“For instance, entertain this fanciful hypothetical (whose implications many will recognize mirror the post 9-11 blowback arguments): let's say the Palestinians abandoned terrorist attacks at some point in the very near future. I suspect Israel's often morally suspect retaliations would consequently come to an end. So, then, in a way the Palestinians can be seen as possessing the means to bring the current spat of violence to a halt, albeit without altering the current status of the occupation. Perhaps the Israelis, by withdrawing from the settlements immediately, could effectuate a similar end. So, then, whose actions do you say are the true "cause" of the current cycle of violence? I, like most here, am more inclined to say that Israel bears the brunt of the responsibility. But it isn't simple. “
But would “Israel's often morally suspect retaliations “ really be likely to stop? Isn’t it more likely that it would continue its general policy of ethnically cleansing the Palestinians in a quieter but no less oppressive manner? And with less restraint?
Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20021203/1b4c467c/attachment.htm>