why the hell isn't the US kicking the **** out of the palestinians?!?!

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Israel may accidentally kill random police men when it bombs police stations.

Am I the only one who sees the lunacy in this sort of statement? It is like saying 'Palestinians may accidentally kill random Iraelis when they suicide bomb random buses'.

It doesn't matter if the killings are random - they are still wrong!

I think both sides are to blame and there is nothing I would like to see better than a third (anonymous) party who would assasinate both the Israeli and Pal leaders, say once every second month, if they do not come up with some sort of peace. I bet that would move things along a bit. (I am joking BTW )

More seriously, ideally, what I would like to see is the entire Israel/Palestine area being united into one country with all Israelis and Palestinians being being citizens. It would have a secular, democratically elected government where everyone had the vote and would therefore be represented in the political system. Any subsequent terrorist attacks by any side would then be a matter for the internal police and anti-terrorist organisations. The new state would not be called Israel or Palestine and would officially have no connection to the old states, so that no one would feel resentment towards it, and 'past deeds' and 'revenge' would not be issues. Note that there would be no problem from the other arab states vowing to wipe this new state away as there would no longer be a 'Jewish' state of Israel - just one big happy ( ) secular family.

I think the chances of this happening are practically zero of course.

[Az]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh

More seriously, ideally, what I would like to see is the entire Israel/Palestine area being united into one country with all Israelis and Palestinians being being citizens. It would have a secular, democratically elected government where everyone had the vote and would therefore be represented in the political system. Any subsequent terrorist attacks by any side would then be a matter for the internal police and anti-terrorist organisations. The new state would not be called Israel or Palestine and would officially have no connection to the old states, so that no one would feel resentment towards it, and 'past deeds' and 'revenge' would not be issues. Note that there would be no problem from the other arab states vowing to wipe this new state away as there would no longer be a 'Jewish' state of Israel - just one big happy ( ) secular family.

I think the chances of this happening are practically zero of course.

I would like the whole world to live as a big happy family.

But frankly, the palestinians are not secular. They're islamist fanatics.

women have no equality in their society. Their society is masculine oriented, and they respect strength.

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
But frankly, the palestinians are not secular. They're islamist fanatics.

Oh rubbish! The palestinians are not all fanatics and they are not all terrorists. Just as not all Israelis are murdering warmongers.

Anyway, having a secular society (or secular government) does not prevent anyone from having their own personal beliefs or worshiping in the way they want (as long as it doesn't impinge on other's rights). In fact a secular society should gaurantee freedom of worship.

[Az]

yes , but you can't keep the government secular and democratic that way.

because then , the religious people will get voted into the parliament, and then they'll vote for a bunch of laws , that are silly. We still have plenty of those , and we have a clear-cut secular majority. Imagine if a single country would exist?

don't you know ? the police in most muslim countries shows a blind-eye to MURDER of women by their husbands. I just saw a show about it on BBC , a case in Pakistan. And they used to have a female PM , IIRC.

[Ecowiz Returns]

Originally posted by faded glory
What do they have to offer us? Archaelogy sites? Desert crops? And please dont spew out that "Oil" crap. Israel doesnt have one drop.

In so few lines you actually presented the reasons why the US does not attack the Palestinians. The (nonexistant) Israelli Oil they would win is much less that the Saudi Arabian they would loose.

Also, now that we are talking about massacres and other Human Rights abuses, why doesn't the US invade:

Zimbabwe
Indonesia
China
Saudi Arabia (and most of the other Arab countries)
North Corea
Angola
most of the African Countries
... (just to name the first one I can remember)
not to mention Israel itself (unless detention without an issued court order, or expelling people from their homes - even if they are the relatives of known criminals - is standard practice, acording to some Human Rights Declaration ammendment I'm not aware of).

Maybe, because, the defense of Human Rights isn't, exactly the American priority when deciding to wage a war.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"They are by definition beyond the reach of reason."

People do not blow themselves up without a reason. They do so out of hatred for what Israel has done and for the amount of hopelessness in the eyes of Palestine's youth. The Palestinians have been humiliated and been placed under occupation.

"Religious nuts do not need a reason. They will find an excuse one way or another."

Religion often used as a facade to carry out acts of their hatred.

"Someday, sit down in a restaurant with your wife and children and then after they have been blown to bits and you are left crippled by some nut who thinks that he is doing God a favor then you can judge Israel."

And I trust you will reserve judgement on the Palestinians until your country had been placed under a brutal occupation, your people humiliated, and you have found yourself economically deprived.


"The problem in Palestine is that an entire generation has now been taught in the public schools that it is the supreme act of patriotism and religious service to kill yourself along with as many innocent Jews as possible. The "root" goes far beyond poverty and vengence. The problem is now in the very heart of an entire people."

Right. And Israel people learn that God has granted them the land they are on, they do not recognize any Palestinian right to live there, and so they believe Israel can do as is neccesary to the pals for their own security.

I support Israel and it's right to exist. I think if Israel were ever to fall, it would be a horrible humanitarian disaster. But Lincoln, you sometimes seem to lack any compassion or empathy for this downtrodden people(the Pals).

First of all I have just as much compassion for innocent Palestians as I do for innocent Jews. The key word is innocent not race or nationality. There is no excuse for intentionally killing innocent women and children by either side. The key word here is "intentional". If society begins to condone the intentional killing and maiming of innocent civilians then the hope of any rational solution is gone.

Opression has nothing to do with fanatics blowing themselves up for God or whatever. If they were rational people who had a legitimate cause then they would be inclined to use the tactics of Gandhi or Martin Luther King if they find themselves in a position of military weakness. They can expect no sympathy while they choose to kill the innocent. Israel is correct in demanding a stop to this killing before negotiating further.

As for judging the Palestians. I do not judge or condemn them in their quest for a nation and freedom. My entire condemnation is toward the fanatics among them who kill innocent people. To approve this tactic is to legitimize it in future warfare and conflict. Caring people should not approve of these tactics as most would approve the tactics of Gahndi etc.. The virtual silence in light of this continued terrorism is nothing less than antisemitism shrowded by so called compassion. It is natural to want to strike back at those who are perceived as opressors but they have lost me as a supporter when they so blatently ingnore the plight of the innocent that they kill as a direct and blatant act specifically aimed at them.

[Adam Smith]

Rufus:

on your last few posts. I think a just settlement would involve a bit more than was on the table at Camp David (Pals claim their West Bank territory was not really contiguous, and they probably should get a bit more of Jerusalem), but it seemed pretty clear to me that the Israelis made all the movement and the Pals didn't much respond.