Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was assassinated early today by Israeli Army Forces.
Wrongful assasination of a political opponent or good riddance of a terrorist leader?

wrongful assassination of a terrorist leader.
He probably was not a saint but Israel won't get rid of terrorism by killing people in the streets.

So how will Isreal get rid of terrorism?

It should be perfectly clear that negotiation doesn't work. They have had on the table some very good deals with Clinton mediating - 95% of what they ask for. What was the response? - Suicide Bombers.

I agree with astropol, I think what the Israeli's are doing is wrong.

So how will Isreal get rid of terrorism?

It should be perfectly clear that negotiation doesn't work.

That may be true, but Israel's tactics aren't working either, and given the choice between negotiation maybe not working and more killing, I choose negotiation.

I think everybody would prefer negotiation - but your choice seems like a shallow choice to the families of the hundreds killed by sucicide bombers.

Choice between negotiation not working & more killing - what this means in reality is

"Choice between more Isreali deaths and more Isreali deaths"

Seems like the Palastinians can set off 2 or 3 sucide bombs in a week and nobody notices - then Isreal assasinates a terrorist and everybody is very critical of Isreal.

You cannot negate the facts on the ground - negotiation has not worked, in the face of a very comprehensive settlement with great terms for the Palestinians their leaders chose terrorism. What is Isreal supposed to do. Watch their children die and do nothing?

I say good bye to the terrorist scum. all you leftists have been sucked in by the labels that this guys followers have applied to him. he is a terrorist who advocates the murder of women and children as the preffered method of combat. I can already hear the chicken shit liberals crying about how this is going to make them mad. matbe if these terrorists were as scared of us as you all are of them we would have no terrorism.

I think if you look at the total death count in the occupied territories you would see that Palestinians are dying in much greater numbers then Israelis. Look at the poverty level of the occupied territories and see who's on the bottom?

This war has been going on for too long. One bombs, the other reacts, one reacts the other bombs. Read reports from 10 years ago and it's the same story. Death responding with death responding with death and more death.

How many more years is it going to take before they realize this isn't working?

It certainly is a terrible tradgedy, but Isreal is a small country surrounded by countries that have a main goal of the total destruction of Isreal and for the most part refuse to accept their right to survive.

This is the core of the problem and unfortuanately good intent is not going to solve this problem. Isreal taking the steps to unilaterally impose a separation is one likely way to bring about compromise, being ruthless in attacking terrorists is another. Appeasement will lead to only more Isreali deaths.

Israelis are not the only people dying here. It seems like this aggression is only going to lead to more death.

Do you think that these militants won't respond to the death of this man? D0 you think they are going to say "Well they got us, let's have peace". The dynamic is already in place and they will continue to play their roles.

Sharon knows what's going on, they know there will be a reaction and more missiles made and subsidized by the United States will reign down on palestinians. But that isn't terror.

Would it be better if palistinians used military hardware to launch missiles and use attack helicoptors? Would this violence be justified?

Terrorism comes in many forms, not just as a suicide bomber.

I don't disagree - but I don't see you screaming about the 2 suicide bombers last week that pre-empted this retaliation.

Ultimately it will be the palestinians that lose far more than the Isreali's do - they should have taken peace when they had it in their hands.

Yeah and the military attack before that and the suicide bombers before that and the military response before that....

You can see how this goes on and on and on, and will continue as much until both sides decide they want peace. The Palistinians have already lost their land, how much more can they loose? Paint people in to desperate corners and they act accordingly.

And please, I was hardly screaming.

Originally posted by DrewM
I don't disagree - but I don't see you screaming about the 2 suicide bombers last week that pre-empted this retaliation.

The thread started out being about the assassination of a palestinian by the Israeli's. There is no way to know for sure who started it anymore, and it isn't really relevant to the question of how to make it stop.

Ultimately it will be the palestinians that lose far more than the Isreali's do - they should have taken peace when they had it in their hands.

I think that the common perception of Yasser Arafat being in charge is a false one. There are too many different groups, and no group speaks for all Palestinians.

I'm not sure how to make it stop. A 3rd party is needed. Perhaps the UN should be a buffer between the 2 parties. It's clear that the US is not going to do much - Bush had that large plan and visit to the region - that is all forgotten about now.

What I do not agree with though is the instant view that Isreal is all wrong and the Palestinians are somewhat justified. I see it the other way around.

I think if the palestinians had a conventional military to attack this wouldnt be an issue. when the terrorists are one in the same as the civilian population,a nd go to great lengths to make sure of that, whata re tehy supposed to do? they kill women and children, wait for a retaliation that kills palestinian civilians (is there any other type of palestinaian?), then play on the emothins of the leftists in the world to try and win the war of public opinion. israel has no choice but to target the terrorists where they are. if they had camps out in the woods I am sure they would hit them there, but when they make their camps in schools and hospitals, its kind of hard.

Being an Israeli citizen, having lived there, and knowing a lot of people (and I mean a large chunk of my family, and inumerbale freinds) who live there now, I'm going to try and explain the situation as best as I can. It's extremely complicated, invovles a lot of emotion, and probably not much logic to those looking at it from the outside.
Most Palestinians aren't terrorists. it's a pretty commonly help misconception that a lot of them are, but the fact is that only 1-2% of the Palestinian population is actualy directly invovled in a terorist organization. The problem is, that the organizations pay families to give up a child to blow themselves up. If the terrorists were blowing themselves up this frequently, they'd all be dead now. The reason families agre to this is becasue they have large famileis, and are generally living far below the poverty level, and are starving. Them oney they get for giving up a child will feed the rets of them for quite a while. thousnands of dollars lasts a long time there. If Israel gave Palestinians full citizenship and rights, and subsequently jobs that made them enough money to supprt themselves, then it wouldn't be such a problem. The mass poverty of living in Palestinian villages an refugee camps is a motivator for terrorism.
The Palestinans have no legitimate leader at the moment, they can't be organized properly. They live in vcamps and villages with no running water or electricity, and many have had their livelihood taken away from them. Basically, when Israel was founded, they had a bunch of people come in and tell them that their god have given them the land they were living on, so please leave. Nobody has anymore claim to the land thna the other right now, becasue the Palestinians were there for a long time, but Israel is an established country with a very strong nayional identity.
To me, the soluion seems as follows; give the Palestinians a state, give them rights to work and live in Israel, and bring in some third party to help with the transition.
To explain other things: Israel will not be going away as long as the U.S. is in power. It's an essential wedge in the Islamic states surrounding it. Without Israel there (and Turkey, which is a full fledged secular state, although it is mostly Muslim) the Muslim countries could organizei nto a large power mimicking the Islamic empire that existed a lon time ago. Id this were to happen, the U.S. would have an extremely unstable supply of oil, and it'a power would be threatened. Thus, the U.S. maintains Israels' safety at all costs.
(I don't mean any of this in an antagonistic way, and I'm osrry if I offended anyone, I just tried to present the facts, and my view on the situation as someone pretty familiar with the sitution.)

Thanks Whammybar - an excellent post

Originally posted by Vilepagan
The thread started out being about the assassination of a palestinian by the Israeli's. There is no way to know for sure who started it anymore, and it isn't really relevant to the question of how to make it stop.
Actually this thread started out about the assassintation of one of the founders and leaders of a known terrorist orginization Vile. Please dont sugar coat your words. Its misleading.

I would hardly equate a leader of Hamas as being just "a palestinian". Do you?

Originally posted by DrewM
Thanks Whammybar - an excellent post

why thank you :rolleyes:

Originally posted by WhammyBar
why thank you :rolleyes:
Well I, for one, shall never complement you if you handle all complements as you handled Drew's.

Originally posted by WhammyBar
why thank you :rolleyes:

Ok I take the thanks back :(

I thought your post was informing and had good insight.

The Israeli have just assassinated Ahmed Yassin, a paraplegic in a wheel chair, who was the spiritual leader of the Palestinians. It’s like assassinating Mandela or the Pope. Blitzer and the Jews in the American media are going potty trying to explain it away, and the White House rolled out “I’ve-come-ta-please-ya” Rice to explain why firing a rocket at an old man in a wheelchair will make the world a safer place. It’s hysterically funny and tragic at the same time. These people are truly demented.

The daily Holocaust of violence the Israelis inflict on Palestine goes almost unreported but the death of Ahmed Yassin is very different. This will reverberate round the world and stiffen opposition. Mark my words. We could wind up in a world war if the Americans don’t stop backing Israel and the extreme right-wing Zionists.

The Zionists are the Ku Klux Klan of modern Jewry. They have America and Britain by the balls but I also feel sorry for ordinary Jews, the Zionists control them with a rod of iron. I don’t think humanity needs to pick a fight with the Jews that would be very sad, but the Zionists might suck everyone into the trouble. They are arrogant racists, supremacists that don’t care for anyone. They are the new Nazis, the chosen people; the would-be master race, violent, sneaky and dangerous. Hitler would have been proud of them. They are the empire of the ghouls made flesh.

You watch now, forces are building that will go after them. The Zionists gave us the atom bomb, the hydrogen bomb and the neutron bomb, little presents from the ghouls that humanity really didn’t need, wouldn’t it be an irony if God comes along and gives it all back to them?

I was shown, some years ago (March 2000) in a vision, the destruction of Jerusalem, of course then I couldn’t work out how that might come about. I put it down in print anyway but it sounded daft to me. But now one can see how things are shaping up it doesn’t look so unlikely.

Jeez, if this Middle East thing goes nuclear there will be a right mess to sort out.


Next time you are in the health food shop buy some Nori seaweed it is very high in iodine. It inhibits the thyroid from sucking iodine mixed with radioactivity from the air. People in Hiroshima with high iodine levels in their thyroids, that were not immediately under the bomb, survived. I found that very interesting.

You saw the destruction of Jerusalem in a vision? - ok:@@:

Originally posted by Violet Lightbea
The Israeli have just assassinated Ahmed Yassin, a paraplegic in a wheel chair, who was the spiritual leader of the Palestinians. It’s like assassinating Mandela or the Pope. Blitzer and the Jews in the American media are going potty trying to explain it away, and the White House rolled out “I’ve-come-ta-please-ya” Rice to explain why firing a rocket at an old man in a wheelchair will make the world a safer place. It’s hysterically funny and tragic at the same time. These people are truly demented.

The daily Holocaust of violence the Israelis inflict on Palestine goes almost unreported but the death of Ahmed Yassin is very different. This will reverberate round the world and stiffen opposition. Mark my words. We could wind up in a world war if the Americans don’t stop backing Israel and the extreme right-wing Zionists.

The Zionists are the Ku Klux Klan of modern Jewry. They have America and Britain by the balls but I also feel sorry for ordinary Jews, the Zionists control them with a rod of iron. I don’t think humanity needs to pick a fight with the Jews that would be very sad, but the Zionists might suck everyone into the trouble. They are arrogant racists, supremacists that don’t care for anyone. They are the new Nazis, the chosen people; the would-be master race, violent, sneaky and dangerous. Hitler would have been proud of them. They are the empire of the ghouls made flesh.

You watch now, forces are building that will go after them. The Zionists gave us the atom bomb, the hydrogen bomb and the neutron bomb, little presents from the ghouls that humanity really didn’t need, wouldn’t it be an irony if God comes along and gives it all back to them?

I was shown, some years ago (March 2000) in a vision, the destruction of Jerusalem, of course then I couldn’t work out how that might come about. I put it down in print anyway but it sounded daft to me. But now one can see how things are shaping up it doesn’t look so unlikely.

Jeez, if this Middle East thing goes nuclear there will be a right mess to sort out.


Next time you are in the health food shop buy some Nori seaweed it is very high in iodine. It inhibits the thyroid from sucking iodine mixed with radioactivity from the air. People in Hiroshima with high iodine levels in their thyroids, that were not immediately under the bomb, survived. I found that very interesting. Yeah, i think i saw that episode of "The Twilight Zone" myself. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by HaVoK
Actually this thread started out about the assassintation of one of the founders and leaders of a known terrorist orginization Vile. Please dont sugar coat your words. Its misleading.

I would hardly equate a leader of Hamas as being just "a palestinian". Do you?

Actually HaVok I was just referring to his "nationality"...er...so to speak...I see no reason to refer to the militant palestinians as "terrorists" and refer to the Israeli Army as...well...Israeli's, when I consider them both equally to blame for the violence. The only real difference I see is that the Israeli's have much better weaponry and they all wear the same clothes. Considering that the Israeli's rely heavily on civilian reservists for their military, I don't see that there is much of a difference at all.

Does the fact that the Israeli's can afford to use men who wear uniforms, make their position and conduct more morally defensible?

During WWII the US, and several other countries, engaged in a well planned and executed campaign of aerial bombing of their enemies' civilian population. This involved hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides of the conflict, yet it was justified as a legitimate attempt to undermine the enemies war effort. Today we have the palestinians who, not unjustifiably, feel that their country has been invaded and occupied by an enemy force, and are using the military means at their disposal to drive out the invaders. No they don't attack Israeli tanks with tanks of their own in large battles, but that's only because they don't have the military infrastructure that their enemies possess. They are engaged in a bombing campaign of their own, using what means are at their disposal in the most militarily practical way they can. They are doing what every army does, they are trying to get the "most bang for their buck".

While I don't think that anybody's civilian population should be bombed, the palestinians learned that tactic from us, and I see little room for us to criticize them. During the American Revolution the British Army complained that the colonials (us), didn't always wear uniforms, and used the most reprehensible tactics when fighting the better equipped forces of His Majesty. This usually happens when a larger, better equipped army faces a smmaller force that resorts to guerilla tactics.

Right or wrong, the palestinians are following the only military stategy they can under the circumstances, and I think it would be hypocritical of us to use simple labels like "terrorist" to make moral distinctions between the warring parties.

I don't see the actions of terrorist groups and the Isrealies as the same. They are quite different

Hamas et al
- Coerce kids into blowing themselves up
- Specifically target innocent women & children
- Stated goal is the destruction of Isreal

Israel
- Specifically target terrorist groups & leaders
- Aim to avoid innocent deaths.

Sure, you can say well who started it all and it's all retaliation - but they are not the same. Isreal is retaliating against specific targets - those who commit terror. Hamas aims to inflict the most death possible using completely evil tactics (sucide bombs)

How many women and children have been killed by sucide bombers? How many women and children have been killed by Israeli shelling, missile attacks, or gunfire?

Give me these numbers.

again, is it the israelis fault the palestinians use civilians as shields and hide among them?

How many?

hold on , let me ask my full time statistician I pay to stay by my side 24/7 to answer such things :rolleyes:

Here are the stats

Since Sept29th 2000 (the date the Intifada started) Through March 22nd 2004 (yesterday)

Israeli Deaths - 871
Palestinian Deaths - 2817

http://www.mepc.org/public_asp/resources_counts/Total04_03.JPG

What is also another way to look at it is to compare it to the population and then to compare that to an equivelent US population

Israel Population - 6,116,533
Killed - 871
US equivalent - 41,345

Palestinian Population - 3,512,062
Killed - 2,817
US equivalent - 232,882

Clearly a terrible story.

I found similar numbers here. I didn't want to be accused of using a biased site.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html

That link also has some break down of cause.

I don't think this situation should be looked at in terms of numbers. It's always the unsuspecting innocents, especially children that die.

Wrapping yourself in nails and blowing yourself up - that is pure evil. It's not a struggle or a freedom fighting action and it will never allow them to reach their goals - a palestinian state.

If the palestinian terror organizations made a public announcement to renounce violence and do no more sucicide bombings - the conflict would end and within 3 years palestine would be a state.

If Isreal stopped assasinating terrorists - the conflict would not end - the sucide bombings would simply increase.

No nation has a right to use terrorist tactics to further their aims.

I agree there is a much bigger picture at play here.

People have to be trained to kill, they have to see the person on the otherside not as a human, but as a thing. Dialoge and intergration is the only thing that will change this. Jews and arabs have co-existed peacefully for over 2000 years. In fact a large % of the Iraqi civil service jobs were held by jews. That changed after the creating of a jewish state.

Schrapnal is just as nasty, launching weapons from a distance is always easier then fighting face to face.

Terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

I see that happening on both sides.

Originally posted by DrewM

Wrapping yourself in nails and blowing yourself up - that is pure evil. It's not a struggle or a freedom fighting action and it will never allow them to reach their goals - a palestinian state.

Drew, is it more "evil" to kill someone with a homemade bomb than it is to kill someone with a tank or a missile? The fact that they use these tactics is because of military expediency. It isn't about morality. War is just killing, and it really doesn't matter how you are killed, you end up dead either way. I don't think it's for you or me to judge whether or not these militants are freedom fighters, or terrorists.

If the palestinian terror organizations made a public announcement to renounce violence and do no more sucicide bombings - the conflict would end and within 3 years palestine would be a state.

The main sticking point is that the Israeli's want to dictate to the palestinians who will be allowed to participate in the government of the new palestinian state. The Israeli's want to exclude all the groups who have been fighting against them on the grounds that these groups, like Hamas, the PFLP and others, are "terrorists". Not a particularly good deal, or one the palestinians are likely to accept. These militant groups are unlikely to agree to give up their power under such an agreement, and no doubt the Israeli's know this.

No nation has a right to use terrorist tactics to further their aims.

Please define "terrorist tactics".

Yes it is far more evil to blow yourself up wrapped in nails than to fire a missle at a specific target. Don't want to get into an argument about relative moralities - but convincing people to blow themselves up to kill as many people as possible is evil. Attacking specific targets is also bad - but it's not even in the same league.

Read up on Arafat - he won the Nobel peace prize for Gods sake - on the basis of a peace that ultimately the palestinians rejected.

I am not saying Isreal does not have blood on it's hands - but they are sourrounded by forces bent on their total destruction - how are they supposed to act?

The stated goal of Hamas is not a situation for palestine - it is the total destruction of Isreal - that is their stated goal. In response, the only action they can take is to destroy Hamas.

The situation is no doubt complex - more so than we comprehend - but I think some topline points are pretty clear. I'll never understand how people can be pro-palestinian terrorists and very negative against Israel. What would you do if you neighbour made it clear that his whole aim in life was to kill you and your family - would you try to appease him, or would you take the necessary action to eliminate the threat. No doubt in my mind what I would do.

Originally posted by DrewM
Yes it is far more evil to blow yourself up wrapped in nails than to fire a missle at a specific target. Don't want to get into an argument about relative moralities - but convincing people to blow themselves up to kill as many people as possible is evil. Attacking specific targets is also bad - but it's not even in the same league.

I don't buy it...evil is a matter of perspective not some quantifiable entity. I really don't understand how you differentiate between the two sides in this conflict. Both sides are using what weapons they have to do as much damage as they can to their opponents. If the palestinian militants had missiles, no doubt they would use them, but they don't so they make their own form of cruise missile that's guided by a human brain. They attack specific targets, but because in your mind, a busload of Israeli civilians is not a legitimate military target this makes the palestinians evil. The point is Drew that you have already decided in your mind that the Israelis are "innocent civilians" and surrounded by countries "bent on their destruction". Yet you don't seem to wonder why these countries want Israel destroyed, and are not prepared to even entertain the notion that they may have legitimate greivances against Israel.

I am not saying Isreal does not have blood on it's hands - but they are sourrounded by forces bent on their total destruction - how are they supposed to act?

Having suffered through the Holocaust I would hope that they would understand what it means to be driven from your home by military force and forced to live in a slum under tight restrictions.

The stated goal of Hamas is not a situation for palestine - it is the total destruction of Isreal - that is their stated goal. In response, the only action they can take is to destroy Hamas.

Perhaps, but the destruction of Hamas will not be a military action. The only way to destroy groups like Hamas is to deny them a way of getting new recruits. I doubt it would be a very large organization if their only goal was to destroy Israel. Without the issue of palestinian statehood there will be no lines of willing individuals forming ready to blow themselves up for Hamas.

The situation is no doubt complex - more so than we comprehend - but I think some topline points are pretty clear. I'll never understand how people can be pro-palestinian terrorists and very negative against Israel.

I'm not pro-palestinian or pro-Israeli, I think they are both wrong.

What would you do if you neighbour made it clear that his whole aim in life was to kill you and your family - would you try to appease him, or would you take the necessary action to eliminate the threat. No doubt in my mind what I would do.

I think I would do just what the palestinians are doing, I'd fight to protect my family... oh wait... you were talking about the Israeli's weren't you...interesting...

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Both sides are using what weapons they have to do as much damage as they can to their opponents.


this is not true, if it were there would be not one palestinian left alive, if there were any left they would have a permanent orange afro. Israel is being very restrained, they could wipe out the palestinians in a matter of minutes if they wanted to. the same could not be said of hammas. if hammas had a nuke, they would blow up tel aviv that day. the fact that israel has nukes and a bigger army than the US and has not anihilated the threat outright shows that they are the retrained ones. they dont teach their kids to hate palestinians, or want to kill them. again I ask, why is it that the only people you want freed in the middle east is the palestinians? is it becasue you know that israel is a rational elected democracy that you can talk to and negtiate with?

Trav makes good points.

Isreal shows remarkable restraint. Pagan by your logic - Bin Laden is no different from the US military - afterall they feel they have a legitamate struggle.

Hamas comits terrorist acts, Israel responds to terrorist acts to protect their citizens. The two actions are miles apart. One purposely tries to kill innocents, the other purposely does all it can to avoid the death of innocents.

The only way to defeat Hamas is to destroy them - you cannot educate them out of being terrorists. They will never give up attacking Israel - they have said as much themselves. Their goals are nothing more than to be terrorists. The ones sold down the river are the palestinian people because the vast majority of them do not support the killing of innocent civilians.

Originally posted by Travh20
this is not true, if it were there would be not one palestinian left alive, if there were any left they would have a permanent orange afro. Israel is being very restrained, they could wipe out the palestinians in a matter of minutes if they wanted to. the same could not be said of hammas. if hammas had a nuke, they would blow up tel aviv that day. the fact that israel has nukes and a bigger army than the US and has not anihilated the threat outright shows that they are the retrained ones. they dont teach their kids to hate palestinians, or want to kill them.

I'm sorry Trav, but I dont think the Israeli's are acting restrained just because they haven't nuked anybody yet. I dont think they're exercising restraint when they go in and bulldoze houses. I dont think they are exercising restraint when they build another Israeli settlement in the occupied territories.

again I ask, why is it that the only people you want freed in the middle east is the palestinians? is it becasue you know that israel is a rational elected democracy that you can talk to and negtiate with?

Huh?

Originally posted by Pepper
I agree there is a much bigger picture at play here.
People have to be trained to kill, they have to see the person on the otherside not as a human, but as a thing. Dialoge and intergration is the only thing that will change this.

Schrapnal is just as nasty, launching weapons from a distance is always easier then fighting face to face. To the first part. If you havent already seen this, go to the religion section and look for a thread titled "Islam Answers Back". You will see that muslims are already trained from birth. They are trained that anyone not muslim is inferior and if they cross certain lines they should be annihilated. No amount of dialogue is going to change that perception. Changing the way you view yourself and the world has to start within. Dont you know that?

To the second, quit praising them like its so much braver to brainwash children to strap bombs to themselves and tell them they are going to heaven if they only go and kill all those women and children eating in that restaurant on the corner. But you probably dont really mind that do you? Since you probably think the children they use should have been aborted in the first place.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
I don't think it's for you or me to judge whether or not these militants are freedom fighters, or terrorists.
Why not? It looks as though you have made your mind up already. Everyone is entitled to the way they view things Vile.

Originally posted by DrewM
Trav makes good points.

Isreal shows remarkable restraint. Pagan by your logic - Bin Laden is no different from the US military - afterall they feel they have a legitamate struggle.

Well, I was talking about the palestinians being referred to as terrorists, not Osama Bin Laden.

Hamas comits terrorist acts, Israel responds to terrorist acts to protect their citizens. The two actions are miles apart. One purposely tries to kill innocents, the other purposely does all it can to avoid the death of innocents.


I don't thing that Israel is doing "all it can" to avoid civilian casualties, and I think the relative death toll proves that point. Both sides are using reprehensible tactics and are equally wrong in my opinion.

The only way to defeat Hamas is to destroy them - you cannot educate them out of being terrorists. They will never give up attacking Israel - they have said as much themselves. Their goals are nothing more than to be terrorists. The ones sold down the river are the palestinian people because the vast majority of them do not support the killing of innocent civilians.

If in fact Hamas has stated that they will not stop until Israel is destroyed, then obviously one side will have to destroy the other at some point in order for the violence to stop.

To clarify from earlier posts, when I wrote that the terrorists must be pacified, I meant that in the literal sense, i.e. they must be made peaceful. This can be accomplished either by coming to some form of agreement with their demands, or by military action. In the case of the "terrorists" that are fighting for palestinian independence, I think their cause is legitimate and I think they should get an independent state. If Hamas wants nothing less than the destruction of Israel, I hope the Israelis blow them to hell.

Originally posted by HaVoK

quote:Originally posted by Vilepagan
I don't think it's for you or me to judge whether or not these militants are freedom fighters, or terrorists.

Why not? It looks as though you have made your mind up already. Everyone is entitled to the way they view things Vile.

I'm not sure why my statement made you think I've made up my mind.

Sure everybody is entitled to their own outlook, but that's what we are debating here is it not?

Originally posted by HaVoK
To the first part. If you havent already seen this, go to the religion section and look for a thread titled "Islam Answers Back". You will see that muslims are already trained from birth. They are trained that anyone not muslim is inferior and if they cross certain lines they should be annihilated. No amount of dialogue is going to change that perception. Changing the way you view yourself and the world has to start within. Dont you know that?

To the second, quit praising them like its so much braver to brainwash children to strap bombs to themselves and tell them they are going to heaven if they only go and kill all those women and children eating in that restaurant on the corner. But you probably dont really mind that do you? Since you probably think the children they use should have been aborted in the first place.

Woowwa how do you make such a stunning leap of logic? Honestly let's keep the discussion in context will you? Did I ever praise? Did I ever say any group was braver? You do an disservice to your argument by bringing in such petty conjecture.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the United States, and they seem to get along pretty well with everyone else. Islam is by and large a peaceful religion subject to a variety of interpitations, just like christianity. Don't group the acts of a very small minority to the people at large.

Originally posted by Pepper
Don't group the acts of a very small minority to the people at large.
remember that next time you insinuate that all catholics are bad because a few homosexual priests molested some litle boys, or if you here that assumption made and dont say what you said about the peaceful muslims and how they are not all like the terrorists.

Travh when have i ever insinuated that all catholics are bad.

Stop putting words in my mouth. Please.

LOL, I knew that those exact words were coming, right down to the "dont put words in my mouth please." ROFLMAO, you guys are to predictable.

In the case of the "terrorists" that are fighting for palestinian independence, I think their cause is legitimate and I think they should get an independent state

Yes their cause is legitimate, their means are not.

If I got ripped off by a store downtown - I would have a legitimate cause to recover my money by proper means. If I went and blew up the store then I could hardly claim that I had a legitimate cause therefore it's not so bad. The police would come after me with rifles - just like the IDF is going after terrorists.

I know you are not saying that sucicide bombings are ok - but you are saying that it's understandable. I don't agree. I don't see any situation that merits strapping nails and bombs on then walking into a crowded area and blowing up.

Isreal had 2 sucide bombings last week. If they had not occured then wheelchair guy would still be alive. This guy was known to be the main guy who approved attacks. He got what he deserved.

ok, before I start criticizing Israel I would like to sya that I'm a zionist, and extremely patriotic about Israel, but I carry the beelif that dissent is patriotic. here goes:

Originally posted by DrewM

Israel
- Specifically target terrorist groups & leaders
- Aim to avoid innocent deaths.



the Israeli army has hit civilian targets many times before. innoicent Palestinians are killed just as often as Israeli soldiers, and many Palestinian houses and livelihoods are ruined by the Israeli army.
also, this is seprate, it might provide some insight: the army is mandatory for all Israeli citizens living in the country. the only way out is to serve in a hospital as a volunteer (many orthodox people do this) or to serve jailtime (I know a couple of people who did this. in fact, I nkow people wh odo both) men must serve several weeks of duty every year post army, and can be called upon when needed in times of war. although there is some chice as to what duty one serves in the army, once youre assigned something, you hve no choice, so there must be soldiers out there doing things they don't agree with. this isn't like the U.S. army. where everyone is there by choice, Israelis really don't have a choice, it's the army in some chape or form, or jail. subsequently, there's a lot of criticism that can't really be applied to the soldiers themselves.

now that I got to the rest of the thread....
the problem here isn't with the majorities in these groups, it's the minorities. most Palestinians don't wnat to see Israel kiled. that's only the terrorists, which are a small percentage of the group. most Israelis don't hate Palestinians. pleanty wnat a Palestinians state. there is a difference between the two, in that the terorist attcks are performed by people with no legitimacy from a governemnt. anyone can be a terrorist, anyone can go and blow things up. the Israeli stuff is all done by a government. There's a completely diferent level of responsibility there. I'm not taking either sie, just pointint out the difference. the terrorists aren't innocent. what they do is horrible, but it doens't represent the views of the majority. Israel has done some things that really aren't good. neither side is completely innocent, nor re the opinions of people the same acrosss the board. it's importnat to keep that in perspective.

Originally posted by DrewM
Yes their cause is legitimate, their means are not.

Perhaps not, but they are the only means the palestinians have.

If I got ripped off by a store downtown - I would have a legitimate cause to recover my money by proper means. If I went and blew up the store then I could hardly claim that I had a legitimate cause therefore it's not so bad. The police would come after me with rifles - just like the IDF is going after terrorists.

The analogy is fine as far as it goes, but let's say the store didn't steal your money, let's say the bank (Israel) took your house and your land, (since you're a farmer that means your job too) and forced you to live in a slum. You ask the courts for relief (the UN) and they tell the cops (IDF), to make sure you get your house back. Then it turns out that the cops and the bank are working together and you're screwed because the cops just ignore the courts, leaving you living in a slum.

I don't see any situation that merits strapping nails and bombs on then walking into a crowded area and blowing up.

I don't either, but rather than assuming this is because these people are bloodthirsty savages that deserve nothing but death, I wonder at the depths of the misery that must be present to drive these people to such extreme behavior.

Isreal had 2 sucide bombings last week. If they had not occured then wheelchair guy would still be alive. This guy was known to be the main guy who approved attacks. He got what he deserved.

I hope the guys that "know" that the wheelchair guy was guilty are smarter than the ones that "knew" Saddam had WMD's.

If Israel's information was so good that they know he was guilty, and they knew where to find him, why not snatch him and put him on trial?

It doesn't matter if it's the only means they have - wrong is wrong. Plus, it's not the only means they have. They can renounce terror and negotiate. Isreal already offered them 95% of what they want at US brokered peace accords in the 90's. Their response was more terrorism.

I don't believe they are all blood thirsty savages. As whammybar pointed out - it's a minority. I also do not believe that the actions by the actual bombers are well thought out - they are brainwashed kids, kids that fit a certain profile. You could find 1000 kids in the US ready to do the same if you worked them up enough.

Isreal has no claim nor desire for the palestinian lands - they are in them because they have to be for security reasons. Remember also that in 1967 most of the Arab world attacked Israel and got their butts kicked - from which Israel became somewhat bigger.

I also find it interesting that they cry for the death of this leader but they rejoice in the deaths of their own kids that they manipulate and use as pawns to kill innocent civilians.

They believe it’s honorable to commit suicide to help their cause. So when a suicide bomber hits, and kills, they rejoice because they are

1. attacking the enemy
2. helping their cause

So when their children die, for their “cause” they believe it’s an honorable, and good thing to do.

Just like the kamikazes, from Japan (aka WWII)

except the kamakazies were attacking military targets in military equipment, not targeting the most vulnerable civilians in their everyday routines with palestinian civilians, often children.

Originally posted by Overdose
They believe it’s honorable to commit suicide to help their cause. So when a suicide bomber hits, and kills, they rejoice because they are

1. attacking the enemy
2. helping their cause

So when their children die, for their “cause” they believe it’s an honorable, and good thing to do.

Just like the kamikazes, from Japan (aka WWII)

Thats what makes it so sad. The have support in the west from liberals in the same way that it's human nature to support an underdog football team. Fighting for a cause, freedom fighters blah blah.. On close analysis - the palestinan cause has been hihacked by the most insidious band of killers to whom life is worth nothing. In fact their whole focus in life is to kill as many women and children as possible. If it were your family that was blown up you'd think differently.

Interesting read about the palestinian cult of death
http://www.robertfulford.com/SuicideTerrorism2.html

Originally posted by DrewM
On close analysis - the palestinan cause has been hihacked by the most insidious band of killers to whom life is worth nothing. In fact their whole focus in life is to kill as many women and children as possible. If it were your family that was blown up you'd think differently.


I agree that the cause of the palestinians has been hijacked by terrorists who have a different agenda. I think it's a bit simplistic to state that their whole focus is to kill as many women and children as possible. You're right, if my family was blown up I'd probably feel differently, but if your house was bulldozed and your land was stolen you might feel differently too.

A house being bulldozed is nothing compared to some childs severed head lying in the street. Plus - they don't randomly bulldoze houses, they do it to the families of the bombers to try and deter such attacks and save lives.

Yassin had stated that the goal of Hamas was the total destruction of Israel and the conversion of the lands to a muslim fundamentalist state. All negotiation or ceasefire being ruled out.

Hamas is a terrorist organization, not struggling with a Palestinian cause, struggling with the cause of the destruction of Israel.

Don't forget - Gaza and the West bank were not occupied by Israel until 1967 when the Arabs attacked them. They have pulled out of these areas on the basis of negotiated peace accords - only to be forced to re-occupy in the face of terrorist acts against their citizens.

Originally posted by DrewM
A house being bulldozed is nothing compared to some childs severed head lying in the street. Plus - they don't randomly bulldoze houses, they do it to the families of the bombers to try and deter such attacks and save lives.

I'm not sure why, but bulldozing someone's house because they are related to a criminal seems wrong to me.

Yassin had stated that the goal of Hamas was the total destruction of Israel and the conversion of the lands to a muslim fundamentalist state. All negotiation or ceasefire being ruled out.

Hamas is a terrorist organization, not struggling with a Palestinian cause, struggling with the cause of the destruction of Israel.

I'm not that familiar with the history of Hamas. If in fact that is the goal they are working for, I have no problem with letting Israel destroy them. I would hope that Israel would be less indiscriminate about it.

Don't forget - Gaza and the West bank were not occupied by Israel until 1967 when the Arabs attacked them.

I don't mean to split hairs but in 1967 Israel attacked their neighbors when it became apparent that they were about to be attacked.

They have pulled out of these areas on the basis of negotiated peace accords - only to be forced to re-occupy in the face of terrorist acts against their citizens.

It does seem ironic that the occupied territories are supposed to increase security in Israel and instead they are the cause of some of the attacks.

Originally posted by DrewM
A house being bulldozed is nothing compared to some childs severed head lying in the street.

What about the innocent palestinian bystanders, victims of Israels "precision" bombings against terrorists ?
Many of them are kids too.

Believe me, I have no sympathy for terrorists. But obviously Israel's strategy is immoral, useless and only leads to further violence.

Originally posted by astrapol2
What about the innocent palestinian bystanders, victims of Israels "precision" bombings against terrorists ?
Many of them are kids too.

Believe me, I have no sympathy for terrorists. But obviously Israel's strategy is immoral, useless and only leads to further violence.

Intent, intent, intent. Yes, Isreal kills innocent bystanders sometimes, but that's inevitable when the enemy doesn't wear uniforms and uses civilians for cover. If Hamas didn't want civilians killed, they could wear uniforms like the Isrealis do or not take cover in civilian targets, and Palestinian civilian deaths wouldn't be such an issue.

"Rantisi [Hamas new Gaza chief], 54, has appeared in public frequently since Yassin's death, but always in large crowds that deter an Israeli attack."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20040324/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_30

Do you see that Palestinians actually exploit humanitarianism? In fact, it's clear that Palestinians have no humanitarian concerns at all, while the exact opposite is clear for Isreal. It amazes me how intelligent individuals can actually utterly fail to pick out the good guys from the bad guys here.

The difference is that Isreal is doing the best they can and Palestinian organizations are doing the worst they can.

Isreal has tried peaceful tactics (negotiation, compromise, etc) and these tactics have been greeted with violence and deception. Such defines Isreal's existance; they've been defending themselves literally from the first day of their existance when Arabs immediately commenced a cold-blooded invasion of Isreal.

What on Earth does everyone want of Isreal? The problem is that Palestinians and most Arabs want Jews exterminated, period. Do you too fault Isreal for existing at all?

Originally posted by astrapol2
What about the innocent palestinian bystanders, victims of Israels "precision" bombings against terrorists ?
Many of them are kids too.

Believe me, I have no sympathy for terrorists. But obviously Israel's strategy is immoral, useless and only leads to further violence.

Yep - obviously it is immoral for a country surrounded by groups publicly stating their intent to destroy their country, blowing up their citizens in the most hideous of ways, to take action against their attackers.

It's clear that doing nothing increases the violence also. Your approach is always appease, appease, appease, run scared and be weak in fear of what might happen.

Israel have a moral right to defend themselves. What is immoral is young kids being coerced into blowing themselves up (in the name of Islam - when everything about that act is contrary to Islam - so you can add religious hypocrites to the list also)

I do not believe you when you say you have no sympathy for terrorists. You make it clear that you have immense sympathy for terrorists and absolutely no sympathy for the victims of terrorism. In fact you define self defense as immorality. Hard to understand really.

Appeasement does not mean doing nothing.

It is not running scared, it is trying to bring peace.

Peace is an objective right?

Originally posted by Pepper
Appeasement does not mean doing nothing.

It is not running scared, it is trying to bring peace.

Peace is an objective right?

There is no question about the definition of what appeasement means. The issue is the outcome of appeasement. Give me any examples of where appeasement worked in a situation where blood is being spilled. I can give you plenty where it lead to further and greater bloodshed.

It isn't appeasement that leads to bloodshed, desire for power leads to bloodshed.

What was the outcome of the second world war? Millions and millions dead. What is the next great war going to look like? How many more dead will we see and tolorate before we say enough is enough.

appeasement led to WW2. Chamberlain and the french's desire for peace led them to the appeasment of adolf hitler, who was breaking laws laid down by the treaty of versailles left and right, any one of which entitled the allies to roll in and crush the germans yet again. unfortuanantly, their desire for peace, and the desire of their populations for peace led them to believe hitler when he said that all he wanted was the rhineland, then the sudetanland, then chechloslovakia. WW2 could have been ended before it started if the french army would have countered hitlers move to remilatarize the rhineland, which he did with only a couple of battalions of infantry. the french could have easily crushed this force and ended hitlers reign. hitler gambled on the reoccupation of the rhineland, knowing the allies had no will for action, and his gamble paid off.

Pepper - as Trav pointed out - you give a great example of a war that absolutely would have been avoided if Hilter had not been appeased on the notion that appeasement would avoid conflict. The outcome - many millions of dead.

Astropol - here is an interesting story
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-03-24-young-mideast-boy_x.htm

16 year old boy with a bomb belt, who had a change of heart. His brother said 'he is easily manipulaed'. What kind of monsters send a 16 year old kid to his death to kill others??? And you call the Isreali response directed only at these terrorist planners immoral while making excuses for the terrorists and generally feeling some solidarity with them. :confused:

You know to say that world war 2 started because of one treaty is not looking at a bigger picture. There were many circumstances that went back to the end of the first great war that created the environment for racial hatred, militarism and facism to breed in Germany before the second ww. Perhaps if Germany wasn't left to pay the entire cost, the second war and the murder of millions of people might not have happened.

Originally posted by DrewM
And you call the Isreali response directed only at these terrorist planners immoral while making excuses for the terrorists and generally feeling some solidarity with them. :confused:

First, as I already stated, i have no sympathy for terrorists. Terrorism is immoral, useless and only leads to further violence.
I have sympathy for the palestinian people, though, that is true. That does not mean that i consider myself against Israeli people. In fact I have som jewish friends who have been living in Jerusalem and who share my point of view.

Now, about the israeli startegy being immoral : yes, it is. To kill people in the streets with rockets while innocent bystanders are near them is not a method acceptable for a democracy.

Leper :
If Hamas didn't want civilians killed, they could wear uniforms like the Isrealis do or not take cover in civilian targets, and Palestinian civilian deaths wouldn't be such an issue.

They do not "take cover in civilian targets". They are being killed in the street, where they live !

Even without the innocent victims issue, Israel has no right to kill people in the streets just because they are considered dangerous.

And I really do not see how this is leading to a solution of the crisis. I see pure vengeance in these actions, not the strategy of a country that ultimately seeks peace and stability with its neighbours.

How is the collatoral killing of the people in the streets (which is clearly a problem) any different than the killing of innocents from stray bombs in Afghanistan? A campaign you already support and as far as I am aware have never considered immoral. There is no real difference between the US campaign in Afghanistan against terrorist planners and Israel's actions against terrorist planners, apart from scale.

Glad to hear you are not against Israel - it sure comes across that way.

Originally posted by Pepper
You know to say that world war 2 started because of one treaty is not looking at a bigger picture. There were many circumstances that went back to the end of the first great war that created the environment for racial hatred, militarism and facism to breed in Germany before the second ww. Perhaps if Germany wasn't left to pay the entire cost, the second war and the murder of millions of people might not have happened.

it is not short sighted to say that the treaty of Versailles was a major cause of WW2. it is the document that forced Germany to take all the blame for and pay for all the damages caused in WW1. the German people felt royally screwed by this. Hitler played on this in his run up to seizing control. he blamed the French, the Jews, everybody, and most of all the treaty of Versailles. he promised to shred this treaty, restore the dignity of the German people, put an end to the rampant sexual perversion and corruption perpetrated by the Weimar republic which was installed against the Germans wishes. he knew what fears to play on, and the main talking point was the treaty.

Originally posted by DrewM
How is the collatoral killing of the people in the streets (which is clearly a problem) any different than the killing of innocents from stray bombs in Afghanistan? A campaign you already support and as far as I am aware have never considered immoral. There is no real difference between the US campaign in Afghanistan against terrorist planners and Israel's actions against terrorist planners, apart from scale.


Not exactly. In Afghanistan, there was a large military intervention to overthrow a regime. In Israel, there is no intent to overthrow a regime : it mostly sniper work - with missiles.

Whenever civil death occur in Afghanistan, it is a mistake. The army apologise and should try to repair the damage as much as it can. In Israel, it is an accepted collateral damage.

In Afghanistan, a new governement has been set up and there is hope (not much though) that the situation will get better. In Israel, there seem to be no political solution : just more death.

The idea that it is possible to get rid of terrorism by killing terrorist leaders is wrong. The more martyrs terrorism gets, the stronger it grows.

Originally posted by astrapol2
Not exactly. In Afghanistan, there was a large military intervention to overthrow a regime. In Israel, there is no intent to overthrow a regime : it mostly sniper work - with missiles.

Whenever civil death occur in Afghanistan, it is a mistake. The army apologise and should try to repair the damage as much as it can. In Israel, it is an accepted collateral damage.

In Afghanistan, a new governement has been set up and there is hope (not much though) that the situation will get better. In Israel, there seem to be no political solution : just more death.

The idea that it is possible to get rid of terrorism by killing terrorist leaders is wrong. The more martyrs terrorism gets, the stronger it grows.

Yes of course there are many differences between the 2 - that's not the point. When it comes to killing terrorists & collatoral damage they are not so far apart that you can claim one is immoral and the other is acceptable. The comparison is mainly to highlight the two faced ideas you hold.

Ok.
But what makes israel "targetted" assassination immoral is that they are not an exception in a broader policy that would try to protect civilians as much as possible. They are the very core of Israel's present policy. And a policy that implies the killing of several innocents to get rid of a supposed terrorist, himself sentenced to death without any trial, is in my opinion totally immoral.

But - how is that any different in essence to Afghanistan? The US military has the same policy about civilian casualties. The Isreali's are at war with the palestinians, as much as the US is at war with terrorists.

They do have a policy of minimizing civilian casualties - they could kill many more of the Hamas leaders if they abandoned that. Why else would the new leader only be in public in a large crowd? Because he knows very well that Israel will not attack him for fear of killing innocent civilians.

You've yet to make a convincing argument on why specifically Israel's policy is immoral while other similar in concept conflicts are ok. There is a wide gap between immorality & acceptable - that needs a strong argument to bridge.

Originally posted by astrapol2

Leper :


They do not "take cover in civilian targets". They are being killed in the street, where they live !

Even without the innocent victims issue, Israel has no right to kill people in the streets just because they are considered dangerous.

And I really do not see how this is leading to a solution of the crisis. I see pure vengeance in these actions, not the strategy of a country that ultimately seeks peace and stability with its neighbours.

You ignore the fact that Palestinian militants purposefully mingle with civilians to protect themselves through Isreal's sense of humanity. Do you really think Isreal is to blame when innocent civilians are incidentally killed in such circumstances?

How is it leading to a solution? It's not. Killing leaders of Hamas leads to treatment of symptoms through short term disruption of the organization, but this is not a cure. Isreal's "cure," and one of the only viable "cures" that I've heard of at this point, is the wall it's building along it's border to keep Palestinians out of Isreal period. Overall, the approach seems very sensible to me, considering the difficulty of the situation.

Originally posted by Leper
You ignore the fact that Palestinian militants purposefully mingle with civilians to protect themselves through Isreal's sense of humanity. Do you really think Isreal is to blame when innocent civilians are incidentally killed in such circumstances?

Yes ! When one shoots missiles in a busy city street, it is to blame for killing innocents.

Originally posted by Leper
Isreal's "cure," and one of the only viable "cures" that I've heard of at this point, is the wall it's building along it's border to keep Palestinians out of Isreal period.
Even that is not "cure" but a short term solution. The only "cure" is peace and giving Palestinian the possibilty to build a real country, both geographically and economically sustainable.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by astrapol2
Yes ! When one shoots missiles in a busy city street, it is to blame for killing innocents.

And what would you do if you knew this person was about to initiate a suicide bombing of your people and you have no oppurtunity to kill him without killing some civilians? I think Isreal's choice is perfectly logical: kill him now and prevent massive bombings of your own people at the cost of killing a few innocent Palestinians. It's not a lovely decision, but any responsible leader would or should do the same. It's Hamas that is forcing such a decision to be made.


Even that is not "cure" but a short term solution. The only "cure" is peace and giving Palestinian the possibilty to build a real country, both geographically and economically sustainable.

Well, the wall/fence itself is not a cure, but it creates a separation of the people which is the only way there will ever be peace at this point. The only way for the problem to be cured is to have an extended period of peace to allow the issues cool off; The wall/fence will accomplish this.

Originally posted by astrapol2
Even that is not "cure" but a short term solution. The only "cure" is peace and giving Palestinian the possibilty to build a real country, both geographically and economically sustainable.

You don't exactly have to be Sherlock Homes to have figured that out - its like saying the whole world would be better if we were all just nice to each other. True, but irrelevant.

"the only cure is peace" - 10 out of 10 for stating the obvious.

I did not pretend to be original ;)
But apparently it is not so obvious for Sharon.