Its Not Working

[MGB8]

No droberts, the world would still protect a terrorist Palestine, because of Arab oil.

And make no mistake, it is almost a certainty that a Palestinian state would be a terrorist state, or at minimum harbour terrorist groups.

For the same reasons that Arafat does not act against the groups now, so would any government not act against them then.

The problem is that these groups would be MUCH stronger because of uncontrolled borders and opportunity to get weapons of mass destruction.

Your "solution" is no solution at all, just an invitation to a much wider and more lethal conflict.

[peacelover]

I think there needs to be a Palestinian state, but that they will need help building their own economy, and developing medical provisions and education etc

There definitely needs to be some international involvement to supervise this:

a) Arafat (or whoever) spends his money on building a state, not buying weapons

b) The education system teaches peace with Israel, not hatred

c) But also to give advice, because the Palestinians haven't exactly made a great state so far

I realise they'll resent an international presence, but I really do think it's necessary, not only for peace, but for their own future state to be successful

elke:

The Zionist use of terrorism was nothing like the second world war.

They used the terrorism because they wanted their own state, not because anyone had attacked them, or because they had declared war on anybody.

Besides, terrorism is either wrong, or it's not.
To say there's no excuse for suicide bombers, but there is for Zionist groups such as Stern and Irgun is hypocritical.

"You were not fighting for your survival"

I don't understand your meaning, what do you mean by 'you'? Britain? And when weren't we fighting for survival?

If you could clarify that, I'll answer it.

Mediocrates:

It was not a loaded question, but if the suicide bombs stopped tomorrow, Palestinians would still be occupied, still have their human rights contravened by Israel (deny it if you want, but you're dismissing a hell of a lot of reports) and still not have their own state.

If the suicide bombs stopped tomorrow, Israelis would have the majority of what their demands would be from any negotiations: peace and security.

BUt do you think the first situation constitues peace for those who live like that?

basically, with an end to terrorism, the Israelis would be OK, Palestinians wouldn't. That's what I meant.

As to the rest of your post, of course I don't see a Palestine free of Jews as a recipe for peace, and i think the media grossly exaggerates Palestinian public opinion, and panders to this idea that Israelis all want peace, and palestinians all want to fight.

I disagree with this notion.

But MGB8

If you don't want a Palestinian state, what do you want?

A complete sacrifice of everything the palestinians want, and most people acknowledge they deserve, just for Israel's sake?

That's no kind of compromise.

You cannot oppress Palestinians entirely just because it's the only way israel will have peace - it's not fair on them.

Likewise, suicide bombs aren't fair on Israelis.

That's why we need compromise

[Mediocrates]

They used the terrorism because they wanted their own state, not because anyone had attacked them, or because they had declared war on anybody.

Against military officers of the UK and after the UK began backing out of prior agreements to create a Jewish state and after their maps suddenly took the land that was divided 50/50 and changed it to 25/75 in the Jordanians favor and after the UK declared that all Jewish immigration to Palistine was illegal and ships bringing Jews to Haifa could be borded even sunk with all aboard.

It's odd really the way the peace camp believe all force is abhorrent unless it's unleashed against Jews. Then it's Manifest Destiny.

[peacelover]

Actually mediocrates, I think force unleashed against Israelis is 'abhorrant' and I have said so.

Please read my posts before accusing me of having opinions which I do not have.

As for the British, well my grandfather was N irish, but worked over in Palestine for Britain. I don't think it was OK for Zionists to target him.

I assume you meant the Balfour declaration - what about the British promise to the palestinians of sovereignity if they supported the end of Turkish rule?

I don't see that they had any more right to break that agreement than they did the one to the Zionists.

[elke]

The Zionist use of terrorism was nothing like the second world war.

They used the terrorism because they wanted their own state, not because anyone had attacked them, or because they had declared war on anybody.

Besides, terrorism is either wrong, or it's not.
To say there's no excuse for suicide bombers, but there is for Zionist groups such as Stern and Irgun is hypocritical.

"You were not fighting for your survival"

I don't understand your meaning, what do you mean by 'you'? Britain? And when weren't we fighting for survival?

If you could clarify that, I'll answer it.

OK, here we go:

The Zionist use of terrorism, as I said before, did not express itself in blowing its members up in Trafalgar Square in London, taking innocent women and children with them. Have the Palestinians limited themselves to the IDF targets, preferably minus the people, it would be valid to compare them with Irgun and Stern Gang ideologically. As it is, it's a faulty comparison.

Moreover, unlike Arafat, Ben Gurion saw them as almost an enemy force. He actively refuted them, again and again. No leader can control 100% of its population 100% of the time, but rule of law is indispensable to a good leader. Ben Gurion was such a leader, whereas Arafat is not.

Let's also discuss how the British treated the members of these organizations, when caught. They were tortured and hung. So much for "clemency".

You really need to learn to read better. What I said was:
"When Hitler tried that tack - i.e. bombing London , you had no trouble whatsoever bombing him and his women and children - and YOU WERE RIGHT TO DO SO!" I never said anything about the Jews or the British declaring war against each other. I can't figure out where that came from.

The British fighting in the Middle East was not related to their survival. These battles never made it within a 1000 miles of London. Nobody, not the Arabs and certainly, not the Jews, ever dreamed of taking over London for their own. So, the British in the Middle East were fighting for their imperialistic aspirations, which have nothing to do with existential survival. Got that?

OK. Now, look at Israel. At best, the distance between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv is what? 12 miles? Something like that. Having a hostile enemy this close is bad enough, but having them capable of cutting you in half within 1/2 hour tank action would be pretty foolhardy to agree to. You also have to consider the other parties: There is Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, just right around "ring around a Rosie". There is Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lybia, Morocco, etc. etc. - all 100,000,000 of them, vs. 6,000,000 of Israelis, including the Arab Israelis.

Just a word of advice: before you type the answer, READ THE QUESTION.

[droberts1958]

This thread started with a vision of futility in the existing methods being used by the Israeli's in combatting suicide bombers.

It is nice to know that even if most did not agree with with my views that the present tactics are encouraging further suicide bombers, at least some one did.

" while the [Isralie Defence Force] is carrying out these necessary actions, the operations themselves ecome a hothouse that produced more and more suicide bombers" " The military actions kindle the frustration, hatred and despair and are a incubator for terror to come"

Does anyone know who the quote is from ?????

A clue. You will have a hard time calling him anti-semetic.

[Mediocrates]

The only way out is up the chimney.


Any idea who said that?

[elke]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
The only way out is up the chimney.


Any idea who said that?

I know! Santa Claus! (or Hanukkah Harry, if you prefer )

[Mediocrates]

Josef Mengele

[elke]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Josef Mengele

Like I said: Santa Claus!

[elke]

I agree with the building of a fence - this isn't really fair on the Palestinians en masse, but I'd ratehr they had this inconvenience as a temporary measure than that more schoolchildren were blown up. Also, unlike the military responses, I find it is a genuinely defensive measure, made to defend, and not to exact revenge.

But what I think is truly central to peace in the middle East, is for the Palestinians to start teaching peace and harmony with Israel to the children in schools. At the end of the day, I don't see how there can be peace unless people want it.

I just almost fell off my chair! As far as I can tell, this is the first - and only - reasonable thing I've seen you write!

Like I said in another thread, I find it extremely difficult to plow through your posts in one sitting.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by droberts1958
A clue. You will have a hard time calling him anti-semetic.

Right. But Fuad's lack of vision makes him a very questionable as a Defense Minister.

The watered-down military operations in which the IDF fights with one hand tied to its back are a problem and have historically caused problems to every nation engaged in these kinds of half-hearted military operations. The U.S. was defeated in Vietnam, the Russians were defeated in Afghanistan, and the list goes one. Israel needs to launch an all-out military strike on its Palestinian enemy to get real results.

As for Israel's self-defense creating more suicide bombers, that is a silly statement. By way of analogy, can we conclude that punishing murderers in our criminal system creates more of an urge to commit murder? Maybe. I really don't know, but I would not recommend stopping to punish murderers just because it may piss them off.

In the case of the Palestinians, at this point, I say who cares if Israel's self-defense creates more resentment.

50 years ago, Palestinian anger was blamed on the creation of the State of Israel. Then, it was blamed on a so-called "occupation." Then later it was blamed on poverty and hopelessness. Then it was blamed on incitement and Islamic religious duty to mass murder infidels. Then it was blamed on Israel's offer of 97% of the West bank as being insufficient. Then it was blamed on not granting the Palestinians a bizzare "Right of Return." Then it was blamed on Israeli self-defense against Palestinian suicide bombers. Then it was blamed on Israel assassinating the organizers of Hamas and Hizbullah. The list of excuses for the Palestinians to create more suicide bombers to massacre Israelis goes on and on. So I say, who cares what the excuse du jour is?

The fact is that the Palestinians launched an all-out war of terrorism with the goal of committing genocide against the Jewish people. They are already shooting missiles into Israeli suburbs daily. They are already sending suicide mass murderers apparently armed with chemical and biological agents into Israeli population centers. What else will the Palestinains do if they get REALLY pissed off at Israel's war against Palestinian terrorism? Nothing more is left at this point.

So, if the Palestinians are angry and more suicide bombers are "created," then so be it -- there will be more targets for the IDF to shoot on sight. The Palestinian goal of ethnically cleansing the Jews from the entire Mideast is about as bad as it gets and the number of suicide bombers will not change that. For example, all it takes is one Palestinian suicide bomber to detonate a dirty nuclear weapon in Tel Aviv. Fuad might not like to talk about this publicly, but he knows that it is not the sheer number of Palestinian mass murderers that is the real issue.

Israel should keep right on course, trying harsher and harsher methods of breaking the Palestinian threat. Sooner or later, it will work, although not as quickly as one would like. And, in any event, it would go a lot quicker without interference from Ben Eliezer and Peres.

[droberts1958]

Newsguy.

You call it Faud's lack of vision. Most would call it a sense of reality. True the Americans would have won Vietnam, Russia - Afganistan etc etc etc. All they would need to do is employ bigger and more weapons till all their opposition was dead. Then they sit back and say look in the end Justice prevailed. Dead wrong.

When you punish murderers do you take out their family home, neighbourhood and subject the total community to constant harrasement. Not where I come from.

"who cares if Israel's self-defense creates more resentment" I would say that the next Israeli family who loses a family member because some Palestinian became so enraged that they became a suicide bomber may care even if you don't. Maybe you cannot make them happy with you but you can work with them in such a way that in the short term they don't want to blow themselves up just to take a few of you along at the same time. This is the point. No one expects there simply to be a happy couple living side by side any time soon but surely if you can stop the desire to take your life along with their own this is a big step forward.

"Fuad might not like to talk about this publicly, but he knows that it is not the sheer number of Palestinian mass murderers that is the real issue" I don't agree. The repeated suicide bombers certainly appears to be the main issue for most Israelis.

"Sooner or later, it will work" Yes if you kill them all and all the Arabs in the neighbouring countries who will take up their task when you have killed all the Palestinians, you will be right. This will not happen because America will tell you to back off and will not be the blind supporter that Bush has so far proven to be. Equally Sharon was elected to secure peace and security. He will be thrown out just as quickly as Barak was when he has failed even more excessively.

The sooner Ben Eliezer and Peres and other moderates are back in power the sooner you will have lasting peace.

[alexbmn]

More Bs from the peace loving camp.To compare this conflict to either Vietnam or Afghanistan is ridiculous.Both of those countries contained tenths of millions of people,rough, rough terrain and were suported by rival super power. In this conflict Israel could wipe out the Pals in a day.Ben Eliezer's idea has an element of truth,yes half assed attempts at war ,both fail to pacify the enemy,and win his resentment and contempt.For the enemy to be discouraged from attacking he must be defeated utterly and completely.But untill recently Israel hasnt even attempted to do this and has been resorting to half assed measures mostly due to efforts from Fuad's Labor party.

[sharonbn]

Originally posted by droberts1958
The sooner Ben Eliezer and Peres and other moderates are back in power the sooner you will have lasting peace.

Amen. I even prefer Peres without Ben Eliezer (maybe with Beilin?)