THE WAR IN GAZA

George, that is truly dishonest and beyond the pale. I guess it is indicative of Israel's Nazi leanings that it made about 90,000 phone calls to places in Gaza to warn away civilians from targeted areas.

The phrase "beyond the Pale" came from the references of Englishmen to the Irish. The "Pale" was the Anglicized portion of Ireland around Dublin, subject to their control. "Beyond the Pale" referred to the subhuman Irish outside the domain of civilization, as they saw it.

My reference was to your oft repeated contempt for the, equally subhuman, "pals" as you call them. In that you do indeed mimic the rhetorical contempt that was the style of the NAZIs ands all like intolerant oppressors before them.

That Israel has taken some precautions to limit civilian casualties ('tho not very effectively) has nothing whatever to do with the repeated contempt you express or my accurate characterization of it.

Revanchism is not a good way to deal with collective psychological issues, red herrings about European ancestry, religion and mythology notwithstanding.

Israel's forceful, if belated response to more than 6,000 Hamas rocket attacks on its civilians over the last three years should be cheered by every nation. Good news: One by one, we're seeing support seeping at least from some of them. Because make no mistake, Hamas's unremitting attacks are not just a life-threatening encroachment on Israel's sovereignty. Hamas represents the global Islamic jihad---what Hamas wants to do to Israel is what all jihadis want to do the U.S., Europe and every Arab and Muslim state: Take it over and impose fundamentalist Islamic rule.

No wonder Egypt and Saudi Arabia have found it in their best interests to condemn Hamas for its recalcitrance in refusing to agree to a ceasefire. The last thing these "moderate" Arab states want is an ascendant Islamic terrorist neighbor. Iran is plenty bad enough for them. What's more gratifying is the public support Israel's incursion into Gaza has received from the Prime Minister of Denmark, the general manager of al-Arabiya television, the Czech foreign minister, German PM Angela Merkel, U.S. president George Bush and even California Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger.

Now that Israeli troops are on the ground in Gaza, it's our job to keep that momentum flowing in support of Israel. You can be sure that the more effective Israel is in incapacitating Hamas, the louder will be the protests from leftists in world capitals. I predicted this in last week's Hotline, and you've no doubt already seen op-eds in your local newspapers condemning Israel for a "disproportionate use of force." Of course the Arab "street" is in a veritable frenzy because Israel has finally decided to protect its citizens.

Let me ask you this: In the face of someone obsessed with trying to kill you, how can any response be disproportionate? After all, the U.S. flattened the cities of Dresden and Hiroshima in response to German and Japanese aggression. (We can only hope that type of action won't be necessary in Gaza before Hamas gets the message.)

With an outspokenly supportive U.S. president still in office and rational voices around the world beginning to appreciate Israel's plight and the virtue of its response, now is the time to put Hamas out of business. As David Hornik's article below attests, the time is ripe for Israel to proceed aggressively to achieve a definitive result. While Israel claims publicly to wish only to stop Hamas rocket fire, today's news reports indicate that Hamas's command and control structure has been so seriously damaged as to be dysfunctional, at least temporarily.

We can only hope that Israeli soldiers succeed in so seriously damaging Hamas that it loses credibility and capability as a governing organization among Gaza's citizens. This is not the time to make the same mistake with Hamas that Israel made with Hizbollah.

--factsandlogic.org

Unless you are specific, I can only take your reply to me as wondering what you meant.

The Israelis have hit 3 schools today. It must make you so proud. They had been given the co-ordinates of all schools.
I find it strange that all the governments surrounding Israel are terrorists: Israel must be very unlucky.
I asked for a sweepstake on the number of murders. It seems no one thinks there is any limit to Israel's barbarism.

Its a minor quibble: The term pale is roman: the logic was the same: I think the English suppression of the Irish was barbaric: but the Brits never resorted to indiscriminate bombing.
Peace in Ireland was only achieved when Britain negotiated with Sinn Fein Considered by some to be Terrorists.
The Irish government Does not recognise the border of the UK at present or Northern Irelands right to exist. This doesn't stop there being peace between the 2 neighbours.
If we had used Israel's logic, then we should be bombing.

The term "beyond the Pale" was used in another context. It meant beyond where the Jews were settled in Czarist Russia. It was used, for example, by saying that the Jews could not live beyond the Pale of settlement. The Pale of settlement was where the Czars had put the Jews. Notice the opposite meaning from your explanation of the British/Irish use. The Pale for Jews was where they could live. The Russians lived beyond the Pale. So in your definition Pale = nice place. In the Russian definition Pale = not so nice place.

Your posts truly are interesting, in that as a career military person, I would believe you did not comment on our military's involvements, while you were in the military? If that is correct, could your posted concerns here reflect some sort of catharsis, after decades of silence?

There is only peace now in Northern Ireland, because right after 9/11, I believe it was realized that the greater good was to stop the fighting between the two groups.

Actually, Northern Ireland may be a bad example, for whatever the analogy was, since in Northern Ireland there was fighting between Catholics and Protestants in the SAME country. In Israel, the Israeli Arabs live fairly well, and are not fighting with Jewish Israelis. The comparsion is invalid, I believe.

That is as wrong as Fountofwisdom's response about non recognation of the border. etc.

As are all such comparisons. If the Welsh took up sending fireworks into the border region in England I don't think we would unleash our military on them.

There must be other reasons. Being short-tempered for example.

An Israeli tank has fired a "clinical targetted strike". It killed 3 soldiers and injured 20 others. They were all Israeli. Israel has now killed more Israelis than Hamas, on their warped logic they should be bombing Tel Aviv.

Eire's constitution only recognises a united Ireland. It does not recognise Northern Ireland. You state I am wrong without giving reasons: this is not debate. Irish politics is very complicated. There is a 1000 year history of claim, counter claim and atrocities.
The point is: peace was negotiated. The IRA claim that they defeated the British by targetting the city of London and the economic damage. There are many views history will judge.
Israel is trying to impose a military solution. This blood letting will not lead to peace. The solution to Ireland defeated the best brains of both countries for 350 years. You claim to know the answer. Well done. Perhaps you should have told us earlier.
Only an American or a fool would claim there were any right or wrong answers in Eire. Your arrogance is as breathtaking as your ignorance.

Wasn't that changed by the Nineteenth Amendment? Just asking....

What I fail to understand is why America backs Israel unconditionally. I mean there is no strategic reason for them to do so. Without the backing of our transatlantic gun huggers, Israel would be forced to compromise, maybe even negotiate with their neighbours.
Our esteemed allies apparently give more "aid" to Israel that to every country in Africa combined. American Aid to Israel is spent entirely on guns.

And the 27th amendment ...

When was the nineteenth amendment? Britain was negotiating with Sinn fein while they were still terrorists. You know how tough Irish politics is. Americans believe England is an "occupying power" of the North which is a more extreme position than the nationalists would take. Ireland had troubles dating back to William the Conqueror. Peace has now been established. The death toll in the 40 years of the modern troubles was around 2000. The Israelis have Got to a quarter of that in a week. Hamas has only killed 4 Israelis recently and produced no rebel songs. Perhaps Gerry Adams should lend them a hand?

The peace was achieved before the 27th amendment. You have a marvellous ability in sophistry: now add to the debate. The point is: compared to Ireland the middle East would be a piece of cake. It would take negotiation and compromise. Israel is proposing neither.

That's a valid point to be made, but it's different from what you said here:



In fact, it seems that the Unionists insisted on an Amendment to the Irish Constitution during the negotiations which led to the Belfast Agreement. Arguably, the fact that the Agreement only came to pass because Ireland agreed to drop its territorial claims to the entire island doesn't exactly support the point that two countries could simply live in peace with each other, even if one of them doesn't recognize the other's right to exist.

Regarding Ireland, etc., we are really going off on a tangent.