posted on December 7, 2002 09:28:17 AM new
On The History Channel Sunday evening.
INSIDE THE MIND OF A SUICIDE BOMBER
Sunday, December 8 at 10pm / 9CT
In the past year, suicide bombers have held the world
hostage. From the streets of New York to the nightclubs of
Tel Aviv, everyone and everything has become a target
vulnerable to attack. Islamic fundamentalists have created
a weapon impossible to predict and fight -- thousands of
eager, would-be suicide bombers willing to take their own
lives in the name of jihad. In this History Undercover
investigation, we'll explore who these suicide bombers are,
the history of the act, how attacks are planned and carried
out, how young men and now women are trained, what the
bomb technology is, and whether this kind of terrorism can
be tracked. The hour will be filled with exclusive and
shocking video including farewell videos from bombers to
their families, terrorist training videos, rare video showing
Israeli police capturing a would-be bomber and an
exclusive interview with former Hamas Commander
Hassan Salameh.
posted on December 7, 2002 11:20:58 AM new
I missed Helen's comment about " disproportionate " force the first read. I absolutely disagree.
A bomber gets on an Israeli bus full of civilians and pulls the wire. Boom. 10 dead, 25 wounded, mainly civilians, women and children included.
Israel responds with a military foray into a Palestinian area, Gaza or the West Bank,
usually seeking specific individuals, grabs them if they can, kills them if they can't grab them. This is not a quid pro quo, this is an arrest to bring those responsible to court. If they know who the bomber was,
they level his house - this to balance the checks ($30,000) that the family gets from Saddam et al for the family's loss. Are others sometimes killed as well? Sure, but collateral damage has to be expected in combat in urban settings.
I believe this is way less than disproportionate force, in fact it's so restrained in my mind as to be foolish.
If Israel were to respond instead by going for those responsible AND having a Helicopter slam a missle into the next loaded bus they see in a Palestinian area, that would be a PROPORTIONATE response.
Whump missles into the next 10 or 12 busses they see, THAT would be a DISPROPORTIONATE response. Kill 10 of our people, lose a 100 of yours.
For my money it would also be the smart thing to do.
The message would be very clear- mess with us and pay a terrible price, way beyond what your actions gained you, and, reflect a
reality best summarized by Machiavelli "..it is far better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both."
posted on December 7, 2002 01:24:18 PM new
Bob9585 and LINDA K
I made the remark that Israel was responding to Palestinians with disproportionate force, based on the number of civilians killed, homes and other structrual destruction. This destruction has been widely reported throughout the world as late as today. Even George Bush has recognized that fact and his reaction is included in a link below.
I have stated here before that I am not anti-semitic or pro-palestinian. I am anti war.
I have posted a few links below that illustrate the disproportionate force that Israel maintains and is using. I am quite sure that if Palestine had available the same arsenal of weapons and army that is available to Israel, instead of suicide bombers, they might also be using such powerful force, killing more people and causing similar destruction.
These are just a few links...I could fill pages with news stories such as these.
Palestine is resisting Sharons's disproportionate violence with more violence creating a never ending cycle of violence. In most cases, Israelis are reported by Amnesty International and other media as responding to Palestinian violence when that is not always the case.
And of course, the tragedies that have been caused by Palestinian suicide bombers are just as awful on a smaller scale.
I am posting only the examples of Jewish overreaction because that is what you questioned in my comment.
Roll call of 322 children killed in the intifada
Amnesty International today condemns both sides in the conflict for their "utter disregard" for the lives of children – 250 of them Palestinian and 72 Israeli – who have been killed over the past year
Fresh evidence of Jenin atrocities
Palestinians who survived the long battle – in which Israeli helicopters fired rockets and machine-guns into a densely populated area – have said the Israeli army committed many atrocities. Witnesses have described people being shot as they surrendered; houses being bulldozed with people inside; the use of human shields; the burial of 32 bodies in a trench, and one case of Israeli soldiers turning on the household gas supply before tossing a stun grenade into a room full of people.
posted on December 7, 2002 04:04:13 PM new
Helen- there is a difference between responding with disproportionate force and having better weapons.
The Nazis had much better tanks than the allies had in WWII, but no one accused the Nazis of responding with disproportionate force during the Battle of the Bulge.
The UN forces had much better weapons than Iraq, but no one accused the UN of using disproportionate force.
Disproportionate force is to inflict much greater damages upon the enemy than is necessary to obtain a just result.
posted on December 7, 2002 04:58:43 PM new
Reamond
I have corrected that unintended inference. By disproportionate, the media is referring to the number killed, and general destruction of infrastructure. Thanks for pointing that out.
posted on December 7, 2002 05:39:37 PM new
reamond- "Just?" Who decides what is just? Something you referred to - was the German Ardenne offensive just? The Bataan Death March? Hiroshima? It depends on who/when you ask.
Helenjw- I agree that at Jenin the Israelis were very tough on the Palestinians - but the first link you put up talks about Palestinians Mortars, we know about bombs, AK 47's, Rockets and RPGs. The incursion to Gaza was to "get" a Hamas leader who engineered the bombs that took out an Israeli tank and killed its crew on an earlier incursion- and the helicopter launched rocket took out his house- and ALL the people in it, including the kids.
So let's turn it around- what do YOU think the Israelis should do when the PLO or Hamas sends a 16 year old (btw, he's included in the Palestinians CHILD losses) who detonates himself and a bunch of Israeli civilians in a pizzeria? You're the Prime Minister- what are your orders?
added an L to let's
[ edited by Bob9585 on Dec 7, 2002 05:41 PM ]
posted on December 7, 2002 07:03:57 PM new
Clearly the Israelis have it in their power to eliminate Palestinians. They are using the least amount of force to defend themselves. The Palestinians are using every means at their disposal to attack Israel, including targeting civilian women and children. Like the school bus that was blown up by Hammas.
That is the only relevant comparison. Not who has the greater military power.
Helen, from your posts, I can only conclude that you believe the intefadeh is justified, including terror attacks on civilians. I don't believe you're against war at all.
You're welcome to your opinion, but it's hard to hold the moral high ground while supporting terrorism.
posted on December 7, 2002 07:41:35 PM new
Bob 9585
"So let's turn it around- what do YOU think the Israelis should do when the PLO or Hamas sends a 16 year old (btw, he's included in the Palestinians CHILD losses) who detonates himself and a bunch of Israeli civilians in a pizzeria? You're the Prime Minister- what are your orders?"
You are asking "me" how to solve the problem in Israel? LOL!
I would not retaliate because it only invites more suicide bombings and the root problem remains. A focus on investigating the suicide operation and how it is financed with the possible use of special forces to take out the goons who are in charge would be a good temporary move.
But more important would be skilled negotiating on an international scale with the goal of entitling Palestine, like Israel to an independent nation of their own. That is the only way that peace will be achieved in the mid east.
posted on December 7, 2002 09:18:03 PM new
Prime Minister,
Re Negotiating a Settlement,
The skilled negotiating was done years ago under the tutelage of Jimmy Carter- the Camp David Accords- and Palestine was on its way to its own nation under Arafat- but the Radicals within Palestine wouldnt hear of it-they wanted to eliminate Israel. So they kept up the terrorist tactics, the suicide bombing being only the latest in a long line of tactics.
Israel demanded that Arafat take measures and arrest and prosecute and/or extradite the bombers, but Arafat didnt do it- because to do so would be the end of his regime, the popular support for the views of the radicals being widely held.
If you think back you will remember Arafat having asassination attempts being made on his life- not by Israel but by fellow Palestinians who deem him too compliant and insufficiently radical.
The radicals are committed to the elimination of Israel. They aren't going to negotiate to have their own country- it was a done deal they passed- they want all of Palestine and a bunch of dead Jews.
Negotiating for a Palestinian Nation won't do it- are you willing to negotiate for all Jews to vacate Israel? That is the only thing that will satisfy the radicals and their numerous supporters. Remember, millions of Palestinians have been forced out of their homes and off their lands in the last 50 years. To many , even those that have settled in elsewhere, the hatred of the Israelis who they hold responsible is not only understandable, but reasonable.
Bottom line- negotiating won't work with the bombers and those who support them. Surrender will, but I think that unwise.
RE; Use of Special Forces
Intelligence is difficult though we have of course been working on it constantly for years. the organizations responsible for the bombings are constantly morphing, splintering and reforming- each time with new leaders and new bases in private homes.
Cell type structures are difficult to infiltrate, admission usually by prior knowledge only, each new member being tested several times before full admisssion. In some groups, the sponsor's life is surety for the reliability of a new memeber.
In years past electronic surveillance provided us with a major part of our knowledge of these groups and their membership but they have gotten wise to that and use cells and phones less and less instead relying on older but less invadable means of communications with face to face thru innocent intermediaries becoming increasingly common. Simple codes are also
being used to obscure communications along with dummy traffic. Finally, waves of dummy traffic are being orchestrated between groups, at times tripling in one day to cover an event about to occur or as a screen to force us to mobilize when there is no planned action.
Bottom line, it is difficult to know who we are after, where to find them, and when we get that info, to have reason to believe they are still there- they move constantly.
Use of Special forces is unrealistic, most captures are effected deep in Palestinian areas, densely populated and difficult to maneuver in - with an AK47 in every
house and an RPG possibly in every 3rd one a helicopter SF raid is destined to become a disaster. Even with Armor and supporting Infantry captures fail as often as they succeeed. SF raids would almost certainly lead to increased IDF losses compounded by risk to IDF troops sent in to rescus a SF raid gone awry.
Prime Minister,
We await a more realistic and viable plan.
Israelis on both the left and right will, eventually, realize that the conflict cannot be resolved under the current conditions, regardless of the amount of military force employed. As Akiva Eldar reported in the Ha'aretz, even sections of the military establishment are now realizing that military force alone will not resolve the conflict. The new government will accordingly be expected to come up with new ideas, and although the situation is complex, there are only three obvious options if we are to break the current impasse.
The first is the two-state-solution. Even if the Labor Party's new leader, former general Amram Mitzna, ends up forming the next government, which is highly unlikely, it's not clear whether he will have the courage to radically alter the Oslo format. While Mitzna has stated that within a year of entering office he will pull Israeli troops out of the Gaza Strip and dismantle all Jewish settlements in this region, he is unwilling to make a similar statement regarding the West Bank. Moreover, he is threatening to unilaterally draw the borders of the Palestinian state-to-be if Yasser Arafat disputes his proposals. In this sense, Mitzna is not all that far from Sharon, who recently accepted the idea of a Palestinian state, albeit one that he will demarcate.
Experience teaches, however, that the two-state option will only be viable if Israel implements a full withdrawal to the 1967 borders and dismantles all Jewish settlements, which now contain almost 200,000 people, not including East Jerusalem. While this may currently appear politically impossible, but we should remember that when France finally ceded control of Algiers, it evacuated a much larger number of French citizens.
The second option is the one proffered by the extreme right: the expulsion of all the Palestinians from their lands, forcefully transferring them to Jordan, Lebanon, Syria or Egypt. The idea of expulsion as a political solution echoes a dark past that some Jews can still remember. Recently, however, it has gained broader support among the powers that be. Polls indicate that The National Union, a right wing party advocating expulsion, is slated to receive eight percent of the vote in the upcoming elections, and its ideas are winning support from beyond its ranks.
The third option is for Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza Strip, bestowing full citizenship on the Palestinian population, and thus turning itself into a bi-national state, rather than a Jewish one. This solution, which had been perceived by Palestinians as a betrayal of the struggle for self-determination, has lately gained legitimacy within corners of the Palestinian establishment. While the bi-national option is, in a sense, the most democratic of the three, within Israel it is still considered an abomination not only by the right but also by Labor and Meretz.
So, if Israel's next leader is to overcome the current crisis, he will have to decide whether to abandon the notion of a Jewish State, employ a policy used by the darkest regimes (not least the Third Reich), or dismantle the settlements and bring the Jewish settlers back home. Each of these options negates certain elements in the Zionist project, suggesting that the settlements are now destroying the very project that gave birth and nurtured them. The Jewish settlements are now helping to transform the Zionist dream, into its own worst nightmare.
Neve Gordon teaches politics at Ben-Gurion University and is a contributor to The Other Israel: Voices of Refusal and Dissent (New Press). He can be reached at [email protected]
posted on December 8, 2002 12:21:28 AM new
Counterpunch.org. Interesting site. There are numerous anti-Israel articles. A couple supporting Iraq. One in defense of sniper suspect John Malvo. On their "About Us" page they state, "Ours is muckraking with a radical attitude...." Is this your unbiased news source?
I'm always surprised to see how at both ends of the political spectrum, extremism becomes dangerous fanaticism. Any real issues are simply eclipsed by hatred. It's ironic that at the far opposite ends of the political spectrum, both sides seem so similar.
Unfortunately, a return to 1967 borders in no way guarantees Israel's security. What the Palestinian sympathizers fail to acknowlege is that the Arabs' promises of peace for land simply can't be trusted. History has shown this clearly.
Helen, I ask you again. Do you really feel that terrorism against women and children is justified by the political situation in Palestine?
posted on December 8, 2002 06:12:33 AM new
Twinsoft
I have made my position on terriorism perfectly clear. I do not intend to answer your bogus accusation or communicate with you and your childish school level name calling and insults. Whatever you say to me or about me affects me in no way because you as an individual represent nothing to me but a cipher.
posted on December 8, 2002 01:01:25 PM new
Helen, it's one thing to sympathize with the plight of Palestinians. It's another to support attacks on civilians within Israel proper. Blowing up school buses, or discoteques, is not a political means to an end.
To make statements such as, "I can understand why the Palestinains, etc." gives support to these horrific, murderous attacks, in the same way as those who provide financial "rewards" to suicide bombers. Basically, it says that the end justifies the means. And that is wrong. (Even if terrorism was an effective means of achieving Palestinian statehood, which it is not.)
You are not anti-war. You are anti-American. You blame democracy for the ills of the world, and see Israel as connected to America in some way. Your hatred for our government spills over into what you perceive as American influence in the Middle East.
You know nothing of the situation in Israel, aside from what you read on radical extremist web sites. You are nothing but a pawn for the Arab propaganda machine which seeks to drive the Jews into the sea. And while I have little respect for suicide bombers, I have even less respect for those who sit on the sidelines, cheering them on.
posted on December 8, 2002 01:07:53 PM new
Awhile back, someone said (I think Katy) that there is lots of money going to the Palestinians but they haven't used it to improve their living conditions and there aren't any roads, etc. Is that true?
