|
<< On Vacation | Main | NRA vs. Hunters >> July 10, 2004Conservatives Should Support Israel Wall DecisionIn some ways, it is perplexing that conservatives don't roar their support of the World Court's decision condemning Israel's construction of the wall slicing through Palestinian land. Or at least they should support the parts that read like a strong anti-"takings" decision protecting property rights: Israel is accordingly under an obligation to return the land, orchards, olive groves and other immovable property seized from any natural or legal person for purposes of construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In the event that such restitution should prove to be materially impossible, Israel has an obligation to compensate the persons in question for the damage suffered.This is the most basic statement of required takings compensation doctrine that exists, yet conservatives don't even seem to care. This highlights how unhinged is conservative support for every abuse by the Israeli regime, since they blithefully support actions by Israel that they normally denounce as economic evil. Of course, the takings compensation portion of the World Court decision is only part of the decision, but the basic idea that the wall will fatally disrupt the economic viability of Palestinians corralled into the remaining portions of the West Bank has been the basic criticism all along. Yes, the Wall is also an international land grab by Israel, but it is its deliberate economic disruption of life for the Palestinians that is most condemned. Posted by Nathan at July 10, 2004 07:42 AM Related posts:
Trackback PingsTrackBack URL for this entry: CommentsIf the analogy holds true that every leftist wishes he could be a Marxist, it is equally true that every conservative wishes he could be a libertarian. Unfortunately, conservative accept that government has several useful roles to play, prominent among them national defense. And while the right might be hesitant to countenance uncompensated taking of American land for the sake of national defense do you really think they'd shed a tear if government seizure of, say, Canadian...better yet Iraqi...land was deemed necessary to safeguard our troops and our people? The wall is a necessary evil; it has been at least partly responsible for the 'all quiet on the Middle Eastern front' that has existed for the past several months. Additionally it may provide the only way Israel can remove itself from much of the Palestinian territories while still retaining security. Posted by: AnonCon at July 11, 2004 02:26 PM By the same token, it's more than a little hypocritical for progressives to criticize Israel for putting the national interest -- its right to self-defense -- above property rights. I notice that you make no mention of the possibility that the wall is a response to years of terrorist attacks, launched against Israel by the Palestinians. BTW, Israel has long since offered to compensate the Palestinians for their land behind the wall. Posted by: Chef Ragout at July 12, 2004 10:03 PM personally, i can't see how the wall/fence (as actually built and planned) is for self-defense... of course, my knowledge is limited... i've studied the maps (for example at b'tselem and i've visited just three of the west bank villages affected: jayyus, kafr laqif, kafr qaddum. even the idf soldiers i talked with did not claim the wall/fence was for security. some of them (as well as the settlers i spoke with) described it as clearing arabs from the land. anoncon and chef ragout - why do you think the fence/wall is for security and not a land grab of more palestinian territory? Posted by: selise at July 13, 2004 08:32 PM And considering as how it will mark the end of negotiations by Isreal and the defeat of the idea of pushing Isreal into the sea, it will cause a bloody civil war within Palestine. Of which, we are beginning to see the first news reports of just the last few days. Posted by: Chad at July 20, 2004 01:07 PM I still am puzzled about why the left consistently criticizes EVERY SINGLE self-defense measure Israel takes, even one as passive as building a fence. Why is it that self-proclaimed progressives hate Israel so much, ironically the only progressive country in the Middle East, and defends their fascist enemies. It seems to me the left is at the least indifferent and probably even gleeful over the murder of Israelis, at least that is true of the radical left such as ANSWER AND ISM. The truth is they want Israel destroyed. They want Jews ethnically cleansed. Also why doesn't the left focus any attention on true human rights disasters around the world such as the Sudan, and focuses a disproportionate amount of time on Israel? Posted by: Laura at July 21, 2004 09:34 PM I still am puzzled about why the left consistently criticizes EVERY SINGLE self-defense measure Israel takes, even one as passive as building a fence. Why is it that self-proclaimed progressives hate Israel so much, ironically the only progressive country in the Middle East, and defends their fascist enemies. It seems to me the left is at the least indifferent and probably even gleeful over the murder of Israelis, at least that is true of the radical left such as ANSWER AND ISM. The truth is they want Israel destroyed. They want Jews ethnically cleansed. Also why doesn't the left focus any attention on true human rights disasters around the world such as the Sudan, and focuses a disproportionate amount of time on Israel? Posted by: Laura at July 21, 2004 09:35 PM I love the wall Isreal is building. The best part is that there are 2 Palestinian Companies supplying all of the concrete to build the wall. Let's all watch this one, if it works I suggest we build one around America. That will keep those illegals out... Posted by: Puff Driver at July 25, 2004 08:31 PM laura, the wall is NOT being build for self-defense. look at the maps. if it was build on israeli land along the green line, i don't know anyone who would object... but, that is NOT what is happening - it is a major land grab and ethnic cleansing. certainly none of the ISM people i met are indifferent let alone gleeful over the murder or suffering of israelis. where their postion may differ from some is that they are also not indifferent to the murder or suffering of palestinians. also, ISM is not radical left - unless you consider the proposition that the universality of human rights is a radical left position. Posted by: selise at July 28, 2004 08:52 AM Laura, Posted by: Bill at July 29, 2004 10:33 AM Post a comment
|
Series-
Social Security
Past Series
Current Weblog
January 04, 2005 January 03, 2005 January 02, 2005 January 01, 2005 ... and Why That's a Good Thing - Judge Richard Posner is guest blogging at Leiter Reports and has a post on why morality has to influence politics... MORE... December 31, 2004 December 30, 2004 December 29, 2004 December 28, 2004 December 24, 2004 December 22, 2004 December 21, 2004 December 20, 2004 December 18, 2004 December 17, 2004 December 16, 2004
Referrers to site
|