Israel: An Earned Nation or an Imperialist Giant?
The headlines on CNN held an interesting question: is the Mideast on the brink of war? With Israeli jets bombing Beirut, ground troops entering southern Lebanon and attacking Hezbollah bases, one must wonder if this is Israel’s way of defending it’s right to exist or simply trying to become an imperialist giant. With most Israeli supporters citing the threat of “terrorist” organizations like the democratically elected Hamas government as well as the kidnapping of Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit as reasons for the strike against Lebanon and Palestine, others, who tend to be more emotionally Zionist or supporters of religiously held land, note Israel’s “right to exist.”
The Jews of Israel are held in a high regard because of the large number of unfortunate events they’ve overcome in the history of their people and also the religious view of them being the “Chosen Ones.” This being said, the Holocaust or any other event does not give them free reign to dominate Israeli or neighboring lands. Though it may be their Holy Land, or as some say the origin of their religion and people, they left that land and moved on. By saying that people can leave a land, experience high loss, then forcefully return, imposing their will by arms, is like saying that a person, after having his house burn down and part of his family killed, can move back into his childhood home with the rest of his family, repressing the current home owners if they don’t like the occupation. A “right to exist” is certainly a right that all people have, but a right to exist at the expense of others isn’t.
The “justified” bombing of Lebanon and Palestinian settlements raises many questions. First, why did the democratically elected Hamas government kidnap Corporal Shalit unless it wanted to cause an armed dispute with the Israelis? In an interview with Independent News Group Democracy Now! celebrated activist, writer, professor and scholar Noam Chomsky tells us of the barely reported June 24th kidnappings of civilians, a doctor and his brother, out of the Gaza Strip by Israeli military. This maybe be the reason for the abduction of Corporal Shalit by militant Palestinians. There are other possibilities, notably the deaths of 22 Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli army during the week of June 20th or the abduction of 64 members of the Palestinian Parliament on June 29 (Maan News Agency). As for the surge of Lebanese attack on Israel, this is most likely a way to shift some of the force off of Palestine and force Israel into a double fronted war. However, when Israeli General Dan Halutz declares that “Nothing is safe [in Lebanon], as simple as that,” it is questionable whether the Israel government and the International Community really does want peace between the nations. It must also be noted that many of the known casualties inflicted by Israel are not connected with the resistance. This “collateral damage” as it’s called, also has children in the majority of deaths.
Though there are notable deaths on both sides of the conflict, it would seem that the majority of it could be resolved with the recognition of Palestinian independence and a co-operative end to blind support of Israeli actions, as done so by America and it’s allies. Also, freedom for not only the Israeli soldiers that were abducted, but for all the Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners in Israel (the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics shows 9,400 Palestinian prisoners held in 30 prisons throughout Israel, some of whom have been held for as many as 30 years) as well. Maybe then, the Mideast will be off “the brink of war.”
12 Comments:
"Terrorist" is just a label. It can be given to anyone against the way things are working. It's way to broad. Technically, George Washington could be called a terrorist.
Kai-- You're fantastic. This is exactly the reason I was so drawn to you to start with. You have so much passion! This is what's going to get things going for you, you're strong. You know what you're talking about, and you easily sway people (esp. ones who are politics-ignorant, i.e. me) into believing every word you say. This stuff is fantastic, and I know you've got something to run with. Incredible.
Ps. (Silly.) "This maybe be the reason for the abduction of Corporal Shalit by militant Palestinians."
Kikiki.
You're fantastic.
haha kai don't ever take a graphic on any news station to be correct. In an age where the guessing of the issues rather then the facts. The graphics are all they got to keep the regular dumb news watcher informed. Good points otherwise.
A friend told me once that what makes government unique is its exclusive legal right to commit violence. I'd say she wasn't far off.
In response to what gil winningham wrote above, I would say that it depends. As Kai writes, a terrorist can be a "freedom fighter", so to speak. There are two genres of terrorism: that of a group fighting for the sovereignty of its homeland, and that of a group inspired by religion. The latter group tends to be much more vicious in its violence and is less likely to ever be appeased, because unlike the former group (which can be appeased through negotiation), religious terrorists believe they fight a holy war for their god, and anything or anyone less than their vision is evil.
If you're interested in this topic, you should check out books written by Bruce Hoffman, who's recently joined the teaching staff at Georgetown University. His "Inside Terrorism" is definitive. It touches on both genres of terrorism, though if you want to inspect more of the religious kind, I recommend "Terror in the Mind of the God" by Juergensmeyer.
Ultimately, terrorism is about a power imbalance. It's a weaker group taking on a greater power, which involves underhanded tactics and creating chaos. Restore a power equilibrium and terrorism stops.
Interesting article, Kai, and you raise good points. Keep it up.
To Yggdrasil, recheck your sources or refine your writinjg becasue that seemed to me as aginst religion. Now, how can you say their are only 2 types of terriosts??? What about the ones, who want to reke havoc and create fear? They do exist.
In no religion or Holy Book, I believe, it would say to intentionally harm others and kill themselves. And everything that doesn't coincide with what they believe is not evil. I think the guy who wrote this isn't really presenting all the facts. It's an Athiest view of terrorism, which might i add has led to the discrimination of those linked to religion, especially Muslim people. This view is only appeasing athiests and those against Muslims.
Anyways, Kai, Fantastic. I didn't agree with some of it, which was opinion rather than fact, but thats ok. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Your writing is sensational!
I only have a short amount of time, but tell me; if Israel's bombing of civilians is due to human sheild-ery, then how come very few resistance leaders have been killed by mass civilians targets have? Anderson Cooper has even reported, with all his right wing bias, that Israel's jets are bombing civilians centers unlike their original target of "Hizbollah military bases."
My view is not "Pro-Radical Islam." I'm strongly against religious regimes, you should know that. However, I do support an oppressed people and I'm highly against westernized imperialism, brought on by Israel.
By citing that Chomsky and Independent News Sources aren't valid, you seem to support corporate media. Lest we forget the CNN is owned by GE which not only makes American military weapons for Iraq but for sale to Israel. Chomsky is a highly quoted intellectual who is not only anti-zionist, but a Jew by birth. As for your website you advised me visiting, why would I visit a radical, right wing anti-Muslim website.
I'd hope that you'd gain more tolerance and realize the murder committed by the Israeli government. It's sad that you don't realize the Palestinian people's right to defend themselves.
Again, I have to be quick, because I'm about to leave, but I'd just like point out that Chomsky is far to busy with lectures and book writings to do a radio show.
Aside from that, I have acknowledged Hizbollah's wrongdoing's, but also their right to self defense.
I'd also like to point out that we've never seen a real communism. Soviet Russia was a Stalinism. You cannot tell me that Marxism won't work becuase we've never seen it tried yet.
One more note, you seem very anti-Muslim as you have spoken very openly of openly killing Muslim's for fear of extremism. Why not kill Christian extremists as well? Or why not outlaw religion?
There's something we can agree on maybe.
Woah. All of a sudden you felt the need to start acting like a prick. Weird.
Anyways, as for the Hizbollah crossing imaginary lines and kidnapping/killing soldiers, I already covered that in my article, in regards to 22 Palestinians dying by Israeli hands and the kidnapping of the Parliment. I know Palestine isn't Lebanon, but if Canada went off and kidnapped some Brits and killed some of them, America would be all over it.
As for extremism, I've been informed that you are very religous. Funny that you would be fine with killing Muslim extremists. I thought it was Jesus that said "Turn the other cheek."
As for the Leninist years in Russia, there were failures, but there were accomplishments. Why do you always have to look at the failures? People do that with Russia, but not America. I can sit there and tell you about the good things Lenin did, but I'll just be told off, however, when someone mentions how we treated the Indians, slaves, Japanese during WWII and many other things, you'll find a different story. People will be quick to jump on the great part of America.
Haha, feeble minions. Watch out, Wes, your ego might pop if it gets any bigger!
As for the millions killed, lest we forget those native americans killed by the U.S.? Or maybe the numerous people killed in our colonization of other nations?
As for these nations, I don't know how I can surely show you that these were not communist nations. The closest they got were Lenin's first years and Cuba. The Chinese did it horribly, we can agree on that. And so did Stalin! He was no better than Hitler!
However, I still defend the Revolution. These were worker's revolutions. I can defend and support the workers' revolutions in both Russia, Cuba, China, Vietnam and Mahknovtchina without support what they became. The human race has a long time to go, and Marxism will eventually work for us. Historical materialism has shown us this. Capitalism turns into socialism. Over time, or by the Revolution.
And to clarify what I meant by "defending the Revolutions..." I meant that I highly stand by and defend the soviets and bolshevik revolutions without supporting Stalin or anything that would come. I support the Chinese revolutions without throwing any support at all to Zedong Mao. I support the Cuban Revolution and the further workings of Ernesto Guevara without supporting the skewed state socialism Cuba would become.
Sorry if that was foggy.
Post a Comment
<< Home