Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is said to be weighing "punitive" measures against the Palestinian Authority for having the temerity to seek statehood from the United Nations.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he is evaluating Israel's next step. But key members of his right-wing coalition are pushing for a firm response, which they say would discourage Palestinians from pursuing their strategy of gaining United Nations recognition or taking other unilateral steps away from the negotiating table.
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has warned Palestinians of grave consequences and, according to one Israeli newspaper report, threatened to quit the government unless punitive actions are taken. He later denied saying that he would quit over the issue.
Lieberman and others say the Palestinian application for U.N. membership violates the 1993 Oslo peace accords, which committed both sides to work out their differences at the negotiating table. As a result, they say Israel should annex all or part of the West Bank, terminate the Oslo accords or cut off tax transfers that Israeli ports collect on behalf of the Palestinian Authority. That revenue, about $100 million a month, accounts for much of the authority's budget.
Showing posts with label Gaza Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gaza Israel. Show all posts
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
And They Wonder Why These Guys Fire Rockets at Them.
Another WikiLeaks disclosure.
"As part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to (U.S. embassy economic officers) on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge," one of the cables read.
Israel wanted the coastal territory's economy " functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis," according to the November 3, 2008 cable.
When will Israel realize that it cannot hope for peace through punishing the Palestinian people? It hasn't worked. It's not going to work. The only thing Israel is getting out of this is a pretext for occupying the West Bank and expanding its settlements there. Putting up with a few unguided rockets of minimal lethality is a small price to be paid for that.
"As part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to (U.S. embassy economic officers) on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge," one of the cables read.
Israel wanted the coastal territory's economy " functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis," according to the November 3, 2008 cable.
When will Israel realize that it cannot hope for peace through punishing the Palestinian people? It hasn't worked. It's not going to work. The only thing Israel is getting out of this is a pretext for occupying the West Bank and expanding its settlements there. Putting up with a few unguided rockets of minimal lethality is a small price to be paid for that.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
The Myth of Israeli Security & Gaza
Israel defends its blockade of Gaza as a necessary evil to ensure its security by preventing arms being smuggled to Palestinian radicals. That's the line Israel has fabricated for public consumption in the West. The only thing wrong with it is that it's not true.
McClatchey Newspapers has obtained, "an Israeli government document that describes the blockade not as a security measure but as "economic warfare" against the Islamist group Hamas, which rules the Palestinian territory."
Last week, after Israeli commandos killed nine volunteers on a Turkish-organized Gaza aid flotilla, Israel again said its aim was to stop the flow of terrorist arms into Gaza.
However, in response to a lawsuit by Gisha, an Israeli human rights group, the Israeli government explained the blockade as an exercise of the right of economic warfare.
"A country has the right to decide that it chooses not to engage in economic relations or to give economic assistance to the other party to the conflict, or that it wishes to operate using 'economic warfare,'" the government said.
The Israeli document reveals that the Gaza blockade is not the defensive necessity as claimed publicly by Israel but an offensive campaign to use deprivation of the Palestinian people to undermine support for Hamas. Quelle surprise!
McClatchey Newspapers has obtained, "an Israeli government document that describes the blockade not as a security measure but as "economic warfare" against the Islamist group Hamas, which rules the Palestinian territory."
Last week, after Israeli commandos killed nine volunteers on a Turkish-organized Gaza aid flotilla, Israel again said its aim was to stop the flow of terrorist arms into Gaza.
However, in response to a lawsuit by Gisha, an Israeli human rights group, the Israeli government explained the blockade as an exercise of the right of economic warfare.
"A country has the right to decide that it chooses not to engage in economic relations or to give economic assistance to the other party to the conflict, or that it wishes to operate using 'economic warfare,'" the government said.
The Israeli document reveals that the Gaza blockade is not the defensive necessity as claimed publicly by Israel but an offensive campaign to use deprivation of the Palestinian people to undermine support for Hamas. Quelle surprise!
Monday, May 31, 2010
Louise Arbour Slams Israeli Flotilla Attack - Iggy, Can You Hear Her?
The President of the International Crisis Group, Canada's own Louise Arbour, isn't pulling any punches in responding to Israel's assault on a flotilla bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza.
For years, many in the international community have been complicit in a policy that aimed at isolating Gaza in the hope of weakening Hamas. This policy is morally appalling and politically self-defeating. It has harmed the people of Gaza without loosening Hamas's control. Yet it has persisted regardless of evident failure.
“The flotilla assault is but a symptom of an approach that has been implicitly endorsed by many”, says Robert Malley, Director of Crisis Group’s Middle East Program. “It is yet another stark illustration of the belated need for a comprehensive change in policy toward Gaza.”
International condemnation and calls for an inquiry will come easily, but many who will issue them must acknowledge their own role in the deplorable treatment of Gaza that formed the backdrop to today’s events. [Iggy, I think that includes you] The policy of isolating Gaza, seeking to turn its population against Hamas, and endorsing a "West Bank first" approach was not an exclusively Israeli one. To focus on this recent tragedy alone is to miss the much wider and more important political lessons.
...“Today, we have witnessed the sad outgrowth of a failed and dangerous policy”, says Louise Arbour, Crisis Group President. “One hopes it can provide an opportunity for a long-overdue course correction.”
Meanwhile, the silence from Ignatieff is deafening. He did issue a cold fish statement regretting the loss of life and asking for Israeli clarification but that's it. Then again he might realize that, when it comes to Gaza, he stands right up there with the "morally appalling" who've been complicit in "the deplorable treatment of Gaza that formed the backdrop to today's events." In any event, progressive and centrist Liberals shouldn't need the International Crisis Group or Louise Arbour to recognize that their party leader's unbalanced and absolutionist, pro-Israel policy on Gaza is morally appalling.
For years, many in the international community have been complicit in a policy that aimed at isolating Gaza in the hope of weakening Hamas. This policy is morally appalling and politically self-defeating. It has harmed the people of Gaza without loosening Hamas's control. Yet it has persisted regardless of evident failure.
“The flotilla assault is but a symptom of an approach that has been implicitly endorsed by many”, says Robert Malley, Director of Crisis Group’s Middle East Program. “It is yet another stark illustration of the belated need for a comprehensive change in policy toward Gaza.”
International condemnation and calls for an inquiry will come easily, but many who will issue them must acknowledge their own role in the deplorable treatment of Gaza that formed the backdrop to today’s events. [Iggy, I think that includes you] The policy of isolating Gaza, seeking to turn its population against Hamas, and endorsing a "West Bank first" approach was not an exclusively Israeli one. To focus on this recent tragedy alone is to miss the much wider and more important political lessons.
...“Today, we have witnessed the sad outgrowth of a failed and dangerous policy”, says Louise Arbour, Crisis Group President. “One hopes it can provide an opportunity for a long-overdue course correction.”
Meanwhile, the silence from Ignatieff is deafening. He did issue a cold fish statement regretting the loss of life and asking for Israeli clarification but that's it. Then again he might realize that, when it comes to Gaza, he stands right up there with the "morally appalling" who've been complicit in "the deplorable treatment of Gaza that formed the backdrop to today's events." In any event, progressive and centrist Liberals shouldn't need the International Crisis Group or Louise Arbour to recognize that their party leader's unbalanced and absolutionist, pro-Israel policy on Gaza is morally appalling.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Hey Steve, Some Terrorists to Sue - Finally!
Steve Harper is going to open Canadian courts to enable victims of terrorism to sue for compensation. I wonder what he thinks of these terrorists. From AFP:
Jewish settlers rampaged in the West Bank on Monday, wounding four Palestinians, as they vented fury that Israel may answer US calls and dismantle outposts in the territory, officials said.
Jewish extremists blocked roads, hurled rocks at drivers, burned fields, cut down olive trees and opened fire towards Palestinians who tried to chase the trespassers from their fields in the northern West Bank, witnesses said.
West of the city of Nablus, an area home to some of the most hardline settlers in the occupied territory, dozens of masked extremists blocked a road in the early hours and hurled rocks at Palestinian drivers who stopped their vehicles to move the obstructions, they said.
"They attacked when the minibus (carrying 17 Palestinian workers on their way to work in Israel) stopped. The man next to the driver was seriously wounded," said Zakaria Sada, an activist with the Rabbis for Human Rights organisation.
Near the settlement of Yizhar -- one of the most radical in the West Bank -- heavy smoke billowed into the air as settlers set fire to Palestinian fields.
When a group of Palestinians threw stones trying to chase them off the land, about 20 settlers armed with guns jumped out from hiding places and opened fire in the direction of the Palestinians and journalists, an AFP correspondent said.
Three army patrol vehicles at a nearby junction stood by and did not intervene to stop the violence, but prevented a Palestinian fire-engine from reaching the field.
That sure sounds like terrorism and I'll bet those farmers whose fields were torched could probably do with a dollop of compensation too. Maybe Steve can tell us where they can sign up to launch their court cases.
Jewish settlers rampaged in the West Bank on Monday, wounding four Palestinians, as they vented fury that Israel may answer US calls and dismantle outposts in the territory, officials said.
Jewish extremists blocked roads, hurled rocks at drivers, burned fields, cut down olive trees and opened fire towards Palestinians who tried to chase the trespassers from their fields in the northern West Bank, witnesses said.
West of the city of Nablus, an area home to some of the most hardline settlers in the occupied territory, dozens of masked extremists blocked a road in the early hours and hurled rocks at Palestinian drivers who stopped their vehicles to move the obstructions, they said.
"They attacked when the minibus (carrying 17 Palestinian workers on their way to work in Israel) stopped. The man next to the driver was seriously wounded," said Zakaria Sada, an activist with the Rabbis for Human Rights organisation.
Near the settlement of Yizhar -- one of the most radical in the West Bank -- heavy smoke billowed into the air as settlers set fire to Palestinian fields.
When a group of Palestinians threw stones trying to chase them off the land, about 20 settlers armed with guns jumped out from hiding places and opened fire in the direction of the Palestinians and journalists, an AFP correspondent said.
Three army patrol vehicles at a nearby junction stood by and did not intervene to stop the violence, but prevented a Palestinian fire-engine from reaching the field.
That sure sounds like terrorism and I'll bet those farmers whose fields were torched could probably do with a dollop of compensation too. Maybe Steve can tell us where they can sign up to launch their court cases.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Is Israel Abandoning Democracy?
Israel is something of a pressure cooker waiting to explode. What it values most, its identity as a Jewish state, is under an existential, demographic threat. There are but two ways to relieve the dangerous pressure, neither of them acceptable in Western society.
Israel's problem is that, when it overran territories after its creation, it absorbed a large number of Palestinians who chose to tough it out and stay in their homes rather than flee. This is what we now know as the pre-1967 war Israel. Israel's Arab population, however, is growing much faster than Israel's Jewish population and is expected to become the majority in the near future.
If Israeli Arabs become a majority at the ballot box it won't fare well for the Jewish state. Israeli Arabs haven't always been treated very well by their Jewish masters. They're unreliable, potentially the undoing of what Israel is supposed to be. If Israel is to preserve the nation as a Jewish state it either must ethnically cleanse itself of the Arab population or it must impose some form of apartheid rule, designating its Arab people as a lower order of citizen with sharply reduced political rights. Either way, Israel loses its vaunted claim as the only real democracy in the Middle East. It also stands to lose a lot of what remains of its support in the West.
Like any pressure cooker situation, changes are occurring. One of these is a spreading state repression of dissent and protest among Jewish moderates, intellectuals and peace groups. Read more here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/30/israel-military
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/05/israel-protest-feminism-draft
Another ominous development appeared in reports during the Israeli war on Gaza of fundamentalist Rabbis in the Israeli military egging their troops on to cleanse the Holy Land of these pesky Arabs.
The spread of religious fundamentalism into military forces isn't limited to Israel. Christian fundamentalists are increasingly taking the levers of power within the American armed forces. Many of them see America's military as a weapon to advance their idea of God's will. Read this chilling account from Harper's, "Jesus killed Mohammed: The crusade for a Christian military":
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488
It wasn't until I read the Harper's story that I discovered the Christian extremists within the US military go straight up to David Petraeus himself. I can't see how any good can possibly come of this.
Israel's problem is that, when it overran territories after its creation, it absorbed a large number of Palestinians who chose to tough it out and stay in their homes rather than flee. This is what we now know as the pre-1967 war Israel. Israel's Arab population, however, is growing much faster than Israel's Jewish population and is expected to become the majority in the near future.
If Israeli Arabs become a majority at the ballot box it won't fare well for the Jewish state. Israeli Arabs haven't always been treated very well by their Jewish masters. They're unreliable, potentially the undoing of what Israel is supposed to be. If Israel is to preserve the nation as a Jewish state it either must ethnically cleanse itself of the Arab population or it must impose some form of apartheid rule, designating its Arab people as a lower order of citizen with sharply reduced political rights. Either way, Israel loses its vaunted claim as the only real democracy in the Middle East. It also stands to lose a lot of what remains of its support in the West.
Like any pressure cooker situation, changes are occurring. One of these is a spreading state repression of dissent and protest among Jewish moderates, intellectuals and peace groups. Read more here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/30/israel-military
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/05/israel-protest-feminism-draft
Another ominous development appeared in reports during the Israeli war on Gaza of fundamentalist Rabbis in the Israeli military egging their troops on to cleanse the Holy Land of these pesky Arabs.
The spread of religious fundamentalism into military forces isn't limited to Israel. Christian fundamentalists are increasingly taking the levers of power within the American armed forces. Many of them see America's military as a weapon to advance their idea of God's will. Read this chilling account from Harper's, "Jesus killed Mohammed: The crusade for a Christian military":
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488
It wasn't until I read the Harper's story that I discovered the Christian extremists within the US military go straight up to David Petraeus himself. I can't see how any good can possibly come of this.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Benny's Loose Cannon
It was obvious that when newly-minted Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu appointed ultra-right nutjob Avigdor Lieberman to be his country's foreign minister it wouldn't take long for the sparks to fly.
As though Israel has something to gain from poking a sharp stick in Washington's eye, Liberman wasted no time announcing that Israel was not bound by understandings on the creation of a Palestinian state reached at a U.S.-sponsored conference at Annapolis in November 2007. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz recently reported on a secret side deal between Netanyahu and Lieberman that could make the possibility of a Palestinian state in the West Bank all but hopeless:
Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu has struck a secret deal with Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman for highly contentious construction on West Bank land known as E1, Army Radio reported Wednesday. A source close to the negotiations between the pair told Army Radio that the plan had been agreed upon even though it did not appear in the official document detailing the coalition deal between Yisrael Beiteinu and Netanyahu's Likud.
Construction in the area is particularly sensitive because it would create contiguity between the settlement and the capital, which in turn would prevent Palestinian construction between East Jerusalem and Ramallah. This would also make it difficult to reach agreement between Israel and the Palestinians on the question of permanent borders.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1073771.html
As though Israel has something to gain from poking a sharp stick in Washington's eye, Liberman wasted no time announcing that Israel was not bound by understandings on the creation of a Palestinian state reached at a U.S.-sponsored conference at Annapolis in November 2007. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz recently reported on a secret side deal between Netanyahu and Lieberman that could make the possibility of a Palestinian state in the West Bank all but hopeless:
Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu has struck a secret deal with Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman for highly contentious construction on West Bank land known as E1, Army Radio reported Wednesday. A source close to the negotiations between the pair told Army Radio that the plan had been agreed upon even though it did not appear in the official document detailing the coalition deal between Yisrael Beiteinu and Netanyahu's Likud.
Construction in the area is particularly sensitive because it would create contiguity between the settlement and the capital, which in turn would prevent Palestinian construction between East Jerusalem and Ramallah. This would also make it difficult to reach agreement between Israel and the Palestinians on the question of permanent borders.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1073771.html
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
A Case to Answer
The Guardian has reported on a 3-week investigation into war crimes during the assault on Gaza. It would be rash to conclude, based on the reporters' accounts, that Israel committed the alleged crimes and the Israeli military flatly denies each and every allegation. However these reports don't stand alone. They're also corroborated by reports coming in from the United Nations, the Red Cross and numerous humanitarian organizations. Worse yet, they're consistent with statements now coming out from Israeli soldiers who took part in the attacks.
These accounts, from such diverse sources - Palestinian, Israeli and neutral - warrant a formal investigation or inquiry. Unfortunately that would have to be ordered by the UN Security Council and subject to veto by the United States.
Will the Canadian government call for such an investigation? Will the leader of the Official Opposition? What do you think? I think they would like to pretend this never happened.
Read the story and watch the three video reports here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/23/israel-gaza-war-crimes-guardian
These accounts, from such diverse sources - Palestinian, Israeli and neutral - warrant a formal investigation or inquiry. Unfortunately that would have to be ordered by the UN Security Council and subject to veto by the United States.
Will the Canadian government call for such an investigation? Will the leader of the Official Opposition? What do you think? I think they would like to pretend this never happened.
Read the story and watch the three video reports here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/23/israel-gaza-war-crimes-guardian
Saturday, March 21, 2009
In the Name of the Liberal Party of Canada
"At the beginning the directive was to enter a house with an armoured vehicle, to break the door down, to start shooting inside and – I call it murder – to shoot at everyone we identify. In the beginning I asked myself how could this make sense? Higher-ups said it is permissible because everyone left in the city [Gaza City] is culpable because they didn't run away."
That is the testimony of a squad leader of the Israeli Army that rolled over the Palestinian population of Gaza, one of many such accounts now pouring out from Israeli soldiers plagued by their consciences.
And why the total silence from the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada who condoned this butchery and absolved Israel, in advance, for these deaths claiming that the deaths of Palestinian civilians at the hands of Israeli troops was to be blamed on Hamas. This is what Michael Ignatieff did in the name of the Liberal Party of Canada and its members.
Evidence that can only be described as grotesque is coming out not from Hamas, not from Palestinians, not from international relief workers but from Israeli soldiers, the very people who had their fingers on the triggers. Among other things they tell of military rabbis who exhorted the soldiers to ethnically cleanse the Holy Land of Israel, God's Israel, of these Palestinian gentiles.
Were any of these possibilities in Michael Ignatieff's mind when he threw the Liberal Party's wholehearted support behind Israel at the outset of this conflict? It brings to mind the words of another Liberal MP from 2006:
"Michael is an intelligent person and I would think that he would have a better handle on the Middle East given his years of experience on human rights and international law."
That was Susan Kadis rebuking Iggy for labelling the Israeli cluster bombing of the Lebanese village of Qana a "war crime." Ignatieff was unquestionably right on the cluster bombing and I'm sure he knew it just as he knew that saying so was politically wrong. It was a defining moment in the life of the Liberal leader, one that carries on to this day. He's got a better handle now Sue.
Friday, January 30, 2009
60 Minutes' Bob Simon Under Attack
It took a lot of courage and integrity for 60 Minutes correspondent Bob Simon to produce his recent piece on the Palestinian plight in the West Bank and Israel's apartheid policy. The network and Simon have since come under attack from Jewish groups enraged at the report. Watch it for yourself and then think about writing CBS News with your thoughts.
Watch CBS Videos Online
Watch CBS Videos Online
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Rivers of Venom in Gaza
A ceasefire may finally be at hand. It's being widely reported that the Israeli government cabinet has agreed to implement a ceasefire this weekend but on what terms remains unclear. Some believe the deal will see Israeli troops and tanks remain in occupation of Gaza for an indefinite period.
An end to the massively excessive carnage certainly will be a welcome development but it raises the question of what's next? How does Israel build on whatever it is it thinks it has achieved? How do the Gazan Palestinians recover? How does anyone find peace out of this savagery?
It's hard to see how Israel hasn't cut its own throat. The Israeli military campaign was utterly misconceived. It had no achievable strategic objective. The IDF knew it stood to repeat the strategic blunders it created in Lebanon in 2006. It knew that punishing the civilian population without destroying Hamas would only enable Hamas to emerge stronger.
This war was never about more than winning votes in the Feburary 10th elections and, given its continued popularity with Israelis, it might still yield dividends for Barak and Livni. It was a stupid war waged for a corrupt purpose, the sort of war that virtually never succeeds.
Israel's use of collective punishment against the Gaza Palestinians has been myopic. To believe that it could somehow counter militants firing a few feeble rockets into nearly Israeli communities by depriving the civilian population of food, medicines and other necessaries of life was just plain dumb. To cap that off with three weeks of airstrikes and artillery barrages, heavy firepower, area-weaponry that had no application in densely populated, urban settings, was to take collective punishment to a new level of barbarity.
Israel will not be forgiven for the hundreds of civilians, especially the hundreds of children, it slaughtered. It has handed the Gaza militants and Islamists in every corner of the Muslim world a brand new reason to hate Israel and seek revenge.
It may be too much to expect an actual ceasefire while Israeli forces remain in occupation of the Gaza Strip. There are just too many people now willing to put a round in any Israeli soldier's back to prevent the sort of incidents that will almost surely lead to a resumption of Israeli attacks.
An end to the massively excessive carnage certainly will be a welcome development but it raises the question of what's next? How does Israel build on whatever it is it thinks it has achieved? How do the Gazan Palestinians recover? How does anyone find peace out of this savagery?
It's hard to see how Israel hasn't cut its own throat. The Israeli military campaign was utterly misconceived. It had no achievable strategic objective. The IDF knew it stood to repeat the strategic blunders it created in Lebanon in 2006. It knew that punishing the civilian population without destroying Hamas would only enable Hamas to emerge stronger.
This war was never about more than winning votes in the Feburary 10th elections and, given its continued popularity with Israelis, it might still yield dividends for Barak and Livni. It was a stupid war waged for a corrupt purpose, the sort of war that virtually never succeeds.
Israel's use of collective punishment against the Gaza Palestinians has been myopic. To believe that it could somehow counter militants firing a few feeble rockets into nearly Israeli communities by depriving the civilian population of food, medicines and other necessaries of life was just plain dumb. To cap that off with three weeks of airstrikes and artillery barrages, heavy firepower, area-weaponry that had no application in densely populated, urban settings, was to take collective punishment to a new level of barbarity.
Israel will not be forgiven for the hundreds of civilians, especially the hundreds of children, it slaughtered. It has handed the Gaza militants and Islamists in every corner of the Muslim world a brand new reason to hate Israel and seek revenge.
It may be too much to expect an actual ceasefire while Israeli forces remain in occupation of the Gaza Strip. There are just too many people now willing to put a round in any Israeli soldier's back to prevent the sort of incidents that will almost surely lead to a resumption of Israeli attacks.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Where Were The Protesters When The Missiles Were Hitting Israel?
The question is asked in today's Jerusalem Post. Oh where indeed were the protesters when those Hamas Qasssam rockets killed seven Israelis over the last two years?
We were probably a bit distracted by the endless supply of vastly worse carnage in so many other ugly corners of the globe.
What does seven deaths really amount to? A small fraction of a wedding party bombed into oblivion in one instant in Afghanistan? A relatively minor market bombing in Iraq? Don't even get into Darfur or the Congo where the dead are tallied from six figures up to nine.
We were probably a bit distracted by the endless supply of vastly worse carnage in so many other ugly corners of the globe.
What does seven deaths really amount to? A small fraction of a wedding party bombed into oblivion in one instant in Afghanistan? A relatively minor market bombing in Iraq? Don't even get into Darfur or the Congo where the dead are tallied from six figures up to nine.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Know Your Limit
I've caught a lot of flak from libloggers for criticizing Israel for using aerial bombardment on densely populated urban areas.
The pro-Israel group invariably says that Israel is acting in self-defence and that's the end to it.
I've gone to some length to explain the blast and shrapnel effects of the modern bombs employed by the Israeli Air Force. Apparently the pro-Israel voices aren't really interested in such picky little details.
Their standard retort is that Israel drops leaflets warning residents that their area is in for a plastering. This seems to presume that the innocents need merely step outside to some waiting helicopter that will whisk they away to safety. It doesn't work that way.
America dropped leaflets on Hiroshima and Nagasaki but the civilian population didn't leave just as they never leave on such warnings. Generally they have no place to go, no way to get there. Please, please, please you bright lights, show me one instance where a civilian populace was able to heed such warnings. If you do find one, I'll bet their circumstances were vastly better than those of the average Palestinian.
No, once you're an innocent civilian trapped in a place like Gaza or Srebrenica, you're going to get whatever is rained down on you. Of course you might take refuge in a school, one the United Nations has clearly identified to Israeli forces - or not.
But, those who support this carnage never explain why these aerial weapons are appropriate for use in these conditions. What makes them appropriate to use in densely populated civilian neighbourhoods? I realize it's lovely not to have to risk anyone shooting back and that, like Ban deodorant, they "take the worry out of being close," but surely there must be more than that.
And then do tell me just what sort of aerial ordinance you wouldn't condone being dropped on Palestinians? Unfortunately you don't have to go far up the chain before you reach the end of the line, the nukes. Would they be okay - if Israel dropped enough leaflets? Obviously you're going to say "no" so that means you find the line somewhere between nukes and 2000 pounders. Tell me where you draw the line.
And, please, don't give me any nonsense about how Israel does everything it can to avoid civilian casualties. That entire argument was put to rest in 2006 when they murdered Canadian Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener in his unarmed, observation post. It was conclusively refuted when Israel, in the final hours of hostilities, fired an estimated four million plus cluster munitions into Lebanon. It was forfeit when Israel refused to give UN deminers charts of where those cluster bombs were to be found. That whole caring for civilians argument is complete bullshit and I'm not going to put up with it.
But getting back to the main point, tell me where you draw the line as to what weaponry Israel can use in densely populated districts in Gaza.
The pro-Israel group invariably says that Israel is acting in self-defence and that's the end to it.
I've gone to some length to explain the blast and shrapnel effects of the modern bombs employed by the Israeli Air Force. Apparently the pro-Israel voices aren't really interested in such picky little details.
Their standard retort is that Israel drops leaflets warning residents that their area is in for a plastering. This seems to presume that the innocents need merely step outside to some waiting helicopter that will whisk they away to safety. It doesn't work that way.
America dropped leaflets on Hiroshima and Nagasaki but the civilian population didn't leave just as they never leave on such warnings. Generally they have no place to go, no way to get there. Please, please, please you bright lights, show me one instance where a civilian populace was able to heed such warnings. If you do find one, I'll bet their circumstances were vastly better than those of the average Palestinian.
No, once you're an innocent civilian trapped in a place like Gaza or Srebrenica, you're going to get whatever is rained down on you. Of course you might take refuge in a school, one the United Nations has clearly identified to Israeli forces - or not.
But, those who support this carnage never explain why these aerial weapons are appropriate for use in these conditions. What makes them appropriate to use in densely populated civilian neighbourhoods? I realize it's lovely not to have to risk anyone shooting back and that, like Ban deodorant, they "take the worry out of being close," but surely there must be more than that.
And then do tell me just what sort of aerial ordinance you wouldn't condone being dropped on Palestinians? Unfortunately you don't have to go far up the chain before you reach the end of the line, the nukes. Would they be okay - if Israel dropped enough leaflets? Obviously you're going to say "no" so that means you find the line somewhere between nukes and 2000 pounders. Tell me where you draw the line.
And, please, don't give me any nonsense about how Israel does everything it can to avoid civilian casualties. That entire argument was put to rest in 2006 when they murdered Canadian Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener in his unarmed, observation post. It was conclusively refuted when Israel, in the final hours of hostilities, fired an estimated four million plus cluster munitions into Lebanon. It was forfeit when Israel refused to give UN deminers charts of where those cluster bombs were to be found. That whole caring for civilians argument is complete bullshit and I'm not going to put up with it.
But getting back to the main point, tell me where you draw the line as to what weaponry Israel can use in densely populated districts in Gaza.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
What Kind of Sick Bastard Would Say Something Like That?
Israel has inflicted a massively disproportional attack on Gaza. Apologists for the Israeli government and military are quick to proclaim that Israel doesn't target innocent Gazans, that it doesn't intentionally kill innocents.
Bullshit. Utterly vile, rotten bullshit.
As I've written so often, we're all deemed to intend the logical and foreseeable consequences of our acts. If I knowingly ignore a red light and drive my car into a busy intersection, hitting another car and injuring or killing the occupants of that car is both a logical and foreseeable consequence of my act. I don't get to say "whoopsie, accident!"
When you use weapons like these bombs, you unquestionably intend to cause the deaths and injuries sustained by everyone unfortunate enough to be within the lethality range of these weapons. You may wish that didn't include innocent women and children but that's no excuse. You didn't let your wishes override your decision to kill them anyway.
Some times the bluntest examples are best. Did the United States intend the deaths of every man, woman and child within the lethal range of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Of course they did. At least they had the courage not to try to hide behind excuses about unintended, collateral damage.
Let's be honest here. These bombing strikes weren't military operations, they were assassinations. The bombs that were used, weapons that cause entire wings of university buildings to collapse or that make entire houses disintegrate and destroy every surrounding house for good measure, are anything but surgical.
Our military uses these bombs when our soldiers are in dire straits, under attack. What Israeli soldiers were under attack from the police stations that were bombed or from the homes of Hamas leaders? You might as well ask yourself how many Israeli soldiers suffered so much as a hangnail during this bombing campaign? There was no military necessity to use area bombing as a means of assassination.
Aerial bombardment is sanitized war, bordering on cowardly. How many jets have we lost in Afghanistan, how many has Israel lost over Gaza. These poor sods don't even have anything that can pass for air defences. They're helpless to fight back and that makes the use of bombing campaigns so attractive to pols wishing for a "bloodless" war (at least on their side).
What we do in Afghanistan is bad enough and it certainly operates as an effective recruiting tool for the insurgency. But at least we do it when we're in combat and our troops need it for their safety. At least we have some thin excuse to claim we don't intend the suffering of innocents we inflict.
Bullshit. Utterly vile, rotten bullshit.
As I've written so often, we're all deemed to intend the logical and foreseeable consequences of our acts. If I knowingly ignore a red light and drive my car into a busy intersection, hitting another car and injuring or killing the occupants of that car is both a logical and foreseeable consequence of my act. I don't get to say "whoopsie, accident!"
When you use weapons like these bombs, you unquestionably intend to cause the deaths and injuries sustained by everyone unfortunate enough to be within the lethality range of these weapons. You may wish that didn't include innocent women and children but that's no excuse. You didn't let your wishes override your decision to kill them anyway.
Some times the bluntest examples are best. Did the United States intend the deaths of every man, woman and child within the lethal range of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Of course they did. At least they had the courage not to try to hide behind excuses about unintended, collateral damage.
Let's be honest here. These bombing strikes weren't military operations, they were assassinations. The bombs that were used, weapons that cause entire wings of university buildings to collapse or that make entire houses disintegrate and destroy every surrounding house for good measure, are anything but surgical.
Our military uses these bombs when our soldiers are in dire straits, under attack. What Israeli soldiers were under attack from the police stations that were bombed or from the homes of Hamas leaders? You might as well ask yourself how many Israeli soldiers suffered so much as a hangnail during this bombing campaign? There was no military necessity to use area bombing as a means of assassination.
Aerial bombardment is sanitized war, bordering on cowardly. How many jets have we lost in Afghanistan, how many has Israel lost over Gaza. These poor sods don't even have anything that can pass for air defences. They're helpless to fight back and that makes the use of bombing campaigns so attractive to pols wishing for a "bloodless" war (at least on their side).
What we do in Afghanistan is bad enough and it certainly operates as an effective recruiting tool for the insurgency. But at least we do it when we're in combat and our troops need it for their safety. At least we have some thin excuse to claim we don't intend the suffering of innocents we inflict.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
I Support Israel
Yes, I do. I support Israel's right to exist.
I also support the Palestinian people's right to live free of the oppression and butchery inflicted on them by Israel.
Feeble rocket attacks that claim seven lives over the past two years do not, I repeat do not, endanger Israel's right to exist. There has been no existential threat against which Israel needed to defend itself.
These rocket attacks by a handful of militants do not remotely justify a weeklong aerial bombardment of populated neighbourhoods in Gaza. That crosses a line into barbarism. It also ensures that Hamas will have plenty of fresh supporters and volunteers. It's the sort of rank stupidity that has been a hallmark of the Olmert administration.
Israel has today sent columns of soldiers into Gaza for the stated purpose of seizing sites from which rockets have been launched. If they had this capability they ought to have done that a week ago instead of resorting to several hundred bombing sorties.
Supporting Israel's right to exist does not mean condoning that nation firing cluster munitions into populated areas in Lebanon or resorting to relentless air bombardment of populated areas in Gaza. Supporting Israel's right to exist cannot be construed as a blank cheque for its brutal excesses. Supporting Israel's right to exist does not mean that Israel should not be rebuked for this unjustified, wanton violence against Palestinian civilians simply because someone from Hamas lives in their neighbourhood.
I support Israel's right to exist and I also support the international community imposing a just peace on Israel and the Palestinian people because both sides have now forfeited their right to feign any willingness to negotiate a peaceful and equitable solution.
I also support the Palestinian people's right to live free of the oppression and butchery inflicted on them by Israel.
Feeble rocket attacks that claim seven lives over the past two years do not, I repeat do not, endanger Israel's right to exist. There has been no existential threat against which Israel needed to defend itself.
These rocket attacks by a handful of militants do not remotely justify a weeklong aerial bombardment of populated neighbourhoods in Gaza. That crosses a line into barbarism. It also ensures that Hamas will have plenty of fresh supporters and volunteers. It's the sort of rank stupidity that has been a hallmark of the Olmert administration.
Israel has today sent columns of soldiers into Gaza for the stated purpose of seizing sites from which rockets have been launched. If they had this capability they ought to have done that a week ago instead of resorting to several hundred bombing sorties.
Supporting Israel's right to exist does not mean condoning that nation firing cluster munitions into populated areas in Lebanon or resorting to relentless air bombardment of populated areas in Gaza. Supporting Israel's right to exist cannot be construed as a blank cheque for its brutal excesses. Supporting Israel's right to exist does not mean that Israel should not be rebuked for this unjustified, wanton violence against Palestinian civilians simply because someone from Hamas lives in their neighbourhood.
I support Israel's right to exist and I also support the international community imposing a just peace on Israel and the Palestinian people because both sides have now forfeited their right to feign any willingness to negotiate a peaceful and equitable solution.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
Images of Gaza
An Israeli woman's apartment in Sderot damaged by a Hamas rocket 
A Gaza apartment building hit by Israeli bombs
The former home of Hamas leader Nazar Rayyan. Two wives and four kids were in this when the Israelis struck.
What used to be the Gaza legislature.
What now passes for what once was a Gaza apartment.
These pictures all came from today's New York Times. The first photo shows Hamas' handiwork. The balance show Israel's proportionate response.
The Gaza Pogroms
It's not just settlers in Hebron who can bring pogroms to the Palestinians. Ambitious Israeli politicians can do the very same thing.
Seumas Milne has written a brilliant piece in The Guardian. Here are a few excerpts which should get your mind, and conscience, into gear:
Israel's decision to launch its devastating attack on Gaza on a Saturday was a "stroke of brilliance", the country's biggest selling paper Yediot Aharonot crowed: "the element of surprise increased the number of people who were killed". The daily Ma'ariv agreed: "We left them in shock and awe".
...As well as scores of ordinary police officers incinerated in a passing-out parade, at least 56 civilians were said by the UN to have died as Israel used American-supplied F-16s and Apache helicopters to attack a string of civilian targets it linked to Hamas, including a mosque, private homes and the Islamic university. Hamas military and political facilities were mostly deserted, while police stations in residential areas were teeming as they were pulverised.
As Israeli journalist Amos Harel wrote in Ha'aretz at the weekend, "little or no weight was apparently devoted to the question of harming innocent civilians", as in US operations in Iraq. Among those killed in the first wave of strikes were eight teenage students waiting for a bus and four girls from the same family in Jabaliya, aged one to 12 years old.
...Hamas and the Palestinians of Gaza are held responsible for what has been visited upon them. How could any government not respond with overwhelming force to the constant firing of rockets into its territory, the Israelis demand, echoed by western governments and media.
But that is to turn reality on its head. Like the West Bank, the Gaza Strip has been - and continues to be - illegally occupied by Israel since 1967. Despite the withdrawal of troops and settlements three years ago, Israel maintains complete control of the territory by sea, air and land. And since Hamas won the Palestinian elections in 2006, Israel has punished its 1.5 million people with an inhuman blockade of essential supplies, backed by the US and the European Union.
Like any occupied people, the Palestinians have the right to resist, whether they choose to exercise it or not. But there is no right of defence for an illegal occupation - there is an obligation to withdraw comprehensively. During the last seven years, 14 Israelis have been killed by mostly homemade rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, while more than 5,000 Palestinians were killed by Israel with some of the most advanced US-supplied armaments in the world. And while no rockets are fired from the West Bank, 45 Palestinians have died there at Israel's hands this year alone. The issue is of course not just the vast disparity in weapons and power, but that one side is the occupier, the other the occupied.
Hamas is likewise blamed for last month's breakdown of the six-month tahdi'a, or lull. But, in a weary reprise of past ceasefires, it was in fact sunk by Israel's assassination of six Hamas fighters in Gaza on 5 November and its refusal to lift its siege of the embattled territory as expected under an Egyptian-brokered deal. The truth is that Israel and its western sponsors have set their face against an accommodation with the Palestinians' democratic choice and have instead thrown their political weight, cash and arms behind a sustained attempt to overthrow it.
The complete failure of that approach has brought us to this week's horrific pass. Israeli leaders believe they can bomb Hamas into submission with a "decisive blow" that will establish a "new security environment" - and boost their electoral fortunes in the process before Barack Obama comes to office.
But as with Israel's disastrous assault on Lebanon two years ago - or its earlier siege of Yasser Arafat's PLO in Beirut in 1982 - it is a strategy that cannot succeed. Even more than Hezbollah, Hamas's appeal among Palestinians and beyond doesn't derive from its puny infrastructure, or even its Islamist ideology, but its spirit of resistance to decades of injustice. So long as it remains standing in the face of this onslaught, its influence will only be strengthened.
Meanwhile, the US and Israeli-backed Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has been further diminished by being seen as having colluded in the Israeli assault on his own people - as has the already rock-bottom credibility of the Egyptian regime.
There's nothing even remotely anti-Semitic in denouncing this Israeli/Western butchery. It's a damned disgrace. Worse, as Milne points out, it's a brutal crime and those of us whose governments endorse it, including Canada, are complicit.
Olmert, Barak and Livni have gone too far this time. Whatever benefit of the doubt they might have once claimed, no matter how feeble, is lost to them now. Israel has allowed itself to become a pariah and we cannot ignore its excesses any longer. Israel must be stopped.
Seumas Milne has written a brilliant piece in The Guardian. Here are a few excerpts which should get your mind, and conscience, into gear:
Israel's decision to launch its devastating attack on Gaza on a Saturday was a "stroke of brilliance", the country's biggest selling paper Yediot Aharonot crowed: "the element of surprise increased the number of people who were killed". The daily Ma'ariv agreed: "We left them in shock and awe".
...As well as scores of ordinary police officers incinerated in a passing-out parade, at least 56 civilians were said by the UN to have died as Israel used American-supplied F-16s and Apache helicopters to attack a string of civilian targets it linked to Hamas, including a mosque, private homes and the Islamic university. Hamas military and political facilities were mostly deserted, while police stations in residential areas were teeming as they were pulverised.
As Israeli journalist Amos Harel wrote in Ha'aretz at the weekend, "little or no weight was apparently devoted to the question of harming innocent civilians", as in US operations in Iraq. Among those killed in the first wave of strikes were eight teenage students waiting for a bus and four girls from the same family in Jabaliya, aged one to 12 years old.
...Hamas and the Palestinians of Gaza are held responsible for what has been visited upon them. How could any government not respond with overwhelming force to the constant firing of rockets into its territory, the Israelis demand, echoed by western governments and media.
But that is to turn reality on its head. Like the West Bank, the Gaza Strip has been - and continues to be - illegally occupied by Israel since 1967. Despite the withdrawal of troops and settlements three years ago, Israel maintains complete control of the territory by sea, air and land. And since Hamas won the Palestinian elections in 2006, Israel has punished its 1.5 million people with an inhuman blockade of essential supplies, backed by the US and the European Union.
Like any occupied people, the Palestinians have the right to resist, whether they choose to exercise it or not. But there is no right of defence for an illegal occupation - there is an obligation to withdraw comprehensively. During the last seven years, 14 Israelis have been killed by mostly homemade rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, while more than 5,000 Palestinians were killed by Israel with some of the most advanced US-supplied armaments in the world. And while no rockets are fired from the West Bank, 45 Palestinians have died there at Israel's hands this year alone. The issue is of course not just the vast disparity in weapons and power, but that one side is the occupier, the other the occupied.
Hamas is likewise blamed for last month's breakdown of the six-month tahdi'a, or lull. But, in a weary reprise of past ceasefires, it was in fact sunk by Israel's assassination of six Hamas fighters in Gaza on 5 November and its refusal to lift its siege of the embattled territory as expected under an Egyptian-brokered deal. The truth is that Israel and its western sponsors have set their face against an accommodation with the Palestinians' democratic choice and have instead thrown their political weight, cash and arms behind a sustained attempt to overthrow it.
The complete failure of that approach has brought us to this week's horrific pass. Israeli leaders believe they can bomb Hamas into submission with a "decisive blow" that will establish a "new security environment" - and boost their electoral fortunes in the process before Barack Obama comes to office.
But as with Israel's disastrous assault on Lebanon two years ago - or its earlier siege of Yasser Arafat's PLO in Beirut in 1982 - it is a strategy that cannot succeed. Even more than Hezbollah, Hamas's appeal among Palestinians and beyond doesn't derive from its puny infrastructure, or even its Islamist ideology, but its spirit of resistance to decades of injustice. So long as it remains standing in the face of this onslaught, its influence will only be strengthened.
Meanwhile, the US and Israeli-backed Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has been further diminished by being seen as having colluded in the Israeli assault on his own people - as has the already rock-bottom credibility of the Egyptian regime.
There's nothing even remotely anti-Semitic in denouncing this Israeli/Western butchery. It's a damned disgrace. Worse, as Milne points out, it's a brutal crime and those of us whose governments endorse it, including Canada, are complicit.
Olmert, Barak and Livni have gone too far this time. Whatever benefit of the doubt they might have once claimed, no matter how feeble, is lost to them now. Israel has allowed itself to become a pariah and we cannot ignore its excesses any longer. Israel must be stopped.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Is Gaza Just a Football for Israeli Electoral Politics?
The Washington Post is offering the first plausible rationale for the Israeli air assault on Gaza - the upcoming elections to pick a new Israeli leader.
The Israeli campaign is being led not by a single commander in chief, but by a triumvirate of politicians. The three are known to mistrust one another deeply, but all have staked their futures on a highly risky military operation aimed at breaking Hamas's capacity to fire rockets at Israel.
With national elections just over a month away, two of the three are vying for Israel's top job. Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni both have led high-profile but fruitless efforts to achieve peace with the Palestinians; now, each is trying to win favor with Israelis by going to war.
All campaigning for the Feb. 10 vote has been temporarily suspended. But Barak, a former prime minister and ex-army commando, is expected to make the case that he can defend the country in times of crisis. Livni, meanwhile, is seeking to overcome concerns that as a woman who never served in the armed forces, she is not tough enough to lead Israel.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will not be a candidate in the elections and may be indicted on corruption charges. But the Gaza offensive could be his last chance to rehabilitate a legacy badly tarnished by Israel's failure to achieve a clear-cut victory against the Lebanese Hezbollah movement in 2006.
Can there be a more crass reason for the aerial bombardment of Gaza? It's no wonder there doesn't appear to be any meaningful military objective to warrant the inevitable fallout because this isn't about Hamas or Gaza or the Palestinians who are getting slaughtered. It's about the political aspirations of two prominent Israelis and erasing the stigma of failure that clings to the outgoing leader.
Now it all makes sense. My god, it's come to this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/30/AR2008123003252.html?hpid=topnews
The Israeli campaign is being led not by a single commander in chief, but by a triumvirate of politicians. The three are known to mistrust one another deeply, but all have staked their futures on a highly risky military operation aimed at breaking Hamas's capacity to fire rockets at Israel.
With national elections just over a month away, two of the three are vying for Israel's top job. Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni both have led high-profile but fruitless efforts to achieve peace with the Palestinians; now, each is trying to win favor with Israelis by going to war.
All campaigning for the Feb. 10 vote has been temporarily suspended. But Barak, a former prime minister and ex-army commando, is expected to make the case that he can defend the country in times of crisis. Livni, meanwhile, is seeking to overcome concerns that as a woman who never served in the armed forces, she is not tough enough to lead Israel.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will not be a candidate in the elections and may be indicted on corruption charges. But the Gaza offensive could be his last chance to rehabilitate a legacy badly tarnished by Israel's failure to achieve a clear-cut victory against the Lebanese Hezbollah movement in 2006.
Can there be a more crass reason for the aerial bombardment of Gaza? It's no wonder there doesn't appear to be any meaningful military objective to warrant the inevitable fallout because this isn't about Hamas or Gaza or the Palestinians who are getting slaughtered. It's about the political aspirations of two prominent Israelis and erasing the stigma of failure that clings to the outgoing leader.
Now it all makes sense. My god, it's come to this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/30/AR2008123003252.html?hpid=topnews
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Stopping the Gaza Slaughter
Israel's aerial bombardment of Gaza will end the minute the White House tells them to call it off. Shrub may not have any credibility left in the rest of the planet, but he still calls the shots with the Israelis. Unfortunately as we've seen in his own failed wars and in Israel's botched war in Lebanon, there's no end to Bush's appetite for bloodshed. Killing civilians, en masse, isn't something that's going to cost George any sleep.
It's interesting how the rocket barrages by Palestinian militants are unquestionably taken to be the work of Hamas, the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people. Everybody makes the claim, takes it for granted, and yet I, for one, haven't seen anything directly linking the militants and the Palestinian government.
It's a guilt by association thing that surely ought to cut both ways at the very least. That means Israel is culpable in every atrocity committed by its own extremists, its settlers, in stealing Palestinian land, in destroying their olive groves, in stoning and shooting their innocents. Of course that would mean we'd have to designate Israel as a terrorist regime, something that's unthinkable of a state whose leaders acknowledge a "pogrom" against the Palestinians and yet are no better than Hamas at eradicating their own, in-house extremists, their Jewish fundamentalists who are just as bloodthirsty as their counterpart Islamist fundamentalists.
We have seen what Christian fundamentalism (the radical Rapture reprobates) has done to the United States. We've seen what Islamic fundamentalism (the radical Wahabism reprobates) has done to the Middle East. We've seen what Jewish fundamentalism (the radical Zionism reprobates) has done to the Occupied Territories. There's no point coddling these people because, when it comes to extremism, there's neither floor nor ceiling. None of them put their nations or their peoples ahead of their religious zealotry. They're not interested in freedom of religion because they know other religions are untrue or worse. They're all one gaggle of freebooter Crusaders ironically huddled around the same book.
The international community created Israel. We have seen for far too long that Israel is incapable of managing its own affairs, both unable and unwilling to find peace with its neighbours. No nation, no group in that region has clean hands. It's time to impose peace on Israel and on the Palestinians, the Lebanese and the Syrians. Israel isn't interested in a one-state solution so a two-state solution it must be.
Back to the 1967 borders. A buffer zone established entirely within Israeli territory and occupied by international peacekeepers armed to the teeth with the latest weaponry and technology. Peacekeepers with a mandate to shoot to kill intruders from either side whether they come by land, by air or by sea. It might take two, perhaps even three generations for the ethnic and religious venom to die off but we're at a point where it's either quarantine both sides or allow this nightmare to worsen, perhaps irretrievably.
This madness must end.
It's interesting how the rocket barrages by Palestinian militants are unquestionably taken to be the work of Hamas, the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people. Everybody makes the claim, takes it for granted, and yet I, for one, haven't seen anything directly linking the militants and the Palestinian government.
It's a guilt by association thing that surely ought to cut both ways at the very least. That means Israel is culpable in every atrocity committed by its own extremists, its settlers, in stealing Palestinian land, in destroying their olive groves, in stoning and shooting their innocents. Of course that would mean we'd have to designate Israel as a terrorist regime, something that's unthinkable of a state whose leaders acknowledge a "pogrom" against the Palestinians and yet are no better than Hamas at eradicating their own, in-house extremists, their Jewish fundamentalists who are just as bloodthirsty as their counterpart Islamist fundamentalists.
We have seen what Christian fundamentalism (the radical Rapture reprobates) has done to the United States. We've seen what Islamic fundamentalism (the radical Wahabism reprobates) has done to the Middle East. We've seen what Jewish fundamentalism (the radical Zionism reprobates) has done to the Occupied Territories. There's no point coddling these people because, when it comes to extremism, there's neither floor nor ceiling. None of them put their nations or their peoples ahead of their religious zealotry. They're not interested in freedom of religion because they know other religions are untrue or worse. They're all one gaggle of freebooter Crusaders ironically huddled around the same book.
The international community created Israel. We have seen for far too long that Israel is incapable of managing its own affairs, both unable and unwilling to find peace with its neighbours. No nation, no group in that region has clean hands. It's time to impose peace on Israel and on the Palestinians, the Lebanese and the Syrians. Israel isn't interested in a one-state solution so a two-state solution it must be.
Back to the 1967 borders. A buffer zone established entirely within Israeli territory and occupied by international peacekeepers armed to the teeth with the latest weaponry and technology. Peacekeepers with a mandate to shoot to kill intruders from either side whether they come by land, by air or by sea. It might take two, perhaps even three generations for the ethnic and religious venom to die off but we're at a point where it's either quarantine both sides or allow this nightmare to worsen, perhaps irretrievably.
This madness must end.
Monday, December 29, 2008
What's Wrong With Israel Defending Itself?
In a word, "nothing."
There's nothing wrong with Israel defending itself against rocket attacks launched from Gaza. Nothing. I have the right to defend myself, you have the right to defend yourself, Israel has the right to defend its people.
But.
Does Israel's right to defend itself against terrorist rocket attacks from Gaza give it the right to respond with terrorist aerial bombardment of the Palestinians?
No.
Most of the aerial bombs Israeli jets are dropping into the overcrowded neighbourhoods in Gaza are of the type depicted above. They're American designed, if not American built, and come in 500, 1,000 and 2,000 pound denominations. They're high-explosive bombs that generate not just shrapnel but incredibly lethal blast:
"Blast is caused by tremendous dynamic overpressures generated by the detonation of a high explosive. Complete (high order) detonation of high-explosives can generate pressures up to 700 tons per square inch and temperatures in the range of 3,000 to 4,500º prior to bomb case fragmentation. It is essential that the bomb casing remain intact long enough after the detonation sequence begins to contain the hot gases and achieve a high order explosion. A consideration when striking hardened targets is that deformation of the weapon casing or fuze may cause the warhead to dud or experience a low order detonation. Approximately half of the total energy generated will be used in swelling the bomb casing to 1.5 times its normal size prior to fragmenting and then imparting velocity to those fragments. The remainder of this energy is expended in compression of the air surrounding the bomb and is responsible for the blast effect. This effect is most desirable for attacking walls, collapsing roofs, and destroying or damaging machinery."
"...For purposes of the present discussion, however, let us concede that the bombs and missiles strike with all the accuracy claimed for them. What happens then? As described recently by Newhouse reporter David Wood, the 2000-pound JDAM “releases a crushing shock wave and showers jagged, white-hot metal fragments at supersonic speed, shattering concrete, shredding flesh, crushing cells, rupturing lungs, bursting sinus cavities and ripping away limbs in a maelstrom of destruction.” Hardly anyone survives within 120 meters of the blast, where pressures of several thousand pounds per square inch and 8,500-degree heat simply obliterate everything, human and material. Metal fragments are spewed nearly three-quarters of a mile, and bigger pieces may fly twice that far; no one within 365 meters can expect to remain unharmed, and persons up to 1000 meters or farther away from the point of impact may be harmed by flying fragments. Of course, the explosions also start fires over a wide area, which themselves may do vast damage, even to structures and people unharmed by the initial blast."
http://www.mafhoum.com/press5/138C32.htm
Aerial bombardment of residential areas is not a legitimate means of self-defence. Targeting a Hamas police headquarters in a built-up district is quite different than bombing a known site used by rocket launchers. Furthermore, police are considered civilians under the laws of war. But this doesn't hang on fine points about the culpability of any particular agent of the elected Hamas government. It's about the deliberate killing of innocents to avenge the deliberate killing of innocents.
As I've written many times before, we are all deemed to intend the logical consequences of our acts. That applies to you, to me and to governments. The logical consequences of aerial bombardment of residential areas include the deaths and maiming of innocents. This is terrorism.
So, it's not about whether you're pro-Palestine or pro-Israel. Even if you're pro-Israel you're backing a terrorist state. Aerial bombardment of civilian areas is rank butchery, plain and simple. It has nothing to do with self-defence and everything to do with retaliatory terrorism. The fact that Israel is our ally changes nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)