View Full Version : Recipe for Peace: Transfer Palestinians
NewsGuy
06-19-2002, 01:26 PM
After examining the history of the Middle East and reviewing the different alternatives attempted without success over the past several decades, I now have come to believe that the key to saving innocent lives and reaching a final peace resolution is the separation between the Palestinian mass murderers and their Israeli victims.
Surely a population transfer is anathema to the ideals of our Western society but, then again, so is the ongoing daily slaughter of Israelis at the hands of the Palestinian terrorists whose aim is to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of its Jewish population. And so, we have come to a point at which we must consider an more extreme solution -- not to mete out punishment, but rather to save lives.
The following is a quote from Alan Dershowitz, a prominent U.S. constitutional rights attorney, civil rights activist, and Harvard Law School Professor speaking of Palestinian "refugees," which is pertinent to this discussion:
"As a civil libertarian and human rights activist, I was never much moved by the claims of these refugees. Political solutions often require the movement of people, and such movement is not always voluntary. Making Arab families move - intact - from one Arab village or town to another may constitute a human rights violation. But in the whole spectrum of human rights issues - especially taking into account the events in Europe during the 1940's - it is a fifth-rate issue analogous in many respects to some massive urban renewal or other projects that require large-scale movement of people. For example, the building of the Aswan High Dam in Egypt necessitated the relocation of 100,000 Arabs and the destruction of numerous Arab villages. There were certainly numerous precedents following both world wars, as well as other dislocating events of history - including the establishment of new states. There were so many refugee groups throughout the postwar world, and in so much worse condition, that it is difficult to understand why this particular dislocation assumed such international proportions.
"For example, following the end of World War II, approximately fifteen million ethnic Germans were forcibly expelled from their homes in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, and other Central and Eastern European areas where their families had lived for centuries. Two million died during this forced expulsion. Czechoslovakia alone expelled nearly three million Sudeten Germans, turning them into displaced persons. The United States, Britain, and the international community in general approved these expulsions, as necessary to secure a more lasting peace. [...] President Franklin Roosevelt's assistant Harry Hopkins memorialized his boss's view that although transfer of ethnic Germans "is a hard procedure, it is the only way to maintain peace." [...]
[Dershowitz describes other population transfers in the Middle East, primarily hundreds of thousands of Sephardic Jews who left their ancient communities in Arab lands for Israel.]
* * *
What do you think? Has it come to this as a last resort solution to the Palestinian terrorism problem?
A simple practical question: where are the Palestinians to be transferred to?
NewsGuy
06-19-2002, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by Vic
A simple practical question: where are the Palestinians to be transferred to?
Possibilities:
1. A Palestinian "zone" carved out by Israel with defensible international borders, which would include something like "Gaza Plus" and would serve as the basis for a future Palestinian demilitartized state.
2. Jordan.
3. Any Arab state of the Palestinians' choosing that would grant them the freedom and independence they desire.
cerulean
06-19-2002, 02:12 PM
Any Arab country would have to agree, presumably, to take the Palestinians if option #3 was used.
The second question I would have: how would this transfer be effected and who would do it?
An older thread http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=6205&highlight=lyberia#post6205 contains some useful ideas regarding all 3 options.
Re-reading this thread, and, pardon this immodesty, my own post http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=6136#post6136, - is an option #4 possible, with a viable, sovereign etc. Palestinian state on someone else's territory?
Do you think that other countries will solve yr problems
Aren,t you know that all land including israel was palestinian land
do y want to bring yr foriegners outres immigrants instead of the real owners of the land
Is it not enough that they left their land to establish your country israel and over all they recognised you
Do u think that u can desmith palestinians to establish big Israel on whole palestine land and on palestinian,s account
If so u must be dreamer and imaginable and u will suffer all times
Be fair to satisfy ur conscious and ur God and save life of ur people
Mediocrates
06-20-2002, 06:08 AM
Thanks but no, let's give the Palistanians Picardy. Just a bunch of dumb Belgian pig farmers there anyway.
andrei
06-20-2002, 06:36 AM
Most of Palestians (at least many) do have Jordan passport and theoretically they can live there, if they stop destributing violence there too - you know the Jordan kicked them out some years ago just because of this reason.
In addition to this discussion, that has many similar threads in Israel forums, I can say that Israel is able (and willing if this help) to pay up to 40.000$ for each arab leaving the country provided firm guarantees he won't return.
It's not a speculation, there are real numbers and people willing to invest (most of them are really not rich). Given with this money one can settle in arab countries and become "upper-class" man. Also governments of these countries would love the money coming to the country with them.
However, the problem is not in economics. Well, instead of repetition I can say that I 100% agree with the 'letter to palestinians'. "The Peace will stand in the Middle East when arabs would love their children more then they hate jews", Golda Meir.
Originally posted by fair
Do you think that other countries will solve yr problems
Aren,t you know that all land including israel was palestinian land
do y want to bring yr foriegners outres immigrants instead of the real owners of the land
Is it not enough that they left their land to establish your country israel and over all they recognised you
Do y think that y can desmith palestinians to establish big Israel on whole palestine land and on palestinian,s account
If so y must be dreamer and imaginable and y will suffer all times
Be fair to satisfy yr conscious and yr God and save life of yr people
IT WASN'T PALESTINIAN LAND. Some was, but the great majority wasn't. Please go read several of the threads here and get a few history lessons as to the history of the mid-east. Please be informed before posting what you've hears as fact.
While I agree with Dershowitz, I don't believe that a unilaterally imposed transfer would be practical, considering the international fallout, and likely war.
HOWEVER, I do believe that we should begin deporting all Palestinian criminals.
If a Palestinian is caught attempting murder - deportation. Supplying weapons or anything else in a conspiracy to commit murder, deportation. Not Jails, that means we have to cloth and feed them. Just get out.
For children throwing stones - give them maybe 3 strikes, after all it is felony assualt in the US, and Battery if the rock connects.
Carrying un registered weapons should get a similar, maybe 2 strikes rule.
I am not kidding, not at all. This would be very legitimate, and while there would still be international condemnation and fallout, it would be much more limited. While it doesn't protect Israel by having these men locked up, it does send a very powerful message to INDIVIDUAL Palestinian arabs.
NewsGuy
06-20-2002, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by cerulean
The second question I would have: how would this transfer be effected and who would do it?
It is not very complicated really.
Israeli tanks enter the Palestinian-occupied town and announce on loudspeakers that all residents have 24 hours to pack their stuff and leave town. They are made aware that they are on their way to reunite with their brothers in a Palestinian-ruled zone, where they will have all the freedom and independence to do as they please. They no longer will have to live among Israelis and will get to realize all their national aspirations. All their dreams can come true in their new Arab wonderland.
Mediocrates
06-20-2002, 01:50 PM
They forget so easily that the Turkish era of Geographical Palestine was also a home to Armenians, Circassians, Turks, Azerbijanis, Bedouins, Cypriots and other groups. 'Palestinian' is really only a generic name like going to the dealership and pointing at all the 'cars'. You have to know something about it to distinguish one from another. If you were to ask those people they would say they are Turk, Armenian and so on. But in the mythology of Palistan they've managed to aggregate all of those real groups together under one imaginary synthetic name and sell it to the world. As if you went on a boat blindfolded sailed to somewhere in the western hemisphere, jumped out of the boat and called everyone 'American'. It's gibberish. It's meaningless and only makes sense in a Disney cartoon world where all the people are young, handsome, under age 30 and speak English: White, red, brown, indian, european, animal, human, whatever, it makes no difference. That's the modern Palistinian.
Mediocrates
06-20-2002, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by MGB8
While I agree with Dershowitz, I don't believe that a unilaterally imposed transfer would be practical, considering the international fallout, and likely war.
HOWEVER, I do believe that we should begin deporting all Palestinian criminals.
I am not kidding, not at all. This would be very legitimate, and while there would still be international condemnation and fallout, it would be much more limited. While it doesn't protect Israel by having these men locked up, it does send a very powerful message to INDIVIDUAL Palestinian arabs.
I don't doubt you're serious. Problem is where, where their host nation won't send them on the next plane back. Holy Moly it took 3 weeks to negotiate the 'release' of convicted killers to 'exile'. First to a luxury hotel on Cypress then to the 4 corners of every bistro in Europe where they scatter like bugs and are probably either back in Bethlehem or banging some Eurochicks to get more recruits and money to the cause.
Sure I'd like to deport them. My vote is some hellhole in the jungles outside Kinshasha or Borneo or maybe Vostok Antarctica.
Originally posted by fair
Do you think that other countries will solve yr problems
Aren,t you know that all land including israel was palestinian land
do y want to bring yr foriegners outres immigrants instead of the real owners of the land
Is it not enough that they left their land to establish your country israel and over all they recognised you
Do y think that y can desmith palestinians to establish big Israel on whole palestine land and on palestinian,s account
If so y must be dreamer and imaginable and y will suffer all times
Be fair to satisfy yr conscious and yr God and save life of yr people
Barking up the wrong tree, Fair.
Originally posted by Mediocrates
I don't doubt you're serious. Problem is where, where their host nation won't send them on the next plane back. Holy Moly it took 3 weeks to negotiate the 'release' of convicted killers to 'exile'. First to a luxury hotel on Cypress then to the 4 corners of every bistro in Europe where they scatter like bugs and are probably either back in Bethlehem or banging some Eurochicks to get more recruits and money to the cause. Care to pay them a visit, Mediocrates?
Europeans not very happy as hosts of the Bethlehem exiles
By Yossi Melman
Ha'aretz
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=173916&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y Soria, in the northern Spanish province of Castilla-Leon, is a small, sleepy town with ancient buildings and a historic past. Normally, it does not make headlines, but last week, the fury of the local residents against the Spanish government was the subject of discussion in the national media. The reason for the fuss was that three of the 13 Palestinians exiled after the standoff at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem have been sent to the village of Lobia, which is on the outskirts of Soria.
According to the popular Madrid daily, ABC, the three have been put up at the official guest house where former Spanish prime minister Felipe Gonzales used to stay. "I didn't know," the mayor of the town was quoted as saying.
"Why here?" asked residents, who fear that the presence of the three with their bodyguards, policemen and private detectives will disturb the peace and alter the quality of life in their town
...
Firstly, the residents are concerned that Israel and the Palestinians will stir up their supporters in these countries and that such actions will lead to demonstrations. The Belgian Foreign Ministry, in informal contacts, asked both the Israeli and the Palestinian diplomatic representations to refrain from activating the Jewish and Arab communities and to influence them to maintain low profiles. The Israeli Embassy clarified that it was not in the habit of stirring up the Jewish community, but passed on the message to its head.
But over and above this is the fear that Israel's secret services will try to assassinate the exiles. Europe has not forgotten the antiterrorist actions on its soil, on the part of the Mossad, in the aftermath of the murder of the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972. In light of such, and before agreeing to help put an end to the Bethlehem impasse, the seven host nations received tacit assurances from Israel that their sovereignty will not be infringed.
Originally posted by MGB8
For children throwing stones - give them maybe 3 strikes, after all it is felony assualt in the US, and Battery if the rock connects.
Carrying un registered weapons should get a similar, maybe 2 strikes rule. What do you mean by "strikes"? Bombing attacks, physical punishment of the culprit...?
Originally posted by Vic
What do you mean by "strikes"? Bombing attacks, physical punishment of the culprit...?
Not to put words into someone else's mouth, but I think MGB8 means 3 warnings, before jail or teargas, or whatever punishment. Rock throwing, as well as illegal gun possession are crimes in the US.
The expression comes from baseball: you get to try to hit the ball 3 times. If by the 3rd time you don't hit a "base run", you are out until next time. :)
Abraham
06-23-2002, 03:48 AM
Although the Forefathers of the Jewish people (Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob) were promised by G-d to inherit the land of Israel, it was later inhabited by the 7 nations of Canaan. The leader of the Hebrews, Joshua, was commanded by G-d to conquer these nations and take possession of the land. So that this land should be transformed into the Holy Land.
These nations were offered to live in peace with the Hebrews, or leave to another country or fight.
By the way, the name Palestine was given by a Roman leader to the Land of Israel after they conquered it so that the Jews should forget about their aspirations of return and rebuilding Jerusalem as its capital.
I promise you that anyone who assists in the destruction of Jewish lives in or outside of Israel, will not have a portion in the world to come, except possibly one of continuous pain and torment. The war you seek is with he G-d of Israel. Killing innocent Americans attempting to advance your political agenda will get you nowhere. Your only chance is to submit to a peace that recognizes the Jews as the rightful owners of the Land of Israel, who are willing to live in peace with you.
Since "Palestinian" children are indoctrinated with hatred and taught the glory of dying in order to kill Israelis, I believe that the men, women, and children should be subject to the same reprisal. Allowing these people of destruction to live by relocating them to another land is a kindness and shouldn't be rewarded with a monetary bribe or reward. If they want peace they should be allowed to stay and live in peace. The truth is that they can have a better life in Israel than with their fellow Arab nations. (Who by the way, don't want them in their lands and enjoy exploiting them as needy people being crushed by the Israelis.) This is not so. Too bad the reporters from the major news stations have had their lives threatened and those of their families, when portraying Israelis in a positive way.
It's time for the Jewish leadership to speak the truth of the Torah. Many people throughout the world regognize the biblical account and agree that the Land of Israel was given by G-d to the Jews. But if the Jews ignor this, why shouldn't others?
________
ABRAHAM
sharonbn
06-23-2002, 04:40 AM
Originally posted by NewsGuy
It is not very complicated really.
Israeli tanks enter the Palestinian-occupied town and announce on loudspeakers that all residents have 24 hours to pack their stuff and leave town. They are made aware that they are on their way to reunite with their brothers in a Palestinian-ruled zone, where they will have all the freedom and independence to do as they please. They no longer will have to live among Israelis and will get to realize all their national aspirations. All their dreams can come true in their new Arab wonderland.
Oh so simple...
Imagine a (hypothetical) Palestinian family: father, 44, construction worker (currently unemployed) mother, 40, and their 8 children, having lunch at home. They support the Palestinian struggle against the IDF and Jewish settlers but oppose terror attacks inside green-line Israel. Furthermore, they hate the fact that the Hamas and Jihad are operating from the civillian towns but have no power to stop this situation.
They themselves have no connection with suicide bombers. They live in Jenin for the last 4 generations. This is their home.
All of the sudden, they hear the roar of the Tanks' engines and the loudspeakers. What are they to do? quietly pack their little belonging, leave their house and .... what? go live in a tent? live in the streets? vanish into thin air? Who will build them the house that they owned? How do you think that the eldest son - 16 y.o boy - would feel in such a case? Which organization is he likely to join - Israeli-Palestinian friendship, or Hamas?
beside the fact that this solution is not FEASABLE, its also MORALLY WRONG. I will repeat myself: Just because the other side is engaing in brutal, in-human war against civillians does not give an excuse to Israel to behave in the same way. This will make Israel a terror state with terror means like Iran. The fact that "they started it" makes really poor difference. Defending the lives of Israeli civillians should NOT be made "at all cost".
The common mistake you're making, NewsGuy, is that all Palestinians support suicide bombing and they all "deserve" to be displaced from their homes to somewhere else. They all suppose to "understand" this action as an Israeli defensive action, pack their stuff and start from scratch in a new place.
The real picture is different. Most Palestinian civillians have no affiliation to terror group. They are simply afraid to speak aloud because the of reign of terror these groups are practicing.
andrei
06-23-2002, 05:04 AM
Originally posted by NewsGuy
It is not very complicated really.
Israeli tanks enter the Palestinian-occupied town and announce on loudspeakers that all residents have 24 hours to pack their stuff and leave town. They are made aware that they are on their way to reunite with their brothers in a Palestinian-ruled zone, where they will have all the freedom and independence to do as they please. They no longer will have to live among Israelis and will get to realize all their national aspirations. All their dreams can come true in their new Arab wonderland.
Transfer is a good idea, actually the only solution of the conflict but the creation of a Palestinian state (Philistinian state, more correctly). However this scenario you've proposed is clearly unreal, spoils the idea to some extent.
takeo
06-23-2002, 05:44 AM
"serbian tanks enter the bosniak town of srebrenica and announce on loudspeakers that all residents have 24 hours to pack their stuff and leave town. They are made aware that they are on their way to reunite with their brothers in a bosnian-ruled zone, where they will have all the freedom and independence to do as they please. "
no comment, let's see if The hague tribunal will like your idea...
Morpheus
06-23-2002, 06:37 AM
Originally posted by Mediocrates
Just a bunch of dumb Belgian pig farmers there anyway.
:confused: :confused:
NewsGuy
06-23-2002, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by sharonbn
What are they to do? quietly pack their little belonging, leave their house and .... what? go live in a tent? live in the streets? vanish into thin air? Who will build them the house that they owned?
Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience, but the are still in a much better situation that the Israeli families who have had their loved ones massacred by Palestinian terrorists.
Let me ask you something, where will the Israeli families go now that their mother/father is murdered and there is no one to provide them with the house they deserve or the income to have what other children their age have in normal Western countries? Who will provide for the unemployed Israelis whose businesses were devastated by Arab terrorism? You know very well that the government has no choice but to cut social benefits to the whole country, which already is living in much worse conditions than ever before. So where does the money come from for the Israelis?
On the other hand, so long as the Palestinians are mass murdering Israelis, there seems to be no lack of money. Saddam Hussein comes up with a crisp $25,000 cash, and Saudi Arabia comes up with another $15,000 per Palestinian mass murderer family. When it came to rebuild Jenin-grad, the Saudi telethom raised, what? something like $100 million?
Anyway, historically, European people needed to be displaced and they were expected to be re-absorbed into their new societies. This is not a picnic, and it's not an invitation to live in the Hilton -- this is an unfortunate price to be paid for the Palestinian terrorism. And the ultimate goal is to save lives and to be able to make peace one day.
This will make Israel a terror state with terror means like Iran. The fact that "they started it" makes really poor difference. Defending the lives of Israeli civillians should NOT be made "at all cost".
Come on, Sharon,did Iran ever need to face daily massacres of its citizens? How can you make such a weak comparison?
And I'm not sure where in the world you came up with this thing about "they started it."
It's simply a matter of finding a new solution for survival. Israel tried peace, tried offering land, tried offering even our Jewish capital to the control of those who personally massacred Israeli women and children. Nothing has worked so far. So now, it;s time to try another way that is less pleasant and is a last resort effort to save lives.
As for being not feasible, you are of course mistaken. It is already starting as soon as it gets legal clearance. The families of the terrorists first, then if there is still no progress, you will see that the rest of the Palestinian squatters in Israel and the West Bank will need to go back to reunite with their Arab brothers elsewhere in the Middle East.
Most Palestinian civillians have no affiliation to terror group. They are simply afraid to speak aloud because the of reign of terror these groups are practicing.
With all due respect, this is the naive dream of many Leftists. The facts as reported by Palestinian polls and the facts on the ground show you are wrong. I have seen polls range from 60% to 80% of Palestinains supporting suicide attacks against Israeli civilians.
If most Palestinians, as you claim, want to coexist peacefully with Israel, then they would have rejected Arafat, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Palestinian Hizbullah a long time ago, and peace would have been possible without all of these thousands of senseless deaths.
How about you test your thoery about how much the Palestinians love you and respect your right to live even within the green line, by paying a visit to Gaza? Or even any Arab village inside the Green Line? Actually, please don't -- you're a nice guy and I would not want to read about you as a statistic in the Ynet newsflash window.
Mediocrates
06-23-2002, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Morpheus
:confused: :confused:
It's how my French relatives feel about Picardy and the Belgians in general. We have Rednecks, you have the Belgians.
Mediocrates
06-23-2002, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by takeo
"serbian tanks enter the bosniak town of srebrenica and announce on loudspeakers that all residents have 24 hours to pack their stuff and leave town. They are made aware that they are on their way to reunite with their brothers in a bosnian-ruled zone, where they will have all the freedom and independence to do as they please. "
no comment, let's see if The hague tribunal will like your idea...
Change the name of the Jenin refugee camp to Omarska and let's see who salutes that.
sharonbn
06-24-2002, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by NewsGuy
Again, I am sorry for the inconvenience, but the are still in a much better situation that the Israeli families who have had their loved ones massacred by Palestinian terrorists.
NewsGuy, You don't right a wrong by doing wrong to someone else. The fact that Israeli families suffer from Palestinian terror attacks DOES NOT make it right to punish Palestinians who are not terrorists themselves. Besides the fact that this is morally wrong, this strategy may also backfire at you as you aggrevate more and more Paletinians and push them to the arms of Hamas and Jihad.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
On the other hand, so long as the Palestinians are mass murdering Israelis, there seems to be no lack of money. Saddam Hussein comes up with a crisp $25,000 cash, and Saudi Arabia comes up with another $15,000 per Palestinian mass murderer family. When it came to rebuild Jenin-grad, the Saudi telethom raised, what? something like $100 million?
These numbers may or may not be true. There are also reports of high unemployment, starving Palestinian children and families, despair and fear.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
Anyway, historically, European people needed to be displaced and they were expected to be re-absorbed into their new societies.
This is nonsense. What do you suggest, that ME returns to medieval Europe? to WWII Europe? We are living in the 21st century. Things that were common and tolerated in the past, like slavery, ethnic cleansing and population transfer are no longer acceptable. You can't say, in Israel, becasue of the extreme situation, population transfer is a valid solution. Population transfer is no longer a solution to anything. It is plain cruel and brutal and will backfire.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
It's simply a matter of finding a new solution for survival. Israel tried peace, tried offering land, tried offering even our Jewish capital to the control of those who personally massacred Israeli women and children. Nothing has worked so far. So now, it;s time to try another way that is less pleasant and is a last resort effort to save lives.
Saving lives should not be done "at all cost". If the cost is harming other innocent people and bcoming a terrorist yourself - its not worth the life your saving. that is my opinion.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
As for being not feasible, you are of course mistaken. It is already starting as soon as it gets legal clearance. The families of the terrorists first, then if there is still no progress, you will see that the rest of the Palestinian squatters in Israel and the West Bank will need to go back to reunite with their Arab brothers elsewhere in the Middle East.
You can rest assured this will never happen.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
With all due respect, this is the naive dream of many Leftists. The facts as reported by Palestinian polls and the facts on the ground show you are wrong. I have seen polls range from 60% to 80% of Palestinains supporting suicide attacks against Israeli civilians.
If most Palestinians, as you claim, want to coexist peacefully with Israel, then they would have rejected Arafat, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Palestinian Hizbullah a long time ago, and peace would have been possible without all of these thousands of senseless deaths.
I say most Palestinians do want to establish peace with Israel. They are led by a minority of extreme fundementalists who force a reign of terror over the rest of the population. I also see the winds of change blowing on the Palestinian people, as the opposition to Arafat strengthens.
cerulean
06-24-2002, 02:50 AM
Former vice-presidential candidate Sen. Lieberman is proposing that at least some Palestinians immigrate to the United States to escape the culture of suicide bombing.
...
"It's important that the president get back on the field here," he said. "The problem here is that this is going nowhere." Lieberman proposed substantial U.S. economic aid to Palestinians and said he would allow more into America as part of an effort to improve ties and separate young Palestinians from the culture of suicide bombing.
...
The obvious question is what if they import the culture of suicide bombing into the United States? If the same people can't live beside Israel, can they really live in the US?
If immigration of Palestinians to the United States is an acceptable solution, so should immigration of Palestinians to some other country, including countries where they will have a greater cultural affiliation.
Link at http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20020623_740.html
(more info about Bush's supposedly imminent Mideast speech also)
Originally posted by cerulean
"It's important that the president get back on the field here," he said. "The problem here is that this is going nowhere." Lieberman proposed substantial U.S. economic aid to Palestinians and said he would allow more into America as part of an effort to improve ties and separate young Palestinians from the culture of suicide bombing.A very bad idea. For one, residence permits for the West are yearned for and difficult to acquire, therefore this measure would be percieved as a reward for terrorism. Better award more scholarships to Israeli students and offer treatment and rehabilitation opportunities to terror victims. For another, the masses of Palestinians in my part of the world are not exactly a stabilizing social and political factor.
An alternative proposal: send them to work for aid organisations in some of the rougher parts of Africa. Maybe they'll realize that they have no right to consider themselves the world's foremost underdogs.
Mediocrates
06-24-2002, 05:17 AM
Well at least the security services could finally recruit people who actually speak Arabic instead of letting all the sigint pile up for months.... :o
NewsGuy
06-24-2002, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by cerulean
Former vice-presidential candidate Sen. Lieberman is proposing that at least some Palestinians immigrate to the United States to escape the culture of suicide bombing.
Lieberman is sadly mistaken. It would be disasterous for the U.S. to actively recruit more potential Palestinian enemies into this country.
If the U.S. wants to invest in the Palestinians (which is also a terrible idea), then let the investment be in resettling Palestinians in Jordan. That way, we'd at least have a chance to achieve peace.
Mediocrates
06-24-2002, 09:56 AM
The obvious question is what if they import the culture of suicide bombing into the United States? If the same people can't live beside Israel, can they really live in the US?
More importantly:
1) All of them?
2) What about the 2/3rds of all Palistinians living in Arab countries?
3) Why would they agree? Do they want to be Americans?
cerulean
06-24-2002, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by Mediocrates
More importantly:
1) All of them?
2) What about the 2/3rds of all Palistinians living in Arab countries?
3) Why would they agree? Do they want to be Americans?
1) I think I read somewhere that Lieberman's idea was to import one million to the US, but I can't find the reference.
2) I need more info! I wonder if Lieberman has a position paper on the subject or something.
3) Good point. If they are willing to immigrate to the United States, it's not about getting a homeland next to and on top of Israel.
Glenn
06-24-2002, 06:54 PM
I have been looking at he history of Israel since Biblical times. What I notice is that it did not include what is now the south of Israel. However, the west bank area was always the heart of Israel. Perhaps a large Palestinian state could be constructed in the south, with territory also from Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. All Palestinian arabs both from the refugee camps and from Israel could go there and build a new nation with massive world support.
Originally posted by Glenn
I have been looking at he history of Israel since Biblical times. What I notice is that it did not include what is now the south of Israel. However, the west bank area was always the heart of Israel. Perhaps a large Palestinian state could be constructed in the south, with territory also from Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. All Palestinian arabs both from the refugee camps and from Israel could go there and build a new nation with massive world support.
IMHO, this is a constructive idea, but there are 2 major problems that I can see:
1. It would require massive relocation of the Palestinians
2. Negev is a desert, its climate is not very good for life. Israelis have been able to make some headway there with agriculture, but it's really very difficult. Very little water among other things.
Glenn
06-24-2002, 07:14 PM
It certainly would involve massive relocation of the Palestinian people, but from what I have seen, they don't seem to be very happy where they are now.
This southern state would also force the Arab nations to put something where their mouths are and do something constructive instead of just yelling at Israel and slipping money and bombs to terrorists. The rest of the world, especially the United States, would be willing to spend billions to set up a clean new Palestinian state.
Originally posted by Glenn
It certainly would involve massive relocation of the Palestinian people, but from what I have seen, they don't seem to be very happy where they are now.
This southern state would also force the Arab nations to put something where their mouths are and do something constructive instead of just yelling at Israel and slipping money and bombs to terrorists. The rest of the world, especially the United States, would be willing to spend billions to set up a clean new Palestinian state.
Well said, Glenn :)
takeo
06-24-2002, 08:00 PM
What i notice is that many people oppose this nazist idea because of realism and fear for the internationa reaction... but only a few because massive etnic cleansing is unethical... that's really frightening, especially since the most posters here are educated people with a western education, not some bunch of marginalised extremists or people who live in undemocratic societies...
you blame the palestinians because they support suicide-bombing, yet your proposed methods are equally despisable...
Well, not "equally": after all, this does not require killing women and children with poisoned bolts and nails.
However, you are right in that the relocation is not a warm and fuzzy solution to contemplate.
Glenn
06-24-2002, 11:19 PM
It is not a warm and fuzzy solution, but it just might work. The real problem for Israel is the explosive birth rate of the Israeli Arab population. It will outnumber the Israelis Jewish population in a generation. Also, I can't realistically see Israel giving up Samaria and Judea.
takeo
06-25-2002, 12:42 AM
"It is not a warm and fuzzy solution, but it just might work. The real problem for Israel is the explosive birth rate of the Israeli Arab population. It will outnumber the Israelis Jewish population in a generation. Also, I can't realistically see Israel giving up Samaria and Judea."
the final solution for the Palestinian problem... :mad:
massive etnic cleansing... :o
what can i ad more? Glen is the representation of everything that I detest in the israeli right-wing, the representation of fascism and inhuman racial cruelty, people like you should be deported, not millions of innocent people to serve your racist utopian Eretz Israel free of Arab "squatters"...
sharonbn
06-25-2002, 04:01 AM
I have to say, as much as I disagree with takeo on lots of things, I agree with him on his last post.
I don't understand how from Palestinians living in WB, GS we came to Arab Israeli citizens living in their rightful traditional homes inside Israel. Both population, Israeli Arabs and Palestinians deserve the same right as Jews - to live securely at their home.
IMO, there is a big difference between evicting people from their home, causing historical injustice and accepting imigration (I'm talking about Palestinian right of return) in an attempt to correct past injustice. I feel no obligation to accept Palestinian immigration that resulted in past wars and conflicts simply becasue I do not believe in Israel's responsibility for this situation becasue the majority of Palestinians were not evicted but fled their homes. This is not the same as Israel initiating mass transfer.
I would like to point out that my opinions are not of small minority in Israel, as some might think. Although the strength of the left wing was diminished in the last two years, we still account some 35-40% of the Jewish Israeli population and that's not a number to be easily discarded.
I say that mass transfer of civilian population is first of all morally wrong. No innocent person should be forcefully removed from his/her home for no reason. Besides the moral issue, this solution is also not feasible, because of the outcry outside as well as inside Israel. If such an action is attempted at large scale, I'm anticipating great unrest in Israel, to the point of the collapse of order and maybe even civil war. The Israeli left wing, which is around 45% of the Israeli populace, will not allow such an action to perform. We will go and stop the bulldozers with our bodies.
and please, spare me the "democratic elected government" cr*p. Remember what happened in US during the Vietnam war - this was also an elected government, but massive crowds took to the streets and violently clashed with the police. it was their actions that eventually put a stop to the war. Similar events took place in France in the 50s when Algeria fought for its independence.
cerulean
06-25-2002, 04:13 AM
I'm not going to say that transfer is the right solution, because I don't know. I see massive practical difficulties, at the very least.
But I don't think that anyone here is suggesting a Trail-of-Tears-style forced march like the Cherokee were subjected to in the US in the 1800s.
From time to time, every government does transfers, large-scale or small-scale. If a particular government decides it wants to build a dam, numerous communities may be completely evacuated and the residents relocated elsewhere. If the government decides it wants my house because it wants to widen the road, I don't really have much choice in the matter. If a landlord decides he wants to sell the home in which an exemplary tenant has been living for thirty years, again she will have no choice in the matter.
If Israel determines it cannot survive continued, random, repeated attacks from hostile residents, what then?
sharonbn
06-25-2002, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by cerulean
If Israel determines it cannot survive continued, random, repeated attacks from hostile residents, what then?
Palestinian terror attacks do not threaten the existence of Israel.
never in history, did guerilla warfare threatens the existence of a sovereign state defended by an established army. Guerilla warfare was successful in driving away an invading army (like Hizbuallah did in Lebanon, Afghans did to the Russians, etc.).
This is not the same. The best the Palestinians can hope to achieve is that Israel will slowly start to fold from WB and GS.
As much as they will continue to pound Israel with terror attacks, there is no chance Israelis will leave green-line Israel.
The only existential threat Israel faced was from invading Arab armies in 1948 and 1973. With the establishment of peace with Egypt - the largest Arab nation, as well as Jordan - who shares with Israel the longest borderline, this threat was diminished to the point where Israel can now assume it will not be overran by military force.
IMO, The biggest threat Israel is facing now is the weakening effect of internal division stemming from morally questionable initiatives like the war in Lebanon and the prolonging of the occupation of Palestinian land.
ibrodsky
06-25-2002, 05:03 AM
Originally posted by sharonbn
IMO, The biggest threat Israel is facing now is the weakening effect of internal division stemming from morally questionable initiatives like the war in Lebanon and the prolonging of the occupation of Palestinian land.
The biggest threat Israel faces is indeed from internal division. Jews who think their own government is the guilty party, who refuse to recognize the depth of Arab hatred and racism, and who fail to understand that Israel's enemies only understand force... these people put Israel at greatest risk.
The enemy is militant Islam. It is a greater threat than Nazism, because it could potentially infect 1.2 billion people -- or more. Lebanon was turned into a staging ground for terrorist attacks long before Israel invaded. The "Palestinians," who are a nation contrived merely to keep Israel's War of Independence going, live on captured land, and the "occupation" is solely Israel's Arab enemies fault. When they demonstrate they are willing and able to live in peace with Israel as a neighbor, the occupation willl end.
takeo
06-25-2002, 06:04 AM
i agree with sharon except that i think, according to the geneva-conventions, that refugees who fled the war should have the right to return. in this particular case massive return could destabilise israel so a just compromise has to be elaborated.
I think initiatives as the occupation of libanon didn't contribute to israeli safety but caused a lot of israeli and palestinian death. And the right-wing in israel is not continuing to keep the occupied territories for safety-reasons (completely ignoring the potential of peace with the entire region that retreat could achieve, not to mention an end to israel's isolated position in the world) but because they see it as a part of Eretz-Israel. Besides israel will never win the war against terrorism without negociations, because you can't win against a guerilla-movement supported by the population of the area you occupy, as the government- sharon has demonstrated.
Let me add at last that such extremist israeli actions would not only provoke internal reactions (i know many israeli who are already ashamed for their government) but would it make more easy for europe and the rest of the world to take united serious economic or even military sanctions against israel and forcing it to change its policy. also those millions of new palestinians refugees will draw israel in a regional war, in which the other side will enjoy world-wide support or even assistance.
finally your example of people being evicted because of dams is different, because that is not on etnical basis, those people will be relocated in other parts of the same country, will get compensation, and this doesn't happen in occupied territory, which is bound by the Geneva-conventions.
Mediocrates
06-25-2002, 06:25 AM
(i know many israeli who are already ashamed for their government) but would it make more easy for europe and the rest of the world to take united serious economic or even military sanctions against israel
1 Oddly all Arab states are shameless. Shame on you.
2 More threats except now that the US agrees with Israel publically you threaten military force as well. That's not a wise move to make.
takeo
06-25-2002, 11:14 AM
in case of a massive etnic cleansing the US would certainly NOT support Israel, because the public opinion would not accept it and besides the destabilisation of the entire middle east as the result would be very much contraproductive for American interests (even today the White House demands israeli retreat from the autonomous areas). I think such actions will and should fireback against Israel, and in such cases the international resistance against israel will go from words to real action.
Some people on this board are shameless too, proposing the deportation of millions of innocent people.
massive etnic cleansing doesn't happen without consequences for the perpetrator in the 21th century, even if that perpetrator is called israel.
Mediocrates
06-25-2002, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by takeo
in case of a massive etnic cleansing the US would certainly NOT support Israel, because the public opinion would not accept it and besides the destabilisation of the entire middle east as the result would be very much contraproductive for American interests (even today the White House demands israeli retreat from the autonomous areas). I think such actions will and should fireback against Israel, and in such cases the international resistance against israel will go from words to real action.
Some people on this board are shameless too, proposing the deportation of millions of innocent people.
massive etnic cleansing doesn't happen without consequences for the perpetrator in the 21th century, even if that perpetrator is called israel.
I understand YOU think this is true if you repeat it to yourself long enough but it is neither true nor is it proposed nor is it supported nor is it advocated by the US. I understand fully that if you say something imflammatory long enough then it takes on the appearance of fact and truth but that is simply not the case. I understand fully your urge to see in a hundred years a Palistinian schoolbook with a chapter called "The Greatest Ethnic Cleansing Ever Comitted". But that too will simply be another myth another fairy tale. BTW you could have included another 'ethnic cleansing' in the second sentence and the fourth sentence as well.
And I like the 'massive' it really lends weight to the lie.
takeo
06-25-2002, 11:48 AM
ok, so how do you call the forced deportation of millions of people from one etnic group to another country, as proposed by people on this board, if it isn't etnic cleansing?
Do you think th US would make no objections?
Mediocrates
06-25-2002, 11:59 AM
I don't know what to make about what other people write here. It is neither policy nor plan nor anything other than people writing. It's very important to distinguish that.
Yes I do believe the US would intervene. One of the purposes of that speech was to establish the US's own 'red lines' and clearly while they did not accord your dream of a Jew Free Samaria he did say that NEW development should stop. To me that means what it means and not something else. The US is saying that new development eg. additional infrastructure to support significantly more Jews than now will not be supported. Of course this does not mean that the population of suburbanites can't grow within the areas it already covers but clearly that has proctical limits. Our President, or any other policy organ has never said anything of the sort that it would sit idly by and let that happen let alone help it. Why do you think this 1800 word speech took so long to finish and deliver? The US will support Israel to the extent that it makes sense to support Israel in the pursuit of its own goals.
takeo
06-25-2002, 12:32 PM
OK, well i was referring to that proposal, because that's what this tread is about.
the US policy concerning israel is indeed very delicate, that's exactly why such a proposal would harm the relations between the US and Israel.
whatever Bush said, the US DID recognise the un-resolutions condamning all settlements, and does recognise israel within its pre-1967 borders, because of political difficulties within his administration he had to make a speech that would both satisfie Israel and the Palestinians.
but anyway the middle-east policy of Bush is one big catastrophy, he didn't achieve nothing and even abandoned the peace-talks that clinton promoted untill his last day in office. and Europe has its own middle-eastern policy, independant of the US', since bush took power serious differences appeared between the us and Europe.
NewsGuy
06-25-2002, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by sharonbn
I would like to point out that my opinions are not of small minority in Israel, as some might think. Although the strength of the left wing was diminished in the last two years, we still account some 35-40% of the Jewish Israeli population and that's not a number to be easily discarded.
Sharon,
What is your source for that inflated statistic?
Elsewhere you stated that you support Leftist extremists like Yossi Beilin and Yossi Sarid. You know very well that 35-40% of Israeli do not support those guys. Rather, it is a tiny fringe element that they represent.
The Israeli left wing, which is around 45% of the Israeli populace, will not allow such an action to perform. We will go and stop the bulldozers with our bodies.
ok, I see now that they grew to 45% within a few minutes... <Looking at watch> Do I hear 50%? 55%? ;)
As for stopping the bulldozers with your bodies, would you please send Uri Avneri first and then Yossi Sarid second?
and please, spare me the "democratic elected government" cr*p.
There we go... Now, we're getting to the true heart of the matter.
Many Leftists have no regard for democracy if it doesn't go their way. Many of those who pretend to care about "human rights" and "freedom" a.k.a. Yefei Hanefesh in Hebrew never really accept these notions when applied to the democratically expressed wishes of others. They act to block the human rights and the freedom of anyone who disagrees with them. Is this what I'm hearing from you, Sharon?
James
06-25-2002, 01:08 PM
What do you think? Has it come to this as a last resort solution to the Palestinian terrorism problem? [/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, expell, (or if transfer is a better term) all Arabs, Palestinians, Moslems into territories surrendered to Israel by their enemies! If
these people resist living peacefully in Israel, expulsion is the only humane answer. If Israel continues trying to keep a peace among proven enemies, more deaths will come! We must remember, Israel (and any country supporting her) is the enemy of all Arabs(Moslems). If any think not, they are being deceived!
Mediocrates
06-25-2002, 01:10 PM
and does recognise israel within its pre-1967 borders
Removal of forces to the September 2000 limits. Limits on FURTHER expansion of Jewish suburbs in YESHA but no limit on headcount habitation.
I don't think Bush made much attempt or was concerned much about making Arafat or the Palstinians happy. Why would he - the terrorist he can find and punish is preferable to the great Iraqi boogeyman he can't find and punish.
and Europe has its own middle-eastern policy, independant of the US', since bush took power serious differences appeared between the us and Europe.
Europe has always pursued its own ME policy that is nothing new. Do you remember the bizarre flight patterns that US jets had to fly to bomb Libya from the UK because they were banned from flying over this country and that one? You were maybe 7 years old but you could look it up.
NewsGuy
06-25-2002, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by takeo
... Besides israel will never win the war against terrorism without negociations, because you can't win against a guerilla-movement supported by the population of the area you occupy, as the government- sharon has demonstrated.
That may or may not be true ultimately, but the facts so far have shown that negotiations and all kinds of nice intentions have not only failed to stop Palestinian terrorism, but have actually accelerated it.
takeo
06-25-2002, 01:14 PM
"Many Leftists have no regard for democracy if it doesn't go their way"
etnic cleansing is not a democratic decision, because the palestinians have no right to decide about their own faith, and it is contrary to the principles upon which every western democracy was established. Sharon is the elected leader of israel, not of Palestine.
Being elected is no garantee of being democratic and governing according to the rule of law, not to mention a very famous personality...
where is your respect for democracy if you refuse the palestinians to choose their own leaders? where is your respect for the elected president of France? and where was the respect for democracy of the right-wing when they opposed Oslo with all possible means (not to mention the extreme rightwing who went as fas as killing the head of state).
Mediocrates
06-25-2002, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by takeo
"Many Leftists have no regard for democracy if it doesn't go their way"
etnic cleansing is not a democratic decision, because the palestinians have no right to decide about their own faith. Sharon is the elected leader of israel, not of Palestine.
Being elected is no garantee of being democratic and governing according to the rule of law, not to mention a very famous personality...
where is your respect for democracy if you refuse the palestinians to choose their own leaders? and where was the respect for democracy of the right-wing when they opposed Oslo with all possible means (not to mention the extreme rightwing who went as fas as killing the head of state).
My God is that sloppy. Do you think free speech means you can yell FIRE in a theater too? The first sentence doesn't mean anything at all. The second sentence is filler. The third is gibberish. The fourth is hypocrisy. The fifth is a jumble of agitprop and pseudofactoids.
NewsGuy
06-25-2002, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by takeo
etnic cleansing is not a democratic decision, because the palestinians have no right to decide about their own faith.
Self-defense by removing one's enemies is consistent with democracy.
As for the Palestinians' right to decide their own fate, they certainly have that right. So far, they have overwhelmingly supported the massacre of Jews, attempted genocide and ethnic cleansing of Israel's Jewish residents.
The Palestinians have had plenty of opportunity to reject terrorism and they have not. So, we need to show real respect to the Palestinian people by listening to their voice. They have chosen Arafat and they have chosen to wage a war of terrorism against Israel. And they know very well that when in war, their opponent will act as if at war. (it actually sounds better in French).
The Palestinians have no one to blame for the outcome but themselves.
* * *
This also seems like a good opportunity to resond to something else you said about international pressure and loss of U.S. support. Well, if Israel would expel Palestinians from towns where terrorism originated, then Israel would be much less dependent on foreign support. With the Palestinian threat of terrorism broken and a solution found, the world will applaud Israel. Just like in the Iraqi nuclear plant bombing. Same thing here.
takeo
06-25-2002, 01:34 PM
"Yes, expell, (or if transfer is a better term) all Kosovars into territories surrendered to serbia by their enemies! If
these people resist living peacefully in serbia, expulsion is the only humane answer. If serbia continues trying to keep a peace among proven enemies, more deaths will come! We must remember, serbia (and any country supporting her) is the enemy of all Albanians. If any think not, they are being deceived"
"That may or may not be true ultimately, but the facts so far have shown that negotiations and all kinds of nice intentions have not only failed to stop Palestinian terrorism, but have actually accelerated it. "
that's not true, the oslo-agreements stopped the first intifadeh, not all the violence stopped, but most. Only since the negociations failed in 2000 and both parties were using violent methods and israel was renouncing further negociations terrorism accelerated as never before. Since the "no-nonsense" approach of Sharon the terrorism accelerated even further.
"Removal of forces to the September 2000 limits. Limits on FURTHER expansion of Jewish suburbs in YESHA but no limit on headcount habitation. "
actually according to the oslo-agreements israel was no longer allowed to build new settlements...
but, except some on the border that can be traded for israeli land inhabited by mostly israeli palestinians, all settlements should be abandoned if you want to achieve peace. in a future palestinian state the settlements in the middle of palestinian land will be impossible to maintain as part of israel, land for peace, got it? unless of course the settlers agree to become palestinian citizens...
"I don't think Bush made much attempt or was concerned much about making Arafat or the Palstinians happy. Why would he - the terrorist he can find and punish is preferable to the great Iraqi boogeyman he can't find and punish. "
no, but he was concerned making his saoudi, pakistani and Egyptian friends happy... without them he can forget about iraq and about pretty much anything in the middle east.
"Europe has always pursued its own ME policy that is nothing new. Do you remember the bizarre flight patterns that US jets had to fly to bomb Libya from the UK because they were banned from flying over this country and that one? You were maybe 7 years old but you could look it up. "
of course, we Europeans don't like illegal terrorist actions against independant countries, and will certainly not cooperate with such actions.
takeo
06-25-2002, 01:50 PM
"Self-defense by removing one's enemies is consistent with democracy. "
not if it is conducted against innocent civilians and in violation of international laws of war.
"As for the Palestinians' right to decide their own fate, they certainly have that right. So far, they have overwhelmingly supported the massacre of Jews, attempted genocide and ethnic cleansing of Israel's Jewish residents. "
While israeli have overwelmingly supported the massacre of palestinians, attempted genocide (if you can use it i can too, more palestinians died than israeli) and oppression of the palestinian people for many decades.
"The Palestinians have had plenty of opportunity to reject terrorism and they have not. So, we need to show real respect to the Palestinian people by listening to their voice. They have chosen Arafat and they have chosen to wage a war of terrorism against Israel. And they know very well that when in war, their opponent will act as if at war. (it actually sounds better in French). "
having an opinion, whatever that is, is not a legitimate reason for etnic cleansing or even punishing someone, if not the suicide bombs would b legal because the majority of israeli support the policy of sharon.
"The Palestinians have no one to blame for the outcome but themselves. "
yes, they can blaim the israeli oppression since 1967, the etnic cleansing in 1948, their own leaders for launching the 1948-war, the US for supporting an oppressive state, the israeli policy of expropriation, racism, limiting free movement in the occupied territories.
"This also seems like a good opportunity to resond to something else you said about international pressure and loss of U.S. support. Well, if Israel would expel Palestinians from towns where terrorism originated, then Israel would be much less dependent on foreign support. With the Palestinian threat of terrorism broken and a solution found, the world will applaud Israel. Just like in the Iraqi nuclear plant bombing. Same thing here."
there is some difference between bombing a nuclear facility and expulsing millions of innocent people...
israel would need foreign support more than ever, because those millions of palestinians won't be very happy, nor will the arab neighbours, which will probably result in a massive regional war against israel including countries as pakistan and iran, which israel can't win without us-support.
And i don't think a un-embargo or European embargo would benefit the israeli economy and society in general... not to mention the deep rift such a decision would cause among israeli.
israel would more than ever be associated with violence, oppression and racism, which on its turn would contribute to anti-semitism because many people still wrongly associate israel with jewry...
I met today someone (a peruvian): "look at those jews, they complain about being persecuted in wWII but once you give them the chance they are doing exactly the same to other people..." i tried to convince him that not all jews or israeli support Sharon, but there are many more like him.
But of course i guess everyone opposing to etnic cleansing is an anti-semite... :rolleyes:
one thing more: what if those palestinians resist to their deportation, which is quite likely?
shoot them all? gaz them? drug them? (you can't surprise me anymore...)
sharonbn
06-26-2002, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by NewsGuy
What is your source for that inflated statistic?
Elsewhere you stated that you support Leftist extremists like Yossi Beilin and Yossi Sarid. You know very well that 35-40% of Israeli do not support those guys. Rather, it is a tiny fringe element that they represent.
The figures I've given account for all left wing in Israel, including most of the voters of the Labour party (largest party on the Knesset), all of Meretz party and some of Shinui and Merkaz parties as well. Remember that even in the last presidential election of Feb 2001, on which Sharon won decisively, still some 35% voted for Barak.
I estimate that around 15-20% of Jewish Israelis support Peres, Beilin and Sarrid, given Meretz voters and a minority of Labour voters.
You have to understand that the Intifadah has uased both sides of the politicalmap to go to extreme: lefties as well as righties.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
As for stopping the bulldozers with your bodies, would you please send Uri Avneri first and then Yossi Sarid second?
I'll tel you who I won't send: my children (like some of the settlers who gamble with the life of their children by refusing to take any precautions for their defense)
Originally posted by NewsGuy
Many Leftists have no regard for democracy if it doesn't go their way. Many of those who pretend to care about "human rights" and "freedom" a.k.a. Yefei Hanefesh in Hebrew never really accept these notions when applied to the democratically expressed wishes of others. They act to block the human rights and the freedom of anyone who disagrees with them. Is this what I'm hearing from you, Sharon?
This is opposed to... whom? the right wingers? you think they regard democratic values? I think we all know what I'm talking about. Right wing extremist have shown that they have TOTAL disregard not only for democratic values, but even for human life. They are willing to kill and murder for their political cause.
I guess everyone has "red lines" that if crossed, he/she will no longer play the democratic game. That's fine. Even a democratic elected government can't do what it pleases without facing consequences.
I guess the only difference between us lefties, and righties is that I am willing to put MY life at risk, defending my beliefs, while the righties are willing to put OTHER lives at risk for their beliefs.
christian
06-26-2002, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by takeo .
I met today someone (a peruvian): "look at those jews, they complain about being persecuted in wWII but once you give them the chance they are doing exactly the same to other people..." i tried to convince him that not all jews or israeli support Sharon, but there are many more like him.
[/B]
I hope not.
Mediocrates
06-26-2002, 08:12 AM
Peru, a shining example of stability, normalcy, freedom. Alberto Fujimori? Montesinos? Tupac Amaru? Lori Berenson?
Get real.
Originally posted by takeo
I met today someone (a peruvian): "look at those jews, they complain about being persecuted in wWII but once you give them the chance they are doing exactly the same to other people..." i tried to convince him that not all jews or israeli support Sharon, but there are many more like him. When I hear this, I usually suggest that the person should find him/herself a nice psychiatrist. Try something like this for a change, it works wonders with some people.
NewsGuy
06-26-2002, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by sharonbn
The figures I've given account for all left wing in Israel, including most of the voters of the Labour party (largest party on the Knesset), all of Meretz party and some of Shinui and Merkaz parties as well. Remember that even in the last presidential election of Feb 2001, on which Sharon won decisively, still some 35% voted for Barak.
I estimate that around 15-20% of Jewish Israelis support Peres, Beilin and Sarrid, given Meretz voters and a minority of Labour voters.
Sharon, maybe you would like to include the entire Labour party as Left wing, but this would come as a surprise to the Labour party, which considers itself Centrist. The proof is Beilin's own flight from the party because his extreme Left wing agenda has been rejected by the Labour's leaders.
I think that the supporters of the radical Meretz party might amount to 1 or 2% of the Israeli population, although they tend to get a lot of press due to their collaboration with the Arab parties in repeated attempts to collapse the Israeli government.
Right wing extremist have shown that they have TOTAL disregard not only for democratic values, but even for human life. They are willing to kill and murder for their political cause.
Who's "they?" Are you saying that a handful of criminals represent the Right wing?
I think it is difficult for Leftists to accept their overwhelming rejection by society and therefore this issue of some lunatic criminals keeps on coming up.
But as a reality check, the violence that has destroyed the Leftist cause is launched by the Palestinians. Every suicide bombing and murder of Israeli motorists further weakens the already unpopular Leftist cause. This is what is pushing the entire center of Israeli society further to the Right -- the desire for survival.
I guess the only difference between us lefties, and righties is that I am willing to put MY life at risk, defending my beliefs, while the righties are willing to put OTHER lives at risk for their beliefs.
What are you talking about? You want to put your life at risk to make a misguided political statement.
On the other hand, even Israeli high-school students are volunteering in droves -- for the first time in history -- to risk their lives over the summer vacation to go out to the West Bank and to Gaza to protect Jewish towns from Arab infiltrators. And there are more volunteers than ever to join fighting units in the territories to wage war on Palestinian terrorism. That, to me, shows real values and patriotism -- not giving one's life to harm Israel's democracy as Leftists would do.
takeo
06-26-2002, 02:33 PM
"Peru, a shining example of stability, normalcy, freedom. Alberto Fujimori? Montesinos? Tupac Amaru? Lori Berenson? "
that's right, Peru is not in the position to give lessons to anyone, yet it shows how much israeli policy is helping anti-semitism to spread.
"I think that the supporters of the radical Meretz party might amount to 1 or 2% of the Israeli population"
much more if the elections might be an indication...
"On the other hand, even Israeli high-school students are volunteering in droves -- for the first time in history -- to risk their lives over the summer vacation to go out to the West Bank and to Gaza to protect Jewish towns from Arab infiltrators. And there are more volunteers than ever to join fighting units in the territories to wage war on Palestinian terrorism. That, to me, shows real values and patriotism -- not giving one's life to harm Israel's democracy as Leftists would do."
more and more israeli are refusing to serve in the occupied territories, ...
and you'll see in the next election, the left will win, because sharon and likud failed miserable in achieving peace.
sharonbn
06-27-2002, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by NewsGuy
I think that the supporters of the radical Meretz party might amount to 1 or 2% of the Israeli population, although they tend to get a lot of press due to their collaboration with the Arab parties in repeated attempts to collapse the Israeli government.
and your numbers are based on .... ?
In fact, I remember you yourself stating in this (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=7443#post7443) post, some 6 weeks ago that Israeli left wing is 30% strong.
The numbers I gave in previous posts are based on this info:
1. Meretz party got 10 seats in the knesset in 1999 election. that's 7.6% (according to knesset web site). Its woth mentioning that they got the same number of seats in 1996 election, on which Netanyahu became PM, so its safe to say that they have a hard base of around that percentage.
2. The labour party is center if generally speaking. However, like the Likud, the Labout party accomodates for a range of opinions and extremes. Shimon Peres is still a strong leader in the party. Also, the fact the Beilin choose to run independantly, does not mean he leaves the Labour party with no support and no followers. They got 26 seats (~20%) in 1999. I estimate around a third are hardcore followers of Peres and Beilin (like myself btw).
3. Some lefties also account for the voters of Merkaz party and Shinui party (6 seats/5% each) I say another 2-2.5%.
4. Hadash party is a mixed Jewish-Arab party. They got 3 seats/2.5% in 1999. This is the real extreme left, they probably increased their strength since 1999 (like I said, conflict causes the rise of extreme on both sides) so the Jews here amount to 2%.
4. Other parties, like the emigrates parties (Yisrael Baalia), the union party (Am Ehad), etc, probably acount for another 2-3%.
So we come to around 20%. These are Jews ONLY. The Israeli Arab parties have further 6%. I say the total of lefties is close to 30%, accounting for those who did not vote at all.
Last, but not least, lets not forget that in the last PM election, that took place while the Intifadah was well underway, Barak got 37.2%.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
Who's "they?" Are you saying that a handful of criminals represent the Right wing?
I think it is difficult for Leftists to accept their overwhelming rejection by society and therefore this issue of some lunatic criminals keeps on coming up.
but NewsGuy, You took me, one person, and made me the sole representative of all left wing...
I base my generalization on the fact that ALL extreme militant groups in the history of modern Israel, came exclusively from the right-wing.
These groups include:
- "Brit Habiryonim" ("allience of thugs" in Hebrew) founded by Jabotinsky, father of the revisionists.
- Haetzel and Halechi underground organizations.
- The two Jewish terrorists movements that rose in the two Intifadahs,
- as well as individuals like Yona Avrushmi, Baruch Goldstain (who got a beatiful memorial park and an anual memorial service) and of course, Yigal Amir.
The only political party to be outlawed in Israeli history was the extreme right Kach movement.
In stark contrast, left opposition over the years is charecterised by non violent actions. Instead, movements and individuals commit actions that jeopardies themselves (like "Women in black" and "4 mothers" movements, and thesoldiers who refuse to serve in the occupied territories)
I think we can establish a pattern here.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
But as a reality check, the violence that has destroyed the Leftist cause is launched by the Palestinians. Every suicide bombing and murder of Israeli motorists further weakens the already unpopular Leftist cause. This is what is pushing the entire center of Israeli society further to the Right -- the desire for survival.
this is partially true. I believe that the right dream of big Israel and the aggresiveness on which righties attempted to realize that dream is one of the cuases of the prolonging of the conflict. The settling of Jews on Arab owned land and the aggressive and often violent conduct of these settlers is the number 1 factor for the hatred and mistrust of the Palestinians in all Jews.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
What are you talking about? You want to put your life at risk to make a misguided political statement.
In extreme cases, I will risk a lot, including my freedom and life, to fight for what I believein. I will never resort to violent action, like the righties so often do.
Originally posted by NewsGuy
On the other hand, even Israeli high-school students are volunteering in droves -- for the first time in history -- to risk their lives over the summer vacation to go out to the West Bank and to Gaza to protect Jewish towns from Arab infiltrators. And there are more volunteers than ever to join fighting units in the territories to wage war on Palestinian terrorism. That, to me, shows real values and patriotism -- not giving one's life to harm Israel's democracy as Leftists would do.
On the other hand, 450 officers and soldiers are refusing to serve in the occupied territories, and they gain increasing support in the Israeli public, as the support demonstrations show.
takeo
06-27-2002, 12:27 PM
"The settling of Jews on Arab owned land and the aggressive and often violent conduct of these settlers is the number 1 factor for the hatred and mistrust of the Palestinians in all Jews. "
that's absolutely true, especially the continuing violent expropriation of Palestinian property and lands for new settlements is a reason for hate and, according to Le Monde, was the main reason for some suicide-murderers to be convinced.
Mediocrates
06-27-2002, 12:48 PM
Quick call Figaro - a posting w/o 'ethnic cleansing' in it.
sharonbn
06-27-2002, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by takeo
that's absolutely true, especially the continuing violent expropriation of Palestinian property and lands for new settlements is a reason for hate and, according to Le Monde, was the main reason for some suicide-murderers to be convinced.
I want to make myself absolutely clear: Although I understand that the anger of the Palestinians is rooted in the Israeli imperialism of the settlements, this does not give ANY right whatysoever to the Palestinians to bomb nd kill innocent civillian Israelis. These brutal vicious terror attacks only tarnish the justification of the Palestinian fight for independance. maybe beyond repair.
I support the IDF operations in Palestinian territory. They are in accordance to the current policy of the government of seeking and capturing terrorists and destroying the infrastructure that enables the terror attacks. If civillian Palestinians are incidently killed and hurt during these operations - this is unfortunate and Israel should appologize in such cases.
This is the difference between terrorism and military operations - who is the target.
If Israel adopts a plan of action where civillian population is the target - like in a case of transfer - these actions cannot be justified in self defense. They constitue a continuation of Imperialism over Palestinian land.
Originally posted by sharonbn
Palestinian terror attacks do not threaten the existence of Israel.
never in history, did guerilla warfare threatens the existence of a sovereign state defended by an established army. Guerilla warfare was successful in driving away an invading army (like Hizbuallah did in Lebanon, Afghans did to the Russians, etc.).
This is not the same. The best the Palestinians can hope to achieve is that Israel will slowly start to fold from WB and GS.
As much as they will continue to pound Israel with terror attacks, there is no chance Israelis will leave green-line Israel.
The only existential threat Israel faced was from invading Arab armies in 1948 and 1973. With the establishment of peace with Egypt - the largest Arab nation, as well as Jordan - who shares with Israel the longest borderline, this threat was diminished to the point where Israel can now assume it will not be overran by military force.
That's just not true. The attacks weaken Israel, making it more suceptible to a mass arab attack. And if you think that the peaces of paper that we have with Jordan and Egypt will stop a war...well, think again. Nor would Europe do anything.
Possibly the US, if they could get there in time...
It would only take a day or two to overrun Israel. Less if its pre 67 Israel, because Israel could be divided in two, creating efectively 6 fronts (2 north, 2 south, two east.) Add amphibious assualt and you have EIGHT fronts.
Not to mention that its not just the "existence of the state" ITS PEOPLES LIVES!
What do you think the parent of a child who was murdered on a bus would say to you? What would you say to them?
That's what I hate about the left - the arrogant belief in Israeli infalibility and security.
Guess what? People are dying! Israel is not secure! The majority of Arabs STILL want Israel pushed into the sea! A large group will STILL attack no matter what they are given!
Transfer is a horrible option. It is. But it is not killing.
People would have to be compensated for their land, and arangements for housing and citizenship in realistic locations made beforehand.
And its still would be an awful choice. It still would be "ethnic cleansing." BUT, it would be Ethnic Cleansing as a last resort...because Israel decides that it needs the West Bank for survival issues, and realizes that they cannot hold on to it reasonably in any other way.
It sucks...a violation of the "right to property" if that exists, but it may be the least of many evils.
takeo
06-27-2002, 01:53 PM
"" I want to make myself absolutely clear: Although I understand that the anger of the Palestinians is rooted in the Israeli imperialism of the settlements, this does not give ANY right whatysoever to the Palestinians to bomb nd kill innocent civillian Israelis. These brutal vicious terror attacks only tarnish the justification of the Palestinian fight for independance. maybe beyond repair. "
I agree, on the other hand the attacks against the occupation-force is legitimate according to me, one has the right to resist to occupation and oppression, but not by targetting civilians.
"I support the IDF operations in Palestinian territory. They are in accordance to the current policy of the government of seeking and capturing terrorists and destroying the infrastructure that enables the terror attacks. If civillian Palestinians are incidently killed and hurt during these operations - this is unfortunate and Israel should appologize in such cases. "
i don't support them, because they never exploited all peacefull alternatives, such as negociations proposed by the palestinians, and the operations are aimed at the wrong targets, instead Hamas the PA and the moderate part of the Palestinian society seems to be the target, according to me a deliberate policy of the right-wing to make every negociation and final settlement impossible. What's more is that the operations seems to be aimed at damaging the palestinians in general, attacks on utility facilities, reoccupation of whole cities, prisons, etc.
Finally those operations will not reach their goal and are contreproductive, they will enhance terrorism and support for terrorism instead of stopping it.
The best option would be negociation combined with military operation against groups that continue assaults on israeli civilians after the peace-talks started.
"If Israel adopts a plan of action where civillian population is the target - like in a case of transfer - these actions cannot be justified in self defense. They constitue a continuation of Imperialism over Palestinian land."
of course
takeo
06-27-2002, 02:35 PM
MGB, the westbank nor gaza will make much difference in terms of Israel's security, while peace with the Palestinians and the Arab neighbours will make a tremendous difference.
Besides, egypt nor jordan constitute a danger for israel, it may be pieces of paper, but pieces that have protected israel since more than 20 years from any attacks, the only left problem is Syria, the Palestinians and Libanon, and all can be solved by implementing the un-resolutions and seeking peace.
Yes, people are diing, but palestinians are diing too, and deporting them means destroying the life of millions of innocent people and everything they have. at least for me all life is equal, wether it is israeli or palestinian life. it would also include the risk of a full-blown war with not only its arab neighbours but with other countries as well, economic sanctions (and be sure that in such a case this will be the consequence from at least Europe) which would damage or endanger the life of millions of israeli.
yes, deportation doesn't necessarily means killing them, but the palestinians will be deported easily, they will resist with all means, and many would prefere to die than to be deported.
at least someone who recognises that massive deportation is etnic cleansing...
There are no advantages at all for anyone, except for the ultra's who want to see an Arab-free Eretz-Israel, or for the Arab ultra's, who would have a new opportunity and new allies to rase israel from the map.
Because of despair from the current situation, the Transfer Option has started to have a room in the discussions of Solutions talked about in Israel.
But, I think that this Idea only flurish in situations like these, and the majority of Israelies are basically moral and couldn't accept such a solution.
We have'nt tried everything yet!!! let me remind you that there is no border between Israel and the WestBank.
I think that when there is a border, a strong border, the faith in the army (which will have much more successes) will rise, and the Transfer option will return to it's classic place - out of the agenda.
About Left and Right, I think the majority of Israel is center-left (I base it upon recent polls about a palestinian state - 60% for it)
looking at the historic "struggle" between right and left - the left has prevailed, i.e. the division of Israel between us and the Arabs.
seems to be the acceptable ideology for the vast majority of Israelies.
What I am proud of in the Israeli society is that even at times of war, the majority of the public thinks of the day after, stays morral and realistic.
takeo,
the decision for this fight against the PA as well as with the other terror groups, is based on comprehensive intelligence reports that flowing from the field about the cooperation of the PA with these terror groups, as well as conducting terror activities of their own.
You talk about Sharon and his lust for war or conquest, but let me remind you that there are people that sit together with Sharon in the government that you would'nt suspect them for wanting to conquer the terretories like Shimon Peres, who support the current military operations as well.
Bush administration wants to replace Arafat, do you think that The US is so biased towards israel that they would, for no specific reason, support this kind of extreme opnion? which contradicts, btw, it's interest for immediate calm in the ME.
To understand this, you must put yourself in their position:
What if, hypotethicaly, you are now the PM of Israel and you are getting reports about Arafat and the PA involvement of Terror activities, building a packt with Iran and Iraq (who wants the destruction of Israel), conducting arms deals, building bombs etc. what would you do? would you still consider Arafat moderate?
Mediocrates
06-27-2002, 03:31 PM
There are no advantages at all for anyone, except for the ultra's who want to see an Arab-free Eretz-Israel, or for the Arab ultra's, who would have a new opportunity and new
allies to (e)rase israel from the map.
Go ahead.... finish the sentence...'and create a Jew Free Judea and Samaria'.
takeo
06-27-2002, 04:35 PM
"takeo,
the decision for this fight against the PA as well as with the other terror groups, is based on comprehensive intelligence reports that flowing from the field about the cooperation of the PA with these terror groups, as well as conducting terror activities of their own. "
the problem is that those intelligent reports accusing Arafat are somewhat biased and not convincing (at least the ones published in public).
Arafat is certainly not having any kind of deal with hamas, which always harmed his interests, or even the pflp.
Fatah on the contrary does attacks against israeli targets, but no suicide-missions inside israel aimed at civilians. their actions can be seen as legitimate answers to the israeli violence against the pa, the palestinian autonomous territory and the palestinian people in general. (both sides to not longer observe the oslo-agreements).
it is prooven that Arafat has lost controll over some segments of the Fatah and over the palestinian in general, but by bombing and condamning the only palestinian leaders that want peace with israel and call for an end to the violence is making the moderate palestinians weaker (the same way the suicide-bombings inside israel are making the moderate sraeli forces weaker).
It is an incredibly stupid policy to isolate Arafat and the pa because there is really noone to replace them except the radicals. And they will not give in to israeli pressure and change their leader, on the contrary this is making Arafat more popular. So by refusing to deal with arafat israel is imposing another difficulty in reaching a solution with the moderate part of the palestinian side. The chance that arafat will be reelected in the upcoming elections is around 90%.
about the us-policy, the us always considered Arafat as a partner, this change in policy came after intense israeli pressure and lobbying in the congress, and doesn't make the us-policy, which has been a disaster since Bush became president, any more consistent or effective, especially since the rest of the world and the palestinians themselves still recognise Arafat, which means they will have to deal with himor one of the pa, if they want a solution to the problem.
"You talk about Sharon and his lust for war or conquest, but let me remind you that there are people that sit together with Sharon in the government that you would'nt suspect them for wanting to conquer the terretories like Shimon Peres, who support the current military operations as well. "
a part of the left participated as well, and shimon Peres, with his constant treats to leave the coalition without actually doing it, hasn't improoved its credibility.
"To understand this, you must put yourself in their position:
What if, hypotethicaly, you are now the PM of Israel and you are getting reports about Arafat and the PA involvement of Terror activities, building a packt with Iran and Iraq (who wants the destruction of Israel), conducting arms deals, building bombs etc. what would you do? would you still consider Arafat moderate?"
i would first try to know if those reports are accurate (which is very doubtfull in this case), and than i would try secret contacts to find out what are the plans of the pa. if there would be any chance that they might negociate about real peace and an end to terror, than i would start official negociations combined with a cease-fire between the groups linked to Arafat and israel, if not, i would indeed continue the current operations or even crush totally the pa-leadership.
during this negociations, with international assistance, the palestinians would get everything they demanded, including a settlement for jerusalem and the refugees, on the condition that they make unconditionally an end to the terror-groups refusing to accept the cease-fire. if Arafat should not be able to do so than he should accept israeli and international military assistance, untill the terroris groups that refuse to accept the cease-fire are completely eradicated. once that is happened the israeli army should leave all the occupied territories and abandon all the settlements, with some compromise on jerusalem and the refugees.
What makes you doubt the veracity of the reports, showing connection between Arafat, Iran, Iraq, and terrorist groups? This information has been accepted as authentic by all the intelligence agencies provided with it.
takeo
06-27-2002, 07:15 PM
except some documents where Arafat signed papers for financial support to fatah (which is not very special because fatah is his own organisation) there is really nothing that indicates Arafat supported terrorism. there is no connection whatsoever between arafat and hamas.
what is Arafat's connection to Iraq?
about the "iranian ship" still many doubts prevail, and certainly there were no documents linking Arafat or the PA-leadership. i don't know about any other connections to Iran. (besides the us had connections with iran too, remember the iran-contragate scandall?)
anyway, even if all this is true, it doesn't mean israel can't negociate with Arafat, south africa also has excellent relations with iran and libia for example... does it make mbeki a terrorist?
Mediocrates
06-27-2002, 07:28 PM
yeah. kind of. it does.
South Africans do not import illegal arms into their territory from Iran. South Africans do not go around killing women and children with human bombs, whose families receive generous payments from Saddam for their "sacrifice".
What questions are remaining regarding Karin-A? Everyone knows by now that these arms were bought by the PA. Since Arafat is the only person authorized to sign over checks, it's clear that he had everything to do with it.
Arafat signed papers not to Fatah proper, but to Al Aksa Brigade members. The authenticity of these papers has been confirmed.
James
06-27-2002, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by takeo
except some documents where Arafat signed papers for financial support to fatah (which is not very special because fatah is his own organisation) there is really nothing that indicates Arafat supported terrorism. there is no connection whatsoever between arafat and hamas.
what is Arafat's connection to Iraq?
about the "iranian ship" still many doubts prevail, and certainly there were no documents linking Arafat or the PA-leadership. i don't know about any other connections to Iran. (besides the us had connections with iran too, remember the iran-contragate scandall?)
anyway, even if all this is true, it doesn't mean israel can't negociate with Arafat, south africa also has excellent relations with iran and libia for example... does it make mbeki a terrorist?
Arafat is a known killer and terrorist. Of course he ordered the ship full of weapons. Nothing happens without his approval. Why would Israel trust the word of Arafat. His many lies betray him.
Wouldn't make more sense to "transfer" the Jews?
Its my understanding that many already have citizenship and family in the US, so setup a program to bring all Jews to the US. In fact, I seen reports that many have left Israel recently because of the poor economic conditions there.
The US economy would certainly benefit from the education and industry they would bring.
For those who want to labor in desert, there is always Texas, with major sections of the state in need of good business leaders. And there is California, another country, errr state in need of an economic boost.
No, it wouldn't make more sense to transfer Jews. Jews are not the ones blowing up people in the cafes. SOME have American citizenship, but not very many - the last I heard, about 20% are from FSU, 40+ percent were born in Israel, and most of the others are from other countries they would rather not see again, for various reasons.
Originally posted by mulp
Wouldn't make more sense to "transfer" the Jews?
...
The US economy would certainly benefit from the education and industry they would bring.
For those who want to labor in desert, there is always Texas, with major sections of the state in need of good business leaders. And there is California, another country, errr state in need of an economic boost. What about the poor, the elderly, the handicapped, the uneducated (like immigrants from Ethiopia for example)?
takeo
06-28-2002, 05:06 AM
of course i don't agree with mulp either, but if this kind of idea would become popular, remember that it can be used against Jews as well...
Israel DOES blow up people in the Westbank and Gaza, i destroys buildings, terrorise the palestinians and killed 1000's of them, violates un-resolutions, etc. . But still it isn't a reason to take revenge on innocent israeli people;(the same applies for the palestinians)
Right, Mbeki a terrorist... i'm sure the southafrican regime tought the same in the 80's...
if saddam pays families of suicide bombers, what's the connection with arafat???
"What questions are remaining regarding Karin-A? Everyone knows by now that these arms were bought by the PA. Since Arafat is the only person authorized to sign over checks, it's clear that he had everything to do with it. "
ever seen any paper or document? it may be taken for granted in the pro-israeli press that arafat is involved in this, but there is no proove whatsoever. israel didn't accept any international independant research over the matter, as in jenin, one might wonder WHY.
"Arafat signed papers not to Fatah proper, but to Al Aksa Brigade members. The authenticity of these papers has been confirmed"
really???
i've read those documents, the only thing one can conclude is that he made payments to fatah-members, none of them any prooven connection to al-aqsa. The European commission has studied those documents and came to the conclusion that the israeli claim is nonsense.
But anyway, let's make things clear, when referring to terrorism i mean attacks against innocent civilians, after the israeli incursions in palestinian territory and the attacks against pa-facilities and people by the idf, the pa and fatah have every right to fight back against the IDF, that's not terrorism but legitimate self-defense.
Israel can never claim to be acting in self-defense as long as it is occupying the Westbank and Gaza.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,739466,00.html
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,678329,00.html
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,678202,00.html
"CNN chief accuses Israel of terror "
"BBC news chief condemns Israeli actions"
of course now he's the greatest anti-semit in world history blabla spare me the comments please, i've read them already...
Mediocrates
06-28-2002, 05:35 AM
Well for one it' simply silly to point to propaganda and use it to say that no other point of view even exists.
Israel DOES blow up people in the Westbank and Gaza, i destroys buildings, terrorise the palestinians and killed 1000's of them, violates un-resolutions, etc
The last time you made a statement like this is was MILLIONS
Right, Mbeki a terrorist... i'm sure the southafrican regime tought the same in the 80's...
Yeah why not - if terrorists or drug lords buy into legitimate companies in order to launder money then the consumer, knowingly or not is supporting them. If you buy coffee at the local Caribou, whether you know it or not you are supporting the management of a radical islamic bank that has made seriously anti american statements, has claimed (unasked) that they support armed struggle against the US and Israel and other unequivocal statements. That some world leader choses to turn a blind eye to it is really unimportant.
You are such a hypocrite really - you make grandiose claims about how Israel and other countries secretly scheme and cooperate to keep the muslim world oppressed yet cooperation among those same countries that engineered the Durban conference is somehow innocent. You realize that you have zero credibility as a result.
i've read those documents, the only thing one can conclude is that he made payments to fatah-members, none of them any prooven connection to al-aqsa. The European commission has studied those documents and came to the conclusion that the israeli claim is nonsense.
You read Arabic? And where prey tell did the EC determine it was nonsense. You remind me of one of those people who gets hit with a flying piano and tells me it's not the piano, it's the wood that the piano is made from.
takeo
06-28-2002, 06:18 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,711064,00.html
"The European Parliament’s block on the transfer of some 18.7 million euro to the Middle East Process budget was lifted on Wednesday. After a forceful address by external relations Commissioner, Chris Patten, both the parliament’s foreign affairs and budgetary committees unanimously voted to release the money. "
http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?aid=6708
"Yeah why not - if terrorists or drug lords buy into legitimate companies in order to launder money then the consumer, knowingly or not is supporting them. If you buy coffee at the local Caribou, whether you know it or not you are supporting the management of a radical islamic bank that has made seriously anti american statements, has claimed (unasked) that they support armed struggle against the US and Israel and other unequivocal statements. That some world leader choses to turn a blind eye to it is really unimportant. "
what exactly is your claim against South Africa?
they can trade with whoever they like, they are an independant country, and making statements is actually not the same as terrorism...
of course SA is not really sympathic to israel, considering the years of Israeli support for the Apartheidsregime, but it doesn't finance terrorism against israel.
"You are such a hypocrite really - you make grandiose claims about how Israel and other countries secretly scheme and cooperate to keep the muslim world oppressed yet cooperation among those same countries that engineered the Durban conference is somehow innocent. You realize that you have zero credibility as a result. "
what's wrong with the Durban conference? states have the right to cooperate and have their own views and policy concerning the Middle east, while other countries support Israel, that's world policy you know. There was nothing secret about the Durban conference.
what are my grandiose claims that israel and other countries secretly scheme to keep the muslim world oppressed?
you are one of those hypocrits that sees terrorism or anti-semitism as everything "directed against he us, israel's or its allies' interests", while us- or israel sponsered use of terror, is considered legitimate.
if palestinians react to israel occupation, than it's per definition terrorism, if the same happens in Kosovo or iraqi kurdistan, than it's not...
Mediocrates
06-28-2002, 06:34 AM
You are beyond hope and beyond salvage.
Takeo,
You are missinformed on many things, and worse, you ignore major distinctions to distort the world to the view that you want it to be in.
Does Israel kill Judean Arabs...yes. Are most of them combatants? Well over 90% are.
How does Israel "terrorize" the Judean Arabs? Checkpoints? That is equivalent to "terror?" a word mainly associated with bombing non-combatents, trying to kill as many as possible, randomly?
Demolishing houses? The majority of which are cover for gunmen attacking Israel, or a re boodytrapped in the case of Jenin, or have been built in violation of Israeli law in the case of Jerusalem. That is equivalent to killing innocents?
You are wrong about the Arafat files, too. This is a man who was audio taped ordering the death an American diplomat, who lies about his birth (in Cairo, not Jerusalen), his academics (never got into an American University), his intentions....but so many for some reason want to stand up for him.
You are sad, takeo.
Gaza won't. The west bank has, does, and will. Has in 1973.
"Peace" with our neighbors is nice, but is not a "permanent thing." No matter what papers are drawn up, there can be no guarantee. This is particularly true in instable regimes with desperate people like those that characterize our neighbors.
Deportantion is not "destroying lives" ...its awful, and chances are that it won't happen...we are not to that point yet, and hopefully never will be...but it is not comparable to killing.
The great majority of Palestinians who are dying are combatants (over 90%)...the great majority of Israelis who are dying are non-combatents (possibly soldiers, but not in combat duties - ie. at military locations or patrol at the time).
THAT is the great difference.
Originally posted by takeo
MGB, the westbank nor gaza will make much difference in terms of Israel's security, while peace with the Palestinians and the Arab neighbours will make a tremendous difference.
Besides, egypt nor jordan constitute a danger for israel, it may be pieces of paper, but pieces that have protected israel since more than 20 years from any attacks, the only left problem is Syria, the Palestinians and Libanon, and all can be solved by implementing the un-resolutions and seeking peace.
Yes, people are diing, but palestinians are diing too, and deporting them means destroying the life of millions of innocent people and everything they have. at least for me all life is equal, wether it is israeli or palestinian life. it would also include the risk of a full-blown war with not only its arab neighbours but with other countries as well, economic sanctions (and be sure that in such a case this will be the consequence from at least Europe) which would damage or endanger the life of millions of israeli.
yes, deportation doesn't necessarily means killing them, but the palestinians will be deported easily, they will resist with all means, and many would prefere to die than to be deported.
at least someone who recognises that massive deportation is etnic cleansing...
There are no advantages at all for anyone, except for the ultra's who want to see an Arab-free Eretz-Israel, or for the Arab ultra's, who would have a new opportunity and new allies to rase israel from the map.
takeo
06-28-2002, 01:37 PM
"Gaza won't. The west bank has, does, and will. Has in 1973. "
it's not sure that the westbank protected israel in 1973, it was in the first place the occupation of the WB and Gaza that caused the 1973 war, and both jordan and egypt have direct access to israel's most vulnerable regions, without passing the WB or gaza.
"Peace" with our neighbors is nice, but is not a "permanent thing." No matter what papers are drawn up, there can be no guarantee. This is particularly true in instable regimes with desperate people like those that characterize our neighbors. "
nothing is permanent and there are no garantees in life, yet should all countries who don't really like their neighbours take a part of them to feel more secure?
in that case the reoccupation of the baltics by Russia should be legitimate.
as long as the occupation go on however, the support for attacks against israel will not stop, and nobody will take real measures to stop it, because in the opinion of most part of the world, Israel can only blame itself, because they had more than 30 years time to find a solution for this problems, instead it did nothing, untill 1993, and even this agreement was not respected by israel. (more settlements, delay of the time-table, israeli refusal to accept palestinian independance in 1999 as foreseen by oslo, etc.).
"Deportantion is not "destroying lives" ...its awful, and chances are that it won't happen...we are not to that point yet, and hopefully never will be...but it is not comparable to killing. "
Do you think that deportation will be bloodless? All Palestinians will resist to their deportation, which is their right.
"The great majority of Palestinians who are dying are combatants (over 90%)...the great majority of Israelis who are dying are non-combatents (possibly soldiers, but not in combat duties - ie. at military locations or patrol at the time). "
i wouldn't think so, do you consider children throwing stones at the occupation force combattants? that's how this whole intifadeh excalated. I saw on television a woman, an israeli journalist who was married to a palestinian , who told that every time israel retaliates innocent civilians get victimised. Israeli responses such as rockets, bombings, shelling, car-bombs, etc. always make a lot of innocent victims. Some policies however are deliberately targetting civilians, such as destroying houses or fields that are build too close to a new israeli settlement, very regular curfews, ...
not to mention the destructions and murders against the legitimate palestinian autority, while hamas-members are left alone.
occupation forces are always a legitimate target, the us did attack taliban forces wether they were fighting or not...
How does Israel "terrorize" the Judean Arabs? Checkpoints? That is equivalent to "terror?" a word mainly associated with bombing non-combatents, trying to kill as many as possible, randomly? "
checkpoints just to leave their own city, demolishing 10000's of houses (sometimes according to the law in jerusalem, but a law that is clearly racist and discriminating the palestinian population in Jerusalem) mostly for building new jewish settlements, curfews, murdering Palestinian politicians, torture, randomly persecution and months or even years in jail without a trial (check the amnesty international-website if you want the complete list). Not only is the israeli occupation of palestine illegal, but israel seems to be determined to humiliate the palestinians and make their life as miserable as possible, during more than 35 years already. All this while the jewish newcomers in the region can build settlements anywhere they like, get double water-supplies compared to the palestinians, tax cuts, free movement, etc.
of course you have to be inhuman to ignore that this policy is the reason of strong hate and anger, that exploded in the first and second intifadeh. It doesn't legitimate the killing of civilians however(nor does the killing of civilians legitimise the israeli occupation!!!) .
"You are wrong about the Arafat files, too. This is a man who was audio taped ordering the death an American diplomat, who lies about his birth (in Cairo, not Jerusalen), his academics (never got into an American University), his intentions....but so many for some reason want to stand up for him. "
any proofs or links, or is this unnecessary???
What about your leader, alleged multiple war-criminal !!!
"You are sad, takeo."
and you can't deal with people with different opinions than your own.
Mediocrates
06-28-2002, 03:02 PM
Do YOU have your own opinions?
The "occupation" had nothing to do with 1973 war. This was nothing more than yet another attempt at destroying Israel. The Arab Summit in 1968, I believe, the way the attack was perpetrated, the buildup, all make this fact abundantly clear to anyone willing to see.
As a matter of fa