Amnesty: Israel must immediately stop the construction of wall

[Resistance]

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE150992003

Amnesty International is adding its voice to worldwide protests against Israel's construction of the fence/wall in the Occupied West Bank. The organization calls on the Israeli authorities to stop the construction of the fence/wall in the West Bank that is affecting the lives of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

"This fence/wall is having devastating economic and social consequences on the daily lives of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, separating families and communities from each other and from their land and water - their most crucial assets," said Amnesty International.

In order to build the fence/wall, large areas of mostly cultivated Palestinian land have been destroyed. The land on which it is constructed has been seized by the Israeli military authorities for "military needs". Although the seizure orders for the land are generally "temporary", usually until the end of 2005, they can be renewed indefinitely. Over the decades, Palestinian land "temporarily" seized by Israel has been used to build permanent structures, including settlements and roads for settlers, and has never been returned to its owners.

[bluesoul]

1. After the end of the Berlin wall

I never thought I would have to say this: STOP THE WALL!

btw, welcome back Resistance! ;)

[Muddleoftheroad]

2. The Palestinians build the wall brick by brick

with every terror attack by Hamas and others.

Lacking any likely peaceful resolution, Israel is building a wall.

[bluesoul]

3. And you support

such policies. nice...

[Muddleoftheroad]

4. I don't see any other options

The wall does not follow the path I would have chosen, but it is either the wall or no wall. So I support it.

[Paschall]

5. Muddle, how you can say that?

The wall is inevitable? Where's your support for the dozens of Israeli peace groups--the tens of thousands of Israelis--who oppose this de facto apartheid?

[Muddleoftheroad]

6. Not apartheid

No the wall isn't inevitable, but it is necessary. Lacking a partner in peace, Israel has no choice but to cut off dealings with the Palestinians. Personally, I would have done it some time ago and it would be ALL dealings. No travel, no jobs, nothing.

[Paschall]

7. I've seen you say that before

What is your religious denomination, if you don't mind my asking?

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Why do you ask?

nt

[Paschall]

11. I can't wrap my head around the idea...

...of a self-proclaimed life-long Black Democrat supporting the death penalty (as I believe you do) and Sharon's policies in the Palestine. Particularly when you put God in your sig line. And choose MLK for your avatar.

Merely trying to grasp what belief framework you are coming from.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Herschel]

13. Explain yourself

What is all your talk of taking root?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

46. What do you need to wrap your head around

I'm black. That should be obvious from 5,000+ posts. Always have been. Funny how that works. I was raised by mom reminding me who fought by our side during the civil rights era -- Jewish people. They marched, they lobbied, they died to help me get the rights I have now. She always told me not to turn my back on my friends. I don't.

And that's enough explaining for anybody.

[Paschall]

56. I'm afraid I still don't understand

The fact is that there are Jews in the US and Israel who view the problem of the Occuptied Territories through a prism your mother would understand well--civil rights.

I haven't taken a poll, but I would guess that the Jews who most supported the Civil Rights movement in the United States were predominately to the left. And it is those Jews--or their heirs--who are most opposed to Sharon's policies.

What I don't understand is how your allegiance goes to one Jewish vision of the problem, namely that supported by Ariel Sharon and the Likud, but not to that of leftist Jews who are fighting actively for the civil rights of the Palestinians. I mean, after all, the American Jews who supported the Civil Rights movement ("your friends," as your mother said) are not now members of the current Israeli government.

In a sense, for those leftist Jews, I believe the Palestinian cause might be viewed as a continuation of the struggle for the civil rights of African Americans. And it is for that reason that I also don't understand why you don't have more empathy for the Palestinians, since as a Black man you could be viewed as their "brother in oppression." Indeed, your attitude to them is openly hostile. I find that incomprehensible.

[Muddleoftheroad]

72. Not my job

After a certain point you just have to accept I am who I am. Maybe that's not enough for you, but such is life.

We all see things through our own prism. I'm a big history buff and I add that to my prism of understanding. I also remember the Munich Olympics pretty well. I will never take the side of those who support such terror. In fact, I will oppose them to the day I die.

My attitude to Palestinians is that I expect better of them. I expect them to not blow up babies or try to murder women and children. I expect that they would genuinely try to make peace, but I don't see it. And I'm enough of a history buff to think it stupid for Israel to negotiate peace with people who don't actually offer it.

[Paschall]

74. So that's it? End of conversation?

Of course I'll accept you for who you are. But I was hoping that who you are and what you've lived through as a Black man in America might mean you had something to teach me.

I would have thought that living as member of an oppressed minority in America you might do better than that. I would have thought that as someone who probably experienced the "mental colonization" of white racism--as Barbara Kennedy called it--, you might have had more empathy for a people that has been dispossessed not only of its dignity, but also its land.

It's unfortunate you haven't used your obvious passion to also examine the atrocities committed by Israel. Or adopted a position more in keeping with an MLK-inspired strategy for mutual healing in the Middle East, like the solutions for peace that many Israeli leftists support, but instead prefer to cast all blame on the Palestinians.

In fact, since you've said Jews are your primary concern in this conflict, it's surprising you haven't seen--as MLK saw about white racists' attitudes toward African Americans--that hard-line Jews' continued demonization of the Palestinians is at least as equally harmful to them, to their spirit.

In short, I'm still puzzled, because I don't believe the positions you've taken can allow Israel to continue to "be a light unto the world." As MLK knew, mere survival is not enough and is, in fact, meaningless if one fails to take up the righteous works one is called upon to do.

[GabysPoppy]

75. Yeah Muddle

How dare you not to live up to someone elses expectations.

Who else wants to hop on board and tell Muddle who he should be and what he should think? Now is your time.

While your at it, tell him what he should wear each day and what he should eat. Everything seems to be in play these days.

[Lurking Dem]

80. I think he should wear a clown suit and golf shoes.

I know I'm a pervert but......

[Paschall]

97. Cute, GabysPoppy. But not funny

If I was so bold in stating my "expectations" of Muddle, it was because he ridiculously said of Palestinians, "I expect better of them"... after stating, "Personally, I would have done it {cut off dealing with the Palestinians} some time ago and it would be ALL dealings. No travel, no jobs, nothing."

That's advocating de facto internment and starvation for the Palestinians. Very unfunny.

Please refrain from derailing the discussion of issues.

[GabysPoppy]

106. If you insist on being the room monitor

Please monitor the ENTIRE room or hand in your badge.

So far you have been as "fair and balanced" as you know who,

[bluesoul]

110. Let's not get into "monitors" and

"fair and balanced" views cause it goes both ways here. Certainly no one can claim the higher moral ground or being less biased...

[Resistance]

141. actually yes

some can claim a moral high ground here.

Some folks denounce all terrorist attacks, while others only denounce Palestinian attacks, while still others fully support Israeli terrorist attacks.

There is definitely a higher moral ground to be found in those who denounce all terrorism, in my view.

[Muddleoftheroad]

109. Not at all, but thanks for playing

I love how so many here deem to speak for me when I post often enough for it not to be necessary.

I am NOT advocating "de facto internment and starvation for the Palestinians." I am advocating that Israel cuts them off and lets them fend for themselves. Certainly, if the Palestinians are to have a viable state at some point, they should be able to handle such a reality. And, just as certainly, they have lots of rich Arab friends who could aid them.

Either way, the Palestinians have to right to access within Israel -- either for jobs or transit. Surely you recognize that. Now, if they EARN such access, as a peaceful and friendly neighbor (much like Canada to the U.S.) then that is all well and good. I certainly HOPE it works out that way. In the meantime, there is too much risk with having Palestinians in Israel.

[Muddleoftheroad]

76. Questioning

This is not your fault, but nevertheless the questions get old. In the last 24 hours, I've had two posters comment that I was either not black or Democratic and one called me a right-wing extremist. Though the mods pulled both, it is a common attack and it just gets old.

After a while, I get tired of the personal focus and would rather just focus on issues.

[Paschall]

94. Then let's focus on issues

Not one of the Sharon boosters I've challenged to give me his/her opinion about Israeli or American Jews who oppose the occupation and/or the wall, has ever done so.

You've said you've followed your mother's commandment to never forget that Jews supported the American Civil Rights movement. I've pointed out that--at least some of--those leftist Jews also support Palestinian civil rights and oppose Israel's current policies in the Territories. I even gave you a quote from the American Jewish civil rights activist Eric Mann, one of the Jews who was out there on the front lines for your civil rights, one of the Jews you called your "friends." He said, "I stand with the Palestinians." Doesn't that give you pause? Apparently not: You failed to respond.

It seems that, like the legitimate demands of the Palestinians, dissenting Jews are simply ignored by the Sharon cheerleaders. Why is that? Why is not admitted there are conflicts within the Jewish community with regard to the Palestinian issue? And why are those dissenting Jewish voices not addressed? The poster who called you a "right wing extremist," Muddle, also identified him/herself as a Jew. How do you react to that? Why do you assume that the Jews who are your "friends," who fought for your civil rights, are the same who cheer the building of the wall and Sharon's other hard-line policies in the Territories?

I see a lot of cognitive dissonance in your camp and no attempt to address/resolve it. In fact, you attempted to cut off all debate by saying "you'll just have to accept me the way I am." That's disingenuous. Wanna focus on the issues? Then do so. There are Jews who disagree with you. Last week, when I joined the Americans Against the War-France protest of the separation wall, at least one third of the Americans participating were Jewish. What do you say to them? If you are not a Jew yourself, don't you think their voices should carry a little more weight in this debate than yours, just as the voices of Black Americans should be the first that get a hearing in matters concerning them?

[Muddleoftheroad]

101. No group agrees 100%

So some small portion of American Jews disagree, so what? You left out that little bit about my memory of Munich and how I will NEVER be on the side of such monsters.

I don't stand with the Palestinians. That is until they stand for peace. Even then, I don't think that gives them carte blanche to get everything they want. Life is compromise but they don't seem to recognize that.

The poster who used a personal attack on me violated rules. I respond to that by asking mods to delete it, which they did. If that poster wishes to debate like a human being, I am here as I always am.

I am not going to debate who I am. If anyone here doesn't like it, too f---ing bad. As a Democrat, I have as much right to be here, speak my mind, etc. as anyone else. If you consider that an attempt to stifle debate, so be it.

Ultimately, I think the voices of the Israeli people are the voices that matter. I defend them here because most of them are too busy out there trying to survive and not get blown up by Palestinian terrorists.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

122. Your words, not mine

Of course, Palestinians matter. So you shouldn't put words in my mouth.

[sushi]

132. "Life is compromise..."

How right you are!

"...but they don't seem to recognize that."

Does Israel recognize that? Why isn't Israel sitting down with the Palestinians and compromise?

"Ultimately, I think the voices of the Israeli people are the voices that matter."

Only of the Israeli people? To get a compromise the voices of all sides, in this conflict two sides, matter.

Dismantling the settlements and moving the settlers to Israel proper is part of the compromise that will happen eventually.

[Muddleoftheroad]

137. Who should they sit down with?

No Palestinian player can genuinely offer that all of the Palestinian groups will agree to peace. THAT'S why the terror groups need to be eliminated so that there are only two actors on this stage.

[Muddleoftheroad]

77. Questioning

This is not your fault, but nevertheless the questions get old. In the last 24 hours, I've had two posters comment that I was either not black or Democratic and one called me a right-wing extremist. Though the mods pulled both, it is a common attack and it just gets old.

After a while, I get tired of the personal focus and would rather just focus on issues.

[Jackie97]

136. You're a history buff? Oh good, so am I.

What I've learned from looking at history is that while violence might not always be okay; it is used in many liberation movements. For example, quite a few African Americans disagreed with MLK's ideas about non-violence, and they showed it too. It took a bloody war to end slavery in the United States. Look at the liberation movements of different minorities sometime. Native Americans used violence against whites. Colonists used violence against the English. Violence was used in South Africa, India, and other places.

What part of history do you concentrate on when you study it or read up on it? I like to try to get a piece of all of it myself.

[Paschall]

57. Here's something for you, Muddle

<snip> It was the eve of Labor Day and 400 U.S. delegates to the now-concluded NGO Forum filed into the large lecture hall at UNISA (University of South Africa at Durban). We had come, ostensibly, to hear a report to the Non-Governmental Organizations from the shell of the U.S. delegation to the UN Conference. ... Sandra Jaribu Hill, an attorney from Mississippi, argued that she believed the Palestinian issue was not a "diversion" but a central focus in the world struggle against racism and imperialism. She raised the question, "How could blacks in the U.S. isolate themselves from such a front-line struggle in the world, especially one that is under tremendous attack and is in so much need of worldwide support?" ... Anyone who read my earlier commentary knows that I left the U.S. with the intent to demonstrate that there are Jews in the U.S. who care deeply about Palestinian rights, as well as whites in the U.S. who want to challenge the racist policies of our government -- as part of a strategy to help coalesce the left, anti-imperialist forces against racism. This is the sentiment I chose to express to the members of our ad-hoc group:

"As a Jew, I am very upset about the provocative role that the U.S. and Israel are playing at the conference in trying to make it seem like "anti-Semitism," rather than principled criticisms of U.S. and Israeli policy. I am of course outraged by anti-Semitism, but my focus is on the German holocaust and U.S. complicity with it. Like many Jews who joined the civil rights movement and the black liberation movement, I was moved into action by my experience of anti-Semitism from Christian whites, not blacks. While of course there is anti-Semitism and there are even anti-Semites in all movements, including the Palestinian movement, the Palestinian movement itself is not anti-Semitic. It is a movement for national liberation. The Israelis want to leave the conference because they do not want to subject their policies to an international debate -- 53 years of occupation of Palestinian lands, the murder of Palestinian civilians in violation of the Nuremberg statutes, the denial of a viable homeland to the Palestinian people, and now the new tactic of targeted missile assassinations of Palestinian leaders. In fact, the U.S., as an anti-Semitic country, does not give a damn about Jews or for that matter about Israel; rather the U.S. government is using Israel as its stalking horse in the Middle East -- and at this conference. Moreover, the Israeli government and Zionism itself are not the same as Jews, does not speak for Jews, but rather represent a specific political tendency within the Jews of the world. As we all must make choices in life, I stand with the Palestinians."
- Eric Mann, Sun Sep 9 '01 </snip>

Eric Mann has been an anti-racist, civil rights, environmental, and labor organizer for 35 years. He is a veteran of the Congress of Racial Equality, Students for a Democratic Society, and spent ten years as a United Auto Workers assembly line worker. He is presently a member of the Planning Committee of the L.A. Bus Riders Union and the director of the Labor/Community Strategy Center.

http://www.flora.org/mai/forum/29720

[TimeLord]

58. Thank you Paschall.

That link was very informative.

[Paschall]

71. You're welcome, TimeLord

And welcome aboard DU. Enjoy the ride! :hi:

[TimeLord]

84. Thanks for the welcome!

Glad to be here! (I think)

[Paschall]

20. Muddle, you still out there?

Was the explanation for my question clear enough?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sushi]

131. And you think

cutting off all dealings would benefit the Israeli economy?

[el_gato]

8. the dead bodies of palestinain children already form a wall

thanks to the IDF thugs

[Muddleoftheroad]

10. Like there are no dead Israeli children

The difference is the Palestinian murderers DELIBERATELY target women and children.

[Jack Rabbit]

16. Gentlemen

There are bodies of dead children strewn all over the place. It has got to stop.

And Mr. Muddle, while it is beyond any doubt that Palestinian murderers deliberately target women and children, the Israelis have shown a callous disregard for civilian life on more than one occasion. For example, while Sheikh Shahada was a legitimate target for the IDF, he was killed in a manner that took no account of civilian casualties. Any fool could have told General Sharon that firing a one-ton missile into a densely populated residential neighborhood at midnight would be as likely to kill sleeping children as detonating a bomb in a crowded cafe is likely to kill people eating. So, please, spare us the one-sided morality. I'm not buying it.

[bluesoul]

17. One could easily say

that the IDF have intentionally targeted Palestinian civilians, even for only throwing rocks without actually endagering them, or demolishing a house while screams where heard from it...

No one has the higher moral ground here, that's for sure

[edzontar]

18. You are both correct....

And the wall is just on more obstacle to peace.

I personally do not accept the claim that is being built for protection.

I suspect that it is, rather, a deliberate step in a plan for the staged annexation of Palestinain territory,

I hope i am wrong.

[Gimel]

23. Except that

there is no arch terrorist sitting in the Moment Cafe, or on that bus of religious Jews. It's just that they want to kill Israeli civilians. That is a great difference. So spare us the self-rightousness.

[Jack Rabbit]

32. No, ma'am. It isn't

No, ma'am. It is not as big a difference as you make it out to be.

I recall an incident when my children were small when I was called upon to help get a stuffed animal toy out of a tree after someone threw it up and it got caught in the overhanging branches.

"How did it get up there?" I asked.

"It was an accident," my son said.

"No, it wasn't an accident," I retorted. "It was carelessness." I thought it a valuable in responsibility that they know the difference.

It would be a big difference if dropping a missile of that size into a residential neighborhood at midnight were the only way to eliminate Shahada, but you'll have a hard time convincing me of that. For example, as long as the Israelis knew where Shahada was, an IDF detail could have been sent to apprehend him. Perhaps there would have been loss of life other than Shahada's in such an operation, but that would be conjecture. The operation as it was carried out made loss of life beyond the target's a certainty. That, ma'am, betrays a callous disregard for life.

Shahada was a legitimate target for Israeli security. Personally, I shed no tears for him. That in no way pardons the recklessness of the operation that eliminated him.

So, if you or forgethell (below, number 29) are trying to sell the idea that one side in this conflict possesses a monopoly on rightousness and virtue while the other is wholly depraved, then I'm still not buying it.

[Darranar]

34. Agreed...

Disregard for human life is not much better than murder.

Perhaps Bush didn't order to specific targeting of the thousands of innocent civilians slaughtered in Iraq, but he approved the invasion knowing that civilian causalties would certainly be very high.

[forgethell]

43. I am not trying

to sell any such idea as that one side possesses a monopoly on righteousness. But neither do I see the moral equivalency between the two sides, either.

One side deliberatlely, deliberately targets innocent civilians. The other side may be a little more callous towards them than they should, but does not target them deliberately.

One side is trying to destroy the other side. The other side just wants to survive in peace.

One side trades land for promises. The other side lies, and lies, and keeps on killing.

I have made my choice which side I am on.

[Darranar]

44. Well...

But neither do I see the moral equivalency between the two sides, either.

One oppresses and brutalizes a people; the other deliberately murders dozens of innocent people. Neither is right, and neither is better than the other.

One side deliberatlely, deliberately targets innocent civilians. The other side may be a little more callous towards them than they should, but does not target them deliberately.

Only a little? So tell me, forgethell, exactly how many of the 7,500 homeless Palestinians were terrorists? How many of the starving children in the West Banka and Gaza are terrorists? How many of the children that the IDF has shot are terrorists? How many of those pushed off their land and/or greatly inconvienienced because of the settlements are terrorists? How many of the hundreds of thousands who will lack even more food then they do now because of the destruction of arable land due to this "security wall" are terrorists? How many of the innocent civilians butchered in extra-judicial assasination after extra-judicial assasination were terrorists? How many needed to die in order to kill the target? How many of the thousands of dead Palestinains were terrorists? How many of the tens of thousands of wounded Palestinians were terrorists? How many of the Palestinians who are brutalized daily at IDF checkpoints are terrorists?

One side is trying to destroy the other side. The other side just wants to survive in peace.

Yes, sharon wants peace - through the complete destruction of the hope for a real Palestinain state. He wants a puppet state, basically a slave-state for Israeli companies, bowing to Israel's every demand. This state will be fragmented and will only be located on fractions of the West Bank and Gaza.

One side trades land for promises. The other side lies, and lies, and keeps on killing.

Uh, I am of the opinion that both sides repeatedly fail to make an effort towards peaceful coexistence.

[forgethell]

78. OK

let me make my position clear. The Israelis and the Arabs are at war. During one of the hotter phases of this war, the Israelis captured a significant portion of Arab land. The Arabs don't get it back until peace, permanent peace, is made. The Arabs lost. But instead of accepting this they continue a useless struggle that they can never win and will never be allowed to win. The Israelis cannot let them win, because what they want to do is to exterminate the Jewsih people. Not live in peace with them, not in one state, or two.

Attacks are made on Jews. The Jews take steps to prevent the attacks. This is called "oppression". Well, yeah. Asking nicely didn't work. THEY ARE AT WAR. STuff happens in war. It's tragic, I agree, but the Palestinians are to blame for the fact that it occurs. Let them make serious effort to root out the terrorists among them and the Israelis WILL respond in a positive manner. If Sharon won't do it, the Israeli people will throw him out.

Concerning your comment, "Uh, I am of the opinion that both sides repeatedly fail to make an effort towards peaceful coexistence." I really don't know what to say about this. That is, I do, but I do not care to have my message deleted. Read a little more.

The sides are at war. I have decided which side I support. If the Palestinians continue their war, then they must suffer the consequences of being at war. Just as do the Israelis.

[bluesoul]

79. The claim that they want to exterminate

the Jewish people is absurd to say the least. It makes as much sense as saying that Israel is trying to exterminate Palestinians. Considering "facts on the ground" that would be closer to the truth even if they don't wish so....

[forgethell]

116. Then why do they keep saying they do?

n/t

[Muddleoftheroad]

47. Military reality

OK, I have addressed this before but I feel compelled to again. Your scenario is militarily ridiculous.

Suppose Israel HAD sent in troops to dig him out. Here are a couple scenarios:

* Israel sends in troops to get him. They have to send in a lot because they are sending troops into enemy territory. They have to secure an entire building AND protect themselves from outside attack as they try to capture him. All this bearing in mind there might be dozens of armed Palestinians in that building and they might have to fight room by room with women and children there. How many Palestinian dead from Jenin? How many Israeli? That was a similar operation. Now the Palestinian Marketing Front is in full swing because Israel sent in the army into their area.
* Maybe he gets away and more Israelis die as a result. But still, probably some Israeli soldiers died trying to catch him.

However, with a missile, fewer Palestinians might die, but definitely fewer Israelis. That is a commander's job to ensure fewer of your soldiers die.

Now a quick question, what do we call people who harbor a known murderer in the U.S.? We call them accessories to murder and they are felons. How many people in that building knew he was there? Certainly his family. How about neighbors? Etc. He and they put the lives of others at risk, not Israelis.

[Jack Rabbit]

62. One more time

EDITED for spelling and typing

Your scenarios are conjecture. Plausible, perhaps, but conjecture. The way the raid was carried out made causalities a certainty.

Moreover, the people who actually died were people who had nothing to do with the operation. In your scenario, the people who die are soldiers. Soldiers are supposed to risk their lives in an operation like this. Sleeping children are not.

However, with a missile, fewer Palestinians might die, but definitely fewer Israelis. That is a commander's job to ensure fewer of your soldiers die.

It is also a commander's job to minimize civilian causalities. Shall I quote the appropriate clause of the Geneva Conventions for you?

Now a quick question, what do we call people who harbor a known murderer in the U.S.? We call them accessories to murder and they are felons. How many people in that building knew he was there? Certainly his family. How about neighbors? Etc. He and they put the lives of others at risk, not Israelis.

Do you know how many people in that building knew they were there? Neither do I. You are holding them guilty by association. Your assumption of the guilt of the dead doesn't cut it, Muddle.

[bluesoul]

63. I wonder

does the police in the US, when looking for a criminal blow up entire civilian buildings, shoot at any civilian they see, bulldoze anything before them and use rockets, bombs and aims them at a certain criminal when they'r among other (innocent) people. One would wonder....:shrug:

[GabysPoppy]

64. One has to wonder

If you are attempting to compare life in the US with life in Israel to make some point?

If your next question is to wonder whether camels are a major mode of transportation in New York City, maybe your comparison makes some sense.

I don't think a metro card is valid on the camel express. But then again I don't wish to speak for everyone.

[bluesoul]

65. How about life in Palestine?

Ever wondered about them and the situation they live in and the daily experience they have to go through thanks to the IDF? I don't think you do...

[GabysPoppy]

66. When you find the time

to justify and explain your post, then you might be entitled to an answer.


I am talking about your comments in #63 above if there is any doubt as to what I am talking about.

[bluesoul]

67. My question

is a counterquestion to yours and has much to do with it...

[GabysPoppy]

68. I wouldn't try to justify your comparison either

[bluesoul]

85. I was referring to Muddle's

post Poppy B-)

[GabysPoppy]

88. Still

You were trying to compare incidents happening in the US with incidents occuring in Israel.

That is the ultimate apples and oranges comparisons.

[TimeLord]

89. I believe it was Muddleoftheroad who brought up the comparison.

eom

[GabysPoppy]

90. I beg to differ

Muddle said the following:

"Now a quick question, what do we call people who harbor a known murderer in the U.S.? We call them accessories to murder and they are felons. How many people in that building knew he was there? Certainly his family. How about neighbors? Etc. He and they put the lives of others at risk, not Israelis."

Muddle is defining the term "accessory to murder"


Bluesoul said the following:


"I wonder

does the police in the US, when looking for a criminal blow up entire civilian buildings, shoot at any civilian they see, bulldoze anything before them and use rockets, bombs and aims them at a certain criminal when they'r among other (innocent) people. One would wonder...."

Bluesoul is trying to compare the tactics of US police to the Israeli army by questioning if the US police bulldoze or use rockets at criminal activities.

If you want to continue to make your claim, knock yourself out.

[TimeLord]

91. I don't believe you've refuted my point.

I'm interested in debate, however, so this discussion is done. I have my opinion and you have yours.

I can respect that.

[Jack Rabbit]

69. That is also a good point

It was Muddle who compared this to a police operation, not BlueSoul. However, your point is taken; it's absurd to do that.

Muddle's point is a little better than I gave him credit for in post 62, but that's because this was no common police operation. It was an act of war by occupation troops against a guerrilla movement. The fact is that even if Shahada's neighbors knew who he was, it might very well have been perfectly all right with them. One need only puruse Mao Tse-tung's book on guerrilla warfare to understand that. According to Mao, a guerrilla's army is a people's army and therefore the guerrilla fighters blend in with the people.

Let's view this conflict in terms of guerrilla warfare. Muddle has said, over and over again, that if the Palestinians (in the sense of the people) want Israeli operations to stop, they must stop supporting terrorists. In the minds of the Palestinians, the terrorists are guerrillas. The fact that in spite of reprisals from the IDF that the people continue to support the terrorists/guerrillas is indicative that the Israelis cannot win this war without committing one of the major crimes of modern times. The Palestinians are daring the Israelis to do that. Which brings us back to the subject of another thread. The Israelis can't do it without risking a firestorm of international condemnation that will be much sterner than some wimpy UN resolutions.

In no way is there any excuse bombing a cafe in Haifa or a recreation hall in Tel Aviv. Attacks on civilian targets are war crimes regardless of whether they are carried out by a regular army like the IDF or by irregulars. The Palestinian guerrillas have legitimate targets they can hit, such an IDF detail on patrol in the West Bank, and should target those instead of people eating lunch in Jerusalem. The guerrillas will serve the Palestinian cause better if they blow up an unoccupied bulldozer rather than a crowded cafe.

However, regardless of what targets the Palestinian resistance movement chooses, the Israelis will strike back as long as they are committed to the de facto or the eventual de jure annexation of the Palestinian territories. Furthermore, as long as the Palestinians appear to be committed to driving Israel into the sea, Israel will fight back simply in order to survive.

The destruction of Israel is an unobtainable and unrealistic goal for the Palestinians. The permanent possession of the West Bank and Gaza would cost the Israelis too much in the long run to make it worthwhile. A two-state solution is the only sensible outcome. Both sides need to do more to work towards it.

[bluesoul]

70. I fully agree Jack

But you will notice that some here even find a problem when Palestinians target the IDF and call such acts "terrorist attacks". No matter who they target the Palestinians are accused of terrorism. Yet when the IDF kills civilians, the first and only people they blame are Palestinians themselves (that are supposed to be hiding among them every moment) not the IDF. I have yet to hear any condemnation of IDF's killings from certain pro-Israel people. Some have, but many still haven't to this point... Which does tell me something

[TimeLord]

86. Great post JackRabbit,

I will throw in a caveat, however.

The PA has recognized Israel's right to exist. Various guerrilla/terrorist actions are not designed to wipe Israel from the map. They know it's unattainable. Israel knows it's unattainable. What is attainable is for Israel to annex more land. Facts on the ground best exemplifies this. The history of the conflict tells me one thing. Regardless of who's at fault, Israel acquires more land. The danger of expulsion is far greater than the chance of destroying Israel. Israel, for all intents and purposes, must get their hands out of the proverbial cookie jar and let the Palestinians, for lack of a better phrase, enjoy their cookies!

:-)

Edit: to place "various guerrilla/terrorist"

[Jack Rabbit]

93. Thank you (with response to your caveat)

Neither side of the conflict is monolithic. The PA may have accepted Israel's existence some years ago, but it wasn't without dissent then and there has been more bitterness in recent years.

Both sides believe they are fighting for survival against the other's worst elements. These bad elements each unrealistically seek total and final victory over the other. Unfortunately, those elements are ascendent. They will probably remain so for at least several more months or years. The best cause for optimism at the moment is that Arafat and Sharon are both in their mid-seventies.

We can only hope that their passing will usher in an ascendency of reasonable leaders with a better sense of what can be won and at what price.

[TimeLord]

111. Perhaps,

Maybe Arafat goes, however, whoever replaces Sharon will this stop the GOI's policies?

Maybe after Arafat, he is replaced by a weak leader who will do Israel's bidding?

It's not on just Sharon or Arafat. The will of the people have to be enticed in to believing the other through actual positive facts on the ground, i.e. removal of settlements (not outposts) and the cessation of hostilities on the part of the various factions of Palestinians.

Excellent posting, btw, JackRabbit.

[TimeLord]

83. Gabbyspopply,

To be fair, bluesoul was responding to Muddleoftheroad who is the one that initially brought up the analogy between I/P and the US. Bluesoul's counter was a legitimate response.

I am curious. Do you think it appropriate to destroy a whole apartment killing innocent civilians to take out one "suspected" terrorist?

[Jim Sagle]

129. There's no war here.

[Muddleoftheroad]

73. Not conjecture, likely

We both know my scenarios are a lot more than conjecture, they are likely.

One of the realities of this non-war is that Israel has to assume that, because the terrorists have such strong popular support, that it is fighting not just them, but Palestinians in general. To attack a terror stronghold invites lots of other Palestinians to come to the terrorist's aid. That is nuts.

While soldiers are supposed to risk their lives, there is a limit to how much a commander allows his troops to be handcuffed when his opponents enjoy no such disadvantage and, in fact, exploit it. And when the population of Palestinians tolerates and embraces such activity. (I would be a lot less understanding here if the Palestinians ever raised a finger against terror. They don't.)

Shall I mention to you that terrorists setting up bases and hiding in the civilian population also violates international law? The probably with dealing with criminals is that they break the law. Going after them in any form into the West Bank or Gaza negatively impacts the people around them. Ignoring them harms Israel. If you were the Israeli leadership, which would you choose?

I know this murderer's family was equally guilty. I know they knew who him was and what he was.

[Jack Rabbit]

92. Likely, but still conjecture

You don't know for certain that this would have happened. In any event, we do know for certain what happens when a missile is hurled into a residential neighborhood at a time when most people are home. One more time: that was not an accident, that was carelessness. Or recklessness. Or a callous disregard of human life.

One of the realities of this non-war is that Israel has to assume that, because the terrorists have such strong popular support, that it is fighting not just them, but Palestinians in general.

That is true. It is why the Israelis cannot win their war of occupation without committing one of the major crimes of modern times. See post number 69, to which you may like to respond as well.

I know this murderer's family was equally guilty. I know they knew who him was and what he was.

You were also speaking of his neighbors. Did they know?

[Muddleoftheroad]

103. Nothing is certain in life

But you do try to play the odds and that is what the IDF was doing.

Again, a full-scale military op might have caused far more death and destruction and everyone here would be writing about how horrible it had been. To a large extent, most Israeli critics go after Israel no matter what it does or does not do.

Israel is fighting a battle of time. The hope is that, sooner or later, the Palestinians might actually OFFER peace. When that time comes, then perhaps this mess gets settled.

Personally, I think a lot/most of the neighbors did know. Celebrities in a small community tend not to move around unnoticed. I'm also guessing Israel KNEW.

[bluesoul]

104. Of course, they KNOW

always...

[Muddleoftheroad]

105. LOL

I meant they knew that the neighbors knew.

[Jack Rabbit]

112. No sale

The Middle East conflict is a complex Russian novel, not a B western. You are continuing to put forth a one-sided view of the conflict and the underlying morality. A simple, blank-and-white view of the world does not fit the morally ambiguous reality.

Yes, Israel is fighting for its survival. So are the Palestinians. Yes, the Palestinians employ tactics that are revolting. So do the Israelis. Yes, the Palestinians have intransigent elements among them who don't want to compromise and would, if they could, drive Israel into the sea. And the Israelis have intransigent elements among them, including members of General Sharon's cabinet, who think all Arabs living west of the Jordan River should be transferred to land east of the Jordan.

You have not convinced me that the operation that eliminated Sheikh Shahada used the minimum force necessary to accomplish its end or that the lives of civilians were taken into account. General Sharon okayed the operation, and he had to know that people living around Shahada would die with him. As far as I am concerned, that makes Sharon no better than Shahada himself. Yet both men considered their acts justified by the circumstances of war.

Muddle, you're still trying to sell a morality in which one side is all virtuous and has good reason for every unpleasant thing it does while the other is depraved and has no excuses. I'm still not buying it.

[bluesoul]

114. Excellent post Jack Rabbit!

And I am not buying it either...

[Lithos]

134. I disagree

A minor conundrum.

If the people know a militant group resides in the building, what should they do? If they say something Israel is likely to destroy the building either through a direct attack or the following cleanup operations. Even they were to survive the attack, then they are likely to be killed for being a quisling. Alternatively, if they do nothing, then they might survive long enough for the terrorists to move on to the next safe house.

It would be in Israel's better interests to break this cycle. I think General Sharon knows this, yet doesn't care for this application of fear is almost identical to that of Sheikh Shahada.

L-

[forgethell]

29. Yet if combatants

shelter among civilians, is the other side obliged to let them go on killing them. The blame for the Palestinian deaths rest SOLELY with the terrorists, and no one else.

[Jack Rabbit]

33. See post 32, above

I do not except that as an excuse for that particular incident.

[Proudlib]

19. Were Was AI When...

Scores of Israelis were being blown to bits by suicide bombers?

I am sick and freakin' tired of hearing about horrible the "wall" is.

I've said it before and I'm going to say it again. What did the Palestinians THINK the Israelis were going to do when the Palestinians launched their waved of barbaric murder against Israelis civilians in the form of suicide and other bombings? Did they think that Israel would reward this?

If the Palestinians are going to learn anything from this episode it should be that when you launch a calculated campaign of death and violence directed towards Israeli civilians by blowing up pizza parlors, banquet halls, resteraunts or any other place that Israeli civilians gather in large numbers, you will LOSE. Period. Considering the carnage unleashed by the terrorists whom the PA facilitate, enable, and refuse to stop a security wall is pretty small beans compared to what Israel could have done.

If the Palestinians are so upset about the wall, they should have thought about that when they were planning their campaign of barbaric slaughter against Israelis civilians and their supporters should have thought of that when they excused and rationalized the killing. Actions have consequences. Israel returned the entire Sinai to Egypt and dismantled every settlement in the process because Egypt negotiated in good faith, lived up their end of the deal, and didn't send bombers to blow up Israelis.

If the Palestinians want to achieve their national ambitions, they are going to have to find a way other than deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and murdering them in the most barbaric fashion they can think of. Further, I would like to think that progressive liberals would abhore violence as a means for the Palestinians to achive their goals rather than rationalizing and justifying.

But this is DU, where the terrorists are given every benefit of the doubt while the nation trying to fight them is evidently not allowed to ever fight back.

[Paschall]

21. Gosh, doesn't sound much like the DU I know

"But this is DU, where the terrorists are given every benefit of the doubt while the nation trying to fight them is evidently not allowed to ever fight back."

One of us be on the wrong website.

Oh, by the way, in answer to your question "Where was AI...," they were right there with you:

<snip> The human rights situation in Israel and the Occupied Territories continues to deteriorate. In the past three years the Israeli army has killed more than 2,200 Palestinians and some 800 Israelis have been killed by Palestinian armed groups. Most of the victims were civilians and included more than 380 Palestinian children and some 100 Israeli children. The Israeli army has assassinated more than 100 known or suspected Palestinians militants, killing scores of men, women and children bystanders and injuring hundreds others.

The Israeli army routinely use F-16 fighter jets, helicopter gunships and tanks to bomb and shell densely populated Palestinian residential areas and Palestinian armed groups deliberately target Israeli civilians in frequent suicide bombings in buses, restaurants and other public places. </snip>

http://www.web.amnesty.org/web/web.nsf/pages/iot_home

[Gimel]

24. Fails to note

that although 2,200 Palestinians have died, more than 500 were killed by their own side. Yes, I'm counting the deaths of the suicide bombers and the so-called collaborators.

[Forkboy]

25. Oh well...thanks

now it's down to just 1700 or so :eyes:

[Forkboy]

22. links please

to the justifying violence for the palestinians.

and when you're done I'll provide links to those who justify Israeli violence on regular occasions.

I would also think that "progressive liberals" wouldn't claim Daniel Pipes is a renowned scholar,that Jeff Jacoby is right about anything ever,that Arabs may well be able to smell their own or that MLK would agree with the occupation yet we see those here on DU too.

[Proudlib]

26. Pick A Thread

Any thread regarding a suicide bomb or other form of violence directed towards Israel and you'll see the rationalizations and justifications.

Given the reaction to the security fence, it would appear to me that those who oppose the fence would rather have Israel have nothing standing in the way of potential suicide bombers. If a few dozen more Israelis get blown up while they hang out at a disco, that should take a back seat to the inconvenience that a security fence is bringing to the Palestinians.

I've seen the light. Take down the fence and remove get rid of the checkpoints. Palestinians should be able to come and go as they please with no restrictions, no checkpoints, no ID's, nothing. A few more blown up buses and resteraunts full of women and children is a small price to pay to make the lives of the Palestinians easier.

[Forkboy]

27. No...YOU pick a thread

the justifications are everywhere...so you should have no problems.

[bluesoul]

28. Pick any thread

and you'll see the justifications and rationalizations for murdering Palestinian civilians (kids, babies, women, whoever) by the IDF by the pro-Israel team saying they brought it onto themselves by "hiding" among civilians (and are self to be blamed for Israel's crimes) as though it was so with every single case. Don't tell me about the lame excuses, as you side brings them every time there is talk about killed Palestinians civilians. You hardly have the higher moral ground here buddy...


PS: See post #29 for such a case....

[The Magistrate]

31. You May Count Me, Mr. Lib

Among those who oppose this barrier's erection, on its current line, as a mere annexation of land, while according Israel the ordinary right of any state to take reasonable military measures to safe-guard its citizens attack criminal attack, while existing in a state of war with such attackers. There is no contradiction whatever in that view. If erected on the de facto borders of Israel, there could be no sensible objection to this barrier as a legitimate military measure. Constructed where it is being constructed, largely on ground that Israel has no legal claim to, and yet enclosing many Israeli citizens dwelling outside its borders, and much fertile land, along with a sizeable number of persons who are not Israeli citizens, it is very hard to see it as anything but an attempt to extend the borders of Israel unmilaterally, under guise of a security measure.

[tinnypriv]

35. I spoke with a military analyst the other day

His view is that the optimal security route of the wall-barrier would be several km inside Israel, allowing the IDF to patrol both sides.

Seems a reasonable view to me, but I couldn't say one way or the other. :shrug:

[Proudlib]

36. I Understand Your Objection Sir

And I respect it.

But keep in mind that a wall is a temporary object. What can be built can be taken apart. As it stands, the wall being where it is the price to pay for a sustained wave of terror which the PA has shown no willingness to prevent, and has facilitated. If or when the Palestinian people choose responsible leadership committed to creating a viable nation-state rather than destroying another, and deal with Israel in good faith as the Jordanians and Egyptians had, then the wall can come down and moved the Green Line.

[tinnypriv]

38. You think New York Jews are donating to have their names enscribed

In order for the fences and walls to be demolished and moved?

What planet are you on? :eyes:

This thing is 590KM LONG. It costs 6 billion NIS. It affects hundreds of thousands of people.

It ain't going anywhere.

Also, the route expressly shows that the purpose is not "security". Following the Green Line is more secure, not less.

All the above is from Israeli commentators and analysts BTW.

If you're going to support the wall-barrier regardless of the facts, at least have the common decency to refrain from pretending it is going to be temporary.

You might not care about the security and lives of Palestinians, but you could at least not insult their intelligence by continuing that ridiculous charade.

[Cassandra]

41. Do you have a link for that?

"You think New York Jews are donating to have their names enscribed in order for the fences and walls to be demolished and moved?"

I'm a Jew in New York and I haven't heard anything about that.

[tinnypriv]

45. I'll find it, Ma'ariv's search engine blows chunks (nt)

[tinnypriv]

50. Here you go:

Original piece:

http://images.maariv.co.il/cache/cachearchive/05082003/ART519668.html (Eli Bohadana, 'Jews abroad to finance protective fence for Karni Shomrom', Ma'ariv, August 5, 2003)

From the article:

"Dozens of New York Jews finance fence to encircle Karni"

"Donors to have names attached to a section of fence"

"104 dollars for 2 meters"

Now, I can't take credit for finding this. It was first cited to my knowledge in the always excellent journal: Foundation for Middle East Peace (latest publication, http://www.fmep.org/reports/2003/v13n6.html#5). It was picked up by AFP also I think, but erased (i.e. ignored) in respectable publications (the usual story).

BTW, I should note that my careful use of language was deliberate. I said "the fences", not "the fence". These funding programes are not designed at the moment to link up with the existing official GOI barrier. However, that is likely in the future (can explain that in more detail if you like, with reference to Ari'el).

This was exactly my point - they aren't going anywhere. This is clear to anybody with their eyes open (perhaps not a large category).

Oh, a word or two about Karni Shomrom. They're so techno, they've even got their own website: http://www.karneishomron.muni.il.

Now, their HTML might rock, but their geography sucks. Apparently they're "a thriving town located in the heart of Israel" (my emphasis).

Er:



I labelled it up for ease of use. Enjoy.

[Cassandra]

54. Dozens...

is a really tiny fraction of New York Jews. Sounds like a weird version of Adopt-a-Highway, Israeli style.
Many years ago, I saw a man on the Upper West Side walking a sheep on a leash on Broadway. I could have assumed that that one incident constituted a trend but I have never seen another sheep in Manhattan. In New York, you can always find a few people who are doing some nutty thing. That doesn't mean it's particularly newsworthy.

In case you were wondering, the sheep elicited the standard New York response: no one said anything to the owner or pointed at the sheep, but they were looking out of the corners of their eyes, muttering to themselves, "That's a sheep, right?"

[tinnypriv]

55. Karni is one project, a fund for the rest

Quote: "hundreds" have funded additional projects. Check the article linked. Regardless, the numbers are irrelevant.

I think it is very newsworthy, and Ma'ariv agrees. The original story had more comments from users than usual for a story of this type as well, so evidently some people in Israel also think so.

Also, in light of the ridiculous comments I was responding to, it is clearly illustrative.

You may also be interested to know that the funds come from "come-on" ads in NY Jewish newspapers.

BTW, I can see sheep out of my window, so that ain't so shocking a story. ;-)

[TimeLord]

60. Tinnypriv, in response to the link you provided:

I found this of particular interest:

Five Reasons you should visit Karnei Shomron

1. It’s yours.



And it says so in the Bible, no less.



Karnei Shomron sits on the Biblical border between the tribes of Ephraim and Menashe, on a series of three hills overlooking Nahal Kana, or the Kana stream. Check it out! And with over 200 families originating from English-speaking countries, you will really feel at home.



2. It’s BIG.



Karnei Shomron is one of the largest towns in the Shomron (Samaria), yet retains a real small-town flavor. With over 6,500 residents in five neighborhoods, Karnei Shomron is one of the largest, most vibrant communities in the area.



3. It’s fun!



There’s something for everyone in Karnei Shomron. Hikes, scenic tours, Torah study, swimming, shopping, a gym, old friends and more.



4. It’s close.



Karnei Shomron is centrally located and only a 15 minute drive from Kfar Saba and Ranana, and on the new Trans-Israel highway, only an hour from Jerusalem. It’s a convenient place to visit, or use as a base for touring the country.



5. It’s Israel.



If you want the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, you’ll get it in Karnei Shomron. It’s a chance for first hand interaction with Israelis who speak your language so you can get a reliable picture of real-life in Israel – something that is not possible from newspaper or TV reports.


Do people really believe such outlandish stuff? I have never seen false advertising to this degree.

[tinnypriv]

81. Oh yeah they sure do

So when they rip up somebody's olive groves in order to build another a couple of houses for themselves (Sharon actually issued tenders for this place earlier this year), they're actually defending Israel while they're doing it.

To be fair, there was a suicide bombing at this settlement a few months back.

Oh, and bear in mind they are advertising to complete lunatics as well.

ie. the same people who think the entire world is anti-semitic and the best way to counter that is pick up an M16 and go harass some innocent Palestin.. sorry, Arabs. :eyes:

[Aidoneus]

113. though it seems to be effectively evaded

a most informative post, thanks. Nice site..

Not quite familiar with the colony names and their locations yet, is that on the road between Nablus & Qalqilyah?

I don't see how anybody could naively or calculatedly think the wall is temporary, considering that a) it's just an extension of basic long-term policies (seizure of water sources, permanent disruption and effective destruction of any possible Palestinian political existance), b) how much they're funding putting into it.. yet here it is, somewhat often. :shrug:

[tinnypriv]

125. Yeah

It's quite a big place, roughly 6,000 pop (about the same as Efrat near Bethlehem). It's actually part of a large settlement bloc slightly to the north west of Ari'el.

It is just off the road between Nablus and Qalqilya (bypass 55 I think).

The encirclement and destruction of Qalqilya is in large part due to this bloc.

Karnie Shomrom will also be encircled by the official fence BTW.

Oh, and the temporary thing is just due to certain people not wanting reality to intrude on their little fantasy. The equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears going "nah nah nah I can't hear you".

The very idea that Israel could be building this wall in order to destroy the two-state solution while professing support for such a solution is completely alien to them. It'd make the GOI all liars.

But, they're the GOI, so by definition they can't be lying.

Hence, they grasp on anything that could allow both to be true: which is that the whole thing is just a lego wall that can be taken down whenever the Pals stop "terror".

[Muddleoftheroad]

127. Not a lego wall, but a wall that can easily be taken down nonetheless

But your post seems so paranoid about everything Israel does you won't see that the wall can indeed come down.

Borders, in this case, are a negotiation. No, the border will not run exactly along the Green Line. I think we all know that. The big question is, Are the Palestinians willing to settle and make peace if they don't get 100% of what they want? If the answer is no, then we will have war till the end of time.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

48. Safety

If it can provide safety, it is worth the price.

And yes, walls are very temporary. If a peace treaty is worked out the wall can come down or be rebuilt on another border.

[The Magistrate]

42. In That Part Of The World, Mr. Lib

The temporary has a way of turning permanent. The boundaries of Israel prior to the '67 war, recall, were origionally a temporary armistice line, and when they froze the fighting, it was assumed by all negotiation for a final peace might alter them somewhat, as the Green Line took no cognizance of population patterns or property ownership. No fruitful negotiation having ensued, the thing has become permanent.

There is every reason to suspect the same will prove true of this barrier; that this "red line" will attain a place of permanence as fruitful negotiations recede into the future, as they seem to always do here. Put bluntly, Sir, it seems to me that to seriously expect that this thing, if it endures much more than a year or so, will ever come down, is to set yourself up for a lingering and bitter disappointment.

[newyorican]

30. "I am sick and freakin' tired of hearing about horrible the "wall" is."

Then go see a doctor, or better yet don't click on the link if it makes you so ill. A perfect example of sound & fury, representing nothing but sound & fury.

[RuB]

37. It is very easy for 'peace' groups to criticize Israel

But I'd be willing to bet they haven't had one of their children blown to bits. Threaten my familty with some insane terrorist with a bomb strapped to his stomach and see what length I go to stop him.

[tinnypriv]

39. Would you build a 20ft wall through your neighbourhood?

Demolishing nearby houses and kicking people into the dust as you go?

Maybe not those lengths, hey?

[tinnypriv]

40. Oh, sorry, somebody *else's* (unconnected to terror) neighbourhood

Forgive the error. Easy to screw these analogies.

[Muddleoftheroad]

49. Imagine

Imagine for a second how the U.S. would react if Mexican or Canadian terrorists were coming across the border in droves. We would not only retaliate, we would essentially flatten their nation.

In fact, in a similar circumstance, virtually any nation would be reacting in a much more aggressive manner than Israel.

[tinnypriv]

51. Yeah when the IRA nearly assasinated the PM, we used F-16's on Belfast

Get real.

[Muddleoftheroad]

52. Not F-16s

But shootings, murder, terror, etc.

[tinnypriv]

53. Damn right

And none of that did fuck all until we started to address the legitimate grieviences of Ireland.

Regardless of terrorism, if grieviences are legitimate, they should be addressed anyway. This is just moral.

[TimeLord]

61. Rub,

I wouldn't be quite as liberal "betting" anything.

In response to your post 37:

But I'd be willing to bet they haven't had one of their children blown to bits. Threaten my familty with some insane terrorist with a bomb strapped to his stomach and see what length I go to stop him.

From John Pilger's Documentary, "Palestine is still the Issue"

Please visit this site for more.

Excerpt:

Rami Elhanan is one Israeli father who knows about suicide bombing. On September 4th 1997, his daughter, Smadar, was killed by one. She was 14 years old. Rami's daughter was shopping with two friends, one of whom was killed, the other seriously injured in the attack.

Rami is a graphic designer and a former soldier. His father survived Auschwitz, but his grandparents, six aunts and uncles perished in the Holocaust.

John Pilger asked Rami, "How do you distinguish the feelings of anger that any father would have felt at losing your daughter in such circumstances?"

"I'm not crazy. I don't forget. I don't forgive. Someone who murders little girls, anyone who murders little girls, is a criminal and should be punished.

"But if you think from the head and not from the gut, and you look what made people do what they do - people that don't have hope, people who are desperate enough to commit suicide, you have to ask yourself have you contributed in any way for this despair? For this craziness? It hasn't come out of the blue: the boy whose mother was humiliated, in the morning, at the checkpoint, will commit suicide in the evening.

"The suicide bomber was a victim - the same as my girl was. Of that I am sure.

"You have to understand where this suicide bombers come from. Understanding is part of the way to solving the problem."

Comment: So if there is at least one, I'd bet there are others.

[rini]

59. Israel builds wall to protect its citizens

Since September 2000, about 6,000 Israelis have been brutally maimed or injured in terrorist attacks. Nearly 900 Israelis have been killed by Palestinian snipers and suicide bombers. Small wonder, then, that in a recent poll, 75% of Israelis stated a belief that they or a family member would become a victim of terrorism. Clearly no nation would tolerate such atrocities in its midst. It is therefore obscene for any nation to complain when Israel - after exhausting every other rational solution - constructs a fence alongside its highways and communities to shield its citizens from the terror and mayhem that have caused more bloodshed, tragedy, and grief than any other society would care to imagine. (Baltimore Sun)


http://www.sunspot.net/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.fence11nov11,0,1497196.story?coll=bal-oped-headlines

[truthspeaker]

82. if they really were building it alongside their highways and communities

I would be behind them 100%.

But they are building it on Palestinian land - right through some people's backyards.

As for "exhausting all possibilities for peace" - those settlements are still there, and they're growing not shrinking.

[Forkboy]

87. "after exhausting every other rational solution"

Let us know when they've done that.

Sounds to me like their just not thinking hard enough.

[Gimel]

95. Operation Defensive Shield

It's the best idea for replacing a conflict that I've heard of yet. Hope they complete it as soon as possible. No more suicide attacks.


Implementation of Oslo agreements brought terror. Failure of Camp David brought terror. Arresting terrorists at the borders did not stop teror. Entering the West Bank to arrest terrorists did not stop terror. All of the above must be continued, but a high Wall must also be built and monitored and patrolled. Stop terror!

[bluesoul]

96. Stop the wall!

Stop the occupation! Stop the illegal settlements! Stop the suffering of Palestinians!

[Blitz]

120. Stop silly slogans!!

eom.

[bluesoul]

121. They may be silly

for you. Not for the Palestinians. It's not as though as Israelis are entitled to be speaking about how threatened they are while another nation is far more...

[Muddleoftheroad]

123. What nation?

If you mean the Palestinians, well they aren't a nation. To become one, they need Israel's help. I just wish THEY would remember that.

[bluesoul]

124. I don't care what you think

For me and many others they are (and have been) a nation for a long time. Because the bigwigs failed to recognize them because of their own interests doesn't mean they don't exist as a nation or that they haven't got their land on which they live on. Sorry...

[Muddleoftheroad]

126. I didn't realize the Palestinians had a nation

Someone should have told them. Perhaps all this fighting is unnecessary since they attained one of their big goals. Tell me, when did this all occur?

[Violet_Crumble]

138. Yet you claim Israel was a nation for thousands of years??

So I've been reading along all this time assuming that you were using the term 'nation' to refer to a collective group of people sharing the same common values, and not referring to a state, which is what yr doing now....

I don't think anyone can deny that the Palestinian people have a strong sense of nationalism and see themselves as a nation. But they're not a state, and I don't think anyone's tried to deny this...

Violet...

[Muddleoftheroad]

139. No, it WAS a nation a couple thousand years ago

And is one now.

Sure, the Palestinians have a sense of nationalism. So do the Basques, The Chechens. And a host of other groups that have no nation.

As for someone trying to deny that, see the post above.

[Darranar]

140. So you're calling both Israel and the state that existed there...

2000 years ago Jewish states? What's your definition of a Jewish state?

Are you aware that both then and now a large portion of Jews did not live in the area?

[Paschall]

98. And the wall will stop terror attacks against Jews?

Even if the wall were to stop attacks on Israeli territory, what about Jews outside of Israel? Do you also advocate building such walls around Jewish enclaves in cities worldwide? I doubt you'll be able to convince the authorities or Jewish communities in France, Spain, Tunisia, or Morocco that walled Jewish ghettos are the solution.

Even if American geography and security forces managed to protect American citizens in the US from Islamic and other foreign terror for many years, other American targets--embassies, ships, businesses, military bases, individual citizens--around the world were, and continue to be, targetted. And Americans overseas continue to die at the hand of terrorists.

When I saw that Sharon was pushing for a purely military solution to the Palestinian issue, I felt he was seriously endangering Israel's future, and perhaps its very survival. This is the same objection that can, and has been raised to Shrub's military approach to terror. Is not the US gravely endangered by the skyrocketing national debt? Is not America's "moral leadership" gravely endangered by this iron-fisted approach to world affairs?

In a world where Jews and Americans live and work on all continents, no "defensive shield" can encircle and protect them all. This policy will not only not stop terror, it is likely to increase it... and bring it to a neighborhood near you sooner than I'm sure you'd like to imagine.

[bluesoul]

99. I doubt very much that

Jews around the world are as threatened as some claim. A Muslim/Arab in USA or Europe is more likely to get threatened, beaten (or even killed) because of what he is. And the statistics prove that.

[Paschall]

100. Funny you mention that

I think, statistically, you run the greatest risk of being injured or killed by terrorists in France if you are a civil servant (school teacher, fire fighter, postal employee, tax official, park ranger, police officer, judge, member of the miltary).

That's because there are hundreds--and I do mean hundreds--of bombings, shootings, and molotov-cocktailings aimed primarily at public facilities and French civil servants every year by Corsican nationalists. These attacks are carried out both in Corsica and on the French mainland. I think there have already been well over the 300 in 2003 (though not all have resulted in death or injury, thank goodness).

[GabysPoppy]

108. "And the statistics prove that."

Most people who make such positive claims usually provide those statistics and the link that goes with it.

I'm sure you will post it when you find it and enlighten all of us.

[Blitz]

119. You have those statistics handy, of course

Right?

I mean, the Jews are just making all of this up to gain sympathy and U.S. dollars, right? Or maybe it's all in their heads. Please provide the statistics. I'd love to feel safer.

[Jim Sagle]

130. No, statistics prove the opposite.

[rini]

107. see post #59

n/t

[truthspeaker]

115. wrong on history

Implementation of the Oslo agreements did not bring terror. Netanyahu's failure to implement the Oslo agreements brought terror.

[The Magistrate]

117. And That, Mr. Speaker

Was hardly a constructive response to Netanyahu's failure. There has yet to be a time when violence by Arab Nationalist or jihadist leadership has gained a thing for the people of Arab Palestine west of the Jordan. At some point, the failure of violence as a policy must be faced.

[Forkboy]

118. Well said Sir

I hope both sides can one day realize this.

[Forkboy]

133. "No more suicide attacks. "

I hope you're correct....we'll see.

[Jackie97]

135. You mean Amnesty is just now "adding" their voice?

Sheesh.