[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Sean

I don't believe that putting a freeze on the resident's "movements" inherently implies that Israel is painting "all arabs with the same brush". What it imlies to me is that since Palestinian authorities refuse to crack down on terrorist activities, Israel is forced to do something to protect themselves, and since they can't know who will be the next terrorist attacker, that means taking sweeping action.

No argument with you here. This was a weak point in his arguments, admittedly. But I don't find it a fundamental drawback to his main assertion that pursuit of responsibility for actions taken on both sides must cut through all the layers of politics, religion, and excuses if the betterment of people's lives is ever going to be achieved.

Originally Posted by Sean

Next, I take issue with the author's assertion that: "It's not because we're Jews; it's because of the relentless oppressive tactics employed by successive Israeli governments since the very foundation of the state." My understanding of the history does not support this statement. From Israel's inception, it has been under constant attack, which put it on defensive ground from the start. That's not to say that Israel has commited no offensive actions throughout the decades, but the author's statement implies that Israel was formed, and basically became instant and perpetual aggressors. I find this to be a flawed, inaccurate implication.

I'm not sure I understand. Israel has not been an instant and perpetual offender but its been an instant and perpetual defender of itself by offensive tactics? On a practical level I'm not sure there's much of a difference, moreover whatever difference in perspective it makes, I think its categorically relative. Baruch Goldstein, the new york born jew who offed 30 moslems worshipping in a mosque virginia tech style made the argument that he was just killing people who would one day kill jews. Which is the rational behind all the heavy handed military action that has not only targeted terrorists but have consistently taken large civilian casualties. This may all exist in a framework of defensive responses to previous palestinian agreession, but they all stand on their own as brutal actions against a civilian populace. And it begs to perspective how offensive/defensive one is to perceive them.

Add on top of this the fact that if you do see the chronology of bloodshed as israel being lopsidedly on the defensive, you're playing into the useful enemy model. Both sides of the fence have used the existence of the enemy to shoulder up support for corrupt politicians on their respective sides, causing as much internal damage for which the other side could only dream. It is because Israel is so terribly oppressive that hamas gets the power it does. And it is because palestinian terrorists are so awful that likud party takes control and ass hats like netanyahu, olmert, and sharon are allowed to ride rough shod over paletinian people while yitzhak rabin gets murdered by a fellow jew.

This is why if you're Jason Roth and you care about the Israeli people first and fore most, your first task ought to be to figure out why the rest of the arab world feels about Israel the way americans feel about palestinians. The Israeli people don't benefit from the model where Israel is perpetually justified. The only people who benefit are the corrupt leaders and the starry eyed believers they manage to con.

Originally Posted by Sean

I do, however, agree with his conclusion that "Vicious reprisals against the killer's family, mass restrictions of movement for all Arab residents of East Jerusalem, and revenge attacks on Palestinian towns and cities, are not the answer. Because when we crush their civilians' lives and livelihoods, the chances are that the radicals among them will do the same to us."

Which is why I trust that we can both see we're not saying anything that different from each other.

Originally Posted by Sean

I don't know what the realistic solution is, but I do still personally believe that if the Palestinian militants and terrorists laid down their weapons today, peace with Israel would ensue...but if Israel laid down it's weapons today, attacks on it would continue unabated until it was obliterated.

Again, when you have every evangelical douche bag like Hagee on this side of the world referencing bible passages that condemns any manouever of compromise, because every speck of palestinian soil is to be Israel by divine decree and jesus won't come until it happens, then you can believe that both sides act on a self driven mandate to obliterate the other side.