THE PAVILION ANNEX

General discussions of interest to readers and fans of Harlan Ellison.

Moderator: Moderator

diane bartels
Posts: 1255
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: CHICAGO IL

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby diane bartels » Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:39 pm

Frank, who the President? I can't afford a flight to Japan. And I don't think they would care what I said. You know that all is never gonna happen right and you just talking to talk right like when I say I want a Red Mercedes convertible and a career as a pop singer and oh lots of other talk. It just filling the air with sound right, and you don't care what we say back or how we say it or who we are or that I think Tim just called us all a bad name or anything. You just get the thrill of seeing your name up here when we reply right? It took me like a long time to finger this one out, but now that I get it it's like copacetic man. I can babble like a happy little brook all night and all day. Tomorrow I will try to apologize for the destruction of Atlantis. I had nothing to do with me and I don't know what friggen good it will do, but please believe I'm really really sorry. Geez.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:23 am

robochrist wrote:"Killing is bad".

Until I met YOU, Frank, I used to believe that!


*Ahem*

No.

Not going to accept that here.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Sat Nov 24, 2012 10:30 am

Diane, never worry, we are all sinners.

-----------

Mark, you keep digging a hole.

We should have intervened to stop Hitler in 1938, how about that! I am not against defense, but I do want to avoid civilian death as much as humanly possible.

The fire bombing of Tokyo and the bombing of Dresden pretty much proved we had a lustful killing heart. We even let off Germany when they did the same thing and used their scientists to help our economy.

During the Korean War we bombed dykes, drowning people, again, just for kicks.

User avatar
robochrist
Posts: 3426
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 1:30 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby robochrist » Sat Nov 24, 2012 11:39 am

Mark...are you digging a - a HOLE???

That's disgusting, man!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frank, a quick question if you have the ability to address it (God! Look who I'm asking!!!):

Your diatribes about racism and minizing casualities in wartime leaves out Japan's Yonsei and Nisei generations, who slaughtered 300,000 Chinese in 1937, and the committed atrocities on POW's during WWII (Bataan, Thailand, etc).

You've dug enough holes to make a war trench, so I suspect you'll add one here too.

Mark Tiedemann
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Mark Tiedemann » Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:54 pm

How exactly am I digging a hole?

If I have this right, then, you believe the United States should have interfered with Germany in 1938 but should have left Japan alone to pursue its expansionism? And because we did not leave them alone, and goaded them into attacking us, we should bear the blame for a crime in your eyes larger than, say, the rape of Nanking or any of the others mentioned here, but by doing nothing to Germany in 1938 it amounted to nothing more than self defense and so was okay?

This is why these debates end up in circles. I stated my position---war in toto is an immoral condition and to bandy morality within it is a parlor game. This is not to say that it is without merit, but there is no way in most cases to make a fair assessment.

The killing of civilians, unfortunately, is one of those subjects that, in terms of actual warfare, goes in and out of fashion. Yes, I think it is probably a bad idea all around. But then I think it is a bad idea for the civilians of a given country to support a war. How, then, do you make a separate case for them? (It can be done, I'm not saying it can't, but it is not the simple metric you seem to think it is.)

So...how deep of a hole am I in now?

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:41 pm

Rob, you mean the Japanese power structure, not the Japanese as a people. Powerful states use violence, that's a given. We targeted Japanese civilians for racial as well as power reasons.

This is my point about Israel--I don't say jews are violent, I say states are violent, no matter who runs them.

All states have awful histories, but it doesn't justify our state not being reigned in.

-----------

Mark, we target civilians, there's a difference. If you notice, as our technology improves, the ante of civilian deaths goes up.

We could use the Iran question to prop up this point: to stop their non existent nukes would we bomb their facilities for nukes, military bases or just carpet bomb Tehran? Using your logic we would always target the city first.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:11 pm

FrankChurch wrote:Mark, we target civilians, there's a difference. If you notice, as our technology improves, the ante of civilian deaths goes up.


Not sure why I bother, but you're absolutely inaccurate about this, Frank.

The reason civilians seem to be on the hit list is because your guys seem to like to hide behind civilian skirts while they lob rocket grenades. In reality -- ie, actual practice -- our military often puts itself in greater jeopardy because they are trying to avoid striking civilians. But when Gazan terrorists put their weapons in civilian apartments buildings and churches someone is bound to get hurt.

Of course, I realize your preference is for our troops to sit in a shooting gallery for terrorist target practice, but the training of a military force is to counterattack when fired upon. The terrorists know this, and squeal like pigs when the civilians they're hiding among are injured as a result of the terrorists' hiding places.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

Mark Tiedemann
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Mark Tiedemann » Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:56 pm

Stay on topic, Frank. We're not talking about what we may or may not be doing now, we're talking about WWII. I said:

If I have this right, then, you believe the United States should have interfered with Germany in 1938 but should have left Japan alone to pursue its expansionism? And because we did not leave them alone, and goaded them into attacking us, we should bear the blame for a crime in your eyes larger than, say, the rape of Nanking or any of the others mentioned here, but by doing nothing to Germany in 1938 it amounted to nothing more than self defense and so was okay?

And you provided some stuff about technology related to civilian deaths. I more or less agree with Barber's response to that, but you did not respond to my question.

WWII, Frank.

User avatar
robochrist
Posts: 3426
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 1:30 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby robochrist » Sat Nov 24, 2012 8:12 pm

Frank,

A culture's mind-set is largely shaped by its leaders. Why do you think, as I pointed out, that Japanese civilians committed mass suicide - taking their children right along with them - with one word from the emporer?

Frank, you're digging yourself in deeper and deeper!

Tim Raven
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 10:30 pm

Diane – I retract my previous statement…

Postby Tim Raven » Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:05 am

What I meant to say was that you are all SILLY cunts.

Kidding aside, I had Thursday off and an entire day of TV got my Irish up.

Especially the maudlin, execrable X-Factor…does every contestant on that show have to have some sort of horrific personal problem or family tragedy to make me more sympathetic toward voting for them? How about their supposed talent? Shouldn’t I vote for them due to that? Apparently not, because all of their success is due to THE LORD….

Anyway, my toe did cross the line, as they say in Bowling League…

C’mon, WWII arguments? Passionate arguments? Gleaned from sixty year old documents written by other people? Did any of us actually take part in that moment in time?

Frank, you are a bit of an attention queen….:)

Tim

Tim Raven
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 10:30 pm

....and Diane....

Postby Tim Raven » Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:10 am

I liked your latest poem. Keep filling that notebook!

Tim

Gwyneth M905
Posts: 1260
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:40 pm
Location: San Francisco, California

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Gwyneth M905 » Sun Nov 25, 2012 2:45 am

Barber wrote:The reason civilians seem to be on the hit list is because your guys seem to like to hide behind civilian skirts while they lob rocket grenades. In reality -- ie, actual practice -- our military often puts itself in greater jeopardy because they are trying to avoid striking civilians. But when Gazan terrorists put their weapons in civilian apartments buildings and churches someone is bound to get hurt.


Steven, as you know, normally I agree with you, but I must point something out. With more than a million and a half inhabitants squeezed into a hundred and forty square miles in Gaza, there just isn't a space to place weapons that isn't near civilian targets, AFAIK. Also, it is documented by the BBC that the Israelis were targeting media buildings, apartment blocks, and other civilian locations.

"The Dahiya doctrine refers to an Israeli "security" tactic to target and destroy civilian life so as to deter resistance. In the words of the 2009 Goldstone Report, the Dahiya doctrine involves "The application of disproportionate force and the causing of great damage and destruction to civilian property and infrastructure and suffering to civilian populations."

Lest anyone forgot this explicit policy of targeting civilian infrastructure, Israeli Interior Minister, Eli Yishai helpfully reiterated it on November 17: "The goal of the operation is to send Gaza back to the Middle Ages."[1]

"...there are many myths and stereotypes dominating mainstream media coverage, and many conversations.

Here are a few of the most common misunderstandings:

Myth: Hamas started the round of fighting that led to Israel’s “Operation Pillar of Defense.”

Fact: This myth represents a common error in mainstream – and even much progressive – media coverage. The “truth” all depends on when you start the timeline. What is clear is that while both Israel and resistance groups in Gaza bear responsibility for keeping the warfare going, Israel is more often the precipitator.

In an analysis that has received very little attention by Western audiences, Nancy Kanwisher (the Walter A. Rosenblith Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) asks, “As Israel and Palestine suffer a hideous new spasm of terror, misery and mayhem, it is important to ask how this situation came about…How did the (last) ceasefire unravel?”

President Barak Obama and the mainstream media in the United States and Israel place the blame squarely on Hamas. It is true that a barrage of Palestinian rockets have been fired into Israel, and that ending this rocket fire is the stated goal of the current Israeli invasion of Gaza. However, this simplistic summary leaves out crucial facts. Consider this chain of events , which followed a “lull” of sorts over the previous couple of weeks: (The details of what took place during these days vary somewhat from one media outlet to another. However, the broad strokes are the same.)

· Nov. 4: Israel killed a mentally ill Palestinian walking near the Israeli-imposed “no-go zone” inside the Gaza Strip -- an event that triggered a rocket from Gaza into southern Israel, which did not cause any deaths or injuries.

· Nov. 8: Four Israeli military tanks and a bulldozer entered Gaza, fatally shooting a 13-year-old boy who had been playing soccer by his family’s house.

· Nov. 10: In retaliation, two rockets were fired from Gaza into southern Israel, and an anti-tank missile injured four soldiers, when it hit an Israeli army jeep that had crossed over into the territory. Meanwhile, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights reported the killing of five more Palestinians, four of whom were civilians – including two soccer players age 16 and 17 and two young men (18 and 19) who ran to the scene. Forty-nine others were wounded, including 10 children.

· Nov. 11: Amid talks of a truce, six more Palestinians (all but one were civilians) were wounded and another was killed by both air strikes and troops on the ground.

· Nov. 12: With Israeli air strikes continuing, two rockets from Gaza hit Israel.

· Nov. 13: After two mid-afternoon air strikes, news services announced a truce had been agreed-upon.

· Nov. 14: Israel ignored the nascent truce and assassinated Hamas military chief Ahmad al-Jabari. (It is questionable whether Israeli officials ever really wanted a truce. As Phyllis Bennis from the Institute for Policy Studies wrote in The Nation: “Earlier this year, on the third anniversary of the Gaza assault of 2008/9, Israeli Army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz told Army Radio that Israel will need to attack Gaza again soon, to restore what he called its power of ‘deterrence.’ He said the assault must be ‘swift and painful,’ concluding, ‘we will act when the conditions are right.’ Perhaps this was his chosen moment.”)

A fact not known by most Americans, who see Jabari as merely a leader of “terrorists,” is that Israeli activist Gershon Baskin confirmed that Jabari was engaged in peace settlement negotiations with Israel. In fact, he was due to send Hamas’ version of a draft agreement to Baskin on the Wednesday evening before he was killed. It’s worth asking: Did Israel intend to torpedo those efforts? "

The rest of the story is tragic history. Jabari’s killing triggered Operation Pillar of Defense, and it continues to unfold.

“It is overwhelmingly Israel that kills first after a pause in the conflict,” writes Kanwisher, who analyzed the entire timeline of killings between Palestinians and Israelis from September 2000 to October 2008, to determine if there was a historical pattern. “Seventy-nine percent of all conflict pauses (during the study period) were interrupted when Israel killed a Palestinian, while only 8% were interrupted by Palestinian attacks (the remaining 13% were interrupted by both sides on the same day). In addition, we found that this pattern -- in which Israel is more likely than Palestine to kill first after a conflict pause -- becomes more pronounced for longer (ceasefires). Indeed, of the 25 periods of nonviolence lasting longer than a week, Israel unilaterally interrupted 24, or 96%, and it unilaterally interrupted 100% of the 14 periods of nonviolence lasting longer than nine days.”

One of the lessons from these data, she writes, is, “If Israel wants to reduce rocket fire from Gaza, it should cherish and preserve the peace when it starts to break out, not be the first to kill.”

Myth: Israel is killing militant “targets.”

Fact: The victims are humans, not “targets.” They have names, families, stories worth telling.

At the close of Nov. 19, Euro-Mid Observer for Human Rights reported that 110 Palestinians had been killed, including 25 children, 14 senior citizens and 12 women. Seventy-two percent were civilians, with no active involvement in the resistance. Another 891 Palestinians (including 277 children, 164 women and 62 seniors) had been wounded.

[In contrast, various Israeli sources report a total of 664 rockets from Gaza have hit southern Israel. Three Israeli civilians have been killed and a reported 10 civilians and four soldiers have been injured.]

In an iconic photograph circulated widely on the Internet, Jihad Misharawi, a BBC Arabic journalist who lives in Gaza, carries the body of his 11-month old son, Omar, through al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City. A round of Israeli missile fire hit Misharawi’s four-room home in Gaza, killing his son. Misharawi’s sister-in-law was also killed, and his brother wounded. He told his manager at BBC that when the missiles hit, there was no fighting in his residential neighborhood.

The killing of Misharawi’s son received so much attention because he works for a major Western news outlet, and his agony was captured so graphically on film. However, there are many other stories that are not being told. With one of the youngest populations in the world, over half of Gaza's 1.7 million residents are aged under 18.

In May, 2012 Salon columnist Glenn Greenwald observed: “Virtually every time the U.S. [or Israel] fires a missile and ends the lives of Muslims, American media outlets dutifully trumpet in headlines that the dead were ‘militants’ – even though those media outlets literally do not have the slightest idea of who was actually killed. They simply cite always-unnamed ‘officials’ claiming that the dead were ‘militants.’ It’s the most obvious and inexcusable form of rank propaganda: media outlets continuously propagating a vital claim without having the slightest idea if it’s true.”

In the words of one Gazan Palestinian, on Facebook: We are not numbers, we are humans! We have names, we have families, we have kids, we have emotions, we have feelings .... Every life has a story ... Just like you and just like any human being! We are not fucking news and death reports!! We are not Fucking Numbers!! We are HUMAN SOULS.

Myth: Israel protects civilians by airdropping leaflets warning residents of Gaza to avoid locations and individuals affiliated with Hamas.

Fact: In the last five days, Israel has bombed an estimated 1,643 sites in an area that is just 140 square miles – about twice the size of Washington DC. Hamas is the party that runs the local government. The question must be asked: Just where are the people supposed to hide?

Myth: Retaliation by Palestinians is either terrorism or just plain stupidity. The former is the common belief of advocates of Zionism, and the latter is a frequent concern (albeit not often expressed openly) among liberal supporters of Palestinian rights.

Fact: The right to self-defense (most often through “retaliation”) is enshrined in international law and was America’s own first response after it was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001. Why was it ethical for the U.S., but not for Palestinians?

As one young Gazan wrote on Facebook: “When you see your family killed by Israeli soldiers in front of your eyes and you see your house demolished in front of you, you feel so angry that you want to fight back. But once you fight back, you are called a terrorist and the aggressor becomes the victim who has the right of defense.”

Catherine Charratt, a PhD candidate in international politics at the UK’s Aberystwyth University, recently wrote:

According to the Geneva Conventions, a people under occupation have the legal right to resist their occupation; Article 1 (4) of Protocol 1 stresses that force may be used to pursue the right of self-determination.

(However,) according to Western news media, all resistance fighters in Palestine are illegitimate militants, while Israel -- as a Western-favored state -- is allowed to target and assassinate Hamas government and military officials... So, Palestinian military and political leaders can be legitimately targeted but they are not allowed to legitimately retaliate." [2]

There is also a gross mistreatment of civilians, with no attempt to allow outside medical aid, which to me points to Israel's violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention Rules:

Furthermore:

"Of course every civilian death on either side - not just Omar's - is tragic. The United Nations says its preliminary investigation shows that 103 of the 158 people killed in Gaza were civilians.

Of those, 30 were children - 12 of whom were under the age of 10. More than 1,000 people were injured.

The Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev said every non-combatant death or injury was tragic and an "operational failure".

In Israel, too, there were fatalities: four civilians and two soldiers. There were also many injuries. But the fact the Israeli Ambulance Service was also reporting those suffering from anxiety and bruises is an indication of the asymmetric nature of the conflict."[3] (italics mine)

The international community has good reason to rally around Gaza this time, I believe.

Sources:
[1]http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/11/20121124105710534138.html
[2]http://www.alternet.org/4-most-common-myths-about-israel-and-gaza-debunked?akid=9704.227861.gmt1kl&rd=1&src=newsletter748106&t=7&paging=off
[3]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20466027
I want to learn the ways of the Force and become a Jedi Knight, the same as my Father.
STAR WARS (1977)

Mark Tiedemann
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Mark Tiedemann » Sun Nov 25, 2012 8:42 am

Something a little less fraught with controversy (or maybe not): http://marktiedemann.com/wordpress/?p=1612

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Sun Nov 25, 2012 1:55 pm

Barber, a majority of their targets have nothing to do with Hamas. Gwyn is right about the size of the Gaza strip and the fact that the people cannot flee.

Hamas may be wrong by shooting off the rockets but they are being egged on by Israeli settlements and constant torture and harrassment.

What Hamas does is self defense, what Israel does is terror. If Israel is allowed to do violence so is Hamas.

Israel can stop this today by calling for a two state solution.

-----------

Mark, I plead ignorance on Japan. I know about the bomb but not much else. Haven't studied Japan.

Germany was manifesting world wide fascism, while Japan was another imperial, criminal state. Maybe not fucking with their trade waters would have chilled their violent urges.

-----------

Barber, question: why have civilian deaths gone up over the years, even though you say we avoid civilian deaths?

User avatar
robochrist
Posts: 3426
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 1:30 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby robochrist » Sun Nov 25, 2012 1:56 pm

I think Gwyneth did a good job there.

I am not solidifying an opinion on the Gaza situation because, always, my first reaction is condeming Hamas for the rockets knowing full well the result.

Yet, it also comes to my attention - from student from Israel - that the policies of the Israeli government over the years have inflicted MASS poverty on the residents of Gaza, mostly in response to the Hamas takeover; poverty is a consistent formula for disaster. People grow desperate, hateful, uneducated, and easy to manipulate by opportuitsts. Israel restricted the flow of people an goods ito and out of gaza and 70% - 70 goddam percent! - of Gaza's workforce is uemployed or without pay.

My understanding is that the majority of Israeli citizens oppose their own governments policies. They are too rigid. And it can be argued that, while I absolutely oppose Hamas' sending rockets over, few listen to the aforementioned outcries and the Muslim world therefore justifies their actions as, in their view, it may be the only way to GET the world to listen!

I really am sick of both sides.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests