For the cause, the settlements must go

[richards1052]

Jerusalem Post
by http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1201523787425&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull">Sheldon Schreter

Israelis seem to have lost their belief in the rightness of our cause, as various observers have recently noted with alarm. Whether you attribute this to ideological fatigue, (or) the universal tendency to pursue personal and material goals over collective ones...there is real cause for concern.

Given Israel's challenges and the demands placed on its citizens, a national consensus on war and peace, relations with our Arab neighbors, and over societal priorities is no luxury, but a necessity.

How did we get to this situation, and how do we get to a better place? Israel's cataclysmic victory in the Six Day War released a wave of euphoric energy inside the country and in the entire Jewish world...

But it also launched many on a gigantic tangent, deviating from the pragmatic Zionism responsible for the creation of the Jewish state. Huge energies, vast resources and endless creativity were poured into the settlements in territories conquered in 1967.

I IDENTIFY with the Jewish and Zionist motivations, though not with the actions or the messianist ideologies of many of the people living in these settlements. They include some of our finest citizens. They also include a small minority, extremist and violent, whose deeds have harmed the cause of the Jewish state, and the settlement project itself...

My sharing of commitments with many settlers does not change my contention that they are profoundly, dangerously wrong in mortgaging the entire Zionist enterprise to the cause of the settlements. In so doing, they have unintentionally caused grievous damage to the rightness of our wider national cause, on two levels...

WITHDRAWING from the settlements will not appease our enemies, nor should we leave unilaterally, without guarantees, safeguards and milestones. But withdraw we should, for our own needs and benefits: Occupying the Palestinians is devouring us from the inside, like a cancerous growth that needs surgical removal in order to enable the organism to survive...

[richards1052]

1. When even the JPost gets into the act, you know things are desperate

The Jpost, one of Israel's most conservative dailies doesn't usually feature such outright dovish sentiment. It's all the more reason to pay attention to this eloquent testimonial by a devout Zionist to the need to exit the settlements now.

[pelsar]

2. the problem remains the same.....

and who will stop the mortars and kassams on jerusalem, hadera, netanaya, afula.....at least one group, islamic jihad if not hamas have made their intentions clear......

besides "believing" that they will "see the light". and the "error of their ways", once there is a an additional withdrawl..perhaps you have a realistic suggestion?


desperate?....I havent really noticed that...perhaps you might explain to me what "desperate" actually means in terms of the avg israeli...or is this no more then mere "hyperbole"

(we're still going to parties, going on vacations, doing reserve service, working, jogging......)

[kayecy]

3. And do the settlements stop anything now?

....and who will stop the mortars and kassams on jerusalem, hadera, netanaya, afula.
Text

Do the settlements stop the mortars etc now?

[pelsar]

4. in fact they do

you do notice that there are no mortars/kassam/kastushas coming from the westbank....unlike gaza.......

[kayecy]

5. Ahh.....I thought it was the IDF that was stopping the mortars etc....

Are you really suggesting it is the settlers that are stopping the mortars etc?

[pelsar]

6. army strategy for control of areas: 101

in case you missed the course:

the settlements break the Palestenain areas in to smaller areas, this make them easier to observe and control. The settlements serve as areas when the Palestenians are not (on the hilltops) limiting the jihadnikims ability to observe the IDFs organization and therefore disrupt and attack them. The IDF has daily incursions in the small areas where the jihadnikim plan, organize and store their weapons.....

larger geographic areas are far more difficult to control, especially when the hilltops are not in control.....giving the other far more freedom.

[kayecy]

8. "Army strategy 101 breaks the Palestenain areas in to smaller areas," - what an admission!

What an admission!

Any two-state solution will therefore leave "...the Palestinian areas in small areas."

Doesn't sound like a two-state solution will ever be possible thanks to Army strategy 101.

[pelsar]

9. am i missing something here...or was that a topic change?

whats to admit...thats how it works......if you want to change the subject, then i do believe it would be appropriate to mention it first. I believe you were asking how the settlements affect the shooting on israelis cities, hence the answer.

if and when the settlements go....as per the O/P the question that comes up is: what are the chances of a repeat performance of lebanons katushas and gazas katushas and kassams.....

whats your take on that?

[kayecy]

10. The subject title is "..the settlements have to go" .....

No topic change. The subject title is "..the settlements have to go" .....

You explained they had to stay because of Army strategy No 101

Therefore, because of Army Strategy 101, either

1. The settlers stay, Palestinian areas are in your words "broken up into small areas" and there is no two-state solution.

or

2. The settlers leave.

[pelsar]

11. i explained....

there purpose in the present situation that the settlements have...i was asked

now back to my question that i asked you....i noticed you skipped it.

here let me save you a few seconds:
__________
if and when the settlements go....as per the O/P the question that comes up is: what are the chances of a repeat performance of lebanons katushas and gazas katushas and kassams.....

whats your take on that?

[kayecy]

12. Army 101: "the settlements break the Palestinian areas in to smaller areas"

Your answer is therefore encapsulated in the Army Strategy 101:

....army strategy for control of areas: 101: "the settlements break the Palestinian areas in to smaller areas, this make them easier to observe and control."

I will attempt to answer your question "..if and when the settlements go.." even though it does not seem a likely scenario at the moment.

If and when the settlements go, I see no reason why you should expect a repeat of the Lebanon situation - providing of course, Israel sticks to the 1967 border (with mutually agreed modifications) and ceases IDF over-flights.

[pelsar]

14. what if...

the agreement between the PA (or whatever it is) is not the 67 border and does allow for overflights.....?.....does that mean the jihadnikim can start shooting in your eyes "legally"...

and what happens as its happened before ....that islamic jihad kinda tends to ignore the agreements and keeps on shooting.....(the PA, etc tend to "look the other way at best)

[kayecy]

15. No of course not....

As for the militants 'legal' action, well, IDF over-flights continue over Lebanon in spite of Israel signing the UN cease-fire declaration. Are those legal?

[pelsar]

17. stay on subject....

we're checking out your views of an agreement with the various scenarios involving the PA....so let me clarify:

its not the 67 borders....what counts is the agreement whatever that may be, (moral or just or immoral and not just) between the two governing bodies that must be upheld by all groups, militias etc...is that correct?

[kayecy]

18. Correct.......And does that apply to Israel too?

what counts is the agreement whatever that may be, (moral or just or immoral and not just) between the two governing bodies that must be upheld by all groups, militias etc...is that correct?

Correct.......And does that apply to Israel too?

Perhaps you think the IDF over-flights over Lebanon in spite of Israel signing the UN cease-fire declaration are somehow different?

[pelsar]

20. an agreement is to be kept by all....

that means hamas/PA cant pretend that they have no control over islamic jihad or whatever the variation is.

and yes if the agreement says no over flights than israel is to keep that as well.
___

Lebanon?...i'm afraid lebanon hasnt kept up their part of the agreement.... Hizballa, Not only are they still armed, but they have been busy replenishing their stocks.
___

Given the actual situation of Hizballa rearming with missiles...i understand that your against the non violent israel recon flights and if the day comes when hizballa decides to launch missiles/attacks as they have done in the past (years 2000-2007) without provocation...your preference is that they have the option of hitting TA as opposed to israel knowing where they are and taking them out.

did i get that right?

___

but we have diverted.....so if there is an agreement with the PA/israel..what are the chances that there will be kassams etc on israeli cities...as in gazas withdrawl?

[kayecy]

24. Highly unlikely in my opinion......

but we have diverted.....so if there is an agreement with the PA/israel..what are the chances that there will be kassams etc on israeli cities...as in gazas withdrawl?

Highly unlikely in my opinion, but it depends on the agreement.

If Israel plays fair with border issues & Jerusalem in the agreement, doesn't fence in the new Palestinian State, doesn't blockade every means of access to the new State, doesn't over-fly it, and above all, injects the sort of investment and aid cash the US occupying forces have been giving Iraq, then there is a very good chance we shall have real peace in the region.

Unfortunately, Israel is more concerned with planning to attack Iran than exerting itself to achieve a real peace with the Palestinians.

[pelsar]

28. wow...."protection money"

so if israel doesnt give the Palestinians enough money....then the Palestinians can start attacking israeli cities......and killing israeli citizens?

doesnt the mafia use that sort of logic?

what does this mean?
but it depends on the agreement.....an agreement is an agreement....doesnt make a difference if its fair or not...or are you saying that if its "not fair" then the Palestinians can keep on shooting? sounds like you want a "loophole"

[kayecy]

30. Remember what happened to the Weimar Republic?

Do you really want a destitute state on your door step?

Remember what happened to the Weimar Republic? It failed after the allies imposed a harsh financial regime on it and was replaced by ..........?

The EU is giving millions to Eastern European countries that were previously enemies. They don't want destitute neigbours. Israel seems unique in not caring about its neighbours prosperity.



"It all depends on the agreement" means exactly what it says. If Israel imposes an unfair agreement on the Palestinians, it should not be surprised if in a few years the Palestinian government is over-thrown and the rocket start again.

[pelsar]

31. so an agreement is not an agreement?

If Israel imposes an unfair agreement on the Palestinians,....

so if there is an agreement and some believe its not fair....or maybe it will be and the Palestenian govt is overthrown by their military, then its israels fault ...WOW again. You sure are preparing the scenarios so that if anything goes "wrong"..it must israels fault...

let me summarize so far:
if israel doesnt give them enough money...they can attack

if the agreement is deemed "unfair"...then they can attack

if the Palestenain govt is overthrown, then its israels fault and they can attack.

i must say it does follow the consistent line that whatever happens its israels fault!!!

[kayecy]

32. I dissociate myself from your "if clauses" except for ........

if israel doesnt give them enough money...they can attack
if the agreement is deemed "unfair"...then they can attack

You said it not me. I dissociate myself from such remarks.

I only pointed out that Israel should not be surprised if it forces an unfair agreement on the Palestinians, in a few years that government is over-thrown.


Now, how about a simple answer to my question.

Do you not care if you have a destitute state on your door step?

[pelsar]

34. what do you mean you "dissociate the remarks..."

you made it not me:...your claiming that if the agreement is "unfair" then it must be because israel forced it and therefore if the Palestinians cant get a stable society and if its overthrown its israels fault....what if only islamic jihad thinks its unfair, and they, being a small but determined group (as hamas) succeed in overthrowing the govt....is that still israels fault?....or how about the muslim brotherhood...they're just waiting for a chance..

so far you've said that israel must pay them off, israel must make take responsibility for the stability for the Palestenian govt, because if its over thrown it must be israels fault..so if that is happening should israel interfere to insure stability?...or just take the blame?


___

in answer to your question, i would want a very successful Palestinian state, that is the only way there will be peace. I want an independent, muslim oriented democratic state, that understands the western concept of consequences for ones actions, responsibility starts with your own govt and civil rights

[msmcghee]

36. " . . an independent, muslim oriented democratic state, . .

. . that understands the western concept of consequences for ones actions,. . "

Do you think that's possible? Are there any examples out there you could point to?

[pelsar]

52. no examples...

i'm just leaving open the ideal...that at best the Palestinians should have a govt based on civil rights with the muslim culture as the character of the state..such as we see in Europe, America and israel.

Whether its realistic or not is another story...if i were to bet..i would bet on hamas taking over and making it more like iran or saudi arabia.....

[kayecy]

38. Then we are in agreement at last ..........

in answer to your question, i would want a very successful Palestinian state, that is the only way there will be peace.

Then we are in agreement at last. Pity Israel seems to do nothing to achieve this.

[pelsar]

39. the problem is how to get there

and i notice in your posts a consistent stream of how israel is not just to blame for the present failures but will be responsible for any future failures as well....you made it clear that no matter what the agreement is, just "not being fair" is enough to blame israel for a PA failure.

well that "not being fair' is such a value judgement that you've taken away any credibility any agreement would have...(though my preference was the money aspect...if israel doesnt give them enough money they can attack......)

[kayecy]

40. There is a simple solution ........

...you made it clear that no matter what the agreement is, just "not being fair" is enough to blame israel for a PA failure.

There is a simple solution - just be more than fair.

Israel has nothing loose and everything to gain by confounding its critics and negotiating an agreement that is "more than just fair" to the Palestinians.

[pelsar]

49. describe "fair"....

its one of those words like "justice"...which is open to interpretation to any and all. To use a word that has such a "value" attached to it and assume all sides agree is absurd.

When you use the "more than fair"..are you referring to the value system of hamas? islamic jihad? settlers? or...just the western european/berkely based left/progressive value system?...are you that ethnocentric to believe that your description of "fair" will be accepted by all?
____

Israel has nothing loose..........will you please explain how the residents of sederot the surrounding areas and Northern israel "have nothing to lose"....i believe they might disagree with you.
_____

you've made it very clear on two major points:

you believe that your version of "fair" etc is the one to be accepted by all

if the PA fails it has to be israels fault, You seem to treat the Palestinians as some kind of "politically challenged group, that cant sign an agreement, and be responsible for their own actions within that agreement. (if they fail, it must be israels fault because.....)
_____

I like these discussions...it usually clears the air, how so many view the Palestinians as some kind of "chump" society that simply cant live up to any responsibility, any failure past, present and future is israels fault (ever have a course in psych or listen to "Dr. Phil" about taking responsibility and not blaming the "other"?-its kind of basic)

[kayecy]

54. Dscribe fair?...Allow me to make a suggestion.....

You are right, fair is subjective, so is "more-than-fair" but just suppose Israel consulted the Palestinians and determined what solution they thought as 'more-than fair', We have a pretty good idea anyway.

Suppose Israel said OK, we agree to your more-than-fair solution, ie
1. We agree to you wanting a New State capital in East Jerusalem.
2. We agree to you wanting 1967 borders with agreed modifications.
3. We agree to you wanting full soverignty, no over-flights etc

In return we expect you to
a. Move towards normal peaceful relations with Israel, no cross-border attacks etc
b. Abandon right of return.
c. Agree this agreement will be a full an final settlement of all past claims.

Now, if Israel can accept steps 1,2 & 3 and the Palestinians accept conditions a,b,& c, we have a 'Final status' agreement but to make sure it works, there must be an agreed set of withdrawal & security steps.

Each step conditional on the previous one being achieved. Further more, for every rocket attack or targeted killing, the last step would be reversed.

Of course it would need some independent monitoring of each step but my point is the agreed final-status eventual goal would be more or less what the Palestinians want, and even if the militants did not agree, the PA would have a big inducement to crack down on them and would suffer re-occupation if they didn't

The process might take a decade or more but at least it would be progress and Israel would not have to sacrifice much until real peace had been in effect for several years.

Of course, Israel would have to accept something like 1,2 & 3 would eventually happen, but isn't that a price worth paying to achieve a lasting peace?

[pelsar]

59. thats all be done...and agree to---know your history

taba 2001 ...nothing new there.

if the militants did not agree, the PA would have a big inducement to crack down on them and would suffer re-occupation if they didn't

history shows that your theory simply does not hold up:

we have 3 solid examples: the suicide bombers, the rockets from gaza and the attacks from lebanon. In all cases the local govt had the "incentive to stop the attacks and did nothing.
_____

which puts us back to my initial question: if israel were to pullout of the westbank, and the militants didnt agree to the "fair" proposal and started shooting rockets and mortars at israeli cities....then what?....your going to say that israel should reinvade the westbank?

[breakaleg]

56. The starting point for fair is international law. And we know Israel isn't such a big fan of that.

[azurnoir]

19. We're checking out??????

Interesting choice of words, is that the royal third person or a group?
More over until last week you were denouncing the settlers in such strong terms that some of your comments were deleted, now a roll over and you seem to be advocating Bantustans forever because of what might could happen and then use Gaza as an excuse

Long and short until Israel stops the overflights of Lebanon, and removes the settlements there will be no peace, if Israel pulls the same type of backhanded withdrawal in the WB as it did in Gaza then there will be no peace,

Now a question I have asked before Does Israel really want peace if it means giving up land?

[pelsar]

23. my personal view of the settlers...

has nothing to do with whether or not the settlements act as a physical buffer as well as aid in the continual pressure on the jihadnikim in the westbank.....its a military strategy which appears to work......why deny it?


lets pretend for a second that israel did not have those overflights in the past years...and hizballa launched their larger missiles on TA (as Nassralla said he would)....i assume this would have been your preference as opposed to the non violent recon flights which showed where they where.(hizballas attacks had nothing to do with the overflights)

at least be honest about it.....your preference is no overflights...and the consequence of missiles on TA etc

____

you ask if israel wants peace even it means giving up land?

the sinai..
lebanon
gaza

those are your answers....1 out of 3.....odds dont look good for the "give up the land get peace scenario does it?...why do you think the westbank would be different?

(were checking out...just playing with words..nothing to "read" into it....)

[azurnoir]

29. 1 in 3

the settlements act as a physical buffer as well as aid in the continual pressure on the jihadnikim in the westbank.....its a military strategy which appears to work......why deny it?

If it actually works it is only in the short term, in the long term the settlements and settlers them selves some of whom feel free to harass and humiliate the Palestinians around them, only serve to create more "militants" in the future.

As for the the 3 pullouts as you point out the only one that did not lead to attacks was Sinai, but Sinai was also singular in that the pullout was complete and uncontested.
Egypt has been allowed to develop their oil resources, do you believe that there would still an uneasy peace between Israel and Egypt if it had been otherwise? Gaza has not been allowed to develop its natural gas resources, there has been a water blockade since prior to the pullout, because of an attack (attempted) by militants earlier in the summer prior to the pullout

Same with Lebanon the issue of Shebaa Farms has yet to have be resolved and that in addition to political prisoners is what Hezbollah's "issues" seem to be.

[pelsar]

33. RESEARCH

the Lebanon pullout was confirmed by the UN.....the intl border..your rooting for a militia (hizballa) who claimed otherwise....It was complete and confirmed...just like the sinai.

RESEARCH AGAIN...Egypt was "allowed" to develop their oil resourses?...israel discovered and developed the Alma field.... and gave it egypt when they pulled out. (are you hinting that israel would attack egypt if they developed an oil field without "permission?).

Gazas been attacking israel since israel pulled out....every event that happened afterward has nothing to do with the attacks...


and now you claim a WATER BLOCKADE..where do you get these things from?...i got to see the link on that one.....

and Research:...the "political prisoners that hizballa wants...do yo even know who they are? and what they've done?
__

lets see some links: water blockade, israels threat to block egypt from developing the oil fields (or is this just imaginary?)...and those "political prisoners" (you might want to start with Samir Qantar)
___

you have a very good imagination....israel "allowed" egypt to develop their oil resources!!!...never ceases to amaze me, just how evil israel is in your eyes...

[azurnoir]

43. Here we go again

So now you claim Gaza has free access to it's coastal waters when did this happen 5 minutes ago?
Or will we quibble the meaning of water? coast? I was not talking drinking water
And I never said Egypt was not allowed to to develop or in anyway threatened in the production oil that they were not and have not been was my point
As far a good imagination, not biting, the air and coastal blockade of Gaza has been mentioned many times on this forum without denial for anyone except you and only this time so if it is untrue prove it

Hezbollah claims the prisoners Israel is holding are political Israel claims other wise
If this statements constitutes my "supporting Hezbollah" take it up with the moderators

as to Shebaa Farms

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=179745

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/features/article_1369138.php/Lebanons_Shebaa_Farms_remain_a_point_of_contention

[pelsar]

50. you wrote.....

And I never said Egypt was not allowed to to develop or in anyway threatened in the production oil that they were not and have not been was my point

previous post:

Egypt has been allowed to develop their oil resources, do you believe that there would still an uneasy peace between Israel and Egypt if it had been otherwise?

sure sounds like your mean israel might or might not "allow" egypt to develop its oil reserves......

_______________

Or will we quibble the meaning of water? coast? I was not talking drinking water
my mistake, i assumed you meant drinking water, nor have i ever denied israels blockade of 3/4 of the gaza borders...i believe it was you who mentioned that rafah was to small to import enough for gaza (i did enjoy that claim btw....as if 12km of border is simply not wide enough to export and import....do you still claim that btw?
_________

Hezbollah claims the prisoners Israel is holding are political Israel claims other wise...does Lebanon claim they are political prisoners?
If the KKK claimed some white guy who killed some blacks to be a political prisoner....you would believe them as well?

and so i understand that you prefer Hizballas view over the UNs demarcation of the border when israel pulled out?... interesting set of values. Is it just in the I/P or do you take other miltias views over countries and the UN?

[azurnoir]

55. okay

The question about Egypt was rhetorical, not implying Israel had or intended threated Egypt but asking what if.

On the question of border I will stand by what I said, in order to develop beyond a peasant compound Gaza will need coastal water ways and air access, and what of the future Palestinian state those access are needed all the more by both , we are talking apples and oranges here, you seem to be talking of survival only and I am talking about a modern state. could Israels economy survive under such restrictions, could any states or countries?

On the last item it is not me should be asking about who's claim on Shebaa farms is valid it is the UN who has apparently "reconsidered" this

Political prisoners vs criminals your KKK example is too easy, for me most likely I would say he is not a political prisoner, but turn the victim and perp around depending on circumstances my answer might not be so plain

OT on that though I have no problem with the stories of Jews hunting down Nazi war criminals and executing right to this day, some evil one never grows old enough to outrun, but do have a problem with the targeted assassinations in Gaza and the WB. go figure.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

7. This is exactly why world-wide boycotts, sanctions and divestment are needed.

"Life as usual" has to stop for the average Israeli.

Israel undertakes a violent military occupation that deprives millions of basic human rights. The occupied, after a time, engage in violent resistance. Israel then uses the "wrong resistance" as the motivation to continue the violent occupation.

What can bring about change? The peace camp in Israel is ineffective. Violence resistance is ineffective. World-wide BSD is really the only option.


http://www.pacbi.org/boycott_news_more.php?id=66_0_1_10_M11

[LeftishBrit]

13. Apart from all other issues...

a policy of 'boycotts and sanctions' is essentially what Israel (and Egypt) and the international community have been trying with Gaza and Hamas. And that hasn't been working particularly well - indeed according to your own posts it is just strengthening resolve. So why do you expect it to work with the other side? Knowing the (perhaps understandable) suspicion that many Israelis have for the rest of the world, I think it would be more likely to lead to an attitude of "We always knew the world was against us! Let's dig in our heels and vote for Nutty!"


'Israel undertakes a violent military occupation that deprives millions of basic human rights. The occupied, after a time, engage in violent resistance. Israel then uses the "wrong resistance" as the motivation to continue the violent occupation.'


Actually there's a lot of truth in this - though I would regard 'occupation' and 'violent resistance' as having occurred in tandem, rather than one preceding the other. Regardless, there is a vicious circle.

So how best to end it?

My suggestions would be:

For the Palestinians: end violent resistance and revert to the nonviolent resistance methods which have generally proved to be more effective.

For the Israelis: strengthen and support the peace camp.

For both: engage in more joint projects. In the longer term, integrate Israeli and Palestinian children and young people more, so that they don't all grow up thinking of the other as enemies.

For the international community: actively encourage peace initiatives and projects, and condemn violence on both sides. Violence generally decreases when the parties feel that they can go to the 'police' and 'courts' about injustices, rather than feeling that their only solution is to take matters into their own hands. The UN, especially the General Assembly, has generally been biased against Israelis (and I think 'Big Oil' has more influence on this than is sometimes taken into account - Arab states have oil; Israel doesn't). Perhaps in reaction, or perhaps for its own purposes, America has generally has been biased against Palestinians, and has also got itself into a spiral of simultaneously giving lots of military aid both to Israel and its Arab state rivals. I would support - both in the Middle East and elsewhere - less funding for military aid and more for peace projects.

www.allmep.org

[ProgressiveMuslim]

16. Why would it work?

Palestinian academics don't *get* to go to conferences abroad.
Palestinian sports teams aren't able to travel.
Palestinian products are already left to rot due to Israeli restrictions.
There IS no international investment in Gaza to be boycotted.

Don't kid yourself, LB. Israel hasn't boycotted Gaza. Israel has created a huge ghetto in which children and sick people are left to languish and die. It is foolish (and IMO immoral) to equate the siege with an international BDS campaign.

These are hardly parallel situations.

Israel behaves like a pariah and should be treated as one.

It worked in South Africa and it can work against Israel as well.

If Israel hunkers down and remains unresponsive, good for them, but at least the pretense of being part of the civilized world will be stripped away.


As for you suggestions, BTDT with the "trust building" measures. All the while the settlements expanded. Israel has not made any good faith effort to end this. And seriously, can you claim they have with a straight face?

There is no denying, minimizing or ignoring the settlement expansion history of the 90s...

[LeftishBrit]

22. Well...

'Palestinian academics don't *get* to go to conferences abroad.
Palestinian sports teams aren't able to travel.
Palestinian products are already left to rot due to Israeli restrictions.
There IS no international investment in Gaza to be boycotted.'

What about the international community dealing more with this side? The constructive side?

Funding/ contributing to education projects in Gaza; inviting Palestinian academics to conferences - frankly, as a member of UCU, the British university teachers' union, I've been shocked at how little attention has been given to that side - neither the advocates of boycotting Israeli universities nor their opponents have bothered much with supporting Palestinian academics.

Sports teams should be invited and encouraged by other countries. There was a case a few months ago when a Palestinian football team couldn't come to the UK after being invited - because OUR immigration authorities wouldn't let them in, out of concerns that they might stay here indefinitely.

Why not actively support Palestinian products? If there's sufficient international demand, then it would be hard for Israel to maintain its restrictions.

Why not invest more in Gaza infrastructure- 'ethical' companies could make a start there - perhaps dealing initially with local entrepreneurs?


This is the side that's never really been tried. Aid yes; collaboration and cooperation of the sort I'm suggesting - no, not really.

[Tom Joad]

37. Invest in Gaza infrastructure, while Israel keeps the borders closed?

when any nation that deals with Hamas will face retribution from the US and Israeli governments?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

48. LB you are in la-la land.

I truly don't think you have a clue as to what the situation in Gaza is, or has been for the past 10 years.

You write all that as though THE GOV'T OF ISRAEL ACTUALLY WANTS PEACE AND MUTUAL PROSPERITY!!!

Can you not look at this objectively and see that they do not, that they've done everything to sabotage that??

There was collaboration and trust building during the 1990s. But the problem was, the settlements expanded exponentially. We can hold hands and play soccer and sing kumbayah until the cows come home, but at the end of the day, the gov't of Israel -- Labor, likud and what have you -- are still stealing land.

They TALK ppace but actions on the ground speak to a different reality.

[msmcghee]

21. " . . though I would regard 'occupation' and 'violent resistance' , ,

. . as having occurred in tandem, rather than one preceding the other."

Sometimes you say things that reveal your bias. This is not even an attempt at moral equivalence. It's spreading falsehoods.

[kayecy]

27. Congratulations on being fired at by all sides........

Congratulations! You seem to be under fire from everyone.

msmcghee says you "...reveal your bias. This is not even an attempt at moral equivalence."

Progressive Moslem accuses you of "minimizing or ignoring the settlement expansion history "

[Tom Joad]

35. To call what israel is doing with Gaza a mere "boycott" is just beyond the pale

first, you have to realize the power Israel has as Occupier. They are not merely not buying Gaza goods, they are preventing any and all trade from Gaza to anywhere else. Israel blocks the sea lanes. Israel destroyed the airport. Israel controls the borders. This is not a mere boycott. This is a military action, a siege. Get a freakin' clue, brit.

it is interesting that you tell Palestinians to stop any and all armed resistance.

For the Israelis? You suggest sending their little kids to summer camps with Arab children. You do say that violence should be condemned on both sides...
but what about the settlements? The illegal taking of Palestinian land to create facts on the ground. Isn't that a form of violence?
Isn't the continued occupation regime, even on a day no one is actually shot, a form of violence??

Isn't the Annexation Wall a form of violence, when a farmer cannot access his crops, when an old woman cannot reach a hospital? When students are separated from their school?

So do these forms of violence go into your definition of what should and must be condemned?

My question, also, is do you support international law being applied, or do you accept the model of Bush/Olmert... that the two sides make an agreement based on the relative power of each side?

[Tom Joad]

41. "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion....

that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection." Martin Luther King.

"Palestinians must be patient" mantra. It does seem like the kahanists and avigdor's accomplish little in preventing justice compared with the many more who preach acceptance of the status quo and say that things will change eventually and of course you Palestinians will have more rights someday but you must be patient, you must accept what Israel is willing to give, you must accept the daily indignities of occupation, the confiscation of your land without responding with protest, the demolition of your homes without protest. The confiscation of humanitarian aid without protest. the hunger of your children without responding with any protest. Palestinians are instructed to wait for world leaders are ready to grant them whatever these leaders deem is enough for the Palestinians. No room for the people themselves to take action. No room for calls for Israel to act according to international law. Palestinians must be nice to Israel, and it will grant whatever they wish to grant... it's really up to them.

[pelsar]

51. well thats pretty stupid

the confiscation of your land without responding with protest, the demolition of your homes without protest. The confiscation of humanitarian aid without protest. the hunger of your children without responding with any protest

nothing comes to those who do nothing....

[Tom Joad]

42. I would like to ask you why you think that "big oil"

is supporting Israeli settlements. Or how you think that Big Oil is very influential in regard to US policy of supporting Israeli actions?

[LeftishBrit]

45. I don't.

I think that Big Oil has some influence on *other* countries support for the *Arab* states, which means opposing Israel (not necessarily equating with positive support for the Palestinians). Because so many other countries oppose Israel, Israel has become excessively dependent on American support.

[azurnoir]

44. For what it is worth

there is a saying about when both sides of an issue want to shot you, means you are probably close to right

[LeftishBrit]

46. Thanks!

This is not the first time I've found myself arguing with both sides on the same thread, though perhaps the record for the number of objections from both sides to the same post!

I am not at all sure that I'm 'close to right', though - a crystal ball would be useful; a magic wand even better!

[bemildred]

47. Well, you're righter than at least one of them, possibly both. nt

[Tom Joad]

53. Just like the moderate religious leaders that so infuriated

Dr. King, an extremist by many people's standards, back in the day. they were called terrible things by the klan too (they had to be doing something right, as they were so in the middle!!), despite their moderation, and as you can see, they were attacked by Dr. King as well.

or even better, we see in President Bush a man who has been attacked because he says that Israel must make some modest concessions, and also attacked by those extremists who insist that all the settlements must go as a matter of international law.

Here you have been criticized by someone who believes that the settlements must be abandoned, because that is international law, and also by someone who believes that Israel should outright annex the West Bank, deprive those Arabs deemed worthy of staying of the right to vote.

The perfect moderate!

[msmcghee]

57. Just to set the record straight . .

. . I pointed out a fallacy in your post.

. . I would regard 'occupation' and 'violent resistance' as having occurred in tandem, rather than one preceding the other.

I recently posted evidence with citations that there numerous terrorist attacks against Israel over a period of 19 years from 1948 through 1967 - which occurred prior to any occupation of Palestinian territory. Yet you chose to repeat that central pillar of "the Narrative" as if it were common knowledge. Your attempts at "even-handedness" seem to be morphing into nothing more than an attempt to find "moral equivalence" using bogus claims.

You don't need a crystal ball or a magic wand to either discredit my evidence or admit you're wrong. All you need is your computer.

[breakaleg]

58. to further set the record straight, I believe it was pointed out to you that not all of those

examples you posted were in fact terrorist attacks. Funny how you chose to ignore that, even in the interest of the record and all that.

[Vegasaurus]

25. Points listed in this document are non-starters

"Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;" (emphasis mine)

"Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194."

Ending the occupation of ALL Arab lands, like the "historic Palestine", aka Israel? Not going to hit the mainstream with that rhetoric.

Similarly, promoting the right of return isn't happening either, since to do so does away with Israel as a Jewish state. There is no international support for that either.

Go ahead and try to get sanctions and boycotts, but there will not be the signatures or supports your movement wants or needs with that kind of language (not to mention that I don't think most Westerners will support sanctions or boycotts of Israeli products anyway, since they affect their way of life too much)

[msmcghee]

26. Yes, to say the nothing of the . .

. . blatant hypocrisies and double standards of such sanctions and boycotts. Fortuntely, all Westerners do not succumb so easily to mob rule.