Only War Can Bring Peace

[ibrodsky]

The Bush administration has swallowed the Clinton administration's misguided view: that peace can only be achieved by committees.

Today Nabil Shaath was interviewed on Fox News. He was quite clear: the PA will never give up on the "right of return" to within Israel for large numbers of Palestinians. It should be obvious to anyone but the most naive that the main goal of the PA is not a state of their own living next to Israel, but a larger Arab population inside Israel. If Israel were to agree to such a thing, it would be an irreversible move towards more terrorism and ultimately the dismantling of Israel.

Clearly, these people have not given up on destroying Israel, and they are willing (as they have publicly declared) to spend 100 years if needed to make it happen.

This is why even the current military operation is insufficient. Israel must eliminate Arafat and all Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, and Al Aqsa Brigades leaders. Israel must deal the Palestinians a truly "crushing" blow. The choice for Palestinians must between complete destruction and a compromise with Israel -- a compromise that includes acceptance of no "right of return" to within Israel and not the '67 cease fire line but defensible borders for Israel.

Israel must defeat the PA just as the U.S. defeated Japan and Nazi Germany.

[Vic]

ibrodsky, in WWII the Allies always stressed that they were fighting not against the Germans or Japanese as a people, even though they caused a high civilian death toll without much hesitation or remorse, but against their respective governments. Indeed they supported the German opposition and even sometimes took pains to "reeducate" the captured soldiers in prison camps. Maybe it would be useful to take care to clarify the difference between "the Palestinians" and the PA, Hamas etc.? The intention to deal "a crushing blow" to the Palestinians does bring Israel linguistically close to an accusation of genocidal designs, dealing the same blow to the PA and other terror organisations, whether internationally recognized as such or not, is a perfectly legitimate goal.

[ibrodsky]

Of course I am saying that Israel must crush its Palestinian enemies -- not those Palestinians truly willing to live in peace.

But by narrowing it down to the PA, Hamas, et. al. you are ignoring the fact that the PA has created a terrorist infrastructure that extends from the PA to the schools to the mosques and to the media. Plus, you ignoring poll after poll that show a majority of Palestinians supporting terrorism.

To wit, the Palestinians have made terrorism the centerpiece of their culture. They glorify terrorists, celebrate terrorist acts, and breed terrorists. The good Palestinians, for whatever reason, have done nothing to stop terrorism.

Therefore, sooner or later Israel is going to have to utterly crush the society and economy whose main "product" is terrorism.

The U.S. did not say "We must send ground troops into Germany and Japan so that we can be sure of only killing the most determined and ideologically motivated enemies." The U.S. understood that German and Japanese societies supported or at least acquiesced to mass murder, and the U.S. (therefore) bombed them into submission.

It is clear from watching the likes of Nabil Shaath that every statement about "peace" from the PA is a ruse. They have built a terrorist culture. They "condemn" terrorism knowing they must verbally condemn it, but materially they do everything they can to support it.

Actually, I think they have stolen a lesson from Maimonides' book. Maimonides advised Jews to recite sentences dictated by their Muslim tormentors so that they could continue living. Today, Palestinian leaders recite words of condemnation for terrorist attacks because they must, but in their hearts they continue to support those attacks. Once you have embraced the evil of killing innocent civilians, it is very easy to lie.

Sorry, but Israel is going to have to crush them and then hand pick Palestinians leaders truly interested in living in peace. It's going to take a new generation of Palestinians brought up in schools and mosques and with media that teach Western values rather than Islamist fascism.

[DanStrat]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ibrodsky
ibrodsky your post #3 is pretty much right on target and your assessment that "Israel must defeat the PA just as the U.S. defeated Japan and Nazi Germany" is also pretty much right on target. Unfortunately it is sometimes necessary to recognize that evil does exist in the world and war is sometimes necessary to bring about peace and ensure that peace thrives and that freedom and democratization is furthered throughout the world.

I would add that not only Israel is looking at the prospect and responsibility of eradicating the will to fight/continue to use terrorist tactics and murder innocent civilians etc. All nations that embrace democracy, and freedom will have to work together to crush not only the terrorist organizations, but also the nation states that harbor and support these cowards. These dictatorships must be eradicated and replaced with governments that will move these countries toward democratization. Otherwise you are correct and quite possibly underestimating that this battle will proceed for another 100 years, hasn’t it been going on since Mohammad was riding around in the desert with his pack of thieves and killers spreading the peacefulness of Islam?

[martinw718]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
The Bush administration has swallowed the Clinton administration's misguided view: that peace can only be achieved by committees.

Today Nabil Shaath was interviewed on Fox News. He was quite clear: the PA will never give up on the "right of return" to within Israel for large numbers of Palestinians. It should be obvious to anyone but the most naive that the main goal of the PA is not a state of their own living next to Israel, but a larger Arab population inside Israel. If Israel were to agree to such a thing, it would be an irreversible move towards more terrorism and ultimately the dismantling of Israel.

Clearly, these people have not given up on destroying Israel, and they are willing (as they have publicly declared) to spend 100 years if needed to make it happen.

This is why even the current military operation is insufficient. Israel must eliminate Arafat and all Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, and Al Aqsa Brigades leaders. Israel must deal the Palestinians a truly "crushing" blow. The choice for Palestinians must between complete destruction and a compromise with Israel -- a compromise that includes acceptance of no "right of return" to within Israel and not the '67 cease fire line but defensible borders for Israel.

Israel must defeat the PA just as the U.S. defeated Japan and Nazi Germany.

Absolutely!

Netanyahu keeps pointing out that strength is respected far more than appeasement.

Every time Israel has given the Arabs something, the Arabs have used it to attack Israel. Always.

Another thing Netanyahu keeps pointing out -- and I hope people are finally starting to get it -- is that once you eliminate the leadership of the threat, the threat almost always disappears.

His examples were hardly isolated: German society went back to Democracy as soon as the Nazis were defeated.
Once Japan was defeated the whole Japanese nationalism mania fizzled out.

We keep hearing that Israel is "just breeding more terrorism." But history does not back up the notion that force breeds force. Even Israel's own history does not back up that notion. I remember clearly how Oslo opened the door for a new wave of terrorism.

People who spout this garbage about Israel just breeding more terrorism remind me of the clowns who say that you need not secure your home because "they'll get in if they really want to."

[Dyeus]

land for peace was always BS, and it will be BS there is no need for Israel to even CONSIDER peace (yes I am AGAINST peace aslong as we need to give up Jerusalem) they could of had it all and they refused and I dont see ANY reason why we should bow for hatred and terrorism, WE have the RIGHT to defend ourselves and OUR PEOPLE, even better it is not a right but our DUTY to do so, EVERYWHERE in the world Jews get terroresized by people (NOT only muslims) and they are affraid to go to the Synagoge, we should stand up for eachother instead of crawling away for we have the right to live aswell

[drelan]

Comparing the PA to Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan seems like somewhat of a falicy to me. I beleive that it is paradoxical to say that war brings peace, and I do not agree that the actions of the Israeli military are now bringing peace to anyone, including Israel itself.

I realize that I may not see things from your perspective as I live abroad, but then perhaps you can explain to me how your actions are bringing peace to anyone. If I am correct, Jews were given a homeland partially in response to the halocaust in WWII. There was rampant anti-semitism prior to WWII, but now everyone agree's that the genocide preformed by Nazi Germany was horrific. Any type of hate in this measure is horrific, and subsequently, any type of hate that leads to the oppression and near anialation of a nation is horrific. I do not support palestinian suicide bombers, but neither do I support the military occupation and oppression of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

However, I feel that in this situation Israel (together with its ally, the United States of America) must take the first step to bring about a peace. And this is not through war. War is such a superficial, and temporary resolution to the promlems nations face today.

Please let me know how much you disagree with me.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by drelan
Comparing the PA to Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan seems like somewhat of a falicy to me. I beleive that it is paradoxical to say that war brings peace, and I do not agree that the actions of the Israeli military are now bringing peace to anyone, including Israel itself.

I realize that I may not see things from your perspective as I live abroad, but then perhaps you can explain to me how your actions are bringing peace to anyone. If I am correct, Jews were given a homeland partially in response to the halocaust in WWII. There was rampant anti-semitism prior to WWII, but now everyone agree's that the genocide preformed by Nazi Germany was horrific. Any type of hate in this measure is horrific, and subsequently, any type of hate that leads to the oppression and near anialation of a nation is horrific. I do not support palestinian suicide bombers, but neither do I support the military occupation and oppression of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

However, I feel that in this situation Israel (together with its ally, the United States of America) must take the first step to bring about a peace. And this is not through war. War is such a superficial, and temporary resolution to the promlems nations face today.

Please let me know how much you disagree with me.

I don’t suppose that you believe that leaving weeds in the garden generate more weeds.

Actually you’re quite wrong when you suggest that the actions of the IDF worsen the situation in the Middle East. The IDF is performing the job that the PA should have done years ago. The Radical Islamic terrorists in the WB and GS are gradually being eliminated and their bomb factories are being destroyed.

Israel is moving slowly in the right direction despite the fact that they are restrained somewhat by the actions of the EU.

Talk is cheap and I’m certain that if you were at the receiving end of suicidal maniacs you’d most certainly demand that your government would take some sort of action. I’m certain that I would hear your cry for help circulating the globe.

[drelan]

Yes, but why are the weeds there? Israeli's must not simply strike in retaliation to suicide bombings, but address the root cause to maintain their own security, and that of the Palestinians. But that leaves a question: What are the root causes of "terrorism"?

There is not one victim here, but two. Not one offender, but two. If Palestinian Terrorists are to be labeled "weeds" as you say, then the IDF should be labeled as a very big weed, being fed constantly by the fertilizer of the US.

I do not think that there is such a simple solution to this problem. "The Radical Islamic terrorists in the WB and GS are gradually being eliminated and their bomb factories are being destroyed." This will not end the conflict, but IMO inflame more terrorist sentiment towards Israel.

Every person killed must be thought of as human, and it is only when we start to value the "enemy" as we value our own, it is only then that we will start to see a solution, and begin to notice the crimes of both sides.

As a conclusion, I do not agree that all talk is cheap. Please tell me what else I can do now then talk. Please tell me and I will gladly listen.

[elke]

Originally posted by drelan
Yes, but why are the weeds there? Israeli's must not simply strike in retaliation to suicide bombings, but address the root cause to maintain their own security, and that of the Palestinians. But that leaves a question: What are the root causes of "terrorism"?


Maybe so, but wouldn't you first have to pull out the weeds in your garden, before worrying why they sprung up in the first place? If you don't pull them out, they'll kill all your flowers/tomatoes/what have you! This is the stage we are at right now: the current situation is such that Israel needs to take care of it NOW! There is no time to worry about the whys and wherefores. At some point - sure! The whole world will have to sit down and think about how to combat poverty, hopelessness, sickness, etc.

[danholo]

Gardening sure is fun... never done that though. :)

[ibrodsky]

Part of the Big Lie is that fighting terrorism only creates more terrorists.

What breeds terrorists? When a group sees that terrorist attacks are successful and that the perpetrators get away with those acts.

The U.S. did not create terrorists by bombing Afghanistan and driving the Taliban from power. Terrorists were already ensconced in Afghanistan. What created terrorists was seeing the first WTC bombing, the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole bombing--while the U.S. seemed indifferent or impotant. That is what creates terrorists.

No one, not even Islamist fanatics, is eager to join a losing cause.

What will stop terrorists? The only way to stop them is to methodically fight and defeat both the terrorists and the states that support them.

To win the war on terrorism, the U.S. must thoroughly defeat Al Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. These are the main culprits, though not the only ones. Defeating them will discourage others.

[Disraeli]

Only War Can Bring Peace


You are I fear sadly mistaken.
I come from Ireland and I can attest that compromise is the only way forward for peace.

So long as the occupation continues Israel will always be subject to attacks, so long as Israeli settlement continues Israel will always live under threat.

This is fact and blindly burying your head in the sand and extolling some mantra about how "terrorism will be vanquished" with military force is counter productive.

Terrorism has no capital you can invade, no leader to kill, because the more cities you invade and leaders you kill the more people you create who want to be "terrorists".

Thus military action is not in fact in the long term interests of an average Israeli, not to mention the millions of Palestinian people who have done "nothing" for the most part to deserve retribution for attacks perpetrated against Israel.

Hamas does not bomb Israel in the name of the Palestinian Authority, the IDF does occupy Palestine in the name of the Israeli state, thus so long as this disproportion exists between the two sides, you will have a war of redress in perpetuity.

As I have said the only amicable resolution to this terrible war between the two peoples in question is in fact an internationally mediated agreement.

Contrary to popular belief, the entire world is not in fact a seething mass of anti-semitism and the entire world does not want to see the "destruction" of Israel.

What I want to see is an end to the occupation, unconditionally.
An end to Israeli settlements unconditionally.
A Palestinian state.
An Israeli state where people do not have to fear for their lives, unconditionally.

Once you start equating the four listed points with each other, you place pre-conditions that obscure the real goal, which has to be peace, not some grandeous mantra about the virtues of war.

You cannot enact some grand troop movement and destroy terrorism, how can you? There is no official line, when some random person can just decide to attack civilians, troops cannot stop that only resolving the grievances that bring about the conflict to begin with can.

Arguably the United States support of Israel was a contributary factor to the bombings on Sepetmber 11th 2001.
Thus for the sake of Israeli security, Palestinian human rights and the American's (Israeli's ally) right to live in peace the occupation and annexation of Palestinian terrorities must stop now and a UN mediated agreement must be implemented.

Regards.
Bryan.

[Disraeli]

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Part of the Big Lie is that fighting terrorism only creates more terrorists.

What breeds terrorists? When a group sees that terrorist attacks are successful and that the perpetrators get away with those acts.


Or perhaps there is an actual grievance?

How is it a big lie that fighting "terrorism" breeds more terrorism? Do you have any proof of that or is it just propaganda?

Answer me one simple question.

Do you believe Israel is justified in making settlements on Palestinian terroritory and citing resistance to occupation and annexation of said terrority as terrorism?

Do you honestly believe that god wants Israel to have that land? Or is there some other way you rationalise the brutal occupation and annexation of Palestine? Don't you care that the more you occupy, settle, asassinate 'terrorists' and utterly ignore the UN that you will breed ever more terrorists?

A man walking down the road to buy milk doesn't just up and decided to blow himself and some people on a bus to bits, he has to have a reason, and working on the premis that the occupation is essentially unjust I propose that the occupation is in fact the root cause of terrorism?

So what you are saying that somehow that proposition is a big lie?
I think not.

[searrard]

First of all I am new to these boards, my intrest in current affairs and world history got me here...and this caught my eye

Originally posted by ibrodsky
Part of the Big Lie is that fighting terrorism only creates more terrorists.


Terrorism is as much a way of life as it is a belief/faith...where the origins of terrorism are in oppression/revenge...you have to accept that the PA has support, it has a large following of like-minded idividuals, even if they only believe in only one of thier goals its a supporter none-the-less...support leads to friends...but oppression or pressure or even death of one member of the PA can incite anger/fury....as much as the death of an Israeli victim...

Most Terrorist organisations fight the losing battle, and often fight it to the bitter end...and believe me Terrorist organisations are not easily "wiped out"

How long have you been fighting and nothing of it? Your correlation between Nazi Germany and the PA is in my honest opinion is grossly mistaken, where Nazi Germany themselves a hardworking people suppressed by the ideals of a singluar political movement, fought and died for a cause that they were told to carry...
Dont get me wrong I hate Nazism and all its forms

Unfortunatly Israel has the power to hold back, to make a grand gesture of peace and still keep the higher ground in terms of despositions and strategy...

Talk is cheap, but pressure and killing are not the answer, to defeat "terrorism of the PA" you must achieve the support of the Palestinian people before you pressure them all into becoming anti-semites

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by Disraeli


You are I fear sadly mistaken.
I come from Ireland and I can attest that compromise is the only way forward for peace.

No Bryan, I respectfully submit you are the one who is sadly mistaken.

Compromise only works when both sides are ready for it. Britain, France, and others tried to compromise with Hitler. They even went so far as to let him conquer Czechloslovakia--in the misguided belief that he perceived a just grievance and that by sacrificing the Czechs peace could be bought for the rest of Europe.

So long as the occupation continues Israel will always be subject to attacks, so long as Israeli settlement continues Israel will always live under threat.

Then please explain why Israel was subjected to constant attacks before Israel captured the WB and Gaza. And please explain why Arab states would not consider for one minute the concept of a negotiated settlement until Israel began building settlements.

This is fact and blindly burying your head in the sand and extolling some mantra about how "terrorism will be vanquished" with military force is counter productive.

Let's wait for you to answer my questions about why there was terrorism before Israel captured the WB and Gaza, and why Arab states only became receptive to negotiations after Israel began building settlements, before reaching any final conclusions about who is burying their head in the sand.

Terrorism has no capital you can invade, no leader to kill, because the more cities you invade and leaders you kill the more people you create who want to be "terrorists".

This defies common sense. What creates terrorists is seeing that terrorism works and that terrorist groups get away with it. According to your logic, the U.S. attack on Afghanistan created terrorists. In reality, it was the first WTC bombing, the embassy bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole bombing that spurred the growth of Al Qaeda.

And you are wrong that there are no terrorist capitals or terrorist leaders. Each of the major terrorist groups is well organized with a clear chain of command. You really need to lift your head up and look around more often.

The terrorist capitals are places like Baghdad, Damascus, Teheran, and Tripoli. These are places where terrorists are provided safe haven and support.


Thus military action is not in fact in the long term interests of an average Israeli, not to mention the millions of Palestinian people who have done "nothing" for the most part to deserve retribution for attacks perpetrated against Israel.

I am not saying that Israelis should want to remain at war forever. But the shortest path to peace has been proven over and over through history. One side has to thoroughly defeat the other. Have you studied history? To suggest that if the good guys just lay their arms down the bad guys will follow suit is at best extremely naive.

Hamas does not bomb Israel in the name of the Palestinian Authority, the IDF does occupy Palestine in the name of the Israeli state, thus so long as this disproportion exists between the two sides, you will have a war of redress in perpetuity.

Hamas and the PA have one major difference: the PA believes that Arabs can gain strategic advantages by creating a mini-state next to Israel (along with placing another million Arabs inside Israel) from which to launch the final assault. Hamas says that negotiating with the "Zionist entity" puts the destruction of Israel at risk.

Actually, the PA is a terrorist United Front.

As I have said the only amicable resolution to this terrible war between the two peoples in question is in fact an internationally mediated agreement.

And that is precisely what Neville Chamberlain said. Had the great democracies stopped Hitler early, tens of millions of lives could have been saved. People like you only learn when it's too late...

Contrary to popular belief, the entire world is not in fact a seething mass of anti-semitism and the entire world does not want to see the "destruction" of Israel.

And what, the exterminationn of half the world's Jews during WW II was just an illusion? No one says all of the world is anti-semitic and seeks the destruction of Israel. But we know who are friends and enemies are. Certainly most of the Arab and Islamic world seeks to destroy Israel. If you can't see that, check for sand in your eyes.

What I want to see is an end to the occupation, unconditionally.
An end to Israeli settlements unconditionally.
A Palestinian state.
An Israeli state where people do not have to fear for their lives, unconditionally.

Let's all just say "unconditionally" and it happens? Again, if you are intellectually honest you will look into the state of things prior to 1967. No occupation, no settlements, and not one Arab country willing to recognize Israel's right to exist. And five Arab countries openly trumpeting their plans to "drive the Jews into the sea."

You cannot enact some grand troop movement and destroy terrorism, how can you? There is no official line, when some random person can just decide to attack civilians, troops cannot stop that only resolving the grievances that bring about the conflict to begin with can.

Terrorists do not exist suspended in mid air. They need state support to build training camps and to organize. They certainly pose a new challenge compared to traditional warfare. But to say they cannot be fought is to surrender before the battle has begun.

Arguably the United States support of Israel was a contributary factor to the bombings on Sepetmber 11th 2001.
Thus for the sake of Israeli security, Palestinian human rights and the American's (Israeli's ally) right to live in peace the occupation and annexation of Palestinian terrorities must stop now and a UN mediated agreement must be implemented.

No, evil mass murderers were the cause. To suggest otherwise shows you are in need of rudimentary moral education. There is no excuse for mass murdering 3,000 people.

According to your twisted logic, had the great democracies simply adopted a more liberal attitude towards Germany and its grievances WW II could have been avoided.

It is foolish to insist that there are no evil people in this world, and that if you give an inch the people on the receiving end will reconsider any evil thoughts that might have entered their brains. In reality, there are people who see life as a struggle of will and arms. When they see their enemies giving an inch, they grab it, and use the new resources to move on to the next demand: a foot.

[Mediocrates]

Contrary to popular belief, the entire world is not in fact a seething mass of anti-semitism and the entire world does not want to see the "destruction" of Israel.

No just the 400 million Arabs they are surrounded by.

What I want to see is an end to the occupation, unconditionally.
An end to Israeli settlements unconditionally.
A Palestinian state.

Let me ask you if you think that unconditional peace in Northern Ireland could include unconditional removal of all Catholics (I’ll simplify the argument to make a point). What I hear over and over Jews Out Peace In I wonder if all the people who advocate this both understand and support the separatist racist aftereffects. Because certainly if a turbulent Palestine in the disputed territories cannot exist, cannot tolerate 9-10% of its population being Jewish there is nothing to suggest that Free Palestine would be anything other than a Jew Free Palestine. Which maybe people do support – but they should cop to it.

An Israeli state where people do not have to fear for their lives, unconditionally.

How does one do that? Since they are faced with a PA-Hamas-istan that has discovered you can use terrorism as a legitimate tool of foreign relations. What does one do with a terrorist state called the Independent Free Nation of Palestine?

Arguably the United States support of Israel was a contributory factor to the bombings on September 11th 2001.

Arguably those terrorists cynically stated that fact, after the fact. In fact, as a largely secular, westernized, college educated, television watching, cell phone owning, nike t-shirt wearing populace, Palestinians are of little interest to OBL. The wonderful thing about terrorism is that you can claim anything at all as a motivation. Even the FALN in Columbia talks about freedom. They understand that as a policy issue civil rights for drug lords doesn’t have any traction. Same too with all of the post hoc analysis of 911. It is about OBLs hatred of the west. Anything else is a peripheral issue and had never surfaced before 9-11.

[searrard]

Originally posted by ibrodsky

...According to your twisted logic, had the great democracies simply adopted a more liberal attitude towards Germany and its grievances WW II could have been avoided.


Did Versailles not sow the seeds for WW2?, if the big three had acknowledged that they were all to blame for WWI, and worked with germany for its disarmamnet and goals of rebuilding europe economically and not socaily (which was impossible)...
...Chamberlain was prepared to give Hitler breathing room while in turn he went about advancing Britains Army and forcing the B.E.F. to work hand in hand with France incase things went sour he was not the muppet that "peace in our time" quote that modern history remembers him for, he worked hard for peace but it was always Hitlers ambtions for war....
is this not so?


Originally posted by ibrodsky

Terrorists do not exist suspended in mid air. They need state support to build training camps and to organize. They certainly pose a new challenge compared to traditional warfare. But to say they cannot be fought is to surrender before the battle has begun.


this is not true, terrorism can happen behind closed doors, can operate by word of mouth alone.....

[Mediocrates]

Unfortunatly Israel has the power to hold back, to make a grand gesture of peace and still keep the higher ground in terms of despositions and strategy...

The ONLY advantage to taking the moral highground is you offer a better target to get shot at.

Talk is cheap, but pressure and killing are not the answer, to defeat "terrorism of the PA" you must achieve the support of the Palestinian people before you pressure them all into becoming anti-semites

There will never be support from the Palestinian people. The best we can hope for is they resist the PA from the inside, topple them and proceed with a negotiated settlement.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by searrard
this is not true, terrorism can happen behind closed doors, can operate by word of mouth alone.....

Terrorism is an organizational endevor like any other. It needs organization, people, materiel, money, logistics, plans, intelligence all of which for efficiency and security must be contained in the heads of important people who sit at the nexus of small cellular local networks linked together from the top down. Eliminate those top down and cross connections eg. people, and you reduce dramatically the ability of terrorists to carry out their operations.

[searrard]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Unfortunatly Israel has the power to hold back, to make a grand gesture of peace and still keep the higher ground in terms of despositions and strategy...

The ONLY advantage to taking the moral highground is you offer a better target to get shot at.


I never mentioned "moral highground" which is so far and removed from troop depositions...

Originally posted by Mediocrates

There will never be support from the Palestinian people

Then what do you have to offer Palestine? But segregation and opression, Enforcement and Racism.....you now offer them nothing but violence and bloodshed and you are surprised when they fight back?...do you truely believe that Israel has nothing to offer "400 million Arabs"...not even common economic goals, common goals on infrastructure...or will this region just be known for violence and War!

Terrorism is an organizational endevor like any other. It needs organization, people, materiel, money, logistics, plans, intelligence all of which for efficiency and security must be contained in the heads of important people who sit at the nexus of small cellular local networks linked together from the top down. Eliminate those top down and cross connections eg. people, and you reduce dramatically the ability of terrorists to carry out their operations.

Terrorism is an organisation, but so is a book club, basic explosives are easy to make, and by pooling a few Euros evry week, comodities are purchased, visit a local cell member and decide a target...In many countries around the world terrorism doesn't need a face, doesn't need a name, it just needs to show a reason

[Disraeli]

Compromise only works when both sides are ready for it. Britain, France, and others tried to compromise with Hitler. They even went so far as to let him conquer Czechloslovakia--in the misguided belief that he perceived a just grievance and that by sacrificing the Czechs peace could be bought for the rest of Europe.

Against the backdrop of the First World War and the Treaty of Versailles, which set the breeding grounds where a nut like Hitler could take control of a country that was for the most part just like most of it's European counterparts until it was defeated in the Great War.

This defeat became known as the stab in the back in Germany and Jews were blamed and scapegoated for that.

In reality though the Palestinian Authority is not akin to Germany. Germany was a huge industrial nation that had a histroy of militarism from the time of Prussia and the Autro-Hungarian Empire ie the 6 weeks war, Palestine is a state that has been occupied for roughly fourty years and is not a gigantic enconomic power. To contrast further there are roughly Eighty Five million Germans and perhaps Three million Palestinians, so I do not accept the anaology between Nazi Germany and the Palestinian Authority or Yassir Arafat and Adolf Hitler.

To say that compromise was the mistake of Britian and France is true, to say that compromise itself is a mistake is false.

If Britiain and Ireland had not compromised on Northern Ireland there would still be war between our two peoples. Fortunately the parties involved saw the futility of attempting to side line in perpetuity the wishes and desires of the other and a dispensation has been reached.

Was compromising a mistake made by Britain in the case of Northern Ireland?

Lest examine that proposition.
The people of Ireland no longer live in fear of Loyalist terrorism. The people of Northern Ireland have a society that is an order of magnitude more peaceful then it was twenty years ago.
The people of the rest of the UK do not live in fear of IRA attacks.

So in this instance and negotiated and compromised settlement was the right solution.

See compromise isn't really such a bad thing and compromise must always supercede war.


Then please explain why Israel was subjected to constant attacks before Israel captured the WB and Gaza.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Israel is still being attacked. Ok so it is being attacked less, but as soon as you withdraw the Palestinians are sure to retailate, thus occupation is counter productive as each incursion or witch hunt simply makes more resentment and more hatred of Israel and thus more attakcs.


And please explain why Arab states would not consider for one minute the concept of a negotiated settlement until Israel began building settlements.
I would assume relgious fundamentalism. Funnily enough it is religious fundamentalism that proports that Israel should be purged of one million Muslims in perpetuity because those people are of the wrong religion.

Didn't the dangers of such exclusion based on religion become so obvious from the autrocities the Nazis commited against your own people in the 1940s. Thus the Jewish more than anyone on earth should be perpaired to accept peoples of all relgions in the state of Israel.

I don't and won't accep that the one million Muslims expelled from Israel are agents of Hamas, that seems racist and I think on examination it would proove to be a fallacy.

What creates terrorists is seeing that terrorism works and that terrorist groups get away with it.

I would say that encourages people with a grievance to act. Without that grievance though there would be no reason for terrorist attack.

Your argument does not stand up to scrutiny. The root cause of Palestinian terrorism is not that Israel has presented a relaxed military posture and been seen to allow terrorism to flourish, but is the suppression of the people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. At this stage in the game Israel must stop arbitrarily vetting out what it regards as justice, I believe Israel must allow the internation community to mediate a settlement and place UN troops between the state of Israel and the Palestinians until such time as relations between the two can be normalised.

According to your logic, the U.S. attack on Afghanistan created terrorists. In reality, it was the first WTC bombing, the embassy bombings in Africa, and the USS Cole bombing that spurred the growth of Al Qaeda.

The dropping of Daisy cutters on villages in Afghanistan has no doubt spurred hatred against the US and thus hatred will I believe unfortunately spur more people to attack the US.


And you are wrong that there are no terrorist capitals or terrorist leaders. Each of the major terrorist groups is well organized with a clear chain of command. You really need to lift your head up and look around more often.
Yes there are terrorists in many of the named cities however if you send an army into that city the terrorist will flee, leaving only the most vulnerable to bear the brunt of military action, thus subjecting innocents to military violence and creating hatred and terrorism.


The terrorist capitals are places like Baghdad, Damascus, Teheran, and Tripoli. These are places where terrorists are provided safe haven and support.

It is the regieme not the country. Saddam Hussein is a distateful character, a despot, without doubt. He has used chemical weapons against the Kurds in Northern Iraq and should have been removed from power long ago. What is wrong is making the Iraqi civilian suffer because of Saddam Hussein, Iraq already suffers his dictatorship, it doesn't need war and sanctions added to that injustice. What is really hypocritical is that the West not just the US has supported Saddam Hussein militarily in the past only to turn on him when it found him not as useful.

I am not saying that Israelis should want to remain at war forever. But the shortest path to peace has been proven over and over through history.

So tell me you suggest military incursion until you emerge victorious? Does it not mean anything to you that the UN and most of the other nations on the planet do not in fact share this view of the Middle Eastern situation?

One side has to thoroughly defeat the other.
Not true in Northern Ireland there is a power sharing government, there has been no victor, but simply the people of these islands are tired of war, we want something better for ourselves and we have compromised with each other to bring that about.

Hamas and the PA have one major difference: the PA believes that Arabs can gain strategic advantages by creating a mini-state next to Israel (along with placing another million Arabs inside Israel) from which to launch the final assault. Hamas says that negotiating with the "Zionist entity" puts the destruction of Israel at risk.

The Palestinian authority is not answerable for the actions of Hamas, you may equate them till the cows come home, but Yassir Arafat has called again and again for an end to terrorist autrocities against Israel.

http://www.usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/peace/archives/2001/december/121701.html


The U.S. State Department said December 16 that Palestinian Authority
Chairman Yasser Arafat's call earlier the same day for an end to
terrorism was "constructive,



Actually, the PA is a terrorist United Front.
Nope, it's the only authority Israel can negotiate with and for peace you need to get that into your heads.

I'm not trying to start an argument, but it is impossible to achieve peace if you won't even recognise the validity of your counterparts in negotiation.

And what, the exterminationn of half the world's Jews during WW II was just an illusion?

That was not the fault of the Palestinians. Look my family fought in that war, it was a terrible autrocity perpitrated by the Nazis and for that reason I can't fathom why Israel can't recognise that it is mistreating the Palestinians when the Jewish people should be the very last people on earth to ever do anything like that. It makes no sense.

No one says all of the world is anti-semitic and seeks the destruction of Israel.
Good I want to see a peaceful world for all people and that includes Jews, Muslims and anyone else you care to mention.

Certainly most of the Arab and Islamic world seeks to destroy Israel.
Seeks? Perhaps so, however Israel can not be a law unto itself, it must operate within the UN not outside of it.


No occupation, no settlements, and not one Arab country willing to recognize Israel's right to exist. And five Arab countries openly trumpeting their plans to "drive the Jews into the sea."
Acting within the auspices of the UN will gaurantee Israels right to exist and a military defeat considering US support of Israel is nonesense, to the argument that a just settlement for the Palestinians implys Israel won't exist is fallacious in my opinion.

Terrorists do not exist suspended in mid air.
Exactly, remove their grievance (ie occupation and a lack of self determination via statehood) and the terrorism abates.

There is no excuse for mass murdering 3,000 people.
Similarly there is no excuse for asassinating people as Israel has done with suspected terrorists. Due process must be paramount.

[Disraeli]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
What I hear over and over Jews Out Peace In I wonder if all the people who advocate this both understand and support the separatist racist aftereffects.


Clearly the settlements must stop, they are wrong, one cannot simply occupy and annex displace and marginalise, these are modern times. So fine the settlements stay then the 'displaced' Muslims must be allowed the right to return to Israel don't you agree? If the Jewish settlers have the right to live unhindered in a Palestinian state (as they most right should) then similarly the Muslims expelled from Israel must be allowed to return.
Quid pro quo.


An Israeli state where people do not have to fear for their lives, unconditionally.

How does one do that? Since they are faced with a PA-Hamas-istan that has discovered you can use terrorism
The corollary of course is that Israel has discovered that it has, or rather has endowed itself with the right to dispense 'justice' via asassination and occupation so it is in my view not an entity that can shout "J'Accuse" in lieu of the fact it has sancioned the arbitrary asassination of people it deems to be terrorists. That is effectively murder and the reality that it is comitted by a state is in fact more repugnant, because whilst Hamas is not an offically mandated constituant part of the Palestinian Authority the Israeli Defence Force is a mandated part of the Israeli state and it has and is carrying out autrocities in the name of Israel.

The Nazi wrongdoing against the Jews in the 40s does not give Israel indemnification such that people should turn a blind eye to the injustice behind the actions of Israel as an entity an the policies it pursues vis-a-vis occupation,annexation and asassination.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by searrard
Did Versailles not sow the seeds for WW2?, if the big three had acknowledged that they were all to blame for WWI, and worked with germany for its disarmamnet and goals of rebuilding europe economically and not socaily (which was impossible)...
...Chamberlain was prepared to give Hitler breathing room while in turn he went about advancing Britains Army and forcing the B.E.F. to work hand in hand with France incase things went sour he was not the muppet that "peace in our time" quote that modern history remembers him for, he worked hard for peace but it was always Hitlers ambtions for war....
is this not so?

No, Versailles did not cause WW II, Hitler did. Hitler demanded "living room," not "breathing room." Hitler enunciated his racial ideology in Mein Kampf before he became Chancellor; people chose not to believe he meant what he said. Hitler violated every agreement that Germany had made before he took power, and violated most everything he agreed to himself.

There is actually a striking resemblance between Nazi Germany and the Arab world in this regard (putting aside for now the fact that Arab states such as Iraq were in open alliance with the Nazis). Both Hitler and a number of Arab leaders believed (and still believe) that paper treaties and signatures are a joke taken seriously only by the leaders of what they see as spineless democracies. Real men don't need to bow to the will of their people...

Just prior to launching the war, Hitler gave a series of speeches in which he insisted he sought peace. Actually, this was just propaganda: he knew that if he talked "peace" that it would bolster the position of pacifists in England, France, and the U.S. Of course, he blamed the war on his victims, even staging an "attack" by Poland against Germany.

this is not true, terrorism can happen behind closed doors, can operate by word of mouth alone.....

So why did Osama bin Laden have multiple training camps in Afghanistan. Why did the 9/11 hijackers enroll in flight school? Who paid for all of this? Do you imagine it was all planned the weekend before?

Sure, an individual with a gun can attack someone by himself. But the embassy bombings, the attack on the USS Cole, and the WTC/Pentagon attacks were well planned, financed, and organized--and had to be.

Big attacks require money, planning, and support. There's no getting around it.

[Mediocrates]

do you truely believe that Israel has nothing to offer "400 million Arabs"...not even common economic goals, common goals on infrastructure...or will this region just be known for violence and War!


Yes I believe that apart from unavoidable regional issues where they all sink or swim together like water there is nothing the Israelis and the Arabs have to offer one another. Israel has lived w/o their love and kindness and the Aab countries seem to make out just fine living in the Bronze Age and pumping oil. The PA, grounded as it is in a service orientation seems poised in a modern world to become a kind of service based economy anyway. There is no reason it can't ultimately become a kind of Abu Dhabi except more secular. And there is less than no reason to pretend that their economic salvation lies with cheap day labor. And even if it does there are plently of jobs elsewhere like the nearly 300,000 who were living in and then expelled from Kuwait in early 1991 after Iraq was defeated. Ask them if they need any help.


terrorism is an organisation, but so is a book club, basic explosives are easy to make, and by pooling a few Euros evry week, comodities are purchased, visit a local cell member and decide a target...In many countries around the world terrorism doesn't need a face, doesn't need a name, it just needs to show a reason

It doesn't even need a reason it just needs a BOOM. But it does require an infrastructure. Asymmetrical warfare still requires the tools of warfare. We're not talking about 2 bombs a month although that is the quaint heroic myth than murderers would have you believe. Wrap a scarf round your head and charge the checkpoints me laddies!

uh no. It takes organization to intercept an ambulance in use and fill it with guns and people to shoot them.

[drelan]

From what I hear on the news here Israel is pulling out more than weeds. Both sides claim that they're in an act of "pulling out weeds", but inflicting innocent civilians is not gardening. Keeping a nation in third-world poverty is not a peaceful act. Occupying a nation, setting a mass curfew, denying basic rights, punishing the relatives of an extremist. Excusing the murder of Palestinians who seemed like a threat is not justice. If it was only pulling weeds, I may sypathize with you, but I fear it is much more than simple gardening.

[Mediocrates]

And to the rest of you:

Their grievance can't be removed. It is the destruction of Israel. So there is no need to pretend they can be appeased, accomodated, bought off or seduced.

It matters nearly zero how the sun rising in the east or waving a flag or defending one's self is a provocation that will lead to more war. Doing nothing will lead to more war when their aim is afterall the destruction of Israel.

[searrard]

No, Versailles did not cause WW II, Hitler did. Hitler demanded "living room," not "breathing room." Hitler enunciated his racial ideology in Mein Kampf before he became Chancellor; people chose not to believe he meant what he said. Hitler violated every agreement that Germany had made before he took power, and violated most everything he agreed to himself.

I never stated that Versailles caused WW II, it was one of the biggest contributing factor, and a major selling point behind the ideals of the Nazi party, in which Hitler was instrumental....

[searrard]

So why did Osama bin Laden have multiple training camps in Afghanistan. Why did the 9/11 hijackers enroll in flight school? Who paid for all of this? Do you imagine it was all planned the weekend before?

Sure, an individual with a gun can attack someone by himself. But the embassy bombings, the attack on the USS Cole, and the WTC/Pentagon attacks were well planned, financed, and organized--and had to be.

Big attacks require money, planning, and support. There's no getting around it.

thats just one example, what about ETA, IRA, UVF...indoneisia
what about lybian terrorist cells

terrorism is not just 9/11 or PA

and from the looks of this site a lot of senior members have no qualms of destroying the Palestinian people in a effort to end terrorism and that has neverworked in any country faced with the same problem

[drelan]

Originally posted by searrard


thats just one example, what about ETA, IRA, UVF...indoneisia
what about lybian terrorist cells

terrorism is not just 9/11 or PA

and from the looks of this site a lot of senior members have no qualms of destroying the Palestinian people in a effort to end terrorism and that has neverworked in any country faced with the same problem

the senior members do seem bent on destroying the Palestinian state, and justify that it is becasue the Palestinians want to destroy them.
Such a mature viewpoint! I now understand why you must be 21 to to voice your opinion here.

The land belongs to both. The Palestinians cannot simply move over to another Arab country, we must also remember that they were evicted from many lands at the creation of Israel, am I not correct?

None of the states should be destroyed.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by drelan
Keeping a nation in third-world poverty is not a peaceful act.

This is an issue that you need to take up with the corrupt Palestinian leadership, which has pillaged and looted their own national funds, leaving the Palestinians to live in poverty. Add to that the Palestinian national choice to support terrorism rather than to support an economic infrastructure and the result is plain to see.

But it's not Israel's fault. These are issues that the Palestinians must solve for themselves through cultural and societal changes.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by drelan


the senior members do seem bent on destroying the Palestinian state, and justify that it is becasue the Palestinians want to destroy them.
Such a mature viewpoint! I now understand why you must be 21 to to voice your opinion here.

The land belongs to both. The Palestinians cannot simply move over to another Arab country, we must also remember that they were evicted from many lands at the creation of Israel, am I not correct?

None of the states should be destroyed.

What an incredible example of turnspeak. You accuse us of wanting to destroy the Palestinian people. Let's review the indisputable facts:

1. Numerous Palestinian groups, including Yasser Arafat's PLO, published charters that explicitly stated their goal is to replace Israel with an Islamic or Arab state.

2. Numerous Arab countries publicly stated that that their goal was to destroy Israel. Egypt's Nasser went further, saying he would "drive the Jews into the sea." Note that most Arab states still do not recognize Israel's right to exist.

3. Arab terrorists purposely kill Israeli civilians and, in doing so, enjoy broad support from neighboring countries--both the leaders and the "street." If their quarrel is really just with the Israeli government or "Zionist extremists" why do they target civilians? If anything, they seem to prefer to kill women, children, and elderly.

4. Israel offered the Palestinians a state. Israel gave the Sinai back to Egypt. What concessions have Israel's enemies made?

5. The PA responded to Israel's settlement offer not with a counter offer but with a war, breaking every agreement that had been made up until then.

6. What don't you understand about Arab maps that show "Palestine" encompassing the WB, Gaza, and Israel?

To claim that we are the ones who want to destroy the "Palestinians" (they even stole the name: Palestine was Rome's Jewish colony) when they have explicitly stated that their goal is to destroy us is the height of hypocrisy.

[pacifist]

I find it sad, even terrifying that the only person here making any reasonable points is drelan. Issues such as the Israeli conflict are NEVER black and white, and seeing them in such a way is highly infantile. There is no simple solution, there is no easy way to peace but war is most certainly not the way.

What we have in Israel is a historical grudge. What it's even based on is hard to decipher, but the beginning of the solution is the realization, by both sides, that they have done wrong. Life isn't about race and religion it's about human beings and embracing the beauty and vitality that may be found all around us.

Both sides fear the destruction of thier unique and valuable culture, and both simply want to live on land that their people have lived on for thousands of years.

They've been fighting for ages, and it appears fighting has gotten them no where. The only solution is compromise and the realization that BOTH sides are comprised of rational human beings with wives, children, emotions and passion who only want security, freedom of belief and expression.

Your demonization of the Palestinean people demonstrates infantile amounts of wisdom and great lack of foresight. War is never the way, violence never a complete solution. Gandhi did great things without even raising a hand.

[Simon]

"An eye for an eye will make the whole world go blind" -Mahatma Gandhi"

At the level of a philosophical discussion, I have a serious issue with the above saying.

If you dont retaliate against the attacker, the attacker will have both his eyes intact while you will be blind. Then he can slit your throat at leisure, r*** your wife, and cut the throats of your little ones. So the proper response upon losing an eye is to completely blind the attacker. Two eyes for one eye. That way, he is now blind while you still have one eye left. And your family is safe.


There is a simple reason why peace with the Palestinians and indeed muslims in general is never going to be achieved. The hatred sown in the muslim mind is too great. For generations now, they have been taught that the jew is dhimmi. That hatred is still taught in most, if not all muslim countries.

Here is why Arafat will never want peace. If there is peace, the palestinians will demand good governance, accoutability from Arafat. That he cannot deliver because he is incapable of providing good governance. He is good at killing and destroying, not creating.

The moment there is peace with the Jews, the palestinians would turn on Arafat in a heartbeat. He knows that. This analogy is also equally applicable to almost all islamic regimes/states. Until now hatred of the jew or the hindu has kept islamic frustrations directed at non-muslims. Take away the unifying factor of hatred for the jew (or the hindu) and their societies will implode from the millenia of accumulated hatred.

It is really disheartening, isnt it? To think that we will never be at peace and neither will our children and their children?

[pacifist]

On the other hand, if you dont retaliate against the attacker, the attacker will have both his eyes intact while you will be blind.

---It's a matter of stopping the cycle of revenge. This has been demonstrated in many conflicts throughout the world. I as a person refuse to let another hurt me but I also refuse to use the petty and useless method of violence. There are many solutions available, but these require new thinking, risk taking and more courage than it takes to kill.---

There is a simple reason why peace with the Palestinians and indeed muslims in general is never going to be achieved. The hatred sown in the muslim mind is too great. For generations now, they have been taught that the jew is dhimmi. That hatred is still taught in most, if not all muslim countries

---I will agree that the Palestineans contribute greatly to the problem of violence through thier hateful worldview and the conditioning of thier offspring to hate the Jews, yet is it not natural to have a poor view of the suppressor? The jews have the upper hand in this situation and the palestineans must feel like biting back is the only option. They have been backed into a corner. They have chosen the *wrong* method of expressing thier position but they've been stepped on for a very long time.---

Here is why Arafat will never want peace. If there is peace, the palestinians will demand good governance, accoutability from Arafat. That he cannot deliver because he is incapable of providing good governance. He is good at killing and destroying, not creating.

---This is quite an interesting point and one that I do find validity in. But again, you're scapegoating the whole situation and pointing the finger at one man and one race when the situation is the fault of everyone that could stand up for peace, muslim and jew alike.---

The moment there is peace with the Jews, the palestinians would turn on Arafat in a heartbeat. He knows that. This analogy is also equally applicable to almost all islamic regimes/states. Until now hatred of the jew or the hindu has kept islamic frustrations directed at non-muslims. Take away the unifying factor of hatred for the jew (or the hindu) and their societies will implode from the millenia of accumulated hatred

---Hatred coming from anywhere is never justified. It is the antithesis to achieving what you are after and will only serve to destroy. Again the point on Arafat is a valid one, yet does it validate escalated violence on the part of the jews? I don't think so. I believe that if the jews demonstrated a refusal to take part in this fighting a message would be sent.---

It is really disheartening, isnt it? To think that we will never be at peace and neither will our children and their children?

Its precisely this view that peace is impossible that exacerbates violence. We must all hold the view that peace is possible, even imminent for it to manifest itself through our actions.

[Mediocrates]

I'm with ya, what's the plan?

[pacifist]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
I'm with ya, what's the plan?

Good question. When people start realizing the validity behind my statements and recognize the flaws in thier thinking the next step is to get together, respecting the stance of everyone else in the room and share views, ideas, opinions- calmly and fairly.

Give me some time to collect my thoughts and perhaps I will be able to come up with a few more steps.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by pacifist
I find it sad, even terrifying that the only person here making any reasonable points is drelan. Issues such as the Israeli conflict are NEVER black and white, and seeing them in such a way is highly infantile. There is no simple solution, there is no easy way to peace but war is most certainly not the way.

You claim on one hand that the issues are not black and white and there is no clear cut solution, but on the other hand that only drelan makes any sense. Amazing how easily you dismiss every other view considering the issues are so murky.

What we have in Israel is a historical grudge. What it's even based on is hard to decipher, but the beginning of the solution is the realization, by both sides, that they have done wrong. Life isn't about race and religion it's about human beings and embracing the beauty and vitality that may be found all around us.

Thanks for the off-the-top-of-your-head history lesson.

Before going further with your sermon, ask yourself which society is for life and which society is for death. Ask yourself who, between the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs, teaches their children the "beauty and vitality that may be found all around us."

If you still don't get it, think about what Israel's main products are and what the PA's main products are.

Did you know that an organ (kidney, I think) from the Scottish lad who was killed in the most recent Palestinian terrorist attack was used to save the life of a Palestinian girl? While Palestinian Arabs dream up new and better ways to kill Jews for being Jews, Israelis save Palestinians' lives.

Both sides fear the destruction of thier unique and valuable culture, and both simply want to live on land that their people have lived on for thousands of years.

Check your history. Arabs have not lived there for thousands of years. They came from Arabia.

They've been fighting for ages, and it appears fighting has gotten them no where. The only solution is compromise and the realization that BOTH sides are comprised of rational human beings with wives, children, emotions and passion who only want security, freedom of belief and expression.

Now, this isn't even history--more like current events. Which side negotiated in good faith and presented a proposal that included a Palestinian state and the guarantee of Israel's security? Which side said "no," demanded something that could only be explained as designed to deny Israel security, and then broke their vow to not resort to violence?

If you are still confused, tell me exactly when the Palestinian side presented their proposed solution? Why was it 100% up to Israel to present the right list of concessions? Why were the Palestinians exempt from even bothering to present a counter-offer?

And given these facts, why do you blame both sides equally?

Your demonization of the Palestinean people demonstrates infantile amounts of wisdom and great lack of foresight. War is never the way, violence never a complete solution. Gandhi did great things without even raising a hand.

We forgot: "Islamic Jihad" is a debating society. Yasser Arafat is a kindly statesman. And homicide bombers are just "frustrated."

Actually, a better question is why do you whitewash terrorists and call us "infantile"?

And since you are against war, why do you overlook one little thorny detail: the Palestinians started this war and have tried for nearly two years to ignite a regional conflagration.

[Justicator]

The moment there is peace with the Jews, the palestinians would turn on Arafat in a heartbeat. He knows that. This analogy is also equally applicable to almost all islamic regimes/states. Until now hatred of the jew or the hindu has kept islamic frustrations directed at non-muslims. Take away the unifying factor of hatred for the jew (or the hindu) and their societies will implode from the millenia of accumulated hatred.

Simon my exact thoughts on the topic leaders like Arafat deserve a fate worse than mere death . :)

[zionist]

Originally posted by drelan
Comparing the PA to Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan seems like somewhat of a falicy to me. I beleive that it is paradoxical to say that war brings peace, and I do not agree that the actions of the Israeli military are now bringing peace to anyone, including Israel itself.

I realize that I may not see things from your perspective as I live abroad, but then perhaps you can explain to me how your actions are bringing peace to anyone. If I am correct, Jews were given a homeland partially in response to the halocaust in WWII. There was rampant anti-semitism prior to WWII, but now everyone agree's that the genocide preformed by Nazi Germany was horrific. Any type of hate in this measure is horrific, and subsequently, any type of hate that leads to the oppression and near anialation of a nation is horrific. I do not support palestinian suicide bombers, but neither do I support the military occupation and oppression of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

However, I feel that in this situation Israel (together with its ally, the United States of America) must take the first step to bring about a peace. And this is not through war. War is such a superficial, and temporary resolution to the promlems nations face today.

Please let me know how much you disagree with me.

Let me respond in this way. I don't think that Israel believes that war can achieve peace. To say that is ludicrous and I give the Israeli government more credit than that. Israel is fighting simply to stay alive. Do you understand that, Drelan? Simply to stay alive. What the hell is Israel supposed to do. We are not talking about a large country. We are speaking about a tiny piece of land. Israel did not OCCUPY (pardon the caps) the land in 1967 rather conquered it. If most nations of the world returned conquered/occupied land there would be no Britian, France or even a U.S. How dare the world demand that Israel return land it conquered in a war forced upon her in '67. I don't know what the solution is. How can Israel, in this situation even attempt to make peace when there is no peace partner? All I know is that Israel needs to protect herself because even though they have military might, one mistake and it's all over! I don't know if you are Jewish because then perhaps you would understand somewhat better.

[Disraeli]

Let me respond in this way. I don't think that Israel believes that war can achieve peace. To say that is ludicrous and I give the Israeli government more credit than that. Israel is fighting simply to stay alive.

What an utterly absurd thing to say. Israel has Nuclear Weapons, so the thought that aggressor (x) might try to militarily destroy Israel is not laughable, but stupid. Seriously there is no threat to Israel from invasion, because any potential adversary knows full well that Israel posesses Nuclear Weapons and is likely to use them to defend itself, thus Israel does not need to supress the Palestinians in order to survive. It is frequently extolled that Israel is frighting for survival, when in fact there is no question that Israel has the right to exist (not according to the UN anyway, nor most of the developed world), thus rather than simply trodding all over world opinion with the mantra "Israel must fight to survive", what the Israeli state should do is come into the fold from it's current isolation.

Benjamin Disraeli exponenciated a policy of "Splendid isolation" for the UK, yet still the UK was sucked into war in the Crimea, war in Europe and it was eventually the wars fought in Europe that Britian participated in that heralded the end of the Briitsh Empire.

Israel did not OCCUPY (pardon the caps) the land in 1967 rather conquered it.

Excuse me, do you think this is the dark ages? Conquored the land? I think the UN takes a rather different view of that. Conquored the land, how can an American (assuming that is what you are coming from New York) speak of 'conquering', when if you read the American constitution the first words are "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal", thus the concept of 'conquering' is a fallacy as it negates the equality of the conquored people.

How dare the world demand that Israel return land it conquered in a war forced upon her in '67.

Are you mad? How dare the Israeli government settle land that does not belong to it, how dare it occupy, annex and settle land contrary to edict from the UN. You obviously haven't read the American constitution, which is big on equality, if you had you would realise that subjetation of another people is in fact setting those people to a lesser standing and that is fundamentally contrary to any notions of democracy or equality contained in the constitution.

How can the Jews who were so hated, who had so many of their rights to equality and freedom to persue happiness even contemplate lessening the civil rights of the Palestinians by attempting to as you so aptly put it "conquor" the Palestinian terroritory? How dare Israel lecture the rest of the world on how it is a seething mass of quasi-nazi anti-semitism when it refuses to acknowledge the basic human rights of the Palestinian people.
Rights like the freedom to live without occupation, the freedom to elect representative government that can take actions to better the surrounding environment of the people who elect it. Occupation, annexation and settlement negates these rights fundamentally.

I just don't get it, how much propaganda makes it ok to 'conquor' and settle on someone else's home? How much hatred and loathing is required to rationalise such a thing? How many people does one have to accuse of being a Nazi before no one else's opinion bar the opinion that agrees with your own counts? I really just need to know that.

How can Israel, in this situation even attempt to make peace when there is no peace partner?
Of course there is a Peace Partner. The international community has and is offering inumerate times and in innumerate ways to intercede and bring about peace in the Middle East and contrary to popular belief the entire Palestinian nation is not in fact a three million strong Hamas reserve, it is in fact a people just like the people of Israel and it is a people who have been stepped on for a long, long time, but the Palestinian are still people and if you treat them with respect and understanding you will recieve the same in kind.


" I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? - fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you ***** us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?"

Now substitute the word Jew for Palestinian and ask yourselves, are the Palestinian people not people too and if you ***** them do they not bleed, if you tickle them do they not laugh and if you wrong them, shall the not revenge?
Quid pro quo.

All I know is that Israel needs to protect herself because even though they have military might, one mistake and it's all over!
Yeah that's true, imagine Israel actually used the Nuclear Weapons it posesses, that really would be one huge mistake!

I don't know if you are Jewish because then perhaps you would understand somewhat better.

Why because if you are Jewish you are perpaired to cast a blind eye to what Israel does, because when it comes to Israel it's Jews who come first? I'm quite shocked, again that a people who were discriminated against so much throughout the ages can be so racist, pig headed and intransigent as to suggest that one's religion should dicatate one's access to human rights, how utterly ironic.

[The Saint]

Israel did not OCCUPY (pardon the caps) the land in 1967 rather conquered it.

Germany didnt occupy Poland, Austria ect. in 1945 rather conquered it.

How dare the world demand that Israel return land it conquered in a war forced upon her in '67.

How dare the world demand Germany return land it conquered in 1945

See where I'm going with this?

I would also like to make a point about this site. Anyone who criticises Israels actions is automatically denounced as an anti-semite and insulted constantly. If someone makes a valid point about Israels disgraceful actions they do not get a serious answer but insults. This only proves that some people cannot defend the point so they turn to insults.

Also, looking at this site, if you changed the word arab, muslim, Palistinian ect with the word Jew it would be Nazism, yet you continue to racially assault these people on this site. If this were any other site in the world it would be banned for racist propoganda.

Just because everyone disagrees with Israels action does not mean the hate jews or want to see Israel destroyed.

[danholo]

Well, you also must know history.

If you look at the situations, Israel occupied the territories in self-defense. Nazi-Germany on the other hand didn't conquer anything in 1945.

[The Saint]

Is that the best response you can give?

[Mediocrates]

Just because everyone disagrees with Israels action does not mean the hate jews or want to see Israel destroyed.


Woops, a slip of the tongue I think!

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by The Saint
Is that the best response you can give?


To what?

[The Saint]

By everyone I meant most non-american and non-jewish people in this world.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by The Saint
By everyone I meant most non-american and non-jewish people in this world.


Most Laplanders feel as I do. But all those Easter Islanders are just a bunch of dogs. There are quite a few who probably live in Indonesia who may or may not feel as I do but I am positive that there are more than a few Koreans who agree.

[The Saint]

No, I mean, Europe, Asia, Australia, South America, Canada, a lot of people in the US are starting realise whats going on. (its about time) and even people in Israel are appauled.

[Mediocrates]

I understand what you mean I just don't agree. The percentage of people all over the world who actually care is quite small. The percentage of people who publically say random antisraeli nonsense is larger. The percentage of people who publically give real support to the Palestinians is very small. The number of people who give public support to Israel is very small.

The Arab 'street' were all supposed to tremble at has never met a Jew or an Israeli first hand and doesn't know anyone who has. Virtually all the press in the Arab world is controlled - it's not news at all really but simply propaganda. Internet penetration in the Arab world is near zero. So let's say that all this vitriolic hatred is focused on 400 million people who consider it their birthright to hate and kill all Jews everywhere.

In the West I would suspect what you're seeing is a public manifestation of what people have felt and talked about in their homes for generations. Why else do you think that no other group can be singled out publically and all the self appointed pundits can tell you they "just know the truth about those Jew/Jewish/Zionist/Israelis?" You couldn't do that with any other group, certainly not in America and get away with it. So add whatever arbitrary percentage of the western populace you want to that baseline 400 million.

[Miriam]

Originally posted by The Saint
By everyone I meant most non-american and non-jewish people in this world. What does your nick mean?

[ayesha]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Internet penetration in the Arab world is near zero.

Where did you get that from Mediocrates?

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by The Saint
Also, looking at this site, if you changed the word arab, muslim, Palistinian ect with the word Jew it would be Nazism, yet you continue to racially assault these people on this site. If this were any other site in the world it would be banned for racist propoganda.

That's nonsense.

And, quote frankly, if Jews would ever commit the atrocities which are committed by the Arabs and other Muslims daily, the world would not react with the same kind of patience and "understanding" that is being shown to the Arab mass-murderers.

But in your fantasy land, in which you apparently delude yourself into thinking that you're some kind of "Saint" because you justify massacres and terrorism against the Jewish people of Israel, things are predictably off kilter.

And on our part, it is not racist at all to point out the facts as they are reported in the media daily.

- It is not racist to criticize Arab and Islamic terrorism.

- It is not racist to oppose the brutal and corrupt regimes of the Arab states, and it is not racist at all

- It is not racist to support the right of the Jewish people to live in our historical homeland, as a free and independent people.

- It is not racist to take Europe to task for its historical -- and present -- record of overwhelming anti-Semitism.


Yes, "Saint", you have landed not on some al Qaeda or radical Marxist or neo-Nazi Euro-babble site, but instead you are here on the Israel Forum. It should come as no surprise to you that people oppose Palestinian terrorism here. And it should come as no surprise to you that many of us know full well that the Palestinian are nothing but squatters occupying parts of the Jewish homeland by force, while conducting a Jihad-genocide against the rest of the Jewish people of Israel.

Sure, you're entitled to have differing opinions and discuss them here. We welcome discussion and debate. But please leave your sanctimonious cheap shots at the forum elsewhere.

But if you can't handle legitimate criticism of Arab and Islamic terrorism, and of the hypocrisy and anti-Semitism that infects much of Europe, then there are plenty of European Islamic, radical Marxist and Neo-Nazi sites that may be a better match for you.

[zionist]

Originally posted by Disraeli


What an utterly absurd thing to say. Israel has Nuclear Weapons, so the thought that aggressor (x) might try to militarily destroy Israel is not laughable, but stupid. Seriously there is no threat to Israel from invasion, because any potential adversary knows full well that Israel posesses Nuclear Weapons and is likely to use them to defend itself, thus Israel does not need to supress the Palestinians in order to survive. It is frequently extolled that Israel is frighting for survival, when in fact there is no question that Israel has the right to exist (not according to the UN anyway, nor most of the developed world), thus rather than simply trodding all over world opinion with the mantra "Israel must fight to survive", what the Israeli state should do is come into the fold from it's current isolation.

Benjamin Disraeli exponenciated a policy of "Splendid isolation" for the UK, yet still the UK was sucked into war in the Crimea, war in Europe and it was eventually the wars fought in Europe that Britian participated in that heralded the end of the Briitsh Empire.



Excuse me, do you think this is the dark ages? Conquored the land? I think the UN takes a rather different view of that. Conquored the land, how can an American (assuming that is what you are coming from New York) speak of 'conquering', when if you read the American constitution the first words are "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal", thus the concept of 'conquering' is a fallacy as it negates the equality of the conquored people.



Are you mad? How dare the Israeli government settle land that does not belong to it, how dare it occupy, annex and settle land contrary to edict from the UN. You obviously haven't read the American constitution, which is big on equality, if you had you would realise that subjetation of another people is in fact setting those people to a lesser standing and that is fundamentally contrary to any notions of democracy or equality contained in the constitution.

How can the Jews who were so hated, who had so many of their rights to equality and freedom to persue happiness even contemplate lessening the civil rights of the Palestinians by attempting to as you so aptly put it "conquor" the Palestinian terroritory? How dare Israel lecture the rest of the world on how it is a seething mass of quasi-nazi anti-semitism when it refuses to acknowledge the basic human rights of the Palestinian people.
Rights like the freedom to live without occupation, the freedom to elect representative government that can take actions to better the surrounding environment of the people who elect it. Occupation, annexation and settlement negates these rights fundamentally.

I just don't get it, how much propaganda makes it ok to 'conquor' and settle on someone else's home? How much hatred and loathing is required to rationalise such a thing? How many people does one have to accuse of being a Nazi before no one else's opinion bar the opinion that agrees with your own counts? I really just need to know that.


Of course there is a Peace Partner. The international community has and is offering inumerate times and in innumerate ways to intercede and bring about peace in the Middle East and contrary to popular belief the entire Palestinian nation is not in fact a three million strong Hamas reserve, it is in fact a people just like the people of Israel and it is a people who have been stepped on for a long, long time, but the Palestinian are still people and if you treat them with respect and understanding you will recieve the same in kind.



Now substitute the word Jew for Palestinian and ask yourselves, are the Palestinian people not people too and if you ***** them do they not bleed, if you tickle them do they not laugh and if you wrong them, shall the not revenge?
Quid pro quo.


Yeah that's true, imagine Israel actually used the Nuclear Weapons it posesses, that really would be one huge mistake!



Why because if you are Jewish you are perpaired to cast a blind eye to what Israel does, because when it comes to Israel it's Jews who come first? I'm quite shocked, again that a people who were discriminated against so much throughout the ages can be so racist, pig headed and intransigent as to suggest that one's religion should dicatate one's access to human rights, how utterly ironic.

Slow down, boy! You know it's soooo easy for people so far away from the situation (in your case Ireland) to sit in their ivory towers and cast judgement. I happen to be an Israeli born female and served in the army. Do not preach to me/us about human rights! Jews are at the forefront of human rights. You also forget that we are not just talking about the Palestinians here. We are talking about the surrounding hostile nations Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Egypt (some peace), etc. Why dont they care enough about their own people in the territories to lay down their swords against Israel, forge a lasting peace and then Israel can confidently give up the land! Before that happens, do not ask Israel to commit national suicide. Remember, Disraeli. You cannot battle this one with me. I served in the army you so villify.

I am not saying that Israel aught not to be criticized. But who is doing the criticizing? Hmmm? You quote the "international community." Well, Israel aught not to give a $#@$% about the international community who condemns and casts blame on Israel (Jenin? Remember that debacle? CNN! Jenin Massacre!!! well, your UN finally came out with the report that indeed there was NO massacre, as Israel stipulated.)

You say Israel has nuclear weapons. Frankly I don't see her using them. After all, Disraeli. What would the "world" say?

I also oject to the notion that Jews, because we've been persecuted, aught to feel the pain of others. Well that's what we have liberal Jews for LOL.

You speak from a purely intellectual point of view, but you know what Disraeli? Sometimes there is no illectualizing. Somethimes things are the way they are. Israel has tried for 54 years to stop the carnage. THe Israeli people want peace. THey were willing to give up almost all of the land for peace. Arafat refused. He didn't accept 99%. He wanted 100%. So now what? I resent the fact that you make no mention of the Israeli's who are massacred on a weekly basis. And the carnage goes on. No solutions. Let me make a suggestion to you. Why don't the Arabs accept Israel, commit not to fight her just for the sake of the Palestinians then if Israel does not negotiate a peace settlement then the world can rightfully so condemn her. Hun? Sound like a plan?

[zionist]

Originally posted by NewsGuy


That's nonsense.

And, quote frankly, if Jews would ever commit the atrocities which are committed by the Arabs and other Muslims daily, the world would not react with the same kind of patience and "understanding" that is being shown to the Arab mass-murderers.

But in your fantasy land, in which you apparently delude yourself into thinking that you're some kind of "Saint" because you justify massacres and terrorism against the Jewish people of Israel, things are predictably off kilter.

And on our part, it is not racist at all to point out the facts as they are reported in the media daily.

- It is not racist to criticize Arab and Islamic terrorism.

- It is not racist to oppose the brutal and corrupt regimes of the Arab states, and it is not racist at all

- It is not racist to support the right of the Jewish people to live in our historical homeland, as a free and independent people.

- It is not racist to take Europe to task for its historical -- and present -- record of overwhelming anti-Semitism.


Yes, "Saint", you have landed not on some al Qaeda or radical Marxist or neo-Nazi Euro-babble site, but instead you are here on the Israel Forum. It should come as no surprise to you that people oppose Palestinian terrorism here. And it should come as no surprise to you that many of us know full well that the Palestinian are nothing but squatters occupying parts of the Jewish homeland by force, while conducting a Jihad-genocide against the rest of the Jewish people of Israel.

Sure, you're entitled to have differing opinions and discuss them here. We welcome discussion and debate. But please leave your sanctimonious cheap shots at the forum elsewhere.

But if you can't handle legitimate criticism of Arab and Islamic terrorism, and of the hypocrisy and anti-Semitism that infects much of Europe, then there are plenty of European Islamic, radical Marxist and Neo-Nazi sites that may be a better match for you.

You are my hero! Couldn't have said it any better myself!

[peacelover]

Originally posted by Disraeli


Why because if you are Jewish you are perpaired to cast a blind eye to what Israel does, because when it comes to Israel it's Jews who come first? I'm quite shocked, again that a people who were discriminated against so much throughout the ages can be so racist, pig headed and intransigent as to suggest that one's religion should dicatate one's access to human rights, how utterly ironic.

Very well said, but not all jews are like that - there are some 'self-haters' who disagree with Israeli policy, and there are those who genuinely believe that Israel has never done anything wrong.

By the way, why are you called Disraeli? He's my favourite British PM!

[pacifist]

*Applauds disraeli*

That was incredibly well articulated and full of truth and wisdom, I could never have said it better, or even that well.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by ayesha


Where did you get that from Mediocrates?


I'll dig it up ~saw it recently in a piece commenting on information development in the middle east. the focus item was that net access in much of the middle east is extremely limited. For example in all of SA, out of 22 million people perhaps 50,000 have net access which is like 0.23%

Here they are

http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/text/0923undp.htm

http://www.sdnp.undp.org/news/lstarch/msg00913.html

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/watch/Policywatch/policywatch2000/485.htm

I think the crucial point though is the power of grass roots and small social support and rights organization. All over Africa

http://www.aviva.org/africres.htm (this is one of hundreds of indexes like it)

As governments fall apart there is growth in these small networks designed for special purpose social functions, rights, infrastructure, public health and so on. They aren't wasting their time on propaganda and middle class consumer websites. I've been to ajeeb - and while it's nice they could probably be doing something more productive with their time money infrastructure and bandwidth.

[peacelover]

Originally posted by ibrodsky


1. Numerous Palestinian groups, including Yasser Arafat's PLO, published charters that explicitly stated their goal is to replace Israel with an Islamic or Arab state.

Arafat has publically said that his aims are for a two state solution, as shown by document A2 of the Oslo accords

4. Israel offered the Palestinians a state.

Please tell me you don't mean to laughable Camp David 'offer'?

What concessions have Israel's enemies made?

Well, at Oslo Arafat provisionally accepted only 22% of historic Palestine.

I think it is clear Israel doesn't want a 2 state solution any more than Arafat - hence why the settlements keep expanding.

[Mediocrates]

Why because if you are Jewish you are perpaired to cast a blind eye to what Israel does, because when it comes to Israel it's Jews who come first?


Asked and answered your honor, stop badgering the witness.

I'm quite shocked, again that a people who were discriminated against so much throughout the ages can be so racist, pig headed and intransigent as to suggest that one's religion should dicatate one's access to human rights, how utterly ironic.

What I am shocked at is that someone who bleeds human rights can be so picky and tunnel visioned about how they are applied. What is peace if not equitable? Or do we suppose like in a family of several children we ignore the one who can read above his grade level because "oh he'll be all right, just ignore him - all we care about is the basket case."

What you are doing is asking and answering your own questions so I'm not sure what the point of debating it is.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by peacelover
Well, at Oslo Arafat provisionally accepted only 22% of historic Palestine.


This is the new buzzword isn't it? first is was 'ethnic cleansing' and that didn't fly because it was too too over the top.

Then we got apartheid - and that ugh, doesn't fly because frankly most people don't really know WTF the word means.

We always have racist - because HEY ! you don't even need evidence to bring the mobs in.

So now we have 22%

But it's not is it? In fact that's a completely bogus thing. "Original" Palestine is now mostly Jordan. It was given to them, so talk to them about it. The Queen mother is American so I'm sure she'll understand what you're saying. Jordan is 78% of Palestine - the other 22% is Israel. So if you want that then you'll just have to get in your peaceful peacemobiles and kill every last Jew living there. I'm sorry, but that's what it will take.

[searrard]

Originally posted by zionist

Do not preach to me/us about human rights! Jews are at the forefront of human rights.

since when is war and occupation at the fore-front of human rights?

Originally posted by zionist

Why dont they care enough about their own people in the territories to lay down their swords against Israel, forge a lasting peace and then Israel can confidently give up the land! Before that happens, do not ask Israel to commit national suicide. Remember, Disraeli. You cannot battle this one with me. I served in the army you so villify.

Your troop depositions tell a different story, you are so far and ahead of your neighbours to the point that all thats left is terrorism- that last act of a desperate army! national suicide pfft...

Originally posted by zionist

Sometimes there is no illectualizing. Somethimes things are the way they are. Israel has tried for 54 years to stop the carnage. THe Israeli people want peace. THey were willing to give up almost all of the land for peace. Arafat refused. He didn't accept 99%. He wanted 100%. So now what?

You pushed the Palestinians to the breaking point, and then you wonder why students are becoming suicide bombers?

Originally posted by zionist

I resent the fact that you make no mention of the Israeli's who are massacred on a weekly basis. And the carnage goes on. No solutions. Let me make a suggestion to you. Why don't the Arabs accept Israel, commit not to fight her just for the sake of the Palestinians then if Israel does not negotiate a peace settlement then the world can rightfully so condemn her. Hun? Sound like a plan?

What comprimise have you tried?

[danholo]

since when is war and occupation at the fore-front of human rights?

I'm sorry to say, that Arabs started the war with Israel.

zionist probably means that Jews invented the whole notion and the fact is that its true.

[searrard]

I'm sorry to say, that Arabs started the war with Israel.

so that makes everything allright then

so its payback?

[drelan]

zionist probably means that Jews invented the whole notion and the fact is that its true. -- danholo

I'm sorry, but do you mean that Jews invented the whole idea of human rights??? If you actually do, I fear you'll have to back it up with some fact.
I look forward to hearing this.


Also, does it ever occur to anyone that there is Jewish opposition to Israel's treatment of Palestine? That Jews are not wholly unified in each and every opinion? Every jew does not even live is Israel (no!!! you don't say!!!) And the same goes for Palestinians, I am sure that there are many opposed to the sucide attacks.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by drelan



Also, does it ever occur to anyone that there is Jewish opposition to Israel's treatment of Palestine? That Jews are not wholly unified in each and every opinion? Every jew does not even live is Israel (no!!! you don't say!!!) And the same goes for Palestinians, I am sure that there are many opposed to the sucide attacks.


Even if 99.9% of the world was against suicide attacks they would still be a reality and some action would have to be taken against them.

[drelan]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM



Even if 99.9% of the world was against suicide attacks they would still be a reality and some action would have to be taken against them.


true, "some action" would have to be taken against them. But not against those who do not support it. What I am trying to say is that many, many, many times today the IDF seems to be inflicting mass casualties on the Palestinian civillian population "in search of terrorists". I don't doubt Israel's will to protect their own security and peoples, and the fear that they hold of the seemingly rapant banner of "anti-semitism", but I think their methods are counter productive.

Right now, the very existence of a Palestinian nation is so much more in threat than the existance of an Israeli one. I just simply wish that those in charge of (and in support of) Israel's current tactics would attatch some compassion to their fears, and see that others are suffering just as much, if not more right now.

Furthermore, I have to say that I think the possiblility of destroying the state of Israel right now is nearly impossible. Israel is backed by the US, and would most likely be backed also by the UN if they came under serious threat. I also question whether the dislike of Israel in the Arab world is a result purely of indoctrination, or one of "injustice". How many Arab and Palestinian peoples were evicted off their land at the creation of the Jewish state? Does anyone know? Could this be a possible reason for the early hostilities towards Israel?

Also, to those in the US on this thread who say to others that they don't realize certain things as they live abroad, is the same not true for you? Do you see the entire conflict living in a country where the administration seems poised to attack anything seriously affecting its interests? Is the media more objective down there (where much of the media is owned by corporations)? Than the CBC up here in Canada, for example?
This confuses me, how much of the support for Israel on this form is from the US, and the questions against it from the rest of the world.

But then again, much confuses me today.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by drelan

true, "some action" would have to be taken against them. But not against those who do not support it. What I am trying to say is that many, many, many times today the IDF seems to be inflicting mass casualties on the Palestinian civillian population "in search of terrorists". I don't doubt Israel's will to protect their own security and peoples, and the fear that they hold of the seemingly rapant banner of "anti-semitism", but I think their methods are counter productive.

You should try listening to yourself sometime. You see Israel inflicting "mass casualties" but not a word about Palestinians purposely inflicting mass casualties. You say "in search of terrorists" as if there is doubt about what... whether there really are Palestinian terrorists?

And after Palestinian groups with names like Hamas and Islamic Jihad blow up a busload of Jews you mock us for believing anti-semitism could have have anything to do with. Your final conclusion regarding a society that breeds homicide bombers and dances in the street when Jews are killed? Israel's actions are "counter-productive."

Right now, the very existence of a Palestinian nation is so much more in threat than the existance of an Israeli one. I just simply wish that those in charge of (and in support of) Israel's current tactics would attatch some compassion to their fears, and see that others are suffering just as much, if not more right now.

Yes, with five Jewish nations and 200 million Jews ganging up on a few million Palestinians who are just trying to live in peace, it really is unfair.

I'm still waiting for you or any Palestinian supporter to tell my why no one demanded a "Palestinian state" prior to 1967. Could it be that the Palestinians are really Jordanians and Egyptians? Could it be that Jordan is the Palestinian state? Do any of you even know that the bulk of Palestine is now Jordan?

Furthermore, I have to say that I think the possiblility of destroying the state of Israel right now is nearly impossible. Israel is backed by the US, and would most likely be backed also by the UN if they came under serious threat. I also question whether the dislike of Israel in the Arab world is a result purely of indoctrination, or one of "injustice". How many Arab and Palestinian peoples were evicted off their land at the creation of the Jewish state? Does anyone know? Could this be a possible reason for the early hostilities towards Israel?

Nonsense. Israel is a tiny country. 20% of her population is Arab. She is surrounded by extremely hostile and belligerent Arab states, all run by dictators. She is vastly outnumbered, vastly outgunned, and has been under attack constantly since her birth.

The Arab world is obsessed with destroying Israel. They are so obsessed that a good number of them are willing to blow themselves up to accomplish it.

Israel exists today because she has fought hard and courageously.

Also, to those in the US on this thread who say to others that they don't realize certain things as they live abroad, is the same not true for you? Do you see the entire conflict living in a country where the administration seems poised to attack anything seriously affecting its interests? Is the media more objective down there (where much of the media is owned by corporations)? Than the CBC up here in Canada, for example?
This confuses me, how much of the support for Israel on this form is from the US, and the questions against it from the rest of the world.

Do you imagine that what is right is determined by who thinks it and not the facts?

[Dan 5]

Im from Ireland also.

Disraeli is pretty insistent that talking is the only way to peace and "attest" to this, presumeably based on his Irishness- and thus apparently knowledge of the NI, a fine example of a negotiated settlement with international mediation thrown in.

Some points which mightnt be well known, Disraeli forgot to mention them.

-Whilst murders in Northern Ireland have gone down (good thing) the actual level of violence has increased, maimings, evictions/ethnic cleansing, intimidation are all up and tension between the two communities is still incredibly high in many areas ( especially working class areas which is where much of the terrorist groups operate from) .... To the point where 5 and 6 year old school girls required a ludicrous security prescence to get to their school ( it lay on the other side of the wrong sort of estate) every morning - to continue the point somebody decided theyd make a brave politcal point by chucking a home made "grenade" at them. The situation has since been "resolved" - but the mutual bitterness "hasnt gone away you know" to paraphrase a leader of a terrorist/political group regarding the prospects of infamous terrorist group in "peacetime".

-Terrorist groups still continue their activities ( In fact the police are so busy tracking them that they cant deal with ordinairy crime, they simply dont have the manpower), Loyalist groups are feuding amongst themselves over control of the drugs industry ( organised, heavily armed groups tend to find work somehow), The IRA seems to be exporting its bomb making expertise abroad - certain Colombian "revolutionaries" in particular. Oh, and the largest single atrocity, Omagh, where 28 people were murdered by a republican splinter group who refused to accept the deal, occured during the peace.

-And because of a combination of all of the above and the rise of hardliners capitalising on peoples wholly reasonable fears of the above the largest party of the pro british faction is going to collapse the assembly shortly by withdrawing unless the IRA deccommissons its weapons and disbands etc etc. Dont think that moderates will fill the vacumn created by their withdrawal- these guys *are* the moderates:(

Just an example of a negotiated settlement and the troubles associated with it. Theyre based on "forgetting" critical issues, sweeping them under the carpet. They come with a hell of a lot of problems, and terrorist groups seem to either ignore them- or continue to operate whilst branching out into other areas.

However it is better than before, less people are being killed. However if some palestinian terrorist splinter group was to take the "into the sea" line and continue their war ( likely, not likely? ) could the Israelis resist the urge to punish the guilty parties ( i.e. Jennins, Ramallahs, etc etc) especially if the Palestinians seemed slow or reluctant to do so ( As an example, in the case of Omagh the mainstream republicans who were on ceasefire refused to assist the investigation in any way whatsoever - despite the families of the dead begging their leadership to give them justice)?

That problem is avoided in NI cos its one state- if the British dont catch the Omagh terrorists they have only themselves to blame ( as it stand I think only one of the terrorists has been jailed, by Irish police - he was traced by his mobile if a i remember correctly). for Israel a politician can quite easily blame the Palestinians and start taking the line if you wont catch them, we will- and then the whole cycle begins again.

For the above reasons Im not very confident that a lasting peace settlement is possible. Best that can be hoped for imho is for a buffer zone to be created and breathing space allowed for.

Oh, and whilst I believe the Israelis are perfectly entitled to kill terrorists, many Europeans consider the IDF to be just as much terrorists because they level civillian housing and they seem to have absolutely no concern for the welfare of Palestinians in general. I cannot recall a single media piece which portrayed the IDF in a positive light, quite the opposite - maybe Israeli papers are full of "IDF soldier saves Palestinian toddler from burning building" stories but they dont seem to be printed here.

The Palestinians are winning the war for hearts and minds hands down right now - it seems very likely in that case that international mediation would tend to favour them. People see rock throwing kids versus tanks. They read about Palestinian families whove lost loved ones due to the IDF, but they dont read about Israeli families who lost loved ones to suicide bombers. The Israelis dont seem to help themselves that much by continuing to push ahead with settlement schemes. Incidents such as that Palestinian boy who was caught in crossfire with his father very early in the current violence are given massive publicity whilst the suicide bombing of a children birthday party in Israel is glossed over and quickly forgotten by the media.

That might explain the rather negative attitude some Europeans have regarding Israel.

[NewsGuy]

Very true and very insightful post.


Thank you, Dan, for bringing this perspective.

[drelan]

Originally posted by Dan 5
could the Israelis resist the urge to punish the guilty parties ( i.e. Jennins, Ramallahs, etc etc) especially if the Palestinians seemed slow or reluctant to do so

What of the Israeli extremists who are not punished by their government?


Also, The main thing I question is not Israel's right to self-defence, but the extent and methods in which they do so. The occupation of Palestinian territories, for example, has dramatically increased unemployment, poverty, and disease. Would this not provide a fodder for the anti-Israeli sentiment? Palestinian terror organizations have likely gained increased support since. Many Palestinians may be simply supporting them now, not for the anhilalation of Israel, but because they seem to be Palestine's only Defense Force (and also a counter-productive one).

For history, the land occupied now by Israel (all parts of Israel, the WB and GS) was promised to be both an independant Palestinian Nation, and a Jewish homeland. It was decided that the Jews should recieve it as a national homeland. However, it was promised to the Palestinians first.

Also, and ironically so, was it not the Jews who were some of the first to use modern-day terrorism for their own political aims? in order to establish a Jewish homeland? Didn't they pressure the British to do so?

If you could describe Israels actions today as self defence, than why can't you describe the Arab reaction to the creation of the Jesish state? couldn't it also be described as self-defense?

There are many questions, but few answers.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by drelan


What of the Israeli extremists who are not punished by their government?

Please tell us who you are talking about. Are you suggesting there are Israeli groups similar to Hamas?

Also, The main thing I question is not Israel's right to self-defence, but the extent and methods in which they do so. The occupation of Palestinian territories, for example, has dramatically increased unemployment, poverty, and disease. Would this not provide a fodder for the anti-Israeli sentiment? Palestinian terror organizations have likely gained increased support since. Many Palestinians may be simply supporting them now, not for the anhilalation of Israel, but because they seem to be Palestine's only Defense Force (and also a counter-productive one).

Israel never occupied "Palestinian territories." A group of Arab countries ganged up and vowed to destroy Israel. The 1967 war began when Egypt cut off Israel's shipping lanes. The land Israel captured was Egyptian, Jordanian, and Syrian.

Palestine was Rome's Jewish colony. There never was an independent Arab state called "Palestine." The original Palestinians were Jews.

Jordan and Egypt made peace with Israel but did not demand all of their land back. Both understood there was a price to be paid for attacking Israel.

Israel, at its discretion, has decided not to annex the entire West Bank and Gaza, instead holding these areas to provide defensible borders (e.g., the Jordan river) and as a bargaining chip if and when the Arab nations are truly ready for peace.

The idea that terrorists who mass murder teenage girls waiting to get into a disco in Tel Aviv constitute a "defense force" is preposterous. They are, in the words of General Zinni, simply engaged in the "most profound evil."

For history, the land occupied now by Israel (all parts of Israel, the WB and GS) was promised to be both an independant Palestinian Nation, and a Jewish homeland. It was decided that the Jews should recieve it as a national homeland. However, it was promised to the Palestinians first.

This is total nonsense. Please tell us: who promised all of Palestine to the Arabs?

The original Palestine was what are now Jordan, Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Look at a map. The majority of this land was given to the Arabs -- it's called Jordan. The problem is that the Arabs demand 100% of the land, denying roughly 40% of the population in the area the right to self-determination.

Also, and ironically so, was it not the Jews who were some of the first to use modern-day terrorism for their own political aims? in order to establish a Jewish homeland? Didn't they pressure the British to do so