The reality of the situation is that the Israelis are acting in self-defense against palestinian terrorism. This kind of moral equivalency by western liberals is a large part of the problem. They fail to make distinctions between victim and aggressor.

The reality of the situation is that it’s far more complex than this black & white, good vs. evil dichotomy that you suggest. A large part of the problem is the moral simplification that western war-hawk/conservatives accept. They fail to see past the propaganda.

Cramer a Jew, an American born reporter who lived in Israel and writes about Israel and the whole situation with love, humor and pain and sadness.

Give it a read.

The Palestinians almost unanimously support those who make terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians. In return the Israelis attack the terrorists, inevitably killing the civilians that the terrorists live among. The Palestinians insist that Jerusalem must be the capital of their state with some willing to settle for it being East Jerusalem and the Israelis adamantly refuse to consider it. For a Palestinian state to be viable it must have a decent sized area of contiguous land. The Israeli settlements on the West Bank and their connecting roads and infrastructure make this impossible while Israeli politics apparently make it impossible to abandon and/or dismantle enough of these settlements to make a difference. In other words, neither side is blameless. Each of them contribute to an inability to find a peaceful solution.

thanks for the link to the yahoo article. Until the original poster and laura read it and think critically about it, no rational discussion can be had.

But in the process, they were responsible for the destruction of the palestinian people. They are largely responsible for their own predicament.

The arabs are responsible for the destruction of the palestinian arabs. From 1947, when the arabs rejected a partition of palestine between Jews and arabs which would have created an arab palestinian state, and instead launched a war of anihilation against Israel, and ordered the arabs to flee believing they would defeat the Jews and then the arabs could return. And the arab world has been using and exploiting these people in the decades since, as pawns in their war against the existence of Israel.

And as I mentioned, there already is an arab state in Palestine, Jordan.

And actually Carter does stand up for the entire arab world in fact. He’s heaped praise on arab dictators and has never taken the arab world to task for its lack of freedom and its oppression. In fact Carter seems to have an effinity also with left wing dictators like castro.

I think this passage the linked article in Michael’s post hits the nail right on the head:

But in so doing, he may have unwittingly embraced a new racism in which he views every challenge as a struggle between dark- and light-skinned people, automatically assuming that those with darker skin are the oppressed and those with lighter skin are the oppressors.

Largely, the formation of Isreal in it’s modern form was a reaction to anti-semitism (Nazism etc.),

This statement completely ignores the centuries of Jewish historical connections to the land, and the fact that there had always been a Jewish presence there. You have no clue as to what you are talking about. The Zionist movement existed long before the holocaust, and the Balfour declaration granted a Jewish homeland in Palestine, to which the British later betrayed the Jews and gave 80% of the Palestine mandate to the arabs, which became Transjordan. There was never any such people as “palestinian” arabs prior to the ’67 war. It is a completely made up nationality, as no such sovereign arab nation ever existed. The so-called “palestinians” themselves are descendents of immigrants from arab nations, who came after the Jews settled largely empty palestine in the 19th century and built up the land.

Islamic law is incompatible with the Western world.

Exactly

He wanted to open our eyes to the indisputable fact that both the Israelis and Palestinians are terrorizing each other.

This is a distorted view of the situation. The reality of the situation is that the Israelis are acting in self-defense against palestinian terrorism. This kind of moral equivalency by western liberals is a large part of the problem. They fail to make distinctions between victim and aggressor.

There is a myth that Palestinians are the only ones committing acts of terrorism. This has to end, and I believe that was the goal of Jimmy Carter’s book. He wanted to open our eyes to the indisputable fact that both the Israelis and Palestinians are terrorizing each other.

If we all can at least agree on that, I think we can start to make some real progress towards peace.

BTW, If you are worried about those kind of political connections, look no further than the oil men in office now. The Bush family and the Saudi royals go way back—a Saudi prince tutored W on foreign policy before he took office. Were there any repercussions for S.A. after 9/11? They have the most oppressive gov’t in the ME, and it must have grated on Osama and his friends (most of whom were Saudis)when a close royal family friend won the presidency.

I am convinced that the reaction of jewish peoples to anti-semitism is a good portion of why this anti-semitism perpetuates. I must first say I beieve in the full equality of men and women of any race. But when one watches the news and hears the anti-defimation league spewing on about Mel Gibson or Jimmy Carter, they make a name for themselves as an inconfident people. A good metaphor is the guy in your office who can’t laugh at himself, so you joke about him more regularly. Largely, the formation of Isreal in it’s modern form was a reaction to anti-semitism (Nazism etc.), an understandable over-reaction. But in the process, they were responsible for the destruction of the palestinian people. They are largely responsible for their own predicament. Yes, bombing people is wrong, especially innocents. However, I know of no other major option for the palestinians. Realistically, they can inflict little or no damage on the Isreali Army. The only means they are able to envision are violent, because largely the global community dropped the ball on, and continues to drop the ball on calling out the Isreali people on their evils. Certainly, the palestinians are wrong in a lot of ways. But you must understand that they live in deep deep poverty. So gaining an inch of land here or there is not enough. Additionally, they are a ruled people. Can you imagine if Canada came into your neighborhood and destroyed it entirely with bulldozers, because somebody didn’t like Celine Dion? Well that’s a stretch. But let us not condemn Carter for his honest and realistic view. He is not advocating the palestinian position. He’s just stating that in order for peace to be achieved, even the most minor of attacks on Isreal must be stopped following agreement. He didn’t say, “In the meantime go bomb em guys. I just love you Hamas folks!” I would argue that the U.S. is very pro-Isreali. If they were so Pro-palestinian I would be upset with that too!

Oops, sry. Lost in translation.

I have to say, this is news to me, Rudi. Would you care to explain this opinion?

Your link to “An Israeli Defense of Jimmy Carter” was spot on. The absence of comment by the Carter critics here is proof of the Yahoo stories accuracy.

There is a definite taboo in criticizing actions of the Israeli government and their lobby in this country. Carter broke the taboo, and now is the beneficiary of outrage ensuing from that act. We ourselves have abstained from our peacemaking role since Bush took office, and Rice is just now traveling to the region to resume that role. You can’t desire peace and unconditionally back Israel.

I think he’s suggesting an endpoint to violence already unfolding. Of course some would have you believe he is a deeply violent man, who has done much ill in this world…

It’s quite a shame because the Carter Center does some excellent work that is completely separate from Carter’s political views, but he does have to realize that these opinions will alienate some people, including these civic leaders who had the ability to garner public support for the Center’s work.

Here’s the link to article:

An Israeli Defense of Jimmy Carter

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070108/cm_thenation/1155513

since he is not just making a prediction, but specifically asking Palestinian groups to set this as their policy, it’s difficult for me to give him the benefit of the doubt.