When the UN had a golden opportunity to throw its weight behind peace, it took the sidelines. When President Clinton advanced his bridging proposal, the UN Security Council should have formally embraced the proposal as satisfying the UN's various resolutions on the historic dispute and called on the parties to accept the agreement. Prime Minister Barak accepted it. Yasser Arafat did not. Perhaps with the Security Council having embraced the Clinton proposal and having called on the parties to accept it, Mr. Arafat's position would have become untenable. The opportunity was missed. Had the agreement been signed, one would no longer need to be debating whether or not collective punishment is occurring, blockades are in place, etc. Things could have been progressing toward growing cooperation and an improving standard of living.
The UN resolutions are not part of a "historic dispute". There IS NO DISPUTE on this issue. You cannot hold on to land seized in a war. You have no legal standing regarding the OPT, other than the responsibility of an "occupying force" with respect to IHL. Furthermore, by illegally colonizing this land and trying to change the demographics of the area, another war crime, you are not in a position to make any demands on agreements or terms with various interested parties. You are criminally negligent and the only solution to the "occupation" is to end it. That has nothing to do with anyone else except Israel. You took that land in the '67 war. It wasn't your land then, it's not your land now. And there isn't a single country in the world, including your own Supreme Court, that recognizes your right to that land.
Hamas is one of the biggest barriers to peace. No one calls for the U.S. or Europe to negotiate or accommodate Al Qaeda or its demands (nor should they, in my view). Yet, that's exactly the implicit message that is given to Israel over and over again, even as Hamas reaffirms time and again that it seeks Israel's elimination and, worse, fires rockets into Israel.
If you want to draw comparisons with al Qaeda, the same could be said for your Likud party. I can make a case that that's a terrorist organization. Begin was a terrorist. Shamir was a terrorist. Before you were a state, you bombed the Star of David hotel to put pressure on the British to further your own political agenda. That's terrorism.
And if you want eliminate Hamas as a terrorist organization, stop calling them terrorists. Are you laughing? It's not meant to be funny. You did the same thing for Fatah. After they started kissing your ass, my country and yours, cleansed them of the "terrorist" moniker.
Here's a few examples of Israeli terrorism...
While the cheerleaders testified to the superior moral fiber of their team, the Palestinian civilian death toll mounted. Israeli missiles tore at least fifteen Palestinian police cadets to shreds at a graduation ceremony, blew twelve worshipers to pieces (including six children) while they left evening prayers at a mosque, flattened the elite American International School, killed five sisters while they slept in their beds, and liquidated 9 women and children in order to kill a single Hamas leader. So far, Israeli forces have killed at least 500 Gazans and wounded some two thousand, including hundreds of children. Yesterday, the IDF blanketed parts of Gaza with white phosphorus, a chemical weapon Saddam Hussein once deployed against Kurdish rebels.
You said you guys were taking measures to prevent that.
And let's not forget that it wasn't too long ago, that Israel was supporting Hamas as an alternative to the PLO.
The basic argument is that Palestinian terrorists represented by Hamas are given to an irrational hatred of Jews so profound that it invalidates their movement, even when they win elections. That was not the view of the Israeli security service when it earlier supported Hamas as the alternative to the then dreaded PLO. Also, history is replete with examples of terrorists becoming statesmen, even within the early ranks of Jews fighting to establish the state of Israel.
Your pot, is calling that kettle, black. Yet, you cannot see this. The good German's a half-century ago refused to believe the holocoust. These are people just like you and I, who didn't commit crimes, didn't participate in hostilities, just tried to survive from day to day, keep their jobs and provide for their families. But when told about the atrocities their government and military had done, they could not fathom their country would be a part of something so horrific. And they kept refusing to believe this, until Eisenhower made them bury the dead.
I wish there was some way I could force you to bury the Palestinian dead. To put a pile of flesh that used to be a 5 year old boy, in a hole, in front of his grieving family, then, as you are putting on the last mounds of dirt with your shovel, turn and tell the family that although it was your bomb that turned their child into worm food, that it was their fault, this occured.
With respect to the current combat, Hamas ended the ceasefire. Furthermore, during the ceasefire, not a single month passed in which 0 rockets were fired into Israel.
For the last 18 months, you've held a blockade of Gaza that has created a humanitarian crisis. And Hamas wasn't the one who conducted a raid into Gaza on November 5, 2008 to assassinate a local official. That broke the cease fire.
Moreover, Hamas deliberately aims to attack civilians. Palestinian civilians are not being killed because Israel deliberately seeks to kill them. Hamas' human shielding is playing a large role.
You want to talk about human shields? Lets talk about them. First off, everytime you post proof that they are doing this, it falls far short of backing up your claim. I'm sorry, but a bunch of kids on the roof of a house trying to prevent their home from getting bombed by the IDF, does not constitute Hamas using them as a human shield.
Even these examples don't prove your point.
From today's edition of The New York Times:
The emergency room in Shifa Hospital is often a place of gore and despair. On Thursday, it was also a lesson in how ordinary people are squeezed between suicidal fighters and a military behemoth.
Dr. Awni al-Jaru, 37, a surgeon at the hospital, rushed in from his home here, dressed in his scrubs. But he came not to work. His head was bleeding, and his daughter’s jaw was broken.
He said Hamas militants next to his apartment building had fired mortar and rocket rounds. Israel fired back with force, and his apartment was hit. His wife, Albina, originally from Ukraine, and his 1-year-old son were killed.
All they prove is that Gaza is a very dense area, and you have no other place to do battle, except next to buildings. And they wouldn't be having to do this if you hadn't invaded.
That's an example of the kind of tactics Hamas is employing that is leading to Gaza's civilian casualties. The outrage that is being directed toward Israel should be redirected at Hamas for those reprehensible tactics. Perhaps then, Hamas would find itself in the crosshairs of public wrath and its demise would follow soon afterward.
My outrage towards Israel, is its irresponsible, detached reality, that they do not share the blame for the current situation in Gaza and that they do not do the same things as Hamas.
I'm willing to admit that Hamas IS a terrorist organization and they DO do bad things and I'm sure they have used human shields and I DO think Israel has a right to respond militarily to these rocket attacks. But your assertion that it is all on Hamas and that no fault or blame should be directed against Israel, is a bunch of horse****!
You accused Hamas of using "human shields", well, Don, my friend, so does Israel.
20 July 2006: Israeli Soldiers use civilians as Human Shields in Beit Hanun
B'Tselem's initial investigation indicates that, during an incursion by Israeli forces into Beit Hanun, in the northern Gaza Strip, on 17 July 2006, soldiers seized control of two buildings in the town and used residents as human shield.
After seizing control of the buildings, the soldiers held six residents, two of them minors, on the staircases of the two buildings, at the entrance to rooms in which the soldiers positioned themselves, for some twelve hours. During this time, there were intense exchanges of gunfire between the soldiers and armed Palestinians. The soldiers also demanded that one of the occupants walk in front of them during a search of all the apartments in one of the buildings, after which they released her.
So what's your comment now? This incident happened too long ago? Or my source was from some anti-simetic arab website like al jazeerah? No, this claim came from your own countryman who don't lie to themselves and do care about human rights.
And I'm not saying you don't. As a matter of fact, I respect the way you keep your cool on a hot subject and the diplomatic way at which you present your case without blowing a gasket from time to time like so many people around here do (of which, I'm one of them).
Back to the shields...
From Amnesty International:
“Our sources in Gaza report that Israeli soldiers have entered and taken up positions in a number of Palestinian homes, forcing families to stay in a ground floor room while they use the rest of their house as a military base and sniper position,” said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Programme. “This clearly increases the risk to the Palestinian families concerned and means they are effectively being used as human shields.”
Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired.
“The Israeli army is well-aware that Palestinian gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and that any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians -- not gunmen.”
And that is current. It's from yesterday, January 9, 2009, about what going on in Gaza.
The only thing I can say to you at this point, Don, is a line from an old Bob Dylan song...
How many times can a man turn his head,
pretending he just doesn't see?
- Blowin' in the Wind
