Quote:
|
We’ve established already, over and over, that Israel has the right to go to war.
|
Who 'established' this? As I said, Israel certainly had the right to respond, but it is HOW Israel responded
initially that, as you agreed earlier, is the nub of the problem. And here, I am afraid, there will probably be no meeting of the twain. You have decided, I think, that Israel had absolutely no other
realistic option other than to attack Gaza, even though it must have been obvious that such an action would escalate a very dangerous situation, and that civilian deaths would inevitably be the consequence. Other people on this thread and elsewhere (many Israelis among them I imagine) probably find this initial action, and the heavy-handed escalation thereafter, hard to stomach. This doesn't mean they hate Israel and/or Jews, or that they wish to see the 'Zionist' homeland wiped off the map. After all, plenty of Jewish people have taken issue with Israel's recent actions (remember that petition?). It doesn't even mean that they find the foul-mouthed rantings of other parties in this conflict even worse (sometimes FAR worse) than anything uttered by Israeli spokespeople. But it isn't words, in the end, that matter. It's actions. I know, you'll be thinking at this point of underlining, again, the actions of Hezbollah, their 'human shields' etc. I don't really think anyone here disputes the ugliness of these tactics. Do you doubt that there are plenty of Lebabese people who don't approve either (or didn't anyway, till they became shellshocked into fatalism)? I don't.
It seems clear to me that you and Seree really love Israel, and are passionate defenders of 'her' honour. I respect that, really. And I can't compete, not feeling the least bit passionate about my own country's honour (our government is pitiable, largely a choice between Big Business conservatism and Big Business Conservatism. Take your pick).
But that doesn't change my perspective; the fact that, from my comfy, safe little cave, it still looks as Israel might have over-reacted. That's just how it seems to me, from the various reports, articles etc. I may well be wrong. Plenty of us here were proved right in our suspicions about Bush and the reasons given for going to war with Iraq. No surprise. Because that really was a no-brainer. The Lebanese debacle is far more complex, I'll grant you. But it still seems to me that Israel jumped the gun. That's not impossible, is it? Has Israel NEVER done anything like this before, never muscled in where Angles fear to tread and damn the civilian casualties? You'd know the answer to that one, far better than I would, even if I googled till the cows come home.
One more thing. I see you have used that word 'terrorist' yet again Dan. I am surprised that someone as intelligent and well informed should use such a hopelessly emotive abstract noun, especially in a discussion like this one, concerned with separating the linguistic wheat from the chaff. It really is an ugly, cancerous term, and the equivalent of a blank letter in Scrabble. Its 'meaning' is completely dependent on who's using it.
[This message has been edited by Mark Granier (edited August 07, 2006).]