I should start off with my own bias. The only Israeli national I’ve met was at a Blockbuster video store I was working in part-time to help pay for bills while I attended college. Naturally, I asked him about the Palestinians in one conversation. He came across as very arrogant. He dismissed complaints of encroaching settlers as evidence of their jealousy and intellectual inability to better themselves. His explanation served as a good excuse to avoid considering the very real possibility that Israeli policies affected Palestinians detrimentally. The statement above reminds me of that Israeli national.

Of course not every Israeli national is a hardliner. I wouldn’t call Haaretz a liberal newspaper, but it does buck the establishment by publishing hard-hitting eyewitness accounts of the realities of Palestinian life by independent journalists.

It seems every time the Israeli-Palestinian conflict comes up we go back to Israel’s political genesis, and which side has really pushed the envelope since its establishment as an independent state. It is similar to arguments relating to OIF. Whenever someone starts a thread regarding the GWoT or Iraq, chances are somewhere along the line a poster reminds us that factors indicating the U.S. was in the right about enforcing U.S. resolutions were wrong all along. Posters will declare they are for one side or the other and current events are shaped in large part by pre-invasion events.

I would ask that posters please provide information in this debate where possible when refuting another’s statement(s).

What atrocities have the Israelis committed?

What atrocities have the Palestinians committed?

Are crimes committed by one side less/more reprehensible? Less/more likely to sustain the status quo?

Both sides have commited great atrocities in the second part of the previous century. I believe that the greatest obstacle for peace in that region is the refusal to be open about what had happened.

If we tried to list the number of atrocities commited by either side, we could overload this server the forum is runnung on.

Certainly both sides have done evil acts. So the measure stick must be extent and polarity. One side is poor destitute and have nothing, the other side has about 4 billion dollars per year in military hardware aid i.e. blackhawk helicopter gunships with hellfire missiles. But in the end it's the occupying force who has the responsibility to act accordingly. In an occupation, it's actually good to fight the occupation, especially if it's illegal under international eyes and law.

Okay so now you have made some claims.

First off I know for a fact that you have managed to just about double the amount of military aid that the US provides Israel. A ten second visit to US Aid tells us that much.

Nor has Israel committed any 'evil acts'. If you have any please state them. I won't state the 100s of thousands of attacks that Israel has received because it serves no propose.

Now name the international law Israel is violating.

Israel has a legal claim to the land, in fact 4 international treaties to be exact. The Feisal-Weizmann Treaty 1919, The San Remo Conference April 24, 1920, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations July 24, 1922, United Nations Charter June 26, 1945. And that is all the land west of the Jordan River.

Care to show us one international law or treaty that gives the land to the Arabs?

Please show us the facts, I have offered written proof, how about you?

Fma please name any 'great atrocities' by Israel.

please name any 'great atrocities' by Israel.

There are so many I wouldn't know where to start. We don't get taught about the bad side of Israel in schools.

Two for example would be the 1982 massacre of Palestinian civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon, and the April 2002 Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) mass killings in the Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank.

I really don't pick sides but history definitely shows Israel as committing massacres and war crimes.

The truth is always a good place to start.



Can't speak about the 1982 allegations, but history definitely shows that the "Jenin Massacre" is a hoax.

BK may not be able to but I can.

I just love when somebody brings up Sabra and Shatila. The number of Israelis that were involved with that - zero. The IDF did not do it period. That is a documented fact that not one single solitary Israeli had anything to do with the attacks.

Sabra and Shatila

That was done by Lebanese Maronite Christian militias as revenge for numerous massacres of Christians by the PLO in Lebanon. History shows no Israeli war crimes or massacres.

So that is two myths down, do you have any REAL atrocities?

What is the rational reason behind Israel allowing a maddened Christian militia access to a refugee camp? How could you say with a straight face that Israel did not take part in a war crime or massacre by ignoring reports of civilian killings, refusing to stop the Phalangists, and blocking fleeing Palestinian refugees from escape?

I take then you have not read the Kahan Commission of Inquiry. Well here's you chance Kahan Commission Inquiry

The IDF did not have much to do with the Phalangists. They had dealt almost exclusively with Hadad’s forces and established a close relationship of mutual trust. Mossad informed the IDF that they had the same sort of relationship with the Phalangist, which later turned out to be wrong.

The IDF agreed to start training the Phalangist after the evacuation of the terrorists and Syrians. They learned that over 2,000 terrorists did not leave.

From the Kahan Commission.

“When I.D.F. forces were fighting in the suburbs of Beirut and along the Beirut-Damascus road, the Phalangists were asked to cooperate with the IDFs actions by identifying terrorists, a task at which the Phalangists' expertise was greater than that of the Israeli security forces. During these actions there were generally no acts of vengeance or violence against the Palestinian civilian population by the Phalangists who were operating with the IDF. Another action of the Phalangists' military force was the capture of the technical college in Reihan, a large building in Beirut not located in a built-up area. The Phalangists captured this place from the armed Shiite organization "Amal." One day after the place was taken, the Phalangists turned the building over to the IDF and left the site.”

...

“As the number of IDF casualties mounted, public pressure for the Phalangists to participate in real fighting increased. The plan formulated in mid-June 1982, when it was still uncertain whether the terrorists would agree to leave West Beirut, was that the Christian forces would fight to take control of West Beirut; the I.D.F. would not take part in that operation; and only in the event that it became necessary would the IDF help out the Phalangists with long-range artillery fire. This plan was discussed in the Cabinet meeting of 15.6.82, where it was proposed by the Prime Minister, and his proposal was adopted by the Cabinet, namely, that IDF forces would not enter West Beirut, and this job was to be done by other forces (meaning the Phalangists) with help they would be given by the IDF.” Kahane Commission

...

“When the war began in June 1982, the prevailing opinion among the Mossad agents who had maintained contacts with the Phalangist leadership was that the atrocities and massacres were a thing of the past, and that the Phalangist forces had reached a stage of political and organizational maturity that would ensure that such actions would not repeat themselves.”



Easy by stating the absolute facts. They did not take part in any war crimes or massacres. They did put a stop the moment that they heard about it. Prior to the entry of the Phalangists they came under heavy fire from those ‘unarmed refugees’ with over 100 casualties. The Phalangists claimed that they too were taking casualties. So IDF on the outside of the camps stopped all people that might be armed from escaping, until what had happened came to light.

The actions of the IDF were in the highest regard for civilian life. When they found out that the Phalangists were engaging in war crimes they move immediately to end those crimes. The only ‘crime’ any of the IDF could be guilty of is ‘failure to read minds’.

Lately I’ve noticed a few posters with opposing views to my own offering sources to back up their claims. I don’t know if these posters actually take the time to read the sources they provide, but you’re the latest poster to claim a source backs up your assertions when examining the source proves the complete opposite, Loreng.


I didn’t single out the IDF. I said Israel because the Kahan Commission found fault with political and military figures. However, one of those figures cited by the commission was IDF Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan.


Sharon made this claim. The Palestinians refuted it but it didn’t matter. Any reasonable person would ask why the IDF would send 200 Phalangists to round up 2000 terrorists, and why, in spite of the Phalangists’ cooperation with IDF, would Eitan and Sharon overlook “outbursts of hostilities between the Phalangists and the Druze in Beit Ad Din. The Druze committed some murders, and the Phalangists took revenge; a small I.D.F. force was stationed in the area in order to prevent such actions. In the early stages of the war there were also some acts of revenge and looting on the part of the Christians in Sidon; these were stopped by the I.D.F.” before the massacre.


The sources you cited do not back up your claims. It is my understanding that IDF suffered casualties upon entering Beirut, not at Sabra and Shatila. The Beirut casualty count is what prompted Israeli support to arm the Phalangists and have them play a more active role than simply ousting terrorists.

Additionally the commission amends its casualty count among the Phalangists from several dozen to two:


Finally:


Your Wiki link does not support this claim.

The fact that Israeli state was created on a land that belonged to a separate nation is a great crime.

Let me illustrate it with an example:

Lets say that a group of people immigrate to the United States and form a separate community there. So far, everything is legal and right.

But just how moral is it if these people declare themselves a separate nation and use arms to make the rightful inhabitants accept this.

If you agree that the creation of Israel was moral and right, then by the same logic Chinatown or any other community could declare independance.

Note: I really liked the comment "We don't get taught about the bad side of Israel in schools", it really reflects the anti-Palestine and pro-Israel bies in America.

The israeli and palestinian war is a long war. Both sides have made mistakes but in the end it are the palestinians who blow up the peace proces. In 1999/2000 president Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak made a peace process that was was about Jeruzalem, the settlements and a pull back from the Westbank and Gaza, it was a peace process that was very good for the palestinians. But Arafat refused, he wanted to fight so the second intifada begun. Know the Israeli\s know you cannot have a peace progress with people who want now peace. So they pull back from the Gaza and the palestinians vote on Hamas to thank the israeli's!!!! Who is wrong her???
Greetings Mupampi

How's this any different than when Israel choose to ignore the Saudi Peace Plan that was good to both the Palestinians and the Israelis and was unanomously adopted by the Arab League? It seems neither side can come to an agreement.

Welcome Mupampi. I don't understand why you look down on the Palestinians for voting for Hamas when you also criticize Arafat's PLO. Fatah had never completely disarmed after the second intifada. Fatah is slightly better than Hamas, but both have a long way to go.

As for TruthMarch's paragraph, I feel Palestinian hardships are irrelevant where suicide bombings are concerned. No one, I hope, would give Israelis a pass on committing crimes today due to the hardships they suffered in the Holocaust. Why should we treat the Palestinians any different?

Why is it that missions headed up by Israel usually stated massacre?

The problem is if these attacks are talked about and blame is put on Israel then we are considered anti-Semitic. Every Israeli politician knows how to use this as a tool. Lets not forget Israel is an opposed nation!

So that is two myths down, do you have any REAL atrocities?

Sure:

1948-Dahmash Mosque
Israeli 89th Commando Battalion lead this attack.
Palestinians were massacred in the mosque, their bodies lay decomposing for 10 days. Not to mention Israel forced all of the Palestinians out of this area in Lyda and Ramble to refugee camps. Hundreds died on the way.

1956-Khan Yunis
An UNRWA investigation found that the Israelis at Khan Yunis and there refugee camp had murdered 275 civilians. Unarmed civilians. After the Israelis withdrew from Gaza under American pressure, a mass grave was unearthed at Khan Yunis,
the grave contained the bodies of 40 Arabs who had been shot in the back of the head after having their hands tied.

1978-Abbasieh,Lebanon
Israeli war planes destroyed the town Mosque that was known to hold innocent people looking for shelter. 80 women and kids dead.

More recently:
1994-Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron
350 people attacked during worship, not all died.

1994-Lebanon,Nabatiyeh
School bus targeted by Israeli plane, 4 kids killed.

1999-Western Bekaa villages in Lebanon
Israeli plane dropped bombs on kids celebrating "eid" festival, 8 kids dead.

Are these considered massacres or atrocities????
My point is this list doesn't end, Israel is not as innocent as the media makes them out to be. We have all been washed with what we see on tv.











Ben Gurion: "It doesn't matter what the gentile
says, what matters is what the Jews are doing".

First of all Israel and the Saudi's áre not great friends, unanomously adopted by the Arab league, the same league how tried to destroy Israel in 1948 (three years after WWII, ), 1956, 1967, 1973. I think i have made my point here.

I am surprised you would state that when the Kahane Commission stated in plain language the opposite of your claims. Did you read any of it?



Does that somehow mean that the IDF had extensive contact with the Phalangists, or does it say that they did not and Mossad was the group that worked with them?

Please read the documents before condemning my syopsis.

Oh that is very interesting, what other country owned that land? Please tell us. Provide some source of this extraordinary statement.

Thats a good question...

Why don't we ask the Turkish Cypriots?


Interesting choice of words there... you like the comment.

Are you equally fond of the comment, "Palestinian children don't get taught about the good sides of Israel."?

Well you'd think that a treaty that was agreed upon by all Arab states is one that Israel would support. That way if Israel stuck to the treaty, none of the Arab nations would have any reason to complain. If say everyone likes a something like the defunct "road map to peace" except Syria, then their will still be potential for conflict between Israel and Syria. Are you suggesting that it's impossible for Israel to agree to any treaty just because someone who isn't "great friends" with Israel came up with it? Seems a bit closeminded and unilateral if you ask me.

I was speaking to your Wiki link. The Kahan Commission’s findings, while informative, are in dispute due to its lax recommendations. The Israeli government wouldn’t have bothered launching an investigation if not for the protests mounted by Israeli citizens.


As you cite from the Kahan Commission, the Mossad was made up of “leaders of the Phalangists and representatives of the Government of Israel and the I.D.F.” What conclusion should I arrive at other than IDF had frequent contacts with the Phalangists either via upper IDF representatives to synchronize operations, military exchange of supplies to outfit the Phalangists, and regular troops to train the Phalangists?

I hold the Israeli government of the time more responsible than the average IDF foot soldier. Some members of IDF did the right thing by reporting the murders and were ordered back to their post. Even if the IDF representatives weren’t higher ups within the IDF at the time the Mossad drafted evaluations of the Phalangists, it does not excuse the IDF members in charge of the operation and present at Sabra and Shatila from doing nothing about the refugee turkey shoot.

Palestine Belonged to the people living on the land prior to the First Zionist Congress making a decision to set up a homeland there and promoting immigration.

From the BBC:



From Wikipedia



All of the atrocities on both sides are a direct result of this.

The US was established in the land that belonged to the Native Americans. It is a pity they did not start insist on committing atrocities since then, because they would have found such great supporters among some of the American bleeding hearts.
The Palestinians murder Israelis because that is a favorite pastime of them, period. I don’t say the Israeli army has always acted properly, although it certainly never made attacking innocent civilians its declared goal. Mistakes happen, but when the Israeli army kills civilians, there is a great outcry in Israel, the soldiers involved are sentenced, etc. the Palestinians, however, celebrate the killing of every Israeli.
I for one believe that trying to satisfy other nations is useless. Most people would anyway stick to their convictions, so why bother? I don’t wonder that people think that Israel commits "atrocities"- quite the opposite: I am always delightfully surprised to find out that some non-Jews actually believe that Israelis are not the new Nazis of the world. If someone, however, is ready to be convinced, I have only one thing to tell them: come to Israel, talk to the people (both Israelis and Palestinians) and find out for yourselves.

Blah, Blah, "yes but another country also did bad things 200 years earlier, that gives us moral justification" blah.



That is the problem. Right there, in black and white, or whatever your screen colour is. In you post you say you are astonished when non jews say that Israel are the Nazis of the world. Of course they are not, they are notheing even vaguely, remotely CLOSE to the Nazis. At their absolute worst, the Israelis bear no similarity to the Nazis, nor have they been called such here, so please do not make such statements.

BUT: I do find disturbing similarities with the way SOME people are willing to dismiss the Palestinians as sub-human based on the actions of a few. Your quote above, and an assorment of similar quotes by Loreng about how Israel can do NO wrong, and Palestinians can do NO right are exactly the problem.


My opinion? Both sides have certainly committed evil acts, on an almost equal level, though I would say the Palestinians have acted slightly worse to be sure. I am even happy to entertain arguments that the actions of the Palestinians have been significantly worse than the Israelis. There is an argument there.

What is annoying and self-defeating is arguments like that or Loreng that Israel is on the side of the angels and has NEVER done anything wrong, while the Palestinians and born and bred savages waiting to become suicide bombs.

Thats just idiocy.

Let me first start by saying that I don't want to choose sides in this debate. I don't think you can find a single party responsible for everything in a conflict that has gone on for so long. It is my opinion that both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to their own state, that is recognized by their neighbors. I really wish both sides would see this, in stead of letting extremists dictate their actions and calling for the destruction of the opposite side.


That being said I would like to offer some counterpoints to the people that seem to think that one side deserves all the blame.

What atrocities have the Israelis committed?

I'm actually surprised at how many people on these boards seem to find no faults in Israeli actions. Maybe this is due to a pro-Israel bias in US media ( as opposed to the more pro-Palestinian feelings that often seem to be present in European media). I personally always thought a lot of facts that clearly indicate violations of human rights and atrocities commited by Israel. ( I list general concerns here, some other posts already list specific incidents)

Heres my take on Israels actions:

1) the IDF have always shown a disregard for Palestinian civilian life. Not only do they target suspected terrorists (which they kill without trial, another action I don't like to see a government take) without any regard for civilian casualties, but they seem to puposely take actions that are designed to cause civilian deaths. This UN document (pdf) makes an interesting read. It points out atrocities and crimes committed by both sides. Including for Israel :





2) Israel has a history of repression against the Palestinian population. These acts target the entire population rather than militant groups. I don't see how the withholding basic utilities, water, medical aid or education is going to increase the safety of Israel. A lot of these actions seem to amount to nothing more then random harassment. I find this whole process reprehensible and it reminds me of the apartheids regime in South-Africa. Excerpts from the same document linked above:













3) About Sabra and Shatila:
while the atrocities committed here seem to be caused by Israel's allies and not the IDF itself,
even Israel seems to admit that they were at fault in not trying to prevent them.
From the BBC:



What atrocities have the Palestinians committed?

On these boards most people seem to agree that the Palestinians deserve their share of the blame. So I ll be short about this.

I just want to point out that while the Palestinians are certainly in a deplorable position, the actions taken by militant groups are nothing short of terrorism. They do not aid the Palestinian people in their quest for a state of their own. These militant groups seem mainly concerned with gaining power and influence in Palestine and causing destruction in Israel. I see few indications that they are actually serving a nobler cause.

All these suicide bombings in public places are atrocities and in my view can never be anything but terrorism. These actions are even made worse because they actually undermine the Palestinian case and cost them international good will (as can be seen from the views of some of the AD members).

Some quotes from the UN document above:






Any groups truly committed to peace and a Palestinian state should start by stopping these attacks and recognizing Israel. But I don't see that happening any time soon.

Are crimes committed by one side less/more reprehensible? Less/more likely to sustain the status quo?


I don't think peace can ever be possible unless both sides change their ways. The whole conflict is a vicious circle of violence that needs to be broken by both sides.

What I do really deplore is the Israel's repression of the Palestinian population. These measures go way beyond what is defensible in the name of security, and are actually counterproductive as it creates the perfect feeding ground for extremism and terrorists. The recent elections are a clear indication that this situation creates a serious shift towards extremism in the population.

"Your quote above, and an assorment of similar quotes by Loreng about how Israel can do NO wrong, and Palestinians can do NO right are exactly the problem.
"
Of course Israel can do wrong. I am not that happy with my state, either. And I, at least, don’t dismiss Palestinians as sub humans. As a religious person I believe we all were created by God, and we all have to do His will. "You shall not murder" apply to everyone. Granted, sometimes Israelis violate it, but Palestinians don’t even condemn those who violate it, provided the victim is someone "who deserves death" (every Israeli is in this category). There are individuals who act differently in both societies, but every rule has its exceptions.
And no, by mentioning the way the US came to exist I did not seek "moral justification." I only meant to say that "snatching lands" is not so unique a method for establishing a country… and in Israel case, most of the lands were bought.

As usual I am accused of things that I have never advocated. First off I am highly critical of Israeli actions, real one not the garbage that is continually spewed out.
First off I have served in both the IDF and the US Army. Actions that would get one a medal in the US Army would get jail time in Israel. But then again Israel is held to a standard that no other country in the world attempts. I would answer each of these, but since your mind is made up, why bother?

The number of terrorist attacks since September 2000 is not 1,100 but well over 55,000. Which is more than the rest of the world combined. The US suffered what 4 terrorist attacks and invaded two different countries and inflicted between 100-200,000 casualties.

So I will just ask a couple of questions.

If Israel acting in any manner that the UN claimed, why did they lose 23 soldiers in Jenin? The Geneva Convention clearly demotes that they did not have to endanger their soldiers in such a manner, they could have just as easily acted like Russia in Chechyna or the US and Great Britain in Bosnia, and Iraq and carpet bombed entire neighborhoods and cities. Please be objective, since it is more than clear to all that the United Nations is not.

Targeting of terrorists, yes they have done that. Though the fact is most are arrested, tried and put in jail. Proof is the simple fact for every terrorist they have killed over 40 have been arrested, tried, and convicted. Isn't that a pretty remarkable for the situation that they are involved in? Their conclusion was that Sharon should have been able to read minds. Nor is this a white-wash of Sharon, I personally feel that he belongs in jail, but for his acts, not that.

Question for those that claim the IDF acted so badly in Operation Defensive Shield. Who supplied those tankers, and the water? During the battle Israel supplied generators, food, medicine, blood and oxygen to the local hospital. The trucks were attacked by the Palestinians, but the IDF drivers still delivered the needed supplies. Pretty selfish of them. As for stopping the ambulances, it might be because the PLO used them as personnel carriers, to resupply their combatants. That's just a guess on my part, but there is a lot of pictures of them doing that.

To dismiss the Kahane Commission (not you freedom fries, but Lesly) as a white-wash is hogwash. It was the most remarkable inward look by any government of it's actions during a war. I still lived in Israel at the time and the driving force was the IDF for this commission, not street protests. Their reputation was very tarnished and they wanted the world to know the truth, all of it.

When the ridiculous claims stop then maybe the real issues can be discussed. With the thousands of lies floating around about Israel it makes that impossible. Two days ago the Syrian government suggested that Israel created the avian flu virus in order to damage "genes carried only by Arabs."

Not to be outdone "On November 16, 1998, the British newspaper Sunday Times published details about what was later dubbed 'the Israeli race bomb.' It reported that Zionist experts were trying to identify genes unique to Arabs, in order to
create, through genetic engineering, dangerous viruses and bacteria that
would exclusively attack these genes. The paper stated that the race bomb
program was being carried out in the secret Nes Ziona Institute, near Tel
Aviv, which specializes in production of chemical and biological weapons. In
October 1999, the newspaper again emphasized that the Zionist entity was
increasing its scientific efforts [to develop] the race bomb.

Lets not leave out "The American newspaper Herald Tribune published a report which truly reveals the terrifying [nature] of 'Israel's race bomb'... The newspaper
reported that after years of serious and intensive research, experts from
universities have attained the capability of manufacturing the flu virus.

Nor is this limited to the newspapers. The PLO has accused Israel in the World Health Organization meetings of inventing AIDS, poison gas attacks, developing biological weapons that target only Arabs, etc, etc. Then you wonder why we get so defensive, since any admission of less than perfection is taken as a confession of a whole host of hororific behavior.

I’m sure good members of the IDF wanted to get to the bottom of the government’s actions with an investigation. I’m sure the government wanted to wash its hands of any wrongdoing. Problem is the Israeli army, air force, and navy are subject to the Israeli government. Without those protests it is unlikely that the IDF would have been able to apply sufficient pressure to make politicians take action. Even the Jewish Virtual Library, which calls Israeli responsibility for the massacre a myth and like yourself can’t help but inject Arab atrocities into the “myth” discussion to dull the sting of Israel’s failure to protect innocent refugees, admits as much: “The Kahan Commission of Inquiry, formed by the Israeli government in response to public outrage and grief...”


Why do you bring up wildly anti-Semitic headlines that are the equivalent of a conspiracy theorist alleging the U.S. created the AIDS virus to depopulate African Americans, a claim the majority dismisses out of hand? What exactly does patently anti-Semitic propaganda have to do with Israeli crimes against Palestinians?


Does the U.N. document similarly go easy on the IDF?

I think you are totally right, but i have a question why are you not living in Israel anymore, in which brigade did you serve in the Israeli and US army?

Greetings mupampi


Edited to remove largely, unecessary quotation.

To all:

Sabra and Shatila were payback for Damour. Doesn't make it right, but there is that old saying about what goes around comes around. Well that, and also, payback's a b.

bluegrassml:

Re Khan Yunis. People die in war. And more people die in places where the opposition concentrates their artillery, as was the case with the Egyptians at Khan Yunis. And as for those found dead with their hands tied, I don't suppose that it has ever occurred to you that maybe there was a little infighting between Palestinian factions? I mean, do you think that Arafat and Fatah rose to power without killing and terrorizing some of their own along the way? And by the way, how many persons were in the IDF's 11th Infantry Brigade?

Nabatiyeh. If the school bus had been the target, then most, if not all the children would be dead. But they are not, because the school bus was not the target. And what you left out was that earlier that day, Hezbollah bombings claimed the lives of two Israeli soldiers and three allied militiamen. Well that, and also that Hezbollah had previously vowed to do anything and everything within its power to sabotage and/or wreck any resumption of peace talks.

Abbasieh. Again, people die in war. And we don't call it an "atrocity" or "massacre" when a stray heavy mortar round accidentally/inadvertently takes out a mosque. I don't think that we can otherwise call the "Battle of Britain" and "atrocity." And so too with Vicksburg and Atlanta.

But if you want "atrocity," then I suppose that Ma'alot and Kiryat Shmona come to mind. As the late Golda Meir reported to the Knesset on 20 May 1974:

"Barely a month has passed since the blood-bath at Kiryat Shmona, and we have been visited by the terrible massacre at Ma'alot. Three terrorists, spawns of Satan, cold-bloodedly and with premeditation killed infants, school-children and adults. The number of our precious dead, the martyrs of Ma'alot, amounts to 24. Many were wounded. The efforts to rescue our dear ones lasted long hours, and had it not been for the Israel Defence Forces' operation, it is not unlikely that all our dear ones would have been shattered in the crumbling of the building.

The huge massacre at Ma'alot recalls to our minds the terrible series of crimes of the base terrorism - the explosive-laden car set off in Jerusalem, in the midst of a market swarming with people; the blowing-up of the Swissair plane, with its passengers, whilst in the air; the murder of the Avivim children on their way to school; the slaughter at Lod airport; the bloody deed in Munich. The long list of victims of terrorism has now been swollen by our fine and innocent children, who set off from Safad to hike through the countryside, and were overtaken by the murderers. And before the murderers perpetrated their foul scheme on our boys and girls at the "Netiv Meir" school, they shot to death an Arab woman on her way home from work and murdered a family in their sleep.

The martyrs of Ma'alot went to their death for the sake of all of us. They were murdered for our sin in coming to this land, for the sin of the establishment and existence of our State, for the crime of our aspiration to live as a free and sovereign nation. This is Arab terrorism's reply to the yearning for peace which imbues us. This is the mark of the identity of the moral portrait of the anti-Israel terrorist organizations.
***
Terrorist activity constantly accompanies both our lives and every step in the progress of our project. The methods employed by the terrorists become increasingly brutal, lacking any semblance of humanity. Those responsible for terrorist activity have clear political goals. They strive for the destruction of the Jewish State and the establishment of a Palestinian State in the Land of Israel. There can be no compromise between us and the terrorist organizations. These organizations increase their activity whenever there are enhanced prospects for peace in the region. This time, too, there are reliable indications that the action at Ma'alot was aimed at undermining the efforts to achieve a separation-of-forces agreement with Syria. The Arab press relates that the terrorists even wrote this explicitly to the Arab rulers. There is no doubt that terrorism against us is also fed by the encouragement of elements which are not deterred from the cynical exploitation of the hostility for Israel in serving superpower interests. In this connection condemnatory mention should be made of the fact that the Soviet communications media reporting the events at Ma'alot did not hesitate to place the responsibility on Israel. In these reports there is an easily discernible positive tone applied to the terrorists, who are referred to as Palestinian partisans waging a legitimate struggle. In contrast, I feel duty-bound to praise worthy expressions on the part of statesmen and dignitaries in various countries, in condemnation of criminal terrorism.

The war against terrorism is vital to our existence. The attacks both here and abroad, which we have witnessed, are only a part of the actions that were planned. A great many attacks were averted in time - and this is not something we are in the habit of publicising. Activity against the terrorists and their organizations must be systematic, constant and daring. Our people are acquiring more and more knowledge and experience, and there is still a great deal, to learn and perfect in this field. I am convinced that it lies within our ability to deal the terrorist organizations mortal blows, but we must soberly realize that they cannot be defeated by a one-time operation. We shall increase our activity and continue to perfect all the (fighting) arms charged with combating terrorism. However, we must not content ourselves with the diligent and dedicated work of the various institutions. A great deal of \volunteering is called for. I hope that this spirit of volunteering will find expression in systematic and organized ways, and I believe that we shall achieve much in the way of prevention and punitive measures, and shall not permit the course of our life to be brought to a halt by the terrorists.

There can be no doubt that the acts of terrorism are also directed at destruction of the mutual understanding which exists between ourselves and the Arab citizens of Israel, as well as between us and the population of the administered areas. I am greatly concerned at certain manifestations of violence towards Arabs in the wake of the terrorist acts. While these manifestations are not the rule, they are nevertheless extremely dangerous - first and foremost to ourselves, to our human image. We are required to exercise self-control. We must not let irresponsible passions come to the fore. Let us not play into our enemy's hands. Let no one, take the law into his own hands. We must not make wholesale accusations. It behoves us all to assist the authorized bodies in fulfilling their task."

Please see: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign+Relation...nister+Meir.htm

And for Shimon Peres on Operation Grapes of Wrath [think operations in Lebanon], 22 April 1996:

"Twelve days ago, "Operation Grapes of Wrath" began, with the objective of putting an end to the firing of Katyushas at Kiryat Shmona and the communities of the Galilee.

The firing of Katyushas, like the actions of HAMAS, were intended to undermine the peace process in the Middle East. The incidents in Tel-Aviv, in Ashkelon and in Jerusalem, like the firing on our northern settlements, stem from the same source and the same logic. The IDF stood, and will stand, against this provocation with its full military capability, and in consideration of a very complex situation.
***
"Grapes of Wrath" is an operation which has no time limit, but is explicit in its objectives. These objectives are to ensure a long period of quiet for the communities of the north, to stabilize the situation in southern Lebanon, and to halt the firing of Katyushas, thereby enabling a resumption of the peace process. The operation relies on the use of sophisticated and precise weapons. It accords expression to the IDF's advantage in human and technological quality, in mobility, and intelligence, and in precise and accurate hits.

The government, in its instructions to the IDF on the operation, ordered it not to harm civilians or civilian targets, and to concentrate solely on Hizbullah installations and on the terrorists themselves. Overall, this instruction was carried out with great meticulousness. However, in a military operation, as hard as one tries to maintain purity of arms, mishaps may occur and innocent civilians may be injured. This was not our intention.

As you know, from the beginning of the operation, all means were taken to distance the civilian population from the areas of fire, and to separate them from the Hizbullah terrorists, so that they would not be harmed.

Hizbullah, in contrast, adopted the opposite approach. Out of cynical cruelty, it attached itself to concentrations of refugees who fled from the areas of fighting, and from them fired towards Israel, in order to draw fire towards them and to endanger the civilians' lives.

The Kafr Kana tragedy and any other harm done to civilians, are first of all, a terrible human tragedy, and we regret them very much. But we know that it was not intentional. It did not serve our objectives, and it is completely contrary to the nature of the operation. However, it occurred, under combat conditions, when one of our units was attacked from all sides, and they fired in self-defense. Notwithstanding, we shall examine the incident in a responsible and organized manner. The IDF has already begun this review and the results will be presented to the government and to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee."

Please see: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-%20Obs...ATIONS%20IN%20L

Kafr Kana was an "incident" wherein IDF artillery mistakenly hit a UN camp and killed 100 or so. Of course, par for the course for an organization in the hands of despots and extremists, the IDF was roundly condemned, and never mind that the UN had allowed Hezbollah to set up an armed camp, from where Katyusha rockets were fired into northern Israel, just across the street. The UN will have to forgive me on this one, but since the UN isn't big on having combatants set up shop in the midst of civilians, or so it claims, the UN should have done and/or said something about the Hezbollah camp across the road. Of course, the UN didn't have the stomach for that, only for blaming Israel. The only "good" to come out of Kafr Kana was that the inadvertent shelling of the UN camp accelerated the efforts of some others to establish a cease-fire.

Lastly, to put the matter into perspective, please see:

http://www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=35

And you said something about "anti-Semitism." If it isn't that, then what other explanation is there for the rather mind-numbing hypocrisy?


Psyclist:

Nice quote for Ben-Gurion. But please see:

http://www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=251

And since Benny Morris is much quoted by the "left", he too reports the same [from his 1948 And After, at 20]:

"Under British mediation, the [Israeli leadership agreed to a ceasefire], offering what the British regarded as generous terms. But then, when faced with Moslem pressure, the largely Christian leadership got cold feet; a ceasefire meant surrender and implied readiness to live under Jewish rule. They would be open to charges of collaboration and treachery. So, to the astonishment of the British and the Jewish military and political leaders gathered on the afternoon of 22 April at the Haifa town hall, the Arab delegation announced that its community would evacuate the city.

The Jewish mayor, Shabtai Levy, and the British commander, Major-General Hugh Stockwell, pleaded with the Arabs to reconsider...but the Arabs were unmoved..."

And then, during the Lausanne negotiations in 1949, Israel offered to take back 100,000 Palestinian Arab refugees. However, the Arab world leaders refused the offer, as such would have implied that they recognized Israel's right to exist.

And then there's these words from the Proclamation of Independence:

"In the midst of wanton aggression, we yet call upon the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve the ways of peace and play their part in the development of the State, on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its bodies and institutions....We extend our hand in peace and neighborliness to all the neighboring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all."

And, by the way, it was David Ben-Gurion who sent Golda Meir to Haifa to urge the Palestinian Arabs to stay put in Haifa.

And if you can't or won't believe anyone Jewish, how about Jamal Husseini, the chairman of the Palestine Higher Committee, who told the UN Security Council on 23 April 1948, that the Arabs "preferred to abandon their homes, their belongings, and everything they possessed in the world and leave the town." And then there's the then Syrian Prime Minister, Khaled al-Azam:

"Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave. Only a few months separated our call to them to leave and our appeal to the United Nations to resolve on their return."

And again:

"We brought destruction upon the refugees, by calling on them to leave their homes." — Khaled al-Azam

And, lastly, for two other voices:

"The most potent of the factors were announcements made by the Palestinian-Arab Higher Committee, urging all Haifa Arabs to quit, intimating that those remaining would be regarded as renegades." — London Economist, October 1948

"The Arab States..encouraged the Palestinians to leave their homes temporarily, in order to be out of the way of the invading Arab armies." — Filastin (Jordan) February 1949

Which is not to say that no expulsions occurred, but the majority, a goodly majority, left of their own free will. And can you blame the Israelis for not taking them back? I mean, if they left hoping that the Arab armies were going to crush the fledgling State of Israel, then they didn't stay to defend the State.

Sorry KivrotHaTaavah, I think you need to brush up on your history. The whole "Palestinians left because they were responding to calls from their leaders" has been discredited multiple times. This line of thinking was proven false with the discovery of “The Emigration of the Arabs of Palestine in the Period 1/12/1947 ­ 1/6/1948″ dated 30 June, 1948 and was produced by the IDF Intelligence Service during the first weeks of the truce (11 June ­ 9 July) of 1948. It analyzes the numbers of refugees, the stages of the exodus, the causes, destination and problems of absorption in the host countries. Altogether, the report states, Jewish -- meaning Haganah/I.D.F., I.Z.L. and L.H.I. military operations accounted for at least 55% of the Arab exodus from Palestine and 15% were caused by dissidents Jewish organizations such as the Irgun and the Stern Gang. The report also states “the Arab institutions attempted to struggle against the phenomenon of flight and evacuation, and to curb the waves of emigration”.
The Arab Higher Committee imposed restrictions, and issued threats, punishments, and propaganda in the radio and press to curb the emigration, and also tried to mobilize the governments in the neighboring Arab states to assist in this effort, as both shared the same interest. You can also see Benny Morris' "Revisiting the Palestinian exodus of 1948," and Eugene L. Rogan and Avi Shlaim's "The War for Palestine: Rewriting the History of 1948". For the myth of Arab orders to leave, see W. Khalidi (1988). For a new review by Israeli authors of Israel's responsibility, see Pappe', Segev, Flapan. For a review of UN files by non-Israeli author, see Palumbo. For a database analysis of all depopulated villages, see Abu-Sitta. (obviously not in the links below as they are books. But you can read more below).

links
links
links
links
links

and so on and so on.

I can't but help noticing that despite its title, this thread seems to be almost completely about Israel. Freedom Fries wrote: and this seems to be the accepted opinion.

But why is there so much condemnation of Israel and so little of the Palestinians and their Arab neighbours? Is it because Israel is a democracy and as such ought to be held to a higher standard than the Palestinians? This was always my stance in the past... or is it because its just become so trendy to dump on Israel, regardless of the facts?

I've always tried to maintain a balance in looking at the Middle East but I can't simply ignore that which doesn't fit into my world view. I have to take everything into account.

Yes, the IDF has used excessive force against the Palestinians and this is clearly unacceptable in most cases we care to examine. Yes innocent Palestinian civilians have died in large numbers... but is this not also the case with the Palestinians? Have they not also slaughtered large numbers of Israel civilians, without remorse or repent?

If we hold Israel to a high standard because it is a democracy, then ought we not to do the same for the Palestinians? They have held elections, also in the past.

Why is Israel held to one standard whilst the Palestinians and their Arab sponsors held to another?

People need to cease these pointless under dog arguments with regards to the Palestinians and recognise the fact that violence and war is not the only recourse available to the Palestinians. It is merely the course of action they have chosen.

Israel is a democratic state with just laws and it would recognize and accept any Palestinian effort that was not based on violence.

Do you know that in the Hamas Covenant it is written: “The time of Muslim unity will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees which will cry out, ‘Oh Muslims, there is a Jew behind me – come and kill him!"
And these people were elected by the Palestinians to lead them, and the world still insists on talking about Israel's crimes. Oh, well. History proves that people never learn, but always repeat their mistakes. I have once read that a holocaust survivor said that his lesson from the holocaust is "believe our enemies. They mean what they say."
I believe Hamas leaders when they say the want all Jews dead. And you?

Unfortunately, people want to make themselves feel better by defending the underdog. They think this conflict is about land because that makes the most sense to them. But no matter how many facts you provide to the contrary, they can't help from rooting for the underdog whether it's right or not.

The reason Israel has taken over portions of land previously occupied (never owned) by Palestinians, is because the Palestinians invited anybody with a tank to use that land as a staging area to help them kill Jews. This is and never was about land. It's all about a bigoted attitude towards an entire race of people.

Hitler tried to exterminate the Jews. The Pals are still trying. The entire Arab world would welcome the extermination of the Jews.

But somehow, this is more Israel's fault than anybody else. When they become enraged at the annilation of women and children at weddings, bar mitzvah's, and pizzerias, they get compared to the terrorists who committed those atrocities and are somehow, of equal blame.

Yes, I believe that is their innermost desire and no matter what they say I do not believe Hamas will let go of that cause.

Considering the near universal outcry when ever a European nationalist party comes even close to gaining power as opposed to the leniency which is granted to the Palestinians though, I'm afraid Hamas will be given free reign to act as it pleases, just as long as it says what the rest of the world wants to hear.

There really is one standard for the Muslims and one for every one else.

I'm becoming more and more convinced that Israel is resented in the west, espcially by the socialist side of the political spectrum, of whom we have so many here in Europe, for 'creating' the violent situation of the Middle East.

There seems to be a prevailing argument that both sides are 'equally to blame' in the conflict, that neither side has the upper hand in the moral stakes and both carry the burden of responsibility. I used to believe this myself, but the more I see of this conflict and the more I read about its history and how that history is presented I have come to the conclusion that Israel is treated as a pariah state, most especially by socialist Europeans who, for what ever reason, choose to support the Palestinians as an 'oppressed people'.

There is a clear anti Israeli/pro Palestinian bias in European politics and it can't be ignored or argued away by talk of IDF atrocities. The bottom line is Israel has been attacked by the Arab nations since the day it was founded and it never received the support it was entitled to. Not from the UN nor from the EU.

I reject, totally, the notion that the Jews did not have the right to found the nation of Israel on the land of Palestine. The fact is, the Jews have no where else to go and they had just as great a claim on that land as any one else.* The alternative to the foundation of Israel was to condemn the Jews to the fate of being eternally without a homeland and subject to the pogroms, intolerance and holocausts which have been carried out against them again and again and again.

No people should be denied their own nation, even it it is a small, 'ethnically challenged' political entity. It is home. The Jews have a home land and it is Israel.


*By saying this I go against my own great grandfather who campaigned for a Jewish 'homeland' on the island of Malta.

Yes. Then again, after failed Israeli assassination attempts at Hamas’ leaders I can see why Hamas doesn’t want to disarm. Khaled Mehsaal, the leader, was injected with a toxic substance in 1997 by Mossad agents. Jordanian authorities arrested the agents and Israel was forced to provide an antidote. The number two guy, Haniyeh, was placed on the kill list in 2003. The air strike on his house in Gaza. The targets escaped. That same year Israel conducted another air strike against Mamoud al-Zahar in Gaza. Israel killed al-Zahar’s son instead.

Hamas took over the PA today. They said peace is not on their agenda. In return, Israel is discussing “tougher restrictions on the Palestinians in a bid to force Hamas to recognize Israel and renounce violence… Israeli officials could restrict the flow of goods and labourers from entering Israel from Gaza and freeze money transfers to the Palestinian Authority.” It doesn’t make sense to me, to be honest, making things harder for the Palestinians. One sure way to make people rally around their leaders is to “attack” the average Joe. Is that what Israel wants, greater support for Hamas?


I’ve noticed that too. I don’t have an intended outcome for the thread in mind. While pro-Israel posters are supporting the