Since the latest Israeli incursion into Gaza, my Twitter feed has lit up with supporters for Gaza and I think one person for Israel. It's very lopsided. Apparently the United States is the only nation right now supporting Israel in its decision. I'm not sure if that means the United States is on the wrong side of this issue or if it means the United States is the least anti-Semitic country. I mean, there's still a lot of hatred for Jews around the world and in Europe. I guess the guilt over Germany's actions in World War II has worn off?
Still, I wonder if all this support for the Gazans is real or just lip-service. Do the nations opposed to Israel's incursion aid the West Bank and Gaza strip to the tune of billions of dollars in annual aid? I'm just speaking out my ass right now, but I feel like the supporters for Gaza are related to the pro-life people.
The pro-life people fight tooth-and-nail to protect the lives of unborn fetuses and put just as much energy into shaming poor, single mothers and fighting the social welfare programs designed to at least give them a leg-up in life. In other words, they don't put their money where their mouth is. They want to force all pregnancies to term but are not interested in making sure those children have a chance in life.
The Gaza supporters go out of their way to immediately blame Israel for its deeds with no blame-sharing (i.e. how much of this is Israel's fault and how much of this is the Palestinians fault?) but leave it at that. The Gazans have the verbal support of the world, but should not ever expect them to pony up some foreign aid (and not simply humanitarian aid) and/or military support...the kind of support they'd actually need if these protestors were actually interested in helping them.
Personally, I'm not too interested in what goes on there. I'm not saying Israel should wipe every Gazan off the face of the Earth, but why can't they use their military to bring about a forced relocation of the Palestinians in Gaza to the West Bank and then annex the territory? It's an old-school tactic. Apparently that's wrong now: it has been arbitrarily decided that maps are permanent now.
Why can't the other countries of the world bring a united force together to oppose Israel? I don't want to hear some bullshit about the United Nations. The United States has veto power: they obviously wouldn't approve a military strike against one of its allies. But why should that stop the Middle Eastern nations from sending a force over? Or the European Union? Or the African Union? Or China? Or whomever? Do they really think the United States would declare war on those who did? The United States is strong, but even it cannot fight a war against, say, sixteen nations at the same time. And it needs those nations for trade/oil anyway so really, what's the United States going to do?
That's why I feel like all this outpouring of support for Gaza is bullshit.
Also, when did the deaths of a few hundred or even a few thousand people get to be considered genocide? Whenever I hear that word, I'm picturing the on-purpose deaths of a significant percentage of a people.
Cambodia's actions under the rule of the Khmer Rouge offer a guideline for what that percentage ought to be. The Khmer Rouge killed a quarter of Cambodia's population and that was considered a genocide. I can go for that. I would consider something a genocide once the death count requires two commas or represents 25% or more of the targeted population, whichever comes first.
Okay, I'm done talking about shit I know nothing about...
No comments:
Post a Comment