Israeli conflict

My good friend Alan, a Canadian who lives in Vancouver and who happens to be Jewish, as I presume is the writer of the article from The Jerusalem Post, sent this response to my post from yesterday, featuring that article by Larry Derfner:

So what would happen in the U.S.A. if ONE missile landed in San Diego?..., how about two?...or two thousand - which is reportedly what happened in Israel prior to the invasion. How would the U.S.A react?

I think this is a very important question for us to ponder. It's hard to live, as Israelis do, under the constant threat of terrorist bombs and rocket attacks. It's hard for us to really know what that is like. What I took Larry Derfner's stance to be -- as presumably a Jew living in Israel himself -- was "yes . . . but is our response appropriate? What about the Palestinian people"

Here's my answer to my friend Alan's question of what would the U.S.A. do?:

The U.S. has been attacked: in Manhattan on September 11, 2001 in the single most devastating terrorist attack in the history of the world. And for a time we did all experience that fear that terrorism causes, wondering when and where the next attack will come. The terrorists achieved their goal: they instilled fear where there had been none.

But I was not in favor of our military response even then when we attacked the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. I felt we should have dropped humanitraian supplies for the people (food, medicine, clothing, agricultural supplies, building materials) instead of bombs and then have concentrated on aid to help this impoverished nation resist the take-over of their country by militant anti-western forces. Think what could have been done with those billions and billions of dollars we have spent on military force, and the people on both sides killed.

That would have been politically impossible, however; our leaders had to show their strength and strike back, they felt. I was in a tiny, tiny minority that felt there had to be a better way of responding than war.

And what good has come of it, eight long years later, as we risk being mired down in the dreaded quagmire of can't win/can't leave?

Then george bush essentially left Afghanistan and went after his preferred target, Iraq and its oil supplies -- even though they had nothing to do with the attack on us. I knew without a doubt that this was the wrong thing to do.

It's easy to sit here, safe and cozy at my computer, and say I think the Israelis should choose a different way than military strikes and bulldozers. Would I feel differently if I lived there? I don't know.

But I do know that, if I lived in Gaza and experienced the prolonged blockade and the destruction of homes and non-military buildings, I would probably turn from my anti-war stance and begin throwing rocks at tanks myself.

I would like to see the Israelis take Derfner's questions to heart and think about whether their retaliatory response is even in their own best interests, or -- like our presence in Iraq -- just creates more terrorists who will attack more and more. What if, instead of tanks, they had removed the blockades and gone in with food, medicine, building supplies, etc. and actually helped these impoverished people rebuild their homes, schools, and hospitals?

My tendency is usually to side with the oppressed and against the oppressors. Historically, that puts me on the side of the Jews. That's been harder lately, because Israel is so much stronger and because I feel their retaliation has been disproportionate to the feeble attempts of Palestinians to stand up for themselves. I begin to think of Israel as the oppressor.

Both peoples have been oppressed, displaced, and attacked. Two wrongs don't make a right. Who owns the land? It depends on how far back in history you go. Each side has its own legitimate grievances and its evidence that the other side is more wrong than they are. There is never going to be a consensus on who is right.

I do not see a solution to the problem unless a different calculus is applied. If enough Israeli Derfners are joined by counterparts among the Palestinians that speak out against their own leaders' refusal to negotiate a peace -- then maybe something can happen.

And now that Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize as a call to action, maybe it will spur him and his representatives on to greater determination to bring peace to the Middle East.

Ralph