Why Bash Israel?

While reading the Dec. 15 issue of The Rambler, I stumbled across an article that worried me. First, it cited all these actions by the Israeli Defense Force against international people trying to help Palestinians. While it is a noble thing to try to help people, going into a war zone is not the way to do it. These people were playing with fire that they obviously could not handle, and unfortunately, for them, they were burned and paid for it with their lives. It also cited mention several instances of “violent US incursions” into such places as South Korea, South Vietnam, Grenada, Afghanistan, and others. The author must have forgotten that several UN nations participated in the Korean War, trying to save the South Korean people from the oppressive, Soviet-backed regime of Kim Il-Sung. These UN nations included Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, Ethiopia, France, Greece, India, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, the Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the US. All these nations saw the threat posed by the Communist Chinese, the USSR, and North Korea. As one can see, it was not a violent incursion by solely the US, but a multi-national effort to save the sovereignty of the South Korean people. In addition, several nations participated in Vietnam, including Australia, South Korea, Thailand, New Zealand, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Spain, as well as several Canadians.

The article’s assumption on Grenada is also false. The government of Prime Minister Maurice Bishop was allowing Cuban military engineers to construct a military-grade airport. The US and her Caribbean allies became concerned by this as well as when Deputy Prime Minister Bernard Coard overthrew Bishop’s government in a bloody coup. This placed undue risk on 1,100 American medical students studying on the island. As far as Afghanistan, I do not see how after 9/11 one could not believe that America and her allies deposing the oppressive, terror supporting, Taliban regime could be a violent incursion instead of a good thing for the Afghan people.

It further amazed me how the article seemed to minimize the former Soviet Union’s own violent incursions into other nations, only mentioning Afghanistan, while having a long list for the US. Here is some history behind the violent Soviet incursion into Afghanistan. In 1979, Soviet forces invaded in order to prop up the government of the communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA). That government had seized power in a bloody coup in 1978 after overthrowing the government of Sardar Mohammad Daoud and killing him and his family. Daoud had been in power since 1973, when he staged a bloodless coup that overthrew the legitimate monarchial government of Afghanistan. Almost immediately, the Marxist PDPA government ran into opposition from the people, who were furious over the Marxist ideas imposed upon them, which were counter to Islamic tradition. In addition, many Afghans were imprisoned, tortured, or murdered. These events ultimately led to the Soviet invasion in 1979 and them getting defeated by the mujahidin and other Afghans in 1989 after many years of war. The Afghan people did not like the communists, so they threw them out, just as they had done to the British twice in the 19^th century. The Soviets also violently incurred into other nations like Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Finland, and Poland. It also sent military personnel to North Korea, North Vietnam, Ethiopia, Somalia, Cuba, as well as the Warsaw Pact nations. It is interesting to note that the Soviets also used the Brezhnev Doctrine of 1968 (which also forbade any Warsaw Pact nation from leaving the Pact) to legitimize their invasion of Czechoslovakia that same year, as well as the invasion of Afghanistan 11 years later. Why does it seem like the focus is only on America, when other nations, like the Soviet Union (all nations listed above), Iraq (Kuwait), and even France (used military force numerous times in Africa in the last fifty years besides just Algeria) have done the same thing. Most nations have at one time or another “violently incurred” upon their neighbors. It has been America who has had to go in numerous times to stop these aggressors, however, the article fails to mention that and only appears to cite awful things that we have supposedly done to “innocent” people, people who would not let views like those in the article fly in their country even though most of them are socialist.

Getting back to the issue of Israel, the UN’s voting records speaks for its bias against Israel. The voting record of the Security Council is as follows: “175 total resolutions — 74 neutral; 4 against perceived interests of Arab state or entity, 97 against Israel.” The General Assembly voted as follows: “for Israel: 7,938 – Against Israel: 55,642.” In addition, “Since it first convened in 1946, at least one Arab state sat on the 9 country Security Council in 39 of its first 43 years. Israel never sat on the Security Council. [In June 2002 Syria who is still listed [by] the U.S. State Department as a Terrorist State, was voted in as Head of the Security Council.] The Security Council “condemned”, “censured”, “deplored”, “strongly deplored”, etc. Israel 49 times; the Arabs: Zero. The Security Council passed 131 Resolutions: 43 or 33% were neutral; 88 criticized or opposed or judged against Israel. Zero critical of Arab state, body or the PLO (founded by the Arab League in 1964).” The positions of the UN can be construed as anti-Semitic. Israel has had to fight for its very existence since the UN created it in 1948, and, upon its birth preached peace with its Arab neighbors. Even Arabs living in Israel have more rights than Arabs living in Arab countries. This may be due in part to most of the Arab countries (along with most of the UN members) not being democracies.

The article also mentions Israel’s lack of abiding by Resolution 242 authorizing Israel to return its occupied territories. Why should a country give up territory that it captures in war when it was attacked by the very neighbors whose territories it captured? Aside from the 1956 Suez War, which was an operation between Israel, France, and Britain to seize the Suez Canal from Egypt, who had nationalized it, Israel has faced the threat of extinction from its Arab neighbors. In 1967, Israel surprised and destroyed the Arab air force as a massed Arab army positioned itself for attack. In addition, the article states that the Israeli-Palestinian confrontation is recent. I guess some could consider 1960 recent. The conflict, known as the third Arab-Israeli War started in 1960 and involved several Palestinian armies allied with Yassir Arafat’s Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Why does the author seem to take such a strong anti-Israeli stance when the facts support defending Israel? Clearly, the facts show that Israel is a victim of UN anti-Semitism as well as Islamic forces committed to attempting to destroy her and her people. I believe that the information presented is not valid or is misrepresented. In conclusion, I pose the question, did the Jewish people not suffer enough during the Holocaust as to now face eradication at the hands of supposed “peaceful” Arab terrorists and armies.

Some information for this article was supplied by the following sources:

http://christianactionforisrael.org/un/stillbirth.html

http://www-atdp.berkeley.edu/virtualatdp/daily/extra/midterms/joe/vietnam.html

http://www.historyguy.com/Grenada.html

http://www.palestinehistory.com/wartext.htm

http://www.historyguy.com/arab_israeli_wars.html

http://www.worldrover.com/history/afghanistan_history.html

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Brezhnev-Doctrine

Sarin, Oleg, Gen. and Col. Lev Dvoretsky. Alien Wars: The Soviet Union‘s Aggressions Against the World, 1919 to 1989. Presidio Press: Novato, CA, 1996.