So Israeli policy works?

[Rat Faced]

NABLUS, West Bank (AP) - The Israeli army destroyed the home of a teenage suicide bomber Tuesday despite his mother's public and impassioned criticism of the group that sent her son on the deadly mission.

Israeli military officials acknowledged the woman's grief, but insisted the policy of demolishing bombers' houses is necessary to deter more attacks. The militants who sent the teenager said they would try to rebuild the family's home.

The incident focused new attention on an Israeli policy that has drawn criticism from Palestinians and human rights groups, which say tearing down homes amounts to collective punishment.

After the demolition, the bomber's mother, Samira Abdullah, backed off her criticism of her sons' handlers, saying her anger had subsided and praising the teenager as a hero.

I wonder why she changed her mind after they demolished her house, despite the fact she was outspoken against the group....



Source (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4591170,00.html)

[cpt_azad]

I wonder why she changed her mind after they demolished her house, despite the fact she was outspoken against the group....



Source (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4591170,00.html)

maybe because she's getting a new house from the people who told her son to go kill himself. Terrorist and suicide bombers make me sick, Israel makes me sicker :dry: .

[vidcc]

not a good policy

[Everose]

As a mother, my first anger would be at my son who, knowing the policy, chose to sacrifice my home for his beliefs.

[ruthie]

As a mother, my first anger would be at my son who, knowing the policy, chose to sacrifice my home for his beliefs.

Wow!!!!As a mother, my first emotion would be grief for the loss of my son. Despair too, that he felt that was a way to make his statement, anger that anyone tried to influence him to take his own life as well as the lives of others.
Somehow, when I read the original quip, it never entered my mind that I would be angry, to think about "he chose to sacrifice our home."
I would be angry that my beloved son was gone. The home? Can't compare it to my beautiful son.

[Everose]

Ruthe, of course I would mourn my son first, but my 'first anger' would be at my son and I would also lay on him the responsibility for his own actions, regardless of who 'influenced' him. I think you know me better than to respond to this the way you did. Please reread the post you quoted. I said my first anger, not my first emotion.

[ruthie]

Ruthe, of course I would morn my son first, but my first anger would be at my son and I would also lay on him the responsibility for his own actions, regardless of who 'influenced' him. I think you know me better than to respond to this the way you did. Get real.

I understand you would mourn your son, and hold him accountable, however....in this country, people are proud of family members who give their lives for our country. Personally, I don't go for the whole suicide bombing trip, but maybe it is not seen that way with many Palestinians..some of them feel that they are defending their country, their homes. Maybe i would be furious with Israel for their sick policy..such as bulldozing the house, though they seem to bulldoze houses for no reason at all.
I'm just saying, everose, I wold not blame my son for the destruction of my home..that wouldn't enter into the equation. I might, however, blame Israel.

[Everose]

I understand you would mourn your son, and hold him accountable, however....in this country, people are proud of family members who give their lives for our country. Personally, I don't go for the whole suicide bombing trip, but maybe it is not seen that way with many Palestinians..some of them feel that they are defending their country, their homes. Maybe i would be furious with Israel for their sick policy..such as bulldozing the house, though they seem to bulldoze houses for no reason at all.
I'm just saying, everose, I wold not blame my son for the destruction of my home..that wouldn't enter into the equation. I might, however, blame Israel.

I am relieved that you do realize I would mourn my son, Ruthe, your first post did not make this apparent. :dry:

I guess that is the difference between us, Ruthe. Responsibility for ones actions has to start somewhere, and I feel it starts with each of us taking responsiblity of our actions and being held accountable for them, regardless.

[ruthie]

I guess that is the difference between us, Ruthe. Responsibility for ones actions has to start somewhere, and I feel it starts with each of us taking responsiblity of our actions and being held accountable for them, regardless.

So, who is accountable? Is it Israel, who has oppressed and abused Palestinians? Is it the Palestinians, who are treated like animals? Is it a kid who sees himself as a freedom fighter?
Who is treated as guilty? Is it innocent Israeli's caught in the crossfire? Is it Israeli's who join with Palestinians to push for peace between the peoples? Is it the children raised in a culture of violence from the time they were born? Is it innocent villagers watching their houses bulldozed? Where does accountability begin and end? I don't think it is with the children...I think it is with the politicians, for one.
Imagine yourself living your life as maybe this kid did, and witnessed what he might have in his lifetime. I don't think either of us are in a position to do so.
So, what came first...the chicken or the egg?

[Everose]

I am relieved that you do realize I would mourn my son, Ruthe, your first post did not make this apparent. :dry:

I guess that is the difference between us, Ruthe. Responsibility for ones actions has to start somewhere, and I feel it starts with each of us taking responsiblity of our actions and being held accountable for them, regardless.


My statement stands.

[ruthie]

As does mine.

[j2k4]

Here's a question:

Who is qualified to authoritatively pronounce on Israeli/Palestinian land rights?

Who has the definitive goods on drawing the borders, etc.?

I know the answer, let's see who else does. ;)

[ruthie]

depends on one's definition of "qualified". By what standard do you qualify one, an organization, country, political body etc. to have the authority? Curious.

[j2k4]

depends on one's definition of "qualified". By what standard do you qualify one, an organization, country, political body etc. to have the authority? Curious.

Ah, but I'm looking for your answer, ruthie.

Define or qualify as you see fit.

Rest assured, you will have my answer when I get back here-hopefully tomorrow.

[Rat Faced]

Under International Law, as there are outstanding UN resolutions on this, then the correct answer is that Israel should be those of the 1947 boundaries.

If we disregard the UN, then there are 2 possible senarios:

1/ Israel doent exist, as you are not recognising its Authority in the creation of said country.... therefore the whole of the land is Palestine

2/ The whole of the Occupied Territories and Israel itself belong to Israel via "Right of Conquest".


Im sure that you're not supporting the 2nd view, as that means you supported the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, as an example. :no:

Im also quite sure that you do not support the 1st option, as you have commented on the subject often.

By default then, you either support the 1947 Borders, or your a hypocrit... your call ;)

[ilw]

is no one your answer? To my way of thinking it is the UN or if it were possible someone impartial with as many of the facts to hand

Bulldozing someones home solves nothing, you need a peace process which brings hope to both sides. Sharon acting unilaterally is not a feasible solution.

[bigboab]

As a mother, my first anger would be at my son who, knowing the policy, chose to sacrifice my home for his beliefs.
I totally agree with your statement Rose(Except the mother bit:rolleyes: ) I think you have to find the 'Achilles Heel' of terrorists and strike at that.

I have mixed feelings about this situation. Though I agree that this is the way to deal with terrorists I also disagree with the 'Placing' of an Israeli state within another country.

Just a wee history lesson here for most of you youngsters. Before the Israeli State was created in 1948 by the then fledgling UN, Jewish 'Freedom Fighters' were killing British soldiers in that area. Palestine at that time was under British Mandate.:(

[vidcc]

the thing is this wasn't "the bombers" house...it was his mothers... just as our house isn't our childrens even though they live here....mind you i do worry because they keep looking up retirement communities on the internet.

my point is that this is equal to punishing an innocent person for something their brother did and it is as bad as the terrorist act in the first place. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[bigboab]

the thing is this wasn't "the bombers" house...it was his mothers... just as our house isn't our childrens even though they live here....mind you i do worry because they keep looking up retirement communities on the internet.

my point is that this is equal to punishing an innocent person for something their brother did and it is as bad as the terrorist act in the first place. 2 wrongs don't make a right.I think anything that makes them 'think twice' cannot be a bad thing.:cool:
Good luck with the 'home'. You will be able to play bingo and things like that all day. You will be looking forward to the tea dances. There will be plent of partners for you.:rolleyes: (Or would that make it a bun dance:wacko: )

[j2k4]

Under International Law, as there are outstanding UN resolutions on this, then the correct answer is that Israel should be those of the 1947 boundaries.

If we disregard the UN, then there are 2 possible senarios:

My default position is total disregard of the U.N., but as the creation of Israel was an act committed during the U.N.'s infancy, we'll lay that aside.

1/ Israel doent exist, as you are not recognising its Authority in the creation of said country.... therefore the whole of the land is Palestine

2/ The whole of the Occupied Territories and Israel itself belong to Israel via "Right of Conquest".

I lean in this direction, but with qualification:

The "Occupied Territories" are just that-occupied.

They remain occupied due to the ongoing perception of a threat to Israel, and are likely to remain so in perpetuity or until the threat no longer exists.

The latter seems unlikely, although with the apparently impending passing of Arafat, certain doors are ajar.

Im sure that you're not supporting the 2nd view, as that means you supported the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, as an example. :no:

Wrong.

Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was offensive and coercive; Israel's movements in the territories are defensive.

Surely you note the difference, Rat?


I'm also quite sure that you do not support the 1st option, as you have commented on the subject often.

By default then, you either support the 1947 Borders, or your a hypocrit... your call ;)

Surely you'll understand if I beg to differ...


How is it nobody here ever comments on Palestine's stated goal of "pushing Israel into the sea"?

The subject has here all the allure of oil-for-food.

[Rat Faced]

Every Arab country, and the Palestinians, have all said they will recognise Israel if returned to its orginal borders.

How many invasions have been done in the name of "Defence"... its a crap argument when Russia and China used it, and its a crap argument now.

[j2k4]

Every Arab country, and the Palestinians, have all said they will recognise Israel if returned to its orginal borders.

How many invasions have been done in the name of "Defence"... its a crap argument when Russia and China used it, and its a crap argument now.

The "crap" part must be why Arafat walked away from the Oslo accords, huh? :huh:

[Rat Faced]

Or why Sharron ripped up Camp David?

[bigboab]

Or why Sharron ripped up Camp David?
Is there not another way you could phrase that RF?:ohmy:

[Biggles]

Is there not another way you could phrase that RF?:ohmy:

Agreed! :ohmy:

Mind full of horrible images...must delete.... :fear:

[hobbes]

I would imagine that indoctrinating hatred in school children might be a policy to look into.

Or perhaps the policy of recruiting and warping young minds to execute your fanatical goals. Preying upon their adolescent desire to be accepted and appreciated. You don't pull kids off the honor roll for these jobs, you recruit the losers and promise to make them heros.

Considering the situation, the house is of little to no concern. How could one focus on the destruction of a building, when we are dealing with people who have killed her son for their bent cause and we are dealing with the families who were hurt by the suicide bomber.

I noticed that the women was allowed to leave her home before it was bulldozed and that she was not shot, that is certainly considerate. And as a bonus, the people who killed her boy are going to build her a new one.

If the woman had honestly objected to what this group was doing to her son, she might have tipped off the Israeli military. Or better yet, her Palestinian authority ( but unfortunately they actually support the suicide bombers, they just move their lips in empty protest against them). A peace loving person understands that peace will never be brought by suicide bombers.

Like in Afghanistan, if you harbour those who execute 9/11, you are going to pay. That policy is no different than that used by Israel. It encourages people to rat out their neighbors, like a neighborhood watch program.

In Iraq, the greatest weapon we could have to providing peace is if the local citizens were to tip off coalition troops to the insurgents operating in their area. But the reality is that they turn a blind eye, in quiet support. These terrorists can only hide as long as the local populations support their cause. If there were a gang of people in my neighborhood who were putting the lives of everyone at risk, I am sure the members of my community would take it upon themselves to band together and weed them out, quite actively. Unless, of course, I was a quiet supporter. This is what causes so many civilian deaths, as the insurgents are nestled among them.

[Rat Faced]

Its the Israeli policy that causes the "Quiet Support".

That support has been growing since the Camp David peace plan that was being implemented was unilaterally torn up and reversed.

Its been growing faster and faster due to Israeli policy in the area since then.

Just as anti-US feelings in the Islamic World have been growing since it was allowed, and that feeling growing quicker by the day due to more recent events.

[Biggles]

Hobbes

What you say is quite true. However, one must also ask why they quietly support them. If those concerns are met and these people then hold something worth keeping there would be no support for the lunatics and fanatics.

In particular, the Palestinians were one of the most tolerant peoples in the ME prior to the loss of their land. Arafat for all his faults is no Muslim radical. His wife is a Palestinian Christian of which there was at one time a considerable number and so, for that matter, are a number of his Cabinet.

I have heard that AQ are hoping to exploit the demise (political or actual) of Arafat and push for a more radical Palestinian Authority based on Islamic principles. It was once said that Arafat never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity - no one can accuse Osama of this. :( Hopefully the Palestinians will avoid this and if the Israelis are wise they will do all they can to make the life of any moderate Palestinian Authority as easy as possible.

[hobbes]

Its the Israeli policy that causes the "Quiet Support".

That support has been growing since the Camp David peace plan that was being implemented was unilaterally torn up and reversed.

Its been growing faster and faster due to Israeli policy in the area since then.

Just as anti-US feelings in the Islamic World have been growing since it was allowed, and that feeling growing quicker by the day due to more recent events.

So, essentially the bulldozer issue, is not an issue at all.

[Biggles]

I would say it rather depends on

1) if it is your house or not

2) if you want to really piss people off and push them into the arms of even nuttier nutters.

If neither of these matter then it is not an issue.

[hobbes]

I would say it rather depends on

1) if it is your house or not

2) if you want to really piss people off and push them into the arms of even nuttier nutters.

If neither of these matter then it is not an issue.


You send a suicide bomber, you lose your house. There is no question about it. Your choice clearly. No chicken and egg dilemma.

Also, she is getting a new house.

There are no nuttier nuts than suicide bombers.

The point is that the Israel policy on bulldozing the houses of suicide bombers is nothing but a pimple on the butt of a much bigger problem. Stopping this policy would not improve a thing.

Now halting all suicide bombers, that might have a wee effect on peace talks, as would Israel halting the construction of its security wall.

People would like us to believe that if lands are restored as per the 1947 agreement, we will have carebear huggles all over Palestine.

I simply disagree. The people sending suicide bombers are not doing so for land, and will continue to do so even if the original borders were restored.

The question then becomes, what will the "silent supporters" do? Turn them in. No, I think business as usual. There will be no peace in that region until one side kills the other.

The land issue is a justification for religion inspired genocide from both sides.

[Rat Faced]

It almost is now...

It wasnt.

The PLO didnt care about religion, it was a nationalist organisation. They numbered Muslims, Christians and yes, even a few Jews in its number..

Of course, since the Camp David Peace Agreement was ripped up, the Palestinian Authority (Former PLO) has lost most of its credibility with the Palestinians.. and they have turned to other Organisations that are active in fighting Israel.

These Organisations are based upon religion... who's fault is it that the PLO lost credibility... well, mostly the guy who ripped up the Camp David agreement. And those countries that accepted and continued to give unconditional support to him..

Hmmm, wonder what countries they would be?

[bigboab]

Hobbes
People would like us to believe that if lands are restored as per the 1947 agreement, we will have carebear huggles all over Palestine

What agreement. did the people of Palestine actually agree to the setting up of an Israeli 'Homeland' in their country. If they did then I apologize*. I was around at the time, but I cant remember any agreement from the Palestinians.


*One cannot always believe history. It all depends as to which side is writing it.:(

"Zionist land policy was incorporated in the Constitution of the Jewish Agency for Palestine...'land is to be acquired as Jewish property and..the title to the lands acquired is to be taken in the name of the Jewish National Fund, to the end that the same shall be held as the inalienable property of the Jewish people.' The provision goes to stipulate that 'the Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labor'...The effect of this Zionist colonization policy on the Arabs was that land acquired by Jews became extra-territorialized. It ceased to be land from which the Arabs could ever hope to gain any advantage...

"The Zionists made no secret of their intentions, for as early as 1921, Dr. Eder, a member of the Zionist Commission, boldly told the Court of Inquiry, 'there can be only one National Home in Palestine, and that a Jewish one, and no equality in the partnership between Jews and Arabs, but a Jewish preponderance as soon as the numbers of the race are sufficiently increased.' He then asked that only Jews should be allowed to bear arms." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."

[hobbes]

It almost is now...

It wasnt.

The PLO didnt care about religion, it was a nationalist organisation. They numbered Muslims, Christians and yes, even a few Jews in its number..

Of course, since the Camp David Peace Agreement was ripped up, the Palestinian Authority (Former PLO) has lost most of its credibility with the Palestinians.. and they have turned to other Organisations that are active in fighting Israel.

These Organisations are based upon religion... who's fault is it that the PLO lost credibility... well, mostly the guy who ripped up the Camp David agreement. And those countries that accepted and continued to give unconditional support to him..

Hmmm, wonder what countries they would be?

Again, the thread is about bulldozers, which are of no signifigance.

If you wish to start a thread about the history of the Middle East, knock yourself out. My point is made.

[hobbes]

What agreement. did the people of Palestine actually agree to the setting up of an Israeli 'Homeland' in their country. If they did then I apologize*. I was around at the time, but I cant remember any agreement from the Palestinians.


*One cannot always believe history. It all depends as to which side is writing it.:(

"Zionist land policy was incorporated in the Constitution of the Jewish Agency for Palestine...'land is to be acquired as Jewish property and..the title to the lands acquired is to be taken in the name of the Jewish National Fund, to the end that the same shall be held as the inalienable property of the Jewish people.' The provision goes to stipulate that 'the Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labor'...The effect of this Zionist colonization policy on the Arabs was that land acquired by Jews became extra-territorialized. It ceased to be land from which the Arabs could ever hope to gain any advantage...

"The Zionists made no secret of their intentions, for as early as 1921, Dr. Eder, a member of the Zionist Commission, boldly told the Court of Inquiry, 'there can be only one National Home in Palestine, and that a Jewish one, and no equality in the partnership between Jews and Arabs, but a Jewish preponderance as soon as the numbers of the race are sufficiently increased.' He then asked that only Jews should be allowed to bear arms." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."

I was just using the date RF gave, I really couldn't give a fuck who gets what land or which date is chosen. Both sides are a bunch of crazy fucks if you ask me.

[Biggles]

Destroying the houses of those you consider an enemy is a ME thing dating back thousands of years. It is a symbolic act designed to crush the spirit of the enemy (although in times gone past the occupants had to remain inside)

The act is one of both revenge and deliberate provocation. In this respect it almostly certainly does work.

I am unconvinced that the Israelis see it as an effective anti-suicide bomber tactic.

[hobbes]

Destroying the houses of those you consider an enemy is a ME thing dating back thousands of years. It is a symbolic act designed to crush the spirit of the enemy (although in times gone past the occupants had to remain inside)

The act is one of both revenge and deliberate provocation. In this respect it almostly certainly does work.

I am unconvinced that the Israelis see it as an effective anti-suicide bomber tactic.


A valid point Biggles.

But when we read the article, the woman flip-flops betweeen being against the group to for the group because her house got flattened.

Then it is implied that the bulldozing of the house is the problem here.

No, it is not, it is the recruitment of peoples children to carry out the ideas of motivated lunatics, which is the real problem.

Had I posted the article, I would might have said, "So, does the Palestinean policy of suicide bombings work?"

Certainly, we know who recruited and encouraged the boy to commit such as mission, where is their punishment?

[Rat Faced]

You miss the point.

She didnt agree with her son..

Her house got flattened..

Israel gets a new enemy...

[hobbes]

You miss the point.

She didnt agree with her son..

Her house got flattened..

Israel gets a new enemy...

No, I just didn't believe her, quite frankly.

She lost her son and is worried about a house?

She is more troubled than I thought.

Her son kills Israeli school children, Palestine gets many more enemies.

What does the Israeli government tells the parents of those killed. We are not going to do anything because it might make someone not like us. Sorry about your kids.

I think the Israelis' are showing incredible restraint, in removing the inhabitants and just knocking the house down.