HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rivk@quads.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis)
Subject: Re: Israel, Lebanon, etc
Reply-To: rivk@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 04:35:58 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.023155.8596@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein) writes in response to a discussion of exactly who was
shooting at Israel from Lebanon:


>Does it really matter which Arab terrorists have been lobbing rockets at
>Israeli civilians from Lebanon?  Is there a rule that Israel can only
>defend itself from PLO terrorists, but not from any other Arab terrorists?
>(Let's not ignore the fact that the number of rockets launched from Lebanon
>recently is not in the single digits, but in the three digits.  Or that the
>the Israeli actions against the Hizbollah terrorist leader was in reaction
>to his murderous acts.)

Oh, don't be ridiculous, Alan; of course it matters. You can shoot back
at whoever happens to be shooting at you, whether that is the PLO, Hiz-
bollah, the NRA, or the Lollipop Kids. But it's fair to say "don't blame
one group who isn't shooting at you for the problems you're having with
the other, who is." If the PLO isn't shooting the rockets, they'd better
not get blamed for the rockets, whatever else they may deserve the blame 
for.

>bx573@cleveland.freenet.edu----Alan H. Stein----stein@uconnvm.uconn.edu

	-Nora
Xref: sparky talk.politics.mideast:17408 misc.headlines:5035 talk.politics.misc:36650 alt.conspiracy:9464 alt.censorship:6495
From: davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il (David Ben_Ami)
Subject: Re: Avoiding Flames
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. of Technology
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:46:32 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.193904.6848@ncsu.edu> hernlem@chess.ncsu.EDU (Brad Hernlem) writes:
>In article <52fm09f.analyst@netcom.com>, analyst@netcom.com (David
>Sternlight) writes:
>>
>> Sandra is full of mirth when she says the Israelis are doing the same
>> thing in Lebanon that the Syrians are.
>>
>> Very droll, Sandra.
>>
>> The Israelis are there to prevent attacks on Israel from Lebanon.
>> The Syrians are not there to prevent attacks on Syria from Lebanon.
>>
>> Sandra, uh, er, did you actually PASS political science?
>>
>> --
>> David Sternlight        David Sternlight Inc.        email:analyst@netcom.COM
>
>One wonders whether Israel is in Lebanon to instigate attacks on Israel.
>The PLO has been disarmed in Lebanon and the Hezbollah have not attacked
>Israel except after the death of Mosavi. It is certainly possible for
>the Lebanese resistance to strike Israel if it chooses. Since it does
>not, it would seem that Israel is not a target. The Lebanese are
>fighting to push Israel out of Lebanon. Israel knows that Syria is
>capable of controlling the Lebanese border just as it is capable of
>controlling its border with Israel. Israel is in Lebanon because it
>wants to be there, not because it has any real security concern. If
>Israel is afraid of the Lebanese it is probably because they know that
>they have rained rockets and artillery rounds down on their heads for
>years and have bulldozed their homes and destroyed their villages. All
>because of what? -- the fear that a few Israelis might be killed because
>of a border infiltration? Some might say killing your neighbors is a way
>to ensure your safety and survival; I call it murder and terrorism.
>
>It is time for Israel to get out of Lebanon and let both countries live
>in peace!
>
>Brad

Just yesterday 1 soldier was killed and 3 wounded in the Security Zone
in a Hezbolla amubush. so are we to let these guys have free hand there
so they'll aim their Katyusha better and restore the people of Northern
Israel to the days of 1981 (or the days of the Scuds in all of Israel).

I think we will not be so naive as to retreat only yo have to come
later and lose sons again.

David.
-- 
=============================================================================
  David Ben-Ami (irc: bigdav)      |   "I can resist anything but Temptation"
  s2780369@Techst02.Technion.Ac.Il |       Oscar Wilde
  davidba@Carmel.Technion.Ac.Il  davidba@Moav.Techniona.Ac.Il
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Israel Cancels Building in the West Bank
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:17:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.011527.4110@midway.uchicago.edu>,
rivk@ellis.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis) writes:

|>In article <1992Jul29.204313.10822@dscomsf.desy.de>
|>hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:

|>>however I'm not sure that the Arabs have anything that Israel is
|>>particularly interested in in that "price range". 
|>
|>Sure they do. A statement from any or all of the Arab leaders in-
|>volved, saying that they accept Israel's existence and no longer
|>hold the objective of wiping it out would do just fine in response.
|>It's politically cheap, since it entails giving up nothing but words
|>and those words are ones that will only improve their political pos-
|>ition with respect to the rest of the world (which has a tendency to
|>dislike countries which openly say their goal is to wipe other exist-
|>ing and recognized states off the map). And it's what all of you have
|>been claiming is true anyway, so ikt shouldn't bother them on that
|>score.

Fraid that's wishfull thinking. The `price' in this context is really
determined by how much the item is wanted, not the cost. Also there is
the question of balancing revokable and irrevokable steps. Such
recognition is inevitable if an areement is eventualy reached. 

As to the initial question, why Israel had to move first, this is mainly
because Shamir followed a maximalist line and undermined any confidence
that Israel was serious about the peace talks. Rabin had to demonstrate
that this was not the case as a matter of urgency.


Phill Hallam-Baker
From: egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
Subject: Re: Israel Cancels Building in the West Bank
Date: 29 Jul 92 08:25:35 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Jul27.201713.20989@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
=>In article <24154@castle.ed.ac.uk> egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:
=>>In article <1992Jul25.174753.11742@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein) writes:
=>>=>
=>>=>I'm sure that the Israelis in the Galilee, still being subjected to rocket
=>>=>attacks from those "disarmed Palestinian fighters in Lebanon," would be
=>>=>delighted to learn that those attacks are merely figments of their
=>>=>imaginations.
=>>
=>>Can you please back up this assertion with estimates of the numbers of
=>>Israelis killed by attacks from Lebanon and the Golan Heights, and compare
=>>those figures with the numbers of Arabs killed by Israeli attacks on
=>>Lebanon and Syria? For the purpose of this exercise, feel free to exclude
=>>the civilians killed during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. 
=>
=>Can you please explain the source for the supposition that a state
=>returning fire against someone who attacks it is required to inflict
=>casualties less than or equal to those which they have taken?

Can you please explain the source for the supposition that the Israelis
were only returning fire?

=> Israel
=>has a more efficient military by a long way; this means that when they
=>answer rocket fire somebody is going to get hurt. That the Palestinian
=>forces in Lebanon are not as good at what they are trying to do is not
=>Israel's problem.

You have a funny way of defining "efficiency" I guess you'd say that the
Philly police were "efficient" at removing the "Move" folk from their 
houses. Most people would have considered the number of civilian casualties
when evaluating "efficiency" - you obviously have other (numbers of) standards.


-- 
-Jeremy Henderson        egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk   

(or am I?)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il (ROBERT WERMAN)
Subject: Re: Zachary Baumel
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Date: 27 Jul 92 08:48:50 GMT
Keywords: Arens' shame


Dr. Yigal Arens responds to a posting by N.Y.Hed, in which the later wrote:

>> In article <22016@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:

>> >The international community can do whatever it wants, but ISRAEL sounds
>> >a bit hypocritical in asking that Mr. Baumel be treated like a POW when
>> >they accord no such courtesy to people THEY capture in Lebanon.

[Mr. Hed comments:]

>>  Red cross was denied visitation to any of the said captives?
>>  Is their status [dead/alive] kept secret?
>>  If dead - are the bodies kept in a local museum?
>>  AND! when did Israel walk it's captives in a parade?
>>  let us here some [gorey?] details please

[and Dr. Arens replies:]

>The conditions at the Khiam prison in southern Lebanon, where Israel
>places its captives from the area, are notorious.  If you are not aware
>of this place, you should probably take the trouble to find out.  Just
>recently, I beleive, another report concerning the goings on there was
>put out by some humanitarian organization.

**********************


Has Dr. Arens no sense of shame at all?  Does his hatred for his
motherland, Israel, reach such zeniths as to preclude acceding to
the obvious fact that the treatment of captured Israel soldiers 
in Syria and Lebanon remains and has always been far worse than 
any lapses, intended or even possibly deliberate, on the part of 
Israel or its Lebanese allies, in South Lebanon?

But of course Dr. Arens has had a lapse; being caught out, he will
return to his standard refrain, "The treatment accorded the 
Palestinians [you may freely substitute Hizballah or the name of 
any other anti-Israel group here] has been so bad that any 
response on their part is in fact justified."

Shame, shame.


__Bob Werman    rwerman@hujivms.bitnet    rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il
Jerusalem


Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Israel Cancels Building in the West Bank
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 12:09:30 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.022316.8380@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>,
bx573@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alan H. Stein) writes:


|>One "minimalist" step the Arabs might take is publicly renouncing that
|>goal, which remains as part of the PLO terrorist charter, and also publicly
|>proclaiming that they are interested in a territorial compromise.

The last thing anyone wants is to do anything that might fragment the
Palestinean movement and have Hamas replace it.

Havsn't anyone out there got any patience at all? It took 50 odd years
to create this mess, now you want it all sorted out in a couple of weeks
after the election. Diplomacy isn't called the art of procrastination
for nothing. What matters is that there is an agreement, suspension of
the arab boycott in itself wouldn't be much use if the same countries
were still prepared to roll the tanks in.

Prediction, nothing will be agreed untill summer 1994. Then the
agreement will allow Clinton to sweep the board in the mid sessional
elections, Rabin and Arafat will be bunged the Nobel prize for peace
(aka Nobel prize for being locked up half your life or being a pretty
nasty character who finaly did something half decent). And Iraq will
take on the role of global/mid east bogeyman.

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: sethr@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (seth.r.rosenthal)
Subject: Re: Sovereignty (Jerusalem)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:59:05 GMT

Been away, and am way behind on my news,
but this pitiful ignorance couldn't pass.
 
In article <1992Jul12.100600.4224@news.clarkson.edu>, saleham@right.clarkson.edu (Anwar M. Saleh) writes:
> jars@milton.u.washington.edu (Juan Rodriguez-Sero) writes:
> 
> > This is a remarkable little know item; in fact, I have never heard or
> > read about Christians referring to themselves as "One Nation", not in
> > this century at least. How did you discover this?
> >
>   Sorry If I did not make clear. I was refering to the Church in 
>   middle ages and early christians. 
> 

The Copts of the Middle East (and the Sumerian Christians, Assyrian
Christians, etc.) have less to do with Catholics and Protestants
of Europe, than Russian Jews do with Yemenites.  Jews at least
practice the same religion, use the same languages, even
eat lots of similar foods.

> > Why not? They all have a commonality of origin, history, customs,
> > traditions, and language (Hebrew); and they have a national conscious-
>  
>  There are many converts. In fact, a Jew may share the same origin with
>  an Arab Christian or Moslem more than that of a Russian Jew. Consider 
>  converts. 
> 
>  History: The Jews of Yemen, Iraq, Morrocco and other Arab countries share
>  the history with Arabs more than the Jews of other countries.
> 

Bzzt, nonsense.  The Morroccan Jews have more Spanish culture
than Arabic.   Go get a record of their music.  Their services
are conducted in Spanish and Hebrew.  They wouldn't bother
with Arabic if they didn't have to do business with their
former Arabic neighbors.  The Jews of the Atlas Mountains seem
to have been Berber converts to Judaism in the pre-Islamic period.

Same goes for Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, etc.  They have more in
common with Italian, Greek, Yugoslav, etc. Jews than with their
Arab neighbors.

>  Customs: Many Jews in Israel keep the customs and traditions of their
>           original countries. For instance, there are many Iraqi Jews
>           sing in Arabic in Israel. 
> 

Curiosly, if you had been following soc.culture.jewish you would
learn that Eastern Jews (roughly Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Yemen)
have less in common with other Sephardics than you might think.
Common customs between Jews and non-Jews (not Arabs) in Iraq
is more due to the mutual adoption of earlier Babylonian and
Persian customs, which greatly influenced the Israelites and Judaeans
of the region.

>  Language: After they arrive in Israel, they start learning Hebrew. 
>           

Wrong, they always knew hebrew in Iraq.  Only during the colonial
period did they decide European culture was more advanced and more
desirable (and tolerant and liberal towards them) so they took on
French and English culture quite happily through the Alliance'
Israelite'.

> > ness. That there is a Jewish nation is an obvious fact; some people
> > don't like, but facts take more than dislikes to make them go away.
> >


		Seth Rosenthal
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Re: Mutlu=ARF
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 05:09:36 GMT
X-Disclaimer:  Material posted in this article is the sole responsibility of
                the poster and does not represent MCSNet or the system owners.

tb13@ellis.uchicago.edu (leon joel gross) writes:
: In article <1992Jul17.134156.1665@ddsw1.mcs.com> arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
: >In article <1992Jul16.151815.15416@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:
: >>analyst@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
: >>#
: >>#In his latest message, Mutlu uses the word "wieneramus." Is it my
: >>#imagination or has that word been used frequently by the neo-Nazi
: >>#anti-semite ARF.  
: >>
: >>As an avid ARF collector (we all have our little problems) I have to
: >>say I have never seen him use this word. The rest of your description
: >>is true, though.
: >>
: >>The two "ARF words" are "chutzpanazi" (meaning anyone who doesn't agree
: >>with him) and "holomanic" (shamelessly stolen from Bradley "BS" Smith).
: >
: >>-Danny Keren.a
: >ARF says:
: >
: >Not quite.  A Chutzpanazi is one who calls critics of Israel antisemites.
: >You are an excellent example of the genus.  My apology to BS,. I thought I
: >coined the term.
: >
: >arf
: 
: Arf lies again.  He has called people Chutzpanazis who didn't call other
: people anti-Semities, or didn't do it because they were reacting to
: criticism of Israel.
: 
: Arf, I'm still waiting for the apology for when you called me a 
: "hatemongering liar"  and you also owe the net the apology you 
: promised if we could prove that you wrote that Jews control the
: media.
 ARF says:

And I am waiting for you to apologize for having obscene conversations with
my telephone answering machine.  Why do you keep calling it a Nazi F---?
It's on three years old.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: analyst@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Cascades
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:01:16 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


Several posters have begun to post extended cascades (where one quotes
another who quotes another who--aaaah, you get the idea). I've 
noticed that many of these make a point about which most of the
quoted material is irrelevant.

Please stop playing with message posting toys and simply quote
the relevant point to which you are responding, or summarize in
a couple of sentences the prior material. To do otherwise
wastes net bandwidth and makes it nearly impossible figure
out what is being said because of the noise.

We are adults here, and it is a lot easier to summarize and continue
than quote. I recognize that some are students afraid of making
a mistake; quoting puts you on 'firmer' ground. But those who
are unwilling either to take risks or display creativity are
cheating themselves and their audiences of a decent discussion,
and instead engaging in near-mindless 'pilpul' (disputation). This
is, after all, not an exercise in mathematical proof,  but a
discussion, and it's easier to correct the occasional mis-summary
(you can count on that being called to your attention when it
happens) than to keep flooding us with all the message history.

David

-- 
David Sternlight        David Sternlight Inc.        email:analyst@netcom.COM
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: Re: ISRAEL JOINS THE CIVILIZED WORLD
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:32:05 GMT

In article <24030@castle.ed.ac.uk> egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:
#
#Now I've heard everything - Shamir and Gandhi in the same category.
#Funny how the little Indian chap is best known for non-violence whereas
#the little Jewish bloke is a well-known member of a murderous gang. Still,
#these little distinctions don't mean much, do they Jake?

While rejecting the comparison between Gandhi and Shamir, one can easily
conjecture how Gandhi's ideas and ways of doing things would work in the
middle-east. Not too good, I am afraid.

(please don't interpert this as a negative opinion on Gandhi, which was
 undoubtly a great man).

-Danny Keren.

PS - Henderson, why are you posting to this newsgroup? I have been reading
it for over a year and, except for Barfie, you are the most obnoxious,
insulting, and un-productive poster here. Why don't you switch to alt.flame?

Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: ejk@coral.JPL.NASA.gov (Elya Kapelyan)
Subject: Mr. Arens, what would you have done?
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:22:17 GMT

	While reading Mr. Arens's responses on Lehi's contacts with the Nazi's,
a question kept popping into my head, and since I wanted a public response,
I decided to ask the question here.  So here it is:

	What would you have done if you were in place of Avraham Stern?  (I
believe that he was still alive during these attempted contacts.)

	Elya Kapelyan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast
From: rivk@quads.uchicago.edu (nora gayle rivkis)
Subject: Re: Israel Cancels Building in the West Bank
Reply-To: rivk@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:50:26 GMT

In article <24305@castle.ed.ac.uk> egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:
>In article <1992Jul30.014215.5200@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>=>In article <24242@castle.ed.ac.uk> egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson) writes:
>=>>In article <1992Jul27.201713.20989@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>=>
>=>>=> Israel
>=>>=>has a more efficient military by a long way; this means that when they
>=>>=>answer rocket fire somebody is going to get hurt. That the Palestinian
>=>>=>forces in Lebanon are not as good at what they are trying to do is not
>=>>=>Israel's problem.
>=>>
>=>>You have a funny way of defining "efficiency" I guess you'd say that the
>=>>Philly police were "efficient" at removing the "Move" folk from their 
>=>>houses. Most people would have considered the number of civilian casualties
>=>>when evaluating "efficiency" - you obviously have other (numbers of) standards.
>=>
>=>I have an economically precise, if somewhat ruthless, definition of
>=>efficiency: getting done what you want done at minimum cost to you.
>
>So, I take it that you approve of the Philadelphia police tactics?

I didn't say I approve of everything that is done efficiently; Treblinka
was run along fairly efficient lines. I simply said that you had to ex-
pect that if two organizations had equally morally good or bad goals, you
could not determine which was the moral superior by looking at which one
was less effective at carrying those goals out.

>Can you rate, in your terms, the efficiency of the Turkish slaughter
>of the Armenians (supposin, for the sake of argument, that it occurred.
>I, myself, believe it did, but I'm only interested in Nora's ideas on
>"efficiency" at the moment, so I don't want to be sidetracked by the
>Turkish/Armenian feud). How about Saddams "efficiency" in gassing the 
>Kurds? 

I don't know enough about the first, and I don't consider the second to
have been very efficient -- took him too much in the way of resources
and didn't get rid of enough Kurds. None of this has anything to do
with morality one way or the other.

>It therefore follows that you are happy for Israel to be in the same 
>moral category as the Turks, the Iraquis, etc.

It follows no such thing. It follows that I do not consider the fact
that Israel was efficient to be a reason to indict them; that must be
done or not on the basis of what they were trying to do, not how success-
ful the attempt was.

>Such high standards you set yourself.

I've never pretended to set Israel terribly high moral standards; I
believe that when your survival is at stake the rules are off. My
goal for Israel is her continued existence and safety at virtually
any cost first; anything it is possible to do after that, we can
see about.

>-Jeremy Henderson        egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk   

	-Nora


Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast