Since I posted the last post I've found myself, when I have time, discussing a variety of issues: the principle of Non Violence, the principle of proportionality, and the principles and history involved in the existence of Israel. I am not on the defensive on these matters because I'm trying to enforce a balanced conception of where (I) we can go as (a human being) human beings and that can only be done in an honest and progressive manner. Israel's existence and future is a matter of current importance to everybody, especially to me because I too have had my imagination inflamed by the events that led to the current situation.
There are some good articles on this subject today:
Richard Cohen writes:
Hunker down with History: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701154.html
Richard Cohen writes;
"The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now. Israel fights Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south, but its most formidable enemy is history itself."
Israel probably is indeed a mistake. Religious radicalism was lit up by the oxygen of even the prospect of a prophesized Jewish return their homeland. Orthodox Rabbis mostly opposed the idea because they knew that the land still had many spiritual issues and that those isses and concepts would be rekindled by creating a State there before the figurative "Davidic King" was restored under ideal circumstances. Anything less would rekindle the kind of conflict and hatred that led to the destruction of the first two states. Moslems have their own end-times predictions about Jews. To them a State in Israel isn't a mistake but a unpardonable sin.
The Haskallah Jews of Zionism were looking at ideals and thought that the Arabs would welcome progressive, hard working people who would use science and technology to make the area a breadbasket that could support millions of people. They rejected such figurative arguments, especially since these weren't framed in a way that these hard-headed, myth-rejecting people could understand.
Sure enough The Orthodox Rabbis were right, but once the state was founded most of them found they had no choice but to sign on. Figuratively God had spoken. To this day some Orthodox and many Marxist Jews oppose a State in Israel, for different reasons. Marxists because they oppose any particular state.
The Hazkallah Jews also came to Israel because they didn't see much of a choice. Between 1922-1948 Europe, the United States, and much of the world shut their doors to Jewish Emigration. Going to Israel, legally or illegally, was often their only choice. When Jews moved to Palestine starting at the end of the 19th century they dreamed of reconstituting a Jewish State there, but many of them were quite content to live as members of the broader state they were living in until circumstances forced them to seek independence in the 40's. They also came to the US, to Argentina, to any port that would have them. Those who left left because they were forced to and could. Those who stayed died.
Chris
Posted by cholte at July 18, 2006 06:00 AMYou apparently closed off comments. You are putting forthg much more propaganda than I. Of course you have a bias. Isreal has no legitimacy but the bomb. If I steal your house but promise not to steal the one next door, that's the two state policy. Why should anyone but the robber accept it? I'm think you'll delete this but I wanted to make clear you are not taking an ubaised look, but merely saying the zionists are justified and right. History as I have seen it in my own life shows me differently.
Posted by: clownhidden at July 18, 2006 02:26 PMClown-Hidden: You are putting forth much more propaganda than I.
The distinction between making an argument and spreading dishonest propaganda is in the word "honest" and the word "truth". You can disagree with me all you want, but I'm talking from facts and have spent some time studying both sides of the issues. I am trying to make some nuanced arguments here and I would suggest that rather than labelling them as "propaganda" you just listen.
Clown: Of course you have a bias. Isreal has no legitimacy but the bomb.
That is a nonsense argument. Where are the facts? If Israel's legitimacy only comes from bombs, where does the legitimacy of Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, or the Fedayeen come from? The muzzle of a Gun? A Car bomb? A suicide belt?
Richard Cohen (in the article i cited) puts it well:
"There is no point in condemning Hezbollah. Zealots are not amenable to reason. And there's not much point, either, in condemning Hamas. It is a fetid, anti-Semitic outfit whose organizing principle is hatred of Israel. There is, though, a point in cautioning Israel to exercise restraint -- not for the sake of its enemies but for itself. Whatever happens, Israel must not use its military might to win back what it has already chosen to lose: the buffer zone in southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip itself."
Yet Israel, Jews, are forced to fight with the likes of Hezbollah. They are even now as I write this invading Southern Lebanon to try to hunt down their tormentors. Too many children, women and others are dying on account of this war. But this matter of "legitimacy" its not really in dispute -- if you are honest on the subject. All humans have a legitimate right to exist in peace, practice their religions and beliefs without oppression and tyranny, and live.
Clown: If I steal your house but promise not to steal the one next door, that's the two state policy.
Here's the rub, Israel is the "Jew next door". It didn't steal your house. It moved in next door and rather than the local Arabs accepting new neighbors they have been trying repeatedly and hostilely for nearly a hundred years now to kill them, dispossess them, and 'drive them into the sea.' That they have failed miserably is not for want of trying -- and for a time it wasn't for lack of material or sufficiency of ammunition. Israel has survived as long as it has because it must be doing something right. 1947-1968 were miracles. The time since has been borrowed time.
Clown: Why should anyone but the robber accept it?
Yes, would be robbers should accept their neighbors. 60 years, 100 years, how long does it take for neighbors to act neighborly? Should Hindus tear down mosques and rebuild temples they lost? Should the Orthodox try to reclaim Santa Sophia? Can the Jews return to Spain or Poland? Should the Armenians be able to claim their property in Turkey? It would be ghoulish of the ghosts of these people to try. Yet there should be some principle of compensation, of dispute resolution, of solution to such disputes that is fair to both parties. Where is the principle that only Moslems can assert their rights in this world and that it is okay for them to steal, pillage and dispossess but it is a sin for anyone to challenge their right to do so?
Clown: I'm think you'll delete this but I wanted to make clear you are not taking an unbaised look, but merely saying the zionists are justified and right.
Well my own feeling is that Israel has a perfect justification to defend itself. It also has a duty and a responsibility to settle things with those who have been trying to destroy it for the past 60 years -- if they can. It's not important to be unbiased, it is important to be honest and self-honest.
Clown: History as I have seen it in my own life shows me differently.
Well I'm sorry to hear you feel that way. I wish I could do something to make amends. Revenge won't do it. When the mothers of both sides cry together maybe that will be a start. When the mothers stop encouraging their children to put on bomb belts -- that will be a real start.
And i don't delete posts. I locked the other post because I don't want adspam and because I wanted to continue the conversations on this post. I'm not afraid to discuss anything with people willing to be honest and look at more than one side of the elephant. Are you willing to do that?
Chris
Posted by: Chris at July 18, 2006 11:39 PMYou think that a jewish state is justified and should be recognized, I do not. And there stems all the difference. I'll say this I attribute all the pain and heart ache of the last 50 years to Isreal and those that support her. The U.S. and Isreal will be able to continue at a great cost in human suffering on both sides. And they have the will and the Arabs have the will. Two guys get kidknapped ( most likelty to be used as bargaining chips in a bid to free prisoners) and Isreal blows a country half to hell. I suppose Isreal would like to do away with as much of the oppposition before being forced into a cease fire. And then this round ends. I predict the next will be far worse, and at some point things get so bad that U.S. troops will be needed. (Isreal has a big army but not big enough to occupy the whole mid-east) That to me is the silver lining, I'm hoping the U.S. is weakened enough to make it easier for the Chinese to become the dominant world power.
The reason I say Isreal's bombs are the thing that makes them legitimate is I believe they could bomb the hell out of anyone they wanted and that knowledge prevents a strong coalition to route them out. And of course for as long as Isreal is there,there will never be peace not in 50,100, or a thousand years.
clown hidden
You think that a jewish state is justified and should be recognized, I do not. And there stems all the difference.
The Jewish State was recognized in 1948. Prior to that this was a subject up for debate. And it seems to me that Hezbollah and Hamas are both trying to blow Israel to hell every bit as much as Nazrullah and the leader of Iran have promised. In case you haven't noticed they are quite seriously planning to literally blow it off the map as soon as they can.
I suspect that you are partly right, Israel will try to eliminate as much of Hezbollah as they can before International pressure forces them to stop. And Hezbollah will go into hiding and look for a new pretext to launch more rockets after laying low for a few days, or will keep playing bop the groundhog for the next 20-30 years.
If I were king of the Universe I'd give Israel a whole planet and name it Israel. Given that we don't have that option, I have some faith that eventually the Moslems will figure it out that its not worth fighting for the next 50,000 years -- when they do Israel/Palestine could become a popular tourist attraction. If there were peace in the region the area could hold everyone perfectly adequately (water is a constraint that can be overcome with engineering).
Can the business side trump the anger side? Yes.
Will it happen? I don't know.
Chris
Posted by: Chris at July 19, 2006 09:30 PM