War Now

[FearlessLeader2]

I have looked at this issue for a while now, and examined both sides rather carefully. One of my co-workers is Syrian, and another used to work in a Jewish community center for years, so I think I have pretty good intel as to the thought processes on both sides.

I've listened to the arguments for and against both Isreal and the PA, the IDF and Hamas, Sharon and Arafat.

Without making any judgements against one side or the other, I honestly feel that the only human solution to this impasse is to take both sides out of the equation. The only way to do this fairly is by having a third party that both sides can agree to take over the defense and internal security of Isreal, the West Bank, and the Gaza strip. If no such third party exists, then one should be shoved down both sides' throats. I hereby nominate the EU. I very much doubt the US would be welcomed by the PA, and the Israelis would never accept the UN.

Whoever is eventually put in charge, should this come to pass, I would recommend a couple things to them.

1) Brutal suppression of terrorist acts, including immediate incursions into staging and training areas of terrorists to annhilate every living thing in and around those areas, no matter what country these areas are found in. Once this is done once or twice, people will realize the third party is serious, and will stop being idiots, hopefully. More importantly, it will make people think long and hard before they give shelter to a nascent terrorist organization. Damned if this omelette isn't going to require a whole lot of broken eggs...

2) Build a big effing wall between the two populations. They are not good neighbors, never have been, and likely never will be. In any location where the two simply have to co-exist, plan and enforce draconian security measures, up to and including full cavity searches of all entrants. After a few weeks of this, either both sides will stop smuggling weapons and bombs, or they will stop trying to interact. Either way, problem solved.

3) Disband the PA, and have the Palestinian people choose a new government via a democratic process. Since the PA's leaders should be either dead or on trial for crimes against humanity by the first two suggestions, they will be ineligible for the vote. Note that the new Palestinian government will not have a military either, as that third party will be handling their defense and internal security as well.

4) If either the Palestinians or the Israelis try to create a military or paramilitary organization, for any purpose, obliterate it and it's leadership (the paramilitary/military organization, not the nation itself). Neither group has a very good track record when it comes to playing with guns, so make sure they don't have any.

5) Take a strong look at whether or not some sort of communal punishment is appropriate for certain crimes. If the locals are cheering in the streets after an attack, perhaps it would be in order to remind them why they don't control their own country anymore...

6) Should the third party decide it wants to leave, make sure the rest of the world is placing sufficient pressure on it to make such a decision unpalatable. For example, make the third party's access to oil from the PG dependant upon its continued presence.

I realize some of this is not going to go over very well, but I really don't care. These two sides are too enmired in the conflict to ever extricate themselves, and they need to be taken aside and have some sense knocked into them.

 

[G-Man]

chainsawkiller-
1) No Israeli leader will return any land as long as there's fighting going on.
2) Once they killed Israelis they're Israel's enemy, and since the PA doesn't stop them we have to stop them ourselves. If they want a fair trial they can turn themselves in and they'll surely be in a better situation, as Israel doesn't have the death penalty.
3) So we're stuck. Israel can't lift closures. We simply have no choice.

FearlessLeader2 -
Your solution isn't very realistic. First of all, no other country would like to get dragged into this bloody conflict. The US was, untill very lately, the negotiater both sides agreed on. As such they didn't promise any of the sides all they wanted. Both sides were a bit angry. But after Bin Laden said the US involvment in this conflict caused the september 11th attacks no country will take the risk. As in any other conflict both sides think they're right, so if the negotiater won't totaly support the Palestinian positions they can always say he's against them and ask Osama (or the Hizzbalah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc) to attack that country.
Also, Israel will never let anyone else control it's security matters. It didn't help in 56, 67 or 73. It gave us a lot of problems in Lebanon. It's simply not working.
A lot of the points you raised also can't be implemented. If this third party wants to be a part of the negotiations they can't allow the two sides to think they're attacked by them, and brutal behavior will cause that problem. You also said some things that are against intl. law so if any of the sides won't be happy with what the third party will say they can always kick them out in that excuse.

 

[chainsawkiller]

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2

Without making any judgements against one side or the other, I honestly feel that the only human solution to this impasse is to take both sides out of the equation. The only way to do this fairly is by having a third party that both sides can agree to take over the defense and internal security of Isreal, the West Bank, and the Gaza strip. If no such third party exists, then one should be shoved down both sides' throats. I hereby nominate the EU. I very much doubt the US would be welcomed by the PA, and the Israelis would never accept the UN.

Most likely is that both parties will not want the third party and will accuse it of interfereing in other people's affairs.

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2

Brutal suppression of terrorist acts, including immediate incursions into staging and training areas of terrorists to annhilate every living thing in and around those areas, no matter what country these areas are found in. Once this is done once or twice, people will realize the third party is serious, and will stop being idiots, hopefully. More importantly, it will make people think long and hard before they give shelter to a nascent terrorist organization. Damned if this omelette isn't going to require a whole lot of broken eggs...

If you've read the news, you will know that this didn't work, in fact i increased support for the terrorists. What you're suggesting seems like killing civilians to intimidate the terrorists, and will probably violate many conventions and human rights and bring down the wrath of the UN, amnesty international etc.

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2

2) Build a big effing wall between the two populations. They are not good neighbors, never have been, and likely never will be. In any location where the two simply have to co-exist, plan and enforce draconian security measures, up to and including full cavity searches of all entrants. After a few weeks of this, either both sides will stop smuggling weapons and bombs, or they will stop trying to interact. Either way, problem solved.

I think people will resent this, especially the "full cavity searches" What you might end up with is people suicide bombing the wall. And didn't the Berlin wall fail?

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2

3) Disband the PA, and have the Palestinian people choose a new government via a democratic process. Since the PA's leaders should be either dead or on trial for crimes against humanity by the first two suggestions, they will be ineligible for the vote. Note that the new Palestinian government will not have a military either, as that third party will be handling their defense and internal security as well.

You can't go around changing other people's government, its technically an act of war, and the palestinian people might want to stick with and current one.

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2

4) If either the Palestinians or the Israelis try to create a military or paramilitary organization, for any purpose, obliterate it and it's leadership (the paramilitary/military organization, not the nation itself). Neither group has a very good track record when it comes to playing with guns, so make sure they don't have any.

Wow! The third party must be omnipotent in order to be able to force countries to not have any military, and it would be an act of war to "obliterate it and it's leadership" , as it would be a country blowing up another country's military.

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2


5) Take a strong look at whether or not some sort of communal punishment is appropriate for certain crimes. If the locals are cheering in the streets after an attack, perhaps it would be in order to remind them why they don't control their own country anymore...

As i said in 2, you can't go around doing these sort of things these days in such a linked world. What you say is like killing all the people who did not do anything but merely liked the terrorist.

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2


6) Should the third party decide it wants to leave, make sure the rest of the world is placing sufficient pressure on it to make such a decision unpalatable. For example, make the third party's access to oil from the PG dependant upon its continued presence.

It would most likely be the rest of the world wanting the third party to leave, especially the UN.

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2

I realize some of this is not going to go over very well, but I really don't care. These two sides are too enmired in the conflict to ever extricate themselves, and they need to be taken aside and have some sense knocked into them.

A very farfetched way your solutions will work is that both parties view the 3rd party as a threat and have a truce while they fight the 3rd party.

 

[G-Man]

Another thing - Israel has many other enemies except for the Palestinians. No foreign nation will send here enough troops to stop a surprise attack from Syria, Iraq and Iran. And even if they will they'll have to remove these troops if Syria, a member of the UN security council, will tell them to.

 

[geake]

Originally posted by G-Man
And even if they will they'll have to remove these troops if Syria, a member of the UN security council, will tell them to.

Is Syria a permanent member?
I don't think so.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
No country can tell another country what to do without the approval of the 5 permanent members, namely USA, Russian Federation, China, Great Britain and France. So please stop using the TEMPORARY place of Syria in the council as an excuse for everything.

 

[G-Man]

The UN is always too afraid to get into a conflict to stand on their opinions. They withdrew in 67' and 73'. And even if they will try to resist Syria will make a voting on the issue, and will use it's majority in the UN to force the UN troops to withdrow.

 

[Michiel de Ruyter]

Originally posted by G-Man
The UN is always too afraid to get into a conflict to stand on their opinions. They withdrew in 67' and 73'. And even if they will try to resist Syria will make a voting on the issue, and will use it's majority in the UN to force the UN troops to withdrow.

What are you talking about? You obviously missed the last vote in the security counsil about sending observers to Palestine in which the USA (as always) voted in favor of Israel, also Great Britain and Norwaydidn't supported it either.

In seems highly unlikely to me that out of the 15 members a "majority" (thats at least 8) are Muslim countries.

 

[PinkyGen]

The US vetoed it because the resolution was one sides.
The only fair thing it did was ask for an end to the violence.

However, it then specifically scolded Israel for its military action. However, the PLA did not get a similiar reproach. The suicide bombings were not even mentioned.

Also, the observers only help the PLA. The observers won't be able to stop any of the attacks (see Lebanon, Sinai forces, etc.), but will serve as more propoganda mouthpieces when Israel goes after the terrorists who launched the attacks.

 

[G-Man]

Michiel de Ruyter
As PinkyGen said, observers can't stop terrorists. They won't put closures so suicide bombings will begin to occur twice a day, they won't be able to put on Arafat any pressure to stop terrorism but they'll stop Israel from fighting back. How will that improve the situation?!?

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by Michiel de Ruyter


What are you talking about? You obviously missed the last vote in the security counsil about sending observers to Palestine in which the USA (as always) voted in favor of Israel, also Great Britain and Norwaydidn't supported it either.

In seems highly unlikely to me that out of the 15 members a "majority" (thats at least 8) are Muslim countries.

Do you know why the United States vetoed the UN resolution? The resolution said NOTHING about the horrendous suicide bombings in Isreal.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Jordan backed by American money is the only Islamic country to take in Palestinian refugees...puts into context the Arab/Islamic support for the Palestinians...

I'm saying this to put into context the sitaution...unless the West can impose on Israel some useful settlement the plight of the Palestinians will continue to provide a breeding ground for Hamas to get recruits...and with Israel killing children in botched assaults you will find those with the rage to fight Israel regardless of the consequences.

The new Israeli settlements built in Palestinian land since the Oslo agreement should be destroyed and the Oslo Agreement should be enforced by the UN and observers provided to ensure the integral stability of the palestinian state is maintain.

The problems of the recent past are MAINLY of Arafat's making...the man is an incompetant negociator who could do with some lessons from Gerry Adams...If he had accepted the terms that Barak presented in the last moments of his leadership THEN from that platform worked to extend the powers he had be given and to try and negociate further Israeli concessions having GAINED that much he would be in a much better position. The uprising of the Palestinians -Al-Intifada- has lead to the deaths of many innocents and the collapse of everything gained for the Palestinian people in the Oslo Agreement. The hardline Israelis and Palestinians have got the show-down that they wanted...Arafat doesn't matter and there is no effective leadership of the Palestinians.

Fearless Leader is wrong in thinking a wall is needed...and hell where would you put it (that is what people have problems deciding now!). The best solution is to stabalise the area and try to get the Oslo Agreement back on track by whatever means and try from there to negociate a settlement. With a more peaceful climate and at least some of the greviances (or merely a reduction in the Palestinian plight) can a more moderate leadership of Palestinians emerge.

If anyone thinks that the Israelis have a right due to them setting up settlements in Palestinian areas of putting kerfews on towns like Hebron then speak! That is the status quo and it is as unacceptable as the Palestinian authority allowing attacks by Hamas...but at the same time how does Israel help the Palestinian Authority control terrorists if they ALWAYS target Palestinian Authority police when they attack and also kill innocents regularly due to their random shelling and missile attacks on the Palestinians.


The task is to provide a palestinian homeland that can be accepted by Israel or at least won't be destroyed by Israel....

I believe for that to best work: well some suggestions as I'd want paid to actually fully solve the problem :b
1. The government of Palestine in a similar manner to that of Afghanistan's most recently...e.g a location in Europe where the Palestinian movers and shakers can meet and be encouraged to form an administration that can be expect to rule over a new state.
2. The boundaries of that state are formed due to a plebiscite in the same manner as many of the disputed territories after WW1 was sorted...this means 400 Israeli settlers cannot cause tens of thousands of palestinians to be under israeli occupation.
3. Economic assistance in should be provided to Palestine to make the state have an economic future.
4. Assistance in terms of expertise in administration etc should be provided to train a civil service for Palestine which can function rather than one made up of people with no experience.
5. A U.N peacekeeping force from Western Countries in Israeli lands and of Turkish and other acceptable nations in Palestinian lands to stamp out terrorists and to prevent ethnic clensing (though surely some of the Israeli settlers would leave, which is no bad thing).

If Israel fears that losing the Golan Heights would compromise her security then you must laugh...her army and airforce is far superior to any of her neighbours and that any aggression upon Israel from a nation state in a direct manner (invasion) would be crushed by American and most likely British, French and Turkish troops.

The problem is the "America doesn't do peace" eh, Mr Rumsfeld...

 

[Simon Darkshade]

The kitten has spoken a great deal that makes sense and is worthy of consideration, but I must make a little qualification on his last point.

"If Israel fears that losing the Golan Heights would compromise her security then you must laugh...her army and airforce is far superior to any of her neighbours and that any aggression upon Israel from a nation state in a direct manner (invasion) would be crushed by American and most likely British, French and Turkish troops.

The problem is the "America doesn't do peace" eh, Mr Rumsfeld..."

One of the corner stones of a nations sovereignty is the ability to defend itself. Losing the Golan to Syria, or Palestine, or whomever would not be in Israel's strategic interest, as it opens up a large part of the north of the country to artillery fire and terrorist penetration. Likewise, the Heights of Samaria on the West Bank provide a potential firing range of a great deal of the country for missiles.

The IDF is the best military in the region, but requires room to move and fight. People often forget how small Israel really is, even with the territorial spoils of 67. Take away some of the strategic spaces, and the IDF will have no time to mobilize to meet a threat, and at best will be fighting in the suburbs of Tel Aviv. It is all well and good to say that foreign troops will come to the rescue, but even if a deployment is very quick, say 48 hours, a vast amount of damage would already have been done to people and infrastructure. The Israeli nuclear deterrent is also not that useful against a neighbouring state, as the radioactivity will drift right back over Israel quickly. Thus, it is only of any use in a dire emergency, like 1973, when IAF aircraft were fitted with nuclear bombs (they never took off).

Therefore, security for Israel is a question that must remain paramount in any consideration of this subject.

But, apart from this little point, kitt-kitt

 

[G-Man]

Kitten... What random shelling of Palestinians? And we only bomb Arafat's security buildings because all other buildings that have terrorists in them are partly civilian and therefore should be destroyed by Helicopters that will destroy only the parts of the building that have terrorists in them whithout leveling the entire building.
1. Everyone but Israel still say Arafat is the legitimate leader so thy won't replace it.
2. Israel will only give away areas as part of negotiations.
3. They already get more then enough financial aid. I can't think of a single thing they need money for, except for illigal weapons. All other things are paid for them.
5. There's no ethnic cleansing, Israel won't agree to a UN force after we saw their uselessness in Lebanon and they can't stop terrorists without using the same measures as Israel.

About the Golan - Syria is funding the Hizzbalah that shoots at Israelis untill today. What makes you think they won't let the Hizzbalah to shoot at Israelis from the Golan? Also, will you help us like you helped qweit - we'll have to live months under the control of a country that teaches kids that Jews are evil, while the US orgenize a coalition, giving countries all kinds of benefits from the new Israeli goverment they'll set up and then start with the ultimatums? No thanks.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

I'll answer these questions in this post later (via editing) after a nice game of CS...I'll shoot a hamas terrorist for you G-man

Just reserving my spot

 

[IceBlaZe]

ChaosofKitten: TFC Owns CS