I don't know much about this, or this topic. But I'll say one thing for sure: Strange Fruit, I'd stay away from DiSeAsEd MoNkEy if I were you.
LOL. Haven you have a funny(weird) sense of humor. (This does not pertain to your view.) (back to the discussion) I think Sharon believes the whole world (except USA) is already against Israel. I believe the USA has shown that it can win a global war if it wanted to without much opposition, so what does he care about what the rest of the world thinks? The US is on his side. The passover bombing was on the same scale (population percentage wise) as 9/11 was to us. If Sharon did not react in this way, he would have lost the tenuous hold he has on the populace's trust in his government. So you are right in saying that Sharon does not want to lose the status quo. As long as suicide bombing of civilians continues, the palestinian arabs will never get anything, and might possibly lose the little they have. You cannot reward this type of behavior, or it will spur others around the world to attempt similar tactics. (note to suicide bombers: target the Israeli military and you will be called "freedom fighters". It might help your cause.)
Just A Note: For close to Twenty Years there was little violence in the Occupied Territoires because they were waiting for Israel to leave peacefully, yet this never happened. The only time dialogue came about is after a violent resistance began. Sad as it is, but suicide bombings is compelling the Israeli public to see it as their vietnam in which they just need to get out. A Note: Many of Israel's founders were on Interpol for committing terrorist actions while trying to create the state of Israel. So I don't Understand the statement that Israel is just trying to defend itself. If it stops occupying land filled with people and goes back to its borders, the violence will stop. I think its quite simple. Israel wants to annex the Occupied Territories and Slowly kick out or kill all the Palestinians.
Doubtful. A nice thought, but it is pure fantasy to think the violence will stop once Israel gives back the west bank. Do you remember why Israel occupied the west bank in the first place, back in 1967? It was due to the shelling, rocket attacks, etc. coming from the west bank that targeted every major Israeli city. When Israel gives back this land, and eventually they will, it will only mean the resumption of these activities. Suicide bombings will stop only because the terrorist's artillery and rockets will be within range once again. In my opinion, the only solution is for Israel to give back the west bank, for Palestinians to set up their own country on the west bank, and then build a 500 foot tall, 100 foot thick Berlin Wall between the west bank and Israel with electrified barbed wire on top to keep the Palestinians and Israelis away from each other. Israel's goal has never been the destruction of the Palestinan people. Israel's concern is the safety of their citizens. On the other hand, the goal of the PLO is the total destruction of the state of Israel, plain and simple. It's in their charter. Read it, and you might realize what the PLO really is. Freedom fighters, my a$$. They are terrorists.
Driving tanks over homes and having troops fire into crowds in peoples towns and cities is sure a great way to defend yourself. The wall sounds like a good idea though.
And blowing up innocent civilians by suicide bombing is a great way to convince the world that your people deserve a country of their own.
Well it worked for Israel to some extent. Many of the founding fathers of Israel were zionist terrorists and placed on interpol for their actions and ultimately got their state. And the Israeli's firing into a crowd of reporters, killing a priest and several nun's is not going to solve anything either. There is violence and atrocities on BOTH sides. This is sad, but the terrorism acts seem to push negotiations, because the Israelis public is getting fed up with the problem.
The difference between the "zionist terrorists" you refer to and the Palestinian terrorists is this: The "zionist terrorists" you refer to killed British soldiers in their attacks. The Palestinian terrorists of today kill innocent civilians, mainly women and children. Can you see the difference? I certainly hope so. Like Buck's T.'s friend said, and was quoted in another thread on this very BBS.. "George Washington would hardly have been viewed as a noble leader of a revolutionary war if his soldiers had been sneaking off to London and chopping up British schoolchildren." I couldn't have said it better myself. Yasser Arafat is no freedom fighter. He is a scumbag terrorist, a sh*t-talking, baby killing coward, and he deserves exactly what Israel is giving him right now.
I bet we could find more legit war crimes against Sharon though. Does Sabra and Chatila ring a bell? Only 2000 people were killed in a UN camp. Who was responsible (by Israeli investigations) for it? Sharon.
It's laughable that we argue about whether or not we can trust the Palastinians while assuming we can trust Israel. Has everyone forgoten about the USS Liberty? Or how about the illegal re-export of defense technology that WE gave them to China? Or how about Jonathan Pollard, who in 1986 was sentenced to life in prison for stealing Defense secrets for Israel? I do not agree with the way that the Palastinians have chosen to fight this war, but I do believe that they should doing something. Does their leadership suck? Absolutely! Is Arafat a self serving b*stard? Absolutely! But what effect do these facts have on the validity of their struggle? None I think. America needs to take a hard, hard look at the situation. It is time to reconsider our "Israel no matter what it does" policy and try to take a fair stance, before it's too late.
Michael Lerner a Jewish Rabbi called it precisely in a 12/01 article. __________________________________ Unholy Alliance -- Sharon, Hamas Work in Concert Against Peace By Rabbi Michael Lerner, Pacific News Service, Dec 14, 2001 Though enemies, Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the Palestinian militant group Hamas are working in a tacit alliance, writes PNS contributor Michael Lerner. Their shared goal: the elimination of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. Lerner (RabbiLerner@tikkun.org) is editor of TIKKUN Magazine, a bimonthly Jewish critique of politics, culture and society, and rabbi of Beyt Tikkun synagogue in San Francisco. The strategies of Ariel Sharon and Hamas are far less irrational than portrayed by American media. Each has been cooperating in what amounts to a tacit alliance to achieve a shared goal: the elimination of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority and its replacement by Hamas. Israel's announcement that it will not deal with the PLO any more is only one part of this process. Ariel Sharon has never hidden his contempt for the Oslo Accord, precisely because it aimed to create a Palestinian state in the pre-1967 borders of the West Bank and Gaza. When campaigning, he presented himself as the strong military man who could play the role of peacemaker. But he always reassured his own right-wing constituents that he had no intention of ceding any land to Palestinians. Sharon was the inventor of the strategy of filling the West Bank with settlements in the 1980s to prevent any possibility of Palestinians creating their own state. His fondest dream would be to find the political excuses that could allow Israel to reoccupy the entire West Bank and establish another hundred settlements. Arafat represented a thorn in his side, because Arafat kept insisting on returning to negotiations and on building the Palestinian state promised in the treaty Israel had signed in the White House garden in 1993. Moreover, the United States has made it clear that it wants Arafat in power and negotiations in place so that Arab leaders can say to their own populations: "See, our cooperation with the United States against Osama bin Laden has produced a return to the peace process." But continued conflict in the region allows Arab elites to displace resentment against the injustices of their own undemocratic societies onto anger at Israel. So they seek a balance: continued negotiations and an endless peace process, but not the creation of a viable Palestinian state. When the United States became preoccupied with the war against terror, Sharon felt free to increase the violence and repression of the Occupation and to accelerate the assassinations of those "suspected" of being directly or indirectly connected to acts of terror. Those assassinations, primarily directed against Hamas leaders, ensured that Hamas would strike back in retaliatory blows against civilian targets within Israel. Instead of striking back against Hamas, Israel instead has used Hamas attacks as justification to destroy the infrastructure of the Palestinian Authority and to debate what would be the best moment to kill Arafat. With Arafat dead and the Palestinian Authority in shambles, Hamas would become the prevailing force in the Palestinian world -- and the image of the Palestinians would then be more like that of the Taliban. Sharon would be able to portray Israel as fighting the same fight as the United States -- a battle against terrorists -- a move he has tried with less success against Arafat. With Hamas in charge of the Palestinian camp, Sharon could rally much broader support, because even those of us who support Palestinian rights would be forced to admit that a Hamas-dominated Palestine would be a real threat not only to Israel, but also to world peace. Hamas has much to gain as well. Convinced that the peace process is betraying Islamic claims to Palestine, Hamas is willing to wait another 30 or 40 years until Israel tires of endless war and terror -- if, that is, it can be assured that when Israel tires, fundamentalists will come to power. Hamas despises the secular forces around Arafat, and worries that if the Palestinian Authority is not destroyed it could become the government of a secular Palestinian state. Hamas is openly contemptuous of the many Christian Palestinians who influence the Palestinian Authority. So it is hard for Hamas to resist the open invitation from Ariel Sharon: Israel will do the dirty work of destroying the Palestinian Authority and rejecting any peace process if Hamas does its part by blowing up innocent Israeli civilians. Sharon refuses to negotiate unless there is a period of non-violence, thereby signaling to Hamas forces that all they have to do to block negotiations is to escalate their terror. And if the violence gets intense enough, Sharon will find himself "with no alternative" but to kill Arafat and wipe out the Palestinian Authority. This position, of course, creates an overwhelming incentive for Hamas to engage in acts of terror. Washington could break this cycle by threatening economic sanctions until Israel ends the Occupation. I won't hold my breath. More likely, it will demand new negotiations, which will drag on endlessly and give a new facelift to endless perpetuation of the Occupation and the suffering of the Palestinian people. There is only one way for Arafat and the moderates to protect themselves from this invidious alliance: unequivocally reject the fantasy of armed struggle against Israel and convert to the principled non-violence of Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Instead of supporting or condoning any form of violence, engage in massive non-violent demonstrations, punish rock-throwers, and refuse to respond to the ongoing violence of the Israeli occupation with further violence. Otherwise, moderates may soon find themselves the victims of an all-too-clever path that links fundamentalists on both sides. But I won't hold my breath for this course, either. Sharon is banking on America's focus on bin Laden to distract attention from the level of brutality Israeli forces are using in the West Bank and ensure that he will have political space to escalate his attacks on the Palestinian Authority. Unless we speak out clearly and quickly to reject his unholy, if tacit, alliance with Hamas, the resulting chaos will likely produce ever more frightful bin Ladens in the future -- and they are as likely to strike America as Israel. For those of us who support Israel, this is a moment when our voices of critique may provide the "tough love" it so desperately needs.
