I keep hearing reports out of Israel of government rocket attacks on Palestinians “in retaliation for” terrorist acts by Palestinians.
Is such action by Israel legal under their own laws?
You could never get away with that in the U.S. Imagine the uproar if the government here had just napalmed Timothy McVeigh’s home. (Which would have been ironic since his actions were a response to the government’s mishandling at Waco of a raid on a church that got that church blown up somehow too.)
Why doesn’t Israeli police just go and arrest these alleged terrorists and give them their due process rights instead of just blowing them up?
What is the rationale of the government?
Are these people not citizens? Why not? Do non-citizens have no rights in Israel? Does Israel have any concern for any innocents that might be fire-bombed along with the alleged terrorists?
(and, will this thread end up in Great Debates, or are there simple and sane answers for all this?)
Considering that Israeli courts freed John Demjanuk, there is no other nation on earth with a higher regard for due process IMHO.
I have been critical of many of Israel’s actions re the Palestinians, but I think you are drawing an unfair analogy. The relationship between Israel and the Palestinians is not that between a governemnt and its citizens- it is that of an occupying power and a subjegat-eted foe. Did we govern our actions in Grenada or Panama by U.S. due process retraints? The Palestinians are pushing the situation close to real warfare- nobody conducts warfare by due process. I’m not saying I think Israel necessarily chose the right tactic in this case, just that the due process standard your question raises is not relevant to what is going on there.
The Palestinians declared war on Israel with the formation and charter of the PLO in 1964. There has yet to be a peace treaty signed with the Palestinian Authority, the PLO’s successor organization, so the state of war still stands.
Don’t know what the exact end strategy is, but I’m sure mass deportation isn’t an option Israel is considering, considering that far right-wing organizations that have advocated such a thing have been banned from participating in Israel’s government.
Kosovo and Sudan were not unilateral actions by the U.S. IIRC. NATO and the UN, as multinational parties, initiated the action in these conflicts, despite the fact that most people tend to blame the U.S. alone.
Change Kosovo and Sudan to Grenada and Panama and you’ve got something, but I still don’t think it puts us on the same level as Israel.
So, Palestinians who are not citizens of Israel who commit crimes there have no due process rights as they are de facto at war with Israel, but Israeli citizens, Palestinian or not, do?
If true, that makes sense. 34 years is a long time not to be able to come to some understanding though. Has Israel conducted any citizen drives or anything during calmer moments?
Are you kidding? Historically speaking, that’s nothing. Remember that a while back, Europe carried on something called a Hundred-year war?
Or, closer (in time) to home, I’d wager India’s and Pakistan’s mutual state of war is longer than that.
Also, remember that it takes two sides to come to an understanding. It wasn’t until the late 1980’s that Yasir Arafat showed any interest in talking to the Israeli government at all. Then, an attempted terrorist attack on a Tel Aviv beach and Arafat’s loud support of Saddam Hussein’s attacks on Israel cooled any Israeli thoughts of him as a serious peace partner for a few years. It wasn’t until 1993 that two-sided peace talks began in earnest, and there are still some important issues unresolved.
Not that I know of, but mainly because they know what kind of reaction they’d get.
Unfortunately, Grenada, Panama, Kosovo, etc., are not close enough analogies–they didn’t happen on U.S. soil, disputed U.S. soil, adjoining territory to the U.S., or involve large groups of U.S. citizens.
A better example would be the U.S.'s conflicts with Native Americans. You have two populations, both who have claims to the land, and one of which doesn’t want to be part of the government that has the upper hand.
Yeah, but in the U.S. any one born in the country is automatically a citizen. I imagine in Israel anyone born there or not has to apply for citizenship when they turn 18 or something, sort of like a driver’s license, right?
Sorry–I should have specified “in the 1800s”. Back when the native americans would NOT necessarily have been U.S. citizens, since the U.S. did not yet count those territories among its holdings.
OP, talk about cognitive dissonance! i believe this could be a test case. if you take the media stance and it doesn’t jibe with reality, it’s time to question the media, i think.
i don’t really want to get into this–cause it always dissolves into bickering–so i’m going to limit my ideas to a few things to provoke thought.
“terrorist” OR “protestor demanding an end to an illegal military occupation that has lasted since 1967”
“war” OR “elite military funded by the US, employing high powered rifles and helicopter gunships VERSUS mostly teenagers with slingshots and stones, a few policemen with guns”
and the government that most closely parallels the modern Israeli state:
Apartheid South Africa
BTW, i’ll save some time for those who might want to attack me. i’m not an anti-Semite.
First of all, the U.S. is more or less the only country in the world which awards citizenship to anyone born within its borders. It is not an international standard. Second of all, you can become an Israeli citzen in three ways:
Being born to Israeli parents.
Immegrating.
Being an occupant of land annexed by Israel.
Yes - annexed. Ever heard the term “Occupied Territories?” They’re not called “Occupied” for nothing. With the exception of the Golan and East Jerusalem, Israel has not annexed any lands taken in '67. The Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza are not Israeli Citizens and have never wanted to be; in fact, if you think things are bad now, you have no idea what would happen if we tried to make the Territories part of Israel. They do not vote for the Israeli parlament, because they do njot consider themselves Israelis.
The Palestinians living in East Jerusalem were offered full Israeli citizenships, and most accepted, as have those Arabs living in Israel since 1948. As to your second question - they have 10 reps. in the Knesset (out of 120), roughly proportional to their share of the voting population.