Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Gaza Pullout
America's Debate > Archive > Assorted Issues Archive > [A] International Debate
Google
Sleeper
I am surprised this has not been mentioned here on ad.gif as a debate topic so I will start one based off of today's events.

To protest the order by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza Strip after almost 4 decades of settlers living there many took up hold in a synagogue to protest the pullout. Israeli troops entered the synagogue and began removing the protestors one by one. (This is actually happening live as I type this)

Link to story

Questions for debate:

Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?
Google
psyclist
Questions for debate:

Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people? I say yes. Gaza is basically a waste land, the West Bank is where the resources and water is. So Sharon makes nice and pulls out of Gaza and then continues to build setttlements in the West Bank. When the Palestinians claim their right to the West Bank and Hamas goes nuts and starts shelling Israel, Sharon is able to say: "look we gave you some land" and it paints the Palestinians in a bad light. Sharon got a lot of flak for pulling out of Gaza until the Israeli's became wise that is was a land grab.


Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

Of course. The people in Gaza knew they were going to be kicked out, they were given plenty of warning.

The idea of this being a land grab may upset a few...I did start a debate about the withdrawal here so feel free to take the debate there.
loreng59
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?
No it was the single worst possible decision that moron has ever made. He forced his decision through the Knesset by firing anybody that disagreed with him, bribe other political parties with public monies & political favors, lied, and blocked all protests against his decision by anybody. His stupidity has encouraged terrorism with has risen to it's highest level in the last 18 months, violated international treaties and pretty well destroyed democracy in Israel.


Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?
No this was way beyond any acceptable level. The police are acting very much as the Chicago police did in 1968. One senior member of the police has been arrested for advocating that his officers 'beat the excrement' (to use an acceptable term though incorrect as to what he really said) out of people protesting this decision. That was caught on tape. Children as young as 12 years old have been arrested and held in prison for more than a month for handing out flyers on the sidewalks.

The Israeli police have over reacted and have been aided by a court system that feels that it can make it's own laws without regard to the Knesset or the people.

The backlash will be felt for a very long time. The fallout from this episode will taint the Israeli government, police and court system for decades.
DaytonRocker
This doesn't happen often in this subject, but I have to disagree with loreng59.

I think it was the right thing to do over the long term but sucks major butt in the short term. Israel did take that land (rightfully so) when it was used as a staging area prior to an imminent attack just before the 6 day war. Since then, it's become a justification to blow up Jewish babies and their mommies supported by half the world and most of the Arab world.

As painful as it is, Sharon is effectively nueturing Hamas and Hezbolla. The only thing left as a reason to blow up Jews is the real one - because the Palestinians want them all dead. Now when the Pals attack (which is as much a certainty as the sun coming up tomorrow), there is no other reason except hatred of Jews. This would seem to leave Sharon many more options in dealing with the Pals and quell the bitterness towards Jews in the Arab world. Will it work? Of course not. But neither is anything they are doing now. He's forced something to change and forced the Pals to change as well.

I'd declare the land occupied by the Pals as "Palestine", make them a state, and wait for an act of war by that state to resolve this conflict once and for all.
Dontreadonme
QUOTE(DaytonRocker @ Aug 18 2005, 10:18 AM)

As painful as it is, Sharon is effectively nueturing Hamas and Hezbolla. The only thing left as a reason to blow up Jews is the real one - because the Palestinians want them all dead. 

I disagree with this point of yours in an otherwise agreeable post. Quoting an Aug 13 MSNBC report:
QUOTE
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - For the first time in a decade, the founders and top political leaders of Hamas gathered on the same stage Saturday, vowing to go on fighting Israel and claiming victory for its impending withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

I don't think that this will deter Hamas, Hezbollah or Al-Asqsa in committing more terrorists acts. I believe they see this as a victory and are emboldened by it.

For there to be peace, Israel really must pull out of the so called occupied territories, but until pro-palestinian terror groups are eliminated, there will never be any peace, nor a stable palestinian state.
psyclist
QUOTE(Dontreadonme @ Aug 18 2005, 11:37 AM)
QUOTE(DaytonRocker @ Aug 18 2005, 10:18 AM)

As painful as it is, Sharon is effectively nueturing Hamas and Hezbolla. The only thing left as a reason to blow up Jews is the real one - because the Palestinians want them all dead. 

I disagree with this point of yours in an otherwise agreeable post. Quoting an Aug 13 MSNBC report:
QUOTE
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - For the first time in a decade, the founders and top political leaders of Hamas gathered on the same stage Saturday, vowing to go on fighting Israel and claiming victory for its impending withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

I don't think that this will deter Hamas, Hezbollah or Al-Asqsa in committing more terrorists acts. I believe they see this as a victory and are emboldened by it.

For there to be peace, Israel really must pull out of the so called occupied territories, but until pro-palestinian terror groups are eliminated, there will never be any peace, nor a stable palestinian state.
*



I agree that Hamas and Co. will be emboldened by the withdrawal and claim it as a victory, however the PA has tried to make it clear to the people that they (the PA) and diplomacy are responsible. Had Israel worked with the PA on the withdrawal instead of going about it unilaterally, I think it would've given more weight to the PA's claims.
I think most Palestinians recognize that the PA were responsible for the withdrawal and not Hamas, but Hamas is making more noise about it.
Erasmussimo
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?
Absolutely. The Israeli people have proven beyond any doubt that the policy of occupation results only in intifadah. Occupation doesn't work. They must find another solution; establishing a Palestinian state appears to be the most promising option at this point.

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?
It would have been more tactful to simply starve them out, but I see nothing wrong with entering the synagogue to remove them. Neither the USA nor the Israelis have any reservations about enterting a mosque that they suspect is being used for terrorist purposes. Besides, the Israelis inside the synagogue weren't there to pray.
Sleeper
Although I don't like seeing people taken from their homes of almost 40 years, in the long run this will show what groups like Hamas are all about as well as the intifadah against Israel.

If they continue with terrorist strikes against the Israeli people it will be impossible for those who once supported to make any claims about occupation.
Julian
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Yes, I believe it is, whether one takes it at face value OR sees it as a strategic move to hamstring Palestinian terror groups and pain the Palestinian Authority into a corner where it's (legal and reasonable) claims to the West Bank and other "occupied territories".

If it's the former - by any non-Biblical measure the settlers have no right to be there (it's not like they paid the previous landowner) - then the security forces as simple enforcing the law, and the protestors are peacefully but vocally expressing their opposition to that law. Nobody on either side has anything in particular to be ashamed of.

And if it's the latter, the important people in the world (i.e. the American public) are being presented with "shocking" pictures that seem to demonstrate Israel's bona fides in the peace process.

A cynic could argue that this is simply misdirection away from the orchestrated land-grab going on in the West Bank, where the barrier being built is going well outside the 1967 borders to enclose settlements, water sources, and other desirable geography inside Greater Israel, so that when the inevitable Palestinian protests (and yes, probably terror attacks too) are directed at that area, Israel can act with wounded pride and point to Gaza.

More optimistically, it could be the first steps in a long process that ultimately leads to peace. I hope this is the case.

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

Well, for one thing, this isn't a "routine" operation for the Israeli security forces, since they have never before done anything like this to other Jewish Israelis.

And I'm not sure how much force has actually been used, either by the settlers or by the security forces in Gaza. The soldiers and polce have made sure that they are unarmed before they enter the synagogue, and are allowing protestors voices' to be heard by the world's watching media. They didn't have to do either, and they certainly don't do that "routinely" with Palestinian protestors (and are using water cannon to disperse crowds of them as I type).

On the protestors side, settlers are often well-armed and willing to use force to defend themselves against aggressors (which, in what is a dangerous part of the world, is reasonable), yet not so much as a stone has been thrown at the security forces so far. Nobody is being beaten up or shot at on either side, which given the strength of feelings involved is something to be quietly celebrated, I think.
psyclist
QUOTE(Julian @ Aug 18 2005, 01:21 PM)
On the protestors side, settlers are often well-armed and willing to use force to defend themselves against aggressors (which, in what is a dangerous part of the world, is reasonable), yet not so much as a stone has been thrown at the security forces so far.
*



Not to nit-pick but CNN is reporting that some protestors have thrown acid onto police officers. But i would agree that has otherwise been peaceful. thumbsup.gif
Google
Hobbes
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Don't want to get too deep into this one at this point in time...there are arguments both ways. The one overriding statement, though, is that time will tell.

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

I believe the police retrieved the Torah from the synagogue, essentially removing its status as a religious establishment. This renders this question moot. However, I would add that if it were an issue, those in error would be the ones that turned it into a fort, not those who removed them from it.
loreng59
QUOTE(Julian @ Aug 18 2005, 01:21 PM)
If it's the former - by any non-Biblical measure the settlers have no right to be there (it's not like they paid the previous landowner) - then the security forces as simple enforcing the law, and the protestors are peacefully but vocally expressing their opposition to that law. Nobody on either side has anything in particular to be ashamed of.
*


Julian I think that maybe a correction is in order. Number one yes they did pay for that land. The largest of the towns was established in 1946 (two years before Israeli Independence) on land that was purchased. Second the rest were built on waste land, that was government owned.

According to the San Remo Treaty of 1920, yes they do have a right to live there and yes it was part of Biblical Israel as well
kalabus
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Though I usually defer to Loreng in Israeli debate I have to say yes. Palestinian breeding habits in the long run are going to threaten Israeli sovereignty from within. The Arab league has not stopped wanting to crush Israel and I suspect that they never will stop. By creating a seperate state for Palestinians I think that Israel has prevented the inevitable takeover that would have happened as the muslim population explodes all around them and resentment festers. I think this is a long run move. It takes away any excuse reason for the arab league to invade again and if they do the world bodies will in the name of law have to step in rather then sit idle as they once did.



Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

What else should they do? This is a pullout not a sting operation.
loreng59
QUOTE(kalabus @ Aug 18 2005, 04:02 PM)
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Though I usually defer to Loreng in Israeli debate I have to say yes. Palestinian breeding habits in the long run are going to threaten Israeli sovereignty from within. The Arab league has not stopped wanting to crush Israel and I suspect that they never will stop. By creating a seperate state for Palestinians I think that Israel has prevented the inevitable takeover that would have happened as the muslim population explodes all around them and resentment festers. I think this is a long run move. It takes away any excuse reason for the arab league to invade again and if they do the world bodies will in the name of law have to step in rather then sit idle as they once did.
*


kalabus - Most kind. It is not that I am against Israel getting out of Gaza, just the opposite as a matter of fact. I have always hated that place personally.

No what I am against is how it was forced through without any outside input. Also I hate the fact the Sharon got nothing for it.

As for the world bodies, well they have done nothing for 57 years, what makes you think they will now? Israel withdrew to the international lines from Lebanon, the result hundreds of attacks and murders. Who does those world bodies blame - Israel of course. Nothing ever changes.
Eeyore
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

I think it is in the interests of the Israeli people. Israel is going to need to end in a two-state solution. Israel has had an effective foreign policy with its neighbors in the sense that its combination of hard-line negotiations and force have led to multiple victories against its neighboring countries.

Yet at some time the chips have to be cashed in and good faith moves will have to be made. The Labor Party was ready to go that way in the 90s and Netanyahu and Sharon slowed the process down.

There is a reality that there are two active groups inside Palestine. One group is dedicated to the complete destruction of Israel. They are in the minority but their actions at times seem to speak for all of the Palestinian people. The other group wishes for peace and stability to move on with their lives. I think Abbas has shown enough to be able to be a political voice for the latter faction. The Gaza pullout will give him the chance to grab the credibility for the act. Gaza will not become Israel proper and it will be a test area to see if law and order can be mustered from within the PA or if Gaza will move to become a base for Hezbollah, Hamas et al.

The Israeli settlement have been a part of the diplomacy. When the Arab nations, the PLO, or the PA have failed to act in the way Israel has wanted, the Israel policy has often times been to punish to continued delay in a two-state solution by expanding settlements. The settlers of the Sinai were effectively compensated, I believe the Gaza settlers will also be justly compensated.



Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

Israel policies have routinely avoided sentimentality. The order was announced and the policy was enforced. It is a difficult situation for the Israeli people and for the Israeli military and police forces involved. They have accrued tremendous good will in this effort and there really is not that much being sacrificed in this good will gesture.
bucket


Well I am not so sure how I feel about the likelihood that a two state solution will in fact bring about a solution to this conflict. Everyone says this is what they want or need..but I have my doubts.

Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

I do believe so. I think Israel was being asked to support or further a policy that was now benefiting only a tiny itty bitty minority of their citizens and in return harming the entire nation.



QUOTE(loreng59)
Also I hate the fact the Sharon got nothing for it.

I happen to disagree with this if anything I think Sharon has gained legitimacy because he has shown that he and for the most part all Israelis want peace. Unfortunately there are far too many people who seem to not believe this. I think this decision has shown the world ..with actions..that Israel is willing to inflict pain on herself and make sacrifices in order to put an end to this conflict.
Sleeper
I am just wondering if those who have supported the Palestinian Authority in the past, will continue to do so if they continue to incite violence again the Jewish people in Israel.
psyclist
QUOTE(Sleeper @ Aug 18 2005, 01:00 PM)
Although I don't like seeing people taken from their homes of almost 40 years, in the long run this will show what groups like Hamas are all about as well as the intifadah against Israel.

If they continue with terrorist strikes against the Israeli people it will be impossible for those who once supported to make any claims about occupation.
*



Just because Israelis are leaving Gaza and 4 settlements in the West Bank does not mean this is a full withdrawal. Parts of the West Bank will still be under occupation as well as, debatably, Gaza. Again check here.
Members of the PLO, Hamas, are already trying to make it clear that this is not the end of occupation.
Eeyore
QUOTE(Sleeper @ Aug 18 2005, 05:24 PM)

I am just wondering if those who have supported the Palestinian Authority in the past, will continue to do so if they continue to incite violence again the Jewish people in Israel.
*



I am not sure that I have per se supported the Palestinian Authority in the past. I have tried to gain the Israeli and Palestinian Arab perspective of this situation as I have followed this story with some detail in the past ten years and with less detail the fifteen or so before that.

What I like about the two-state solution is that once Palestine is granted full statehood it can be held accountable for its actions and the actions conducted from its borders. I would support an aggressive policy by Israel against an independent Palestine should attacks be launched from outside its borders.

If Mexico allowed its citizens to launch paramilitary attacks against us I would supported an aggressive response and I would in the case of ISrael against Palestine.

I want Palestine to have the chance and I want Israel to gain an opportunity to get off of the tiger's back it climbed onto when it occupied predominantly arab territories in 1967.

It is a risk for Israel, but not doing anything is a greater risk for that country. Given a chance the more moderate element in Palestine may be able to take the appropriate actions to keep their country free of an Israeli invasion.
Aquilla
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

As tragic a decision as it is, I think it is Sharon's last best chance for a workable peace solution. The Israeli settlers in Gaza have in many cases been there their entire lives and this is a horrible sacrifice they are being forced to make. Still though, they served as a constant target for hate-filled terrorists like Hamas and the PA who used them to deflect from the corruption in the so-called "leadership" of the Palestanian people. They also served as a symbol on which the jew-haters that seem to pervade so much of Europe could focus. I'm afraid that this was a necessary step, and a last step. This must be made clear to all. If the violence against Israel continues from Gaza, then Israel will be legally and morally justified to solve the Gaza problem once and for all with military force. I hope that doesn't happen, but it must be made crystal clear to the current PA that such an option is in play. It is now up to them.


Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

I don't know, the Israeli government really had no choice in this instance. It is just a bad situation all the way around.
loreng59
QUOTE(Eeyore @ Aug 18 2005, 07:47 PM)
What I like about the two-state solution is that once Palestine is granted full statehood it can be held accountable for its actions and the actions conducted from its borders.  I would support an aggressive policy by Israel against an independent Palestine should attacks be launched from outside its borders.

If Mexico allowed its citizens to launch paramilitary attacks against us I would supported an aggressive response and I would in the case of ISrael against Palestine.
*


Well Eeyore - sounds good but in fact it has been happening for 57 years now and nobody but Israel has ever been held accountable. It hasn't happened yet and it won't. When five nations invaded Israel in 1948 the UN did nothing, and to date has never condemned a single terrorist attack against Israel, do you really think that anything is going to change? Today a rocket fired from Jordan hit near the Eilat airport, what will happen? I can answer that - nothing at all. In the past year there have been dozens of attacks from Lebanon - who is held responsible, take a guess?

As for your "One group is dedicated to the complete destruction of Israel. They are in the minority but their actions at times seem to speak for all of the Palestinian people. The other group wishes for peace and stability to move on with their lives. I think Abbas has shown enough to be able to be a political voice for the latter faction." That 'minority' is over 90%. Nearly 70% support suicide bombings if Israel withdraws to the '67 borders, that is some minority. Abbas is one of them, he has publicly proclaimed that his goal is all of Israel why don't you believe them when they say this? Arafat said that he would continue terrorism no matter what and the world didn't believe him. Abbas has the largest police force to population in the world period. He could remove Hamas in one night and has no intention of doing so. He has proclaimed the opposite at every opportunity and says that he will do nothing to rein them in.

The PLO was organized in 1964 in Kuwait to 'liberate Palestine'. Only three years before any of the so-called 'occupied territories' existed. Their charter formally renounced all claim to Gaza and the West Bank. Which were occupied by Egypt and Jordan. So where the heck was this 'Palestine' they were to liberate?

The only thing that Sharon has done is give the terrorist more land to attack Israel from, shown that Israel can be force to cede land, and terrorism works.
Erasmussimo
QUOTE(Aquilla @ Aug 18 2005, 09:50 PM)
If the violence against Israel continues from Gaza, then Israel will be legally and morally justified to solve the Gaza problem once and for all with military force.

What would this "once and for all" solution consist of? Occupying Gaza? That has been the solution for the last 38 years, and one would think that, after 38 years of failure, people might have figured out that occupying Gaza isn't working.

The logic here is brutally simple: you can't keep millions of people under military occupation indefinitely. Eventually they get sick and tired of it and they revolt. At that point, you have three choices: genocide, interminable low-level conflict, and pulling out. The Israelis have decided against the first option and gotten tired of the second option. That leaves only one option.

loreng59, I am very much suprised by some of your claims. Could you provide some sort of documentation to support these assertions:

"Nearly 70% support suicide bombings if Israel withdraws to the '67 borders"

"Abbas is one of them, he has publicly proclaimed that his goal is all of Israel"

" Abbas... could remove Hamas in one night and has no intention of doing so. He has proclaimed the opposite at every opportunity and says that he will do nothing to rein them in."
bucket
QUOTE(Sleeper)
I am just wondering if those who have supported the Palestinian Authority in the past, will continue to do so if they continue to incite violence again the Jewish people in Israel.


Well I support the Palestinian Authority only...and this is a big only mind you...because I wish to support any means or attempt by the Palestinians to address this situation through political actions. I feel the more we invite, insist and yes support Palestinian political mechanisms for dealing with this conflict the better it will be dealt with. And yes I am more than aware of the very fine line between the PA and Hamas and/or the condoning of violence. Yet I do feel we must keep insisting on the importance of the political process.

It is hard to keep the position I have..I must admit.. especially upon hearing the the PA has granted Hamas control and participation of Gaza and in return Hamas has refused any of the PA demands.
loreng59
QUOTE(Erasmussimo @ Aug 19 2005, 08:42 AM)
loreng59, I am very much suprised by some of your claims. Could you provide some sort of documentation to support these assertions:

"Nearly 70% support suicide bombings if Israel withdraws to the '67 borders"

"Abbas is one of them, he has publicly proclaimed that his goal is all of Israel"

" Abbas... could remove Hamas in one night and has no intention of doing so. He has proclaimed the opposite at every opportunity and says that he will do nothing to rein them in."
*


I have gone out and found some of the information and must say I am surprised at the drop in support currently being reported

From the the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, the Public Opinion Research of
Israel and Palestinian Media Watch found that 80 percent of Palestinian Arabs say that even if Israel surrenders all of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem, the Palestinian Arabs should still insist on the “right of return” — which would mean flooding Israel with millions of Arab “refugees” and thereby putting an end to Israel as a Jewish state. It also found that 59 percent of Palestinian Arabs believe that Hamas and Islamic Jihad should continue their violence against Israel, even if Israel surrenders all of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem.

Public Opinion Poll Unit Jerusalem Media & Communication Center - JMCC Sunday, May 15, 2005
56.5% Gazans support suicide bombings against Israel civilians,
58.5% oppose using force against cease-fire opponents

So yes it is down to 56.5% support. Still hardly a minority.

From the Palestinian Authority 26 July 2005 official newspaper over the last suicide bombing.

"The two shahids are Tariq Salim Yassin (22) ... of Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades and the Shahid Yekhya Al-Ris Khamad Abu Taha (21), from Rafah.

"Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which belongs to the Fatah movement, the Al-Quds Companies, the military branch of the Islamic Jihad movement, and Al-Nasir Salah Al-Din Regiments, the military branch of the Popular Resistance Committees, [all] claimed joint responsibility for the attack...

"An Islamic Jihad movement senior [official], Khalid Al-Batash, emphasized that the operation in Kisufim ... came in retaliation to the assassination crimes that were committed by the Occupation...

Abbas is the head of Fatah.

Last but not least

From 4 Feb 2005 Palestine Television:

"We tell you Palestine, we shall return to you, by Allah's will, We shall return to every village, every town, and every grain of earth which was quenched by the blood of our grandparents and the sweat of our fathers and mothers. We shall return, we shall return. Our willingness to return to the 1967 borders does not mean that we have given up on the land of Palestine. No! We ask you: Do we have the right to the 1967 borders? We have the right. Therefore, we shall realize this right with any mean it takes. We might be able to use diplomacy in order to return to the 1967 borders, but we shall not be able to use diplomacy in order to return to the 1948 borders. No one on this earth recognizes [out right to] the 1948 borders [before Israel's existence]. Therefore, we shall return to the 1967 borders, but it does not mean that we have given up on Jerusalem and Haifa, Jaffa, Lod, Ramle, Natanyah [Al-Zuhour] and Tel Aviv [Tel Al-Rabia]. Never. We shall return to every village we had been expelled from, by Allah's will.

I will let 'peaceful Palestinians' speak for themselves.

As for Abbas police force, it numbers over 60,000 and is the largest per capita police force in the world.
Erasmussimo
QUOTE(loreng59 @ Aug 19 2005, 08:30 AM)
From the the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, the Public Opinion Research of Israel and Palestinian Media Watch found that 80 percent of Palestinian Arabs say that even if Israel surrenders all of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem, the Palestinian Arabs should still insist on the “right of return” — which would mean flooding Israel with millions of Arab “refugees” and thereby putting an end to Israel as a Jewish state. It also found that 59 percent of Palestinian Arabs believe that Hamas and Islamic Jihad should continue their violence against Israel, even if Israel surrenders all of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem.

Public Opinion Poll Unit Jerusalem Media & Communication Center - JMCC Sunday, May 15, 2005
56.5% Gazans support suicide bombings against Israel civilians,
58.5% oppose using force against cease-fire opponents

I won't disagree that there remains strong support for continuing violence among the Palestinians. However, the numbers are confusing and I think we need to consider a wide range of results. For example, this recent poll from the same source you cite shows 76.5% "Support at different degrees the continuation of the calm with the Israelis." "(37.2%) Would vote for Fateh, (25.0%) for Hamas in the coming PLC elections". Here's a bit more data from this poll, which was released on June 20, 2005:

QUOTE(poll results)
Q.1)  The PA president, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, called upon the Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas” to abandon violence and to hold a dialogue with Fateh saying that the atmosphere is appropriate now for conducting such a political dialogue, which is considered to be indispensable.  Do you agree with that, or not?

1. Strongly agree
20.7%
2. Somewhat agree
54.6%
3. Somewhat disagree
13.8%
4. Strongly disagree
7.1%
5. Don’t know / refuse.
3.8%


Q. 2) The PA president, Mr. Abu Mazin, said that “the era of explosions (suicide attacks) is over and that this deadly style didn’t achieve neither the support of the Palestinian Authority nor that of the Palestinian people”.  Do you agree with this statement, or not?

1. Strongly agree
13.4%
2. Somewhat agree
40.0%
3. Somewhat disagree
28.0%
4. Strongly disagree
14.4%
5. Don’t know / refuse.
4.2%



I am not attempting to refute your claims, but instead to show that Palestinian opinion is muddled and that the Palestinians are not so bloody-minded as some of our extremists would paint them.

You provide a quote from a Fatah newspaper that reports on a pair of suicide bombers, and then you assert that Abbas is the head of Fatah. I gather that you read the newspaper report as laudatory of the suicide bombers; I do not.

The long quote you present from Palestine Television is, I assume, a direct quote from Mr. Abbas; is this correct? Clearly, there are some difficulties with the translation; the English is muddy. The speaker asserts the right of return vehemently -- which the PA has been upfront about with everybody. He says that he shall "realize this right (to return to the 1967 borders) with any mean it takes." This does not quite translate into a statement that violence is part of his policy, especially when you read all of his references to diplomacy. I think that it is reading too much into a murky translation to insist on this as proof of violent intent, especially when Mr. Abbas has issued so many unequivocal statements callling for an end to violence and supporting a peaceful solution.
loreng59
I will agree that the numbers are changing, but you will have to understand what they are actually saying. First off all Israelis are considered in the military regardless of age, sex, or anything less, so they are 'fair game'. Second what they consider to be non-violent is not the same as you do. Under their understanding of a 'cease-fire' means you can not shoot back, and anything less than a rocket is 'non-violent'.

What Abbas is saying in English and what he is saying in Arabic are two very different things. He has totally abandoned any pretense in Arabic. There are no calls at all for non-violence, the opposite it the case. He calls for the violence to be 'effective' but not end. In English he has repeatedly stated that he will do nothing to stop the terror and wants to incorporate the terrorists into his police force, though most already belong. He has stated that he will not fulfill any of the obligations that they have agreed to ever and now is demanding the release of all terrorists so that they can join his police force and continue their attacks. That is what he says in English, and it doesn't get any better in Arabic.

No Sharon has given away the store and for what? What has Israel gotten in return? Europe is already stating that is a nice beginning, now give them the rest, and the Shrub from Texas is demanding Israel arm those terrorist with better weapons and wants to divide the State of Israel in two so the terrorist can attack without having to go through any checkpoints.
lederuvdapac
Erasmussimo, the major problem is not the Palestinian people or the Palestinian government really. It is the extremist groups like Hamas who listen to no rule of law and who have no ability to use democratic and diplomatic methods to voice their views. The Palestinian government CANNOT control these terror groups. So, they will do whatever they wish.

Hamas Leader: "The Beginning of the End for Israel"

QUOTE
Speaking to al-Hayat newspaper, Mashaal was quoted as saying on Tuesday that the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as “the beginning of the end for the Zionist program in the region.”
 
The Hamas leader reiterated the movement’s commitment to the calm with Israel until the end of the current year, but added the “resistance is a strategic choice, because the withdrawal from Gaza is the first step in the way to complete liberation.”
 
The Damascus-based official stressed that “Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon wants the Gaza exit to be the first and last, and the payment for the continued control in the West Bank, settlement construction, wall construction, and the annulment of any possibility of establishing a Palestinian state within the framework of the Zionist project to end the Palestinian issue with the unlimited US support,” adding “We, however, see the withdrawal as first step for full liberation and achieving all of our legitimate rights. Today Gaza and tomorrow the West Bank and later every inch of the land.”


The terrorists are emboldened. This act of appeasement makes them believe that it is their brutal tactics and NOT a strive for peace that brought forth thi s favorable action. Groups like Hamas will not be satisfied until Israel is in ruins and every Jew in the region is killed.
Erasmussimo
QUOTE(loreng59 @ Aug 19 2005, 11:20 AM)
Under their understanding of a 'cease-fire' means you can not shoot back, and anything less  than a rocket is 'non-violent'.

I think you've gone into the realm of the imaginary here. If you've got solid documentation to prove your point, I'll accept it, but don't give me one or two quotes from a couple of hotheads who don't represent the Palestinian people. What I would like to see is a direct poll on the question "what does 'ceasefire' mean?" Of course, such a poll doesn't exist -- so you have no basis for making claims about what the Palestinian people believe. Yes, there are lots of hotheads among the Palestinians who have very violent intentions. But you need to show that these hotheads constitute a majority -- which you haven't.

QUOTE(loreng59 @ Aug 19 2005, 11:20 AM)
What Abbas is saying in English and what he is saying in Arabic are two very different things. He has totally abandoned any pretense in Arabic. There are no calls at all for non-violence, the opposite it the case. He calls for the violence to be 'effective' but not end. In English he has repeatedly stated that he will do nothing to stop the terror and wants to incorporate the terrorists into his police force, though most already belong. He has stated that he will not fulfill any of the obligations that they have agreed to ever and now is demanding the release of all terrorists so that they can join his police force and continue their attacks. That is what he says in English, and it doesn't get any better in Arabic.

This is directly contradicted by the poll I presented earlier. The relevant quote is:
QUOTE(poll)
The PA president, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, called upon the Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas” to abandon violence and to hold a dialogue with Fateh saying that the atmosphere is appropriate now for conducting such a political dialogue, which is considered to be indispensable.  Do you agree with that, or not?

Now here is a Palestinian pollster asking Palestinian people a question, the pretext of which is that Mr. Abbas has called upon Hamas to abandon violence. This totally contradicts everything you are saying, and you have not offered a shred of evidence to back up these wild claims.

QUOTE(loreng59 @ Aug 19 2005, 11:20 AM)
No Sharon has given away the store and for what? What has Israel gotten in return? Europe is already stating that is a nice beginning, now give them the rest

If by "the rest" you mean the West Bank, I think that would be a good idea. Given your previous statements, I fear that you are imputing that the Europeans want to destroy Israel. Please tell me that my fears are unjustified.

QUOTE(loreng59 @ Aug 19 2005, 11:20 AM)
and the Shrub from Texas is demanding Israel arm those terrorist with better weapons and wants to divide the State of Israel in two so the terrorist can attack without having to go through any checkpoints.

Wow! I didn't realize that Mr. Bush had changed his position so dramatically. Could you please provide me with a quote from Mr. Bush saying, in effect, "I demand that Israel arm the terrorists with better weapons!" and "I demand that Israel be divided in two so that terrorists can attack without going through any checkpoints!"

QUOTE(lederuvdapac)
Erasmussimo, the major problem is not the Palestinian people or the Palestinian government really. It is the extremist groups like Hamas who listen to no rule of law and who have no ability to use democratic and diplomatic methods to voice their views. The Palestinian government CANNOT control these terror groups.

I agree entirely. There are really three sovereign parties here: Israel, the PA, and the extremists. The solution is for the PA and Israel to gang up on the extremists -- but Mr. Abbas doesn't yet have the political clout to pull that off. The Gaza departure will give him a stronger hand. Let us pray that it is sufficient.

QUOTE(lederuvdapac)
The terrorists are emboldened. This act of appeasement makes them believe that it is their brutal tactics and NOT a strive for peace that brought forth thi s favorable action.

Of course the terrorists are going to take credit for the pullout. Do you think they would publicly declare, "Aw, shucks, we never wanted the Israelis to end the occupation! It's all the fault of that dirty rat Abbas and his disgustingly successful diplomacy!"

No, they're going to claim all the credit they can, but the real question is whether anybody believes them. And that, in turn, hinges on the belief that Israel will go right back into Gaza if things go badly. In other words, if Palestinians believe that Hamas chased the Israelis out with violence, then they'll quite logically conclude that Israel can be beaten with violence, and we'll see less political support for Mr. Abbas, a jump in recruitment of extremist organizations, and a lot more attacks and killing. If, on the other hand, Palestinians believe that this was accomplished by means of diplomacy, then they will reject the claims of the extremists, increase their support of Mr. Abbas, and we will see a decline in violence.

So why don't we just let the pot simmer for a few months and see what happens? That will reveal the truth.
psyclist
QUOTE(lederuvdapac @ Aug 19 2005, 02:22 PM)
Erasmussimo, the major problem is not the Palestinian people or the Palestinian government really. It is the extremist groups like Hamas who listen to no rule of law and who have no ability to use democratic and diplomatic methods to voice their views. The Palestinian government CANNOT control these terror groups. So, they will do whatever they wish.

The terrorists are emboldened. This act of appeasement makes them believe that it is their brutal tactics and NOT a strive for peace that brought forth thi s favorable action. Groups like Hamas will not be satisfied until Israel is in ruins and every Jew in the region is killed.
*



This may have been true pre-Abbas but things have changed a lot. First off your assertion that their is no democracy in Palestine is pretty much flat out wrong. Second, the PA is and has been trying to keep the extreme groups under control and are in a PR battle with Hamas over who is responsible for the withdrawal from Gaza.

QUOTE
Determined to win the airwaves, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas on Saturday inaugurated a special Gaza-withdrawal media center, complete with live-feed points for TV crews, a 24-hour text messaging service for news updates, maps, and free hats and T-shirts.

"The center will facilitate the media in all they need. ... A group of Cabinet ministers and officials will be ready at all times to answer your questions," Abbas assured journalists.
cite


I think the people of Palestine know that Abbas, the PA, and diplomacy are responsible. Obviously their was no progress when Arafat was in power who openly called for violence so logically it's not Hamas' use of violence. Egypt and the PA are working together to try and make this as peaceful of a withdrawal as possible. Is the PA as effective as the IDF, CIA, or LA Swat team in combating terror? No, but they're moving in the right direction.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2021 Invision Power Services, Inc.