Posted on 05/07/2024 9:12:37 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
American colleges seem to be on fire with the anti-Israeli and pro-Hamas demonstrations turning aggressive and violent. The students involved in these demonstrations seem stalwart in their beliefs, insisting that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza as it replies to the Oct. 7 invasion.
What many of these students lack, if not sincerity, is a good dose of history. Particularly, Israeli efforts to attempt to make a lasting peace with the Palestinians.
However, before that can even be addressed, the obvious must be stated: On Oct. 7, 2023, Israel’s border fence was breeched by Hamas terrorists. A bloodbath ensued in which upwards of 1,200 Israelis were brutally killed, and 240 were taken hostage, including Americans. Israel was certainly not the aggressor — it was the victim. Enough said?
Israel has sincerely reached out it’s hand for peace many times, only to have it slapped away by Palestinian representatives.
Consider the Camp David Accords that followed the 1973 Yom Kippur War that were brokered in 1978 by then President Jimmy Carter. In it, Egypt and Israel agreed to put away the sword and not solve their differences with military action. Moreover, Israel agreed to negotiate the return of the Sinai Peninsula. Following the conflict the U.N. adopted Resolution 242 which called on Arab countries to “live in peace within … secure boundaries” and a prompting to recognize Israel as a legitimate state in the region.
Surprisingly, as the first Intifada exploded, PLO leader Yassir Arafat made what was to some, a shocking announcement — the PLO would accept “the existence of Israel as a state in the region.” As a “bonus” the PLO would refrain from all forms of “terrorism.”
This move opened the door for more productive and direct negotiations with the Palestinians — it was a hopeful sign that there would be movement and, finally, a peace outcome that all could agree on. Unfortunately, it bore little fruit as more details were exchanged and no real agreement solidified; the PLO and the Palestinians simply ignored or rejected robust offers from the Israeli side.
Then, in 2008, Israel, practically speaking, just about “gave away the store.” The Prime Minister at that time, Ehud Olmert, decided it was time to get some kind of peace talks going with the Palestinians. Those talks were held in Annapolis, Maryland. Oddly, Hamas supported the talks and was at least willing to listen. They even stated that they would give full recognition to Israel should an acceptable agreement be reached.
The offer proposed by Olmert was quite generous: the Palestinians would get approximately 5.8% of Israeli land in exchange for 6.3% of the West Bank.
Additionally, other concessions would be worked out should this first offer go forward.
The PA representative, Mahmoud Abbas, did not sign the agreement, making vague excuses that he needed “more details.” The fact seems to be that he never said “no” to the offer and was motivated more by Olmert’s political troubles, namely, his convictions on bribery — would his replacement rescind the agreement? Many, even today, believe that Abbas was secretly “on board” with the agreement.
In any event, had the PA and Hamas moved forward on the offer, the door would have swung wide open for further and more far-reaching negotiations, and the events of Oct. 7 might have never happened.
In 2009, Netanyahu offered something similar, but insisted on all areas under Palestinian control to be de-militarized. Obviously, this was a move to protect Israel from terrorist attacks. Clearly, an armed Palestinian state could pose an existential threat to the Israeli population. We need not meditate long on this as the events of the past months have clearly demonstrated its wisdom.
So, to all the American college students who are screaming about Israel’s action in Gaza, my plea goes out to them to put down the bullhorn and placards and spend some time looking honestly at Israel and her agreeable actions toward the Palestinians.
Surely, there is no one in Israel, except maybe fringe elements, who want to see the women and children in Gaza killed or suffer from lack of food and housing. But when you have an enemy that hides behind women’s skirts, in tunnels — and perhaps most egregiously — in hospitals, your military choices are few.
History does not necessarily go in a circle — it goes in a line toward new situations and resolutions.
Hopefully, the events in Gaza will have a resolution that will surprise us all — a lasting peace for all and a time to rebuild.
Hamas doesn’t want peace. It wants a final solution.
The Hamas protestors are abominably evil; the paid protestors are disgraceful mercenaries; the student protestors are useful idiots of Satan.
Most these protesters know nothing about the middle east
I saw an IDF tank run over a big GAZA sign this morning, felt good.
I disagree with the premise. The ‘students’ involved aren’t uninformed or ignorant of history. Many have declared their opposition to ‘colonialism, white supremacy, capitalism, America in particular, and Western values in general. It’s not that they don’t know about the history of Israel, they deem history and facts irrelevant to their goals.
“What many of these students lack, if not sincerity, is a good dose of history.”
Marxism: CT failed, Try CRT. CRT failed, back to CT.
See my #6
The 75 year long war over possession over the part of former Ottoman Syria called “Palestine” remains unresolved, and neither party to the conflict has surrendered.
This article is a long complaint that the Arab inhabitants of this region persist in their claims to some or all of the territory which, after the defeat of Turkey in WW I came under the possession of the British Empire. These Arab inhabitants have not agreed to the jurisdiction of outside parties (just as no unconquered nation should ever do).
I presume the United States would not consent to a UN directive to return the Mexican Cession, for example, and would properly answer “And who’s gonna make me?”
There is therefore no solution to this long war that does not involve victory for one or the other side. The United States should have learned from Vietnam, Iraq twice and Afghanistan that declaring victory and going home isn’t the same as winning.
Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians have that option, since both of them ARE home. Unless they are able to become disposed (at the same time) to agreement, victory by conquest for one or the other party is the most likely outcome.
They didn’t miss anything. This article makes the mistake of taking their rhetoric at face value. Including calling them “protesters”.
CORRECT
HAMAS is the liar.
RE: There is therefore no solution to this long war that does not involve victory for one or the other side.
And the author’s complaint is a valid one. There NEED NOT be war had the Arab leaders in Palestinia accepted negotiation terms which the Israelis were amenable to.
Since one side REFUSES reasonable negotiations and compromises, then you’re right, there is no choice but for one side to win decisively.
But still the BLAME cannot be laid on Israel.
RE: Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians have that option, since both of them ARE home.
Let’s remind ourselves that ARE already Palestinian Arabs who live in that part we call Israel who have EVERY RIGHTs that the Jews in Israel have including representation in Parliament. THIS IS HOME.
Israel would be willing for the other Palestinians ( those not living in the place we call Israel) to have their home too if they reciprocate that willingness and allow Israel the right to call where they live Home too.
So what?
"Blame" in war is meaningless. Winning absolves blame, losing negates blame.
It is a feminized Western contrivance.
Right, of course, and trees that grow Snickers bars and water fountains that gave bourbon would be nice, too.
Israel would be willing...to defeat their enemies without combat is what you are saying. Who wouldn't?
Israel's enemies so far have not conceded the main issue. Perhaps someday they will.
What you are proposing is that Israel's enemies accept Israel's peace offer - but they don't and they won't.
The issue becomes, "what then?"
This goes back to Islamic Syria or 1000 yrs predating the Ottoman empire. It covers more than the current geographical boundaries of Israel.
It’s too inconvenient to include the pals warring with other arabs for 1600yrs prior to Israel’s existence.
The protesters also miss soap, water, and grey matter.
The faux academics are focused on the oppressor/oppressed narrative and historic, sometimes ancient perceived (not necessarily real or mutual) injustices. They don’t want progress. They want regression. They want to redress past injustices, real or imagined, with future injustice.
What the college kids haven’t figured out yet is that their rabid hatred for Israel gives Hamas hope and incentive to continue to fight, which will just serve to extend the war, increasing the loss of life, especially on the Palestinian side. They’re industriously paving the road to hell for those whose welfare they’re pretending to champion with their misguided intentions. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was right; stupidity does much more harm than deliberate malice.
RE: Israel would be willing...to defeat their enemies without combat is what you are saying.
No, that is NOT what I’m saying. Israel is willing to live and let live with her enemies and perhaps make them friends ( see Jordan and Egypt for example).
They do not want war. I know because I’ve spoken and lived and worked with enough Jews to know their sentiment.
Defeating their enemies in combat is what they will do if they are given little choice.
RE: The protesters also miss soap, water, and grey matter
So much for superior IQ.
These Ivy Leaguers are supposed to be the cream of our IQ crop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.