sharon's visit to the temple inflamed palestinians to no end.
and yes i believe arafat realized if he'd gone through with the accord's he'd have been doomed. i feel this is when arafat realized he was a paper tiger.
and yes i believe sharon's walk to the temple mount that day was designed to derail the peace accords.
The peace accords were already dead, a la Arafat.
Sharon's visit was cleared by the Palestinian authorities (strange that a jew should need permission to visit their holiest of sites) and was meant at worst, to embarrase Barak...related to Barak allowing the destruction of Jewish artifacts etc at the temple mount. Related to the peace accords? No. But it is easy to say he meant it that way, since the palestinians used it as an excuse for the intifatah, then Sharon must have meant for it to cause the intifatah.
This is the greatest of all straw-men arguments. There will always, at least for years and probably decades, be extremists on both sides that attack each other.
Yeah? And how many jewish extremists infiltrate civilian areas? One jew is a couple years attacking civilians, vs hundreds of attacks against jewish civilians.
It is not a strawman arguement to say that Hamas will continue to attack Jews is Israel, palestinian state or not. And this constitutes an obvious threat to the security of Israel. Oh, I forgot, Jews are supposed to just roll over. Please name another country that is expected to remain responseless when they are attacked repeatedly.
You know, I was going to qualify my question, reminding you that Palestine is not yet a state, but convinced myself you wouldn't need reminding. So, since Palestine isn't a country and has never been a country, try again.
But, I wantto ask you my other question, related to your orginal statement in the threat. What can Israel to, in your eyes, to no longer be a threat to mideast peace?
You know, I was going to qualify my question, reminding you that Palestine is not yet a state, but convinced myself you wouldn't need reminding. So, since Palestine isn't a country and has never been a country, try again.
What you end up with is a semantic argument then. Oh, the Palestinians don't have a state, so they can be slaughtered....
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
But, I wantto ask you my other question, related to your orginal statement in the threat. What can Israel to, in your eyes, to no longer be a threat to mideast peace?
The same thing I believed three years ago.
You even say there is no Palestine, no state. But when an uncontrolled faction or group within this geographical area strikes Israel or the occupied territories, the entire non-existant state is held accountable. Israel wants it both ways. That's impossible.
Israel needs to enter into peace negotiations, even if 'extremist' groups, or 'terrorist' groups, or whatever you want to call them groups, try to intercede. The Palestinian Authority is being held accountable for extremists. That's the equivalent of the US Federal Government being held accountable for the wackos in Waco, or Timothy McVeigh's bombing.
Israel needs to work out an agreement regardless. When someone other than the government of the non-state of not-Palestine tried to intercede, it must be ignored.
You even say there is no Palestine, no state. But when an uncontrolled faction or group within this geographical area strikes Israel or the occupied territories, the entire non-existant state is held accountable. Israel wants it both ways. That's impossible.
No, the entire Palestinian people are not held accountable. But the PA is held responsible. You are right, Israel wants it both ways. They want peace with the Palestinian people, and they want that peace to mean they are secure from being targetted with terrorist attacks against their civilians.
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Israel needs to enter into peace negotiations, even if 'extremist' groups, or 'terrorist' groups, or whatever you want to call them groups, try to intercede. The Palestinian Authority is being held accountable for extremists. That's the equivalent of the US Federal Government being held accountable for the wackos in Waco, or Timothy McVeigh's bombing.
If McVeigh and the like were attacking civilians in another sovereign state and using US territory and govenment for funding and, then yes, the US gov would be held accountable for stopping them.
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Israel needs to work out an agreement regardless. When someone other than the government of the non-state of not-Palestine tried to intercede, it must be ignored.
So, for Israel to have peace, they must ignore their civilians being targetted and killed? Then you saying that Israel must just roll over for peace. That's not peace. That's suicide.
Israel must work out a peace agreement, but not at the cost of her people's lives. Israel should not have to accept a peace that allows jews to be slaughtered and no one is held accountable for those deaths.
So, for Israel to have peace, they must ignore their civilians being targetted and killed?
So, for the Palestinians to have peace, they must ignore their civilians being targetted and killed? Or because they don't have an official state, there are no true Palestinian civilians to be killed?
Your logic states that Israel can attack while trying to make peace while the Palestinians can't. That's suicide for Palestinians.
I read the posts in these threads, specifically posts like moogs', but there are others... anyway - it gives me a great deal of comfort to know that if ever a hateful anti-jewish organization takes power with the goal of destroying the jewish people, Israel has weapons preventing it from happening, and as much as they hate, and as much as they would like to see the destruction of the jews and israel - they will never see it.
"typical jewish arrogance".
People can think whatever the f*ck they want to - I can still live my life and nobody can stop it - regardless of what some dimwit racist lowlife thinks - as if I need them to like me, ha! go ahead and hate yourself into a stroke. [deep breath, with sense of inner peace]. I'll live my life - happily too.
A terrorist attack was foiled yesterday morning when a large explosive charge was found and diffused in Kafr Qasem. Police captured two 21-year-old Tanzim activists from Nablus - a suicide bomber who brought the explosives and his guide.
The bomber had intended to blow himself up in the crowded Petah Tikva market, which could have caused many casualties, police sources said.
The two suspects, both members of the Tanzim's Al Aqsa Brigades, were caught due to accurate intelligence information.
I suppose some would claims that what's ceaee-fires look like.
Quote:
Palestinian negotiators said Wednesday. But the tenuous deal was immediately undercut by an Israeli airstrike and Hamas threats of revenge.
Follows long verbiage about the talks of reaching such a cease-fire, which has not actually been reached. Not much about the actual Israeli attack. So here's something about it:
Israeli helicopters fired missiles at two cars near the southern Gaza city of Khan Yunis yesterday, killing two people, including a woman.
The Israel Defense Forces said the helicopters fired the
missiles at a Hamas cell that was about to fire mortar shells at an Israeli settlement. The attack came minutes after Palestinian officials announced that Hamas and other militant groups had agreed to a three-month halt to attacks against Israelis.
A reasonable person wouild be more serious about getting mortar operators than about listening to unsubstantiated ?cease-fire? mentioned by splinter groups. It's with the PA that Israel is supposed to reach a cease-fire and negociate, not with Hamas. When the PA disarms all other armed factions and reaches a cease-fire with Israel will it be known it means business.
Quote:
It's not the first time this country has attacked at an 'inopportune' moment.
It is always opportune during an armed conflict to attack militia combatants.
Quote:
I think it's fair to say that this attack will do more to damage the current situation than the cease fire the militants were in the midst of signing.
With whom, thmeselves?
Quote:
If Israel can't control itself, what can be done to force them to cooperate? Since over the past two to three years this has been their consistent response to peace,?
What peace? do you mean, the PA-initiated campaign of ?armed struggle? of the last three years?
Quote:
I can't understand a defense of their government's positions.
While there is mich worng with that government, it had not rejected any offer of cease-fire, nor was it offered any.
Quote:
This is as much of a threat to stability in the region as Iraq was, but what can be done to keep them from destroying any hopes of peace in the region?
If Israel was remotley comparable with Saddam's Iraq, it would have no more a problem with the Palestinians than Iraq had with the Shias or the Kurds in 1990.
But perhaps what you'd actually like to see is a big military campaign against Israel by the world's major powers, just to make the fight a ?fair? one.
You could find some better arguments for such noble cause but the one you're making above is a very poor one indeed.
No. Hamas was committing to a cease-fire. Israel interjected and became, yet again, the obstacle to peace.
That is a plain lie!
Maybe you don't really check the news out but hamas has not yet agreed to a cease fire ever - they were merly considering it... and that two, only after getting a serious kicking by the IDF.
Now, you were saying that the Sharon government is to blame for not really wanting peace because it hit at hammas since the Aqaba summit - well, look at the facts:
the next day after the summit (which BTW Hamas flatly rejected and even went to the trouble of lambasting Abu Mazen for being an apeaser of the usurper Zionists) the bodies of a young Israeli couple were found mutilated in a forest outside of Jerusalem. the next day Hamas attacked an IDF post on the Gaza strip border and Killed 5 soldiers, another soldier was killed in Hebron - and all this within 2 days of Bush, Mazen and Sharon talking all those lovely words of peace - I'd say that's a very clear message AGAINST peace or a ceasefire.
As a result of these attacks Israel tried to kill Abdul Aziz Rantisi the Hamas top man in Gaza - the attempt sadly failed. the next day 17 People were murdered in a bus bombing in Jerusalem including the niece of the US ambassador to Israel and over 50 people were wounded including the daughter of a US senator.
the result of all this was that Israel escalated its attacks on top Hamas activists killing around 10 of them within 3 days and arresting lots of others -that campaign has been so effective that it has now forced Hamas to consider a ceasefire which they have still not accepted - earlier today another innocent Israeli civilian was killed by gunfire on the border between the west bank and Israel.
Its dead simple - no other sovereign self respecting country would have it otherwise - until the fire ceases Israel will keep defending itself against those who attack it! you do the same in the US.
This is a war for us - you dont deal with a war by turning your back to the enemy - you fight until it has given up the hope of beating you...
Blame Israel if that gives you a kick but the above stated simple fact will not change - ever!
And I can assure you that if a real ceasefire takes effect Israel will not be the one to break it!
Hey if the Palestinians & Arabs put down there weapons there will be peace.
If Israel puts down there weapons there will be no Israel.
I not sure where I heard but I thought that there is a great deal of truth in that.
Spot ON!!! look at Egypt and Jordan - as soon as they were willing to renounce war they got peace with us, same went for the Palestinians during the Oslo years - only they chose to revert to a strategy of war - well, we are allways ready to defend ourselves! we have become quite good at it over the years....
I have to wonder with all the anti-Israel tunnel vision here followed up quickly with Hamas blinders what do bunge et al think the Final Solution will be for this problem?
Comments
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
i was there. or shortly before.
sharon's visit to the temple inflamed palestinians to no end.
and yes i believe arafat realized if he'd gone through with the accord's he'd have been doomed. i feel this is when arafat realized he was a paper tiger.
and yes i believe sharon's walk to the temple mount that day was designed to derail the peace accords.
The peace accords were already dead, a la Arafat.
Sharon's visit was cleared by the Palestinian authorities (strange that a jew should need permission to visit their holiest of sites) and was meant at worst, to embarrase Barak...related to Barak allowing the destruction of Jewish artifacts etc at the temple mount. Related to the peace accords? No. But it is easy to say he meant it that way, since the palestinians used it as an excuse for the intifatah, then Sharon must have meant for it to cause the intifatah.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
israel was created by extremists! america was created by extremists!
all the groovy places were created by extremists baby!
Any based on the single premise of the complete destruction of another people?
Originally posted by Tulkas
Any based on the single premise of the complete destruction of another people?
Based on the removal of said people, yes.
Originally posted by bunge
This is the greatest of all straw-men arguments. There will always, at least for years and probably decades, be extremists on both sides that attack each other.
Yeah? And how many jewish extremists infiltrate civilian areas? One jew is a couple years attacking civilians, vs hundreds of attacks against jewish civilians.
It is not a strawman arguement to say that Hamas will continue to attack Jews is Israel, palestinian state or not. And this constitutes an obvious threat to the security of Israel. Oh, I forgot, Jews are supposed to just roll over. Please name another country that is expected to remain responseless when they are attacked repeatedly.
Originally posted by Tulkas
Please name another country that is expected to remain responseless when they are attacked repeatedly.
Palestine?
Originally posted by bunge
Palestine?
You know, I was going to qualify my question, reminding you that Palestine is not yet a state, but convinced myself you wouldn't need reminding. So, since Palestine isn't a country and has never been a country, try again.
But, I wantto ask you my other question, related to your orginal statement in the threat. What can Israel to, in your eyes, to no longer be a threat to mideast peace?
Originally posted by Tulkas
Any based on the single premise of the complete destruction of another people?
in the heat of the moment, probably, yes.
Originally posted by Tulkas
You know, I was going to qualify my question, reminding you that Palestine is not yet a state, but convinced myself you wouldn't need reminding. So, since Palestine isn't a country and has never been a country, try again.
What you end up with is a semantic argument then. Oh, the Palestinians don't have a state, so they can be slaughtered....
Originally posted by Tulkas
But, I wantto ask you my other question, related to your orginal statement in the threat. What can Israel to, in your eyes, to no longer be a threat to mideast peace?
The same thing I believed three years ago.
You even say there is no Palestine, no state. But when an uncontrolled faction or group within this geographical area strikes Israel or the occupied territories, the entire non-existant state is held accountable. Israel wants it both ways. That's impossible.
Israel needs to enter into peace negotiations, even if 'extremist' groups, or 'terrorist' groups, or whatever you want to call them groups, try to intercede. The Palestinian Authority is being held accountable for extremists. That's the equivalent of the US Federal Government being held accountable for the wackos in Waco, or Timothy McVeigh's bombing.
Israel needs to work out an agreement regardless. When someone other than the government of the non-state of not-Palestine tried to intercede, it must be ignored.
Originally posted by bunge
The same thing I believed three years ago.
You even say there is no Palestine, no state. But when an uncontrolled faction or group within this geographical area strikes Israel or the occupied territories, the entire non-existant state is held accountable. Israel wants it both ways. That's impossible.
No, the entire Palestinian people are not held accountable. But the PA is held responsible. You are right, Israel wants it both ways. They want peace with the Palestinian people, and they want that peace to mean they are secure from being targetted with terrorist attacks against their civilians.
Originally posted by bunge
Israel needs to enter into peace negotiations, even if 'extremist' groups, or 'terrorist' groups, or whatever you want to call them groups, try to intercede. The Palestinian Authority is being held accountable for extremists. That's the equivalent of the US Federal Government being held accountable for the wackos in Waco, or Timothy McVeigh's bombing.
If McVeigh and the like were attacking civilians in another sovereign state and using US territory and govenment for funding and, then yes, the US gov would be held accountable for stopping them.
Originally posted by bunge
Israel needs to work out an agreement regardless. When someone other than the government of the non-state of not-Palestine tried to intercede, it must be ignored.
So, for Israel to have peace, they must ignore their civilians being targetted and killed? Then you saying that Israel must just roll over for peace. That's not peace. That's suicide.
Israel must work out a peace agreement, but not at the cost of her people's lives. Israel should not have to accept a peace that allows jews to be slaughtered and no one is held accountable for those deaths.
Originally posted by groverat
Am I the only person who thought "Oh yeah? *Your mom* is a threat to world peace!" when they first read the title of this thread?
Yes?
hmm
No you are just alone, i have just discovered this thread. I will keep an eye on it
Originally posted by Tulkas
So, for Israel to have peace, they must ignore their civilians being targetted and killed?
So, for the Palestinians to have peace, they must ignore their civilians being targetted and killed? Or because they don't have an official state, there are no true Palestinian civilians to be killed?
Your logic states that Israel can attack while trying to make peace while the Palestinians can't. That's suicide for Palestinians.
Originally posted by Tulkas
No, the entire Palestinian people are not held accountable.
Look at the conditions in 'Palestine' and come back and try and argue this truthfully. You can't.
"typical jewish arrogance".
People can think whatever the f*ck they want to - I can still live my life and nobody can stop it - regardless of what some dimwit racist lowlife thinks - as if I need them to like me, ha! go ahead and hate yourself into a stroke. [deep breath, with sense of inner peace]. I'll live my life - happily too.
Originally posted by bunge
After reading this article, I was left feeling rather negatively towards Israel.
Let's not be foolish, you have been harbouring similar feelings quite some time before reading it.
Originally from the article
JERUSALEM (AP) - Islamic militants agreed to halt attacks on Israelis for three months,?
They did not. There are talks of a cease-fire, but none had been agreed to.
Suicide bombing suspects nabbed in Kafr Qasem
A terrorist attack was foiled yesterday morning when a large explosive charge was found and diffused in Kafr Qasem. Police captured two 21-year-old Tanzim activists from Nablus - a suicide bomber who brought the explosives and his guide.
The bomber had intended to blow himself up in the crowded Petah Tikva market, which could have caused many casualties, police sources said.
The two suspects, both members of the Tanzim's Al Aqsa Brigades, were caught due to accurate intelligence information.
I suppose some would claims that what's ceaee-fires look like.
Palestinian negotiators said Wednesday. But the tenuous deal was immediately undercut by an Israeli airstrike and Hamas threats of revenge.
Follows long verbiage about the talks of reaching such a cease-fire, which has not actually been reached. Not much about the actual Israeli attack. So here's something about it:
IDF missiles kill two in Gaza strike on cars
Israeli helicopters fired missiles at two cars near the southern Gaza city of Khan Yunis yesterday, killing two people, including a woman.
The Israel Defense Forces said the helicopters fired the
missiles at a Hamas cell that was about to fire mortar shells at an Israeli settlement. The attack came minutes after Palestinian officials announced that Hamas and other militant groups had agreed to a three-month halt to attacks against Israelis.
A reasonable person wouild be more serious about getting mortar operators than about listening to unsubstantiated ?cease-fire? mentioned by splinter groups. It's with the PA that Israel is supposed to reach a cease-fire and negociate, not with Hamas. When the PA disarms all other armed factions and reaches a cease-fire with Israel will it be known it means business.
It's not the first time this country has attacked at an 'inopportune' moment.
It is always opportune during an armed conflict to attack militia combatants.
I think it's fair to say that this attack will do more to damage the current situation than the cease fire the militants were in the midst of signing.
With whom, thmeselves?
If Israel can't control itself, what can be done to force them to cooperate? Since over the past two to three years this has been their consistent response to peace,?
What peace? do you mean, the PA-initiated campaign of ?armed struggle? of the last three years?
I can't understand a defense of their government's positions.
While there is mich worng with that government, it had not rejected any offer of cease-fire, nor was it offered any.
This is as much of a threat to stability in the region as Iraq was, but what can be done to keep them from destroying any hopes of peace in the region?
If Israel was remotley comparable with Saddam's Iraq, it would have no more a problem with the Palestinians than Iraq had with the Shias or the Kurds in 1990.
But perhaps what you'd actually like to see is a big military campaign against Israel by the world's major powers, just to make the fight a ?fair? one.
You could find some better arguments for such noble cause but the one you're making above is a very poor one indeed.
Originally posted by bunge
No. Hamas was committing to a cease-fire. Israel interjected and became, yet again, the obstacle to peace.
That is a plain lie!
Maybe you don't really check the news out but hamas has not yet agreed to a cease fire ever - they were merly considering it... and that two, only after getting a serious kicking by the IDF.
Now, you were saying that the Sharon government is to blame for not really wanting peace because it hit at hammas since the Aqaba summit - well, look at the facts:
the next day after the summit (which BTW Hamas flatly rejected and even went to the trouble of lambasting Abu Mazen for being an apeaser of the usurper Zionists) the bodies of a young Israeli couple were found mutilated in a forest outside of Jerusalem. the next day Hamas attacked an IDF post on the Gaza strip border and Killed 5 soldiers, another soldier was killed in Hebron - and all this within 2 days of Bush, Mazen and Sharon talking all those lovely words of peace - I'd say that's a very clear message AGAINST peace or a ceasefire.
As a result of these attacks Israel tried to kill Abdul Aziz Rantisi the Hamas top man in Gaza - the attempt sadly failed. the next day 17 People were murdered in a bus bombing in Jerusalem including the niece of the US ambassador to Israel and over 50 people were wounded including the daughter of a US senator.
the result of all this was that Israel escalated its attacks on top Hamas activists killing around 10 of them within 3 days and arresting lots of others -that campaign has been so effective that it has now forced Hamas to consider a ceasefire which they have still not accepted - earlier today another innocent Israeli civilian was killed by gunfire on the border between the west bank and Israel.
Its dead simple - no other sovereign self respecting country would have it otherwise - until the fire ceases Israel will keep defending itself against those who attack it! you do the same in the US.
This is a war for us - you dont deal with a war by turning your back to the enemy - you fight until it has given up the hope of beating you...
Blame Israel if that gives you a kick but the above stated simple fact will not change - ever!
And I can assure you that if a real ceasefire takes effect Israel will not be the one to break it!
Originally posted by bunge
Your logic doesn't fly.
>>> It means that they'll ride the coattails of Hamas if that's what it takes to achieve their goals.
Care to focus on those goals?
Originally posted by BostonMJH
Hey if the Palestinians & Arabs put down there weapons there will be peace.
If Israel puts down there weapons there will be no Israel.
I not sure where I heard but I thought that there is a great deal of truth in that.
Spot ON!!! look at Egypt and Jordan - as soon as they were willing to renounce war they got peace with us, same went for the Palestinians during the Oslo years - only they chose to revert to a strategy of war - well, we are allways ready to defend ourselves! we have become quite good at it over the years....
Originally posted by bunge
What about when Hamas puts down their weapons?
When did they do that?
Hamas has never put down its weapons - not once since its establishment in the late 80s...
Originally posted by Powerdoc
No you are just alone, i have just discovered this thread. I will keep an eye on it
LOL Doc - the two of you should consider marriage