[quote=“Got To Be Kidding”]
Rabin paid the price for that, but I believe that it was a price worth paying.[/quote]
If he has been better protected against the creep who murdered him, perhaps the middle east would have been a better place.
[quote=“Mr He”][quote=“Got To Be Kidding”]
Rabin paid the price for that, but I believe that it was a price worth paying.[/quote]
If he has been better protected against the creep who murdered him, perhaps the middle east would have been a better place.[/quote]
You’re probably right.
My suspicion was that he understood Yassir Arafat better than anyone else and would have avoided many of the mistakes that subsequent prime ministers have made.
Que sera sera, and all that.
If my posts on the first page of the thread struck you as too pie-in-the-sky, you can hear a couple of Economist contributors lay out the same argument on the political untenability of a shoot 'em all or razor wire and minefield solution.
podcast: itunes link
Hamas (is too radical).
Fatah is more realistic on their goals.
Israel needs to stop promoting double standards: They can have nukes, but others can’t. They practice Jewish immigration only, but promote DIEversity in the US through their control of the media, they veto all important laws that are in favor of Palestine, etc, etc, etc.
[quote=“Jaboney”]If my posts on the first page of the thread struck you as too pie-in-the-sky, you can hear a couple of Economist contributors lay out the same argument on the political untenability of a shoot 'em all or razor wire and minefield solution.
podcast: itunes link[/quote]
I’m not sure that being a contributor to the Economist qualifies someone as being a good policy analyst.
You cannot have open borders unless you have a couple generations of peace and populations demonstrating a willingness for peace. None of the countries in the Middle East want some tiny group of thugs causing an international incident that leads to war.
There are times in history when good walls make for good neighbors. It took generations for Europe to come together, and it may take generations for the Middle East to do the same.
I don’t think you can compare the Israel/Palestine situation with Europe 1946-1989, to be honest.
Of course not, I’m talking about European history BEFORE 1946. Up to then, Europeans were killing each other in massive numbers for a couple thousand years - incessantly. Biggest bunch of warmongering thugs ya’ ever saw. But, after a few generations of cold peace, they were able warm up enough to tie themselves together in a union.
The Middle East can do the same. But, they MUST come to terms with Israel.
And, from my own viewpoint, the Middle East cannot come together within our lifetime without Israel. Israel has had a dramatic, and positive, impact on the region. Why else, do you think, that the Palestinian Authority is the most democratic Arab government in the world? I know that this isn’t saying much, but the Palestinians have the best democracy in the Middle East - outside of Israel.
The Muddle East is truly a fascinating, mixed-up mess. (Which can be said about humanity in general.)
not in the Balkans they weren’t. Not without the iron fist of Tito to keep them tied up in Yugoslavia, at any rate. As soon as Yugoslavia broke up, just look at those Croats, Serbs, Bosnians, Montenegrans, Macedonians, and Albanians go!
The issue is that apart from Jordan and Egypt, no-one have come to terms with Israel. That would include the Palestine Authority.
I would think that economic growth along with freer societies might lead them to hate Israel less, however the last time the middle east grew was in?
Interesting.[quote=“McClatchy”]A young man calling himself Yehudi Tzadik — “righteous Jew” — picked up a rock and rolled it around in his hand, as if considering pitching it at a police car parked nearby.
Within sight was a mosque in Jerusalem that was torched and defamed Wednesday with graffiti that included, “Death to Arabs.” Tzadik claimed he knew some of the group that was responsible for the attack, though he added that he wasn’t there when it happened.
“The state of Israel has lost its moral code. It has forgotten what is at the heart of the Jewish nation. … We are reminding them,” said Tzadik, who gave his real name only as David.
A spate of attacks this week by Jewish right-wing extremists has called into question Israel’s definition of the word “terrorist,” and has prompted security officials to acknowledge the separate rules of engagement they’ve created for Jews and Palestinians.
Those rules were highlighted when a spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces, Brigadier Yoav Mordechai, was asked whether a soldier should open fire on a Jewish person who was throwing rocks, as soldiers routinely do with rock-throwing Palestinians. Mordechai answered, “I assume … you wouldn’t expect the brigade commander to open fire at a Jew standing in front of him. I am certain you didn’t mean that.”
[…]
On Thursday morning, Israeli soldiers destroyed several structures in a small outpost adjacent to Yitzhar. Israeli officials had ordered the buildings demolished because they’d been built on private Palestinian land, but their demolition had been delayed repeatedly.
Jeremy, a resident of Yitzhar who wouldn’t give his surname, said he viewed the demolition order as a declaration of war by the Jewish state.
“What is it if not war? It’s a declaration of war against the settlements and what we stand for,” he said. “How would you feel if they came and kicked you out of your home in the middle of the night? Would you not want to defend your home?”[/quote]I agree with both the brigade commander, and little terrorist. They just don’t go far enough. I wouldn’t expect the brigade commander to open fire at any protestor standing in front of him, and I’d expect anyone to want to defend his home.