posted by Susan Stark
One commenter on this blog stated that I should include an Israeli poem along with the Palestinian poem. I agree. Here it is:
To extinguish the fire,
To end the blockade,
To bring calm to all.
To recognize facts:
Hamas is a part of—
The Palestinian people.
No peace without it.
To stop playing at
“Divide and conquer”.
We are all in
The same boat.
Tedrall's Blog 
January 1, 2009 at 6:46 pm |
Since I can empathize with both sides of the Israeli/Hamas conflict, I’m not going to object to the content of the poem. I’m simply going to object to this thing being called a “poem” in the first place.
“That’s not writing. That’s typing.” – Truman Capote
January 1, 2009 at 8:59 pm |
Susan,
If I were firing rockets into your home for a week, what would you do?
January 1, 2009 at 8:59 pm |
Susan,
If I were firing rockets into your home for a week, what would you do?
January 2, 2009 at 2:47 am |
What would I do if Anonymous was firing rockets into my home for a week?
Why, I would demonstrate my moral and spiritual superiority by raining hundreds of times the firepower back at the entire area in which he stood, unfortunately missing him but still managing to kill hundreds around him; including children, students, the elderly, even local policemen.
What else can a civilized person do?
January 2, 2009 at 4:29 am |
I would pack up and leave as soon as possible.
But if I lived in Gaza, I wouldn’t have that option. I’d be a sitting duck.
January 2, 2009 at 6:23 am |
The interesting difference between the Arabs and the Israelis is a massive one. The latter wants to defend itself and have a homeland. The latter wants the extermination of an entire people.
Like another person said in the previous “poem;” if Canada were to launch rockets at us, how long before we attack?
And sorry Susan, but packing up and leaving is not a good answer. Specially if you have lived in your house for decades. I don’t think anyone wants to be uprooted from their house by terror.
January 2, 2009 at 5:58 pm |
I don’t think anyone wants to be uprooted from their house by terror.
The Palestinians certainly didn’t.
Do some research on the history of the region before you make assumptions about the motivations of either side. You might be surprised by just how wrong our framework and superstructure of the conflict truly are.
January 2, 2009 at 6:47 pm |
Terrorism is the last resort of people who don’t have access to billions in military aid from Washington. Their crude rockets are pretty lame compared to the “smart” bombs and other munitions that the U.S.A. starts shipping to Israel every time they feel the need to rain death on the ghettos of Gaza or Lebanon or the West Bank. Come to think of it, the actual ability to create terror makes the IDF the hands down winner in that department.
January 2, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
Flamingo Bob,
I would demonstrate my moral and spiritual superiority
This is a classic tactic used by you lefties. Instead of answering a question or refuting facts, you attempt frame the thoughts of the person(s).
Would you prefer that Israel only launch exactly the same number and same type of rockets back? Perhaps we can have a “blue helmet” counting exactly how many rockets each side fired to ensure equality on both sides.
Susan,
As for them “not having anyplace to go”: If the Palestinians have a stake on Israeli land, they also have a stake on the land of other Arab countries including Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Yet those countries put the Palestinians in refugee camps if they give them any land at all. Perhaps Hamas should rocket those countries as well.
January 2, 2009 at 7:32 pm |
The Israelis shouldn’t change a thing. Trying to bomb their enemies into submission has been working for 60 years. Why change now?
January 2, 2009 at 7:32 pm |
The Israelis shouldn’t change a thing. Trying to bomb their enemies into submission has been working for 60 years. Why change now?
January 2, 2009 at 9:21 pm |
The biggest irony of the 20th century will be, when studied hundreds of years from now, what Israel was well on its way to becoming after what its people had been through. We were all doomed the day we accepted that there was a singular Holocaust and became Israel’s…what? Pit bull, thick-necked bodyguard? No, I’m not denying that particular holocaust, just putting it into its proper perspective as possibly the most notable genocide of that particular decade. Two wrongs don’t make a right and any other religionist bromides you care to insert. One day I hope to find out which of Israel and the United States is the puppet.
January 2, 2009 at 9:21 pm |
The biggest irony of the 20th century will be, when studied hundreds of years from now, what Israel was well on its way to becoming after what its people had been through. We were all doomed the day we accepted that there was a singular Holocaust and became Israel’s…what? Pit bull, thick-necked bodyguard? No, I’m not denying that particular holocaust, just putting it into its proper perspective as possibly the most notable genocide of that particular decade. Two wrongs don’t make a right and any other religionist bromides you care to insert. One day I hope to find out which of Israel and the United States is the puppet.
January 3, 2009 at 1:34 am |
Why exactly do you feel you have to give equal time to the victimizers and to the victims?
January 3, 2009 at 2:08 am |
Always Right says:
As for them “not having anyplace to go”: If the Palestinians have a stake on Israeli land, they also have a stake on the land of other Arab countries including Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Yet those countries put the Palestinians in refugee camps if they give them any land at all. Perhaps Hamas should rocket those countries as well.”
———
The Gazans do not have anyplace to go. They are stuck there. No one will take them in. And yes, other countries are just as much to blame as Israel. But at the same time, the people who live in Gaza are either indigenous to the area, or are descendants of refugees who fled from what is now the State of Israel back in 1948. So in a sense, Israel is responsible for them.
I would also like to point out that the Hamas Party won the Palestinian elections in 2006. It is Ismail Haniyeh who is the legitimate leader of the Palestinians, insomuch as they have a leader. But the Bush Administration didn’t recognize Hamas’ legitimacy, in compliance with Israel’s wishes. The pretext was that Hamas doesn’t recognize Israel’s right to exist, but that’s just an excuse. The truth is that Israel wants the total and complete unconditional surrender of the Palestinians. That’s what they’ve wanted from Day One, and it’s not going to happen.
January 3, 2009 at 2:19 am |
And that poor doofus who goes by the name of Mahmood Abbas is slowly and steadily losing any moral authority he might have once had. He’s losing more of it as we speak. If the lunatic chicken shoot in Gaza isn’t over with soon, he will soon have to take Hamas’ side or slink away into obscurity.
Boy, it must’ve been hard for that man to get out of bed in the morning for the past two years. I can’t imagine.
January 3, 2009 at 4:26 am |
Susan,
The Palestinians had almost everything they demanded from Israel when Clinton was in office. Arafat walked away.
January 3, 2009 at 4:26 am |
Susan,
The Palestinians had almost everything they demanded from Israel when Clinton was in office. Arafat walked away.
January 3, 2009 at 6:07 pm |
That’s an Israeli talking point. But it’s not true. Arafat walked away from an offer that would have divided Palestine into discrete Bantulands. The country would have been ungovernable and economically unfeasible, nothing more than a Lesotho to Israel’s South Africa.
The truth is that Israel has never resolved its founding sin–it failed to slaughter the people whose land it stole. We Americans were much smarter when we stole America from the Native Americans.
Now, 60 years later, too many Israelis are too liberal to allow full-scale genocide. So they compromise. The Palestinians respond the only way they can, with terrorism designed to wear down the Israelis. And so it goes.
January 3, 2009 at 7:44 pm |
In 1947, there were only roughly 1 million Palestinians in existence. Much of the land that the Jewish settlers had acquired before was purchased from the landowners.
In 1948, the Jewish settlers took over and drove a good deal of those Palestinians off the land by theft. Those Palestinians became refugees, and it is they who the Israelis are fighting today. The refugee population is five-fold of what it was in 1948.
If the Jewish settlers had maintained their policy of simply buying land from Arabs and Muslims rather than taking it, and had absorbed all of the Arab/Muslim population into the State of Israel instead of making them refugees, the Palestinian/Israeli problem as we know it today would never have existed. In this theoretical alternate-history, the Palestinians would have remained in their original place, and probably at the same level of population as in 1948. And they would not have been known as “Palestinians”, but simply “Israeli Arabs” like the current Arabs living in Israel. And Israel today, in this alternate-history, would be known as just a backwater surrounded by oil-rich states, barely a blip in the world-wide news media. There might have been the usual tension between two different religious groups, but nothing like the grotesque conflict we see now.
But Israel, back in ’48, chose the “ethnic cleansing” route, and the rest is history. Of course, as Ted Rall suggested, Israel could have slaughtered the inhabitants outright. But what would have been the consequences in this other alternate-history? Israel wouldn’t have had the refugee problem, but everyone would have known on some level what had taken place, including the Israelis, and that has it’s own subtle consequences.
January 3, 2009 at 7:46 pm |
“Do some research on the history of the region before you make assumptions about the motivations of either side. You might be surprised by just how wrong our framework and superstructure of the conflict truly are.”
It’s hard to get a good grasp because the Arab authorities snuff out any information lest it gives the Israelis a standing. If you disagree with that statement then you really have not been paying attention.
January 3, 2009 at 7:46 pm |
“Do some research on the history of the region before you make assumptions about the motivations of either side. You might be surprised by just how wrong our framework and superstructure of the conflict truly are.”
It’s hard to get a good grasp because the Arab authorities snuff out any information lest it gives the Israelis a standing. If you disagree with that statement then you really have not been paying attention.
January 3, 2009 at 7:51 pm |
I love it when people tell me to research things.
The last person who did that was funneling money to Hamas. I did some research and he ended up in the FBI headquarters.
Hope he’s having a good time.
January 3, 2009 at 7:56 pm |
You know, I think I am finally going to start looking at it on the Palestinian side at least tongue in cheek.
Since I am Puerto Rican would it be acceptable to fire rockets at the U.S.?
Or maybe the left over Indians will start firing rockets at the U.S.
How would you feel about that Susan?
Seeing as how the U.S. still manages to jail our Independence fighters in P.R. So really, tell me Susan, can the start shooting at the U.S.?
January 3, 2009 at 9:43 pm |
The Jews did not start living in Israel in 1948. Last I heard they’ve been there several thousand years,occasionally getting conquered or massacred.
Pragmatically speaking, going through the exercise of who lived there first does nobody any good…. it’s an argument anyone could use anywhere in the world with no resolution.
If nothing else, the current situation (and the Korean War stand-off) should highlight what a worthless organization the UN is.
January 3, 2009 at 10:40 pm |
The Puerto Ricans can starting shooting at the US, Anonymous 2:56, but they should first ask themselves if the benefits of such an action outweigh the cost.
January 3, 2009 at 11:17 pm |
Ah! There you go Susan. Finally someone said it.
If the Puerto Ricans were to start shooting at the US the country would be in flames.
Two things would happen. Either a majority force would oust the shooters. Or they would rally behind them.
The Palestinians have done the latter. Therefore, they have really no right to start arguing about casualties, scale of force, etc. They are backing the Hamas government so they must endure the consequences.
The election pretty much proved they wanted Hamas. You reap what you sow.
By the way, being a Puerto Rican and all. If they started doing that I would fight against them.
On another note, Always right, I’d like to comment on your post. The truth is that they have been living there for thousands of years. The only issue is the current one which arose from the Mufti and WW2.
I really place no blame on the UN (even though I’ve burned my share of flags from them) but I place the blame on the Mufti and Hitler. A really unknown story about WW2 which has led to all these conflicts.
I was just watching TV and it really saddened me to see the “Socialists” and “Communists” marching against Israel. In reality they are marching for antisemitism and Hitler.
I think the also forget how the USSR was the first country to recognize Israel and give them aid. Not only that a good amount of their people are Communists.
Frankly, the Jews have been thrown out of their homeland enough times. It’s nice the Palestinian people are getting a taste of what the Arab ancestors did to the Jews.
January 4, 2009 at 8:26 pm |
But, seriously, can’t we all at least agree that this is a really bad poem?
January 5, 2009 at 12:30 am |
Agreed.
January 5, 2009 at 1:31 am |
Jason, I have to disagree, it’s no poem at all.
January 5, 2009 at 8:44 pm |
Always Right, for once I agree with you on the worthlessness of the UN (although the US veto history in the Security Council certainly doesn’t help).
The JNF buying land is one thing; the IDF stealing it is something else altogether.
Anonymous: funneling money to Hamas? Hell, in this economy I can’t even afford to funnel money to the electric company.
January 5, 2009 at 8:52 pm |
Question for everyone:
A few days ago, a friend asked me if I believed Israel would actually launch a ground invasion. My answer was “probably not. The only reason I could foresee a ground assault in Gaza would be to bait Hizbollah in the north into another confrontation; the IDF was embarassed in 2006, and this would be a chance to fight Hizbollah on their own terms. I don’t think Israel would want to commit additional troops to Gaza and the West Bank while expecting attacks from Lebanon.”
Then, to my surprise, the ground assault began (with troop numbers so far fewer than ideal, you’d think Rumsfeld planned it), and Israel called up most of their remaining reservists to the border with Lebanon.
So, I’m inclined to think my analysis about Hizbollah was correct. Thoughts? Opinions? Does anyone think Hizbollah would be stupid enough to get involved?
January 5, 2009 at 8:52 pm |
Question for everyone:
A few days ago, a friend asked me if I believed Israel would actually launch a ground invasion. My answer was “probably not. The only reason I could foresee a ground assault in Gaza would be to bait Hizbollah in the north into another confrontation; the IDF was embarassed in 2006, and this would be a chance to fight Hizbollah on their own terms. I don’t think Israel would want to commit additional troops to Gaza and the West Bank while expecting attacks from Lebanon.”
Then, to my surprise, the ground assault began (with troop numbers so far fewer than ideal, you’d think Rumsfeld planned it), and Israel called up most of their remaining reservists to the border with Lebanon.
So, I’m inclined to think my analysis about Hizbollah was correct. Thoughts? Opinions? Does anyone think Hizbollah would be stupid enough to get involved?
January 6, 2009 at 3:01 am |
In regards to Jason’s question whether or not this poem is good or bad, let me say that I liked the Palestinian poem that I posted better.
But I also think that I made my point with both poems. There are those on both sides who do NOT like what is happening in Gaza.
Just because you think a poem is bad is not enough to discredit the composer’s viewpoint. It just means that they MIGHT need to brush up their skill.
January 6, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
Oh there was no question about it being bad. It was stated as a fact.
And I just thought it would be nice if we could all unite behind one common goal – to rid the world of bad poetry.
I can see us all marching through Washington now – black, white, Israeli, Palestinian – all chanting carefully metered and perfectly rhyming chants to bring an end to bad poetry. All worldly conflicts will come to an end as we unite under a single banner. It will be beautiful.
Someday, someday . . .
January 7, 2009 at 1:19 am |
Jason, I want to sacrifice my firstborn in your honour!
January 7, 2009 at 12:53 pm |
YES EVERYONE LETS TALK ABOUT HOW BAD A POEM IS. That outta take our minds off how our tax dollars are being used for genocide.
January 7, 2009 at 12:53 pm |
YES EVERYONE LETS TALK ABOUT HOW BAD A POEM IS. That outta take our minds off how our tax dollars are being used for genocide.
January 8, 2009 at 12:37 am |
Great idea, Fouad! I think I’ll do just that.
Man, that poem sucked!!!
January 9, 2009 at 4:19 am |
Yes, Jason, that poem sure does suck.
And people are dying. That sucks too.
In fact, you suck. You suck ass.
And so do you, Inci-ratus.
January 9, 2009 at 4:19 am |
Yes, Jason, that poem sure does suck.
And people are dying. That sucks too.
In fact, you suck. You suck ass.
And so do you, Inci-ratus.