Can you name a tactic they could have employed that wouldn’t have had this result?
Full-on, organized warfare was out; they were generally outmanned and/or outgunned, depending on the specific situation.
Attempts to negotiate treaties led to temporary respite, followed by breach of promise, further encroachments and continued killings by Europeans.
I guess they could take the other option—accede to whatever the bully wants, and hope he’s benevolent enough to let you live as a subjugated people.
So, the Native Americans have plenty in common with the Jews? They were hated and feared by another group, “outmanned and outgunned” as you say, systematically eradicated by various means, with nowhere to run and no-one willing to help them, their culture nearly destroyed and their children kidnapped or murdered, forced to live confined to desolate land they couldn’t farm, and are still to this day viewed by many as second-class people?
Wow. I never thought of it like that, but yeah, I guess so.
When have I done so? You keep saying that I am saying things that I am not saying. Please quote where I said “all Palestinians are evil”
What are you talking about? Are you even reading the same thread? It’s this one. Mhendo’s first post in response to me was “Well, the rest of your post is reasonably unproblematic, but anyone who believes that the IDF always uses “utmost restraint” is genuinely or willfully ignorant on the matter.” To translate that for the reading impaired (leander), that means he agreed with me, except for one point about the IDF, a point which we have been debating. See how that works? The subject of a discussion is laid out, and both sides discuss it. Notice that neither Mhendo no myself is insulting the other, nor trying to invent arguments for the other side nor throw in extraneous points if it looks like we’re losing. That’s how a debate occurs, unfortunately for you it starts with one thing that you seem unable to do: The willingness to listen to what the other guy actually says and respond to that, not the determination to project what you believe onto him.
Can you honestly point to one place in this thread where I have said "All Palestinians advocate genocide and unrestricted attacks? Reread what I’ve written, I never have. I’ve talked about the actions of certain Palestinians and about “any Palestinian resistance group” and “Palestinian terrorists”(both direct quotes from my earlier posts) but never have I said anything about all Palestinians. You’re making shit up again. That being said, FinnAgain has presented you with an interesting cite on exactly what a majority of the Palestinians do support. Would you care to comment on it?
Yup. Both, actually. What does that have to do with anything?
I’ve made no blanket statements. You can’t show anywhere that I have.
I apologize then. I just thought someone who was so clearly unable to read anything that I actually said and instead kept putting an anti-Palestinian spin on my words was posting from a partisan position. My mistake.
Really? In my original post (#42), I stated that the IDF had caused “too many” Palestinian civilian deaths, and then in my next post, on the same subject, I said "and you can argue if they take enough (care to avoid civilian deaths) or not " in the context of recognizing that they were a bad thing. In my last post before this one I clearly stated “And I am not excusing anything done by either side”. Looks like the load of crap is your accusation.
Oh bullshit. Nobody else has responded to it that way. You’re reading from your bias again.
Yup. I’ve done it here for you. It would be refreshing to read something for you that actually addresses the points I’ve made instead of engaging in character assassination as a mode of debate.
That’s not what I’ve been doing at all. If you’d just open your eyes and read for comprehension, you’d realize that what I am criticizing is the actions Palestinian militants have consistently engaged in in their efforts to exterminate Israel are, in general, an order of magnitude worse than the actions Israel has taken to defend itself against these attacks. If you want to refute a point, that’s the one to refute. I don’t think you can do it, but give it your best shot.
Except that “The Palestinians are doing worse” is not offered as an excuse for Israel’s actions (remember? reading for comprehension? This is a good place to try it out) but as an analysis of the tactics being used by both sides which was my original point! By and large Israel responds to terrorist attacks or targets specific individuals terrorists, while having a stated willingness to allow an independent Palestinian state if one can be fairly negotiated. Palestinian militants (again, by and large)attack civilian targets, often using their children as suicide bombers while calling for the extermination of Israel and genocide against the Jews. If you see no difference between those two positions, than you are an a hopeless moron.
Yup. You outta work on that.
Well, I’ve made a couple here, why don’t you have a whack at them?
Go right ahead and titter. The above was only my opinion. However, answer me this: given the ongoing debate within Israeli society about how to handle the Palestinian problems, of which a significant minority is in the “cut 'em loose” camp, coupled with Israel’s recent willingness to make concessions to the Palestinians (which Arafat and crew rejected), can you give me any good reason why a non-violent Palestinian stance, one that included a majority of their population AND a willingness to concede that Israel has every right to exist, wouldn’t have produced the results they want? I can’t, but I’d love to hear what you think.
Well, considering they were jumped in '48 and have have held their own against all comers ever sense, I’d say the Israelis were more than prepared for the consequences, wouldn’t you?
I’m not quite sure whether you’re being sarcastic here or not, but either way, you completely miss the point i was trying to make.
I was not making the claim that the situations are identical, or that the problems faced by Native Americans and Jews are the result of the same types of prejudices or the same strategies or the same geopolitical goals. Actually, if there was any analogy being made, it was between the Palestinians and the Native Americans, but there also i make no claim for complete congruency.
The point i was trying to make was simply one about resistance to a superior armed force, and our expectations about what constitutes fair and reasonable force in response. As a general principle i believe in violence as an absolute last resort, whether by people or by nations, which is why i condemn the suicide bombers unequivocally. But i also have to suppress a chuckle at people who seem to believe that war should only be fought on the terms dictates by the superior force, and that civilian casualties are apparently OK if the army didn’t really mean to bomb the wrong house. I guess it’s something of a pacifist viewpoint, although i’ve never really used that term to define myself.
Firstly, i have—or, rather, had—no time for Arafat, in case anyone was wondering about that. I completely agree that he seemed, for the most part, much more concerned with protected and shoring up his own position of authority than he was with actually making progress towards peace. In many ways, i believe he sold out the people he was meant to be leading.
I’m not sure what you mean by “recent,” but some of the overtures rejected by the Palestinians over the past decade or so have been devil’s bargains that would have left them no better off than before. Others, of course, were better, and should have been accepted. I’m not really interested in getting into a blow-by-blow analysis right now of why some were OK and some were crappy, but that’s what i believe.
Also, some (not all, by any means) of the “cut 'em loose” camp that you’re talking about has reached that position because they feel that hanging on is not worth the violence being suffered by Israel. Again, i reiterate that i reject the Palestinians’ tactics, but the fact is those tactics have changed some Israeli minds. Of course, on the flip side, the violence has also hardened the attitude of many other Israelis so, even leaving aside the moral issue, the violence has probably not led to much, if any, strengthening of the Palestinian position.
Still on this issue, it’s also incorrect to imply that any Israeli who opposes Israel’s policies in the region is simply in the “cut 'em loose” camp. This implies a sort of “throw your hands in the air” resignation, but there are, in fact, many Israelis who have an active interest in ameliorating the current situation of the Paleesitinians, and who feel that Israel bears a burden of responsibility for the conditions they suffer.
Sure, but what i was trying to point out is that the position you are taking seems to be that there is literally no connection between IDF actions and the suicide bombings. In your formulation, the IDF does the best they can, and the Palestinians are wholly to blame for the situation. As i’ve said before, i don’t believe that the IDF actions excuse the terrorism, but they might help to explain at least some of it.
Look, this debate has been done to death on these boards, and i’ve rarely seen very much movement on either side. I didn’t want to turn this into a hijack of Zev’s thread, because i completely agree with his OP. And, in fact, i only wieghed in initally to respond to what i thought was leander’s oversimplification of a complex issue. But i can’t agree with anyone whose position seems to be that there is only one—Palestinian—cause for the troubles in Israel, Palestine, and the occupied territories.
Mhendo,
I can’t really disagree with anything you’ve said. Remember also that “Israel is always right” is not my my position, but rather leander’s simplistic characterization of my position. However one views the responses of the IDF to Palestinian terror, the refusal of the Palestinian leadership to negotiate honestly (rejecting proposals that should be rejected, absolutely, but accepting those that should be accepted) or to even recognize Israel’s right to exist while at the same time calling for an intifada and taking no meaningful steps to curtail terrorism or prosecute terrorists makes them more culpable for the continuing cycle of violence and hate than the Israelis. Both sides at fault for the situation in the first place? Absolutely. Both sides equally at fault? Ehh, not so much, I don’t think. If nothing else, Israel has a historical track record which includes the full participation of all of it’s citizens, Jewish, Muslem or whatever in a democratically elected government, and of protecting the rights of all those citizens. I’ll throw your question back at you in reverse, what should the response of a nation be in the face of repeated bloody, cowardly suicide attacks on their population, while the oposition refuses to negotiate honestly or to clamp down on those same terrorists? Hopefully the new Palestinian leadership can inject some positive change into this bloody, stinky quagmire.
Wow, you go away for twenty four hours (to celebrate shabbos and you miss a lot.
No, my OP was about a group of idiots acting in the manner you describe. It was most emphatically NOT about the Palestinian population at large (as my earlier thread was not about the Iranian people at large, but about the producers of the TV show that began this whole thing).
Are we reading the same thread?
My first post was the OP.
My second post confessed my ignorance of the term shahid and asked for an explaination.
My third post dealt with the fact that the laws involving kashrus are set aside in a life-saving situation.
My fourth post expressed my regret that some while some people will hate us for no reason (is this really in doubt?), it is truly regrettable that a centuries-old lie has to be repeated again.
This is my fifth post in this thread.
At what point (especially in my second post [?!] did I make any sort of statement where I projected this group of idiots onto the Palestinian people as a whole?
Zev Steinhardt
No it’s not propaganda at all.
If you see Israelis (and Jews worldwide) making claims that Palestians eat Jewish children for breakfast - go ahead and condemn them - I’ll be there right beside you. If you see Israelis (and Jews worldwide) claiming that Arabs steal Jewish children for slave labor - feel free to start a thread - I’ll be happy to add my voice to yours.
I’m not stating that there isn’t legitimate cause to criticize Israeli positions and policies. But you sure as hell don’t see Jews evoking images of a centuries-old blood libel to demonize Palestinans. You don’t see Jews worldwide telling needless, outright and blatant lies about Palestians.
Sure, we have our share of idiots and nutcases. I’m not going to state that no Jew anywhere has never taught a bad thing about Palestians. But it is far, far, more common on the other side.
Zev Steinhardt