 sj |
||
|
||
BS: War crimes - continuing discussion
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 05:11 PM Here's an interesting example of this...
Last month the Saudi daily Al Riyadh published an article that accused Jews of consuming the blood of Christian and Muslim children during the holiday of Purim. The author, a lecturer at King Faisal University in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, called this medieval fiction a "well-established fact."
And yet when troll states the idea that Palestinians hate Jews more than they love their children, he states it as a well-established fact. Can't see much of a difference myself.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 27 Apr 02 - 05:07 PM The interesting (and sad) thing I've noticed is that when people use hateful language about Jews, they are quite rightly called "anti-semites". But hateful language toward Palestinians or Arabs is completely overlooked, or if it's noticed at all, it's considered the right thing to do. And when someone does speak out against hateful language toward Palestinians or Arabs, the person speaking out often regarded as being anti-semitic. That shows how completely marginalized and de-humanized Palestinians have become in the US and Israel. And I also think it shows that racism toward Palestinians has become institutionalized in the US and Israel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Apr 02 - 01:25 PM Anti-semitism in Europe creates Zionism, and this in turn is used a pretext to generate anti-semitism in the Islamic world. And that in turn helps empower extremist versions of Zionism. It's a vicious circle.
In all places and all times the enemy are those who preach hatred of other peoples, whatever the excuse - and whether the "other peoples" are Jews, Arabs, Palestinians, Israelis...
It's a good idea to focus on the fact that the neo-Nazis like Le Pen hate both Jews and Arabs. Two sorts of anti-semitism rolled into one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST Date: 27 Apr 02 - 09:08 AM April 27, 2002 -- NEW YORK TIMES Anti-Semitism Is Deepening Among Muslims By SUSAN SACHS Stay in a five-star hotel anywhere from Jordan to Iran, and you can buy the infamous forgery "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." Pick up a newspaper in any part of the Arab world and you regularly see a swastika superimposed on the Israeil flag. Such anti-Semitic imagery is now embedded in the mainstream discourse concerning Jews in much of the Islamic world, in the popular press and in academic journals. The depictions are not limited to countries that are at war with Israel but can be found in general-interest publications in Egypt and Jordan, the two countries that have signed peace agreements with Israel, as well as in independent religious schools in Pakistan and Southeast Asia. Arab leaders, for their part, have long rejected the accusation that their state-controlled press, universities and television stations promulgate anti-Semitic views. Islamic history, they say, contains nothing like the anti-Semitic horrors that occurred in Christian Europe, and Islam as a religion accepts many of the revelations embodied in Judaism. The use of Nazi imagery, the newspaper caricatures of Jews with fangs and exaggerated hook noses, even the Arab textbooks with their descriptions of Jews as evil world conspirators — all of that, Arab leaders often insist, reflect a dislike for Israelis and Zionism but not for Jews and Judaism. Yet in many Muslim countries the hatred of Jews as Jews, and not only as citizens of Israel, has been nurtured through popular culture for generations. Take for instance an official Jordanian government textbook for high school students. It describes Jews as innately deceitful and corrupt. "Up to the present," it states, "they are the masters of usury and leaders of sexual exhibitionism and prostitution." In the view of many scholars of Islam, such texts are a sign that the Arab-Israeli conflict has been transformed in Muslim culture from a political, nationalist and territorial battle into a cosmic war between religions and, indeed, between good and evil. The length of the Middle East conflict has contributed to this shift. "You see a certain level of anti-Semitism that you look at and think, how can smart people really believe this?" said John L. Esposito, a professor of religion and international affairs at Georgetown University. "Part of the explanation is that they grew up with this, but part is also that they grew up in a confrontational situation. You make the world into `us and them,' and therefore you buy into every possible caricature of the other." Both Jews and Muslims engage in hatemongering based on skewed readings of their holy books, said Professor Esposito, author of the recent book "Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam." Islamic fundamentalists frequently refer to Jews as either the sons or the grandsons of apes and monkeys. These sorts of descriptions can sometimes be heard in sermons at mosques in the Palestinian territories as well as from some Saudi religious leaders. The reference is drawn from a verse in the Koran that, taken in context, refers to Jews and Christians who break the Sabbath and who mock the early Muslims for their beliefs. The Koran says that God made those people as despicable as monkeys, pigs and idol worshipers. "In all faiths, more exclusivist or militant verses are taken out of context by some and amplified in popular culture," Professor Esposito said. The Koran also contains complimentary verses about law-abiding Jews, at one point saying that the "believers and the Jews" who do right will be rewarded by God. Islamic doctrine concerning Christians has also been reinterpreted in recent decades in an effort to forge a bond between Muslims and Christians against the Jews. Literal Islam recognizes Jesus as a prophet but does not believe that he was crucified. The Koran says that Jews tried to crucify him, but that God rescued Jesus and that the Jews instead killed only a likeness of Jesus. Yet a common charge from Muslims these days is that the Jews did indeed kill Jesus. When Pope John Paul II visited Damascus last year, President Bashar al-Assad greeted him with a speech accusing Jews of just that. Mr. Assad's minister of religion affairs, Muhammad Ziyadah, later embellished the remarks, saying, "We must be fully aware of what the enemies of God and malicious Zionism conspire to commit against Christianity and Islam." The pope did not respond directly but called for reconciliation and peace. That Jews would be demonized by some Arabs, and Arabs demonized by some Jews may not be surprising after nearly a century of conflict over Palestine. Even in less enduring wars, nations have engaged in vicious and sometimes racist wartime propaganda against the enemy. And since Israel was founded as a Jewish nation, the issue of religion has always been an element in its relations, or lack of relations, with its Arab neighbors. Still, the breadth and viciousness of the anti-Semitism is striking. Recent attacks on Jewish centers in France and an ancient synagogue in Tunisia have been attributed to Arabs or Muslim fundamentalists. Last month the Saudi daily Al Riyadh published an article that accused Jews of consuming the blood of Christian and Muslim children during the holiday of Purim. The author, a lecturer at King Faisal University in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, called this medieval fiction a "well-established fact." After the article was translated from the Arabic and publicized by an Israel-based group called the Middle East Media Research Institute, the editor of the newspaper repudiated the article, saying it was nonsense and should not have been published. The recycling of such stories has become a fixture of Muslim discourse, said Bernard Lewis, a historian of Islam and the Middle East, who has called this trend the "Islamization of anti-Semitism." Its literature, he has written, includes classic European anti-Semitic writings like "Protocols," introduced to the Middle East in the late 1800's and now easily available in Arabic throughout the region and in English. In recent decades this material has been supplemented by a home-grown body of work, ascribed to Islamic teachings, that describes what it calls the innate wickedness of the Jewish people throughout the ages. Yet Jews were minor players in Islamic theological writing for centuries, Professor Lewis wrote in "Semites and Anti-Semites." They figure in the Koran, which Muslims call the final and perfect revelation of God, as obstinate antagonists to the prophet Muhammad's efforts to bring Islam to the people of the Arabian Peninsula. Of the tribes he encountered, the Jews were the most hostile to his message. But in the end, the Jewish tribes were defeated, and the Koran refers to them as a people whose rebelliousness had always been punished by God. In more modern Islamic teachings, which can be found in Arab textbooks and mainstream newspaper articles, the Koran's description of the Jews' opposition to Muhammad takes on monumental importance. The Jews corrupted the word of God from the start, the more recent interpretations say, and their scheming against the prophet was an expression of their innate wickedness. "Some people confuse certain verses of the Koran attacking the Jews of that day, as an attack on Judaism," said Seyyed Hossein Nasr, a professor of Islamic studies at George Washington University. "It's not innocent confusion. It's deliberate confusion, and it happens on both sides." This is a modern development, less theological than emotional, and leaves as its casualty a long tradition of amity between Islam and Judaism, he added. "If religious authorities in both religions put the demands of God above nationalistic and ethnic feelings," Professor Nasr said, "then maybe something can be done."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 05:55 PM Now, for the rest of you who think the playing field needed to be leveled after I posted links to sites about Israel's use of torture...
You guys are so biased against the Palestinians, you didn't even notice that my posting those links was a direct response to accusations made against Palestinians relating to the way they dealt with people they thought were collaborators.
It was I who was leveling the playing field when I posted that since two people, troll and sledge, were using that episode as an example of why we should hate Palestinians.
And troll, if you can justify anything the Israelis do because of extreme circumstances, why can't you understand that Palestinians could be acting out of the same basic human impulses. They've not had the same exact experiences as the Jews, but their experiences have been horrific in their own way. If there is any racism or bigotry being practiced here it's much more the case against Arabs and Palestinians than it is against Jews. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 05:48 PM Feder, is it more wrong to be an anti-semite than it is to be racist against Arabs? I don't see you complaining about the regular occurance of racism against Arabs in this forum. And with far greater frequency than anti-semitism, I might add. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Apr 02 - 05:41 PM True enough. And perversely enough the activities of anti-semites are used as a way of deflecting criticism of the actions of the Israel government.
Here is a link to a recent article by a Jewish writer reminding people who are appalled at Sharon's policies that they need to be particularly active in attacking anti-semitism in all its forms.
"When anti-semitism is no longer treated as Jewish business, to be taken care of by Israel and the rightwing Zionist lobby, Sharon is robbed of his most effective weapon in the indefensible and increasingly brutal occupation. And as an extra bonus, whenever hatred of Jews diminishes, the likes of Jean-Marie Le Pen shrink right down with it."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST Date: 26 Apr 02 - 04:06 PM Troll, I do mean what I said. Anti-Semites are using the Middle East conflict as a medium to advance their hatred of Jews. But, you're right too. They are using the conflict to justify their hatred and convince others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 03:16 PM Feder, I think what you mean is that the anti-semites try to use the Middle East conflict as a way to justify their hatred and to convince others of its' rectitude. Yes? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,Feder Date: 26 Apr 02 - 02:52 PM McGrath, You may be correct, maybe not. What disturbs me is that anti-Semites do use the Middle East conflict as a medium to advance their hatred of Jews. It happens here at Mudcat with too much regularity. Witness the beginning of this discussion when RO1SIN started the initial thread by blaming "the jews" (sic) for the alleged actions of some Israeli soldiers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Apr 02 - 02:37 PM I suspect that last ostensibly anti-semitic GUEST was probably either someone trying to colour critics of Israel as anti-semitic, or just a shit-stirrer seeing an opening. Either way nothing to reply to. (Commenting on it like this is closer to replying to it than I care to get, but I'm actually responding to paolaitaly's post.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 26 Apr 02 - 02:02 PM I suspect Carol has already posted that, paolaitaly. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,paolaitaly Date: 26 Apr 02 - 01:19 PM If you search "Israel" on the same place where Wolfgang made a link ( Human rights ) you'll find a lot more stuff on torture. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: DougR Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:43 PM Shame on you Wolfgang! What are you trying to do? Level the playing field? :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: sledge Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:10 PM Yep, the evidence of torture seems to go both ways, another sad indication that both sides are as capable of being as bad as the other. No search however has given me anything on Israeli mob justice/lynching. Lets hope they can dignify their nation by demonstrating restraint in that respect. Sledge |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 11:22 AM Carol, I have never claimed that the Israeli Government was kind and gentle and what I am about to say is in no way condoning their use of torture. It is rather an attempt to explain the mind-set that allows such things to happen. The Nazis marched millions of Jews to their deaths and they went, for the most part, without protest. It was best, their leaders felt, not to cause trouble, but to go to the "work camps" peacefully. They could not concieve of men so evil that they would murder innocent women and children. They were wrong. The Israelis decided early on to whatever was necessary to protect their security so that another Holocaust would never happen again. Considering that they have been under threat of attack from their closest neighbors for all of their existance and have, in fact, beaten off several major attacks over the years from an enemy whose avowed intention has been the total eradication of Israel, I am amazed that they have not been even more excessive than they have. I do not agree with the policy. I feel that it dehumanizes both the victim and the perpetrator. But I can understand why they are doing it and it saddens me deeply that they should feel that torture is necessary to insure the survival of their country. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,mg Date: 26 Apr 02 - 11:13 AM My understanding, and of course it could be wrong, is that the original split was 3 ways..Jordan and then the remaining land into Israel and Palestine. Palestine was never supposed to be Jordan, and Jordan has given citizenship rights to the Palestinians and of course their new queen is Palestinian. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Wolfgang Date: 26 Apr 02 - 11:10 AM Just for the balance of it: torture link #4 Wolfgang
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST,paolaitaly Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:48 AM I am one who think that (rougly said) in the Middle east situation most of the "rights" are by the side of the Palestinian population, and most of the "wrong" is on the Israely Governement, mostly on Ariel Sharon; but I think that is AWFUL find the eternal anti-semite use this orrible situation for spittin his/her poison like in the last post. Shame on you, whoever you are! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: GUEST Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:26 AM Thae actions of the jews makes really makes you wonder about all the so called "persecution" they've supposedly faced over the years. Maybe the so called "chosen people" business means they just can't get on peacefully with anyone else. Just think of all the trouble that could have been avoided had they not taken over Palestine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:22 AM Ok, sledge. These three links (among 163,000 that came up when I did a search with the words "Israel" + "torture"), say that Israel does practice torture, and in the first link, an example is given of someone who is tortured for espionage (that's a bit like collaborating I guess)... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Apr 02 - 10:16 AM "I don't know of any country who has ever given back land which they had conquered in war without a quid pro quo." The quid pro quo in this kind of situation is peace.
That's why powerful countries pull out of places they have been occupying, not because they have been militarily defeated, but because they realise that they can never win, and that the war is causing unacceptable damage to their own country.
That's why the Americans pulled out of Vietnam. That's why the British pulled out of most of Ireland. That's why, sooner or later, Israel will pull out of the occupied territories.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 09:11 AM I don't know troll. But why should only one side be expected to turn over their assasins?
I think I'll answer this one on this thread instead of the other one...
The well-meaning people who give my wife tracts are stunned too. They just can't conceive that anyone could not believe as they do. Especially when they have shown them proof. My wife is not wicked because she doesn't believe as they do and you are not foolish because you don't agree with me. There are several sides to almost every question and one mans Mesiah may be another mans Prophet. I think you misapprehend the emotions that motivated both my statement that I didn't think you had read the links as well as the statement that I found it stunning that you could have read the links and still hold the views that you do. It has nothing to do with whether or not we agree with each other. It's more that I have been so deeply and profoundly effected, emotionally, by the things I have read in those links, I just wasn't prepared for the possibility that someone else might not be similarly effected. It just took me by surprise, is all. I don't expect you to believe as I do, or to agree with me. I just was unprepared for a different emotional response by others, from the one I experienced myself. This doesn't happen very often for me. I usually don't have any expectations about what other people should or shouldn't feel. Maybe that's why I was so unprepared for my reaction to your response to the links. What I experienced was just a very strong, visceral, gutwrenching sort of inability to comprehend. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:58 AM While much of this thread has made for excellent reading, it is difficult for anyone of you....and indeed anyone at all....to voice an opinion, no matter how well documented, without being labeled in some way. It is the basic problem in all Middle-East affairs. Middle ground doesn't seem to exist even when thoughtfully and logically laid out. Perhaps it can't. We are currently at the lowest point that I can remember. No one can promote one position or another on either "side" of this without stumbling across the well known atrocities of the past.....from both sides, across the spectrum. There are Arab/Israeli communities living in peace in Israel and in them and the people who make them up are the only solutions. If I were Hawk, I would not post another word because his last paragraph is a gem. A complete explanation in a nutshell. Until all are willing to draw a different "line in the sand" and one that relegates history and blame to a back seat position, I doubt that anything will be achieved. And that line will be virtually impossible to draw for the reason that Hawk's post so beautifully sums up: It's a long, twisted, and sad story. Power has been served. Money has been served. Privilege has been served. Business has been served. Democracy has never been served. There are no good guys among the major players in this Middle Eastern fiasco. Not one. They all have the blood and misery of millions on their hands. .........and not a one will admit it. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:56 AM I don't believe so. Is that a part of the interim peace agreement? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:43 AM Has Israel ever turned over any of their people who have assasinated Palestinian officials to the Palestinians for prosecution? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:38 AM I think Israel may be out of luck on this one. The PA , or what's left of it, appear to have abided by the interim agreement. The following is off the AP Wire. "As a condition to lifting the siege, Israel is demanding that Arafat turn over the assassins of Israeli Cabinet Minister Rehavam Zeevi, gunned down in Jerusalem on Oct. 17. Instead, the four suspects were put on trial in Arafat's office, with police serving as lawyers and judges. After a one-day makeshift session, they were sentenced to terms ranging from one to 18 years, Palestinian officials said. Israel rejected the procedure. Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer called it "the best show in town," and Sharon said, '"They will anyway be brought to trial in Israel."
According to interim peace accords, Palestinians must extradite suspects to Israel unless they are put on trial by the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinians have never turned over a suspected militant to Israel." troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:13 AM I'll see what documentation I can find. The court that you refer to happened in the office where Arafat is under seige. They had to slap the court together with the people they had on hand, and it was far from adequate. However, I heard some of the peope who used to have positions high up in the former government in the Palestinian authority saying that there is nothing they can do. They have no means to carry out their jobs, and they said they were afraid that the streets would revert to mob rule, as any place with a lot of people crowded together with no civil systems in place would do. They don't like it either, but that's what happens when all systems upon which civil society depends are destroyed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Troll Date: 26 Apr 02 - 08:09 AM LH, you said:Yes, the Arabs have been beaten badly again and again...but they might well have won in 1973, had not the USA massively resupplied Israel with new tanks in a matter of a few days. This is not lost on the Arabs. They had to go it alone. Israel did not." You help your allies. Thats what the word means. I don't know of any country who has ever given back land which they had conquered in war without a quid pro quo. Why shouldn't Israel build settlements on its own land? They didn't start the war that gave them the land, so why should they give it back? When the British Mandate of Palestine was divided in 1948, creating the independent State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, it was intended that Jordan be the palestinian homeland. If I am wrong on this I am sure that someone will correct me. Part of the division was -including Jerusalem- was to remain in British hands but when the fighting ended, Jordan held Jerusalem along with Samaria and Judea. They owned the land by right of conquest and held it until the 1967 war. Why should Israel not do the same? Otherwise, a well thought-out post. Wrong, pig-headed, knee-jerk, and starry-eyed perhaps, but well thought-out. Why can't you see it MY way? troll***BG*** |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: sledge Date: 26 Apr 02 - 07:10 AM Carol, compared to your previous posts there is a lot of "I think" but very little reference. Thats not enough for me. We could all do that and some have but it means little in the real world. As for lack of infrstructure, the palestinians courts, the other day sent four of their own to prison for up to 13 years with hard labour for their part in the murder of the Israeli tourism minister, so the ability is still there. The Israelis thought the sentences light and want them handed over for trial in their courts, I can't see that happening as these men have now been dealt with. It show a certain reasonableness on the part of the Palestinians that they went through with it and produced a guilty verdict. Sledge |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 06:43 AM Little has been said about the three palestinians who were accused of being Informers for the Israeli forces, two days a go they were dragged into the street and murdered by their own people, the bodies then hung from pylons for all to see, and for those of you who didn't had access to uncensored tv /press pictures, it was very ugly, Will those killers be bought to justice.
I think this one is worth answering here. troll asked a similar question on another thread.
I think the Israeli government would probably treat people who are informers for any entity with whom they are at war pretty harshly also. I'd bet they would first torture them, and then the informers would probably be either imprisoned or executed.
I think a lot of people are operating with an incredible double standard here. Things they wouldn't give a second thought to if the side they favor does it ("because my guys have good reasons") and they condemn the very same things when practiced by the side they don't favor.
You might want to think that there is something barbaric about doing it in the streets or something. Remember that the Israeli military destroyed all of the Palestinian infrastructure for handling things like that in a civilized way. And furthermore, I think torture is pretty barbaric, not to mention illegal. But my understanding is that the Israeli government practices it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 01:37 AM Here you go, LH...
Subject: RE: BS: Israeli soldiers charged with war crime
troll - I understand what you are saying, for sure, although I would partially disagree with much of it. You are viewing it all through a certain prism, and probably have not read some of the articles I have, representing the more progressive forces in the Muslim community (I'm assuming that you haven't read them...I may be wrong).
Yes, the Arab oil states are extremely wealthy...for the few at the top. One of the reasons why the wealth is not shared with the general populace is this: the USA and Britain have traditionally supported autocratic rule by compliant dictators in many Muslim countries (and elsewhere in the 3rd World too), supplying them with weaponry in return for oil and military bases.
Some examples: Saudia Arabia, Egypt (not for oil, but for other strategic reasons), Kuwait, Pakistan, Indonesia, and until fairly recently, Iraq. Iran when the Shah was in power. There have been some genuine initiatives toward democracy in some of those places from time to time...crushed by people on an unofficial USA payroll.
Britain did the same thing when they were ruling the roost in the Middle East. They talked democracy, supported autocracy and feudalism.
Neither the USA nor the dictators they support have any intention of allowing democracy to develop in those countries. Democratic regimes are way too hard to control. (When they do arise of their own accord, as happened in Chile and Nicaragua and began to happen once in Iran, they are ruthlessly destroyed by whatever means possible...a war, a coup, an assassination, an economic blow, whatever it takes.)
The Saudi government spends millions on religious facilities...yes...to distract its people and keep them in line while a few rich people live like emperors...in collusion with their rich western friends who own the multinationals. They get together in places like Monaco and Paris and gamble or play polo. A lovely time is had by all. The building of more religious facilities is a cynical exercise, meant to shore up popular support, and it works...for a while.
It is precisely because collusion between the West and the local sheiks and bully boys have rendered the development of local democracy impossible that fanatical Islamic revolutions have occurred, like that in Iran. The common people see it as the only avenue left to them to institute change and achieve real national sovereignty. This further imperils the chances of liberalizing and modernizing those societies, and is a great tragedy for the Islamic moderates who dream of achieving a peaceful, progressive, modern society. There are many such moderates, but you don't hear much about them on the news, because they aren't killing people.
Is there any reason why the USA should not support Israel? Well, sure there is...a host of reasons. The USA should not support either aggressor in this useless conflict, they should show no favoritism at all, but bring all possible influence to end the fighting by negotiation and equivalent concessions from both sides, and by not arming or funding the combatants on either side. This, of course, would be VERY bad for business, so it absolutely ain't gonna happen! It would likely also help lead to the collapse of several compliant Arab regimes in fairly short order...it's US supplied armaments that keep them in power.
Yes, the Arabs have been beaten badly again and again...but they might well have won in 1973, had not the USA massively resupplied Israel with new tanks in a matter of a few days. This is not lost on the Arabs. They had to go it alone. Israel did not.
Israel has precisely the advantage in battle that a thoroughly modernized military has over a half-modernized one every time. I've played very accurate simulations of many Middle Eastern battles with tanks, etc....the Arab armies are so technologically outclassed by both the USA and Israel that all they can do, generally speaking, is show that they know how to die bravely. This is what has happened again and again when colonial European forces, a generation or 2 ahead of their opponents in the techniques of war, slaughtered Africans, Asians, or Arabs with more advanced weaponry. It's not really something to be particularly proud of...it's rather like shooting fish in a barrel. This is why you see suicide bombers these days. They feel it is the only way they can strike back effectively and do real damage. For them to fight openly with tanks, etc. is basically suicidal in any case, just as it was for the Japanese after 1943, which is why they too adopted planned suicide tactics on a large scale.
The Arabs are not going to stop fighting unless they are all killed, and that is not going to happen...or until there is real substantial negotiation and positive change in the status quo...give and take on both sides. Israel is not particularly interested in that, because they figure they have the power to get what they want by force. They may change their minds if the suicide bombings continue indefinitely.
I agree that Israel wants and needs defensible borders, and I understand that concern, particularly as regards the Golan heights. I think that those areas should be demilitarised and strongly occupied for at least a generation (or longer than that, if necessary) by not Israel but a multinational peacekeeping force of well-armed soldiers from neutral countries...but Israel would not hear of it...(nor, perhaps would the Arabs) and the world community is too probably too fractured to agree on how to do it anyway. Too bad. The fighting will go on until something like that is done or until there's a nuclear conflict and everybody in the region gets fried.
If Israel was not expansionist, they would not be putting Israeli settlements into various of the occupied areas. Sounds like "lebensraum" to me....remember that? It's on a much smaller scale of course...but the intention is rather similar, I think. "We took this land, so let's use it. Well, now that we live here, we aren't leaving. Too bad for you!" That's expansionist. The same thing happened in America with the Indian lands. They were also outgunned.
Lastly, Osama Bin Laden was a rich kid...yes. So? So was Fidel Castro. Most of Castro's rich family repudiated him and fled to Florida when he threw out the Mafia and the multinationals and divided the land up among the farmers who had worked it for generations, on a starvation wage. Why did he do that when he was already a rich kid with a guaranteed easy life at the top of the heap?
Well, it happens. Rich people are not necessarily immune to acquiring social ideals, and some of them become fervent revolutionaries despite putting themselves in personal danger and risking losing everything. Washington and Jefferson did. It often happens. What is so surprising that it happened in Bin Laden's case? His religious viewpoint is his form of social conscience. You don't agree with it. I doubt that I do either. But for him, it is a high ideal that is synonymous with having a social conscience. He was an exception to the rule among his peer group. Most of his foot soldiers come from the poor, and I trust that most of his rich relatives have disinherited him. He is a noble who decided to opt out of the club...and that is unforgivable when you're in that club, I believe, but it still happens. Revolutions are often led by the sons of the rich, because rich people have the time and the educational opportunities to read in depth, to think, to philosophize, and to develop theoretical passions and ideals of every kind...if they are so inclined. A few of them always are. Buddha was the son of a king. He chose complete renunciation of all that luxury and privilege, and launched a philosophical revolution that changed the world.
But the real key to all of this is that the West (and Russia as well) have pursued foreign policies which pretty well guaranteed that democracy would have no chance of developing in the oil-producing countries, but that they would remain obedient clients of Big Business, ruled by autocrats, and keep their poor people superstitious, helpless, poor and oppressed.
It is precisely that which has led to the rise of ever more fanatical and dangerous muslim religious extremists. The West sometimes has used those extremists to fight its dirty wars in places like Afghanistan in the 80's...but later discovered that the scorpion they created will not stay quietly in its box.
It's a long, twisted, and sad story. Power has been served. Money has been served. Privilege has been served. Business has been served. Democracy has never been served. There are no good guys among the major players in this Middle Eastern fiasco. Not one. They all have the blood and misery of millions on their hands. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: War crimes - continuing discussion From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:55 AM Sorry. Should've posted my long message to troll on this one, I guess... - LH |
|
Subject: War crimes - continuing discussion From: CarolC Date: 26 Apr 02 - 12:05 AM At the request of mg who can't load the old thread which can be found here... |