Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - Interesting Statistics

Don Radlauer

Hobbes wrote:

Around the same time I (and a few other Irish in the class) had to be escorted home by teachers for fear of being beaten after the IRA decieded to put a nail bomb in Hyde park killing 7 horses and 4 people. You think we had anything to do with that or agreed with it? No, yet we were being treated as such by the public.

Well, you can't blame them. The Brits may not like people, but they love horses! <g>


-Don Radlauer
(resident of Weybridge, Surrey, 1993-7)

Clintons Cat

Well, you can't blame them. The Brits may not like people, but they love horses! <g>

Thats just plain rascist.

DadaKopf

Originally posted by Don Radlauer
DadaKopf asked:
Maybe.

To tell you the truth, I'm not sure. Could you flesh out the question a bit? I think I kind of see where you're going, but I'm not 100% certain; and I don't want to attempt an answer until I'm sure I understand the terms you're using, and their implications.

Well, I posted more out of a hunch. I suppose, in your previous post, to my mind, you identified one major cultural dissonance between the two sides which is one of the major barriers to eventual resolution.

Essentially, I see it this way. Inasmuch as Palestinian political strategies have been rational and strategic, their overriding value-system (the Arab variety) and unique situation has generated a reaction which is deeply personal - hence their 'rageful' actions. This is, also the result of the major power differential in the region. I don't consider this an 'irrational' point of view, it is conversely one which is rational but of a more personal sort. It has a different locus to the Western kind.

On the other hand, Israel is accepted as the most 'Westernised' state in the Middle East and, consequently, embodies European and Anglo-American values and attitudes. Not least because Israel is technologically and militarily advanced, Western oriented and the dominant power of the two, it's probably inevitable that a process of rationalisation occurs and, by effect, depersonalisation. Though I don't wish to dwell on this point (and I certainly don't intend it as a cheap dig), this process has been blamed for the holocaust, so in a sense, those Europeans who emigrated to Israel brought with them those same European values. It has been argued for decades that it was the European mode of rationality that essentially permitted the slaughter of tens of millions due to the depersonalisation of social life that was engendered by Enlightenment rationality and the subsequent extention of mass bureaucracies.

Israel is a militarised state, so there's a culture of violence there too. There is conscription and a large administrative structure (of which the military is part) which organises all public affairs. Israeli citizens do not take up arms because there is a military in place to protect them. Effectively, this is a 'rage container' since the public knows that there is a large administration in place to protect them. This produces a separation between what is personal (public outrage; grief at a murdered family member etc.) and what is depersonalised (state sponsored military action).

Administrations are rational organisations and therefore, any actions/retaliations carried out by the military are assumed to be rational acts. I suspect that this internalised Israeli rationality has generated defence mechanisms that, out of themselves, result in 'defence strategies' (to the Israeli) while simultaneously being acts of dehumanisation on Palestinians people.

However, they are not rational acts. They are acts driven by rage by people who have access to that state-military apparatus. I'm not implying Israeli rage is degenrate, insincere or illegitimate. I'm saying that all of the above tends to become an internalised excuse for outrageous acts of human cruelty, too, and that this is of the Western variety (of course, not every Israeli is pro-war or anti-Palestinian).

So, in terms of Palestinan defence strategy and 'rage containers': Palestinians have no such luxury since they're hardly even recognised as a legitimate nation with land rights. This is the first act of depersonalisation (it has been consistently been denied to them). Secondly, they have no 'rage container' so it's no surprise that their methods of defence/survival are more personalised. With no state apparatuses, paramilitaries emerge. With scant resources, terrorist bombings become a sensible strategy. With no 'rage container', war gets personalised and a political culture of martyrdom emerges (as much as this is being promoted by Palestinian organisations as a 'good' thing to do, swathes of the population are receptive to it and convinced by it).

Both sides have to meet each other half way.

Don Radlauer

Clinton's Cat said:

Thats just plain rascist.

No, no, some of my best friends are horses!


-Don Radlauer

P.S. Sorry sorry sorry.

Clintons Cat

don,before you give out lectures on terrorism perhaps you should look up the definition of Racist,

Either that or stop looking up your jokes in the Bernard Manning Book Of Humour.

Dr_Teeth

Get a sense of humour please Clinton. kthx

Teeth.

Don Radlauer

Clinton, I deliberately didn't respond "straight" to your initial complaint, because it was, IMO, not worthy of a "straight" response. I still don't think it is. Further, I'm unaware of what "race" I'm supposed to have transgressed against. Considering that I can quote an example of quintessential Britishness no less distinguished than the late Princess Royal, who was on record as preferring horses to people, I'd say I'm within bounds here.

If I've offended anyone, of course I apologize - such was not my intent. But if you're simply looking for things to find offensive in order to make me out to be some form of racist monster, then I'm not interested in playing along.

Who's Bernard Manning? The name's vaguely familiar, but I don't think he was on my "watch list" when I lived in Blighty.


-Don Radlauer

Biffa Bacon

Don, I really don’t know how you manage to respond politely to ignorant crap like this: “At one point both sides have to stop seeing each other as the enemy. That is only going to happen when one side goes totally out on a limb and ends the violence regardless of the reprocussions.”

If Israel wants to start winning the propaganda war it needs to stop participating in the charade of the peace process, because it only gives support to the notion that both sides need to compromise for peace to come about. What really needs to happen is for the aggressor, i.e. Arafat, Hamas etc. to unilaterally end its campaign of violence against the victim, Israel. Israeli leaders need to start spelling out much more forcibly the truth about the Middle East conflict, i.e. that the root cause of the violence is not the “occupation” of the West Bank and Gaza, but rather the Palestinians’ refusal to accept the legitimacy of the state of Israel. The world must be confronted with the truth that no compromise is possible with Palestinian Islamofascism and that Israel has no choice but to defend herself.

Sparks

Don, I really don’t know how you manage to respond politely to ignorant crap like this

Biffa,
Most posters here live in a country that has proven over the last thirty years that, unpleasant and ideologically distasteful as it is, the only way to solve such problems is through peaceful resolution and comprimise.

Unless, of course, you would care to advocate total elimination of the other side.

Hobbes

Originally posted by Don Radlauer
If I've offended anyone, of course I apologize - such was not my intent.

It's a tribal thing. The only person who could tell a Jewish joke and make it funny (rather then racist, or whatever ist) is a Jewish person. Likewise with English/Irish/etc.

Who's Bernard Manning? The name's vaguely familiar, but I don't think he was on my "watch list" when I lived in Blighty.

Very offensive British comedian. Actually famous for his racist Jewish jokes (He is Jewish) and mother-in-law jokes as far as I recall.

IMHO not that funny.

Just passing through on the thread for the moment.

Biffa said some stuff

Your starting to get slightly trollish Biffa.

bonkey

Originally posted by Don Radlauer
In other words, you, the European liberal (I assume you're more-or-less liberal) are accusing the Palestinians of stupidity and/or irrationality.

No, I'm accusing the Palestinians of having behavioural patterns which are close reflections of every other society I can think of which has been in any comparable situation.

These kids have been brought up on a steady diet of martyr-worship; they get it in their school textbooks, from their religious and secular teachers, on the radio, on the TV. They actually collect "martyr" medallions, with pictures of famous "martyrs" on them. These are their greatest heroes.

OK - but you go on in later posts to clarify that clearly you are not painting all Palestinian kids as terrorists-in-training etc. Now why do some of them succumb to this propaganda that they are being fed to hate the Israeli and so stupid things and others not???

After all - they all get fed the same value system. They all grow up in the same manner.

But anyway.....thats just a side issue.

And, perhaps most sadly of all, the kids who are most likely to go out and get themselves killed are precisely the good ones, the ones who want to win the approval of their parents, peers, and teachers.

So you are suggesting that the kid throwing the rock at a tank is actually saying "kill me, please" ??? That, in actual fact, this group of Palestinian non-combatant deaths are carefully orchestrated suicides where they have done everything they can to get the "evil Zionist" to off them while still not doing anything to lose their non-combatant status???

Because unless they're actively trying to get killed by throwing those rocks, then the argument doesnt hold - they cant be trying to further their leader's propaganda unless they're actually trying to get killed.

Even if they are actively trying to get killed, it also has to be more than just a "its good to die for Palestine" belief, because this still fails to explain why they are trying to get killed while engaging in actions so futile against the perceived enemy that they might as well not bother.

If you want to die, why throw rocks at soldiers when you can get your hands on an assault rifle and let off a few rounds? Makes it even more likely you'll get killed too. OR you could use a bomb.

But such actions would lessen the sympathy....they wouldnt be "innocent" non-combatants any more.

So, the only possible conclusion is that these people are actually being told "its important that you die, but you must die in a manner which doesnt class you as a combatant....so no, you can't have a bomb...here's a nice rock and there's a big tank".

Now, let me refer you back to an earlier quote :

This hypothesis seems to account for a good deal of Palestinian behavior over the course of this conflict without bringing in any mystical, unobserved causative factors

But there are unobserved causative factors inherent in your explanation. While you have stated that there is no shortage of evidence that there have been attempts to encourage youth to go out and get themselves killed, there is nothing explaining why so many of them choose to do it in a manner which is sufficient to ensure that they remain as non-combatants.

If they hate the Israeli's so much, and are willing to die...then why are they throwing rocks at tanks instead of firing bullets and exploding bombs????

Or - more accurately, why are some of them using the real weapons and some of them throwing stones and making faces? This requires an unobserved causative factor - an organisational structure that is far larger than any the Palestinians have been credited with that I am aware of.

In order to have any real understanding of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, you need to accept, at a "gut" level, that you're not dealing with a bunch of dark-skinned Irishmen who happen to be behaving strangely.

Don - no offence - but I am the one arguing that they are behaving in a manner consistent with what has been observed in many, many conflicts which can be considered "occupational" (rightly or wrongly) in nature.

I'm not saying that they are acting strangely at all. I am saying that they are acting exactly how I would expect them to act.

You are the one arguing that their behaviour is "strange" unless we put it in the context of this Palestinian-wide conspiracy that builds its youth into martyrs which it then decides how they will die...combatant or non-combatant....and sends them off to win a propaganda war.

But here's one last one. Lets say you're right. Lets say that these people are indeed attempting to get killed as non-combatants for the sympathy factor.

This does not in any way excuse their deaths.

If anything, it makes Israel more culpable for their deaths, because you are saying that these people w2alk into a situation wanting to die but not willing to initiate combat in order to do so.....and the Israeli's oblige.

So, if I'm arguing that the Palestinians are stupid, are you arguing the opposite - that it is in fact your own people who are the idiots here?

jc



You need to accept that (A) the Palestinian "leadership" (or at least Arafat and his allies) is nothing whatsoever like the leadership of Ireland, Israel, or other Western countries; and (B) ordinary Palestinians behave in a rational, goal-seeking manner, just like people anywhere else. Forget this "global village" crap; resurrect the concept of foreignness, and realize that Israel and - to a much greater extent - Palestine are foreign countries.

As long as you view the Palestinians (or the Israelis, for that matter) as "defective Irishmen", you'll never understand what's going on here. You'll never understand why peacemaking here is so damned difficult, because you'll write off behavior driven by the most fundamental values and beliefs as "irrationality". [/B][/QUOTE]

bonkey

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
Don, I really don’t know how you manage to respond politely to ignorant crap like this:

Pity you can't seem to learn politeness by inspiration from him though.

I've tried hints and requests, and that didnt work.

Tell you what....lets try a one-week ban and see how that goes.

jc

Hobbes

What I said was that they've been carefully groomed as weapons against Israel;

Which is pretty much the same thing. You know for a fact that every single child is like this?

Even if they are being groomed. It's a lot harder to groom someone if they aren't given evidence to the fact. I thought I pointed that out in that England tended to be a bit more civil to Irish people except when something was happening.

Even now, the majority of Irish are apathetic to northern Ireland. Probably because they don't have to live through it. So saying the British are the enemy to say a child in Dublin is going to have a lot less effect then say someone living in Northern Ireland in a trouble spot.

When you apply a negative stereotype to a person you automatically build up a wall against them.

There are Loyalists and Republicans who would quite happly sit back and watch the other bleed to death (and these are people with normal day to day lives). Does this mean I treat everyone who is replican or loyalist with this assumption? No. I treat them like normal people. Odd as it may seem they are a lot alike with each other.

seems to see Israel as the party that can "go totally out on a limb and end the violence regardless of the repercussions." This only sounds easy!

I believe I said one side, I didn't pick one. It may be that Israel may be in a better position to do this while maintaining damage control.

For example cease fire within Palistine areas while using that extra man power to beef up Israel security for any possible attacks.

I never said it would be easy. Far from it, but until one side shows an open hand instead of one with a gun in it neither side is going to get anywhere.

Originally posted by Hobbes
Which is pretty much the same thing. You know for a fact that every single child is like this?

Even if they are being groomed. It's a lot harder to groom someone if they aren't given evidence to the fact. I thought I pointed that out in that England tended to be a bit more civil to Irish people except when something was happening.

It's the exact same grooming that goes on in NI, I would think, the kind of grooming that gets kids out on the street on occasion still, to throw petrol bombs or rocks at the police and other peoples houses.
To say that every one is involved/affected would be wrong, but a large amount of people are.
It's a crazy fact of human life.
Anyone , living well away from those influences and the society that breeds them can count themselves so lucky.
mm

Don Radlauer

Bonkey wrote:

I'm accusing the Palestinians of having behavioural patterns which are close reflections of every other society I can think of which has been in any comparable situation.

Find me an example of suicidal behavior on a scale to match that of the Palestinians.

You go on in later posts to clarify that clearly you are not painting all Palestinian kids as terrorists-in-training etc. Now why do some of them succumb to this propaganda that they are being fed to hate the Israeli and so stupid things and others not???

After all - they all get fed the same value system. They all grow up in the same manner.

Nothing strange here. Think of it as a bell curve. Indoctrination serves to move the center of the curve, but it would be surprising if the center could be moved all the way to the "self-destruct" setting. Some kids respond more thoroughly than others - exactly as we'd expect.

Don't forget, also, that there are lots more kids doing dangerous stuff who *don't* get killed; the ones who are killed are only a tiny percentage (a small fraction of one percent, I'd say) of those who engage in confrontations with Israeli troops.

So you are suggesting that the kid throwing the rock at a tank is actually saying "kill me, please" ??? That, in actual fact, this group of Palestinian non-combatant deaths are carefully orchestrated suicides where they have done everything they can to get the "evil Zionist" to off them while still not doing anything to lose their non-combatant status???

Yes. And the commercials and other indoctrination being fed to these kids, as well as frequent speeches by Yasser Arafat, promote *exactly* this kind of behavior.

Even if they are actively trying to get killed, it also has to be more than just a "its good to die for Palestine" belief, because this still fails to explain why they are trying to get killed while engaging in actions so futile against the perceived enemy that they might as well not bother.

If you want to die, why throw rocks at soldiers when you can get your hands on an assault rifle and let off a few rounds? Makes it even more likely you'll get killed too. OR you could use a bomb.

But such actions would lessen the sympathy....they wouldnt be "innocent" non-combatants any more.

So, the only possible conclusion is that these people are actually being told "its important that you die, but you must die in a manner which doesnt class you as a combatant....so no, you can't have a bomb...here's a nice rock and there's a big tank".

Ahhh so... You are beginning to understand, Little Grasshopper. (Sorry for obscure reference to Bronze Age American TV series.)

If they hate the Israeli's so much, and are willing to die...then why are they throwing rocks at tanks instead of firing bullets and exploding bombs????

Or - more accurately, why are some of them using the real weapons and some of them throwing stones and making faces? This requires an unobserved causative factor - an organisational structure that is far larger than any the Palestinians have been credited with that I am aware of.

In almost all cases, young kids are not given "real" weapons like Kalashnikovs. This makes a certain amount of sense, after all - a Kalash is a fully-automatic 7.62mm assault rifle. Using a weapon like that without causing excessive damage to your own side isn't exactly easy, especially when you're little. (7.62mm ammunition kicks like a mule, for those of you not familiar with the stuff.) Besides which, the Palestinians are far too media-savvy to get caught giving Kalashnikovs to 12-year-olds.

It has been documented that Palestinian kids are being paid to throw Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs. Given the level of poverty many of these kids are living at, combined with the eagerness for "martyrdom" that they've been fed upon, it must be very hard for them to turn down the money.

As far as organizational structure goes, you don't really need all that much beyond what's well known and documented. All the "factions" among the Palestinians have local branches with local "counselors"; this is especially true of Hamas and Fatah/Tanzim. (Jihad Islami is smaller, as are groups like the PFLP.) There's plenty of local organizational infrastructure to pull this off.

Don - no offence - but I am the one arguing that they are behaving in a manner consistent with what has been observed in many, many conflicts which can be considered "occupational" (rightly or wrongly) in nature.

I'm not saying that they are acting strangely at all. I am saying that they are acting exactly how I would expect them to act.

You are the one arguing that their behaviour is "strange" unless we put it in the context of this Palestinian-wide conspiracy that builds its youth into martyrs which it then decides how they will die...combatant or non-combatant....and sends them off to win a propaganda war.

Again, I challenge you to come up with examples of similar behavior from other conflicts - especially from conflicts outside the Arab world.

And keep in mind the scale of things here: A "Palestinian-wide conspiracy" doesn't actually have to be very big! We're not talking about Europe or the United States here, but about the Gaza Strip and a few not-very-big cities in the West Bank. It's no biggie.

But here's one last one. Lets say you're right. Lets say that these people are indeed attempting to get killed as non-combatants for the sympathy factor.

This does not in any way excuse their deaths.

If anything, it makes Israel more culpable for their deaths, because you are saying that these people walk into a situation wanting to die but not willing to initiate combat in order to do so.....and the Israeli's oblige.

So, if I'm arguing that the Palestinians are stupid, are you arguing the opposite - that it is in fact your own people who are the idiots here?

BING-O!

OK - it's not always 100% as simple as you've put it. Sometimes the Palestinians place kids (with or without rocks) in front of adults with "real" weapons. And not all of us are idiots! But, in general, I think you're describing it rather accurately. (And I think I've already said much the same thing in previous posts.)

As I know I've said before, part of what I'd like to accomplish with this study is to get my own government and the IDF more aware of the real dynamics of the conflict. It's an uphill struggle! There's a classic Israeli mentality of "What's important is what we do, not what the rest of the world thinks." There's also a tendency among Sabras (native Israelis) to avoid reading stuff in languages other than Hebrew, which means that foreign news media (as well as my own humble efforts) get short shrift. So wish me good luck.

DadaKopf

Find me an example of suicidal behavior on a scale to match that of the Palestinians.

The Tamil Tigers.

Hobbes

Originally posted by Don Radlauer
It has been documented that Palestinian kids are being paid to throw Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs. Given the level of poverty many of these kids are living at, combined with the eagerness for "martyrdom" that they've been fed upon, it must be very hard for them to turn down the money.

So if they weren't living in poverty do you think they would be less inclined to take that money if it meant death?

Sparks

Originally posted by DadaKopf
The Tamil Tigers.

Hell why go that far?
Kids throwing rocks at saracens in belfast.

Clintons Cat

Originally posted by Don Radlauer
Clinton, I deliberately didn't respond "straight" to your initial complaint, because it was, IMO, not worthy of a "straight" response. I still don't think it is. Further, I'm unaware of what "race" I'm supposed to have transgressed against. Considering that I can quote an example of quintessential Britishness no less distinguished than the late Princess Royal, who was on record as preferring horses to people, I'd say I'm within bounds here.

If I've offended anyone, of course I apologize - such was not my intent. But if you're simply looking for things to find offensive in order to make me out to be some form of racist monster, then I'm not interested in playing along.

Who's Bernard Manning? The name's vaguely familiar, but I don't think he was on my "watch list" when I lived in Blighty.


-Don Radlauer

Don,>
if you cant see what is Rascist or for that matter Offensive about making jokes about the British Valuing the lives of horses over the lives of people then i really dont see any point in explaining it to you.

Needless to say i found it offensive and in poor taste given the seriousness of the topic being discussed.

You can pull some bull**** about the British not being a "proper race" if you like its beside the point.As is trying to hold up the comments of a minor royal on a subject unrelated to both the Hyde Park Bombing and Terrorism in general as "proof" of some quintessential British characteristic to back your claim.

However Your Appology is Accepted,you have my assurance that i have no intrest in painting you as some kind of Racist monster.Personally i find most of your comments interesting and worthy of debate.

Bernard manning is a Northern comedian who is known for making Racist /Racially devisive jokes mostly about Blacks,Pakistanis,Jews and to a lesser extent Catholics though unsurpisingly not against his target audience (wasps).


Dr Teeth>
Got one thnx bye

Cork

Find me an example of suicidal behavior on a scale to match that of the Palestinians.

In a country that witnessed the sheer horror of Omagh - suicidal bombers intent in causing death to civialians has turned me off the Palastenian issue.

It has been documented that Palestinian kids are being paid to throw Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs.

Violence on all sides is futile. I think that the sooner they sit down with each other the better.

The Palastenians & Israellis need to compromise. Peace processes do come under pressure - but the Palastenians & Israelis need to make a choice to end conflict and live with muutual repect for each other.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Clintons Cat
if you cant see what is Rascist or for that matter Offensive about making jokes about the British Valuing the lives of horses over the lives of people then i really dont see any point in explaining it to you.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not shown recently that the British spend more, pro capita, on their pets than on their children?

Clintons Cat

Well that sounds like conclusive proof to me,some dodgy press release put out by a childrens charidie on a quiet news day.

Pro Capita meaning per head of Population yes~?

Aging population~Decreasing Birthrate~Smaller nuclear families means it is plausible though unlikely when other factors like housing,medical and Education and other hidden costs of child care are factored into the equation.

Anyway whats that got to do with the value of human life?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Clintons Cat
Well that sounds like conclusive proof to me,some dodgy press release put out by a childrens charidie on a quiet news day.

Never said it was conclusive proof, however, from a non-Anglo-Saxon point of view, I have noticed that the British, amongst other (predominantly English speaking) nations do appear to place an unusual level of devotion twoard animals that they do not twoards their fellow man.

Clintons Cat

This sounds pretty dubious to me,for example,i doubt there are statistically speaking significantly more vegitarians in Britain than in any other Western European State,and significantly less than in mainly Hindu or Buddist societies in the east.

The conditions in our abetoirs are determined by regulations laid down in brussels,with europe wide consensus, were way stricter than traditional british slaughter methods.

Furthermore the RSPCA,the RSPCB and local authority agencies and charities,pet shelters and Sanctuaries would dispell the myth of Britain being some Orwellian Animal Utopia.As would the 2.7 million Vivisection experiments carried in the UK per vear hardly the actions of a nation of foxy woxy loving tree hugging xenocidal hippy psycopaths....or is it...?


By the way how do you quantify "placing an unusual level of devotion twoard animals that they do not twoards their fellow man."?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Clintons Cat
By the way how do you quantify "placing an unusual level of devotion twoard animals that they do not twoards their fellow man."?

I don't. It was a personal observation and a subjective one at that, but you will have to admit that groups such as the ALF are generally more commonplace in English speaking countries.

Anyway, t’was an aside. Off-topic.

Don Radlauer

DadaKopf wrote:

quote:

---

Find me an example of suicidal behavior on a scale to match that of the Palestinians.

---

The Tamil Tigers.

Nope. I wasn't talking about suicide bombings (of which the LTTE have, indeed, performed many), but rather of "suicide propaganda" - that is, a deliberate policy (or the effect of a deliberate policy, were there one) of getting people on one's own side killed without causing material harm to the other side.

Keep trying.

Don Radlauer

Hobbes wrote:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Don Radlauer
It has been documented that Palestinian kids are being paid to throw Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs. Given the level of poverty many of these kids are living at, combined with the eagerness for "martyrdom" that they've been fed upon, it must be very hard for them to turn down the money.

---

So if they weren't living in poverty do you think they would be less inclined to take that money if it meant death?

Less inclined, perhaps - but I can't say exactly how wealthy they'd have to be made. I think to really solve the problem of "martyrdom-seeking" behavior among young Palestinians would take a concerted effort at deprogramming.

Keep in mind that at the beginning of the "Intifada", when a large proportion of the "suicide propaganda" deaths took place, Palestinians were economically much better off than they are today; in fact, their economic situation at that time compared pretty well with other Arab populations in the Middle East.

dathi1

Less inclined, perhaps - but I can't say exactly how wealthy they'd have to be made. I think to really solve the problem of "martyrdom-seeking" behavior among young Palestinians would take a concerted effort at deprogramming.

Perhaps some settler occupation / stealing land deprogramming might alleviate them somewhat from this illness?

Don Radlauer

Dathi1 wrote:

Perhaps some settler occupation / stealing land deprogramming might alleviate them somewhat from this illness?

This does not really deserve a serious response, but I lack the skill of letting such remarks go unchallenged.

I'd refer you to my previous post on the topic of the legality of Israeli settlements. The accusation that land has been "stolen" from the Palestinians is, at best, unsupported by any evidence. It is true that some settlements (and the roads leading to them) have been built on "public" land - that is, on land to which no clear private title obtains. There are also some cases where title is dubious - land that has been designated as "abandoned" by its previous owners, for example. But no settlement in the "occupied" territories has displaced any Palestinian village or town; all the "lost" Palestinian towns and villages actually lie within "Israel Proper".

(Parenthetically, there is also plenty of Jewish-owned land that has been "stolen" by the Palestinians and other Arabs. The Jewish Agency holds legal title to many plots of land in what is now Jordan. Jews were forced to leave most Arab states after 1948, and received no compensation for lands and businesses that were looted from them. And Jews own parcels of land in what are now Palestinian towns; the family of one of our ICT secretaries owns part of what is now downtown Kalkilia. Nobody in Israel seriously believes that the owners of these properties will ever be allowed to benefit from their ownership, or be compensated for the effective theft of these lands.)


All this aside, the entire premise of your question is invalid; it demonstrates what happens when people read newspapers and think they're studying history. Any time someone blames "Israeli occupation" for Palestinian terrorism and other forms of "active discontent", you should remember that such behavior on the part of Palestinian Arabs preceded the 1967 war that created "the occupation" you decry. What was the excuse then? Arab terror against Israel existed before 1967, and even before 1948. One could even make a case that some of the Arab rioting against the British Mandatory Government had a "suicide propaganda" aspect; although such a strategy doesn't really work without modern news-media to propagate the messages of victimization.

Yes, "the occupation" - in the form of Israeli measures that interfere with the lives of ordinary Palestinians - does provide some of the impetus and excuse for Palestinian behavior. But I maintain that if the Palestinian leadership had really wanted to end "the occupation", they have had ample opportunity to do so. The problem, I believe, is that this leadership defines "the occupation" not as Israel's administration of the lands captured in the 1967 war, but as Israel's existence, period.

To the extent that "the occupation" is really a code-word for Israel's existence, then there is no point in using it as an excuse for terrorism and the wasting of a generation of Palestinian youth. Israel's existence has been validated by the international community, and if the Palestinian Arabs can't make their peace with that, it's their problem. Further, I don't really see any a priori reason why the Palestinians should be entitled to a Judenrein state; Jewish communities existed in Hebron and other nowadays-Palestinian-Arab towns continually since Biblical times, and were never considered "occupation" until very recently.

Sparks

Don,
In that post you managed to both condemn those that hold the opinion that Israeli settlements are in violation of Oslo, and put forward the opinion that Israeli lands have been illegally occupied by arabic states including Palestine.

I fail to see how you cannot understand the viewpoint of those on the other side of the argument, when past Israeli leaders have:

"If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" -- David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister) Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.