the humanitarian principle that one cannot morally sacrifice someone else life to save oneself
.
The Warsaw Ghetto uprising, along with all the other examples of resistance that you mentioned are the flip side of this coin. They are the kind of unity that is responsible for all the social justice in the world.
You can't have it both ways, kid.
Killing someone to save yourself = immoral
Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, in which Jews killed Nazis to save themselves = unity of the kind responsible for all social justice in the world and...wait for it...immoral?
I know I should have the self-contol to refrain from further contributing to this foolishness, but it's way more engaging than the law of annuities. Forgive me.
The difference is self defense vs. finding someone else to sacrifice in your place. Killing is justified in the former instance, never in the latter.
But really, I'd like to say what I wrote about "fear" was misguided. I wish that we are all brave in the face of evil, although I'd be scared shitless in the face of the SS and Gestapo. I hope that I'd be able to fight through that fear and live or die in accord with my morals. What led actions like Kaster's was not about fear, but selfishness and ideology. These are the tendencies for which we should always be wary.
I'd also like to apologize for derailing this thread by being a provocateur. What is happening in Gaza right now is much more worthy of discussion than how we should understand the history of Jews who aided the Nazis.
Jennifer Loewenstein's piece posted on Counterpunch this morning makes for horrible, searing reading. I agree with her. Her rage is a necessary corrective to the bland and evil newspeak that so compromises the Western press when it addressses this subject.
It has a right to respond to attacks, but will not achieve its ultimate aim - peace - until it stops thinking in military terms
Israel's attempt to wipe out Hamas is understandable, but stupid. No country in the world is going to ignore the provocation of rockets being launched from neighbouring territory day after day. If Mexico had a group of anti-imperialists bombing Texas, imagine how long it would take for America to mobilise a counterattack. Israel has every right to respond.
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
Completely absurd. Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone, not prosperous. What he says and what he does are entirely different things. He is evil filth, as is much of the Israeli establishment.
What's happening right now in Gaza is horrible and wrong.
I don't really understand whats going on but here's what I think I know....
1. Hamas/Palestine fires missiles into Isreal for some reason.
2. Isreal gets pissed and strikes back super hard core.
3. Some people think they shouldn't have.
4. Hamas is the democratically elected leader of Palestine therefore Hamas=Palestine and vice versa. So if Israel has already killed 500 palestinians maybe they are like "well you shouldn't have elected Hamas as your leaders then, stupid."...?
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
Not to mention incredibly condescending. Though it's nice of you to admit "it's been an imperfect experiment", I'm sure the thousands of Palestinians who've lost their lives, homes, love ones, will appreciate candour.
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
Completely absurd. Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone, not prosperous. What he says and what he does are entirely different things. He is evil filth, as is much of the Israeli establishment.
What's happening right now in Gaza is horrible and wrong.
^^^ clearly didn't read the commmentary I linked to ^^^
b/w
people that use this type of exaggerated and offensive rhetoric ("Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone") can never explain to me why the Palestinian population in the W. Bank and Gaza (indeed, even within Israel itself) is growing at such an impressive rate. Meanwhile the Israeli military is supposedly some sort of fantastic killing machine. And Israeli gov'ts keep ceding territory to the Arabs (Sinai, Lebanon, Gaza) and treating wounded Palestinians in their hospitals. I cram to understand how the Israelis expect to meet their genocidal goals with such behavior.
Lord knows I shouldn't get into this again, but it kills me how whatever politically effective start point is always chosen as the beginning of the story for whatever's happening.
This time around it all started because Hamas wouldn't stop firing rockets into Israel. Like this is not one of the most complicated and long standing conflicts of the modern era.
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
Not to mention incredibly condescending. Though it's nice of you to admit "it's been an imperfect experiment", I'm sure the thousands of Palestinians who've lost their lives, homes, love ones, will appreciate candour.
welcome to the twisted logic of Soulstrut. someone suggests economic prosperity is the key to piece. I point out that many Israelis have advanced this very idea and it hasn't worked, and link to some commentary explaining that the hope of economic prosperity ending the violence is condescending. then another dude comes in, in in apparent agreement with the first dude, talmbout economic prosperity being the key to piece (the very idea advanced by the first dude) is condescending!
Israel's fait accompli in Gaza[/b] by Eric S. Margolis[/b]
There are two completely different versions of what is currently happening in Gaza.
In the Israeli and North American press version, Hamas - 'Islamic terrorists' backed by Iran - have in an unprovoked attack fired deadly rockets on innocent Israel with the intent of destroying the Jewish state. North American politicians and the media say Israel "has the right to defend itself".
True enough. No Israeli government can tolerate rockets hitting its towns, even though the casualty totals have been less than the car crash fatalities registered during a single holiday weekend on Israel's roads.
The firing of the feeble, home-made al-Qassam rockets by Palestinians is both useless and counter-productive.
It damages their image as an oppressed people and gives right-wing Israeli extremists a perfect reason to launch more attacks on the Arabs and refuse to discuss peace.
Israel's supporters insist it has the absolute right to drop hundreds of tonnes of bombs on 'Hamas targets' inside the 360sq km Gaza Strip to 'take out the terrorists'.
Civilians suffer, says Israel, because the cowardly Hamas hide among them.
Actually, it is more like shooting fish in a barrel.
Omitting facts[/b]
As usual, this cartoon-like version of events omits a great deal of nuance and background.
Seventy per cent of Palestinian children suffer from psychological trauma [GALLO/GETTY] While firing rockets at civilians is a crime so, too, is the Israeli blockade of Gaza, which is an egregious violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions.... ---------------------------
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
Not to mention incredibly condescending. Though it's nice of you to admit "it's been an imperfect experiment", I'm sure the thousands of Palestinians who've lost their lives, homes, love ones, will appreciate candour.
welcome to the twisted logic of Soulstrut. someone suggests economic prosperity is the key to piece. I point out that many Israelis have advanced this very idea and it hasn't worked, and link to some commentary explaining that the hope of economic prosperity ending the violence is condescending. then another dude comes in, in in apparent agreement with the first dude, talmbout economic prosperity being the key to piece (the very idea advanced by the first dude) is condescending!
No you are condescending. Not the radical (sarcasm) idea that economic prosperity / stability can bring peace. And just because you write that Duderonomy, Netanyahu and you, are all in agreement doesn't make it so, apparent or not. That's twisted logic.
I'd like to hear a very succinct answer from those who oppose Israel's current policies as to what they SHOULD do to solve this problem. Short, to the point, black and white answers please.
While it has frequently been rubbished on here as an over-simplification to compare Northern Ireland with what's happening in Israel/Palestine, I still think that prosperity for the Palestinians is the only way to dislodge Hamas. As much as Tony Blair & Clinton would like to take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, it was gentrification that settled things down; now the IRA & UDF have dropped political extremism for dealing drugs and guns, often between each other.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
Completely absurd. Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone, not prosperous. What he says and what he does are entirely different things. He is evil filth, as is much of the Israeli establishment.
What's happening right now in Gaza is horrible and wrong.
^^^ clearly didn't read the commmentary I linked to ^^^
b/w
people that use this type of exaggerated and offensive rhetoric ("Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone") can never explain to me why the Palestinian population in the W. Bank and Gaza (indeed, even within Israel itself) is growing at such an impressive rate. Meanwhile the Israeli military is supposedly some sort of fantastic killing machine. And Israeli gov'ts keep ceding territory to the Arabs (Sinai, Lebanon, Gaza) and treating wounded Palestinians in their hospitals. I cram to understand how the Israelis expect to meet their genocidal goals with such behavior.
I'd like to hear a very succinct answer from those who oppose Israel's current policies as to what they SHOULD do to solve this problem. Short, to the point, black and white answers please.
Withdraw from the Occupied Territories.
Is that easy enough for you, Rich? If you don't know anything about this subject, why do you even have an opinion?
So why did Hamas shoot their rockets into Israel then?
Did they have some stated objective?
Were they unaware that Israel would turn around and smash them?
If they were aware then I suppose they are taking full responsibility for all the deaths right? And if they weren't aware then why don't they surrender right away so more people don't die?
I really don't have an opinion on this since I don't know anything about it.
Again though, wasn't Hamas democratically elected? Then doesn't that mean that anything that Hamas does it does as the State of Palestine? i.e. it was Government officials that fired those rockets and not just rogue militants?
Somebody help me out here. CNN always assumes that you know what is going on. This shit always seems to come out of nowhere, like the Russia/Georgia thing.
So why did Hamas shoot their rockets into Israel then?
Did they have some stated objective?
Were they unaware that Israel would turn around and smash them?
If they were aware then I suppose they are taking full responsibility for all the deaths right? And if they weren't aware then why don't they surrender right away so more people don't die?
I really don't have an opinion on this since I don't know anything about it.
Again though, wasn't Hamas democratically elected? Then doesn't that mean that anything that Hamas does it does as the State of Palestine? i.e. it was Government officials that fired those rockets and not just rogue militants?
Somebody help me out here. CNN always assumes that you know what is going on. This shit always seems to come out of nowhere, like the Russia/Georgia thing.
I am in search of the article(s) that might give you a thorough answer. But I think a lot of it has to do with the blockade around the Gaza Strip as well as the cutting off of supply vehicles allowed through in the six months or so.
Comments
You can't have it both ways, kid.
Killing someone to save yourself = immoral
Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, in which Jews killed Nazis to save themselves = unity of the kind responsible for all social justice in the world and...wait for it...immoral?
I know I should have the self-contol to refrain from further contributing to this foolishness, but it's way more engaging than the law of annuities. Forgive me.
But really, I'd like to say what I wrote about "fear" was misguided. I wish that we are all brave in the face of evil, although I'd be scared shitless in the face of the SS and Gestapo. I hope that I'd be able to fight through that fear and live or die in accord with my morals. What led actions like Kaster's was not about fear, but selfishness and ideology. These are the tendencies for which we should always be wary.
I'd also like to apologize for derailing this thread by being a provocateur. What is happening in Gaza right now is much more worthy of discussion than how we should understand the history of Jews who aided the Nazis.
It breaks my heart to see Israel's stupidity
It has a right to respond to attacks, but will not achieve its ultimate aim - peace - until it stops thinking in military terms
Israel's attempt to wipe out Hamas is understandable, but stupid. No country in the world is going to ignore the provocation of rockets being launched from neighbouring territory day after day. If Mexico had a group of anti-imperialists bombing Texas, imagine how long it would take for America to mobilise a counterattack. Israel has every right to respond.
Read the rest here.
There's obviously a bit more to it than that, but I don't understand how anybody can separate Hamas from civilian when the entire population has nothing[/b] to lose.
WE CAN DO THIS
Ask not what this thread can do for you etc etc
Netanyahu agrees with you 100%, as does much of the Israeli establishment. the idea that prosperity for the Palestinians would lower support for armed action against Israel has been advanced for years. it hasn't really panned out, though. consider that the Palestinians under full Israeli occupation (pre-Oslo peace process) enjoyed a higher standard of living than most of the Arab world. granted, the Palestinians lacked ANY political horizon at that point, and in the subsequent peace process years their economic prosperity was largely lost to corruption and mismanagement, so I admit it's been an imperfect experiment.
here's some commentary on this very idea if you're interested.
Completely absurd. Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone, not prosperous. What he says and what he does are entirely different things. He is evil filth, as is much of the Israeli establishment.
What's happening right now in Gaza is horrible and wrong.
1. Hamas/Palestine fires missiles into Isreal for some reason.
2. Isreal gets pissed and strikes back super hard core.
3. Some people think they shouldn't have.
4. Hamas is the democratically elected leader of Palestine therefore Hamas=Palestine and vice versa. So if Israel has already killed 500 palestinians maybe they are like "well you shouldn't have elected Hamas as your leaders then, stupid."...?
5. Sometehing about Russia.
Not to mention incredibly condescending. Though it's nice of you to admit "it's been an imperfect experiment", I'm sure the thousands of Palestinians who've lost their lives, homes, love ones, will appreciate candour.
^^^ clearly didn't read the commmentary I linked to ^^^
b/w
people that use this type of exaggerated and offensive rhetoric ("Netanyahu wants the Palestinians dead and gone") can never explain to me why the Palestinian population in the W. Bank and Gaza (indeed, even within Israel itself) is growing at such an impressive rate. Meanwhile the Israeli military is supposedly some sort of fantastic killing machine. And Israeli gov'ts keep ceding territory to the Arabs (Sinai, Lebanon, Gaza) and treating wounded Palestinians in their hospitals. I cram to understand how the Israelis expect to meet their genocidal goals with such behavior.
This time around it all started because Hamas wouldn't stop firing rockets into Israel. Like this is not one of the most complicated and long standing conflicts of the modern era.
welcome to the twisted logic of Soulstrut. someone suggests economic prosperity is the key to piece. I point out that many Israelis have advanced this very idea and it hasn't worked, and link to some commentary explaining that the hope of economic prosperity ending the violence is condescending. then another dude comes in, in in apparent agreement with the first dude, talmbout economic prosperity being the key to piece (the very idea advanced by the first dude) is condescending!
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/war_on_gaza/2009/01/200914102257130539.html
Israel's fait accompli in Gaza[/b]
by Eric S. Margolis[/b]
There are two completely different versions of what is currently happening in Gaza.
In the Israeli and North American press version, Hamas - 'Islamic terrorists' backed by Iran - have in an unprovoked attack fired deadly rockets on innocent Israel with the intent of destroying the Jewish state.
North American politicians and the media say Israel "has the right to defend itself".
True enough. No Israeli government can tolerate rockets hitting its towns, even though the casualty totals have been less than the car crash fatalities registered during a single holiday weekend on Israel's roads.
The firing of the feeble, home-made al-Qassam rockets by Palestinians is both useless and counter-productive.
It damages their image as an oppressed people and gives right-wing Israeli extremists a perfect reason to launch more attacks on the Arabs and refuse to discuss peace.
Israel's supporters insist it has the absolute right to drop hundreds of tonnes of bombs on 'Hamas targets' inside the 360sq km Gaza Strip to 'take out the terrorists'.
Civilians suffer, says Israel, because the cowardly Hamas hide among them.
Actually, it is more like shooting fish in a barrel.
Omitting facts[/b]
As usual, this cartoon-like version of events omits a great deal of nuance and background.
Seventy per cent of Palestinian children suffer from psychological trauma [GALLO/GETTY] While firing rockets at civilians is a crime so, too, is the Israeli blockade of Gaza, which is an egregious violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions....
---------------------------
For coverage from the inside, check: Electronic Infitada
Eric Margolis.
Draft a paragraph.
That is more than one.
Sentence long.
No you are condescending.
Not the radical (sarcasm) idea that economic prosperity / stability can bring peace.
And just because you write that Duderonomy, Netanyahu and you, are all in agreement doesn't make it so, apparent or not. That's twisted logic.
But then, I've long ago stopped expecting poasters like you to actually bother to read.
Apologies
You are a brainwashed muppet.
Withdraw from the Occupied Territories.
Is that easy enough for you, Rich? If you don't know anything about this subject, why do you even have an opinion?
where's my graemlin related.
SOULSTRUT IS ....
Never having to know anything about a subject you have strong opinions on.
Did they have some stated objective?
Were they unaware that Israel would turn around and smash them?
If they were aware then I suppose they are taking full responsibility for all the deaths right? And if they weren't aware then why don't they surrender right away so more people don't die?
I really don't have an opinion on this since I don't know anything about it.
Again though, wasn't Hamas democratically elected? Then doesn't that mean that anything that Hamas does it does as the State of Palestine? i.e. it was Government officials that fired those rockets and not just rogue militants?
Somebody help me out here. CNN always assumes that you know what is going on. This shit always seems to come out of nowhere, like the Russia/Georgia thing.
I am in search of the article(s) that might give you a thorough answer. But I think a lot of it has to do with the blockade around the Gaza Strip as well as the cutting off of supply vehicles allowed through in the six months or so.
Why is the sky blue?
Why is water wet?
Why did Judas grab the Romans while Jesus slept?