Israel is doing the right thing by killing Hamas leaders

Who balances the US as a nuclear power now?

 

It would be easy to defend the position that we aren't imperialistic because we don't acquire territories, but that is only part of the definition.

We have, I dislike to admit, and on numerous occasions, acted imperialistic through exerting undue economic or political influence over others. This wouldn't bother me if it was honestly for the right (maybe I should say 'correct' ) cause, but it has been self-serving at times.

 

Despite our past disagreements, I agree with you whole-heartedly here.

I think it is only a matter of time, before determined Muslim terrorist groups or nation (Iran or anyone who can speak Korean) acquire a WMD. Then this precarious balance Israel has with her nukes/American support vs. all the Arab nations will be totally upset. How can Israel "strike back" against a Palestinian or Al Qaeda nuke?

Now is the best time for Israel to arrive at a peace settlement. In the future, she may not get one if she tried...

 

regardless whether its diamond cutting, software, arms, tourism, phosphate, etc. etc. etc., all we know is that Israel is not self-sufficient yet.

once Israel IS self-sufficient, however, it will be even more difficult for America to keep Israel on a tight leash, or any other type of leash, and that scares me even more.

who's going to stop them from building more settlements? who's going to stop them from selling AWACS to China? who's going to prevent even more human rights abuses and military adventures in the name of "security"?

once again, i say, NOW is the time for America to act to resolve this quandry. Tomorrow it may be too late. I'd rather American guidance resolve the issue peacefully and permanently than leaving it to some trigger-happy fanatics itching to erase Israel off the map with WMD...

 

It's funny you keep mentioning American and Israel's responsibility to fix this, and you don't address the pesky little issue of Arab terrorism, hatred, poverty, etc. Have you considered that maybe a significant number of Palestinians do not want peace?

 

Keep dreaming. Get back to your anti-semetic UK newspapers.

 

Is that your response to everything??

Either you call someone Anti-Semitic or tell them they want another Holocaust in which the jews are driven into the sea.

Come up with an argument for once.

The point of most of my comments in this thread are that US interest in Israel is a net negative. The Israeli government and military are so dependant on support that they would go bankrupt without it given their enormous military budget and budget to sustain the occupied territories.

If you cut support, Isreal will realize it cannot financially support outer settlements in the Occupied territories and peace will come VERY quickly. That is almost an assurity. Israel still has hundreds of nuclear weapons that will enable them from being attacked.

They will get out of the occupied territories and then they will secure only their own borders. Then if they don't want to let Palestinians in the country, they don't have to and they won't have to financially strain themselves defending the settlements and paying to subsidize those who live in the settlements.

Hmm....America wins by limiting global hate and creating a solution, Israeli's win (except for Likud and Franchise 2001) by getting peace within their borders, the Palestinians (who are muslim and christian) win and my pocketbook wins because I get to stop giving a handout to Israel as well as the countries that play nice with Israel and get a handout like Egypt and Jordan. Then again, it must be my hidden goal of pushing the jews into the sea

 

I really doubt this scenario. If America cuts funding, then the extra land that provides security will be even more important to Israel. I would expect them to give up even less in any proposed land-for-peace deal. America pushes them to give up more and convinces them to do so by providing security.

When the peaceful factions among Palestinians win decisively, then peace will be brought about quickly, because Israel will once agani elect another Ehud Barak who will give many concessions. We just have to wait for the Palestinians to elect a Barak, so to speak.

 

Mr. Clutch,

Don't you see that there are certain radical elements in both Palestinian society as well as Israeli society?? If we say that peace is on hold every time there is an incident, then we are letting them win??

By continuing the peace process we show the people a future without terror, and they will cling to it and squash those factions. But return missle attacks and other engagements will simply drive more to become extreme. We cannot give in to terror, and that is what we would be doing. The peace must be decided and go on regardless.

 

Aren't we having fun today!?

Ok F.D. Khan, lets play into your argument of economics. I am going to keep this short since I have class coming up soon.

One question for ya...

If the US sends money to Israel, so Israel can purchase planes/guns/tanks/ammo, and Israel agrees to buy these from US companies. Then isn't it really a good thing for the US since its putting that money right back into the american economy?

 

Yes, there are extreme elements on the Israeli side, but the situation is different. Since they have to work through a democracy their voices are essentially muted. Sharon is supposed to be very extreme, but how different is he from Barak? He advocates a free Palestinian state, he has negotiated cease fires, he started taking down some outposts. I can't think of any substantive way Sharon is different from Barak, other than styles of negotiating or the strength of military response.

I strongly support Israeli retaliation. A state that does not defend itself against attacks during peace negotiations is a weak and dying state that invites more attacks and makes this process longer. But I also agree a military solution is not possible, and Israel will have to return to the bargaining table.

 

No you see in a perfect world there would be no killing. And you say well pele, we dont live in a perfect world.

Well you see when people evolve on day to the point when we dont think its ok to kill people, or its ok to be racist then we will be ever closer to a perfect society.

Thats why its not ok to kill people Dadakota. Because it gets you nowhere. It only brings more pain and its a horrible cycle. And people like you that thinks its ok to KILL someone. Just think about what your saying KILL KILL KILL, but its not ok to legally do a drug or some other twisted logic you have then it will only take longer for us as a society to get to the point where it will be a better place to be.

So yeah Dadakota just kill all of the Jewish people or arab people whoevers side your on and everything will be better.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/08/28/mideast.gaza/index.html

Well, you don't see this everyday. 3 missiles launched at a donkey cart!

<I>(CNN) -- An Israeli helicopter gunship fired on a donkey cart in Gaza late Thursday, killing a Hamas militant and wounding three other Palestinians, Palestinian security sources and witnesses said.

The cart was traveling in a residential neighborhood in Khan Yunis in southern Gaza when it was struck.

Witnesses said the Hamas member was traveling alone in the cart when it was struck by three rockets fired from an Israeli helicopter.

...
</I>

 

My prayers go out to the donkey & his family. It's always sad when innocent animals get caught in the middle.

Sincerely,

The President of PETA

p.s.
Either the IDF has some really wimpy missiles, or that's the toughest wooden cart ever. You'd think 1 would have done the job.

 

They were probably using their Hydra (yeah!) rockets, in which case you rarely see just a single rocket used.

 

You've got a wooden cart traveling in a residential area, and you use [probably] 3 times the necessary ordnance. Look, I'm glad the Hamas guy is dead, but overkill like this, and the collateral damage it causes, is one of the main problems I have with the Israeli retaliatory strikes.

 

If that is your view of efficient allocation of capital, then I feel sorry for whoever you work for.

That and the money is sent to subsidize their government. They recieve military aid on top of direct funds. So they get funds, and a great deal of military equipment virtually free.

Thats a nice setup.

 

Seems like self castration is more enjoyable than debating with you F.D. Khan. Something relevant to this thread.

France to Israel: No evidence Hamas, Islamic Jihad are ''terror groups''

25-08-2003


France expressed objections to placing Hamas and Islamic Jihad on the European Union(EU)'s list of "terror organizations", according to an Israeli report on Monday.

Israel's Yediot Aharonot website reported that diplomatic advisor to French President Jacques Chirac, Maurice Gourdault-Montagne, told theIsraeli ambassador in France, Nissim Zvilli, during a weekend meeting,that there is no evidence that these two organizations are "terror groups."

"If we find that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are indeed terror groups opposed to peace, we may have to change the EU's stand," Gordoconveyed. "However, we mustn't limit ourselves to one, clear cut, position."

The meeting between Zvilli and Gordo, said to be Chirac's right handman, took place in the framework of Israeli lobbying efforts to includethe two Palestinian groups in the EU "terror list".

Some two months ago, the EU added the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestinian to its list, enabling European countries to freeze these groups' assets, and impose othersanctions on them.

France, according to Gordo, is opposed to placing both Hamas and Islamic Jihad on the EU list, and believes Israel should deal with its"terror threats" through political, rather than military, channels.

In addition, with regards to Yasser Arafat's status, the French,according to the report, refused to accept the United States' and Israel's position. When Arafat was discussed in the meeting between Zvilli and the French official, the latter expressed the "legitimacy"of Arafat as opposed to the lack of it regarding the Palestinian Premier, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen).

In the meantime, Israeli Foreign Ministry officials expressed anger and outrage at the French stance regarding the two palestinian groups."Such an attitude is one of criminal negligence. It refuses to assume responsibility over the war against terror and thus legitimizes -terrorism."

http://www.albawaba.com/news/index....lang=e&dir=news

This is sickening.