Blog powered by Typepad

News orgs

« The Sock Thief: How the United States armed Saddam Hussein | Main | The Googlewhack challenge »

Oct 16, 2004

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c8c8153ef00d8346c6c6c69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Lange believed in protecting the weak from agression:

Comments

Tony

What "Israeli group punishments of Palestinian civilians"? You continue to fall for the line that, just because aggressors aren't in uniform, then they must be civilians. You find it fair that a state should defend its citizens, but your rationale lives in the Cold War era of state versus state. Hey, this is post-9/11, and Israel has been living that since the early 1970's. Remember Black September and the Munich Olympics? Which was the state that Israel needed to defend itself from then, or since? Like al-Qaeda, the belligerents from one side take physical and moral shelter amongst those they claim to represent. The armoured divisions of Cold War rivalry have given way to the furtive roadside bombs or the beheadings of sheltered terrorists. Wake up sagenz - the rules of chivalry expired at Agincourt.

That's not to say that democratic countries like Israel or the US (or NZ for that matter) can choose to disregard the rule of law - but it does mean the new front-lines are in the back-streets of Finsbury Park, the souks of Lebanon or the mountains of Peshawar. And the theatres of "war" (quite different from the days of Von Clausewitz) migrate and mutate rapidly. It's a lesson that the West must learn and apply, or perish.

So, spare us your self-loathing "collective punishment", that is unless you have proof of your allegations, rather than parrotting the clap-trap of that tired old rest-home for unelected dictators, the UN.

I see that Saudi Arabia has just modified its plans for (a historic first) local elections - they claimed that adult women now won't be able to vote (they ran out of time to make separate voting arrangements, or something like that, was the lame excuse). Have you thought to enquire when the Palestinian Authority held an election that was fair? The only thing resembling one was in 1996, when Arafat ran against a no-name grandmother (since retreated to political oblivion). They haven't even had the decency to hold another sham "election" since. These are the people that Goff and Clark shamefully press to their bosom and declare as friends. Those same people fund and direct a war on innocent Israelis (and Jews abroad).

So what happened to your theory of the collective punishment of terrorists on Israelis and Jews (and others) who are slaughtered whilst going about their daily lives? The facts are clear here - yet you choose to highlight the propaganda of the terrorists who claim that house destruction punishes the innocent - even though it has revealed 100 arms smuggling tunnels and helped reduce the uncidence of successful terror attacks. It seems that Jewish blood is worth less to you than Arab dignity.

Shame on you.

Palestinian National Authority
From the PA website - hardly independent but you are looking for numbers on infrastructure destruction.

"The death toll of the Palestinians killed in the West Bank and Gaza Strip within 38 months totaled 3,835, among were 522 children, 166 women and 211 were killed by the assassination attacks perpetrated by the Israeli occupying forces..."

This is about 1000 higher than the Israeli estimate of 2806 but I would go with the lower figure and guess that all the Palestinian numbers are say 30% overstated. The Israeli site has 921 Israeli deaths and includes all over 12??? year olds as adults. Guess that makes a 16 year old throwing rocks a combatant in your eyes. Not worthy of a bullet in mine.

From the PA "..The losses inflicted to the infrastructure of the Palestinian areas were distributed as; total number of uprooted trees 975,473 until November 30, 2003 while the razed land reached 62,039 dunums, while 176,620 dunums were confiscated for building the Apartheid wall around and through the West Bank. Meanwhile, the number of houses totally destroyed by the Israeli war machine amounted to about 4,727, including 2,218 in Gaze Strip while the number of partially destroyed houses totaled 54,947 including 15,373 in the Gaza Strip. "

If you read partially destroyed as damaged, then with discounts you have around 3000 houses destroyed and 40000 odd damaged. Figures substantially higher than highest estimates of suicide bombers. Not interested in Saudi in this context. They have an even heavier dose of reality coming when Iraq is a stable democracy supplying oil to the world.
ccording to the Economist only 20% of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are economically active. West Bank/Gaza with 3 million people received $865m of total aid in 2003 whereas according to the US embassy in Israel the US gave Israel's 6.7m people $2.7bn plus loan guarantees of a further $10bn. For as long as Palestinians in West Bank/Gaza are treated so badly they will see no alternatives to the increasingly destructive cycle. My whole point is that you must use carrot and stick. If you think that all the destruction caused by israel was justified then you would be as blind and biased as arafat. The lack of a recent election is hardly a reason to justify continuing to inflict collective punishment on Palestinians. In fact the opposite. We both know that Israels policies would cause Arafat to be reelected which is why nobody wants an election in Palestine to give him a further mandate.
Open your eyes. 2 Israeli children killed by rockets and 100 Palestinians killed as retribution. An Israeli company commander puts 19 bullets into a 14 year old girl. Dont take either side as gospel. The Israeli policy of collective punishment and strangling the Palestine economy is the self fulfilling prophecy that keeps terrorists like Arafat in power. There is no moderate alternative available. Until Israel realises it must invest in the future of the moderate Palestinian while the intifada rages there will be no change.
The truth Tony is that Palestinian blood is worth the same as Israeli blood. And Israelis have spilled Palestinian blood at 3:1.

Tony

You said:
"From the PA website - hardly independent but you are looking for numbers on infrastructure destruction."

I wasn't looking for numbers,but if you want to play the "numbers-game", well (sigh) ... here goes. First, thank you for acknowledging that your source may be less than accurate. Second, I'm certain that numbers of those killed or injured do not necessarily identify right from wrong (but you seem to feel that if a party loses more then it must be the victim). Have you thought about the possibility that the party that loses more in a conflagration (and deliberately continues to throw lives away) may, in fact, value its people less.

You said:
"The death toll of the Palestinians killed in the West Bank and Gaza Strip within 38 months totaled 3,835, among were 522 children, 166 women and 211 were killed by the assassination attacks perpetrated by the Israeli occupying forces..."

The Middle East Policy Council (http://www.mepc.org/public_asp/resources/mrates.asp) reports about 3,362 and 931 respectively, from 29 September 2000 to 10 October 2004. In “An Engineered Tragedy” from the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) (http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=439), covering the first two years of the al-Aqsa conflict, research into the figures reported: “the usual fatality count quoted in news articles presents an inaccurate and distorted picture of the al-Aqsa conflict, exaggerating Israel’s responsibility for the death of noncombatant civilians”.

ICT says “ … such numbers hide as much as they reveal: They lump combatants in with noncombatants, suicide bombers with innocent civilians, and report Palestinian “collaborators” murdered by their own compatriots as if they had been killed by Israel. … While Israelis account for 27 percent of the total fatalities as generally reported, they represent 43 percent of these noncombatant victims.”

Also, “The proportion of combatants among Palestinians killed has increased significantly over time, from around 40 percent to its current value of 54 percent. (It is also worth noting that the figure for Palestinian noncombatants includes a large number of fatalities for which combatant status could not be determined …”

And, “The proportion of females among Israeli fatalities was relatively low in the early months of the conflict, and gradually rose to a level of around 30 percent; since June 2001, this proportion has remained fairly stable. Palestinian fatalities, in contrast, have been consistently and overwhelmingly (over 95 percent) male”.

And, “The number of Palestinians killed by actions of their own side – including suicide bombers, “work accidents”, collaborators, and people killed in intra-Palestinian fighting – has increased strongly over time.”

You said:
"Guess that makes a 16 year old throwing rocks a combatant in your eyes. Not worthy of a bullet in mine."

Now take note from the ICT Report: “In general, rock-throwers are not considered to be combatants; an exception to this generalization would be, for example, someone dropping large rocks from a bridge onto fast-moving traffic. A rioter throwing "Molotov cocktails", grenades, or the like can be considered a full combatant.”

You may think a 16 year old can't cause death and injury. The reality is that the "Palestinians" constantly recruit children, even as young as 8 (!!) as suicide bombers ("sacred explosions"). Check out MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4601244/), or (http://www.rense.com/general20/ch.htm), or (http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1946.cfm), or (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=234733&attrib_id=8745). There's plenty more, as the saying goes "there are none so blind as those who will not see". Go read, and learn.

Next, we’ll turn to “infrastructure" losses. Stay tuned.

Tony

You said:
From the PA "..The losses inflicted to the infrastructure of the Palestinian areas were distributed as; total number of uprooted trees 975,473 until November 30, 2003 while the razed land reached 62,039 dunums, while 176,620 dunums were confiscated for building the Apartheid wall around and through the West Bank. Meanwhile, the number of houses totally destroyed by the Israeli war machine amounted to about 4,727, including 2,218 in Gaze Strip while the number of partially destroyed houses totaled 54,947 including 15,373 in the Gaza Strip. "

According to the IDF, there were 22,406 terrorist attacks from September 2000 to July 2004. They came from somewhere – the PA areas. Even if you believe the above PA figures, and that’s asking a lot, then Israel has a right to defend itself against about 6,000 attacks a year. Yes, attackers had homes – demolished. Yes, attackers fired from fields behind the cover of buildings and olive groves – demolished. Yes, attackers fired from homes – the IDF fired back and damaged some of those buildings.

Yes, attackers crossed from Jenin and Tulkarem and … and – the security barrier was erected. But note that permits have been granted this year for an additional 1,000 Palestinian workers during the olive harvest, and the agricultural gates will be opened for longer hours to allow the entrance of Palestinian workers into the olive groves for the harvest. Even in the heart of the maelstrom, Israel acknowledges the need to maintain some level of economic activity. Let's see how many abuse the permits to try and launch attacks.

You said:
“ccording to the Economist only 20% of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are economically active. West Bank/Gaza with 3 million people received $865m of total aid in 2003 whereas according to the US embassy in Israel the US gave Israel's 6.7m people $2.7bn plus loan guarantees of a further $10bn. For as long as Palestinians in West Bank/Gaza are treated so badly they will see no alternatives to the increasingly destructive cycle.”

Oh, so it’s Israel’s fault! Since more than 90 percent of all “Palestinians” now live under the Palestinian Authority's jurisdiction, they are not “occupied” any longer, though they do suffer severe restrictions as a result of the war they declared on Israel and their widespread use of terror. The economic mayhem they suffer is predomjnantly of their own making. No terror means more jobs for them in Israel. No corruption, by Arafat and cronies, means more support systems for them in the PA areas. You’ll be excited to know that the “Apartheid Wall” as you repeat it, was built with PA contracts, using PA sourced cement!

If not Israel’s fault, then maybe it’s the USA’s fault for not giving them enough. Maybe it’s got nothing to do with the war they wage on the US too? Dancing in the streets of Ramallah on 9/11, or murdering US citizens and diplomats, and Fulbright selection panel workers? Nah, can’t be that – must be the evil US.

How about taking off the green tinted lenses and declaring that the “Palestinians” are their own worst enemies.

You said:
“My whole point is that you must use carrot and stick. … We both know that Israels policies would cause Arafat to be reelected which is why nobody wants an election in Palestine to give him a further mandate.”

What was the 1967 offer to negotiate, what was Madrid, what was Oslo, what was Wye River, if not “carrot”? In all circumstances, the Arabs turned their backs on the offer of land for peace.

You said:
“Open your eyes. 2 Israeli children killed by rockets and 100 Palestinians killed as retribution. An Israeli company commander puts 19 bullets into a 14 year old girl.”

You’re still counting numbers as a measure of who’s right and who’s wrong. Presumably it would only be OK, in your eyes, if 100 Israelis were murdered first. There’s nothing about retribution in the IDF approach. If the terrorists would surrender, whether to PA police or the IDF, for courtroom justice to take place, then you’d see a lowering of the “Palestinian” death toll.

The simple fact is that the PA has never enforced security in its areas (well before Operation Defensive Wall in 2002), a security that it was armed, agreed and charged to enforce. The terror merchants cower amongst innocents, and shoot from behind their backs. As you’ll know, this is a war crime – and what would the world do about it? Zip. You can’t even acknowledge it.

As for the girl who was shot, no doubt you saw recent reports of this. What you don't mention is that the company commander was found not to have committed any violation, but he was transferred as he and his troops had a poor relationship. (Was the report of this shooting true, or a "set up" by disaffected troops? You'd think there were plenty of witnesses.) The simple death of this girl is deeply saddening - but why was she in an open fire zone, carrying a schoolbag? Again, it's the cowards hiding behind her who have to answer for this also. But only the IDF appears in the media (controlled and cowed by Arafat's terrorist mobs).

You said:
“Until Israel realises it must invest in the future of the moderate Palestinian while the intifada rages there will be no change. The truth Tony is that Palestinian blood is worth the same as Israeli blood. And Israelis have spilled Palestinian blood at 3:1.”

Israel does invest in the future of moderate Palestinians, except the PA and affiliated terror groups call them “collaborators” and lynch them. If “Palestinian” blood is worth the same as Israeli blood, then let those who send them to their deaths, chanting “Allahu ackbar”, realise the enormity of their crime, come forward and face punishment. Until those who say “we love death more than you love life” are eliminated (or change their ways) there should be no let up in the defence of the innocent.

Now go read, and learn.

spotlight

Tony, I think you are the one that needs to read and learn, or maybe your glasses are so tinted that you cant see anything beyond the "everything Israel does is good, everything Arabs do is bad" mentality.

You state that: What was the 1967 offer to negotiate, what was Madrid, what was Oslo, what was Wye River, if not “carrot”? In all circumstances, the Arabs turned their backs on the offer of land for peace.

You are either ignorant or choose to ignore the most obvious fact: Israel is as guilt as its Arab neighbours (1956 Suez war and 1967 war and Lebanon in 1982 are just three examples of blatant Israeli aggression). For decades Israel dragged its feet on reaching a peaceful settlement, because Israel wants piece not peace. A piece of this and a piece of that. You mention Oslo, yet fail to mention that Oslo was a swindle.

Tony

spotlight.

You said:
"Israel is as guilt as its Arab neighbours (1956 Suez war and 1967 war and Lebanon in 1982 are just three examples of blatant Israeli aggression)."

Nice attempt to rewrite history - but no pass mark.

The 1956 facts are that Egypt blockaded the Suez Canal and the Gulf of Aqaba (to Israeli vessels), it sponsored numerous fedayeen attacks on Israel, and on October 25, 1956 it took over the leadership of three Arab armies (Egypt's, Syria's and Jordan's). All this represented more than enoughof a casus belli.

Rather than continue to fight a war of attrition with the terrorists and wait for Nasser and his allies to build their forces up sufficiently to wage a new war, Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion decided to launch a preemptive strike on 29 October.

The provocations were explained thus to the UN Security Council on 30 October:

"During the six years during which this belligerency has operated in violation of the Armistice Agreement there have occurred 1,843 cases of armed robbery and theft, 1,339 cases of armed clashes with Egyptian armed forces, 435 cases of incursion from Egyptian controlled territory, 172 cases of sabotage perpetrated by Egyptian military units and fedayeen in Israel. As a result of these actions of Egyptian hostility within Israel, 364 Israelis were wounded and 101 killed. In 1956 alone, as a result of this aspect of Egyptian aggression, 28 Israelis were killed and 127 wounded."

The June 1967 (Six Day) war - same mistakes, spotlight.

On 15 May 1967, Egyptian troops began moving into the Sinai and massing near the Israeli border. Nasser ordered the UN Emergency Force, stationed in the Sinai since 1956, to withdraw on 16 May. By 18 May, Syrian troops were prepared for battle along the Golan Heights. On 22 May, Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran to all Israeli shipping and all ships bound for Eilat. This blockade cut off Israel's only supply route with Asia and stopped the flow of oil from its main supplier, Iran.

"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight," Nasser said on 27 May. The following day, he added: "We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel...Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948."

The Arab rhetoric was matched by the mobilization of Arab forces. Approximately 250,000 troops (nearly half in Sinai), more than 2,000 tanks and 700 aircraft ringed Israel.

On 5 June Israel acted.

The 1982 War in Lebanon - you get the cigar, spotlight. Three times wrong.

After the PLO was expelled from Jordan by King Hussein in 1970, many of its cadres went to Lebanon. The PLO seized whole areas of the country, where it brutalized the population and usurped Lebanese government authority. The PLO repeatedly violated a July 1981 UN-brokered cease-fire agreement. In the ensuing 11 months, the PLO staged 270 terrorist actions in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, and along the Lebanese and Jordanian borders. Twenty-nine Israelis died, and more than 300 were injured in the attacks. During this period, Israel launched raids against PLO bases in Lebanon.

After Israel launched one such assault on June 4-5, 1982, the PLO responded with a massive artillery and mortar attack on the Israeli population of the Galilee. On June 6, the IDF moved into Lebanon to drive out the terrorists.

spotlight, you say Oslo was a swindle - but the PLO signed up to it, and reneged - murderously. As for your "piece/peace" pun, you conveniently overlook the Israeli calls for peace negotiations in 1949, 1956 and 1967 - and in the periods in between. You also ignore the peace treaties Israel concluded with Egypt and Jordan. All of the Sinai Peninsula was handed back to Egypt. You dismiss peace offers, you dismiss peace treaties, you dismiss Oslo, you dismiss history - what's left for you? Empty slogans?

sagenz

giproc. winning the wars to preserve the integrity of the state is one thing. Both sides can go back into their history and find atrocities and bad faith on behalf of the other. "What you don't mention is that the company commander was found not to have committed any violation, but he was transferred as he and his troops had a poor relationship. (Was the report of this shooting true, or a "set up" by disaffected troops? You'd think there were plenty of witnesses.) The simple death of this girl is deeply saddening - but why was she in an open fire zone, carrying a schoolbag?" - This is your bias well and truly on display. So it is the fault of a 14 year old school girl that she got shot 19 say that again 19 times. Say it again 19 times. If you have fired an automatic weapon you might understand how many aimed rounds would be required to get that into a dead body. then the company commander "was found not to have committed any violation, but he was transferred as he and his troops had a poor relationship." That is precisely the point. That commander has obviously lost all reason and morality in his hatred of Palestinians. The system was unable to find a violation because it is equally bankrupt of morality. The only redeeming feature is that his troops found his behaviour as revolting as I do. And please do not offer further examples of Palestinian behaviour. Just go read Tim Collins speech again. Maybe a number of times. Its not about the numbers, its not about the history, its about exercising restraint in the use of force on civilians and innocents.

spotlight

Tony, you mention the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. Yet you fail to mention how this was achieved. Egypt tried and tried to get Israel to agree, but was unsuccessful. That was the whole point of the 73 war – to get Israel to agree to a treaty.

Tony, rather than supporting your case the Egypt-Israel treaty proves my point – that no amount of propaganda will disguise the fact that in terms of military adventurism, Israel is no different to its neighbours.

Note also the nature of treaty. The Sinai, almost empty of population was abandoned, while the heavily populated Gaza Strip was retained under Israeli control. Could Israel have held out for better terms before signing the treaty? Now, we'll never know. But maybe Israel could have insisted on retaining parts of the Sinai, not giving up some of its air and naval bases, and not uprooting Israeli settlements there, while turning over to Egypt the headache of Gaza.

But Menahem Begin could not do it. For him Gaza was part of the Land of Israel, and Sinai was not. It was easy to give up the Sinai, while nothing could get him to withdraw from Gaza. As a matter of fact, the treaty almost fell apart when Begin refused to agree to the presence of a UN observer in Gaza.

spotlight

Tony, since you like quotes, let me give you some regarding the 1967 war:
Menachem Begin: “The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him”.
IDF Chief of operations Ezer Weizman: “there was no threat of destruction”…”the Egyptians would have suffered a complete defeat even if they attacked first”
Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld: Israel was “at the peak of its prepardness” …”confident in its power” … “spoiling for a fight and willing to go to considerable lengths to provoke it”.
Defense Minister Moshe Dayan (a true hero if there ever was one): “the main impetus behind Israel’s seizure of the Golan was not Syrian shelling but good land for agriculture…lust for that ground”.
And there are many more honest Israelis.
As Orwell said” “At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.
Yes Nasser made inflammatory speeches. But he wasn’t alone. Recall that on 12th May 1967, Rabin announced that he would occupy Damascus. (hey with neighbors like that ...)
As Abba Eban remarked: "If there had been a little more silence, the sum of human wisdom would probably have remained intact."
Ben-Gurion blasted Rabin for mobilizing Israeli forces.
Noone believed that Nasser was going to war. The Yanks told Israel that there was no chance of war as the Arabs were far too weak. Naser knew that Israel was stronger than all the Arab nations combined.

Tony

sagenz.

What I find amusing about your style is that when you can't find enough bigotry to support your anti-Israel stance in the newspapers, you make up the rest.

According to the official report "On October 5th, an IDF force stationed at a post on the Israeli Egyptian border near Rafah, spotted a suspicious figure approaching the post which was under a concrete security alert. Several hours earlier, Palestinian gunmen had opened fire at the post which comes daily under attacks. The figure, carrying a bag suspected as booby-trapped, was moving in a prohibited area right near the outpost, far from the Palestinian neighborhoods. The forces, suspecting the figure was a gunmen, opened fire at the figure and hit it."

"A squad led by the company commander left the post to confront the suspected gunmen, and shot the figure which was then identified as a girl. Simultaneously, the force was fired upon from the Rafah area; a weapon belonging to one of the soldiers was hit by the fire. The force returned fire and retreated to the post."

"The investigation did not fined (sic) that the company or the company commander had acted unethically during the incident. When the company commander was approaching the suspicious figure he noticed bullets at his side and shot towards the ground as he moved back."

"The investigation concluded that the behavior of the company commander from an ethical point of view does not warrant his removal from his position. If a military police investigation will find otherwise he will be relieved from of any command duty."

So, unless you personally counted all 19 bullets, my advice is to have a quiet lie down and reflect soberly on both sides of the story, instead of jumping to the sort of knee-jerk conclusions that you've developed a reputation for.

Tony

spotlight.

You said:
"Egypt tried and tried to get Israel to agree, but was unsuccessful. That was the whole point of the 73 war – to get Israel to agree to a treaty."

You should read your words again. Are you seriously suggesting that the 1973 Yom Kippur war was started by Egypt and Syria because Sadat wanted a peace treaty? Remember peace treaties are between two consenting parties. What Sadat wanted in his 1971 quest for a treaty was for Israel to simply give up all the territory it won in 1967 - for nothing, as a precondition to any negotiations! Meanwhile he had been busy stationing Soviet SAM missile sites along the Suez Canal, in violation of the agreed cease-fire conditions.

You said:
"... no amount of propaganda will disguise the fact that in terms of military adventurism, Israel is no different to its neighbours."

Hey, there's some pretty obvious differences that even propaganda can't hide - Israelis vote, have independent judiciary, free papers, form political parties - all brakes to any "military adventurism". Given that all the wars Israel fought since 1948 were in defence of their country against Arab aggression, you're using a bizarre yardstick.

You said:
"The Sinai, almost empty of population was abandoned, while the heavily populated Gaza Strip was retained under Israeli control."

Well, maybe that's because the Sinai peninsula used to be part of Egypt, whilst the Gaza strip was a part of the British League of Nations Palestine Mandate. By the way, during the decade after Israel captured the Sinai in 1967, it had been developed into an economic asset (oil). That was handed over, lock stock and (oil) barrel to the Egyptians.

You said:
"As a matter of fact, the treaty almost fell apart when Begin refused to agree to the presence of a UN observer in Gaza."

Why shouldn't Begin oppose UN observers in Gaza, when it was captured territory and subject, as a negotiating asset, to UN Resolution 242 (the land for peace resolution)?

You said:
"Tony, since you like quotes, let me give you some regarding the 1967 war:"

Your quoting Martin van Creveld (a trenchant Israeli critic of the IDF, as well as religious Judaism) tells me a lot about where you're coming from (Israel is wrong, regardless of the facts). People have the freedom to criticise their own government in Israel (even in a time of war) – try arguing for some freedoms for people living in any of the surrounding Arab countries.

spotlight

So Tony, you get your information only from trenchant IDF supporters. I can see now why your knowledge is so limited.

The comments to this entry are closed.