Rough Day In Israel. Anyone Heard From Anyone ?

[The diplomat]

Hamas is now warning it will target Israeli homes.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/09/10/mideast/index.html

[GePap]

Did I ever say I agreed with the airstrikes agains Saddam and Khaddafi? Please, someone, anyone, quote me?

The Khaddafi one is undefensible and on the same sordid level as these israeli assasinations. The fact that the US can claim it was striking at command and control and leadership targets the first time during a declared open conflict between two states muddles the pic for the first strike against Saddam, and ditto the second, though that one is less defensible.

So what double standard?

As for your list LoTM:
Kosovo: so which times did we bomb the houses of Serban leaders? Did I miss that strike against Slobo's house?
1998: Oh, so a training camp in the mountains was Osama's residence? And Saddam's house in desert Fox?
Little thing: an air campaign differs from a targeted assasination attempt. sarel already tried an air campaing vs Palestinian Authority sites.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Edan


Because people like you keep saying that murdering 70 year olds - even if they're cold blooded murderers - would inflame the Arab Street(tm).

So the solution to murder is murder..wait!

We could say the same thing about the US government and Bin Laden and Al Qaeda before 9/11 - it wasn't our priority - a point is reached when too much is too much.

Sorry, analogy (as so many here) fails: last time I checked te uS wasn;t bmbng anone regularly to get them to hit Al qaeda, which was Israel's excuse attacking the PA for 2 years before they started to attampt to go full time at Hamas, even though Haams and IJ wer ethe first to claim suicide attacks going back to 2000. The drill was: Hamas attacks, Israel bombs PA,blames Arafat. The thing is, israel ran out of PA targets, so now finally either they hit Hamas, or hit no one...poor Sharon, no..ran out of piggies.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
How many Indian rebellions in the US have you heard of since 1890? It seems the reservation system has worked.

At least one in 1873 at Pine Ridge.

Course, maybe the indiscriminate slaughter of indians and their food sources had more to do with it than the success of the Res.



Israel should destroy all of Palestine's crops and ability to get food and water, and then provide it for them. Once the Pals are totally dependent on Israel for their day to day survival, they'll stop fighting.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


In the last 30 years:

It's kinda hard to have regular elections when you have no government and you're occupied.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
"Israel has killed 13 Hamas members and six bystanders in nine airstrikes since an Aug. 19 "

That's an anomaly. Usually they kill more innocents than badguys. Not that I'm complaining that they're getting more accurate.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


It's kinda hard to have regular elections when you have no government and you're occupied.

But they are still occupied in large part due to the actions and decisions of the guy who's been in power for 30 years. Convenient, eh what?

[GePap]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


It's kinda hard to have regular elections when you have no government and you're occupied.

Arafat was not the leader of the palestinains until 1993, when under oslo the PLO became the PA. Before that he was the most prominent palestinian but could claim no legitimacy as the leader of anyone else outside of the PLO. And they had one election in 1996. So he has been in power 10 years, and in the las few, due to vioelnce, elections have been really rather impossible to hold fairly.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
But they are still occupied in large part due to the actions and decisions of the guy who's been in power for 30 years. Convenient, eh what?

Yes, by his actions and those of dozens of others from both sides. And again, he has been the head of the PLO for 30 years (given how many assasinations by other Pals. he lived throught) He was only to become Palestinian leader in 1993.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Arafat was not the leader of the palestinains until 1993, when under oslo the PLO became the PA. Before that he was the most prominent palestinian but could claim no legitimacy as the leader of anyone else outside of the PLO. And they had one election in 1996. So he has been in power 10 years, and in the las few, due to vioelnce, elections have been really rather impossible to hold fairly.

The PLO has been recognized by the arab world as "the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people" since at least 1972, IIRC.

My point was not that the Pals dont deserve a state cause they havent had elections - my point was simply a response to those who say the two current leaders are at fault. Sharon may be an obstacle to peace, but hes only been in power for 3 years. During that time israel had many other leaders, with a many different approaches - yet none managed to reach peace with the Palestinians. In all that time the Palestinians have had only one leader - de facto until 1992, de jure since then. So it would seem at least possible that changing leadership on the Pal side would make a difference.

Which is not to say that the personalities of the leaders are the only issue - but if you are going to focus on the leaders personalities, as some here have done, the assymetry in the terms of office is striking.

It is virtually certain that Sharon will not be in office in 5 years time (its unlikely he'll be in office more than another 2 years) Arafat seems likely to remain in office till he dies, or is expelled,

[Edan]

Originally posted by GePap


Arafat was not the leader of the palestinains until 1993, when under oslo the PLO became the PA.

No, he was. That's why the Palestinian "leadership" would always be on the phone with Arafat folliwng his orders on the negotiations during the Madrid conference and during the Oslo negotiations.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Yes, by his actions and those of dozens of others from both sides.

Yup, but he's the constant.

And again, he has been the head of the PLO for 30 years (given how many assasinations by other Pals. he lived throught) He was only to become Palestinian leader in 1993.

Ive heard many people argue precisely that Israel's big mistake in Oslo was in bringing Arafat and the other Fatah leaders back from exile, and effectively setting them up in control over the territories. They argue that instead it would have been possible to negotiate with an emerging local leadership, a leadership that has been subordinated by Arafat.

Ive always been skeptical of that myself, but its interesting to see you making related points.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


That's an anomaly. Usually they kill more innocents than badguys. Not that I'm complaining that they're getting more accurate.

It does seem much better than my impression of how theyve done before, which struck me (the numbers are from AP, BTW)

Im not sure its an anomaly though. It could be better weaponry (the US record on collateral damage seems to have improved considerably as well, in just the last 4 years since the Kosovo campaign). It could be a deliberate strategic move. It could even be better intel.

[chequita guevara]

It's anaomalous if you ust look at the numbers this year. IIRC, the ix people who died did so in the first two assassinations (when they did stuff like bomb the ambulance and fired rockets into the crowd that had surrounded the car after the first attack). Since then I've been impressed that they have't killed any bystanders, though they've injured quite a few of them.

Thought it was rather wrong to blow up a whole building of apartments just to get a couple guys on top.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Edan


No, he was. That's why the Palestinian "leadership" would always be on the phone with Arafat folliwng his orders on the negotiations during the Madrid conference and during the Oslo negotiations.

The international community decided to annoint him the leader of the Palestinians: not the palestinians (until after 1993).

Ive heard many people argue precisely that Israel's big mistake in Oslo was in bringing Arafat and the other Fatah leaders back from exile, and effectively setting them up in control over the territories. They argue that instead it would have been possible to negotiate with an emerging local leadership, a leadership that has been subordinated by Arafat.

To me oslo was the fllowing deal: Arafat would be made the legitimate leader of all Palestinians, get to go home a hero, and get a fiefdom to rule: his responsibility was to keep the Militants down and weak, so that thy would not attack Israel. Israel got to rid itself of the cost and worries of ruling the bulk of the Palestinians and all the cost involved without having to agree to anything long term, and free to continue building settlemets and so forth. Besides withdrawing from araes to be given to the PA, they had no significant other responsibilities.

So when askign why oslo faile,d given that only the PA had significant responsibilities, obviously then their inaction lead to failure of the process. But the process was fundamentaly flawed cause the Israelis had no responsibilties towards the Palestinians on the street themselves (like a freeze on all settlemets, access roads, movement restrictions and so forth).