Turn on thread page Beta

Israel Vs Palestine.... 2 wrongs watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What do you find more as a disgraceful act?

    A Palestinian suicide bomber killing a bus load of people or an Israeli raid for a precise target but with innocent casualties killed due to brute force attack?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    self-pleasure in public
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Me personal view on this is that both sides could certainly do a better job of things, however:

    Though they get a lot of slack, Israel does not kill simply for the sake of killing or causing terror. The innocents they kill are usually because their targets hide amoung innocents. I'm not sure how to judge these actions, but I'm also not sure what else they can do to protect themselves. The arab militant groups are completely unjustified in their tactics in IMO. They attack innocent civilians, with no other motive than to kill some people and cause terror. They view the IDF as infringing on their territory and rights. Based on this, I could say they were justified if they attacked that which is attacking them, that is, the IDF. Go attack an army base or military targets if you're so desperate. But they don't, they go for civilians. Based on this, I find it far easier to justify the acts of Israel rather than the acts of Hamas/Hizb Allah/Islamic Jihad/PLO/Al-aqsa Martys brigade, ect.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saintsin)
    What do you find more as a disgraceful act?

    A Palestinian suicide bomber killing a bus load of people or an Israeli raid for a precise target but with innocent casualties killed due to brute force attack?
    OK, let's see.

    Taken in isolation for the sake of argument, for the IDF to "target" a militant and take JUST him/her out is, morally, exactly the same as a Palestinian attack on the home of an IDF soldier, which takes JUST him/her out.

    However, we have the issues of innocent casualties. Extending our example, if the Israeli attack described above kills 5 innocents then obviously it is as morally wrong as a Palestinian attack on an Israeli soldier's home which also kills 5 innocents.

    However, what about a suicide bomber, who kills 5 "innocents" and no "guilty" people? Is this worse than the "targeted" attack from either side?

    Let's look at the facts. In each case the attacker knows the outcome will be innocent death. In each case the attack ends in the same amount of innocent death. So where is the difference? In this isolated example, there is none.

    The only possible differentiation would have to be made on (a) the righteousness of the attack, or (b) that the long term outcome of the attack would be morally advantageous.

    (a) Rightousness.... There is obviously a danger here of opening this up into a much larger debate. Suffice to say I believe the occupation and oppression of the Palestinians is the central cause of the current conflict. To argue that the suicide bombers cause the occupation is mad, not least because the occupation, land grabs, etc, began decades before any Palestinian resistance. Hence, on the point of righteousness, the Palestinian attack has more of a case than the Israeli one.

    (b) Moral outcome...I think it has been proved beyond doubt, empirically, that further oppression of the Palestinians does not result in greater security for the Israelis. Also, it is certainly been proved that suicide bombers do not aid the cause of peace either. Hence, neither is more justified in the context of long term moral consequences.

    So, in conclusion, I believe that the Palestinian suicide attacks are more justified. Because, all other variables being equal, they are in more of a just cause.

    However, what is interesting to note about this analysis is that it depends entirely on your views of the GENERAL righteousness of the situation, rather than particular opinions on the tactics employed. I believe the Palestinian case to have more weight, and that is ultimately the thing that has resulted in me believing that their attacks are more justified. A supporter of Israel would probably conclude the opposite on identical grounds.

    Of course, this whole analysis, and the question that preceded it is loaded. This is because it assumes two equal (in terms of resources and righteousness) sides attacking each other. This is not the case.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    hmmm depends who gets killed, the sad truth. If a suicide bomber blows up 4 innocent people, and isreal responds with an air strike killing terror leaders and ones who are killing isrealis, then i think the air strike is much more justified. However, if its a mix of innocent,guilty, there will never really be a correct answer.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saintsin)
    What do you find more as a disgraceful act?

    A Palestinian suicide bomber killing a bus load of people or an Israeli raid for a precise target but with innocent casualties killed due to brute force attack?
    Nothing is black and white!!
    All is grey
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Bomb them both and solve both problems
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    llama boy i agree with what you say but i believe attacks against israel would continue even if the israeli incursions/occupation ceased. part of the reason they are attack is because they are jewish and that hatred will last longer
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MattG)
    llama boy i agree with what you say but i believe attacks against israel would continue even if the israeli incursions/occupation ceased. part of the reason they are attack is because they are jewish and that hatred will last longer
    It is not because they are jewish but rather because they are jews who stole the land based on historical ownership............ having owned it in the past doesnt mean they can come in and take it..........stupid zionists
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MuniE)
    It is not because they are jewish but rather because they are jews who stole the land based on historical ownership............ having owned it in the past doesnt mean they can come in and take it..........stupid zionists
    acutally, the land was not stoling, it was for sale, zionists bought it, and only when it was made furtile and nice again did the palistinins start complaining.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MattG)
    llama boy i agree with what you say but i believe attacks against israel would continue even if the israeli incursions/occupation ceased. part of the reason they are attack is because they are jewish and that hatred will last longer
    The hatred between the two sides would not die immediately, that is certainly true.

    However, the hatred is ultimately not based on their Jewishness, rather their Zionism (and the injustices that follow from that). It is sad that both sides equate the two.

    IMO the spin about future attacks is largely untrue. Even the most extreme of Palestinian groups has bent over backwards to achieve a settlement. There have been several examples of complete ceasefires in the past decade, even when what is on offer is waaaay below a just settlement, and they have declared those ceasefires without any sign of an Israeli withdrawal. ALL the militant groups have said they will declare a complete ceasefire on the end of the occupation. Hamas have even said they will accept a deal that gives Palestine only 30% of their historic country.

    I'm not going argue that no one in Palestine would feel resentment still (especially if the settlement was not just), however, the situation would then be very similar to Northern Ireland. The extremists cannot have any success without significant support. The VAST majority of Palestinians support the resistance because, simply, it is resisting the occupation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PadFoot90)
    acutally, the land was not stoling, it was for sale, zionists bought it,
    lol, so, according to you, there were no illegal land grabs at all?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saintsin)
    What do you find more as a disgraceful act?

    A Palestinian suicide bomber killing a bus load of people or an Israeli raid for a precise target but with innocent casualties killed due to brute force attack?
    Innocent people in Israel are killed by suicide bombings. And the latter would be prevented if there was no suicide bombings in the first place!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gemgems89)
    Innocent people in Israel are killed by suicide bombings. And the latter would be prevented if there was no suicide bombings in the first place!
    The suicide bombings would be prevented if Israel pulled back its borders to how they were in 1967, giving the Palestinians only a small amount more land.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llama boy)
    lol, so, according to you, there were no illegal land grabs at all?
    How can you say the Jews *stole* the land?! They were *given* it. Who was it, Chaim Wizeman, that's it. In the Balfour Declaration, he got the Jews a homeland because he couldn't bare to see them suffering anti-semitism and he felt they deserved a land of their own. Is that such a bad thing? Just try and put yourself in their position!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thefish_uk)
    The suicide bombings would be prevented if Israel pulled back its borders to how they were in 1967, giving the Palestinians only a small amount more land.
    Yes, well the Israelis would pull back out of the borders once they know it's secure..and it's not secure.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gemgems89)
    Yes, well the Israelis would pull back out of the borders once they know it's secure..and it's not secure.
    Secure? What do you mean by secure?

    Apparently, the Palestinian terrorist leaders have declared that all they ask for is for Israel's borders to be reduced like that.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thefish_uk)
    Secure? What do you mean by secure?

    Apparently, the Palestinian terrorist leaders have declared that all they ask for is for Israel's borders to be reduced like that.
    Why do you think they're askig that?

    So they can get in and blow more bombs off, maybe? Why else would they want the borders secure? Anyway, the Israelis have a right to protect their borders.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gemgems89)
    Innocent people in Israel are killed by suicide bombings. And the latter would be prevented if there was no suicide bombings in the first place!
    And no innocent Israelis would be killed if the suicide bombers didn't have to protect their families against IDF conscripts.

    It can work either way round and is the vicious circle on which this conflict is based.


    (Original post by gemgems89)
    How can you say the Jews *stole* the land?! They were *given* it. Who was it, Chaim Wizeman, that's it. In the Balfour Declaration, he got the Jews a homeland because he couldn't bare to see them suffering anti-semitism and he felt they deserved a land of their own. Is that such a bad thing? Just try and put yourself in their position!
    Irrelevant, no matter how unjustly treated the Jews had been, it does not justify the unjust treatment of another group. Neither does not change the fact that the land was forcibly taken ("stolen") from those who were then living on it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gemgems89)
    Yes, well the Israelis would pull back out of the borders once they know it's secure..and it's not secure.
    it is not secure BECAUSE they're there.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.