Tuesday, August 8, 2006
Wherein, a rant, by isirota1965:
Israel is taking so much grief from so many countries over its "disproportionate" response to the Hezbollah terrorist attack. I was wondering what the record of some of those countries who are criticizing Israel might be.
Let's see, why don't we start with Russia. Ah, the Russians are a peaceful group, aren't they? Why, look at what they did in Chechnya. Estimates range from 20,000 to well over 100,000 Chechen civilians were killed when Grozny was levelled. Now, the Chechens undoubtedly have engaged in terrorist acts against Russia, but they didn't killed tens of thousands. So, methinks the Russian response was, shall we say, DISPROPORTIONATE.
Okay, what about those wonderful nations of Western Europe. I'll give you that they don't like to use military action. Hell, they were protected by the American nuclear umbrella for 50+ years after WWII, so they really didn't have to do much (though the ultra-hypocritical French managed to knock off some 82,000 Algerian civilians when that country dared to assert that it should not be a French colony), but now they've been involved in some military adventures of late, like in Bosnia and Kosova (through NATO). How many civilians were killed there? Well, according Human Rights Watch, over 1,000 civilians were killed in those two actions. See here and here.
Now, near as I can tell, Serbia NEVER threatened Western Europe, and NEVER posed an existential threat to France, or Holland, or Great Britain, or Germany, etc. Any of you remember Serbian suicide bombers blowing themselves up in Parisian cafes? How about in London pubs? No? What about in German brauhaus'? I didn't think so.
And of course, Israel has been condemned by those paragons of virtue, the Chinese. In Tiananmen Square, the government itself admits that it killed at least 200 people, but estimates range into the thousands. See here.
Those numbers too low for you? Ask the Tibetans how nicely they've been treated. Over 1,000,000 (a conservative estimate, according to some) of them have died as a result of the Chinese takeover. See here. Let's do the math, shall we? That works out to 18,181.8 people per year since 1951, when the Chinese moved in. Gee, sounds kind of DISPROPORTIONATE to me, especially given that I don't believe that Tibetans have ever lobbed so much as a snowball in the direction of Shanghai, Beijing, Nanjing, Guangzhou, etc., etc.
Then there is the Arab League, and the various Muslim organizations around the world. I wonder what they have to say about Darfur, where over 300,000 people have died and 1.2 million have been rendered homeless? See here. Gee, not a thing. What a shocker! Then again, that situation involves Muslims killing non-Muslims, so that's justified, I guess.
And what about Rwanda? Twelve years ago, 500,000 Tutsis were murdered by the Hutu government. See here. Yet, the world did nothing, and I don't recally any mass protests around the world to decry what was going on. I don't recall Security Council condemnations being issued, or resolutions being contemplated. Where was France then? Where was Russia? Where was China? Where was the Arab League?
What's my point in all of this? It is simply this: There is one standard for Israel, and another for the rest of the world. The discussion of "proportionality" is a joke, offered only because those who hate Israel or simply can't bring themselves to say that they don't like Jews can't come up with anything better to say in response to what is obviously a defensive action. It's frustrating and it is simply wrong.
Isirota;
I am as frustrated as you. But Israel, like the US, will always be held to a higher standard than most other nations, primarily because both act out of moral conviction, rather than political expediance. While a double standard exists as far as criticism, reportage, and political posturing, I am glad that both the US and Israel are verbally assaulted by those who support and abet terrorist regimes and organizations. It means both of us are generally on the right side.
Thanks for your kind words, Tom. I guess that I am just aggravated that the U.S. is alone in the world in supporting Israel strongly, despite attacks on this policy from both the right (Pitchfork Pat Buchanan, et als.), and the left (almost anyone associated with the Daily Kos and Huffington Post).
Gosh. I think you're way off base there. I mean, ONLY the US and Israel governments have ever killed civilians. And they do it deliberately! Haven't you heard? War is now a greater terrorist act than any silly suicide bomber could hope to be.
PUH-lease. (Yes, that's sarcasm. Honest!)
I'm just glad there are people who can spot the selective memory and hypocrites out there and expose them for what they are. Even if it does seem all too often that it's only a few lone voices in a vast wilderness of insanity. It gives me some hope for the world that maybe humanity hasn't completely lost its collective mind.
Just one more thought on proportionality.
The number of Israelis killed in terroist attacks on Israel since the beginning of the first Intafada would be proportionately equal to about 64,000 dead if this campaign were conducted against America. Would we stand for any criticism if we had another 64,000 dead as the result of Islamic attacks?
So you're justifying FURTHER killing by saying "everyone else has done it in the past".
Resorting to a close to home case for emphasis: Hitler killed a bunch of jewish people, a lot more than have been killed in this war by many magnitudes, so that's (by your logic) justification.
That example is one that is trotted out all the time by Israel and as such is hypocritical given that it as a nation has inflicted extreme things upon the palestinians when the lessons of history should seem to indicate that a more peaceful approach would be demanded.
I'm really appalled at the disregard for the value of human life shown on here at times..
"Resorting to a close to home case for emphasis: Hitler killed a bunch of jewish people, a lot more than have been killed in this war by many magnitudes, so that's (by your logic) justification."
That isn't even remotely reflective of what he's saying. And I don't believe that any honest reading could possibly come up with that interpretation.
"when the lessons of history should seem to indicate that a more peaceful approach would be demanded."
Actually, the lessons of history indicate that Jews would be fools to rely on Europeans for defense, and that they ought to defend themselves physically and quickly when threatened, rather than walking peacefully into the gas chambers.
What is it that you think you're accomplishing by continuing to post as you have around here?
Solomon:
Well my question is what was the point of the blog post then if not to say "everyone else has killed lots more, so Israel is justified in this situation"? I happen to dispute that and hope that someone wouldn't think that comparing one set of killings to historic cases is valid. I mean it's not going to take humanity anywhere good is it?
By listing out figures for what other groups have done in the past seems to me what that post was saying.
As for why do I post here: I'm posting my views, that's all. I don't have a goal other than to stimulate discussion or contribute thoughts. I'm sorry if that doesn't conform to the "yes" men and "yes" women that might also post on here, but if you only want posts in agreement with whatever view (regardless of whether readers agree or disagree) then you should change the conditions of posting..
Condition 3 below the posting box: "I'd love to have your input, agree, disagree or just offer a different data point, really."
I'm attempting to avoid being rude, disrespectful or derisive despite an almost constant barrage of narrow minded insulting posters..
Perhaps I'm also hoping that those people will calm down and accept debate on things (or at least answer a few questions) or admit that the world isn't black and white on every option. I'm also interested in the opinions people express on here given the various things going on in the middle east at the moment..
So would you rather I not contribute?
I don't really care whether you stay or go for the moment, but you are starting to bore me. Right now I perceive you as purely a troll, who sees it as fun to toss a bunch of words on the screen solely for the purpose of being contrarian, without trying to honestly understand the point being made, and posing as though you have more knowledge than you obviously do just to argue. If you want to explore ideas, you'll find people to do that with you, but not if they perceive they're wasting their time with you.
Solomon: when my posts are meaningful, lengthy, backed up, though out and (I hope) intelligent arguments and you say that's "toss a bunch of words on the screen" then you're obviously missing reading what I've written. I do read what's written and have an opinion on it.
Compare and contrast my posts versus twits like Eddie (whome you really should warn about his complete bullsh*t racist posts and the ever so clever: ""F", "F", PaleSWINE." ) or other people just spouting anti-Islamic stuff. Not that I care about Islamic religion getting bashed, but it's just plain moronic half the stuff said.
A troll jumps on and says stuff like Eddie. Again, if you mean point 3 (agree, disagree or offer a different data point) which is exactly what I'm doing.. Otherwise what is the point of the comments for these articles as they won't ever produce any thought..
As for whether people are willing to explore ideas: well that's the goal isn't it.. It's taken a lot to get some people to even learn the rules of debating (as in avoiding name calling, shutting down via accusation of anti-semitism, referencing bastard muslims who should be shot etc etc).. I think that in itself is progress..