So, I take your point to be extrajudicial killings are justified.

I'm curious just how much of the history of Palestine you have sampled. Are you aware that a study of US and UK news media showed that more than 300 Palestian children are murdered by Israeli soldiers for every jewish child's death reported by corporate media? Are you aware that founders of the Zionist movement are linked to the German Nazis? Did you know that Israeli war planes attacked the USS Liberty in the Meditaranean with CIA participation?

However, I will not argue that Israeli jews deserve to reap a bloody harvest. I argue that violence begets violence, and the ends can not be used to justify the means.

If you really have concern for lives lost to terrorism you will explore the foundations of your interest in the matter. You seem to take courage from the brutal murder you cite. I wonder about that bullied aspect of your personality that seeks expression through the support of state-sponsored terrorism. I would suggest that there are other ways to express this pain, other paths to healing.

All I have to say is "Nice shooting". The IDF earns another lovely pie as a reward from me. Link

I'm curious just how much of the history of Palestine you have sampled. Are you aware that a study of US and UK news media showed that more than 300 Palestian children are murdered by Israeli soldiers for every jewish child's death reported by corporate media? Are you aware that founders of the Zionist movement are linked to the German Nazis? Did you know that Israeli war planes attacked the USS Liberty in the Meditaranean with CIA participation?

There are many ideas and theories about the Zionist movement. Usually, they're spouted by the same people who condemn the killing of terrorists, but not the killing of innocent Israelis, so I can't help but think that they just hate Jews, and so I cannot take these ideas seriously, especially when they are clearly ignoring many of the vital facts (i.e. USS Liberty).

However, I will not argue that Israeli jews deserve to reap a bloody harvest. I argue that violence begets violence, and the ends can not be used to justify the means.

How do you propose to solve the problem then? These terrorists want Israel to die, so should Israel just be erased from existence?

If you really have concern for lives lost to terrorism you will explore the foundations of your interest in the matter. You seem to take courage from the brutal murder you cite. I wonder about that bullied aspect of your personality that seeks expression through the support of state-sponsored terrorism. I would suggest that there are other ways to express this pain, other paths to healing.

So killing people who kill innocent Israelis is "terrorism"? And supporting Israel defending itself means we have some deep pain in our lives? I guess if that's true, then it's also true that people who are criticising Israel defending itself have some hatred deep inside their hearts for Jews. I love assuming things to make me feel better!

If a country doesn't stand up and take action they'll get stepped on by other countries. Our original plan was to send the Jews into Africa, but they pleaded to go to Jerusalem. Why? Because that's where all of the religious sites were. We offered Palestine a fair deal, and they turned it down, only to bitch about it later. Israel has constantly been outmanned, but they've always managed to beat off opponents, and in some cases snag some land too. Why should Israel be forced to give back the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights? I think Israel is justified in it's actions against terrorists because what country wouldn't do that? Maybe France, but they're different.

If you perceived any joy or glee in my reporting the death of a human being, you were wrong. I am resigned to the situation being as it is, for the time being and under the current leadership. Terrorist forces will continue their actions and Israel will continue its responses.

And neither will acheive much except the loss of life.

The bombing at Erez did nothing to gain a Palestinian homeland and the response did not bring Israel any nearer to peace.

So, does anybody know the history of Israel? What about the US, for that matter?

It doesn't make me antianglo to admit that propably the worst genocide in modern history was committed against the peoples in America. And it doesn't make me a white hater to say that institutional oppression of people, like blacks let's say, is indefensible and should be stopped.

Everybody knows that the greatest instrument of terror in the history of mankind is the United States of America. And if some ("stupid white") people choose to ignore and apologize for this fact I feel justified in criticizing them on the merits -- without fear that my character is at risk.

My advice is that you each spend more time learning the history of those you support and less time in this masturbatory self-congratulation.

And one other thing: I'm sick of all these brutal necrophilic hippocrites deluding themselves with ideas of Christianity. Gandhi said Western civilization would be a good idea. The same goes for Christ-like behavior.

"Given that Hamas will not negotiate for peace and that terrorist attacks continue unabatated in Israel, I can think of no reason why Israel should not respond in this manner"
Nice to read the western version of reality I suppose. It makes it easier to wish death on others. Hamas wishes for Israel to do what's right. Withdraw in accordance with international law. The same UN international law the US used as justification for the illegal invasion of Iraq. In accordance with my non-biased belief in what's right, I think using 1551 as evidence of illegal doings in Iraq is moot unless it's used as evidence of illegal doings in Israel.


Security Council

S/RES/242 (1967)
22 November 1967
Resolution 242 (1967)
of 22 November 1967


The Security Council,

Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,

Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,

Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,

1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

2. Affirms further the necessity

(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;

( For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;

(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;

3. Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;

4. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.
Adopted unanimously at the 1382nd meeting.

So, does anybody know the history of Israel? What about the US, for that matter?

I know there are two versions of Israel's history, and the version in which history is decent, although not perfect, sounds more believable than the version that demonizes Israel. It's possible that the version in which Israel is evil is correct, but anti-Israelists aren't going to convince anybody with their wacky behavior.

Nice to read the western version of reality I suppose. It makes it easier to wish death on others. Hamas wishes for Israel to do what's right. Withdraw in accordance with international law.

If Hamas really doesn't want the death and suffering of Israel, then they need better PR, because their spokespeople are making them look bad.

The gist of my article was pretty straightforward. "Given that Hamas will not negotiate for peace and that terrorist attacks continue unabatated in Israel, I can think of no reason why Israel should not respond in this manner." By not negotiating for peace, Hamas has lost any leverage in negotiations. Visit the Hamas homepage (http://www.hamasonline.com/) and you will see that Hamas is commited to continuing the cycle of violence, leading to reprisal, leading to more violence. Hamas own statement and I quote is "And it is a Jihad until either victory or martyrdom."

Now having said that, let me comment on the comments.

So, does anybody know the history of Israel? What about the US, for that matter?

Everybody knows that the greatest instrument of terror in the history of mankind is the United States of America.

These kind of remarks add nothing to the discussion. They do not refute my arguments, they are not intended to persuade, only to inflame, to provoke a response. In other words, they are trolling. I notice that ChomskyLoverChild has been a registered JoeUSer member for one day now. No blog. It seems likely that registration was for the sole purpose of commenting on my post.

Let me lay out some rules. I tolerate and encourage debate. ( In fact I share an award for Most Reasonable Blogger, thank you GemCityJoe and others.) I respect many people whose opinions differ from mine, O G San and shadesofgrey to name two. (shadesofgrey, THIS was the moral relativism that I referenced, never meaning your posts.) I do NOT tolerate trolling. It is a parasitic form of internet life, waiting for someone else to do the work. Be warned. I will delete future trollish posts, loathe as I am to do so.

Mikimouse, in the future you might consider linking to an article. rather than using copy and paste. (God, I hope that you used copy and paste and didn't type all that out.) If you are trying to make a salient point, rather than calling attention to your posts by their volume, that would be the way to go.

This message was from your sponsor. We now return you to the original thread....

Larry:

I have wanted to post a response to this, but really had to have a think about what it was that I wanted to say. Once the comments section became a mudslinging match, I was wary to step in...but now that you've regained control, I'll try to add my two cents.

I have no sorrow that Hamas has been taken down a notch, and that their leader was killed. How does the saying go, you live by the sword, you die by the sword?

That said, I think Israel isn't doing itself any favors by using extra-judicial killings to accomplish it's goal (I will add that I am against extrajudicial killings on principle, much the same way that I am against suicide bombing on principle--I rather have bin Laden and Hussein alive and able to answer questions and explain themselves and their petty actions to the world than to have them dead and martyred). Rantisi even said on a US News interview (I can't remember the network) that he was going to be a martyr and he wasn't afraid of dying because it will be Allah that decides that his time on earth is done--I'm loathe to think that this man will be enshrined as a hero to Palestinian school children because he predicted his own death and said it was "Allah's" will.

If Israel's goal is security, killing Rantisi isn't going to acheive it. If anything, the killing will only glorify Rantisi and create another emotional wave for the anti-peace factions to ride. For every Rantisi and Sheik Yassin that gets killed there will be another Palestinian ready and willing to fill the shoes. The tit-for-tat model has been tried in the past, and failed...I'm not sure why there is a need to revisit it.

shadesofgrey, I am so glad that you stopped by! Was it okay that I mentioned you by name? I hope that it was, especially in the context of being a "good citizen."

If Israel's goal is security, killing Rantisi isn't going to acheive it.

You could not be more correct. My arguments against the current Israeli policies are twofold: I don't care for the morality behind them, but more to the point, I think that they are most ineffective. Round and round it goes.

Yet they are effective in this light. Neither Sharon or Arafat (nor Hamas as an organization) have to concede any iota of their power. Every incident leaves them more entrenched. Can you imagine Sharon being voted out of power at a time like this? Or a moderate rising up to challenge Arafat? Not hardly.

Like the man who rides the tiger, the secret is not in staying on, but in managing to get off with your life. It will take a massive international effort to break this cycle.

Thank you for posting. (As always!)

You can use my name any time--I was actually quite flatter for two reasons--1. I think very highly of your opinion based on the thoughtful way that you address the issues you discuss and 2. to call OG San articulate would be an understatment of vast proportion--to be listed with him was enormously gratifying!

I've been doing a lot of thinking about Israeli policy recently and how, even though I am very ready to criticize, I don't have any viable peace plans to present. You are certainly correct that with every step they are becoming more and more entrenched. The question--that I don't have an answer to--is HOW does the cycle stop?

For fear of sounding like a broken record, I think the only way to move forward is with new leadership (on both sides). Yet, I agree that Sharon is not likely to be voted out--this pending indictment might be the kickstart to the peace process.

It would be interesting to see if we couldn't attempt to hammer out some sort of viable roadmap here on JoeUser--between OG San and myself, the Palestinian interests would be well represented, and I think that you do an excellent job of representing Israeli interest--I suppose all we are missing is the hard core element on both sides--but I am sure that we would have enough trollers on both sides to derail the process--it might be an interesting experiment.

Bravo, good shooting.

Everybody knows that the greatest instrument of terror in the history of mankind is the United States of America. And if some ("stupid white") people choose to ignore and apologize for this fact I feel justified in criticizing them on the merits -- without fear that my character is at risk.

Why does this idiot say everybody, has he got a few turds in his pocket ? He sounds racist. He doesnt fear his character being at risk ? Which one, Bozo the Clown

NoamChomskyLoveChild - I find it interesting that you would use the name of a guy who doesn't even have the sack to allow commentary on his blog page. Don't beleive me well.... Link

Where to start....

GreyWarrior, you can chat with Chomsky at ZNet, btw.

GanjaGuy, I admit it would have been more accurate had I said, "Everybody with eyes to see knows the US is the greatest instrument of terror...." Forgiven my shorthand.

Kuperman, thanks for the erudition.

And MikiMouse, bravo.