Support Palestinian guerrillas.

Great Debates
101

I am on a KLM flight from Houston to Tel Aviv via Amsterdam on December 23rd. It is for my cousin’s bar-mitzvah, which will be a Shachris on Thursday Dec. 26th at the Kotel, the Western Wall, which borders Temple Mount or Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem.

Am I scared? A little. You may ask how this is relevant. I was in Israel last in 1997, in the middle of the relative-calm of the Oslo and Wye River accords. The souqs in Jerusalem and Jaffa were vibrant and all open. the Old City was safe. I took a bus from the north to Be’ersheva including a transfer at the central bus station in Tel Aviv without reservation whatsoever. We had many an enjoyable day in the shopping districts of Dizengoff Street in Tel Aviv and Ben-Yehuda street in Jerusalem.

This has obviously all changed. I won’t be taking buses. I probably won’t eat out much. I will probably avoid crowded markets, cafes, restaurants, and malls. This is because of terrorism, which as I see it was never provoked by the Israelis.

We can tit-for-tat this back to Abraham vs. Sarah and Ya’akov vs. Hagar and Ishmael. Frankly, I feel the argument against Israeli legitimacy is about as tenable as the argument against Texan legitimacy. The facts on the ground stand as 5 million Israelis and 5 million Palestinians, and all legitimate peace needs to take that into account. The easiest solution would be unilateral withdrawal and a border on the 1967 Green line. One can understand the reluctance of the Israeli people, though. In 2 years, there is no peace process and few fragments of Oslo remain. The fact that the Palestinian people were such a tinderbox that the spark of Sharon on Temple Mount triggered the inferno of this intifada, gives one pause for consideration of the tenability of the peace process.

In 2000, both Israelis and Palestinians were more prosperous and peaceful than they had ever been, and the Israelis were the willing to take bigger steps than they ever had before. The fact that these were rejected without counteroffer, accompanied by this upswing in violence meant to the average Israeli that 8 years of peace talks had accomplished absolutely zero. Not only were the Palestinians not willing to negotiate the final steps for their homeland, but they were completely unappeased by 8 years of relative calm, prosperity and gains in autonomy.

The cynical Israeli sees Oslo as the worst decision ever made by the country, because it fooled Israel into believing that peace was possible with Arafat, even if he shirked his responsibility in containing the militant elements of his society. It has become quite easy to focus on those elements and conclude that Palestinians will never settle for a negotiated peace – that they want an end to the Zionist presence. The Phased Plan and all of that.

Israel has demonstrated a willingness to negotiate and sign land-for-peace deals when there are true peaceful overtures. Sadat comes to Israel, Egypt gets the Sinai. Supporting more military action won’t solve anything, it will only feed the fire of war. What is needed is support of leaders and movements which support peace. What is needed is true peaceful overtures from the Palestinian leadership. If the Palestinian leadership contacted the Israelis for help in outlawing Hamas, IJ, and PFLP, I’m sure the Israelis would only too gladly oblige. If the Palestinian leadership renounced the full right of return for 3 million Palestinians to land within Israel, I’m sure the Israelis wouldn’t protest. Little things first – stop anti-Israeli propoganda on state-owned media and take it out of schoolbooks. Speak unambiguously in Arabic against suicide attacks. Declare a willingness to be a happy partner of Israel on 1967 land. None of things are done yet. Many of them would be easy, and would easily end the current issues and make life much happier for everyone in the region.

102

Palestinians are, for the most part, despicable scumbags who should be grateful that Israel hasn’t wiped them from the face of the Earth. Israel was never theirs, and never will be.

If they did somehow manage to gain control of Israel, it would be transformed into a cesspool in less than 10 years IMO.

103

You better have the materials to back up that racist assertion.

104

sigh

105

Racist? Palestinians are simply Arabs, not a separate race. I do not have the same opinion of all Arabs that I do of “Palestinians”.

Eventually, these fourth-world whiners will either realize that they lack the ability to acheive their goals, or they will be vanquished. They will never gain control of Israel.

106

Oh, I apologize for the semantic discrepancy, then. Please have facts to back your hateful comments, then.

:rolleyes:

107

OK, let me get this straight. You’re saying that, by dint of their being born in the area that is commonly (if not universally) known as “Palestine”, they are therefore less worthy than other Arabs, against whom you don’t bear any grudges?

Based on your few posts, I might choose to base my opinions of people from Wichita on you. But I don’t think that’s a very sensible idea.

108

Let me make this absolutely clear:

I am NOT against Israel.

What I am against are Israel’s policies in the occupied territories. You see, I am of the opinion that Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as Israeli Jews.

And, by the way, there have been numerous high-profile communist supporters of Israel. Jean-Paul Sartre is probably the most famous. This is not a question, though, of communism or capitalism. Israelis themselves claim that the state was founded as a social democracy, and the socialist roots run deep. Perhaps you have heard of the Israeli Kibbutzim? These are communities organized along socialist-anarchist principles. Indeed, there are many aspects of Israel that I find highly admirable, not the least of which is the strong socialist current that runs through Israeli politics.

109

They will be?

110

Sartre wasn’t a high profile communist. He was a high profile writer and existentialist who happened to be communist for a period of his life. High profile communist would come to mean someone who is a communist leader, i.e. Molotov, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc.

111

Sorry to nitpick a hijack (!), but surely Sartre: Communist + high profile => high-profile Communist.

112

It’s misleading, though. Sartre was communist only partially in his life, and was never a communist leader or prolific spokesperson. Although technically he may have been a high profile communist, it doesn’t hold much water.

113

You’re implying that he was high-profile as or for being a communist. His communist leanings were accidental to his high profile.

114

Israel has always rejected even considering the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and, indeed, continues to build more settlements in Palestinian territory.

Sadat and peaceful overtures? Sadat showed that he was a genuine force to be reckoned with, and that the cost of holding onto Egyptian territory would be greater than whatever benefit they would get from it. It had absolutely nothing to do with “peaceful overtures.” The Palestinians are not Egypt. They don’t have an army or an air force. They have nothing. So, Israel can continue to oppress them, steal their land, destroy their economy, and so on, without fear of any real threat. Sure, there is the terrorism, but the Sharon’s of the world love that–it just feeds their power.

In the actual world, what Israel has shown is that when the Palestinians do not resist, they just get kicked in the teeth. They have more of their land taken, they continue to be degraded and oppressed, and they lose all hope. Only when there is resistance is any progress made.

115

How exactly did Sadat make it painful for the Israelis to hold onto the Sinai? What successful Egyptian military actions, or actions of any sort, made Israel plead for peace? It seems to me that after their 1967 trouncing, in 1973 they were able to take the east bank of the Suez Canal back at the cost of 8000 men and a couple brigades of men, not exactly a resounding victory. The UN gave them a narrow strip on the west bank in 1974, and the canal was reopened in 1975. In 1977, Sadat came to Israel. This wasn’t seen as a “good thing” by the Arab world – there was much scorn and revulsion at Sadat’s action both in and out of Egypt, and certainly the perception was not that he was exacting reparations out of Israel. The fact that he came convinced one of the most hawkish and conservative Israeli leaders, Menachem Begin, to give back the Sinai I think says a lot.

I think Israel has trounced everyone in the area at least twice. The ones that continued warmongering towards Israel – Syria, Lebanon, Iraq – have no lasting peace with Israel. The neighbors who have shown peaceful intent – namely Egypt and Jordan, but Tunisia and Morocco certainly could qualify – have had lasting peace with Israel.

IMHO Israel cannot be faulted for lack of trying. But, as they say, change comes from within. Arafat cannot expect to have Israel give him a state (even though I think that the Palestinians rightly deserve one) if he won’t at least give it a college try in making it a peaceful coexistence. I have see no evidence to date that Arafat is concerned with anything besides keeping Arafat alive. Until we see a meaningful gesture out of the Palestinians, and not showmanship for Arafat self-preservation, I really can’t see how Israel could possibly change their tune.

116

And keeping Arafat rich, sadly. :frowning:

117

So the question:
How to help the Palestinians to defend themselves outside the UN-boarders?
Or should we just watch? :eek:

118

Change must come from within…so Arafat must change. I seee.

There is nothing wrong with what Israel is doing, nothing that needs to change from within in Israel. No, of course not.

An outside observer might suggest, however, that it is the most powerful member of any conflict that shares the greatest responsibility for seeking out a resolution. Since Israel is a dominant world power, with the 4th most powerful military in the world, and the Palestinians have nothing, this implies that it is Israel that should seek some change.

One thing they could change would be to stop blocking a peaceful settlement. They could put aside the terrible fear of peace, and try working for peace. Try seeing Palestinians as human beings. That would be a good start.

119

Need it be pointed out that Israel made an offer that gave the PA 97% of what they wanted, and Arafat rejected it?

The suicide bombings and upswing in terrorism is being brought about by those who do not want peace with Israel. They are trying to provoke retaliations by Israel so as to foment a general attack on Israel that will end Israel as a state.

It is overly simplistic (to say the least) to blame Israel for the situation. Although it is also overly common to do so.

Regards,
Shodan

120

Shodan

Need it to be pointed out that it is the biggest propaganda lie of last century?
Even Josef could not come through with anything like that.

See: http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

Even if Arafat was against CD II, so was Sharon. He also voted against it, like he has voted against Oslo etc.

And tell what happened to the negotiations of in Taba?
The offer made by Israeli Prime minister Barak, that the Palestinians was ready to accept with some swaps, agreed with Israel.

You are speaking like the killings of palestinians would happen in Israel. No. Israel is occupying and launching hits here and there.
And the extremist tells they will hit back, as they told last week.
Just keep Your TV open and You will see.

Personally I hope they will change their tacticts thus, that they hit purely military targets.
Military that is occupying their country (or motherlnad if You would like to have it that way).
It is their duty, not a fucking game.

Just secure Your UN borders.
But no, Israel is too busy to plan and build new colonies in a country that does not belong to them.
Stealing the water-resourses, ploughing down gardens that are not on their soil, using civilian Palestinians as shields in combat etc. etc.

Just go home, and secure Your borders. If USSR could close their borders against the “enemy”, it will be an easy task for You also.
Your arguments are just redicilous.

So look at the link and come back into the discussion with some facts.