About US, Israel, terrorism and consistancy

What are your opinions on Ariel Sharon

Well I don't know him personally so I can't say anything about that. But from his history I sincerely doubt he has any interest in "freeing" the Palestinians.

A brief summary on Ariel Sharon, from BBC:


I don't think there will be peace in that area until he is gone.

Why?

More importantly, what are his views of the other side of the Arab-Israeli conflict? In particular, the Palestinians themselves, and most especially those Arab governments who treat the refugees so badly and have refused to recognize Israel's right to exist within secure borders as demanded by the UN Security Council.

Another question would be the role of European governments and their support of Israel. Germany, in particular, has been a generous aid-giver and arms supplier. France and Britain have as well. I'm not criticizing that fact, I just find it interesting that it isn't mentioned.

Basically, this is a very complex issue with lots of roots, and lots of players. It isn't so easily summarized as just US support to Israel.

Same goes for Arafat.

Personally, I don't think there WILL be peace, because it's not in the interest of the leaders on either side.

It would be like racism going away for Jesse Jackson. There's nothing in it for him.

I think that's probably the statement of the day. Until a new leadership will take control of both Israel and Palestine, a leadership commited to a peaceful solution, this will sadly carry on.

Germany has recently denied delivery of tanks asked for by the Israeli government. Which, I think, was a good idea.
AFAIK Germany isn't exporting any weapons that may be used offensively to Israel either but I might be wrong on that one.

This is true, but it is a recent change. Historically, Germany has been among Israel's most generous benefactors. And in terms of civil aid, it still is.

Guilt.

Geld. (money)

Two words, sharing the same root. Explains a lot methinks.

To quote my first post:

First I want to say that I condemn the suicide bombers, I condemn any action taken by the Palestinians that violates human rights and international laws and I condemn the Palestinian authorities for being unadequate in their search for terrorists.


Why do you try to shift the blame onto everybody else than Israel? As you see this thread is about the US, Israel etc. Of course I'm disgusted by how the other countries have treated them. But would they be there if Israel would have behaved? What is the reason they are there? C'mon, I'm sure you can stay on topic.......



Perhaps not. But still I think the main reason is the blind support the US has given them. How many times has the US tried to force Israel to comply with the resolutions? How many times has the US condemned Israels crimes against humanity? How many times has the US condemned Israel for it's violations of the Geneva Convention? And by that I mean in strong words that they are willing to back up with reducing aid, money, weapons and technology.

And about Arafat. Yes, he has a bad past that isn't helping his cause. I'm sure that it would be more likelly peace would come if someone else was in charge. But what happened to The Roadmap to Peace�? They have installed a new prime minister(or what he is), the US promised to deliver the Map� when the Palestinians did that.

At last(again).....
What do americans think is the real reason for the anti-americanism and terrorism? Your cars or culture?



edit: damn bold and quotes got ****ed up

Explicitly so. But that doesn't explain all the Mirages in the Israeli air force.

But my point isn't to attack Europeans for supporting Israel (far from it). I just marvel how this information never makes it into the news and these discussions. I know that US aid is far bigger, but that isn't an excuse for Europeans palming the whole issue off on to the US.

BTW, shouldn't that be Schuld <----> Geld. Not such good alliteration that way, I suppose.

Is the EU holding any of its aid to the PA hostage to Palestinian compliance? I didn't think so.

The US has spent decades trying to help negotiate a peaceful settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Several presidents have made this centerpieces of their presidencies. At the top of that list comes Carter and Clinton. Carter helped create the Camp David accords and US taxpayers and the US military are still paying for and enforcing those accords.

Clinton also spent much of his presidency working on it. He was very much involved in the peace settlement between Jordan and Israel and under pressure from him, Israel agreed to a comprehensive settlement. But the Palestinians walked away and turned instead to war. You can't blame that solely on Israel, still less on the US.

<off topic, sorry logic>

No, that's not what I meant. The words guilt and Geld share a common root. They once shared a meaning, namely the expression of a debt. You can still see this in Holland's currency, the guilder.

Sorry to be nitpicking



</off topic.>

And how do we throw global politics into the mix? We have, in several threads, linked the current Iraq conflict to the generation of an middle eastern state that will recognize Israel. Is one of the problems that the Arab nations do not recognize Israel...so why should they follow the subsequent resolutions until the first resolution is follows?

Very complex issue.

There are no Mirages in the Israelis air force any more. France started a boycott of military goods to Israel after Israel bombed the Airport in Beirut. This doesn't say anything good about France in general, because France has a record of supplying almost anything to anyone in any area, but it does point out the way allegeances have changed. Neither does britain suplply any military equipment to Israel any longer.

Germany has, since the beginning of the state of Israel lived in a state of guilt towards the Jewish people. Germany is the only country that ever paid reparitions to a whole nation, and that for a hell of a long time. Up until this very day, it has been almost impossible for a politician to even remotely critisize Israel, for fear of being tainted as a Nazi, something which the Israeli media and political circus have constantly used to blackmail Germany into being silent in the face of Israeli atrocities.

Note. This doesn't say that the suicide bombers are any less evil, or wrong, but it doesn't try to take the blame away from Israel either.

I always thought Sharone was pretty much a terroist eleceted to fight a terrorist given his past record. It just seems no one is allowed to say that because of all the sympathy and tip toeing around isreal issues trying not to hurt peoples feelings.



This is not the first time I have read this.

You say get to the root of the problem.. okay... kill all the Arab bastards who keep blowing up innocent people.

You have been reported and will now join Zimph on my ignore list.

Don't bother responding with some cheap remark 'cause I wont see it.

Have a nice day.

Whatever floats yours boat.

I've been to Israel before. I've had friends just barely miss a homicide bombing. One friend of mine in the Israel army was murdered by those people...

The Israeli people have endured this crap for so long, and when they defend themselves from terrorism, it gets slapped back in their face that they're the ones who are terrorizing.. that is weak and spineless and ignorant.


Long live Israel.

Logic....

as your name implies, you are that.

I agree.


But Israel is immune from law. Israel will always be right. It can do no wrong (at least since WWII).

The problem at this point is that not everyone in the world will accept that as fact. That is where the trouble is.

What's the purpose of all of this fingerpointing? What is it going to achieve?

Harping on US aid to Israel is just an attempt to place blame elsewhere. Nobody seems to have stopped providing aid to the Palestinian Authority, despite its inability (or deliberate choice) to prevent terrorism. The US government has criticized Israel on several occasions -- how do you think those UN Security Council resolutions passed? In addition, the Bush administration has been openly critical of Israeli military tactics on several occassions.

The appointment of a Palestinian prime minister is a step in the right direction, but it hasn't yet been demonstrated that he will wield any significant power. The US requested appointment of a prime minister with real power, not just a figurehead, as a first step toward implementation of the road map.

Criticize the US all that you want, but it is the only nation that has actively worked for peace in the region. What has the EU done other than issue pronouncements? What has the Arab League done other than issue unilateral demands?

As for Article 49 of the Geneva Convention, I'm not aware that Israel has transferred any Palestinians onto its own land. I'm also not aware that Israel has forcibly transferred any of its own population onto occupied territories, they choose to go. Can you clarify this?

Article 47 is the big one, given the Settlements Israel is putting up. I don't like the PLO in the least, but clearly Bush needs to start putting more pressure on Israel.

Having said all that I think Arafat really blew it after 9/11. Bush was starting to side with the Palestinians until that boat was found with all those weapons. Then more info came out trying Arafat into terrorism more. The US had been looking the other way and coming down hard on Israel. However Bush is someone fairly principled (whether or not you agree with his principles). The Bush doctrine pretty much demanded that he bitch slap Arafat. You'll note that after that Bush dramatically decreased his criticism of Israel and then let Israel surround Arafat.

I personally think that long before the UN diplomacy move that Bush should have repushed for a peace process. But clearly Bush felt that he couldn't trust Arafat and refused to deal with him until replaced.

This is partly true. Our collective guilt for the holocoust is still affecting our judgement IMO. Jews were treated terribly in WWII and we still feel guilty. Maybe we should, but at the same time we shouldn't let that allow that Israelis treat others in a similar way. No, I'm not saying that the Israelis are treating the palestinians in the same way as jews were treated back in the days. My point is that they are breaking a lot of international laws, agreements and conventions. We cannot allow a ally of ours behave in that way. It doesn't matter how they were treated in the WWII.

I guess I have to say it again. I'm in no way happy with how the palestinian authorities are behaving but I tend to try to hold our allies under a bigger moral restrictions and demand that they follow the rules followed by generations before us.

The fingerpointing is needed for trying to find ways to deal with this situation. It is the best way to find what we are doing wrong and try to fix it. If you resort to just pointing out what the other side is doing wrong no solution will be found. I know that US isn't the only one responsible, but I also know that they are Israels strongest ally and probably the only non-Zionist country they will listen to.



No it isn't. US aid to Israel is not in sending them food and medical supplies. That is what is mostly sent to the palestinians. At least from Europe. Europe isn't sending weapons and weapons technology to the palestinians. The criticism from the US has been rather lame. They have said that they don't like their methods but in the end of the sentence they blame the Palestinian authorities for the respond they get. And has the US ever reduced their aid after Israel has broken yet another resolution, convention or human rights? No. They get slapped on the hand, and then they get the next shipment of money. Inconsistancy. If your government want to make your own country secure from terror, this is where to start. There is no doubt about that.



OK, this is true. But if the Palestinian authorities have made a step in the right direction why not now put pressure on Israel to also take a step in the right direction? Why not start with something as fundamental as withdraw from the settlements. If you think that the new prime minister will have any real power if his country is under siege from Israeli troops you are mistaken. He will have no control over his people as long as they have to go through Israeli checkpoints when going to school, when in an ambulance, or when going to buy food. He will have no real power if the threat of palestinian homes being bulldozed, and while they are under the threat of being put in jail without a fair trial are still present. That is a big obstacle. All those actions are raising funds for terrorists and recruiting terrorists. That is what you must stop to get peace in the area.



Activelly worked for peace???? Are you really saying that the US is the only country working for peace? Oslo is not a town in the US. I hope you know that.
And what do you expect the Arab Leage to be doing. They lost the war. They lost territory. But Israel is the country breaking the Geneva convention and Israel is the country 242 was mainly issued to. Israel is still today breaking the same Geneva convention your government holds so high. What is done?

Nothing



Article 49, 4th Geneva Convention:

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.

Hope that clarifies it. They have forcebly taken Palestinians to questioning. The Israelis have bulldozed their houses, thereby forcing them to move. I also saw an interview with some Red Cross spokesman a couple of months ago, he mentioned among others these articles. Sorry can't find any links.

But here is a link that might be useful.

edit: added link

I just think it's time to move past merely pointing out what everyone is doing wrong and instead come up with a solution that everyone will actually adhere to.



To be honest, American foreign policy has always been somewhat inconsistent. But I don't see anyone complaining that Egypt also gets billions of dollars of aid annually, AND their debts were forgiven by the US when they joined the Gulf War coalition. Israel has never received any such free lunch. I agree that I'd like to see a reduction of military aid to Israel, but most of the aid the US gives (to my knowledge) is economic.

I don't think many Israelis will see a total withdrawal from the settlements as an equivalent step to the appointment of a prime minister who has not yet shown that he has power. I believe the next step in the US plan did have something to do with Israeli withdrawal from some settlements, but I don't remember exactly. Ultimately, I think the main problem concerning the settlement issue from the Israeli perspective is not so much the idea that Israel would not have sovereign control over areas like Hebron, but that any Israelis choosing to stay there would have to live under a Palestinian government, and Arab governments as you know have not been very benign towards Jews in recent years. Some sort of confidence building and assurances have to be provided I think.


And Paris is not a town in the US or Spain, yet the Spanish-American War ended there.

Israel's Arab neighbors have a responsibility in resolving this conflict. The primary objective to many Israelis is reconciliation and peace with their neighbors. That aspect of the equation can't just be ignored.

I do think it is terrible that Israel violates the Geneva Convention. I also think it's terrible that Israeli citizens are under constant threat of terror attacks.

I agree with the latter part. We really need to find a solution that all parties will actually agree on. But I also think that to be able to do that we need to identify the problem and especially what our allies(in this case Israel) are doing wrong. I think that one of the things you are required to do if you want to be an ally of the western world, is to follow the rules and conventions we uphold. Agreed?




Again, I somewhat agree. I can understand some things of the past concerning US foreign policy even if I disagree with them. But about the economic aid given to Israel. Do they really need this huge amount of money given by the US? They have an almost western standard of living I think, If they are able to do so they can't be in desperate need of money. I can understand that in the past the US gave Israel weapon technology. But is it necessary nowadays? I also agree that giving someone "a free lunch" like you said about Egypt is unacceptable. That is one thing that, IMO, is fueling this anti-americanism you see in the middle east. When arab countries(predominantly muslim) are given money to attack another arab country or their depts are written of, you will get the reaction that you are infact buying allies and not really having a "moral" cause or right. That really hurts your(US) cause, just like the aid you were going to give to Turkey if they allowed troops to attack Iraq from there. Arabs are just as proud as we westerners and don't like the feeling of being bought. If you know what I mean.


Again I somewhat agree, what is happening? I was afraid this would turn into yet another Flamewar�. I agree that maybe my words were a little too "big". Of course we couldn't force Israel to withdraw from all settlements. I could and I thing most others live with it if that would be the next step in the peaceprocess. That is partial withdrawal from some settlements. Don't get me wrong though, From the settlements Israel would withdraw from it would need to be a complete withdrawal. But then we have the problem with Israelis living under Palestinian authorities and the threat of endangerment. The latter could, I dare say easily, be solved with UN peacekeapers. The first is a problem, the question is who's fault is it? Is it the Israeli governments fault because they allowed it, or is it the international communities fault for not being strong enough to stop it? In my opinion both but the main culprit is the Israeli government. They signed the Geneva convention and are members of other conventions and knew the international laws on this matter. But what can be done about that? Should the Israeli government force them to leave the settlements? Should the Israeli government be accountable for the settlements and pay the settlers if they want to move back to Israel? There would be many possible solutions and many different opinions on every one of them. But I would like to see Israelis(Jews) being able to live in the Palestine side by side with the Palestinians. The question is wether the hate and resentment has risen so much that they never will........



I'm not really getting your point. I was only challenging your statement that the US was the only one actively working for peace in the area. The EU effort maybe doesn't get much attention but there is an initiative for peace there as well. I think that they have been working behind the curtains with the US as well as putting forth their own proposals. The problem is that EU(and other european countries but let's call the whole thing EU, ok?) want the UN to handle this. And the only way to let the UN handle this thing is to work with the 5 permanent members and most importantly with the US, because of their close bonds with Israel. We shouldn't be saying that this and that country is the only one working actively for peace in the area, because the only way to get enduring peace in the area is if every country in the world think that we have come to a good agreement.



Again I agree! This is scary. Of course the neighbors of Israel bear a great responsibility in the peace process. That is what scares me now. By entering this war before starting the peaceprocess we give the radicals a reason for being suspect of any proposal for peace in the area. They will affect the stance the neighbors of Israel will take if the peaceprocess starts. I'm afraid this war will in the end not give the region peace, but rather calm under the threat of force. That will never last IMO and according to history.



True, but living under the threat of terror does in no way give you an excuse for breaking the Geneva convention. Just as living under the military threat of Israel does not give the palestinian terrorists any right to commit the atrocities they have the recent years. Both sides are in my opinion hurting their own cause by acting the way they do. Neither one of them is taking the moral high that both should if they wanted sympathy from the international community. The thing is that many, like me, the use of heavy force(military) to hmmmm...... I don't know the correct word in english. This is not meant as hostile even if will sound that way ok? The thing is that many, like me, think the use of massive force(military) to break an uprising of light forces(militias with assault rifles), and the bulldozing of houses etc is worse than the atrocities committed by the palestinian terrorists. I hope you know what I mean. When using overwhealming force against "civilians" gives the ones opposed to it a "reason" for being very angry and resort to idiotic remarks. I certainly have in some of the heated debates here in the lounge resorted to such tactics. It also gives the ones who suffer sympathy from people around the world.

This thread was in no way meant to turn out to be a Flamewar� and I'm glad it hasn't yet. This was more to discuss what is maybe the culmination of the reason anti-americanism and the resentment we now see around the world. Of course both sides are to blame, but my opinion is that we, the western "civilized" world, should enforce our allies to uphold the humanitarian and international laws we want other countries to bring in to their civilizations. If we force our ideals upon some countries with the use of force(military or sanctions) we better make sure that we and our allies should always be an example of how the ideals we uphold should and will work. Any other message we send will be met with suspicion and opposition. It is just the same as the peaceprotesters destroying property and acting hostile. They do cast a shadow over the other 95% of real peaceprotesters that act according to their beliefs. We just have to read a few threads here in the lounge to see what result it gives when people behave like that. The same goes on in the real world� and is especially the case in the middle-east. They will never trust us while our own allies are breaking the same rules we want them to bring about.

Of course. At the same time, I don't think that just cutting off relations, to some extent, with Israel will achieve very much.

They do need the money, as much as ever nowadays. Their economy is in shambles. This is the side-effect of terrorism.

My somewhat un-educated opinion is that it's not as necessary anymore. I'd be in favor of decreasing military aid to Israel.

Well what's worse is that many Arabs view this as the US bribery. We're keeping several of the governments Arabs hate in power (eg Egypt). I don't know what Syria's excuse is though

I think it's too early to judge. The radicals will always be angry wherever they see US influence in the region. If the US can set up a legitimate, democratic government in Iraq and then get out quickly, then I think it stands the chance to win friends in the region. The Iraq war is a gambit -- the US realizes policy in the region is not working and is attempting to shake things up in a way that the Bush admin thinks will lead to positive results. We've yet to see how it turns out...

I didn't mean to suggest that the EU hasn't taken any role in the peace process. But in terms of actions, I think they have come short. The only nation whose leaders have actively stuck their necks out on the line (eg Carter, Clinton) in order to achieve peace is the US. My primary criticism is that EU members seem to favor dialog over action and want to push the debate into the UN. This frustrates me, because I don't think Israel views the UN as a legitimate arbiter.

I agree with pretty much everything else you wrote. I do, however, have relatives in Israel so to me the terrorist threat is immense. I also think Israel can be heavy handed in its military tactics, that's a perfectly legitimate opinion.

Living in the SF Bay Area, it really scares me how much public opinion has been polarized over this issue the last two years, especially on college campuses. People have to realize that just blaming each other is fruitless. Ultimately, this crisis will only be resolved if the Israelis and Palestinians can reconcile. It's important to see that there are things both sides agree on and that both sides desire a future where they can live in peace, side by side.