[Sandwich]

Give back the West Bank. In fact I would have done that as the first act upon becoming president so that the majority of Palestinians would view me favourably.

At least that way I'd have the moral high ground. Might even get the rockets to stop falling. Would certainly get world opinion on my side.

Ok, so following the historic pattern here: Israel pulls out of territory she's occupied, leaving it in the hands of a terrorist organization (I refer to Gaza and our pullout of Lebanon in 2000; returning the Sinai actually remained peaceful for the most part since Egyptian military forces were in control of that border). In both cases above, we have continued to be bombarded from areas we have given away.

You need to understand the Arab mindset here (and if you don't believe me, go read any number of papers on the subject). In their way of thinking, giving back land is not and cannot be seen as any sort of "nice" gesture, but as a reward for their struggle, giving them more incentive to struggle further.

So. You've given back Judea and Samaria (I refuse to call it the West Bank until and unless Jordan takes control of that area, since it is only the western banks of the river Jordan... but anyway). Hamas-led Palestinians now govern Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How do you deal with the Jerusalem issue? Oh yes, and what about all the new cities that within a few months come under bombardment? Or are you so naive to think that it's only Iran's Muslims who want us wiped off the map?

[aldo_14]

Nowhere in that article or any other article on the current conflict does the BBC report that Israel claimed that the Qana bombing was based on reports that Hezbollah was launching rockets from that building. Every single article, as far as I've read, focus entirely on the viewpoint that Israel bombed a building and killed 54 civilians in cold blood. Every other news source (CNN, local Israeli news, FOX) report that the Israelis believed that Hezbollah was firing rockets from that building. Unless BBC TV said something along this line, then I'll have to assume that this is either very poor journalism or bias.

The latter BBC article did exactly that.  Again, I ask you to look at the dates.

NB: (something I didn't answer earlier)
I would give back the occupied territories, partition Jerusalem into a 'shared' city controlled by a neutral UN administration (akin to a 'free port'), probably one supplied by predominantly non-Christian, non-Jewish and non-Muslim country that can be perceived as neutral.  In exchange for this (which is really just observing UN resolutions about not using war to claim territory anyways), I would expect in return a raft of UN resolutions specifying sanctions (both military and economic) against any foreign nations aggression (already made less likely due to the removal of a key casus belli), including the introduction of a UN peacekeeping force into the new Palestinian state in the event of any sort of terrorist campaign which is beyond the will or capacity of the new Palestinian government to tackle.

(of course, saying what not to do is always easier than what to do; I can very easily say, for example, that the way to fight a terrorist organisation believing in the concept of glorious martyrdom is not to create hundreds of martyrs)

[karajorma]

Yes, you'd have the moral high ground. No, you still wouldn't have the world opinion on your side; the world simply doesn't like Israel in the first place. Europe created it to keep the Jews out of Europe, which they had been attempting to do for hundreds of years.

It was the Jews who wanted their own homeland. It wasn't as if the other Europeans came up with a plan to evict the Jews from Europe. You can't be surprised that Europe wasn't willing to give up their land, very few countries were in the first place. Those who didn't want to go stayed. I've got no idea why you're trying to come up with some massive conspiracy to remove the Jews from Europe when that is actually what they themselves wanted to do.

Pretty much the whole of Europe recognises the right of Israel to exist. That's what the UN set out in 1947. However that also recogised the right for the Palestinians to have their own state too. And they have just as much right to exist as Israel does.

What makes you think that the bombings will stop if Israel gives back the West Bank? The Palestinians aren't just going to forgive and forget and be happy with the land they have, after all. The conflict goes much, much deeper than just the West Bank and Gaza; it's anti-Semitism. Arabs want Israel wiped off the map, period. No giving back land, just completely gone.

While that may be the view of some it's not the view of all Palestinians. Sure they won't forgive and forget but why do you think Hamas got elected only now? It's cause they're the only people who seem to be doing something about the **** lives the Palestinians live in Gaza. The way to stop the hatred is to give them a reason to back someone else. Israel is simply giving them more reason to support Hamas.

I never said the bombings would stop but this hasn't stopped them either. Nor will it stop them. Having the UN come in and help the palestinian people would do more to stop the bombings than any number of military solutions like this one.

[vyper]

I will once again point out for the umpteenth time - it was a Israeli-Jewish terrorist group that fought to have Israel declared an independent state.  The Empire thought: what the hell, we have enough problems!

[Sandwich]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3284514,00.html

[aldo_14]

Of course, none of that equates to anything beyond speculation.....

[karajorma]

The Lebanese website LIBANOSCOPIE , associated with Christian elements in the country and which openly supports the anti-Syrian movement called the "March 14 Forces,"

So a completely unbiased source then.

[aldo_14]

Am I entitled to question the objectivity of a website which supports a movement seemingly named after a significant Israeli victory (Operation Litani, the March 14th 1978 invasion)?

[Nuclear1]

I never said the bombings would stop but this hasn't stopped them either. Nor will it stop them. Having the UN come in and help the palestinian people would do more to stop the bombings than any number of military solutions like this one.

Giving land back to the Palestinians won't stop them either. If the UN wants to try to do something to stop this, they can jump in with a peacekeeping force whenever they feel like it, since their diplomatic attempts to stop the violence don't seem to be working so far.

It was the Jews who wanted their own homeland. It wasn't as if the other Europeans came up with a plan to evict the Jews from Europe. You can't be surprised that Europe wasn't willing to give up their land, very few countries were in the first place. Those who didn't want to go stayed. I've got no idea why you're trying to come up with some massive conspiracy to remove the Jews from Europe when that is actually what they themselves wanted to do.

Jews were persecuted and essentially demonized for the better part of Europe's medieval and recent history. No European country wanted them; England, Germany, Spain, and France expelled them all, and the ones that remained in Germany and Russia were persecuted even more, culminating in the Holocaust. The Jews asked for a homeland, and Europe agreed to it, seeing as how Christian and Jewish populations were never able to peacefully coexist in Europe.

Plus, it's not as if the Jews had wanted to leave their homeland in the first place. So, returning the European Jews to Israel essentially benefited both the Europeans and Jews.

Of course, none of that equates to anything beyond speculation.....

But doesn't it even register as a possibility that Hezbollah intended for this to happen? Isn't it just too convenient that women and crippled children happened to be in a building that Hezbollah used for rocket attacks against Israel, and in the same town that a similar incident had occured some years before?

[aldo_14]

But doesn't it even register as a possibility that Hezbollah intended for this to happen? Isn't it just too convenient that women and crippled children happened to be in a building that Hezbollah used for rocket attacks against Israel, and in the same town that a similar incident had occured some years before?

It's also a possibility that a meteorite hit it.  Which do you think is the most likely event?  Bomb hits building, building collapses; or bomb hits building, Hezbollah guerillas run into the bombing target site, hold civvies back, and then wait 7 hours for a possible collapse (or wait 7 hours to blow up the building)?  Or Hezbollah rockets/charges detonate to destroy the building, and there just happens to be civillians waiting 7 hours for it to happen?

[vyper]

If the UN wants to try to do something to stop this, they can jump in with a peacekeeping force whenever they feel like it, since their diplomatic attempts to stop the violence don't seem to be working so far.

You try telling Israel that.

[Nuclear1]

If the UN wants to try to do something to stop this, they can jump in with a peacekeeping force whenever they feel like it, since their diplomatic attempts to stop the violence don't seem to be working so far.

You try telling Israel that.

What, that diplomacy with terrorists doesn't work? Doesn't their present course of action lead you to believe that maybe they've figured that out?

[karajorma]

If the UN wants to try to do something to stop this, they can jump in with a peacekeeping force whenever they feel like it, since their diplomatic attempts to stop the violence don't seem to be working so far.

You try telling Israel that.

Exactly. It's pretty bloody hard for the UN's attempts at diplomacy to work when Israel keeps shooting Palestinians and Palestinians keep suicide bombing Israelis. IF you want to say that the UNs attempts have failed then you have to realise that the major reason for that is

1) The UN has no power to censure Israel
2) Even if they did it wouldn't matter one jot while both sides keep shooting at each other instead of being willing to talk.

[aldo_14]

Any UN resolution to censure Israel is veto-ed by the US.

(http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/membship/veto/vetosubj.htm)

[FSW]

Conspiracy theory!
Maybe Hezbollah know that their demands for the release of prisoners will not be met - perhaps their goal was, all along, to goad Isreal into attacking Lebanese civilians.
This sways international public opinion against Israel, and by extension the USA. This will be a more effective strategy against Israeli occupation (and the Western world) in the long term.
And all at the cost of a few hundreds of lives and several thousands of livelihoods! Diabolical!

[vyper]

If the UN wants to try to do something to stop this, they can jump in with a peacekeeping force whenever they feel like it, since their diplomatic attempts to stop the violence don't seem to be working so far.

You try telling Israel that.

What, that diplomacy with terrorists doesn't work? Doesn't their present course of action lead you to believe that maybe they've figured that out?

No you gentleman of low intellect, I meant that Israel is probably unwilling to accept a situation where UN Peacekeepers would treat them as equals of their neighbours.

[aldo_14]

Conspiracy theory!
Maybe Hezbollah know that their demands for the release of prisoners will not be met - perhaps their goal was, all along, to goad Isreal into attacking Lebanese civilians.
This sways international public opinion against Israel, and by extension the USA. This will be a more effective strategy against Israeli occupation (and the Western world) in the long term.
And all at the cost of a few hundreds of lives and several thousands of livelihoods! Diabolical!

Scarcely a conspiracy theory, surely?  Most people - especially in the wake of the Gaza re-invasion - would know any repetition of a kidnapping would lead to an Israeli military response.  I think a lot of people - including me - are surprised at the sheer ferocity (dare I say inanity?) of the consequent bombardment of Lebanon, but it's still not a major shock to see a military response.  Israeli attacks have always been very useful for, in particular, the likes of Hamas as they create a substantial amount of innocent 'martyrs', regardless of intent.

[vyper]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5235468.stm

The head of the British army has cast doubt on the practicality of UK ground troops joining any future international peacekeeping force in the Middle East.

Gen Sir Mike Jackson said commitments in areas like Iraq and Afghanistan meant he doubted it would be "sensible" to offer troops to such a force.

Looks like any multinational force will be short on British numbers.

No wonder Tony doesn't want a ceasefire. He can't find any glory in it, as other nations would have to take the lead.

[aldo_14]

No, he says it's not sensible.

Thus, it is a given that Tony Blair shall do it.

[vyper]

Point.