Farewell to Palestinian Leader Abu Ali Mustafa

Another one bites the dust.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/18/rantisi.funeral/index.html

Yes, the assassination (conventiently not punished by the international community) will increase attacks against Israel. Exactly what Israel wants. It will justify any further expansions and such.

Chen said:

Another one bites the dust.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/18/rantisi.funeral/index.html

We knew this would happen.
This stupidity was predictable.
Both sides work for the same creative company: Murder Inc.

Adam said:

Yes, the assassination (conventiently not punished by the international community) will increase attacks against Israel. Exactly what Israel wants. It will justify any further expansions and such.

And keeping him alive would have helped Israel?

Chen said:

And keeping him alive would have helped Israel?

It wouldn't have hurt them any more than killing him did. And at least they wouldn't have so much blood on their hands.

master_coda said:

It wouldn't have hurt them any more than killing him did. And at least they wouldn't have so much blood on their hands.

Obviously you have no idea who this person was and what kind of movement he had led. "wouldn't have hurt them"? Rantisis was the mastermind behind dozens of terrorist acts, so what makes him so harmless all of a sudden?

Chen said:

Obviously you have no idea who this person was and what kind of movement he had led. "wouldn't have hurt them"? Rantisis was the mastermind behind dozens of terrorist acts, so what makes him so harmless all of a sudden?

The idea that killing a single person will significantly reduce the amount of terrorism is absurd. You could kill everyone in Hamas, and at best you would get a temporary reduction in the amount of terrorism. Pretending that you can eliminate terrorism by killing a few key people is wishful thinking.

master_coda said:

The idea that killing a single person will significantly reduce the amount of terrorism is absurd. You could kill everyone in Hamas, and at best you would get a temporary reduction in the amount of terrorism. Pretending that you can eliminate terrorism by killing a few key people is wishful thinking.

Good idea, let's let them get away with it.

Why does the US pursuit Bin Laden so hard then? I mean, it's just one person... it wouldn't stop terrorism, it would only increase it!

Chen said:

Good idea, let's let them get away with it.

Why does the US pursuit Bin Laden so hard then? I mean, it's just one person... it wouldn't stop terrorism, it would only increase it!

I see. The only two options are doing nothing and assassinating people.

Ok so it's either:
a) Kill Bin-Laden
b) Talk to Bin-Laden
c) Do nothing
What do you choose?

Chen said:

Ok so it's either:
a) Kill Bin-Laden
b) Talk to Bin-Laden
c) Do nothing
What do you choose?

Well, you didn't even point out the very popular idea of capturing him...but I don't think you really understand my point. You seem to be fixated on the idea that attacking specific terrorists is a productive way of fighting terrorism. It isn't.

Anyone killed is easily replacable, so it doesn't weaken them significantly from a personel point of view. It clearly doesn't act as a deterent.

So, how do you justify such killings? You can't do it in the name of fighting terrorism...it clearly doesn't reduce terrorism.

The cycle of retaliations has just gotten a lot of people killed. The terrorists are fools as well...clearly blowing people up has accomplished nothing for them either. Yet both sides continue killing, absolutly certain that if they just keep on killing the enemy they'll eventually win. And we can't try anything else, because these people we're fighting against are murderers and they deserve to die.

Isreal seems to like creating martyrs.

The vicious cycle will never stop.

Suicide bombers blew themselves up--->>Israel hunts down leader
Israel kills leader----->>Suicide bombers blew themselves up again.

It goes on and on.

Adam said:

Yes, the assassination (conventiently not punished by the international community) will increase attacks against Israel. Exactly what Israel wants. It will justify any further expansions and such.

Assassinations have actually reduced attacks and the big push at the moment is due to Israels planned pullout. Which is more likely to increase attacks because it will be seen as a significant win for the different palestinian groups. The goal atm is to unbalance Hamas enough to give Arafat's Organization the upper hand in the pull out and attempt to avoid a civil war in the vacum.

Rantisi was a child preying (palestinian and israeli), hateful murderous scum. The world is a better place without him.

master_coda said:

Well, you didn't even point out the very popular idea of capturing him...but I don't think you really understand my point. You seem to be fixated on the idea that attacking specific terrorists is a productive way of fighting terrorism. It isn't. Rantisi had sent hundreds of Palestinians on suicide missions (only few of which managed to carry it out), so every Palestinian mother should be happy that he is gone now.

Anyone killed is easily replacable, so it doesn't weaken them significantly from a personel point of view. It clearly doesn't act as a deterent.

So, how do you justify such killings? You can't do it in the name of fighting terrorism...it clearly doesn't reduce terrorism.

How do I justify the killing? Easily - Rantisi is directly responsible for the deaths of dozens of Israelis (if not more), and deserves to be killed. It is a very simple equation.

Do you honestly believe it will increase terrorism? I agree, in the long run, that killing Rantisi would not stop terrorism. I do believe it will reduce it for a while, however. I don't agree that it will increase terrorism - what do you base this on? The whole argument of "this is like giving them a reason/incentive" is completely invalid. It's not like they didn't already have a reason to attack us, and they have more than enough incentives to do so.

Suppose we arranged a big operation and captured him (and probably lost a couple of soldiers on the way, but who cares about them right? )... what difference would it have made? Would it not anger the Palestinians?

Chen said:

How do I justify the killing? Easily - Rantisi is directly responsible for the deaths of dozens of Israelis (if not more), and deserves to be killed. It is a very simple equation.

This happens to be the exact same equation that the terrorists use. They see their friends and relatives die at the hands of the Israelis, so they respond in kind.

Both sides see killing as "evening the score". Israeli soldiers aren't really murderers because they're just avenging the deaths of their fellow Israelis and defending their homeland. The terrorists aren't really murderers either, since they're just doing the same thing.

Both sides have come up with the exact same reason to justify their killings and see themselves as heroes while their enemies are evil murderers. The irony is almost sickening.

master_coda said:

This happens to be the exact same equation that the terrorists use. They see their friends and relatives die at the hands of the Israelis, so they respond in kind.

Not true. Those friends that died, were they killed by civilians? By women? By children and babies? No, so why do the terrorists "return the favor" by murdering innocent Israeli families in the middle of a restaurant or while riding the bus?

Chen said:

Not true. Those friends that died, were they killed by civilians? By women? By children and babies? No, so why do the terrorists "return the favor" by murdering innocent Israeli families in the middle of a restaurant or while riding the bus?

Oh, I don't disagree that Israel does a much better job of not killing women and children. They certainly have the moral high ground. That doesn't change the fact that Israeli revenge killings are still part of the endless cycle of death. Or the fact that, ultimately, the same emotions and reasoning are what motivate both sides.


What level of separation does there have to be between a killer and another person for that person to no longer be responsible for the killings? Are you still responsible if you're just involved in the planning? Or what if you only supply the killer with weapons? Or what if you only supply encouragement? How much separation does there have to be to absolve someone of direct responsibility?

I don't agree that this cycle of death is endless. I believe it can be ended by a mutual agreement signed by both parties, and I also believe that there are people on the Palestinian side that wish to reach such an agreement. However, these people are not doing enough. Maybe because they are afraid, I don't know. But if the Palestinian government wants peace, it needs to make some sacrifices. For example, fight the terror rather than help the Hamas. Last time we tried to make a temporary truce by both parties for a period of two weeks, it was violated by the Palestinians after a couple of days.

I know it sounds like a "he started it!" argument. And you are probably going to tell me that "one of you needs to rise above itself and end this fight". But this is not kindergarten, and we are not arguing over pieces of lego. The lives of many people, both Israeli and Palestinian, are hanging on the balance here. We can't just pull our forces out of there, nor can we stop our fight against terror, because Israeli citizens will lose their lives. Israeli fights terrorists to keep its citizens safe, whereas Palestinian terrorists murder people to sabotage any chance of peace.

I think the only way to end this is by cooperation, both militarily and politically. Israel also has its extremist that try to hurt the Arabs, but when was the last time you heard about an Israeli teenager walking into a Palestinian restaurant carrying a bomb? Over the last 20 years I can count the number of terrorist acts executed by Israeli extremists on just one of my hands. Two will not be enough to count the terrorist acts coming from Palestinian in the last month.



(By the way, it is nice to have an argument on this subject with intelligent people, for once. On most other forums that try to discuss these issues threads usually end in a flame war.)

Chen said:

I don't agree that this cycle of death is endless. I believe it can be ended by a mutual agreement signed by both parties, and I also believe that there are people on the Palestinian side that wish to reach such an agreement. However, these people are not doing enough. Maybe because they are afraid, I don't know. But if the Palestinian government wants peace, it needs to make some sacrifices. For example, fight the terror rather than help the Hamas. Last time we tried to make a temporary truce by both parties for a period of two weeks, it was violated by the Palestinians after a couple of days.

I know it sounds like a "he started it!" argument. And you are probably going to tell me that "one of you needs to rise above itself and end this fight". But this is not kindergarten, and we are not arguing over pieces of lego. The lives of many people, both Israeli and Palestinian, are hanging on the balance here. We can't just pull our forces out of there, nor can we stop our fight against terror, because Israeli citizens will lose their lives. Israeli fights terrorists to keep its citizens safe, whereas Palestinian terrorists murder people to sabotage any chance of peace.

I think the only way to end this is by cooperation, both militarily and politically. Israel also has its extremist that try to hurt the Arabs, but when was the last time you heard about an Israeli teenager walking into a Palestinian restaurant carrying a bomb? Over the last 20 years I can count the number of terrorist acts executed by Israeli extremists on just one of my hands. Two will not be enough to count the terrorist acts coming from Palestinian in the last month.



(By the way, it is nice to have an argument on this subject with intelligent people, for once. On most other forums that try to discuss these issues threads usually end in a flame war.)

I think cooperation most certainly is the answer. But this is the problem with the killings, on both sides. On the surface, whenever someone is killed, it seems to "justify" the extremists. The desire for revenge that is generated is most readily satisified by people who advocate immediate retaliation, while cooperation is critisized as having failed.

While Israeli extremists don't use terrorism, that much is true...but I think that tends to be a matter of circumstance. They can kill the enemy without killing innocents. The terrorists can't. If they want to kill people for their cause, then they have to kill indiscriminatly.


To be completely honest, I don't really know how this situation is going to work out. Neither side can achieve military victory, at least not without resorting to genocide. Peaceful cooperation is the only real solution in my eyes, but that almost seems like wishful thinking...it only takes one terrorist to ruin it.

I was trying to convey the feeling of "We are doing our job; now it's time that they do theirs". I can't see how anything new can happen until the Palestinian government takes control of the terrorists and at least tries to stop them.

Chen said:

I was trying to convey the feeling of "We are doing our job; now it's time that they do theirs". I can't see how anything new can happen until the Palestinian government takes control of the terrorists and at least tries to stop them.

Of course, this highlights the optimial solution to the terrorists Israel is killing...it would be much better if they were aprehended and punished by the Palestininan government. Unfortunatly they seem to be too weak to do anything useful at all.

master_coda said:

Of course, this highlights the optimial solution to the terrorists Israel is killing...it would be much better if they were aprehended and punished by the Palestininan government. Unfortunatly they seem to be too weak to do anything useful at all.

The terrorist are...members of the government...there is not this clear separation you appear to believe there is.

kat said:

The terrorist are...members of the government...there is not this clear separation you appear to believe there is.

And even if they were "captured" it would be at best a showpiece. I was speculating as to what the best solution would be...terrorists being aprehended and punished by their own people. It sure ain't going to happen any time soon.

If people are allowed to speculate about the fantasy world where killing terrorists actually stops terrorism, why can't I imagine places where terrorism is ended without violence?

master_coda said:

If people are allowed to speculate about the fantasy world where killing terrorists actually stops terrorism, why can't I imagine places where terrorism is ended without violence?

Lol, you can...you can..but just don't expect others to believe it. I think the lesson was learned during oslo..you remember when Israel armed arafats police force in good faith, only to have it used against them.

kat said:

Lol, you can...you can..but just don't expect others to believe it. I think the lesson was learned during oslo..you remember when Israel armed arafats police force in good faith, only to have it used against them.

If there's anything that history has taught us, it's that when you're faced with the total failure of a diplomatic solution and the total failure of a military solution...you're screwed.

master_coda said:

Of course, this highlights the optimial solution to the terrorists Israel is killing...it would be much better if they were aprehended and punished by the Palestininan government. Unfortunatly they seem to be too weak to do anything useful at all.

That is correct. As soon as the Palestinian government starts to take care of the terrorism, IDF's presence in their territory would not be needed. Do you agree? In the absence of any action from their government, Israel has no choice but to do away with the terrorists on its own.

Chen said:

That is correct. As soon as the Palestinian government starts to take care of the terrorism, IDF's presence in their territory would not be needed. Do you agree? In the absence of any action from their government, Israel has no choice but to do away with the terrorists on its own.

My point was never that Isreal shouldn't try and eliminate terrorism, even if it requires the use of force. Just that assassinating a few thugs doesn't really accomplish anything. Killing someone who'll just be replaced by yet another thug is an empty victory.

That's another thing... it is a lot more than "a few thugs". Your newspapers only report the big fish, like Yasin and Rantisi, but we kill a lot more terrorists every day, and that's only from the reports in the Israeli press (who knows how many more we kill without telling anyone).

kat said:

Rantisi was a child preying (palestinian and israeli), hateful murderous scum. The world is a better place without him.

agree 100%

Chen said:

That's another thing... it is a lot more than "a few thugs". Your newspapers only report the big fish, like Yasin and Rantisi, but we kill a lot more terrorists every day, and that's only from the reports in the Israeli press (who knows how many more we kill without telling anyone).

Fine, they catch a lot of thugs. What does it matter if they catch 10 terrorists or 10,000 if another 10 or 10,000 replace them? This isn't a problem that can be attacked "one terrorist at a time"; The supply of terrorists is effectively unlimited.

I'm not sure this discussion is doing anything other than going in circles...perhaps we should just agree to disagree.

master_coda said:

Fine, they catch a lot of thugs. What does it matter if they catch 10 terrorists or 10,000 if another 10 or 10,000 replace them? This isn't a problem that can be attacked "one terrorist at a time"; The supply of terrorists is effectively unlimited.

I'm not sure this discussion is doing anything other than going in circles...perhaps we should just agree to disagree.

Well, let's look at it from the other direction then: You've told us how they should not deal with the problem, now tell us how Israel should deal with the problem.

russ_watters said:

Well, let's look at it from the other direction then: You've told us how they should not deal with the problem, now tell us how Israel should deal with the problem.

Oh, I sure wish I had a great solution.

Well, I support the current policy of capturing/killing suicide bombers themselves. This does prevent actual bombings. By itself this isn't a solution though, since they'll just be followed by more bombers later on.

For terrorist leaders, a more observational strategy might work better. Of course, Israel is probably spying on them as much as they can already; but overt attacks again the leaders only makes that more difficult, since it tends to drive them further underground.

Israel could put a great deal of effort into supporting non-violent groups among the Palestinians; this is difficult though, since obviously for any aid they provide, at least some will end up in the hands of the terrorists. Plus aiding these groups may just get them labeled as collaborators, anyway...

Perhaps even just taking a consistent stand would help Israel. It's certainly difficult to understand how their policy works right now...they commit to a withdrawal and then all of a sudden go on the offensive...and then they turn around and commit to a withdrawal. I understand that they're just reacting to a dynamic situation, but it becomes difficult to take people seriously when they Israels policy changes every few weeks.

Perhaps the current situation is just too unpredictable to make a good plan to work out of; unless a drastic change in the social and political structure among the Israelis or Palestinians occurs, there may not be a policy that can end the cycle of retaliation. It's like an awful prisoners dilemma; both sides have to cooperate to come away with anything, but once one side demonstrates weakness, the other side will sense their advantage and try and bargain selfishly.

master_coda said:

Oh, I sure wish I had a great solution.

I appreciate your honesty. Your suggestions aren't bad, but clearly this isn't an 'x won't work, they should do y' situation. No, using force isn't a perfect solution, but I do think its the best.

Israel could put a great deal of effort into supporting non-violent groups among the Palestinians; this is difficult though, since obviously for any aid they provide, at least some will end up in the hands of the terrorists. Plus aiding these groups may just get them labeled as collaborators, anyway...

Looking at how many times neighboring Arab countries have tried to destroy Israel, it's quite clear that peace is not the option Arabs have in mind.



I think it's great that terrorist leaders are being taken out.