Israel plans to build a 3 million$/mile high tech security wall, to isolate itself from its neighbors. This thing looks like what the former East Germany built along its border-complete with watch towers, security cameras, and dogs.
Anyway, suppose Israel completes the wall, and deports/expels the remaining palestinians from Israel-willit (Israel) then have peace and security? I imagine that the palestinian labor will be replaced by contract labor (from Romania, Thailand, etc.). So, is this a good thing?Will Israelfinally not have to worry about suicide bombings, etc.?
Or can this wall be undermined, and turn into another “Maginot Line”?
For such a monumental campaign of ethnic cleansing, comparable to the treatment of the Jews in WWII, I would hope Israel would be regarded as an utter pariah by the entire world including its current allies, and treated accordingly.
If the wall passed through my land or cut me off from my family and employment without any recompense or recourse to the law, even I would consider taking action outside the law.
If Israel had built this wall along pre-1967 borders, combined with a withdrawal from the OTs, then I might have more sympathy. As it is, this thing snakes and twists like a rollercoaster way into the OTs, in order to wrap around Israeli settlements - often cutting through people’s farms and villages, isolating them from their own fields, olive groves, schools, communities. It stinks.
Expelling Palestinians (aka Israeli Arabs) from Israel? Sheesh. I truly hope that nobody in the international community would countenance that.
Couple points:
[ul][li]Noone is considering moving anyone anywhere. The reason the fence, or wall, snakes around so mush is because it attempts to keep Jews “inside” and Arabs “outside”. [/li]It is a certainty that with the given route the fence is taking, about 1/2 a million Palestinians will remain “inside”. Noone plans to move them, much less any Israeli Arabs (who are full fledged citizens)
[li]The fence is very much unlike the Berlin wall, in that its purpose is not to keep people inside some area (the OT) but, rather, keep them outside (of Israel).[/li][li]In parts where the fence has already been erected (notably between about Netanya and Afula) terrorist incursions into Israel have gone WAY down. Far more so than in other parts of the country, where the fence has not been erected. So, whatever morality people are assigning to it, it seems to be doing its job.[/li][/ul]
All that said, I agree it should have been put up at least roughly along the green line. But I’m considered left-of-center by most people I talk to…
Dani
While Israel should be doing all it can to protect its citizens, I find the idea of putting the wall further than the illegal settlements, and with no consideration for local land users to be severely unfair.
whats to stop a wall going up, and then more settlers moving outside the wall again, causing the wall to be pushed further to protect them?
As Noone Special says, the policy is to ensure a demographic balance in favour of Jews everywhere inside the “apartheid wall”. This is sometimes brought about by arbitrarily defining a village to be inside but the people who live there to be resident outside the wall. The UN General Assembly has condemned the wall in a resolution which Israel has (surprise!) ignored.
A poignant description of what happens when a section of wall is built, severing families and making schools, clinics and workplaces immediately off-limits and, unlike what NS says, effectively keeping Arabs inside the wall because they know they would never be able to go home if they stepped past the boundary.
Incidentally, the US is making sure the wall will cost not $3M but $1Bn.
Well, those are the sacrifices one has to make in order to have peace.
Exactly which side is “making the scarifices” in this case, Alessan? This seems a rather odd term to describe forced prohibition from work/education/health/family visits solely to Arabs.
Well, yeah. We’re not stpid.
And besides - you can’t say we haven’t suffered just a little bit. And soon some 40,000 Israelis will be uprooted from their homes, which is not a thing to take lightly.
Would these “homes” be illegal settlements?
Both sides have suffered, Alessan. The objective is surely to minimise this suffering, rather than load it disproportionately onto one side becuase “we’re not stupid”?
No. I voted for a government that would do what is best for me and my country, not for ayone else. If easing up on the Palestinians is for the best, as it often is, then fine. If not, then also fine. I don’t pay my taxes so my government can be objective.
Besides, it is a compromise. The Arabs lose some land around the Green Line, and we lose all the settlemts past the fence. It’ll be a hard time for both sides, but it’ll pass, leaving most everyone better off.
Now, I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the main Plaestinian objection is not to the exact path of the fence, but to its very existance, which puzzles me a bit. They want a country, but they don’t want a border? Odd.
They are also your countrymen.
The problem being, as in the linked case of Nu’man, that the village is placed inside the fence but the people aren’t. The pattern is repeated deliberately in countless villages:[ul][li]Part of the town or village is cordoned off[]Entry to its schools, fields, businesses, clinics and homes is forbidden those elsewhere in the town or village[]The people in the cordoned part must move outside the wall or risk never seeing their family again, even though it means leaving their home to a Jewish settler without any compensation.[]The businesses which have suddenly lost all of their workers must bring in workers from elsewhere, move past the wall, or die.[]Meanwhile, the suddenly redundant staff in the schools, clinics and other resources must move past the wall and try to start again, leaving the schools and clinics to the settlers.[]The harvest inside the wall rots in the fields, and is burned by the Army.[/ul]The fence would cause some problems wherever it was laid, agreed. However, it is the deliberate policy* of achieving a 70%-30% demographic split by this intentional severing of specific communities which is the main objection.[/li][quote]
They want a country, but they don’t want a border?
[quote]
They want a viable state, which is difficult once most of the resources have been fenced off-limits.
Please explain how objecting to a fortitified, guarded fence is equivalent to objecting to a border.
Because if there’s a border, then anything on our side is theirs, and anything on their side is ours. We can build anything we want on our side, and we can let anyone we like pass from their side to ours - or, if we prefer, nobody at all. They’re welcome to do the same.
That’s what a border means. It’s a barrier, and its nobody’s business wnat we put on our side.
They can’t exactly “do the same” when a) Israeli troops are going to be on “their” side of the fence too, and b) the fence is also on their territory, since the definition of what’s Israel’s and what’s “theirs” has been arbitrarily decided by Sharon & the IDF.
I do.
Alessan, how would you like to live in Qualqiliya?
This map of the wall makes it clear who is “making the sacrifices” here.
SM
So? It’s just real estate. Israel will be abandoning a whole bunch of towns too. The Palestinians arens’t sefs - they’re not tied to their land. Abandoning a town is a small price to pay for an independent country.
jjimm
-
The whole point of the fence is to pull the troops back - why should they be there if terrorism stopped and the interior settlements abandoned?
-
The point is that the border will be defined by the fence; It will be our territory by definition. Hey, it’s not as if the the Green Line is any less arbitrary - it’s just where the Jordanian Army happened to stop in 1949. Nothing holy about it.
-
You want an objective government? Sucker. If you ever found yourself on trial, you’d probably hire an objective lawyer too - he may take your side, he may side with the opposition. On maybe you’d like an objective army - one day they bomb enemy territory, the next day the bomb yours, just to be fair.
Oh right, I forgot. Your coubtry doesn’t have any enemies. LUXURIES, I TELL YOU! LUXURIES!
Let me get this clear: you’re admitting categorically that it is indeed a land-grab, as well as being an antiterrorism measure?
No, it is the land where people live and work and provide food for their families: Their food.
I contend that the land within the wall is not independent. To re-state what this flash presentation shows, the Green Line Lands to which the Palestinians agreed is to be further slashed by 25%, which includes a massive 80% of the fertile farmland and 65% of the water resources in ALL of the Green Line Lands. An estimated half a million people will be cut off from their towns and provinces.
Alessan, Noone Special and our other Israeli Dopers here, I implore you: Vote Green Line.