Another Murderer Taken Out

Great column from Barbara Amiel: http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/04/19/do1901.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/04/19/ixopinion.html

Then again, there’s always the crazy Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1194813,00.html

You’ve got to love it when your crazed left-wing zealotry breaks your brain and forces you to call Rantisi a “lover of freedom”. That guy really was the worst of the worst.

I’m sure this will be looked back upon as the turning point in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Sharon is the entire fucking turning point. Words can’t express how I hate that man. Compared to him Rantisi is a school boy.

Compared to him Rantisi is a school boy.

Was he in your grade 8 class? Did you get to play this game http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/19/international/middleeast/19beir.html?ex=1082952000&en=172bd035a5a8787c&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE with the other smarty anti-semites?

For god’s sake, criticism of Israeli policy is not anti-Semitism. Why does that fallacious argument keep coming up?

[quote=“MarchHare”]

For god’s sake, criticism of Israeli policy is not anti-Semitism. Why does that fallacious argument keep coming up?[/quote]

When you find out, please tell me. I don’t get it either.

Wow, Sharon has, against all odds, driven the hope out of and alienated the Palestinians even more. I’m sure that will lead to less terrorists.
And if you say that it wasn’t Sharon, due to it being a response to actions by Hamas, you’re wrong. Hamas may have attacked Israel, but most Palestinians, I think, don’t regard themselves as terrorists, or at that time supportive of Hamas’ military wing. Ergo, being struck by the retaliation from Israel only proves to them that Hamas was right in the first place, and garners them support.

Does anyone really think that they will end Palestinian opposition by cutting of the head of Hamas? That’s a stop-gap solution, at best. Though of course, with Sharon’s likely plan of having all Palestinians in a chained encampment with military all around for the forseeable future, I guess that’s enough. You know, as long as we’re not worried about the morality of our democratic brethren.

Every single act Israel makes draws condemnations around the world and hundreds of threads right here, yet every suicide bombing gets hardly noticed.

Maybe it’s time for you to stop being shocked, SHOCKED, when Israel retaliates instead of just lets suicide bombings be planned and enabled. It reminds me of when I see Hamas rallies on TV, where they go nuts and crazy when Israel kills some of them, like that should never ever ever happen, yet party and pass out candies when they kill Israelis.

I just don’t understand your viewpoints at all.

Ooh, anti-semite, how predictably sad of you. And it manages to come up in a thread where I haven’t even mentioned Israel as a whole, jews as a group or even the actions of a group of jews. Congratulations, you’ve managed to expand the definition of anti-semitism into such a broad concept that it has now become meaningless! You are a fucking retard with no grasp of the english language, congratulations! Buy the biggest dictionary you can find, look up the word anti-semite and then slam it repeatedly against your forehead until it manages to pentrate your thick fucking skull what an anti-semite is.

I’ll throw you a bone and say that I’m not an anti-semite as I have no prejudices against jews. I do however have a huge fucking prejudice against condemned war criminals and mass murderers turned politicians. Are we clear on this? Or am I an anti-semite for calling a jew condemned by other jews as a war criminal on his bullshit?

Now do you have any actual arguments you want to throw around? You know, ones that aren’t based on an assumption that your opponents are all racists?

Because there isn’t much to comment on the subject of “Terrorist group commits act of terror/heinous deed” when compared to “Democratic state does same”.

So what is said democratic state supposed to do? Lie down? Let it happen?

Give in to terrorist demands of people who relentlessly and specifically target civilians?

I honestly don’t understand what them being a democratic state has to do with anything at all. The argument never made much sense to me - it’s like an false argument waiting for a point.

Even better, let’s say Sharon went as crazy as you all assume he is and turned Israel into a dictatorship under him. Would you then stop your criticism?

How do you feel about Arafat?

So what is said democratic state supposed to do? Lie down? Let it happen?

Give in to terrorist demands of people who relentlessly and specifically target civilians?

Yes, thank you, that’s exactly what I was trying to say.
No, of course not! I expect them to fight back in a way that doesn’t mean death and suffering to the Palestinian community and do their best to help them reach a place (not geographical) where they have right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I’m kind of not seeing it at the moment.
And no, that’s not easy, but it seems Sharon is doing his best to fulfill the opposite.

I honestly don’t understand what them being a democratic state has to do with anything at all. The argument never made much sense to me - it’s like an false argument waiting for a point.

Because we expect more of democracies, else what is the point? If it’s not based on the ideas of establishment of liberty and human rights, and repeat the atrocities of the countless totalitarian states before them, what worth is it?

Even better, let’s say Sharon went as crazy as you all assume he is and turned Israel into a dictatorship under him. Would you then stop your criticism?

In its current form? Yes. Of course, at the same time I’d expect all economic support and trade with Israel from democratic nations to stop, while supporting a democratic movement within the country. Since Israel has nukes, it would be a difficult situation.

And how, praytell, do they do that, without looking weak and inneffective and encouranging more suicide attacks when it looks to the terrorists as if their tactics are working?

Because we expect more of democracies, else what is the point? If it’s not based on the ideas of establishment of liberty and human rights, and repeat the atrocities of the countless totalitarian states before them, what worth is it?

I expect democracies to believe in the values of liberty and individual rights for its citizens, not for people who are attacking those citizens and specifically targetting their civilian population. I expect democracies to accept that one of the rights of its citizens is defense from such attacks and the absolute neccesity to go after the perpetrators of such violence and indiscriminate killing with feverous zeal. Or else, as you say, what worth is it?

Of course, at the same time I’d expect all economic support and trade with Israel from democratic nations to stop, while supporting a democratic movement within the country.

So, the Palestinians, who aren’t in any shape or form a legitimate democracy, should be dropped of all economic support and trade, as well?

It seems to me their tactics are working right now. For every attack the Palestinians are more alienated from the concept of the “Western world”, removing any vested interest they have in working with the Israelis, since it is so stunningly clear that they are considered enemies by them. You fight your enemies. I fully expect the Palestinians to, and which organisation has the best organisation set up for just that specific purpose. I do believe it’s Hamas.
And in a way that’s not “weak and ineffective” and would therefore “encourage more suicide attacks”, because it’s obviously a working tactic?
Obviously the current strategy by Israel encourages more suicide attacks, but that’s not because it’s (suicide attacks) a working tactic, but because they’re desperate, right? Personally, I’d say it’s both.
Of course I do not preach ineffective tactics, but having Hamas see actions as weak, I do not see as necessarily negative (they’re a freaking terror organisation, their opinions don’t matter much to me). And how would fostering positive Palestinian-Israeli relations mean the Hamas tactic is working? Because I would guess it would be quite the opposite, making working for a Palestinian state alongside Israel for most Palestinians a reasonable plan, removing support for Hamas. In that case, they’d really get desperate, or so I’d guess.

I expect democracies to believe in the values of liberty and individual rights for its citizens, not for people who are attacking those citizens and specifically targetting their civilian population. I expect democracies to accept that one of the rights of its citizens is defense from such attacks and the absolute neccesity to go after the perpetrators of such violence and indiscriminate killing with feverous zeal. Or else, as you say, what worth is it?

I expect democracies to care for, even if they don’t have the resources, for the development of democracy for all humans, and care for those living in disgusting conditions. The people in Palestine’s fate is ruled by the actions of Israel. By allowing Hamas to set their policy in dealing with Palestine, they are ruled by terror. I claim that the actions of Israel when it comes to Palestine is not a proper defense at all, since it works in no way to set up a long-term sustainable solution that is also acceptable in regards to the ideals of the philosophies of liberty and humanity.

So, the Palestinians, who aren’t in any shape or form a legitimate democracy, should be dropped of all economic support and trade, as well?

Actually, the people of the occupied areas should be supported by Israel, as stated in the Geneva convention, but that’s a sidenote.
No, because the Palestinians aren’t Hamas, or even PA, and the state of education and so on in the area is woefully inadequate to start a popular democracy movement (unlike Israel) without it.
There is no easy universal way to create or promote a democracy, I just know that Israel, in Palestine, is doing the direct opposite, at the moment.

You fight your enemies. Isn’t that what Israel is doing?

I fully expect the Palestinians to, and which organisation has the best organisation set up for just that specific purpose. I do believe it’s Hamas.

Just so we have this established, you’re right here establishing that Hamas is a legitimate Palestinian organization that has the backing of “Palestinians,” thus their society.

And in a way that’s not “weak and ineffective” and would therefore “encourage more suicide attacks”, because it’s obviously a working tactic?
Obviously the current strategy by Israel encourages more suicide attacks, but that’s not because it’s (suicide attacks) a working tactic, but because they’re desperate, right? Personally, I’d say it’s both.
Of course I do not preach ineffective tactics, but having Hamas see actions as weak, I do not see as necessarily negative (they’re a freaking terror organisation, their opinions don’t matter much to me). And how would fostering positive Palestinian-Israeli relations mean the Hamas tactic is working? Because I would guess it would be quite the opposite, making working for a Palestinian state alongside Israel for most Palestinians a reasonable plan, removing support for Hamas. In that case, they’d really get desperate, or so I’d guess.

I don’t mean to insult you here, but I really don’t understand what you mean. Can you write it again from a different approach?

I expect democracies to care for, even if they don’t have the resources, for the development of democracy for all humans, and care for those living in disgusting conditions.

Just curious, how did you feel about the Iraq war?

The people in Palestine’s fate is ruled by the actions of Israel. By allowing Hamas to set their policy in dealing with Palestine, they are ruled by terror. I claim that the actions of Israel when it comes to Palestine is not a proper defense at all, since it works in no way to set up a long-term sustainable solution that is also acceptable in regards to the ideals of the philosophies of liberty and humanity.

Well, you’ve already said that the Palestinians have enabled Hamas as a legitimate organization on their behalf. Reactions to them should be seen as legitimate as well. Setting up a sustainable solution isn’t something Israel can be expected to think about when they’re under constant attack. Britain wasn’t thinking about how to set up a proper government in Germany when they were getting hammered with V2 rockets.

No, because the Palestinians aren’t Hamas, or even PA, and the state of education and so on in the area is woefully inadequate to start a popular democracy movement (unlike Israel) without it.

Well, the Palestinians have accepted Hamas as their proxy organization, as you say, and support it. In essence, there is no PA in Gaza, it’s only Hamas. They run the show. So how do they deserve any benefits at all? And the education argument is a red herring, as I see it. I don’t see the relevance.

There is no easy universal way to create or promote a democracy, I just know that Israel, in Palestine, is doing the direct opposite, at the moment.

Well, what’s the direct opposite of nothing? I don’t get it. How do you know that what Israel is doing is wrong if you have no idea of what is right?

No, they are taking the simple way out and are creating enemies of people who could have gone either way (with a certain slant against Israel of course, it wouldn’t have been easy). They are fighting Hamas, granted, but at the same time, creating ever new enemies of Palestinians who will join, or start their own version.

[quote]I fully expect the Palestinians to, and which organisation has the best organisation set up for just that specific purpose. I do believe it’s Hamas.

Just so we have this established, you’re right here establishing that Hamas is a legitimate Palestinian organization that has the backing of “Palestinians,” thus their society.[/quote]
No, I’m saying that when Israel has made enemies of Palestinians, Hamas, who have fought Israel for years and years, will be a legitimate organization to them.

I tried to edit it slightly, it might work better now.

Just curious, how did you feel about the Iraq war?

I think it’s a stupid war, since I do not believe the US will have the cohesion to stay the distance, set a negative precedent, and works against fledgling democratic movements worldwide.

Well, you’ve already said that the Palestinians have enabled Hamas as a legitimate organization on their behalf. Reactions to them should be seen as legitimate as well. Setting up a sustainable solution isn’t something Israel can be expected to think about when they’re under constant attack. Britain wasn’t thinking about how to set up a proper government in Germany when they were getting hammered with V2 rockets.

Since I really didn’t, this part was pointless. And the next quote, which I snipped.
And comparing this to WW2? Please.

Well, what’s the direct opposite of nothing? I don’t get it. How do you know that what Israel is doing is wrong if you have no idea of what is right?

Well, I guess if you’re in the camp of “destroy a region to save it”, I don’t see how they work towards a democracy. And even if they’re doing that, they’re taking their time.
Build infrastructure, not create a wall of separation, work to effectivise roadblocks (in those cases they’re necessary), fund schools, withdraw settlements, provide aid in general.
I know those promote democracy, the problem is that this is Palestine we’re talking about, and it’s not as easy to do as to write, but I do know that Israel is doing the direct opposite of these, and generating support the hardline approach to Israel every day.

So isn’t Hamas (and all the Palestinian terror organizations, which enjoy enthusaistic, majority support among the Palestinian people) doing the same thing to Israelis, creating new enemies out of the familes they destroy, out of the people they affect?

Obviously the current strategy by Israel encourages more suicide attacks, but that’s not because it’s (suicide attacks) a working tactic, but because they’re desperate, right? (personally, I’d say it’s part of both, it it working as every response by Israel draws more Palestinians towards Hamas, but at the same time I do believe the current Hamas leadership feels the heat, though that doesn’t help Israel any in the long run)

I personally believe that suicide attacks are not a tactic of desperation but rather a perverted political tool. But that’s frankly a side argument.

Of course I do not preach ineffective tactics, but having Hamas see actions as weak, I do not see as necessarily negative (they’re a freaking terror organisation, their opinions don’t matter much to me).

I don’t begrudge the right of Palestinians to enter into armed resitance if they so desire. I do not think this gives them any right to specifically target civilians. I also think that entering into armed resistance requires that you acknowledge the right of the target to strike back. And hiding your paramilitary among your civilian population so as to limit the ability of the much more conscientious target to strike back is completely unconscionable.

And how would fostering positive Palestinian-Israeli relations mean the Hamas tactic is working? Because I would guess it would be quite the opposite, making working for a Palestinian state alongside Israel for most Palestinians a reasonable plan, removing support for Hamas. In that case, they’d really get desperate, or so I’d guess.

By not targetting the people who are killing your civilian population and instead negotiating for answering their demands without regard to stopping the terror that is occuring, you are giving Hamas ample assurances that their tactics are working. The terror MUST be stopped, completely, before any quarter is given. Otherwise, you are simply showing the enemy, in this case, Hamas, that their tactics are working, and will work elsewhere. Perhaps in the US, or in Spain, or in Britain, or in Sweden.

And comparing this to WW2? Please.

I don’t mean to compare the conflict to WW2. Just to draw an analogy to the idea that when you’re in combat, and you’re experiencing losses, your concern is with the safety of your people, not the feelings of your attackers.

Well, I guess if you’re in the camp of “destroy a region to save it”, I don’t see how they work towards a democracy. And even if they’re doing that, they’re taking their time.
Build infrastructure, not create a wall of separation, work to effectivise roadblocks (in those cases they’re necessary), fund schools, withdraw settlements, provide aid in general.

So, in other words, give in. Let the terror continue and at the same time invest in their society, let them turn aorund and use the money and infastructure to finance more terrorism, which is exactly what they have been doing for years. Not show them that the path of terror is the path to ruin, and only by rejecting the terror as a whole can they hope to improve their conditions.

I don’t discriminate against murdering bastards turned statesmen, but Arafat is right now impotent for all intents and purposes. His past crimes still weigh against him, but at least he is not committing more crimes.

By not targetting the people who are killing your civilian population and instead negotiating for answering their demands without regard to stopping the terror that is occuring, you are giving Hamas ample assurances that their tactics are working. The terror MUST be stopped, completely, before any quarter is given. Otherwise, you are simply showing the enemy, in this case, Hamas, that their tactics are working, and will work elsewhere. Perhaps in the US, or in Spain, or in Britain, or in Sweden.

So you are suggesting that we give every single suicide bomber a veto on the peace process?

As long as there’s no real, extensive, exhaustive effort on the part of the people to stop the actions of the terrorist organizations, you bet I am.