Rachel Corrie....dead at 23

13

Comments

  • haffajappa
    haffajappa British Columbia Posts: 5,955
    "terrorism" is a very subjective term...
    live pearl jam is best pearl jam
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,167
    One's man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, blah, blah, blah...this is the sort of relativistic nonsense that people come up with when they're confronted by the reality that the guys they are backing are actually sadistic maniacs. When you strap a bomb to yourself filled with ball bearing and nails, walk into a cafe full of people and blow yourself up you are a terrorist. Very simple, very clear cut.

    It's amazing how people never learn lessons from history. For example, a story I just heard from an Austrian journalist friend...the first time he went to San Francisco he visited the Castro. He came away absolutely astounded by the fact that the community in the Castro were lionizing Fidel and Che as symbols of revolution, even though these were guys that were rounding up gays and throwing them in camps. The lessen being that the left has an unnerving ability to ignore the reality of evil when it suits them. Stalin for example, and now Hamas...
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    there is only one oppressing country in this tragic affair and it's not palestine ... one can decry the horrors of suicide bombers all day but yet not see the horrors of denying people land, food, water and medicine ... how is that possible? :(
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    polaris_x wrote:
    there is only one oppressing country in this tragic affair and it's not palestine ... one can decry the horrors of suicide bombers all day but yet not see the horrors of denying people land, food, water and medicine ... how is that possible? :(

    I don't know, does anyone in this thread think that the Palestinians don't have legitimate reasons to be upset?
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,167
    I don't deny any of what the Palestinians suffer. I'm just not so foolish as to think that there are easy solutions to this conflict, nor am I so foolish or so malicious as to think that Israel WANTS to be oppressing the Palestinians. Objectively true or not, Israel feels that the measures it has taken are necessary and defensive. I do not agree with this in every case, but I recognize the nuance of the situation.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    rebornFixer wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    there is only one oppressing country in this tragic affair and it's not palestine ... one can decry the horrors of suicide bombers all day but yet not see the horrors of denying people land, food, water and medicine ... how is that possible? :(

    I don't know, does anyone in this thread think that the Palestinians don't have legitimate reasons to be upset?

    you tell me ... maybe ask the person who thinks palestinians are to blame for spurning peace ...
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    yosi wrote:
    I don't deny any of what the Palestinians suffer. I'm just not so foolish as to think that there are easy solutions to this conflict, nor am I so foolish or so malicious as to think that Israel WANTS to be oppressing the Palestinians. Objectively true or not, Israel feels that the measures it has taken are necessary and defensive. I do not agree with this in every case, but I recognize the nuance of the situation.

    so ... what you are in fact saying is that it is OK to oppress the palestinians because it is necessary for Israel - in essence rationalizing their behaviour as appropriate ...
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    polaris_x wrote:
    you tell me ... maybe ask the person who thinks palestinians are to blame for spurning peace ...

    He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I've read enough of yosi's posts to know that he does feel that Israel bears part of the blame here. He doesn't ignore the role Israel plays. He just doesn't feel that one side holds every single card here, and I happen to agree with him. Suicide bombings and cross-border raids don't put food in the bellies of kids.
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,167
    polaris_x wrote:
    yosi wrote:
    I don't deny any of what the Palestinians suffer. I'm just not so foolish as to think that there are easy solutions to this conflict, nor am I so foolish or so malicious as to think that Israel WANTS to be oppressing the Palestinians. Objectively true or not, Israel feels that the measures it has taken are necessary and defensive. I do not agree with this in every case, but I recognize the nuance of the situation.

    so ... what you are in fact saying is that it is OK to oppress the palestinians because it is necessary for Israel - in essence rationalizing their behaviour as appropriate ...

    I'm not saying it's ok, I'm saying it's reality, and reality sucks, and it's tragic. But pretending that the Palestinians don't have a history of attacking and killing Israelis is stupid and false. From what I know of Israel, which is quite a lot having lived there, most Israelis would want nothing more than to end the occupation and have nothing more to do with the Palestinians for the rest of their lives. Unfortunately, they are also convinced that the Palestinians have never reconciled themselves to Israel's existence and that the minute the occupation ends violence will jump right back up to the worst levels of the second intifada. So they support the occupation because they believe they must for their security, even as they hate the occupation for all the reasons that should be obvious plus a few that are all their own.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    rebornFixer wrote:
    He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I've read enough of yosi's posts to know that he does feel that Israel bears part of the blame here. He doesn't ignore the role Israel plays. He just doesn't feel that one side holds every single card here, and I happen to agree with him. Suicide bombings and cross-border raids don't put food in the bellies of kids.

    how many suicide bombings have happened in the past decade? ... it's all anyone points at when clearly the problem is the daily crime against humanity israel sujects palestinians to ... the casualty rate is one-sided ... rationalizing their behaviour as if they are somehow an equal in any way makes no sense to me ...

    what can the palestinians do that they haven't done in the last 40+ years? ... they've done ceasefires, they've done negotiations ... all the while, illegal settlements pop up ... land is taken away ... food, medicine, clean water, etc ...
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    yosi wrote:
    I'm not saying it's ok, I'm saying it's reality, and reality sucks, and it's tragic. But pretending that the Palestinians don't have a history of attacking and killing Israelis is stupid and false. From what I know of Israel, which is quite a lot having lived there, most Israelis would want nothing more than to end the occupation and have nothing more to do with the Palestinians for the rest of their lives. Unfortunately, they are also convinced that the Palestinians have never reconciled themselves to Israel's existence and that the minute the occupation ends violence will jump right back up to the worst levels of the second intifada. So they support the occupation because they believe they must for their security, even as they hate the occupation for all the reasons that should be obvious plus a few that are all their own.

    reality sucks!? ... if i kick you in the head every day and one day you decide to kick back - does it make it ok for me to continue to kick you? ...

    i don't doubt that many israelis would love peace but what israelis fail to recognize is that their actions aren't leading to peace ... they are just making a bad situation worse every single day ...
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,167
    The same could (and should) be said about the Palestinians who fire rockets at Israeli towns, and continue to attempt bombings and kidnappings (now almost universally unsuccessful due to Israel's draconian security actions). Actions have consequences.

    As for casualty numbers, they don't tell the whole story. Sometimes they don't even tell the truth. To begin with a frivolous example that nonetheless proves a point, I would imagine that during all of the second world war the number of American civilians killed by the Germans was virtually zero, while America killed thousands upon thousands of German civilians. If we are judging oppression based on numbers alone than America has some explaining to do to the descendants of the Nazis.

    Israel is the more powerful actor, for sure. That doesn't mean it is in the wrong. Besides which power is a matter of perspective. If you look just at Israel and the Palestinians Israel is a goliath. However if you view the same situation the way an Israeli might, within the context of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel is a tiny country surrounded on all sides by hostile neighbors.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    actions DO have consequences ... who acted first?
  • haffajappa
    haffajappa British Columbia Posts: 5,955
    yosi wrote:
    One's man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, blah, blah, blah...this is the sort of relativistic nonsense that people come up with when they're confronted by the reality that the guys they are backing are actually sadistic maniacs. When you strap a bomb to yourself filled with ball bearing and nails, walk into a cafe full of people and blow yourself up you are a terrorist. Very simple, very clear cut.

    It's amazing how people never learn lessons from history. For example, a story I just heard from an Austrian journalist friend...the first time he went to San Francisco he visited the Castro. He came away absolutely astounded by the fact that the community in the Castro were lionizing Fidel and Che as symbols of revolution, even though these were guys that were rounding up gays and throwing them in camps. The lessen being that the left has an unnerving ability to ignore the reality of evil when it suits them. Stalin for example, and now Hamas...
    actually i was referring to the USA and Israel being just as easily terrorists (if you go by one of the USA's definitions of terrorism, anyways) than people who fly themselves into buildings or strap bombs to their chest.
    live pearl jam is best pearl jam
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,167
    I know what you were referring to, and I think it's nonsensical moral relativism cynically used to obscure the reality of the situation, which is that there are those who would kill innocents intentionally and with malicious glee (terrorists), and those who who seek to defend themselves against such people, and in the process do unwitting harm. I don't deny that there is such a thing as state terrorism. Stalin practiced it. Hitler practiced it. Every petty dictator with a secret police has practiced it. But that isn't what you are talking about.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • NoK
    NoK Posts: 824
    rebornFixer wrote:
    He's using hyperbole to make a point!

    Were you not the one that asked people to quit with the hyperbole because it "adds nothing to the discussion"? Only when it suits you ay ;)
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    NoK wrote:
    rebornFixer wrote:
    He's using hyperbole to make a point!

    Were you not the one that asked people to quit with the hyperbole because it "adds nothing to the discussion"? Only when it suits you ay ;)

    Probably. :) You didn't think that what you said was hyperbole, though. Truthfully, I felt kinda bad after we had that exchange because I know that you are indeed capable of listening to other people's arguments. Peace and all that shite.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    yosi wrote:
    One's man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, blah, blah, blah...this is the sort of relativistic nonsense that people come up with when they're confronted by the reality that the guys they are backing are actually sadistic maniacs. When you strap a bomb to yourself filled with ball bearing and nails, walk into a cafe full of people and blow yourself up you are a terrorist. Very simple, very clear cut.

    http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4690.shtml

    Book Review: The Case Against Israel
    Raymond Deane, The Electronic Intifada, 9 May 2006
    '...As for "terrorism", which he defines as "random violence against non-combatants", he distinguishes it from "collateral damage" with the assertion that the latter "involves knowingly killing innocent civilians" while "Terrorism involves intentionally killing innocent civilians", concluding that "the moral difference is too academic even for an academic." Why, then, is "terrorism" considered to be particularly morally repugnant, while "collateral damage" tends to be taken in our moral stride?

    "Imagine trying to make such a claim. You say: 'To achieve my objectives, I would certainly drop bombs with the knowledge that they would blow the arms off some children. But to achieve those same objectives, I would not plant or set off a bomb on the ground with the knowledge that it would have that same effect. After all, I have planes to do that, I don't need to plant bombs.' As a claim of moral superiority, this needs a little work."
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    yosi wrote:
    I don't deny any of what the Palestinians suffer. I'm just not so foolish as to think that there are easy solutions to this conflict, nor am I so foolish or so malicious as to think that Israel WANTS to be oppressing the Palestinians.

    No, you'd prefer that they just disappear.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    yosi wrote:
    I'm not saying it's ok, I'm saying it's reality, and reality sucks, and it's tragic. But pretending that the Palestinians don't have a history of attacking and killing Israelis is stupid and false. From what I know of Israel, which is quite a lot having lived there, most Israelis would want nothing more than to end the occupation and have nothing more to do with the Palestinians for the rest of their lives. Unfortunately, they are also convinced that the Palestinians have never reconciled themselves to Israel's existence and that the minute the occupation ends violence will jump right back up to the worst levels of the second intifada. So they support the occupation because they believe they must for their security, even as they hate the occupation for all the reasons that should be obvious plus a few that are all their own.

    The occupation has nothing to do with Israels security. In fact, it's the complete opposite. Once again you try turning reality on it's head in order to justify Israel's land grab.

    And as for the second Intifada that you love to keep harping on about:

    Origins of the 2nd Intifada:
    'The underlying reason is the continuous 30-year Israeli military occupation of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza. The Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (Oslo Accords) signed in 1993 had raised hope. Palestinians anticipated a state and the end of occupation, but it was constantly delayed while the situation on the ground worsened. Israel expanded settlements and by-pass roads and confiscated more Palestinian property. Israelis continued to demolish homes and to uproot or burn olive and fruit trees, leaving people without sources of income. Checkpoints, closures and other signs of a tighter occupation were imposed; Israeli soldiers detained or turned ambulances back from checkpoints and Israel constantly reduced the number of permits to enter Israel to work. Israeli soldiers humiliated Palestinians at the checkpoints. Frustration, rage and despair mounted as Palestinians' human rights were infringed and their dignity ignored. Many Palestinians became disillusioned with the Oslo Accords and felt betrayed by them.
    When Mr. Sharon with about 1000 armed soldiers and police visited the Noble Sanctuary (Haram ash-Sharif), a site sacred to Muslims, on September 28, 2000, it was like throwing a match into a pile of dry tinder. The following day, Palestinians protested and seven were killed by the IDF. This was the immediate reason for the intifada. The underlying conditions that caused the uprising still exist and have been made worse by a siege imposed in early March 2001 isolating cities, towns and villages and by the building of the "Security Fence."

Categories