The aborted suicide bombing halt

(This is long, but as I've been hitting this topic a lot recently I won't respond much).


As a kid I read an account of how Winston Churchill failed to warn an English town of an impending German air raid because the source of his intelligence was too vital to give away, even though it meant certain death to many of his own citizens. I’m not even sure if the story’s true, but it stuck with me because it illustrates a point that one seldom sees emphasized: people with significant power must often sacrifice the innocent to accomplish wartime and other political goals they deem vital. They literally must get used to it. It makes them quite a bit different than us, and we should be cautious about projecting onto them the ordinary humanity of people that rarely if ever are asked to make such decisions.


I’ve been harping about how the current Israeli government and the suicide bombers symbiotically provide each other with a pretext for using violence to accomplish their respective political goals. I've even suggested that Sharon welcomes, to an extent, Palestinian terrorism because it shifts the discussion away from his odious colonization scheme. Most people find this crazy.


But consider the chronology of events that led up to last week’s attack in Gaza. I submit it as a stark example of how Sharon deliberately uses the prospect of violence against his own citizens in order to pursue his lifelong agenda of crushing Palestinian nationalism by force of violence.


May, June and July:

Palestinian peace negotiators and international diplomats convene and work to bring about a unilateral Palestinian cease-fire, including an end to the suicide bombings. Alex Fishman, Yediot Aharanot, 7/24/02 (Translation available at http://www.gush-shalom.org/english/index.html).


Weekend of July 14:

Sheik Yassin (the spiritual leader of Hamas) and senior Hamas member Abd-El-Aziz Rantisi start making statements aimed at creating a public atmosphere among the public conducive to accepting a cease-fire communique calling for a halt to the suicide bombings. Id.


Sat., July 20:

Palestinians notify Israel that militant factions were working behind the scenes to unilaterally halt the suicide attacks. Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat says lengthy high-level meetings between the two sides included Foreign Minister Shimon Peres. (Julie McCarthy, NPR, 7/25/02, (transcript at http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/transcripts/2002/jul/020725.mccarthy.html).


Sun., July 21:

Ha’arezt reports the defense establishment's difficulty in stopping the suicide bombings, noting that IDF operations in the West Bank have proved only a “partial solution.” “Discussions in the defense establishment on what can be done to deter suicide bombings are still going on. A week ago, Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer told the government he was setting up teams to examine likely means.” In other words, trying to figure out what to do about the suicide bombings is still in the planning stage. Harel, "No easy answer to stopping the attacks"


Monday afternoon, July 22:

Representatives of the European Union brief the Israeli government of the progress being made toward halting the suicide attacks. According to Fishman, however, “that briefing was not needed, since Israel is already for weeks following the deliberations inside Tanzim on the idea of declaring a unilateral cease-fire without making any immediate demands upon Israel.” Fishman, op. cit. “Israeli defense officials had been updated by European diplomats on the evolving text, [Yediot Aharanot] reported, in an account Western diplomats confirmed today.” "Palestinian Cease-Fire Was in Works Before Israeli Strike," James Bennet and John Kifrner, NYT, 7/25/02.


Monday Evening, July 22:

Muhammad Dahlan meets with [Hamas Leader] Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, in which meeting Yassin accepted the principles of a cease-fire communique. Fishman, op cit.


Monday Evening, July 22, at 22:30:

The heads of Tanzim and Fatah approve the text of a communique that includes the following, to be announced on Tuesday and published Wednesday “as an article in the Washington Post and simultaneously in the Palestinian and Israeli press.” Id. (Full text available Ha'aretz, "Letter for an American Editor," 7/30/2, at http://www.haaretzdaily.com)


[i]We know that the names on this article are unknown to most Americans. And we understand, because we read your newspapers and watch your news shows, how you feel about us. We are a "gang" and a "bunch of murderers." We support and lead political organizations with strange names - Fatah and Tanzim. We "can't be trusted." But maybe, just this once, you should drop these prejudices and listen to what we have to say. Here is what we say, directly, to the people of Israel:


We, from the leaders of the most influential political movements among the Palestinian people; we, part of those who represent those who, like you, have been orphaned and widowed; we, who desire the comfort and security of not just a state but a home - we choose the future. It is in the name of that future, and in the name of all of those who have lost their lives that we make this declaration: we will do everything in our power to end attacks on Israeli civilians, on innocent men, women and children. We will do this without seeking or demanding any prior gains.


. . .You must cease strangling our cities, killing our youths, taking our land for your settlements, ripping up our orchards, humiliating our women and children, detaining our young men in your squalid camps, and demonizing those we choose to lead us. You have done all of these things and continue to do them, and you know it. But whether you stop these practices, or not, we will not shift our declaration. The rivers of blood that have so embittered our peoples will be stanched. The suicide bombings will be brought an end. By us. Now.


You, the people of Israel, should understand clearly what we are proposing. We cannot stop the violence, today, immediately. There are those in our society who will attempt to undermine and deter our efforts. Some of them, unfortunately, may succeed. But we will now have the weight of public opinion on our side.


So too, there are those in your society and even at the very top of your government who may attempt to provoke us. They will try to underestimate this declaration. They have done so before. These people are our enemies, they must also be yours. They are the enemies of peace. While provoked, we will do everything in our power to keep our self-restraint.


Monday Evening, July 22, Midnight (an hour and a half later):

The Israeli Air Force launches a 1-ton bomb into an apartment building immediately adjacent to two other apartment complexes, levelling an area “half the size of a city block.” NYT, 7/2402. The decision to use an F-16 instead of an Apache helicopter is explained by “a senior military official” this way: “An Apache missile does nothing to a two-story building. We had to collapse it and make it rubble.” Id.


The attack destroys three buildings, killing fourteen civilians, including an 11-year-old boy and eight other children under the age of ten. “No one even heard the F-16 approaching, survivors said. People had put their children to bed and were chatting in family groups, watching television or preparing to switch off the lights.” Id.


Tuesday, July 23:

A statement for the Qassam Brigades (the military wing of Hamas) declares “We will not rest until we have our revenge, until we see Zionist body parts in every restaurant, bus stop, buses and sidewalk.”


How the NY Times summed up the chain of events:

“Palestinian officials were secretly working in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to achieve an agreement that some of those involved described as a unilateral cease-fire, others as a lessening of the conflict. . . . [Israel dropped the bomb] as the Palestinian negotiators were working on a text of their announcement.” (emphasis added). However, “Israeli officials scoffed at the accusation that they wanted to snuff out progress toward peace and Palestinian statehood. While they knew of the Palestinian talks, they said, they also knew from bitter experience that the talks would go nowhere. That explanation underscored a hard truth that was left in plain sight by the bombing: Israel has lost confidence, or even interest, in any short-term Palestinian efforts to ensure Israeli security.” James Bennet, "Stalemate in Mideast After Deadly Bombing," 7/28/02.


Note how the talks are described as a “secret,” yet Israel “knew” of them, and in the 7/25 Times article that the talks were “supported by Jordanian and Saudi diplomats,” that the PA was informed, and that the Bush administration was briefed on their substance. So that’s the EU, U.S., Israel, PA, Hamas, Tanzim, Fatah, Saudi Arabia and Jordan that knew of these "secret" efforts to stop the suicide bombings.


Note also how the damning allegation that Israeli has no interest in Palestinian efforts to bring about peace is watered down by the explanation that Israel has lost “confidence” in the Palestinians, as if it would matter, given their lack of "even interest."

Chris,


Your writing seems to be based upon the presumption that it is incumbent upon ISRAEL to stop the homicide bombings, not the Palestinians. Have you forgotten WHO is committing these murders? Israeli civilians are the victims, Palestinian terrorist groups are the murderers. Your post is clearly an attempt to deflect blame from the murderers to the victims. Nice try to pin the blame on the victims, but everyone knows who the true criminals are.


There is absolutely nothing stopping the terrorists from unilaterally declaring a halt to the homicide bombings at any moment. They could do it today, and they could have done it last week, last month, or last year. All it requires is a decision on their part to stop murdering innocent civilians. Why don't they do it? What is stopping them? Today it is the excuse that they want revenge for the bombing last week, but there was a wave of homicide bombings before the bombing in Gaza. What were the excuses for those? Or the excuses for the homicide bombings that killed hundreds of other Israelis over the last two years? The Palestinians always have excuses for why they commit homicide. None of them justify slaughtering innocent civilians. Maybe for once they they just tell the truth--that their goal is to murder as many Jews as possible. It is not Israel's responsibility to stop these crimes (though it is their right to defend against them), it is the perpetrators of the crimes who are responsible.


If the Palestinians are sincere in stopping the homicide bombings, let them stop. There is NOTHING preventing them from stopping, and nothing would be easier (all they have to do is stop!). Suggesting Israel is responsible for the continuation of these crimes because of last week's attack is illogical and ludicrous (not that I don't expect that from you when discussing this topic).

'I've even suggested that Sharon welcomes, to an extent, Palestinian terrorism because it shifts the discussion away from his odious colonization scheme. Most people find this crazy.'


anyone who has any historical context knows that this is true and that throughout history tyrants have even attacked themselves to blame it on the opposition and then have a legititmate excuse to go after the opposition.


brad

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=820792002

=======================

HUNDREDS of former US prisoners of war have begun a battle for

compensation after uncovering documents that allegedly prove the

wartime administration deliberately used them as a tool to whip up

domestic support for war with Japan.


A former prisoner has uncovered papers in the US National Archive

that she claims prove the government restricted the travel of 7,000

American citizens from the Philippines, while at the same time

encouraging evacuation of Americans from other potential Japanese

targets in China and south-east Asia.

========================

I don't agree with what you are saying, but for the sake of discussion lets assume for the moment that Sharon does welcome homicide bombings, as you allege.


Would this justify homicide bombings and the murders of hundreds of innocent civilians?


Would this mean that the terrorists are NOT free to stop the homicide bombings anytime they choose?


Noone is forcing the Palestinians to commit homicide bombings. They commit these despicable, evil acts of their own free will. Blaming their actions on Sharon or anyone else is probably the dumbest argument I've ever heard.

I fail to see how something Roosevelt did 60 years ago--good, bad or ugly--is relevant to this discussion.


Even if Roosevelt did what the article alleges, what does that have to do with Sharon? What are you trying to say--that because Roosevelt did something bad, Sharon must be doing something bad, too?

I'ts an enormous leap of faith to believe that the Palestinians would actually stop all the suicide bombings. Just because Fatah says they will doesn't mean they can control groups like Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and al-Aqsa Martyrs brigade. What I read in the paper was that the Hamas leader had actually stated they would "consider" stopping them once Israel withdrew. "Consider"--that's all?. Meanwhile Israel nailed the chief architect of Hamas suicide bombings, the man personally responsible for planning the deaths of over 200 Israelis.


The timing was unfortunate if indeed it derailed some sort of cease-fire or move towards peace and it is possible that some sort of symbiosis of the sort you describe exists. However I suspect Israel just saw and took the opportunity to get one of the worst bad guys in the whole region. Given Hamas' long avowed aims: the destruction of Israel and the sabotage of any peace processes through violence, it's rather hard to believe they would do an about face so suddenly, and after all it was only one Hamas leader speaking and he only said they would "consider" ending the bombings (quite possibly just an attempt to get Israel to withdraw). The Fatah statement reads more sincerely but they can't guarantee the militant groups will cease their attacks, can they?


The Palestinians have long had a history of saying one thing while doing another (sort of like Arafat's denunciations of terrorist bombings). So why should Israel now take certain statements at face value? And even if they were to do so, there is no assurance that the attacks would cease because the militant leaders themselves have not guaranteed this--not one of them.


If the Palestinians want peace and withdrawal let ALL the militant leaders state their promise that there will be no more suicide bombings. Hard to believe they will ever do this because it runs 100% counter to their previously publicly avowed aims. If they do, great. If they don't, and if they continue to send suicide bombers, I think Israel should probably pursue and exterminate the rest of the miltant leaders who are sending the bombers.

im just saying, to use a chess analogy, that first you must look at all the candidate moves before you start calculating.


i think to dismiss things out of hand is wrong. its clearly within the realm of possibility that the israeli government's dirty tricks programs have gotten out of hand 'for the greater good'.


but for the record i could care less about who does what to whom, and feel the best solution is probably to relocate palestinians to a nice place (weve taken 10-20 illegal alien mexicans, whats a few palestinians (not in my backyard though) ), let israel have its own country, and then watch them incessently argue amongst themselves.


brad

sorry, i meant true in general as in the general paradigm.


not that sharon is doing it. my fault.


brad

B-Man:


No matter how removed from the topic, Israeli chauvinists always try to shoehorn their role-reversal paradigm into any discussion of the Middle East: that the government of Israel is a victim of "the Palestinians," whom it has displaced, occupied, impoverished, imprisoned, humiliated, injured and killed in far greater numbers, because a relative handful of the conquered murder Israeli civilians. Accordingly, any attempt to pin responsibility on Israel for anything, even those things for which Israel obviously has and accepts responsibility, amounts to “blaming the victim.”


Your claim that it is not “incumbent upon ISRAEL” to do what it can to prevent suicide bombings is bizarre. What kind of government has no responsibility to protect it's citizens from mass murder? It is the very thing that governments are supposed to do, and it's certainly a responsibility that Israel has often professed as a motivation, indeed the motivation, for its actions, particularly the most brutal and controversial. It is not my strange “presumption,” it’s Israel’s, and probably that of every other government on earth. It's as if I criticized Sharon for legalizing murder, and you responded by saying that I "forgot" to mention that it's the murderers who are to blame.


Typically off-point, you argue that the suicide bombers shouldn’t give into the Israeli provocations, a point on which I completely agree, and nothing in my post suggested otherwise. But you completely ducked the point about how the right-wing elements in the current Israeli government benefit politically by undermining Palestinian efforts to halt the bombing, and that the circumstances strongly suggest that the Gaza bombing was timed to do just that. I therefore take it that you agree with me on the issue I actually raised.


Your casual equation of millions of "the Palestinians" with murderers (e.g., "The Palestinians always have excuses for why they commit homicide;" "If the Palestinians are sincere in stopping the homicide bombings, let them stop") is characteristic of the unconscious racism that clouds so much thinking by Americans on this topic.

"If the Palestinians want peace and withdrawal let ALL the militant leaders state their promise that there will be no more suicide bombings."


Reverse it like this:


"If the Israelies want peace and an end to terrorism let ALL the Israeli leaders state their promise that there will be a complete withdrawal of troops and settlements."


If the cause of peace and independence in the occupied territories should be put off until all Palestinian hard-liners give up, isn't it equally fair that the cause of peace in Israel should be put off until all Israeli hard-liners give up?

You know damn well that homicide bombings are the cause of the violence of the last two years, not anything Israel has done.


Israel put an offer on the table at Camp David--an offer Arafat rejected--which would have given the Palestinians more than 90% of what they were asking for. Arafat recently said he would accept the same offer. But instead of accepting it then, he blew up the entire peace process and instigated the intifidah.


Noone--including Israel--is going to negotiate under threat of terrorism. The violence needs to stop before there is a return to the bargaining table. The Palestinians are causing the violence through the homicide bombings, whether you choose to admit it or not.


I would be amazed if, just once, you would place blame where it actually lies rather than twisting everything around to blame Israel. Noone is to blame for the homicide bombings but the terrorists and the organizations which shelter and support them.

If the Palestinian militants were fighting a war--even a guerilla war--which had as its primary targets the Israeli miltary and/or Israeli government personnel/leaders, I would not have said this. It is the incessant targeting of primarily innocent Israeli citizens for cold-blooded murder (and the disgusting cheering of these attacks) which I find so morally repugnant, and which must be stopped. The onus for stopping these attacks lies on the Palestinians, and failure to do so must of course result in Israeli self-defense...which translates into offense against the terrorist homicide bombers.

"You know damn well that homicide bombings are the cause of the violence of the last two years, not anything Israel has done."


False. Should I believe this just because you say so? Why must I know "damn well" that the point reported in the (conservative) The Economist this week has no merit? "Many Palestinians argue that there have been several occasions when Mr. Sharon has destroyed periods of relaive quiet by ordering the assissination of Palestinian leaders, thus inspiring therir militia to revenge. They point to the killing of Abu Ali Mustafa, the leader of the PFLP, in August 2001, and of Raed Karmi, leader of the al-Aqsa Brigades, in January 2002. Both of these asssassinations were preceded by relative calm, and followed by bloodletting." p.42


In fact the pattern of provocation by Israel, followed by Palestinian retalliation, followed by even more massive and indiscriminate Israeli retalliation, has been rountinely characterized for decades as mere Israeli "retalliation" by media apologists in the U.S. Read the dissected accounts of popular media coverage at electronicintifada.com


"Israel put an offer on the table at Camp David--an offer Arafat rejected -- which would have given the Palestinians more than 90% of what they were asking for."


False. You see this argument constantly bandied in the pro-Israel press with no anlaysis of actual facts, but the 90% figure (usually cited at 94%) excludes portions of the West Bank that Israel had already annexed and did not involve actual Palestinian sovereignty over any portion. In fact, the Palestinians were asking for 22% of the former homeland, a capital in Jerusalem and the right of refugees to return to their homes. The Camp David proposal floated by the Americans said no to Jerusalem, no to the right of return, and no to the 22%, offering instead a carved up 17.6% with Israel retaining control of water resources, veto power over certain Palestinian legislation, control over internal movement, permanent colonization well into the West Bank and other characteristics of permanant occupation.


"But instead of accepting it then, he [Arafat] blew up the entire peace process and instigated the intifidah."


False. At the time Arafat and the PA were clear that they wanted to continue to negotiate, but with Sharon in charge they had no one to negotiate with.


"No one--including Israel--is going to negotiate under threat of terrorism."


False. Only Israel constantly invokes this line while other countries routinely engage in negotiations with "terrorists," really no different from military forces that target civilians in order to exert pressure, like the U.S. did in WWII. It's really a question of whether the terrorists have brought enough pressure and have something to offer negotiations, not whether or not they have nice uniforms and modern armaments. India-Pakistan and Great Britian-Sein Fein are notable examples of negotiations that took place with terrorists once cease-fires have been put in place.

Interesting that you mention this, because this was another deal in the offing. From The Economist I received today (p. 41), discussing the negotations that were derailed by the Gaza bombing:


"Perhaps more important, something was in the air inside Hamas itself. On July 22nd, the Islamic faction's spirtitual leader, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, said that his men would stop killing Israeli civlians if the army withrew from Palestinian cities, lifted the sieges on Palestinain areas, freed recently detained prisoners [some 1800 still in custody -- CA] and ended the assassinations of Palestinian leaders. The sheikh has also been floating the idea of some sort of unwritten pact with Israel that would confine violence to military targes in the occupied territories. This would be akin to the "undersandings" (to avoid the attacks on civilians) between the Israeli army and Hizbullah during the last years of Israel's occupation of south Lebanon."

maybe so. I can see, however, why Israel would find itself hard-pressed to take at face value the assurances of the chief architect of Hamas homicide bombings. Also, all I read was that the offer was to "consider" ending the bombings--not quite the same thing, by a long shot.

It is patently obvious to anyone who has read the newspapers on a daily basis for the last two years what has been going on. I am not relying on The Economist or anyone else, I can see for myself what the pattern is.


Palestinians commit homicide bombings, Israel retaliates against the terrorist groups, and the Palestinians complain. I suppose Israel is supposed to do nothing but sit there and suffer these attacks without any response. Is that what would make you happy Chris?


As M stated so well below, terrorist attacks are morally repugnant. They are more than that--they are pure evil. There is no justification for them whatsoever. The excuses you and others keep coming up with to explain/justify the attacks are ridiculous. There is no way to justify pure evil. Israel has every right to strike back, and the fact that the Palestinians use Israel's responses as a pretext for more attacks on innocent civilians shows that their only goal is to kill as many Jews as possible.


When I said it last week I wasn't sure if it was true, but you really do support terrorism. How do you sleep at night?

"Typically off-point, you argue that the suicide bombers shouldn’t give into the Israeli provocations, a point on which I completely agree, and nothing in my post suggested otherwise. But you completely ducked the point about how the right-wing elements in the current Israeli government benefit politically by undermining Palestinian efforts to halt the bombing..."


Chris, I don't agree with it, its just irrelevant. As I said before, lets say it is to Sharon's advantage that homicide bombings take place. SO? Does that justify the homicide bombings? You seem to be implying that it does. Well, it doesn't. It is irrelevant whether or not the bombings serve Sharon's agenda; they are horrendous actions regardless.


"Your casual equation of millions of "the Palestinians" with murderers (e.g., "The Palestinians always have excuses for why they commit homicide;" "If the Palestinians are sincere in stopping the homicide bombings, let them stop") is characteristic of the unconscious racism that clouds so much thinking by Americans on this topic."


There is no unconscious racism here. You've seen the statistics on how many Palestinians support the suicide bombings. I didn't make that up. I never said millions, but I suppose if you multiple the percentage by the population it probably is in the millions. Thats pretty sad.


Finally, you still haven't given me a reason why the Palestinians can't just stop the bombings. You blame Israel and Sharon for the bombings, but if the Palestinians want to implement a unilateral cease-fire, all they have to do is stop.

I don't know Chris Alger from Adam but it's funny watching him throw facts and figures at the fanatics of this page who can only respond with aphorisms and abstractions!

As a regular of the Voodoo Blackjack website I feel right at home.


"It is patently obvious to anyone who has read the newspapers on a daily basis for the last two years what has been going on. I am not relying on The Economist or anyone else, I can see for myself what the pattern is."


See what I mean ? Economist Schmeconomist. B-Man knows that he knows what he knows because he knows it! Outside evidence is quickly dismissed if it disagrees with his chosen reality.


"Palestinians commit homicide bombings, Israel retaliates against the terrorist groups, and the Palestinians complain."


Of coursee, as it has been demonstrated time and again, this is only half of the pattern. B-Man looks at events like a weaver who chooses to see only the red colors in the cloth. The fact of steadfast Israeli aggession is ignored in favor of the convenient manichean set up : Israelis all good // Palestinians all bad.


"How do you sleep at night?"


I don't know about Chirs Alger but I'll tell you about me : not at all well! Been having these bouts of indigestion, they's just killing me. And while I don't exactly lie sleepless worrying about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, it doesn't sit well either with me.


As for you, I have no doubt that the rose-tinted shell of a reality you have constructed has you sleeping like a baby. Sweet dreams.

"I don't know Chris Alger from Adam"


In the fortunate event that this changes, the first beer is on me.


"'How do you sleep at night?'"


Great. The only thing that keeps me up is responding to silly posts. Gotta get out more.

Cyrus,


I need a flat changed; bring along your long-necked friend. I'll buy both of you a drink.


Related case: Israeli soldier apprehends rock-throwing Palestinian adoslescent and beats him to death. Sentence: Anyone care to guess?


John

I will give credit where credit is due--Chris is very knowledgeable about the Middle East and excellent at finding quotes and statistics to back up his positions. Its unfortunate Chris uses his knowledge to support evil. I don't think everything Israel does is right, nor do I think everything the Palestinians do is wrong, but one thing I know is that homicide bombings of innocent civilians are nothing but evil. The two of you spent the last week ripping Israel for the bombing in Gaza, yet you defend/justify/rationalize homicide bombings. Do you see the inconsistency there? How can you argue that the killing of innocents is never justified when it is Israel that is doing the killing, then defend it when Palestinians are doing the killing? That's without even taking into account that Israel targets terrorists and militants, while the Palestinians target civilians.


If you support homicide bombings, you support terrorism.

"All I read was that the offer was to "consider" ending the bombings--not quite the same thing, by a long shot."


Quite. But a party interested in peace, or at least a cease fire, would try to exploit that balloon floated by the terrorists. If Israel was indeed after peace/cease fire, they would have suspended their attacks against Palestinians. They did not need to do it officially, just a silent time-out.


It has been done a million times before in similar situations in other conflicts, eg N. Ireland.


But, no, never happen. The Israeli administration was, in fact, worried, that the "threat" by Hamas to halt their attacks would materialize. (Bush has gotten some sort of promise that Israel will seek a political way out when the bombings stop.) If you need verification, just wait and see until we go through the cycle again and the terrorists once more float a cease fire balloon. Watch the Israelis open fire.


Read my lips : Ariel Sharon does not want peace. I would never, never, but never stop to beat you up, dear M, if I was a million times stronger than you and I was winning and no one intervened to stop me.

Cyrus,


How many times has Arafat promised to crack down on the homicide bombers? How many times has he failed to take any meaningful action? Every time.


The problem is that the terrorists' words no longer have any credibility. The only way Israel will ever believe them is if they actually stop. They have told too many lies already. If they are sincere, let them stop the homicide attacks.


It is ridiculous that the supporters of the terrorists only look at the time period commencing with an Israeli retaliation, completing ignoring the events that led up to the retaliation (i.e. the wave of homicide bombings from two weeks ago).

It is relatively easy (but very time-consuming) to look up stats and facts on the internet to support one's position.


I never said or implied that all Israeli actions = god and all Palestinian actions = all bad. I said that the routine homicide bombings are exceptionally evil and must therefore be stopped. I don't see anything wrong with condemning most strongly that which is the most evil.

'It is patently obvious to anyone who has read the newspapers on a daily basis for the last two years what has been going on. I am not relying on The Economist or anyone else, I can see for myself what the pattern is. '


you realize the american press is very slanted in what they present. take the nightly news for the worst case.


realize that how they frame the debate is in itself very much propaganda. look at the gun control debate for a case in point.


brad

'How many times has Arafat promised to crack down on the homicide bombers? How many times has he failed to take any meaningful action? Every time. '


its funny but i was talking (actually drinking beer but thats not the point) about arafat with someone and i pointed out that israel is very powerful and do you think they would let the palestinians have an effective leader? the guy just kind of realized he was just parroting something he heard on the news.


but my point is that arafat is really just an israeli shill whether he knows it or not. because if he wasnt (kinda like natural selection) he wouldve been gone a long time ago.


i mean, in order to get control, you must control both sides of the debate. the controlled opposition. (for example the NRA in this country is the controlled opposition. notice how gun control groups are contrasted with the NRA, which leaves out the main focus of self protection and constitutional issues and makes it an us-vs-them situation with NRA on one side and handgun control inc. on the other)


brad

"The two of you spent the last week ripping Israel for the bombing in Gaza, yet you defend/justify/rationalize homicide bombings."


It's a lie. Neither Cyrus nor I has ever tried to defend, justify or rationalize the homicide bombings. Just to make my point for the umpteenth time, all Palestinian terrorism, including all homicide bombings cannot be defended, justified or rationalized in any fashion. When I spoke of empirical circumstances where terrorism "worked," I was referred expressly to Irish urban terrorism in the 1920's and prestate Israeli terrorism. This obviously isn't the case with Palestine. Historical truths like these, however, do not address the moral question of whether terrorism can therefore justified. In all cases, IMO, it isn't.


I don't care if you disagree vehemently but have the courtesy to refrain from calling me a cheerleader for murderers, especially when I haven't heard a peep of protest from you about U.S tax dollars supporting Israeli state terrorism.

" ...it's funny but I was drinking beer about Arafat ... "


Excellent.