Dear Sir Vivor,

Yours is a voice of reason, one of many, including
from Israel itself.

I was watching 'Lateline,' on the ABC last night.
A journalist from the Israeli newspaper, 'Ha'aratz,'
painted a rather grim picture of the area's
future. He said that he still believed peace was
possible, but his children no longer believed in
peace.

We can only hope that his belief proves to be the
right one. That peace will be strived for and
eventually achieved with the help of the international
community and US support.

Foxy,

"1) According to the Israeli daily, 'Ha'aretz,'
Israel's all-out assault on Gaza had been
planned six months earlier. How come?"

It is inevitable that Israel would have to make plans to attack the terrorist groups committed to its destruction all the time, so that when they commmit more terrorist attacks, they can be defeated.

"2) Why does Israel not agree to a two-state solution,
obey international law and end their illegal occupation
beyond the 1967 borders"

The Israeli government is happy to negotiate a two-state solution, but it has always maintained that terrorism would have to stop permanently for this to ever occur. That's fair enough. It's not fair to ask Israel to recognise a Palentinian state when the Palentinians won't commit to an end of terrorist activities.

Sir Vivor,

Israel has tried displomacy. It even offered the Palentinians most of the land they demand back in 2000, but was repaid with scorn and terrorist attacks. Also, when the ruling Gaza government is Hamas, an anti-semitic organisation whose main purpose is to destroy Israel, tehre's really not much to talk about.

In terms of Mr Lieberman's statement, whether I agree with him would depend on what he means by being "not loyal" to the Israeli state. Certainly, anyone planning, inciting, promoting, assisting or participating in the preparation or execution of terrorist attacks against the nation state of Israel does not deserve to have citizenship of Israel.

Israel-Palestine events back in 2000 aren’t as clear-cut as you say, AJFA. Here’s an “unbiased” summary from the US Council on Foreign Relations:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/CGME_transcript.html

“July 2000: Camp David
“In July, U.S. President Bill Clinton hosts two weeks of intense Israeli-Palestinian negotiations at Camp David. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offers substantial concessions, including withdrawal from more than 90 percent of the occupied territories, possible partition of Jerusalem's Old City, and a Palestinian state in the area of withdrawal. According to U.S. negotiators involved, Palestinian President Yasir Arafat turns down the deal. Though Arafat is often blamed for the summit's failure, many Palestinians argue Barak was offering something that he couldn't deliver and that didn't satisfy their requirements for a deal: pre-1967 borders and a recognized "right of return." The summit ends with a Trilateral Statement to serve as a framework for future negotiations, though subsequent efforts by Clinton and others to rekindle the process yield little.

“September 2000: New Violence Erupts
“Ariel Sharon, the head of the Likud Party and formal opposition leader, makes a September visit to the Temple Mount in East Jerusalem-also the site of Islam's third-holiest site, the al-Aqsa Mosque. Sharon's presence provides the spark that ignites a round of fighting, dubbed the "second intifada" by Palestinians. Unlike the 1987 rising, however, this conflict is marked from the beginning by fewer mass demonstrations and a much greater use of firearms and suicide bombs. This, in turn, leads to harsh preventive measures by Israel, including the reoccupation of parts of the West Bank, air strikes, targeted killings, and the construction of a barrier separating Palestinians from Jewish population centers in the West Bank.”

Details crucial to both Israelis and Palestinians are glossed over. AJFA, can you fill in the blanks and/or connect the dots, from your viewpoint? I’m hoping you’ll be able to explain what seems to me to be cruel, stupid and criminal behaviour of some IDF troops in Gaza, and entrenched support of IDF war crimes by leaders of major Knesset parties.

& Foxy, thanks for the kind words.

Unfortunate name could be mistaken for some one who actually cares.
the facts are that Palestine is a region not a state.
it has no real form of government as its only recognised by an act of america( g bush) not a sovreign nation.
Not that thats any excuse for the protectionist policies it is forced to undertake just to survive. Get real.

I don't dispute that account. Whatever you think of Sharon's provocative move, the Palestinian response was completely irrational. And yet Israel's critics accuse Israel of not acting proportionately!

Sir Vivor, I am also skeptical whenever I hear of Israel being accused of this or that, simply because it usually emerges that the accusations are completely false. Remember that strike inside a school which killed 40 people which really never was? Even members of organisations such as the UN and Amnesty International buy the lies of Palestinians, or even lie themselves.

Here's some info on the school strike which didn't even go in the school and didn't kill anyone: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25004467-20261,00.html

Likewise, some accusations don't make any sense. Like the ones where Israeli soldiers were accused of spray painting Palestinian homes with obscene messages. What are the chances of combat troops carrying spraypaint and having the time to engage in such activities?

So as you can see, I am extremely skeptical of most accusations against Israel. I think that you should be too.

Press reports often beg for skepticism.

AFJA, while it seems unlikely to you that soldiers would carry spray paint, it is possible.

A report I saw on Australian SBS TV showed a chicken farm that had been commandeered by IDF troops as a fire base. The chook sheds must have been in the field of view, so they were demolished. The owner, on return, found dead and dying chickens in crushed cages. It looked as though tanks or other treaded machinery had been used to level the buildings, as there were treadmarks on the metal which had been walls and roofs.

The owner found graffiti scored into the walls of his home: racial vilification of Palestinians. The star of David was also carved into the walls.

Evidence of racial vilification points to the root of this conflict. It is aggravated by Hamas and other militant factions launching rockets into Israel, but it is further aggravated by Israeli and other parties, who vilify Israeli and Palestinian Arabs and anyone who does not agree with their vision of Israel.

Israeli leaders and policymakers are the people who should be working toward a cure, and the removal of Palestinians from the Holy Land is not only wrong in my eyes, it is an easily argued act of genocide. What despicable government is famous for using that cure?

Like a man in court who claims to beat his wife because she aggravates him into doing so, any Israeli who claims aggravation as a defense against war crimes may find a jury unsympathetic.

The possibility of trials is real. See
http://www.alternet.org/audits/126724/?page=entire

"Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann would coordinate the defense of any soldier or commander charged with a war crime. In any case, the United States would veto any effort by the UN Security Council to refer Israelis to the International Court at The Hague."

AFJA, Without a change in policy and diplomatic approach, Israel will become ever more isolated and its citizens ever more confined.