tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4289920756166920386.post5279444058313958309..comments2023-05-12T04:45:07.316-07:00Comments on My Bell Jar: "Palestine? You mean like, Pakistan?"Sirenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00015764248104088649noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4289920756166920386.post-31697886091324161262007-08-15T07:56:00.000-07:002007-08-15T07:56:00.000-07:00Hey Sirene: I saw your post over at Justin's blog...Hey Sirene: <BR/><BR/>I saw your post over at Justin's blog, and then I saw your own post on your blog. I thought I might put my response here as well. <BR/><BR/>I discovered a LONG time ago that arguing back and forth over the Arab-Israeli conflict in a tit-for-tat manner is an incredible waste of time. <BR/><BR/>Between then and now, I read a lot more and my opinions changed, in some areas slightly, in other ways significantly. <BR/><BR/>In that time, I've received hate-mail (or more specifically hate-email in this new techy world) from both sides. <BR/><BR/>Last summer, when I wrote in my column about the war in Lebanon, I suggested Israel should negotiate with Hezbollah and that it did not have the right to indiscriminately bomb the country, in effect killing scores of civilians. I also said that Hezbollah sucks and that they're a an anti-semitic organization. <BR/><BR/>It was a minority view; you either had to support the complete destruction of Lebanon or you had to be a member of Hezbollah. And I received hate-email indicating such. I had email saying that I was a self-loathing Jew, and I had email saying Hezbollah was akin to the ANC or the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising resistance groups. <BR/><BR/>I don't know if this is the kind of flak you've received, but I've been convinced that in our constant rallying, we've become too polarized. <BR/><BR/>You may or may not agree with what I have just written, or what I post below. That's fine. But, these opinions are based on a rudimentary theory: the Middle East, specifically the people living there, aren't going anywhere. Peace is not only possible, it's the only option. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, sorry for the long banter. If you wish, you could put a link to my blog on your blog, and I put one for yours on mine. Here's my response to Justin: <BR/><BR/>"Justin: <BR/><BR/>Some important things to note: while you're certainly right about Syrian attacks upon Israeli territory prior to 1967 and possibly about the credibility of the word of Bashar Assad, Sirene makes some good points as well. <BR/><BR/>International law (which, some might argue, would go against Israel's security interests) is pretty clear about the Golan Heights: it belongs to Syria and Israel can't impose its laws on it. Sirene is dead on here. <BR/><BR/>However, while legally the Golan is occupied, I would argue that the occupation of it is certainly different than the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. <BR/><BR/>My own opinion: Israel should engage Assad and begin negotiations. If Israel is worried about possible attacks from Syria if the Golan is returned, then it needs to address concerns in negotiations and in international forums. <BR/><BR/>These are, legitimate concerns. So while I may argue for the return of the Golan so that Israel can respect international law, it must be noted that it was the Syrian government's aggression, under Bashar's predecessor and father, that caused Israel to think it would be ok to take the Golan. <BR/><BR/>But another interesting point: if international law is cut-and-dry, why have negotiations at all? Why not just take the point that Israel must return the land unconditionally? <BR/><BR/>The truth is that there is a principle higher than the return of occupied territory that most UN resolutions since 1967 have been based on. Land-for-peace. <BR/><BR/>Thus, the whole premise of international law here, and possibly with regard to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, is not the unconditional return of occupied territory but rather a return of occupied territory in exchange for peace treaties. <BR/><BR/>To make a long story short, while I agree with Sirene in that the end goal is for Israel to return the Golan, I also agree with you, Justin, in that Israel's security concerns need to be addressed as a part of this deal."Jaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07624341818900636812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4289920756166920386.post-37325624936882987242007-08-13T09:36:00.000-07:002007-08-13T09:36:00.000-07:00This is why I'm proud to call her my sister.... B...This is why I'm proud to call her my sister.... BUT this is also what i live with. So it's quite easy for me to laugh at his words of<BR/>"your stupid and dont make any sense" because for anyone that wants to piss Sirene off..thats all you have to say.<BR/>Good DayAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06872795988986584381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4289920756166920386.post-62139809464904312812007-08-12T13:13:00.000-07:002007-08-12T13:13:00.000-07:00"You're stupid and don't make any sense." -- that'..."You're stupid and don't make any sense." -- that's hilarious. I like your points.<BR/>And I like that when you decide to make points in an argument, you demonstrate them in a respectable manner. :)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01679085025078073199noreply@blogger.com