Israel and Gaza

Yes, it is very wrong. If those that want to play 'war' insist on doing that - they should limit the death list to themselves and leave ordinary citizens out of it.

I despair of it all - do they not have the sense to realise that bombing each other isn't working? Why on earth can't they just sit down and discuss things until a solution is found; probably not as 'exciting' as firing guns and rockets ...

There will shortly be another cease fire and then a year or so later, it will begin again without really stopping in the meantime. Jonathan Miller's reports on C4 news are excellent and heart breaking. I am full of admiration for the European doctors working in the Gaza hospitals - how incredibly brave of them , and as mentioned on another thread in a different context, they are seeing things they will never unsee.

Hollydaze do you think it's because they are 'macho' men?
I can't help but wonder how women would handle it?
I'm quite serious,not flippant. Would we handle it differently?

www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/07/16/371556/israel-must-kill-all-palestinian-mothers/

Maybe like this Galen!

What is the international community doing? Israeli land-grabs are well illustrated by these maps. Is it surprising that Palestinians feel marginalised and pushed out of what was their homeland? Is it surprising that Islamist movements like Hamas get their votes? Who else is there to speak for them? Or, regretfully, to fight for them?

The threads on MN are excellent - lots of different views, interesting and informative links. I've learned a lot

It is worthwhile reading Jewish Voice For Peace on Facebook. While they protest and publicise the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, the forces of law and order in the US continue to suppress street protest.

There are some moving posts from Israeli Jews on MN who have been out protesting in Tel Aviv against the bombardment in Gaza and have been spat on and reviled by other Israelis, including the IDF

Just a thought but I was wondering last night how I would feel, if, at the end of the Second World War the Israelis were given England and the English were moved to, say Scotland. And then treated quite badly. My problem is that, whatever the Israelis do they seem to be able to accuse any retaliation as anti semitism which isn't the case. And, having had such terrible things happen to them, as a people, I would expect a greater degree of compassion. But I must admit to being no expert on the conflict and it's obviously more complicated than my analysis.

I completely agree with you Eloethan. So wrong.

But sometimes Tegan, taking something back to basics, as you have , can really clarify some of the issues. My take on it is that after the war, Western powers were full of guilt as to what had happened to the Jews. They therefore gave them what they fought for without any long term thought to how the displaced Palestinians would feel. ( bit like the aftermath of Iraq ( although much worse)not been thought through and future trouble stored up). Over the years, Israel wanted more land , 1967 etc, building and expanding settlements and ignored UN resolutions - and were allowed to. The US supports them financially - bankrolls the IDF, and morally. The Palstinians - who have a range of views from annihilation of Israel to just wanting to go back to the pre 1967 borders and the dismantling of the settlements, have got increasingly desperate - they voted in Hamas which is defined as a terrorist organisation and so allows the Israelis to take whatever action they want against them. Meanwhile Gazans live in one of the most overcrowded areas on earth, lack basic necessities and have no hope of any future, the building of the wall on their land tore communities asunder, dug up olive groves so destroyed livelihoods etc. I am definitely anti- Israeli government and the people who voted them in. I have huge respect for all the Jews here and abroad who are protesting about their government's actions and are called 'self-hating Jews' and worse. It is all very very very sad and the West have blood on their hands

Mind you, Hamas are no way whiter than white. Far from it. These tunnels are horrible. But Israel's response is bullying in the extreme. And unforgiveable where innocent families are concerned.

Why can't they just blow up the tunnels?

Galen

^Hollydaze do you think it's because they are 'macho' men?
I can't help but wonder how women would handle it?
I'm quite serious,not flippant. Would we handle it differently?^

I just think it's down to men with high levels of testosterone. Of course there will be women who display male tendencies (just as there are men who display female tendencies) with regard to aggressive outbursts but we are talking about the general population and it would be ludicrous to imply that women are just as likely to resort to violence as a first option as men are - history doesn't bear that out.

I do think women would deal very differently. I think they would see widespread bloodshed as something to avoid and would seek a more peaceful approach.

There is an interesting article about the Kurgan hypothesis that displaced the 'peaceful matriarchal societies that worshipped a Mother Goddess that changed then to a patriarchal society and the worship of the warlike Thunderer (Zeus, Dyaus)'

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

See Invasionist vs. diffusionist scenarios (about half way down).

Male domination through violence is nothing new but not particularly original either.

There is also an interesting parallel regarding Gaia that predates current religions that also serves to highlight that a drastic change took place in our history.

Generally I'd agree with you HollyDaze but I'm not sure that these particular woman are typical of womankind. They seem to be inculcated by hatred and revenge built up over decades. Not all obviously but many.

I was listening to the fathers of the murdered teenagers which ignited this latest bombardment. The Jewish father interviewered said he felt for the family of the Arab boy and that all the families were feeling the same pain a nd grief and he hoped it would not escalate. The Palestininan father was spewing hatred and revenge.

That said the loss of life is appalling, but it's counterproductive as this is building up more feelings at hatred and revenge for future generations.

I'm not sure that these particular woman are typical of womankind. They seem to be inculcated by hatred and revenge built up over decades. Not all obviously but many.

I do think that with some women, Aka, it is learned behaviour - a bit like 'if you can't beat them then join them'. I don't know which women you are referring to though.

That said the loss of life is appalling, but it's counterproductive as this is building up more feelings at hatred and revenge for future generations.

But still it persists. This is the one problem I have with it all - the men just seem more interested in coming out on top than finding a solution that suits the majority.

I just don't understand the mentality that goes on in that part of the world, they always seem to fighting one another over this or that. They display the kind of socialisation skills that would get the Ebola virus a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize!

I am wary of the line of thought (in any argument) that says women would behave differently if they were in power. I think that all the evidence suggests that women in power - whether that be in charge of countries, organisations, teams, or sometimes just families, can behave every bit as badly as men and can become just as power crazed. Women are not all nurturers and power often breeds a need for more power IMO.

Historical evidence doesn't show that matriarchal societies were aggressive, it tends to show them as peaceful nightowl.

As there haven't been enough women, in modern times, to be in charge of anything for a prolonged period, it isn't possible to state, with any certainty, that they would be aggressive or passive from the outset. If, however, we look at statistics for violent crimes, it would, imo, be the latter of the two that would be more likely.

Perhaps HollyDaze, but there are few true matriarchal societies in the world and on a global level I fear there is too far to go for us to truly know what the effects of a matriarchal world would be. In the meantime women rising to power in the male world we inhabit have to become more like men to succeed. In my limited experience women who do that often assume all the worst characteristics of men and lose the more positive aspects of women.

I agree that it's interesting to wonder!

When Israel needed a strong leader during the late sixties, they had one.....Golda Meir.

Although I think testosterone must play a part in war-like behaviour, I think it might be more about the sort of people that strive for power, rather than what gender they are (or maybe they just have more testosterone). In my view (though I know many don't agree) Margaret Thatcher displayed the sort of "bullish" characteristics that we tend to see more in men, apparently having little capacity for empathy, reflection or self-doubt.

I'm sure this isn't so for all men and that there are some perfectly decent and honourable men who could probably do a much better job of running a country than the sort of people who are in power around the world now. But in our society, competitiveness, rather than co-operation, is what is held in high esteem and it is the type of people that fit in with this model who get to the top and who wield power. In this respect, women are faced with a difficult problem. If they are firm they are described as "bossy" and if they are more conciliatory they are described as "weak" or "lacking leadership qualities". It's no wonder that many decide to opt out all together.

I was struck by the Juncker/Cameron "high five" incident. Can you imagine two women being so juvenile?

On balance, I think that if more women were involved in politics and achieved positions of power, at least initially there would be a less confrontational and more conciliatory approach to difficult situations and less of an appetite for starting wars.

Did the obsession with territory begin when we evolved from hunter gatherers to crop growers I wonder? Men seem to be much more territorial than women. I'd assume that women would [I'm going back a few thousand years here] always look for a none confrontational approach given that they had young depending on them whereas men could risk being killed.

The Arab boy was killed in an appalling manner. The father had a right to spew hatred. Just as some of us, on another thread, feel the father of the abused boy had a right to beat up the attacker.

They will have to talk to each other in the end [just like the problem of Ireland was solved here]. It may take a long time though.