Could this be our future
Oct 13th, 2009 by David Anderson
Israel’s then left wing government defended its people from constant attack in Gaza led by the terrorist group Hamas. Now a UN report is critical of Israel for civilian casualties and is raising concerns about officials of those government traveling to some European countries. Hamas is basically a civilian group. You can not fight it without casualties in the population that shelters it. This report has a perverse logic that a population which shelters and elects terrorists should be protected even if it means allowing a daily barrage of terrorism and military attack on a nation’s civilian population. It acts as if Hamas is not responsible for stationing its rockets in population centers including schools and apartments. According to the law of war, when those are used to hide, plan, or launch attacks they are subject to attack themselves.
The Israelis protected their forces and did not target civilians. Total civilian casualties were between 300 and 900 depending on who you call a civilian. 1 is a reason to mourn, but it is not a reason to stop a nation from defending its innocents. The fact report equates Hamas with Israel when it recognizes Hamas started the conflict is puzzling. It speaks of rejecting a culture of impunity in the region. Stopping bloody attacks on people walking the streets or sleeping in their own homes is now viewed as impunity. The response was not based upon impunity but destroying the infrastructure used to attack.
The UN panel is ignoring its own rules to make a political attack on a sovereign nation defending itself. The administration must stand up and threaten to veto this when it comes before the security council and if necessary do so. If we do not stand up for Israel’s right of self defense today, the UN will be running our national defense tomorrow based upon the appeals of the Taliban. That is a future I reject. This will be a significant test of whether our President values justice or elite opinion in the UN more.
I have a different view, not so one-sided pro-Israel, viewed in a post 1948 context, ignoring the Zionist movement for the moment, although the Palestinians can never forget that, understandingly so I think.
On most occasions Israel has refused to sit down at the bargaining table without preconditions, and has refused to honor the pre-1967 UN mandated boundaries.
The Palestinians have continued their mortar and rocket attacks on Israeli settlements, especially on these settlements which are in Palestinian territory.
While I believe over time both sides have been guilty of extreme hostility and terrorism (Ask each side what they perceive.), courageous leaders on both sides must step up to resolve this conflict, otherwise it will continue to fester and continue to destabilize the entire region.
The US, with our unbalanced position in favor of Israel, through the decades, has contributed to the difficulties in arriving at a settlement, with the exception of the efforts of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
Israel’s recent overreaction to the Gaza/Hamas problem with their invasion, on top of the humanitarian stranglehold they had imposed on the Gazans following their turn over of Gaza, has exacerbated the situation.
Obama is now in a position to exert pressure on both sides to attempt to broker a peace settlement. There couldn’t be a better man involved than George Mitchell. I hope he succeeds!
Perry is a known terrorist apologist who dawdles in revisionist history. His comments should be taken with much less than a grain of salt.
Hube, Perry’s ramblings reveal no ability to engage in independent analytical thought. Perry has emotions and prejudices. The emotions and prejudices drive his views as opposed to facts and rational deduction. I am not surprised that Perry sides with terrorists as opposed to a small gallant nation struggling for survival. Israel is a small island of Democracy surrounded by an ocean of tyrants and autocrats. Naturally Perry sides with the tyrants and autocrats.
Here we go, Clinton and Carter?! Really Perry? Come on I expect a bit more from you my friend!
Simply put none of our U.S. Presidents or their administrations have done the right thing. Each one has taken one side or another(except MAYBE Clinton who I think did a decent job). Every one of them has taken a side. It’s not OUR PLACE TO TAKE ANY SIDES! What I see is a Palestinian movement that is very violent, very militant and with a deep hatred that they must control if there is ever to be peace. I also see an Israeli government who provokes the Palestinians. It’s like two brothers fighting. I don’t know how EXACTLY to resolve it, if I did I’d go do it and win a Nobel Peace Prize (oh, that’s right, Obama stole that already) for doing it. However, I think the right thing is to simply bring the two sides to the table and sit and listen. Let THEM talk but when the talk escalates you calmly bring the debate back to level. Show them America, explain the rather grim and disgusting history of our Post Civil-War era. Show them how today, for the most part we live in harmony across racial lines. It’s not perfect and relationships could be improved but we’re moving in the right directions.
“Israel’s recent overreaction to the Gaza/Hamas problem with their invasion, on top of the humanitarian stranglehold they had imposed on the Gazans following their turn over of Gaza, has exacerbated the situation.”
Nice try, Per Per, but that is a total myth!
Goldstone’s report would take away any ability Israel has to protect itself in the future (thankfully Israel will pay it little mind.) Why would they ever pull out of any area in the future if the terrorists could simply move in and launch rocket attacks at them just as they did in Gaza? If this is report (written by some whack job) is accepted by the international community, then, in affect, Isreal will never be able to defend itself against rocket attacks again.
I wonder what Mr. Goldstone would say about the US’ invasion of Afghanistan?