Video of Today's suicide bombing - Jan 29th

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, you really have to admit that Sharon's initial call was reasonable under the circumstances.

It was utterly unreasonable. If he was worried about armed Palestinians inside, send in the IDF to secure the place- the leader of the Phalangist had just a few weeks before been assasinated by the PLO-a huge blow to the Phalangist. The Phalangist were looking for vengance, and Sharon should have known.

He might have wanted to keep possible IDF loses low, but the IDF also had responsibilities to safeguard civilians.

[Ned]

Besides, the Israelis have no history of massacring women and children. It must be presumed, if one is fair, that Sharon had no intention that such an attrocity occur. I think that is why he prevailed in the libel suit.

[Az]

The Phalangist had a history with the Palestinians. Sharon knew this history- Again, why he was found by Israel ITSELF as indirectly responsible for the whole massacre.

Because they had to blame someone. If they wouldn't, people would say it was a cover-up.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Ned
Besides, the Israelis have no history of massacring women and children.

Untrue - see the Deir Yassim incident, amongst others.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Azazel

Because they had to blame someone. If they wouldn't, people would say it was a cover-up.

Nope. The largest protests in Israeli history (and the few really large geenral protests I have heard of) were against the abuses in Lebanon (as it were, Lebanon is Israel's vietnam). A lot of people were mad he was not found directly resposible but instead indirectly responsible.

[Sirotnikov]

Untrue - see the Deir Yassim incident, amongst others.

Deir Yassin is as always taken way out of proportion.

What happenned is that following a short combat between Iraqi commandos and the Lehi and Ezel troops, several commandos dressed up as women, hid among regular populace and then started shooting at unsuspecting Israeli troops. They (expectedly) panicked when they saw that supposedly innocent people beging shooting at them, and began spraying the crowd.

As a result IIRC around 120 people were killed. A massacare, though not an intentional one. When the soldiers came to their senses the massacare was stopped. Most of the population was alive and tended by the Israelis.

The Israelis also immediately invited the Red Cross to the place.


Sadly, after that, all sides began spreading unrealistic rumors.

The Palestinians exaggerated because they hoped it would infuriate the arab street and Arab leaders would increase their efforts to defeat the Israelis.

The Arabs exaggereated to defame Israel.

The Lehi and Ezel right wingers exaggerated in hope to create fear and have the Palestinians submit quicker or leave.

The left wing government exaggerated because they disliked the Lehi and Ezel and searched for excuses to blame them for going against official policy and dismantle them for good.


What you have in the end, is a myth about an intentional massacare with hundreds of dead.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm very critical of what they did and the fact they eventually killed 120 people.

But I can understand that when you are in combat, and suddenly become unsure of who is truely a civilian and who isn't you act according what you percieve to be self defence.

When I posted that I'm going to the IDF, I think somebody here quoted the murphy laws of war : "When in doubt - empty your clip".
That is probably what happenned in Deir Yassin.

[Sirotnikov]

Nope. The largest protests in Israeli history (and the few really large geenral protests I have heard of) were against the abuses in Lebanon (as it were, Lebanon is Israel's vietnam). A lot of people were mad he was not found directly resposible but instead indirectly responsible.

Just because alot of people hoped that Sharon was found guilty doesn't mean he should have been found guilty or that he infact was.

I think that the Israeli court agreed with the claim that Sharon had acted unresponsibly, and as a commander had a responsability for the well being of the civilians under his control.

As a result he was fired, banned from holding a position having to do with the ministry of defense, and would have ended his career by now, if not Arafat.

[Sirotnikov]

.. If the palestinians had guided missiles and jet fighters and tanks they could be "nice" as well. They don't. The Palestinians attack civilians because they don't have the power in general to do otherwise.

That is a very nice arguement based on the premise that the human nature is good.

But it's false. Especially in the middle east.

You can see it in the way Iraq and Iran chose to use unconventional weapons (chemical, suicide) against each other even though they had other weapons.

You can see it in the way Iraq gassed curds instead of arresting them or using military.

You can see it in the way the Arab governments chose to sponsor terrorist commando groups in the 50s and 60s (the Fedayeen) instead of declaring war on Israel.


Israelis on the other hand always attempted to only target military or combatant targets.

Ezel and Lehi had some exceptions but they saw themselves as fighting fire with fire (eg arab terrorism with jewish terrorism). Arab terrorism started in 1921. In the 30s and 40s it evolved to 'gang wars' where jewish armed gangs fought palestinian armed gangs, and both at times targetted civilians.

The Israeli mainstream didn't like this and did the maximum to rid of that.

The Palestinians and the Arab world adopted it as a strategy.