Israeli-Palestinian Roadmap - Sharon Not Complying

Normally I would agree with this sentiment. 9/11 changed that view, for me. The guys who flew planes into buildings were pretty educated fellas. Certainly not living in poverty.

When groups like Hamas say it is their stated goal to do nothing but remove all Jews and other infidels from their holy land, I'm not sure economics or "a future to look forward to" has much to do with it. I think a faith has been hijacked, and until there's some sort of reformation, you're not going to see substantial changes in the willingness of these folks to blow others up. OBL's primary justification for targetting the US was that US troops were stationed in holy land in Saudi Arabia. Land that, as infidels, we were unworthy to walk on. That's a whole different mindset. And apparently it's won a pretty fair amount of support.

I would agree that education is important, no doubt.

 

doh...

 

now that's encouraging!

 

When groups like Hamas say it is their stated goal to do nothing but remove all Jews and other infidels from their holy land, I'm not sure economics or "a future to look forward to" has much to do with it. I think a faith has been hijacked, and until there's some sort of reformation, you're not going to see substantial changes in the willingness of these folks to blow others up.

I agree that Hamas will attempt to continue doing its thing. My view, though, is that they'll lose the popular support they enjoy, and it'll be easier to eliminate them militarily. The average Palestinian, who nows wants to build a future for his or her kids, isn't going to support Hamas and may well support efforts to get rid of them and bring about peace. Right now, these people honestly believe Hamas and other groups are the only one that can bring them peace (through the destruction of Israel) - they have to be shown that they are wrong.

This applies to OBL/Al-Queda too. Sure, the actual hijackers were educated - but keep in mind they only had to pick 20 out of thousands of members they have. Of course they are going to pick the most educated fanatics to ensure the highest chance of success. But how much of Al-Queda is built on average people who have little / nothing else to live for? I think you can get at the backbone of support and the backbone of the organization if you eliminate the root causes they are joining and supporting those organizations. In the case of Al-Queda, that's not easy because they pick off impoverished people from all over the globe. In the case of Palestinian terrorist groups, its far easier because it is very possible to improve the conditions and level of hope in that one area.

 

Do you think, every time the KKK did something ridiculous, the civil rights movement should have been halted? All you're doing by doing that is encouraging these terrorist groups - they know that all it takes is one bomb to prevent peace, and that's their objective. What Israel is doing is essentially giving them veto power over the peace process, which is exactly what they want.

Sharon, isn't that stupid. Why won't people take him and Netanyahu at their words nd their deeds. They want virtually all if not all the West BAnk and Gaza and are willing to kill and be killed for it. They know what they are doing when they seemingly give Hamas or Islamic Jihad veto power. Those guys and their followers still want to fight on for more land.

What makes you think Palestinians will crack down on terrorists when they are given there own state?

As Major says, you do what is right. If you believe that a real Palestinian state is right and you want to follow international law and the UN resoloutions you just do it. PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD AND A VIABLE STATE IS NOT A REWARD TO BE GIVEN TO THE PALESTINIANS IF THEY STOP THE VIOLENCE. It is just, legal and the right thing to do, Hamas or no Hamas.

If there is violence afterward the creation of a Palestinian state , you deal with it. You don't use it as an excuse to not have the Palestinian state unless you are a Sharon and you want to use it as an excuse.

Interesting, we just saw the US (and Israel could do it too )invade and occupy Iraq. Any sort of thinking that a Palestinian state would make it imposible to control extremists is just another bs excuse to not have a Palestinian state. Interesting many of those who were most in favor of invading Iraq and other countires often act like it would just be totally impossible to do anything to control Palestinian violence if they had a state. .

 

I agree with you 100%.

The only thing though is that the Israeli supporters feel for whatever reason (Old Testament, Will of God, revenge for the Arab-Israeli war???) that these lands belong to Israel and that the Palestinians are "guests" on soveriegn Israeli land that Israel can dole out (or not) to a Palestinian state as it sees fit.

 

I'm sure that probably most Palestinians are not interested in blowing themselves up. However, there are a significant number of them who are. And extremist leaders like Hamas and Hezbollah are interested in that kind of thing as well.

The way it could hurt is like this- with a new agreement, Hamas and Hezbollah start to rebuild their infrastuctures and gain confidence that they can destroy Israel. With the Israeli military incursions stopped, they have time to recruit new people and set up another Intifada.

I'm not saying not to move forward. I'm just wondering how exactly this is supposed to work, since the Oslo agreements were a horrible failure in stopping terrorism. If Isreal does not kill the terrorists themselves, then the new Palestinian government must do it. They must destroy Hamas, Hezbollah and uproot any other terrorist infrastructure. That is a huge task for a government that has been working with terrorists all this time.

I agree on the settlements, I'm not sure why they keep building them. I suppose they feel they have a right to it, since they won it in self-defense during a war. But it plays into terrorists' hands, and I think most Israelis oppose them.

 

glynch,

Sorry to burst your idealist bubble, but things rarely happen in international politics simply because they are right. Most actions are determined by self interest for the acting state, as the liberals are so quick to point out regarding the US and its war for Iraqi oil. What does Israel have to gain by making all of these concessions. All the Palestinians have to offer is a stop to the violence. There are two problems with that. Israeli concessions do not guarantee a stop or even a diminishment of the violence, and even if the violence was stopped, you just set a precedent that to get you way, all you have to do is blow up a bunch of civilians. I think that Palestine has put itself in a situation that it will have to work long and hard to get out of. Just demanding concessions is not the way, IMHO.

 

Thanks for the story. I would love to see any and all support for these groups dry up and disappear. This was a real positive sign.

I think that one thing that helps groups like Hamas is the fact that they take in orphans, clothe them, feed them, educate them and provide them with basic services. If a group like the U.S. would come in and provide those services it might take away part of the support for groups like Hamas. It would also take away part of the propoganda tools groups like Al Qaeda use against the U.S.

 

understand that cuts both ways...there are Palestinians and Arabs who believe that the Israelis are entirely unwelcome as infidels on holy land.

 

The attacks will increase with peace talks since hamas et al don't want any negotiated settlement with Israel.

You have a point. If you have a plan like Sharon to "negotiate" for 30 years with no end in sight, while tearing down Palestinian houses, and spending billions of dollars on expanding settlements. If the goal being negotiated is Bantustan like developments you can't expect much acceptance in the Palestinian community.

It is an undeniable fact that you have THIS TYPE OF ATTACK because you have an occupied West Bank and Gaza. Now you can argue that attacks across the border between and independent Palestine and an Israel could occur, but it is easier to prevent and the bulk of the Palestinian population would probably NOT be so supportive. This is the reason some in the Israeli security apparatus advocate retreating to the UN mandated border FOR SECURITY REASONS.

The fact is that you have to have the viable Palestinian State prior to receiving the benefits of reduced terrorism. There is an alternative to crush the Palestinians militarily and to create a police state in the occupied territories with check points, This has largely been done. but as you can see it is still difficult to prevent these bombings despite these efforts.. The problem is that it is hard to lock down a population as big as your own and growing, forever.

So do you support SAharon for calling off the negotiations for the Raodmap until the last Islamic Jihad member has surrendered?

 

I wonder if I am on glynch's ignore list.

 

Originally posted by glynch

You have a point. If you have a plan like Sharon to "negotiate" for 30 years with no end in sight, while tearing down Palestinian houses, and spending billions of dollars on expanding settlements. If the goal being negotiated is Bantustan like developments you can't expect much acceptance in the Palestinian community.


Sharon sucks. So what? The bombings would be occuring w/ or w/o Sharon.


It is an undeniable fact that you have THIS TYPE OF ATTACK because you have an occupied West Bank and Gaza. ...


It is a very deniable fact.


The very people responsible for the attacks admit they will continue regardless of settlement construction. They want Israel gone.



The fact is that you have to have the viable Palestinian State prior to receiving the benefits of reduced terrorism. There is an alternative to crush the Palestinians militarily and to create a police state in the occupied territories with check points, This has largely been done. but as you can see it is still difficult to prevent these bombings despite these efforts.. The problem is that it is hard to lock down a population as big as your own and growing, forever.

I am still at a loss as to the best solution, but I agree with your basic premise.

Other than it being the morally correct thing to do, a Palestinian nation with opportunity (and as much to lose) is, IMHO, the only viable solution for all parties. I tire of the Israeli gov's insistence on negotiating everything. It's obnoxious and ignorant.

But they are at war. Would be crazy to let an enemy gain advantage, eh?

So do you support SAharon for calling off the negotiations for the Raodmap until the last Islamic Jihad member has surrendered?

No. Would never happen. You basically give 'veto' rights over peace treaties to the terrorists.

But it certainly would be nice to see some more concrete examples of how the Palestinian leadership is willing to fight terrorism (before they become the government of a soverign nation).

 

Cohen, again, we agree pretty much on the eventual desired outcome. Time to stop the handwringing and essentially allowing Sharon and Hamas to call all the shots.

Time to start arguing against Sharon and current Israeli policies in a more forthright manner and advocating a Palestinian State now. This is not rewarding the Palestinians for violence, claiming the Palestinians are blameless or failing to support Israel or Jews in general.

We in the US have the power to force Israel to do what is right for both it and the Palestinians. How much clout do we really have over the Palestinians. What can we do to them that Israel had not already done.

If a free Palestine aggresses against the Israeli state that is relatively easy to take care of compared to the present security mess for Israel. This is not the issue for Sharon, who still wants to fight on for total annexation.

 

I like the idea of having a Palestinian state now. Terrorists can still be persued once the state exists. Having a Palestinian state doesn't mean that the terrorists are victors and will just march around with immunity. In fact it might be easier for the Palestinian state to maintain a viable security force to go after the terrorists. If we help them to acheive that statehood they may actually want our help in how it's formed. If we help them provide vital services, build up their schools, and help them maintain an economic infrastructure it would be a good start. That way we get to spread democracy, help round up the terrorists, do the right thing, and it won't take an invasion to do it, unless Sharone is totally out of his mind and we have to invade Israel.

If we don't help them form their state they will continue to harbor animosity to us for supporting Israel, and not calling it's hand on settlements and human right's abuses. We will catch much more flies with honey.

 

Sorry, but you don't understand the PLO and Arafat.

The current Palestinian "security force" and the terrorists are the same people. Arafat's people in Ramallah have been caught redhanded with documents linking them to suicide bombers. There is also the matter of the ship full of offensive weapons that was en route to the Occupied areas.

Peace is not possible until Arafat is either dead or exiled.

 

Sharon's dream is a greater Israel comprises present-day Israel plus most of West Bank and Gaza. But he doesn't want the Palestinians there as he doesn't care to make millions more Arabs citizens of Israel but he can't just kick them out and deport them to other lands at least not in one fell swoop.

So the plan is to build settlements which are governed by and for only Israelis. It can't be done too quickly but slowly you build a settlement here, a settlement there and before you know it, Israel will have annexed most of the West Bank and Gaza and have driven the rightful inhabitants out of their own lands.

This is why Sharon is not complying. It would impede his imperialist Israeli plans.

 

I get my information from UN observers who are there on the spot. It was their observation that IDF attacks on the security forces hindered their ablility to stop the terrorist attacks.

This is from:

Report of the Secretary-General prepared pursuant
to General Assembly resolution ES-10/10

http://www.un.org/peace/jenin/
Israeli military retaliation for terrorist attacks was often carried out against Palestinian Authority security forces and installations. This had the effect of severely weakening the Authority's capacity to take effective action against militant groups that launched attacks on Israelis.

 

Does the IDF sometimes target Palestinian security forces............probably so. Do the Palestinian security forces do some questionable things in regards to security..........probably so.


<a HREF="http://www.time.com/time/world/printout/0,8816,193521,00.html">Postmarked Tehran</a>

 

I agree. I didn't mean to imply the security forces were blameless. Only that with no security force Palestinians can't be expected to stop the terrorists.