A PALESTINIAN VIEW - A practical guide to a successful nonviolent strategy

[Lithos]

A PALESTINIAN VIEW
A practical guide to a successful nonviolent strategy

by Sami Awad

The Palestinian nonviolent movement is as old as the Palestinian liberation movement itself. As far back as the 1930s, Palestinians engaged in nonviolent protests and demonstrations against the British Mandate authorities. This form of protest peaked with the breakout of the 1987 intifada. That uprising, which was for the most part nonviolent in nature, brought immediate international recognition to the Palestinian people, forced Israeli society to recognize Palestinians as a "people" and to recognize their legitimate leadership, and finally led to a peace process. The failure of that peace process, known as the Oslo peace process was not due to the means that led to the negotiating table, on the contrary; it was largely due to the lack of continued mobilization and support by the Palestinian leadership of the popular Palestinian nonviolent resistance movement. Nonviolent resistance should have continued as a means to balance the imbalance at the negotiating table, viewed by the Palestinian leadership as the only way of attaining the legitimate rights of the Palestinians.

-- snip --

A more important question deals with the issue of efficacy. Are the means used effective in achieving the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people?

When discussing armed resistance, Palestinians must recognize both the internal and international implications of continuing the armed resistance. The gross imbalance of power, the unrestrained and brutal actions of the Israeli military, and the change in the direction of world politics have left Palestinians defenseless and isolated in the face of daily aggressions. The armed resistance, even armed defense, has been effective only in creating excuses for greater Israeli aggression.

-- snip --

Nonviolent resistance is never easy. It takes tremendous dedication, discipline and sacrifice. And while no means are guaranteed effective, the nonviolent approach attempts to neutralize the power of the enemy and to target the collective consciousness of the populace rather than empowering enemy extremists by handing them the blind and unconditional support of a people fearful of annihilation.

The international community has declared that the death of the late President Yasser Arafat is an opportunity to revive the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. The Palestinian community needs to see the death of their president as an opportunity to reinforce the commitment to the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people and to achieve these aspirations by engaging in effective nonviolent means of resistance and community building.

more

[Lithos]

1. From an Israeli viewpoint

This would appear to be an appropriate time to discuss the potential for Palestinian nonviolence and its ramifications for Israel. First, because there is a growing number of people and groups in Palestine that believe in nonviolent struggle against Israel. Secondly, because in a few instances in the central West Bank in recent months nonviolent demonstrations proved effective in drawing the attention of the media and the courts to the injustices of Israel's security fence as originally located at the local, village level.

Thirdly, the emergence of Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) as leader of the PLO and leading candidate for the Palestinian Authority presidency points to the relevancy of nonviolent tactics of resistance. Abu Mazen unequivocally denounces Palestinian violence as a counterproductive approach; by default, the only appropriate form of resistance in his eyes would be nonviolence (coupled with a diplomatic campaign for a peace process congenial to Palestinian terms). Indeed, if Abu Mazen's current efforts bear fruit and Palestinians agree to a comprehensive ceasefire, the nonviolent approach may come to the fore as a means of protest or resistance.

The most famous, and successful, nonviolent campaign in modern history was led by Mahatma Gandhi in India against the British, and culminated in Indian independence in 1947. It is generally understood that the campaign succeeded because, at the end of the day, the British were a civilized occupier that could not for long stomach shooting at point blank range at masses of nonviolent Indian demonstrators, and because Gandhi employed effective forms of economic boycott, and got global publicity.

Are we Israelis a "civilized" occupier? Despite all the casualties we have inflicted in four years on Palestinian civilians and their property--yes. We are no worse than any other occupier. But the difference between Israel in the West Bank and Gaza and the British in India is that even those of us who oppose the settlements and seek to end the occupation, strongly believe that we are defending our homes and our families, which have been under intense and brutal attack, rather than some distant "jewel in the crown" of an empire.

-- snip --

If all these conditions were met, a Palestinian nonviolent campaign could be effective, particularly if Abu Mazen gets a popular mandate for his rule. Yet this does not appear to be an easy option for Palestinian society under current social and political conditions.

more

[dems4israel]

2. A wolf in sheeps clothing

Mahmoud Abbbas/Abu Mazen is as two faced as his two names he played good cop in the PLO while Arafat played bad cop. Abu Mazen is a Moscow educated version of Arafat in a suit and tie but at least he did not rob as much money from innocent Palestinians. As for Palestinian non violence movements where were they during the Hebrow Massacres in the late 20's?

[Lithos]

3. So I take that as a yes vote

For continuation of the status quo and more violence against Israel and against Palestine?

L-

[Darranar]

17. Ah, yes. That's why he was willing to negotiate with Israel...

and bring both sides closer towards peace. It's good Sharon spurned him with refusing to halt settlement growth, otherwise we might actually have had some progress. How disastrous that would be!

[HawkerHurricane]

4. IF the Palastinians actually were brave enough

to adapt a non-violent protest movement, like many others, the Isrealis would have no choice but to make concessions. As long as the Palastinians use violence, the Isrealis are justfied using violence back on them 10 fold.

[Lithos]

5. That is the gist of the articles

Plus a discussion of who benefits from continued violence.

While there is much division among the Palestinians which makes it difficult for a unified attempt at nonviolence, there is real evidence that non-violence has worked in a positive way for the Palestinians - one place being the demonstrations against the Wall which forced significant deviations to occur in the planned path.

L-

[HawkerHurricane]

6. The problem is...

one of 'group guilt'. If one Palastinian kills himself trying to blow up a bus, the Isrealis will feel justified in blowing up buildings.
If one SYRIAN kills himself trying to blow up a bus 'in the name of the Palastinians', the Isrealis will blow up buildings.
Isrealis make no distinction between murderous bastards and innocents, then get surprised when the other side doesn't either. And vice versa.

[Lithos]

7. The chain has to be broken somehow

And Israel will have to make the distinction, especially if it becomes obvious that to continue otherwise is the "barbaric" thing to do. The Palestinians MUST take another tack if they are to try and win. Violence has effectively emasculated any voice inside of Israel who could argue for change in Israeli behavior.

L-

[HawkerHurricane]

8. We must stop shooting at each other!

You first.

[pelsar]

9. win our confidence......

Just to put things into perspective: Intifada I was "relativly" non violent. Its actually rather amusing in some respects: What we consider non violent, most western countries police, armed forces would consider "life threatening"

rocks, slingshots, moltov cocktails, refridergators dropped, etc..

For an example, take a look at the French reaction to the Ivory Coast "riot"...That said, the jist of the article is correct. What is missing is what it will take for most of the israelis to believe "they really do mean it"

It will take sometime, and they have to police themselves, not only is that an essential step for us, but for them as well. In their present condidtion of multiple gang bangers disguised as "liberation" movements" they are in no position to have a state, it would in essence be one more "failed state". A non violent movment that works, would give them responsabilities, give them some breathing room from the israelis (instead of tanks, they're would be a reduced presence, a couple of bored border policeman).

More than that, it would force them, via their own education to give up on their threatening speaches, horrible videos, etc, their whole society would change....and then they would have the more than 60% of the israselis have no problem with the future country next door.

What more do they need?...they need to reject the cheerleaders in Europe and the Arab countries which tell them that their fight it "holy" and the evil zionists have to go. Those "inspirational" speaches, literature are litterly robbing the palestenians of their youth and show us that "nothing has changed in the world."

When they tell Saudi Arabi to "keep their money", the ISM to stay at home, when they tell everybody that they "do not want their help".....(an expression of taking responsability-practically they will finacial help)

Obviously, all of this will take time, and not all will happen, but once that gets moving, and there is a momentum about it, there will be a chance, and most important of all, the israelis will be more than happy to join in with them. (as its been shown to happpen)

what does it come down to? use violence, preach violence against us, and we'll return it. Use real non violence protests and we'll all sing kumbaya together, the choice is for the palestenians to make.

[dems4israel]

10. NoN violent my ass

The Intifada started VERY violently remember the two Israeli reservist who were lynched in broaddaylight and then had guts ripped out and paraded by mobs? I hardly call that "non-Violent" unless your a murdering waco

[pelsar]

13. who started what...

dems....if we go into the "who started what"...we'll never get anywhere. Its really not a matter of actual facts out here, its more of perception....and those two dont always coincide.

More difficult is the arab culture which has a fuzzy line between actual facts vs percieved facts. Its not western oriented hence the negotiating track is far different than when dealing with just the western culture. There is a lot we have to "swallow" for the possibility of a better future....but like I wrote, the ball is in their court.

[Lithos]

25. *sigh*

First, I strongly advise that if you wish to continue posting here, for you to read the Israeli/Palestine Forum Guidelines. To accuse someone of being a "waco" (sic), is against these guidelines.

As for the discussion, we were talking about the first Intifada starting in 1987 and ending in 1993. Your comment about the two reservists, Vadim Nourezitz and Yosef Avrahami killed Oct 12, 2000 in Ramallah, concerns itself with the second Intifada.

The first Intifada started after two events in 1987 involving the ambush of several men accused of being part of the Jihad by the IDF and the shooting death of a young Palestinian girl by an Israeli settler. It involved several significant event threads, major of which was the non-violent tax revolt led principally by Palestinian Christian merchants against what has been described as a grossly unfair levy imposed by Israel. The majority of violence in Intifada I did involve attacks by stone wielding men against small Israeli patrols. However, towards the end the violence-level did increase with the use of molotov cocktails and small arms.

The second Intifada started with Sharon's infamous march on Al-Aqsa on Sept 28, 2000, and followed closely the deaths of an Israeli Sgt on the 27th and the killing of an Israeli policeman during a joint patrol by his Palestinian police counterpart. Even so, the real initiating event of the Second intifada was the failure of the July 2000 Camp David talks which allowed for political opportunists such as Sharon and Marwan Barghouti to take the stage and push the situation into one of violence.

Again, the deaths of the two reservists occured well past the start of the Second Intifada.

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator
Democratic Underground

[dems4israel]

31. check the facts yourself please

Sharons walk on the Temple mount was not the cause of the second "intifada" which in my opinion is no infifada at all if you compair it to the first one The PLO was just waiting for a opportunity
to launch a violent attack on Israeli society if they could not get what they wanted at the boardroom table (greater "Palestine") they would force the issue with violence. The second intifada was actually planned for years by the PLO and carefully coordinated by different Palestian factions ie Hamas,Islamic Jihad the first intifada I agree was random and unplaned. Sharon visiting a sight that is both very historically and religiously important to Jews which I believe that he should be able to have the freedom to visit whatever they want. Palestinian Propagandists have used this as a excuse and continue to do so. I see that you certainly want to argue the Palestinian side which is fine just be prepaired to back it up with actual facts.

[Darranar]

18. There is a central problem with Palestinian non-violent resistance...

As long as there is violence as well, Israel can excuse any brutal dispersing of a non-violent attempt to disrupt the occupation by saying that they're hurting Israeli security. This will make such resistance ineffective, and until it is effective violent resistance will never stop.

[pelsar]

24. grass roots reaction

what you dont seem to understand is that the IDF soldiers will not take up weapons against their own mom and dad, sister and brother....thats what its all about.

the palestenains stop with the violence, more than half of the israelis will be rooting for them, many will actually join them...this acutally happens by the way...(no illusion, no propaganda just simply facts on the ground)

and then the IDF and the politicians (who also will not want to see their own children either shooting fellow israelis or being shot)....will then react to the grass roots movement. Its happened in the past...thats how israeli society works.

for those who insist that violence is the answer....are simply condeming the region and more than anything the palestenians to a horribly miserable destructive life......

[Darranar]

33. Where in my post did I say anything contradicting that? n/t

[HawkerHurricane]

39. The problem remains

ANY group using violence on the Palastinians 'behalf', even if denounced by all Palastinians, will be used as a excuse to continue a violent response.

[pelsar]

48. you miss the point....

its not the individual jihadnist that will screw things up...the palestenians as a group must show that they are going non voilent...enough to have the israelis join them....once the israeli public is convinced whom by the way is made up of IDF soldiers, there will be change. That same education in peaceful protests the palestenains badly need for themselves

I keep reading this here that the "IDF" as if its some kind of machine with no roots in the israeli society....well the IDF is made up of kids, moms and dads of israel....convince the israeli public and your convincing the IDF, were one and the same.

[Tuco Ramirez]

11. Don't be non-violent - you're winning

You don't need to talk of peace; take Allah at his word.

There is no victory for "them", and they know it.

[pelsar]

12. Allah?.......at his word?

dont get me started on him....we'll just leave this as a "no comment"

[Tuco Ramirez]

14. He (Ishmael) will be the prince of a great people

He is; they're called Arabs.

[drdon326]

16. "take Allah at his word" ??..."There is no victory for "them" ??

without getting into religion , do YOU believe the koran calls for the destruction of jews??....of israel??

Is that taking "Allah at his word" ??













ed.note- I am asking THE POSTERS opinion and i make no accusations.

[Tuco Ramirez]

26. I don't believe it does at all

That came about more recently, for political rather than religious reasons.

[Spider Jerusalem]

64. Allah = YHVH...

and any religious justification for violence is an absurdity...witness, for instance, the ultra-Orthodox who equate the Palestinians with Amalek and cite the commandment to "destroy utterly the seed of Amalek" as justification for continued violence.

[Darranar]

21. "You're winning"?

Care to elaborate on, how, exactly, absolutely no progress towards statehood coupled with horrible humanitarian conditions, thousands dead, and tens of thousands wounded constitutes "winning"?

[Tuco Ramirez]

27. Because even then, there is no way they can lose.

The current situation could last another thousand years in their minds; eventually their enemies will tire.

They're willing to wait it out; is their opponent?

[drdon326]

15. Imagine my surprise....

when i turned on my computer and saw this....and NO ONE CALLING HIM A RACIST.

Perhaps you have noticed , uh-hem , i have posted 3 articles in the past several days by muslim writers/intellectuals condemning Palestinian VIOLENCE and AGGREESION...

Destroying the stereotype
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x81275



Innocent religion is now a message of hate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x81275#81532



Israel cultivates Nobel laureates, Arabs cultivate suicide bombers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x81088#81129


All 3 articles and yours call for the end of Palestinian atrocities that have forced Israel to take drastic actions against near invisible GROUPS of terrorists some/?most have called for "pushing every Jew into the sea"(thank you Jackie)

It seems that the "moderate" Muslim world that many (djinn and myself, to start) ,are desperately seeking are hopefully finding their voices ....AND yet some here knee-jerkly accuse these voices as "racist"(openly) or if called on it use innuendo.

Also notice the INCREDIBLE recent warming between Israel and Jordan and Israel and Egypt. And even my favorite country , Syria <gasp>, has made OPEN overtures about settling the Golan Heights............
Its not a stretch to believe that these countries tying themselves to a failed, violent (see "collaborators"), terror-allowing Palestinian authority is EVEN too much for them.

With respect to Marx...(Karl, not Groucho)...MAYBE...

A Spectre is haunting the middle east....a spectre of NON-VIOLENCE.






BTW.....I'M LOCKING THIS......TOO INFLAMMATORY.(juuuuuust kidding)

[Darranar]

19. Where did the writer of the original post's article...

say that most terrorists are Muslim? Or that Islam is a "message of hate"?

[drdon326]

20. Did I say that ??

why do you accuse me of things i didnt say??

[Forkboy]

22. You didn't say it

but one the articles you're touting as a message of peace did.I suspect you knew that...but maybe not.

[Darranar]

23. No, the articles you posted did. n/t

[drdon326]

36. Ooops...my bad.

my apologies.

d

[newyorican]

28. Another example of a shoe fitting so well...

that the foot is clueless to its existence.

[newyorican]

29. Good article...

good advice. :thumbsup:

However, there is ample evidence that there are those on both sides of the issue that will not respect anything at all. Hope springs eternal!

[dems4israel]

30. No Actual plan here

"non-violence" I don't see any real non-violent tactics I just see more overused rhetoric

[Jack Rabbit]

32. You seem to be either misunderstanding or ignoring Mr. Awad's purpose

It is not Mr. Awad's purpose to present in a few brief paragraphs a detailed plan for a campaign of nonviolent protest, but rather to persuade his reader of the desirability of such a plan. Nowhere is he saying that the Palestinian resistance has been characterized principally by nonviolence, which would obviously be a foolish remark; rather, he is stating that nonviolent elements have always been present.

Mr. Awad's points are:

• Independent of the means employed to achieve the goals, the Palestinian cause -- the goals of which are an end to occupation of the Palestinian Territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state -- is a just cause.
• Armed resistance has failed to achieve these goals.
• The time has come to try a new approach.

It is implicit in this piece that Mr. Awad envisions a two-state solution in which Israel and Palestine share a border approximating the Green Line. Most issues he leaves open, as he should; it will be for Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, not Mr. Awad alone, to determine the shape of the final treaty that ends the conflict.

It is an unfortunate given that there will be those on the Palestinian side who will reject his approach and demand the annihilation of Israel, a goal which, even if there were any moral merit to it, could never be achieved. That, more than equally hard-line position of some elements of Israeli society, accounts for the failure of violent the tactics employed by organizations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Apart from the moral repugnance of tactics that deliberately target civilians, no suicide bombing, nor all of them together, had prevented the construction of one unit of illegal settlement housing in occupied territory or the bulldozing of one Palestinian home to make way for the construction of such housing or a segregated road to access it.

Advancing this proposal, as Mr. Awad does, cannot be done without challenging the credibility of the Palestinian right wing militants. That challenge to the Palestinian right is long overdue. Arafat, in his last years, was ineffective in making such a challenge to the Palestinian right; one would be justified to wonder out loud if he had any will to do so. With Arafat's death, the Palestinian people will have an opportunity to discuss their future and the role Islamic religionists will play in it.

For peace between Israel and Palestine to be achieved, both nations must change course and install new leaders willing to do what is necessary to that end. Mr. Awad, by writing this piece, is doing his part to persuade his people to take that path.

[Lithos]

34. Nice summary

:thumbsup:

[Djinn]

35. how many actions of non violence have resulted in death

at the hands of the IDF who'll shoot "anything that moves even if it's a three year old" or who'll drive over and crush non violent demonstrators against house demolitions?

Of the 1656 unarmed Palestinians (about half the total Palestinian fatalities) killed since the second intifada began only ONE has resulted in any convictions against the troops responsible.

When the IDF can kill with impunity - the deaths of unarmed Palestinians were always investigated during the first intifada that's no longer the case and the only statements taken are those of IDF personnel - there is very little impetus to engage in non violent protest.

Non violent protests would be dimished as militant demonstrations and those present written off as "terrorists" as the defence lawyer for the soldier accused of shooting a 13 girl is using - soldier kills unarmed 13 year old girl despite his own troops telling him she was a terrified schoolgirl running away, soldier charged with pissy administrative charges like "conduct unbecoming", and the defence insists this child was a terrorist - what was she going to do blow up the soldiers with her textbooks?

Children sitting in classrooms, children walking to school, women buying food have all been described as militants/terrorists, as long as demonstrators have reason to beleive they would be shot or blown apart via missile and then described by senior IDF personel and the Israeli government as simply terrorists - there is very little incentive to do so.

[Lithos]

37. Yes and no

The troops who did those actions were generally in the midst of a live firefights against militants of one sort or the other. Taking this off the table would change the dynamics dramatically.

Organized non-violence has worked to the Palestinian benefit in several cases including a recent example dealing with the Wall. It is the solution if done right.

[dems4israel]

38. Flawed information

The fatality rate of Palestinians is sad but what is worse is the fact that Palestinian Terrorist groups recklessly use innocents as human shields or they hide in highly populated areas the IDF does have rules of engagement they don't just shoot everything that moves.

[Djinn]

40. maybe you should tell that

to the soldiers that dobbed in their superior for saying that EVERYTHING that moves even it's a THREE year old needs to be shot.

[pelsar]

42. they did....or is this a case of mis information?

how do you think the information got to the press in the first case?...it was the soldiers who complained.

There are rules of engagement for the IDF, but not so for the "other side". My favorite is not to shoot at the direction of a hospital unless taking accurate fire.

of course one "begs" to ask what is the definition of "accurate fire"...being shot first, watching my buddy get shot, little puffs of dirt next to my feet.....

sure is fun making judgments of like that......

[pelsar]

41. non violence demands commitement.....

as long as palestenian proclaim (and those that "support them") that violence is the answer....they have nothing to "complain about".......

and yes the IDF can kill with impunity, the IDF and israel are the strong one here, thats why its incredibly stuided for the Palestenians to take the violent tract. You would think that after so much death and misery that the Palestenians and their supporters would wake up and smell the roses (as some have done.....see original article)

over 70% unemployment (aprox) income plummed down, tourism next to nothing, danger just walking to school...lives that have no hope...

and all the while over half of the population next door really wants the palestenians to have their country......and will help and support them instead of putting them further down in their misery

non violence demands fulll commitment, not half measures not discussions, but commitiment (the black movement of america would be a good example).....

"try it, you'll like it"

[pelsar]

43. 13 years olds as terrorist......

what was she going to do blow up the soldiers with her textbooks?

kind of a dumb comment since 13 year olds have actually attacked a settlement in the past, and are used daily as lookouts, food and information carriers....not a very far jump from that to carrying a bomb.

and more to the point, 2 days later a similar occurance, A 13 year old, ignored loud speaker warnings, warning shots walked right up to a base proclaimed she had a bomb in her bag.......the commander simply didnt believe here and ordered her to open it up.....she had books. (sorry not in the news, my neighbors son is the commander).

on one hand, it was pretty dumb of the commander "not to believe her"...on the other hand, his own intuition told him she was lying and was in fact "looking for some fame" like the other dead girl.

still, no black and white here, just lots of decisions based on partial information.....

[newyorican]

44. ROFLMAO!

Not in the news! BWAHAHAHA

Man you just can't make this shit up...oh, my bad, I guess you can...

Psst, Your "commander" ain't the only one not buying bridges in Brooklyn...

[pelsar]

45. not in the news..big deal

It really doesnt bother me a whole lot whether or not its in the news...some people simply want to believe something reguardless of information. Its kind of sad that "new information is "not accepted.."

I've slowly understanding that its kind of like a religion or cult.....information which doesnt fit someones belief is either igrnored, thrown out or deemed irrelevant. (or in this cased "laughed at.....)

I've always wondered whats going to happen to those people if and when peace comes to the conflict...what wil they do, what will they believe in?...will they find a new cause a new "cult"...or will they choose one of the more traditional religions and simply join them?

at any rate, getting ones news from the internet and from newspapers hardly gives one an actual full picture of the real goings on....but then I guess "you have to be there" to know that.

[Englander]

46. " laughed at"....

"not in the news" is being ridiculed 'cos it is bare-faced,ridiculous,(racist,even),offensive propaganda.

It's not being believed because all you are offering is anecdotal "evidence".
If that is the only "proof" there is,don't be surprised if you find yerself being ridiculed.

Did I mention I find it utterly offensive to suggest that there's nae problem in murdering a 13yr-old school-girl? Just so you know.

[pelsar]

49. Racist?....

I fail to understand a description of events being racist...and newspapers have never been known for their honesty, hence reports are also suspect. I get the impression that real events from the field that go against your belief are simply not to be believed.

But more interesting I believe I understand where your coming from now, let me clarify this: I realize that its a bit off topic, but you wrote in a previous thread:

On which side of the political spectrum? Is there anyone on the left who puts forward this viewpoint?

As far as I understand, what the "left" says is what you agree with....is that a good description?

[Englander]

50. "What to believe?".....

If the reporting of "the real events from the field" makes it into LBN;
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=102

then I'll believe it.Possibly.;)

On the subject of my political beliefs,I agree with whom I agree with; it's mostly,though not always,people of a progressive,left leaning persuasion.And the definition of "left" differs in each country.If you read all of the articles I've posted,I imagine you'll get an idea of my perspective.

[pelsar]

51. events in the field...

they happen everyday....every minute there are interactions between palestenians and israelis, be it PA businessmen meeting in the Hilton in Tel Aviv (did you know that?) to palestenains going after settlers with pitchforks (did you know that?)...how about israelis in hebron throwing water on palestenians and IDF soldiers (that?).....how about israeli moms using their kids against the police?...how about palestenians kids being used to test the new army units reaction....and reporting their movements, how about how the IDF warning the PA to "stay indoors" because there going to be a mission somewhere in a certain area....I could go on and on, about how each side does what...and even then I know very little.....whether or not the events make it into some "piddly little discussion group" has absolutly no bearing on whether they happen or not.

but having been an actual player out there i would think that those who are actually interested in the real events would like to hear from what is referred to as Israeli moderate leftest.

when I am so easily "shoved aside" as a "propagandist" etc.....when my views are of no concern...its those actions, when they filter down into the UN, the field, that makes realize that were probably just kidding ourselves, nothing has really changed in the last 2,000years.....and yes then we wonder if that pathetic axiom that anti israel is just a variation of anti-semetism.....whether or not its true or not I have no idea, I do know that for those who dont want to hear my views...it does make us wonder why not? why are our views, concerns, explanations not worthy?.....(but dont misinterpet this, I am not "crying", I am just curious....)

and just to finish: If I am to continue the though process of "my view" having no weight, no concern...it doesnt make me want to compromise with anybody, quite the contrary. Why should I care what the "world' thinks when obviously they dont even care to listen to me. (your reactions to my posts being a good example of that)

Funny thing is the palestenians and arab world are slowly starting to "get it"...I suspect the last ones to really understand will be those in Europe.....if ever...(but thats if they "stay white and christian and traditional oriented..who knows with the changing demographics we'll probably end up having some very good friends in europe....)

[Englander]

52. You have every right to state your views....

Your views carry weight,and are not being dismissed. Being labelled as a "propagandist" is all part of the rough-&-tumble of this forum;if you feel I'm dismissing you,or saying your views are worthless,then don't.I am not suggesting that at all.I would not suggest that anything you bring to the discussion is irrelevant.

The disagreement I have is with you,or anyone else,is when repuke sites or politicians are quoted,or when the UN ambulance/weapons bollocks is suggested,or when an explanation is offered as to why it's perfectly OK for 13 yr-old school-girls to be murdered.
When some-one does that,their claims of being a moderate,or a progressive,or a leftie count for nothing,and I tend not to believe a lot of what they have to say.But,of course,it's their right to say it.

[pelsar]

53. explanation vs justification

a lot of what I have been doing here is explaining the environment which leads to killing of kids...which you tend to dismiss out of hand. War is not a civil society and no matter how much you may not understand it, war is about killing.....the only way the killing stops is when the war stops, anything short of that is just a waste of breath or in this case bandwidth. (i.e. complaining about a particular death....)

I get the impression that you dont believe the palestenians use their kids (this will not be true of all, but the peer pressure within their society is intense)....

if so, I will offer to do the research for you that shows you that many of their kids are actively involved. Now you probably dont read arabic so sending you newspapers with letters to the editor where palesetenian moms tell the PA to stop it, wont work....so you tell me

pictures from reuters? I understand that websites from the "right" are automactically "no good" (btw, that is very biased on your part, many times they have both info and insights to doings that the left doesnt realize)....

Quotes from palestenian personalities, human right groups?.....what type of information (I"m assuming my own experiences dont "count" either)

[idontwantaname]

54. i didnt follow the whole thread here...

but pelsar offers a unique and valid argument here...

you will find areas where 12 & 13 year olds(mentally far from being idealistic naive "kids") are look outs... actively and intensely anti-israeli... where they carry knives til theyre old enough to carry a gun.

this is not everyone... and they do not behave like this without provocation and many hard years.

i would like to add here though that more often than not its not "the palestenians use their kids" but the youths rebelling against "the system". like "cowboys and indians" or spy games... nobody wants to be a square.

-------------------------------------------------------

parents do not want their kids involved with the al-aqsa boys. they dont want their kids hanging out late at night looking for collaborators.

they want their kids to go to school. get a job(if avalible)... have a family if they can afford and move out of the west bank. this is what parents want.

but you know how difficult youths can be... sometimes they just dont listen.

[pelsar]

55. validation from the "other side"

idontwantaname.....its such a "pleasure" not only to hear a valid response but one that adds some additional information. But that comes from ones whos actually been there.

I believe the very first step is to attempt to be honest about the societies, including the warts......because we will find that within those warts is common ground......basically our kids growing up with warped morals.....

just an interesting side note: there is a place in israel called Givat-Chaviva, where they do a lot of studies involving arabs/palestenians etc. About last year or so they had a peer help group of palestenian mothers whos children were suicide bombers. Given the pressures within the palestenian society, they were not allowed to show grief, so they came to israel...just an interesting interaction. On one hand we kill each other on the other we reach out.....

[Djinn]

56. you agree with the soldier then

anything that moves needs to be shot - including 3 year olds - even when your colleugues tell you she's terrified and running away :eyes:

does it ever occur to you that the excuses and justifications YOU use are used on the other side to justify dead Israeli children.

No justification as far as I'm concerned, you may see things differently.

[pelsar]

57. justification?.....read carefully

you seem to be confusing justification with explanation....

is killing a 13 yr old justified?.....it depends on the situation....I never justified what that particular soldier did, nor do I justify shooting 3 yrs olds. Please read again what I wrote.

But by the previous posts you can see that 13yr old palestenians are activly involved, not passive...so yes they will be directly/indirectly threatening israelis with death and when doing so, as active participants they take the risks that go along with it.

if you read a previous post of mine where a very similar situation happend two days later and the commander chose not to shoot. Part of the difference, I suspect, was the culture of the two commanders, one being druz (the one who shot) and the other being raised in Sweden...but thats just some guesswork on my part.

As far as a blanket "no justification'.....that black and white version usually changes when the 13-16yr old is pointing an AK-47 at you, or is directing some else to shoot at you.....or may (or may not) be carrying a bomb....

I guess the urban version would be downtown in some city USA where the gangbangers run....if a 13yr gangbanger is threatening to kill you....you would let him? or does you "no justification" apply there as well?

[Djinn]

58. cool

"you seem to be confusing justification with explanation...."

I'll remember that the next time someone gets called a terrorist supporter for mentioning they understand why Palestinians (and Iraqi resistance fighters and many other groups) attack non military targets - it's explanation not justification.

BTW - given people of both sexes and most ages have been involved in this conflict I guess this rationalises ALL the 1600+ unarmed Palestinians killed...hey they could be holding a bomb :eyes:

[pelsar]

59. your looking for a black and white answer....

I can explain why they attack non military targets, understanding why, doesnt mean justification...why are you confusing the two?

and for some reason that escapes me you've applied an explanation to a single incident and somehow extened it to include 1600 additional palestenians...

how does that work?

either I'm not writing clearly or your "playing with my explanation, which I really dont appreciate.....

[Djinn]

60. don't care what you appreciate

I'm not confusing anything I'm pointing out the "explanantion" can go both ways so next time you berate someone for "supporting" terrorism I can point that out.

As for

"and for some reason that escapes me you've applied an explanation to a single incident and somehow extened it to include 1600 additional palestenians..."

would that be like your justification for shooting a 13 year old (even though she was identified as running AWAY) because at other times teenagers have proved to be combatants, ie extending those incidents to cover ALL 13 year olds (or three year olds)

[pelsar]

61. hmmm lets try again...

I guess I have to ask you to be specific as to where I justified killing that particular girl....

btw its wonderful conversations like this that really explain a whole lot to me: one side (me) does not justify the killing of the little girl and say so in simple english and here we have the other side (you) try very hard to prove that I do justify it...

seems to me one of us here isnt very interested in understanding what makes the "other side tick"....sort of the first baby steps in working out disagreements.

so what part of my writing isnt clear? I understand when Hebrew and Arabic are translated as much gets lost (especially in arabic a very complex language and culture)...but this just English


I think the difference between justification and explanation are pretty clear in the dictionary.....where do you see the confusion within those two words

If you want a good example of explanation check into the above writing of "dontwantaname" as he explains why the palestenain kids join the war.

[Djinn]

62. patronise much

fine you want to call it explanation thats fine - just remember that when people explain suicide bombings and the targetting of civilians -it's not justifying it's explanation.

I'm not trying to prove anything pelsar - I just view your repeated posts about thirteen year old bomb throwers and how this poor soldiers career is ruined as somewhat distasteful.

When asked about this SPECIFIC events (Iman el-Hams death) you speak about 13 year old combatants SHE WASN'T one - caqn you condemn her death at all?

YOU can call it whatever you like but I'm sorry if I don't put half as much weight into your posts as you do.

[pelsar]

67. condem the girls death...

i guess you missed it.....given what i understand of the communications, that the soldiers identified her as a little girl, scared behind an embakment. its a "no brainer" the commander shouldnt have killed her, shouldnt have confirmed the kill and has no right to be in the IDF.

at the sametime, whereas i condem the suicide bombers it does not make me "deaf" as to why they do it-the explanation. On the contrary i want the explanations (there are several) as to understand how to prevent them

same here, I want to why he did what he did...where was the failure of the IDF?

punishments in wartime of soldiers is very unlike that of a peacetime civilian society. Its far more complex as it involves a complete subculture with very long term influence on the army as a whole. But if you really want to understand that i can explain what I understand of in a different thread......but its a tough one to understand for those who havent been on the "inside"

[Djinn]

72. it's also hard to understand

what it feels like to be a child in a UN school getting shot at, or a mother watching her house and all it's possesions being destroyed because someone else in your neighbourhood committed a crime, or a father identifying the body of his son shot for chucking a stone.

Yet you presume to know everything - please stop with the I know more than anyone here because I say I've been there crap - it's tedious and lends zero to the discussion

[pelsar]

81. but there is a difference....

i wont even pretend to know what its like to have my child shot at while at school, at the sametime I do know what its like to send my child on a schoolbus and wonder if it will get blown up during their trip. I also know what its like to tell my kids not to go into certain shopping malls because they might get blown up......i also know what its like to drive in jerusalem passing some of the favorite bomber spots and wonder if I 'll get through it....and I also know what its like to walk within the refugee camps of jeballia, chan yunis or downtown gaza, those experiences, like all experiences shape ones opinion, and give some weight to it.

but then I would turn the question around and ask if you know of those things?.....and yes experience counts for a tremendous amount in life...though i know nothing about you, perhaps you skydive? snorkel, climb mtns?.....car mechanic?. wouldnt you be surprised if someone who never got their hands dirty in an engine would tell you how to fix it?

or an "armchair" mtn climber telling you how to dig a snowcave?.....you would probably laugh your head off at him.....experience counts in life...why not in the here in this conflict?

[Djinn]

83. the thing I wouldn't

do is assume to know ANYTHING about the experiences of people on an internet forum - not all of us wear our experiences on our sleeves or shout about them quite as much as you do.

[pelsar]

85. and yet experiences are relevant

its from experiences that we learn....just take a look at the posts from dontwantaname. Those few posts shed light on the why the paletenian kids are involved. If I recall when i mentioned it earlier I was lambasted...yet he also was there (from the other side) and through his own experiences confirms it-that explains the strenght of the personal experience.

no i know nothing about the posters here, sometimes there a little info leaks out, sometimes not.....but like i mentioned earlier where as my experiences in fixing my motorcycle arent relevant here, i dont mention it, my experiences within the IDF and within the westbank and gaza I see as very relevant, is that not the discussion subject?

but you've never really explained how is it that those experiences are somehow "less impotant" than what you've read.( now I am guessing that you've never been partly because of how you write and partly because you've never expressed personal knowledge).

I guess the classic example of how and why experience is valuable is when dad/mom sits down and talks to their kids about their first 'broken heart"...how does it go?....we tell them dont worry, they'll get over it, and then we proceed to tell them about our own PAST experiences with it....because we've been through it and have personal knowledge, we simply know more in that particular subject at that time.

this is the first time in my life that I can recall, in that my own experiences have been more or less rendered "less worthy" less knowledgeable" than those who have none.....how does that work (excuse the assumption that you've never been out here-correct me if I am wrong)

[Englander]

47. This is a good article.....

".. the Palestinian population inside and outside of Palestine must be mobilized in mass campaigns beginning with a boycott of Israeli products campaign and moving on to more dangerous protests at check points, on settler roads, and near international border crossings."

[Djinn]

63. As a gesture of faith to initiate

some trust within the Palestinian community perhaps every single settlement outside the boundaries of what is internationally accepted as Israel, could be either demolished or at the very least Israeli tax dollars be removed from them (ALL infrastructure and military protection).

At this point Palestinians (the non fundies atleast) would see some sign that non violence on their part would not be met with more expansion and dispossession.

Between the nakba and the first intifada how far did non violence get the Palestinian cause?

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pelsar]

68. realisim....

remove the military infrastructure from the settlements?....given the almost weekly attempts to attack settlements (be it in gaza or the westbank-missle or sniper) that would be tantemount to israel murdering its own citizens.....

try being practical......one possible simple thing I would suggest is for the palestenians to call on their arab brethern to stop with the anti jew/israeli tv/radio programs...now that really wouldnt cost them anything,but it sure would do a lot from our perspective.....


the palestenians between 48 and the first intifada, didnt do much in terms of non violent protest.....at least none that I can recall.....can you link me to report? article? magazine?

[Lithos]

69. One example

AN ISRAELI VIEW
Nonviolence in the Abu Mazen era
by Yossi Alpher

******

A veteran Israeli general once related to me how, in 1949, leaders of the Palestinian refugee population, freshly arrived in Gaza, threatened to launch a "green march" north up the Mediterranean coast to homes they had abandoned in Ashdod and Jaffa. The general's response was to threaten to open fire on the marchers, and the march was cancelled. Today the response would feature tear gas and rubber bullets, but the principle would be the same: if the purpose of Palestinian nonviolent tactics were to endanger Israel and Israelis and rekindle a conflict, it would undoubtedly be opposed by all available non-lethal means.

more

[pelsar]

70. on the ground (again)

during the first intifada where the revolt was considered relativtly non violent and not threatening to to Israel, many reserve units had problems filling their units. Reserve soldiers didnt show up, excuses were many....bottom line, no one wanted to be killed or kill for whats was deemed "reasonable response to the occupation.

now the reserve units are generally filled to 100% as the current intifada with its sucide bombers has affected and threatens daily life of the israelis within the green line.

its not the politicians nor the army who will decide when the occupation ends, its the israeli people. Convince us that the palestenian state wont threaten us....and thats all that has to be done..we just wont show up for reserve duty....and we'll influence our sons and daughters-no occupation army, no occupation

its so godam simple.....

[Lithos]

71. I agree with this 100%

That is why I so staunchly believe non-violence is the only way to a real solution.

L-

[Djinn]

75. hang on a minute

your saying when there wasn't violent opposition people in general thought the Palestinian response was reasonable yet they STILL didn't end the occupation? now that the response is violent they wont pull out either?

Jeez sounds like damned if you do/damned if you don't

[pelsar]

76. Djnn....you have confused the issues

the palestenians have yet to have a non violent protest movement....being passive non violent without protesting doesnt do anything.

they're protest started with intifada I...before that there was nada, nothing, zero in terms of their protesting the occupation as a "people"

there were acts of violence by the various groups but nothing as a people such as in intifada I...that was the cause for oslo.

now if they had continued it after oslo, and even perhaps kept away the molotov cocktail and rocks of intifada I they would have had a state by now....

you seem to have confused non voilent protest with passive non violence with out the protest.....protesting, makeing your voice heard is the key here.

[Djinn]

79. and you've ignored reality

there HAVE been non violent protests...they've ended up in violent reaction by the Israeli military. Or they've been cancelled because the military has come right out and admitted that they would SHOOT protestors.

As for Oslo - well atleast you didn't use the words "generous offer" although I could have used a laugh today

[Djinn]

74. Thanks Lithos

this is precisely my point - when people know that non violence will be met with violent reaction there is little incentive to do it.

[Djinn]

73. The settlements are NOT on Israeli territory

if people want to live outside the boundaries of their nation they shouldn't expect protection from that nations armed forces...it's very simple.

If I choose to live in PNG I'm choosing a dangerous location, I could NOT expect the Austrlian (or British) government to provide infrastructure and military protection for me.

Or do you support the illegal settlements?

[pelsar]

77. the settlements...

actually its really quite a tricky legal issue, and I'm sure the courts would be busy for years with it if it really even went to non political court.

after all israel took that land in a defensive war from an attacking force....and therefore belongs to them....or you can say that it was the jews 2,000 years ago and unless there is a statue of limitations on a countrys land ownership it still belongs to them (or israel can keep out the palestenians for the next 2,000 years until they lose their ownership rights....

I'm sure international lawyers would have field day with this one ( how about this one: the palestenians by not declaring their state in 48 forfitted their rights!)

that whole "legal" issue is declaring a party guilty without trial...hence its just a play on words. The settlements lega issus is a mute point.

....its really not relevant since the issue is really not legal ownership. The reality on the ground is whats relevant. The negotiations that work out the differences.

and of that issue there is but one single issue that counts: will the future palestenian state use their new found status as a state to attack israel, who then in turn will have to defend itself and will find itself in the same situation all over again, but with a lot more dead!

that and only that is the real question. and that question I KNOW you cant answer.


(but no, I have no love for the settlements nor the extremist who live in many of them-not all mind you)

[Djinn]

78. if the settlements are on israeli territory

then the people who also live on that land - PALESTINIANS - should be accorded the same rights as the settlers, the right to vote and to have their lives and livelihoods protected by the IDF, if not then the settlers should not receive that either.

In your own words....Goddamn simple

[pelsar]

80. land is disupted-outcome yet to be determined

why are you trying to play some kind of "legal game" of land ownership....we dont have that problem out here.

the palestenian society is a seperate society from isaeli society....at least to us and the palestenians thats very clear. They have their territory, we have ours, They dont vote in our elections, we dont vote in theirs. They pay taxes to the PA we to the israel, we dont have a problem with the jurisdictions.

the land is in dispute, thats also very clear...and its not a legal issue, its a negotiation

but to clariy, the israeli settlements are at this point considered part of israel, the PA enclaves made up areas defined as A and B are "theirs.....this is how the oslo negotiations ended with agreement from both sides. Obviously this is a temp arrangement but it serves its purpose until further notice. That should explain the temp land ownerhip today that both sides have agreed to take care of the many legal issues involved.

[newyorican]

82. "They have their territory, we have ours..."

Clearly not the case...

It's more like, We have their territory and we have ours. Hence the conflict.

[pelsar]

86. how about this version......

we get some territory from our distant past(48)....we then get attacked and take a little bit of yours(49).....we then get continually attack an we do nothing (fedayan)....we then get attacked yet again and this time we take a lot of yours (67)......we then get attacked yet again and we take more of yours ...this time we return a bit(73).....we then get attacked from inside those territories but in a semi peaceful manner and we give back some (intifada I)....we then get attacked again from those territories and we take some back....(intifadaII)


I see a pattern here...... dont attack us

as far as "their territory goes" .... I cannot walk in to the PA territory without have my life indanger, whereas they can come to mine....guess that mean they do have some control over "theirs"....(damn facts on the ground always mess up a good theory dont they?)


btw in all of these discussions no one here has mentioned how you guys figure that the palesetenians after the "final status and they have their state, will stop attacking israel?

how will they suddenly do this switch from the "zionist evil subhuman enemy" to good neighbor?

And just for discussions sake (cuase we actually wonder about this) what will be israels options if the palestenains continue to attack?

[Djinn]

84. sounding more like Gimel everyday

:eyes:

[pelsar]

90. djinn...

its ok you can still reply..as i am quite curious:

assuming a mutually agreeable solution to the various territories and settlements whatever they be by the govts:

how is it that the continual attacks upon us, be it verbal or physical will suddenly stop or if not what do you see will be our options?

mostly I wonder if someone who is appears to be so strong in favor of the palestenian state, would question him/herself if said palestenian state turned out to be (after a bunch of political manuvers by the various gangbangers) a variation of iran in terms of a religious dictatorship? Absence of civil rights, continued attacks upon israel etc.

The reason I am curious is that I've seen protest where left/human right activists sit with prohamas, etc against israel, or they join in with muslim extremists (iran style "democracy) against israel....and it "boggles my mind" how anyone who is concerned with human and civil rights could stomach sitting next to someone who epitimizes the worst of all possible govts: theocracy 12th century style..... to make it short:....again humor me, and remember this is the middle east, anything can happen, the future palestenian state, what would it take for you to say....yea, the palestenian state turned out to be a failure

[Djinn]

96. LIke I need your permission

to reply or ignore you pelsar/gimel/nachama

[Tuco Ramirez]

87. They will always win

They are more sincere. Would you blow yourself up to protect a Sbarro's pizzeria?

Until you're willing to do that, accept the reality that they MUST win. Or, as they say, the Shah ALWAYS falls.

[pelsar]

88. no Tuco..

they are not more sincere....they are victims of what is called "groupthink"....and anyways we're done with being on the loosing side (surprise!)

[Tuco Ramirez]

91. Again, what would you be willing to give up?

I suspect much less than they do.

[drdon326]

89. I missed this little bit of wisdom....

They are more sincere.

No ...these terrorists are more PSYCHOTIC..

and hopefully more will be DEAD .

[Tuco Ramirez]

92. 200 years ago we would have called them patriots

Guess it depends on how you look at it.

They want their land back; they will get it. Until someone can tell me in 1,000,000 words or less how they can lose. The current state of affairs, and the last 60 years, are pointing towards Palestinian victory.

[pelsar]

93. they wont lose...quite the opposite

it all goes well and they get a palestenian state in the westbank/gaza based on democratic values, they will consider themselves the winners (take a look around at their comrades in iran....) and the tribal neccessity for land based on ethnic/cultural/religious neanderthal values will no longer be a requirement.

a state like iran/syria/sudan etc is not a success story.

and patriots?...dont blow themselves up to kill other people-stuiped people do that, and viscious people set them up to do that and fools support them...those are not the good foundations for a country based on civil rights for all.

[Tuco Ramirez]

94. Iran, Syria, and Sudan

were more successful than the Soviet Union, South Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Czeckoslovakia.

(Remember them?)

[pelsar]

95. thats some list....which proves?

what is that...a listing of the failed states of world? Sudan....probably one of the worlds worst places to live....unless of course your not in to 12century religious nut jobs, in which case I wouldnt suggest iran....and syria..i'll tell you one thing, they sure know how to take care of terrorism in their own country.

What was that they did to their own city (hama)back there in 82?-shelled it and massacred those that survived-u betcha...my kind a town. But the syrians sure do have quiet now. (when you visit, just keep your head down)

anyways enough of the sarcasim....whats your point?...that failed countries can impload? get invaded.....