I don't think that the IDF disbanding is a realistic scenario, and I agree that in the extremely unlikely event that it happened, all of Israel's neighbors would capitalize on the weakness by attacking. I'll agree that the local Arabs in the British mandate of Palestine weren't really a cohesive group until 1948, but circumstances since that time have made the term and the grouping real.Bitter Clinger wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:01 pmIf one is familiar with the Israeli Army rules of engagement, one would come to realize that they are the most humane fighting force in the world. More than one soldier has given their life in order to prevent the death of an innocent civilian. As far as the "Palestinians" (which BTW is a made up word that came into existence after 1948) who seem to by and large only be able to find unarmed civilians to murder - in a land where everyone serves in the military at one time or another - if these Arabs laid down their weapons (rockets, AK's, knives and homicide vests) tomorrow, there would be peace. If the Jews laid down their arms, there would be only a massacre of another 6 million-plus Jews.MaduroBU wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2019 2:53 pm I'll stand up and say that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians concerns me. The Palestinians have not made themselves a very sympathetic group, between atrocious leadership and bring used as an excuse to exterminate Jews by all of Israel's neighbors since 1948. Israel has a unique mandate as an ethno-state (something that we in the West wouldn't tolerate under virtually any other circumstance), but they're also a Western democracy. They're also unqiue in that the religious and political climates of their neighbors put them in a strategic position that we cannot understand in the West. Giving up Golan would put all of Northern Israel (including Tel Aviv) in Syrian artillery range, while giving up the West Bank would make a 9 mile wide strip of land connecting Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. If you live in Texas you think "Who cares?". If you have relatives who remember how they maintained 10:1 kill ratios in wadis along the Golan to save the country, those strategic and tactical considerations are very real. "On Both Banks of the Suez" and "The Heights of Courage" are great reads, but they also put into perspective how close and personal the Yom Kippur war was versus the conflicts that we can recall which all took place an ocean away. The Israeli position toward Palestineans hinges upon an absolute unwillingness to allow them to act as a third column or as a means of cedeing strategically vital territory (e.g. WB or Gaza, particularly with no Sinai buffer).
I think that there are valid criticisms of Israeli policy toward Palestinians, but it's also extremely easy to forget how much history goes into those conflicts. It's also too easy for us to minimize the fear and reactions of a group of people who have faced extermination at least twice in the span of 30 years. You cannot encapsulate the complex decisions in a Twitter post or a Facebook rant, and if you do, it's bound to appear (or maybe actually be) an anti-Semitic trope that does nothing to advance important discussions.
Some of the harshest critics and some of the most ardent defenders of Israeli policies are Jews. That diversity of opinion is supported by a shared understanding that NONE of the opinions voiced are motivated by anti-Semitism. That safety is a necessary precursor to meaningful debates on Israeli policy, and Omar's flippant comments completely undermine it. I don't know if she hates Jews or if she is just a moron, but it is clear that she moved her own aims backward by saying something idiotic.
I don't agree that the Palestinians could ensure peace by disarming, because they aren't the threat. The Palestinians do the most damage on a day to day basis, but only because of the detente between Israel and it's Arab neighbors since 1973. If the multitude of Palestinian groups all laid down their arms, the issues of land and water would be just as acute for Israel and the Palestinians. The IDF does make an effort to avoid civilian casualties against a set of opponents who routinely use terror rocket attacks and human shields while retaliating in kind against attacks on their home soil. The restraint shown on a daily basis by the IDF IS impressive, but it's not the heart of the issue. Rather, the Palestinians in Israel (who generally represent the folks who didn't have the resources to leave...most "Palestinians" live outside of Israel if they have the option) don't have the resources to create a real economy, with the added trouble that aid or remittances are shunted towards funding terrorism.
I think that shaping the discussion as a right vs wrong debate and trying to figure out which participant is the "bad guy" minimizes the legitimate motives of both groups. By way of example, Begin did bad things but he also did a lot of good, and he was always committed first and foremost to the survival of Israel. His actions made sense in that context, and I think that approaching how the Palestinians think with the same view (i.e. "why did they do this?") gives a much more accurate view of the players involved and the choices to be made.
The only clear things are that the violence has solved nothing and that the problems prevent easy answers. It is extremely difficult to find a way to admit that a group of people whose world view has incorporated huge amounts of virulent anti-Semitism and whose interests have been frequently co-opted by nations that would gladly exterminate Israel may have valud claims. I'll reiterate that Israel's unilateral capitulation to even some Palestinian demands wouldn't solve the problems because Israel is and must remain on guard against existential military threats. To that end, I think that the real pre-requisite to improving conditions for the Palestinians is a normalization of relations with stable neighbors (i.e. more akin to Jordan than Egypt).
As a regional player, Israel doesn't have the clout to accomplish this end. To the extent that we're a much larger player (both militarily and in terms of oil purchases), we might be able to do more.