# Palestinian and Arab hatred is the problem, but what's the answer? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 31, 2002, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002 "2002-03-31T01:48:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Demosthenesian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Demosthenesian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Demosthenesian)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/21 "2002-03-31T20:15:19Z")
> [@](#): > > There is NO question that Palestinians incite their own children to violence and encourage them to take part in dangerous demonstrations. Often, Palestinian children are let out of school in order to take place in violent demonstrations. Judging by the above posting, it would appear that there is a question. Or at least subtleties. There usually are. Personally, the more I read about this issue the less I believe either side; it’s one of those situations where practically every statement begs the question one way or another, as each side accuses the other of being an apologist (and both sides have a point). What bothers me is this notion that there is greater moral outrage in “directly targetting civilians” rather than simply shooting them as bystanders. Frankly, dead is dead. While I can accept that there are inevitable civilian losses involved in counter-terrorism and warfare, the **methods** used to achieve these goals deserve examination as well. There is a big difference between using some discretion and taking out terrorists and blowing up (or shooting up) city blocks because you’re pretty sure that there are some terrorists there. The question of “necessary civilian losses” is whether all of said losses are necessary, and I remain yet to be convinced that that is the case. Using dynamite to swat a gnat is not morally justifiable, whether you manage to get that gnat or not. Rules of engagement exist for a reason. ---
**Author:** ![Sweet\_Willy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sweet\_Willy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sweet_Willy)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/22 "2002-03-31T20:17:43Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t know how much of all of this is distorted by the media or outright propaganda. But it’s clear that the Palestinians certainly teach their children the kind of hatred against Israel that leads them to get involved in the conflict. > . I agree. It takes alot of hate to teach your kids to deny human instinct of self preservation. It is not a short process to train a suicude bomber. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/23 "2002-03-31T20:30:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > **Palestinians have also used children as either human shields or political pawns, depending on your point of view.** And so have extremist Israelis: the settlers bring their kids with them. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/24 "2002-03-31T20:50:46Z")
Israel is most definitely dovish and conciliatory. Consider for a moment the fact that they’re surrounded by people who for the last forty years have repeatedly proven both by word and deed, that they want destroy them completely. The Palestinians have had repeated opportunities at full Israeli citizenship, which they rejected. Insstead the palestinians went to stay in neighboring Arab states while those states attacked Israel and sought to destroy it. These Arab states failed to do so, and got sick of putting up the Palestinians. So, the Palestinians went back to Israel were offered full citizenship, again refused it. They wanted their own country. “Fine,” Israel said. “You don’t want to live with us smelly jews that you hate so much? Here. We’ll give you some space in our own territory. You can even have a degree of self-governance, with more to come as long as you can prove you’ll be good neighbors and not use the land as a base to attack us from.” The Palestinians moved in, and promptly used the territory as a base to attack Israel from within. The Palestinian’s aren’t satisfied with anything less than the destruction of Israel. I think it’s pretty damn dovish and conciliatory what the Israelis have done. If my next door neighbors were trying to destroy me, but they didn’t have enough beds to sleep in, I’d consider myself pretty dovish and conciliatory to let some of them sleep in my house. Yet, that’s what Israel’s doing. The Mideast Arab nations are highly religious states. If you want to live there, you live under Moslem rule, and must follow Moslem law. When in Rome, right? It is considered proper and fair that they be allowed their own right to self-determination as far as how they live within their own borders is concerned. Yet, this same standard isn’t applied to Israel. They’re expected to accomodate other groups’ beliefs even if one of the cornerstones of those beliefs is the destruction of Israel! Now, the fact is that not all Palestinians acted as stupidly as described above. Many went to live elsewhere. Some took Israel up on its offer of citizenship, and are a part of the Israeli population, as are their children. The fact is the people that are left in Israel who identify themselves as “Palestinians (though there really is no such thing”) are the die-hard stalwarts who have been fighting Israel’s basic right to exist for over fifty years, and who have indoctrinated their children into the fight as well. I personally think Israel has shown too much forbearance in their civilized treatment of the Palestinians. Had they simply used the six-day war as an excuse to expand their borders, and either wiped out the Palesinians or told them to go pound sand somewhere else, Israel wouldn’t have its current problems. I think though, that the legacy of the holocaust left Israel reluctant to destroy their enemies, and they’ve been paying the price for their mercy ever since. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/25 "2002-03-31T21:27:08Z")
It’s rather telling that in a post defending the notion that Israel is dovish and conciliatory, you spent the first 90% of it describing how ignorant and violent the Palestinians have been, and the last 10% stating that the Israelis should have used even more violence. In other words, you think that because they haven’t used as much force as they might have been justified in using, you consider them a bunch of bleeding heart peacenicks. Okey doke. I’ll keep that in mind next time the Israelis open a can of Dove Brand Whoop-Ass on the Palestinian Authority. FTR, I wholeheartedly agree with the great majority of what you said about the Palestinians, who have been and are, IMHO, acting like a bunch of short-sighted barbarians. I’m just not delusional enough to think that the Israeli response has been to hand flowers to the rock-throwers and try to start a round of Kumbaya. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/26 "2002-03-31T21:37:05Z")
mhendo said: > [@](#): > > Again, we see the self-serving demonizing of the Palestinians. Wow, these people are so evil they send their own children to where guns are being fired! If the shoe fits… > [@](#): > > Not only is this a half-truth at the absolute best, but it is also inconsistently applied to the two sides in the conflict. Really? How often do we see Israelis purposely sending their children to where guns are being fired? > [@](#): > > And does absolutely nothing to address the issue that is most important: no matter where the children are, or how they get there, killing them is not justified. Not _on purpose_ (presuming they aren’t a threat – which is not always a correct presumption), but since they often send them into the zones where other Palestinians are firing weapons, they put themselves into a position where death is likely. In the middle of a warzone, it’s hard to determine which of the people are firing the guns at you and which are just there to be human shields. > [@](#): > > The last sentence here is particularly instructive. Many people make the argument that the Palestinians kids killed by Israeli soldiers were demonstrating (which mostly, for these kids, involves chanting and yelling, and throwing rocks), so they desrve what they get. Strawman argument. Nobody here has made that argument. > [@](#): > > contrary to your assertions, that Israelis do TARGET innocents. Are you purposely misstating what I said? I specifically said “The Israeli **army** ” (emphasis added this time so maybe you’ll get it). So what do you do? Quote back what some extremist settlers did. Apples and oranges. > [@](#): > > But in another way, you are right. Israelis don’t target innocents because in many cases they barely seem to “target” at all. As i said in my last post, instead of seeking out wrongdoers or going after particular groups, it is not unusual for the Israeli army to simply attack a whole area, with bombs landing rather randomly all over the place. Bombs landing randomly? Cite? > [@](#): > > Or they drive their bulldozers into a Palestinian settlement and start pushing houses over with no concern for whether the individuals inside actually have anything to do with violence against Israel. Perhaps if the snipers and bomb-makers wouldn’t use those areas as hiding places, things like that wouldn’t happen. But like I said earlier, the problem is there is no specific place to strike back, so they do what they can – if a settlement is allowing terrorists to use their area as a base, well, I hate to paraphrase President Bush, but those who harbor terrorists are as bad as the terrorists themselves. > [@](#): > > For those unwilling to accept the evidence of American media bias in the article i linked to in my previous post, you can also check out Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting’s statements (1, 2) on NPR’s coverage of the conflict. Want to know what’s really funny? Jews are complaining that NPR is biased _against_ Israel. I figure if everybody is complaining they are biased against their viewpoint, they must be doing something right. Incidentally, FAIR is not exactly the most unbiased source of news, either. > [@](#): > > Something is only “news” in the US when it involves a bombing, or multiple killings at once. The day-to-day, one-by-one murders carried out by the Israelis actually add up to more deaths than those carried out by Palestinians, yet we never hear of most of them. Oh, this is cute. You complain about bias but then call what happens to Palestinians “murders” but what happens to Israelis are “deaths.” It’s good to see that you’re an unbiased source. > [@](#): > > And the overall numbers of killings by each side in the period under consideration in link number 1 aren’t even close So? Are we supposed to judge who is right and who is wrong by the number of deaths to each side? In that case, the Tabliban was clearly in the right and the U.S. is evil. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2002, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/27 "2002-03-31T22:43:47Z")
**Sam Stone** wrote: > [@](#): > > The Israelis went to the trouble of building a replica of the scene, and determined that the boy was not even visible from Israeli positions, and concluded that he was shot by a Palestinian terrorist because the cameras were rolling and they recognized a good PR opportunity. And of course, the Israelis had no reason whatsoever to conduct anything but an objective and unbiased investigation. :rolleyes: And , again, you accept unconditionally the racist and insulting notion that Palestinians are so evil and subhuman that they would not only put their own children in harms way, but actually kill them for PR purposes. As the article to which i linked previously indicates, Palestinian children do get involved in the conflict. But again, you ignore the evidence that not only do Israelis do exactly the same thing, but that when they do they are not judged in the same way as the Palestinians by the US media. Surely if you are arguing that it is morally reprehensible to use children in conflicts, then you must apply the same standards to both Palestinians and Israelis. We also need to ask: What exactly is a “child,” for the purpose of this argument? I notice that many media outlets and reporters in America who complain about the Palestinians’ use of “children” are often the same people who, here at home, advocate charging 14 and 15 year old criminal offenders as adults because they are “old enough to know what they’re doing.” These people want it both ways - when it’s convenient for their argument, teenagers are responsible for their own actions, and when it’s not, they’re not. What’s your position on this issue? > [@](#): > > I don’t know how much of all of this is distorted by the media or outright propaganda. But it’s clear that the Palestinians certainly teach their children the kind of hatred against Israel that leads them to get involved in the conflict. Well, firstly, you admit that you have made no real effort to determine the accuracy of reporting on this issue. Then you assume the accuracy of that reporting and state that it’s “clear” what the situation is. And like others on this thread, you also make no attempt to determine whether something other than unprovoked “hatred against Israel” is responsible for Palestinian actions. > [@](#): > > Can anyone point me to a non-biased source for information on the shooting of Sara Abdul Azeem, the infant who was apparently shot by Jewish Settlers? The only references to this incident I have found so far are in Palestinian news sources. Has there been an official investigation? Were there any witnesses who saw this take place, other than the people in the car? Has the Israeli government launched an investigation? So far, all I can see is an accusation by Palestinian that Israeli settlers killed his child. I haven’t found any corroborating evidence. What would you consider an “unbiased source”? Maybe an Israeli TV report? You overlook one of the key aspects of American media coverage of this conflict - any Palestinian source is automatically considered suspect, yet official Israeli sources are often quoted unreflectively as if they told the unvarnished truth. And when the only witnesses to an action are the perpetrators and the victims, as in this case, where is your unbiased source going to come from? Here is a [report](http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,385800,00.html) from the _Guardian_ on Sara Abdul Azeem’s death. The last line, a quote from the father, is particularly instructive: > [@](#): > > At the family home in Kusra, an isolated village near the West Bank city of Nablus, there is a poster of a proud father holding a pretty two-year-old girl. The gunsight superimposed in red ink over her copper-coloured curls is not immediately apparent. > > On the afternoon of October 1, Sara was running a temperature, and the girl described by her family as a little chatterbox was quiet and listless. So her father, Abid al-Azeem Abdul al-Haq, left his potter’s workshop early to take her to a doctor in Nablus. > > He found total confusion: roadblocks and scores of Israeli soldiers with heavy armour. Three hospitals turned him away as they struggled to cope with incoming wounded. “I was ashamed. There were a lot of wounded and I was just coming with a small girl running a temperature,” her father said. It was well past 8pm, and dark when Mr al-Haq returned home with Sara in the back seat of his car cradled in the arms of her aunt, Reema Rabia. As he approached his village, he noticed a car idling by the side of the road. Mr al-Haq slowed down, and then sped up when he saw the car had yellow plates - which meant that it was an Israeli vehicle, possibly owned by settlers from the nearby Jewish settlement of Migdalim. There were two men in the back seat wearing skullcaps. > > As he overtook, the two men opened fire. The aunt grabbed Sara and lay down. Then she screamed that she had been shot. > > The child made no sound. Mr al-Haq did not stop driving until he reached the safety of his village. When he opened the car, Sara was in the well between the seats. Her brain had fallen out of her head. > > There were eight bullet holes in the car. Mr al-Haq says the settlers used to be welcome in the village. But he doubts they can live together now. > > “I believe the mentality of the Jews is like the wild west with cowboys and Indians. They believe the guy with the biggest weapon is the king,” he said. > > “The guy who shot at our car did not want to kill me, or Sara, or Reema, or even Yasser Arafat. He just wanted to kill any Arab.” > > Thirteen children have been killed in the violence, according to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem. But they do not include Sara. That is because the organisation is still investigating contradictory claims by the Israeli army that she was killed by her own father when he was cleaning his gun inside the house, or that he opened fire on the settlers first. > > Kusra lies in a part of the West Bank that remains under Israeli security and administrative control. Mr al-Haq did not clean his daughter’s blood off the red Renault for several days after her death, expecting the Israeli military or police to arrive to begin gathering evidence. > > No one came. > > “Mohammed al-Direh was lucky because one of the journalists recorded the minute when he was killed. Sara was not,” said her father. This last incident referred to here was captured by a cameraman, and according to the same _Guardian_ report: > [@](#): > > Those pictures led to widespread condemnation of Israel for excessive use of force against stone-throwing Palestinians. > > They also propelled thousands of Palestinian youths - including citizens of the Jewish state living inside Israel’s borders - to join the violent protests. This report indicates that it is pretty simplistic to argue that parental incitement is the only reason Palestinian youths and children becoming involved in the conflict. These people see their friends and relatives killed, and feel the need to retaliate. Now, while this next report contains no information on Sara’s death, you might be interested in what Amnesty International had to say about Israeli killings of children, and the use of children by the Palestinians (unless, of course, you think AI is a hopelessly liberal apologist for Palestinian terrorism). Their 2001 report _Borken Lives: A Year of Intifada_, available on the web [here](http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/MDE150832001?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CPALESTINIAN+AUTHORITY) in PDF, says: > [@](#): > > **Children** : > > A large proportion of those injured and killed by Israeli security forces included children usually present and often among those throwing stones during demonstrations. Sometimes children demonstrated on leaving school; sometimes they were called out of school to demonstrate. Many children were apparently killed by poorly targeted lethal fire; others,as the case studies indicate, appear to have been deliberately targeted. In many of the locations where children were killed there was no imminent danger to life nor reasonable expectation of future danger. > > Sami Fathi Abu Jazzar > > Sami Fathi Abu Jazzar was declared brain dead after being wounded in the head on 10 October 2000 when Israeli soldiers shot at a crowd of some 400 people, mostly young elementary school-children, who were throwing stones at an Israeli military post near Salah al-Din gate in Rafah in the Gaza Strip. Six others were injured. The children had been encouraged by older youths to leave their schools and demonstrate. Amnesty International delegates concluded that the lives of Israeli soldiers, whose position was heavily fortified and located far from the stone-throwers behind two wire fences,were not in danger and there was no justification for the use of lethal force. Sami Fathi Abu Jazzar died the following day, on the eve of his 12th birthday. > > Israeli government spokespersons and media have stated that the reason so many children have been killed has been the use by Palestinians of “child soldiers”. However, the fact that children are participating in riots and confrontations with the army does not mean that they are child soldiers. **A law enforcement force trained in riot control and equipped and prepared as required by international standards should not need to use firearms against stone-throwers. Children throwing stones are not military objectives for lethal attack by the Israeli forces.The killing and wounding of children has revealed a reckless disregard for life by Israeli soldiers.** > > The PA as well as armed groups such as Fatah have reportedly taught children to parade or strip rifles in camps.Hamas training sessions using children have been filmed.There are some members of the Palestinian security forces aged under 18 who are armed. It is probable that during the year-long intifada there have been children under 18 who have had possession of a gun or grenade and shot at Israelis or participated in gunfights, but it is uncommon. In general,children do not carry guns. In every case investigated by Amnesty International, the killing of a child appeared to have been an unlawful killing. The Israeli government’s failure to learn from errors in crowd control, to investigate killings, and to hold anyone to account for unlawful killings has meant that children and adults have continued to be killed when lives have not been in danger. The Palestinian security forces have also failed in their duty to protect and respect the lives of children. (pp. 20-22) I have bolded what i think is a key part of this report. I have not been arguing, and nor was i arguing in my earlier posts, that Palestinian children do not get involved in the conflict. Nor have i argued that their elders have played no role in inciting this involvement (although the AI report blames “older youths,” not adults). What i have been trying to show is that the Palestinian actions are rooted in something more complex than simple, unreflective hatred (as asserted by the OP), and that, no matter the reason behind the involvement of children, the Israeli security forces have showed little willingness to minimize the violence of their response. Their tendency to resort to deadly methods of crowd control when not in any imminent danger and when they so dramatically outgun the demonstraters is, in my opinion, as abhorrent as a suicide bombing. And Amnesty also has much to say on the issue of collective punishment that i brought up earlier, where the Israelis make little attempt to determine the individual responsible for certain actions, but instead carry out punitive action against the whole Palestinian community. The AI report, which has a whole section on this issue, begins the section in this way: > [@](#): > > “No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited… Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.” > _Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention_ > > The Israeli authorities have consistently used closures, curfews > and demolition of homes as a form of collective punishment against Palestinians. And in response to **David B** ’s most recent post: Well, first of all you ask me for citations about Israeli bombing of Palestinians, while yourself making the unsubstantiated assertion that > [@](#): > > they often send them into the zones where other Palestinians are firing weapons, they put themselves into a position where death is likely. In the middle of a warzone, it’s hard to determine which of the people are firing the guns at you and which are just there to be human shields. The AI report quoted above may not refute your unsupported assertion completely, but it certainly calls it into question. > [@](#): > > Strawman argument. Nobody here has made that argument. I know they didn’t. If you read my post you’ll see that the argument was made in the context of my comments on US media coverage. > [@](#): > > Are you purposely misstating what I said? I specifically said “The Israeli army” (emphasis added this time so maybe you’ll get it). So what do you do? Quote back what some extremist settlers did. Apples and oranges. And maybe **you’ll** get it one of these days that the Israeli army also does this. And to separate the army and the settlers might be convenient for your argument, but to the Palestinians they represent different aspects of the same problem. Indeed, the army often comes in to quell the disturbances caused by these “extremist settlers,” and take a wild guess as to whether they are more violent towards the settlers or towards the Palestinians with whom the settlers are clashing. > [@](#): > > Bombs landing randomly? Cite? Perhaps randomly was the wrong word. But if you’ve watched _any_ news coverage at all of this conflict you’ll be well aware that Israeli bombardments often hit houses and businesses of people totally unconnected with any actions against Israel. Who knows, maybe you’re right and those aren’t random occurrences, but a deliberate policy of terror on the part of the Israeli army? And, as the AI citation from the Geneva Convention shows, this form of collective punishment is illegal under the convention. > [@](#): > > Perhaps if the snipers and bomb-makers wouldn’t use those areas as hiding places, things like that wouldn’t happen. But like I said earlier, the problem is there is no specific place to strike back, so they do what they can – if a settlement is allowing terrorists to use their area as a base, well, I hate to paraphrase President Bush, but those who harbor terrorists are as bad as the terrorists themselves. And what of the people in those areas who might have absolutely no knowledge of who or where these “terrorists” are? The AI report that i cite above states: > [@](#): > > In Rafah and Khan Yunis up to 30 homes were demolished in single operations between March and July 2001. By August demolition of a few houses at a time was more common – > operations that caused less public outcry from abroad. Sometimes,especially on the West Bank, homes have been demolished ostensibly for lack of planning permission; at other times, especially in the Gaza Strip (where Israel does not have the right to demolish for lack of planning permission), the reason given has been “security”. In the name of “security” Israel appears to be planning to create a "no-go"area of between 70 and 500 metres wide around every settlement and every military installation. Many demolitions are also carried out as collective punishment in reprisal for attacks on Israelis. > > … > > Since the beginning of the intifada the Israeli authorities have demolished more than 200 houses in the West Bank. Although the official reason has often been because of lack of planning permission rather than security reasons, the demolition of the houses frequently appears to have been as a collective punishment for individual acts of violence and an attempt to expel Bedouin families from the area altogether. (pp. 84-85, 89) Again, in case you’re not getting it still, i’m not arguing that some Palestinians don’t support and help the suicide bombers. Nor do i support Palestinians who murder Israelis for any reason. I am simply trying to move beyond the simplistic “palestinian hatred” model of explanation, and also beyond the tendency of many on this thread to make every possible excuse for Israeli violence and no possible excuse for Palestinian violence. In supporting the cause of the Palestinians, i have explicitly repudiated the use of force of their part quite a few times on this thread. Yet those who defend Israel shrug Israeli use of force off while condemning the Palestinians unreservedly. And as i said in an earlier post, i do not hold all Israelis responsible for the actions of a few. Many Jews in and out of Israel are horrified at their government’s policies and actions, and refusals to serve in the occupied territiories are increasing in the Israeli Defense Forces. Some school students are now even signing pre-emptive declarations refusing to go to the West Bank etc. when they enter the IDF. > [@](#): > > Incidentally, FAIR is not exactly the most unbiased source of news, either. I never asserted that FAIR was perfect; i just gave an example of a particular study. What do you dispute about the FAIR reports? Do you dispute their figures? Or their interpretation of the figures? Or are you content simply to dismiss them without examining their argument? You would be well served by an argument that did something more than simply say that FAIR is not a perfect source. > [@](#): > > I wrote: > > Something is only “news” in the US when it involves a bombing, or multiple killings at once. The day-to-day, one-by-one murders carried out by the Israelis actually add up to more deaths than those carried out by Palestinians, yet we never hear of most of them. > > > [@](#): > > > > Then you said: > > > > Oh, this is cute. You complain about bias but then call what happens to Palestinians “murders” but what happens to Israelis are “deaths.” If you read that paragraph, you will see that i use the term “murders” to describe killings by both Israelis and Palestinians. The term “deaths” was what i said _resulted_ from the murders. If you have trouble determining the meaning of complex sentences, may i recommend _Fowler’s Modern English Usage_ or a similar usage book? The demonstrative pronoun “those” used in my paragraph above refers back to the antecedent “murders.” Parsing the sentence in order to remove the word “those,” it would read: “The day-to-day, one-by-one murders carried out by the Israelis actually add up to more deaths than \*\* the murders\*\* carried out by Palestinians, yet we never hear of most of them.” Now, in case you’re having trouble with this, i’ll say it unambiguously: In my opinion, killings by Israelis and by Palestinians that are not carried out in self-defence against an immediate and clear threat to life, are all murders. You can dispute my definition of what constitutes murder, but don’t attribute something to me that i never said. > [@](#): > > So? Are we supposed to judge who is right and who is wrong by the number of deaths to each side? In that case, the Taliban was clearly in the right and the U.S. is evil. Again, you pull a statement made in one context out and use it in another. This sentence was made, like the other one you cited earlier, in the context of my argument about US media coverage of the issue, and the way in which it fails to reflect the reality of how many people die on each side in this conflict. It was not a statement about relative evil. In fact, if i remember correctly, i have yet to accuse either the Israelis or the Palesitinians of evil. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/28 "2002-04-01T00:07:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by minty green \* > \*\*It’s rather telling that in a post defending the notion that Israel is dovish and conciliatory, you spent the first 90% of it describing how ignorant and violent the Palestinians have been, and the last 10% stating that the Israelis should have used even more violence. In other words, you think that because they haven’t used as much force as they might have been justified in using, you consider them a bunch of bleeding heart peacenicks. Okey doke. I’ll keep that in mind next time the Israelis open a can of Dove Brand Whoop-Ass on the Palestinian Authority. > > \*\* And what would your point be? We can’t really judge whether the Israeli’s actions were appropriate or not without analyzing what they were reacting against. Naturally, that’s where I spent th bulk of my effort. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/29 "2002-04-01T00:08:05Z")
Mhendo: Okay, let’s see here… I said that the Palestinians incite their own children to violence, and used as an example such things as training camps where children practice being bombers and using weapons, and that schools teach hatred towards Israelis. I also pointed out that children are intentionally released from school in order to participate in potentially deadly protests. I said that children are often killed by Israelis firing into crowds because gunmen open fire in otherwise peaceful protests. Based on this, you call me a ‘racist’, and claim that my views are highly distorted. To support this claim, you cite an Amnesty International report that says that Palestinians incite their children, let them out of school to participate in potentially deadly protests, and that there are camps children go to where they learn to be terrorists, and that most of the Israeli killings happen when crowd control gets out of hand during violent protests. If that’s your idea of a refutation, you need to do some more work. Incidentally, can we call a moratorium on accusations of racism in this particular conflict, please? Race has nothing to do with this. Accusing someone of racism is just a shortcut for more substantive criticisms of their position. Part of the problem with the Palestinians is that they refuse to take the blame for ANY of this. If a parent doesn’t want his child to protest, he can damned well keep him home. If some Palestinians don’t agree with the terror tactics of their government, they can speak up or leave. If Arafat doesn’t agree with the tactics of some in his own government, he can speak up. If the world saw the Palestinians honestly trying to correct the injustices perpetrated on their side, then we would be more willing to take Israel to task for their own problems. But the Palestinians will not concede ANYTHING. They won’t negotiate, they won’t compromise, they won’t accept responsibility for even the most horrific acts perpetrated by suicide bombers. Arafat was offered the best deal he is ever going to get by an Israeli government in 2000. It gave the Palestinians about 95% of everything they said they wanted. He turned it down flat. I don’t recall any Palestinians protesting Arafat to accept that offer. I don’t recall any suicide bombings of PA headquarters to try and get Arafat to change his mind. I don’t remember any Arab nations pressuring Arafat to take what was clearly a good deal for the Palestinian people. Instead, he called off negotiations and started the intifada. The other possibility is that we should just take the Palestinians at their word - in Arabat, the Palestinian authority still calls for the destruction of Israel. Israeli children are taught that Israel is not a legitimate state. Is that what they really want? To destroy Israel? If not, why do they teach it? If so, then exactly how is Israel supposed to negotiate with them? ---
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/30 "2002-04-01T00:21:59Z")
Do Israelis send their youth into places where people are eating pizza or shopping or praying to blow themselves up? Do Palestinians send their youth into places where people are eating pizza or shopping or praying to blow themselves up? Who is more credible, Sharon or Arafat? Why are Palestinians on CNN demanding that the U.S. do something to stop the violence? Do they want peace or do they want attention? ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/31 "2002-04-01T00:25:22Z")
The point is simple, **Scylla**. The Israelis are not acting like Gandhi. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but they’re being no more dovish and conciliatory than the U.S. has been in the wake of 9/11. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/32 "2002-04-01T00:42:33Z")
Er, ‘Arabic’, not ‘Arabat’. Anyway, where are the Palestinian moderates? Where is THEIR peace movement? Why is there absolutely no pressure whatsoever on Arafat to moderate his viewpoint? Where are the Palestinian protests against suicide bombings? ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/33 "2002-04-01T02:15:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by minty green \* > \*\*The point is simple, **Scylla**. The Israelis are not acting like Gandhi. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but they’re being no more dovish and conciliatory than the U.S. has been in the wake of 9/11. \*\* Yes, I agree that Israel is not practicing non-violence. However, I think Isreal’s policy IS more dovish than the US. The US declared al Qaeda arch-enemies and put the Taliban with them. They then overthrew the Taliban government. They boast about killing as many all Qaeda and Taliban as they can, using thermobaric weapons, daisy cutters, smart bombs, etc. The analogous policy would be for Israel to classify the Palistinan Authority as terrorists because they harbor terrorists and their leader calls for terrorist acts. Then Israel would overthrow the PA, substitute a different government and kill as many member of Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc., regardless of collateral damage. We may see this policy at some point, but it hasn’t happened yet. [sub]I was feeling sad, when a man told me, "Cheer up; things could be worse. So I cheered up, and things did get worse.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/34 "2002-04-01T02:21:59Z")
“More dovish and conciliatory” != “dovish and conciliatory.” ---
**Author:** ![Urban\_Ranger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Urban\_Ranger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urban_Ranger)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/35 "2002-04-01T07:28:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > The analogous policy would be for Israel to classify the Palistinan Authority as terrorists because they harbor terrorists and their leader calls for terrorist acts. So what you are saying here is while Palestinian suicide bombers are terrorists Israeli soldiers and settlers who target civilians with lethal forces aren’t. That’s an interesting position to take. ---
**Author:** ![Nietzsche](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8dc957/32.png) [@Nietzsche](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nietzsche)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/36 "2002-04-01T08:14:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > We can’t really judge whether the Israeli’s actions were appropriate or not without analyzing what they were reacting against. Naturally, that’s where I spent th bulk of my effort. Perhaps it would serve you well to spend the bulk of your efforts in understanding that Israel has no legal right to occupy the lands it has gained in much of the wars it has been involved in. In fact, it has been against the UN law since 1949, yet the most anyone can seem to ask Israel to relinquish is the territory taken in the 1967 war; Not that they seem all that willing to let that go either. You stated in an earlier post… > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > The problem with these kind of conflicts is the double standard that arises. Indeed. You’re probably talking about the same type of hypocrisy that exists when a state can use a UN mandate to justify its existence, yet summarily ignore every single other mandate that requires it to stop occupying foreign lands or to develop settlements on foreign lands. Double standard indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Nightime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Nightime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nightime)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/37 "2002-04-01T10:08:39Z")
It seems to me that all of this arguing over the tactics used by both sides is pointless, and does not answer the OP. All it really amounts to is debating which side has been more calculating in fighting a war while making it seem as though they are really just victims. For example, one person says, “I think Palestine has been more successful, because by using suicide bombers and children they make themselves seem forced to desperation, show the world they believe in what they are doing, and cleverly make it hard to retaliate properly.” Another says “Israel has been more successful, because they have better public relations with the US, because they offer land, which implies they currently own it, and because they use an official army which makes them not look like terrorists.” The problem is, why should we defend one side because they have been more devious? Isn’t there a more fundamental way to determine what to do than to side with the most devious? > [@](#): > > The fundamental reasons why Palestinians and other Arabs attack Israel is that they hate Isrealis and they hate Jews. > [@](#): > > Perhaps it would serve you well to spend the bulk of your efforts in understanding that Israel has no legal right to occupy the lands it has gained in much of the wars it has been involved in. These are two opinions of the fundamentals behind the conflict. I think the true reason is a combination- Palestinians do not believe Israel has a right to exist, but if they didn’t hate the Jews so much they would definitely have taken Israel up on some of its past offers. So the OP is in a sense right, in that stopping the hatred would solve the problem, but I have seen no good solution nor do I have one myself. As for the right for Israel to exist, the reason why the US would support them is no surprise. Israel is a small island in a sea of extreme hostility against them. They just want to protect their homes (I say homes in the sense that yes, that is where they have lived for some time.) For all the rhetoric used by both sides, the real reason US public sentiment is with Israel is that they are seen as having only a small amount of land, and people don’t understand why it is so vital to many arabs that they not be allowed to exist there. I would like to see both sides explain their views on these fundamental problems, and what should be done about them, as the OP asked, rather than everyone continuing to boast that their side has been more clever. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/38 "2002-04-01T15:01:34Z")
\*\* > [@](#): > > For all the rhetoric used by both sides, the real reason US public sentiment is with Israel is that they are seen as having only a small amount of land, and people don’t understand why it is so vital to many arabs that they not be allowed to exist there. \*\* Not to hijack but– I’m curious about how US public opinion feels towards Israel and the Palestinians. We know how the government feels, but how about the citizens? Does anyone know about the existence of polling data that might gleam this kind of information? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/39 "2002-04-01T16:13:33Z")
They mentioned on CNN yesterday that the people in the U.S. were favoring Israel’s actions by more than a 4-1 ratio. There is almost as much support for Israel’s actions as there is in Israel itself. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2002, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002/40 "2002-04-01T16:13:48Z")
A few observations: [list=1] [li]“Palestinians” and “Israelis” are as united in their views about these issues as **december** and **stoid** are on the proper stance for American politicians to take.[/li][li]With that caveat taken into account, Palestinians are not interested in Israeli citizenship; they want to be citizens of Palestine, a separate nation. While the idea of a single nation occupying the land called Palestine before 1948 may sound reasonable to us sitting over here in America, Canada, Australia, etc., the fact of the matter is that Israel was founded as a state for the Jewish people. Palestinians no more “fit” the qualifications for being a good Israeli citizen than Billy Graham fits the qualifications for being a good citizen of the Islamic Republic of Iran.[/li][li]The issue is made more complex by religious issues brought forward by both sides. There are large parts of the Israeli populace who would not grant Israeli citizenship to any Palestinian even if he formally requested it – they would qualify only as “resident aliens.” (I’m sure one of our Orthodox Jews can supply the official Torah terminology for this, but the point is that to these people that is the sole role available to anyone not a Jew who cares to live in Israel.) While I’m not saying that the Israeli government buys into this, there is an Israeli equivalent to Jesse Helms with equal political power demanding that it be the case.[/li][li]The sincere beliefs of people on both sides that they are the rightful residents of the land and that the other side are interlopers do have to be taken into account.[/li][li]The issues cited above are not those of the true extremists. Less than 20 years ago the Gush called for the genocide of the Palestinians as the “new Amalek.” Two conspirators were stopped before they could carry out careful plans to blow up the Dome of the Rock. (cf. Karen Armstrong for cites) I trust that the activities of the Palestinian extremists need not be cited.[/li][li]Palestinians have **not** been offered a separate state, but merely autonomous areas to and from which access would be controlled by Israel.[/li][/list=1] Quite simply, this is not a situation where “men of good will” can negotiate a compromise that everyone can accept. There are religious extremists, political extremists, pragmatic politicians seeking the best results for their side, and every other complication imaginable short of divine intervention (which religious extremists of both sides do expect, BTW). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palestinian-and-arab-hatred-is-the-problem-but-whats-the-answer/101002.md?page=3)