Israel Gaza offensive

[straffo]

Bronk , I was just pointing the obvious , pre-emptive or not Israel was the aggressor

Note , that I've not posted my opinion about that

[Bronk]

Originally posted by straffo
Bronk , I was just pointing the obvious , pre-emptive or not Israel was the aggressor

Note , that I've not posted my opinion about that

[Charon]

I think Nashwan and Bozon are covering any point I could make

I sympathize with the Palestinians in that the creation of the state of Israel came at their expense with more than a little help from the West. As a non religious person I can't buy the divine right argument. An interesting though is what if the European Zionists at the end of the 19th century had decided to work to found the new state of Israel in Argentina as had been proposed.

But, it's a bit hypocritical to be too outraged given our history and that of most of the Western world and Eastern world, for that matter. The reality on the ground today is that both Israel and the Palestinians exist and are here to stay regardless of "what ifs" and "fairness" and "wouldn't it be nice" and "should have beens."

Imagine the upside to both if they could find a practical, and emotionally acceptable way to make a new, perhaps even cooperative future together. But, you wonder if the hate, propaganda, religious fever, greed, envy, internal politics and outside influences can be worked through. A lot of challenges, but I suppose all that needs to happen for now is a basically acceptable and somewhat fair framework to build upon for decades to come.

Bozon, what is the political and public will in Israel today post Sharon relative to a Palestinian state and the West bank settlement issues? I must admit I haven't been paying too much attention to that lately.

Charon

[lutrel]

Originally posted by straffo
I fail to see the difference between an attack and a preemptive attack.

I mean is that really different when you have a bomb coming your way ?

Sorry, but that makes about as much sense as a legally armed citizen saying "I'll wait until this armed robber pointing a gun at me shoots before I defend myself".

[Elfie]

Originally posted by straffo
Bronk , I was just pointing the obvious , pre-emptive or not Israel was the aggressor

Note , that I've not posted my opinion about that

Launching a preemptive strike does not necessarily make the attacker the aggressor imo. We have to look at all the facts surrounding the case to determine who was the aggressor in each case.

In the case of the 6 Day War, I think it's clear that the Arabs, led by Egypt were going to attack Israel. Also, the Syrians had been shelling Israeli towns from the Golan Heights for some time prior to full scale hostilities breaking out. Egypt had blockaded the Straits of Tiran, a vital supply line for Israel, stopping all Israeli flagged vessels from entering.

Just how long do you have to accept artillery shelling your towns, enemy armies massing tanks and troops on your borders and blockades of your vital supply lines before you can claim self defense?

[Brownshirt]

How long do you have to accept some other country is occupying land belonging to you, forcing you to move out from the land you, and your forefathers, have been living for hundreds of years?

When is it justified to arm yourself and start a war against aggressor?

[evenhaim]

Originally posted by Brownshirt
How long do you have to accept some other country is occupying land belonging to you, forcing you to move out from the land you, and your forefathers, have been living for hundreds of years?

When is it justified to arm yourself and start a war against aggressor?

[Elfie]

Originally posted by Brownshirt
How long do you have to accept some other country is occupying land belonging to you, forcing you to move out from the land you, and your forefathers, have been living for hundreds of years?

When is it justified to arm yourself and start a war against aggressor?

Uh.....what are you talking about?

[SD67]

You'll have to forgive brownshirt... he's our trollbot V2.03
Sometimes his posts are a little out there, we're working on it.

[bozon]

Originally posted by Charon
Bozon, what is the political and public will in Israel today post Sharon relative to a Palestinian state and the West bank settlement issues? I must admit I haven't been paying too much attention to that lately.

Since the 90s, there is a majority who is in favor of a Palestinian state "based" on 1948 lines - these were not borders mind you as not a single arab state recognized them, but cease fire lines, just as 1967 lines were cease fire lines. Nothing is holy about them and some minor corrections (scale of hundred of meters) may be required. How big the majority is depends on the specific details of the Palestinian state.

The only real issue regarding territory which is highly debated among Israeli public is the area of Jerusalem. This is a sensitive and loaded issue, but essentially a technical one that can be solved in negotiations. The religious sensitive issue is the old city of Jerusalem, but we are talking of a well defined and confined area of 1 square kilometer that carry significance to 3rd parties as well (add the Cristian world into the equation). There are many reasonable suggestions of how to handle this 1 square km (have you every heard of a vertical border? ).

Unless Palestinians demand more than 1948 borders this is not what will stop them from getting a state. Actually, one Kneset member when he wants to annoy the Israeli arab public suggests to be even more generous and give the palestinian state even more territory that include large concentrations of Israeli arabs. This always embarrasses them since they have to explain why they consider themselves as Palestinians, support a Palestinian state, yet passionately claim that they should belong to Israel and not Palestine.

Israel has already proved twice that when it decides to move settlers out of a region, it is capable of doing so (evacuation of Sini peninsula and the Gaza strip). There is some hypocrisy in the Palestinian demand that all Israeli settlers be evacuated from the west bank. What they demand is that the Palestinian state will be completely cleared of Jews, which is about as racist demand as you can make. Imagine a Europian country demanding that all people of certain ethnicity leave because they have a state somewhere else in the world - and just to be clear again, this is not illegal settlement on occupied territory (unless on private land) because Israel had not borders before that and there is no other state that can legally claim this land. What they claim in practice is that between Jordan river and the Mediterranean there should be two states: 1.5 for Palestinians and 0.5 for Jews. However, for all practical reasons, Israel is willing and has the proved ability to evacuate settlers.

The much bigger problem and the central issue as far as Israel is concerned is what KIND of state this Palestine will be - not its borders. Palestinians will have to convince Israeli public that they can ensure quiet borders and that they are not about to become an Islamic extremist country that will be used as a base for attacking Israel. So far they only managed to convince the exact opposite and THIS is why they are in the piss poor state that they are in. Israeli public, even those that support the palestinian state idea simply do not trust them. Very few people believe that if they get a state today this will not explode in our faces. The withdrawal from the Gaza strip and the 4500+ rockets fired at Israeli from there since then, Hamas taking over with support of Iran and Hizballa and the kidnapping of the Israeli soldier annihilated almost all practical support of Israeli public of a Palestinian state in the present. This is how Palestinians keep shooting their own foot and why although supported by Israeli public majority, they get zero sympathy from it.

[Charon]

Thanks Bozon,

I always appreciate your perspective on the issue as reasoned and level headed.

(have you every heard of a vertical border? Smiley ).

No, but I might assume that given the archaeological nature of the holy sites you could, say, have a Mosque on the surface under Palestinian control and a temple underneath under Israeli control.

Charon

[evenhaim]

another suicide attack just occured in jerusalem 8 killed and 57 injured gunmen run into an area near a religous school and open fire, great another example of intelligent hamas reasoning.