<strong>We`ve all heard how "Arafat never misses an oppurtunity to miss an oppurtunity..."
What I belive you might not have heard is that every day Isreal settles a little bit more of the occupied territories. Just days ago Sharon expressed that he wished a million imgrants (1.000.000 !!!) to come from south africa, france and argentina to settle the golan heights. A move to make this area unreturnable to Syria. Since Israel occupied the Golan heights they have redirected the water from these hills to flow into Isreal instead of the Syriaian farmlands below Golan. This practice of water redirection is also used widely on the west bank and in gaza.
In one case water that previously supplied over 100.000 palestinans is now supplying new settlements with less than 20.000 inhabitants.
Policies like this makes the land for peace deal a little more hollow. What use is land that can no longer be cultivated...?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gosh you know what you're right. I now think Arafat was justified in bombing kids and old people.
You know, You could change the religion and names and that could have been a palestinian webpage.
I'm not taking sides here, I'm trying to give some background to the conflict to show that things might be a bit more complicated than just "good Vs evil"...
Seems to me that you are more interested in throwing some more fuel to the fire...
<strong>....why is it that in many occasions the whiners, complainers and the critical comments to America and it's policies come from Europeans and Scandinavians?
If the Japanese didn't attack Pearl Harbor and we didn't go to War in Europe then where would you be?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You may not know, but Scandinavia, is a part of Europe.
Why do you call whiners people that have a different opinion? There where several huge mistakes in the above post.
The figures you gave, please give some backup for them.
And on your question on where Europe would be. Well Ofcourse without the help of American troops, the Russians would have won over the Nazi's. And Europe could have been completely communist.
This could have been a HUGE difference for our current life as the BIGGEST economic zone in the world would have been communist.
This would mean that we, in Europe, would probably suffer under communist dictatorship. But ALSO, the USA wouldn't be what it is today.The economy couldn't have grown that much and quick.
It was important for Europe, but also for the USA to go to war.
I'm not calling this selfish; there is nothing wrong with helping somebody if it also helps your own situation.
The economic factors of going to war were learned in the 1940's.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
Are you talking about Israelis vs Palestinian people? Or Israeli vs Palestinian authorities and fighting units? There is a huge difference, by the way. Why do you feel the Israeli people deserve peace and security whereas the Palestinian people don't? Or have you been tarnished by the 30 year media association of Palestine and terrorism, largely because of Yasser Arafat and the PLO's violent activities, and thereby trashing an entire community, the vast majority of who are not terrorists, but just regular ordinary people wishing for a peaceful life?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was talking about the Palestinian Authorities, not the citizens. But also, I think the Palestinian citizens aren't so great either. A lot of them are so anti-Israeli and anti-American it's sickening.
From when did Arafat have the power to do ANYTHING against the terrorists? Its not like he is in control of a state in the weberian (controlling the means of violence in a given area inward and outward in acceptance from the population living inside it) sense like Denmark or US. He has so little power now so even if he did know where the terrorists were and told his police to find them they probably wouldn´t do it or they would be killed or the orders would be leaked to Hamas. Arafat is only in power as long as he doesn´t do anything.
As long as there is people who want to remove Israel from the map and rather die than accept peace with it what is the most clever thing for Sharon to do? Demand a week of non-violence before Israel end their retaliation and any talks can begin? Think not! And will the constant attacks from Israel create more or less people that are prepared to blow up a bus with themselves inside it?
Its like more and more societies in the world are returning into the age of clan wars. Where an eye for an eye was the rule until the society was beyond survival. It may not seem fair but the best Israel could do was to start talking to anyone who still want to achieve peace even though people who don´t want it blow up Israelies and stop doing revenge attacks that doesn´t achieve anything else than put the Palestine people in a state of war. It may not seem fair not to allow yourself to hit back with attack helicopters but its their only chance to stop the suicide bombs from killing more of their citizents.
At least the US realise that nothing will be achieved by carpet bombing the people of Afghanistan so why can´t Israel come to the same conclusion with their random attacks? learn from Powell: Know who your enemy is and it isn´t Arafat. Part of it is the policy of their own goverment.
<strong>Do you actually believe that Arafat is personally ordering these attacks?
The anti-arabic attitude of americans could also be described as sickening...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I do.
Why do you think I'm "anti-arabic"? Because I think Arafat is a terrorist? I'm anti-Arafat that's for sure. But he's a blood thirsty terrorist so what's not to hate?
The "anti-arabic" comment was ment as a respons to EmAn's post. If you read his post you'll see this. I did not imply that you, or EmAn for that matter, are "anti-arabic".
Today Arafat placed the spiritual leader of Hamas under house arrest. Before you answer I would just like to remind you that this man does notting else than sit in his wheelchair and defend Hamas' actions. So bombing him would be a violation of public international law as defined by the UN.
But then again; All liquidation of political leaders without a fair trial is.
That explains your position but I see no evidence at all. I even doubt he knew anything before it had happened (and certainly nothing specific) and had he known he would not have been able to do anything.
Arafat still have some respect you get from being the leader of PLO for so many years. But among the young ones who can´t remember the 70´s and 80´s he has compromised himself too much to have any respect.
He is like an Osiris unable to do anything himself but anyone is using him as an symbol.
That explains your position but I see no evidence at all. I even doubt he knew anything before it had happened (and certainly nothing specific) and had he known he would not have been able to do anything.</strong><hr></blockquote>
His own Fatah Party claimed one (more?) of the attacks. How can he not know? How could he not stop it? He's been calling for the "infatada" for the last freaking year. He doesn't want peace.
Today Arafat placed the spiritual leader of Hamas under house arrest. Before you answer I would just like to remind you that this man does notting else than sit in his wheelchair and defend Hamas' actions. So bombing him would be a violation of public international law as defined by the UN.
But then again; All liquidation of political leaders without a fair trial is.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I believed that killing him, using torture or anything else would do anything to end this conflict or at least spare some lifes I would say go ahead. Hell I would personally do it. But this conflict will not end with one side winning or murdering anyone. This will only end when they start to talk to each other and anything they do inbetween now and then will only make it more difficult to begin that process.
A house arrest means at least that he can't talk to his organisation... There have also been about a 100 other arrests of posible millitants by arafats police today.
But then again there is only so much he can do, with his limited power.
A house arrest means at least that he can't talk to his organisation... There have also been about a 100 other arrests of posible millitants by arafats police today.
But then again there is only so much he can do, with his limited power.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea right. Like bin Laden had his phone taken away too.
Time to stop treating these terrorist like teenagers that forgot to come home before 11pm. "Your grounded and can't talk on the phone for two weeks. That i'll teach you to order people to bomb busses! And I want to see those grades come up young man!"
His own Fatah Party claimed one (more?) of the attacks. How can he not know? How could he not stop it? He's been calling for the "infatada" for the last freaking year. He doesn't want peace.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Like I said he is not leading a well organised society with a well functional bureaucracy. He is a dictator but only in the sense "no democratic mandate", using dubtfull methodes in getting his will and clinging to power, not in the sense controlling anything and having the means to force his will though. His "crime" is that he is clinging on to the power he has got and not risking his (political and physical) life by challeging those who do harm to Israel. Not that that would have any effect on anything...
The key to peace is not Arafats but Israels: As long as they demand a periode of non violence before talk can begin or they will end their retaliation those who doesn´t want peace have it their way. As long they can get a couple of persons who are willing to end his life for the cause every week this will continue. And as long as Israel is provoking the common palestinian population like they do now there will be no shortage.
Scott: It seems quite clear to me that you have no idea at all of what you are talking about. do you know the difference between the secular oriented Fatah and the religious Hamas. Do you know what the intifada actually is, (and that it has notting whatsoever to do with suicide bombings)...
Your post are full of undocumented accusations and emoitinal outbursts...could you please start refering to some facts?
<strong>Scott: It seems quite clear to me that you have no idea at all of what you are talking about. do you know the difference between the secular oriented Fatah and the religious Hamas. Do you know what the intifada actually is, (and that it has notting whatsoever to do with suicide bombings)...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I know all that. So what does that change? Nothing. Arafat is a terroristist. He doesn not want peace. There can be no peace as long as he's in charge.
[quote]Originally posted by New:
<strong>Your post are full of undocumented accusations and emoitinal outbursts...could you please start refering to some facts?</strong><hr></blockquote>
How do you figure that? Outburst? Because I'm uncompromising? What facts have I said that were wrong?
Comments
<strong>We`ve all heard how "Arafat never misses an oppurtunity to miss an oppurtunity..."
What I belive you might not have heard is that every day Isreal settles a little bit more of the occupied territories. Just days ago Sharon expressed that he wished a million imgrants (1.000.000 !!!) to come from south africa, france and argentina to settle the golan heights. A move to make this area unreturnable to Syria. Since Israel occupied the Golan heights they have redirected the water from these hills to flow into Isreal instead of the Syriaian farmlands below Golan. This practice of water redirection is also used widely on the west bank and in gaza.
In one case water that previously supplied over 100.000 palestinans is now supplying new settlements with less than 20.000 inhabitants.
Policies like this makes the land for peace deal a little more hollow. What use is land that can no longer be cultivated...?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gosh you know what you're right. I now think Arafat was justified in bombing kids and old people.
<a href="http://members.aol.com/natanya200/attack.html"; target="_blank">http://members.aol.com/natanya200/attack.html</a>;
I'm not taking sides here, I'm trying to give some background to the conflict to show that things might be a bit more complicated than just "good Vs evil"...
Seems to me that you are more interested in throwing some more fuel to the fire...
<strong>....why is it that in many occasions the whiners, complainers and the critical comments to America and it's policies come from Europeans and Scandinavians?
If the Japanese didn't attack Pearl Harbor and we didn't go to War in Europe then where would you be?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You may not know, but Scandinavia, is a part of Europe.
Why do you call whiners people that have a different opinion? There where several huge mistakes in the above post.
The figures you gave, please give some backup for them.
And on your question on where Europe would be. Well Ofcourse without the help of American troops, the Russians would have won over the Nazi's. And Europe could have been completely communist.
This could have been a HUGE difference for our current life as the BIGGEST economic zone in the world would have been communist.
This would mean that we, in Europe, would probably suffer under communist dictatorship. But ALSO, the USA wouldn't be what it is today.The economy couldn't have grown that much and quick.
It was important for Europe, but also for the USA to go to war.
I'm not calling this selfish; there is nothing wrong with helping somebody if it also helps your own situation.
The economic factors of going to war were learned in the 1940's.
And this is whining?
[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: S10 ]</p>
<strong>
Are you talking about Israelis vs Palestinian people? Or Israeli vs Palestinian authorities and fighting units? There is a huge difference, by the way. Why do you feel the Israeli people deserve peace and security whereas the Palestinian people don't? Or have you been tarnished by the 30 year media association of Palestine and terrorism, largely because of Yasser Arafat and the PLO's violent activities, and thereby trashing an entire community, the vast majority of who are not terrorists, but just regular ordinary people wishing for a peaceful life?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was talking about the Palestinian Authorities, not the citizens. But also, I think the Palestinian citizens aren't so great either. A lot of them are so anti-Israeli and anti-American it's sickening.
<strong>You know, You could change the religion and names and that could have been a palestinian webpage.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not so sure. Arafat targets people on busses. Israel targets terrorists.
The anti-arabic attitude of americans could also be described as sickening...
As long as there is people who want to remove Israel from the map and rather die than accept peace with it what is the most clever thing for Sharon to do? Demand a week of non-violence before Israel end their retaliation and any talks can begin? Think not! And will the constant attacks from Israel create more or less people that are prepared to blow up a bus with themselves inside it?
Its like more and more societies in the world are returning into the age of clan wars. Where an eye for an eye was the rule until the society was beyond survival. It may not seem fair but the best Israel could do was to start talking to anyone who still want to achieve peace even though people who don´t want it blow up Israelies and stop doing revenge attacks that doesn´t achieve anything else than put the Palestine people in a state of war. It may not seem fair not to allow yourself to hit back with attack helicopters but its their only chance to stop the suicide bombs from killing more of their citizents.
At least the US realise that nothing will be achieved by carpet bombing the people of Afghanistan so why can´t Israel come to the same conclusion with their random attacks? learn from Powell: Know who your enemy is and it isn´t Arafat. Part of it is the policy of their own goverment.
[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: Anders ]</p>
<strong>Do you actually believe that Arafat is personally ordering these attacks?
The anti-arabic attitude of americans could also be described as sickening...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I do.
Why do you think I'm "anti-arabic"? Because I think Arafat is a terrorist? I'm anti-Arafat that's for sure. But he's a blood thirsty terrorist so what's not to hate?
Today Arafat placed the spiritual leader of Hamas under house arrest. Before you answer I would just like to remind you that this man does notting else than sit in his wheelchair and defend Hamas' actions. So bombing him would be a violation of public international law as defined by the UN.
But then again; All liquidation of political leaders without a fair trial is.
<strong>Today Arafat placed the spiritual leader of Hamas under house arrest.</strong><hr></blockquote>
House arrest? OOooooo. Arafat is "cracking down" for sure now. How often do you think the guy left the house anyway?
<strong>
Yes I do.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
That explains your position but I see no evidence at all. I even doubt he knew anything before it had happened (and certainly nothing specific) and had he known he would not have been able to do anything.
Arafat still have some respect you get from being the leader of PLO for so many years. But among the young ones who can´t remember the 70´s and 80´s he has compromised himself too much to have any respect.
He is like an Osiris unable to do anything himself but anyone is using him as an symbol.
<strong>
That explains your position but I see no evidence at all. I even doubt he knew anything before it had happened (and certainly nothing specific) and had he known he would not have been able to do anything.</strong><hr></blockquote>
His own Fatah Party claimed one (more?) of the attacks. How can he not know? How could he not stop it? He's been calling for the "infatada" for the last freaking year. He doesn't want peace.
<strong>
Today Arafat placed the spiritual leader of Hamas under house arrest. Before you answer I would just like to remind you that this man does notting else than sit in his wheelchair and defend Hamas' actions. So bombing him would be a violation of public international law as defined by the UN.
But then again; All liquidation of political leaders without a fair trial is.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If I believed that killing him, using torture or anything else would do anything to end this conflict or at least spare some lifes I would say go ahead. Hell I would personally do it. But this conflict will not end with one side winning or murdering anyone. This will only end when they start to talk to each other and anything they do inbetween now and then will only make it more difficult to begin that process.
A house arrest means at least that he can't talk to his organisation... There have also been about a 100 other arrests of posible millitants by arafats police today.
But then again there is only so much he can do, with his limited power.
Anders: I agree 100%
[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: New ]</p>
<strong>I was expecting an answer like that...
A house arrest means at least that he can't talk to his organisation... There have also been about a 100 other arrests of posible millitants by arafats police today.
But then again there is only so much he can do, with his limited power.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea right. Like bin Laden had his phone taken away too.
Time to stop treating these terrorist like teenagers that forgot to come home before 11pm. "Your grounded and can't talk on the phone for two weeks. That i'll teach you to order people to bomb busses! And I want to see those grades come up young man!"
Arafat needs to go.
<strong>
His own Fatah Party claimed one (more?) of the attacks. How can he not know? How could he not stop it? He's been calling for the "infatada" for the last freaking year. He doesn't want peace.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Like I said he is not leading a well organised society with a well functional bureaucracy. He is a dictator but only in the sense "no democratic mandate", using dubtfull methodes in getting his will and clinging to power, not in the sense controlling anything and having the means to force his will though. His "crime" is that he is clinging on to the power he has got and not risking his (political and physical) life by challeging those who do harm to Israel. Not that that would have any effect on anything...
The key to peace is not Arafats but Israels: As long as they demand a periode of non violence before talk can begin or they will end their retaliation those who doesn´t want peace have it their way. As long they can get a couple of persons who are willing to end his life for the cause every week this will continue. And as long as Israel is provoking the common palestinian population like they do now there will be no shortage.
Your post are full of undocumented accusations and emoitinal outbursts...could you please start refering to some facts?
<strong>Scott: It seems quite clear to me that you have no idea at all of what you are talking about. do you know the difference between the secular oriented Fatah and the religious Hamas. Do you know what the intifada actually is, (and that it has notting whatsoever to do with suicide bombings)...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes I know all that. So what does that change? Nothing. Arafat is a terroristist. He doesn not want peace. There can be no peace as long as he's in charge.
[quote]Originally posted by New:
<strong>Your post are full of undocumented accusations and emoitinal outbursts...could you please start refering to some facts?</strong><hr></blockquote>
How do you figure that? Outburst? Because I'm uncompromising? What facts have I said that were wrong?
<strong>
There can be no peace as long as he's in charge.</strong><hr></blockquote>
1) So I can expect peace every minute now?
2) So with who in charge would there be peace AND how long would that person survive in that position?
I do not doubt that Israel could kill Arafat the moment they wanted to. Why doesn´t they do it then?
Just who or what would you like to replace Arafat with?