Obama Fiddles While Gaza Burns

Thanks to Hamas' stupid, provocative, and self-defeating rocket assault on, well, nothing, in Israel, the Middle East that Barack Obama will inherit from George W. Bush just got a lot more complicated. And, sadly, Obama seems content to fiddle while Gaza burns.

Yesterday Obama got an official US intelligence briefing on the crisis in Gaza, which may or may not have numbed his brain with data he didn't need. Obama didn't need an intelligence briefing to tell him anything he really needs to know: that, once again, the twin poles of Israeli and Palestinian extremism have flared up in a way that will only undermine, perhaps fatally, the chances of a negotiated accord during Obama's first term in office.

The only useful intelligence Obama might have gained from the briefing is that the Mossad knew, before Israel's massive attack on Gaza, that Hamas was only trying to make a show of force. That is, Hamas' not-too-bright leaders thought that they could get away with a few hundred rocket attacks into Israel and then renegotiate a better ceasefire deal. Like the less-than-brilliant strategists in Georgia, who thought that they could attack Russia with impunity and who instead got their heads handed to them last August, Hamas' own armchair fanatics thought they could get away with it. Oops. The Wall Street Journal reports today:

In recent weeks, Israeli intelligence officials have said they believed Hamas doesn't want a full-scale confrontation, but rather wants to make a show of force before seeking a renewed cease-fire on more favorable terms.

If that's true, and there's little reason to think it isn't, it was certainly within Israel's power to exercise restraint -- or perhaps to engage in a little tit-for-tat counterattacks -- while waiting for things to settle down. But, no. Hamas, for its part, should have known that it was firing its rockets directly into Israel's pre-election political mess, in which hardline extremists like Bibi Netanyahu are gaining the upper hand. And the power of those extremists, playing on Israeli public opinion and its fears, pushed the pathetic Olmert-Livni government over the brink. (It's particularly disgusting that Olmert, who in his various exit interviews and speeches has pretty much acknowledged that Israel needs a deal involving the removal of Jewish settlements and the partition of Jerusalem, would go along with the overkill in Gaza.)

But the truly sad thing is see how Obama has opted out. He left the commenting to David Axelrod, his political strategist, who said, mouse-like: "I think he (Obama) wants to get a handle on the situation so that when he becomes president on January 20 he has the advantage of all the facts and information leading up to that point." To that gobbledygook he added that now all-too-familiar nostrum that America has "one president at a time."

It's long past time for the United States to have opened a dialogue with Hamas. As stupid as they are, their leadership is divided and they are not all religious fanatics (though many are) and they are not all living in the fantasy that Hamas can defeat Israel. The same Journal story today notes:

There are indications that the Hamas leadership is divided on how forcefully to respond. When Hamas's traditionally hard-line Damascus-based leader Mr. Meshal urged renewed attacks against Israel earlier this month, local Hamas leaders in Gaza quickly distanced themselves from his statements.

Those more sensible Gaza leaders of Hamas might be willing to reconcile with Fatah and the Palestinian authority, and it's the least that Obama could do to say so. It might be nice, too, if Obama would gently (or not so gently) point out that Israel's ham-handed overreaction needs to be reined in. (The Bush administration, which cheer-led Israel's 2006 attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon, isn't going to call for restraint.)

Meanwhile, just as Israel's attack on Lebanon strengthened that country's band of religious fanatics -- Hezbollah -- the Gaza assault is almost guaranteed to end up bolstering Palestine's own religious extremists, including Hamas's more wild-eyed and terrorist-inclined gangs. For some Israeli extremists, that may be exactly what they want, because it pushes a two-state solution that much further away. It would nice, too, if Obama would point that out.

During 2008, Obama never allowed any daylight between himself and the Israeli lobby. Those inclined to believe that Obama had a secret plan to break with AIPAC and its allies and to push for a solution in Palestine in a manner that wouild involve twisting Israeli arms discounted Obama's pro-Israel rhetoric as campaign posturing. We'll see. But it now appears abundantly clear that we'll have to wait until January 20, if not long afterwards, to find out.

Comments (189)

1. Once again the headline exaggerates and distorts the point of the column. The column begins by saying Hamas screwed up, and ends by saying Obama may be on Israel's side rather than neutral. Both these points are more important, and placed in a more important position, than the suggestion that Obama is dithering, which appears glancingly in paragraph four: talk about a buried lede!

   Posted by chessw at 12/29/2008 @ 11:23am

2. Your opening line suggests--once again--the limits of The Nation's liberal outlook. Could we not thank Israel's stupid, unjust, and illegal occupation of Palestine for the fighting? Is Hamas really responsible for the current assault on the Palestinian people? To the first question, the answer is overwhelmingly "yes". It is nothing short of Israel's unwillingness to let Palestinians live in dignity that provoked the current conflict. It is also our fault (yes, us Americans) for perpetuating myths like Mr. Dreyfuss's opening paragraph that suggests Hamas is responsible for Israel's aggression. It's time for the simple recognition that a two-state solution is unjust and untenable. Let's show the spirit of our liberalism by advocating the obvious: only one state, a bi-national state, can address the problem of Israel and Palestine.

   Posted by MPerez at 12/29/2008 @ 11:32am

3. Israel: bully or victim?? The world is torn:

   http://controversialpolling.blogspot.com/

   Posted by jimmyvegasjimmy at 12/29/2008 @ 11:34am

4. The solution is not that complicated. It is spelled out in this "Memo to Obama": www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0812/S00137.htm

   But we all know that Obama will do as the other have done before him: pretend to want peace while doing nothing.

   Posted by hudicourt at 12/29/2008 @ 11:35am

5. Posted by MPerez at 12/29/2008 @ 11:32am

   Wow, Mr Dreyfuss, there IS a contingent that puts even YOU in the 'owned by AIPAC' column!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 12/29/2008 @ 11:50am

6. Dreyfuss writes an "even-handed" column, condemning the extremists on both sides. He gives equal criticism to the oppressed Palestinians and the Israeli oppressors.

   Dreyfuss implies that if Hamas were not so unreasonable, they would have been more successful in getting concessions from Israel.

   Question for Mr. Dreyfuss: On the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority, lead by Abbas, is willing to act as Israel's accomplice. They counsel collaboration with the Israeli occupation, not resistance to the occupation. How successful has the PA been in getting concessions from Israel? Answer: the PA has had no success at all. Expansion of Jews-only settlements continues on the West Bank, as does construction of the Apartheid Wall, as does confiscation of land from Palestinians.

   So what is really the problem? Hamas advocates resistance to the Israeli occupation. Israel wants to get rid of the non-Jews, to establish a purely Jewish state. So Israel wants to drive off the non-Jews. Drive them off, or kill them off. By starvation or by bombing by F-16s.

   Dreyfuss in the past has had some decent pieces on Israel and the Palestinians. This wasn't one of them.

   For some real criticism of Israel, see today's CounterPunch, which has several eyewitness pieces of Israel's destruction of Gaza.

   Posted by NevadaNed at 12/29/2008 @ 12:49pm

7. It would be good to hear Mr. Dreyfus -- and the Nation's editorial board -- urge Hamas to build a real country, with high-tech companies, secular schools, medical centers, construction businesses, etc., and to stop using Gaza as a launch pad to carry out its only serious political mission: the destruction of a sovereign country.

   Also: What is extreme about Bibi Netanyahu? He was a signatory to the Oslo Agreement, which advocates withdrawal from the West Bank and the transfer of other territory to the full control of the Palestinians.

   Posted by modestine at 12/29/2008 @ 12:50pm

8. Too bad, the only people who never get the opportunity speak for themselves are Palestinians, or Arabs generally, at least here. If Hamas consists of "stupid gangs" and some are "religious fanatics" wonder what Palestinians would say of Israelis and their leadership. Without excusing whatever tactical mistakes Hamas might have made, the greater issue remains Israel's strategic intentions and behavior which remain consistently the same regardless of any Palestinian behavior, whether from Hamas or Fatah, non violent or violent resistance. Arab and Palestinian opinion might focus on that consistency which is now into its fortieth year of occupation, its extremism, deceitfulness and violence.

   Could you have had a Hamas without Israeli behavior? Would Hezbollah exist without the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and occupation of Lebanon's southern territory? Only here will anyone believe Hezbollah is predominatelya band of religious fanatics. And are we really to accept that Hamas finds itself in a similar situation to the US backed Georgian leadership?

   Suggest a better perspective can come from reading the articles found regularly on line from the The Lebanon Daily Star and specifically the opinion pieces of Rami G. Khouri who is neither a nationalistic or religious fanatic. At least for one.

   Charlie M.

   Posted by cmsandia at 12/29/2008 @ 12:59pm

9. By "decent pieces," NevadaNed seems to mean pieces that slam Israel. I am not a supporter of Hamas. That doesn't mean, obviously, that I support what Israel did. (I think my piece makes that clear.) But if you can't see that Hamas is a destructive, negative, and extremist force in the Israel-Palestine conflict, you're blind. Yes, some (many) Palestinians join Hamas because they're frustrated with the hellish conditions imposed on the OT's by Israel, and many see Fatah as corrupt and ineffective. That said, Hamas' leaders are insane if they think a few rockets into Israel can help their cause. I've written an entire book on the problem of the Muslim Brotherhood and its century-long crusade against progress and the left. Hamas is part of the MB, and in fact (as my book details) Israeli intelligence created Hamas. Pay attention.

   Posted by dreyfuss at 12/29/2008 @ 1:05pm

10. Dreyfuss you seem to stand where I stand, which is that both of these people are being idiots and they are both at fault for their current situation. Both sides have the power to end this but neither side wants to appear politically weak. This is what happens when you make a war political. Neither side can back down for fear of appearing weak in the face of the enemy. It's why the cease fire didn't work fully in the first place, neither side was willing to commit 100% to it for fearing of looking weak to their citizens.

    My problem with this whole issue is that from the right we keep hearing about how Israel needs to protect it's citizens but none of them wants to comment on the fact that Palestinian civilians are locked in Palestine with no way of leaving while their homes are being bombed. Palestinian civilians are basically being forced to die whether they support Hamas or not. Why is it the right who are supposed to be the compassionate religious folks have so little respect for Palestinian lives that they are perfectly fine with civilians being locked in a war zone?

    When you look at it from that perspective I think you can see why the screams of genocide are a little more understandable. They are basically locking them all in a room and then spraying in bullets. For the 1 Israeli civilian who died this weekend Israel has killed 50 Palestinian civilians. Does that not strike anyone as counterproductive to achieving peace? I guess Israel will just have to nuke Palestine if they intend to continue using force as the solution because they don't have the power to occupy it with enough force to stop Hamas.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 1:34pm

11. The cease fire that just ended only covered Gaza. Operations against militants continued in the West Bank. There was no total cease fire covering the occupied areas. If the cease fire had also covered the West Bank, I think the rockets would have stopped. These rocket attacks have been going on for years, and, while they disrupted daily life, produced fewer casualties than suicide bombers. I have been reading Haaretz since the al-Aqsa intifada began, and, initially, they were not reported. I think the Israeli response is an attempt to derail any peace negotiations that might occur with the Obama Administration. It is also my opinion that the main reason Sharon removed the Israeli Settlers from Gaza was to turn it into "Free Fire Zone". After the Israeli experience with Hezbollah, I wonder if there will be any ground operations in Gaza? While the IDF may "win", the casualties will be high. Defense has the edge on offense when it comes to casualties.

    Posted by P. J. Casey at 12/29/2008 @ 1:35pm

12. Posted by dreyfuss at 12/29/2008 @ 1:05pm

    You see Mr Dreyfuss the paradox you are in....moderate, middle-of-the-road, even REASONABLE positions (or drifts to one side or the other) on Israel and Palestine are putting yourself in the cross-hairs.

    Between the Rabidly Pro-Israel Right (who think Israel can do no wrong AND who rarely offer answers except vague "Kill 'em all, let Allah sort 'em out..haha!")...

    and the Rabidly (or "reflexively" as your colleague Ari Berman once called them) Anti-Israel Left (who Israel can do no right or Hamas can do no wrong AND who rarely offer answers except vague "Negotiate and make Israel do all the concessions even while they're under fire by rocket attack!")...

    say something not on the extreme, and even your own "friends" will rip you a new one.

    Now...imagine you live in Israel or Palestine!

    Posted by Mask at 12/29/2008 @ 1:38pm

13. "X fiddles while Y burns" has to be one of the most over-used journalistic tropes of late, as it seems to be popping up everywhere. However, the Nation would do well to remember that Mr Obama is not yet the President. There is no office of the "President-Elect;" therefore I find it particulary amusing that the Nation would already be launching criticism-laden missiles towards a man who has yet to ascend to a seat with any sort of power. If you take that into account, comparisons with Nero are rather premature.

    Israel is reacting to a threat from Hamas militants and extremists. They are reacting appropriately to repeated cease-fire violations on the part of Hamas and the puppet government of Abbas, a leader in name only. Obama is doing the right thing by remaining neutral at this point; he's not yet earned the right to speak on the subject, in my opinion, and won't until he is sworn in as the President. In the meantime, he's best advised to remain silent on the Gaza issue. I do not think Mr Obama is qualified, or knowledgable, on the region, the conflict, or the subject. That's what his (soon to be) Cabinet, advisors, and secretaries are for.

    Give Obama time to analyse the situation and arrive at a reasonable, informed judgment before you criticise his lack of action. Instead, praise his restraint for not running headfirst into the journalistic trap which has been laid.

    BTW, if Canadians were launching rockets over the border at the US, would you be in favour or in opposition to air-strikes to neutralise the threat? Or are Palestinians somehow above responsibility for the actions of Hamas?

    Posted by Paralyse at 12/29/2008 @ 1:52pm

14. As long as Hamas exists, there can be no peace in the region.----Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 1:54pm

    See, Mr Dreyfuss, nutters on both ends?

    "Between the Rabidly Pro-Israel Right (who think Israel can do no wrong AND who rarely offer answers except vague "Kill 'em all, let Allah sort 'em out..haha!")..."---Posted by Mask at 12/29/2008 @ 1:38pm

    Or does LVLIB have a plan for destroying Hamas...and carefully avoiding hurting the folks who VOTED FOR THEM???

    Posted by Mask at 12/29/2008 @ 2:20pm

15. Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 2:28pm

    You mean like how Reagan was going to negotiate away all our nuclear weapons with a country whose leadership once said "We will bury you"?

    Now your turn, Larry...how about proving my postulation wrong and tell us your NON-"Kill 'em all" theory on how we destroy Hamas (which YOU said was the only way to secure peace--Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 1:54pm)...

    and leave the people who VOTED HAMAS INTO POWER (and I think could be argued SUPPORT HAMAS)....untouched?!??!??

    (No specifics in 5...4...3...2..1....)

    Posted by Mask at 12/29/2008 @ 2:30pm

16. I feel like I am rereading the history of the Warsaw Ghetto.

    Posted by onthehelm at 12/29/2008 @ 2:41pm

17. Robert Dreyfuss,

    I want to repeat what I said above. What your article ignores is historical experience and strategic intentions, which is far more relevant than whether one slams Israel or supports Hamas. Without a recognition of Palestinian experience under Israelis there is no way to understand the rise and decline of Fatah, or the rise of Hamas, which did manage to win the democratic, electoral support of more than "many" Palestinians disgusted by more than Fatah corruption and ineffectiveness, Palestinians who were perfectly aware of Hamas ideology, tactics and actions. Hamas is more than destructive just as Hezbollah is more than a band of religious fanatics.

    Your book on the Muslim Brotherhood aside, and whatever, that means for the "left" what you write lacks the legitimacy for Palestinians of their own experience, which may just provide a truer read of Israel's intentions. Why Khouri, who can be found easily on the International Herald Tribune as well as the Lebanon Star is more relevant.

    Sorry, but you lack the standing a Palestinian may provide, and maybe why you can confuse the historical situations of Georgia and Palestine, and ignore what Israel's effect has been on that region. It is all to easy to blame extremists on all sides, however true, without dealing with the effects of Israeli expulsions, expropriations, invasions, occupations, violence and militarist arrogance would inevitably have. Sadly, it is naive to bundle leftist aspirations with resistance. It may very well be that no matter what Palestinians do or do not do the result will be the same. There is no equivalence of power.

    Charlie M.

    Posted by cmsandia at 12/29/2008 @ 2:42pm

18. Good to see a fairly lively discussion here on a topic that is deserving of all of our attention.

    I understand the heated reaction to Dreyfuss' opening paragraph in particular. Clearly, Hamas has blundered badly in stoking the ire of the Israeli political establishment, but I think it's also pretty clear that Israel continues to do itself no favors in overreacting so blatantly and bloodily.

    By the way, a few numbers on Gaza:

    Area: 139 sq. miles

    Pop.: 1.5 million

    Median age: 16

    This is one of the most crowded pieces of land anywhere on the planet, as well as a place that is among the most destitute. That such a place can exist in full view of the entire civilized world speaks volumes about our "civilization".

    I think we can give Hamas some slack since they aren't exactly standing on firm ground.

    Here's the latest from Robert Fisk:

    Excerpt:

    We've got so used to the carnage of the Middle East that we don't care any more – providing we don't offend the Israelis. It's not clear how many of the Gaza dead are civilians, but the response of the Bush administration, not to mention the pusillanimous reaction of Gordon Brown, reaffirm for Arabs what they have known for decades: however they struggle against their antagonists, the West will take Israel's side. As usual, the bloodbath was the fault of the Arabs – who, as we all know, only understand force.

    Ever since 1948, we've been hearing this balderdash from the Israelis – just as Arab nationalists and then Arab Islamists have been peddling their own lies: that the Zionist "death wagon" will be overthrown, that all Jerusalem will be "liberated".

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:04pm

19. And always Mr Bush Snr or Mr Clinton or Mr Bush Jnr or Mr Blair or Mr Brown have called upon both sides to exercise "restraint" – as if the Palestinians and the Israelis both have F-18s and Merkava tanks and field artillery. Hamas's home-made rockets have killed just 20 Israelis in eight years, but a day-long blitz by Israeli aircraft that kills almost 300 Palestinians is just par for the course.

    The blood-splattering has its own routine. Yes, Hamas provoked Israel's anger, just as Israel provoked Hamas's anger, which was provoked by Israel, which was provoked by Hamas, which ... See what I mean? Hamas fires rockets at Israel, Israel bombs Hamas, Hamas fires more rockets and Israel bombs again and ... Got it? And we demand security for Israel – rightly – but overlook this massive and utterly disproportionate slaughter by Israel. It was Madeleine Albright who once said that Israel was "under siege" – as if Palestinian tanks were in the streets of Tel Aviv.

    By last night, the exchange rate stood at 296 Palestinians dead for one dead Israeli. Back in 2006, it was 10 Lebanese dead for one Israeli dead. This weekend was the most inflationary exchange rate in a single day since – the 1973 Middle East War? The 1967 Six Day War? The 1956 Suez War? The 1948 Independence/Nakba War? It's obscene, a gruesome game – which Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, unconsciously admitted when he spoke this weekend to Fox TV. "Our intention is to totally change the rules of the game," Barak said.

    Exactly. Only the "rules" of the game don't change......

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:04pm

20. .....Yes, Israel deserves security. But these bloodbaths will not bring it. Not since 1948 have air raids protected Israel. Israel has bombed Lebanon thousands of times since 1975 and not one has eliminated "terrorism". So what was the reaction last night? The Israelis threaten ground attacks. Hamas waits for another battle. Our Western politicians crouch in their funk holes. And somewhere to the east – in a cave? a basement? on a mountainside? – a well-known man in a turban smiles.

    End quote.

    The whole article: tinyurl.com/7q9j4v

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:04pm

21. No concessions will ever pacify hamas. Every concession Israel makes is almost immediately met with more terrorism. More than 6000 rockets sent into Israel in the last 3 years and you morons are keeping track of who kills more people? Too bad if they can't hit their targets ( which are innocent women and children ) and too bad for the palestinians who voted a terrorist org. into power that takes cover behind "innocent palestinians " while lobbing rockets at innocent Israelis. Stop sending rockets and suicide bombers into Israel, stop threatening Israel and maybe these things won't happen.

    Posted by barry25 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:29pm

22. I say, in Israel's defense, " it is time to changes the rules of the game and it's been a long time coming and hopefully the U.S. will follow suit by stating to the whole world that terrorism will not be tolerated in the least bit anymore and those who empower, fund, enable, and defend terrorism will be taken down, by force when necessary"! If that were ever the case, I'd be very fearful if I were a liberal because the fifth column is here, working at the Nation and all over the MSM, indoctrinating our youth through academia, and let's not forget hollywood!

    Posted by barry25 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:39pm

23. These civilian deaths would not be occuring if Hamas did not utilize the typical jihadist tactic of attacking from civilian positions. their most common means of attack utilizing apartment and home rooftops. Hamas like all Islamic terrorists groups intentionally use this tactic to make further gains by stirring up Muslim populace, getting sympathetic media coverage, and outrage and demonstrations by ignorant westerners. These terrorists believe it to be a worthwhile price to pay by sacrificing innocents who don't ask to be sacrificed. Hezbollah and AQ use the same tactic. Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 2:10pm

    Your point being? If a terrorist fired off of your mothers apartment roof and therefore the government flatten your mothers home in it would that be perfectly justified to you? I don't care what the terrorists are doing, Palestinians civilians are locked in Gaza unable to leave and they are being killed so that Israel can fight their enemy. If that strikes you as perfectly ok then you need to get check for tendencies of a sociopath. I don't think Hamas choosing to fire from populated areas justifies killing 50 civilians. If we follow that logic to it's extreme then Israel should just nuked the region and solve their problem.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:59pm

24. Those trapped civilians you speak of either VOTED for Hamas or must find the resolve to stand up against them in the name of their people. So, once again, WRONG!

    Posted by barry25 at 12/29/2008 @ 4:01pm

25. A 5 fold increase of rockets sent AFTER Israel gave the Gaza concession. Wow, I guess diplomacy really can work with terrorists! Maybe Obama was right after all? Well, he's sure gonna find out! Let's see what we get from the " Hope, Change " Dude! LOL!!!!!!

    Posted by barry25 at 12/29/2008 @ 4:08pm

26. To "LOVELIBERTY", you ask how the critics of Israeli destruction in Gaza would deal with Hamas. The solution is for Israel to be willing to accept an independent Palestinian state in return for Arab acceptance of Israel. Every one knows what a deal must include: return to 1967 borders in line with U.N. resolutions, East Jeruselem as the Palestinian capital. But the Zionist imperial lust for land keeps Israel from the negotiating table. And with unlimited support from the U.S. and its all-powerful lobby, Israel has no incentive to honestly negotiate land for peace. And so the brutal occupation goes on. Hamas exists because of Palestinian frustration with Israeli refusal to negotiate for peace. And if you were a real Christian, you would not gleefully support Israeli killing of Palestinians. Set my people free.

    Posted by philbq at 12/29/2008 @ 4:45pm

27. So, by your logic, Israel should not fire back at someone trying to kill Jews? As long as they use civilians for cover, Hamas should be allowed to keep firing rockets into Israel? So, if drug lords/gangs in Tijuana decided to take revenge against the attempts to stop the flow of drugs into the US and started firing rockets from homes in Tijuana, we should just let them so that no one is harmed on their side; even if it means US citizens are left undefended? Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 4:03pm

    No you send in forces on the ground and you pick your way through. Kind of like how SWAT is trained not to fire on civilians to kill hostage takers even if the hostage takers fire at police.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 5:03pm

28. Those trapped civilians you speak of either VOTED for Hamas or must find the resolve to stand up against them in the name of their people. So, once again, WRONG! Posted by barry25 at 12/29/2008 @ 4:01pm

    The world is an incredibly simple place to you isn't it. If you don't want to get die by the hand of Israel just take up arms and probably die at the hand of Hamas. Sounds simple right. Maybe you should learn to put yourself in other peoples shoes it might be a little enlightening.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 5:08pm

29. I love the failure of pro-war people to see that actions like Israel's only breed, contempt, hatred and more terrorism. Anyone who advocates peace by force in the case of Israel while simultaneously arguing that Palestinians will never accept peace with Israel is then arguing that Israel should commit genocide. The only way to stop an enemy who won't stop is to kill all of them.

    So for all of you pro-Israel or pro-Palestine people, what's the solution to the problem? Both sides seem to believe that neither side will stop killing the other, so, what's the solution. I see a lot of blame being lobbed but little to no suggestions.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 5:13pm

30. It should be clear by now to all but the most obtuse that if Hamas and the Palestinians didn't exist, the Israeli right would have to invent them in order to keep their hold on power.

    What we see in Gaza are merely the opening salvos in the Israeli February elections. The key to "solving" the conflict lies not in the fruitless hand-wringing of outside international conferences, but in Israeli ballot boxes. That assumes, of course, that the Israeli political process has not sunk to our level of one-party rule by "political parties" who's differences are over trivialities.

    Posted by S Thornton at 12/29/2008 @ 5:24pm

31. If you vote for Terrorists ( Hamas ) to control your destiny then you better accept responsibilities for their actions!

    Posted by barry25 at 12/29/2008 @ 5:27pm

32. Hamas's home-made rockets have killed just 20 Israelis in eight years,

    just? what if it was your mom?

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 6:46pm

33. urge Hamas to build a real country, with high-tech companies, secular schools, medical centers, construction businesses, etc

    you are describing Israel.

    as for Gaza? with what would they do that? this is really only a fantasy.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 6:48pm

34. Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 5:42pm

    Hmm. My question to you is what make Israel's claim to the land any more or less legitimate. The last known Jewish claim to the land was about 1500 years before they decided to just divide up the land when they did. So what gives them right to come in and tell the Arabs residing there that they have to leave?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 7:26pm

35. We'll stay hands off and let God (or Allah) sort 'em out. :)

    It's not "pro-war" to suggest that a country has the right to defend itself against enemy aggressors. Scholars can debate for aeons about the rightful claimant of the Holy Land; but the fact is, the Jews and Arabs are there, and must either learn to coexist, or face an eternal, genocidal war.

    That being said, how come none of you are calling for the US to return its land to the Native Americans from whom it was stolen? Why are you not demanding the exodus of the French and Spanish descendents from Canada and Mexico, both of whom displaced native populations by war? Then why are you claiming that Israelis should be forced out of the area? Anti-semitism or anti-Israelism? It seems hypocritical to me.

    Whether you think Israel or Palestine "deserves" to live there, someone has to win eventually. Hamas has proven time and time again that it is incapable of keeping to any sort of cease-fire or peace accords. Israel is not and has not been the aggressor here.

    Posted by Paralyse at 12/29/2008 @ 7:37pm

36. there will be no return to the status quo ante '48. Israel's occupation and in my view illegal settlements in the west bank, are another matter. many Israelis are willing to give up the west bank, but they want something in return.

    the extremists on both sides are the same. they will, I think , be left behind by history.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 7:37pm

37. Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 7:41pm

    So basically you are saying that most of their claim to Jerusalem lies in their religious practices? Funny didn't you JUST day that Arabs had to give up their religious claim to the land?

    "3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 B.C.E. the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years."

    A group of people residing in a land and having power of a land are two different things. Native Americans were here before white people but you don't seem to have any qualms with us kicking them out.

    All of your historical "evidence" to the claim rest on one precept. That because of religious backing a country can lay claim to a land, while simultaneously trying to say that the Muslim Religious claim to the land is not valid.

    What they did in 1922 was wrong. I will say that now. You can't create a state out of nothing and then expect everyone to get along. You want proof of that? Look at Africa. It's just more evidence of European and American egos at work. They thought they could just dice up the world however they wanted. Arabs were residing on that land for last 1500 years and had just as much power over it the Jews who lived there, did people actually expect them to leave just because some European said so? Give me a break. Get a grip. Whether you like it or not Palestine is their home and they will die defending it just like you would die defending your home.

    If you expect anything else from them then you are out of touch with reality completely.

    The people who caused this problem were the Europeans and Americans who believed they could give the land away to whomever they wanted. If they would have let the people choose this might not even be a problem

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 7:58pm

38. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 7:58pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    Palestine was partitioned. two states, one muslim, one jewish were created. arabs had not had sovereignty over Palestine in over 1000 years. even the concept of arab is a relatively recent one.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 8:31pm

39. Palestine was partitioned. two states, one muslim, one jewish were created. arabs had not had sovereignty over Palestine in over 1000 years. even the concept of arab is a relatively recent one. Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 8:31pm

    And Jews had had sovereignty over how long before it was partitioned? My problem is the partitioning.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 8:45pm

40. We must never again mistake the Israelis for human beings.

    Let them join the Nazi filth they so devotedly emulate and die in history's sewers.

    Posted by rykart at 12/29/2008 @ 8:55pm

41. Posted by onthehelm at 12/29/2008 @ 2:41pm

    "I feel like I am rereading the history of the Warsaw Ghetto."

    Or the Warsaw uprising in 1944.

    Truth be known, I had a similar sensation myself. What is so terribly sad about the whole history of this violence is the way in which it devalues the legitimate claims of Jews to the sympathy of the world respecting the Holocaust. Seemingly, the impact of the Nazi's on Israeli Jews, anyway, has been more profound than one might have suspected, and not in a salutary way. Here we see emulated in unconscious fashion the very methodology of Himmler: The stolen land, the ethnic cleansing, the ghettoising, and the slow and deliberate maltreatrment of those ghettoised. What are we to say of the violence of the last few days, that what we are witnessing is a reduction of the Gaza ghetto with a Final Solution to follow? To their eternal shame both the outgoing and incoming American administrations, Bush and Obama, remain mute. One wonders what Shmuel Zeigelboim, the wartime Jewish leader who took his own life in despair over the failure of Allied governments to appreciate the truly perilous situation faced by Jews throughout Europe in the years 1939-1945, might think of present plight of Palestinians. Somehow I suspect he'd be sympathetic.

    Posted by john lowell at 12/29/2008 @ 9:35pm

42. I have stopped comparing the Israelis with the Nazis---not because the comparison is inappropriate, but because I honestly believe the Israelis are flattered by it. They cultivate Nazi ideology. It's undeniable that they revel in it.

    To them, that is what being a strong Jew is all about.

    Posted by rykart at 12/29/2008 @ 9:53pm

43. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/29/2008 @ 8:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    I suggest you read a decent history of the region.

    Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Fourth Edition: A History with Documents (Paperback) by Charles D. Smith (Author)

    the anti Israeli and anti jew hysteria here is staggering. where do these "people" come from?

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 10:15pm

44. Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 7:41pm

    so,

    you're ready to give your land back to the luiseño?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 12/29/2008 @ 11:13pm

45. Posted by emile duBois at 12/29/2008 @ 10:15pm | ignore this person | warn this person'

    "the anti Israeli and anti jew hysteria here is staggering. where do these "people" come from?"

    You mean people like Albert Einstein who called the Israelis "Nazis" and "fascists" ??

    You mean people like Primo Levi, who said the Israelis are Nazis?

    Do you mean Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Israeli polymath and winner of the Israel Prize who coined the TERM judeo-Nazi to refer to Israel's stomach turning behavior??

    Here's what another Jewish luminary, Philip Roth had to say about your wonderful "light unto nations"

    Posted by rykart at 12/29/2008 @ 11:24pm

46. ""But then to the entire world they are oblivious. For the entire world they have one word: goy! 'I live here and I speak Hebrew and all I know and see are other Jews like me and isn't that wonderful!' Oh, what an impoverished Jew this arrogant Israeli is! Yes, they are the authentic ones, the Yehoshuas and the Ozes, and tell me, I ask them, what are Saul Alinsky and David Riesman and Meyer Schapiro and Leonard Bernstein and Bella Abzug and Paul Goodman and Allen Ginsberg, and on and on and on and on? Who do they think they are, these provincial nobodies! Jailers! This is their great Jewish achievement -- to make Jews into jailers and jet-bomber pilots!

    ...I spit on them! I spit on them!

    ..Philip Roth

    Posted by rykart at 12/29/2008 @ 11:26pm

47. Collective punishment is of course a violation of international law. (as if Israel cares about international law. It defies several U.N. resolutions.) Israel bombs and starves 1.5 million people. They bomb mosques and universities. Now we know that Israel started this round of violence with a military action against Hamas on Nov. 4th. The Western media did not report it. Perhaps it was because of the big news night. Or perhaps the Western media protect Israel every chance they get by painting Israeli state terrorism as justified. And the U.S. politicians vow on bended knee its total support for Israeli destruction and mass killing.

    Posted by philbq at 12/30/2008 @ 12:17am

48. Not many that frequent the Nation website would disagree that the sooner Bush and his henchmen get out of our lives and back on the farm the better.

    Never have the American public been so anxious for a new administration to take over. But stakes are high and the expectations of Obama are almost unrealistic.

    But one thing is for certain, the process should in which we elect and install a new president and his administration should be respected.

    This will be the longest test of our patience until the 20th of January. However, the decision that Obama has made and the comment that; "there is only one president at a time" is valid ... in this case unfortunately. I for one would love to demand that Bush and Cheney get out of Dodge in the next 24 hours.

    Again, as politically and socially incorrect as it may sound, our blind support of Israel has been a major factor of why we are in the position we find ourselves.

    NO one questions, takes to task or demands constraint. They are untouchables and have used the genocide card so effectively that anyone with the presence of mind to question them will suddenly find themselves labeled anti-semitic or worse.

    Until we see that the unjust practices that Israel has often times played out, we will continue to be drawn into their often times, self inflicted struggles.

    Posted by Hoot at 12/30/2008 @ 12:37am

49. Posted by Hoot at 12/30/2008 @ 12:37am

    "However, the decision that Obama has made and the comment that; "there is only one president at a time" is valid ... in this case unfortunately."

    Oh, cow flop, Hoot. Obama's silence on this question is the worst possible kind of cowardice. He can express himself on without interfering in any way with established policy. He now routinely criticizes Bush economic policy, there would be something terribly seismic about his expressing a desire for the cessation of hostilities? Only if he wished to see Israel unhindered in this violence would he not express such sentiments, but I'm afraid that his owners and handlers just won't countenance something like that. Indistinguishable from the neo-cons that preceeded them, they have no interest in in seeing peace realized in the Middle East.

    Posted by john lowell at 12/30/2008 @ 01:48am

50. The organization of Hamas must be destroyed. Whether that is by military force or the Arab people growing tired of them and reducing their presence and power, or both, I do not know.------Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/29/2008 @ 3:34pm

    Well, first, good to see even an old die-hard anti-Commie like you....didn't see the Soviet Union as a worse threat to us than Hamas is to Israel....uh...right?

    Second, notice you STILL didn't give a specific on "How to destroy Hamas"...and that was my earlier point from the Chauvisnist-Israel types.

    Mostly because you CAN'T answer it. Say "Wipe 'em with the IDF" and you have to come up with a plan that even the Israelis know won't work.

    So you say "Or the Arabs get tired of them"...to which the question is "Why?"...especially if the PA is corrupt and weak and there's NOWHERE ELSE to turn for the Palestinians.

    and you're left with "I don't know".

    Besides you have no real concern for the Palestinians anyway...you just want "Biblical Israel" maintained. Period.

    Posted by Mask at 12/30/2008 @ 07:34am

51. I agree with the Israelis about one thing: The Palestinians MUST stop firing Qassam rockets into Israel. Killing one Israeli in four years is pathetic, a disgrace. You can't even call that resistance.

    The Palestinians need to take a lesson from the Iraq insurgency...switch to IEDs, roadside bombs and so-called 'sticky bombs' which can be placed under cars. The Palestinians could be killing 10 israelis per day and when that happens, the Israelis will have to leave Palestinian territory, just as the American filth were driven out of Iraq, Indochina, and soon---Afghanistan.

    Only when the price to Israel becomes too exorbitant will it relent. As long as it isn't costing them anything, their extermination jamboree against the Palestinian people will continue.

    Posted by rykart at 12/30/2008 @ 08:12am

52. Posted by rykart at 12/30/2008 @ 08:12am | ignore this person | warn this person

    grrr, kill, kill

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 09:29am

53. just as the American filth...

    whatta charmer you are. I suggest you crawl back under your rock.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 10:24am

54. I suggest you join your Nazi pals in SHITerot.

    Then you can play your phony victim routine with the rest of the Israeli vermin.

    Posted by rykart at 12/30/2008 @ 10:45am

55. Posted by rykart at 12/30/2008 @ 10:45am | ignore this person | warn this person

    you're foaming at the mouth, and the blood is dripping from you fangs all over your brown shirt.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 12:22pm

56. Brown shirt? that's a good one!!

    Go back to your Hebrew Einsatzgruppen...they must be looking for you.

    Posted by rykart at 12/30/2008 @ 1:19pm

57. Joe the Plumber Fiddles While Gaza Burns!

    Mr. Dreyfuss, that is an equally accurate and impactful headline for this melodramatic spew.

    Mr. Obama is not the president. Mr. Obama is no longer even a Senator. Mr. Obama would be overstepping his bounds to try affecting this conflict. Mr. Obama has clearly stated that, "We only have one president at a time." Mr. Obama is not in charge of U.S. foreign policy.

    Mr. Dreyfuss, which of these concepts was not made clear to you in high school civics classes. Maybe you should enroll in a "refresher" GED course.

    Mr. Bush is fiddling while Gaza burns. Mr. Obama does not have the authority to affect Mr. Bush's incompetence until January 20th. It's one of those Constitutional things they teach in high school civics ... you must have forgotten.

    What dreck!

    Posted by ChuckWhite at 12/30/2008 @ 2:52pm

58. sometimes the headline is written by someone else.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 3:14pm

59. Chuck

    Were the president elect witnessing a massacre of European Jews, would you consider it unconstitutional for him to speak out and condemn it?

    Posted by rykart at 12/30/2008 @ 3:20pm

60. Part 1: This column and the comments on it present a futile argument. When enemies differ greatly, as do the Israelis and Hamas, because of different religious beliefs and language, among other things, war conventions have no historical precedent. If Israel saw Hamas as a party with whom Israel could do business in peacetime, tacit or explicit rules would be formed by now for how the Gaza battle should be fought. Only where there is some possibility that both parties see such conventions as mutually beneficial do enemies restrain their actions to avoid provoking an indefinite series of vengeful actions.

    Saint Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologicae, presents the general outline of what has become the "just war" theory. Aquinas discusses the justification of war and the kinds of actions he deemed permissible in war. Aquinas's thoughts were the model for later scholastics and legal authorities, including: Francisco de Vitoria (1486-1546), Francisco Suarez (1548-1617), Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), Samuel Pufendorf (1632-1704), Christian Wolff (1679-1754), and Emerich de Vattel (1714-1767).

    The "just war" theory has been revived in light of the hellish history of warfare during the twentieth century involving carpet bombing using incendiary devices, not to mention the use of nuclear weapons. The arguments proliferated, so to speak, on America's involvement in the Vietnam war.

    Some modern academics who have devoted books to the "just war" concept include Michael Walzer in Just and Unjust Wars (1977) and War and Justice (2001), Barrie Paskins and Michael Dockrill, in The Ethics of War (1979), Richard Norman, in Ethics, Killing, and War (1995), and Brian Orend, in War and International Justice (2001). see pt 2:

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/30/2008 @ 4:31pm

61. All of the chatter about Hamas' stupidity, fanaticism, et al, ignore all of the history leading up to this dreadful moment(Yes! Another!) The genesis of what is happening now can be found in Hamas' victory in the 2006 elections, and the immediate refusal of Israel, the Bush administration, the EU, the "moderate" Arab authoritarian states, Fatah, to recognize that victory in an acknowledged fair and open election. The aftermaths of that election were the military intrusions into the West Bank Arab enclaves where Israeli forces arrested many of the elected Hamas representatives and interned them; and, to the best of my knowledge, are still interned ,guaranteeing that a Hamas majority would never be seated in parliament. The concerted action against this democratically elected party puts me in mind of the Nixon-Kissinger response to the election of Allende's socialist government in Chile, i.e., do everything to overturn a popular mandate and ensure regime change. We are as a nation shamed by our role in seating a military dictatorship and the torture and blood-letting that ensued. Unfortunately, given the (circa) forty year history of Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the continuing justifications for that condition , I see no redeeming hope of national shame on the horizon. President-ELECT Obama has put forth a philosophy of "talking to one's enemies" if any solutions are to be forthcoming, or if agreements on common interests are to be found. The Arab nations of the area previously hostile to Israel promise normal relations if the pre-1967 borders are restored, Is Hamas really the problem we should be concentrating upon now, or should it not be the rejectionist, blood-letting policies that have been put in force by our side?

    Posted by banewfe at 12/30/2008 @ 4:33pm

62. Pt 2: Some argue that there are long-term benefits to having a war convention. Others argue that certain spheres of life ought never to be targeted in war; for example, hospitals and densely populated suburbs.

    Both ethical arguments suffer from the same fatal defect in that they become either vague or restrictive when it comes what war requires when the objective is to come out on top.

    While in principle such ethical prescriptions appear commendable, I submit war is an inherently messy business that inevitably leads to unethical conduct. This is especially so when military targets are hidden among civilians. War has become increasingly asymmetrical and unconventional, and the legacy of WW II and its mass terror bombing renders most of this debate over who is in the right and what means are good or bad a rather futile exercise.

    For example, try arguing over whether the rocket and mortar attacks by Hamas constituted ethical actions. Given just cause and right intention, the just war theory asserts that there must be a reasonable probability of success. Is there any such reasonable probability of Hamas defeating Israel through force of arms, using rockets, mortars, or troops? If not, how can Hamas' actions be justified by other with purely partisan, political arguments? Put the shoe on the other foot and we find much the same result. Israel can have no realistic expectation that it will defeat Hamas through force of arms, regardless of how much damage is inflicted on Hamas' infrastructure or leadership.

    My point, therefore, is that the argument over which party is in the right with respect to the Gaza violence is futile. Where one stands on that argument depends entirely on where one sits.

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/30/2008 @ 4:34pm

63. Obama has a serious problem with reaction time. Time and time again, he has waited too long before responding to issues that needed immediate attention.

    In the primaries his surrogates accused Hillary Clinton's campaign of racism for weeks until he finally made a statement to stop it. When Reverend Wright happened, he let it grow and grow. His speech on race came off as reactionary because it came too late. Just recently we saw the same behavior with Blagojevich - we didn't hear any reassuring response from Obama for several days, allowing unwarranted suspicions to grow.

    This behavior might have been acceptable as a candidate, but now that he is President-elect it is inexcusable. When scary things happen in the world, the country needs leadership and a reasurring voice right then - not after a few days or weeks after he's had time to take it all in.

    Posted by bobfet1 at 12/30/2008 @ 4:35pm

64. I admit I missed the memo. I thought George Bush was still the President of the United States.

    I also missed the other new rules of engagement that now state if your cities are attacked and your people killed you do nothing but beg for them to stop.

    I guess fighting terrorists is ok as long as the Jews are not the ones doing that. I am afraid I understand what the real issue is.

    Posted by geek at 12/30/2008 @ 5:06pm

65. What is just conduct in war? Consider two principles: 1) discrimination, which concerns those who are legitimate targets in war, and 2) proportionality, which concerns how much force is morally appropriate.

    Discrimination

    Generally, we tend to think it is unfair and unjust to attack indiscriminately non-combatants or innocents.

    Warfare sometimes unavoidably involves civilians. The principle of discrimination argues for their immunity from war. However, since WW II, and the advent in more recent times of asymmetrical war, a different model has evolved. The doctrine of double effect offers a justification for killing civilians in war so long as their deaths are accidental.

    Thus, targeting a military establishment in the middle of a city is permissible according to the doctrine of double effect and civilian casualties are foreseeable but accidental. This doctrine justifies "collateral damage" to civilians; however, it raises a number of issues concerning the balance between achieving military objectives and causing civilian casualties.

    The fact of asymmetrical warfare raises the question of who is a combatant and who is not. Guerrillas may disguise themselves as civilians. Does the nature of modern warfare dissolve the possibility of discrimination?

    As civilians may be just as necessary for a war machine as combatants, is there any moral distinction in targeting an armed combatant and a civilian involved in arming, feeding, or supporting the combatant?

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/30/2008 @ 5:08pm

66. Rykart, you say, "Were the president elect witnessing a massacre of European Jews, would you consider it unconstitutional for him to speak out and condemn it?"

    The simple answer is no. I wouldn't consider it unconstitutional in your scenario, nor in this one. Of course, I did not phrase my objection in a constitutional frame.

    I did say, "Mr. Obama would be overstepping his bounds to try affecting this conflict." In addition, any statement he made would have exactly zero legal effect until January 20. It could have psychological effect, a possibility that, I'm sure, has not gone unnoticed by Obama. There are possibly good reasons for his lack of a statement. Such as ...

    I don't know if you have ever been in a serious fist-fight or a high-level negotiation. But, I can tell you, that often, the best strategy is, "Don't telegraph your move until you are sure it can score a hit." Let's give Obama a little credit for intelligence, shall we?

    He has shown time and again that he is intimately aware of the forces at play. Time and again, he has been criticized for a lack of forceful, immediate response. I've done it too. Time and again, he has ultimately responded in an effective manner, in his own time. I've learned to give the man some slack, because, so far, he's been one step ahead of me, the pundits and ... you, I suspect.

    Posted by ChuckWhite at 12/30/2008 @ 5:19pm

67. Proportionality

    This principle holds that to be just, any offensive military action should remain strictly proportional to the objective desired. This principle requires restraining the violence of warfare to minimize destruction and casualties. It seeks to minimize suffering. The principle of discrimination looks at identifying legitimate targets of war, while the principle of proportionality deals with what kind of force is morally permissible. It does not seem morally reasonable to machine gun a barely armed, though hostile group of people. At the battle of Omdurman in the Sudan, six machine gunners killed thousands of dervishes. One could argue on the one hand that while the gunners may have had the right to defend themselves, the principle of proportionality demanded that the battle should have ended before it became a massacre. On the other hand, one could also argue that not until the defenders had shot virtually all of the charging thousands of dervishes, many presumably under the influence of drugs, would the defenders have succeeded in ensuring their own survival. Of course, there was a further complication relevant to this debate in that the British behavior at Omdurman was, at Kitchener's express instructions, to exact revenge for the death of Gordon at the hands of the Mahdi's forces. Thus, proportionality is easy to state in principle and rather less easy to define in practice.

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/30/2008 @ 5:22pm

68. I can't believe I'm defending Barack Obama, but keeping his mouth shut at this point is exactly what he should be doing. He is not President of the U.S. until Jan 20, and if says or does anything until then he would only create political chaos and potential disaster for the day he does take office. When he does take office he would be wise to support Israel which is the injured party here, and oppose the terrorist Hamas organization with everything he's got.

    Posted by valwayne at 12/30/2008 @ 5:59pm

69. Having provided some context to show where I'm coming from, I have to say that Mr. Dreyfuss has me somewhat confused. Is he saying that because "Hamas ... should have known that it was firing its rockets directly into Israel's pre-election political mess" that makes illegitimate Israel's military response to the renewed Hamas rocket barrages? I am also unsure what Mr. Dreyfuss would suggest Israel's response should have been, proportionally speaking, and on what set of assumptions he bases his judgment. I have yet to see adequate recognition let alone an answer to the question of what constitutes an appropriate military response by Israel or any nation to attacks from asymmetrical forces fighting from within civilian communities. When the principle of discrimination is no longer applicable, does the doctrine of double effect not then apply? I also have seen a lack of criticism of Hamas and other, similar, groups for targeting almost exclusively civilian, non-combatant people in their homes, in restaurants, on buses, everywhere but on a battlefield. It would appear that this publication and those who agree with its point of view do not think the principles of just warfare apply to the Palestinians. How is it ethically correct to apply the criteria for just warfare only to the Israelis? To me, it seems an arbitrary choice similar to one made by one with no dog in the fight who prefers one football team to another simply because one team is the underdog. Don't the rules that determine what is moral and ethical conduct apply equally, regardless of the ethnic or political identity of the parties involved in a conflict? If not, why not?

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/30/2008 @ 6:03pm

70. Obama fiddles? While he rests up after a grueling campaign and with a daunting leadership role ahead?

    And you sit at a keyboard, tappy tap tap, and bitch at him for this.

    Punk.

    Posted by johndenton46 at 12/30/2008 @ 6:04pm

71. the headline is unfortunate.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 6:14pm

72. And you sit at a keyboard, tappy tap tap, and bitch at him for this.

    it's his job. he is fortunate to have one.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 6:15pm

73. "Obama Fiddles While Gaza Burns"...?

    Why is this an Obama issue? If Israel and Hamas want to kill each other, Obama and the U.S. should stay out of the way.

    Until both sides want to negotiate peach and stop trying to get an advantage, the Middle East mess will never be solved. The U.S. should offer to negotiate. The U.S. should offer aid. However, the U.S. should stay out of the way of two idiot groups (Israel and Hamas) who are only interested in killing each other.

    Posted by pnkearns at 12/30/2008 @ 7:04pm

74. Pnkearns,

    Then call back home the F-16 fighter jets, which are blowing to pieces the flesh of Palestinian kids, courtesy of your tax dollars given to Israel every year; 6 billions Dollars annually to be precise.

    It is really immaterial whether you decided to act or not; your Congress and Obama are sitting helplessly in the pocket of AIPAC and the Jewish Lobby. So sit down and relax and go back to watching your "American Idol", your power of citizenship has been stripped away from you, long before you even noticed.

    Posted by CripThink at 12/30/2008 @ 8:37pm

75. Gaza was left to the Palestinians when the Israelis withdrew. It was an imperfect, even messy, extraction but at some point the Palestinians and their Arab allies - to the extent they have any - have to take the bull by the horns. There was construction and light industry to pursue, a beach front to exploit for tourism, children to educate and a hopeful world to impress. If, with international help, Gaza had been used as a model for development, Israeli commerce and tourism would have flowed in and Israelis would have eagerly pursued peaceful engagement - during Oslo they did so in Jericho and throughout the moderate Arab world.

    Instead, every fear that Israelis had about Hamas and Palestinian self destructive politics played out and here we are.

    If it wasn't so horrible a scene, it would be laughable reading and listening to Western Hamas apologists. We all know they would be the first to yell for a US Marine or Israeli soldier at the glimpse of one of these thugs. But its so cool to be in with the in crowd and the in crowd thinks Israel is a grotesque rogue nation, when in fact it is a vibrant, peace seeking democracy fighting for survival and, if that's ever secured, some quiet borders.

    Posted by motu at 12/30/2008 @ 10:07pm

76. "Yesterday Obama got an official US intelligence briefing on the crisis in Gaza, which may or may not have numbed his brain with data he didn't need. Obama didn't need an intelligence briefing to tell him anything he really needs to know"

    that is literally anti-intelligence. information is for losers, let's feel this one out. i mean, who needs to base decisions on data, context, and expert opinion when you can use your emotions and your gut?

    stop acting like conservatives! stop it! stop it now!

    Posted by burndtdan at 12/30/2008 @ 11:41pm

77. "Yesterday Obama got an official US intelligence briefing on the crisis in Gaza, which may or may not have numbed his brain with data he didn't need. Obama didn't need an intelligence briefing to tell him anything he really needs to know"

    that is literally anti-intelligence. information is for losers, let's feel this one out. i mean, who needs to base decisions on data, context, and expert opinion when you can use your emotions and your gut?

    stop acting like conservatives! stop it! stop it now!

    Posted by burndtdan at 12/30/2008 @ 11:41pm

78. "Yesterday Obama got an official US intelligence briefing on the crisis in Gaza, which may or may not have numbed his brain with data he didn't need. Obama didn't need an intelligence briefing to tell him anything he really needs to know"

    that is literally anti-intelligence. information is for losers, let's feel this one out. i mean, who needs to base decisions on data, context, and expert opinion when you can use your emotions and your gut?

    stop acting like conservatives! stop it! stop it now!

    Posted by burndtdan at 12/30/2008 @ 11:42pm

79. Wow Motu, I love your sweet deceptive talk.

    So the Israelis pulled out from Gaza and it was time for Hamas to undertake a light industrial and tourism developments, etc…

    Now, let's examine the non-romantic facts:

    After the Israelis left Gaza, they maintained total control over all border crossings to Gaza. They also controlled Gaza's airspace, territorial water, ports and fuel supply, Furthermore, the Israelis spliced 25% of Gaza's land along the border with Israel and declared it as security zone, baring Palestinians from entering that zone. Gaza was transformed to 300 square miles jail by Israel, nothing got in or out of Gaza without Israeli permission. The assassination of Palestinians in Gaza by Israeli warplanes was a daily ritual. The Israelis signed a truce with Hamas for six months, during which the Israelis had 135 incursions into Gaza murdering 30 Palestinians. During the truce, food to Gazans was restricted; fuel supply for Gaza's single electric power plant was intermittent at best. Gaza was slowly dying in the dark from the most savage siege since the German siege of the Jewish Ghetto in Warsaw. So let's stop the romantic talk about Israel giving back all Gaza to the Palestinians; this simply an Israeli propaganda.

    As for Israel the cool, vibrant, peace-loving democracy; facts point otherwise. Mahmud Abbas has recognized Israel and negotiated with them for years before Hamas even existed. And what did Abbas get from Israel in return? More settlements in the occupied territories, more annexation of Palestinian land, more military check-points and more demolition of Palestinian homes. Israel is a democracy for Jews only, as South Africa was a democracy for whites only.

    Posted by CripThink at 12/31/2008 @ 12:04am

80. First, this has nothing to do with any "occupation" of anything by Israel. Prior to 1967, Israel was not in Gaza and not in the West Bank. Gaza belonged to Egypt and the West Bank belonged to Jordon. Prior to 1967 Israel was subject to 5 wars of extinction and countless terrorist attacks. You people saying its Israel's "fault" forget that Israel did not live in peace with its Arab neighbors prior to 1967.

    The "problem" is that the Arab world continues, as it has from 1948 to view Israel as illegitimate and that it should not exist. To Hamas and its supporters, Tel Aviv is "occupied" territory. Israel withdrew from Gaza. Did it reduce the terrorism? Israel could withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank tomorrow and Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran, Syria, etc., would still want to see Israel exterminated. In this debate, there is really only one question, do you believe Israel has a right to exist even under the pre-1967 borders? This is simple, a yes or no will do. If its yes, Israel has the right to protect itself. If its no, then Israel is the evil oppressor.

    Second, the Arab world has so little to be proud of that it views the mere survival of its terrorists as a "victory". Hamas loves it when children in Gaza get killed. That's why they put their operations next to schools and hospitals. It makes for great pictures on CNN. The more dead the better. If you want to know the difference between Hamas and Israel, Hamas wants Israel children to die and does everything in its power to kill them. Israel endangers its own soldiers to try to limit civilian casualties. For Hamas, like Hezbollah and their supporters, a win is 10,000 dead Gazians and one Hamas representative still alive who can go on CNN and say, "look, we are still here!" Pathetic.

    Posted by alanmarv at 12/31/2008 @ 12:10am

81. By the way, Obama is not the President. He shouldn't say anything. Dreyfus obviously knows nothing about U.S. governnment. We don't have coups here. We have orderly transfers of power. Until Jan. 20, George Bush is President. Period.

    Posted by alanmarv at 12/31/2008 @ 12:11am

82. "the headline is unfortunate."

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/30/2008 @ 6:14pm

    Very much so JR. I can only empathise with his beach loving, pec building priorities. Who in their right mind would want to get out of that frame of mind for such a messy issue. He, in my humble opinion, has thus shown us, in contrast with those pot-bellied Americans who pontificate about his tardiness to get out of holiday mode and say something about war, what a well balanced, civilised individual he really is proving to be.

    You're not your usual irrational Lefty self on this one JR. One thing that seems to be forgotten is that the Jews have been treated pretty poorly in Arab countries so it's not a wonder that Israelis are apprehensive about one or two state solutions and the Arabs intentions toward them. Post 1948 they were persecuted and deported from most Arab countries and so have their backs to the wall in Israel.

    Here's just a little of what happened to them in Iraq:

    THE PERSECUTION OF JEWS IN IRAQ AFTER 1948

    In 1950, Iraqi Jews were permitted to leave the country within a year provided they forfeited their citizenship. A year later, however, the property of Jews who emigrated was frozen and economic restrictions were placed on Jews who chose to remain in the country. From 1949 to 1951, 104,000 Jews were evacuated from Iraq in Operations Ezra and Nehemiah; another 20,000 were smuggled out through Iran. In 1952, Iraq's government barred Jews from emigrating and publicly hanged two Jews after falsely charging them with hurling a bomb at the Baghdad office of the U.S. Information Agency.

    With the rise of competing Ba'ath factions in 1963, additional restrictions were placed on the remaining Iraqi Jews.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 12/31/2008 @ 12:41am

83. A bit more on that anti-Jewish pogrom in Iraq but was common in other Arab states:

    The sale of property was forbidden and all Jews were forced to carry yellow identity cards. After the Six-Day War, more repressive measures were imposed: Jewish property was expropriated; Jewish bank accounts were frozen; Jews were dismissed from public posts; businesses were shut; trading permits were cancelled; telephones were disconnected. Jews were placed under house arrest for long periods of time or restricted to the cities.

    Persecution was at its worst at the end of 1968. Scores were jailed upon the discovery of a local "spy ring" composed of Jewish businessmen. Fourteen men-eleven of them Jews-were sentenced to death in staged trials and hanged in the public squares of Baghdad; others died of torture. On January 27, 1969, Baghdad Radio called upon Iraqis to "come and enjoy the feast." Some 500,000 men, women and children paraded and danced past the scaffolds where the bodies of the hanged Jews swung; the mob rhythmically chanted "Death to Israel" and "Death to all traitors." This display brought a world-wide public outcry that Radio Baghdad dismissed by declaring: "We hanged spies, but the Jews crucified Christ." (Judith Miller and Laurie Mylroie, Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf, p. 34).

    Jews remained under constant surveillance by the Iraqi government. Max Sawadayee, in "All Waiting to be Hanged" writes a testimony of an Iraqi Jew (who later escaped): "The dehumanization of the Jewish personality resulting from continuous humiliation and torment...have dragged us down to the lowest level of our physical and mental faculties, and deprived us of the power to recover.".

    Posted by lrjones4 at 12/31/2008 @ 12:48am

84. The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza live on 22% of historical Palestine, their ancestral homeland which they lost to waves after waves of European Jewish immigrants through the good works of Great Britain and America. They see Israel court these immigrants from the four corners of the Earth, provide them with all social services, and settle them in clean luxuriously built settlements while they, the damned race, are herded, squeezed more and more into ghettos, besieged, and culled like animals from the air. Put yourself in their shoes then think how rational you'd be...

    Posted by Dubaian at 12/31/2008 @ 03:12am

85. I see that anti-intellectualism is alive and well on the left, not just on the right, in America. No one has seen fit to address in a calm, civil and rationally intellectual way my discussion of the ethics of warfare. As is usual on all blogs and all other means of "communicating" over this medium called the internet, very little if any rational dialogue occurs. One sees emotional expressions without logic or scholarship -- so we end up, as always, displaying in cyberspace so many millions of anthropoid apes beating their chests and howling at reality instead of using the cerebrums that supposedly evolved to house that which distinguishes humankind from the apes.

    Even an orangutan here in the National Zoo in Washington, D.C. appears to be able to converse with one in a more rational, civil, and intellectual way. Orangutans, even in captivity, often expressed gratitude by seeking to grasp one's hand after a kindness done to them. Thus do the apes, at least, exhibit that which appears entirely missing here and elsewhere on the internet; it is called manners.

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 09:54am

86. in addition to jews, who by the way did not all come from Europe, there was a great wave of arab migration into palestine, not least because of the infusion of capital into what had been a backwater of the Ottoman empire.

    if the establishment of Israel it deemed to be illegitimate, all the countries in the ME, with the exception of Egypt, are equally illegitimate, as they were, like Israel established by fiat by the victors of WW1.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/31/2008 @ 10:16am

87. Humanity is a part of the Creator's cosmic intelligence and can therefore stand, if naked and alone, at least pure and undefiled, amidst chaos and futility. There is only one thing that belongs to an individual fully--his or her will, or purpose. We are not responsible for the ideas that present themselves to our consciousness, though we are wholly responsible for the way in which we choose to use them. Apart from the will, there is nothing good or bad. It is likely futile to try to direct reality. Rather, one's task in life is to recognize and accept reality with intelligence and grace. To do this, one must distinguish reality, events actually happening as they happen, from mere thoughts existing only between our own ears and not outside of us. It is wise to remind one's self not to believe everything one thinks. We are each a citizen of our own commonwealth, but also a member of the wider community of humanity, of which the political city is only a poor copy. By virtue of our occasional rationality, we humans are the progeny of the cosmic intelligence that created the universe. We are kindred in nature with the intelligence that created us. We are capable of learning to administer our own commonwealth and our life according to the will of our creator, which is the will of nature. The Creator designed the universe and all nature operates under the universe's physical laws, which we as yet do not fully comprehend. Our natural instinct is self-preservation and self-interest. The wider community of humanity has yet to learn that we as individuals cannot secure each our own interests unless each individual contributes to the common welfare.

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 11:08am

88. even the arab world is divided now, with Saudi assigning blame to Hamas, as well as Israel.

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/31/2008 @ 11:10am

89. A solution to the Middle East conflict is a matter subject to human will. A majority of individuals from all parties must decide to accept that which is real instead of insisting against all reason only on their own self-interest. It is hard to see how or when it will become possible to structure a community of all peoples in the region. Too many on both sides of this conflict fail to accept that all must strive together for the common good to end the misery and insecurity of all. Until and unless a majority of all those involved in the region recognize this reality, there shall be violence and war among them. Thus, the argument over which specific faction or side is in the right is irrelevant; they all are in the wrong. Arguments over who has a right to live on disputed land are merely a way to refuse to distinguish reality from mere breast-beating and daydreams. Support for either side is merely an expression of one's self-interest, entitled to no more weight than the electrons refreshing the screen as I write.

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 11:11am

90. Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 11:11am | ignore this person | warn this person

    the US could lead, as it has done in the past, preBush2

    Posted by emile duBois at 12/31/2008 @ 11:17am

91. "the US could lead, as it has done in the past, preBush2" Posted by emile duBois at 12/31/2008

    Yes, the US could conceivably lead a process that might result in less violence. However, we ought to consider the political and economic interests of the US in such an undertaking. Quite a complex matter. What is France's interest? What is Russia's?

    Apart from considerations related to national security, what about domestic political concerns?

    Could the US lead a process that genuinely would seek to provide the incentives for Palestinians to abandon their historical positions and accept a new arrangement?

    Is the US in any position now to fund such an effort?

    Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 12:37pm

92. Rykart, I was so utterly disgusted by your posts that I took the trouble to register to this site just so I could respond to them. Your encouragement to the Palestinians to up their level of attacks to roadside bombs is nothing less than an incitement to murder.

    Your comments that the Israelis are proud to be compared to Nazis could not be further from the truth. Israel was founded primarily so there would be a jewish refuge from people like the Nazis -- people like you Rykart, who hate us so much.

    I live in Israel. I have relatives and friends who have been killed by rockets. The Israelis clearly acted with utmost restraint; Prime Minister Olmert essentially begged Hamas to sign a new cease-fire. You are utterly full of crap if you think the Jews want war. The jewish people pray for peace all the time; it's all we want for the world. Hamas, as has been made clear by other posters, wants nothing less than our utter destruction as Jews. It sounds like you should just join Hamas as that's apparently what you want to do.

    Just because we won't sit and be slaughtered like sheep anymore doesn't make us Nazis. If we were Nazis, Gaza would be gone and Israel would not be going out of her way to just hit Hamas and no one else. It's not Israel's fault if Hamas places warriors and rockets deliberately among civilians, in mosques and schools. It's Hamas' fault. If the Palestinians want peace, they have to show it by supporting leadership that doesn't have in its charter, like Hamas, the desire for the utter destruction of the Jews and quotes to classic anti-semitic works like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

    You don't know Israel, Rykart, & you don't know the Jews. I suggest you look deeply into your own soul - I think that's where all this hatred is from. Respectfully ...

    Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 1:50pm

93. On the topic of "the Jewish people pray for peace all the time":

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3648144,00.html

    "Students all over Israel rallied on Wednesday in support of the IDF and its Operation Cast Lead in Gaza."

    While I do not agree with or find agreeable the writings of "rykart" here, I also am appalled at "jojojo" who seems to be in a bubble himself. While we are on the topic, Jojojo, perhaps you could identify your friends and relatives who have been killed by Hamas rockets? To date, only 4 people have died as a result of this rocket fire, over the last 5 days. Prior to that, a year had gone by without a single fatality in Israel as a result of anything Hamas did at all. Could you identify any of these people killed by rockets for us?

    Posted by syfriendly at 12/31/2008 @ 2:21pm

94. Likewise, Jojojo, Israel is not in the place of simply demanding that millions of desperate, miserable refugees who've been confined to open-air prisons, military occupation, and military and "settler" violence for decades simply take all the steps in making peace with Israel. Unfortunately for Israel, the consequence of taking these peoples' lands from them, and allowing them to exist miserable in the open-air prisons or "coexist" in an Apartheid regime within the lands taken up to 1967 are probably severe enough to include a questionable future for Israel if Israel does not make very real and serious concessions - and reparations - to the Palestinians.

    Posted by syfriendly at 12/31/2008 @ 2:24pm

95. Posted by Dubaian at 12/31/2008 @ 03:12am | ignore this person | warn this person

    exactly -

    Posted by syfriendly at 12/31/2008 @ 2:26pm

96. Dreyfuss: I'm sick and tired of blaming the victims -- the victims of a 61-year ethnic cleansing operation that has come in the form of massacres (e.g., Deir Yassin, Sabra/Shattila, Jenin, and Gaza once again) and making room for more colonization in the form of illegal settlements and the apartheid wall. This cleansing started with the Zionists prior to 1948 and it continues today in both Gaza and the West Bank, and in Israel itself. Ask the 2nd-class Palestinian citizens of Israel. Reading Wallace Shawn's truth-telling about Israel's and America's irrationality makes clear the why of all of this madness, brutality, and inhumanity.

    Posted by Sanna Towns at 12/31/2008 @ 2:35pm

97. Like many leftists, whom I've had the pleasure of conversing with, you question Israel's right to exist in general.

    It's really incredible to me, because often these leftists are from the USA which -- if I understand history correctly, almostly entirely dispossessed the American Indians. Yet I have never heard such a leftist offer to leave his home and give it to an Indian.

    The difference between the USA and Israel is the Jews were here long before the Arabs, before Islam itself. We do have the idea in our religion that this land is our birthright given us by G-d. But you don't need that idea to support jews living in Israel; like I said, the history is there plain for anyone to see. You could count it as a cultural thing though that we've prayed towards Jerusalem for 2000 years, that we believe the perfection of the world will only come about when the Jews finally return to Zion, etc. - in other words, it shows our permanent attachment. In terms of who displaced who, it's the Christians (many of whom now have become our friends) and the Muslims and their precursor pagans who displaced us. Alot of Muslims want to conquer the world; Jews just want their tiny little part of it.

    I totally support the Gaza operation, btw, I think it's necessary to deter Hamas and protect Israel's citizens. I think all of you would support it if you were under rocket fire.

    In terms of the victims though to clarify, though I'm not putting personal info here which has some real haters, I was referring to rockets from both Gaza and the Lebanon War. I don't see a real difference between them; they are both religiously motivated, more than anything else. I don't live in a bubble either. I live next to a bomb shelter. I don't want a single innocent Palestinian hurt, but Hamas has to end.

    Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 2:59pm

98. Oh, and to the one who wrote peace on jerusalem, peace on you too friend and I wish there were more people like you in this site and in this world. jojojo

    Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 3:00pm

99. Oh, and to the one who wrote peace on jerusalem, peace on you too friend and I wish there were more people like you in this site and in this world. jojojo Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 3:00pm

    So of the 14 people in the last 4 years who have been killed by Hamas' you know not only one but more than one?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:19pm

100. Those who throw the Palestinian version of history about as fact are no more credible than those who attest to the Israeli version. Neither side's propaganda and name-calling are relevant or of interest. What Israeli reaction would any reasonable person expect in response to Hamas' attacks after the December 19th "cease fire" ended, particularly so close to Israeli elections? Was it even conceivable that Israel or any country could do or be seen to do nothing? The provocation appears deliberate. Iran perhaps saw an opportunity on the eve of Obama's inauguration and Israeli elections to lure Israel into repeating mistakes made previously in Lebanon. Or perhaps Iran simply wants Bibi and his blunders back, as Obama clearly prefers Livni. One despairs of finding anyone here who is willing to look at reality instead of mouthing the politically fashionable slogans of the moment. Everyone I read lies to me out of self interest. The West Bank Palestinian Authority deplores the Israeli attacks, officially, while unnamed Palestinian officials express the hope that Israel will oust Hamas and allow Fatah to take over in Gaza. Events and people are seldom what they appear to be. There always is another side to disputes, notwithstanding all the self-righteous, distorted, political claptrap mouthed by both parties to it. As in most disputes about the right to land fought over for centuries, there are no good or bad guys in the matter. Apparently, the readers of the Nation who comment here do not count among themselves even a single disinterested, educated, and dispassionate observer willing to eschew obfuscatory advocacy in favor of civil discourse and discussion. I had hoped to find someone willing to admit they had no dog in this fight so we could talk about it rationally.

     Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 3:27pm

101. thank you. I write here constantly correcting the lies, misinformation, and distortions of history that permeate these kinds of websites.

     Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:16pm

     hahahahaha. More like perpetuating other lies. Don't you think it's a bit suspicious that this one guy happens to know more than 2 of the 14 people who have died in the rocket attacks of the last 4 years. Seems like the odds are a bit astronomical to me.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:36pm

102. Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 3:27pm

     Finally someone sensible who sees that this isn't just a who's right, who's wrong, who started it issue.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:38pm

103. Wow, you sound like the original Epictetus... write on...

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 3:48pm

104. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:38pm

     Are we children? Is life a playground?

     I had hoped to find some folks with mature minds here.

     Well, so much for The Nation ....

     Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 3:49pm

105. I had hoped to find someone willing to admit they had no dog in this fight so we could talk about it rationally. Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 3:27pm

     I actually said earlier that this isn't a battle of right or wrong. That both sides are acting like idiots. I don't particularly care for either side of the coin. All I am interested in is finding a peaceful solution.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:51pm

106. Are we children? Is life a playground? I had hoped to find some folks with mature minds here. Well, so much for The Nation .... Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 3:49pm

     No we aren't kids and life is not a playground. That's why people need to stop bickering and playing politics if they ever want to end situations like these.

     The matter between Israel and Palestine has become some fraught with childish posturing that no one is willing to offer a realistic solution. Hamas postures and Israel responds by posturing.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 3:53pm

107. I agree with Epictetus that it's very hard to be objective when you're in the middle of a situation.

     When someone is trying to murder you, it's hard to think straight.

     Obviously it's the job of the Israeli government to think straight even when the going gets rough.

     It is in fact known that Abbas wants Hamas deposed and that moderate Arabs have supported that too. Saudi Arabia even went so far today as to arrest a cleric who issued a fatwa to murder all Jews. That's a first for Saudi Arabia.

     There isn't going to be a democratic or peaceful solution possible in the Middle East, until the Arabs actually reach a point where they can stop believing in such large numbers in Islamicism, which really does call for the death of Israel and even all Jews in many cases. It's really not possible for Israel to negotiate with an entity like Hamas unless it changes its charter and its behaviour. Arafat started to do that with Fatah and there was some hope there, but it is much harder for me to see a religion-based group doing that. They just believe too strongly in their cause.

     I think the Israelis are bottom-line very practical and want a deal, but they can't just have a repeat of what happenned in Gaza in the west bank. If so, all of Israel would be covered with rocket fire in a matter of months. Rocket fire is not just a question of deaths; it's also injuries & endless trauma. Right now 1/10 of Israel's population is in rocket range and when you include Hezb more like 1/2. Unfortunately Israeli concessions like pulling out of Gaza have been interpreted as weakness, rather than peacemaking, by the Arab street. I don't really see a way out of this. Suggestions, besides asking the Jews to just give up their homeland and start getting massacred again across the world?

     jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 3:56pm

108. "Arafat started to do that with Fatah and there was some hope there, but it is much harder for me to see a religion-based group doing that. They just believe too strongly in their cause."

     I don't think all of them do. I think there are some who are zealots. I would contend that a large portion of Palestinians who have joined Hamas have joined because there are no other opportunities in Palestine. I don't think they believe as strongly in the set of beliefs that the true Hamas members perpetuate.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 4:02pm

109. Suggestions, besides asking the Jews to just give up their homeland and start getting massacred again across the world?

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 3:56pm

     I don't think this is going to take the Jews giving up their country. This is going to take a changing of hearts and minds where both sides learn to live together in peace. Israel has been posturing to appear strong for a long time. The argument for those who are pro-Israel has been that Israel should not make any concessions because it makes them appear weak. How can you realistically achieve any brand of peace process if one or bother sides is not willing to concede anything? The cease fire didn't work because both sides weren't willing to fully commit, only half way commit. Both sides need to stop their posturing and fully commit to a peace process. That includes Israel giving concessions like allowing in a full flow of humanitarian aid like they promised and Hamas stopping all not just most of the rocket attacks.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 4:06pm

110. That is just nonsense and besides, is totally irrelevant in a war. Wars on not fought on some kind of game rules. They are fought for victory over those who want to kill you and/or dominate you. Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/31/2008 @ 4:18pm

     Hamas is fighting a war. Is that their intention? You make it sound so simple and glorious when you completely ignore the other side of the coin. So is Hamas' war against Israel on that is being fought for victory over those who want to kill you or dominate you?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 4:25pm

111. "I don't think all of them do. I think there are some who are zealots. I would contend that a large portion of Palestinians who have joined Hamas have joined because there are no other opportunities in Palestine. I don't think they believe as strongly in the set of beliefs that the true Hamas members perpetuate."

     I hope you're right. the problem is this group of people isn't taking action to stop Hamas. I know it takes guts, but if they can't do it internally it has to be done externally, just like the Nazis. Jews honestly don't see any big diff. between Hamas and the Nazis - their charters read highly similarly with the diff. that Hamas is religion-based whereas Naziism was race-based. They both call for murdering us all.

     Israel doesn't have a choice; it has to overthrow Hamas or see endless rocket attacks forever, with a real probability of eventually becoming nuclear when they get their hands on nukes. I know - that would be suicide for the Arabs - but that's exactly what the fanatics believe in - suicide bombings.

     The moderate middle, if it's there as you say, in the Palestinian world has to stand up and be counted and soon ...

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:47pm

112. re: all the talk about rockets not hurting people, I agree. I was so disgusted with Mika's dad (Brezinski) appearing on msnbc and calling rocket attacks 'irritants'. that's insane. you now have 1/10 of israel's children being traumatized by rocket attacks, a kindergarten was just hit in beer sheva. and the entire north was hit by the hezbollah.

     no rational society can accept endless rocket attacks on its citizens and israel has put up with more of them -again - than i think ANY of you would accept if they were directed at you and your children.

     Israel's tried restraint - it does not work - Hamas is self-driven. Israel tried withdrawing from Gaza, it didn't work, it made the arab radicals stronger. Again I don't see a solution unless it involves overthrowing the islamicists, or much better - the Arabs doing that themselves. that's why I'm so happy Egypt/Saudi/the PA have apparently taken a 'let's try to get rid of hamas' stand.

     Again, caricaturing Israel as some 'war -driven' country could not be farther from the truth. Most of the guys here are in reserve duty and nobody wants to see any wars here at all. But they can't tolerate endless targeting of their civilians; nobody else would.

     so again - what to actually do?

     I think if Israel overthrows Hamas and Abbas can condolidate control again, the peace process may have a real chance; otherwise I think it's helpless.

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:52pm

113. "I don't think all of them do. I think there are some who are zealots. I would contend that a large portion of Palestinians who have joined Hamas have joined because there are no other opportunities in Palestine. I don't think they believe as strongly in the set of beliefs that the true Hamas members perpetuate."

     One other thing on this point.

     It just doesn't cut it for jews, and never would, for someone to still 'join hamas' but really not 'believe in their cause'. It's exactly parallel as i wrote to a german joining the nazi movement, then saying later he didn't believe in their cause.

     Just read their charter. it's all there in black and white. they advocate murdering the jews behind every tree, behind every stone. How could anyone with any real moral responsibility join such a group?

     Even if they don't fully agree with it, by joining they are still making it stronger and that means one thing to israelis- more jews dead.

     Could you imagine jews negotiating with the Nazis during wwii? it was tried, btw, to get out hostages, and without much success. It's untenable because the core set of beliefs of the Nazis made them implacable enemies. I can't convince a hamasnik to think of me as a human being anymore than i can convince a kkker or a neo-nazi today - through a miracle it may be possible but not in the vast majority of cases.

     The left has to recognize this basic truth. It's like Mein Kampf - no one thought hitler was serious until he actually started carrying out his words. but it was there to read all along.

     if the jewish people go down this time again, if G-d lets that happen, it's going to be while fighting.

     Meanwhile, I think israel woudl readily do a real peace deal with a serious responsible palestinian leadership that really was committed long-term.

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:57pm

114. ps re: humanitarian aid my understanding is israel is going out of her way to let in tons of it.

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 5:22pm

115. Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:47pm

     That's the problem though. In trying to protect itself Israel is making itself less safe. Why does Israel think it can take down Hamas if the US can't even take down AQ? In trying to protect itself Israel is making itself less safe. The more innocent Palestinian civilians Israel kills the more people it drives into membership of Hamas. That's the problem with this situation.

     This isn't like fighting a country. The more people Israel kills the more it strengthens Hamas and weakens itself. Read some of the articles about how Hamas is actually enjoying higher approval ratings now that Israel has started bombing Palestine.

     Terrorism can not be fought with planes and tanks carpet bombing cities. Terrorism must be fought with a steady and by changing peoples minds. People still think of war in terms of one country vs. another. That's not how war works now. Israels show of force will just bolster the ranks of Hamas and increase Palestinian approval of them just like it did with Hezbollah.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 5:38pm

116. Just read their charter. it's all there in black and white. they advocate murdering the jews behind every tree, behind every stone. How could anyone with any real moral responsibility join such a group? Even if they don't fully agree with it, by joining they are still making it stronger and that means one thing to israelis- more jews dead.

     Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:57pm

     Because it's their life or service. Think about those people who have no other job opportunity. The only option they have to make money to pay for their life is to join Hamas. They are starving to death. It's either join Hamas and make money to pay for food. Or die slowly and painfully through starvation. Maybe that's why they are willing to join.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 5:40pm

117. Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:57pm

     Again this shows a lack of understand for the type of war you are fighting. This isn't the Nazis. This isn't one country versus another. This is an organization entrenched in civilian territory that is block off by Israeli blockade. The civilians can't leave Palestine to get out of the way of the war. So Israelis have left them two choices. Do you join Hamas and POSSIBLY die to Israel's rockets or not join it and die to Israel's rockets anyway.

     I know it's easy to say that ALL Palestinians have to do is take up arms against Hamas but when it's your family who has been killed, you tend to blame the person who's weapon killed them. This war will not end well for Israel or Hamas because this is not a war in the traditional sense. Notice the worlds complaint isn't generally about Hamas, the world is complaining about Israel choking out innocent Palestinians. If you have so little regard for their lives that you are more than willing to let them die to succeed in your cause then how are you any better than Hamas?

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 5:47pm

118. Posted by jojojo at 12/31/2008 @ 4:57pm

     OH and also just for the understand purpose. There were many Germans who only joined the Nazi army because it was either join or die. That is why when WW2 ended the German soldiers were able to work relatively peacefully with Allied soldiers. If every German who fought in WW2 was as zealous as Hitler we would have had a country full of corpses by the time Germany was finally taken.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 12/31/2008 @ 5:55pm

119. <i>Posted by Epictetus at 12/31/2008 @ 3:49pm </i>

     I think any read of the situation here has to be more nuanced than that. In many cases I've seen, the difference between your posts and theirs isn't so much a lack of intellectual content. Rather, it's the thoroughness and extent of individual argumentation.

     I think there's a significant difference between those two. Posters here aren't really eschewing argumentation. Though we may engage each other without always deconstructing the premises that divide them, we're still in many cases engaging the substance of each other's arguments rather than just trying to shout louder.

     In short, what I think you're seeing isn't so much a lack of intellectual content, but rather a weaving together of rhetoric and intellectual content to achieve broader (though less deep) coverage of difficult issues. Though this can be a problem when premises are taken for granted when they should be carefully deconstructed and analyzed, I don't see it as a categorical flaw.

     At the very least, it's worth noting that the blog-centered format of this website (and the established character-count limit) does tend to cater more towards this style of argumentation than it does towards the style you appear to defend.

     Posted by Thrawn at 01/01/2009 @ 03:41am

120. Cccomf... I understand your arguments and they are reasonable, I just want to point out a few key flaws in them and you can tell me why i'm wrong. it will take a few posts as you wrote so much.

     "That's the problem though. In trying to protect itself Israel is making itself less safe. Why does Israel think it can take down Hamas if the US can't even take down AQ? ... This isn't like fighting a country. The more people Israel kills the more it strengthens Hamas and weakens itself... Terrorism can not be fought with planes and tanks carpet bombing cities. Terrorism must be fought with a steady and by changing peoples minds."

     First of all, there's a factual mistake here. Israel is not carpet bombing gaza, it's trying for hamas only and as carefully as it can. Hamas entrenches itself among civilians to create the collateral damage they cynically benefit from themselves.

     You're right - the key is to change people's minds. But you are dealing with religious beliefs here - how do you change people's minds in that case?

     It seems clear from the past 10 years of history that a non-response - a sort of pacificism if you will - can't work to change such strong beliefs. Again, when israel withdrew from gaza, entirely peacefully, it made hamas stronger.

     So how do you propose to make hamas weaker?

     in other words, what would actually work?

     jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 09:24am

121. "Notice the worlds complaint isn't generally about Hamas, the world is complaining about Israel choking out innocent Palestinians. If you have so little regard for their lives that you are more than willing to let them die to succeed in your cause then how are you any better than Hamas?"

     But Israel is not in fact choking them out! She's allowing in full humanitarian relief and again just attacking Hamas. Any collateral damage is simply because Hamas has entrenched among civilians. Israel will probably have to retake the Egyptian border at a minimum, but that's just because it's been used to smuggle in all the long range rockets (made in China, paid for and shipped by Iran) that have been smuggled in. A 9th grade schoolroom was just blown to bits yesterday but just such a rocket in beersheva, once of israel's largest cities! the only reason a bunch of kids were not murdered is because the mayor was smart enough to close the schools that day! this is totally intolerable and it's just going to go on and on and on and on. how many years is your 'change peoples minds' strategy going to take and how would it actually work? how many rockets does israel have to allow to hit her before it starts to work?

     convince me - lay it out - i'm very interested to actually hear it.

     jojojo

     ps I have the highest regard for innocent palestinian lives. i just think the responsibility for their deaths in a war their society starts is with their society, not mine, esp. when my society is going out of its way not to hit them. i mean the israelis actually called over 100,000 gazans on the phone to warn them to leave certain areas that would be attacked - did you know that?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 09:30am

122. Ok, one more and I'm done. I hope this level of debate is closer to reaching what epictetus wanted, if not i'd really appreciate it if he's pipe in and explain how to improve it some more. he sounds alot smarter than me.

     "Because it's their life or service. Think about those people who have no other job opportunity. The only option they have to make money to pay for their life is to join Hamas. They are starving to death. It's either join Hamas and make money to pay for food. Or die slowly and painfully through starvation. Maybe that's why they are willing to join."

     In jewish law, you are allowed to violate almost any aspect of the Torah if your life is threatened with death. you can steal, you violate the sabbath, , you could hit somebody in the face.

     The 3 things you cannot do, and must die for by refusing to do are: a. you cannot kill another human being or abet it. b. you cannot commit a sexual crime like incest. c. you cannot worship an idol in public. (you are actually permitted to do so in private).

     The key one is a.

     when a person joins hamas, they are joining an organization one of whose main purposes, AS STATED BY ITSELF, is to murder jews. when a person joins the Nazi party, they were doing the same thing in wwII.

     for me that's crossing a line which puts the person in a moral place where they are aiding and abetting people who are trying to murder me and my entire people.

     i think everyone has a soul and a conscience and there is no excuse to take such a step.

     I do it is true, though, as demonstrated by the fact that hamas took full power in a violent coup, that they are in fact terrorizing alot of innocent Gazans, but i also think they are getting tons of support from others.

     The nazis were actually very popular in germany for awhile, if you recall...

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 09:38am

123. and just one other thing, btw.

     if hamas has indeed reached a point where you either join it or die as an alternative, then i think that's obviously another reason it must be overthrown.

     in terms of industry, the israelis did their best to help improve gazas industrial situation when they left. i think one american jew even gave a huge amount of money to buy settler's great agricultural technology and farms and GAVE them directly to the palestinians. i think those farms (drip based highest level agricultural technology, environmentally perfect) -- just got looted and destroyed when israel left. nice...

     israel, which is an extremely capable technical country, would like nothing better than to have more trade, peace and technical sharing with the entire arab world including the palestinians.

     but again - she can't tolerate this endless terrorism. so again i ask you - what's the 'other strategy' which changes minds? how long does it take and how many more rockets does israel get to absorb before it works?

     remember you are dealing with a religiously fanatic mind to 'change'.

     thanks again, best wishes, respect, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 09:44am

124. <i>Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 09:38am </i>

     I confess to being a bit curious about the Jewish Law analysis. Are you saying that under Jewish law (or at least, the particular version you reference), one cannot kill another human being even if one's own life is threatened? If that is the case, it would appear that Israeli soldiers who kill EITHER innocent Palestinians OR guilty members of Hamas are violating the Jewish law that you describe.

     Posted by Thrawn at 01/01/2009 @ 1:29pm

125. No, of course you can kill another human being if your own life is threatened by that human being. In fact, you're supposed to stand up and kill him first.

     What jewish law says is that if somebody gives you a knife and then points a gun to your head and says 'kill this person (another person) OR I will blow your head off, you have to say 'Blow my head off'.

     You are not allowed to kill somebody else just because someone is threatening your life unless you kill him.

     So if you are a German living in Nazi germany, and the nazis say to you 'Kill this person (it doesn't matter who it is) or we will kill you,' you have to refuse and die for it.

     However, if a Nazi points a gun to your head and says 'here eat this lovely pork sandwich or I will kill you', then go right ahead and eat the sandwich - that's what jewish laws says. If he says 'steal from this store or I will blow your head off', then go ahead and steal from the store.

     At the level of national level, btw, it's a different situation by jewish law because there you are dealing with two groups. I am not a rabbi and don't know those laws as well, but I do know for a fact that in that situation, if one group is trying to kill another (e.g. hurling rockets at them), the aggressed group is supposed to defend itself fully. In that situation, if innocents die, it's the responsibility of the aggressing group. So it's perfectly 100% kosher by jewish law for Israel to take out a Hamas fighter, if his group is fighting a general war against Israel -- which it clearly is -- and if he's hiding among civilians to save his rear-end - you're still allowed to take him out. The moral responsibility for the deaths of the innocents is on his soul, not yours, in this case. and that's the reality in Gaza.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 3:21pm

126. Oh btw, there's another interesting fact about jewish law - something I find very interesting, which I thought you may want to know about. It tells you alot about how the jewish religion works, and makes for a very big dif. w Islam.

     In general, when it comes to ethics, a Rabbi is to be relied upon - so for example, when I got an extra powerbar from the vendor machine last month (the machine just gave me 2 by glitch), I phoned a Rabbi to find out what to do about it - to leave it on top of the machine, to phone the company, or to take it. Was it theft to take it, for example? The machine had ripped me off by taking coins and not giving snacks in the past. did that matter? etc. In all these types of cases, so long as you did your best to find a good, righteous Rabbi who truly knows jewish law, you can trust him and follow him and it's on his shoulders spiritually if he's wrong. so even if he says 'you can take it' & he's wrong, then its on his shoulders in heaven.

     but when it comes to killing someone, say you're a cop or whatever and you need to know the ethics of jewish law - even if you ask a great Rabbi, if he's wrong - if he gets the Torah wrong, and you kill someone and it was actually against the Torah, then it's fully on your spiritual shoulders. you can't go to heaven and ask G-d to forgive you and expect it. That's why in cases of life or death (e.g. capital punishment of cases of murder) a court of the 71 greatest rabbis is required by jewish law. We have to really know it's right.

     That being said, Israel is not a religious country, it's a secular country, and most of the jews in it, though they are getting more religious, are not religious... but my sense of Israelis is they are very serious in general about minimizing loss of human life when they fight.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 3:36pm

127. Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 09:38am

     I am going to address your posts as a whole for now and then will come back and address them individually later. I see your perspective but doesn't this statement by you

     "The 3 things you cannot do, and must die for by refusing to do are: a. you cannot kill another human being or abet it. "

     Refute everything you say about Israel. Shouldn't Israel then let itself die in order to not violate the Torah? Maybe I completely misunderstood this sentence but you are using the Torah as justification for the Palestinians to not join Hamas out of pure self-defense while simultaneously saying Israel deserves to defend herself. Those two things can't go together. You are in violation of the Torah because your killing Palestinians, innocents included, in order to defend yourselves.

     To change the minds of Palestinians you can't kill their people. You have to show them that Israeli rule is better than Hamas' rule. Anyone can be swayed no matter how diehard they are. Hamas can not survive without recruits so if you cut off the recruits you cut off their lifeline. To change Palestinian minds you have to show them that they aren't in between a war where they HAVE to choose a side. You show them that your side is the calm and caring side who wants to help them. Hamas does not have the power to destroy Israel. Israel has more than enough power to destroy Hamas if it can stop with the war making and show Palestinians that they care for them.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/01/2009 @ 4:00pm

128. No, I guess I didn't explain it right -- sorry. I should also say i'm not a rabbi and just know what i know so i'm not claiming to be any type of expert on jewish ethical law but just giving you what i know as a layman.

     IF Israel wanted to actually exterminate the palestinians and was acting to do so - like the Nazis did the jews - of course 100% the palestinians would be entirely right to defend themselves and kill the jews first.

     Israel has no desire to kill the palestinians - it just wants them to stop attacking israel.

     The issue here is that palestinian society in gaza is mobilized through hamas to be the aggressor against israel. so in that case it's 2 groups and the group which is aggressed is supposed to defend itself. In that case, you fight back and IF you have collateral damage on civilians its the fault of the aggressor.

     I understand everyone always goes back and forth forever on who is aggressing who - I get that - but you have to remember that Olmert was essentially pleading with Hamas to sign another ceasefire, Hamas refused and launched tons of missiles at israel. and of course their position of wanting to murder us is backed up by what they say about themselves in their charter and publicly all the time. find anything like that in the israeli gov. docs (e.g. basic laws, found docs, whatever) and you'd have a point but its simply not there - the opposite.

     THEY are very clear about what they want (to murder us en masse) AND they are acting upon it. WE don't say that about them or act to do it. That means by jewish law Israel can strike and strike hard to stop them from attacking more. That's moral by jewish law.

     was that clear? sorry if i'm not.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 4:22pm

129. Why, Oh! why does double standard applies to Israel in matters of war crimes, international law and crimes against humnanity?

     First, theres the gentiles guilt of assisting nazi germany or not doing anything to help european jewry during before and during WWII.

     Second, Theres the identification of westerners with israelis: Israel was founded and led since the beginning by Western jews.

     Third, Theres the recognition of Judaism by western christians as being a legitimate religion unlike Islam.

     Fourth, The deep-seated, secular (and religious) racism against muslims and Islam in general and Arabs in particular.

     Fifth, the identification of wasp America with israel: colonizing and ethnically cleansing the natives for the sake of religion and "superior" civilization.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 6:25pm

130. Zionism is a european chauvinistic ideology bred and born in the same period as Europe's hardcore nationalisms of the late XIXth century.

     Its brothers and cousins are fascism, nazism, colonialism and apartheid.

     Resistance against the hegemonic zionist project is the reason why Israel is systematically opposed to all and every palestinian entity that refuses to submit to Israel's will.

     Zionism as an doctrine and Israeli state leaders refuse the presence on the land between the Jordan and the Mediteranean any political entity that it does not dominate.

     Whether its the secular Fatah or the islamist Hamas does not make an inch of a difference.

     Its the same story since 1948: Palestinian existence and thus right to resist dispossession and oppression is denied.

     This is zionism.

     The topic is not whether Jews have the right to live in Palestine or not.

     Its about whether zionist hegemonic project can continue without selfdestructing.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 6:26pm

131. And destroying the entire region in the process...

     ...Israel does hold hundreds of nuclear warheads.

     Peace to all in 2009! ...but not without justice

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 6:36pm

132. The founder of zionism, the atheist Theodor Herzl, thought that the "old myth" as he liked to say about returning to Jerusalem, was a good way of convincing Jews to move out of Europe and striking two birds with one stone:

     1- Make the Jewish people safe from goy oppression and regenerate the jewish people into modern nationhood

     2- Solve the European so-called "jewish problem" (read the founding text of zionism: "The jewish state" by T. Herzl)

     The religious, more recent, religious zionists claim that Abraham (peace upon him) gave the land to his descendents (Christiand and Muslims non-included) thus making the talmud a exclusivist land deed and make it seem as though that non-jewish presence in "Eretz Israel" is an act of generosity on the part of Jews.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 6:54pm

133. peace to you as well Karim, just to point something out - the jews see themselves as the natives here. like i said before, i was pointing out the american analogy just to ask why a leftist american wouldn't give up their home to an american indian. do you think they should? But not because i felt it applied to israel, the jews were here long before the arabs ...

     also, you forgot to mention that about half of israels jewish population are from arab countries. they are called sephardim. in those arab countries - places like iraq, syria, egypt, etc., they have been oppressed for centuries because islam believes jews are inferior to muslims. they were forcibly converted, raped, murdered, etc. etc. etc. that's why the sepharadim of israel are more right wing than the ashkenazim from europe. do you understand that? i just finished reading a very long article about how in yemen, for example, there was an orphan law for a very long time to very recently where jewish children orphans were forcibly taken and given to muslim families. and of course we have the law in many muslim countries that anyone who converts to another religion from islam deserves death. do you believe that, karim?

     by these standards, the sephardic jews of israel can be compared to american indians, who, after great persecution by the white man, managed to gather into one state together and defend themselves.

     what do you say to the sephardic jews of israel?

     peace, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 6:57pm

134. The issue is not whether dispossession and land theft happened or not but how do you position yourself towards the issue: you assume, you live in self-denial, give excuses and blame the victim or you denounce it.

     Benny Morris the israeli scholar whose part of Israel's "new historians" debunking israeli myths as been thoroughly sincere on the subject matter just like Gourion and Jabotinsky.

     He said, after years of studies into the matter, that contrary to israeli myths, palestinians did not leave on their own free will or on the orders of some arab government: they were expelled by force by israeli military forces.

     To him, this was a good thing, he went on to say, making a parrallel between Israeli dispossession of Palestinians and White settlers driving native americans off their land "for the good and betterment of civilization".

     At least, this position is sincere and honest.

     Unfortunately for his ilk, for the sincerity, he is an advocate of ethnic-cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity but at least he is honest.

     And for all the inhumanity, this much we can respect.

     Peace all...

     but not without justice.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 7:03pm

135. "The founder of zionism, the atheist Theodor Herzl, thought that the "old myth" as he liked to say about returning to Jerusalem, was a good way of convincing Jews to move out of Europe and striking two birds with one stone:

     1- Make the Jewish people safe from goy oppression and regenerate the jewish people into modern nationhood

     2- Solve the European so-called "jewish problem" (read the founding text of zionism: "The jewish state" by T. Herzl)

     The religious, more recent, religious zionists claim that Abraham (peace upon him) gave the land to his descendents (Christiand and Muslims non-included) thus making the talmud a exclusivist land deed and make it seem as though that non-jewish presence in "Eretz Israel" is an act of generosity on the part of Jews."

     it's true - herzl was an entirely secular jew and he just wanted to save the jews from oppression. unfortunately most of the ashkenazic jews of europe failed to listen to him before it was too late and they were slaughtered.

     it's also true - religious jews believe G-d gave the jewish people israel as its birthright. that's actually what it says in the Bible Karim.

     We can argue that back and forth all day and get nowhere. the bottom line is the Arabs have 20 states or so - right ? and something like 800 times more land than the jews? and many islamicists actually want to conquer the ENTIRE WORLD. do you see the difference? do you think Islam should convert and conquer the entire world?

     Also - you have to keep in mind that even among the religious jews who believe Israel is the jewish birthright, there are great Rabbis who have ruled land for peace is acceptable if it leads to true peace - if the other side really intends and actually keeps the peace. Plus the secular jews in Israel as well in general support that.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:04pm

136. Karim, I don't understand something - the arabs get 20 or so states and no one questions it and the jewish people get nothing in your view? how is that fair? also how do you address the massive persecution of the jews in arab lands for 1000 years or so? you just didn't notice it?

     i dated an egyption jewess whose family was forcibly expelled from egypt. I dated an iraqi jewess whose grandmother was born in baghdad, moved to israel when her family was massively persecuted (and all their property stolen), and then was blown up by a suicide bomber on a bus in jerusalem in her 80s... I dated a persian jewess whose father heroicly risked his life many times over to help jews escape from Iran, the same country that today supplies hamas with missiels to try to kill all of us. wow - 3 sephardim i dated and all 3 of them had true stories like this to tell.

     how do you deal with all this fact, Karim?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:11pm

137. I like you jojojo.

     I disagree with you, but like your open-endedness.

     First, lets make one thing clear: the crimes of one people dont make the crimes of others acceptable.

     Thus, the crimes perpetrated by some of the newly independent arab regimes free from ottoman and english rule against jews are unacceptable but they do not legitimize any of Israels action towards the palestinians.

     Second, not all arabs are alike. We are different. We have different cultures and histories.

     Palestinians are the natives of Palestine.

     They did not appear a couple of decades ago.

     They have been living on this land forever.

     This is the only land they have ever known. They know other land.

     Further, the ancestors of todays muslim and christian palestinians are a mix of canaanites, moabites and other pagan peoples and of jews and christians who converted to islam and adopted the arab language by free will (and sometimes by force) over 1400 years ago.

     The transfer solution (ie. ethnic cleansing) advocated by Netanyahou, livni and libierman is a criminal idea.

     Any justification of israeli crimes on the basis of seniority to the land is nul.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 7:23pm

138. I would have expected The Nation to at least put up the appearance of fairness. All its opinions pieces blast Israel but I did not see one writer acknowledge that Hamas has fired nearly 10,000 rockets into Israel and 3,000 this year alone - and that is PRIOR to this recent outbreak. Israel's detractors here all seem to repeat the "Israel as oppressor/colonialist/imperialist" canard. Isn't it noteworthy how infrequent is any mention of Hamas' charter calling for Israel's destruction? Not Israel's return of the West Bank but of Israel's total obliteration. And by the way, these are the same people who used to call for Israel's withdrawal from Gaza but, of course, since Israel has withdrawn from Gaza, they omit that salient piece of information. Now about this "disproportionate response". I wonder what would be a "proportionate" response: sending thirty wildly inaccurate rockets into Gaza every day? Notice also how so many comments ignore the criticism of Hamas by Fatah, the Egyptians and even the Europeans. Even BBC, which has treated Israel like a nation of Somali pirates taking over a cruse ship, has acknowledged that Hamas has been provoking Israel since its withdrawal from Gaza in the summer of 2005.The idea that Hamas is blameless is patent nonsense. Many of these writers accuse the U.S. administration - both current and incoming - as in the pocket of AIPAC. They seem incapable of considering that maybe the U.S. agrees with Israel on its merits. Finally, it is reprehensible that The Nation would allow Richard Falk the space to launch his diatribes; the man is so much in the Palestinian camp that he did not once acknowledge the Gaza provocation by Hamas.

     Posted by NeilLater at 01/01/2009 @ 7:27pm

139. Remember, has much as one dislikes Islam (and they are many of you on this site), arab did not bring women with them when they submitted the old byzantine empire.

     Thus, all Palestinians have the blood of the ancient inhabitants of this land.

     Ashkenza jews are of european stock.

     Their ancestors are old converts to judaism who believe they descend directly from ancient israelites.

     But this, is irrelevant.

     The connection of jews to Israel is spriritual and i respect that but that does not give any kind of right to israelis to treat the natives as subhumans.

     Finally, even if all the anti-islam propaganda about evil arabs conquering ancient palestine was true, the contemporary palestinians know no other land.

     Theres absolutely no justification for Israels past and present ethnic cleansing.

     Palestinians are not the invading settlers. Israelis are. And thats how traumatised Palestinians see them.

     Theres no other solution but respect of international law.

     As far as concrete, practical matters is concerned, the Geneva accords (torpedoed by Barak and Sharon) is in my opinion, a very solid basis.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 7:28pm

140. Morris may be correct but that doesn't make him right. There are alot of historians, with many different conclusions. The bottom line is that 20% of Israel's actual citizens are Arabs today so it's highly clear that the jews didn't have a master plan to expel the arabs. During the war of independence, the Arabs were threatening to murder every jew in palestine if they won however.

     The moral equivalence stuff drives me crazy.

     The gazan hamasniks just lobbed another missile today into the middle of a beer sheva school. they were not going for military targets, they were targeting children deliberately. I never hear any arabs calling them on this. I never hear any karims saying its wrong. i think alot of arabs and muslims are actually proud that an islamic terrorist murdered a rabbi and his wife a few weeks ago in mumbai, who were true paradigms of peacefulness and givingness in this world. are you proud of those murders karim?

     In contrast, there are so many jews who protest publicly when israel does collateral damage - accidental collateral damage - when going after military targets - its hard to even count them. including protestors within israel.

     how can you then say that the jews are in denial and the arabs arent? why didn't the arab street 'care' when hamas lobbed 80 or so missiles into israel as israel's pm was pleading for another ceasefire? is there no sense in this? anyways, karim i'm still waiting to hear how you answer my earlier questions, ESPECIALLY about the sephardim.

     peace, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:33pm

141. 3 sephardim i dated and all 3 of them had true stories like this to tell.

     how do you deal with all this fact, Karim?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:11pm ignore this person | warn this person

     Please, brother.

     How many Palestinians DONT have a horrofic story of dispossession, expulsion, torture, of family members executed, raped, brutalised and humiliated, of a house destroyed, of property stolen, of women giving birth at a check point, of old folks humiliated, of school girls killed by snipers etc. to tell?

     There is none.

     I'm sorry jojojo but theres no symetry between Palestinian suffering at the hands of Israelis and the opposite and Palestinians ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE for crimes perpetrated by leaders of other arab regimes.

     Why should there be 20 arab dominated states?

     That has nothing to do with Palestinians.

     Nothing. Its not even a question. Why do most of central and south america have spanish speaking majorities?

     Israelis will have to learn to live with Palestinians as equals and respect international law and universal principles of ethics and justice.

     By the way, ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 7:41pm

142. I like you too karim; at least you didn't make fun of the fact i had to date so much to get married :)

     you wrote: "The connection of jews to Israel is spiritual and i respect that but that does not give any kind of right to israelis to treat the natives as subhumans.

     Finally, even if all the anti-islam propaganda about evil arabs conquering ancient palestine was true, the contemporary palestinians know no other land."

     Again, like I said before, I think we could go back and forth forever about who was here first and who G-d promised the Land, etc. It's useless. The reason I was making this point is just to say that the jewish people have a very valid point of view in saying they are natives. I fully acknowledge palestinians have a valid point of view as well.

     But the problem - again - is that it seems a majority of palestinians, and certainly Hamas in Gaza, think it's ok to murder jews, including en masse, including innocents in acts of terrorism, to achieve their goals. you never said if you believed that or not. do you?

     The vast majority of jews clearly do NOT believe that's ok to do to arabs.

     Secondly, we are in a conflict in the here and now. So regardless of yesterday and who is right or wrong and who persecuted who, we have to deal with the here & now.

     In the here and now, a jew is afraid today to go pretty much most places in the muslim world, or suffer the fate of being murdered. in contract, the israeli arabs are NOT afraid of being murdered - in fact there were stories today from beer sheva about jewish israelis and israeli arabs hanging out in bomb shelters together.

     Your calls for justice, justice, justice ring hollow precisely because you don't make clear what your ethical lines are, if you support terrorism or not, etc. what are your core beliefs?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:44pm

143. I forgot, what would YOU do if your people were living in an open air prison like Gaza?

     A prison where the warden controls the borders, the air and sea, who blocks the entry of medecine and medical supplies, of food, who blocks all commerce, who stops sick people of leaving and residents to re-enter, who kills on a daily basis elected officials causing massive "collateral" casualties?

     A warden that destroys crops, uproots olive trees and spreads toxic waste in the prisoners fields?

     A prison where the warden kills foreign peace activists like Rachel Corrie who was crushed by a bulldozer for opposing yet another house being demolished?

     A prison where the people are starving and living in conditions that ressemble Mogadishu, the Congo or Sudan?

     Collective punishment (Israel wants people of Gaza to rebel against Hamas by strangling them in this inhuman naziesque experiment called the Gaza blockade) is a crime against humanity and one of the criteria for qualifying a genocide.

     I dont think you would be yelling at Hamas, Islam, Arabs, Palestinians and western lefties for their supposed antisemitism.

     You would be asking why do these people refuse us the right to live in the land of our ancestors.

     You would be shouting in the streets.

     You would be mourning your dead.

     And perhaps you would be trying to launch a few rockets of your own to try to alleviate the pain of being a slave and an exile in your own country by that old illusory feeling called vengeance.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 7:57pm

144. Karim, - brother - i'm still waiting to hear on your core beliefs. do you think islam should conquer the world? do you think someone who converts from islam to another religion deserves death? do you think it's ok to deliberately lob missiles at kids?

     just lay out what you think.

     re: the general point that there is no connection between the palestinian and general arab issue, I respectfully disagree. When it's good for them, the Arabs, including the Palestinians, have emphasized greatly pan-Arabism. there is the common religion and language and of course great ethnic/genetic kinship.

     The arab people - in general - have to take responsibility for what they did to the jews over 1000 years. I have heard christians do that - btw - some of them have done it splendidly, including Pope John Paul. But I've never heard - not a single time - of an Arab state do it. have you? 1000 years is a long time, Karim.

     Again - i have to emphasize -the sephardic jews in israel are MORE RIGHT WING than the ashkenazim. alot of the ashkenanim make up the most powerful leftists. there is a simple reason for this. The sephardim have lived under arab rule for centuries and seen nothing but pain (except for to some extent the brief 'golden age' under islam a very long time ago)...

     and Israel must deal with the Arab world to defend herself and not just the Palestinian Arabs. best, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:59pm

145. What is your position on the occupation?

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/01/2009 @ 7:59pm

146. "A prison where the warden controls the borders, the air and sea, who blocks the entry of medecine and medical supplies, of food, who blocks all commerce, who stops sick people of leaving and residents to re-enter, who kills on a daily basis elected officials causing massive "collateral" casualties? "

     From what I understand, the only reason Israel has any blockades is to prevent weapons being smuggled into Gaza. and israel regularly relents and pays for it. for example, the grad missiles that are successfully hitting beersheva today are only there because israel allowed egypt to take over that border, then the egyptians got 'lax' and hamas smuggled in tons of new rockets.

     so in my view, hamas brought the blockade upon itself. everytime israel tests this thesis and reopens things there is just new more powerful weapons smuggling which are later fired at israelis.

     the way to break out of this impasse is for the arabs in gaza to prove their honesty by stopping to use the openings they get and use more weapons. then over time, the israelis will open things up more and more until they can fully trust them.

     on top of that, alot of the stuff you write i think is just false, like deliberately poisoning fields, from what i understand for example, an american jew actually bought and GAVE the jewish gazans superadvanced farms to the pa when israel withdrew, only to see it destroyed in looting. I think israel wants to see Gaza succeed economically, not the other way around.

     the problem is the terrorism emanating from gaza, which is unrelenting. and it's not a 'few rockets', Karim, it's huge numbers of them. fully 1/3 of the jewish kids in range are suffering from ptsd, for example, from being deliberately targeted. so again - what are you core beliefs? is this ok?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 8:07pm

147. karim, i'm still waiting to hear your core beliefs. is it ok for islam to conquer the world? does someone who converts from islam to another religion deserve death? is it ok to lob rockets at kids?

     but out of respect, i'll answer your question about the occupation.

     you asked 'what is my position on the occupation'.

     I think in general it's a bad thing for one people to occupy another. I think both the arabs and jews would be much better off if they lived separately (primarily) for awhile and just became good neighbors.

     I could see israel doing a deal with the pa and jordan, where she gave some of the west bank and the pa and jordan combined, held elections and became a new country. jordan is already over 50% palestinian right? i mean with all due respect to King Abdullah, he's superpolite and a real dashing prince, but he's just another monarch in the end right? if he just resigned and held free and fair elections jordan would be a palestinian country overnight, right?

     i'd like to see that happen and that palestine negotiate with israel for some of the west bank for peace. perhaps also for some of israel proper as well, like some of the galilee, of heavy populations of israeli arabs, who mostly (and i think reasonably) identify more with arabs than israelis and so should rationally be part of a palestinian state.

     This all being said I don't think israel should give up one iota of land until the palestinians truly renounce terrorism and truly show they will be good neighbors and not just use the land to inundate israel with rockets, like happenned in gaza. that's why i care so much about your core beliefs.

     If the palestinians just continually embrace nazilike ideologies like hamas' core platform (just read it), I think israel can be more rightwing morally.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 8:15pm

148. ps re: the negotiation i just mentioned, it's also possible israel could give up some of the arava or negev, besides parts of the west bank and the galilee, if things really worked out well and true peace could come. you have to figure in as much territorial integrity as possible for palestine/jordan, while still giving israelis some security in the high places of the west bank, where they are extremely vulnerably geographically. israel is like 10 miles wide at the leftmost part of the west bank to the sea.

     I do NOT however, personally think israel should likely ever give up the golan heights, as she may be conquered if she gives it up and the syrians betray her. she won it in a war the syrians started, its also part of ancient israel and it has a small arab population. but IF syria became democratic and it looked like they could really keep a treaty it could theoretically be an option, though honestly it makes me too nervous as a jew to see the golan given up - i mean the arabs almost won the 73 war and israel started it WITH the whole golan. israel is very small, karim, compared to the arab world. I know you emphasize the palestinian part of it but its hard for a jew not to see the whole thing.

     What i'm trying to say is this is all flexible, we're really after peace, but we can't get anywhere until the jews can know and really have validated arab core beliefs of people just like you.

     so what are they brother?

     best, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 8:26pm

149. Only suffered through ONE of jojos repulsive, Judeo-Nazi posts. I guess he's unaware that a high ranking Israeli politician said that the israelis needed to internalize the lessons of the Warsaw Ghetto and should emulate their tactics in putting down resistance in the Occupied Territories. More recently, israel called for a "shoah' against the Palestinians. In 10982, they murdered more civilians in Lebanon than have died in the entire history of Israel...that is a fact--something you are clearly allergic to. Like most of your vile compatriots.

     Stay in your hebraic rat hole, which Jews (and non-Jews) of character all over the world have turned from it utter disgust.

     Posted by rykart at 01/01/2009 @ 10:27pm

150. This has been a tremendous contribution from jojojo in a great spirit. He has filled in so many of the missing gaps particularly about Jewish attitudes and their desire to live in peace. And that from an indigenous Jewish voice than spans the religious and secular Israeli perspectives.

     For those of us whose natural inclination is to support Israel, I guess because of our shared religious-intellectual-cultural perspectives, it is reassuring to know that here is an Israeli who is nothing like the cruel caricature presented by so many here and elsewhere.

     Though I was impressed with karim's friendly spirit, one began to realise very quickly that he speaks a very different intellectual and logical language. Where jojojo elucidates and we follow his logic and can agree or disagree with him, with karim my first thought was he that is being evasive.

     However I wonder if it is something different altogether, in that we don't speak the same intellectual language because of our different cultural backgrounds and is that possibly part of the reason that agreement between the Palestinians and Israelis is so elusive? i.e. though karim and jojojo were getting on well at the personal level every post and response pushed them further apart on the issues. On the issues that separate there appears to be no common ground.

     Which means that something more fundamental may be at play that just differences over issues. And perhaps goes some way to explaining why mediated peace conferences have failed, over decades, to move the parties closer to a settlement.

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/01/2009 @ 11:59pm

151. From what I understand, the only reason Israel has any blockades is to prevent weapons being smuggled into Gaza.

     so in my view, hamas brought the blockade upon itself. everytime israel tests this thesis and reopens things there is just new more powerful weapons smuggling which are later fired at israelis.

     posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 8:07pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     The reason for the blockade is to punish Gazans for having voted for Hamas. Just listen to israeli commentators they all call for Gazans to renounce and revolt against Hamas.

     Gaza has been called an enemy entity by Israel (19/11/07) thats why medecine, medical supplies, fuel, food and power supplies have been cut off from Gaza. Yes, weapons are being smuggled into Gaza as well as food and medecine.

     Theyre shouldnt be an occupation in the first place. Weapons are being smuggled because Fatah is not protecting Palestinians. Palestinians shouldnt be living at the mercy of Israel.

     It is not up to Israel to decide the fate of Palestinians.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 12:34am

152. West Bank Faces Toxic Waste Crisis

     By Mel Frykberg

     29 March, 2008

     I was mistaking. Its not Gaza but the West Bank.

     Nevertheless. Its still shows the contempt of Israeli leaders for Palestinian lives.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 12:39am

153. But the problem - again - is that it seems a majority of palestinians, and certainly Hamas in Gaza, think it's ok to murder jews, including en masse, including innocents in acts of terrorism, to achieve their goals. you never said if you believed that or not. do you?

     The vast majority of jews clearly do NOT believe that's ok to do to arabs.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 7:44pm | ignore this person | warn

     Then why no recognition of the Nakba?

     Why is there still an occupation?

     Why are Palestinians still at the mercy of Israeli overlords?

     Why refuse the arab peace initiative?

     Why after the PLO recognized Israel and signed the Oslo accords did TelAviv not stop colonization but on the contrary, accelerated the process?

     Why did BArak offer Palestinians Bantustans in his 2000 proposal?

     Why did ISrael reject and did not want any part of the Geneva Accord?

     Why do IDF still enter PAlestinian homes and humiliate its occupants on a daily basis?

     Why is Israeli politics hijacked by the extremist settlers who call for the murder of Israeli or Jews who think out loud about giving land back to Palestinians?

     What if i expelled you and your family by force, take over your land, strip away your belongings and tell you that you can never come back and that you should be living in another english speaking country?

     Israeli society is in a permanent state of war. Military duty is an obligation.

     Because of the palestinian threats?

     Yes, of course. How could it be otherwise when Israel was founded on stolen land (by ruse and by force) inhabitated by its native residents.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 12:53am

154. Furthermore, most Palestinians agree to have their state inside the green line, and polls conducted at the time of the formulation of the Geneva Accords showed that most Palestinians accepted the proposals of the Accords; meaning they accepted the partition of historic palestine and have their state on only 22% of historic Palestine.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 01:03am

155. "the problem is the terrorism emanating from gaza, which is unrelenting. and it's not a 'few rockets', Karim, it's huge numbers of them. fully 1/3 of the jewish kids in range are suffering from ptsd, for example, from being deliberately targeted."

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 8:07pm

     You wanna talk about children? An entire generation of Palestinians in Gaza is growing up stunted: physically and nutritionally stunted because they are not getting enough to eat; emotionally stunted because of the pressures of living in a virtual prison and facing the constant threat of destruction and displacement; intellectually and academically stunted because they cannot concentrate -- or, even if they can, because they are trying to study and learn in circumstances that no child should have to endure.

     The sound of F-16s flying overhead dropping bombs is not a sound one ever forgets. Nor are the daily sonic booms that cause false labors. In other words, 750,000 children –or half the population of Gaza--have it ingrained in their memories for the rest of their lives.

     Another equally unacceptable percentage of this group will have had images burned into their minds' eyes of the devastation and death wrought by these sounds as well, a factor that partially explains why more than 50 per cent of Gaza's three-quarters of a million children suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder: it isn't easy to see piles of the dead or their blown apart body parts without some kind of reaction.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 01:13am

156. karim, i'm still waiting to hear your core beliefs. is it ok for islam to conquer the world? does someone who converts from islam to another religion deserve death? is it ok to lob rockets at kids?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/01/2009 @ 8:26pm

     It is not ok for anyone movement to violently conquer anything.

     No one who changes religion should be put to death. Religion is religion, politics is politics. If an Israeli works for the Palestinians he is liable to be sentenced for high treason and be put to death. Just like traitors in Palestine who snitch for Israel are put to death and collaborators in Middle east, Africa and Vietnam were killed for their sellingout.

     Its wrong to kill kids. Its against every principle of all religions including and specifically islam which has codified rules of warfare more than a thousand years ago: women, children, the elderly, the weak and the disabled are not free game.

     How about Israeli snipers killing school girls? How about Muhammed Aldura? How about the girls killed last week by us supplied israeli aircrafts?

     Dont go there bro. The body count is distungtingly in favor of ISrael in matters of killing childre, women and the weak.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 01:24am

157. People like me dont have anything to prove to people like you dear cousin.

     Stop the murderous blockade in Gaza and pull out of all occupied Palestine. go back to the green line, follow international law and from there, the Geneva Accords, if Palestinian people vote in favor of it, should be the basis for the settlement of the dispute.

     Israel also needs to pay back to Palestinians billions for all the damage and wrong doing done to the Palestinian people.

     Of course, money can never bring back the end and erase the torture, humiliations, theft, rapes etc. but it would go a long way to bridging the divide and reconcile the peoples.

     Germany has paid billions to Israel and jewish organizations for their wrong doing.

     Israel needs to do the same to Palestinians.

     Its either that or a One-state solution; and an end to a jewish majority state.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 01:32am

158. "Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen. Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered – death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo – but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."

     http://www.doublestandards.org/hedges1.html

     Those wonderfully compassionate Israelis!!

     Such a light unto nations!

     (or are they really just Nazi scum from the sewer?)

     Posted by rykart at 01/02/2009 @ 01:33am

159. Of course, money can never bring back the end: should read : bring back the dead.

     Concerning the 1000 years of oppression, you should read something else than bernard lewis and samuel huntington racist propaganda.

     When christians were burning jews in europe, israelites fled to the muslim world where, if their situation was not has as good as it is for jews in the post WWII West, they were still able to live in peace, do business and attend the same universities as muslims.

     They would never have been a Maimonides if it wasnt for islamic tolerance.

     When Peter the Ermit killed tens of thousands of jews in route to Jerusalem in his "poor peoples crusade", Jews sought protection from muslims and got it from them.

     Current antijewish feelings amongst muslims has everything to do with contemporary zionist aggressions.

     I make the difference between judaism and zionism even between Martin Buber peaceful-longing-for-coexistence zionism and mainstream zionism.

     Unfortunately, not enough people listened to Buber and his warnings.

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 01:41am

160. Uri Avnery said it best: Herzl's dream of a jewish military fortress in the middle east is bankrupt.

     Israel needs to stop looking to Europe and the United States and needs to start opening itself to its middleeastern environment.

     What a tragedy, alas, that Palestinians need to pay for the crimes of the peoples of european christian descent!

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 02:03am

161. Final word goes out to lrjones. I smell your mentality from afar:

     you said: "that he speaks a very different intellectual and logical language. Where jojojo elucidates and we follow his logic and can agree or disagree with him, with karim my first thought was he that is being evasive."

     Your post reminds me of Ehud Baraks insults against muslims and arabs in general and Yasser Arafat in particular.

     "They are products of a culture in which to tell a lie ... creates no dissonance. They don't suffer from the problem of telling lies that exists in Judeo-Christian culture. Truth is seen as an irrelevant category."

     Yes. When an arab doesnt think in conformity with the dominant colonial zionist narrative its because of a cultural defect which reifies the racist assumptions and attitudes.

     Just like black folks just coulndt understand the white mans world, socalled superiority and fundamental goodness.

     Wanna know why the arab and muslim "streets" dont protest against the pathetic rockets launched into Israel?: for the same reasons blacks did not complain against blacks killing whites in South Africa.

     It wouldnt be Karim B's way of dealing with Israeli state-terrorism were he a Palestinian but altough i disagree on a certain level, i sure understand. And i am not a Palestinian so its for me tell the oppressed, distressed, dispossessed, humiliated, crushed and starved Palestinians how to defend themselves.

     On this ladies and gentlemen, i wish you good night and good luck and may God the Most Merciful, forgive us all.

     Peace...

     but never without justice!

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 02:09am

162. RYKART HOW NICE TO FINALLY HEAR FROM YOU! you write: "Only suffered through ONE of jojos repulsive, Judeo-Nazi posts. I guess he's unaware that a high ranking Israeli politician said that the israelis needed to internalize the lessons of the Warsaw Ghetto and should emulate their tactics in putting down resistance in the Occupied Territories. More recently, israel called for a "shoah' against the Palestinians. In 10982, they murdered more civilians in Lebanon than have died in the entire history of Israel...that is a fact--something you are clearly allergic to. Like most of your vile compatriots. "

     so let's get this straight - i read through ALL of your posts, including the one inciting people to murder, carefully and attentively and you read ONE of my posts, and then claim you know me based on it and do not even BOTHER to read the rest. wow - a great leftist supporter of dialogue and understanding in the Middle East you are?

     evidently you totally missed, for example, the fact that Karim and I were trying our best to have an honest dialogue, just as one example.

     you keep citing complete and utter lies, systematically. for example, you cite above "More recently, Israel called for a 'shoah' against the Palestinians'. Source? Where did you get that information? Did you evaluate the source, or just read it on your own blog, for example? It's an obvious and complete falsehood.

     Also, why do you insult the Holy Land, beloved of 3 faiths and call is a 'rat hole'? I'm just curious - rykart, do you believe in G-d? not that such belief would necessary lead to you thinking Israel is the holy land - but I just am curious. Why do you call this land a rat hole???

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 02:13am

163. "They would never have been a Maimonides if it wasnt for islamic tolerance."

     karim - it sounds to me like you know alot of history, though i think some of what you think you know is off, though i'm sure you think the same about me.

     Maimonides is considered THE greatest Rabbi in Judaism since ancient times, maybe even since Moses. His greatness was not dependent upon the Muslims he lived among, though he did benefit from reading the works of great Muslim and greek scholars. His essential greatness was in Torah, though he was also a fantastic physician and as it says on wikipedia:

     "Maimonides was a devoted physician. In a famous letter, he describes his daily routine: After visiting the Sultan's palace, he would arrive home exhausted and hungry, where "I would find the antechambers filled with gentiles and Jews ... I would go to heal them, and write prescriptions for their illnesses ... until the evening ... and I would be extremely weak."

     His remains to this day a model for jewish physicians; my own brother is an ER doc who regularly saves the lives of everyone - he even saved the life of a neo-Nazi on yom kippur - Rykart! how did he know he was a neo-Nazi? The huge swastika tatooed on his chest kind of gave it away.

     But though - relatively speaking - his Muslim 'rulers' were good to him, you can hardly say things were 'ok'. Here's a direct quote from wikipedia on part of the history.

     "The Almohades from Africa conquered Córdoba in 1148, and threatened the Jewish community with the choice of conversion to Islam, death, or exile.[9] Maimonides's family, along with most other Jews, chose exile. For the next ten years they moved about in southern Spain, avoiding the conquering Almohades ..."

     Sound familiar? Sounds like Hamas, right?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 02:30am

164. Karim, i understand (though totally disagree with) all your posts about black rage and killing white south africans and so on and so forth, but again - you are still not acknowledging that at the most basic level, the middle east conflict can't be resolved until people let go of this level of hatred, and just see each other as people.

     I think I have alot of evidence that the arabs treated the jews much worse than vice-versa - you think you have the opposite.

     who really cares?

     are you arab btw? you say you're not palestinian, but i think you're clearly moslim - are you from another arab country? just curious...

     the only peaceful way forward in this conflict, besides just a fight to the finish which would not be peaceful and may be disastrous, is for clear lines to be drawn.

     Targeting civilians has to be one of them; each side has to agree just not to do it, if you want peace. there's no way around that one.

     the blockade is a great example - israel should just withdraw from the west bank, like gaza and see what happens you say? but look what happenned in gaza! hamas can hit 1/10 of israelis now from gaza, from the west bank they could hit just about every israeli. how is that acceptable for a people to take such a risk when all the evidence is it will lead to more assaults?

     peace, best, and rykart -- please get a psychiatrist - i mean that with all due respect. oh wait, no - psychiatrists are all jewish and just meant to manipulate the gentiles yes rykart? seriously - think about it.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 02:41am

165. sorry just to clarify: "Targeting civilians has to be one of them; each side has to agree just not to do it, if you want peace. there's no way around that one.

     the blockade is a great example - israel should just withdraw from the west bank, like gaza and see what happens you say? but look what happenned in gaza! hamas can hit 1/10 of israelis now from gaza, from the west bank they could hit just about every israeli. how is that acceptable for a people to take such a risk when all the evidence is it will lead to more assaults? "

     what i meant by this is no responsible israeli leader can just open up gaza knowing that it will be used to take in all these advanced rockets which will then be fired upon israelis. hamas' charter makes it clear they are happy to fire the rockets. they are gloriously happy to train and send out the suicide bombers too. I don't know a single israeli (well maybe one nutjob, but that's it - and he needs a shrink like rykart does (in my humble view)) who is happy about palestinian civilian casualties. everyone's made in the image of G-d, is fundamentally equal - and this whole situation completely sucks. that's the jewish view.

     So we need hamas to change their charter and no longer include verses saying they advocate killing jews, wherever they are, for example. that would be a big step forward...

     rykart -where art thou? you have no problem with that part of the hamas charter?

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 03:00am

166. Karim i forgot to thank you for answering my questions on your core beliefs. thank you! i see you're a decent person. you write:

     "It is not ok for anyone movement to violently conquer anything.

     No one who changes religion should be put to death. Religion is religion, politics is politics. If an Israeli works for the Palestinians he is liable to be sentenced for high treason and be put to death. Just like traitors in Palestine who snitch for Israel are put to death and collaborators in Middle east, Africa and Vietnam were killed for their sellingout.

     Its wrong to kill kids."

     that's fantastic, but don't the islamicists in fact want to conquer the world? so you're not one of them, or am i misunderstanding?

     also, isn't is THE LAW in a significant number of moslim states to receive the death penalty for conversion?

     re: "Its wrong to kill kids" I'm very happy you wrote that - so you acknowledge its wrong to shoot off a rocket at a civilian population, knowing full well it could easily kill kids, as just almost happenned with the deserted (just in time) classroom in beer sheva? so hamas should stop pursuing that as a matter of policy?

     you know what it said on the blackboard with the rocket hole in the wall next to it? - 'honor life' - kavod habriyut - that was what the kids - grades 9s- were learning the day before the mayor of beer sheva ordered them to not go to school and thereby saved their lives. that's what the jews teach their kids. that's what we actually think.

     peace, and i hope you are having a good sabbath now (it's friday for you yes?) and re: what you write 'peace, and justice' - i agree, but the true justice of G-d and not that of fallible mortals like all of us. We have to assume we don't know so much or we're not going to get anywhere.

     jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 03:10am

167. Final word goes out to lrjones. I smell your mentality from afar:

     Posted by Karim_B at 01/02/2009 @ 02:09am

     Thank you for your civility but my comments were meant not as an insult to you nor to degrade a culture. It was merely to point up the significantly different way each party may look at or appraise the conflict.

     You may note that at first I thought you were being evasive but floated the idea that on consideration it may be due to different intellectual cultures. I was not aware that Barak had said that and that was not the way I was thinking. I noticed that you assumed a position of victim hood, (perhaps vicariously) in response to what you perceived as an insult. One steeped in Western culture would have dealt with it by showing that my position is not sustainable or why those differences exist and defended them. That perhaps illustrates the point I was making. Rather than tackle it head on you seem to evade it.

     It may of course not even be a Muslim thing but have more to do with Arab culture which may include Christians as well as Muslims and Arabs with no religion, if it is possible to be a secular Arab and still culturally Arab.

     It may be something as fundamental as what place things like revenge and forgiveness and concepts like justice play in the two cultures. Are these things intellectualised in the same way in both cultures? Do they mean the same thing?

     The thought has occurred to me that the Palestinians, despite all the hindrances, could begin to build a materially better and more prosperous society than they obviously now have. They would thus gain the respect and support of the West including America and show the world that they also can build a modern, stable, prosperous state.

     Does their cultural baggage hold them back from that?

     Posted by lrjones4 at 01/02/2009 @ 04:07am

168. rykart, just fyi if i'm interpreting what i read correctly i saw one of your posts on the nytimes (if it's you, if not i apologize) about hillary clinton and i actually agreed with about 90% of it.

     i actually wanted obama to win over mccain and alot of israelis like obama - in fact, i just bought a very popular book about him here in hebrew. i think everyone (except the racists) across the world were happy when obama won on some level - even the conservatives - it showed humanity could make real progress on race.

     i still think you need a shrink though. you come across as someone who is just totally filled with hatred. you seem to just believe every piece of propaganda you read so long as it conforms to your previous beliefs.

     are there any jews in the world you actually like rykart?

     be well...

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 04:15am

169. I personally do not think lrjones was being racist on any level, and i greatly appreciate the compliment that was sent my way earlier --

     but it's always hard to talk about cultural differences between peoples without risking inadvertently saying something that may offend. i think it shows she/he is brave to try... and i think she/he is very open to feedback.

     I think the arabs have given alot to the world, and have alot more to give and i'd like nothing more than to work with them to build a better world. For example, in math, I think they had alot to do with the full introduction and appreciation of the number zero which was critical for making alot of advanced mathematics possible. Their language is a very beautiful one, and they have alot of amazing poets. I've heard some very nice things about their mystics - the sufis - and I've always wanted to learn more about them.

     The problem is that in the recent past Islamicism has taken over a big chunk of Islam and from what I've read, Islamicist believe in conquering the world for Islam. It actually sounds abit like the Christianity of the Middle Ages which was also bent on domination - but later moved beyond that. I don't see how it squares with a peaceful world, whether with jew, hindu or christian.

     That's why I look first and foremost to the Arabs move beyond this type of ideology, as the Arabs are the founders and make for many of the foremost leaders in Islam.

     I regard Arabs as my natural cousins - because yitzchak (isaac) was the brother of Ishmael, and the jews and arabs therefore descend from the same family line and you can see clearly that they even look alot alike. I once asked a big Rabbi for example about what jews think about Arab circumcision as a religious practice and he said it made sense by jewish law because the arabs come from abraham (who started the practice) just like us.

     ok that's too much information... :-)

     But i look forward to the day when the children of Yitzchak and Ishmael can be truly reconciled.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/02/2009 @ 04:29am

170. Another item from those seething anti-Semites at Reuters:

     Israel warns Gaza of "shoah"

     http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL2868601720080229

     You're attempting to defend the indefensible, jojo. Your failed atate and lunatic asylum has been squarely rejected. Jews have been the most scathing in their indictment. Einstein, Primo Levi, Philip Roth, Uri Avneri, Jennifer Lowenstein, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, Raul Hilberg, Ilan Pappe...the list is long and illustrious.

     Read the Bt'Selem reports about your countrymen...then hide your head in shame.

     Posted by rykart at 01/02/2009 @ 11:39am

171. For jojo and all Israelis:

     http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/11400

     Sara Roy is a liar?

     Really?

     Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Bt'Selem?

     The UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk is a liar?

     Everyone is a liar but you, jojo?

     Sorry...that's not credible.

     Posted by rykart at 01/02/2009 @ 11:46am

172. How DARE you Israelis purport to speak for the Jewish people?

     You have dragged the Jewish name through the sewer and turned Jewish kids into murderers.

     You have soiled the Jewish heritage with an indelible stain of arrogance and blood.

     I can't stand the sight of you people.

     I can't listen to your abominable lies any more.

     Posted by rykart at 01/02/2009 @ 11:53am

173. Don't you even read your own journalists, jojo??

     http://www.gush-shalom.org/terror/destroy.html

     What cruelty.

     What BLIND cruelty!

     Posted by rykart at 01/02/2009 @ 11:56am

174. "Muneer al-Zughair, a spokesman in Jerusalem for the families of Palestinian prisoners, said that Hamas has been strengthened by what he called "the massacre" in Gaza. "People feel that they are the only ones who are doing something for the Palestinian people," he said.

     At the entrance to the Shuafat refugee camp on the edge of Jerusalem, Palestinian youths burned tires and threw stones toward an Israeli checkpoint where soldiers stood in full riot gear.

     A man from the camp, who identified himself only as Qassem, said that, "everyone is against what is happening in Gaza. The Israeli army are the terrorists."

     Many denounced the bombing of mosques and the deaths of civilians.

     "Let them go in on the ground and take Hamas, but spare the children," said a taxi driver from the camp who identified himself by his first name, Yasir. The missiles from the air "do not differentiate," he said."

     Proof of my point. In trying to create war. You are making yourselves less safe. The more civilians you kill the more Palestinians you have to kill until you wipe them off the earth. Because they are getting angrier and angrier and that means Hamas is getting more members.

     Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/02/2009 @ 3:10pm

175. Lvliberty1 and jojojo often use the deceptive propaganda that Israel wants negotiated Peace settlement with the Palestinians; facts on the ground point to the contrary.

     Mahmud Abbas, the so-called moderate Palestinian President, has been negotiating peace with Israel since 1993. Here are summary of what he got from the Israelis so far:

     .Settlements-building in the occupied West Bank has increased four folds .Army checkpoints in the occupied West Bank have increased by over 102 checkpoints .The Israeli Army has so far demolished 75,000 Palestinian homes and commercial structures. . Israel has confiscated over 80% of the West Bank water resources . Israel has built a wall, annexing 20% of the most fertile land of the West Bank. . Assassination of Palestinians in the West Bank by Israeli forces has never stopped.

     The Israelis use the so-called Peace negotiation to solidify their occupation and to transfer more Jewish settlers to the occupied territories. Let's listen to what the Israeli newspaper HAARETZ said about this issue:

     "They used to say about Yitzhak Shamir that he conducted peace negotiations with our neighbors as long as they never ended … Every prime minister after him, with the exception of Yitzhak Rabin, behaved exactly like he did, though they added whistles and bells to the foot-dragging. If the rumors are true and history really does have a muse, he will one day convene a press conference and utter his verdict: Shamir, Shimon Peres, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert are in fact the same dancer - one step forward, two steps back"

     Posted by CripThink at 01/02/2009 @ 6:15pm

176. Rykart, Albert Einstein was definitely supportive towards Israel's founding. He was invited to be Israel's first president, and though he said no, he considered it a great honour. He did alot of things to defend and encourage the founding of the State of Israel.

     re: the quote you made you just failed to give the whole quote:

     "Israel's deputy defense minister Matan Vilnai told Army Radio: "The more Qassam fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger 'shoah' because we will use all our might to defend ourselves. The word "shoah" is rarely used in Israel beyond discussions of the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews but government spokesmen said Vilnai had employed the word only to mean "disaster".

     The quote was conditional - all he was saying was 'the more they attack us, the more we'll attack them back.' He was using the word in its meaning of 'disaster' and not to mean that Israel would wipe them out like the Nazis did the Jews. Obviously Israel isn't trying to wipe out the Palestinians, Rykart, or half of them would be dead by now. It would take the Israelis very little time to do that.

     It's obvious, though, that it was a very stupid choice of words on his part, you are certainly right there.

     Someone's stupid sometimes; it does not make it 'government policy'. You didn't hear Olmert, the actual head of state saying anything like that, or Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister did you? Contrast this with the Hamas charter:

     ""The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."

     How do you feel about that quote Rykart? that one ok with you?

     jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 02:57am

177. "Proof of my point. In trying to create war. You are making yourselves less safe. The more civilians you kill the more Palestinians you have to kill until you wipe them off the earth. Because they are getting angrier and angrier and that means Hamas is getting more members."

     I understand your point, but Israel does not have a choice. Right now 100,000 Israelis are in range of continuous rocket fire. the number is simply going to go up.

     No sovereign government on the planet can simply sit by while it's citizens are constantly bombarded by rockets. It's inhuman.

     I asked before if anyone (including Rykart) had an actual plan for peace, and nobody actually proposed one. I'm asking again. How in the world can Israel just sit by while continuous rockets rain on her citizens' heads?

     You're just dodging that question by saying that acting against Gaza makes it worse. What would make it better?

     Rykart - I asked Karim already and he answered morally. So I'll ask you - do you think it's ok to shoot rockets at kids?

     jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 03:02am

178. Rykart, I've read some of the human rights groups critiques of Israel. Sometimes, they take Palestinian testimony at face value which is later proved to be false. Sometimes, they deliberately omit critical context, and sometimes they are right.

     I am not in 'denial'. I know that Israel has committed human rights abuses against the Palestinians at times and I'm very against that. I also know that the Palestinians - in this case Hamas - are engaged in a many-year long continuous human rights abuse against the jews of israel, in that they are constantly trying to suicide bomb us, throw rockets at us, or kill us anyway they can. They deliberately target our children ALL THE TIME. That's why every school here has a SECURITY GUARD. Every mall has two guards, one to protect against car bombs and a 2nd to protect against body bombs. Every 1.

     I also know that people like you are great at protesting any mistake Israel makes (which it indeed does make - Rykart), while never pointing out the incredible crimes that Hamas is committing all the time. Hamas even regularly kills fellow palestinians without trial in their quest for power. You know that right? They just murdered a bunch more yesterday.

     You also benefit from a very self-critical Israeli press, which finds out examples of Israeli human rights abuses, and reports on it. At the same time, there is no free press among the Arabs, so nobody is safe enough to report effectively on what they do. And so there you have it - all the 'evidence' is against Israel.

     What could be clearer though than lobbing thousands of rockets at civilians for a period of many YEARS? isn't that a very clear human rights abuse, Rykart?

     I'd appreciate it if you'd try to be more balanced and fair in your appraisals of the situation.

     Respect, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 03:10am

179. Rykart, re: speaking for the jews, I certainly do not intend to speak for the jews and I'm not qualified. i'm just speaking for myself.

     But FYI, almost half the world's jews live in Israel today and it is expected to go over half within a few years. So the country of Israel is certainly a good mix of Jews and certainly as a whole represents our many subgroups. You have in Israel every type of jew today. Sephardim, ashkenazim, black jews from ethiopia, yemenite jews who have the closest language to ancient hebrew, religious jews of all stripes, chassidim, misnagdim, modern orthodox, traditional, secular jews of all types, kibbutzniks, moshavniks, high technologists, you name it. So does Israel represent the jews? I'd say at least in some ways - yes...

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 03:15am

180. Cripthink, you said I use deceptive propaganda - which deceptive propaganda did I use? Can you please be specific?

     Also, what did you think about the quote I gave you from the Hamas charter - do you agree with it?

     Again it says: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."

     That's not propaganda - Cripthink - that the actual real hamas charter, by and for Hamas - do you agree with it?

     How about this quote: "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up."

     you agree with that?

     AND

     "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement"

     You agree with that?

     That's not 'propaganda' - Cripthink and rykart - that is an explicit statement by Hamas that they do NOT WANT PEACE.

     So, what to do about that? I addressed alot of you said - now address something I said -

     I'm asking you straight up -

     jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 03:20am

181. Here is a quote from the jpost about how Hamas is handling its fellow arabs.

     "The Hamas government has placed dozens of Fatah members under house arrest out of fear that they might exploit the current IDF operation to regain control of the Gaza Strip. Fatah Hamas clashes. ...

     Fatah Hamas clashes. [illustrative] Photo: AP Slideshow: Pictures of the week

     The move came amid reports that the Fatah leadership in the West Bank has instructed its followers to be ready to assume power over the Gaza Strip when and if Israel's military operation results in the removal of Hamas rule.

     Fatah officials in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Hamas militiamen had been assaulting many Fatah activists since the beginning of the operation last Saturday. They said at least 75 activists were shot in the legs while others had their hands broken.

     Wisam Abu Jalhoum, a Fatah activist from the Jabalya refugee camp, was shot in the legs by Hamas militiamen for allegedly expressing joy over the IDF air strikes on Hamas targets. RELATED

     * Palestinian Affairs: Touted as traitors

     "Hamas is very nervous, because they feel that their end is nearing," a senior Fatah official said. "They have been waging a brutal campaign against Fatah members in the Gaza Strip."

     Meanwhile, sources close to Hamas revealed over the weekend that the movement had "executed" more than 35 Palestinians who were suspected of collaborating with Israel and were being held in various Hamas security installations. "

     --- Do you think this is also all false propaganda? Do these above accounts count as human rights abuses?

     Do lobbing rockets at innocent civilians for several YEARS count as human rights abuses?

     best...

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 03:25am

182. Again, I want to understand how quoting the Hamas Charter, which they explicitly state as their purpose for existence and plan of action, is propaganda.

     Nobody on the left has answered ANY of my posts about the Hamas Charter and what to do about the fact that their rocket campaign is simply a logical and rational implementation of the beliefs they express in the charter, namely: a. that all of 'palestine' is theirs with no compromise possible, by religious law. b. that it's a good thing to murder every jew.

     Add up a. and b. and you get continuous rocket fire for several years, in fact, - I'd say - FOREVER.

     That's why Hamas has to be stopped.

     Can any of you leftists actually address this? Why is this propaganda? Why isn't this just believing what Hamas says about themselves, and prove they believe it by acting upon it?

     Why does the left always dodge the truth about Hamas?

     Why is it propaganda to just believe what they say about themselves? In my book, that's integrity.

     And I'm not talking about some 'wild-card' or some 'weirdo', I'm talking about their mainstream charter and their mainstream leadership and rank and file...

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 04:07am

183. cc: i just wanted to parse your words a little bit here.

     'in trying to create war'

     Israel isn't trying to create war, she's engaged in a very belated reaction to many years of rocket fire from Hamas upon her citizens and specifically upon Hamas' refusal to sign a new cease-fire which the Egyptians begged them to do and which the PM of israel pleaded with them to do. instead they launched very large salvo of rockets.

     "The more civilians you kill the more Palestinians you have to kill until you wipe them off the earth."

     there are a great number of civilian palestinians in gaza - close to 2 mil right? Israel has killed I think 50 - 80 so far as collateral damage from attacking Hamas. Those civilian casualties were ALL TRAGEDIES, but they were all side effects of going after hamas.

     When you say Israel is going to have to eventually wipe out every civilian, I think you are incredibly distorting. 50-80 people is not a large percentage of 1.8 mil or so.

     btw, if Israel wanted to give a proportionate response to Palestinian rocket attacks, she could simply fire a single rocket back at their civilian population every time they fired a rocket at hers. If israel did that, a great deal more than 50-80 palestinian civilians would be dead. Say Israel responded to 1000 rockets (there were alot more than that), with 1000 rockets of her own. Each israeli rocket could easily strike a hit, because the israelis have better technology. Say each killed 50 people. that would be 50,000 palestinians dead.

     It should be obvious to anyone with a brain in their head, that Israel is doing her best to minimize civilian casualties while at the same time trying to root out hamas' capacities to smuggle in and launch rockets at israeli cities. It doesn't take alot of thinking to figure this out.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 04:21am

184. Sickening.

     They call themselves Jews in that Nazi shithole??

     They have no right to even call themselves human beings!

     MONSTERS!

     Vermin from a black lagoon!

     Disgrace to world Jewry and trash from a reeking cesspool.

     That's all the Israelis have ever been and will ever be.

     Posted by rykart at 01/04/2009 @ 10:31am

185. I have to really thank you jojo.

     It's hard in the abstract to even imagine people can think, speak and act with such vulgar depravity as the people of Israel.

     You are an outstanding spokesman for their Nazi mentality, their "God's Chosen" Judeo-fascism that sees 40 years of home demolitions, murder, torture, humiliation, the bulldozing of olive groves and the beatings of children and old women as a just response to Palestinian demands for justice and an end to occupation.

     In the future, you Israelis will be studied. Museums devoted to your vileness will spring up. People will ask, (as today they ask about the Nazi era), "how did this happen? How could an entire people turn so utterly rotten? How did we allow this?"

     Posted by rykart at 01/04/2009 @ 11:12am

186. Rykart, i'm sorry - it just sounds like you need a psychiatrist. you didn't address a single thing i actually wrote, esp. the questions about the hamas charter ... all you are doing is raving. you don't give any logic or reasoning behind what you say... i'm not sure how to proceed ...

     good luck though and best wishes, jojojo

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 3:21pm

187. for example, you say i spoke with 'depravity', but you don't give a single actual example of how. you just rant and rave - rant and rave - you don't address on the merits a single thing i actually wrote... don't you think that's intellectually weak? calling someone a 'monster', when you're the person who incited to murder on this website, is a bit much, man.

     Posted by jojojo at 01/04/2009 @ 3:28pm

188. Sure, jojo

     The Israelis are torturing the poor Bedouin of the Negev, herding them into concentration camps, cutting down the few trees so that their animals die of thirst in the desert, because of the HAMAS CHARTER.

     That's why the Israeli's carpeted Southern Lebanon with over a million cluster bombs which are killing civilians every day...because of the HAMAS CHARTER.

     That's why Israel has tortured tens of thousands of Palestinians in their dungeons, including children..because of the HAMAS CHARTER.

     That's why they scrawl "arabs to the gas chambers" in Ramalah...because of the HAMAS CHARTER.

     You are a Nazi scum out of the toilet.

     You're not even worth a bullet.

     Posted by rykart at 01/04/2009 @ 10:55pm

189. Hamas charter??>?>?

     But it's just fine for Israeli garbage and filth like Golda Meir to declare "there's no such thing Palestinians!"

     It's fine for their Chief of Staff to state they would strip the Palestinians of their land, after which, the victims will "run around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." (Raphael Eitan)

     What Israeli has EVER repudiated the Nazi scum who have run their country for 60 despicable years??

     But Hamas must renounce their charter!

     I have a better idea.

     GO DROWN YOURSELF IN THE RED SEA, WITH THE REST OF YOUR NAZI PALS.

     Posted by rykart at 01/04/2009 @ 11:41pm