| By Nazik - Feb 28th, 2008 at 4:37 pm EST |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
You won't see this on CNN:
"A string of Israeli air raids targeted Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip on Thursday.
In the afternoon, four boys reportedly aged between eight and 15 were killed whilst playing football near the al-Salam mosque in Jabaliya. Three of them were members of the same family, according to the Palestinian news agency Maan.
The interior ministry building in Gaza City, run by Hamas, was hit on Wednesday evening. The building was empty.
Nearby buildings were caught in the blast, killing a baby and wounding at about 30 other people, Palestinian medical officials said."
The raid was in "response" to the killing of an Israeli student by a Hamas rocket on Wednesday. I use the word "response" reluctantly and with hesitation, because it has the effect of equalizing the military might of the two parties. These raids on Gaza, which have killed at least 20 Palestinians (including at least 9 civilians) are no less morally unjust than the killing of the Israeli student in Sderot, yet Israel escapes condemnation by the international community by claiming the deaths were merely collateral damage. Dead civilians are dead civilians--no matter their nationality, skin color, religion, or sex; whether they are Palestinian, Israeli, Iraqi, Sudanese, Rwandan, or American. When will we begin to treat their deaths with an equal sense of moral outrage?
!
Comments are closed for this post.
How about I come over and punch you in the face 15-50 times every single day for month on end. How many times can I punch you and knock out your teeth before you'll try to stop me?
When you Honestly can answer that question - perhaps your fucked up thinking patterns can be corrected.
Either way, Nazik I do agree and respect your comments. Obviously someone here isn't really aware of the Israeli-Palenstinian conflict in its entirety because it did not start with Hamas' killings. IT started with the Jews in that area coming and demanding land. When they refused, they were killed. So if you are speaking of a retaliation, then this is the proper one. Or, I guess you didn't hear that story.
I guess history always sounds good when you seem like the victim.
I think even the most ardent anti-Israel people would not argue that point. There are countless quotes by Arab leaders of the time that admit to it.
Here's part of the quote of the Arab League rejecting 181 "The Arab world is not in a compromising mood. It's likely, ... that your plan is rational and logical, but the fate of nations is not decided by rational logic. Nations never concede; they fight. You won't get anything by peaceful means or compromise."
If you look at 181 it partitioned Israel along Jewish population centers, the Palestinians along the Arab centers. Israel was 55%, but included the Negev.
You know you have already won the battle when individuals start off with how much of an idiot you are. Please, doesn't a college student have anything more than calling you an idiot? Let's get some good mud slinging going :-)
Nazik, I support your comments and agree. No matter how we identify, last I checked we all bleed red blood.
I imagine that if 50 or 60 years ago some government official told me to "piss off" my land because men in suits have just declared on paper that the land is to be home for the Jewish people, I'd be pretty upset, too.
Before anyone starts screaming, I DO NOT support violence by either side. Sadly, however, it seems to me the Palestenians have been left with little power and even less choice.
It begs the question, what did the world think was going to happen? Did everyone really think that it was OK to displace a culture and replace it with another because the Bible says so?
I guess they did...
HAMAS has chosen not to meet any of those criteria. HAMAS has chosen their agenda and ideals ahead of the well being of their people. HAMAS has chosen the economic siege and HAMAS has chosen violence.
HAMAS IS CALLING THE SHOTS!
Even during this week, on the day of the peaceful demonstration in Gaza, 11 missiles were fired.
Do you recall how Lebanon dealt with Palestinian violence last year in Nahr al-Bared? They used military force, and eventually emptied the camp. Should Israel try the same - empty Gaza until all that is left is militants?
Or are you suggesting they just sit their and wait to be hit?
Here goes:
"History is a myth agreed upon." Napoleon Bonaparte.
"The past isn't dead; it isn't even past." William Faulkner.
According to the site, Link, the Gaza strip is currently under Palestinian rule.
It also had to say this about the role of the U.N in 1947, and how the Arab nations reacted to GA 181
immediately:
“Partition - The United Nations Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) recommended that Palestine be divided into an Arab state and a Jewish state. The commission called for Jerusalem to be put under international administration The UN General Assembly adopted this plan on Nov. 29, 1947 as UN Resolution (GA 181), owing to support of both the US and the Soviet Union, and in particular, the personal support of US President Harry S. Truman. Many factors contributed to Truman's decision to support partition, including domestic politics and intense Zionist lobbying, no doubt.”
“The Jews accepted the UN decision, but the Arabs rejected it. The resolution divided the land into two approximately equal portions in a complicated scheme with zig-zag boarders. The intention was an economic union between the two states with open borders. At the time of partition, slightly less than half the land in all of Palestine was owned by Arabs, slightly less than half was "crown lands" belonging to the state, and about 8% was owned by Jews or the Jewish Agency. There were about 600,000 Jews in Palestine, almost all living in the areas allotted to the Jewish state or in the internationalized zone of Jerusalem, and about 1.2 million Arabs.”
“It soon became evident that the scheme could not work. Mutual antagonism would make it impossible for either community to tolerate the other. The UN was unwilling and unable to force implementation of the internationalization of Jerusalem. The Arab League, at the instigation of Haj Amin Al-Husseini, declared a war to rid Palestine of the Jews. In fact however, the Arab countries each had separate agendas. Abdullah, king of Jordan, had an informal and secret agreement with Israel, negotiated with Golda Meir, to annex the portions of Palestine allocated to the Palestinian state in the West Bank, and prevent formation of a Palestinian state. Syria wanted to annex the northern part of Palestine, including Jewish and Arab areas.”
OK, so we agree Palestine is getting the short end
:-)
1) I really hate to use this but, haven't the Jewish people waited to return to what is written to be "rightfully their's" for more than just a few generations?
2) I think both sides need to denounce violence and then stick to it, (but we both know this will not happen as it has not for 60 years. It won't happen because these are primarily tribal cultures with a deep honor, respect and regard for their respective history and bloodlines). Both parties are equally guilty, and have been since the birth of the Jewish state. Most of the recent violence occurs in the Gaza strip. Doesn't Israel want control of this area? If Israel fights to control the Gaza strip the only choice the Palenstinians have is to defend it or to walk further away.
3) NAFTA is about how to conduct "fair" business, (fair, hmmm...no, I won't go there) so that the US wins the economic game. It is between two Americans both striving for the same thing. It can not be compared with the Israel/Palestine conflict, a battle over LAND, LAW, and LINEAGE (i.e. which of the 2 (actually 4) opposing groups holds power).
OK, I take back the "laughable" comment, but I still do not understand how you can say that Hamas calls the shots. Check out the site I mentioned, I would like your opinion on it. Do you see it as fair and balanced as it says? If not, can you offer a good site for me to learn more from?
Your ball :-)
1) Recognize that your land (i.e. resources = power) was stolen from you.
2) Don't do anything about it but walk away.
3) Remember that you agreed before, even though it was forced.
Hamas "calling the shots" as you say, is laughable. You are on the internet, do some historical research on the formation of Israel; don't take my word for it. Just DON'T GO to FOX NEWS :-)
1. What happened 60 years ago is history, although you and I probably have different views of that history. Please tell me of any precedent where people who flee their lands (under duress) continue to wait to "return" for three generations? Many peoples have suffered many ways, but it should not drag from one generation to the next.
2. I never said HAMAS should walk away. But just about anyone can predict Israel's response, don't you agree? So yes, once again, it is HAMAS' choice. IMO - HAMAS' next move should be to make peace with Abbas.
3. The Palestinian government made certain agreements - that's what governments do. That doesn't mean past agreements can't be renegotiated, but they should be honored. Listen to McCain and Obama sparring over the renogation of NAFTA - there is no suggestion about honoring it, only renogiating.