Because a stable, civilized Middle East would actually notice that it’s got class issues to be angry about as well as racial ones? It’s not like racial tensions have even before been used to deflect attention from the moral crimes of property.

A Middle East where Isreal is held accountable for its crimes is a Middle East that might one day know peace, and that would be a terrible thing for those who buy and sell access to oil.

Hmmm. Let’s see….
Israel – democracy where all races, including a significant number of Arabs, are given full rights of citizenship, etc.
Iran, Egypt, Syria, etc. – theocracies, kingdoms, dictatorships, etc., where being Jewish is punishable by death.

Now, why is it again that an extreme anti-semite who feels suicide bombers are good and killing Jews is a good thing isn’t taken seriously?

In all reality, Israel has done several stupid things and oftentimes the way they deal with Palestinians is one of them. But I find it amazing how so many on the left are often eager to attack Israel over their policies while ignoring the actions of the Palestinians, etc.

In fairness, I don’t think it’s generally the case that the left defends Palestine vs. israel, per se. I think it is the case that left is more vocal about calling out what they see as something of a double standard regarding the behavior and aggressions of the respective nations.

Big U:

Gee, I wasn’t aware that the Palestinians enjoyed all the same rights, privileges and immunities that Israeli Jews enjoy.

And I’m sorry, but I’m calling BS on the idea that the left “ignore” the actions of [a small subset of ] the Palestinians. We just don’t think that those actions excuse any and all reactions by the Israeli government. How many Israeli Jews did the Hamas rocket attacks kill? How many Palestinians did the Israeli response kill? I’m not saying tit-for-tat corpses is the best measure of fairness, but let’s face it, the Israeli response was excessive, especially when one considers how many of the Palestinian dead were “collateral damage” as compared to how many were legitimate militant threats.

As for the actions of the Palestinians in general, I’m sick and fucking tired of having to restate the obvious — that Palestinian attacks targeting civilians are contemptible — every time I dare to say something in any way negative about the Israeli government’s actions. That’s bullshit. It’s like saying that if I were alive in the 1950’s, I’d have to condemn the actions of the “bad” blacks before I dared to argue that the US policies discriminating against them were in any way unjust or unfair. Worse, it’s like demanding that there must be no bad actions taken by any blacks anywhere before we even consider giving them something vaguely resembling basic rights. It’s total and utter bullshit, and I’m sick of it.

Look, I’ve been saying for a long time that in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there’s nobody to root for — both sides are insufferable assholes. You can pick a side, but you can’t feel good about it. But all that said, to anyone with a shadow of an open mind, it’s clear that one side is oppressing the other. You can argue that it’s justifiable oppression (I’d disagree), but you can’t argue that it isn’t oppression.

And I’m pretty sure I made it clear that the messenger in this case (Ahmadinejad) is a shithead. But that’s not the point. The point is that while he’s obviously an anti-Semite and not to be taken seriously, criticism of Israel’s actions with respect to the Palestinian people — and the West’s seemingly unquestioning and unconditional support thereof — is not inherently antisemitic.

tgirsh > I agree that what Israel did was overkill and should not have happened. And there was a great deal of criticism world-wide for it, including from the US.

However, what would you consider a reasonable response to over 3000 rocket and mortar attacks on your country in one year? What about the 8000 Israelies injured or killed between 2000 and 2007?

Are the Palestinians oppressed? Yes. No question. Is Israel 100% innocent? No. But where do you draw the line when dealing with people who have stated in their constitution that they are going to wipe your race from the earth? I would be curious to hear your suggestions.

Most of the Palestinians just want their own state. Yes, there are some ideologues who want Israel wiped off the map, but they don’t represent the bulk of the Palestinians, at least not as far as I can tell.

And while I’m not defending the mortar attacks, it’s silly to pretend that they’re completely and utterly unprovoked. Gaza and the West Bank are effectively isolated prison camps, with the residents thereof unable to leave, and supplies blockaded.

And I’m sorry, but while I can’t speak for other Western powers, the “criticism” that the US engaged in with respect to Israel didn’t even rise to the level of a slap on the wrist. It was effectively “We don’t approve, wink wink, nudge nudge.”

Whither Larry E? Aside from dealing with other periodic stresses, LarryE has been seriously sick (and having to work in spite of it) to the point where making the occasional comment on other blogs is all he can handle.

But in brief, LarryE thinks Ahmadinejad is a jerk who says half of what he does because it plays well domestically and doesn’t really give a damn how it plays in the world at large. (That being something you can afford to do when the nation you lead in fact is not a major player in the world, as much as you may like to imagine the contrary.)

LarryE also thinks that the most revealing line in the linked article in where is said Western nations threatened to quit the conference “if it descended into anti-Semitism or other rhetoric harshly critical of Israel.” Not just anti-Semitism, where some clear protest might have been justified, but “harsh criticism.”

So he also thinks that the walk-out, obviously pre-planned, was an affectedly self-conscious stunt that will ultimately accomplish nothing except to show once again that Israel gets a pass that other nations do not, gets judged by different standards.

One last thing from LarryE before he goes to work and then back to bed:

8000 Israelies injured or killed

According to the Israeli government, 1182 people (most, but not all, of them Israelis) have been killed by “Palestinian violence and terrorism” between September 2000 and 2007. An additional 8,341 were wounded, of who 5,676 were civilians and 2,665 were “security forces.” So 9,543 casualties, of which 3,007 were security personnel. (The government site did not give a breakdown of civilian vs. security forces deaths; the total is based on a scan of the listing of the killed, which revealed 342 identified as security personnel.) Nearly 3/4 of those casualties came in the first half of that time period.

On the other side, there are no exact figures because of the difficulty of compiling them, but the estimates are about 4,000 Palestinians killed and about 20,000 wounded in that same period. 24,000 casualties, or over 2.5 times as many. And as a Palestinian in Gaza, you are living as a virtual prisoner, with your access to food, even to cooking gas, even to your own money if it’s in a bank outside the strip, wholly dependent on Israel’s good graces.

So, BigU, I turn the question back to you: If you were a Palestinian, what would you consider a “reasonable” response? Just remember that you can’t include suspending rocket attacks (you already tried that, nothing gained) or offering recognition of Israel (also already tried, also nothing gained) or having elections (again, already tried; the US and Israel’s disapproval of the outcome is what lead to the current situation of Fatah controlling the West Bank and Hamas controlling Gaza).

Well, LarryE, since I asked the question first, I would have expected you to answer it. However, since you didn’t I will answer. I would see rocket attacks, etc. as reasonable if I was a Palestinian. But I would be wise enough to know that if I attack the only place I can earn an income in that I may wind up going without. If I was Israeli, I would consider a 10 of them for every one of us to be reasonable. We are fully surrounded by potentially hostile nations and the only thing keeping us alive is our ability to pound the snot out of any opponents. Good for neighborly relations? No. Necessary for survival? Yes.

Significant gains were made in 2000 prior to the fall of the Israeli government of the day and prior to renewed attacks by Palestinians. However, the election of hard-line governments on both sides has significantly hampered any further progress.

As for the Gaza strip, work on massived increase in trade with Egypt. Hamas controls the Egypt Gaza strip border so it would make sense that if supplies are choked by Israel that an increase in supplies should be sought from Egypt.

So LarryE, since I answered my own question, do you have an answer?

BigU -

Your question was what would be a “reasonable” response on the part of Israel. Here are some proposals:

- Stop trying to claim the role of innocent victim. (And before you jump, I didn’t say you were making that claim, I said the Israelis – or, to be more exact, the various Israeli governments – have done so.)

- End the blockade of Gaza, which has even included things like cement, steel, glass, spare parts for water and sewage treatment plants, medical equipment, and spare parts for hospitals, the latter two of which somehow did not meet Israel’s definition of humanitarian aid. Stop engaging in collective punishment, which is both immoral and contrary to international law (and counterproductive to boot).

- Abandon the fantasy that Hamas now could (any more than in the past Fatah could) simply snap its fingers and all terrorist, including rocket, attacks would immediately stop. Hamas can control rocket attacks, as it did during the summer 2008 ceasefire: During the period July-October, a total of 11 rockets were fired out of Gaza. But it can’t eliminate them, as it is not the only group firing them. In fact, the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Israel Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center says that the rocket attacks in November 2008 were the first with evidence of the direct involvement of Hamas.

- Specifically and clearly avow a commitment to the establishment of a viable Palestinian state and mean it. No, Israel has never done that except in a vague philosophical sense and always with a string of preconditions. Offer to meet without preconditions with a joint Hamas-Fatah delegation to discuss how to achieve that end. Publicly accept that matters such as security guarantees will come as part of such an agreement, not as precursors to it.

- Pledge to accept the results of elections among the Palestinians – even if you don’t like the outcome.

- Prosecute Israelis who committed war crimes in Gaza.

- Tear down the sections of the so-called “separation fence” that extend beyond the Green Line. (I actually think the whole thing should be torn down, but the right of Israel to build it inside the Green Line can’t be reasonably denied.) Dismantle the apartheid imposed on the West Bank and put an end to the routine humiliation of Palestinians at border checkpoints, humiliation which has nothing to do with security and everything to do with bigotry. Discipline soldiers who engage in such humiliation.

- Stop expropriating Palestinian lands, especially in and around Jerusalem.

- Stop being the side to break a ceasefire the vast majority of the time. (Linked because I knew there was no way you would believe me otherwise.)

I expect I could think of more.

I happily confess to concentrating my rhetorical fire on the Israelis. That’s not because I think Hamas is blameless or some paragon of virtue but because a)I say that in the present circumstances and indeed for the past couple of decades, Israel has been the primary A-hole here and b)I am primarily concerned with what is done in my name, which means first by my own government and second by those which it supports – and it is not Hamas which receives about $3 billion is US military grants every year.

Finally, a few comments on your own proposals:

If I was Israeli, I would consider a 10 of them for every one of us to be reasonable.

You thus make Israelis into immoral monsters, no better than – if not clearly worse than – the terrorists that they oppose. There is a saying that those who deal in vengeance become that which they say they oppose. Are you making Israelis an example of that?

We are fully surrounded by potentially hostile nations

And the sane course of action is to keep doing things that will both continue and increase that hostility? In what alternate universe?

Good for neighborly relations? No. Necessary for survival? Yes.

Good for neighborly relations? No. Necessary for survival? Absolutely not. You, Israel, have been “pounding the snot” out of others for decades. Are you any closer to security than you were, say 30 years ago? Have the attacks stopped? Have your people stopped “living under the horror” of terrorism, as one site put it? I’ve quoted this before and I truly wish I could recall who said it beyond knowing it was a retired IDF general: “Secure borders do not bring peace, peace brings secure borders.” Establishing “good neighborly relations” is the path to survival and the best remedy for terrorism is and always has been justice. Or do you prefer to pursue the fantasy that you can keep up your present course indefinitely?

As for the Gaza strip, work on massived increase in trade with Egypt

The idea that there is some kind of open border between Egypt and Gaza is belied by the facts. The border has been closed almost continuously for nearly two years as Egypt, for its own reasons, actively cooperates with the Israeli-led blockade of Gaza. The only reason there hasn’t been a constant Israeli military presence there is because it was thought unnecessary and too difficult to manage. The recent incident when an Egyptian-built wall intended to completely seal the border was damaged by a Hamas explosive (only to have a replacement barrier built in a combined Egyptian-Hamas effort) caused Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak to say that it was “urgent” that Israel build its own fence along its border with Egypt.

So the idea that Hamas could secure a “massive increase in trade” with Egypt just won’t fly.