

Palestine, Israel and the UN

Nerves are jangling again

Will Israeli and Palestinian leaders let a renewal of violence in Gaza get out of control and make diplomacy even harder to revive?

See article

Readers' comments


Burak M

Hey economist how you doing? Good I hope because you should be proud of your magazine as it seems to be now embraced by many more with balanced articulate views. How? Because before the comments on here would be staunchly attack Palestinians and portray Israel as angelic peace loving people. However many now see the conflict for what it is. As though placing draconian embargoes, having soldiers shoot protesting kids here and there, having possibly the most extreme right wing government in the world, building on occupied land that even the UN finds illegal, humiliating a whole people was not enough, now characters like Lieberman would like to see Abbas and Fatah punished for what? Oh that's right for starting the process of being a sovereign state. How dare he!!!!!!!. Before anyone comes back at me with the cliche line of "try to live in rocket shelters" etc , let me say that I am against such actions of Hamas, as they cause much more suffering on both sides than doing any good. But before any of you ask me that, ask yourselves what would it be like living in Palestine as the small jail it has been forced to become where kids are lucky to get basic medical requirements. And no one bother trying to simplify this comment as anti Semite. Infact I love some Jews ie Chomsky, Soros, Fieldman(sometimes). All in all this is Palestinians saying enough of apartheid like policies of the occupier. Oh and for the record this is a much fair unbiased peace about the conflict than many including NYT.

Burak M in reply to Attendant Lord

If what your really asking (and I assume is this) whether I believe Israel has a right to exist? Than yes I do. I believe there should be a state where although it should be secular and have equality, that it should inherently have a Jewish identity. I do however have a problem with such a state being built on the homes of others when these innocent people had nothing to do with the policies and actions of Nazi Germany. So Nazis gas Jews, and Palestineans pay the price?? Hmmm. Hence I respect most things that abide by international law. And you? Do have respect for anything at all that is critical of Israel? Or you believe Israel is justified in everything it does and that its occupation is a holy right?

benificence in reply to Attendant Lord

In 1948, the UNGA was in the middle of recommending trusteeship for Palestine as per indications of UNSC when Israel, and it would not have succeeded without USA complicity and support, declared independence although if we are to abide by standards of international law, the declaration was illegal. UNGA can only make recommendations. It is only the UNSC under Chapter VII that are legally binding. UN Article 73b specifically defines how UN assumes responsibility for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government. The UN also accepts as a sacred trust, the obligation to promote the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories. Palestine would, in 1948, be in such a category. Protocol Addition to the Geneva Conventions are also accepted as international laws. In particular, Article 1 Paragraph 4, relates to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts. These rights are also enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law. Thus, the Arab countries asked, and it is difficult not to see why this is not a lawful and legitimate request, why did the UNGA believe that it had the power to partition a country against the wishes of the majority of its inhabitants. Within present remit the UNGA does not have, and has never possessed, that power. As King Abdullah stated, "why shouldn't national sovereignty apply to Palestine when Western countries would not for one moment give away their rights of national sovereignty and certainly would not agree to another country dictating those rights." King Abdullah describes how Arabs have been the overwhelming majority in Palestine for nearly 1300 uninterrupted years so why should they accept 600,000 foreigners with many hundreds of thousands more to come; why should Palestine, which is innocent of anti-Semitism, pay for the crimes of Europe? Why, indeed?

tzatz in reply to benificence

You said: "… why did the UNGA believe that it had the power …"

Stop right there. The fact is … that's history … it happened … by the International Body called the UNITED NATIONS … the rest is 'sour grapes' … something Arab/Muslims seem to know a lot about!

In 1922 … at the San Remo Conference … the British Mandate over Palestine was granted enshrining in its MISSION STATEMENT … that Britain should help foster a Jewish Homeland … guess what … the San Remo Treaty is also Internationally recognized … part of INTERNATIONAL LAW …

The fact is … after WWI … the Arab/Muslims were slaves of the Ottomans … but the Western Powers gave them their freedom … but in doing so … the Great Powers granted the Jewish People the right to live in their ancient homeland … 

The Arab/Muslims can huff and puff about it … but it's been OVER 100 YEARS and the Jews are NOW INDIGENOUS TO THE MIDDLE EAST … get used to it … stop whining


As soon as the Economist publishes any article about the MidEast conflict, dozens of antisemitic resposes show up in the comments. Now I understand why Hitler killed 6 million Jews and the world was nonchalant. Nothing has changed on the planet earth since that time. It's sad but if Israel doesn't defend itself, Holocaust might be reiterated.

Attendant Lord in reply to LEO595

Nothing has changed on the planet earth since biblical times. Weakness invites aggression. New religions distinguish themselves from older religions they hope to replace by criticising them. Thus did Christianity attempt to ensure eternal hatred for Jews among Christians ("the Jews killed our Lord") while simultaneously preaching love for fellow man and insuring that few followers even knew that Jesus was Jewish by keeping the church service cloaked in Latin; thus did Islam criticize both Christianity and Judaism for not believing that Mohammad was the new messenger from God.

The problem during Hitler's time was not so much that the world was nonchalant as it was that there was nowhere to flee and no ability to respond militarily. Israel of course must defend herself, but no more so than any and every other nation on earth. A nation that does not defend herself will soon fail to exist, unless she is under the total protective umbrella of a larger and more powerful nation.

LEO595 in reply to Attendant Lord

First, according to Vikipedia, "After the Holocaust became known to the Allies, the British continued to refuse to change their policy of limited immigration, or to admit Jews from Nazi controlled Europe". Second, there was ability to respond militarily, but the US did it when it was too late.

Attendant Lord in reply to LEO595

I refer to the ability of the victims, the Jews, to respond militarily. Not only the British, but all nations, refused to admit large numbers of Jews fleeing Nazi controlled Europe. Israel, had it existed, would have been the only nation on earth to have offered refuge to all who came in hopes of saving their lives. Every people needs a nation and a military and its young men must be willing and able to shed blood to defend its borders.

Mark S. Oller in reply to LEO595


Not a single autopsied body at Nazi concentration camps was killed by poison gas. Israeli sources now admit that the lampshades made from human skin and the soap made from human fat was a hoax. Even the curator of the Auschwitz museum admits that the gas chamber disguised as a shower was a postwar Soviet creation. And according The International Red Cross, the death toll in Nazi concentration camps was 271,301. Only about 20% of the prisoners were Jewish.

This is a minor but equisite example of Nuremburg justice:

One notable incident occurred when investigator Joseph Kirschbaum brought a certain Einstein into court to testify that the accused Menzel had murdered Einstein's brother. When the accused was able to point out that the brother was alive and well and, in fact, sitting in court, Kirschbaum was deeply embarrassed and scolded poor Einstein:

"How can we bring this pig to the gallows, if you are so stupid to bring your brother into court?"


Mark S. Oller in reply to LEO595

Even if Nazi genocide were real, Zionists prevented every attempt to rescue Eurpoean Jews.

Ten questions to the Zionists
by Rabbi Michael Dov Weissmandl ZT"L
Dean of Nitra Yeshiva



c) No ransom will be paid

IS IT TRUE that this response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.




IS IT TRUE that this offer was rejected by the Zionist leaders with the observation "Only to Palestine!"


IS IT TRUE that during the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weitzman, the first "Jewish statesman" stated: "The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important". Weitzman's cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe".

There are additional similar questions to be asked of these atheist degenerates known as "Jewish statesmen", but for the time being let them respond to the ten questions.

These Zionist "statesmen" with their great foresight, sought to bring an end two two-thousand years of Divinely ordained Jewish subservience and political tractability. With their offensive militancy, they fanned the fires of anti-Semitism in Europe, and succeeded in forging a bond of Jew-hatred between Nazi-Germany and the surrounding countries.

These are the "statesmen" who organized the irresponsible boycott against Germany in 1933. This boycott hurt Germany like a fly attacking an elephant - but it brought calamity upon the Jews of Europe. At a time when America and England were at peace with the mad-dog Hitler, the Zionist "statesmen" forsook the only plausible method of political amenability; and with their boycott incensed the leader of Germany to a frenzy. And then, after the bitterest episode in Jewish history, these Zionist "statesmen" lured the broken refugees in the DP camps to remain in hunger and deprivation, and to refuse relocation to any place but Palestine; only for the purpose of building their State.

The Zionist "statesmen" have incited and continue to incite an embittered Jewish youth to futile wars against world powers like England, and against masses of hundreds of millions of Arabs.


Mark S. Oller in reply to LEO595

quote from "Uniting Danzig with Germany, by Adolf Hitler, September 19, 1939:

At that time there was in Poland a man whose insight and energy were incontestable. I succeeded in coming to an agreement with the late Marshall Pilsudski, which was intended to pave the way towards a peaceful understanding between the two nations, an agreement which, from the outset, did not sanction anything that was created by the Treaty of Versailles, but which endeavored to lay at least the foundations for a reasonable and tolerable side-by-side existence by completely ignoring that treaty....

Danzig was to return to the Reich. An extraterritorial road was to be built to East Prussia—at our expense of course. In return Poland was to receive the most extensive Free Port rights, and similar extraterritorial access. I, on the other hand, on top of that, was prepared to guarantee the existing frontiers, hardly bearable as they were, and finally to let Poland participate in guaranteeing the safety of Slovakia. I cannot imagine what a state of mind the Polish Government was in when it rejected these proposals. I do know, however, that untold millions of Germans gave a sigh of relief because they were of the opinion that in making those proposals I had gone too far.

This is an undisguised pro-Nazi website, but it is the only complete text I could find. I admit that parts of the speech are mildly racist, but that does not invalidate the main points.

If you do not trust Hitler or jrbooks, read H. G. Wells's prophetic words.

The Shape of Things to Come (1933), by H.G. Wells, is written in the form of a fictional history book published in the year 2106. Wells uses this perspective to comment on various social and political phenomena of his time. The latter part of Chapter 10 (Versailles: Seed Bed of Disasters [1]) is devoted to expressing the writer's strong objection to the creation of the Polish Corridor by the victorious WWI Allies, on which Wells placed a large portion of the blame for the rise of Hitler, and (correctly) predicted that it would turn out to be the flash point of a new Europe-wide war.

I also recommend "A Jewish Defector Warns America," by Benjamin H. Freedman, 1961.

The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The Case Against The Presumed
Extermination Of European Jewry
by Arthur R. Butz

"Judea Declares War on Germany"

Exposing the Holocaust™ Hoax Archive

Mark S. Oller in reply to LEO595

This is from "The Lies of Simon Wiesenthal; His Holohoax story an outrageous fabrication; His work as "Nazi hunter" and Holocaust™ "historian" a total fraud"


Some might put more credence in The Jewish Chronicle than Exposing the Holocaust Hoax Archive.

It is right to expose Wiesenthal

Accepting that the great Nazi hunter was a braggart and, yes, a liar, can live alongside acknowledging his contribution

By Daniel Finkelstein, August 20, 2009


I am wondering why the West and TE are not offering the panacea that they push to China constantly, although China has problems, they are not as severe as flying missiles... the panacea of a general election, and live happily thereafter?

Alex DeLarge in reply to Houshu

Believe it or not Israel is a functioning democracy.
The majority of Israelis are Jewish, and have a tendency to vote in right-wingers like Netanyahu.
But there are moderate Jews like those who support Peace Now, and there are Muslim Israelis.
Moderate Israelis must be feeling very uncomfortable now because after Netanyahu is done with Hamas he may start on Iran, a much tougher opponent.
The US must be wondering how to get it's erstwhile ally back on it's leash before it attacks Iran and sends the Middle East into a conflagration.
Expect several thousand Israelis to visit their auntie Ruth in Florida.


There is no hope for peace so long as both sides believe that the area is a "holy land" and that "god" intended it for them alone. Israelis and Palistinians are criminally insane and should be treated as such.

Alex DeLarge in reply to lambertamr

That is far too simplistic a view.

As far as the Palestinians (and all Arabs) are concerned, Israel was created out of Palestinian territory in 1948 by the British, who had the mandate (aka colonial authority) there.

Many Arabs do not believe Israel has the right to exist. Iran seems to share that view. I expect some Arabs take a more moderate view, but Israel's behaviour makes it hard for them to espouse it.

As far as I can tell, Israeli views are more complex. Some believe in Eretz Israel, which includes the West Bank and Gaza and parts of Syria and Jordan. I think people who believe that (and work towards it) are called 'Zionists'.

Moderate Israelis want to work towards a two-state solution. Unfortunately for them Netanyahu is currently in charge. Netanyahu, as far as I can tell, is a Zionist.

The interesting thing about the current fighting is that Egypt has changed position. Mubarak was kept in line by several billion annually from the US, but the new Egyptian regime has today said it "will not abandon their Gazan brothers".

This is important because US funding persuaded Mubarak to limit the flow of weapons across Egypt's border with Gaza...a limit the may now have been lifted. A sign that the situation has fundamentally changed will be Egyptians crossing into Gaza to fight with Hamas against Israel.

Perhaps someone will correct me if my views are incorrect.

lambertamr in reply to Alex DeLarge

Very nice reply and i don't see anything incorrect about your views.
The situation is more complex then we could ever discuss on here,and although my view is simplistic, i do feel that it is valid.
We have two groups who both believe that god intended the land for them, and they are both killing in defense of that land while at the same time claiming to be religions of peace. If i ever tried to do something violent in the name of god, they'd lock me in the loony bin.
The point is, that even a two state solution will not amount to peace when the parties are so utterly delusional.
As you said, there are moderates on both sides, and i wish they could grab a hold of the reins. But even then, any government based on religion is inherently undemocratic and oppressive to those citizens not of the national faith.

Loyd Eskildson

If Iran had 'the bomb,' Israel wouldn't be so obnoxious.


Violence will not solve the seemingly everlasting conflict between Palestine and Israel. The ongoing exchange of rockets and tit-for-tat claims from both sides that “they did this, so we are therefore justified to do that” only ensures never-ending violence and deaths. FACT; there are two groups unwilling to leave the region and who will resort to violence in order to protect their claim. Unfortunately, the use of violence from both sides symbolises a distinct failure in acknowledging this fact and only leads down a path towards death and destruction. Therefore, there must be comprises from both sides in order for any peaceful stability to emerge. This will require a drastic change of thinking from both ruling governments and a willingness to compromise so that future generations do not become caught in this cyclical conflict. Force may seem to be a viable option for some, but it is also a product of short-sightedness and a failure to understand the underlying realities of the Israel-Palestine conflict. It simply perpetuates the never-ending cycle of violence and stagnation within the region.


A comments on The New York Times:
Can you stop terrorism by bombing to ruins a sealed-off crowded territory of refugees? Is that how you get peace? Did that happen after 1,400 people were killed in 2008-2009? The Israeli's who genuinely want peace see this for what it is - an outrageous attack that will only lead to more and more violence on both sides. And NYT needs to stop publishing a blatantly one-sided account that focuses only on Israeli losses. We don't make peace by ignoring the humanity of the other side.
My comment: at the time of the Cast Lead operation the Gaza Strip was sealed-off indeed. Four years later, here we are...

Yura2009 in reply to LEO595

Of course, an honest man like you always worries about the Palestinian kids growing up in bomb shelters. Indeed, generations of such "bomb shelter" kids have grown up in Gaza grateful to Isreali politicians for the unique lifetime experience.

john4law in reply to Yura2009

Moral equivalence propaganda. There would be no bomb shelters if Anti-Semites let Israel live in peace and the Palestinians honored THEIR Peace Agreements. You hate Israel and that is all there is to it!

john4law in reply to Yura2009


Attendant Lord in reply to Klara_M

Please review the Infitada, which ended the peace by beginning the suicide bombings in Israel, which led to the building of the Wall.

You have forgotten that many Palestinians used to come into Israel to work before the Infidata, and that Palestine had at that time one of the world's fastest growth rates. As a result of the extremism that followed, Palestine suffered loss of Israeli jobs, and the building of the Wall.

Anyone who reads the Hamas Charter will stop talking about peace and peace talks, as the Charter calls upon Hamas to eschew all peace talks and all international agreements.


Of course let us not forget that, under the edicts of the ruling Likud party, there must never be a Palestinian state. Never. Not if they throw down their weapons, cede half the West Bank and all of East Jerusalem, and agree to lie prostrate so that Israelis can walk on their backs.

NEVER. That is the Likud position.


the only problem in all this is that 70 years ago,a british government and the UN decided that it shouldn't be a problem to parachute a new country inside the middle east by occupying someone else's land thinking that yeah they'll get used to their new neighbors.well newsflash : the palestinians will never forget that this is THEIR land and they will always shoot rockets because their land is OCCUPIED. and frankly it's their right.occupy my country and we would've done the same.

Sam88488 in reply to john4law

my friend I have absolutely nothing against jews but you cannot go throught history messing up and using this phrase.no one wants to get rid of the jews but you cannot occupy someone else's land and expect them not to retaliate.

john4law in reply to Sam88488

You decree the Jews out of Israel on pain of death. Who are you???
Hundreds of International treaties, resolutions, United Nations or League of Nations Mandates or the agreements signed BY THE PALESTINIANS THEMSELVES, mean NOTHING TO YOU?? What does??? The death of the Jew is all I can think of Mister!! You and your ilk have been reaching for that blessed moment for thousands of years but are NOT going to get it!!

ghostoflectricity in reply to Sam88488

All the modern states of the Middle East are fabricated from previous empires. You single out Israel, for the obvious reasons. The Jews were pushed out of all the Arab and Muslim countries and sought one piece of land, a SMALL one, and Sam88488 (does that stand for Heil Hitler for Heil Hitler? You're pretty transparent.) wants to blame the Jews.

Attendant Lord in reply to Sam88488

The British Government was one of the Allies that won World War I. That is what happens in war; one side wins, another loses. The Allies carved up the entire region once controlled by the Turkish Caliphate, in order to create a bunch of smaller states that could compete with each other instead of there being one huge powerful state. At the same time, Muslims in India were given Pakistan and there was a great migration. Once Israel declared herself a state, the surrounding Arab states expelled as many Jews as there were Palestinian refugees. There never was a country named Palestine. When the Caliphate was divided up, there were landholders, largely Arab and absentee, who legally sold their lands to Jewish groups. When the UN decided to divide the region of the British protectorate into two separate regions, an actual nation was offered to the Arabs living there and another nation to the Jews.
The Jews accepted; the Arabs revolted and lost the war. It is time to get over it, and adjust to the new reality, like every other people has done. These are the only ones who have not.

marting456 in reply to Sam88488

But expelling 1 million Jews from Arab countries 70 years ago and confiscating their property was I guess ok with you.

It's fine to take land and property from Jews but not the Arabs', right? Take your nazi propaganda somewhere else.

marting456 in reply to Mark S. Oller

The sites you quoted look like makeshift Arab/Nazi propaganda. You might as well have quoted from Der Stürmer.

I met many Jewish refugees from Arab countries and Holocaust survivors. They all said the exact opposite.

Mark S. Oller in reply to marting456

This is the first time I heard that Neturei Karta and Jews Not Zionists are Arab/Nazis, although I have known Zionists to equate Arabs with Nazis. That includes Arab Jews. An Arab is a native speaker of Arabic, and Arab Palestinian Jews are among the greatest victims of the Zionist barbarians.

Mark S. Oller in reply to marting456

North Africa was colonized by the French, and there is a vast difference between Saudi Arabia and Palestine or Lebanon. Nor do I consider homosexuality "gay" or healthy, but it is widespread in Arab cultures.

john4law in reply to Sebastianin

Sorry: I do not know which of my comments you are referring to. Israel is NOT going to commit suicide! If it goes down, unlike Czechoslovakia, it is going to take a LOT OF COMPANY with it. If you don't think that will affect the world at large, be a fool.

Alex Kilgour

So, to all those suggesting that Israel has "started" this current situation. I would like for you to take a look at your pretty little city where you live (London, Paris, Berlin perhaps) and ask yourself how you would feel if 150 rockets mounted with explosives were fired into your pretty little city in 2 weeks. How would you feel when over 700 rockets were fired in the last year? What would you, as a citizen, say when your government hasn't taken any action to stop those who are doing this?

How many Israelis need to die before western civilians recognize that the Paletinians ARE NOT PACIFISTS.

Does Israel hold a portion of the blame for this situation? Of course. But so do the Palestinians. So do all of the surrounding Arab nations who stoke this situation to maintain control of their uneducated mob. More of the blame lands at the feet of the US and French governments. But most of the blame belongs to the British government and the UN itself who approved of creating this Jewish homeland by booting the current residents out.

The Jews in Israel have only 3 choices. They can pick up and leave, scattering to the corners of the globe (like they used to be), they can surrender and allow the Arabs to take over (in which case we'll have another holocaust) or they can fight and defend their land and themselves. If you were faced with those choices in your pretty little town, which one would you choose?

F R O Y in reply to Alex Kilgour

And how would you feel if your city was placed under siege by a foreign power for over six consecutive years, exports blocked and imports severely restricted (let alone emigration and immigration), if this foreign power declared most of your farming land and fishing waters "no-go zone", if this foreign power made incursions into the city with complete impunity shooting and killing whoever they pleased?

You forgot the last, and, if unlikely, most sensible choice: end the occupation. Lift the siege on Gaza. Leave Palestinians alone. Sadly, much like you, Israelis don't seem to have taken this option into consideration.

galiliyo in reply to F R O Y

Last time I've looked at the map - Gaza shared a border with Egypt, the same Egypt which is now ruled by Hamas' ideological parent - the Muslim Brotherhood.
So maybe enough with this "Gaza Siege" nonsense? If they are starving in Gaza why don't they import rice instead of Iranian missiles?
I am not justifying Israel's right wing government and it's policy land grab in the West Bank, but nobody seems to care when 1 million Israeli citizens are under a constant bombardment from Gaza for years - all we hear about is this "Gaza Siege" lie.

Alex Kilgour in reply to F R O Y

There was an extensive 50 year history getting to the point where Israel decided to build a wall, arm the portals, and try to control the Paletinians through economic means.

The first mistake in the whole mess was the British and the UN creating a Jewish homeland on top of land already occupied by someone. Although, maybe we can blame the Romans for expelling the Jews. Or perhaps let's go back to the Babylonians because the Romans just copied their earlier methods.

The problem is that both sides can point to an earlier wrong done by the other side, and both sides refuse to put aside the past and move forward. Israel has a very real grievance, my point is that most people only look at the one side. The wall has reduced the suicide bombings, at least, and now Hamas has resorted to indiscriminately firing rockets into cities.

The only long-term solution is for an economy to be developed in Palestine. If the Palestinians managed to find oil, then people would be interested in helping them. Otherwise, they need help to develop a functioning economy.

Men who work all day to feed their families and who can come home to a happy household and sports on TV don't tend to strap high explosive vests on or fire rockets into other cities.

I agree with you that the Israeli response is not helping. But we did travel a road to get to that point. You can understand their response if you look at what they endured in the way of suicide bombings and rockets prior to locking Palestine down.

F R O Y in reply to galiliyo

So far Egypt has played his part as Israel's subcontractor in keeping the siege on his single entry to the strip. Maybe that will change under the Brotherhood's leadership, but so far it hasn't. And Israel is still the one controlling 6 of the seven border entries, the airspace and maritime waters of Gaza. So yes, it is indeed a siege.

F R O Y in reply to Alex Kilgour

Each side can point at the other and voice their grievances, but I think we can agree here on who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed. And once that is clear, there is little else to say. Oppression will always be at the root of violence, because oppression is violence itself. The oppressed will use it to liberate themselves, and the oppressors will use it to maintain their privileged position. Only ending oppression will end violence.

Alex Kilgour in reply to F R O Y

Words like oppressor are loaded with meaning and are used for very specific purposes of conveying meaning.

Israel was attacked by an alliance of nations looking to perform genocide on the Jews in Israel. They defeated the enemy forces, and in doing so anexed land that had been in the possession of their attackers. It was a defensive occupation.

That said, I agree that Israel is not helping their situation or the plight of the Palestinians with their current actions. I just happen to understand how they got to the point of making these decisions and I can sympathize with that even though I would prefer to see a different situation created. It would, however, require a shift in emotion in the area which those in charge have no interest in seeing happen. The Hamas leadership are most happy when Israeli hard-liners are in power, it lets them use the external bogey-man to keep everyone behind them.

F R O Y in reply to Alex Kilgour

Israel was attacked by an alliance of nations seeking to prevent the colonization of Arab land by foreigners. Months before that war, Jewish militias had begun a ruthless ethnic cleansing campaign against Arab villages, perpetrating atrocities like the Deir Yassin massacre. Arab nations had reasons to be concerned about the colonialists' intentions.

Understanding how a regime got to make decisions doesn't justify them.

galiliyo in reply to F R O Y

The Egyptians share a border with Gaza, so let them take care of their bothers and by lifting the "Siege".
If they refuse to open thier border with the Gaza strip then they are to be held responsible for the suffering of the civilian population just like Israel (and more so).

Why doesn't anyone complain to UN about them?

Israel has left Gaza and as result got bombarded by thousands of missiles, just as has left Lebanon with similar consequences. Hamas has sworn to a violent Jihad and is getting what it had asked for.

Hilary Hahn in reply to Alex Kilgour

I have asked myself the same question and I agree that I would want the government to respond to that situation. However, have you asked yourself the question WHY the Palestinians continue to fire rockets AND why the Israelis continue to build new developments in the West Bank?
I think we need to be honest here. The Jews have another option which is to work on a real and lasting peace agreement as outlined by the Clinton administration and halt new developments. End of story.

ghostoflectricity in reply to F R O Y

They've had Gaza for the last 3/4 decade- 7 1/2 years since Israel withdrew. They chose to turn it into an Islamo-extremist, martial enclave, launching thousands of rockets at the Israeli population. That is, except for the expensive Mediterranean villas on high-end beach-front real estate built for Hamas cronies- so much for the "starving, suffering, oppressed" Gazans. They also taught their young that there is to be no peace with Israel- pre- or post'67, what-have-you. They taught their young that Jews are at the root of all evil in the world and that Jews are "the sons of pigs and apes." And yet you blame the Jews. I know what kind of "human being" you are.

Attendant Lord in reply to F R O Y

Why on earth would Israel do that when, after withdrawing from Gaza without setting restrictions, Gaza turned itself almost immediately into a launching pad for suicide bombers and missiles?

Have you READ the Hamas Charter, not one word of which has ever been changed? If you read it you will discover why there cannot be peace. The Charter calls upon the Palestinians not to rest until they have destroyed the Israeli state. Period.

Read it and then return to comment: http://middleeast.about.com/od/palestinepalestinians/a/me080106b.htm

F R O Y in reply to Attendant Lord

Hamas has repeatedly declared truces with Israel in Gaza, only to be shattered by Israel when it suited it to have the rockets back. They did so right after Hamas's electoral election in 2006, shelling a crowded beach and killing an entire family, and they did it again in 2008, launching an incursion that killed 6 Hamas militants. You have to accept that it has never been about rockets. Israel doesn't give a fig about the inhabitants of Sderot. Actually, the rockets and the pain they cause are the perfect excuse to launch major punitive operations in Gaza with full popular support.

This time it has been no different. A truce was mediated by Egypt on November 11th. On 13th Hamas managed to have the other groups pledge to keep it. Then on 14th Israel killed Jabril, making sure the rockets will not stop flowing, so "Pillar of Defense", which probably had been planned months ago, could be launched on time for the elections.

In Your Face in reply to F R O Y

"Hamas has repeatedly declared truces with Israel in Gaza". Don't be ridiculous Froy. In their short history the palestinians have managed to make hundred of agreements and sign hundreds of truces with many different parties. There is not ONE SINGLE INSTANCE in which they abided by an agreement. And I'm not talking only about their agreements with Israel. Every couple of months you read in the news about an agreement between Hamas an Fatah to reslove their diffrences and reunite. And what happens next? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

This is a people with a culture of not keeping solemn promises and not honoring their word. That's what makes it hopless to try and do any diplomacy with them. For them a "truce" means, at best, a reduction in rocket firing, never an absolute halt. The concept of strictly and absolutely adhering to a truce or to any other form of commitment is simply alien to them.

F R O Y in reply to In Your Face

What agreement has Hamas ever signed with Israel, exactly? The only agreements reached by those two have been "tacit truces" mediated by Egypt and which, as I said, Israel systematically shattered on every occasion, despite the efforts from Hamas to halt rocket launches. That clearly shows that Israel's recurrent punishment of Gaza has nothing to do with rockets and much with forcefully removing an undesired leadership, and probably with earning electoral support among the most radicalized segments of the Israeli populace.

tzatz in reply to F R O Y

Oppressor … Arab/Muslim World (400 MILLION STRONG)


You can do the math … can't you Froy? I agree with YOU … 'Only ending oppression will end violence.'

F R O Y in reply to tzatz

You're such a demagogue Tzatz... By your reasoning, Tamils surely can't be oppressed in Sri Lanka, Tamils being 77 million strong world-wide, and poor Sinhalese only 15 million. I guess Chinese also can't be oppressed in Indonesia, them being 1.5 billion people! How could that ever be possible, right?

PALESTINIANS in the OPT (4m of them) are being oppressed by Israel (7m, and with one of the most sophisticated armies in the world). You do the math, but it's not like if a small number of people hasn't ever oppressed a much larger population (ever heard of the British Empire? the Raj?).

tzatz in reply to F R O Y

Let me know the last time the Tamils threatened the Sinhalese with TOTAL DESTRUCTION? You talk about being a demogogue? It's risible! What chutzpah you have Froy!

It's the Arab/Israeli Conflict … Froy!

It's the Arab/Muslims (and the Persian Shia) continually braying about destroying the 'Zionist entity' … and they've made several attempts and continue to do so.

Cosimo Rondo

Hamas has been embolden by the Muslim Brotherhood's recent rise to power in Egypt. This year alone, Hamas -- the offspring of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood -- has fired 800 projectiles into Israel proper. To say that Israel has long been patient while under constant enemy barrage would be an understatement. Should the Brotherhood continue to support Hamas' wanton acts of terrorism, they not only risk jeopardising Egypt's thirtythree year peace accord with Israel and its attendant consequences, but also a pecuniary loss vis-a-vis the United States, should the Americans come to the realisation that an Islamist Egyptian government is not an ally -- as Obama stated earlier this year* -- but another radical player in that tumultuous region (think Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, al Qaida in Iraq, Iran).

* In an interview earlier this year, President Obama said Egypt -- whose Muslim Brotherhood government gave sanction to the Sept. 11th seige on the U.S. embassy in Cairo -- was neither ally nor enemy.

Doron Kahn

It came after 200 rockets in 4 days fired into southern Israel.
What would have been considered as a legitimate reaction by any country is considered as violence when it comes to Israel.

F R O Y in reply to Doron Kahn

Right, and Israel did not fire any missile in Gaza in all that time. They did not make any incursion into Gaza. They did not kill any civilians. They did not assassinate any Palestinian leader. It was all unprovoked. Or perhaps that's just the natural prerogative of the occupation power, and can't be taken into account. Only the occupied's actions count as provocations.

Gbox in reply to F R O Y

Hamas has clearly stated that they are at war with Israel, so killing one of their military commanders is not an assassination, its a casualty of war. Also, the Israelis do not randomly fire rockets into Gaza, they aim at combatants, who, like the cowardly fanatics they are, shoot from positions adjacent to civilian areas hoping for civilian casualties. After all, they do keep saying they love death and the Israelis love life.

Doron Kahn in reply to F R O Y

Facts will be welcomed.it seems you have a very poor or biased view of reality .here some facts for you to learn:
a.israel left gaza on2005 therefore gaza is not occupied
b.killing civilians is not a mission of the israelis (as opposed to deliberately firing rockets at civilians)but a by product due to the palestinian usage of human shields (for example hiding rockets in kindergardens)
c.no political leader was killed unless he himself was involved in killing
anyway, im sure you wont let the facts confuse you

F R O Y in reply to Doron Kahn

When a foreign force can enter at will into your territory, when it controls your borders, maritime waters and airspace, when it can decide the amount of calories your population can consume, when it can kill whoever it wants whenever it wants, you are still under occupation. They merely moved it from the inside to the borders, but it's no different from the West Bank. That's why the entire world still considers Gaza as occupied.

ghostoflectricity in reply to F R O Y

GBox and Doron Kahn: You're wasting your time. FROY (notice the all caps- what an insecure narcissist) is exactly what the Jews have faced for the last 4,000 years. He is soulless, sociopathic jerk with no sense of right and wrong, looking for a scapegoat to blame all his personal troubles and the world's problems on. Why not blame the Jews. FROY and his ilk will never change.

tzatz in reply to F R O Y

The Hamastanis … shot a missile at a military jeep … inside Israel injuring 4 soldiers and destroying the vehicle … along with the attempt earlier that same week … of blowing up a tunnel alongside the Israeli border … missing the soldiers nearby … but only just!

These 'bold' moves triggered the 'targeted killing' of the thug 'Jabari' … he had been underground in hiding but decided to come up for air and he was swatted down! The use of an advanced weapon against Israel … WITHOUT PROVOCATION AND INSIDE ISRAELI TERRITORY …  were the 'steps' that triggered this latest 'escalation'.

Hamas wanted to insert themselves on the world stage … Abbas & co were getting all the press in going to the UN and all … jealousy sparked this episode. Jealousy and over playing their hand … Hamas figured their 'big brothers' … Turkey & Egypt will bring the cowboys to the rescue … can you say …  oops?

Do you think Turkey and Egypt will come to the defense of Hamas? Do you?

F R O Y in reply to tzatz

The "Hamastanis" shot a military jeep on November 10th. On November 8th Israel carried out an incursion inside Gaza, killing a 13 year-old boy in the process. Can you use a calendar, Tzatz? November 8th comes before November 10th, or did you miss that Sesame Street program? Before and after. It can be tricky, I know.

But perhaps you just consider that Israel's actions just don't count as a cause of conflict. They are merely the prerogative of the master, and anything but submissive acceptance will deserve righteous punishment. It must work the same with truces, for why else would Israel have assassinated a Hamas leader one day after the islamists had agreed to a ceasefire? Obviously truces are something to be observed by the "savages" alone. Masters are well above such unbecoming constrictions.

tzatz in reply to F R O Y

The border incident I mentioned in the same paragraph Froy … sloppy reading skills … don't get too close to Elmo now Froy … although I want it known … I'M GAY POSITIVE … no prejudice here!
The fact is … the Hamastanis … were itching for a fight … they dug a tunnel adjacent the Israeli border … and blew it up real good … EXCEPT … THEY MISSED THE SOLDIERS … AND BLEW A VEHICLE 20 FEET IN THE AIR … THE IDF SAID IT WAS A HUGE EXPLOSION … BUT THE 'GANG THAT COULDN'T SHOOT STRAIGHT' … YOUR BUDDIES … MISSED AGAIN … THANKS GOD … INSHALLAH
You do the calendar dates Froy. The kid who died was a victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. An accident. Don't give me the minutiae Froy. The Hamastanis are in a CONSTANT … NEVER ENDING … WAR WITH THE SOVEREIGN JEWISH STATE. It's their state of being!!! They admit it … how about YOU?


Hamas campeign of indiscriminant attacks on Israel's civilians must suffer a severe blow.
Godspeed, IDF!

john4law in reply to Strait_Forward

Somebody has a sane and moral viewpoint about civilians being rocketed out of pure hatred and religious and political bigotry. Arabs specifically and Muslims generally aren't above International Law and peace respecting norms and Jews aren't BENEATH International standards of self defense or national sovereignty.

john4law in reply to Strait_Forward



Stating that up until now all missiles fired into Israel have been harmless is an imbecilic comment. I am sure that the intent of each of the 750 missiles fired into Gaza this year was not harmless and their effect has terrorized the populace in South Israel.
That said, Netanyahu is suffering the repercussions of having done nothing to forward the two state solution, has keep up the usurping of West Bank land, beat the drums endlessly to bomb Iran and in general has been the worst Israeli Prime Minister, arguably, ever.
And now the cycle begins again as Hamas attacks Israel civilians recklessly and Israel in turn obliterates Gaza infrastructure.

Strait_Forward in reply to RumbaClave

You say:
'...now the cycle begins again as Hamas attacks Israel civilians recklessly and Israel in turn obliterates Gaza infrastructure.'

There is no 'cycle' here. There is cause and consequence: Indiscriminant fire rocket fire on innocent Israelis, 3 of whom were murdered today by those "harmless" rockets.

Hamas attacks Israel's civilians, and Israel obliterates TERROR infrastructure, not just infrastructure.

ayayay1 in reply to Daniel1984

But at least Israelis make an effort to minimize civilian casualties, which is the total opposite of your buddies, who make it a point to kill as many bystanders as possible, a tradition started all the way back in the 1920s.

Ant Aloy

*** Resolution 694 (1991) - BINDING
Adopted by the Security Council at its 2989th meeting on
24 May 1991

The Security Council,
Reaffirming its resolution 681 (1990),
3. Decides to keep the situation under review.
*** Resolution 672 (1990) - BINDING
Adopted by the Security Council at its 2948th meeting on
12 October 1990
The Security Council,
1. Expresses alarm at the violence which took place on 8 October at the Al Haram al Shareef and other Holy Places of Jerusalem resulting in over twenty Palestinian deaths and to the injury of more than one hundred and fifty people, including Palestinian civilians and innocent worshippers;
4. Requests, in connection with the decision of the Secretary-General to send a mission to the region, which the Council welcomes, that he submit a report to it before the end of October 1990 containing his findings and conclusions and that he use as appropriate all the resources of the United Nations in the region in carrying out the mission.

24th April 2012 – UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said:

Furthermore, I would like to refer you to specific serious concerns raised by the International Court of Justice (2004) - with relevance to the ‘security barrier’ - which was viewed with alarm by the international community. Incidentally the reference to the illegality of settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem was also reinforced when the International Court of Justice also found the following (indeed the EU supported the UN vote pertaining to the ‘security barrier’):



Mark S. Oller in reply to Hurnanity

Zionists and Jewish true believers do not consider themselves bound by non-Jewish laws. They consider the entire human race the enemy.

This is an excerpt from a review of Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, by Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, in "The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs":

Ideological basis of racism in Israel

"The Talmud states that...two contrary types of souls exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from the Satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness...Rabbi Kook, the Elder, the revered father of the messianic tendency of Jewish fundamentalism said, "The difference between a Jewish soul and the souls of non-Jews...is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle.' "Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky's "Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel"

Mark S. Oller in reply to RumbaClave

When did I ever say the New Testament and Koran were any better? The Christian fundamentalists in the GOP and the United States armed forces are the craziest fanatics of all. Just click my name and see some of my previous posts.

Ant Aloy

Dear All

The UN view of the Palestinian Territories can be seen at the following URL:

The West Bank and East Jerusalem is occupied Palestine (recognised by 132 nations in the world including India, China, Russia, Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Iceland). Palestine is still illegally held and sadly Israel has ignored the ruling of the International Court of Justice (subsequently supported by the UN and EU) with respect to the "separation barrier". This "wall" is 3 times the length of the Berlin Wall.
UNESCO’s recognition of Palestine last year was supported by France, Spain, Ireland, Belgium. Norway, Greece and other European nations.
International law and UN Resolutions (over which there are over 150) are ignored by Israel.

God bless

*** UN Security Council Resolution 478 (1980) of 20 August 1980 - BINDING


Attendant Lord in reply to Ant Aloy

I'm a little confused here. The UN voted for the establishment of two states, and Israel set hers up. The Arabs went to war, and instead of driving out the Israelis, lost territory.

The same people now calling for some respect for UN resolutions disrespect the first one that partitioned the area into two regions: one for Israelis and one for Arabs. Until they respect the first one, why pay any attention to their picking and choosing amongst the resolutions they prefer and those they reject?

The UN Charter itself, article II, contains the following language:



The very first act of the Arab states surrounding the brand new state of Israel was an act of war.


This is becoming an Israeli elctoral tradition, just like Obama's basketball game. Every time elections approach, Israel launches an attack on Gaza. Nothing like some Palestinian blood to get those voters energized.

Strait_Forward in reply to F R O Y

It is actually the other way around, FROY. Just like in the Cast Lead days, just before Israel's elections, Hamas always fires a barrage of dozens of rockets on Israeli civilians’ heads.

Of course, for some the sight of a Jew defending himself is unacceptable. But Jews can defend themselves today. Even ahead of elections.

Strait_Forward in reply to F R O Y

'Palestinians defending themselves', you say? - Calling for Israel's destruction and while at it, indiscriminately attack innocent Israelis, is "defense" in your standard.

Logical. After all, what Hamas wants if to kill the Jews, as per their Covenant, Article 7. A perfectly "defensive", and therefore legitimate and worthy goal, isn't it?

Thanks for clarifying your point.

Daniel1984 in reply to Strait_Forward

Your point isn't very strong either. The slaughter taking place at the moment is horrendous, and both sides are guilty.

But Israel is killing A LOT more Palestinians, as it has been, for years. Therefore, it can hardly take the moral high ground. Its actions are reprehensible, whatever the excuse, as is the support for them from the U.S., U.K., etc.

tzatz in reply to Daniel1984

You want proportionality?

There are 300 MILLION ARABS … and



tzatz in reply to tzatz

You're too slow … the answer is … 150 DEAD MUSLIMS

Except … since the Israelis have targeted ONLY HAMAS terrorists … the death toll is only 39 … give the Israelis some applause for behaving themselves like 21st C warriors …

AND not like the slugs in the Arab/Muslim World … let's think of say …








Do I need to continue? LOL


Economist commentators can be relied upon to urge the Jews to accept their wickedness and their destruction and stop arrogantly expecting their cites not to be rocketed at will by those fanatically seeking their destruction. What else is new in The Economist comment pool??

F R O Y in reply to john4law

Right, but Palestinians must surely accept their wickedness and their destruction and stop arrogantly expecting their cites not to be sieged, their fishermen and farmers not to be harassed, and their leaders not to be assassinated at will by their colonial masters. Either meekly submit and accept their fate, or suffer the consequences.

Attendant Lord in reply to F R O Y

From the get go, Palestinians and Arabs have made war on Israelis--even before the Partition. In fact, it was this insistence that Jews not live in the region, even after the Jews legally purchased lands legally and willingly sold to them by Arabs, that eventually got so out of hand that England threw up her hands and decided that partition would be the only "solution" to the ongoing violence.

The Palestinians made war time and time again after Israel established a state with the approval of the UN. Each time they made war, they lost more land. They did not withdraw from the lands they lost; they stayed on those lands and made war from them.

Had the Israelis made a habit of returning lands the Palestinians lost every time they or their Arab brethren started a war against Israel, it would have been quite an encouragement: you make war and win; you keep the land; you make war and lose, you get to keep the lands you lost. You can't lose! Just keeping attacking until you finally win it all.

Yeah, right.

tzatz in reply to F R O Y

Check your rear-view mirror Froy … your brothers and sisters in the Arab/Muslim World … certainly are behaving like they still live in the MIDDLE AGES! Tribalism … Clans … and look at the way they're dealing with each other in Syria … Libya … et al

The last time the Arab/Muslims tasted any success … was in the Middle Ages … don't put them down …

BTW … ignorance … uneducated masses was also the 'touchstone' of the Middle Ages … Hmm what's different?


A tiny correction.

You wrote in the article:
"The next day, in an even more dangerous escalation, a rocket killed three Israeli civilians in a town between Gaza and Tel Aviv, Israel’s biggest city."

Tel Aviv is only the second most populous city in Israel.
Tel Aviv metropolitan Area (Gush Dan) is the biggest though.
Also by area, Jerusalem is more than twice the size of TA.


When will international comunity stop and sent this Izraeli criminals to the International court of justice at Haag for a war crimes they have done?

john4law in reply to stevvo

The authentic Palestinian Death to Israel and the Jews crowd have every right to wipe out Israel and particularly its JEWS!!! I fully understand where you and the other One Sided Moralists who infest comment columns about matters Israeli or Liberation of the Middle East are coming from!!! Maybe the Judges on your ideal Court against Israel and the Jews should be the Passover Bomber Planners and the terror Rocket commanders!!

Strait_Forward in reply to stevvo

You say:

Don't you know that targeting innocent civilians, as Hamas does, is the war crime, while fighting the terrorists who target innocent civilians is legitimate?

Once you push for Hamas leaders and their Egyptian/Turkish supporters to The Hague, only then could you can talk in the name of war crimes.

stevvo in reply to john4law

You forgot to mention tanks, aircrafts, nuclear bombs etc.
Israel has them or Palestinians?
I am not against Izrael and Jews.
Just against some criminals who rule the politic there.
I still remeber how they murderd unarmed people on those ships and thousands of civilians in Ghaza at last crime they did.

raskarll in reply to Strait_Forward

and you conviniently forget the many thousands of palestinians killed by the Isreli establishment. i am certain that any assessment of the numbers will show a disproportionate amount on side being killed, its like the lives of Palestinians are worth that of flies and the lives of Israelis are worth more than that of ordinary humans. what do they hope to achieve but constantly flexing their muscles? No one likes a bully and sooner rather than later the status quo will change

Attendant Lord in reply to stevvo

Just out of curiosity, do you consider using civilians as human shields a "war crime" and, if so, why are you not calling for the International Court of Justice at Haag to send Palestinian criminals to that court for war crimes?

Strait_Forward in reply to stevvo

You mean the Palestinians, who tried to jkill the Jews, lost, and now they whine "oh, I tried to kill you and now I suffer... bring me back what I once owned, for me to use to try and kill you again...".

The Israelis murderred yesterday were killed for one 'crime': they happen to carry an Israeli ID card. That's it.

stevvo in reply to Strait_Forward

I mean Palestinians who are fighting to come back on their property, in their places in their houses from which Israelis expeld them with rifles.

This is the esence of problem. When it will bee solved there will be no more problem.

I repeat, for the moment, Israel is teroristic state which don't respects any human and international law in a very similiar way as Hitler did and this is unacceptable from a civilization point of wiev.

Israel must be faced with consecvences for such behaviour and it will be.

Israelis can't no more count on sympaties and misuse them as they did in a cool blood till now because of holocaust that happend in WW2. New generations who are not loaded with bad concience about that are grown and won't allow that it happens again to anybody.

Israel must change it's politic otherwise one morning will be faced with the wall arround himself which havent him built.

stevvo in reply to Attendant Lord

Using civilians as human shields is crime. No doubts about that.
That is what Izraelis said that Palestinians are doing and in a case of Ghaza, it is lie whith which they try to cover what they are doing there for real.
Izraerlis military estabilishment knows that any fighter anywhere in the world won't stay longer than a minut at the place from where he fired.
Nobody do that.
But they shoot anyway althougt they know that target is gone, even without knowing where it exactly was, using weapons for mass destruction.
End what is worse, they are using ammo that is strictly prohibited by the Internationa conventions like phosphorus bombs and shells. This are not weapons of pin point accuracy and not weapons for pin point targets but non selectiv weapons for targets that are spread in a wide space.

And they use this in so dense settled city as Ghaza is knowing that they will not hit enemy fighter but innocent civilians.

That indicates that real targets are not enemy fighters but common people, civilians, and that Izraeli tactik is taking hosteges in a way: "If you shoot on us we will shoot on your people "," If you kill one our soldier we will kill 100 your civilians", etc.

That's why so many civilians were killed in last attack on Ghaza.

This is war crime.

I doubt that Izrael can do the same again without extremly hot reaction of international public opinion. Izrael must count with that and there is another thing which is often forgotn: Jews who live out of Izrael.
What about them?
How such actions will reflect on their status in surroundings where they live?

Peace is the best, bro. The True is, in all wars, first casuality. She dies first.

With so much money and afforts which they all spend on wars in this region all people could live like Cezars.

But....... we have what we have. And we must try to save what we can.

tzatz in reply to stevvo



There you have it … THE solution to the Arab/Israeli Conflict. And now back to the 'rest' of the news. LOL


No-one can argue that Mahatma Gandhi was an example of the power of passive resistance and peaceful protest. He broke the British Empire in India.
The link below is what Gandhi said about Palestine. Read it and weep.
In an article by Mahatma Gandhi in 1938, titled "The Jews in Palestine", he concluded his highly complimentary comment on the Jewish people by saying, "They can add to their many contributions, (to humanity), the surpassing contribution of non-violent action"

The failure of the Jews in Palestine in the 75 years since those words were written to contribute "non-violent action" in the Middle East arena, and their ongoing militarism, will prove their undoing.
If they had followed Gandhi's advice it could have been different. But now the die is cast. "Live by the sword, die by the sword" is inevitable, and the tragic consequences are being played out today.

john4law in reply to Ping2

Gandhi also called Hitler "not a bad fellow" and advised the Jews to humbly accept their destruction in the Holocaust. These comments are THE BLACKEST OF MARKS on the record and legacy of this often perverse and VASTLY OVERRATED historic figure. Your quote from Gandhi shows what your true Anti-Semitic agenda is!

Ping2 in reply to john4law

I backed my comment with a link for you to read what Gandhi wrote. I doubt if you actually read it. Please support your quotes with some evidence. I cannot believe that Gandhi would advise the Jews to accept their destruction in the holocaust. Back it with evidence or your comment has no integrity.

Alex Kilgour in reply to Ping2




Amazing what google will do for you

Ping2 in reply to Alex Kilgour

Well done you open the matter to honest debate. But you commit the error of quoting without reference to context. Gandhi's comment on Hitler was made in early 1940 before Hitler had rolled out his expansion, and even the Brits thought he was a man who could be reasoned with. They were all clearly wrong.
On the issue of the context of Gandhi's comment on the death of millions of Jews,(which was made after WW2), Wiki-pedia says "the quote is in the context of Gandhi's argument to his biographer that collective suicide would have been a heroic response that would have "aroused the world and the people of Germany to Hitler's violence".
His argument being that they succumbed quietly and only after the war did the world become aware of the horror of the genocide perpetrated by Hitler. If they had sacrificed themselves visibly, the resulting backlash might have aroused the world to prevent it. Or not, we'll never know.
But to infer that Gandhi supported Hitler in any way is incorrect. He also did not ask the Jews to "humbly accept their destruction", but to rather use it as a weapon. As he says, they succumbed anyway. and as we now know, to no avail. There was no outrage, no rescue.
Don't forget that Ghandi said "It is the greatest crime of our time."
The vitriolic nature of your response tells me that I am not in a debate with men of reason but men of poison.

Attendant Lord in reply to Ping2

Ghandi was dealing with England; the Jews in the middle east were dealing with Arabs. That is the key difference and why Ghandi was wrong about non-violence. The British traditions and culture and the Arab traditions and culture do not react similarly to non-violence.

Just look at the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which had been occupied by Israel. Did the Arabs there live in peace once Israel withdrew, and once millions were spent by well meaning Jews who left the greenhouses that had supported many Jewish businesses in Gaza intact for the Gazans?

The Arabs destroyed the greenhouses immediately and treated the withdrawal as an Arab victory; they immediately launched the Infidada, sending in suicide bombers to blow up civilans, men women and children eating at cafes and pizza parlors; they launched countless rockets into civilian areas.

Non violence my foot.

Ping2 in reply to john4law

If I have substantiated and justified my position why should I retract?
Because you petulantly demand it? You will have my retraction if you can convince me that Gandhi was not sincere in his belief that non-violence is more powerful than violence, and that the CONTEXT of his words are critical to the understanding thereof. Read again what I posted above.
Before the extent and nature of Hitlers atrocities were known, Gandhi, like the British, the US, Russians, Japanese, along with the aristocracy and ruling class in Europe treated him with respect and offered friendship.
Having the benefit of hindsight allows you the advantage to label Hitler as the madman he was. Which proves my point that context counts. In 1938, when Gandhi wrote his piece on Palestine, no-one had the knowledge and the benefit of 20/20 vision with which to make judgement, as you now have. If you had fully extracted the quote from Wiki-pedia, you would have included the emphasis they put on context.
If you are so blinded by your cause that you cannot be rational enough to put yourself in the shoes of a man living at that time, and understand the difference between what the world knew then, and what the world knows now, then I cannot help you to see that you are blinded.
The fact that you are blinded by hatred imprisons you, not me.
I have no pro or anti position, and I can be objective and see the light.
Pray tell, what should I retract, and why?

Ping2 in reply to Attendant Lord

Does not the fact that the Jews and the Arabs are at each others throats yet again, after almost 70 years of living in amongst one another, tend to prove Gandhi's theory that violence just begets violence? You have not tried peace yet. In the words of John Lennon, "give peace a chance".
Stop the violence.

Ping2 in reply to john4law

I like to think of myself as an "Israeli survival realist".
The behaviour of the state of Israel in choosing aggession before peace, threatens your survival.
Thats not denialism, its realism. Especially when you consider the numbers of Israeli citizens vs the numbers of those re-aligning themselves with Gaza, and the ramifications of the "Arab spring" uprisings. With technology and US backing you have been able to trample on the opposition who have had to throw stones at your F16's and tanks.
It remains more or less so, but for how long is the question that would keep me awake at night, if I were an Israeli.
If you continue to miss opportunities for reconciliation and peace, you may cross a rubicon from which there is no recovery, and the seeds of your destruction will take root. That's if you are not there already.
I don't know, and as an objective observer, I don't have an attitude one way or the other. Although I do so dearly love Jerusalem as a city.
Be a real loss to the world if it were flattened in senseless warfare.
Your choice.
P.S. What makes you think you deserve decency above anyone else. Birthright?

tzatz in reply to Ping2

Birthright? Is that double-speak for 'Chosen People'?

Just want to get your prejudices on the table Ping2

You know … I play Pings when I play golf … smacking that ball around has taken on 'new' meaning … LOL

Ping2 in reply to tzatz

Just read the words I wrote in simple English and don't try to look for innuendo and double-speak. There is none. John4law was stamping his feet and childishly demanding retraction and expecting that I show him "decency" by agreeing with him. Why, because it is his birthright to demand that everyone treat him specially? Every person deserves to be shown decency, Jew, Christian, Muslim, Hindu. I never showed him anything but decency. He seems to have retired from any debate by resorting to highschool level monosyllabic "you lie, you lie, you lie" type of response. That tells me the debate with him is over. (I was hoping he would actually read what I said, and engage me with a well-reasoned argument, so that I may broaden my knowledge, and, yes, perhaps even agree to retract some of my earlier statements.) I don't mind abandoning a line of reasoning if it can be shown to be fallacious.
To tzatz.
I will be the first to acknowledge that I have prejudices as a result of my upbringing and world experience, but I try to be as open-minded on all issues as I can be, especially those which have no effect on my life.
But neither you nor John get it when I say that I really do not have any agenda when it comes to the Middle East and its politics. I do not know anyone in the Middle East, and I am half a world away. I have visited several times, and what I observe is the insanity of blood brothers who live cheek by jowl, killing one another over land and religion. The world is outraged and sickened by the senseless killing of civilian women and children on both sides. (Althought he body count is skewed if you analyse the numbers. This tends to tilt world opinion in favour of the underdog, by the way.)
If you have to fight, it would be better if all the testosterone-overdosed males on both sides went into the desert and had it out, mano a mano, as in the olden days, and left the innocent women and children out of it.
Hope you are getting much more distance from your driver now that you think of me when you hit your Ping. Peace and love to you all.

tzatz in reply to Ping2

As a quick retort … let me remind you … that while 'in the old days' the men did do the fighting 'on the battlefield' … the women and children suffered too … that is, once the battle was over the victors … ALWAYS TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE WOMEN & CHILDREN!!! Ask any Arab/Muslim … it's in the Koran & Hadiths … today's warfare … since we're in the era of TOTAL WAR … has just advanced the timeline … that is, EVERYONE IS IN THE FIRING LINE … just ask the Arab/Muslims who targeted the Twin Towers!!!!

tzatz in reply to tzatz

You said: "Hope you are getting much more distance from your driver now …"

If you played golf you'd know that it's all about 'the short game'!

Putting … chipping … lobbing … putting !!!

You said: "… Israel in choosing aggession before peace …"

Tells me that you do not understand the Arab/Muslim mindset … you should read … Lee Smith: The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations … it would inform you that Arabs respect POWER … and attack those they feel are WEAK …

The Arab/Israeli Conflict is the PERFECT example … in May 1948 … the Arab States attacked the nascent Jewish State with the intent of dismantling it … that is, to utterly destroy it!!! The fact that they failed did not dissuade them from attempting again and again keep on trying … 1967 … 1973 … are certainly examples … it is only after the Arab/Muslims respect OUR (that is, Israel's) POWER that they can and will make a deal (Egypt and Jordan) … the recalcitrant states like Syria or the rest of the Arab League continue the belligerence … Hamas and the PA belong to the latter group … they can never be allowed to 'bow' to Israel … except … the PA under Abbas has decided to strategically attempt to remain non-violent but still NOT AGREEING TO A END OF CONFLICT SETTLEMENT THAT WOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE Arab League AND HAMAS … is the belligerent 'bad boy' NEVER ACCEPTING/RECOGNIZING THE JEWISH STATE …

The only way forward for Israel is to keep on inflicting as MUCH PAIN AND SUFFERING AS POSSIBLE … on the belligerents in order to bring them to … accepting their fate … that being acceptance of the sovereignty of the Jewish State … it will come with a cost … the blood and treasure of Israelis but as sure as the hair on my face … it will come … Inshallah

clujeanul in reply to john4law

And what is wrong in being anti-semitic? Is it really wrong or is it politically wrong? It may occur that the way jews do politics, in 10-20 years time (or sooner?) one would have to worship you in the street, passing by. If you have God in your back it doesn't mean you're always right.


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
The crisis in Venezuela: Another day, more bodies
Americas view March 13th, 16:49
A tribute to Robert Ashley: A perfect life
Prospero March 13th, 16:22
Commodities and the economy: Copper bottomed
Buttonwood's notebook March 13th, 15:58
Germany's Hoeness trial: Uli goes to jail
Charlemagne March 13th, 14:18
El Salvador's election: An extraordinary result
Americas view March 13th, 14:13


Products & events