Israel to Target More Militant Leaders

[Edan]

This is not a war as there is only one state here

I could have sworn the "Civil-really-bad-and-deadly-but-not-a-war-Disagreement" was called "The Civil War" in my American History class.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Edan




I could have sworn the "Civil-really-bad-and-deadly-but-not-a-war-Disagreement" was called "The Civil War" in my American History class.

USA vs. CSA

[Edan]

Originally posted by The Templar


USA vs. CSA

IL vs PA

(see, I can use acronyms too)

And, of course, that wasn't the only civil war in history...

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

(1) The Israelis get a big heaping share of the blame. This is not a war as there is only one state here - Israel.

not exact.

It's a war between a state, a state like entity and paramilitary terrorist organzations that hide among civilians.

It's not a war because there is only one state. That's what war means - and either words mean something or they do not. You might be able to call it a civil war if the Palestinians were citizens of Israel. Nope, this is an occupation.

The Palestinian people have no rights and no recourse when they are abused.

Not entirely correct.

They can appeal to the Israeli High Court of Justice and they do. Just a year ago, Palestinian civilians that were hurt in military actions in the frist intifada (87-90) have won reperations for their damages, from the Israeli government.

Other law-suits stopped several Israeli tactics, and the Palestinians often file suits against the ruining of their homes, which sets the process back for a day or two, and may at times cancel it completely (though I don't recall specific cases now).

OK, I remember an Israeli case about torture which went favorably for Palestinian petitioners (don't remember the cite though). Still, Palestinians do not have equal protection or anything close.

Their dignity is constantly under assault.

Correct. But that is a result of the situation they are in. Their dignity isn't assaulted as a tactic. More blame on stupidity than evil intentions by Israel.

Does that matter to the average non-terrorist whose dignity is assaulted? Probably not. This exaserbates the problem, doesn't it?

If a settlement "needs" the land, the land is expropriated.

Not entirely correct. Often settlements expand on their own, and the Israeli government allows the land to be expropriated post factum, after there are already houses and families in the area. This more likely to a large lobby of Settlers, and less due to evil plans.

Who said anything about evil plans? I'm sure the settlers have pragmatic concerns about their settlement when they take over some Palestinian's olive vineyard for the growth of the settlement. I'm equally sure the Palestinians who have lost their land don't care about anything but the loss.

there is no security in the future and no opportunity for the Palestinians.

Sure there is, if they start securing their streets against militias. IDF is there while they do nothing. Israel has stated and restated, that as soon as Palestinians start policing themselves, including against terrorists, they would withdraw.

Actually, Israel has demanded that the Palestinians lock up people the Israelis consider terrorists. This is sure to cause some due process issues. Moreover, I doubt the palestinians have the power to lock up the terrorists - and I KNOW they don't have the institutional competence to deal with such a widespread problem.

The Israelis constantly cause "collateral damage" (i.e. the slaughter of bystanders) when they launch missles into apartment buildings.

war. **** happens.

Not a war.

"Extra-judicial killings"? Try assassinations! No due process, no recourse for injustice.

Try - military actions against known combatants in hiding.


There is no due process in war. This is not policing action where you get a court warrent or something. It's war. Military. Boom.

Uh, again - not a war. These are criminals - not combatants. I'm sorry if that means it is harder to deal with them, but that's life.

Moreover, what if they get the wrong guy? What if a missle takes out an apartment building with people other than the terrorists in it. There always seems to be an "investigation" - but when is the last time an Israeli soldier stood trial for going to far?

Gee, if you kick a dog long enough, you get a mean, vicious dog. Same with people. The Israelis reap what they sow.

Gee, if you kick a dog long enough, you get a mean, vicious dog. Same with people. The Palestinians reap what they sow.

Yes they do. That was 1/3 of my point.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Edan


IL vs PA

(see, I can use acronyms too)

And, of course, that wasn't the only civil war in history...

OK, I'll for the moment grant you the bit about civil wars not being between nations (mostly because I cannot remember if other countries recognized the CSA).

Even so, civil wars are usually between citizens of the same nation (English civil war) or people trying to break away from their nations (US and Ethiopian civil wars). Palestinians are not Israelis and never have been.

[Zevico]

The Templar: They kept prisoners during Oslo quite well. Then the PA released em all at the very first day 2nd intifada.
What do you mean by equal protection?
Also, please find an example where settlers actually stole a Palestinian person's vineyard 'for the growth of the settlement'. I doubt that it has ever happened, personally.
Also, as others have pointed out-what about civil wars?

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by The Templar
It's not a war because there is only one state. That's what war means - and either words mean something or they do not. You might be able to call it a civil war if the Palestinians were citizens of Israel. Nope, this is an occupation.

Look, don't lecture me on semantics.

If you want to pull out a study book on war and it's definitions I am very willing. I read a very very thorough book on that.

War [...] is a conflict among political groups, especially sovereign states, carried on by armed ofces of considerable magnitue for a considerable period of time" (Q. Wright, "War, in: The International Encyclopedi of the Social Sciences)

"War is a socially recognized situation in which armed histilities of considerable magnitude are conducted more or less continually between two or more nations, states or governments" (J. Gloud & W.L. Kolb, Dictionary of Social Sciences)

"Armed conflict between political units" R. Aron

"Organized violence carried on by political units" (H. Bull, in: "The Anarchical Society, p 184)


All sources as quoted in Y. Herkabi, War and Strategy, p 33, Part I - War, Chapter 1 - What is War?
(ISBN 965-05-0476-1)

The Palestinian Authority is a recognized government of the Palestinian Autonomy. It is by definition a Political Entity. So are btw, Hezballah, Hamas and to a lesser extent, Islamic Jihad.

According to the defenitions above, Israel is most definitly at war with the Hezballah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and currently at a state of limited truce with the PA.

OK, I remember an Israeli case about torture which went favorably for Palestinian petitioners (don't remember the cite though). Still, Palestinians do not have equal protection or anything close.

Correct. That is both because as non-civilians they enjoy less rights, and because they usually deal with military and not civil authorities.

Does that matter to the average non-terrorist whose dignity is assaulted? Probably not. This exaserbates the problem, doesn't it?

The question is where the dignity comes in, when compared to the question of security in Israel.

If there is a suicide bomber who I know is trying to infiltrate Israel, the question of whether or not put up roadblocks is a very subjective one. For me it is clear. I will put up roadblocks and attempt to save my life.

Who said anything about evil plans? I'm sure the settlers have pragmatic concerns about their settlement when they take over some Palestinian's olive vineyard for the growth of the settlement. I'm equally sure the Palestinians who have lost their land don't care about anything but the loss.

I was refering to actions when the government legalizes parts of the newly established settlements, both because they were heavily populated and because of the strong loby.

Actually, Israel has demanded that the Palestinians lock up people the Israelis consider terrorists. This is sure to cause some due process issues. Moreover, I doubt the palestinians have the power to lock up the terrorists - and I KNOW they don't have the institutional competence to deal with such a widespread problem.

If there is anything such as due process in Palestine, I would be seriously surprised.

Did you know that it took less than 48 hours for Arafat to arrest, interrogate, try and execute people he accused of being Israeli collaborators?

And as for the institutional competence - the PA has shown it numerously. Let's talk about this and the previous year, when the Palestinian security mechanisms are supposedly "ruined".

Somehow, when last year, Hamas supporters started a riot against Arafat and his leadership, the Palestinian police was quite fast to start shooting live bullets, killing at least one youth and injuring others.

Somehow, when during the last few months, Islamic Jihad militants have placed a bomb near the headquarters of Dahlan (Abu Mazen's ministor of security, now displaced by Arafat), he managed to "scramble" forces, to arrest and shake up a large bunch of Jihad members.

Not a war.

Yes a war.

Uh, again - not a war. These are criminals - not combatants. I'm sorry if that means it is harder to deal with them, but that's life.

I'm sorry if you are mistaken, but criminals are people who commit civilian crimes against law codexes.

People who commit crimes in the name of a national or a political cause, in an organzied fashion, are most clearly combatants.

There is nothing a police force could do or should be doing against an army of 2,000 Hamas members, or 30,000 Fatah-Tanzim members.

Moreover, what if they get the wrong guy? What if a missle takes out an apartment building with people other than the terrorists in it. There always seems to be an "investigation" - but when is the last time an Israeli soldier stood trial for going to far?

There are such investigations constantly.

But they lock up people who went to far as in kowingly targeting innocent people. Not people who followed orders through, and unintentionally caused harm to innocent people.

Btw, they broke up whole brigades of border guards for isntance, when investigations uncovered harassing and abuse of local palestinian population.

And the accused are tried.

Even prison guards who went too rough on Palestinian prisoners have been tried and are now serving time.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
Sirotnikov:

"I personally think that Sharon feels he shouldn't confront the settlers as long as he isn't absolutely sure about the success of the Roadmap."

And Abbas felt he wouldn't confront the terrorists as long as he isn't absolutely sure about the success of the Roadmap. There will never be a solution that way.

I know.

I saw your answer coming a mile away and I'm very aware of this duality.

I'm fairly mad at it too, and I do want the ****s kicked out of the settlers lobby. But no one is willing so far, sadly.

However, it's also a game of risk.

What Sharon has to gain from kicking the settler loby? A slim chance of a lasting peace. Losing most of the 67 territories. Losing the right side of the political scale.

What does Abbas have to gain from kicking the terrorist lobby? International recognition. Funds. In 2 years time - full statehood.

"But it has done good. It is only sad that the job is unfinished, and he isn't exiled / dead."

Further escalation will achieve nothing.

I disagree.

To make an omlet you need to break some eggs

"Obviously these countries are now scared for their own skin"

After the Iraq trouble, they have little to worry about.

Exactly my point.

If they make troubles in Iraq, they will have less to worry about. Thus, they make troubles in Iraq.

99 % of the posts here do not deserve a good reply.

hehe

[HershOstropoler]

"However, it's also a game of risk."

A game for territory.

"What Sharon has to gain from kicking the settler loby? A slim chance of a lasting peace. Losing most of the 67 territories. Losing the right side of the political scale."

In short, it would cost his political ass.

"What does Abbas have to gain from kicking the terrorist lobby? International recognition. Funds. In 2 years time - full statehood."

Statehood is not so certain. Also, under what limitations and on what territory? But the bigger issue, would he survive it? He'd have to sell it on a "trust the israelis to keep their side of the deal" - if Sharon enters into one at all beforehand.

In short, it would cost his political (and probably physical) ass.

"To make an omlet you need to break some eggs "

True, but breaking eggs is not a sufficient condition to make an omelette. Throwing eggs against the wall just creates a mess.

"If they make troubles in Iraq, they will have less to worry about. Thus, they make troubles in Iraq."

I doubt they have to make much trouble there. The place, especially with the Americans there, seems quite self-reliant on trouble supply.

[Sirotnikov]

I still think that Abbas has more to gain from unilaterally cracking down on terrorism, than Sharon has from unilaterally cracking down on settlers.

And they both have the same to lose - their ass (both possibly in the physical sense, remember Rabin was assassinated).


And Arafat is really a major pain. He is now effectively sidelining all of Abbas's government, for his own representatives. The foreign minister, the minister of defense, the minister of interior.

Even the US are angry.

I think his months are numbered.

[Sirotnikov]

I doubt they have to make much trouble there. The place, especially with the Americans there, seems quite self-reliant on trouble supply.

I vehemently disagree.

I'm sure that over 50% of the troubles are stirred up by Iranian and Syrian agents in Iraq.

[HershOstropoler]

"I still think that Abbas has more to gain from unilaterally cracking down on terrorism"

Probably, but not enough.

"And Arafat is really a major pain."

He's always been. The question is, what benefit in removing him?

"I'm sure that over 50% of the troubles are stirred up by Iranian and Syrian agents in Iraq."

Based on what?

I doubt the Iranians hold much sway over Iraqi sunnites. When we say similar levels of violence from the shiites, it may have something to do with Iran. The Syrians, maybe, but why would Baathists and islamists need anyone to stir them up to kill Americans?

[Sirotnikov]

He's always been. The question is, what benefit in removing him?

there is a chance for a new leader?

while he's alive, NO new leader will arise. Nada.

Based on what?

based on my understanding and knowledge of the scene there.

When we say similar levels of violence from the shiites, it may have something to do with Iran.

[/q]
there were several top shiite Iraqis who have been hiding in Iran, and operatig their own TV station and mini-army, financed by the Iranian govt.

I bet their army is wrecking havoc in Iraq right now.

The Syrians, maybe, but why would Baathists and islamists need anyone to stir them up to kill Americans?

The Syrians are baathists. So they are of course helping thier "brotherin".



[/q]

[HershOstropoler]

"there is a chance for a new leader?"

Like?

"while he's alive, NO new leader will arise. Nada."

And when he's dead there is no leader for a long time.

"I bet their army is wrecking havoc in Iraq right now."

So why is the south relatively quiet for now?

"The Syrians are baathists. So they are of course helping thier "brotherin"."

Feuding brothers, there's been a split in Baath, has there not. Also the Syrian Baath party is a vehicle of the Alawis, so I wonder how well they get along with the Iraqi Sunnis.

Also why would they need encouragement? And how much aid could the Syrians provide without being caught?

That's all pretty much speculation. If there was anything substantial, we would have Israel and the Neocons firing on all propaganda cylinders with that.

[Agathon]

Gee whiz, I'm looking forward to calling the Israelis "ethnic cleansers" when they finally get around to herding the Palestinians into Jordan and Egypt as per Sharon's desire.