Fact: many of the recent attacks have been committed by members of Fatah, Arafat’s political party, or by Force 17, Arafat’s personal guard. Even if Arafat’s control over Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and PFLP are completely gone, he maintains some influence over his personal guard and political party.
Fact: The media in Palestine is state run. Arafat has a direct mandate to what they broadcast. And they broadcast sermons made calling on Palestinians to die in martyrdom, to go out and shoot Israelis. They broadcast shows with children singing about the glory of shahids and jihads.
Fact: Textbooks in Palestine still contain anti-Israel references. The PLO charter still contains advocation of “liquidation of a Zionist state.” The imams still call for Jewish blood.
Fact: Militants are arrested, often to be out on the streets within a few hours or days. House arrest is a joke.
Fact: Arafat has made repeated condemnations against terrorism in the international press, but these are rarely broadcast on Palestinian media.
As much as I dislike Bush, he made a strong statement in the wake of 9/11 which could possibly determine American foreign policy for decades to come. That statement was something along the lines of “We will make no distinction between terrorists and the governments who harbor them.” All Israel is trying to do here is point the finger at Arafat. If he is not directly coddling terrorism, the best he is doing is just giving Hamas, IJ, and PFLP a convenient base from which to launch terror attacks. The Bush is serious about not making a distinction between terrorists and those that harbor them, the finger should be pointing directly at Arafat.
The Israeli government has never let attacks against Palestinian civilians go unpunished. The Israeli government does not knowingly harbor groups who target Palestinian children intentionally.
god damn, TQM, god damn. That’s all I can say when I see such a categorical and vulgarly aggressive response.
Efrem said that Israel and Palestinian Terrorists are two sides of the same coin, because they both kill innocents and “radicalize the populations on both sides”. While I don’t agree with Efrem’s assertion that that is all both sides do, his comment indicating a vicious cycle of violence is a very good one. You responded with the example of the US and the Taliban. The US started hammering the Taliban with the approval of the majority of world governments after discussions with world leaders and strategists. Israel did no comparable thing. The US and the UK brought forth an acceptable quantity of evidence that pointed to OBL as the culprit of the 9/11 tragedy, that outlined he was being harboured by the Taliban, and indeed that he had many close ties to the organization. Israel makes many similar claims, but seems less forthcoming on presenting the evidence and cares not for world opinion. The Taliban essentially bit their thumb at the rest of the world and thus deserved what was coming (anyone with a minimum of foresight knew they deserved “it” back in 1997). The Palestinians, on the other hand, have put forward a diplomatic effort over the years to slow down or stop the violence. The US struck at the Taliban, tried to avoid civilian deaths, and sent aid to the Afghani people. Israel struck at infrastructure in heavily populated areas, used assassination, and blockaded millions of people. This is after their many years conduct towards the Palestinian people that many would call questionable.
And so forth. Your example is applicable only on a very shallow level. Your example as far as concerns the US and Nazi Germany is way out in the Outer Limits, and more a manifestation of Godwin’s Law than any kind of relevant argument. Please spare me.
Now, this does not mean that I support the PA or Palestinian terrorists. I do however take issue with the methods of a sovereign country against a group of (essentially) refugees when individuals among those refugees decide to take matters into their own hands and kill innocent Israelis. Punish the individuals if you are able to, but try to save the greater picture for god’s sake.
A much more appropriate example to call up in such a discussion is the Serbia/ethnic Albanians problem. Kosovo IS Serbia and has been for a very long time. You have a lot of Muslim ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, who are at odds with the Orthodox Serbs. The ethnic Albanians want degrees of autonomy independence, even though a chunk of Kosovo’s population is Serbian, Serbia tries to put them in their place over a period of decades. Finally the KLA emerges–it’s a terrorist outfit heavily involved in smuggling of arms and drugs-- and positions itself as “freedom fighters” for Kosovo. No question of it, the KLA (like Hamas and similar radical organizations) is a dastardly group of people whose main business is incitement (much like some people on this board) and violence. They begin to target Serbs, from civilians to policemen, and Milosevic, that bloated idiot, finally sends the Yugoslav army to Kosovo to crush all resistance. Since the KLA fade into cover when they need to, Milosevic is able to find few of the terrorists, and resorts to driving the ethnic Albanians out of the area in an exercise of ethnic cleansing and slaughter.
In that example you have a sovereign state consisting of a majority X religion, with a sizeable group of people of Y religion ostensibly causing trouble.
Of course your wishing away the context makes your assertion meaningless. All of that supposed 'oppression, occupation, and human rights abuses’is a result of making the security of innocent civilians in Israel a priority. OF course it matters not to you that before the Intifada none of this was an issue.
The numbers are ridiculous. More Germans died in WWII than Jews. One however targeted an innocent population for annihilation and one was simply massacred innocents. Of course when you add all of the dead terrorists and suicide bombers in the list of dead palestinians it makes this claim even more farcical.
Excuse me? When innocent Palestinians are killed the Israelis respond by moving tanks?
The point was that the response of the population gives away their relationship to killed innocents. One cheers it and one deplores it.
Nah, just that the arabs have never learned to accept the fact that the Jews ought to live peacefully in their own country. They make lots of excuses to try to validate the continuin massacre of innocent Jews.
Barak was booted for foolishly believing that the Palestinians wanted peace when they said openly to their own people in Arabic that their intention was destruction of the entire state of Israel. He gave them land, guns, an interim state and just as they said they would, they used it as a launching pad to massacre more innocent Jews. Who would want a person as short-sighted as that as a leader?
Precisely, your attempt to rationalize the intentional massacre of innocents by comparing it to the attempted prevention of said massacre is the kind of thought used by Islamists worldwide to perpetrate the horrors that we have seen both here and in Israel. **
[/QUOTE]
Moderators, I accidentally pressed the submit reply button instead of the preview in my reply above. Would you be so kind as to cut out all the text beginning from the “quoted” part (in bold). I had not meant for it to show up. Thank you.
Btw, my post is not finished yet, so please hold on if you have one of the stinging replies that seem so common in this thread.
to continue: In that example you have a sovereign state consisting of a majority X religion, with a sizeable group of people of Y religion ostensibly causing trouble. There is land dispute (what a surprise) and there is bad blood. Serbia/Yugoslavia is a sovereign nation that has been for several decades the closest ally the West has in the East, with a constitution modelled on the American one, and with many honorary accomplishments particularly during WWII against the Nazis and their Croat puppets.
In spite of this, it took one moron in power (Milosevic), a few deranged Serb army leaders (some still being hunted today), a strong pro-Albanian lobby in the US, and a smear campaign championed by Piggy Albright to turn the world against Yugoslavia. Suddenly the KLA weren’t filthy murdering terrorists, but freedom fighters with a noble cause and the support of the West.
Imagine the dismay of the Serbian people (who, by the way, had little or no knowledge of the atrocities committed by a few factions in the army) when:
a bunch of murderers and smugglers declared Kosovo not to be Serbia
some of the oldest Serbian Orthodox churches in the country were destroyed (Kosovo again)
Serbs were attacked and driven out of Kosovo by Ethnic Albanians (whose country is actually right next door??)
Serbs were vilified in the eyes of the world
Serbs were attacked and their country bombed flat by their own long-time allies
And so forth. But at the time, the Serbs were murderers, ethnic cleansers, racists, and so forth, because they had a leader who was completely insane and such is the power of popular opinion and vulgar chatter. The terrorists (KLA) were seen as the good guys. When they were eventually and at last neutralized in Serbia, these “good guys” hopped over to Macedonia, renamed themselves, and are still persisting in their dastardly plans to form a greater Albania through the techniques of murder, ethnic cleansing, intimidation, etc.
Funny, people in general thought they could see the whole picture back then too, just as a number of them claim to do here. Let’s not even mention the Afghanistan issue, back when a bunch of idiots on these boards were making noises about the death of all Afghanis, nuke Afghanistan, Islam is an evil and violent religion, and so forth.
I am commenting briefly on your problem areas below. Throughout this message, I insert some comments directly on your text, in italics and square brackets.
Well, as you can see you’re the only one suggesting such a thing. Then
Admirable offer, I agree, but the art of negotiation is more complex than that. Indeed, the high quality of the offer might have had something to do with its rejection, sad as that may seem.
False characterization again–those were acts of terrorism and, heinous as such acts are, you can’t hold all Palestinians responsible for them any more than you can claim that all Basques are violently opposed to Spanish sovereignty and active in such terrorism.
Could say the same for the Arabs in the region. There’s always more to every story than categorical assertions like yours would have us believe.
Yes, it’s part of conflict. Listen to all the rhetoric you still hear today about Pearl Harbour, for example. Israel is indeed in a very difficult position. When you dump all the blame for this on the Palestinians (or the Israelis), however, you are not helping Israel (or Palestine), you are simply making a contribution to radicalizing (polarizing) both sides in this conflict. In case it has somehow escaped you, problems are solved when differences are minimized, not further polarized or radicalized.
More cheap tactics in your first sentence there–I said the PA attempted to distance themselves from acts of terror. If Arafat’s own security forces have been involved in terrorism that doesn’t necessarily invalidate my point. And was there actually evidence that acts of terror were ordered and sponsored by PA? In recent years? And how does that compare to Israel’s controversial assassinations and intimidation tactics, to mention but a couple?
Of course, it’s all part of the political process, wherein each side asks the question: “how may I use available elements to the maximum advantage for my position?”
Of course they do, there are heavy pressures on Arafat and the PA, and these men may be used in future actions against Israel should the situation continue to get worse. The PA doesn’t have a lot of resources, and they won’t throw away anything that ay come in useful in the furture (including what popular support remains) if they can help it.
In Afghanistan I see Taliban and Al-Qaeda targets being taken down with International consensus and cooperation, while relief for the population is organized and delivered, the immediate formation of a new broad base government is sponsored, and monetary assistance is prepared. In Israel I see very few of these elements–none of the positive ones in fact. I do see that millions of people are blockaded by a hostile occupying force, led by a right-wing hawk who was found responsible by an Israeli tribunal in 1983 for the deaths of hundreds of Palestinian refugees. As for the current blocakde situation, apparently pregnant women have been forced to deliver children at checkpoints because Palestinians are not even allowed to travel to a hospital.
I suppose that’s nothing new considering the low points of how the Palestinians have been treated for the last 50 years.
Foolish, I agree, but how do you fight against popular sentiment? With tanks and fighter jets? That’s called oppression and subjugation, and simply leads to more violence (Milosevic found out the really hard way). Plus, there is the contentious issue of Israeli settlements, not to mention attacks by the Israeli side (military or civilian). It would be foolish to call every Israeli attack justified, just as it is foolish to claim the same for Palestinian attacks.
My emphasis. What is your basis for this extraordinary assertion?
Better back that bold statement with better material than the biased categorical views you have provided so far. Actually, I am beginning to think that your good sense is far too clouded to really see anything I am posting here–you certainly haven’t identified my position, although you find it convenient to think you have.
“Fools like you”?? Hello, are there any MODERATORS left in this forum? Does a strong opinion over a controversial topic entitle you to reply in such an offensive and vulgar tone? Do you feel you have the right to insult me and group me with people you find distasteful? And when you don’t even understand my position, that goes from being merely obnoxious to rich. At least we have established that you are not suited for a career in diplomacy!
But to address your point–poorly expressed as it was–it seems many of the Israeli actions against the Palestinians are just not that surgical. And to launch an attack in the same immediate area as a school, at an hour when children are known to be running around, is irresponsible and counterproductive (in fact there is a thread on the counterproductivity of Israeli actions in this forum).
Again, this sounds more like the Outer Limits than a serious point. The US was not interested in negotiating with Afghanistan–that was made very clear from the beginning. Therefore they had no need to exert pressure that would influence the decisions of the Taliban. The US went in there fast and hard, their demands were not met, they proceeded to take what they needed (well, they’re still taking it). Perhaps you can outline how in your eyes this is “precisely” like the situation we are discussing?
Another false assumption in a long line of them, TQM. At any rate, you didn’t address the point being challenged or my question. The Intifada, by the way, is not that old. These issues have existed for decades, longer than the uprising. I will suggest to you that the actions on both sides are intended to influence negotiations. That’s part of the reason why Arafat is still alive. The actions on both sides result in terror. Both sides claim to want to set up a peaceful environment for their suffering people. And so forth. Not such great differences, as Efrem pointed out.
You can twist these things as far as you want, TQM, and still not get anywhere. Or do you have precise figures on how many innocents were killed on both sides of the Palestinian/Israeli problem? Over the years? Adds up, doesn’t it? If you don’t have a clue, stop wasting my time with this equivocal avoidance.
You didn’t say “innocent Palestinians”, you just said innocents. My assertion stands.
Here I believe you are engaged in more of your generalizing. Sure, some Palestinians cheer when they hear that the “occupying enemy” has been struck. Do all of them cheer? Even the majority? No. Is this a thin rhetorical device of yours to downgrade the Palestinians to the level of savages? Looks like it.
Another simplistic assessment of the situation, but I think you know that. The Palestinians contest the right of the Israelis to the land. This is not an “excuse” to massacre innocent Jews, but a reason to resist against them and their occupation (detestable as the results of such a thing are).
Are we using the same definition of massacre here??? Anyway: On the contrary, Barak had more vision than you give him credit (or are able to perceive). You seem to have fallen victim to Sharon’s smear campaign efforts. Barak understood the simple fact that generations of hatred are not going to be removed by an easy arrangement, and he sought to grant the Palestinians a standard of living and authority like no one before him had ever offered. I believe this ambitious and honourable plan failed owing to a number of factors, none of them directly Barak’s fault (he had the majority of Parliament behind him, a remarkable feat in itself for such a move). He certainly made more progress than any leader before him, and if the Palestinians had not been forced to deal with a policy of overwhelming Israeli force and fork-tongued Israeli leaders for 50 years, perhaps things would have gone better.
You can argue that the current Palestinian problem has been made worse by generations of bigoted and hostile Israeli leadership. Look at Ben-Gurion, whining about how Israel is a weak and oppressed country while at the same time his not at all weak and opressed armies were fighting to capture more Arab territory. M. Begin was a former terrorist for crying out loud, he led frequent acts of terrorism against Arab and british military AND civilian targets–then managed to market himslef in such a way as to win the Nobel Peace prize. Yidzhak Rabin refused to speak with the Palestinians for years, kept up the philosophy of overwhelming force, and was eventually pressured into signing the Oslo agreement. When he did sign it, he delayed implementation while he expanded the controversial West Bank settlements! He managed to win a Nobel Prize too. Simon Peres, probably one of the best of this lot, ordered the borders of Gaza and the West Bank closed and transformed both into gigantic detention camps.
Palestinian actions are in part a product of a long history of being lied to, oppressed, repressed, being slapped in detention, stolen from, relocated, and so forth. Barak himself came under fire for several “lapses” in judgement, such as the June 24, 1999 raid against Lebanon. But, in spite of him being a career soldier (or perhaps because of it?) and in spite of being guilty of such niceties as assassination on foreign soil on at least one occasion, he seems the only Israeli leader who truly understood what was going on and how it might be fixed. How many other Israeli leaders made the peace process the core of their government?
The Hawk Sharon, on the other hand, who is nothing but a loathsome right-wing fanatic, didn’t make it in Barak’s government because he opposed Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights, and favoured construction of more Jewish housing in East Jerusalem. His position is “keeping maximum land and political rights for the Jewish state and giving the very minimum of both to the Palestinians” in the words of the BBC. He led the 1982 invasion and occupation of Lebanon without the express permission of the prime minister. In spite of later apologists, Sharon was found responsible for the massacre of Palestinians at the hands of lebanese Christians. Do we really expect much progress under a bigot with such a track record?
Another cheap technique, and in this one you manage to call me an Islamist? What are you, Zenster under cover? Have you lost all your senses in your self-righteous fog of rage? Your insults notwithstanding, your original bigoted, categorical, and one-sided post still makes no sense. Your follow-up post, packed with under-handed debate techniques and insults, pretty much established that yours is an argument of emotion and not of reason. Please correct that or keep your biased rhetoric to yourself.
Just brought a book back here to the library called the Battle For Jerusalem by John Hagee where he has a Quote from Arafat saying they will martyr every child until they get what they want. I will get the whole quote if the book is back on the shelves in a bit.
When Rabin became PM, he stopped government spending on the settlements, and the spending freeze continued until 1996, when Likud took over the government.
Yitzhak Rabin probably fought harder for peace in Israel than almost any Israeli or Palestinian has since or after, and he paid for that with his life. I don’t agree with all of his positions, but if anyone deserved a Nobel Prize, it was Rabin.
Obviously all war will fall under at least two of those three conditions. Big fucking deal: that’s how I feel.
Obviously they are not just like “us.” If they were just like us they wouldn’t be at war with Israel so many times in the past. That is just one comparison. It is just as easy to say Israel isn’t just like us either. In fact, that is the whole friggin’ point of having seperate nations. People are not the same everywhere in all ways. Their lives are different. Their opinions are different. The way they look at life is different. The languages they speak are different. The foods they eat are different. People are not the same.
I think that is really an obvious point you need to get around to understanding. Once you’ve accepted that you can quit painting strawmen of the posters here and read what they’ve posted.
I asked you in the pit to back these assertations up, and I’ll ask you to do it here, too.
I guess my point is-the terrorists strike at Israel, killing civilians. Israel fires back, killing civilians. The terrorists fire back. Israel fires back, etc etc…
It’s a cycle…and it’s not working.
What do the Israeli textbooks say about the Palestinians?
By now, I think, SOMETHING has to be done. This constant sniping isn’t doing anything. I just hate seeing anyone get killed.
Anymore, it seems like the only thing to do is just let them kill each other-because it’s not going to stop.
This depresses me. I hate seeing things like this. Yes, I’m an idealist.
Moderator’s Note: I realize this is a rather impassioned discussion, but remember, personal insults are out of line in Great Debates. “That’s a foolish argument” is one thing; “you are a fool to make such an argument” is another.
I agree that there is a ‘cycle of violence’ and I aslo know what its beginning point is. The ‘cycle’ you described is known as ‘the intifada’. It has this Arabic name because it is initiated and carried out by the Palestinians. The Israeli response to the ‘intifada’ is part of what you call the ‘cycle of violence’, but its origins are Arab attacks on civilians. The obvious fact is that if the ‘intifada’ did not exist, there would be no ‘cycle of violence’.
Irrelevant. If every sovereign country needed the approval of the international community every time it needed to protect it citizens we’d be in the stone age.
It is widely known and widely reported that the PA harbors and aids terrorists. In many cases, they themselves (force 17 and Fatah) are the terrorists. Arafat pledged to arrest and detain the terrorists and then released them all from jail about a year ago. That the PA harbors terrorists is obvious. As far as the ‘evidence’, this is ridiculous as it is openly available in your morning paper (unless you live in Syria or Iran).
Aha, and this makes their behavior wrong?
The PA knowingly harbors and aids terrorists. Israel asked them to (and they even signed a pledge to) put a stop to such attacks and they have not. Israel asked them to (and they pledged to) arrest the terrorists, instead they released them from jail and threatened all those who help Israel find them with death. No different than the Taliban.
Yes an effort that was very revealing when it turned out that Arafat refused the best offer he would ever get and provoked violence. The honesty of these diplomatic efforts are legitimately judged by the corollary actions of those who engage in them.
The US can strike away from populated area because that is the geography of Afghanistan. In wars where this was inevitable, the US did too. As far as assassination - the folks who were assassinated were terrorist leaders who Israel has repeatedly requested be arrested. One who would not assassinate a leader of an active terrorist organization that was planning to kill more innocents is as immoral as the murderer.
Yes, outer limits. Reductio Ad Absurdum. Showing that the premise was ridiculous because it lacked context. I have no intention of sparing you from rigid logical analysis.
How for heavens sake? Should Israel simply open all of its borders to anyone and make no effort to stem the tide of the massacre of innocents? Should it simply sit back while Hamas and others openly plot to destroy Israel entirely by violent means.
Now as we are about to see, you are about to engage in all manner of silliness which you accuse me of:
No, you are. Because you reject the idea that Israel has the right defend itself with the means available to it. Your ideas that Israel end its checkpoints (which every country has at its border) and other security measures amounts essentially to what I have stated.
Um, ‘the high quality of the offer’ caused it’s rejection? Aha. Sounds reasonable to me!!
It is precisely this type thinking that Israel needs to deal with when trying to make peace with people who wish them dead.
Yours is the false characterization. I never said that all Palestinians are responsible. What I did say was that the Palestinian side, for whatever reason has never had a significant movement which firmly and openly advocated peaceful co-existence. The PA textbooks still call all Jews traitorous and thieves among other nasty things:
A statement by Naser Ahmad, an official in the PA’s Political Guidance Directorate, that appeared in the Palestinian Authority Daily on November 7, 1998:
“Corruption is a Jewish trait worldwide. So much so that one can seldom find corruption that was not masterminded by Jews or that Jews are not responsible for. They are well known for their intense love of money and its accumulation. The way in which they get hold of that money does not interest them in the least. On the contrary—they would use the most basic despicable ways, to realize their aim, so long as those who might be affected were non-Jews. A Jew would cross any line if it were in his interest.”
They do not teach that Israel has any right to exist, and they have openly said in Arabic in their own press that they intend to wipe Israel off the map.
"On February 1 Palestine National Council (PNC) Speaker Salim Za’anoun held a press conference in Cairo to announce the establishment of the “Commission of National Independence” (Hay’at al istiqlal al watani). Although this announcement came as a surprise to many, the idea to establish the organization had been vetted by Za’anoun with top Palestinian leaders in Ramallah several weeks earlier.
Typically, new Palestinian organizations and committees do not attract much attention; there are many of them and their influence with the upper echelon of decision makers in the PA is limited. But those reportedly involved with this initiative included an impressive list of luminaries: Fatah Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouthi, PA Security heads Jabril Rajoub and Amin al-Hindi, Hamas leaders Ismail Abu Shanab and Mahmoud al Zahar, PLO Political Department Head Farouq Qaddumi, and respected human rights advocate Haidar Abdel Shafi, among others. As a result, the Commision’s draft platform has drawn extensive coverage in the Arab press.
The most stunning element in the document is the statement that articles in the PLO Covenant calling for the destruction of Israel remain valid:
“The establishers [of this organization, including the Speaker of the PNC] consider that the PLO Covenant remains in place inasmuch as the PNC has not until now met to ratify the changes which were previously suggested, particularly that a legal committee was not formed to adopt the demanded modifications.”
These clauses, many of which referred to “armed struggle as the only way to liberate Palestine,” are the ones Arafat claimed to have nullified in 1996 and which, at Israel’s insistence, the Palestine National Council confirmed were nullified at a December 1998 session in Gaza attended by President Clinton. "
Now, you may not believe all the rhetoric, but it would be refreshing if there were more popular support behind peaceful statements that are offered by the likes of Sari Nusseibeh. And don’t bother to argue that there would be if Israel would change, because there never was significant support for those ideas, even before the ‘blockades’ and ‘checkpoints’.
I like this methodology. When you see that the facts don’t work your way you simply brush them aside as too general or the like. So tell me all about those innocent Arabs who were being massacred by marauding Jewish mobs in British Palestine. Find me a comparison to the 1929 Hebron massacre. Or the mobs who violently drove the Jews out of their homes from what is today known as the ‘Arab quarter’ of Jerusalem. Find me a Jewish leader who attested their intent to wipe out all Arabs as the supreme Palestinian religious leader (Grand Mufti) did - in regard to Jews - when he met with Hitler. (All this before a state of Israel mind you - no ‘occupied lands’ no ‘Israeli aggression’, no ‘checkpoints’ , no’intimidation’).
And you refuse to realize that problems are solved when assessed realistically as opposed to in a fantasy world. Of course I’d like to believe that if only we offered the Palestinians enough they would stop the massacre of innocents. However, once Israel went beyond the call in their offer the facts became clear.
Yours is the common problem of many diplomats who in their eagerness to find any solution put blinders on in order to convince themselves that they have found the solution.
The fact that the PA has continued to incite its population since day 1 of Oslo as opposed to preparing it for peace is the prime example of that which diplomats try to wish away. When we see what the PA textsbooks teach, and how the PA official mouthpiece praises suicide bombers (Don’t believe it? Go check out the SEPT. 11 (!) edition of Al-Hayat Al-Jedidah, the official PA newspaper which praised suicide attacks. Just a touch of bad timing no?) what are we to do? Close our eyes and make believe that it doesn’t exist?
Here is a challenge: Find one (just one) significant (not a small or renegade) Arab organization that openly condemned suicide bombings of innocents prior to Sept. 11. Even to this day almost all of the major Arab-American organizations prevaricate when asked to repudiate such acts. (They also believe that the Mossad was behind 9-11. I personally heard this during that week on NPR).
When folks like me see this what are we supposed to think? Is this a people that really wants peace? One that defends intentional mass murder of innocents?
Go read about the schools in the PA where suicide bombers have posters glorifying them. Read about how Arafat praises suicide bombers ."(New York Times, January 8, 1996). Read about the PA summer camps where kids are taught terrorism (John F. Burns, “Palestinian Summer Camp Offer Games at War,” The New York Times, August 3, 2000). And almost all of this was occurring before the latest intifada. I don’t care if you choose to blind yourself to this, but don’t ask me to.
The following is admittedly a partisan source, but it quotes the PA media and stories about these kids verbatim. #3
I firmly believe that there are Palestinians who want peace. I even believe that many are smart enough to realize that part of the problem is their inept leadership. Of course they cannot change that since they have no elections and the majority of the population approves of targeting innocents anyway (70% in the last poll - This from a Palestinian university poll (Bir Zeit).
Please help me here. I am unsure how one can at one and the same time assert that they are ‘trying’ to distance themselves from terror and also participate in it.
Moreover, in their poll, Bir Zeit writes the following category head:
“The PNA gets a positive evaluation for its general political role in supporting the Intifada, but does less well on specific issues.” Somebody is paying attention…not you.
Yes.
Both Fatah and Tanzim are official branches of the PA
" U.S. Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) has revealed that senior law enforcement officials believe that Osama Bin Laden, who is presumed responsible for the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington,
is “very much involved with Hezbollah, Fatah, and other terrorist organizations.” (Associated Press, Sept. 13, 2001)
*In March 2001, three Fatah Tanzim captured by Israel confessedto a series of attacks that killed eight people, three of whom were U.S. citizens, Esh-Kodesh Gilmore and Binyamin and Talia Kahane. (Jerusalem Post, March 16, 2001)
*The Tanzim claimed responsibility for the murder of Aharon Abidian, a kashrut supervisor, who was shotrepeatedly at point-blank range while shopping.
*The Tanzim claimed responsibility for the murder of Lt. Col. Yehuda Edri, who was shot in the head at point-blank
range.
Excellent question:
The terrorists intentionally target innocent civilians - Israel does not.
The Palestinian attacks are intended to sow terror in a civilian population - the Israeli attacks are attempts to stop said terror.
Precisely my point. In other words, the PA openly harbors and assists terrorists. That they find political advantage in it is no surprise and not relevant.
I am unsure of what you are doing other than proving my point. It is well known that the PA does not arrest terrorists and when they do, they generally release them immediately. I agree that this policy is driven by a corrupt desire to keep pressure on Israel via violence against civilians. No one is asking them to kill these folks, only to keep them under lock and key so that they cannot massacre innocents. When the PA allows them free reign, they too are complicit in their acts.
This has nothing to do with your characterization of the battle as one between a mean army and rag-tag groups. This precise situation is what is happening in Afghanistan. That one is rag-tag and inefficient and one is not does not render them inappropriate.
Arafat has received millions of dollars from many sources for refugee repatriation and other humanitarian needs. According to internal Palestinian watchdog groups he has embezzled much of it and doles much of it out to cronies. Go look it up.
Find out how the Palestinian Legislative Council demanded that Arafat dissolve his cabinet in light of massive corruption and fraud. Read the Special Palestinian Legislative Council Committee
Report on Corruption and Mismanagement in the Palestinian Authority
These blockaded folks approve of murdering innocent civilians by a 70-30 margin. Their government refuses to police its own populace and openly encourages such acts. Do you have a better idea?
I am glad that you brought this up because it highlights the drastic difference between the Israeli approach to Arab deaths and that of Arabs to Israeli deaths.
When the Arab phalangist militia entered the refugee camp where they massacred innocent Palestinians, no one asserts that Sharon ordered them to do so.
What happened was that a militia which was aligned with Israel was given the job of watching the camp, and instead massacred many of the inhabitants.
Now watch what happened.
Israelis * themselves * started an outcry and demanded accountability. (Find me one instance in the history of the conflict where an outcry and demands for accountability are demanded by the Arab street for ill-treatment and murder of Jews).
They then began an internal investigation (find me just one Arab internal investigation into Jewish deaths).
They concluded that Sharon was ‘Indirectly responsible’
In other words “He should have realized that these Arabs hated these Arabs enough to massacre them”.
And this man is the greatest devil that the Arabs can find in an Israeli.
In other words, he does not compare even slightly to the many leaders in the Arab world who openly advocate and carry out mass slaughter of innocents.
It is very telling that this is the best that the Arab world can come up with when describing Israeli ‘atrocities’. A case where Arabs murdered other Arabs without being told to do so by Israelis.
Now go ahead and compare that to the behavior of numerous Arab governments and the Arab street. (I still wait for the day that Arabs demand accountability from those who massacre innocent Israelis. I actually wait for the day that they stop cheering and supporting it).
Also, compare it to the exact same actions by the Belgians who do not get the same vicious monikers and demonizations that Israelis get:
Of course they are allowed to travel to a hospital. In each (rare) case where the above has occurred, it provoked an internal inquiry.
It is foolish for you to merge the two into one amorphous mass. The FACT is that basically ALL Palestinian attacks were at innocent civilians and military outposts and that basically ALL Israeli responses were intended for self-defense. Whether they were effective is another story, but the nature of the difference is beyond dispute.
Look it up. I am tired of doing your research for you.
I do not doubt that on occasion the Israeli actions are counterproductive. On the other hand, it is inevitable that mistakes will be made in such a reality. These mistakes however contrast drastically with the intentional acts of the Palestinian terrorists.
The US is ‘asserting its superiority’ to influence its power to negotiate (in this case the handover of OBL). It did not engage in discussions or talks. It used its military superiority to get what it wanted. And you approve.
Sure, the ‘issues’ were there. It was at an interim stage of the peace accords. However all of the accusations about ‘blockades’ and ‘choking the economy’ are backward rationalizations for that which the Palestinians create by endorsing and participating in an intifada.
It is you with the avoidance problem. One side targets innocents, the other does its utmost not to hurt civilians, and only engages in military action in order to defend its populace from massacre. If the intifada ended tomorrow, no more Palestinians would die, terrorist or otherwise. This is not a choice the Israelis can make (other than to utterly capitulate to every terrorist demand, including Hamas which includes the dismantling of the state). However, it is a choice that the Palestinians can make. This is why the numbers are MEANINGLESS. Just as it would be meaningless to argue that the Germans were the victim in WWII because more of them died than Jews. Now don’t engage in more avoidance. Address the real issue.
How silly of me to assume that you had understood the context!..(and then when you realize the context that you might admit that you had made a mistake).
Another one of your horse blinders. In all recent polls an OVERWHELMING majority of Palestinians approve of suicide attacks on civilians.
Fantastic. What a delightful way to spin intentional suicide attacks on innocent teens. Just call it ‘resisting’ or something. Now we can justify it!
Of course their first motivation isn’t dead Jews. Their first motivation is no Jews in the mid-east. They then use poor excuses to move that cause forward. The massacre of Jews began long before there were any ‘occupied territories’ or ‘checkpoints’ or any other of the Arab excuses to drive the Jews into the sea. At least a few decades ago they were more refreshingly open about their intentions.
Lets see. Intentional mass murder of innocents? Sounds like a legitimate definition to me.
Precisely, which shows how obvious it is that the Israelis wanted peace, but could not get it because of whom they were dealing with.
Oh, so you are saying that the Palestinians have a good excuse for not trying to find peace, but rather to murder innocents? If we tried this same trick and analyzed the past of Arab leaders, would we find them any better if not worse?
You will notice that I did not call you an Islamist. I described your backward rationalizations of mass murder as the typical argument of the Islamists. Please pay attention.
Um, weren’t you the one just calling for the MODERATOR just moments ago? And now you find it appropriate to engage in mud-slinging as a result of your having not read my words correctly? For shame!
I know that this post is far too long as it is, but let me add my synopsis here. (it also aids you in responding so that we can distill the points).
As far as I can see it a majority of Israelis are perfectly willing to allow the Palestinians a homeland on ONE condition:
That the Israelis are convinced once and for all that the Arabs are not out to drive them into the sea and that they recognize Israel’s right to exist.
This formula worked very well with Jordan and still does to this day. Egypt is not as good, but they got their Sinai because they were willing to express such an idea.
To this day, critical elements of the Palestinian authority, and much of the street do not recognize Israel’s right to exist. Moreover, the majority of Arab states still feel the same (Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Iran, Iraq, etc…).
I don’t think the Palestinians are evil. I think that they are the victims of an inept and corrupt group of Arab leaders and states who refuse to repatriate their refugees for political gain, refuse to end their belligerence against Israel’s existence, and encourage and support terrorism as a legitimate political tool.
I guarantee you that the day the Arabs openly agree to allow Israel the right to exist (and do not speak out of two sides of their mouth) is the day that I can guarantee you a happy and healthy Palestinian state. I actually like what Prince Abdullah said recently about how the Arabs need to guarantee Israel’s security. Would I trust them? Not at this point. But if they earnestly demonstrated that they were willing to allow there to be a state of Israel, the entire problem would end.
Ever since its founding, Israel has been under attack from those who wish to utterly destroy it. This was the cause of the Palestinian problem in the first place. Had the Arabs accepted the partition they would be celebrating the 52nd anniversary of a Palestinian state.
Israel has been waiting 50 years for one thing. An open and honest statement from Arab countries and peoples that they will be left alone to live peacefully in their land. That’s all. Until that happens, any arrangement is a false peace and is bound to end in more deaths.
TQMshirt, if you hit the “submit” button more than once, you might end up with multiple copies of the same post. Sometimes they just show up as a fluke, but you can usually prevent multiposts by only hitting “submit” once.
