The real reason Israel is attacking Gaza

What is the real reason?  Is it Israel’s right to defend themselves that causes them to kill 400 Gazans and wreak havoc on Palestine?  Jennifer Lowenstein has delineated the real underlying reason for this aggression and this should be apparent to the serious observer of history in the region since the inception of the Israeli state in 1948 and the history which led up to that point.  She says:

The answer is because Israel has no intention of allowing a viable, sovereign Palestinian state on its borders. It had no intention of allowing it in 1948 when it grabbed 24% more land than what it was allotted legally, if unfairly, by UN Resolution 181. It had no intention of allowing it throughout the massacres and ploys of the 1950s. It had no intention of allowing two states when it conquered the remaining 22% of historic Palestine in 1967 and reinterpreted UN Security Council Resolution 248 to its own liking despite the overwhelming international consensus stating that Israel would receive full international recognition within secure and recognized borders if it withdrew from the lands it had only recently occupied.

It had no intention of acknowledging Palestinian national rights at the United Nations in 1974, when –alone with the United States—it voted against a two-state solution. It had no intention of allowing a comprehensive peace settlement when Egypt stood ready to deliver but received, and obediently accepted, a separate peace exclusive of the rights of Palestinians and the remaining peoples of the region. It had no intention of working toward a just two state solution in 1978 or 1982 when it invaded, fire-bombed, blasted and bulldozed Beirut so that it might annex the West Bank without hassle. It had no intention of granting a Palestinian state in 1987 when the first Intifada spread across occupied Palestine, into the Diaspora and the into the spirits of the global dispossessed, or when Israel deliberately aided the newly formed Hamas movement so that it might undermine the strength of the more secular-nationalist factions.

 Israel had no intention of granting a Palestinian state at Madrid or at Oslo where the PLO was superseded by the quivering, quisling Palestinian Authority too many of whose cronies grasped at the wealth and prestige it gave them at the expense of their own kin. As Israel beamed into the world’s satellites and microphones its desire for peace and a two-state solution, it more than doubled the number of illegal Jewish settlements on the ground in the West Bank and around East Jerusalem, annexing them as it built and continues to build a superstructure of bypass roads and highways over the remaining, severed cities and villages of earthly Palestine. It has annexed the Jordan valley, the international border of Jordan, expelling any ‘locals’ inhabiting that land. It speaks with a viper’s tongue over the multiple amputee of Palestine whose head shall soon be severed from its body in the name of justice, peace and security.

Through the home demolitions, the assaults on civil society that attempted to cast Palestinian history and culture into a chasm of oblivion; through the unspeakable destruction of the refugee camp sieges and infrastructure bombardments of the second Intifada, through assassinations and summary executions, past the grandiose farce of disengagement and up to the nullification of free, fair and democratic Palestinian elections Israel has made its view known again and again in the strongest possible language, the language of military might, of threats, intimidation, harassment, defamation & degradation.

Israel, with the unconditional and approving support of the United States, has made it dramatically clear to the entire world over and over and over again, repeating in action after action that it will accept no viable Palestinian state next to its borders. What will it take for the rest of us to hear? What will it take to end the criminal silence of the ‘international community’? What will it take to see past the lies and indoctrination to what is taking place before us day after day in full view of the eyes of the world? The more horrific the actions on the ground, the more obscenely insistent are the words of peace. To listen and watch without hearing or seeing allows the indifference, the ignorance and complicity to continue and deepens with each grave our collective shame.

The destruction of Gaza has nothing to do with Hamas. Israel will accept no authority in the Palestinian territories that it does not ultimately control. Any individual, leader, faction or movement that fails to accede to Israel’s demands or that seeks genuine sovereignty and the equality of all nations in the region; any government or popular movement that demands the applicability of international humanitarian law and of the universal declaration of human rights for its own people will be unacceptable for the Jewish State. Those dreaming of one state must be forced to ask themselves what Israel would do to a population of 4 million Palestinians within its borders when it commits on a daily, if not hourly basis, crimes against their collective humanity while they live alongside its borders? What will suddenly make the raison d’etre, the self-proclaimed purpose of Israel’s reason for being change if the Palestinian territories are annexed to it outright?

Read more of her good article here:

20 Responses to “The real reason Israel is attacking Gaza”

  1. 1 Ann Mere June 4, 2010 at 3:21 am

    Rather than the perspective expressed by you, it is the Arab states that deny the existence of the state of Israel. Their educational books do not even have Israel on their maps, but show Jordan, Syria, & Gaza as occupying the entire length & width of the area now occupied by Israel.

    Maybe you would benefit by reading by following book which I recommend: From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine by Joan Peters.

    • 2 Joseph June 7, 2010 at 10:30 pm


      I once was totally behind Israel. Learning that they were bulldozing families in their homes began to weaken my sympathies, but I still held on. Electing Netanyahu has all but destroyed my sympathies.

      Look, I’ve known people who lived in Israel, and I understand their concerns. I understand the prejudice they still face here in the U.S. (along with every other non-Protestant religion). I understand their desire to return to the land of their spiritual roots. But they are doing things the wrong way. Depopulating entire regions is wrong. I could go on here, but won’t.

      Anyway, I’ve read, and listened to, lots of perspectives, and one book isn’t going to change my mind. Israel has lost legitimacy because of the things that nation has done. I’m not condemning all Israelis, since I know many have no sympathies with Netanyahu and the extremists he represents, anymore than “dubya” represented everyone in the U.S. during the 8 years of hell that he was in charge. But things have gone far astray in Israel, and I don’t know how they are going to be fixed.

  2. 3 theradicalmormon June 4, 2010 at 5:37 am

    Thanks for your opinion. If you would like to know what the facts are about the origins of the Arab Jewish Conflict, I would highly suggest the following link:

    for a beginning. Thanks for visiting.

  3. 4 theradicalmormon June 4, 2010 at 5:43 am

    Doing a little research on your book, I came across this review from Noam Chomsky, one of the greatest intellectuals of our day:

    “[As] soon as I heard that the book was going to come out in England, I immediately sent copies of Finkelstein’s work to a number of British scholars and journalists who are interested in the Middle East—and they were ready. As soon as- From Time Immemorial- appeared, it was just demolished, it was blown out of the water. Every major journal, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review, the Observer, everybody had a review saying, this doesn’t even reach the level of nonsense, of idiocy. A lot of the criticism used Finkelstein’s work without any acknowledgment, I should say—but about the kindest word anybody said about the book was “ludicrous,” or “preposterous.”

    I found a lot of other scholarly critiques which repeat these sentiments. I think you had pick up a better source for your knowledge of history over there.

  4. 5 Ann Mere June 4, 2010 at 2:42 pm

    I’ll read your reference, IF you promise to read mine. Fair play.

  5. 6 Ann Mere June 4, 2010 at 2:43 pm

    NOAM CHOMSKY is a radical leftist. You must discount at least 60% of what he says. I’m old enough to have read him for many years.

    • 7 Joseph June 7, 2010 at 11:16 pm


      So exactly why does being a radical leftist mean that 60% of what you say should be discounted? There is no logic to that. Your statement isn’t grounded in anything. It’s an “ad-hominem” attack that isn’t really even based on anything substantial.

      And attacking Noam Chomsky does nothing to defend Joan Peters’ book. Her book has critics who are not so easily dismissed as “radical leftists.” I’m not saying it has been as thoroughly debunked as Chomsky claims, but there are some pretty big holes in her theory. Palestine was uninhabited before 1880? Really? I find that as believable as holocaust denial theories. And I find it as offensive. The article “There Were No Indians” is a pretty good op-ed on this in the NY Times by Anthony Lewis back from 1986. Peters’ book has been discredited a long time.

      I don’t have to read “Protocols for the Elders of Israel” to know that it’s bunk. I haven’t read “No Man Knows My History” cover to cover either, but what I have read isn’t even good fiction. Joan Peters’ book seems from my reading (and I read more than just Chomsky) to be in the same category.

  6. 8 theradicalmormon June 5, 2010 at 7:08 am

    I’ve been reading Chomsky for a long time too and have always found him to be entirely solid. I’ve heard criticisms of his work before and have always found them to be baseless. He backs up his words with solid sources and his critics can never seem to get around them. Titles such as, “radical leftist,” only make me want to see more what he is about.

    Besides, he is not the only one, but only one of many who roundly critique Peters book as unworthy of the paper it is printed on.

    Good luck with the pursuit of truth. As for me, I’ve researched enough to know when my leg is being pulled.

  7. 9 Ann Mere June 5, 2010 at 10:56 am

    You obfuscate.

  8. 10 Forest Simmons June 6, 2010 at 12:42 am

    I don’t see any obfuscation on the part of radicalmormon. What have I missed?

    It’s hard for me to see why any LDS people can fall for the idea that a tiny faction of one tribe of the House of Israel has the right to forcibly evict their distant cousins from the land that they themselves were scattered from as Moses promised they would be for repeated breaking of their covenants … and all without any renewal of those covenants. The Book of Mormon makes it clear that their claims are in vain until they accept the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Yes, I know that the land was dedicated for the return of the Jews, but it must be done in the Lord’s way, not by the power of Satan.

  9. 11 Ann Mere June 8, 2010 at 2:11 pm

    I have at least read and watched Noam Chomsky.
    You haven’t read or watched Joan Peters so your opinion of her book
    is worth

  10. 12 Joseph June 8, 2010 at 8:31 pm


    To whom are you speaking?

    I respect Noam Chomsky, but he doesn’t walk on water to me, so whether you have or haven’t read him means nothing to me. You’ve probably read more by him than I have.

    And, while I haven’t read much Chomsky, I did go and read a great deal about the book you recommended, from respected and peer-reviewed journals like American Historical Review. As I mentioned before, I find her central tenet, that Israel was uninhabited before 1880, to be offensive. I would just as soon read a book trying to prove the world is flat as to entertain such nonsense as Peters tries to prove. I would call her argument laughable if it weren’t so downright dangerous. It is as a result of such colonial lies that genocides throughout the world have been carried out. I live among the Navajo in New Mexico whose Long Walk remains a very local and real example to me of the results of such fabrications.

    Having this book by Joan Peters brought to my attention has, in fact, turned me more against Israel than when I wrote my initial response to your comments yesterday. Knowing that such a book was written and given any measure of credibility, I realize that Israel is more dangerous than I thought.

    Were the library I work for to acquire this book (I was grateful to see we don’t have it), I would do the same to it that I did to “The Arab Mind” by Ralph Patai and “Leaving the Saints” by Martha Beck and put “Fiction” in the Subject Headings (the library has thankfully, and justifiably, removed both of those books after I did that).

  11. 13 SUNNofaB.C.Rich June 11, 2010 at 5:39 am

    interestingly enough the root of the “palestinian”/Israeli conflict is immigration. What do you think about that Joe? Maybe you think that old bag in the white house press corps that said Israelis should go back to Germany or Poland was right on. But a guy born in Tennessee can’t tell someone born in Oaxaca to go back to Mexico. Problematic isn’t it?

  12. 14 theradicalmormon June 11, 2010 at 6:27 am

    Immigration is not really the root of the problem. It is actually the transfer policy of the Zionists, transfering the Arabs out of their lands, that is the problem. On the other hand, if we moved the guy from Oaxaca moved into Tenessee and then started killing a bunch of Tenessee natives and forced others from their homes and did terroristic bombings against Tenessee natives, like the early terrorist Irgun Israelis did, then we would be talking about a similar type of problem. Palestinian/Israeli issues don’t even remotely resemble the immigration issues in the USA.

  13. 15 Joseph June 12, 2010 at 5:38 pm

    I agree with Radical Mormon, except I would go further to say that the root of the problem now is genocide. When immigrants from Mexico and bulldozing homes with families still in them, you can maybe try to make that comparison again.

    Yes, the reaction to Helen Thomas’ statement was overboard. However, she could have demonstrated more tact, and she oversimplified the problem, which she acknowledged in her apology.

    What bothers me most is that the Israeli military’s murder of peace activists trying to get food to poor staving people is brushed over in the mainstream media (no, I’m not going to buy the whole “armed resistance” propaganda, especially after seeing the info given in more recent posts on this blog) while Helen Thomas’ overall benign statements (she didn’t threaten anyone or make any racist statements) are exaggerated and are all over the news.

  14. 16 Joseph June 12, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    “when immigrants from Mexico and bulldozing” should be “when immigrants from Mexico are bulldozing families in their homes…”

    And, if there is a comparison to be made, it’s between the Palestinians and Mexican immigrants. The indigenous and Hispanic migrants have actually been here longer than Anglos. Anglos, like the Israelis, moved onto their land, killed them, took their property, and forced them to move.

  15. 17 SUNNofaB.C.Rich June 16, 2010 at 3:28 am

    they had to immigrate their first, Mormon Radical and the Irgun came about after the 1929 riots when Arabs massacred Jews…. so I guess you should go back further than the late 40’s dude..

    Joe, I really don’t see how you can compare someone from Oaxaca whose ancestors never ever lived in the area of Tennessee coming to Tennessee to someone who’s lived in an area for what, 1200 years? anyways by your logic whoever was in the area first has the rightful claim to it… so guess that would be the Jews huh?

  16. 18 theradicalmormon June 16, 2010 at 3:28 pm

    You are correct there. The Arab inhabitants had apparently seen the Zionist influx as a denial of their nationalistic aspirations and a promise by the British of self-determination for the Arab peoples of Palestine. Their revolt start as early as 1918 apparently. So it appears that immigration was a problem in the beginning. However, immigration turned into a problem of Jews pushing Palestinians out of the land, or killing them… which, in my mind, became a much larger problem than just immigration.

  17. 19 Joseph June 16, 2010 at 10:32 pm


    So you have historical proof for your claims about the Israelis? Who is and who isn’t a descendant of the original inhabitants of Palestine/Israel is not a settled matter.

    And you still haven’t given any examples of of Mexican immigrants bulldozing U.S. homes with the families still in them. I wasn’t making any claims for any direct correlations between U.S. immigration issues and what is going on in Palestine. That was your idea. I was just offering up what I would consider a closer comparison, but ultimately I don’t see much similarity between the U.S. immigration situation and what is going on in Gaza.

    And you haven’t even come close to justifying the genocide that Israel is carrying out against the Palestinians. “They started it” doesn’t justify genocide, so you’ll be wasting your time to try that argument.

  18. 20 Do You Like Worms? June 17, 2010 at 3:49 am

    Joe, probably I was reading too much into your commitment to the “Palestinians” good/Israel Bad thing… and making the arguments you would eventually make before you made them, hence the confusion. But really I think what we have here is what they call “rooting for the underdog” syndrome… The Arabs have gotten their posteriors soundly spanked over and over again by Israel, might make some people start to feel sorry for them… The problem with rooting for the underdog is: sometimes the underdog is a real scumbag.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Just Foreign Policy Iraqi Death Estimator
Impeach Cheney

%d bloggers like this: