Replies

How do you suggest we fight the terrorist bastards?

Actually yours is the first response that merited an answer. This is a conflict about 2,000 years in the making and stopping will not happen over night.

Look at the history of the region. During the Crusades (and they are still prominent in the Islamic mindset) the Arabs (known as Saracen and Turkomen) lost many of the engagements in the 300 years the European Knights occupied that area. But they were on their home turf and had long memories. They had no place else to go and kept fighting (and got better at it), while the West eventually lost interest and lost key battles.

In Biblical times Palestine encompassed both Jew and (pre-Islamic) Arab. How then to reconcile in the modern context the establishment of a homeland that is Home exclusively to one and not the other?

Number one you must face the fact that you must either a) wipe out the Palestinians utterly, or b) learn to live with them.

The rest of the posters of this thread would tend to agree with option a), but before that happened, I am certain the rest of the non-Jewish population of the USA would see that it is morally repulsive to support a country engaging in genocide and yank US support from Israel: cash, military material and intelligence, leaving Israel alone to face a whole lot of pissed off Arabs who, with Clinton and the Chinese PRC's help, may soon have nuclear, biological or chemical tips for their Scuds. And judging by the events in 1990 - 1991, I'd say Israel is in Scud range.

That is the very direction Sharon is taking Israel now. Your man is dead-set for war and I want no part of someone else's war. (Conversely, I volunteered for every chance to go into harm's way while I was active -- but that was for the US of A).

The Palestinians have hinted at what is needed to get Israel peace: they want their land back. Or, to be practical, a substantial chunk of their land back. As long as it is denied them, they will have nothing better to do than to attack. By keeping them in extremis you guarantee continual warfare.

Sharon is thinking in revanchist terms, much like the French did in 1918, and wanted to humiliate and 'bleed Germany white.' What that bred was a population thisting for revenge. A population willing to listen to the rantings of the extreme Socialist factions (Communist and National Socialist) rather than just getting on with their daily lives.

Jenin, even if it turns out to be a myth, has now taken on the rallying cry akin to 'Remember the Alamo!' 'Remember the Maine!', 'Lusitania,' or 'Pearl Harbor.' We can only hope that the damage done is not irreparable.

Second, you must have justice. If you close ranks behind murderers in your midst, you aide and abet their crimes against humanity. You must allow the truth to be revealed, and, should guilt be established, you must punish the guilty. If indeed an atrocity has been committed, we have already established precedent by trying Nazis in Nuremburg, Vopos (East German border guards who shot to kill) after the Wall came down, now and Rwandan and Yugoslav killers are on trial. Sharon might well be a candidate for going on the dock.

Yes, I know your response already: 'but these are murderous terrorists!' Yes, and prior to 1948 Palestine was under British mandate and that mandate was to bring the country up to self-governance speed -- not to pass it off to a third party who had been absent for some 2,000 years. From the Palestinian / Arab perspective, the Jews are interlopters who used terror tactics until they actually acquired sufficient arms and equipment to become an actual army. Then in 1948 they declared Statehood. Mere force of arms is the only thing that has kept Israel from being wiped out, and lest Israel forget, most of those arms and the cash to pay for them, comes from the USA. Indeed, Israel had a close call in 1973. Had it not been the sudden infusion of 10 percent of our entire frontline armored strength summarily handed over to the Israeli's, you would be part of Palestine or Lebanon right now.

Third, assuming you decide that you will have to live with them after all, either by absorbing them into the Israeli population (impractical), or by partitioning what is Israel now, and what had been Palestine in 1948 and moving towards total segregation.

They need full statehood, not ghettoization, not being moved onto a reservation or a Bantustan. The Palestine that you set up must be viable, e.g. capable of being self sustaining. Then you close the door between you and them.

If Israel can present the face of reasonableness -- in American terms -- to Americans, I can almost guarantee our undying support. This means allowing Palestine (or at least a part of Palestine) be Palestine. That takes a lot of heat out from under the pressure cooker. If people can lead a normal life, they a far less prone to picking up a rifle and risking their lives (because life is good). If life is miserable, they have nothing else to lose.

There are any number of examples of successfully-waged low intensity conflicts (guerilla wars) in the latter half of this century. The Philippines, Greece and Malaya are good examples. All of them included both political and military components. All of them recognized that the political aspect was the far more important of the two.

Thanks for being the first to ask a logical question.

That is all for now.

Jurist