The Same House Idea;

As I stated before, I believe that it is absolutely vital that the foundations of freedom and equality are garuanteed before the sanctification of 'shedding blood' together could work. That would mean that Isreal as it exists would have to give up Zionism and the Pals give up Islam in order for the two to live together in the 'same house'. In this case, it seems that the function of the two religions are analogous to having two women in the house. It naturally would degenerate otherwise.

Once these seemingly impossibiities are overcome, and the state of Isreal does not exist, a larger state of equals and one law to bind them together for common security would have to be implimented, garuanteeing the right of redress. A perfect jurisprudence. Quite a tall order, IMHO.

This of course will discard the two state solution favored in the Road Map for Peace.

The Dome of the Powder Solution;

Impliment any buffer you want to with any force you want, then threaten that if it does not work, the rock of Abraham will be crushed into powder.

Why the need for one state? Israel will not go into an agreement that dissolves their state into a larger one incorporating the Pals. Two independent states with one buffer force drawn from both sounds doable, except for the fact that it makes too much damn sense. The Pals would have to give up their insane insistence that Israel be eradicated.

Elvis,

That's why we would try to pull from the 20% who don't want to see Israel destroyed. The single state is a non-starter and it would also be nice to avoid genocide.

One state is necessary for garuanteeing the equality between the two. Also satisfies the demand of arab blood libel that Isreal no longer exists.

In the "Fly in the Ointment Department", Laurence Simon has posted an article on a Palestinian security forces unit that apparently mutinied, and allowed that missile attack from Gaza to take place.
This is an indication that we cannot depend on those folks to do their jobs.
In light of this, can, or WILL Israeli soldiers fight alongside these forces without worrying about turning their backs on them in the heat of battle?
This time the Palestinians are really outdoing themselves, with this sort of thing happening, there will go the last possibilities that the Israelis will trust them even a smidgeon.

I personally prefer the Dome of the Powder solution. But Dubet thinks I am sick and twisted.

We could call it New Sumeria.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-france-mideast,0,1161749.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

French at it again. Check the last paragraph.

Devil's chewtoy, the Israelis are smart. They know better than to let the UN or the EU get in there and turn their security situation into a goatfuck. If you were having a problem, would you want those folks to come to your house and "solve" it for you?
NOT!!!!
I was a little worried about that one, I thought it was gonna overrun my address bar.

Wolf --

"This is an indication that we cannot depend on those folks to do their jobs."

Ok - but lets say that that border patrol was joint PA/Israeli. The Israelis wouldn't have let the missile be fired in to Negev - and under the eyes of Israeli 'comrades' the PA troops probably wouldn't have either.

The flip side of that is that Israelis patrolling under the eyes of their Palestinian 'comrades' would be above reproach when it comes to charges of purported war crimes. The civilian population could be assured that under the gaze of their own troops they could be guaranteed fair treatment.

Further, if a gunman believes that the IDF will summarily execute him if caught he is much more likely to fight to the last breath. If, however, he believes that he will be treated according to the Geneva conventions - by fellow countrymen - then he may just lay down his arms and come quietly. A devout Islamic gunman would also be bound by the Koran not to kill another Muslim.

Personally I would also recommend that each patrol carry an embedded reporter so that there can be full transparency with regard to the actions on both sides in the international media. If this had always been standard IDF policy the myth of Jenin would never have become so widely accepted into liberal culture.

In the purges of extremists like Rantisi from the balance of power in the PA - which must come if this peace has any chance of success – such a force may be the most bloodless way of detaining the terrorist hierarchy and curtailing their operations. For there to be peace there has to be a 'night of the long knives' that cripples the hierarchy of Hammas et al for just long enough for peace to break out. That task would have to form the basis for the mandate of any such a joint Israeli/Palestinian Taskforce.

Such a force would further help provide the PA the nucleus of the state security apparatus that they will undoubtedly require for any long term two state solution. Fatah are not currently capable of fulfilling this role without the acquiescence of the militias (Hammas et al). If there is to ever be a state of Palestine then its new government must be able to impose the rule of law, else we are just creating another terrorist state in the Middle East.

Devil's Ragdoll,

I like Elvistonia. Has a certain ring to it, no?

Robert,

I am not sure I like the 20/80 odds. The 20 are cowed by the 80 or whatever the percentage of death before peace wackos.

Simon

Done that way, it could work.
The embedded reporters would have to be trusted by both sides for them to agree, probably, and given the mistrust and hostility levels between the two sides, that might be akin to jury selection for a high profile murder trial.
Once that obstacle has been surmounted, however, it might well be exactly what's needed. With both sides doing their jobs in front of each other AND a reporter, Arafat and his terrorist associates would lose most of their propaganda base overnight, and with that, hopefully, a significant percentage of their recruiting power.

But how does the 20% who are 'cowed' become steeley enough to do the whole 'long knifes' thing.? How do they change allegance overnight? I mean would they not be looked on like lackeys for the zionists?

Not trying to poke holes, I just don't get it.

Hey Elvis,

Sure does. I think that Church of Elvis has an even better ring to it. Dome of the the Elvis Powder?

heheheee

One day...I am gonna get a better keyboard!

devils chewtoy --

Not "change allegance" - just work together towards peace.

In fact, this is not an entirely new idea. Under the Oslo accords, Israeli and PLO security forces actually worked together for quite some time. Then the uprising came and everything went to hell. I think something like this will have to be rebuilt to at least give the boots on the ground a little communication so they dont end up shooting at each other. As far as the UN/Nato forces go, it will never happen. All this would insure is that guys in blue helmet will idly watch terrorists as they blow things up, while bringing up war crimes charges on every Israeli traffic ticket. The Israelis are not fooled, they have seen the UN undermine them and indeed attempt to conspire in their destruction since the beginning.

Been reading our Tom Clancy have we?

This is a comment I left on Robert's Cross-Posts at Israpundit:

Robert,

I wish it were possible. In fact, this used to exist pre Sept. 2000. It was called the DCO -District Coordinating Office. There used to be joint patrols that indeed were building comradeship and cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian security personnel. I mean real relationships. Drinking coffee together, asking about each other's kids, the whole nine yards.

Unfortunately one morning after Sept. 28, 2000 (sorry I can't remember the exact date as I was on active duty in Hebron at the time - good times, believe me), as the Israeli officer parked himself in the back of the jeep for his morning coffee, his Palestinian "partner" shot him dead.

The joint patrols were halted shortly thereafter as it became clear that our Palestinian "partners in peace" were in fact the ones perpetrating most of the transgressions. So much for forging a partnership in building a new Mid-East. Damned if you're gonna see me hop in the back of that jeep without some serious guarantees.

I don't think dressing up in matching uniforms with matching weapons is the issue here.

And by the way, those were not good times in Hebron (unless getting shot at every day by Palestinian Police and the peaceful (Hamas) folk over at the Hebron Engineering College Soccer Team is your idea of fun). By the way, I hear some new openings have just recently opened up on the squad. Strange, most sports teams don't have such rapid turnover.

Robert Responds:
eotw,

Would the fact that they were commanded by Americans and Brits matter at all? Could a screening process be put in place to weed out militants? You can't even get on an Israeli airliner without three hours of interviews so they must have some experience.

Did the DCO act in place of the IDF in the disputed territories? It would take at least one complaint away from the Palestinians -- that they were being occupied by the Israelis.

I'm searching for an answer here and this is the best idea I've heard that could contribute to a lasting peace. Destroying Hamas would help but the hostility would remain.

My reply here is:

The DCO was attached to the IDF and acted as a liason available to all.

I'm not the one making the decisions here, but I just can't see Israel's military elite allowing foreigners to command their army. As a grunt, I wouldn't be too happy about it either. A bigger affront to seovereignty I could not imagine, especially since Israel is not allowed to take part in ANY international peace-keeping missions that might familiarize the military elite with cross and joint commands. You let me go peacekeep in Iraq-giving Israel the"Place among the Nations" she deserves (and which America doesn't really do all that much to provide so as not to inflame the (gasp) Arab Street) - and I'll think about letting you tell me what to do in the territories.

If you need a treatise on how the UN handles their peacekeeping duties, ask the Mulsims in Bosnia if you can find any. Or any number of victims in the Congo right this minute. In 1973 the UN observers were kindly enough to move out of the Sinai so Egypt could break its treaty and mass on Israel border. In fact any of Israels wars are instructive on how the UN treats the Israelis, ie deafening silence when the Arabs launch sneak attacks deep into the heart of Israel followed by instant condemnation and demands for ceasefire once Israel turns the tide and rolls back the invasion. There have been more UN resolutions condemning Israel than any other nation on earth including such upstanding international citizens as China, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, or South Africa.

Mark,

You didn't read the post. The UN is explicitly excluded. Read it again and then comment.

Read the intro people. This is about finding alternatives to the UN useful. The purpose is to brainstorm about alternatives to genocide.

Really wish that there was some alternative to this insanity.

Alternatives? How about the Palis teacing their children that I am a human being? Currently this is not the case.

eotw,

That's true, but not germaine to the current discussion. There was a good suggestion about embedding reporters in the multi-ethnic units we were discussing. That's what I would like to continue pursuing.

However, if you believe war is the only choice then fine: have the IDF destroy the military wings of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and Fatah. Obliterate them. That is one way, ultimately, to peace. No half measures and fuck world opinion. You're better equipped and should be able to handle it.

eotw - Agreed. Hatred from the womb is hard to overcome. Hatred from the knee is hard to overcome. Hatred from the classroom is hard to overcome. This whole thingy is Orwellian. Black is not White. Hatred in not Love. Somebody, and we know who, (that would be Muhammad) is teaching these folks the WRONG things about Humanity and Brotherhood. We will deal with this incongruity until we come to grips with the root. The root dies if it is not given sustinence. 'Nough said.

I wonder if anyone else thinks this idea stinks or not. I think that the embed reporters is prolly a good idea, but that some moderate Imman should be there and proclaim it as Gods will, (of course the joint army patrol thing is still what we are talking about here, just a minor addition). I'm sorry if this seems that it is a bit of a stretch, however most of this seems to be religiously centered. Make a whole MTV styled, 'Road Rules', production out of it.

Just after the world trade center went down, there in Yankee stadium, NY, was something that I had never seen before. Every major and minor religion Known To Man was there and each one seemed to have a message of peace to the world. It seemed to me a great cry to heaven and a sincere prayer for peace in the world.

The Bible has had several Concordances where it was edited for applications to modern times. I think that if they could see that a loving God, would not want them to kill and die, that there is a time for peace, as evidently there is a time for war, That Time is Now. Perhaps it may be time for encouraging a new interpretation of the Quran, if that society would like to survive.

Any thoughts on this?

State solutions are about to get a whole lot of people killed...

Devil's Chewtoy - I've asked Gabriel Hanna this before, and you seem to be asking as well, so I'm going to ask again, in the hope that there is someone reading this that can either confirm or deny:

Can the textual cites which radical Muslims use to justify their activities be misinterpreted? If these cites (they're called proof texts) cannot be misinterpreted, how do non-radical Muslims interpret them? If these proof texts are so straight-forward that it is impossible to deny their meaning, where does that leave the non-radical Muslim?

Religiously speaking, if a 'believer' does not believe ALL, then he is not a believer. He is without 'faith'. It is my understanding that in Islam, he is worthy of death. Talk about peer pressure...
Am I right on this, or can someone point out the 'wrongness' of my point of view?

It is my understanding that in order to garuantee that there is misinterpretation you define something...

Some can misinterpret the word 'no' to mean 'yes' if it suits some personally defined parameter.

The difference here is where people become delusional. It is most evident when people 'see it for themselves'. Take an eyewitness account with ten witness. Put them into a room and pull each one out individually. Not all of the stories would be the same.

You arrive at what really happened by concentrating on the one who has a different story and use a truth table, and boolean algebra. Even then, the diference between reality and truth can be decieving. One then becomes aware that humans are imperfect thought processors.

People are deluded. It is the degree to which they are deluded which makes them unique.

DT - I ain't lookin' for an argument, here, I'm looking for an answer, and in a sense I want to be able to use your 'truth table'. I know how to use one o' dem.

Thats why the 'Road Rules' style production might work re: the Arab Street. Pay off someone from Al-Jez to do a wag the dog piece on it.

Al-jez aparently has some cred with these maniacs because of the gore... If they saw it there, then saw that peace was coming, we might strengthen the hand of Arab Liberalists....

Maybe.

You gotta keep em separated!!! There is no way now or in the future these two jackass societies will every get along. The murdering hamas will never stop until Israel is gone. That doesn't leave a lot of room for negotiation or anything else. Even if the palestinians seriously try to get along with the israelis, hamas won't allow it to happen for long. It's got to be two completely separate states or this stupidity will never end. Another generation of children on both sides will grow up hating each other and the cycle will repeat itself.

Learn from Northern Ireland.

I remember a while ago that some civilian 'observers' came over to Northern Ireland to watch the marches that happen during the marching season. The idea being that people would behave with respect to each other if international observers are present.

Now, I know that if you put an add in the paper looking for international observers to work with palestinian and Israeli patrols, you would end up with all sorts of odds'n'sods looking to push their agenda. But assuming you could get genuinely neutral observers, it would be a start.

The other thing you must learn from Northern Ireland is the need for 'confidence building measures' during negotiations - something that allows trust to be built up on both sides. Its often the small things that let people trust one another as human beings, and not the large issues.

Could a joint Palestinian/Israeli task force work? Yes, but it would need supervision, and frankly, the only people who have enough respect worldwide to do that would be the UN. The US is way, way too biased to play that role.

We shouldn't discount the UN, despite its many failings - if both Israelis and Palestinians trust it, then it should be given a chance to resolve it.

Daniel,

The Israelis would never trust the UN to administer security in any way because they wouldn't strike back at acts of terror. Based on the solution we were looking at, one of the key points is having the IDF stand down because they are not trusted by the Palestinians, and have an international force that responds against the perpetrators of unprovoked acts of violence.

Every time even the smallest amount of progress is made, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah or the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades spoils it through acts of terror. The "building trust" part never even gets started.

I saw Senator Mitchell, who helped out with Ireland, on FNC the other night and he pointed out that about a month after a treaty was signed in the dispute with the IRA a bomb was set off -- was it the stock exchange bombing? -- but there it was not a major setback, even though 30 or so were killed and hundreds injured, because the trust had begun to build. Hamas, et. al., seem to have learned from that and will never let it happen.

In short, you are right but Hamas won't cooperate.

How difficult do you think it would be for one of the 80% to pass themselves off as one of the 20%?

I am deeply troubled by the idea of handing Palestinians automatic weapons just because they answered a poll a certain way. Those wanting to join this force should be heavily interrogated, given polygraph tests, and possibly even be given truth serum.

This is a nice philosophical discussion, but you know it doesn't have a very good chance of getting anywhere. For there to be peace, both sides have to be bone tired of war. The Pals have not shown themselves to be anywhere close. Hamas and Jizzlamic Yeehad have drawn a line in the sand, and will not back down, because it isn't costing them much, just a few martyrs a month, to stay in power and have influence.

The Pals are getting hosed by their own kind. The kindest thing the Israelis can do is go all out and kill anyone that supports these terrorist a$$holes.