Fear of peace will be the death of Israel

[ting]

Fear of peace will be the death of Israel

[Part One of Two]

SHEIKH JARRAH, Jerusalem - As the grandson of anarchists, I've always had a soft spot in my heart for fanatics. Expressions of extremism, and passionately reasoned, exquisitely twisted world views make me feel, how shall I put this, at home.

So it was with a certain relish that I approached the cover story of a recent issue of Commentary, "The Deadly Price of Pursuing Peace," written as it was by a talented colleague and friend, Evelyn Gordon.

The thrust of the piece, which Commentary Editor John Podhoretz understandably calls "groundbreaking," is that Israel's international standing has plummeted to an unprecedented low - and the number of Palestinians killed by Israel has concurrently soared - specifically because of Israel's having done much too much for peace.

"The answer is unpleasant to contemplate, but the mounting evidence makes it inescapable," she writes. "It was Israel's very willingness to make concessions for the sake of peace that has produced its current near-pariah status."

The essay has the seamless, compellingly elegant, hyper-lucid, parallel universe logic of a hallucination - or a settlement rooted in the craw of the West Bank. Until I read it, it was difficult for me to comprehend the current runaway-freight recklessness of Israeli authorities and a certain segment of the hard right, bolstered by shady funding from abroad.

It was hard to fathom why Israeli police in this quiet hollow of the Arab half of Jerusalem, would choose to openly flout and violate the rulings of an Israeli court. I was unable to grasp why they would manhandle and arrest non-violent demonstrators - among them the executive director of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel - for protesting the official expulsion from their homes of more than two dozen Palestinian families here, driven out and into the street, so that subsidized and sheltered settlers could move in.

It was beyond my understanding why an Israeli government which views the idea of a Palestinian Right of Return as tantamount to annihilation of the Jewish state, would set a legal precedent that paves the way for just such a right.

Just as I was clueless as to why the Knesset was to vote Wednesday on a bill that would make aiding asylum seekers fleeing African genocide, granting them shelter, medical care, food, a crime subject to up to 20 years in prison.

Or why there were vigorous new campaigns to increase gender segregation at the Western Wall and on public buses, and why women have been arrested and interrogated on suspicion of having worn prayer shawls while praying on their side of a barrier raised so that they would no longer be able to watch their sons' bar mitzvah on the mens' side.

Or why a sudden and ferocious campaign against human rights organizations and charity work agencies in Israel is coinciding with new human rights outrages against Palestinians and foreigners, some of them unable to leave, others forced to.

It was not until I saw the title of the Commentary piece that it all made sense.

The right is terrified of peace. And, in the end, the right's fear of peace will be the death of Israel.

They are afraid of peace, in part, because it threatens the core of what has come to replace other values as the goal of Judaism: permanent settlement of the West Bank. But that is only a part of it.

They are afraid of peace because they are afraid of the world. They dismiss fellow Jews who want to see a two-state solution - a majority of Israelis - as unrealistic, as living in a bubble. The name of the bubble these moderates live in, however, is planet Earth.

The right, meanwhile, wants to wall off Israel as the world's last remaining legally mandated Jewish ghetto. A place where all the rules are different, exit and entry, citizenship and human rights, because the residents within are Jews. A place where non-Jews, dehumanized as congenital Jew-haters, are rendered invisible. A place which, if suffocating and insufferable, still seems safer than the scary world outside.

A place which, because of its walls and its politics and its cowardice, is losing its ability to function as a part of the world, reveling in cheap-shot humiliations of key foreign ambassadors, deliriously proud of its sense that of all the world, including most of its Jews and Israelis - only the right sees the real truth.

This braid of thought was venomously endorsed this week both by an uncharacteristically Kahane-sounding Alan Dershowitz, and the obscenely infantile Im Tirtzu movement. According to them, where Cast Lead was concerned, the real war criminals are Richard Goldstone and Naomi Chazan - two people who are open about their love of Israel, and who have worked their whole adult lives for its well-being.

The fears of the right are not mere devices of rhetoric. The risks of making peace are real. Every bit as real as the risks of failing to make peace.

It all comes down to belief. It comes down to the kind of country the believer wants Israel to be. And for that reason, there is a civil war going on for Israel's soul.

It will not be weaponry that decides this war, but courage. People who care about the direction that Israel is moving, and whose watchword is moderation, would do well to choose one facet of the fight, and join. One place to start, is to support the New Israel Fund and the groups it supports.

Another place to start is this one. At the weekend, challenging the threats of rightist thugs and law-scorning police, the weekly demonstration on behalf of the Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah doubled in size. The police backed down on their vow to break up the protest, and the Kahanists barely showed.

If non-violent peace activism scares the right to this extent, there must be a great deal of power in it.

After all, most Israelis can sense that if peace is to be the enemy, more dangerous even than the threat of war, this is one doomed ghetto.

Things have reached such a devastating point, that for the first time in recent memory, even Ehud Barak is beginning to get it: "The simple truth is, if there is one state" including Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, "it will have to be either binational or undemocratic," Barak told the Herzliya Conference Tuesday.

"If this bloc of millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state."

The fear of peace has left Israel as a country which is prepared for nuclear warfare but not for non-violent protest on behalf of Palestinians. The fear of peace, and the blackmail of the right on behalf of settlement, has contorted Israel into a body which, unable to countenance the perils of treating the sickness of occupation, will eventually be killed by it.

Israel's defense minister, for one, is convinced: "The lack of a solution to the problem of border demarcation within the historic Land of Israel - and not an Iranian bomb - is the most serious threat to Israel's future."
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147257.html

Sorry about another Israel related thread. I thought this article was so interesting that I had to post it.

So RoyB if it's too much for you, send me a PM and I can give you some Norwegian news. I think there was a car accident today due too it snowing.;-)

[seraosha]

What a turd of an editorial...I should have followed my first impulse and stopped after

As the grandson of anarchists, I've always had a soft spot in my heart for fanatics. Expressions of extremism, and passionately reasoned, exquisitely twisted world views make me feel, how shall I put this, at home.

Live and learn, I suppose.

[dracon49]

Why do you only post things that criticize Israel?

[kamaz]

"After all, most Israelis can sense that if peace is to be the enemy, more dangerous even than the threat of war, this is one doomed ghetto."

stopped reading after first paragraph, but just saw this shiny nugget of intellect. Astounding.

[ting]

Why you only post things that criticize Israel?

I think this article criticizes some Israeli policies.Not Israel. But anyway, It might be because I'm critical of Israeli policies.

[dracon49]

I think this article criticizes some Israeli policies.Not Israel. But anyway, It might be because I'm critical of Israeli policies.
Be more fluralist...write/post also good things like what we did(and i think continue to do)in Haiti....and about the article itself, to say that we live as a Jewish ghetto is a ****ing bull****.

[HellToupee]

Article seems to criticize the right wing of Israel, even mentions the majority of Israeles being moderates. As it is peace means giving up control and ability to settle the west bank, holding on to it and continuing to settle would eventually require absorbing all the inhabitants into Israel thats what i got out of the article.

[dracon49]

Article seems to criticize the right wing of Israel, even mentions the majority of Israeles being moderates. As it is peace means giving up control and ability to settle the west bank, holding on to it and continuing to settle would eventually require absorbing all the inhabitants into Israel thats what i got out of the article.
How can you define the word "moderate"? I as someone that you would consider an hawk ,i consider myself as a moderate and left wingers as radicals because the policies that they think that should be implemented are destructive to Israel.

[HellToupee]

Well in the context of this article i would say moderate is one that supports 2 state solution and attempt polices towards peace.

[dracon49]

Well in the context of this article i would say moderate is one that supports 2 state solution and attempt polices towards peace.
It's a political definition. Everyone can define themself or others according to their political view...what do you mean by saying "attempt policies for peace?" for me, using military power will make peace and for others it's by giving land to the arabs.

[HellToupee]

I don't see military power as attemping peace only security its so far lead nowhere towards any resolution. More like actually halting expanding settlements rather than a weak temporary freeze.

[dracon49]

I don't see military power as attemping peace only security its so far lead nowhere towards any resolution. More like actually halting expanding settlements rather than a weak temporary freeze.
Before 1967(six days war as you know)we didn't have one settlement(unless you consider Haifa as a settlement)-did we have peace then? After we left the Gaza strip and parts of Judea and Samaria in 2005-did we have peace(at least from the areas that we left)?

[Peanut]

It's a political definition. Everyone can define themself or others according to their political view...what do you mean by saying "attempt policies for peace?" for me, using military power will make peace and for others it's by giving land to the arabs.

No, it wont, atleast not in Israel's situation.

[HellToupee]

Before 1967(six days war as you know)we didn't have one settlement(unless you consider Haifa as a settlement)-did we have peace then? After we left the Gaza strip and parts of Judea and Samaria in 2005-did we have peace(at least from the areas that we left)?

You have peace with Egypt and Jordan now those two countries were in control of Gaza and the westbank before 1967. Egypt was Israels greatest enemy fought many wars yet have made peace with them.

[dracon49]

No, it wont, atleast not in Israel's situation.
Why do you think so? And btw, im not talking on a full peace(diplomatic ties etc, im talking only on peace;that no one will attack us for the years to come after a military conflict).

[dracon49]

You have peace with Egypt and Jordan now those two countries were in control of Gaza and the westbank before 1967. Egypt was Israels greatest enemy fought many wars yet have made peace with them.
Why do you think that we have peace with Egypt? And you said yourself that Gaza and the Judea and Samaria weren't belong to the Palestinians-so why should we give Judea and Samaria to them?

[HellToupee]

Why do you think that we have peace with Egypt? And you saying yourself that Gaza and the Judea and Samaria weren't belong to the Palestinians-so why should we give Judea and Samaria to them?

Do you want to make them all Israeli citizens then? You can't have your cake and eat it to you know.

[Clockwinder]

What a piece of claptrap journalism. Worthy of a left wing Academia student for his/her dissitation on "Sublime and ridiculous notions transferred into rationale without any reference to reality." Absolutely my pick for a nomination in the category of "Biggest piece of sh!t published as kosher for 2010"

[dracon49]

Do you want to make them all Israeli citizens then? You can't have your cake and eat it to you know.
As you said yourself ;that they were belonged to Egypt and Jordan(Judea and Samaria and the Gaza strip),so they need to control them(Judea and Samaria needs to be under Jordanian control and Egypt needs to control the Gaza strip).

[HellToupee]

As you said yourself ;that they were belonged to Egypt and Jordan(Judea and Samaria and the Gaza strip),so they need to control them(Judea and Samaria needs to be under Jordanian control and Egypt needs to control the Gaza strip).

That boat has sailed, Egypt and Jordan haded over their claim of the land to the palestinians a long time ago.

[dracon49]

That boat has sailed, Egypt and Jordan haded over their claim of the land to the palestinians a long time ago.
They were belonged to them....they need to control them....it doesn't mean that if an X country doesn't want part of it's territory because some reasons, it doesn't mean that it should become a state. By your logic, you would have much more states then you have now in the world.

[HellToupee]

Israel took control of it became their problem, as it was the orginal partition plan was for two states Israel and Palestine.

[dracon49]

And the arabs rejected it. We are not responsible for their stupid decisions...

[HellToupee]

Neither are todays Palestinians, but you occupy the land and are thus responsible for finding a solution for the inhabitants.

[dracon49]

Neither are todays Palestinians, but you occupy the land and are thus responsible for finding a solution for the inhabitants.
Do you think that if will give them Judea and Samaria there will be peace? That they will stop terrorist attacks and will start to love us? Btw, it's a very good dabate-i hope more will contribute to it.

[HellToupee]

Their might be, certianlly a much better chance towards peace than just persisting with the status quo. Once there is a stable independent Palestine state the terror groups would lose alot of their support, they could no longer be seen as the victims, also remove any potential rallying call to war for Arab states if they ever decided to give war another crack.

[seraosha]

Their might be, certianlly a much better chance towards peace than just persisting with the status quo. Once there is a stable independent Palestine state the terror groups would lose alot of their support, they could no longer be seen as the victims, also remove any potential rallying call to war for Arab states if they ever decided to give war another crack.

So, they grow some really good weed in kiwi land I see. Pass it on the left, man.

[dracon49]

Why do you think that Hamas and Islamic Jihad will stop terrorist attacks?

[HellToupee]

Hamas depends on its popular support to operate, if Gaza had a functioning economy thus employment and independance from Israel these groups wouldn't receive nearly the support that they do, maybe not stopped but reduced anyway.

[dracon49]

Actually less ppl support Hamas now because the Gaza operation(Hamas brought it on them) and in any case they are committed to destroy Israel and will not have peace also because of that(and many other reasons).

[kamaz]

I love how its always Israel's problem and always their obligation to do something. Meanwhile just yesterday Jordan annulled 30,000 citizenships of Palestinians living in Jordan, all this within a context of Jordan's wonderful relationship with Palestinians in last 40 years (post Black september massacres, attempts on Hashemite royal family, etc) but no one is writing deeply critical and 'enlightened' articles about Jordan's actions. Not one peep. But let an Israeli fart in Palestinian's general direction and the UN is busy handing down resolutions and sending self-hating judges to pass idiotically biased rulings for the most overrated refugee group in the world.

Did you guys know that the UN has a special refugee agency devoted SOLELY to the Palestininas? the UNRWA. No other displaced ethnic group has that privilege. Talk about playing the world's smallest violin.

[GB_FXST]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1147257.html

Sorry about another Israel related thread. I thought this article was so interesting that I had to post it.

So RoyB if it's too much for you, send me a PM and I can give you some Norwegian news. I think there was a car accident today due too it snowing.;-)

So a Palestinian legacy of murder, rejectionism and deceit has nothing at all to do with dismal peace prospects?

The onus is on Palestinians (Hamas and Fatah) to accept Israel and renounce violence. I question the morality and motive of any author of any opinion piece who fails to recognize this fundamental stumbling block to peace.



What a piece of claptrap journalism. Worthy of a left wing Academia student for his/her dissitation on "Sublime and ridiculous notions transferred into rationale without any reference to reality." Absolutely my pick for a nomination in the category of "Biggest piece of sh!t published as kosher for 2010"

x2



I love how its always Israel's problem and always their obligation to do something. Meanwhile just yesterday Jordan annulled 30,000 citizenships of Palestinians living in Jordan, all this within a context of Jordan's wonderful relationship with Palestinians in last 40 years (post Black september massacres, attempts on Hashemite royal family, etc) but no one is writing deeply critical and 'enlightened' articles about Jordan's actions. Not one peep. But let an Israeli fart in Palestinian's general direction and the UN is busy handing down resolutions and sending self-hating judges to pass idiotically biased rulings for the most overrated refugee group in the world.

Did you guys know that the UN has a special refugee agency devoted SOLELY to the Palestininas? the UNRWA. No other displaced ethnic group has that privilege. Talk about playing the world's smallest violin.

Well said.

[Sideline]

Did you guys know that the UN has a special refugee agency devoted SOLELY to the Palestininas? the UNRWA. No other displaced ethnic group has that privilege. Talk about playing the world's smallest violin.
The trolls probably do, as there was a thread posted less than a week ago on the subject by Isasc K....it only had 2 replys. These trolls are just selective.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?173581-UN-s-Double-Standard-for-Arab-Refugees

[HellToupee]

Actually less ppl support Hamas now because the Gaza operation(Hamas brought it on them) and in any case they are committed to destroy Israel and will not have peace also because of that(and many other reasons).

They still have considerable support since they control the smuggling tunnels provide employment for alot of people, blockade has them pretty dependant on hamas.

[dracon49]

They like Abu Mazen much more according to polls(not that i think that he is a lot better then Hamas),but he is very weak. He hardly controls half of his ppl and still he has the title of the "President of National Palestinian Authority".

[ting]

Do you think that if will give them Judea and Samaria there will be peace? That they will stop terrorist attacks and will start to love us? Btw, it's a very good dabate-i hope more will contribute to it.

And East Jerusalem. Yes I do believe that.

[Atlantic Friend]

Hardly a great piece if literature, but he might be onto something.

[Atlantic Friend]

Did you guys know that the UN has a special refugee agency devoted SOLELY to the Palestininas? the UNRWA. No other displaced ethnic group has that privilege. Talk about playing the world's smallest violin.

On the other hand, what other displacement of an ethnic group has created so much trouble worldwide in the past 60 years?

[ZZEZ]

And East Jerusalem. Yes I do believe that.

Ting how are you fooling..seriously
You know very well that giving them Gaza/WB/E.Jerusalem won't solve anything, every single Israeli concession was met with more terror attacks.
Examples?Oslo Accords, S.Lebanon pullout, Gaza disengagement plan..explain to me how and why this will be different?
You know very well that ultimately their goal is to exterminate Israel and drive the Jews to the sea - it doesn't take allot of intellectual power to see all the hate and propaganda in the Arab media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrieBhaGgHM

Ohhh wait..is the grandpa talking about Tel Aviv as settlement?Haifa as settlement?huh..I suppose Hamas wants it back aswell don't they?

[ting]

Ting how are you fooling..seriously
You know very well that giving them Gaza/WB/E.Jerusalem won't solve anything, every single Israeli concession was met with more terror attacks.
Examples?Oslo Accords, S.Lebanon pullout, Gaza disengagement plan..explain to me how and why this will be different?
You know very well that ultimately their goal is to exterminate Israel and drive the Jews to the sea - it doesn't take allot of intellectual power to see all the hate and propaganda in the Arab media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrieBhaGgHM

Ohhh wait..is the grandpa talking about Tel Aviv as settlement?Haifa as settlement?huh..I suppose Hamas wants it back aswell don't they?

Yeah like Sinai, you gave it back and signed a peace agreement, and those egyptians keep raining rockets on your head and have tanks massed on your southern border ready to push you into the sea.....

[GB_FXST]

And East Jerusalem. Yes I do believe that.

Wishful thinking.



On the other hand, what other displacement of an ethnic group has created so much trouble worldwide in the past 60 years?

What other displaced ethnic group has been forced to remain as perpetual refugees by their co-nationalists?

[GB_FXST]

Yeah like Sinai, you gave it back and signed a peace agreement, and those egyptians keep raining rockets on your head and have tanks massed on your southern border ready to push you into the sea.....

The analogy fails because Egyp,t then under Sadat and now Mubarak, has no interest in pushing Israel into the sea. The same cannot be said for either Hamas or Fatah.

[ting]

The analogy fails because Egyp,t then under Sadat and now Mubarak, has no interest in pushing Israel into the sea. The same cannot be said for either Hamas or Fatah. They had an interest before they signed the peace deal.

[this Dude]

Hamas is only able to operate because Palestinians are showing them sympathy .Palestinians just dont get why Israel has the right so solely govern and decide what land belongs to it and what not.And to be honest neither do I.

[~Berdan]

Yeah like Sinai, you gave it back and signed a peace agreement, and those egyptians keep raining rockets on your head and have tanks massed on your southern border ready to push you into the sea.....

You are talking about Egypt,the most stable country surrounding Israel,and a governor of an Arab league.
And yet:the peace between Israel and Egypt,means just what you said:They do us a favor and they don't shoot rockets at us (Well,gosh darling me,Syrians don't rain rockets at Israel as well).Numbers of Israelis visiting Egypt is awful small (and the Israelis don't go pass Sinai,into the mainland of Egypt,for obvious reasons.No one wants to end like mr. Azam Azam in Egypt prison,just because he has Israeli passport),Egypt prints most god awful propaganda against Israel.

Newsflash for you:In 1977,before returning of Sinai,the situation was the same.So,they throw a bone at Israel once upon a time..They serve as negotiators between Israel and Hamas,they agree to help Israel against Hamas from time to time(because it serves their government purpose against Muslim brotherhood,Hamas is a part of).What do the small guy like me feel from it?I could go to Sinai without fear of getting blown to bits right around 1977!!!!!!!!!!And I assure you,it was a lot nicer then.

And mind you,we are talking about the beacon of Pan-Arab in the area.The biggest,most important,and a stable Arab state in the region.

Now,you want what?????????You want Israel to "return" part of Jerusalem,part of most important place in Israel,simply as a "bribe" for peace,to whom????
To nation who still can't get their shyte together?To nation,when in it's prime coherence in late 90's,the Arafat couldn't control even fighters from his own branch?(Read what Majed Maraka said about Arafat,and lack of full control on Fatah).
Do you even understand what you asking?Jerusalem is not "close" to Israelis(physical close).Israelis live in Jerusalem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You don't need Kassam,you don't need mortar,you don't need ****!The distance is walking from your bed to your shyteroom.

So,thank you,you kind and generous sir,for your kind and generous offer...I like to dream of peace myself,while smoking the pipe and singing John Lennon from time to time.The only difference is,you live in Oslo.You don't give a 2 shytes.For you it's writing on a forum with a cup of milk.For us,it's our lives here.


Than there is also this.I was looking at pictures of IDF fighting for Jerusalem.Strange:I coudln't see "Palestinian army" soldiers fighting and dying for it.All I could see was soldiers in Jordanian uniform.And ha!!History books say those are Jordanian soldiers fighting and dying for Jerusalem.I must be mistaken here:You want us to give east Jerusalem back.You said return.Well,fock me in my behind,and call me a retarded,but shouldn't we "return" it to the country it belongs?Like,Jordan?Because otherwise,it wouldn't be much of a "return" now,wouldn't it?

[Climber]

we bad, we warriors, we dont want peace, we want war, we are the evil juice.

[ting]

You are talking about Egypt,the most stable country surrounding Israel,and a governor of an Arab league.
And yet:the peace between Israel and Egypt,means just what you said:They do us a favor and they don't shoot rockets at us (Well,gosh darling me,Syrians don't rain rockets at Israel as well).Numbers of Israelis visiting Egypt is awful small (and the Israelis don't go pass Sinai,into the mainland of Egypt,for obvious reasons.No one wants to end like mr. Azam Azam in Egypt prison,just because he has Israeli passport),Egypt prints most god awful propaganda against Israel.

Newsflash for you:In 1977,before returning of Sinai,the situation was the same.So,they throw a bone at Israel once upon a time..They serve as negotiators between Israel and Hamas,they agree to help Israel against Hamas from time to time(because it serves their government purpose against Muslim brotherhood,Hamas is a part of).What do the small guy like me feel from it?I could go to Sinai without fear of getting blown to bits right around 1977!!!!!!!!!!And I assure you,it was a lot nicer then.

And mind you,we are talking about the beacon of Pan-Arab in the area.The biggest,most important,and a stable Arab state in the region.

Now,you want what?????????You want Israel to "return" part of Jerusalem,part of most important place in Israel,simply as a "bribe" for peace,to whom????
To nation who still can't get their shyte together?To nation,when in it's prime coherence in late 90's,the Arafat couldn't control even fighters from his own branch?(Read what Majed Maraka said about Arafat,and lack of full control on Fatah).
Do you even understand what you asking?Jerusalem is not "close" to Israelis(physical close).Israelis live in Jerusalem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!You don't need Kassam,you don't need mortar,you don't need ****!The distance is walking from your bed to your shyteroom.

So,thank you,you kind and generous sir,for your kind and generous offer...I like to dream of peace myself,while smoking the pipe and singing John Lennon from time to time.The only difference is,you live in Oslo.You don't give a 2 shytes.For you it's writing on a forum with a cup of milk.For us,it's our lives here.


Than there is also this.I was looking at pictures of IDF fighting for Jerusalem.Strange:I coudln't see "Palestinian army" soldiers fighting and dying for it.All I could see was soldiers in Jordanian uniform.And ha!!History books say those are Jordanian soldiers fighting and dying for Jerusalem.I must be mistaken here:You want us to give east Jerusalem back.You said return.Well,fock me in my behind,and call me a retarded,but shouldn't we "return" it to the country it belongs?Like,Jordan?Because otherwise,it wouldn't be much of a "return" now,wouldn't it?
Take a chill pill dude, your making me wanna http://emoticons4u.com/sad/310.gif with all that anger.

Egypt, a country of 77 million is doing all it can to cool down tensions with Israel and it's neighbors. While Syria, a country of 22 million people is doing more or less the opposite. IIRC according to Jimmy Carter the Camp David accord was to include giving the Palestinians a state(Israel does not agree AFAIK). So maybe the Egyptians could argue that Israel is not fulfilling it's obligations. Egypt is still doing it's best to see the Issues resolved peacefully. Now if you had gone down the Syrian route with the Egyptians you would have had an enemy 4 times as powerful as Syria on your southern border.

Seems to me that this peace deal has been very beneficial to Israel.


ps. I'm drinking coffee.

[~Berdan]

First of all,I am very chilled.Second of all,you didn't answered the more important question from my part.
Which is,that Egypt is the most organized country in the region.Making peace with Egypt (how much beneficial it is,is not yours or mine guess,as we both can't guess what could happen othwerise) wasn't much of a bet.

Now with whom exactly Israel should do the peace thingy(yea,ok,Palestianians...Which one exactly?Gaza or west bank guys?What fraction?What part of fraction,political or military?Who is the guy who can actually keep the accords under control,so it wouldn't "expire" after he's gone?),and who is the guy who can promise eternal peace of the spotless mind if Israel give them east Jerusalem?So it wouldn't blow up in Israel face later?

(P.S:There were 2 agreements of camp David,Palestinian and Egypt one aren't related to each other).

[Kaplanr]

. . . IIRC according to Jimmy Carter the Camp David accord was to include giving the Palestinians a state(Israel does not agree AFAIK). So maybe the Egyptians could argue that Israel is not fulfilling it's obligations. Egypt is still doing it's best to see the Issues resolved peacefully. Now if you had gone down the Syrian route with the Egyptians you would have had an enemy 4 times as powerful as Syria on your southern border.

Sorry I'm with Berdan on this one. Your observation above doesn't hold water; the peace treaty and the discussions about an "Autonomy" are not dependant on each other. "There were two 1978 Camp David agreements: A Framework for Peace in the Middle East and A Framework for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel, the second leading towards the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty signed in March 1979. The agreements and the peace treaty were both accompanied by "side-letters" of understanding between Egypt and the U.S. and Israel and the U.S."[9]

As a side note, in a 2006 survey, over 90% of Egyptians surveyed consider Israel an enemy.
[9]^ "The Camp David Accords." Jimmy Carter Library and Museum. 21 July 2001. 28 April 2008.

[GB_FXST]

They had an interest before they signed the peace deal.

The PA is not Egypt, and Abbas is not Sadat.

Berdan above notes some very good reasons why the one is unlike the other.

But, it is questionalble whether or not Egypt in 1973 sought the destruction of Israel. It is not clear that they did, despite the fact that Israel perceived the Yom Kippur war as existential threat. Still, did Egypt seek to go all the way to Tel Aviv in '73? Followin the war, in the run up to the Camp David Accords, did Egypt establish common ground with Israel? Did Egypt recognize Israel?

Hamas is most candid in its intent and position. Consequently, there is no common ground, and nothing to discuss.



Hamas is only able to operate because Palestinians are showing them sympathy .Palestinians just dont get why Israel has the right so solely govern and decide what land belongs to it and what not.And to be honest neither do I.

The Palestinians could have had a state already. They must assume responsibility for those missed opportunities.

BTW, where do you live?

[Atlantic Friend]

What other displaced ethnic group has been forced to remain as perpetual refugees by their co-nationalists?

The Jews, possibly? I mean, if we focus on nationality, that is, and keep in mind before 1947 their co-nationals were American, French, Polish, etc.

[RoyB]

ting, I really suggest going through both of berdan's posts thoroughly and answering and responding to every single bit of it. He raises some really good questions for you, with the support of important facts and examples.

[Atlantic Friend]

Now with whom exactly Israel should do the peace thingy(yea,ok,Palestianians...Which one exactly?Gaza or west bank guys?

Not sure it's important. A success in Gaza or the West Bank only would already be a boon for Israel. It would also provide a roadmap and serious incentive for the Palestinians of the other area.


What fraction?What part of fraction,political or military?

Wild idea, but since neither Fath nor Hamas nor Hezbollah can be relied upon, how about working with a whole new set of guys and prop them up? I don't think Palestinians are born with a genetically-induced defect that would make them prefer a normal life in their own nation over a perpetuate state of war on the losing side of it.


Who is the guy who can actually keep the accords under control,so it wouldn't "expire" after he's gone?

Since moderates in this kind of conflict are generally the ones who get immediately rejected by both sides (one because they don't ask for enough, and the other because being moderates they're easier to brush aside), it might be interesting to see if, among the Palestinians who held local authority of any kind (including only moral authority) and got sidelined by their hardliners and by Israeli authorities, there aren't a few of them who are still around, and who still enjoy a power base.


and who is the guy who can promise eternal peace of the spotless mind if Israel give them east Jerusalem?So it wouldn't blow up in Israel face later?

There was not, there is not, there will never be any man of any nationality able to promise that. Where is the Israeli Prime Minister who could promise eternal peace of the spotless mind for millenia to come, amen? That's the kind of prerequisite that guarantee nothing ever changes.

[dracon49]

And East Jerusalem. Yes I do believe that.
Why do you think that they will give up on "Histotic Palestine" (as they call it)?

[ting]

First of all,I am very chilled.Second of all,you didn't answered the more important question from my part.
Which is,that Egypt is the most organized country in the region.Making peace with Egypt (how much beneficial it is,is not yours or mine guess,as we both can't guess what could happen othwerise) wasn't much of a bet.

Now with whom exactly Israel should do the peace thingy(yea,ok,Palestianians...Which one exactly?Gaza or west bank guys?What fraction?What part of fraction,political or military?Who is the guy who can actually keep the accords under control,so it wouldn't "expire" after he's gone?),and who is the guy who can promise eternal peace of the spotless mind if Israel give them east Jerusalem?So it wouldn't blow up in Israel face later?

(P.S:There were 2 agreements of camp David,Palestinian and Egypt one aren't related to each other).
Sorry about not answering everything in your previous post. It was so mixed with what I perceived as anger that I felt it was more of a tirade.

Egypt: Organized as in stable, I agree. However Syria also seems to be quite stable. Both have extensive repression, however Syria is of course in a league of it's own.

Who to make peace with
I believe there are many possibilities. I will focus on a simple one(to write down).

If Israel could get a peace agreement with PLO(Abbas), I believe Hamas will bough to popular pressure and agree. What the peace deal would contain is more or less known. Gaza/WB/EJ and some kind of communication arrangement between WB and Gaza. Tunnel or special road or something.

The Big settlement blocks would go to Israel while a similar sized part of Israel would go to Palestine. Essentially the 1967 borders.

Now there is the other settlements and the Pals right of return issue needing to be solved. One solution would be to evacuate the settlements and let the Palestinian diaspora return to Palestine with monetary compensation from Israel.

Keeping the deal through successive governments.
The population of Palestine would vote yes or no, and It would be incorporated into the constitution.

For a time there will be crazies on both sides willing to do all they can to wreck the deal. One situation might be the organization "Islamic peace over my dead body" launching rockets at Israel. Pressure will be huge on Israeli politicians to "teach the Pals a lesson". "Jewish peace over my dead body" is growing politically strong, and the Politicians feel that they have no choice but to launch a punitive strike. And were back in the ****.

I think that a forceful presence of UN/EU/US troops will have to be placed in Palestine to A. help the pal police and military take out "Islamic peace over my dead body" and B. physically prevent Israel from taking action( Israel would lets say have to shoot down EU/US planes to get at "IPOMDB").

This means that the population of Palestine can feel that they are safe from Israel. Most Palestinians will happily get on about their business of building their country, welcoming tourists, sending their kids to school etc. Hard feelings will still be there but they will slowly subside as more and more people get it better.


eternal peace of the spotless mind if Israel give them east Jerusalem?So it wouldn't blow up in Israel face later?
No one and nothing can guarantee this. Who can guarantee that us Norwegians wont some day find that we want the territories lost to Sweden back? Life is uncertain. But the things I have mentioned should minimize the risk that things blow up.

This is just one possibility of many out there. There are many Ifs and buts, but I how you get the general idea.

On Egypt peace deal(s) see response to Kaplanr.




Sorry I'm with Berdan on this one. Your observation above doesn't hold water; the peace treaty and the discussions about an "Autonomy" are not dependant on each other. "There were two 1978 Camp David agreements: A Framework for Peace in the Middle East and A Framework for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel, the second leading towards the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty signed in March 1979. The agreements and the peace treaty were both accompanied by "side-letters" of understanding between Egypt and the U.S. and Israel and the U.S."[9]

As a side note, in a 2006 survey, over 90% of Egyptians surveyed consider Israel an enemy.
[9]^ "The Camp David Accords." Jimmy Carter Library and Museum. 21 July 2001. 28 April 2008.

OK, I am just repeating what the gist of what was in Jimmy Carters book. My memory might be in error, but thats how I remember it. I also stated that there would be different interpretations of this. I'm saying I could be wrong, but also that you could be wrong. I don't feel it's essential in this discussion so I'm not going to go deeper into this. If I'm right I'm right, and if I'm wrong I'm wrong. No biggy.

Israel as the enemy
What was the number in 1980 and 1994? Has it gotten worse or better?
What was and is the same number for Israelis at these same time intervals?

I believe Egyptians feelings toward Israel is related mostly to the Occupation. If that gets resolved, Egyptians will feel less animosity towards Israel.


The PA is not Egypt, and Abbas is not Sadat.

Berdan above notes some very good reasons why the one is unlike the other.

But, it is questionalble whether or not Egypt in 1973 sought the destruction of Israel. It is not clear that they did, despite the fact that Israel perceived the Yom Kippur war as existential threat. Still, did Egypt seek to go all the way to Tel Aviv in '73? Followin the war, in the run up to the Camp David Accords, did Egypt establish common ground with Israel? Did Egypt recognize Israel?

Hamas is most candid in its intent and position. Consequently, there is no common ground, and nothing to discuss.

Destruction of Israel.
I don't know when they realized that Israel was there to stay. The question is more of if the IDF had been soundly defeated would the Egyptians just stop or continue? Who knows. Personally I believe very few of the actors in the middle east want the "Jews in the sea". Their number gets lower as Israel gets older. As for recognition. I think Abbas also recognizes Israel. I believe that is a minor obstacle. It's more a question of wording than practical policy.

I don't believe Hamas is as dogmatic and unapproachable as you do. I believe they will follow the mainline of Palestinian mood. No matter what their charter says.



The Palestinians could have had a state already. They must assume responsibility for those missed opportunities.

BTW, where do you live?
May bee. Personally I don't see them having any great opportunities in the post 1967 era, that they missed. The biggest opportunity, Oslo was scuttled by both parties, though I personally believe Israel is the one who bears the most responsibility in this matter.

I live in/close to Sandvika in Bærum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandvika
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bærum



ting, I really suggest going through both of berdan's posts thoroughly and answering and responding to every single bit of it. He raises some really good questions for you, with the support of important facts and examples.

Yes daddy!;-) I'm a slow typist, and I like to think before I type and while I type, so it can take a little while. Also I was looking at Scandinavianball.:lol:

[ting]

Why do you think that they will give up on "Histotic Palestine" (as they call it)?

For the same reason that Israel would give up on the idea of a "Greater Israel".

Not worth the blood and money.

[Hollis]

For the same reason that Israel would give up on the idea of a "Greater Israel".

Not worth the blood and money.


From the safety of his home in Norway, a person who believes Michael Moore's movie, 'Bowling for Columbine" to be a factual documentary laying out a plan for another country not even near where he lives. Ever notice it is about Israel in your opinion and not the terrorists that needs to do things, well the terrorists can be reasonable in your opinion the barrier is Israel.

Arafat set a standard for wannbe terrorists leaders in the ME, be successful, become a leader that would lead to global recognition as a good guy (still a terrorist) and make billions of dollars. Rank and file tangos may be about all those groovie terrorist's reasons for axing Israel but for the leaders it can be a simple issue of money and power. As long as there is conflict, they will make money. Arafat figure that out, the more the Palestinian people suffered, the richer he got. While the Palestinians lived in "deprivation under the evils of Israeli occupation", Suha Arafat was struggling to survive in solidarity with the Palestinian people while living in Paris living on mere $100,000 USD per month.

[dracon49]

For the same reason that Israel would give up on the idea of a "Greater Israel".

Not worth the blood and money.
You need to see what they show on Palestinian channel(that belongs to the PNA not Hamas);they ask kids for example what is the size of "Palestine"? They say 27.000 square kilometers and i will give you another example:they ask kids what is the most important port for them and the options are: Jaffa ,Haifa and Acre(and as you know these cities are in the green line....)They don't really educate them for peace and im saying that in soft words...

[ting]

From the safety of his home in Norway, a person who believes Michael Moore's movie, 'Bowling for Columbine" to be a factual documentary laying out a plan for another country not even near where he lives. Ever notice it is about Israel in your opinion and not the terrorists that needs to do things, well the terrorists can be reasonable in your opinion the barrier is Israel.

Arafat set a standard for wannbe terrorists leaders in the ME, be successful, become a leader that would lead to global recognition as a good guy (still a terrorist) and make billions of dollars. Rank and file tangos may be about all those groovie terrorist's reasons for axing Israel but for the leaders it can be a simple issue of money and power. As long as there is conflict, they will make money. Arafat figure that out, the more the Palestinian people suffered, the richer he got. While the Palestinians lived in "deprivation under the evils of Israeli occupation", Suha Arafat was struggling to survive in solidarity with the Palestinian people while living in Paris living on mere $100,000 USD per month.

Bowling for Columbine.
I can't remember writing it being a factual documentary. I believe it was a documentary based on facts, but in Moore's style used to support his arguments. I think he concluded that the the US focus on guns and the amount of gun crime was more related to culture then gun control laws. Though it's been a long time since I saw it, so I might be mistaken. Please remember that that movie did not make my "blood boil" like it might have done for gun owners in the US, so I'm less likely to remember details. For me the movie is interesting and gives me some insight into the US and Guns. I'm not interested in it enough to form an in dept and coherent opinion. My opinion is that guns in the US is a complex issue and thats that. One misconception I had was related to the thing with Charleton Heston, and GajinSamurai cleared that up.

Distance to Israel
It's the Internet Hollis. The distance to Israel is a matter of nano seconds.;-)

My opinion about the conflict
Please remember Hollis that you and I live in different media realities. Some examples IIRC there were these guys Walt and Mersheimer(or something) who wrote about AIPAC. It kicked up a huge stink in the media in the US, and there were accusations flying left and right about them. Here our reaction to this is duh. Is this news?

Then there is this guy called Finkelstein. In the US he is seen as a troublemaker because of his views about Israel, and how it's "friends" in the US attack their opponents. Here our reaction is the same. Duh. Is this news?

When Jimmy Carter released a book with the title Israel and Aparteid, it kicked up another stink. But according to this article Israels minister of defense used the same method to describe a possible situation.

The point being is that in the US, some views are difficult to say in public without being labeled something. They might be correct, but they immediately kick up such a stink that many feel it's better stay away from and not publish. Think about the run up to the Iraq war. US news organizations censored them selves for fear of being labeled unpatriotic. The US media has for a long time followed unnamed rules about how subjects should be covered. I believe that the US media has for a long time been biased towards the Israeli point of view. The framework of the conflict has been presented in a way that is beneficial to the Israeli point of view. I am unsure when this skewing started. I suspect in the mid 1960s.

Norwegian media reality
In Norway from 1945 and onwards we were rabidly biased toward the Israeli framework. Opposing views had difficulty establishing themselves. However I suspect opposing and unpopular views have had an easier time here than in the US. Israel could do no wrong. We gave them monetary support, political support, we even facilitated them getting heavy water. We were so against nukes that not even the US and NATO were allowed nukes on our soil, yet we had no problems helping Israel get nukes. How is that for bias? All this was the Left wings doing. The Left was dominated by former WW2 resistance fighters and the prime minister had spent time in Sachsenhausen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einar_Gerhardsen

This slowly began to change in the 1980s. Soldiers posted in Lebanon did not see the same face of Israel as they had learnt while at home. Some became journalists and started to propose other viewpoints. Also remember that Likud came to power in the 1970s. The prime minister was Begin, who also created Likud. He was a member of Irgun who again was responsible for the King David Hotel bombing(terrorism). Begin's history and views were not congruent with what the Left(Labour party) saw as Israel, yet the close relations and diplomatic support continued.

Most Norwegians saw Israel as a beacon of light in the Middle east, as did most politicians. So it was a huge surprise when we were approached by Arafat as the middle man. I think most Norwegians saw him as a terrorist and IIRC this posed some delicate problems.

When there was a deal, us Norwegians were shocked, that we, little Norway, the poor man of Europe, in the unknown wilderness of Northern Europe had played a part in such a historical event. So we asked our selves why us? And how could we have helped the Israels to make peace with Arafat? What's this deal about? Whats the situation on the ground? Whats the history in this conflict?

This need for answers meant the media went out to get stories. Norwegians due to the Oslo Accords were seen by both sides as impartial, and were given access to all sides. Norwegians were now interested in learning about both sides of the issue, not just "our side". Also Norwegians have pr capita the most newspapers and newspaper readers in the world(IIRC), so there was a lot of information in dept. This meant that we were much more in the loop, and had access to more diverse information than a typical US citizen. As the 90's progressed, Norwegians were involved in the negotiations, and the Norwegian public followed intensely. I began to see Israel as the obstacle, and so did IMHO most of my fellow citizens.

Here is another interesting contrast, the difference between your world and mine.

I was born in 1977 and was 16 when the Oslo accords were signed. I was at a lecture about memory this fall, were it was stated that one internalizes(makes new information part of ones understanding) the most about the world situation between early teens and early 20s. I'm skeptical, but my impression is that the research was sound. That means that the time period were I was most impressionable about politics and acquired a world view was between about 1990 and 2000. Hence the situation in the middle east made a huge impact on me, and could help explain some of my interest in the subject.

AFAIK you were in Vietnam in 68-69, so i assume you were born in about 1950. Your period of internalization would hence be sometime between.1963 and 1975. You were in a horrible war, whose value has been deemed dubious in posterity. I can only imagine how this has affected your life and world view compared to my period of internalization which was without bloodshed, free of the cold war, and with hope of peace in the middle east.

Now according to Sipri, arms transfers to Israel started to pick up in 64-65 with delivery of HAWK air defense systems, 65-66 with delivery of 210 M48a1 Pattons as aid and 1966-1969 of 50 A-4f skyhawks. This tells me that Israel was getting good press, since I don't think the US would deliver weapons to a country seen as unfriendly by the media. Add to this the USS Liberty incident in 67 which I believe would have created a big media stir had the mood in regards to Israel been different. If you rap this in with the all encompassing threat of nuclear conflict between the free world and the communist countries, It's most extreme manifestation in the Cuba Crisis in the fall of 1962, you got your self a hell of an introduction to the world son:lol:

Point being your period of internalization was when the conflict between East and West was most acute. Israel was getting slowly aligned towards the west. It might have been portrayed in the media as the wests front line against the reds, surrounded by communist allies bent on its destruction. Heroically standing tall in the face of incredible odds.

I believe this has affected and skewed your world view. Yes I am telling a mod that I think he is biased:oops: I believe you are open minded enough to internalize some of what I have written. I don't expect you to agree with everything, or suddenly see things my way. I just want you to try to see the world a little more as I see it, and understand some of the reasons that we see things so differently. I am not saying that I'm not biased. I might very well be, however I believe that my situation has enabled me to be less biased than your situation has allowed you to be.

Both of us live far away from the conflict, and are not under personal threat like those who live there, so we should be more able to leave our emotions out of this conflict. However you have experienced war first hand against an asymmetrical enemy. I have only experienced peace.


Oh, my brain is cooked and time is short, I will have to leave anymore in dept discussions for tomorrow. If I have touched some nerves or hurt some feelings, I apologize. It is not my intention.

[ZZEZ]

I knew one day it would come to this, ting - your too much naive and idealistic.
You think Hamas and Fatah are pragmatic and Israel is the problem?ok...got your point, no problem.

[dracon49]

Norway gave Israel nuclear fuel ,no? Still ppl from Norway come to the Kibbuz(or it was only Swedish)? Interesting to know and btw i saw a video in youtube about a Norwegian(im almost sure that she's from norway) woman-she told to a soldier in Judea and Samaria not to enter an house and she told him "**** you". We need to kick ppl like her from Israel.

[~Berdan]

Norway gave Israel nuclear fuel ,no? Still ppl from Norway come to the Kibbuz(or it was only Swedish)? Interesting to know and btw i saw a video in youtube about a Norwegian(im almost sure that she's from norway) woman-she told to a soldier in Judea and Samaria not to enter an house and she told him "**** you". We need to kick ppl like her from Israel.

We need to kick people like you from Israel...You know why?Because you are a testament to deterioration of Israeli education system.You also testament of a person who have such a narrow mind,that a bicycle can't pass without get slammed in the walls of what is supposed to be your imagination,but instead filled with various strange ****** fantasies :).Your mind is so hardwired with good-bad,right-wrong,we-them,that you would fit so well into Airstrip 1,you would enjoy living there (books in not your strong side,so just look for a movie 1984).
And what's most important,you actually do very draconian service in representing Israel in this forum (I'll admit,it isn't half as shyte as it used to be before you were banned a couple of times..But it is bad as an actor from a z movie).

And before you start wining "but what did I said",when soldiers come to your house in the middle of the night,you will say "fokk you".Where ever you live (and if someone wants to live in freaking Gaza,whatever).Words are free in this world,and a surprise to you:people can actually say want they want!!!Hahaha!!FREEEEEDOOOOMMMM.

[Hollis]

Ting, a simple fact, is we are all biased. It is good to know what you are biased in and why. We are all ignorant in things, but the worse form of ignorance is not knowing that one is ignorant. Also I have been in more than one hot spot in the world. and live out side the US in several places. IMHO, most pro-Palestinian people are not pro-Palestine, they are anti-Israel. It is outside interference by people who are propagandized to a anti-Israeli bias who probably adds more to the suffering of Palestinian people than ever helping them. Jimmy Carter is one, who helped to prolong the conflict. I doubt you have any fair or impartial thoughts on this issue. Yes I am biased, I do not care to see innocent people murdered. As I mentioned Arafat became a billionaire on the suffering of the Palestinian people. Blame Israel for everything, crap.. Israel is between the rock and hard spot and so is the Palestinian people. You see all the so-called Palestinian supporter mute on Iran, Hezbullah, Hamas, AL Fatah, etc etc. Palestine is controlled by terrorists. The Palestinian people are under occupation of those terrorist groups. How many reporters in the Palestine have been shot, bones broken, etc all because the try to do the right thing and report the wrong doings of those in control of Palestine? Palestinian will never be free as long as terrorists control and can act with immunity in Palestine.

Israel is just convenient escape goat for repressive nations and during the cold war. The sins of Israel are well know on a global scale regardless if they are true or myths. Yet the terrorist who operate with immunity in Palestine almost always gets a free pass to murder. Compare the news on the global level. Israel a nation of 7 million gets more coverage than about half of the world, mostly all negative. Iran a nation of over 70 million, in it's repressive crack down on dissent, which is still going on, hardly anything in the news.

Keep believing you are less bias, keep clicking your heels (reference to Wizard of Oz)


As for Moore, your comments.


I like his movies. They give me some understanding of the US from a more European perspective(yes we are really liberal commies who hate freedom and love taxes).

I think he has been demonized in the US media. Mind you I haven't seen any discussions he has had, just his movies. Perhaps he is seen as a left wing version of Rush Limbaugh or something. Anyway I don't know.


In Bowling for Columbine I thought taking down Heston was appropriate. He had taken a prominent role in the post massacre debate. He might have been old, but he was not senile or anything so I don't see a problem.

As for the Marine, I don't remember that one. The thing that sticks to me from that movie is George Bushes: "Now watch this drive":lol:

I think I have watched some of it's show, though I don't remember that episode.


I seem to remember something about Heston and the NRA went campaigning right after the massacre with a pretty destructive message. But cheap shots are part of his documentary style.



You are more than just biased, ignorant and you don't know it. Bowling for Columbine was a complete fabrication of the time of events and gross misinterpretation of facts. Yes you are still nano seconds away on the internet, but still a light year a way on facts. Ever thought of questioning your source of information. A lot of people in the US, know moore is BS. Why not because of the nano seconds on the internet, because we also happen to live here. Besides I am a life member of the NRA, so yeah tell me all about the group that I am a member of.


PS you are also clueless about my Viet-Nam experience. Stereo types. Yeah, just like all people in Norway are Norseman run around in furs and helmets.

and yes, I wear a cowboy hat, wear a six gun and ride a horse. Bigoted Americans suck so do those bigoted Europeans.

I am not against pointing out the problems or jumping on Israel or any other country when they do bad things. This whole Palestinian/Israeli conflict is completely lopsided. It is like people have taken all the anger and frustration during the cold war and when the cold war ended, transfer it to this conflict.

[dracon49]

We need to kick people like you from Israel...You know why?Because you are a testament to deterioration of Israeli education system.You also testament of a person who have such a narrow mind,that a bicycle can't pass without get slammed in the walls of what is supposed to be your imagination,but instead filled with various strange ****** fantasies :).Your mind is so hardwired with good-bad,right-wrong,we-them,that you would fit so well into Airstrip 1,you would enjoy living there (books in not your strong side,so just look for a movie 1984).
And what's most important,you actually do very draconian service in representing Israel in this forum (I'll admit,it isn't half as shyte as it used to be before you were banned a couple of times..But it is bad as an actor from a z movie).

And before you start wining "but what did I said",when soldiers come to your house in the middle of the night,you will say "fokk you".Where ever you live (and if someone wants to live in freaking Gaza,whatever).Words are free in this world,and a surprise to you:people can actually say want they want!!!Hahaha!!FREEEEEDOOOOMMMM.
Because i said that a Norwegian girl messed with Israeli soldiers and that Israel should not allow ppl like that to enter Israel im draconian? So fine with me.

[Climber]

We need to kick people like you from Israel...You know why?Because you are a testament to deterioration of Israeli education system.You also testament of a person who have such a narrow mind,that a bicycle can't pass without get slammed in the walls of what is supposed to be your imagination,but instead filled with various strange ****** fantasies :).Your mind is so hardwired with good-bad,right-wrong,we-them,that you would fit so well into Airstrip 1,you would enjoy living there (books in not your strong side,so just look for a movie 1984).
And what's most important,you actually do very draconian service in representing Israel in this forum (I'll admit,it isn't half as shyte as it used to be before you were banned a couple of times..But it is bad as an actor from a z movie).

And before you start wining "but what did I said",when soldiers come to your house in the middle of the night,you will say "fokk you".Where ever you live (and if someone wants to live in freaking Gaza,whatever).Words are free in this world,and a surprise to you:people can actually say want they want!!!Hahaha!!FREEEEEDOOOOMMMM.

Another thing I agree 100%


Because i said that a Norwegian girl messed with Israeli soldiers and that Israel should not allow ppl like that to enter Israel im draconian? So fine with me.

Not only because of what you posted here, but what you post everywhere every time, and not only as dracon, but as the late spider too. You are a shame.

[dracon49]

Actually now i hardly post things that you can consider radical...and here is the video on the incident that im talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aqy7uyVKYMA&feature=player_embedded
Say what do you think about that.

[Kaplanr]

Oz Mah? Comes with the territory (no pun intended.) I give her 10 points for guts and -10 for being stupid. Both she and the other guy (English? South African, Irish?) know damn well, just like the Palestinians, what the behavior threshold is with IDF soldiers.

At some point something has to give. The Pals and the rest of the Arabs are going to have to accept that Israel exists and will continue to. We are going to have to stop playing with words and actually commit to something, somewhere - with a political leadership that can actually think a week ahead, and not just how to stay in office. BTW I'm in Berdan's and Climber's camp with you.

[dracon49]

What i said on that girl you dont accept it? We should allow "human rights activities" that offend our soldiers to be in Judea and Samaria?

[~Berdan]

What i said on that girl you dont accept it? We should allow "human rights activities" that offend our soldiers to be in Judea and Samaria?

I will say it again,because you are thick in the skull area.
People have the right to determine what they want to do with themselves.As long as they don't disturb anybody or break any laws.
What laws they broke here?Saying leh tizdayen to a soldier?Boo fokking hoo,he is a big guy,I bet he's been told worse.I'm sure there isn't a law prohibiting bad mouthing.Specially not one that justifies kicking them out of country.I am not seeing any arms raised here.Would she interfere with soldiers work,they would have the full right from my part to punch her in the nipples.Otherwise,it's just your wishful thinking.

Your back hurts?Cause the box your in is so tight.You have no sympathy for no one.Why should you?It's not like you actually have any life experience,where you can feel how other people feel.When I was smaller,I got trapped in the middle of civil war.Both sides had decent and good young guys fighting each other,when they could be a good friends.Yes,I felt mighty pissed on the assholes inside the tank,which was shooting from his coax MG at our balconies(more scared than pissed.Actually,all scared).Despite the fact,that probably in this tank,there were probably 3 magnificent guys who got orders,and just wanted to get over it.Probably some of them could have the same hobby as me,same taste in movies,same taste in girls.

But again,I wouldn't be feeling bad at that time,if someone would blow this tank to pieces.Not so black and white here.Strange world,right and wrong is not so set and steady.So,saying "leh tizdayen" is not the end of the world.Emotional people tend to say stuff like that.Stuff like that is a part of the soldiers job,you know,democracy and such is a bitch,but somehow I have a hunch you would prefer to live here than in Afghanistan.

Without any life experience,you can't understand other humans,and their suffering.That way,there is dissonance,and you can treat the other side without emotions.What bothers me is you actually put yourself in this box by choice,and proud of it.


BTW,each year,hundred of Israelis roam Thailand,Goa,India after army,and live there for some time.Seeing how they behave,following your formula,they should have been executed on spot,or picked by police and thrown away from the country.No respect for locals,authority and such and such.Lets kill em all,for the glory of big brother!

You want to deport people from the country,because they offend soldiers?I heard there are some great guys you would feel at home with,they called Taliban,arsewipe.

[dracon49]

I will say it again,because you are thick in the skull area.
People have the right to determine what they want to do with themselves.As long as they don't disturb anybody or break any laws.
What laws they broke here?Saying leh tizdayen to a soldier?Boo fokking hoo,he is a big guy,I bet he's been told worse.I'm sure there isn't a law prohibiting bad mouthing.Specially not one that justifies kicking them out of country.

Your back hurts?Cause the box your in is so tight.You have no sympathy for no one.Why should you?It's not like you actually have any life experience,where you can feel how other people feel.When I was smaller,I got trapped in the middle of civil war.Both sides had decent and good young guys fighting each other,when they could be a good friends.Yes,I felt mighty pissed on the assholes inside the tank,which was shooting from his coax MG at our balconies(more scared than pissed.Actually,all scared).Despite the fact,that probably in this tank,there were probably 3 magnificent guys who got orders,and just wanted to get over it.Probably some of them could have the same hobby as me,same taste in movies,same taste in girls.But again,I wouldn't be feeling bad at that time,if someone would blow this tank to pieces.Not so black and white here.Strange world,right and wrong is not so set and steady.
Without any life experience,you can't understand other humans,and their suffering.That way,there is dissonance,and you can treat the other side without emotions.What bothers me is you actually put yourself in this box by choice,and proud of it.


BTW,each year,hundred of Israelis roam Thailand,Goa,India after army,and live there for some time.Seeing how they behave,following your formula,they should have been executed on spot,or picked by police and thrown away from the country.No respect for locals,authority and such and such.Lets kill em all,for the glory of big brother!
It's not only that she cursed him...those activities tried to block the soldiers from doing their mission.

[tanks_alot]

I don't get it. After Oslo, Israel got out of most of the major Palestinian cities and they got their corrupt autonomy. Israel even provided them with weapons (honestly, what kind of country provides it's enemies with weapons to be used against you at a later date?). however, while Arafat used his newly founded autonomy in order to rob his own people and get rich on it, he also used it in order to launch the 90's terror campaign on Israeli cities. and what do you know? after a few years the peace process didn't seem that attractive to the avarage Israeli citizen and so a right wing government led by Netanyahu was elected. sure, Israel was still building settlements at the time and it's very annoying for the Palestinians, but building houses doesn't kill people.


And what do you know, while the peace process wasn't really advancing during Netanyahu's first term, another thing wasn't really advancing - the Palestinian terror campaign that took a nap. however, we Israelis are quite fickle. and after a couple of years of a right wing government, Barak promised to take us out of south Lebanon and to renew the peace process. sounds good, right?


So, the dude is elected, pulls us out of south Lebanon - the UN confirmes a complete Israeli withdrawal and Barak is talking again with Arafat, offering him the best offer the Palestinians got so far. sounds like we are on the right track to your Scandinavian utopia. however, what do you know? about two months after Israel got out of south Lebanon, 3 IDF soldiers were kidnapped by Hezballah (later it was found out that they were killed and not taken alive). Hezballah has some great new claims in order to have an excuse to keep it's arms and suddenly talking with Israel doesn't seem that lucrative to Arafat, when he can simply take it by force, like Hezballah did. more glory that way.


So, sure. Israel still had the settlements at the time and it's very annoying, but it still doesn't kill people. so, we still have a warm border with Lebanon, while Hezballah is able to gather strength. Arafat launches the second Intifada and Israel is again portrayed as the big bad monster. so those fickle Israelis go right wing again, this time in the shape of Sharon. about 4 years later and about a 1,000 dead Israelis more - mostly civilians, Israel gets things under control, more or less. the seperation barrier is starting to work and along with good work by the Shin Bet and the IDF, the Palestinian terror machine is an a noticeable decline.


Now, you can say what you want about Sharon't Gaza disengagment plan, that it wasn't in order to help the Palestinians, but in order to cut the IDF losses in the Strip, put a squeeze on the Palestinians, or maybe he genuinely thought it's the right thing to do in order to put a stop to the conflict. however, it simply doesn't matter, as the fact is that Israel got out of the Gaza Strip without asking anything in return and the majority of Israelis supported it. Sharon and Olmert also had a similar plan for the West Bank and Olmert won the elections with this plan in his manifest. all the Palestinians had to do was simply nothing! just sit back, even if they wanted to continue fighting, they should have just waited and then start fighting again, after getting more land and improved positions, but they weren't even able to do that!


So, the Palestinians see the Israeli withdrawal as a sign of weakness (it's the Middle East, dude. not Scandinavia). the agricultural infrastructure was left intact by Israel. the destroyed Israeli settlements could have been used as a building ground for new Palestinian towns and villages, in the very, very crowded Gaza Strip. however, instead they were turned into training grounds for the terror groups and the infrastructure was pillaged instead of being used.

The Palestinians saw the Hamas as heroes and combined with their dismay of the corruption of the Western backed Fatah, they elected the Hamas (but it's the Israelis that are an obstacle to peace!). and when the

Hamas felt it doesn't have enough power, they wiped out the Fatah's presence in the Strip, killing and torturing anyone that opposed them, until all those who survived decided to run to evil Israel for refuge.

Gaza turned into Hamastan, southern Israel turned into rocket target practice and weapons flowed into the Gaza Strip like there's no tomorrow.


So, sure. Israel still maintained some security measures in the Gaza Strip. but what's the best way to show the avarage Israeli that pulling out of the Strip was a step in the right direction?


A) Stop the violence as a good will gesture, so the other side will see it's OK to make more concessions.


Or:


B)Attack, Attack, Attack! pick up the pace of the rockets you are shooting at the other side's towns and cities, attack the forces on the border and promise the enemy you'll keep going until he'll be pushed into the sea.

And despite that, moderate Olmert was still elected, while wanting to do the same thing in the West Bank, but i won't be fooled! it's those warmongering Israelis that are the problem!


So, Olmert is elected. Gilad Shalit is kidnapped in the Gaza Strip, soon to be followed by another kidnapping (of course, keeping in tradition, Hezballah didn't bother taking live soldiers) in the border with Lebanon, which came back to bite us in our collective ass. we have a fun war, some skirmishes in the Gaza Strip and when the fun is over, those fickle Israelis start re-thinking again about the effect of making concessions(don't worry, give us a few more years and it'll seem like a great idea again - we have a short memory).


Not to mention the fact that the people that we are supposed to be negotiating with, are in a civil war! sure, we can make some sort of agreement with the Fatah, stop all of the presence in the West Bank etc'. however the reason the Fatah is in the West Bank, is because Israel is operating non stop against the Hamas and Islamic Jihad there. the second the Israeli security forces will let the Fatah handle things, well, we saw how good they operated against the Hamas in the Gaza Strip. so, we have a little paradox here. and it is my opinion that people that say that Israel should sign a deal with the Fatah, are imbeciles, because such an agreement will not be worth the paper it's signed on when the Fatah will lose power. first they need to resolve their own issues and then start dealing with Israel. what can be more simple than that?


In the mean time, Israel needs to improve the economy in the West Bank, so the Palestinians will see that working with Israel is better than fighting against it and that's exactly what is being done. their economy is on the rise, road blocks are removed (at the cost of terror attacks which already took place) and the PA police is being improved.


You can't have anything better at this moment in time. at some point, people need to understand that there is no way to resolve this issue in the coming years and the best that can be done is to calm the area, improve the economy and build the conditions which will allow peace in the future.

People that haven't learned from the past and are trying to impose artificial solutions on all of the sides, are simply perpetuating this conflict and are setting the ground for the next round of violence.


By the way, i'm sure you'll forgive me for skipping Netanyahu's re-election in my fun little review, but my point was already made and i'm too tired to keep typing.

[this Dude]

The Palestinians could have had a state already. They must assume responsibility for those missed opportunities.

BTW, where do you live?[/QUOTE]

Well they might have missed some oppertunities but still that doesent give israel the right to decide alone about the land.I think israel has to try and make "friends" with the arab wolrd and stop doing provocative and hostile actions towards them like cast led and "fiddiling "around with the relations of the nile delta countries because israel is the last one who needs enemys over here.
P.S. im not in palestine if that matters to you otherwise I don't see the point of telling you where i live cause this shouldnt matter to you anyway .

[Kaplanr]

Frankly "Dude" until they get the collective **** together and cease being the collective ****s of Farfour, the Palestinians can go **** themselves. And I'm from the left side of the spectrum.

[Ozzy[NO]]

Frankly "Dude" until they get the collective **** together and cease being the collective ****s of Farfour, the Palestinians can go **** themselves. And I'm from the left side of the spectrum.

I concur. Whatever Israel does, or does not do, the Palestinians have been their own worst enemy for several decades.

[GB_FXST]

The Jews, possibly? I mean, if we focus on nationality, that is, and keep in mind before 1947 their co-nationals were American, French, Polish, etc.

Maybe. But, it is a concept that requires some thought and analysis. I defer further discussion, however, because my point is that the Arab states (and the UN) have done nothing but exacerbate the plight of Palestinian refugees. The world would have be a different place if Arab countries had accepted and welcomed Palestinians as equals. This status of perpetual refugee does nothing but serve to perpetuate the conflict, and prolong the misery of Palestinians.





... snip ...


I don't believe Hamas is as dogmatic and unapproachable as you do. I believe they will follow the mainline of Palestinian mood. No matter what their charter says.


... snip ...



What empirical evidence so you have to support this conclusion? Has a Hamas official ever advocated something less than the destruction of Israel? Has a Hamas official ever expressed tolerance for secularism or Palestinians who are not muslim?





... snip ...

May bee. Personally I don't see them having any great opportunities in the post 1967 era, that they missed. The biggest opportunity, Oslo was scuttled by both parties, though I personally believe Israel is the one who bears the most responsibility in this matter.

I live in/close to Sandvika in Bærum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandvika
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bærum

... snip ..



Thank you for taking the time to answer the question, but it was not directed at you.





I don't get it. After Oslo, Israel got out of most of the major Palestinian cities and they got their corrupt autonomy. Israel even provided them with weapons (honestly, what kind of country provides it's enemies with weapons to be used against you at a later date?). however, while Arafat used his newly founded autonomy in order to rob his own people and get rich on it, he also used it in order to launch the 90's terror campaign on Israeli cities. and what do you know? after a few years the peace process didn't seem that attractive to the avarage Israeli citizen and so a right wing government led by Netanyahu was elected. sure, Israel was still building settlements at the time and it's very annoying for the Palestinians, but building houses doesn't kill people.




... snip ...




By the way, i'm sure you'll forgive me for skipping Netanyahu's re-election in my fun little review, but my point was already made and i'm too tired to keep typing.


Excellent post. Thanks for taking the time to write it.




The Palestinians could have had a state already. They must assume responsibility for those missed opportunities.

BTW, where do you live?c

Well they might have missed some oppertunities but still that doesent give israel the right to decide alone about the land.I think israel has to try and make "friends" with the arab wolrd and stop doing provocative and hostile actions towards them like cast led and "fiddiling "around with the relations of the nile delta countries because israel is the last one who needs enemys over here.
P.S. im not in palestine if that matters to you otherwise I don't see the point of telling you where i live cause this shouldnt matter to you anyway .


Israel is the soveriegn - or High Contracting - power over the West Bank, until such time as a peace deal is concluded and final borders are defined between Israel and another High Contracting power. Until then, Israel can make unilateral decisions about the land in the West Bank.

I asked where you live because I wonder if you have moral standing to question the legitimacy of Israel's claim to land.

[juliannicholas]

When you look at what Israel has achieved compared to what the Arabs have achieved given the resources the Arabs have its amazing.

Maybe if Israel was a shi*hole, despotic corrupt regime with tons of oil people wouldn't care

As for the Palestinians they need to stop crying and get on with their lives.

If the Jews can get out of the gas chambers and concentration camps of Europe and build successful lives in Israel, USA, UK, France etc why can't the Arabs.

Why do they blame Israel for all their problems......its getting mighty boring now. Take some responsibility instead of brainwashing people into hatred.

[this Dude]

Israel is the soveriegn - or High Contracting - power over the West Bank, until such time as a peace deal is concluded and final borders are defined between Israel and another High Contracting power. Until then, Israel can make unilateral decisions about the land in the West Bank.

I asked where you live because I wonder if you have moral standing to question the legitimacy of Israel's claim to land.[/QUOTE]

So you say a nation has the right to occupy -or whatever you wanna call it- disputed territory as long there is no "high contracting power" to talk to ?And if so then Jordan has the right to claim ownership of the West Bank too .Because its as neighouring to the West Bank as Israel is.
And what makes Israel the "high contracting power "over the west bank? the IDF?

And please define me moral standing to me its a too much of an elastic term ,
thanks

[GiladS]

So you say a nation has the right to occupy -or whatever you wanna call it- disputed territory as long there is no "high contracting power" to talk to ?And if so then Jordan has the right to claim ownership of the West Bank too .Because its as neighouring to the West Bank as Israel is.


If you actually knew the history of the region you would have known that Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in 1967 and that since then it has ceded it's claim on it.


And what makes Israel the "high contracting power "over the west bank? the IDF?


Pretty much, Israel is a substantial military and economic power in the region.

[GB_FXST]

So you say a nation has the right to occupy -or whatever you wanna call it- disputed territory as long there is no "high contracting power" to talk to ?And if so then Jordan has the right to claim ownership of the West Bank too .Because its as neighouring to the West Bank as Israel is.
And what makes Israel the "high contracting power "over the west bank? the IDF?

And please define me moral standing to me its a too much of an elastic term ,
thanks

Up until 1967, Jordan was the High Contracting party in the West Bank. There has never been a recognized state of palestine in that geographical area.

In 1967, Israel fought a defensive war, thereby conquering the West Bank. Israel is the soveriegn power in the West bank under existing international law and UNSC 242. And, Israel will remain the soveriegn power in the West bank until Israel agrees to a peace treaty with another High Contracting party. In other words, Jordan went to war, lost territory, and now Israel has full legal right to that territory. Israel's legal rights in the West Bank will remain in effect until a deal is reached with the Palestinian Authority (which has now become (since the early 1990's) the defacto High Contracting party of the Palestinians).

Jordan abandoned their claim to the West Bank. Had they not done so, Israel would have been fully justified in negotiating a return of the West Bank to Jordan, and not to the Palestinian Authority or amny other Palestinian organization.

In regards to place of residence and moral high ground, my questions are simple. Your equivocation is interesting. At any rate, the issue is simply this: by what right do you question Israel's land claims? Are yoiu so certain that your moral claim to your place of residency is beyond reproach? I suspect that Israel's historical land claims trumps your claim of residence.

[ting]

Ting, a simple fact, is we are all biased. It is good to know what you are biased in and why. We are all ignorant in things, but the worse form of ignorance is not knowing that one is ignorant. Also I have been in more than one hot spot in the world. and live out side the US in several places. IMHO, most pro-Palestinian people are not pro-Palestine, they are anti-Israel. It is outside interference by people who are propagandized to a anti-Israeli bias who probably adds more to the suffering of Palestinian people than ever helping them. Jimmy Carter is one, who helped to prolong the conflict. I doubt you have any fair or impartial thoughts on this issue. Yes I am biased, I do not care to see innocent people murdered. As I mentioned Arafat became a billionaire on the suffering of the Palestinian people. Blame Israel for everything, crap.. Israel is between the rock and hard spot and so is the Palestinian people. You see all the so-called Palestinian supporter mute on Iran, Hezbullah, Hamas, AL Fatah, etc etc. Palestine is controlled by terrorists. The Palestinian people are under occupation of those terrorist groups. How many reporters in the Palestine have been shot, bones broken, etc all because the try to do the right thing and report the wrong doings of those in control of Palestine? Palestinian will never be free as long as terrorists control and can act with immunity in Palestine.

Israel is just convenient escape goat for repressive nations and during the cold war. The sins of Israel are well know on a global scale regardless if they are true or myths. Yet the terrorist who operate with immunity in Palestine almost always gets a free pass to murder. Compare the news on the global level. Israel a nation of 7 million gets more coverage than about half of the world, mostly all negative. Iran a nation of over 70 million, in it's repressive crack down on dissent, which is still going on, hardly anything in the news.

Keep believing you are less bias, keep clicking your heels (reference to Wizard of Oz)

Bias
I agree we are all biased. It's a question of what definition you give the word.

Ignorance
I agree.

Anti-Israel
I don't know which people you have met. If you believe that not supporting Israels right beyond the 67 border is anti-Israeli, then your impressions might very well be a good indicator for reality.

Foreign anti-israelis
If your definition is that of the above then I disagree. I think I generally disagree with you on this. I think without foreign attention and support the Palestinians would be far worse off.

Jimmy carter prolonging the conflict.
If you mean that no peace deal would have shortened the conflict, you might be correct. However I suspect that the Jewish people would be suffering the most 30 years later.

Arafat's Billions
Arafat AFAIK led a simple lifestyle. If he had half a brain he would have dumped his people and enjoyed "his billions". The point is they weren't his. They were fatah/plo funds. As the head of the organization he had control of the funds. He used them to remain in power, and to help his people etc. Not personal enrichment. What the funds financed is another matter. He used all the means at his disposal to achieve his goals. Weather they were sensible or honorable or despicable etc. Is another matter.

Muteness of Palestinian supporters
Those people you describe, I have yet to come in contact with. Could it be that you don't know what other beliefs people who criticize Iran etc have? Could it be that they are when you are not looking Palestinian supporters?

Controlled by terrorists
I don't think Abbas is a terrorist, but if you do, then you make a consistent argument.

Journalistic freedom
Yes that is disconcerting. However the Palestinians are occupied, so I'm not sure i expect them to have full freedom of the press. I don't like how it is, however I think it is improving.

Israel vs. Iran
democracy vs. dictatorship
press freedom vs. government controlled
open vs. closed

Do you really expect these differences to equal a life for a life news report?
How many died in Haiti vs. New Orleans. Who is looking to get the most press?

Israel is a democracy, and more is expected of a democracy than of a dictatorship. You expect dictatorships to be oppressive and abuse human rights. If there are human rights violations in a democracy it is news. If there are human rights violations in a dictatorship it is consistent with what a dictatorship is.

I haven't seen the Wizard of Oz.





As for Moore, your comments.






You are more than just biased, ignorant and you don't know it. Bowling for Columbine was a complete fabrication of the time of events and gross misinterpretation of facts. Yes you are still nano seconds away on the internet, but still a light year a way on facts. Ever thought of questioning your source of information. A lot of people in the US, know moore is BS. Why not because of the nano seconds on the internet, because we also happen to live here. Besides I am a life member of the NRA, so yeah tell me all about the group that I am a member of.


The fact is that gun control is not an important issue for me. I would love to have the possibility to shoot with all the weapons I read about. To see for my self the difference between firing a 5.56 and a 7.62 assault rifle/battle rifle. I would love to test out different machine guns. But I can't. It is not common here to have a lot of guns. I think some do but they keep it to themselves. Perhaps I will be able to buy some weapons one day when I have money to spend. I don't know the rules. I suspect they are strict. However this is listed somewhere in the vicinity of buying a Ferrari. It might happen, but it probably wont.

I said Moore gives me a viewpoint. If I had an interest I could find counterpoints. But why should I? I am not a US citizen, It doesn't apply to me. But since I have seen the film, liked it and said it gave me some information on guns in the US, does that mean I agree with all the info in the film, or Moore him self? No it does not. Do I think people in the US shouldn't have guns? no Do I find it strange that guns are so prevalent in US culture? Yes. Do I think its strange that Chinese eat dogs? yes That some Scots wear kilts? yes

Should I know the pros and cons of these issues in dept in order to voice my opinion about a documentary about these issues? I think not. Am I ignorant about guns in the US? yes. Does it bother me? no Do I know something about it? yes.

NRA
What I know about the group is that it's called the National Rifle Association. I think they are a powerful factor in US politics. I thought they were ruthlessly cynical in their pursuit of their goals, however Gajin cleared that up.

From your comments I get the impression that it's akin to a religion in the US. I'm sorry if I offend your beliefs. Though I find it difficult to understand what it is that I said that was so offensive.




PS you are also clueless about my Viet-Nam experience. Stereo types. Yeah, just like all people in Norway are Norseman run around in furs and helmets.

and yes, I wear a cowboy hat, wear a six gun and ride a horse. Bigoted Americans suck so do those bigoted Europeans.

I am not against pointing out the problems or jumping on Israel or any other country when they do bad things. This whole Palestinian/Israeli conflict is completely lopsided. It is like people have taken all the anger and frustration during the cold war and when the cold war ended, transfer it to this conflict.

Vietnam experience
Yes I'm clueless, I'm basing my reasoning on assumptions which I state clearly as part of my reasoning.

Thanks for the info about the cowboy hat, horse and six gun. I personally thought big mac, coke and SUV. Well I cant always be right.

Cold war and Israel
The cold war made this area a battle ground. When the cold war ended, this area came to the top of the agenda with it's unresolved conflicts. The conflict had been fueled by the cold war. With the cold war ending it was now possible to solve this conflict. Minor conflicts were no longer seen as yet another battleground of the cold war, but as conflicts in themselves. Their solution was no longer seen as one side winning the cold war, but as a local conflict needing local solutions.

[Hollis]

Foreign anti-israelis
If your definition is that of the above then I disagree. I think I generally disagree with you on this. I think without foreign attention and support the Palestinians would be far worse off.




My contentions is that current foreign involvement, not all of it, but a majority tends to support terrorist rather than the Palestinian people. Israel, from what I can determine does not need me one way or another. I do believe the Palestinian people do need support in creating a stable internal environment with out terrorists. As long as the terrorist can act with immunity in Palestine, the Palestinian people will never lift the yoke of oppression internally and will never be able to forge a lasting peace with Israel. The same goes for Lebanon, with Hezbullah, Syria and Iran involvement in the domestic affairs of the Lebanese. This is something, that it seems to me you fail to understand about foreign involvement in the ME.


When a women can be dragged from her house, executed in front of her children by terrorists operating in Palestine without due process of law and with immunity, How can anyone rational person say place Israel as a priority in the peace process is beyond me. Israel has absolute no control or command over the terrorists operating in Palestine. Again Until the Palestinian people are free to choose their government without coercion from terrorists groups they can not, will not be able to negotiate any agreement with any other government with good faith. Priority One for Peace, establishing a Palestinian state is to abolish those terrorist groups. Once that is done, I think we can then honestly look at Israel and it's role in Peace in that area. Until then, outside support which has often aided the terrorist, whether it was their intent or not, needs to stop. Aid need to actually be given to the Palestinian people in reality not those terrorist groups.

Those terrorist groups promote a culture of death. They have forced children, mentally handicapped people, and other to carry out suicide attacks. They place the Palestinian people constantly in harms way to promote their own agenda.

Maybe for once people who actually do support the Palestinian people will think more and act to the benefit of the Palestinian people rather than to their determent. IMHO, Carter has never help the Palestinian people but played into the hands of the terrorists.



Psst, you need to know the meaning of documentary, Moore's films are never documentaries. "If ya gotta lie to promote your agenda, maybe there is something wrong with your agenda." (not saying you, but people like moore)

[Kaplanr]

I don't believe Hamas is as dogmatic and unapproachable as you do. I believe they will follow the mainline of Palestinian mood. No matter what their charter says.
Except the man who runs Hamas is Khaled Meshaal who hasn't a man of the mainline Palestinian mood, and works out of Damascus. Ismail Haniyah doesn't get to work independently, and Meshaal doesn't run in elections.



May bee. Personally I don't see them having any great opportunities in the post 1967 era, that they missed. The biggest opportunity, Oslo was scuttled by both parties, though I personally believe Israel is the one who bears the most responsibility in this matter.
Here's what set the tone after the 6 Day War.


Resolution of September 1, 1967 was issued at the conclusion of a meeting between the leaders of eight Arab countries in the wake of the Six-Day War. The resolution, which formed a basis of the policies of these governments toward Israel until the Yom Kippur War of 1973, called for:

No peace with Israel
No recognition of Israel
No negotiations with Israel
Khartoum Resolutions text:

"1. The conference has affirmed the unity of Arab ranks, the unity of joint action and the need for coordination and for the elimination of all differences. The Kings, Presidents and representatives of the other Arab Heads of State at the conference have affirmed their countries' stand by and implementation of the Arab Solidarity Charter which was signed at the third Arab summit conference in Casablanca.

2. The conference has agreed on the need to consolidate all efforts to eliminate the effects of the aggression on the basis that the occupied lands are Arab lands and that the burden of regaining these lands falls on all the Arab States.

3. The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.

4. The conference of Arab Ministers of Finance, Economy and Oil recommended that suspension of oil pumping be used as a weapon in the battle. However, after thoroughly studying the matter, the summit conference has come to the conclusion that the oil pumping can itself be used as a positive weapon, since oil is an Arab resource which can be used to strengthen the economy of the Arab States directly affected by the aggression, so that these States will be able to stand firm in the battle. The conference has, therefore, decided to resume the pumping of oil, since oil is a positive Arab resource that can be used in the service of Arab goals. It can contribute to the efforts to enable those Arab States which were exposed to the aggression and thereby lost economic resources to stand firm and eliminate the effects of the aggression. The oil-producing States have, in fact, participated in the efforts to enable the States affected by the aggression to stand firm in the face of any economic pressure.

5. The participants in the conference have approved the plan proposed by Kuwait to set up an Arab Economic and Social Development Fund on the basis of the recommendation of the Baghdad conference of Arab Ministers of Finance, Economy and Oil.

6. The participants have agreed on the need to adopt the necessary measures to strengthen military preparation to face all eventualities.

7. The conference has decided to expedite the elimination of foreign bases in the Arab States."

Council on Foreign Relations
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14841/khartoum_resolution.html?breadcrumb=/publication/publication_list%3Ftype%3Dessential_document%26page%3D69

[ting]

My contentions is that current foreign involvement, not all of it, but a majority tends to support terrorist rather than the Palestinian people. Israel, from what I can determine does not need me one way or another. I do believe the Palestinian people do need support in creating a stable internal environment with out terrorists. As long as the terrorist can act with immunity in Palestine, the Palestinian people will never lift the yoke of oppression internally and will never be able to forge a lasting peace with Israel. The same goes for Lebanon, with Hezbullah, Syria and Iran involvement in the domestic affairs of the Lebanese. This is something, that it seems to me you fail to understand about foreign involvement in the ME.

I see the majority of foreign aid going to the Palestinian people. The major donors are the European states and the US. I'm pretty sure they keep a good eye on were the funds end up.



When a women can be dragged from her house, executed in front of her children by terrorists operating in Palestine without due process of law and with immunity, How can anyone rational person say place Israel as a priority in the peace process is beyond me. Israel has absolute no control or command over the terrorists operating in Palestine. Again Until the Palestinian people are free to choose their government without coercion from terrorists groups they can not, will not be able to negotiate any agreement with any other government with good faith. Priority One for Peace, establishing a Palestinian state is to abolish those terrorist groups. Once that is done, I think we can then honestly look at Israel and it's role in Peace in that area. Until then, outside support which has often aided the terrorist, whether it was their intent or not, needs to stop. Aid need to actually be given to the Palestinian people in reality not those terrorist groups.


The terrorist thrive on the occupation. End the occupation or give them a reason to believe it is about to end and the terrorists will starve. I don't think the Palestinians can get rid of the terrorists without the occupation ending.



Those terrorist groups promote a culture of death. They have forced children, mentally handicapped people, and other to carry out suicide attacks. They place the Palestinian people constantly in harms way to promote their own agenda.
Some are worse than others, but yes they are bad. Still if you kill one 2 will often take his place.



Maybe for once people who actually do support the Palestinian people will think more and act to the benefit of the Palestinian people rather than to their determent. IMHO, Carter has never help the Palestinian people but played into the hands of the terrorists.
You are talking about a lot of different supporters here. If you are thinking about most of the Arab countries I can agree. However most of the support for the PA comes from the West.

Carter
If you look at camp David as a disaster for the Palestinians, then you might have a point. Personally I'm not sure I would like how things would have been now without it.




Psst, you need to know the meaning of documentary, Moore's films are never documentaries. "If ya gotta lie to promote your agenda, maybe there is something wrong with your agenda." (not saying you, but people like moore)

Action
Adult
Adventure
Biography
Children's
Comedy
Crime
Disaster
Documentary
Drama
Foreign
Espionage
Family
Fantasy
Gay & Lesbian
Horror
Musical
Mystery
Period Piece
Romance
Sci-Fi
Short
Sport
Suspense
Teen
Thriller
War
Western
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_genre

I view it as a documentary. If you have a new way to classify movies, then I'm sure someone will listen. I prefer the generally accepted classification system for movies.

[ting]

Except the man who runs Hamas is Khaled Meshaal who hasn't a man of the mainline Palestinian mood, and works out of Damascus. Ismail Haniyah doesn't get to work independently, and Meshaal doesn't run in elections.
Neither Meshaal or Haniyah = Hamas. Hamas needs support of common people. If common people want a different Hamas, Hamas will either change or become irrelevant.



Here's what set the tone after the 6 Day War.



Council on Foreign Relations
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14841/khartoum_resolution.html?breadcrumb=/publication/publication_list%3Ftype%3Dessential_document%26page%3D69

Interesting, thanks for the info. We can sure see how that went. Peace deals with Jordan and Egypt. The big Satan having bases all over the middle east. Yep the Arabs sure are committed to what they state in lofty declarations of solidarity with each other...;-)

[GiladS]

I see the majority of foreign aid going to the Palestinian people. The major donors are the European states and the US. I'm pretty sure they keep a good eye on were the funds end up.


Just like people claimed when Arafat was running things?

http://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CAcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2F2%2Fhi%2Fmiddle_east%2F3243071.stm&rct=j&q=palestinian+funds+go&ei=8jptS6fsBIapsQa9p6j3BQ&usg=AFQjCNH5uJKCPy7cETFHOzwpylevxV7NZQ


The terrorist thrive on the occupation. End the occupation or give them a reason to believe it is about to end and the terrorists will starve. I don't think the Palestinians can get rid of the terrorists without the occupation ending.

Facts show otherwise...

Israel's unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip was completed in September of 2005.

In January of 2006 Hamas won the Palestinian legislative election and the rest is well known.

According to Hamas Tel-Aviv is also "occupied land" and that's something you seem to be unable or unwilling to comprehend.


Still if you kill one 2 will often take his place.

A very simplistic outlook, Hamas has yet to find someone who could fill Yahya Ayyash's shoes (for example) just as Hizbollah has yet to find someone who can fit Mughniyah's and so on and so on.

[Kaplanr]

Neither Meshaal or Haniyah = Hamas. Hamas needs support of common people. If common people want a different Hamas, Hamas will either change or become irrelevant.



Interesting, thanks for the info. We can sure see how that went. Peace deals with Jordan and Egypt. The big Satan having bases all over the middle east. Yep the Arabs sure are committed to what they state in lofty declarations of solidarity with each other...;-)

You specifically referred to opportunities in the post 1967 period; I gave you an indication of what the immediate post 1967 period encompassed.

[ting]

Just like people claimed when Arafat was running things?

http://www.google.co.il/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CAcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2F2%2Fhi%2Fmiddle_east%2F3243071.stm&rct=j&q=palestinian+funds+go&ei=8jptS6fsBIapsQa9p6j3BQ&usg=AFQjCNH5uJKCPy7cETFHOzwpylevxV7NZQ

It is anecdotal. One case does not apply to all equal cases.




Facts show otherwise...

Israel's unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip was completed in September of 2005.

In January of 2006 Hamas won the Palestinian legislative election and the rest is well known.


According to Hamas Tel-Aviv is also "occupied land" and that's something you seem to be unable or unwilling to comprehend.

Gaza
This only makes sense if you view Gaza as a separate entity. Lets say Sweden occupied all of Norway. Then withdrew from the north of Norway. Norwegians would still be fighting the occupier.

Election
Hamas won not because of their death to Israel founding document, but because it was seen as uncorrupted and a tough negotiator.

Founding document or what they call it
I see this as what Hamas would want in a best case scenario. I believe that it will not preclude Hamas from accepting a two state solution.



A very simplistic outlook, Hamas has yet to find someone who could fill Yahya Ayyash's shoes (for example) just as Hizbollah has yet to find someone who can fit Mughniyah's and so on and so on.

Of course I'm simplifying things. I don't have the typing/thinking speed to make it more complex. However if you think in a 5-10-20 year period, I don't see their individual losses as much of a problem for them.

Sorry if I'm oversimplifying things. I'm just not in a complex form right now. And as alway all this is just my opinion.;-)

[ting]

You specifically referred to opportunities in the post 1967 period; I gave you an indication of what the immediate post 1967 period encompassed.

Ah, I was thinking 1967 until now. English is not my primary language. You have no disagreement from me. Any peace deal would be impossible at this time. Peace only became a real option IMHO with Camp David.

Sorry for the mix up.:-)

[GiladS]

It is anecdotal. One case does not apply to all equal cases.
It doesn't?

So after such cases one can be completely certain that foreign funds can't be used for terrorist activity?

You know the saying: "fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, shame on me"?

You should really take it to heart.



This only makes sense if you view Gaza as a separate entity. Lets say Sweden occupied all of Norway. Then withdrew from the north of Norway. Norwegians would still be fighting the occupier.


The Gaza Strip unilateral disengagement was to set a precedent for future concessions and advance the peace process by changing the status quo.

All the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip needed to do was to cease conducting terrorist activity from this territory and to develop it.

You made this claim earlier on:

End the occupation or give them a reason to believe it is about to end and the terrorists will starve.
The exact opposite happened and everything those in Israel who opposed the disengagement from the Gaza Strip said would happen did in fact happen.

As a teenager who strongly believed the disengagement would have pushed progress forward I found myself two years later as a soldier in the IDF having to go into that s***hole in order to clear out the hornets nests that were nurtured there.

Today I and most Israelis who believed in the disengagement plan don't think we should even spit in the Palestinians direction.

These are the sad facts.



Hamas won not because of their death to Israel founding document, but because it was seen as uncorrupted and a tough negotiator.


Yeah, Israel's distruction is certainly a tough term for any negotiations... :roll:

Being uncorrupt in comparison to Fatah is one factor out of several, another factor was that Israel's pull out from the Gaza Strip was precieved by the Palestinians as a sign of weakness and that Hamas had a key role in "driving out" the Israelis.



Founding document or what they call it
I see this as what Hamas would want in a best case scenario. I believe that it will not preclude Hamas from accepting a two state solution.

Wait, are you a representative of Hamas? If not then why pretend to talk on their behalf?


Of course I'm simplifying things. I don't have the typing/thinking speed to make it more complex.
Nah, I believe it's more to do with having a warped view of the situation.