quote:A prince does not spend much on colonies, for with little or no expense he can send them out and keep them there, and he offends a minority only of the citizens from whom he takes lands and houses to give them to the new inhabitants; and those whom he offends, remaining poor and scattered, are never able to injure him; whilst the rest being uninjured are easily kept quiet, and at the same time are anxious not to err for fear it should happen to them as it has to those who have been despoiled.
Now compare this to Israel's treatment of Palestine. Here, despite promises of peace and of reigning in the "Settlements" continues to do things like threaten common Palestinians with expulsion either blatantly, or by ruining their ability to earn a living on historically held grounds and allowing them no choice but to move or starve.
Despite the views of his own military which argue that the Hard Line is causing many of the bombings , Sharon sounds very much like Machiavelli. Is there a difference in Israel's policy of retaliation with targeted assassination despite civilian casualties and "It is better to be feared than loved. Fear is easier to maintain."
I agree that Palestinian terrorists are wrong and need to be punished.
I agree that the targeting of civilians is a lazy, cowardly way to fight for your independence.
I agree that Arafat is a big lieing pain in the butt, an ego-maniac willing to sacrifice the lives of his own people just to get his name in the paper and their power in his hands (even his own people can't work with him).
However, that does not allow Israel, in the name of self-defense and anti-terrorism, to remove, subjugate, destroy, and devalue the Palestinians. They have only one reason for getting away with what they appear to be doing, and it is the same reason we in the US got away with it when we did it to our native population, and that reason is, because they can.
And according to Machiavelli, and his classic bible of realism--"the Prince", that is all the reason anyone needs.
posted
My take on it is that we're seeing the devolution of the whole Israel situation. It's sad to say it, but a complete breakdown might be a necessity before anything can be fixed.
What I would like to see, that might make a good last effort at this is:
1. Have the UN re-establish Lebanon as an actual state and not a puppet of Syria. Most of the hard-line groups that commit acts of terrorism in Israel find safe haven in southern Lebanon. Syria, always an opponent to Israel, finds this a fine and dandy way to operate. Without this safe haven, many of the foreign fighters that "work" for Palestinian "independence" will hopefully be forced to return home to their countries of origin.
2. Work to formalize ties between Jordan and Israel as was done between Egypt and Israel. So far, it has given the people of Israel a bit of breathing room.
3. Bring the Israelis to the table and require them to formalize a real border to Palestine. It is not to be a state within a state, but a nation of and to itself. Remove all Israeli settlers from the areas within this region, no questions asked and do it immediately.
4. Have a UN guarded border between the two states with limited traffic.
5. Israel must offer any Palestinian wishing to remain within the Israeli boundaries full and complete citizenship with full voting rights. Those choosing to not have citizenship should be packed up and repatriated to the Palestinian area.
6. Release of all prisoners from the conflict by both sides.
7. Establish Jerusalem as an open city governed by three representatives from each the Palestinians and the Israelis. Security for the city to be provided by the UN and all firearms/explosives are strictly forbidden.
8. The US should make it known that if either side breaks the peace, all economic ties to that country will be severed for one calendar year. That includes any monies held in US banks by citizens and corporations on either side. The same word of warning will be given to any other nation that is found to sponsor any terrorist activities against either entity.
But those things are about as likely to happen as me winning the lottery this week being that I don't buy lottery tickets.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Occasional, they're doing that themselves already. I think we're trying to come up with things we can do to STOP that from happening.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Of course it has to come despite the two ruling governments, and some US resistance (because none of our politcal parties will be able to claim it as a victory for them).
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
1. Sounds good but unlikely. 2. Sounds good but pretty unlikely. 3. So now its OK to uproot people but it was right in 1948? Not that that's what happened but that's what Palestinians claim. 4. "Limited traffic" is what Palestinians complain about now. Something like half, correct me if I'm wrong, of the Palestinian work force is employed inside of Israel and most decent public facilities are in Israel. 5. There are already Arab-Israelis. The only thing is that Arabs don't have automatic citizenship like Jews but instead have to go through the equivalent of every other country. 6. Hell no for a multitude of reasons. First, Palestine holds no prisoners. Two, you expect Israel to release a couple thousand terrorists who have sworn to destroy Israel? There are a bunch of other problems with that but I won't go into those right now. 7. When Israel controls Jerusalem everyone has equal rights there. When Arabs control Jerusalem only Muslims are allowed in. I prefer the status quo. 8. Well the the State of Palestine is really going to be a wreck.
On the topic in general, I find it inconceivable to place virtually any restriction on the State of Israel to defend itself. None of us can really imagine what its like to live in a place where at any moment you might be blown up by a suicide bomber.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: I find it inconceivable to place virtually any restriction on the State of Israel to defend itself. None of us can really imagine what its like to live in a place where at any moment you might be blown up by a suicide bomber.
nfl. Yes, but Israel has lately been killing civilians indiscriminately in their air stike missions to get the leaders of Hamas and other terrorist leaders.
None of us can imagine what it like to be an uninvolved bystander blown up by a Hellfire anti-tank missle launched from an Apache helicopter gunship, either, which has happened frequently this year.
Sharon's tactics have sacrificed any claim Israel might have once had to the moral high ground. I find it difficult to tell the terrorists from the military in Israel and the territories this year.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So let the Hamas leader responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Israelis and indirectly hundreds more of Palestinians go? When bystanders are killed that's obviously bad but I'll take that over letting a mass murderer go free.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its hard for a sniper to destroy a car though. And there's the off chance that the sniper won't be able to get into a position to take out the target due to the fact that the target would be in the West Bank or Gaza Strip and the sniper would probably be noticed and the sniper isn't going to have enough time to get there because Israeli intelligence doesn't know where the target is going to be until he's just about there so you kinda need speed.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fair enough, nfl-- if speed is your only concern. But turn it around a bit. Do you suppose the Israeli military would be quite so eager to be lauching Hellfires in all directions if the Hamas leader they were targeting was speeding through downtown Tel Aviv rather than a refugee camp?
My point is the Israeli military's near-total disregard this year for collateral civilian deaths and woundings makes them look increasingly like terrorists themselves. Which is a common political goal of terrorists, of course: to make the target government lash out indiscriminately, thus costing them domestic and international support, and in this case hardening the resolve of Palestinians, as well as forcing moderate Palestinians out of favor. Sharon is only playing into the terrorists' plans with his inchoate and random assaults. He may please hard-line Israelis but in the end he is hurting Israeli goals.
[edit: I think we have hashed this out before, nfl, not positive.]
posted
Speed isn't my only concern but the fact is that if you don't get there in time you can't do anything about the problem.
Israel does everything it can to avoid collateral civilian deaths its just not very easy when the target surrounds himself with bystanders as "human sheilds". For example, Israel managed to kill a couple high ranking terrorists by exploding their cell phones but of course the terrorists aren't that stupid and they caught on. If there were more effective techniques then Israel would use them but they don't exist. You know what the purpose of the "humiliating" checkpoints are? To stop the terrorists before they get anywhere and to stop them with as little violence as possible. If Israel really didn't care about civilian casualties then the settlements would be radioactive dust right now.
The only real international support Israel will ever get is from the United States and occasionally from the UK. When the Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohammed claim the Jews world by proxy and a EU poll claims Israel is the single greatest threat to world peace then you know there isn't just a negative image of Israel, there's out and out anti-Semitism.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The UK? Have you seen the stuff the BBC has been putting out for the last few years?
quote: Israel does everything it can to avoid collateral civilian deaths its just not very easy when the target surrounds himself with bystanders as "human sheilds". For example, Israel managed to kill a couple high ranking terrorists by exploding their cell phones but of course the terrorists aren't that stupid and they caught on. If there were more effective techniques then Israel would use them but they don't exist. You know what the purpose of the "humiliating" checkpoints are? To stop the terrorists before they get anywhere and to stop them with as little violence as possible. If Israel really didn't care about civilian casualties then the settlements would be radioactive dust right now.
posted
BBC also denounces everything Blair has done concerning Iraq. Even though the BBC is the mouthpeice of the party in power it still doesn't accurately represent the official government position. Having said that I would agree thaat the BBC is even more garbage than every other news organization in America and many others around the world. Of course none of this is the point. The point is that Israel simply isn't going to have international support until it doesn't exist.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone see 60 Minutes' story on Arafat? Seems of the world's kings, queens and despots, Forbes' Magazine lists him as the 6th richest in the world. How big is it to be number 6? Queen Elizabeth of the UK is 5th...
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, that explains why Dubya's been stirrin' up the Israeli/Palestinian pot: wants to keep enriching a fellow Republican.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's not exactly what I was getting at Aspectre. And if anything, the situation that arose with sales tax revenues for the Palestinian Authority going to Arafat's coffers arose during the Clinton Administration. This isn't a Republican/Democrat situation, it isn't even an American one.
Arafat, who started his career as a gun runner (not an arms dealer but an arms smuggler) has never risen above the opportunistic rogue he started out as. While his people have languished in poverty for decades, he has amassed a fortune and done very, very little to improve their lot in life. He has used their misery, however, to funnel attention and funding into the PLO which then filters into his pockets.
Outside of the issue of the Palestinian people, Arafat is a despot of the worst sort and a crook of the highest order. It's no wonder that the Israelis can't stay at the table with him and that "his people" have remained in dire straights for so long. It all goes to benefit Arafat and his cronies, none of which have done the suffering or dying that "his people" have gone through.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you saw the special then you would also know that Israel was pressured into giving Arafat a lot of that money by the doves. All that sales tax that went right to into Arafat's pocket makes up a significant portion of his fortune I'm sure.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Now the next debate is whether there is any reality to the concept of international law...
I liked this question. The answer to this is; there never has been and never will be. In order to have a law one must be able to enforce the law. My guess is that as soon as someone is able to enforce the law there will be a build up to World War Three as those nations who are effected by the law enforcers will retaliate in what they would consider self-defense against those nations that are enforcing the law.
Many point to the Neuramburg(sic)trials as a triumph of the possibility of International Law. Ironically, it occured after a war and certainly didn't prevent one from happening. In a way it was a physical repetition of the 1918 treaty at Versalise. A true test of International Law would be bringing jusice to a strong, undefeated nation, with minimal bloodshed.
Just look at the United States, both as a Nation that is considered capable of enforcing and accused of breaking International Law. It is hated for using its power to enforce that law. At the same time it is hated for the inability or refusal of anyone to do anything to enforce laws against it. Yet, it is unlikely that the United States (or at least a majority of its people) would sanction an International Law Enforcement troops to enter into the Country without resistance. Enforcement of International Law simply means war by another name.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
