Please, If You Want to Help Israel, Stop Using the Word "Conflict" - by Varda Meyers Epstein

In a conflict, there's no question of guilt or blame or innocence. There are just two rivals lashing out at each other in perfect equality, both fighting for the same thing. Which is so much nicer, after all, than thinking about the men who kill Jewish babies in their strollers and cribs, solely on the basis of their religion.

Varda Meyers Epstein..
Judean Rose/Elder of Ziyon..
17 July '19..

If you really want to help Israel, please lose the word “conflict” from your vocabulary. There is no such thing as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A conflict is two sides attacking each other. This is simply not the case when it comes to Israel and the Arabs. The Arabs attack, the Israelis defend.

People like the notion of a “conflict.” It’s the American way. It’s tidy.

Americans like to think, “It takes two to tango,” which really means “It takes two parties to have a conflict and we prefer a conflict to one party attacking the other so let’s call it that."

It's not only Americans, of course. Progressives, in general, like to say things like, “There’s bloodshed on both sides,” as if the cause of blood being shed has no import, no weight. A dead murderer is equal in death to his victim, therefore the cause of death must be also be equal. One fact creates the other, in spite of the truth.

So if you have a home invasion and the cops come and shoot someone who just killed your family member, is that also "bloodshed on both sides?" https://t.co/6kdbEZxTqQ

— (((Varda Epstein))) (@epavard) July 16, 2019

Because people have this need for parity, for fairness. But this situation does not satisfy the necessary conditions that define conflict.

A conflict must have two parties at odds with each other. You don’t have that here. In the case of Israel, you have one side minding its own business and interests.


The losers, meanwhile, can’t cope with reality. They won’t make the best of a situation and you can’t make them. They prefer to maim, kill, and destroy: an adult version of the two-year-old tantrum, albeit an evil version. Because two-year-olds aren’t responsible in any moral sense for their choices. But adults, are.

In this case, the adults, who happen to be Arabs, know just how bad it is to, for instance, kill a ten-month-old infant in her stroller by sniper fire. This makes the act evil, which means that in no sense is such an attack at all like a two-year-old’s tantrum. It is, instead, a willful act of ugly violence. A deed of the Devil.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.