Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxm.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!abeles From: abeles@mhuxm.UUCP (J. Abeles (Bellcore, Murray Hill, NJ)) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish,net.politics Subject: Re: Terrorism Inc. Message-ID: <449@mhuxm.UUCP> Date: Tue, 15-Oct-85 18:44:40 EDT Article-I.D.: mhuxm.449 Posted: Tue Oct 15 18:44:40 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 17-Oct-85 00:28:53 EDT References: <488@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP> <12165@rochester.UUCP> <491@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 90 Xref: watmath net.religion.jewish:2562 net.politics:11504 (Odd numbers of ">"'s are Mr. Aourouri (sp?) ): > > > 2) Israeli war-jets, with the active assistance of the US... > > Your #2 comment is an extremely dangerous statement. Do you have any proof? > Yes! I do have evidence that the US actively participated in the > Israeli raid on Tunis, by refueling israeli war jets. > Refering to a newspaper article written by a french > military analyst and published in the french newspaper "Le Monde" > (The equivalent of the Washington Post in France) the day after the > raid. > In that article, the author asserts that Israel has indeed refueling > capabilities consisting of 3 air tankers. The raid on Tunis has > been carried out by an escadron of 8 jets. The analyst shows then, > that it is mathematically impossible for those 3 tankers to refuel > the escadron of 8 jets, given the distance, the speed and the tank > capacity of the jets and the refueling tankers. > After eliminating the possibility of Egypt, Italy, Turkey Greece or > France aiding the israeli air force in its mission, he concludes > that the US helped refueling the israeli war jets . Mr. Aourouri (spelling?) exercizes suspicious discrimination in his choice of sources. In the original article he claimed concern for a world battered by terrorists. But he is totally confused about what constitutes terrorism--including Israel as a "terrorist nation!" Since he accepts the childish propaganda of the "Ashaf (Hebrew acronym for PLO)," and from his name, I suspect that he may be of a persuasion similar to most PLO supporters. If this is so (now donning my psychiatrist's cap), he probably truly recognizes the utter destructiveness of the Ashaf. Unfortunately, he cannot bring himself to the recognition that the PLO (with other Arabs) and not Israel pursues the psychopathy of destruction. For those not familiar with, e.g., the writings of the psychologist Erich Fromm, I urge you to consult one of his books with the title something like "Man and the Nature of Human Destruction (that isn't the actual title)." The introduction to this book alone will acquaint you with the similarity between constructive and destructive behavior. To epitomize this concept, man has the built-in desire to influence his surroundings; while it is preferable to influence them in a constructive way (such as building a homeland for Jews), when this is not possible it is still satisfying to do so in a destructive way (such as senseless terrorism against targets unrelated to achieving any positive goals). Unfortunately, it appears that the Anti-Israel Arabs have fomented such hate among generations of youth, particularly in (but not limited to) the Palestinian "refugee" camps (these camps cannot be considered refugee camps when their inhabitants, now into their third generation, have never lived in lands now contained within Israel--i.e., they are not "refugee"'s but rather, resident aliens) that they are unable to distinguish between constructive and destructive actions. This will have the most far-reaching implications for their future abilities to support themselves, to advance their standards of living, etc., etc. I personally am deeply disturbed by the effective destruction of a large population, but in this case sadly there isn't anything I can do to help. There is no possibility of branding the Israelis as terrorists. I do not expect non-Jews to feel a special joy because of the existence of the State of Israel, but that is quite different from accepting it as a sovereign state (something no Arab country with the exception of Egypt has shown any inclination to do). As a sovereign state, Israel has the right to protect itself, and its people, against enemies. Israel has never rattled its sabre threateningly against any of the Arab States, but not a day passes during which several of the Arab States don`t vilify and threaten little Israel with destruction. When Israeli men are forced to lay down their livelihoods and pick up rifles, and manage to repel the would-be invaders, they know very well that if they fail their entire country would be overrun by hostile armies and Israel would be wiped off the face of the map and they would all die, G-d forbid that this should ever happen! But when they take over the Sinai peninsula, they are forced to return it to Egypt without a peace treaty not once but three times. Israel, it is widely acknowledged, could have had its troops in the streets of not only Cairo, but also Damascus, Syria during the 1973 war--what constructive Arab leader would resisted marching into Jerusalem if they ever get the opportunity? For those who believe that some kind of "Jewish Lobby" is responsible for the support given Israel by the United States, I offer you this parallel between Israel and the U. S. and between the Arabs and the Russians: After the end of WW II, the U. S. possessed the most potent military weapon ever known until then to mankind. The U. S. could have exercised its military influence at that juncture to dominate the rest of the world--particularly the Soviets who were marching into German territory (of course, Communism was a fitting punishment for the Germans). But we did not. Do you for a moment think that given the Soviets would have refrained from using the nuclear bomb to advance its ideological ends? Actually, many suspect that the same situation exists today, and that the Israelis have the bomb, whereas the Arabs do not. --J. Abeles