Friday, July 14, 2006

Howard defends reprisal killings

Here's Johnny:
This latest incident started because of the Hezbollah incursion into Israel against all of the resolutions of the United Nations, against all of the understandings now of international law.
"Incident"? They've lost the plot. Here's a bit of perspective on his efforts to paper over the Israeli maelstrom of death:
reprisals that have killed 53 civilians in Lebanon since Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers a day earlier.
Murdering 53 civilians (and rising) for 2 captured soldiers? Topping off over 50 civilians killed in Gaza in a futile response to 1 soldier taken prisoner there?

I can see why Israelis get so angry at comparisons with the hated Nazis, it's because they're so damn easy to make sometimes:
In a number of occupied countries, the Wehrmacht's response to partisan attacks was to take and shoot hostages, up to 100 hostages for every German killed.
Sure Mr Howard, is this what you are saying, that every time some terrorist scumbag attacks the Israeli military then that entitles Israel to kill 50 times as many civilians in reprisal?

Are you out of your mind?

Israel has the right to target and kill those who are attacking their own people. Hezbollah and Hamas are riddled with maniacs who don't care what the outcomes of their actions are, who don't care if their own civilians are killed along the way.

Surely though there's got to be a limit to what Israel's allies will tolerate? This is just mass murder, it is beyond any form of justification whatsoever. And because this large-scale killing of civilians clearly and unambiguously constitutes a crime against humanity, one that could easily be argued before any competent court, this madness will haunt Israel for a long, long time.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

good to see someone on the left finally admitting that the intentional killing of civilians is completely unjustifiable and the actions of murderous human scum, whether Israeli or Palestinian

Splatterbottom said...

The apt comparison is not between Israelis and Nazis. That comparison is only easy to make if no rational thought is involved.

The Palestinians have reigned terror down on Israel in the form of over a thousand rockets this year aimed at Sderot, having elected a terrorist government to do just that.

And according to the moral cretins of this world, they are not entitled to strike back.

Further, the Palestinians are to be rewarded for using their own people as human shields by the condemnation of Israel by the ignorant and disingenuous every time one of them is killed.

This round was clearly started by the Palestinian and Hezbollah kidnappings, and can just as easily be stoped by them handing back their victims. They are to blame for this current crises, but funnily enough you don't see this point raised at all by the left. The ones who have seen this most clearly are the Saudis. They obviously understand that this whole caper is orchestrated by Iran, and feel threatened by it.

You also failed to mention the people of Haifa killed by the indiscriminate rocketing of civilian targets there as well. Why would that be now?

Boysenberry said...

I think the crux of the problem lies between what you are saying, armaniac, and the response you received from splatterbottom.

- The killing of innocents is to be condemned, no matter who perpetrates the act.
- The destruction of property, especially vital infrastructure, does not lend itself to making "the people of the enemy" understand your position, nor does it allow the government to improve the security situation.
- History will always play a big part, and attempting to define who started what is near pointless. Both sides, particularly in the case of Palestine/Israel, have committed despicable acts over the last century.

Armagnac Esq. said...

I've always said the killing of innocent civilians is wrong and at the crux of the problems, and that both terrorist targetting of civilians in Israel AND israeli expansion into land they have no right to occupy are continuing barriers to peace.

Go to bethlehem bloggers, in the links to the side, scroll down to the post on the wall passing through bethelhem, and see me getting a caning from BOTH sides on this basis.

Why am I not talking about it here? Because that is not the subject here. Israel is a sovereign nation carrying out reprisal killings.

More crucially to our debate, my government and its close ally do not support and prop up the Palestinians- they prop up and support Israel.

phil said...

"against all of the understandings now of international law."

Now? Now? What changed? (No need to answer this: 9/11). Everything has changed. Maybe not in writing - which I have been told a lot of law is written in - but just changed. Trust us).

Puke.

theHippy said...

Great post, Armaniac. I really came by to hear the only Lefty on the entire planet who actually thinks bombing kids is a crime. Very RWDB of you, old cock!

Guy said...

Trackback.

Bravo. I think the only sensible position to take is to condemn the killing on both sides.

Armagnac Esq. said...

I do but I don't accept that we can stand back and say well there's a bit here and a bit there- a sovereign state that carries our blessing can't go mindlessly slaughtering civilians in reprisal.

mikey said...

Anonymous and the hippy, is that really how you see things? Is it just because 'lefties' usually mention the actions of Israel(or the greater west) first? Because 'we' usually put the greater number before the smaller number?

Having said this, i'm beginning to think that while condemning both sides is the only logical position to take, it's not neccesarily the most sensible. I think in order to communicate with both sides we have to accept a certain (in the short term unshakeable) belief in self-defense and/or righteous revenge. Also I think it is useful to always try and remember what Hamas or hizbollah might do if they had the means and might of the Israel Defense Force.

Sorry if spelling = bad, i'm in a hurry. Good stuff Armaniac.

Nilk/Leeianne said...

Armaniac, the IDF are not mindlessly killing civilians. They are dropping leaflets and giving the civilians advance warning of bombings.

That's a lot more than the other side are doing.

theHippy said...

Great post Armaniac.
(Gratuitous sarcastic hack at anonimous deleted.) Apologies to all.

Twenty more Lebs died while I play with this piss-ant Political Correctitude. Sorry to have bothered you.

Andrú said...

Seems to me, morals aside, that this cannot end well for Israel. Once they leave (they must leave eventually), Hezbollah will rebuild their city, wave their guns over their heads at the retreating Israelis, and become even more popular. The result: A stronger Hezbollah, a weaker Lebanese authority, and a tighter knotte of war.

Seems to me that the only way to counter a small raid is with a small raid, perhaps a regression to the shimmering tribal warfair practiced by Native American tribes of times past.

Armagnac Esq. said...

Andru I think you may be on the money: as with Iraq, what's noticeable is the lack of dispassionate realist analysis from the right, once the home for such thinking.

I don't see any evidence that this will lead to a positive outcome for Israel, leaving aside endless debates about who started it and who is most culpable.