mrph | Making the world safe for democracy

You're viewing

mrph's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

Is Israel really any safer after using an airstrike to kill a quadriplegic old man, who was being pushed out of a mosque in his wheelchair when the missile hit?

I don't think so. If only because those are the terms in which most of the world's going to view it - and certainly most of the middle east. It seems like a deliberate attempt to pour petrol on the flames.

Yes, he was a hateful old bastard who was in favour of terrorism and spoke against the peace process (and the existence of Israel itself). But I still don't see how this helps. The damage he did was done with words, and his words didn't die with him. If anything, they've now gained weight.

Current Mood: cynical

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

taoist-goth.livejournal.com

Israel can be it's own worst enemy sometimes. I also think that capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden won't achieve anything either - in fact it'll make things worse. A recent poll showed 80% of the Arab World think he's great. His capture would turn him into a martyr. And does anyone really think he hasn't already made plans for his successor? Such a person would take over from him with the ultimate battlecry: "For Osama! To arms against the infidel America and all her allies!"

The whole Israel situation needs to be sorted out far more than "getting" Osama, and far more than dropping bombs on nasty old men.

From:

mrph.livejournal.com

I think it'd be a very good thing to catch him and put him through the courts, like any other mass-murderer.

But I'd agree that it won't achieve that much in the struggle against terrorism. It's not as if he's sitting at a desk cooking up fiendish plans himself - it's a cell structure with Osama as a figurehead and guiding force, so he's not sending detailed "right then, bomb 12th street on Tuesday" memos out to the troops, is he?

From:

goth-tart.livejournal.com

Yes, someone on the BBC website suggested that Yassin ought to have been tried in a war crimes court and/or imprisoned rather than killed and I think the same is applicable with Bin Laden as you've remarked.

However, the danger of this is that the militants will try to rescue their leader from prison/court so it would need to be done very cleverly and I don't think the UN is quite up to such a level of cleverness!

However, I am rather shocked that our impartial BBC (and the government for that matter) is focusing on Yassin being a frail old man in a wheelchair rather than a man who lead the Hamas, a Palestinian terror organisation, into mass suicide bombings against Israeli citizans. Even with this information, I think there is enough to create a factual and unbiased story because I agree with Jack Straw in that Israel probably haven't helped themselves by killing him.

Someone else on the site has likened the Hamas to the IRA and I think that's a fairly accurate comparison. Before we leap to anyone's defence or criticise others, we must first consider all the facts and shamefully, I must confess that our British Press is not exactly forthcoming with these...

From:

mrph.livejournal.com

Thing is, what could you try Yassin for? He obviously played no physical part in the attacks, and I've not seen any specific claims that he was part of the day-to-day command and planning structure. He was dangerous because of what he said, as an inspiration to his followers, not because of what he did... and that makes for some murky legal ground.

Looking at Yassin again - Israel did jail him for eight years (1989-1997). If they couldn't break him out then, I can't see them breaking him out now. Osama might be a lot trickier to hold... but we've currently got Saddam behind bars somewhere, which is a promising precedent.

The wheelchair aspect seems to be mentioned - at least in passing - on every news site, btw. The AP report on Yahoo (US) says much the same, although with a little less emphasis on it. I think it is relevant, if only because it undercuts the idea that this man was so dangerous/elusive that he had to be assassinated from the air, by missile...

I'd agree with the IRA comparison, though. Both are groups with unacceptable tactics (and some murky, corrupt elements that are only in it for self-interest and power...) with a valid grudge at the core of their campaign. And I don't think either can ever be beaten through military force while that grudge is still fuelling them. Which is something that's now been addressed (with partial success) in Northern Ireland, at least. Hopefully Israel will manage to do the same.

From:

goth-tart.livejournal.com

Thing is, what could you try Yassin for? He obviously played no physical part in the attacks

No, he didn't play a physical part but he instigated them. He founded Hamas in 1987 with the aim to, and I quote IRN here, "detroy the Jewish state". His method of doing this was to use the suicide bombers that Arafat had been training up since the 60s. Under UK laws, this would be categorised as incitement of terrorism or intent to cause injury.

I'm not sure, at this stage, why Israel let him out of prison in '97. I vaguely recall something about a pact with Hamas that they weren't going to carry out any more bombings, which of course they broke almost immediately. They have owned up to most of the bombings that we've heard about in the news over the past few years.

Sadly the emphasis on his frailty seems to be making most people sympathetic and the BBC's lack of facts aren't helping!

I wonder whether Hamas, and other similar groups, can be treated the same as the IRA though in terms of stopping their violence. I don't ever recall the IRA being suicide bombers - they were more about placing bombs in locations (I remember being caught up in a bomb scare in the V&A when I was about 8). I think the religious beliefs and the lump sum payments to families of suicide bombers are encouraging them to continue their work. They've been brainwashed since the late 1940s now - you're looking at about 3 or 4 generations-worth of Palestinians.

From:

mrph.livejournal.com

According to the BBC he was released in exchange for two Israeli agents, who'd been captured while attempting to assassinate a Hamas leader. Unless there were strings attached, Israel couldn't really lock him up again on the same charges - ideally, they'd have needed evidence of things done since his release.

As for Hamas... I think the only people who can stop them are the Palestinians. That means finding ways to drain the swamp and cut off their popular support - which means there needs to be a non-violent way forward for them, so that people can honestly claim that violence is not the answer. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening while Sharon and Arafat are in power.

The religious element is a growing problem, too - but it is fairly new, and the original Palestinian groups were mostly political in nature (otherwise we'd never have seen leaders like Arafat). Remember that suicide bombings have only been used by Palestinians for the last decade, and that they started because they were so much more effective rather than for any overtly religious reason. I think that with the current resurgence in fundamental Islam - and the War against Terror - that's now changing fast, which is definitely a bad sign. Not sure how to address it, though.

From:

giolla.livejournal.com

Someone else on the site has likened the Hamas to the IRA and I think that's a fairly accurate comparison.

Scarily so if you also consider that after the 1916 uprising James Connolly was so badly injured that the British had to tie him to a chair to execute him.

Didn't work then either.