----- Original Message ----- From: "Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 3:52 AM Subject: RE: Fwd: CNN Breaking News
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > > Van: John D. Giorgis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Verzonden: maandag 21 januari 2002 22:14 > > Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Onderwerp: Re: Fwd: CNN Breaking News > > > >> As I have posted earlier, I believe Israel should stick to the > > >> borders it was given when the State of Israel was founded. IOW, the > > >> 1948 borders, not the 1967 borders. > > >> It would be too much for Israel to expect to be left alone then, but > > >> I think it would greatly stimulate the peace process if Israel would > > >> cease the occupation and oppression of the Palestinians and retreat > > >> to its original (1948) borders. > > > > Ummmmm....... could you explain why after being viciously attacked on > > four separate occasions, Israel should then rstop defending itself and > > retreat *before* the aggresor parties even sign a peace treaty? I > > think that I have asked this before but I don't seem to recall your > > answer. > > It would certainly be a sign of good will. So, If I understand it correctly, Israel is required, after 4 attacks to retreat to show good will. Am I missing something? Shouldn't the attacking countries be the ones required to demonstrate good will? > Let's face it, Israel is not a country with little or no military power. No. But, they came close to loosing it all in 1973. They could not have had the borders you proposed and survived. >Combine that with an UN Peace Force to keep the parties apart, You don't recall the history. A UN force was put in place as part of the world's forcing Israel to give up the gains made after they were attacked in 1956. When the Arabs wanted to annilate Israel in 1967, the UN force quickly complied with the Arab request to leave. >and and Israeli government that actually wants to talk about peace, and we might actually get >somewhere. They offered the Palestinians 98% of the West Bank and Gaza. As mentioned numerous times before, the land deal was agreed upon. Arafat had as his show stopper, the right of Palestinians to return to Israel proper. When he wasn't given this, he restarted the war. And, you consider Israel to be at fault for this? > > I will give you the same reply I gave Dan: > > You know, you Americans really should stop pretending that children are the > only targets. All I ever hear is "Palestinians kill children". Palestinian > children have been killed by Israeli fire, but you do not hear the rest of > the world hammering on "Israel kills children". Can you cite examples where Israel bursts into a quit gathering for dinner and opens fire, or a coming of age party and opens fire, or opens fire indiscriminately in the market? To me there is a difference between shooting people who are actively involved in violence and are threatening you and shooting people sitting down to dinner. Are they the same to you? >So, following your reasoning, Israel should not complain if the > Palestinians evacuate and then blow up the Knesset either. If they tried that in response to a massive shooting of unarmed, non-violent civilians going about their daily lives, it would be such a step forward for them it would qualify as a modern miracle. Dan M.
