Break the cycle of violence

An excellent idea... just because they can.

All Israel need do is keep sending Mossad out to liquidated the Palestinian terrorist leaders.

Behave or die. It seems to work.

Carpet bombing is always a fallback position.

That's a childish suggestion. One could equally say that every time Israelis praise, award or promote an outpost or the settlers, that Palestinians should praise, award or promote an act of terrorism.

The only way, in my view, to deal with this situation is between Israel and the Palestinians. It has nothing to do with the other arab states which have all shown not merely their disinterest but hostility to the existence of a democratic Palestinian state, an Islamic democracy in their midst.

The biggest step required is one to be made by Israel and Israel has, so far, never shown any interest or intention of taking such a step.

Israel ought to recognize the reality of both the Palestinians as a people, something that many Israelis (and others) refuse to do, and the legitimacy of a Palestinian state, something that Israel also refuses to do.

This doesn't mean getting out of Gaza, for Gaza is, as a resource, sterile on its own. It is simply, so to speak, a massive apartment block. Its major economy was based around greenhouses, supplied with water and hydro from Israel, with all produce shipped to Israel. When Israel quit Gaza, it closed the border to this produce and shut off the water and hydro. That ended the economy.

The real focus is the West Bank, the site of a potential Palestinian state. But -this means getting out of the West Bank - and this is a key action, for Israel wants the West Bank, its land and its vital water supplies, for itself. Without the inhabitants.

That's why Israel cannot claim the West Bank as Israeli land (as a result of war success) because that would make the inhabitants Israeli citizens. This can't be permitted because the ratio of Muslims to Jews would thus be imbalanced. So, Israel continues to occupy the West Bank, leaving its inhabitants stateless and powerless and obviously angry - while it continuously settles the land, builds roads, farms etc, denying land, water, roads to the Palestinians, and thus hoping to drive the inhabitants, slowly, off the land.

It's a complex situation, made worse by years of emotions and fictionalized accounts of history, of authority, of 'what god set up for us' on both sides.

My own view is that the only answer is to set up a Palestinian state in the West Bank, but one whose economy is intimately linked to that of Israel. Not to the other Arab states, which, again, have shown no interest in or support for a Muslim democracy. But linked to the economy of Israel. If you get a people able to prosper, to support themselves on their farms (rather than having the settlers burn down those farms), to develop towns and cities with service industries linked to those of Israel, with people able to work in both areas etc....then, you have a people with no need for anger and resentment.

But if you have a people denied the right to work, to education, denied the rights of land and business ownership, of self-governance, of freedom of movement etc - all in the name of 'what god told us' or in the name of 'you have evil intentions to us'...then, the hostility continues.

The ball, so to speak, is in Israel's hands and it's extremely difficult, for many of its leaders are, for various reasons, committed to full ownership of the West Bank and reject any idea of a Palestinian state. It would require a tremendous act of faith and courage on the part of Israel - plus - as noted, the other Arab States, never mind their rhetoric, actually oppose a democratic Palestinian state. They don't want such an example in their midst - just as they don't want a democratic Iraq in their midst.

Reciprocity. What a good idea. How about whenever the "Palestinians" send out a suicide bomber, the Israelis strap up one of the terrorists they have in their jails and send him home. After all, don't the pro-Palestinian crowd always complain about disproportionate responses by Israel. What could be more proportionate.

I've always been curious, almost the entire arab league does not recognize Israel - or its government - yet leftists are upset that a few governments do not legitimize(and send aid directly to) Hamas as the government of Palestine?

Hypocrisy?

ET, you sure have a lot of words to express your naivete. Why do you find only excuses for the failure of Gaza? The problem is not Israel and never was, the problem is the current social and political state of the so-called "Palestinians" and their never ending victimhood, created and supported by the Arab world, and the outright assault on Israel by the Arab world.

A first step would be to expel the UN, the EU and the NGO's from the entire region. They're 2/3rds of the problem.

Then close the boarder around Israel permanently. All Pali territories boarder other arab states. They can get supplied with food and goods on the same route they've been getting their explosives and guns. Why the Eurotrash demand that Israel supply and employ their tormentors and enemies is beyond me.

We didn't send food and oil to Germany or Japan now did we? We expect the Israelis to fight a war against an enemy who knows no bounds of depravity while demanding the Israelis not kill any of them. And all we did in past wars is firebomb entire enemy cities and drop a few nukes...

doug - I'm not naive, but I suggest that you are. You don't seem to understand or know the actual facts of what's been happening in that area.

It is naive to assume that one side is perfect and the other side is imperfect; that's a so-called 'black-and-white' fallacy.

You ignore the economic reality of Gaza. Do you know what happened to the greenhouses, those that were bought by external funders for the Palestinians? [A Jew cannot, by religious rules, sell to a Muslim]. Do you know about the shutting off of the water and hydro? The closure of the borders?

Do you know about the aquifers of the West Bank? About the religious theme of 'Judea and Samaria' and the beliefs of the settlers? Are you aware of the social and political beliefs of Israelis based around Judea and Samaria?

Do you know why Israel hasn't simply taken over the West Bank as its own, a conquest of war, and instead, occupies the land?
Do you agree with an occupation? Why not simply take the land for Israel and have done with it? Isn't that a direct act by Israel of putting people in a state of perpetual victimhood? They can't be citizens, they can't develop their land, they can't protect themselves against the settlers who come in and burn down their farms, they can't use the roads Israel puts up, they can't use the water, they can't build new buildings - and you reject their actually being 'victims'?

And you don't seem to understand that the other Arab states don't give a hoot about Palestinians; they consider them, frankly, a 'scum' - there's a very complex hierarchy of tribes and peoples in the Arab world, and the Palestinians are viewed as among the lowest.
AND - the other Arab states don't want a Palestinian democracy! You don't understand that either.

I suggest you do a bit of research on the history of the area, and above all, on the ecology, the water resources - and - the demographics and infrastructure of settelements.

Jason, I certainly agree that the UN etc are a big problem in the area, which is why I think this ought to be between Israel and Palestine.

But you are very wrong about post war Germany and Japan. Are you unaware of exactly how much money and work was put, by the US, into the reconstruction of both Germany and Japan? Ever heard of the European Recovery Program, the Marshall Program, from 1948-51, over 300 billion in aid. Japan was occupied until 1951, with a massive economic, political and educational restructuring program. I suggest you do a bit of research before you make such statements.

ET;

You say that Israel shut off water and hydro to the Gaza greenhouses when they left. That is not reality. The Jews pulled out in the summer of 05. By December of that year, after initial looting of the greenhouses by the Palestinians, they were running them with very limited success and asking the Jewish farmers who had originally run them to provide assistance. How could that be without water.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48015

By April of 06, Ahmed Al-Masri the Palestinian manager of the greenhouses was telling the world that the greenhouses were fully operational. Again, completely impossible without wqater.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49710

You also say that Israel wants to keep the West Bank and to drive the Palestinians from it. While that is undoubtedly true of some Israelis, you are ignoring the historical fact that at Camp David Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak committed Israel to giving back 95% of the WB to the Palestinians. The only part they were to stay in was Jerusalem with an agreement that within 10 years they would swap some Israeli land in exchange for it so long as the Palestinians lived up to an agreement to be peaceful.

I really enjoy most of your posts, but on this issue you are woefully offside.

The biggest hoax is the very existance of "Palestinians". There are no Palestinians.
Such an entity only existed in the mandate which ended in 1948 by UN resolution and was ended when Eygpt, Syria, Jordon and lebanon annexed the "UN Arab" territiories mandated in 1948.
Indeed these "Palestinians" held Eygptian etc citizenship prior to 1967 when Arrafat (an Eygptian...grandson of Amin El-Husseni) invented the PLO/Fatah.
El-Husseni was the former Mufti of Jerusalem who had spent WW2 in Germany as an honoured guest/ally of the Third Reich.

Doesn't Israel have a model rocket association?

ET said: "That's a childish suggestion. One could equally say that every time Israelis praise, award or promote an outpost or the settlers, that Palestinians should praise, award or promote an act of terrorism."

Ma'am, arguably that exactly the situation they have at the moment. Except at this point the Palies don't even respond to Israel, they preemptively commit atrocity after atrocity trying to provoke Israel.

Ask yourself what Dalton McGuinty would do if the Mohawk Warrior Society (as distinct from Indians generally, for the simple minded Leftists out there) started lobbing mortar rounds into Caledonia from the Six Nations reserve. One or two a day, every day.

What would happen?

Then they start sending women and retarded kids loaded with thirty pounds of C-4 and roofing nails to blow themselves up in front of chic cafes and nightclubs in Toronto.

What would happen?

I think we can be absolutely sure of one thing: the official response here in Ontario would NOT be what's going on in Israel.

Meaning, we don't understand the real parameters of what's going on in Israel, because what they're doing doesn't match what anybody else would do by a country mile.

I bet you a dollar Obama told them he'd cut them off cold if they fired on Palestinians for any reason. That would explain it.

ET;

A post script to my 10:07 am post. Please note the date on the article quoted. This is 3 years after Israel left Gaza.

January 25, 2008
JERUSALEM - A top Israeli defense official said Thursday that Israel wants to relinquish all responsibility for the Gaza Strip, including the supply of electricity and water, now that the territory's southern border with Egypt has been opened.
"We need to understand that when Gaza is open to the other side we lose responsibility for it," Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai said, according to his office. "So we want to disconnect from it."

It was not immediately clear if Vilnai spoke for the entire government.

"We want to stop supplying electricity to them, stop supplying them with water and medicine, so that it would come from another place," Vilnai said.

Israel will continue to be responsible for the flow of such supplies into the Gaza Strip until an alternative is found, the office quoted him as saying.

bob c - I'll differ with you.

Israel shut off both the water and the hydro, and, closed the borders to the produce. Since the consumer of the produce was Israel, all these actions ended the economy.

http://www.library.utoronto.ca/pcs/eps/gaza/gaza1.htm

http://70.85.195.205/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46011

The water that is available in Gaza is not suitable for irrigation as it requires desalinization and further treatment, plus, it is inadequate for the greenhouse needs.

The Camp David agreement was NOT about allowing a Palestinian state; all it did was 'grant' municipal local governance to a few towns in the West Bank. BUT, the resources (water, etc), the air space, the borders, the roads, ..everything that would normally be the rights of a sovereign state, were to remain in the hands of Israel.

Allan - Jordan and Egypt have long recognized Israel.

I have to agree with ET. Israeli's aren't saints either. There is a history of violence and terrorism on both sides all the way back a 100 years when Zionists started buying up land in Palestine. The point though is that Israeli's and Palistinian;s aren't going to go away and Israel has to take the lead and the focus has to be the West Bank - to start. It is not inconceivable that we really could see the makings of a peace deal soon if Israel gets on board - the Palestinian's will reject Islamism as they become more prosperous and feel more freedom - and that is apparently happening right now on the West Bank.

wow, here I am on holidays again, checking sda, and like the ever ready battery, ET is here with lists of reasons why the Israelis are responsible for the problems of Palestinian Arabs.

Bottom line:

In 1947 the Palestinian Arabs were offered a state and they said no. They could also be right now celebrating 63 years of statehood.

Between 1948 and 1967 the West Bank was part of Jordan, Gaza was part of Egypt, there were no settlements there, no evil occupation. As well there were no calls from the UN, Europeans, Canadians, Americans, Arabs, Muslims or anyone for a "homeland for the ancient Palestinians". hmmm

After the 67 war Israel asked Jordan and Egypt to take back their lands (ie the westbank and gaza), and they refused. These territories are disputed. During the "evil occupation", the infant mortality went down, life expectancy and literacy went up, and 7 (I think) universities were opened in the West Bank.

Israel protects its citizens and its interests. What country doesn't?

As far as Joe Settler's idea, I think I prefer Charles Krauthammer's. If they lob in a Kassam or Ketusha or whatever, a missile automatically gets fired from Israel to the pinpointed location of the enemy's launcher. Israel informs the UN of this policy and that's that.

sasquatch - Your argument is an old and naive one. it is naive to consider that a political entity, a state, can only exist if it is populated by people who have a distinct ethnicity, defined as such since they emerged from their neanderthal origins.

You state that there 'are no Palestinians'. Well, heck, there weren't any Canadians at one time. Or US citizens. Or even French. Or...Does this mean that Canada should not now exist because, at one time, there were 'no Canadians'? Hmmm?

Kindly note that a political entity, a state, is created by men. It is a legislative construct and is not a genetic construct. Therefore, it is not tied to ethnicity.

phantom - what do you think would happen if non-natives moved in and began to settle the prime land of a reserve? And began to burn down the farms and homes of the natives who were living there? What if the non-natives went into the reserves and, for example, destroyed all the apple crops being grown on that land by the natives?

What do you think would happen if the Ontario govt built roads for these new non-native inhabitants of the reserve and yet, forbade the natives from using those roads? And put in massive irrigation infrastructure, for the settlers but not for the natives?

It isn't so simple, is it?

As I said, the reality is that the Palestinian people exist and the Israeli people exist. They've got to acknowledge this dual reality. To deny the Palestinians the right-to-work and the right-to-exist as a people, is unjust.

It is astonishing that people here blame the Palestinians for being angry about this existence, and come up with such trivia as 'If you won't be angry then, maybe, we'll give you a state of your own'. Or the psychpathic suggestion of 'nuke them all'.

What you have are two peoples, each with a long tribal history of hostility towards each other. I suggest you read not only the Qu'ran and Hadiths but also the Judaic texts that forbid Jews from economic interactions with Muslims - which is why Gates and others had to buy the greenhouses, because the Israeli owners couldn't sell them to the Gazans.

Then, you have the political reality of the Israeli requirement for a Judaic majority in their state which means that they cannot annex the West Bank and make the population citizens.

Then, you have the ecological reality of the need for water in that area, and the vital aquifers of the W. Bank.
Oh, and the religious ideology around 'Judea and Samaria'.

It's a complex situation on both sides, and can't be solved by such simplistic solutions as 'Oh, it's the fault of the evil arabs who are all terrorists', or, 'it's the fault of the ideological settlers who think god gave them the land'. Or that utterly evil 'nuke them all'.

Again, don't think that the other Arab states care about the Palestinians. They don't. And don't mix up Islamic fascism and jihadism with Islam. BUT, don't ignore that both 'tribes', the Judaic and the Islamic, have a long history of restrictions against tribal, societal and economic interactions with each other. These outdated and in my view, idiotic rules, each over 1,000 years old, are valid only back then..but maintained by both sides. Still.

And don't ignore the vital role of water in the Middle East.

ET;

You fail completely to answer the simple point. Why was a Palestinian manager of the greenhouses saying the greenhouses were operational both 4 and 8 months after Israel withdrew. Your argument isn't with me but with him.

A second and perhaps even better question for you to contemplate is, why when you do a google search for Israel shutting off water to Gaza greenhouses you cannot find one complaint by Hamas, Fatah or anyone else in the muslim world about it. For that matter, you can't find one complaint from the UN, any European government or the US either. Does that make you at all curious.

You can find references to Israel shutting off Gaza's water, but only by about 2007 in response to missile fire coming from Gaza.

With respect to this link you provided,
http://70.85.195.205/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46011
you're taking as fact the comments by a couple of former Gaza Jews who found no water in the greenhouses when they returned to look at them and assumed that Israel had turned it off. Not a very convincing source.

Indeed there was no water at the time these two individuals visited the greenhouses, but that was because of the looting. It's a little hard to get water up to the plants when looters have stolen the water pumps, which is what had happened.

ET,

Why the f**k is it Israel's responsibility to provide them with water to begin with? Why can't they stop killing jews long enough to do something on their own? Why can't they take responsibility for themselves and their own needs?

The answer is that they'd rather kill jews than be useful. All other considerations are moot.

In fact, why should Israel recognize a Pali state at all? The so-called Palestinians never recognized the right of Israel to exist and joined with all the arab states in trying to wipe it out. They fought a war of aggression and lost. International law states that when you start a war and lose, you have no right to regain lost territory.

Lefties and anti-semites always try to claim that criticism of Israel isn't anti-semitic. If that criticism is specific to Israel but not others in the same circumstance, and when Israel is held to a standard that no other nation or people is held to, the only conclusion to be drawn is that is damn well is anti-semitism. I know you aren't left, but you are an anti-semite. Full stop.

No other people in human history have been demonized like the Jews for the crime of not rolling over for those who would kill them.

ET,

Further to your point on Germany and Japan, the US owed them nothing after the war. They did what they did for their own reasons. Namely, that paying for reconstruction (and writing their constitution) reduced the likelihood of having the bomb them again. My point was to illustrate that we carpet bombed, fire bombed and nuked our enemies and then turn around and tell Israel not to harm any of their enemies? There is only one reason I can think of for that kind of disconnect: anti-semitism.

The US also didn't enact the Marshal plan DURING the fricken war. They weren't rebuilding the place as they were dismantling it. The Germans and Japanese surrendered unconditionally. When the Palestinians do so they can beg for aid from Israel.

Jason;

I very much agree with the main thrust of your argument, although water is something Israel has to provide to Gaza. If you look at a map, Gaza has a desert to their west and Israel to their north, east and south. They have no source of water and Israel is the only place to get it from.

The point is that Israel shutting off water to Gaza's greenhouses is a myth. You can google around all you like and you will not find any complaints about it from the UN, Hamas, Fatah, surrounding Arab countries, no mention of it in newspapers like the NY Times, Washington Post, Der Spiegel or any other European newspaper.

We all know that had that happened, protests from around the world would have been deafening. It would have been front page news around the world. There would be no problem in finding news articles about it in the world's press. That we can't find any today is instructive. Turning off water to Gaza's greenhouses was a libel like many of the others Israel has to endure.

Bob,

That would be fine in peacetime but the Palis are at firing rockets at Israel. Why is it Israel's problem to provide anything at all to the people who are trying to kill them?

And Gaza is seaside. Some places have desalination plants. Even a small island nation like Aruba can build one. Divert all the "Humanitarian Aid" they get from the gun budget to the building budget. In fact, to build a society, all they have to do is switch their energy to building it from their present obsession with jew-killing.

Jason;

You are absolutely right. If the Gazans stopped firing missiles, their leaders stopped taking the aid that is given them, buying weapons with it or stashing it in personal Swiss bank accounts etc. things would be much better for them.

Beside that, haven't we been told all these years that Palestinian violence was only because the Jews were occupying their land. Get off our land they say and all will be wonderful. Well, the Jews moved out 4 years and we've still got the violence.

I get your point, but if Israel were to cut off water at this point we'd have a couple of million dead Palestinians on our hands. That just can't be justified, which is pretty much why Israel didn't cut it off in the first place.

Jason: right on. Nothing to add to this awesome summary of the bare facts.

ET had accumulated a signifigant credibility here until this anti-semitic rant and blatant spewing of Palestinian propaganda....
Such as alleged interuption of electricity and water....deliberate ommision of Kassim rockets....suicide bombers......
THAT is a personal tragedy.......

jason - the reason why it was Israel's responsibility to provide the greenhouses with water (paid for by the Gaza govt) is because Israel had set up an irrigation infrastructure where only it provided water and hydro to the area. Therefore, until another infrastructure could be developed, it could not, morally, stop the water.

All you have to do is google Israel and water supply to Gaza greenhouses 2005, and you'll find lots of references to the FACT that Israel shut off the water, hydro and closed the borders to produce. And no, it wasn't the looting that shut down the water supply. And, bob c, these are not 2007 and 2009 references, but 2005 references.

As for your statement that UNLESS Hamas and Fatah complain, then it didn't happen, is an invalid argument. I suggest you check out B'Tselem's site, and others for information about the 2005 shutting off of the water and hydro.

"When Israel withdrew from Gaza, it destroyed 1,500 homes once occupied by settlers, but two types of buildings were left standing: synagogues and greenhouses. James Wolfensohn, who at the time was the special envoy for the Quartet to the Middle East – U.S., E.U., UN, and Russia – got wealthy Jewish-Americans to compensate the settlers with $14 million (half a million came out of his own pocket) and the 800 acres of greenhouses were not dismantled.

These greenhouses were seen as a vital acquisition for they employed 3,600 workers who were mostly Palestinian, and created an extra 3,000 jobs once the settler workforce was replaced. On top of that it was projected that the harvest would inject up to $100 million of much needed annual revenues into Palestinian Authority coffers.

But as the settlers left, the greenhouses were looted by Palestinians seeking expensive equipment like computers used to monitor the plants and water pumps for irrigation. The farmers overcame this, and after repairs were able to plant produce and flowers in time. Yet, when the harvest season arrived, the Karni export crossing was often closed or very backed up. The international community had brokered an Agreement on Movement and Access between the parties that called for passages to be open “on an urgent basis” for the 2005 harvest, but safety concerns trumped the stipulations of the document. Produce was dumped on the side of the road even when Karni was open because extensive searching of perishable goods like seafood and strawberries (on tarmacs exposed to the heat and dust) meant that about 10% of each shipment had to be discarded."

And it continues:

http://www.plannersnetwork.org/publications/2009_summer/kennedy.html

The fact that 'we've been told' that the only problem is Israeli occupation-causes-the-violence is a superficial opinion. First, even though Israel has theoretically left Gaza it hasn't functionally left Gaza (see above), for the existent water, hydro and border infrastructural control by Israel means that Gaza cannot function as an interactive economy with anyone. Second, don't ignore the West Bank, with its vital arable lands and absolutely necessary water aquifers.

bob c - the water that was cut off was to the irrigation plants. Kindly get your facts straight. The Palestinians are allowed a limited amount of water for personal needs but even this is insufficient. You can read the above, and can also google water problems in Gaza and the West Bank.

ET: why in hell would you expect us to believe anything written in article with a title like "Israel’s Ongoing War Against the Palestinians of Gaza"?

The site's self-described mandate is:

"Planners Network is an association of professionals, activists, academics, and students involved in physical, social, economic, and environmental planning in urban and rural areas, who promote fundamental change in our political and economic systems."

I think you are both a Judaeophobe and quite daft and have accidentally landed in the wrong blog. Don't let the door hit you in the ass...

No deal will ever be reached between Israel and Palestinians because the Palestinians so called supporters, Arab Nations and Jihad extremists, are using them as pawns, a convenient excuse, to blow Israel off the map - it has absolutely nothing to do with land or rights, and everything to do with the Arab Nations Islamic incited hatred of the Jews. The Palestinians are simply straw country men who are expendable in the eyes of Islamic Jihadists.

sasquatch - what an ignorant statement. To criticize Israel is not anti-semitic. Are you seriously saying that one can only evaluate Israel as if it were, not a political state, but a human being, a member of a particular religion?

Israel is a POLITICAL entity. Not an individual. It cannot be cocooned from evaluation and criticism. Do you suggest that to criticize Saudi Arabia is an action of 'Islamophobia'? Or a rational action?

Nor are my criticisms of Israeli policy a 'rant'; they are based on facts. Check out the West Bank settlements, the problem of the aquifers; check out the water allowances to the Palestinians there versus that allowed to the settlers. Check out the roads, the 'reasons' for the settlements.
Why hasn't Israel annexed the West Bank?

Why didn't the Israeli Gazan settlers SELL their greenhouses to the Gaza Palestinians? Do you know why Gates and others had to buy them?

Oh, and desalinization isn't all that perfect. Check it out for the very high costs and the problems with the water. Indeed, desalinization has harmed California's crops.

Again, what you are all ignoring, in your fallacious 'black and white' opinion (Israel is perfect and all problems are due to the evil Arabs) is the long, long history of tribal hostility between the two peoples, which are outlined in written tribal rules of interaction and which you all seem to know nothing about, and the demographic reality of Israel's requirement for a Judaic majority which means they can't accept Palestinians as citizens, and the very real problem of control of the water - particularly, the W. Bank water.

You are also ignoring that the other Arab states don't give a hoot about Palestine, and don't want it to be its own state. Their hostility is to democracy as a mode of governance.

Things aren't as simple as you outline them. I suggest you do some research on history, on religion, and above all, on water.

Um, ET?

You quote something that whines that those pesky Jews won't let the produce through their boarders into Israel without security?

Really?

Anyone who would use that sort of idiocy as an argument is too daft to debate. The boarder was slow or closed for reasons that should even be obvious to you and certainly an explanation is not even required for the rest of us.

Maintaining a boarder and controlling who comes and goes isn't the same thing as an occupation of the lot on the other side of it. Canada maintains a boarder with the US and sells them electricity so we must be "functionally" occupying the Yanks by that logic. They'll be surprised to discover that... Give yourself a smack, the gears are stuck.

"until another infrastructure could be developed" lol. I won't be holding my breath for the palis to stop firing rockets long enough to start such a project - and there lies the reason for their plight.

I think the citizens of Israel should build a wall around their island of democracy and civilization in the M.E.

a wall, and include the West Bank as a province of Israel within that wall. They won it, it's theirs.

no, jason, you are looking only at the superficial status of two peoples locked in conflict. I suggest you do some in-depth research.

First, check out the thousand year history, written into rules of interaction, that forbid both Jews and Muslims from constructive interaction with each other. We in N. America can ignore this, but the orthodox tribalism operates in the Middle East, among both peoples. Read about the halakhic rules and the hadith rules - of both peoples.

Check out the religious ideology of Judea and Samaria (the W. Bank) and how it is considered to be by divine right, a property of the Judaic peoples.

Then, move out of the religious and into the political and economic. Read about the arable land base and above all, the aquifers of the W. Bank.

Ask why Israel doesn't annex the W. Bank and make its occupants citizens. And don't come up with false arguments such as 'we sell electricity to the US, therefore we must be occupying it'. Israel DOES occupy the W. Bank, regardless of its supplying electricity and water.

Furthermore, maintaining a border by refusing to allow the majority of a population access between different check points (from the village to the farmland) isn't comparable to the US/Canadian border.

Actually, no, you are quite wrong about developing another infrastructure for hydro supply. Egypt doesn't want to do it for Gaza. And remember, as I said, the Arab states don't support a Palestinian state - and their rants against Israel are rants, which have more to do with their desire to control each other, than to control Israel.

Don't ignore that Iran, for example, is interested in controlling ALL the other Arab States (Iran is not Arab by the way) and uses Israel as a strawman to flex its might in the area. Iran is after control of the Arab states via its control of Syria, Lebanon, and attacks in Iraq.

Equally, it is sheer ignorance, and arrogance, to declare that to criticize Israel's political actions, is an act of anti-semitism, for that sets up Israel as acting outside of reason and only for reasons of faith. I don't think Israel operates only because of religious orders - and you don't know much about Judaism if you think that its rules and beliefs are all homogeneous -

As I said, this situation is not black and white, a view in which most of you seem to have become t trapped. It is complex. The way out, I suggest, is in Israel's hands.

Recognize a Palestinian state. That means get out of the W. Bank - and that, I think, is the basic sticking point. Israel wants that arable land and those aquifers. But, get out, enable a Palestinian state BUT with its economy bonded, embedded, with Israel. The two states, economically bonded to each other - would be a formidable opposition to the jihadists of Islamic fascism and the imperialist agenda of Iran.

But the sticking point is that W. Bank, the land of Judea and Samaria.

Cut off all aid and force the people to grow up and provide for themselves, if we continue to provide the necessities of life they'll continue on their current path of professional victimhood. End the global welfare, perhaps the people of Palestine will choose food over weapons but I doubt it six decades of being taught to hate Jews will never be erased.

Deja Jew all over again. Me No Comment.

Except, hi ex-liberal!

I've read enough of ET's posts in the past to know he is far better read on almost everything than I am. I don't know what the answer is between the Israelis and the Palestinians. I do know that if 3 out of the last 10 times I ate shrimp, I got sick, I would quit eating shrimp. I would not care if it were the shrimp's fault, the fisherman's fault, the cook's fault or my fault. This is common sense.

When applied to people and relationships, we call it discrimination and prejudice. As thinking animals, it behooves us to discriminate. It is part of our survival mechanism. It is not prejudice if most of the evidence and experience we have gathered in the past counsels against dealing with the other party. It is still common sense, applied to shrimp, people or states.

We can whine and moan and bitch about how unfair it is but you can't (with common sense) expect a person to put a loaded, cocked gun into the hands of his enemy and turn his back.

wayne - what so many here fail to acknowledge is that the loaded gun is on both sides. It is not the case that Israel is a passive participant in this situation; it's active. That West Bank 'hold' is a key to the problem. The West Bank is an integral ideological part of Israel (Judea and Samaria) and is a vital ecological component of its capacity to function.

Plus, as I've said, BOTH sides have a long ideological history, written in their 'the rules by which we live' - and I mean written not oral habits - that reject interaction with The Other. That's a first door-in-your-face. The second door is the West Bank.

Then, the third door is the reality that the other Arab states don't give a hoot about the Palestinians but cynically use its 'victim' existence to advance their own agendas - and their own agendas are all about control over each other. Not control over Israel but control over each other.

In fact, I'd suggest that the presence of Israel has prevented and saved those Arab states from swallowing each other up, saved them from Iran's imperialist ambitions, Egypt's ambitions, Syria and Jordan's ambitions. And Saddam Hussein's ambitions, as well as those of Saudi Arabia.

Remember, Israel can't absorb the Palestinian population of the West Bank as citizens, since this would demographically deny the Jewish majority in the state. So, they continue to occupy the land.

My own view, as I've said, is a kind of two-state but one economy infrastructure, where the West Bank becomes a Palestinian state but is economically embedded with the Israeli state. Legally embedded.

This would set up a powerful 'in-your-face' example to the Arab and Persian states in the area, where a democracy, with two 'provinces', each sovereign, would function within a shared economy.

I think this is the only answer. BUT, it's fraught with difficulties. First, both sides have to throw down their guns, both actual and figurative; they have to dispense with the rules of the halakah and hadiths that forbid interaction with each other. Then, they have to see themselves as democratic and global rather than sectarian and local. Palestinians have to see themselves, not as members of the arab community but of the global community. Remember, the Arab states don't give a hoot about them, for Palestinians are considered the 'lowest of the low' in the Arab hierarchy.

A further problem is that the Arab states won't like Palestine both becoming a state and working with Israel and being economically successful. I mean that - they don't want to see these people, either the Palestinians or the Israelis, succeed. They'll make trouble for this 'dyadic state'.

But I can't see any other solution. Israel's hope that the Palestinians will give up and drift away is not going to work. Palestine's hope that Israel will relent and give up the West Bank to a SEPARATE state - is not going to work.

Therefore, a kind of 'binary state', of two parts, each side controlling, for example, their own parliament, immigration, etc..but with many shared aspects of water, irrigation construction, roads, etc...seems to me the only viable solution.

40+ years of closely observing the situation has led me to blieve that what the Palestinians really want is not so much a separate state in the West Bank as the death of every Jewish man, woman, and child in the region. But ET, being so much better-read than me, has dissuaded me - not.

ET, as I was on my way home I seriously considered writing that you are pretty obviously a crypto-leftie who has infiltrated this blog in order to practice your skill at making the insane seem rational. I am relenting for the time being and will simply say that, given the places you cherry-pick your `facts` from, I do stand by my earlier statement regarding Judaeophobia.

Wayne
[......We can whine and moan and bitch about how unfair it is but you can't (with common sense) expect a person to put a loaded, cocked gun into the hands of his enemy and turn his back.]

Pretty much!
My problem with this nonsense ET spouts is that unlike ET, I have actually walked the walk and seen these human rodents, the Pali's, first hand. They are unwanted by the arab states for good and proper reason....for the most part despite propaganda to the contrary, the so-called "palestinians" are not indiginous but are mostly migrants from Eygpt and Trans-Jordan arriving with the first "sabras" during the late 19th and early to mid 20th century. The sabras provided employment for migrants from elsewhere. Indiginous Palestinians were indentured farmers working land owned by absentee landlords who sold the lands to the "sabras". The sabras naturally occupied their property which the former TENANTs refused to vacate.
I recall remarking this to a Pali and his response: "See! See! You do know how the Jews stole our land---they bought it."
ET is either a "pali" or a deluded lefty deluded by leftist fantasies.....reality is a real bitch.

The so-called peace talks are a sham and will continue to be, thanks to the world, and that includes Israel, pandering to Arab violence. If it were made clear by all parties that there shall be no talks, no negotiation, no support financial or otherwise until the violence ceases on all sides, it is probable that people would come to understand that violence does not pay. As it is it clearly does pay, and pays very well, and we continue to make it possible even turning a blind eye to the on-going indoctrination of Arab children to hate and to murder Jews.

michael anderson - heh, nope, I'm immune to juvenile insults. I'm an adult. I think you should debate the issues and move out of childish insults. I'm not a lefty nor anti-semitic. Kindly see my remarks on the irrationality of setting Israel up as a religion rather than a political entity. As a political entity, Israel is necessarily open to rational criticism - and my points are all valid and factual.

Interesting that you don't comment on the points I've raised about the cultural ideologies of both sides, as tribal cultures; nothing about the demographics; nothing about the arable land and the aquifers. Nothing about the role of and the ideology of the settlers. Nothing about the agendas of the arab states and Iran regarding their power over each other; nothing about the islamic rejection of democracy. Hmmm. Do you realize you refuse to debate the issues?

Sasquatch - same to you. You refuse to debate the issues. No-one is a 'rodent' and such a term is not an argument. What the heck is indigeneous? The Palestinians (and others) have been living in that area for centuries, under the Caliphate, etc and the Ottoman and the British. The land wasn't sitting idle and empty since the BC era!

Are you seriously declaring that only an indigeneous people have the 'right' to land ownership? Doesn't that mean that we should all leave Canada to the indigeneous peoples? Hmmm? And no, the land of Israel wasn't all sold to the Israelis. Ever heard of the 'absentee property' law in Israel?

As well, sasquatch, you too have no argument, no comment on the reality of the situation with the two tribal perspectives (halakha and hadiths), the W.bank land and aquifers, the agendas of the arab and Iranian states and so on. Not a word. Just simplistic empty rhetoric and insults. How about dealing with the facts?

Alain, I agree, the peace talks are a sham. I don't think that Israel panders to Arab violence, but Israel has no intention of allowing a Palestinian state. That's the key problem - the W. Bank.

And don't think that the settler violence, and there IS settler violence against Palestinians, will stop just because anyone asks for it. You ignore the deep religious ideology of the settlers around the role of Judea and Samaria.

The only solution, in my view, is to go against the wishes of the Arab states (and Iran) which do NOT want a Palestinian democracy in their midst, and for Israel to take the initiative and enable a Palestinian state but one with its economy embedded with that of Israel. A weak comparison would be Quebec embedded within the economy of Canada, - for Quebec controls its own immigration, language, schools, borders and other things.

I can't see a completely separate Palestine for it would be unprotected from its Arab neighbours - and Iran/Syria would want to overrun it completely and even annex it. At the moment, Israel is preventing this. Again, no Arab state gives a hoot about Palestinians.

To prevent an arab/Iranian takeover of the W. Bank very valuable land and water resources, I think that the two 'states' would have to be somehow bonded to each other. I see no other solution. Israel and Palestine are 'wedded' in a way that no other states in the area are. Both actually need each other and frankly, to set up such a 'binary state' would be, I think, the solution.

I always get a kick when a leftard characterizes my arguments as `juvenile`- especially when they`re obviously about half my age. Not even sure what you`re referring to - I was simply making observations.

ET: I`m not INTERESTED in your asinine theories regarding subtle cultural minutiae in the conflict, you drooling halfwit! I`m interested in the bald fact that the Palestinains are barbarians who invented things like the public suicide bombing of civilian gathering places to register their discontent with their lot. I`m interested in their continued violence against Israeli civilians, and the way they threw their lot in with scum like Hamas when given the opportunity to try out statehood.

At the end of the day, your self-appointed status as the region`s problem-solver based on your close reading of, and ability to parrot ideas found in leftist activist websites might impress some people here, but I think you can see that sasquatch and I aren`t the only ones wondering why you`re here at all.

By your uninformed comments on the nature and character of ET you
are, essentially, making a fool of yourself in public, Anderson. If you
would like more information: you know my phone number, call me.
I tried calling you, but the old number I have is no longer in service.

ET, I agree. If they could just get all the ideology out of the way, forget about 1200 years of hate, ignore the edicts of their religions, quit teaching each new generation that the other side are animals and do not deserve to live, they could probably come to an agreement.

'Balls said the Queen, if I had them I'd be King'!!

None of those things are going to change during our lifetime, I'm afraid.

ET, excluding the Arab states and Iran is a nice thought but not reasonable, because they inhabit (except Iran) the same neighbourhood. As long as the Arabs insist on eliminating Israel and Jews, there can never be peace. Here I refer to peace as the absence of violence and attacks, not the real peace that is much more than that. We can only foresee the possibility of any peace if there is a change in the present Islamic ideology.

When I wrote that the world is guilty of rewarding Arab violence and terrorism, I was not limiting this to those calling themselves Palestinians. Unfortunately the world to-day is awash with a level of anti-Semitism that would put that of the Nazis to shame. Criticising particular policies of Israel is one thing, but when one seeks to excuse and to appease the perpetuators of the most evil forms of violence one is in bed with the anti-Semites whether one intends to or not.

Notice the directionality of your argument, though, Alain. You claim that if one makes a certain class of what seem to you to be mistakes then one is in bed with the anti-Semites whether one intends to or not, and that therefore one's position is in the negative. And yet it remains the case that should one not be making mistakes, and then find out that the anti-Semites gratuitously agreed with oneself for some irrelevant reason, then one would still be bed with the anti-Semites whether one intends to or not. But one's position would remain correct ~ in the positive ~ pace the anti-Semites.

Interesting take, Vit! So just how would you qualify those who agree with the extermination of Jews and Israel, the only Jewish state in the world? I suggest that anti-Semitism was actually rather mild.

Hello to you MND

Remember when the Gaza Jews wouldn't sell their greenhouses because of ritual prohibition, so some American Jews had to buy them - and here I thought they wouldn't sell them because they did not want their sworn enemies to have all of their immovable property and the fruits of their hard labor.

Remember how all ideologies are equally invalid and there really is no difference between Judaism and Islam?

Remember the indigenous people of Palestine?

Remember how Jerusalem is a Hebrew word? I think Kate is in Jerusalem now - it is an amazing place, everyone should try to visit there

Alas, I'm done here, Alain. I'm not going to get into this pissing match. My point was solely that those who would transfer their I/P frustration onto the shoulders of ET are, frankly, off topic. If one wants to engage ET's arguments (ET and CGH and I once spent over two days having an intelligent discussion of this, here at SDA, about three years ago, in the culmination of which we achieved a good understanding), that's one thing, just be aware (as I pointed out) of the foundations of argument. On the other hand, if one doesn't want to engage ET's arguments, if one is only interested in slagging ET without putting the necessary work and investment into refuting or at least containing her arguments, then one is off topic, independent of whether or not one is correct or incorrect. That was my point, and I've made it, so I don't really want to talk about it any more. That would be off topic.

michael anderson, I didn't say your arguments were juvenile, for you have made no arguments. Instead, I said that your insulting someone was a juvenile behaviour; I said 'juvenile insults'.

By the way, I haven't seen any sites, left, centre or right, arguing for a two-state solution with Palestine's economy embedded within that of Israel. Arguing for a two-state solution is not the answer, I suggest, for reasons I've outlined above.

Wayne, the ideology on both sides isn't going to disappear, it's part of the religious traditions. Both sides have long, written traditions that reject constructive interaction with 'the Other'. What has to be done is to focus on an economic alignment of the two states such that they are bonded to each other, first, economically. The cultural bonds will come later.

But Palestine cannot be a sovereign state on its own without that embedded bond with Israel. As I said, if Palestine were a separate state on its own, it would be swallowed by Syria or Iran (same thing actually) - who are after the land and water of the W. Bank. The only protection against this future would be its being embedded with Israel!

I also think that the Arab/Iranian rhetoric of getting rid of Israel is just that - rhetoric. Their real agenda is to retain their tribal political infrastructures and prevent any hint of democracy in their states, i.e., prevent the development of a middle class in their states. You can see this in what is going on in Iran.

What is interesting here is that no-one seems to want to take on the actual issues and discuss the problems in the area - the arable land, the water, the demographics, the role of the Arab States and their agenda, the function of tribalism and the rejection of democracy, Iran's imperialist agenda, the role of the W. Bank, the settlers, the ideology and so on.

All I get in response to my points, are accusations of 'anti-semite', 'leftist' and other silly and ignorant insults about 'the Palestinian scum' . How about dealing with facts, issues and using some reasoning about these things?