 sj |
||
|
||
BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2)
|
|
|
|||||||
|
BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) |
Share Thread
|
||||||
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: GUEST,GUEST Date: 04 May 02 - 02:09 PM CarolC, I am but a child of God/Allah made in his image. If you do not care about me, then you cannot care about any of God/Allah's children. GUEST |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 May 02 - 02:40 PM "I responded in kind."
That's the normal commonsense thing to do. And it's the reason conflicts build and build and seem impossible to get out of.
In the tragedy in the Holy Land that is especially evident.
Responding in kind, whether that means returning sarcasm for sarcasm, or anger for anger, or in response to verbal abuse, just doesn't work, except as a way of building antagonism. Yes, there are situations where a forceful response can work, a response strong enough to make an attacker back off, but that doesn't apply here in this thread.
And I don't think it applies in the case of the conflict in Palestine and Israel either. I'd like to hope that there could be a move away from suicidal murder among Palestinians, and towards a non-violent struggle with the same willingness to die if necessary, but without the willingness to kill. I think that this could have been a far far more effective way of challenging the Israeli occupation and expansion.
But it is hard to imagine how this can come about. Far more likely is another wave of freelance suicide attacks, fuelled by the onslaught that was presented as a way of stopping them.
The truth is, if there were to be acts of radical non-violent resistance in the present climate, is there any likelihood that they would even be reported? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: GUEST Date: 04 May 02 - 02:46 PM Israel itself the obstacle to Middle East peace Deir Yassin (1948)... Sabra and Shatilla (1982)... Qana (1996)... Jenin (2002) is only the latest in a long list of Israeli crimes against humanity during the zionist state's short but bloody history. Whether or not a UN fact-finding mission is sent to the camp is irrelevant; everyone who watched events there unfolding, and has seen the devastation — in terms of both the camp and the lives of its people — left after the Israeli withdrawal, knows exactly what happened there, without a report that will inevitably be written with political objectives in mind. It should also be remembered that while Jenin was undoubtedly the greatest atrocity of the Israelis' latest offensive, it was by no means the only one. Palestinians in Ramallah, Bethlehem and many others towns, villages and refugee camps have also suffered enormous damage and terrible losses. Indeed, every Palestinian in Palestine is suffering as a result of the Israelis' determination to destroy the infrastructure of Palestinian society and the spirit of the Palestinian people. Such has been international outrage at the Israelis' actions that even the US has had to speak out against them, although no one takes George W. Bush's criticism of Ariel Sharon very seriously. It is inconceivable that Israel was acting without a prior green light from Washington, or that it will face any meaningful sanction for its actions. When we hear US and Israeli statements, and see their actions, we should understand them as two arms of the same entity, working together to pursue the same objective: the maximization of Israel's size and power, and the legitimization of its control over as much Muslim land as possible. The talk in recent weeks has been of a return to the negotiating table and the resumption of peace talks aimed first at a ceasefire and then at a comprehensive settlement. However, all the arguments against the peace process, which sceptics have been making since the earliest days of the Oslo process a decade ago, have been validated by the events of the last decade in general, and of the last few months in particular. They can be summed up very simply: that Israel is insincere and untrustworthy in everything it says and does, and cannot be worked with. Many Palestinians have felt this from the start. Very few now have any doubts. There is, however, a more fundamental reality that we must not forget: that Israel itself is wholly illegitimate and has no right to exist. The pragmatic acceptance of a two-state solution by some Palestinians was based not on recognising Israel's right to exist, but on accepting the reality of its existence. If Israel were willing to co-exist with a Palestinian state, some argued, then the question of its illegitimacy should be put aside for the sake of a settlement. Now that Israel has proved that it is not willing to make an even vaguely equitable agreement, the question of its illegitimacy comes to the fore. The fact that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegitimate, occupying entities, created by aggression and dispossession, and are obstacles to a peace is widely recognised; the same is true of the whole of Israel. It is one huge settlement, established by Jews invading Palestine from Europe and elsewhere, and forcing Palestinians out of their lands and properties. No number of UN resolutions, and no degree of international recognition, can change that fact. Even many Israelis now accept that the settlements in the West Bank and Ghazzah will have to be abandoned. The truth is bigger than that: such is the nature of Israel and of the Israeli mindset that peace will only be possible when the settlement that is Israel is itself dismantled. That is the inescapable conclusion of the experiences of the last decade. Israel is a creature born of zionism, a racist ideology based on a belief in the God-given superiority of the Jews as a race over all other peoples. The parallels between zionist Israel and apartheid South Africa are clear, and zionism will have to go the way that apartheid went. The Jews in Palestine will have to make the same choice as the whites did in South Africa: to remain as equal citizens of a fair, open Palestinian state shaped by the wishes of the majority of its people, or to leave for greener pastures elsewhere. Less than a decade after the end of apartheid, most white South Africans recognize it as an abhorrent phase in their history that should never have happened; some Jews already feel the same about zionism. The problem is that the zionists (not all of whom are Jews) are going to create great deal more conflict and bloodshed before allowing the inevitable to come about.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: Troll Date: 04 May 02 - 02:49 PM Carol, I do apologize for hurting you. It was not intentional. Because I do care. Perhaps we should look on what is happening between us as a microcosm of what is happening in the Middle-East. Perhaps, like us, they don't really understand just where the other side is coming from and why. If we can find a way to make peace, maybe they can too. Again, I apologize for having hurt you as you say I have. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: RichM Date: 04 May 02 - 03:05 PM Here's a proposal for peace, from today's Jerusalem Post. Natan Sharansky is the current Deputy Prime Minister of Israel.
Rich McCarthy May. 3, 2002 Where do we go from here? NATAN SHARANSKY Today, as the Israel Defense Forces are engaged in destroying the terrorist infrastructure, we must ask ourselves, "Where do we go from here?" Is there any other option besides reestablishing full Israeli control over Judea and Samaria, or resigning ourselves to the fact that Yasser Arafat is the only address that we have? I believe there is, and it is based on the premise that only democracy and economic prosperity for the Palestinian people can bring security for Israel. In order to ensure our own security, the Palestinians must be encouraged to form an open and free society that is not burdened by the fear, hatred, and terror that have been sown in recent years by Arafat and his leadership - a society that affords real economic opportunity for all its inhabitants. Only such a society can serve as a solid guarantee for normal relations between the two peoples, and as a promising starting point for negotiations, ultimately leading towards a permanent peace settlement. This cannot happen overnight; for this we need a Transition Period. Last week, I presented the following seven-point plan of action to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, defining the principles for a three-year Transition Period, leading the Palestinians away from terror and towards peace: The rest of this proposal is
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: Troll Date: 04 May 02 - 03:12 PM Israel is a creature born of zionism, a racist ideology based on a belief in the God-given superiority of the Jews as a race over all other peoples.
Guest, you'd better find out a little more about what the Jews feel it means to be the "Chosen People". One thing for sure, it is NOT a philosophy of racial superiority. The Jews do not feel that they are better than other peoples. They DO however feel that they are different in that God made a covenant with them. That covenant did not promise world dominion. It said simply that if the children of Israel kept Gods commandments that He would sustain them. That's all. troll
BTW, to GUEST, YA in Ramallah:
As far as racist comments go, look up where the term "white hope" came from.
troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: CarolC Date: 04 May 02 - 03:16 PM Ok, troll. I accept your apology. But please don't do it any more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: Troll Date: 04 May 02 - 03:18 PM Peel me a grape? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 May 02 - 03:25 PM Well, the tone of that is a bit more encouraging than that of Sharon.
I noted one paragraph that could be interpreted in various ways: "Israel will not be involved in this process, and will only maintain the right to veto candidates to the PAA in the event that such candidates had been connected to terrorist activities against Israel." The thing would be, who would define that, and on what basis? Does resisting the Israeli army count as terrorism? What does "connected with" include, and what doesn't it include.
Now if they could apply that restriction on people with terorist records both ways that would remove Sharon from the picture as well as Arafat, and be a lot more even handed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: CarolC Date: 04 May 02 - 04:18 PM Sure troll. Here's your grape... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: RichM Date: 04 May 02 - 04:24 PM For anyone interested in understanding the complexities of the Muslim cultures, I recommend Milton Viorst's "In the Shadow of the Prophet". It's a good read, and an even better re-read... click here! Currently I am reading "Among the Believers: an Islamic Journey" by V.S. Naipaul. I'll post more about this when I've digested it. Rich McCarthy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: DougR Date: 04 May 02 - 04:41 PM Skeptic: I have read and re-read that statement troll made and for the life of me I cannot see it as a racist statement. I see it only as troll's speculation as to why there are not more Palestinian peace groups than evidently there are. It's just a statement. McGrath, I applaud your efforts, and Bert's original effort to make a positive statement about how peace can come to the Middle East. Far more learned individuals than most of us are here on the Mudcat have made numerous attempts to bring peace to that region and they have failed. Other than them continuing to fight until one wins, I see no lasting solution. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: PEACE in the Middle East (2) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 May 02 - 05:26 PM I've started a part3 to this thread. - and I've started off by including a link to a fascinating young Palestinian singer and musician, with sound files. That's my positive suggestion for now - listen to the music. |