Hezbollah started this

Infinity_Now

OK - Back to the news:

http://gnn.tv/articles/2445/Kidnapped_in_Israel_or_Captured_in_Lebanon

THERE IS A DISCREPANCY, over who entered where and who "shot first."

one story) tells us that Hezbollah did it, they entered Israeli territory and attacked a tank. highly unrational, who the fuck would attack a tank?

another story) tells us that Israel did it, they entered Lebanon and initiated/provoked rational albeit aggressive Hezbollah response.

So far - there is no official version.

Israel has given us no continuity, and thus far have no census of responsible reporting of their activities.

Hezbollah - well, they can't be trusted.

I'm kinda furious over this, so it's best summed up by a poster on GNN:

"...it is more important to acknowledge the disparity in the reporting and show that a true consesus does not exist. Therefore an investigation prior to military action should have been obvious before anyone backed the Isreali war on Lebanon."

If Israel was not acting aggressively - if they were so innocent, would they have been so voracious to go after their deus ex machina-like plan of attack?

It seems, like I trust the fact that Israeli response has thus far been of criminal neglect for the Palestinian people, and so outrageously extraordinarily out of focus - ... I blame them.

There I said it, and yes I have booked my flight to the moon.

If they wanted to defend their people - they would demand a cease-fire with Hezbollah, and apologize for the totally accidental deaths of those Palestinians in Gaza a month prior to this whole clusterfuck. That way the bombs stop and the soldiers can go back to doing their job of defending Israeli borders - instead of wanton murder and near insane destuction of thier Palestinian neighborhood.

If Israel was innocent - they'd probably also be humane enough to find a way out of this nonsense instead of:

"The Israeli Cabinet authorized "severe and harsh" retaliation on Lebanon - 400 inoocent Lebanese killed vs 24 innocent Israeli's killed. Israel's cief of staff Lt. Gen Dan Halutz, told Israel's Channel 10, "If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years."

Look!

2 kidnaped soldiers are not worth violently invading your neighboring, non-combative, sovereign nation and saying, "We are going to turn your clock back 20 years."

That's not what diplomacy, democracy, intelligence, and hard-honest-thinking administrators of a civilized government are meant to do. Question that sort of brutish behavior.

...

If you truly, still feel that Israel's response is thus far justified after considering the ISRAELI CONDITION of 2 soldiers vs. 20 years of suffering - then fuck you, you're ignorant beyond my capabilities of belief.

Having said that - Hezbollah are sure as hell not innocent, nor do they deserve to be defended. I'm just saying - stop Israel from killing hundreds before turning to Hezbollah and stoning them for killing a handfull...


...I had better get packing. Who's comming with me?

"Jan... Jan! Thank you - Jan!"

rightondude

PaperPlates wrote:

I refuse to feel bad for someone who poked a bigger guy with a stick, and then is surprised when the bigger guy turns around and whoops his ass.

Is that what you think is going on in the Gaza Strip? What role do you think the Israeli's are playing there?

Infinity_Now

rightondude wrote:

Is that what you think is going on in the Gaza Strip? What role do you think the Israeli's are playing there?

Jingoism and a dash of imperialism?

... coupled with a full cup of religious seasoned paranoia all baked in a pan the size of interstellar egos that's inscribed, "I'm right, you're wrong, as long as I'm right, you're wrong."

When you put it all together, it resembles unconditional war served by both sides.

Zaphod Beeblebrox: "If there's anything around here more important than my ego, I want it caught and shot now!"

What role? Warmongers.

shiraz

Puck78 wrote:

It is true, I'm contact with a lot of israeli peace activists and lawyer that denounce the situation in israeli jails for palestinians. At the same time i'm in contact with palestinian human rights activists that are always ready to denounce the attacks on civilians by palestinians to israeli people. However, thay are already busy enough to denounce about torture in jails, etc. You know, they have to deal with the occupation...

I know, but its not good enough for me. I think specifically because of all the escalation around here, they have a *responsibility* for making their balanced / sane voice heard, just like we're doing right now. You know, Israel is at war, it's no picnic for us either but we're doing everything we can to make a different voice to be heared.

Infinity_Now

Zaphod Beeblebrox:

"In the name of people and freedom... democracy and stuff. *haha* I hereby kidnap myself, and I'm taking this ship with me!"

There you go, start a war.

We were kidnaped. As long as we win - we're innocent.

You can all forget the loser - they're the ones who started this thing in the first place.

History will always tell the story of the winner, because there is nothing left of the loser to talk about. You can't find out what would have happened if the otherside won the race.

That's what the winner - being in the case of war, the criminal is counting on.

Both sides at war are committing the same horrible crimes. Until one side wins, then they are forgiven. Then the loser becomes the aggressor against the winner.

Hence Israel should strive for peace - if they want to succeed in my eyes. And I do want them to succeed - I'd prefer this thing be over with right now. All they have to do is so the same - if they prefer this thing be over right now, or then... whenever - then they will have won the peace - then we will have seen thier innocence.

Untill then - they're commiting the same murders as Hamas and Hezbollah, they''re playing the same game - as Noam Chomsky would most likely agree, they're acting as terrorist states... all three of them.

That's my justification for calling Israel a "warmonger" mind you - I don't "hate" or dislike Israel because of it - I'm just saying what I see.

shiraz

Eva7 wrote:

But I am afraid that this escalation of violence now will bring the average people to support more military actions from the Israeli government. I hope I am wrong, of course

.

You are, in fact there are more and more voices who call to end this situation around here.

Eva7 wrote:

about this board and the support to Palestine.... this board doesn't reflect the world in this case. for decades, the Israeli politics have been supported by all the western governments (the US first of all) and the corporate media.

.

World = people of the world, no govts. Do you know what its like to have everyones finger poited at you? I can't even writing about buying a cd, eating a killer ice cream or just being frustrated about the situation I'm into right now, without someone will say/write something demagogic like "Yeh, enjoy your ice cream while Palestinians are starving". Do you know how does it feel when your whole existence and essence are being condensed into just one aspect (Israel-Palestinians conflict)? I'm worry that too many people like me will eventually reach some kind of a boiling point, and we all know what will happen next - balanced view will turn into a radical one. I'm telling you, Eva, lots of us in Israel feel more and more pressed against the wall, and there's no way something good will come out of it, only catastrophic.

Eva7 wrote:

I have been working and researching about media propaganda, and I have been part of study projects on the US/Israeli propaganda worldwide, and I have to disagree with you about this. About the Palestinians, you should know better than me about their living conditions, so I don't see how you can expect such awareness from them

See Puck78's post about it, and my latest response to her.

Eva7 wrote:

There are peaceful palestinians and there are palestinians who choose the violence as a defence, exactly like it happens in Israel

Never said anything else...

Eva7 wrote:

As well, I am in touch with several groups for peace in Palestine. and I agree with you, palestinians who have voted for hamas or have supported terrorist groups are not doing good to the cause, I totally agree.

We were SO disappointed, almost 80% of them had voted to an organization who doesn't recognize Israel right to exist.

Eva7 wrote:

But this doesn't have to let us forget the horrible conditions of life in Palestine ,and the constant massacres by the Israeli army. you cannot pretend this doesn't happen, and cannot pretend that the world media costantly bury such reports and all the reports from the humanitarian groups

I'm living here, I'm living IT, the last thing I (and the rest of Israeli's) need is a constant reminder to what's going on in my country. And I never claim we're not doing this things around here either. About the media - well, I can say the exact same thing about reports about Israel. You wouldn't believe how many times things that are happening around here are being twisted against us. Both of us are the victim of interests.

Eva7 wrote:

but again ,I don't want to fall into the logic of who is wrong and who is right. but if you ask me, what has always damaged the peace process to me is the silence and non-action of the international community, and the powerful US foreign politics.

And also the unbalanced & narrow view of TOO many people around the world.

Ahnimus

Shiraz, your governments actions have put it in the spotlight. Hezbollah kidnapping soldiers is nothing new. But this time I guess they reached the "boiling point" and now the Lebonese are feeling the wrath of Israel. Nobody is holding you responsible, unless of course you support these actions. Then you will inevitably feel the pressure. You can't deny the history of the region and Israel's place in it, it's like that where ever you live. You guys picked a bad spot, should have taken Zion in Africa.

shiraz

Ahnimus wrote:

Shiraz, your governments actions have put it in the spotlight. Hezbollah kidnapping soldiers is nothing new. But this time I guess they reached the "boiling point" and now the Lebonese are feeling the wrath of Israel. Nobody is holding you responsible, unless of course you support these actions. Then you will inevitably feel the pressure. You can't deny the history of the region and Israel's place in it, it's like that where ever you live. You guys picked a bad spot, should have taken Zion in Africa.

Nobody, really? is that why you has just called me a sheep who is blindedly following her govt decision (in another thread)? Is that why you automatically assumed I'm not recognizing the situation in Palestine? Is that why you think I feel stressed cause I "deny the history of the region and Israel's place in it"? Is that why a debate about some jewish organization turned into Israel-Palestine debate, with your fingures pointed at me, a simple civilian?

Take a long good look at your self, you are a perfect example of what I wrote to Eva.

Infinity_Now

"tele" - far from
"vision" - sight

Watch this.

http://throwawayyourtv.com/2006/07/peace-propaganda-promised-land.html

How can you justify Israels position?
How can you justify Israels actions?
Can you justify their occupation?

Can you trust their lies of defense?
Can we even see their lines of defense?

No.
It's offense, offense, offense, offense, offense, offense...
On all sides.

The only ones defending themselves are the non-combative civilians.
I reapeat - the only ones defending themselves are the non-combative civilians.

The IDF,
They don't seem to be defending anybody.
They don't seem to be asking Hezbollah to stop throwing bombs.
To the contrary, they seem to be taking Hezbolla's bombs and throwing them back with 10x more force.

I'd love this to make any sense. It doesn't.
If anybody has any good reason why Israel should be doing what they are doing, I'd like to hear it.

So far we've been bickering a lot over personal opinions and matters of rhetoric - but there's been little discussion of actual factual actions of state.

Rue D'Awakening

Ahnimus wrote:

Many Palestinians say they do not wish Shalit to be harmed, but they back the demand to free some of the 9,000 underage Palestinian prisoners, including infants, held by “Israel”.

i didn't read past this part of the thread because i wanted to take this opportunity to point out a clear example of how you distort facts and figures.

9-10,000 is the estimate for ALL palestinians in Israeli jails. not just the underage.

i also challenge you to prove that israel has imprisoned a single palestinian "infant".

shiraz

Rue D'Awakening wrote:

i didn't read past this part of the thread because i wanted to take this opportunity to point out a clear example of how you distort facts and figures.

9-10,000 is the estimate for ALL palestinians in Israeli jails. not just the underage.

i also challenge you to prove that israel has imprisoned a single palestinian "infant".

Hi, how are you? I heared today it was "your turn" to have missiles all around. Is everything ok?

Anyway: You are right about the numbers, and about the infant (= little kids or babys, right?) thing. The only way it could happen is for some woman prisoner to given birth inside prison.

Infinity_Now

Having watched the rest of the video posted above, I figured it out.

One word to describe all that's is happening in the Middle East, everything that's going horribly wrong:

Feudalism.

It's feudalism of the Israeli population, and it's trying to force that feudalism on Palestinians - if they refuse then they are denied life, liberty, and property - if Palestinians refuse Israeli feudalism then they are called "a threat."

shiraz - regardless of your opinions, it would seem to me you're living in a feudal state. But oh - don't be sad, I think we're all living in the same plot of land.

There is definitly some hardcore feudalism at work here:

"The glue that held the feudal “state” together was vassalage, which can be defined as “a system in which a free man binds himself personally to a lord, offering him loyalty and military service in return for protection and the use of property (usually land).” 11 It was entered into by doing homage, which was a ceremony in which the lesser man, kneeling before the greater man with hands joined as if in prayer, pledged himself and his loyalty to the greater man. In some areas, the pledge was “sealed with a kiss.” Ties of vassalage lasted during the entire lives of both lord and vassal. 12 Vassalage was thus a complex politico-military system based on ties of personal dependence within which all men were the “men of other men,” to whom they owed obedience and loyalty and from whom they expected unwavering assistance and beneficence. Thus, dukes, counts, marquis, and even bishops and abbots pledged themselves to their kings. Lesser knights pledged themselves to counts and marquis, and so on. As will be seen in the next chapter, the rise of the territorial state involved replacing an idea of politico-military power and authority rooted in the personal ties of loyalty and obedience to individuals with a conception of politics rooted in identity with and loyalty to the institutions of the sovereign territorial state.

Although some vassals resided in the households of their lords, more significant were those who were granted an estate called a fief, from which the vassal could derive sufficient income to feed, clothe, and arm himself and, if the fief was large enough, keep an armed retinue. Political power in the form of immunities, that is, the right to collect taxes and tolls, dispense justice, and coin money, were often delegated by the king to local lords. The granting of land from which the vassal could derive personal income became the most common way of rewarding service, because land was the primary source of wealth. From the king’s point of view, granting fiefs to vassals was a way of shifting the cost of maintaining an army of heavy cavalry to the warriors themselves. 13

Vassals provided the king with three forms of service. The first was military, which involved appearing fully armed when summoned by the king. The second was counsel, or advice on important decisions, a legacy of the German practice of involving all warriors in decisions affecting the tribe. The third was financial, which involved payments of money to the king to help him meet unusual expenses such as ransoming himself from his enemies, paying for the great feast given when his eldest son was knighted and given horses and armor, or when his eldest daughter was married. 14 As will be shown below, such aid evolved into modern systems of general taxation.

The feudal contract was binding on both lord and vassal for life, although it could be broken by mutual agreement or individual public renunciation. Nonetheless, at the beginning of the medieval period, the status of the lesser vassals was precarious. Their fiefs could be seized by the king for no reason at all or exchanged for others. Vassals had no assurance that their lands would be inherited by their heirs, because after a vassal’s death, the fief legally reverted back to the king. In other words, the vassal had no hereditary right to the fief. As a consequence, vassals became obsessed with strengthening rights of inheritance any way they could. The transference of a fief exclusively from father to son did eventually become hereditary under laws of primogeniture, although it was never automatic and had to be reaffirmed by the king. Kings gladly acquiesced to these efforts because they did not want fiefs to become too small by inheritance to provide protection. Laws of primogeniture replaced the earlier Germanic custom that favored equal inheritance among sons and daughters. Therefore, although there were occasionally exceptions, as a rule, women were unable to inherit fiefs. When a woman was permitted to inherit, it was always with the proviso that her husband perform vassalic duties in her stead. If the firstborn son was too young to meet the obligations of a vassal, an adult relative, usually a maternal uncle, was chosen to exercise vassalage until the minor came of age.

Fiefs were subdivided into manors, the basis of the feudal agricultural economy. The lord of each manor was a free man who owed feudal obligations to the lord of the fief. Thus, political and economic life were thoroughly intertwined within the feudal “state.” The peasants who lived on the manor were free, half-free, or tenants called serfs. They tilled a plot of land owned by the lord of the manor, who gave the serf life tenure and military protection for as long as he paid an annual rent in produce, labor, and money. 15"

I always knew there was a conspicuously absent gap in History class from lessons on feudalism and the Middle Ages to the period of the Enlightenment and modern industrialization - they always came one right after the other, as it is apparent to some degree that we are indeed seeing the remnants of that archaic feudal state in our modern "democratized" nations... Maybe that's what's causing this war? People aren't quite getting what they are promised? They are told, "Democracy!" - but all they get is... well, I think I've made my point.

farfromglorified

Infinity_Now wrote:

Having watched the rest of the video posted above, I figured it out.

"I"????

It's feudalism of the Israeli population, and it's trying to force that feudalism on Palestinians - if they refuse then they are denied life, liberty, and property - if Palestinians refuse Israeli feudalism then they are called "a threat."

It is not the business of Isreal to give a foreign population "life, liberty, and property". It is the business of the Palestinians to give these things to themselves. War and warmaking are the opposite of those things, and both sides are involved in warmaking.

I always knew there was a conspicuously absent gap in History class from lessons on feudalism and the Middle Ages to the period of the Enlightenment and modern industrialization

It's known as the birth of capitalism.

Infinity_Now

farfromglorified wrote:

It is not the business of Isreal to give a foreign population "life, liberty, and property". It is the business of the Palestinians to give these things to themselves. War and warmaking are the opposite of those things, and both sides are involved in warmaking.

It is not the business of Israel to TAKE AWAY THESE THINGS!

I'll put this in real simple terms,

Israel are the fuckers, Palestinians are the fucked.

Every single thing I have learned over the past few weeks about this conflict that spans back to Israel's conception - is war, war, war - that is all Israel has done since they became a nation. Not one single action of peace - not one. I challenge anybody to show clearly ONE SINGLE PEACEFUL ACTION on Israel's part.

Good luck.

War is not the answer.
That is peace.
One side must provide peace.
Then all will be forgiven.

It's really that simple, and it's not even that poetic - it's almost completely logical. If Israel can't provide peace - then what right do they have of hundreds of billions of dollars in arms? At this point - I don't think Hezbollah has anything to do with it - sure, they're bad - but ... they don't even compare. If Israel would stand down, and give Palestinians their land back - then Hezbollah would probably drop to their knees and cry in the streets.

danmac

farfromglorified wrote:

I have read my history. And it tells me that force creates oppression.



They did so by force. They fought against an oppressive government such that they could establish their own.



They did so by force. The Vietcong fought one oppressive invader in favor of another.



They did so by force. They fought against an oppressive government such that they could establish their own.



They did so by the greater force of a greater oppressor.



They did so by force. And they're in the middle of a fight against a new system of oppression.



The point that oppression begets oppression? Yes, you've made that point quite well. If only you could see it.

This is a well reasoned, if flawed response. To say what the (black) South Africans have now is worse than apartheid or white oppression, is not really in keeping with the reality of the world they live in.
Nor the Vietcong, nor can i see how the people of the Philipines wil ever say life was better under the Japanese than the Americans and eventually Marcos.
Good counterpoints, though I don't see how in the real world you proose to end regimes of tyranny and oppression.

So, should all those oppressed in the world simply do nothing?

I cannot think of an example where peaceful methods have ended oppression. Has there been a bloodless revolution? India and Gandhi, perhaps, though that wasn't really an army of occupation or oppression, more colonial and exploitation.

Infinity_Now

oppression yields oppression
peace yields peace

If there were no peaceful solutions to wars (of oppression) would there be any meaning whatsoever to war?

I don't think the peaceful would allow oppression (in their ranks.)
and I don't think the oppressors would allow peace (in their oppression.)

If you have one side - Israel, acting as the oppresor.
They won't allow peace to overtake them.
This is why I insist that Israel disarm.
Then Hezbollah will follow.
Because Hezbollah are not peaceful - they are oppressed and thus linked to the state of Israel.
Hezbollah will not allow peace to overtake them, either.
Because if they do - then the oppressor, Israel will stomp all over them forever.

"A boot stamping on a human face, forever." - Oppresion, war, ... so much for western civilization. There I go longing for the moon again.

Infinity_Now

Before I start to sound sort of... unreasonable - I must say this:

If American's were as BRAVE AS ISRAELIS who go over to Palestine and help rebuild homes and mend relations - then maybe the entire country of Iraq would not hate U.S. nor would our little Iraqi venture have FAILED SO MISERABLY.

...I'm quite tired now, so I'm typing as literally as I'm feeling these words emotionally as they come out of my head - hence the emboldening of certain words.

farfromglorified

danmac wrote:

This is a well reasoned, if flawed response. To say what the (black) South Africans have now is worse than apartheid or white oppression, is not really in keeping with the reality of the world they live in.

Nor the Vietcong, nor can i see how the people of the Philipines wil ever say life was better under the Japanese than the Americans and eventually Marcos.
Good counterpoints, though I don't see how in the real world you proose to end regimes of tyranny and oppression.

So, should all those oppressed in the world simply do nothing?

I cannot think of an example where peaceful methods have ended oppression. Has there been a bloodless revolution? India and Gandhi, perhaps, though that wasn't really an army of occupation or oppression, more colonial and exploitation.

I never said that any of those situations are worse now. For the most part, all of them are now better than they were.

The oppressed in the world should not do nothing. They should first reject oppression. This means not participating in their oppression or becoming oppressors.

You cannot think of an example where peaceful methods have ended oppression??? This says much about your world view. You may start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Revolution

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17th_century_philosophy

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

farfromglorified

Infinity_Now wrote:

It is not the business of Israel to TAKE AWAY THESE THINGS!

I completely agree.

I'll put this in real simple terms,

Israel are the fuckers, Palestinians are the fucked.

You are not the only one to sacrifice reason for simplicity.

Every single thing I have learned over the past few weeks about this conflict that spans back to Israel's conception - is war, war, war - that is all Israel has done since they became a nation. Not one single action of peace - not one. I challenge anybody to show clearly ONE SINGLE PEACEFUL ACTION on Israel's part.

Here's one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords

It's really that simple, and it's not even that poetic - it's almost completely logical. If Israel can't provide peace - then what right do they have of hundreds of billions of dollars in arms? At this point - I don't think Hezbollah has anything to do with it - sure, they're bad - but ... they don't even compare. If Israel would stand down, and give Palestinians their land back - then Hezbollah would probably drop to their knees and cry in the streets.

"Almost logical". Yes. Almost.

If you believe that Israel leaving Lebanon would stop the attacks, perhaps you should read the Hezbollah charter. Or perhaps you should realize that Israel did leave Lebanon 6 years ago.

Infinity_Now

OH! One more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution

I named my band after that one... "Vital Revolution" meaning "healthy" Revolution...