Wall a huge failure

[Jim Bowen]

So if the Palestinian Authority refuses to arrest and stop terrorists and the Palestinian people refuse to stop terrorists then Israel has the responsibility to stop them. And they did, by not allowing them to sneak into Israel disguised with Palestinian workers.

It doesn't alter the fact that the innocent are still being punished with the guilty. I wonder how many lives this heavy handed policy has saved and what the cost has been to both the Israeli and Palestinian economies? Perhaps being more selective in who is punished would be most cost effective?

Jim Bowen

 

[Elind]

Exactly.

Elind, I know you've been critical of Israel in the past, but you've also been critical of the Palestinian-Arabs. This observation I made wasn't directed at you. Rather it was an observation about a thought process I used to have, and that I observe in others. Overall, I think on many issues you and I are very close.



Let me clarify:

I also find fault within the culture. I don't think these problems were created from outside. I also believe the religious fanaticism is terribly destructive and will take them nowhere but down.

What I find racist (or bigoted, if you prefer) are those that fail to condemn this religious fanaticism that leads to terrorism. Those that refuse to recognize the role this fanaticism has played in prolonging this conflict. Those that deny that in order to achieve peace, the Palestinian-Arabs must rise above this fanaticism and victimhood to become partners in creating an environment where peace can happen. Those that expect peace to be something created by the Israelis and the Israelis alone, regardless of what the Palestinian-Arabs do.

Time and time again in these forums (and in other places) we see the argument that terrorism, suicide bombing, sniping, etc. are the only options available to the Palestinian-Arabs. The Fool, AUP, Jim Bowen and even Daveoc are guilty of holding these people to a lesser standard of behavior that is applied to every other population in the world. The racism I speak of is not condemning them for terrorism, but in being incapable of expecting anything else of them. They are human beings, as such they are capable of rising above fanaticism (as other cultures have done).



Exactly! In recognizing these many choices to do different, you are not guilty of the racism I describe.

Well, perhaps we do agree on essentials after all, however I am not as kind as you. I do not think that these kinds of changes come readily from within, at least not in our lifetime (it has already been more). They already know that they have choices to peace, but they (or those in control) have decided against those choices repeatedly. They will not change by being nice, any more than the Taliban, Osama or Saddam or, for that matter, their mirror images in the most orthodox jews, would.

 

[Elind]

It doesn't alter the fact that the innocent are still being punished with the guilty. I wonder how many lives this heavy handed policy has saved and what the cost has been to both the Israeli and Palestinian economies? Perhaps being more selective in who is punished would be most cost effective?

Jim Bowen

Is that a realistic comment? More selective, less selective, according to who? The Guardian, The Independent, The New York Times, other armchair generals?

 

[Jim Bowen]

Merely stopping all Palestinians from entering Israel is hardly the intelligent use of selective force. It is merely an arbitary measure that doesn't single out the terrorists from the majority of Palestinians.

Jim Bowen

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Jim Bowen
Merely stopping all Palestinians from entering Israel is hardly the intelligent use of selective force. It is merely an arbitary measure that doesn't single out the terrorists from the majority of Palestinians.

You're right. Stopping Palestinian-Arabs from entering Israel is not selective force, and it doesn't single out the terrorists from the other Palestinian-Arabs.

The question is; is singling out the terrorist from the other Palestinian-Arabs a realistic goal?

We have this weird double-standard here where Israel is supposed to act as though there is no war going on. Terrorists are supposed to be treated as criminals, with Israel behaving as police. Everyone is supposed to be presumed innocent until the results of some investigation prove otherwise, and then they're supposed to get a trial.

The Palestinian-Arabs, on the other hand, are fighting a war. It's understood that they will attack any target of vulnerability without any criticism. Even in fighting a war, the rules of war don't apply to them. They can target civilians, hide amongst their own civilians, use civilians for cover, use children...whatever.

Originally posted by Jim Bowen Jim Bowen

Denny Crane

 

[zenith-nadir]

Merely stopping all Palestinians from entering Israel is hardly the intelligent use of selective force. It is merely an arbitary measure that doesn't single out the terrorists from the majority of Palestinians. Jim Bowen

To you it's arbitrary, to Israelis it' a matter of life and death.

 

[a_unique_person]

To you it's arbitrary, to Israelis it' a matter of life and death.

I don't know if you realise it, but more Palestinians die than Israelis.

 

[davefoc]

I'm not sure I'm following this. Are people saying that Israel shouldn't be stopping Palestinians from working in Israel while some Palestinians are crossing into Israel disguised as guest workers with the intent to commit suicide bombings?

This is one action by Israel that strikes me as legitimate. If Mexicans were coming into California commiting terrrorist attacks I think I'd be pretty much in favor of shutting the border down.

Of course I'd be pretty much opposed to setting up American settlements in Mexico to be defended by the American army. And I'd be pretty much opposed to building a wall through Mexican villages to protect the American border, but I'd be pretty unhappy with the government if it didn't close the border with Mexico if Mexicans were coming in and blowing themselves up on buses.

 

[Elind]

Merely stopping all Palestinians from entering Israel is hardly the intelligent use of selective force. It is merely an arbitary measure that doesn't single out the terrorists from the majority of Palestinians.

Jim Bowen

All Palestinians are not stopped. Either you don't understand the realities, or I don't understand your point.

 

[zenith-nadir]

I don't know if you realise it, but more Palestinians die than Israelis.

When a suicide bomber targets Israeli civilians on a bus or in a restaurant or a corner market that is not freedom fighting, that is not justice, that is not fighting the occupation. It is deliberate premeditated murder of innocent civilians AND suicide. Talk about a self-defeatist ideology.

 

[Elind]

I don't know if you realise it, but more Palestinians die than Israelis.

And if the reverse were true, what would be your point then?

 

[Atlas]

... Of course I'd be pretty much opposed to setting up American settlements in Mexico to be defended by the American army. ...

Not a far fetched notion. The Mexican American War started over disputed territiorys just North of the Rio Grande. People who don't like GW Bush probably would have had problems James Polk too.

Mexican-American War

Texas was annexed by the United States in 1845. The move angered Mexico because they had never officially recognized Texan independence. General Zachary Taylor was sent to Texas with a large army to provide protection. Two companies of infantry from Fort Scott were included in Taylor's contingent of men. In August of 1845, Taylor arrived in Corpus Christi on the Nueces River. Mexico claimed that the Nueces was the southern boundary of Texas, while Texas claimed land all the way to the Rio Grande.

When Taylor took position on the north banks of the Rio Grande in the spring of 1846, his army proved to be too great a target for the Mexican Army. A portion of the Mexican Army crossed the Rio Grande and engaged a body of eighty dragoons, killing eleven of them and capturing most of the rest. Claiming that "American blood had been shed on American soil ," President James K. Polk asked Congress for a declaration of war. War was declared on May 13, 1846.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Not a far fetched notion. The Mexican American War started over disputed territiorys just North of the Rio Grande.

The West Bank and Gaza weren't annexed by Israel as was the case for Texas. Israel's original borders were "X". In 1948 the Arab armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon invaded and lost. So the borders became "Y" per the armistice agreements signed in 1949. Then in 67 the Arabs lost another war and Israel's borders became "Z". Those are the borders we know today.

 

[Elind]

Of course I'd be pretty much opposed to setting up American settlements in Mexico to be defended by the American army.

No doubt, but I believe that the Mexicans welcome Americans who bring money and resources and would like to settle in Mexico, and the American army is not required to protect them, by virtue of that welcome. The analogy is irrelevant, unless you are slyly suggesting that the Palestinians are jackasses for not considering their own interests, and that of their children, above their inherent anti Jewish bigotry (or racism, as Mycroft would say. )

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

originally posted by Mycroft
They can target civilians, hide amongst their own civilians, use civilians for cover, use children...whatever.

Does any of this remind you of the Stern Gang for instance or was their terrorism somehow different?

 

[Jim Bowen]

Ref the number of Palestinians being stopped from entering Israel, I was following wisdom received from ZN, who claims on an earlier page, that from 120,000 entrants it is now an 'handfull'.

It strikes me that a less arbitrary policy would help to ameliorate the serious hardship imposed on ordinary Palestinians by this policy. Heck, it might even show Israel in more of a favourable light to the Palestinians for once.

Jim Bowen

 

[Elind]

Ref the number of Palestinians being stopped from entering Israel, I was following wisdom received from ZN, who claims on an earlier page, that from 120,000 entrants it is now an 'handfull'.

It strikes me that a less arbitrary policy would help to ameliorate the serious hardship imposed on ordinary Palestinians by this policy. Heck, it might even show Israel in more of a favourable light to the Palestinians for once.

Jim Bowen

They have done that in the past, and had employers murdered by their employees not to mention turning into bombers, so now they import workers from other countries instead.

As to doing what they DID do not many years ago, so as "to show Israel in a more favorable light"; that sounds like a remarkably naive statement and it's hard to respond to without assuming you just arrived from Vega.

 

[Atlas]

Ref the number of Palestinians being stopped from entering Israel, I was following wisdom received from ZN, who claims on an earlier page, that from 120,000 entrants it is now an 'handfull'.

It strikes me that a less arbitrary policy would help to ameliorate the serious hardship imposed on ordinary Palestinians by this policy. Heck, it might even show Israel in more of a favourable light to the Palestinians for once.

Any idea how that policy would look? Obviously it would take into account that Palestinians still bent on killing Israelis would try to convince those able to come across into doing something for them.

The thing is when you know people are trying every which way they can to kill you, it builds a kind of paranoia into the society. That is unhealthy and must be dealt with. There are only a few ways to deal with it.

1) Kill the enemy trying to kill you.
2) Take away all their weapons so they cannot kill you.
3) Lock them out so they can't get at you.

Until the Palestinians stop their violence and show that they want to live in peaceful coexistence Israel has to protect itself against them. Israel cannot even pull out of Gaza unmolested and that is something that the Palestinians want them to do. At some point it stops being Israel's fault that the Palestinians exist in this madness.

The new Palestinian leadership has to show that it wants to act like a peaceful nation before Israel has to treat it like one.

 

[Jim Bowen]

Or of course one could address the causes of the hatred, find a way of living together without fear that the other party will blow you up. For that both parties must be willing to give.

Jim Bowen

 

[Atlas]

Or of course one could address the causes of the hatred, find a way of living together without fear that the other party will blow you up. For that both parties must be willing to give.

But in this case the causes of hatred go back to Abraham. That's why that approach is flawed. The path to peace must be preceded by both sides wanting peace.

I think the Israelis want peace more than the Palestinians because they have a state to lose. Peace is so much more prosperous for a free state than perpetual violence. The Palestinians have been educated to a different idea, they have nothing and nothing to lose. They bought into a malignant dream that keeps receding further from their grasp. Hopefully new leadership will recognize that and come with an olive branch instead of a Qassam missile.