No need. I think you’re observations are on cue. Israel treats its own Arab citizens like shit and actively meddles in the democratic process in neighboring Arab states. The Palestinians, for example, were punished for voting for the “wrong party”; Lebanon was invaded and replaced with a puppet government after its citizens elected the “wrong party”. These citizens have no impetus to vote in a free election, their democratic voice is seemingly drowned out by the din of Israel’s protest.
I am ashamed that my country gives Israel weapons and aid.
Now, the pro-Israel people will go on about how Israel’s behavior is justified because it must protect itself from the terrorists and the Islamic extremists. I personally think its all hyperbole but your mileage may (and justifiably so) vary on that controversial point. I think if Israel would stop bulldozing homes, illegally cluster bombing civilian targets, and meddling in other country’s politics, Arab anger and resentment might - just might - start to wane. It’s such a novel concept, I doubt it’ll ever be tried.
Unfortunately, however, I think Israeli overaggression has fomented so much hatred among Arabs, that I often wonder whether the gulf between the two sides is truly irreparable. I think the solution to the Middle East problem is to let Israel handle it. Israel started the problem, let them finish it, without using the US lives as a proxy to do it. If they want the history of Israel to be as bloody and regrettable as the United States, let the blood of their enemies be on Israel’s hands and not ours.
Never left it as a matter of historic record. There have been Jews in the area throughout. True, at points the numbers were small and it was not under Jewish control but it was never trivial. For example Hebron had a continuous Jewish presence until the Arab massacre of 1929 removed it.
The claim continually expressed in central prayers through out the history of the Diaspora. And from the Diaspora to the founding of Israel no other distinct group placed living in that region as a critical part of their identity. To others it was a province. A place where a few holy things happened to occur at but not the critical place. The foundation of Israel changed that and created a distinct Palestinian identity but such did not exist until Israel did.
FRDE said: "Israel is not really occupying ‘Palestine’, they don’t govern the place, they don’t impose taxes and they don’t impose laws. They do have checkpoints to prevent movement.
They also have built a very expensive security wall to prevent people slipping into Israel."
This is just obfuscation. Israel maintains complete freedom of its military to carry out any actions it feels necessary in the OTs, it maintains rigid (and economically devastating) control over the movements of civilians in the OTs, and it has built a wall on land in the OTs which does not follow, and in many cases deviates significantly from, the internationally recognized borders of Israel. There is no aspect of life in the OTs that Israel does not reserve the right to interfere with as it pleases. And this situation has been going on for 40 years! I hate to think what things would be like if this really were an occupation!
As you allude to later in your post, the final status of Jerusalem is a particular sticking point in envisioning any final peace settlement. I suspect that, as a matter of realpolitik, the Palestinians will probably eventually have to settle for some sort of compensation for the loss of East Jerusalem, but I am not particularly sympathetic to the argument that “After we illegally occupied this land, we built a bunch of stuff on it, and now it would be just too much of a hardship for us to give it back!” Of course, sovereignity over Jerusalem is regarded as absolutely non-negotiable by those Zionists whose ideology is informed by fundamentalist Judaism, and has deep emotional significance even for most Jews who do not fall into that camp, which is what makes this an especially tricky point to negotiate.
You did notice that the “wrong party” includes wiping Israel off the map as part of their plan of action? That’s a rather fine definition you have of punishment.
Of course it does. My point is not that the removal of settlements is a sufficient condition for peace, but that it is a necessary condition. Sincere Palestinian renunciation of terrorism is also necessary, but that, unlike the removal of settlements, is not within Israel’s control. Since both sides are generally failing to do what they would have to do to acheive peace, it seems to me problematic to assign primary responsibility for the conflict to one of them.
Ridiculous. Can you imagine if Mexico elected a government whose stated platform was to invade and occupy the United States and kill or exile any Americans who were unwilling to live under whatever conditions Mexico decided to impose on them? Would we really just say “Well, we certainly can’t respond to this by rethinking our economic and diplomatic ties with Mexico, because that would be meddling in the democratic process!” The freedom to have democratic elections implies the responsibility to face the consequences if you decide to elect evil morons (and, as an American, how I wish that weren’t the case!). The proximate cause of the recent Lebanon war wasn’t the result of any Lebanese election, it was Lebanon’s failure to prevent its territory from being used as a staging ground for attacks on Israel (which failure, at least per the Lebanese government, was a function of its incompetence rather than actual hostile intent).
Well, there you might be on to something!
As can be readily seen from multiple sources already cited, “hatred among Arabs” has existed since long before there was even an Israel to be overaggressive. Broken record time: Neither side bears sole responsibility for the current mess, and both bear shared responsibility for its resolution.
Suppose Israel annexed everything west of the Wall and gave the rest of the land back to Jordan. (Considering that the WB, minus what’s west of the wall, would be too small and poor and dry to be a viable state by itself.) Would that work, as a compromise? The Palestinians would still get a state in which they would be an electoral majority – and Jordan is closer to a real democracy than any other Arab state; and the Israelis would no longer control the Palestinians’ border on the Jordan.
I understand that. And, if I were Israel, I would do the same thing. My point, however, is that the Palestinians have impetus to vote. Why bother? I think Israel is partially to blame for the collapse, though. The Hamas platform didn’t materialize out of thin air; indeed, if the Palestinian people were warned before hand that voting for the wrong party would lead to the economic crisis, they may have not voted for Hamas in the first place.
Either you have a democracy or you don’t.
The current, watered-down Palestinian government isn’t respected internationally nor domestically. Because of Israel’s meddling, I think it behooves the country to either (a) absorb the Palestinian territory and enact laws that prevent political groups that don’t agree with Israel from running for office, (b) annihilate the Palestinian people, or (c) engage in substantive diplomatic talks with all sides without the childish “Nya-Nya, I’m not talking to you!”.
H, truth be told the Palestinian voters were given a choice between voting for a corrupt government that wasn’t delivering on services but which was engaged with some emerging international respect, and a Party that was delivering services on the ground but that was much more fundamentalist than the average Palestinian and that would make the PA an international pariah. They didn’t have great choices. But they are stuck with the consequences of the one they made. That is how it works.
While the PA (with Hamas in control) endorses terror they must be isolated and pressured to commit to another path, one that acknowledges that Israel is part of their future forevermore. But I agree with your last point nevertheless: economic isolation and pressure is good, but of course you still talk. Moshe Dyan said it well: “If you want to make peace, you don’t talk to your friends. You talk to your enemies.”
I recently found this blog written by an American Jewish woman working in Palestine documenting human rights violations. Her purpose in writing is to 1) let the world know about the human rights violations committed by the Israelis, and 2) to document the forms of nonviolent resistance used by the Palestinians. She even meets with the man known as the “Palestinian Gandhi.” Prior to reading this, I never knew that the Palestinians engaged in any sort of nonviolent resistance, but it seems that there are some, if not many, who do.
But they don’t make the nightly news, the suicide bombers do. You know the saying, “If it bleeds, it leads.”
I think you should be aware that Hamas don’t believe in democracy
it is a bit like the Germans electing Hitler
You should also be aware that Israel gets on fine with Egypt and Jordan, also with non-Hezbollah Lebanese.
There is also something going on with Syria, for a start they are going to turn the Golen Heights into some sort of national park.
Comically Nancy Pelosi has just told the Syrians that Israel wants to come to terms with them, something that Syria has known for quite a long time - I even heard an Israeli minister saying just that on BBC World Service radio.
You should also note that there have been quite long periods where things have been peaceful.
Oh please. Hamas = Hitler? You have to be kidding me.
If Hamas didn’t believe in the democratic process, why would they bother running for office? Let’s assume that you’re correct, though. Let’s assume that Hamas are terrorist organization that makes Osama Bin Laden’s club look like boyscouts. How do you reconcile removing this party from power and, simultaneously, slapping the electorate in the face? Do you take the idea that the Palestinians are too feeble-minded to elect their own leaders without Israel’s fatherly guidance? Or, perhaps, do you feel that Palestinians are too irresponsible to take on the burden of democracy?
See what I mean? The Israelis’ propaganda is never far away. It is all about keeping the debate inflamed and off-balance, as bare reason kills their position.
How did they get this way? Misinformation first started out as a tactic of necessity, then it became commonplace and routine for them. And now, spreading falsehoods, such as Little Nemo’s, is an end in itself and a mark of prestige among the Israelites.
It’s not misinformation. Your attention is directed to the Hamas Charter:
“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)…“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him…All this is utterly serious and no jest, for those who are fighters do not jest.”
I think the solution to the Middle East problem is to let Israel handle it. Israel started the problem, let them finish it, without using the US lives as a proxy to do it. If they want the history of Israel to be as bloody and regrettable as the United States, let the blood of their enemies be on Israel’s hands and not ours.