29 Sep 2001, 23:47
It seems to me that you are presenting a very one-sided view of the issue. It is worthy to note, I believe, that for every Israeli that has died in violence during the last year, at least five Palestinians have died in violence.
Numbers
are just numbers - you have to look at context. The majority of
Palestinians killed were rioters, "throwing rocks" with slingshots,
with men with assault rifles backing them up. The Israelis that have been
killed have been mostly innocent people in markets, at bus stops, in buses and
in their cars. How can you even compare?
And
beyond this, why are we even talking about casualties? Who began this
war? Again, let's look at the context - the Israelis suggested a plan and
Arafat rejected it. One month later, he followed through on his long-time
plant to start a new Intifada. Who's fault is it that people are
dying? It's all Arafat's fault because he began this Intifada.
It is also worthy to mention that most of the Israelis that die are all soldiers, while most of the Palestinians that die are civilians. Granted, they might be rowdy civilians, jeering, shouting, and throwing rocks. But even civilians armed with rocks should not be -shot down- by soldiers with assault rifles.
The
media in the Palestinian territories (of which most are Palestinian citizens, or
at least, those that are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause) often misportray
actual events. Sure, there are rowdy civilians, but who is behind
them? There are, more often than not, "Palestinian
Gunmen" shooting at the soldiers. Using civilians as cover seems
to be a typical Arab tactic.
It is also, as you seem to believe, no lie that Palestinian children have died by Israeli bullets. I am not saying that this is a state-condoned strategy, however the hatred present in Israeli soldiers, for them to shoot down children, sometimes as young as the age of three, is something that is outside of the realm of reason. Not to mention the Israeli army and government do nothing to discpline soldiers who commit such horrible acts as killing children.
What
is the context of the shooting of children? Were they shot in a cross-fire
or were they intentionally lined up in a soldiers crosshairs? Go look up
the story of Shalhevet Pass, who was very obviously the DIRECT target of a
"Palestinian Gunman" with a telescopic viewer, used for greater
accuracy.
Now, while the PLO was no saint during its inception as an organization, it has reformed considerably. In fact, it has regcognized the right for a Jewish state to exist.
Where
and when did it recognize Israel's existence? Show me the money...
Besides, even if it did, is recognition of a state that has existed for 50 years
a great gift? Duh, it's obvious Israel exists...now, if the Palestinians
do recognize Israel, do you think they accept it as legitimate?
Israel however, has not recognized the right for a Palestinian state to exist.
Wrong
- Israelis want a separate Palestinian state, but they want to be ensured of
their security. Judging by what Arafat has said in the past, Israel is not
going to ever get it...at least while Arafat is in control.
And while you say that Palestinian leaders call for the death and destruction of Jews, what I actually see happening is the Israeli army making what it calls "targetted killings", which by any rational definition would be called assassinations, of Palestinian leaders.
Wrong
again - these are not Palestinian leaders - they are terrorists. Arafat
was given about a year to arrest these men (Israel gave them lists of wanted men
months ago), but he hasn't arrested them. Does Israel really have a choice
other than to accept more victims of terrorism?
Granted, they were accused of plotting and perpetrating violence, and I do not pretend to absolve them of these crimes, but any accused individual, in a freedom-loving state, has the right to a fair trial by jury. Israel has no right to kill whomever it pleases.
Israel
would be happy to bring these people to justice, but the Palestinians are
harbouring them. Again, what is Israel to do? Israel could go an
arrest any Arab Israeli that they suspect of terrorism, but since Oslo, the
Palestinians have control over large portions of the West Bank and Gaza Strip
and it is their responsibility to arrest people who are killing Israelis.
I do not question the right of Jews to a Jewish state.
You don't - many Arabs do.
They have been continously prosecuted, tormented, and exiled throughout history. In fact, some of the most horrible memories in history come from the Holocaust. A history teacher I once had went as far as to say that World War II was the only war where there were clearly "good" and "bad" sides, thanks to the horrors perpetrated by Hitler. However, a history of oppression does not give Jews the right to vent their anger on others, and continue the cycle of oppression. However, the collective sympathy and pity of the Western world after WW2 helped everyone turn blind eyes to the violence in the Middle East.
That's
a bunch of bunk. The Israelis aren't "venting their anger on
others" - Jews for the first time in history are able to defend their own -
they should not feel guilty for that. The Palestinians posses 100,000 illegal
weapons - there is aggression from the Palestinians, so don't be talking about
"cycles of oppression". If the Palestinians really cared for
peace, they would lay down their guns and start to negotiate. Peace will
never occur until that day.
It should also be observed that the Western world was at its peak of imperialism when Israel was granted to the Jews.
Actually,
imperialism was crumbling. Check your history books to see how many
countries declared independence since then.
After the first World War, Britain got a "mandate" to rule Palestine, which was at the time inhabitted by a majority of Arabs. The local population was considered too ignorant and savage to adminsistrate itself.
If
you look at the Arab world, you can see they are still ignorant and
savage. Unfortunately they are trying to administrate themselves.
Typical western views, just ask Berlusconi. Similar "mandates" were held by Western powers in Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. Obviously this was a mockery of the worst kind. Britain had no right to rule Palestine. In fact, the U.N. Charter, to which Britain was subject to, during 1948, called for the right of self-determination of all states. That meant that Arabs clearly had the right of governing themselves.
But
by 1948, there were tonnes of Jews there. There are also some very good
sources that claim that a large influx of Arabs into Palestine in the 1930s and
1940 was due to the Jews success at building the land. Many Arabs in
Palestine in 1948 weren't actually "Palestinian".
However, in 1948, Britain "gave permission" for Jews to settle in large numbers in Palestine.
Actually,
they resisted quite a bit - they set quotas on the numbers that could come in,
which is why the Jews had to get there illegally. Unfortunately at the
time, the Jews had absolutely nowhere to go.
This was in the aftermath of the Holocaust, and of course eveyrone felt terrible about the horrors inflicted on the Jews. The permission was obviously not Britain's to give, and yet Jews settled anyway.
Again,
the Brits didn't allow Jews to come in droves - they had to sneak in
mostly. Regardless, if the Brits controlled the territory, why should they
not decide who they want in and who they want out?
And so the conflict was born that lasts unto this day, when West and East stand poised on the brink of war.
You're
right, and I say it's mostly due to the Arabs not accepting the fact that Jews
are there and will always be there. Israel wants peace, but Arabs want
Jews out.
I do not say that any side is either right or wrong, and I do not condone violence. However, it is clear to me that Israel is practicing something called "excessive use of force" against the Palestinians. This is actually prohibbited by the Geneva Convention governing the laws of war.
Rifles versus rocks? It all seems crazy to me.
"Rifles versus rocks" is a fallacy.
Again, look at these few pictures of "Palestinian Gunmen" - they have
more powerful rifles than the Israelis and they have viewfinders too, for
accurate sniping. There is no "rifles versus rocks" - there is
guns and tanks versus guns and suicide bombers, and it's sad that people don't
see it that way. Of course, if the Palestinians put down there guns, so
will the Israelis. If the Israelis put down their guns first, more
Israelis will die. It's a fact that's hard to swallow, but this fact has
stood the test of time.
