|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Apr 6, 2002 21:50:12 GMT -5
As to the suicide attacks on the US, it's not just a few people that died. There were FOUR suicide attacks that killed thousands of people in one day. Surely we're not going to kick back and say, "Dang, Why they do that?"
|
|
|
Post by Semi-Charmed.Life on Apr 7, 2002 0:25:19 GMT -5
"It seems to me that you do not even recognize Israel's right to exist"
Israel has NO right to exist. Its not their land therefore the Palestinians, with the aid of all Middle Eastern countries, should do all they can to end the Israeli expansionism.
"No one is going to get all the land, so when you say that the Palestinians will get all the land back, it makes you seem foolish."
We will fight 'til the end for our land and to ensure that the Israeli state is abolished.
"Arafat has to go, he has been the leader of the Palestinians for a long time and has hardly accomplished much."
He has accomplished a lot for his nation. He has made it clear to the world that the Israeli's actions are uncalled for and unjust......unlike President Bush who clearly can't make up his mind.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 0:39:05 GMT -5
^^I'm sorry but you are living way in the past. Most countries in the ME are moving toward recognition of Israel. Also Western countries are moving toward acceptance of a Palestinian state.
<<We will fight 'til the end for our land and to ensure that the Israeli state is abolished. >>
With a statement like that, I really mean no offense, but it makes you seem out of touch with reality. The Palestinians do not have the means to do such a thing or it would have been done in the last 54 years. Israel is here to stay and you need to come to terms with that.
I do however agree that Israel has no right to be in the West Bank or Gaza, and I believe that if the Jewish settlers are attacked on that land that it is their own fault. Those very settlements are illegal and in breach of international law. I think that the Mitchell Plan should be implented, and that an eventual Palestinian state side-by-side with Israel is necesary.
<<He has accomplished a lot for his nation. He has made it clear to the world that the Israeli's actions are uncalled for and unjust>>
No, all he has done is lost credibility with the Western leaders and populace. Suicide bombings on innocent civilians are not the way to convey your message. When Israel is attacked, as any sovereign nation, she has the right to protect herself. The only message Arafat is sending is that he is a terrorist.
<<unlike President Bush who clearly can't make up his mind. >>
I'm not quite sure what you are refering to. I think that the foreign policy of this Admininstration has been fairly sound.
|
|
|
Post by busybodies on Apr 7, 2002 2:04:55 GMT -5
<<The only message Arafat is sending is that he is a terrorist.>> The only person who has achieved this much for the Palestinians is Arafat. After the UN screwed up, Arafat was the one who brought the Palestinians this far. I'm sorry if you don't like him, but the Palestinians owe a lot to him.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 2:40:53 GMT -5
^^By the "UN screwing up" are you refering to the 1948 Partition?
Maybe its just me, but I do not consider suicide bombers and those who advocate and encourage the death of innocent civilians as espousing progress in this field.
|
|
|
Post by busybodies on Apr 7, 2002 3:18:47 GMT -5
Yes, I am referring to the 1948 partition. If that isn't a monumental screw up then... I don't know what is. Maybe the Palestinian land isn't important to you, but it is for the Arabs. If Arafat doesn't do something about it then who will? America certainly won't do any good for the Palestinians.
|
|
|
Post by sunny.side.up on Apr 7, 2002 9:53:14 GMT -5
>>I don't agree with the suicide bombers but they don't have any other choice. Palestinian women and girls are being raped daily by the Israeli soldiers. Palestinian families are being forced out of their homes and humiliated. They are being MURDERED! What are we doing about it? Siding with the Israelis?<<
I agree that that's not right, but you can't deny that the Palestinians are killing innocent Israelis too. The Palestinians and the Israelis both aren't right. They're both doing the wrong thing.
>>The only person who has achieved this much for the Palestinians is Arafat. After the UN screwed up, Arafat was the one who brought the Palestinians this far. I'm sorry if you don't like him, but the Palestinians owe a lot to him.<<
The way in which Arafat achieved all this doesn't seem very right to me. He certainly doesn't make himself very popular in the Western world, and although I know that that wasn't exactly his goal, it definitely does make a difference what people here think of him and/or the Palestinians. He basically gave them a bad name. I don't have anything against Palestinians - it's just that I know that some other people are prejudiced because of Arafat's actions. Of course that means that those people are wrong, but it also means that Arafat is obviously doing something wrong too.
>>Israel has NO right to exist. Its not their land therefore the Palestinians, with the aid of all Middle Eastern countries, should do all they can to end the Israeli expansionism.<<
Israel is the only Jewish country in the world. I think it is very important that Israel exists. There are enough islamic countries (although most of not all of the governments suck). I don't mean that Palestine doesn't have the right to exist, but the way you are talking about Israel is both unrespectful and unrealistic.
~*Esther*~
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 13:25:55 GMT -5
<<Yes, I am referring to the 1948 partition. If that isn't a monumental screw up then... I don't know what is. >>
The Jews needed somewhere to go after WWII. Six million of the Jewish people were killed in Holocaust, and after centuries of anti-Jewish feelings, would you really feel safe in such a place? There were already Jewish settlers before WWII and all they wanted was a small state. Since then the Arab mood of violence has persisted and Israel had to protect herself and her sovereignty.
<<America certainly won't do any good for the Palestinians. >>
We can attempt to help in brokering peace agreements but they have to be honored by both sides. I'm not quite sure what more you want from us, we have called for an eventual state, and voted in the same manner at the Security Council, now its up to Israel.
<<Maybe the Palestinian land isn't important to you, but it is for the Arabs.>>
Well it seems as if it is loosing its importance amongst Arab governments as many of the governments who have not yet recognized Israel are moving toward recognition. The peace plan proposed by the Saudi Crown Prince calls for normalization of relations between those two states in return for Israel pulling out of the lands occupied since 1967. This says to me that anyone who still wants to push Israel off into the sea is living in the past.
|
|
|
Post by Semi-Charmed.Life on Apr 7, 2002 15:03:02 GMT -5
"With a statement like that, I really mean no offense, but it makes you seem out of touch with reality."
I am being extremely realistic. Our ideas of reality might differ but that doesn't give you the right to refer to me as "unrealistic".
The land of Palestine belongs to the Palestinians. End of story.
The Palestinians were nice enough to allow the Israelites (as they were called at the time) to enter Palestine. The Israelites then took it one step farther and began to expand. And here we are now. Playing a tug of war.
I have read many books about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and I have come to the conclusion that Israel should keep to their own side (which isn't even theirs to begin with) if they want to avoid conflicts instead of running to the US with all of their problems.
"No, all he has done is lost credibility with the Western leaders and populace."
Who need the US? So many people have become brain washed and so they now believe that the world revolves around the US. All the US can do is shoot missiles from a far distance.
"Suicide bombings on innocent civilians are not the way to convey your message."
Palestine doesn't have tanks and advance military weapons that Israel has. Although I DO NOT agree with this specific tactic, I can see why Palestine is using it. They have NO choice. How else are they supposed to get the worlds attention when America, the superpower it is, is Israel's alley?
"I'm sorry but you are living way in the past. Most countries in the ME are moving toward recognition of Israel."
Thats what you think. You're telling me that countries like Iraq and Iran are recognizing Israel? Please.
"When Israel is attacked, as any sovereign nation, she has the right to protect herself."
First off, Israel is on the offensive where as Palestine is on the defensive. Israel has the right to protect herself? Protect isn't the right word in this context.
"Israel is the only Jewish country in the world. I think it is very important that Israel exists."
I realize that Israel is the only Jewish country in the world but what does that have anything to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. You see, this is the mistake most people are making. They are mixing religion with political conflicts.
"There are enough islamic countries (although most of not all of the governments suck)."
What is that supposed to mean? What if there are many Islamic states in the world? Are you offended? These Islamic nations have fought to be where they are today and I think they deserve recognition. Which Islamic governments "suck". I am very interested in your answer.
"I don't mean that Palestine doesn't have the right to exist, but the way you are talking about Israel is both unrespectful and unrealistic."
Respect? I respect Israeli citizens but I honestly have NO respect for the Israeli authorities. Again, I am being realistic. Maybe you don't agree but then again, you don't need to. "The Jews needed somewhere to go after WWII."
And which nation accepted them? Palestine. Let's not forget that.
"Well it seems as if it is loosing its importance amongst Arab governments as many of the governments who have not yet recognized Israel are moving toward recognition. "
Are you able to provide evidence for your statement?
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 16:10:38 GMT -5
<<I am being extremely realistic. Our ideas of reality might differ but that doesn't give you the right to refer to me as "unrealistic". >>
What you seem to want is Israel ran off into the sea. Well that is simply not going to happen. The Arabs just do not have the means to destroy Israel, as you envision. The notion is just not practical, if they could carry out such an operation it would have been done over 50 years ago.
<<The Palestinians were nice enough to allow the Israelites (as they were called at the time) to enter Palestine. The Israelites then took it one step farther and began to expand. And here we are now. Playing a tug of war. >>
When the first Jewish refugees started coming the British had a mandate over Palestine. I'm pretty sure that they co-existed quite well in the begginning. But then after the 1948 UN Partition all the Arab states rose in agression against Israel. Israel was succesful in these conflicts and was on the defensive on all of them except the Six Day War.
<<Who need the US? So many people have become brain washed and so they now believe that the world revolves around the US. All the US can do is shoot missiles from a far distance. >>
Where did I say the US? I said the Western world. And credibility with the Western world is essential if you want your point to gain credibility. <br> The US can protect her interests diplomaticaly as well. It seems your intense dislike for the US may stem in jelousy.
<<Palestine doesn't have tanks and advance military weapons that Israel has. Although I DO NOT agree with this specific tactic, I can see why Palestine is using it. They have NO choice. How else are they supposed to get the worlds attention when America, the superpower it is, is Israel's alley? >>
Their land never would have been taken if they did not start wars with Israel. I do not respect anyone who kills women and children to get their point across.
<<Thats what you think. You're telling me that countries like Iraq and Iran are recognizing Israel? Please. >>
Of course not Iraq and Iran, they are tyrannical regimes. More moderate states however are moving toward recognition.
<<First off, Israel is on the offensive where as Palestine is on the defensive. Israel has the right to protect herself? >>
I believe the Israeli attacks were retalliation to Palestinian suicide bombers. When a sovereign nation is attacked the atacker can expect just retribution.
<<Which Islamic governments "suck". I am very interested in your answer. >>
Iran sucks....Syria usually "sucks" um even though Iraq is not an Islamic government I'd just like to add that it "sucks" too. Oh yes, and the Tailban sucked
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 16:20:59 GMT -5
<<Are you able to provide evidence for your statement?>> Arab summit adopts Saudi peace initiative BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) --The Arab League adopted Thursday the first "pan-Arab initiative" for peace in the Middle East, Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa announced.[/b] The plan, offered by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, was adopted in a closed session following hours of wrangling over its final language. The plan, in its broadest terms, offers Israel security and "normal relations" in exchange for a withdrawal from occupied Arab territories, creation of an independent Palestinian state with al-Quds al-Shareef (East Jerusalem) as its capital, and the "return of refugees." Prince Saud al Faisal, Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, told a news conference, "This is the way toward security ... Israel can't keep the land and want security at the same time. It has to withdraw and give the Palestinian their rights. "If Israel does that, the Arab states will put an end to the state of war. That will give Israel its security." The adoption of the initiative was delayed for a time as the parties argued over the language on refugees. In the end, the initiative asks for "a just solution to the Palestinian problem" by following United Nations Resolution 194. That resolution calls for Palestinian refugees displaced from their former homeland to be allowed to return or to receive compensation. In addition, the declaration says the summit "rejects all forms of resettlement of Palestinians which conflicts with the special circumstances in the Arab host countries," an apparent reference to the Lebanese objections. Asked how "normal relations" are defined, Prince Saud al Faisal, Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, said, "We envision a relationship between the Arab countries and Israel that is exactly like the relationship between the Arab countries and any other state." In his speech Wednesday, Crown Prince Abdullah -- the architect of the Saudi peace initiative -- called on Arab League delegates to unanimously back the Saudi initiative. (Speech excerpts) The prince's speech provided the first account of what the Saudis are proposing, but contained few details. Saudi sources told CNN that the prince intentionally did not spell out the specifics on what was meant by "all occupied Arab territories" and "the return of refugees" to allow the Israelis to settle those matters through negotiations with the Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. "All the neighborhood, if you will, will be at peace with Israel, will recognize their right to exist," he said. "If this doesn't provide security for Israel, I assure you the muzzle of a gun is not going to provide that security," said Prince Saud al-Faisal. He added that the United States must play a key role in moving toward a lasting peace. "It has been shown that when the United States pushes Israel toward a compromising position, they will listen even if public opinion is affected by what the United States is doing," al-Faisal said. "This is the time where sense must be talked into (Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon. The war and the conflict is in his head. This has to be removed from his mind and only the United States can do that." The Saudi foreign minister condemned the deaths of 20 civilians in Wednesday's suicide attack in the Israeli coastal town of Netanya, but placed blame on the Jewish state for inspiring the attack. (Full story) "It is the actions of Israel that are creating these suicide bombers and it is that violence ... that has to stop," he said. The Arab League summit's final declaration also rejected any attack Iraq. The statement goes on to say, "We demand the respect of Iraq's independence, sovereignty, security and unity." (Full story) The summit, held in Beirut, has been marred by the absence of three key leaders -- Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah. Arafat's attempts to address the summit failed when his satellite link from his headquarters in the West Bank was stopped, prompting the Palestinian delegation to walk out of Wednesday's session. The text of Arafat's speech was distributed to delegates on Thursday. Abdullah presented his proposal for a comprehensive land-for-peace pact with Israel on Wednesday, the first day of the summit. www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/03/28/arab.league/index.html
|
|
|
Post by Semi-Charmed.Life on Apr 7, 2002 16:45:07 GMT -5
"What you seem to want is Israel ran off into the sea. Well that is simply not going to happen."
Time will tell. Many nations have ended in destruction. What makes you so sure that Israel won't be one of them?
"The Arabs just do not have the means to destroy Israel, as you envision."
They damn well do have the means to cause serious damage.
"The notion is just not practical, if they could carry out such an operation it would have been done over 50 years ago."
The Middle Eastern world has more power now than it did 50 years ago. They can easily end Israel's existance if all the countries were determined to! They (Middle Eastern countries) can be more powerful than even America if they united and stood behind each other.
"Where did I say the US?" <br> Okay...Who needs the Western World? So many people have become brain washed and so they now believe that the world revolves around the Western World. The only thing the Western Worldcan do is shoot missiles from a far distance.
Basically, my point is that the US runs the Western World. What the US does, Canada and the other countries must do. <br> "Their land never would have been taken if they did not start wars with Israel. "
Their land was never taken because they started wars with Israel. Their land was taken because they were taken advantage of.
"I do not respect anyone who kills women and children to get their point across."
Well then, I guess you have no respect for America since they have killed women and children in many cases. They might claim it was an "accident" but I believe otherwise.
"Of course not Iraq and Iran, they are tyrannical regimes. More moderate states however are moving toward recognition."
I will repeat again, just because Iran and Iraq ensure an Islamic state does not mean they are "tyrannical" or terrorists. I have many friends from countries like Iran and Iraq and they are quite proud of their country and their government.
Which "moderate" countries? The only country that might be working to recognize Israel is SA and they are hypocrits themselves.
"I believe the Israeli attacks were retalliation to Palestinian suicide bombers."
No, the use of suicide bombers was retalliation to the violence from the Israeli side.
"Iran sucks....Syria usually "sucks" um even though Iraq is not an Islamic government I'd just like to add that it "sucks" too. Oh yes, and the Tailban sucked."
Iran, Iraq, and especially Syria do not "suck". <br> "It seems your intense dislike for the US may stem in jelousy."
Ha! That has got to bethe funniest comment I have heard in a long while. What is there to be jealous of?
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 17:06:31 GMT -5
<<Time will tell. Many nations have ended in destruction. What makes you so sure that Israel won't be one of them? >> Because the seeds of peace are being planted throughout the region. What you are looking for is World War and if that cause is ensued it can only lead to Arab demise. <<They damn well do have the means to cause serious damage. >> Serious intentful collateral damage. If that is a goal you wish to pursue then I question your intentions and heart. <<The Middle Eastern world has more power now than it did 50 years ago. They can easily end Israel's existance if all the countries were determined to! They (Middle Eastern countries) can be more powerful than even America if they united and stood behind each other. >> The West is much more powerful than it was 50 years ago as well. They could not end Israel's existance if they wanted to because her allies would come to her aid. You do not want a World War III, because it would be vastly un-winnable for you. <br> Nor do the Arab states have the industry or capital to overtake Israel, and certaintly not the US. <<Basically, my point is that the US runs the Western World. What the US does, Canada and the other countries must do. >> They are sovereign nations and can do as they wish and what they want to protect their interests. <<Their land was never taken because they started wars with Israel. Their land was taken because they were taken advantage of. >> Who was the aggressor in the War in 1948?? <<Well then, I guess you have no respect for America since they have killed women and children in many cases. They might claim it was an "accident" but I believe otherwise. >> I take offense to that statement. The US or any other civilized nation would never intentionally kill innocent women and children just for the hell of it. Why in world would the US want to kill innocents? Maybe we just want to get people pissed at us? Come on! Collerateral damage may happen in war but never on purpose. <<I will repeat again, just because Iran and Iraq ensure an Islamic state does not mean they are "tyrannical" or terrorists>> Well Iraq is a secular nation, and I do not despise those countries because they are Islamic, it is because they seek the demise of my country. <br> Are you trying to tell me Sadaam is good man?? Are you saying that he is not a tyrant? <br> <<No, the use of suicide bombers was retalliation to the violence from the Israeli side. >> And what was Israel's motive for violence? <<Ha! That has got to bethe funniest comment I have heard in a long while. What is there to be jealous of? >> Life, liberty, and property.
|
|
|
Post by Semi-Charmed.Life on Apr 7, 2002 17:32:45 GMT -5
"What you are looking for is World War and if that cause is ensued it can only lead to Arab demise." If World War does result from this conflict then so be it. I strongly doubt that the Arabs would be the failures. "If that is a goal you wish to pursue then I question your intentions and heart." Just because I have a differing opinion? "They are sovereign nations and can do as they wish and what they want to protect their interests." Yes, they might be independant nations but they are easily influenced by the US. "I take offense to that statement." Well, I have taken offence to many of your comments but I take it as your opinion. It doesn't affect me just as my opinion shouldn't affect you. "The US or any other civilized nation would never intentionally kill innocent women and children just for the hell of it." They have and they will. "Why in world would the US want to kill innocents? " Because they are a superpower and they easliy can. I have discussed many events where the US has taken it upon themselves to cause serious damage. I am not going to explain it here because it just isn't the place to. "I do not despise those countries because they are Islamic, it is because they seek the demise of my country." Why do you think these countries want to witness the end of the US? Ask yourself that question. "Are you trying to tell me Sadaam is good man?? Are you saying that he is not a tyrant?" Sadaam is just as much of a tyrant as Bush is. That is the simplest way I could put it. "And what was Israel's motive for violence?" To expand their nation. "Life, liberty, and property." The funny thing is that I already have these rights. So tell me the real reason why I'm jealous of the US since you were the one who accused me of it.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 7, 2002 17:52:34 GMT -5
<<If World War does result from this conflict then so be it. I strongly doubt that the Arabs would be the failures. >>
I dont see on what premise you make your claim. I really find that assertion to be quite absurd. If the entire military arm of the United States and other Western countries was to be unleashed, it would be no contest.
<<Just because I have a differing opinion? >>
No, because you are seemingly vindicating suicide attacks on civilians.
<<Yes, they might be independant nations but they are easily influenced by the US.>>
That they may be, but they endure the sovereignty to make those decisions.
<<They have and they will. >>
We do not kill innocents just for that purpose. Such actions would not make any gains in the interest of the US.
<<Why do you think these countries want to witness the end of the US? Ask yourself that question. >>
I don't care why they want the end of me. But if they wish it and act upon those wishes, they will feel the wrath of our military industrial complex.
<<Sadaam is just as much of a tyrant as Bush is. That is the simplest way I could put it. >>
Come on now! Bush is a constitutionally elected President, he is bound by that Constitution and by Congress. He is not capable of being a tyrant. While Sadaam seeks the death of innocents, gives payment to suicide bombers while his country is starving, and uses chemical weapons against his own people, is breach of his Surrender Agreement, need I go on?
<<To expand their nation.>>
After they were attacked.
<<So tell me the real reason why I'm jealous of the US since you were the one who accused me of it. >>
It seems you envy our power and prestige in the world.
|
|