Bus exploded in Haifa

[CyberGnu]

[quote]Perhaps it would have been if people hadn't been running around blowing up buses? [/quote[

Actually, I quite doubt that. The occupation of palestine is not about stopping terrorism, one must be incredibly naive to buy that line.

It's about grabbing more land. Why do you think the settlements are steadily increasing? Why do you think the palestinian infrastructure was systematically destroyed?

Stopping bus bombing might have a positive effect on the palestinian quest for statehood, but only thought international opinion. and can you really fault the palestinians for not holding out any hope for that, when the international opinion didn't give a rat's ass about them for over 40 years?

It took an intifada to make the world realize the palestinians plight. Many, if not most, palestinians believe only a second intifada has any chance of realizing a palstinian homeland.


You know, I'm not telling them to keep using bombs. In the current climate, it is most likely counter productive. But I also can't morally condemn them for taking extreme measures in order to stop an oppressive occupation.

Hey, you should know this: just look at your country men during world war 2, for example.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by CyberGnu

Yet, they are still oppressed.

I don't quite follow your intention here. Are you implying that since an occupation is old, it is OK? Or are you trying to establish a case for my opinions being inconsistent, when I think that a country who has publically apologized for its bloody past, and who are doing their very best to make up for past crimes shouldn't be compared to a country who are continually oppressing a subjugated people?

Well, in a way, both and neither, I suppose.

I now see how you distinguish between the governments, yet you fail to make any distinction between the people who are blowing up buses and the people who aren't.

Any chance of this little difference possibly affecting the actions of the respective governments?

[CyberGnu]

If it worked as far as to ending the occupation, then what makes you think they would stop at that when many of these groups have clearly stated intent to destroy Israel?

Because these groups are marginalized without the plight of the common people to draw upon.

Just look at Northern Ireland, for example. Britains heavy handed tactics only made the situation worse for 20 years, but when they finally realized that eroding popular support for the IRA was the key to peace, they made huge steps forward.

[Eli]

Yoav and his brother are fine.

The victim is a teen with the same name as his brother - obviously Yoav's family has gotten many frightened calls from friends and relatives.

He was a poster here for about a year. He has no time to post now.

[Guardian]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by CyberGnu

Perhaps it would have been if people hadn't been running around blowing up buses? [/quote[

Actually, I quite doubt that. The occupation of palestine is not about stopping terrorism, one must be incredibly naive to buy that line.

It's about grabbing more land.

...and the conquest of America wasn't?

[CyberGnu]

Gnu, I picked those topics because they've been forum topics over the past few months. Maybe if you'd poke your head out of your bunker every now and then, you'd know that.

Monk, I actually haven't been to the forums much over the last few months. My work keeps me pretty busy, as the poor saps who play in Imperial dip can attest.

Right now I've filled up my computers with jobs, and am waiting for some of them ro finish so I can submit more.


I actually DID read the "Free Kurdistan" thread, and while I found your first post in that thread to be quite funny, I never felt I had anything to contribute. Ranskaldan argued quite well, and anything I could add would only be an echo of his comments.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by CyberGnu

Because these groups are marginalized without the plight of the common people to draw upon.

Just look at Northern Ireland, for example. Britains heavy handed tactics only made the situation worse for 20 years, but when they finally realized that eroding popular support for the IRA was the key to peace, they made huge steps forward.

Well, there's a point.

Then again, Gandhi managed to beat the British Empire without blowing up a single busload of civilians...

[CyberGnu]

...and the conquest of America wasn't?

And the U.S. goverment has apologized, and are trying to repay for past crimes.

Look, are you saying that we shouldn't oppose slavery, because the U.S. at one point had the same practice?

If the US was proud of its sometimes genocidal past, that would have been one thing. But it isn't!!!! Not even close!

Or if Native Americans would be systematically persecuted or dienfranchised. again, this is not the case! It's even the opposite: if you are a Native American, you get significant affirmative action coming your way, plus you get a yearly stipend from the US goverment just for being born. (not sure about the extent of this last item... A friend from South Dakota claimed this, but I've yet to meet a Native american who can verify. It might be applicable only to members of poor reservations)

[Guardian]

Originally posted by CyberGnu

And the U.S. goverment has apologized, and are trying to repay for past crimes.

Yes, but they're not giving the land back, which is what you're asking Israel to do.

[CyberGnu]

Then again, Gandhi managed to beat the British Empire without blowing up a single busload of civilians...

True, but that was only because it became uneconomical to maintain the occupation. Soldiers cost money, and England didn't have Uncle Sam to bankroll their occupation.

I think a better example would be the American revolution. What do you think would have happened if the americans had said "let's be pacifists - that'll teach them"?

And hell, if King George had been less heavy handed, maybe the sun wouldn't set on the british empire to this date.

[Firelad]

Well, there's nae a Gandhi on either side over here. Just a lot of suffering people and a bunch of evil, evil beasts cynically exploiting them. People trying to follow Gandhi's ways get shot or imprisoned around here, or at least very effectively silenced in less obvious ways....

[CyberGnu]

Yes, but they're not giving the land back, which is what you're asking Israel to do.

Actually, they ARE giving land back. There are currently several law suits regarding who owns what parcels of land... But that is beside the point.


At some point, you have to be pragmatic. We can't change history. Might gave right 150 years ago, and there is nothing we can do about that, we can only try to lessen the effect. But we CAN make sure that might does not give right today. Sure, Israel is there to stay. I don't think there is anything we can do about that either. (I'm glad that you accept the assumption that Israel has as much right to Palestine as England had to America, though - which is none at all. It makes it easier when one party doesn't use a 2000 year old book to support their claim.)

But we can make sure that the palestinians have at least the same standard of living as Israelis. Anything less can not, in any way, be considered moral.

I've outlined what I think is the minimum "path to peace" several times before.

Israel must leave the occupied territories completely. That includes all settlements. If Israel feels the need to retain one particular area, they can barter for it: exchanging it for land elsewhere, but only in a fair trade, as accepted by impartial negotiators. The trade proposed in the Camp David, for example, is not satisfactory: you can't suggest trading pieces of jerusalem for pieces of desert and hope your opponent will accept that...

Second, there must be an ironclad agreement that Israel cannot enter palestinian land FOR ANY REASON. This must be physically safeguarded by an international force, as well as politically accepted by the US. If this isn't in force, we will see the exact same thing in palestine as in lebanon : It will take the IDF roughly six seconds to come up with some excuse to invade again. We all know how this works...

Grievances has to be taken up with the international force, who must have law enforcing power in the new palestine. It would be even better if they had power in Israel as well, but I'm guessing that would never work.

Finally, the "right of return" must be settled. Israelis usually claim that they can't allow 4 million refugees to immigrate into Israel, since that would make arabs and jews roughly equal in numbers. Well, there is a simple solution to that: Partition off half the land inside the green line and give that land to the refugees. Not only it is practical (although expensive), but it also has several historical qualities: The remaining land of ISrael would be roughly the same size as proposed in 1946, before Israel seized the land inside the green line. It also reflects a fairly decent population/area ration, as the "New Israel" would have about 40% of the original palestine, with ~5 million inhabitants, and the "new palestine" would have 60% with ~8 million inhabitants.


As you probably see, the main problem with this solution is that Israel would never agree. Givning up so much land would never be aceptable, which is my this solution would have to be imposed on it...

[CyberGnu]

Firelad, true.

I'm guessing the settler who killed Rabin is celebrating every time he hears of a new atrocity, on either side...

And I'm off to bed.

Night.

[MRT144]

rabin how my heart aches and my eyes tear whenever i hear or read that name.

[Edan]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
I think a better example would be the American revolution. What do you think would have happened if the americans had said "let's be pacifists - that'll teach them"?

When did the American revolutionaries bomb a busload of civilians - or indeed, target any civilians?