Quote:
Originally posted by capribex
Well, I get my sources also from the ground. I have family in Israel and I have Palestinian friends who live in Nablus and in Gaza.
Leaving the details aside for a sec, I think what I hear is the same from both camps: there could have been peace already nearly 2 years ago, when Barak was PM. It was the strategic decision of Arafat to restart the Intifada that brought this hope to an end. Arafat is the tragedy of the Palestinian people. Sharon would never be elected if it wasn't for the Intifada.
As for Jenin - the place you are talking about is 100 X 100 meters. This is not the city of Jenin, and not even the Refuge Camp itself. It's the area inside the Refuge Camp where the people didn't surender. 23 Israeli soldiers died in these 100 X 100 meters. They didn't die from nothing. There was a fierce fight there, with the Palestinian leaving explosives inside the houses to destroy them ontop of Israeli soldiers (13 Israeli soldiers died when palestinians detonated their own houses on the Israeli soldiers). Israel could have done what America did in Afghanistan, and bomb these 100 X 100 meters with F-16 and flatten the land to reduce it's own casualties. The reason why Israel chose to fight house-t-house shows an attempt to try and avoid hurting civilians when possible.
These 100 X 100 meters, was the home of more than 50% of the suicide bombers who killed hundreds of Israeli women and children, a crime which the UN opted not to investigate (hey, it's just Jewish blood...)
|
I meant the entire area of Jenin.
Reality is that people will fight with the weapons at hand.
Both sides are accusing eachother of terrorism, are they both correct? Remember that the definition of "terrorism" has changed alot since 11 september 2001.
There are too many opposite interests in the middle-east to have peace.