The UN and Israel

Ninja_Sher · August 14, 2004

It bothers me when so many people (not pointing fingers at anybody on this site) bash israel, or attempt to judge or condemn israel for it's actions. Israel has to be harsh because of the harsh realities that it faces. It bothers me when so many people judge without even knowing whta it is like to live in an environment of fear like that.

Israel is not the only country that lives under fear dude!

just lately the EU donated the Palestinians 1.3 euro to repair

hahahahaha You are still trying to make me laugh.

nemafakei · August 14, 2004

"I'm saying that if they were in the situation we are so they would have the right."

Ok. I accept this as a qualified answer.

Do I take it that you believe that the Palaestinians do not have the prerequisite circumstances?

"Why can't they? Do u know how much does the wall cost?"

Uh, you're saying the cost of the wall prevented Israel from building it on their own land? Is Palaesinian land cheaper or something?

The rest of this paragraph talks about Palaestinian finances and has no relevance as to whether or not Israel could have built the wall on their own land.

"just lately the EU donated the Palestinians 1.3 euro to repair their infrastructure"

Was that before or after tax?

I mean, I know they say a little goes a long way... perhaps the exchange rate is extremely favourable to the Euro.

"What do u expect me to say? I monitor the progress of the wall daily and I almost know its entire rout by heart."

My cynicism is not because I doubt your knowledge of the location of the wall. It's more to do with where you and I think the border lies. I cannot, however, seem to find any map of the wall itself on the BBC website.

"You seem to criticize the act but not the reason which brought to it"

Not at all. The Palaestinians who kill and conspire to kill are wrong indeed. It's just that there is simply no argument over whether they're in the wrong. If everyone said "Yep, Israel's government is in the wrong as well", then you'd hear nothing more from me about it.

"when USA was attacked only in 1 terror attack it whipped out 2 countries (I'm not criticizing them or anything)"

I condemn your choice of action as well as theirs.

"your UK is not better in this issue.

And I criticise Blair, too, if that's what you're referring to...

"If you want we can have a little history chat?"

Just because I'm British doesn't mean I believe everything Britain has done is right. I'm happy to condemn any mistake of Britain you can name (and I do), be it slavery, be it warmongering, be it pure incompetence.

Shiroko...

"Now just a point, Israel's control of the territories is not illegal, the territories should have become a palestinian country in 47, but instead our indepenence war ended with Jordan control those lands. In 67 we conquered them, back in those days, it seemed rational to hold them (Yes, some thing sound stupid 37 years later)."

The problem is that you neither free Palaestine, nor treat it as a part of the same country. Palaestine is either part of Israel or it isn't. That means either it's an independant country or every palaestinian gets the same rights as people the other side of the wall (including the right to vote for the parliament that controls the entire country).

Dude_Doc · August 14, 2004

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_wall

Check that link for info about the Wall, along with a map of the wall, present and future possible constructions...

Shiroko · August 14, 2004

To Nema Fakei:

There were a lot of disscussions about it, what to do with the palestinians, as you might recall we started peace talks and they were on their to a country, with several disputes over lands, mostly Jerusalem as a critical issue. We did not blow up the situtation, it was blown by the Palestinian authorities in a sad attempt to gain from terror.

We did the right thing, andthat is not surrendering to terror, as did USA, and England (And several ohter countries which I think much more greatly of).

Going to war might sound very cinical, as the leaders are never in danger, but I despise countries that act like Europe of 1939, expecting that the other side will pacify itself is a fantasy that will not happen. And the war of terror was something that had to be done in order of stopping it from destroying our economy, sure $45 for an oil barrel, but I honestly believe that without those wars we would suffer much more in the future.

-Shiroko

nemafakei · August 15, 2004

Thankyou for that map. Perhaps not 90%, but certainly 80% (I'm assuming that where the barrier runs immedately inside the boundary line, the map implies that the barrier actually runs on top of it; taking the map literally would put the figure at 100%).

"There were a lot of disscussions about it, what to do with the palestinians, as you might recall we started peace talks and they were on their to a country, with several disputes over lands, mostly Jerusalem as a critical issue. We did not blow up the situtation, it was blown by the Palestinian authorities in a sad attempt to gain from terror"

I understand that the Palaestinian authorities (specifically Yasser Arafaat) can often be problematic and stubborn, but it is the people who suffer. By failing to act diplomatically, you are forced to attack or be attacked, neither being

Given you seem to prefer letting the Palaestinians have their own country to sharing the land, how about simply declaring Palaestine a free country of its own right and letting it do what it wanted. Thereby, Israelis may not enter Palaestine withour Palaestinian approval, Palaestinians may not enter Israel without Israeli approval.

Jerusalem would obviously have to be treated as a special case, perhaps kept as a demilitarised zone policed by an impartial country (invite some, it's in everyone's interests to keep the fighting ended).

TMA_1 · August 15, 2004

somehow I think it is more complicated. Not only that but in my opinion, I think it hasent happened for a reason. The palistinians want ALL of israel, now the authorities are (not always) careful in saying things to to international community, but still most palistinian leaders want the whole of israel. Because of this they do not just want "part" of israel or the settlements made, they want all of it. Now I think if a deal is struck that is totally unfair towards israel, than palistine will agree. This though would just be a stepping stone towards trying to take control over israel. I think this is not as realistic a case though.

Personally my greatest fear would be where palistinians start getting involved in the israeli government. The Palistinian population is growing much faster than the jewish population. So eventually you could have a complete takeover legally by palistinians getting involved in government democratically, where other palistinians who are israeli citizens could vote palistinians into government. Almost like Balem's curse.

leo · August 15, 2004

Yes TMA, it makes a hell of an issue in Israel, but it's even more scary to think of that actually you can't do anything about it. I only hope that the democracy in Israel will change the Israeli Arabs mentality.

Shiroko · August 15, 2004

Nema Fakei, right in your text you already find problems in simply letting them be a free country. Not to mention that the disengagement in Gaza Strip, though its to 1949 is something the palestinians do not approve of. We can't just cut off everything, they use our electricity, our water and our currency. You can't create such an artificial cut between the countries, even if everybody would approve (Which they don't).

nemafakei · August 16, 2004

I hasten to point out that France and Germany use the same electricity grid and the same currency. As to water, I have different water to people a mile away on the other side of town. And there's a great big reservoir a few miles away I'm not even connected to.

What happens is you sell them your electricity, and, if necessary, water. Or they sell you theirs.

And there is no resolution which will please everybody. That's mostly because both sides goals are completely opposite. The most important thing is to come to a (relatively fair) resolution that will work and that will be enforced, so people can get on with building and working, not destroying and killing.

Shiroko · August 16, 2004

The last time I checked Germany and France weren't at war, or a dispute.

And water is on a constant shortage in Israel, unlike Europe.

Anyway, if you can't control your fanatics, no resolution will help. And the palestinians do not control their fanatics, and can't make them stop any of the attacks.

-Shiroko

erjin999 · August 17, 2004

Anyway, if you can't control your fanatics, no resolution will help. And the palestinians do not control their fanatics, and can't make them stop any of the attacks.

Funny, thats what the Palestinains say of the Isrealies, isnt it ? :O

EDIT: Just found this. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3572142.stm

nemafakei · August 17, 2004

"Anyway, if you can't control your fanatics, no resolution will help"

The Palaestinians can't control fanatics until they have a country and a sovereign security force of their own, and the option to invite foreign forces in if need be.

You can not wait for peace before making a resolution, because not only will it take too long, but worse, you give terrorists on all sides the power of veto.

Shiroko · August 17, 2004

Funny, thats what the Palestinains say of the Isrealies, isnt it ?

nemafakei · August 18, 2004

"palestinians police attacked IDF in the start of riots, instead of controling crowds they shot at Israeli soldiers"

What were the Palaestinian police and the IDF doing in the same place, though? Incidents like that have occurred, I know, and that's why I said it won't work unless the palaestinians have a country of their own. If the IDF left, the police would in no wey be able yo consider themselves defending palaestinians or themselves against the IDF, so the only threat they'd have is palaestinian terrorists.

"And anyways, in the last couple of years thing are getting better in here for people not in the front lines, so I would have to say I prefer having palestinians suffer than israeli citizens."

Um. Good for you.

"And probably because the BBC website doesn't care, I'd like you to know that we have suicide bombers caught every week"

Yeah, BBC occasionally shows major catches, but there's little point showing every one... else all we'd ever hear about was Israel.

"Actually no, they say we all just want to kill them. Never seen a palestinian say that its only the fanatics who bother him, frankly I think more israelies are bothered from our fanatics then palestinians"

Why should they be that bothered about fanatics when their homes are destroyed by the official side of things?

"Nema, the palestinians don't have the courge to control their fanatics, such a thing invlolves a internal war which they are all afraid."

They can't afford an internal war because you give them a common enemy. If they were left to their own devices, so to speak, they would find the extremists more of a drain on their resources and a danger to their own people than an ally of any kind. People just wouldn't support them.

When Franco subjugated the Basque country, support for the banned language and the fueros (customs and local laws) soared, and people who would normally abhor violence were prepared to defend terrorist groups. After Franco died, the Basque country was given its own parliament, allowed to speak its own language, and was treated as a significant part of Spain. Now, ETA are more of a nuisance than a threat, and they have minimal support even in the Basque country. Members are very few, because people are quite content in the Basque country: there's no longer anything much to fight for.

If the IDF aren't in Palaestine, if the Palaestinians are allowed to live without fear of their land being taken or attacked, then they will see no reason to support terrorists, especially if they have a state of their own they can support, a political sovereignty through which they can govern their own affairs.

ordos45 · August 19, 2004

I find it ironic no one has mentioned Arafat's role in the building of this wall. Egypt sold him cement at $15 per tonne to rebuild Palestinian homes and businesses for cheap, and he resold the cement to Israel for $100 per tonne to build the wall.

http://www.rnw.nl/hotspots/html/isr040803.html

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/701/re51.htm

erjin999 · August 19, 2004

True capitalism. :P

Would they not got the cement from somewhere else ? Its not like Isreal would have a problem aquiring cement from anywhere else would it ? America could send it over for free, being best buddies that they are ;)

But it was wrong of Arafat...

Shiroko · August 19, 2004

Nema, You're entirely wrong about the palestinian fanatics goals. They have no intention to satisfy themselves with the "Territories" only. They jewish people out of Israel as a whole. They used terror in the middle of the peace talks, and no of the palestinians really minded.

They were all quite happy with terror 4 years ago. It helps you get political wins. You can change elections (Watch Spain to see how it works instead of me giving examples of Israel), you can demand more.

But we went on the much smarter option. And that is teachign the palestinian authorities that if they let terror pass by (And support it) then they will suffer as well. Terror is mostly a weapon employed by a country who wishes to stay out of the fight and not to suffer from it. Just like Syria and Iran.

Unlike the Basque or the Chechinians (I know I spelled that one wrong, sorry) they have no need for a part only. But for all of Israel. The hamas and the jihad (And the hizbullah) say they will get rid of all of Israel, they have no intention of stopping when there is peace. And if we would have peace we will still have those terror acts, but with less ways to stop them.

You want the IDF to leave? From where? All israeli settlements around? They will still see us on the border. You don't have to put IDF in the middle of Nablus in order for them to meet palestinians. This also did not prevent palestinian policeman attack IDF where they weren't in the middle of a palestinian village/city.

The situtation is as good is it gets now. With one sided disengagement on the way from Gaza and a big fence blocking them from coming to Israel. They don't wanna solve the problems? Good, then we'll be at one side and they on the other. Peace is overrated anyway.

-Shiroko

leo · August 19, 2004

Nema,

*Palestinian policemen committed terror attacks against Israeli civilians INSIDE Israel (including suicide bombings).

* IDF left Lebanon more than 4 years ago, somehow Hezbollah is still sending rockets on our cities/hijacking and murdering our soldiers. Something tells me that the same will be with the Palestinians, but hey who knows maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Ahmed that shot a baby in the head would put down his weapon, or maybe the almighty leader Arafat will stop funding and supporting terror...

ordos45 · August 19, 2004

While we're going on a wish list Leo, how about Arafat finally decides to stop embezzling funds and committing fraud? And apologizes for carrying on his grandfather's legacy in a smaller way?

erjin999 · August 19, 2004

Peace is overrated anyway.
-Shiroko

I guess it would be when your the ones with the WMD, the gunshits, the airplanes and the tanks ! ;)

nemafakei · August 19, 2004

"Nema, You're entirely wrong about the palestinian fanatics goals"

I accept that the basque situation and the palaestinian situation differ in this respect.

But I never said that the palaestinian terrorists' goals stopped short of removal of Israel, only that the palaestinian people's did <|Edit: or at least, that they will do|>. I'd like to make that distinction, because it's a very important one. Terrorist groups will still be saying "Look, Israelis on the border, they've got big guns", but if you stay on your side of the border, then the people will point out that the only ones using the guns are the terrorists, and that it would be better if they actually helped rebuilding the country instead of causing more trouble. The terrorists will still fight vehemently, but support for them will die out when the people realise nothing will be gained thereby. I also doubt Arafat would be there all that long, either.

"a big fence blocking them from coming to Israel. They don't wanna solve the problems? Good, then we'll be at one side and they on the other. Peace is overrated anyway."

It's also blocking palaestinians getting to palaestine.

"Palestinian policemen committed terror attacks against Israeli civilians INSIDE Israel (including suicide bombings)."

Seriously?

Uh, hang on, you armed them with explosives?

"IDF left Lebanon more than 4 years ago, somehow Hezbollah is still sending rockets on our cities/hijacking and murdering our soldiers"

Hm. Fair point. but do you think you should not have left Lebanon, that you would be better off and safer, were you doing there as you do in Palaestine?

Erjin, I think you mean gunships.

HasimirFenring · August 19, 2004

Erjin, I think you mean gunships.

I also think thats what he meant, but it's a funny typo

leo · August 19, 2004

Nema,

I think it was a good idea to step out, but nevertheless the situation didn't become better, isn't it? You said if we leave the Palestinians than the pressure would be on them. Well where were the world when the 3 soldiers were kidnapped and killed? where were it 2 weeks ago when a 5 years old boy was killed from a rocket sent by the Hezbollah that hit him near his kinder garden? We stepped out of Lebanon when we were promised by the UN that they will make Hezbollah stop. Is any1 condemning Lebanon? I mean can you get it? We have rockets dropped on our civilians from a foreign country, I would like to see any European country in our position.

The Lebanese government seems to do nothing and even worse, as the Palestinian authority they support them. Where were the UN soldiers that actually watched (and videotaped) our 3 soldiers being kidnapped?

Frankly, even if the world would point the finger on them I really don't give a W#%$@# on that, You know why? Basically 2 reasons; First, as I don't, the Palestinians won't give a %##$ on the world. Second, I'm not sure it's really gonna help to the victims families. *NOTE* before u say anything about the paragraph keep in mind I said "IF" at the beginning, means that it probably wont either way(not that it will change anything).

nemafakei · August 19, 2004

"I think it was a good idea to step out, but nevertheless the situation didn't become better, isn't it?"

This sounds like doublethink. What precisely do you mean 'It's no better now, but we should have done it anyway'?

You really think you would be attacked less if you were still in Lebanon?

"before u say anything about the paragraph"

Uh, frankly, I don't really intend to say anything about that paragraph. Or by extrapolation, I suppose, the last half of the previous. There's not much that can be said.

leo · August 19, 2004

So according to my 1st paragraph, what do you want us to do? Or where are we wrong?

"You really think you would be attacked less if you were still in Lebanon?"

That wasn't my point. But as we go into it, more than 95% percenate of the Palestinian terror attacks are being stopped by the IDF only cause it searches every cm there, I don't wanna even imagine what would have happened if it won't.

Sign In

The UN and Israel

Recommended Posts

Ninja_Sher

nemafakei

Dude_Doc

Shiroko

nemafakei

TMA_1

leo

Shiroko

nemafakei

Shiroko

erjin999

nemafakei

Shiroko

nemafakei

ordos45

erjin999

Shiroko

leo

ordos45

erjin999

nemafakei

HasimirFenring

leo

nemafakei

leo

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information