Monday, July 11, 2005

Blue in the Holyland

As if we havent had enough politics on this blog, i was thinking about what nukes wrote a article further down this page, and how i think the disengagment should be viewed. Its not like I'm a die hard leftist or some kind of communist, but i have thought that the disengagment is probably the right thing for israel to do solely because it has proven that it cannot win in a densely populated hostile urban environment. And if Israel cannot win it has no right to sacrifice its kids to a lost cause. I think that is the crux of the thinking behind it. I dont know if it will bring peace, it may not, but a different approach must be taken because the status quo is unacceptable.I dont see the purpose in simply killing soldiers, especially if its in defense of a rather small population, with a surrounding arab population which is much larger, incredibly densely populate, impoverished and desperate. I am sorry if jews have to leave their homes, its not something i cherish but if its for the greater good i think its a necessary evil. We had to leave Lebanon eventually for similar reasons. Israel wins conventional wars on conventional battlefields, but the fact is that big conventional armies have never been able to successfully maintain any "occupation" over a hostile population. if anyone could give me an example of a successful military occupation over a hostile population i would I love to hear about it. basically if u cant win you have to leave, theres no point in just killing soldiers for a lost cause, i dont care how unromantic or unpleasant leaving parts of eretz yisrael sounds, if u have to cut off ure foot to save the rest of ure body from being infected, then that is what u have to do, its not exactly a pleasant thought to say the least. I suppose if u could tell me a way that israel could actually win in the gaza i might be persuaded to change my position, but as long as this is some open ended war of attrition i think it would be sad to just continue sacrificing young men.

I would also like to mention that these settlers got their homes at a reduced price to begin with, which is why most of them moved there. the government placed them there because the thinking was that this would be the most effective way to control the territories. Apparently that is incorrect, especially in gaza and for the same strategic reasons that they were placed there in the first place they are going to be removed.

another point worth mentioning is that this whole yehudi lo migaresh yehudi is really warping the situation. the fact is that the army could just leave the gaza and the settlers who want to go with the army could go and get what ever compensation is available and the ones who want to stay should stay and face teh palestinians alone. the army is actually doing the settlers a favor by forcing them out, because without military support the settlers would quickly run out of ammunition and be overwhelmed by the hysterically hostile surrounding population. basically by dragging all the settlers out of gaza, the Israeli government is also saving the settlers from the palestinians who would inevitabley attack them, or even more so from themselves. The Israeli army is really saving the settlers from themselves and their own fanaticism which would otherwise get them killed.

sorry about being so frank

am yisrael chai

regards from israel i cant wait to see u guys when i get back

crazy moishele

4 Shpeils

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Anonymous Y.D. Naridaga said...

hey elder punk, maybe this article might clear things up :-)

Monday, July 11, 2005 8:45:00 PM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Blogger Mesiach said...

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MOISHELE!!!!

Monday, July 11, 2005 8:46:00 PM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Blogger The Nucular Jew said...

It's not an issue of whether it's right to pull out, and I think we'd all agree that if we had a solid peace agreement, we'd give away Gaza, but that's not what's on the table, that's why I'm against disengagement now.

Also, the government placed them there to lay claim to the land. Settling has been going on since the 1860s, not a new thing. The way we got land in the pre-state era was by laying down settlements. Something called chuma u'migdal, look it up.

Leaving them in the Gaza strip, not good. The army isn't "doing them a favour", the army is doing what it's there to do, protect Jews. Leaving Jews in Gaza would completely go against the idea of Israel.

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 11:18:00 AM  

<$BlogDateHeaderDate$>

Anonymous Anonymous said...

im really not in the fight picking mood now, so dont please dont take my response as my attempting to pick some fight.

anyways i apologize if i was slightly unclear and all, but the disengagment is unilateral because it is ovbious that we cannot win there. we are going to have to leave some time, either now or later when it gets worse and we lose more kids. we are leaving now because we will inevitably have to leave but that by doing this we will lose less soldiers. i do believe that every soul is a world, and a soul lost is a lost world.

i have heard of the notion of a "wall and a tower" however pre-48 and post 67 settling are completely different things
with completely different expectations.

this notion of protecting jews has massive implications. if u say that the state of israel has the obligation to protect jews world wide, than it would be obligated to kidnap jewish kids at risk or on drugs in say brooklyn ny and bring them to israel against their wishes for treatment. my point being that adults make adult decisions. i think if these people wanna stay in gaza they should be allowed to, of course i dont want to think about what will happen to them. so in fact the army is doing them a favor by saving them from what seems like their own stupidity.

no offense or anything sorry about the ranting

moishele

Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:33:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Check out our Punks tees!

And our really cool MFFC:HCC tees!

Powered by Blogger Listed on 
BlogShares