Israel's 'new approach'

outsider · February 21, 2002 11:48AM

<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/02/21/mideast/index.html"; target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/02/21/mideast/index.html</a>;

Things are only going to get worse. It's only a matter of time until all out war and the taking away of gaza strip and west bank. After Israel puts the smack down on the Palestinians (there is no doubt they would obliterate the PA and all other organizations associated with the old Palestine) how would this affect relations in the middle east? Obviously worse but how much worse?

fran441 · February 21, 2002 11:57AM

Are we really surprised? No, I didn't think so. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

ghost_user_name · February 21, 2002 12:10PM

Why should they sit by and get bombed by the PterroristA?

Or are we still pretending that Arafat is not a terrorist?

noahj · February 21, 2002 1:17PM

To all you out there who know how best to deal with the situation in Israel. Get a plane ticket, go to Israel, and fix the problem there. If your ideas are so good, do something about it. I am getting tired of hearing the whining about how they are going to destabilize the region. It is groups like PFLP and the PA that are responsible for most of the aggression agains Isreal. Israel is just making it a very un-profitable thing to attack them. "You attack us, we will retaliate in greater measure." With the history there, I would say that I cannot blame them, and all of my opinions mean just as much as yours from my comfy chair at home.

ghost_user_name · February 21, 2002 1:48PM

You all know that the number of rocket attacks from the PA/Hammas/Hizbullah (sp?) has increased a great deal. Turns out that PA/Hammas/Hizbullah have gotten good at making "amateur" rockets that the launch into the cities.

Or did you think the Israelis were the only ones doing the attacks?

ferro · February 21, 2002 1:56PM

"JeBus Frikin ChristMas"....

Cant these people get along!?!?!?!?!

stay on your own dam side...!

I dont think these people would stop fighting if GOD himself came down...

this would be the perfect place to land a mile-wide comet... thats probably the only way they would stop fighting...

------------------------------------

outsider · February 21, 2002 2:50PM

It's mostly religious intolerance. It took christians hundreds of years to get along with jews, you'd think the muslims would have also.

artman @_@ · February 21, 2002 3:21PM

PA/Hammas/Hizbullah

powerdoc · February 21, 2002 3:35PM

[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:

It's mostly religious intolerance. It took christians hundreds of years to get along with jews, you'd think the muslims would have also.<hr></blockquote>

yes and it's take also hundreds of years simply for that christians can get along togethers (catholics and protestant : and it's not finish in some area ...)

ferro · February 21, 2002 3:39PM

Poverty, Corrupt Goverments, Tyrants the Religous Nuts dont help the situation either...

------------------------------------

outsider · February 21, 2002 3:41PM

Word up to that.

agent302 · February 21, 2002 8:42PM

Lest we forget, it wasn't a muslim who assassinated Yitzhak Rabin. Fundamentalists on all sides are equally bad.

torifile · February 21, 2002 11:20PM

[quote]Originally posted by Artman @_@:

PA/Hammas/Hizbullah<hr></blockquote>

Why? Not that I'm saying that you can't think that, but I just wonder what most people's rationale is for having a particular stance in this issue. I'm biased in my feelings and I'll openly admit that. How about someone explain to me the other side? (I'm being completely serious. I never hear the other side of this issue. Scott? Can you fill me in?)

ghost_user_name · February 22, 2002 1:02AM

I'm just 100% anti terrorist. Arafat is a terrorist. Ergo I am anti Arafat. I'm anti Hamas, Hizbullallahtoldmetokillthejewbecausewearethenewna zis.

syn · February 22, 2002 4:32AM

Arafat is not a terrorist. He's a nobel peace prize for god's sake. He's not responsible for extremist groups.

The problem is we have a vicious cycle. Palestinans will throw stones, the Israel army will reply with F16s and assault tanks. Then it keeps on getting worse.

Hate has been breeding in the region for 50 years, there's very little that can be done. Calling Arafat a terrorist is certainly not the thing to do. Nor is keeping him under house lock .

If Sharon is so big and powerful and mature, why doesn't he realise sending colonies in palestinian territory is only going to make things worse?

matsu · February 22, 2002 5:49AM

Uhh no. Arafat was a terrorist, is at best soft on terrorists, and most intelligent people understand that he operates with a kind of tacit co-operation with terrorists. He's slime. I wouldn't let him give me a cab ride, forget about negotiating a peace.

powerdoc · February 22, 2002 6:18AM

Arafat was a terrorist in the past, several years ago with the OLP. Time have past and things where getting better (there were many fluctuations but i resume), and after the treaty of Oslo he receive the nobel prize with Rabin. Rabin was a great man of peace, but unfortunetaly the israelians extremist kill him. We don't know if he was still alive if the situation will be different, but his death was certainly not a good thing.

Arafat is not directly responsible of the terrorism, but he is indirectly. I think (dont ask me proofs, just my feelings) that the terrorism was a good way for him, to make pression under the Israelians governement, in order to obtain more. he is not himself a terrorist or their chief but he did nothing in past in order to stop them definitively. Terrorist groups where a sort of dogs, that Arafat should take in jail if he want to please Israel, or get out if he want to obtain something. Unfortunately the dogs rules their owns ways now, and aren't any more under Arafat's control.

Some israelians leaders also have a great responsabilities in that conflict, with the politic of colonies. In order to obtain more territories or more thing, the israelians governement built colonies inside the palestinian territories. Colonies are a bad things for the resolution of the conflict because :

- Israelians , quit the colonies and betray the people who use to live there (people who where encouraged to live there by their governements)

- Colonies stay there, but it's impossible to make a palestinian state that looks like Emmental's cheese (the cheese withs many holes you know). The constitution of a palestinian state imply the deplacement of many colonies.

So for me, there is two or three points who prevents the peace :

- terrorism : terrorism need nowhere and is not an excuse for any good goal. One of my favorite heroe is Gandhi , no violence but he obtain what he wanted to have, the indepandance of India.

- colonies : the politic of colonies was bad in my point of vue, you have to remove them in order to make a palestinian state, but it would betray the people who live there.

- Jerusalem : the holy city for the three majors religions of the world. Should stay to the jews ,but perhaps should have a special status for the mosque like the vatican has;

And to make peace you need two things :

- an israelian governements who want to make the peace

- and a palestinian who want to make the peace and have the power to do it (he must have the power to control his own state).

As a conclusion, i only see (some of many) problems and have no solutions to it

outsider · February 22, 2002 7:01AM

Palestinans will throw stones, the Israel army will reply with F16s and assault tanks.

I didn't know 'stones' was french for bullets. Interesting.

ghost_user_name · February 22, 2002 11:15AM

[quote]Originally posted by SYN:

Arafat is not a terrorist. He's a nobel peace prize for god's sake. He's not responsible for extremist groups. <hr></blockquote>

HOLY ****ING SHIT THAT'S THE FUNNIEST ****ING THING I EVER READ IN MY LIFE! ROTFLMAO! CRAP YOU ARE ****ING FUNNY!

ghost_user_name · February 22, 2002 11:20AM

[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:

 Palestinans will throw stones, the Israel army will reply with F16s and assault tanks.

I didn't know 'stones' was french for bullets. Interesting.<hr></blockquote>

No you have it wrong. "Stones" is French for "high quality explosives" and also "bomb children and launch rockets" as well as ?bomb bus full of people going to a wedding?.

I think that French anti-Semitism is showing itself here.

timo · February 22, 2002 11:50AM

[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:

I think that French anti-Semitism is showing itself here.<hr></blockquote>

Look who's throwing stones now.

Israel's 'new approach'

Comments