Build beyond hatred

Lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace requires more than U.N. vote

  • Follow Editorials

The Palestinian one seems a rather bizarre route to statehood: Wage war on your neighbor until the United Nations chooses to reward such behavior with “non-member state” status, as it did this week.

If this is the pathway to a true and lasting peace, so be it and all to the good. But it will take more than a U.N. vote to make Palestine a nation, much less a “non-member” or neighbor worthy of embracing.

It will require something other than abject hatred of one’s neighbor, for instance.

The truth is, Palestine would likely have existed long ago had the Palestinians been led by people who were more interested in their welfare than in harming the welfare of Israel. Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip, is recognized by the United States and many other nations as a terrorist organization. It has never entertained the notion of recognizing Israel’s right to exist, and has been fighting a proxy war (likely on behalf of Iran) with Israel for years.

Even Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, head of the supposedly moderate West Bank family of Palestinians, took the opportunity of the vote to denounce Israel for “war crimes” – for, one is left to think, defending itself against the terrorists of Hamas.

To give an idea of the breadth of this conflict, and its flavor, consider that former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir said, “Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us” – and she died way back in 1978.

What she said those many tears ago holds true today. A nation cannot be built on hatred alone.

We do hope the events of this week can somehow lead to peace. We encourage the Obama administration to see to it, to the extent possible.

Our fear, though, is that the U.N. resolution will only embolden the haters – those Palestinian leaders, particularly in Gaza, who have yet to see the beauty and hope – and the concordant despair – of Golda Meir’s prophecy.

Comments (16) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
bethjohansen
10
Points
bethjohansen 12/01/12 - 12:21 am
2
4
what else did Golda say?

This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy.
As quoted in Le Monde (15 October 1971).
God.....really??

bethjohansen
10
Points
bethjohansen 12/01/12 - 12:33 am
4
5
one-sided editorial

Today's approval by the Israeli government to build 3,000 new illegal settlements in the occupied territory says what?

Young Fred
18057
Points
Young Fred 12/01/12 - 01:34 am
3
2
“Today’s approval” by all

“Today’s approval” by all involved is just another example of one half riding the band wagon and one half swallowing propaganda.

Riverman1
87157
Points
Riverman1 12/01/12 - 08:12 am
7
1
State Supported Terrorism

BethJohansen, because Golda Meir used a reference to God, you excuse the Arab attacks on Israel? Peace is easy…just put your weapons down. From Ari Ben Canaan to the present, Israel has had to fight to survive. When does it stop?

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 12/01/12 - 09:04 am
1
5
Interesting

Interesting that some see the response of rocket attacks to the building of housing in an area as legitimate.

As to the land Israel won in the 1967 war, ask yourself who they won that land from.

dahreese
4743
Points
dahreese 12/01/12 - 10:47 am
5
4
Israel
Unpublished

Nice try on the part of the paper to put an anti-Palestinian twist on this.

However, a "state" of Israel did not exist until 1946/47 when the U.S., England and the U.N. "declared" it to be so "in the land of Palestine."

The fact of the recent vote in the U.N . to allow Palestine more opportunity in that organization was a whopping message from the rest of the world (The vote was 138 delegates in favor, nine against and 41 abstentions) that they are fed up with the behavior of the U.S. and Israel towards the Palestinians.

What we need to read is a responsible editorial calling on the U.S. to recognize that just maybe the U.S. needs to regroup and take a realistic look at this situation.

The dominance of Palestine has gone on too long and needs to stop, immediately.

Nor do all of us who love our country fall for the propaganda of our government AND our conservative media - hint, hint.

soapy_725
43772
Points
soapy_725 12/01/12 - 10:52 am
0
0
Arafat's remains to be exhumed
Unpublished

New autopsy to reveal poisoning. Stoke the fires with feces when there is no wood. The Big Three will not allow a nuclear war in the middle east that could disrupt the flow of cheap crude oil. A stable monetary system is the goal of the true world leaders. The true world leaders make war to maintain an economic balance just as kings have done for millennia. Destroying oil reserves does not make these people's wealth stable.

soapy_725
43772
Points
soapy_725 12/01/12 - 10:56 am
0
0
Biblicaly, materially or economically
Unpublished

someone will step in and declare the borders of this area. And attempt to secure them. Jimmah Katar say himself as this biblical world leader. The one who would finally bring peace to the middle east. The Baptist Sunday School teacher, and avowed socialist, did not care that this " prophesied one" would be the anitchrist.

allhans
24050
Points
allhans 12/01/12 - 03:35 pm
5
4
Jews owned the land from the

Jews owned the land from the beginning of time, it is their homeland. They formed the state of Israel...that is their HOME.

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 12/01/12 - 01:45 pm
5
2
Palestine was never a

Palestine was never a "country" it was at best a territory. Who did Israel win the land from in the Six Day War?

Israeli... build a settlement
Palestinian response? Randomly lob rockets or blow up disco's and cafe's.
I find it strange that some people think that this is reasonable.

dahreese
4743
Points
dahreese 12/01/12 - 02:42 pm
3
2
"Palestine a territory"
Unpublished

A loose confederation perhaps, but still not the right of the U.S., England and the U.N. to tell the Palestinians to "move over", we're putting somebody else on your land whether you like it or not."

Additionally, seems like Israel has "won" a LOT of land since 1967. Not all through additional "wars", either. Almost the entire area, now.

Israel is now a "fact" and that is not going to be changed except through genocide and we cannot allow that to happen.

I do argue that Zionism is extreamist and its religious/political extreamism (supported and winked at by the U.S.) is the primary cause of the Middle East situation.

Jake
32954
Points
Jake 12/01/12 - 04:16 pm
5
1
@allhans

Actually, the Jews did not "own the land from the beginning of time" because Abraham (the father of the Jewish religion) was born and lived in Ur which is now Iraq. When he and Sarah, his wife, left and went into what is now the land of Israel, there were already many other tribes living there.
Genesis will tell you all about it if you are interested.

Little Lamb
47042
Points
Little Lamb 12/01/12 - 05:33 pm
3
3
Legality

bethjohanson posted:

Today's approval by the Israeli government to build 3,000 new illegal settlements in the occupied territory says what?

Once the Knesset approves the construction, it becomes legal. That's what legislatures do – enact laws. You may agree with the law or disagree with the law, but the law is legal. Ergo the settlements are legal.

burninater
9693
Points
burninater 12/01/12 - 06:08 pm
3
2
I'd be curious what the

I'd be curious what the response would be in the CSRA if the UN decided to give Aiken to the displaced Cherokee nation next week, and the Cherokees began to illegally expand their granted land with illegal settlements into Warrenville, Graniteville, and on down Route 1. Heck, it was their ancestral homeland.

Boy, I can't imagine any Southerners viewing that as a hostile nation requiring an armed response. Once the Cherokees approve the expansion, it's legal after all. You may not disagree with that, but the law is legal. Any displaced Warrenville or Aiken residents who resisted such an incursion would be terrorists, pure and simple.

Right?

dahreese
4743
Points
dahreese 12/01/12 - 06:23 pm
3
5
Let those of you who are so
Unpublished

Let those of you who are so anti-Palestinian not forget that most of the Southwest United States was "taken" from Mexico.

And if you want to be so dogmantic about supporting Israel taking over Palestinian lands, will you be just as dogmatic when it comes time to return what U.S. land once belonged to Mexico back to Mexico?

Know whut....?

I done think you're gonna like that very much.

In fact, you're gonna feel like the Palestinians feel now.

Little Lamb
47042
Points
Little Lamb 12/01/12 - 07:10 pm
1
2
Taking

Burn and Reese, you miss the point. Maybe some parts of the U.S. were taken from Mexico, but Mexico was taken from the Aztecs, who took it from someone else. Israel has "taken" what the Palestinians call "occupied territories," but Israel calls Israel. Israel took that land in in the 1967 war and they have no intention of giving all of it back. Netanyahu has said he will do some land swaps to make the border between Israel and West Bank be more contiguous, but it would be ludicrous to give back land that Israelis have settled on and have businesses, schools, factories, etc. on.

Wars are all about taking land. Palestine needs to look forward, not back.

Gage Creed
17889
Points
Gage Creed 12/01/12 - 07:35 pm
1
2
"I done think you're gonna

"I done think you're gonna like that very much." Freudian slip?

dahreese
4743
Points
dahreese 12/01/12 - 07:56 pm
2
3
Little Lamb, I can't disagree
Unpublished

Little Lamb, I can't disagree entirely.

I do think we need to put ourselves in the shoes of the Palestinians.

Yes, they have fired rockets, been bad, etc. But Israel is not innocent in its behavior toward the Palestininan even in times of "no war."

Some of their own generals have admitted that.

(And then there is the matter of their attack on the U.S. Liberty, and, being caught a few years ago spying on us).

As someone else has posted, you'll have to decide for yourself what the situation would be if there was no oil there.

And...misleading editorials....

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 12/01/12 - 08:27 pm
1
1
The land in dispute at the

The land in dispute at the moment was won in the 1967 "Six Day War" or "June War" when three neighboring states, Syria, Egypt and Jordan, who started it with the intention of, as the Syrian chief of staff then put it, "...the liquidation of the Zionist existence".
LL I don't miss the point.

dahreese
4743
Points
dahreese 12/01/12 - 09:24 pm
0
3
Well geeeezzzzeee, Bruno.
Unpublished

Well geeeezzzzeee, Bruno. That's a real news flash!

Little Lamb
47042
Points
Little Lamb 12/01/12 - 10:37 pm
0
0
Misidentity

Bruno, when I wrote "Burn" I was speaking to Burninater. I gave you a thumbs up for your 12:45 post above.

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 12/02/12 - 10:16 am
1
0
Dahreese, parts of the SW USA

Dahreese, parts of the SW USA was won from Mexico in a war with Mexico. The area in question in Israel was not won from palestine in a war with palestine as palestine was not a country. It was won from three countries bent on the destruction of Israel. So even if Israel gives back all of the land to those they won it from palestine would not be receiving it rather Egypt, Syria and Jordan (who had their own problems with palestinians) would be getting it back.
Simply put, responding to building apartments with random rocket attacks and suicide bombing isn't a reasonable response.

Little Lamb
47042
Points
Little Lamb 12/03/12 - 09:25 am
0
0
War

dahreese posted:

But Israel is not innocent in its behavior toward the Palestininan. . . .

Innocence is not the issue here. Israel took some land from Syria, Jordan, and Egypt in 1967. Since that time it has managed to hold onto that land. That is the time-honored tradition. I'm glad you brought up the issue of Mexico. In that case, the United States took some land from Mexico in a war. Since that time we have managed to hold onto that land. That's the way it works.

The Palestinian Authority has no claim to the land Israel holds. If they want it they will have to take it from Israel in a war. The U.N. can snipe all they want, but they will not be able to get that land and give it to the Palestinian Authority.

KasparHauser
364
Points
KasparHauser 12/14/12 - 10:18 am
0
1
Revisionist Tripe
Unpublished

Jews took over the Palestinian Mandate when the British, cowards that they are, ran away from the troubles they allowed to reach a crisis. Much like old President Buchannan facilitated the Civil War.

Visit almost any trouble spot in the World, and you'll find a Queen Victoria Jubliee Post Box on the corner.

I suggest we insist the Royals be required to move to 'smelly Arab land", as I assume Prince Philip would characterize it, until the issue is resolved. If having him and Poltroony Prince Charlie stalking the land, looking for Duchy Originals to dunk in their Early Grey tea, isn't enough to unite Palestinian and jewish Israeli, then there's no hope for the area.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs