# Israeli policy is self-defeating and counter-productive (for Israelis) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 4, 2001, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778 "2001-12-04T03:51:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2001, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/21 "2001-12-04T18:20:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tclouie \* > \*\* > > [This poll](http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0199/9901060.html) shows that in early '99, before the current intifada, the vast majority of Palestinians supported the peace process even though they were pessimistic about its outcome. \*\* Gee, it is to bad that Arafat turned down Barak’s offer. > [@](#): > > \*\* > To me, this indicates, at the very least, that Palestinian popular opinion is not as grim and inflexible as **NaSultainne** would have us believe. Like most other people, Palestinians probably change their opinions as the world changes. \*\* Maybe what they need is new leadership. > [@](#): > > \*\* > By the way, **NaSultainne** and **MGibson** , the acquisition of populated territory by military conquest is [illegal](http://www.merip.org/mer/mer217/217_falk.html) under international law. \*\* If I lived in Israel I imagine I wouldn’t care what international law had to say on the matter. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I realize that **MGibson** ’s suggestion, of expelling all the Palestinians, has been echoed by Israeli politicians like the late Tourism Minister Ze’evi, but such an act would not only be contemptible and contrary to international standards of decency (“genocide” if you will), \*\* Well I wasn’t actually serious about expelling them. But on the other hand it wouldn’t be genocide either. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Slight hijack, concerning international law: Israel is in violation of Articles 5-13, 15, 17-21 and 25 of the UN’s [Universal Declaration of Human Rights](http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html). \*\* I’m sorry, I didn’t know there were still people that took the UN seriously. > [@](#): > > \*\* > This is depressing! Doesn’t anyone WANT to try to make things better? So, you think my recommendations are paternalistic and pie-in-the-sky? Why not TRY paternalism for once? Nothing else has worked, certainly not violence and retribution. Like I said: self-defeating policies, self-defeating attitudes. > > Tom \*\* I guess it might be easy to want to try paternalism. Especially when you’re not the one worried about suicide bombers near your bus to work. Marc ---
**Author:** ![hansel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6bbea6/32.png) [@hansel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hansel)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2001, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/22 "2001-12-04T19:04:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tclouie \* > \*\*This is depressing! Doesn’t anyone WANT to try to make things better? So, you think my recommendations are paternalistic and pie-in-the-sky? Why not TRY paternalism for once? Nothing else has worked, certainly not violence and retribution. Like I said: self-defeating policies, self-defeating attitudes. > Tom \*\* Like I said in my post, paternalism won’t work because there are too many Israelis who are against it, even violently so. You ask “why can’t we just try?” Because the last time an Israeli prime minister tried, he was shot to death by a young and idealistic Jew who saw any compromise with the Palestinians as a betrayal of his people. Until you deal with that portion of the mix, any solution you propose will be unworkable. Handing out smiley face buttons with the slogan “think positive” on them isn’t going to change a thing. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2001, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/23 "2001-12-05T05:29:07Z")
> [@](#): > > Sorry to be “borderline insulting”, Alessan, but are you talking about actual combat troops? I’m glad y’all can fight your own wars, but do you think Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres would actually say “no, thanks” to an offer of, say, a little air cover? Maybe a couple of bombing runs just to soften things up? Or maybe a few Marines, just to establish a base, and then the Israeli Army can take over from there? OK, Duck, that more or less crosses the border. Telling an Israeli that his air force needs “help” (other than a chance to improve on your best technology) is like walking into a Dallas bar and saying “Well, them Rangers are OK, but I think we can teach them a thing or two about football”, with one major difference - unlike the Rangers, the IAF _never_ loses. As for the Marines - aside from the fact that we hardly need a sea landing into a track of land we share a long border with - thanks, but no thanks. I’ve met Marines, and they seem like competant soldiers and really nice guys, but… well, they have much nicer dress uniforms than we do. And those MREs are real cool. No offence, but the big advantage the U.S. military has over the IDF is size and the ability to project power across great distances. Not much else. Rick: > [@](#): > > While I’m supportive of Israel, you’re insulting our intelligence by claiming that “all we need is moral support and some PR.” Israel is heavily dependent on U.S. dollars, and if the taps were turned off Israel would scream bloody murder. Yeah, we’d probably do that. But bear in mind that that money is there to counter the large amounts you give to Egypt, the huge infuence the Gulf States have on you, and the huge amounts of money those states have flowing towards our enemies. We may be trying hard, but we’re only a small state and we can’t counter all that damn oil money. The thing is, all that money is a means for the U.S. to moderate and control Israeli actions, which answers Duck’s question: > [@](#): > > Why else would they have an official Cabinet meeting to label Arafat as a terrorist, if not to get Uncle Sam’s help? Because you’re our friend and we owe you a lot, and we want your approval. Is it wrong to ask? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2001, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/24 "2001-12-05T06:32:40Z")
Back to the OP: [quote] This poll shows that in early '99, before the current intifada, the vast majority of Palestinians supported the peace **process** even though they were pessimistic about its outcome. Three years and many bombings, shellings, blockades and targeted killings later, that opinion has obviously changed. [quote] Emphasis mine. The Palestinians supported the Peace Process, and why not? They were getting a shitload of stuff - land, money, guns, prestige - and giving only promises in return. Who wouldn’t be happy with that? The thing is, they may have wanted the process, but I’m not sure they wanted peace, because peace meant the end of the conflict - no more demands. Both countries could go their seperate ways, peacefully existing side by side. Peace means not getting everything you want. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2001, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/25 "2001-12-05T07:03:53Z")
> [@](#): > > _Posted by Alessan_ > But bear in mind that that [US] money is there to counter the large amounts you give to Egypt, the huge infuence the Gulf States have on you, and the huge amounts of money those states have flowing towards our enemies. We may be trying hard, but we’re only a small state and we can’t counter all that damn oil money. > > The thing is, all that money is a means for the U.S. to moderate and control Israeli actions And they do seem in need of strong moderation and control, but that’s a bit of a moot point right now, as Sharon has been pushing the line of what is “acceptable” further and further out and Dubya is unlikely to put a stop to it in any meaningful way. The money (and lenience) the US gives to Israel is more a result of the powerful Jewish lobby in the US than it is a counter-balance to other funds going to Israel’s enemies (and who are we talking about when we say enemies?). > [@](#): > > quote: > **Duck Duck Goose:** Why else would they have an official Cabinet meeting to label Arafat as a terrorist, if not to get Uncle Sam’s help? > > \*\*Alessan: \*\*Because you’re our friend and we owe you a lot, and we want your approval. Is it wrong to ask? How facetious. The only obvious answer to DDG’s question is that Israel is officially declaring “terrorism” in order to gain US approval as they step up military action against Palestinians, in what amounts to state terrorism. They don’t want the US’s help, they just don’t want the US (or anyone else) to interfere with their plans. Using the excuse that they are targeting terrorist organizations, they are demolishing Palestinian infrastructure and blockading millions of people. The logical goal is to pound them until Israel’s negotiating advantage is such that Arafat will be forced to strike any deal he is offered (which is why he is not being killed right away). Why would the most powerful military in the area need help to fire on populations of unarmed Palestinians? Israel doesn’t need outside military help, and it’s in their best interests to keep foreign militaries out of their country. There are some very disturbing things happening. ---
**Author:** ![Dave\_Stewart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e274bd/32.png) [@Dave\_Stewart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dave_Stewart)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2001, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/26 "2001-12-05T07:10:57Z")
**RickJay** > [@](#): > > One can hardly blame them, though; when push came to shove in 1967, the UN acted like cowards and ran like a whipped dog. > > I’m not going to say Israel is perfect, but the manner in which they’ve been treated by the United Nations is an absolute disgrace and completely invalidates any claim the U.N. might lay to having any authority in this quagmire. Israel’s sovereignty has been constantly threatened by belligerent neighbours for fifty years and the U.N. has shafted them again, and again, and again, and done nothing to help Israel, which is a member state and which damn well deserves U.N. support. Israel’s never been given any reason to trust the U.N. and I don’t see why they would start now. What an absolute load of rubbish. Once again, ignorance on the way the UN operates is displayed on this board. I have been thinking about starting a thread validating the UN for a while, and might have to do that tomorrow. The UN makes no value judgments. It is a non-partisan player in world affairs. It has to be in order to get anywhere with everybody, instead of somewhere where a few. It is not a world government - the world is in anarchy, on the level of international relations. It has no authority, except that which member states give it. It is an international forum, which operates a conciliation process. The worse thing is that the UN gets blamed for the actions of its members. Israel is one country. The Arab states which gang up on Israel are many. As the UN is a forum for international discussion, the enemies of Israel use it to pick on Israel. That is not the UN’s fault. Lets look at the UN’s approach to Israel in 1967, specifically Res. 242, from this site: [http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/un/more242.html](http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/un/more242.html) > [@](#): > > U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 Calls for: > Recognition of Israel’s right to exist > An end to the state of war maintained by the Arab world against Israel > Secure and recognized boundaries for Israel > 242 DOES NOT REQUIRE ISRAEL TO RETURN TO THE NON-SECURE BORDERS OF PRE-1967. > Arthur J. Goldberg, an author of U.N. Resolution 242, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (1965-1967): > > “It calls for respect and acknowledgment of the sovereignty of every state in the area. Since Israel never denied the sovereignty of its neighbouring countries, this language obviously requires those countries to acknowledge Israel’s sovereignty.” > “The notable omissions in regard to withdrawal are the word ‘the’ or ‘all’ and ‘the June 5, 1967 lines’ the resolution speaks of withdrawal from occupied territories, without defining the extent of withdrawal.” > > “The Meaning of 242” - June 10, 1977 > Lord Caradon, an author of U.N. Resolution 242, U.K. Ambassador to the United Nations (1964-1970): > > “We didn’t say there should be a withdrawal to the '67 line; we did not put the ‘the’ in, we did not say all the territories, deliberately… We all knew - that the boundaries of '67 were not drawn as permanent frontiers, they were a cease-fire line of a couple of decades earlier… We did not say that the '67 boundaries must be forever.” > MacNeil/Lehrer Report - March 30, 1978 > Eugene V. Rostow, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs (1966-1969): > > “Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338… rest on two principles, Israel may administer the territory until its Arab neighbors make peace; and when peace is made, Israel should withdraw to ‘secure and recognized borders’, which need not be the same as the Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949.” > “The Truth About 242” - November 5, 1990 > Lyndon B. Johnson, U.S. President (1963-1968): > > “We are not the ones to say where other nations should draw lines between them that will assure each the greatest security. It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of June 4, 1967 will not bring peace.” > September 10, 1968 > U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 - A set of guidelines for Peace & Security > > What does it say? > > "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency " > "respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every State in the area " > “[every State’s] right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” > “Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories in the recent conflict.” > What does it mean? > The Arab states must end the state of war initiated and maintained by them since 1948. > The Arab states must recognize Israel’s right to exist. > Israel is entitled to clearly defensible borders. This is not a privilege, but rather a right guaranteed by international law. > Israel should withdraw from some, not all, of the territories captured in the 1967 Six-Day War. > Israel’s indefensible pre-1967 borders provided no security. > The Arab states should sit down with Israel, without preconditions, to negotiate peace. It seems to me that the American people have had poisonous bile from the likes of Jesse Helms drip into their collective ears for such a long time that they now firmly believe that the UN is something that it is not, and think it should be accountable for something which it has not responsible for. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2001, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778/27 "2001-12-05T07:29:43Z")
Thank you, **Dave**. I was going to try to tackle that same nonsense next, but I’m glad you beat me to it. I too am tired of hearing the same silliness about the UN over and over again, and I know a few others like Collounsbury are as well. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-policy-is-self-defeating-and-counter-productive-for-israelis/96778.md?page=1)