Israel Maps Out Security Fence

[dArKeR]

Israel published a detailed map Friday of its planned security barrier, which would encircle tens of thousands of Palestinians, cutting them off from the West Bank, and would keep about 80 percent of Jewish settlers on the Israeli side of the fence.

The snaking path of the fence, which slopes from flat land up into mountains, cuts deep into the West Bank, surrounding much of it from the north, west and south, and will likely enflame already fierce international opposition.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said the military also was planning a final section of the barrier in the eastern area of the West Bank and would soon present it to the Cabinet. That section, which would cut Palestinians off from the Jordan Valley, would likely pass a few miles from the Jordan River, he said in an interview broadcast Friday on Israel's Channel Two.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/21/world/main579327.shtml

I never thought I'd come to this. Israel is joining my boycott list. I'm selling my stock in:
Elbit Medical Imaging Ltd (EMITF) and Elbit Systems Ltd (ESLT)

[LibertyorDeath]

1. This should solve everything no more worries

[RowWellandLive]

3. If I had a neighbor

hell bent on destroying me I'd put a fence up too. Maybe they would penetrate it but it's better then nothing. It's a sad, pathetic situation with no good alternatives for the Israelis. Self preservation tactics are entirely understandable.

Edited because I can't spell!!

[Violet_Crumble]

4. So you'd build that fence deep in yr neighbours yard?

After all, that's what Israel's doing to the Palestinians. And I strongly suspect that the Palestinian people no more want to destroy Israel than Israelis want to destroy the Palestinian territories. Sure, there's extremists within both populations that do want that, but not the entire populations...

If the government of Israel was truly interested in self preservation tactics, it'd promptly remove its settlements from the West Bank and build the wall along the Green Line....

Violet...

[bluesoul]

5. Very true

Amen Violet! ;-)

[drdon326]

6. Some neighbor....

sending mindless bomb-strapped pit bulls to kill as many
of your family as possible....yeah i'd build a fence anywhere
i damn well please to protect my family.

"And I strongly suspect that the Palestinian people no more want to destroy Israel than Israelis want to destroy the Palestinian territories."

wow...you REALLY believe that??....especially in light of the 75%
pal.population support of terrorist bombings??

And the 60% support of contining the "armed struggle" (read terrorism) even after the
palestinians get their own state??


you know whats interesting...

Terrorism's greatest achievement is convincing people that it really
doesnt exist.

[bluesoul]

7. Well

How many Israelis support Sharon and his policies? Vice versa effect...

[drdon326]

9. Bluesoul......

you seem to be a smart person.....

why do you think israel voted in Sharon??

[bluesoul]

11. Vice versa again

Why do you think Arafat is so popular (or becomes popular) or why many Palestinians support even suicide bombers? Being a smart person as well I am sure you can figure it out. It might have something to do with Israel and it's policy and actions.. The cycle goes on and on DrDron..

[Darranar]

13. Israel voted in Sharon...

because of the suicide bombings.

The suicide bombings are happening because of the horrible situation of the Palestinians, which is partially caused by Sharon with his tactics, his wall, and his refusal to make peace.

Both sides shoud be blamed for what they do regardless; they have had many chances to stop, and they have not. Just because the causing of suffering was provoked does not mean that it was moral.

Atrocities don't excuse atrocities, but atrocities can incite atrocities. And that is what is occuring.

In this particular case, a cycle exists. A right-wing Likudist will never stop the oppression of the Palestinians; hence, the suicide bombings will continue, and the right-wing Likudist will remain in office. And on and on it will go.

Yet some see only one side of the cycle; "the settlements/incursions/assasinations only happen because of Palestinian terrorism" or "the suicide bombings only happen because of Israel's settlements/incursions/assasinations" and forget the other side of the cycle, which is proposed by the other side of the debate.

Because the other side's atrocities are used to excuse one side's atrocities, the conflict continues. If one side were to stop, the conflict would end.

[HawkerHurricane]

20. Nailed it, Darranar.

"Avenge the atrocity they committed, and never mind the one we did before that" - Terry Pratchet, 'Thief of Time'.

[Violet_Crumble]

10. And the same can be said for Israel...

Some neighbour, invading a neigbours land and occupying it for decades while it builds what it wants all over the neigbours land and moves its people in....

You haven't yet given any sort of constructive argument as to why the path of the fence has anything to do with security. I take it you think it might have to do with security because you support the settlements staying where they are and think Israel is obligated to protect them, no matter what the cost is to the Palestinian people?

As for polls that say a majority of Palestinians support suicide bombings (and is 75% from a reputable poll?), that doesn't say that they want to destroy Israel....

And as for the shonky poll result you brought up about the 60%, I suggest you go back to that thread and read what the Magistrate had to say about the credibility of that particular pollster. While the 'result' works well for those who wish to demonise the Palestinian population and who really have no desire to see peace in the region, it's a bit hard to keep it going when the facts about the pollster have been pointed out to you...

And no offense don, but having seen you refer to attacks on Israeli troops as terrorist acts, I think you'd be wise to brush up on what the term actually means and think about what path you've travelled down if you believe that attacks on occupying military forces is terrorism and not legitimate resistance. Does that mean you believe that the King David Hotel bombing was terrorism as well? Or are there different rules that only apply to Israeli troops?

Violet...

[drdon326]

15. Ok.....

if you find attacking IDF within the bounds of war,

dont bitch too much when israel goes after these terrorist

punks which can lead to unintended deaths.

you cant have it both ways.

[Violet_Crumble]

16. You didn't answer the question...

If you think attacking Israeli troops is an act of terrorism, do you also think that the King David Hotel bombing was also terrorism? If you don't think it was, I'd like to hear yr reasons why you don't think it was...

It's not a matter of me finding anything a certain way. It's a hard, cold fact that attacks on a military force occupying territory that doesn't belong to it is legitimate resistance and not terrorism....

The problem I have with the retaliations carried out by the IDF is that more often than not it involves the indiscriminate killing of civilians. You call them 'unintended deaths'? Using one example, how is dropping a bomb on an apartment building in the middle of the night to try to get one person and resulting in the deaths of civilians including babies 'unintended'? The IDF thinks that people don't actually live and sleep in their homes and they shouldn't have been there in the first place?

I have no problems with Israel using legitimate means to apprehend those who carry out attacks on Israeli civilians. So you might want to rethink that 'can't have it both ways' because what you claim I think isn't the case at all...

Violet...

[drdon326]

17. Uggggh

King david.....we discussed this ad nauseum.....
different time and place.

I spoke out against that one attack.....but i know its
hard for you to give up that one incident as your proof of the
mean ol'idf.

[Violet_Crumble]

18. Different time and place?

So what difference does that make? That only attacks on IDF troops is the right time and place for legitimate acts of resistance to be termed as terrorism?

That one attack isn't the only time indiscriminate killings of civilians have happened. Children out riding their bikes and playing have been killed, and there's many examples that have been posted many times before here....

Violet...

[Violet_Crumble]

25. Yoo hoo! Don!

I'd still like to know what difference the excuse of 'different time and place' makes when it comes to whether attacks on occupying military powers are terrorism or acts of legitimate resistance....

Violet...

[HawkerHurricane]

2. Now that...

Isreal (France) has completed the border fence (Maginot Line), they will have no more fears of the Palastinians (Germans).

Also: For sale by owner, cheap: one bridge, connects Brooklyn with Manhattan, solid construction, historical value, provides steady income through tolls. PM HawkerHurricane for details.

[Muddleoftheroad]

12. A couple points

No one expects that the fence/wall will be perfect, but it has to be better than this.

The reasons the Maginot Line didn't work were two-fold:

* It was completed, enabling the Germans to do an end-around move.
* It was a shell with very few guns and soldiers inside.

Conceptually it still could have worked heavily slowing a German and advance and keeping France in the war.

[Darranar]

14. I agree, Muddle...

the Maginot line failed because it was made for a war which was obsolete. The effectiveness and speed of German Panzers was not planned for, and neither was the strike through the forest (whose name escapes me.)

The wall is another story entirely; however, the fact that it will be somewhat effective does not make its position okay.

[HawkerHurricane]

19. Actually, the Maginot line worked as planned!

It was intended to force the Germans to attack through Belgium, thereby guarenteeing(sp) Belgian support and probably British, which would even out the manpower between the sides (Germany had a larger population than France).

UNFORTUNATELY, the German's used superior strategy to outmanuever the poor French (and British)...

"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the folly of man" - George Patton, looking over the Siegfried Line.

[Muddleoftheroad]

21. If you are defending an entire continent

Then Patton would be right. Defending a very tiny nation, fixed fortifications work just fine.

[HawkerHurricane]

22. Whelp,

the fixed fortifications in Belgium and Luxembourg didn't help at all.

They did help in Norway, sinking a heavy cruiser, but didn't stop the invasion.

All fortifications do is make the problem (how do we get at the other guy) more diffucult, not impossible. Mobile defenses and defense in depth work better against armies; investing in police would probably work better in Isreal.

[Muddleoftheroad]

23. They are not trying to stop an army

Just trying to stop some determined lunatics. Again, a different problem altogether.

[Darranar]

24. That makes his point even more accurate...

not less.

[Darranar]

8. Don't boycott Israel...

you'll end up hurting the "good" Israelis along with the "bad."

Israel's economy is in horrible shape. That hasn't hurt Likud. Making it in even worse shape STILL won't hurt Likud, IMO.

When an economy is bad, everyone suffers - Labor voters and Likud voters, Meretz Party activists and Moledet Party activists.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Are you opposed to all boycotts?

I'm thinking of things like sporting boycotts and other cultural type things that don't hurt the general population. I don't think they're particularly effective apart from making a symbolic protest, but I do feel pretty yuck when I hear of our cricket team playing teams like Zimbwabwe...


Violet...

[Darranar]

27. ALL?

No.

I'm simply against boycotting countries, states, etc.

I'm all for boycotting powerful corporations.