War and Peace in the Mideast

End the Suffering in the Middle East By Rabbi Michael Lerner

The people of the Middle East are suffering again as militarists on all sides, and cheerleading journalists, send forth missiles, bombs and endless words of self-justification for yet another pointless round of violence between Israel and her neighbors. For those of us who care deeply about human suffering, this most recent episode in irrationality evokes tears of sadness, incredulity at the lack of empathy on all sides, anger at how little anyone seems to have learned from the past, and moments of despair as we once again see the religious and democratic ideals subordinated to the cynical realism of militarism. Meanwhile, the partisans on each side, content to ignore the humanity of ?the Other,? rush to assure their constituencies that the enemy is always to blame. Each such effort is pointless. We have a struggle that has been going on for over a hundred years. Who tosses the latest match into the tinder box matters little. What matters is how to repair the situation. The blame game only succeeds in diverting attention from that central issue. Within the context of blame, there?s enough to go around. It all depends on where you start the story. Counting on lack of historical memory, the partisans on all sides choose the place that best fits them into a narrative in which they are the ?righteous victims? and the others are the evil aggressors. Palestinians like to start the story in 1948 with the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes during the war on Israel proclaimed by neighboring Arab states, and the refusal of the Israeli government to allow these people to return to once the hostilities ceased. Israelis prefer to start the story when Jews were desperately seeking to escape from the genocide they faced in Europe, and a cynical Arab leadership convinced the British military to side with local Palestinians who sought to prevent those Jewish refugees from joining their fellow Jews living in Palestine at the time. I tell the story, and how to understand both sides, in my book Healing Israel/Palestine. Or one can start more recently, with this summer?s escalation of violence. But where exactly did that start? Please go to the website of Israeli Human Rights Organization B?tselem www.btselem.org to see that each side can point to outrageous acts on the part of the other. Since the death of Yasir Arafat and the assumption of power by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Palestine?s major political factions ? Fatah and Hamas ? observed a hudna, or ceasfire. Yet Israel, pointing to the fact that Abbas? police force (decimated by Israeli bombings during the 2nd Intifada of 2001-2003) was unable to fully restrain the violence of Hamas, the Al-Aqsa Martyr?s Brigade and Islamic Jihad?and used that weakness as its reason to claim that there was ?nobody to talk to? when the peace forces in Israel pleaded with former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and later with current PM Ehud Olmert that the Palestinian request for negotiations should be accepted. Instead, Israel announced a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the northern West Bank (implemented in 2005) and from forthcoming sections of the West Bank (to have begun with the removal of illegal outposts this summer) that would de facto create new borders which would incorporate into Israel large parts of the West Bank that Israel had agreed to leave during the 1990s. Tikkun magazine and Israeli peace forces warned that the unilateral withdrawal, opposed by the Palestinian Authority, would add credibility to Hamas? claim that all the Palestinian Authority?s efforts at non-violence had produced nothing more than Israel refusing to talk, whereas acts of violence by Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza had led to the IDF withdrawing to protect its soldiers. It wouldn?t be hard to see why Sharon went ahead with the unilateral withdrawal. If his intention was, as stated, to hold on to as much of the West Bank as possible, it would be far easier to convince the world that ?there is nobody to talk to? if Hamas would win the coming election, since Hamas was universally recognized to be a terrorist group. When the Palestinian people complied by falling for this trick and establishing a government run by people who refused to acknowledge the right of Israel to exist, it was easy for Olmert to affirm the Sharon unilateralism and announce plans to withdraw from the West Bank that would be the political cover for Israel annexing significant parts of the Occupied Territory. Hamas played its expected role by lobbing Qassam rockets at Israeli population centers, thereby ?proving? for the Israeli right that any withdrawal would only intensify Israeli vulnerability and give Israeli hard-liners reason to oppose Olmert?s partial withdrawal as appeasement that had already failed to bring peace in Gaza. Of course, from the standpoint of Hamas, this was only part of an ongoing struggle to free thousands of Palestinians who continue to be ?arrested? (or, from the Palestinian perspective, ?kidnapped?) by the IDF, incarcerated without charges or trial for six months in huge prison camps, often subject to torture. Yet Hamas, faced with an economic boycott (including the withholding to Hamas of taxes Israel collected from Palestinians that Israel had previously promised it would give back to the Palestinian Authority) that was preventing it from being able to function as a government, made statements that indicated that it was exploring the idea of de facto recognition in response to the Prisoners document, which threatened to undercut everyone because it was signed by members of every major faction of Palestinians sitting in Israeli jails). For Israeli militarists and the settlers, Hamas recognition of Israel, however partial, would have been a dramatic propaganda defeat. Within days Israelis began shelling inside Gaza (allegedly to stop Hamas? firing of Qassam rockets against Israeli population centers). One such shell landed on a Gaza beach, killing a family of eight who were simply enjoying the sun and water. A few days later, a Hamas group captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, and Israel used this as its excuse to implement a plan it had developed months before to re-enter Gaza and destroy the Hamas infrastructure. At this point a huge escalation took place. Instead of narrowly focusing on Hamas? capacity to make war, the Israelis chose the path of collective punishment, a frequently ineffective counterinsurgency policy used to eliminate public support for resistance movements. In the height of the oppressive summer heat, Israel bombed the electricity grid, effectively cutting off Gaza?s water and the electricity needed to keep refrigeration working, thereby guaranteeing a dramatic decrease in food for the area?s already destitute, million plus population. This act was yet another violation of international law that include the arrests of thousands by Israelis and the shooting of Qassams at population centers by Hamas. In response, Hezbollah fighters who had occupied the land abandoned by Israel when Israel terminated its occupation of southern Lebanon in 2000, launched an attack on Israeli troops inside Israel in clear violation of the understandings that peace would be maintained on that border?understandings that made it politically possible for Israel to withdraw from Lebanon without fear that its northern citizens would once again be subject to rocket fire that had put many Israelis into bomb shelters off-and-on for years since Israel had invaded Lebanon in 1982. From the standpoint of some in the Arab world, the attack on Israeli troops in northern Israel was an act of Islamic solidarity in face of the huge escalation taken by Israel against the entire population of Gaza. They argue that what really needs to be explained is not why they acted, but why the rest of the world did not act to demand that Israel end its outrageous punishment of a million people for the acts of a few (when the U.N. tried to act, the right-wing government of the U.S. vetoed a resolution supported by the Security Council majority). Yet from the standpoint of Israel, the attacks by Hezbollah were a blatant violation of the understanding that had kept Israel out of Lebanon for the past seven years. And in fact, it was also a violation of international law and human rights, subjecting a civilian population to random bombings aimed at terrorizing the population. Hezbollah had shown itself to be the vicious terrorist force that Israel always claimed it to be. People living in Haifa or Tsfat or dozens of other locations in Israel are at this very moment living in the same kind of fear that rekindles the fears of earlier experiences in their lives (some, remember, are Holocaust survivors, others the children of survivors, and many have lived through wars that were explicitly aimed at the annihilation of Israel). Those fears are unfortunately likely to be played on by right wing politicians in the coming years. Nor should we underestimate the malevolence of Iran and Syria in attempting to stimulate unrest and destabilization. While there are some in both of these countries who genuinely feel outrage at Israeli behavior toward Muslim co-religionists, the record of indifference to the plight of the Palestinians in their own countries and failure to provide material support for Palestine to build up its own economic infrastructure when it was needed suggests that their assistance to Hezbollah comes more from seeking political advantage and domination in the Middle East than from genuine moral solidarity with the Palestinian people. And the fear of Iran, a country whose president out and out denies that there ever was a Holocaust and who explicitly affirms the goal of destroying the State of Israel gives Israelis real reason to worry when his proxies in Hezbollah or Hamas develop the capacity to shoot rockets into Israeli population centers. What was Israel to do? Well, had Ariel Sharon been in power, having learned his lesson in Lebanon, he likely would have done the exact same thing he did two years ago when an Israeli businessman was captured by ?the enemy??namely, a prisoner exchange in which hundreds of prisoners are released for a single Israeli. That exchange had been asked for by Hamas and pleaded for by the family of POW Gilad Shalit, but was been rejected by the Israeli government. Please read the analysis of this error, and other articles analyzing the current situation at the daily updates of ?Current Thinking? at www.tikkun.org . The consensus among Israeli peaceniks is that both Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his Labor Party Defense Minister Amir Peretz feel the political need to show that they are ?strong? and hence the invasion and attack on Lebanon is their only politically possible strategy. For the sake of their egos and their future political viability, they ?must? proceed with the wild escalation of the struggle against the Lebanese people, most of whom had exercised their democratic rights by rejecting Hezbollah?s electoral appeals, voting in a government that had only a small minority of Hezbollah within it. What could Israel still do? It could redefine these issues as minor border irritants, exchange POWS, and unilaterally announce that it will no longer hold arrestees for more than 3 days without filing formal criminal charges against those who had acted with violence and releasing everyone else, giving speedy and public trials, and punishing any soldier or Shin Bet or Aman officer who engages in torture (or, as they call it, ?moderate pressure?) on detainees. It could then immediately announce its intentions to strengthen the position of Palestinian Authority President Abbas by giving to him the tax monies withheld from Hamas, and opening ?final status? negotiations within two months. Meanwhile, Israel could begin dismantling the Separation Wall, and promise to rebuild it only on the lines of an international border agreed to by both sides. And Israel could unilaterally censor anti-Palestinian incitement within government-controlled media and instead begin to build a culture of non-violence and educate Israelis about the need for reparations to Palestinian refugees. What could Palestinians do? President Abbas could announce that he is inviting Israel to form a joint Israeli/Palestinian border force to ensure that there are no more violent attacks on Israeli civilians, in exchange for the immediate opening of ?final status? negotiations with Israel before any further West Bank withdrawals are created. There were joint patrols and security coordination until Sept. 2,000 and they contributed to the low level of violence on both sides until Ariel Sharon made his famous provocative trip to the Temple Mount. Abbas could further announce that the Palestinian people who elected him are committed to a non-violent (not passive) struggle for ending the Occupation, but that anyone engaged in violence against Israel or against fellow Palestinians would be tried and, if convicted, would lose their Palestinian citizenship. Abbas could tour the West Bank and Gaza preaching non-violence, implement an immediate end to anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric in the Palestinian press and in their schools, and could announce that he is determined to build a culture of non-violence inside Palestine. What could the U.S. and other Western states do? They could immediately establish an international conference representing all the nations of the world who were willing to accept the right of Israel to exist within the 1967 boundaries and the right of Palestine to exist within Gaza and the West Bank, and let those countries impose on both sides a settlement that is fair to both sides and enforce such a settlement, guaranteeing peace and security to both sides. Each participant country in this international conference would be allowed in after it had given to a neutral international bank a deposit equal to .01% of its GDP for the purpose of creating the beginning of an inernational fund for reparations as described below. As the Tikkun Community has outlined in the past, the terms of that settlement should include: 1. Permanent boundaries for both states that roughly resemble the pre-67 borders, with some border adjustments mutually agreed to along lines developed in the Geneva Accord (Israel incorporating some of the border settlements into Israel, in exchange for Israel giving equal amounts and quality of land to the Palestinian State). 2. Sharing of Jerusalem and its holy sites, with each side entitled to establish their national capital in Jerusalem, Israel to have control over the Jewish and Armenian quarters plus the Wall and adjacent territory, and Palestine to have control over the Temple Mount with its mosques. 3. All states participating in the International Conference would dedicate at least .1% of their GDP toward an international fund for reparations for Palestinians who lost property, employment or homes in the period 1947-1967, and to Jews who fled from Arab states in the same period (however, reparations will not be paid to any Arab or Jewish family with current gross assets of more than $5 million dollars). 4. A joint Israel/Palestine/International Community police force will be set up to enforce border security for both sides. The U.S. and Nato will enter into a mutual security pact for both parties guaranteeing that each side will be protected by the U.S. and Nato from any assault by the other or by any assault from any other country in the world. 5. Creation of an Atonement and Reconciliation Commission which will unveil all records of both sides, bring to light all violations of human rights on both sides, bring formal charges against those who do not confess their involvement in those violations and testify to the details, and supervise a newly created peace curriculum for all schools and universities aimed at teaching reconciliation and non-violence in action and communication. The explicit goal of this Commission will be to foster the conditions for a reconciliation of the heart and a new understanding on the part of both peoples that each side has been cruel and insensitive, and need to repent, and that both sides have a legitimate natrrative that needs to be understood and accepted as a legitimate viewpoint by the other side. Who are Israel?s friends and the friends of the Jewish people? Those who support this path toward peace and reconciliation. Who are its enemies? Those who encourage it to persist in the fantasy that it can ?win? militarily or politically. Just as the objective enemies of America in the 1960s were those who egged it on to persist in the Vietnam war, and those who were its objective friends were those of its citizens who actively opposed that war, so similarly today the friends of the Jewish people are those who are doing everything possible to restrain it from cheerleadng for Israel?s militarist adventures and refusal to treat the Palestinians as equally entitled to freedom and self-determination as the Jewish people. Who are Palestine?s friends? Those who encourage a path of non-violence and abandoning the fantasy that armed struggle combined with political isolation of Israel will lead to a good outcome for Palestinians. Who are its enemies? Those who preach ideas like ?one state solution? or global economic boycott without offering the Jewish people a secure state in Palestine–paths that will never produce anything positive but continued resistance by Israel and world Jewry. As for us in the Tikkun Community who are friends of both sides, our orientation is clear. Our goal is to speak truth to both the powerful in Israel and the powerless in Palestine, to tell them that their goals cannot be achieved without a radical reversal in the strategic directions they have been following. This truth will eventually be heard?the only question is whether it will be heard without another generation of Arabs and Israelis losing their lives. Because we care very much about the human suffering on both sides, we pray that this truth will be heard, and our strateges for a solution will be implemented. And we will do more than pray?we will also demonstrate against the governments of the U.S., Israel and Palestine till they all change their directions in the ways suggested here, we will organize and educate, and will take other non-violent stepts to get our message heard. You can join us. Join the Tikkun Community as a dues paying member at www.tikkun.org . Or help us get our message printed in Israeli and U.S. media or broadcast on public radio and television in the US and Israel?by sending a tax-deductible donation of $300 or more (if you want your name added to the list of signatories who are putting out this message) or less than $300 if you just want to help us get the monies but don?t want to have your name listed). The reason for these funds: buying media space is very expensive, but it?s also the only way to get our message out to a population that has simply never heard anything like the message of Tikkun?s ?progressive middle path.? Send donations to TIKKUN (yes, it can also be in the form of a credit card number, expiration date, and name on the card and billing address) c/o Middle East Peace Ad, 2342 Shattuck Ave, Suite 1200, Berkeley, Ca. 94704. You can take this message and shorten it, write its message as op-eds or letters to the editor. You can ask elected officials or candidates for office in any and every poliical party to endorse it, setting up meetings with their aides if you can?t meet with them, establishing relationships, and continuing to push for this position every few moments. . You can create a local demonstration around this analysis. You can create a study group using Healing Israel/Palestine (North Atlantic Books, 2003) and The Geneva Accord and other Strategies for Middle East Peace (North Atlantic Books, 2004), so that you personally feel empowered to present a progressive middle path as an alternative to the partisans of each side. You can demand of the other peace groups that they work together with Tikkun to create a yearly gathering in Washington, D.C. of all these groups that support this kind of balanced perspective rather than having each meet with elected officials separately in order to build their own separate political power base rather than give the task of changing America?s policies the highest priority (which they?d do by merging with other groups and thus appearing stronger than any group can be on its own). And you can write letters to the governments of Israel and Palestine sharing this perspective, using my words or your own. So don?t just sit there despairing?there is much that can be done, and lives that can be saved. But lets not abandon prayer, meditation, song and celebration either. We need moments to come together, to nourish our souls, to rekindle our hopefulness, and to joyfully recall all the goodness in the human race, including the goodness of the majority of Israelis, Jews, Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims and everyone else on the planet! ********************************************************* Rabbi Michael Lerner is author of Jewish Renewal: A Path to Healing and Transformation (Harper, 1995), Healing Israel/Palestine (North Atlantic Books, 2003), most recently The Left Hand of God: Taking Back our Country from the Religious Right (HarperSanFrancisco, 2006) and seven other books. He is the editor of Tikkun Magazine in Berkeley (510-644 1200) and rabbi of Beyt Tikkun synagogue which meets in both San Francisco and Berkeley.

http://www.tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/news_item.2006-07-16.3522046449

Yippee. That’s great until you realize that one party wants peace while the other party wants to eliminate the first party.

Peace is, and has been for a long long time, in the hands of the people in the region.

When both groups are willing to grab for it at the same time it can happen. Expecting either party to lie down while the other is killing their citizens is extreme stupidity.

I see several parties claiming they want peace, yet passing on any opportunity to move in that direction.

Which party are you talking about? :wink:

[quote]vroom wrote:
Yippee. That’s great until you realize that one party wants peace while the other party wants to eliminate the first party.

Peace is, and has been for a long long time, in the hands of the people in the region.

When both groups are willing to grab for it at the same time it can happen. Expecting either party to lie down while the other is killing their citizens is extreme stupidity.[/quote]

I agree.

Unfortunately, historicaly, peace is achieved through victory IMHO. I don’t see both parties mutually wanting peace ever though I’m afraid, so I imagine that the killing will continue for a long time.

I read quite a bit of the rabbi’s opinion, but fuck! it’s long, so i stopped. BUT i am a history student and i got a 1st for the Israel/ arab world (not just palestine) conflict. That is the most corrupt shit, ever. U Americans, did u know, as of 2002, 1/2 of ALL US humanitarian aid was sent to Israel, they aren’t a very poor nation, so it goes to buy tanks/helicopters/new guns. Did u also knwo that Israel has stolen the land which Gaza draws it’s water from, and now sells it to them?

I could go on with facts. It makes me so bitter to think of the injustices. And if anyone doubts the arab’s willingness to negotiate, check out UN security council resolution 336 (i think, but i know it was made on nov 22nd, my birthday) which instructed the Israelis decades ago to return ‘expropriated land’ to the Palestinians.

Israelis use Jewish persecution as a massive excuse, they are evil. I am 1/8th jewish. I am not racist. I am informed. This shit needs to stop. Bob Geldof and Bono will not suffice. Americans need to pressurise their government.

Everytime a rehash of res.336 is made by the UN again, USA uses it’s power to completely veto the whole shit. There wasa quote i used for my paper i can’t forget “The Western World is trying to salve its conscience with Arab land (and blood)”

What do u think of this?

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
What do u think of this?[/quote]

I think you are an example of the hatred that develops from listening to too much propaganda.

When both sides are willing to allow a peace, then there can be a peace. Until then, well, we know how that works don’t we.

Vroom man, i’m not like that. i think ur cool. i love what u did for beginners, so i’ll break it down 4 u. Firstly, my nan is jewish, so there’s no semitic hatred here (that word actually is a misnomer, it means hatred of the peoples who historically inhabited the area, including the arabs equally).

Secondly, i knwo of educational protocols actively enforced by the Israeli’s from time of rehabitation to at least the 1980s, which tried to cultivate a jew-centric, backs to the wall kind of ideology of warriors- this is expressed in the fact that all Israeli youths have to serve in the army. is that an example of a placid nation? i think not.

You may counter by saying that they are surrounded by hateful enemies. That is true. i am just saying that maybe you should check out the history and genocides of former (and crucial) Israeli PMs Menachim Begin and Ariel Sharon. What Sharon did to Palestinians in camps after the Lebanese leader he preferred was assassinated, what Begin did before the inception of the Israeli state, to ‘persuade’ the british (who were fighting in a big, terrible war on behalf of the victimised, helpless jewish masses of eastern and central europe) to give them a state in Palestine. If you ahve any questions, please ask.

but i’m in total agreement about your second statement (equal desire for peace=peace)

but there is a massive imbalance of power, and the only means afforded to the arabs in palestine are atrocious, leading to very effective bombings by the vastly superior Israeli army

No peace appears on the horizon

Look, I’m not trying to say that Israel has been angelic in it’s time.

However, when is it enough? When do we stop killing each other and fighting over history.

If and when Israel does not feel threatened for its very existence then perhaps it will become a “placid” nation.

There is nothing that has happened in the region that is out of expectation, really, except that both sides like to look back and justify continuing enmity and hatred with it.

Peace is available tomorrow. People are too busy plotting terrorist attacks and figuring out how to “wipe Israel off the map” for peace to break out.

I don’t really have an intention of focusing on who wronged who in the past, because I’ll never “prove” one party or the other is in the wrong.

However, I can apply principles to today. The basic principle I apply is that terrorism is warfare. Also, there is no such thing as “partial” war. You are at war or you aren’t.

If you have an enemy that is at war with you then you, as a government, are duty bound to protect your citizens and win the war.

I agree with you man. Both sides are at war- that means each will kill, both sides will suffer casualties, pain, doubt, fear. I agree with the principle that the nation surrounded by violent opponents will seek further consolidation of its’ existence, even if that means killing another.

thats is ‘selfish’, also very logical and sensible from this selfish perspective.

You say you have no intention of considering ‘who started it’. That’s fair, without trying to condescend, i recently spent months doing just this. I am a very thorough student.

I’ve read things. Britain offered The dispossessed, humiliated and violently persecuted jews many alternative homelands. Jews had started to move to Israel/palestine since the early 1900s, despite objections along the lines of ‘you’ll be repelled, resisted’ etc. There wasn’t really a conception of terrorism then. there was certainly no unified Islamic terrorism structure, but the British knew, dispossessing another people of their homeland due to a recent, unrelated atrocity, and a distant (although biblical) relation to that land, would result in deaths.

Please get me. Neither side is right, it just incenses me. Here in the UK, when i watch the news, what i mostly see is propaganda. since my media operates from a predominately caucasian perspective, and through terrible occurences like 9/11, the madrid bombings, and the recent july 7th attacks on my own birthplace of london, they offer a very distorted, ignorant and exclusive opinion. there is no reason, except on the liberal tv station (channel4).

The jews were offered various places, like i said. canada is very underpopulated right, like the 2nd or so largest geographical country in the world? The Jews of the 1900s, and even of the 1948 exodus generation, had many alternatives, but due to their scripture they refused, and walked into an eternal war. They win the wars now, but if they were to lose ONE war, they would be exterminated as a country.

If you want to enter into a dialogue on this, please tell me. If not, suffice to say that i bear no mailce to jews, israelis or other ‘peoples’. My hatred is reserved for people, and it is my observation that the David Ben Gurion (1st israeli PM) was peaceable, just until he saw how far he could push it, and since then, there hasn’t been a single moderate Israeli PM.

They build walls that push into what remains of palestine, shoot peaceful protesters (i even have a dvd documentary which shows this) and completely ignore international censure, due to a (correct) assumption that USA, for whatever reason, will reject reforms that don’t include the Palestinians being completely crushed and humiliated.

If you want, tomorrow i could find a quote of Security Council resolution 336, and you will see just how reasonable it was, and you may see how many times it and variations of it has been rejected by the Israelis (supported by the US) when the arabs, resigned to their desperate impotence in the situation, had accepted its’ terms.

please let me know what you think of this

I think you give entirely too much credence to the alternative locations theory.

No country is willingly going to give away part of itself. It’s probably something that would require some type of referendum at the least.

Anyway, I have heard that the Jewish people returned basically to their origin – it’s an origin that happens to be shared by other religions.

I really don’t imagine that you could expect them to just settle on antarctica or something… just where would they have gone?

I think it is unfair to blame them for where they ended up going. However, I don’t think it is unfair for others to be upset that they were displaced by this activity.

The problem is that it is land. It doesn’t really matter all that much, in the sense of the entire world, or history, who lives where. At some point people will just decide they are tired of hatred and warfare.

I’m hoping the people of Lebanon will equate their current suffering with their support and/or tacit agreement to let Hezbollah operate with impunity in their country.

The odds are low, but I can hope. They certainly need to be told over and over again that their ability to allow terrorism to flourish in their country is why they are suffering…

[quote]vroom wrote:

No country is willingly going to give away part of itself. It’s probably something that would require some type of referendum at the least.

Anyway, I have heard that the Jewish people returned basically to their origin – it’s an origin that happens to be shared by other religions.

I really don’t imagine that you could expect them to just settle on antarctica or something… just where would they have gone?

I think it is unfair to blame them for where they ended up going. However, I don’t think it is unfair for others to be upset that they were displaced by this activity.

The problem is that it is land. It doesn’t really matter all that much, in the sense of the entire world, or history, who lives where.

???
Tell that to Israeli founders/generals/politicians! No, I’m joking, they will kill you then say you were threatening them. Believe me man, i’ve read transcripts from meetings of the Zionist council, and they were very stubborn about their settlement in their biblical homeland, there was never going to be anyone to persuade them. I’m glad you see the injustices. There was a famous campaign for Jews from all over the world to come to Israel/Palestine (to consolidate, just like how if some older guys try fucking me up, i go get my uncle for backup). The phrase was “a land without a people, for a people without a land” . I’m serious. This was a Zionist initiative.

I’m hoping the people of Lebanon will equate their current suffering with their support and/or tacit agreement to let Hezbollah operate with impunity in their country.

The odds are low, but I can hope. They certainly need to be told over and over again that their ability to allow terrorism to flourish in their country is why they are suffering…[/quote]

I believe that the Zionists were offered some Islands (bear in mind ww2 fucked the British empire, leaving the USA to truly decide the outcome, as the sole relatively unscathed big nation) from the Empire, places in Africa (Nigeria? I can’t remember), limited places inside Britain, and an area of Australia. If you’re really interested, I don’t mind looking it up in my notes tomorrow. But it’s 5.12 am now. Most seem pertinent, except for the ancestral homeland thing.

And then, there’s always America/Canada. Seriously. There’s quite afew Jews in USA, no doubt. This seems agreeable to me. Of course antarctica is a ridiculous idea. Most of the suggetsed places have similar climates, and facilities to Palestine. And they’d be foreigners wherever they went (since the fall of Judah)

Noble spirit again my man. But just how would a peaceful civilian stop terrorism, in a country where admittedly the state is weaker than said terrorists?

I sympathise with your position, if it’s a little confusing. Please clarify, because at the moment it sounds like “War is very bad and painful…People need to be free of oppressors… People need to have a place to live… But we should bomb a nation of innocents to condemn the sins of their (figurative) neighbours.”???

And i’d like to say how much i appreciate finding a place where people not only pursue an aesthetic, physical ambition, but are also cognisant.

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Vroom man, i’m not like that. i think ur cool. i love what u did for beginners, so i’ll break it down 4 u. Firstly, my nan is jewish, so there’s no semitic hatred here (that word actually is a misnomer, it means hatred of the peoples who historically inhabited the area, including the arabs equally).

Secondly, i knwo of educational protocols actively enforced by the Israeli’s from time of rehabitation to at least the 1980s, which tried to cultivate a jew-centric, backs to the wall kind of ideology of warriors- this is expressed in the fact that all Israeli youths have to serve in the army. is that an example of a placid nation? i think not.

You may counter by saying that they are surrounded by hateful enemies. That is true. i am just saying that maybe you should check out the history and genocides of former (and crucial) Israeli PMs Menachim Begin and Ariel Sharon. What Sharon did to Palestinians in camps after the Lebanese leader he preferred was assassinated, what Begin did before the inception of the Israeli state, to ‘persuade’ the british (who were fighting in a big, terrible war on behalf of the victimised, helpless jewish masses of eastern and central europe) to give them a state in Palestine. If you ahve any questions, please ask. [/quote]

I have a question. Are you writing this drunk, or do you speak english as a fourth or fifth language?

Haha neither. I was just writing it fast. How about you? Been tooting meth?

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
… U Americans, did u know, as of 2002, 1/2 of ALL US humanitarian aid was sent to Israel,…[/quote]

Please post the numbers.

I have read that we give almost as much to Egypt as we do Israel.

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/trade/files/98-916.pdf

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Noble spirit again my man. But just how would a peaceful civilian stop terrorism, in a country where admittedly the state is weaker than said terrorists? [/quote]

When you are talking about the Middle East, I get a little suspect of just who is a civilian and who is a supporter of terrorist organizations.

Anyhow, what you miss is this, peaceful citizens should join the Lebanonese army and they should demand their government do something about the terrorists.

How do you think peace is won anywhere? It requires sacrifice on behalf of those that want it but don’t have it. Instead, everybody is consumed with hatred and very willing to allow things to continue.

Seriously. Think about it. There is a criminal or terrorist disease in Lebanon, who’s doing anything at all about that? Nobody other than Lebanon or the people within it can be responsible for allowing that to continue.

Perhaps at some point the Lebanese people will realize that peace is better for them than allowing a terrorist organization to flourish in their land and commit acts of war against a country which is then forced to retaliate?

If Lebanon is not able to stop acts of terrorism (acts of war) from within their territory into another country, that country has every right to return the warfare.

Yes, no matter how much people whine about the fact that civilians will be caught in the middle is immaterial. The terrorism must be stopped. It is in fact war. The fact that the terrorists can’t conduct war on a larger scale is the only reason they don’t.

danny,

First of all, NEVER, EVER use “u” if you want to be taken seriously.

Those are the rules.

Second, I used to sympathize with the palestinian people. No longer. That ended with targeting of Jewish civilians. Not collateral damage, targeting.

Nothing in the world can justify this. NOTHING. Little girls in night-clubs. People shopping.

They are being directly targeted.

TERROR-ISM.

Any group that uses this as a primary tactic, automatically invalidates whatever cause they fight for.

Third, people need to let go of “the formation of Israel was a mistake.”

Even if it was the worst possible “mistake,” how does talking about that help? Do not say, “that is understanding the context of the conflict.” Israel is a reality. Talking about what happened at the creation does nothing to solve on the ground problems.

Finally, you state that lebanon is a nation of “innocents.” Rubbish. While there are undoubtedly people who don’t directly participate in terrorism, hezbollah has been allowed to set up a visible and persuasive presence in lebanon.

You ask what they could do? Vote. Join the army. Petition. Hunger strikes. Get on television. Form a resistance. Stop doing business with syria/iran.

That help?

Resolution 1559 wasn’t enforced by lebanon. They are guilty and culpable. They are accomplices.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
danny,

First of all, NEVER, EVER use “u” if you want to be taken seriously.

Those are the rules.

Second, I used to sympathize with the palestinian people. No longer. That ended with targeting of Jewish civilians. Not collateral damage, targeting.

Nothing in the world can justify this. NOTHING. Little girls in night-clubs. People shopping.

They are being directly targeted.

TERROR-ISM.

Any group that uses this as a primary tactic, automatically invalidates whatever cause they fight for.

Third, people need to let go of “the formation of Israel was a mistake.”

Even if it was the worst possible “mistake,” how does talking about that help? Do not say, “that is understanding the context of the conflict.” Israel is a reality. Talking about what happened at the creation does nothing to solve on the ground problems.

Finally, you state that lebanon is a nation of “innocents.” Rubbish. While there are undoubtedly people who don’t directly participate in terrorism, hezbollah has been allowed to set up a visible and persuasive presence in lebanon.

You ask what they could do? Vote. Join the army. Petition. Hunger strikes. Get on television. Form a resistance. Stop doing business with syria/iran.

That help?

Resolution 1559 wasn’t enforced by lebanon. They are guilty and culpable. They are accomplices.

JeffR[/quote]

Bang.

[quote]vroom wrote:

When you are talking about the Middle East, I get a little suspect of just who is a civilian and who is a supporter of terrorist organizations.[/quote]

This is a common problem i think.

[quote]
Anyhow, what you miss is this, peaceful citizens should join the Lebanonese army and they should demand their government do something about the terrorists.[/quote]

This is perhaps where we differ, i think a war to stop war/terrorism is a war just the same. It seems like selfish defence of our own interests, not objective peace-loving. After all, since the end of the Ottomans 9which the west engineered) there’s been no unity out there, so we no wexpect them to troop the colour, to stop their compatriots attacking what we hold dear? or else?(Israel will bomb them indiscriminately)?

[quote]
How do you think peace is won anywhere? It requires sacrifice on behalf of those that want it but don’t have it. Instead, everybody is consumed with hatred and very willing to allow things to continue.[/quote]

Very true, good point.

[quote]
Seriously. Think about it. There is a criminal or terrorist disease in Lebanon, who’s doing anything at all about that? Nobody other than Lebanon or the people within it can be responsible for allowing that to continue.[/quote]

Bullshit. Did i stop the IRA? I was born/raised in London, after all. No i didn’t. Diplomatic acquiescence to at least some of their demands placated them (for now).

We have a few options when trying to calm terrorists- give in completely, give in not at all (fight back fiercely) or give some compromise. At present there’s no balance.

Stand outside yourself, and see what you said in this last paragraph. Imagine you are wearing a kufi, and your skin is very tanned. Replace ‘terrorism’ with ‘invasion’ or ‘imperialism’. Imagine that you are at the negative imbalance of munitions, and power, and only your devotion to sacrifice and resistance can stop the enemy ‘conducting war on a larger scale’. Do you get this?