Free Palestine?

Great Debates
61

[QUOTE=Honesty]
No. It has nothing to do with that.

Israel wonton use of force in Palestine and, in partucular, Lebanon has been gratituous and frighteningly so. If memory serves correct, didn’t Israel simply start bulldozing homes everytime a rocket was launched across a border? Why not actually attack, kill, or arrest the individuals who are launching these rockets? Why bulldoze and bomb homes when the chance for civilian casualties are so high? Israel’s hands are dripping with the blood of its Arab neighbors.

If Israel has a problem with terrorism (which I believe they do), then why not employ actual intelligence and information gathering about specific targets before attacking? Even the Art of War, written over a thousand years ago, gave a nod the importance intelligence in warfare. Israel attempts to come off as the beacon of Western ideals in the tumultuous Middle East, but its my belief that no modern, Western nation would annihilate its neighbors like Israel has. Serious question that I don’t know the answer to: During the riots in France, did the government bulldoze or bomb areas where the Arabs live? Serious question. In any case, I think Israel has just as much hatred for Arab neighbors that they let on. Indeed, nothing but hatred could possibly explain Israel’s often over-the-top strategies in dealing with “terrorists”; furthermore, it is apparent that these strategies are inefficient and do nothing but foment Arab bitterness and resentment

  • Honesty
    [/QUOTE]
    I’m frankly not quite sure what the correct response is to people placing bombs on a city bus or launching rockets into civilian areas (but I do know it has nothing to do with Chinese food). Rather than bulldozing the homes of the families involved, should Israel randomly target Palestininan buses and cafes? Do you think a policmen could just cross the border, wander down the street, and “arrest” those involved? ? It is the responsibility of the govt in which the terrorsists live to arrest them. The fact that they refuse to do so is in my mind an act of war and I think Israel shows great restraint.I think there is a valid debate to be had over what the proper borders should be (pre-67 would be a good start), how to govern Jerusalem so that the Abrahamic religions all have access to it, how to compensate the Palestinians (think 100s of billions of dollars), and so on. But instead we are stuck in this cycle of violence with Arab leaders calling for the destruction of Israel. Sometimes I think there might be a giant Zionist conspiracy to incite arabs to behave in the most counter-productive way possible, other times I think its just not needed.
62

Sal Ammoniac:

Note this portion of the Mandate quote:

In other words, who decides? The Mandatory decides. Your bolded portion just describes the state of development of the territory prior to Mandate (as opposed to the Class B and Class C mandates, which were total backwaters), but does not recognize any governing authority other the Mandatory authority until the Mandatory decides to hand over, and gives only lip service to the wishes of the population.

And I’m not going to play a numbers game. If all the Palestinian Arabs wanted was to haggle over numbers, this problem would have been solved ages ago. They insist on Israel’s total dissolution. Demanding a justification for Israel’s existence altogether is way, way different from demanding a justification of specific borders and allocations.

63

[QUOTE=Alessan]
Third of all, allowing the refugees (or rather, the childern, grandchildren and great-grandchildern of refugees) back would displace hundreds of thousands of israeli citizens and constitute a major - perhaps fatal - security risk to the country. Or stated differently:.
[/QUOTE]

:dubious:

I don’t get this and I have a suspicion that it may be a testament to media’s dehumanization of Arabs. Does the fact that Israel displaced over 1,000,000 Lebanese citizens even reigister a blip on your radar?

The argument isn’t whether Israel should exist (obviously it should) or whether its government is obliged to concede land to the Palestinans. Not at all. The issue is whether Israel’s treatment of its Arab neighbors, particularly Palestine and Lebanon is justified. And its not. Israel is the ally of one of most powerful countries in the world, yet it behaves like a third-world country that has just received a cache of state-of-the-art military toys.
Whether you believe its right or wrong, Israel is held to a higher standard and rightly so. It is the beneath the dignity of any “Western” country to treat its neighbors the way that Israel does.

  • Honesty
64

cmkeller, remind me not to appoint you as a trustee of my estate. God only knows what you would do with the money.

65

H-

I certainly think (and thought at the time) that Israel made a bad choice in prosecuting the war in Lebanon, for many reasons. But still your statements are just plain untrue. No your memory does not serve you correctly.

Few countries have the quality of intelligence that Israel has. They used that intelligence and targetted accordingly. In Gaza they bulldozed where tunnels were. They bombed where the launchers were; they happened to be intentionally placed in highly populated areas. There was no way of targetting those launchers without causing civilian death and no way of disrupting the infrastructure of Hizbollah without disrupting civilian infrastructure. That is the tactic of Hizbollah: any attack on them gives them a victory in the court of world opinion.

No, the problem with the Israeli action in Lebanon was not that military action was used wantonly and without regard for intelligence, it was that the goal of eliminating Hizbollah was not achievable by a military action. Israel should have stood down once the President made his (yes, impotant) promise to go into the South and control Hizbollah. Israel must become a “snapping turtle” inside a protective shell and snapping quickly but briefly at anyone who pokes a stick inside. The answer must be in disengagement behind a defensible shell followed by political engagement (short of the unlikely prospect of real political engagement while Israel is easily attackable).

You are seriously comparing teens burning cars in their neighborhoods with Katusha rockets raining down on populated areas and long-planned invasions of a country’s territory with murders and kidnappings? You must be joking. Please try to find a real example of any country tolerating attacks without answering in some way. Find any example of a country engaging an organized and dedicated enemy in urban settings without causing civilan deaths and infrastructure harm.

Yes, Israel’s sometimes heavyhanded responses have been playing into the hands of those whose interests lie in keeping conflict ongoing … but your statements do not accurately portray the facts.

66

[QUOTE=DanBlather]
It is the responsibility of the govt in which the terrorsists live to arrest them . . . The fact that they refuse to do so is in my mind an act of war and I think Israel shows great restraint.
[/QUOTE]

Interesting. An act of war by whom, exactly? Palestine? Lebanon? Which party are you referring to?

  • Honesty
67

[QUOTE=Honesty]
Interesting. An act of war by whom, exactly? Palestine? Lebanon? Which party are you referring to?

  • Honesty
    [/QUOTE]
    The Palestinian National Authority and Lebanon both.
68

[QUOTE=Honesty]
Whether you believe its right or wrong, Israel is held to a higher standard and rightly so. It is the beneath the dignity of any “Western” country to treat its neighbors the way that Israel does.

  • Honesty
    [/QUOTE]
    That skates on being racist. Can’t hold them Ay-Rabs accountable, they’re just too hot headed. Sure they send rockets and suicide bombers into Israel, but they aren’t “civilized” like the rest of us.
69

[QUOTE=Honesty]

Whether you believe its right or wrong, Israel is held to a higher standard and rightly so. It is the beneath the dignity of any “Western” country to treat its neighbors the way that Israel does.

[/QUOTE]

I’d like to hear of a “Western” country that responded less fiercely to attacks on its own soil. Can you bring a single example?

70

[QUOTE=DSeid]
H-
You are seriously comparing teens burning cars in their neighborhoods with Katusha rockets raining down on populated areas and long-planned invasions of a country’s territory with murders and kidnappings? You must be joking. Please try to find a real example of any country tolerating attacks without answering in some way. Find any example of a country engaging an organized and dedicated enemy in urban settings without causing civilan deaths and infrastructure harm.

[/QUOTE]

This is also interesting. What makes Israel’s situation so unique? That rockets are involved instead of car bombs? I’m sorry but this doesn’t fly. There is no excuse for Israel’s treatment toward the Palestinians. None. If there is terrorism then you use intelligence to seek out the terrorists and eliminate them. You do
not, however, tear large swaths of land in an effort to root out the terrorists.

[QUOTE=DSeid]

Few countries have the quality of intelligence that Israel has.
[/QUOTE]

If Israel has top-notch intelligence, how do you justify Israel’s civilian casualties? We’re sort of an impasse on that one, I think. Either Israel is incapable of appropriately responding to new intelligence or Israel is purposefully attacking civilians. I think its the former. Israeli intelligence needs to get better, much better. Israel’s regrettable use of cluster bombs is illustrative of the fact that the country needs some major improvements in the area of information gathering.

  • Honesty
71

[QUOTE=Honesty]
Israel wonton use of force in Palestine
[/quote]
If you used your noodle, you wouldn’t make such a hash of this.

72

[QUOTE=cmkeller]

[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion]
Third, the issue of compensation: it is almost impossible for Palestinians to get compensation for their lost land, as those who left voluntarily (with the thought that they could avoid the fighting and return later) are excluded from compensation. Explain to me how that is just.

[/QUOTE]

Answered above.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure I see how you answered this. You seem to be saying that all Palestinians who fled their homes did so with the overall goal of seeing Israel defeated. Two points:
First: BS. How can you possibly ascribe this motive to all Palestinians who fled the fighting? Maybe some of them fled so as not to get caught up in the bloodshed? Maybe?
Second: So what if they did have the goal of Israel’s defeat? I still have yet to see a single argument for the claim that the Jews had a right to Palestine and the Palestinians were wrong for resisting this, and therefore deserved forfeiture of their property. If your claim is ‘might makes right’, then you are claiming that the Palestinians have the right to kill Israeli civilians, so long as they are able–a claim which is obviously absurd.

I’m going to sleep. I’ll post again after many many hours. In the meantime, feel free to abuse me.

73

[QUOTE=DanBlather]
The Palestinian National Authority and Lebanon both.
[/QUOTE]

:confused:

Odd, I don’t remember ever hearing about Palestinian or Lebanese generals leading troops over the Israeli border. Nor have I heard that any of these countries declaring war on Israel. So what act(s) of war are you referring to?

  • Honesty
74

[QUOTE=DanBlather]
That skates on being racist. Can’t hold them Ay-Rabs accountable, they’re just too hot headed. Sure they send rockets and suicide bombers into Israel, but they aren’t “civilized” like the rest of us.
[/QUOTE]

It has nothing to do with anyone being “hot-headed”. That’s absurd. Israel is a cohesive, internationally recognized country; these terrorists are apart of some fragmented network of Islamic extremist and weapon smugglers. Launching attacks on these countries because they failed to stop some idiot from firing a rocket across is Israel is downright criminal. Mexican cartels have trafficked drugs, weapons, and crime into the United States. I imagine the trafficking of these illicit drugs have cost the U.S economy billions of dollars. The Mexican government is unable to stop them despite our demands for them to so. Should the United States attack the Mexico City? Of course not. You can’t reasonably expect a government like that to be corruption free. So why should we expect it of Palestine or Lebanon? More importantly, how can the Palestinian government ever be an autonomous if it voids the people’s voice in a democratic election?

In 2006, when Hamas were democratically elected by voters, this should have been a victory for democracy. The economic sanctions imposed by Israel on Palestine because of the outcome of that vote was unforgivable. The subsequent economic collapse of the country’s infrastructure seemed like a cruel way to punish the people for voting. What Israel hope to achieve in doing this? Moreover, why didn’t Israel have the moral courage to explain to the Palestinian people the dire consequences if Hamas were to be elected?

Oops, I have to go.

But in a nutshell, Israel should be held to a higher standard because they have stripped away the right of the Palestinians to have fair elections. The people’s political voice has been drowned out by the din of Israel’s protest.

  • Honesty
75

Every action Israel takes has to be evaluated in the context of Israel’s struggle to survive against outside aggression.

Do you know what my country did when our ally was threatened? We helped firebomb civilian population centers of the enemy. We flattened anyone who got in the way of our troop advances. We machine-gunned first, asked questions later. Civilians were killed by the millions - mostly on the enemy side.

Israel flattens houses with bulldozers because they are desperate. They cannot tolerate indiscriminate rocket attacks from Palestinian or Jordanian territory. They cannot tolerate having their borders breached and their soldiers taken hostage. Yet they have few good options, due to the nature of a war against terrorists. The terrorists don’t play by any rules - they’ll set up rocket launchers on a hospital, or use an ambulance to deliver explosives. They are a real threat to Israel, and they are getting the backing and moral support of large Arab nations, one of which is claiming that it will destroy Israel and is feverishly working to build nuclear weapons.

We here in North America truly can’t know the feeling of living in a country surrounded by people who hate it and have sworn to destroy it. When the U.S. sufferered its big terrorist attack, it toppled two governments and occupies them both.

Israel is being held to a standard that no democracy can possibly meet under those conditions. Israel has a right to exist, and Israelis will do everything they have to do to continue to exist.

The Arabs are just being stupid about the whole thing. They have absolutely nothing to gain with this constant intransigence and hatred. If they push Israel to the brink, Israel could unleash a lot of fury in that region. The Israelis are not going to crack, because their backs are against the wall. If the violence stops, Israel will get along with its neighbors fine. Israel is not the aggressor. If the violence gets worse and the threats get bigger, the Arabs will once again take the brunt of the conflict, as they did in 1948, 1967, 1973, and during the various intifadas.

76

[QUOTE=Honesty]
:confused:

Odd, I don’t remember ever hearing about Palestinian or Lebanese generals leading troops over the Israeli border. Nor have I heard that any of these countries declaring war on Israel. So what act(s) of war are you referring to?

  • Honesty
    [/QUOTE]

Whether or not the governments of these countries were directly involved in the fighting is immaterial. According to international law and thousands of years of tradition, a government is responsible for any acts of aggression originating on its soil. Otherwise, it has no right to call itself a government. You seem to think that because the Palestinians and Lebanese were incapable or unwilling to enforce the rule of law over their own citizens they should be given a free pass. That’s awarding incompetance, and I find it unacceptable.

Besides, what should we have done? Just sat back and let them bomb us? A government’s first responsibility is for the welfare of its own citizens. Everything elase is a distant second.

[QUOTE=Honesty]
I don’t get this and I have a suspicion that it may be a testament to media’s dehumanization of Arabs. Does the fact that Israel displaced over 1,000,000 Lebanese citizens even reigister a blip on your radar?

[/quote]

I was referring to the 1948 Palestinian refugees.

As for the Lebanese refugees, perhaps they shouldn’t have allowed Hizballah to launch rockets from inside their cities.

You know what? No, I don’t care about them at all. I have only so much sympathy in me, and all of it was directed towards the hundreds of thousands of *Israelis * displaced during the war, as well as the hundreds of thousands more who spent a month and a half in bomb shelters. My sympathies are for my mother, in Haifa, who came about an inch away from a nervous breakdown after having to listen to air-raid sirens 16 times a day. The bastards threatened my family and you expect a BLIP?

If displacing a million people makes my family safe, then I say: displace *two *million and make them safer.

77

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
If the violence gets worse and the threats get bigger, the Arabs will once again take the brunt of the conflict, as they did in 1948, 1967, 1973, and during the various intifadas.
[/QUOTE]
Not after they have nukes.

I truly hate to say it, and I pray I am wrong, but I don’t think the state of Israel will survive for another century. People who think like the OP are part of why.

78

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
Every action Israel takes has to be evaluated in the context of Israel’s struggle to survive against outside aggression.
…
[/QUOTE]
Are you talking about the success in having the US fight a war for them in Iraq: Or is it the current efforts to ensnare the US in a conflict with Iran? It sounds to me like the latter. Is that what you meant here?

[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
…and Israelis will do everything they have to do to continue to exist.
[/QUOTE]

It is really quite difficult to tell because your post is awfully light on facts, and no wonder, those are things that hardly help the zionist causes, or assist your argument. Still nice sermon, as these things go.

Israel’s predatory land seizures in the West Bank; there is, isn’t there, the tiniest difficulty in describing that as non-aggression? How did you term it?
[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
Israel is not the aggressor.
[/QUOTE]
Don’t there facts instead rather characterise Israel as an abomination?

Given the concentration of criminality and vice in its short history, the present issue, is much as furt intimates: What is the minimum retaliation for Israel’s litany of misconduct that rational, just people will tolerate?

And this point I would like to interject, with a small request to the subjects of the intensive propaganda bombarded on North America in particular by Israeli sympathisers over the past decades, if I may. While the facts of its true and aggressive nature have recently become stark and appalling, like Sam I ask that you consider its history. Doubtless many of you a filled with a terrible rage at the intense disinformation put about, which you may have believed and now find debunked. Moderate that rage please, thoughts of obliteration, the erasure of Judaism from the face of the earth, the demolition of its temples and incineration of the last Torah, while entirely natural and to be expected, these are marks of extremism and do not much assist.

Certainly, it is necessary to recognise that the network of right-wing influence that precipitated the Iraq war for Israel’s benefit is still in place and not surrendering that influence with any haste or willingness. That may be a place to start? Although addressing that problem will not sufficiently deter such conduct in future, or amount to satisfactory retaliation. The question is, what will?

A question about Sevastopol's banning
79

I think it is pushing it a bit to suggest that the USA attacked Iraq on behalf of Israel

  • I would put that down as one of the very last of them

As for the ‘land grab’ that was in 1967 and was a bit of an accident. Well W & R Churchill’s book on the Six Day War certainly suggest that.

Given that the historical Arab windbags that ranted about Israel tended rant about the USA in the same breath,and that the current non-Arab cheerleader, Ahmadinejad is following in their footsteps, it seems possible that Israel’s and the USA’s interests coincide rather than one is working on behalf of the other.

80

[QUOTE=Sevastopol]
Don’t there facts instead rather characterise Israel as an abomination?

Given the concentration of criminality and vice in its short history, the present issue, is much as furt intimates: What is the minimum retaliation for Israel’s litany of misconduct that rational, just people will tolerate?
[/quote]
This sort of diatribe has already been answered, quite well, earlier in the thread.