[lbo-talk] Rejectionists and Thugs (Was Cockburn on Hondorich)

[andie nachgeborenen]

I'm not sure of your point. Unlike Luke, I don't
accept the potential legitimacy of suicide bombings
directed againmst civiloian targets even
conditionally; I don't think they would be acceptable
even if they were aimed at an acceptable end or had
the unintended effect of furtherinmg an accep[table
end. I also doubt taht it makes much moral difference
if they are aimed at an unacceptable end. Yous eem to
think that matters a lot, I don't actually care that
much. But we agree that it's not OK to kill innocent
civilians by suicide bombing  or other means, whatever
your ends are. I do think it is quite crucual tahgt we
understand the desperation that drives people to this
tactic and to adopt the ends that they have, if they
have them, otherwise we shall never be able to repair
the damage. That dfoes not vindicate or jutify the
terror, any more than Israeli fear of being swept into
the sea justifies shooting children who throw rocks,
rocketing houses without regard to civilina
inhabitants, "retaliation" raids with F16s, Sabra and
Shatilla. jks

--- Shane Taylor <s-t-t at juno.com> wrote:
> andie nachgeborenen wrote:
> > And what does it illuminate to say that the
> suicide
> > bombers reject Israel's right to exist? Would it
> > vindicate them as merely misguided rather than
> > wicked? Or what is your point?
> 
> It's mass murder.  And it's wrong to debate of this
> merely as an
> ineffective tactic of resistance.  Both Islamic
> Jihad and Hamas, not the
> occupation, are responsible for such attacks, and
> both aspire to the
> destruction of Israel.  It's as if Israeli citizens
> have no more right to
> live than their nation has to exist.  Civilian
> deaths at the hands of the
> IDF must be answered with civilian deaths in Israel.
>  That's more about
> the balance on a ledger of corpses than anything
> else.
> 
> My objection is that, as far as suicide bombings
> against Israeli
> civilians are concerned, the violence and
> illegitimacy of the occupation
> should not trump the criminality of the attacks. 
> Ultimate culpability
> falls to the bombers.  Recitation of the facts of
> the occupation in
> reference to such massacres makes about as much
> sense to me as fitting
> the torture and killings under Mugabe in the context
> of the need for
> meaningful land reform.  It's a non sequitur.  This
> is lethal fanaticism,
> regardless of whether or not it was born of
> desperation with the brutal
> occupation.
> 
> > Personally I think the whole point is that they
> are
> > desperate. That is not an excuse, but it is  an
> > explanation crucial to understanding what is going
> > on. Are they rejectionist Probably. Is that the
> > problem? Only a Zionist thug would think so, sorry
> > for the blunt language.
> 
> No, I don't think suicide bombings are the exclusive
> problem.  Whatever
> the solution, it should include an end to the
> occupation and a contiguous
> Palestinian state.  But suicide bombers are now a
> criminal part of the
> problem.  They get no more license from the
> occupation to slaughter than,
> say, the Holocaust provided for the expulsion of the
> Palestinians in the
> first place.
> 
> -- Shane
> 
> 
>
________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno
> SpeedBand!
> Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up
> today!
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com