What would happen if Muslims stopped trying to conquer Israel?

[JAR]

What would happen if Muslims stopped trying to conquer Israel?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

What would happen if the sun exploded tomorrow? Or if Jedi Knight turned out to be correct once?

It's pointless to speculate, because it will never happen.

[JAR]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
What would happen if the sun exploded tomorrow? Or if Jedi Knight turned out to be correct once?

It's pointless to speculate, because it will never happen.
In my opinion, Jedi Knight is correct quite often. One example is the debate over whether Iraq secretely owned weapons of mass destruction. Jedi Knight said that Iraq did. I agree with him.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by JAR

In my opinion, Jedi Knight is correct quite often. One example is the debate over whether Iraq secretely owned weapons of mass destruction. Jedi Knight said that Iraq did. I agree with him.

LOL!

[crocodile deathroll]

IMO is it the same as saying 800 years ago "what will happen if the Mongol Empire stopped trying the conquer the east?". At the time people thought that that situation was pretty chronic, but the political situation is changed radically since then.

[Genghis Pwn]

Well, it looks like Hamas is about to agree to a cease-fire. If a Palestinian state can be established, things can begin to straighten out, because there is no way in hell that Palestine will want to go toe-to-toe with Isreal in a nation vs nation war. They will have to crack down on militants, or face all-out war and their own certain destruction.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn
Well, it looks like Hamas is about to agree to a cease-fire. If a Palestinian state can be established, things can begin to straighten out, because there is no way in hell that Palestine will want to go toe-to-toe with Isreal in a nation vs nation war. They will have to crack down on militants, or face all-out war and their own certain destruction.

Yes, imagine that if you will. Israel vs. Palestine, nation-state against nation-state in total war.

JK

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn
Well, it looks like Hamas is about to agree to a cease-fire.

Lest we speak too soon...

Arrests threaten truce hopes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3016672.stm)
The Palestinian militant group Hamas has angrily condemned an Israeli operation which rounded up 150 people in the West Bank overnight, saying it had damaged prospects for a ceasefire.

[KelvinG]

Originally posted by JAR

In my opinion, Jedi Knight is correct quite often. One example is the debate over whether Iraq secretely owned weapons of mass destruction. Jedi Knight said that Iraq did. I agree with him.

I don't believe that has turned out to be correct yet. It's your and JK's opinion at this point, but the truth is still out there.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by JAR
What would happen if Muslims stopped trying to conquer Israel?

"The Zionist menace would spread like a disease"..."now is the time to address this threat to mankind"...arbeit macht frei! :rolleyes:

[Supercharts]

Fanatical Muslims would all move to Pakistan and invade Kashmir(sp?)? They would move to Morroco and try to invade Spain? Invade Turkey to establish Shira? Walk into a Fredrick's of Hollywood store and blow themselves up? Poison all the pigs in Iowa? Kill the Saudi Royal family? Take over Northern Ireland? Establish a World Series of Stoning between Sunni and Shites?

[Landis]

The radical Muslim fundamentalist are not trying to conquer Israel, they are trying to eradicate it. The modern state of Israel was carved out of Palestine based on what? "A two thousand year old claim based on the bible!"

If a band of Shawnee Indians showed up at my house in Southern Illinois and said get out, we owned this land 2000 years ago, and then they used military might to remove me, well I might be intent on getting my house and land back also.

Of course, the radical fundamentalist can't overthrow Israel, especially since it is backed by the US's Military might. The result will be continued terrorism. Our ( the US's) only hope is to contain the violence to the Mideast Region.

[JAR]

Originally posted by Supercharts
Fanatical Muslims would all move to Pakistan and invade Kashmir(sp?)? They would move to Morroco and try to invade Spain? Invade Turkey to establish Shira? Walk into a Fredrick's of Hollywood store and blow themselves up? Poison all the pigs in Iowa? Kill the Saudi Royal family? Take over Northern Ireland? Establish a World Series of Stoning between Sunni and Shites?
That's so true. And they'd probably still to do that even if they did conquer Israel.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Landis
The radical Muslim fundamentalist are not trying to conquer Israel, they are trying to eradicate it. The modern state of Israel was carved out of Palestine based on what? "A two thousand year old claim based on the bible!"


Even though I don't think Israel is totally blameless in the conflict, I do not think it is fair to characterize their claim as being simply based on the bible.

There have been Jewish people in the region of Israel for a long time, so it is partly based on history. And much of the territory currently under control of Israel was obtained in defensive wars.

Oh, and by the way, there was no real "Palestine" prior to the creation of Israel; the territory allocated to it was taken from other countries in the area.

[Landis]

"There have been Jewish people in the region of Israel for a long time, so it is partly based on history. _____________________________________________



There have been Jewish people in almost every region of the world for centuries, so what?? When you go into a Palestinian home and throw out the inhabitants, replace them with an Israeli family you are asking for trouble. Are you saying the historical claims of the American Indians should justify turning over all of the USA back to ownership of the various tribes?


"Oh, and by the way, there was no real "Palestine" prior to the creation of Israel; the territory allocated to it was taken from other countries in the area"
_________________________________________________


Did the other countries agree to give up their land?

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Landis
"There have been Jewish people in the region of Israel for a long time, so it is partly based on history. _____________________________________________


There have been Jewish people in almost every region of the world for centuries, so what??

The proportion of jewish people was higher in the area near Israel than it was in most areas of the world. And, even though the bible is largely fictional, their roots there go back a long time.

Originally posted by Landis
When you go into a Palestinian home and throw out the inhabitants, replace them with an Israeli family you are asking for trouble. Are you saying the historical claims of the American Indians should justify turning over all of the USA back to ownership of the various tribes?


It was unfortunate that Palestinians lost their homes. But, the same argument you are using could now be used to justify Israel's existance.

Israel has been aroudn for decades; they have held the land, governed it and developed it. Most of the 'original' owners have died. Should the 'historical' claims of the Palestinians justify turning over all of Israel to the Arabs?

Originally posted by Landis
"Oh, and by the way, there was no real "Palestine" prior to the creation of Israel; the territory allocated to it was taken from other countries in the area"
_________________________________________________


Did the other countries agree to give up their land?

Probably not, but I also don't see Egypt and Jordan making any attempts to bring the West Bank and Gaza under their control. If they still wanted to claim their territory, then that would be the place to start.

[Landis]

I saw a news story recently about a Palestinian family. An Israeli family had moved into their former Palestinian home. The Israeli family had greatly improved the home, and it was a fabulous looking house (not your typical image of a Palestinian home). The Palestinian family, still had the original keys to the house but they are not allowed to even go into the area where it exist. The Father says he will always try to reclaim his home and if he dies, he will pass on the keys to his son. When I can see the home right there and the people who had it taken away from them, then I tend to side with the Palestinians. We are not talking ancient history here.

As for Egypt and Jordan, both countries are bought and paid for by the US. They will always be our lackies (unless their governments are overthrown) and we will be doling out billions to them for decades to come.

I don't mean to imply that I side with the Israeli's or the Palestinians. In truth, I don't give a damn about either one. I just don't like the US being involved as it results in things like 9/11
and I don't see any advantage for the US in being so one sided in its support of Israel. (yes, I know the Israelin lobby has a strangle hold on our politicians, I just don't like it.)

[Tormac]

I think you have a good point Landis.

Is it not just as fair to ask

What would have happened if Isreal had not tried to settle the west bank?

[CapelDodger]

From Segnosaur:
And much of the territory currently under control of Israel was obtained in defensive wars.
I just wanted to look and wonder at that again.
It was unfortunate that Palestinians lost their homes
Unfortunate?
The proportion of jewish people was higher in the area near Israel than it was in most areas of the world
Another reason why Austria was the perfect place for the Jewish Homeland in 1948.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger

Another reason why Austria was the perfect place for the Jewish Homeland in 1948.

Too bad you weren't alive back then Capel Dodger. Maybe you could persuade our human fellow beings that Jews were humans like them and not evil creatures that they were plotting against humanity.

But Europeans failed to protect their jewish fellow citizens and so the later, had to look for a safe place to go...Don't forget the sefardic proverb : " Palestine is for the desperate" and this where the desperate went.

[CapelDodger]

Cleopatra, my own personal Fury:
But Europeans failed to protect their jewish fellow citizens and so the later, had to look for a safe place to go...Don't forget the sefardic proverb : " Palestine is for the desperate" and this where the desperate went.
Safer? Israel has to be the least safe place for Jews that still has any Jews in it. As for proverbs, "Those who live by the sword shall perish by the sword". It's counter-intuitive that the more recently arrived people are the victims, and the original population the aggressors. And we all surely know, by now, that nationalist Zionism predates the flight of the desperate - many of whom went home or to America. The way of the sword was chosen by, at the latest, 1920. The current evidence is that the leadership are still making that choice.

[Cleopatra]

Capel Dodger.

I do not really understand why you can't accept the fact that Europe failed to protect the Jews. In fact it didn't only failed, Europe didn't want them.

I am sure you know that Sefardic Jews were pretty much against of National Zionism and why not be? I think that I have mentioned the example of my family. It wasn't about the wealth. On the contrary. On this corner of earth, those people had built a life based on things that money can't buy. They had a unique, multi-cultural lifestyle.

When people in Western Europe hear the word "Balkans", endless conflicts come to their minds. Our Balkans, is a place of conflicts indeed but above all, it used to be a place where all people of all races and religions were living together :) In the streets of Salonika, before WW II, you could hear to 54 different languages!!! Fifty four different languages in a city!!! In Salonika, 200 years ago, you could buy books in one of the 10 ( maybe) bookstores in Europe. The sign is still there( not even the Nazis dared to touch it...) and the bookstore still exists: " Salomon -Livri"

So, what do you think? Did those people want to end up in Palestine, living with religion maniacs that enjoyed their lives in ghettos and that their ultimate delicacy was sauerkraut,chicken soup and bagels and they haven't even heard of what having a shower mean???? :(

As for the issue of Israel's safety, I will risk to sound like an american gun owner now but more people are killed in Greece in car accidents than people from terrorists attacks...

It's not that Israel is less safe than UK, it's that it's a country that lives under terror. Terror blocks everything.

Terrorized people can do nothing but holding a sword. They do not have other options.

[Gem]

If, for some reason, Isreal just vanishes or peace is actually imposed, Arab leaders are in trouble.

Once all the hate of the jew is gone to divert attention, all that attention is going to fall on domestic issues, including democratization. Ironicly, trying to stop to "destroy" isreal may give democracy a chance in the region.

Expect a few more protests in the streets against their current leader.

Gem

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Landis
The Palestinian family, still had the original keys to the house

I assume they would have changed the locks.

Originally posted by Landis
The Father says he will always try to reclaim his home and if he dies, he will pass on the keys to his son. When I can see the home right there and the people who had it taken away from them, then I tend to side with the Palestinians. We are not talking ancient history here.


The same argument could also be made by the Native American who wanted to reclaim the land that his ancestors lived in. Where you live was once 'owned' by Natives. Would it have mattered if the last Native who lived on the land passed the "keys" (or rights) to his son? And to his son's son? (And we're not talking ancient history here either; much of it happened in the last 200 years, easily spanned by 3 or 4 generations.) How many generations do you think must go by between someone getting kicked out of their property and their descendants loosing all claim to it?

Originally posted by Landis
As for Egypt and Jordan, both countries are bought and paid for by the US. They will always be our lackies (unless their governments are overthrown) and we will be doling out billions to them for decades to come.


Given the amount of anti-Jewish and anti-American sentiment coming from Egypt and Jordon, the US isn't getting their money's worth.

Oh, not sure about Jordan, but one of the reasons why the US gives money to Egypt is due to the peace deal Carter arranged, where Egypt gets aid relative to the amount of aid given to Israel.

Originally posted by Landis
I don't mean to imply that I side with the Israeli's or the Palestinians. In truth, I don't give a damn about either one. I just don't like the US being involved as it results in things like 9/11
and I don't see any advantage for the US in being so one sided in its support of Israel. (yes, I know the Israelin lobby has a strangle hold on our politicians, I just don't like it.)

Well, a couple of points:
- bin Laden wasn't claiming that Israel was a reason for his attacks on the US. His problem was with the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia.
- Many people point to US hipocracy in their support of dictatorships, etc. Well, here's a case when the US has the opportunity to support a democracy (and Israel IS a democracy) when they are struggling against dictatorships.

[Landis]

"I assume they would have changed the locks."

Of course they changed the locks, the keys were merely a physical symbol of the house, something to hold onto. If I remember correctly, the Palestinian family also had the deed to the house, which Israel had simply nullified. Now, If an American Indian should turn up with a land deed to some property, I think they could challenge ownership in the courts and if the deed were legal they would win. The Palestinians don't have that option at this time. (The American Govt. in its Greedy way managed to draw up treaties in which the Indians gave up their prime land in exchange for reservation land and then forced them to sign the treaties under penalty of death.)

"Given the amount of anti-Jewish and anti-American sentiment coming from Egypt and Jordon, the Us isn't getting their money's worth."

Yeah, let's get our money back, oh, but who would we get to torture our Al Queda prisoner's for us?


You are right about OBL's intent on getting the US presence out of Saudia Arabia, he just tacked on the US's biased support for Israel to rally the other loonie Islamic fundies to his cause.

[peptoabysmal]

Riddle me this:

Why does the flag with the map of "Liberated Palestine" that Arafat wears on his sleeve look exactly like the map of Israel?

[Cleopatra]

Arafat wears his scarf, the Middle Eastern "Cafiyia", in a way that forms the shape of the future state of Palestine... of course, it looks like Israel but Arafat at least, has declared that he doesn't go for the whole pie anymore....

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Arafat wears his scarf, the Middle Eastern "Cafiyia", in a way that forms the shape of the future state of Palestine... of course, it looks like Israel but Arafat at least, has declared that he doesn't go for the whole pie anymore....

Oh, hey I feel better already. I believe Arafat totally. :rolleyes:

[Cleopatra]

LOL! You see at first, Arafat, was put in that position by the Arab League. Back then, the Arab League wanted the complete destruction of Israel, now they have changed their attitude, so Arafat doesn't want the destruction of Israel anymore.

To be exact, Arafat is interested only in his gang's survival, he doesn't really care about the future of the Palestinian people.

[CapelDodger]

Cleopatra:
To be exact, Arafat is interested only in his gang's survival, he doesn't really care about the future of the Palestinian people.
I think that was clearly demonstrated after Oslo, when Arafat immediately took the normal Arab course of corruption and cronyism.

It's the greatest problem of Arab culture that it seems to prevent any kind of democracy. The idea of public, independent institutions that exist to serve the people, not to provide a source of funds and partonage, seems alien. It's not that there aren't many Arabs who recognise what needs to be done, but they never seem to get the chance to do it. Just one successful Arab democracy with a free press, independent judiciary and so on could be a catalyst, but I don't see it happening soon.

When people in Western Europe hear the word "Balkans", endless conflicts come to their minds. Our Balkans, is a place of conflicts indeed but above all, it used to be a place where all people of all races and religions were living together
Indeed. The talk we've heard recently about "ancient hatreds" and "they've always been ethnic cleansing" was the result of ignorance and mis-representation. If they've always been behaving like that, how is it they live so mixed up together?

The Balkans got a bad name in Western Europe during the late 19CE because diplomats and travellers found the place terribly untidy and couldn't make sense of it. Coming from a much tidier arrangement of "nations" with linear boundaries and simple ethnic make-up, they were lost. So "Balkanisation" becomes a rude word.

In the streets of Salonika, before WW II, you could hear to 54 different languages!!! Fifty four different languages in a city!!!

You mentioned once that Salonika had suggested it become an independent city after the fall of the Ottoman Empire; that would have been wonderful. It really doesn't have the appreciation it deserves - something to do with being in the Balkans, perhaps.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by CapelDodger
It's the greatest problem of Arab culture that it seems to prevent any kind of democracy. The idea of public, independent institutions that exist to serve the people, not to provide a source of funds and partonage, seems alien. It's not that there aren't many Arabs who recognise what needs to be done, but they never seem to get the chance to do it. Just one successful Arab democracy with a free press, independent judiciary and so on could be a catalyst, but I don't see it happening soon.

I can't help but wondering though. Maybe this is what makes them happy. Don't they have the right to live the way they chose? Who are we to impose our lifestyle to them? I think that the West doesn't really care about Democracy and Constitutions. The only thing that the capitalist West cares about, is open markets and unlimited access to their natural resources ( oil etc). I might sound like Malachi now but I am afraid that this is the truth :)

The Balkans got a bad name in Western Europe during the late 19CE because diplomats and travellers found the place terribly untidy and couldn't make sense of it. Coming from a much tidier arrangement of "nations" with linear boundaries and simple ethnic make-up, they were lost. So "Balkanisation" becomes a rude word.

When I was working on my PhD, I spent quite some time in Foreign Office's ( sinful) Archives... The reports of the Royal Agents regarding the Balkans, gave me some hard laughs. They were full of inaccuracies and they demonstrated a complete ignorance of the History and the people of this beautiful area... Of course, what made me laugh in the early 90ies, made thousands of people in the Balkans cry some decades earlier. What do I say now?! Decades earlier? Ha! What happens in the Balkans even in our days, is based in the mistakes and the misconceptions of 19th ce...

BTW Have I told you, Capel Dodger, the news about FYROM and the trade they did with USA regarding the name of Macedonia?You have brought the Macedonian Conflict up a couple of times but I haven't bitten the bait ;) I might start a thread about this...to show people here how USA makes enemies...

You mentioned once that Salonika had suggested it become an independent city after the fall of the Ottoman Empire; that would have been wonderful. It really doesn't have the appreciation it deserves - something to do with being in the Balkans, perhaps.

Yes. And the Jews were accused of being traitors and for betraying the national vision for a future Greek State ... Some days ago in a Greek discussion list, someone brought up this issue, of the judas Jews... I had to remind him that large geographic areas of Greece, like the Seven Islands in the Ionian Sea ( you know, Corfu, Cephalinia, Ithaca etc etc where the Brits still enjoy spending their vacations) wanted to stay under the British Rule and not join the "turks" of continental Greece...

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by JAR
Jedi Knight said that Iraq did

Then perhaps he can tell us where they are?

No.

I didn't think so.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Cleopara
Terrorized people can do nothing but holding a sword. They do not have other options

With respect they do.

In Northern Ireland the people have been terrorised by the IRA and Loyalist paramilitaries many of whom are still operating today. The British Government did not use helicopter gunships and kill children while targetting untried people for assassination. They did not bulldoze swaths of houses because a terrorist might live there. They did not impose communal punishment. They did not institute a apartheid state. In short they did not behave as the Nazis did in WWII.

With some exceptions they used intelligence and the rule of law to prevent terrorists from killing the population and as such there is a peace process in Northern Ireland today, albeit flawed. If they had done any of the above as currently carried out in Palestine the entire Northern Irish state would be alight today - see Bloody Sunday as an example. The military in Northern Ireland were eventually of the opinion that it was not possible to defeat the terrorists by military means alone a lesson that might usefully be learned by other military states

As in South Africa, Iran, Israel and Northern Ireland if you treat people badly it will come back to haunt you. Human beings will generally and eventually respond to oppression.

[Cleopatra]

Ok. I get your point. I think that I have cleared in other threads my position regarding bulldozing houses and some discriminatory Laws that exist in Israel.

I think that we have nothing in common with the Nazis and their industrialized methods of exterminating people though...

Also, Israel's enemy is not IRA but people that in the name of Allah do not hesitate to wear bombs and explode themselves in public places.

I agree that violence brings nothing but violence that's why I am never tired to talk - ok why be ashamed to admit it-to pull the agenda of Peace Now (http://www.peacenow.org.il/English.asp) But as I have said many times in this forum, Hamas has done its best to ridicule the pacifists in Israel and justify Sharon's policy.

[E.J.Armstrong]

Sorry. I was not aware of all of your views on the other threads. I have no time for terrorists of any persuasion and make no comparison between extermination chambers and the actions of Israel in Palestine on any level at all. The Germans however did demolish an entire village in Czecheslovakia after an attack was suspected of coming from there.

With regard to the IRA. True they did not blow themselves up. They did kill themselves in hunger strikes. They also exploded bombs without warning in public places and indeed blew up important members of the government. The method of death was not really the issue of my post. Rather it was how a nation state deals with attacks. If it deals with terrorism through the rule of law and protects the rights of all citizens fairly and has a robust intelligence and a strong police/military operation based on the rule of law - not assassination or torture - then peace will tend to eventually return.

If Hamas ridicules peace then the answer is not to give in to them or to follow their lead. If a state assassinates people outside the law how can it demands that others do what it itself will not? No matter how hard it is, and it is hard, the state usually has to be the one to start behaving fairly (unless Ghandi arrives back on earth again) and show that it is committed to fairness. Unfortunately I get the feeling that the government of Ariel Sharon has not yet fully taken that decision

Thank you for the link to Peace Now. I have not yet had the time to study it fully but my first impressions are very positive and that it supports the sort of actions needed to help resolve the problems. I would urge that the agenda of the men of violence is rejected at evey level. If Hamas ridicules people of peaceful intent then their message should be rejected and Israel, by showing a real willingness to treat all Palestinians fairly through the law and with compasssion, will slowly turn the ordinary people towards peace and the extremists will be pushed to the margin.

Human beings are stubborn and prone to territorial aggression with little provocation. Society can however override these basic urges with eqanimity in the face of extreme provocation including death and nothing shows good intent more than by remaining fair in the midst of turmoil.

[Cleopatra]

I find astonishing the fact that you were unaware of Peace Now and this lack of knowledge regarding the pacifist movement in Israel didn't prevent you from being so severe towards Israel...

I mean Peace Now is everyday in the News... Anyway.

I know that what Nazis did wasn't unique in History. I mean we know what the Brits did to their colonies long before Hitler but what makes Nazis unique is their systematic extinction of people...so we can't really compare the British colonists to Nazis indeed, although some incidents show striking similarities.

Your example with the Chech village was a good one, I guess it resembles to the bombardment of Dresden or the evacuation of the island Castelorizo by the British Navy just to rob the civilians ,who happened to be Allies...

I agree also with what you say about IRA. What made their resistance noble was their personal sacrifice. You cannot really compare a hunger strike with a human bomb.Hamas unfortunately, doesn't target politicians the way IRA did but they are after unarmed civilians.

The Middle eastern conflict is more than territorial aggression, is not the like The War in the Fawklands, for example... for both sides - Israeli and Palestinian- is an issue of existence , maybe this is the reason that people from the West -especially those with a colonial past-have some difficulties to understand the full issue.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by EJ Armstrong:
They did not impose communal punishment.

What about internment? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/1737078.stm)

[]In August 1971, troops in Northern Ireland rounded up and jailed a total of 342 men - the vast majority of them Catholics with alleged links to paramilitary organisations, and just a handful of Protestants.[/I]

They did not institute a apartheid state.

Oh yes they did. Northern Ireland was an intrinsically sectarian state, established by an act of the House of Commons in 1920.

Originally posted by Cleopatra:
I agree also with what you say about IRA. What made their resistance noble was their personal sacrifice. You cannot really compare a hunger strike with a human bomb.Hamas unfortunately, doesn't target politicians the way IRA did but they are after unarmed civilians.

Excuse me, Cleopatra, but by your definition weren't the 9/11 bombers "noble" because their actions involved personal sacrifice. IRA "resistance" was mainly directed against the weight of opinion of the people they purported to represent and defend. The IRA started a civil war in the newly formed Irish state in 1921 after the Irish people backed a peace treaty with the British. Likewise their campaign in Northern Ireland in the 1950's met with apathy and hostility (www.fortunecity.com/bally/sligo/93/past/history/19451963.html) from the Catholic and Nationalist population there. In between all of this the IRA connived with the Nazis during World War II. How noble.

The difference between Ireland and the Middle East is this; Ireland has a tradition of democratic politics and agitation, the Arab world doesn't. The British didn't use bulldozers in Northern Ireland, but then they knew that a democratic Irish state existed that had always been unequivocal in it's response to terrorism commited in the name of it's people, that lacked any mandate from it's people. When they very existance of Britain was under threat, then concerns for the safety of enemy civilians weren't a consideration. Who remembers Dresden?

[CapelDodger]

A few points about Northern Ireland:

In my experience, the (Provisional) IRA did have majority support in the areas where the Troubles were mostly concentrated - such as Belfast, Derry and Portadown. These were the areas where the populations were most at risk from Protestant gangs - including the RUC. Internment, Bloody Sunday and the behaviour of garrison troops confirmed, for many, the need for the IRA as an ultimate sanction. IRA volunteers were very often motivated by duty to their community, but resentment at the checkpoints, the casual roughing-up, the insults (particularly to women), had their influence as well. Combat-oriented soldiers should never be used as a police force.

The campaign of the 1950's wasn't seen as justified in the same way, and in fact it ended with the (Official) IRA renouncing violence and sectarianism in favour of class-based, Marxist objectives. Thus the emergence of the Provos when the excrement really hit the fan.

The Provos were dominated for a short time - in the early 70's - by the psychopathic tendency, but they lost support as a result and the politically-oriented tendency gained control. The end result was the Good Friday Agreement. (OK, that's in deep trouble, but things are better than they were.)

There are lessons to be learnt from this that apply to Palestine. One of which is that the psychopathic tendency of a movement will not necessarily dominate at all times.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Shane Costello



Excuse me, Cleopatra, but by your definition weren't the 9/11 bombers "noble" because their actions involved personal sacrifice.

Shane, maybe I wasn't clear. I agree with you. I consider noble forms of "resistence" those that do not kill other people, like hunger strikes. If Hamas guerillas were on hunger strikes, I would be with them!!!

Capel Dodger

psychopathic tendency of a movement will not necessarily dominate at all times.

This is wise. I am not in the position to make comparisons between IRA and PLO because I do not know the action of IRA that well, but PLO was addressing to really desperate people that had no future in a refugee camp under the Israeli occupation...

[CapelDodger]

Cleopatra:
I was really referring to Hamas rather than the PLO, who I think went the political road a long time ago. One problem, of course, is that Hamas is going to split if violence is stopped, just as the Real IRA has split from the Provos (who themselves split from the Officials over violence). There are always going to be rejectionists who, in my opinion, are mostly motivated by an innate violent nature. But they can be defeated if their actions aren't magnified by the response.

The vital ting in all this is that the Palestinians have to see real improvements in their lives - not just over their current situation but better than the conditions that sparked the second intifada. During the post-Oslo period they actually experienced deteriorating conditions, with more checkpoints, more dedicated roads, more settlements and Russinas brought in to take their jobs. That can't happen again.

[Cleopatra]

Yes I know but after the second Intifanda PLO has done nothing to stop Hamas and very ofter it gave the impression that it used Hamas.

I couldn't agree more with this observation though :There are always going to be rejectionists who, in my opinion, are mostly motivated by an innate violent nature.

This is very true. Let's make prediction here. I wouldn't be surprised when this is over-because it will be over- if Hamas turns into the way "17 November" in Greece transformed ... into a bourgeois terrorist organisation... if only terrorists could hear me calling them bourgeois :p They have heard me once you know...


During the post-Oslo period they actually experienced deteriorating conditions, with more checkpoints, more dedicated roads, more settlements and Russinas brought in to take their jobs. That can't happen again.


I couldn't agree more. We don't like it either. As an Israeli citizen I feel humiliated too when I know that close to my house some people are treated that way. This must stop.

[E.J.Armstrong]

originaly posted by Cleopatra
I find astonishing the fact that you were unaware of Peace Now and this lack of knowledge regarding the pacifist movement in Israel didn't prevent you from being so severe towards Israel...
You may find it astonishing that I did not know about the existence of Peace Now. I wonder why. It may be in your press. With respect nothing about the existence or otherwise of Peace Now has any bearing on my view or statements about the behaviour of the Israeli state under Aerial Sharon as I understand that they are not the same thing. I know that what Nazis did wasn't unique in History. I mean we know what the Brits did to their colonies long before Hitler but what makes Nazis unique is their systematic extinction of people...so we can't really compare the British colonists to Nazis indeed, although some incidents show striking similarities. I think I should warn you that simply because I see certain parallels between some things Ariel Sharon has done and some things the Nazis did does not mean that I believe the British have not been guilty of certain things similar to what happened in Nazi occupied Europe.

It seems that some peoplebelieve that no comparisns should be made between their government and the Nazis. I beg to differ. If you wish to make any specific comparison between what Britain did and the Nazis feel free to bring it up for discussion. Your example with the Chech village was a good one, I guess it resembles to the bombardment of Dresden or the evacuation of the island Castelorizo by the British Navy just to rob the civilians ,who happened to be Allies... The indiscriminate killing of civilians is definitely reprehensible and Bomber Harris had his reputation damaged with many of the British people by Dresden. I hope that the people of Israel also do the same to Ariel Sharon. I agree also with what you say about IRA. What made their resistance noble was their personal sacrifice. You cannot really compare a hunger strike with a human bomb.Hamas unfortunately, doesn't target politicians the way IRA did but they are after unarmed civilians. Unfortunately I have no respect for the IRA at all. In a return to your original comments I am surprised the you appear to think the IRA targetted mainly politicians. They were and are a bunch of cowardly murderers who saw nothing wrong with killing children when targeting innocent businesses and those who merely out for a drink. They blew up many innocent civilians and hid in the gutters while doing so. At one stae their nickname amongst Catholics was I Ran Away.

They saw nothing wrong with killing a mother of young children for her heinous crime of trying to give a bit of human succour to an injured soldier then making her (Catholic) children grieve over the decades by disposing of her body without trace. I find some of what they did similar to some of the actions of Sharon whose forces have killed children while trying to asassinate certain untried individuals or Hamas who seem to feel that killing innocent children is somehow OK. The Middle eastern conflict is more than territorial aggression, is not the like The War in the Fawklands, for example... for both sides - Israeli and Palestinian- is an issue of existence , maybe this is the reason that people from the West -especially those with a colonial past-have some difficulties to understand the full issue. That is an interesting argument you seem to be trying to make here. In my humble opinion is is fundamentally flawed because most people can clearly see when apartheid and oppression are being applied whether they come from a country with a colonial past or not. As to not possibly understanding what issues of existence might mean. Does possible invasion by the Nazis or death by bombers in the middle of the night not count?

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Shane Costello
What about internment?
You know this could be one of those rare occasions where I tend to agree with you in relation to my original agument. Internment was indeed a communal punishment in Northern Ireland and one which went badly wrong. It however lagely did not result in the deaths of innocent people which is what I had intended to highlight in my comments about Palestine. That is more of Sharon's bag when we consider the civilians who dies in Jenin etc. As far as I recall interned prisoners in Northern Ireland largely returned to their families in one piece.Oh yes they did. Northern Ireland was an intrinsically sectarian state, established by an act of the House of Commons in 1920. I think I said apartheid rather than sectarian. Perhaps you know of legislation in Northern Ireland which prevented marraige between a black person or a white person. If you mean between Catholics and Protestants can you point to any legislation that prevented Catholics from drinking at the same water fountains? Which organisation demanded that their chldren should be taught in separate schools and got legislation allowing that to happen? The Catholic church. IMHO this is one of the myriad things that has contributed to the problems between the different communities.Excuse me, Cleopatra, but by your definition weren't the 9/11 bombers "noble" because their actions involved personal sacrifice. IRA "resistance" was mainly directed against the weight of opinion of the people they purported to represent and defend. The IRA started a civil war in the newly formed Irish state in 1921 after the Irish people backed a peace treaty with the British. Likewise their campaign in Northern Ireland in the 1950's met with apathy and hostility from the Catholic and Nationalist population there. In between all of this the IRA connived with the Nazis during World War II. How noble. Although not directed to me this appears to be another area of basic agreement. This state of affairs clearly cannot be allowed to continue.