The Northern Agrarian


Me Gaza Es Su Gaza
January 8, 2009, 12:23 am
Filed under: Foreign Policy, War

Greetings everyone. I hope you all had a wonderful holiday and, despite my own reservations on the ludicrous January 1st spectacle, a happy New Year. My New Years resolution: to post daily. Watch out.

I thought I would start out 2009 on a light note, so I am going to post a recent debate I have been a part of on Facebook over the Israeli offensive in Gaza. My opponent, who shall be known only as “Igor” to protect the intellectually dense, supports the operation. I oppose it. This took place in the comments section of a note by an extremely intelligent friend of mine who feels differently about the issue, but his note is a bit too long to reprint. If anyone wants to see it I can reprint it. Enjoy.

Your Hero: First of all, Mike, I hope you’re doing well. This note was well written, per usual.

I think it is terribly misguided, however. Let’s address first the important comparison you make to Pearl Harbor. To equate a couple wackos firing missiles into empty buildings to an organized and deliberate military strike meant to cripple a country’s naval power is at best misguided, at worst misleading. It seems that no matter the circumstances, be it Russia responding to Georgian attacks or Hamas killing half a dozen Israelis, to advocates of neoconservative military policy every conflict is comparable to “The Good War.” This is a mindset divorced from reality.

You discuss thoroughly that hatred held by Palestinians for Israelis, but what of hatreds held by Israelis towards Palestinians? Are we to believe that years of conflict have left Islamocrazies hateful but not Israelis?

I ask these clearly rhetorical questions because Israel has been looking for reasons to move on Hamas since its overwhelming election victory. One could bring to question the validity of the silly democracy-doctrine peddled by the former leftist Trotskyites occupying the “Right” these days, but I will leave that argument for another day. You conveniently brush aside Israel’s blockade, but such a blockade, be it military or economic, would be viewed as an act of war by any independent state. In this recent reincarnation of the seemingly ageless conflict, this was the first blow.

So let’s draw up a more logical analogy, courtesy of Justin Raimondo. If Mexico, looking to reclaim lands long lost and unhappy with an American election cycle, invaded south California,drove the residents of San Diego from their city, cooped them up in, say, Death Valley, and wouldn’t let anything but a basic minimum of consumer goods and medical supplies either in or out, I think we know what would happen.

In the end many of these arguments are semantic in nature, so here are the facts. Nearly 30% of those killed in gaza so far have been children. Israel responded to an attack that was meant simply to agitate with full-scale war, with casualty numbers suggesting that civilian deaths have been more than collateral. This is not to say hamas is innocent. They certainly are not. But America’s stance in the region has been insanely one-sided, in conflict with our own security interests and that of the Israeli people. neither are safer as long as the Israeli military responds to childish attempts at agitation by creating more orphans.

Igor: “To equate a couple wackos firing missiles into empty buildings” Let me fix your gros error. The correct statement is “20,000 wackos firiing 7200 missiles into a million civilians.” This is as real as it gets.

Israel’s blockade was put in place because Hamas is a terrorist organization, therefore illegal, and it was importing weapons to kll Israeli civilians. How do you overlook such critical elements?

Your Hero: How many people were killed in recent Hamas attacks, Igor? Nothing is more real that ground numbers.

The ability to decide a government is illegal is completely arbitrary. Israel refuses to recognize that by delegitimizing a decision made by an overwhelming percentage of the Palestinian population, they continue to invite resistance from that population. What Israel has said by doing this is we refuse to recognize a foreign body because they have seperate interests than our own. Imagine another country employing such logic!

Igor: “In the end many of these arguments are semantic in nature,” ou said a few wackos, when Hamas flaunts 20,000 martyrs. That is not symantecs, that is stupidity on your part for not knowing the real numbers.

“Nearly 30% of those killed in gaza so far have been children.” This is also complete lies. Nearly 20% of all those kiled are “civilians”, of which maybe half are children by the most anti-Israel reports. Until this conflict is over, we will not know the real numebrs. Bottom line, you are just bloating the numebrs to suit your arguments.

“But America’s stance in the region has been insanely one-sided” How is America’s stance one sided?

“childish attempts at agitation by creating more orphans.” If you are okay with 7200 missiles being launched at you, can I have your address so I can pet your residence with 7200 shrapnel-pcked explosives? I mean since you are so okay with it, you would not even think of responding.

How many people were killed by hamas is irrelevant. What is relevant is how many people are in range. Since the conflict began the death toll is at 8 Israelis. The difference is at Hamas aims for civilians and Israel aims for Hamas, and tries to avoid civilians.

“The ability to decide agovernment is illegal is completely arbitrary” No it is not. The EU, USA, and Israel all consider Hamas to be ilegal.

What you fail to recognize is that Hamas wants to eliminate Israel from the map. If Mexico wanted to erase America from the map and was acting to achieve its aim, do you think America should just take it on the chin?

I doubt I should waste my time arguing with you, becase you seem highly anti-Semitic, and reasonably unintelligent. You do not even know the numebrs that you are arguing about.
Besides, since when is proportionality determined as tit for tat? And how does that apply to an entity which proclaims that its objective is to destroy the Jewish state? Would the inadvertent death of noncombatants become “more justifiable” if only more targeted Israelis were killed? Does Israel have to experience a mega massacre before implementing deterrence? What sort of sick thinking is this? As Barack Obama said in June when he visited Sderot, “If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I would do everything to stop that, and would expect Israel to do the same thing.”

Your Hero: Pardon me if this is too frank a response, but your answer is completely absurd.

For one, the civilian numbers are not lies. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/04/gaza.humanitarian/

I eagerly await the obligatory response with some straw-man about the media bias.

The comment about targeting my home with missiles does not warrant a serious response by a serious thinker. If you can’t argue foreign affairs without resorting to such childish nonsense I don’t know what to tell you.

And lastly, how have I indicated, even for a moment, that I am anti-Semetic. I shouldn’t have to defend myself by explaining that one of my best friends is Jewish. As for the argument about my intelligence, I think my words (and especially, your words) speak for themselves. Disagree as some may with me, much of what you have said has been laughable at best.

Igor: Me launching rockets at your home is not childish nonsense, it is a reasonable example.

If it sounds like an anti-Semite, and argues like anti-Semite, it is porbably an anti-Semite.
Nearly 20% of all those kiled are “civilians”, of which maybe half are children by the most anti-Israel reports. Until this conflict is over, we will not know the real numbers. Bottom line, you are just bloating the numbers to suit your arguments.

So I do not care what link you post, there cannot be a legitimate civilia death toll count until the fighting is over.

But I am still extending th offer… if you feel launching missiles at Israeli civilians is not big deal, give me the word to pelt your home with shrapnel-packed bombs. As long as I have your permission, I will concede my argument.

Your Hero: The constant citing of Hamas’ claims to destroy Israel demonstrates a misunderstanding of how the Middle East works. If Mexico had some tinpot dictator yelling about America I wouldn’t care. I would do a legitimate threat analysis, and govern my response by Christian just-war doctrine. That does not make me some radical.

You asked how our relationship is one-sided. We sell Israel millions in weapons. Israel is the only country in the world that we give loans to without any check on where the money goes. We give an enormous amount to Israel, far far more than they ever have given back to us. It is an entirely one-sided relationship.

Humor me. How do I sound anti-Semetic? Because I criticize actions of the Israeli government? Sounds like fear-mongering on your part. Accuse anyone that questions the actions of a legitimate state as a degenerate. That seems a bit unfair.

Oh, and bomb my house and I won’t go on a killing spree in your neighborhood. I’ll come to your house and kill you myself. Fair enough?

Igor: AH!!! So you are saying that if Hamas launches missiles at Sderot, then the IDF can go and exterminate the entire Hamas regime? Did I understand you correctly?

What if I hide behind litle children while you try to kill me? And you nd up killing them in the process of getting to me?
You would be guilty of war crimes and innocent civilian deaths according to your logic.
Law is created to protect the innocent, however, it is the innocent who, mistakenly thinking that it is reserved for the guilty, fail to exercise rights granted to them by law.

Your Hero: You are employing a self-fulfilling prophecy. No civilian toll is too high because Hamas “hides behind civilians.” If I fire a gunshot into the air and the bullet lands in your vicinity you might as well nuke my state, because I could have potentially killed your daughter. The logic is operating outside the realm of common sense. I believe that if some wackos fire some missiles and kill 8, the country shouldn’t respond by killing hundreds or thousands of civilians. THAT MUST MEAN I’M OKAY WITH YOU SHOOTING MISSILES AT ME! OF COURSE! I hope that those reading, regardless of viewpoint, can see just how laughable this argument is.

Civilized people are supposed to discuss concepts like justice and fairness without employing arguments that are purely emotional in nature.

Igor: Can you clear things up for me a bit? Did you say that you would be okay with me firing missiles at your house?

Your hero: I’ve discussed statistics, philosophy on just-war, and addressed the actions of an independent state without hurling slanderous accusations. You have called me an anti-Semite and a liar, questioned my intelligence, and threatened to bomb my house. Your words do so much more to harm your argument than mine could ever do.

Igor: Stop avoiding the question! Here is a little bedtime reading for you while you think of an answer to my question.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/129242

Your Hero: The question is insane Igor. No, you can not shoot missiles at my house.

If you shot missiles at me, I would expect you to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Your suggestion is as insane as the idea that hamas could destroy Israel. Just cause you have threatened me doesn’t mean I’m going to invade your town, which would be the likely Israeli response.

By the way… Israeli National News, good choice of impartial news source.

Igor: At least they provide accurate numbers. Considering this war is taking place in Israel, what could be a better source for the news?

Also, since you are obiously not okay with me bombing your house and would prosecute me, just look at this war as Israel prosecuting Hamas. I will repeat the questions that you have still not answered.

Since you have not answered them yet, you either have Alzheimer’s, are ignorant, are conceding your point, or are an idiot. Which one is it?

Your Hero: Alzheimers, bud. Alzheimers.

Igor: As long as you are upfront about it. If you can at least remember you have the disease, then at least there is still hope for you.

Your Hero: Keep talking Igor. You’re doing great!

At this point, the argument died. I am posting this partially because I want to know if I’m crazy for thinking Igor is insane, and because I want it out in the open that he threatened to bomb my house. I’m pretty sure he was joking. Then again, I would believe that the whole thing was a joke.

3 Comments

3 Comments so far
Leave a comment

You can never rule out a bombing when a neocon is involved!

“You disagree with what the Israeli government is doing? You obviously hate the Jewish people if you question what their leaders order!” Was this guy writing directly from AEI?

And according to the antiwar.com newswire, 220 out of approximately 700 dead are children: 31%.

Comment by Carl Wicklander January 8, 2009 @ 3:16 am

I’m taking a break from my vegetative state for a moment. . . Good training and superior technology lead to fewer casualties. Are you recommending that the Israeli army should lower its preparedness for armed conflict so that the number of casualties are more even on each side? Hamas has been intent on the destruction of Israel, why should Israel do anything less than destroy this organization?

Comment by Ariel Sharon January 10, 2009 @ 5:48 pm

[...] Me Gaza Es Su Gaza [...]

Pingback by The Weekly (sub)Standard « The Northern Agrarian January 14, 2009 @ 2:23 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI


Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>