[lit-ideas] Re: Islam, Israel and the Code of the West

  • From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:17:08 -0700

Passing over the ad hominem slur . . . 

 

The IDF is justified in destroying the Hezbollah sites that Lebanon allowed
Hezbollah to set up in violation of the treaty Israel had with Lebanon.
Israel does not have to allow an Iranian-financed terrorist organization on
Lebanese soil to launch missiles into Israel.  Hezbollah initiated attacks
against Israel probably to deflect attention from Iran's problem with the
UN.  The IDF is justified in destroying Hezbollah's infrastructure.

 

Since when does a terrorist organization take prisoners of war?  They take
hostages for ransom . . . or beheading.

 

Lawrence

 

  _____  

From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Simon Ward
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:24 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Islam, Israel and the Code of the West

 

I suppose it's expected now that Lawrence will seek to justify an action by
referring back to his simplified historical perspective. All too soon, the
argument degenerates into a muddled discussion about whose view of history
is correct and meanwhile the original point is forgotten.

 

So perhaps Lawrence can forget about how miffed he is and answer a simple
point. 

 

Is the IDF justified in destroying Lebanon's infrastructure as a means of
getting back two prisoners of war?

 

Simon

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Lawrence <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  Helm 

To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 

Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 5:25 PM

Subject: [lit-ideas] Islam, Israel and the Code of the West

 

LH >> The Christian Crusades were in response to Islamic expansion.  

 

OK >*Hardly. The said Muslim expansion took place several

centuries earlier. They were, rather, a response to

the European conditions of the time including the rise

in numbers of dissatisfied nobles who could not

inherit, the power dynamics between the European kings

and the Pope etc.

 

LH > Not true.  The Muslim expansion had not yet silenced the Byzantine
Empire and it was calling to the Western Empire for help.  

 

 

LH >>The Byzantine Empire called for help against the Muslims for a couple
of hundred years before the Western Church responded with a call for a
Crusade. 

 

OK >*How did the Roman Empire, or the Byzantine Empire

which was one of its offshoots, have more moral right

to rule over lands like Palestine, Syria, Egypt, than

did the Arabs ?

 

LH:  Beats me.  This started when Irene said Israel had no moral right to
"muscle into" the land they now inhabit.

 

 

LH >> The Jews were expelled several times, by the Babylonians, Assyrians,
and Romans, but they always returned.

 

OK >*Yeah, and by the Byzantines too. Under the Byzantine

rule, the Jews were prohibited from settling in

Jerusalem.

 

http://www.aish.com/literacy/jewishhistory/Crash_Course_in_Jewish_History_Pa
rt_43_-_The_Jews_of_Babylon.asp 

 

LH > Anti-Semitism has a long history.  I am amazed that in these so-called
enlightened times Old Europe is returning to it like a dog to its vomit.

 

 

LH >>  They were there when the Muslims muscled in.  

 

OK >That is roughly right. "Under early Arab rule, a

Jewish community was reestablished in Jerusalem and

flourished in the 8th century."

 

http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/jerusalem/jerusalem3.htm 

 

OK > Of course, as we know, when the Crusaders conquered

Jerusalem, they celebrated by massacring both Arabs

and Jews.

 

LH > I've read histories of this period.  No group had a corner on massacres
-- unless it was the Islamic Turks. Their ruthlessness was legendary.  

 

LH >> I don't have anything against "muscle," only when some accuses the
Jews of being unfair, and muscling into a land belonging to poor defenseless
Muslims.  

 

OK > As I said before, the Muslims did not expel Jews when they conquered
the land. The Jews did expel the Muslims.

 

LH:  But the Muslims tried very hard to expel the Jews when they conquered
the land.  I don't see how you can take the Muslim failure and make it into
a virtue.  How knows what the Jews would have done had the Muslims not tried
so hard to expel them.

 

 

LH  I see you have a Ward Churchill problem with the European movement into
North America -- muscling into those Indian tribes which had spent their
lives muscling each other from place to place. 

 

OK >*As usually, you grossly simplify things. The Indian

tribes did have limited wars over land, but this is

not in any way equivalent to a mass extermination

program that was undertaken by the European settlers.

 

LH: There were no programs of mass extermination except in the imaginations
of anti-Americans like Ward Churchill.  Settlers moving across the West were
attacked by Indians who were accustomed to torture and the mistreat
prisoners.  The settlers reacted with extreme anger and hostility: a clash
of civilization occurred that didn't go well for the Indian.  The Indian was
regularly offered the opportunity to assimilate, and those who did were
treated better than the Taliban treated ordinary citizens in pre-liberation
Afghanistan.

 

Lawrence

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 07-2006