A few clarifications of the above two posts. 1. The Unionists in Northern Ireland are mainly of Scottish descent. 2. Most of them are descended from families that have been in Northern (and other parts of) Ireland for ~500 years. 3. At last count, the majority Unionist population is around 53%, compared to 44% Nationalist, though this number is possibly skewed because of a campaign in some circles against completing the census forms.
Anyway, I largely agree with what Eolbo is saying - in addition to courageous leadership from the Republican movement, I believe that the relatively benign (relative to Israel, that is) manner in which the UK government handled the terrorism situation, and willingness to negotiate with the terrorists (in secret at first) also contributed to the eventual (still imperfect) ceasefire. The times that the British armed forces did behave like the IDF, there was outrage everywhere.
So - Boil for 50 years then simmer for 500, and you get yourslelf a nice tasty stew? I mean, this is rich! Occupy some land for 35 years and you’re a mad-dog criminal state; do the some for 500 and it’s all hunky-dory by now, you’ve pushed out the local population and brought in your own, you are now the Majority! Fine - give me some time in the kitchen, and let’s talk again, oh say around Dec. 2499! (after all, semi-millennial madness may make the ME situation moot at years end…)
You think there are no secret (as well as overt, BTW) talks with Palestinian leaders? I think this is a non-issue. Courageous Palestinian leadership? When this happens, we’ll probably get somewhere. I honestly think that this is the #1 problem right now (and that Israeli leadership and public opinion will be willing to make necessary sacrifices if and when a real window of opportunity opens).
No real argument here, just to say that we are in the midst of a very real (albeit low-intensity) war, and that war is sh*t, not a clinically sterile activity. I submit that very little of the civilian suffering on the Palstinian side is purposely inflicted, and that none of it is inflicted purposely as govt./military policy. Doesn’t make it less terrible, and I cringe every time Palestinian civilians are injured and killed (more than they do for us!) - but I see it as an unfortunate “Us or Them” situation. If staying live entails hurting others in the process, well I don’t like having to do it, but do it I will.
Repression makes a religion flourish – that’s one of the most important reasons Jews have done so well. The destruction of the Temple, the Diaspora – they “harmed” Judaism the same way forest fires “harm” lodgepole pines.
Unfortunately, Israel doesn’t realize that its own oppression of the Palestinians only gives them strength.
I suspect that the heart of the problem is that the same factors that often make Judaism so strong – the convergence of tribal, social, and religious forces – also make it a hypernationalistic mess when it gains power. Bad things happen when someone who’s always kept down finally gets to be on top.
Come on for a start the people of Northern Ireland have full UK citizenship and are allowed to cede from the Union in a referendum. Yes the original plantation was wrong but that happend 500 yrs ago and surely you can see the difference between 500 and 35 years.
Yasser Arafat has shown far more willingness to negoitate than Ariel Sharon who had to be dragged kicking and screaming into negoitations by the Americans. I can hardly see Ariel Sharon effectively deposing himself as the PA didn’t want to negoitate with him.
That’s BS, Israel in waging this war has broken so many of the rules and customs of war and falls along way short of even the bare minimum level of human rights. The Israeli occupation of the Occupied territories has been one of the most oppressive and brutal regimes with it’s citizens affectively having no rights and being subject to the rule of an Israeli military commander. For example until the mid-90’s when the PA where allowed to take control of some areas it was illegal even to own or display the Palestinian flag or colours, a Palestinian artist spent three months in prison in the eighties for painting a picture which had a horse in the colours of the Palestinian flag in it’s corner.
Israeli government policy of not prosecuting or bringing disciplanry proceedings against wrongdoers has led to a culture of impunity amoing the IDF and the settlers furthermore Israeli governments policy has directly led to many avoidable deaths among Palestinian civilians, since the first suicide bomb struck the same number of Palestinian minors have been killed as people killed in suicide bombings?
Britain (or more accurately at first, England) occupied Ireland in various guises for 800 years. Eventually there was a war, involving guerilla activity and some terrorism. Ireland won. Britain withdrew from all but 26 of the 32 counties. It is in the remaining 6 that the trouble has been for the last 80-something years.
WRT settlements in the OTs, this is what Britain did with the “plantations” in an overarching imperial manner ~500 years ago. After that length of time, it’s kinda difficult to fix the fuck-ups. However, 1967 is still within a single lifetime. Furthermore, the “mad-dog criminal” attitude of which you speak is more related to how Israel treats Palestinian civilians under occupation, than the occupation itself.
If you’re talking about direct military action, I submit that the IDF regard Palestinian lives as worth somewhat less than Israeli ones. If you’re talking about land rights, freedom of movement, drinking water, the ability to work, the ability of the police force to keep order, then I’m afraid I think that the suffering is in fact purposefully inflicted.
Alas, I can see Hamas terrorists saying the same thing.
But how about had full UK citizenship? Yeah - I see the difference. 35 years, not enough of our people brought in, not enough natives killed and extradited = wrong. 500 years to “correct” the situation - all’s well. You probably think that Turkey did nothing wrong in the Armenian regions - after all, there are so many more Turks than Armenians there now!
(warning - sarcasm alert)
Like at Camp David (while Barak was still Prime Minister)? Give me a break!
Israel’s rule in the OT is the worst regime in the world? Most Brutal? You sure all Iraqis, Burmese and North Koreans (e.g.) - heck, even all Chinese - would agree with you on that?
This is different from a policy of actively seeking to harm civilans. And I’m glad you added that question mark at the end. I think it is rightly there.
On the whole, I would say that you, as a non-partisan bystander (are you, BTW? Not a contention, you have the right not to be, but an informational question), show less compassion for Israeli civilians than I, an embroiled participant, have consistently (in this and other threads) shown for the other (Palestinian) side. You seem to be quite single-mided in your disrespect and scorn for everything Israeli. Israel=black and Palestinians=white; no shades of grey. I find this uncharacteristic of your conduct in non-ME related threads (I generally quite like your style and content), and I am saddened by this.
If we could maybe we’d right all the ancient wrongs and give back Constantinople to the Turks, and England back to the Welsh, and the Sioux would own their plains once again. But what happened long ago, happened long ago and there’s nothing anyone can do about it now. But this is the here and now.
**
No real argument here, just to say that we are in the midst of a very real (albeit low-intensity) war, and that war is sh*t, not a clinically sterile activity. I submit that very little of the civilian suffering on the Palstinian side is purposely inflicted, and that none of it is inflicted purposely as govt./military policy.
Dan Abarbanel **
[/QUOTE]
Just imagine for a moment that an Israeli soldier is sitting in a crowded bar. As the rules of war would have it a soldier is a legitimate target. A militant throws a grenade at the soldier and it kills him. Although the militant isn’t after anyone else, he knows the logical and predictable consequence of throwing his grenade is that it will kill and wound many innocent Israeli civilians in the bar. Which it does. The militant’s organisation announces a “great success” but says it does regret the heavy collateral damage. What do you think about this attack? Just collateral damage or terrorism? Is there any meaningful sense in which those civilian deaths aren’t purposeful?
165 dead and wounded, most of the dead being children. Which is what I would consider the logical and predictable effect of calling in an airstrike on a crowded residential apartment building in an urban area to get just one man.
So why don’t they up and leave for home, setting us a good example to follow?
Ahh, so all we need to do is stall for time (say a couple hundred years)? The fact the Britain STILL refuses to just leave its “OT”-s after so much time makes it OK for them to lecture US? Maybe they should address the plank in their own eye first?
You mean, relative to the gentle, peaceable actions of the English in Ireland circa 1500? And don’t give me “times were different” - either we view both cases from the same (Modern “western”) POV, or we allow that the situation NOW in the ME is different from the situation NOW in “The West”.
I agree (to “worth somewhat less”. not “worthless” as some posters seem to imply). If we think we are danger, we will quite likely inflict some damage on the endangerers themselves and on their innocent neighbors alike, if this will keep us safer. That’s Real Life ™
I disagree. The one factor that has undermined employment opportunities for Palestinians the most is the Intifadah itself, following which the many Pal’s who worked here were gradually replaced. AND They have MORE drinking water and electricity (well, at least had, pre-Intifada, things may have deteriorated) than they did before 1967 - who put the infrastructure in place?
I vehemently disagree. I clearly said that I can tolerate (not justify - tolerate) harm to civilians on the other side only because I deem it necessary in order to stay alive myself. Do you honestly think Hamas leaders, sending the next suicide bomber, really think that they are saving Palestinian lives doing so? I find this reasoning disingenuous
On the offchance that this isn’t an entirely facetious comment - these people’s families have been there fore 500 years. The Israeli families in the OTs have only just arrived. Noone Special, times were indeed different then. But neither does that excuse English/British actions in Ireland 500 years ago. You see where I say “overarching imperialism”? That’s a value judgement. I consider it bad. That you choose to justify Israeli actions in the present day by comparing it to appalling British imperialism of the Tudor times is telling. It’s also no damn excuse for Israeli imperialism in my lifetime. The British gave the Irish infrastructure, too. It still didn’t make British occupation right at the time.
As to your final point, I see disingenousness in your argument; even though the Palestinian terrorists are setting out to murder innocents, the IDF has still managed to kill nearly 3 times as many Palestinians through collateral damage.
I want you guys to live without the threat of terrorism. Alas, I also think that what your government is doing at the moment is increasing it, rather than protecting you.
Well you could of course do what the British have done. Annex the OTs outright and give the inhabitants full political rights as citizens. It would mean the end of Israel as a jewish state but maybe it could be made to work as a bi-cultural one.
I’m not seeing the contradiction you seem to be seeing.
Britain was wrong to invade and settle Ireland then, and Israel is wrong to invade and settle the OT now. Its a perfectly consistent position.
Most of the contemporary inhabitants of NI want the British to stay. Most of the contemporary inhabitants of the OT want you to leave. That’s quite a difference.
See my previous answers to this point. While there may be a “statute of limitation” for the actual situations in question, I don’t think there should be a “moral” statute of limitations - so I think all these arguments, coming from countries no less guilty of colonialism - should restrict themselves to the practical questions of solving the conflict, and avoid the “holier than though” moral preaching I seem to hear all the time. I think most of us here can agree on the outline for the solution - something fairly similar to the “Road Map”, which means PA has to quash terrorism, and Israel has to agree to a future Palestinian state.
Bad analogy. We don’t go after anyone only remotely involved with Hamas. We go after their LEADERS. Your analogy would be better if you claimed this soldier was a Full Colonel, actively involved in killing Palestinians. Most Israeli soldiers are still involved in training for real war and guarding the border with the neighboring countries (or are just plain old non-combat soldiers in support roles, cooks, drivers, paper-pushers at HQ…), and have nothing to do with Palestinians or the OT’s in general. Even then, a few more bones to pick:
We DON’T kill Palestinians just for the sake of killing them. No amount of trying to paint parallelisms here will make it so!
We DO try to get to the terrorist leaders with as LITTLE, not as MUCH, colateral damage as possible (see below)
The exception that “proves” the rule. This was NOT deliberate, but a mis-planning due to bad intelligence. I can’t give you a cite, but I know this for a fact. You will just have to trust me here (much as I hate to use that phrase - I know I’ll get flak for this…). And the next time this happened, in the latest attack on Hamas leadership, they walked away because we used a much smaller bomb, JUST IN CASE there were civilians about that we didn’t know about. Bottom line? No colateral damage, but we didn’t get the terrorists, either.
As I mentioned in another thread, there is no black and white here, just various shades of grey. But I still think our side is wearing a much lighter shade of that color.
Many settlers have (already) been born where they live. Have we been there long enough yet? (Need I? OK - S.A.)
You forgot to mention that British conduct at the time was in response to the Irish killing English right and left in London and Birmingham
[/Sarcasm] We are not an imperialistic power. Most Israelis - including most of the current, relatively right wing govt. (which has rstified the Road Map) - are willing to see the creation of a Palestinian State. But we demand proof that the proposed leadership of this state - and thus by extention, the future state itself - is able and willing to ensure that a stop is put to terrorism!
Hence my remark about shades of grey. It’s really a very complex situation, and I have spent far too much time here aready today, but I think that, in part, the number of civilian casulaties has to do with the terrorist leaders purpusefully surrounding themselves by civilians. And some of the casualties are civilians actively opposing Israeli soldiers while the latter are searching for known terrorists, often potentially endangering said soldiers’ lives. Again - not wholeheartedly supporting everything done by my army in the name of security; lots of grey areas; but I think that ON THE WHOLE, our military tries to create as little havoc as possible under less-than-ideal conditions.
I appreciate the sentiment (I really do, not sarcastic this time), but I am not certain your conclusion is correct (I’m not sure you are wrong, either - only time will tell - but I tend to disgree with you).
No 500 yrs has not obviously corrected the situation, I personally think that independance or joint sovereginty is the way forward in Northern Ireland.
The Armenian genocide again is a different subject and one I have studied (I have connections to Turkey via Turkish occupied Northern Cyprus where a few members of my family have lived since British colonial times), yes of course it happened, though visitng Turkey you’ll see rows of books in bookshops written by nationalist historians either outright denying it or some how trying to pin the blame on the Armenians themselves.
But a total withdrawal or removal of the settlemnts was not offered, negoitations conmtiuned after that until the outbreak of the intifada a couple of months later.
I said one of the most brutal and oppressive, there are certainly strong paralells with those regimes just like those regoimes a Palestinian can be held indefintely without trial and be subject to torture and the right of politcal assembly is forbidden. Formerly even admitting that you supported the PLO could earn you a custodial sentence.
I’m British and nominally Anglican (i.e. I only go to church a handful of times each year to please my Gran), though my family were hevaily involved in British colonialism, the Mandate was not one of the places they helped adminstrate, so I have no connections to the immediate region.
Of course there are shades of grey, suicide bombing is clearly wrong; Hamas and Islamic Jihad are racist murderers, Yasser Arafat is autocratic and like much of the PA/PLO corrupt. But this doesn’t mean that the occupation is right or justify Israel’s human rights abuses, many of which have little to do with Israeli security. Groups like Hamas are a product of the occupation and Israel was using brutal methods in the OT long before Palestinian terrorism became such a problem as it is today. Also there is a tendency by some to try and whitewash over past and present Israeli abuses against the Palestinians which I take exception to.
I don’t hate everything Israeli (certainly not Ronnie the Rocket!!)and I am quite friendly with sevral Israelis (one of which is much more critical of the Israeli occupation than I am and is an ardent bi-nationalist), but when I think something is wrong I’m not going to pretend I don’t.
One definmte failing I have is that I can defintely be over combatroila on ME threads and I’ve tried to curb this, this is partly because I used to post on another forum of Netanhayu supporting transferists and racists, the kind of people who wouldn’t even admit that there was such thing as a Palestinian. This may of certainly dimmed my view of Zionists (though talking to people who hold a more centrist/leftist Israeli position certainly makes me realize that they were far from the norm).
Exceptions dont prove rules right, they prove them wrong. And not deliberate? That bomb wasn’t stray. It landed at exactly where it was meant to go and it killed its intended target. Ariel Sharon announced it as a “great success”.
**
And the next time this happened, in the latest attack on Hamas leadership, they walked away because we used a much smaller bomb, JUST IN CASE there were civilians about that we didn’t know about.
**
[/QUOTE]
If you are referring to the current missile strike on Mahmoud al-Zahar, he walked away. Not everyone did. His son died and 25 other people were wounded. Fourteen people were wounded in last week’s missile strike on Ahmed Yassin. Fifteen more in the airstrike on Abu Shanab. Another three in the hit on Iyad al-Baeck. One woman and five children were killed in the attack on Hussein Abu Kweik. Seven were killed and 25 wounded in the attack on Yasser Taha. Another 25 were wounded in the strike on Fuad al-Lithouwee. Etc Etc Etc.
To me the real issue isnt the size of the bomb you use. Its why are you using heavy weapons and airstrikes at all in built up areas in what you yourself describe as a low intensity conflict. The British could have used airstrikes to kill individual IRA members in Londonderry. But they didn’t. They just bumped them off quietly with the SAS. Less fuss, less collateral damage, less repercussions all round. I suspect the assassinations are really to give a public display of revenge, I cant see they serve any rational purpose.
**
As I mentioned in another thread, there is no black and white here, just various shades of grey.
**
[/QUOTE]
MC, Thank you for elaborating on your views, and especially on your past experience. Incidentally, one of the few reasons I have for supporting Sharon is that if he goes we’ll probably get Netanyahu back… :eek:
eolbo, exceptions “prove” the rule in the sense that they test it (like a “proving ground”). I think the attack on Salakh Shkhada “tested” the notion that Israel is normally more restrained than that; and the reactions - including within Israel itself - showed, in my mind, that this notion is in fact correct, and that this attack was not considered to be “standard Israeli operational procedure”.
KidCharlemagne (remember him - the OP?) - If you are still with us, I hope the latest exchanges have given you an idea, not necessarily on the facts and lore of the situation (although these have been bandied about), but more on the emotional fervor with which even non-partisans, and certainly participants such as myself, invest themselves in the debate. And let me assure you this has been an exceptionally polite and reasoned debate, compared to most
This emotional tone is, IMHO, a key element in understanding the conflict - which was your original question. I hope you have seen the two sides of the conflict, as presented by relative moderates on each side. I hope you too will feel the urge to educate yourself further on the actual facts of the situation, and to take a side (or a reasoned middle ground) in the debate - even if it is not my side. I personally prefer to deal with the unconvinced, or even the hostile, rather than with the unknowing.
Eolbo, one more point - when I said that the carnage during the attack on Shkhada was the result of bad intelligence, I was referring not to the targeting of the man (which was accurate), but to the fact that Intelligence (erroneously) concluded that the adjacent shanty was unoccupied. It was, and many innocent victims were killed there. This was quite shocking to many people, including air-force personnel responsible for the planning. Later attacks have had far smaller colateral damage, but have also generally failed to get at the intended target
What people may not realize is that I was quite happy when Sharon was elected (though of course I would of much preferred Peres as I have a lot of respect for him and in my eyes he is one of the few characters who come out looking good from this whole sorry affair (the second intifada).), as Netanyahu is not going to be good for anyone. I think though that Sharon is a much more astute politican than Netanyahu (he must be one of the few recent PMs not to have reached a high rank in the IDF?) and has manevoured him (Netanyahu) into a weak postion, damaging his chances of a successful leadership challenge.
I don’t understand how what I said is arrogant. If I’m wrong, I’m willing to stand corrected.
But is there a grass-roots Palestinian peace movement, perhaps equivalent to Peace Now? If so, is it viable in any reasonable sense (does it have a decent-size following among the Palestinian population, such as 5 percent [I choose 5 percent because I would argue that 5 percent of the Israeli population is ready to hand over the WB and Gaza tomorrow, no questions asked])? Can it bring pressure on Arafat or Hamas or Islamic Jihad? Are there large peace demonstrations in Gaza City or Hebron or Jenin that would indicate the existence of said peace movement?
I’m quite sure there are many Palestinians who just want peace, who just want to raise their kids, to just be normal and live side by side with Israel. But for whatever reason, they have not coalesced into a movement to bring pressure upon Arafat or the murderous radicals. Maybe the policies of the Israelis have something to do with it, but I suspect it has a lot more to do with being pushed to the margins of society by their own radicals and their corrupt leaders and are silent.
Hold on a minute there. I NEVER said Palestinians don’t have a right to exist. I DON’T deny there is such a thing as Palestine. I respectfully ask that you don’t put words in my mouth.
