Connecting Singles^® Forums 100% Free Online Dating

Neither does Gaza!

I've never heard about it, but you seem to bit a bit too eager about comparing it to Gaza, WHY????????

In Both the places the innocent civilians are caught between

Israel's critics decry the disproportionality of the war's casualties - but they forget the asymmetries that point in the other direction.

If you never even heard of the genocide in Sri Lanka before, how is it that you claim to know what the appropriate level of "eagerness" might be???

Frankly I thing the comparison is very valid.

In both cases a nuclear power closely allied to the US is massacring an indigenous people and stealing their land.

And in both cases the international media is heavily biased in favor of the superpower and severely underreports the abuses.

.

And just what "asymmetries" might those be?

I would just like to make a couple of points here...

With all the death and destruction in Gaza, has anyone stopped to wonder why, even though they built miles of tunnels and bunkers for use against a probable Israeli attack, they did not build a single shelter for Gazan civilians? The failure of Hamas to afford any kind of shelter from attack to its population is in itself a war craime.

To all those who rail against Israel's blockade of Gaza - until the advent of the most recent intifada in 2000, literally tens of thousands of Gazans worked in Israel, goods flowed freely between the two, Gaza had its own international airport and there was talk of building a major seaport, as well as hotels and resorts to take advantage of the beautiful beaches there. Indeed, many PLO leaders had villas overlooking the Mediterranean. It was violence initiated by Arabs against Israel that caused Gaza to be cut off from Israel.

The sanctions imposed by Israel 18 months ago (bear in mind that it was not a total economic cutoff) were the result of Hamas' refusal to accept minimal Israeli conditions - e.g., acceptance of Israel's right to exist and observance of previous PA - Israel agreements.

Israel is no longer Gaza's 'occupying power' and as such does not have any responsiblity under international law to care for Gaza's citizens. Moreover, when faced with attacks on its own population, it has a higher obligation to protect that population. According to some of you, Israel should have waited until Hamas had the ability to fire larger and more powerful rockets with a greater range, so that they could cause a greater number of casulaties. This in turn would have given Israel more leeeway in the proportionality of force it could have used. Then again, you still would have shed your crocodile tears about the plight of the poor Palestinians. Most of you care as little (or less) about them as you do about Israeli Jews.

Finally, while we're on the subject of Palestinians and Jews, let's talk a bit about those who have questioned how an Arab (a Semite) could be anti-Semitic. The origination of the term 'anti-Semite' has its roots in the hostility toward Jews (it was coined by a 19th century Austrian politician). It has nothing at all to do with Arabs. As such, Arabs can indeed be anti-Semitic. Playing semantic games with the word 'Semite' only tells me that those engaging in such behavior are themselves anti-Semites, or if you like, Jew haters.

Gaza does have oil Conrad - theres more to all this than a handful of dead Israeli soldiers and a few home made mortars..........


http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/33-israelis-or-2-lng-reserves-what-do-you-think-the-gaza-invastion-is-about/



http://darthchaosofrspw.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/war-and-natural-gas-the-israeli-invasion-and-gazas-offshore-gas-fields/

If you believe some Conspiracy Nuts,Friends of Alex Jones.
Throwing a bunch of Maybes and Suppositions around.

Think what you will Conrad of course but personally, I now have a much more clear understanding of why the BBC news reports are refering to white phospherous bombs as 'flares'............

I am really glad to see this kind of answer of yours to that kind of thinking that pretends to be rigurous and balanced.

Yes, any official-truth-glutton will hear from the BBC that those lights in the sky are just flares and would repeat it millions of times. Anyone else saying something different or defying that statement would be called "Conspiracy nuts" and "supposition abuser". It seems that one rule of modern and decent thinking is that one cannot say something different to the reports of huge news-companies that have so many ties with big companies and all sort of lobbies....

When the OP talks about the reasons why the Tamil plight is forgotten and mentions the lack of oil, the next answer is "Neither Gaza!!" I can see this is exactly the way of thinking promoted by the system. "Of course, there is not oil in Gaza so any mention of oil is nuts, any suggestion that the geo-political aims of the US and Zionist elites are fixed on the hegemony they need in the area is just supposition and "conspiracy" It is easy to see that kind of thinking of the "truth-gluttons "avoid any form of conceptual activity that would raise any unconfortable question: the pawns learn the lesson and repeat it, learn that there is not need to think and ask questions beyond what they have been told, the stuff that satisfy their little worlds.

And the "conspiracy".... well, I would connect it to the following reflection:

In India and Sri Lanka, again as in Gaza the British Empire and other powers should be pointed to. The way those places developed even with their own conflicts -before the European ionvasion of the world- was not meant to be taken over by a sucking-blood organism that never cared about creatig more problems in the areas they occupied, used and looted. The firm belief that all those places were populated by inferior beings did help skip any qualms of what they might be leaving as future problems for those that had to remain. Here again, in Sri Lanka, the colonialism and the imperial powers created and fueled the modern foundations of the hatred between two religions: Hindus and Muslims. Has this been said clearly in human history, I mean in the official one? And the answer is Never, because human history, at least the part that is influencing the present,has been written upside down: the history of Western Civilization seen as a firm shift to upper stages of humanity. Well, in fact that is just the history of the triumph of barbarie.

This is a way of seeing hstory that has been denied by those of "clear and balanced" mind.

And history will go on, without denouncing the atrocities of the past that we are still experiencing. Yes, I know, the "truth-gluttons" will mock that statement and say sarcastically that it implies that we have to find our modern hate origins in the way the Neanderthal might have been exterminated by the Cro-Magnon. It shows how little they understand of an organism as mankind that moves according to certain mechanisms, in particular, its stromg dependence with that part of history whose consequences we see now. And what would they say of the new powers that have replaced Colonialism with the same arrogant and blood-thirst nature? From that perspective I laugh when they talk about the coin-in-Hollywood conspiracy theories they feel so sure they can smash down with a gesture of their clear, balanced and selfless mind.
I do not use that terminology of "conspiracy" but I just see history as a continuous flow that can not break up its dependence with the past, soemthing we can see everyday, as in the way the Tamils as a nation meet their plight, same way other human groups have met their tragic own plight too.

Epilogue

The truth-gluttons however will have a formula: move on and don´t harp on the past. It is more confortable of course, eh?
To their dismay, part of the past however, especially the part they want to hide desperately is just acting on the present and producing all those massacres that they want to put as a strange stain of their inmaculate civilization.

The world has too damn many wars already,
we are so darn close to becoming a world war.

we have to draw a line somewhere and stop all of this fighting.
and WE can't fight everybodys wars!

Rasgumby

Funny, this is the most peaceful time of earth's history when man was here.

Rasgumby

Nor can we simply allow bad men to do everything. Where is the balance?

WE-meaning the USA.
how many countries now do we have boots on the ground!

way too many, the list is longer than the list of what countries we aren't in.

called.. spread too thin.
and we American people are paying to fight all of these other countries wars, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
and we passed enough "long" ago.

Rasgumby

Got that right. Us Canadians are slowly seeing the light and that is that somebody has to actually help with the lifting so take heart. It is not just the 90 plus nations that endorse the War on Terror that are there it is also the ones that are willing to put troops on the ground like us and make sacrifices on the ground that will see this historical enemy vanguished.

I've lost five friends so far to this war, but it doesn't stop our resolve. Nor can it as there is too much at stake.

That War on Terror and its heroes deserve a renovation of Epics...... oh!!!!!!!! we need the classics back.

Sacrifices? lovely... Canadians seeing light?
I am not sure.... what does it mean as I only know societies just controlled by money and a blind seeking for any kind of physical pleasure. Human beings emptied of any spirituality and full of egocentrism and petty longings. That is the way it is and that is what make their individuals dream a bit on the new epics that they Western soldiers are writing on the uncivilised and hating Muslim lands.

If the Tamils die or get thrown to the oceans ....well? is it not the usual history of those barbaric peoples so away from the peaceful and "advanced" West?

The world is not. The number of articles and discussions about the situation is endless.

Would you care to rehash the original reason for the conflict to us, perhaps without leaving out India’s role and side-taking?

In this, also make a slight comparison between the two countries, a little about the importance of the control of the waters between them?

Maybe a short briefing about what SL actually done for its citizens, be it Tamil or Sinhalese?

And lastly, mention something about the local support among the Hindi for the actions of LTTE, and how LTTE finance their mission.

I will be listening carefully and maybe someone else will too.

I can only say one thing; the history of Palestine and Israel is very different to the one you talk of and has a lot more ties to the west than the troubles in Sri Lanka. We should keep them apart and learn about each setting as they are and not become confused by mixing it all up.

Interesting post. I agree to your points .I am concerned about the plight of the people there not the politics behind that .LTTE doest not represent the Tamils .They are indeed a terror outfit and should be dealth with Iron hands but not at the cost of innocents caught in between .My concern is that . LTTE doent enjoy any support from India .Infact IPKF was sent to Srilanka to deter LTTE for which India has payed with one of promising leader's life. LTTE chief is the most wanted criminal in India. Well there are some political parties try to whip up the tamil sentimements for vote bank politics .which I must agree.My point was only ot draw the attention towards the plight of people fleeing their home . Palastine and Srilanka are one and the same in this context if you remove the political side of it .