Something stood out this weekend that hasn’t gotten enough attention – imo. A point that gets mentioned now and again but always seems to be overridden by the
‘who’s most at fault’ arguments. Or the
‘who started it’ argument.
It seems that it is long overdue to have a discussion of exactly the opposite - “who’s going to stop first?”.
Not as a part of the - 'who's fault it is' argument; or as a side issue of - 'who started it', but just that one question.
Who will stop first?
Who can stop first?
Who is going to refuse to attack and instead, disengage from the violence? Focus on taking care of all the injured and in need, but stand up and refuse to participate in killing as the defense. A very hard thing. One that leaders all around the world seem have a great deal of trouble figuring out. It’s seems like that would be a very worthwhile discussion to have. Maybe if leadership paid the kind of price that the people do they'd figure it out, but that's for another discussion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Years ago at choir camp in Humboldt county, I got involved in the usual snipe hunts organized by the elder church members to keep the noisy youngins away from the peaceful campfire, I’m guessing, maybe burn off some of the excess energy and for the joke of it.
Another thing that always got started was water balloon fights. They were against the rules (littering and the fighting it caused)
Once you were in on the game though; once you threw the first balloon there was no going back. You were fair game. An attack at any time or any place was part of it; even in your tent at night and one of the reasons they were against the rules.
I was sharing a tent with a friend and his father that year and was told I’d be kicked out of the tent if I was involved with the water balloon fights. I was involved. I’d picked up a balloon that hadn't broken and smacked one of the older boys real good. I couldn’t resist. He almost never got smacked. It pissed him off. He was one of the bigger boys and also one of the usual instigators of these fights.
In order for me to disengage, just saying you were out didn’t cut it. These instigators would accuse you of trying to trick them. So to prove that I was really out of the fight I had to stand there and get pummeled by these guys until I was soaking wet, a bit sore, and made zero attempt to retaliate.
I disengaged, paid the price and learned my lesson about this big boys game.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Martha Raddatz raised a question this weekend, as she did 26 years ago in 1988 about the perpetuation of violence. One generation after the next
ABC News' Chief Global Affairs Correspondent Martha Raddatz tracks the Mideast conflict's impact on Israelis and Palestinians over 26 years of reporting.
Martha Raddatz:
“This day, twenty six years ago seems a lifetime ago. The Israeli soldiers I interviewed during a patrol on the west bank never imagined how bad the future would be, but perhaps they should have when you listen now to what they said then”
An Israeli soldier said this about a young Palestinian child he remembers while patrolling the west bank:
“You can see in their eyes a lot of hatred. You can see sometimes a little child of 2 years old or 3 years old who is ataring at you with hatred”
(@ minute 1:30)
Link to you tube posting by Easp Resse:
https://www.youtube.com/...
And in case the video gets pulled, here is an extra link to ABC:
http://abcnews.go.com/...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So on a tangent (iow’s as this also applies to US foreign policy or lack thereof) It’s not about “they hate us for our freedomz”.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How many people have as some of their strongest memories, those as a child growing up, both good and bad? I know I do
- I know very little about the history of the middle east or that of the long struggle/conflict happening now. It just seemed to me that someone has to stop fighting first. Even if the other side does not stop simultaneously. To break the seemingly endless cycle that is reborn with each new generation, too young to understand the reasons for the pain that is felt and remembered for life.
Thx for stopping by
P.S. I have an opinion on who should stop it first based on who is going to get the least soaking wet, or a bit sore (my water balloon example and not in any way meant as a comparison of injury in any wars/fighting anywhere) and who is better organized to actually coordinate a disengagement from retaliation and continued fighting, but I'll leave that part of it to the experts.
But I will say this with certainty. A majority or people in any country do not - want - war. It takes no expertise to say those words, but it does take experts to figure out how the "leadership" in most any country gets away with speaking for, keeping all of us involved in, and paying for war with our labor and our lives. And to figure out how to make them, the "leadership", and that includes our leadership, the first to stop.
That seems to me to be the harder challenge that has gone unanswered for far too long
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here from Abbreviated pundit round-up are some opinions:
♦ Jonathan Freedland at The Guardian writes Israel’s fears are real, but this Gaza war is utterly self-defeating.
♦ Rami G. Khouri at The Daily Star of Lebanon writes Go to the roots when addressing Gaza
♦ Henry Giroux at Truthout writes Killing Machines and the Madness of Militarism: From Gaza to Afghanistan
♦ John Judis at The New Republic writes Who Bears More Responsibility for the War in Gaza?
P.P.S. I've got to head out, but will be back in a bit