Israeli barrier move sparks anger

[newyorican]

Israel has resumed construction of one of the most controversial parts of its separation barrier in the West Bank - deep inside the occupied territory.

The attorney general approved the work near Ariel settlement on Monday, four months after a court order halted it.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei accused Israel of bad faith by resuming construction during ceasefire talks.

<snip>

The decision by Israeli Attorney General Menachem Mazuz to approve the resumption of construction has been deplored as an act of bad faith by Palestinians.

"How are we going to convince our people and factions that we are trying to end Israeli occupation while Israel is imposing facts on the ground?" said Palestinian cabinet minister Saeb Erekat.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4205663.stm

The incitement continues. This is the Israeli response to the PA stopping missle attacks...niiiice. Must be too quiet for the GOI.

[mike_c]

1. Israel simply does not want peace....

They will always do something to provoke new fighting.

[Lithos]

2. I disagree

Please do not confuse Sharon and company with all of Israel.

L-

[newyorican]

3. How many times has Arik been re-elected?

In a democracy, the citizenry must take some responsibility for the actions of it's government. We all know that they (citizens) will pay for any and all blowback that occurs.

[mike_c]

4. I spoke of Israel the nation, Israel the political entity...

...which is both more than, and I suppose less than, the sum of it's people. Much as one might speak of "the U.S.," because despite the disunity in this country, America acts internationally as a discrete political entity. As does Israel.

[Colorado Blue]

5. You can't imagine how much Israel wants peace. But she

must be secure and assured of the fact that her neighbors do not want to destroy her and the five million souls who live within her borders. This is the avowed goal of millions of Arabs who are determined NEVER to allow the Jewish people their state, their peace or their lives. This hatred, this implacable desire to destroy, is NOT an invention of the Jews, a fact I should NOT have to state.

It has, however, resulted in war, sorrow and bloodshed that have injured all involved. To suggest that Israel WANTS this is damnable and unspeakably cruel.

I am surprised and saddened by the attitudes of many on this board. Somehow Israel the state and Israel the people have been demonized. The DU board makes a fine distinction, saying that anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism are two different things. But that is a cop-out. Israel is the Jewish state, the manifestation of the Jewish people's need and desire to live as a free people within defensible borders. Attacks by people stating that "Israel doesn't want peace" or "Jews attack themselves so they can blame other people for attacking them," or "Jews (or Israel) start wars then blame them on other people," are cut from the same bigoted cloth.

This, I expect from the Aryan Brotherhood. Among liberals, people who SHOULD know better, I find it shocking and sad.

Here's a link to an article posted elsewhere on this board:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1182319

If the link doesn't work, it's the article about the Russian lawmakers who essentially want to outlaw Judaism within Russia.

It shows the absurd degree to which anti-Semitism is on the increase globally. We Jews had hoped never again to have to face a holocaust, or to deal with with the virulence of this particular form of bigotry and hatred. I never thought I'd have to encounter it among my fellow Democrats.

Finally, I have a wish: if you disagree with an Israeli POLICY, that's fine. Many of us do - none more than liberal Jews, here and in Israel. Constructive ideas as to how to build bridges to the Arab world would be more than welcome, believe me. I myself have worked in this area for over 30 years, struggling to overcome my own hatred and fear - of Arabs - in the process. So bridges CAN be built, must be built.

But to hear blanket statements, bigoted statements, is wounding, unworthy and serves to promote that which we as Democrats supposedly stand AGAINST.

[newyorican]

6. Interesting replies to the "article"

Care to speak to the actual topic? Psst, it's about the barrier...

[Colorado Blue]

7. OK - about The Barrier - and "The Great Game"

OK - I'll talk about the barrier.

I think it's a tragedy that the barrier is being built. It is a far greater tragedy that a group of people continue to think that violence in the form of suicide bombers is the way to try to effect reform.

And I reiterate what I said in my previous comment. Deliberate incitement is not the goal. The lives lost on the Israeli side are real. The goal is protection of her people. I shouldn't have to say this but apparently it needs to be said: Israelis grieve for their dead just as much as Palestinians grieve. The pre-1967 borders are indefensible so some land is probably going to be permanently annexed. I wish this wasn't so! But absent a clear indication that peace is about to break out it seems inevitable.

Tragically, when one side is violent and kills people the other side gets violent and kills people. Ugly and awful as the wall is, it seems to have reduced the bombings - for now. And note: the issue is being discussed, in a civilized manner, in court. Progress is being made. But is takes TIME and good will and decades of violence are not going to vanish overnight.

I will repeat: rather than simply condemning a nation for attempting to protect its people, perhaps you have a constructive idea for dealing with the hardcore terrorist elements within the Arab population? Do you believe that reason will work? Money? Love? Appeasement of ANY kind? Do you believe that if Israel were to simply lie down and die the Islamic Jihad would vanish?

I will repeat AGAIN: constructive ideas are most welcome.

Please realize that you are dealing with something far larger than the Israeli/Palestinian situation. It has been centuries, since the ascent of the Ottoman Empire, since the Arab world has truly been in control of its destiny. After WWI, with the collapse of the Ottomans, the British created modern nation-states based upon Western models, which had little to do with tribal affiliations, ethnic background or religion (there are, in addition to the Suni, Shiite, and Sufi Muslims, Zoastrians, Druse, Christians, and Jews living throughout the region for thousands of years and some Kurds practice their own ancient religion).

The oil companies and the Western industrial empires have had a lot to do with the modern Middle Eastern map and a great deal to do with its woes. A study of the history of modern Israel and the manipulation of Muslim state against Muslim state, the manipulation of Arab against Jew and sect against sect, will reveal classic power politics: the control of a vast region and a huge number of people by a relatively small but powerful group with superior leverage and technology.

If you look at it this way you will see that EVERYBODY in the region is a pawn. The British call it "The Great Game."

Blaming Israel for the woes of the Middle East is to miss the point - bigtime.

When I was younger I used to think, wow - if Israel and the surrounding Arab states could link up and combine their resources they could have an amazingly rich and diverse, strategically located and wealthy region. A "United States of the Middle East", would arise. Well, unfortunately that possibility has not eluded the attention of the Western powers OR of Russia/Soviet Union. The region is touchy at the best of times but with a little push here, a little shove there, the situation can (and has been) destabilized to the point of open war - the most devastating of which of course was the Iran/Iraq conflict in which over 1,000,000 people died. The several wars in which Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and others attacked Israel, along with the propoganda that drove Palestinians out of Israel in the first place, are others. Further examples of note include The Catastrophe of 1920-22, in which Greece was prompted by Britain to invade Turkey. The Turks resented this and chased ALL Greek speaking individuals out of the country, destroying the Greek army and the Greek cities in Asia Minor in the process. Later, rebellion was fomented on Cypress, exploiting the ethnic and religious differences between Greek and Turk; and a democratically elected (and left-leaning) government in Greece was overthrown by an American-sponsored junta. These are but a few examples. One of the ugliest, most painful of course was the war on Afghanistan by the Soviet Union, in which the pastoral nomads and their flocks were damn near destroyed, millions driven out of their homes and their country, their animals slaughtered in countless numbers. They're living now in refugee camps and the land has been given over to the poppy.

The people of the industrial world have been the beneficiaries. Oil flows. THAT is the root cause - not some wall. The wall is an EFFECT.

As for constructive ideas: if you own a car, sell it and take the bus. I gave mine up in 1978. I have settled for what most Americans would consider a smaller life. But I figure it's the direct approach and the principled one.

If you have money, help companies that are developing new sources of energy. Lobby Congress; try to make a CONSTRUCTIVE, real difference.

More ideas, anybody? Besides just accusing Israel of inciting a war it does not want? Or maybe you think Israel WANTS more dead Israelis?

[Violet_Crumble]

9. Yeah, let's talk about the barrier...

You claim it's for protection and that the pre-67 borders are indefensible. Can you explain how violating international law and building the barrier in Palestinian territory makes the new defacto border more defensible than if the barrier had been built along the Green Line?


Violet...

[eyl]

10. Again

While there are places I disagree with the barrier's route, there are reasons it shouldn't be strictly on the Green Line, at least at the present time.

1) There are places where the wall can't be built on the Line for topographical reasons.
2) The purpose of the barrier is not, strictly speaking, to defend the State of Israel, but rather Israeli citizens. As such, it needs to encompass at least those settlements close to the Line.
3) The most important reason is the Jerusalem area (where the majority of the deviations take place; almost all the Palestinians who will end up west of the barrier are residents of the city). The Green Line runs through the middle of the city. The barrier can't be built there, however; besides the civil (and symbolic) consequences of redividing the city, it would allow terrorists to launch indirect-fire weapons over the barrier, as well as allow tunneling under it (both of which are far easier in the cover of the urban environment than from open areas). It would also endanger the Jewish residents of eastern Jerusalem (especially the Jewish Quarter). Therefore, the eastern part of Jerusalem, and its environs, also needs to be west of the barrier.

[rfkrfk]

12. no Arab country recognized the pre '67 line as a border,why should anyone?

The 1948 cease fire line {aka '67 'border''},
was not recognized by any Arab country
as a border.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Because last time I checked...

..what any particular Arab state recognises or not doesn't dictate what international law is...

Using that 'logic', answer this question. Saudi Arabia doesn't recognise women as being worth anything, why should anyone else?

Violet...

[eyl]

15. AFAIK,

the '67 line isn't a border under intl law either (just under intl opinion, which is not the same thing) - the 1949 Armistice Agreements explicitly specified the Armistice lines would not be considered borders.

[Violet_Crumble]

16. Let me be very clear here...

International law does not view any territory beyond the Green Line to be part of Israel. It stands to reason then that the Green Line is acknowledged by most to be the border....

Violet...

[Violet_Crumble]

8. Speaking of blanketed, bigoted statements...

How do you considet this not to be one?

"This is the avowed goal of millions of Arabs who are determined NEVER to allow the Jewish people their state, their peace or their lives. This hatred, this implacable desire to destroy, is NOT an invention of the Jews, a fact I should NOT have to state."

Violet...

[Colorado Blue]

11. Please forgive me if I gave the wrong impression. I did not

mean to imply that all or even most Arab citizens of the region have this attitude. However, many do, especially including members of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. And the many wars since 1948 have borne this out. These were not isolated terrorist attacks but all-out coordinated WARS by well-armed nations of vastly greater size and population than Israel. The Yom Kippur war particularly devastating for Israel and her very survival was, as in the War of Independence, in the balance.

Unfortunately this is not my imagination. A visit to Al Jazeera's website or some in-depth reading will reveal the depth of the hard-line attitude against Israel and its Jewish citizens.

Further reading will inform you of the expulsion of approximately 1,000,000 Jewish people from their homes in Arab lands all across the Middle East and North Africa. They'd lived there for centuries. So the displacements have hardly been one-sided.

There is a street in Beirut where the portraits of "martyrs" - suicide bombers - are prominently displayed and their exploits are celebrated in stories and parades.

One of the great hopes for peace is that, with the passing of Yasser Arafat, Israel can at last deal with a representative of the Palestinian people who is willing to live with the Jewish state. I truly hope the majority of the Arab population feels the same but fear the element who vows the destruction of Israel will once again derail the process.

[Violet_Crumble]

14. In-depth reading...

These were not isolated terrorist attacks but all-out coordinated WARS by well-armed nations of vastly greater size and population than Israel. The Yom Kippur war particularly devastating for Israel and her very survival was, as in the War of Independence, in the balance.

Unfortunately this is not my imagination.


No, unfortunately it's the sort of creative reworking of history that online 'pro-Israel' websites try to pass off as fact. I'm not all that well-versed on the art of warfare, but it seems a bit strange to me that the geographical size and population of a country would mean anything at all when it comes to military power...

Could you point me in the direction of this in-depth further reading I have to read in order to comprehend that MANY Arabs hate Jews? I'd really enjoy reading that stuff...

As for murals of suicide bombers, how is that any different than those Israelis who put murderers like Baruch Goldstein on a pedestal? Or Israelis who voted for a murdering war criminal to be their PM?

One of the great hopes for peace is that, with the passing of Yasser Arafat, Israel can at last deal with a representative of the Palestinian people who is willing to live with the Jewish state.

So, will we have to wait for the passing of Sharon so the Palestinians can at last maybe deal with a representative of the Israeli people who is willing to live with a Palestinian state? Because anyone who thinks that Sharon is willing to deal in good faith with anyone who has a goal of ending the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the creation of a Palestinian state is just a bit on the gullible side, imo...

Violet...