Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Phoenix: Middle East war not Israel’s fault

By

In an editorial published this week, the Boston Phoenix argues that “Hezbollah and Hamas, Iran and Syria — not Israel — are to blame for the unexpected war in the Middle East.”  They start off:

Like people of goodwill everywhere, we shudder at the images of death and destruction ravaging civilians in Lebanon, Israel, and Gaza.

But while our heart is engaged, our mind is clear: the carnage is due to the aggression — the terror — of Hamas and Hezbollah, groups that at best are dedicated to the destruction of Israel and at worst want to kill as many Jews in the Middle East as they can.

For some bizarre reason, in thoughtful company, in advanced intellectual circles, it is considered impolite and impolitic to recognize this reality.

The Phoenix editors are no neocons.  Here is their take on how the Iraq war relates to what’s going on in Israel and Lebanon:

The fundamental imprudence, the overreaching hubris, of President Bush’s war on Iraq has never been so clear. The stateless forces of international terror as represented by Hezbollah and the irresponsible factions of Hamas have been emboldened by the regional instability Bush’s Iraqi adventure has visited on the Middle East. Thus, the irony that Bush’s war on terror begets even more terror now becomes painfully and tragically apparent.

Still, it is the craven stupidity of Hezbollah’s and Hamas’s miscalculation that is responsible for the blood that flows in Lebanon, Israel, and Gaza….

Our counsel to Israel is this: years ago you let your invasion of Lebanon turn into your own version of Vietnam. This time, don’t allow your understandable defense of your homeland and your people turn into your version of Iraq.

I recognize and respect that Charley and others here don’t see things that way.  But [My bad. Apologies. -David] I find it hard to disagree with much of what’s said in that editorial.  (Including their analogy, which is a lot like one I’ve been using in conversation lately but haven’t posted on yet: imagine that Canada had such a weak government that it couldn’t control a well-organized, well-armed band of terrorists that sent suicide bombers and rockets into the US and kidnapped the occasional border patrol agent.  What would we do?  Go to the UN?  Please.) 

It’s all very well to criticize the “‘they started it’ mentality.”  But it matters, doesn’t it, who the aggressor is in a war situation?  Doesn’t it matter who “started” World War II?  Doesn’t it matter that 9/11 happened before we invaded Afghanistan?  I’d argue that it does, and that it matters here as well.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. If I read the essence of each of both is that Israel was right in reacting to the initial aggression, but the level of their response has created a blacklash that puts Israel in a much tougher spot.

    <

    p>
    Charley writes, “Self-defense against terrorist bombing? Heck yeah.”

    <

    p>
    The Phoenix writes, “carnage is due to the aggression — the terror — of Hamas and Hezbollah”

    <

    p>
    Charley writes regarding the level of Israel’s response, “Is what’s going on in Israel’s long-term interests for peace — much less the USA’s?”

    <

    p>
    The Phoenix writes, “Our counsel to Israel is this… don’t allow your understandable defense of your homeland and your people turn into your version of Iraq.”

    <

    p>
    What am I missing?  They both seem to afgue that Israel has a right to respond, but the way events have played out (about 20% of Lebanon is freaking homeless because of the way Israel responed and Hezbollah is grown 10 times politically stronger becuase of Israel’s inability to route them) are becoming counter productive to interests of Israel.

  2. When you look at the history of Zionism, Israel, and the Arab population which includes Muslims and Christians, it is hard to play the label game.  The same people that condemn the Americans of European extraction for sins against “Native Americans” congratulate Zionists for building an independent state out of Palistinian lands. 

    <

    p>
    Israel, much better armed due to US complicity, can use enormous firepower on the indigenous Arab population, killing thousands.  Is Israel killing the terrorists?  The news reports say that an office of Hezbolla was just bombed.  Does anyone think the members were still there?  This punishment was dealt to civilians.  If this were being done by a country we didn’t support, would it be a “War Crime”?

    <

    p>
    I just hope the powers in Washington have learned enough to stay away from sending troops as “peace keepers”. 

    • That is an awful analogy…
      starting from the begining and working our way forward….

      <

      p>
      1.  The Jews had lived on the land thousands of years earlier and were forced out of their homes unwillingly

      <

      p>
      2.  During the time of the British Mandate the Jews legitimately purchased the land, often from Palestinians (I think it’s safe to say that is not the case with us and the Native Americans)

      <

      p>
      3.  When the UN RE-created the state of Israel in 1947, they partitionted Palestine, leaving a state for both the Jews and the Palestinians.  The Palestinians chose to reject this compromise and ended up losing it all in the 48 war.

      <

      p>
      4.  skipping forward to present conditions….Israel does not nor has not ever done anything even remotely close to what we did to the Native Americans (I.E. mass slaughters, distribution of Small Pox blankets), and has NEVER tried to out and out “exterminate” the Palestinians.

      <

      p>
      are the Israeli’s harsh at times? Yes.  But they do what they must to defend their right to exist.  It’s easy for us to criticize them and their actions, but what would you do if you were under attack on a constant basis, never knowing when the next “devout jihadist” is going to strap a bomb on and blow himself up in the middle of a crowded street? 

      • furthermore, Gaza and the West Bank are a vastly larger chunk of land (proportionately) than the little pockets of land the Native Americans have been given.

      • That is an awful analogy…
        starting from the begining (sic) and working our way forward….
        1.  The Jews had lived on the land thousands of years earlier and were forced out of their homes unwillingly.

        <

        p>  I doubt if any of the Jews forced out of their land 2000 years ago were alive when the Zionists settled Palestine.  Who was wronged?  How far can a land claim go back?

        <

        p>  And please, don’t confuse Jews with Zionists.  The Jews are an ancient and justifiably proud people that have advanced civilization greatly.  The Zionists are a group within Judaism.  The wrongs of some people should  not paint their larger group.  James Jones is not a representative of Christianity, nor Osama Bin Laden a representative of Islam.  Many Jews do not accept Zionism.  http://www.nkusa.org…

        <

        p>
        2.  During the time of the British Mandate the Jews legitimately purchased the land, often from Palestinians (I think it’s safe to say that is not the case with us and the Native Americans)  When Israel declared itself a state, it Zionists owned about 6% of the land of Palestine,laws were changed and Arabs and Christians that fled for safety were declared “absentee landlords” to expropriate their land and prevent their return.    In colonial American times, land was purchased, usually from barter, with Native Americans.  The colonists had metalworking skills and pots, pans, axes, and the like were highly prized.

        <

        p>
        3.  When the UN RE-created the state of Israel in 1947, they partitionted (sic) Palestine, leaving a state for both the Jews and the Palestinians.  The Palestinians chose to reject this compromise and ended up losing it all in the 48 war.  If I enter your house and “compromise” with you so that I can have just a few of the rooms, will you agree? How about I call in a local legislator to complete the bargain?  Would that help?  Would you call the police?  There is a difference in “compromise” and “extortion”.  As David Ben Gurion said,  “…in our political argument abroad, we minimize Arab opposition to us,…let us not ignore the truth among ourselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country, while we are still outside”.

        <

        p>
        4.  skipping forward to present conditions….Israel does not nor has not ever done anything even remotely close to what we did to the Native Americans (I.E. mass slaughters, distribution of Small Pox blankets), and has NEVER tried to out and out “exterminate” the Palestinians.  I hope you don’t understand how hollow that sounds.  The massacres of the time of the British Mandate, through the Sabra and Shatila massacre, into what’s happening now.  All Bupkiss?

        <

        p>
        are the Israeli’s harsh at times? Yes.  But they do what they must to defend their right to exist.  It’s easy for us to criticize them and their actions, but what would you do if you were under attack on a constant basis, never knowing when the next “devout jihadist” is going to strap a bomb on and blow himself up in the middle of a crowded street? 

        <

        p>  “Harsh!”  Yes, I’d call it “Harsh”.  While all people have a “right to exist”, few have a right to exist dependent upon taking from other people.  But the most immoral are the politicians that support this with arms and blood money. 

        • Both of you are partially wrong about to whom the land “belongs.”  While a large majority of Jews were indeed forced out of the Levant 2,000 years ago (including my own ancestors), the area was never completely devoid of Jews.  While Jews were certainly a small minority when Zionism was first conceived, there were vibrant Jewish communities in places like Safed.

          <

          p>
          The kicker is that animosity between Jews and Muslims is a relatively new phenomenon.  The Ottoman Empire, while favoring Islam in its laws and society until its final years, provided a relatively good climate for Jews and other minority groups.  As the empire declined, various forms of nationalism began to take hold.  Citizens had to ask themselves whether they were Ottomans or Turks/Arabs/Jews/etc, and European nations interested in weakening the empire did their best to ensure it wasn’t a fair fight.

          <

          p>
          The point is, anyone can point to events in history and claim they validate their position.  Any of the groups involved in the Middle East conflict can easily make the case that they’re right, but I submit that this is irrelevant.  What is relevant is the situation on the ground today, which is that there are millions of Jews and Palestinians living in this small region.  Millions of children are growing up in a place where war is always a threat, and where poverty and other pressing issues aren’t being addressed because of the conflict.  It is unproductive and irresponsible to be arguing about whether Zionism or Palestinian nationalism is “right” when what we need right now is to move beyond it.

          <

          p>
          I’m hesitant to wade into your wider argument about Zionism, but I seriously hope you don’t actually mean to compare Zionists with Osama bin Laden.  There are nutjobs and terrorists who happen to be Zionists, but Zionists are certainly not nutjobs and terrorists.  Zionists are people who look at thousands of years of persecution in Europe and come to the conclusion that Jews can only be safe in a land of their own.  Zionism didn’t even originally have a preference as to where that homeland would be — early proposals even included sites in South America.  All these people wanted to do was to escape from the senseless violence that dominated most of the Jewish diaspora.  Following the Holocaust, it only makes sense that such thinking became particularly popular.

          • My comparison is with people who see only their God, not a God of mankind.  I have known more individuals of all religions that see only their God than I care to recall.  In my own experiences with maybe a few hundred Zionists (not the American kind, that’s another story) I’ve never heard one speak of Arabs except in the most denigrating terms.  Would not all mankind be God’s children?  I certainly agree that not all Zionists are either nutjobs or terrorists.  As you say, there are both in the movement.  As for nutjobs and terrorists, Jim Jones was certainly a nutjob, I doubt if Osama is a nutjob, but he follows a tactic of terror to achive his aims. 

            <

            p>
            I see hope as I read:

            <

            p>  http://www.haaretz.c…

            • This thread is already being buried (and has been superseded by another one on a similar subject), but I find your separation of American Zionists from other Zionists to be curious.  Yes, there are some important issues that influence American Jewish thinking specifically, but considering that around half (if I remember correctly) of the world’s Jewish population lives in the United States, America is the de-facto center of Jewish thought outside of Israel itself.

              <

              p>
              While you are correct that not all Jews are Zionists (and in fact not all Zionists are Jews), the overlap is huge.  I can tell you from first-hand experience that the importance of the modern State of Israel is a central theme in Hebrew school curricula.  While you seem to think American Zionism is somehow watered down, my experience is the opposite.  Israelis argue about the wisdom of their government’s actions all the time, as well they should in any modern democracy.  Your linked article is a good example of that.  Unfortunately, some elements of American Jewry have a tendency to take criticism of Israel’s actions very personally.

              <

              p>
              I won’t pretend to know anything about these few hundred people you’ve met, but they don’t sound anything like the supporters of Israel that I know.  Granted, I live in the United States, and you insist on separating American Zionists, but let’s be clear, you can’t be a true Zionist and harbor hatred for any ethnic or religious group.  You can’t logically advocate for a state that protects the Jewish people while undermining one of the central values of Judaism itself — respect and good will towards the righteous of all nations.

              <

              p>
              As an aside, I notice your link is to a Haaretz article.  Haaretz is the paper I check for news on Israel, which I suppose is as telling as my preference for the Times and the Globe.  As much as I like their reporting, however, I must warn you against taking the site’s Talkback forums seriously.  I sure hope your impression of Zionism doesn’t come from the trolls who post there.  That would be like going to Slashdot and surmising that all technophiles are tin-foil-hat-wearing misogynists who spend most of their lives in their parents’ basements.

  3. I read the Phoenix analogy between Lebanon/Israel and Canada/U.S. but why don’t we carry this analogy through?  What would Americans have done if after World War II the UN had decided America had commited war crimes against the Native Americans and so gave half of the continental U.S. to the Navaho, Pawnee, etc?  And not crappy Oklahoma either (I grew up in Nebraska) but all of the West Coast (thereafter known as the West Bank) and more…I suppose the United States would just through up their hands (and down their weapons) and say, “Oh well, the UN has spoken.”

Archives