I think it was a US Senator who remarked after the investigation into the Mai Lai massacre by US soldiers in Vietnam that 'morality is a question of altitude', reflecting on the apparently different moral equation applied to killing civilians by bombing them from the air in the course of having a legitimate aim in mind, versus killing them face to face, or I guess by strapping a bomb to your body and setting it off. Seems still true today, even though presumably a cynical remark.
Israel can rightly claim that its intention is to kill people planning to attack it, or who have previously attacked it and that the ends justifies the means (i.e. the means including the killing of civilians as an unintended consequence) as opposed to those who launch indiscriminate rocket attacks into Israel, or suicide attacks.
I guess their oppponents would use more discriminating and effective ordnance if they weren't forced to live in a kind of new stone-age by their occupiers. A catch 22.
Being relentlessly 'righteous' and 'implacable' is Israel's sword and shield, but a murderous and militaristic Nation whose own Prime Minister is assasinated for attempting compromise is painting itself into a corner. Incidentally, I must have missed the news reports of the home of the parents of the killer getting bulldozed.
Leaving Israel aside for a moment, Jews are arguably some of the best, brightest, most inventive, vigorous and talented people to inhabit the earth - never mind argumentative, oi veh, that Torah.
It must be hard for some of them to accept that the tremendously powerful State of Israel, which exists as a fact, is able to use the entirely notional and impotent denial of that fact by people, who Israel, in fact, actively prevents from developing the infrastructure necessary to operate a Palestinian state, as a moral justification for preventing the reasonable aspiration of these same people to have their own State.
Fair enough, international relations is driven by perceived self-interest of every Nation alike, with spin to suit, and admittedly, it might be a bit complicated for a disinterested observer to fairly characterise, let alone solve the problem in one post on HC, but gee, you'd like to see the collective problem-solving power of Jews have a proper crack at it and not just continue along this same path forever.
I read recently that maintaining a combatative cultural stance is perceived as part of Israel's way of sustaining the necessary societal attitude to survive.
Maybe it is in the relatively short term, but reaching a compromise seems a better longer-term position.
You guys know a thing or two about suffering - apply a bit of empathy to the neighbours and don't let yourselves be hostage to demographics and technological advances that will surely provide the means to overcome this relentlessly agressive defence stance.
On that point, but not relating to Israel's position, why exactly can't Iran have nuclear weapons, even if it was true that they are seeking them (and maybe they are - even if the US military and Intelligence thinks not)?
It's fair to say that even if it is not their primary goal, once they have the capacity to make them - why would they not? Nuclear weapon capability seems quite effective in preventing others from attacking you, so that must present a temptation.
You'd have to think that North Korea and Pakistan will have been told by US, Russia, China and Europe that they can use their nuclear weapons in some burst of hubris as long as they don't mind having all their population and their nation turned into glass and completely ceasing to exist for all time, and that Iran would be told the same.
Just some idle thinking to share - from an entirely 'disinterested' party, except as far as observing events in the news most days.
Thank heavens to live at the other end of the world.
As a parting remark, did you know that among places the UN considered as the site for an Israeli State were locations in WA and Tasmania?
I wonder how things would have turned out then?
It sure would have made for some more lively Commonwealth / State conferences and I'll bet we wouldn't be short of ideas for alternatives to mining for National development.
