Israel a threat to world peace ?

gurramok · 04-11-2003 12:42am #1

Well according to a EU wide poll reported in thebbc , Israel is perceived as a worldwide threat to peace by most europeans.

I agree to a certain extent that this is the case, they are only nuclear power in Mid-East and their treatment of the palestinians is in the same league as what saddam hussein did to his own people in Iraq.

Israel embassy spokesman condemn the media for the poll results, guess the media report the truth alot

But Romano Prodi's response is beyond belief, comparing the poll results to anti-semitism views is outrageous and narrow minded.

Playing the holocaust card should not be allowed to excuse the behaviour of one nation towards another nation 60 years on.

Éomer of Rohan · 04-11-2003 11:28am

Israel has nuclear weapons and an extremist fundamentalist and racist government. I'd say they constitute a threat to regional if not world security, given that their region is central to the interests of much of the rest of the world - at the very least the other nations which have nuclear weapons.

swiss · 04-11-2003 12:10pm

"To the extent that this may indicate a deeper, more general prejudice against the Jewish world, our repugnance is even more radical," Mr Prodi said in a statement.

Perhaps Mr Prodi would be better suited trying to find out the reasons why Israel is considered such a threat to world peace, rather than dismiss anyone with such views as an anti-semetist.

I would also see Israel as a potential threat to world security, even though I see that threat as far from imminent. They have a record of belligerence against their Palestinian neighbours, as well as the muslim world in general (whether this is a response to aggression on the part of neighbouring muslim countries towards Israel is a semantic argument - the fact is that this belligerence exists).

Coupled with the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons and is led by right wing prime minister Ariel Sharon, whose war record is dubious at best, then I can see many instances in which the Israeli government might use these weapons to "protect" their own interests.

I don't have a problem with Jews or Judaism, but if I get handed a questionnaire which asks if I believe Israel is a threat to world security, I'll be looking for the "you betcha!" option.

Xterminator · 04-11-2003 12:16pm

I agree that Isreal is an danger to peace.

I know that they are living under threat of sucide bombings and other terrorist attacks, but i dont think by lowering themselves to the level of terrorists is the way to solve the problem

By lowering themselves i mean in particular the denial of due legal process to the people they assasinate because of their suspected activites. Further, the collateral damage missile and tank attacks on the homes/cars/workplaces of these targets shows Israel's lack of respect for life.

In addition the revenge taken on the homes and families of poeple connected with terrorist attacks, (eg the destruction of sucide bombers homes, and making homeless their relatives) re further actions which dont have an place under rule of law.

I personally belive Israels actions are counter productive and will spawn greater numbers of extremists, that will be willing to commit further atrocities, in the continuing spiral of violence.

X

shotamoose · 04-11-2003 12:21pm

Funnily enough, I generally view Jews who don't live in Israel as a lot less dangerous to world peace than those who do. Maybe I'm just a geographically specific anti-Semite?

Can you still be anti-Semitic if you only think some Jews are dangerous sometimes in some contexts? Apparently so. But I think the same about everyone else too.

I can't help wondering if Israel isn't actually promoting anti-Semitism by hysterically denouncing as such any criticism whatsoever of its actions AND by continuing to espouse a vision of Israel as a Jewish state notwithstanding the many, many non-Jews who live there.

04-11-2003 2:30pm

"But who cares about such polls?" he asked, saying that negative findings tended to get greater prominence than positive ones

he was certainly true abt that.

The Palestinian Authority was not included in the poll because the EU does not consider it a country.

not really the best poll in the world, since one of the reasons Israel could be a destabilising influence, is because of Palestine.

____________

their treatment of the palestinians is in the same league as what saddam hussein did to his own people in Iraq.

ok you believe Israel to be a threat to pace, but please don't associate them with a mass murderer. Thats taking things too far. Israel has never been to my knowledge brought to account for war crimes or crimes against humanity. Israel has not used chemical weapons against their own people. Nor has Israel proven to have torture camps. So your comment just shows that you're so pro-palestine that you are blind to Israel having any decent values. Basically, open your eyes.

they are only nuclear power in Mid-East

currently they are. But other nations are researching/building with that aim in mind. I don't see you calling them threats to peace. Technically any nation with nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons is threat to peace, since these weapons cannot be used defensively. So that includes, the US, Britain, France etc....

Israel embassy spokesman condemn the media for the poll results, guess the media report the truth alot

Of course they're going to condemn them. Every government would condemn any media that said similiar things abt them. Its not necessary a matter of the truth. Just what was said.

Do we know if any of the other nations listed have protested at all? or is israel the only one.....

But Romano Prodi's response is beyond belief, comparing the poll results to anti-semitism views is outrageous and narrow minded

Oh i agree. Anti-Semitism has been used too much. Besides Israel has gone beyond that stage of evolution. The past is dead. Let it lie there.

Playing the holocaust card should not be allowed to excuse the behaviour of one nation towards another nation 60 years on

Maybe not. but consider every nation out there always refers to some incident as a reason for their actions. israel is jumping on the bandwagon.

I would also see Israel as a potential threat to world security, even though I see that threat as far from imminent. They have a record of belligerence against their Palestinian neighbours, as well as the muslim world in general (whether this is a response to aggression on the part of neighbouring muslim countries towards Israel is a semantic argument - the fact is that this belligerence exists).

So the Coalitions invasion of Iraq was semantic. They viewed Iraq as being a threat, and invaded. Israel sees the past aggression of the Arab nations, and rightly knows that it has and never will have anything but enemies in the middle east. they responded to aggression with aggression, and have been screwed ever since.

Coupled with the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons and is led by right wing prime minister Ariel Sharon, whose war record is dubious at best, then I can see many instances in which the Israeli government might use these weapons to "protect" their own interests

Which is no less than any other nation out there. The US has said that they reserve the right to use Nuclear weapons should they or their interests feel threatened. Most nations have admitted the same.

I don't have a problem with Jews or Judaism, but if I get handed a questionnaire which asks if I believe Israel is a threat to world security, I'll be looking for the "you betcha!" option.

Oh, i'd say yes also. But i'd also include every nation capable of producing WMD's.

I know that they are living under threat of sucide bombings and other terrorist attacks, but i dont think by lowering themselves to the level of terrorists is the way to solve the problem

Very easy to say when we're not living it. Or have never experienced it. I'm basing my opinions on what i think not what i know . until you live in Israel for a few years, under the constant threat of bombings or ambushes, don't dismiss it so easily.

Further, the collateral damage missile and tank attacks on the homes/cars/workplaces of these targets shows Israel's lack of respect for life

it just shows how ineffective they are. They're making a mistake, but they can't see any other alternative.

Just for one second, stop being pro-palestine. How would you deal with a nation that is currently occupied and continues to attack your civilian population. Retreat is not an option, since that won't stop the violence. The only option is continued occupation. So how do you combat a force that moves and attacks from the crowds?

I'm not justifying it. I don't like it. But don't disparage them so much that you fail to recognise alot of the blame lies with the Palestinian Resistance groups.

In addition the revenge taken on the homes and families of poeple connected with terrorist attacks, (eg the destruction of sucide bombers homes, and making homeless their relatives) re further actions which dont have an place under rule of law.

Well since the majority of what happens in Israel & Palestine happens outside the law, why should this make a difference?

I personally belive Israels actions are counter productive and will spawn greater numbers of extremists, that will be willing to commit further atrocities, in the continuing spiral of violence.

Both sides are counter-productive. The blame lies at all the surrounding arab nations, the US and with Israel. Don't target Israel, when the blame lies with everyone.

I can't help wondering if Israel isn't actually promoting anti-Semitism by hysterically denouncing as such any criticism whatsoever of its actions AND by continuing to espouse a vision of Israel as a Jewish state notwithstanding the many, many non-Jews who live there

To be honest i don't know. The only comparison i can draw, is Ireland just after the republic was formed. A Catholic state, where other religions occupy. Grand, not as aggressive as Israel, but circumstances differ. Their religion is not an excuse.

--- on a personal note: I believe that Israel could become a threat to peace. But at the end when is the world at peace? Every nation out there is a threat. Hell, Ireland could be a threat, if we had secretly produced chemical weapons in quantity, and suddenly revealed the possession of it.

At the end of the day this poll is crap. A threat to peace? When has the world been stable at any time?

shotamoose · 04-11-2003 2:36pm

Originally posted by klaz

--- on a personal note: I believe that Israel could become a threat to peace. But at the end when is the world at peace? Every nation out there is a threat. Hell, Ireland could be a threat, if we had secretly produced chemical weapons in quantity, and suddenly revealed the possession of it.

At the end of the day this poll is crap. A threat to peace? When has the world been stable at any time?

Hardly the point, and (without knowing what your stance on the war was) would you have said that about Iraq? As in 'Yeah, maybe Saddam's a threat, but so what? Who isn't a threat, when you think about it?'. Surely if you evaluate that a country is a threat, you try to do something about it (usually in cooperation with others), as to let it simply grow would be a bad idea in itself and a bad example to others.

Geromino · 04-11-2003 2:43pm

Originally posted by swiss
Perhaps Mr Prodi would be better suited trying to find out the reasons why Israel is considered such a threat to world peace, rather than dismiss anyone with such views as an anti-semetist.

I think Mr Prodi knows full well where those attitudes lay.

I would also see Israel as a potential threat to world security, even though I see that threat as far from imminent. They have a record of belligerence against their Palestinian neighbours, as well as the muslim world in general (whether this is a response to aggression on the part of neighbouring muslim countries towards Israel is a semantic argument - the fact is that this belligerence exists).

And the PLO hijacking the Achille Laurel, the PLO assassinating Sedat, the PLO assassinating the Israeli Athletes in Munich, the PLO being kicked out of Jordon in 1952 and Lebenon in 1958 and the Arab states since the inception of Israel sworn to destroy "Zionism" and Judaism. The simple creation of a nation state from the Trans-Jordon. Also keep in mind that Israeli defense forces knocked out an Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981 that was poised to make nuclear material and nuclear weapons long before you even heard of the Gulf War. The Mossad also saved the life of Sedat in 1974 from the same PLO organization. And to call Israel a threat to peace is to ignore the history of how and why Isreal was created. It goes back to Europe and its general anti-Semetism that has been involved since the 15th century and was culminated by the Nazi regime of extermination of Jews and other less desirables.

Coupled with the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons and is led by right wing prime minister Ariel Sharon, whose war record is dubious at best, then I can see many instances in which the Israeli government might use these weapons to "protect" their own interests.

Would you prefer an Islaimic Fundamentalist state with nuclear weapons less dangerous than Israel or a nut case in Asia called Kim Il Jung less dangerous? With Islamic fundamentalist, not to be confused with traditional Islam, anyone who is not a Muslim is considered an infadel and are the evil of the world. As with Asia, Japan is at the center of the crosshairs of NK, not to mention China, Taiwan, Thailand, Australia, US, and other Pacific Rim countries.

I don't have a problem with Jews or Judaism, but if I get handed a questionnaire which asks if I believe Israel is a threat to world security, I'll be looking for the "you betcha!" option.

Depending on how the question is worded, one should be careful to make absolutes on a question with a situation that is very complex and there are no innocents in that particular battle.

04-11-2003 2:44pm

Surely if you evaluate that a country is a threat, you try to do something about it (usually in cooperation with others), as to let it simply grow would be a bad idea in itself and a bad example to others.

sure.... but Irael sees the arab nations as being threats to themselves, just as they see palestine as being a threat.

So they see a threat, and the EU poll has responded to that, and called them a threat to peace, because they're willing to defend themselves.

Hardly the point

Actually it was very much to the point. The issue is "Israel a threat to world Peace?". Every nation is a threat. And since we don't currently have world peace, the poll is irrevelent.

(without knowing what your stance on the war was) would you have said that about Iraq

My stance was that it was handled wrong. I didn't agree with the invasion, since i saw that as bad as if Britain invaded ireland for nothing. As for removing Saddam, what a great Idea, however i would have agreed had the UN backed it. They didn't, so i was against it.

shotamoose · 04-11-2003 2:47pm

Originally posted by klaz
Actually it was very much to the point. The issue is "Israel a threat to world Peace?". Every nation is a threat. And since we don't currently have world peace, the poll is irrevelent.

So you have no way of telling whether one nation is more of a threat than another. Or you do, but you just don't think it's important?

04-11-2003 2:54pm

well its important, but i don't think peoples opinions are that relevent especially in a poll thats not very specific. The article doesn't say much abt the poll in question..

In regards to other nations, i do think its important, but again, i don't see how it can be measured. I see the US as a threat to peace, but they're not necessarily going to be one. The prior posters seemed take the poll as fact.

bonkey · 04-11-2003 4:03pm

You know, I was going to reply to a number of points on this thread, but I've decided that its not worth the effort.

Only a couple of hours - and a handful of posts - in and this thread has already moved from discussing a poll carried out by the EU about the world in general to being the age old "you can't say anything about Israel without condemning Palestine, which in turn excuses Israel" post-fest, with a smattering of "Europe are anti-semitic and always have been" added in to the mix for good measure.

I'm not even going to bother asking people to get back on topic. You don't care about the topic. You don't care who the public perceive as a threat to world peace.

You all just want another platform to promote or condemn Palestine or Israel anywhere you see someone mention them, regardless of what they are discussing.

So knock yourselves out.

jc

p.s. I do find it amusing that after spending so long telling us how we Europeans just don't understand America, it is Geromino who is bringing up the "fact" of anti-Semitism in Europe. I'm guessing that the US scoring 53% is because of anti-Americanism as well, but the high scores for Iran, North Korea, etc. are all good perception on our part.

shotamoose · 04-11-2003 4:21pm

I thought the first post specifically referred to perceptions of Israel and the explanations for those perceptions, which is what a good proportion of the posts have been discussing.

Quit tarring us all with the same brush. Oh, and do we all get to post to threads explaining why we're not going to post to those threads, or is that just the preserve of moderatorss?

Hobbes · 04-11-2003 4:43pm

Originally posted by Geromino
...And to call Israel a threat to peace is to ignore the history of how and why Isreal was created....

History is amazing when you are so selective in what you pick.

The same thing goes on with both sides daily.

Oh no Isreal lives with Suicide bombers attacking!

Oh no Palistine lives like a third world country denied basic rights.

So who is at fault?

I agree PLO are no spring chickens, but please don't try to show that Israel is somehow the good guy.

Just remember who bombed the USS Liberty, left that out of your history lesson. Or threatend to blow up other countries oil wells, who said recently they would nuke Iran if they made thier power plants, yet had no problem lying to UN inspectors when they created thier own reactors to process weapons grade fuel?

The Saint · 04-11-2003 4:47pm

...And to call Israel a threat to peace is to ignore the history of how and why Isreal was created....

Not wanting to stray off topic but also Jewish terrorism, bus bombs, ethnic cleansing, expansionism, etc, etc.....

The Saint · 04-11-2003 4:55pm

I would agree that Israel is a threat to a percieved "world peace". They have a clandestime WMD programme and are not signatories to the non-proliferation treaty as Iran is. They occupy Gaza, the West Bank, the Golan Heights and have annexed the Sinai and periodiacally attack their neighbours (Lebanon, Syria) while threatening to attack Iran. No other country in the region or the world has done all of these things including Iran or North Korea. If this was any other country in the world the would have been regime change long ago. The thought of NK, Iran and even Saudi Arabia isnt terribly appealing either but it doesnt help when Israel and the US reject a call for a WMD free Middle East from other countries in the region.

Typedef · 04-11-2003 5:31pm

Originally posted by klaz
Thats taking things too far. Israel has never been to my knowledge brought to account for war crimes or crimes against humanity. Israel has not used chemical weapons against their own people. Nor has Israel proven to have torture camps. So your comment just shows that you're so pro-palestine that you are blind to Israel having any decent values. Basically, open your eyes.

Not true.

http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/2001/08/27/13489.html

Ariel Sharon may land in the dock now that Lebanese legal expert Shbili Al-Mallat has brought a war crime suit against him in Belgium, whose legislation stipulates, since 1993, liability of alien political activists suspected of war crimes, rights violations and genocide.

Not that facts, play a large part in pro-Israeli rhetoric. Apparently, all of Belgium would now be anti-Semetic, according Mr Prodi.

Hobbes · 04-11-2003 5:43pm

Belguim removed that law didn't they? So klaz would be correct?

mr_angry · 04-11-2003 8:01pm

The sad thing is that the Israelis have become the Nazis. They continue to occupy lands that don't belong to them (I'm not talking about the entire state of Israel, just the occupied palestinian territories), they randomly kill their own "citizens", and they blame all their problems on one section of their own society. It all seems so familiar...

Sharon has been accused of many, many war crimes, and Israel has rejected more UN resolutions against it than I can count. I don't think you can dismiss Israel as a threat to world peace by any logical reasoning. I think the poll is absolutely right. I also agree that America is a massive threat to world peace - they've proved that again and again - I don't know how anybody can deny it at this stage.

Some countries act responsibly with the power that they have, be that conventional or extraordinary. I believe Ireland, and most of the countries in the EU fall into this category. That is why they are not threats to world peace. However, Israel and other such states do not, and are therefore threats to world peace.

Finally, could you guys please cut out the 50 million line posts? I find myself interested in a thread, but then put off by some massive spiel from Geronimo or Klaz. Please stop.

Hobbes · 05-11-2003 8:46am

Another 50 million lines

I thought this news story was somewhat black comedy.

Israel destroys US-built wells
By Justin Huggler in Jerusalem

05 November 2003

The US has reportedly complained after the Israeli army destroyed wells built for civilians in Gaza by an American government aid agency.

Huge areas have been demolished by the Israelis in the Gaza Strip in recent weeks, including more than 150 homes.

The wells had just been dug by the United States Agency for International Development (USAid). A few months ago the agency announced a $20m (£12m) project to rebuild infrastructure including roads, electricity supply lines and sewers in the occupied territories.

The agency was reporting good progress. But its workers were dismayed when they turned up to finish the wells and found that their work had been destroyed. A source at the American embassy said that when USAid complained, the Israelis told them that they demolished the wells because Palestinian militants had been hiding in them.

That has been a regular claim from the Israeli military to justify demolishing houses in Gaza - but in recent weeks whole streets have been knocked down. Israel has also been accused of trying to move refugee camps away from the border with Egypt.

Spokesmen at the American embassy were careful not to criticise the Israeli army. But according to reports in the Israeli press yesterday, they were less diplomatic behind the scenes. The newspaper Ma'ariv reported that the US had threatened to stop all reconstruction work unless the Israeli army promised not to demolish anything built by the Americans.

Paul Patin, a spokesman for the embassy, denied that. He said: "We don't have any plans to leave." But the Israeli authorities are reportedly dismayed at the incident. Ma'ariv quoted unnamed political sources as calling it a "failure". Someone identified as a "high-ranking political official" said: "The Palestinian population is not Israel's enemy."

Although Gaza is on the coast, the overpopulated strip suffers severe shortages of clean water, and many drink salt water. Wells are of vital importance. The Israeli army's blunder came after the US State Department said that it would ask Congress to approve $2.2bn of military aid for Israel in 2005, $60m more than the allocation for 2004.

The increase is part of an agreement made in the 1990s to reduce economic assistance to Israel by $120m a year and simultaneously increase military aid by $60m a year.

But the US has since agreed an extra $9bn of loan guarantees over three years to bail out the Israeli economy, in serious trouble after three years of the intifada.

The costly military response, led by the Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, has severely damaged tourism and investment in Israel.

05-11-2003 2:52pm

Finally, could you guys please cut out the 50 million line posts? I find myself interested in a thread, but then put off by some massive spiel from Geronimo or Klaz. Please stop

Sorry abt the long posts, but i don't have the opportunity to spend all day on boards. I reply to what i feel is directed towards my posts, or what i disagree with. So basically until a mod tells me i can't post here, i'll continue... just fast scroll my posts if you don't want to read thru all my opinions/points.

The sad thing is that the Israelis have become the Nazis. They continue to occupy lands that don't belong to them (I'm not talking about the entire state of Israel, just the occupied palestinian territories), they randomly kill their own "citizens", and they blame all their problems on one section of their own society. It all seems so familiar...

Please tell me you're joking? Posters are aways making references to the nazi's. During the invasion of Iraq some posters compared the US to the Invasion of Poland. The comparison cannot be made in this instance, or most others. For a comparison to be made, could only apply if Israel had started concentration camps, and systematically killed a race. No matter what the pro-palestinians and others say, Israel is not in this category...

In regards to the occupation, sure they do. As do a number of other nations. The only issue is that Palestinianbs are still fighting/dying in those territories. Randomly kill their own civilians? Hardly. They attack palestinians, or are you going to tell me that arabs living in Israel are israeli's and as such are responsible for Israels actions. as for blaming on one section, sure.. But Nazi germany blamed multiple areas, just as ireland blames tax dodgers, and France blames immigrants. Every nation will point to a single catagory.

Some countries act responsibly with the power that they have, be that conventional or extraordinary. I believe Ireland, and most of the countries in the EU fall into this category. That is why they are not threats to world peace. However, Israel and other such states do not, and are therefore threats to world peace

i'm assuming you're calling Britain responsible also, despite their involvement in Iraq? Or France who sells weapons to African countries, or Russia, who occupied territories in Europe. As for the EU itself, the majority of its member states, has had some history that made it a threat. (seeing as people refer back 1000 years into Palestinian/Israeli history)

I would agree that Israel is a threat to a percieved "world peace". They have a clandestime WMD programme and are not signatories to the non-proliferation treaty as Iran is. They occupy Gaza, the West Bank, the Golan Heights and have annexed the Sinai and periodiacally attack their neighbours (Lebanon, Syria) while threatening to attack Iran. No other country in the region or the world has done all of these things including Iran or North Korea. If this was any other country in the world the would have been regime change long ago. The thought of NK, Iran and even Saudi Arabia isnt terribly appealing either but it doesnt help when Israel and the US reject a call for a WMD free Middle East from other countries in the region.

In the majority of wars that the US has been in, they have kept a pernament military presence in those countries. Other nations have forces outside of their domestic borders. Israel's occupation of many areas came about as a result of aggression by the areas currently occupied. Its only in this century that we frown on occupying territory that someone wins in a war. I'm not saying that Israel is innocent of aggression, but don't be so quick to disregard the original reasons for the occupations.

mr_angry · 06-11-2003 3:11pm

In regards to the occupation, sure they do. As do a number of other nations. The only issue is that Palestinianbs are still fighting/dying in those territories.

That doesn't necessarily make it acceptable though, does it? I admit, my original reference to the Israelis having "become the Nazis" was a wild exaggeration, but not wholly without a basis in fact. Forgive me for being sensationalist, but I believe it is worth highlighting the incredible injustices they are guilty of. They might not "randomly" attack their own citizens, but they aren't too worried if they cause some collateral damage, and obliterate a few streets worth of Palastinian civilians.

i'm assuming you're calling Britain responsible also, despite their involvement in Iraq? Or France who sells weapons to African countries

That's why I left it at "most EU countries". I don't feel either reference you made is an instance of a country acting responsibly, and I entirely condemn these particular actions. In fact, I feel the British government were more irresponsible than usual, by going to war clearly against the wishes of such a large percentage of their voting population. Democracy? Hardly.

However, back on topic, Israel do these things on such a regular basis, and without any kind of restraint on their government by the people of Israel. I would have thought that more people in Israel had a conscience, but either they dont, or the Israeli media is guilty of mis-reporting the events. Lets face it - Fox news is virtually a propaganda machine at this stage. Its quite likely that Israel has a similar equivilant.

06-11-2003 3:20pm

That doesn't necessarily make it acceptable though, does it? I admit, my original reference to the Israelis having "become the Nazis" was a wild exaggeration, but not wholly without a basis in fact. Forgive me for being sensationalist, but I believe it is worth highlighting the incredible injustices they are guilty of. They might not "randomly" attack their own citizens, but they aren't too worried if they cause some collateral damage, and obliterate a few streets worth of Palastinian civilians.

No its not acceptable. But don't make such broad and offensive statements. For me, Supporters of Palestine are too quick to call Israel the Devil, without opening their eyes to Palestine.

And i agree, they don't seem to be too concerned abt harming civilians in the streets, but then that is the wr that has evolved in Palestine. The Terrorist/freedom fighters are just as bad.

Israel do these things on such a regular basis, and without any kind of restraint on their government by the people of Israel. I would have thought that more people in Israel had a conscience, but either they dont, or the Israeli media is guilty of mis-reporting the events. Lets face it - Fox news is virtually a propaganda machine at this stage. Its quite likely that Israel has a similar equivilant.

The Irish governemt does so much without the support of the Irish people, and we're not callin for their arrests. Odd case i know, but its a aspect. Basically what the israeli Government is doing is wrong, and i agree with you on that, but then so too are the Palestine government/groups. You need to look at both sides, before you blame one side for the whole. It takes two to tango.

I don't see Palestinian civilians crying out for the end of their leaders who constantly call for revenge do you?

sovtek · 07-11-2003 5:06pm

Originally posted by klaz
And i agree, they don't seem to be too concerned abt harming civilians in the streets, but then that is the wr that has evolved in Palestine. The Terrorist/freedom fighters are just as bad.

Actually the terrorists more often attack soldiers, more so than they do civilians...you just don't hear about it as much.
Secondly I don't agree with attacking civilians at all...but when you look at history...the invader is the one who starts this kind of activity.
Does that make it right..no but then when a group of humans are subjected to certain circumstances they are going to react in, at least, a few predictable ways. I'm not saying that suicide bombings and attacks on civilians aren't atrocious and wrong....just when an invader doesn't allow for a political option, is far more advanced and heavily armed, is backed by the worlds superpower...it's just what humans do.

I don't see Palestinian civilians crying out for the end of their leaders who constantly call for revenge do you?

When their democratically elected leader and those groups are all that's between them and Isreali bulldozers and American supplied F-16's...not likely.

Geromino · 08-11-2003 4:23pm

Originally posted by Hobbes
History is amazing when you are so selective in what you pick.[

Funny, I think you too, Hobbes. Let me see, now who is at fault here?

The same thing goes on with both sides daily.

Oh no Isreal lives with Suicide bombers attacking!

Oh no Palistine lives like a third world country denied basic rights.

So who is at fault?

I agree PLO are no spring chickens, but please don't try to show that Israel is somehow the good guy.[/N]

The question in heitory is never "who is at fault." The question in history is always "why something happened?" and to explain the reasoning of the specific events involved. When you start taking about who is at fault in history, you then go down the slipery path of revisionism. Now it is acceptable to blame "Israel" and to make history show it is Israels fault. When political attitudes change and say it was Palestine, then the history books will be rewritten. Then when it is someone else's fault, then the history books will be rewritten. And the slippery path remains and history professors will lose the actual reality of why it happened.

Now, let us look at the Palestinians, especially Arafat. Now keep in mind he and his organization have been kicked out of Jordon in 1952, Lebenon in 1958, assassinated Sedat, assassinated Israeli athletes, the Achille Laurel incident and executed a Jewish American in a wheelchair, and the list goes on. Now, let us look at Palestinians in general. Name one place in which they are not treated as equals in the Middle East? Let me see here, let us take a look at Saudi Arabia? No! How about Jordon? No. How about Egypt? No. How about Syria? No. How about Tunisia? No. How about Lebenon? No. How about Yemen? If you know the history and culture of each of these countries, you will recognize that Palestinians are treated like Gypsies of Europe. They are transplanted in each of those countries, much like the Jews have been

Just remember who bombed the USS Liberty, left that out of your history lesson. Or threatend to blow up other countries oil wells, who said recently they would nuke Iran if they made thier power plants, yet had no problem lying to UN inspectors when they created thier own reactors to process weapons grade fuel?

The whole incident with the USS Liberty is contreversial, not because Israel attacked it, but because of the command decisions made by the 6th Fleet Commander, the ships captain, and the entire incident of the 6th Day war. To simply put it on Isael is to ignore several key points in both the US investigations (ten in all) and Isreals investigations (three in all). And these investigations have gone over a long period of time and spanning several adminastrations. A good historical analysis is written by Dr. John Borne called, "The USS LIBERTY, Dissenting History vs. Official History" or you can go on his web site.

gurramok · 09-11-2003 1:48am

Geronimo, I started this thread not as a history lesson but what is happening in present day.:)

What is your view on Israel as a threat to world peace in 2003 ?

How would you rank the state, if at all ?

P.S.- talking about the state, not its people, some of whom should not be labelled in a bad light.

Geromino · 09-11-2003 5:25am

Originally posted by gurramok
Geronimo, I started this thread not as a history lesson but what is happening in present day.:)

What is your view on Israel as a threat to world peace in 2003 ?

How would you rank the state, if at all ?

P.S.- talking about the state, not its people, some of whom should not be labelled in a bad light.

First, to ignore history between the Palestinians and to some extent the surrounding Arab states with the creation of Israel/Judiasm/Zionism is to ignore the conflict altogether. You cannot seperate the two. If you ignore the history, then anyone can interpret the event or events in any manner suited to their needs, political idealogy or historical perspective.

Second, to answer your specific question, it is hard to say. There are some decisions in which I disagree with Israel and there are some decisions which I agree. And I have specifically not identified those events either way. However, without more specific parameters on how Israel is a threat to world peace, I cannot make an accurate or determined decision.

Third, when you are talking about Israel you are talking about its people too since the PM is elected, for better or worse. The same goes for my country (which was listed as second in that survey you mentioned) and other democratic counties.

mr_angry · 09-11-2003 2:34pm

Allow me to try and put these "parameters" on the question for you Geronimo:

Do you think Israel (as a state) acts responsibly given their military and political prowess, and considering their geographical position and idealogical stance, as compared with their own citizens, and their geographical neighbours?

As for the Palastinians being like the "gypsies of Europe" - I have two Romanian gypsy families living on my street. I don't treat them as second class citizens, I don't try to bulldoze their houses, and I haven't yet tried to build a big wall to keep myself "secure".

Then again, they haven't suicide-bombed my cat, but at least we can seem to live in peace! I think Israel has to accept some (not all) responsibility for the situation in the middle east.

The Terrorist/freedom fighters are just as bad.

I appreciate that, but that doesn't mean the Isrealis should stoop to the same level. If you consider "terrorist/freedom fighters" to be on the same level as the Israeli state, then I feel you have to concede that Israel is a threat to world peace.

10-11-2003 10:07am

I appreciate that, but that doesn't mean the Isrealis should stoop to the same level. If you consider "terrorist/freedom fighters" to be on the same level as the Israeli state, then I feel you have to concede that Israel is a threat to world peace

I'm not going to say that what Israel does is acceptable, but can someone tell me if there is any other nation out there at the moment that is living under the same conditions, and doing any better? I mean everyone is saying how Israel could be handling this so much better, and yet, i have yet to see another nation do any better. Israel is responding to terrorism, by fighting on their own level. The US Invades, and occupies. What other nations have done any better?

Actually the terrorists more often attack soldiers, more so than they do civilians...you just don't hear about it as much

perhaps so, but do they really have to use weapons that have such spread damage, that anyone in the immediate area is at risk. Israel is no better in the use of rockets, though.

Secondly I don't agree with attacking civilians at all...but when you look at history...the invader is the one who starts this kind of activity.

Not always true. And as far as i know, it was Palestinian groups bombing in Israel that started this bloodbath. But i could be wrong.

Does that make it right..no but then when a group of humans are subjected to certain circumstances they are going to react in, at least, a few predictable ways. I'm not saying that suicide bombings and attacks on civilians aren't atrocious and wrong....just when an invader doesn't allow for a political option, is far more advanced and heavily armed, is backed by the worlds superpower...it's just what humans do.

No its what terrorists do. Humans work for a better option. The only option Palestinians are working for is death. Ninety years ago it would have been the only option, however, world organisation have enough power to force peace, if both sides are willing. At the momnent neither side is.

Hobbes · 10-11-2003 3:10pm

Originally posted by klaz
I'm not going to say that what Israel does is acceptable, but can someone tell me if there is any other nation out there at the moment that is living under the same conditions, and doing any better?

Which? Israel conditions or Palistine conditions?

Ireland/Northern Ireland/England a few years back. Granted there weren't suicide bombings but we certainly did have our fair share of terrorism on both sides as well as state sanctioned terrorism.

and yet, i have yet to see another nation do any better.

Your comment doesn't make any sense? First you cite that there is no other country with the problem, then they are not doing any better?

If you mean suggestions to solve the problem. Well if a certain country didn't veto every suggestion the fighting may of stopped long ago. Like for example putting UN Peacekeepers into Palistine.

Israel is responding to terrorism, by fighting on their own level. The US Invades, and occupies. What other nations have done any better?

How are thier actions better? If anything I find them extremly wrong. How is invading a country a good thing?

No its what terrorists do. Humans work for a better option. The only option Palestinians are working for is death.

Gah! It is this sort of argument that I hate. Terrorists != Palistinians. Likewise you can't blame the crap that Israel or the US does on it's population. Granted there are some that agree with it, but it doesn't mean they all do.

You are also equating palistinians to less then human. Which I find offensive.

At the momnent neither side is.

Erm, did you forget the recent ceasefire were they did actually have the Terrorist groups form a ceasefire, even for a while after having palistine rocket attacked and people rounded up against the letter of the ceasefire.

sovtek · 10-11-2003 3:45pm

Originally posted by klaz
No its what terrorists do. Humans work for a better option.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. It's what SOME humans do. Some humans will also suck up to invaders and gain more power. Some will look for a diplomatic solution and some will fight to the death to resist occupation. Some will just go about their lives no matter what happens as best they can.
I wonder what your feelings on Nelson Mandela are as regard his humanity or lack there of (based on your stated belief of what humans do).

Israel a threat to world peace ?

Comments