Options

UN Report on Gaza Flottila is out.

1246

Posts

  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I don't care.

    Until the governing body of Gaza decides that it's no longer acceptable to call for religiously-dictated genocide within their establishing charter, I just don't care.

    Hamas being horrible does not forgive Israel being horrible. Israelis supposed to be morally superior, but they sure weren't acting the part with the flotilla.

    However I WILL say that it is mildly upsetting to see people who decry Israel's actions at ever turn, but don't turn around and also call for the release of Gilad Shalit, or the cessation of rocket firings. Both sides ARE wrong, and they should BOTH be treated as such.

    Evander on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    I don't care.

    Until the governing body of Gaza decides that it's no longer acceptable to call for religiously-dictated genocide within their establishing charter, I just don't care.

    Hamas being horrible does not forgive Israel being horrible. Israelis supposed to be morally superior, but they sure weren't acting the part with the flotilla.

    However I WILL say that it is mildly upsetting to see people who decry Israel's actions at ever turn, but don't turn around and also call for the release of Gilad Shalit, or the cessation of rocket firings. Both sides ARE wrong, and they should BOTH be treated as such.

    Who is condemning this raid on the flotilla who doesn't condemn Hamas's actions?

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I wish we had a government who could stand up to Israel and make them behave in a way that could end this crap once and for all.

    In terms of lasting impact, I'm far more concerned about our lack of attempt to get Israel to extend the settlement freeze, but yes, I agree.

    Israel doesn't have the ability to end the entire conflict unilaterally, but there is still a lot that they could and should be doing, but aren't

    Evander on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    I don't care.

    Until the governing body of Gaza decides that it's no longer acceptable to call for religiously-dictated genocide within their establishing charter, I just don't care.

    Hamas being horrible does not forgive Israel being horrible. Israelis supposed to be morally superior, but they sure weren't acting the part with the flotilla.

    However I WILL say that it is mildly upsetting to see people who decry Israel's actions at ever turn, but don't turn around and also call for the release of Gilad Shalit, or the cessation of rocket firings. Both sides ARE wrong, and they should BOTH be treated as such.

    Who is condemning this raid on the flotilla who doesn't condemn Hamas's actions?

    Where is the thread about Gilad Shalit? (and there IS recent news on the case, Hamas has released a new list of demands)

    I'm not accusing anyone of supporting the kidnapping, but there is a clear focus when it comes to who to publicly announce condemnation of.

    Evander on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    I don't care.

    Until the governing body of Gaza decides that it's no longer acceptable to call for religiously-dictated genocide within their establishing charter, I just don't care.

    Hamas being horrible does not forgive Israel being horrible. Israelis supposed to be morally superior, but they sure weren't acting the part with the flotilla.

    However I WILL say that it is mildly upsetting to see people who decry Israel's actions at ever turn, but don't turn around and also call for the release of Gilad Shalit, or the cessation of rocket firings. Both sides ARE wrong, and they should BOTH be treated as such.

    Who is condemning this raid on the flotilla who doesn't condemn Hamas's actions?

    Where is the thread about Gilad Shalit? (and there IS recent news on the case, Hamas has released a new list of demands)

    I'm not accusing anyone of supporting the kidnapping, but there is a clear focus when it comes to who to publicly announce condemnation of.

    Oh to be sure, and I think you explain why in your own post. Israel is a "western" nation with a supposed dedication to human rights, that it engages in such reprehensible actions make it almost more worthy of condemnation in the eyes of many, like it is betraying the values that civilized nations adhere too.

    As far as the media is concerned, when a group like Hamas does something horrible its just horrible people being horrible.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »

    Where is the thread about Gilad Shalit? (and there IS recent news on the case, Hamas has released a new list of demands)

    I'm not accusing anyone of supporting the kidnapping, but there is a clear focus when it comes to who to publicly announce condemnation of.

    Where's your thread decrying Nazis?

    How about your thread decrying the genocide in Darfur?

    Why haven't you made a thread asking for somebody to bring back Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law

    Why do you love Nazis, Evander? Why do you hate the people of Darfur? What did Harvey Birdman ever do to you?

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    I don't care.

    Until the governing body of Gaza decides that it's no longer acceptable to call for religiously-dictated genocide within their establishing charter, I just don't care.

    Hamas being horrible does not forgive Israel being horrible. Israelis supposed to be morally superior, but they sure weren't acting the part with the flotilla.

    However I WILL say that it is mildly upsetting to see people who decry Israel's actions at ever turn, but don't turn around and also call for the release of Gilad Shalit, or the cessation of rocket firings. Both sides ARE wrong, and they should BOTH be treated as such.

    Who is condemning this raid on the flotilla who doesn't condemn Hamas's actions?

    Where is the thread about Gilad Shalit? (and there IS recent news on the case, Hamas has released a new list of demands)

    I'm not accusing anyone of supporting the kidnapping, but there is a clear focus when it comes to who to publicly announce condemnation of.

    THREAD TO SUPPORT GILAD SHALIT'S RELEASE

    "Soo, I think he should be released."

    "Yup."

    "Sure should."

    "..."

    "So..."

    "he released yet?"

    "No. Hey, those Hamas are assholes, huh?"

    "Sure are."

    "Indeed."

    "Hey, maybe we should make a thread condemning North Korea!"

    Debate and discourse actually means that there should be differing opinions around. Nobody here doesn't believe that Gilad Shalit shouldn't be released or Hamas doesn't do horrible things. We don't have some legally mandated condemnation quota that we have to divide between all faiths, beliefs and nations equally. Israel is condemned more often because it is not exactly an widely accepted view around the world and as such generates more discussion and debate between people who hold different ideas on the subject.

    I mean, even if there was a quota, the pro-Israel forums would already handle it for us.

    DarkCrawler on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    As far as the media is concerned, when a group like Hamas does something horrible its just horrible people being horrible.

    And that is a big issue, in my mind. It is ignoring one of the lessons of the Holocaust (there are no monsters, only people.)

    You (not personally, generally you) can't write off Hamas' actions BECAUSE they are terrorists. Holding Israel to a higher standard doesn't mean that A) we shouldn't also hope that Hamas can meet a higher standard and/or B) that we should hold Hamas to no standard at all. Hamas' charter should not be dismissed, it should be scrutinized, because it IS an issue if these pople are supposed to come to peace with Israel. The charter DOES NOT excuse anything that Israel does, but rather as I said, BOTH SIDES need to be held accountable to their individual actions.
    Evander wrote: »

    Where is the thread about Gilad Shalit? (and there IS recent news on the case, Hamas has released a new list of demands)

    I'm not accusing anyone of supporting the kidnapping, but there is a clear focus when it comes to who to publicly announce condemnation of.

    Where's your thread decrying Nazis?

    How about your thread decrying the genocide in Darfur?

    Why haven't you made a thread asking for somebody to bring back Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law

    Why do you love Nazis, Evander? Why do you hate the people of Darfur? What did Harvey Birdman ever do to you?

    There ARE threads about those things.

    Evander on
  • Options
    PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    You haven't made a thread about how evil Nazis are. Or if you have it isn't on the front page so you obviously don't care about it.

    I'm sorry Evander, I can't keep talking to someone who loves Nazis so much.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Debate and discourse actually means that there should be differing opinions around.

    That's the debate half. There is still discourse.

    I'm sorry, but it's kind of a bullshit answer to say that no one is saying anything BECAUSE OF how deeply we all care. There are tons of threads where everyone agrees, and there are still pieces within the story of Shalit that people would disagree on (like what terms Israel should negotiate with Hamas under)

    edit: for the record I am NOT calling for a Shalit thread to be made. I could give half a shit about a thread.

    I am just responding because of the way that you were so dissmissive of any criticism of Hamas' charter. I'm sorry, but we need to be critical of both sides, not just critical of the Israels, and tryign to dissmiss criticism of Hamas because we think Israel is more important. Believe me, the Israelis are NEVER going to come to peace through a process that dissmisses their concerns about Hamas (just as Hamas wouldn't do the same the other way around)

    Evander on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I'm sad you ignored most of my response Evander.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I'm sad you ignored most of my response Evander.

    I was following DC's advice and ignoring the parts that I agreed with. ;-)

    Evander on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    I'm sad you ignored most of my response Evander.

    I was following DC's advice and ignoring the parts that I agreed with. ;-)

    That was a lot of the point though. People discuss Israels actions more because we expect better of a country in their position.

    Hamas is a rabid dog, who acts surprised when it attacks?

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    ChopperDaveChopperDave Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Honestly, Evander, if you think that there are enough interesting points to debate about re: Gilad Shalit, put together a decent OP and make the thread yourself. This might sound callous but I don't care enough about Shalit to research the minutia and don't see the need to say anything beyond, "I do not support the kidnapping of hostages -- civilian or military -- for any purpose, and Hamas is particularly despicable for its poor treatment of Shalit and its hedging for years over his release." But if there's something more interesting there, I trust you can lead a conversation about it.

    The reason we don't ever talk about the rockets or Shalit is not because of some double standard, it's because these things are old news and we all implicitly condemn Hamas for them. Or at least I hope we do -- if there's anyone who doesn't think these things are contemptible, I'll be first to step in line for the mass condemnation and derision.

    I don't really see the point of bringing these things up in threads like these because it creates a false equivalence. Just because Hamas and Israel are on opposite sides of the conflict doesn't mean we should hold them to the same standard, or temper every story of Israeli malfeasance with, "Remember guys, Hamas is just as evil."

    It reminds me of how after the flotilla incident, Israel whined about how the world was bullying them when they could be condemning the North Koreans too. Nice one, Israel, keep putting yourself on the same plane as Hamas and North Korea.

    ChopperDave on
    3DS code: 3007-8077-4055
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    I'm sad you ignored most of my response Evander.

    I was following DC's advice and ignoring the parts that I agreed with. ;-)

    That was a lot of the point though. People discuss Israels actions more because we expect better of a country in their position.

    Hamas is a rabid dog, who acts surprised when it attacks?

    Who lets a rabid dog run wild, though?

    I am not opposed to the standard to which Israel is held by the majority of people. What worries me in the dissmissal of concerns about Hamas, and the seeming lack of standard that they are held to, keeping in mind that if Palestine is to be an independant sovereign nation (and I will tell you that this is in EVERYONE'S best interest, especially Israel's) these people will end up as some part of the governance, and it makes no sense to magically apply standards to them the moment that a constitution is signed, but not a moment before. Hell, the content of their charter is ESPECIALLY important if the same people are going to be involved in writing a constitution.



    It takes two sides to make peace. I think that Fatah is currently almost exactly where they need to be (although their beholdeness to the Arab League always bugs me, but as long as the AL doesn't call them away from talks, I can live with it. I'd rank Israel next, and say that more than anything, their issue at the moment is their leadership. I DO believe that Israel will knock off the majority of their awful behaviors when they believe that they have a shot at peace, but I think that Likud has been fighting so long that they will simply never honestly believe that. I really wish Barak or Livni were in power right now, because that very well may have meant an extension to the settlement freeze. Hamas falls in dead last, but they can't be ignored. Israel can START negotiating peace with Fatah and not Hamas, I believe, but the process can't be finished without all three parties at the same table. A three state solution isn't a viable option here.

    Peace with not come without Hamas being held acountable in one regard or another. If an animal is sick, you either treat it, or you put it down. You DO NOT just let it run rampant.

    Evander on
  • Options
    ChopperDaveChopperDave Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    I am just responding because of the way that you were so dissmissive of any criticism of Hamas' charter. I'm sorry, but we need to be critical of both sides, not just critical of the Israels, and tryign to dissmiss criticism of Hamas because we think Israel is more important. Believe me, the Israelis are NEVER going to come to peace through a process that dissmisses their concerns about Hamas (just as Hamas wouldn't do the same the other way around)

    I am dismissive of the Hamas Charter because it was written in the 80s by a few crazy guys in the Muslim Brotherhood who never, ever could have expected that their group would transform from a marginalized paramilitary wing into the ruling government party of Gaza.

    The Hamas Charter is crazy and clearly detrimental to the peace process, but it's also one of Hamas' only bargaining chips with Israel. We can expect them to unilaterally rewrite it just as much as we can expect them to unilaterally recognize Israel as a Jewish state -- i.e., never.

    That doesn't mean that they're unwilling to do so, however. Transforming into a political party representative of Gaza means that Hamas has necessarily moderated, and some of those moderate voices have made overtures towards revising the charter as part of a negotiation process with Israel. But before that even has a chance of happening, Israel needs to suck up its pride and enter into a negotiation without any preconditions, IMO. Until then Hamas is going to cling to that charter out of defiance, even if many of their members and/or voters don't necessarily agree with it.

    Hamas is a shitty organization full of shitty people, no doubt. But I have to roll my eyes at the people who say, "LOOK AT THEIR CHARTER!!11 ISRAEL CAN NEVER TALK WITH PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THAT," because it's a dumb position that ignores the political realities of the organization.

    ChopperDave on
    3DS code: 3007-8077-4055
  • Options
    DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Debate and discourse actually means that there should be differing opinions around.

    That's the debate half. There is still discourse.

    I'm sorry, but it's kind of a bullshit answer to say that no one is saying anything BECAUSE OF how deeply we all care. There are tons of threads where everyone agrees, and there are still pieces within the story of Shalit that people would disagree on (like what terms Israel should negotiate with Hamas under)

    edit: for the record I am NOT calling for a Shalit thread to be made. I could give half a shit about a thread.

    I am just responding because of the way that you were so dissmissive of any criticism of Hamas' charter. I'm sorry, but we need to be critical of both sides, not just critical of the Israels, and tryign to dissmiss criticism of Hamas because we think Israel is more important. Believe me, the Israelis are NEVER going to come to peace through a process that dissmisses their concerns about Hamas (just as Hamas wouldn't do the same the other way around)

    Those tons of threads seem to be mostly about fictional entertainment/information/cars, sports, etc. Anything political or generally concerning the actions of real people always needs something with both halves to keep the discussion going.

    I'm not dismissing criticism of Hamas' charter. It's a stupid document. Those religious lines in it are stupid. I'm dismissing the claim that what is written down on a charter is the end and all within the organization. Frankly, very few entities actually fully operate on what their founding documents say, Israel included. Calling Hamas genocidal maniacs based on their documents alone is like calling North Korea a Democratic People's Republic because it's written in it's name. It's the actual actions that matter.

    Frankly, I think Israel should focus on the actions of the organization as well, they just don't because the charter is a good talking point. And like all talking points it actually falls apart when it's actually detailed out. It's not like there aren't stupid talking points about Israel, like the "Zionist entity" talking point Ahmadinejad and his ilk are trying to use to not acknowledge the fact that Israel exists as a real country. Like all talking points, one side or another refuses to let go of it and halts the entire discussion.

    Just to clear it out, I think Hamas is an evil terrorist organization that kills innocent people, and the world would be better without them. Does this clear my quota for the forseeable future, or do I have to make a thread detailing how exactly Hamas is terrible? I really don't see if the thread concerns Israel's actions (which, like previously said, are more controversial) why I should bring up Hamas's actions every time I criticize Israel's. It's pointless unless the topic directly concerns Israel's response to Hamas's actions.
    Evander wrote: »

    Who lets a rabid dog run wild, though?

    I am not opposed to the standard to which Israel is held by the majority of people. What worries me in the dissmissal of concerns about Hamas, and the seeming lack of standard that they are held to, keeping in mind that if Palestine is to be an independant sovereign nation (and I will tell you that this is in EVERYONE'S best interest, especially Israel's) these people will end up as some part of the governance, and it makes no sense to magically apply standards to them the moment that a constitution is signed, but not a moment before. Hell, the content of their charter is ESPECIALLY important if the same people are going to be involved in writing a constitution.



    It takes two sides to make peace. I think that Fatah is currently almost exactly where they need to be (although their beholdeness to the Arab League always bugs me, but as long as the AL doesn't call them away from talks, I can live with it. I'd rank Israel next, and say that more than anything, their issue at the moment is their leadership. I DO believe that Israel will knock off the majority of their awful behaviors when they believe that they have a shot at peace, but I think that Likud has been fighting so long that they will simply never honestly believe that. I really wish Barak or Livni were in power right now, because that very well may have meant an extension to the settlement freeze. Hamas falls in dead last, but they can't be ignored. Israel can START negotiating peace with Fatah and not Hamas, I believe, but the process can't be finished without all three parties at the same table. A three state solution isn't a viable option here.

    Peace with not come without Hamas being held acountable in one regard or another. If an animal is sick, you either treat it, or you put it down. You DO NOT just let it run rampant.

    Hamas is "running wild"? Did you miss, the, uhh, blockade? Criticism from practically every sovereign nation in the world? Being put on the terrorist organization list of every respectable authority? Sanctions? Refusal to recognize it as the democratically elected leadership of the Palestinians (by Palestinians as well)? Withdrawal of aid? Bombings? Militants killed every other day? Complete unacknowledgement of anything even remotely positive it ever does by the world at large? Refusal to have it participate in any peace negotiations? Friction and armed conflict with other militant groups inside the Strip? Popular opinion falling down like a brick, lately?

    It's seems that Hamas has been dished out pretty much all that is possible without burning Gaza to the ground. Israel hasn't be treated with one percent of what Hamas has to take on a constant basis and the two sides are, like you constantly say, equally bad.

    See, here is another aspect of why Hamas isn't critizised as much. They are evil, but at least Hamas is constantly getting what they deserve. Honestly, if every person in Gaza was a Hamas militant, I would press the button to nuke it myself. I don't really want to waste my breath slamming a group that constantly gets fucked in the ass anyway.

    DarkCrawler on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Hey Dave, did you miss the part where I clearly explained my point?

    My issue isn't Shalit, it's the dissmissal of criticism of Hamas along the lines of "well, we all know that they are bad, so there's nothing to talk about."

    Tat dissmissal only serves to harm discourse. Hamas' actions DO NOT excuse Israel's, but if you look at it critically, the flotilla incident is also absolutely zero surprise, and really business as usually for Israel (shoot first, ask questions later, and answer questions never). If I were to dissmiss critics of Israel by saying "what did you expect them to do" no one would accept that answer (I wouldn't accept it personally). I don't believe that this defense should be valid for EITHER side.

    Evander on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Hamas is "running wild"? Did you miss, the, uhh...Popular opinion falling down like a brick, lately?

    In Gaza? Because yes, I DID miss that, and I would very much like to see it.

    Evander on
  • Options
    KalkinoKalkino Buttons Londres Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I don't care.

    Until the governing body of Gaza decides that it's no longer acceptable to call for religiously-dictated genocide within their establishing charter, I just don't care.

    Agreed. Israel have no responsibility whatsoever in anything they are involved in, just like Apartheid South Africa. If black South Africans wanted me to care about them, maybe so many of them (including a certain Mr Mandela) shouldn't have become terrorists.
    Kalkino wrote: »
    Just in case this is an issue, the proposed chair (iirc) was Geoffrey Palmer, former PM of NZ and noted constitutional lawyer and I assume he is still involved. This guy is responsible for most of the good reforms of NZ constitutional law in the 1980s and an incredibly talented constitutional lawyer and academic. So far as anyone who has an actual clue with regards to Westminster style constitutional law goes, he would be very high on the list.

    He is also a slight douche, but I do know the guy well enough to say (as he taught me for a year or so at law school during post grad) he is perhaps one of the smartest guys I've ever met and one should assume that he would not sign off on a fundamentally flawed report.

    Wrong inquiry, he's chairing the UN one (which is seperate from the Human Rights Council one).

    Edit:
    Bastable wrote: »
    Several of the soldiers' former comrades attending the court session at an army base in southern Kastina wore shirts with the slogan "We are victims of Goldstone" - a reference to Richard Goldstone, the South African jurist , who authored a scathing UN report on war crimes committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip.[/I]

    Ugh...

    I was just wondering if I'd got the wrong report - I just read through it and didn't see his name anywhere. Thanks for confirming that

    Kalkino on
    Freedom for the Northern Isles!
  • Options
    DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Hamas is "running wild"? Did you miss, the, uhh...Popular opinion falling down like a brick, lately?

    In Gaza? Because yes, I DID miss that, and I would very much like to see it.

    2008
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/hamas-popularity-among-palestinians-declining-poll-finds-1.253005

    2009
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/poll-hamas-popularity-falls-in-both-west-bank-and-gaza-1.279048

    2010
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/hamas-to-raze-180-gaza-houses-to-erect-islamic-religious-center-1.291347

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-detains-palestinian-activists-who-warned-of-revolt-in-gaza-1.285176

    It's gradual, but the latest thing in April was a pretty significant drop in my opinion. PLFP seems to be rising. Following the same pattern as with Fatah. Of course I'm not sure what the situation is now, after the flotilla and peace negotiations.

    also completely unrelated but I gotta say this brought a smile to my face:
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/settlers-replace-korans-burnt-in-west-bank-mosque-1.317361

    DarkCrawler on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Man, the apologists are really crawling out of the woodwork for this.

    I'm not apologizing, I just don't care.

    If this issue was a litmus test, I'm a pH 7.

    However, one side is definitely making some sort of vague humanistic appeal, and there's no real logic or consistency in that. I'm not going to waste energy getting wound up over the perceived injustice of those aiding the citizens of a horrible ignorant fascist regime against a somewhat-less-horrible regime.

    Just . . . . no.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Hamas is "running wild"? Did you miss, the, uhh...Popular opinion falling down like a brick, lately?

    In Gaza? Because yes, I DID miss that, and I would very much like to see it.

    2008
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/hamas-popularity-among-palestinians-declining-poll-finds-1.253005

    2009
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/poll-hamas-popularity-falls-in-both-west-bank-and-gaza-1.279048

    2010
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/hamas-to-raze-180-gaza-houses-to-erect-islamic-religious-center-1.291347

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-detains-palestinian-activists-who-warned-of-revolt-in-gaza-1.285176

    It's gradual, but the latest thing in April was a pretty significant drop in my opinion. PLFP seems to be rising. Following the same pattern as with Fatah. Of course I'm not sure what the situation is now, after the flotilla and peace negotiations.

    also completely unrelated but I gotta say this brought a smile to my face:
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/settlers-replace-korans-burnt-in-west-bank-mosque-1.317361

    It's nice, but I'd rather see the settlers announce that they are all moving to Tel-Aviv to start a nightclub, and the Palestinians can have their houses. As far as things that actually COULD happen, though, it is indeed good to see.

    I'm looking forward to checking out the rest of those links later. I was very hopeful when Hamas was elected, because I thought that it would mean that either they would mature in to a pragmatic force of good for the Palestinian people whom they clearly care abut, or else they would be held accountable by the world for their actions, as the elected government. I've been really dissappointed to see the world dismiss them the way that they have, rather than holding them accountable, so it would be good to see their support wane (although Israel will inevitably declare it a success for the gaza siege)

    Evander on
  • Options
    gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    However, one side is definitely making some sort of vague humanistic appeal, and there's no real logic or consistency in that. I'm not going to waste energy getting wound up over the perceived injustice of those aiding the citizens of a horrible ignorant fascist regime against a somewhat-less-horrible regime.

    I don't know if you've ever considered this or not, but the citizens of an oppressive regime don't cease to deserve basic human rights just because you disapprove of the government that claims to represent them. (I suppose basic human decency may also be "vaguely humanistic" by your standards, whatever those standards are.)

    gtrmp on
  • Options
    ChopperDaveChopperDave Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Hey Dave, did you miss the part where I clearly explained my point?

    My issue isn't Shalit, it's the dissmissal of criticism of Hamas along the lines of "well, we all know that they are bad, so there's nothing to talk about."

    Tat dissmissal only serves to harm discourse. Hamas' actions DO NOT excuse Israel's, but if you look at it critically, the flotilla incident is also absolutely zero surprise, and really business as usually for Israel (shoot first, ask questions later, and answer questions never). If I were to dissmiss critics of Israel by saying "what did you expect them to do" no one would accept that answer (I wouldn't accept it personally). I don't believe that this defense should be valid for EITHER side.

    I did, actually. Your edit explaining your position came while I was writing my post :/

    I get your point that we should take neither side's, ermm, badness for granted.

    To be fair, however, I don't think anyone seriously advances the "Well what did you expect them to do" argument in favor or Hamas. When Hamas fires a volley of rockets in response to an Israeli assassination in the West Bank, for example, my response isn't "This is entirely Israel's fault, what did they expect Hamas to do?" but rather "Israel were dicks and morally culpable for the assassination, Hamas were dicks and morally culpable for the rockets." This is the reasonable position, I believe.

    That said, when we make a point of remembering Hamas' baditude every time Israel makes a poor decision (especially in a thread like this, seeing as Israel's actions against the flotilla are almost entirely unrelated to Hamas), it tends to create a false equivalence and that should be avoided. If people begin to think, "Israel is shitty, Hamas/Hezbollah/the protesters/whatever are shitty, they're both equally responsible for this situation and we can't hold either side more or less accountable, I'm washing my hands of this debate and having a drink," that is a) unfair b) intellectually lazy and c) the surest way to short circuit a conversation that really needs to happen. We don't need to know who is to blame -- both sides are almost always to blame -- but who is more to blame, who deserves to be held to a greater standard of accountability, and who is in the best position to be pressured/changed by the international community.

    edit: Not that I'm accusing you of intentionally creating a false equivalence. But plenty of people, both on these forums and off, have voiced opinions like, "They're both equally shitty," "They're made for each other," "Let's just leave them alone and let them duke it out, nothing we can do will change the situation," and that kind of apathy is baaaaad.

    ChopperDave on
    3DS code: 3007-8077-4055
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I shouldn't have said "defending" hamas. What I shoud have said was that putting Hamas on a backburner treats them like a seperate issue, when in reality Israel and Hamas are both part of the same issue, and need to be dealt with together, if only because it erases the perception to either one that the other is gettign a free pass (and perceptions are VERY important in this conflict.)

    I would NEVER said that both sides are equal. In my personal opinion, Israel commits actions whose outcomes are FAR worse than anything Hamas could every pull off, whereas the intentions of Hamas are FAR more devious than anything Israel has in mind (and Fatah comes out smelling like roses compared to the two.) They are two different situations that are inherently linked. We don't need to do equal ammounts of everything to each side, but we DO need to hold them both to the same standards, publicly, because they are supposed to be working together towards living side by side. The actions needed for each side to meet those standards are, of course, different.

    edit: as for blame, I think that is the wrong way of doing things. It does not matter who caused a fight, what matters is who can stop it. Reparations get paid out after the end fo a war, not in the middle. What we need right now is pragmatism, while people are still dying. Once the dust has settled we can figure out who is to blame, although I already know the answer...
    the British

    Evander on
  • Options
    ChopperDaveChopperDave Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    edit: as for blame, I think that is the wrong way of doing things. It does not matter who caused a fight, what matters is who can stop it. Reparations get paid out after the end fo a war, not in the middle. What we need right now is pragmatism, while people are still dying. Once the dust has settled we can figure out who is to blame, although I already know the answer...
    the British

    It's not that I actually think you're lying, I've just always wanted to salmon and lime a single post :D

    I think assigning blame is important, because it helps us understand the problem and what needs to be done to fix it. I don't think we should reach back as far as 1948 or even 1967, mind you... but I do think it's important to, say, pinpoint who is more to blame for the breakdown of the Israel/Hamas ceasefire in 2008, to give an example. Knowing exactly who and/or what caused that breakdown helps us to identify underlying trends, existing attitudes and problems, and what needs to be done to prevent similar breakdowns in the future. IMO it's very difficult, if not impossible, to stop a problem (or at least stop it from reoccurring) if we refuse to identify who or what started it.

    That said, I entirely agree with the sentiment that we should focus more on possible solutions rather than bickering about who is to blame, if it comes down to that (as it often does with Israel).

    ChopperDave on
    3DS code: 3007-8077-4055
  • Options
    YougottawannaYougottawanna Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Man, the apologists are really crawling out of the woodwork for this.

    I'm not apologizing, I just don't care.

    If this issue was a litmus test, I'm a pH 7.

    However, one side is definitely making some sort of vague humanistic appeal, and there's no real logic or consistency in that. I'm not going to waste energy getting wound up over the perceived injustice of those aiding the citizens of a horrible ignorant fascist regime against a somewhat-less-horrible regime.

    Just . . . . no.

    If you don't care, why are you posting on this thread?

    Yougottawanna on
  • Options
    Magus`Magus` The fun has been DOUBLED! Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    So we know how much he doesn't care, duh

    Magus` on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    The problem, in my mind, is the difference between blame and fault (to arbitrarily differentiate the words.)

    Fault is important in a situation, because you need to know what caused it in order to prevent it. The emotional pieces (which I am arbitrarily tacking on to blame but not fault) are the concern.

    To illustrate, I will say that I do find Hamas at fault for breaking the ceasefire. However, Operation Cast Lead occurred because of the Israelis focusing too much on blaming Hamas, and not enough on just trying to find a way to get the rockets to stop.

    Blame (again, arbitrarily splitting out the concept here) is what causes people to seek punitive measures, rather than pragmatic ones. Did Israel have a place to do SOMETHING? Yes. Was that something Cast Lead? No, because the scope of Cast Lead was clearly retributive, not preventative.

    That is where so much of the continuation of this conflict comes from, an insistence on retribution on both sides. What we need to be doing, as the international comunity, is keeping them on point. We are on a family car trip, and Israel and Palestine are sitting in the back poking each other. It doesn't matter who poked who first, just that they BOTH need to stop poking right now.

    Evander on
  • Options
    ChopperDaveChopperDave Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Fair enough. A bit hair-splitting, yes, but whether you call it "fault" or "blame" I think we're fundamentally in agreement here. (Well, except for the whole "Hamas is at fault for breaking the ceasefire" thing, but that's a different thread.)

    Wait, did I just have a reasonable, levelheaded conversation and find common ground with Evander in an Israel thread? What's going on here

    ChopperDave on
    3DS code: 3007-8077-4055
  • Options
    HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Fair enough. A bit hair-splitting, yes, but whether you call it "fault" or "blame" I think we're fundamentally in agreement here. (Well, except for the whole "Hamas is at fault for breaking the ceasefire" thing, but that's a different thread.)

    Wait, did I just have a reasonable, levelheaded conversation and find common ground with Evander in an Israel thread? What's going on here

    Night is day, black is white, etc etc.

    HamHamJ on
    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I've never been interested in defending a Likud controlled Israeli government. You should have seen some of the things I was saying about Sharon prior to the Gaza pullout.

    Evander on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Magus` wrote: »
    So we know how much he doesn't care, duh

    Exactly.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    KetherialKetherial Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Magus` wrote: »
    So we know how much he doesn't care, duh

    Exactly.

    i strangely think that this is a reasonable position to hold with respect to hamas vs. israel.

    it's almost like, i wanted to care at first, and i thought i cared, but now that i see what assholes both sides are, i dont care anymore. fucking just kill each other. fuck them both.

    i dont actually hold this position, but i think this is what ross thinks.

    if it was up to me, id probably just cease providing aid to anyone and everyone involved in this entire mess. they need to just work it out themselves.

    Ketherial on
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ketherial wrote: »
    Magus` wrote: »
    So we know how much he doesn't care, duh

    Exactly.

    i strangely think that this is a reasonable position to hold with respect to hamas vs. israel.

    it's almost like, i wanted to care at first, and i thought i cared, but now that i see what assholes both sides are, i dont care anymore. fucking just kill each other. fuck them both.

    i dont actually hold this position, but i think this is what ross thinks.

    if it was up to me, id probably just cease providing aid to anyone and everyone involved in this entire mess. they need to just work it out themselves.

    Except that Israel really is a strategic ally of the US, and the Palestinian situation is a HUGE human rights crisis, much of which is actually going on in places like Lebanon and Jordan (the news doesn't focus on that so much, because it's a less glamorous story. Palestinian refugges are living in camps in a bunch of different countries)

    It's not as simple as "these two dudes don't like each other." It is a huge clusterfuck that involves a LOT of nations, and like all clusterfucks of this sort, the British caused it.

    Evander on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ketherial wrote: »
    Magus` wrote: »
    So we know how much he doesn't care, duh

    Exactly.

    i strangely think that this is a reasonable position to hold with respect to hamas vs. israel.

    it's almost like, i wanted to care at first, and i thought i cared, but now that i see what assholes both sides are, i dont care anymore. fucking just kill each other. fuck them both.

    i dont actually hold this position, but i think this is what ross thinks.

    if it was up to me, id probably just cease providing aid to anyone and everyone involved in this entire mess. they need to just work it out themselves.

    Well, I certainly don't feel like "fuck 'em both" is the proper attitude, but I'm also not interested in wringing my hands over the human rights violations of one over the other. In cases like these, it's usually the more affluent and civilized countries that get taken to task, and I think that's completely unfair and sophomoric for people to take that unilateral view of responsibility in this regard.

    I guess it all boils down to whether you feel that authority can be ignored up until the point it gets abused. Do you feel like it's okay to assault a police officer? If so, don't be shocked when overwhelming force is brought down upon you.

    Both sides in this matter have a long history of hateful shit done on their behalf, but only a simpleton who believes in moral (and cultural, for that matter) relativity sits there and gets irate when poor people get fucked over for doing something wrong and don't extend the same courtesy to the not-so-poor.

    Both sides are fucking things up, but the financial or cultural situation of one nation doesn't excuse them from shitty behavior, nor does it excuse them from following the rules that are placed upon them. Much the same way, I don't shed a tear or lose sleep when the Israeli government bulldozes Jewish settlements.

    I think the great mistake many people make here is believing a large number of people on both sides want to get along and maintain peace; both sides want an end to the violence and misery, but the nutjobs on both sides won't give up religious claims to attain that peace, and until both governments do something about that, peace will never happen.

    However, when one party is explicitly not even attempting to attain peace, and calls for the genocide of the other party by writ of constitution, I'm just not going to get too unhinged about the plight of their citizenry under such government. Hamas was democratically elected, and continues to ignore those reaching out to them in peace. In this way it's much like feeling sorry for the townsfolk who live under a dam and spend all day throwing dynamite at it when the inevitable flood comes.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    DacDac Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Israel did in fact step over the line in its assault and executed a number of civilians. It's clear, and is indefensible (esp. the shooting of injured on the floor). So Asshat points for Israel.

    On the other hand, as others have pointed out, you can't wash the flotilla's hands of all responsibility. While the murders conducted by the Israeli soldiers were criminal, it was also a complete dumbass move to mob up under a helicopter with blunt and edged weapons and fuck with its rappel line. The captain should have ordered everyone to their quarters the second he was aware that a helicopter was going to board.

    I'm not trying to be an apologist for Israel - I think those responsible should pay the price. But it's not like those on the flotilla were being saints, either. In my mind, both sides fucked up.

    Dac on
    Steam: catseye543
    PSN: ShogunGunshow
    Origin: ShogunGunshow
  • Options
    ChopperDaveChopperDave Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Dac wrote: »
    Israel did in fact step over the line in its assault and executed a number of civilians. It's clear, and is indefensible (esp. the shooting of injured on the floor). So Asshat points for Israel.

    On the other hand, as others have pointed out, you can't wash the flotilla's hands of all responsibility. While the murders conducted by the Israeli soldiers were criminal, it was also a complete dumbass move to mob up under a helicopter with blunt and edged weapons and fuck with its rappel line. The captain should have ordered everyone to their quarters the second he was aware that a helicopter was going to board.

    I'm not trying to be an apologist for Israel - I think those responsible should pay the price. But it's not like those on the flotilla were being saints, either. In my mind, both sides fucked up.

    I dunno, I can't really expect a bunch of young dudes being attacked with live gunfire in the middle of the night on international waters to behave in a completely rational way. I'd imagine a number of them went above deck just to see what was going on, then got caught up in the mob mentality.

    Attempting a blockade run on Israel was indeed a "dumbass move" and an obvious, even cynical political stunt, but that doesn't in any way make the protesters responsible for what happened to them. To me, it's a lot like blaming the rape victim for wearing a short skirt at night. Yeah, you could argue that they invited the situation by putting themselves in a dangerous position, but that in no way makes them responsible for what happened to them. I for one am happy to assign culpability to whatever douche ordered a nighttime special forces raid on a civilian vessel on international waters, with side helpings to the individual soldiers who apparently thought it a-ok to shoot prone and defenseless guys pointblank.

    ChopperDave on
    3DS code: 3007-8077-4055
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Dac wrote: »
    Israel did in fact step over the line in its assault and executed a number of civilians. It's clear, and is indefensible (esp. the shooting of injured on the floor). So Asshat points for Israel.

    On the other hand, as others have pointed out, you can't wash the flotilla's hands of all responsibility. While the murders conducted by the Israeli soldiers were criminal, it was also a complete dumbass move to mob up under a helicopter with blunt and edged weapons and fuck with its rappel line. The captain should have ordered everyone to their quarters the second he was aware that a helicopter was going to board.

    I'm not trying to be an apologist for Israel - I think those responsible should pay the price. But it's not like those on the flotilla were being saints, either. In my mind, both sides fucked up.

    I dunno, I can't really expect a bunch of young dudes being attacked with live gunfire in the middle of the night on international waters to behave in a completely rational way. I'd imagine a number of them went above deck just to see what was going on, then got caught up in the mob mentality.

    Attempting a blockade run on Israel was indeed a "dumbass move" and an obvious, even cynical political stunt, but that doesn't in any way make the protesters responsible for what happened to them. To me, it's a lot like blaming the rape victim for wearing a short skirt at night. Yeah, you could argue that they invited the situation by putting themselves in a dangerous position, but that in no way makes them responsible for what happened to them. I for one am happy to assign culpability to whatever douche ordered a nighttime special forces raid on a civilian vessel on international waters, with side helpings to the individual soldiers who apparently thought it a-ok to shoot prone and defenseless guys pointblank.

    Though I believe you have to add in the factor of whether or not the blockade runners thought being boarded would work as a PR stunt in their favor. That's been one of Israel's (and any Western entity, really) major problems with international relations in that area, as any move is no-win; you do nothing and the terrorists hurt you, you give them ground and you are seen as an appeaser, you respond with force and the humanists wring their hands about inappropriate response.

    The way I see it, some people knowingly performed an illegal act and, when told to stop by authorities, they then attacked and hampered said authorities. Does that give the authorities the right to pillage and murder? No, but then again, I'm not losing sleep over something that could have been prevented by not willfully breaking the law in several ways and instances. It wasn't JUST running the blockade, it wasn't JUST evading arrest, it wasn't JUST hampering the boarding party, it wasn't JUST the assault of the officers with deadly weapons: it was all of that, and at any point along that trajectory they could have stopped and avoided the outcome.

    Atomika on
Sign In or Register to comment.