| Revision as of 10:28, 9 April 2002 editEd Poor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,217 edits ideas for improving the article← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:43, 9 April 2002 edit undoDanny (talk | contribs)41,414 edits DannyNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| No doubt there are other issues as well. Please, someone who knows the area and the issues, write about this. Thank you. ] | No doubt there are other issues as well. Please, someone who knows the area and the issues, write about this. Thank you. ] | ||
| :Ed, you are confusing several issues here. military installations are not settlements. Many people in Israel, perhaps the majority, support removing most of the settlement but keeping military installations in vital places. And it is actually 3 minutes, not 10. ] | |||
Revision as of 10:43, 9 April 2002
I removed:
- As a means to legalise their position, the israelis have taken invading refugee camps Sabra and Chatila Massacre and vilages in an attempt to scare off Palestinians and claim the land as theirs.
The massacre in Sabra and Shatilla was not committed by Israel. Israel's responsibility, and for that matter Sharon's, was in not stopping their Christian Phalangist allies in Lebanon from committing the massacre. Nor was the massacre committed to legalize settlements. It took place in Lebanon, not the West Bank or Gaza. No Israeli government has ever made territorial claims on Lebanon, nor have any settlements been created there. Of course, a statement like this also merits an Israeli explanation of the actions if it is to be considered NPOV. According to Israel, refugee camps in the West Bank have Gaza have been invaded to stop thm serving as terrorist bases. It is not a question of agreeing with this or not. Personally, I do not, however, claiming that it is a policy intended to scare off the Palestinians requires some factual backing. I'd like to see that. Finally, it is Sabra and Shatilla (S and 2 l's).Danny
Let's improve the article by describing
- advocacy which opposes the settlemnts
- advocacy which supports the settlements
I presume Arabs are mostly against the settlements, because they regard the West Bank as properly belonging to a Palestinian state (de facto, de jure, or proposed) -- so the Israelis are trespassing, to say the least.
I presume the Israeli military wants radar installations that can see across the Jordan River, to get an extra 10 minutes' warning of enemy jets or missiles.
No doubt there are other issues as well. Please, someone who knows the area and the issues, write about this. Thank you. Ed Poor
- Ed, you are confusing several issues here. military installations are not settlements. Many people in Israel, perhaps the majority, support removing most of the settlement but keeping military installations in vital places. And it is actually 3 minutes, not 10. Danny