EU is shamefully ignoring number one Israeli concern: Security

Truth2016

Found this article & thought it was really good. What do you think ?

EU is shamefully ignoring number one Israeli concern: Security

So most Europeans will have undoubtedly missed that in Jerusalem, also this morning, two 80 year old women were stabbed in the back whilst out for a morning stroll by Palestinian assailants who fled the scene and went back to East Jerusalem.

Two 80 year old women. Probably grandmothers. About as much threat to anyone as a feather duster.

Shlomi Tedegi, a medic, described the scene of the attack: “In an area adjacent to the promenade we saw two approximately 80-year-old elderly women lying in the dirt. They were fully conscious and suffering from stab wounds, one in the extremities and her upper body and the second in her upper body.”

Meanwhile in Gaza, the Israeli defence forces keep uncovering fresh terror tunnels, and large amounts of chemicals used to propel rockets.

Starting tonight, Israel marks Yom HaZikaron, the remembrance day for all the soldiers who have fallen in defence of the country, from 1948, 1967, 1973, two Lebanon wars and all the attacks and skirmishes in between, as well as remembering the 23,447 Israeli citizens murdered to date by terrorists. It is rare to meet a single Israeli whose family circle or whose friends haven’t been touched someway by terrorism, or a loss of a loved one on active duty. This remembrance day is not harking back to a bygone age, it reflects every day reality and the price that Israel pays for simply existing. The numbers go up every year.

The number one overarching concern for Israeli citizens, wherever they are, is security. They want the freedom that most of us enjoy in Europe, despite the recent terror attacks: to live a life without concern that you may be stabbed, blown up on a bus, your house hit by a rocket or just randomly targeted to be shot whether you are a boy, girl, man, woman, pensioner, whatever.

Events in Munich, and the threat of Munich – and much worse besides — is the daily reality for Israeli citizens.

And sadly, shamefully, it is being massively overlooked by the EU. Who prefer to hold debates about settlements, and later today in Strasbourg about demolitions of illegal Palestinian buildings in Area C.

Tonight’s debate in the European Parliament, where EEAS Chief Federica Mogherini will speak too, is symptomatic of this myopia and, to be brutally honest, total lack of regard for Israeli security.

There is a simple and perhaps inconvenient truth that the EU must digest: The Palestinian population is currently completely unprepared for peace. They are fed from birth with a steady and unrelenting diatribe of hatred for Jews and Israelis. They are incited to stab, murder and maim. Most cannot even countenance the existence of the State of Israel. As one Israeli academic and thinker once noted “Even if we were to move all of Israel into a small apartment in Tel Aviv, it would be too much for them”.

Taking all of the above into consideration and in the absence of any concerted EU effort to tackle this ongoing and daily incitement, this raw and unbridled hatred that saw two stabbed 80 year olds lying in the dirt; we would respectfully ask any European citizen if they would want unchecked and illegal construction of homes by people who seek their and their family’s destruction within rocket reach of their own homes, cities, villages or hamlets?

We think the answer would be a resounding no.

So why must it be imposed on Israeli citizens? Something for all of us to think about as MEPs and Mrs Mogherini gather this evening to discuss demolitions of illegal buildings that they support through EU taxpayer funded programmes.

3rdDegree

Perhaps my view is naive and over simplistic, but I neither condone an attach on innocent 80 year olds or the illegal occupation of a country and the oppression of its people.

RustyNut

Truth2016 wrote: »

Number one Israeli concern: Security

Must be hard to secure all that stolen land all right.

IrishTrajan

RustyNut wrote: »

Must be hard to secure all that stolen land all right.

Especially so when the guys blowing up children on buses are also using women as human shields.

J Mysterio

On the story - terrible for the auld ones, savage crime.

On the message - the Israelis cant portray themselves as victims given their foreign policy, its that simple.

RustyNut

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Especially so when the guys blowing up children on buses are also using women as human shields.

And the guys who blow up children playing on the beach.......

ancapailldorcha

RustyNut wrote: »

Must be hard to secure all that stolen land all right.

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Especially so when the guys blowing up children on buses are also using women as human shields.

This is a forum for serious discussion. Please read the charter before posting again.

Truth2016

3rdDegree wrote: »

Perhaps my view is naive and over simplistic, but I neither condone an attach on innocent 80 year olds or the illegal occupation of a country and the oppression of its people.

The illegal occupation of a country ? Can I just ask, When was Palestine ever actually a country ?
The Arabs can't even pronounce that name properly as there isn't a P in the Arabic language, that is why it always sounds like they say "Balestine" .

The Arabs are doing a mighty fine job of oppressing themselves but that doesn't draw out the crowds out on the streets in Ireland. As the saying goes, No Jews, No News.

Truth2016

RustyNut wrote: »

Must be hard to secure all that stolen land all right.

This is the same land that the Arabs rejected for a state back in 1947 and have rejected ever since ? They have been offered the two state solution for 68 years and refused. The Arabs are more interested in denying Jews their right to self determination in Israel than building their own state.
We are constantly told "Oh if there was peace between Pals and Israelis, there would be peace in the Middle East" , Nonsense, the Arabs would fight with their shadow. They drove out 850,000 Jews after 1948 from across North Africa and the Middle East and now are driving out the Christians and Yazidis. The Turkish-Kurd conflict, Sunni-Shia conflict, the racism against black Arabs will all continue regardless of a peace solution in Israel.

Lockstep

Truth2016, please read the Forum Charter before posting. This isn't a news dumping site and if you're going to refer to an article, you need to source it. Copying and pasting without sourcing articles is not acceptable in this forum.

Truth2016

Lockstep wrote: »

Truth2016, please read the Forum Charter before posting. This isn't a news dumping site and if you're going to refer to an article, you need to source it. Copying and pasting without sourcing articles is not acceptable in this forum.

Yeah , I actually tried to post the link but kept on saying it wasn't possible.

Lockstep

Truth2016 wrote: »

Yeah , I actually tried to post the link but kept on saying it wasn't possible.

New users are prevented from posting links until they've reached a certain number of posts (50 I believe). This is to prevent spamming/shilling. The same rules apply here. By all means, post away in the meantime but you won't be able to post any links but the same rules apply to you: news dumping is prohibited.

Irish Praetorian

[I'm attempting to graduate from the Cafe to the Politics forum so mods do let me know if I'm meandering over any rules]

Do we actually have any real meaningful contribution to make to the Israel-Palestine conflict? I mean as far as I can see, we are dealing with an immensely convoluted ethnic-territorial struggle, and the limits of our intervention seem to be no more than condemning violence as bad and being broadly in favour of a Palestinian state (in some way shape or form). Yet I'm increasingly left wondering what exactly the breadth of our outrage at both sides has done for the conflict - Israel is not much safer than in previous decades and Palestine continues to be an occupied territory rather than a state. Meanwhile, the more 'active' prospects for intervention are pretty dire and we're left with a choice of supporting terrorist organizations, ignoring a bloody occupation, or trying to peacefully ethnically cleanse the region a la the BDS movement. Is there anything left for the international community to say or do about this conflict?

hatrickpatrick

Truth2016 wrote: »

And sadly, shamefully, it is being massively overlooked by the EU. Who prefer to hold debates about settlements, and later today in Strasbourg about demolitions of illegal Palestinian buildings in Area C.

This bit is the fallacy. Area C is Palestinian land, illegitimately occupied by Israel. Nothing they declare "illegal" in Area C is legitimately illegal, because no Israeli law, authority or institution has any legitimate jurisdiction in that area. End of.

hatrickpatrick

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

trying to peacefully ethnically cleanse the region a la the BDS movement

Have to take issue with this part - BDS does not have an issue with Israel itself, but with the occupation of territory beyond Israel's border.

Irish Praetorian

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Have to take issue with this part - BDS does not have an issue with Israel itself, but with the occupation of territory beyond Israel's border.

In and of itself that should not include ethnic cleansing, however the problem is that the occupied territories consist now of a large number of Jewish denizens - none of whom can realistically expect much succour in a Palestinian state. As such, a full return to the 67 borders would entail a significant removal of Jews (presently somewhere in the region of 700,000) from the area. This is particularly problematic in areas where the Jewish population is now a majority or plurality, as in the Golan Heights or East Jerusalem. As such, I'm somewhat sceptical of the potential for the BDS movement to achieve much, or indeed much good, in the region.

hatrickpatrick

The term "ethnic cleansing" implies a racially charged removal of legitimate residents from an area. The return of stolen property, as is the case with a withdrawal to the 1967 borders, is rather different - the settlers are an illegitimate occupying force, not mere innocent bystanders. They knew exactly what they were doing when they chose to settle in those regions, displacing those already living there. Personally I have absolutely no sympathy. The only sympathy I would have is for kids born into occupation who are not responsible for their parents' crimes, and I'd hope they would be given a right to full citizenship when the Palestinian state is created in those regions.

First Up

Truth2016 wrote: »

The illegal occupation of a country ? Can I just ask, When was Palestine ever actually a country ?

OK, how about the eviction of people from their homes?

Irish Praetorian

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The term "ethnic cleansing" implies a racially charged removal of legitimate residents from an area. The return of stolen property, as is the case with a withdrawal to the 1967 borders, is rather different - the settlers are an illegitimate occupying force, not mere innocent bystanders. They knew exactly what they were doing when they chose to settle in those regions, displacing those already living there. Personally I have absolutely no sympathy. The only sympathy I would have is for kids born into occupation who are not responsible for their parents' crimes, and I'd hope they would be given a right to full citizenship when the Palestinian state is created in those regions.

How is the forced removal of a group of people from an area simply by virtue of their religion not ethnic cleansing? People are generally quite quick to say that Israel should not exist in the Middle East, simply because it existed there 2000 odd years ago - fair enough. Does this not also apply to some extend for parts of the Palestinian territories that have been settled for what, fifty years now? Are we actually seriously proposing that the children, grand children and great-grand children of these people might be able to survive in a Palestinian state?

I would submit, if we are going to be serious about establishing a Palestinian state, we do have to make some concessions to Israeli needs here - proposing that they take back three quarters of a million people simply for a 'status quo antebellum' is not pragmatic - proposing that the most recent and most egregiously situated settlements be removed for a future Palestinian state is I would say, a better course.

hatrickpatrick

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

How is the forced removal of a group of people from an area simply by virtue of their religion not ethnic cleansing?

It has nothing to do with religion, it's about removing people who illegally moved into the regions after 1967, displacing the residents at gunpoint and building houses and infrastructure on land they had no sovereignty to build on. That's the issue. Religion is a deflectionary side-show.

[/quote]People are generally quite quick to say that Israel should not exist in the Middle East, simply because it existed there 2000 odd years ago - fair enough. Does this not also apply to some extend for parts of the Palestinian territories that have been settled for what, fifty years now? Are we actually seriously proposing that the children, grand children and great-grand children of these people might be able to survive in a Palestinian state?

I would submit, if we are going to be serious about establishing a Palestinian state, we do have to make some concessions to Israeli needs here - proposing that they take back three quarters of a million people simply for a 'status quo antebellum' is not pragmatic - proposing that the most recent and most egregiously situated settlements be removed for a future Palestinian state is I would say, a better course.[/QUOTE]

They don't have a legitimate right to a single square centimetre of land outside their 1967 border. Anything they currently occupy, they took by force from the people who were living there at the time. Their state itself was created with an incredible amount of international goodwill in 1948, but the international community has never accepted the expansion of that border in any way, shape or form. The region was crowded and volatile enough as it was without Israel suddenly declaring sovereignty over other people's lands and saying "if you don't like it, tough, we'll bomb the sh!t out of you if you resist our imposition of our laws and our government here".

What Israel did in 1967 would be akin to the government of Northern Ireland suddenly saying "by the way, we're taking the other three counties in Ulster as well as the entire province of Connaught as well, anyone living there now can get the f*ck out so we can build our own sh!te on those lands". How anyone can defend this is totally beyond me. Giving those lands back to the Palestinians who were displaced is not ethnic cleansing, it's undoing the ethnic cleansing which has been going on since '67.

Irish Praetorian

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It has nothing to do with religion, it's about removing people who illegally moved into the regions after 1967, displacing the residents at gunpoint and building houses and infrastructure on land they had no sovereignty to build on. That's the issue. Religion is a deflectionary side-show.

I'm not sure why you have illegally put in bold, clearly if the rule of law was more important in the region, we wouldn't have this conflict or indeed quite a few others. I'm not entirely certain that religion is mere deflection though; I do not believe for an instant that this conflict would have the same intensity or international appeal were it simply the case of one Arab population displacing another.

They don't have a legitimate right to a single square centimetre of land outside their 1967 border. Anything they currently occupy, they took by force from the people who were living there at the time. Their state itself was created with an incredible amount of international goodwill in 1948, but the international community has never accepted the expansion of that border in any way, shape or form. The region was crowded and volatile enough as it was without Israel suddenly declaring sovereignty over other people's lands and saying "if you don't like it, tough, we'll bomb the sh!t out of you if you resist our imposition of our laws and our government here".

Legitimate in what sense? Under the rules of the UN certainly not, yet that does not extricate us from the reality of the situation, which is to say that a return to the borders of 67 would mean orchestrating the greatest mass movement of Jews since the end of WW2, the removal root and stem of Jews who have been born, lived and died on that land which is not theirs and would mean all of the above on the unfounded assertion that a return to the 67 borders would put an end to the conflict.

What Israel did in 1967 would be akin to the government of Northern Ireland suddenly saying "by the way, we're taking the other three counties in Ulster as well as the entire province of Connaught as well, anyone living there now can get the f*ck out so we can build our own sh!te on those lands". How anyone can defend this is totally beyond me. Giving those lands back to the Palestinians who were displaced is not ethnic cleansing, it's undoing the ethnic cleansing which has been going on since '67.

We do not need to venture into the realm of imagination to find conflicts similar to the Israeli-Palestinian one. The Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus is a real life example of a country invading, turfing out all the locals (which incidentally is not what Israel has done either in Palestine or Israel proper) and then settling new people from the mainland. Are you aware of what the most recent UN peace plan for the region suggested? Everyone stays put, the displaced get money and the settler government gets recognized. Now if we are going to defer to UN precedent in condemning Israel's operation, why should we not refer to it's precedent in arranging peace deals?