Some Getting Amnesty, Many Released from Jail (palestinians)

[webfusion]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/884353.html
Hundreds Released from Israeli Custody Today

Also, many palestinian militants have been given amnesty, and they have surrendered their weapons.


What does this mean for the palestinians? -----

Israel is prepared for very serious concessions; Israel has always been prepared for serious concessions, and the land which is presently legally disputed (not illegal) will form the basis of negotiations.


Stop shooting and start talking. We'll hear you.

[corplinx]

Until Israel admits to assassinating Sonny Bono, there will be no peace.

[Dr Adequate]

And this makes me wonder what it always makes me wonder: is the Israel-Palestine thing really like Northern Ireland, or isn't it?

Let's see what happens.

[a_unique_person]

It happens to be politically expedient to help Fatah, just as it was once politically expedient to help Hamas.

[JJM 777]

Let's see what happens.
Israel will bribe Abbas and Fatah to give up some of the claims and rights of the several million Palestinians-in-exile.

Someone may even send an army to conquer Gaza.

But these actions would not create a peace between Israel and the entire Palestinian population, of whom more than half are now in exile.

[Pardalis]

Israel will bribe Abbas and Fatah to give up some of the claims and rights of the several million Palestinians-in-exile.

What do you mean, and how will it do that?

[JJM 777]

What do you mean, and how will it do that?
Western aid and the tax funds belonging to PA are being channeled to bank accounts controlled by Abbas and Fatah. More money will be promised to them by US, EU and others. This is the bribe.

This bribed party will be expected to sign a "peace agreement" dictated by Israel and US. Such an agreement that cancels any right of return of Palestinians-in-exile, and leaves a disproportionate share of the land in Jewish hands.

[webfusion]

Western aid and the tax funds belonging to PA are being channeled to bank accounts controlled by Abbas and Fatah. More money will be promised to them by US, EU and others. This is the bribe.

This bribed party will be expected to sign a "peace agreement" dictated by Israel and US. Such an agreement that cancels any right of return of Palestinians-in-exile, and leaves a disproportionate share of the land in Jewish hands.


Sounds fair to me.

[Bud Fox]

Western aid and the tax funds belonging to PA are being channeled to bank accounts controlled by Abbas and Fatah. More money will be promised to them by US, EU and others. This is the bribe.

This bribed party will be expected to sign a "peace agreement" dictated by Israel and US. Such an agreement that cancels any right of return of Palestinians-in-exile, and leaves a disproportionate share of the land in Jewish hands.



That's what happens when your side is on the losing end of a series of wars (defensive wars for Israel). Guess they'll have to deal with the fact that the losers don't call the shots. Never have. There will be no "right of return" as presently demanded. They'll have to learn to deal with it and make the best of what they get.

You see, had the Arab coalitions achieved their goals in '48, '56, '67, or '73, there would be no Israel, and our so-called progressive peace activists wouldn't utter peep demanding that Israel be reinstated with its pre-war borders intact.

[webfusion]

...

Someone may even send an army to conquer Gaza.

But these actions would not create a peace between Israel and the entire Palestinian population, of whom more than half are now in exile.

About 100,000 - 150,000 individuals only, and I mean this, in 1947-49, were disappropriated from lands that they had any deeds or rights to. The remainder of whatever few hundred thousand people who were suddenly disenfranchised in the late 1940's, never really left the lands of their forefathers, in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan etc. The truth be told, the vast vast majority of Arab population, within what became Israel in the conclusion of the Rhodes Cease-Fire Lines, had only just arrived themselves from just those lands during the previous years of Zionist building-up of Western Palestine during the post WW-ONE environment.

That is a fact.

The 4-million 'exile' is a figment of a myth, and is a gross miscalculation for anyone seeking peace deals. Israel is not stupid. The palestinians are O-U-T beyond the fences, beyond the stockade-lines, completely cut off. These are the new lines.

Drop your weapons, hands up --- surrender.
The militarization and the importing of explosives and Sagger rockets, and GRAIL missiles, into Gaza, is a huge blunder on the part of the HAMAS.

They will regret the day they get tough into-it with the IDF.
Yes, JJM, and that army is ready to TCB...

[The Fool]

That's what happens when your side is on the losing end of a series of wars (defensive wars for Israel). Guess they'll have to deal with the fact that the losers don't call the shots. Never have. There will be no "right of return" as presently demanded. They'll have to learn to deal with it and make the best of what they get.

You see, had the Arab coalitions achieved their goals in '48, '56, '67, or '73, there would be no Israel, and our so-called progressive peace activists wouldn't utter peep demanding that Israel be reinstated with its pre-war borders intact.
and if the Israelis had been losers in those wars you would (no doubt) be saying that it just tough for the Israelis as they lost...no right to go back. Losers don't call the shots remember.

And could you expand a little on what you refer to as "defensive wars" what do you mean by that term?

[Kerberos]

You see, had the Arab coalitions achieved their goals in '48, '56, '67, or '73, there would be no Israel, and our so-called progressive peace activists wouldn't utter peep demanding that Israel be reinstated with its pre-war borders intact.
The Suez war was defensive? How do you arive at that conclusion? Also what Arab "coalition" was involved in that war. That term ussually requires at least 2 countries involved. Also the October war was executed with limited war aims. The notion that it could be anything alse is absurd since Israel had nuclear weapons. No non-nuclear armed country can wage a war of extermination against a nuclear power.

[E.J.Armstrong]

'That is a fact.'


Like all your other 'facts' no doubt.

If the Israeli government and Hamas had any interest in peace and international law they would abide by UN resolutions.

The Palestinians and Israelis are so similar in many ways. Palestinians chose to elect Hamas in free elections. Israelis chose to elect people from terrorist organisations in free elections.

[Darth Rotor]

and if the Israelis had been losers in those wars you would (no doubt) be saying that it just tough for the Israelis as they lost...no right to go back. Losers don't call the shots remember.

And could you expand a little on what you refer to as "defensive wars" what do you mean by that term?
TF: had Israel lost in 48, 67, or 73, there wouldn't be an Israel to talk about getting "back" to. Losing for them meant political extinction, which it has not for the Pals.

Subtle difference, but a difference nonetheless.

DR

[Bud Fox]

and if the Israelis had been losers in those wars you would (no doubt) be saying that it just tough for the Israelis as they lost...no right to go back. Losers don't call the shots remember.

Correct. Losers don't call the shots. Had Israel lost, it would have been SOOL and it is unlinkely that there would have been any serious effort on the part of anyone in the rest of the world to re-establish it. I could have screamed at the top of my lungs regarding their right to go back, but I highly doubt that it would have happened. Had Nasser been successful, there would be no more Israel, period.

This essay by Eric Hoffer, written in May of 1968 is as applicable today as it was then:

ISRAEL'S PECULIAR POSITION

By Eric Hoffer (LA Times 5/26/68)

The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations areforbidden to the Jews.

Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people and there is norefugee problem. Russian did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it, Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchman. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese-and no one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees.

Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis.

Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jewsto be the only real Christians in this world.

Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover but should Israelbe defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews.

No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on. There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him.

The Swedes, who are ready to break of diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore, and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.

The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts. And Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is toAmerica and the West in general.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us.



And could you expand a little on what you refer to as "defensive wars" what do you mean by that term?

I can see how it would be a difficult term to understand for those who prefer tyo see Israel as an imperialist nation. Although the rationale behind the wars I listed is complex, Israel did not initiate any of them. You can argue about the pre-emptive action in '67, but that was in response to clear and deliberate provocation.


The Suez war was defensive? How do you arive at that conclusion?

I gather the ongoing Egyptian incursions into Israel in the 6 preceding years don't constitute provocation in your books? Nasser's goal wasn't clear to you? Interesting.

I will grant you that the Yom Kippur War's goals were more limited, but a major victory for the Arab forces may well have emboldened them to attempt a repeat of earlier efforts to eliminate Israel (speculation on my part).

[Mycroft]

Western aid and the tax funds belonging to PA are being channeled to bank accounts controlled by Abbas and Fatah. More money will be promised to them by US, EU and others. This is the bribe.

Which is the system Arafat created and insisted on maintaining.


This bribed party will be expected to sign a "peace agreement" dictated by Israel and US. Such an agreement that cancels any right of return of Palestinians-in-exile, and leaves a disproportionate share of the land in Jewish hands.

Which pretty much indicates that you personally will dislike any peace agreement the Palestinians and Israelis come to. You have a built-in mechanism for invalidating it.

[Mycroft]

The Suez war was defensive? How do you arive at that conclusion?

Is that a joke?

If I threaten to kill you and start loading a gun, and you preempt my action by punching me in the nose, your punch is still defensive even though you struck first.

Could that be any more clear?

[Darth Rotor]

Is that a joke?

If I threaten to kill you and start loading a gun, and you preempt my action by punching me in the nose, your punch is still defensive even though you struck first.

Could that be any more clear?
Heck, this conversation has long since reached stupid.

We see these wonderful arguments for which year the borders and boundaries need to be referenced from, so I say scrap the entire lot, go back to the 1800 border, and give the whole boiling back to the Turks.

Let them sort it out.

That would doubtless make JJM 777 happy, since the ancient right of the Turks to rule that land goes back to around the 1400's.

While we are at it, give the Netherlands back to Spain, and Cuba as well, and let's give Brazil back to Portugal. Give Finland back to Russia, as that was the pre Versailles owner, and FFS, let's give Manhattan back to the Indians, any Indians, though I have a soft spot for the Iroquois, that'll show them New York Jews, won't it JJM 777? That's who you are after in the first place, right? Those horrid Zionists from New York who supported Israel's foundation?

What is with these half measures, anyway?

/absurd off

DR

[The Fool]

Correct. Losers don't call the shots. Had Israel lost, it would have been SOOL and it is unlinkely that there would have been any serious effort on the part of anyone in the rest of the world to re-establish it. I could have screamed at the top of my lungs regarding their right to go back, but I highly doubt that it would have happened. Had Nasser been successful, there would be no more Israel, period.

so would you have beens screaminmg at the top of your lungs for thier return? That was my point. You have one standard for Israelis and one for the rest...whats that called?

This essay by Eric Hoffer, written in May of 1968 is as applicable today as it was then:

ISRAEL'S PECULIAR POSITION

By Eric Hoffer (LA Times 5/26/68)

The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations areforbidden to the Jews.

Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people and there is norefugee problem. Russian did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it, Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchman. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese-and no one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees.

Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis.

Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jewsto be the only real Christians in this world.

Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover but should Israelbe defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews.

No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on. There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him.

The Swedes, who are ready to break of diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore, and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.

The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts. And Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is toAmerica and the West in general.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us.


Its nice when writers try to turn logical falacies into literature. Extra points if you can name the falacy where you say what was done was ok because others have done much worse...

and this one ("Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab")is called a straw man....very popular in this section of the forum...


I can see how it would be a difficult term to understand for those who prefer tyo see Israel as an imperialist nation. Although the rationale behind the wars I listed is complex, Israel did not initiate any of them. You can argue about the pre-emptive action in '67, but that was in response to clear and deliberate provocation.

I think I am starting to see where you are coming from...you want to go back until you find something Israel didn't do and then label that the start of the war....am I roughly correct? No doubt you are one of the people who starts the 1948 war with the crossing of Arab armies into the lands allocated to palestinians but not the earlier crossing of Jewish forces into those lands? ...which was in response to arab attacks which were in response to Jewish attacks which were in response....etc...etc....etc....but you will always start the clock on some arab act eh?

[/quote]

[The Fool]

TF: had Israel lost in 48, 67, or 73, there wouldn't be an Israel to talk about getting "back" to. Losing for them meant political extinction, which it has not for the Pals.

Subtle difference, but a difference nonetheless.

DR
Correct...there could have been something like a "jewish Authority" with limited autonomy in areas of Jewish majority. Or...what is more likely (in my opinion) there would have been a period of Israeli government in exile pending the US led invasion to re-establish Israel. The eradication of Israel may be a wet dream of quite a few fundies in the middle east but as a realistic expectation ......I just don't see it happening.....Political extinction of the Zionist movement???? please tell me you are not serious, it would take more than an Arab army of occupation in Israel (for as long as it survived the counter attack) to eradicate the attachment to Jerusalem and the cause of Zionism from Jewish culture.

[Lithrael]

Admittedly I'm just blundering in and asking people to toss me answers here, but no matter what's going on the Israelis don't need to be shooting rock-throwers dead any more than the Palestinians need to be raising so many kids to be terrorists. In both camps, I've seen plenty of crazy dogmatic hate-spewing people, plain or in disguise, and a few genuine peace-seekers (admittedly way fewer Palestinian than Israeli). I just can't figure out how most people are picking and sticking so staunchly to a side on this issue.

Every time I read one of these discussions it's like

Criticising Israel = anti-Jewish
Criticising Palestine = anti-Islam
Supporting Israel = Zionist
Supporting Palestine = Terrorist

It can't really be that simple, can it? Of course at this point they've both done so many horrible things to one another I don't see how they possibly could make peace. If they tried to live together, the nutters and grudge holders on both sides would turn it into a bloodbath. If they try to live with a wall, they just keep sniping and exploding at one another until it boils over anyway.

But it does still feel like the Palestinians do have plenty to be mad about, cut off from water and work and shot at and such. Olive orchards bulldozed, old men crying. I'm not saying they're right, or nice peaceful people or anything, but they do seem to be getting the horribly short end of the stick.

I know a bunch of Israelis, one of my best friends is in the IDF right now. We chat online all the time. On TV I've seen Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and they look like cities where anyone could live.

I don't know any Palestinians. On TV I've seen arid countrysides and shot-up villages. Where do I go to find some balance?

[JJM 777]

The average Palestinian does not have an Internet connection. The wealthier ones can afford surfing at Internet cafes, if they happen to be not yet blown in the air by Islamists.

Witnessing racism and apartheid in the modern world sucks. It does not help to hear that Algeria or Turkey have done it before. If that is the thinking pattern, then nothing matters anything any more, since you possibly cannot do anything so horrible that it wouldn't have been done also before in the history of mankind.

[Kerberos]

I gather the ongoing Egyptian incursions into Israel in the 6 preceding years don't constitute provocation in your books? Nasser's goal wasn't clear to you? Interesting.
They certainly doesn't make the war about Israel survival as you implied. Might have been s justifiable preventive war, but a defensive war for the survival of israel? That I find hard to believe.


I will grant you that the Yom Kippur War's goals were more limited, but a major victory for the Arab forces may well have emboldened them to attempt a repeat of earlier efforts to eliminate Israel (speculation on my part).
I don't supose you'd vare to speculate on how the Arabs were going to get around the slight problem of Israel having nukes?

Is that a joke?
No it's a question, I don't claim to know everything there is about the Suez war, but I haven't hear anything about Egypt attacking first or at least being about to attack, which is what the term defensive war ussually means. PArticuarly when Bud states that it's for the survival of Israel.

If I threaten to kill you and start loading a gun, and you preempt my action by punching me in the nose, your punch is still defensive even though you struck first.

Could that be any more clear?
Well it could be, for example by actually being about Egypt and Israel.

had Israel lost in 48, 67, or 73, there wouldn't be an Israel to talk about getting "back" to. Losing for them meant political extinction, which it has not for the Pals.

Reality check here, 73-war: Limited war aims. Israelli nuclear weapons.

[a_unique_person]

Correct. Losers don't call the shots.



Jews were the losers in WWII. I don't think that makes it right that they were.

[Darth Rotor]

Correct...there could have been something like a "jewish Authority" with limited autonomy in areas of Jewish majority. Or...what is more likely (in my opinion) there would have been a period of Israeli government in exile pending the US led invasion to re-establish Israel. The eradication of Israel may be a wet dream of quite a few fundies in the middle east but as a realistic expectation ......I just don't see it happening.....Political extinction of the Zionist movement???? please tell me you are not serious, it would take more than an Arab army of occupation in Israel (for as long as it survived the counter attack) to eradicate the attachment to Jerusalem and the cause of Zionism from Jewish culture.
No, political extinction of the Nation State of Israel. The Zionist movement would have gone back to the "Next Year, Jerusalem" inspired movement among the diaspora that it was before 1919. I don't see it have gone away, why to you attempt to put words in my mouth?

US invade to re establish, in the Cold War?

Nope.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Correct...there could have been something like a "jewish Authority" with limited autonomy in areas of Jewish majority. Or...what is more likely (in my opinion) there would have been a period of Israeli government in exile pending the US led invasion to re-establish Israel. The eradication of Israel may be a wet dream of quite a few fundies in the middle east but as a realistic expectation ......I just don't see it happening.....Political extinction of the Zionist movement???? please tell me you are not serious, it would take more than an Arab army of occupation in Israel (for as long as it survived the counter attack) to eradicate the attachment to Jerusalem and the cause of Zionism from Jewish culture.
No, political extinction of the Nation State of Israel. The Zionist movement would have gone back to the "Next Year, Jerusalem" inspired movement among the diaspora that it was before 1919. I don't see it have gone away, why to you attempt to put words in my mouth?

US invade to re establish, in the Cold War?

Nope.

DR

[webfusion]

"But it does still feel like the Palestinians do have plenty to be mad about, cut off from water..."


Where? When?


Of course at this point they've both done so many horrible things to one another I don't see how they possibly could make peace. If they tried to live together, the nutters and grudge holders on both sides would turn it into a bloodbath.


The jews and palestinians are already living together. I am not sure why you gloss over that fact.

The leader of Israel and the leader of the Palestinian Authority are doing what they can to "make peace" --- Israel is familiar with making peace with sworn and brutal enemies (see: Egypt, Jordan)


On TV I've seen arid countrysides and shot-up villages. Where do I go to find some balance?

http://kr-emba.tau.ac.il/_Articles/Article.asp?ArticleID=165&CategoryID=72
Procter & Gamble is sponsoring the participation of a Palestinian executive residing in Ramallah in the prestigious Kellogg-Recanati International Executive MBA Program, at Tel Aviv University.

or go to
http://www.palestine-art.com/

[The Fool]

No, political extinction of the Nation State of Israel. The Zionist movement would have gone back to the "Next Year, Jerusalem" inspired movement among the diaspora that it was before 1919. I don't see it have gone away, why to you attempt to put words in my mouth?

US invade to re establish, in the Cold War?

Nope.

DR
Nope....

Nope??

got anything a bit more substantial than that to cast doubt on the US invading to re-establish Israel? They invaded to re-establish Kuwait...are you suggesting that the US feels a stronger bond with Kuwait than Israel?

Honestly folks...this Israel could be wiped off the face of the earth story is right up there with bogey man stories kids get told so they will eat thier vegetables.

[webfusion]

Nope....

Nope??

got anything a bit more substantial than that to cast doubt on the US invading to re-establish Israel? ...


Look, T-F, he said it twice and that makes it doubly true, so there!

As for Israel being in existential danger, I can only call your attention to the following map:

9 miles (15km) across
http://www.zionism-israel.com/maps/map_Israel_distances_small.gif
{LINK TO MAP}

That's the picture for Israel's entire mid-section.


Now, go eat your vegetables.

[Mycroft]

Nope....

Nope??

got anything a bit more substantial than that to cast doubt on the US invading to re-establish Israel? They invaded to re-establish Kuwait...are you suggesting that the US feels a stronger bond with Kuwait than Israel?

Honestly folks...this Israel could be wiped off the face of the earth story is right up there with bogey man stories kids get told so they will eat thier vegetables.

I'm trying to figure out what your point is here.

Is it that Israel has nothing to worry about from losing a war since if they do they would only suffer a similar fate as did Kuwaitis under Saddam Hussein?

Is it that it's okay for Israel to lose a war since the United States would inevitably (never mind changing administrations, changing political climates, changing times, etc) go to war to take back whatever was lost?

Or is your points simply that Israel is wrong when it defends itself?

Please clarify for us. What is the point you're trying to make?

[The Fool]

I'm trying to figure out what your point is here.

Is it that Israel has nothing to worry about from losing a war since if they do they would only suffer a similar fate as did Kuwaitis under Saddam Hussein?

Is it that it's okay for Israel to lose a war since the United States would inevitably (never mind changing administrations, changing political climates, changing times, etc) go to war to take back whatever was lost?

Or is your points simply that Israel is wrong when it defends itself?

Please clarify for us. What is the point you're trying to make?

good attempt. But you still don't get it. Ask web.....

[Mycroft]

good attempt. But you still don't get it. Ask web.....

Evasion noted.

[The Fool]

Evasion noted.
Lol....
Evading your lack of understanding? I plead guilty. Feel free to rejoin if you ever figure out what the topic is.

[Mycroft]

Lol....
Evading your lack of understanding? I plead guilty. Feel free to rejoin if you ever figure out what the topic is.

Evading direct questions, of course.

I'm guessing you won't answer these questions because doing so would force you to express an actual opinion that you might later have to defend with actual evidence, and that your likely failure to do so would make you look like an idiot. It's much easier to sit back and make sarcastic comments and pretending they're not devoid of substance.

C'mon, it's not that hard. Earlier you said;

got anything a bit more substantial than that to cast doubt on the US invading to re-establish Israel?

That the US would invade to re-establish Israel is the positive assertion that requires evidence to support. You're the one apparently making the assertion, so it's up to you to support it. It's not up to anyone else to prove the negative to your assertion.

[The Fool]

Evading direct questions, of course.

I'm guessing you won't answer these questions because doing so would force you to express an actual opinion that you might later have to defend with actual evidence, and that your likely failure to do so would make you look like an idiot. It's much easier to sit back and make sarcastic comments and pretending they're not devoid of substance.

C'mon, it's not that hard. Earlier you said;

got anything a bit more substantial than that to cast doubt on the US invading to re-establish Israel?

That the US would invade to re-establish Israel is the positive assertion that requires evidence to support. You're the one apparently making the assertion, so it's up to you to support it. It's not up to anyone else to prove the negative to your assertion.
I'll keep this simple. Hopefully that will help.

comment removed

Be civil and polite per your membership agreement.

[Tipush]

Admittedly I'm just blundering in and asking people to toss me answers here, but no matter what's going on the Israelis don't need to be shooting rock-throwers dead any more than the Palestinians need to be raising so many kids to be terrorists. In both camps, I've seen plenty of crazy dogmatic hate-spewing people, plain or in disguise, and a few genuine peace-seekers (admittedly way fewer Palestinian than Israeli). I just can't figure out how most people are picking and sticking so staunchly to a side on this issue.

Every time I read one of these discussions it's like

Criticising Israel = anti-Jewish
Criticising Palestine = anti-Islam
Supporting Israel = Zionist
Supporting Palestine = Terrorist

It can't really be that simple, can it?

Unfortunately, it isn't.
I was born and raised in Israel (except a couple of years in my childhood when I lived in the USA), I am 23 years old today and after giving it a long thought, my boyfriend and I decided to try and leave this country.
When I look at the Israeli- Palestinian war (and it is a war), I feel as though they are fighting a war which is not mine. My parent's family ran away from the Nazis and reached What was then Palestine.
A country which I can hardly relate to. As an Israeli, I can honestly say I disagree with both sides. They are fighting a religious war, not a war in which the winner survives, they are fighting about who's ancestors been here first. They are fighting about what the bible claims is our "promised" land vs. their ownership papers.

As far as I see it, they can take this sick land and keep it. But I am a part of a minority.
I might have been born to a Jewish mother and father, but I consider myself an Atheist. I don't believe in God. I don't believe in the bible.
This country isn't mine.

On the other hand:
I can't walk into a mall, a restaurant a coffee house without being fully searched by armed men.
I have walked off buses more than enough times because suspicious men walked on the bus.
I have friends who died at explosions, people who were peace seekers as much as any other.
They are killing us and they are killing themselves, IDF is killing them and Israeli citizens are killing themselves.
We are taught that being a soldier is respectful, we are taught to love the army. As kids they take us to see tanks as part of the school activity. We have soldiers coming to our schools and teaching us about how cool the army is. Is that any different from what they teach their children? I am not so sure.
I am sometimes more afraid of the religious Jewish person standing next to me more than the Palestinian in front of me.
People here (Israelis) are more frustrated than anything, as far as I can see, they will take it out on anyone who comes their way.

The religious are making my life hell as well:

Opening shops on Saturday is forbidden (although it is still being done, but owners pay fines), There are no buses or public transports on Saturday and Friday evening, And now they want to forbid selling the little "non kosher" food we can buy (pork, sea food, anything that mixes meat and cheese),
We have to study the bible in school, and now they want to censor the internet
(Isn't the internet for Porn?? ;) )


In conclusion:

I am an Israeli (but I am not a Zionist)
I understand the Palestinians (But I am not a terrorist and I disagree with their measures)
I don't agree with the with the Israelis (and I am not anti Jewish)
Nor do I agree with the Palestinians (but I am not anti Islam)

I most probably haven't made anything easier for you. I don't think it's possible and I
am sorry, but maybe now you understand a little more why this isn't easy.



Tipush

[a_unique_person]

Thanks Tipush. An interesting insight into what has so far been an intractable problem.

[Tipush]

Any time :)

[JJM 777]

Peace in the Middle East would be immediately possible, if more Israelis had the attitude that Tippush has.

Live and let live.

:duel

[a_unique_person]

I don't think it's that simple, JJM. I certainly think Israel has to change it's attitude, I don't think it's only up to Israel to bring about peace.

[jsiv]

A country which I can hardly relate to. As an Israeli, I can honestly say I disagree with both sides. They are fighting a religious war, not a war in which the winner survives, they are fighting about who's ancestors been here first. They are fighting about what the bible claims is our "promised" land vs. their ownership papers.

But regardless of the past, Israel is an established country now. As are the palestinian territories, really. It really is not productive to argue about the past.

We are taught that being a soldier is respectful, we are taught to love the army. As kids they take us to see tanks as part of the school activity. We have soldiers coming to our schools and teaching us about how cool the army is. Is that any different from what they teach their children? I am not so sure.

A bigger issue is the reasons for war they are taught, and I have to say that I do consider the palestinian side far more irrational. But I'm thousands of miles away.

The religious are making my life hell as well:

Opening shops on Saturday is forbidden (although it is still being done, but owners pay fines)

This is an issue even in today's Europe. Up here in the cold and wet north, the law prohibits stores from being open on Sundays under the guise of protecting "employee's rights to time off." In reality, it is a religious tradition that is being carried on to this very day.

Things take time to change, a long time.

In conclusion:

I am an Israeli (but I am not a Zionist)
I understand the Palestinians (But I am not a terrorist and I disagree with their measures)
I don't agree with the with the Israelis (and I am not anti Jewish)
Nor do I agree with the Palestinians (but I am not anti Islam)

I most probably haven't made anything easier for you. I don't think it's possible and I am sorry, but maybe now you understand a little more why this isn't easy.

Do you believe there is any action Israel can take to bring peace to the region, or do you just consider it a lost cause? If you were to put your weapons down, what do you think would happen?

[webfusion]

Peace in the Middle East would be immediately possible, if more Israelis had the attitude that Tippush has.

Sure, her main point was :
"As far as I see it, they (the Arabs) can take this sick land and keep it."

which was backed-up by:
"...after giving it a long thought, my boyfriend and I decided to try and leave this country."

and

"This country isn't mine."


If more Israelis had that attitude, certainly peace would be "immediately possible", as the nation is abandoned by jews in the face of islamic threats.

Yeah, go ahead, Tipush, run away.
I'm not so sure you'll be safe, however, from ongoing worldwide threats of islamic jihadists, even as Israel collapses (as the canary in the coalmine) and succumbs in the face of the spread of islamic violence.

My parent's family ran away from the Nazis.

Chilling. Now, you'll run away from HAMAS & Co.
Which will leave your children to wonder about their heritage.
How will you explain it? Good luck.

[a_unique_person]

But regardless of the past, Israel is an established country now. As are the palestinian territories, really. It really is not productive to argue about the past.



It is important to recognise that the Palestinians are being expected to pay for the sins of the Europeans.



A bigger issue is the reasons for war they are taught, and I have to say that I do consider the palestinian side far more irrational. But I'm thousands of miles away.



According to Tipush, both sides are playing the religion card, from which no rational result can come.



This is an issue even in today's Europe. Up here in the cold and wet north, the law prohibits stores from being open on Sundays under the guise of protecting "employee's rights to time off." In reality, it is a religious tradition that is being carried on to this very day.

Things take time to change, a long time.



Israel is heading the other way, the laws are becoming more restrictive as time passes, which is an indication of where israel is headed. There is a large resistance to this, but those people appear to be losing the war, despite winning some battles.



Do you believe there is any action Israel can take to bring peace to the region, or do you just consider it a lost cause? If you were to put your weapons down, what do you think would happen?

False dichotomy, there are alternatives to just laying down arms and following current policies.

[jsiv]

It is important to recognise that the Palestinians are being expected to pay for the sins of the Europeans.

All of the Middle East (and half the world) is "paying for the sins of the Europeans." The entire region was shaped by us, against the will of the people who lived there. Sadly, there is no way to change the past.

A jewish state was inevitable, regardless of WW II, and there is no other logical place it could have been founded.


According to Tipush, both sides are playing the religion card, from which no rational result can come.

Perhaps they are "playing the religion card" to justify the continuing existence of Israel. If they are, it's unfortunate, as there is no need for any justification.

I still stand by my statement that the palestinian indoctrination is more extreme, making it a greater obstacle to peace.


Israel is heading the other way, the laws are becoming more restrictive as time passes, which is an indication of where israel is headed. There is a large resistance to this, but those people appear to be losing the war, despite winning some battles.

I know. I was commenting on how difficult an issue this can be, if it still exists in the west today.

I certainly hope the ultraorthodox jews can be stopped from getting too much power. I have no love for them at all, or a lot of the jewish traditions.


False dichotomy, there are alternatives to just laying down arms and following current policies.

There certainly are, but it is a very common argument from the "anti-Israel" crowd that if only Israel puts down their weapons and withdraw behind the armistice lines, the palestinians would do the same and peace would appear as if by magic.

The hate goes too deep for that, and is too focused on the past.

[Lucky]

Peace in the Middle East would be immediately possible, if more Israelis had the attitude that Tippush has.
JJM, this remark shows your (possibly unconscious) prejudice. Do you see why? Please think about it.


I don't think it's that simple, JJM. I certainly think Israel has to change it's attitude, I don't think it's only up to Israel to bring about peace.
A_U_P, it occurred to me when reading JJM's post that you have a much better understanding, and I'd be very surprised to see anything like that from you these days.

As it happens, a couple of visiting Israeli relatives (and close friends) were sharing a Shabbat meal in my home the day of the prisoner release. They are doubtless the type you are thinking of when you talk about how difficult it is for the Israeli mindset to change, and I know you're wrong – so many people on both sides are so desperate for peace that it doesn't take much at all. Any gesture from either side can be valuable.

You would see these people as quite typical secular Zionists who love and defend their country, readily excuse wrongdoing by their own side and choose not to understand the daily hardships and national aspirations of the Palestinians. (Actually, they are exceptionally clever people, but their politics are very conventional.)

I can (and often do) discuss Israel/Palestine with them, and am openly very critical of Israeli policies and actions in many ways, but I have to choose my words carefully so as not to antagonise them and cause them to stop listening to me.

Anyway, I was pleased when my relative remarked out of the blue that it was good that a few hundred Palestinians who had been prisoners only a few hours ago were now at home perhaps sitting round a table and talking with their families, just as we were. He hoped it was the start of better times for both peoples.

As for the apparent advance of ultra-orthodoxy in Israel, it's not that middle-of-the-road Israelis like my cousins are any closer ideologically to the ultras now than previously, but they are all being thrown together as a reaction and defence against the threat to their security and the existence of their country. It just doesn't feel like a good time to raise the issue of what a Jewish state means (or should, or could, mean) - hasn't for several years.


And this makes me wonder what it always makes me wonder: is the Israel-Palestine thing really like Northern Ireland, or isn't it?

Let's see what happens.
It's an interesting question; one that I've thought about and discussed a lot. My view is that there are many basic similarities that are very instructive, even though the players and events don't map precisely.

[Darth Rotor]

Nope....

Nope??

got anything a bit more substantial than that to cast doubt on the US invading to re-establish Israel? They invaded to re-establish Kuwait...are you suggesting that the US feels a stronger bond with Kuwait than Israel?

Honestly folks...this Israel could be wiped off the face of the earth story is right up there with bogey man stories kids get told so they will eat thier vegetables.
While you pose an irrelevant question, Kuwait was re invaded about a year and a half after the wall fell. The Cold War was over. Bush made a deal with Russia/CIS. Not sure what it was, and I am guessing none of us will know for sure until NSC notes are unclassified, but they did not veto the UN Operation. I am guessing it had to do with US aid for Russia, but that's a guess.

Israel, 1948. Had they lost, I don't see the US invading. Post war retraction.

Israel, 1956. The US stopped the Brits and French.

Israel, 1967: Didn't need to intervene

Israel 1973: This one was a near run thing, but the USSR and USA were, according to some declass notes, as close to pushing buttons as they ever got. US Sixth Fleet and Sov Fleet units had each other in their sights. US rushed aid to Israel, so maybe a landing would have been made before the war was lost, but to

Re Invade after the war was lost?

Nope.

You are not even close.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

A jewish state was inevitable, regardless of WW II, and there is no other logical place it could have been founded.
Rot.

There was nothing inevitable about it. It took concerted effort by parties in Palestine (post WW II / pre Israel) and in the UK and US, and elsewhere, and no small amount of blood and iron, and treasure, to make Israel happen.

It was not by any means inevitable. It took immense effort and risk taking to bring about.

DR

[Policenaut]

I don't know if he means this or not but I think he meant there was a consensus among various world powers than there had to be a jewish state cause most countries would not want a mass influx of broke down, mentally scarred, and injured people and I'm sure most jews wouldn't want to go back to any european country except maybe england. So I think he's trying to say that something had to be done with all these survivors and the most logical place was palestine. I don't think he said that it was ever going to be easy or necessarily the best thing to do but nevertheless it was done. Alright sorry if this isn't what you meant. :P

[Mycroft]

I'll keep this simple. Hopefully that will help.

comment removed

Okay, I'll take that as an indication that you decline to provide any evidence to support your assertions that the US would invade to reestablish Israel, and that Israeli concerns of being wiped out are "right up there with bogey man stories kids get told so they will eat thier[sic] vegetables."

That would also be a very blatant violation of rule 8 of your membership agreement and will be reported.

[Mycroft]

It is important to recognise that the Palestinians are being expected to pay for the sins of the Europeans.

No, for the umteenth time, Palestinians are not being expected to do anything except make peace.

They are, in fact, not paying for the sins of any European, but for the sins of their own leaders and the leaders of their forefathers who have and continue to bring genocidal violence upon this immigrant population. It's dishonest to continually portray Palestinians as innocent victims as though none of them played any role in creating the situation.

From Mohammad Amin al-Husayni (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni) on through modern times, the Palestinians have been led by violent and racist fanatics, and those are the "sins" they are paying for.


According to Tipush, both sides are playing the religion card, from which no rational result can come.

That's way too simplistic. Certainly there are elements on both sides that do this, but it's far more complex than that. More importantly, presenting these elements as equivalent is deceptive. By any rational measure the "religion card" represented by Hamas being elected into power far outweighs the religious element on the Israeli side.


Israel is heading the other way, the laws are becoming more restrictive as time passes, which is an indication of where israel is headed. There is a large resistance to this, but those people appear to be losing the war, despite winning some battles.

I've actually been following this and that's not the impression I get at all. The larger trend seems to be more towards greater liberalism.

[The Fool]

Okay, I'll take that as an indication that you decline to provide any evidence to support your assertions that the US would invade to reestablish Israel, and that Israeli concerns of being wiped out are "right up there with bogey man stories kids get told so they will eat thier[sic] vegetables."
[/quote
No...but you can take it as an indication that I am bored with your standard contribution which is to follow me around like a lost puppy constantly claiming you "don't understand" my posts followed by asking me if I really mean X ....where X is one of your stock strawmen.

at least try to vary your mantra....you are boring.


That would also be a very blatant violation of rule 8 of your membership agreement and will be reported.[/QUOTE]

report this one too.....you are a monotonous attention seeking pest.

[a_unique_person]

A_U_P, it occurred to me when reading JJM's post that you have a much better understanding, and I'd be very surprised to see anything like that from you these days.



I think it's more a matter of context, I don't think I have ever thought otherwise. You refer to the Ireland situation below. Even though England was entirely wrong to invade Ireland, the Irish have to accept a partition to achieve peace. Who knows how long it will take, but in a few centuries or so, it will revert back to being one state again.

As far as I am concerned, I have been arguing that Israel has been wrong in it's treatment of Palestinians, but no-one has asked me directly if they have to accept a compromise. They do, and it won't be what they wanted. I think this has been implied in my position that a two state solution is the best, possible outcome that can be realistically achieved.



As it happens, a couple of visiting Israeli relatives (and close friends) were sharing a Shabbat meal in my home the day of the prisoner release. They are doubtless the type you are thinking of when you talk about how difficult it is for the Israeli mindset to change, and I know you're wrong – so many people on both sides are so desperate for peace that it doesn't take much at all. Any gesture from either side can be valuable.



I get that feeling from reading the various news stories on the actual people who live there. It is the extremists on both sides who do their best to destabilise the situation, forcing the moderates to choose which side they are on. Wedge politics in practice.



You would see these people as quite typical secular Zionists who love and defend their country, readily excuse wrongdoing by their own side and choose not to understand the daily hardships and national aspirations of the Palestinians. (Actually, they are exceptionally clever people, but their politics are very conventional.)

I can (and often do) discuss Israel/Palestine with them, and am openly very critical of Israeli policies and actions in many ways, but I have to choose my words carefully so as not to antagonise them and cause them to stop listening to me.

Anyway, I was pleased when my relative remarked out of the blue that it was good that a few hundred Palestinians who had been prisoners only a few hours ago were now at home perhaps sitting round a table and talking with their families, just as we were. He hoped it was the start of better times for both peoples.



Their is hope, at least.

[Mycroft]

That would also be a very blatant violation of rule 8 of your membership agreement and will be reported.

report this one too.....you are a monotonous attention seeking pest.[/QUOTE]

I did.

I find it personally offensive that the very real concerns of Israelis are dismissed as "right up there with bogey man stories."

This conflict is not a child's fantasy. It's waged by real people with real weapons who really kill each other. When Arab nations mobilize their armies they are not doing so with the expectation that anything they achieve will be reversed by the more powerful United States military, and Israelis certainly can't afford to assume that would happen either. The consequences of defeat are very real.

[webfusion]

mycroft says:The consequences of defeat are very real.

You know, I often look back at the defeat of the Arabs in 1956 (Israel occupied and then returned Gaza) as a vital point of the conflict. Many nations around the world came forward in 1956 and declared their support for Israel, and "guaranteed" that Israel would not suffer a blockade again, nor be subjected to threat of invasion across those 9-miles of waistline as defined by the 1949 Cease-Fire Agreements at Rhodes.

The UN sent in a "Disengagement Observation Force" to Sinai. The leading powers on Earth put their word on paper and promised Israel it would not have to face war again.

From 1956 to 1967, it was all proven to be useless --- all the resolutions, all the promises, all the cease-fire lines, and even the UN Sinai mission ---- they were ineffective and Israel was pushed until it had its back to the sea and nowhere else to go.

The palestinians have a chance right now to encourage Israel to go along with a plan that will provide a four-corner solution (Gaza, Jerusalem, Samaria and Judaea).

But, after all is said and done, this four-corner solution involves Israel being inside. The palestinians need to work harder at making us feel comfortable being in that box. The palestinians can obtain a list of benefits too numerous to mention, if they drop their weapons. That is the primary lesson of the OP.