----- Original Message ----- From: "J. van Baardwijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: Re: Child Soldiers RE: This week in the Middle East
> At 09:18 29-3-02 -0600, Dan Minette wrote: > > > > That would depend on your definition of "Arab state". I would not consider > > > Israel to be an Arab state simply because part of the population is Arab. > > > >Ah, 20% of the population of Israel is now Arab. If the Palestinians were > >to all return, it would be about 60^ Palestinian. > > But who says they all *will* return to Israel? I can imagine that once > there is a sovereign State of Palestine, many of those Palestinians will > choose to live in Palestine instead of in Israel. Even though they have said that Palestine is the land that is now Israel for the last 50 years? Even if their stated goal is still the establishment of a Palestinian state in the territory that is now Israel. Even though over 90% of the Palestinians are either opposed or strongly opposed to the proposition that Palestine should: After reaching a peace agreement between the Palestinian side and Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian state that is recognized by Israel, adopt school curriculum in the Palestinian state that recognizes Israel and teaches school children not to demand return of all Palestine to the Palestinians http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2001/p3a.html and obvious links The Palestinians want it all, not just the West Bank and Gaza. They have stated so repeatedly. Why do you think they would be satisfied with the West Bank and Gaza when they could move to Israel and have it all. > >The question is what would happen when the majority is Arab. You honestly > >don't think that the Arabs would not, once they gain control of the > >government, work to achieve their stated end: the elimination of Israel? > > Not necessarily. Actually, I think that Arabs and Jews living in the same > country, the same towns and cities, the same neighborhoods, the same > streets, the same workplaces, is the only way for them to live in peace. > Why? Because then, and only then, will they get to know each other better > and understand each other better. If you keep them separate, they will > never cease to hate each other. Jews lived in Europe for hundreds of years. They were never accepted for who they were, and forced to live in ghettos. Finally, after numerous pogums two thirds of the population in Europe were killed, approximately 60 years ago by a government that was, initially, elected, and that had popular support from the German citizens. (There is compelling evidence that the German people had a pretty good idea what was happening in the death camps and still supported the Nazis until they began to lose the war.) > You will never be able to end hatred by using violence. The only way to > accomplish that is through mutual understanding. And mutual understanding > can only be reached by living together. So, the Jews in Israel should lay down their arms and trust to the good will of the Arabs? Is this your serious recommendation? Let me give a parallel. For 50 years, the United States defended Europe against the Soviet Union. Was this a mistake? Should we just have let the Soviets take over Europe, to better foster understanding? The US and the Soviet Union (with a bit of help from other allies, defeated Nazi Germany. Was the best solution to let the Nazis live with the Dutch until hatred disappeared into understanding? If it was a mistake, why are the German and Japanese governments friendly towards the United States. Why isn't there widespread hatred? > Sure, there will always be some Arabs who will hate Jews simply because > they are Jews, just as there will always be some Jews who hate Arabs >simply because they are Arabs. But only through living together will both sides > come to realize that the other side is not the Great Evil they thought >they were. Once that has been accomplished, they can work together to fight > those who are still intend on killing the other side. > > > >Like, 51%? What fraction of the Arabs would vote for Jewish candidates, > >especially when an Arab candidate would run on the platform of "a true > >Palestinian state." > > That would only happen if all those Arabs share a black-and-white view of > "Arabs good, Jews bad". No, actually there is considerable historical evidence that the acceptance needed to vote for someone is far higher than the acceptance needed to live side by side with them. The United States has plenty of historical examples of this. Europe has even more extreme examples. Why were two thirds of the Jews killed last century after Jews live in Europe over a thousand years? At the time, Germany was a urbane sophisticated country. There is no excuse of ignorance. >But, as with any other people, they are not all > black or all white; they come in various shades of grey, each shade with > its own political party. There will without doubt be some Arabs who will > want nothing less than the destruction of Israel; however, there will also > be Arabs with a more moderate view OK, that's true...opinion polls indicate that's about 10% So, Arabs may need about 55% of the population, I stand corrected. Every indication is that the Palestinian population, who have been raised on the belief that the Jews have been trying to take over the world feel that attacks on Jewish civilians is acceptable...in overwhelming numbers. and don't believe Bin Laden was responsible for the attack on the WTC. > in peace with their Jewish neighbors, and Arabs who really do not even > care about politics at all as long as there is food on the table. And once > they have been living together for a while and gotten to work on mutual > understanding, the extremists will only be a small percentage of the total > Arab population. 1) There will not be a long run 2) 1000 years wasn't enough for Europe > That is the beauty of a multi-party system: it is virtually impossible for > any party to gain complete control. Parties form coalitions to form governments. I'll agree that proportional representation allows for small parties to impose their will on the majority if they barter their single issue to both sides. (I'm not sure why an opinion held by 10% of the population needs to be foisted on the 90%, but that's beside the point.) However, it doesn't stop the existence of a prime minister. Or the ability of the prime minister and the defense cabinet to appoint the new generals. Lets say that, after the elections, the Fateh party, the Hamas party, and the Islamic Jihad party have a majority of the Knesset seats held between them. Do you want to bet against them forming a coalition government? Using this example, lets say prime minister Ahmad Yasin appoints the chief of security of the Islamic Jihad party as the head of the armed forces. He proceeds to fill the ranks of generals and colonels with military men from these three parties. I would be shocked beyond belief if this sort of scenario didn't play out. I'd also be shocked if they didn't cancel all future elections. Why? 1) The Palestinian view of Palestine still includes all of Israel. Over 90% of Palestinians think its wrong to stop this being taught in school and to teach that Israel has a right to exist separately. 2) There is no tradition of democracy in the Arab world. 3) The overwhelming majority of Palestinians have been taught the evil of Jews in their lives from almost the time they were born. This has been documented repeatedly on the list. Earlier you said that it was utopian to believe that one could stop all terrorism by force of arms. That is true. However, one can reduce it greatly if one is willing to take measures. I hope and pray that Israel doesn't stoop to Syria's level...but Syria did effectively stop terrorism. I find it ironic in the extreme that you think self defense is utopian. Expecting the Jews to trust their lives and the lifes of their families to the hope that the Palestinians will repent from their stated goal of the last 50 years just when they were finally handed the means for accomplishing that goal just blows me away. Would you trust Tom's life to such a hope? Dan M. Dan M.
