With a cease-fire like this, who needs war?

[Mycroft]

Why?

Because it's so much easier to be "fair" and "conciliatory" to an opponent who's been reduced to nothing. You give up very little of economic value and there is no physical danger at all.

I believe if the aborigionals were strong, numerous, united, and opposing white Australians with organized violence, this 1992 "mabo" judicial decision would never have happened.

Which is not to say such reconciliations should not be attempted, I'm just pointing out Australia has one huge advantage that doesn't apply in the Middle East.

 

[Darat]

Because it's so much easier to be "fair" and "conciliatory" to an opponent who's been reduced to nothing. You give up very little of economic value and there is no physical danger at all.

I believe if the aborigionals were strong, numerous, united, and opposing white Australians with organized violence, this 1992 "mabo" judicial decision would never have happened.

Which is not to say such reconciliations should not be attempted, I'm just pointing out Australia has one huge advantage that doesn't apply in the Middle East.

But even given all that shouldn't we be looking for anything that may help provide a less bloodthirsty route to a lasting peace? Do you not think any of the principles of "mabo" could be applied to the current Israel and Palestinian situation?

 

[zenith-nadir]

But even given all that shouldn't we be looking for anything that may help provide a less bloodthirsty route to a lasting peace? Do you not think any of the principles of "mabo" could be applied to the current Israel and Palestinian situation?

No. Because the charter of Hamas and Islamic Jihad calls for the total destruction of Israel. They are not the Aboriginies of Australia, they are terror groups. Nor are they interested in the slightest in any of the principles of "mabo".

That is why the Palestinian Authority has the obligation to dismantle these groups as they operate in violation of international law and the Palestinian Authority's wishes.

[edited to add]

Hamas charter

- Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it

- Israel, Judaism and Jews challenge Islam and the Moslem people. "May the cowards never sleep."

- Article Six: The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine...

- The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders.

 

[webfusion]

Watch and learn, grasshopper

The Israel Air Force attacked on Wednesday several launchers of Qassam rockets in the refugee camp of Jabalya north of Gaza City. The launchers, ready to fire rockets, were hit.

Now, this is the way it's gonna be ---- Israel is going to bring to the mat the Islamic Jihad and HAMAS (and FATAH and PFLP and anyone else who gets it into their heads to break the cease-fire). Right now, the IDF is holding back and keeping a low profile. After the Gaza evacuation (August 15th-25th) then all IDF restraints will be lifted and I pity the fools who wish to continue these terror tactics.

"If needed, Israel will return to the Gaza Strip after the disengagement for several days in order to put an end to terror," Israeli FM Silvan Shalom said.

Call it what you will. The Palestinians are at a crossroads and they probably will take the wrong fork in the road. Fortunately, as it always has been, the Israeli Air Force will be right there, prepared to bomb that road into oblivion.

"Stupidity: Doing the same mistake over and over again and expecting different results."
-Albert Einstein.

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

I think that a show of 'good faith' has long been needed, but not forthcoming. Eg, no settlements would be an excellent start. Gush Emunim has been encouraged and funded in it's expansion for years, rather than discouraged. Now that Sharon has decided Gaza is untenable, he is trying to pull out. The actual result of that decision is yet to be seen, but at the same time, other land is being stolen in Jerusalem.

To be fair, you have to act fair.

The circular argument on terror has also been pointed out before. The occupation continues, because it is resisted.

Really, AUP, you persist in talking of things like fairness, when some groups, apparently majority ones, haven't the slightest interest in any form of fairness. When it comes to Islamic Jihad and other perversions of their culture, the only solution is to kill them. Perhaps your fairness can have an effect on those who have not yet taken that step into mindlessness, but those who have are not ones one can talk to, IMHO.

 

[Mycroft]

But even given all that shouldn't we be looking for anything that may help provide a less bloodthirsty route to a lasting peace? Do you not think any of the principles of "mabo" could be applied to the current Israel and Palestinian situation?

I think we should always be looking for a less bloodthirsty route to a lasting peace, but I wonder if you might be looking at the principles of mabo with some false impressions.

My understanding of the Mabo ruling of 1992 is that it recognized land rights for aborigionals who could claim "title" to land even when they didn't have written title to the land based on previous historic useage.

The problem is this is not at all comparable to the situation in Israel, where the Holy Land had been ruled by the Ottoman Empire for some 600 years, and the locals had very similar concepts of land ownership as did the Jewish immigrants comming from Europe. The immigrants didn't colonize the land as did the first whites who went to Australia, they purchased the land they put their farms and towns on.

Essentially colonization is Europeans going to places like America, Australia or Africa and imposing European customs of land ownership on land inhabited by primitive cultures. That wasn't the case in the Holy Land, where they already had similar customs of land ownership, and the natives already had all the same aspects of civilization the immigrants did.

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

To be fair, you have to act fair.

Where I see you as having a double standard (and I can't comment on any conclusion we might draw about a person who holds different standards for people of different ethnic groups) is you only have this expectation of fairness from the Israelis. It never bothers you when the Palestinian-Arabs are not "fair."

A person who was fair would expect fairness from both sides. They would expect boths sides to maintain a cease fire. They would expect both sides to live up to their agreements. They would expect both sides to work towards peace. Someone who puts that obligation on only one side...well, that's not an honorable disagreement, but one that involves fault.

Whilst your wording is less inflammatory then in the past you are still persisting in discussing your personal opinions of another Member rather then issues relevant to this section of the forum. This is your first warning, desist in discussing your opinion of another Member and use this section of the forum as it is intended i.e. to discuss " Politics, Current Events, and Social Issues". If you continue despite this warning further sanctions may be applied which may even include suspension.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[demon]

Yes, with a cease fire like this, who needs war?
Good old Avi Shlaim right on the money as usual...

quote:
Condoleezza Rice hailed the understanding between Israel and the Palestinian Authority on the need to destroy the homes of the 8,000 Jewish settlers in Gaza as a historic step on the road to peace. This is a fatuous statement by one of the most vacuous US secretaries of state of the postwar era.
American foreign policy has habitually displayed double standards towards the Middle East: one standard towards Israel and one towards the Arabs. To give just one example, the US effected regime change in Baghdad in three weeks but has failed to dismantle a single Jewish settlement in the occupied territories in 38 years.

The two main items on America's current agenda for the region are democracy for the Arabs and a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. America, however, insists on democracy only for its Arab opponents, not for its friends. As for the peace process, it is essentially a mechanism by which Israel and America try to impose a solution on the Palestinians. American hypocrisy is nothing new. But with Dr Rice it has gone beyond chutzpah.
With Ariel Sharon, by contrast, what you see is what you get. He has always been in the destruction business, not the construction business. As minister of defence in 1982, Sharon preferred to destroy the settlement town of Yamit in Sinai rather than hand it to Egypt as a reward for signing a peace treaty with Israel. George Bush once described his friend Sharon as "a man of peace". In truth, Sharon is a brutal thug and land-grabber.

Sharon is also the unilateralist par excellence. The road map issued by the quartet (US, UN, EU and Russia) in the aftermath of the Iraq war envisaged three stages leading to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel by the end of 2005. Sharon wrecked the road map, notably by continuing to expand Jewish settlements on the West Bank and building an illegal wall that cuts deep into Palestinian territory.

*********He presented his plan for disengagement from Gaza as a contribution to the road map; in fact it is almost the exact opposite. The road map calls for negotiations between the two sides, leading to a two-state solution. Sharon refuses to negotiate and acts to redraw unilaterally the borders of Greater Israel. As he told rightwing supporters: "My plan is difficult for the Palestinians, a fatal blow. There's no Palestinian state in a unilateral move." The real purpose of the move is to derail the road map and kill the comatose peace process. For Sharon, withdrawal from Gaza is the prelude not to a permanent settlement but to the annexation of substantial sections of the West Bank**********.......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1511702,00.html

 

[zenith-nadir]

Sharon is also the unilateralist par excellence. The road map issued by the quartet (US, UN, EU and Russia) in the aftermath of the Iraq war envisaged three stages leading to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel by the end of 2005. Sharon wrecked the road map, notably by continuing to expand Jewish settlements on the West Bank and building an illegal wall that cuts deep into Palestinian territory.

Here are the first twelve words of the roadmap because obviously we cannot rely on the "Guardian's" interpretation of it.

A Performance-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

PHASE I: Ending Terror and Violence, Normalizing Palestinian Life, and Building Palestinian Institutions

In Phase I, the Palestinians immediately undertake an unconditional cessation of violence according to the steps outlined below; such action should be accompanied by supportive measures undertaken by Israel.

Since there has been no unconditional cessation of violence on the Palestinian side I find it hard to accept that Sharon is to blame for wrecking the roadmap. Yet the Guardian & Demon blame Sharon...


[edited to add Sharon's evil doings... ]

Gunmen Disrupt Lecture by Palestinian PM - June 22, 2005

BALATA REFUGEE CAMP, West Bank - Gunmen in a refugee camp opened fire Wednesday, disrupting a lecture from the Palestinian prime minister about the need to end violence.

"This country needs order, needs quiet," Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia shouted, repeating a theme he has pressed for weeks. But even as he spoke, gunfire rang out, startling Qureia and putting his bodyguards on high alert.

After Qureia's speech, gunmen opened fire again and set off an explosive device about 300 yards from his convoy. No one was injured. Qureia was whisked away.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

Really, AUP, you persist in talking of things like fairness, when some groups, apparently majority ones, haven't the slightest interest in any form of fairness. When it comes to Islamic Jihad and other perversions of their culture, the only solution is to kill them. Perhaps your fairness can have an effect on those who have not yet taken that step into mindlessness, but those who have are not ones one can talk to, IMHO.

Winding back the occupation must be a part of any ceasefire.

Officially it is not even a ceasefire, still less a peace process, but the "period of calm" that crept into being after Yasser Arafat's death in November brought a sharp drop in killings and hopes of better things.

....

Mr Abbas in turn accused Mr Sharon of failing to deliver any real improvement to the daily lives of Palestinians living under Israeli military control.

Palestinians and Israeli human rights groups say that despite the sharp drop in violence only a small number of Israel's hated West Bank checkpoints have been removed and in many areas of the occupied territories restrictions on civilian movements have significantly worsened.

Settlement has accelerated in the West Bank and the Israeli security barrier, which runs through the West Bank, is severely disrupting the lives of Palestinians. There has been no full-scale release of prisoners and Israeli troops have continued to arrest suspected militants in the West Bank throughout the period of calm, killing several in the process.

According to reports from the summit, Mr Abbas told Mr Sharon that Israel's failure to make concessions meant the Palestinian Authority was too weak to move against militants.

"You don't give me anything, because there is terror, and I can't do anything against terror because you don't give me anything," the Israeli daily Haaretz quoted him.

So, it is officially not even a ceasefire, according to this article, but a 'period of calm', which is indeed the way it started.

A ceasfire must include the equivalent from Israel, a relaxation of the occupation. To impose conditions on one side only is not fair.

As a previous post indicates, many Palestinians die, but their deaths are just not front page news. Those deaths still happen, and count to the Palestinians.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/middl...east-truce-fade/2005/06/22/1119321790018.html
....

 

[a_unique_person]

Because it's so much easier to be "fair" and "conciliatory" to an opponent who's been reduced to nothing. You give up very little of economic value and there is no physical danger at all.

I believe if the aborigionals were strong, numerous, united, and opposing white Australians with organized violence, this 1992 "mabo" judicial decision would never have happened.

Which is not to say such reconciliations should not be attempted, I'm just pointing out Australia has one huge advantage that doesn't apply in the Middle East.

The apparent acts of Israel are to produce just that state in the Palestinians, only they won't give in yet.

I am not proud at all of Australias past in regard to Aboriginals, it is a great shame on the nation that has yet to be faced up to and reconciled.

Conservatives are the ones who say it had nothing to do with them, just forget the past, and, indeed, it was all sweetness and light, there were no massacres.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: what response are you seeking?

The IDF responded ---- it specifically denied the charges made by the New York-based HRW. Israeli soldiers aren't given orders to wantonly kill and shoot willy-nilly. They take great care to refrain from any "collateral damage" when engaging in combat. ◊◊◊◊ happens, however, in war.

Yes, and the last organisation you want investigating something is itself, as the Australian army has learned. http://www.theage.com.au/news/Edito...ralian-military/2005/06/17/1118869092840.html

The natural response is 'it's not our fault'. It's not an "israeli" problem, it's a systemic one.

A lengthy Senate committee of inquiry into the effectiveness of Australia's military justice system has found that the administration of justice within the Australian Defence Force is at the point of collapse. This was the finding in relation to both its disciplinary and administrative functions. In a unanimous cross-party report, the committee has recommended sweeping changes. In effect it has called for the dismemberment of the current investigatory and judicial functions within the military and their replacement with a whole new system. It has recommended the establishment of a Permanent Military Court, staffed by independently appointed judges, and an independent director of military prosecutions. It has also called for the formation of a statutorily independent grievance and complaint review body

Now, it might be instructive to realize the Israelis are going to respond with less precision and pinpoint-fire in the near future (August) should they come under attack by Islamic terrorists during the Gaza withdrawal. I suggest you take a look at the warnings issued today by Israel Brigadier-General (Res.) Eival Giladi, the head of the Coordination and Strategy team of the Prime Minister's Office.

"If pinpoint response proves insufficient, we may have to use weaponry that causes major collateral damage, including bombing by helicopters and jets, with mounting danger to surrounding people."

============================
Screw HRW.
This is their claim:
"During the course of its fieldwork in 2003, Human Rights Watch researched some thirty cases of alleged wrongdoing by members of the IDF."
30 cases. Big effing deal. From that they extrapolate the IDF is "promoting impunity" -- are they kidding or what?
Since the Palestinian intifada began in 2000, Israeli forces have killed or seriously injured thousands of Palestinians who weren't taking part in the hostilities, Human Rights Watch said in its 126-page report.
126 pages and not one single mention of the thousands of Israelis NOT TAKING PART IN HOSTILITIES (riding busses, eating in Piza restaurants, going to discos, etc) who were killed or seriously injured by terrorists.
Rachel Corrie they have written about in great detail.
Tom Hurndall they have devoted much time to.

Where are the mentions of these innocent dead Israeli non-combatants? Their names are already forgotten by the world, ignored by HRW.
What about their rights?

Yael Orbach

Aryeh Nagar

Ronen Rubenov

Itzik Buzaglo

=================================

09:19 Yevgeni Reider, killed in Mon. (6-20) terror shooting to be buried Wed. evening (Army Radio)
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw=Yevgeni+Reider&itemNo=590675

There has never been any shortage of information on Israeli deaths, nor contention that they have happened, the issue here is that when Palestinians die, it is often is if it never happened. If you want a balanced point of view on the issue, then you have to have all the facts.

 

[Mycroft]

historical revisionism at its best

Winding back the occupation must be a part of any ceasefire...


...
A ceasfire must include the equivalent from Israel, a relaxation of the occupation. To impose conditions on one side only is not fair.

If you had been following the links provided in this thread, you would know that Israel has been "winding back the occupation." They have been withdrawing from territory, closing checkpoints, releasing prisoners, and most recently have offered to withdraw from two more cities.

How is it that you don't know that?

The apparent acts of Israel are to produce just that state in the Palestinians, only they won't give in yet.

Nonsense. If they were, they would be slaughtering them by the hundreds of thousands, like your ancestors did.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: historical revisionism at its best

If you had been following the links provided in this thread, you would know that Israel has been "winding back the occupation." They have been withdrawing from territory, closing checkpoints, releasing prisoners, and most recently have offered to withdraw from two more cities.

How is it that you don't know that?




Nonsense. If they were, they would be slaughtering them by the hundreds of thousands, like your ancestors did.

There were only a few hundred thousand to start with.


As links have shown previously, the actions of Israel appear to be.

a) Suppress the news of deaths, harrasment and land theft, as the HRW report and other sources show, and disclaim any responsibilty for them.

b) Harrass and intimidate the Palestinians, bit by bit, plus the mass ethnic cleansing at the creation of Israel. A massacre is not what is happening, but the gradual reduction of Palestinian land, to the point where they are in a virtual open air prison, has been used instead.

Eg, poison wells, stock, steal land, reduce children, sniper attacks, beatings, to malnutrition because of the lost land.

I am not at all proud of Australias past, nor with it's present, in regard to aboriginals, but I am prepared to admit that.

There are numerous checkpoints that have not been closed, that serve no purpose in protecting entry to Israel. I would have expected all of these to be closed as a corresponding response to the initial observance of the cease fire.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

AUP,

It's because your rhetoric is so over the top is why I think your arguing with dishonest motives. You've essentially just accused the Israelis of secretly planning a genocide, and you expect to be taken serously?

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

AUP,

It's because your rhetoric is so over the top is why I think your arguing with dishonest motives. You've essentially just accused the Israelis of secretly planning a genocide, and you expect to be taken serously?

I have called it a genocide in the past, and been convinced by debate to not call it that, fair enough. Genocide is a very specific term, and what is happening to the Palestinians is something that I do not know there is a word to describe. The most similar example would be the bantustans of South Africa, or, as I have described it, a large open air prison.

If you are calling the logical result of these actions a genocide, that is your deduction.

The evidence is all there, and I have provided links from reputable sources, in recent posts.

Settlers harrassing Palestinians, poisoning stock, land and wells :- documented.
Theft of land and subsidising of settlements :- documented.
Inadequate internal controls of IDF actions :- documented.
Denial of deaths at hands of IDF :- documented.

The thing you seem to do is to extrapolate that because these things are done by Israelis, I am accusing all Israelis of being complicit, and all Jews. That has never been my claim. Many of the sources for my claims are Haaretz, for example. If you read it, there are numerous articles by Israelis decrying what is happening due to the occupation, and attacking quite vociferously the extremist settlers.

You seem to think that I don't care about Israeli deaths, but, as I have stated many times, I would never be happier than to see this whole, terrible process end. No Israeli deaths, no Palestinian deaths.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

I have called it a genocide in the past, and been convinced by debate to not call it that, fair enough. Genocide is a very specific term, and what is happening to the Palestinians is something that I do not know there is a word to describe. The most similar example would be the bantustans of South Africa, or, as I have described it, a large open air prison.

Which again, wasn't until the Intifada. Which is now over, and all the restrictions you describe are being rolled back. Why do you refuse to acknowlege that?

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

Which again, wasn't until the Intifada. Which is now over, and all the restrictions you describe are being rolled back. Why do you refuse to acknowlege that?

"Are Being" is debateable, according to the article I linked to earlier, a few checkpoints gone, then the process stopped. That is all I claimed, I did not say none, the claim was a few, and then none. It apparent expectation of the Palestinians, and a reasonable one in my opinion, the reasonable response to the initial observance of the ceasefire would have been all internal checkpoints closed, with only the checkpoints to Israel itself still being manned, which would have been entirely reasonable.

Ceasfire <=> cease internal checkpoints.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

AUP,

It's because your rhetoric is so over the top is why I think your arguing with dishonest motives. You've essentially just accused the Israelis of secretly planning a genocide, and you expect to be taken serously?

As for 'Over the top', what happened in Tasmania to the aboriginals there was an act of genocide, that removed all full blood aboriginals living there from the face of the earth. According to conservatives here, that is the "Black Armband" view of history, and to be derided at all costs, as 'too over the top'.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: historical revisionism at its best

Which again, wasn't until the Intifada. Which is now over, and all the restrictions you describe are being rolled back. Why do you refuse to acknowlege that?

You missed this bit

The thing you seem to do is to extrapolate that because these things are done by Israelis, I am accusing all Israelis of being complicit, and all Jews. That has never been my claim. Many of the sources for my claims are Haaretz, for example. If you read it, there are numerous articles by Israelis decrying what is happening due to the occupation, and attacking quite vociferously the extremist settlers.