<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 9"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 9"> <link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C29AB4.E1881D60">  <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US style='tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=Section1> Luke suggests –<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> “For instance, entertain this fanciful hypothetical (whose implications many<o:p></o:p> will recognize mirror the post 9-11 blowback arguments): let's say the<o:p></o:p> Palestinians abandoned terrorist attacks at some point in the very near<o:p></o:p> future.  I suspect Israel's often morally suspect retaliations would<o:p></o:p> consequently come to an end.  So, then, in a way the Palestinians can be<o:p></o:p> seen as possessing the means to bring the current spat of violence to a<o:p></o:p> halt, albeit without altering the current status of the occupation.  Perhaps<o:p></o:p> the Israelis, by withdrawing from the settlements immediately, could<o:p></o:p> effectuate a similar end.  So, then, whose actions do you say are the true<o:p></o:p> "cause" of the current cycle of violence?  I, like most here, am more<o:p></o:p> inclined to say that Israel bears the brunt of the responsibility.  But it<o:p></o:p> isn't simple.  “<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> 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?<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Christopher Rhoades D�kema<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> </div> </body> </html>