Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

463
Lemuel Gulliver wrote:I'd guess some of the jew haters on this thread wouldn't come to my point of view...

Calling someone opposed to Israel's tactics a "jew hater" is ridiculous. It is a way of avoiding the content of the discussion and makes you look like an asshole. You shouldn't do it.

If there is an actual jew hater reading this thread, he is not anyone we know. I'm pretty confidant of that.
steve albini
Electrical Audio
sa at electrical dot com
Quicumque quattuor feles possidet insanus est.

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

464
AlBStern wrote:Article about the Israeli bombing of the UN post.


It was widely reported that Hezbollah was launching rockets in the vicinity of the UN observatory prior to the fatal Israeli air-strikes, but that *no* rockets were fired from the area the day the observatory was hit repeatedly by "precision" Israeli missile strikes.

As to the article above, many conservative-right advocacy groups and blogs are linking to it (as I've just discovered by googling it). The Ottawa Citizen, folks should know, is owned by CanWest Global Communications (following its sale by "Lord" Conrad Black). CanWest also bought Black's National Post, which remains Canada's most stridently right-wing daily. CanWest's publications are known for an unabashed pro-Israeli/Zionist bias, thanks to the Asper dynasty (Canwest's board of directors includes 3 Aspers; Izzy Asper, its founding patriarch, was a vitriolic Likud supporter, going so far as to coopt the local editorials, or "leaders," of all CanWest dailies for his screeds--an imperial arrogance even Lord Black never visited on the Edmonton Journal, Montreal Gazette, etc).

The journalist meanwhile, Joel Kom, is a young, ambitious (right-leaning) rung-gripper. Following Major Hess-von Kruedener's death, Kom has used one of the Major's emails to legitimate Israeli airstrikes, all the while omitting the fact that the deceased's wife has publicly stated--w/ recourse to her own conversations with her husband--that the air-strikes were "intentional."

It's not enough that an unarmed peacekeeper with 20-years service and UN experience in Cyprus, Bosnia and the Congo was murdered (and this, after 10 phone calls in the 6 hours preceding the attack pleading for his safety), but rescuers risked their lives retrieving his corpse as the area continued to be hit by Israeli air-strikes in the total absence of Hezbollah rocket launches. And then, opportunistic careerists capitalize on his death to advance total war.

Fuck's sake. You want to talk to me about "objectivity," AlBStern? There's no need to apologize for atrocities just b/c one allies w/ Israel.

AIBStern, do you think the Israeli military response in this "conflict" has been warranted or "measured," whether on strategic or moral grounds?

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

465
Andrew L. wrote: Fuck's sake. You want to talk to me about "objectivity," AlBStern? There's no need to apologize for atrocities just b/c one allies w/ Israel.


Yes Andrew, I'd hope for objectivity. There has been a serious lack of it so far in this thread. Both sides shoulder blame and need to be called out on it, repeatedly if necessary, until this whole fucking thing ends. There is no greater example of this than one side intentionally firing from civilian positions, counting on the other side being stupid enough to fire back and the other side mindlessly obliging. Fuck any argument that gives moral justification for either side on this topic. They both know the consequences of their actions.

Besides, no one was apologizing. There had been accusations that Israel had intentionally targeted the post. Israel claimed it was accidental, the result of an errant shelling of Hezbollah positions that were near the UN building. As far as I know, there had been no evidence to support their claim. The article (if true) at least gives credence to their version of events. Further, it was posted without comment or judgment.

Andrew L. wrote:AIBStern, do you think the Israeli military response in this "conflict" has been warranted or "measured," whether on strategic or moral grounds?


A response was warranted. Hezbollah needs to be dealt with. Israel couldn't stand by while a proxy army, answering to no one, amassed weapons stockpiles at their border. I can't imagine a single scenario where anyone other than Israel would have ever done anything about it.

That being said, Israel's actions have been excessive, grossly so at times. There is no justification for the scope of the destruction, both in human toll and infastructure. I neither apologize for it nor ask anyone to do so.

Incidentally, I have had the same discussion with friends who are in support of Israel's actions. To them, I'm Hezbollah's apologist, the victim of anti-semetic propoganda.
Eat me.

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

466
steve wrote:Calling someone opposed to Israel's tactics a "jew hater" is ridiculous. It is a way of avoiding the content of the discussion and makes you look like an asshole. You shouldn't do it.

If there is an actual jew hater reading this thread, he is not anyone we know. I'm pretty confidant of that.


For jew hatred, see pp. 11-12, 17-18 of this thread as a starter. There are elements there that go far beyond Israeli's flawed tactics of late and get straight to the old Worldwide Zionist Conspiracy bit.

Curious little was said in objection of those posts, yet I get labeled an asshole for calling them what they were--rank jew hatred.

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

467
AIB, I appreciate your reply and respect your right to post articles of interest. The "it was posted without comment or judgment" bit does not fly with me however. It, like the article, is weak. And I'll bet you know it.

I have heard that Hezbollah is the 2nd-largest employer in Lebanon. And I've read that the multiple generations--numbering in the hundreds of thousands--of displaced Palestinians in southern Lebanon benefit from and are active in Hezbollah's non-military operations (schools, hospitals, etc). Now, regardless of how pernicious an instrument Hezbollah may be, its value, its practical necessity for thousands of families, cannot be bombed and slaughtered out of reality. The same might have been said of the National Liberation Front of Vietnam, whose politics were also dodgy to say the least.

I have yet to come across one primary journalistic source that provides verification for the common-sense belief that Hezbollah guerillas "hide behind civilians." By primary source, I mean journalists on the ground in Lebanon, like this guy, not journalists who convey the "truths" of the military and the state. I would honestly like to find such a source.

I'm not saying that Hezbollah doesn't launch rockets from populated civilian areas, mind you; but, if it does, it is likely among civilians who, for good or ill, are active in the non-military operations of Hezbollah. As I understand it, it's pretty hard to drop a bomb anywhere near a family home or a school in S. Lebanon, without hitting (non-military elements of) Hezbollah. I'm a dipshit in Canada, and I grasp this. I'll bet the IDF does too. And, as such, they are happy to lay waste to this population. This is the difficulty with Hezbollah. You cannot extract it from its social-material base. As I understand it, it is inextricable from the life of southern Lebanon. Foreign aid or no, it is of and for the people. This is why the Hezbollah-is-an-Iranian-proxy-militia line does so much ideological work every time it's repeated. It obscures social reality.

But the IDF can't beat social reality with all the bombs in the world. So the question becomes how does an organization like Hezbollah thrive? It's not b/c Iran and Syria finance it, it's because it fulfills a need. This need (food, medicine, education, community, pride) is not the result of some natural deficit in the Shiite population waiting to be exploited. It's the result of the dispossession of a people. Refugees.

And the history of the state of Israel, and the Occupied Territories, and the Jewish settlements and the well-being of the Palestinian people is inextricable from all that.

This has always been much more difficult for Israel and the west to face than mass carnage and total war. Hence, all the sensitive liberal handwringing over this "tragedy," as if it were beyond reason and understanding, and all the facile bullshit with "freedom" and "democracy," as if our leaders would benefit if the people of the middle east had either. When someone like Lemuel asks what colonialism and history have to do with this war in Lebanon in 2006 on one hand, and self-assuredly claims that some ill-defined "we" is more civilized than they/Hezbollah on the other, I am painfully aware of how blind-fucked stupid "we" are (don't take it personally, if you read this, Lemuel).

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

468
Andrew L. wrote: It's not b/c Iran and Syria finance it, it's because it fulfills a need. This need (food, medicine, education, community, pride) is not the result of some natural deficit in the Shiite population waiting to be exploited. It's the result of the dispossession of a people. Refugees.


It's amazing how far the "treat others how you want to be treated" can go, however it never ceases to amaze me that governments hardly ever grasp this. I think one of the prime examples would be post-WWII Europe and the divided war spoils between the US and the USSR. The soviets had a hegemonic approach with their sphere of influence as opposed to USA's more hands off approach. We all know which side had it better. Our invasions of Iraq, Vietnam, and similar places where communites are more self reliant and engrained with socio-political movements (or generally a decentralized control) are much harder then invasions of more tyrannical governments, like with yugoslavia and afghanistan. The best way to win over places like lebanon, iraq and other places is to win the hearts of the people so they want to change. Maybe if we trucked in food, medical supplies, and teachers instead of m16 rounds we could have been out of iraq with some sort of self sufficient government by now. I have thought about this a lot recently- alternative tactics to war. I mean, so far we have spent roughly 11 grand for every person in iraq over the past three years. For a country whose citizens make an average income of 800 dollars a year that's a considerable amount of cash- almost 4 times your annual income is spent indirectly on you. If a country came in and gave me 4 times the amount I am making now (that is per person, imagine a family of 5) with the only requirement being that my I help my country become more advanced with a self sufficient government and protect our borders, you bet I would, I would do it for half as much.

Instead, the government chooses the only "logical" method they know- a hegemonic sphere of influence by military occupation, with little or no benefit to the iraqis. But I guess, as humans, we would rather spend 11 grand on a precision bomb then a person, mainly due to our destructive pyromaniac personalities, rather then using our ability as man to think outside the box.

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

469
Let me spell out what I thought would be clear.

Israel as a geographical expression has been fluid even since 1948. I don't have the time to find links to relevant maps, but I'm sure anyone who follows this stuff has a sense of its shifting borders. Whatever will one day happen to Gaza or the West Bank or Golan Heights there are still large numbers of Arabs in areas that less contentiously belong to Israel -- Galilee, for example. Point number one: Israelis and Arabs will always need to deal with each other within Israel.

The Jewish migration to Israel that started in the 1880s and picked up speed after WWII is not quite colonialism along typical European lines, for reasons that will I assume be obvious to anyone who has made it to page 24 of this thread. But mix this migration with the activities of the more territorially ambitious settlers and, at times, the government itself and things get more complicated. We should view Israel's past and plight with not so much those other products of late nineteenth-century nationalism in mind, modern Germany and Italy being the most notable two, but instead with a consideration of colonial ventures. Does Israel's situation bear any meaningful resemblance to that which allowed a colonial "triumph" like Britain's in North America (column one)? No. Does it bear resemblance to a colonial "failure" like Britain's in South Asia (column two)? No. I think -- point number two -- that Israel's relationship to the Arabs both within and surrounding the country is sort of similar to that between whites and blacks in South Africa (column three): two major groups of people living in the same area are, neither of them, going anywhere. Given that, what happened in S. Africa in the 1990s is striking in world history. White colonizers, who after all made some positive contributions to the area, didn't pack their bags and go home (at this point, after generations, they of course didn't any longer have a European home to go to); they also didn't eradicate the people who had been there for longer (though of course earlier on they had tried); they helped set in motion processes by which they risked losing power, and they in fact did lose much political power to the ANC, but the country is now, in a meaningful way, on the road to being something better than what it once was. Israeli Jews don't neatly correspond to whites in SA anymore than Arabs do to blacks. But I take it you'll take my point that Israel would do well to be mindful of an episode in the history of colonialism that had the closest thing imaginable to a happy ending for both sides. One day it will have to either let go of its occupied territories or allow the people living there to meaningfully be part of political and economic life.

The Arabs will have to do their part too -- Yasser Arafat was certainly no Nelson Mandela.

I've labored the comparison to the point that it now sounds ridiculous. It isn't worth pursuing further.

"So, I guess what I'm saying is I don't fully understand how Israel's colonial roots come into play with the last few weeks' fighting, because they're their now and have been for 60 years. I see no imperialistic ambition on Israel's part. How do these roots come into play?"


Not to be pedantic, but you're confusing colonialism and imperialism here. Israel is not an empire and doesn't have plans to be. (While I'm risking being pedantic let me also point out that the League of Nations didn't exist in 1948 but had been replaced by the nearly as ineffectual UN.) But in any case your question is how do "Israel's colonial roots come into play with the last few weeks' fighting"?

How do they not?

The various wars Israel has been fighting with the Arab world since the late 1940s are about the very sorts of things colonial wars are about: scarce resources, demographic displacement, settler conflicts, cultural difference, contested political legitimacy, etc.

Isn't it more obvious in this conflict than it most others that history matters?

Hezbollah too is a grotesque product of this history. It's not some age old organization. It didn't exist before Reagan took office! It is an outgrowth of the Islamic fundamentalism that the Arab populations have allowed to exist and the US and Israel have helped to flourish.

I'll say this and then happily pull myself out of this discussion. Israel is here to stay, and I don't have a problem with that at all. At times I think it has been, and in the future it could be, an oasis in the middle east (much like Lebanon). I don't just say this. I wouldn't say it about, for example, Yemen. And anyway, go back far enough and you find usually much more bloodiness in the formation of any state. But that said, in no way whatsoever does it excuse what's now going on. If Israel wants the approval of the West, approval without which it wouldn't exist in the first place, it cannot be the agent of the kind of barbarity we've been reading about the last couple of weeks. What it is doing in Lebanon is insuring the strength of its enemies -- this makes its actions politically miscalculated. What it's doing there is also setting back one of the few places in the Arabic speaking world with deep cosmopolitan and democratic roots. And I'll admit that I have Lebanese roots and would like one day to go this place to find family I have never met. I will admit too that I'm saddened but not perplexed when I read that more and more Lebanese are pinning their hopes on the one organization that has missiles to hurl back at the country that's doing things like this (from the NYT):

July 31, 2006
The Scene
A Night of Death and Terror for Lebanese Villagers

By SABRINA TAVERNISE
QANA, Lebanon, July 30 — The dead lay in strange shapes. Several had open mouths filled with dirt. Faces were puffy. A man’s arm was extended straight out from his body, his fingers spread. Two tiny children, a girl and boy, lay feet to head in the back of an ambulance, their skin like wax.

In the all-day scramble to retrieve the bodies from the remains of this one house — backhoes dug for hours at the site after an early-morning airstrike — tallies of the dead varied, from as many as 60 to 27, many of them children.

This was the single most lethal episode in the course of this sudden war. The survivors will remember it as the day their children died. For the village, it is a fresh pain in a wound cut more than 10 years ago, when an Israeli attack here killed more than 100 civilians. Many of them were children, too.

The Israeli government apologized for that airstrike, as it did for the one here on Sunday. It said that residents had been warned to leave and should have already been gone.

But leaving southern Lebanon now is dangerous. The two extended families staying in the house that the Israeli missile struck — the Shalhoubs and the Hashims — had discussed leaving several times over the past two weeks. But they were poor — most worked in tobacco or construction — and the families were big and many of their members weak, with a 95-year-old, two relatives in wheelchairs and dozens of children. A taxi north, around $1,000, was unaffordable.

And then there was the risk of the road itself.

Dozens, including 21 refugees in the back of a pickup truck on July 15, have been killed by Israeli strikes while trying to evacuate. Missiles hit two Red Cross ambulances last weekend, wounding six people and punching a circle in the center of the cross on one’s roof. A rocket hit the ambulance convoy that responded in Qana on Sunday.

“We heard on the news they were bombing the Red Cross,” said Zaineb Shalhoub, a 22-year-old who survived the bombing. She was lying quietly in a hospital bed in Tyre.

“What can we do with all of our kids?” she asked. “There was just no way to go.”

They had moved to the house on the edge of a high ridge, which was dug into the earth. They thought it would be safer. The position helped muffle the sound of the bombs.

But its most valuable asset was water. The town, mostly abandoned, had not had power or running water in many days. A neighbor rigged a pumping system, and the Shalhoubs and Hashims ran a pipe from that house to theirs.

Life had taken on a strange, stunted quality. In a crawl-space basement area near the crushed house, five mattresses were on the floor. A Koran was open to a prayer. A school notebook was on a pillow. Each morning, the women made breakfast for the children. Ms. Shalhoub gave lessons. And they all hoped for rescue.

The first missile struck around 1 a.m., throwing Mohamed Shalhoub, one of the relatives who uses a wheelchair, into an open doorway. His five children, ages 12 to 2, were still inside the house, as was his wife, his mother and a 10-year-old nephew. He tried to get to them, but minutes later another missile hit. By morning, when the rescue workers arrived, all eight of his relatives were dead.

“I felt like I was turning around, and the earth was going up and I was going into the earth,” said Mr. Shalhoub, 38, staring blankly ahead in a hospital bed in Tyre.

Israeli military officials said the building did not collapse until the early morning, and that “munitions” stored in the house might have brought it down. But the house appeared to have been hit from above, and residents said the walls and ceiling came down around them immediately after the first bomb.

“My mouth was full of sand,” Ms. Shalhoub said. She said doctors had told her family that those who died had been suffocated and crushed to death.

“They died because of the sand and the bricks, that’s what they told us,” she said.

At least eight people in the house survived, and told of a long, terrifying night. Some remained buried until morning. Others crawled free. Ms. Shalhoub sat under a tree with Mohamed Shalhoub, without his wheelchair, and three others, listening to the planes flying overhead in the dark.

“You couldn’t see your finger in front of your face,” said Ghazi Aidibi, a neighbor.

Ms. Shalhoub said she tried to help a woman who was sobbing from under the wreckage, asking for her baby, but she could not find the child. A neighbor, Haidar Tafleh, said he heard screaming when he approached the debris, but that bombing kept him away.

“We tried to take them out, but the bombs wouldn’t let us,” Mr. Tafleh said.

The area took several more hits. A house very close to the Shalhoubs’ was crushed. A giant crater was gouged next to it. Residents said as many as eight buildings had been destroyed over two weeks.

Collapsed buildings have been a serious problem in southern Lebanon. Dozens of bodies are still stuck under the rubble. The mayor of Tyre, Abed al-Husseini, estimated that about 75 bodies were still buried under rubble in Slifa, a village on the border.

A grocer, Hassan Faraj, stood outside his shop, near a monument to those killed in the 1996 attack. He said that Hezbollah fighters had not come to Qana, but that residents supported them strongly. There was little evidence of fighters on Sunday, but Hezbollah flags and posters of Shiite leaders trimmed the streets. “They like the resistance here,” he said.

He cautioned people not to stand in the street in front of his shop, because that was where the ambulance convoy was hit in the morning.

At the Hakoumi Hospital in Tyre, Mr. Shalhoub sat in bed. His face was slack, stunned. His relatives poured him spicy coffee, and the room filled with its scent. The survivors spoke of their faith as a salve. The children, Mr. Shalhoub said, were in paradise now.

But 24-year-old Hala Shalhoub, whose two daughters, ages 1 and 5, were killed, was moaning and rocking slightly in her hospital bed.

“I want to see them,” she said slowly. “I want to hold them.”

A relative said, “Let her cry.”

Zaineb Shalhoub, in the next bed, rested quietly.

“There’s nobody left in our village,” she said. “Not a human or a stone.”


Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Is Israel in the midst of perpetrating terror attacks?

470
New addition to the C/NC on AIPAC: excerpts from a new nation.com article by Ari Berman

ari berman in the nation dot com wrote:On July 18, the Senate unanimously approved a nonbinding resolution "condemning Hamas and Hezbollah and their state sponsors and supporting Israel's exercise of its right to self-defense." After House majority leader John Boehner removed language from the bill urging "all sides to protect innocent civilian life and infrastructure," the House version passed by a landslide, 410 to 8.

AIPAC not only lobbied for the resolution; it had written it. "They [Congress] were given a resolution by AIPAC," said former Carter Administration National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who addressed the House Democratic Caucus on July 19. "They didn't prepare one."


full article from alternet

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests