What are these people in "Merry Olde England" so angry about?
a Manchester United lost a soccer match
b The pubs are closing one hour early
c Prince Charles is now King Charles
d America has declared independence
e Jack the Ripper has been (unjustly) charged with murder
f British food
g Israel has attacked Hamas in Gaza
Oh, I guess the picture gives it away, eh?
So I suppose "g" is the best answer (after much thought). Last night, the usual suspects had a demonstration in front of the Israeli Embassy in London for the second night in a row to protest the Israeli attack on Hamas in Gaza. Projectiles were thrown at the Embassy and police, and seven were arrested. It won't be long before we see placards demanding the beheadings of any Israelis that can be rounded up in London.
Interestingly, in the previous week, there had been no such demonstrations to protest a week's full of rockets that were lobbed into Israeli civilian settlements by Hamas terrorists.
Why is it that every time I see a photograph from London, it is of some angry mob? Are there not any happy people in the UK any more? Cheer up, lift your pints!
Let's drink to Israel!
BOTH sides in the conflict share some blame, and Israel is not completely unjustified in defending itself, but it is as usual overreacting.
ReplyDeleteHere's a good article.
Bryan,
ReplyDeleteWere we overreacting when we were dropping daisy cutters on Bora Bora?
War is not golf-with handicaps. War is to win.
Yes, actually we were.
ReplyDeleteAnd there's much more to winning a war than just sheer military power and force. See the Vietnam War for example.
Overreacting? Overreacting to 8+ years of rocket attacks on a daily basis? I'll tell you what Bryan. I'll come to your home, shoot guns into your house every day for 8+ years with the police letting me get away with it. I won't tell you when I'll shoot. I'll aim for any part of your home, might kill you and/or your family. See if you will show some restraint in that.
ReplyDeleteThat is what the people of Sderot and the Western Negev have endured.
But Gary, how are they ever going to win by going about things the way that they have been? This is war without end.
ReplyDeleteAnd no, I don't have an answer to this, but I know the wrong one when I see it.
Lance,
ReplyDeleteWhat is your solution-negotiation? Israel is confronted with an enemy that only seeks its destruction.
Poor Obama will enter office next month determined to be The One that brings about peace. And he will fail for the same reason the others have failed. The Palestininans don't want peace. They want the destruction of Israel.
Sorry, it's hard for me to be impartial in this one. The Palestinians hate us almost as much as they hate Israel. Remember how they danced on 9-11.
And Bryan, Remember, our military never lost one battle in Viet Nam. We lost because we lost our will at home (which perhaps was your point).
Lance,
ReplyDeleteSometimes, the simplest answer is the best answer. At a certain point, evil must be defeated. That is the lesson of Munich 1938 (which we have lost sight of).
Will it ever change? Probably not until the last man is left standing. That's what happens when one side or neither really wants peace.
"I'm becoming more and more convinced that what constitutes 'conservative' thinking is oversimplifying everything."
ReplyDeleteLance, I think you hit the nail on the head with that one. Couldn't agree more. The enemy is pure "evil" and our side is pure "good." Everything is black or white, gray does not exist. "You're either with us or you are with the terrorists," as our outgoing President once said.
I could sit here and explain why Israel's response is disproportionate until the cows come home, but let's face it, I'm not going to convince anyone.
Sometimes, the simplest answer is the best answer. At a certain point, evil must be defeated. That is the lesson of Munich 1938 (which we have lost sight of).
ReplyDeleteBut even then, the answer wasn't simple. We had to ally ourselves with Stalin, who became a problem later on. Not only that, but there were Germans who resisted the Nazis. We also bombed the hell out of Dresden - a civilian target which didn't help us in our objectives. I think you've watched too many John Wayne movies.
And this isn't the same thing. If the Palestinians held all the power, then maybe you'd have an analogy that you could work with here.
Lance,
ReplyDeleteJohn Wayne??!/
But in WW2, things were pretty simple. We were fighting for our survival. So I can understand the need to ally with Stalin even though he was a bad guy. To me, Israel is fighting for its existence. The Palestinians don't really want a divided state. They want it all. If they were willing to split the land in half, there would have been peace by now.
There is another question that should be asked.
If somehow magically, every Israeli converted to Islam tomorrow, would the problem still exist? A lot of people on both sides say there would be no further issue.
So-is it all about land-or religion?
As for Dresden, I don't take it lightly, since I have been there, but even more so since I have been to Hiroshima.
Gary, you need to quit referring to all Palestinians as if they were this monolithic entity that agree on everything. According to polling done as recently as 2007, 26% of Palestinians preferred a one-state (bi-national) solution, 46% preferred a two-state solution, and the rest preferred neither.
ReplyDeleteBryan,
ReplyDeleteIf you want to split hairs, one could argue that in reality, there is no such thing as a Palestinian, nor was there ever such a thing as a Palestinian political entity. It is just a convenient term used to give the false impression that a group of Arabs possess a nationality that Egypt, Syria, Lebanon or Jordon refuse to bestow. So who are these folks you are breaking down in some poll?
Gary, I wasn't splitting hairs, I was refuting your claims with FACTS. Now that I've proven you wrong about what Palestinians want, you become stubborn and start splitting hairs. Ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteHere's an article I happened to read just after posting that statistic, which showcases some of the diverse views amongst Palestinians.
Ted, I won't even bother debating you. You're so emotionally invested in this conflict that you completely look past the points I've been trying to make, so it's not worth my time.
Bryan,
ReplyDeleteNot sure what the point of the article is. So the BBC ( a very biased source BTW) interviews 4 or 5 people and gets a few disagreements. If so many of the palestinian people are for peace and a final settlement, then they should throw out Hamas because Hamas is for no peace and no settlement-they are committed to the destruction of Israel.
I'm not sure if you noticed, but in the article they were interviewing people in the West Bank, not Gaza. And in the West Bank, they did just that: threw out Hamas. The West Bank is run by Fatah.
ReplyDeleteMy main point in showing you that article was simply to further prove to you that Palestinians are not homogenous in their opinions on the conflict.
Bryan,
ReplyDeleteOr was it the West Bank that the Fatah fled to after Hamas threw them out of Gaza?
It seems like once again, when faced with the facts, you act stubborn and start splitting hairs.
ReplyDeleteThanks you do that, Bryan; and I won't wast my time engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
ReplyDelete