A true Israeli doesn't evade

DOESN'T EVADE?!!!

Dayaamm!

This almost sounds like Randroid-speak straight out of ARI-land. Here is the article on the reason for the above statement:

Draft-Dodging Israeli Youth Trigger Campaign to Shame Evaders
By Gwen Ackerman
March 17, 2008
Bloomberg

From the article:


Here is the commercial (in English and Hebrew) on YouTube:



There it is in all its glory: the Original Sin of Objectivism.

As if evading was Israel's main headache...

Michael

A few tovs and todas as the chai is passed was all the Hebrew I could pick up, but, Michael, the link you showed was about NOT EVADING THE TRUTH. It was for "a civil society." The one girl said she was an NCO until two of her soldiers committed suicide, then she got a medical out. The one guy would not go in because his family cannot afford books for his brother -- "the state does not give a shit about his family," the girl explains. The first guy said he was in Hebron (Palestine) and got out after he saw how they (the Israeli army) treated people there.

This is the orginal commercial about not evading the DRAFT (which is apparently a problem...):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0_M-2WO7pI

Michael, from the Bloomberg story you linked to --
On the one hand:

On the other hand:


Let's see... how can we turn those enemies into friends.... hmmmm... is there anything we can sell them (aside from their own land back...) I mean, we're all capitalists here but I found it telling that the pro-draft messages were underwritten by the manufacturer's association. Also, lest this get complicated, note that "ultra-orthodox" Jews in seminaries are excempt and myself, I would expect them to be out there on the front lines since they were the ones who caused all this in the first place. But, hey, don't ask a gentile, we have plenty of God's Chosen People right here on OL, maybe one the the Elect can parse this for us.

The Bloomberg article has bad links. This is the pro-war shaming ad: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R0_M-2WO7pI (not linked to in the article), this is the truthful antiwar ad, which MSK linked to: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=GwTebMJtJPI

There is a tradition of dodging the draft, leaving the army or petitioning the Government, to combat human rights abuses amongst Israelis. The first big one was Peace Now which gained momentum after Israel's Vietnam and then in the Shaking Off. Other smaller movements exist, such as ones adhering to Zionism's non-Imperialist and anti-Racist aspects

God I am so damned political about this.

Anyway the fact is that Israeli youth are aware of the Israeli Right's campaign to control all of the "Land of Israel" or "Judea and Samaria" in the name of Race or God and are not willing to fight for it. Israel has proven, repeatedly and clearly, that "anti terrorism" is often an excuse for territorial expansion and imperialism (Christian Lebanon backed by Zionist Might, for example) so it is right to be skeptical, especially when called for duties like the defense of Jewish Hebron (now fortunately undergoing deconstruction).

Ironically, despite recent depressing immigration stats, Israel is finally letting go of its possessions in the Territories as Hamas mounts continuing attacks. Still Israel's policies of "creating facts" are coming to an end now that the PA has teeth, which they use, to eat themselves....

So they ought to be joining...

Sigh.

And in the end you just wonder why you care.



Edit: Someone beat to pointing out the link, oh well.

"God I am so damned political about this." Hmmmm....

And since some have opined that politics is the art of the possible, why the emotional energy about being politcal. We are all "polis".

Adam

OK... Look, Israel has opposition parties, three minor parties, BALAD, HADASH and The United Arab List, that all advocate for Arab rights within the Jewish state. These are anti-Zionist parties. I think that UAL is the oldest and is the one that has had women in the Knesset. So, OK, now, go to Syria or Jordan or Egypt or Saudi Arabia and show me an Anti-Islamist Pro-Jewish party with women parliamentarians.

It is pretty easy to see that when push comes to shove -- and pushing and shoving has been going on in Jericho since before recorded history -- that Israel has a strong democracy and the other nations do not.

That said... How strong does that democracy need to be in order to justify the invasion of Palestine? "We are better than you, so we can take everything you have," sort of begs some deeper questions.

If the Europeans felt so guilty about the holocaust, why did they not create a Jewish state in Europe? Like, out of Austria? Was it necessary to create a Jewish State in Palestine? Could not the individuals who just happened to be Jewish just moved in bought their lands and homes and just settled in among the indigenous people and let Palestine be Palestine? Jews could have moved from Europe all over the old Levant and become significant minorities just as in days of old... but the Stockholm Syndrome explains why the Jews imitated their tormentors and in turn found someone underdoggier to kick... Maybe the Palestinians should all pack up and go to the Antarctic and oppress penguins....

There is another, similar kind of argument used by Objectivists and other Westerners which privileges technology in the same way. Churchill said about Palestine that the greater crime would be to have the land and not develop it. As if being a better driver lets you kill your neighbor and take his car.



2 Reasons, first the Jews were well on their way to controlling Palestine with a separate Jewish economy, culture, military and immigrants who wanted a nation, second ... um ... white racists maybe?



The land purchases were the problem. Someday I'm writing an paper for a class tracing the entire conflict to the Tanzimat's property reforms, my case will be strong. Traditionally land was held communally (Oh NOEZ!!! - sayeth the Randroid) and no one person owned the farms or village, enter the Ottomans and a set of literate landlords in Beirut, Baghdad, Cairo and Istanbul now own them. When the jews bought an area (at "exorbitant prices" goes the refrain) the villagers were not consulted, the jews arrived, presented a dead with the force of law, and a massive population of unemployed and angry peasants emerged. It was not legally possible to ethically buy the land.

As for a State, one half Arab, one half Jew, one half tied to the West, the other to Arabia, one Secular one Religious, one Agricultural one Industrial....

Those conditions are worse than those that brought on the Civil War.

If it could have happened it would have required the elimination of Revisionism and, more importantly, a far less elitist attitude of the Socialists towards the arabs. Herzl had a point with his ideas of gaining the love and trust of arabs with jewish gold and brains but the Jews were to Modern and Colonial in spirit, the Arabs to tribal (literally, not as in "evil").

Michael,

That was precisely my point. It sounds like Randroid-speak, although Objectivists usually just say "evading."

I wonder how far Rand's works have penetrated into Israel. Yaron Brook is Israeli, but that is just an indication for speculation. It doesn't necessarily prove anything.

Michael

Michael,

It was necessary to create a Jewish state somewhere. It was Jewish people who were being exterminated for being Jewish. They needed a safe haven where they could be Jewish and human at the same time.


They did that in country after country and look what that got them. They needed a place that was specifically Jewish.

I personally think planting themselves in the middle of Nazi leftovers among Arabs was pretty stupid, especially at the time they did it, but there it is. I think it was time for "New World" kind of thinking, like the people who left Europe during the colonial period, but the Jews preferred tradition. South America or some place like that would have been a far better choice for a safe haven. But they think the geographic location is magic. Then again, so do the Palestinians.

They fight bitterly over magic...

Michael

Facing the draft here, back during the Vietnam fiasco, I had 3 options.
Succumb to the slave labor that was the Army.
Succumb to the slave labor of the Federal Penitentiary.
Flee to Canada.

I choose the Army, and although I was fortunate enough not to be sent to Nam, lost 2 of the best years of my life.

No sympathy here from me. I could tell a similar tell. It is not the time in the army necessarily, it is the years previous that are distorted by the specter of National Service. Regardless, make lemonade out of your lemons. In America you can. Get over it.

--Brant

Well, cannot a Jewish person be both Jewish and Human in a secular, classical liberal state that respects and protects the individual rights of members of the Jewish community? Why is a specifically "Jewish State" needed when all you really need is a state that respects individual rights?



How can a place be Jewish? Is not "Jewish" applicable only to a specific people and their culture?



So we know that their choice of location is irrational. Why then does America have to subsidize them? Really, its time the US simply stopped propping up Israel. It may be an improvement over all of the other countries in the middle east, it may be a relatively secular and relatively liberal state, but being freer than Iran is not exactly an achievement.

So someone should just "get over" a heinous act of temporary enslavement?

Studiodekadent,

In an ideal world, your comments make sense. We don't live in an ideal world, however. Hatred against Jews is a reality, along with the attempts at genocide. If I were a Jew, I would want a Jewish country just to be sure I had a place to run to when things got out of hand where I was living. It has just happened too many times to ignore. After you have been persecuted as violently as they have, you begin to realize that the haters really do want to kill you. Dead.

As far as place goes, any dictionary will tell you that a word has more than one definitoin. I was using place in the sense of country. When I said place to go to, I meant country to go to that would have different rules and laws. A country can be Jewish by including such a condition in the constitution or charter documents.

I agree that our foreign policy needs a serious overhaul. I do not know enough yet to say what that overhaul should be. There are too many hidden interests.

Michael

Michael,

I have seen you say this many times. And n my time (which has been short) I have not seen any such level of hatred of Jews in the Religious sense, though I have seen great hatred for the state of Israel and for Zionism. And furthermore, since 1948 the Jews have had Israel, the problem is that the Zionist continue to expand it, by displacing and killing another ethnic group. The Israelis are doing the same thing to the Palestinians that the Europeans did to the Native Americans in this country. I we do not learn from the past we are failed to repeat it. If the Israelis continue down the path they have chosen they will eventually wipe out the Palestinians, and when they do it will be genocide.

The Jewish state was already built in Palestine before WW2 ended. Most White counties refused to allow Jews into their country. Palestine was an ideal location for British interests as it was a point from which to control the Suez and a springboard for White imperialism generally.

Jews being in Palestine was the only way 1945-1948 was going to go down.

Dustan,

I don't know about the religious sense. I only care about the killing/extermination sense on this issue for now. I intend to do a fuller study of Judaism (and Islam, for that matter) to get a feel of the religious sense. From what I have read, there is a lot of wisdom in both religions that is rarely discussed when discussing the conflict. I normally see people throw away or belittle the wisdom because it belongs to the other side.

I was not addressing the issue of what Israelis are doing to Palestinians, anyway. I was answering a question about why a Jewish state came into being. Why Jewish? It is pretty obvious to me. People try to kill you because you belong to a group by birth. So you band together to protect yourself in group. Surely Nazi Germany would have been enough to convince anyone except the Holocaust deniers that genocide was being attempted.

I have documented pretty extensively (within the context of a philosophy forum) the leftovers from Nazism that exist today in the modern world, especially in the area surrounding Israel and among Islamists. There are plenty of links to all kinds of information. If you want to see hatred, there's plenty of hatred of Jews for you right there. Watch the TV commercials from the Middle East. Read the newspapers. See productions like wildly popular miniseries on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion that was even aired in softer countries like Egypt. It's all there in public for everyone to see, just as easy as, say, the anti-Muslim racism rampant on the SOLOP board.

I am against ALL racism. Racism sucks.

But I am not against a racial/ideological group forming and settling somewhere and developing protective measures because all the individuals in that group were formally targeted for extermination for being a member, either by choice, birth or association.

Speaking out against suicide bombers and anti-Semitism does not mean I endorse Zionist expansionism or genocide against Palestinians (if that is really going on, which I don't see). Speaking against Israeli excesses (which are many) does not mean I am against the country of Israel or am anti-Semitic.

It is hard to speak from my position. Even the most obvious observation in the world, say, people don't like it when you try to exterminate them, gets twisted into propaganda for one side or the other. I hold that NOBODY likes it when you try to exterminate them. They get mad.



Michael

That's absolutely true. Mark Tessler wrote that when discussing the conflict it usually turns into finding one's virtue exclusively by not sharing the vices of the fantastic "Other". Which is a great way to look at the world, when the other group has no virtue or capacity to reason its easier to talk about wiping out the "Other" with the associated psychological and economic benefits. Must often these people have made no attempt to understand the "Other". I spoke to some Muslims (to just take an example) a while back and asked "Do you know why the Jews are there?" "Sure, they wanted our Land." "Do you know why?" "Yah, they're Evil!"

As for studying Judaism and Islam for an understanding of the conflict you'd be better served studying Zionism, Judaism in itself would be largely useless until the Orthodox colonials ramped up in the 70s -90s and even then required the support of other Zionist groups.

I have a very simple approach:

Eem yavoh l'hargecha hashkeem l'hargo.

If he comes to kill you, rise up early and slay him first. Sanhedrin 72A, Babylonian Talmud.

The Babylonian Talmud is one of the world's oldest survival guides. Its validity has been well proven by the fact that there are still Jews around in spite of vigorous efforts to the contrary. All the talk talk and jaw jaw about morality is hot air. When they come for you, either kill or be killed. Or run like hell or hide.

Eventually the Israelis will realize what they must do in order to survive. When they do, it will not be pretty, but it will be Necessary. And the world will curse the Jews for having the gall to survive. How dare they!

Ba'al Chatzaf

deleted.

Brant,
My intent was not to solicit sympathy, far from it. Just stating facts.

"If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; And if he is thirsty, give him water to drink"
-- Provervbs 25:21

You cannot deny the overwhelming success of Christ's Mission.

For that matter, Buddhist priests developed KARATE in order to defend themelves without hurting others (more than necessary). Buddhism survives. Confucius taught filial piety. Confucian philosophy endures.

The point is not to validate those mystic, altruist philosophies, but only to show that the definition of "practical" depends on what it is one wishes to practice. There are many roads. The one you choose will be the one you put yourself on. If you choose a life of reason, productivity, ethical self-interest and affirmation of achievement, then that is the life you will live. If you choose something else, then that is the life you will have.

My question to you, Robert Kolker: Have you ever taken a human life?
You talk like someone who wants to kill, but who never has.
Perhaps I am wrong.
If so, I apologize, deeply.

Michael

Once directly, by accident. Unintentional and most regrettable.

Indirectly several thousand. I help to design the guidance system for our cruise missiles (pre GPS version).

I have many scalps on my belt, enemy scalps. I also participated in the design of nuclear warheads. They have yet to be used.

I wanted to enlist as a warrior but health conditions intervened (chronic bronchial asthma). If I could not slay enemies with my own hands, I helped to build weapons for the real warriors. One does what one can. If one cannot be an archer, one can make arrows and bows for the archers.

I have no compunction or scruples about slaying the enemies of my family or my countrymen. Whatever it takes.

And screw that turn the other cheek shit. If thine enemy smite thee on thy cheek, tear his head off and shit down his neck.

Ba'al Chatzaf

I can and I do. Christianity has been a disaster. It kept Europe filthy and ignorant for hundreds of years.

It has been the pretext for rape, plunder, tyranny and murder. If Christianity is a success, I would ask what is it a success at?

Europe made it through the dark ages and into the enlightenment in spite of Christianity, not because of it. The secular way has been the path to our prosperity.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Baal reminds me too much of one of my favorite films. The guy fighting is a Jew -

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=DVkQk9n3Q_I&feature=inbox
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=aAENkoLBqB8&...feature=related
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRUjy1Dhx-k&...feature=related

Right, but that is not what we are talking about here, Robert. You cited the so-called "Babylonian Talmud" one of three such versions that were laid down after the failure of the Bar Kochbar Revolts so that the oral traditions would not be lost. These "holy books" are no more (or less) valid than the books of the Buddhists or Jain or Druse. These "Talmuds" actually are YOUNGER than the oldest known Christian manuscripts. So, your citation of them is flawed on several grounds. They are not millennia-old wisdom of the ancients, but just another set of quips and quotes as best as some people could remember them... which is pretty much what all such "holy books" are.

As for the success of this or that mystical doctrine, my point -- which you are too intelligent to have missed and are only evading -- is that a billion people believe this or that and a few hundred millions believe something else. They are all
"successful." The first security firm I worked for was AKAL, owned by Sikhs, warriors all in their own minds, very serious about security and an honor to work for... and yet another mystical creed with a few million followers. To cite the "Bablylonian" Talmud is no more (or less) valid that to cite the Guru Granth Sahib, the Sikh holy book called the "Eleventh Guru" because it contains the summary wisdom of the previous ten gurus.

Again, in terms of evasion, the Dark Ages ran about 500 or 600 years and if you study the history of CHINA or INDIA you will see that such eclipses are pretty much part of the cycle of human history. Rise of the New ... a Golden Era... Decline... Ignorance and superstiition are never in short supply anywhere. When I think of the Dark Ages (so-called), I include the demise of legal slavery, the creation of contractual society, and one of everyone's favorite Popes, Sylvester II, Gerbert of Aurillac, who brought ARISTOTLE and MATHEMATICS to the West from his time among the MUSLIMS of Spain. Five hundred years is a long time in the history of a continent... There are always high and low points, heroes and villians ... I have a book at my bedside now, a sympathetic fictional biography of The Sheriff of Nottingham ...

I stiipulate to the superiority of secular culture, Robert, but the Babylonian Talmud is outside that tradition because it is only a recent transcription of some people's memories of what other people said about religion... which is why some people here think you sound a lot like Daniel in The Believer...

MSK:

~ I understand, via a Mar-21-08 'PM,' that Ba'al has been 'blocked' (moderated? banned?) from posting. I tried responding/questioning him via 'PM' but, I still have my own msg'ing probs (dumb firewall or whatever.) --- He can be obnoxiously exasperating sometimes, but, have I missed some unequivocably unacceptable posts somewhere?

~ However 'bad' he may sometimes get, he has not surpassed *you* in-a-bad-mood when you get EMOTIONALLY going on 'kids' (think RoR and your child-in-the-woods concern), you know?

~ Albeit, any accusations of 'racist' are showing some self-creating...dumbness.

LLAP
J:D