Right…I was just pointing it out because the Saudi plan would have required them to give up the Golan too.
You’re right, the fault is yours. The question is flawed.* But, to humor you, if the EXACT situations and circumstances of the combatants* were reversed, I’d make the same argument. OK?
I said in my last post:
“I don’t advocate the extermination of the Palestinian people” and “I don’t seek their total systematic extermination simply because they happen to be Palestinian.”
What you’re trying to imply by your question is that I’m a Nazi; that the world would be better off without the Palestinians’ existence. This is a bullshit implication.
What I seek is a change in the mindset of the Palestinian culture so that it can thrive in the modern world. If this can be done by ANY means other than what I’ve laid out, great, and every non-violent avenue must be explored until there is no other choice.
Is this moral? Of course not. All war is immoral, but as one SDMB poster (not sure who) has said on more than one occasion, when it comes down to a choice between protecting my innocent people or killing yours, I have to choose the latter (paraphrased). I agree with this premise.
It’s sad, but history teaches us that existential enemies cease hostilities only when they are beaten so badly that they acknowledge that there is no hope in victory — thus resistance means only useless sacrifice. Obviously, this does not speak well of human beings, but there it is.
- The way you phrased your question was flawed, because Jewish people =! Israelis. The combatants - supposedly - are the Israelis and the Palestinians, not the Jewish people and the Palestinians.
Sigh, I’ve written like four seperate ultra-long replies and each time, as I move to post them, I get this inkling that I’m gonna be shot down, attacked, make to feel inferior due to my opinions… maybe even called anti-semitic (meaning anti-Jewish, of course, rather than anti-semitic in this case)… so I delete and rewrite, delete and rewrite…
Horror stories seen in the editorial pages of newspapers accusing those opposing the war in Iraq of being supporters of Saddam. The fact that Chomsky is STILL accused of having supported Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge… John Howard coming on telly the other night (in Australia on the 7:30 report) and claiming people who demand the truth on whether or not intelligence actually supported the war in Iraq are people who wanted Saddam to stay in power…
Supporters of the Israelis are accused of advocating genocide against Palestinians.
Supporters of Palestinians are accused of being at best anti-semitic and at worst neo-nazi (example not from this thread).
Yeah, this is a fine debate…
for me to poop on!
Except for this: why do they need to change their culture? What is it that they’re catching up with? What determines that Palestinians are culturally backward… and compared to whom…? Scary.
Yeah, but that was a Saudi plan - one extreme solution - you think there wouldn’t be negotiation if Sharon went into talks with the Arab league in good faith?
There could be. But any Arab League plan would include the surrender of the Golan to Syria. Syria is powerful enough in the Arab League to make sure of that, and Syria doesn’t want to see peace happen between Israel and the Palestinians until it gets the Golan. I can’t see the Arab League moving on that position.
However, the Israelis also aren’t going to move on the Golan. It’s non-negotiable for them, and they’re going to throw out any offers, unread, that include that deband. So, I don’t think any Arab League proposal could be feasable.
Anyway, the point of mentioning it was to counter assertions that the Arab nations aren’t willing to negotiate, not to get into the detail of the actual offer.
If the US was really on the ball, they would secretly fund the Palestinians in addition to funding Israel, in order to make a killing in arms sales, and indirectly inflict major population losses on both sides. At that point, they could use their superior military strength to invade and destroy the remaining populace, then subdivide the territories and sell them to the highest arab bidder.
What were we talking about again?..
The Palestinians justify their terrorism as a ‘proud’ response they have to make due to a hopeless situation forced on them by Israel.
Let’s examine some of the reasons for the ‘hopeless’ situation of the Palestinians.
- An apparent majority who voted for an Egyptian to represent them, who has ripped them off to the tune of about $200,000 a month, using Israel as the excuse for his failure to build their state, and incited terrorism to make sure it will never be built. = Pretty hopeless.
- Refused to accept 97% of pre 1967 lands as an initial diplomatic settlement giving them autonomy and self-determination, choosing instead to launch numerous terrorist attacks against Israel designed to force retaliation, and use western media to portray them as ‘desperate and proud’. = Very stupid – and definitely hopeless.
- When Israel opens checkpoints to allow Palestinian workers into Israel to improve their standard of living, a suicide bomber blows herself up there to force its closure. Obviously Palestinians improving their living standards is not good for the media image they want to project. = Can people make themselves more hopeless?
- Any Palestinians who voice opposition to the militant and terrorist approach to a Mid-East solution are summarily accused of being Israeli collaborators by the militants, dragged out into the street, and publicly murdered without trial. = Ensuring a hopeless situation can continue.
- Terrorist groups like Hamas, maintain a terror campaign to prevent any diplomat solution from benefiting their people, causing widespread poverty and desperation, but give some financial assistance to offset their negative acts. = A vicious cycle of hopelessness.
- For every solution that Israel and the world have put forward to end their hardship and give them autonomy, the Palestinians have maintained terrorism as the way forward. Then they cry how oppressed they are by those they perpetrate their terrorism upon. = Pretty f**king hopeless.
- Glorifying the image of Mohammed El-Dura, the 3 year old killed in the early days of the intifada, initially blamed on the Israelis but later proved to have been purposefully shot by Palestinians as a publicity stunt to support their righteous struggle. = Sickeningly hopeless.
- With their leaders and religious clerics brainwashing and educating their children and subjects that a futile and totally negative death will be rewarded in heaven can only maintain their future hopelessness.
Could go on and on, but I think the picture is clear. The Palestinians need protection from their own stupidity and apparent need to maintain hopelessness as the way forward. They must not believe that the few naïve and ignorant politicians who accept their hopelessness as an outside force, or a corrupt media who present them that way in return for a demographic acceptance, does them any real favours. Just about every decision they have ever made has been the wrong one. The one that would take them out of hopelessness as a way of life is never followed. For the time being Israel needs to protect itself from such insanity.
Good points, Ted. Welcome.
But at least,
- Suha Arafat has achieved a homeland in the upscale shopping districts of Europe.
GoHeels you start strongly, there are circumstances where liquidiation of the “Israelis” becomes necessary and you would demand it post-haste.
However, the post is left half done. You nominate only a scenario from science fiction. I think it reasonable to assume my question was limited to real world circumstances.
I merely ask you to stipulate the real world circumstances necessitating liquidation of the “Israeli” occupiers.
It can’t be that hard, you’ve done a 4-post dissertation of the question in relation to Palestinian peoples, CheekyMonkey has thought about it and could help if you find a block.
To help in my small way, I remind you of the principles you appear to apply: intransigent defiance of world opinion; and every non-violent avenue must be explored until there is no other choice.
You could perhaps apply these principles to the question of the “Israelis” which seems to otherwise vex you so.
As to “Israelis” as you term them, or Jewish occupiers as I prefer, I borrow CheekyMonkey’s licence and refer to “Israelis” in inverted commas. The correct terminology is another discussion.
Just an aside, one thing about this board that has enlightened and saddened me is how much complaint of anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian–and anti-Jew (no, not always the same thing as anti-Israeli)–sentiments there is. I read anti-gay posts here, and that doesn’t surprise me, because of how I grew up, but when I read (in this thread and others, and I am not singling anyone out) I am shocked at how much Jew hatred all over the world and the US there is said to be.
Yet this discussion could amount to an open invitation to anti-Israeli and anti-Jew sentiments, but no stranger has appeared to vehemently answer the question I ask of GoHeels & CheekyMonkey. No voice has appeared to advocate liquidation of the Jewish, Israeli or Zionist peoples. How then are such voices said to abound, when none actually appear?
It’s . . . enlightening. And scary, to realize how little I know about how much ignorance and prejudice there still is. Oy, how naive I can be sometimes.
Israel has the OT (not the Golan Heights without Syria pulling out of Lebanon, at least) and the fence to negotiate with. The Palestinians have the terrorism to negotiate with. Clearly the Israelis own the military upper hand. Whatever you say about Israeli use of force, it is by definition restrained.
If Israel does make land concessions without a reduction in terrorism the seige mentality will worsen. It’s not that Israel will be “justified” in killing any civilians. However, they will do so in an effort to crush the remaining terrorists without the same reservations they once had. Yes, it could get worse with a hostile Palestinian state.
Think about it. The Palestinians get a state. They don’t stop the terrorism. Israel conquers it. Now, guess what? We’re back to “occupied territories”. I
Thank you Beagle.
Yes the Palestinian situation has been very good for Mrs Arafat, languishing in France.
Which brings me to another point.
The perfect solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
Since the Palestinians want a homeland and it doesn’t seem that chopping Israel up even smaller than it already is, is a satisfactory solution, Let’s give France in the IslamoArabization stages… to the Palestinians!
The French have already stated that nothing is worth fighting for. Besides, France has better irrigation and soil than the West Bank and Gaza strip. It’s the perfect solution. The French won’t even fight back.
And how about a new name for this Franco-Palestine? How about Frankenstine?
Well, sevastopol, since you have revealed yourself to be against the existence of the state of Israel in the first place, there’s not much point in continuing the discussion.
I already addressed your stupid and loaded question with the dismissive response that it deserved.
Besides, why don’t you answer the question yourself? Hey, according to you, the Israelis are just “Jewish Occupiers” anyway, they deserve to die. Why do you need me to do your work for you? Why should I waste my time? It should be easy enough, even taking into account your limited intellect.
Anyway, I’m done with you, sevastopol. I’ll leave you with an alternate scenario, one that I admit is probably just as much “science fiction” as my previous posts, but one that has NO chance of occurring without the presence of the “Jewish Occupiers” you so despise:
Let’s say enough Palestinians figure out:
-
that their “leaders” are totally corrupt, mismanaging foreign aid for their own nefarious purposes
-
that religious groups like Hamas and Hezbollah may be geniuses at figuring out ways to kill Israelis, but will never figure out how to make trains run on time (see, “Iran, state of nation after the 1979 revolution” for proof)
-
that the idiotic geopolitical positions taken by the Palestinians in the past have helped usher them to their current lowly situation
-
that their extremists are poisoning their society, tainting them ALL with the terrorist brush; whether or not this stereotype is “fair” doesn’t really matter - the stereotype exists
-
that the current strategy of terrorism is killing Palestinians faster than the hated “Jewish Occupiers,” not to mention ruining their already dilapidated infrastructure
-
that their precious Arab/Muslim “brothers” are using them as cannon fodder for their own war against Israel that they can’t - or won’t - fight conventionally
-
that their precious Arab/Muslim “brothers” really couldn’t care less about them (otherwise, why haven’t they tried to absorb them as immigrants and relieve the pressure in the West Bank, Gaza, and refugee camps, which are among the most densely populated areas in the world?)
-
that their education system (run by the same corrupt “leaders”) helps mold the mentality of the suicide bomber instead of minds capable of functioning in the 21st century
-
that dissidents who speak out against Palestinian terrorism are not necessarily Israeli collaborators, and do not deserve to have the shit kicked out of them on the streets
-
that even if Israel is destroyed, you (as a Joe 6-Pack Palestinian) will likely still have to endure a civil war among the various Palestinian factions competing for power, unless you perish as Israel says “fuck it” and destroys you in its death throes
-
that the relatively non-violent resistance carried out during the first Intifada in the 80s did more to win the Palestinian cause public support in America (the ONLY entity that has real muscle to affect the policies of your enemy) than martyrdom will ever get you. Not so coincidentally, the first Intifada was a grass-roots movement, organized and directed by the people in the territories, instead of an Arafat/Hamas-led production. The symbol of the first Intifada was a child throwing a stone at an Israeli tank, or a Palestinian worker striking. The symbol of the current Intifada is a wild-eyed man (or woman) blowing up a pizza parlor or a Passover seder. The first Intifada led to peace talks and economic expansion; the current Intifada led to Sharon.
-
that the symbiosis in their public discourse between victimhood and terrorism - aided and abetted by the Western left - may have been emotionally satisfying, but has prevented them from addressing their own aforementioned societal pathologies. After all, when you’re a helpless victim, you never have to take responsibility for your own fuck-ups.
-
and lastly, and most importantly, that it’s IN THEIR FUCKING INTEREST TO COOPERATE WITH ISRAEL
Let’s say these basic ideas enter the consciousness of the Palestinian national psyche, both in the occupied territories and the refugee camps. Let’s say these ideas translate to Palestinian political moderation. Hey, I can dream, can’t I?
When a modicum of Palestinian sanity ruled the day before the current mindless Intifada started, economic integration between the Palestinians and the Israelis hit their peak (from 1996-2000).
For the most part, Israelis could travel unmolested through the territories, and Palestinians flooded the labor market in Israel. Real per capita income in the territories expanded by 25 percent from 1996-2000, reaching $2,000—the highest per capita income in the non-petroleum exporting Arab world.
At the time, 150,000 Palestinians (about 22 percent of Palestinian employment) worked in Israel, commuting daily from the West Bank and Gaza, and earning wages considerably higher than those paid by the PA. Official and private aid flowed into Palestine at a rate of $400 to $500 million a year—roughly 12 percent of Palestinian GDP.
Israel collects the sales taxes and duties on goods imported to Palestine and transfers the money to the Palestinian Authority. Israel transferred $4.7 billion to Palestine until summer 2000 - equal to the entire GDP produced in Palestine during 1999.
(So was that money reinvested into the Palestinian infrastructure? Please. The Fearless Leader Arafat diverted approximately $1 billion to some secret “special” accounts. The rest financed a bureaucracy and security apparatus filled with loyal stooges to cement his rule.)
To me, Palestinians have a choice to embrace moderation or choose martyrdom. It’s up to them.
I see why GoHeels introduced the notions of implications & subtext to this discussion. His meaning is in the subtext, I get it now.
I am but a modest student of middle eastern politics and dispute resolution. GoHeels & CheekyMonkey propose a means of dispute resolution I hadn’t heard of before. The nature of my inquiry then was the extent and application of this principle.
I realise then that the refusal to answer my simple question was in fact GoHeels generating a ‘subtextual’ and ‘implied’ answer over 5 posts.
That answer is: *The principle we apply may never be applied to Jewish people, because Jewish people are inherently more valuable than any others.
That is, we, GoHeels & CheekyMonkey rely on principle of racial discrimination in our policy advocacy and cannot be shifted from that principle.
Racial discrimination is a great evil that civilised people, we acknowledge will strain to eliminate at any cost.
Insofar as we, GoHeels & CheekyMonkey, are voices of Zionism as well as racial discrimination, this answers the question of: “what is the right time to liquidate the zionist peoples?” That time is now, immediately.*
What clever stuff subtext is. I hope I’ve read GoHeels use of this literary technique accurately. I hope he has humane means in mind, lethal injection perhaps, being as I’m a gentle soul.
How unseemly of me, I omitted thanks and attribution where due.
How kind of GoHeels to attribute to my limited powers his own perspicacious solutions. But alas no, I am a respecter of intellectual property.
The notion that time is up for a people in the middle east belongs in this discussion to GoHeels & CheekyMonkey alone.
Erasure of the Jewish peoples from that place as a matter of urgency, is an idea for which I can in truth and modesty claim no credit, but must bow to those great minds, surging at the avant garde of dispute resolution. How subtle their arguments, yet cogent in forceful conclusion.
Whatever you say, sevastopol.
You’re not worth the effort. Goodbye.
What the fuck are you talking about? I hope you don’t come away from this thinking you made one coherent point. This thread is full of examples of the Palestinian mindset and the total refusal of their leadership to negotiate, and you just totally ignore the points made and instead continue with your ignorant and incomprehensible ramblings.