BS: Middle East: Solutions

Subject: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 04:54 PM

War and killing are easy to criticize and argue about. Peace is lots better (to all but a rabid few). With that said, what do y'all see as being possible solutions to the situation there? The discussion could include the welfare of Palestinians, security of Israel, probability for a lasting peace in that area of the world. I'm guessing that a rehash of history or who did what to whom would cause things to get us all back into a loooong argument. But, finding some sort of common ground from which to pursue peace would be so much more productive. We all kinda work together to solve the difficulties instead of exacerbate them. Any takers?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,bert
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:14 PM

Give them the Panhandle of Texas

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:16 PM

Nice idea, and a sensible idea too. Mind, I bet it'll all end in screeching and screaming.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:20 PM

That post of mine was a response to brucie's suggestioin rather than bert! (Of course the Panhandle of Texas, along with the rest of the USA, is an example of one conceivable future. The one in which the natives lose out completely to the settlers in their land.)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:30 PM

Unfortunately, I don't see much hope for progress while Bush, Sharon and, especially, Arafat remain in power.

If Kerry wins in November, we may have a U.S. administration that is willing to pave the way to peace. The two presidents who made real progress in achieving Middle East peace have both been Democrats. Jimmy Carter brokered the peace between Egypt and Israel and Bill Clinton brokered the peace between Jordan and Israel and actually came close with the Palestinians and Israel.

As anyone who follows Israeli politics knows, Sharon won't be around for long. Due to various scandals, his approval rating has sunk to historic lows and he's coming under increasing pressure to resign. It is very doubtful that he'll survive the looming power struggle from within his own Likud Party.

The kind of leader the Israelis elect to replace Sharon will be, to a very large extent, dependent on the Palestinians. When the Palestinians are not committing and supporting terrorism, and show that they are open to peaceful negotitians, the Israelis elect peace makers like Rabin, Perez and Barak. In times of terror, the Israelis get scared and elect tough guys like Netanyahu and Sharon.

A Palestinian leader must emerge who is prepared to work toward peace, who is prepared to keep working toward peace when less than 100% of Palestinian demands are not met, who is prepared to rein in the terrorists and who is ready to actually prepare his people for peace, something that Arafat never did during the hopeful negotiations of the 1990s. One thing is certain, as long as Palestinians are committing terrorism, Israel, as would any government in the world, will react punitively. Clearly, Arafat has proven throughout his career that he is not the leader who will lead the Palestinians to peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:32 PM

Just a brief note before I get outta the way here. This thread was in response to a suggestion fro Jack the Sailor (Rob). It sure would be nice to observe Marquis of Queensbury Rules for at least 50 posts. Not tellin' anyone what to do, just think maybe we could use some peace and joy with Christmas just around the corner and all.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:46 PM

Easter?

"In times of terror, the Israelis get scared and elect tough guys like Netanyahu and Sharon."

And Palestinians hold on to Arafat for the same reasons, or turn to people who are a lot more extreme than he is.

The cycle of violence freezes people into patterns of behaviour that make any kind of progress virtually impossible. And in a sense any movement forward could even threaten the leadership on both sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 05:52 PM

It's not having a TV what's doin' it to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 06:24 PM

C-watch ...I can hardly believe what you have written regarding the Palestinians. You say that they are not contributing enough to the so called "peace process".
When I was in my teens,I remember a journalist who worked for the BBC,called Keith Kyle. He useds to appear regularly on Cliff Michelmores' "Tonight" programme,and was always on about the dreadful wrong that had been done to the Palestinians,most of whom had been shovelled into temporary refugee camps.
Its now 50 yrs down the line ,and several generations have lived and died in these camps,with no hope of seeing their stolen land again.
How can you talk of lack of envolvement under these conditions.
I met and conversed with a member of the British Army who was assisting with the allocation of Palistinian land to the Israelis,and he told me it was robbery with violence.
There will never be any progress towards peace until the "Palestinian problem" is addressed.
Then we get to the main feature "The West V Islam"   I can hardly wait ....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 06:49 PM

We have tried this before, but there are a few people on this forum that will not accept that one of the givens for Mideast peace is that Israel has a right to exist, where it is, as a primarily Jewish state, with secure boundries. They can, and will, object to these conditions, but anything else would require the forceable eviction of the population of Israel.

That said, my personal opinion is that the fence/wall is the best idea, except it should follow the Green Line exactly, take in no Palentinian territory whatsoever, and all settlements outside the fence should be abandoned. There should be monetary reparations paid to the residents of the refugee camps or to Palestinians who have moved on, based upon the value of their expropriated property whenever they left it, with an appropriate increase for inflation. The Moslem nations of the region should also pay reparations, on the same basis, to Jewish citizens of their nations who were forced to leave in 1949. Palestinians who want to work inside Israel may do so, on the same basis as other foreign workers, but they have no right to jobs there.

There's a start for the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 06:55 PM

Looks like a level field. Good one, artbrooks.

Anyone see a place for the UN in all this?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 07:11 PM

It will never happen while Likud is in control of the government, whether that be with Sharon or Netanyahu, but the only way to get the thing back on track is to get back to the pre-Sharon/pre-Bush days of the Helsinki agreement, just before the second infitada started.

If they can get back on that square, where both sides had made what was really dramatic progress on both of their agendas, and go from there, peace could actually be brought about very quickly.

There would have to be prerequisites though. For the Palestinians, a complete cessation of all suicide bombings and attacks on Israelis, including in the settlement areas. That would mean the paramilitaries would have to police themselves, at least until the Palestinian Authority could get up and running again. That could be phased in through international assistance in a nation building initiative from a coalition that includes the Israelis, the US, the EU, and the UN.

For the Israelis, the wall will have to come down, the settlements stopped, and the land given back.

Finally, as part of the peace process and nation building, an agreement on access to shared resources, like water, road infrastructures, etc. would hopefully be included as well. Some sort of joint authority might do the trick.

In other words, there really is nothing standing in the way of peace except the parties themselves. But that is always the case. But also remember that there are many, many people who always continue working for peace, even though they are never the ones we see in the news. They are the truly brave ones.

Try and remember Rachel Corrie this week:

Rachel Corrie Memorial Website

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 07:19 PM

Some great ideas there guest and I hope they come to pass,but remmember bthe Palestinians are being used as pawns by both the Moslem fundamentalists and conservative jews, who dont want to make any concessions,but want to continue their expansionist agenda...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 07:28 PM

So, the problem is radicals, not reasonable people?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 07:40 PM

The problems been there for 50 yrs Brucie, but there are always those people who will use other folks misfortune for their own ends.
You were right to start this thread,and I hope we get a good discussion and some clear thinking...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 07:42 PM

We will, Ake. I'm sure. Hope you're doin' well, buddy. BM

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 08:13 PM

Many serious problems in this world are created and encouraged by radicals. Most people are happy to live peacably with their neighbors until some fanatic points out that the neighbor has different color skin or different beliefs about religion or property that we must have. Unfortunately, we keep listening to the damn radicals and follow their lead into war, bigotry and hatred. When will we learn.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 08:22 PM

I'm pretty sure that if I was an Jewish Israeli or a Palestinian my ideal solution would be to have a single secular state including the whole of the Holy Land - call it Eretz Israel or Palestine - with both peoples living there as equal citizens, both with a "right of return" for their diaspora. Within that single state there would be some areas where there was a Jewish majority, and some where there was a Palestinian majority, and others where the numbers were more or less equal.

However I know that looking towards that as a solution of choice is not a position that is held at present by many Jewish Israelis (though there always have been some who think in these terms) which means that at this time it is not on. So I imagine I'd want a two state settlement, and hope that in time when the madness has gone, the way madnesses often do some kind of confederation could be established. After all, look what has happened between warring countries in Europe?

The crucial thing is for the two peoples to learn to appreciate how very much they have in common, in terms of culture and religion and history, and to learn to tell each others stories, as a way of understanding each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Nerd
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 09:19 PM

Great thread Brucie. I agree essentially with C-watch here.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 09:29 PM

I Wish I had a solution.

I wish a good solution here meant something. It really doesn't.

How about if you put everyone into therapy? Or, wipe out centuries of hate of Jews by most anything Arab.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 09:51 PM

Better yet, ignore anything Carol C. has to say about the subject. For sure, for the good of Israel!

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 10:27 PM

I wouldn't wanna ignore the advice of anyone. She's a smart woman, and this is about solutions, not positions, pardon my arrogance MG.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Mar 04 - 11:05 PM

I find myself agreeing with most of the second paragraph of artbrooks' 13 Mar 04 - 06:49 PM post.

Nice thread, brucie.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Johnny in OKC
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 02:50 AM

There isn't going to be a solution until they start over.
The problem goes back to '48. When the Israelis moved in,
they kicked out everyone that had been living there for
centuries. Out of their homes, farms, businesses. Don't
care where you go, just get out.

What they should have done was guarantee everyone equality.
Equal rights, equal opportunity, etc. for everyone.

Not that the USA in 1948 was any model of fairness, what
with Jim Crow. But now we know better.

So how's this gonna happen in Israel now?? Good question.
They would need a leader like Nelson Mandela.

Love, Johnny

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Nerd
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 01:10 PM

Johnny,

From Brucie's opening post:

I'm guessing that a rehash of history or who did what to whom would cause things to get us all back into a loooong argument.

Many people here do not agree with your assessment of 1948, which is factually inaccurate. In 1948, the neighboring Arab countries and the Palestinians began a war with Israel; Israel did not just "kick everybody out." But we've just been through a "loooong argument" about it on another thread, so I won't go into all the details here. The point is, what can be done NOW?

As you say, Nelson Mandela would be a good start.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 01:21 PM

Actually, the problems between Palestinians and Israelis have already been solved. They were solved in the negotiations that came out of the Helsinki agreement. The problem now, just as is the case in Northern Ireland, is that one side is not willing to implement the agreement.

Israel's right wing Zionist parties, like Northern Ireland's right wing unionist and loyalist parties, are refusing to implement the terms of the agreements that were negotiated to solve the problems.

Thank god Northern Ireland did regress the way the situation did in Palestine. But that is the reality. There is war today, because the right wing politicians are standing in the way of peace. It truly is that simple, folks.

The hard part--the negotiating and coming to agreements--has been done. Those agreements have been undermined by those who hold the power--Israel and Britain--in both conflicts.

It could all end tomorrow, if in both parts of the world, people would denounce the right wing politicians who feed off war and human misery for what they are, and demand their governments put an end to the conflicts here and now. Clear thinking, strong hearts, and a mighty resolve is what is needed. Nothing more, nothing less.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 01:28 PM

I've a feeling there's a lot in what GUEST says - that peace will come when the peaceful majorities on both sides tell their leaders to pack it in or bugger off. Until then they'll carry on and give others the 'justification' to bomb innocents both in Israel and further afield.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 02:12 PM

"Thank god Northern Ireland did regress"

Oops! That of course should say "didn't regress".

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Judah
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 02:14 PM

I believe there has been a long time double standard which accepts the fact that Arab lands should be 100% non Jewish and under Muslim law, and even be allowed to be at war with Israel, but Israel must be multi-ethnic, secular, and treat every act of war within its borders as a civil court case. So long as this world view paints Israelis and Zionists into a corner, I do not see where 'peace' is an option for Israel.

How about this:

The Arab States take responsibility for the Jewish population which used to exist throughout Arab and Islamic lands and either through emigration or eviction left those lands to resettle in what is not the State of Israel.

That as part of that acceptance, the Arab States take upon themselves the resettlement of those non-Israeli people forced to live such wretched existence in the Gaza Strip.

Similarly on the East side of Israel, there is already a State for the Palestinians. It is called Jordan.

There should be a council admistered by the U.N. and composed of equal amounts of Arabs and Israelis to negotiate the West Bank situation. So far it seems that everyone feels that Israel should be a secular state with an existing healthy minority of Arabs and Christians, but somehow a Palestinian State should have no Jews. If there is to be another Palestinian State on the West bank of the Jordan, it too should be multi-ethnic and democratic. And it should have a healthy minority of Jews.

There are already significant signs that an independent Palestinian State which no access to the Mediterranean, and over land with significant water rights issues, is going to be non-viable from the start.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 02:17 PM

I think we're better off sticking with the agreements already negotiated. Once the peaceful majorities decide to make their nations ungovernable by staging massive demonstrations until the criminal politicians are thrown out of power, everything will change. Everything.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 02:47 PM

Well, it is wonderful to see a thread progressing that recognizes two essential elements to the ME situation.

1) Both people have a right to live in peace and security
2) We may be able to keep looking for solutions that don't involve war

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 03:18 PM

I don't think anyone's suggesting that there should be no Jews in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. Certainly the Palestinians are not suggesting this. What they are saying is that if Jews are going to live there, they should be governed by a Palestinian government, and live just as the rest of the Palestinians live, instead of in segregated settlements that are under Israeli rule, defended by Israeli soldiers, and accessed by roads that can only be used by Jews. And the Palestinians don't want an exclusively Muslim state, either. There are Christian Palestinians, and before the creation of the State of Israel, there were Jewish Palestinians, as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 03:27 PM

If there is to be another Palestinian State on the West bank of the Jordan, it too should be multi-ethnic and democratic. And it should have a healthy minority of Jews.

I think you'd find that there are a lot of Palestinians who in principle would be in favour of that.

The Jewish communities in the rest of the Middle East were there for thousands of years, and played a valued part in those societies. Their uprooting in the wake of the war of 1948 was a tragedy and a disaster for the whole region. And there are many Arabs who see it in that way. The hope must be that in the wake of a just and viable solution in the Holy Land, these communities can start to come back into existence.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 05:45 PM

We are facing what I perceive to be a compound problem that complicates matters.

1) Religions

2) Security

Comments?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 06:11 PM

1. Get Bush out of office.

2. Patch up the damages he has created with out allies and the United Nations.

3. Put the war powers back in Congress and away from a single trigger happy exectutive.

4. Call for a Middle East Peace Summit with the Saudi Propoasl being a general framework.

5. Have Denis Kucinich head the US delegation to this summit.

Then watch the details than many of you argue over fall into place.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 06:24 PM

Bobert,

I'm starting to get the distinct impression that you don't like President Bush. Would that be an accurate assessment on my part?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Gareth
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 08:06 PM

No Brucie, I suspect that the Bobert despises GWB Jnr, tho he is to good a christian ( in the correct sense of the word ) to use those terms.

But for myself, I have no such restrictions.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 08:14 PM

Perhaps they could call halftime, and swap ends.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Mar 04 - 08:29 PM

In reality, I don't despise Bush but I ain't too wild about most of his policies. Might of fact, off the top of my head, I can't think of any I agree with. He tends to see things only as black or white. The real world isn't that way at all and that's why his going back to the ranch is a first and necessary step toward peace in the Middle Esat.

"One cannot solve a problem with the same consciencousness that created it." (Einstien)

I'm not say that Bush created all the problems in the Middle East but he sure chooze a lousy time to turn his back on the region because it might, just might, be perceived by his friends that he actually agreed with any thing that might be percieved as something that Clinton was doing well. And you have to give Clinton credit for making the effort. Specially when you see how little effort Bush's folks have made...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 12:36 PM

I had to rescfue this thread from the very bottom. Brucie said this thread was about solutions, not positions.

What a stupid waste of time, unfortunately.

Abdul, look out for that missile. You just maybe blew up your last bus.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:10 PM

Ahhhh, ex*cluse* yerself if you like but I did put forth a plan with components that are not exactly flaming commie liberal. The Saudi Plan is still a viable framework. Oh, you don't like Saudis? Well, okay, lets call it the Mitchell Plan since it was also introduced by this Senator (Congressman?)..... Purdy much the same plan...

Oh, sure you can find components within the plan to argue over but there has never been a peace (or no war) plan than ended up too danged complicated in its general framework. They all purdy much are contracts were parties agree to quit blowing each other in exchange for_______________,________________ and_____________.

See, the problems is that folks first must see that blowing each other up is probably not going to improve the chances of peace. Most of the time that you can't get folks to this point is because the stronger party isn't quite ready to stop stealing the other parties stuff.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:22 PM

The thing is, sooner or later this will be over. It might be 100 years or more, it might be mnore, it might be a lot less, but it will be over. One trick sometimes is to imagine the future you'd hope to see, and then work back from that to imagine the intermediate stages.

If the right people on the two sides can find a common future they could live with, that's the start of finding the intermediate stages.

And in fact there does seem to be a fair amount of agreement about that - in principle, but not in details, and as they say "the devil is in the details".

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:02 AM

2002 Saudi Proposal:

US welcomed it
Israeli's were interested in it
Palestinian Authority were interested in it
Egypt was in favour of it
Jordan was in favour of it
Syria (+ their colony Lebanon) was against it
Iraq (in the form of Saddam Hussein) was against it
Iran (in the form of 12 old geezers of the ruling council) were against it
All Islamic terrorist organisations were against it

Doesn't sound much like a recipe for success, all those currently keen on indiscriminate murder and mayhem appear to want to go on killing people.

2004 Saudi Proposal (with a few modifications and incentives):

Summit Meeting:
Following to participate:
US
Israel
Palestinian Authority
Egypt
Jordan
Syria (+ their colony Lebanon)

Israel to withdrawn to 1967 line:
All troops/police to be withdrawn from settlements built on land occupied in the aftermath of the 1967 war. The inhabitants of those settlements can decide whether or not they want to live in the new seperate Palestine State. Israel's incentive to do this based on the clear message from the US, that failure to comply will result in total and immediate cessation of all US aid to Israel. Assets of those attempting to send funds to Israel where and when possible will be frozen.

Recognition by all participants of the right of the State of Israel to exist:

Security of Israel guaranteed by all participants:
Clear message from all participants that failure to observe this guarantee will result in direct action to protect Israel by all participants.

No right of return - no compensation:

Water rights throughout the region guaranteed:

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:30 AM

Pedantic note: It's not really accurate to call Lebanon "a colony" of Syria, since that implies that putting in colonists in foreign territory is the heart of the relationship - "a protectorate" would surely be the correct term. In this case a protectorate in a former province that is now legally an independent state.

Not so pedantic note: "2004 Saudi Proposal (with a few modifications and incentives):"

Wouldn't this be better called "Teribus Peace Proposal 2004". If there has been a 2004 Saudi Proposal it doesn't seem to have been very high profile.

It's not clear whether the "No right of return" is supposed to apply just to Palestinians who came from what is now Israel, or also to Jews from the rest of the world. I think that would be a rather serious stumbling block for Israel - though it would be a concession that could have a considerable impact on the willingness of Palestinians to make an equivalent concession.

As for "no compensation" - I'd have thought that "non compensation by Israel" might have more mileage. Compensation from other countries which have contributed to the problem might be appropriate, more especially Germany, the USA and Saudi Arabia. (Remember, the compensation in question would be to innocent people and families who have had their whole lives disrupted in an unjust way by events over which they had no control.)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 09:15 AM

Pedantic note: To describe it as a colony, that implies that putting in colonists in foreign territory is the heart of the relationship - You mean kinds like what they've done in the Bekaa Valley? You could of course describe it as "a protectorate". In the case of Lebanon it would be a case of an independent sovereign state involuntarily becoming a protectorate and then reverting to a quasi-independent state, playing host to however Syria and Iran tell it to.

Pedantic note: "2004 Saudi Proposal (with a few modifications and incentives):"

Would have been better called "2004, the rejected 2002 Saudi proposal revisited (with a few modifications and incentives):"

"No right of return" is only to apply to Palestinians who came from what is now Israel. Once created and recognised Israel and the new Palestine can admit whoever they wish on the understanding that Israel is Israel and Palestine is Palestine.

My apologies for not elaborating on the "no compensation" bit - As you say it would be no compensation from Israel. The deal would have to be funded, those funds going to the participating countries and in the case of the Palestinians to a specifically formed, fiscally responsible and transparent UN committee, so that thieving, weasel Arafat can't get his hands on any of it.

Your suggestion of compensation from other countries which have contributed to the problem might is a good idea. My list would include:
USA
UK
France
Germany
Iran
Iraq
Syria
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Libya
Kuwait

A very good point you make:
(Remember, the compensation in question would be to innocent people and families who have had their whole lives disrupted in an unjust way by events over which they had no control.)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 09:21 AM

Well, that's something we're agreed on, anyway...

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 09:23 AM

Hey, it is a framework, isn't it? And, T-Bird, the US wasn't jumpin' up and down in support of it, if you'll recollect. Might of fact, it's support was more on the tepid side of the equation. Had the US shown more interest than perhaps other parties would have followed suit...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 10:12 AM

Hey Bobert, I'm only reporting the comments at the time, they were as indicated in my first post, i.e. "welcomed"; "interested"; "rejected".

Unfortunately, I doubt if US interest would have cut much ice with those who rejected it I mean they were completely disinterested about the whole issue while the US were welcoming). In the case of one of the principles (our ol' incarcerated buddy Saddam) he actually went to war purely on the premise that the opposition (in that particular instance Iran) showed signs of being amenable to a negotiated settlement of Iraq and Iran's dispute in the Shat-al-Arab - He viewed their approach, olive branch in hand as being a sign of weakness.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:46 PM

One of the most discouraging Middle East stories on tonight's newscast was about an 11 year old Palestinian boy who was, without his knowledge, used to transport a bomb through an Israeli checkpoint. Israeli soldiers, who knew the boy as a courier who earned money, carrying bags through the checkpoint intercepted the bomb. The Palestinian terrorist who gave the bomb to the boy tried to blow him up at the checkpoint, but failed.

href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=1312&e=8&u=/ap/20040316/ap_on_re_mi_ea/palestinians_kids_in_combat_1">I
found this AP story.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:47 PM

I
found this AP story

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 10:27 PM

And it was interesting that this 11 year old kid was released by Isreali authorities because they knew him and knew he had been been put up to it.... Then cameras asked the kid what he wanted to do when he grew up and he said "be a suicide bomber"... This oughtta send some message to those who think things are going peachy...

This foriegn policy isn't working. Sure, one can say, "Hey, what can then US do?" but to these folks I'd just point to two facts:

1. The Clinton administration made a huge effort to broker peace and...

2. The US sends a lot of our tax dough to Isreal...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 04:11 PM

I recently attended a presentation by Barbra Sokol- noted Isreali author and a Director of Public Relations for Israel. (she is a wonderful speaker with great stories) She presented 4 alternatives for Israel and explained why all 4 of them were bad.   She did not have any solutions.   She did say that people in Israel are now open to land for peace- something that did not exist in the past.   On the other hand, they will not(I repeat) will not negotiate with Arafat.   

The Palestinians were given a bad deal.   They were told by the arabs in 1948 that as soon as Israel became a state, they would "drive them into the sea" and the Palestinians would be given their land. The Palestinians have been waiting 50 years for that to happen with no land in site.   Israel doesn't want them.   The arabs don't want them.

At the end of her presentation I suggested a fifth alternative.   I believe in the history of mankind that peace only comes after total unconditional victory.   Either the Palestinians need to go back to Jordan (Palestinian have never had their own country or land or government or currncy or constitution) or be destroyed.   Sokol rejected that as immoral and not even to be considered.

Given that thinking, I don't see a solution.   I only see terrorism and retaliation.   I only see Arafat getting wealthy while his people live in poverty and blow themselves up.   I only see the rest of the middle east not really caring about Isreal and the Palestinians killing each other.   And finally, I only see that people in the USA turning away and not wanting to deal with it.    The prevailing ignorance of uninformed people is that both of them are wrong and they wish they would both stop.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 04:30 PM

As long as people continue to believe the idea that the Palestinians migrated from Jordan to Israel, instead of the truth, which is that they have been living in that area for over a thousand years (even though they may not have called themselves "Palestinians" the whole time, and even though they were governed by outside forces, such as the Ottomans and others, rather than having independence and their own government), there probably will not be any solution.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 04:52 PM

As long as people continue to believe the idea that the Palestinians migrated from Jordan to Israel, instead of the truth

I don't know anyone who thinks the Palestinians migrated from Jordan to Israel. The fact, though, is that the Jordanian kingdom was artificially carved out of historical Palestine, which is why many people equate the Palestinians with the Jordanians.

It is also a fact that the West Bank territory claimed by the Palestinians was part of Jordan from 1948-1967 (while Gaza in that period was part of Egypt) and that during that time the Palestinians, Jordanians and Egyptians had no interest in any kind of Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. In those days, the call remained for the destruction of Israel and for the Jews to be driven into the sea.

In 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty. At that time Israel dismantled all of its settlements in the Sinai and returned the territory to Egypt. Egypt, however, washed its hands of Gaza and the Palestinians there.

In 1994, Jordan and Israel also signed a peace treaty. Jordan, however, had already washed its hands of the West Bank and the Palestinians.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 05:00 PM

I was responding to this part of Larry K's post:

Either the Palestinians need to go back to Jordan. (Emphasis mine)

As far as the Palestinians who's families have lived in what is now Israel and the Occupied Territories for centuries are concerned, all of this political bickering over the land that has been their home for more than a millenium is not the issue. For them, the issue is that they are being driven from their homes by a lot of outside forces who don't really have any legitimate claim to this land. These people take it simply because they can.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 05:08 PM

As is evident from the reaction of Israeli official in Larry K's post, his vision is an extremist one that Israel itself categorically rejects.

You give that position much more prominence in these discussions at Mudcat, than anyone beyond a small fringe, does in Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:16 PM

This is spiralling down into the same old stuff.

Anyone like to try my suggestion? That is, jump forward, say 100 years, to a time when things have been sorted out and people are living together in peace, and try to look back and pick out what happened to bring that about.

That's optimistic of course - it's possible to imagine an end-game which isn't nice to contemplate. Ethnic cleansing, genocidal war...But I think it could be helpful to imagine a future in which that hasn't happened, and see how they got there.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:37 PM

McGrath...Your living in cloud cuckoo land. This is not some sporting encounter, were involved in a fight to the death.
The two opposing sides, Moslem fundamentalists(Islam), and the Global capitalists,who are also "Fundamentalists" in their own way.
Defeat for either side would be terminal in the long run, so they have no alternative but to use any means at their disposal to ensure survival.
If my hunch is correct, the Capitalists will turn out to be just as bloodthirsty as the Moslems when their backs are to the wall.The Capitalist religion was never much hindered by Scruples...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:43 PM

I'm 100% with you, McG..... There are folks that just get so bogged down in detail that they can't see the forest thru the trees. These people aren't the folks you wnat around a peace process. Their thought processes are poisoned in negativity...

I've suggested a general framework in this thread and haven't really had one person find fault with it other than the first step in getting rid of the Bush folks as a first step. But lets say that doesn't happen, the rest of the plan is still possible....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: artbrooks
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:46 PM

Global capitalists? Capitalist religion? As led by the precepts of the 'Protocals of the Elders of Zion", I presume. Jerk.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:52 PM

Artbrooks..."Protocals of the elders of Zion"...Please explain...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:53 PM

A "fight to the death" ends when one party gets killed, or both do. It is of course possible that the conflict in the Holy Land will end up that way, and I admitted that that is quite possible. In 100 years all the Israelis, or all the Palestinians may be dead or fled, or the whole area might be a radioactive desert.

But I think it's more useful to try to imagine ways in which this kind of "solution" might have been avoided.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 08:21 PM

ake: The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was a book that appeared in the late 1800s. It was purported to be the blueprint for a Zionist takeover of the world. It is a fake of course, an anti-Jewish piece of crap. It is hate literature (although I don't
see it as 'literature' at all). It is a piece of garbage that surfaces from time to time and is held up by anti-Jewish groups as proof that Jewish people are cheats, etc. The book is BS. It is like "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century". Garbage and false scholarship.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 08:25 PM

Artbrooks: TPOTLEOZ is actually happening. However, it is not Jewish people doing it. It is multinationals and governments. Akenaton is not a racist, and I don't think it's right to suggest he is.

Bruce Murdoch

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 09:11 PM

You give that position much more prominence in these discussions at Mudcat, than anyone beyond a small fringe, does in Israel

I only respond to it when I see it, Guest, C-watch. But you're wrong that only a small fringe in Israel believe this. There are a lot of Christians (mostly of the fundamentalist stripe) here in the US who believe it. I have a relative (Christian) who used to believe it. And although most of them are not in Israel (some of them are), US public opinion does have an impact on US policy in the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: freda underhill
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 09:52 PM

Quinquireme of Nineveh from distant Ophir,
Rowing home to haven in sunny Palestine,
With a cargo of ivory,
And apes and peacocks,
Sandalwood, cedarwood, and sweet white wine.

Stately Spanish galleon coming from the Isthmus,
Dipping through the Tropics by the palm-green shores,
With a cargo of diamonds,
Emeralds, amethysts,
Topazes, and cinnamon, and gold moidores.

Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack,
Butting through the Channel in the mad March days,
With a cargo of Tyne coal,
Road-rails, pig-lead,
Firewood, iron-ware, and cheap tin trays.

       -- John Masefield

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 10:33 PM

But you're wrong that only a small fringe in Israel believe this.

Since I spend a month in Israel twice a year, and am in touch with Israelis on a daily basis, I suspect that my first-hand understanding of the Israeli people may be better than someone whose knowledge comes from media and websites.

The extremist position of Larry K is that of a very small fringe. Israel has reached the point where even right wing politicians like Ariel Sharon are acknowledging that the future lies in a Palestinian state.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 10:42 PM

This is a joke -

I think we need to fund a giant space borne holographic device that can project a giant image of God in all of his glory, flowing white beard and robe to a spot in the very center of Israel and announce in Heavenly tone:

"Are you Meshugenna? The promised land isn't here! Oy! I should never have given Moses verbal direction! Carve it in stone! That's my motto! Now all of you that truly believe pack up and move to Florida. Now that's the promised land!"

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 10:46 PM

Guest, C-watch, you seem to be saying that among Israelis, only a small fringe believe it. The way you had it worded originally, I wasn't sure weather that was your meaning, or if you meant that the only people who believe this (possibly anywhere in the world) are a small fringe in Israel.

I have no idea how many people in Israel believe it. I'm willing to take your word that it's only a small fringe. But I have never suggested that many Israelis believe it. I have only suggested that many people believe it. And the fact is that many do (and more than a few of them seem to post to the Mudcat), and those people who do believe it, at least those here in the US, can and do have an impact on how things happen in the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: artbrooks
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 12:45 AM

Brucie: when the Muslem religion and the "Capitalist religion" are seen as the two opposing sides in Israel, one immediately assumes that the "Capitalist religion" means Judeism. BTW, I would not accuse him of being racist. Race has nothing to do with being Jewish. Antisemitic is something else entirely. If you really think that multinationals and governments are engaged in a conspiracy to institute a world under the control of Jews, which is what you appear to be saying in your post of 8:25 PM, perhaps you should consider seeking medical assistance.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 01:01 AM

I am saying exactly the opposite, Artbrooks. The Protocols are trash. Jews don't control governments or multinationals. The Protocols simply show a methodology that seems to be at play today. It has nothing to do with Jews or Muslims. It has to do with international banks and big business. They are not under the control of Jews or Muslims. You put those words in my mouth. Not me. You should seek assistance with your reading hotshot.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: freda underhill
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 01:04 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 03:15 AM

well said freda

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: artbrooks
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 07:53 AM

Brucie: perhaps I read things too literally. If your intent was not to say that multinationals and governments are implementing the Protocals, whose only purpose is supposedly to put Jews in charge of the world, then I apologize. I'm sure that you are aware that there are many otherwise intelligent people who still believe that they are literally the blueprint of the "New World Order."

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: kendall
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 08:53 AM

I don't mean to "drop a clod in the churn" here , but let's discuss this phrase, "Israel's right to exist"
Where does this right come from?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 10:17 AM

Artbrooks,

Yeah, which is why I hesitate even to mention the Protocols. We know they were fabricated and we know they are racist documents.

I apologize for my remarks to you; the Protocols are a fake document, but I see the things written in them being played out today. It has nothing to do with Jews. I get upset when people even mention the damnable thing. It's the NWO doing its work.

Take care,

Bruce M

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Wolfgang
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 11:17 AM

Kendall, you're in the wrong thread. This is the 'solutions' thread and not the 'left anti-semitism' thread.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 02:22 PM

Artbrooks ...I see my friend Brucie has taken up the cudgel on my behalf. I was being sincere when I said I did not know of the book you mention.
I am certainly not anti-semitic, or bigoted in any other way I hope.
"Capitalist religion" was a kick at the capitalist system and the " fundamentalists who control it,and nothing against the Jews at all.
The biggest wrong in the Palestine situation ,to my mind was not perpetrated by the Jews but by the British government who organised the whole shambolic affair....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 07:18 PM

That's unfair Wolfgang - kendall's suggestion that it's worth trying to define a phrase that people throw around very freely, is a reasonable one.

Does "the right of Israel to exist" mean "the right of people who live in Israel to maintain this territory as an independent state" or does it mean "the right of one ethnic group in Israel to ensure that it will always maintain control over this country, and to ensure that it will always remain as a dominant majority"?

The former right is one which is generally held to exist for all countries. The latter is something different - and in fact, within the European Union, it does not exist, since we all have freedom to move and live and work in each others countries.

It can be argued that the terrible history of the Jewish people is a valid reason for this kind of difference from other countries, but it is a difference.

In the thought experiment I suggested, looking back from a hundred years ahead, I can envisage a world in which Israel existed within a trans national grouping similar to that of the European Union - perhaps even linked with it, along with other Southern Mediterranean countries, with all its citizens having this same freedom to live and work anywhere within it.

Would this mean that Israel had lost its freedom to exist,any more than Ireland or Germany have lost their freedom to exist?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Obie
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 10:08 PM

Perhaps God himself is at fault! It seems he has each side covinced that they are fighting for him! If He is all powerfull it is time for Him to send these zealots on all sides a message that they can understand.
If not, religious teaching in schools should be banned worldwide , allowing children to mingle before they learn to hate. Only then can they see each other as fellow human beings, who just happen to have different beliefs.
For eons wars have been caused and fueled by religious belief, and as a world society we must acknowledge the cause before we can address the cure!

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 10:21 PM

I had the opportunity today to meet a fascinating Palestinian man named Walid Shoebat. Once a PLO terrorist, Walid is now working for peace.

Here are two articles about him

From the BBC.

From the Jewish Week.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 11:12 PM

Here's the story of another Palestinian man who is working for peace:

His organization; The Palestinian Center for Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation

This is what happened to his organization in spring of 2002; Noah's story

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 06:56 AM

McGrath, my post was meant flippantly, but if it is read as serious, then I agree, it is unfair.

The serious background of my line:
(1) I was quite glad we could discuss the issue rather civilised here, quite different as in the other thread. Kendall's remark could have been the start for a decline of the discussion here to the level of the other thread. That's why I did mention the other thread.
(2) As for solutions, good negotiators know that moaning about past wrongs is the best way to ensure a bad end for the negotiotions. I had read Kendall's remark in that way, directed at the past (tell us, why are you Jews here at all, that's our place). Your reading of Kendall's remark looks to the future which is a far better way to solve conflicts. Had I read the remark your way I hadn't posted.
I hope your reading is the correct one.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 10:24 AM

If we are going to talk about Israel's right to exist, then we'd better follow up with the USA and Canada's right to exist. Also New Zealand and Australia. Want me to keep listing here?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 11:09 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: kendall
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 08:53 AM

I don't mean to "drop a clod in the churn" here , but let's discuss this phrase, "Israel's right to exist"
Where does this right come from?

________

I presume this is the same kendall whose home is on land that was stolen from the Abenakis.

Giving it back any time soon, kendall?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 12:02 PM

But what does "right to exist" actually mean? If there were an Arab majority, as would very likely have been the case if no refugees had left in 1948, would this mean that this conflict with "the right of Israel to exist".

It seems to me that when people speak of "the right of Israel to exist" they are conflating two meanings of "Israel" - one being, the nation state, and the other is, the Jewish people.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: DougR
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 01:34 PM

The Israli/Palestinian problem won't be settled until one has defeated the other. I've said that before, and I still believe it. It's not what I would prefer, I would prefer that negotians would work. I don't think they ever will. You have to have two parties ,each of whom are willing to compromise for negotiations to succeed. This is not the case with either Israel or Palestine. As has already been pointed out, neither Carter or Clinton could do it, and Bush's Roadmap lies languishing on the peace table.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 01:52 PM

Quite possiblt true,Doug. And that is very depressing, because in the long run that is going to mean that Israel will go the way of the Crusader states within a few generations.

Now is the time when it is still possible for Israel to reach a settlement which will ensure that doesn't happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 03:03 PM

The Israli/Palestinian problem won't be settled until one has defeated the other.

Maybe you need to define the term "defeat", DougR. Seems to me the Palestinians have already been pretty well defeated, short of being gotten rid of altogether. They are a people living under occupation.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 03:21 PM

From a purely military standpoint, Israel is so far superior to the Palestinians that an all-out war for the survival of only one or the other, would not be a contest.

If Israel had any desire to score such a defeat over the Palestinians, it would have happened long ago.

Despite the statistics that about twice as many Palestinians than Israelis have been killed during this Intifada, the fact is that Israel takes much more care than most countries to protect innocent civilians. If they didn't, the Palestinian death count would be much higher. More along the lines of what we've seen in Iraq, where approximately 20 times as many civilians than Americans have been killed.

One thing that should be pointed out is that almost all of the Israeli deaths have been randomly targeted civilians victimized by suicidal homocide bombers, while most of the Palestinian deaths have been either terrorists, terrorist masters, or the unfortunate civilians that the terrorists and their masters hide behind.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 03:44 PM

From a purely military standpoint, Israel is so far superior to the Palestinians that an all-out war for the survival of only one or the other, would not be a contest.

Short term that is true. And that is what makes it possible for Israel to negotatiate a settlement that will preserve its interests, and that s why it is important that it takes advantage of this temporary opportunity.

But long term "the purely military standpoint" is unlikely to stay the same way that happens to be today. History doesn't work that way. Military superiority just fades away, given a few decades.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 05:04 PM

Very true, McGrath. Without the Palestinians being in such close proximity to the Israelis, Israel would probably be a lot more vulnerable as a target for nuclear attacks from any number of sources than it is now.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 05:24 PM

McGrath,

While I don't see much possibility of the Palestinians ever having military superiority over Israel, I do think that a negotiated settlement is inevitable in the medium term, and that that is what the vast majority of Israelis want. As I said, Israel has demonstrated for many decades now that a decisive military victory over the Palestinians is not what they seek.

However, as I said in my first post to this thread, I don't think the settlement will come while Bush, Sharon and, especially, Arafat remain in power.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 05:29 PM

I am inclined to agree with GUEST C-watch. I don't think there is a specifically military solution available. I'd like to see a 'peace' force in there. Canadians are good at that.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 07:12 PM

I've always thought it was a tragedy that, after 1967, an offer wasn't put on the table by Israel saying "Now Palestine/Eretz Israel is united once more, and it should stay united - and all exiled Palestinians can come home, and we will share this land between us in peace."

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 10:59 AM

So much for peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 11:47 AM

You mean the assassination by Israel of Sheik Yassin, together with a bunch of bystanders? It reads to me as if that was the idea behind this. To make sure that, even if the USA were to start leaning effectively on the Israel Government to make a deal, there'd be no danger of there being anyone in a position to respond, by making sure that Hamas is in control.

The online edition of the moderate Israeli paper Haaretz had Danny Rubinstein arguing 'that the killing "may well turn out to be a blow - not to Hamas, but to the Palestinian Authority". This is because, he writes, "the more Israel hits Hamas leaders and rank-and-file members, the more their popularity climbs".

Which ties in with what the Washington Post reminded its readers of about the origin of Hamas: "(Sheik Yassin) rose to prominence in the 1980s when Gazans turned increasingly toward a fundamentalist brand of Islam, encouraged at times by the territory's Israeli military occupiers, who saw Islamism as a political rival and counter-weight to Yasser Arafat's exiled Palestine Liberation Organization."

....................

But for a more positive story, here's a link to a piece about some brave young Israelis - Teenagers who stand for honesty, decency and sanity

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: robomatic
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 09:35 AM

Pretty fair trade. Surgical strike on a known terrorist organizer and leader. Sure beats blowing up a bus of civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 09:58 AM

"Surgical strike" which killed seven other people and injured over 15 others who just happened to be there? God save us all from a murderous surgeon like that if we ever need an operation.

You'd think, when the target is a blind man in a wheelchair on a route that he regularly took, that they could have been a wee bit more "surgical" than that.

I cannot believe that in any sense this was intended as a way of "weakening" Hamas. And I cannot believe that the Israeli believed it either. The object was to strengthen Hamas in relation to the PLF, and destroy any chance of a peaceful settlement in one with the famous "Road Map". The hope is to inflame the situation, and ensure reprisals, both in Israel and elsewhere.

I gather that both the Israeli Interior Minister and the Israeli Minister of Justice were opposed to this assassination. They were outvoted.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 10:28 AM

Post-9/11, would we pass up a chance to kill Osama Bin Laden in a similar manner to that Israel used on Yassin? I don't think so.

Though terrorist efforts may increase *temporarily*, in the long run the elimination of Yassin will upset Hamas' leadership and violent capabilities, and serve as an essential deterrent to ongoing Palestinian terror. His elimination will serve peace *in the long run*. He was personally responsible for all the most dreadful attacks in Israel. He was a dangerous extremist Islamic ideologist. What Bin Laden was to 9/11 and many other terrorist operations, including last week's in Spain, Yassin was to the Palestinian terror murders committed in Israel. Yassin directed dozens of heinous terrorist attacks, his hands were drenched in Israeli blood.

Yassin continually called for suicide terrorism as a "religious obligation," and even said about himself that "the day in which I will die as a shahid [martyr] will be the happiest day of my life." (Al-Quds, July 26, 1998) I suppose Israel has made him happy.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: robomatic
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 11:28 AM

You hang out with terrorists, you should be real familiar with the clauses in your life insurance.

I think there is more than one way to go here. Each strike on terrorists reinforces the side which perceives the terrorists as effective. But each 'successful' strike on terrorists reduces their effectiveness.

The extreme difference in frame of reference here, between packed venues of admirers of Hamas and their leaders, and those who seek a negotiated settlement, WHICHEVER SIDE THEY ARE ON, I think is the real war.

When Meir Kahane was assassinated in Israel, I don't recall packed halls of Israelis proclaiming the loss of a martyr and vowing bloody vengeance.

The safe and accurate prediction: More of same.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 12:21 PM

Some of this sounds to me like saying Eichmann shouldn't have been dealt with because he was kidnapped from the house on Garibaldi street so he could be brought to trial in Israel. Mt God, why is it only the Israelis who should play 'fair'?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:07 PM

Fair?

How about just not acting in a way that will produce exactly the opposite result from the one they say they want?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:20 PM

How about just not acting in a way that will produce exactly the opposite result from the one they say they want?

Kind of like the Palestinian terrorists who know that every time they murder Israelis, more Palestinians than that are likely to be killed in the reprisals that they know will come from Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:22 PM

Your "temporarilies" sounds very optimistic to me, C-watch. Whistling in the wind. There is no reason on earth to think that the killing of an old blind paraplegic in a wheelchair could in any way weaken an organisation like Hamas. His importance was as a symbol, and his power as a symbol has been magnified now.

Absolutely the last thing you wish to do, if you want to kill a movement is to kill some charismatic leader in a way that makes him appear a martyr. You'd really think after all these years the penny would have dropped.

Hamas is a movement that depends on supporters, and all the indications are that this killing will lead to a surge of support among people who have previously been disengaged or suspicious - and not just in Palestine. I have a horrible feeling that it is also going to make it much much easier for Al Qaeda to recruit.

"the day in which I will die as a shahid [martyr] will be the happiest day of my life." (Al-Quds, July 26, 1998) I suppose Israel has made him happy. No joke, C-watch, that's probably true. He made a point of travelling then same route to and from the mosque, and he knew that Israel had targetted him before. He knew that his death would strengthen Hamas. If he saw the missile coming he undoubtedly did die happy.

From the point of view of Sharon it may well be a success, assuming, as seems reasonable, that he is not concerned to get rid of terrorism, but to use it as a way of furthering his aims. But for ordinary Israelis, and potentially for all of the rest of us, this was a disastrous act. "It was worse than a crime, it was a mistake" as the saying goes.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: robomatic
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:28 PM

By the above logic, all around him should have died happy, knowing they were accompanying a self-proclaimed martyr to glory.

That kind of logic is a closed circuit, much as human aspirations which seek to reinforce themselves via self-fulfilling prophecies.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:31 PM

There is no reason on earth to think that the killing of an old blind paraplegic in a wheelchair could in any way weaken an organisation like Hamas.

Yassin was a paraplegic since age 12. It's evident that being wheelchair-bound never hampered his ability to orchestrate terrorism. He founded Hamas in 1987 and proved perfectly capable of building the organization to its current strength from a sitting position.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:41 PM

Kind of like the Palestinian terrorists who know that every time they murder Israelis, more Palestinians than that are likely to be killed in the reprisals that they know will come from Israel.

There's no cause and effect there whatsoever. Israel continues to kill Palestinians even when the Palestinians are conducting unilateral cease-fires. Palestinians know that they will be killed and their houses demolished no matter what they do. And they are right. And by behaving in this way, Israel removes any incentive the Palestinians might have for not conducting reprisals of their own.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:47 PM

And how does being dead do anything to reduce his symbolic power? He's far more dangerous now than he ever was when he was alive.

Where does this fantasy come from that killing an individual who is some kind of leader is going to weaken or destroy a movement or organisation?

I believe when Hitler heard that Roosevelt had died, there was great rejoicing, because he thought it might make some difference to the American war effort.

It doesn't work like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Nerd
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 02:55 PM

All the same things could be said about killing Bin Laden. He's an old man with kidney disease who probably needs (or will soon need) dialysis and his eyes are probably failing; he probably won't be the mastermind of too many more attacks. By killing him, the US will create a martyr, get more people to join Al Qaeda, etc, etc.

But don't tell me for a minute that this is the REASON Bush wants to kill him. Bush is acting out of a desire for revenge, and a desire to show strength. This is the same thing the Israelis are trying to do. To claim they have bizarre ulterior motives of INCREASING violence against their own civilians in order to perpetuate war is just wild conspiracy theory.

And by the way, I don't agree with Sharon's action, and don't necessarily agree with Bush's actions against Bin Laden (I'll have to see them first). I am generally pretty liberal. But to demonize the right (in any country) by saying they WANT their own civilians to be killed in order to fulfill a larger political agenda goes pretty far, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:05 PM

There's no cause and effect there whatsoever. Israel continues to kill Palestinians even when the Palestinians are conducting unilateral cease-fires. Palestinians know that they will be killed and their houses demolished no matter what they do.

CarolC,

That is false propagandizing. There have been no "unilateral cease-fires" by the Palestinians. On the rare occasions that the Palestinian Authority has agreed to, or called for, a cease-fire, they've been shattered by either Yassin's Hamas or Arafat's own Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade.

It takes at least two sides to have a conflict. When I look back at what you've written about this conflict on this forum, it is painfully obvious that you place 100% of the responsibility on one side and one side only. Although I'm pro-Israeli, I know it's not that simple and that the Palestinians do have legitimate demands and that a negotiated settlement is ultimately inevitable.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:07 PM

All the same things could be said about killing Bin Laden.

I agree witht his completely. Bush should not be trying to kill bin Laden. bin Laden should be captured and brought to trial in front of an international court.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:14 PM

No, in this case, GUEST, C-watch, it is what you are saying that is "false propagandizing". There have been unilateral cease-fires on the part of the Palestinians that were shattered when the Israeli government conducted "targeted killings" of Palestinians leaders. In the last of these (prior to the killing of Yassin), the target of the assaination survived, but his small child was killed. It was after that killing that the Palestinians ended their own, self imposed cease-fire.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:28 PM

Mcgrath is right .Sharon believes that the only way the State of Isreal can survive in the long term,is to escalate the conflict to the extent that America is forced to move against both the Palistinians and finally the whole of Islam.
Although I understand the crime that has been committed against the Palistinians,and I would hope for a two state settlement,I fear that even if Sharon is a monster, His analyis may well be correct...

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:37 PM

So, do we now 'justify' violence? Because if it's gonna be wrong, then it has to be wrong for everyone, NO excuses. No buts.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:49 PM

Yes Brucie we all hate violence, but most States cynically use violence to further their agendas.
How many times has America tried to murder Fidel?.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:50 PM

No, brucie. I don't think we should justify any violence. The Palestinians have been calling for, asking for, and even begging for international monitors and peacekeepers to be placed in the Occupied Territories. I think this request shoud be granted, and the Palestinians should receive the protection of the international community.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 03:51 PM

Bingo. Now, we got lift off.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 04:02 PM

Seems to me that an awful lot of people do justify violence, provided it's from the side they identify with.

I don't believe that in general political leaders, on either side, do these kind of things to make themselves feel good, even if in some cases it does make them feel good. They operate on the basis of calculating what the results will be, both on their own side and on the other side.

It seems pretty obvious to me that one effect of this assassination will be to strengthen Hamas, and to strengthen the kind of groups who are associated with the Al Qaida franchise. Another set of effects is going to be upon the way Israelis, and those who support Israel, feel towards Sharon and his government.

Obviously there's a limit on speculation as to how the effects are going to balance out, and also on how Sharon and his team calculate it is going to work out.

My instinct is that the upsurge in violence and the increase in the strength of Al Hamas and its friends that can be anticipated is seen as a desirable result by Sharon, as a calculated sacrifice for a greater gain.

Perhaps I'm wrong, and it's seen as undesirable, but worthwhile when balanced against some perceived domestic political advantage. Very likely we will never know. But I don't think there's anything particularly bizarre about this kind of notion - it's an elementary chess strategy to sacrifice pieces for a reason. After all, this happens all the time in the case of organisations deploying suicide bombers.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 04:22 PM

The Palestinians have been calling for, asking for, and even begging for international monitors and peacekeepers to be placed in the Occupied Territories.

What is left out of that statement is that the Palestinian Authority has been asking for peacekeepers to be deployed if Israel follows through on Sharon's plan to withdraw Israeli settlements and forces from Gaza. It doesn't take much to figure out that protection from Israel is secondary to protection of the Palestinian Authority from the greater threat of Hamas.

Read about it from Al Jazeerah's info site. Hardly a pro-Israeli source.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 04:35 PM

There seems to be a problem with that link to Al Jazeera.

Try this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 04:45 PM

And with Hamas greatly strengthened now by this assassination... That, I think, is one of the main reasons it happened.

No Palestine Authority which has any real authority, and there's no negotiating partner. And when you don't want to negiotiate, because you think it's not in your interest, that is just what you want.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,mgarvey
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 04:45 PM

Where are the suggestions? Well, I have some...
1) give right or return to people whose former villages are now abandoned..I think there are quite a few.
2)   Have extensive vocational education for Palestinians. Have those who wish to become experts in mobile rescue operations...this can be done even from the camps...if there is an earthquake or natural disaster mobilize them to help with medical and construction help.
3) Find some employment that the world can offer them in cramped quarters..one thing that comes to me is optomotry..or making eyeglasses, dentures etc.
4) US and former colonies of British Empire offer massive immigration for millions of carefully screened people to get them out of camps.
5) Somehow turn around thinking so they can live somewhere else and still have Palestine as a homeland..like Mother Ireland etc.
6)   Repair of housing that has been bombed etc.
7) Trips out of the camps..excursions to other areas for peaceful vacations, work projects, help with harvests here and there..to help counteract the overcrowding etc....especially for children and young adults.
8)   More worldwide interaction..again much for children and young adults..they keep asking "why does the world hate us." (See Children International Site for messages from the children).
9)   Ways for them to continue their traditional arts (needlework for the women) and crafts.
10) Medical facilities in place so they do not have to cross checkpoints.
11) Ways for them to grow food in their occupied lands..
12) More respect in general for their history and needs..with simultaneous zero tolerance for terrorism.
13) Better control of what they are teaching kids in schools paid for by U.N. etc...stick to non-propoganda.
14) Ways to get the garbage and sanitation issues resolved.

That is all for now. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 06:22 PM

What is left out of that statement is that the Palestinian Authority has been asking for peacekeepers to be deployed if Israel follows through on Sharon's plan to withdraw Israeli settlements and forces from Gaza.

The Palestinians have been asking for years for peacekeepers to be deployed... long before this "plan" of Sharon's to pull out of Gaza became part of the equation. So your use of the term "left out of that statement" is nothing but hyperbole.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 06:42 PM

Somehow turn around thinking so they can live somewhere else and still have Palestine as a homeland..like Mother Ireland etc

That's happenimngh in principle already, actually - there are Palestinians in a diaspora all over the world, including the USA. Like Irish emigrants they retain their love of the mother country, but have no plans to uproot themselves and return home. However, unlike Irish emigramts, if home is in Israel itself, they don't have that option. Nor, in real terms, do they have it, if their home is in Gaza or the West Bank.

I think it is very likely that in the context of a peaceful settlement, either a two state one, or a one-state one for that matter, most Palestinians would very likely live outside the Holy Land, in the same way that most Jews do, and playing very similar role in the societies they lived in.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,She who saw Chomsky on Mass. Ave.
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 09:46 PM

CarolC's demand for peacekeepers is premature. The prerequisite to peacekeepers is peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 10:10 PM

So, how about peacemakers?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 12:03 AM

Or protectors or monitors. I bet any of these would be preferable to the Palestinians than the current situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 12:22 AM

Peace? Ahhhh, that elusive element can not be reached until there is a chizzeled in stone agreement that provides Isreal with a declaration of it's right to survive at the exact same time providing for a Palestian state.

Ain't rocket science...

There aren't any other options here short of nukin' all the Palestinians...

You pick............

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Nerd
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 01:11 AM

There's Bobert with his "nuking the Palestinians" fixation again. When you bring that up you remind me of the beloved but weird uncle at the family gathering, Bobert. Like him, I know you don't mean it!

Actually, your "other" solution, of a treaty guaranteeing Israel's rights AND establishing a Palestinian State, is what I hope will happen eventually too.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 02:56 AM

UN Peacekeepers/Monitors have been deployed in that area on and off since 1956. They have proved to be fairly marginal and ineffective.

UN has never, ever, had a "Peacemaker" role. Those advocating such a role should have a look at the UN Charter which defines the bounds of what UN "Blue" helmets can and cannot do - it is limited to establishing a "peace line", interposing it's (UN) troops between the parties in conflict to physically keep them apart until talks start and a negotiated settlement can be reached. They can only come into such a situation if invited, they cannot impose their presence.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 06:52 AM

But, as kendall asked way back, what does "Israel's right to survive" actually mean? If, in the course of time, people defined as Jews were no longer in a majority, would that mean the country had ceased to exist? If there had been no flight of refugees in 1948 that state of affairs would very likely exist today, even within the boundaries of Israel.

..............................

Peacekeeping is difficult and dangerous, whether it is done by outsiders who have been shipped in to do so, or by people recruited locally. So is maintaining an army of occupation.

There aren't any risk-free options. Whatever happens there are going to be people who suffer. Anyone who undertakes a role as a peacemaker or a monitor knows that there is a possibility that they will be killed, and when that happens it does not mean that what they were doing was a mistake and a waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 09:05 AM

It's always amusing to see this Bobert character mentioning nukes.

Bobert, an American, the citizen of the only country in the world to ever use nukes on human beings.

Not once has Bobert's country used nukes on human beings. Bobert's country has done it twice.

And in the years since Bobert's country became the first and only country in the world to use nukes on human beings, Bobert's country has amassed an arsenal of nukes greater than that of all the rest of the world combined.

As long as Bobert's own country maintains and expands their arsenal of nukes, nobody in Israel has anything to learn from any American, escpecially one named Bobert.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 09:20 AM

It's always amusing to see the tireless pontificationg of CarolC.

CarolC, another American, a citizen of the most imperialistic occupying force of the contemporary world.

Israel's occupation can be argued on the basis of direct defense and terrorist threats.

CarolC's country, though, commits war and occupation, and kills 10 times more innocent civilians in a year than Israel has in 37 years, purely in the name of oil and to avenge a slight to CarolC's president's daddy.

As long as CarolC's own country is occupying Iraq and any other country, nobody in Israel has anything to learn from any American, escpecially one named CarolC.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 09:28 AM

It's also always amusing to read the endless moralizing of McGrath of Harlow.

McGrath of Harlow, a citizen of the country whose imperialistic empire is responsible for the mess that is today's Middle East.

McGrath of Harlow, a citizen of the country that is America's main accomplice in a war and occupation that has killed 10 times more innocent civilians in a year than Israel has in 37 years.

As long as McGarth of Harlow's own country continiues to behave as it does, nobody in Israel has anything to learn from any Brit, escpecially one named McGrath of Harlow.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 10:56 AM

And GUEST lives where?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: DougR
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 11:15 AM

GUEST is on a roll!

Well, Kevin, I would guess that he does not live in Great Britain, the U. S., and certainly not West Virginia!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 11:30 AM

CarolC, another American, a citizen of the most imperialistic occupying force of the contemporary world.

You're absulotely dead-on correct there.

Israel's occupation can be argued on the basis of direct defense and terrorist threats.

No it can't. It's creating those "threats" itself with it's own behavior, just as the US is creating the very "threats" it purports to be fighting against with its own behavior.

CarolC's country, though, commits war and occupation, and kills 10 times more innocent civilians in a year than Israel has in 37 years, purely in the name of oil and to avenge a slight to CarolC's president's daddy.

Yes. And I condemn the actions of my country in this respect. And my country is also responsible for the many hundreds of innocent Palestinians and the several hundreds of innocent Israelis killed in recent years, by virtue of having paid for the weapons that make all of this possible.

As long as CarolC's own country is occupying Iraq and any other country, nobody in Israel has anything to learn from any American, escpecially one named CarolC.

On the contrary. They can, if they want, learn that it is not always in one's best interest to follow the leaders of one's country like a bunch of sheep. Sometimes our leaders are WRONG. I know the leaders of my country are, and so are the leaders of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 11:53 AM

Well, is it time yet to whitewash the Palestinians? Just curious.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 12:38 PM

Everyone is an example.
Either bad or good.
Wisdom is knowing which is which.
Intelligence is choosing to emulate the good.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 12:04 AM

How many Zionists does it take to screw a lightbulb?

Zionists don't screw lightbulbs, they screw Palestineans.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 06:55 AM

McGrath of Harlow - 23 Mar 04 - 04:45 PM

"And with Hamas greatly strengthened now by this assassination... That, I think, is one of the main reasons it happened."

I believe you could be right there Kevin. The emergence of Hamas as the organisation speaking for the Palestinian people would do two things:

1. Get rid of Arafat and the Palestinian Authority, which has never had any authority, or at least has never exercised it for fear of losing what support it has. Arafat's motives as leader of this organisation ran more towards financial gain - any solution cuts off his own opportunities to rob the Palestinian people.

2. It injects a bit of reality into the "Peace Process". On the one side you will have the Israeli's and on the other side you will have the Palestinian organisation whose sole reported aim is the total destruction of the State of Israel.

The Israeli's have shown time and time again that they are fully prepared to negotiate. The Palestinian Authority has flirted with the idea but have proved as constant in their intent as a wind-sock, shackled to the likes of the Al-Aqsa Brigade, Hamas and Hezbollah, whose position is stated time and time again as non-negotiable.

At last the Palestinian side of the arguement will be shown clearly to all.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 03:47 PM

For the second time in a week, Arafat's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade strapped a bomb onto a child and tried to blow him up at an Israeli chekpoint. This time a mentally retarded boy.

The family of the teenager said he was gullible and easily manipulated.

"He doesn't know anything, and he has the intelligence of a 12-year-old," said his brother, Hosni.

In the newspaper interview, Abdo said he wanted to reach paradise, which he was taught in school was the reward for suicide bombers.

"A river of honey, a river of wine and 72 virgins. Since I have been studying Quran I know about the sweet life that waits there (in Paradise)," the newspaper quoted the boy as saying.

Here's the story.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 07:23 PM

I'm quite able to imagine that there are people in the business of terorism who are quite capable of doing that kind of stuff - but I have a nasty feeling that there is something a bit too neat and tidy about that story, with the photos and all.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 07:33 PM

Well gol danged, GUEST... That was purdy danged rude on yer part... Hey, why ya' associatin' me with the nuking of Japan. I weren't even born yet so I have as good an alibi as one can come up with.

But, with that said, I think it was wrong to drop a nuclear bomb on Japan. And the second one was beyond wrong. It was dispicable and as immoral as anything that has ever been done....

All that needed top be done was tocommunicate to the Japanese that the US would be conducting a "test" somewhere off its coast line without divulging where exactly it would occur. This would have demonstrated the US's power and forced the same results, sans the massive collaterial damage...

As fir the Middle East? I'msticken with the plan I've put forth so very many times. The Saudi Porposal (Mitchell proposal).

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 08:04 PM

Everyone seems to be getting bogged down in trying to find a solution to the "Palistine problem". what we should realise is that the Israeli, Palistinian conflict is only the sharp end of an even bigger struggle between Islam and Western capitalism,and the people, as always, are being used as pawns.
To my mind there will never be a "solution", as there are too many vested interests willing to escalate the violence.
Israel may be the theatre today,but the shows' coming to a venue near YOU someday soon ....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 08:28 PM

Up till now what's been happening in Israel isn't really about that, it's about two bunches of people who've been pushed their homes trying to find some way of living together in a small patch of land. Compoicated by considerations of electoral politics in the USA.

This assassination has probably pushed it a lot closer to being subsumed in the wider conflict akenaton refers to; I think this is one of the main reasons it happened.

But I'd disagree with the formula "struggle between Islam and Western capitalism"; there are two struggles going on in the world today. One is a struggle by predatory capitalism to assimilate just about every other form of activity (a bit like the Borg in Star Trek), and the other is a bid by a cult within Islam to take advantage of this situation to achieve a dominant position.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Mar 04 - 08:33 PM

Yo, Ake, I'm not ready to throw in the towel quite yet. The Palestianians aren't like some backwoods hillbilly tribe. They understand capatilism purdy well. Like I say, there is hope there if the US would get behind someone else's framework.... But, no, if the US can't fix it then it can't be fixed! What a crock!

And the beat goes on, and on........

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 09:57 AM

akenaton's, "even bigger struggle between Islam and Western capitalism" is a gross over-simplification, in which he compares apples to oranges.

Islam is a religion, capitalism is a system of economics, neither are political parties and neither can "run" a country.

I can think of many "Islamic" countries that totally embrace "western capitalism" without any problems and thrive doing so.

That a small minority of Islamic fundamentalists have a problem with western capitalism I can see, because the benefits the latter brings tends to undermine the power to control of the fundamentalist leaders.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 10:49 AM

One issue that nobody has adressed is time.    I can assure you that this is of monumental concern in Israel.   The arab population in Israel is growing at a far higher rate than the Jewish population.   There are projections that the arabs will outnumber the Jews in Israel in the next 10/15/25 years depending on who you ask.   What happens then?   Does Israel become South Africa where the minority rule the majority?   This is a major issue that must be addressed.   The status quo cannot be maintained as it is with terrorism and retaliation.   time is running our for Israel.

In dealing with Palestineans right to have a homeland you have to ask the question- Is it a country or a people.   If so please asnwer these questions:

What is their currency?   What year did they become a country?   What is their constitution?   What is their progression of leadership? What is their election process? Where does their currency compare on the world market? Are they recognized by the UN or other countries? Do they have an embassy or ambassadors?   Do they have any formal treaties or alliances?   I could go on.

My contention is that the Palestinians are far closer to a terrorist organization than they are to a country.   Therefore negotiation is not an option.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 11:04 AM

The only good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian, right Teribus and Larry K?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 11:15 AM

We negotiate with terrorists all the time, Larry K.
We just choose the ones which are politically expedient at the time, that's all.

Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 11:22 AM

One issue that nobody has adressed is time.    I can assure you that this is of monumental concern in Israel.   The arab population in Israel is growing at a far higher rate than the Jewish population.   There are projections that the arabs will outnumber the Jews in Israel in the next 10/15/25 years depending on who you ask.

Larry K,

That statement is incorrect. The projections are not that Arabs will outnumber Jews "in Israel." Rather, given the differential birthrates, the projection is that Arabs will eventually outnumber Jews in the combined populations of Israel and the occupied territories. That is why a two-state solution, a fact acknowledged even by rightwing Israelis like Ariel Sharon, is imperative if Israel is to remain Jewish and democratic.

The only good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian, right Teribus and Larry K?

CarolC,

Such cheap attacks, implying vicious and absent motives to posters with whom you disagree, are what led to the disintegration of the previous thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 11:29 AM

I disagree, Guest, C-watch. I think it was the cheap attacks leveled against me in that other thread that caused its disintegration.

I'm interested to see Teribus' and Larry K's response to my last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 12:39 PM

CarolC,

Irrespective of who, how could I establish whether, or not he/she was good if they were dead? Testimonials from friends perhaps? How?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 12:45 PM

I don't know, Teribus. Maybe the same way you learned what "the Palestinian side of the argument" (as represented by Hamas) is.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 01:31 PM

Palesitnians are closer to a terrorist organization than a country?

That's slinging a mighty big hammer there.
I'm sure that there are many peace loving palestinians and israelis out there who would love to just settle this over tea and honey cakes. People on both sides of this conflict are manipulating their people and their media to their best advantage.

I'll say it again because nobody bothered to answer.
Israel can continue to make martyrs all it wants (even though assassination is against int'l law). The only real problem I see is that they aren't trying to capture and try these people before a court of law. Wouldn't they be better off capturing them and then interrogating them to gain more info? What happened to the days that the Massad was smart enough and competent enough to penetrate the enemy and do them in in ways that left only them dead with no "collateral" damage (I mean innocents there)?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 02:29 PM

And people bitched when the Mossad did its job after the Olympics. They screwed up and killed an innocent person in Sweden (?), and they shut the operation down. I think the 'correct' way to deal with terrorists (freedome fighters--screw the semantics) is with squads that just go take care of business. Bombing ain't too surgical, and lots of innocents people get hurt. Both Palestinians and Israelis are aware of that. Assassination is against the law; so is killing kids on school busses. If I had to choose between the two . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 02:41 PM

Heck, no, let me go a step further: I think 'terrorists' who kill people ought to be located, interrogated and shot. If it takes special squads to do that, so be it. Law is a f#ckin' joke if everyone isn't observing it.

When that Lybian asshole was fronting and supporting terrorists, the Yanks sent a few planes in to deliver a message of sorts. They hit his family instead of him. That was not good, but he went real silent after that. I hope the spirits of the people at Lockerbie rest easier as a result.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: C-Watch
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 02:52 PM

I would note that Israel twice tried, convicted and imprisoned Yassin. They released him the first time as a goodwill gesture when peace negotiations with the Palestinians looked promising. They released him the second time as one of hundreds of Palestinians exchanged for two captured Israelis.

BTW, look at the many prisoner exchanges that Israel has participated in over the years. Virtually every time, hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, including mass murderers, have been exchanged for one or two Israelis.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 04:04 PM

Bobert I note your last post,and agree with your ideas regarding US involvement to solve the problem.   Unfortunately the US at the moment only appears interested in power and influence to safeguard oil supplies.
Teribus... you accuse me of over simplification,and its true I try to keep my thoughts on the Middle East very simple,as the real issues tend to become blurred by too much detail.
Both the fundamentalist Moslems and the conservative Jews use the unfortunate Palistinians as pawns in their quest for power and territory.In my opinion this situation must lead sooner or later,(I feel sooner rather than later) to a global conflict between Islam and the West,the beginnings of which we can see the the various bomb outrages in the last year or so .   One serious biological attack would almost certainly set the whole thing rolling.
Islam is more than a religion, and Capitalism more than an economic system ,and both are quite capable of "running counties ".
Capitalism certainly runs the Western "democracies",and Islamic fundamentalism "runs"a number of countries ,with many more "in the pipeline"...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 04:56 PM

So when do we call for squads to go in and take out Ariel Sharon? Or do we have a double standard when it comes to matters of this sort?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 04:59 PM

Not at all. If people are terrorists, get 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: C-Watch
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 05:01 PM

Who is the "we" that you represent?

I suspect the Israelis take a different approach to the recognized head of a "government" than to the leader of a terrorist organization. Hence, we see that Arafat, who is, in many ways, the head of both a government and a terrorist organization, is still alive.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 05:06 PM

I read 'We' as 'Us'... you know... the ones who 'fight the good fight', and all that....
Apparently we can't expect Arafat to be around for much longer, though.

And weren't the Taliban heads of Government, as well?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 05:06 PM

Just a generic sort of "we" for the purpose of this discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 05:30 PM

The people to whom I refer point rifles at kids, civilians, and kill them to make a statement. They deserve what they try to serve.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 05:55 PM

Brucie, I'm going to get some information about Ariel Sharon for you. I might not be able to post it until later today or some time tomorrow.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,CarolCfriend
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 06:46 PM

Click
Click
Click
Click

Another slice, anyone?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 07:26 PM

I know that Sharon is a bad man. I also know that the leaders of groups like Hamas kill lots of little kids. I'm not saying one side has clean hands. But, that then means that both side are dirty, and I'd like that to be stated.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 07:42 PM

I saw little kids in some of the pictures in those links, brucie.

You're not actually saying anything

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 07:45 PM

GUEST: What I said was clear. I am aware the Israel has killed kids. BUT, I am equally aware that the Palestinians have also. Understand that.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 07:46 PM

Maybe that's why I think assassins will make a comeback. They can get pretty selective. More so than tanks and bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Mar 04 - 09:08 PM

And also Qibya

Witnesses had been uniform in describing their experience as a night of horror, during which Israeli soldiers had moved about in their village blowing up buildings, firing into doorways and windows with automatic weapons and throwing hand grenades. A number of unexploded hand grenades, marked with Hebrew letters indicating recent Israel manufacture, and three bags of TNT had been found in and about the village. An emergency meeting of the Mixed Armistice Commission had been held in the afternoon of 15 October and a resolution condemning the regular Israel army for its attack on Qibya, as a breach of article III, paragraph 2,62/ of the Israel-Jordan General Armistice Agreement, had been adopted by a majority vote. The Chief of Staff stated that he had
discussed with the Acting Chairman of the Mixed Armistice Commission the reasons why he had supported the resolution condemning the Israel army for having carried out the attack, and that, after listening to his explanations, he had asked him to state them in writing; the technical arguments given by Commander Hutchison in his memorandum appeared to the Chief of Staff to be convincing.


From B'Tselem

Minors under the age of 18 killed between 29 September 2000, and 10 March 2004-

Palestinian minors killed by IDF:

460

81 age 17
86 age 16
72 age 15
61 age 14
161 age 13 and under

Plus 28 minors under 18 killed by IDF during extrajudicial executions

Palestinian minors killed by Israeli civilians:

3, including a 2 month old baby

Israeli minors killed by Palestinians:

104 under age 18

18 age 17
18 age 16
21 age 15
41 age 13 and under

I condemn everyone who kills children, on both sides.

Considering the numbers of Palestinian children who have been killed by the IDF and by Israeli civilians, and with the Palestinians not having a military of their own, how do you propose, brucie, that the Palestinians should protect themselves? I keep hearing that the Israelis have a right to protect themselves. Who will protect the Palestinians from the Israelis? Do you consider 460 Palistinian minors, 161 of them age 13 and under, to be acceptable numbers?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 12:02 AM

From B'Tselem

Same source you cite:

Attacks on Israeli Civilians by Palestinians

Since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada, there has been a sharp increase in the number of attacks perpetrated by Palestinian organizations against Israeli civilians. These attacks have killed hundreds of Israelis and wounded thousands, including many minors, inside Israel and in the Occupied Territories.

Attacks aimed at civilians undermine all rules of morality and law. Specifically, the intentional killing of civilians is considered a "grave breach" of international humanitarian law and a war crime. Whatever the circumstances, such acts are unjustifiable.

Palestinian organizations raise several arguments to justify attacks on Israeli civilians. The main argument is that "all means are appropriate in fighting against a foreign occupation and to attain independence." This argument is baseless. It is also contrary to the fundamental principle of international humanitarian law, whereby civilians are to be protected from the consequences of warfare. In attacking the other side, therefore, each party must discriminate in selecting its targets and attack only military objects. This principle is part of international customary law; as such, it applies to every state, organization, and person, even those who are not party to any relevant convention.

Palestinian spokespersons distinguish between attacks inside Israel and attacks directed at settlers in the Occupied Territories. They argue that, because the settlements are illegal and many settlers belong to Israel's security forces, settlers are not entitled to the protections granted to civilians by international law.

This argument is readily refuted. The illegality of the settlements has no effect at all on the status of their civilian residents. The settlers constitute a distinctly civilian population, which is entitled to all the protections granted civilians by international law. The Israeli security forces' use of land in the settlements or the membership of some settlers in the Israeli security forces does not affect the status of the other residents living among them, and certainly does not make them proper targets of attack.

B'Tselem strongly opposes the attempts to justify attacks against Israeli civilians by using distorted interpretations of international law. Furthermore, B'Tselem demands that the Palestinian Authority do everything within its power to prevent future attacks and to prosecute the individuals involved in past attacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 12:05 AM

Acceptable? Of course not. Do you see 104 Israeli dead to be acceptable?

And I question the figures: no young children killed? At all?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:00 AM

The US has vetoed a motion in the UN condemning Isreal for murdering a civilian in Palestein. Who was it who said "by their actions ye shall know them"?

Thos Palestineans have no manners at all, didn;t their mothers teach their kids not to throw stones at Israeli Tanks? - that's the best weapons most of them have...

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 02:26 AM

Acceptable? Of course not. Do you see 104 Israeli dead to be acceptable?

Did you not see the part of my last post where I said, "I condemn everyone who kills children, on both sides"?

And I question the figures: no young children killed? At all?

Did you not see the part where I broke down the ages? I grouped all of the children under the age of 13 together for each of the categories because there are small numbers of a lot of ages, and it would be cumbersome to try to post. But you can check it out in the statistics part of that site. They break it down according to age. There have been several very small children and infants of both sides who have been killed.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 02:30 AM

BTW, your quote from that site supports what I have been saying all along, which is that the policies and actions of the government of Israel have produced exactly the opposite result from the one they say they want. Violence has been increasing... not decreasing. They say they do what they do for security, and yet, the Israelis are far less secure today than they were several years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 02:32 AM

No, Carol, it doesn't. It states that the Palestinians are just as guilty.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 11:10 AM

it is always fascinating to see the carolc's of this world trying to blame the jews for everything. case in point: the anti-semitic propaganda links that she provides blaming ariel sharon for the massacres at sabra and shatilla.

one group of arabs murders another group of arabs. ok, let's blame a jew. let's repeat the lie loud enough and often enough and all the anti-semites of this world will ingrain it into their orthodoxy.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 11:57 AM

Here you go, brucie:

Since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada, there has been a sharp increase in the number of attacks perpetrated by Palestinian organizations against Israeli civilians.

And I agree with that site when it says that attacks against civilians are unacceptable. I don't know how many times I have to say that before my having said that gets acknowleged. I have condemned people who kill civilians on both sides. Are you willing to condemn those on the Israeli side who kill civilians, as well as those on the Palestinian side?

it is always fascinating to see the carolc's of this world trying to blame the jews for everything. case in point: the anti-semitic propaganda links that she provides blaming ariel sharon for the massacres at sabra and shatilla.

The link I provided was for the purpose of showing information about Qibya. However, Re: Sabra and Shatilla... the IDF was reponsible for those camps. It had control of who it let into those camps. It stood by while the massacre was taking place and did nothing. Some eyewitnesses (including some Jews) say that some members of the IDF were, in fact, inside the camps during the massacre. It was Jews who found Sharon to have personal responsibility for this massacre. Are you calling those Jews anti-Semites? It looks to me like you think everyone, Jew and non-Jew alike, who disagrees with you is an anti-Semite.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 12:00 PM

Thank you Carol; I knew we would understand each other. Yes, I am willing to call a spade a shovel and state that in my view, murder is murder. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 12:22 PM

A long gime ago, long before you joined the Mudcat, brucie, I said that I think if some Palestinians feel they need to kill themselves in order to promote freedom for their people, they should do it in a way that gets the attention of Israelis without harming any of them. Like blowing themselves up where they can be seen by Israelis but not were they can harm anyone. A bit like the self-immolation of the Buddhist monks during the Vietnam War. It would be much trickier to do that with explosives, and I don't know how it might be accomplished, but it would be preferable to killing civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 12:36 PM

I knew we would understand each other. Yes, I am willing to call a spade a shovel and state that in my view, murder is murder

I don't know if we actually do understand each other. Are you saying that you acknowlege culpability on the part of the Israelis?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:10 PM

Hmmm... No, I gusss not. Ah well.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: DougR
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:18 PM

Hey, CarolC, still carrying the torch for the Palestinians! Right on! I would have been disappointed had you not. One thing about you, you are consistent.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:28 PM

12:36 pm: CarolC asks Brucie a question. Doesn't wait for an answer and then puts her conclusions in his mouth. Pretty typical of her. Ah well.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:33 PM

Yes Doug.... Consistent and obviously sincere.
    Carol puts the argument for these unfortunate people very well,and seems to care very deeply about the subject.
Only a fool would see the Jews as blameless in this conflict.
Why has the US used its veto yet again ,to stop a resolution condemning Israel?   The very same resolutions which opened the door for war on Iraq

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:36 PM

Carol,

We do understand each other. You have admitted that the Palestinians are guilty of crimes against Israeli citizens. I have agreed with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:41 PM

And, I don't think Israel's hands are clean, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Hussam
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:45 PM

If I can't have my seventy-two virgins, I'll settle for CarolC.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 01:46 PM

My apologies.....guest 1.33pm was me ,cookie expired...

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 03:42 PM

Brucie, you only say that Israel's hands are dirty but you say Palestinians are guilty of crimes against humanity. Do you also agree that Israelis are guilty of crimes against humanity?

I'll give him a bit longer this time, GUEST, 27 Mar 04 - 01:28 PM, just for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 03:44 PM

OOps. Correction: that should read, crimes against Israelis, and crimes against the Palestinians. brucie did not say "crimes against humanity".

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 04:24 PM

BTW, that B'Tselem site also accuses the Israeli government of collective punishment:

Since September 2000, the IDF has erected an extensive network of checkpoints, road blocks, trenches and other obstacles - a virtual siege around every Palestinian community in the West Bank. Most West Bank roads are now reserved exclusively for Jewish travel.

Most checkpoints and physical obstacles do not prevent entry into Israel; they prevent travel between Palestinian cities and villages within the West Bank. They disrupt every aspect of Palestinian daily life. Children cannot get to schools, adults cannot reach jobs, and patients cannot get medical treatment. The restrictions on movement have contributed to a collapse of the Palestinian economy.

The checkpoints do not target only those who pose a security threat to Israel; they target everyone. In fact, those most harmed are people physically unable to bypass the obstacles: families with small children, pregnant women, the sick and the elderly.

When over two million people cannot travel even a few miles down the road, cannot conduct any aspect of their daily lives without encountering innumerable obstacles, such restrictions are no longer legitimate security measures - they are collective punishments.

This isn't security. It's humiliation.


These testimonies from members of the IDF, also in the B'Tselem site, do support my contention that the policies and actions of the government of Israel towards the Palestinians create the opposite outcome from the one they say they want; that they undermine the security of Israeli civilians rather than increasing it:

"IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon: "The government's policy is very harmful. There is no reason to punish the Palestinians indiscriminately."
(Ma'ariv, 29 October 2003)

Maj. Gen. (Res.) Ya'akov Or, Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories from 1997-2001: "The more that the [Palestinians'] distress grows, the more the power of Hamas increases. If the Palestinian public has nothing to lose, we will lose. Rather than go to work, they will prepare explosives and ambushes, and will blow themselves up in Tel-Aviv."

Yediot Aharonot, 13 July 2001

Former Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. (Res.) Amnon Lipkin-Shahak: "IDF soldiers face hundreds and thousands of people waiting at checkpoints every day… This reality, the intolerable friction between Palestinians and IDF soldiers, creates potential suicide bombers every day."

Ma'ariv, 21 December 2001

IDF report: "Checkpoints in the Occupied Territories do not prevent the entry of terrorists."

Ha'aretz, 2 November 2001

An internal IDF report reveals that the IDF checkpoints in the Occupied Territories do not work from an operational perspective; at the same time, they harm the local population and create unnecessary friction and abuse by the soldiers."
Kol Ha'ir, 2 November 2001

M. L., Staff Sergeant (Res.), Armor Brigade, May 2002: "If a terrorist wants to, he can cross at other points along the road. We do not have enough troops to prevent it. We have implemented a policy that has done nothing to meet security needs and is intended only to make the lives of the civilian population miserable… There were situations in which we stood at the checkpoint for hours and prohibited people from crossing, and then we left, without anybody replacing us. Anybody who wanted to could cross."
For additional segments from the testimony

Lt. Col. Dov Zadka, head of the Civil Administration, 1998-2002: "I do not like this situation. It encourages large-scale hatred over the long term… Two weeks ago, I saw a father walking with two sacks and carrying a five-year-old boy on his shoulders. Stumbling behind him was the mother with what may have been a newborn infant. It was mid-afternoon and they were walking from the junction to their home. Tell me, how does this help? What good does it do? I can picture my wife walking like that with our daughter, shuffling through the mud. I swear, it gives me the chills."

B'Mahaneh (IDF magazine), 28 December 2001

Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya'alon Chief of Staff: "I fear that even if we win the war, in the end we will not be able to look at ourselves in the mirror. We have a problem. All this fighting is not good for our health, from the perspective of our moral strength. A soldier who is ordered to stand at a checkpoint, where it is easy and tempting to loot does not add to our moral strength."

Yediot Aharonot, 4 July 2003

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Frankham
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 04:31 PM

1. Get rid of the word "terrorist" to define Hamas.
2. Both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to exist.
3. For Israelis, try to understand what Hamas means.
4. Palestinians....non-violent resistance.
5. UN broker the deal.

Solution: one state with equal governing powers
and Separation of Church and State.

Perhaps a socialist/democracy or capitalist/socialist/democracy.

A theocratic solution is doomed to failure. But Israelis have the
right to worship as they choose as do Palestinians.

Caveat: The rest of the Arab world will not allow Israel to bomb
Palestinians out of existence. It's not an option.

The nation of Israel may not be removed without the world community
censuring it.

Noam Chomsky still makes the best sense to me.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 07:00 PM

Frank,

Hamas is a terrorist organization responsible for murdering hundreds of innocent men, women and children.

A one-state solution is a non-starter for almost all Israelis from across the political spectrum: far left to far right.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:12 AM

Ok GUEST, 27 Mar 04 - 01:28 PM I waited a while just for you.

No, I don't think we do understand each other, brucie. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:23 AM

OK, Carol, what don't we understand? In a few sentences. We have both admitted that both Israel and the Palestinians have committed crimes. What's not to understand? Or is it that you want me to understand that the crimes committed by the Palestinians are of a lesser nature because they are 'oppressed'? Like maybe Israel hasn't been oppressed.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:30 AM

No, I just wanted to see you use the same verbiage for what Israelis have done, ie: are guilty of crimes against the Palestinians, as you use for what Palestinians have done.

Palestinians/Israelis are guilty of crimes against each other.

This has a very different impact than:

Palestinians are guilty...
Israelis don't have clean hands

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:36 AM

You are right. It does. So we agree. They both have dirty hands and they are both guilty of crimes against each other. We agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 10:45 AM

Yes we do.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 12:48 PM

Carol, I luv ya. Did anyone ever get the last word with you?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:36 PM

I don't know, brucie. Would you like to have the last word this time?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:36 PM

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 01:45 PM

.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: dianavan
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 03:00 PM

If the Palestinians had a voice, maybe they wouldn't need terrorists.

If Zionists could listen, maybe they wouldn't need revenge.

If the U.S. didn't need to control the middle east, maybe we could have peace.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 03:34 PM

After a couple of days away, it seems pretty clear to me that brucie's original suggestion for this thread, that of trying to pay attention to ideas for solutions, has rather run into the ground. That's thanks largely to the assassination of Sheik Yassin, (together with a bunch of people near him at the time), which seems to have diverted people into arguing about who is are terrorists in this context.

That's an interesting topic, but it's not the same topic. Does this mean there's no point in trying to follow up that earier option?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 03:44 PM

Good point, McG of H. Correct as usual.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 06:29 PM

If the Palestinians had a voice, maybe they wouldn't need terrorists.

The Palestinians have a voice and certainly don't need terrorism. Terrorism has been disastrous for the Palestinian people. The terrorists know that, in the real world, no government can accept terrorism and will strike back, usually with more damage than the terrorists inflict. Indeed, that has been the case. Before unleashing this wave of terrorism, the Palestinians were on the verge of statehood and enjoyed a flourishing economy. All of that was destroyed when Arafat walked away, rather than continued, the peace talks with Clinton and Barak. As I said, the consequences of terrorism have been disastrous for the Palestinians.

If Zionists could listen, maybe they wouldn't need revenge.

As I said, there is no government in the world that will accept terrorism and not retaliate when it is perpetrated on them. Dianavan, I believe you're from Canada. When domestic terrorists were operating in Canada in 1970, Prime Minister Trudeau invoked the War Measures Act and brought the army into the streets to root it out. More than 500 people, most of them innocent, were imprisoned with trial and charge for the duration.

If the U.S. didn't need to control the middle east, maybe we could have peace.

If the U.S. actually controlled the Middle East, they would have dictated a peace long ago. The fact is, the U.S. actually has very limited influence there.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 06:31 PM

More than 500 people, most of them innocent, were imprisoned with trial and charge for the duration.

I meant to say: More than 500 people, most of them innocent, were imprisoned ***without** trial and charge for the duration.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 06:37 PM

Terrorism has been disastrous for everyone, except Sharon.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 06:50 PM

Terrorism has been disastrous for everyone, except Sharon.

Oh please, that is a ridiculous statement. If you think that terrorism has not been disastrous for all Israelis, then you know nothing of what's going on in the Middle East.

One effect of terrorism, though, is that it makes rightwingers like Sharon electable. When they feel secure, in the absence of terrorism, Israelis tend to elect leftwing governments. When they're under terrorist siege, they elect rightwing governments. And don't think the Palestinian terrorist masters don't know it. They don't care. If they did, they wouldn't strap bombs onto mentally retarded children.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 07:17 PM

I didn't say "Terrorism has been disastrous for everyone, except the Israelis" - that would indeed have been ridiculous.

How about:

Terrorism has been disastrous for everyone, except Sharon. And Sharon has been disastrous for everyone.

It does seem to me that there is a kind of symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides on internecine conficts. Of course, that in no way excludes murdering each other. In fact that is a key part of the dynamic process.

...........................

To get back to casting around for solutions, we keep on getting claims about how the Camp David Summit offered the Palestinians everything they could have wanted for a viable sovereign state, and that refusing to accept it on the spot could only be seen as totally unreasonable. If that is actually true, it is obviously important.

But nowhere have I seen a map showing what was actually on offer. The only maps which have turned up show something which is very much less than a "viable sovereign state" - for example. If Israel had been offered a state looking like that, fragmented and enclose, I do not think anyone would suggest that it could have been described in such terms.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 07:27 PM

This site has other maps, as well as a lot of other useful stuff, but no full clear map seems to be available.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Mar 04 - 10:22 PM

All of that was destroyed when Arafat walked away, rather than continued, the peace talks with Clinton and Barak. As I said, the consequences of terrorism have been disastrous for the Palestinians.

The problem with this statement is that it is a complete fabrication.

"The Intifada began on September 29, 2000, when Israeli troops opened fire on unarmed Palestinian rock-throwers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, killing four and wounding over 200 (State Department human rights report for Israel, 2/01). Demonstrations spread throughout the territories. Barak and Arafat, having both staked their domestic reputations on their ability to win a negotiated peace from the other side, now felt politically threatened by the violence. In January 2001, they resumed formal negotiations at Taba, Egypt.

The Taba talks are one of the most significant and least remembered events of the "peace process." While so far in 2002 (1/1/02-5/31/02), Camp David has been mentioned in conjunction with Israel 35 times on broadcast network news shows, Taba has come up only four times--never on any of the nightly newscasts. In February 2002, Israel's leading newspaper, Ha'aretz (2/14/02), published for the first time the text of the European Union's official notes of the Taba talks, which were confirmed in their essential points by negotiators from both sides.

"Anyone who reads the European Union account of the Taba talks," Ha'aretz noted in its introduction, "will find it hard to believe that only 13 months ago, Israel and the Palestinians were so close to a peace agreement." At Taba, Israel dropped its demand to control Palestine's borders and the Jordan Valley. The Palestinians, for the first time, made detailed counterproposals--in other words, counteroffers--showing which changes to the 1967 borders they would be willing to accept. The Israeli map that has emerged from the talks shows a fully contiguous West Bank, though with a very narrow middle and a strange gerrymandered western border to accommodate annexed settlements.

In the end, however, all this proved too much for Israel's Labor prime minister. On January 28, Barak unilaterally broke off the negotiations. "The pressure of Israeli public opinion against the talks could not be resisted," Ben-Ami said (New York Times, 7/26/01)."

Distorting the Camp David negotiations

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Mar 04 - 02:32 AM

And this from Ha'aretz

"The Taba talks began at the height of the intifada, a few weeks before Israel's prime ministerial election, in the face of surveys predicting a resounding defeat for then prime minister Ehud Barak. But Barak nevertheless sent the largest and most senior delegation in Israeli history to continue the negotiations, including then foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, justice minister Yossi Beilin, transportation minister Amnon Lipkin-Shahak and Meretz Party Chairman Yossi Sarid. Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat also sent his most senior advisers to the talks. But some days later, Barak ordered them stopped."

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Peace
Date: 02 Apr 04 - 06:25 PM

I hope that someone who can actually DO something about it gets an idea or two from stuff on here. Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Apr 04 - 08:36 PM

Here's an article from a pacifist Islamic site (http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/) that makes interesting reading A Muslim Call To The Israelis:

...Our heartfelt wish as Muslims is for the anger and hatred on both sides to die down, for the bloodshed to stop and for peace to come to the Middle East. We oppose both the Israeli killing of the innocent and the Palestinian bombing of innocent Israelis.

In our view, the most important condition for this blind conflict to come to an end and for real peace to be established in the Middle East is for both sides to genuinely and honestly understand and implement their own beliefs.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 03 Apr 04 - 01:26 PM

The Plan
In the beginning there was the plan
And then came the assumptions
And the assumptions were without form
And the plan was completely without substance
And darkness was on the faces of the workers
And they spake unto their Group Heads, saying,
`The plan is a crock of shit, and it stinketh.'

And the Group Heads went unto their Section Heads and sayeth, It is a pail of dung, and none may abide the odour thereof.'
And the Section Heads went unto their Managers, and sayeth unto them, `This plan is a container of excrement, and it is very strong, such that none may abide it.'

And the Managers went unto their Director, and sayeth unto him, `It is a vessel of fertilizer, and none may abide its strength.'
And the Directors went unto their Director-General, and sayeth, `It contains that which aids plant growth, and it is very strong.'

And the Director-General went unto the Assistant Deputy Minister, and
sayeth unto him, `It promoteth growth, and it is very powerful.'
And the ADM went unto the Deputy Minister, and sayeth unto him, `This powerful new plan will actively promote the growth and efficiency of the department, and this area in particular.' And the Deputy-Minister looked upon the plan, And he saw that it was good; And so the plan became policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Apr 04 - 03:06 PM

Hey Dave (tam). It's good to see you here again.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Apr 04 - 05:35 PM

The exile's return

I keep remembering the utterly prophetic words you let fly one day, stoned out of your mind. You said that perhaps we should set up a sort of protest movement of friends. I would introduce you to all my Israeli friends and you would introduce me to all your Palestinian friends. We would throw a party, you said, turned on by the idea - parties!

Later, all my friends and your friends would introduce each other to all their friends; the thing would grow and grow. People would learn to love each other, learn to forgive each other. There would be comfort, reciprocity, you will see, you said, taking another drag and exhaling the words slowly from your lungs. "It will change the situation, I am telling you, a movement like this could change the whole political map in the Middle East." Then, throwing your head back, you burst out laughing.

That's the ending of a very moving article in today's Guardian. It's a farewell letter from a young Israeli novelist to her friend, a young Palestinian, whom she'd met while they were both living in New York. And now the friend, Hassan Hourani, an artist, has been drowned trying to rescue a young nephew in the sea of Tel Aviv. (Where they legally shouldn't have been, but they'd sneaked in, because they wanted to go for a swim in the Mediterranean, and when your home is in the West Bank, that is not easy to achieve.)

It's a lovely article, full of bits I'd like to quote, because I know often people don't click through and read long articles on the screen. But I really think it's an article that's worth reading for anyone concerned who cares about what happens in the divided country this pair of friend both called "home".

So just two quotes, to push you into opening up the blue clicky:

..."Deep inside you, you know very well that your grandchildren and my grandchildren will live together in this land, so why not now?" you would ask so convincingly, "why not us?"...

...I look from here at who we were in New York and see us as other people saw us - with disbelief. Israelis and Arabs were either amazed or suspicious. We seemed strange when we reminded each other to ring home after every suicide bombing in Israel and with every report of Israeli army operations in the territories. American Jews could not understand how it was that your Arabness is more familiar to me than they will ever be. We come from the same neighbourhood, I used to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: dianavan
Date: 04 Apr 04 - 04:21 AM

McGrath - That is absolutely beautiful.

I've had a little cry and now I'll say good-night.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 04 Apr 04 - 10:51 AM

As I said in my initial post to this thread: "Unfortunately, I don't see much hope for progress while Bush, Sharon and, especially, Arafat remain in power."

If the Democrats don't blow it, we might well have a new president come next January.

Events unfolding in Israel indicate Sharon's political career is rapidly coming to an end.

And now, a Palestinian alternative to Arafat in Mohammed Dahlan seems to be emerging.

Contradicting CarolC, Mr. Dahlan, who has spent 25 years on the Palestinian front lines, including five years in an Israeli jail, said: "The Palestinian leadership must share the blame for this result. It's not just the occupation."

Read the full article from the Globe & Mail in Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Apr 04 - 11:01 AM

That Globe & Mail link wouldn't work for me. But I can't see why that quote is supposed to be "Contradicting CarolC". Pretty obviously the blame for what has gone wrong belongs on both sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,C-watch
Date: 04 Apr 04 - 11:10 AM

I just tried the link again and it worked for me. Here is the URL if you want to paste it in your browser.

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040403/DAHLAN03/International/Idx

He contradicts CarolC in that she has stated in past threads that it is the Israeli occupation that is solely to blame for the conflict. Mr. Dahlan acknowledges culpability on both sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Apr 04 - 11:23 AM

I can't see any contradiction at all between saying the Israeli occupation is to blame, and saying that blame also falls on the Palestinian leadership.

The fuller quote gives a fuller picture: "The Palestinian leadership must share the blame for this result. It's not just the occupation. The [Israeli] occupation destroyed the Palestinian Authority. . . . There is no central ruling authority. The visible militant groups are the ones that are in control locally."

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Apr 04 - 12:29 PM

We shall see, Guest,C-watch. And who is the alternative to Sharon?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Apr 04 - 08:06 AM

Frankham - PM
Date: 27 Mar 04 - 04:31 PM

1. Get rid of the word "terrorist" to define Hamas. - They should then be defined as what exactly?

2. Both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to exist. - Undeniable, they should.

3. For Israelis, try to understand what Hamas means. - The Israeli's fully understand what Hamas means. Hamas have stated very clearly and often what they mean - The total extermination of the State of Israel.

4. Palestinians....non-violent resistance. - Good idea, but Arafat knows he can't make any money out of that, so he's not going to advocate that line, and none of the other Palestinian terrorist groups are either.

5. UN broker the deal. - I believe they have been trying to do exactly that since 1948. How much time are you and Chomsky going to give them?

Solution: one state with equal governing powers
and Separation of Church and State. - Israel, a secular democracy has already done this, I don't think the Palestinians will ever contemplate such a move - judging by the "thousands" who turned up to see that lamb.

Perhaps a socialist/democracy or capitalist/socialist/democracy. - would depend on who you are expecting to pay for it.

A theocratic solution is doomed to failure. - True, very true, elsewhere in the region, the Government of Iran (12 old gits) are trying awfully hard to convince their population otherwise - and failing.

But Israelis have the right to worship as they choose as do Palestinians. - Also very true.

Caveat: The rest of the Arab world will not allow Israel to bomb Palestinians out of existence. It's not an option. - Does this mean that if the Israeli's are attacked once this plan of yours (or Chomsky's) is put into operation and Israel responds it becomes open season on Israeli's? The Arab nations have tried this in the past and been spectacularly unsucessfull.

The nation of Israel may not be removed without the world community
censuring it. - By God, what a deterrent eh? "world community censure". Roughly that would probably equate to what some of the world community "serious consequences" meant. But as this censure by the "world community" seems only to kick-in once Israel has been attacked and removed, it would be a fairly moot point anyway, which is just as well, as the "world community" in the form of the United Nations is pretty good in situations where all the dust has settled and the bodies are lying on the ground - Rwanda is a good example.

Noam Chomsky still makes the best sense to me. - If the above is anything to go by - He makes absolutely no sense to me - Unless, of course, as a seriously proposed solution, the destruction and erradication of the State of Israel, is seen as an acceptable solution. Maybe some do, Hamas for certain.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Apr 04 - 10:30 AM

"Terrorist" is best used as an adjective to describe certain types of actions. Whoever carries them out. Hamas, like the IRA, is undoubtedly an organisation that has been responsible for many terrorist acts. The same is arguably true of the Israeli and British governments. That isn't saying the two sets of adversaries are identical, obciously they are not. That is what is meant by the current vogue expression "asymmetric warfare".

.............................

Israel's secular democracy is founded on the ethnic cleansing of the country to ensure a majority of one ethnic group. When South Africa attempted to introduce a versioin of this policy, with Bantustan homelands, this was rightly seen as a pretty severe distortion of the democratic system. If there had been no flight of refugees in 1948, or if they had been permitted to return home, in line with normal international law, there would be at present a balance between Arabs and Jews within the territory of Israel.

Given the realities of power at present, a solution involving an end to partition, and the establishment of one secular state within the historic boundaries of Palestine (or Eretz Israel), is evidently not practical politics. I think it would provide the best hope for the long term future for both Jews and Arabs in the area. There have always been some Israelis and many Palestinians who have wished this future for their country.

A two state settlement is probably the best available one - however if the process of destroying the viability of the Palestinian state continues, that option is likely to cease to be possible.

(That link I gave above to a piece by Dorit Rabinyan about her friend Hassan Hourani isn't working at present. It should be back - I think the paper has a technical problem with its website today.)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 05 Apr 04 - 01:02 PM

Defining terrorists is a favoutite ploy of those who do not have to lie in a hole and hope and pray that those pilots sitting in the comfort of their state of the art killing machines fly on bye.
There bombs are massive and kill and maim thousands, they bombed the citizens of Iraq in the hope that they would conform to whatever government the USA would put in place, it seems that this has been all in vain as todays news from that sorrowful land is worse than ever.
The hornets nest the USA has unleashed on the world is now completely out of control, prepare yourselves for more acts of terroism from desperate people.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Apr 04 - 01:04 PM

Another link to that piece by by Dorit Rabinyan about her friend Hassan Hourani I mentioned earlier. This should work a bit better, I hope.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East: Solutions
From: GUEST,Boab_d
Date: 16 Apr 04 - 10:38 AM

This one is simple.

Put all the Arabs and all the Isrealies into the red sea and then insert a rather large food processor.

turn it on


This would give you a middle east solution.

cheer up man{;'>

Dylan