[TerraMex]

>The Israelis are trying to take out paramilitary targets
>in their raids. The palestinians normally target civilians,
>even though they have ample military targets to hit.
>There is a big difference there. I fail to see how a
>reasonable person can't see that.

You're failing to see a particular point. Most of what you consider a civilian area, isnt for them. It's a constant warzone, take the Gaza strip. There a inumerous inhabitants, but there are also a considerable amout of israelit military posts and skirmishes between both sides. So the difference is very blur. It boils down on how the news is treated.

And they do hit israelit military targets ... who then drop a few bombs on palestinian areas by helicopter, or drive the tanks through to the palestinian side... and redo from start. Its a no win situation for both sides.

>As far as "the Israelis are the agressors" goes: do you
>honestly think there would be fewer terrorist attacks
>from the palestinians if the Israelis just left them
>alone?

It's hard to tell.

You'll have to see the general picture. Part just wants to be left alone to keep living their lives without interference, a large part , but another part just will see the redrawal of israelit forces as an sign of weakness , and push more attacks. Others just want the isrealits out of their houses, another part want them all dead. So its a mix of feelings that keep this a explosive situation. Its not easy to predict a certain event.

>We both know that they'd just be emboldened and
>increase the frequency of attacks. This has been
>proven before. Whenever the Israelis move back, the
>palestinians increase the frequency of their terrorist
>attacks.

That's unsubstanciated (and the rest is above) But i'm going as far as to say "its wrong". I cant really tell that far, and i'm safe to assume that its not that linear.

>That situation is about public opinion: (...)

The public opinion is based alot in what they see on tv. They didnt see concentration camps for the captured palestinians , neither the mass executions by the military.

> Or is your burning antisemetism getting the better of
> you?

Nothing to do with that. It's a plain analysis of the events. You're seeing it as antisemitism.

If the palestinians invaded israel, i'd have the same rant about them.

>It is no excuse to say that the actions of the
>palestinians are justified because they don't have a
>regular army.

It's not what i said . It will happen as long they are an occupied people. They fight as they can. Its not about right or wrong (like i've said before). As long as they feel as an occupied people, opressed and hunted, they will strike back. Changing that has to pass in resolving the conflict between them, in order to the palestinians feel safer. And the israelits for that matter.

You keep forgeting an important point, they have a different culture from ours. This determines the methods of operations . You say its terrorism, they say its freedom fighters, and for them that's exactly what it is. Their cultural and religious beliefs have a major role in determining what is done , and how.

The Bottom line is , they'll keep at each others throats until the Old City problem is solved, the Israelits start following the UN's resolutions (wich they havent), and the palestininians form a stable goverment.

The first one is the real "pain", because neither wants to part with the old city due to the religious grounds. Personally i'd put it under the blue helmets, and keep it an international place, with neither have control over it.

>Regardless, it is a crime to target civilian populations,
>especially considering the multitude of military targets
>that they could more easily target.

Also true, and goes also for the Israelits.

Jaydee116 :

It disagrees with you in the point that you say the Iraqian oil is not that critical. It is, alot.

This can have several outcomes. The US takes over the oil, and uses to its own agenda. And that will have serious repercussions on the economy depending on whats done.

The US turns over the oil fields to the new Iraqian govermnent, but "convinces them" to give the exploration to american companies. Wich is not as bad, but since those power and technology scandals, im not very confident.

The US turns over the oil fields to an international , UN agreeded, taskforce , composed also by the US, and keeps things stable, and the oil flowing, with the current agreements with the companies that are exploring them. Probably boosts up confidence, and keeps the economy stable.

PS: I've just heard that the US military have taken over a large area of oil rigs. Wich is not a surprize, having fully operational oil rigs is on the agenda. And keeps the economy from sinking. Another oil crisis wont help anybody.