Which Iran would Israel bomb?

[IndianaGreen]

Last update - 07:43 21/06/2009

Which Iran would Israel bomb?

By Zvi Bar'el, Haaretz Correspondent

Suddenly, there appears to be an Iranian people. Not just nuclear technology, extremist ayatollahs, the Holocaust-denying Ahmadinejad, and an axis of evil. All of a sudden, the ears need to be conditioned to hear other names: "'Mousawi' or 'Mousavi,' how is it pronounced exactly?"; Mehdi Karroubi; Khamenei ("It's not 'Khomeini'?"). Reports from Iranian bloggers fill the pages of the Hebrew press. Iranian commentators - in contrast to Iranian-affairs commentators - are now the leading pundits. The hot Internet connection with Radio Ran (the Persian-language radio station in Israel) is the latest gimmick. And most interesting and important is that the commentary on what is taking place in Iran is not being brought to the public by senior intelligence officers, but via images transmitted by television.

Israel is now gaining a more intimate, accurate familiarity with the Iranian public. The demonstrations have made quite clear that there is not one Iran or even two, but rather a number of Irans. There is the Iran that belongs to those who screamed, "Death to America and to Israel," and there is the Iran that screams, "Down with the dictator."

The entire world intently listened to Iran's supreme leader with the same anticipation and focus with which it received Barack Obama's speech in Cairo, perhaps even more so. The political sermon delivered by spiritual leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which included couched threats against his opponents, proved that not everything is done on the command of the supreme leader. He too needs to heed public opinion, he too needs to compromise, he too is operating within a system that includes religious and political adversaries. In short, it was not the son of God who spoke on Friday, but a politician who needs to preserve his system of rule as well as his own legitimacy.

Khamenei, like his rivals, knows that even if the world believes that the elections were as pure as snow, there are still, by a conservative estimate, at least 15 million grown men and women - who make up over one-third of Iranian citizens who have the right to vote - who stand in opposition to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. These are Iranians with families and businesses. Some of them oppose his economic policies, others his nuclear policy; some object to his denial of the Holocaust or his anti-American stance, or perhaps all of these things together.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1094453.html

[Grey]

1. and this needs to be heard around the world.

I simply hate the single word message. All world needs to be seen in shades of grey.
Things are never just black and white.

[Adsos Letter]

2. THIS is where the inattention to the study of history in our schools has harmed us.

One of the benefits of a well structured history program in high school is the ability to evaluate with nuance.

[Grey]

3. I agree, One needs context.

[jaysunb]

4. Interesting twist...

in a rapidly unfolding drama.

[madeline_con]

5. Like Israel cares. They'd kill all of them if they could. n/t

[henank]

6. Absolutely. Those blood thirsty Israelis

ready to kill millions at the drop of a hat bomb. They don't really want to just neutralize Iran's nuclear capability. Noooo. They want to kill every last one of those damn Iranians. Sure, why they said so just the other day. I'm sure you can google it to find us proof.

Talk about context. :sarcasm:

[madeline_con]

8. Why would they treat Iranians any differently than they do Palestinians? n/t

[Vegasaurus]

10. Has Israel killed all the Palestinians?

Last I checked, their population had increased 30% in 10 years.

[Lakrosse]

12. didn't you know thats genocide?

when a population increases 30% in ten years?

:eyes:

[Violet_Crumble]

15. Yeah, apparently we're only supposed to accuse Palestinians of genocide...

And then things like population increase etc fly out the window in favour of flinging the much used and abused *g* word around for dramatic flair.

Congrats for being the newest member of the Rapid Response team devoted to appearing in threads and throwing in the word 'genocide'. After 20 successful forays there's a promotion to the Hamas Supporter Spotter Team that roves around here on a regular basis...l

[IndianaGreen]

19. ZOA Campus activists are on summer break

I could make a snide comment about ZOA Campus zealots, but I recognize that there is a lot of anti-Semitism on campus as well, and that it needs to be confronted even when we disagree about the settlements and the occupation of Palestine.

[Dick Dastardly]

25. Exactly

I agree with you that its a obvious organized conspiracy to try and counter the truth we heard in #5 and #8

Like Israel cares. They'd kill all of them if they could.

Why would they treat Iranians any differently than they do Palestinians?


in any way. The truth should be accepted and not be met with sarcasm, snide comments and propaganda.


Its good to see you agree that Israel would kill them all if they could just like they do with the Palestinians. I commend your vigorous defense of this truth from the propaganda smear to hide it.
As Bobby Boucher's mother says "Israel Is The Devil!"

[Violet_Crumble]

28. Yr talking at the wrong person...

Its good to see you agree that Israel would kill them all if they could just like they do with the Palestinians.

I didn't say or agree with anything like that. If you click on the post I was replying to, you'd have noticed that...

[Violet_Crumble]

..

..

[Violet_Crumble]

29. ..

..

[IndianaGreen]

14. Isn't that the fear of the uber-zionists, the Palestinian birthrate?

Isn't that the reason why Israel treats the Palestinians in the same perverse and racist manner as the Afrikaners treated the indigenous South Africans?

The slow starvation of Gaza, the destruction of homes and olive groves, the confiscation of water sources and of the best arable land. These are the fruits of uber-zionism.

[Ken Burch]

38. You know perfectly well it'd be impossible to just hit the nuclear sites

And you also know perfectly well that Israel would have no right to complain if the Islamic world attacked it in response.

[Sezu]

7. What an insane notion. n/t

[madeline_con]

9. It's based on Israel's track record with human rights. n/t

[Sezu]

11. No it isn't. It's a crazy opinion based on

broad based sterotyping of the most foul kind. . Israel has never ever said it wanted to "kill all Iranians," and anyone who thinks they want to is way off beam.

[Ken Burch]

39. Any bombing of Iran would have to be massive and indiscriminate

And any such bombing would have to make Iran go reactionary and anti-West for the rest of eternity.

There's no way to have a "World War II" ending to that storyline.

[proteus_lives]

35. Well, that's the stupidest comment I've seen on DU.

:eyes:

[azurnoir]

13. IMO if Israel were to "bomb" Iran

which is quite unlikely it would be more likely to happen soon while Iran is in chaos not once order is restored, as to the rest both Bibi and Obama are on the same page it doesn't matter who is the President in Iran either way Iran is still the bad guy

[LeftishBrit]

16. Great article, and expresses a LOT of what I've been thinking over the years

And very best wishes to the people of Iran, for their safety now, and for a better future.

[shira]

17. Where is Everyone?

Where is Everyone?

Ma’ariv (Monday, June 22, 09) by Ben Caspit and Ben-Dror Yemini (opinion) –

Tell us, where is everyone? Where did all the people who demonstrated against Israel’s brutality in Operation Cast Lead, in the Second Lebanon War, in Operation Defensive Shield, or even in The Hague, when we were dragged there unwillingly after daring to build a separation barrier between us and the suicide bombers, disappear to? We see demonstrations here and there, but these are mainly Iranian exiles. Europe, in principle, is peaceful and calm. So is the United States. Here and there a few dozens, here and there a few hundreds. Have they evaporated because it is Tehran and not here?


All the peace-loving and justice-loving Europeans, British professors in search of freedom and equality, the friends filling the newspapers, magazines and various academic journals with various demands for boycotting Israel, defaming Zionism and blaming us and it for all the ills and woes of the world—could it be that they have taken a long summer vacation? Now of all times, when the Basij hooligans have begun to slaughter innocent civilians in the city squares of Tehran? Aren’t they connected to the Internet? Don’t they have YouTube? Has a terrible virus struck down their computer? Have their justice glands been removed in a complicated surgical procedure (to be re-implanted successfully for the next confrontation in Gaza)? How can it be that when a Jew kills a Muslim, the entire world boils, and when extremist Islam slaughters its citizens, whose sole sin is the aspiration to freedom, the world is silent?

Imagine that this were not happening now in Tehran, but rather here. Let’s say in Nablus. Spontaneous demonstrations of Palestinians turning into an ongoing bloodbath. Border Policemen armed with knives, on motorcycles, butchering demonstrators. A young woman downed by a sniper in midday, dying before the cameras. Actually, why imagine? We can just recall what happened with the child Mohammed a-Dura. How the affair (which was very harsh, admittedly) swept the world from one end to another. The fact that a later independent investigative report raised tough questions as to the identity of the weapon from which a-Dura was shot, did not make a difference to anyone. The Zionists were to blame, and that was that.

And where are the world’s leaders? Where is the wondrous rhetorical ability of Barack Obama? Where has his sublime vocabulary gone? Where is the desire, that is supposed to be built into all American presidents, to defend and act on behalf of freedom seekers around the globe? What is this stammering?

A source who is connected to the Iranian and security situation, said yesterday that if Obama had shown on the Iranian matter a quarter of the determination with which he assaulted the settlements in the territories, everything would have looked different. “The demonstrators in Iran are desperate for help,” said the man, who served in very senior positions for many years, “they need to know that they have backing, that there is an entire world that supports them, but instead they see indifference. And this is happening at such a critical stage of this battle for the soul of Iran and the freedom of the Iranian people. It’s sad.”

Or the European Union, for example. The organization that speaks of justice and peace all year round. Why should its leaders not declare clearly that the world wants to see a democratic and free Iran, and support it unreservedly? Could it be that the tongue of too many Europeans is still connected to dark places? The pathetic excuse that such support would give Khamenei and Ahmadinejad an excuse to call the demonstrators “Western agents,” does not hold water. They call them “Western agents” in any case, so what difference does it make?

To think that just six months ago, when Europe was flooded with demonstrations against Israel, leftists and Islamists raised pictures of Nasrallah, the protégé of the ayatollah regime. The fact that this was a benighted regime did not trouble them. This is madness, but it is sinking in and influencing the weary West. If there is a truly free world here, let it appear immediately! And impose sanctions, for example, on those who slaughter the members of their own people. Just as it imposed them on North Korea, or on the military regime in Burma. It is only a question of will, not of ability.

Apparently, something happens to the global adherence to justice and equality, when it comes to Iran. The oppression is overt and known. The Internet era broadcasts everything live, and it is all for the better. Hooligans acting on behalf of the regime shoot and stab masses of demonstrators, who cry out for freedom.

Is anything more needed? Apparently it is. Because it is to no avail. The West remains indifferent. Obama is polite. Why shouldn’t he be, after all, he aspires to a dialogue with the ayatollahs. And that is very fine and good, the problem is that at this stage there is no dialogue, but there is death and murder on the streets.

At this stage, one must forget the rules of etiquette for a moment. The voices being heard from Obama elicit concern that we are actually dealing with a new version of Chamberlain. Being conciliatory is a positive trait, particularly when it follows the clumsy bellicosity of George Bush, but when conciliation becomes blindness, we have a problem.

The courageous voice of Angela Merkel, who issued yesterday a firm statement of support for the Iranian people and its right to freedom, is in the meantime a lone voice in the Western wilderness. It is only a shame that she has not announced an economic boycott, in light of the fact that this is the European country that is most invested in building infrastructure in Iran. She was joined by British Foreign Secretary Miliband. It is little, it is late, it is not enough. Millions of freedom seekers have taken to the streets in Iran, and the West is straddling the fence, one leg here, the other leg there.

There is a different Islam. This is already clear today. Even in Iran. There are millions of Muslims who support freedom, human rights, equality for women. These millions loathe Khamenei, Chavez and Nasrallah too. But part of the global left wing prefers the ayatollah regime over them. The main thing is for them to raise flags against Israel and America. The question is why the democrats, the liberals, and Obama, Blair and Sarkozy, are continuing to sit on the fence. This is not a fence of separation, it is a fence of shame.

[henank]

18. Excellent article. n/t

[shira]

20. yeah, good to know there are others out there taking notice of the obvious

good to know I'm not the only one who's paranoid and delusional :)

[LeftishBrit]

21. There are quite a lot of people campaigning over Iran...

If anyone wants to make a statement, you can go here:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/iran_vote_truth/

There are also organizations such as:

www.standwithiran.com

www.iranliberty.org.uk


Also human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are organizing campaigns.

[shira]

22. in comparison to anything related to Israel, this is very tame

we all know quite well what's going on, LB.

If not for twitter, events in Iran would be even more under-reported and less sensationalist.

[LeftishBrit]

27. I disagree about 'ANYTHING related to Israel'

The very anti-Israel people in Europe and America are noisy, but they do not usually control policy. EU and especially American leadership tends to regard Israel as an ally, rather than as something uniquely evil.

The UN as an organization DOES unfortunately exceptionalize Israel.


But Iran also gets exceptionalized as uniquely evil, mainly by different people. The right-wing, especially the American Right, often treat Iran as not just a country with a nasty government, but as a uniquely evil enemy, their big 'bogeynation'. Compare and contrast the general attitude to Iran and to Saudi Arabia, though both have oppressive theocratic governments.

ETA: My last paragraph doesn't refer to coverage of the current protests and the government's brutal reactions to them. This deserves all the publicity it gets, and more! It refers to the long-term treatment of Iran as one of very few countries in an 'Axis of Evil'.

[shira]

31. "The very anti-Israel people in Europe and America are noisy..."

Yes, the respected "peace camp" and UN are both MUCH noisier regarding Israel compared to anything happening elsewhere on the planet (Iran, Russia/Georgia, Sri Lanka, etc). That's the point. It appears we agree.

And I agree with your point regarding S.Arabia and Iran (they both suck an awful lot).......now compare the general attitude most Europeans and Americans have of the Al-Qaida/Taliban and compare and contrast to Hamas/Hezbollah. It's all sales and marketing, isn't it?

[shira]

32. more evidence for you, LB..........latest from the UNHRC

Council Decides to Discontinue Consideration of the Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo under the Complaint Procedure
http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/0/2198BF97A8AE4D1DC12575D90036C71C?opendocument

...to quote Ben Dror Yemini, "Where Is Everyone"? Where are all the hand-wringing peace lovers who are so concerned about civil rights? It's been a week since this outrageous decision was declared by the UNHRC.

It's not just the UN, as there's been ZERO negative international reaction to this. Can you imagine international non-reaction to such a decision if it were with respect to consideration of the situation in the Palestinian territories?

[LeftishBrit]

33. The UNHRC are well-known for being a political organization, not a serious human rights group

And they've constantly dropped the ball on African countries.

No argument there.

[Ken Burch]

43. You can't turn everything into "they hate the Jews".

Give it a rest, already.

[shira]

44. just pointing out obvious hypocrisy and double-standards when it comes to Israel

pretty difficult for you to explain away isn't it.....how, unlike other countries, Israel is singled out?

The UN has been really quiet regarding Iran too, hasn't it?

[Ken Burch]

45. The Israeli government gets called on its actions because it deserves to.

The massive U.S. aid, if nothing else, gives people here a right to hold it to humane standards. Their is no security benefit to the Occupation, and there is no security benefit in holding the settlements that's worth the jeopardy they put peace in.

And, since we've demonstrated that a louder global response would endanger the Iranian democracy movement, will you please give the "everyone's letting Iran off the hook" thing a rest?

[shira]

46. it's not just silence on Iran, but recently Russia (Georgia) and Sri Lanka too

And the PA gets massive U.S. and E.U. aid as well....should they be held to humane standards too? Hamas is getting aid for "building" Gaza....should they be held to humane standards too? Your U.S. tax dollars pay for all that $$, especially the $$ going to the U.N. too.

Tell me, if there is no security benefit to the occupation, you're all for ending it NOW and risking MASS death and destruction that would very likely result soon after?

[Ken Burch]

47. It's not a question of Occupation or annihiliation. The Palestinians Are Not Nazis!

They never "just hated Jews". They hated another group coming in and forcing them out. This had nothing to do with religion, and any other group coming in citing "the right to 'self-determination'" on what was always Palestinian Arab land(say, for example, if the Ottoman had sent in a million Turks to create "Greater Anatolia" or the U.S. had sent in a million Baptists to create "Eretz Waco"), WOULD have faced the same response. Please don't ever again equate Palestinians or other Arabs with the monsters of Europe. Remember, no Arab country turned its Jewish community over to the Nazis for extermination(even Morocco and Algeria when they were ruled by Vichy France), unlike most European countries who did so gladly.

The Palestinian people of today accept that the Jewish population of pre-1967 Israel(the only legimate area that Israel can claim)are never going to be driven away and they don't want to slaughter them. The Palestinian people are willing to accept a state in the West Bank and Gaza(which must be all the West Bank if such a state is to be viable), and they'd probably accept compensation for those driven out of pre-1967 Israel, if that compensation was sizable enough, came with an apology and an admission that the victims of the Nakba were wronged and were falsely smeared as European-style antisemites, and was paid immediately(not delayed for decades as the Israeli government, to its eternal disgrace, delayed the payments it was legally and morally obligated to make to Holocaust survivors living in Israel). Couple this with a commitment from the Israeli government that it would NEVER try to destabilize the Palestinian state or ever again send troops onto Palestinian soil, and you'd likely get a deal. Palestinians are rational human beings, with just as strong a commitment to basic morality as any Israeli, and are capable of showing common sense if treated as equals with Israelis.

If anything were to cause "mass death and destruction", it would be the indefinite continuation of the Occupation and settlement building (and we both no there's no moral difference between starting new settlements and "expanding existing settlements". Land theft is land theft no matter what). People that are held down will inevitably rise up and free themselves by any means necessary. The way to prevent death is to end the Occupation and start a major project of reconciliation and compensation to the Palestinian people for the treatment they've received. The hard line doesn't work and will never work again.

What the Israeli government needs to do is give up on being able to say "we won". That government needs to accept that it's enough to say "the war is over". And this will require that government, a government that's basically been addicted to war, crisis and conquest, to give up those addictions as well. None of them are good for the Israeli people, and being fixated with winning isn't good for it either. I assume you'll agree with me on these last points.

[shira]

49. please answer the question

I'll state it once more:

If Israel ends the occupation under your terms immediately and a BIG, nasty war is the result with MASSIVE death and destruction not seen in that area since at least 1948, you'd be for ending the occupation?

simple question, really.

[Ken Burch]

52. It's a useless, dishonest question.

You know perfectly well that the Palestinians are not Nazis, and that they don't want to slaughter all the Jews in what is now Israel. Please stop spreading such an insane, paranoid canard.

No suffering and no war is PREVENTED by the Occupation. And every year, month, week, hour, even minute that it continues, the justified anger it causes in all Palestinians only grows. It's the Occupation, not the end of Occupation, that puts Israelis at risk.

It would be enough for Israel to exist in the pre-1967 lines. Palestinians would accept that. They are reasonable, sane human beings. They don't live to kill. And they never just "hated the Jews".

[shira]

59. so you guarantee no big war would break out as a result of Israel ending occupation?

given Intifada 2 (which resulted after Israel's best offer of a state) and Gaza 2005 (which ended occupation/settlements there)?

you think chances are slim no war will break out, right?

-------------

what if you're wrong and a BIG WAR broke out as a result - with MASSIVE death and destruction (mostly on the Palestinian side)? Then you'd regret the occupation ending, right?

[Ken Burch]

60. There's no good reason to keep asking a dishonest question.

It's now nothing but spam.

[shira]

61. okay, so long as you remember there's no good reason for you to keep spamming your nonsense

What real EVIDENCE do you have that Hamas and Fatah will not use the end of occupation to start an all-out war on Israel?

[shira]

63. what's dishonest? Israel stopped occupation in Leb'n 00' and Gaza 05', neither worked out so well

[LeftishBrit]

34. On this topic...

(1) I don't think the 'peace camp' as a whole are obsessed with Israel as opposed to everywhere on the planet. What they are most preoccupied with - for understandable reasons - is not Israel, not Iran, not Russia/Georgia, but *Iraq*. This doesn't mean that Iraq is worse than anywhere else, though it's very bad; but the Americans and British and to some extent other countries are responsible for what's going on in Iraq, which is why peace-campers in Britain and America are concerned with influencing the actions of our own governments.

There are lots of different groups that latch onto the anti-Iraq war cause, and a few of them are not particularly progressive and may be disproportionately anti-Zionist (neo-isolationists; Islamists; a few old-style far-leftists still influenced by Soviet propaganda of 30 years ago). This does not mean that the anti-war cause is not a good thing or a worthwhile cause! Almost any cause will have a few dodgy people and groups latching onto it.

(2) As regards attitudes to the Taliban/Al Quaeda vs Hamas/Hezbollah - well, I don't think most Europaeans or Americans care for *any* of them! However, you must admit that the Taliban and Al Quaeda have killed more people; and that the Taliban *is* one of the most oppressive governments around, and even worse than Hamas - though perhaps not worse than some African governments that attract less attention.

Also, people tend to be more preoccupied with groups that are directly threatening them; and Al Quaeda are quite explicitly threatening the West as a whole, in a way that Hamas and Hezbollah aren't. No doubt it is selfish to worry more about those that are threatening us directly - but it's common. A parallel is the very different attitude that I've noticed by many Americans and British people to the IRA and similar groups. But as I say, very few people in the US or EU actually support Hamas or Hezbollah (possible inclusion in multi-party talks is not the same as supporting them, and lots of people don't even support that.)

(3) I don't think Iran has been much neglected, though it may have been stereotyped as a country where everyone has the same views - not so at all. The places that DO get shamefully neglected by the West tend to be the African countries, many of which are in a horrible state. They are far enough, and powerless enough, to be readily ignored; and so they often are. I don't think that has much to do with either Zionism or anti-Zionism, however.

[azurnoir]

23. Obama says US, world 'appalled' by Iran violence

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama on Tuesday declared the United States and the entire world "appalled and outraged" by Iran's violent efforts to crush dissent and for the first time expressed significant doubt about the legitimacy of the national election at the root of the upheaval.

The president suggested that Iran would face consequences for brutally beating back protest, warning that the way the country responds in the days ahead will shape its relationship with other countries, including the United States. He would not specify what any punishment might be.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-06-23-16-09-16

and it took an agonizingly long 10 d
gays for this rather than only a mere 40 years, gee I guess some can walk and chew gum at the same time

[Dick Dastardly]

24. So true. Israels brutal defense against the peaceful war to liberate Palestine

caused the occupation. Defending themselves from this war of peace was unconscionable as was their rejection of the 3 no's of peace offered by those they brutally defeated and that if implemented would have resulted in peace. Since their brutal defense against the 67 peace war and rejection of the peaceful aims, they have for 40 years continued their brutal and unconscionable defense against wars to make peace, terror to make peace, rockets to make peace and any other attempt by their adversaries to implement what would result in peace if they only stopped their brutal defense.

Iran after 10 days
when
Israel not even after 40 years of its brutal unconscionable defense against what would result in peace if implemented. Its truly disgusting the Zionists think they have a right to defend themselves against peace as well as how disgusting the worlds turning a blind eye to it. Until such a peace is implemented no one but Israel should be held to account.

I am happy we agree on all this. As Bobby Boucher's mother says "Israel Is The Devil!"

[azurnoir]

26. Pffft

you like so many other supporters of Israeli colonialism refuse to understand the difference between an internal civilian struggle and an occupation but by all means stick to your they want it all because some people still do not yet realize who that really means

[Violet_Crumble]

30. The problem with that sort of post is it says far more about you than anyone else...

It's to be expected that people who hold such black and white, one side is good and the other is bad views where Israel is the peaceful innocent victim and the Palestinians are always cast as the evil terrorists would just assume that people they don't agree with hold the same absolutist stance, but in reverse. There's a whole lot of people who don't view the conflict through the same absolutist prism that you do, and in fact there's many of us who oppose the occupation including the settlements, support two viable and independent states, and are opposed to human rights violations against both Israelis and Palestinians, not just Israelis....

[Ken Burch]

41. Nobody who disagrees with you about Israeli secutiry policy and the Occupation

has ever made an argument even vaguely similar to the one you think you're satirizing. People who oppose the Occupation are not antisemites(and a lot of us aren't even anti-Zionist).

Please give this a rest.

Oh, and none of us has ever said "Israel Is The Devil", like that lame redneck character in the Adam Sandler movie. Furthermore, if you'd watched "Don't Mess With The Zohan", you'd know that Sandler is actually to your left on Israeli security issues(if he weren't, he would never have written a screenplay in which his character, a former Israeli commando, falls in love with a Palestinian woman).

Even Muttley's getting sick of your jive, Dastardly.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

36. Keeping quiet, because supporting the protesters will harm their cause.

If the protestors in Iran are seen as Western-backed, their support will evapourate.

There may well be covert things the West can do to aid them - and, for all I know to the contrary, the West may be doing them - but us speaking out in their support is the *last* thing they need.

[Ken Burch]

40. What Netanyahu would REALLY like would be heavy U.S. support of the protesters

because he knows it would lead to a massacre, which would then let him pretend that a massive IDF carpetbombing campaign(and the restoration of the Pahlevis, which is what Bibi wants more than anything)was then justified.

[LeftishBrit]

48. Exactly!

[shira]

50. what was the excuse last year with quiet regarding Russia (Georgia), Sri Lanka, etc?

how about Kosovo?

The world should not stay silent about Kosovo's missing
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=103376

[LeftishBrit]

55. There has not been 'quiet' on Sri Lanka...

Human rights organizations and even the UN have spoken very strongly on this. Also there was a lot of human rights campaigning on Russia/Georgia.

It is clear that action against violence and conflict has not been effective in lots and lots of places. It's also clear that anti-Israel exceptionalism exists - but I honestly feel that you sometimes take concern over *that* aspect to the point of ignoring the existence of campaigns and activities that *are* aimed at the various conflicts in the world, and which need all the support they can get.

For example, I'm taking the opportunity to mention the organization Peace Direct, which supports grassroots peace building activities in several parts of the world, including Sri Lanka, Congo and others:

www.peacedirect.org

I know people involved in this organization, and it seems to me like a great one

[shira]

56. compared to Israel, it's quiet, not saying demonstrations don't exist, but nowhere near the scale

and you HAVE to be joking about the UN on Sri Lanka.

UN rejects calls for Sri Lanka war crimes inquiry
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/28/sri-lanka-un-war-crimes-investigation

and then there's this in Europe...

The world should not stay silent about Kosovo's missing
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=103376

but maybe the author is misguided about that one too?

[shira]

62. hey, LB.......check out "Stop the War Coalition"

they're doing a bangup job condemning atrocities in Iran, aren't they?

[LeftishBrit]

64. The Stop the War Coalition has ONE purpose alone: to stop the war in Iraq

It was never intended as a general human rights/ pacifist organization. It is for one purpose alone. I have some ambivalent feelings about it, because like many single issue organizations it includes a few groups that are not generally progressive/ have other agendas - but I would never expect it to get involved in the Iran issue - or anything but Iraq.

Here are a few links to Iran-related campaigns, of which I'm aware (some from general human rights organizations; some specific to Iran) for anyone who is interested. I hope as many as possible are interested in some of these:

www.amnesty.org.au/action/action/21185/

www.amnesty.org.uk/iran/

www.rabble.ca/whatsup/amnesty-international-rally-iran

www.hrw.org/en/middle-east/n-africa

www.avaaz.org/en/for_the_people_of_iran

www.avaaz.org/en/iran_stop_the_crackdown/

www.standwithiran.com

www.solidaritywithiran.com

[shira]

67. they could still harshly condemn the atrocities there while advocating for no US or UK intervention

[IndianaGreen]

57. You should post this in the Sri Lanka forum

instead of using this as a strategy to deflect criticism of that gloriously shitty country in the Middle East that is always beyond reproach in that tiny universe of yours.

[shira]

58. the problem is deflecting criticism of Sri Lanka, Russia, Kosovo, etc....

in favor of going overboard and beyond against Israel.

not that you mind....since all other victims in other conflicts can go to hell, right?

ps
quite telling that you believe it's a shitty country.

Was Russia a shitty country for going ballistic last summer against Georgia?

[LeftishBrit]

65. To be blunt...

if you think that there is insufficient criticism of other countries compared with Israel, or that it's ineffective or too quite when it happens, why not post a bit more elsewhere, on forums or in campaigns where it could make a difference? Maybe you do already - in that case, could you give links to useful campaigns?

I honestly *don't* think that the main reason that there is insufficient action on these is that everyone is preoccupied with Israel. If there were a peaceful two-state solution tomorrow, or if the entire world suddenly loved Israel - there would STILL be insufficient or insufficiently effective action on Iran, or Sri Lanka, or Pakistan, or many African countries. There are many reasons: people are preoccupied mostly with what's close to home; the peace-campers are understandably MAINLY preoccupied with Iraq right now, as that has been made close to home; sometimes it's not clear what an effective action would be. And the UN can't be relied on for that much, as it's a loose and 'cliquey' political alliance.

The one positive sign is the invention of modern technology: perhaps Twitter and the like will eventually rank almost with the invention of the printing press as a means for political change by getting the word out.

I am worried about people I know who have relatives in Iran; it's not an abstraction for me. It's something that people should be SERIOUSLY concerned about and I want as much effective action as possible - but I don't think that concerns about Israel (positive or negative) are the main reasons for lack of action.

[shira]

69. okay

if you think that there is insufficient criticism of other countries compared with Israel, or that it's ineffective or too quite when it happens, why not post a bit more elsewhere, on forums or in campaigns where it could make a difference? Maybe you do already - in that case, could you give links to useful campaigns?

I only post here and my time is short....to be blunt, I find actively getting involved in good causes is better and more rewarding than being a keyboard commando.

I honestly *don't* think that the main reason that there is insufficient action on these is that everyone is preoccupied with Israel.

Me neither....I think most people don't care......many are anti-USA (and therefore anti-Israel) or they get their jollies bashing Israel and pretending that they 'care' for human rights.

[LeftishBrit]

70. OK; I'm not really implying that you're doing nothing, or telling you what to do.

I apologize if I sounded too personal or aggressive. Right at the moment, I'm pretty worried about the welfare of someone I know who's there; and I interpreted some of your remarks as using Iran as a pawn in a debate about Israel, rather than for its own sake. This was probably unfair, but my own emotions are running a bit high.

Anyone who does want to support any of the campaigns I posted links to, is very welcome to. If people are doing something more active about IRL, that's even better of course.

[IndianaGreen]

66. Georgia was the one that attacked South Ossetia, triggering a Russian response.

Don't tell me you are one of John McCain's "I'm a Georgian now?"

But then, you as a Uber-Zionist would also support Georgia, just as Israel did sending arms and military advisers in support of Georgia's war of aggression against the South Ossetians:

Up until now, this war was framed as a simple tale of Good Helpless Democratic Guy Georgia versus Bad Savage Fascist Guy Russia. In fact, it is far more complex than this, morally and historically. Then there are two concentric David and Goliath narratives here. The initial war pitted the Goliath Georgia--a nation of 4.4 million, with vastly superior numbers, equipment and training thanks to US and Israeli advisers--against David-Ossetia, with a population of between 50,000-70,000 and a local militia force that is barely battalion strength. Reports coming out of South Ossetia tell of Georgian rockets and artillery leveling every building in the capital city, Tskhinvali, and of Georgian troops lobbing grenades into bomb shelters and basements sheltering women and children. Although true casualty figures are hard to come by, reports that up to 2,000 Ossetians, mostly civilians, were killed are certainly believable, given the intensity of the initial Georgian bombardment, the wanton destruction of the city and surrounding regions and the generally savage nature of Caucasus warfare, a very personal game where old rules apply.

The War We Don't Know By Mark Ames

August 13, 2008

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080818/ames2

Israel also supported the apartheid government of South Africa as part of collaboration on developing nuclear weapons.

[shira]

68. you don't have a big problem with Russia's warcrimes against Georgians?

[Ken Burch]

42. We're being quiet because we don't want to get the Iranian democracy movement massacred

There's no antisemitic double standard here, and it's disgusting for you to imply otherwise.

Furthermore, events have proved that Operation Cast Lead did nothing to improve Israeli security.

[shira]

51. yeah sure, see post #50

[Ken Burch]

53. Israel has NEVER been criticized for its actions because it claims to be "Jewish"

Please stop repeating that canard already.

Every time you bring up the "they just hate the Jews" lie, you dishonor the real victims of antisemitism(none of whom has ever served in the Israeli cabinet). Antisemitism must be fought with equal energy as other hatreds are fought(and remember, all other forms of prejudice, including anti-Palestinian prejudice, are just as wrong as antisemitism) not through stealing other people's land. You can't treat antisemitism as if it's in a different class of hate from all other hates.

The way to defeat antisemitism is to defeat all hatred and all injustice. Taking Israel's side against the Palestinians does nothing whatsoever to stop antisemitism. The answer is justice and social transformation, not military occupations.

Israel is criticized for what other states get criticized for, and the left does criticize those other states.

And you can't blame us for what the UN does. We have no control over the UN.

[shira]

54. where are all the mass demonstrations regarding Russia, Sri Lanka, Kosovo, etc?

and more of your tax $$$ goes to the UN than Israel....but that's fine with you, right?

[shaayecanaan]

71. US funding of the UN's operating budget runs to about $1 billion a year...

US contributions to peacekeeping missions is about $1.5 billion a year. However, the US often withholds UN funding on one basis or another, and is currently about $1 bn in arrears.

Whether or not you include drawdowns, etc, US foriegn aid to Israel is between $2.4 bn and $3 bn each year. Obviously, this goes up when you include loan guarantees and direct loans, many of which were forgiven and therefore became grants.

Either way, US aid to Israel is clearly larger than its contributions to the UN.

[Ken Burch]

37. Indeed. Bombing Iran would be just as unconscionable as nuking the USSR would've been.

In both cases, we know for certain that only innocent bystanders would've been killed.