Discussion on the Israeli/Palestinian situation... [Archive]

View Full Version : Discussion on the Israeli/Palestinian situation...

MrsSkywalker

29-Mar-2003, 14:23

epicstruggle

29-Mar-2003, 14:56

ill post later about my views on israel/palestine later. Just saw an interesting fact that I thought I would share. Prior to the 1940s about half of bhagdads population was jewish.

just thought i would throw that in the mix.

later,

nutball

29-Mar-2003, 15:30

Who do you feel has the land rights to Israel?

Regardless of any of the history, recent or biblical, I don't think trying to judge the strength of the claims to land rights will get the peace process anywhere. Each side will only look back as far in history as suits their claim. You're much better off just starting with a clean slate, saying "we start from here", and starting from here.

There's been a similar(-ish) dispute going on over here over Northern Ireland. The English (not the British mind, the English) are held to be an occupying power by one side (and it's supporters across the Atlantic). If you trace back the web of British history with a little more balance you find it's a whole lot more complex than that. It's not actually clear who is occupying whom. The solution there is to start afresh, accept that neither side is going to leave, and work to try to live together. It's been a stop-go process, but at least to first order they've stopped killing each other.

I think the same is true in Israel/Palestine. Neither people are going to leave, so they'd both just better face up to it and give over trying o kill each other.

That web page looks a bit one-sided by the way.

Sxotty

29-Mar-2003, 15:32

I agree with nutball, you have to start at the present in a place as fubared as there, and work to get something good accomplished

MrsSkywalker

29-Mar-2003, 18:41

You're much better off just starting with a clean slate, saying "we start from here", and starting from here.

I am not disagreeing with you, but it's easy for us to say that, thousands of miles away and in a completely different world. The issues of the past are extremely important, as neither side is ready to let it go. I think the solution lies somewhere in the middle. You can't ignore the past, but you can't get stuck in it. I think any past injustices have to be addressed before they will be ready to take a serious, less biased look at the future. Rivalries run deep in almost every society...humans have this annoying thing called "pride". When you have a large group of people whose pride has been injured, you have to find a way to soothe the collective wound before there can be any step forward.

Just telling Bob Amad, "Hey, don't sweat the past, let's move forward from here," won't work. Bob Amad remembers his nephew that was killed in a terrorist attack and something inside him cannot live with "don't sweat it". When you have an entire country of people who can't live with that simplistic solution, then you have the problem that region is facing now. Each side, each person on each side, fights for past injustices, past and present prejiduces, lost family members, fear of oppression, fear of persecution...fear that they will wake up one day and find that the other guy won. You can't ignore the past...that's the entire reason there is trouble now.

Sxotty

29-Mar-2003, 19:07

I agree and I understand that Mrs. Skywalker but since there is nothing to do about it, except pull a S. Africa truth commision it is still the only option to start from here.

kyleb

29-Mar-2003, 20:02

That web page looks a bit one-sided by the way.

i nominate that comment for understatment of the year. :lol:

but i agree with nutball and my basic solution is push Israel's boards back to the 1967 agreement and fill in the space with a demilitarized zone. you can't stop people from being angry but you can make it hard for them to fight; and without as much fighting it is less likely that young people will adopt the anger and eventually all the angry ones will grow old and die off anyway, at wich point the walls can come down.

DeanoC

29-Mar-2003, 20:49

I know that this is probably opening an enormous can of sour worms, but hey, it's boring without controversy :wink:

People keep talking about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in posts on this board, so i figured that I would start it's own thread. I feel that the minority of people in the US actually know the turbulent history of the area, and I'm not sure about the other folks around the world. Here is a good link to give a brief overview of the land disputes, the 6 Day War, and where things stand now, mostly from the land POV since that is what's "really" at issue.

http://masada2000.org/historical.html

So, my discussion topic is this. Where do you stand on the issue? Who do you feel has the land rights to Israel? And, are there any solutions to the situation that you can come up with? Oh, and any ranting about the UN causing the majority of this mess is fine, too :wink:

Well that article is a biased point of view. Its trys to validate Israel existance by claiming the Palestine claim is less valid. Thats missing the real point, the truth (however unpalatible to both sides) is that neither side has a very good claim. Its too mixed up for any side that use history as any form of justification.

The west (in particular the US) has set itself up as the next British/UN scapegoats in the region, from now on (regardless of actual pro/con of the Iraq war and other influence in the region) the west will get blamed. Of course thats not new, thousands of have died over the last few decades, the problem will only get worse the more 'force' that is exerted. With 300,000 troops and one sided aid packages (from the view of the Arabs) extremists will target the west even more.

First rule of terrorism is that you can't 'fight' it, a 'war' on terrorism is a horrible joke. Becuase every 'victory' gathers you 5 more terrorists and then the only military solution is to use awesome fire power to slaughter everybody in the region.

When the British was fighting the P.I.R.A. in the 1970's all it lead to was 1000's of innocents (on all sides) getting killed or maimed. Peace could only happen when the guns and bombs stop on all sides.

The truth is that there is no solution except for all sides to agree to peace. We now have peace through out the Ireland island and the British island, thanks to the fighters realising that death was getting nowhere.

I don't there is a solution until the majority of both sides agree on it. No UN or US mandated solution will stop the terrorist activity. Its worth remembering the 50 years ago the British were the guys in the middle with terrorists (Israel) bombing them, now the terrorists are Arabs but the bombing continues. The balence of power has shifted but whoever is in the middle get bombed.

pascal

29-Mar-2003, 21:11

I think this link is less biased and was written by jews :shock: http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

Tahir2

29-Mar-2003, 21:16

Why do the Arabs/Palestinians not jsut give up eventually as they always have faced supposedly insurmountable odds in recent times? I mean the attrition rate must be absolutely horrid but the Palestinians still cling on to the hope that one day they will be able to live in the disputed territory under their own rule or a less (mucho mucho less) hostile 3rd party rule.

IMHO the answer is: Jerusalem

MrsSkywalker

29-Mar-2003, 21:51

*LOL* The article was biased, I get it :)

I just chose it b/c it had some good maps of the region at different points in the conflict...you know, let us know what land is where and who started out in what part of the world.

MfA

30-Mar-2003, 00:47

Israel is never going to give the palestinians citizenship. Without giving them sovereignty that amounts to the occupied territories being one big prison, no people would accept this indefinately ... there can be some small hope that people could give up their claims to land based on prior posession by them or their forefathers, but the present situation is intolerable. They can beat them into submission for a short time but as long as this fundamental grievance exists the situation will inevitably escalate again. I dont think you can keep the escalation to a simple intifadah and some small scale terrorism now and then either.

Sooner or later something has got to give ... either the state gets established soon or something will spark another Israeli war in the region. That might still happen if the state does get established, but going from certainty to probability seems a good deal to me.

Nagorak

31-Mar-2003, 07:29

The problem with the Israeli/Palestinian situation is the United States is supporting the Israelis. Cut the lifeline and they'd come to a settlement soon enough.

The reason the U.S. is the scapegoat for the whole situation is because we're financing one of the sides. Frankly, Israel has done nothing but cause problems for us, so I'm at a loss for why we offer them aid? Many of the major difficulties the U.S. has in the mideast is thanks entirely to Israel.

Israel either needs to mature to the point where it can exist on its own, or it needs to go under. If they'd spent half the money they have on the military to improve the lives of Palestinians and just ceded them some more land, everything would be fine. Probably if Yitzhak Rabin hadn't been assassinated (by a crazed Israeli), then this whole thing would have been laid to rest a long time ago. Under Ariel Sharon, however, it never will be fixed.

It would also help if they didn't lash out at an entire population whenever a terrorist attacks. All it does is polarize the situation even more.

They can beat them into submission for a short time but as long as this fundamental grievance exists the situation will inevitably escalate again.

It doesn't seem to me, based on the recent history, that they can even beat them into submission for a short time. Honestly, in the long run Israel is screwed if they do not solve this problem. There will keep being Arab-Israeli wars and eventually Israel will lose and that will be that.

nutball

31-Mar-2003, 09:16

When the British was fighting the P.I.R.A. in the 1970's all it lead to was 1000's of innocents (on all sides) getting killed or maimed. Peace could only happen when the guns and bombs stop on all sides.

The truth is that there is no solution except for all sides to agree to peace. We now have peace through out the Ireland island and the British island, thanks to the fighters realising that death was getting nowhere.

The IRA came to the realisation that 30 years of bombing and shooting had got them almost nowehere, and the UK Government realised that they could never stamp out the IRA. So there's really only one solution. The people on both sides still hate each other, they still remember every victim, every last little slight against their side by the other. That will take many many generations to be forgotten. Nevertheless the peaceful way is the only way in the long-term.

Another point is that a significant player in the original ('92) peace process was the US. I think there has always been a large pro-Republican movement in parts of the US, so having the US and Irish Governments approach Sinn Feinn and say "enough, gotta get talking and work this out peacefully" I think was a major motivating factor.

Strikes me the US is in a similar position with Israel. The US is the key to unlocking the peace process. You just need to have the will to do it, and you need to buy GW some lessons in basic diplomacy. He thinks the French are abrasive, stubborn and arrogant? Wait 'til he talks to Ariel Sharon.

MrsSkywalker

31-Mar-2003, 18:00

Frankly, Israel has done nothing but cause problems for us, so I'm at a loss for why we offer them aid?

Oh, the Palestinians have been saints. :roll:

Remember the PLO? Remember Arafat ordering acts of terrorism left and right all around the world? Remember the attempted assasination on Sharon ordered by, then praised by, Arafat? As recently as 2001, Arafat was calling to the Palestinians to commit acts of martyrdom in the name of their cause. Yeah. Let's give THEM money, weapons, supplies. Good plan. Like it or not, the US giving supplies and weapons to Israel has kept the PLO in the middle East and away from us and most of our allies.

Israel has a feeling, and I think it's credible, that if they ceed the Gaza Strip and declare it an official Palestinian state, rather than the DMZ it supposedly is right now, then the Palestinians will advance even further, placing their citizens in harm's way. Ever hear the saying, "history repeats itself?" The past is the only thing they have to base their plans for the future on. Look at the history of Israel. It was created by the UN for the Jews after WWII. These are a people that were beat down by Hitler, only to be jumped on by all the surrounding Arab nations the day after Israel was officially declared a country. What, in their history, would make them think that ceeding any land would be a wise decision? They aren't trying to take over more land. They aren't invading anyone. They are trying to keep what they have, and keep it safe.

That said, I totally agree that innocents should not be the target of Israel's frustrations. Their current plan seems to be to just bowl over anyone and anything on the course to the bad apples. That can't be tolerated, no matter who is doing it. I am not condemning the Israelis for their reasons. I think they are sound and historically just. But the way they are going about things is not right. They should just be targeting the terrorist groups, and not the people who have no involvement.

There will keep being Arab-Israeli wars and eventually Israel will lose and that will be that.

I wouldn't quit your day job and become a prophet if I were you. :wink: Israel has nukes.

This issue is not going to be resolved by talk. Oh, sure. It'll all look good in the press, and be great PR for those chumps who actually think that the few words of an outsider will mean anything. But they won't.

I think the US, UK, and whoever else is man enough to do the dirty work has to set up there and FORCE peace. Tell the Israelis "You fire on them, we'll fire on you." Tell the Palestinians, "You fire on them, we'll fire on you." Think of how liberating it would be to be an Israeli or a Palestinian and not have to worry that the other guy was going to shoot you on the way to work...that your daughter can play outside with her friends without a grenade landing in the yard....that your elderly mother can go to pray without getting run over by a tank.

pascal

31-Mar-2003, 18:38

...They aren't trying to take over more land. They aren't invading anyone. They are trying to keep what they have, and keep it safe.What about the illegal sparselly distributed israelis settlements and roads?

Listen to this audio: http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1395000/audio/_1396773_israel_sharon.ramWATCH AND LISTEN
1983: Ariel Sharon -
The West Bank and Gaza "will not be, not now and not in the future, a Palestinian state"

MfA

31-Mar-2003, 18:54

The occupied territories are a DMZ? Funny, we see plenty of military there all the time ... it is a defacto prison.

MrsSkywalker

31-Mar-2003, 19:05

The occupied territories are a DMZ?

That's why I said "supposedly". The initial "creation" of the Gaza Strip was in fact supposed to be a DMZ, in an effort to create a buffer zone as protection for the Israeli citizens...remember, Israel is a pretty small place. My point was that we should make it (well, a small section of it anyway) a TRUE DMZ.

Sharkfood

31-Mar-2003, 19:23

The Palestinians are never going to achieve sovereignty until they put a government together that doesn't support and create terrorism. It's as simple as that.

I don't care how valid their cause is- to the Western mindset, "fighters" that intentionally target women and children to be killed will not gain public opinion or support. It's just too difficult to gain momentum in the public arena when the leaders and soldiers of one side happily states this fact and exercises it daily.

This isn't to say Israel hasn't killed harmless citizens. The difference is, Israel has always stated this is not their intention and that any loss of innocent life is the fault of the terrorists who use them as human shields or dig themselves deep in civilian populated areas from which to hide from counter aggression from terrorist plots. Israel has always made the public statement that they do NOT target innocent civilians, women, children, schools, malls or civilian structures while the Palestinians make the statement almost daily that these are their primary targets.. and that killing 12-year olds and their mothers is their top priority.

When you have two sides at war with each other, ANY Western alliance will never be with the self-proclaimed "baby killers".. no matter what the actual body counts are. The advertised ethic is what buys public opinion and therefore seals the standpoint of support. This is the way of politics.

What really needs to happen before peace can be achieved is for the Palestinians to elect a government in place that will talk the talk and walk the walk. A government that states to the world that they do not target women and children in their fight, and that terrorism and suicide bombing of civilians is not an acceptable means AND ENFORCE THIS WITH THEIR PEOPLE. Even if the proper military control over one's civilians is not present to enforce such standard, the immediate and voluntary condemnation (in both English and Arabic) for acts that lead to the deaths of innocents should begin at every occurance and this will help buy them clout on the global table.

Until this time, it's a moot point since Palestinians have a government in charge that is caught trying to arm suicide bombers with explosives and create bonus plans for families of suicide bombers based on how many Jewish women and children their loved ones are able to take out on their trip to martyrdom and to their great harem of 12 virgins in the sky.

Sxotty

31-Mar-2003, 21:23

horvendile

31-Mar-2003, 21:43

Oh, the Palestinians have been saints. :roll:

(...)

Yeah. Let's give THEM money, weapons, supplies. Good plan.

I can't help thinking that there should be a solution that does not involve giving anyone weapons.

Anyway, what I was going to say, and relating to other comments:
There are definitely no saints here. Israel was destroying Palestinian infrastructure and generally harassing long before the second intifada. We're basically talking apartheid. The Palestinians' suicide bombings on the other hand are not only disgusting, they are also incredibly stupid. If not for them, I'd wager they'd have a good bit more of world opinion on their side now, and they don't really achieve much. (Come to think of it, they do hurt Israel's economy badly, but that hasn't helped the Palestinians.)

The Palestine state, when it existed, was corrupt and... well, corrupt. Now, it barely exists, since Israel
a) physically cuts it to pieces with walls and settlements
b) "mentally" cuts it to pieces by systematically destroying its administrative functions. Over and over again, it has been shown that Israel sabotages institutions that, even stretching it, cannot be said to be "terrorist infrastructure".

These ramblings aside, for the practical matter at hand, I don't think discussions on who is the worst sinner are very interesting. Israel is where it is, and so are the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world. The Bible view on how it should be cannot be heeded. Obviously, the first step must be to stop aggressions, and it is only Israel that can do that.
Why do I think so?
Because
a) The Palestinian society/state is in such a bad shape that the leadership have little control over the suicide bombing groups
b) The bombings did stop. There was a suicide bombing a short while ago, but if my memory serves me right, before that there was a period of several months with no bombings at all. Yet, I understand that Israel did not slow its shredding of the Palestinian society one bit.

Like it or not, the US giving supplies and weapons to Israel has kept the PLO in the middle East and away from us and most of our allies.

Had the US not been giving weapons and in blanco-support to Israel, the PLO likely would have no problem with the USA.

That said, I'm quite tempted by the two-way "you fire on them, we'll fire on you" approach. It might just work! But given Israel's military resources, it presupposes them approving external military influence, and I just don't see that happen anytime soon.

Okay, one last rambling, then I'll go to bed:
What the Palestinians have not understood is that suicide bombings only make things worse.
What Israel has not understood is that you cannot continue to scream about the suffering of the Jewish people, antisemitism and the holocaust as soon as anyone dares criticize Israel, when you are in such a position of strength as Israel is. To put it harshly, you can be a victim or a superior power. Not both.

BTW, I have repeatedly heard that the news reporting on the conflict in US is very one-sided. I do not know if that's true, but I recommend the article Pascal linked to. I haven't read all of it, and I don't agree with every word, but I find it mainly good. One could argue that it's biased too, but it is written by Jews, and I'd say it gives a fair view of the situation. In any case, it's less slanted than the first article in this thread! :)

Sharkfood

31-Mar-2003, 22:49

b) The bombings did stop. There was a suicide bombing a short while ago, but if my memory serves me right, before that there was a period of several months with no bombings at all. Yet, I understand that Israel did not slow its shredding of the Palestinian society one bit.

Not according to the media reports here for the past 2 years.

There have been several attempts from Israel in the past two years where all troops and tanks have been pulled out of the West Bank/Gaza and the result was intensified suicide bombings in Israel. Sharon showed the world for the THIRD time with his withdrawal shortly after the Bush effort to dictate "pull all troops out of the West Bank" statement, at which point there were three extremely bloody suicide bombings on the Israeli people. It took three events before the troops were moved back in. Sharon also referenced two other such events that the world seems to have short memory of.

That is the valid standpoint of the Israeli standpoint- how can they be expected to constantly and continually take the "pull the troops out of the occupied lands" stance when they have shown.. and proven.. to the world on multiple occasions what the proven outcome is. Intensified murder of women and children in Israel. It doesnt seem to matter HOW many times Israeli lives are lost to illustrate this fact.. people just dont seem to want to absorb it.

And the bombings have never stopped in recent months, they just lost media attention due to current Iraq/US/France political drama. Palestinians have continued to target women/children in Israel every month for the past year with complete regularity. The only breaks in the violence can be measured in days/weeks, from which Israel has claimed (be it true or false) responsibility for by documenting which homes had been demolished and what terrorist planners had been captured or killed in days prior, as well as listing the events they were planning.

Humus

01-Apr-2003, 01:05

If everyone there is so great though, why can't the palestinians just live in isreal why do they need their own little state, it is a democracy let them live there and vote. What is so wrong with that.

Well said. To me the best solution would be that the palestines would be granted full Isreali citizenship and the right to vote. Getting there might not be quick an easy, but I don't see it as impossible to settle a plan over how to get there over a number of years.
Also, to solve the issue, we need to get Sharon and Arafat out of the picture. New leaders with a new way of thinking would be required.

Natoma

01-Apr-2003, 02:07

Sharkfood

01-Apr-2003, 03:00

horvendile

01-Apr-2003, 14:14

And the bombings have never stopped in recent months, they just lost media attention due to current Iraq/US/France political drama.

No. They did stop. It was not just me not paying attention.
Regardless whether they did stop or not, however, I recognize that Israel cannot be expected to pull all security measures, checkpoints and so forth (though I would appreciate if they got their soldiers to cut down on the arbitrary assaulting). What they could do is stop expanding the settlements. I should imagine that the continuing expansion of these is one of the most important explanations to the continuing violence.

As a bonus, stopping that expansion would save Israel a lot of money. It is incredibly expensive.

If everyone there is so great though, why can't the palestinians just live in isreal why do they need their own little state, it is a democracy let them live there and vote. What is so wrong with that.

Well said. To me the best solution would be that the palestines would be granted full Isreali citizenship and the right to vote.

This is one of the inherent problem with having an explicitly jewish state. Depending on how you count, there would be more Palestinians than, er, Israelis, in Israel. The jews might turn out a minority. I don't see them accepting that.

Natoma

01-Apr-2003, 15:14

Actually Sharkfood the bombing did stop from 1998 - 2000.

November 2, 2000 Jerusalem 2 Killed, 10 Wounded Islamic Jihad Car Bomb in outdoor Market
October 26, 2000 Gaza 1 Wounded Islamic Jihad Youth Suicide Bomber on Bike
November 7, 1999 Netanya 27 Wounded Hamas 3 Pipe Bombs
August 10, 1999 Nahshon Junction 6 Wounded Hamas Car Plows into Crowd (Twice)
November 6, 1998 Jerusalem 2 Killed, 20 Wounded Islamic Jihad 2 Suicide Bombers
October 29, 1998 Gush Katif 1 Killed, 8 Wounded Hamas Suicide Bomber Attacks School Bus
October 19, 1998 Be'er Sheva 59 Wounded Hamas Grenades Thrown at Central Bus Station

Do a google search on just about anything and these are well documented.

That's very odd. I remember reading news articles a few years ago regarding the cease fire between the palestinians and the israelis. Basically the Intifadeh was no more during 1998-2000. I guess there were still suicide bombings, however, the official sanctioning from the Palestinian 'government' was one of a cease fire. Arafat (well, if you trust him that is) also condemned the suicide bombings during that time of cease fire.

Arafat officially called for the intifadeh to begin again after Sharon's visit to the muslim sanctuary in Jerusalem.

Sharkfood

02-Apr-2003, 20:05

horvendile-
No. They did stop.

So I guess Israeli bodies they are putting in the ground are just some elaborate government hoax orchestrated by Sharon. *sigh*

Natoma-
I guess there were still suicide bombings, however, the official sanctioning from the Palestinian 'government' was one of a cease fire. Arafat (well, if you trust him that is) also condemned the suicide bombings during that time of cease fire.

There has never been a time in recent history that Arafat hasn't condemned the deaths of women and children in English. There have just been several occasions where he has been found stating the opposite in Arabic directed at his own people which people have tried to put date ranges around.

Whether or not you "trust" Arafat or not isn't the issue. The real issue is- how do you put a leash on Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Sharon believes the only way is through Israeli occupation and reductions in future killings of women and children can only be orchestrated by their occupation and intelligence operations. Arafat's (and the standing government) have only proven that they are either: a) In support of their actions or b) impotent at controlling these factions. There is no c) or d) in this situation- it only falls into one of those categories when you look at the history of the region.

The victims are the people that live in this region. Be they Hamas/Islamic Jihad followers, or just innocent civilians that have been displaced in this area. They are caught up in this war and victimized almost daily by the pending war between the two sides.

Nagorak

02-Apr-2003, 23:52

Oh, the Palestinians have been saints. :roll:

Do we support the Palestinians militarily? Please go back and read my post.

Remember the PLO? Remember Arafat ordering acts of terrorism left and right all around the world? Remember the attempted assasination on Sharon ordered by, then praised by, Arafat? As recently as 2001, Arafat was calling to the Palestinians to commit acts of martyrdom in the name of their cause. Yeah. Let's give THEM money, weapons, supplies. Good plan. Like it or not, the US giving supplies and weapons to Israel has kept the PLO in the middle East and away from us and most of our allies.

Israel has a feeling, and I think it's credible, that if they ceed the Gaza Strip and declare it an official Palestinian state, rather than the DMZ it supposedly is right now, then the Palestinians will advance even further, placing their citizens in harm's way. Ever hear the saying, "history repeats itself?" The past is the only thing they have to base their plans for the future on. Look at the history of Israel. It was created by the UN for the Jews after WWII. These are a people that were beat down by Hitler, only to be jumped on by all the surrounding Arab nations the day after Israel was officially declared a country. What, in their history, would make them think that ceeding any land would be a wise decision? They aren't trying to take over more land. They aren't invading anyone. They are trying to keep what they have, and keep it safe.

Both Israel and Palestine were founded on terrorism, and they both continue to follow that model today. They both fought against the British and each other, until the British left.

You need to go back and read up on history: originally Israel was divided evenly between Israel and Palestine and that still is how things are supposed to be today according to the UN. Israel took over most of the country, yes they do need to cede some of the land back. Instead they are continuing to build illegal settlements in Palestinian territory.

That said, I totally agree that innocents should not be the target of Israel's frustrations. Their current plan seems to be to just bowl over anyone and anything on the course to the bad apples. That can't be tolerated, no matter who is doing it. I am not condemning the Israelis for their reasons. I think they are sound and historically just. But the way they are going about things is not right. They should just be targeting the terrorist groups, and not the people who have no involvement.

Yeah, but they're not doing that. The bottomline is they see it that all Palestinians are involved. Just like Hamas and Islamic Jihad see all Israelies as the enemy.

Both sides are instigators of terrorism, it's just Israel uses Tanks and Jets, while the Palestinians use suicide bombers. Neither side is actually very different at all. Neither side is the good guy. You're the one trying to paint one as being superior, not me.

I wouldn't quit your day job and become a prophet if I were you. :wink: Israel has nukes.

Do you know anything about nuclear weapons at all? If Israel used it on any country in the region, they'd irradiate themselves. A nuclear war in the mideast would end up destroying Israel as well. Furthermore, any use of nuclear weapons and the rest of the world would go in and throw them out, including the US. You are badly understimating how devastating and unacceptable the use of nuclear weapons is.

By the way, eventually all the arab countries will have nukes and what then? Eventually Israel will lose. It's not prophetic, it's common sense. There's one country amidst 20!

This issue is not going to be resolved by talk. Oh, sure. It'll all look good in the press, and be great PR for those chumps who actually think that the few words of an outsider will mean anything. But they won't.

I think the US, UK, and whoever else is man enough to do the dirty work has to set up there and FORCE peace. Tell the Israelis "You fire on them, we'll fire on you." Tell the Palestinians, "You fire on them, we'll fire on you." Think of how liberating it would be to be an Israeli or a Palestinian and not have to worry that the other guy was going to shoot you on the way to work...that your daughter can play outside with her friends without a grenade landing in the yard....that your elderly mother can go to pray without getting run over by a tank.

This statement to me shows how little you understand the situation. Talk is eventually the only way to come to peace. Both Israel and Palestine will just keep fighting indefinitely, if both cannot accept they have to give something up at the table. Unless, of course, Israel decides to resort to genocide (which would be ironic in a twisted way, considering their history), but I'm not sure that would tolerated any more than the use of nuclear weapons.

Both sides are responsible for the problem. Both sides have to make concessions. But right now neither one thinks they have to. That's fine, let them fight it out. But stop giving one side money, it just draws the US into the cross fire.

If everyone there is so great though, why can't the palestinians just live in isreal why do they need their own little state, it is a democracy let them live there and vote. What is so wrong with that.

Because the Israelis want a theocracy. They can't let any non-jews in, or they lose their majority. If things were that simple, the world would be a wonderful place.

MrsSkywalker

03-Apr-2003, 04:33

Nagorak, I am sitting here shaking my head in dismay of YOUR lack of understanding of the situation.

First off, Israel was not founded on terrorism. In that you are completely wrong. Neither was Palestine. The terrorism came after both sides felt grave injustices were committed against them by the other team.

Do you know anything about nuclear weapons at all? If Israel used it on any country in the region, they'd irradiate themselves.

You are the one here that has no grasp of a nuclear weapon. Dropping one nuke would not irradiate them. You know, I watched a movie called "Nuclear Winter" when I was in high school. It was written by people like you. According to "The Effects of Nuclear War" (Washington: Office of Technology Assessment, Congress of the United States, 1979), the lethal fallout zone around a nuke is between 1-160 miles, depending on wind and rain factors. Granted, a lot of people would die...but most of Israel would be perfectly fine. If they dropped one on, say, Jordan, then ALL of Israel would most likely be unaffected b/c of the wind patterns in the area.

You are badly understimating how devastating and unacceptable the use of nuclear weapons is.

I never, EVER said the use of nuclear weapons was an acceptable way to solve a problem. I was pointing out that if a country invaded Israel and Israel fired the nukes, they would win. Period.

By the way, eventually all the arab countries will have nukes and what then? Eventually Israel will lose. It's not prophetic, it's common sense. There's one country amidst 20!

Yes. Eventually every country will fall. Eventually we'll all die. Eventually the earth will cease to contain life. I was talking about the near future, not a few hundred years from now. Sorry I'm not as forward thinking as you...I was speaking about events that will happen in my lifetime. No one else in the area wants to get involved b/c of Israel's nukes. Notice how they are all staying out of it?? I think Israel's pretty safe as a nation in the forseeable future.

This statement to me shows how little you understand the situation. Talk is eventually the only way to come to peace. Both Israel and Palestine will just keep fighting indefinitely, if both cannot accept they have to give something up at the table.

This statement to me shows how little you understand reality. The reality of things is that neither side wants to give in AT ALL. Both sides feel that they have a legitimate claim to the land, both sides want revenge for past wrongs, both sides are unwilling to cooperate. It's not just the governments involved. Say they sign a treaty...like a for real deal treaty. Both governments agree to end the fighting. Great. What about the citizens who are bitter? Hurt? Feel incensed that their own government could side with "them"?? Are you going to call each individual person to the table to sign the agreement and mean it? They aren't just going to stop b/c some big-wig-thinks-he's-important-American-politician tells them to. You are dreaming if you think that will actually work.

Why don't you "pacifists" get it?

You know what? Go ahead and wave your banners and signs calling for peace. While you're out there talking about it, we're gonna go make it. They can't just "set aside their differences" because someone tells them to...sometimes you have to make them. It's ugly, it's childish, but it's the truth.

And I do support Israel's POV more than I support the Palestinians. I do not approve of the way Israel is going about things, and I agree they must be stopped, with force if necessary. If that makes me one sided, then slap my ass and call me Righty.

horvendile

03-Apr-2003, 09:31

The bombings did stop. There was a suicide bombing a short while ago, but if my memory serves me right, before that there was a period of several months with no bombings at all. Yet, I understand that Israel did not slow its shredding of the Palestinian society one bit.

It appears I'll have to revise that statement a bit.
It arose from me seemingly remembering an article in one of Sweden's most reliable newspapers stating that there had been a stop in suicide bombings. I haven't been able to find that very article, but I dug around a bit and found that:
There was a stop. But:
It was only six weeks, not "several months".
It was around September last year, not as short a while ago as I remembered.
So, I was a bit off.
Sorry about that.

That does not however change my main position, that regardless who is the worst sinner, Israel must stop expanding its settlements. If they don't, I don't see how the violence could ever stop.

(BTW, is there a good synonym to "however"? I use that way too much.)

Sharkfood

03-Apr-2003, 11:46

That does not however change my main position, that regardless who is the worst sinner, Israel must stop expanding its settlements. If they don't, I don't see how the violence could ever stop.

They must not only stop the expansion of new settlements, but also start an accelerated process to remove existing settlements.

As it stands right now, any form of peaceful negotiation of co-existence between the Israeli and Palestinian people would require YEARS of Jewish settlement displacement and removal of these settlements. The longer such a process takes, the more difficult maintaining peace in the interrim will be. By increasing the volume of settlements, the end result is increasing the complexity of any future peaceful agreement.

horvendile

03-Apr-2003, 15:19

Aye.

03-Apr-2003, 18:07

Just wanted to make a few comments, as the resident Israeli on this board. It's a response to several points made.

First, removing settlements can be done very quickly. I believe that was the case with the peace with Egypt. [That said, I'm fully for removing small settlements and not creating new ones -- there are quite a few illegal settlements with people that can be counted on one hand and are guarded by several times the number of soldiers. This is stupid. I just don't think it's creating a real long range problem.]

Secondly, the idea of granting the Palestinians full civil rights was raised by the Israeli left before the first Intifada, but was dropped after that. The problem is that it's not practical to give political power to an enemy that about equals you in number. We already have two groups that vote mostly as a group and not as individuals -- "Israeli Palestinians" and Ultra Orthodox Jews. We really don't need, IMO, another group that will help undermine the precarious democracy that we have here.

The temple mount, where Sharon visited to ignite the second Intifada, has been, before it was returned to the Palestinians, under Jordanian religious control, even when it was part of Israel. Israelis where always welcome there, including into the mosque. It has only become problematic after the peace with Jordan, when it was given to the Palestinians, and largely used for inciting riots (including throwing stones on Jews praying beneath). That Sharon's visit was to show off is obvious, but that it was just an excuse for violence for the Palestinians is also obvious. It was just after the talks with Prime Minister Barak, when he offered quite a lot, and Arafat refused.

Most political parties, including the Likud (from which Sharon comes) agree to the solution of a Palestinian state. The real question is how much it would encompass and on what terms. Thorny problems are Jerusalem, the "right of return", and what weapons the Palestinian state could have.

By the way, Europe gave and still gives quite a lot of money to the Palestinians. That support didn't help the Palestinians much because of the corruption of the Palestinian Authority. They are encouraged to keep the bombing on Israel because the most direct money they get is, for example, from Saddam, who pays money to families whos children have died as suicide bombers.

Frankly, I've been more left wing in the past, but I'm less now simply because I'm less hopeful. The support given the Palestinians, and all the peace talks, have usually resulted in more bombings. Fortunately, there are some voices amongst them that are starting to see that the violence gets them little. I hope this leads to discussion.

Nagorak

04-Apr-2003, 00:32

Nagorak, I am sitting here shaking my head in dismay of YOUR lack of understanding of the situation.

First off, Israel was not founded on terrorism. In that you are completely wrong. Neither was Palestine. The terrorism came after both sides felt grave injustices were committed against them by the other team.

They both engaged in terrorism against the British and against each other.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_terrorism

I think Israel's pretty safe as a nation in the forseeable future.

It doesn't seem like that to me. Outside of some African countries, their situation is probably one of the most precarious. Not to mention, there's a difference between existing, and existing in prosperity. If the people there all are in a living hell (Palestinian and Israeli alike) then what difference does it make if the states exist in name.

Why don't you "pacifists" get it?
You know what? Go ahead and wave your banners and signs calling for peace. While you're out there talking about it, we're gonna go make it. They can't just "set aside their differences" because someone tells them to...sometimes you have to make them. It's ugly, it's childish, but it's the truth.

Who is a pacifist? Let me quote myself:

Both sides are responsible for the problem. Both sides have to make concessions. But right now neither one thinks they have to. That's fine, let them fight it out.

And I do support Israel's POV more than I support the Palestinians. I do not approve of the way Israel is going about things, and I agree they must be stopped, with force if necessary. If that makes me one sided, then slap my ass and call me Righty.

Why don't you take a trip to the region and take a tour of the Palestinian territories. Or even just look at some photos online. Then maybe you'll understand why they're fighting, and you might have some more sympathy for their situation.

More Palestinians have been killed in this conflict than Israelis, so I guess the wanton use of military force is at least as effective as a suicide bomber here and there. Honestly, I don't understand why it's ok to blast people with tank rounds, but not to strap explosives to yourself. In the end, the result is the same.

Both sides are fighting, that is clear. There are extremists on both sides. So why do we play favorites by giving aid to Israel? Cut the life line and let them both fight it out.

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

The truth is the Israeli conflict is dangerous in that it could set off the whole region, and then it becomes a problem for everybody.

Nagorak

04-Apr-2003, 00:44

By the way, Europe gave and still gives quite a lot of money to the Palestinians. That support didn't help the Palestinians much because of the corruption of the Palestinian Authority. They are encouraged to keep the bombing on Israel because the most direct money they get is, for example, from Saddam, who pays money to families whos children have died as suicide bombers.

It's true that Saddam's money isn't helping the situation, but it looks like that won't be a problem much longer. I just think both Europe and especially the US needs to get more involved in the peace process, if they're going to keep giving money in aid. The Bush admininistration especially has been negligent in this area. Then again, considering Bush's idea of diplomacy, maybe it's just as well. :wink:

Frankly, I've been more left wing in the past, but I'm less now simply because I'm less hopeful. The support given the Palestinians, and all the peace talks, have usually resulted in more bombings. Fortunately, there are some voices amongst them that are starting to see that the violence gets them little. I hope this leads to discussion.

I think the problem is, there are extremists on both sides that find it very easy to hijack the peace process. Terrorists are quite effective, in that way, at least. It's really too bad an agreement couldn't be reached under Barak, since it seemed like it was just out of reach. It probably would help if the Palestinians had some better leadership too.

RussSchultz

04-Apr-2003, 00:47

Of course, the US government doesn't give money/arms to the Israelis to oppress the Palestinians. Its been co-opted to some degree, but the support of Israel is to keep it alive from the threats of its neighbors, all who refuse to accept Israel as a state and would like to "sweep it into the sea".

Nagorak

04-Apr-2003, 00:50

Jordan and Egypt have both signed formal peace agreements with Israel, so I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. Although, a peace agreement is just a piece of paper.