At least 5 Dead 60 Injured in Suicide Bombing in Tel Aviv

[zengeos]

Originally posted by: Czar

if so then Israel must provide medical treatment, sanitations, schooling and other basic services by international law. They dont provide these services because they dont want to be the "defacto government" of the west bank and the gaza strip because of this international law.

Funny youshould mention that. When Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza in 67 that is exactly what they did. It was not until the late 80's, with the Intefadeh, and associated violence that Israel pulled back from the actual infrastructure improvement and education. It was between 67 and the mid 80's where the West bank and to a lesser extent, the Palestinians in Gaza had a relatively high standard of living. Since the Intefadseh and the PA takeover of much of the control of this that things have fallen apart. Israel poured hundreds of millions into sewer systems, providing electricity throughout the area as well as educational subsidies. So your conclusion is somewhat moot/incorrect.

Mark-

 

[zengeos]

Originally posted by: bauerbrazil

Originally posted by: Czar

Israel is the government in Israel, not in the Palestininian lands, there they are the occupying force.

I only spout tooth for tooth because so few of you even care what the Palestinians are going through you only scream when something terrible happens in Israel but nothing when it happens in the West Bank or the Gaza strip, thats why I try to mention this.

Agreed.

Actually, I hear about it on the news here in US every time it happens or nearly so. Is it described in as high detail as the suicide bombings?

No. But it IS mentioned on the news. So don't try to claim that we never hear about the suffering of the Palestinians.

 

[zengeos]

Originally posted by: justint
I would like to clarify however, that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians killed in the current intifada were not terrorists or combtanants of any sort, just as the overwhelming number of Israelis killed in the current conflict by terrorist actions have been non-combatants. One need only look at the appalling number of Palestinian and Israeli children killed to know this fact. It is virtually impossible to effectively suppress terrorists operating amongst a friendly civliian population using conventional military forces without killing large number of non-combatants. Notice I said it is virtually impossible to suppress terrorists, it is impossible to defeat them under these circumstances. Kill one there will always be another to take his/her place. This is a historical fact, demonstrated in many conflicts including Vietnam, Afghanistan, Algeria, etc. etc.

Additionally, IDF, Border Police, and Paramilitary Security forces have been using lethal force on people who would not fit the definition of terrorist, in the first weeks of the Al Aqsq Intifada over a hundred Palestinians mostly teenagers and young men were shot by Israeli troops using live ammunition during protests where the only weapons were rocks and burning tires. Many have been killed ancillary to combat operations against terrorists such as assasinations of terrorist leaders, raids on towns and villages, sniper fire from Israeli troops to enforce curfews and protect settlements, shooting incidents at checkpoints etc. Some of these incidents were mistakes, some were collateral damage, and some were deliberate actions designed to suppress the Palestinian population.

I am not making any judgements about the morality of these actions, and there effectiveness is open to debate amongst both Palestinians and Israelis. Palestinians know that terrorism against civillians particularly in Israel causes them great damage in the realm of public opinion, yet Hamas, and Islamic Jihad continue to enjoy wide support for thier activties due to the fact that they are seen to be doing SOMETHING against the occupiers. Sharon and his government is aware of the fact (reinforced by repeated statements and assessments from the Shin Bet, the Mossad, the Israeli National Security Council, and the Defense minister that the military activities of the Isreali security serivices will not ever stop terrorism or bring permament security yet they persist in escalating thier activities as they need to show as doing SOMETHING against the terrorists.

The current armed conflct is more based on political and emotional resons on both sides rather than strictly military ones.

Good summary/overview Justin.

Mark-

 

[Moonbeam]

When the Arabs defeat the Jews and relegate them to reservations the Jews will become the terrorists and kill Arab civilians with suicide bombs. The answer is obvious. Give the Palestinians the military equipment and training that Israel has so they can fight like real human beings.

It's real fun to watch a people strangle another people, their brothers and sisters, to such a degree that the children of that strangled people are willing to die to get even and all the while the oppressor continues its oppression claiming the moral high ground. There are no Palestinians and Jews, there are only fools who cannot see their common humanity.

 

[zengeos]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
When the Arabs defeat the Jews and relegate them to reservations the Jews will become the terrorists and kill Arab civilians with suicide bombs. The answer is obvious. Give the Palestinians the military equipment and training that Israel has so they can fight like real human beings.

It's real fun to watch a people strangle another people, their brothers and sisters, to such a degree that the children of that strangled people are willing to die to get even and all the while the oppressor continues its oppression claiming the moral high ground. There are no Palestinians and Jews, there are only fools who cannot see their common humanity.

And it is only because of the Arabs unwillingness to negotiate peacefully that Israel has had to resort to harsh responses. Yes, we can go on and on..further and further back in history to blame one side or the other, but it boils down to one side or the others' unwillingness to negotiate peacefully and in good faith.

If I were in Israel's shoes I honestly don't know if I wuld have shown the restraint Israel historically, until the Intefadeh in the 80's showed; their repeated humanitarian efforts to have some kind of peaceful solution and the continued refusal of the Arab states to negotiate. Instead, the Arabs have said things like "When you become a people subject to the Islamic laws common to the region we can live peacefully with you." Essentially suggesting that the Israelis must give up their country and become a *subject people*.

Now, if you think Israel will EVER do that then you really don't know Israelis well.

The sad thing is many paestinians, at least those on the West Bank, would love to have peace with Israel again; a real, just, negotiated peace. Unfortunately, it is the extremists on both sides which prevent this from happening.

Mark-

 

[Moonbeam]

And when the Arabs defeat the Jews and put them on reservations it will only be because of Jewish intransigence that the Arabs will have to treat them like dirt.

 

[zengeos]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
And when the Arabs defeat the Jews and put them on reservations it will only be because of Jewish intransigence that the Arabs will have to treat them like dirt.

Thank goodness that is unlikely to happen. The sad fact is the Arabs have always treated the Palestinians like dirt. Worse by far than the Israelis until the Intefadeh. By the Palestinians misguided violence they do themselves even greater harm. The few violent Palestinians make the rest suffer and pay for their violence. Very sad.

Mark-

 

[Moonbeam]

No sadder than if the roles were reversed the Israelis would do the exact same thing.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Being right is not nearly as important as winning.
Unless, of course you live in Utopia and/or attend Berkeley.

 

[darren]

i feel that one needs to look at the big picture in order to see the context of the current events.

19th century manifest destiny = 20th century zionism

a hundred fifty years ago, in settlements across the midwest and west, war parties attacked civilian farms.
the native indian and his tomohawk wreaked havoc upon the innocent white farm woman and her children while fighting white man's soldiers and militia as well.

today we witness similar brutality (and desparation) in the way that palestinians are fighting and have been fighting the israeli settlers and their government. Settlers that are attempting to settle west bank and the settlers of yesteryear that have occupied much of Palestine proper.

read king crane commission of 1919:
at the time the jewish population of what is today Israel and west bank was 65,000 / 647,000
that is 10%. today the figure has skyrocketed.
census of 1870 counts that less than 3% of the region's inhabitants were jewish.
why and how?

if a census count of America was made in 1650:
less than 10% of the region would be of European immigration/ descent.
by 1800 the figure would be a strong majority. A result of disease, murder, and european settlements.
eventually the native indians were relegated to reservations.
today the world's most democratic (arguably), affluent society is built upon the ruins of the Native Americans. yet it doesnt mean that the original genocide/robbery/injustice did not occur.

the palestinians are somewhere in the middle of the process - on their way to becoming oblivion / irrelevant in refugee camps, reservations. im sure native american indians can understand "never again"
and we should be with them in remedying what is going on in Israel today.

20th century zionism in its dictionary.com definition: "A Jewish movement that arose in the late 19th century in response to growing anti-Semitism and sought to reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Modern Zionism is concerned with the support and development of the state of Israel."
is the contemporary equivalent of 19th century Manifest Destiny.

read "reestablish"
yes a Jewish kingdom once existed on the land 2000 years ago. does that give them anymore right to settle there and establish a state there against the idigenous people that have been living there all long.
no.

because if it did. europe should be returned to the Romans; indo-china to China; perhaps Eastern Europe to the byzantines; and you history buffs out there could name more - simply because they once ruled the land 2000 years ago. its twisted logic.
yes i believe that there should be rules to war. combatants differ from non-combatants.

but who are YOU to tell a people that are being violently occupied with YOUR tax-dollars and YOUR tanks, and helicopters that they should resist non-violently. and yes Israel would be hard-pressed to survive without 6 billion dollars of american aid and the most advanced military equipement.

in the past 50 years of this conflict, israel has killed 10 arabs for every 1 israeli killed by arabs.
50 years of defending occupation.

 

[zengeos]

Actually, the Israelis tried for 20 years AFTER winning the West Bank, Gaza and Sinai, to negotiate land for peace. After 20+ years of repeated attempts to find SOMEBODY to negotiate with it is no surprise that Israel has seemingly given up on land for peace. Heck, even the negotiations/ letting Arafat setup his little terrorist training system for nearly 10 years in the West Bank and Gaza has not brought them closer to peace. If anything it has pushed them further from peace.

It's been 2 generations now and Israelis have little hope it seems that there will ever be real, lasting peace. Understandably so.

Mark-

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: darren
i feel that one needs to look at the big picture in order to see the context of the current events.

19th century manifest destiny = 20th century zionism

a hundred fifty years ago, in settlements across the midwest and west, war parties attacked civilian farms.
the native indian and his tomohawk wreaked havoc upon the innocent white farm woman and her children while fighting white man's soldiers and militia as well.

today we witness similar brutality (and desparation) in the way that palestinians are fighting and have been fighting the israeli settlers and their government. Settlers that are attempting to settle west bank and the settlers of yesteryear that have occupied much of Palestine proper.

Palestine proper? Where is that? Is that like a country or something?

read king crane commission of 1919:
at the time the jewish population of what is today Israel and west bank was 65,000 / 647,000
that is 10%. today the figure has skyrocketed.
census of 1870 counts that less than 3% of the region's inhabitants were jewish.
why and how?

if a census count of America was made in 1650:
less than 10% of the region would be of European immigration/ descent.
by 1800 the figure would be a strong majority. A result of disease, murder, and european settlements.
eventually the native indians were relegated to reservations.
today the world's most democratic (arguably), affluent society is built upon the ruins of the Native Americans. yet it doesnt mean that the original genocide/robbery/injustice did not occur.

the palestinians are somewhere in the middle of the process - on their way to becoming oblivion / irrelevant in refugee camps, reservations. im sure native american indians can understand "never again"
and we should be with them in remedying what is going on in Israel today.

20th century zionism in its dictionary.com definition: "A Jewish movement that arose in the late 19th century in response to growing anti-Semitism and sought to reestablish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Modern Zionism is concerned with the support and development of the state of Israel."
is the contemporary equivalent of 19th century Manifest Destiny.

read "reestablish"
yes a Jewish kingdom once existed on the land 2000 years ago. does that give them anymore right to settle there and establish a state there against the idigenous people that have been living there all long.
no.

Ummm, Jews have been living there all along too. Oh, and it wasn't an Arab country before the State of Israel. It was British. And before that Turkish. Where were the outcries when the Brits took over? Why wasn't anyone screaming for the British to give back the country?

because if it did. europe should be returned to the Romans; indo-china to China; perhaps Eastern Europe to the byzantines; and you history buffs out there could name more - simply because they once ruled the land 2000 years ago. its twisted logic.
yes i believe that there should be rules to war. combatants differ from non-combatants.

By that logic, Israel shouldn't give away a foot of land. They rule it now, Arab rule is in the past. At least 100 years in the past.

but who are YOU to tell a people that are being violently occupied with YOUR tax-dollars and YOUR tanks, and helicopters that they should resist non-violently. and yes Israel would be hard-pressed to survive without 6 billion dollars of american aid and the most advanced military equipement.

Really. Just curious how they kicked the asses of 5 Arab countries once without US support. Remember?

in the past 50 years of this conflict, israel has killed 10 arabs for every 1 israeli killed by arabs.
50 years of defending occupation.

I'm sure you have statistics to back that up from holyjihad.net or something.
Eh, why do I bother........

 

[Perknose]

Israel is the defacto government in Israel. Israel is the defacto government of the West Bank and Gaza . . .

Small point, but you used the terms, so . . . Israel is the de jure government of Israel, and, yes, the de facto government of those Arab territories. De jure means what's explicitly spelled out in the law, de facto means what is actually the case on the ground, irrespective of what the law says.

Even smaller point: they are both two word terms. [\Anal retentive off]

 

[Bulk Beef]

in the past 50 years of this conflict, israel has killed 10 arabs for every 1 israeli killed by arabs.

Assuming that your number is accurate, is it Israel's fault that the Arab armies are incompetent?

The Palestinians are fighting an inevitable future. They can make it as easy or as hard on themselves as they like, and the few who are choosing the hard road are forcing their neighbors to walk the path with them.

 

[zengeos]

Originally posted by: ThePresence


I'm sure you have statistics to back that up from holyjihad.net or something.
Eh, why do I bother........

Actually, I have no doubt of these statistics. The arab armies have tended to be quite large...just poorly trained and led by mostly incompetents. For instance, in 67, I think Israel lost something like 500 soldiers compared to around 10,000 Egyptian soldiers lone!

Tactics and excellent leadership were on the Israeli's side. The Egyptians had far more modern equipment, but bad tactics and even worse leadership.

In 73 the losses were similar, though Israel lost something like 1000 soldiers during that war. The Egyptians again had superior weaponry and initially had surprise on their side and excellent tactics provided by Russian *advisors*. However, they blew it when Sadat decided that they should retake the Sinai more quickly and their SAM network fell apart.

In 47/48 the invading armies were simply uncoordinated and bickered amongst themselves too much. The Israelis had a major advantage with intenal lines of communication and resupply. Again in this war, the Arab armies were hugely superior in terms of numbers and firepower/equipment. They again lacked coordination, tactics and good leadership in general.

Mark-