Harper must apologize for calling Liberals anti-Israel
Harper's comment on the Liberal leadership hopefuls being anti-Israel was totally inappropriate and he should apologize immediately. I don't always agree with Bob Rae, but I think his comments on this were right on the mark. Lets remember Bob Rae is half Jewish and is married to a Jewish wife and has Jewish children. In fact part of the reason for parting with the NDP in 2002 was he felt their position on Israel was unbalanced. In fact contrary to what Harper says, many Liberals are very supportive of Israel. This has been a divisive issue within the party which different people have different opinions on and to make some generalizing statement is quite insulting to many Liberals. I myself am a great supporter of Israel and I don't agree with Ignatieff's assessment that the attack on Qana was a war crime. I think it was a tragedy and I would hope it is investigated and if Qana was improperly targeted, those involved should be punished. But it can only be called a war crime if Israel deliberately targeted a civilian area where there were no military posts. If Hezbollah was hiding military targets amongst civilians, then Hezbollah is the one committing war crimes since it is illegal to use civilian areas as military targets.
While I realize Liberals have sometimes said some nasty things about Harper that I felt were over the top, I feel Harper has been using the PMO office more to promote his own re-election chances rather than serving all Canadians. At least Paul Martin limited his attacks, as vicious as they were (and even I believe they were over the top), to party events and party rallies. When acting as prime-minister he stayed away for partisan attacks and focused on uniting all Canadians. For example the PM's website was totally non-partisan when Martin was prime-minister, while today it is blatantly partisan. It is also in some cases outright lies such as the link calling the Tories $1,200 a year cheques a universal childcare program. I am not going to debate whether this is a good or a bad policy, I've discussed that elsewhere, but at the very least call the program what it is, a baby bonus, not a universal childcare program, which it isn't. It is time for Harper to do his job as prime-minister in representing all Canadians and quit using the office to smear his opponents. I have no problem with him smearing them at party rallies or on the party site, that is fair game, but leave the partisan politics out of the PMO's office.
While I realize Liberals have sometimes said some nasty things about Harper that I felt were over the top, I feel Harper has been using the PMO office more to promote his own re-election chances rather than serving all Canadians. At least Paul Martin limited his attacks, as vicious as they were (and even I believe they were over the top), to party events and party rallies. When acting as prime-minister he stayed away for partisan attacks and focused on uniting all Canadians. For example the PM's website was totally non-partisan when Martin was prime-minister, while today it is blatantly partisan. It is also in some cases outright lies such as the link calling the Tories $1,200 a year cheques a universal childcare program. I am not going to debate whether this is a good or a bad policy, I've discussed that elsewhere, but at the very least call the program what it is, a baby bonus, not a universal childcare program, which it isn't. It is time for Harper to do his job as prime-minister in representing all Canadians and quit using the office to smear his opponents. I have no problem with him smearing them at party rallies or on the party site, that is fair game, but leave the partisan politics out of the PMO's office.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 8:42 PM
16 Comments:
But it can only be called a war crime if Israel deliberately targeted a civilian area where there were no military posts. If Hezbollah was hiding military targets amongst civilians, then Hezbollah is the one committing war crimes since it is illegal to use civilian areas as military targets.
I have to disagree with this assessment. The Israeli military could have violated the laws of war if it failed to take appropriate steps to minimize the risk of casualties, even if it was attacking a military target. Intentionally targetting civilians is always war crime, but inflicting civilian casualties disproportionate to the military objective, even without intending to cause civilian casualties, is also a war crime.
Also, if Hezbollah used civilians as human shields for their rocket launchers, they too have violated the laws of war. However, this does not excuse violations by the Israeli military. The issues are separate and it is a mistake to conflate them, as you appear to have done here.
Anonymous - You do have a valid point, however I think until a proper investigation is completed, it is best to not call it a war crime. As for the proportionality, that is a tough one since certainly the attacks were not proportionate to kidnapping two Israeli soliders, but when you consider Hezbollah has fired numerous rockets at Israel and has called for wiping Israel off the map, then it would be proportionate.
The problem here is that if a country is putting rocket launchers in civilian areas, does that mean Israel should do nothing or take them out. They obviously must do whatever is possible civilian casualties, however they should not rule out hitting them if there is no alternative. The important point of his entry was Harper needs to apologize for his blatant calling the Liberals anti-Israeli. My assessment is quite similiar to that of Bob Rae who I believe is quite balanced on Middle East policy.
You do have a valid point, however I think until a proper investigation is completed, it is best to not call it a war crime.
While a proper International investigation has not been completed, both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, both respected and highly credible organizations have labelled Israel's actions a war crime.
If only Harper would speak off the cuff more often, perhaps he would be gone much sooner.
I should add, Miles, that it is not only targeting civilian areas deliberately that is a war crime. It is also considered a war crime not to take due care to avoid civilians.
From the Human Rights Watch report on the conflict:
The Israeli government claims that it targets only Hezbollah, and that fighters from the group are using civilians as human shields, thereby placing them at risk. Human Rights Watch found no cases in which Hezbollah deliberately used civilians as shields to protect them from retaliatory IDF attack. Hezbollah occasionally did store weapons in or near civilian homes and fighters placed rocket launchers within populated areas or near U.N. observers, which are serious violations of the laws of war because they violate the duty to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian casualties. However, those cases do not justify the IDF’s extensive use of indiscriminate force which has cost so many civilian lives. In none of the cases of civilian deaths documented in this report is there evidence to suggest that Hezbollah forces or weapons were in or near the area that the IDF targeted during or just prior to the attack.
While a proper International investigation has not been completed, both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, both respected and highly credible organizations have labelled Israel's actions a war crime.
I am not suggesting that it wasn't a war crime, but I think it was inappropriate to call it that until a full investigation was done. Also Hezbollah could be at fault here to. If it was an accident, than it is a tragedy, but not a war crime, but if it was deliberate than it was a war crime unless it was proportionate to the threat.
If only Harper would speak off the cuff more often, perhaps he would be gone much sooner.
Thats for sure. I think all we have to do is bring up some of his past quotes. His real views may appeal to the 15-20% who are right wing ideologues, but I don't think they would sit well amongst the 20-25% who are centre-right voters and are the ones Harper needs to get a majority.
I should add, Miles, that it is not only targeting civilian areas deliberately that is a war crime. It is also considered a war crime not to take due care to avoid civilians.
From the Human Rights Watch report on the conflict:
You are right that one must go to great lengths to avoid war crimes. Whether a war crime or not, since I am not an expert here, I think Harper's comments of the Liberals being anti-Israeli was innappropriate and he should apologize immediately. Such divisive tactics are totally unbecoming of a prime-minister.
Whether a war crime or not, since I am not an expert here, I think Harper's comments of the Liberals being anti-Israeli was innappropriate and he should apologize immediately. Such divisive tactics are totally unbecoming of a prime-minister.
I agree. Inappropriate and inacurate.
BTW the CPC is naive if this will win them any significant Jewish support, they've historically voted Liberal and NDP and their support for the Tories is very low. Jewish Canadians are smart enough to know that none of the parties are anti-Israel and they hate the religious right far more than the occasional criticism of Israel from the Libs.
Besides I doubt Iggy is going to be leader now - too many gaffes. It will be Rae or Dion.
Mike - I don't think any party is anti-Israel. I think the NDP tends to have a bias towards Palestine while the Tories towards Israel and the Liberals are divided, but generally try not to blindly support any party.
BTW the CPC is naive if this will win them any significant Jewish support, they've historically voted Liberal and NDP and their support for the Tories is very low. Jewish Canadians are smart enough to know that none of the parties are anti-Israel and they hate the religious right far more than the occasional criticism of Israel from the Libs.
Besides I doubt Iggy is going to be leader now - too many gaffes. It will be Rae or Dion.
Even if the CPC did pick up a large chunk of the Jewish vote, most of the ridings with large Jewish communities went Liberal in a landslide so it wouldn't win them many new seats. I really have never bought into this idea of ethnic block voting. I think you will find that while certain ethnicities may have a tendency to vote for a certain party, you still have a significant amount who go for other parties.
The Liberals have made this the most over exagerated comment of all time. The comment was "Most Liberal leadership contestants have taken anti-Israeli positions". Seriously, the Liberals just needed to rally around somthing here and they chose this.
Most Liberal leadership contestants have taken anti-Israeli positions is not a visious attack, its the PM saying what it looks like.
And this is not some ingenius plan to gain support for the Canadian jewish population. The Conservatives have always been pro-Israel, the fact that they are in office is no difference.
And Israel took the most steps by any country in the history of warfare to limit civilian casualties in this conflict. More then we did in Yugoslavia for absolutly sure. I mean they would call your house after 4 days of leafletts telling you an attack was coming.
I should add, Miles, that it is not only targeting civilian areas deliberately that is a war crime. It is also considered a war crime not to take due care to avoid civilians.
Hey Mike, can you give me an example of one country ever that took more steps to limit civilian casualties in the history of warfare then Israel did in this conflict?
Most Liberal leadership contestants have taken anti-Israeli positions is not a visious attack, its the PM saying what it looks like.
Wrong! Michael Ignatieff has made clear that he supports Israel on the whole even if he may disagree with an individual action. Stephane Dion and Gerard Kennedy have refused to call it a war crime, while Bob Rae left the NDP partially over their Israel policies. In fact Bob Rae is half Jewish himself and his wife and children are Jewish. Joe Volpe and Scott Brison are just as pro-Israeli as Harper, so saying the Liberals are anti-Israeli is an outright lie.
And this is not some ingenius plan to gain support for the Canadian jewish population. The Conservatives have always been pro-Israel, the fact that they are in office is no difference.
I agree with this. Considering the Muslim population is now larger than the Jewish population and growing at a far more rapid pace, if anything it would make more political sense to back Lebanon. However, it is possible this was done more to appeal to the religious right who are pro-Israel not so much in that they support Israel but they believe once the Israelis conquer all their former land, Jesus will return to the earth and it will be the end of the world.
And Israel took the most steps by any country in the history of warfare to limit civilian casualties in this conflict. More then we did in Yugoslavia for absolutly sure. I mean they would call your house after 4 days of leafletts telling you an attack was coming.
Once again I agree Israel has taken great steps to avoid civilian casualties. My problem here is Harper calling the Liberal party anti-Israeli and putting a blanket generalization on a party that is divided on the issue. Perhaps this could be said about the NDP and Bloc Quebecois, but certainly not the Liberals. In fact some of the strongest backers of Israel are Liberal MPs.
In fact I think Harper's comments are likely to hurt the CPC in the Jewish community. By implying that only he and his party are "pro-Israel" and the other parties are "anti-Israel" he insults the intelligence of the vast vast vast majority of Canadian Jews who don't vote Tory.
Anonymous - That is certainly a possibility, although considering some prominent Jews have quit the Liberal party it could help Harper. However, help or hurt him amongst the Jewish community, the ridings with large Jewish communities went Liberal massively so even if some go Conservative next time around, it would not be enough to swing the riding over to the Conservatives. On the other hand, it may cost him seats in Quebec and will make it very difficult in future elections to gain support from the Muslim community who are growing quite rapidly and in some areas such as Brampton/Mississauga, Ottawa South are large enough in numbers that they could prevent Harper from winning those ridings.
That was me - forgot to sign.
Hey Mike, can you give me an example of one country ever that took more steps to limit civilian casualties in the history of warfare then Israel did in this conflict?
Brad:
I don't know how one would quantify such a thing. Civilian casualties are often one of the least recorded events in a war. Your question is a red herring anyways. A war crime is a war crime.
I would not try and argue that a mass murderer who has only murdered 4 people is somehow 'better' than one who has murdered 10 people.
"Lets remember Bob Rae is half Jewish"
How can you be half-Jewish? Oh wait, I forgot Bob Rae is half-retarded.
How can you be half-Jewish? Oh wait, I forgot Bob Rae is half-retarded.
Good to see you finally come on the comments mack. Bob Rae's father's side was Jewish, but mother was Scottish. And no Bob Rae is not retarded. He made bad decisions in Ontario, but he has a Rhodes Scholar. Besides what Harper said was wrong and he should apologize.
Post a Comment
<< Home