To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 17409
17408  |  17410
Subject: 
Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 16 Aug 2002 02:49:58 GMT
Viewed: 
902 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:

Hamas, for instance, has publically declared their desire to not end their
fight until Israel is no longer.  Peace is dangerous when one side's idea
of it is the elimination of the other side.

There are those in Israel who want to do the same to the Palestinians. You
are using the views of extremists to condemn a whole nation.

Wanting and doing are two very different things.  Besides, I have tried to
make distinctions between Palestinian extremists and the GP all the time.
It is my criticism of them that *they* aren't making that distinction more.

Murdering civilians the way Palestinian terrorists do is WAY wrong-- it
doesn't matter what their grievances are-- it is *never*
justified.  They become instantly as guilty as those who oppress them.  Do
you agree?

I agree they are oppressed. I agree murdering civilians is wrong. I reject
the notion that there is an acceptable ?way? to murder civilians. Do you
know otherwise?

I was making a distinction of intent.  The IDF does not *target* the civilian
population as Hamas does.  Yes, innocents are killed, but not intentionally.  I
find the distinction crucial.

But if you want to make comparisons, answer this: why do we see 1,000s of
Palestinians dancing in the streets and eating candy upon learning of Israeli
women and children being blown up by homicide bombers?  Do you see that type of
behavior on the streets of Tel Aviv when innocent Palestinians are killed?

For the most part, the IDF violence upon the Palestinians is in retaliation
for terrorist attacks.  The same holds true for Israeli occupation.

High Court decision gives green light for collective punishment
http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/MDE151272002?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES\ISRAEL/OCCUPIED+TERRITORIES

?This judgment gives a green light for collective punishment in the Occupied
Territories? ?Destroying Palestinian homes to punish whole families for a
crime committed by others, is a war crime.?

Actually, I happen to think that that is an excellent policy of deterrent.
Those who wouldn't think twice about destroying Israeli families might think
twice if they knew that *their* families will be punished for *their* actions.

Incidently, where is AI's outrage against war crimes of homicidal bombers who
slaughter civilians?

They *have* to respond lest they embolden the terrorists.
That is a simple fact.  I know you don't agree, and I'm not willing to
debate it.  The *worst* thing one can do in response to terrorism is to do
nothing--it is like a big green light to these people.

Perhaps the Palestinians are saying the same of the Israelis? Anyhow, I'm
not suggesting they "do nothing".

What *do* you suggest they do?

Even if Israel stopped responding in force to terrorist attacks, they would
continue.

I expect they would - but the number would reduce. The number will reduce
further when Israel gives back what is has stolen. At that point the "GP"
will turn away from violence and Hammas will wither.

Yes, well, this is where we differ.  Maybe the number would reduce, but so
what?  There will *always* be terrorist attacks on Israel by extremist Arabs
until the last Israeli is dead.  No amount of land, or reparations, or anything
will ever change that.  It is naive and dangerous to think otherwise.  Even
*if* the Palestinians make peace with Israel, they will have made enemies with
Hamas and other such terrorist organizations-- Hamas' existence is not
dependent upon Palestinian support, but rather Saudi and Iraqi $$$.

The dirty little secret is that extremist Islamists are just as much the Arab
world's enemy as they are Israel's or the US's.

-John



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) What do you mean? Isn't that the goal? The only goal? Isn't saving lives the whole reason for concern? I hope it's not just about retribution for you. (...) This can only be said if you extend the timeframe infinitely. It's like saying there (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) In the past it has deliberately targeted non-combatants. Now it acts with (at least) complete disregard for civilian losses. (...) I'm sure some Israelis are happy - don't doubt that. I'm sure not all Palestinians celebrate – don’t deny that. (...) (22 years ago, 19-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) Are you saying Israeli extremists do not murder Palestinians out of pure hate? Are you saying Israeli extremists did not wreck Oslo and Oslo II? (...) I agree they are oppressed. I agree murdering civilians is wrong. I reject the notion that (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

44 Messages in This Thread:














Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR