• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Palestinian MIlitants Attack Israeli Position Behind Green Line, Kidnap A Soldier

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
SellyCat said:
I think it's absolutely ludicrous and totally outrageous to use the term "genocide" to describe Israel's actions. You can't just throw that word around just because its the equivalent of a "triple word score" is Scrabble, because its so loaded.

this has happened before, i think it was the "jenin massacre" or something as such.

these types of accusations hope the mere mention of them invoke an emotional reaction, with any rational defense appearing to be back peddaling or "quantifying human death and suffering" the whole "1 life is too many" type argument.

if this conflict continued on its current pace and widened, i would consider the question but calling this a genocide at the moment seems way off base non?
 

Lurker

TRIBE Member
Ditto Much said:
Okay I have one that’s been bugging me in regards to what is a legitimate target. Are financial assets a legitimate target. Is it valid to strike Hezbullah owned facilities that are not of a military nature simply because they are what generates funds for arming and training their army.
I dunno. Hezbollah doesn't own the airport or the bridges north of Beirut but those were still bombed :confused: . I understand where you're going with that though and I don't think it's that far of a reach for the IDF to use that logic.

And re: "genocide" being thrown around here, the other day there was an air strike on a Christian city in the north of Lebanon for example. Israel doesn't seem to be specifically targetting Muslim parts of town or infrastructure. The majority of the neighborhoods that Hezbollah has been integrating itself into are understandably muslim neighborhoods.

Chicken before the egg or egg before the chicken???
 

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Okay but lets say office buildings and apartment buildings. Hezbullah do use these as rental properties, if you destroy them then they don't have income.

Is it a legitmate target.
 

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
judge wopner said:
this has happened before, i think it was the "jenin massacre" or something as such.

these types of accusations hope the mere mention of them invoke an emotional reaction, with any rational defense appearing to be back peddaling or "quantifying human death and suffering" the whole "1 life is too many" type argument.

if this conflict continued on its current pace and widened, i would consider the question but calling this a genocide at the moment seems way off base non?
It serves the same rhetorical function as this typical refrain.

"Hey guys, check *this* out. You can totally compare Israel to the Nazis!!! Isn't that SO IRONIC! To think, Jews are doing exactly the same thing to others that happened to them! Let's call them on it :D :D :D"

There's nothing genocidal about any of this--to say so is to take advantage of and therefore belittle the entire concept of the word genocide. I use anti-bacterial soap; THAT'S genocide. Imagine what it would look like if Israel actually intended to commit genocide.
 

deafplayer

TRIBE Member
Today 10:36 AM SellyCat I think it's absolutely ludicrous and totally outrageous to use the term "genocide" to describe Israel's actions. You can't just throw that word around just because its the equivalent of a "triple word score" is Scrabble, because its so loaded.

Today 11:06 AM SellyCat [...] There's nothing genocidal about any of this--to say so is to take advantage of and therefore belittle the entire concept of the word genocide. I use anti-bacterial soap; THAT'S genocide. Imagine what it would look like if Israel actually intended to commit genocide.



I wasnt "throw[ing it] around just" for dramatic effect - give me some credit

I was refering to the - ongoing - openly "systematic" and deliberate ("planned") elimination of a nation (guess which one - oh, does it even exist?), which deliberate elimination is a fact I dont think you would deny

genocide isnt merely mass murder




Imagine what it would look like if Israel actually intended to commit genocide.

woudl it look like Palestine?



edit: and Lebanon isnt the only theatre in this war, or in isolation: check out the thread title
 
Last edited:

PosTMOd

Well-Known TRIBEr
SellyCat said:
Imagine what it would look like if Israel actually intended to commit genocide.
That is a very scary thought experiment (because I believe that people who have had something perpetrated against them would be even 'better at it' if they chose to be)... but, perhaps a necessary one in order to show that what is happening right now is not genocide...

If Israel were to commit genocide, what would it look like?

I have to think on that for a while...someone else start...
 

deafplayer

TRIBE Member
Ditto Much said:
Okay but lets say office buildings and apartment buildings. Hezbullah do use these as rental properties, if you destroy them then they don't have income.

Is it a legitmate target.
... :O

. . . what about the properties the Israeli state collects taxes from?
 

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
I don't know if Palestine could be considered a genocide. First more than half of the palestinians have been in UN controlled refugee camps since the late 40's. Next they clearly aren't slaughtering them in what would be considered a mass execution or slaughter. In fact the Palestinians have had a population increase over the last 50 years.
 

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
deafplayer said:
I was refering to the - ongoing - openly "systematic" and deliberate ("planned") elimination of a nation (guess which one - oh, does it even exist?), which deliberate elimination is a fact I dont think you would deny

Imagine what it would look like if Israel actually intended to commit genocide.

woudl it look like Palestine?
You use all these terms which are totally open to debate. "Systematic," "planned," "elimination of a nation," "Does it even exist," "deliberate elimination". These are *specifically* your own opinion. They are not facts. They are not statistics. They are not the "truth," over which nobody has a monopoly, not matter how moral they are--or think they are.

I hope you never get to see what *real* deliberate elimination looks like. But if you really want to, you can look up what happened to the "Marsh Arabs", Armenians, the American (North and South) Natives, Rwandan Tutsis...etc. And I know you know about some of these, which makes it even more disturbing that you would characterise what's going on as "genocide.

Seriously, if this is "genocide," then every single armed conflict--WITHOUT EXCEPTION--is "genocide".

As of July 2006, the CIA Word Factbook estimates the Lebanese population to be 3,874,050. Let's see, now. I'll round the death toll UP to 700. That's 0.018% of population. Would you characterise what Egypt and Syria did to Israel in 1973 as Genocide? Let's look at the numbers again. The Israeli population at the time was roughly 5,000,000; and over 3,000 were killed--I'll round DOWN in this case--putting it at 0.06% of the population. Did Egypt and Syria commit genocide against Israel in 1973? How bout in 1948? Or do these incidents not count simply by virtue of the fact that Israel is "so powerful".

"Elimination of the whole nation". Please. What a huge exaggeration. Would you say that what Israel is doing now is just like what America did to Vietnam? I'm sure you'll use the word "indiscriminate" to describe the bombing, and all I can say is that if you think that's "indiscrinimate" then you don't understand the meaning of the word. Carpet bombing Vietnam, fire-bombing Dresden, dropping nuclear weapons on Japan--THAT'S indiscriminate. You don't want to know what "indiscriminate" would look like if the Israeli Air Force were, in reality, actually behaving "indiscriminately".

Rwanda = Genocide. Holocaust = Genocide.
Lebanon = not even "total war" yet. It's a misconception that Israel has attacked "all the lebanese civillian infrastructure omg". That would mean there is no more room for escalation, and beleive me, there is. Israel has not gone after the real Lebanese, seriously sensitive infrastructure. Water plants, their main electrical plants--I'm talking about the MAIN ONES--dams. They've destroyed lots of bridges, but sure as shit not all of them--same goes for the roads. They didn't destroy the airport, only the runway. They haven't hit any official symbols of the Lebanese government. Not the presidential palace, not PMO, not the Parlament.

If Israel is committing "indiscriminate" "Genocide" in Lebanon--god it's so ridiculous--then how is it that a like half a dozen Arab Foreign Ministers travelled to Beirut to have an official meeting there this week? Where did they have their meeting if the country has been systematically "eliminated". You have got to be kidding me.

And no, it wouldn't look like Palestine--honestly, if you think any of what's going on there is "genocide," then we have entirely different conception of what Genocide is.

And yes, Genocide refers to murder--only brand new conceptions of genocide include other, braoder, socio-economic and cultural features about "ethnic cleansing". It is precisely this kind of broadening of the term that makes it cheap and hollow, because you can apply it to anything.

Canada commits genocide against Quebecers. England commited genocide against the Argentinians. Sure! Why not? Did Egypt,

Like I said, did Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Iraq commit "genocide" against Israel in 1948 and 1973? They EXPLICITLY STATED that that was there goal--will you say, right here, that they were, in fact, committing genocide against Israel?

I sure as fuck wouldn't. In 1973, Anwar Sadat described his surprise invasion of Israel as a "limited war". And that's exactly what it was. He invaded part of the country and then stopped, but in the process they killed thousands of Israelis. NOT GENOCIDE, despite the fact that they were killed in a fart shorter span of time than Israel has managed to "genocidally" murder under 700 Lebanese.

So really, I think the word is clearly being thrown around without regard to the implication of how serious the term is.
 
Last edited:

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
Ditto Much said:
Okay but lets say office buildings and apartment buildings. Hezbullah do use these as rental properties, if you destroy them then they don't have income.

Is it a legitmate target.
...was responded to by DP with...

deafplayer said:
... :O

. . . what about the properties the Israeli state collects taxes from?
Yeah, um, Israel doesn't collect any taxes from Lebanon or the Hezbollah. lol That's what the Lebanese government is for.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Oh shit! That proves it! Since there is no apparent slaughter of Palestinians and their population is growing, we can then make use of the word "ergo" in conjunction with the statement "there is no Palestinian genocide".

What I am amused by in this thread, more than anything else, is the fervour with which we are willing to defend Israel in this conflict. I hold the bar far higher against Israel for precisely the reason that their actions are supported (implicitly) by the nations that actually matter (United States, Canada, Britain and so on) while the actual output of violence committed by their military is far, far beyond that of any Palestinian or Lebanese terrorist group. They claim to be a democracy, and claim to be oppressing an entire population of people for a good reason...so they should be held accountable to these things.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Also, this debate over genocide is fucking stupid, unless we're using it to make ourselves feel good about killing people (again).
 

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
WHo is "we" Keith. You keep thinking that anybody is defending Israel when that is totally not the case.

Disputing whether or not they are commiting "genocide" in NO WAY means "defending Israel". There is no fervour.


And yeah, sure, why not...sure, we've been feeling good about killing people...whatever the fuck "we" means. These are hollow terms that don't mean anything in real life. "(again)"

Please share with us the last time "we" "felt good" "about killing people"
 
Last edited:

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
You know what fuck it...sure. It's genocide. Let's just agree on that and be done with it. That'll make all our lives easier, that way there doesn't need to be any kind of legitimate dialogue, discourse, or debate...just one, hegemonic, world-veiw that every one agrees with, without questioning it, without assessing its validity, without analysing it, without being critical of its interpretation. Let's just be sarcastic and cynical while making underhanded--yet transparent--personal attacks...just because "we" don't want to actually have a debate, merely impose our personal opinions about morals onto others.

Edit: Not so nice to be on the receiving end of that kind of bullshit rhetoric, is it?
 
Last edited:

~atp~

TRIBE Member
lol. You're way too hostile and took my comments way too personally (not to mention distorting them completely with a series of implicit suggestions that weren't even there), so I don't think I need to even bother with responding.
 

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
I think "certain people" should at least aknowledge what Ditto has gone to great lengths to point out regarding the obvious and deliberate attempts to manufacture images, stories, and statistics for the purpose of promoting the notion that there is a "genocide" or "indiscriminate bombing" or "elimination of a nation"--gotta love the rhyming on that one--doesn't it matter to anyone that there are deliberate attempts to fabricate lies about exactly this kind of thing, while people are parroting the exact same rhetoric that these propagandists are trying to promote?
 

SellyCat

TRIBE Member
~atp~ said:
lol. You're way too hostile and took my comments way too personally (not to mention distorting them completely with a series of implicit suggestions that weren't even there), so I don't think I need to even bother with responding.

nm
 
Last edited:

deafplayer

TRIBE Member
SellyCat said:
You use all these terms which are totally open to debate. "Systematic," "planned," "elimination of a nation," "Does it even exist," "deliberate elimination". These are *specifically* your own opinion. They are not facts. They are not statistics. They are not the "truth," over which nobody has a monopoly, not matter how moral they are--or think they are.
I realize this (the following) isn't an academic argument...

these are all pretty famous quotes.... note their agreement with the historical reality (ie they're not "just rhetoric")

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
-- Golda Meir, statement to The Sunday Times, 15 June, 1969.

Note: the particular "Arabs" who live(d) in Palestine are Palestinians (calling them simply Arabs has obvious - I THINK - ideological convenience)
http://www.monabaker.com/quotes.htm



Also see some commentary of some pictures
http://www.jkcook.net/ArabRemainsIndex.htm

Examples:

"Activists with the small Jewish group Zochrot (Remembering) place a sign on a busy main road in Haifa alerting passersby to the fact that much of the city’s Arab past has been systematically erased by the state. Officers in a police van, just visible on the right side of the picture, keep a wary eye on the proceedings. (November 2004)"

"The Dona Rosa restaurant in what is today known as the Jewish artists’ colony of Ein Hod, south of Haifa. In fact, the restaurant is housed in the former mosque of a Palestinian village that once went by the name of Ayn Hawd. Some 700 villagers were forced out of Ayn Hawd on July 15 1948. The village was occupied by Jewish artists in 1953 and is today a thriving tourist destination."


edit more examples:

"Jewish and Arab families walk to the destroyed village of Indur, 10km south-east of Nazareth, on Israel’s Independence Day 2004 to mark the Palestinians’ mirror event: Nakba (Catastrophe) Day. (April 2004)"

"The mosque of al-Khalisa, a Palestinian village of 2,000 inhabitants that was ethnically cleansed by the Palmach on 11 May 1948. Today the mosque stands incongruously in the middle of the northern Jewish town of Kiryat Shemona converted into a public building with a plaque over the door declaring: “This building was renovated in memory of those Israelis who fell in battle to protect Israel’s independence”. (August 2004)"

"The mosque of al-Khalisa, a Palestinian village of 2,000 inhabitants that was ethnically cleansed by the Palmach on 11 May 1948. Today the mosque stands incongruously in the middle of the northern Jewish town of Kiryat Shemona converted into a public building with a plaque over the door declaring: “This building was renovated in memory of those Israelis who fell in battle to protect Israel’s independence”. (August 2004)"





edit: if thats not the systematic and planned elimination of a group of people...
 
Last edited:

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Dear Universe,

The concept of "genocide" in this particular case is clearly irrelevant, and almost always is, since murdering civilians in the context of any conflict is usually "bad", mmmkay? Most of the time, we -- you know "we" as in human beings -- make use of that debate in order to help us decide when to feel sufficiently morally outraged; I only need to care when the numbers are high enough, or when the killing efficiency is on the scale of Rwanda, etc. The reason I believe this debate about genocide is "fucking stupid" is because the conflict in Lebanon, specifically, obviously isn't anything approaching a genocide. It's absurd! We all know (by now) that Chavez uses sensationalist dialogue in his speeches, and many of his Venezuelan supporters love to hear it because it empowers them and there is a cultural basis for that sort of emblazoned oration. In the context of the Lebanon conflict, such a suggestion is obviously being used for propaganda purposes! Just as reporting such propaganda by the media is being used to undermine Chavez' own authority! It's obvious and ridiculous. The subsequent discussion about whether or not the West Bank annexation and Gaza violence could be appropriately labeled as such is also totally irrelevant, since the moral certitude of the conflict in those areas does not depend on its definition whatsoever. The reason, then, for getting excited about this debate is obviously related to the perception that a successful assignment of this conflict to "genocide" vindicates (or condemns) the activities of the actors involved.

With respect to my other comments regarding the fervour with which "we" are willing to defend Israel, I am again speaking in a general sense. I think it is more important to be critical of Israel than it is to be critical of Hamas or Hezbollah. I have elaborated previously on my reasons for this, though I still don't think Ditto Much understands my intentions in that regard. He (I assume) perceives my apparent support for "Arab violence" as in defense of a position, though I'm not really sure what position that is if I am then required to accept the violent consequences of terrorism and murder. Israel is a powerful nation with an amazing history; it is a democracy with which most other democracies in the West can identify; the people and its own religious history is more closely tied to our own (superficially, perhaps, but it is); Israel's propaganda efforts about the conflict in that region are extremely effective in the West; Israel's military policies with respect to the Palestinians in particular -- regardless of the merit of those policies -- is quite violent and oppressive. And most critically, Israel claims to hold itself to a very high standard of social justice and democracy, and would like to impose those standards on other nations! For these reasons, we must be very diligent in holding Israel accountable. It is for similar reasons that I am very critical of American foreign policy.

My comments weren't directed at SellyCat, Ditto Much or deafplayer. I thought that was clear, but obviously not. As well, SellyCat, you are not correct when you think that I "keep thinking that anybody is defending Israel"...
 

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
I dunno deafplayer you sure you want to get into a quote war with me on this one.

“We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem.”

want to guess the nobel prize winner who said that one
 
Top