What would any western country do?

[AmyBright]

I would like to see how long the Palestinians would be around if they were bombing cafes and Discos in Paris, London or Rome on a daily basis. We know what the U.S. Government would do if we had 10 or 20 civilians dead every couple days. It would be called something like "Operation Civilian Defence" and the whole place would be flying the U.S. flag in less then a week. CNN would be interviewing Palestinians at the nearest McDonald, thanking the U.S. for liberating them from the Israeli Occupiers and the Palestinian Extremists.

The 10-year old boy that's currently featured on CNN as a symbol of Israeli aggression would be renamed collateral damage in the U.S. War on terror.

I think Israel should be given the green light to comb through the territories and arrest or kill the terrorist network responsible for the daily attacks on it's citizens. Only then can these two people talk about peace with security.

You can't have a World War on Terror and then make exceptions when it comes to Israel.

[Flame]

All you have to do here in the US is show up to a peacful protest and the national guard is all over the place... the WTO protests in Seattle is the most recent example... and the rodney kning riots... no country on earth allows security to run amok... but the double standard applies to how many countries other then Israel???? Lets see... there aren't any others!

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by AmyBright
I think Israel should be given the green light to comb through the territories and arrest or kill the terrorist network responsible for the daily attacks on it's citizens. Only then can these two people talk about peace with security.

You can't have a World War on Terror and then make exceptions when it comes to Israel.

Exactly right.

Here are some examples of what happens in response to terrorism in other countries:

1. Muslim Chechnian rebels bomb a Moscow mall. Within 24 hours the Russians dynamite 7 blocks of apartment buildings where the terrorists' families live in Chechnya, and then bomb hundreds of Islamic militants. From that time on, there have been no further terrorist attacks in Russia.

2. The US gets attacked by Islamikazis on 9/11. Untold thousands of Islamic militants bombed to smithereens, including hundreds of dead Afghanis as "collateral damage." The terrorist Taliban government is destroyed.

Contrast this strong reaction to the non-reaction of the US when Islamic suicide terrorists mass murdered 63 American soldiers and injured 120 in Beirut in the 80's and the Islamic terrorist attack in the Khobar towers in the 90's where nothing was done.

From this, it's easy to see that only massive military action against terrorism works.

The fact that there is criticism of the Israeli war on terrorism, is nothing but pure hypocrisy and a stamp of approval for Arab slaughter of Jews.

[ibrodsky]

We Jews are fond of saying "never again." Well, militant Islam is a neoNazi movement and they are out to destroy us. I believe that if 10 - 15% of Muslims think the WTC attack was moral, then we must figure there are at least 100 - 150 million Muslims who are for destroying Israel and wiping us out.

I don't think I'm an alarmist... but we are witnessing a clear rise of anti-semitism. A French Ambassador called Israel "that ty little country" and got away with it. A UN-sponsored conference against racism turns into an Israel and Jew-bashing conference.

I'm reading Conor Cruise O'Brien's book about Israel called "The Siege." Very interesting, though he is not quite as supportive of Israel as I was led to believe. But there is a very interesting comment in the book -- almost eerie.

He talks about a survey of Israelis and how many Jews felt that a Holocaust could happen again. In fact, about 25% believed a Holocaust could happen in the US.

He basically dismisses this because the US is a society based on rule of law. However -- he says he would not absolutely rule out a major wave of anti-semtism in the US. He said that if the US were to experience some sort of national calamity it could create a need for a scapegoat.

Hmmm. 9/11?

Now think of all of the people who say we brought 9/11 on ourselves through our support for Israel (you know, that "ty little" democracy in the midst of all of those nice Arab dictatorships).

[ibrodsky]

BTW, I forgot to say: nice post AmyBright!

[Flame]

For some reason only Jews see the writing on the wall as the goyim world remains not just indifferent (wouldn't expect them to care, realistically) but to be in this sort of denial, that it is the poor love filled arab muslims who are the ones suffereing... well... if any of us wondered how hitlers vision came about, I have to say, we are seeing now what happened then, icy cold indifference, blame, and denial. Very scary! Especially since everyone knows exactly what happened before. I always had a eerie feeling in the back of my mind that I wouldn't even be able to count on my non-Jewish friends to see reality, to even half-way understand, and if it comes to another "solution" that they would infact turn a blind eye.

I think the goyim prefere the stereotype version for what a victim looks like... shabby clothes, not much going for them, some poverty thrown in... Jews can't ever be seen as any one's victim... good jobs, nice homes, dress nicely... we don't look or act like victims... so how can we make such a claim..... look how those poor palestinins live... The one thing I am getting really sick of is this bleeding heart attitude that someone elses poverty is a result of your doing well.

If the US and Israel both vanished from the face of the earth... I really doubt that all these 3rd world countries would suddenly florish and have cozy lives.

Sorry I got off track... but it sort of all ties in with the way these PC bleeding hearts view the world. They are VERY scary!

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Flame
well... if any of us wondered how hitlers vision came about, I have to say, we are seeing now what happened then, icy cold indifference, blame, and denial. Very scary! Especially since everyone knows exactly what happened before. I always had a eerie feeling in the back of my mind that I wouldn't even be able to count on my non-Jewish friends to see reality, to even half-way understand, and if it comes to another "solution" that they would infact turn a blind eye.

This is very true. I think we need to do more to debunk the myths, counter the Islamist lies, and encourage Christians supportive of Israel.

I suggest everyone who supports Israel send a thank you e-mail to Rush Limbaugh... rush@eibnet.com. He is incredibly supportive of Israel, sees exactly what is going on (he has criticized the administration over recent comments), and has retained a rabbi as an advisor.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
I suggest everyone who supports Israel send a thank you e-mail to Rush Limbaugh... rush@eibnet.com. He is incredibly supportive of Israel, sees exactly what is going on (he has criticized the administration over recent comments), and has retained a rabbi as an advisor.

Done. Thanks for posting the e-mail link.

[Flame]

Good idea

[cerulean]

The New Republic (at http://www.tnr.com/ ) regularly has interesting articles on Israel, including this one:

http://www.thenewrepublic.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020325&s=notebook032502pope

[Odysee]

Absolutely!
Like a few months ago, the Palestinians assasinated Revham Zeevi, could you imagine what would happen to any militia group who took out a US politician? Anihilation!

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Odysee
Absolutely!
Like a few months ago, the Palestinians assasinated Revham Zeevi, could you imagine what would happen to any militia group who took out a US politician? Anihilation!

I have my doubts about that. One of President Bush's first concerns after 9/11 was to reassure Arabs and Moslems. Then the U.S. went to great lengths to prove to the world that our mission in Afghanistan was both to seek justice and provide humanitarian relief.

The problem is that we grossly underestimate the depth of hatred and number of shock troops on the other side.

Both George Will and Daniel Pipes have recently made comments to the effect that the US is losing the War Against Terrorism, and I have to agree. We really should have sent a shockwave through the Islamic world. 9/11 should have been a wakeup call to them . Either they root out militant Islam or face massive military force.

[edaly]

Massive military force is probably bang on for the kind of reaction a western country would have to the types of attacks Israel has suffered.

However I don't think this is necessarily a wise course of action. I would submit that sometimes overwhelming force doesn't act as a deterrent, but instead increases the will and determination of the people being attacked with overwhelming force.

Another risk is that if that force is overly brutal and attacks civilians, it can decrease the will of the people supporting it in the first place. Vietnam comes to mind.

I see a number of very informed posts on this forum from people like NewsGuy, but I don't see that much balance of opinion. The general consensus seems to be that Israel is holding back and should be responding with overwhelming military force to the attacks they suffer.

Well put me down for one vote against this philosophy.

In my view, Israel is responding quite severely already. The death toll in the latest intifada is around 3 to 1, palestinians to isralis, and most of them civilians on both sides.

If Israel were to crank up the heat even more, we're basically talking about killing a LOT of civilians. Will that act as a deterrent when nothing else has? No way, IMO.

Put it another way.. do the suicide bombings that kill civilians act as a deterrent to Israel's own military actions? If not, then why would the reverse be true?


edaly

[gev]

I agree that a larger death toll is not something Israel should try to accomplish.
However, the fact of the matter is that right now the Majority of the Palestanian think that Terror attacks and the Intifada is the right way to acheive that goal, this has to be changed.
Israel should fight Terrorists, kill or arrest, it doesnt matter.

Throughout the history of israel, Israel has survived only by proving to the arab world that nothing can be gained by their agressiveness. This is what it should do now too.

[ibrodsky]

While I agree that just killing a large number of people is not the solution, that doesn't mean massive military force is inappropriate.

What Israel needs to do is kill the right people and discourage their followers.

I think one has to take into account the fact that the Oslo Peace Process and the US' determination to keep asking the Father of All Terrorists to "try harder" has created an environment in which the Palestinians no longer believe that Israel has the will to win.

We also need to keep in mind that Iran is heavily involved. There is a constant threat of Hezbollah missile attacks, and Iran/Hezbollah is becoming increasingly brazen in funneling weapons to the Palestinians, plus training.

Finally, it's clear that President Bush doesn't have the stomach to take on Iran and Hezbollah. Instead, it looks like he is obsessed with finishing a longstanding family dispute between his Dad and Saddam Hussein.

Iran is the bigger threat. Like Arafat, they don't hesitate to lie about their actions or intentions. They are already creating mischief in Afghanistan, and are becoming an increasing force in Lebanon.

At some point, Israel and/or the US needs to crush Hezbollah or the War Against Terrorism will be lost. These people are every bit as evil as Al Qaeda, and perhaps more dangerous, as they have created a reputation for themselves as charity workers to provide cover for their mass murder activities. I would not be surprised if they played a key role in the Passover Massacre of 2002.

[edaly]

How do they kill the right people though? These people are intermeshed with the civilians, and don't wear uniforms. Further, it's been shown by Israel's own actions that assassinating key extremists only enrages them further - new blood gets promoted to take their places and the attacks continue. I don't think there is any chance for a deterrant against people who are so willing to die for their cause.

Thus I think massive military force is inappropriate. The way out is not by bringing the hammer down harder, but by lifting it up when by most standards it should be coming down. How else does the tit-for-tat cycle end? Someone has to be the bigger man and take some awful violence without responding, while at the same time easing up their own violence. I hope it would be the Palestinians. I also hope it would be the Israelis. Neither seems to have a long-term view of the situation.


edaly

[gev]

What will happen if Israel would retreat is the exact opposite of what you think. there will be more terror and the support for terror would rise.

You see, if Israel retreat now Terror groups will see this as a victory and that it is the result of their Terror activities.

A Palestanian survey show that most of the Palestanian public beleives that with Terror attacks they will gain more than with talks. what you are actually saying: encourage that claim!

The terrorism is not as a result of any "crimes" or attacks, it is for the gain of political achievements, as an example: 1996 terror attacks were in the middle of the peace talks.

So more pressure will not solve this yes, but collecting weapons and arresting and killing as much terrorists as possible will convice the palestanians that nothing is to be gained by terror.

[edaly]

I disagree - I think we've seen quite clearly that rounding up weapons and killing as many terrorists as possible has only bred more terrorism, and not convinced the palestinians that nothing more is to be gained by terror.

This is because it's impossible to just round up weapons and kill _only_ the terrorists. The IDF invariably ends up killing countless civilians, which in turn enrages the palestinians and they turn to terror.

When Israel pulled out of south Lebanon, largely as a result of the persistent terrorism of the Hezbollah, there were a lot less terror attacks by the Hezbollah, if only for the very simple reason that there weren't very many Israeli targets in Lebanon to attack anymore! It's also interesting that in the latest Intifada the Hezbollah have carried out a tiny fraction of the attacks compared to the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Fatah, and all the rest.

It's sad that the palestinians have had such poor leadership and such violent tendencies - imagine if they had a Ghandi-like figure leading them to peaceful resistance.


edaly

[Flame]

Ghandi... no better or different than any other arab appoligist, he as well places the onus on Jews, he isn't a very bright person in his logic or history.... and pretty much says he understands the arab's use of violence ... mind you, these words are written during hitler's reign.
---------------
Gandhi on Jews & Middle-East
PART 1


A Non-Violent Look at Conflict
& Violence

Article Written on November 20, 1938
Published in Harijan on November 26, 1938
This Web Page Last Updated: December 04,2001

It is of utmost importance to remember
the time of this writing. It is 1938, Hitler is
ruling Germany, and the clouds of a
terrible conflict have begun to form.
Gandhi's article shows his incredible
sense of right and wrong, his blind faith
in his methodology, and his profound
vision of things to come. -Ed.

by Mohandas K. Gandhi

Several letters have been received by me asking
me to declare my views about the Arab-Jew
question in Palestine and the persecution of the
Jews in Germany. It is not without hesitation that
I venture to offer my views on this very difficult
question.

My sympathies are all with the Jews. I have
known them intimately in South Africa. Some of
them became life-long companions. Through
these friends I came to learn much of their
age-long persecution. They have been the
untouchables of Christianity. The parallel
between their treatment by Christians and the
treatment of untouchables by Hindus is very
close. Religious sanction has been invoked in
both cases for the justification of the inhuman
treatment meted out to them. Apart from the
friendships, therefore, there is the more common
universal reason for my sympathy for the Jews.

But my sympathy does not blind me to the
requirements of justice. The cry for the national
home for the Jews does not make much appeal to
me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and
the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered
after return to Palestine. Why should they not,
like other peoples of the earth, make that
country their home where they are born and
where they earn their livelihood?

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense
that England belongs to the English or France to
the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose
the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in
Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral
code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction
but that of the last war. Surely it would be a
crime against humanity to reduce the proud
Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the
Jews partly or wholly as their national home.

[Flame]

PART 2



The nobler course would be to insist on a just
treatment of the Jews wherever they are born
and bred. The Jews born in France are French in
precisely the same sense that Christians born in
France are French. If the Jews have no home but
Palestine, will they relish the idea of being forced
to leave the other parts of the world in which
they are settled? Or do they want a double home
where they can remain at will? This cry for the
national home affords a colorable justification
for the German expulsion of the Jews.

But the German persecution of the Jews seems to
have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old
never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone.
And he is doing it with religious zeal. For he is
propounding a new religion of exclusive and
militant nationalism in the name of which many
inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be
rewarded here and hereafter. The crime of an
obviously mad but intrepid youth is being visited
upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If
there ever could be a justifiable war in the name
of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to
prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race,
would be completely justified. But I do not
believe in any war. A discussion of the pros and
cons of such a war is therefore outside my
horizon or province.

But if there can be no war against Germany, even
for such a crime as is being committed against
the Jews, surely there can be no alliance with
Germany. How can there be alliance between a
nation which claims to stand for justice and
democracy and one which is the declared enemy
of both? Or is England drifting towards armed
dictatorship and all it means?

Germany is showing to the world how efficiently
violence can be worked when it is not hampered
by any hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as
humanitarianism. It is also showing how hideous,
terrible and terrifying it looks in its nakedness.

Can the Jews resist this organized and shameless
persecution? Is there a way to preserve their
self-respect, and not to feel helpless, neglected
and forlorn? I submit there is. No person who has
faith in a living God need feel helpless or forlorn.
Jehovah of the Jews is a God more personal than
the God of the Christians, the Musalmans or the
Hindus, though, as a matter of fact in essence, He
is common to all the one without a second and
beyond description. But as the Jews attribute
personality to God and believe that He rules
every action of theirs, they ought not to feel
helpless. If I were a Jew and were born in
Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would
claim Germany as my home even as the tallest
gentile German may, and challenge him to shoot
me or cast me in the dungeon; I would refuse to
be expelled or to submit to discriminating
treatment . And for doing this, I should not wait
for the fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance
but would have confidence that in the end the
rest are bound to follow my example. If one Jew
or all the Jews were to accept the prescription
here offered, he or they cannot be worse off than
now. And suffering voluntarily undergone will
bring them an inner strength and joy which no
number of resolutions of sympathy passed in the
world outside Germany can.

[Flame]

PART 3

Indeed, even if
Britain, France and America were to declare
hostilities against Germany, they can bring no
inner joy, no inner strength. The calculated
violence of Hitler may even result in a general
massacre of the Jews by way of his first answer to
the declaration of such hostilities. But if the
Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary
suffering, even the massacre I have imagined
could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and
joy that Jehovah had wrought deliverance of the
race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the
god fearing, death has no terror. It is a joyful
sleep to be followed by a waking that would be all
the more refreshing for the long sleep.

It is hardly necessary for me to point out that it is
easier for the Jews than for the Czechs to follow
my prescription. And they have in the Indian
satyagraha campaign in South Africa an exact
parallel. There the Indians occupied precisely the
same place that the Jews occupy in Germany. The
persecution had also a religious tinge. President
Kruger used to say that the white Christians were
the chosen of God and Indians were inferior
beings created to serve the whites. A fundamental
clause in the Transvaal constitution was that
there should be no equality between the whites
and colored races including Asia tics.

There too
the Indians were consigned to ghettos described
as locations. The other disabilities were almost of
the same type as those of the Jews in Germany.
The Indians, a mere handful, resorted to
satyagraha without any backing from the world
outside or the Indian Government. Indeed the
British officials tried to dissuade the satyagrahis
(soldiers of non-violence) from their
contemplated step. World opinion and the Indian
Government came to their aid after eight years of
fighting. And that too was by way of diplomatic
pressure not of a threat of war.


And what has today
become a degrading man-hunt can be turned in
to a calm and determined stand offered by
unarmed men and women possessing the strength
of suffering given to them by Jehovah. It will be
then a truly religious resistance offered against
the godless fury of dehumanized man.

The
German Jews will score a lasting victory over the
German gentiles in the sense that they will have
converted that latter to an appreciation of human
dignity. They will have rendered service to
fellow-Germans and proved their title to be the
real Germans as against those who are today
dragging, however unknowingly, the German
name into the mire.

And now a word to the Jews in Palestine. I have
no doubt that they are going about it the wrong
way. The Palestine of the Biblical conception is
not geographical tract. It is in their hearts. But if
they must look to the Palestine of geography as
their national home, it is wrong to enter it under
the shadow of the British gun.

A religious act
cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet
or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by
the goodwill of the Arabs. They should seek to
convert the Arab heart. The same God rules the
Arab heart, who rules the Jewish heart. They can
offer satyagraha in front of the Arabs and offer
themselves to be shot or thrown in to the Dead
Sea without raising a little finger against them.
They will find the world opinion in the their favor
in their religious aspiration. There are hundreds
of ways of reasoning with the Arabs, if they will
only discard the help of the British bayonet. As it
is, they are co-sharers with the British in
despoiling a people who have done no wrong to
them.

[Flame]

PART 4 (end)


I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they
had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting
what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable
encroachment upon their country. But according
to the accepted canons of right and wrong,
nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in
the face of overwhelming odds.

Let the Jews who claim to be the chosen race
prove their title by choosing the way of
non-violence for vindicating their position on
earth. Every country is their home including
Palestine, not by aggression but by loving service.

Given the will,
the Jews can refuse to be treated as the outcaste
of the West, to be despised or patronized. He can
command the attention and respect of the world
by being man, the chosen creation of God,
instead of being man who is fast sinking to the
brute and forsaken by God. They can add to their
many contributions the surpassing contribution
of non-violent action.

© 1987 Navajivan Trust.

[L@mplighterM]

Thanks for passing along the Gandhi letter very enlightening.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by edaly
I disagree - I think we've seen quite clearly that rounding up weapons and killing as many terrorists as possible has only bred more terrorism, and not convinced the palestinians that nothing more is to be gained by terror.

According to your logic, fighting Nazi Germany should have bred more fascists. And fighting Al Qaeda and the Taliban will breed more of them.

Actually, this is not how the world works. The lesson of history is that if you only fight evil-doers half way, you will end up with more of them. But if you fight them 100% and win, no one will want to join their ranks.

This is because it's impossible to just round up weapons and kill _only_ the terrorists. The IDF invariably ends up killing countless civilians, which in turn enrages the palestinians and they turn to terror.

This is false on two counts. First, it is possible to mainly fight the terrorists. Certainly the people with AK-47s in the streets are not civilians.

Second, with 85% of Palestinians supporting suicide bombing (mass murder of Jews for clearly racist motives), it's harder to find the truly innocent than the terrorists and their supporters.

When Israel pulled out of south Lebanon, largely as a result of the persistent terrorism of the Hezbollah, there were a lot less terror attacks by the Hezbollah, if only for the very simple reason that there weren't very many Israeli targets in Lebanon to attack anymore! It's also interesting that in the latest Intifada the Hezbollah have carried out a tiny fraction of the attacks compared to the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Fatah, and all the rest.

Sure, and if Israel goes away the terrorism will stop.

Your ignorance is encyclopedic. There are not "many" Hezbollah attacks because Hezbollah is in Lebanon and Israel has made it clear it will attack Lebanon's Syrian occupiers if attacked by Hezbollah. Plus, Hezbollah is very involved in aiding Palestinian terrorists. And Hezbollah is attacking Israel right now.

It's sad that the palestinians have had such poor leadership and such violent tendencies - imagine if they had a Ghandi-like figure leading them to peaceful resistance.

And you think all of this is just coincidental? The Palestinians have evil leadership and use evil means because their cause is evil.

You can search all you want, but you will never find a trace of noble sentiment among these racists. They celebrated the deaths of 3,000 Americans and celebrate every terrorist attack against Jews. They bathe in the blood of their victims, glorify the most cruel acts, and purposely target children, elderly, and the helpless.

[Leviathan]

Originally posted by edaly
In my view, Israel is responding quite severely already. The death toll in the latest intifada is around 3 to 1, palestinians to isralis, and most of them civilians on both sides.
edaly

It's interesting to me that after the latest "intifada" began, the daily NA papers and "media outlets" like CNN reports all routinely reported the body counts - ('to date, 37 Palestinians have been killed while 6 Israelis have died' or some such). As of late - and coincident with the Israeli body count rising precipitously - the papers have dropped this little nugget from their daily stories of Palestinian woe.

I would dispute your 3 to 1 figure. I think any fair accounting of damage must allow for the following:

1. Deduct all Palestinian suicide bombers killed by their own repulsive efforts.

2. Deduct all Palestinian suicide bombers killed before they could get to their intended targets.

For interests sake, I'd like to see a count that did NOT include both Palestinian and Israeli's killed during gun battles. What I'd be curious to see is basically a count of women and children killed on each side. Cause it ain't anywhere near 3 to 1.

[L@mplighterM]

Personally I believe that it?s obscene to include terrorists in the total of dead or wounded in any attack on civilians. In other words they should be counted separately.

Whatever the ratio of dead or wounded is moot unless someone is suggesting that when a 1:1 ratio is reached then the other side should lay down their weapons and let terrorists have the next shot.

In any event deliberately and indiscriminately killing someone in a terror attack is a whole lot different than individuals ending up as collateral damage.

Palestinians terrorists and their leaders is just a bunch of killers and thugs. Arafat the brave is a wimp why doesn?t he face the enemy and become a martyr? Out of his mouth spew lies and garbage. Yesterday he was praying aloud for his mortal soul whimpering for help. Help!!!!!!!!!!!!! I?m under attack and holed up by the IDF and they are destroying my compound.

I think his biggest fear is the IDF is going to find incriminating evidence in the compound directly linking him to terrorists.

Help me !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that the best war cry a brave fighter that wants to be a martyr can muster?

As he sits in his bunker watching the flames of the candles flicker I hope the IDF has had enough sense to cut off his water supply.

[edaly]

"In any event deliberately and indiscriminately killing someone in a terror attack is a whole lot different than individuals ending up as collateral damage."

I beg to differ - to a grieving family the two are identical. And this is what drives the palestinians to terrorism. In my opinion Israel engages in state terrorism that is just as harmful as suicide bombing - as seen in the civilian death tolls and humiliating restrictions on the palestinians. When you kill more civilians than the other side - no matter how you do it - then you're just as culpable as they are.

Regarding ibrodsky's comment about fighting Al Qaeda and the Taliban breeding more terrorists, I think that's exactly what will happen. The US may succeed in destroying parts of the network, but it is still losing the war of ideas badly, and that will ensure that new blood will still get pumped into the system.

BTW, let's try and avoid the ad hominems eh.. I may have found your posts ignorant too, but as they say "work the idea, not the person".

Thanks to Flame for posting the Ghandi essay. Very interesting stuff. I still feel palestinians would be better off with a Ghandi-like figure simply for the peaceful resistance it would bring. Israel is not Nazi Germany and would respond much, much better to peaceful resistance than they do to terrorism.


edaly

[L@mplighterM]

I agree to disagree. Anytime that the Palestinians lay down their arms they would not be harmed.

In any event it dosen't appear that they give a damn about their offsprings. It's obsene to capitalize from the death of a child that went on a suicide mission.

Whatever blood is accidently spilt in Israel's pursuit of peace is the Palestinians leaders fault.

Are you suggesting that there should not be any retaliation for the horendeous acts committed by the Palestinians?

I will tell you that the Israelis are showing/have shown remarkable restraint dealing with Palestinians.

[edaly]

Pipe dream suggestion: yes.. neither side retaliates for their civilians killed. They go a full month with no violence.. which opens the door for diplomacy and Tenet / Mitchell or whatever solution they devise.

Basically what I'm suggesting is that someone has to take a longer term view of the situation. Each side is so concerned with sending the wrong 'message' that they keep the tit-for-tat violence going in a neverending cycle. Israel doesn't want to send the message that terrorism works and will go unpunished. And the Palestinians don't want to send the message that brutal occupation and civilian deaths (be they collateral damage or not) are acceptable.

I must admit it's much more likely that a Palestinian end to violence would be more successful than an Israeli end to occupation. An Israeli withdrawal would have to be accompanied by a heavy crackdown by the PA (which would be a very long shot at best), or the extremist groups might deign to continue their attacks.

Nevertheless, after this much time with no positive results, each side should be trying something different. I think it's at least clear that continued reprisals keep things going as-is.


edaly

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by edaly
I disagree - I think we've seen quite clearly that rounding up weapons and killing as many terrorists as possible has only bred more terrorism, and not convinced the palestinians that nothing more is to be gained by terror.
That's very difficult to conclude, because there has not yet been a full-press campaign against the terrorists.

Every time Israel gets ready to deal a decisive blow to terrorism, there is a huge amount of pressure (maybe even blackmail) on Israel not to finish the job. And so it results in a tank parade in and out of the Palestinian terrorist grounds, with a little shooting here and there for symbolism.

Unfortunately, Israel is beholden to the US, and the US, along with the EU, has very different interests than Israel, which results, time after time, in preventing Israel from finishing the job.

Even now, the US and the EU have twisted Israel's arm not to get rid of Arafat and the rest of the PA's top terrorist leadership.

So, it's impossible to know what would happen if Israel did have a real military option to deal with the terrorists properly.

This is because it's impossible to just round up weapons and kill _only_ the terrorists. The IDF invariably ends up killing countless civilians, which in turn enrages the palestinians and they turn to terror.
Yes, the Arabs hate it when Israel or the US take action against terrorism. But that's no reason for Israel to leave its citizens sitting like ducks in a shooting gallery.

I also want to respond to your equating accidental civilian casualties with intentionally targeting civilians for terrorists attacks. That is, of course, completely false. There is no comparison at all, because you cannot compare between someone being shot accidentally and someone murdered intentionally. Yes, all loss of life of innocent civilians is tragic, but that's where the similarity ends.

When Israel pulled out of south Lebanon, largely as a result of the persistent terrorism of the Hezbollah, there were a lot less terror attacks by the Hezbollah
That's one of the basic misconceptions about the Lebanese situation.

The fact is that when the IDF was in Lebanon, the Hizbullah was not able to target Israeli towns, because the security zone was effective in this regard. But since Israel left Lebanon, the Hizbullah has been able to mass thousands of Iranian missiles on Israel's border, capable of striking all the way to Tel Aviv, and in fact, on a regular basis, they do send missiles into Israeli towns, including today.

The situation is even more volatile after Barak rewarded Hizbullah terrorism with land gifts, with an all-out war between Israel and Syria more likely than ever.

These are the conclusions that need to be taken when considering an Israeli withdrawal that would give the appearance of a rout.

It's sad that the palestinians have had such poor leadership and such violent tendencies - imagine if they had a Ghandi-like figure leading them to peaceful resistance.
Here I agree with you. If the Palestinians or any other Arabs would be peaceful and civilized, then Israel would be extremely accommodating and a resolution would be reached.

Who knows, maybe in the next few generations the Arabs will catch up to the rest of modern civilization and will reap the benefits of it. That would be good for everyone.

[Flame]

.Here I agree with you. If the Palestinians or any other Arabs would be peaceful and civilized, then Israel would be extremely accommodating and a resolution would be reached (NewsGuy)

But NewsGuy --------- -IF --------- is the operative word and a huge IF at that. Like the cliche goes, if pigs could fly.

Anyhow, I challange Daly to draw us up a list of Ghandi-like arab candidates ... good luck.

[edaly]

I wish I were more educated about the arab world to offer such a list, if such figures do indeed exist. I doubt any of us here has enough information to make a call on that.

"If the Palestinians or any other Arabs would be peaceful and civilized, then Israel would be extremely accommodating and a resolution would be reached"

Herein lies the paradox both sides are locked in. From the Palestinian side, that would read "If the Israelis would only be just and end their occupation, then the Palestinians would be accomodating and a resolution would be reached." It's a "you go first" scenario where neither side wants to. Pull out of the occupied territories and you'll get peace and security. Give us peace and security and we'll pull out of the territories. And on an on.

Regarding comparing so-called collateral damage civilian casualties to intentional civilian casualties, I see your point NewsGuy. I think from our perspective, the two aren't comparable at all. But I also think from the perspective of those engaged in the conflict, there is no distinction. If an occupying army killed accidentally your daughter while carrying out its operations - and such events were commonplace - it would differ little from whether they killed her intentionally or not.

Further, there are tons of accounts of civilian deaths by the IDF that were so unnecessary as to go far beyond collateral damage. Kids shot in the head by snipers, civilians killed during indiscriminate bombings.

One recent such act was videotaped by an Israeli news crew that was taping the IDF's incursions into the refugee camps several weeks ago. It was broadcast despite objections by the IDF, and showed the IDF using an explosive device on a wall to gain entry to a palestinian home. Upon entry they found that one of the bricks hit the mother of the house, who was lying on the kitchen floor bleeding to death, her kids looking on (she later died). The news report was aired with no commentary whatsoever and stirred up a huge controversy, leading finally to the IDF barring any news crews from accompanying them in the future:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=142890&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y


edaly