Jerusalem Post Editorial: Kill Arafat

[EvilYeti]

Enough.

Fine with me.

 

[espritch]

"We must kill Yasser Arafat, because the world leaves us no alternative," the English-language daily wrote in an editorial entitled Enough.

Cute. Let's kill Arafat and then blame "the world" for it.

"Arafat's death at Israel's hands would not radicalise Arab opposition to Israel; just the opposite. The current jihad against us is being fuelled by the perception that Israel is blocked from taking decisive action to defend itself," the right-wing paper added.

Translation: there's nothing wronge with Israel that a few more dead Palestinians won't solve.

 

[Grammatron]

Cute. Let's kill Arafat and then blame "the world" for it.



Translation: there's nothing wronge with Israel that a few more dead Palestinians won't solve.

Both sides are bordering idiocy and self annihilation at this point. I would give up on them both equally, but I think Palestine takes the cake of self annihilation and idiocy with targeting civilians in their bombings.

 

[Cleopatra]

Come-on espritch from all the threads about Arafat you chose this one to post, a thread that is about an editorial of a newspaper and it has a provocative title.

You just showed how much you care.

Wait for a moment and Unique and the other "usual suspects" will join you and all of you will have one of your usual parties about two countries you know very little about them ( You started googling about ME only a week ago according to your posts)

Enjoy your party!!

 

[espritch]

Both sides are bordering idiocy and self annihilation at this point. I would give up on them both equally, but I think Palestine takes the cake of self annihilation and idiocy with targeting civilians in their bombings.

I agree that blowing up a bus load of children didn't do anything good for the Palestinian cause. I think even Hamas realized that one was counter productive. I noticed their latest attack was directed at a group of soldiers instead.

 

[hgc]

I agree that blowing up a bus load of children didn't do anything good for the Palestinian cause. I think even Hamas realized that one was counter productive. I noticed their latest attack was directed at a group of soldiers instead.

Ah, you agree that it doesn't do any good to the Palestinian cause, but do you agree that it's the wrong thing to do morally? I also notice your clever bit of data selection above. There were 2 bombings the other day, one targeting a cafe -- not filled with soldiers.

 

[KelvinG]

Both sides are bordering idiocy and self annihilation at this point. I would give up on them both equally, but I think Palestine takes the cake of self annihilation and idiocy with targeting civilians in their bombings.

Ditto.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Both sides are bordering idiocy and self annihilation at this point. I would give up on them both equally, but I think Palestine takes the cake of self annihilation and idiocy with targeting civilians in their bombings.

Sure. And Isreal doesnt kill civillians either.

Woopdeedoo lets kill Arafat. Then everything will be just peachy.

 

[Furious]

Sure. And Isreal doesnt kill civillians either.

Subtle difference in target selection. Israel doesn't intentionally target civilians for effect, it targets terrorists hiding out in civilian areas.

What makes Palestinian suicide bombers terrorists and not militants/freedom fighters is the simple fact that military targets are free and open to attack, but instead they choose civilian targets in crowded areas to maximize casualties. What makes the Palestinians as a whole look really bad is their popular support of Arafat who supports these methods.

As long as Arafat is alive and relevant, there will be no peace. Killing him outright won't solve the problem though, as he then becomes their greatest martyr.

I wouldn't mind people blowing themselves up in defense of their homeland if they didn't do it in such a cowardly fashion. Knowingly putting your own civiliation population at risk and intentionally targeting the enemy's civilians shows me your true character.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Subtle difference in target selection. Israel doesn't intentionally target civilians for effect, it targets terrorists hiding out in civilian areas.

Hiding in civillian areas? are there designated terrorist only areas in the palestinian ghetto? You say that Isreal doesnt intentionally target civillians for effect (which is debatable, but you must concede it does absoluetly nothing to try and minimize civillian deaths.

 

[Jon_in_london]

What makes Palestinian suicide bombers terrorists and not militants/freedom fighters is the simple fact that military targets are free and open to attack, but instead they choose civilian targets in crowded areas to maximize casualties. What makes the Palestinians as a whole look really bad is their popular support of Arafat who supports these methods.

Military targets are also attacked. Arafat has often condemned suicide bombings out of hand. Where do you get this 'Arafat supports terror' stuff anyway?

I wouldn't mind people blowing themselves up in defense of their homeland if they didn't do it in such a cowardly fashion. Knowingly putting your own civiliation population at risk and intentionally targeting the enemy's civilians shows me your true character.

Yes I agree that the Isrealis are very cowardly, using F16s to fire missiles into civillian areas. etc etc...

 

[Grammatron]

Sure. And Isreal doesnt kill civillians either.

Woopdeedoo lets kill Arafat. Then everything will be just peachy.

Please read what my post before distorting it completely and utterly. I never said Israel doesn't kill civilians I said that Palestine TARGETS civilians. If you can't see a difference between launching a missiles into a house where a known terrorist lives and ACCIDENTALLY killing someone or putting on a bomb, going to a crowded market/cafe/hotel/bus and blowing up civilians just terrorize them then I am very sorry for you.

 

[Furious]

Military targets are also attacked. Arafat has often condemned suicide bombings out of hand. Where do you get this 'Arafat supports terror' stuff anyway?

Not saying military targets aren't attacked. It is the blatant targetting of civilians for effect I have an issue with.

While I concede Arafat doesn't support civilian targets in his speeches, you have to agree he is either unwilling or unable to stop them either. Given that you don't support Israel's methods of protecting its civilians and Arafat's inability to do so, how do you propose stopping bombings of Israeli civilians? I've yet to hear anyone answer that question adequately.

Also, I meant to highlight the method of "kill something, and then hide among the populace" as being supported by Arafat more than his condoning civilian killing. While he may not support the civilian side of the targetting, I bet he still supports the hit-and-hide methods against military targets. Are you saying Israel shouldn't defend against attacks on military targets?

Hiding in civillian areas? are there designated terrorist only areas in the palestinian ghetto? You say that Isreal doesnt intentionally target civillians for effect (which is debatable, but you must concede it does absoluetly nothing to try and minimize civillian deaths.

Fine, I'll concede Israel is cavalier with Palestinian civilians. You have to concede it isn't killing civilians to make itself internationally legitimate or popular with its fellow Jewish allies and that a vast majority of civilian deaths occur when a terrorist is the overt target.

As for designated terrorist areas in the Palestinian ghetto, you highlighted my issue. They are knowingly putting their own civilians at risk by not separating themselves and becoming completely legitimate military targets.

Why are hiding among the civilian population? Because they know damn well that to separate themselves would mean death, and no one in the international community would give a rat's ass. Very few people care that Israel is killing terrorists, it is how Israel screws up and kill civilians (intentionally or not is something we'll just have to disagree on I suspect) that other countries get upset.


I am perfectly fine with guerilla type warfare of hiding in the hills or forests. It is the use of human shielding I despise.

Fair enough assessment?

 

[espritch]

Cleopatra:

Come-on espritch from all the threads about Arafat you chose this one to post, a thread that is about an editorial of a newspaper and it has a provocative title.

You just showed how much you care.

Do you agree with the contention of the Jerusalem Post editorial that Arafat should be killed? If so, why do you see turning him into a martyr as helping the situation?

Do you agree with the assertion from the article that the “jihad against us is being fuelled by the perception that Israel is blocked from taking decisive action to defend itself”? What kind of decisive action do you think they’re referring to? Are they just talking about Arafat?

If, on the other hand, you don’t agree with the contents of the editorial, then why castigate me for pointing out the absurdity of it?

hgc:

Ah, you agree that it doesn't do any good to the Palestinian cause, but do you agree that it's the wrong thing to do morally?

Yes, I think it’s morally wrong. Why would you even ask such a question?

I also notice your clever bit of data selection above. There were 2 bombings the other day, one targeting a cafe -- not filled with soldiers.

Nothing particularly clever about it, just a rather stupid oversight on my part. Proves I shouldn’t post too far past my bed time.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Cleopatra
Wait for a moment and Unique and the other "usual suspects"...

Suspected of what? Having an opinion based on facts? Is that not allowed where you come from?

In case you hadn't noticed people do not have to be citizens of a country before they are allowed to read factual material and come to an opinion about the antics of that country. It is what is known as free speech.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Furious
It is the blatant targetting of civilians for effect I have an issue with.

Then you will presumably have no hesitation in condeming without equivocation all states which assassinate people without trial in a way that guarantees innocent children are killed?

Do you agree that it is wrong in a democracy to murder people without trial?

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Grammatron
I said that Palestine TARGETS civilians.

Please provide evidence to support your claim that Palestine as an entity TARGETS civilians.

Israel deliberately targets suspects - please note suspects, not people tried under the rules of law - with air launched missiles in circumstances which routinely guarantee the death of innocent children. In the opinion of many around the world those actions terrorise the ordinary people of Palestine.

The people of Israel should not be attacked and neither should innocent people in Palestine.

 

[Ben Shniper]

Arafat must die

Arafat is a tyrant, a terrorist, and a popular one because he's seen to target just Jews and Muslims, who Christians think he leaves alone. Never mind that he has trained several terrorists who ended up in Al Queda, one of whom (a palestinian trained under Arafat's PLO) was the mastermind behind the September 11th attacks (Al Sheik).

My point is not that Arafat is directly or indirectly responsible for September 11th, although the 2000 deaths in Israel recently on both sides was entirely his doing. My point is that all terrorism is quite closely connected. Even the IRA is known to have cross-trained with Palestinian terrorists, and just as the Americans used to support Osama when he was fighting the Russians, Arafat was trained by the Russians when he was in the PLO.

Not killing Arafat, while killing Osama bin Laden and Saddam is a goal of the Anti-terrorist coalition of Bush, sends a double message. There are no "good terrorists" and "bad terrorists". Arafat is not a "reformed terrorist". He has sowed grief all over Israel for the last two and a half years, and it is time for him to pay the price.

"But he didn't do it"? Of COURSE HE DID. Al Asqa martyr brigades was his own organization, directly reporting to Arafat by their own admission. And Hamas was protected by Arafat, who fought back politically and physically whenever Hamas was attacked, no matter how unquestionably evil the Hamas targets were, he even was caught tipping off Hamas as to Israeli planned strikes.

Kill him.

-Ben

 

[Gem]

he even was caught tipping off Hamas as to Israeli planned strikes.

You mean the IDF tells Arafat where they're going to strike? No wonder Isreal wants to kill him, he knows exactly where and when Isreal is going to strike!

Seriously though: I think this is just loud talk, like North Korea did with their Nuclear program. I seriously doubt Isreal will actually kill him, now that people are rallying with him.

Gem

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I am perfectly fine with guerilla type warfare of hiding in the hills or forests. It is the use of human shielding I despise.

Fair enough assessment? [/B]

I think it invites the response "What do you think the Palestinians should do? What's the moral way for them?".

It seems to me they haven't got many great options.

Give up violence, raise bountiful gardens in the fertile soil, build a few factories and become the next Japan?

Lay down their arms and hope Israel gives them back their houses?

Take up arms against a vastly superior army in open conflict?

It's an absolute hell of a mess, and there are neither simple solutions nor simple moral judgements as to who is a bad guy and who is a good guy.

It's not going to be a nice part of the world to live in unless both the Palestinian and Israeli ruling elites undergo some major changes.