Synagogue attack: Netanyahu vow in 'battle for Jerusalem'

[Ulysses G.]

Do you understand what "permit" means? It is not something that is guaranteed. She lost her permit along with her terrorist husband and has no right to another one. Bye Bye.

"Everyone who is involved in terrorism needs to take into account the effects it could have on family members, as well".

So, if people rightly or wrongly consider the actions of Israel against the Palestinians as terrorists, then all family members of the IDF are fair game?

Fair game for what? Taking their residence permits away? I'm pretty sure no Jews have any for Gaza and they would be murdered if they tried living there.

Edited November 28, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

Fair game for what? Taking their residence permits away? I'm pretty sure no Jews have any for Gaza and they would be murdered if they tried living there.

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

[jdinasia]

it's a decision they have made.

A decision that they have every right to make and they have decided that they don't want to grant permits to Palestinians that are cheerleaders for terrorism and what sane person would blame them? On the road again...

"Everyone who is involved in terrorism needs to take into account the effects it could have on family members, as well".

And again this would apply to the IDF and their cheerleaders, when they use human shields, collective punishment, and attack places of worship ( to keep on topic)

[Seastallion]

Fair game for what? Taking their residence permits away? I'm pretty sure no Jews have any for Gaza and they would be murdered if they tried living there.

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

You forgot about shooting the perps dead first. Israel did that.

Somehow, I don't imagine the families would pay the price, it is after all against international law, and a future Palestinian state would be quite mindfull of the law....unlike Israel.

[jdinasia]

What the Palestinian demonizers want us to ignore is that nothing occurs in a vacuum.

[thaibeachlovers]

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first, but the UN "Human Rights Council" pretty much ignores it. When I was in the Marines, they taught us to do anything to our enemy that they did to us and to do it worse - not "official" policy of course.

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first .

The Israelis have been illegally occupying Palestinian land for generations, and illegally been building settlements on Palestinian land and building a wall on Palestinian land that destroys any chance of having a viable Palestinian state.

If I were a Palestinian, I'd be pretty pissed at Israel and.............................

The only legal land of Israel is what the UN gave them in 1948. Everything else is illegally occupied.

[Morch]

I watched a piece on al Jazeera this morning detailing how the widow of one of the synagogue attackers is going to have her Jerusalem residency removed. I felt mixed initially as to whether this was fair or not, until they interviewed her. Going by al Jazeera's translation at least, she saw her husband as a martyr which in itself suggests that she sees her husband's death not as being stopped in his tracks while in the middle of carrying out a murder spree, but as have sacrificed his life with his acts for some kind of greater good / goal / struggle etc etc. Simultaneously she was whinging that now her young child was without a father and the family is alone because 'they' (the Israelis) killed him and took him from the family. As I see it, he had already abandoned her and the child to fend for themselves when he knowingly set off to carry out the killing spree in the Syngaogue, and as she appears to see him as a hero even now, then any sympathy I had for the removal of her Jerusalem residency evaporated once she opened her mouth for the cameras.

Under current Israeli laws, as a resident she is eligible for social security payments (which strangely enough would apply also in this case). There are calls to amend these laws, but nothing done yet. In addition both the PA and the Hamas usually extend funds to families of perpetrators (whether dead or imprisoned).

[Morch]

I watched a piece on al Jazeera this morning detailing how the widow of one of the synagogue attackers is going to have her Jerusalem residency removed. I felt mixed initially as to whether this was fair or not, until they interviewed her. Going by al Jazeera's translation at least, she saw her husband as a martyr which in itself suggests that she sees her husband's death not as being stopped in his tracks while in the middle of carrying out a murder spree, but as have sacrificed his life with his acts for some kind of greater good / goal / struggle etc etc. Simultaneously she was whinging that now her young child was without a father and the family is alone because 'they' (the Israelis) killed him and took him from the family. As I see it, he had already abandoned her and the child to fend for themselves when he knowingly set off to carry out the killing spree in the Syngaogue, and as she appears to see him as a hero even now, then any sympathy I had for the removal of her Jerusalem residency evaporated once she opened her mouth for the cameras.

Going by your logic, the French Resistance were not heros attacking an oppressive and violent occupation of their land by a foreign power, but simply terrorists.

In case you don't get it, destroying houses like that is COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT which is ILLEGAL under international law. The only thing that will be achieved is creating more Palestinian resistance fighters.

Only they did not carry out an attack against the forces of that occupation, but rather, murdered a bunch of old men in prayer. While I would not condone it, an attack on police or army personnel would be more "acceptable" as manifesting resistance.

[Morch]

The Israeli high court has frozen any further house demolitions of terrorists. Not a final decision ... a freeze on further actions for now.

The bodies of the terrorist cousins from the synagogue terror attack have still not been released. That seems surprising.

As far as the revocation of Jerusalem residency rights, well that lady with her pro-terrorist views will feel at home outside Jerusalem.

Official Palestinian Authority Media:

As said before, much easier to verbally demolish houses (either as promise or threat), than actually carrying it through. This adds to them being a bad measure (even if one accepts their morality) - if a demolition was carried out right away, things would have flared and public attention would move on to the inevitable next event. As it is, the demolitions keep in the headlines, and even if not actually being carried out, serve to incite further violence.

The bodies thing is turning into another fiasco. Israeli police says that the state's position is to hold a temporary burial by the state, and return the bodies when there is less chance of the funerals being used to incite further violence. More likely withholding the bodies (with the inevitable rumors surrounding this), does exactly the same thing. There is the expected right wing politician with the law suggestion to prohibit return of bodies in such cases - things go from bad to worse.

[Morch]

Fair game for what? Taking their residence permits away? I'm pretty sure no Jews have any for Gaza and they would be murdered if they tried living there.

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

You forgot about shooting the perps dead first. Israel did that.

Somehow, I don't imagine the families would pay the price, it is after all against international law, and a future Palestinian state would be quite mindfull of the law....unlike Israel.

There is absolutely nothing to support the view that a future Palestinian state will be "quite mindful of the law".

Anyone with even a little experience of dealing with the PA can attest to this.

Not even getting into how ridiculous this assertion sounds with regards to Hamas.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Morch

[Morch]

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first, but the UN "Human Rights Council" pretty much ignores it. When I was in the Marines, they taught us to do anything to our enemy that they did to us and to do it worse - not "official" policy of course.

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first .

The Israelis have been illegally occupying Palestinian land for generations, and illegally been building settlements on Palestinian land and building a wall on Palestinian land that destroys any chance of having a viable Palestinian state.

If I were a Palestinian, I'd be pretty pissed at Israel and.............................

The only legal land of Israel is what the UN gave them in 1948. Everything else is illegally occupied.

I get the pretty pissed at Israel bit. I would probably feel the same.

Hope that nevertheless, I would still know murdering a bunch of old people at prayer is plain wrong.

[jdinasia]

Fair game for what? Taking their residence permits away? I'm pretty sure no Jews have any for Gaza and they would be murdered if they tried living there.

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

You forgot about shooting the perps dead first. Israel did that.

Somehow, I don't imagine the families would pay the price, it is after all against international law, and a future Palestinian state would be quite mindfull of the law....unlike Israel.

There is absolutely nothing to support the view that a future Palestinian state will be "quite mindful of the law". Anyone

even with even a little experience of dealing with the PA can attest to this. Not even getting into how ridiculous this

assertion sounds with regards to Hamas.

The same assertions can be made about Israel following the law. They have no history of doing so.

[Seastallion]

I watched a piece on al Jazeera this morning detailing how the widow of one of the synagogue attackers is going to have her Jerusalem residency removed. I felt mixed initially as to whether this was fair or not, until they interviewed her. Going by al Jazeera's translation at least, she saw her husband as a martyr which in itself suggests that she sees her husband's death not as being stopped in his tracks while in the middle of carrying out a murder spree, but as have sacrificed his life with his acts for some kind of greater good / goal / struggle etc etc. Simultaneously she was whinging that now her young child was without a father and the family is alone because 'they' (the Israelis) killed him and took him from the family. As I see it, he had already abandoned her and the child to fend for themselves when he knowingly set off to carry out the killing spree in the Syngaogue, and as she appears to see him as a hero even now, then any sympathy I had for the removal of her Jerusalem residency evaporated once she opened her mouth for the cameras.

Going by your logic, the French Resistance were not heros attacking an oppressive and violent occupation of their land by a foreign power, but simply terrorists.

In case you don't get it, destroying houses like that is COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT which is ILLEGAL under international law. The only thing that will be achieved is creating more Palestinian resistance fighters.

Only they did not carry out an attack against the forces of that occupation, but rather, murdered a bunch of old men in prayer. While I would not condone it, an attack on police or army personnel would be more "acceptable" as manifesting resistance.

While I agree with your view on attacking old men in prayer, I could not find an attack on police any better. Israel's attacks on Gazan police have been strongly condemned as unlawful and unacceptable. Military police may be a different matter (and lets face it, who likes the provos in any man's army?)

Using the French resistance example that you responded to, could not an attack on occupying military be quite acceptable? If so, why not condone it here?

[Morch]

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

You forgot about shooting the perps dead first. Israel did that.

Somehow, I don't imagine the families would pay the price, it is after all against international law, and a future Palestinian state would be quite mindfull of the law....unlike Israel.

There is absolutely nothing to support the view that a future Palestinian state will be "quite mindful of the law". Anyone

even with even a little experience of dealing with the PA can attest to this. Not even getting into how ridiculous this

assertion sounds with regards to Hamas.

The same assertions can be made about Israel following the law. They have no history of doing so.

I was replying to an baseless assertion made by another poster, not asserting that Israel is a paragon of morality, nor anything similar regarding the way it upholds laws. There is no inherent balance here, both can be less then perfect.

As for Israel "having no history of doing so" - well, this is just another one liner hyperbole. There are numerous examples to the contrary. Once again, this whole or nothing style of seeing things is well removed from realities. Israel does not always following the law (which, btw?) does not mean it never does so.

[Ulysses G.]

The same assertions can be made about Israel following the law. They have no history of doing so.

Israel follows plenty of laws. They do not follow every law, but there is no country that does. He was responding to the silly assertion that "a future Palestinian state would be quite mindful of the law", which is frankly ludicrous considering their appaling track record.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

I watched a piece on al Jazeera this morning detailing how the widow of one of the synagogue attackers is going to have her Jerusalem residency removed. I felt mixed initially as to whether this was fair or not, until they interviewed her. Going by al Jazeera's translation at least, she saw her husband as a martyr which in itself suggests that she sees her husband's death not as being stopped in his tracks while in the middle of carrying out a murder spree, but as have sacrificed his life with his acts for some kind of greater good / goal / struggle etc etc. Simultaneously she was whinging that now her young child was without a father and the family is alone because 'they' (the Israelis) killed him and took him from the family. As I see it, he had already abandoned her and the child to fend for themselves when he knowingly set off to carry out the killing spree in the Syngaogue, and as she appears to see him as a hero even now, then any sympathy I had for the removal of her Jerusalem residency evaporated once she opened her mouth for the cameras.

Going by your logic, the French Resistance were not heros attacking an oppressive and violent occupation of their land by a foreign power, but simply terrorists.

In case you don't get it, destroying houses like that is COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT which is ILLEGAL under international law. The only thing that will be achieved is creating more Palestinian resistance fighters.

Only they did not carry out an attack against the forces of that occupation, but rather, murdered a bunch of old men in prayer. While I would not condone it, an attack on police or army personnel would be more "acceptable" as manifesting resistance.

While I agree with your view on attacking old men in prayer, I could not find an attack on police any better. Israel's attacks on Gazan police have been strongly condemned as unlawful and unacceptable. Military police may be a different matter (and lets face it, who likes the provos in any man's army?)

Using the French resistance example that you responded to, could not an attack on occupying military be quite acceptable? If so, why not condone it here?

East Jerusalem being annexed to Israel makes the Israeli police and Border Guard units are the foremost security agencies as far as locals go. Considering the role they play, I would say that makes them "fair game" (not talking about traffic police or such). Israeli Military police is hardly relevant in this case.

I would not condone it as I would not condone most violence. I can understand a resistance movement fighting an occupying army, yes. Do I support such attacks? Generally speaking, no. That such actions are more justifiable than attacking civilians does not always make them right.

[jdinasia]

The same assertions can be made about Israel following the law. They have no history of doing so.

Israel follows plenty of laws. They do not follow every law, but there is no country that does. He was responding to the silly assertion that "a future Palestinian state would be quite mindful of the law", which is frankly ludicrous considering their appaling track record.

Israel has an appaling track record as well. Theft of land, collective punishment, murder of innocents, the list is endless.

BTW the current State of Palestine, does have a crappy record. This is mostly the fault of Israel.

Edited November 29, 2014 by jdinasia

[Morch]

The same assertions can be made about Israel following the law. They have no history of doing so.

Israel follows plenty of laws. They do not follow every law, but there is no country that does. He was responding to the silly assertion that "a future Palestinian state would be quite mindful of the law", which is frankly ludicrous considering their appaling track record.

Israel has an appaling track record as well. Theft of land, collective punishment, murder of innocents, the list is endless.

Yes, dear - and I was not claiming Israel is perfect, another poster claimed that a future Palestine would be better.

[Ulysses G.]

BTW the current State of Palestine, does have a crappy record. This is mostly the fault of Israel.

Somehow, I knew, according to you, it would all be Israel's fault.

[Seastallion]

Fair game for what? Taking their residence permits away? I'm pretty sure no Jews have any for Gaza and they would be murdered if they tried living there.

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

You forgot about shooting the perps dead first. Israel did that.

Somehow, I don't imagine the families would pay the price, it is after all against international law, and a future Palestinian state would be quite mindfull of the law....unlike Israel.

There is absolutely nothing to support the view that a future Palestinian state will be "quite mindful of the law".

Anyone with even a little experience of dealing with the PA can attest to this.

Not even getting into how ridiculous this assertion sounds with regards to Hamas.

Nothing to support the view but common sense.

The way Hamas and the PA are now is not a good way to judge their attitude once they are not under occupation! They are as they are because of the occupation!!

When full statehood is bestowed it is perfectly reasonable to see an Androcles and the lion situation. Androcles could be the UN, the US, or Israel. The Palestinians, will, in my view, not want to ever return to war. Would you?

I think part of the peace deal should indeed include promises and promises of consequences.

Another post in one of these threads also pointed out, should Palestine demolish the Israeli state, there is nothing stopping Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, and Jordan, reclaiming the entire area. Hamas knows this all too well, I'm sure.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Seastallion

[Morch]

Imagine if any Jews did live in Gaza or in a future "Palestinian state" and they went in to a mosque to chop up Arab Muslims there to pray. Imagine what Hamas would do to those Jews and their families. Compare to revoking residence permits and have a laugh.

You forgot about shooting the perps dead first. Israel did that.

Somehow, I don't imagine the families would pay the price, it is after all against international law, and a future Palestinian state would be quite mindfull of the law....unlike Israel.

There is absolutely nothing to support the view that a future Palestinian state will be "quite mindful of the law".

Anyone with even a little experience of dealing with the PA can attest to this.

Not even getting into how ridiculous this assertion sounds with regards to Hamas.

Nothing to support the view but common sense.

The way Hamas and the PA are now is not a good way to judge their attitude once they are not under occupation! They are as they are because of the occupation!!

When full statehood is bestowed it is perfectly reasonable to see an Androcles and the lion situation. The lion could be the UN, the US, or Israel. The Palestinians, will, in my view, not want to ever return to war. Would you?

I think part of the peace deal should indeed include promises and promises of consequences.

Another post in one of these threads also pointed out, should Palestine demolish the Israeli state, there is nothing stopping Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, and Jordan, reclaiming the entire area. Hamas knows this all too well, I'm sure.

Most of the countries in the Middle East are not the best role models for lawfulness. There is no tradition of upholding the law among Palestinians, there is no great respect or trust as far as officials go. This will not change just by having independence, and probably not in the short/medium range as well. Wishful thinking is

all very nice, but lawlessness and violence do not breed an inherent respect for the law.

Not quite sure what this got to do with "going back to war". The above relates to the future Palestinian domestic situation. As for war - there are certainly those who will wish to go on fighting. The belief that human beings act along logical and rational thinking is not always supported by reality, quite the opposite, if anything.

I'm not aware of nonsense posts regarding Palestine "demolishing" Israel and therefore making neighboring countries seriously doubt if this figures anywhere in Hamas's view of things, can't recall ever running into this bit.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies removed.

[thaibeachlovers]

I watched a piece on al Jazeera this morning detailing how the widow of one of the synagogue attackers is going to have her Jerusalem residency removed. I felt mixed initially as to whether this was fair or not, until they interviewed her. Going by al Jazeera's translation at least, she saw her husband as a martyr which in itself suggests that she sees her husband's death not as being stopped in his tracks while in the middle of carrying out a murder spree, but as have sacrificed his life with his acts for some kind of greater good / goal / struggle etc etc. Simultaneously she was whinging that now her young child was without a father and the family is alone because 'they' (the Israelis) killed him and took him from the family. As I see it, he had already abandoned her and the child to fend for themselves when he knowingly set off to carry out the killing spree in the Syngaogue, and as she appears to see him as a hero even now, then any sympathy I had for the removal of her Jerusalem residency evaporated once she opened her mouth for the cameras.

Going by your logic, the French Resistance were not heros attacking an oppressive and violent occupation of their land by a foreign power, but simply terrorists.

In case you don't get it, destroying houses like that is COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT which is ILLEGAL under international law. The only thing that will be achieved is creating more Palestinian resistance fighters.

Only they did not carry out an attack against the forces of that occupation, but rather, murdered a bunch of old men in prayer. While I would not condone it, an attack on police or army personnel would be more "acceptable" as manifesting resistance.

When an oppressed people can't attack the military force that occupies them, they will attack any soft target that presents itself- that is the point of terrorism, and of course the attack on religious people was terrorism.

The point is though, that if the Palestinians had their own land and no occupation, they might not feel the need to kill religious people. Indeed, if they had a viable Palestinian state, and some carried out a terror attack, I would be opposing them, for the same reason I presently oppose the state terrorism of Israel.

[thaibeachlovers]

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first, but the UN "Human Rights Council" pretty much ignores it. When I was in the Marines, they taught us to do anything to our enemy that they did to us and to do it worse - not "official" policy of course.

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first .

The Israelis have been illegally occupying Palestinian land for generations, and illegally been building settlements on Palestinian land and building a wall on Palestinian land that destroys any chance of having a viable Palestinian state.

If I were a Palestinian, I'd be pretty pissed at Israel and.............................

The only legal land of Israel is what the UN gave them in 1948. Everything else is illegally occupied.

I get the pretty pissed at Israel bit. I would probably feel the same.

Hope that nevertheless, I would still know murdering a bunch of old people at prayer is plain wrong.

I would still know murdering a bunch of old people at prayer is plain wrong.

I agree, just as murdering a bunch of children in Gaza with high tech weapons was wrong. However, till the Palestinians have a free homeland nothing is going to change. Expect more of the same.

How long DOES Israel think it can occupy Palestinian land and not have terrorist attacks on them anyway? 600 years was as long as the English occupied Ireland and the Irish rebelled for the entire time- do the Israelis want the same?

[Ulysses G.]

However, till the Palestinians have a free homeland nothing is going to change. Expect more of the same.

Until the Palestinians stop the violence - that they started in the first place - they will never have a free homeland and Israel is going to always come out of top in any type of warfare. It has always been the same since the Palestinians refused their own homeland in 1948, declared war on Israel and LOST in a big way. Some folks never learn.

Edited November 30, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

I watched a piece on al Jazeera this morning detailing how the widow of one of the synagogue attackers is going to have her Jerusalem residency removed. I felt mixed initially as to whether this was fair or not, until they interviewed her. Going by al Jazeera's translation at least, she saw her husband as a martyr which in itself suggests that she sees her husband's death not as being stopped in his tracks while in the middle of carrying out a murder spree, but as have sacrificed his life with his acts for some kind of greater good / goal / struggle etc etc. Simultaneously she was whinging that now her young child was without a father and the family is alone because 'they' (the Israelis) killed him and took him from the family. As I see it, he had already abandoned her and the child to fend for themselves when he knowingly set off to carry out the killing spree in the Syngaogue, and as she appears to see him as a hero even now, then any sympathy I had for the removal of her Jerusalem residency evaporated once she opened her mouth for the cameras.

Going by your logic, the French Resistance were not heros attacking an oppressive and violent occupation of their land by a foreign power, but simply terrorists.

In case you don't get it, destroying houses like that is COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT which is ILLEGAL under international law. The only thing that will be achieved is creating more Palestinian resistance fighters.

Only they did not carry out an attack against the forces of that occupation, but rather, murdered a bunch of old men in prayer. While I would not condone it, an attack on police or army personnel would be more "acceptable" as manifesting resistance.

When an oppressed people can't attack the military force that occupies them, they will attack any soft target that presents itself- that is the point of terrorism, and of course the attack on religious people was terrorism.

The point is though, that if the Palestinians had their own land and no occupation, they might not feel the need to kill religious people. Indeed, if they had a viable Palestinian state, and some carried out a terror attack, I would be opposing them, for the same reason I presently oppose the state terrorism of Israel.

You got to be kidding. The Palestinians "can't attack the military force that occupies them"? How so? What exactly is stopping them? If anything security forces are more "accessible" to many would-be Palestinian terrorists. It is true that there is a greater risk involved, but surely a real freedom fighter ought to be brave enough....

Again, Palestinians hating Israelis is understandable. Palestinians wishing to hurt Israelis, alright. The part less clear is choosing to attack civilians rather than security personnel. How does this serve their cause in a better fashion? It does not deter the Israelis so much as cement their notions regarding the impossibility of peace. It also undermines the underdog's higher moral ground. And its plain cowardice on top.

[Morch]

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first, but the UN "Human Rights Council" pretty much ignores it. When I was in the Marines, they taught us to do anything to our enemy that they did to us and to do it worse - not "official" policy of course.

The Palestinians are the ones who broke the law first .

The Israelis have been illegally occupying Palestinian land for generations, and illegally been building settlements on Palestinian land and building a wall on Palestinian land that destroys any chance of having a viable Palestinian state.

If I were a Palestinian, I'd be pretty pissed at Israel and.............................

The only legal land of Israel is what the UN gave them in 1948. Everything else is illegally occupied.

I get the pretty pissed at Israel bit. I would probably feel the same.

Hope that nevertheless, I would still know murdering a bunch of old people at prayer is plain wrong.

I would still know murdering a bunch of old people at prayer is plain wrong.

I agree, just as murdering a bunch of children in Gaza with high tech weapons was wrong. However, till the Palestinians have a free homeland nothing is going to change. Expect more of the same.

How long DOES Israel think it can occupy Palestinian land and not have terrorist attacks on them anyway? 600 years was as long as the English occupied Ireland and the Irish rebelled for the entire time- do the Israelis want the same?

I agree that nothing is about to change much regarding these sort of attacks, The attacks will continue as long as the Palestinians do not have independence. On the other hand, the continuation of attacks plays a negative role in regards to the prospect of getting said independence. Moreover, as a peace agreement, if reached, will not be of the sort where everyone gets what they want - my guess is that some of these attacks will go on regardless (and thereby fueling the anti-agreement forces).

Does Israel expect zero terrorist attacks? Doubt it. But then I also doubt that Israel got a cohesive accepted overall plan of how to handle the situation. Long term planning (or more correctly, carrying out of long term plans) is not exactly the hallmark of the country.

[Ulysses G.]

I agree that nothing is about to change much regarding these sort of attacks, The attacks will continue as long as the Palestinians do not have independence.

IMO, the attacks will continue, even if they do have independence, without a comprehensive peace plan that can be enforced - just look at Gaza. That is why so many Israelis are hesitant about the whole independence thing.

[thaibeachlovers]

However, till the Palestinians have a free homeland nothing is going to change. Expect more of the same.

Until the Palestinians stop the violence - that they started in the first place - they will never have a free homeland and Israel is going to always come out of top in any type of warfare. It has always been the same since the Palestinians refused their own homeland in 1948, declared war on Israel and LOST in a big way. Some folks never learn.

since the Palestinians refused their own homeland in 1948

That's an interesting take on it. As I remember it, the UN stole their land to give to a bunch of foreigners from Europe, and was only able to do so because Britain occupied the land at that time and agreed to it. I doubt if any of the actual inhabitants of the land for hundreds of generations agreed to it.

If the UN decided to give away the area of your country that you live in to refugees from another country, would you accept that?

The Irish never agreed to the English taking their land and fought them for 600 years. Perhaps it'll take that long for the Palestinians too.

BTW, if you believe the Jews have an historical right to that land, then you should also believe that the Native Americans have a right to have all their land back too.

[thaibeachlovers]

I agree that nothing is about to change much regarding these sort of attacks, The attacks will continue as long as the Palestinians do not have independence.

IMO, the attacks will continue, even if they do have independence, without a comprehensive peace plan that can be enforced - just look at Gaza. That is why so many Israelis are hesitant about the whole independence thing.

I do not disagree with that, however, the present situation is not working, so perhaps time to try something different.

Just how long do the Israelis think they can occupy Palestinian land- for ever?