The Disengagement Thread

[DinoDoc]

I don't get the problem with this. Just treat it as if your are throwing a Palestinian out of his house to be bulldozed. Give them a few hours notice and pull them out by force.

[Edan]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I don't get the problem with this. Just treat it as if your are throwing a Palestinian out of his house to be bulldozed. Give them a few hours notice and pull them out by force.

That is approximately what they're doing. They gave them 48 hours notice and are now pulling them out. But even ignoring the enormous logistical complexities that this action entails, they're trying to make this go as smoothly as possible to try to prevent violence or suicide (especially with the increased risk of Palestinian terrorists trying to attack) and to try to maintain support among the general population. Given that they so far have been successful (AFAIU, about 2/3 of gaza residents have left, and so far there's been almost no serious violence), it seems like they're making the right decisions.

[Eli]

A few minutes ago an Israeli citizen opened fire on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank, killing at least 2. Another 4 are seriously wounded.

[Az]

I don't get the problem with this. Just treat it as if your are throwing a Palestinian out of his house to be bulldozed.

We should do that more often, since it seems people think we're doing it all the time

[GePap]

The NY Times has had now several articles on the "plight" of the settlers and how emotional everything is.

I have no sympathy for the settlers thought, or their ideology. They never moved to Gaza to be neighbors with the Palestinians. They went there for the Greater Israel. That dream is dead, and these folks should realize it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
The NY Times has had now several articles on the "plight" of the settlers and how emotional everything is.

I have no sympathy for the settlers thought, or their ideology. They never moved to Gaza to be neighbors with the Palestinians. They went there for the Greater Israel. That dream is dead, and these folks should realize it.

some of them didnt go there. Some were born there, as some of the settlements are almost 30 years old.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
The NY Times has had now several articles on the "plight" of the settlers and how emotional everything is.

I have no sympathy for the settlers thought, or their ideology. They never moved to Gaza to be neighbors with the Palestinians. They went there for the Greater Israel. That dream is dead, and these folks should realize it.

actually when i was in israel back in '81, I was told that settlers in the West Bank had pretty decent relations with neighboring arab villages. That changed with the first intifada.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
The NY Times has had now several articles on the "plight" of the settlers and how emotional everything is.

I have no sympathy for the settlers thought, or their ideology. They never moved to Gaza to be neighbors with the Palestinians. They went there for the Greater Israel. That dream is dead, and these folks should realize it.

so if and when the PA disarms Hamas, and the NYT reports how emotional it is, how bad Hamasniks feel that their own people are disarming them, will you be equally unsympathetic.

actually thats a red herring isnt it? Its most unlikely there will be seens of Hamasniks in tears, arguing with Pal soldiers, singing songs and prayers as there weapons are taken away. Rather it will be a battle. If it happens at all.

[Sandman]

The poor settlers will only get enough compensation to live comfortably for the rest of their lives. After a lifetime of tax breaks and freebies.

My heart bleeds.

[Az]

Everything changed with the first Intifada. Things got a whole lot worse for the palestinians, that's for sure.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
some of them didnt go there. Some were born there, as some of the settlements are almost 30 years old.

Too bad.

so if and when the PA disarms Hamas, and the NYT reports how emotional it is, how bad Hamasniks feel that their own people are disarming them, will you be equally unsympathetic.

What's sad is that you have such a dumb view of me that you would think I would be emotional about that. NO, I would be happy to see them being disarmed. But if you need to seer me an an anti-semite or Arab lover to make yourself feel better, go right ahead. I don;t care.

actually when i was in israel back in '81, I was told that settlers in the West Bank had pretty decent relations with neighboring arab villages. That changed with the first intifada.

This isn't the West Bank, now is it?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Az
Everything changed with the first Intifada. Things got a whole lot worse for the palestinians, that's for sure.

They are much closer to statehood today than in 1981. I doubt Israel would have ever accepted the principle of a Palestinian state without it. IN fact, they most certainly would have not.

[Az]

They are much closer to statehood today than in 1981. I doubt Israel would have ever accepted the principle of a Palestinian state without it. IN fact, they most certainly would have not.

That's very debatable. What's not debatable is the 4-fold drop in living standards ( even before this Intifada), deterioration of their society, etc. etc.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Az


That's very debatable. What's not debatable is the 4-fold drop in living standards ( even before this Intifada), deterioration of their society, etc. etc.

Is it debateable at all? Why exactly would Israelis have ever thought of granting Palestiians independence if they could continue in the fiction that Palestinians were but a docile Arab population they could control?

As for a drop in living standards, mayeb it was the measures taken by Israel to continue its control of palestinian areas during the intifadah's that did that?

[Az]

Is it debateable at all? Why exactly would Israelis have ever thought of granting Palestiians independence if they could continue in the fiction that Palestinians were but a docile Arab population they could control?

Because many Israelis would see the potential danger of living with a large palestinian population, docile or not. Duh. The settlements were a burden on Israel, war or not - and you didn't have to have an intifada to let Israel go. If anything, Intifada, and the attacks on Israeli civilians especially, were the ones that prolonged Israeli control of the territories.

As for a drop in living standards, mayeb it was the measures taken by Israel to continue its control of palestinian areas during the intifadah's that did that?

Man, you're like the palestinian Scott Mclellan. What were those measures exactly? The major thing that hurt the palestinians the most was that it hurt the sale of palestinian goods and labor to Israel - and that wasn't done to "tighten it's evil grip" - but to protect it's territory from attacks and infiltrations.

Controlling the territories wasn't ever in Israel's best interests, and that's why Israel never annexed them - we don't want them, except for certain pockets. But leaving them back in the 70s was ****ing improbable - leave them to whom? the 70s PLO?!