Posted by
Andrews on Sunday, December 28, 2008 9:02:09 AM
I was watching morning news thanks to a small work crisis with which I had to deal, and was disgusted by some "cycle of violence" coverage form Gaza. Yet again, according to the talking heads Israel is to blame for somehow attracting missiles launched by Hamas, or for responding.
Now, I am as saddened as anyone to see innocent civilians, especially children, being hurt or killed. But who is to blame? Israel or the terrorists who hide among women and children? If a bank robber grabs a hostage and the hostage is shot is it the fault of police or the bank robber?
Let us look at the situation. Israel fights in uniform, they attack only in response to terrorist attacks and target known terrorist locations. The terrorists fight out of uniform, often being counted among the "civilian casualties", and are not above using women and children in attacks. They attack without provocation with the goal of either killing or driving away every Jew in Israel, and they intentionally target civilians, including children.
Which is to blame? And where is the "equivalence" that the "cycle of violence" argument assumes?
If someone picks me out of a crowd and begins pummeling me, when I strike him it is not "an escalating cycle of violence" nor am I to blame. And that is truly the situation here.
Now, I am sure some will tell me about Israeli atrocities, or tell me how the Israelis stole the land, but that is just nonsense. The Jews began settling when the land was Ottoman, and they definitely did not prefer Jews to Moslems. Later the British did allow in Jewish settlers, but protected the property rights of Arabs as well as Jews, so the Jews bought whatever land they owned. Even then, the British were none too fond of the Arab resentment the Jewish settlers caused and so took extensive steps to curtail Jewish settlement. So, how, exactly, under such circumstances, could Jews have "stolen" Arab land?
Well, I have covered all that before, and doubtless will again. It is too early in the morning to go through all the details of the history of Israel. Too early even to go into the many ways the King David bombing differs from the current Arab attacks on civilians, nor to even point out that one bombing hardly half a century ago or more hardly compares to years of missile launches. I will leave all that for later.
For now I just wanted to mention how revolting it is that the media continues to adopt the party line that somehow Israel "keeps the violence going". How? By refusing to die as the "Palestinians" request? Yes, how unreasonable of them.
POSTSCRIPT
Here is a short list of past articles on the same topic. I am sure it is destined to grow as I get irritated time and again with absurd news coverage:
Moral Equivalence
A Hypothetical Situation
I hope these make my case better than I did in the post above. It is too early for the better reasoned arguments I like to think I normally make.