Israel I'm getting a clear picture

[Sirotnikov]

Re: The Theory of the Flank Redux

Originally posted by Jules
First, I must confess that I'm shocked by many of MOBIUS's comments. But considering the recent horrific suicide attack that claimed the lives of innocent Israelis and the ensuing escalation of the "finger-pointing" campaign (Apolyton included ), his frustration is understandable and shared I'm sure by all of us.
*snap*

Agreed that it is very frustrating, especially for those who live here.

However, while one side is finger pointing the other side must keep up. Otherwise the other side will provide wrong facts and cause skewed judgement.



I whole heartedly agree with the intentions and solutions provided in the rest of your post. I think this is exactly what Rabin had intended and hoped for when he signed the Oslo agreements.

However, even though the PA territories began to thrive, the propaganda against Jews and Israel in Arab countries and PA territories never stopped.

5 Israeli ministers changed since the Oslo agreement.
Arafat stayed.

Arafat is the first and foremost part of the Problem.

A real benevolent and peace-wanting leader must rise for the PA.

Then, Israel will elect a peace leader, like it did in 1999 with Barak, and peace will be acheived.

Before my eyes were opened to Arafat's real nature, this is exactly what I had expected.

[faded glory]

I agree is Israel is using lots of restraint. They get suicide bombed and they go and drive a few tanks past Yassir's HQ in Gaza. Thats a very...very...restrained response. If Israel wanted to...it could wipe out every muslim on the W.Bank and Gaza within 3 days. And theres not a damn thing anybody could do about it.

So there is some restraint on Tel-Aviv's side (i think)

[Sirotnikov]

Jerusalem.

The govt. is in Jerusalem.
So is the Knesset.

[Natan]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by MOBIUS

Why not? In more ways it's more their home than Israel is

I don't think it's your right to judge that.

My, albeit arbitrary, solution would be to return territory (that's 100%) to the pre 1967 borders - now I say arbitrary, because I would support that because that's about the best the Palestinians are EVER likely to get! But then I'm not some Palestinian who was terrorised out of the Palestinian portion of greater Israel in 1948... So those people should either be allowed to return (fat chance!) or be adequately compensated in today's values for the land and possessions they lost!

Why would you ever think that the Palestinians would agree to stop fighting for they want just because you gave them half of it? All of the Palestinian organizations, including Yasser Arafat's Fatah, exclude negotiations as a means of achieving their ultimate goals, which are clearly the destruction of Israel. The Fatah constitution leaves no doubt about this.

They were attack because they were an easy target, the problem with the IDF from a terrorist POV is that they are more than capable of defending themselves and therefore not a very attractive target...

They were attacked because they were Jews: As the PA television station reminds us, "blessed is he who sticks a bullet in a Jews head."

I just think the government of Israel has it's head so far up it's own arse that it is oblivious to the fact that the more Palestinians/terrorists it kills the more that population becomes blinded by rage and attacks those it can most easily reach (the innocent). The reason why the onus is on Israel is because it is the one who wields the power (like a gigantic mallet!) and it is the one that is illegally occupying Palestinian territory! When will they realise that their current policies are not working and that maybe they should try something different?

When will you realize that the terrorists are not motivated by anything except a desire to kill?

That Sharon is in power is the will of the 'majority' of people - that is not every Israeli, it is fatuous of you to suggest that it is...

So why are you suggesting that Israelis deserve death without even knowing who they voted for? And as if voting the wrong way is a capital offense . . .

They were easy targets as I outlined above - if you don't want to get killed make it more difficult for the enemy to kill you! Surely the fact that you're safer if you're in the IDF than a civilian is an irony that's not lost on you!?

Civillian deaths outnumber military deathes in many modern conflicts. But I'm not sure that as a percentage of the population, IDF soldiers are less likely to die than civillians - something like 10% of the Israeli deathes in the Intifada have been soldiers, and combat troops don't make up 10% of the Israeli population.

Only about half of it! And only because the World felt sorry for the plight of the Jews

This is a fantasy on your part - Israel was created by the tears, toil, and sweat of the Jews who came, and with the help of a very few other kind souls - any other help Israel recieved was for political reasons, not the goodness of the World's heart.

NO! Those that tried to defend it were kicked off, murdered and forced to flee for their lives to live as refugees for the next 50+ years! It was their right to defend it and they lost out to superior firepower!

Only a lunatic or a propagandist could believe that Syrians, Egyptians, and Iraqis needed to wage a war which was billed from the start as genocidal to defend their "homeland" of "Palestine," and that these people who themselves kicked out hundreds of thousands of Palestinains were acting in self-defense - their countries were not even the battlegrounds!

Nothing less than 100% is fair IMO - I'm sure that if each shop you bought something in only gave back 97% of your change you'd feel a little pissed off! Tell you what, why don't you give me 3% of your wages, seeing as you don't need it... Better still, how about donating it to charity - how about B'Tselem, I'm sure they be happy to receive the odd thousand dollars or so that 3% of an average person's wage would be...

Arafat did not even offer a counter-offer, he simply refused to talk. But besides, this is insane

Nothing to do with Sharon and the Temple Mount episode of course - sure he's allowed to visit the holiest Jewish site but to choose such a time!!!???

At what time? What was so special about the time? And furthermore, why should religious freedom be restricted to certain times? How could the mere visit of a Jew to the temple mount have started 11 monthes of deadly terror? And didn't the Mitchell Report absolve Sharon of blame for starting the Intifada?

It's a bit like allowing Phalangist militia into a PLO refugee camp the day after their President was assassinated by the very same PLO

Firstly, I don't see how a Palestinian refugee camp becomes a PLO one. Secondly, your whole argument here is that the Israelis could never have been dumb enough to let a bunch of crazed nationalist thugs with a history of murderous atrocities run wild - but somehow, when another set of Israelis did the same thing 11 years later with a bunch of crazed nationalist thugs reffering to themselves as the PLO, this was not a war crime, but an act of peace.
[QUOTE]

Yeah right - it was reported as almost civil war when he tried to crack down last month!

Let's get real here - Arafat does not want to crack down on terror, because his own organization says that it is the one and only means of achieving their ends and has always said so.

If they know so much about them they could be apprehended at the border!

Actually, knowing that someone is planning terrorist attacks is not the same as knowing the details of these attacks - that's why the Israeli police often issue warnings that terrorists are loose or are infilftrating one part of the country or another, but are sometimes still unable to find said terrorists.

It's funny how the majority of these assassinations occur during times of relative quiet such as this latest incident

Do you have one iota of evidence to support that claim?

- it seems to the casual observer to be a calculated act to cause incitement!

Actually, if Israel didn't kill them, you'd be posting that Israel wants its civillians to do so that it has an excuse to retaliate.

Happened all the time in Northern Ireland, but then we were far more civilised in dealing with the crowd by firing rubber bullets (which also did kill people from time to time!) and NOT live rounds except maybe Bloody Sunday, which in Israel would have been almost a routine day. Of the people killed during the troubles, about 10% were actually killed by British forces as opposed to the 60+% casualties caused by the IDF...

Come on, the battles in Northern Ireland were never as deadly as those in Israel.

In the most part an entire ceasefire process has been brought down by the actions of several fanatics in a nation of millions!!!

It has been brought down to the entire PA enterprise which exists to protect terrorists and foster terrorism - the most the PA would say during the so-called "cease fire" (Look at me Mom! I only fired 12 bullets at random Israeli drivers today!) was that "our brothers in Hamas" should temporarily restrain themselves for the goals of the Palestinians. Arafat has already explained that "we are unity with [Hamas.]"

Much of the time it is 'forces on the ground' who strike - if they can pick their targets so easily then they can capture them.

False: It's a lot easier to fire a volley of bullets at someone then to knock them out and drag them home - and furthermore, I should note that strikes by close range assassins are rare, and that kidnappings have been used on occasion.

I think a high profile trial of a few captured terrorists would be far more effective than martyring the next one, and the next one, ad infinitum...

No. The example of Ahmed Yassin shows otherwise.

These fanatics are more than happy to die for their cause, but are they so willing to live for it - behind bars for the rest of their lives!!?

Yes. Especially since they'll be paroled as soon as their brothers in Fatah kill enough Jews to ensure their release.

Well you only have to go as far back as the Balfour Document, which was the vital foot in the door for the Zionist movement IMO...

After all, if foriegners are given the right to immigrate peacefully, they should be slaughtered ruthlessly. Why don't you join some xenophobic white supremacist group, with beliefs like that you'd fit right in.

I agree, round up the terrorists and try them for the murderous criminals they are - but don't add legitimacy to their cause by assassinating them! For every one you kill, five probably take their place - it's not working!

Why shouldn't five take the place of the imprisoned ones as well?

Well given that Israel is systematically destroying the Palestinian economy and infrastructure - is it any wonder that previously moderate people are becoming involved? I still remember that bus driver who'd been driving the same route for 20 yrs - then one day he snapped and ploughed into a crowd of people killing about a half dozen or so... The ordinary people of Palestine are being snapped to breaking point, with each passing day they have less and less to live for! Is it any wonder...

Okay, next time a few Israelis snap and gun down some Palestinians, I'm going to excuse it by pointing to constant Palestinian terrorism. People are responsible for their actions. Palestinians are human beings, not animals - no matter how much you deny their free will to make moral choices, they still have it.

Or perhaps because of it's occupation of the WB & GS?

The Palestinians don't think that ending the Jewish presence in the WB & GS (that is the true meaning of "uprooting settlements) is their goal, they want to end all "Zionist" presence in "all of Palestine" - that is, the west bank, the gaza strip, and Israel.

The only fault I find with the Palestinians are some of their targets and their locations...

That's the only problem a lot of Germans had with Hitler. That's a mighty nice synonym for massacring children and slaughtering innocents.

That is BS - the Northern Ireland peace process (with the odd hiccup!) proves it!

I think that remains to be seen - the IRA has yet to disarm. Furthermore, neither side in Northern Ireland wants to wipe out or expel the other, making it a poor model for Israel.

Why is the existence of Israel right - it was dead for 2000 years!

I'm not talking about destroying it - it's here to stay, it's just the manner of it's existence that concerns me...

So if it's only the manner of its existence that bothers you, why are you arguing about the fact of its existence?

[Sprayber]

This is another one of my questions about the Mid East.

Has Arafat ever publically stated that the State of Isreal has a right to exist in the Mid East?

Why is it that Arafat was chosen to be the leader of the PLA? How many elections have there been in the West Bank and Gaza.

People talk about the Palastinian economy. But exactly what does that entail, besides residents working in Isreal?

Does anyone ever wonder why Jordan isn't more involved? It appears to me that they are glad to be rid of the Palastinians.

[Natan]

Originally posted by Sprayber
Has Arafat ever publically stated that the State of Isreal has a right to exist in the Mid East?

IIRC, yes, in English.

Why is it that Arafat was chosen to be the leader of the PLA?

Let me just clarify - the PLA exists - in China, the People's Liberatian Army. I know it's confusing, but Arafat's organization is the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and his pseudo-government is called the Palestinian Authority (PA) although Palestinians refer to it as the PNA, or Palestinian National Authority. (Israelis and some others prefer to omit the National part because it implies the PA to an internationally recognized state)

How many elections have there been in the West Bank and Gaza.

IIRC, once in 1994.

People talk about the Palastinian economy. But exactly what does that entail, besides residents working in Isreal?

People working in Israel are what has kept it going, but there are some other jobs available too. There are a few doctors, lawyers, bodyguards etc. who get paid by the PA and by foriegn governments and organizations, and then there is some money which comes in from other Islamic nations to support the Intifada, although how signifigant this is to supporting Palestinian families, I don't know. There's a light manufacturing sector as well as agriculture, mostly exporting to Israel and Jordan, and then of course there are criminal enterprises, mostly smuggling drugs, stolen cars, and prostitutes between Israel and Egypt. As I understand it these are quite widespread. The same tunnels which carry guns accross the border into the Gaza strip also carry drugs (which I assume are destined for Israeli markets, since Palestinian drug use is close to non-exist) and just today, three Israelis were almost killed venturing into the PA governed city of Tulkarm in the hopes of regaining their stolen car. In fact, it seems like Jewish and Arab criminals get along better then most of their co-ethnicists.

Does anyone ever wonder why Jordan isn't more involved? It appears to me that they are glad to be rid of the Palastinians.

Appears that way to most analysts too. The Jordanian government believes that the Palestinians, and in particular the PLO, are out to overthrow them. Also, as one of the smallest and weakest states in the region, Jordan realizes that it can't afford to take a hard line against Israel.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Iran, Syria, etc.

Is it "restraint" that's stopping Sharon from invading these countries, then? Or the fact that an attempt to invade Syria would crystallize opposition to Israel as almost nothing else could, and an invasion of Iran is just about impossible?

I agree is Israel is using lots of restraint. They get suicide bombed and they go and drive a few tanks past Yassir's HQ in Gaza. Thats a very...very...restrained response. If Israel wanted to...it could wipe out every muslim on the W.Bank and Gaza within 3 days. And theres not a damn thing anybody could do about it

Really? I thought the Israelis were outkilling the Palestinians by a factor of about 4-1. They're hardly playing pacifist. So anything except outright genocide is restraint? If Israel killed a million civilians because of what God they worshipped then it would cease to exist as a country within a month. Don't talk out of your ass, fg. Even an American refusal to ship arms to Israel would prove fatal in the event of another Arab-Israeli war, and mass murder on that scale would probably make support of Israel an untenable position for any politician.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Is it "restraint" that's stopping Sharon from invading these countries, then?

That's not what you asked and that's not what I answered, old man.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


That's not what you asked and that's not what I answered, old man.

No, but follow the thread of the argument. Faeelin said that the actions of the Israelis were an exercise in restraint, because they would be justified in wiping a country that attacked them that way off the map. If he answered Palestine, then I would argue that Palestine is not a country, but is occupied territory. If he answered, as you did, Syria or Iran, then I demonstrate it's not restraint but political/military reality stopping them.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by Natan

do you know what a Slav is?
(Poles are a slavic people, so the percentage of Poles who were neither Jewish, Gpysie, or Polish and who were also not German must have been negligable)

Heh... well, I guess I never really did pay much attention to race issues...

[Goingonit]

Really? I thought the Israelis were outkilling the Palestinians by a factor of about 4-1. They're hardly playing pacifist. So anything except outright genocide is restraint? If Israel killed a million civilians because of what God they worshipped then it would cease to exist as a country within a month. Don't talk out of your ass, fg. Even an American refusal to ship arms to Israel would prove fatal in the event of another Arab-Israeli war, and mass murder on that scale would probably make support of Israel an untenable position for any politician.

Israelis are outkilling Palestinians because they don't want to die. If you're a soldier and somebody comes up to you with an AK-47 and starts shooting, you kill him. I'm sure if these soldiers were willing to die to show someone like you how pacifist Israel is, they could get killed, but Israeli soldiers aren't religious fanatics.

Israel is showing restraint in that the government is not acting on the demands of the voters. If they went and got blood every time the people screamed for it, there would be many fewer Palestinians, and that includes Palestinian terrorists, but they don't for both humanitarian and pragmatic reasons. As it is, Israel is doing its best to brotect its borders. This includes killing known terrorists. I hope you're not naive enough to think that the killings which are supposedly in response to assasinations actually are; if it weren't that it would be something else. Just like how Sharon's walk on the temple mount was not the reason for the current spate of violence, rather a pretext.

[KrazyHorse]

If we want to play "question their motives", then I can easily (and not entirely falsely) claim that the reason for the Israeli assassinations themselves is the urge for a little bloodletting. By the way, I wasn't accusing Israeli soldiers of murder, but there are more than a few instances in which I could.

Both sides seem to hate the middle ground here. Sharon weakens his most moderate opponent, opening the way for some real wackos. The Palestinian nutjobs kill indiscriminately, bringing heavier and heavier-handedness down on themselves. It's partisanship taken to the extreme, and both sides seem to want to find every excuse to break ceasefires and get back to the good old-fashioned slaughter.

[Natan]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
If we want to play "question their motives", then I can easily (and not entirely falsely) claim that the reason for the Israeli assassinations themselves is the urge for a little bloodletting.

You can claim anything, but you could never prove it.

Both sides seem to hate the middle ground here. Sharon weakens his most moderate opponent, opening the way for some real wackos. The Palestinian nutjobs kill indiscriminately, bringing heavier and heavier-handedness down on themselves. It's partisanship taken to the extreme, and both sides seem to want to find every excuse to break ceasefires and get back to the good old-fashioned slaughter.

Another way to put this is that both sides are starting to realize that the so-called peace proccess which has been forced upon them from the outside. They also see that the practical differences between their various opponents are nil, and therefore in the absence of the mythical peace proccess, it's to their advantage to ensure the politically most extreme but practically identical opponent comes to power and thereby loses for his side the propaganda victory of Oslo.

[Keygen]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Correction:

Little of the arabs actually settled here.

Most people here remained from ancient times and accepted Islam (or stayed jewish) or Christianity.

Most of the Palestinians, just like most of the jews, immigrated here later than 1880.

How sure can you be that the modern Palestians in their majority are descendants of the ancient nations that lived there?
So many tribes from the entire middle east and central asia inhabited in Palestanine...

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Most Israelis do recognzie their need for a country however:
1) Several Israelis believe Jordan is already a palestinian country.
And truth be told, it is. It's an Arab Monarchy ruling a Palestinian majority.
2) Israelis want an agreement that when Pals get a country, they put down their guns and live in peace. Following the recent events, Israelis do not believe the PLO headed by Arafat will do that, and think Arafat is just trying to use the peace process to get land, and will not stop warring with Israeli following it.

And the arabic world is crying for Palestinians having not their own land
I always was wondering despite the obvious difficulties since all arabs are supporting the independence of the Palestinians so strong why they didn't ever bothered to provide a small area in Jordan near the borders with Israel to the Palestinians to have their independent state.
Now I hear that most of Jordan's inhabitants are accually Palestinians! Here's the solution.
Jordan gives its west part and Israel gives part of east bank and Palestinians have their own state!

That would be nice and would end the middle east issue but I don't think that some leaders would be thrilled about it, including Sharon and possibly the Americans and Saudi Arabs...

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
It is true that fighting terror will create more terrorists.
However not fighting terror will create more terrorists AND hurt Israelis.

It is true that when guns speak instead of peace talks then terrorism in all forms from both sides is endless.

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Fighting x10 folds is not what we had a problem with.

We had a problem with extermination of a people for no damn reason that their ethnicity.

Had they not decided to exterminate jews and several other minorities, German jews would fight alongside, just like they did in WWI.

I also would have had no problem had Hitler simply decided to take over land. While it's immoral, I accept that countries and "tribes" have done so and will keep doing so.

I would even had no problem with the persecution of the Jews had the Jews done something. If the Jews really wanted to do something, or would have fought against Hitler or something. But they didn't. They simply wanted to go on with their lives, as German citizens.

Yes, you're right but what's your point?
That you grand the tactic that Germans were killing 10 and some time 100 civilians for the death of a single German officer simply because the enslaved people were fighting for their freedom?

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Why is the existence of Israel right - it was dead for 2000 years!

I'm not talking about destroying it - it's here to stay, it's just the manner of it's existence that concerns me...

Accually Israel wasn't existing for more than 2000 thousand years...

But Greece didn't exist for 2000 years either with the exeption of the Greek rule over Byzantine empire after the 7th century and for 7 centuries.
Ireland didn't exist for 8oo years.
Persia didn't exist for more than a millenium.

What does that mean?

Not deserving a country as well?

Is it better living all over the world without a country like the gypsies and get kicked off every time nationalism dominates?

Maybe the Palestinians doesn't deserve an independent country too since they never really had a state on their own, maybe for a short time only.

Common Mob...

[KrazyHorse]

Natan

All of which again assumes that neither actually has it in them to live in peace with the other. They're playing brinksmanship with actual violence, and in lieu of outright warfare (which isn't quite politically sustainable yet), they relieve their tensions with low-level conflict.

They should find a goddamn modus vivendi already.

By the way, you can sneer all you want at the outsiders who try and pressure for peace, but at least I'm sure that most of their hearts are in the right place, and I'd rather have them for neighbours than the population of either the PA or the State of Israel.