Negotiating with terrorists

[solicitr]

I have to ask, SW, how does one rationally hope for the moderation of people who deliriously cheer as a 'national hero' a man whose principal claim to fame is smashing a four-year-old girl's skull with a rifle butt?

I note also that Hamas has announced that this episode has encouraged it to kidnap more Israeli soldiers in the future. This is nowt but appeasement with a capital A.

[sauronsfinger]

I would imagine the Japanese asked the same questions of the US reaction to the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Probably went something like this

"how can a nation cheer and celebrate a victory which was achieved by dropping of atomic bombs on tens of thousands of civillians including women, children and old people".

Everyone justifies everything when it benefits them.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

Wasn't Calley treated as a hero in some quarters?

[sauronsfinger]

Good point Tosh.

[solicitr]

The fruits of appeasement are already being recognized by terrorism's Amen Corner, like The Guardian's Charles Harb:

Hizbullah's success can be added to its already long list of achievements, and reminds Arab and Muslim audiences worldwide of the effectiveness of a steadfast resistance

[solicitr]

Tosh, the US government did not give Calley a ticker-tape parade and declare a national holiday in his honor, nor did Nixon kiss him on both cheeks and award him the Medal of Honor. He was court-martialed.

[sauronsfinger]

We certainly honored those who were responsible for the atomic bomb.

And Calley had legions of defenders.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

No, a quick check revealed that the day after he was sentenced to life imprisonment with hard labour, Nixon ordered he be transferred to house arrest on a military base. He served three and a half years under house arrest and was then released.

Qoote from Wikipedia:

In this incident, as many as 500 villagers, mostly women, children, infants and elderly, were systematically killed by American soldiers during a bloody rampage in 1968. If convicted, Calley faced the death penalty.

[sauronsfinger]

Paul Tibbets, the pilot who dropped the bomb on Japan did pretty good for himself when he returned. He was honored with medals and awards and later promoted to Brigadier General. He even had a website where he sold atomic bomb memorabillia to admirers.

[JewelSong]

I hardly think that the Mai Lai massacre should be compared to the dropping of the A-bomb.

We can look back now and say what a terrible thing the bomb was, but at the time, it was seen by many (by MOST) as the only way to end the war.

[Jnyusa]

[removed]

[sauronsfinger]

from JewelSong

I hardly think that the Mai Lai massacre should be compared to the dropping of the A-bomb.

We can look back now and say what a terrible thing the bomb was, but at the time, it was seen by many (by MOST) as the only way to end the war.

JS - I brought up the incident just to show that every society can justify their actions if the benefit goes to them. I am sure the Japanese would make the opposite case about its necessity. But history is written by the victors.

You are right about Mai Lai not being comporable to the atom bomb. However, some may argue it is because the bomb was thousands of times worse.

[JewelSong]

You are right about Mai Lai not being comporable to the atom bomb. However, some may argue it is because the bomb was thousands of times worse.

It killed many more people. But it was government sanctioned and ordered. The men who dropped the bomb were acting (as they thought at the time) in the best interests of their country and against a seemingly unstoppable enemy,

Calley acted alone and against orders and protocol.

Whether the bomb should have ever been dropped at all is another matter entirely.

And, in the Calley case...what we do to the young men we send off to fight in order to get them to become basically killing machines is what allowed it to happen. Not that Calley was blameless - not at all. But the mechanics of war are designed to completely dehumanize the enemy. And it obviously worked.

[halplm]

The revisionsism of history where we should not have bombed japan, borders on the obscene these days...

[Teremia]

I recently (just a few weeks ago) saw a lot of footage of aftermath of the bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I have to say I despaired about humanity, seeing those terrible images.

THAT was obscene, not someone saying we shouldn't have dropped the bomb.

Now you can argue it had to be done to prevent other obscenities, but you can't argue that what the bomb itself did was not obscene.

[solicitr]

Jny, your points about artificial borders is well taken, but my specific exceptions remain:

1) no borders were created by Sykes-Picot, except the line dividing the British and French spheres*. Please don't confuse S-P (1916) with the creation of vassal states in the 1920s.

2) the cis-Jordan, West Palestine, Israel + West Bank, was never part of any Hashemite territory until Abdullah annexed it in 1948. I *have* looked at the maps. In fact, I just went back to the superb articles on the subject contained in the (1929) 14th Edition Britannica (now that was an encyclopedia!)

Britain never remotely considered relinquishing direct control of the Holy Land west of the Jordan Valley between 1916 and 1947 (when it had its arm twisted). After all, General Allenby was ennobled for having won the "Last Crusade."

The Hashemites were not 'mere' Bedouin, but the hereditary rulers of the Hejaz, the western Arabian peninsula including the Holy Cities. Britain's principal tool in the Arab Revolt was Hussein, Emir of Mecca. The original (Colonial Office) plan was to rule the ex-Ottoman Arab lands though a triple-headed Hashemite family 'empire': Hussein and then his son Ali in Mecca, son Feisal in Damascus, and son Abdullah in Baghdad- the three ancient Muslim capitals. Palestine (including Phoenicia/Lebanon) was to remain under direct British control.

This idea fell apart, though it had been sold to the Arabs in good faith. The FO, apparently with no consultation with either the CO or the High Commissioner, realized the French had to be given a piece of the spoils, even though France had played no part in the Turkish war. Thus Sykes-Picot. With Syria and Lebanon no longer within their gift (Feisal tried to fight the French in 1918, but was driven out), eventually the Brits re-assigned Feisal to Baghdad and gave (barren) East Palestine to the displaced Abdullah, still retaining ancient Israel for themselves. Then things really went to hell, when the Hejaz was conquered by the Red Sea Arabs under Abdul-Aziz ibn-Saud. The Brits were forced to recognize Saudi Arabia in exchange for Abdul-Aziz' staying out of the minor protectorates: Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Yemen, Qatar, and the Trucial States (now the UAE).

Their motivaton here, ironically, was imperial and especially naval- oil wasn't discovered until later. HMG's concern was security for Suez, the Red Sea and the sea-route from India.


I suspect Abdullah's widely-acknowledged territorial ambitions may have stemmed from his ignomiously having been bumped from prosperous Mesopotamia in favor of the golden boy Feisal, hero of the Revolt, and being fobbed off with some empty desert. For years made no secret of his desire to rule all Palestine: 1948 presented him with an opportunity to grab what he could. Being however a fairly agreeable sort, he (almost uniquely among Arab rulers) had no issue with the Balfour Declaration, did in fact cooperate sub umbra with proto-Israel, and only reluctantly participated in the Arab League invasion (and then for his own purposes).






*And Russian- but after the Revolution, Lenin was frozen out. It's possible that the original reason for S-P was to give the Czar an incentive to keep fighting.

[halplm]

The war needed ending, the bombs did it in the fastest way possible.

Only someone trying to make America out to be the "big bad evil guy" would ever argue that it shouldn't have been done.

[superwizard]

I have to ask, SW, how does one rationally hope for the moderation of people who deliriously cheer as a 'national hero' a man whose principal claim to fame is smashing a four-year-old girl's skull with a rifle butt?

Ah but the question is: do they believe that he murdered the child in cold blood? He denies it and his brother denies it. It would be rational to assume that many Arabs would be more inclined to believe them then the Israelis.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast ... ar.attack/

On a side note: Kuntar in fact is not Sunni or Shi'i but rather a Derzi (Druze). Many (if not most) Muslims do not even consider them to be Muslim because of their difference in beliefs and they are definitely not what people have in mind when they talk about Islamic extremism. Just goes to show you that religion is not the main driving force for these heinous acts...

[solicitr]

Seven armies declared war on Israel but only one army actually showed up to fight. The battle was carried by Palestinian irregulars and no one else,

That is simply not so. On May 15 the Egyptian Army attacked Kfar Darom and Nirim. May 18th the Syrians overran Tzemach, Masada and Merom Hagolan. May 19-24 Egyptins take Yad Mordechai after a prolonged battle. At the same time, the Jordanians take East Jerusalem except the Jewish Quarter. May 20 Syrian assault on Kibbutz Degania beaten off. May 25, Haganah attempt to retake Latrun from the Arab Legion fails. May 28 Jordanians take the Jewish Quarter- all Jewish inhabitants are expelled and all synagogues (but one) razed. May 25-28 Iraqi Army takes Guelim, Kfar Yona and Ein Vered, but are then driven bak to Tul Qarm. May 29 Egyptian 2d Brigade advancing on Tel Aviv halted at Gesher Ad Halom. May 30/31 IDF again fails to dislodge Jordanians from Ladrun, but on June 1 they bypass the redoubt and open a tenuous supply corridor into besieged West Jerusalem. June 2 Egyptian 1st Brigade assaults Kibbutz Negba but fails to take it. Simultaneously, an IDF counterattack aginst the E2B at Gesher Ad Halom fails, and two IDF brigades are routed by the Iraqis at Jenin. June 6-10 the Northern Offensive (Lebanese and Arab Liberation Armies) begins. Malkieh and Kadesh lost, while the Syrians take Mishmar Hayarden. June 7, Nitzanim falls to Egyptian tank assault. June 8/9, Jordanians successfully defend Ladrun yet again; the next day the Transjordan Legion takes Gezer. June 10 Syrian assault including tanks, artillery and aircraft fails to take Kibbutz Ein Gev....



...and that's just up to the 'halftime' truce. "Palestinian irregulars and no one else" my foot.





(Incidentally, 1973 came close to disaster because the Egypto-Syrians manged the complete surprise they failed to get in '67. But though it was 'a damned near-run thing' for a while, the end result was similar.)

[sauronsfinger]

from Hal

The war needed ending, the bombs did it in the fastest way possible.

Only someone trying to make America out to be the "big bad evil guy" would ever argue that it shouldn't have been done.

Since I posted that information, I was not making America out to be the evil big bad anything. My point was a simple one with good guys or bad guys:

people can justify anything in times of war if it benefits themselves or their side.

Or to put it another way:
one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter
one mans traitor is another mans patriot
one mans act of barbarism is another mans heroic act
one mans illegal riot becomes another mans righteous rebellion

and so on....