Gardener said:
The houses that are being razed hide networks of underground tunnels through which arms are smuggled with the intention of murdering Israeli citizens. It certainly makes for great propaganda when the world is shown images of the bulldozings, and especially when terrorist allies such as Rachel Corrie attempt to aid terrorists by getting in the way, but if the houses are part of the terrorist base of operations, they aren't exactly innocent, now, are they?
Well, if you talk 'bout Rachel Corrie (and if possible, could you try to expand your vocabulary.. ALL the people that don't share your ideas are NOT terrorists or terrorists allies. This makes you look as intellectually challenged, and I don't think you are), she protected the house of a doctor, who had nothing to do with terrorism. The propoaganda goes both ways. Israel pretends that all demolitions are made to destroy this or that, while we all know it's false. At the same time, the palestinian groups say the exact opposite, which is equally untrue.
As to the extrajudicial bombings, I would point out that this is not a terrorist act because it does not satisfy the basic requirement for consideration as terrorism, namely that targets are chosen because they are innocent. Terrorists are blowing up busses full of civilians and discoteques full of teenagers, while the IDF is blowing up the murderers. That is not terrorism. It may be heavy handed. It may be excessive, and the loss of life in what is called "collateral damage" (a term I hate, myself) is certainly a tragedy but to draw a moral equivalency between the intentional murder of innocents and the unintentional killing of innocents in an attempt to mete justice on those who murder is specious at best and simply part and parcel of the rationalizations of the terrorists, themselves at worst.
Not all terrorists blow innocent civilians because they are innocent civilians. I thought it was a very good definition, but then, I thought 'bout IRA, ETA, Brigade Rosso, RAF, etc.. They targeted specific people, and didn't care 'bout "collateral damage". What is the difference between such actions carried by the IDF and the Baader-Meinhof group? I don't see any.
Palestinian terrorisism is widely supported among the Palestinian population and the terrorists receive much support. Reported figures have varied over the last several years, but from over half of the Palestinian population to nearly three quarters supports terrorist killing of Jewish Israelis, and the common tactic of the terrorists is to hide among this civilian population that supports them. Bulldozing a terrorist base of operation doesn't kill people, and the houses hold still as they cover the smuggling tunnels. Getting to the terrorists, themselves is a trickier matter because they move about and because they are always among civilians. To serve any sort of warrant would require an extensive mobilization of enough troops to be able to deal with the large number of terrorist supporters, wade through the fray of those attacking them, each man deciding whether or whether not to return fire, and the whole operation could turn into an even bigger blood bath. Besides the messiness of this operation, there is often insufficient time to stage it because of the mobility factor.
1/ Some Palestinians support the terrorist groups because they kill Israelis. 75% of the Palestinian population? That's bullshit, my friend. On the other hand, Hamas for example provides help, food etc.. to the Palestinian people. THAT is something they support.
2/ Those that support pure terrorism do so because they don't see any other solution to end their nightmare. Since 1967, they are second-rate citizens in their own country. Every action, every plan, was stopped one way or another. Every motion at the UNSC to end this was vetoed by the US. Every day, they can be jailed, killed, .. and are sure to be humiliated. Their fields are stolen from them. The jobless rate in Palestine is so high that they know they won't be able to support any family. And this lasts since nearly 40 years. I can understand that, when someone comes and tells them that blowing up a bus will help, they believe it. And now, Hamas and others can say that terrorism works, as they got Israel out of the Gaza strip. If only the roadmap (even though it's imperfect.. but perfection is impossible in such a messy situation) was followed, it would have been possible to show the Palestinian population that the world DID care, and that the end of their misery was in sight. You can be tricked to blow yourself up when desperate. Take away the despair, bring hope, and the terrorists will have a LOT of problems recruiting. As they are gutless cowards, that SEND people to die, but don't want to die themselves, it would mean less terrorist attacks.
An international solution, forcing Israel and the Palestinian authority to cooperate, would have helped to calm the situation down, and to go further. But that was not the idea of Mr Sharon, as we all can see.
I agree with you that I would like to see judicial actions rather than extrajudicial killings, but you still haven't explained how you think they could go about it. How do you arrest a terrorist when they are surrounded by those who support them, when they intentionally maximixe casualties in order to utilize them as a propaganda tool, and when they are so mobile?
Common criminals also hide in the public. The support that terrorists receive from the Palestinian population could be drastically reduced (eventhough I'm sure it's not much right now) if the people from Palestine could see that a solution does exist and will be put in place.
So, how do you arrest a terrorist? The way it was done in Europe during the 70s and 80s. You use police, exchange information, etc.. untill you can get them. That's the civilised way to do it.
It's maybe more difficult, but if you want simplicity, try dictature. Democracy isn't easy.
CU
Y
