Unfortunately, you both have a clue, however, the United States at this point is the instigator. We need to leave it alone until we have a cabinet member who really knows how to approach peace in that region. the current administration is lacking real leadership in this particular matter of foreign presence.

That's the problem. He can't be calmed down. He feels that every time Israel is attacked, that there should be a military response because he does not want to look weak.

He's just trigger happy. MAybe he should be replaced

Welcome Rep7 - please avoid posting two posts in a row. If you were the last person to post and you want to add more, you merely need to go in & edit your last post. After 12 hours, go ahead and make a new one if you want to add more info because your edit window will have closed. Thanks.

I read the data, Dayton, and while it was good data, it doesn't automatically lead me to the same conclusion as you. The number of Palestinian combatants killed by Israel is excessively high. That could indicate that the Palestinians are indeed the major agressors in the situation, but you'd really need a breakdown of what is considered to be a combatant to determine if this is the case. It could also show that Israel is being excessive and abusive. That seems to be the problem with most sources that I find. They lack certain pieces of data, and while they may not be trying to spin the information, I still remain skeptical because of the amount of propaganda that does exist in regards to this conflict.



Dayton, I didn't say that Israel needs to do more or that the Palestinians need to do less. I merely said that the numbers don't automatically mean what you say that they mean.

What the HELL?? Are you serious? Sharon should not respond to terrorists attacks? Do you people hate Jews that much or simply love the Palestinians more because of their "plight"?

I can promise you one thing. If I were to walk up to your significant other and shoot him/her, you're not going to sit there and do nothing. And this is what you're demanding of Israel because it's well, Israel.

This isn't about two wrongs making a right because you ignore the first wrong. A busload of innocent women and children, who have nothing to do with anything, get blown to bits. Body parts are left scattered among the destruction. This is not what's shown on TV. As shown in the data (that you obviously have chosen to ignore), Sharon is retaliating against the targeting of Israeli non-combatants by TARGETING the Palestinian combatants. This is undisputable.

If Sharon were leveling neighborhoods because some of his soldiers lost a firefight with a bunch of Palestinians, you might have a point. But it's not. 80% if Israelis casualties are innocents who are NOT fighting. Sharon has no other choice than to eliminate the source of the violence.

Finally, the events of the last month prove your premise as ridiculous. During the "cease fire" over the last month or so, the Palestinian terrorism continued. Sharon showed restraint. He even released prisoners. Then, they blew up the bus killing 20. Appeasement is not an option and has proven once again, it doesn't work.

edited to add:


You couldn't have read the report. It does break it down in very good detail. As a sample (because it breaks it down much, much further):

I did indeed miss that page, Dayton Rocker. My apologies. I was reading the summary of the analysis (which is pretty in depth on its own) and not the analysis itself. I'll have to get back to you on this when I have time to read through it this evening.

Edited to add: Just as an FYI, DR. I'm checking out the "who we are" page on the source that you provided and ICT is an Israeli site with some pretty big names in Israeli politics running the show. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's biased, but it's a good thing to know.

By the very logic you use against the palestenians of there being "no real innocents' or whatever, I would retort that there are no innocents at all on the Isreali side- they are foriegn invaders all bent on ethnic cleansing (and quite succesful at it really) of the palestenian poeple. The very method the Isrealis are using are exactly the same as against the bosnians or kosavars- kicking the indiginous poeple off thier land, settling the ethnic families you want there, bulldozing the homes of the poeple defending themselves against this and then calling them the "terrorists"- if the Isrealis don't like thier busses getting bombed, why don't they just move back to the country they came from? Remember, there were poeple living and running this country BEFORE the isrealis started thier migration here, and therein lies the entire reason for this "war" in the first place!

Excuse me? That is a blatant misrepresentation of the situation and there is nothing to substantiate that with other than PR and propoganda.

I've studied the numbers. You're wrong.

As far as who was here first, when are you leaving the country? I can only assume you will leave to let the Native Americans have back their land since you demand the same of the Israelis.

Yes let's use some logic here.

Why doesn't Arafat move back to Egypt, where he came from?

Umm.... do you mean Tran-Jordan or the Ottoman Empire...or what? Since there never has been a nation of palestine.

Mass graves anywhere? Didn't think so.

Murdering animal scum, I like to say.

DR summed the rest up nicely.

Because they were hated in the country they came from and they went to that country to escape from hatred in another country, which they fled to escape hatred in another country. In the end they're Jewish wherever they live. That's what the world has forced them to do, be separate in Israel. It's not like they want that.

Who broke the cease-fire? Who derailed the roadmap? Who started the Entefada? Who said no to a 2 state solution? Who attacked whom in 1948? What is Israel supposed to do when they are attacked? Why should Israel have to be saints (martyrs) in the face of murderers? How many Jews must die before they aren’t the aggressors?

The Israelis aren't "Foriegn Invaders". They were given the land they have by the UN (with the exception of the land they took).

They are not bent on "ethnic cleansing" either. If that were so, they wouldn't be just targeting Hamas leaders and members. They'd be using their Apache heliocopters to blow up schools, buses and etc.

So, if Hamas members not terrorists, what are they?

it seems that israel is completely innocent and the palestinians are evil

israel is just as much to blame for this mess as the palestinians. remember, it was sharons visit to the al aqsa mosque with 1000 armed military men which helped spark the al aqsa intifada.

as to who derailed the roadmap, let's not forget that israel was required to stop settlement building, and in fact was required to dismantle something like 50 of them (they did no such thing, and in fact continued settlement construction) or that israel is in the process of building a wall twice as high as the one that encircled berlin, and in doing so has stolen land from farmers to build it on. this wall goes well inside the green line ('67 border) in many places. israel has been trying to derail the roadmap since the beginning:

sharon has never wanted the roadmap to work!

in fact, I love when people call the palestinians the aggressors, but look at maps over the past fifty years and it becomes obvious who the real aggressor is (since when do "aggressors" lose land btw?)

edited to add:

while they may not be "bent on ethnic cleansing," there is historical evidence that there is an ethnic hatred of palestinians by israeli leaders:
EXAMPLES OF HATE SPEECH

it seems to me that there is the possibility that israel may want to ethnically cleanse the west bank.

and yes, Hamas is a terrorist organization, but let's remember it was shin bet that funded hamas to begin with. (shin bet is isreal's internal security service) (more: http://www.counterpunch.org/hanania01182003.html)



again I state, no one side of this conflict is innocent!!!

This discussion assumes that all Israelis are the same. Either they're all ethnic cleansers or none are ethnic cleansers. The truth is that a large minority of Israelis are ethnic cleansers, in that they lay claim to all of the biblical lands of Judea and Samaria and hope to achieve this by removing the existing population of Arabs to another place. This is ethnic cleansing. There is a clear parallel with Serbians claiming their ancestral lands in Kosovo. However only a minority of Israelis support this position. The majority long for a political settlement with the Palestinians which would allow each side to live in peace.

The same can be said for the Palestinians. It is true many of them want to expel the Jews from Palestine, but many more would be happy to live in peace with the Jews in return for political rights, freedom to move about their own country as they wish, and prosperity.

The tragedy of the current situation is that the extremist minority on both sides has been allowed to veto the peace process. Sharon won't negotiate with the Palestinians unless there is a ceasefire - so Hamas, who do not want to co-exist with Israel know they can block the peace process by unleashing suicide bombs. Similarly it seems Israel has often launched attacks on Hamas (much to Bush's annoyance) in a way that seems designed to provoke Hamas into a response which might stop the peace process. Progress will only be made if both sides agree to move towards a settlement, and to keep the process moving regardless of the violence the extemists on either side throw up.

There is not one shred of evidence to substantiate that rhetoric. Not one.


No, MOST of them want to expel Jews. That can be substantiated via polls and the PA charter that calls for the destruction of Israel. The links substantiating this can be found scattered throughout these threads. The Palestinians are free to move about their own country. Unless they have bombs strapped to their chest. Achieving prosperity requires them to quit acting like savages. The minute they become civilized and actually recognize Israel's right to exist (which is the biggest show-stopper now), they can have anything they want. They can not achieve prosperity by blowing up their neighbors not matter how much you think that tactic will work.


Not true. The PA and Palestinian people support Hamas and their ilk and will not do anything to get in their way. So, Israel responds because they won't and everybody blows a gasket. The problem with your minority Hamas argument would hold water if the palestinians in general were involved in getting them to stop. But they're not. Instead, the majority of Palestinians support Hamas.

Ah, but that isn't the case today. Today, it doesn't matter if you're Jewish pretty much anywhere in the world, they aren't being persecuted. The only people who are moving to Israel today are those trying to make a point and extremists. What the Middle East needs is certainly not more extremists, that's what brought about the Sharon administration. We need less of the "Promised Land" crap and more willingness to work toward a secular society. So long as Israel is on their "chosen people" kick, they're going to keep getting attacked again and again.

This is what I see as the implication of what you're saying, if someone was to strictly follow the Jewish religion they deserve to be killed and driven out of their country? Are they supposed to stop being Jewish? Are they supposed to stop having a democracy? The Jews are different than the Arabs but it's not anyone's fault. Why can't the Palestinians just accept a state alongside Israel?

Depends on how you define "Jewish". Jewish ethnically or Jewish religiously or Jewish (Israeli) nationally? If Israel wants to be a theocracy, then absolutely, by all means, they should drop it immediately. Personal religious beliefs aside, religion has no place in politics and especially not in a nation's leadership (and yes, that goes for Muslim countries as well).

I'm sure there are plenty of Palestinians who would be more than happy to take a Palestinian state if the Israelis would just LEAVE THEIR TERRITORY! The Israelis are out building more apartments in the occupied territories for their own citizens, in violation of the peace agreements. They continue to settle Jews in Palestinian-controlled areas using military force to keep back those who aren't too wild about the idea.

Sure, that's a good idea.

Now that Abbas is offering his resignation, i guess that means Arafat has won and that we will never see peace in the middle east until somebody decides to do something

Where is all the rioting in the Palestinian streets to protest being led by a terrorist instead of a person who had a chance to get peace? If Arafat is not the leader they want, why is he still in charge? If Arafat is not the leader they want, why did Abbas have to resign? If they truly wanted peace, why are the Palestinian people allowing this to happen?

It can't be fear. One thing the Palestinians are not, is cowards. None of them are afraid to strap a bomb to themselves and blow innocent people up. But they won't use these tactics to get peace, prosperity, and global recognition within their own borders. So, what is more important? Killing Jews or improving the quality of their life? Abbas resigning without fanfare speaks volumes as to the answer of this question.

One might as well ask: where is all the rioting on the streets of Israel to protest being led by Sharon - the man held indirectly responsible by an Israeli commission of inquiry for the massacre of 800 palestinian refugees at Shabra and Shatila.

Lets face it the Palestinians can't choose the leader of Israel, and neither should the Israelis or US try to impose a leader on the Palestinians. Abbas had no realistic chance to achieve peace because he was seen, probably unfairly, as a tool of Israel and the US.

We in the US may find both Arafat and Sharon distasteful characters, but at the end of the day they are the chosen leaders of their peoples. If we give up on them, the only alternative we have left is to impose a solution on both parties.

I wish the European Union had been there to help both parties. I fail to understand why we didn't intervene. Is it because the roadmap was an American idea? Anybody has a clue?

More rhetoric. And half the story to make an excuse for Arafat.

Sharon was not behind the Shabra and Shatila massacre (as if somehow, blowing up babies in busses is not massacre). The Christian Falangist Militia was. The Palestinians were launching missles from those areas at Israel, and the Christian Falangist Militia allied with Israel to fight the PLO.

An Israeli court found that Sharon should have foreseen the massacre and done more to stop it. He was immediately relieved of his post as defense minister. In other words, he didn't know about it, but should have.

Overall the history of it all makes it the difficult task that it is. The same thing was going to happen in Bosnia. That’s why intervention was so needed. The other side was already going into the religious thing with martyrs. The process of any peace has to be solid and over at least a generation of people in time, its not something that is going to get better in a week. Both sides need to gather for the process and realize the both parties have sides that would like to see each other dead. To lump Palestine in with the rest of the middle east does no real justice to the situation as it only fans the fires of people that do the fighting. More or less the politics of that area are different even if they have things in common with other areas in that part of the world. America is most definitely an alley of Israel, so that will be part of what Palestine looks at when dealing with the whole thing, thus here I come again with the u.n. Palenstine needs statehood and a force capable with dealing with the people of that area and the "terrorists" there also. Israel needs to stop colonizing and displacing Palestinians.

If you're going to accuse me of giving half the story you shouldn't follow up with your own half truths. The massacres at Shabra and Shatila took place after the PLO militias had withdrawn from Lebanon leaving the refugees undefended. Yes - it was the Christian Phalangist militia which carried out the massacres - but it was the Israelis who surrounded the camps, set up check points to seal them, sent the Phalangists in to "search and mop up the camps", and even provided illumination by sending up flares during the two nights that the killing went on. Sharon resigned as defense minister, but stayed on in the Israeli cabinet as minister without portfolio.

Those who want a fuller account should go to this link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_ea...ast/1779713.stm, or read the account by Jewish journalist Thomas Friedman who was one of the first into the camps.

I don't mention all this to make excuses for Arafat. If you ask me he's been a bad leader for the Palestinians and has lacked the courage needed to lead his people to a peaceful solution. But its for the Palestinians to decide if they want to keep him, not Israel or the US. Sharon has been an equally bad leader of Israel: he led them into their disastrous invasion of Lebanon, and now thinks that by assassinating Hamas leaders he is going to destroy terrorism, when to any rational observer he is only provoking ever more desperate responses.

They were too busy condeming Israel's retaliations for strikes even after a Hamas member would blow himself up in a bus full of children.

Thanks for responding to my question, GoAmerica.

Your comment raises an interesting point : it seems that Europe stands for Palestinians whereas the US are supporting Israel. It has been so for a long time...

Is it because Israel doesn't trust the EU? Or is it because the Palestinians are weary of the US?

I think it's because the EU doesn't like our supporting Israel.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/801833.asp?0cv=CB10&cp1=1

According to this article, Israel may be taking things to the next level:



They're even considering:


I personally think it's about time that Arafat was done away with. If the US can topple Saddam, then Israel has even more of a right to rid it's self of this two faced lier and terrorist.

I knew it was a matter of time. Arafat's power has kept both sides from declaring peace and the only thing that will end it all is the death or the expulsion of Arafat.

He's been in power too long and has basically made PM Abbas worthless and he would make this new PM even as worthless because he holds too much power

Arafat now says he won't leave and Palestinian supporters are rallying outside of his compound. If Israel takes action to "expel" him (just kill him please) it looks like it will be a point of no return. It seems to me this should have been done years ago when PM Rabin was assassinated. It's a double edge sword in my opinion, because the region would be better off to be rid of Arafat, but it would make him a martyr and hatred for Israel would multiply and intensify. It's all a big bloody mess.

This debate is really quite simply--Palestinians will never get what they want through terrorism. It just won't happen. You can argue till you're blue in the face about whose fault it that things got to the point they're at, but it doesn't change that simple fact. Nor should it. As long as Palestinians continue to bomb buses, what on earth would Israel accomplish by giving them what they want? Is there any indication that the terrorism would stop? NO! In fact, most of the terrorist groups have publicly stated that they will not be satisfied until Israel is gone. So, Israel would simply be giving away all its bargaining chips with nothing to show for it. The onus is on the Palestinians--stop the terrorism (or at the very least admit that it is wrong!), and the peace process will take care of itself. Right now, Palestinians are losing the political war, and it is completely within their power to regain the high ground. I know that I for one am completely sick and tired of hearing them say, when asked about why they just blew up another bus, pointing the finger back at Israel and stating, "but look what they did". No recognition at all that blowing up schoolchildren is not the right way to go about getting what they want. Well, as long as they continue with that attitude--SCREW 'EM. And I think the majority of people think the same way--which is exactly why their current path will never get them to where they want to be.

To hell with making him a martyr. As long as the obstacle is out of the way of the peace plan. Arafat has too much power to make the PM's he appoints worthless

Unfortunately, your thesis falls on deaf ears. Many people see this soley as a David and Goliath scenario and ignore what "David" actually does.

It is not about land and never has been about land. It IS about the elimination of Jews. Palestinian kids are taught to hate Jews and sacrifice their lives to rid the world of them. Textbooks in the Palestinian schools do not show Israel and do not mention the word Israel. If an Israeli is injured and taken to a Palestinian hospital, they are refused treatment and left to die.

There is no roadmap to peace because peace can only be accomplished through victory. The Palestinian's idea of "victory" is the elimination of all Jews.

Over the past few months, Israel has opened itself up to great risk by turning over land to the Palestinians, releasing prisoners, and resisting the urge for swift and severe retaliation when homicide bombings continued under the "cease fire" agreement (of course, the Palestinians never stopped killing Jews, but because it was less than normal, this was considered "progress"). The Palestinians responded by blowing up a bus and killing 20. And did the good Palestinians make any attempt to do something about it so more progress could be made?

Hell no. As usual, they left it up to the Israelis to figure who did it and discover for themselves where the murdering thugs came from so they could bitch about their "severe treatment" to the world. Abbas quit because he couldn't make progress and hold a cease fire if the Palestinians failed to do anything different.

I would not expel Arafat. I would paint his name on a missile and take out his entire compound with him in it. He adds nothing positive to his people or the human race. Maybe Palestinians leaders would actually try to make peace if they knew the consequences was a missile up up their a$$.

While you're right, terrorism will never achieve the goals of the Palestinians and, of course, shouldn't be used, what other choices do the Palestinians have? The US typically kisses Israel's backside on anything they want to do, the Palestinians have little voice which is why they've resorted to terrorism, the only weapon they have against the western-backed Israel.

What other real options do they have?

The current strategy of the Palestinians is a complete and utter failure. It is accomplishing nothing except further hatred and death (on both sides).

Why would Israelis sympathize with those who blow up schoolchildren or disco patrons? The Palestinians, like it or not, are the ones who must show that they are willing to change, because it is their leadership which condones random killing of Israelis.

Arafat must go. I was watching news commentators who were hesitant to condone the "assassination" of Arafat, but agreed that Arafat must be removed. Not physically removed, completely removed. If they exile him, he would still be calling the shots. He would still be a rallying point. If they eliminate him, the short term upheaval would be greater, but in the long run, peace would at least be a possibility.

The Palestinians need leadership who will completely reject terrorism as a viable means of accomplishing anything. The United States will not negotiate with terrorists, I do not understand who could argue that anyone should...

Ghandi managed to effect some change if I recall correctly. Did he ever strap a bomb to his back. If the Palestineans put down their arms and invited the world into the West Bank to show what the Israeli's (and the militants... not taking sides here, I'm Jewish) have done to their homes then perhaps they could get some of the sympathy that is needed to develop momentum towards independence. That is the road that most Palestineans would probably prefer. The only problem is that it would mean acknowledging that the Israeli's aren't going anywhere either, and for Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah that's not good enough.



You obviously don't have any family over there. To some people the daily bombing casualties are just numbers. If Arafat were "removed" forcefully hundreds if not thousands of Israeli's would pay with their lives. That is precisely why the government is wavering in its decision to expell him.

Murdering innocent children is NOT a good option and they've about run out of any viable option due to the incompetence of Arafat and his terrorist organization hell bent on ridding the region of the Jews.
They could STOP sending suicide bombers and START acting like civilized members of society and realize that violence only breeds more violence.

I think what is often missed in the finger pointing is that the Israelis have shown that they are willing to compromise to achieve peace--they did it with Egypt, they've done it with Jordan. Most of the actions they have taken against the Palestinian's have either been in retaliation, or in an attempt to force them to the negotiating table. I'm not pro-Israeli in this, but it does seem clear whose court the ball is in. The problem seems to be that Arafat doesn't really want to play. What to do at this point is rather cloudy, unless and until the Palestinian's embrace peace as the path forward. I'm not sure what it will take to get them to do that.

I am disgusted that there are people actively condoning assassination. KILLING ISNT THE ANSWER. The same people advocating assassinating Arafat are the same people that say the Palestinians are evil for blowing up busses. Is there a difference? Why is one "terrorism" and the other not? Has NO ONE learned that killing is wrong?

This, of course, just proves that its OK for Israel to kill people, but not the Palestiniains, and with that kind of inconsistencty, nothing will ever change.
An

Of course there is a difference!

Nobody is suggesting that Israel resort to blowing up Palestinian busses. Your comparison is absurd.

Arafat stands in the way of peace. He is a military leader who instructs his "army" to destroy non military targets. He is a terrorist. His death would lead the way to some other opportunity for peace because his involvment is a roadblock to the entire process.

Should Israel decide to cut the head off the snake, Arafat - just like the militant leader Israel already targets to reduce terrorists attacks - should be taken out just like any other miltary target. He is not an innocent in the deaths of thousands of innocent Israelis and Palestinians. He is one of the main causes.

Of course, because murdering is the "peaceful" solution.

My comparison is not absurd in the least, it comes down to the fact that its always OK for Israel to kill Palestinians, but the opposite is not. As long as you can justify the killing of Palestinians (be it Arafat, or Hamas members) then nothing will get solved. It is NEVER alright to kill.

If Arafat said he was going to assassinate Sharon, the pro-Israelis would be throwing a fit, and retaliating by killing some children or something.

Wait a moment, "what's good for the goose is good for the gander", if we can topple Saddam, kill his sons, take out the Taliban and wage this "war on terror", then Israel has every right to take the same avenue for their preservation. Unless there's a double standard in this country.... Gee, and I wonder why half the world is fed up with us?

It depends on who is doing the assassination and who it is against.

That is based on a person to person basis. I, for one, do NOT condone any sort of assassination, so why should I support this one? I dont support the war on terror as its being waged, I dont support killing Saddam, or any other Iraqi. I dont know why people dont understand this, but: Killing is wrong.

But, why is it OK for Israel to take every route for self preservation and not Palestine? Its OK for Israelis to kill the leader of Palestine, but its not OK for Palestinians to want to kill Sharon? Its OK to kill Palestinian bystanders and civilians and children for breaking a curfew, but its not OK to kill people on a bus? One is not better than the other, and killing should not be the response that Israel takes when some Arab wants medical attention (or UN members for that matter. Hmm..)

And what the US does with its forgien policy is not something that ANYONE should try and emulate domestically. A good majority of the Arab world is fed up with us for supporting Israel, so then in turn they are also fed up with us for the way we are pursuing terrorism. But thats not exactly what this thread is about.

I think self-defense is a perfectly good reason to kill someone.

During times of cease fire between Israel and Palestinians, it's always - 100% of the time - the Palestinians that begin killing. This last cease fire was no different.

Now, Israel could do nothing and look the other way (what I'm assuming most Palestinian supporters would like) and many Jews would die. Israel could retaliate and still, many Jews would die. In other words, no matter what Israel does (as exemplified by this latest cease fire), more innocent Jews will die.

Doing nothing is not an option. What is Israel supposed to do? They've just tried doing everything the Palestinians asked of them, and dozens of their people are dead.

Agreed, killing is horrible. But any person and any country has a right to defend themselves. Killing Arafat may save lives because no matter what they do, Jews will die. It's a matter of minimizing the amount that have to. Nothing else has worked. The only thing Israel could do is allow itself to be run into the sea. Only then will the killing stop. Of course, there'd be no more Jews to kill anyhow.

There is a difference, in real terms, between killing your enemies who are plotting your death and the death of your country (Arafat, Al Qaida, etc) and killing someone who just happens to be riding a certain bus, or going to a certain temple, or listening to music at a certain club.

Some people make themselves targets, because they are the leader of violent organizations. If, let's say, Iran wants to attack the Pentagon (or any other military target), then that is fair game. If they attack civilians, then they are clearly in the wrong, no matter what their motivation is.

Arafat not only condones the killing of innocent bystanders, he orders it. He is a murderer. He is guilty of genocide and attempted ethnic cleansing. He should be on trial for war crimes...

I found it very funny that Howard Dean equated Hamas with being an army the other day. He thinks they are a legitimate opposition group and that the US should not take sides in the struggle. I guess someone needs to inform Mr. Dean that "armies" don't go around blowing up civilians while distinctly avoiding confrontations with other armies or security forces...

let's look at what Israeli leaders have said about the palestinians:

1)We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.

2)"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail." -- Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994

3)"When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.

4) "The Palestinians" would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls." " Israeli Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

and another thing, if this "wasn't about land" why is it that if you look at maps of the palestine area of the past 50 the israelis land slowly increased? you think the arab countries may not have been so uppity about them if they had been content with the land britain gave them? I think they wouldn't have. instead over the first 20-30 years of israel's existence they were constantly expanding. THEY are the aggressors!



source(s) please.



no, instead israel resorts to using 1000 pound bombs to assassinate hamas leaders in CROWDED APARTMENT BUILDINGS! (he along with 14 or so INNOCENT people, including CHILDREN died) but that's ok because "[The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." (Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982.)



I INSIST that you cite the source(s) for the above dayton.
I will respond further to this once I have found sources for my argument.

oh by the way, israel started the latest round of violence:



speaking of Ghandi: "Let the Jews who claim to be the chosen race prove their title by choosing the way of non-violence for vindicating their position on earth." -SEGAON, November 20, 1938
Harijan, 26-11-1938
(Vol. 74, pp. 239-242)



while israel may not purposely target innocents, they have shown a complete disregard for bystanders in their attacks on hamas. they use large bombs to kill two or three people, and end up killing ten to twenty bystanders in the process. many times children. (this is bound to happen in the gaza strip, the most densely populated strip of land in the world) perhaps israel, being the more powerful entity in this situation, and claiming to be the chosen people, could stop sending f-16's, and apaches to kill a few militants. perhaps they could stop the collective punishment of palestinians. perhaps THEY could start acting like the civilized people they claim to be, THEY could realize that violence breeds more violence
(perhaps BOTH sides should realize this!)

Current comments would be relevant here, unabomber.

Your August 8th example, the death occured during a raid on a bomb making factory. An Israeli soldier was also killed in the exchange.

From your own link:


Hamas has its headquarters in a civilian area. It routinely uses civilians as human shields, which is against the Geneva Convention (Howard Dean calls them an army, remember... )

I am showing that israel's leaders have always had a racist and repugnant attitude toward the palestininans. since the beginning, they have hated them and wanted them killed off (or treated as sub-human) this is a CONTINUING symptom. It is very relevant. ariel sharon's actions over the past 20 years have been racist (such as standing by while the CPM (christian phalangist militia) massacred thousands of palestinians, his building of the [http://home.earthlink.net/~brookehatherton/id6.html]"fence"[/URL] (in reality a 25 foot high wall) palestinians know him as the "butcher of beirut" and don't forget the collective punishment that happens all the time (recently an entire market was bulldozed to make room for his [http://home.earthlink.net/~brookehatherton/id6.html]"fence"[/URL] ) so there may not be many statements by sharon, but his actions speak for him.



let's see, hama's declares ceasefire, and israel makes a miltary raid into a palestinian area (which was an almost daily occurence!) they kill a hamas agent in the process. either way you cut it, the ISRAELI'S started this! (either by killing the oprative or making a military incursion. israel not making incursions was a condition of the hamas cease fire with the PA) and I should point something out

notice there was no CONCLUSIVE evidence about it, as you imply. israel decided, (likely through information tortured out of someone) "that's an explosives factory. and the used an ANTI TANK ROCKET which they KNEW (as any reasonable person should) would result in deaths of bystanders. just another example of Israeli cowardice! (don't say pal. suicide bombers are cowards. blowing yourself up takes a lot more courage then firing a anti-tank rocket!)

by the way, I didn't post all that because it violates the rule about not posting full copyrighted material!



amlord, first it is conventionS (but that is petty semantics) secondly, I would like to point something out: HAMAS IS NOT SIGNATORY OF TH CONVENTIONS THERE FORE ARE NOT BOUND BY THEM!!!! (ICRC: States party to the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. ) I see no palestine (as there is currently no such state) and no Hamas (not a state, but an organization) and you know what, I don't care what howard dean calls them. (what does that matter anyway )
(you may take note that america and israel have both not signed nor ratified the 2 additional protocols, but I digress) and what do you want them to do go out to the middle of nowhere, build new buildings, and fight the israelis in the desert!?!? you obviously understand nothing about guerilla warfare! there is reason behind the idea of hiding in civilian areas. it keeps your enemies from bombing you (if they have any morals!) (and yes, I would do the same thing in their posistion. (excluding suicide bombing innocent civilians)

I guess "guerilla war" means "blowing up children" or "not attacking the real enemy, but some defenseless bystanders instead".


The Palestinian killed on August 8th was a member of Hamas, not an "innocent bystander".


Here is an article that demonstrates that Israel, unlike Palestine , arrests those who participate in terrorist activities. In this case, it was Jewish settlers planning an attack on Palestinians...At least one had a previous grief against Palestinians (his 10 month old daughter was killed by a sniper 2 years ago...) but that did not stop the Israelis from arresting him. His "grievance" against the Palestinians was not used a crutch to allow him to murder others. I wish the Palestinian Authority would arrest the terrorists among them.