you're right, but please don't think this is just something that the mean Israelis are doing while the freedom fighting Hezbollah is playing it regal.
Ever seen the aftermath of a suicide bombing?
No one is defending Hezbollah at all. AT ALL.
sorry if I seem a little defensive here. I just seriously feel like Israel has to live up to an impossible standard when it comes to diplomacy and defense.
I'm pretty worked up about this whole war. I belong to several middle eastern groups based on my campus all of which have a decidedly arab outlook and its fucking killing me. I've got e-mails about going to Palestinian/ Lebonese rallies I've got commentary on the internet and NPR and I've got my own mixed feelings about Israel.
The best way for me to cope with it is to bring it back the rudamentry "when your being attacked you must defend yourself".
I'm going to bow out of this topic before I litter it with my feelings and come back when I have some better put together thoughts.
its interesting how much attention continues to be given to the innocent people killed by the israelis, considering that there have been 40,000 iraqi CIVILIAN casualties since 2003. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
i agree that israel should be hard pressed to defend its actions, i just don't understand why the us hasn't received equal attention on a daily basis.
its interesting how much attention continues to be given to the innocent people killed by the israelis, considering that there have been 40,000 iraqi CIVILIAN casualties since 2003. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
i agree that israel should be hard pressed to defend its actions, i just don't understand why the us hasn't received equal attention on a daily basis.
Keith,
I actually think the number of Iraqi civilian casualties gets brought up all the time, esp. by people who oppose the invasion. The only ones who shrug it off are right-leaning media and the administration. Seriously - anti-war folk point out that stat at every opportunity. How are you not hearing/seeing that?
The reason why we're focusing on Lebanon right now is because it's happening RIGHT NOW. I'm pretty sure people are still dying in Darfur but no one's talking about it at the moment because this is how our attention works in a media society. That doesn't mean the 40,000 are unimportant. Nor the 200 and rising in Lebanon.
its interesting how much attention continues to be given to the innocent people killed by the israelis, considering that there have been 40,000 iraqi CIVILIAN casualties since 2003. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
i agree that israel should be hard pressed to defend its actions, i just don't understand why the us hasn't received equal attention on a daily basis.
Keith,
I actually think the number of Iraqi civilian casualties gets brought up all the time, esp. by people who oppose the invasion. The only ones who shrug it off are right-leaning media and the administration. Seriously - anti-war folk point out that stat at every opportunity. How are you not hearing/seeing that?
The reason why we're focusing on Lebanon right now is because it's happening RIGHT NOW. I'm pretty sure people are still dying in Darfur but no one's talking about it at the moment because this is how our attention works in a media society. That doesn't mean the 40,000 are unimportant. Nor the 200 and rising in Lebanon.
I'll take a wild guess. I think he's trying to make a comparison between the Occupied Territories and Northern Ireland.
Northern Ireland had the IRA and its terrorist war against the English. The IRA got backing from many private citizens in Ireland, plus Irish-Americans for that matter, plus foreign help from the PLO and Libya.
I think the comment about the missiles is implying that England, while dealing with the IRA's attacks, never started blowing up Ireland or other countries or groups that supported them.
its interesting how much attention continues to be given to the innocent people killed by the israelis, considering that there have been 40,000 iraqi CIVILIAN casualties since 2003. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
i agree that israel should be hard pressed to defend its actions, i just don't understand why the us hasn't received equal attention on a daily basis.
Keith,
I actually think the number of Iraqi civilian casualties gets brought up all the time, esp. by people who oppose the invasion. The only ones who shrug it off are right-leaning media and the administration. Seriously - anti-war folk point out that stat at every opportunity. How are you not hearing/seeing that?
The reason why we're focusing on Lebanon right now is because it's happening RIGHT NOW. I'm pretty sure people are still dying in Darfur but no one's talking about it at the moment because this is how our attention works in a media society. That doesn't mean the 40,000 are unimportant. Nor the 200 and rising in Lebanon.
i dont want to turn this discussion into a criciticism of the media, but i strongly disagree. the republican owned media is responsible for much of what we see, hear and read about the iraq war. i'm sure 200 civilians were killed within the first few days of our invasion of iraq, but if that was a continuing major news story in march of 2003, than we must get different newspapers and tv stations.
its interesting how much attention continues to be given to the innocent people killed by the israelis, considering that there have been 40,000 iraqi CIVILIAN casualties since 2003. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
i agree that israel should be hard pressed to defend its actions, i just don't understand why the us hasn't received equal attention on a daily basis.
Keith,
I actually think the number of Iraqi civilian casualties gets brought up all the time, esp. by people who oppose the invasion. The only ones who shrug it off are right-leaning media and the administration. Seriously - anti-war folk point out that stat at every opportunity. How are you not hearing/seeing that?
The reason why we're focusing on Lebanon right now is because it's happening RIGHT NOW. I'm pretty sure people are still dying in Darfur but no one's talking about it at the moment because this is how our attention works in a media society. That doesn't mean the 40,000 are unimportant. Nor the 200 and rising in Lebanon.
i dont want to turn this discussion into a criciticism of the media, but i strongly disagree. the republican owned media is responsible for much of what we see, hear and read about the iraq war. i'm sure 200 civilians were killed within the first few days of our invasion of iraq, but if that was a continuing major news story in march of 2003, than we must get different newspapers and tv stations.
Every couple months there's a report about estimated deaths in Iraq. I hear about it on NPR and read about it in the SF Chronicle. I would take a big bet that most Iraqi civilian deaths have not been caused by Americans though, but rather Iraqis themselves. First you had the Islamists with their suicide bombings against police and army units, anyone helping the U.S., and Shiites. Now you have Shiites going around killing Sunnis in revenge.
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
From today's NY Times: "With the B>Lebanese death toll exceeding 200 and the Israeli count at 24/B>, the increased efforts to turn to diplomacy showed little prospect of an immediate way out. In Lebanon, a vast majority of those killed were civilians, while in Israel about half of the dead were civilians.[/b]"
BAGHDAD, July 1, 2006 (AFP) - At least 1,009 Iraqis, including civilians, soldiers and policemen, were killed in rebel attacks in June, government officials said Saturday.
In May the total number of people killed was 1,055, according to statistics obtained by AFP from the ministries of interior, defense and health.
At 1,771, the number of people wounded in June was more than 24 percent higher than the 1,423 recorded in May.
Iraqi civilians continued to be the main target of rebels in June with at least 887 killed against 932 in May, while 1,588 civilians were wounded compared to 1,271.
A total of 79 policemen were killed and 126 wounded against 95 and 97 respectively in May, an interior ministry official said.
June saw 43 Iraqi soldiers killed and 57 wounded against 28 and 58 the previous month, a defense ministry official said.
There were 19 car bombings attacks during the month against 26 in May. The authorities also counted 32 roadside bombings and three suicide bombings against 65 and two the previous month. There were 24 shootings compared with 60 in May.
Officials said that 93 insurgents were killed in June against 324 the previous month.
War's Iraqi Death Toll Tops 50,000 Higher than the U.S. estimate but thought to be undercounted, the tally is equivalent to 570,000 Americans killed in three years. By Louise Roug and Doug Smith Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
June 25, 2006
BAGHDAD ??? At least 50,000 Iraqis have died violently since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, according to statistics from the Baghdad morgue, the Iraqi Health Ministry and other agencies ??? a toll 20,000 higher than previously acknowledged by the Bush administration.
Many more Iraqis are believed to have been killed but not counted because of serious lapses in recording deaths in the chaotic first year after the invasion, when there was no functioning Iraqi government, and continued spotty reporting nationwide since.
The toll, which is mostly of civilians but probably also includes some security forces and insurgents, is daunting: Proportionately, it is equivalent to 570,000 Americans being killed nationwide in the last three years.
...
But Health Ministry records do differentiate causes of death. Almost 75% of those who died violently were killed in "terrorist acts," typically bombings, the records show. The other 25% were killed in what were classified as military clashes. A health official described the victims as "innocent bystanders," many shot by Iraqi or American troops, in crossfire or accidentally at checkpoints.[/b]
I'm still trying to figure out what you are saying, BigSpliff.
Cool.
I was just trying to point out that even as innocent civilians were being killed and maimed by the IRA on the UK mainland, there were plenty of people in the UK, myself included, who could see that the Irish republicans had a point, and that terrorism was a symptom of injustice. People don't blow up pubs or go on hunger strikes if all is rosy back home. Likewise, there are many, many Israelis who are disgusted with the direction their government has taken in the last 20 years. But nobody asks them. Instead we get opinions from Orthodox Brooklynites on the one side or that Mofo Pat Robertson or some Arab prince on the other, because their rants fit into soundbites. You won't learn shit from watching the news, better to read history - not the stuff about battles and dates, but the stuff about bloody human struggle against oppressive regimes. It's all a big power struggle, why do you think the Israeli government has been importing right wingers from the US?
The IRA were seen as a very, very legitimate "Freedom Fighter" organisation over here pre-9/11, but what do they mean now that there's a Global War On Terror?
The US, yet again, wants to turn something complex and messy into something pure and righteous. That means more blood all round.
PS: Caterpilar (NYSE: CAT) among others, is laughing all the way to the bank.
I assumed so too, I don't understand why dude is like trying to be all cryptic about it.
Because in a 10 page thread, nobody even came close to mentioning it, instead we get nutjobs talking about rockets being fired from Canada and Mexico!!!!
And Rock, all of those ideas about America I just wrote about are called American Exceptionalism. President Bush talks about it all the time when he says America has a special role to play in the world. Writers have been talking about all the way back to Alex de Tocqueville.
I agree....as a country, we're exceptional.
So should Israel act like us then? That was the original point. I said no because they're in different situations. Somehow when I tried to explain how American exceptionalism gives America a totally different outlook than Israel's and most other countries for that matter, you take this as "self-loathing" on my part. I wonder if you actually read the posts sometimes Rock.
Oh I read em....I just may have a different shade of glasses on than you.
Early on you suggested that Israel might just sit back and wait for the Palestinians to "get their shit together" a proposition that you yourself admit you don't see happening any time soon.
So the scenario was presented that America wouldn't just sit back and wait and neither should Israel.....in that regard the analogy was spot on.
For you to suggest that any people should sit back and accept missles and terrorist attacks as the status quo is absurd, sort of like that guy who said a rape victim should just lie back and enjoy it.
In case you didn't read it, but this is from an excerpt of an article from Foreign Affairs on Israel's current polciy towards the Occupied Territories that started under Ariel Sharon and has been taken up by his successor Olmert.
???The emerging new policy is based on a broad Israeli recognition that holding onto the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is simply not in Israel???s interests, despite the fact that the Palestinian leadership has been uninterested in and incapable of making peace and that both Fatah and Hamas will use that land to try to launch attacks on Israel. The territories no longer serve a strategic function for Israel, given the unlikelihood of a conventional attack by Arab state armies, and Israel could better defend its citizens by creating a strong defensive line rather than by dispersing its forces. Moreover, because a comprehensive peace deal is not likely to be reached for many years, the territories are no longer of value as bargaining chips.???
???The Israeli military played a considerable role in developing this new viewpoint.???
???The idea of a defense based on a clear line laid out along advantageous terrain was far more attractive to strategists.???
???The only remaining vulnerability would be from missiles fired over the frontier, which was as much of a problem when Israeli forces were actually on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza.???
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
It doesn't help that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the like explicitly, proudly and matter-of-factly tell the entire world that innocent civilians are very much fair game in their "struggle" against the Jews.
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
It doesn't help that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the like explicitly, proudly and matter-of-factly tell the entire world that innocent civilians are very much fair game in their "struggle" against the Jews.
This comment makes no sense in relation to the previous one.
It doesn't help what? If Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRA, etc weren't explicit then the Israeli and/or US governments wouldn't have to kill so many civilians?
Israel never killed German civilians after WWII, they carried out assassinations and forced extraditions on specific individuals. Bombing civilians now seems more like playing catch up with their own history.
The IRA is interested in the liberation and autonomy of their country from under British rule, right? The IRA isn't commited to the destruction of the "British" as a "people." Least not last I checked. I see your point, BigSpliff but it's apples and oranges to me.
The IRA is interested in the liberation and autonomy of their country from under British rule, right? The IRA isn't commited to the destruction of the "British" as a "people." Least not last I checked. I see your point, BigSpliff but it's apples and oranges to me.
Take Hamas and Hezbollah out of the equation and you are still left with the same basic problem.
Most people in the world just want a future, not the destruction of a people.
I don't know what's the confusion is about. Its sad that civilians are getting bombed in Lebanon, but maybe the people there should have got their shit together & not allowed a force like Hezbollah to set up shop in their country. If some Canadians got it into their heads to lob bombs into upstate NY, I'd be the first to pick up a gun, blow their brains out & hand whoever was left to the US government for a trial. Play with fire, get your ass burned. Boo-fucking hoo. Did the world cry when dozens of my relatives were butchered just for being different? no. So I won't cry for these dudes.
This comment makes no sense in relation to the previous one.
It doesn't help what? If Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRA, etc weren't explicit then the Israeli and/or US governments wouldn't have to kill so many civilians?
Makes perfect sense. These terrorist groups put their agenda completely up front for everyone to see and make no bones about their desire to see innocent civilians dead. Double standard or not, it certainly helps explain why some people throughout the world may have less tolerance for these fucks. I don't see why that's so hard to understand.
EDIT: Although sadly, as evidenced by some on this board, that's often not the case. Incredibly it's often the opposite. Despite the fact that these monsters are being completely up front to the world about just how horrible they really are , relativism - both cultural and moral - prevails, and as a result... tolerance.
We can sit here and debate whether or not the state of Israel intends to inflict the same sort of damage to Palestinian innocents or not, but the intentions of Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. are not up for debate. That does make a difference where public perception is concerned. That's all I'm saying. Pragmatically speaking.
I don't know what's the confusion is about. Its sad that civilians are getting bombed in Lebanon, but maybe the people there should have got their shit together & not allowed a force like Hezbollah to set up shop in their country. If some Canadians got it into their heads to lob bombs into upstate NY, I'd be the first to pick up a gun, blow their brains out & hand whoever was left to the US government for a trial. Play with fire, get your ass burned. Boo-fucking hoo. Did the world cry when dozens of my relatives were butchered just for being different? no. So I won't cry for these dudes.
Wow, someone who makes Paul seem warm, fuzzy and compassionate.
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
It doesn't help that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the like explicitly, proudly and matter-of-factly tell the entire world that innocent civilians are very much fair game in their "struggle" against the Jews.
Serious. Intentional killing of civilians does not equate with unintentional killing of civilians. period. no matter the numbers. AND NO THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE OF ONE IS WORTH MORE THAN THAT OF ANOTHOER. So forget that shit. But to equate a groups that exists mainly to kill civilians with a country that exists mainly to protect its civilians is NONSENSE.
And yeah, whether you (or Israel) want to admit it or not, the higher casualty rate on the Lebanese side is part of Hezbollah's plan. That's why they hole up in apt buildings instead of army bases. Only wish Israel was not playing into their hands right now but no one here has proposed a better alternative.
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
From today's NY Times: "With the Lebanese death toll exceeding 200 and the Israeli count at 24, the increased efforts to turn to diplomacy showed little prospect of an immediate way out. In Lebanon, a vast majority of those killed were civilians, while in Israel about half of the dead were civilians."
It doesn't help that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the like explicitly, proudly and matter-of-factly tell the entire world that innocent civilians are very much fair game in their "struggle" against the Jews.
You do realize that Israel has "declared" the exact same thing. Not by words perhaps, but by their actions overwhelmingly. And they have proven it thousands of times more than the other side has.
You do realize that Israel has "declared" the exact same thing. Not by words perhaps, but by their actions overwhelmingly. And they have proven it thousands of times more than the other side has.
....
Serious. Intentional killing of civilians does not equate with unintentional killing of civilians. period. no matter the numbers. AND NO THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE OF ONE IS WORTH MORE THAN THAT OF ANOTHOER. So forget that shit. But to equate a groups that exists mainly to kill civilians with a country that exists mainly to protect its civilians is NONSENSE.
And yeah, whether you (or Israel) want to admit it or not, the higher casualty rate on the Lebanese side is part of Hezbollah's plan. That's why they hole up in apt buildings instead of army bases. Only wish Israel was not playing into their hands right now but no one here has proposed a better alternative.
And yeah, whether you (or Israel) want to admit it or not, the higher casualty rate on the Lebanese side is part of Hezbollah's plan. That's why they hole up in apt buildings instead of army bases. Only wish Israel was not playing into their hands right now but no one here has proposed a better alternative.
Sorry Paul, but it does seem like Israel is blowing up a whole bunch of shit that has nothing to do with Hezbollah. I think Israel is bombing things like that Lebanese army base to try to pressure the Lebanese government to move into the South.
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
It doesn't help that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the like explicitly, proudly and matter-of-factly tell the entire world that innocent civilians are very much fair game in their "struggle" against the Jews.
Serious. Intentional killing of civilians does not equate with unintentional killing of civilians. period. no matter the numbers. AND NO THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE OF ONE IS WORTH MORE THAN THAT OF ANOTHOER. So forget that shit. But to equate a groups that exists mainly to kill civilians with a country that exists mainly to protect its civilians is NONSENSE.
And yeah, whether you (or Israel) want to admit it or not, the higher casualty rate on the Lebanese side is part of Hezbollah's plan. That's why they hole up in apt buildings instead of army bases. Only wish Israel was not playing into their hands right now but no one here has proposed a better alternative.
Army bases are good for holing up in if you have planes and tanks. You know, the chosen method of war that results in the ("unintentional") killing of civilians. Moral relativism is not a monopoly of the left.
Comments
sorry if I seem a little defensive here. I just seriously feel like Israel has to live up to an impossible standard when it comes to diplomacy and defense.
I'm pretty worked up about this whole war. I belong to several middle eastern groups based on my campus all of which have a decidedly arab outlook and its fucking killing me. I've got e-mails about going to Palestinian/ Lebonese rallies I've got commentary on the internet and NPR and I've got my own mixed feelings about Israel.
The best way for me to cope with it is to bring it back the rudamentry "when your being attacked you must defend yourself".
I'm going to bow out of this topic before I litter it with my feelings and come back when I have some better put together thoughts.
These photos are very emotional and powerful.....
I believe this is the reason why our TV media doesn't show photos of the dead children and body parts that are the results of suicide bombers and war.
Maybe if they did, more people would have the emotion of disgust that we just had looking at the above photo.
If that policy changes I'd suggest we start off with a collage of all the Pre-9/11 deaths at the hand of Islamic suicide bombers all around the world.
Instead of the board's more reactionary types talking about rockets being fired from Canada and Mexico, maybe they could talk about reality?
Cause Celebre.
i agree that israel should be hard pressed to defend its actions, i just don't understand why the us hasn't received equal attention on a daily basis.
Keith,
I actually think the number of Iraqi civilian casualties gets brought up all the time, esp. by people who oppose the invasion. The only ones who shrug it off are right-leaning media and the administration. Seriously - anti-war folk point out that stat at every opportunity. How are you not hearing/seeing that?
The reason why we're focusing on Lebanon right now is because it's happening RIGHT NOW. I'm pretty sure people are still dying in Darfur but no one's talking about it at the moment because this is how our attention works in a media society. That doesn't mean the 40,000 are unimportant. Nor the 200 and rising in Lebanon.
And Haiti.
I'm still trying to figure out what you are saying, BigSpliff.
I'll take a wild guess. I think he's trying to make a comparison between the Occupied Territories and Northern Ireland.
Northern Ireland had the IRA and its terrorist war against the English. The IRA got backing from many private citizens in Ireland, plus Irish-Americans for that matter, plus foreign help from the PLO and Libya.
I think the comment about the missiles is implying that England, while dealing with the IRA's attacks, never started blowing up Ireland or other countries or groups that supported them.
i dont want to turn this discussion into a criciticism of the media, but i strongly disagree. the republican owned media is responsible for much of what we see, hear and read about the iraq war. i'm sure 200 civilians were killed within the first few days of our invasion of iraq, but if that was a continuing major news story in march of 2003, than we must get different newspapers and tv stations.
Every couple months there's a report about estimated deaths in Iraq. I hear about it on NPR and read about it in the SF Chronicle. I would take a big bet that most Iraqi civilian deaths have not been caused by Americans though, but rather Iraqis themselves. First you had the Islamists with their suicide bombings against police and army units, anyone helping the U.S., and Shiites. Now you have Shiites going around killing Sunnis in revenge.
On the topic of double standards, it will always baffle me as to why Israel can historically kill scores more civilians than their enemies, and still somehow be thought of as the more noble of nations.
From today's NY Times:
"With the B>Lebanese death toll exceeding 200 and the Israeli count at 24/B>, the increased efforts to turn to diplomacy showed little prospect of an immediate way out. In Lebanon, a vast majority of those killed were civilians, while in Israel about half of the dead were civilians.[/b]"
BAGHDAD, July 1, 2006 (AFP) - At least 1,009 Iraqis, including civilians, soldiers and policemen, were killed in rebel attacks in June, government officials said Saturday.
In May the total number of people killed was 1,055, according to statistics obtained by AFP from the ministries of interior, defense and health.
At 1,771, the number of people wounded in June was more than 24 percent higher than the 1,423 recorded in May.
Iraqi civilians continued to be the main target of rebels in June with at least 887 killed against 932 in May, while 1,588 civilians were wounded compared to 1,271.
A total of 79 policemen were killed and 126 wounded against 95 and 97 respectively in May, an interior ministry official said.
June saw 43 Iraqi soldiers killed and 57 wounded against 28 and 58 the previous month, a defense ministry official said.
There were 19 car bombings attacks during the month against 26 in May. The authorities also counted 32 roadside bombings and three suicide bombings against 65 and two the previous month. There were 24 shootings compared with 60 in May.
Officials said that 93 insurgents were killed in June against 324 the previous month.
Higher than the U.S. estimate but thought to be undercounted, the tally is equivalent to 570,000 Americans killed in three years.
By Louise Roug and Doug Smith
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
June 25, 2006
BAGHDAD ??? At least 50,000 Iraqis have died violently since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, according to statistics from the Baghdad morgue, the Iraqi Health Ministry and other agencies ??? a toll 20,000 higher than previously acknowledged by the Bush administration.
Many more Iraqis are believed to have been killed but not counted because of serious lapses in recording deaths in the chaotic first year after the invasion, when there was no functioning Iraqi government, and continued spotty reporting nationwide since.
The toll, which is mostly of civilians but probably also includes some security forces and insurgents, is daunting: Proportionately, it is equivalent to 570,000 Americans being killed nationwide in the last three years.
...
But Health Ministry records do differentiate causes of death. Almost 75% of those who died violently were killed in "terrorist acts," typically bombings, the records show. The other 25% were killed in what were classified as military clashes. A health official described the victims as "innocent bystanders," many shot by Iraqi or American troops, in crossfire or accidentally at checkpoints.[/b]
Cool.
I was just trying to point out that even as innocent civilians were being killed and maimed by the IRA on the UK mainland, there were plenty of people in the UK, myself included, who could see that the Irish republicans had a point, and that terrorism was a symptom of injustice. People don't blow up pubs or go on hunger strikes if all is rosy back home. Likewise, there are many, many Israelis who are disgusted with the direction their government has taken in the last 20 years. But nobody asks them. Instead we get opinions from Orthodox Brooklynites on the one side or that Mofo Pat Robertson or some Arab prince on the other, because their rants fit into soundbites. You won't learn shit from watching the news, better to read history - not the stuff about battles and dates, but the stuff about bloody human struggle against oppressive regimes. It's all a big power struggle, why do you think the Israeli government has been importing right wingers from the US?
The IRA were seen as a very, very legitimate "Freedom Fighter" organisation over here pre-9/11, but what do they mean now that there's a Global War On Terror?
The US, yet again, wants to turn something complex and messy into something pure and righteous. That means more blood all round.
PS: Caterpilar (NYSE: CAT) among others, is laughing all the way to the bank.
Because in a 10 page thread, nobody even came close to mentioning it, instead we get nutjobs talking about rockets being fired from Canada and Mexico!!!!
edit: well it seemed like a 10-pager!
In case you didn't read it, but this is from an excerpt of an article from Foreign Affairs on Israel's current polciy towards the Occupied Territories that started under Ariel Sharon and has been taken up by his successor Olmert.
???The emerging new policy is based on a broad Israeli recognition that holding onto the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is simply not in Israel???s interests, despite the fact that the Palestinian leadership has been uninterested in and incapable of making peace and that both Fatah and Hamas will use that land to try to launch attacks on Israel. The territories no longer serve a strategic function for Israel, given the unlikelihood of a conventional attack by Arab state armies, and Israel could better defend its citizens by creating a strong defensive line rather than by dispersing its forces. Moreover, because a comprehensive peace deal is not likely to be reached for many years, the territories are no longer of value as bargaining chips.???
???The Israeli military played a considerable role in developing this new viewpoint.???
???The idea of a defense based on a clear line laid out along advantageous terrain was far more attractive to strategists.???
???The only remaining vulnerability would be from missiles fired over the frontier, which was as much of a problem when Israeli forces were actually on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza.???
Doesn't sound very American to me!
It doesn't help that groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the like explicitly, proudly and matter-of-factly tell the entire world that innocent civilians are very much fair game in their "struggle" against the Jews.
This comment makes no sense in relation to the previous one.
It doesn't help what? If Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRA, etc weren't explicit then the Israeli and/or US governments wouldn't have to kill so many civilians?
Israel never killed German civilians after WWII, they carried out assassinations and forced extraditions on specific individuals. Bombing civilians now seems more like playing catch up with their own history.
Take Hamas and Hezbollah out of the equation and you are still left with the same basic problem.
Most people in the world just want a future, not the destruction of a people.
If mentioning the IRA is "apples and oranges" then the above is surely just a psychological problem. Paging Sigmund.
Makes perfect sense.
These terrorist groups put their agenda completely up front for everyone to see and make no bones about their desire to see innocent civilians dead.
Double standard or not, it certainly helps explain why some people throughout the world may have less tolerance for these fucks.
I don't see why that's so hard to understand.
EDIT: Although sadly, as evidenced by some on this board, that's often not the case. Incredibly it's often the opposite. Despite the fact that these monsters are being completely up front to the world about just how horrible they really are , relativism - both cultural and moral - prevails, and as a result... tolerance.
We can sit here and debate whether or not the state of Israel intends to inflict the same sort of damage to Palestinian innocents or not, but the intentions of Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. are not up for debate.
That does make a difference where public perception is concerned.
That's all I'm saying.
Pragmatically speaking.
Wow, someone who makes Paul seem warm, fuzzy and compassionate.
Serious. Intentional killing of civilians does not equate with unintentional killing of civilians. period. no matter the numbers. AND NO THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE OF ONE IS WORTH MORE THAN THAT OF ANOTHOER. So forget that shit. But to equate a groups that exists mainly to kill civilians with a country that exists mainly to protect its civilians is NONSENSE.
And yeah, whether you (or Israel) want to admit it or not, the higher casualty rate on the Lebanese side is part of Hezbollah's plan. That's why they hole up in apt buildings instead of army bases. Only wish Israel was not playing into their hands right now but no one here has proposed a better alternative.
You do realize that Israel has "declared" the exact same thing. Not by words perhaps, but by their actions overwhelmingly. And they have proven it thousands of times more than the other side has.
....
Sorry Paul, but it does seem like Israel is blowing up a whole bunch of shit that has nothing to do with Hezbollah. I think Israel is bombing things like that Lebanese army base to try to pressure the Lebanese government to move into the South.
Army bases are good for holing up in if you have planes and tanks. You know, the chosen method of war that results in the ("unintentional") killing of civilians. Moral relativism is not a monopoly of the left.