ben wulff says:
March 6, 2010 at 8:56 AM
hey guys.
wow, just read in todays newspaper, they’ arrested 2 Palestinian guys in Dubai for the murder of that mean Maboud person! my Gawd…..isn’t that awsome!!!!!!! jews and palestinians working together. imagine, murderous mossad (that’s an illiteration, feel free to use it), and murderous palestinians, murdering other murdering palastinian guys. thats so kewl!!! who said that jews and palestinians cant cooperate together? evn Imadinnerjacket in Iran will be impressed by that!

LMFAO! That made me sneeze out the milk from my cheerios. I thought people like you were just made up on TV. That’s some funny shit dude!

tamingkorach.c...

P.S. to Jerry: Yes my name is more “Jewish” than yours (JW)! How about having the integrity to reveal yourself?

It’s so childish how you and others hurl abuse at those you don’t agree with. How about less personal abuse and more substance in what you say?

But I can’t understand anyone who says it’s immoral to take out a murdering terrorist scumbag like al-Mabhouh.

Illegal, maybe. Ill advised, perhaps. But immoral? Absolutely not.

And anyone who says that this makes it OK for somebody to cap Barak in DC or wherever doesn’t have two brain cells to rub together. In case anybody forgot, it’s Hamas who is out to murder any Jew it can get its hands on. That makes them fair game.

I think this was a stupid hit and a botched one. I have no idea whether it was necessary, though, so I can’t condemn it outright. Of course it’s idiotic to do this and to do it this way. How many posts must I write criticizing the IDF or the Israeli government before it becomes clear that I don’t think that Israel has the leadership it needs. However, that wasn’t the issue. We were talking about morality of this type of action and whether I think these types of actions should take place.

Let’s unload my personal baggage, shall we? Why am I bent out of shape about moserim? Because moser means traitor. And nearly every Israeli I know and admire personally is a human rights activist, lawyer or NGO employee. I am also employed in this field. Not because we hate Israel, but because Israel should be more awesome than it is presently. Which is sometimes lotsa awesome and sometimes lotsa poo. So recently when a bunch of right-wingers ran a national campaign that portrayed my people as traitors, that stings. We — the Israeli human rights community and extended Jewish friends abroad — do that work you describe as Merisa. Which could get any one of us killed, because Yigal Amir has friends.

So I’m doing a poor job of keeping my cool, because this post was already tasteless and juvenile without pointing fingers at who is and isn’t a traitor to Jewishness/Israel.

You are something of a public intellectual. It behooves you to behave like an adult, consider the weight of your words, and connect the dots. Casting about for Jewish traitors is a big, big deal. If you didn’t think twice before now, then you heard it here first.

Don’t forget me. I’m celebrating too. And I agree with Tori. Besides, I don’t believe in the whole “cycle of violence” myth. It’s on par with Utopia, World Peace, and Global Warming: all liberal dreams that never will happen.

The Jews having been persecuted, hated, marginalized and murdered for centuries, have every right to tell the world: leave us alone in our own state, let us handle our own security, and piss off. That’s emotionally satisfying and entirely justifiable morally. But there’s a problem. It doesn’t work. Every country must act with what our founders called a decent respect for the opinions of mankind. Even the world’s hyperpower– look at how McCain and Obama both called for the closing of Guantanamo.

To respect world opinion means, from time to time, to be constrained by it. Haven’t we learned this lesson in America in the most painful way these last years?

As Jerry points out, Israel is quick to defend killing Hamas fighters in Gaza. Killing Hamas fighters in Gaza– stay with me now– is not the same as stealing the identities of citizens of several European countries, procuring or faking British, French, and Irish passports, and (alas) getting spotted on the way out in a manner that may result in future arrest and prosecution.

The government and people of Ireland may have an issue, as it were, with Israel faking Irish involvement with a military operation targeting non-state terrorist actors in that cesspool of hatred and violence, the Middle East..

If this was a smashing success, what would failure look like?

Now, the macho response is not to give a fuck about Irish opinion, or resort to the kinds of defensive moral arguments that Middle so often purveys (which seem to amount to little more than the ends justify the means).

But here we go again, Middle, with an event that may cause enormous harm to Israel, that could put Goldstone and the damage he caused in the shade.

Do you agree?

So again, not a moser, not a traitor. Just a douchebag. How do the Geneva conventions relate exactly to this case? And when on earth did I ever call you or anyone a traitor? Why do you all insist on projecting the idiotic ideas of right-wing lunatics onto me? This operation, assuming it was a Mossad job, brings up serious questions. Are such extra judicial assassinations effective for instance? Did the Mossad use the identities of Israeli citizens and was that such a good idea? Silverstein’s approach was just so venomous and hateful, I had to clean the bile off of my screen.

Just so you know, I never visit Silverstein’s shithole of a blog unless someone sends me a link and insists I comment. OK I got a Festival to continue to start to run. Westboro Baptist is on their way…

If it is permissable under the laws of war to take out a Hamas operative in Dubai because he has directed operations in which civilians were killed in the past, and because he is involved in arms acquisition in the present, it is permissible to take out Ehud Barak when he visits the US for the same reason.

From a moral standpoint, yes. If Barak is in an official capacity of supporting a war effort, why shouldn’t he be a target? The law might not agree with this assessment, but I don’t understand why it’s immoral to stop a person who is your enemy while he is procuring weapons? Besides, it is entirely hypocritical of leaders of states and non-states to claim immunity from the very wars they inflict on their populations and armies.

More to the point: how would you react if Russian agents shot a Chechen “terrorist” leader to death in a Washington hotel? Or if the Chinese killed the Dalai Lama on his visit to Washington? China having been victim of centuries of invasion and colonialist exploitation by the West, I suppose that would be just fine by you. Or at least, no one in this part of the world would have standing to complain.

I don’t know whether I should laugh or cry that someone is finally comparing Israel to these two countries since their crimes are far more severe than Israel’s just as their impunity is so much greater. Certainly, the absence of criticism that we see from so many Leftist groups that have no problem directing severe criticism at Israel is absent when it comes to these two states.

So, in answer to your question, I don’t place these countries on the same plane as Israel. Israel is far more moral and always has been. Israel is also involved in an existential war that has the other side targeting its civilians for almost a century. China is not in the same category and neither is Russia.

However, I would understand, after some of the Chechen terror attacks we’ve seen, why a Russian hit squad would seek to take out a terror leader (no quotes, as unbelievably brutal as the Russians were to the Chechnyans, there is still no justification for the attacks on Russian civilians) even in Washington, DC. I would expect the killers to be charged and tried in the US for murder if they are caught, and to lose in court. As to their right and necessity to do it? I think they would be morally in the right to kill that terror leader if it saves the lives of Russian civilians. I’m not talking about a cynical murder like the one they committed in England with the radiation pill, I’m talking about a situation where a person is personally involved in providing the tools for attacks against Russian civilians and is known to be involved in further planning and acquisition. Absolutely, get him and kill him before many of your people are killed. This is war.

The problem everybody is facing is one where states are trying to fight non-state entities. These groups are fighting a war wearing civilian garb and utilizing their status as non-soldiers in non-armies for non-states to play around with international law that was constructed around warring high contracting authorities. The problem is that the critics of these forms of action, such as the assassination in Dubai, refuse to acknowledge that the laws we have in place do not account for this type of war. Listen to Goldstone in the clip above. It’s a good thing he doesn’t have to decide how to defend Israel, because he doesn’t know how to do it while abiding by his interpretations of international law. Does he really think Israel hadn’t tried to use commandos to stem the attacks from Gaza? Does he really think it’s possible to fight a war where the enemy wears civilian clothing and uses civilians as shields while attacking your civilians? Well, he does think that, but when asked how one could fight that sort of war, he spouts nonsense because there isn’t a solution if one sticks to his interpretations.

“But we can’t have a legal regime in which one state sends hit squads into hotels in the capital of another state to take out its enemies.”

And “we can’t have a legal regime” fight Hamas using normal military procedures, CURRENTLY EMPLOYED BY VARIOUS WESTERN NATIONS, because you will endanger the civilians…

And “we can’t have a legal regime” arresting Hamas terrorists because other Western media headlines will scream that Israel kidnapped innocent militants “resisiting occupation which is in their right according to Int’l law.”

And basically “we can’t have a legal regime” called Israel that is allowed to defend and protect itself.

This is really where this conversation is going, isn’t it?

If we take everything into consideration, this operation was an absolute success:

1) A high level Hamas terrorist was killed.

2) There were no drones dropped from the sky killing scores of civilians (Hello US or British army in Iraq or Afghanistan + Yemen) or car bombs killing innocent passerbys (hello Arab countries).

3) The team made it out safely and their identities were not compromised in any way.

4) Dubai has been outed as a meeting place in the Middle East for terrorists, as opposed to the false image of a ME Disneyland that we often see. The media is ignoring this aspect of the story but I expect in the future we will see more about it.

I am by NO means defending that guy, but this is just a stupid, stupid statement. Is Bernard Lewis NOT an expert on Islam because he is not a Muslim??

Quite simply, one does not have to be Orthodox to have an understanding of Jewish law.

What’s the difference?

During a state of hostilities (war, etc.) between two parties, each side can kill soldiers who are actively engaged, at the time they are killed in directing or planning such operations. Soldiers who are not taking part in the war effort are immune — which is why the Hamas bombing of the Beit Lid soldier stop during the 1990s, which killed mostly soldiers, was a war crime, even if there had been active war going on, and although the targets were soldiers.

All that has to do when there is a war and when there is a theater of operation. If it is permissable under the laws of war to take out a Hamas operative in Dubai because he has directed operations in which civilians were killed in the past, and because he is involved in arms acquisition in the present, it is permissible to take out Ehud Barak when he visits the US for the same reason. The point of laws of war are precisely to avoid the sort of killing that LB Chasid in LA celebrates.

“Yeah, but we are the good guys and they are the bad guys.”

(To be said by the Palestinians and the Israelis, respectively.)

And by the way, when you are casting the movie in LA, Lb Chasid, don’t forget to cast the Jewish babies who will be blown up in the Hamas reprisals for the “super awesome” assassination.

Anyway, I guess you don’t want to pony up $100, but the following should be of some interest to you. Listen to Goldstone respond to the question of how Israel should have fought against Hamas at around 1:53:40 of the following video.

youtube.com/wa...

Goldstone talks about what would be a potentially a proportionate response to the Hamas attacks. He mentions targeted commando attacks. In other words, targeted killings, since there is no other way to understand commando reprisals in the context of a response to rocket attacks. Is that different than attacking an enemy warrior with a hit team while he is on a mission to acquire more weapons?

“Who is a moser? Not Silverstein. Nope.” = “Silverstein is a moser.” I might need to go back to Sunday School, but I don’t want to, because I’m going to find Abitbol never left the playground. Did you just wink at your audience? “Hyuk, I’m not sayin’, I’m just saying…”

Look, disagree with people about their values. Silverstein doesn’t believe in extrajudicial assassinations, so what? He’s a traitor now? Lots of us care that Israel obeys all international laws. All of them. I’m sorry you think that makes us traitors. This theme comes up in all the left/right conversations it seems. To me, Israel is treaty to the Geneva Conventions and that obligation is upheld again and again in the Israeli Supreme Court. But I’m a traitor for agreeing? This particular thought of yours isn’t well thought out, and perhaps you’re not aware of how calling out Silverstein on this particular topic smacks the rest of us too.

Either way, how old are you? 47? You’re just a few years behind Silverstein in age, so I can’t say pot and kettle come out of this looking good.