Skip to main content

Specious Reasoning Disgusting

Israel has repeatedly insisted all of its weapons used were in line with international law and has blamed Hamas for the high number of civilian casualties...
"They (Hamas) were committing war crimes by putting the civilians in the frontline," she said. "If Hamas chooses to locate training camps, command centres... in the middle of the (civilian population)... look how populated it is... naturally they are endangering the lives of civilians. Hamas is accountable for the loss of the civilians."

[Source: Yahoo news]

What a load of horseshit.

Hamas is responsible for the 13 people it killed, giving the Israelis provocation, and destabilising the Palestinian government.

Israel is responsible for the 1300 people it killed, destroying $2 Billion of property, and creating the conditions where a group like Hamas would gain considerable popular support.

Israel's response to Hamas rockets was totally out of proportion and deliberately devastating to civilians. If they (and USA) spent half the money on development and aid that they spent on ordinance the middle east would be the most peaceful place on the planet. Instead this unjust escalation will create bitterness and hatred against Israel that will last and have further consequences. Violence can only be defeated by reconciliation. That this 'war' (atrocity) has come to an end in time to spare Obama any political embarrassment exposes it as a cynical move to unleash indiscriminate amounts of ordinance on Gaza before the political weather changed. Let us just pray that Obama can read his Bible better than Bush.

However I guess for Israel the precedent (of escalation) had been set by Bush declaring war on two countries in response to one terrorist attack, because that has really worked to make the world safer and create peace... hasn't it?


  1. "Violence can only be defeated by reconciliation."

    Both violence and renconciliation begin in the heart. In the case of the Israelis and the Palestinians, there is no room for reconciliation. Palestinians believe that Israel has no right to exist as a nation on the land that it currently inhabits.

    The only path towards reconciliation to the Palestinian mind is to undo 1949. As the president of Iran has stated: if Europe wants Jews to have a homeland, why didn't they establish a homeland for them in Europe? (Of course, this comes from the same guy that denies the Holocaust occurred).

    In an ideal world, development and aid would work, but we're dealing with thousands of years of animosity. Israel's offensive against Gaza is seen by many as morally wrong. Nobody seems to remember that Israel was getting hit all the time by suicide bombers and rockets coming over the border.

    America attacking Iraq was 100 times more of an over-reaction than Israel attacking Gaza. America was only attacked once (and not even by Iraq). Israel has been attacked daily.

    Hardline Arabs will not be satisfied until 1949 is reversed (i.e. Israel vacates the whole country and gives it back to the Palestinians).

    Aid and development is a long term solution. However, what should we do in the short-term to deal with a real, deadly, and daily threat?

    This hate has been ingrained in the culture for hundreds of years. I think it might take more than just a few years of aid and development to reverse that attitude.

    Finally... one more thing:

    "This unjust escalation will create bitterness and hatred against Israel that will last and have further consequences."

    1. There already was huge bitterness and hatred.
    2. "Unjust escalation?" Would it have been "just" for Israel to only have responded with the tactics of Hamas (i.e. suicide bombers and rocket attacks)?

    Just some food for thought... war is terrible no matter what cause.

  2. Hi Dan thanks for your comment. I think you are wrong though. Aid and development is very immediate in its consequences. Hamas rockets would become very unpopluar indeed if the Israelis started building hospitals, schools, allowing food and trade, investing in infrastructure, etc. Reconciliation is not only for 'an ideal world' but the only pragmatic solution. Violence makes things worse not better. If you want to difuse your enemies hatred you show them love.

    I dont see how the 'war' was about saving Israeli lives when more Israelies died in the offensive than would have died in a year of rocket attacks. What would have been just would have been for Israel to respect the lives of both its soldier and its civilians and the palestianians and work towards peace with all their resources.

    Finally, hardline arab rhetoric is exactly that, rhetoric. If Israel started loving its neighbours and gave restitution for its crimes hostility would soon be a thing of the past.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Dr Charles Stanley is not a biblical preacher

Unusually for me I was watching the tele early on Sunday morning and I caught an episode of Dr Charles Stanley preaching on his television program. Now I know this guy has come under some criticism for his personal life, and that is not unimportant, but it is also not something i can comment on, not knowing the facts. His preaching is however something I can comment on, at least the one sermon I did watch.

He started off by reading 2 Timothy 1:3-7. Which is a passage from the Bible, so far so good. He then spent the next 30 minutes or so talking about his mum and what a great example of a Christian mother she was. Now nothing he said or suggested was wrong, but none of it actually came from scripture, least of all the scripture he read from at the beginning. It was a lovely talk on how Stanley's mother raised him as a Christian despite considerable difficulties and it contained many useful nuggets of advice on raising Christian kids. All very nice, it might have made a nice…

That one time Jesus got the Bible wrong

It's so typical isn't it? You are preaching all day long, training your disciples, sparring with the Pharisees, encouraging the poor and down trodden, healing the sick and casting out demons, all day, day after day, and even when you go up a mountain to get a rest the crowds hunt you down and follow you up, and then the one time you get a bit muddled up with some of the details of a biblical text . . . that is the one they write down in the first gospel - verbatim. At least Matthew and Luke had the good sense to do some editing. But Mark, he always had his eye on giving the public the "historical Jesus" whoever that is supposed to be . . . warts and all. Thanks a lot Mark!

Some think I made the mistake on purpose, just to show the Pharisees up.

For some there is no mistake worth mentioning, only a slightly ambiguous turn of phrase.

Others think I am doing something tricky with Abiathar's name, getting him to figuratively stand in for the priesthood.

It really has…

The Addictive Power of End Times Speculation

The mighty Rhett Snell has picked up his blog again (I wonder how long he'll last this time), check out his theory on why people get so into annoyingly unbiblical end times nonsense.

I think that where codes-and-calendars end times theology is dangerous, is that it can give a sense of false growth. We read a theory online, or hear it from some bible teacher, and we come to think that we have mastered an area of our faith. A bit like levelling up in a computer game, or Popeye after he’s eaten some spinach. At worst, we begin to believe that we’ve taken a step that other Christians have not; that we’ve entered an elite class of Christianity.