Proportional Response

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture
Submitted by Kyrel Zantonavitch on Fri, 2012-11-16 02:29

At some quick point the wartime standard and ideal of "proportional response" is truly inhuman and depraved. You're supposed to defeat your evil enemy -- not play "tit for tat" with him. Israel is surrounded by massively-large, monster nations mostly guided by the wondrously false and heinous philosophies of socialism and Islam. So it badly needs to win its wars -- not just somehow respond and temporarily stay alive.

But Israel is a considerably irrational and illiberal nation itself, guided largely by a philosophy of self-hatred and self-destruction. So it militantly refuses to win its wars. It prefers fairly broad scale appeasement of its attempted destroyers.

But the way you win any given war is not to gingerly respond to those assaulting you, but to terminate the aggression. You need to stop the unjustified attacks. And to do that you need to conquer land and kill people. But Israel adamantly refuses to conquer enemy land and kill enemy people. Its confused, convoluted, false, and corrupt moral standards and ideals forbid this. So look for there not be "peace" in the Middle East for pretty much forever.

No justice, no peace!


( categories: )

As an interesting side note

Jules Troy's picture

There needs more women like this to stand up to the mullah shitbags.

http://www.theblaze.com/storie...

Considering the repression over there I say that this is one hell of a brave woman!

 

Interesting enough is

Jules Troy's picture

That the Iranian president and the mullahs are not happy with one another, plus the economic woes, it might be enough to spark a real dictator toppling riot.

"The big difference is WHEN

Leonid's picture

"The big difference is WHEN Iran has them they WILL use them."

You don't know that, and in any case who will allow them? You present Iran as a mighty superpower as befits any Islamic fear-monger. In fact Iran is so weak, it cant produce its own gas, its currency depreciated in half during the last 6 months and there is a food shortage.

I am not saying russia is not a threat

Jules Troy's picture

If Russia was going to actually use nukes they would have long ago.  The big difference is WHEN Iran has them they WILL use them.

"Biden says it's not the Cold War 1950s."

Leonid's picture

"Biden says it's not the Cold War 1950s. Although we have disagreements with Russia, he says they're "united with us on Iran" and that Russia is one of only two ways the U.S. is getting supplies into our troops in Afghanistan."

Biden is or an idiot or a traitor, that is-Russian agent. Doesn't he know that Russia supports Iran, constantly blocks all anti-Iranian sanctions in Security Counsel and constructed Iranian nuclear power station which produces plutonium, from which nuclear bombs could be made. Doesn't he know that Russia opposes American anti-missile shield in Europe and even threats with military conflict, should such a system be implemented. Ask yourself why Russia doesn't want Europe to be protected and from aggression of whom? As yourself, Biden concerned with the imaginary threat to the world ,represented by few rugged Taliban fighters in some Afghani shithole and ignores the real menace.

Possibly,not really

Jules Troy's picture

Yes, really

Leonid's picture

"Iran is so close to developing a nuke"-so is North Korea. This is another example of your mystical Islamoapologism. You are scary about one or two nukes which Iran may develop and totally ignore 4000 nuclear warheads of Russia, each of them is counted not in kilo but in megatons. The Russian hatred for the West and in particular for America is not less, but probably more than that of Iran and this is a reality, not you imaginary Islamic threat. Besides, Iran could be easily dealt with even by such a mini-country like Israel, not to mention America.

Really?

Jules Troy's picture

Iran is so close to developing a nuke it is down right scary, come tell me how weak they are once they have a pile of nuclear warheads and how silly I am for having said so.

Somehow I think " I told you so" just wont cut it.

You and Doug

Leonid's picture

You and Doug represent the worse type of Islamoapologism by describing Islam as a scary satanic mighty religion with mystic superpowers which engulfing the world, while in fact Islam is so weak that even in the Muslim world it rules in full only in few countries. In fact you have to be paid by Islamists for the PR service you do to them. If this is not a dishonesty, then it's plain idiocy. Worse than that, you are apologists for every budding dictator from Lawrence Auster to Barack Obama who, by using Islamic threat, wants to eliminate the last remnants of freedom in the West.

I am dishonest?

Jules Troy's picture

The only one here guilty of intellectual dishonest here is you Leonid.  Nice try I believe you have called Linz the exact same thing at one time or another when he held you to task. I may not write 15 page diatribes, but there is never any intellectual dishonesty on my part.  

I have no basis of fact that you accept money from Iran however one could see and draw that conclusion even if it is not in fact correct as you always evade and defend them even when presented with evidence as to why Islam needs to be contained at the least or at best removed from western civilization until such time as they remove jihad from their religion.

Jules

Leonid's picture

" Leonid probably is accepting payment from Iran...He obviously is not an objectivist."

You don't know Objectivist from your elbow. Objectivism requires some wits and intellectual honesty which you obviously don't possess.

Doug

Leonid's picture

". I don't know if African blacks with their low IQ can overcome that tribalism which is why I say that for low IQ Africans, Christianity is IMO taken as nothing more than superstition with Christian imagery."

You have posted enough racist diatribes before, so there is no need to repeat yourself. As for the rest-your position is that of a paleo-conservative KKK, who somehow managed to escape his enclosure in political Jurassic park. Why do you think that your WASP tribalism is better than that of " low IQ" Africans? No wonder, you don't get along with Objectivism and Yaron Brook. Ayn Rand used to tear your ilk to the pieces. Besides, you are an ignorant who doesn't know basic school geography and never even attempted to refute any of my arguments. Why don't you just go back to the dustbin of history where you belong?

Dear Israel

Jules Troy's picture

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/N...

Iran Is building a bomb that looks to be a BIG 50Kton yield you are running out of time.

Fuck what the rest of the world thinks and do yourselves a favor, turn Iran into a cinderblock before they do it to you.

Doug

Jules Troy's picture

Leonid probably is accepting payment from Iran to pave the way by sowing dissent, confusion and doubt amongst it's enemies. He obviously is not an objectivist or even a classical liberal.(in the true old freedom loving sense of the word).

Anyway you could show him every event and the complete deathtoll including 80million east indians etc totalling well over 200 million.  No problem for Leonid he knows many peaceful ones!

 

Leonid

Doug Bandler's picture

You are a ridiculous Islamic apologist that loves to throw out endless minutia. The Muslims disrupted the eastern half of Europe (and the southern) through constant warfare. I suspect that if there had been no Muslim presence you would have seen no ethnic warfare in the Balkans. Serge Trifkovic is the specialist in the subject of ethnic and religious conflict in the Balkans and he lays out good arguments for the presence of Islam as the leading reason for that conflict.

As for Africa, yes they have crazy Christians there and I am not surprised that they ally themselves with the crazier American Evangelicals. But the fact remains that African Christianity shows no signs of being neutered the way European Christianity was. But more importantly, African Christianity is a religion for AFRICAN BLACKS. The problem is with the Africans not with Christianity. The African blacks are steeped in tribalism; a tribalism that Europe overcame. I don't know if African blacks with their low IQ can overcome that tribalism which is why I say that for low IQ Africans, Christianity is IMO taken as nothing more than superstition with Christian imagery. It is not the Christianity of Agustine, Aquinas, Albert, etc; ie it is not the intellectual Christianity that the Europeans created. African blacks are just not smart enough at the population level for that.

But you'll link to some bullshit rejecting that too. You're annoying Leonid. And worse, you're an Islamo-filth apologist. Objectivists like you we don't need.

Clueless

Leonid's picture

"The Christianity the African blacks believe in is probably some superstitious mess with Christian symbolism superimposed on it"

You don't have a clue about Christianity in Africa. Why you even post on this issue? Christians in Uganda who want to hang gays, have been inspired and supported by American Christians, not by Sharia law.

http://www.alternet.org/story/144403/uganda's_%22kill_the_gays%22_bill_tied_to_rick_warren_mentor
http://www.salon.com/2010/07/0...

"Even in the Balkans the problem is with ISLAM. Constant Islamic attack on Eastern Europe has altered the history of that region. Similar dynamics occur wherever Islam goes. (Evil fucking religion.)"-

So, it Islam and not General Ratko Mladić is responsible for the Srebrenica massacre in which 8000 Bosnian Muslims have been killed. Wonder, why his lawyer never used this argument during the trial?

Btw, Balkans is Southern, not Eastern Europe.

apples and oranges

Doug Bandler's picture

However the same war is going on in DRC ( Congo) and many other African countries. Sufficient to mention Rwanda in which all Christian Hutus killed about million Christian Tutsis without any help from Islam.

Apples and oranges. The problem in Africa is African blacks not Western Christianity which has been defanged in the West. Today, with the exception of the Balkans, there are no Christian civil wars. Even in the Balkans the problem is with ISLAM. Constant Islamic attack on Eastern Europe has altered the history of that region. (I think also Easter Orthodox Christianity changed its character as well, but that's harder to lay out.) Similar dynamics occur wherever Islam goes. (Evil fucking religion.)

The Christianity the African blacks believe in is probably some superstitious mess with Christian symbolism superimposed on it. With African violence the questions always arise about IQ and native intelligence, as well as higher hereditary predispositions to laziness and violence. I know, controversial stuff which Objectivists don't want to even acknowledge, yada, yada, yada.

Islam is now and always has been a warrior cult dedicated to conquest, theft and subjugation. It is the most evil thought system ever devised by man. I think it is more evil than Nazism. Christianity is not of the same order of evil. Not by a long shot. There IS a difference in degree. Something lost on Christianity hating Objectivists.

"You say muslims are not a problem?"

Leonid's picture

First of all I never said that. In the view of Islamic militant Jihadism some Muslims are definitely a problem. What I said is that one shouldn't demonize Islam by ascribing to it some evil superpowers, as Islamic World dominance fear mongers do. One also shouldn't dehumanize all religious Muslims by describing them as "the Borg." This is pure mysticism and collectivism. As for Africa-this is a continent of never-ending tribal wars in which Muslims also participate. The wars are mainly over minerals, diamonds gold and oil, although militant Nigerian Muslims obviously present their fight as a religious jihad. However the same war is going on in DRC ( Congo) and many other African countries. Sufficient to mention Rwanda in which all Christian Hutus killed about million Christian Tutsis without any help from Islam.

http://history1900s.about.com/...

Speaking of Africa Leonid

Jules Troy's picture

You say muslims are not a problem? Check this out...

http://www.releaseinternationa...

Btw make no mistake if muslims have their way guess who dies even before christians?

Enemy number one in a muslim's eye is the infidel AKA the atheist...and homosexuals of course..

Caroline Glick writes..

gregster's picture

She knows her stuff. "From 1994-1996, as an IDF captain, [Caroline Glick] served as Coordinator of Negotiations with the PLO in the office of the Coordinator of Government Activities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In this capacity [] was a core member of Israel’s negotiating team with the Palestinians."

In The Jerusalem Post

Over the weekend, Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood held what the media claimed was a stormy meeting. Its members were split over what to do about Israel. Half wanted to go to war with Israel immediately. The other half called for waiting until the Egyptian military is prepared for war. In the end, the voices calling for patient preparation for war won the day.

And for their patience, the Muslim Brothers received the plaudits of the US government. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her boss President Barack Obama were effusive in their praise of the Egyptian government, and joined Egypt in placing Israel on the same moral plane as a terrorist group.

Moreover, Obama and Clinton compelled Israel to accept wording in the cease-fire that arguably makes Egypt the arbiter of Israeli and Palestinian compliance with the agreement.

Aside from the administration's de facto support for the Hamas regime in Gaza, it is hard to think of a greater humiliation than Israel being forced to submit complaints to its sworn enemy about the actions of the sworn enemy's terrorist client.

Egypt-land of Pharaohs.

Leonid's picture

Egypt-land of Pharaohs.

And now

Jules Troy's picture

Morsi has granted himself "temporary" sweeping powers that make him immune to upper judiciary judgements which has the streets rioting and protesting.   What did they expect?  

Victory for Mursi.

Leonid's picture

Who won the war on Gaza? Undoubtedly, Egyptian president and Muslim Brotherhood. Thanks to Barack Hussein Obama, he became a chief "peace-keeper" and major political player in the region. This is a metamorphosis which Kafka never could invent.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/s...

The outcome of American reliance on Saddam Husein and Osama bin Laden didn't teach them a thing. Again they put their money on the Arab Islamist horse while betraying their only real ally in the Middle East-Israel. How many 9/11's they need in order to learn?

Victory for Mursi.

Leonid's picture

Cancel

Victory for Hamas!

Richard Goode's picture

My apology

Jules Troy's picture

160 dead 1500 injured

Jules

Leonid's picture

"The whole world flipped out because 1500 palastinians died."

How 160 became 1500?

Disproportional response

Leonid's picture

The proportionality of response today is usually measured by the comparison of the collateral damage on both sides , that is-some kind of Hollywood action movie type body count. This postmodernist approach completely ignores such a questions who is an aggressor and who is its victim, is the war just or not, what is a goal of such a war and what causes collateral damage. In principle when the war is unjust, than even one single casualty is disproportional. In the just war any response is proportional if it helps to achieve the war's objective, that-is a victory over aggressor. By the very nature of just self-defense war such a victory cannot be achieved by deliberate targeting of non-combatants, namely children, women, elderly people. Although due to effects of the modern warfare these casualties cannot be completely avoided, any reasonable effort should be made in order to minimize them. Contrary, the unjust aggressive war's primary target is a non-combatant population. The last war between Israel and Hamas clearly demonstrated these differences. The barrage of Hamas' rockets was primary and exclusively aimed to the civilian population. Israel from the other side attacked only military and strategic targets of Hamas. The result was unprecedented in the whole modern military practice: Israeli Air Force attacked and destroyed 1500 targets and caused only 160 casualties, mainly Hamas senior military personnel. In terms of collaterally damage it was a bloodless war. Hamas' primary goal was to kill and terrorize civilians. They managed to kill only 6 people. Every single heart bleeding liberal idiot in the West was crying bloody murder and accusing Israel in disproportional response. They don't understand that such a small number of civilian casualties on the both sides is a result of Israeli effort to avoid them-namely strict measures to protect Israeli civilians by means of stunning Israeli anti-rocket system "Iron Dome" which intercepted 80% of Hamas rockets and by using of protective shelters. On the Palestinian side Hamas made all possible effort to increase collateral damage by using its own people as living shields. Israel warned Palestinian civilians on incoming attacks by using SMS and even was broadcasting warnings on the frequencies of Palestinian radio station. To any unbiased observer it should be clear by now which side used disproportional response.

Yee Shane

Jules Troy's picture

It was clear.  

It was also wrong.

I am not going to explain why, you're vast intellect could not possibly comprehend such simple "wurdz".

Jules

Shayne Wissler's picture

Your interpretation of what I said is as wrong as it is idiotic.

And no, I will not clarify because what I said is exceedingly clear already. I came to give an alternate perspective, and I have, and I'm done.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...

Well it appears

Jules Troy's picture

Well it appears Israel followed that line of reasoning.  It is not going to work.  Hamas is only going to fortify their positon during this cease fire and smuggle in more and better weapons from Iran.  Israel got hamstrung by the usa and Obama's pro muslim agenda.

Morally speaking Shane Israel has the right to defend themselves, the whole world only grudgingly approves of this.  They should have hammered Hamas into dust regardless of casualties until they got an uncondtional surrender.  No one told Hamas to fire 300 rockets a day into heavily populated areas in Israel, and no one said much about it.  The whole world flipped out because 1500 palastinians died.  If Israel was in fact as indescriminate with their targets the death toll would have been much higher.

The entire Islamic world wants to wipe Israel off the map, but by your reasoning Shane they would have achieved that during the 6 day war if Israel would have followed your rhetoric.

WW2

Shayne Wissler's picture

"If WW2 were fought"

Incidentally, it was Bandler's collectivist logic that got the human race into WWI and WWII in the first place. Once you have large groups of people who think "somebody killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand, therefore we need to attack an entire nation in retaliation; targeted response to the guilty party makes national defense impossible" then no rational principle is going to help.

Besides, in Bandler's foaming at the mouth he's ignored the principle I put forth, because "targeted response escalating as necessary" means "response", which means that if a government insists on protecting a guilty party, then at some point that's going to lead to an attack on that government, and if anyone gets in the way that's their choice. But such escalation should be declared openly and especially to the people who are in the way. So, nothing in what I'm saying precludes war, it can get to that point, but it should only get there through a certain rational and just process.

I.e., your intent should be to target the guilty, but if someone insists on getting in the way, then they have painted a target on themselves, and so long as you have openly declared your intent and reasons, and so long as you are responsive to possible counter-points to your open declaration (i.e., so long as you are following reason), then if your case is solid, your continued escalation into a war is justified.

Nothing is "pacifist" about what I'm saying, which is simply a rational escalation based on a proper theory of justice. Why does Bandler call this pacifist? I'm thinking anything less than nuking whole cities when somebody gives him the wrong look is going to be viewed as "pacifist" by him. He has no regard for human life. I'm glad he's not leading the military.

Collectivist response

Shayne Wissler's picture

"You've just made national self-defense impossible."

I haven't made it impossible, it's impossible in principle. Regardless of how many bodies you pile up, you are never going to be able stop everyone who is committed and wants to attack you. The best thing to do is not act with such eggregiously evil injustice that there are a lot of people who'll want to do just that. You have to try to target your response to the guilty party, and if you do act in a morally-upstanding way then you'll gain the support of all good people, which is really the most important factor in winning a war, and even more importantly, in preventing future wars.

Rationalistic Bullshit

Doug Bandler's picture

However, if a "nation" attacks another "nation", then it is completely improper collectivist "logic" to use the above line of reasoning regarding escalation of force, because a nation refers to every man, woman, and child living in a given geographic region, and they are certainly not all guilty. What you want is not a proportionate response, but a targeted response, one that follows the same escalation principle above.

Garbage. You've just made national self-defense impossible. If WW2 were fought according to this logic the Allies would have lost. This type of argument, ie that devastating war is "collectivistic", is the staple of almost every libertarian. I remember Chris Sciabarra making this argument ad nauseum on his blog from 2002-2004 back when I used to read his work. The entire libertarian blogosphere makes this argument. Its wrong. This is actually one thing that the ARI has been good on. Yaron Brook and Alex Epstein's article on Just War theory was pretty good at showing the reasons why that argument fails.

Proportionality should not be the standard of retaliatory self defense. The standard should be "overwhelming force" or "devastating force". What is needed is enough force to achieve an UNCONDITIONAL surrender with the MINIMUM loss of lives and treasure to your side. And most importantly, EVERY CIVILIAN of the enemy country is fair game. They are ALL culpable for the violent government that was erected in their name. How many to kill is strictly a tactical decision.

But I know the bullshit Shayne is going to come back with. I've been reading this libertarian pacifist drivel for a decade now.

Proportional response

Shayne Wissler's picture

I think this phrase is confused, but so is the nationalistic response, which is the one I often see from Objectivists and almost always see with the average person.

If an individual attacks you, then you escalate to whatever degree is necessary to get justice, but only to that degree. If your neighbor knocks over you mailbox (and lets say for sake of argument that there is definitive proof he did this, with no mitigating circumstances), you don't shoot him in the face, you ask him to pay for it, if he won't, you bring him to court and they do, if he still won't, they confiscate his property, by force if necessary, if he continues to resist then they may eventually shoot him, even perhaps in the face. And it's all the neighbor's fault, not the people who, in the end, finally shot him. All over a mailbox.

However, if a "nation" attacks another "nation", then it is completely improper collectivist "logic" to use the above line of reasoning regarding escalation of force, because a nation refers to every man, woman, and child living in a given geographic region, and they are certainly not all guilty. What you want is not a proportionate response, but a targeted response, one that follows the same escalation principle above. And I think that when people say "proportionate response", they may be trying to express this idea in a confused way, but can't, precisely because they are collectivists, reacting against the sheer insanity of the other collectivists who are calling for anihilation of an entire nation.

"Does the west even realize

Leonid's picture

"Does the west even realize that Ahmadinejad is nothing more than a puppet and the mullahs are the real power behind Iran? "

I think it does. If the West, and namely USA wanted to end regime of ayathollahs, they could easy do it long time ago-after attack on American embassy in Teheran. But they allowed to ayathollahs to rule and now, when they face a nuclear threat from Iran, they as powerless as ever. Israel again on its own.

Does the west

Jules Troy's picture

Does the west even realize that Ahmadinejad is nothing more than a puppet and the mullahs are the real power behind Iran? Or are they as stupid as I think they are.

The shame is on the West.

Leonid's picture

"It seems to me that sooner or later Israel and Iran are going to go to war,"

Israel hasn't been allowed by the Western powers to destroy Hamas. We all witnessed how this gang leaded by Hillary Clinton arrived to Jerusalem and, under instructions of President Obama stopped Israel on its tracks , granting to Egyptian Muslim Brothers a status of the " peace keeper". This is a bad joke. I don't believe that West will ever allow Israel to take on mullahs. Israel can fight and destroy Jihadism. Israel can withstand international pressure. But Israel cannot do both the same time. The shame is on the West.

Problem solving

Jules Troy's picture

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/N...

It seems to me that sooner or later Israel and Iran are going to go to war, for Israel sooner will probably be better than later.

Iran is funding and supplying arms to Hamas, actually Iran is training and funding pretty much every terrorist organization in the middle east.  If that regime is crippled the Palestinian Hamas groups ability to launch Iranian rockets should be greatly reduced if not eliminated.

Also remember prior to 1979 Iranian revolution the Iranian government had good relations with Israel and was the only middle eastern country to accept and recognize the state of Israel.  Their own people It seems are fed up with the dictatorship and tyranny of that regime so who knows?  Would it be a far stretch of imagination to think if the mullahs are stripped of power Iran could go back to being the Paris of the middle east?

"Auster doesn't call for genocide-doesn't he?

Leonid's picture

"Auster doesn't call for genocide, Leonid. He calls for a decisive victory."

I didn't make it up. This is a quote.

"if a country had faced what the Israelis face with the Palestinians, namely having a population of violent fanatics living within the borders of that country who were relentlessly seeking its destruction, that country would long ago have either expelled them all or killed them all, and the world would have accepted it as a just and necessary act of self-defense."

There are about 3 million Arabs who live in Israel, Judea, Samaria and Gaza strip.Everybody who advocates a killing or deportation on such a scale is a crazy butcher. There is no end which justifies such means. Decisive victory will be achieved not by means of massive ethnic cleansing, but when Israel would be given a chance by the West to eliminate Hamas and Hezbollah. So far, thanks to Hillary Clinton, Israel is fighting with both arms tied.

To expel Druzes?

Leonid's picture

The Muslim population of Golan Heights are Druzes and most of them are loyal to Israel. 10% of them already accepted Israeli citizenship and many others applied. Why to expel them? Besides, how and where one expels 3 mln people?

It figures

Jules Troy's picture

That they would send dried up old Clinton over there for wuss talks.

Pot, Kettle, etc

Doug Bandler's picture

http://m.indianexpress.com/new...

"Turkey accuses Israel of 'ethnic cleansing' in Gaza"

From Muslims, the biggest ethnic cleansers in history.

Israel needs to expel all Muslims from Gaza, the West Bank and especially the Golan Heights. Its the simplest thing in the world really but it is made impossible by modern liberalism; ie the demonic Left.

Grr

Jules Troy's picture

150-200 rockets a day fired into Israel....

Israel should wipe them completely off the map.

http://m.indianexpress.com/new...

The fact that Israel's Iron dome makes palastinians rockets next to useless does not render their intent any lesser.  The intent and potential for deaths of Israelis is enormous just from the sheer number of the rockets.  The rest of the world should stfu and let them defend themselves.

Don't Buckle, Bibi!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

From Hamas-Filth's Charter, a hymn of hatred:

'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' ...

'The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.'

Auster doesn't call for

Richard Wiig's picture

Auster doesn't call for genocide, Leonid. He calls for a decisive victory. I'm not sure how you get a "crazy butcher" who wants "genocide" (the dropping of the context of a defence of values to be replaced with butchering as an end in itself) from what Doug has posted.

Doug

Leonid's picture

"that country would long ago have either expelled them all or killed them all, "

"When I read Auster's commentary on Israel, Islam and Muslims I fell that I am reading the thoughts of a mature man"

Since you defined a crazy butcher who calls for a genocide of millions as a mature man, I have now a full understanding of your own nature. And that is really sad.

Or Brazil

Doug Bandler's picture

How about the transfer of Jews from Israel to some place else (e.g., New Zealand's West Coast)?

They would be better off there as they wouldn't be surrounded by a sea of Muslim hate. I think they were offered land in Brazil after WW2. They should have taken that. Modern liberalism (leftism) will not allow them to wage the type of war necessary to defend themselves from Muslim savagery.

Doug

Richard Goode's picture

I think the above article calling for the transfer of Arabs from Israel to Jordan is a very good idea.

How about the transfer of Jews from Israel to some place else (e.g., New Zealand's West Coast)?

Population Transfer

Doug Bandler's picture

http://www.vdare.com/articles/...

Vdare is a racialist Conservative site; its Steve Sailer's brainchild. But they often do have good material. I think the above article calling for the transfer of Arabs from Israel to Jordan is a very good idea. The article concludes:

Population transfer is not a perfect solution. Some people would get killed.

But the alternative is a low-intensity war in which people are being killed every day. It would be a cauterizing but effective end to the conflict, a cutting of the biggest Gordian knot in world politics.

And it has, as I said, crucial implications for other Western nations—including America.

He lays out exactly how it could be done at a minimum of bloodshed and misery.

More Israel Realism

Doug Bandler's picture

Here is a great comment from that Auster blog post which is directly on target to Kyrel's main point:

Of course, you’re correct, but you do not blame the Jews enough. As a Jew, I think I can say that (OK, I would say it anyway). Part of the problem is that they (not me) are, for the most part, leftists, liberals, socialists (just like in the U.S.), and therefore cannot bring themselves to do what any sane country would do: destroy the enemies who are raining rockets on them every day, and have repeatedly verbalized their intent to kill them all and push them into the sea. Proportional response is nonsense. People who attack after stating their intention to destroy you must themselves be destroyed.

This is leading me to believe that the essence of modern liberalism / Leftism is not altruism or egalitarianism but RELATIVISM. Not being able to pronounce moral judgement because you don't believe in absolutes leads to relativism which leads to egalitarianism (what Auster calls "non-discrimination") which leads to the pacifism we see all around us.

More great comments from that thread:

Gilad Sharon states Israel’s alternatives in Gaza starkly, but he should have been starker still. As long as Gaza and the West Bank are in Moslem hands, they will be assembly areas and launch points for attacks on Israel. Nothing short of Israel’s extermination will satisfy Moslem desires for the Levant, so it is self-destructive to think a peaceful Moslem Arab state in the West Bank and Gaza alongside—in fact intermingled with—Israel can exist. Thanks to the provocations Hamas and Hezbollah, and through them their Iranian and Syrian masters, constantly inflict on Israel, the only safe course for Israel is peace through strength—beginning with a full reoccupation of Israel within the Mandate borders that existed before Israel declared independence in 1948. That is the territory Israel currently controls plus all of the Gaza Strip and all of the West Bank. That land entirely should be the State of Israel, with its eastern border at the Jordan River. Arabs living within Israel who are hostile to this dispensation, as most assuredly would be, should be relocated at Israeli expense to the land that already is their country: Jordan. I’m not in Israel, so I write from the cheap seats, but I see no other settlement that can provide long-term security. And even those more rational and defensible borders will not end the need for capable. rapidly deployable Israel Defense Forces backed by a nuclear deterrent.

The wild card is the Golan Heights, which were legitimately part of Syria before Israel occupied them in the Six Day War. As the Golan Heights physically dominate Galilee, it is hard to see how the Israelis could safely cede control of them to Syria. Syria’s current situation only heightens the uncertainty.

I totally agree with the above. Every word of it. But Leonid tells us that Muslims are great "low cost builders". With Jews like that who needs homicidal Arabs?

Larry Auster on Gaza

Doug Bandler's picture

Once again, Auster states what so few others have the balls to:

Finally, someone in Israel speaks realistically about Gaza. Writing in the Jerusalem Post Gilad Sharon (son of Ariel Sharon) says that instead of just punishing Gaza and then leaving, allowing the Hamas rocket fire into Israel to continue, as happened with Operation Cast Lead several years ago, the IDF must win a decisive victory, meaning that they must either make Gaza unlivable, or re-occupy it.

I will repeat what I have said before: at any other time in human history, if a country had faced what the Israelis face with the Palestinians, namely having a population of violent fanatics living within the borders of that country who were relentlessly seeking its destruction, that country would long ago have either expelled them all or killed them all, and the world would have accepted it as a just and necessary act of self-defense. But because of modern liberalism, which prohibits decisive victory in war as an act of inequality (a belief system shared by the Israelis themselves), and because of Muslim oil power, and because of world-wide anti-Israelism, that obvious and necessary step cannot be taken.

When I read Auster's commentary on Israel, Islam and Muslims I fell that I am reading the thoughts of a mature man who understands much of the way the world and human nature work. When I read Leonid's commentary on the same subjects I feel I am reading Pollyanna idiocy.

Leonid, in the end, you are a suicidal, self-destructive Jew, Objectivist or not. Sadly, you are not alone.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/ar...

Update:

Best line on Israel ever:

As I’ve said before, to understand Israel, imagine that Jewish Upper West Siders had their own land which was surrounded by their mortal enemies. The way those Upper West Siders would have behaved, is more or less the way Israel has behaved.

Exactly. A bunch of liberal Jews running a country surrounded by mortal enemies that want to exterminate them. That's who is running Israel.

Kyrel

Leonid's picture

Israel doesn't seek to punish anybody. Its purpose to achieve lasting peace. And I repeat-Israel already did take all territories. The withdraw from Gaza strip in 2005 was a mistake and it seems that Israel is in the process to retake it.

"Israel should also have occupied them and set up a libertarian, non-aggressor state."

With that I'm fully agree. Good proper occupation never hurt anybody yet. Look on Germans or Japaneses. In fact such a state will be part of Israel for all practical purposes.

"And Israel never won that 3-week Gaza War (January 2009) by any rational standard."

That's true. Israel was stopped by the heavy pressure of international community, all heart-bleeding liberals of the world, including all European and American governments. To avoid exactly this kind of scenario Israel uses now surgical strikes and not carpet bombing. Israel which is a small country, cannot stand alone against the whole Western world. But to say that this is a symptom of self-hatred or self-destruction is very odd and wrong conclusion. If people in the West for their own sake , really want to help Israel to finish the job, they should apply pressure on their own governments. So far they do exactly the opposite. Ever heard about world-wide Western " Boycott Israel" movement?

" If you know a lot about these topics, then what is your view of Meir Kahane, Chaim Ben Pesach, the old Jewish Defense League, and the current Jewish Task Force?"

I personally met Rabbi Meir Kahane in Jerusalem in 1977, and we had very fruitful conversation. We didn't agree on everything, but bear in mind that even Kahane considered forcible removal of Arabs as a last resort and only those who resist peaceful coexistence with Jews in the land of Israel under the rule of Jewish government. Remember that Kahane was a Rabbi, a devout religious scholar of Jewish Law, and halacha ( Jewish religious law) strictly prohibits oppression of the law obedient non-Jews who live in the land of Israel. He supported an idea of voluntary emigration financed by Israel and world Jewry. As for Ben Pesach and task force-I don't think they are a serious political players. Their actions are mostly symbolic. I'd rather support Bennet, the head of " Jewish home" party who is going to win large number of MP's in the forthcoming elections and definitely will be a minister in the coalition government. He represents settlers in Judea and Samaria and his ideas are similar to those of Kahane, but without his militarism. As you people say, there are many ways to skin the cat.

Doug

Leonid's picture

"No one is talking about ethnic cleansing. Removing Muslims from Israel after having paid them market value for their land or homes is not tantamount to Hitler or Stalin."

It is, if you do it by force. The act of payment when it's done under coercion, doesn't change it in the slightest. During WWII Stalin relocated all ethnic Germans, who lived in Russia for centuries to Siberia. He also considered them to be foot soldiers of Hitler, just because they happened to be born Germans. Franklin D. Roosevelt , a great Left wing liberal, did the same to 110000 American Japaneses who lived in America for generations. You think, Israel should follow these shining examples?

"Namely that Islam is a political / military movement whose aim is world conquest and that ANY Muslim is therefor a foot soldier in that army."

This is pure non sequitur. Some Muslims are, some aren't. Foot soldiers of militant Islam should be not relocated but jailed or killed in action. The rest should be left alone. You are looking for short cuts while disregarding human lives. Israelis will never thread such a path-they know too well how it ends.

"The fact that no Objectivist will even consider that yet just shows that most Objectivists are clueless on how to deal with the Muslim threat."

Objectivists know it very well. The answer is a retaliation under the strict supervision of Objective law. This is a trademark of strength. Indiscriminate abuse of population is a clear demonstration of philosophical and moral weakness. That why all dictatorships are essentially weak and never last for long.

Win the (Just) War; Defeat the (Evil) Enemy

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Leonid wrote:

"You clearly don't follow the current events. During the previous operation in Gaza Israel used carpet bombing , hit 130 targets in 3 weeks and killed over 1000 civilians-without much effect."

That's still a very minor penalty to pay for 64 years of existential terror. Israel should have taken away some or most of their territory as a just punishment. Israel should also have occupied them and set up a libertarian, non-aggressor state.

And Israel never won that 3-week Gaza War (January 2009) by any rational standard. Gaza didn't surrender. Israel self-hatingly, self-destructively, absurdly declared a unilateral cease-fire. Next time the Jews need to do the rational, moral, normal, healthy thing and fight their remorseless, genocidal, monstrous enemies until they declare an unconditional surrender. They should put a stop to the mindless, pointless fighting, dying, and tyranny forever -- as America and Britain did to Germany and Japan in 1945.

"As for the rest of your post-I can only repeat that you don't know and don't understand Israel. Try to do some research on the topic you write about, get some facts. Otherwise, whatever you post is a pure rationalism, a fantasy detached from reality."

I study Israel like crazy. I love the subject! If you know a lot about these topics, then what is your view of Meir Kahane, Chaim Ben Pesach, the old Jewish Defense League, and the current Jewish Task Force?

Not ethnic cleansing

Doug Bandler's picture

I think you confuse Israel with Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany which used to do a lot of ethnic cleansing.

No one is talking about ethnic cleansing. Removing Muslims from Israel after having paid them market value for their land or homes is not tantamount to Hitler or Stalin. It is recognition of the facts or reality. Namely that Islam is a political / military movement whose aim is world conquest and that ANY Muslim is therefor a foot soldier in that army.

The fact that no Objectivist will even consider that yet just shows that most Objectivists are clueless on how to deal with the Muslim threat. On my darker days I almost hope that Islam conquers the West and then proceeds to butcher all dissenters in bulk. That will probably include me. But its out of a sense of justice that I say this. Western liberals, including Objectivists, have been so weak and pathetic in their approach to Islam that in one sense they don't deserve to survive. History has a way of weeding out weak people. Westerners are about to learn that.

Kyrel

Leonid's picture

"Surgical strikes are exactly the problem. It's well past time to indiscriminatingly carpet bomb. No more "innocent civilian" nonsense."

You clearly don't follow the current events. During the previous operation in Gaza Israel used carpet bombing , hit 130 targets in 3 weeks and killed over 1000 civilians-without much effect. At present during 5 days Israel hit over 700 targets and killed only 50 people, most of them senior Hamas' military personnel. Israeli strength always was and is in the advanced cleaver technology, not in the brutal mindless indiscriminate killing. Americans carpet bombed Baghdad and killed over 10000. What they achieved? Exactly nothing. As for the rest of your post-I can only repeat that you don't know and don't understand Israel. Try to do some research on the topic you write about, get some facts. Otherwise, whatever you post is a pure rationalism, a fantasy detached from reality.

Doug

Leonid's picture

"I have encountered Jewish Objectivists on the web for years who have defended allowing Muslims to remain in Israel."

I think you confuse Israel with Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany which used to do a lot of ethnic cleansing. No Objectivist, Jewish or Gentile never will support an idea of collective punishment on the ethnic, religious or any other basis. As for the "HOPE" there are different types of it. One is that of Obama. Another, as expressed in the Israeli anthem is " To be free people in our land, land of Zion and Jerusalem"
What's wrong with it?

Muslims want Islam and thus Islamic rule

Doug Bandler's picture

It doesn't matter whether I've been to Israel or not. Your comment that Israeli Muslims don't dream of Islamic rule is sheer fantasy. If they are Muslim, then they want an Islamic world, no matter where they are.

My sentiments exactly yet Leonid is not alone here. I have encountered Jewish Objectivists on the web for years who have defended allowing Muslims to remain in Israel. I have never understood it.

As for Jewish "hope". Hope is about the most worthless of sentiments. Obama believes in hope too.

Richard Wiig

Leonid's picture

"You spend half your time trying to convince everyone that's there's little to no difference between Islam and Christianity."

I simply refuse to be obsessed with Islam. I proved that all religions have a potential to become militant and evil. Islam is an Abrahamic religion which due to philosophical, moral and political crisis of our times became aggressive as many other religions before. Such an aggression should be opposed by all necessary means. But that doesn't warrant a demonization of Islam or spreading of irrational scares of World's domination by the Elders of Islam. And now I'd like to break really bad news to you-Islam in the West is not going to disappear in the thin air. So get used to the sights of burka and nikab.

Richard Wiig

Leonid's picture

"If they are Muslim, then they want an Islamic world, no matter where they are."

And who cares what they want? They don't dare even to dream to do anything in this direction. In Israel they don't proclaim it and do nothing to achieve it. There is no such a thing as stealth Jihad in Israel and military Jihad Israelis treat very well. Just watch the latest TV news.

PS I have no particular views

Richard Wiig's picture

PS I have no particular views on Islam.

Clearly nonsense. You spend half your time trying to convince everyone that's there's little to no difference between Islam and Christianity. Telling us that all religions are bad is a waste of time. You may as well tell us that Ayn Rand was Russian. We know it already, and it isn't the issue.

It doesn't matter whether

Richard Wiig's picture

It doesn't matter whether I've been to Israel or not. Your comment that Israeli Muslims don't dream of Islamic rule is sheer fantasy. If they are Muslim, then they want an Islamic world, no matter where they are.

Doug

Leonid's picture

"But it remains 80% Arab. I don't think there should be ANY Arabs in Israeli territory. "

Again you are factually wrong . They are 800000 Arabs who live in Judea and Samaria ( what you call West Bank for some obscure reasons) and 400000 Jewish settlers. That makes 50% and the number of settlers is rapidly growing due to high birth rate and immigration. Arabs do emigrate in large numbers without any coercion and sell their property to Jews for good money, dead penalty law notwithstanding. In may view the idea of Palestinian State will die natural death in 10 years. Maximum they will have an autonomy. And why to get rid of all Arabs? They are excellent low cost builders and also run very good restaurants and in the Arab shuk ( open market) you could get a real bargain. Now, have you ever heard anything remotely similar to what Western mullahs and Imams openly proclaim in regard to Islam domination from any Israeli Muslim leader? Do you think it's because Israel is soft on Islam? The main difference between Israel and the West is that Israel has very strong ideology of survival, love of life and hope for the better future. The name of Israeli anthem is "The Hope". This is the West, not Israel who needs a philosophical revolution, or at least 10% of Israeli sense of life. As for ability of Israel to defend itself-it's doing exactly that for the last 65 years and doing it very well, thank you very much.

PS I have no particular views on Islam. In fact qua Islam the issue is boring me. But I expressed certain views on the philosophy of religion as such which is much more interesting a topic. I use Islam, Christianity and Judaism as examples, but what I said could be applicable to any formal religion. It is pity that you post without checking your premises.

Leonid

Doug Bandler's picture

I know more than a few Jews that share your optimism about Israel. Even on O'ist forums I see the same sentiments being expressed. I remain doubtful. As for the West Bank, yes I know it is under Israeli rule. But it remains 80% Arab. I don't think there should be ANY Arabs in Israeli territory. I would remove them all although I would pay them for their property. I know you disagree. IMO your ENTIRE view of Islam and all things related is suicidal. There is something to this delusional attitude Jews have regarding Islam, Muslims and the strength of Israel. They are too soft on Islam, too accepting of Muslims and too naive about Israel's ability to defend itself. I repeat, barring philosophical revolution Israel will fall. I don't say that with pleasure but with sadness.

Richard Wiig

Leonid's picture

"Yeah, it is Pollyanna garbage.
It is the safest place to be and Israeli Muslims don't even dream about Islamic domination,"

How much first hand knowledge do you have about Israel? Have you visit it at least once? Did you speak with any Israeli- Jew, Arab or Druze? Have you actually met or conversed with one living breathing Muslim? It seems that your opinion on this matter as on all other matters like Islam is pure rationalism.

Doug

Leonid's picture

"Israel's days are numbered"

Many people in the Middle East and even in the West would answer " Amen"

Only as they are , you are deadly wrong. You don't understand Israeli culture and mentality. If the West were adopted at least 10% of Israeli sense of life, it wouldn't be in such bad state of affairs as it is. I give to you just a little example to taste it: everywhere in Israel you find a graffiti which reads " Am Israel chai!" which means " Nation of Israel, the living!" Israel is a shining example and maybe the only hope for the decaying West. Multiculturism and egalitarianism practically don't exist in Israel, unless you count very small but very noisy left wing. As for your comments about West bank-don't you know it is under Israeli military rule since 1967? The withdraw from Gaza strip was an experiment, a bad mistake, however not the fatal one. It could be taken back any time, and it most probably would in the right time and right conditions.

Gaza and the West Bank

Doug Bandler's picture

Israel also needs to restructure itself. Right now its a joke how it has to accept the Gaza strip and the West Bank. Israel's borders are a post-modern nightmare. A nation should have clear boundaries and easily defensible borders. What Israel has been told to live under is insane. The Israelis should take back the Gaza strip and relocate all those "Palestinians". They should also take the West Bank. They should also expand into parts of Syria to give their nation size.

But all that is impossible. They would have to challenge altruism and that is not possible in the modern world. Egalitarianism also works against Israel. They are a superior culture to the surrounding Arabs. That means that under Cultural Marxism they must be sacrificed for the less capable culture. And on and on it goes. What a sick world.

Israel 3 part plan

Kasper's picture

I think Israel should bomb the shit out of the gaza strip. Then turn onto Egypt. If Egypt gets in on it then wipe out major infrastructure - govt, roads, military bases etc. Part three, turn the guns on Iran. Make an explicit and clear threat of an all blood bath if they so much as even fuckin flinch. Schools, kids, their army, govt - the lot. It's time to deal with these islamists properly. I reckon it could be done in a week.

Yeah, it is Pollyanna

Richard Wiig's picture

Yeah, it is Pollyanna garbage.

It is the safest place to be and Israeli Muslims don't even dream about Islamic domination,

Even More Rapidfire Analysis

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Leonid wrote:

"Israel is the only country in the world which properly treats terrorism and jihadism."

This is both true and false. Reality and massive enemy size forces the Jews to be psychologically and militarily effective, but ultimately they're appeasers, self-haters, and self-destroyers who deliberately refuse to defeat their weak-as-day-old-kittens enemies. The Israeli Jews still exist and semi-thrive because they aren't purely suicidal, but they're maddeningly and disgustingly close to it.

"Israelis are self-loving ( some times even too much) and very proud nation."

Not philosophically.

"Try such a scare on any Israeli Jew and he will ask you when did you take your last brain MRI scan."

I want to ask him the same question.

"As for Gaza's strip, get the latest Bibi's statement and listen to it carefully."

No time. I have to work today. Hopefully in two days or so. This stuff, however ghastly in human terms, is ideologically interesting, challenging, and fun. I'm Commander Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation.

"Also note how Israel eliminated the military head of Hamas and proceed to destroy its infrastructure by beautiful surgical strikes."

Surgical strikes are exactly the problem. It's well past time to indiscriminatingly carpet bomb. No more "innocent civilian" nonsense.

" There is no need to pile corpses."

YES, THERE IS. If Israel had properly self-loved and self-defended and won its wars, starting over 60 years ago, there would be vastly more Jews and Arabs alive today. Also vastly more freedom, wealth, and happiness in the Middle East. Also justice and peace. And planetary ecstasy.

Pollyanna

Doug Bandler's picture

It's sad, that you have a habit to to discuss issues about which you have no clue. Israel is the only country in the world which properly treats terrorism and jihadism. Israelis are self-loving ( some times even too much) and very proud nation. It is the safest place to be and Israeli Muslims don't even dream about Islamic domination, in spite they are large minority-about 20%. Try such a scare on any Israeli Jew and he will ask you when did you take your last brain MRI scan . As for Gaza's strip, get the latest Bibi's statement and listen to it carefully. Also note how Israel eliminated the military head of Hamas and proceed to destroy its infrastructure by beautiful surgical strikes. There is no need to pile corpses.

This is Pollyanna garbage. Israel's days are numbered if there is no philosophic revolution in the West.

More Rapidfire Analysis

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Doug -- Your remarks pretty much score a bull's-eye. Hope mine's did. But this is a truly rich philosophical vein. Ayn Rand basically anticipated and nailed the hell out of it. And the late, great, war genius John David Lewis added considerably to her ideas.

The current war in greater Israel is a microcosm of the whole world, and of the last about 225 years of Western history. This world event is philosophy writ large. This is today's most pure version of Good vs. Evil doing battle, and displaying itself for all the world to see and potentially learn from. This is essentially today's best, cleanest, clearest version of liberalism vs. illiberalism, civilization vs. savagery, freedom vs. slavery, the heroic West vs. the animal Third World, etc.

Ultimately and objectively, of course, both combatants are wildly corrupt, compromised, convoluted, and complex. So it isn't easy to untangle all the philosophical threads, and explicate all the philosophical lessons to grasp. My ambitious but loose commentary above was just thrown together quickly.

Kyrel

Leonid's picture

"But Israel is a considerably irrational and illiberal nation itself, guided largely by a philosophy of self-hatred and self-destruction."

Nothing could be more far from the truth.
It's sad, that you have a habit to to discuss issues about which you have no clue. Israel is the only country in the world which properly treats terrorism and jihadism. Israelis are self-loving ( some times even too much) and very proud nation. It is the safest place to be and Israeli Muslims don't even dream about Islamic domination, in spite they are large minority-about 20%. Try such a scare on any Israeli Jew and he will ask you when did you take your last brain MRI scan . As for Gaza's strip, get the latest Bibi's statement and listen to it carefully. Also note how Israel eliminated the military head of Hamas and proceed to destroy its infrastructure by beautiful surgical strikes. There is no need to pile corpses.

Kyrel

gregster's picture

I was concerned for your welfare during the inclement weather. How did you get on?

Well

Jules Troy's picture

With the USA completely fuxored for the next few years Israel is going to be even more threatened.  Ironically they may by default become our buffer against an Islamic wave overtaking the west.  When the Israeli's realize they are truly on their own there is a very good chance they will stop pulling punches. When it comes to stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear power they have already told the USA "stay out of our way we will do what is necessary".  What this tells Iran is "dont fuck with us or we will turn you into a sheet of glass".  Iran knows this and it is the only thing that they seem to understand and is why Israel is still on the map.  

all true

Doug Bandler's picture

All true. But modern liberalism will not allow an egoistic approach to war. The Jews are perceived as strong. The Muslims/Arabs are perceived as weak. That's all there is to it. The Jews must be sacrificed because both altruism and egalitarianism demand it. Leftism and the post-modern philosophical premises it relies on will not allow the west to defend itself against Islam. The West in fact is sacrificing itself for Islam. This is the most disgusting spectacle of civilizational suicide in human history, and before the greatest evil, ie Islam.

I think Rand's argument is right. This is all because Kant destroyed the concept of objectivity in the ivory tower. He destroyed objective knowledge. Without objective knowledge there can be no moral certitude and without that there can be no proud defense of nation and culture. Thus we get Benghazi-Gate and Israel's pinprick attacks against the PLO.

Poor Israel. But their Left is even worse than ours. It would have been smarter that post WW2 for the European Jews to have taken the land they were offered in Brazil or that fresh water island east of Canada, rather than that troublesome slice of the Levantine Coast. They are surrounded by a sea of Muslim hate. Who needs that headache?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.