AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: 2nd Intifada Lessons Never Learned
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I must confess that I have not paid much attention to the 2nd Intafada for some time now. In fact, I had almost forgotten about it. But it ocurred, and the Israeli won it. Yet, in spite of it all, and Yasser "That's my Baby" Arafat's attempt to gain more leverage, his organization did not win anything as a result. As a result, they have lost even more territory to the more radical elements within.

But what are the lessons to be learned here?


Quote:2nd Intifada forgotten


Why do so many people prefer to forget 2nd Intifada and ignore its lessons?



The second Intifada, which started in October 2000 and ended in October 2004, is barely being discussed or written about. It has been marginalized and pushed out of public discourse. Books about it are hidden away at bookstores. Political journals barely mention it. The media forgot it. Cultural institutions ignore it.


The amnesia in relation to the second Intifada is surprising in the face of its high casualty toll and the heavy price it exacted from Israel’s society and economy, as well as the ruin it brought to Palestine and the Palestinians. What then is the reason for this amnesia, which borders on denial? The human desire to ignore a sequence of events that undermines and breaks away from convention. Once it’s over, we all rush to repress it from our consciousness and return to the comfort of the familiar, acceptable, predictable, and normal.


The second Intifada contradicted and disproved two basic assumptions, axioms almost, which were commonly accepted at its outset and end. The first one: Economic prosperity brings peace. The second one: Terrorism cannot be defeated by force. Both these arguments were and still are deeply rooted in our collective perception and instigate the leading narrative when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Both axioms are politically correct and provide an orderly doctrine for analysis and interpretation.


Bidding these arguments farewell means abandoning viewpoints we have become accustomed to and heading into the unknown. Therefore, so many prefer to forget that there was ever an Intifada here and ignore its lessons. However, that which is repressed will resurface – it always does.

Palestinian future sacrificed

The second Intifada broke out at the zenith of Palestinian economy prosperity. The fruit of the Oslo Accords finally started trickling down to the poor and neglected strata in the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian standard of living skyrocketed, money was readily available, tourists flocked to the whole of the Holy Land, foreign investors discovered cheap and skilled Palestinian labor, and Palestinian merchants discovered the purchasing power of Israeli consumers.


These achievements were erased on one clear day in October 2000. The second Intifada cost the Palestinians an economic loss of a generation. It will take at least 10 to 15 years before the per capita income in Palestine will return to its level on the eve of October 2000.


The welfare and future of millions of Palestinians were sacrificed on the altar of maintaining the zeal of the national and religious revolution. Normalcy, stability, the growing middle class, and the pursuit of a higher standard of living became a disaster and crime in the eyes of leaders such as Yasser Arafat and Ahmed Yassin. They wanted violence, ongoing war, blood, and fire – and that’s what they got. Now, both of them are buried deep in the soil of Palestine among with thousands of their countrymen who paid the price of their caprice.


Overwhelming Israeli victory


And what for? For nothing. After all, there is no arguing that Israel scored an overwhelming and unpredictable win in the second Intifada. Hundreds of articles written in its midst warned Israel’s leadership against attempting to fight terror by force, because the failure is guaranteed: The regular army of a democratic state would never defeat terror-resistance-guerilla groups that operate within oppressed civilians like fish in water. This is what we learned from Cuban genius Che Guevara and Vietnamese genius Ho Chi Minh.


In the absence of any other choice, Israel ignored the strategic warnings. In an integrated move, which included assaults on urban terror headquarters, assassinations of the most senior terror leaders, and the extensive deployment of human and technological intelligence means, Israel defeated its enemies. The unbelievable happened – and was repressed after it happened, particularly after Ariel Sharon’s hospitalization.


The world continues to pour aid money into the Palestinian Authority in the hopes that money will buy an agreement. Most Palestinians voted in favor of yet another destructive “ongoing revolution” introduced by Hamas. Tens of thousands of Israelis continued to settle in the West Bank and embitter the lives of the Palestinians, even though the IDF’s Intifada victory proved that settlements are a burden, not an asset.


Meanwhile, the false conviction that “a terror organization cannot be defeated” has paralyzed the Israeli government ever since Hamas came to power; at the end, we shall be forced to recognize the state of Hamastan, instead of Hamas recognizing us.


Did the Intifada ever happen, or was it just a bad dream?

I think the writer is definately on to something here. Conventional wisdom, is not always so wise, as I learned in one of my graduate Anthropology classes on day. It was an upper level course, and had undergraduates, as well as graduates. One of the UGs asked the professor, I believe it was Dr Bill Bass, a question, and then ended it with "And since we know that Necessity is the Mother of Invention.............".

The professor immediately cut her off, and gave a lengthy expose about how Necessity was NOT the Mother of Invention. It takes time to explain, but trust me Necessity is not the mother of invention.

The point is that economic prosperity does not bring peace, and terror Must be defeated by the use of force. Just two more sets of conventional wisdom, that do not work.
-----------------------------------


There is another guilty party here: the Arab World in general. The arab world has been going out of it's way to forment hatred, and not actually help their fellows to blend in and get on with life. They did it because it was their vehicle of fighting the Jews, on another front. When are they going to learn?
Quote:The professor immediately cut her off, and gave a lengthy expose about how Necessity was NOT the Mother of Invention. It takes time to explain, but trust me Necessity is not the mother of invention.

Well? Spill!
Pixiest Wrote:
Quote:The professor immediately cut her off, and gave a lengthy expose about how Necessity was NOT the Mother of Invention. It takes time to explain, but trust me Necessity is not the mother of invention.

Well? Spill!

Alright, alright! Here it is.

Humans are, by nature, conservative/reactionary. They subconsciously resist change, because it is in our genes. Ok, are you with me so far?

Let's take a primitive society as an example. Hey, I'm an anthropologist. Let's suppose a tribe in prehistoric Siberia, are used to hunting Mammoth. Their entire subsistence relies on them. Or take bison. Both primitive societies used the products of their prey, in every day use. Their entire reason for existing is based on these prey.

Now, suppose the climate changes, or suddenly the herds of mammoth, or bison, begin to diminish, or disappear. What does the primitive society do in order to correct this problem?

If Necessity if the Mother of Invention, then the primitive society would stop and consider how to change their lifestyle. They would think of another way to subsist, right?

But that is not how primitive societies, almost always NEVER do. What do they do? They exploit that which they are best at doing. This means that they will exploit their ability to hunt mammoths/bison, until ALL of them are gone. Then the primitive society catastropically collapses under it's own inability to change.

Do you question me here? Well consider. Whenever humans are given a choice of actions, which tend to affect their well-being, which path will they tend to take: new untested ones, or tried and true ones that have always worked in the past?

Necessity the mother of invention? Forget it! No such thing. How it got started is unknown, but it is just another urban myth. Naturally, there are exceptions to everything, but it is rare.
Well, if you look at it another way... It's not really NECESSARY to change until all the bison are gone... And then they have to invent something new or die. Then it really IS necessary.

I still don't think you're wrong though. I think invention is boredom + inspiration + talent. Need is just something that turns invention Useful.

Many many many useless things are invented.
This genius learned too late, that the second axiom above, "Terrorism cannot be defeated by force," is Bunk. Scratch one peace activist.

Quote:"Somali gunmen shot dead a peace activist and kidnapped a senior UN official, while a roadside bomb killed three policemen in the anarchic Horn of Africa country today, witnesses said. In Beledweyne, central Somalia, assailants assassinated the regional head of respected local non-governmental organisation Centre for Research and Dialogue. "Men armed with pistols killed Mohamed Hassan Kulmiye in front of a cafeteria," said resident Ismail Farah. "They shot several bullets in the head. He died on the spot. The men ran away and we do not know who they were."
[Image: simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg]
From the stories about the Iraq conflict, it seems that mild force alone is not sufficient to stop terrorism. That is, the US did not try ruthless force, so we cannot conclude that ruthless force would have stopped the insurgents. What seemed to work was involving the locals in their own self defense, cutting them in on the authority and adding some fiscal grease, as well as prosecuting the "intelligent use of force". Ruthless force can make mistakes, which has the effect of producing victims who are not terrorists, thereby increasing the number of terrorists, at least temporarily. As I understand history, the Romans used a mix of ruthless force and buying the complicity of various second level leaders in the population (promoting them to local administrators), after the main leaders were removed. However, when this was no possible, they might completely destroy the enemy, as they ultimately did with Carthage.

But this still proves the point that "poverty causes terrorism" or "economic underdevelopment" are false.
You're one heatless woman "P". I'd certainly hate to to be a terrorist in your neighborhood. Wink1
There are two kinds of people:

Terrorists

and

targets.


Any questions?
The professor is too sure of himself. Invention comes from many origins.

SERENDIPITY is one such mother of invention. What happens is that opportunity abounds in all societies, and occasionally someone stumbles across something that works. In the Christian mindset, studying science is a way of revering the Maker and his rules - so more serendipitous invention has come from them than any other societies.

It is true that most people are habit-oriented - not necessarily reactionary. A reactionary people would see the thinning of the bison herds and react to deal with it. A non-reactionary people would not.

But even the demise of cultures can be serendipitous. Look at the Central American extinct tribes, who once were great in their culture and reach. Some theorize that warlike feuding took away their able-bodied farmers and turned them to dead soldiers... that the cultures died because war took away the vitality of the people and the civilization ended.

The theory I think more likely is that the growth of technology did them in. To combat long, unending droughts, they invented irrigation. Someone should have prevented them from watering all their farmlands from sea water. Similar to the Romans killing men, women, cattle, and sowing the land with salt, these people ruined their own land with high tech.
John L Wrote:You're one heatless woman "P". I'd certainly hate to to be a terrorist in your neighborhood. Wink1

I'm not heartless.

But "Peace Activists?" Oh JEEZUS how stupid ARE these people? They go somewhere really really really dangerous to encourge murderous animals to lay down their arms and THEY GET SHOT. Darwin wins.

I'll save my pity for people who do the right thing and have horrible things happen to them rather than for people who try to give The Whole World a BIG OL' HUG because they're too stupid to realize that there are BAD people out there.
John L Wrote:You're one heatless woman "P".

LOL! gotta love those typos.
Pixiest Wrote:
John L Wrote:You're one heatless woman "P". I'd certainly hate to to be a terrorist in your neighborhood. Wink1

I'm not heartless.

But "Peace Activists?" Oh JEEZUS how stupid ARE these people? They go somewhere really really really dangerous to encourge murderous animals to lay down their arms and THEY GET SHOT. Darwin wins.

I'll save my pity for people who do the right thing and have horrible things happen to them rather than for people who try to give The Whole World a BIG OL' HUG because they're too stupid to realize that there are BAD people out there.

John's teasing you in a sarcastic way. Don't take him serious.
scpg02 Wrote:
John L Wrote:You're one heatless woman "P".

LOL! gotta love those typos.

SmartAss! I would correct it, but it is too funny. Wink1
I was gonna ignore the typo. =)

I AM heatless today though. They A/C is turned up way too high. Just like I like it. Better to be too cold than too hot. I can always put on more clothes, but there's a limit to what I can take off.

And I know John was just teasing me. But it just bugs me we're supposed to be so outraged that a peace activist died. We're supposed to have sympathy for someone with less since than a child sticking a fork into an electrical outlet.
Sharon's last work for his country. He literally decapitated HAMAS and then got sick. I've long argued our chief strategy should be to find and kill Islamist recruiters and pr agents across the globe,with no concern for sovereingty of nations,via executions w/o trials.

Dangerous and difficult,it would save lots of everyone's lives long run,this is what Arik did to Hamas. No rest for the wicked. We've done a little of it,but we need to prioritize this view.

We are doing it in Iraq like Israel did it in Israel,but we need to do it anywhere we learn a human has recruited to this insanity. Make no comment,just start sniping dead specific humans when possible.
Palladin Wrote:Sharon's last work for his country. He literally decapitated HAMAS and then got sick. I've long argued our chief strategy should be to find and kill Islamist recruiters and pr agents across the globe,with no concern for sovereingty of nations,via executions w/o trials.

You are absolutely correct Patrick. An ounce of "prevention" is ALWAYS worth a pound of "cure". But it should always be kept with the proper oversight, so the squeemish will not have grounds to squeel when it becomes public, as it most assuridly Will.
John,

Yes,of course,occasionally our guys would be caught,tried openly and executed. I advocate this activity,but this nation isn't man enough for it or anything remotely close to it. It's way too objective and doesn't factor in western guilt/subjectivity that is dripping out the ying yang of our nation.