Untitled

I was interested to see how this would play out and who would end up taking responsibility for the attack. I find it intriguing that the bomber was just a member of Hamas and that the group ended up not taking full responsibility for this (according to the article), yet they condone the violence against against Israelis. Wouldn't they want to claim responsibility or is there a reason why they're falling short of this? Whatever the reason is I am sure we will continue to see an increase in "lone wolf" terrorist attacks. Technology has made it easier for individuals to break away from terrorist organizations and act alone, rather than relying on the organization. I wonder if future organizations will rely on "lone wolf" terrorists to continue to do the "dirty work" while the organization's reputation will remain unscathed. However, I am unsure of how probable this actually is.

I think that the answer to your question, @herdonuttheorist, is that it depends on how effective that technology is.  If its effective, then Hamas should obviously reconsider investing money in the tunnels.  However, if this is the only tunnel they’ve found, then it is not as effective as the Israelis are making it out to be.  What I found interesting about the article was that it noted that the tunnel was actually incomplete, meaning it “did not have an exit coming up to the surface, suggesting that it was detected deep underground” at about 100 to 130 feet.  Before we contribute the tunnel’s discovery mainly to technology we should also consider that Lt. Col. Peter Lerner reported that it was a combination of “technology, intelligence, engineering, and troops on the ground.”  It is difficult to tell how much weight we should give each of these components.

I agree with you that this is definitely a step in the right direction.  I think that if there are more Arab-Isreali police officers it will help ease tensions.  However, I don’t think it will help too much.  As you stated, they will “create new police stations in Arab-populated areas,” but if they are only interacting with a majority Arab population will this really help the tensions between Israeli-Jews and Isreali-Arabs?  I think that is unlikely.  In order to be more effective for easing tentsions between Israelis and Arabs, in my opinion, it would have to be Israeli-Jews & Isreali-Arab police officers working together and in areas populated by both demographics.

I’m thankful that you shared this article, and encourge others to read through it.  I agree with you that the exclusion of signs in Arabic, especially in public areas, should not be tolerated.  However, the only legal action that has been taken against this is human rights lawyers in Tel Aviv threatening the city with a contempt of court action.  Surprisingly, this is happening 14 years after the legislation was passed and not sooner.  In addition, I found it interesting that last week the Palestinian members of the Knesset switched to speaking Arabic.  As you mentioned, the parliament provides no translation services and most of the Jewish members, “like the rest of the Jewish population,” do not understand Arabic.  The point was made in the article that they had sacrificed their right to speak Arabic for the sake of the Jewish members understanding, however they weren’t being listened to anyways.  Although I think the English/Spanish and Hebrew/Arabic do have their differences, I really thought that there was a strong parallel when the article reported that “The hostile attitude of offficial bodies, including municipalities like Tel Aviv, encourages a general climate that treats Arabic as an alien and despised language,” said Jamal Zahalka, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Knesset who is currently suspended from the parliament.

Such a fascinating article… It’s always interesting to see how Israeli/Palestinian conflict reaches into all areas of life. I was really interested in the fact that Arabic as an official language is something left over from the British mandate period, since I feel like a fair amount of the legitimacy of the claims that Arabic needs to be included on the signs stems from the language’s official status. However, I think the inclusion or exclusion of Arabic on signs is less a matter of legality or even a matter of whether a large enough percentage of the population speaks the language to warrant its inclusion. I see it more as a symbolic gesture - by excluding Arabic, the message that Arabs themselves are not wanted is sent. I think the inclusion of English on signs supports this point, along with the slightly ridiculous excuse that including Arabic would mean “too much text” on signs. If they can find room for English on the signs, surely they can find room for Arabic, especially since it’s an official, widely-used language in the country. Nine times more people have Arabic as their first language than have English as their first language in Israel. (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4335235,00.html)

I’m thankful that you shared this article, and encourge others to read through it.  I agree with you that the exclusion of signs in Arabic, especially in public areas, should not be tolerated.  However, the only legal action that has been taken against this is human rights lawyers in Tel Aviv threatening the city with a contempt of court action.  Surprisingly, this is happening 14 years after the legislation was passed and not sooner.  In addition, I found it interesting that last week the Palestinian members of the Knesset switched to speaking Arabic.  As you mentioned, the parliament provides no translation services and most of the Jewish members, “like the rest of the Jewish population,” do not understand Arabic.  The point was made in the article that they had sacrificed their right to speak Arabic for the sake of the Jewish members understanding, however they weren’t being listened to anyways.  Although I think the English/Spanish and Hebrew/Arabic do have their differences, I really thought that there was a strong parallel when the article reported that “The hostile attitude of offficial bodies, including municipalities like Tel Aviv, encourages a general climate that treats Arabic as an alien and despised language,” said Jamal Zahalka, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Knesset who is currently suspended from the parliament.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4787310,00.html Building off the original post, Netanyahu has "dared" Abbas to meet with him and subsequently cleared his schedule, according to the article below. It will be interesting to see if Abbas takes Netanyahu up on his offer or not. If he does, then hopefully peace can start to unravel. If not, then again....stagnation. Either way, it's almost relieving that both leaders have publicly announced and opened a road of communication between the two countries. Although this may not happen, it still, in my opinion, gives hope to both the Palestinians and Israelis (and international community) that want to see an end to the conflict. I'm eager to see how this will end or if it will continue.

Shutting of the Palestinian power is counterproductive.  How are they going to work or pay off their debt if they have no power to do so?  I don’t think it would be poor decision for Israel to allow the Palestinians to set up their own power district, however I do not see this as something Israel would be willing to do.  From Israel’s perspective I could see this being a step towards Palestinian sovereignty, a move they more than likely do not want to take.  I think that turning off the electricity will exacerbate the poverty and make the economic situation worse, for both parties.  If they do decide to keep the electricity on I don’t think that it would necessarily be free, only increase the debt that is owed to Israel...and who wants to be in that situation?  I think that letting the Palestinians run their own power district would be best, but I don’t think Israel will go for that.

I can definitely empathize with your anger about this.  I find it very disturbing that this organization has grown as much as it has.  It seems as if ISIS and the atrocities grow, the situation continues to leave our grasp.  I think that you have every right to furious with politicians’ inactions, which has caused millions of deaths.  However, defeating terrorists is not as simple as putting troops on the ground.  It is a complex organization and putting troops on the ground could just make the problem worse, such as it did after 9/11 by being in Iraq and Afghanistan unnecessarily wasting US lives.  I think that there are better ways to go about defeating terrorism rather than just simply putting our troops abroad.  I also think that we should also consider that anytime politicians decide to go to war, it is more than likely going to be unpopular to its’ citizens.  That being said, I do not think we should refrain from humanitarian intervention for the sake of a war not being popular.  This is the point that actually disturbs me the most, not helping people when we clearly have the ability to do so.

Although this is upsetting, I really appreciate this point being brought up because, as you pointed out, this way thinking is more prevalent than we usually consider.  I really liked how Shibley Telhami, Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland, pointed out that “seeing Arabs as a demographic problem is not only wrong because it privileges Jewishness over democracy, but it also diverts from the fact that Israel has an obligation to end the occupation.”  I think that it should be extremely important for the international community, especially the US, to consider whether or not to support this type of country.  What is even more shocking is that 74 percent of Jewish respondents did not see discrimination against Muslims, while 8 in 10 Palestinian citizens believed there was heavy discrimination in Israeli society.  Not only does this show blatant disregard and ignorance towards the experiences of their Muslim counterparts, but it also takes away the seriousness of the Israeli occupation.

I’m really glad that you brought this article into discussion because it has very interesting points, including some solutions that should be tried.  I, too, believe that having more Arab women employed would allow for cultural norms to change overtime, eradicate poverty, and help end stereotypes.  However, if the high-tech sector keeps these women working at home then it may not help the last point so much.  I also think that we should refrain from the belief that “most of the Arab women don’t want jobs,” as @thepreppypolitique put it.  I think that this statement perpetuates the social norm that women are obligated to stay at home and it doesn’t account for the complexity of the issue.  As stated in the article:  “The main obstacle we need to address is the female students finishing high school who have better grades than the male students, but then ‘disappear’ and do not enter into academic fields that lead towards high-tech.”  So it seems that there is a barrier between finishing high school and then not entering into academic fields and for the sole reason of this being because they do not want to is too simple.  If an Arab woman is showing interest in an academic setting by earning good grades why would she do that in order to just stay home in the end?  I’m sure that some Arab women don’t want jobs and solely desire to just have a family and be the caregiver, but this stereotype cannot be applied to all Arab women.

I doubt the U.S. would be willing to take in the displaced, especially since some of our politicians won’t even allow those who are being persecuted by ISIS to come here. You’re right about the ethical implications of doing this. The displaced could be sent to refugee camps, which always seem to have terrible conditions for the refugees living there. Any talk of sending Jews back to Israel is somewhat alarming to me, because this seems to be something that people say because they think this is the first step that will eventually lead to the Second Coming, and they want to be part of making that happen.  

I am beginning to wonder if the UN Resolution 242 was a big mistake. If it hadn't happened would Jews still have a strong sense of having to create a pure Jewish state? More importantly, would the anti semitmic attitudes be relatively nonexistent if there wasn't a place to segregate Jews in the world? I seriously just wish we could all coexist. That'd be nice.

I agree with you, I can understand why Indonesia is concerned about what happens to Muslims in Palestine.  However, I think that this statement also has the power to bolster the pro-Muslim, anti-semitic attitudes, which can give the impression that Israel is solely at fault.  I think that both sides need to take responsibility for their actions.  In addition, Jokowi stated that  "The OIC should be part of the solution, and not part of the problem,” which I completely agree with, except for how are they going to do this without Israel?  Indonesia (among others) does not recognize Israel as a legitimate state and this is going to be a major barrier for coming to a solution.  We have seen how disastrous solutions have been when only one side of the conflict is present.  If these states attempt to impose a solution without Israel’s input I predict that they are going to receive backlash from Israel.  We must recognize that Israel and Palestinians are not going anywhere, and in order to come up with a solution, it is a necessity that both sides are present.

I have briefly touched on the tunnel topic before. I believe that if Israel was a little bit more open with allowing people in and out of Gaza, the tunnels wouldn’t be built in the first place. I recognize that Israel does this to keep Israelis safe, but clearly just separating these people from everyone is causing issues. Hamas knows, or should know, that these tunnels anger the Israeli government. They also know, or should know, that Israel is capable of destroying these tunnels and whoever try to use them. Complaining that Israel is somehow using unfair explosives only draws attention away from the fact that the tunnels shouldn’t even exist in the first place. You mention what their next move might be, and well, who knows. They certainly can’t waste resources with rockets and missiles. Israel is currently setting up to have some of the best rocket and missile defense systems in the world. I think that Israel is well within its rights to get rid of these tunnels, but there should be another plan in place to deal with Hamas. The consequences of not having a plan could bring on something totally unanticipated that could devastate Israeli communities.

Indeed, Israel does have the right to protect itself from terrorist attacks.  But how justified is this method when utilizing other method would not produce casualties?  How are they for sure, with 100 percent certainty, that everyone in those tunnels are guilty?  We have seen in many countries, including the United States, how fighting against terrorism can lead to persecuting an entire group, especially when the definition of a terrorist is vague.  @sunshinekitty15 makes an interesting point that these tunnels should not even exist, and I think both sides are at fault for this.  Israel’s response by blowing up tunnels does not ensure that the terrorist organization will cease to exist.  And even after the tunnels are gone, there are many ways in which terrorism can be conducted.  Thus, blowing up tunnels will only increase tensions on both sides.

I agree with you. I think education is the best way to encourage peace between Israel and Palestine. I think educating the young and new generations is feasible because educating and changing the norm in the older generations I would say is next to impossible because there is already such a stigma against each on both fronts. However, but if the younger generations can be educated, this would be tremendously positive. I also think that trying to educate both the Israeli children and Palestinian children together would further enhance the positive impact for the hopes of a peaceful coexistence between the Israeli’s and Palestinian’s. However parents may not approve of this idea, but hopefully as the older generations are less prevalent, education can improve and build a positive relationship. 

I think that you both have intriguing points.  There is no doubt that an unbiased education is vital in order to achieve peace.  Integration is also a key component here.  As @herdonuttheorist​ pointed out however, trying to change these stereotypes for older generations is going to be next to impossible.  But how much of a difference will the oly make?  How much of an impression is the older generation going to make on the younger one?  This question is even more pertinent because the older generation is still choosing what type of education the younger one receives, which currently contain many biases. I agree with @a-kanyeforpresident and believe that there will be another generation before seeing any major changes.