JOSH
not an entrirely unexpected response :) no problem. And as far as it goes, I take your points on board humanly speeking.
My main struggle with what you said, is that you appear to be still looking at the symptom, and the 'day to day' issues, rather than at the big picture. You are saying "Israelis are well trained, well armed etc" and.."they kill children" But that sounds too much like simple propoganda mate.. it really does. Children get killed in any war, and not actually being there for each questionable incident and not knowing the facts apart from what is communicated to me via the media its a bit hard to claim "Israelis deliberately target children" Some may, its possible, others may be caught in a moment of uncertainty or fear or knee jerk reaction.
If we just respond to those incidents and attempt to lay blame, we won't get very far except in a rather circular motion.
I still remember when the Israelis stopped completely from actions, and all was quiet.. 'until' the Jihadists blew up a bus. Remember that ? Even so, I wont say 'Therefore the Palestianians are this or that' I just interpret such things in the bigger context.
You seem to be taking a liberal, leftish,humanistic approach to all this. Am I right? I'd like to know your foundation for your morality.

You seem to be neglecting where all this started. Which was around AD 70, and the Romans exiled the Jews from their land, destroyed Jerusalem and indirectly contributed to the Holocaust which would never have occurred had the Jews been left alone. The "H" in turn which gave the final sense of "We must return to our ancestral land" which brings us to the present scene.

Josh. SERIOUS question.... Do u REALLY feel that peace is acheivable based on anything other than one side dissappearing from the area ? Lets explore one scenario.
1/ Israelis give back occupied lands.
They allow Palestinians to use half of Jerusalem as their capital. Peace ? I guess its as likely as their being peace between Serbs and Kosovo Albanians. As Arab birth rates continue to rise, and population grows, do u really think they will be satisfied with just the above mentioned allocation ? Have a read of 2 Kings Chapter 6:8-33 for a historical precedent of such a move in the Old Testament. Its quite instructive about human nature.

2/ ISRAELI SIDE. Based on the above, we should examine what 'seeds' would be present in the Israeli camp, pushing in a different direction.
a) Orthodox/Religious Jews: The likelihood of sacrificing the 'Holy of Holys' to 'pagans' is something comparable to pigs flying. Remember Masada ? Jews can be rather stubborn at times.
b) Islam. One of the fundamental doctrines of this faith is "The world belongs to Allah and his apostle" If u put a) and b) together you get, to put it mildly "problems".
c) The political right. Which would view any compromise as capitulation, and an open door to an unbearable threat.

Josh. Pls refer to my post in response to Grace. But, further, it might be a good idea to gain a sense of the emotional/spiritual forces in play here, by reading both the Old Testament from Genesis 12 up to the end of II kings. Then, read up on the beginnings of Islam and its expansion. Look at Sahih Muslim , book of Jihad and various other collections. . (if u search on Sahih Muslim u will get an english translation avail)Read "Sword of Allah" about the life of "Khaled bin Al Waleed" and the battle of Yarmuk
Its not possible to understand the middle east apart from these histories.

I hope this contributes to a richer discussion of the issue.

LEGALITY OF SETTLEMENTS.

This is an interesting concept :) How 'legal' and by who's standard are OUR settlements in Australia ? aah.. welcome to the world of moral relativity. It's amazing how the White Zimbabwians talk long and hard about 'legality' of Robert Mugabe taking back the 90% of useful land from the 10% of Whites who stole it from the 80%+ of blacks when they settled.
Each time I feel like crying out about some local injustice in Melbourne, I'm forcably reminded that its not about justice, but about law and power. Where do I encounter this ? simple, -the Boys in Blue will hustle me off to jail if I disagree in action to some law made by the oligarchy to maintaim social order while they pillage the country.. okok.. a bit 'rabid' sure :) but u get the point.

Israeli settlements are illegal 'how' ? At which point in history do u want to make your reference point? Err.. lets try AD70.. or.. lets go back furhter to the invasions of the Phoenicians who became the Philistines (some of whom would have a current presence in the Palestinians of the Gaza area), Israels arch enemy.

Israeli settlements are as legal as the power which backs them up. Just like every other 'status quo' in the world which exists today.

INTERNATIONAL LAW ? oh this is a good one. By virtue of WHAT is it 'law' ? only one thing- power. The concept might be useful to give money grubbing lawyers a sense of purpose and destiny, but its interpretation would always boil down to 'vested interests'. When u see how the 'Oil for Food' scandal included funnelling payments to a company controlled by the former UN Sec Gen. Boutros Ghali.. err..c'mon :) the UN is as corrupt as any other well meaning, but impotent human organization.

JOSH..
one more for you. I dont dispute any of the issues u raised about Jewish/rightwing lobby groups etc etc..

Ok... deny and spin this as anti-whatever.

The modern day problems, that we are dealing with here and now, in the Middle East are down to one thing. The creation of a Isreal and the way in which it violently put down and displaced arabs who occuppied land that was 'promised by god' according to some unverifiable text fingered thousands of years ago, when god 'spoke' to some community leader of the time. Sheesh... padded cells and Fruedian Psychoanalysis might have solved this back in the late '40s.

The idea that anyone who critiques Isreal policy is anti-semetic is intellectual dishonesty. Like saying anyone who questions immigration policy is racist. Its just a way of avoiding the issue, twisting the logic and using shame to deflect honest contemplation.

Ok... here's a logical twister for you claimants of anti-semitism. A sizeable proportion of arabs are semites. Does that mean that critiquing Iranian policies is anti-semetic? Or that admonishing islamic terrorists, who are arabs and likely to be semites, is also anti-semitic?

You can only cry wolf so many times before you will be ignored.

Philip Mendes should be congratulated for this propaganda effort. The sterotyping of anti-Zionists and strawman arguments didn't begin until paragraph four: "The radical Left... romance with the PLO began." Romance with terrorists (which is what most people regard the PLO as) is the first slur Mendes brushes Palestinian human rights defenders with.

Of course, Mr Mendes is too clever to make it obvious that this article was just another one of his anti-Palestinian propadanda efforts, so he poses a question instead and leads us to the answer he would like us to adopt. To maintain credibility he reluctantly admits that not all anti-Zionists are anti-Semitic ("per se" is the term he uses), but it's clear that he wants us to think most of them are. That will no be the impression left with many and Philip Mendes knows it.

PAULx82

If u dont believe there is a place for moral value judgements in Australian social policy (as he argues in a different article) u wont see much in terms of 'right and wrong' in that conflict either.