Why are the Palestinians upset that Israel blew up the Hamas guy?
He was parapalegic. He wasn’t getting any healthier. I suspect women weren’t flocking to him.
And Israel martyred him.
So if they really believe the line they’re feeding to gullible 14 year old boys, why aren’t they holding celebrations saying, “Thanks to Israel, the founder of Hamas is now cavorting in a land of milk and honey with 72 virgins! Bless you, Israel! You could have let him have a slow, lingering unmartyred death, but no! You were thoughtful and dropped bombs!”
But instead they’re all upset. Doesn’t make sense. Not if they really believe in the glories of the hereafter, instead of just using it to sending credulous and insecure teens to their deaths.
And the UN wants to condemn Israel for blowing up a man complicit in the murders of hundreds of Israelis. I’m curious: Was there a condemnation of Palestinians for cynically manipulating a 14 year old? A ten year old? Just wondering.
PAD
• 
I just can’t figure out why they needed a helicopter and missiles. Doesn’t Mossad have an assassin capable of making a head shot on a paraplegic in a wheelchair from the top of a nearby building? Barring that, couldn’t they use the Vulcan 20-mm autocannon on the Apache, instead of launching explosive-tipped rockets into a residential area?
But if their happy about him being dead – then that means he isn’t really a martyr.
Your applying logic to these idiots. Then again I suspect sarcasm is in your words. ^_^
And the UN wants to condemn Israel for blowing up a man complicit in the murders of hundreds of Israelis. I’m curious: Was there a condemnation of Palestinians for cynically manipulating a 14 year old? A ten year old? Just wondering.
Just another example why the UN is worthless.
The definition of martyr has changed over the years. It used to mean dying for a cause, now it mean dying for a cause, but taking as many enemies with you as you can.
One can only wish that people following these terrorists would realize that “Hey, these leaders are saying go blow yourselves up, so why aren’t they strapping bombs on and leading the charge?”
Couldn’t agree with you more, Peter.
-Dave O’Connell
How about we get a UN resolution saying that any time a person is intentionally killed for any reason it’s a bad thing?
Crud. Forgot about Texas.
You know, Israel is just as full of peckerheads-in-power as the Palestinian areas. I think we should preemptively invade the whole country and force a strange form of government on all of them. That will do the trick.
(Sarcasm! WHEE!)
I’am sorry but personally I think that Isarail has gone to far. Since we have gone to war with Iraq, we should now head for Israil. The fact that the rest of the world has let this gone on is appailing. Break down the wall and mix everyone up so that they shoould learn to get along.
I think to become a martyr you have to “knowingly” put yourself in a life threatening situration. has apposed to been blindsided by a sneak missile attack.
but here’s what really reeks.
Until recently he had been a prisoner and the old excuse of whoops he fell down a flight of stairs wasn’t really going to wash so hey let’s release him then blow him up! capital punishment Israelie style.
and in case your not sure
killing people is wrong simple as that
terrorist do so cause their the bad guy’s hence they do bad things
governments however are supposed to be the good guy and are supposed to uphold the law hence the UN and people like me condem israel when it take “action like this” that really ain’t much different from what the terrorist do themselves.
What I don’t get is: both sides have the same diety, the same basic stories in their religon, the same dietary laws, the same everything. The only major difference is who they claim God gave the land to. Can’t they just agree it’d be a nice place to live if both sides stopped killing each other?
“governments however are supposed to be the good guy and are supposed to uphold the law”
You’re right, of course. They should always just send in cops to arrest someone who has his body wrapped in explosives instead of blowing them up at a distance. (Yes, yes, this leader wasn’t, but the point is still valid overall.)
And, besides, the Hamas have unofficially declared war on Israel. Which part of “Israel has the right to end the war as quickly and effectively as possible and beheading the opposition is a good way to start” doesn’t make sense?
Jonathon posed: “I just can’t figure out why they needed a helicopter and missiles. Doesn’t Mossad have an assassin capable of making a head shot on a paraplegic in a wheelchair from the top of a nearby building? Barring that, couldn’t they use the Vulcan 20-mm autocannon on the Apache, instead of launching explosive-tipped rockets into a residential area?”
Regarding statement #1 and Question #1, Isreal wanted there to be absolutely no question of how he died and and who did it. They wanted it extremely visible.
Question #2? Hmmm that’s tougher, but I’d wager that if you were the Isrealies and had these idiots strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up buses and nightclubs and shopping centers full of non-military targets, you’d say it’s time for some severe payback…
As far as the idea that America should invade Isreal now, give me a break. America needs to stay the hëll out of other countries business. Notice how we went after Iraq, with only suspected WMD’s, but North Korea has proven it’s nuclear capabilities yet we leaves them alone….
You see Peter in the twisted logic of martyrdom, you’re only really a martyr if you see it coming.
Jess, keep thinking that way. I hope one day someone will listen.
Sorry Jon, I went back to double-check the no “h” between the o and the n, but forgot you use an a rather than an o near the end…
Oh Geez PAD…there is no “right” and “wrong” side to this whole affair for Pete’s sake (pun intended). Both sides of this war have committed an untold amount of atrocities – whether they claim it’s based on a religious belief or not – it’s long since passed that point. Israelis kill Palestinians because “they always have” and visa versa. I’ve long since given up hope for a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
I’m not sure what’s more sad – the actual conflict or the fact that so many Americans find humor in it.
Simplist Answer: They hate Israel and this just fuels the fire.
What I don’t get is: both sides have the same diety, the same basic stories in their religon, the same dietary laws, the same everything. The only major difference is who they claim God gave the land to.
I have a feeling that the differences are a lot more pronouced than what you’ve stated. Yes, there are similarities, but the differences are more than minor points.
Well i think that what terrorist do is wrong, horrible and have no justification but i can’t see with good eyes killing anyone, no matter what he have done. And when they kill the terrorist also killed another persons. I think that it’s a very complex problem and no one can say there are a good and a bad side. Both sides have done wrong things.
I expected nobody gets upset with my comment is just my oppinion it could be wrong (i’m not the good side)
As far as the idea that America should invade Isreal now, give me a break. America needs to stay the hëll out of other countries business. Notice how we went after Iraq, with only suspected WMD’s, but North Korea has proven it’s nuclear capabilities yet we leaves them alone….
So if we go in, you get mad, and if we stay out, you get mad. At least you’re consistent.
Where dod I say I’m mad if America quits intefering in other countries?
C’mon, Clark, I’m really interested!
Clark, if that’s how you interpreted my jibs at Herr Bush not invading N. Korea, you’re dead wrong, I think we should leave them alone too.
Same with Iran and Lebanon too, until they actually present a credible threat. I hate the idea of America as the sole superpower in the world. I hate the idea of any one country having that much power actually.
It’s the fifth horse of the apocolyps!
I agree with both Peter and Bladestar. (And it’s a weird feeling, let me tell you…)
Why are the Palestinians upset that Israel blew up the Hamas guy?
Not to get into an Israel argument with you, but this seems to me kind of a callous way to dismiss someone being killed. It’s like saying “Why are Al-Qaeda members upset that we offed Osama bin Laden? After all, he was on dialysis so they should consider it a sort of blessing”; or “Why are Catholics so up in arms about that sniper shooting the Pope? After all he’s an old man and can barely move, the Church has been responsible for all that bloodshed over the centuries, and it’s not like their current stances are doing any favors for women or gays…” No matter how reprehensible someone may seem to non-adherents, if he or she has a fanatic following and someone kills them (again, justifiably or no), that following is going to be upset.
I don’t want to say much about what Israel, the Palestinians, the UN or the US should do, have done, not do.
My take on Peter’s original question, or at least the way it was put: People all over the world are upset by the deaths of people they know, love, or regard highly. However much they believe in a blessed hereafter: People are upset and grieve. No need for the dead ones to have died martyrs: Christians, too, believe that the departed one has gone to a better world, and still they grieve.
So I think this part of his argument isn’t very convincing, even though Peter wrote “upset” rather than “grieve”. I guess I’m taking Peter too literally here.
I have a feeling that the differences are a lot more pronouced than what you’ve stated.
Well, it’s probably more like the fact that, like the Christians, Nazi’s, and anybody else needing a scapegoat, Jews are the root of all evil, and therefore must be destroyed.
So if we go in, you get mad, and if we stay out, you get mad. At least you’re consistent.
And you’re making a mockery out of the situation with North Korea.
Bush invades a “soft target” that’s no real threat, plays hooky with the Saudis, and we have to “play nice” with North Korea, a country that has directly, intentionally, and repeatedly threatened us?
Yeah, what a @#$^’ing great job Bush is doing.
I’m not sure why the Europeans seem to find it worse when Israel attacks Palestinians than they do when the Palestinians attack Israelis. I suspect it’s just good old fashioned European anti-semitism (as the French would say “Il y a des juifs se cachant dans le grenier, mon ami allemand” (“There are Jews hiding in the attic, my German friend.”))
Alternatively, it could be that they think of the Palestinians as little more than deluded followers of a death cult and therefore nothing should be expected of them, while the Israelis are held to a higher standard.
Given recent history, I’d go with the former as the more likely scenario.
When…not if but when…Iran or one of the other Middle East countries sets off an A bomb in Tel Aviv the Israelis will settle all accounts with the 50 or so nukes they themsleves have. It will be death on a scale unimagined but who can honestly say they didn’t see it coming?
Hope I’m wrong, afraid that I’m not.
So if we go in, you get mad, and if we stay out, you get mad. At least you’re consistent.
And you’re making a mockery out of the situation with North Korea.
Yeah, it’s all my fault.
Bush invades a “soft target” that’s no real threat, plays hooky with the Saudis, and we have to “play nice” with North Korea, a country that has directly, intentionally, and repeatedly threatened us?
But which, ultimately, hasn’t DONE anything to us or our allies.
Second, an unprovoked war with North Korea may ultimately draw China in against us. That would be BAD. And we gave Iraq 12 years to work things out with the UN, so we can probably wait another eight for North Korea.
What the Israelis have to do to get Europeans and the left in general to actually see the truth is simple.
Tanning beds.
You see this situation is the “lefts” wet dream. Evil rich democratic, capitalist whities vs the poor darkies!
Tanning beds. It’ll confuse them. See Sudan where slaves are still kept, but too mux hcaramel, not enough vanilla.
What’s really funny is that there was a story
on the english Al-jazeera webpage that it was
really Israel that strapped the Palestinian boy
with explosives as part of a propoganda hoax and
that Palestinians could never, ever do such a
horrible thing.
Personally I’ve never head of any of the
Palestinian “freedom fighter” Leadership
having their own kids blow themselves up.
Hear at lot of how they would be proud,
but not anything of actually doing it.
You would think they would want to brag.
Always seems to be someone else’s kid.
I’m sorry, but I can’t agree that the Israeli action was proper.
I’d like to think that a higher moral ground could be taken, they could arrest and prosecute him with due process, etc., etc.
What the Israeli’s have basically done is said that they are at a state of war, and there is no peace process going on. I was hoping for a better outcome than that.
Yes, I agree, let’s let due process take its course. While we’re at it, let’s insist the Taliban extradite bin Laden so we can put him on trial.
/sarcasm.
Actually Rob, substitute Pakistan for the Taliban and that’s pretty much what we’re doing.
“I think to become a martyr you have to “knowingly” put yourself in a life threatening situration. has apposed to been blindsided by a sneak missile attack.”
See, now I thought that, too. That was until I saw the article on the AOL newsfeed about a rally led by the new leadershop of Hamas, in which it was stated:
“Rantissi again vowed Hamas would hit Israel hard over Yassin’s slaying. “I remind you that … we do not forget the blood of our martyrs,” he told the crowd, in which many people held up portraits of the elderly, wheelchair-bound cleric.”
And Elayne, when you said, “No matter how reprehensible someone may seem to non-adherents, if he or she has a fanatic following and someone kills them (again, justifiably or no), that following is going to be upset”…darlin’, you’re missing the point. Way missed. Putting on my best Cartman voice, the point is over heah, while you are way, way somewhere over theah. My point, and I do have one, is this…
Once upon a time, I was a 14 year old boy who was convinced he’d never have a girlfriend. I couldn’t get a date. I couldn’t get a girl even to look my way without derision, ’cause I was this, y’know, fat kid who liked comic books. So I can totally wrap myself around the mindset of that kid from a couple days ago. It’s a bad, sad, depressing place to be. It pervades you, gets into you, colors how you view the world and yourself.
And these bášŧárdš, these cretins, these slimebags, these motherf**kers, they go to these kids and speak about how wonderful it is to kill themselves. They manipulate them, muck their minds up even more than they already are, prey upon their low self-esteem. Instead of having people telling them, “Adolescence is tough on everyone, but you’ll find someone, you really will, just believe in yourself,” these kids are getting, “You’re right, you’ll never get laid, and the only way you’ll ever amount to anything is to die.”
And over and over Americans say, Well gee, if the organizers really believe that killing themselves is such a great thing, why don’t they do it? And the answer clearly lies in the chest pounding and moaning over Yassin’s death. Rather than, say, holding a New Orleans-style funeral in celebration–which would make sense if they *really* believed he was cavorting with 72 virgins while leaving behind a useless body–they’re flipping out and vowing vengeance.
Which, to me, lays bare the hypocrisy of their vomitous mind-f**king of these kids.
This bášŧárd started a teen suicide cult. That’s what it really is. If someone started a teen suicide cult in the United States and Europe, resulting in the death of child after child, and then got killed in an FBI standoff, there’d be no UN condemnation and the world would be saying “Good riddance to bad rubbish.”
That’s my point.
PAD
What seems to have escaped a lot of people is that, both in the US and Israel, governments no longer seem to be concerned with the issue of the (for lack of a better term) ‘moral high ground’.
Terrorists kill innocents, use nasty weapons, and assassinate leaders. Thats what makes them Terrorists.
Governments (at least openly) arrest lawbreakers, conduct trials, use economic leverage, and use overwhelming force in the pursuit of a declared conflict against an aggressor nation.
Israel has now killed innocents, assassinated a leader and depending on your definition, used a nasty weapon. The US has now used overwhelming force against a non-agressor nation (unless anyone can document an Iraqi military force attacking a US target outside of Iraq since Desert Storm, they are not an aggressor. Supporter, probably, aggressor, no.) The US led coalition has also censored (closed down) an Iraqi newspaper.
The lines here are becoming increasingly blurred. To paint yourself as the ‘good guys’ as both the US and Israel have, then you have to ACT like them, and accept the limitations that role entails, at least in the public arena.
Would it have been more risky to send a squad in to arrest this Cleric? Sure! But then could Israel have claimed that ‘look, they are blowing us up, but we follow the law!’ by putting him on trial? Would that not have bought them a lot more international support in the long run? Instead, they chose a short sighted path that hurt their international image, for a questionable, if any benefit (recruitment for Hamas is allegedly up a significant percentage).
There are few character traits that people in general dislike more than arrogance. That’s a lesson most govts need to learn.
PAD,
Well said. I don’t think I have ever agreed with you more.I am all for justice in the Mid-East, and a Palestinaian state should be part of that. But groups like Hamas do NOT want peace. Their hatred of Israel and perversion of Islam is so great all they want is to kill as many Jews as possible. To paraphrase Golda Meir, peace can only come when the extreme Arabs love their children more than they hate Israel. Right now the opposite is true. What is true is that the U.N. is worthless, hopelessly corrupt, and I am proud of my country for being the only one to say “nay” to the resolution condemning Israel.
I have a feeling that the differences are a lot more pronouced than what you’ve stated. Yes, there are similarities, but the differences are more than minor points.
One religion calls God Yahweh, the other Allah. One calls their law, Halakha. The other Sharia. But both Judaism and Islam are law/deed based religions. And the laws are similar. If this were a religious war, it would be silly, in that there are probably less differences between Judaism and Islam than there are between Catholicism and Protestantism (cf. Ireland). The war is a war between brothers. (If we accept the beliefs of both religions, it is literal, in that Isaac and Ishmael were half-brothers)
But it’s not a religious war. It’s a war over land. Land that was promised to both by Britain. (It’s all really Britain’s fault.) Israel, over time, has shown they are willing to trade land for peace. The Palestinians haven’t. But I still hold out hope.
I wonder how much the timing of killing this Hamas guy is related to Sharon’s upcoming indictment and removal from power?
Parting shot?
Or calculated plan? By planning to make Sharon even more of “the bad guy” than ever before he leaves office by having him kill as many militant leaders (leaders who will never accept peace with Israel under any circumstnaces) then replacing Sharon with someone who will say “It was Sharon, not us”. They might then likely try to get back to the peace table with some Palestinian moderates having already sent a strong message to the miltants. Of course Sharon would have to be in on it though.
Pad: I’ve never agreed with you more than I do right now.
The basest animal on earth protects its children. Only humans could sink this low.
I totally agree with Peter on this one. If Israel had offed Yasser Arafat, the world outcry out be moreso understandable — Arafat *technically* represents the authentic Palestinian leader, however laughable he or his organization gets at times.
However, Hamas is an organization exclusively dedicated to the extermination of Israel and all its people. If there were an organization solely dedicated to killing the French, I would think the French are quite within their rights to kill the group’s leadership.
So Europe’s condemnation is nothing but absurd.
Thor
Actually Rob, substitute Pakistan for the Taliban and that’s pretty much what we’re doing.
The difference being we’re dealing there with a fairly lab-abiding, real government, who has shown commitment to peace. Only in some people’s wildest fantasies was the Taliban, or the Palestinian govt, ever really committed to any such process.
How can a government attempt to negotiate peace when the majority of the opposing population supports the efforts of terrorist organizations bent on the destruction of said government? And if no one has “control” over these organizations, who do you meaningfully negotiate with?
And let’s not forget the fact that you cannot negotiate with terrorists. Because once you do, everybody with an agenda will take up those methods saying, “It worked for those guys.”
Why are the Palestinians upset that Israel blew up the Hamas guy?
The same reason al-Qa`ida is pìššëd about our invading Iraq, despite the fact that it has given them great propeganda and created an anarchic playground for their kind of fanaticism to fester. The same reason the Arab nations rail against Israel for human-rights violations, while abusing their own people’s rights all the worse. Once you have taken an absolutist stance, once you have decided that your enemies are absolutely Evil(tm), ANYTHING they do is wrong, and anything that hurts them is right. You have to keep justifying the hatred.
And the UN wants to condemn Israel for blowing up a man complicit in the murders of hundreds of Israelis. I’m curious: Was there a condemnation of Palestinians for cynically manipulating a 14 year old? A ten year old? Just wondering.
Last time I checked, Hamas wasn’t a nation-state or a member of the UN. It’s like complaining that the USDA doesn’t do enough to fix interstate highways. While the UN certainly doesn’t condone terrorism, its sphere of authority is primarily the governments of its member nations. There is a difference between individual’s acts of violence, and those performed under the authority of a government, in the same way there is a difference between being burgled and having the government perform an unwarranted search.
(Sure, a burgler is probably going to show less regard for your safety and property than the government, you can’t call the cops when the cops are the ones doing it.)
Personally, I am less concerned with their blowing up an evil parapalegic, so much as their blowing up several people who happened to be next to him…
I agree completely with PAD and most of the other entries on this thread. The double standard applied to Israel and the Palestinians would be shocking if all of us were not so used to it. Right now we have a ton of finger pointing going on in Washington as to who was at fault for letting Bin Laden go when we had him in our cross-hairs, a tumor removal that might have prevented 9/11. Israel had its chance, took it, and succeeding in turning a monster, much like Bin Laden, into a stain. Bravo.
For those on this thread who can’t understand why the two sides don’t just talk it out. Forget it, at least for now. Not only Hamas, but even those in the Palestinian “mainstream” are starting to abandon the idea of a 2 state solution, advocating in the alternative a one state “majority rule” of Arabs and Jews together. This is transparently tantamount to the elimination of the Jewish state–Israel– and its replacement with an Arab controlled “Palestine” in which Jews would find their lives increasingly intolerable and would eventually seek to leave in droves. A de facto destruction of the Jewish nation. Only Israel now seeks a 2 state solution and for obvious reasons. I hope the other side comes back to the table at some point, (and an evaporation of the above-noted double standard might encourage them to get there) but for now there is no reasonable optimistic position.
I seem to remeber a time where someone was angry about a war between two people and decided to do something about it. He took the leaders of the two militaries and asked them to fight it out between themselves. Of course this idea turned out to be moot because one of the leaders said that,”we’re not angry at each other!”
I wish this could have been a true story, but it wasn’t. It was a product of two guys from Cleveland. The Man was Superman.
Don’t you just hate it when comics have better solutions than real people?
Charles F. Waldo
I just want to say that i don’t think there is a generalized anti-semitism feeling in Europe, disagreeing whith Israel’s goverment doesn’t means that you think that jews are evils, or that you want all of them being killed.
Well there are Neo-Nazis groups but they are more interested in attack Black or Arab people.
What I don’t get is: both sides have the same diety, the same basic stories in their religon, the same dietary laws, the same everything. The only major difference is who they claim God gave the land to. Can’t they just agree it’d be a nice place to live if both sides stopped killing each other?
It isn’t, and has never been, a religious conflict. It is a conflict over territory, national identity, and cultural division. Jews fared better in the Islamic world, for most of history, than they did in the Christian world. It was only when the Zionist movement began that conflict erupted, not just over land, but also over the cultural differences between less educated Palestinian Arabs and more modernized, western Jews. Indeed, the first violence against Zionist settlers was performed by Arab CHRISTIANS.
The conflict has been MADE religious by some factions, turned into an article of faith, but this is artificial, just as the conflict in Northern Ireland is not over acknowleging papal authority.
I like to point this out because there is a tendency to assume that this conflict is insoluble because it is supposed to be rooted in fundemental doctrines of faith, or that it has been going on for “thousands of years”.
Bill Mulligan posted:
The basest animal on earth protects its children. Only humans could sink this low.
Hate to burst your bubble, but it’s a fact that female rodents often have been known to eat their own offspring when other food sources are scarce. Also, a fact that many lion cubs are killed and eaten by a new male taking over the pride–and the females do nothing about it.
Then, too, female turtles lay their eggs on beaches all around the world and just go off (no protection there), and female crocodilians often only protect their offspring until they hatch–depending on the species, the hatchlings may never actually know their “parents”.
Even among primates, I’ve seen enough nature programs to know that protecting one’s offspring doesn’t always trump the idea of saving one’s own skin first.
I mostly agree blackjack, but think on both sides revenge is a large component now.
” my jibs at Herr Bush not invading N. Korea, you’re dead wrong, I think we should leave them alone too.”
Ah, I see. We should leave alone a nutbar fanatic who is seeing his people starving by the carloads so that he can keep building his military (a military which has a known history of invading neighbours) and who colaims to have actual, working atomic weapons.
I’m not sure I believe him on that last one, but if an unstable child in a crowded tenement building claimed to have dynamite and you’d better be nice to him, would you just shrug and walk away?
Not a terribly responsible way to behave, is it?
Actually, if it was me I’d try to talk him out of the dynamite from outside the building.
Blackjack,
My point, which is certainly different from the one posted to which you respond, is not that the present situation is “insoluble because it is supposed to be rooted in fundemental (sic) doctrines of faith” or even that it has been going on for millennia. The Palestinians are not waging a war of destruction on Israel because of Islam. Some, like Hamas and Islamic Jihad, predicate their movements on Islam, but Arafat (like Saddam Hussein) is generally a secular leader and most of the Fattah ruling party are secular and/or Christian. Their desire to get rid of the Jewish state, either by violence or securing a one-state solution with an Arab (not exclusively Muslim) “right of return” is a general desire to rid the region of the Jewish people , whether because of their race, their religious beliefs, their western bent, their level of economic success etc. It is not exclusively tied to the issue of faith, even though Hamas, for example, uses that rhetoric.
So in a sense I agree with you. Where we disagree is when you state it all went bad because of the fledgling Zionist movement. Come on–yes, at some points in history Jews did fare better in Muslim than Christian lands, but as Bernard Lewis and most leading scholars on the subject have well documented, Jews where always “dhimmis” or second class citizens and were often treated brutally in the Islamic world. Centuries of dhmitude lay at the heart of why, in particular, the Arab Muslims will never accept Israel as a nation among them. The Zionist movement formalized in that part of the world a concept of equality for Jews, so in a sense it galvanized both the positive attributes of equality that all are entitled to in the western canon, but in bringing that idea to a world which finds no value in equality, it likewise galvanized the resistance, which we see today in an unwavering opposition to Israel’s very existence.