> Could be this sort of tactic of indiscriminate terror by suicide bomb
> is the best they have to offer wrt violent resistance. I suspect the
> choice is as much wrapped up in the religious ideology of the groups
> that advocate suicide bombing; someone here (Michael Pollack, I think)
> mentioned that there was, at the start of the Palestinian resistance,
> a left-secular Palestinian resistance group. Did they do the human
> bomb bit?
I'm puzzled by the lack of imagination the Palestinians seem to have about ways of resisting the occupation. Other occupied peoples haven't been so restricted in their tactics. Perhaps there are other things they're doing that are not being reported, or we aren't noticing, because the bombings are so dramatic. To be very cynical about it, I would say that the organizations doing the bombing, and it is obviously very organized, including recruiting and training bombers and building the bombs, may have intimidated the Palestinian people on the street to the point that no one can do anything else.
As for the religious ideology, I have seen reports to the effect that the whole "martyrdom" thing is quite important to these folks -- their moral justification is that because the bombers die, too, they are showing their sincerity and strength. I always thought that martyrs were people who were unjustly killed by *others,* not suicides, and that they didn't take others with them, but obviously I don't understand the Islamic concept.
> No, it isn't surprising, so why don't they just say, "Sorry, you're
> right" and give the Palestinians what they want or something
> approximating it, instead of swearing tit-for-tat vengeance? I really
> think this is planned by the Zionists in charge of the country (and
> their apparatchiks), to a fair degree.
You and I, being rather rational types, would do that, and a certain number of Israelis, being equally rational, are in favor of it, but most people, Israeli and other, are more into vengeance than we are. I think it's a genuine popular feeling, not "planned by Zionists."
Of course, the whole idea of founding Israel as a Jewish state wasn't rational in the first place, IMHO. Certainly there was plenty of criticism of the Zionist idea among Jews from the very beginning, and I would have agreed with the critics. But then I wasn't a Jew trying to deal with the anti-Semitism of the 19th century.
> Point to the slaughter? Well, there is a real reason why both sides
> continue to do it and why they'll continue to do it unless those basic
> problems are addressed or the context of the fight changes eg there
> are no more Palestinians left. But, if you'll permit me to be
> personal, it really sounds as though you're suffering from burn-out.
> If you're really feeling that way, my advice is to cut back, give
> yourself some slack. Burning yourself up won't make the fighting
> stop. Pace yourself; others can take a bit more of the load for a
> little while.
Not so much burn-out, but sheer frustration at seeing this thing going on endlessly, with the US establishment and (I guess, not having seen any opinion polls on the subject) a big majority of the people so solidly behind whatever the Israeli government wants. Now Sharon is back presenting his backside for the ritual U.S. kiss, and Shrub apparently will give it to him in the form of acquiescence in the keeping of the main West Bank settlements. Perhaps I have a residual bit of the American attitude that all problems are soluble that I haven't been able to get rid of yet.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax