Is Peace Really Necessary At All?

[NewsGuy]

If you take a step back for a moment and look at the big picture, you might conclude that all these "peace" initiatives may be all headed down the wrong path and are failing as a result of a basic mistaken assumption that peace is necessary or even achievable.

To be sure, the world loves a Hollywood movie ending in which the battle-weary enemies finally embrace, make peace and become best friends for the common benefit of their people. The audience applauds as the credits roll.

But in reality, the term "peace" implies a state of friendship and collaboration, which is really not possible for Israel and the Palestinians at this point in time. Education of Palestinian children to hate, official anti-Semitism, as well as Islamic and Arabic cultural bias agianst Jews and Westerners all serve to defeat the possibility of real peace in the Middle East.

Not surprisingly, this barrier to peace is the direct result of the Palestinians never considering a scenario other than the annihilation of the state of Israel.

Does this really matter, though?

IMO, not as much as many might think.

Israel is not in need of peace, per se, but rather both sides are in need of a state of non-war and limited cooperation.

I wonder if state of non-war is much more achievable than a state of peace, and if so, should the diplomats turn their attention to a goal other than full peace?

What do you think?

[Mediocrates]

If you mean a great big group hug and sitting down to sip kaffir with one another, no. An armed truce in an undeclared war is the best possible outcome. Other than through passage between Gaza and the West Bank and carefully controlled air lanes between them the border between the two should be a DMZ and sealed off from one another. The Israelis should turn their backs on the PLO in perpetuity, figuratively speaking. Any broach of that should be construed an act of war.

Any terrorist incursion into Israel should be treated as a national security issue and any captured terrorists should be executed as spies in a time of war and not treated as POWs or civilians.

The Israelis should jam any unauthorized electronic transmissions over their country and broadcast their own message in any direction over the West Bank & Gaza.

The Israelis need to develop water purification facilities for the inflow from Syria into Gallilee which is badly polluted by the Syrians today and pump out as much of the Gallilee as they can while maintaining a stable aquifer depth. They should develop water resources with Turkey on the same time table.

They should begin the pullout of the 'settlements' and similar to the agreement with the Egyptians regarding Sinai they should demolish every structure and infrastructure they are forced to abandon. The reverse settlement must take no more than 2 years. The Israeli government on behalf of the settlers must be compensated for the settlements as well as for the effort to evacuate the settlers and that money should come from the Saudis since it is their peace plan initiative. The settlers repatriated across the green line shall be personally compensated and resettled in Israel to a place of mutual agreement.

All Arab countries must renounce all violence against Israel and they must be held accountable to it subject to sanction of the UN and by mutual treaty.

All Arab countries must end all trade embargoes with Israel. They are free to rebuild diplomatic relations or not at their decision.

Israel must be made eligible as a seat on the UN Security Council (only eligible - not guaranteed membership) and the Magen David Adom must be welcomed into the International Red Cross.

All Threats of EU sanctions and embargoes must cease immediately and that protection must be guaranteed by treaty.

The estates of all US citizens killed/injured in Israel by and during the intifada must be allowed to bring suit for criminal death against the PA who must either produce a defendant or pay reparations. Failure to do so results in immediate ending of all aid dollars from the US to the PA and condemnation by the world court.

Any international terrorist act traced back to the PLO. the PA either directly or indirectly via support and funding must be considered an act of terrorism against the victim country perpetrated by the PA or PLO or it's acting bodies as an officially sanctioned act by the PA and its leaders.

Any criminal act perpetrated in Israel by a legal Palestinian who escapes to Palestine or which is directed by a legal Palestinian residing in Palestine shall be subject to extradition to Israel where a public trial shall be held. Israel will determine if the criminal act classifies as a terrorist act or not and if so shall be subject to the definition of terrorist spying outlined above.

All applications for Israeli citizenship by non Jewish Palestinians will be treated as any other application for Israeli citizenship by a non Jew and subject to approval by appropriate Israeli ministry.

[takeo]

I don't see any alternative for a peace-plan except the continuation of the current violence...

"But in reality, the term "peace" implies a state of friendship and collaboration, which is really not possible for Israel and the Palestinians at this point in time. Education of Palestinian children to hate, official anti-Semitism, as well as Islamic and Arabic cultural bias agianst Jews and Westerners all serve to defeat the possibility of real peace in the Middle East. "

Of course, Israel is totally blameless on the Palestinian hate against Israel... who wouldn't like to live in a desert-refugee camp because they are not allowed to return home and who wouldn't like to see foreign tanks and bulldozers destroying your garden and house to build some houses for some nice armed neighbours with some nice fences????
Yes i agree, the Palestinians are biased against israel because Arafat and Mufti told them so and have totally no reason to hate it...

[takeo]

actually your plan is ok, except that if you want recognition of israel and trade with israel, than you will have to open the borders for trade, recognise palestine as well as a state, and treat it as an equal partner, if not your plan will fail. You can not demand what you are not prepared to give yourself.

"The Israelis should jam any unauthorized electronic transmissions over their country and broadcast their own message in any direction over the West Bank & Gaza. "

if israel is not prepared to accept electronic transmissions in their territory the palestinians should not be obliged to accept israeli transmissions.

palestinians aND israeli who wommitted crimes should be persecuted, preferably by an international court, and if not israel should deliver war-criminals to the palestinians while the palestinians should deliver war-criminals and terrorists to israel. Both polices should cooperate in the future and hand-over people who committed crimes on the territory of the other state. Victims of PA/PLO actions should get reparation pays, on the condition that victims of the israeli army should get reparation pay from israel.
Israel has to pay for the relocation of the settlers as its a problem they created themselves.

And last: "All applications for Israeli citizenship by non Jewish Palestinians will be treated as any other application for Israeli citizenship by a non Jew and subject to approval by appropriate Israeli ministry."

This is racist and in contradiction to un-resolutions and gneva-conventions. racist= selecting people on grounds of their racial origin instead of on the place they lived or theirnationality. everyone living for generations in a place has the right to apply for the nationality.

[Mediocrates]

Nonsense - any country has the right to protect itself from propaganda and the right to make its own propaganda.

Nonsense - it is simply applying Israel's immigration laws to all non citizens equally. Every country has quotas, even yours.

[Mediocrates]

Nonsense - Israel doesn't HAVE to recognize anyone as a trade partner if they don't want. They are free to recognize the existance of Palestine as you wish. Sign a piece of paper that says so. They are not by that under internatioal law compelled to deal with them or even have an embassy or any diplomatic contact. There is actually NO LAW against that. You are of course free to create an UN resolution that compells every country in the world to deal with Palestine. In fact you are free to write a UN resolution ceeding various parts of all the countries of the world to Palestine if that is your wish. My vote is for Ille de France.

[takeo]

OK, well fine so your plan will have this consequences:

Israel won't necessarily have an embassy or consulate in palestine, there is no law against that but than there won't be either a law that forces Arab countries to recognise israel... (they won't do it if israel doesn't promise to establish full diplomatic relations).

if every country has the right to make their own propaganda, than so do the palestinians, and they even have the right to make anti-israeli propaganda...

"it is simply applying Israel's immigration laws to all non citizens equally. Every country has quotas, even yours"

OK, but our country doesn't require that you have to be of racially pure origin to go living in France... actually that could have happened if the elections yesterday had another turn...
and actually people who can proove they lived there before should automatically get citizenship. By the way not all non-citizens are treated equally, someone with no other link to the country except that he is Jewish will not be treated equally... that's called racism.

[Mediocrates]

Tell it to the Hugenots.

[takeo]

that was 400 years ago... :rolleyes:

[Mediocrates]

Every country has quotas, even yours. Some use income, some use parentage, some use geography, some use race, some use whatever reason they want. It's called national sovereignty. Odd that Arab countries who use the "no one but muslim" or "anything but Jew" criteria, meet with your approval.

[takeo]

ok, some Arab countries have a racist policy as well, are you happy that israel is not the only one in the middle East? Note that australia changed its immigration policy because the high court considered it racist, they only accepted "white" people untill the 70's. Clearly israel is much more comparable to its middle eastern neighbours that to Western countries.

but that's not the point, the point is that those Palestiian refugees are no immigrants, they are inhabitants who left their houses some decades ago. they should have the right according to the Geneva-conventions to return if they wish so, their are no immigrants to their own houses and lands.

[Mediocrates]

600,000 Jews must be compensated for being thrown out of Iraq 1948-54. As soon as 200,000 Jews must be compensated for being thrown out of Egypt 1948-54 and so on......

[takeo]

OK, why not, on the condition that all palestinians are compensated or can return to their land of origin.

[thrud]

Originally posted by takeo
OK, why not, on the condition that all palestinians are compensated or can return to their land of origin. The Jews do not expect to be compensated and they do not expect a right of return to the homes they lost in Europe. The Palestinians need to give up their right to return claims and just move to Jordan where they can have full citizenship.

With today's violence, the Palestinians should not expect anything, but the rage of a nation where its children were murdered by homicidal animals. The Palestinian's should see that they were nearing peace, but only made their situation worse by justifying incursions into Gaza.

They targeted teenagers who were enjoying the greatest times of their lives. They cut down people who might have been willing to not hate. They killed young people who had nothing more political on their minds then youthful intimacy and fun.

This is evil, and it needs to be erradicated.

[Jorge]

To NewsGuy:
Congratulations my dear fellow! You seem to have a talent for initiating threads by posing interesting questions;
sometime ago it was that about "Where are the good arabs"
and now this one about whether Peace is really necessary at all.
Keep up the good work!

Your opening remarks, namely:
If you take a step back for a moment and look at the big picture, you might conclude that all these "peace" initiatives may be all headed down the wrong path and are failing as a result of a basic mistaken assumption that peace is necessary or even achievable.

are quite sensible. After all these years of talking so much about peace (and doing so little to promote it) it is high time to step back and discuss whether both sides can manage without it.

I don't know if you are familiar with Demonology; as the story goes once upon a time Lucifer had the brilliant idea that the
most efficient way to condemn human souls was through the verbiage they may have uttered or written in their lives.
Lucifer entrusted a minor fiend called Tittivulus with the task
of collecting the verbiage; the operation was quite a success and in a few hundred years all the empty caves in Hell were overflowing with verbiage. Tittivulus had to be given scores of assistants and
in no time was promoted from minor fiend to CEO of the Verbiage Collection Department. I mention this story because I suppose
that in our times Tittivulus must have been very busy collecting verbiage from Peace Statements, Declarations, Conferences and what not. If we conclude that peace peace is unachievable or unnecessary or both may be israelis and palestinians could put aside all this rhetoric and get on with the business of living amicably together. In future notes I intend to discuss your propositions in detail.

[Mediocrates]

Verbiage is as verbiage does. To their credit the PLO and its collaborators have successfully mastered the concept of dumbing down their message and staying on point. On any media, on any speech in every forum the message is the same, a mantra: "its the occupation, the occupation, the occupation". Yet we zionists feel somehow compelled to engage in a dialog, ticking off this debating point or that, hoping to score rhetorical points.

You will only hear or read an individual Palestinian 'moderate' once. After that that person is removed and someone who knows the party line is moved into place.

Our message is garbled and scattered with some of us more hard line than others, some posing alternatives while others debate the merits of the Palestinian cause.

This is in part some of the reason that the media is so fantastically anti Israeli - we ourselves give them an opportunity to find one Jew with a sad story about the Palestinians. Trust me, they don't need our help.

This state of things is unacceptable. We must stay on message we must stay on point and we must never never NEVER concede any point to someone who is only a little bit murderous. We are not here to debate facts that murderous thugs deny, ignore or refute. That is why you have trials - because criminals rarely indict themselves.

They are wrong, we are right. They are murderers we are defending ourselves. Couch it in whatever language you wish but that is what it is. Those who frame the discussions of the present are rewriting the history of the future and this is something we cannot allow to happen.

[Vic]

Originally posted by NewsGuy
I wonder if state of non-war is much more achievable than a state of peace, and if so, should the diplomats turn their attention to a goal other than full peace?

What do you think?
David Grossman described it years ago in attempt to cool down the post-Oslo euphoria as a "bookkeepers' peace".

[cerulean]

I agree peace is not possible at this time certainly. So let's look at historical precedents for how non-war could work.

What neighboring countries or ethnic groups have a working model of non-peace/non-war?

What examples are there of populations schooled in hatred with a strong death culture rehabilitating themselves in a relatively short time period?

[Jorge]

I'd like to consider first the question as to whether an state of peace between israelis and palestinians is "achievable".
There is of course no clear cut and straightforward answer but it may be useful to examine analogous sitations where nations involved in deep conflict for many decades have achieved peace or not. The example that inmediately comes in mind is that of
Germany and France, two nations experiencing crel wars for nearly a century, with the sequels of hatred and mistrust and now so interlocked that they have open frontiers, a comon currency and joint policies.
I think that a crucial historical factor in the interruption of
nearly chronic state of war was the so called Marshall Plan
after WW2. I don't think americans are particularly wise regarding
international politics but that Plan was one of the wisest
things they ever did. I think also that this example is particularly relevant to the israli-arab conflict. After WW2 there were two alternatives to countenance the so called "german menace"; one
alternative was to keep Germany in a state of economic weakness
and political control by mantaining even occcupying armies; the second was to help Germany to attain economic and social prosperity and to regain political independence and this was the alternative chosen bythe US and its european allies. The decision taken proved to be the right one, it led to the "german miracle"
of the following decades and to Germany being on the front line of the European Union initiative. What I see relevant to our present discussion is the concept that peace is more easily achieved between equals than between strong and weak partners. A Palestinian State with large unemployment, marginal per capita incomes and weak political institutionsis bound to be unstable and prone to demagogic leaders, eager to blame
"international conspiracies" for their economicaland social troubles and a fertile ground for recruitment of terrorists. Some sort of a new version of the Marshall Plan is required to put the
Palestinians on the road to prosperity and thus make peace not
inevitable, but at least achievable.

[ibrodsky]

Some sort of a new version of the Marshall Plan is required to put the
Palestinians on the road to prosperity and thus make peace not
inevitable, but at least achievable.

Sure -- as soon as they lay down their arms, surrender, and turn over all wanted terrorists.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Jorge
What I see relevant to our present discussion is the concept that peace is more easily achieved between equals than between strong and weak partners. A Palestinian State with large unemployment, marginal per capita incomes and weak political institutionsis bound to be unstable and prone to demagogic leaders, eager to blame..
Historically speaking, peace has only been achieved by one side winning decisively through devastating military force over the other, and imposing a settlement on the loser.

As for the generosity of the settlement imposed, there are some factors to consider. In Germany's case, their economy, educational system, and culture of efficiency and discipline was able, through independent means, to rebound. Not so in the case of the Palestinians.

In the case of the Palestinians, their culture is one that de-emphasizes those very same values that led to Germany's economic strengths. This does not only apply to Palestinians, but to all other Arab countries in the world, so far as I know. Without oil, Arab countries live in abject poverty since the beginning of time.

For this reason, IMO, the only way that a Palestinian economy will see revenues would be from:

1. Charity from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States (unlikely, because those states only pay to sustain the terrorist infrastructure and never for any constructive purpose).

2. Maybe from Muslim tourism, if the Palestinians are able to charge a steep fee for visiting the Muslim holy places. (unlikely to provide enough funds in any event).

3. From employment inside Israel (possible, but any Israeli employing palestinians at this point would have to be crazy).

4. "Loans" from the EU and the US, which would be forgiven eventually for non-payment like all economic aid to most third-world countries.

Basically, IMO, the only way the Palestinians will be able to independently achieve a Western standard of living is by somehow presenting attractive investment opportunities to international businesses, i.e., selling foreigners ownership in Palestinian institutions.

But again, I can't imagine any investor crazy enough to throw money at a businesses that exist under the control of a terrorist dictatorship regime. That's why the reforms Sharon and Bush are demanding, are the key to economic recovery for the Palestinians.

Honestly, I highly doubt that Palestinian society, full of Islamic extremism, can tolerate a transparent system which is open to independent oversight. No Arab country has ever been able to achieve that so far.

In the end, factors like overpopulation, sub-par education, sex-discrimination, low productivity, religious extremism, and corruption in all walks of life will prevent economic success for the Palestinians.

[takeo]

i agree completely with Jorge, in the interbellum, people tought of Germany as a country that had its totalitarism in it and could never become a stable democratic state able to leave its neighbours alone, etc. for that reason germany was punished by France and other countries after WWI, for that reason (in the first place) Hitler came to power.
after WWII, as jorge said, a different approach happened, one that had very positive results. as usual you try to ignore this by using racist arguments against the "nature" of the Palestinians.
In fact you are wrong, some Arab countries without oil but with good governance and peace, as Tunisia, are doing great and can even be called an economical miracle. Palestinians are as hard-working as Israeli people but in the current condition every hard labour is useless because israel will destroy sooner or later what was build up (they destroyed virtually all economic activity in the palestinian territories, and the curfews, blockades, etc. all have a disastrous effect on the economy). In fact as i said before investors couldn't care less who is in power, in fact countries as Myanmar attract huge numbers of investors. The only thing they require is a peacefull and stable environment for their investment.
Palestinians would also benefit from christian tourism, investment from overseas palestinians and Arabs, proximity to israeli markets, attractiveness for some israeli investors (for example casino's etc. low wages)

The real problem is Israel not wanting to allow a palestinian state on grounds it considers to be their own. Israel doesn't want a strong and stable palestinian state on the Holy Jewish grounds, that's the unspoken truth, it doesn't want to allow another strong and independant state in the historical palestine, and as newsguy and now also truth says they prefere to ban them all to jordan, supposedly because israeli died from plaestinian actions. ("forgetting" that many more palestinians, including innocents, died from israeli actions and that palestinians as a whole have suffered tremendously more than israeli people, if this would be the same revengefull mentality with the palestinians they would call for the destruction of israel, and indeed also some palestinians want revenge for what happened). What do you think palestinians feel who daily see israeli tanks and bulldozers destroying their house and garden, what do you think the family of people murdered by the israeli army ("collateral damage" or not...) feel? What do they palestinians feel who never had their own land and had to live for 35 years under foreign unwanted occupation, which made them dirt poor? the 1000's of younf people who died for israeli occupation, don't they deserve the same rights as israeli youth, your consideration for their well-being seems to be considerably less... you can blame whoever you want for this, but they will logically blame israel, as israeli will not blame sharon for provoking hatred but the paletinians for the suicide bombers...
In fact it would be the best for both parties to forget to past and start building on new common interests, PEACE. by always refering to crimes of the past of course any peace is impossible as there will always be reason for hate and nobody want the other side to live in happiness. About the trial of war-crimes, it is ok but on the condition both sides get indicted. If one of the two parties is not prepared to agree with this, than it is best to forget about punishment for past crimes (on the condition no further crimes occure) and build further on the future, as happened in northern Ireland or South Africa.

"They are wrong, we are right. They are murderers we are defending ourselves. Couch it in whatever language you wish but that is what it is. Those who frame the discussions of the present are rewriting the history of the future and this is something we cannot allow to happen."

who is rewriting history? both sides use propaganda, and this occured in every conflict. Your position is one of extreme simplicity. Someone who occupied territories for 35 years ans banned millions of people from their homes, started two wars and is accused by world bodies and human rights groups of massive war-crimes is not just defending itself, even if the palestinians are to blame too your sentences are ridiculous and meaningless and damage your other ideas and opinions that may be interesting.

"I agree peace is not possible at this time certainly. So let's look at historical precedents for how non-war could work.
What neighboring countries or ethnic groups have a working model of non-peace/non-war?
What examples are there of populations schooled in hatred with a strong death culture rehabilitating themselves in a relatively short time period?"

Why isn't peace possible? The hate is deep but if the reasons for such hate are taken away than it will diminish and die in the next generations.
the examples of cold war are not very interesting: Libanon, ok, better than before, but is this the kind of situation you want to create at all israel's borders? Korea,... to you want to seal of israel from all neighbouring countries overland?

"The Jews do not expect to be compensated and they do not expect a right of return to the homes they lost in Europe. The Palestinians need to give up their right to return claims and just move to Jordan where they can have full citizenship. "

yes, they expect to be compensated, in swiss banks, holland, etc. and they received years of compensation from Germany. Arab states are prepared to offer compensation to jews who left but instead they want the palestinians to be compensated and return to their property if they wish so. Jews who lost their houses in Europe have the right to return, no doubt about that.
Jordan isn't were they came from, they came from israel and that's were their houses and properties were, and they will never give up the right for compensation or return, without this issue adressed israel will not and should not know any peace.

[thrud]

more [stuff] from takeo the woman The real problem is Israel not wanting to allow a palestinian state on grounds it considers to be their own. Israel doesn't want a strong and stable palestinian state on the Holy Jewish grounds, that's the unspoken truth, it doesn't want to allow another strong and independant state in the historical palestine, and as newsguy and now also truth says they prefere to ban them all to jordan This sounds very similar to what many people have said are the Palestinian reasons for trying to expell the Jews from Israel. They simply do not want any Jew on what they consider holy ground. Isn't this what started the intifada? A bunch of spoiled brats who did not want a Jew (Sharon) to get anywhere near a Islamic holy sight.

Come on, how childish is this? It is trying to apply Islamic propaganda to the Jews who have yet to say to the arabs who are living in Israel "Get thee out!" No, no. The freaks wearing pizza-joint table cloths seem to think only they have rights to the many holy grounds in Israel. :mad:

[Belgium@EU]

First of all I don't believe in the "Holy land". Israel is just a country in the middle of the desert, some nice cities in the south, but that's it. If Jews and Muslims continue their fights over some rediculous meters of land, than that's really pathetic. Both religions are to blame for this.

"The Jews do not expect to be compensated and they do not expect a right of return to the homes they lost in Europe. The Palestinians need to give up their right to return claims and just move to Jordan where they can have full citizenship. "

Ohh, right, that's nice of Israel. We don't want them anymore, let's all send them to Jordan. How friendly of you. Israel were the ones that conquered those territories, the Palestinians have the right to stay there, even if it costs their life. The only ones who have to leave are the Israeli in their settlements. If peace-talks can't handle these problems, than the PA should buy some bulldozers and level those setllements, just like Israel is doing right now. And the people of Israel get donations from Germany each year, I hope this will stop very soon, because the people of Germany need that money a lot more. I couldn't live with the idea that My gov't would give money for something which has happened 60 years ago. Than people wonder why one votes for extremists like Le Pen.


Jorge and Takeo have said some wise words, especially the idea of a new "Marshall plan". Germany was backed by France, the UK and the US, and now they get everything in return. We can't expect from Palestine to become a second Germany. We have to stay realistic, and the current situation won't allow this to happen. As long as suicide attacks continue, Israel will not give a cent to the PA. But Palestine will have to be rebuilded sooner or later, and the people diserve to have a better living-standard than they have right now. Instead of Germany giving money to "rich Israel", it would be better to give it to the UN, which can make sure these funds get to the Palestinian people.

[Vic]

Originally posted by Belgium@EU
And the people of Israel get donations from Germany each year, I hope this will stop very soon, because the people of Germany need that money a lot more.

Instead of Germany giving money to "rich Israel"...
Can you provide any real data on it? To the best of my knowledge the German state doesn't give a cent to the State of Israel (not to be confused with payments to Holocaust victims who happen to live in Israel), but rather tons of money (directly, through the EU, the UN, other NGOs) to the Palestinians.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by takeo
...using racist arguments against the "nature" of the Palestinians.
No... I did not comment on the nature of the Palestinians, but rather on Palestinian society, which de-emphasizes the very same values that made Germany successful after WWII. Please don't distort my words.

In fact you are wrong, some Arab countries without oil but with good governance and peace, as Tunisia, are doing great and can even be called an economical miracle.
Well, looking at your example of the one Arab country you consider to be a success, Tunisia (another victim of French colonialism) is still a primitive third-world country ruled to a great extent by Islamic law. Still, Tunisia is sort of a relatively free society in Arab terms, with something resembling elections in which only government-approved parties can participate.

Still, the per capita income in your "successul" Arab country is only about 1/3 of that in Israel. And to achieve that tiny per capita income, let's not forget that Tunisia has plenty of natural resources like petroleum and metal, which the Palestinians do not have. (I suppose you would say that's also Ariel Sharon's fault).

And the most important defference between Tunisia and Arafatistan is that in Tunisia, the current president "dominated the country for 31 years, repressing Islamic fundamentalism and establishing rights for women unmatched by any other Arab nation," according to the CIA Factbook. I guess you will also accuse the CIA of racism because they are criticising Arab society.

Now, let's be realistic, the Palestinians will never repress Islamic fundamentalism, at least not in the next generation, because that would require a bloody civil war. And as long as extremist Islam and other forms of terrorism are allowed to persist, there will be no chance of independent success.

That's why I continue stand by what I said earlier -- Palestinian culture will not allow for the conditions that other countries used to succeed independently. They will remain a third-world country plagued by their own societal problems, with nothing much to offer in exchange for first-world investment.

without this issue adressed israel will not and should not know any peace.
Well, IMO, no matter what the concessions to the Palestinians, there will be no peace because there will be another demand and another demand, and that is exactly the topic of this thread -- to explore whether anyone really needs "peace" at all, or whether there can just exist a framework for non-war.

[takeo]

it is not a question of another demand etc. the palestinian (at least the majority of palestinians) and international demands are clear and they did never hide this, they want a palestinian state in the occupied territoires and a solution for the refugees. The plo and most palestinians forgat about reconquering their original homeland that is now israel. They know it is not realistic and is not possible anymore, and they don't have any international support for this. It is maybe on religious basis for some, for most it is because it was entirely their land before zionism, but palestinians(with some exceptions), on the contrary to right-wing israel, have come to the conclusion that they can not claim all the land for themselves anymore. Right-wing israeli think they can and have the right to do so, not for security reasons but for ideological and political reasons. Newsguy once said to me that palestinians have enough land left "in their original homeland" (which is a historic lie but anyway) Jordan. At least he is honest, Sharon and many others think so too but nowadays you won't hear it from because it's not popular stuff in the White House, instead he tries to link the occupation to the "struggle against terrorism", nowadays always good for some us-cuddles. Yet it is not the real reason but the other way round, in fact the terrorism is a consequence of occupation and ideological settlements, as it would be in every part of the world.

Well ok maybe you didn't say "nature" but saying that their cultural values are too low is pretty much the same thing.

Tunisia is not so primitive as you think, it was indeed a backwards country thanks to French colonism (and ottoman colonism who never invested much either in their colonies), as you know i have no problem admitting this, but since independance it develloped in a fast way, without many billions of aid from all over the world, especially the us, as Israel.
Tunisia is not ruled by Islamic law and is relatively free to thirth world stadards ruled by "tunisian socialism dostour". (however i agree democracy is one of the weaker points, but we were talking about economics)

The per capita is only 1/3 o israel's ok, but again israel is a Western country, not a thirth world country, and had the aid from all over the world, yes including german aid (who payed, untill this yea, every year an amount of money directly to Israel , as well as to the individual victims as well). Their petrol sources are really very limited, only a small percentage of the BNP.
The difference with palestine is having better neighbours (even with libia tunisia has good relations, the libians nor the algerians did ever occupy parts of tunisia...) and also being closer to the European markets.
islamic fundamentalism is not very popular in palestine, only the fighters against israel are popular, which is very different. in most opinion polls hamas has not more than 20% of the trust, and in the last election in the 90's the call of hamas to boycott the elections was widely ignored. But even islamic fundamentalism isn't necessarily responsible for a bad economy, untill a couple of years ago the iranian economy was doing great, and better than any of its neighbours.
palestine has to offer what i stated in my last post, i think it has a fairly good chance of building a devellopping economy, but of course lt depends on the israeli decisions and the policy of the new palestinian state.

[L@mplighterM]

Bold originally posted by Belgium:

First of all I don't believe in the "Holy land". Israel is just a country in the middle of the desert, some nice cities in the south, but that's it. If Jews and Muslims continue their fights over some rediculous meters of land, than that's really pathetic. Both religions are to blame for this.
What history books have you read? Books published in Islam?
If you had a fundamental understanding of the issues you wouldn't post ridiculous statements like 'Both religions are to blame for this'.

If I posted that Belgium was wholly responsible for this conflict I should be considered equally stupid.
Who are you to insult a persons homeland? They might as well say the same about Belgium as a matter of fact I would refer to it as a ****ty little country.

[takeo]

:o

"****ty little country"

you just made a terrible racist remark, according to yourself ;)

[Belgium@EU]

Frankly I don't care about what you think of belgium ... or France. What I know is that here, it's safe to go out on the streets, without having to fear that I'll be killed by a suicide attack or by a Merkava tank.

And it's true that tensions were ereptud because of religious believes. If you don't get this, than maybe it's you who's mistaking. Jewish AND Muslims are to blame for this, is it so hard to understand? Look at history books.

[Mediocrates]

CIA factbook tab for Tunisia:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ts.html


CIA factbook tab for Israel:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/is.html

The Israeli GDP is ~69% larger than that of Tunisia in constant US dollar weighted terms.

[takeo]

as i said tunisia doesn't get a constant amount of aid, trade benefits and cash from the richest country in the world, yet it is a civilised, hard-working and advancing arab country. By the way Tunisia doesn't seem much poorer than israel, the wealth is better spread.

[Northlander]

well you pro-israelis here just seem to love to compare Israel to non western countries. Without the american and european support Israel would have been a poor undeveloped country IF it at all would have existed by now.

the arabs had a culture that was far superior to the western earlier in the history. At that time they didnt even have any oil so... Alot of people in this forum are nothing else but pure rasists.
Its nothing about race, culture or religion. Its about history and geographics. War and politics. Colonialism and dictators. Give an arab country the same aid as israel have got and they would do just as fine.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Northlander
well you pro-israelis here just seem to love to compare Israel to non western countries. Without the american and european support Israel would have been a poor undeveloped country IF it at all would have existed by now.



...because a similar Western European country the size, population and geography as Israel has survived so well on it's own surrounded by hostile neighbors. Which one was that again?

I recommend you read "A Friend in Deed" by Dan Raviv. It describes in some detail the relationship between Israel and the US, among the governments and agencies. True, the book is 8 years old but one thing you should take away is that the history of that relationship is one of shared interests even if they don't like one another. And when it was based on mutual liking one another it was a matter among 2 or 3 strategically placed individuals and not a matter of official policy. Do Europeans know how ambivalent Eisenhower and Carter were (and still is) to Israel? How Johnson liked the people involved but didn't see much of a shared interest. That Truman's state department actively persued a policy of anti Israelism? That until 1952 Israel could have gone to the US or the CCCP and it was Stalin's outrage that the Israelis weren't totally in the Soviet sphere while their main armament's suppler was Czechoslovakia that caused the Israeli government to commit to the US instead? Or that most 'foreign aid' directed at Israel until 1956 was private money not government aid? Money raised in the US mostly?

[takeo]

OK, you are right about most of this, but nobody can deny that since the 60's at least israel and the US are almost one and the same. (in the 50's israel had close relations with France, both on their colonialist quest and ennemies of Arab nationalism). Which shared interests? What interest does the us have to maintain a country that is a constant ennoyance for its relations with its main oil-suppliers and much of the Islamic world? OK, Israel can be a US-satellite in the mid-east, but so is egypt, Jordan, SA, and most of the gulf-states. I think the US is supporting Israel because of the strong zionist lobby, at least since the 60's.
The Soviet-union supported Israel for a short period, but since its invasion of egypt and unwillingness to discuss the refugee problem the relations got to freezing point.
What similar Western country has the same problem as Israel? what about Greece that has no friends in the region but nothing but ennemies and countries with a poor economy (and albanian and turkish terrorism).
however i have to disagree with northlander that Arab countries with the same amount of aid would be similar to israel, because many Jewish people coming to israel were very engaged to build a new country, westernised, educated, etc. and without some cultural barriers to devellopment that exist in contemporary Arab culture (no total integration of women, a different approach to working ethics, and more heavy ancestral habits). this is not racism but just a fact, which of course on the other hand doesn't mean arabs are meant to be poor and terrorists, they can devellop as well if the conditions are the same (as the example of Tunisia and some other countries as well show), but at a slightly slower pace because of the cultural barriers to westernisation.

[Northlander]

when it comes to you I think its not racism but that is not the case with some others here.
no total integration of women, a different approach to working ethics, and more heavy ancestral habits
dont agree to the working ethics but maybe the other points.
My experience is that instantenly when arab/muslim immigrants comes to at least northern europe they are often more or at least as hard working as europeans. When they have the same possibilities its no difference. When it comes to women I think it depends. In dubai women can start companies and get fairly high in society and they have a degree of education comparable to most western countries. Had for example Tunisia been even more developed the same thing would happen there cause they would clearly see the benefits. But I agree Israel had the intelligencia much for free when they started. Israels situation is special so maybe we cant compare. But we can compare to some european states and others. Paraguay which i have been to have women integrated in society etc. Bolivia and Peru too. The living standard is by no means higher than in Tunisia or even some other muslim countries. What is the conclusion? That latinos has corruption in their blood? That they have no working ethics? The tendency to see a whole group of people as no good is dangerous.
I dont think we can say an arab country would be less developed and its a fact because its just a hypothetical question. It will probably not happen in a long time and has never happened that they have the same possibilities. Portugal in europe is not all that rich even with their colonial history and the benefits that gives. what does that say us about the portuguese people?

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by takeo
OK, you are right about most of this, but nobody can deny that since the 60's at least israel and the US are almost one and the same. (in the 50's israel had close relations with France, both on their colonialist quest and ennemies of Arab nationalism). Which shared interests? What interest does the us have to maintain a country that is a constant ennoyance for its relations with its main oil-suppliers and much of the Islamic world? OK, Israel can be a US-satellite in the mid-east, but so is egypt, Jordan, SA, and most of the gulf-states. I think the US is supporting Israel because of the strong zionist lobby, at least since the 60's.

Yes. You are right, but not completing the statement. Moreover, there are many powerful jewish politician in US, such as Joe liberman, Willian Cohen, Jack Rubin, Madeline Albright. They are the inner circle of the white house. Even in Republican white house, there is a few poweful jewish official, such as Paul Wolfiwitz. In other words, they are leaders of the US.

Even in EU, there are few poweful jewish politician, such as France finance minister Fabius. I can't recall Denmark or Norway. Four years ago, they have a jewish PM within EU.

That is the reason the US jewish community has trouble, critizing EU for anti-semitism. :D

[takeo]

yes all of them are part of the zionist lobby (however not all Jewish politicians are zionist and some zionist lobbyists in the US are not Jewish). In France we have many jewish politicians who are not zionist at all, for example prime minister Jospin, Bernard-Henri Levy, Straus-Kahn, etc. . (which makes the accusations of anti-semitism even more ridiculous).

Northlander i agree that devellopment is not completely dependant on cultural factors but much more on economic factors, totally agree, however in some countries I think cultural factors play a role as well, for example in the former Eastern Europe Eastern Germany was much richer than the Soviet-Union or Balcan countries which were offered exactly the same conditions of economic devellopment, maybe because Germans are more organised and work harder than Eastern Europeans (in general i mean). You are right about the working ethics of Arabs in Europe, but i meant in Arab countries. Yet anyway those cultural barriers can play a role, but will ultimately not make so much difference when the economic benefits are the same. (some 50 years ago nobody would believe that China today is a devellopped country)
Have you been in Paraguay? Hey, i always would like to go there. How do you explain that it is so much poorer than its neighbours Argentine or Brazil?

[Northlander]

well I guess I have to agree to some extent to the cultural working ethics. The germans are probably unique in some kind of way. Probably a reason for a whole discussion on itself. But when it comes to arabs I dont belive thats the problem. The ideas of women not working are of course a huge problem but nothing that are not changeble as we have seen examples of with many muslims. Without so much religous influence in society arab nations would do just fine, thats my belive. They have done that before, long time before oil and colonisation.

When it comes to Paraguay and also Bolivia and the poorer countries in s.america its hard to say. The poorest country is bolivia which also has the largest indian population. If you ask people overthere they would probably come up with an explanation somewhat racial about indians not being able to work etc. I dont think thats entirely true.
I only stayed a week in Paraguay on my way from Brazil to Bolivia so I never got a real feeling for the country.People didnt look very poor compared to parts of brazil but at the same time the infrastructure was strange. Huge differences between people. Some of the most luxurious places I´ve seen in s.america. Also the german influence was obvious. Guess it was all those nazis going there after the war and there were blond little children begging on the streets as well, not only latin or blacks as in Brazil.
One would belive that the big german influence there would have helped the country to some degree and high in the society it might have. Could see alot of german named companies and so.
Lack of natural resources and a total lack of investments in the infrastructure are my explanations to their poverty. Difficult to compare to Brazil maybe that are a huge industrial nation with large(cheap) population. Still I consider brazil to be poor. The gap between the rich and poor are terrible and most people are poor.
But now we have drifted from subject maybe :)

[takeo]

yea, but anyway, it's interesting. I would love to visit Brazil too i heard they have some beautiful things there to see ;)
I went to Guatemala which is mostly indian yet (somewhat) better than Nicaragua and El Salvador where more people are coming from the Spanish. (however in Guatemala only the white minority has some wealth, the big majority is dirt poor too)
however in Cuba it's still true that blacks are (somewhat) poorer than whites, without any discrimination for 40 years, yet the difference is small. (however could also be because the whites in Cuba, 10% of the population, have family in Miami, while the mulatos and blacks much less).
this racial gap could still be a legacy of 100's of years of colonialism, this applies as well for Arab countries, and also of course Western people have more easy to adapt to modern society (which is mostly of Western origin and spread to the whole world). This could also be the reason why Eastern Germany did better than Russia in the same post-war conditions(total destruction), with a non-western culture and mentality.
on the other hand some cultural stereotypes are not corresponding to reality, French are supposed to be more lasy than northern countries, yet i went to scotland which is much poorer than any region in France.

I think it's mostly economic conditions that is important, however cultural barriers can make recovery more slowly than in Western countries (israel is mostly Western because it was founded by ashkenazi-Jews who have their original roots in Germany, in Russia they see Jews as a western people, also because so many ashkenazi-jews livein the States and Western Europe)

[Jorge]

I'd like to return to some of the initial questions posed by NewsGuy when starting this thread 05-05); one of them was (quote):

I wonder if state of non-war is much more achievable than a state of peace, and if so, should the diplomats turn their attention to a goal other than full peace?

I' d say that whether or not a state of non war is more achievable depends to a large extent on the measure it can fulfill
or satisfy the expectations of both parties. If by "non war"
we understand to preserve, the present status quo and at the same time to put an end to violence from both sides, Israel might readily agree to it. Not so the Palestinians. Since
(as my argentinian uncle used to say)" it takes two to dance a tango " the state of non-war is a non-starter.

Non-war was roughly what existed between Israelis and Palestinians in the period between Iom Kipur's War and the
first intifadah. Except for occasional terrorist actions, the palestinian population didn't stir; israelis could wander freely through the occupied territories and palestinians commuted effortlessly and unrestricted between their towns and work places all over Israel. Each side acquiesced with their prescribed roles: the Israelis as the benevolent conquerors, the Palestinians as the submissive conquered. Whilst one side supplied employment the other supplied cheap labor; troughout that period
the israelis founded one settlement after another in the West Bank and Gaza Strip while the palestinians built the settler's houses and gardens.

Alas! That idyllic state of non-war didn't last for long and was replaced by violent uprisings of the civilian population. The palestinians, not the israelis, are entirely to blame for this turn around of the situation. The unrest or disquiet started when some people realized that everyone around seemed to have an State of their own except them; it is true that there were some vague israeli promises that in the future "when Peace will come"
they might have one of their own, but the cleverer amongst the population began to apprehend the fact that
at the rate new settlements were sprouting, there wouldn't be be much land left for them whenever that moment came.
As a side line some of them (devilish Marxists no doubt) started to question the Ethics of a situation whereby Israel profited from the exploitation of cheap labor, with none of the surplus being used in the infrastructure and industrial development of the territories. Those and other factors conduced to the
rebellion of the Palestinian population, what's been called the first intifadah, which put an end to the state of non-war.

Even now, after so many years of being taught lessons of proper behavior by the Israeli army, palestinians would not accept to go back to an state of non-war. They continue nagging about an State of their own and about the question of the
settlements; true the "labor question" is no more, but new demands have been added instead, namely, part of Jerusalem and even some sort of solution of the refugee problem.

More and more israelis are awakening to the fact that the conditions for a lasting and just Peace are not symmetrical at all. For Israel, Peace means just one
small thing, namely, to be left in peace; for the palestinians on the other hand, Peace means the achievement of a solution for the four Big Things enumerated above. Surely, this is unreasonable and unfair. As some of my fellow Forum members have asked , why so many? why don't they drop one or two? Like the refugee problem for instance.

In this respect, Mr. Sharon's peace plan has at least the beauty of being symmetrical: one for one. Palestinians get their State israelis get their peace and quiet. Tit for Tat. All the other superfluous demands of the palestinian side to be dropped on the spot and a Treaty could be signed by next week.

A pity that Mr. Sharon never heard that saying about the tango.

[Mediocrates]

"The Soviet-union supported Israel for a short period, but since its invasion of egypt and unwillingness to discuss the refugee problem the relations got to freezing point. "

A minor point but the CCCP dropped Israel as a client state in the 50's after they refused to totally capitulate while their main arms supplier was Czechoslovakia - actually this predates Stalin's death.

[Jorge]

The following is another sentence from NewsGuy opening remarks that merits discussion,(quote):

Israel is not in need of peace, per se, but rather both sides are in need of a state of non-war and limited cooperation.

Three points actually: a) whether or not Israel needs peace
b) the need for non-war and c) need for limited cooperation.

About point b) I wrote in my last note and my conclusion was that it's a non-starter because palestinians won't go along with it.

About point c) [leaving a), the heaviest for the last): if one just
begins to think about even limited, not full, cooperation the prospects are staggering. Israel is dangerously close to economic collapse. (This is not hostile propaganda but learned opinions from israeli academics). There's an urgent need for effective growth which of late has been zero or negative. There are two areas that could alleviate this trend with little additional investments. One is tourism, the other, agricultural livestock industry, for both the infrastucture is already in place, so that once conditions are favorable, they can supply an inmediate boost to the now stagnant economy. Most experts agree that
foreign tourism has the potential of being one of the main
sources of income for Israel. What is meant for favorable conditions for tourism and the role that cooperation bet. both sides can play in it, is obvious and doesn't require further explanation.

Regarding the livestock industry, particularly eggs and
poultry and dairy products. In recent years a number of reforms
in the industry organization together with technological improvements led to an impressive increase in production capacity. Problem being that there is not enough internal purchasing power, both branches are in crisis and some of the large chicken farms are contemplating closure. A natural
consumer for these products is the palestinian and jordanian
markets. Here again the existent capacity is in place but iddle.

These are just two examples of what "limited cooperation" could do for Israel; just imagine what could be the results of "full cooperation". The picture from the palestinian side
will be dealt with in another note.

[pierom]

Great posts, Jorge

[elke]

Originally posted by Jorge
[B...These are just two examples of what "limited cooperation" could do for Israel; just imagine what could be the results of "full cooperation". The picture from the palestinian side
will be dealt with in another note. [/B]

In my mind, there is no question that you are absolutely correct. The only question I have is whether even a partial cooperation is truly achievable at this time. It seems that even though the picture could be as rosy, if not more so, for the Palestinians as well, they don't seem to realize it...or at least, their leadership doesn't.

[Jorge]

Continuation from my former note of 05-23.

Turning now to the issue of "limited cooperation" from the palestinian side.

Once the wawes of the present storm calm down a bit
and the peace process gets re-started, the palestinians
will have to confront two main issues: structuration of some form of internal government and economic development. The latter
cannot wait till final peace is achieved because the present social
situation is untenable.
An initial take-off could be achieved with investments from the European Union and from some arab countries (not from the US for reasons to be discussed later).

Foreign aid does not automatically result in economic development; in the present case at least two preconditions are
necessary: a)some sort of efficient bureaucracy that could efffect
a wise and speedy allocation of resources; and,here I come to the
point, b) Israel's "limited cooperation".

The main point of this cooperation would be to allow free
passage of goods into and out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Port facilities at Gaza are rudimentary and the "natural' sea ports
for Palestine are the israeli ones. Obviously, no economic development is possible without the easy flow of raw materials and industrial products.

Such a commitment would be no small matter for the israeli
government because of its security implications; (remember that we are talking of a period before final peace is achieved and the
conflict is still ON). Free passage of goods might mean also free passage of terrorists into Israel unless nearly zero tolerance security precautions are implemented. Furthermore, Israel
would have to guarantee uninterrupted free passage of goods.
No investor in his sane mind is going to put money in an industry that can be cut-off from the world at the next terrorist act. The situation that existed two years ago with agricultural produce
rotting in trucks at the checkpoints every time there was a terrorist attack was only conducent to bankruptcy of everyone involved.

I can anticipate at least objections to the precedent remarks from fellow Forum members:

1) Considering the risks involved, why should Israel bother?

2) What about corruption?

These objections will be discussed in my next note.

[Jorge]

Continued from 25 -05:

1)Considering the risks involved, why should Israel bother?

2) What about corruption?

Re. the first question: Israel should take the trouble because increased prosperity of the Palestinian population is in the best
interests of Israel.

To start with Israel and Palestine are "natural" trading partners,
each one is the obvious market for the products and services of the other. Increased prosperity of the Palestinians means, provided trade channels are kept open, means more purchasing power for Israeli products and services. As I said earlier, Israel
is not producing nor selling enough of a number of products which the palestinians
could buy, if they had the money for it. Second, but far more important, economic development is a key factor in the fight against terrorism. The present economical situation of the occupied territories can be summed up in three short sentences: unemployment between
60 and 80%, GDP less than one tenth of that for Israelis, no government and no infrastructure worth the name. If any one wants a good cocktail recipe for breeding terrorism, ad nauseum , here is one: mix the former economic data with
a fair measure of hate and resentment towards the conquering nation and tip it off with a fair measure of frustration and lack of hope. As any one can see it's working nicely so far.

Economic improvements
will not of course eradicate terrorism, but they may have the effect of making it a marginal phenomena, to isolate it from the mainstream of the population, to the point where police action
can be effective.

In the face of this situation there are two main options for both palestinians and israelis : one is to keep throwing the blame around (everyone but ourselves is responsible) the other is to do something to improve the situation. Since we have spent already more than a fair time in the first without getting anywhere, may be we should get on with the second option.

The second question posed was "What about corruption?" There's been quite a fuss about it lately, so much that some government sources here and in the US have said that a precondition for negotiations is that palestinians "should clean their act", whatever that might mean. In my humble opinion, corruption does not constitute
a serious threat to economic development. Take for instance
the US, where Big Business and politics are promiscuously intertwined, it is one of the most prosperous countries of the world;
or take the financial scandals of Chirac's and Jospin's associates,
France is doing very well, thank you. The list is really quite large.
I would go as far as to say that bureaucratic inefficiency and stupidity,are far more important threats to economic development than corruption.
This wisdom comes from an uncle of mine;( this was another uncle, not the argentinian one I mentioned earlier in connection
with the nonwar/tango question). This uncle was,
for a brief period, Minister of something or other, in a Central American place; this brief period was however more than enough for him to amass a rather respectable fortune.
Anyway, he used to say: "corruption and economic development go hand in hand, the more prosperity the more opportunities for us, honest politicians, to get their share".

For anyone interested in a better analysis of this corruption business I refer him to one of Danny Rubinstein (Ha'aretz,English Ed.,May 26): Taking aim at the PA - Battling Corruption

To be continued

[elke]

Corruption is not the biggest issue, although when people live on handouts it is a major problem. The biggest issue is whether there is psychological readiness to deal.

[gev]

Jorge,
all the talks of financial development, how it is the interest of Israel, all are very nice and true.
They have been said already, and there were actually many projects done in the time when Oslo was created.

But when looking at the risks Israel is facing today, Israel cannot "afford" itself one terror attack every now and then...

poverty is not the only reason for terror, Osama Bin Laden is not exactly poor...

actaully it has been seen that acts of terror commited by poor and desparate people are not the worst ones, Terror attacks that are made by a mad fanatic and computed terrorists are the ones Israel fears and fight with in the last Israeli military operations.

The bomb that was planted in a fuel truck and made it's way to a massive gas and fuel depo, could have had a devastating result much like september 11th attack, these kind of 'strategic' terror attacks (as they called, by Israeli military officials) are not commited by desperate men.

a more creative solution should be formed in order to develop the economy of palestinians and yet to Close and secure as much as possible the border with Israel.

One solution will be: trade with other countries, work in other countries, all this monitored by Israel (Air Space and borders with Egypt and Jordan) in order to be sure that no weapons are smuggled, but the Israeli border will have to stay shut, much like we have with Syria and Lebanon (and look how they are doing fine without our help :) ).

I would like to remind you that Israel has developed without any help from Arab countries and with the risk of a war everyday. so, it is all about will power.

About Israel,
Israeli economy can grow without any help from palestinians, it is true that the construction and argicultural industries was actually dependent on palestinian workers, but this has too creative solutions, such as imported workers from China and Thialand.

[Mediocrates]

Trade is not a key factor, generally else the Northern Irish would be fat dumb and happy trading with the rest of the UK. Since 1994 the per capita income of the Irish republic exceeded that of of GB and in fact one defining characteristic of modern Ireland is that there is little Irish left about it at all.

[Jorge]

Originally posted by elke
The biggest issue is whether there is psychological readiness to deal.

I agree this is a very important factor. Now, assume worst possible scenario: there is no readiness to deal. Then for Israel
two main options:

a) To adopt policies that may result in an increased motivation to deal like the ones I outlined above or others.

b) To continue in the same warpath that has been followed for the last year.

Option a) may work. Option b) has proved so far useless
regarding psycological readiness to deal.

[elke]

Originally posted by Jorge
[/COLOR]

I agree this is a very important factor. Now, assume worst possible scenario: there is no readiness to deal. Then for Israel
two main options:

a) To adopt policies that may result in an increased motivation to deal like the ones I outlined above or others.

b) To continue in the same warpath that has been followed for the last year.

Option a) may work. Option b) has proved so far useless
regarding psycological readiness to deal.

Agreed. Really risky though...

[Jorge]

To Gev:
Sorry to start from the end upwards:
About Israel,
Israeli economy can grow without any help from palestinians

I'm sure it could . My point was that even "limited cooperation" ,
along the lines I mentioned could be of great help.

One solution will be: trade with other countries, work in other countries, all this monitored by Israel (Air Space and borders with Egypt and Jordan) in order to be sure that no weapons are smuggled, but the Israeli border will have to stay shut,

I agree it's an alternative solution if the israeli border has to stay shut. Nevertheless, to grow vegetables or fruit in the West Bank to be marketed in Kuwait or Saudia when you have a market a few miles away seems a bit artificial. A situation whereby two neighboring countries that could complement each other, do not trade is an anomaly. It perpetuates tension and what we should be looking for is for ways to alleviate the tension.

poverty is not the only reason for terror ,

I don't think so either. However I do think that poverty, coupled
with desperation and frustration are excellent breeding grounds
for terrorism.

Allow me to explain myself through an analogy: a disease like
say, tuberculosis or cholera, is caused by a particular microorganism. If the disease appears in a town with good
sanitary conditions and well fed population, the disease may be easily limited to a few isolated cases. When the same disease
appears in a town with unsuitable sanitary conditions and with an overcrowded an underfed population, a few isolated cases
may easily led to an epidemics. It is clear that a certain bug and not poverty is the cause but the latter supplies the conditions for the spreading of the disease.

I'm aware that analogies have weaknesses but I've chosen this one because it can illustrate some points about terrorism of the kind we are experiencing now.( It's not Bin Laden's terrorism,
nor the Red Brigades,nor the IRA' terrorism). In our case, certain isolated cases show deviant behavior of the sort that in a normal and well adjusted society would be certified as insanity. This kind of deviant behavior may appear in any society, even in Israel
(think of Fedderman and his boys) but it is easily contained and isolated. Not so in a society where poverty, desperation and
frustration are widespread. There it is much easier to convince people, that otherwise might be sane and stable, to support and
even applaud abherrant behavior. When suicide bombers become heroes, scores will seek to imitate and emulate them.

It is in that sense that I said earlier that the prevalent conditions in the Palestinian society at this particular moment
supply a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. This is not a trait peculiar to the palestinians or the arabs; any human group
placed in similar conditions will probably behave in the same way.
Now, since we don't have a method to "cure" terrorists, our efforts
should be conducted to change the conditions in the Palestinian
society so that at some stage it will cease to be a breeding ground for terrorism. Israel has the power to influence the situation for the best, what's lacking is the formulation of more
longsighted policies than the shortsighted ones that the present
leadership is following.

[Mediocrates]

It is in that sense that I said earlier that the prevalent conditions in the Palestinian society at this particular moment
supply a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. This is not a trait peculiar to the palestinians or the arabs; any human group..


This is fairly precient - it's not the economy that's their problem. That's a side effect. The problem is their culture that foments the problems of which economic collapse is merely one manifestation.

Here's the thought experiment I ask you to try. For Palestine substitute the phrase "Central African Republic". Their problems are not there is no coffee, jute, oil, hemp, bananas, bauxite to process and sell. Their problem is their profoundly broken government and social institutions that breed corruption, contempt, abuse and anarchy.

Why do you think that the only Arab region in the world that doesn't have any oil decends into violence and anarchy? Because there isn't any money to cover up the problems and there aren't any structures that can effect the management of a country otherwise. If they struck oil tomorrow in the West Bank what would it accomplish? Well for one it would paper over some of the discontent. But it would not alleviate the utter absence of anything resembling a modern state and all that that entails. It would become another non-genetic oil thugocracy. Maybe a wonderful welfare state for some of the people who live there but no better in terms of an operating polity. How could it? They already have more college grads than you can swing a stick at and what has been accomplished?

(this is only slightly tongue in cheek - the basics are still true)

[Jorge]

Quote from Mediocrates (05-30)

This is fairly precient - it's not the economy that's their problem. That's a side effect. The problem is their culture that foments the problems of which economic collapse is merely one manifestation.

Here's the thought experiment I ask you to try. For Palestine substitute the phrase "Central African Republic". Their problems are not there is no coffee, jute, oil, hemp, bananas, bauxite to process and sell. Their problem is their profoundly broken government and social institutions that breed corruption, contempt, abuse and anarchy.

Re., the thought experiment you propose: I'd be happy to oblige but my knowledge of Central Africa is rather scarce. If you don't mind I'll choose instead a "Central American Republic"; about them I happen to know a bit more. Your characterization of their problem as "their broken government and social institutions that breed corruption, contempt , abuse and anarchy.", although a bit harsh, may apply also to some of them. They don't have much hemp and bauxite but there is coffee and bananas. Plenty of bananas really
and I suppose that's why they are called derisively " banana republics" which later became a generic appellative for countries with similar traits.

Bananas don't count for much nowadays but in the past you could make a lot of money out of them. You would think that a country that grows bananas for nearly a century would be a fairly
rich one by now, but these republics are not rich but shamefully poor. To understand why they are so poor you have to go
back a while to the times of the Monroe doctrine : "America for the Americans"; the doctrine, as applied to bananas, meant that only companies from the USA.
could monopolize their trade. These companies were led by very patriotic men that took pains to insure that all the earnings from bananas would go to the USA and virtually none to the producing countries that were to be kept in pastoral and idyllic poverty. The most notorious of these robbers, sorry, international companies, was an outfit called United Fruit Company which
literally owned some of these republics. UFC decided how the countries should be ruled and by whom. In collusion with the State Dept. it took decisions about the borders bet. the countries
and even about creating
"new independent democratic republics". Some cynics said that
the political geography of Central America, with its multiplicity of tiny countries, was designed in the main offices of the UFC. Whenever a political group got elected on a plattform centered
on changing the situation it was swiftly replaced by the next General in line, the General being of course in the company's payroll. Hence "anarchy", hence "corruption", hence "broken government and social institutions".

The lesson of thhis story being that when we think of "Central African Republics" or "Central American Republics"
(CAR's for short) " as corrupted and anarchic we should attempt to examine
how much of the blame is on the "natives" and how much on
the ruling foreign empires, past and present. I recommend it as a very interesting thought exercise.

Now, going back to the Palestinian society: although the diagnosis may be similar to those of some of the CAR's, the causes or reasons are of a different kind. First, there are no natural resources and hence no colonial exploitation. Second, prior to the PA there was no semblance of government
that could be copied or improved upon; the leaders of the PLO that took charge of self rule had no previous experience as civil servants. In short every institution had to be improvised.

Whatever semblance of self government was achieved was disintegrated by the israelis just before and during "Defensive Shield ". Thus, when talking about "broken government and social institutions"
again we have to apportion the blame for the present situation between the natives and a foreign power, as in the case of CAR's.

To state that(quote): " The problem is their culture that foments the problems of which economic collapse is merely one manifestation" is an unwarranted statement to say the least. Cultures are not static, they are reflections of the structure of societies; if the structure changes so does culture.
Palestinian society in 2002 is not the same as the one of two years ago, nor the same as 1967. Few societies, in recent decades have gone through such drastic changes, in such short
periods, as the palestinian one. When we blame or praise their culture we should be aware of the fact that we are talking about a transient and not an established one.

[Night_Flight]

hello all. im new here. i'm a turkish boy and i live in Ankara/Turkey

i agree that peace is useless. we had the same problem here in turkey,and we saw that PKK(kurdish terrorists) will never leave it up. so we captured APO(pkk's leader) and now he is in the jail.
mossad cia and mit worked together and they helped us to capturing him. when he was captured there were many protests amongs kurdish folk in turkey,states even in canada but we ignored them. becouse Turkey's independence and Turkey's welfare is more important that other minorities here.

I hope israel will capture all terrorists and burn them. Unfortunately most terrorist run away to greece and greece train them. there were many pkk terrorists in greece and greece were feeding them in a training camp. now palestenians terrorist run to south cyprus where the greeks are the most fanatick there.

Burn the Terrorists to keep the peace!

[MGB8]

Originally posted by takeo
ok, some Arab countries have a racist policy as well, are you happy that israel is not the only one in the middle East? Note that australia changed its immigration policy because the high court considered it racist, they only accepted "white" people untill the 70's. Clearly israel is much more comparable to its middle eastern neighbours that to Western countries.

but that's not the point, the point is that those Palestiian refugees are no immigrants, they are inhabitants who left their houses some decades ago. they should have the right according to the Geneva-conventions to return if they wish so, their are no immigrants to their own houses and lands.

How ignorant are you? Some??

ALL of the Arab states are racist, ethnocentric regimes, even the so called moderate ones. For G's sake, Kuwait expelled its Palestinian population after the Gulf War because it was a conveniant excuseto do so. Do I have to remind you of what Iraq, Iran and Syria have done to Palestinian arabs, kurds and turks?

As for Israel being a racist country, that is a joke. Israel is a completely pluralistic country, its only fault being that it is the Jewish homeland and has a national reliegion, as do most countries in the world. Any arab can become a citizen of Israel should they choose to do so, as long as they haven't committed crimes.

there are Arab membere of Parliament, including some treasonous SOB's who go to other countries to urge them to war on Israel.

[andrei]

Originally posted by takeo
Of course, Israel is totally blameless on the Palestinian hate against Israel... who wouldn't like to see foreign tanks and bulldozers destroying your garden and house to build some houses for some nice armed neighbours with some nice fences????


I am new at this forum and I'm trying to understand the situation with takeo and I cannot.

Either he simply doesn't know what he is writing about, which is clear from the statements like this one for instance. But this is unlikely since he put so much attention to this subject.

Or he knows the situation in Israel well and he is ********ting on purpose.

Anyway I must admit that his existence on the forum really refreshes it. May be he is a jews-follower indeed, in secret for himself :)? Sometimes when you hate something TOO MUCH, you really love it...

[Northlander]

Burn the Terrorists to keep the peace!

I see we have another representative from a similar country to israel. Im sure you will agree on alot of things.

Torture at police stations, air raids on civilians etc. You are giving us a hard time here to treat and take care of the survivors. What ever is left of them. I put Turkey at the same list as some arab countries and some african when it comes to human rights. Good luck applying to the EU. I promise to do anything I can to not let that happen.

[NewsGuy]

Takeo's entitled to his opinions like anyone else, even if he is greatly mistaken about most things. :o

Instead of focusing on him personally, I'd suggest responding to his ideas.

[platypus]

Being new to this Forum and lacking a working knowledge of
politics I am at a loss as concerns the conflict in any and all of
its aspects.
Are not Arabs, Jews and Palestinians both and all Semitic?
To fall back on an argument that this conflict has gone on for
ages and is totally beyond any solution due to the intenisty of
hatred founded in differences in Religeous and Political/Geo-Boundries is a catch 22 argument/debate!
Since Israel is a NEW State/Nation and the Jews are a people
persecuted and annihilated by the Nazi's Holocaust it is no wonder that they, as a people and a Nation are extremely defensive about there New Independent Territory and their
existence as a race and Divinely-oriented peoples.
I do not know that Muslims are taught and instructed to hate
and destroy on the level of genocide. And I have no first-hand
evidence of the nuances of violations of human rights being
alleged against any and all parties; but, it seems to me that hatred begets hatred [which is not to say: "Love and lay down your arms and all will be alright!"] Any solution must be something that is MUTUALLY worked for. And that demands the
simple fact of *desire* on the part of all involved parties.
Do I expect a resolution of this problem?
NO!
And why not?
Because as long as anyone or a people cling to playing the vicitm
then they will continue being a victim and victims victimize out of
reactive-retribution.
May the Supreme Being help us all!
john

[Vic]

Just how did the American Civil War come to pass? Weren't both of the parties Americans?

[IsraelAdvocate]

I think the most we can ever hope for on this issue is a cease-fire, implemented for the long term, followed by a non-belligerency arangement (of the type we now have with Egypt), accompanied by a UN seperation line and methods for observing the Palestinians.

This is not the warm peace between USA and Canada, but rather a ceasation of hostilities. It is the most we can hope for. Sad but true.

[IsraelAdvocate]

Originally posted by Vic
Just how did the American Civil War come to pass? Weren't both of the parties Americans?

They were both Americans, but the issue of Slavery in the South (an economic necessity at the time) divided them.
Eventually the war was fought over slavery.

The north did not want to let the south have slaves.

The difference here is that the Palestinians are not our countrymen, nor our slaves. We don't actually want them to come to Israel and work, and are willing to pay them salaries not to come to Israel at all. But ofcourse, despite thier hand wringing, they sneak in 25,000 Palestinians per day to do labor in Israel.

[Vic]

IA, my point was that ethnic/linguistic etc. proximity doesn't exclude bitter conflicts ;)

[Northlander]

methods for observing the Palestinians.

I can understand the need for that. Other than using the term "palestinians" for a whole people. Also what I have been saying over and over again. IDF are not the tool for observing them. AND there is a need to observe Israelis too. The casualties on the palestinian side are a evidence of that. A cease fire is the initial step too for a long time. A forced peace is better than no peace. Doesnt have to be a warm relation between neighbours. Think that is true for many european states. There are mistrust but no immidiate threat of war.

[elke]

So, who would be the tool for observing the Palestinians... uh... terrorists? You can call them something else, but provided that entity is not suicidal, it better have armor to protect it. Terrorists don't play "nice", you know.

[Northlander]

Instead I ask you? who should observe the palestinians? IDF?
What happened after IDF´s last months of war on terror? The two latest attacks are the worst in many years. If IDF are successful in fighting terror then how come the attacks are worse than ever? Again, is it at all possible that the IDF presence makes things even worse? When jews used terrorism against the brits in the 40´s they got rewarded in the end by having their own state. At least if you use a common israeli argument these days you could put it that way. The jewish terror then would still go on today if they hadnt got their own state, Im I right? Give the palestinians the control of their own lives, in their own territory, and at least we could start to see an end to these horrible bombings. As it is now things are escalating no matter how many troops you send in and how many fences you build.
The american plan of a provosoric palestinian state is at least constructive.
Both sides should not be so quick in rejecting it.
Despite my feelings towards US foreign politics in general I think they can make a difference here. They seem to have a determination in solving thing now and there is a need for constructive thinking which the americans are giving some examples of. How can the occupied territories be kept with the argument that they are crucial to Israels safety, when its clear they are causing so much grief on the israeli people? How can the settlers be allowed to jeopardise Israels safety, its reputation, its economy? Its absolutely not smart by the average israeli to accept this situation. Is it all about honor? The refusal to back of just a tiny little bit? Despite the tough attitude its clear israel as a country is suffering from this too. The economy is not doing that great I hear.

[Mediocrates]

There is no occupation there are no occupied territories there are no settlers. There are new suburbs of Tel Aviv in the disputed areas inside Judea and Samaria (YESHA).

[Northlander]

Yeah right. Total denial of reality.

Maybe there is no Israel? Only a temporary state formed by invaders like during the crusades. I support Israels right to exist of practical reasons, like those jews living there should never be forced to leave. Comments like yours makes it harder.
You should be able to see the consequences of your actions.
Keep on sending in settlers and you will see the result. We all know that. Without a solution to what to do with the palestinians I hope Israel never gets fully accepted. I know I will not.
People lived there before the construction of Israel. Denying it doesnt make it any less true.

[Northlander]

The first thing you have to do is determine if you can tell the difference between success and failure.

Mediocrates.
Would you call the latest two bombings in Israel for a success or failure when you see it as an israeli security issue?

The israeli civilians are paying the price for their government´s unwillingness to compromise.

[Mediocrates]

If that's a threat I'm unmoved. I refer you to my prior answer.

[Northlander]

If you are refering to the non acceptance of Israel its no threat. I dont think you care even though you should.
Diplomacy can be a very powerful tool you know. Even stronger than military force. Much stronger sometimes. Israel cant solve its problems by military means so...

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Northlander
If you are refering to the non acceptance of Israel its no threat. I dont think you care even though you should.

The European threat of non-acceptance of Israel has lost all meaning. It makes absolutely no difference. There will always be hatred of Israel, because Israel is the Jewish homeland.

And, what is "acceptance" anyway?

Do we accept the Chinese human rights abuses and political oppression? No...

Do we accept Arab official racism and hatred in their mass media? No...

Do we accept Arab discrimination against women, forced genital mutilation and "honor killings"? No...

But still, when it suits us to deal with these countries, we deal with them. We send them our money in exchange for their goods and many in our society pretend that their cultural norms are just as valid as those of civilized countries.

[Northlander]

There will always be hatred of Israel, because Israel is the Jewish homeland.

Has nothing to do with it exept from some ultra right wing racists.
There will be anger or in some cases hatred against Israel because of its actions/politics. Im sorry but you are wrong on this.

But still, when it suits us to deal with these countries, we deal with them. We send them our money in exchange for their goods and many in our society pretend that their cultural norms are just as valid as those of civilized countries.

To some extent yes. But not as between more civilized countries.
No arab country and not china either comes even close to most western countris when it comes to an easy daily living.
Its easier to change and its easier to develop for countries that are "accepted" if you excuse the word.
The situation for Israel is not perfect. Even without the bombings there would be problems. and without "acceptance" from USA you would not even exist. So it is still important for Israel to look after its relations to europe as well. A scenario where trade between Israel and europe declines would be devastating for Israel. Even between my country that is small and one of the most critical to israel historically there are large trading deals. Even weapon deals since we are buying from you. If relations dropped to the bottom between europe and Israel the economy would drop rapidly. Its just stupid to grow too dependent of USA and i dont think that is the plan either. So you better belive that when it really comes to anything more than fancy talks Israel will start to look after its interests. And that is as always economics.
Im talking about what could happen here. I can guarantee that there will be resistance of bying more arms from Israel. Oranges, Pentium 4 processors what have you. A boycott. I dont think it will happen but it could in the future. To say it doesnt matter is ignorant. The arms are already out of the question and that is the case in some other european countries too.
Its heavier than not buying french wines which at most annoyed France when testing nukes but it amused the public that felt they were doing ANYTHING. Israel is losing large amounts of money compared to what it COULD make in an ideal situation.

[platypus]

IsrAdvoc in Post #64 answers for me on the one point about the Americans.
As for the "perfect sheep/immaculate sheep" of A. Einstein, I would offer in response That the Big Bad Wolf is the best friend a sheppard has: sheep tend to cuddle closely when they are being threatened.
While making this post along THIS thread I feel impelled to add an observation: I tend towards being Pro-Israel for sundry reasons; but, I confirm that I am greatly influenced by the Media
seeming to favor the horrible coverage of the terroristic violence being enacted against the Jews through these insane suicide bombings [Kamakasis!]
True, there are images of the Iraeli attacks against the Palestinians but not so many as the former mentioned here. Of
course, I watch "American" TV and this Gov supports Israel to all
outward appearences.
However, I am beginning to give second thought to the matter of
"territory claims begetting terroristic tactics!" Andthat applied to both factions I might add!
Problems present difficulties (even on a persona level) when one has few if any OPTIONS. Individuals commit suicide when they are deeply convinced they have no options available.
john

[Northlander]

I go on the same line as above by commenting that the kamikaze phenomenon in the pacific in WWII was used in large extent only in the end of the war. When the war was already lost for Japan. Of course its a desperate act. The Japanse didnt use it in the beginning. Nor did the palestinians. It becomes an easy way out when all hope is gone.

[NewsGuy]

Northlander,

You are right about that it is not in Israel's interest to become too dependent on any one trade partner, even if that partner is the U.S.

On the other hand, Israel cannot afford to go along with the EU's pro-terrorism policies that are designed to appease the Arab terrorists and to damage Israel. The EU's hypocrisy is really overwhelming.

But I have complete faith in Europeans that they will never be swayed by what they perceive as mudane matters like priciples and values. It's one thing for many Europeans to make fancy speeches and ceremonious proclamations and then shake hands very politely with all their dignitaries and munch on some wonderful Brie and bloodwurst. But at the end of the day, Europeans will invariably be guided by their prime directive of greed. Plain greed. They will not walk away from $2(?) Billion in Israeli business.

And other than greed, one of our wise European members has once said that the reason the EU will never impose a serious boycott on Israel is because then they will lose all leverage on Israel and will no longer have any influence on the Mideast peace process.

This is why "acceptance" of Israel is no reason for Israel to succumb to European dictates.

btw - We had an interesting discussion about Israel's dependence on EU business in a thread from February, called "Israel's trade dependency: reality check":

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=1664#post1664

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Northlander
Its just stupid to grow too dependent of USA and i dont think that is the plan either. So you better belive that when it really comes to anything more than fancy talks Israel will start to look after its interests. And that is as always economics.
Im talking about what could happen here. I can guarantee that there will be resistance of bying more arms from Israel. Oranges, Pentium 4 processors what have you. A boycott. I dont think it will happen but it could in the future. Israel is losing large amounts of money compared to what it COULD make in an ideal situation.



More threats? Why wouldn't Israel amplify its relationship with the US in light of your statements?


Riddle me this - if Morocco took over Gibraltar and if you threatened a response, the OPEC cartle raised the price of oil by 50% what would you do? Do you think for example another Falklands war could occur today or would EUistan simply sit on its collective hands under the umbrella of post colonial compassion?

Is your bravado merely the echo of cowards and toothless policy?

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Northlander
I go on the same line as above by commenting that the kamikaze phenomenon in the pacific in WWII was used in large extent only in the end of the war. When the war was already lost for Japan. Of course its a desperate act. The Japanse didnt use it in the beginning. Nor did the palestinians. It becomes an easy way out when all hope is gone.

Whispering Wind was not a terrorist act directed at civilians you dunderhead. It consisted of dragging people off the streets, plunking them at gunpoint into airplanes with only enough gas for a one way trip. A white bandana and the Glory of the Empire of Japan. While we were disintegrating their war machine capacity from the air we were inflicting a far greater damage on their trained pilots. They simply ran out of pilots so what better way to use the plane but as a bomb itself. It didn't require much skill and could inflict as much damage otherwise as long as you don't care too much about sending teenagers probably juiced up on sake to their deaths. Bully for you and your human wave attacks.

Do you think that Iran's use of waves of unarmed 14 year olds in their war against Iraq was some kind of holy dictat? No, they simply scooped up millions of children for whom they cared nothing and sent them to their deaths because it was cheaper than guns and ammo and rockets and trained tank crews. It was based on whatever modern military tactics one can gather from reading Quran all day.

[hagg323]

Originally posted by platypus
[Problems present difficulties (even on a persona level) when one has few if any OPTIONS. Individuals commit suicide when they are deeply convinced they have no options available.
[/B]

Yes, Individuals commit suicide when they are deeply convinced they have no options available (among other reasons, I guess). But do you honestly believe that these terror attacks really are random acts of stressed individuals that in their deep emotional despair they’ve gone temporally insane and were driven to irrational self-destruction??? Don’t fall for it. The media likes to depict an oppressed nation that fights a heroic war to achieve what we all so much admire and treasure: freedom. But this is truly not the case. These guys are using their own people to promote a greater cause that the media and most Europeans have yet to comprehend: get a hold of the entire land; drive all Israelis away; and to build a new ‘kingdom’ for the corrupted heads of the Palestinian authorities… and guess what? all on the expense of their own people, who are still too miserable and poor and mostly ignorant to realize it. Do you really think that the average Palestinian has anything to say about it? Do you honestly think that the mass support of the Palestinian’s ‘street’ to increase violence against Israel and to deprive themselves from working in Israel and put food on their table is by free will and choice? Think again, buddy.

[Mediocrates]

Nobody wakes up depressed and finds a bomb under their bed. This is organized, commanded and funded like any other enterprise. These people are screened, trained, supplied, targeted, transported and their families rewarded.

BTW if they didn't reward the families would all the weeping burkahs still prostrate themselves with thankfulness to Arafat and Allah? Hmmmm - I doubt it. How do we even know if any of the weeping mamas are real? By journalistic standards normally you're supposed to get two corroborating sources independently. Do you think CNN even bothers? Do you think they have any integrity at all?

[MGB8]

Northlander,

There are many more trading partners than Europe and the US. There is Russia, China, India, South Africa, Japan, the Korea's, Thailand, Singapore, Taiwan, Australia, Canada and all of South America.

Do you really think that Europe matters? Europe is not the sole, or even best supplier of any single good (with the possible exceptions of luxury cars and fashion.)

Moreover, as you have pointed out, Europe is not a monolythic entity, and the EU does not involve everyone, at least not yet.

There are also very viable grey markets.

So to my bretheren in Israel, I say "SCR-W EUROPE!"

[Northlander]

There are many more trading partners than Europe and the US. There is Russia, China, India, South Africa, Japan, the Korea's, Thailand, Singapore, Taiwan, Australia, Canada and all of South America.
Of course there are. But IF EU worked together it would still be a serious blow to Israeli economy.

Riddle me this - if Morocco took over Gibraltar and if you threatened a response, the OPEC cartle raised the price of oil by 50% what would you do?

With or without US cooperation Im sad to say that Morocco would be flattened. They could of course not keep an operation like that secret so I guess a few navies would make it impossible for them to move but IF they somehow succeded to take gibraltar by force the retaliation would be horrible. It would be absolutely impossible for EU to accept an attack. It would quicken the process to really unite europe. Some other oil producing countries like russia and norway and others would give europe fair deals to strengthen their own position. Then EU would act quickly before they lost to much face and money and I wouldnt even conclude the threat of nuclear arms. Even some of the Opec countries would have difficulties sleeping at nights. There are EU carriers and airforces too you know. It would be like an attack on florida. No one would even think the thought. Not a very realistic scenario but I get your point. My point is that after USA ,EU is still the number two power in the world. Military and economically.
Also its growing and the population grows bigger than the US. the infrastructure are already there so in the long run EU will surely have their own agenda. Its not an entity yet, but its obvious in what direction its moving. I dont want it, voted against it, but it will happen.

While we are at it. How come USA is sucking up to s.arabia?
Is it not a old fashioned deal? You give us oil and we protect you and can position our troops in your country?
Does it even matter what they do to their own population and how fundamental their government gets?
There is just as much hypocrisy in USA as EU. More in my opinion.
Arm s.arabia now, attack them later. Arm Saddam, attack him later.Arm the Talibans, attack them later. Etc. Maybe arm Israel now and at least stop defending them. Who knows, if Israeli politics threatens the oil interests then USA maybe will lose its patience with Israel. Its nothing but greed as you said.
The oil will start to run out sooner or later and it will be a virtual race for the best positions in getting it. From eu,usa, asia etc.


PS. To all americans on this forum: good luck in the WC quarter final against germany in soccer today. :)

[MGB8]

Northlander - you could be right, Israel could be a passing entity - THAT'S THE POINT! Israel needs to survive as the Jewish homeland, not just because it was so originally, or because it is the cradle of Judaism (and Christianity), but because it is the place where it IS NORMAL to be Jewish.

Non-jews don't understand this. But even in the US, where Judaism is failry well accepted (Lieberman's candidacy was huge for the Jewish people here), the country is still very much a Christian country, and you feel it.

Moreover, Israel gives the Jewish people control over their own destiny. Never again will we be dependant on others for our survival.

I also want to Emphasis the point that PALESTINE is a ROMAN WORD. IT has nothing to do with modern "palestinians," who should at best be called Palestinian Arabs. Before the romans changed the name to Palestine they called it JUDEA. Maybe we should start refering to the "Palestinians" as JUDEAN arabs. Actually, I think I will - its as accurate.

As for the EU, they can go F- themselves, for all that I care. Israel will survive without them. Europe is a continent of self-serving, imperialistic hypocrits (sp).

As for the US, it is less hypocritical than the EU because, outside of Bush, it really makes no claim of moral superiority. Everyone knows and accepts that the US acts out of self interest, along with a love of democracy and capitalism.

Europe pretends as if its actions come from some higher good, masking the real motivations. Maybe hypocrits is the wrong words, and liars is more accurate.

No, hypocracy, "punishing" Israel for actions that they themselves would and have taken, works well, also. Israel is less imperialistic than TODAY's France and Great Britain.

Please go read my post on the Arab-Israeli conflict board titled "why they hate us" and come back to me.

[Jorge]

Quote frpm MGB8 post 85:

As for the EU, they can go F- themselves, for all that I care. Israel will survive without them. Europe is a continent of self-serving, imperialistic hypocrits (sp).

Europe pretends as if its actions come from some higher good, masking the real motivations. Maybe hypocrits is the wrong words, and liars is more accurate.

The above quotation from MGB8 is just an example, among many others in this Forum, of what I'd qualify as an exaggerated criticism on Europeans regarding their views on the present israeli-arab confrontation.

The "crime" Europeans appear to be guilty of nowadays is to criticize the violent actions of both parties while showing more understanding and sympathy towards the predicament of the palestinians than that of the israelis. To the best of my knowledge
this way of apprehending the confrontation has not so far materialized into any concrete action other than a small contribution to the PA budget.

To call them hypocrites, liars, intriguants and so on, just because they dissent with israeli policies is unwarranted. A sizable segment of the israeli population also dissents; does it make them also hypocrites and liars? What about Asians, Africans and South Americans having also a similar position?

The current europhobia appears to ignore the fact that up to two years ago Europeans have been either neutral in the Israeli-arab conflict or sympathetic to Israel. Scandinavian countries , in particular, were openly friendly towards us. Why the change? Is it because suddenly they became infected by an anti-Semitic virus? Alternatively, could it be that the reason for the change is that our present policies
are indeed reprehensible? When your friend becomes your foe you should try to find out why before you start insulting him.

Also from MGB8 (#83) quote:

Do you really think that Europe matters? Europe is not the sole, or even best supplier of any single good
Yes , I do think that Europe matters. As a matter of fact good relationships with Europe are of the utmost importance for Israel. Europe is our most important trading partner and one of our dreams is that one day we'll become members of the European Common Market. May be, just may be, we could find other trading partners : Thailand, Taiwan, Uzbekistan, Papua and Timbuktu. But we have a unique cultural relationship with Europe ; Uzbekistan and Papua are not a viable alternative from the cultural point of view. You have to realize that in the Middle East we are a tiny inclusion surrounded by a hostile Moslem population; culturally we have little in common with them. A factor of the arab-israeli conflict, although not the most important, is that we are really a European enclave inserted into an strange environment. How do we manage? Through our unique ties with Europe: our songs compete in Eurovision, our sports teams compete in the European Leagues, our musicians tour European cities part of the year, research in Universities is closely tied up with them. There are few aspects of our life, except of course religion, which are not a part of a larger Eoropean scene. Israelis take their holidays in Europe and feel there at home because in everyday life we basically behave as they do;
even moroccan Jews feel more at home in France than in Morocco. You cut that and we become culturally isolated.


As for the EU, they can go F- themselves, for all that I care. Israel will survive without them

Of course we can survive without them; Jews survived in ghettos for hundreds of years. The question is : is that the future we envision for Israel?

[elke]

Jorge, very well-reasoned post.

[MGB8]

No, criticism isn't the problem. Embargo's, threats, non-sales (from England and Denmark), the scientific-community threat...these are attempt of Europe to strong arm Israel.

For what? For defending itself.

Europe has been quick to jump on stories of "massacres" that never happened. It is home of the international red cross that won't accept magen david adom as a symbol because it is "offensive" - ie. Jewish.

It has done Israel no favors, did not come to Israel's aid in any wars (nor offer), has sold a ton of arms to the Arab nations, especially the French who were (and probably are) actively helping Iraq and Iran gain nuclear power.

Belgium has its phoney suit against Sharon, with nothing against Assad, Arafat, and the Iotola Khumeini, not to mention prince Saud or Sadam Hussein.

The Europe who keeps trying to lessen the penalties and monitoring of Iraq, who scudded Israel only a decade ago.

European contries who allowed the UN to pass a "zionism is racism" resolution.

No, Europe is not "hated" for its criticism. Its hated for its hypocrisy.

[MGB8]

As for Jorge's other points (e