Tophat665

OK, this is just a thought:
It seems to me that the only way that Israel and the Palestinians can ever come to a peace is if first the Israelis stop calling it terrorism and declare war upon.... Well, therein lies the problem. It would take a good international lawyer to phrase this properly, but a list of armed groups intent upon 1) the expulsion of Israelis from the occupied territories through violent means and/or 2) the destruction of the state of Israel through, including but not limited to Hamas, al-Aqsa, Fatah, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad.

Yes, these people are terrorists, fine. That is the fashionable way to look at it, and it is an accurate description of their method, but I wonder if, in this case, that description might not have outlived its utility, and now serve only to obscure other avenues by which one might reach a peace.

Do not misunderstand me! I am not advocating negotiation. Not yet. Maybe not for a very long time. Negotiation has been tried. For it, Yitzak Rabin sleeps in the earth, slaughtered by his own countryman. Shimon Perez is not willing to go that far out on a limb, or, in any case, will never be allowed to. Ariel Sharon is just making the occasional conciliatory noise so that it remains political poison for the US to back off even slightly. No leader on either side has the support of his people to do what it takes to make it work. It has failed.

So, other than terrorists, what are these people? Well, they are the partisans of a country that no longer wants them. They are soldiers, in one sense (but not in many others, which becomes important later) in an assymetrical war, an urban guerrilla war of attrition against an enemy that has proven it's ability to take on any combination of any or all of the militaries of it's neighbors, and not merely win, but win resoundingly.

So the Israelis assassinated Yassim the terrorist guru, and the world is having a snit. Well, Yassim was an Israeli citizen. Had he not been tried and conviceted for treason? No? If not, well, they could have tried and convicted him in absentia, and then this would have been an execution. Messy, but arguably legal. So Traitor is more useful than terrorist for Yassim. But if Israel is at war with Hamas, well, then they just took out one of the generals. These things happen in war, particularly if it is done right. Yassim the soldier would have been easier to kill with fewer repercussions. Not saying that the Palestinians would not have screamed bloody murder, but I am saying that, if it's a war, what does it matter?

Also, if Israel declares war, well, all the groups I listed are composed exclusively (with the possible exception of some of Hezbollah units) of unlawful comabants. I haven't read the entire Geneva convention, but I went over the Article on POWs last night, and these guys don't qualify. They can be shot on sight or locked up indefinitely. The UN gets indignant, it's, "Hey, we're fighting a war here, for our survival, against people who have no use for civilized rules. We're doing what we can, but we will have to break some rules ourselves to win."

If Israel has a war against these Islamists, all of a sudden, they aren't negotiating with terrorists; they're (eventually) discussing the terms of surrender with the enemy they are sure they can beat.

Now, I really don't want to get into an argument, but it seems to me that there has got to be some lateral thinking about this to break the deadlock. What do you think about this one? Any other interesting ideas about how to get this moving that haven't been tried?

(Edited for typos)

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

djtestudo

The problem would be that at least Syria and Jorden, if not Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc. would likely come to the aid of the Palastinians and go to war against Israel.

Then you start interfearing with the already-fragile US relations with those nations, and bad things begin to happen.

The only reason Israel hasn't already tried this is probably because the US told them that we'd abandon them if they tried it.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Tophat665

They have to know that would be an empty threat. Anything that sanctions Israel gets shot down in the senate - that seems to be the pattern.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

ChrisJericho

Yes that would clear up some of the legal questions if Israel declared war. However, I think there would be a psychological effect on its citizens. Instead of just worrying about whether they will die on the morning bus, they would have to be ready for another massive attack from the surrounding Arab countries.

__________________
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows us that faith proves nothing." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Tophat665

Strikes me that Israel is really at their best when confronted by those kind of odds.

I also think that, properly handled (of course, this contradicts my original argument: there is no one available who could handle it properly) I don't think that it would necessarily draw an attack from the surrounding states. I think Israel needs to make it clear that a precondition to their leaving the occupied territories is the military defeat of the guerilla/terrorist groups, and if they were properly solicitous of the Palestinian population outside these groups, maybe, just maybe, this could be framed to keep the surrounding states out of it. I think if Syria sees it as a way to regain the Golan, maybe they just sit back and let it happen. Egypt knows if they get into it they do lose all US aid. Hard to tell which way Jordan jumps, but Abdullah has to take into account that, if he gets into it and loses, he may lose much more than the West Bank. Finally, I think it's entirely possible that Qaddafi might try to raise his standing by actually being Johnny on the spot with some diplomacy. (Yep, I buy it. I think he's feeling his mortality, and really trying to turn his image around and leave a positive legacy. If he can take credit for a peace in the Levant, he will die a happy man.)

Finally, If Israel were to declare war, it would thin the population of crazies in Iraq as they went to fight Israel. In effect, it would force al Qaeda to open a new front. Given that we are in Iraq, and have created another front in the "War on Terra", I think it may be possible to add to it and begin to get the fanatics to over exetned themselves. The trick is to do that without overextending ourselves, and the trick to that is getting other countries to help. Israel might be a good place to start.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

Dragonlich

Can one actually declare war on a subgroup of people in a certain country?

If the Palestinians have their own state, Israel could justifiably blame the Palestinian government for any and all hostile actions against Israelis by Palestinian citizens - that'd be an act of war, after all. However, as long as the Palestinians are technically Israelis, I don't see how we can find a legal framework that would allow it.

IF we do find a way of (legally) declaring war on terrorists, it'd solve a lot of legal and moral problems for Israel, but it wouldn't solve the underlying problem, which is that Israel would still be killing poor, innocent, friendly and very Islamic Palestinians (as seen from their side). Israel's opponents wouldn't really care about the technicalities, because they're convinced Israel is evil, which makes everything she does evil, regardless of legal status.

Tophat665

Only one way to find out.

The workaround here is for Israel to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state, then give it some time to get it's act together, with the stated understanding that, when that time is up, if they can't or won't control their terrorists, then they are waging an undeclared war (which it seems to me they are), and Israel could then declare war on them.

The problem is not so much that Israel can't do what needs to be done to fix the problem, as it is that they won't do it without at least some diplomatic cover. Right now, the EU sides with the Palestinians, mostly, IMO to counterweight the US siding with the Israelis. In a declared war, I think that would change. Couple more al-Qaeda bombings in Europe would accelerate that.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

ChrisJericho

Haha nice.

__________________
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows us that faith proves nothing." - Friedrich Nietzsche

OFKU0

The thought about Israel losing American support is crucial if not suicidal and only compounded if they attack a people who don't even have a country.

The world would turn away in disgust. Face it . We love the underdog, the victim. Now we would have a different type of victim.

And the Senate? I think that no matter how much someone is or can ardently support the pro-Israeli cause, when push comes to shove, even those in the Senate have to answer to someone. A ride to the Senate doesn't come without strings attached and if popular opinion doesn't side with whom they support, in this case the Israeli's, the ride could get bumpy.

As for a solution, a world body has to tell both sides where the boundaries are. If they don't like it, they stand a chance of losing everything. Both sides.

Imagine the Palestinian's never to have a country. The gypsies of the world. The scum of the earth. Or the Israeli's without a country. It was a gift from the world. Celebrated. You don't play by the world body rules, your statehood will be revoked. How then would we tell either side apart? Would we even give a shit?

But it will never happen.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

Mephisto2

Does the word "Vietnam" mean anything to anyone?

Also, Israel can't declare war on the Palestinians, as they deny them the right of statehood.

Mr Mephisto

Rangsk

People have to realize something. Israel was founded by the Jewish survivors of WWII. These people had to be subborn in order to survive. Israel was founded with a crucial thought - "never again!" Never will the Jewish people not have a place to go while being persecuted. Jews will always have a safe harbor when no one else will take them. Maybe people don't realize just how small Israel is... and some map-makers draw it even smaller, due to "disputed" areas. Are the people of the world so insensitive as to not allow the Jews even this much?

The Palestinians are just the next people to threaten the Jewish way of life, and when Israel says "never again," they mean it! I am a Jew myself, but I am also a reasonable person. Having said that, I think that Israel is justified to defend itself, even if the enemy does not have the organization into a country that "normal" enemies of the past had.

Why some people vehemently side with the Palestinians will always be beyond me, but I still respect them and what they have to say. However, after reading all of their arguments, I have yet to see an argument which could possibly stand a chance of convincing Israel to, after only 50-odd years, abandon their pledge for eternal survival.

__________________
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose." -- Douglas Adams

OFKU0

I think the biggest problem regarding the Israeli/Palestinian dilemma is that people do takes sides rather than trying to understand both sides of the equation equally.

And more often than not, those who so vehemently support their side are often blinded by subjective rhetoric which in a lot of cases can be reduced to propogandist nonsense.

Unfortunately those who take that stance never really see the forest for the trees, and will continue argueing points no matter how misguided or just plain false their version of the so-called facts are.

But then again, people will believe what the want too believe. The sad part is that alot of people who have chosen one side over the other have done so because they have been convinced by the aforementioned subjective rhetoric which unfortunately has become the norm.

I think that a large part of the blame lies squarely on the media for spinning the truth, that is if the spin was true or even somewhat factual in the first place.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

Arc101

It is also true that Israel is threating and destroying the Palestinian way of life, and as such they are justified in defending themselves. I personally belive that both leaders do not want peace, and both need to be replaced.

nate_dawg

but

was there any official declaration of war? I know that the US never formally declared war, but what about the koreas?

Tman144

One thing I still don't understand is why the Palestinians use terrorism against Israel. Guerilla/terror campaigns are only sucessful against invading powers. You can't convince Israel to withdraw from it's own country. For example, you may convince America to withdraw from Iraq if you constantly have terror attacks against Americans in Iraq, but you aren't gong to convince them to withdraw from Texas.
Also, haven't the Arabs tried to attack Israel more than once? And each time Israel kicked their butts, even occupying the entire Sinai Peninsula at one point.

__________________
"Don't touch my belt, you Jesus freak!" -Mr. Gruff the Atheist Goat

Mojo_PeiPei

Gaza and West Bank are not territories which Israel was given in 49' nor have they ever been annexed, so technically Israel is an invading occuppying force.

Israel has mopped the floor with the Arabs 4 times in the last 50 years, thats the reason they are in Gaza and the West Bank.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Sun Tzu

I don't want to put words in your mouth and Im just trying to make sure I'm interpreting what your stating:

I understand your thoughts on the reasons why Jewish people should have a homeland; but are you stating indirectly the most founded reason why they (Israeli political descion makers) are in the right is because of the reality that they have a superior military. In the theme of the one with the biggest guns is the one who is truly right; survival of the fittest?

The reason I've brought this up is how you've started your post. "Israel was founded by WWII survivers." I'm not disageeing with that statement; infact I've seen some Israeli supporters sway from that view, because of its migratory suggestion. As I understand a major part of the founding was done by immigrating Zionists to be specific. These immigrants were entering the "Holy Land" with a population of 757,182. 11% of which were Jews already living there. I'm curious in what your views of the other 89% of people that were living there are.

Without agreeing or disagreeing with the points I read you stating that contribute to you being puzzled on some that disagree with certain policies of Israel (or "siding with the Palestinians" as you put it) are that the Israeli governement is justified in its past and present actions because:

1. The very foundation is land where something such as the Holocaust would never be tolerated to happen again to the Jewish people. (and hopefully anyone else. . .)

2. Jews can have a safe haven when no one else will take them.

3. Its only a small piece of land.

4. The "enemy" has not been recognized by the United Nations as having a state, only alloted areas.

5. Israel has only been around for 50 years; the passion for enternal survival in what sounds as a world against Jews is too strong to be questioned in such amount of time.



Did I interpret your post right?

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking