Another Israel/Palestine debate that started as something else - Carpe Diem

[Andyboy]

1. I have to assume that those of you going to such great lengths to justify parents murdering their children have no children of your own. Infanteer? Britney? Che? Anyone of you have the experience to speak on being a parent? If your answer is to say that "it's just their way" then you can keep it. If their "way" is to murder their children then they need to change their way.


2."What would you do if you were the Palestinians?" Excellent question Britney, except that you haven't answered it yourself. I don't know what I would do if I were in their shoes and neither do you. As you have all gone to great pains to explain (ad nauseum I might add) no one here can really understand them or their circumstances. Here is a question for you: do you believe that hey are justified in using their children as suicide bombers? Would you? Seeing as you haven't offered any alternatives yourself I must conclude that you agree with them actions and would do the same yourself and yet somehow I doubt it. More importantly does it not pain you to see parents acting with such disregard towards their children? Does it not make you want to act? 

To answer your question though I have but one suggestion for what I'd like to see them do. Nothing. See Ghandi. 

3.As fo the comparison to cadets, it is apt on one very basic level but deeply flawed otherwise. I understand the link between children emulating their military. Here we have the CF-cadet link and there they have the Hamas-baby suicide bomer link. Makes sense but that is about where it ends. The fundamental differences between parent organisations in terms of goals, methods and results is so vast that the comparison really has no point. Like the saying goes, you are comparing apples to oranges. Both are fruit and that is about where it ends. Personally I don't appreciate being compared to Hamas as a former cadet and a serving member of the CF.

4.I think the one thing we are all overlooking here is the level of support that we assume Hamas (and and others, the PA included) have amongst the populace there. I don't think anyone here would argue that there is any real evidence showing that the PA has the support of the population. In other words I think that the percentage of parents eager to kill their own children is very low. In every society there are parents who don't care about the well being of their children and I suspect that the percentages are similar between here and there although I have no proof of that. I think the difference is in the atmosphere created by the leadership. Here parents who harm their children are vilified, there they are raised to hero status. It seems to me what is in order is a change of leadership.

At any rate enjoy your discussion gents, I'm obviously not going to change any minds here and frankly it doesn't really matter to me. REpeating the same input and expecting different results is a sign of insanity (no matter how many times you repost something you've already posted) My opinion on right and wrong is something I have cultivated, examined, reworked and studied over the years. You guys seem to believe that if someone doesn't agree with you it is because they haven't thought enough about it.

 

[jmacleod]

For a perspective of the situation in the Middle East, go to DEBKAfile, and Honest Reporting.
DEBKAfile, based in Israel is staffed by former Mossad personnel, and in my opinion is the most
accurate source of information in the Region - Honest Reporting is focused on assessing news
emanating from world's media, which is slanted and/or biased against Israel. One of the most
anti Israeli sources of news is the CBC, often taken to task for distortions, lack of credibility and
outright lies. I am pleased to welcome the IDF F-16's to Maple Flag, but would extend the
same welcome to the Royal Jordanian Falcons, the official aerobatic team of Jordan. The late
King Huessien of Jordan, a graduate of the RAF College Cranwell, was up until his death, Honorary
Chairman of the famed Royal International Air Tattoo (RIAT), RAF Fairford, Glocs., UK an enterprise
of the Royal Air Force Benevolent Fund (RAFBF), well known to CF personnel, especially F-104
Squadrons of the period. MacLeod

 

[Infanteer]

1. I have to assume that those of you going to such great lengths to justify parents murdering their children have no children of your own. Infanteer? Britney? Che? Anyone of you have the experience to speak on being a parent? If your answer is to say that "it's just their way" then you can keep it. If their "way" is to murder their children then they need to change their way.

Where did "murdering your children" come into play?  The debate was about Palestinians dressing their children up like Martyrs.

I have been a parent for the last 2 years, if it means anything.

2."What would you do if you were the Palestinians?" Excellent question Britney, except that you haven't answered it yourself. I don't know what I would do if I were in their shoes and neither do you. As you have all gone to great pains to explain (ad nauseum I might add) no one here can really understand them or their circumstances. Here is a question for you: do you believe that hey are justified in using their children as suicide bombers? Would you? Seeing as you haven't offered any alternatives yourself I must conclude that you agree with them actions and would do the same yourself and yet somehow I doubt it. More importantly does it not pain you to see parents acting with such disregard towards their children? Does it not make you want to act?  

To answer your question though I have but one suggestion for what I'd like to see them do. Nothing. See Ghandi.

You are right, I guess answering the question is the next step.  The Palestinians "won" the first 4GW conflict (the original Intifada) because they, for the most part, abandoned violence and justified the underdog appearence.  They distanced themselves from two-bit terrorists (the PLO), justified their cause to the international community, renounced the destruction of Israel and moved to Oslo.

They've since moved back - Ehud Barak gave the Palestinians everything they needed, but by then Arafat had hijacked the movement (again) and walked out.  They have resorted to terrorist bombing and calling for the destruction of the Jews - they are taking the wrong approach.

If the Palestinians wish to gain any support from the international community (myself included) they need to dump much of the PLO and get back to the principles that brought them initial success leading up to Oslo.

3.As fo the comparison to cadets, it is apt on one very basic level but deeply flawed otherwise. I understand the link between children emulating their military. Here we have the CF-cadet link and there they have the Hamas-baby suicide bomer link. Makes sense but that is about where it ends. The fundamental differences between parent organisations in terms of goals, methods and results is so vast that the comparison really has no point. Like the saying goes, you are comparing apples to oranges. Both are fruit and that is about where it ends. Personally I don't appreciate being compared to Hamas as a former cadet and a serving member of the CF.

You are right - that's all I claimed, that both images were representative of those who defend society (two fruits).

As a serving member of the CF, our tactics and our ideals are far different then those of the Hamas, but we are both fighters for our cause (again, two fruits of a different variety).

4.I think the one thing we are all overlooking here is the level of support that we assume Hamas (and and others, the PA included) have amongst the populace there. I don't think anyone here would argue that there is any real evidence showing that the PA has the support of the population. In other words I think that the percentage of parents eager to kill their own children is very low. In every society there are parents who don't care about the well being of their children and I suspect that the percentages are similar between here and there although I have no proof of that. I think the difference is in the atmosphere created by the leadership. Here parents who harm their children are vilified, there they are raised to hero status. It seems to me what is in order is a change of leadership.

I think its desperation following the high casualties of both sides from the Al Aqsa Intifada that was triggered by extremists pushing from both sides.  Decompression and a step back are needed to disengage both sides, where the intensity of the rage is obviously high - this is why the Wall is probably the best thing right now.

At any rate enjoy your discussion gents, I'm obviously not going to change any minds here and frankly it doesn't really matter to me. REpeating the same input and expecting different results is a sign of insanity (no matter how many times you repost something you've already posted) My opinion on right and wrong is something I have cultivated, examined, reworked and studied over the years. You guys seem to believe that if someone doesn't agree with you it is because they haven't thought enough about it.

Not so Andy, I'm happy that you've contributed - you are the first one to actually challenge the statements I've made with a logical argument rather than simply closing your ears and saying I'm an idiot.  As you can see, there is more agreement between our viewpoints than may be apparent - it just may take a little bit to hammer that out.

Cheers,
Infanteer

 

[Andyboy]

Where did "murdering your children" come into play?   The debate was about Palestinians dressing their children up like Martyrs.

What else would you call inciting a child to kill himself?

 

[Britney Spears]

2."What would you do if you were the Palestinians?" Excellent question Britney, except that you haven't answered it yourself. I don't know what I would do if I were in their shoes and neither do you.

It wasn't a rhetorical question, if anyone truly has a better idea I'm all ears. The Ghandi idea sounds like a pretty reasonable one, as far as a starting premesis goes.

What else would you call inciting a child to kill himself?

Well the parents themselves obviously don't think it's murder.

 

[MysticLies]

I think one misconception, is that the majority of the mothers want their kids to become suicide bombers. While infact more then the majority encourage their children to hate the Israelis, but only a rare number of mother actually encourage their children to go on a suicide mission. Wile the majority of mothers do not want their kids to perform these suicide missions, a some what large number of those come to terms to what their children did.

 

[Andyboy]

Well the parents themselves obviously don't think it's murder.

First of all that the question wasn't what the parents consider it, the question was what do you consider it? ANd it isn't a rhetorical question.

Second of all how do you know what the parents consider it, ever heard from one? Ever discuss it with one? I haven't. Either way I don't think it really matters what they think any more than it matters what any criminal thinks about their crime. For example does Karla Homolka's opinion of killing her sister (among others) make it any less of a crime?

The way I see it anyone (parents or otherwise) encouraging children to kill themselves are guilty of child abuse at a minimum, if a governing body is doing it that govenring body should be removed.

edited for content and clarity

 

[Infanteer]

What else would you call inciting a child to kill himself?

Are you sure that is how they view it?   I'm sure to a Muslim who's belief system sees Paradise, this is no different than sending a child off to war.   It is not so much the actual parent, but the society in general.

I'm sure there are many who see this as unjust, but there are also mothers who see George W. Bush as a murderer for sending their kids to Iraq where they were killed in the line of duty.  Just as our society generally accepts that professional soldiers may have to give their lives in the service of the country, many within their society may understand this as necessary for the defence of theirs - this is the impression I get from seeing interviews of the families of Martyrs.

Well, it has been asked a number of times by Britney and Infanteer, what would you do if you were in the Palestinian's shoes. Well, what would you do? Better yet, how best to go about ending this conflict?

....The real issue is, the Palestinians who are fighting Israel are basically anti-semetic while many Israelies (especially their extreme fringe elements) are scared of anything arab and want to re-create the jewish holy land.

I don't think that is the real issue - I think the real issue is that the violence following th Al-Aqsa Intifada has spiralled out of control, basically putting moderates from both sides into the corner.  The solution for the 10% is easy (Hellfire), but getting the other 80% to disengage is the challenge.

So what is the solution? I'm curious, because I don't have it. We can talk all we want about why they are doing it (kinda like pointing out the obvious again and again) and how we the west aren't so different, but no real 'solution' has been devised.

I gave my answer in the last post, so you can take it for what it was worth - the Oslo Accords seemed reasonable and were to be respected by both sides and recognized by the international community; both sides recognized that the other was here to stay.  Since then, both sides failed to live up to the agreement, so now we need disengagement.  The Israelis have done their part in pulling back and building a wall.  The way I see it, the ball is now in the Palestinian court, and since the Palestinians have been caught up in the whole Islamic Insurgency, it may be a little harder to get them to back down - but at least Arafat is gone (although the credibility of his successor has been debated here).

 

[Andyboy]

Are you sure that is how they view it?   I'm sure to a Muslim who's belief system sees Paradise, this is no different than sending a child off to war.

You're sure? How? That sure doesn't square with what Acorn said earlier.

 

[Infanteer]

You're sure? How? That sure doesn't square with what Acorn said earlier.

I edited my comments to answer your edited statement - but, in answer to the question above, obviously many do see this as a reasonable way to conduct themselves in battle; it has been a fairly widespread occurence in many cultures (different areas of the Middle East, India, Japan).

 

[Britney Spears]

That wasn't the question, the question was what do you consider it?

But what does that matter? You and I are not the ones sending out the suicide bombers, so the REAL answer still lies within the minds of the Palestinian parents.

I don't think I am well versed enough in the situation to debate the specifics, jut trying to spread the open-mindedness a little is all. Infanteer seems to have the specifics down fairly pat, so that's good enough for me.

 

[Andyboy]

It matters because we (in the west) are the ones capable of making a change. Personally I think the Pals need our help in the same way the Germans and Japanese needed our help. There are without a doubt many more parents there who want their children to grow up, we should be supporting them, not making excuses for their misguided neighbors.

 

[Britney Spears]

I see, and I am in agreemnent then.

 

[MysticLies]

the only clear solution I see to this is that Palestine becomes a country. So then both Israel and Palestine have their own sovereignty, instead of both people fighting over the same land. The only problem with that is the land division, which is the main reason that no peace deal has actually worked till this day. because the terms are close to ridiculous *palestine says: I want 90% and you get 10% of the land, Israel says: I want 99% and you get 10%*...and so on and so on.

Its obvious that this problem can no way be solved between these 2 countries, and only by the intervention of an outside body

 

[Acorn]

The solution is one that the current Isareli administration seems to be adopting, despite opposition from within - separation. As Infanteer said, Oslo would have been a better solution for all concerned, but Arafat derailed that, and the result of his foolishness (or selfishness) was the rise of HAMAS. Unless HAMAS moderates, highly unlikely, the best course for Israel is withdrawal from the occupied territories and the barrier. It will then be wholly up to the Palestinians to get their house in order.

A couple of things: DEBKAfile is highly suspect. I wouldn't necessarily disregard it, but I certainly wouldn't regard it as a primary open source. Honest Reporting is similar. They are both likely PSYOPS tools of the Israeli government, so tread with care. If you want relatively honest Israeli reporting read the Jerusalem Post and Ha'aretz - contrasting views (kind of like reading both the National Post and The Globe and mail, or even the Toronto Star).

Next, something that constantly annoys me, is the use of "anti-semitism" when referring to Arab attitude towards the population of Israel. The Arabs are a Semetic people, and a significant part of the Israeli population is not. There is certainly strong anti-Jewish sentiment in the Arab world, but consider how highly propagandized the population is. More on this later.

Finally, I hope AndyBoy doesn't really believe anyone has truly tried to justify suicide bombing and encouraging one's children for that. What I'm trying to do, and I think Infanteer and Che are on the same page, is to try to get people here to think a little differently, and try to understand what could cause a parent to consider suicide bombing as an honorable choice. It certainly isn't as simple as "Islam encourages it" because for most Muslims that's not part of Islam at all. In fact, if anyone here has truly been exposed to Arabs, you'd realize a few things: they value their kids as much as we do (with some cultural differences), and Levantine Arabs are probably closer to Christian Mediterranean cultures in outlook than they are to the outlook of Gulf Arabs. So what makes the Palestinians different (Lebanese and Syrians don't have a prediliction to suicide bombing, nor do Egyptians - Palestinians are the same cultural stock as Lebanese and Syrians), why are Palestinians more likely to be suicide bombers? If, in fact, they are more likely to be so.

Sidebar- I hope the Israelis benefit from their trg in Cold Lake.

Acorn

 

[48Highlander]

Infanteer, I understand what you're trying to say with your comparisons, however I must also disagree.  You think that palestinians dressing up babies in suicide-bomber outfits is like parents here allowing their children to join cadets.  However, the cadet movement generaly doesn't represent warfare or "heroes" to Canadian parents.  While the Palestinian mother might dress up her baby as a suicide bomber in order to show her support for their idea of liberators, the Canadian parent generaly just sees an organization which will teach their child some discipline, social skills, and provide a free source of entertainment.  How many parents force their children to join cadets because they want them to become "martyrs" or "freedom fighters" or even just soldiers?

So your comparison is flawed from the get go, but to add to that, you're also suggesting (probably unintentionaly) that cadets and pretend-suicide-bomber babies are somehow the same.  You may as well suggest that cadets have the same values as the Hitler Youth, or that the cadet movement is somehow similar to, for instance, KKK members dressing their kids up in white sheets, or shirts with racist slogans.  So you're taking a youth organization which happens to have ties to a disciplined proffesional force dedicated to doing "good", and comparing it to the actions of parents who are using their children to showcase their own misguided beleifs.  Even if you assume that somehow the Paelstinian suicide bombers have the same moral standing as the CF, it's STILL an invalid comparison.  Since I'm not willing to make that assumption...well, I think your comparison is right out to lunch.  I understand the importance of looking at their point of view if we want to find real solutions to the conflict, however, that doesn't mean we should be grasping at straws to try and make comparisons between their society and our own.

 

[Andyboy]

Finally, I hope AndyBoy doesn't really believe anyone has truly tried to justify suicide bombing and encouraging one's children for that.

I've reread the thread and I haven't found anything to suggest otherwise. Silence can be seen as tacit approval. Infanteer is a father, ask him what happens if you don't tell a child no when they do something wrong.

The gist of your arguments seem to ask us to see it through the Pals eyes. Fair enough, think of the effect you are having by not condemning their actions. If the world doesn't let the Pals know that what they are doing is wrong (no matter what the Pals themselves think) how is it going to end? You can condemn without taking a side.

The question still stands: Do you think using children as suicide bombers is legitimate?

 

[CBH99]

I've got a question for you now Andyboy...

Do the Palestinians actually use children as suicide bombers?

I know the conflict between Israel and Palestine has been going on for a long, long time now...and that each side has resorted to rather barbaric methods of inflicting casualties on the opposite side.  But, are you embellishing anything by saying they use children as suicide bombers?

I agree with everything else you said, Andyboy.  You can condemn the actions of one side without taking sides.  Just curious about the child/suicide bomber comment.

 

[Infanteer]

I've reread the thread and I haven't found anything to suggest otherwise. Silence can be seen as tacit approval.

Well, that's how you are chosing to interpret things than - if you read my posts, you'll see that I've gave my own opinion on the matter on various occasions, including here:

You are right, I guess answering the question is the next step.  The Palestinians "won" the first 4GW conflict (the original Intifada) because they, for the most part, abandoned violence and justified the underdog appearence.  They distanced themselves from two-bit terrorists (the PLO), justified their cause to the international community, renounced the destruction of Israel and moved to Oslo.

They've since moved back - Ehud Barak gave the Palestinians everything they needed, but by then Arafat had hijacked the movement (again) and walked out.  They have resorted to terrorist bombing and calling for the destruction of the Jews - they are taking the wrong approach.

If the Palestinians wish to gain any support from the international community (myself included) they need to dump much of the PLO and get back to the principles that brought them initial success leading up to Oslo.

I don't think Palestinian tactics are conducive to ending the conflict or winning points with the international community; especially considering the atmosphere of the post 9/11 world.

Infanteer is a father, ask him what happens if you don't tell a child no when they do something wrong.

Step - just to clarify (I don't want to be labelled a poser here.... ).

The gist of your arguments seem to ask us to see it through the Pals eyes. Fair enough, think of the effect you are having by not condemning their actions. If the world doesn't let the Pals know that what they are doing is wrong (no matter what the Pals themselves think) how is it going to end? You can condemn without taking a side.

Again, this is how you are chosing to read arguements by Acorn and myself - but it is clearly not the case.  I posted my opinion in response to the following statements:

You know, when mothers  (At Gaza a recent Australian 60 Minutes programme) dress their toddler aged kids up in toy explosive belts and AK47 rifles (actually praising that they want these kids when they get older to kill themselves to kill Jews), then to grow up and be martyrs, by strapping on real HE, and then to walk into a shopping centre or board a bus, something SERIOUSLY has to be wrong,

A society that allows proud mothers to dress their children up in fake explosives and carry plastic guns and then sends young men and women off to blows themselves into bits has more wrong with it than it's neighbors.

That has to be one of the truest and best posts I have read in a while.

I've responded by attempting to show that there are legitimate reasons within Palestinian culture that would lead them to do this - human beings and societies are complex things, and the whole line of the ignorant savage was getting a little old.

The question still stands: Do you think using children as suicide bombers is legitimate?

I'm not sure that was the issue; you seem to be setting up a straw man here.  The arguement was dressing up a kid up like one.  I don't recall babies or children actually being used as suicide bombers - but if you have a documented case, I'd be interested to see the details.

 

[Infanteer]

Infanteer, I understand what you're trying to say with your comparisons, however I must also disagree.   You think that palestinians dressing up babies in suicide-bomber outfits is like parents here allowing their children to join cadets.   However, the cadet movement generaly doesn't represent warfare or "heroes" to Canadian parents.   While the Palestinian mother might dress up her baby as a suicide bomber in order to show her support for their idea of liberators, the Canadian parent generaly just sees an organization which will teach their child some discipline, social skills, and provide a free source of entertainment.   How many parents force their children to join cadets because they want them to become "martyrs" or "freedom fighters" or even just soldiers?

So your comparison is flawed from the get go, but to add to that, you're also suggesting (probably unintentionaly) that cadets and pretend-suicide-bomber babies are somehow the same.   You may as well suggest that cadets have the same values as the Hitler Youth, or that the cadet movement is somehow similar to, for instance, KKK members dressing their kids up in white sheets, or shirts with racist slogans.   So you're taking a youth organization which happens to have ties to a disciplined proffesional force dedicated to doing "good", and comparing it to the actions of parents who are using their children to showcase their own misguided beleifs.   Even if you assume that somehow the Paelstinian suicide bombers have the same moral standing as the CF, it's STILL an invalid comparison.   Since I'm not willing to make that assumption...well, I think your comparison is right out to lunch.   I understand the importance of looking at their point of view if we want to find real solutions to the conflict, however, that doesn't mean we should be grasping at straws to try and make comparisons between their society and our own.

<Sigh> - Rather than typing up a new spiel, I'll simply dredge up my easy explanation (which no one touches up when they tell me they are out to lunch).

Let me put it in as simple terms as possible:

Cadets = youth emulating military qualities of self-sacrifice, pride of service, and discipline (whether their parents put them there or not) which is seen as admirable; consider the fact that these traits are ascribed to by Western Soldiers who are fighting Muslims.

Bomber Youth at Protests = youth emulating traits of piety and martyrdom essential to religious defence (whether their parents put them there or not) which is seen as admirable; consider the fact that these traits are ascribed to by Muslims who fight us.

Of course they are not the same, but kids as icons of defence of society is a strong theme in both.   Irregardless of the current policies of the Cadet Movement, it still remains an organization tied to the Canadian Forces (in image, bearing, norms, and outlook).

As I said, they are not the same, one is a youth group and the other is a costume at a demonstration - as I said though, there are strong themes that both share, and these themes are something we should recognize when we try to understand the way culture affects the will to war for another society.

Anyways, this thread is getting convoluted (as any discussion of the topic tends to) and crosses many themes.  I'll attempt to sum them up here so we can perhaps move on:

1) Suicide bombing:  Some label the tactic cowardly - but is it?  I think alot of the emotion comes from the current GWOT - try changing gears and considering the Japanese Kamikaze instead; were they cowards?  Attacking military targets though, you say?  As I alluded to, perhaps the events in the Mid-East have led many to believe that they are in a Total War situation, meaning that the civilians of the other side are legitimate targets - just as we did when we torched Dresden, Hamburg, and Tokyo.  Who has the moral authority to declare total war (or is this possible)?

2) Young Children in Suicide Bomber outfits:  As alluded to above, I don't think this should get confused with a discussion of suicide bombing - unless someone can prove that there is a systematic use of young children as bombers.  The only way this factors into the argument is that I have stated that Palestinians do this not because they are bloodthirsty, cowardly murderers but rather as they (individuals who do this - not their society as a whole) see it as an emulation of service to the Nation - just as many do when they put their children in the military uniforms of the State and watch them march around.  This is the connection I've been trying to make, but others have been bringing in outside arguments which really have no bearing in the discussion (regarding the above).