Getting rid of Arafat

[bemildred]

A truly ruthless Israeli government would have
killed Yasser Arafat in a surprise raid on his
headquarters in Ramallah. It would have counted on
long-term indulgence from the Bush Administration,
even if the first reaction had been critical. And it
would have calculated that Arab fury would
gradually abate as the Palestinians realised they at
last had the chance of choosing a new leader to
rescue them from the cul-de-sac of violence.

telegraph.uk

[Darranar]

1. HAHAHAHAHA!

He hasn't been forced by anyone to threaten Arafat. That is entirely his doing.

[bemildred]

2. I liked this bit:

Tactically, the decision is extraordinarily inept,
raising doubts as to whether any coherent strategy
for dealing with Palestinian terrorism lies behind it.

Coincides with my own view that they are thrashing around on
how to deal with events.

[Resistance]

3. my view

is that "dealing with Palestinian terrorism" is hardly the ultimate priority; rather, capturing as much precious 'Holy' land as possible is, and always has been, for the State of Israel. "Dealing with Palestinian terrorism" provides the justification.

[sushi]

5. I think that too

It's all about land.

[LastDemInIdaho]

6. Fair enough

So you think Israel is just after more 'Holy' land. I accept that.

My view is that Palestinian terrorism is an attempt to eliminate the Jewish people from the land they call home. Calling them infidels provides the justification.

[Resistance]

7. here's where I would differ, LastDem ...

I don't think that Palestinian terrorism is focused on Israelis solely because they are (mostly) Jewish - rather it is because they are the ones who dispossessed them of their homeland. I think it is misguided to view the extremist movements as a sort of extension of the Nazi holocaust, although, obviously they do try to appeal to more racist elements in calling for 'jihad' against a 'Jewish' enemy.

I also don't mean to discount the history of tensions between Jews and Moslems, or the factor of religious fanaticism - I just don't think that is what primarily fuels the extremists' fire.

On edit, let me add this: Maybe we can agree that there is a mix of both outright racial and religious hatred, and also anger about the recent history of dispossession? Where we would argue on is how to portion each element, I take it?

______

Just a final note: sorry I kept editing (I did about 5 times)- I just want to be sure I am clear on these important points, and also I don't want to come across as making any excuses for the murderous actions of the Palestinian terrorists.

[Darranar]

8. However accurate your points may be, Resistance...

"misguided" is an understatement. Hamas is a despicable organization that most certainly is driven by racial and religious hatred in a a large amount, despite the fact that anger over past dispossession also plays a part.

When it comes to the subject of dispossession, I think that you cannot blame the israelis solely for this; Arab leaders also played a part, by placing national interests over the rights of the Palestinians and also trying to convince them to leave.

[Resistance]

10. I agree that Hamas is despicable

and I don't mean to justify or condone their actions. Whatever it is that they are 'driven by' doesn't really matter to me given that they send suicide strikes on Israeli civilians. These lose any resemblance of sympathy from me when committing these crimes against humanity.

I also agree that you can't pin the blame all on Israel - obviously not! The British majorly screwed things up during the mandate era, just for starters on playing the blame-game. Also you make a great point about Arab leaders ... I think you state it perfectly, in fact.

[Darranar]

11. Okay...

I guess we agree then.

[Resistance]

12. while we're at it

I have another point to make.

What angers me on the Israeli side is the officials of the state who know damn well that dispossession of Palestinian land, and all the illegitimate means which go into fulfilling those plans, are what swells the ranks of the extremist Palestinian movements, yet they continue down that dismal path anyway. I believe they knowingly put their citizens at risk, when they continue the march down this colonialist path, yet their religious fundamentalist aspirations just keep on pushing the thing along. This is despicable. And the United States - the only country in the world with the power to alter this atrocious course of history - blindly supports the entire campaign.

There is NO reason why the settlements can't end right now, and plans for a Palestinian state cannot begin to be mapped out within the occupied territories. I know the Camp David negotiations are a hotly disputed matter between various partisans, and I don't wish to go over that right now - only to say that I believe the peace partnership can resume, but those hopes continue to be crushed underneath each new housing structure going up on Palestinian land.

[Darranar]

13. It's a very interesting point...

that I'm not sure I can agree with for a number of reasons.

I'll play the other side for a while: Barak offered Arafat a very good deal. Why did Arafat refuse it?

[Resistance]

14. sorry

I edited again.

You might be interested in reading through this though:

The Myth of the Generous Offer - Distorting the Camp David negotiations

[Darranar]

15. Very interesting article...

I have heard similar arguments before. Thank you for the link.

[Resistance]

16. so you see

Barak is the one that walked. And my personal view is not to specifically blame him: I think the election of Ariel Sharon is what iced the thing. International pressure would have forced Barak and Arafat to resume the negotiations, and from there, it is hard to say if a deal would have been hammered out, but the chances would have been infinitely better than with Sharon and his right-wing insanity.

[Darranar]

17. The election of Ariel Sharon...

permanently locked negotiations in the bad state they were. I think that they probably would have improved, if international pressure had been applied on Arafat and Sharon - in other words, I basically agree with you.

[sushi]

9. The difference is

that the Palestinians are weak and know that they can never succeed in driving the Jewish people away, while Israel CAN take more and more and more land but haven't done it (yet) because they know the world is against it. Maybe they plan to do it slowly.

Non-Muslims ARE infidels to the Muslims, and vice versa, right?

[Darranar]

4. However inept the action may be...

he says that Sharon has been forced into it. He seems to be a reasonable pro-Israel person - though perhaps a bit in denial. I am not familiar with the author, though, so I can't formulate an opinion on him until I've read a few more of his articles.