The result of brutal occupation? (Tel Aviv attack)

[webfusion]

Quote:

"We think that this operation... is a direct result of the policy of the occupation and the brutal agression and siege committed against our people," said Khaled Abu Helal, spokesman for the Hamas-led Interior Ministry.

OK, so let's get skeptical --- in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955 there was no 'seige' there was no 'occupation' and there was no policy of 'aggression' on the part of the Israelis towards the Palestinians. In fact, there was an internationally-brokered Armistice in force (the 1949 Rhodes Agreements).

Yet, the "Fedayeen" operated from bases located in and controlled by Egypt (Gaza), Lebanon and Jordan (West Bank). In the period 1951- 1956, over 400 Israelis were killed and 900 injured as a result of the "Fedayeen" infiltrations and attacks. The "Fedayeen" acts of terror, (supported by the Arab countries) led eventually to the outbreak of Sinai Campaign in 1956, in which IDF losses in the campaign were 171 dead, several hundred wounded, and 4 Israelis taken prisoner. Egyptian losses in Gaza and Sinai were estimated at several thousand dead and wounded, while 6,000 prisoners were taken.

Now, it's 2006, and HAMAS (along with the other groups in HAMASTAN) still perpetuate the murdering ways of the fedayeen.
So, I ask:
Is Israel about to embark on a major Campaign to re-take Gaza and eliminate the leaders in HAMASTAN? Is such a thing desirable or even achievable?

[a_unique_person]

There were refugees, and the knowledge that the goal of many zionists was the 'greater israel'. It was no secret, it is was their stated aim.

If you eliminate the current leaders, I would guess new leaders would just replace them. That has certainly been the pattern till now.

[webfusion]

Quote:

There were refugees

WWII created refugees worldwide. The war ended in '45. Millions were homeless, millions more had been forced to move, millions of others were dead.
By 1948, less than 36 months later, the jews had to defend themselves against armies of 5 arab nations, whose stated aims were no different than the stated intentions of today: "Destroy the jews"
Meanwhile, during those same years, Jewish refugees came to Israel from all over the MidEast.

Only the arabs have failed to deal with their refugees.

Are you telling us that the terrorism of then (when there was no occupation) is based on the same motivation of the terrorism of today?

And if so, why is HAMAS asking for withdrawal to the 1949 Rhodes Armistice (otherwise called the June 1967 Lines)? Is an Israeli relinquishment of the land called 'West Bank' somehow going to be sufficient now, although it was insufficient when there was no occupation at all?

Let's see where this goes...

[epepke]

Originally Posted by webfusion

OK, so let's get skeptical --- in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955 there was no 'seige' there was no 'occupation' and there was no policy of 'aggression' on the part of the Israelis towards the Palestinians. In fact, there was an internationally-brokered Armistice in force (the 1949 Rhodes Agreements).

Yet, the "Fedayeen" operated from bases located in and controlled by Egypt (Gaza), Lebanon and Jordan (West Bank). In the period 1951- 1956, over 400 Israelis were killed and 900 injured as a result of the "Fedayeen" infiltrations and attacks. The "Fedayeen" acts of terror, (supported by the Arab countries) led eventually to the outbreak of Sinai Campaign in 1956, in which IDF losses in the campaign were 171 dead, several hundred wounded, and 4 Israelis taken prisoner. Egyptian losses in Gaza and Sinai were estimated at several thousand dead and wounded, while 6,000 prisoners were taken.

It's not considered appropriate around here to remember or even be aware of things like this. You have been warned. Smoke some more dope and read some more Noam Chomsky books.

[.13.]

Originally Posted by webfusion

So, I ask:
Is Israel about to embark on a major Campaign to re-take Gaza and eliminate the leaders in HAMASTAN? Is such a thing desirable or even achievable?

I think it might be necessary to do that. I'm not sure though what you mean by re-taking. Does it mean just a strong military presence or does that also include re-settlement?

Re-settlement would mean a more permanent presence and a step back in the peace process. Though only party making any progress has been Israel and I can't blame them if they decide to take a step back and require the PA to do their part.

Capturing Hamas leaders might not be achievable if they go into hiding and as a_unique_person said they would be replaced by new ones anyway. But even in that case there might be advantages in pursuing them. I think chasing them off would remove what political power they have left and force new elections in the Palestinian territories. I know there are not a lot of choices to vote for. But the voters might remember the corruption of Fatah and look for other options. If there are any.

[a_unique_person]

I saw/read an interview with an IJ leader once. He expected to die, or be captured, within a year. He was already resigned to that fate. Threats meant nothing to him.

[webfusion]

Quote:

I'm not sure though what you mean by re-taking. Does it mean just a strong military presence or does that also include re-settlement?

Although the possibility of an IDF ground invasion to gaza has been mentioned, it seems more unlikely currently. Gaza is sealed-off, and the long-range artillery is sufficient for keeping the qassem rockets to a minimum, along with the Air Force targeting various terrorist leaders directly.
The IDF has too many troops committed on the West Bank, and those operations are expanding now, in Jenin, Tulkarem, Nablus, etc.

Also, the entire security situation has been widened inside Israel, with the police setting up checkpoints on major highways, as well as police patrols and presence at shopping centers, entertainment sites, and nature areas. Training academies, immigration police, and traffic patrol units were to be diverted to patrol duties. In addition, the army sent eight companies of soldiers to the police to increase security forces presence in urban centers.

NOTE: No mention of re-settlement of gaza from anyone.

[webfusion]

Quote:

I saw/read an interview with an IJ leader once. He expected to die, or be captured, within a year. He was already resigned to that fate. Threats meant nothing to him.

Was the interview published before or after he was killed by an accurate IAF missile blowing up his car?

[The Fool]

Originally Posted by webfusion

Was the interview published before or after he was killed by an accurate IAF missile blowing up his car?

So after you have the palestinian population sealed up in Gaza whats the plan?

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

I saw/read an interview with an IJ leader once. He expected to die, or be captured, within a year. He was already resigned to that fate. Threats meant nothing to him.

Do you think the possiblity of setting aside the violence for peace means anything to him?

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by The Fool

So after you have the palestinian population sealed up in Gaza whats the plan?

What do you think the Palestinian's plan is for when they have the Israelis sealed up behind the '48 borders?

[Manny]

Originally Posted by The Fool

So after you have the palestinian population sealed up in Gaza whats the plan?

Apparently, remove the travel rights of three guys. Grrr, those Israelis sure are animals.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

Do you think the possiblity of setting aside the violence for peace means anything to him?

Hahahahaha! Good one.

Quote:

Factions demand Abbas apology for slamming attack (AFP)

GAZA CITY (AFP) - A number of armed factions demanded that Palestinian Authority president Mahmud Abbas apologize after his fierce condemnation of an Islamic Jihad suicide attack in Tel Aviv.

"We demand that brother Abu Mazen (Abbas) apologize to the Palestinian people for the harm that he has done," said a joint statement read out by a masked militant at a press conference in Gaza City.

"By describing the heroic martyr operations as 'despicable,' Abu Mazen denigrates the blood of martyrs who have sacrificed themselves to defend Palestinian dignity," the armed factions' statement said.

[The Fool]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

What do you think the Palestinian's plan is for when they have the Israelis sealed up behind the '48 borders?

sorry, thought you may have had some thoughts beyond the point of imprisoning the palestinians....my bad.

[HeavyAaron]

Originally Posted by The Fool

sorry, thought you may have had some thoughts beyond the point of imprisoning the palestinians....my bad.

Oh, I didn't realize your question was sincere, I figured the answer was obvious. Maybe I need to be corrected, but I always thought it went something like this:

1) Build a darn fine wall.

2) Leave the Palistinians to their own devices until they grow up.

3) Treat them as a foriegn nation.

Am I missing something?

[The Fool]

Originally Posted by HeavyAaron

Am I missing something?

yes...a plan.

build the wall? where? On the border? where is the border?

Treat them as a foreign nation? How can you when they are not a nation. Maybe you do have a plan after all...Is addressing thier nationalist ambition part of your plan?

will leaving the palestinians to thier own devises preclude shelling them?

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by The Fool

sorry, thought you may have had some thoughts beyond the point of imprisoning the palestinians....my bad.

You think closing the border imprisons Palestinians? What about that border with Egypt? What about the Mediterranean? Palestinians are no more imprisoned in Gaza than Israelis are imprisoned in Israel. This is nothing more than propaganda you spew.

It's irrational for the Palestinian government to keep up a policy of hostility with Israel then expect Israel to accommodate their needs. If they want good relations, they need to make peace. It’s that simple.

Originally Posted by The Fool

yes...a plan.

build the wall? where? On the border? where is the border?

That doesn't seem to be an issue, does it? The wall is going up. Every so often there is an issue brought before the court, but they seem to be doing a fine job of making decisions.

Originally Posted by The Fool

Treat them as a foreign nation? How can you when they are not a nation. Maybe you do have a plan after all...Is addressing thier nationalist ambition part of your plan?

I think Palestinians should address Palestinian nationalist ambitions, don't you? What responsibility should Israel have once they step out of the way?

Originally Posted by The Fool

will leaving the palestinians to thier own devises preclude shelling them?

I think that should depend on if rockets keep coming over the border to hit Israel, don't you?

[The Fool]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

You think closing the border imprisons Palestinians? What about that border with Egypt? What about the Mediterranean? Palestinians are no more imprisoned in Gaza than Israelis are imprisoned in Israel. This is nothing more than propaganda you spew.

you are correct, I apologise. Palestinians could swim across the Med, I forgot that method of contact with the outside world. They could also beg passage from Egypt then cross the sinia (on foot due to the fuel embargo?)....too easy, what are they whining about.

Quote:

It's irrational for the Palestinian government to keep up a policy of hostility with Israel then expect Israel to accommodate their needs. If they want good relations, they need to make peace. It’s that simple.

I totally agree about the good relations bit...What about the human rights of the citizens.....what should they have to do to earn thier human rights? Pardon me but I thought being human was enough....

Quote:

That doesn't seem to be an issue, does it? The wall is going up. Every so often there is an issue brought before the court, but they seem to be doing a fine job of making decisions.

yes the wall goes up....you seem to have stopped denying its the future border of Israel....lets get it up asap so we can start to try to deal with this longrunning land dispute. Israel should take all the land it wants and then at least the starting point of the next problem is known....When demands are made for people to recognise Israel at least we will know what Israel is.

Quote:

I think Palestinians should address Palestinian nationalist ambitions, don't you? What responsibility should Israel have once they step out of the way?

OMG mycroft...do you believe that once this disengagement stuff is enacted that means Israel will still not have the final say if "Palestine" is proclaimed? Where did you get that one from?

Quote:

I think that should depend on if rockets keep coming over the border to hit Israel, don't you?

I hate to tell you this but short of total elimination of the entire palestinian population whichis not going to happen... I don't see how attacks like this will stop in the short term or even medium term.. I think we are looking at generational change as being the most likely.....how about 10 to 15 years for things to settle down completely? sound scary? Maybe it does but what if we had started 10 or 15 years ago?how about we start now?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by The Fool

yes...a plan.

build the wall? where?

Wherever they want. If Palestinians want some of that land back, they've got to bargain for it with something other than the blood of Israelis.

Quote:

Treat them as a foreign nation? How can you when they are not a nation.

If Israel says "we no longer accept any responsibility for you, you're on your own", then they either become a nation or descend into anarchy. True, they don't HAVE to pick the former, but if Israel stopped controlling their borders, then I don't see how the Palestinians can refuse to have statehood thrust upon them and still get any sympathy (which they rather need for survival, though you'd never know from their behavior).

Quote:

Maybe you do have a plan after all...Is addressing thier nationalist ambition part of your plan?

It would be part of mine: namely, crush the ambition they have to drive Israel into the sea, and leave them with the option to accept a more modest ambition of a separate existence beside Israel. That's how I'd deal with their ambition.

Quote:

will leaving the palestinians to thier own devises preclude shelling them?

No, it won't. In fact, if I were in charge, after a complete pullout, I'd be MORE inclined to use shelling as a response to rocket attacks. Just as if Mexico started shooting rockets at San Diego, I'd expect us to hit back, and hard. So either the Palestinians decide that they want such a state of war and accept the return fire from Israel, or they do something to stop the rocket attacks. It's a very simple choice.

It would be nice if such raw exercise of power were never necessary, it would be nice if there were a course of action to resolve this conflict which didn't have collateral damage among innocents. It would also be nice if I never got cavities. But it's time to start dealing with this problem the way it is, and not they way we wish it were. It's brutal and messy, and there's no solution which isn't also brutal and messy. It's a question of bad and worse, and if it were up to me I'd grab onto the bad solution as hard as I could.

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by The Fool

you are correct, I apologise. Palestinians could swim across the Med, I forgot that method of contact with the outside world. They could also beg passage from Egypt then cross the sinia (on foot due to the fuel embargo?)....too easy, what are they whining about.

Fuel embargo? I don't remember hearing about any embargo. Is that another one of your lies?

I do remember them being cut off for not being able to pay for fuel, but that's very different from an embargo.

I know of one very simple way to get the money back to buy the fuel: All Hamas needs to do is recognize Israel as a soverign nation, and work towards ending the violence. Heck, if they did that, I'd even redirect my own "Pizza for the IDF" money towards them.

Originally Posted by The Fool

I totally agree about the good relations bit...What about the human rights of the citizens.....what should they have to do to earn thier human rights? Pardon me but I thought being human was enough....

Don't you think the Palestinians should look after Palestinian human rights?

Originally Posted by The Fool

OMG mycroft...do you believe that once this disengagement stuff is enacted that means Israel will still not have the final say if "Palestine" is proclaimed? Where did you get that one from?

Wow, previously you denied having any ability to predict the future. Funny how that problem goes away when you get to bash your favorite target.

"Do I get the million if I'm right? Maybe we could cover both predictions between us and split the million?"

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...54#post1579654

Originally Posted by The Fool

I hate to tell you this but short of total elimination of the entire palestinian population whichis not going to happen... I don't see how attacks like this will stop in the short term or even medium term.. I think we are looking at generational change as being the most likely.....how about 10 to 15 years for things to settle down completely? sound scary? Maybe it does but what if we had started 10 or 15 years ago?how about we start now?

Ah yes. The attacks can't be stopped. We know this because the previous Palestinian administration didn't try to stop them either.

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by The Fool

I hate to tell you this but short of total elimination of the entire palestinian population whichis not going to happen... I don't see how attacks like this will stop in the short term or even medium term.. I think we are looking at generational change as being the most likely.....how about 10 to 15 years for things to settle down completely? sound scary? Maybe it does but what if we had started 10 or 15 years ago?how about we start now?

Now that Israel has said " I think I'll act rationally now", to end the madness, it assumes the other side will too.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Now that Israel has said " I think I'll act rationally now", to end the madness, it assumes the other side will too.

You forget that Hamas, Islamic Jihad are islamic fundamentalists, they are also designated terrorist organizations recognized as such by the US, EU, Canada and Israel. Islamic fundamentalist terror organizations are generally mad, irrational, and dangerous.

For instance.

Quote:

Tue Apr 18, 6:20 PM ET

AMMAN, Jordan - Jordan accused Hamas activists of smuggling missiles and other weapons into the kingdom and said Tuesday it was canceling a planned visit of the Palestinian foreign minister — the second diplomatic snub for the Hamas-led government in a week.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Zahar's visit to Jordan, which was planned for Wednesday, had been "put off until further notice," a Jordanian government spokesman said.

The Jordanian spokesman, Nasser Judeh, told The Associated Press that "missiles, explosives and automatic weapons were seized in the last couple of days."

So what do the terrorists of Hamas have to say about Jordan's claim?

Quote:

Wed Apr 19, 2:15 AM ET

GAZA (Reuters) - Hamas denied on Wednesday accusations by Jordan that the Islamic militant group had stored weapons on its territory and said it regretted Amman's cancellation of a visit by the Palestinian foreign minister.

"These accusations are false and completely contradict the well-known Hamas attitude that it does not intervene ... in the internal affairs of other countries," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said.

THere's your Hamas ceasefire....but as usual the typical Palestinian response is "Who us? You must be kidding...we would never do that, those are not our missiles, explosives and automatic weapons that you seized, these accusations are false."

It reminds me of Arafat, despite being caught red-handed, the Palestinian Authority denied any knowledge of the Karine-A, dismissing the incident as an Israeli "propaganda campaign." The Palestinians went from Arafat lying to Hamas lying.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by The Fool

yes...a plan.

build the wall? where? On the border? where is the border?

Wherever Israel decides it is - that may sound facetious however that is the reality of the situation i.e only the Israeli's have the will and the capability to impose a border.

Quote:

Treat them as a foreign nation? How can you when they are not a nation. Maybe you do have a plan after all...Is addressing thier nationalist ambition part of your plan?

Not Israel's problem -Israel should look after its own borders and what people do in a foreign land is of no concern to Israel (see point below for a caveat).

Quote:

will leaving the palestinians to thier own devises preclude shelling them?

If attacks on Israel are directly launched from a foreign land I believe that the Israelis have every "right" to take action to remove such threats - including killing the people in the foreign land that made such attacks.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by The Fool

you are correct, I apologise. Palestinians could swim across the Med, I forgot that method of contact with the outside world. They could also beg passage from Egypt then cross the sinia (on foot due to the fuel embargo?)....too easy, what are they whining about.

If you look on a map of the world you will see many states that are completely surrounded by other states (see central Europe and central Africa for some examples). Why is it different for the proto-state of Palestine?

Quote:

I totally agree about the good relations bit...What about the human rights of the citizens.....what should they have to do to earn thier human rights? Pardon me but I thought being human was enough....

This is why Israel should remove itself from any association with the proto-state, then it is up to the citizens of such a state to decide what human rights they wish and how they will ensure they are delivered.

Quote:

yes the wall goes up....you seem to have stopped denying its the future border of Israel....lets get it up asap so we can start to try to deal with this longrunning land dispute. Israel should take all the land it wants and then at least the starting point of the next problem is known....When demands are made for people to recognise Israel at least we will know what Israel is.

I agree.

Quote:

OMG mycroft...do you believe that once this disengagement stuff is enacted that means Israel will still not have the final say if "Palestine" is proclaimed? Where did you get that one from?

If the political will in Israel is to serve the best interests of the citizens of Israel then I believe it will happen.

Quote:

I hate to tell you this but short of total elimination of the entire palestinian population whichis not going to happen... I don't see how attacks like this will stop in the short term or even medium term.. I think we are looking at generational change as being the most likely.....how about 10 to 15 years for things to settle down completely? sound scary? Maybe it does but what if we had started 10 or 15 years ago?how about we start now?

I totally agree.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally Posted by The Fool

They could also beg passage from Egypt then cross the sinia (on foot due to the fuel embargo?)....too easy, what are they whining about.

Let's deal with the utter fabrications in that one sentence.

1) The Rafah crossing into Egypt is controlled by the Palestinians. The crossing operates under joint Egyptian-Palestinian management and under European Union supervision. Palestinians are free to travel through the Rafah crossing into Egypt at their leisure. They do not have to "beg passage".

2) There is no fuel embargo, none whatsoever, no one has placed a legal prohibition on fuel commerce with the Palestinians. Ergo they do not have to cross the Sinai on foot.


JREfers why do you debate someone who posts total demonstrable fabrications?

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Now that Israel has said " I think I'll act rationally now", to end the madness, it assumes the other side will too.

Where do you get these from?

Israel seems to have woken up from decades of expecting the other side to act rationally, despite all evidence to the contrary, and has now adopted a plan where the actions of the other side don't matter.

Not only are you dead wrong in citing Israel's expectations, but you actually acknowledge Israel is the side that's acting rationally, yet still turn it into Israel bashing. Amazing!

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by zenith-nadir

Let's deal with the utter fabrications in that one sentence.

1) The Rafah crossing into Egypt is controlled by the Palestinians. The crossing operates under joint Egyptian-Palestinian management and under European Union supervision. Palestinians are free to travel through the Rafah crossing into Egypt at their leisure. They do not have to "beg passage".

2) There is no fuel embargo, none whatsoever, no one has placed a legal prohibition on fuel commerce with the Palestinians. Ergo they do not have to cross the Sinai on foot.


JREfers why do you debate someone who posts total demonstrable fabrications?

Webfusion answered that question already, IIRC. The 'road' as such, is not practical for transporting goods. The sea is cut off by the Israeli Navy to all traffic, Palestinian fisherman in small boats only are allowed to land or launch from the beach. The airport is closed, at Israel's insistence. The only commercial quality route in/out is via Israel.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Webfusion answered that question already, IIRC. The 'road' as such, is not practical for transporting goods. The sea is cut off by the Israeli Navy to all traffic, Palestinian fisherman in small boats only are allowed to land or launch from the beach. The airport is closed, at Israel's insistence. The only commercial quality route in/out is via Israel.

If that is the case then Isreal should end that practice. If the proto-state has a coastline then it should be observed by the Israeli's just as any other state's coastline would be.

[Manny]

Originally Posted by Darat

If that is the case then Isreal should end that practice. If the proto-state has a coastline then it should be observed by the Israeli's just as any other state's coastline would be.

It's a nice thought, and one definitely hopes that over time that comes to be. However, the Palestinians have shown a consistent tendency to use shipping rights for things other than those which would help their economy (cite) (cite) (cite). Maybe if the Palestinians elected a government which was concerned more with helping Palestinians and less with importing things they intend to launch over the border something could be worked out.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by manny

It's a nice thought, and one definitely hopes that over time that comes to be. However, the Palestinians have shown a consistent tendency to use shipping rights for things other than those which would help their economy (cite) (cite) (cite). Maybe if the Palestinians elected a government which was concerned more with helping Palestinians and less with importing things they intend to launch over the border something could be worked out.

I understand all that but my opinion is that it is no more Israel's business what the proto-state imports then it is what France imports to the UK (well OK we are both part of the EU so we do have some say via the EU on what France can and can not import but I'm sure you get the idea).

And I can guess a possible objection you may bring up regarding this free-market approach e.g. no other purpose but to use these against Israel. However there is nothing to stop Israel blasting the hell out of anyone and anyplace in the proto-state if they try to use any such imports against Israel.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally Posted by Darat

If that is the case then Isreal should end that practice. If the proto-state has a coastline then it should be observed by the Israeli's just as any other state's coastline would be.

Israel controls the coast Darat because the Palestinians continue terror. The borders to Israel are closed because the Palestinians continue terror. The airspace and airport are closed because the Palestinians continue terror. All of the above are done because the Palestinian Authority refuses to disarm and dismantle the Palestinian terror organizations even after hundreds of promises to do so and several internationally-brokered peace agreements that the Palestinian Authority signed.

What people want is everything to be opened regardless if Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades continue terror. It's amazing hypocrisy in a post 9-11 world.

Originally Posted by Darat

I understand all that but my opinion is that it is no more Israel's business what the proto-state imports then it is what France imports to the UK....

If France was terrorizing Britain and had been previously caught importing weaponry to terrorize Britain you can bet your life that it would become Britains business what France imports.

[Manny]

Originally Posted by Darat

However there is nothing to stop Israel blasting the hell out of anyone and anyplace in the proto-state if they try to use any such imports against Israel.

That's definitely true. It would be my approach. When something happened like the suicide bomber this week who was supported by the majority party of the elected Palestinian government, I'd just start a bombing campaign. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, bomb after bomb after bomb after bomb. I'd say, "You say you want a war? Now you've got one. This is what a war looks like. Let us know when you want it to stop. All you have to do is stop yourselves."

Israel has chosen a more peaceful approach which they hope will result in far fewer deaths on both sides.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

The 'road' as such, is not practical for transporting goods.

Then I guess if the Palestinians want to profit off trade with Israel the Palestinian Authority better get off it's *** and take control of the known and designated Palestinian terror organizations threatening Israel.

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

The sea is cut off by the Israeli Navy to all traffic, Palestinian fisherman in small boats only are allowed to land or launch from the beach. The airport is closed, at Israel's insistence. The only commercial quality route in/out is via Israel.

All the more reason for the Palestinian Authority to get off it's *** and take control of the known and designated Palestinian terror organizations threatening Israel.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by zenith-nadir

Israel controls the coast Darat because the Palestinians continue terror. The borders to Israel are closed because the Palestinians continue terror. The airspace and airport are closed because the Palestinians continue terror. All of the above are done because the Palestinian Authority refuses to disarm and dismantle the Palestinian terror organizations even after hundreds of promises to do so and several internationally-brokered peace agreements that the Palestinian Authority signed.

And?

Originally Posted by zenith-nadir

What people want is everything to be opened regardless if Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades continue terror. It's amazing hypocrisy in a post 9-11 world.

I'm not bothered about what "people want" (whoever those "people" are) I am bothered about what the only people who can do anything about the situation do i.e. the Israelis.

Engagement with the proto-state has been proved beyond any reasonable doubt both wrong and ineffective (as evidence for this I would point to the first part of your post that I quoted). Israel should deal with Israeli problems which means more or less means what happens within its own borders not the problems of another nation (or in this case proto-nation). (With my normal caveats of course.)

[Darat]

Originally Posted by manny

That's definitely true. It would be my approach. When something happened like the suicide bomber this week who was supported by the majority party of the elected Palestinian government, I'd just start a bombing campaign. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, bomb after bomb after bomb after bomb. I'd say, "You say you want a war? Now you've got one. This is what a war looks like. Let us know when you want it to stop. All you have to do is stop yourselves."

Israel has chosen a more peaceful approach which they hope will result in far fewer deaths on both sides.

I can't agree with such an approach - it amounts to nothing more then genocide which whilst of course being a certain solution to the current violence it is not a path I can contemplate given the relatively low level of violence against Israel.

[Manny]

And that is why shipping is closed off to the Palestinian protostate.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally Posted by Darat

I'm not bothered about what "people want" (whoever those "people" are) I am bothered about what the only people who can do anything about the situation do i.e. the Israelis.

And the Israeli response to Palestinian terrorism is to seal the borders/coastline/airport so that it makes it very difficult for the terrorists to operate. It only takes one terrorist to get through to cause many casualties. Like suicide bombing a fallafel stand in Tel Aviv.

Originally Posted by Darat

Israel should deal with Israeli problems which means more or less means what happens within its own borders not the problems of another nation (or in this case proto-nation). (With my normal caveats of course.)

But if that "proto-nation" refuses to aknowledge your exsistence, refuses to renounce terrorism and allows known and designated terrorist organizations a safe harbor then it becomes Israel's problem... since that "proto-nation" borders the west and east of Israel.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by zenith-nadir

And the Israeli response to Palestinian terrorism is to seal the borders/coastline/airport so that it makes it very difficult for the terrorists to operate. It only takes one terrorist to get through to cause many casualties. Like suicide bombing a fallafel stand in Tel Aviv.

If it was the Israeli boarder I would have no problem with them sealing them however as far as I am aware the coastline in question is not part of what Israel considers is its coastline? Or am I confused and you are talking about a part of the coastline that is part of what Israeli considers to be its territory?

Originally Posted by zenith-nadir

But if that "proto-nation" refuses to aknowledge your exsistence, refuses to renounce terrorism and allows known and designated terrorist organizations a safe harbor then it becomes Israel's problem... since that "proto-nation" borders the west and east of Israel.

I have already explained - any nation is (as far as I am concerned) entitled to protect itself from direct attacks, and it I was an Israeli I would want to know that the money poured into the defence of Israel was being well spent and any attacks on Israeli territory would result in immediate retaliation against the direct attacker.

[Manny]

Originally Posted by Darat

I have already explained - any nation is (as far as I am concerned) entitled to protect itself from direct attacks, and it I was an Israeli I would want to know that the money poured into the defence of Israel was being well spent and any attacks on Israeli territory would result in immediate retaliation against the direct attacker.

The direct attacker ususally dies in the attack.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by manny

The direct attacker ususally dies in the attack.

I presume you are referring to suicide bombers? I was referring more to examples such as the continuing mortar and rocket attacks Hamas have been engaged in since the elections.