Report: Israel issues ultimatum and will act if PA delays crackdown

[denverbill]

http://web.israelinsider.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=ArticlePage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Article%5El2651&enZone=Security&enVersion=0&

Army Radio reports this evening that Israel has informed the United States that the IDF will take military action in response to Tuesday's suicide bombing attack in Jerusalem if the Palestinian Authority does not act "within hours" against the Islamic Jihad and Hamas groups that claimed responsibility for the blast, in which 20 Israelis were killed and more than 130 people were injured.

Following the attack, Sharon froze all contacts with the Palestinians and the planned transfer of security responsibilities in Jericho and Kalkilya this week was cancelled. In addition, the IDF imposed a general closure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and took up positions to block off Palestinian towns. Palestinian workers were not allowed entry into Israel.

In the security talks it was decided not to deport Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat or take over Arafat's Mukata government compound in Ramallah, Israel Radio reported. Earlier, Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman called on the army to level the Mukata on all its inhabitants, and Internal Security Minister Tzachi Hanegbi warned that Arafat's "time had come." This week Mofaz told the cabinet that Arafat continues to give a "green light" to terror and works constantly to undermine the leadership of Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen).

<snip>
Great. Just, fuckin, great.

[QuietStorm]

1. Ah yes Mofaz

I would guess that according to him this is all on schedule.

[Resistance]

58. Exactly

The cycle of terror against each other continues, but, odd how it never strikes anyone that Israel is the one benefitting from it all (stealing the land). The violence works out great for the right-wing Zionist aggressors in Israel, doesn't it.

Too perfectly, in fact. Makes you wonder who is really pulling Hamas's strings

[QuietStorm]

68. that is a whole other conversation

considering how ineffectual Hamas retaliation is. Wouldn't you think if they really wanted to do damage they would go after infrastructure or even that fence. That fence has been under construction for a year now. it has cause the bulldozing of palestinian property. Why no retaliation against that fence? for all the suicide bombers sent over. Why have they never once tried to set Israel back on schedule with that fence. Never has that fence been attacked. One does sometimes wonder about Hamas. One sometimes wonders about this consistent claim about all the arab hostility toward Israel and their desire to destroy the state altogether. Certain things don't always add up do they?

[Muddleoftheroad]

71. Blame

Wow, you won't even blame the Palestinians for Hamas. Anything else you want to blame Israel for? How about global warming? The stock market crash of 1929?

[Resistance]

74. Huh?

I don't "blame the Palestinians for Hamas"? What on earth are you talking about now?

[Muddleoftheroad]

76. Your comment

You said, in reference to Hamas, "Makes you wonder who is really pulling Hamas's strings."

[Resistance]

81. Sorry

"Makes you wonder" and "you don't blame Palestinians for Hamas" is not the same thing.

[Muddleoftheroad]

89. You implied someone else might be pulling their strings

Someone else is NOT them, so there ya go.

[Resistance]

94. come on muddle

one statement is an absolute, the other is speculation. Do you really fail to see the difference? It seems now that you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Muddleoftheroad]

98. Arguing

Funny, I would say the same of you.

You made the statement. If you have no doubts that Hamas is a Palestinian terror group run by and for Palestinian terrorists, then we can agree on something.

[QuietStorm]

75. Palestinians are completely to blame

yes we know. the spoils of war argument. it gives Israel full justification. They the winners. Palestinians the losers and generally the Losers are to blame. Probably why they get zero coverage in the states even though they have suffered four or more times the civilian casualty in the last three years where Settlements remain in violation of UN resolutions (although that problem might have now been taken care of), with Sharon's war crimes ignored competely, and IDF in voilation of human rights (killing journalists and peace activists).

But who cares about fine points the Palestinians are the Losers, it follows they are the ones to blame. It has something to do with the Laws of Victomology. Probably why Israel is a victim victimizing another culture. It works out on some half assed base human level of consciousness.

Then again look at all the money the US has thrown at Israel. Even the US prefers to keep Israel's skeletons in the closest. What a helpful ally the US really. That is life. That is what people say.

It has nothing to do with blame. But a progressive admittance - acknowledgement of ones past negative actions, understanding of the harm these actions have caused, toward forgiveness. You know they will not put a criminal on death row to death until he has admitted his crime and has expressed remorse for it, and understand the harm he or she has caused. Interesting eh? No remorse is indicative of a psychopathic mentality.

[Muddleoftheroad]

80. For Hamas, yes, since it IS a Palestinian organization

Are they to blame for this conflict, in part only.

[QuietStorm]

84. and GOI

Its militant politicians and generals - Ariel Sharon. Transfer policies that have been denied while being executed. The countless immoral acts of the IDF. Duvaden instigation. Shall we go back to Irgun and Haganah the stern gang. are they too to blame for this conflict?

[Muddleoftheroad]

87. If you read my other post on this

Yes, in part.

Actually, I'd blame the UN most of all for not backing the 1948 partition and preventing the war that ensured. Then both groups would have states already.

[QuietStorm]

92. we can not scapegoat the UN

apparently they have a problem with that rubber stamp of theirs. The two parties involved can not be allowed to deny their sins. Problem is Israel has always gotten a pass and chronologies have been successful blurred. The doctrine and the propaganda has been a great success and it is what guides our media as well. US supports the propaganda, contributes to the propaganda because our Generals refuse to admit their part in this as well. And the UK too!

But if the two parties at the core of this conflict were to come clean. Israel most specifical much more so than the Palestinians. Than perhaps the extremists will be defrayed and we could get somewhere here. The last thing that can be ignored is Right to Return that is the core of the Israeli denial.

[Muddleoftheroad]

93. Ah there it is

The demand for the Right of Return. In other circles, this is also known as the destruction of Israel demand. Subtle.

[QuietStorm]

100. that is a misnomer

The circle that insists right to return is a call for the destruction of Israel have missed the point of right to return, do not understand what it is palestinians are asking for, and are either propagandists for the RW themselves or are being duped by the propaganda of the RW. One or the other.

[Muddleoftheroad]

102. OK, then

What do you think would happen with the right of return?

(It's so rare to find someone who discusses this situation civilly, I am eager to do so as well.)

[QuietStorm]

103. It needs to be put on the table

for negotiation. with the admittance that is being asked for. and the hearing of the palestinian claims with the proper reparation the issue of right to return if handled with the proper diplomacy I feel could set the stage for true lasting peace. Problem is right to return involves claims made of massacres that RW Israel and its propagandists to this very day deny. That is why I believe Netanyahu, Barak, even Rabin left Right to Return on final status, and now too Sharon. It is a very important can a worms that needs openning up. If negotiated in good faith. which will not happen. It could set the stage for reconciliation and lasting peace.

Rather Israel RW insists on denials. They deny the claims that are the basis for this big issue called right to return, basically they are denying the Palestinians their story and their history as well as their argument.

[The Stranger]

79. Occupation is Terrorism

Stop the Denial.

[QuietStorm]

82. *sound of crickets*

Yes stop the denial. That is the point. What sources are needed?

[Resistance]

86. The denial will never end

Defending Israeli terrorism for muddle is like a born-again Baptist defending the truth of God. There is no other way.

[Muddleoftheroad]

85. What would you have Israel do?

Give up to 1967 borders? Would that get it peace? No.

Give up to 1948 borders? Would that get it peace? No.

Or the Palestinian terrorist solution...Give up to PRE-1948 borders.

Peace has to come through a settlement with a Palestinian leadership that will fight the terrorists. No such leadership has come forward.

[The Stranger]

106. I answered your question.

Stop the Denial. Stop denying the fact that it is occupying someone else's land.

This is key: Before you start talking about borders or blaming everyone for being upset their land was taken, understand that simple fact.

Then there might be some hope, some change, some Peace.

But stop the Denial.

[papau]

124. Seems Arafat refused anything more than PR and marching restrictions

From the AP:

"In the end, Abbas and Arafat agreed on a joint statement which said the Palestinian Authority would enforce the rule of law, take control of illegal weapons and end "military displays" by the militants, a reference to marches led by gunmen.Islamic Jihad and Hamas officials said they were ordered by Palestinian police not to speak to reporters, and many leaders of the two groups had their phones turned off Thursday.The Palestinian leadership statement did not refer to arrests, which would appear to be a cornerstone of any crackdown, but Palestinian officials said there would be detentions. "It's a campaign that even in the worst nightmares Hamas and Islamic Jihad never imagined," said Elias Zananiri, a spokesman for Palestinian security chief Mohammed Dahlan. "There's a list of people to be arrested."

[nn2004]

2. Long overdue

There is no excuse for the targeted bombing of innocents and the bombers are being given too much freedom of movement.

[ex_jew]

3. Yes, it's time for Israel to TRULY show the world

how a state is created - with the massive slaughter of guilty and innocent alike. Prolonging the pangs of birth for 55 years was simply obscene. And then, once Israel has exhausted every shred of goodwill among the rest of the world, no one will be surprised or disappointed when Israel... I can't presume to say what lies down that path. I'll bet it's not a happy ending, though.

[meegbear]

6. while I agree with the first part ...

I don't understand the second. How would one know who is a bomber and what constitutes freedom of movement?

[ScotTissue]

8. A lot of people lost patience yesterday

With the bus bombing. You can't do much to counter the impression that it is extremists in the Palestinian movement that is derailing the peace process. I'm happy that Israel didn't swiftly respond to the bombing without an ultimatum. Politically, that must be hard for them to do. Abu Mazen, weakened by Israel though he is, must make an extraordinary effort to tame the extra-Authority militias...or the cause of peace is lost.

[StandWatie]

10. oh bullshit..

there was a ceasefire, Israel breaks it and starts shooting at IJ and Hamas leaders and then you get an immediate bombing. Israel responds again with a very obvious political assassination for revenge, you get an immediate bombing.

It's completely obvious that the Israeli's aren't interested in negotiations.

As a matter of fact Hamas and IJ actually seem to have more restraint than the Israeli government since they were just sitting still while Israel was bulldozing homes, building more settlements and encircling them in a wall.

[legin]

16. Exactly right StandWatie

I've sat through this garbage about 5 times now over the last 18 months.

There is a lull in hostilities. Things get a bit too quiet for some people. So targeted assination on somebody by israel, and if that don't stir things up, another one. Any collateral damage is just a nice bonus which inflames the situation more.

Palestinians hit back with suicide bomb killing 20.

Utterly apalled by the sheer immorality of the bombing, israel invades the West Bank or Gaza, or if it is a good day both of them.
Death toll 40.

Palestinians hit back with another suicide bombing, another 20 bite the dust.

Chaos ensues.

[Resistance]

49. Road Map obscured by blood

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1840.shtml

Since the commencement of the ceasefire (which applies only to Palestinians) on June 29, Israeli soldiers and settlers have killed 17 people (including 7 children), wounded 437 (including 88 children), arrested 593 people, confiscated 4,457 acres of land for Jewish settlements, bulldozed 987 acres of farmland, destroyed 12,462 trees and destroyed or damaged 253 houses.

[QuietStorm]

54. *sound of crickets*

these stats will never see the light of day on FOX, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS!

[QuietStorm]

18. Mofaz's

plan went into action right after 9/11 the insurgence began. Tell me is his plan not right on schedule for the most part. Wait and bait.

[Muddleoftheroad]

19. Restraint

Yeah, they only butchered a FEW kids yesterday.

Unbelievable what you can rationalize.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

62. Actually, you are quite wrong

I just expect viable sourcing for such complaints. You don't seem to believe in it.

[QuietStorm]

63. What viable sourcing would that be

that directly passed out from the RW Likud?

[Muddleoftheroad]

65. Nope not at all

You are jumping into an argument that has been going on a couple days. Personally, I expect somewhat balanced sources and not overly biased ones with a HUGE ax to grind before I trust what they tell me.

[Resistance]

67. you think this is about a debate over news sources?

No - I am talking about your constant defense of Israel's terrorism and aggression, which didn't just start the past couple days. You've always done it as far as I know of.

[Muddleoftheroad]

69. As far as you know

Which is clearly not too far.

You just got particularly upset that I complained about your sourcing the last few days as you searched for every radical pro-Palestinian site you could find to post nasty stuff about Israel. At least one of those was banned as a result.

[Resistance]

73. Umm, hello

(knock knock anyone home?) I said this wasn't about our 'debate' over news sources - it's about your constant defense of Israeli terrorism.

Whenever Palestinian civilians are murdered by the Israelis, you are the first one in line to make excuses and support the Israeli aggression. That is why you sound like such a hypocrit when you complain about Palestinian terrorism. Why you would think this has anything to do with your recent rantings about news sources you don't like is beyond me.

[Yentatelaventa]

121. Oh hush yourself chi

You are not the arbiter of rights to complain or not. At least I don't recall seeing you given those powers.

[QuietStorm]

53. bingo

this isn't rocket science!!

[Yentatelaventa]

120. Hamas leaders and other terror groups are always fair game

No peace accord in the world can let these child killers run free. They are always wanted dead or alive. Peace does not mean allowing criminals to go free.

[bpilgrim]

12. Israel is losing with it's current strat just look at sharons numbers

he has certainly not brought 'peace and security' to his people as he likes to campaign on he has brought nothing but death and destruction.

i say it is time for a new plan and a new leader let him and arafat duke it out in their retirement home if they want but their old ideas - FORCE - apparently aint working.

peace

[Julien Sorel]

27. Israel's current strat is getting them exactly what they want.

The slow expropriation of the West Bank.

I would have conducted negotiations for 10 years, and in the meantime we would have reached half a million souls in Judea and Samaria the West Bank.

Yitzhak Shamir, Likudnik and one of Sharon's mentors.

...

“the dream of territorial compromise will disappear, like a dream...


Shamir again. The 'Road Map' is perfect for Israel's long-term plan, since it's easy for Israel to put the onus on the Palestinians, and since no one in the U.S. has the balls to stand up to Israel any more. The last president to do so was Bush's daddy.

[QuietStorm]

33. and the slower the better

makes it look like once again the palestinian extremists are to blame. it is the foxnew line of bunk and people do swallow it, regardless of how transparent Mofaz's plan always was.

[QuietStorm]

17. I see the Palestinian extremists have derailed the Hudna

not Sharon's outposts, not the separation wall, or his overall lack of good faith. not the new Israeli orders disseminate regarding the Jerusalem leg of the wal, not the neocons who have been trying to off the roadmap since the beginning, not benny elon and his proposal for transfer, or the encouragment of Tom Delay and all the other peace Hawks that just arrived back from their mission to encourage the hudna be ignored, but the Palestinian extremists.

[QuietStorm]

119. Ah yes restraint-nice while it lasted. This broke today in LBN

BREAKING: Palestinians report tanks moving into Ramallah

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=74932&mesg_id=74932

justifiable retaliation works best into the plan NOT restraint.

[bpilgrim]

11. so israel should target civilians now as well?

and theres the rub... unless they are willing to kill all the palestinians or let them create there own state and deal with this as a police action the cycle will continue.

i of course hope for the latter but israel calls the shoots over there as far as that goes.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. The wall

This explains why the wall is a necessity. If the Palestinians are separated, they can't commit these bombings with impunity.

[bpilgrim]

21. do they get their own state after it's finished... or shoud i say prison?

and why isn't it built on israeli land? seems to me that it will just add more fule to the fire.

but i guess we shall see, eh.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. I'd love a Palestinian state

And if they care to negotiate a realistic peace, I'd be all for it.

But it's not a prison, unless the Palestinians make it one by refusing peace with Israel and eliminating any partnership they can have with their neighbor.

As for building it on Israeli land, by the definition of many of their opponents there isn't any such thing. Wherever the wall was built there would be conflict, even if it were built on the 1948 borders. I wish you could see that.

I wish a wall were not necessary, but it is.

[bpilgrim]

25. it is just sharon thats the problem, i hear ya...

i mean look at how much progress was made before this bull in a china shop came on the scene in a typically arrogant and insensitive way to bring 'peace and security' to the people of israel...

i'd say it should be less walls, prisons, death and destruction and more diplomacy but i suspect you will never go for that considering your well known views and your support of NUKING a defeated, trying to surrender nations cities filled with inoccent civilians TWICE.

the facts on the ground spell out that sharon and the hard liners don't have a clue on how to actually achieve 'Peace and Security' with their neighbors.

time for a new 'pitcher' if you ask me.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. LOL

Barak failed to bring "peace and security" because he didn't have a partner in peace.

I'd love peace, but not the peace of surrender, nor the peace of the dead. THOSE are what you advocate.

And achieving peace and security seems to be impossible for both sides, not just Sharon. So it's not just his fault.

[bpilgrim]

29. you may choose to laugh at peace but tell it to the ones LEFT BEHIND

who lost EVERYTHING.

to you this is all just some game on the internet i suppose and most folks can see through your games and lies since you are CONSISTANLY on the side of the AGGRESSOR or OPPRESSOR.

just compare sharons record to his predessesor and try to spin that.

i know, i know, it's all the 'terrorist' or 'illegal combatants' fault right? just like the japanese said in china about the chinese fighters who hid among the civilians and attacked their 'soft' targets in the thirties.

israel is the occupying army and is responcible for EVERYONES security there... if they can't take the 'FACTS ON THE GROUND' then they should pull out else they should get back to the peace table.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

31. Not laughing at peace

Just laughing at your comments.

Actually, this is FAR from a game to me. I've been to Israel. I have friends there. It's no game.

Sharon's predecessor lost his job because he couldn't find a partner in peace among the Palestinians.

Where would you have Israel "pull out" to, Switzerland?

[bpilgrim]

36. glad to hear it... just laughing at comments for peace, i c

but that is to be expected i suppose via partisians such as your self who pollute this board daily with the radical hard line view of foreign policy, most i would say are now familiar with your postions so i am sure no one is suprised.

now, let's see, there seemed to be someone who was working with israel up till the time israel decided he needed to go and if you compare the records of what we had then to what we have now i say we should maybe think about getting that person back, eh, the difference is VERY dramatic, no.

it is interesting even with the former head of palestine now removed the pattern continues.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

41. The radical soft line

Surrender. Do whatever your enemies wish even if you are destroyed. THAT is what you advocate.

What former head of Palestine was removed? Arafat? He still runs things.

[bpilgrim]

44. same logic you use to justify NUKING a defeated nation, TWICE

they must agree to 100% of the your condtions well that don't work for MOST people, haven't we learned that leasson by now, win/win is the only way.

i would say ending the occupation, adhering to the U.N. resolutions, and allowing pallestine to become a state will do more to end terrorism then terrorism will.

no one is asking that israel be destroyed only the voices in your head or on the teeVee i suspect since you still think arafat is in charge of palestine :crazy:

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

45. Boy, you sure as hell don't give up a stupid argument, do you?

You still want to refight WWII, no wonder you are so dogmatic about now.

Actually, expecting someone to agree 100% is the Palestinian position. They want a state, they want all the land and they want the right of return and they offer nothing.

Allowing an adversarial Palestine to become a state would only escalate the violence and give the terrorists the cover of a nation to operate from. A state without peace is no deal at all.

So Islamic Jihad and Hamas don't wish to destory Israel. That's news...to THEM.

Well, Arafat still thinks he's charge, so maybe HE'S the one who's crazy.

[bpilgrim]

48. ah, so wether or not we should NUKE somebody is a stupid argument?

interesting...

"Actually, expecting someone to agree 100% is the Palestinian position. They want a state, they want all the land and they want the right of return and they offer nothing."

more BULLSHIT :puke:
remember it is the U.N. resolutions the palestinians are TRYING to get israel to comply with.

"Allowing an adversarial Palestine to become a state would only escalate the violence and give the terrorists the cover of a nation to operate from. A state without peace is no deal at all."

ah, hommie... that is what we have NOW, hello...
and secondly, how do you know that will happen if it has NEVER been tried?

"So Islamic Jihad and Hamas don't wish to destory Israel. That's news...to THEM."

who cares what EXTREMIST THINK? this is about the palestinian and israeli people. there will always be EXTREMEIST it is a question of how many are around. the policies of the existing jewish state only increase their numbers and support.

"Well, Arafat still thinks he's charge, so maybe HE'S the one who's crazy."

so it's down to him and you... maybe you should TRACK HIM DOWN and set him straight? i am sure the IDF needs all the help they can get.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

52. Arguments

Actually, we are not arguing to nuke anyone, we are arguing about whether something that happened 58 years ago was wise. It was. But you seek to pollute this argument with that one. That one lasted over 400 posts on its own.

"remember it is the U.N. resolutions the palestinians are TRYING to get israel to comply with."

The UN resolutions don't mean Israel should simply surrender. There are Palestinian parts to those resolutions as well. And, of course, the UN doesn't rule any particular nation, so all nations take the advice of the UN and put it into action as they see fit based on national security. No nation, simply surrenders, even if the UN says it should.

"ah, hommie... that is what we have NOW, hello..."

Huh, English please.

"and secondly, how do you know that will happen if it has NEVER been tried?"

How do you know that if all the Palestinians ehld their breath till they turned blue, THAT wouldn't work? After all, it's never been tried.

"who cares what EXTREMIST THINK?"

Well, Israelis sure as hell do, since they are the ones carted off to the morgue because the PA won't stop these monsters.

"so it's down to him and you... maybe you should TRACK HIM DOWN and set him straight? i am sure the IDF needs all the help they can get."

Not just the two of us. I think much of the PA would agree.

peace

[bpilgrim]

110. lol - sure they are

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

112. In case you didn't check your in box

I sent you a personal invite to:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=205669

[Ripley]

4. I heard a CNN correspondent in Israel say

last night that because of this attack "the gloves are off for Israel." That is a really frightening statement. You mean their previous brutalities of bulldozing homes and shooting kids was tepid? What's tougher? Nukes?

Yikes. I think we lost the roadmap for peace and we're now on the Highway to Hell.

[cspiguy]

5. the nukes were meant for nutcases like Saddam,

so we may have postponed that evil day for a while...

[legin]

7. Nice to see

Avigdor Lieberman is his usual sweet self.

Actually things are improving over there. Normally israel would be massing tanks on whatever border by now. At least they are issuing ultimatums to Abu Mazen first, even if they know he has not got enough power to do one goddamn thing about them.

[NoKingGeorge]

9. Killing innocents is outside civilization

The WILLFUL attacking of innocent people is outside the acceptence of civilizations and demands the harshest of rebukes. Forcibly repatriot the Palistians to their homelands, Syria and Lebanon . Expel Arafat.
The palastiians who are living in these refugee camps are being pawned by the governments of their homelands and they are being kept ignorant of alternatives by the extremists.
Israel should not force the exodus, the UN or some meeting of the worlds' leaders should help the Countries involved to accept these refugees...

[bpilgrim]

13. but we and they do it all the time as well...

guerrilla war has often been very successful i doubt that the people who live there see any alternative after decades of lies, oppression and murder.

and remember how successful the young israel was at it after wwII to gain what they have now.

its time to head back to the negotiation table and have some real progress in conforming to UN resolutions that require a palestinian state and an end to the BRUTAL OCCUPATION less death and destruction as the record shows.

peace

[LivingInTheBubble]

50. That is their homeland!

Sorry about your confusion.

[PsychoDad]

113. The ground Israel occupies is their Homeland

Palistine... The Homeland of the Palistinians. Occupied by Zionist invaders from europe. Who began their drive for control of the region through illegal immergration and terrorism.

What would you do if you were the Palistinians, The Jews of Warsaw or perhaps the Native Americans? Resign yourself to the reservations and ghettos, or fight back?

[newyorican]

14. The bomber was from Hebron

Hebron is 100% under IDF control. The PA has no authority or responsiblity PER THE GOI in Hebron vis-a-vis security. Something tells me IDF HQ in Hebron is safe from demolition.

[Felix Mala]

15. Who's doing all the killing?

What's the current ratio of dead Palestinians via retribution to dead Israeli's via bombings? I know they got it under 100:1 a few years back.

[bpilgrim]

23. huh? just look up sharons record since he has brought 'peace and security'

Twice in the past 20 years Sharon has gambled with Israel's security and lost. Each time the reason was essentially the same. He thought the explosive application of force would demoralize and overpower his enemies - and intimidate them into submission. Both times, the "strategy" failed and Sharon was left without any backup plan - other than waiting for a diplomatic rescue from the United States. Sharon's first tragic failure was in Lebanon in the summer of 1982. He believed that a quick blitz by Israeli air and ground forces would drive the Palestine Liberation Organization from Beirut. But the PLO dug in and held its ground, forcing Sharon into a siege of the Lebanese capital that was politically disastrous for the Israelis - and ended only when the United States intervened with a plan to get Yasser Arafat and his men out of Beirut.

Sharon's second failure has unfolded over the past year, in his struggle as Israeli prime minister to crush the new Palestinian intifada. The Palestinian uprising was the collective equivalent of a suicide bomb, and Sharon had few good options. But the approach he chose had the same flawed logic as America's policy of "gradual escalation" in Vietnam - the idea that the enemy's will can be broken by a little more force, and a little more, and a little more. As in Leb-anon, Sharon appears to have leapt into this military campaign without knowing where he would land. In that sense, he didn't really have a strategy - more a hope that he could bull his way thro-ugh. But it hasn't worked, and Sharon now appears to be moving toward accepting a new U.S. diplomatic initiative to resolve the conflict.

more...
http://www.tamilguardian.com/tg154/opinions.htm

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. War or peace

Something in between never works. Israel should either ramp up one or the other. Either way would be more effective.

So, if it can find a partner in peace among the Palestinian leadership -- one who will fight the terrorists -- then it should go for peace. If not, it should go for war.

[bpilgrim]

28. i guess that leaves peace...

since the hard liners plan has brought nothing but more DEATH and DESTRUCTION.

fyi: the IDF are running the show in many areas but i guess they don't really fight hard enough and that is why there are still attacks, eh?

once you realize that you will have to come to a fair agreement with the palestinians or kill them all there really is only 1 choice which is to FINALLY accept the U.N. mandates that call for a palestinian state and mop up any remaining resistance as a joint police action.

i am sure that is too sane and rational for sharon to understand besides after all these decades it looks as if israel or its hard liners have a completely different aggenda in mind than adhering to the U.N. mandates.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

30. It's sure as hell not war

Because war makes this look like a picnic. A real war would accomplish that which many accuse Israel of trying to do. It would chase Palestinians from any contested territories. It would lay waste to cities and towns. It would eliminate the Palestniian government, infrastructure, etc.

And thousands would die -- in days.

So, don't confuse what is going on with war. It's not.

Personally, I'd prefer peacee, but no one can be patient forever.

A fair agreemnet, eh? That Is the problem isn't it? What is fair? Many of the Palestinian terror groups have vowed to fight until they get what they want, the destruction of Israel. No Palestinian leader is willing to battle the terrorists, so no current Palestinian peace agreement is really a peace agreement. It just gives the Palestinians something without giving anything in return.

That's your idea of fair?

[bpilgrim]

32. i think the word your are searching for is war CRIMES...

um, your dated propaganda is showing, ALL the countries in the region just last year offered to sign a treaty with israel affording full diplomatic relations with israel AND full recognition of the israeli state, sharon said no.

and their is a FAIR mandate out there already backed by the U.N.

i know, i know, the U.N. is out to get israel and hates israel as much as the terrorist.

:crazy:

remember how well things were going before sharon stepped into it...
or are you like many americans with ADD brought on by FAUX and FRIENDS?

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

35. Yes, the Palestinians do commit war crimes

I agree. Thanks for the term.

First off, Palestinian terror groups are not countries, they are just the ones who murder women and children and don't ever get stopped by the PA. So, if they don't agree or get stomped on by the PA, then there is no peace.

Secondly, I believe Right to Return was a bit of an issue in that proposal.

And yes, the UN represents the Arab world quite well. They and those who want their oil and will kiss their ass to get it.

You seem obsessed by Faux. You must watch it a lot. I never do.

[bpilgrim]

37. i was talking about YOUR proposal

which typically i ignore, shoot i never even posted on a message board before DU, but now that your crimminal ideas are actually being given serious thought not only over 'there' but here as well i choose to challenge them in our own little world...

"First off, Palestinian terror groups are not countries, they are just the ones who murder women and children and don't ever get stopped by the PA. So, if they don't agree or get stomped on by the PA, then there is no peace."

BullShit. but a very good example of the fanatical, extremist, partisian view of the situation.

"Secondly, I believe Right to Return was a bit of an issue in that proposal."

yeah good reason to halt all the talks and switch to plan b - sharon

"And yes, the UN represents the Arab world quite well. They and those who want their oil and will kiss their ass to get it."

another good example of the double standard the partisians like to play with the U.N.

when Iraq - a rich oil producing state from the region - was in violation of U.N. mandates it was lets get'em

'You seem obsessed by Faux. You must watch it a lot. I never do.'

i cancelled cable because i got sick of listening to war and hate mongers like yourself and not being able to reply...

thank 'gore' he invented the internet ;->

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

40. You ignore

My comments, which explains yours.

"BullShit. but a very good example of the fanatical, extremist, partisian view of the situation."

More of a rant than a debate of my point.

"yeah good reason to halt all the talks and switch to plan b - sharon"

The right of return as defined by Palestinians is unacceptable and would mean the end of Israel. And you expect them to negotiate that?

"another good example of the double standard the partisians like to play with the U.N."

Care to elaborate on that a bit?

"when Iraq - a rich oil producing state from the region - was in violation of U.N. mandates it was lets get'em."

It wasn't from me. Iraq had nothing to do with the UN.

Then why keep mentioning Faux? If neither of us ever watch it?

[bpilgrim]

47. sweeping statments of untruth by partisians, yes

- "First off, Palestinian terror groups are not countries, they are just the ones who murder women and children and don't ever get stopped by the PA. So, if they don't agree or get stomped on by the PA, then there is no peace."

"BullShit. but a very good example of the fanatical, extremist, partisian view of the situation."

- "More of a rant than a debate of my point."


another good example of your partisian style, leaving out the context.

"The right of return as defined by Palestinians is unacceptable and would mean the end of Israel. And you expect them to negotiate that?"

call me a moderate, but YES i certainly do but it isn't my call, it is the israelis call and they can NOT ignore it with out continuing the cycle of violence.

there are i am sure compromises that can be worked out instead of flat out rejection. remember how hard everyone came down on arafat for alledgedly doing the same thing?

- "And yes, the UN represents the Arab world quite well. They and those who want their oil and will kiss their ass to get it."


"another good example of the double standard the partisians like to play with the U.N."

when Iraq - a rich oil producing state from the region - was in violation of U.N. mandates it was lets get'em

i was pointing out the tin-foil-hat nature of your thoughts regarding the U.N.

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

59. Well, you do make a few points

Amidst the rambling.

You a moderate? Not likely. You are one of the main reasons why I know more and more Jewish friends who are going to vote Repuclican in national elections. They fear for the future of Israel and read posts like yours. I don't want our party to abandon Israel and the Jewish voters who support it. You see that as radical. I see it as loyal.

Wow, we can agree on one thing. I do think there are compromises that can be worked out. But not until the PA is willing to FIGHT the terror groups.

AS for Iraq, I opposed the invasion from the very first. It was a power grab by *. It still is, but the UN had nothing to do with it.

[denverbill]

34. I think you give Sharon too much credit.

Sharon is absolutely not interested in peace with the Palestinians. He is not interested in a Palestinian state. He is only interested in rebuilding Israel on the entire land of ancient Israel, including all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Israel has had to endure more than it's share of attacks over the years from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, etc. However, that does not justify the theft of Palestinian lands. Israel has got to eventually destroy all the settlements they've built on the West Bank and allow Palestine to become a 'normal' state. Radical 'greater Israel' Israeli settlers are little better than the Palestinian terrorists they inspire.

Sharon has done NOTHING to end the cycle of violence. As a matter of fact, he was the original caus eof the violence when he visited the Temple Mount with a cadre of armed men.

[bpilgrim]

38. for all the recent 'peace and security' he has brought to israel?

he get's FULL CREDIT is all i am saying ;->

:hi:

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

39. A little clarification

Since you seem more rational than others I debate on this topic.

How can Sharon find peace with the Palestinians when several groups vow to fight till Israel is destroyed?

You mention "the theft of Palestinian lands." What do you consider to fall into this category?

I would love to see a peace treaty that creates a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. How would such a state exist? Would Palestinians travel across Israeli territory to go from one to the other? Why should Israel allow this? Why should Israel create a state and get nothing? Do you expect Israel to give up Jerusalem as part of this process? How about the Right of Return?

And Sharon was NOT the casue of the violence. The violence had already started. And, besides, he had EVERY right to visit the holiest site in Judaism.

[Julien Sorel]

42. LOL

You advocate war against Palestinian civilians and cities, but consider yourself worthy to decide who is and isn't 'rational?'

In actual fact, by the way, Sharon has no right to visit the Temple Mount, since that site is legally owned by Arabs -- Palestinians to be exact. The 'right' he had came as did everything else to Israel -- by force of arms. The same arms you now advocate be used against Palestinians civilians.

I'm sure MLK would approve of your 'rational' posting, though.

[Muddleoftheroad]

43. Not at ALL what I said

I said the current state of mid-level violence doesn't work. Either peace or war would be more effective. But what we have now is not anywhere near war. I would love peace personally and an end to all this debate, but Israel has no partner is such a concept.

How can you say that advocates war?

Yes, Sharon DOES have a right. It came into ISRAELI hands by war as well.

[Julien Sorel]

46. War doesn't give anyone the right to

conquer territory. Not morally, not legally, as I said in my previous post. I suppose it was too rational for you, though.

And you advocated war against Palestinian civilians, but are now too cowardly to stick to your words. But I'll remind you of them:

So, if it can find a partner in peace among the Palestinian leadership -- one who will fight the terrorists -- then it should go for peace. If not, it should go for war.

And then,

Because war makes this look like a picnic. A real war would accomplish that which many accuse Israel of trying to do. It would chase Palestinians from any contested territories. It would lay waste to cities and towns. It would eliminate the Palestniian government, infrastructure, etc.

And thousands would die -- in days.

So, don't confuse what is going on with war. It's not.

Personally, I'd prefer peacee, but no one can be patient forever.

Since you claim that Israel has no 'peace partner' you are obviously advocating war against Palestinian civilians -- which you now deny. So in addition to being bloodthirsty, you are a liar. But then, I already knew that, from your many, many posts which demonstrate you have no business posting on a progressive message board, except as an object of contempt and derision.

[LivingInTheBubble]

51. *clap clap*

well said.

[newyorican]

55. *sound of muddle hitting the alert*

Too close to the truth *not* to be censored.

BTW, that grinding noise is MLK turning in his grave.

[Muddleoftheroad]

56. Of course it does

And it always has. If you don't think so, who owned the land you live on before you? Native Americans? Who?

"So, if it can find a partner in peace among the Palestinian leadership -- one who will fight the terrorists -- then it should go for peace. If not, it should go for war."

Yep I said I preferred peace, too. But you try to bury that part.

Actually, war should never be against civilians. That's not war, that's terror. That's a Hamas/Islamic Jihad/Hezbollah/etc. specialty. But one I oppose. Yes, war sucks for all involved, but war should focus on military targets. But military targets in this case are hidden amidst the Palestinian population in direct opposition to the Geneva Convension. (Terror camps in population areas.) There is no way to knock them out that won't inconvenience the populace. THAT is why the terrorists put them there, for PR reasons.

If you think I am lying, then you need Reading Comprehension 101. Unlike you, I have not given up on the MAJORITY of the Palestinian population and hope that a true leader will step forward and offer peace AND make part of that peace fighting the terror groups that murder women and children.

As for contempt, I have contempt for your position, true.

[Resistance]

64. Your demands for Palestinians to cease terror

might have some worth, if you didn't always advocate and defend Israeli terrorism.

[Muddleoftheroad]

66. I don't

I just question your sources.

I have said repeatedly that war is for military people only. Attacks on civilians -- ALL civilians -- are wrong.

[Resistance]

70. Wow, are you really changing your tune now?

You have always made excuses when the Israeli military murders Palestinian civilians. So what happened to make you realize you were wrong?

[Muddleoftheroad]

72. Nope

I never excuse murder. People do die in a war zone and not every case is murder.

[Resistance]

77. Ah, here we go

I know, I know muddle. According to you, when the Israelis murder Palestinian civilians, it's "not a case of murder" - it's "deaths in a war zone" and "collateral damage".

These are the excuses you make for Israeli terrorism.

[Muddleoftheroad]

83. No

But when terrorists hide in the middle of population centers, innocents ARE going to get killed. It's the terrorist policy. Only the PA could move in and take them out with little risk and they choose not to.

[Resistance]

91. Oh, forgot about that excuse too

The "terrorists hiding amongst civilians" excuse ... yeah keep them coming muddle. I know you've got plenty of defenses for Israeli terrorism (which is why I called you on your hypocrisy in the first place)

[Muddleoftheroad]

95. So you are DENYING that terrorists hide in population centers

Cause that would really be funny.

[Julien Sorel]

104. Yawn.

I really am amazed that you weren't tombstoned ages ago, since you are about as 'progressive' as Ariel Sharon, with half the education, and 1/4 the intellect:

Pro death-penalty.

Pro harsh criminal sentences.

Pro ethnic cleansing.

Pro war on civilians.

Pro the conquering of land via warfare.

Those are literally the only positions I've ever seen you post.


And it always has. If you don't think so, who owned the land you live on before you? Native Americans? Who?

Red Herring. We aren't talking about American land, but the Palestinians' land. Should the U.S now begin expropriating Iraqi land? We conquered it! We earned it! We should take their oil, because we defeated them in warfare! It's your argument, reduced to its logical (look the word up) conclusion.
The wrong that was done to the American Indians does not justify the wrong that is being done to the Palestinains now. If you want to start talking about American land, start your own thread and advocate returning it. It would be the first progressive thing you've done in your life on this board.

Yep I said I preferred peace, too. But you try to bury that part.

You said, Mr. Reading Comprehension, that you preferred peace, but that since peace was impossible, Israel should make war on civilians. Again, you lack the courage to stick to what you advocated before, but your intent is plain to everyone. Too late to try to backtrack now.

If you think I am lying, then you need Reading Comprehension 101. Unlike you, I have not given up on the MAJORITY of the Palestinian population and hope that a true leader will step forward and offer peace AND make part of that peace fighting the terror groups that murder women and children.

I know you're lying as does everyone who reads your posts. You're as progressive as John Birch. You claim not to have 'given up' on the Palestinians, but advocate Israel making war on their cities and people:

Because war makes this look like a picnic. A real war would accomplish that which many accuse Israel of trying to do. It would chase Palestinians from any contested territories. It would lay waste to cities and towns. It would eliminate the Palestniian government, infrastructure, etc.

And thousands would die -- in days.

That's not 'giving up' on them? I can only shudder to think what your idea of 'giving up' on the Palestinians would be.

[Muddleoftheroad]

105. Since you misstate some things about me, I will respond

Even though I have launched a new thread in GD to move past all this he said/she said.

Pro death-penalty -- I've lived in one of the worst urban areas in America -- Southeast DC -- and I know what animals people can become. Of course, I also want to fix those areas and provide opportunity, which you don't mention.

Pro harsh criminal sentences -- Depends on the crime. I am wildly against the drug war, which accounts for most of the sentencing I believe.

Pro ethnic cleansing -- Flat out lie.

Pro war on civilians -- Again, a flat out lie.

Pro the conquering of land via warfare -- Not pro, just realistic. It has happened throughout history. It's how nations are built or did you miss that in history class?

I guess then you've missed a host of positions on African-American life in America, drugs, problems in the cities, politics, problems living under the * regime etc.

For the rest, I'm moving on to the other thread. I just wanted to set your mistakes straight.

[Julien Sorel]

107. Thanks for 'setting my mistakes straight.'

Since you agreed with everything I said, except to deny the obvious fact that you advocate war on civilians, it doesn't look like they were mistakes, does it?.

Pro ethnic cleansing -- Flat out lie.

Pro war on civilians -- Again, a flat out lie.

Your words in this thread speak for themselves.

[Muddleoftheroad]

108. How many times can I say it?

You don't wage war on civilians. That's terrorism.

Now, if you feel like being constructive:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=205669

[QuietStorm]

57. the old spoils of war argument

has that argument not been sufficiently debunked yet.

[Muddleoftheroad]

61. Not likely

Unless you feel like giving your home up to the orginal owners.

[QuietStorm]

109. another pat response

Palestinian claims are real and they are viable, documented and founded. In the face of that reality, pat responses are demeaning to the discussion itself.

[Muddleoftheroad]

111. Moving forward

If you have input, try this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=205669

[QuietStorm]

114. okay I bookmarked it.

I have to focus in on my actual life right now. I will pull it up later tonight.

[Muddleoftheroad]

115. Cool

Thanks

[dolstein]

78. All I can say is: IT'S ABOUT FRIGGIN TIME!!

Sorry, but as long as the Palestinian Authority continues to appease the terrorist groups that remain hell bent on destroying Israel one innocent civilian at a time, there will never be peace in the Middle East.

[Resistance]

88. Let me ask you something

Do you also demand an end to the support of Israeli terrorism which is hell bent on destroying Palestinians one innocent civilian at a time?

[Muddleoftheroad]

90. Boy, THAT is a biased question

I think I would want some definition of terms. What you consider Israeli terrorism and what I consider it to be are a hell of a lot different.

You support the Palestinian right to attack Israel, just not the Israeli right to do defend itself.

[QuietStorm]

96. that you believe that question is biased

along with your response supports the Israeli denials people allude to here. And with that said that ends my time on this topic. There are others I am as interested in. thank you for your time.

[Resistance]

97. Where did I say that?

[Muddleoftheroad]

99. It is a summary of your comments

You are welcome to dispute it.

So, let's clarify. Do you support the Palestinian attacks on Israelis in any form?

[QuietStorm]

101. you did NOT say that (Don't fall for it)

he is misinterpreting your argument. You know the spoils of war argument (yawn). This accussation that was made is a tactic know as "flamebait and wait". Don't fall for it. You have nothing to defend.

[dolstein]

116. I think Israel has every right to defend itself

And unlike you, I can see a different between (1) targeting terrorists, which of course carries the possibility that civilians could be harmed too (after all, terrorists rarely do the Israeli military the favor of segregating themselves from the non-terrorist population) and (2) targeting civilians.

Can you see the difference? It doesn't sound like you can.

[BelgianMadCow]

117. Thank you QuietStorm, BillyBunter and Resistance

for pointing out the positions of certain people participating in this discussion. You have a lot of energy to try and debate like this, and although you may not have changed opinions on the other side, at least you've made positions clear.
:thumbsup:
A warned man...

[QuietStorm]

118. you forgot bpilgrim

:thumbsup:

[Equinox]

122. There are some of us here who see the truth.

And there are some that believe in the "spoils of war" or devine right to the land.

The latter will never have their mind changed.

It's up to us to expose Israeli terrorism as equivalent to Palestinian terrorism.

Moderates on both sides should negotiate as EQUALS. The Palestinians have nothing to negotiate except more land to be stolen from them.

They have lived this nightmare since 1948 and continue to do so.

Equating this to the Natives here in America is not only a redherring but it's an attempt to make two wrongs a right. That doesn't hold water. Muddleoftheroad will excuse any sort of Israeli terrorism with the "terrorists hide among the civilian population." Well guess what, they are part of the civilian population. They have every right to defend and resist and illegal occupation of their land. I don't agree with the means, but I can understand them.

IDF snipers target women and children, relief workers, peace activists and the like. I have links and articles too prove it. Yet you continue to excuse anything Israel does. Resistence, bpilgrim, Newyorican, tinoire, Darranar, billybunter, and many others are willing to except the nature of Palestinian terrorism, however, you cannot bring yourself to even admit that Israel is guilty of the same. Not until then will your arguement hold any water.

Note: Israeli terrorism worked just fine in establishing the state of Israel for JEWS only even though there is a second class citizenship doled out to the Arab population.

I can't help but note that Israel as it is, is a failed experiment.

Time for one free and democratic state with a constitution (one that Israel doesn't have) guaranteeing the rights of all it's citizens!

One state, one solution. Right of return. All citizens are equal before the law.

[QuietStorm]

123. oh

BelgianMadCow wasn't being sincere? I thought he was. I suppose he pointed out myself, resistance and billy bunter because when you mention right of return to some that translates to mean that you advocate the destruction of Israel. This translation is grossly inaccurate. To those of us that support right of return, that misinterpretation is an inaccuracy that can translate to mean that the poster who has misinterpreted advocates divine right, manifest destiny, spoils of war, but more precisely Israel right or wrong.

The inaccurate interpretation of Right to return is the result of a calculated and long cultivated RW nationalist propaganda campaign which wants us to believe right to return is only a call for violence. An action of defiance on the part of the Palestinians, rather than a rightful and worthy claim for reparation for the loses the Palestinians have suffered and the harm that has been done to them by well conceived Israeli policies of dispossession, transfer/ethnic cleansing.

Right to return must be addressed or there will not be peace and the cleansing will just continue justified by any means necessary. Right to return is rooted in a history of Palestinian persecution and oppression. Very much like Jewish persecution gave way to the use of terrorism and the phrase "never again" or "never forget."

While I do not advocate the destruction of Israel, I do advocate the Palestinians must never forget their own history, they must continue to document it as accurately as possible (with the continued help of Israeli revisionist if need be), and must not let go of Right to return. It should never have been allowed to remain on final status.

It is because of these kinds of propagandized fallacies and what I believe to be conscious misinterpretations, that I do not participate in the IP forum and will return to LBN.

[Equinox]

125. I'm not sure who you were directing that to..

but I want to make it clear that "Right of Return" is not only fair, it's guaranteed by Geneva Conventions. You know those silly little conventions that wanted to ensure that what happened to Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, Poles and enemies of the state would never happen again.

[QuietStorm]

126. this I know

I got confused because I thought Madcowbelgian had thanked resistance BB and myself. I thought it was sincere, but than I read your post and it seemed from the tone of your post to Madcowbelgian that perhaps I had misunderstood and instead he was being sacarstic ( I don't discuss much down here - mostly in LBN so I wasn't familiar with his arguments).

The tone of your post made it look as if he was being sarcastic so I just assumed it was because all the three that he thanked had advocated right of return. I wanted to point out that the propganda line on those that advocate right to return suggest they also advocate for the destruction of Israel. THAT IS PROPAGANDA TACTIC. It is misleading bunk. ( you've noticed how the two seem to go together for some haven't you?). One on forum says right of return will always come another on forum accusing that you are calling for the destruction of Israel. Just patented argument bred by concise propaganda - RW talkpoints.

So since it seemed he might have not been sincere but instead pointing us out to others here that might feel right of return advocates call for the destruction of Israel, I felt the need to clear that bit of pat propagandizing up.

You see I don't and neither do Palestinian right of return advocates (who are not necessarily all that concerned with Israel proper as always suggested, but instead admittance, acknowledgment and having losses and claims addressed. Acknowledgement and admittance of Israel's past actions which led to dispossession and expropriation, transfer; of what caused the refugee problem to begin with, and reparation). Advocacy of Right to return has nothing to do with advocacy for the destruction of Israel. I am amazed they still keep that going. Israel proper is moot in light of the depth of Israeli denial present .

The oppression of Right of Return I feel is one of Israel's biggest sins. I could easily forgive all the carnage, but for the Israeli denial of the history and the claims that make up Right to Return. That to me is the biggest sin. Almost even bigger than the occupation.

For me it is why it is never addressed. Why it is left on final status, because it would open a can of worms on Israel which would contradict much of their slant peddled by their long time Nationalistic Propaganda Campaigns (to their own populace) which fox and now the US doctrine on Israel are a part of .

[Equinox]

127. I advocate right of return and all citizens be equal in one state.

That does mean the end of Israel as a "Jewish State." The one state can call itself Israel as long as every citizen both in the diaspora (Palestinian and Jew) are regarded as equals. The state will have a constitution guaranteeing the most basic of human rights to all citizens. Settlers in the occupied territories will be part of this "Greater One State" and be citizens equal to the Palestinian populace. The settlements, roads, water, health facilities and all infrastructure will be used by all citizens in Israel proper and in "The Greater One State" as equals. That is what should occur. This will redress the Palestinian grievance and will also not "push the Jews in the sea." The settlers can stay where they are and continue to build with their fellow Palestinian citizens. Everyone would work together and be productive while living in peace regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, and creed. This will be the democracy in the Middle East that everyone talks about now.

[QuietStorm]

128. I see that advocacy

And in a perfect world I would advocate for a one state as well. However, me thinks what benny elon and sharon have been after is a one state solution of all jews which requires they clear that land of Palestinians. It seems to have been an underlying aim all along.

How realistic is this one state solution now? Especially with these new laws concerning mixed marriages. Israel seems to have made itself very clear. Both have been fighting each other for so long. You can see that bigotry exists on both sides, which each side can justify for different reasons. Israeli leaders would never go for a one state as they are quadruplely out numbered by Palestinians. And even a one state could not work WITHOUT Israel admitting it's ORIGINAL SIN.

I do agree that a one state for all citizens would solve the matter of a second state being erected that Israel and the US would not allow a MILITARY which is further proof that a separate Palestinian state was always and remains dead in the water. All just a bit of slight of hand for photo ops and to maintain general sympathy from the world at large.

What I am saying is that with the appropriate admittance and an inclusion of that portion of the Palestinian history from 1948 which is still denied, and good faith negotiation regarding, perhaps even altered borders that would serve both Jewish state immigraton as well as Palestinian State immigration; Right to Return of refugees to than Palestine proper could be conceded by the PA with the appropriate Israeli reparation to the refugees and Israel proper does not have to enter into the picture. Which is why I went out of my way to point out when someone says Right to Return that does not automatically mean they advocate the destruction of Israel.

Without the admittance and proper acknowledgement and with the continued exclusion of the Palestinian side of the story regarding Al Naqba and what has been revealed about Tantura the Palestinians can not concede Right to return just out of hand. That would be death to the Palestinians side of the story. They would be conceding that they are liars regarding their exodus and the massacres they sustained back then. They will not concede this. They can not concede this. This in my eyes is the crux of the problem.

Compromises are in order here. Who is in violation of law here? And again, even if there was a chance in hell that a one state would be compromised to serve both cultures (which I doubt at this point), Israeli admittance would still be required. I do not advocate either Israels destruction or that Palestinian refugees return to Israel proper. I advocate Israel admit it created the refugee policy that dispossession was part of the zionist movement and that arabs were both driven of and massacred by Haganah to make way for the state.

We know iraq, syria were gearing up to attack Israel back in 1948. Like British Authority, Israel which had been taking in Eastern Europeans since I believe the Balfour and until the White paper, was considered and rightfully an intruder with the added insult of once again having an outside anglo authority superpose their partition upon the lowly Arabs that really none of the Balfourists truly wanted to contend with on equal terms. This does not exhonerate Israel from having dispossessed and cleansed the Palestinians.

One or Two state solution, this has to be addressed.