4 dead in a lethal terror attack near hebron

[ido_]

Don't these two posts qualify as 'decrying civilian casualties'?

I can't see how you nor Apoc decry civilian casualties.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Remember that there are forces on both sides determined that peace attempts should fail? I never doubted it for a second. But what point are you trying to make? You're not finding parallels between the actions of government ministers and those of a terrorist cell, are you?

No, I think the real lesson there will be what can be learned from Israel's unwillingness to latch onto this as an excuse to scuttle talks, and comparing that to the invariable excuse the Palestinians will latch onto to walk way.

But you're right. Annoucements from some local politician of building in Jerusalem is FAR less offensive than the murder of four civilians. remember that when all the anti-Israelers start screetching about Israeli bad faith and how some minor announcement is sufficient and good justification for Abbas walking away.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Hamas are not included in peace talks. How can there be any possibility of settlement in this situation? This is a genuine question.

There is no chance.

And that is a genuine answer.

 

[Andalublue]

No, I think the real lesson there will be what can be elarned from Israel's unwillingness to latch ontop this as an excuse to scuttle talks, and comparing that to the invariable excuse the Palestinians will latch onto to walk way.

But you're right. Annoucements from some local politician of building in Jerusalem is FAR less offensive than the murder of four civilians. remember that when all the anti-Israelers start screetching about Israeli bad faith and how some minor announcement is sufficient and good justification for Abbas walking away.

Well, you're right in part. However, resumption of settlement building on disputed territory would not be some 'minor announcement', it would be a major obstacle.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Well, you're right in part. However, resumption of settlement building on disputed territory would not be some 'minor announcement', it would be a major obstacle.

Shouldn't be, depending on the quality of the announcement and actions.

Building in existing communities that the Palestinains may claim but do not actually live and are within existing settment territories does not actually raise any issues at all. To the extent those settlements will be abandoned to the Palestinians as part of a final peace deal, the Palestinians will just get more infrastructure. No one is harmed by such construction, and we all know there are a number of cities east of the green line that for defensive and politicval reasons Israel will retain.

So really, honestly, this kind of construction would just be an excuse, rather than a real justification for the Palestinians to walk away from talks (though, as they are framing the debate as if this would be grounds to scuttle their people's chances at independence, it appears this is precisely what they intend to do).

This is, I think, different than settlment construction on state lands (which is more of a problem) and construction on private Palestinian land (which would be a huge problem). The last of these probably would be justification for the Palestinians to suspend participation in talks, while construction on state lands would be very problematic and possibly rising to the level that could justify suspension.

But this whole "all or nothing" thing is simply an effort to construct an excuse by the Palestinians to walk away from the talks while blaming Israel for it. Pretty transparent, but that doesn't mean it can't be effective (think Black september or the al-aqsa martyrs brigades and how transparently they were "independent" from the PLO/Fatah, and how well that sort of ridiculous cover actually worked).

 

[Andalublue]

Shouldn't be, depending on the quality of the announcement and actions.

Building in existing communities that the Palestinains may claim but do not actually live and are within existing settment territories does not actually raise any issues at all. To the extent those settlements will be abandoned to the Palestinians as part of a final peace deal, the Palestinians will just get more infrastructure. No one is harmed by such construction, and we all know there are a number of cities east of the green line that for defensive and politicval reasons Israel will retain.

So really, honestly, this kind of construction would just be an excuse, rather than a real justification for the Palestinians to walk away from talks (though, as they are framing the debate as if this would be grounds to scuttle their people's chances at independence, it appears this is precisely what they intend to do).

This is, I think, different than settlment construction on state lands (which is more of a problem) and construction on private Palestinian land (which would be a huge problem). The last of these probably would be justification for the Palestinians to suspend participation in talks, while construction on state lands would be very problematic and possibly rising to the level that could justify suspension.

But this whole "all or nothing" thing is simply an effort to construct an excuse by the Palestinians to walk away from the talks while blaming Israel for it. Pretty transparent, but that doesn't mean it can't be effective (think Black september or the al-aqsa martyrs brigades and how transparently they were "independent" from the PLO/Fatah, and how well that sort of ridiculous cover actually worked).

I was with you up until the last paragraph. I think the PA/Fatah is investing a lot in this process. Failure would undermine their position vis-a-vis Hamas, it would show Hamas' strategy to be correct in the minds of many.

 

[Degreez]

No, I think I have read Degreez stating this is the case. I am sure when he comes on he will clarify.

Yes, you are correct. According to Palestinian Basic Law, the current Prime Minister of Palestine cannot be Salam Fayyad, because he was not approved by the Palestinian Legislative Council (which Hamas has the majority in). Until an appointment by Abbas is approved by the Palestinian Legislative Council, the current Prime Minister of Palestine is Ismail Haniyeh (who, according to the Basic Law, runs the current caretaker government).

 

[Vader]

Hamas has taken responsibility for the actions, saying there are more to come. This sounds like an attempt to derail the current peace talks.

My first reaction to this is that violence against civilians on both sides should obviously be condemned universally as a blatant violation of human rights.

My second reaction is that in polarized situations like the Israel/Palestine conflict, the painting of the "enemy" as an other that is not only monolithic but also inherently guilty by association is common and happens on both sides quite frequently. This is a very common political move utilized in order to rally support against a common enemy; it has been used in the majority of wars throughout history. In fact I'm not really sure if you can call it a "political move" as such because of the fact that this is not only consciously nurtured but also arises out of the development of the conditions at the time.

My third reaction to this is that it is somewhat strange for Hamas to be carrying out these attacks during the peace talks, as if they were attempting to have an affect on them, when in reality the peace talks are inevitably going to fall apart due to Netanyahu reneging on his offer to cease the encroachment of illegal settlements onto Palestinian land. This will certainly cause a lot of disappointment in the Palestinians (common after this happens) which would both damage the credibility of Abbas and Fatah and would invariably open up further support for Hamas.

We are seeing an increase of extremism on both the side of the Israelis and the Palestinians. With Hamas consolidating its support base as it has been recently, and with Israel becoming more polarized not only on the issue of Palestine/Hamas but simply more extremist in general, we will see an increase in both the tensions and hostilities in the near future.

Now, please carry on attacking Hamas and whining about the liberals who support them. I just wanted to add some actual substance to this thread before it degenerates further.

Typical anti-isreaeli drivel. If peace talks fail, it will be because Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn't want peace.

 

[ido_]

Another terrorist attack, luckly no one was killed in this one

Another West Bank shooting: 2 Israelis hurt - Israel News, Ynetnews