I don’t often get many people writing on my blog. Most of the people who comment on what I write either comment of TRemeritus or the Facebook page of the Independent Singapore. However, in my piece “An Eye for an Eye Makes the Whole World Blind,” I received the following comment:
As with a lot of emotional comments, I think the chap
didn’t actually read my piece nor did he or she fully understand the meaning of
bias nor did he or she want to get what I was saying. At no time did I try to
excuse the October 7 attacks on Israel. I was quite clear that the actions went
above any moral call of “resistance.” I was also quite clear that I accept that
Israel has a right to defend itself and to go after the perpetrators.
What I do take issue with, is the response. Yes,
killing 1,400 people is awful. However, responding by killing 9,061 people in
response is not the answer either – unless you want to believe that the life of
an Eastern European decent practicing the Jewish faith is worth far more than
that of a Semite practicing the faith of Islam. Just as the actions of Hamas
cannot be justified in the name of resistance, the bombardment of the Gaza
strip cannot be justified in the name of “self-defense.”
Leaving aside the morality of trying to out kill each
other, there’s also the practicality of things. If you look at the situation,
it’s clear that the latest round of violence is going to continue and never
stop. Israel will not be secure and the HR department will have a never-ending
supply of recruits. The message that Hamas’s HR department is simple – “there’s
no point making peace with the people who bombard you and starve you,” and when
you make that the reality on the ground, a people with no hope will bite.
Arguing that “we gave them land in 1948 but they said
no,” is not a viable excuse to take more of what little they already have. Sure,
it might seem like a mistake on the part of the Palestinians not to have
accepted the offer in 1948, however, let’s not forget that when the late Saudi
King Abdullah proposed Israel withdraw to its 1967 borders in return for diplomatic
recognition by all 22 members of the Arab League, the then Prime Minister, Ehud
Olmert gave him the proverbial middle finger.
https://alianzaporlasolidaridad.org/voluntariado/palestinians/
Israel is a miracle in so many ways. However, keeping
the Palestinian population hemmed up is only creating a powder keg that will
keep things uncertain and dangerous. Again, let’s look at the American response
to September 11, 2001. America invaded Afghanistan and two-decade latter and 20
trillion dollars later, the Taliban are back in charge. They also invaded Iraq,
which gave is ISIS, the people who would make Saddam look like a Teddy Bear.
So, if I am biased for saying that the response to
October 7 is going to make the problem worse, what does that make the people
who created a response that was worse than the original problem?
1 comment
I am not an Israeli or a Christian Zionist. I read your piece and still consider you are biased.
Post a Comment