a basically peaceful relationship with Israel for decades, etc. It's a matter of degrees. Yes, they give money, but I'm not sure Israel considers that a real "threat." The problem is that the Palestinians can't get their shit together and have this fantasy that they can actually win an armed struggle with Israel.
You also nailed it when you said that many people foolishly believe that they can win an armed conflict - so how should Israel respond? By ducking and dodging as many bullets and bombs as they can? Or by granting the armed conflict that the people want and demonstrating (yet again) that they are superior?
Now we're coming to the point.
not that much. there should be tangible outcomes associated with our expenditures. especially that much money. RON argues that Israel is not that well off. But it still ranks among the top 20 wealthiest countries on this planet. Yet, it receives 30% of the total US foreign aid budget.
and I also think that, while you may not grasp them, the benefits are not intangible.
are you talking about the media or this board? either way you are wrong.
i applauded the gaza pull-out on many occasions on this baord. (we paid for that too!) as far the media, i was mostly reading the NYT during that period and remember lots of positive things being written about that effort.
well, why don't you bama it down for me?
what are they?
thank you.
Sorry to be a pessimist about this, but I'm not sure there is anything to be done about either of those problems right now. I do feel strongy that Israel using force is not going to solve the problem. It just makes the Arabs feel more oppressed. You can win a strategic battle, but you're not going to win the war IMO.
What will ultimately end the struggle is not changing the opinion of the "Arab street" in other countries, but having the Palestinians themselves change, but I don't see that happening any time soon either. I think this younger generation coming up on the Palestinian side is very radicalized and that means violence. They are just so factionalized you can't do anything with them right now.
Until this recent flare up, I think the Israelis had basically decided that they were going to hunker down behind the wall and let the Palestinians screw themselves and take the missiles. Like I said in an earlier post, the Israelis were getting missiles while they were in the Occupied Terroritories, so pulling back behind the wall wasn't going to change that.
But what does that have to do with Hezbollah? Their pandering to the Palestian cause seems to be just lip service though there might be some funding thrown in, but ultimately, their mission, as an organization, isn't about Palestinian sovereignty.