Obama - First Black President

[0ni0n]

Israel wouldn't be able to withstand a calculated insurgency, either. Though they do one thing right - they kill everything without regard for humanitarian issues. That's really the only way to beat an insurgency, however I think that if Israel was left to decay by the US, there would be not only conventional military battles by many Islamic countries, but also an insurgency by stronger state powers that hold back because of their fear of the US.

What I don't know, is who would be attacked first: Israel, or the other countries in the Persian Gulf which are seen as apostate US puppets. I would assume Israel, because they could rally the largest strength by using all of the middle east, but I could be wrong.

Israel would be insane to attack countries the likes of Iran, Iraq, etc. While it's having a lot of trouble trying to squeeze out Palestinians in the Gaza strip, the political landscape of its underlying sovereignty is unstable (The acting prime minister, Ms. linvi just failed to form a two-party coalition). Plus, US and UK won't permit Israel to do anything irrational at a time when the global economy is in recession and US is tied up in two fronts. It would be very unwise indeed to further provoke islamic extremists in the region.

[Dimmauk]

Israel wouldn't be able to withstand a calculated insurgency, either. Though they do one thing right - they kill everything without regard for humanitarian issues. That's really the only way to beat an insurgency, however I think that if Israel was left to decay by the US, there would be not only conventional military battles by many Islamic countries, but also an insurgency by stronger state powers that hold back because of their fear of the US.

What I don't know, is who would be attacked first: Israel, or the other countries in the Persian Gulf which are seen as apostate US puppets. I would assume Israel, because they could rally the largest strength by using all of the middle east, but I could be wrong.

None of this is really secret. If Israel was so strong, they wouldn't spend millions of dollars lobbying us to give them billions of dollars, millions of dollars to keep the world feeling guilty for the holocaust, and millions of dollars brainwashing the world and killing innocents in their lands.

Though I guess they learned from the best.

I know I wash my brain with dollars. Everyone know why the U.S. uses Israel, even Israel. They don't care either as long as they have the best Bodyguard on the planet behind them.

[thatwasnifty]

It really doesn't really matter, since the US Naval fleet is patrolling in the red sea. Without US backing, Isreal won't be able to withhold with a coordinated invasion from all the Islamic countries in the region.

Israel did before. Three times, in fact (1948, 1967, and 1973). What's changed that would turn the tide against them now?

[pohibaba]

If Obama pulls this off then I'll convert to Pastafarianism.

Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders deal - Times Online

Initial impressions:
Pros:
- Pre-1967 war borders, full Israeli withdrawal

- East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital
Cons:
- Israel gets veto rights on all refugees

Nothing is said about the illegal settlements and the various apartheid walls, but I'm assuming all will be dealt with accordingly.

Overall, I think this is too good to be true but its amazingly hopeful.

This isn't what I would like President Obama to do, but I do think that this is a step in the right direction so I can honestly say that I'm pleasantly surprised.

[Elvis]

This is an absolute certainty. Arab extremist groups have long since held the destruction of Israel as a whole as their main goal. I don't see how giving way to borders that didn't work 40 years ago is going to do anything about that.

Right, because containing a hostile population for 40 years is much safer. If the walls were about security then why the constant settlement building? Even an overview of the wall building shows that it's keeping in line with the bantustan model.

Why deny medical supplies and food to Gaza? It's always terrorists huh?

Israel is allowed to build walls on it's own borders, not in Palestine. As to the terrorism, what's the motivation? Blind hatred of Jews? Or is it as widely known Israeli historian, Benny Morris, suggests - 'it was the fear of territorial dispossession and displacement that was to be the chief motor of Arab antagonism to Zionism.'

I don't think a peace settlement would put an absolute end to the violence and terrorism but it's the first step. You can't hold a hostile population via military occupation while crying 'security!'.

This isn't what I would like President Obama to do, but I do think that this is a step in the right direction so I can honestly say that I'm pleasantly surprised.

To each his own but what exactly do you disagree with?

Israel did before. Three times, in fact (1948, 1967, and 1973). What's changed that would turn the tide against them now?

Nothing largely. Guerrilla warfare can be waged against Israel endlessly IMO. The PLO is gone but now there's Hezbollah. In the latest Israeli-Lebanon war (2006), the people of Lebanon suffered greatly but the casualties amongst the Israeli forces and the Hezbollah forces were identical. A cease fire basically meant Hezbollah 'won.'

I don't think Iran would ever attack Israel directly. For one, they'd lose, no question about it, and secondly, it would be international suicide. It would justify an American invasion. Regime change. Etc.

[Rhinox]

Even so, I could make the same argument based solely on how realistic the general estimation of Israel's military capabilities seems, without claiming to have insider information.

Anyone can make any argument about anything. It doesn't

A. Make someones claim any less retarded.
B. Make said claim true.

To claim overestimation or underestimation of a military force you have to have first hand knowledge to make an accurate claim.


Anyway on topic:
Sure it's a step in the right direction but I have serious doubts anything will ever get done because fundamentalist muslims won't ever be satisfied until Israel is no more.

[Churchill]

And the world would be tenfold better.

[Elvis]

Fundamentalist Muslims are not the problem. Israel is the problem. The lack of an honest broker for peace (the US) is the problem.

Who broke off the last peace agreements? It was Israel. Arafat was a shitty leader, but they counted on him being a shitty leader.

The Palestinians then vote in Hamas in an honest election and they get punished for it. It's a constant lose-lose for them.

Bad/corrupt leadership and then the people they DO get to choose themselves are dismissed as terrorists.

The entire issue of 'who's the terrorist' is another debate entirely.

[Rhinox]

And the world would be tenfold better.

Oh you~

[Rhinox]

Fundamentalist Muslims are not the problem. Israel is the problem. The lack of an honest broker for peace (the US) is the problem.

Who broke off the last peace agreements? It was Israel. Arafat was a shitty leader, but they counted on him being a shitty leader.

The Palestinians then vote in Hamas in an honest election and they get punished for it. It's a constant lose-lose for them.

Bad/corrupt leadership and then the people they DO get to choose themselves are dismissed as terrorists.

The entire issue of 'who's the terrorist' is another debate entirely.

I have a hard time believing that Iran/Saudi/Syrian hate for jews would subside when Palestine becomes its own nation. The seeds of hatred have been sowed for far too long.

[Elvis]

Ok, I can accept that but let's translate whatever hatred those countries have into action. And then compare - with a focus on civilian deaths.

Remember These Children 2008 Memorial

Deaths of Children in the Israel/Palestine conflict:
TOTALS SINCE SEPT 2000:
Israelis: 123

TOTALS SINCE SEPT 2000:
Palestinians: 1050

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/images/deaths.gif

Civilians in general (counting the children statistics listed above afaik):
4,876 Palestinians and 1,062 Israelis
have been killed since September 29, 2000.

Israelis and Palestinians Killed since 9/29/2000

Sources:
Remember These Children 2008 Memorial
B'Tselem - Statistics - Fatalities (the leading Israeli-based Human Rights group)

Subsequently, you'll find little if any deviation amongst the various human rights groups who cover the conflict.

I personally don't think there is any difference between indiscriminate force (Israel) and the intentional targeting of civilians (terrorists). Firing into a densely populated civilian sector to get a terrorist target will inevitably result in the deaths of many civilians.

The other statistics to consider are: house demolitions, kidnappings, abuse of prisoners, the number of Palestinians currently imprisioned (10,000ish), land seized, Palestinians evicted, etc.

Not to mention the building of illegal settlements and walls in the bantustan model.

So while we can talk about how all these Muslim extremists plot to destroy Israel, Israel is undoubtedly destroying Palestine and the Palestinians as we speak.

Sidenote:
Other stats relating to human rights in Israel/Palestine - http://www.btselem.org/english/Statistics/Index.asp

[Zilong]

You can't expect to eliminate conflicts, but easing the ongoing tension would probably do the region a lot of good.

All these bullshit over a fictional pieces of literature written thousands of years ago, the stupidity of humans really knows no bound.

[Dimmauk]

Palestine "uses" bombers to blow-up Israel's malls and pizza shops, and Israel uses missiles to kill "terrorists"

Israel can just use the War on Terror to justify the attacks on Palestine.

[Dimmauk]

Look what happend today.


JERUSALEM – Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Monday promised to release 250 Palestinian prisoners, a goodwill gesture to the moderate Palestinian president at a summit overshadowed by ongoing violence in Gaza that threatens a cease-fire.

Even as Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas met in Jerusalem, Gaza militants were firing rockets, underlining that Abbas has little influence in the seaside territory. Islamic Hamas militants overran the Gaza Strip last year, expelling forces loyal to Abbas.

After a relatively effective five-month cease-fire, violence has returned, with Gaza militants firing dozens of rockets and Israel undertaking small armed incursions and air strikes.

At least 17 militants have been killed over the past two weeks, and Israel has clamped a punishing blockade on Gaza, drying up vital supplies.

An Abbas aide said the Palestinian president called on Olmert to ease the restrictions. On Monday, Israel allowed 30 truckloads of food and medicine and a limited amount of diesel fuel into Gaza. U.N. officials said that would allow them to resume distribution to 750,000 needy Palestinians.

Both Israeli and Hamas leaders have said they hope the Egyptian-mediated truce can be preserved, but Israel has threatened to strike hard if the rocket fire persists.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Israel is ready to attack Gaza, but it would not make a hasty decision. "There is always a need to consider the wider picture before Israel starts using its immense military force," he told a gathering of North American Jewish leaders in Jerusalem.

Responding to critics who charge that the truce has allowed Hamas to rearm, Barak said he does not regret "any single month" of quiet on the border. The truce was preceded by a year of disruption of lives of tens of thousands of Israelis by constant rocket attacks.

Olmert and Abbas have been meeting regularly over the past year to discuss peace efforts.

The planned prisoner release would be the latest in a series of Israeli gestures meant to bolster Abbas in his conflict with Hamas. The release is meant to coincide with a Muslim holiday next month, and all of the prisoners will come from Abbas' Fatah movement, Israeli officials said.

The prisoner issue is sensitive in Palestinian society. Israel holds more than 9,000 prisoners, and nearly every Palestinians has a relative, friend or neighbor who has served time. While Olmert has carried out similar prisoner releases, the Palestinians have always said they should be larger in scope.

Olmert and Abbas relaunched peace talks a year ago with the goal of reaching a final agreement by December 2008.

Both sides have acknowledged they will not meet this target, but hope to lay the foundation for further talks after Olmert leaves office early next year to battle corruption allegations. Elections are scheduled on Feb. 10.

The military said by sundown, 11 rockets and a mortar shell were fired from Gaza at Israel on Monday, causing some damage but no casualties.

Rockets exploded around the time that Britain's foreign secretary, David Miliband, was visiting the rocket-scarred town of Sderot, near the border with Gaza. Miliband was not harmed, and it was not immediately clear whether he was still in the area at the time of the attack.

Palestinian leaders asked Miliband to take steps against Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank, and Miliband criticized the construction during a news conference with Palestinian officials.

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad told The Associated Press that the Palestinians have approached the EU with options on removing tariff benefits from products made in the settlements.

[Elvis]

It certainly does. Everything is justified as defense in spite of the large disproportion in violence against the Palestinians.

And while the wall may prevent suicide bombing, it doesn't prevent mortar fire and most of the walls being built now are fragmenting the Palestinian population, not protecting the Israeli one.

Personally, I think the Palestinians have a right to fight the foreign occupiers. The methods we can largely agree on (the targeting of civilians is deplorable and a war crime) but every people has the right to defend themselves against foreign invaders.

EDIT:

The militants are so fucking stupid. Gaza is very densely populated and if Israel launches an attack (as it has said it will soon be doing, http://www.imemc.org/article/57644)...

[Bingbong]

Since you like charts Elvis...

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8...tacks20007.jpg

That's just the zealots/72 virgin attacks, not including "incursions", "firefights" or "breakouts" on the Israeli side of the wall since 2000.

So Palestinians blow up a pizza place, killing primarily civilians, while Israeli's fire on encampments containing terrorists, and get collateral damage.

Let's hypothesize though, if Israel stopped fighting, just dropped their guns, never retaliated for another suicide bomber, what's the probability that the Palestinians would do the same? What's the probability that the attacks would continue?

I'd put the odds at 1:500 that the Palestinians would follow suit.

[archibaldcrane]

Only 1 suicide bomb in the entirety of 2007?

Not bad.

[Kuya]

Since you like charts Elvis...

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8...tacks20007.jpg

That's just the zealots/72 virgin attacks, not including "incursions", "firefights" or "breakouts" on the Israeli side of the wall since 2000.

So Palestinians blow up a pizza place, killing primarily civilians, while Israeli's fire on encampments containing terrorists, and get collateral damage.

Let's hypothesize though, if Israel stopped fighting, just dropped their guns, never retaliated for another suicide bomber, what's the probability that the Palestinians would do the same? What's the probability that the attacks would continue?

I'd put the odds at 1:500 that the Palestinians would follow suit.

Were you refuting his claim that more Palestinians die, trying to say that maybe some of those Palestinians deserved it, or are you did you just try to morally obfuscate his point by randomly posting a graph?

[Churchill]

Since you like charts Elvis...

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8...tacks20007.jpg

That's just the zealots/72 virgin attacks, not including "incursions", "firefights" or "breakouts" on the Israeli side of the wall since 2000.

So Palestinians blow up a pizza place, killing primarily civilians, while Israeli's fire on encampments containing terrorists, and get collateral damage.

Let's hypothesize though, if Israel stopped fighting, just dropped their guns, never retaliated for another suicide bomber, what's the probability that the Palestinians would do the same? What's the probability that the attacks would continue?

I'd put the odds at 1:500 that the Palestinians would follow suit.

So you're taking the Israeli's side.

Guess those millions pay off.

[Elvis]

Since you like charts Elvis...

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/8...tacks20007.jpg

That's just the zealots/72 virgin attacks, not including "incursions", "firefights" or "breakouts" on the Israeli side of the wall since 2000.

So Palestinians blow up a pizza place, killing primarily civilians, while Israeli's fire on encampments containing terrorists, and get collateral damage.

Let's hypothesize though, if Israel stopped fighting, just dropped their guns, never retaliated for another suicide bomber, what's the probability that the Palestinians would do the same? What's the probability that the attacks would continue?

I'd put the odds at 1:500 that the Palestinians would follow suit.

Ceasefires are broken by BOTH sides often. I can go through the record to try to find out who has done so the most - although it may take me awhile. That's a good proposition though. I am assuming, since you made a mocking reference to the terrorists/resistance, that you don't believe they'd keep to their word.

On your statistics:
Not sure what you're trying to prove. The Palestinian death toll in terms of civilians is atrocious. 10 Palestinian children for every 1 Israeli? 4 Palestinian civilians in general for every 1 Israeli civilian?

Are you implying that the civilian deaths I sourced were from terrorist encampments? Where's your proof? Let's check my source. I may be wrong, but let's first check it.

But as I said, I see NO difference in indiscriminate force and intentional killings. You can justify it by your own moral standards.

To me, firing a missile into a crowded street to kill an enemy target, with the FULL knowledge that you will kill/maim civilians in the process of doing so, is just as bad.

YouTube - Gaza: The Killing Zone - Israel/Palestine

I don't like appeals to emotion/pity but I think it's important to put a face on the people caught in the middle. I have denounced terrorist suicide bombing. Any rational person would do so, but I believe in reciprocity. I think the numbers of civilian death + the illegal occupation + the illegal settlements + the evictions + the discrimination and abuse at the hands of Israeli settlers and the IDF + etc. etc., all must compel us to look at the Palestinian side of things.

It's easy to dismiss the suicide bombers. They hurt their cause by targeting innocents. I believe they have the right to fight the Israelis on the grounds that the Israel has invaded their lands (West Bank/Gaza). And that's perfectly true. People have the right to fight back against their occupiers.

When you target civilians, you not only hurt your cause but you kill yourself/others/your own people. It's fail all-around.

Personally, I think the same can be said of Israel. I don't blame the Palestinians for being pissed off all the time. If you were living under a military occupation for 40+ years and were continually abused and your rights violated, you'd resort to violence as well. I think we can understand their frustration while at the same time disagreeing with their tactics.

EDIT: What was the source for your graph and were those civilian deaths? I'm thinking they are but just wanted to make sure.