Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 21 Oct 2001 19:49:34 -0700
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Stephen McKay <mckay@thehub.com.au>, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, chat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Islam (was: Religions (was Re: helping victims of terror))
Message-ID:  <3BD3893E.84367A3B@mindspring.com>
References:  <1003617187.3bd1fba3d31ff@webmail.neomedia.it> <1003617187.3bd1fba3d31ff@webmail.neomedia.it> <4.3.2.7.2.20011020213927.048a1780@localhost> <200110211547.f9LFlIB27704@dungeon.home> <3BD32635.EC54F003@mindspring.com> <20011022105743.B18153@wantadilla.lemis.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg Lehey wrote:
> >> Or are you suggesting they do this purely secularly, without religious
> >> connotations?  That's a subtle point in these times.
> >
> > After the celebrations in the streets of the West bank following the
> > events of September 11th, I think you will find this a hard sell.
> 
> You mean the stunt put on for the press?  What makes you think that
> that's the general opinion in the Middle East?

Of course not.  I also recognized some file footage of an
unrelated holiday celebration being foiseted off by CNN as
a "celebration of the bombing of the U.S.".

I'm just telling you that it's going to be a hard sell, to
get the U.S. to be sympathetic to the Palestinians.


> > Before September 11th, it was possible to have sympathy for these
> > people; now it is no longer possible.
> 
> Because now the Americans have been hurt, and not only lots of people
> over there who don't count because they believe in a different
> religion?

A lot of people who it was none of the U.S.'s business to
correct their behaviour, since it was largely internal
matters (or we would have attacked Afghanistan over the
treatment of women, or Pol Pot over the murder of anyone
who wore glasses).  It's a fine line, what's internal vs.
external.  Crashing planes into U.S. targets makes it no
longer internal.


> > Looking at the Israeli/Palestinian situation from outside, it's
> > really hard to understand what it is the Palestinians hope to
> > achieve.
> 
> For a certain definition of "outside", you're obviously correct.  I'd
> like to know that definition, though.  These people lived in this
> country for over a thousand years.  The British occupied the country
> and then gave part of it to immigrants.  They fought and lost.  Does
> that make them vermin?

No, it makes them displaced.

Attacking Israel was just plain stupid, and now they are not
only displaced, they're disposessed.  That happens in war; I
might have some sympathy, if they hadn't been the aggressors,
and lost what they had trying to get away with something.


> > It's clear they want self rule.  I don't think anyone objects to
> > that -- the problem is _where_ they want it: in land lost to them in
> > war.
> 
> Wasn't that what the Israelis wanted when they returned to Palestine?
> Why should their cause be right and that of the Palestinians be wrong?
> (Wrong answer: "because God said they should").

Because the state of Israel was formed as reparations for
World War II... "because the rest of the world said they
should".


> > If the complaint is that the Israelis punish the group when an
> > individual transgresses... I completely understand that policy: the
> > U.S. might have been able to avoid the September 11th events, had it
> > adopted a similar policy earlier.
> 
> But isn't this what the Palestinians are trying too, with what methods
> are available to them?  Again, you're being very selective in your
> allowance of this behaviour.

Which individual are you claiming has transgressed?

Realize, also, that The Social Contract only applies to
the society of which you are a member, and not to all
the world.


> > If the complaint is that they react to stone-throwing by children
> > with deadly force... I completely understand that policy, too:
> 
> Of course, because they're Palestinian children.

No.  Because their parents should fully expect the response
to such attacks to be the use of deadly force, and by tacitly
approving the childrens attacks the soldiers anyway, they
invite a response.  If the Palestinians didn't want that
response, in general, then they would better control the
actions of their children.

Such responses are probably condoned by the Palestinians,
since the reprisals serve their cause in the formation of
negative public opinion over the actions of the Israelis,
so they don't control their children, and thus spend their
lives in trade for the political capital they want.


> > I think most people in the West see the correct reaction to
> > Palestinians is to say "you lost; get over it, quit whining, and go
> > on with your lives; if you don't like it, as Israeli citizens, you
> > get to elect representatives, so elect people who will do what you
> > want".
> 
> That may be correct, but what right have people in the West to dictate
> what happens to the Palestinians?

People in the West do _not_ dictate what happens.

It is the Palestinians who are courting the Western public
opinion, in an attempt to remove support for Israel, so
that they can repeat their past mistakes (attacking Israel),
unhindered by the Wests support for Israel.  But it is the
Wests support for Israel that prevents an all-out blood bath,
and it would not be the Israelis who would lose.


> If you had been born in 1910, would you have written something
> similar in 1938 about how these horrible Jews were being treated
> in Germany?

I would have condemned (and do condemn) the actions taken
against the Jewish populations in Europe.  The Palestinian
situation is hardly comparable to the situation of the Jewish
situation prior and during World War II.


> I'm sure you'll come out and say "but that's nothing like the same
> thing".  Explain the principles (not the details) why not.

The Jews were citizens of Germany, not of a foreign power
which had attacked Germany, lost land to Germany, and then
resorted to terrorist acts to try and get that land back.

The Palestinians engaged in the terrorist acts are not
citizens of Israel, but of a foreign power (Palestine),
they attacked Isreal, they lost land to Israelm and they
are now resorting to terrorist attacks to try and get the
land back.

If you want, we can also discuss sufferage, ownership of
property, naturalization and deportation vs. death camps,
etc..

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BD3893E.84367A3B>