Israelis Killing Palestinians

[Darth Wong]

Why should they go to the table? 'Israel' has been devided three times, each time the Jewish part got smaller, that didn't stop the Arabs from attacking.

Your history books must be different from mine. Israel demanded and got far more territory than it warranted by population at the time of its formation, then it seized even more territory afterwards, and then again in numerous wars. At what time has their territory shrunk? Or are you classifying their pullout from occupied territories in Lebanon etc. as shrinkage?

What makes you think if they divid Israel up one more time the Arabs will stop attacking?

Please describe the nature of these devastating Arab attacks which threaten the Israeli state. Do you refer to terrorism? That is, like it or not, an internal Israeli matter between its majority and an oppressed minority, which has no rights and which has been largely segregated to gigantic ghettoized regions which are classified as "occupied territories" so that they have excuses not to treat them as citizens.

They lost the war, live with it. Move on with life.

Agreed. They lost the war. So they're Israeli citizens now, and they should be treated as such. But nooooo, they're permanently trapped in no man's land, not as Israeli citizens and not as a sovereign nation, aren't they? Face it; the "occupied territories" are just an Israeli code-word for the Palestinian ghetto, where the residents have no rights unless they happen to be Jewish.

If the Palestinians spent more effort on imporving their lives instead of killing Jews they wouldn't be in the situation they're in.

Does it ever occur to you that they've tried? Let's suppose you're a Palestinian man and you work for 20 years to own a home. Then let's suppose that the Israeli army comes and bulldozes your home because they want to replace your neighbourhood with Israeli settlers. You get thrown out in the street with no compensation and you are left to beg for shelter with your impoverished wife and children, the product of your life savings casually annihilated in an afternoon to make way for "The Jewish Homeland". How would you react to someone telling you that you should have tried working to improve your life? This tale has been repeated THOUSANDS OF TIMES in the occupied territories.

[Coyote]

Your history books must be different from mine. Israel demanded and got far more territory than it warranted by population at the time of its formation, then it seized even more territory afterwards, and then again in numerous wars. At what time has their territory shrunk? Or are you classifying their pullout from occupied territories in Lebanon etc. as shrinkage?

Actually, at first the entire territory of Jordan (then "TransJordan") was up for grabs, and it got cut down tot he 1948 borders-- but this was before the UN agreement and dates back to the original request of the Zionist movement and Ze'ev Jabotinsky in the 1800's. By the time we get to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 the Jewish land was going to be slightly larger than it is now, and then by the 1948 Declaration it was closer to a 50-50 split of the land sliver west of the Jordan.

The UN made the declaration, the Jews accepted it but the Arabs did not and started a war, which they lost. The UN redefined Israel within the current, pre-1967 borders since they gained the new territory as a result of a defensive war that was not at their instigation.

The 1956 war was sparked by Israel's problem with Sinai-based border raiders called Fedayeen. Using this as an excuse, they launched (in conjunction with France and Britain) a aggressive war with Egypt and siezed the Sinai Penninsula. They gave it back as part of a peace agreement.

The agreement was broken by the Egyptians in 1967, who moved vast amounts of military forces into the Sinai, which was (by agreement) suppose fto be a de-militarized zone. When Israel attacked again to thwart the attack, they siezed the Sinai again and annexed it as a part of Israel. This was later returned to the Egyptians as part of the Camp David accord in 1982.

Israeli gains in the Golan and later in Lebanon were never intended to be part of Israel, so no, those don't count. The actual Golan Heights itself is in dispute but it is not a 'hot' war, just an argument, and is a sepertae issue from the Palestinian controversy.

So technically, yes, Israel is one of the few victorious conquering nations that gave land back in exchange for a peace deal (Egypt) and again with Jordan. Israel also pulled out from Lebanon and obeyed the UN border to the millimeter even though they got no peace deal with Lebanon in exchange, and cross-border raids by Hezbollah continue in mild form. One point of discontent was two years ago when three soldiers were attacked and kidnapped on the border-- and the whole thing was videotaped by some UN guards who were supposed to be patrolling the border to prevent this sort of incursion. The soldiers' fates are unknown.

It is precisely this "land for peace" tradition that the Palestinians are trying to pressure the Israeli gov't for now, and the biggest fly in the ointment (more like a pteridactyl) is the damn Settlers, who won't pull out of Pal territory so they can set up a real state that isn't "Swiss cheesed" by enclaves and access roads (an unfortunate drawback to the otherwise generous Barak offer).

If the Palestinians spent more effort on imporving their lives instead of killing Jews they wouldn't be in the situation they're in.

Does it ever occur to you that they've tried? .... the Israeli army comes and bulldozes your home because they want to replace your neighbourhood with Israeli settlers. You get thrown out in the street with no compensation and you are left to beg for shelter with your impoverished wife and children....

This is exactly how it happens. If the Settler's Movements can be stopped and the Settlements withdrawn, we'd have a chance at real peace. At last poll, as I was leaving Israel in June, 64% of Israelis want the Settlers to pull out. But like some corporate interests in the US, the Settlers have a tight stranglehold on the Likud political party and they also know how to play the fear card. Groups like "Peace Now" and the "Refuseniks" (soldiers and officers that have signed petitions that they will refuse duty call-ups in the Territories) are gaining strength slowly, but both sides will see more blood before thay are able to gain any majority with any challenging party.

[Faram]

40 tons of weapons employed in guerrilla or terrorist operations can prolong a war like this one for decades.

40 tons (metric) is less than a MBT. How many tanks have usa sold cheap / given to the Israel?

Bulldozing hoses of innocents(sp?) sounds a lot like terrorist tactics.

And yes the relatives of a suicide bomber are not guilty of any crime; it is just the despicable tactics.

[guyver]

40 tons of weapons employed in guerrilla or terrorist operations can prolong a war like this one for decades.

40 tons (metric) is less than a MBT. How many tanks have usa sold cheap / given to the Israel?

Bulldozing hoses of innocents(sp?) sounds a lot like terrorist tactics.

And yes the relatives of a suicide bomber are not guilty of any crime; it is just the despicable tactics.

I agree that the tactics used by the IDF are wrong. To destory peoples homes and think that this is going to stop the bombers is just wrong, it will never work. The people will just get hate them more.

[Coyote]

40 tons (metric) is less than a MBT. How many tanks have usa sold cheap / given to the Israel?

I already mentioned the imbalance of forces and also how the Palestinians feel about it; I doubt I need to point out to you or anyone else here how irrelevent it is. Can I assume, then, that the US won in Vietnam because we had tanks and the VC didn't? Or the Soviets won Afghanistan for the same reasons? 40 tons of guerrilla weapons in guerrilla hands is nothing to sneeze at.

Bulldozing hoses of innocents(sp?) sounds a lot like terrorist tactics.

I never once made any excuses for the bulldozing of houses, if that is what you are implying. If you want to be technical, the oppressive actions of a government in power (in this case, house destruction) is an example of Tyranny, not Terrorism-- but most people would say that it is a splitting of semantic hairs.

Also bear in mind that the Israelis are supposed to chase the people out of the house first and warn them; admittedly this comes in the form of a kicked-in door at 3am with all of five minutes to get out. It's a hell of a lot more than the victims of a suicide bomber ever get, though. It is true that sometimes the soldiers don't warn anyone or do a thorough search first; but again, compare that to the deliberate doctrine of seeking out the softest civilian targets by bombers... but again, don't make the mistake of thinking that I approve of house demos. In this case the Israeli action is "evil", while in my pov the actions of the bombers are "more evil". But both are examples of a corrupt mentality.

And yes the relatives of a suicide bomber are not guilty of any crime; it is just the despicable tactics.

The relatives are not guilty to an extent; they didn't do the killing but they do shelter the terrorist and provide him resources; they do nothing to dissuade him and spare his own life and the lives of innocents. Or, if they do see their sons and daughters as heroic freedom fighters, they don't try to convince them to at least attack armed troops rather than grocery shoppers. But no, I don't think they can really be punished, although I do reserve the right to criticize them.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Why should they go to the table? 'Israel' has been devided three times, each time the Jewish part got smaller, that didn't stop the Arabs from attacking.

Your history books must be different from mine. Israel demanded and got far more territory than it warranted by population at the time of its formation, then it seized even more territory afterwards, and then again in numerous wars. At what time has their territory shrunk? Or are you classifying their pullout from occupied territories in Lebanon etc. as shrinkage?

First of all, the land wasn't divided based on the number of Jews living on the land at the time. It was based on the number of Jews that were expected to move there when Israel was formed. And they were right. More Jews fled Arabic territory and moved to Israel than Arabs fled Israel and moved to Arabic territory. In fact, more Jews moved to Israel than there were Arabs there in the first place. And a lot of places forbid this movement, so the Jews had to abandon their homes, losing almost everything.

Secondly, that division was the last of the three divisions I was talking about. The First happen when France and Britian were given a mandate over the land after WWI. The British part, which was smaller, was supposed to be made into a Jewish homeland. But after rioting the British divided it again, with 77% going to the Arabs thus creating Transjordan (later just Jordan.) Later still, after more rioting, it was divided again, with an addition 11 percentage points going to the Arabs.

But you do bring up a good point. Israel has given back land it conquered in war. When was the last time that happened? And what have they received in return?

What makes you think if they divid Israel up one more time the Arabs will stop attacking?

Please describe the nature of these devastating Arab attacks which threaten the Israeli state. Do you refer to terrorism? That is, like it or not, an internal Israeli matter between its majority and an oppressed minority, which has no rights and which has been largely segregated to gigantic ghettoized regions which are classified as "occupied territories" so that they have excuses not to treat them as citizens.

And the Arabs treated them better?

BTW, Arabs do have rights in Israel. It's those that refused to accept Israeli citizenship that have no rights under Israeli law. Is that really surprising?

They lost the war, live with it. Move on with life.

Agreed. They lost the war. So they're Israeli citizens now, and they should be treated as such. But nooooo, they're permanently trapped in no man's land, not as Israeli citizens and not as a sovereign nation, aren't they? Face it; the "occupied territories" are just an Israeli code-word for the Palestinian ghetto, where the residents have no rights unless they happen to be Jewish.[/quote]

Wrong, they'd have rights if they were Israelis. But they'd rather fight for the myth of an Arabic Palestine instead of join Israel.

If the Palestinians spent more effort on imporving their lives instead of killing Jews they wouldn't be in the situation they're in.

Does it ever occur to you that they've tried? Let's suppose you're a Palestinian man and you work for 20 years to own a home. Then let's suppose that the Israeli army comes and bulldozes your home because they want to replace your neighbourhood with Israeli settlers. You get thrown out in the street with no compensation[/quote]

Sort of how the Jews were forced to flee Arabic territories without compensation. Israel offered to compensation Arabs displaced in the creation of Israel, on the condition Jews were compensated for their losses. The Arabs refused.

This tale has been repeated THOUSANDS OF TIMES in the occupied territories.

And it was repeated more often with Jews losing out.

Face it, you'd be hard pressed to find a single thing that Israel did to the Arabs that the Arabs didn't do to the Jews, or even to themselves.