From the Good News Dept.

[NewsGuy]

At a time when so much bad news is being widely reported, I thought I might share what I consider to be good news for Israel. Please feel free to add to this list as the events warrant:

1. There has been a new settlement drive in the West Bank.

The BBC reports:

"A group of Jewish settlers in the West Bank has launched a controversial campaign to attract more Israelis to join them.

Settlers in the Binyamin area say they aim to bring 1,000 families - about 4,500 people - to their 32 settlements by the end of the year. At present an estimated 29,000 settlers live in the area.

The organisers say no new building will be required, and that the newcomers would move into vacant homes...

The head of the settlement project in the Binyamin area, Elazar Sela, says his goal was "to bring some 1,000 families to the Binyamin area in order to... give new life and new impetus to all that is called settlements".

Mr Sela estimates that there are about 200 vacant houses in the Binyamin area, plus about 50 available for rent and about 50 mobile homes, making a total of 300..."

Certain groups in Israel are opposed to this initiative but, in the end, the facts on the ground will determine the final outcome.

I used to think that the settlements should be kept under control, but now seeing the way things unfolded in the past 2 years of the Palestinian Jihad-genocide against Jews, I have come to believe that one of the most effective ways to counter Palestinians terrorism is to expand the Jewish presence in the land of Israel. At least until a peace agreement is in place that determines a mutually-agreed international border.


2. While the Palestinians are still living in their mideval world of feudalism, Israel rejoins the space-age with the imminent launch of the Ofek 5 satellite. btw - With Ofek 1 launched in 1998, Israel became the eighth country to launch its own satellite. (Ofek is Hebrew for horizon).

But an equally exciting aspect of this launch is the Shavit rocket used to launch the Ofek satellite. The Shavit (Hebrew for Comet), is thought to be a rocket capable perhaps of carrying a conventional (or non-conventional) missile not only to any point in the Middle East, but also well beyond the Middle East. It is used for both the launch of the Ofek satellite, as well as the Jericho-2 missile.

In addition to its long-range missiles capabilities, Israel is also interested in promoting the Shavit as a commercial space launcher.

Back to my original point, it is not only Israel's military superiority that is the good news, but also Israel's scientific advancement that is world-class, in contrast to the primitive third-world conditions of its Arab enemies.

[sharonbn]

This is bad news for me.
The more fanatic Israeli settlers reside in WB, the farther the peace seems to be.

Israel government should do what it should have done 25 years ago - freeze setlements at once!

[Iori Yagami]

As for the Ofek 5, afaik it`s the first Israeli satelite that is being launched from Israel. The others were launched from Russia.

[Mediocrates]

You mean they're not using their technology to build IRBMs pointed at all the holy places in Islam? I guess building missiles that don't actually achieve orbit are so much harder to develop.

[ibrodsky]

Let's not make too much of Israel's space prowess.

It's true that all of the Arab countries combined couldn't put a satellite into orbit. But it's only because they completed that phase of their development about 1,300 years ago, when Mohammed ascended to heaven.

[Mediocrates]

Hmm dunno - maybe it's that evil western calculus and the Great Satan, Issac Newton. I mean you can plot orbits and perform real analysis and solid analytic geometry and polar calculus with only algebra but it's painfully hard to do.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Let's not make too much of Israel's space prowess.

It's true that all of the Arab countries combined couldn't put a satellite into orbit. But it's only because they completed that phase of their development about 1,300 years ago, when Mohammed ascended to heaven.

LOL

[gev]

Originally posted by NewsGuy
At a time when so much bad news is being widely reported, I thought I might share what I consider to be good news for Israel. Please feel free to add to this list as the events warrant:

1. There has been a new settlement drive in the West Bank.

The BBC reports:

"A group of Jewish settlers in the West Bank has launched a controversial campaign to attract more Israelis to join them.

Settlers in the Binyamin area say they aim to bring 1,000 families - about 4,500 people - to their 32 settlements by the end of the year. At present an estimated 29,000 settlers live in the area.

The organisers say no new building will be required, and that the newcomers would move into vacant homes...

The head of the settlement project in the Binyamin area, Elazar Sela, says his goal was "to bring some 1,000 families to the Binyamin area in order to... give new life and new impetus to all that is called settlements".

Mr Sela estimates that there are about 200 vacant houses in the Binyamin area, plus about 50 available for rent and about 50 mobile homes, making a total of 300..."


can you tell me how is this good news?
how does it get us forward to our goal?
spread the army further, and get it deeper into the terretories?



Certain groups in Israel are opposed to this initiative but, in the end, the facts on the ground will determine the final outcome.


it's not "some groups" it's the majority!
and the facts on the ground will not determine anything, it's just means more people to evacuate, a painful process to us all, but should be done in the end of the conflict...




I used to think that the settlements should be kept under control, but now seeing the way things unfolded in the past 2 years of the Palestinian Jihad-genocide against Jews, I have come to believe that one of the most effective ways to counter Palestinians terrorism is to expand the Jewish presence in the land of Israel. At least until a peace agreement is in place that determines a mutually-agreed international border.


can you elaborate how you've got to this conclusion?
settlers do not defend anything, the army does. the settlers "make facts on the ground" and then ask for the army to come defend them, that's dangerous to them and the army,
if there wasn't for the settlements the army could have spread itself more effictively and could defend Israeli citizens with much more success.



2. While the Palestinians are still living in their mideval world of feudalism, Israel rejoins the space-age with the imminent launch of the Ofek 5 satellite. btw - With Ofek 1 launched in 1998, Israel became the eighth country to launch its own satellite. (Ofek is Hebrew for horizon).


what makes this news so good is that the Ofek 5 has many intelligence capability and counter terror capabilities.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by gev
can you tell me how is this good news?
how does it get us forward to our goal?
spread the army further, and get it deeper into the terretories?
Filling the vacant houses doesn't require more IDF deployment. In any case, the IDF is plenty "deep" into the territories as is. This makes no diffrence to the IDF and only strengthens Israel, because of the reasons I stated before.


it's not "some groups" it's the majority!
and the facts on the ground will not determine anything, it's just means more people to evacuate, a painful process to us all, but should be done in the end of the conflict...

You are mistaken on both issues. First, the majority of Israelis do support settlements, as evidenced very clearly by Sharon's landslide elections.

The Leftists, who oppose settlements, are under a delusion that if Palestinians are allowed to achieve a better military position, then Israel will somehow be safer. I, and most Israelis, disagree of course, based on past behavior of the Palestinians.

Regardless, though, this [articular settlement initiative does not even require building any more housing, but rather just filling existing houses that are sitting empty at the moment.

I consider this to be good news.


can you elaborate how you've got to this conclusion?
settlers do not defend anything, the army does. the settlers "make facts on the ground" and then ask for the army to come defend them, that's dangerous to them and the army,
if there wasn't for the settlements the army could have spread itself more effictively and could defend Israeli citizens with much more success.

I'll start with your last statement first, which I think is at the core of the misunderstanding. You apparently do not consider Jewish settlers living in their Jewish homeland to be Israeli citizens. This is incorrect, and it explains your point of view.

To me and to most Israelis, Jews living in Tapuach and Neveh Dekalim are Israeli citizens who deserve as much IDF protection as those living on Sheinkin street.

[gev]

Originally posted by NewsGuy

Filling the vacant houses doesn't require more IDF deployment. In any case, the IDF is plenty "deep" into the territories as is. This makes no diffrence to the IDF and only strengthens Israel, because of the reasons I stated before.


They were talking about mobile houses too which are isolated and wasn't protected by the IDF, and would be protected once they are filled.



You are mistaken on both issues. First, the majority of Israelis do support settlements, as evidenced very clearly by Sharon's landslide elections.


latest polls made by various institutes (also some who are led by people who thought of as right winged) all suggested that the majority would like to see evacuation of settlements and a palestinian state in the end of the conflict.
Sharon elections was the disappointment of Arafat and the current peace process, and it was nothing to do with settlements. when a real palestinian leader arrives and terror is stopped most israelies wouldn't think twice and vote to whoever is ready to evacuate settlements.

Netanyahu himself said he knows that most Israelies think that a palestinian state should be formed and settlements should be evacuated, he just want to pursuade them that they are wrong.
(ofcourse, this does not add up with his actions when he was PM like Hebron aggreement, but thats another story)




The Leftists, who oppose settlements, are under a delusion that if Palestinians are allowed to achieve a better military position, then Israel will somehow be safer. I, and most Israelis, disagree of course, based on past behavior of the Palestinians.


There are fractions in the left as it is in the right, what you are reffering by saying leftists is extreme leftists. most leftists and I among them think that when there could be a solution of some sort the settlements shouldn't get in the way, because there shouldn't be there any anyway.




I'll start with your last statement first, which I think is at the core of the misunderstanding. You apparently do not consider Jewish settlers living in their Jewish homeland to be Israeli citizens. This is incorrect, and it explains your point of view.

To me and to most Israelis, Jews living in Tapuach and Neveh Dekalim are Israeli citizens who deserve as much IDF protection as those living on Sheinkin street.

you've got me wrong. I do think they are citizens and they will be much safer if they were not there.
the IDF could have protected them and any other citizen better.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by gev
They were talking about mobile houses too which are isolated and wasn't protected by the IDF, and would be protected once they are filled.

Yes, the small groups of caravans are a bad idea, not because they are wrong ideologically, but only because they are difficult to defend from the ethnic cleansing the Palestinians are carrying out against the Jews.



latest polls made by various institutes (also some who are led by people who thought of as right winged) all suggested that the majority would like to see evacuation of settlements and a palestinian state in the end of the conflict.
Sure, most Israelis are willing to have an independent Palestinian state even if SOME settlements are evacuated. You are correct that even Sharon and Netanyahu have offered to remove some Israeli settlements and remove some Palestinian settlements to have a defensible border.

If you remember, even Menachem Begin z"l dismantled Yamit, with Ariel Sharon actually in charge of the evacuation.

So, agreeing to a peace with painful concessions, like dismantling some settlements is a position of the moderates of the Left wing and of the Right wing also. That's why the poll you mentioned shows a majority. But by no means is the majority prepared to uproot all settlements.

Now, in the meantime, while Palestinian terrorism continues, I support building and expanding settlements as a message to the Arabs that they need to figure out some way to stop their violence, because otherwise, all of the land of Israel will be settled by Jews, and this mass of people will be able to choke off terrorist infiltrators from all Palestinian villages. This is the alternative.

[gev]

Originally posted by NewsGuy

Now, in the meantime, while Palestinian terrorism continues, I support building and expanding settlements as a message to the Arabs that they need to figure out some way to stop their violence, because otherwise, all of the land of Israel will be settled by Jews, and this mass of people will be able to choke off terrorist infiltrators from all Palestinian villages. This is the alternative.

you support expanding settlements and building towns you agree that will be evacuated in time?
do you think the people who go live there realy sees eye to eye with you? I think not, apart for playing with people lives here there are other issues:

I think that the way to go is not expanding settlements just to send a message to the Arabs they may or most surely may not understand, but to evacuate some sttelments and fortify borders in order to prevent terror attacks.

I know I said it before, but there is another point to add to the list of arguments for this plan:
the situation that will be created is that the palestinian terrorists will be mostly unsuccessful in their acts, while Israel continues to attack terrorists with much more success, this will create despair and will eventually make the palestinian see that the violence is not getting them nowhere.

Now, the palestinians has a sense of power: "mighty" Israel that win all the wars against many Arab armies at once can't stop us from attacking it everyday, this false sense of power is dangerous and will not get us anywhere.

[alexbmn]

there was an article in Israelinsider regarding this matter and although i cant find it unfortunately I can relate the main point of it.The fact is if you look at the maps of Israel after the war of Independence you would see that its territory was a touch greater then the one alotted by the 1947 UN Partition.What this shows is that just as in 1967 Israel had conquered it in a defensive war and later people moved into it and estabilished "settlements " which then later grew into large communities or cities.Now the main point sof the article is that there doesnt seem to be any outcry from Israelis about those "settlements." And the authors ask ,why is it that the communities that were created in Judea and samarea are treated differently?
The fact is Arabs see Tel Aviv ,Haifa,and other cities within the Green Line on the same terms as Neitzarim. All these cities represent illegal zionist settlements on Arab land. And honestly although some see settlement expansion as the main roadbump on the road to peace,the fact remains that Arabs never wanted peace ,and thus expansion is a good way to show them that all their efforts to make Israel retreat and shrink are worthless.

[gev]

alexbmn,



Arabs never wanted peace ,and thus expansion is a good way to show them that all their efforts to make Israel retreat and shrink are worthless.


in your sentence replace Arabs with Israel , replace expansions with Terror attacks , and "make Israel retreat and shrink " with "stop our resistence to occupation "

and you will get exactly what the Tanzim and Islamic-Jihad are saying for their terror activities.

[alexbmn]

but I dont give a rat's ass about what terrorists say.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by sharonbn
This is bad news for me.
The more fanatic Israeli settlers reside in WB, the farther the peace seems to be.

Israel government should do what it should have done 25 years ago - freeze setlements at once!

Certainly most of the world agrees with you. But as NewsGuy pointed out, just because many people have been browbeaten into accepting the notion that a Jew-free West Bank is desirable and just, that doesn't mean that it is.

As Alexbmn suggests, Israel's Arab enemies attacked and paid for their mistake by losing land. Now they demand that the future of the disputed territory be resolved in their favor as a precondition to "peace negotiations."

In reality, if Israel is going to survive it has to start anexing the West Bank piece by piece as long as Palestinians and their immoral supporters think it is acceptable or "understandable" that they blow up innocent civilians.

I have no doubt that eventually we will all learn that Israel's enemies don't want peace with Israel -- they only want a "deal" that will improve their prospects for destroying Israel. (This is the only logical explanation for why they rejected Barak's offer.) Only after they are thoroughly defeated will they choose to try living next to Israel, because they will have no choice.

To think that Arafat's band of terrorists want peace with Israel is about as realistic as believing that Nazi Germany just wanted a fair deal regarding Germanic people living in Czechloslovakia.

Colin Powell is today's Neville Chamberlain. But where is Churchill? I think Netanyahu is the world's best hope.

[gev]

alexbmn,
I know, but you didnt get my point,
as much as the Tanzim and Islamic-Jihad plan wont work, so will your plan won't.
dont you see the resemblance of the arguments?

when the palestinian launches a terror attack, Israelies think of the palestinians as only wanted to kill as much Israelies so peace is not acheivebale, and we should fight the palestinians.

when Israel builds another settlement, the Arabs think Israel only wants to conquer the entire West bank so peace is not acheivable, so they should fight the Israelies.

The exact opposite of what you wish to accomplish.

[alexbmn]

and neither should anyone in Israel.

[alexbmn]

ok that last post meant that nobody in israel should care what terrorists say either.

[alexbmn]

but you see the fact is Israel has already given peace a chance.It didnt work.Now its time to give war a chance

[gev]

Originally posted by alexbmn
but you see the fact is Israel has already given peace a chance.It didnt work.Now its time to give war a chance

I agree. give war a chance, not settlements.
fortify the borders not make them more breakable and the army more spread, defend Israel instead of expanding it, thats what I'm saying.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by gev
you support expanding settlements and building towns you agree that will be evacuated in time?
No, some settlements will need to be evacuated and most will not. It is worth building more in the meantime.

You may think that the Palestinians will not understand the message, but what if on the site that any Israeli is murdered, 1,000 new settlement houses are built? Do you think they will not get the point? I think they will.


the situation that will be created is that the palestinian terrorists will be mostly unsuccessful in their acts, while Israel continues to attack terrorists with much more success, this will create despair and will eventually make the palestinian see that the violence is not getting them nowhere.
Right, the terrorist infrastructure will be weakened, but it will only mean that the conflict will reach a lower "acceptable" level of terrorism. What would that level be to the Leftists? 5 Israelis murdered per month? 10 per month?

I think that you are starting to reach a good solution by building a wall around Palestinian towns, but at the same time the IDF needs to continue its offensive on a large scale in any Palestinian location, including Gaza.

At the same time, some Palestinian settlements need to be evacuated also, so that the separation wall can be built properly.

[gev]

You may think that the Palestinians will not understand the message, but what if on the site that any Israeli is murdered, 1,000 new settlement houses are built? Do you think they will not get the point? I think they will.


you can "trust" palestinian propoganda machine for that one, it can pursuade the palestinian pepole just about anything.
and this one is not so hard actually.



Right, the terrorist infrastructure will be weakened, but it will only mean that the conflict will reach a lower "acceptable" level of terrorism. What would that level be to the Leftists? 5 Israelis murdered per month? 10 per month?


I havent said nothing about "acceptable" terror attacks...
and again you are maybe reffering to extremists.
what I'm saying that Terror infrastructure should still be harmed after we have done these steps. where ever is necessary.
but if Terror is reduced we will be in better position than we are in now. I think the number of casualities will be smaller than that: the best of my recall there wasn't any terrorists coming from Gaza in the past year or even more...

while building more settlements will get us the exact opposite result!

[Mediocrates]

A man walks into a curio shop in Haifa. Looking around at the exotica, he notices a very lifelike, life-sized bronze statue of a rat. It has no price tag, but is so striking he decides he must have it. He took it to the owner: "How much for the bronze rat?"

"Twelve shekels for the rat, one hundred shekels for the story," said the owner. The man gave the man twelve shekels. "I'll just take the rat, you can keep the story."

As he walked down the street carrying his bronze rat, he noticed that a few real rats had crawled out of the alleys and sewers and began following him down the street. This was disconcerting, he began walking faster. But within a couple blocks, the herd of rats behind him had grown to hundreds, and they began squealing. He began to trot toward the Bay, looking around to see that the rats now numbered in the MILLIONS, and were squealing and coming toward him faster and faster. Concerned, even scared, he ran to the edge of the Bay, and threw the bronze rat as far out into the Bay as he could. Amazingly, the millions of rats all jumped into the Bay after it, and were all drowned.

The man walked back to the curio shop. "Ah ha," said the owner, "you have come back for the story?" "No," said the man, I came back to see if you have a bronze Arab".

[L@mplighterM]

Great joke!

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by gev
I think the number of casualities will be smaller than that: the best of my recall there wasn't any terrorists coming from Gaza in the past year or even more...
I only wish that was true.

But there have been roadside shootings on the road between Gush Katif and Jerusalem, and maybe hundreds of RPGs shot into Gush katif population centers, and other nearby Jewish settlements.

Gaza is also the place where the terrorist leadership which controls terrorism in the West Bank exists undisturbed by Israel.

btw - I don't think you're an extreme Leftist at all, but very often the main message that is heard is from the Leftist extremists, because they make the most noise.

[gev]

Originally posted by NewsGuy

I only wish that was true.

But there have been roadside shootings on the road between Gush Katif and Jerusalem, and maybe hundreds of RPGs shot into Gush katif population centers, and other nearby Jewish settlements.



ofcourse, when they can't produce terror attacks inside Israel, they go to an easier target: the settlers.
they are isolated inside a hostile palestinian zone, it's hard or impossible to defend them there.
(unless they want to live in a military base and call it a settlement)

thats why when going about such a separation plan in the West Bank and in Gaza, part of the plan should be evacuating isolated settlements. because when the border is safe and terrorists know they can't pass to inside Israel - the settlements will become the main target.
you may say that settlers are now already a target, but we haven't seen the worst of the scenarios the Israeli military is warning about.




Gaza is also the place where the terrorist leadership which controls terrorism in the West Bank exists undisturbed by Israel.


Yes, Gaza Strip is home base for Islamic Jihad and Hamas groups. and still terror attacks to inside Israel is prevented


When I look at the two pssibilities:
1. build more settlements and bring more settlers that in the final agreement will be evacuated, and in the mean time Terror attacks will stay the same or grow.
2. fortify the border, evacuate isolated settlement (which would have been evacuated in the final agreement anyway), make Israel and the settlements that remains safer - terror attacks will decrease

I think the choice is obviuos.

[gev]

Originally posted by ibrodsky


I have no doubt that eventually we will all learn that Israel's enemies don't want peace with Israel -- they only want a "deal" that will improve their prospects for destroying Israel. (This is the only logical explanation for why they rejected Barak's offer.) Only after they are thoroughly defeated will they choose to try living next to Israel, because they will have no choice.

To think that Arafat's band of terrorists want peace with Israel is about as realistic as believing that Nazi Germany just wanted a fair deal regarding Germanic people living in Czechloslovakia.

Colin Powell is today's Neville Chamberlain. But where is Churchill? I think Netanyahu is the world's best hope.

Yes, Arafat, the Hamas and other terrorists dont want peace,
But that doesn't mean that whole of palestinians don't want it.
or won't accept it when presented.

It's like an Arab will say: Israelies don't want peace look at Goldstien and Kahana.

[Mediocrates]

Somehow I think that if we accepted that violence will follow us whichever side of the Green Line people lived on and we were utterly unapolegetic about it things would go easier.

The left and the peace front are hanging an enormous weight on the hope that terrorism will abate when the last Jew leaves the last settlement. I'm hard pressed though to:

1) Believe that is true
2) Understand what your success criteria are

I don't see the magic connection. That's not to say that I don't agree with it - merely that I admit its purely out of fatigue and deadlock. Of course what we see is the evolution of all official foreign policy of a free and independent Palestine. Any dispute from that point onward would be pursued with rocks, guns and bombs. The PLO can always, in the future, make a demand, send terrorists out and claim an inability to reign them in. It's worked so far - heck it's practically their official policy already.

Just so we're clear - a free Palestine will settle water disputes with violence, trade disputes with violence, land use disputes with violence, labor disputes with violence and so on. And by disputes I mean unilateral demands.

[gev]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Somehow I think that if we accepted that violence will follow us whichever side of the Green Line people lived on and we were utterly unapolegetic about it things would go easier.


the fact is that there is violence on both sides of the Green Line.
I don't think that the palestinian will "understand" anything if we evacuate settlements, I dont want to change their way of thinking.
I think that now we should look at one simple fact:
no matter what will do: expand military operations, expand settlements, evacuate settlements, seize military operations - Terrorists will not stop launching their attacks.
After we understand that there is only one possibility: prevent the success of these attacks, this is done by evacuating isolated settlements and fortifying and creating a border.




The left and the peace front are hanging an enormous weight on the hope that terrorism will abate when the last Jew leaves the last settlement.


some maybe, but they're not the majority of the left.
I think that now the majoriy of the right and the left think the same, the difference between the two wings will be noted when there will be a serious palestinian partner that will stop palestinian terrorism for good (if there will ever be such a thing)

But then I think/hope we will se that most Israelies are actually moderate leftists.

[alexbmn]

this is best article I've seen regarding the settlements.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110001769

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by gev


Yes, Arafat, the Hamas and other terrorists dont want peace,
But that doesn't mean that whole of palestinians don't want it.
or won't accept it when presented.

It's like an Arab will say: Israelies don't want peace look at Goldstien and Kahana.

What an absurd comment.

The Palestinians made a terrorist their leader. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are highly respected in Palestinian society.

Israel not only didn't make Kahane their leader, they banned his party. And while a few nut cases may idolize Goldstein, he is not generally revered as a "martyr" for the Zionist cause.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by alexbmn
this is best article I've seen regarding the settlements.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110001769

Excellent article!

[gev]

The Palestinians made a terrorist their leader. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are highly respected in Palestinian society.

the palestinians live in a dictaroship where someone that speaks against the leader is "quiet down".
The majority of palestinians just want a country of their own and to live in respect in side of Israel, this was published on many objective polls.
you can't compare Israel that is a democratic society and the palestinians who are brain washed by palestinian education and TV for hatred.

after all this is gone I hope the voice of the majority is heard.

btw- this is what Sharon know too, that's why he wants to replace Arafat and the current PA.



Israel not only didn't make Kahane their leader, they banned his party. And while a few nut cases may idolize Goldstein, he is not generally revered as a "martyr" for the Zionist cause.

I know that.
the minority who support these acts in israel no matter what is the reason is ofcourse less than the minority who support in the palestinian side.
and it is far less organized than in the palestinian side because Israeli Shin Beit is stopping the phenomena when it's small.