Israel attacks Gaza - Page 35 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-13-2009, 10:17 AM   #511
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 01:12 AM
to be slightly off topic, but isn't the rumored closing line of NLOTH supposed to be, "choose your enemies carefully / because they will define you."

just, you know, kind of applicable, in that Bono vague kind of way.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2009, 11:33 AM   #512
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 11:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

just, you know, kind of applicable, in that Bono vague kind of way.
Of course it can be applicable to either side depending on a person's point of view.
__________________

__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2009, 03:12 PM   #513
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 06:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
Perhaps it can be said that I do value erudition over emotion, which is why I have distaste over emotionally-charged pleas of any kind,
Which is totally fine. Consider though, that having sat on the sidelines of this discussion in the early stages, once you became in your words "appalled" you acted.

The circle of ideology and violence won't stop until enough people (mostly Americans due to scope of influence) are appalled enough to act by signing petitions, writing their representatives or going to rallies etc. Sadly, like many other instances of scale, that takes a critical incident.

From Obama's statements, I'd have to optimistically guess that enough people are doing exactly that.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2009, 03:56 PM   #514
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 459
Local Time: 06:12 AM
When Israel calls: the US comes wagging. Just who exactly is the superpower.

Quote:

Olmert: "It transpired all of a sudden that a vote would be held in 10 minutes' time. I tried to find President Bush, and I was told he was attending an event in Philadelphia. I know that if somebody tried to find me on the phone right now, it would have to be something unusual and extraordinary for them to say: Leave it all and go to some room to talk to me. In this case, I said: I don't care, I have to talk to him right now. He was taken off the podium and brought to a side room.

I spoke with him; I told him: You can't vote for this proposal. He said: Listen, I don't know, I didn't see, don't know what it says. I told him: I know, and you can't vote for it! He then instructed the secretary of state, and she did not vote for it.

It was a proposal she had put together, one she formulated, one she organized, one she maneuvered. It left her rather embarrassed, abstaining in the vote on a proposal she herself had put together. That was why the French and the Brits said she had pulled a fast one on them, she having been the one to spur them to submit the proposals."
__________________
popshopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2009, 05:00 PM   #515
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 01:12 AM
Wow those Arabs really must be PARANOID when they think this sort of thing happens.

The State Department is flatly denying this, who's the liar?
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2009, 05:16 PM   #516
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 459
Local Time: 06:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Wow those Arabs really must be PARANOID when they think this sort of thing happens.

The State Department is flatly denying this, who's the liar?
The evidence supports Olmert to be honest.

1. The US wrote the resolution with the UK and France and mysteriously couldn't bring itself to vote on it despite the UK and France both saying that they had assurances that the proposal had US backing.
2. Rice was scheduled to hold a press conference immediately before the session where the vote took place, but cancelled it because she had to take a call with Bush. That's public record.
3. Generally on these types of votes the US does not abstain, it either votes for or against. Obviously voting against a bill you wrote would be foolish so they chose to abstain.

Bottom line is that regardless of what happened Olmert is a fool for saying it, it's the dirty little secret of International politics that the Israelis have power to exercise the US veto whenever they like, but no one likes it to be spelled out so blatantly, especially the US.
__________________
popshopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2009, 03:25 AM   #517
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:12 AM
While I strongly condemn my country's failure to support UN Res 1860, it was tragically predictable that both Israel and Hamas would quickly reject it and persist with bombing, shooting and rocketing until an actual negotiated ceasefire agreement is reached. Although the language of the Resolution "called upon" both parties and their allies to "intensify efforts" to address the most pressingly critical grievances--end Israel's blockade, stop smuggling of arms and ammunition into Gaza, resume talks on Palestinian statehood and mutual recognition--and at least implied that unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid, like the cessation of hostilities, should commence immediately, it was entirely lacking in ready solutions to the problems driving the conflict. Effectively, it was just a protest against the criminal disproportionality of Israel's response, which while well worth making doesn't actually solve anything.

There's still some hope that the Egyptian negotiations will succeed--if one can legitimately apply the word "hope" to any aspect of the present situation, or consider a longer view of the future relationships between Israel, Hamas, and Fatah without seeming obscenely abstract.
Quote:
by Jeffrey Goldberg (op-ed), New York Times, January 13

...As the Gaza war moves to a cease-fire, a crucial question will inevitably arise, as it has before: Should Israel (and by extension, the United States) try to engage Hamas in a substantive and sustained manner?

It is a fair question, one worth debating, but it is unmoored from certain political and theological realities. One irresistible reality grows from Hamas’s complicated, competitive relationship with Hezbollah. For Hamas, Hezbollah is not only a source of weapons and instruction, it is a mentor and role model. Hamas’s desire to best Hezbollah’s achievements is natural, of course, but, more to the point, it is radicalizing. One of the reasons, among many, that Hamas felt compelled to break its cease-fire with Israel last month was to prove its potency to Muslims impressed with Hezbollah.

...There is a fixed idea among some Israeli leaders that Hamas can be bombed into moderation. This is a false and dangerous notion. It is true that Hamas can be deterred militarily for a time, but tanks cannot defeat deeply felt belief. The reverse is also true: Hamas cannot be cajoled into moderation. Neither position credits Hamas with sincerity, or seriousness. The only small chance for peace today is the same chance that existed before the Gaza invasion: The moderate Arab states, Europe, the United States and, mainly, Israel, must help Hamas’s enemy, Fatah, prepare the West Bank for real freedom, and then hope that the people of Gaza, vast numbers of whom are unsympathetic to Hamas, see the West Bank as an alternative to the squalid vision of Hassan Nasrallah and Nizar Rayyan.
Quote:
by Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff, Ha'aretz, January 14

...As expected by many analysts, Hamas offered a less than clear response to the Egyptian cease-fire initiative. The deputy head of the Hamas politburo, Musa Abu Marzouk, explained that some changes to the proposal are necessary. "If the changes are accepted, the Egyptian proposal will become a framework for a solution," he said on Tuesday. Hamas is mainly concerned about the lack of a timetable in the Egyptian proposal. Cairo is demanding the immediate cessation of hostilities, without offering a timetable for the withdrawal of the IDF forces from the Strip. Also, only at a later stage will it be decided when and how the crossings to the Gaza Strip will opened. Hamas sees answers to these issues to be critical and would like clear commitments as part of a cease-fire. Moreover, Hamas is also opposed to the third part of the Egyptian proposal which calls for the resumption of talks with Fatah in an effort to mend the internal rift in the Palestinian camp--and the return of Palestinian Authority officials to the Gaza Strip.

...In Jerusalem there is a growing concern that Hamas may be playing for time--six days prior to the swearing in of a new U.S. president, the group may prefer to wait for the Obama Administration in the hope that the environment may be more conducive to its aims.
The rumors that Hamas is close to throwing in the towel, which began to circulate following the speech by Ismail Haniyeh Monday, proved to be premature.

...The future of the Philadelphi route is the most crucial point in any arrangement for ending the fighting. Israel's concern that the smuggling of arms will continue along the route running parallel to Sinai centers on the possibility that in the future, missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv will be brought in by Hamas. If the gap in southern Gaza is not blocked, Iran will be able to, indirectly, threaten central Israel in months, if not weeks.

Only at this stage is the sophistication and extent of the smuggling mechanism in place being understood in Israel, and the role played in that smuggling by officers in Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Since the success of the naval commandos in intercepting the Karin A, a ship carrying weapons to the Palestinians in January 2002, the Iranians have changed their methods. Instead of smuggling large quantities, the arms are brought in small amounts through an intricate network of mediators. But these small shipments included Katyusha rockets, and there is a possibility that Fajr missiles will follow--reaching targets 70 kilometers from Gaza. Israel has noted that Security Council Resolution 1701 ending the Second Lebanon War has a major weakness: arms smuggling that allowed Hezbollah to rearm. In the case of the Gaza Strip, Israel is adamant that this matter needs to be dealt with thoroughly. Israel will not make do with the good will of engineering experts--some of them academics--that the Germans are proposing.
Quote:
by Michael Slackman, International Herald Tribune, January 13

Late last month, Iran's supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that anyone killed defending Palestinians in the Gaza Strip would be rewarded in heaven as a martyr. Young men began lining up--70,000 in all--to go off and die. But a week later Khamenei announced without explanation that no one was going anywhere to fight. "I thank the pious and devoted youth who have asked to go to Gaza," he said in a televised address. "But it must be noted that our hands are tied in this arena."

While the fighting continues in Gaza and negotiations for a cease-fire take place in Egypt, officials in Tehran are treading carefully because they, too, have a great deal at stake. Iran is trying to position itself as the regional superpower, while also trying to generate maximum leverage before expected talks with the administration of President Barack Obama. But to achieve those goals, Iran needs Hamas to declare at least a moral victory in its war with Israel. In that event, Israel and Washington's Arab allies would be weakened, and without Iran's having to get involved in the battle.

Iran's leaders are leery of siding publicly with Hamas because of the potentially damaging consequences of an Israeli victory. A Hamas defeat by Israel would deprive Iran not only of a valuable proxy force on the border with Israel, but also of a trump card to play with Washington, and it would further alienate it from the leaderships of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Keeping a little distance from Hamas could help minimize the damage if Hamas loses. "Iran wants to sit at the negotiating table with Obama with all the cards of the region in hand: Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, the relationship with Syria," said Mustafa el-Labbad, an Iranian expert in Cairo. "They are also being smart. They're trying not to antagonize the U.S. very much. But with the Arabs they are going at it very hard, very roughly."


...Iran's relationship with Hamas is one of shared interests. By pedigree, the sides are unlikely allies, with Iran a Shiite theocracy and Hamas a fundamentalist Sunni organization. Hamas, for example, praises Saddam Hussein, while Iran views him as a psychotic killer. But Hamas, a pariah to Egypt and Jordan, has received money and training from Iran, while the group has provided Iran with a powerful surrogate to undermine U.S. and Israeli interests in the region. While Iran is the primary patron of Hamas, the two do not enjoy the same seamless relationship that Iran has with Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite militia and political organization that Tehran helped to form. Giving voice to these conflicting currents, Muhammad Mir Ali Mohammadi, the spokesman at the Iranian consulate to the United Nations, said in an e-mail that Tehran's support is for the Palestinians in general, not specifically for Hamas.

...Iran started its aggressive campaign against Egypt and Saudi Arabia for failing to bring an end to the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. The attacks were aimed at King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. "King Abdullah, the puppet king of Saudi Arabia, is not expected to ignore the demands of his American and Zionist masters and frown at what is going on in Gaza," read a column in Iran's most conservative newspaper, Kayhan, which is aligned with Khamenei. As the war grinds on, Iran and its Arab opponents continue to eye each other warily, each side concerned that the other will get the upper hand in negotiations over a cease-fire. For now, Iran is encouraging Hamas to hang on and refuse to give up.
Quote:
by Khaled Abu Toameh, Jerusalem Post, Jan 14

Despite the severe military blows that it has been dealt since the beginning of Operation Cast Lead, there were still no signs on Tuesday that the Hamas regime was even close to collapsing. Palestinian sources in the Gaza Strip said Hamas lost several hundred of its fighters in Israeli air and ground attacks over the past 18 days. At least 2500 Hamas gunmen were wounded during the same period, the sources told the Post. But, the sources pointed out, these are only a tiny percentage of Hamas's armed wing, Izzadin Kassam, and other security organizations belonging to the Islamist movement. Altogether, Hamas is believed to have more than 25,000 militiamen and policemen in the Gaza Strip. And Hamas is not alone on the battlefront. Dozens of Fatah gunmen belonging to the faction's armed wing, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, are reportedly participating in the fighting alongside Hamas gunmen...Hamas is also being aided by other groups such as Islamic Jihad, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Popular Resistance Committees.

...While the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip has been repeatedly signaling its readiness to accept an immediate cease-fire, Khaled Mashaal and other Hamas officials in Damascus believe that Hamas must continue to fight until it can claim achievements. This schism explains the contradictory statements that have been coming from Hamas leaders over the past few days. On the one hand, Haniyeh and his friends in the Gaza Strip are so desperate for a cease-fire that they have been sending messages to some Arab capitals to put pressure on Mashaal to accept the latest Egyptian truce proposal. On the other hand, the Iranians and Syrians are continuing to exert pressure on Mashaal not to accept the Egyptian initiative. Among the Hamas leaders in both the Gaza Strip and Damascus, there is a growing sense of disappointment with the Syrians and Iranians for failing to come to the movement's aid during the war. As a Hamas representative in Gaza City said on Tuesday night, "We feel that our brothers in Teheran and Damascus have betrayed us, as have the rest of the Arab and Islamic governments."

The military and political setbacks, nevertheless, have thus far failed to bring Hamas to its knees. Buoyed by the support of the Arab and Muslim street, Hamas appears determined to cling to power regardless of the heavy price. Although Hamas has been hit hard, not a single Palestinian in the Gaza Strip has raised his voice against the movement and its leaders. Hopes that the massive IDF operation would encourage Palestinians to revolt against a weakened Hamas have not materialized.
Quote:
by Daniel Williams, Bloomberg, January 14

...In the mid-1990s, [Hamas] spearheaded suicide bombings inside Israel. It was a period when that country was ceding control of the West Bank cities of Ramallah, Nablus, Qalqilya, Jenin, Tulkarm, Bethlehem and Hebron to the Palestinian National Authority, then led by Yasser Arafat. These concessions did nothing to alter Hamas’s anti-Israeli stand. In its view, the Palestinian territory that Israel illegally occupies includes not only the West Bank and Gaza, conquered by Israel in 1967, but also Israel itself. The Islamic party posits use of force as an alternative to peace talks promoted by Arafat’s successor, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, to create a Palestinian state alongside Israel. “Israel is simply an illegal state,” said Nizar Ramadan, a Hamas member of the Palestine Legislative Council, or parliament, from the West Bank city of Hebron. “It is not a moral entity we can accept.”

Hamas’s power struggle with the Fatah Party of Abbas is a subplot of the Israeli invasion. Hamas won West Bank and Gaza parliamentary elections in 2006, pushing aside Fatah. In 2007, Abbas’ security forces--armed by the US, some trained in Egypt and given passage into the Gaza Strip by Israel--tried to oust the Hamas government from Gaza. Hamas routed Fatah. The Israeli army sealed Gaza’s borders, periodically cutting off fuel and food supplies, while Abbas continues to rule the West Bank. “Hamas is reaching to take the flag of the Palestinian national cause from Fatah and their battle with Israel may deliver it,” said Mohammed Naim Farhat, a sociology professor at Al-Quds Open University in Bethlehem.

On Dec. 28, a day after Israel invaded Gaza, Abbas blamed Hamas for breaking a six-month truce with the Israelis. “We were not surprised. Abbas frequently does Israel’s work for them,” said Ramadan, 48, in an interview at his Hebron office. “He kept talking with them while we starved.”
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2009, 05:14 PM   #518
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Wow those Arabs really must be PARANOID when they think this sort of thing happens.

The State Department is flatly denying this, who's the liar?
They both lie,

but I think Olmert is correct

Why would Rice be there, work on it to get the language she wanted, and then abstain?

The Bush Administration has been a complete disaster for the Mid-East process
and Israel is in a much worse position than it was 8 years ago.


Quote:
Olmert stands by his version of Rice flap
The Associated PressPublished: January 14, 2009


JERUSALEM: Aides say Prime Minister Ehud Olmert stands by his claim that he caused the U.S. to abstain from a U.N. resolution calling for a halt in Gaza fighting.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice negotiated the resolution. Olmert claimed earlier this week that he humiliated Rice by persuading U.S. President Bush to instruct her not to vote for it.

Rice spokesman Sean McCormack has called Olmert's claims "100-percent, totally, completely not true."

But on Wednesday, Olmert aides said the Israeli leader told the story as it happened. Olmert has also claimed that Bush broke off a speech he was giving in Philadelphia to take his call, and that the abstention embarrassed Rice.

The aides spoke on condition of anonymity because the diplomatic matter is sensitive.
__________________
deep is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2009, 07:24 PM   #519
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:12 AM
More evidence of pronounced partisan divides on Gaza in the US, from a Pew foundation poll released yesterday:
Quote:
By nearly three-to-one (55% to 20%), Republicans approve of the military action Israel has taken in the Gaza Strip. Independents, by a smaller margin (44% to 29%), also approve of Israel’s actions. However, a plurality of Democrats (45%) disapproves of Israel’s military campaign, while just 29% express a positive opinion. Nearly two-thirds of Republicans (65%) say that Israel’s response in Gaza has been about right, while very few (8%) believe Israel has gone too far. Fewer than half of Democrats (45%) say that Israel’s response has been about right and more than a third (36%) say it has been excessive.
Again, not something you'd ever guess from following the statements of Congress, including last week's unqualifiedly supportive joint resolutions (which passed the Senate unanimously and the House 390-5, with Ron Paul and four Democrats--Kucinich, Waters, Moore and Rahall--the only opposition).

From an article in this week's Newsweek by Aaron David Miller, who worked for the State Department from 1978-2003 and served six secretaries of state as an advisor on Arab-Israeli negotiations:
Quote:
In 25 years of working on this issue for six secretaries of state, I can't recall one meeting where we had a serious discussion with an Israeli prime minister about the damage that settlement activity—including land confiscation, bypass roads and housing demolitions—does to the peacemaking process. There is a need to impose some accountability. And this can only come from the president. But Obama should make it clear that America will not lend its auspices to a peacemaking process in which the actions of either side willfully undermine the chances of an agreement America is trying to broker. No process at all would be better than a dishonest one that hurts America's credibility.
Regardless of whether such silence comes from a uniquely misguided vision of what it means to be an 'ally', a paranoia about the terrorist potential of any resistance movement which happens to be dominated by Muslims, or a cynical, do-what-you-like-with-them indifference to the Palestinians so long as Israel serves US goals by retaining military supremacy in the Middle East, there's no way it can be in the longterm best interests of either Israel or the United States, let alone the Palestinians.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2009, 08:53 PM   #520
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:12 AM
I didn't really intend coming back to this thread, but I saw some interesting comments made in the Irish parliament which possibly gives some weight to Irvine's accusation of a trace of anti-semitism on the European left:-

Quote:
THE ISRAELI ambassador to Ireland, Dr Zion Evrony, and Fine Gael TD Alan Shatter have reacted angrily to Sinn Féin deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh’s comparison of their methods to that of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.

Dr Evrony yesterday appeared at an emergency meeting of the Oireachtas foreign affairs committee to discuss the conflict in Gaza.

The ambassador and the Palestinian Delegate General to Ireland, Dr Hikmat Ajjuri, gave presentations about the conflict and took questions from TDs and Senators.

Mr Ó Snodaigh claimed Dr Evrony and Mr Shatter, a member of the committee who criticised the Palestinian representative’s presentation, had exposed the committee to “propaganda, twisted logic and half truths”.

He said: “I think Goebbels would have been proud of it.".....

Speaking afterwards, Mr Shatter said he was “appalled” by what he described as “the analogy he [Mr Ó Snodaigh] made between myself and Dr Goebbels”.

“It’s particularly appalling to suggest that a member of this House conducts himself in such a manner that resembles the conduct of the chief propagandist of Hitler’s Nazi Party, and quite extraordinary that such remarks should be made by a Sinn Féin member about the only Jewish member of this parliament.

“His reference about both myself and the ambassador gives a very interesting insight into the mindset of the deputy.”

Israeli envoy condemns TD's 'outrageous' Goebbels remark - The Irish Times - Wed, Jan 14, 2009


Apart from O'Snodaigh's comments being over-the-top and offensive the other thing that annoys me about this is that it draws the focus away from Mr Shatter's propaganda in the other direction. Mr Shatter is a man who, like some US politicians, never sees fit to make even token criticism of any Israeli action.


One thing I've noticed. Irish people tend to have strong views on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, usually strongly in the pro-Palestinian direction. Is this simply due to our colonialist past, or is it more complicated than that? I welcome your comments for anyone interested in this.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2009, 10:30 PM   #521
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 01:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post

One thing I've noticed. Irish people tend to have strong views on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, usually strongly in the pro-Palestinian direction. Is this simply due to our colonialist past, or is it more complicated than that? I welcome your comments for anyone interested in this.
I think it's interesting beyond just the Irish.

When people like Irvine or melon post about latent anti-semitism and what role it plays in things like UN resolutions against Israel, I often have a very different take on it. The fact is that a lot of the world, and pretty much all of the developing world has a history of being colonized by major world powers who then took away land, parceled it as they seemed fit, oppressed local populations and so on. There are very strong negative connotations to colonialism, and I do believe that a lot of countries and people around the world are reacting to that, because of the vestiges from their own histories.

I would say that this is a large part of why most people globally relate more to the Palestinians than the Israelis, and it's at least as good of a thesis as the anti-semitism one.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2009, 01:01 AM   #522
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:12 AM
^ That makes sense in the case of the Irish (and much of the rest of the world, as you point out), though I don't know that it applies too well to most of Western Europe (since the 'European left' was invoked). The reason for comparing Israel/Palestine to other colonial situations is obvious--however, comparing the Holocaust to colonialism is bizarre: identifying a group of people as an existential parasitic threat to the rest of humanity, hunting them down across multiple countries, rounding them up and methodically executing them with the explicit ultimate goal of killing every last one, has nothing to do with what 'colonialism' is. That is certainly not to deny that colonialism almost always entails mass dispossession, episodic massacres, and relentless economic, political and social oppression, all of which are themselves deeply tragic and most understandably a cause of long-lasting bitterness (and at times, as I believe Muldfeld alluded to earlier, a collective tendency towards various self-defeating internalized behaviors, even when the colonizer has long since physically departed--just as the paranoia occasioned by having been collectively subjected to a systematic annihilation campaign on grounds of your alleged parasitic-opportunist nature, particularly when your history was already rather grim to begin with, can do the same). I have no way of knowing what precise train of thought or emotion led Mr. Ó Snodaigh to make this comparison; I am skeptical though whether that would've been the analogy that came to his mind had it been another ethnic Irishman he was excoriating for defending 'Operation Cast Lead.' I suppose on some level it might've been an expression of seething resentment at anticipated charges of anti-Semitism upon expressing his disagreement (though I have no idea whether Mr. Slatter in fact routinely makes such charges); but really, when someone has hangups that deep over the possibility of receiving such a response that they speak in this way, you have to question how rational their resentment is and what combination of things might be fueling it. I don't deny that charges of anti-Semitism can be and sometimes are wielded wholly cynically and with calculated intent to undercut an Israel critic's integrity, but it's a bad habit to get into assuming that any and every such accuser couldn't possibly sincerely perceive what s/he's claiming s/he does (which of course doesn't necessarily mean s/he's correct in that perception), particularly if you harbor any susceptibility to the narrative that The Jews are always looking to score a cheap victory by cunningly manipulating others.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2009, 07:51 AM   #523
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 01:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
^ That makes sense in the case of the Irish (and much of the rest of the world, as you point out), though I don't know that it applies too well to most of Western Europe (since the 'European left' was invoked).
Yes, that's true. Much of Western Europe is comprised of colonial powers anyway (England, France, Spain, etc). Eastern Europe is a different story and so is pretty much the rest of the world.

I just feel that this is an angle that's almost never discussed whereas the anti-semitism angle takes about 5 minutes to emerge in this discussion.

I'm just saying that when African or Latin American countries rebuke Israel, it is more likely, in my view, that there are complex historical causes at play rather than plain old anti-semitism. Let's also not forget the rather well-known and not-so-flattering history that Israel had with the Apartheid regime in South Africa, and what damage that did on the continent. For example, my uncle, who lives in Namibia, says that Israel and its policies are widely reviled there, and it has more to do with what was happening in the 1980s than anything related to a historical persecution of the Jews. And in the Namibian context, that makes absolute sense.
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2009, 12:35 PM   #524
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:12 AM
Yeah, I don't substantially disagree with any of your points re: the former colonial world, I think it's a good argument...I've spent a lot of time in South Asia and study their political culture for a living, so I do have some understanding of how the perspective of having been colonized oneself informs one's understanding of what's happening in the rest of the world. I don't generally apply this explanation to the 'Western world' though, and don't find that the respective discourses feel quite the same. For instance, Indians in my experience do tend to be pro-Palestinian (if that's the way to put it), but at the same time they also tend to be refreshingly free of hangups either way about 'the idea of Israel' and more generally the place of Jews in (really, European) history; they just kind of call a spade a spade as they see it, they don't tend towards hysterical Nazi analogies or the like and are just as critical of oppressive regimes at least in their region (except perhaps when it's their own, lol--some kinds of blind spots are universal). This state of affairs might presently be shifting somewhat, in that India does have internal and regional problems which can predispose its majority towards sympathies with the newfound GWOT meme, which Israel obviously derives a certain sword-of-Damocles benefit from in some quarters (although, the way a country's ethnoreligious demographics inform perspectives on this topic can cut both ways). But, overall, I think this summary remains accurate.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2009, 03:17 PM   #525
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:12 AM



Quote:
Christian Science Monitor, January 16

The Israeli military on Thursday shelled the main United Nations aid compound in Gaza, struck a building that houses foreign news organizations, and caused a fire at a hospital. The attacks sparked global condemnation even as efforts to reach a cease-fire continued.

...While Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister, apologized to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon for Israel's strike on their Gaza headquarters, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert took a different approach. He said the building had been used by Palestinian militants to strike Israeli forces. Mr. Olmert, quoting a senior IDF officer, said Israel's troops opened fire on militants inside the compound shot antitank weapons and machine guns. "It is absolutely true that we were attacked from that place," he said.

...Into the afternoon Thursday, the UN headquarters in Gaza, where some 700 Palestinian civilian had sought shelter, was still burning out of control, several hours after it was hit, forcing the suspension of major aid operations in the coastal territory. The chief of operations there said there wasn't enough water to douse the flames, a result of Gaza's battered infrastructure in the 20-day war with Israel. "The warehouses are burning down, the fire is spreading, and we're very concerned," says John Ging, the director of operations in Gaza for UN Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), the UN's main arm for aid to Palestinians. "There's a shortage of water and that's why it's spreading. All the food, medicine, and humanitarian aid we have to distribute in Gaza are stored here," Ging adds. The solution is to "stop the shooting, respect the UN, and then we can start to rebuild. Our compound is falling apart before my eyes! There are a million-and-half people depending on aid from us, and an attack on our compound is another challenge that we can do without." ...A UN spokesman said that the headquarters was hit by what was believed to be three white phosphorous shells, which burn at higher-than-usual temperatures, and that UN workers were unable to douse the flames with standard fire extinguishers.

Mr. Ban, a diplomat who usually speaks in carefully crafted statements, issued his strongest statement to date on the conflict, which mushroomed on Dec. 27 after a six-month cease-fire expired and Hamas resumed rocket fire at Israel. "I conveyed my strong protest and outrage to the defense minister and the foreign minister and demanded a full explanation," said Ban, who had met Ms. Livni earlier Thursday as part of a multi-national effort to bring the devastating 20-day-old war to an end. Ban said in a press conference that he had spoken to Barak. "The defense minister said to me it was a grave mistake and he took it very seriously," Ban said. "He assured me that extra attention will be paid to UN facilities and staff and this will not be repeated." Thursday marked the second time since the war began that a UN facility took a direct hit from Israel. Last week, Israeli forces bombed a UN-run school in Jabalya, in northern Gaza, killing 39 Palestinians sheltering there. The Israeli army says it hit the school because it was the source of mortar fire, but the UN says that no militants were found at the site.

...Later in the day, Hamas struck the Israeli city of Beersheba with a salvo of Qassam rockets, injuring five people, two of them seriously. One of the Qassams launched by Hamas made a direct hit on a car. In all, Gaza militants fired at least 24 rockets at Israel Thursday, hitting cities such as Gedera, Ofakim, and Sderot. The wail of sirens, sending people in and out of bomb shelters, was heard throughout the day

...The Israeli strikes on what political officials said were unintended targets in the Gaza campaign underscore what some analysts see as a furious drive by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to achieve as many last-minute blows to Hamas as possible before a cease-fire is reached. And at this stage of the war, fissures are emerging within the Israeli civilian and military leadership. "It's the final push to make Hamas understand, either they make a decision for a cease-fire, or it will be difficult to survive," says Shmuel Rosner, a leading opinion maker and journalist. "They need to show seriousness so Hamas doesn't interpret Israel's waiting of the last few days as reluctance to continue the operation."

...Those points provide a window into the differences that have developed at the top of the Israel political structure, run by an unlikely troika of Olmert, Mr. Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni--none of whom are allied. With an election set for Feb. 10, the political rivals have become even more assertive in claiming their share of the credit for the war. Ms. Livni, who is running to succeed Olmert, reportedly favors a unilateral pullback even without a cease-fire, according to media reports. A swift pullback would minimize risks to Israeli soldiers as well as the chances of a giving Hamas an opportunity to score any parting blows. A quick withdrawal would also improve Israel's position with its Western allies, which is progressively eroding as damage and death tolls mount...Barak, who has got a boost from the polls for leading the war effort, reportedly supports a swift "humanitarian" cease-fire and the Egyptian efforts to reach a truce with Hamas. He would also like to wrap up the fighting and show a willingness to pursue peace to bolster his position among in his pro-peace Labor Party. Olmert, who reportedly supports continuing the operation, is a lame duck prime minister and is free of his colleagues' political calculations. Mr. Doron says he's concerned about his legacy and would like to be remembered as the leader who squashed Hamas.
Not to reduce the human costs to a cold procedural judgment, but the whack-a-mole recklessness of the IDF throughout this assault has been just dumbfounding.

Both Hamas and Israel have signaled willingness in principle to accept the Egyptian ceasefire plan; however Hamas is now demanding a more rapid Israeli pullout than the proposal had originally called for, which Israel might balk at if that means a time gap between their troop presence and the imposition of a smuggling control arrangement, depending on which camp in the Israeli government gets its way.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com