<strong>Also, you completely evaded the actual point I made.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What point? You insist on pretending that the U.N. isn?t anti-Israel. That just isn?t true. What about that world conference on racism that the U.N. held just last year in Durban?
[quote]Originally posted by rashumon: Mmm Interesting so how would you explain the long string of terror and wars brought on Israel by the Arabs that happened before 1967 when the OT were not occupied ?
<strong>... That was 35+ years ago. And you should strike the word "terror" from that. Up until 1967 it was outright war against Israel by Arab nations.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In other words you just want to continue blaming Israel. Any evidence that gets in the way of this, you?ll just ignore. I don?t get you. 35+ years ago? So what? The creation of Israel by the U.N. was over 50 years ago. You have no problem talking about that.
[quote]<strong>It's the only part of the problem that can be dealt with by simple actions. If you pull out of the territory you lessen the credibility of the Palestinian terrorists. Give them no reason to be angry and they will be as racist freaks that just want all Israelis dead. If you pull out and the terror stops then everyone has won.</strong><hr></blockquote>
As Israel has withdrawn the viloence has escalated.
[quote]<strong>... The continuing suicide bombings are evidence that it isn't effective, either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How many suicide bombings were there when Israel occupied more of the West Bank?
[quote]<strong>When one method of keeping peace fails, try another.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That?s what?s happening.
[quote]<strong>Until your government gives back 100% of the Palestinian's territory negotiations are pointless because they will not accept that, and rightfully so. Israel would not accept ~90% of its territory, Israelis would want 100%.
There needn't be negotiations. Give their land back. It's very simple.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It is very simple. When the terror stops the Palestinians get their homeland.
[quote]<strong>When you don't get your land back you fight for it, that's logical, that's the way the world works.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And when you are repeatedly attacked by someone, you fight back. It?s logical. That?s the way the world works.
[quote]<strong>Zionism is racism. The belief that the Jews are entitled to the entire region for their nation is racist. Manifest Destiny was racist and so are Arabs who think that the entire region should be theirs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess I now know why the Durban conference wasn?t on your radar screen. From Webster?s: Zionism n. [Zion + -ism.] Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion, or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for religious or nationalizing purposes.
Where?s the part about being entitled to the whole region?
[quote]What point? You insist on pretending that the U.N. isn?t anti-Israel. That just isn?t true. What about that world conference on racism that the U.N. held just last year in Durban?<hr></blockquote>
[quote]In other words you just want to continue blaming Israel.<hr></blockquote>
I will blame Israel for what she is responsible for and Palestine for what she is responsible for.
Ask me if I think Palestine is morally justified or is innocent.
[quote]I don?t get you. 35+ years ago? So what? The creation of Israel by the U.N. was over 50 years ago. You have no problem talking about that.<hr></blockquote>
Surely we can discuss 1967 but I fail to see how it works as any kind of justification for the present. If you can find an instance of me using a 30+ year-old action to further any of my arguments I'll gladly entertain it.
Times have changed since 1967, Arabs in the region have become far far far more open to the idea of Israel as a state that will last. Before they thought they could just get rid of it. Times have changed, pushing Israel into the sea is no longer the collective goal of Arabs.
[quote]As Israel has withdrawn the viloence has escalated.<hr></blockquote>
Specifics?
[quote]How many suicide bombings were there when Israel occupied more of the West Bank?<hr></blockquote>
I don't know, how many?
[quote]It is very simple. When the terror stops the Palestinians get their homeland.<hr></blockquote>
Terror *had* stopped (relatively) for a long while, yet Israel retained occupation. It's quite easy to justify this by asserting that the only reason for less terrorism is Israeli occupation. Self-fulfilling prophecy.
[quote]And when you are repeatedly attacked by someone, you fight back. It?s logical. That?s the way the world works.<hr></blockquote>
Which is why we're at the impasse we're at now.
[quote]Where?s the part about being entitled to the whole region?<hr></blockquote>
Well, it's right in your own definition:
From Webster?s: Zionism n. [Zion + -ism.] Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion, or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for religious or nationalizing purposes.
If that doesn't include having control over all their holy cities then I don't know what does.
Times have changed since 1967, Arabs in the region have become far far far more open to the idea of Israel as a state that will last. Before they thought they could just get rid of it. Times have changed, pushing Israel into the sea is no longer the collective goal of Arabs.
And how do you know what the collective goal of the Arabs is? Is there a link you can show that states their collective goal? The TRUTH is that actions speak louder than words.
That was 35+ years ago. And you should strike the word "terror" from that. Up until 1967 it was outright war against Israel by Arab nations.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
LOL .. whats the ****ing differance ?
both are means to an end ... the destruction of the state of Israel.
You really enjoy draging this debate down to never never land.... have fun dude ... i certianly am....
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
It's the only part of the problem that can be dealt with by simple actions. If you pull out of the territory you lessen the credibility of the Palestinian terrorists. Give them no reason to be angry and they will be as racist freaks that just want all Israelis dead. If you pull out and the terror stops then everyone has won.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fair enough i pretty much agree with this ... doesn't that just gets your goat ?
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Until your government gives back 100% of the Palestinian's territory negotiations are pointless because they will not accept that, and rightfully so. Israel would not accept ~90% of its territory, Israelis would want 100%.
There needn't be negotiations. Give their land back. It's very simple.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
ROFL ... you just keep getting better ....OK , regardless of weather i agree with this or not, this will never happen. if anything the US won't allow it to happen ... so if you want to maintain very light touch with reality forget about it !
NO government in the world would simply withdraw from an occupied land without negotiations and a replacement government willing to peacefully take power and assure the security and well being of both nations ! isn't that exacatly what the US did after occupying Japan and Germany ?
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
When you don't get your land back you fight for it, that's logical, that's the way the world works.
And yes, I'm not 100% informed on this particular sequence, so I'm trying to learn the facts as I go along so I can get a clearer picture. If Arafat was bent on going after Israel forcefully because Israel wouldn't give 100% of the land back then that makes sense.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
What land back ? the one lost in 48 or the land occupied in 67 ? or perhaps all of what they call Palestine ? you see how complicated this is ? even resolution 242 doesn't specify any specific borders .. thats why humans invented negotiating.... to sort issues out..... offcourse you can always resort to violence .... we'll see who wins then !
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
No, it was the Israeli people. The same people who have had your Prime Ministers killed for being reasonable about the situation.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Saying this makes you a real pathetic demagogue you know that ! by that token you are guilty for JFK's death and for all the shit ...( plenty of it ) the US has done around the world.... Just for your information Barak was far more willing to give in to Palestinian demands then Rabin was , he was elected by a landslide of 57% of the vote to make peace. your ignorance is only matched by your disdain for the Israeli people.
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Zionism is racism. The belief that the Jews are entitled to the entire region for their nation is racist. Manifest Destiny was racist and so are Arabs who think that the entire region should be theirs.
....ACCORDINGLY, WE, the members of the National Council, representing the Jewish people in Palestine and the Zionist movement of the world, met together in solemn assembly today, the day of the termination of the British mandate for Palestine, by virtue of the natural and historic right of the Jewish and of the Resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations,.......
....
THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open to the immigration of Jews from all countries of their dispersion; will promote the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; will be based on the precepts of liberty, justice and peace taught by the Hebrew Prophets; will uphold the full social and political equality of all its citizens, without distinction of race, creed or sex; will guarantee full freedom of conscience, worship, education and culture; will safeguard the sanctity and inviolability of the shrines and Holy Places of all religions; and will dedicate itself to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be ready to cooperate with the organs and representatives of the United Nations in the implementation of the Resolution of the Assembly of November 29, 1947, and will take steps to bring about the Economic Union over the whole of Palestine.
We appeal to the United Nations to assist the Jewish people in the building of its State and to admit Israel into the family of nations.
In the midst of wanton aggression, we yet call upon the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to return to the ways of peace and play their part in the development of the State, with full and equal citizenship and due representation in its bodies and institutions - provisional or permanent.
We offer peace and unity to all the neighboring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all.
I just did , few monthes ago Hizbullah gurillas kidnaped and subsequently killed 3 Israeli soldiers on the Israeli Lebanese border, the UN's peace keeprs were there all the time and even cought the action on their survailance cameras , but didn't bother informing the Israeli army about any of this or trying to prevent it despite this being an ILEGAL unprovoked attack into Israeli soverign territory !
In the past 3 weeks Hizbullah has continuesly attacked Isreal from lebanon with rockets, morters light artilery and has tried to infiltarate several isareli border posts, as a result of this severl civilians were ingured and killed (most of them Israeli Arabs ) but the UN didn't lift a finger to stop the attacks the only thing that actually did convinvce the Syrians to preasure the Lebanese to get the Hizbullah to stop were direct Israeli threats and a firm warning from US secretary of state on his latest visit to Syria !
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
The UN security called for Israel's immediate withdrawal in 1981 with Resolution 497. Christ, you guys must move reeeeeaaallly slow.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, maybe a big part of the problem is that there was no one to negotiate with about giving the OT back. .. Remmeber that before the Oslo accords were signed in 93 the PLO did not accept the right of Israel to exist at all, it has constantly called for its destruction, it was busy carying that policy out and had refused to any negotiantion or compromise with 'the evil Zionist entity' as they called it .. there was literaly no one to end the occupation with....
[quote]The TRUTH is that actions speak louder than words.<hr></blockquote>
You're right, and I think the evidence lies in the fact that the major Arab nations are gearing up to attack Israel nor have they expressed any desire to attack Israel lately.
--
rashumon:
[quote]LOL .. whats the ****ing differance ?<hr></blockquote>
There's a big difference between war and terror. With war you could see them coming. With terror it's surprising. Terror is more cowardly.
[quote]Fair enough i pretty much agree with this ... doesn't that just gets your goat ? <hr></blockquote>
Nope, I like it when people agree and get along. We should sit 'round a campfire and sing songs of joy.
[quote]NO government in the world would simply withdraw from an occupied land without negotiations and a replacement government willing to peacefully take power and assure the security and well being of both nations ! isn't that exacatly what the US did after occupying Japan and Germany ?<hr></blockquote>
Interesting point you make and I must admit I downplayed the need for negotiations too much. 100% of the territory should be given back, at any rate, and I can only pray that Palestine gets a sane and stable government.
[quote]What land back ?<hr></blockquote>
Pre-1967 borders.
[quote]Just for your information Barak was far more willing to give in to Palestinian demands then Rabin was , he was elected by a landslide of 57% of the vote to make peace.<hr></blockquote>
So you're saying that he barely won, in which case it is unclear that the Israeli people want peace above anything else in this conflict. (Although I think electing Sharon at all indicates that peace in the region might be undesireable.)
I'm confused by that chain of events. Rabin assassinated, more peaceful Barak barely wins, Sharon beats him handily.
[quote]How sad and ignorant can you be ? read the Israeli declaration of independance and see for your self what Zionism is !<hr></blockquote>
Where am I to find Zionism in that?
Funny excerpt: "and will dedicate itself to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations." <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[quote]but the UN didn't lift a finger to stop the attacks<hr></blockquote>
And the U.N. doesn't lift a finger when the IDF shoots international journalists, so I don't see what you're complaining about.
If the U.N. comes in to stop the violence they should stop it on both sides.
[quote]Remmeber that before the Oslo accords were signed in 93 the PLO did not accept the right of Israel to exist at all, it has constantly called for its destruction, it was busy carying that policy out and had refused to any negotiantion or compromise with 'the evil Zionist entity' as they called it .. there was literaly no one to end the occupation with....<hr></blockquote>
Why wasn't it done after the formation of the Palestinian Authority?
---
Roger
[quote]No it isn't. Colonization doesn't automatically mean control of an entire region. Where do you get that?<hr></blockquote>
It's also the current prime minister of Israel saying in 1998, "Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them."
There's a big difference between war and terror. With war you could see them coming. With terror it's surprising. Terror is more cowardly.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you really think i give a shit who's comming to kill me - uniformed soldiers or disguised terrorists ?
Also there were plenty of terrorist attacks by Arabs against Israelis before 67...
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Nope, I like it when people agree and get along. We should sit 'round a campfire and sing songs of joy.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Kumbaya ..... nanana kumbaya .....
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
at any rate, and I can only pray that Palestine gets a sane and stable government.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
belive me when I say I do too !
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
So you're saying that he barely won, in which case it is unclear that the Israeli people want peace above anything else in this conflict. (Although I think electing Sharon at all indicates that peace in the region might be undesireable.)
I'm confused by that chain of events. Rabin assassinated, more peaceful Barak barely wins, Sharon beats him handily.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh man, Oh boy ... how lame can you get ?
?
Wining the elections by 57% when the other opponent gets around 36 is a MEGA landslide ! name me one US elections where the margin was that big..... you can rumble on as much as you like but as elections go .... this is considered a LANDSLIDE... OK ?
Now that we got that out of the way...
You got th whole chronology wrong - read on:
1992 - Rabin ( Labor party) elected to PM
1993 - Oslo accord signed with Arafat
1995 - Rabin assasinated by an extreme right wing Israeli , this is probably the most traumatic event in Israel's history to date. Israeli people throughly shocked ! Peres ( Labor No 2 man)replaces Rabin as PM
1996 - Despite the Oslo accords progressing well a wave of suicide bombings strikes in the heart of Israel killing over 70 Israelis in the space of two weeks, In addition the Hizbullah Lebanese militias lauch a major offensive on Israel's northern border
despite Peres's attempts to cool things off his very leftie leaning is percived by most Israelis as too soft on the terrorists
1996 - In subsequent elections Likud's ( centere right party ) candidate Netanyahu wins by an incredibly slim margin over Peres and becomes PM.
1998 - Wye river accord signed with the PA , more land ceded by Israel. Netanyahu loosing support among the people for mooving too slowy towards peace !
1999 - Elections again this time moderate Barak ( Labor again) wins by a landslide (the greatest margin in Israeli politics till then) to become PM.
Aug 2000 - Barak and Clinton offer a final deal to Araft at Camp David, offering the PA 97% of the OT and a compromise on the issue of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees, with the aim of settling the Arab Israeli conflict once and for all. Arafat rejects the deal and starts the Intefada (uprising) using the pretext of Sharon's ( the then head of the opposition Likud party) visit to the Temple mount as an excuse for initiating violence.
Dec 2000 - With the Intefada spiraling out of control and Barak's popularity droping He and Clinton attempt a last ditch attempt in getting Arafat to agree to a deal (at the Sharem al Shych summit in Egypt) , this time offering even more then what was offered in Camp David - Arafat rejects a deal again and instead intensifies the violence.
Feb 2001 - Sharon elected PM by Israelis who cannot forgive Barak for his mishandling of the crisis with the Palestinians.
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Where am I to find Zionism in that?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Are you for real ??? or is it that you simply hit the auto reply button each time to spew more carp ?
Its in there in the bit I pasted there you sure you can actually read ? it says :
'ACCORDINGLY, WE, the members of the National Council, representing the Jewish people in Palestine and the Zionist movement of the world, met together in solemn assembly today........'
These are the heads of the Zionist Congress which is THE body that defines Zionism, in this document they are laying the basis for Israel ... every subsequent law created by Israel's parliament is subject to this document much in the same way as the American declaration of independance is for the US constitution !
Do you understand how this relates to what Zionism is ? need me to spell it out for you again ?
You are clearly choosing to ignore the facts...LOL.
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
And the U.N. doesn't lift a finger when the IDF shoots international journalists, so I don't see what you're complaining about.
If the U.N. comes in to stop the violence they should stop it on both sides.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The IDF doesn't shoot at journalists !
There is absolutly no comparison to be made here !
there are no UN peace keeping troops in the OT therefore the UN can't intervene in what either side does in the Israeli Palestinian conflict.
On the Israeli Lebanese border however there is a UN mandated force who's declared aim is to prevent violence on both sides .. a job which it's clearly failing to do ! this is my point - That the UN is useless in defending Israel's security ! ( Again I had to spell it out to you ... ) Get it ?
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
_________________________________________________
quote:Remmeber that before the Oslo accords were signed in 93 the PLO did not accept the right of Israel to exist at all, it has constantly called for its destruction, it was busy carying that policy out and had refused to any negotiantion or compromise with 'the evil Zionist entity' as they called it .. there was literaly no one to end the occupation with....
Why wasn't it done after the formation of the Palestinian Authority?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who says it wasn't being done ? as I ( and plenty of others ) have stated here before, Israel and the Palestinians were in the midst of the Oslo peace process when the current Intefada started.
Ever since the accords have been signed in 93 Israel has been gradualy withdrawing from the OT
..... the Palestinians had quite a lot going for them before they started going apeshit and bombing Israeli kids in discos .. they were gradually getting their state built, the economy was becoming more independant and less reliant on Israel, more and more Palestinians were being rulled by the PA and as I belive I had said in a previous post if they haden't started the uprising they would probably have had their state by now....
But now after all this violence and death its going to take a lot more to get Israelis to trust them
... And like it or not that has to happen for peace to become a possibility !
Its a shame none of you are bothering to respond to this last one .... especially re all the crap about Zionism being said on the other threads....
Andres I would have really wanted to know what you have to say about the last few posts since it was you who started this thread and you are obviously a reasonable person who knows a thing or two about Israel...
Laila Odeh, Correspondent for Abu Dhabi TV, being shot in leg by an Israeli soldier in Gaza with live ammunition.
"Look, it's a microphone terrorist, get her!"
[quote]Who says it wasn't being done ? as I ( and plenty of others ) have stated here before, Israel and the Palestinians were in the midst of the Oslo peace process when the current Intefada started.<hr></blockquote>
Palestinians say Sharon didn't come back to the meetings after he was elected. It's not as clear-cut as you would make it seem.
[quote]But now after all this violence and death its going to take a lot more to get Israelis to trust them.<hr></blockquote>
Israel has to stop the murders itself before anyone in the international community trusts them, either. It works both ways, Israel isn't inherenly right in this situation.
<strong>There can be no reasonable discussion with people thinking they are entitled to land that isn't theirs and are willing to shed massive amounts of blood to get at it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why did these territories become "occupied" in the first place? Could have been because six arab countries decided to attack Israel simultaneously in an effort to destroy it? Israel somehow survived the attack and in that DEFENSIVE WAR THAT THEY DID NOT START they took the land. Spoils of a war they didn't want. Don't bitch now because the plan to destroy Israel backfired. Idiot.
Besides Israel isn´t interested in making the West Bank and Gaza parts of Israel. That would mean accepting that Israel could loose its status of a jewish state in very few years. Unless of course they would use one of three tactics: Apartheid (which is what we in reality have right now), expulsion of innocent palestinians from the land they have lived on all their lifes or some sort of Endlösung.
<strong>Besides Israel isn´t interested in making the West Bank and Gaza parts of Israel. That would mean accepting that Israel could loose its status of a jewish state in very few years. Unless of course they would use one of three tactics: Apartheid (which is what we in reality have right now), expulsion of innocent palestinians from the land they have lived on all their lifes or some sort of Endlösung.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly.. which is what I was saying all along , its not only that Israel is afraid of changing its demographic structure its also that most Israelis really want peace ... you people don't realise this but the peace process has prompted an amazing economic boom in the 90's. on the flip side these days the economy is in deep recession due to the ongoing hostilities. also Israelis are fed up living in a constant state of war for over 50 years now they really just want to lead a normal life.
As have said before... polls show that over 80% of Israelis still see the only solution to the problem in the establishment of a Palestinian state within the borders of the pre 67 OT ... some border adjustments WILL need to be done( even the Palestinians recognise that ) but the basic solution is clear to all.
The problem is that by launching the Intefada the Palestinians have destroyed the trust which was slowly being built between the nations. many Israelis who used to sympathise with the Palestinian side (like me and most people I know) have hardened their opinions considerably since the violence started, many people really fear that if Israel backs down now ( under fire) terror will never stop and instead just continue until the whole of Israel is turned into a Palestinian state .... Arafat being the terrorist and the liar that he is definitely dosen't help .... and even though many people really want to get back to the negotiations they think Arafat has proven he will not stop his lies and terror until Israel is destroyed. these people think that only once the Palestinians get a new leadership then peace will become possible again.
I personally am not sure but I know for a fact that Palestinians MUST STOP THEIR VIOLENCE before negotiation can resume
The problem is that by launching the Intefada the Palestinians and by Israel not giving their land back and electing a warhawk and war criminal for Prime Minister, both sides have destroyed the trust which was slowly being built between the nations.
And if the Israeli people really do want peace, I pray they oust Sharon with all due diligence.
The problem is that by launching the Intefada the Palestinians and by Israel not giving their land back and electing a warhawk and war criminal for Prime Minister, both sides have destroyed the trust which was slowly being built between the nations.
And if the Israeli people really do want peace, I pray they oust Sharon with all due diligence.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is getting tedious Israel has been giving land back .. Israel (including Sharon) did walk the extra mile and Sharon is NOT a war criminal ! he might be a hawk and a person who views Israel's security needs above the rights of the Palestinians but he is nowhere near as destructive as Arafat is . he is not a pathological liar and he's not sending Israeli children on suicide missions. for the current state of affairs ( war ) Sharon is probably one of the best man for the job ! he is one of Israel's brightest generals ( he had some amazing successes in the Yom-Kippur war on the Egyptian front ).
When the time would come and the Palestinians stop fighting any Israeli PM ( Sharon or other ) will make peace with them and give the land back as you love saying soo much
To use the words of your president- there has to be moral clarity here. Israel did not start the fighting, Israel has complied fully with all of the US's proposals for a ceasefire, Israel has not dragged this conflict for 19 months. this is a calculated attempt by the Palestinian leadership to pressure Israel and the US into greater concessions and to weaken Israel's economy till it reaches a braking point ... Only those who declared the Intefada can stop it, its got nothing to do with Sharon and all to do with Arafat's strategic calculation.
But please stop calling Sharon a war criminal, it just reflects badly on you...
Comments
<strong>Also, you completely evaded the actual point I made.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What point? You insist on pretending that the U.N. isn?t anti-Israel. That just isn?t true. What about that world conference on racism that the U.N. held just last year in Durban?
[quote]Originally posted by rashumon: Mmm Interesting so how would you explain the long string of terror and wars brought on Israel by the Arabs that happened before 1967 when the OT were not occupied ?
<strong>... That was 35+ years ago. And you should strike the word "terror" from that. Up until 1967 it was outright war against Israel by Arab nations.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In other words you just want to continue blaming Israel. Any evidence that gets in the way of this, you?ll just ignore. I don?t get you. 35+ years ago? So what? The creation of Israel by the U.N. was over 50 years ago. You have no problem talking about that.
[quote]<strong>It's the only part of the problem that can be dealt with by simple actions. If you pull out of the territory you lessen the credibility of the Palestinian terrorists. Give them no reason to be angry and they will be as racist freaks that just want all Israelis dead. If you pull out and the terror stops then everyone has won.</strong><hr></blockquote>
As Israel has withdrawn the viloence has escalated.
[quote]<strong>... The continuing suicide bombings are evidence that it isn't effective, either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How many suicide bombings were there when Israel occupied more of the West Bank?
[quote]<strong>When one method of keeping peace fails, try another.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That?s what?s happening.
[quote]<strong>Until your government gives back 100% of the Palestinian's territory negotiations are pointless because they will not accept that, and rightfully so. Israel would not accept ~90% of its territory, Israelis would want 100%.
There needn't be negotiations. Give their land back. It's very simple.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It is very simple. When the terror stops the Palestinians get their homeland.
[quote]<strong>When you don't get your land back you fight for it, that's logical, that's the way the world works.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And when you are repeatedly attacked by someone, you fight back. It?s logical. That?s the way the world works.
[quote]<strong>Zionism is racism. The belief that the Jews are entitled to the entire region for their nation is racist. Manifest Destiny was racist and so are Arabs who think that the entire region should be theirs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I guess I now know why the Durban conference wasn?t on your radar screen. From Webster?s: Zionism n. [Zion + -ism.] Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion, or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for religious or nationalizing purposes.
Where?s the part about being entitled to the whole region?
How does one give that to Israel?
Get the Palestinians to stop killing people. Thats why israel was in the west bank........................
What of <a href="http://www.un.org/WCAR/aconf189-1rev1.htm"; target="_blank">it</a>?
[quote]In other words you just want to continue blaming Israel.<hr></blockquote>
I will blame Israel for what she is responsible for and Palestine for what she is responsible for.
Ask me if I think Palestine is morally justified or is innocent.
[quote]I don?t get you. 35+ years ago? So what? The creation of Israel by the U.N. was over 50 years ago. You have no problem talking about that.<hr></blockquote>
Surely we can discuss 1967 but I fail to see how it works as any kind of justification for the present. If you can find an instance of me using a 30+ year-old action to further any of my arguments I'll gladly entertain it.
Times have changed since 1967, Arabs in the region have become far far far more open to the idea of Israel as a state that will last. Before they thought they could just get rid of it. Times have changed, pushing Israel into the sea is no longer the collective goal of Arabs.
[quote]As Israel has withdrawn the viloence has escalated.<hr></blockquote>
Specifics?
[quote]How many suicide bombings were there when Israel occupied more of the West Bank?<hr></blockquote>
I don't know, how many?
[quote]It is very simple. When the terror stops the Palestinians get their homeland.<hr></blockquote>
Terror *had* stopped (relatively) for a long while, yet Israel retained occupation. It's quite easy to justify this by asserting that the only reason for less terrorism is Israeli occupation. Self-fulfilling prophecy.
[quote]And when you are repeatedly attacked by someone, you fight back. It?s logical. That?s the way the world works.<hr></blockquote>
Which is why we're at the impasse we're at now.
[quote]Where?s the part about being entitled to the whole region?<hr></blockquote>
Well, it's right in your own definition:
From Webster?s: Zionism n. [Zion + -ism.] Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion, or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for religious or nationalizing purposes.
If that doesn't include having control over all their holy cities then I don't know what does.
And how do you know what the collective goal of the Arabs is? Is there a link you can show that states their collective goal? The TRUTH is that actions speak louder than words.
<strong>
That was 35+ years ago. And you should strike the word "terror" from that. Up until 1967 it was outright war against Israel by Arab nations.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
LOL .. whats the ****ing differance ?
both are means to an end ... the destruction of the state of Israel.
You really enjoy draging this debate down to never never land.... have fun dude ... i certianly am....
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
It's the only part of the problem that can be dealt with by simple actions. If you pull out of the territory you lessen the credibility of the Palestinian terrorists. Give them no reason to be angry and they will be as racist freaks that just want all Israelis dead. If you pull out and the terror stops then everyone has won.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fair enough i pretty much agree with this ... doesn't that just gets your goat ?
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Until your government gives back 100% of the Palestinian's territory negotiations are pointless because they will not accept that, and rightfully so. Israel would not accept ~90% of its territory, Israelis would want 100%.
There needn't be negotiations. Give their land back. It's very simple.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
ROFL ... you just keep getting better ....OK , regardless of weather i agree with this or not, this will never happen. if anything the US won't allow it to happen ... so if you want to maintain very light touch with reality forget about it !
NO government in the world would simply withdraw from an occupied land without negotiations and a replacement government willing to peacefully take power and assure the security and well being of both nations ! isn't that exacatly what the US did after occupying Japan and Germany ?
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
When you don't get your land back you fight for it, that's logical, that's the way the world works.
And yes, I'm not 100% informed on this particular sequence, so I'm trying to learn the facts as I go along so I can get a clearer picture. If Arafat was bent on going after Israel forcefully because Israel wouldn't give 100% of the land back then that makes sense.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
What land back ? the one lost in 48 or the land occupied in 67 ? or perhaps all of what they call Palestine ? you see how complicated this is ? even resolution 242 doesn't specify any specific borders .. thats why humans invented negotiating.... to sort issues out..... offcourse you can always resort to violence .... we'll see who wins then !
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
No, it was the Israeli people. The same people who have had your Prime Ministers killed for being reasonable about the situation.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Saying this makes you a real pathetic demagogue you know that ! by that token you are guilty for JFK's death and for all the shit ...( plenty of it ) the US has done around the world.... Just for your information Barak was far more willing to give in to Palestinian demands then Rabin was , he was elected by a landslide of 57% of the vote to make peace. your ignorance is only matched by your disdain for the Israeli people.
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Zionism is racism. The belief that the Jews are entitled to the entire region for their nation is racist. Manifest Destiny was racist and so are Arabs who think that the entire region should be theirs.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How sad and ignorant can you be ? read the <a href="http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/israel.htm"; target="_blank">Israeli declaration of independance</a> and see for your self what Zionism is !
In case you're too lazy to click the link I paseted some relevant sections here
--------------------------------------------------
....ACCORDINGLY, WE, the members of the National Council, representing the Jewish people in Palestine and the Zionist movement of the world, met together in solemn assembly today, the day of the termination of the British mandate for Palestine, by virtue of the natural and historic right of the Jewish and of the Resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations,.......
....
THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be open to the immigration of Jews from all countries of their dispersion; will promote the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; will be based on the precepts of liberty, justice and peace taught by the Hebrew Prophets; will uphold the full social and political equality of all its citizens, without distinction of race, creed or sex; will guarantee full freedom of conscience, worship, education and culture; will safeguard the sanctity and inviolability of the shrines and Holy Places of all religions; and will dedicate itself to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
THE STATE OF ISRAEL will be ready to cooperate with the organs and representatives of the United Nations in the implementation of the Resolution of the Assembly of November 29, 1947, and will take steps to bring about the Economic Union over the whole of Palestine.
We appeal to the United Nations to assist the Jewish people in the building of its State and to admit Israel into the family of nations.
In the midst of wanton aggression, we yet call upon the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to return to the ways of peace and play their part in the development of the State, with full and equal citizenship and due representation in its bodies and institutions - provisional or permanent.
We offer peace and unity to all the neighboring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all.
--------------------------------------------------
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Examples?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I just did , few monthes ago Hizbullah gurillas kidnaped and subsequently killed 3 Israeli soldiers on the Israeli Lebanese border, the UN's peace keeprs were there all the time and even cought the action on their survailance cameras , but didn't bother informing the Israeli army about any of this or trying to prevent it despite this being an ILEGAL unprovoked attack into Israeli soverign territory !
In the past 3 weeks Hizbullah has continuesly attacked Isreal from lebanon with rockets, morters light artilery and has tried to infiltarate several isareli border posts, as a result of this severl civilians were ingured and killed (most of them Israeli Arabs ) but the UN didn't lift a finger to stop the attacks the only thing that actually did convinvce the Syrians to preasure the Lebanese to get the Hizbullah to stop were direct Israeli threats and a firm warning from US secretary of state on his latest visit to Syria !
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
The UN security called for Israel's immediate withdrawal in 1981 with Resolution 497. Christ, you guys must move reeeeeaaallly slow.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, maybe a big part of the problem is that there was no one to negotiate with about giving the OT back. .. Remmeber that before the Oslo accords were signed in 93 the PLO did not accept the right of Israel to exist at all, it has constantly called for its destruction, it was busy carying that policy out and had refused to any negotiantion or compromise with 'the evil Zionist entity' as they called it .. there was literaly no one to end the occupation with....
[ 04-23-2002: Message edited by: rashumon ]</p>
<strong>
Well, it's right in your own definition..</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it isn't. Colonization doesn't automatically mean control of an entire region. Where do you get that?
<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/04/22/jenin.fighter/index.html"; target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/04/22/jenin.fighter/index.html</a>;
[quote]The TRUTH is that actions speak louder than words.<hr></blockquote>
You're right, and I think the evidence lies in the fact that the major Arab nations are gearing up to attack Israel nor have they expressed any desire to attack Israel lately.
--
rashumon:
[quote]LOL .. whats the ****ing differance ?<hr></blockquote>
There's a big difference between war and terror. With war you could see them coming. With terror it's surprising. Terror is more cowardly.
[quote]Fair enough i pretty much agree with this ... doesn't that just gets your goat ? <hr></blockquote>
Nope, I like it when people agree and get along. We should sit 'round a campfire and sing songs of joy.
[quote]NO government in the world would simply withdraw from an occupied land without negotiations and a replacement government willing to peacefully take power and assure the security and well being of both nations ! isn't that exacatly what the US did after occupying Japan and Germany ?<hr></blockquote>
Interesting point you make and I must admit I downplayed the need for negotiations too much. 100% of the territory should be given back, at any rate, and I can only pray that Palestine gets a sane and stable government.
[quote]What land back ?<hr></blockquote>
Pre-1967 borders.
[quote]Just for your information Barak was far more willing to give in to Palestinian demands then Rabin was , he was elected by a landslide of 57% of the vote to make peace.<hr></blockquote>
So you're saying that he barely won, in which case it is unclear that the Israeli people want peace above anything else in this conflict. (Although I think electing Sharon at all indicates that peace in the region might be undesireable.)
I'm confused by that chain of events. Rabin assassinated, more peaceful Barak barely wins, Sharon beats him handily.
[quote]How sad and ignorant can you be ? read the Israeli declaration of independance and see for your self what Zionism is !<hr></blockquote>
Where am I to find Zionism in that?
Funny excerpt: "and will dedicate itself to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations." <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[quote]but the UN didn't lift a finger to stop the attacks<hr></blockquote>
And the U.N. doesn't lift a finger when the IDF shoots international journalists, so I don't see what you're complaining about.
If the U.N. comes in to stop the violence they should stop it on both sides.
[quote]Remmeber that before the Oslo accords were signed in 93 the PLO did not accept the right of Israel to exist at all, it has constantly called for its destruction, it was busy carying that policy out and had refused to any negotiantion or compromise with 'the evil Zionist entity' as they called it .. there was literaly no one to end the occupation with....<hr></blockquote>
Why wasn't it done after the formation of the Palestinian Authority?
---
Roger
[quote]No it isn't. Colonization doesn't automatically mean control of an entire region. Where do you get that?<hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://www.poica.org/casestudies/israelization/"; target="_blank">Read up</a>
It's also the current prime minister of Israel saying in 1998, "Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them."
<strong>Outsider:
There's a big difference between war and terror. With war you could see them coming. With terror it's surprising. Terror is more cowardly.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you really think i give a shit who's comming to kill me - uniformed soldiers or disguised terrorists ?
Also there were plenty of terrorist attacks by Arabs against Israelis before 67...
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Nope, I like it when people agree and get along. We should sit 'round a campfire and sing songs of joy.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Kumbaya ..... nanana kumbaya .....
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
at any rate, and I can only pray that Palestine gets a sane and stable government.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
belive me when I say I do too !
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
So you're saying that he barely won, in which case it is unclear that the Israeli people want peace above anything else in this conflict. (Although I think electing Sharon at all indicates that peace in the region might be undesireable.)
I'm confused by that chain of events. Rabin assassinated, more peaceful Barak barely wins, Sharon beats him handily.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh man, Oh boy ... how lame can you get ?
Wining the elections by 57% when the other opponent gets around 36 is a MEGA landslide ! name me one US elections where the margin was that big..... you can rumble on as much as you like but as elections go .... this is considered a LANDSLIDE... OK ?
Now that we got that out of the way...
You got th whole chronology wrong - read on:
1992 - Rabin ( Labor party) elected to PM
1993 - Oslo accord signed with Arafat
1995 - Rabin assasinated by an extreme right wing Israeli , this is probably the most traumatic event in Israel's history to date. Israeli people throughly shocked ! Peres ( Labor No 2 man)replaces Rabin as PM
1996 - Despite the Oslo accords progressing well a wave of suicide bombings strikes in the heart of Israel killing over 70 Israelis in the space of two weeks, In addition the Hizbullah Lebanese militias lauch a major offensive on Israel's northern border
despite Peres's attempts to cool things off his very leftie leaning is percived by most Israelis as too soft on the terrorists
1996 - In subsequent elections Likud's ( centere right party ) candidate Netanyahu wins by an incredibly slim margin over Peres and becomes PM.
1998 - Wye river accord signed with the PA , more land ceded by Israel. Netanyahu loosing support among the people for mooving too slowy towards peace !
1999 - Elections again this time moderate Barak ( Labor again) wins by a landslide (the greatest margin in Israeli politics till then) to become PM.
Aug 2000 - Barak and Clinton offer a final deal to Araft at Camp David, offering the PA 97% of the OT and a compromise on the issue of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees, with the aim of settling the Arab Israeli conflict once and for all. Arafat rejects the deal and starts the Intefada (uprising) using the pretext of Sharon's ( the then head of the opposition Likud party) visit to the Temple mount as an excuse for initiating violence.
Dec 2000 - With the Intefada spiraling out of control and Barak's popularity droping He and Clinton attempt a last ditch attempt in getting Arafat to agree to a deal (at the Sharem al Shych summit in Egypt) , this time offering even more then what was offered in Camp David - Arafat rejects a deal again and instead intensifies the violence.
Feb 2001 - Sharon elected PM by Israelis who cannot forgive Barak for his mishandling of the crisis with the Palestinians.
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
Where am I to find Zionism in that?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Are you for real ??? or is it that you simply hit the auto reply button each time to spew more carp ?
Its in there in the bit I pasted there
'ACCORDINGLY, WE, the members of the National Council, representing the Jewish people in Palestine and the Zionist movement of the world, met together in solemn assembly today........'
These are the heads of the Zionist Congress which is THE body that defines Zionism, in this document they are laying the basis for Israel ... every subsequent law created by Israel's parliament is subject to this document much in the same way as the American declaration of independance is for the US constitution !
Do you understand how this relates to what Zionism is ? need me to spell it out for you again ?
You are clearly choosing to ignore the facts...LOL.
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>
And the U.N. doesn't lift a finger when the IDF shoots international journalists, so I don't see what you're complaining about.
If the U.N. comes in to stop the violence they should stop it on both sides.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
The IDF doesn't shoot at journalists !
There is absolutly no comparison to be made here !
there are no UN peace keeping troops in the OT therefore the UN can't intervene in what either side does in the Israeli Palestinian conflict.
On the Israeli Lebanese border however there is a UN mandated force who's declared aim is to prevent violence on both sides .. a job which it's clearly failing to do ! this is my point - That the UN is useless in defending Israel's security ! ( Again I had to spell it out to you ...
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
_________________________________________________
quote:Remmeber that before the Oslo accords were signed in 93 the PLO did not accept the right of Israel to exist at all, it has constantly called for its destruction, it was busy carying that policy out and had refused to any negotiantion or compromise with 'the evil Zionist entity' as they called it .. there was literaly no one to end the occupation with....
__________________________________________________
<strong>
Why wasn't it done after the formation of the Palestinian Authority?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who says it wasn't being done ? as I ( and plenty of others ) have stated here before, Israel and the Palestinians were in the midst of the Oslo peace process when the current Intefada started.
Ever since the accords have been signed in 93 Israel has been gradualy withdrawing from the OT
..... the Palestinians had quite a lot going for them before they started going apeshit and bombing Israeli kids in discos .. they were gradually getting their state built, the economy was becoming more independant and less reliant on Israel, more and more Palestinians were being rulled by the PA and as I belive I had said in a previous post if they haden't started the uprising they would probably have had their state by now....
But now after all this violence and death its going to take a lot more to get Israelis to trust them
... And like it or not that has to happen for peace to become a possibility !
Andres I would have really wanted to know what you have to say about the last few posts since it was you who started this thread and you are obviously a reasonable person who knows a thing or two about Israel...
Violence against Israel started essentially from day 1 of Israel's formation. I know this.
[quote]belive me when I say I do too ! <hr></blockquote>
I know you hope for peace in the area, too.
[quote]Wining the elections by 57% when the other opponent gets around 36 is a MEGA landslide !<hr></blockquote>
I'm not the one who said it was a landslide.
[quote]You are clearly choosing to ignore the facts...LOL.<hr></blockquote>
I'm not naive enough to think that nations always act in accordance with their documents.
[quote]The IDF doesn't shoot at journalists !<hr></blockquote>
<a href="http://tv.cbc.ca/witness/mediawar/mediasyn.htm"; target="_blank">Untrue</a>
Laila Odeh, Correspondent for Abu Dhabi TV, being shot in leg by an Israeli soldier in Gaza with live ammunition.
"Look, it's a microphone terrorist, get her!"
[quote]Who says it wasn't being done ? as I ( and plenty of others ) have stated here before, Israel and the Palestinians were in the midst of the Oslo peace process when the current Intefada started.<hr></blockquote>
Palestinians say Sharon didn't come back to the meetings after he was elected. It's not as clear-cut as you would make it seem.
[quote]But now after all this violence and death its going to take a lot more to get Israelis to trust them.<hr></blockquote>
Israel has to stop the murders itself before anyone in the international community trusts them, either. It works both ways, Israel isn't inherenly right in this situation.
<strong>There can be no reasonable discussion with people thinking they are entitled to land that isn't theirs and are willing to shed massive amounts of blood to get at it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why did these territories become "occupied" in the first place? Could have been because six arab countries decided to attack Israel simultaneously in an effort to destroy it? Israel somehow survived the attack and in that DEFENSIVE WAR THAT THEY DID NOT START they took the land. Spoils of a war they didn't want. Don't bitch now because the plan to destroy Israel backfired. Idiot.
We've already been over this, for God's sake, you can't keep land you take in war. U.N. says no and Israel said they would uphold the U.N.'s charter.
And I'm the idiot?
<strong>
We've already been over this, for God's sake, you can't keep land you take in war. U.N. says no and Israel said they would uphold the U.N.'s charter.
And I'm the idiot?
Yes. Yes, you are......................................
<strong>Besides Israel isn´t interested in making the West Bank and Gaza parts of Israel. That would mean accepting that Israel could loose its status of a jewish state in very few years. Unless of course they would use one of three tactics: Apartheid (which is what we in reality have right now), expulsion of innocent palestinians from the land they have lived on all their lifes or some sort of Endlösung.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Exactly.. which is what I was saying all along , its not only that Israel is afraid of changing its demographic structure its also that most Israelis really want peace ... you people don't realise this but the peace process has prompted an amazing economic boom in the 90's. on the flip side these days the economy is in deep recession due to the ongoing hostilities. also Israelis are fed up living in a constant state of war for over 50 years now they really just want to lead a normal life.
As have said before... polls show that over 80% of Israelis still see the only solution to the problem in the establishment of a Palestinian state within the borders of the pre 67 OT ... some border adjustments WILL need to be done( even the Palestinians recognise that ) but the basic solution is clear to all.
The problem is that by launching the Intefada the Palestinians have destroyed the trust which was slowly being built between the nations. many Israelis who used to sympathise with the Palestinian side (like me and most people I know) have hardened their opinions considerably since the violence started, many people really fear that if Israel backs down now ( under fire) terror will never stop and instead just continue until the whole of Israel is turned into a Palestinian state .... Arafat being the terrorist and the liar that he is definitely dosen't help .... and even though many people really want to get back to the negotiations they think Arafat has proven he will not stop his lies and terror until Israel is destroyed. these people think that only once the Palestinians get a new leadership then peace will become possible again.
I personally am not sure but I know for a fact that Palestinians MUST STOP THEIR VIOLENCE before negotiation can resume
The problem is that by launching the Intefada the Palestinians and by Israel not giving their land back and electing a warhawk and war criminal for Prime Minister, both sides have destroyed the trust which was slowly being built between the nations.
And if the Israeli people really do want peace, I pray they oust Sharon with all due diligence.
<strong>May I amend a sentence of yours?
The problem is that by launching the Intefada the Palestinians and by Israel not giving their land back and electing a warhawk and war criminal for Prime Minister, both sides have destroyed the trust which was slowly being built between the nations.
And if the Israeli people really do want peace, I pray they oust Sharon with all due diligence.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is getting tedious
When the time would come and the Palestinians stop fighting any Israeli PM ( Sharon or other ) will make peace with them and give the land back as you love saying soo much
To use the words of your president- there has to be moral clarity here. Israel did not start the fighting, Israel has complied fully with all of the US's proposals for a ceasefire, Israel has not dragged this conflict for 19 months. this is a calculated attempt by the Palestinian leadership to pressure Israel and the US into greater concessions and to weaken Israel's economy till it reaches a braking point ... Only those who declared the Intefada can stop it, its got nothing to do with Sharon and all to do with Arafat's strategic calculation.
But please stop calling Sharon a war criminal, it just reflects badly on you...
[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: rashumon ]</p>
And with both sides taking this idiotic "It's ALL THEIR FAULT!" attitude there will never be peace.