View a Quassam Missile Attack

[The Decider]

Quote by: shrike So you say Israeli government should do nothing as its citizens are blown up by the Suicide bombers such government will not last long it will be overthrown by the citizens.

No. Israel must respond to placate its population. But it shouldn't prevent the continuation of negotiations. Only politics will offer any hope of a solution.
.

Quote by: shrike There was no part in Egyptian constitution that Israel should be destroyed. I don't think there was something about Israel or Palestine in Egyptian law system.

Nasser threatened to "drive the Jews into the sea." I don't think any Israeli mistook that message for a love note.

Quote by: shrike The stated Charter of Hamas is to create a state on whole territory including Israel. Hamass don't want peace they said its numerous time. Although they willing for some kind of temporary cease fire but in the end they want to destruction of Israel. And I don't see any change in their statements or intentions.

Are charters and constitutions immutable? The Hamas Charter will be on the negotiating table with everything else. America didn't trust the Soviet Union either, but we sat down for negotiations. Israel will do the same, one way or another. It doesn't have 200 years to wait. America can't afford to let the Israelis wait for Hamas to change their charter before Israel returns to the bargaining table. Our nation sends $2 billion a year to your country and currently wages a brutal war in Iraq that dethroned one of Israel's most implacable enemies; at the cost of over 3,000 American dead. We have a say in the Israel/Palestinian crisis.

[shrike]

No. Israel must respond to placate its population. But it shouldn't prevent the continuation of negotiations. Only politics will offer any hope of a solution.

Israel has full right to protect itself against those who attacking her. And like I said negotiations has already was tried and failed time after time even with more moderate government. By choosing Hamas Palestinains showed they don't interested in peace.

Nasser threatened to "drive the Jews into the sea." I don't think any Israeli mistook that message for a love note.

Maybe you missed this out. But peace was done not with Nasser but with Sadat. Maybe if Palestinians would choose more moderate government instead that might be a chance although I am very doubtful about that.

Are charters and constitutions immutable? The Hamas Charter will be on the negotiating table with everything else

There is no indication that they willing to do that. When Sadat wanted peace he changed his rhetoric drastically and came to Knesset in Jerusalem and definitely he did the maximum to stop the violence from Egyptian border. I don't see its happening. I see no statements and no intention from current PA government quite the opposed they part of the violence perpetrators and doing nothing to stop it.

America didn't trust the Soviet Union either, but we sat down for negotiations

Irrelevant Super powers and cold wars have nothing to do with I/P conflict at least on local level.

It doesn't have 200 years to wait. America can't afford to let the Israelis wait for Hamas to change their charter before Israel returns to the bargaining table

Our leftists opened a Pandora box in Oslo accords and showed that Israel can be blackmailed. Only after 3 wars Egyptians saw that with violence they will get nothing so they turned to Peace negations. Until the same thing will happen in Palestinian population no peace would be reached. Jobotinsky has foresaw it all in 1923

All this does not mean that any kind of agreement is impossible, only a voluntary agreement is impossible. As long as there is a spark of hope that they can get rid of us, they will not sell these hopes, not for any kind of sweet words or tasty morsels, because they are not a rabble but a nation, perhaps somewhat tattered, but still living. A living people makes such enormous concessions on such fateful questions only when there is no hope left. Only when not a single breach is visible in the iron wall, only then do extreme groups lose their sway, and influence transfers to moderate groups. Only then would these moderate groups come to us with proposals for mutual concessions. And only then will moderates offer suggestions for compromise on practical questions like a guarantee against expulsion, or equality and national autonomy Vladimir Jabotinsky: The Iron Wall - We and the Arabs (1923)

.
But the stupid leftists have booked this wall and now the Israelis and Palestinians paying price for their incompetence.

[The Decider]

Quote by: shrike Israel has full right to protect itself against those who attacking her. And like I said negotiations has already was tried and failed time after time even with more moderate government. By choosing Hamas Palestinains showed they don't interested in peace.

Yeah, Olmert had the "right" to attack Hezbollah and destroyed major portions of Lebanon in the process. Israel not only failed to destroy Hezbollah, but it failed to gain freedom for its kidnapped soldiers. But Olmert had the "right" to self-defense. How one exercises that right makes all the difference however, as Olmert has learned painfully in recent weeks.

Quote by: shrike Maybe you missed this out. But peace was done not with Nasser but with Sadat. Maybe if Palestinians would choose more moderate government instead that might be a chance although I am very doubtful about that.

Yes, and Sadat was Nasser's protege. So?

Quote by: shrike When Sadat wanted peace he changed his rhetoric drastically and came to Knesset in Jerusalem and definitely he did the maximum to stop the violence from Egyptian border. I don't see its happening. I see no statements and no intention from current PA government quite the opposed they part of the violence perpetrators and doing nothing to stop it.

Sadat's agreement to curtail the Sinai violence was contingent upon a peace treaty. It didn't happen as a prerequisite for negotiations, as Israel now demands of the Palestinians.

Quote by: shrike Super powers and cold wars have nothing to do with I/P conflict at least on local level.

You are right in one sense--the Israeli Goliath to the Palestinian David bears little resemblence to US/USSR relations. However, the US was still willing to negotiate with the USSR even when leaders like Premier Nikita Khruschev screamed "We will bury you!" We still kept talking.

Quote by: shrike Only after 3 wars Egyptians saw that with violence they will get nothing so they turned to Peace negations. Until the same thing will happen in Palestinian population no peace would be reached.

What a simplistic analysis of the Camp David Accords. In fact Egypt had financial reasons to sue for peace. The US gives $2 billion a year to that nation as you may recall. Furthermore, Sadat feared the rise of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood if a state of war continued. In the end it was MB that assassinated him. Egyptian moderates couldn't afford to wait for peace. Time was (and is) on the side of the extremists while hostilities continue. Of course the right wing Israelis see Sadat's historic journey to Tel Aviv as a massive humiliation for Sadat and a confirmation that Might Makes Right. Reality, as usual, is more complex.

Quote by: shrike But the stupid leftists have booked this wall and now the Israelis and Palestinians paying price for their incompetence.

Yitzhak Rabin paid with his life for the Oslo Accords, courtesy of a right wing Israeli fanatic's cowardice. The agreement's flaws were mainly tactical. It mandated stages for negotiations and not a single comprehensive agreement on a date certain. The stages allowed the radicals on both sides to muster their forces and disrupt the negotiations. Plenty of Israelis opposed the removal of settlements in the Occupied Territories. The next round of negotiations need to play for keeps. One agreement, one date certain for implementation.

[GHook93]

Quote by: jose More civilian deaths in Gaza - International Middle East Media Center - IMEMC

Do you ever have any ideas of your own? And just like every source you quote it is suspect at best.

[GHook93]

Quote by: The Decider When Israel attacks, they kill civilians and make more terrorists. It's counterproductive. We've seen the Israelis attack the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank year after year after year. Has it produced more moderate Palestinians? What has Israel gained for all its military muscle flexing--"security?" Israel must return to the bargaining table and hammer out a comprehensive peace settlement EVEN WITH the occasional missile attacks on its borders. To expect cooler heads to prevail over time is simply fantasy. Temporarily move the settlements further from the border if they have to. Resume the peace negotiations, now.

Occassion missile attacks? What are you smoking? It is daily and numerous. Just like I said it is illogical to expect them to endure such attacks.

Did you ever see the movie "In the Name of My Father?" Watch it and you'll learn the price Britain and the Irish paid for an overzealous military approach to "The Troubles." In the end, a political solution brought peace. The same end must take place in the Middle East. Israel has no military solution to her vexing Palestinian problem. None.

I saw the movie and enjoyed it. Small item out of the big picture. The point is, if the British sat idle, then the attacks would keep coming.

[GHook93]

Quote by: shrike There is no partner on other side. Hamass don't want peace it even want to recognize the Israel right to exist.How can you negotiate with someone that their stated goal is to destroy you? Political solutions was tried by the leftist and failed miserably. I say Palestinians are not ready for peace maybe after 200 years something will change.

I don't necessarily agree with this. Negotiations have to take place and with whoever Palestinians elect. Israel doesn't have to accept anything. They should open negotiations with Haniyeh. It might lead to nothing, but no communication leads to nothing. At the very least it gives you credibility to your peace desires.

Egypt and Jordon were 2 huge enemies of Israel and neither recognize her right to exists before the treaties. I know its not quite apples to apples comparison, but its close.

On top of that, Israel's Muslim neighbors are nearly ready to recognize and normalize relations with Israel.

America along with Israel does not have 200 years to wait. We need it now. The non-solution in Israel is also a threat to America's national security.

The Palestinians need their own State sooner rather than later.

[The Decider]

Quote by: GHook93 Occassion missile attacks? What are you smoking? It is daily and numerous. Just like I said it is illogical to expect them to endure such attacks.

I said above that Israel would have to do something, but it matters what they do and how they do it (ie Lebanon War II). A military approach by itself is a failed strategy, and that is all Israel has at the moment.

Quote by: GHook93 I saw the movie and enjoyed it. Small item out of the big picture. The point is, if the British sat idle, then the attacks would keep coming.

No, the point is that the British recognized the failure of the military option and pushed for a political solution. It was perhaps the single best accomplishment of Tony Blair's tenure as prime minister.

[Setnakt]

Sitting down at the negotiation table is not "nothing."

[GHook93]

Quote by: Matt W No, we stuck them in prison, we didn't launch rockets into random areas of Belfast. Any more strawmen? Anything more to add about me being a mod, or have you quite finished with that particular BS distraction? I am a member, examining your argument. Is there a problem with that?

Exactly you were able to stick them in prison, because they were suicide bombers and they were shooting missiles from their territory into yours.

And I highly doubt you tossed them all in prison and there was no bloodshed. Not one gun went off. But the point is you responded.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Setnakt Sitting down at the negotiation table is not "nothing."

It can produce nothing though

[jose]

Quote by: shrike Do you have a major news source?

I think they tend to keep their heads down

The Israeli authorities have repeatedly been called upon to investigate attacks on journalists that have been perpetrated by their security forces. However, the results of only a few investigations are publicized. Those that are, usually absolve the Israeli army of any wrongdoing in attacks that have led to grave injuries and loss of life among the press. The lack of a thorough and public investigation into these incidents points to an official disregard for the safety and security of journalists and suggests that the Israeli army has tried to whitewash its own responsibility in the deaths of journalists.

IPI (International Press Institute) :: Israel

[shrike]

Quote by: The Decider Yeah, Olmert had the "right" to attack Hezbollah and destroyed major portions of Lebanon in the process. Israel not only failed to destroy Hezbollah, but it failed to gain freedom for its kidnapped soldiers. But Olmert had the "right" to self-defense. How one exercises that right makes all the difference however, as Olmert has learned painfully in recent weeks.

What Hezbollah and Lebanon has to with anything we talked about Palestinians and their unwillingness to promote peace. I think it red herring to run from the issue.

Yes, and Sadat was Nasser's protege. So? Sadat's agreement to curtail the Sinai violence was contingent upon a peace treaty. It didn't happen as a prerequisite for negotiations, as Israel now demands of the Palestinians.

He changed his rhetoric drastically he came to Jerusalem before the agreement and violence generally stopped before Peace agreement. I don’t see any change in Hamas rhetoric quite the opposite .

You are right in one sense--the Israeli Goliath to the Palestinian David bears little resemblence to US/USSR relations. However, the US was still willing to negotiate with the USSR even when leaders like Premier Nikita Khruschev screamed "We will bury you!" We still kept talking.

It’s nice that you talked out of the equation all the 22 Arab countries and presented Palestinians as the underdog.

What a simplistic analysis of the Camp David Accords. In fact Egypt had financial reasons to sue for peace. The US gives $2 billion a year to that nation as you may recall. Furthermore, Sadat feared the rise of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood if a state of war continued. In the end it was MB that assassinated him. Egyptian moderates couldn't afford to wait for peace. Time was (and is) on the side of the extremists while hostilities continue. Of course the right wing Israelis see Sadat's historic journey to Tel Aviv as a massive humiliation for Sadat and a confirmation that Might Makes Right. Reality, as usual, is more complex.

Of course the reasons that you mentioned important too but like I said they saw that their could not get the Sinai by force so the only option that was left is negotiations. Until Palestinians will understand that it will take a long time by retreating from Gaza we showed that Israel can succumb to violence it was a fatal mistake from our side.

Yitzhak Rabin paid with his life for the Oslo Accords, courtesy of a right wing Israeli fanatic's cowardice. The agreement's flaws were mainly tactical. It mandated stages for negotiations and not a single comprehensive agreement on a date certain. The stages allowed the radicals on both sides to muster their forces and disrupt the negotiations. Plenty of Israelis opposed the removal of settlements in the Occupied Territories. The next round of negotiations need to play for keeps. One agreement, one date certain for implementation

I agree with you generally but do you really think it could be reached with current PA government it was already tried like I said before with more "moderate" Fatah and it failed miserably.

[The Decider]

Quote by: shrike What Hezbollah and Lebanon has to with anything we talked about Palestinians and their unwillingness to promote peace. I think it red herring to run from the issue.

Red herring? We're talking about the definition of "self-defense." You claim that Israel's military approach to the PA is justified as "self-defense" and I countered that overreaction in the name of "self-defense" is counterproductive. I used Lebanon II as an example, but I could just as easily have cited the innumerable Israeli incursions into Gaza, missile attacks on crowded apartment buildings, targeted assassinations in the streets, and bulldozing of refugee settlements throughout the Occupied Territories. Have the Palestinians responded with moderation to this policy of collective punishment? Did they release the kidnapped soldier? Obviously not. The radicals are more powerful today than at any time in the history of this conflict. The military approach has failed. Only a political solution can hope to end this crisis.

Quote by: shrike He changed his rhetoric drastically he came to Jerusalem before the agreement and violence generally stopped before Peace agreement. I don’t see any change in Hamas rhetoric quite the opposite.

Two key differences: Israel didn't occupy most of Egypt, just a few towns and resorts in eastern Sinai. Israel continues to occupy the West Bank and dominate the economic life lines into and out of Gaza. Egypt wanted closer relations with the United States; the Palestinians get little from the US.

Look at the enormous risk Sadat took despite the absence of actual war in 1977. He arrived in Jerusalem with only a day or so notice, surprising even the Israelis, who never thought it would happen. Sadat's trip was condemned in Egypt and throughout the Arab world. And in the end Sadat lost his life for the effort. It is totally unrealistic to expect guerrilla organizations to lay down their arms completely in the absence of a peace treaty. Occupation is itself a form of warfare.

Israel would do well to learn a lesson from the British. In Northern Ireland, the British initiated talks DESPITE continued bombings and shootings in Britain and Northern Ireland. The talks continued anyway. The British didn't demand that all hostilities cease before they sat at the bargaining table. Such an unrealistic demand would only have the effect of ending all negotiations indefinitely. The British also recognized that not all Northern Irish supported the radicals. The talks took years and years with many setbacks, but they never surrendered to the violence.

Quote by: shrike It’s nice that you talked out of the equation all the 22 Arab countries and presented Palestinians as the underdog.

Oh, please shrike, this isn't 1948 or even 1967/1973. Israel is far and away the strongest nation in the region; a nuclear power with the most advanced air, land, and sea forces in Middle Eastern history. The Palestinians can't rely on Arab military power today. They are isolated in squalid refugee camps. Israel is the Goliath today, and then some.

Quote by: shrike Of course the reasons that you mentioned important too but like I said they saw that their could not get the Sinai by force so the only option that was left is negotiations. Until Palestinians will understand that it will take a long time by retreating from Gaza we showed that Israel can succumb to violence it was a fatal mistake from our side.

Israel's iron fist strategy has totally failed. When it physically occupied Gaza, the Israeli soldiers were HATED and attacked at every opportunity--with stones if nothing else. The "retreat" left Gaza economically and politically dependent on Israel--another form of occupation. Israel never retreated from Gaza; they just lengthened the leash a little. Shortening the leash yet again to beat the dog more often won't make the dog love its "master" more.

Quote by: shrike I agree with you generally but do you really think it could be reached with current PA government it was already tried like I said before with more "moderate" Fatah and it failed miserably.

What choice does Israel have? You can send in the tanks, bulldozers, and attack helicopters again and again and again and the Palestinians won't raise the white flag of surrender. What occupied people in modern world history ever succumbed to such oppression? Did the Maccabees learn the Roman "lesson" and behave? No, they killed themselves and their families at Masada rather than live under the Roman boot. Why do you think Palestinians, or any proud people, would behave differently?

[shrike]

Red herring? We're talking about the definition of "self-defense." You claim that Israel's military approach to the PA is justified as "self-defense" and I countered that overreaction in the name of "self-defense" is counterproductive.

.Again there is no overreaction of course I don't deny that there were some wrong actions by the government and army. But what do you except in such long conflict there will be always mistakes. Nobody is perfect

Israeli incursions into Gaza, missile attacks on crowded apartment buildings, targeted assassinations in the streets, and bulldozing of refugee settlements throughout the Occupied Territories

Yes of course those pesky Jews should sit quite and don’t interfere as the Arabs trying to kill them. Why they wouldn’t jump into the sea that will solve all the problems .:eek:

.

Have the Palestinians responded with moderation to this policy of collective punishment? Did they release the kidnapped soldier? Obviously not. The radicals are more powerful today than at any time in the history of this conflict. The military approach has failed. Only a political solution can hope to end this crisis.

The political solution failed too. Israel taking nesccacry steps to protect itself. The radicals stronger not because of the military action but because Israel showed its weakness by retreating from Gaza with no agreement its was prize for Hamas for their terrorist activities.

Two key differences: Israel didn't occupy most of Egypt, just a few towns and resorts in eastern Sinai. Israel continues to occupy the West Bank and dominate the economic life lines into and out of Gaza. Egypt wanted closer relations with the United States; the Palestinians get little from the US.

Israel doesn’t occupy anything there is no military rule over the Palestinians. Palestinians govern themselves. They elected Hamas government and cut most of the support they received from other countries. So they have interest to stop terrorist activities but the PA government seems don't care about their people.
Israel would do well to learn a lesson from the British. In Northern

Ireland, the British initiated talks DESPITE continued bombings and shootings in Britain and Northern Ireland. The talks continued anyway. The British didn't demand that all hostilities cease before they sat at the bargaining table. Such an unrealistic demand would only have the effect of ending all negotiations indefinitely. The British also recognized that not all Northern Irish supported the radicals. The talks took years and years with many setbacks, but they never surrendered to the violence

.
Apples and oranges. Did IRA wanted the distraction of UK? Did they wanted to establish their capital in London. Did they want that Irish over flood Britannia?

Oh, please shrike, this isn't 1948 or even 1967/1973. Israel is far and away the strongest nation in the region; a nuclear power with the most advanced air, land, and sea forces in Middle Eastern history. The Palestinians can't rely on Arab military power today. They are isolated in squalid refugee camps. Israel is the Goliath today, and then some.

Are you deny that Arab/Muslim countries do help Palestinians military and comically .Also these Arab/Muslim countries are threat to Israel (Iran for example)So its not only Palestinians.

Israel's iron fist strategy has totally failed. When it physically occupied Gaza, the Israeli soldiers were HATED and attacked at every opportunity--with stones if nothing else.

Its not failed. Before stupid Oslo accords the first Intifada already ended and there was no violence only when we allowed the terrorist gang from Tunis to return. We showed our weakness we gave them weapons to shot us. Stupid leftists.

The "retreat" left Gaza economically and politically dependent on Israel--another form of occupation. Israel never retreated from Gaza; they just lengthened the leash a little. Shortening the leash yet again to beat the dog more often won't make the dog love its "master" more.

Israel doesn’t own to Gazans anything. They have open border with Egypt. Of course if they will not attack the block post there. So the Europeans will close it.I don't understand why my government giving to enemy civilians electricity.

What choice does Israel have? You can send in the tanks, bulldozers, and attack helicopters again and again and again and the Palestinians won't raise the white flag of surrender. What occupied people in modern world history ever succumbed to such oppression?

We should wait for more moderate administration. Hamas don't want peace they say it numurous times and negation with is giving legitimation with it. Even Europeans don't talk with Hamas ministeres why should we?