Perhaps you should go look up who, historically, the Semitic peoples are before you throw around the term "anti-Semitic." Arabs coming from the regions of Jordan, Syria, and Palestine are all Semitic people too actually. Jews and the people of Israel are not the only Semitic people, so by declaring people who oppose Israel as being anti-Semitic, you are being foolish and incorrect.
Remind me, what are the concessions that the Palestinians are offering to make again? Oh yeah, they are offering to stop the violence. Even if you view this as a legitimate negotiating tactic (it seems to me that doing so is to say that terrorism is an acceptable way to get what you want), they have not managed to do it. They are also not willing to put provisions in any agreement that would give Israel recourse if the violence continues. So basically, the Palestinians want the Israelis to make humongous concessions while they offer hollow promises in return. I can't understand why Israel wouldn't go for that.
it's not just a one-off. israel is america's single greatest recipient of foreign aid, period. they get billions EVERY YEAR. we're fighting a global terrorism which is in large part a consequence of our support of a brutal regime in Israel. you ask all the arab terrorists out there why they fight, and 99% of them will tell you because America supports israel. and while we're putting out the terrorism fire in afghanistan and iraq, Israel starts new ones by bulldozing more arab homes, building more settlements, killing more arab children, etc. While we're destroying their arab enemies, they're busy selling arms to our other enemies all over the world. While we're busy trying to keep our fragile middle east alliances in order to protect israel, israel is busy rejecting our peace proposals. but hey, who am i to call such thoughtful actions backstabbing? i've got plenty of jewish friends who feel the same exasperation with Sharon and his idiotic policies. you cannot honestly say that things are better now with the intifada than in the days of Rabin and Peres. and frankly i think it is high time that America made this clear to israel. is what i say anti-israel? yes (though i prefer to call it anti-sharon). but it ain't propaganda. it is simply common sense.
terrorism is a tool often used by those who have nothing else. exactly what sort of leverage would the palestinians have if they actually stopped the violence? israel occupied and kept them in refugee camps for 50 years. only BECAUSE of terrorism has the world paid attention and israel been forced to the negotiation table. you know it, and they know it too. if they stop their attacks, israel would just go back to the way it was, and they can kiss palestinian statehood goodbye. if one day some brutal fascist/communist country took America over, i would want the right to resist as well. and nothing they say will make me stop attacking them and everything dear to them until every last one of their soldiers is kicked off of American soil. it's that simple. sure you might say that what's to guarantee the palestinians won't continue to attack israel once granted concessions. i can't say they won't, because there is so much hatred there. but if this problem is ever going to be solved the first step MUST be taken by the party in the wrong and the only party capable of giving ground: Israel. Stop aggressive zionism. Give back the occupied territories. Restore the Palestinian state. Damn it, if they can't do all three, then at least do ONE! Do SOMETHING! That's all Rabin did, and peace was given a chance. I, for one, believe that the Palestinians can be convinced that peace is the better choice. Yet for a people who have experienced so much suffering, the Israelis sure have little sympathy for others. 19th Century America --> American Indians = 20th Century Israel --> Palestinians Yeah, let's tell Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, and Geronimo to all stop resisting and just go quietly back to their reservations while we're butchering their children and burning their tepees, for the sake of American "security". That's going to work real well.
It is nice that Israel has an opninion but ... Who cares what the rest of the world thinks. We're on top, we make the rules now, so f* em... You are either with us or against us ... No Worries, I'm sure you'd like nothing more than the US to attack Israel, as it is painfully obvious that you hate that state with a passion, but I think you misunderstand the situation here. The "Roadmap" proposal is just that: a proposal. It is not an ultimatum set by Bush to the Israelis, and refusing to accept it will not in any way damage US-Israeli relations. Let me repeat that - Israeli refusal of the US-proposed peace plan will not damage US-Israel relations in any way, shape, or form. Why? Because it is not an ultimatum sent to a government that we are angry at for supporting terrorism. Now, I'm sure that in your wacky world where the US is the greatest threat to world security and the government is planting chemical weapons in Iraq right now as "evidence", Israel is also a terrorist nation, and the Palestinians are simply persecuted angels. But your wacky little world seldom coincides with the one the rest of us live in, so... There's nothing but smoke and mirrors to anything you have posted in this thread. Typical. Oh, and nice job leaving off the last line from my quote there. Changes the context completely. Bravo, you've successfully lied again. Er, almost.
Lil, Its nice that you think that Israel is the party in the wrong and Israel is the party that can back down, but you said yourself that there is no assurance that they will get anything out of it. You put yourself in the place of the Palestinians and felt you would do what they are doing. First, I wouldn't. I would attack Israeli SOLDIERS, not strap a bomb to myself and head off to blow up a mall with a bunch of INNOCENT CHILDREN standing around, or even blow up a frickin school bus. Second, nevermind. I was going to ask what you would do in Israel's position, but you would probably come up with something about making concessions. In the real world, you have to give something to get something, and the Palestinians aren't willing to give anything. You want Israel to make concessions, that is what they did before. Have you heard of the Oslo accords. The Palestinians turned their backs on concessions and started the intifada. If I were in Sharon's place, you're damn right I wouldn't be making concessions. I would be sending a Mossad agent after Arafat. I would be hunting down every last member of Hamas, IJ, Hizbollah, etc. I would be building a wall around the Palestinian areas and disallowing movement in and out. There would be no more suicide bombings in Israel and thus no retaliations in Palestine. I would let the Palestinians sit in their villages stew for all of eternity. To legitimize terrorism is something I will never do. You are the kind of person that allows al Queda, Hamas, et al to exist in this world. Without them and their supporters, the rest of the world would be better off.
i'm actually not at all offended by this. i'm cool with what you say here. and if i were to put myself in israel's shoes, Sharon's way (and i guess your way?) would appear at least as tempting as Rabin's way, at least in terms of visceral satisfaction, knowing we're hitting back, etc., especially once the conflict and deaths escalate. but nonetheless, i just wanted to get across the point that the palestinians have no concessions left to make... their only leverage lies in their ability to inflict terror. they have no army with which to attack VASTLY SUPERIOR israeli troops, and certainly no money with which to try and build one. they have no vital strategic interests or powerful political lobbies with which to gain international allies... an analogy would be: i've got 1 cent. i want to buy 3 widgets from you totaling 1 cent. my penny is indivisible and it is the only one i've got. however, once i give it to you, i'll be left with nothing, and there's no guarantee i'll get the widgets, and vice versa. isn't the usual business procedure (in the absence of a guarantor), for you to give me 1 widget first, and then i pay you, and then you give me the remaining widgets? Simple confidence building? Israel not only refuses to permit any guarantor (including the U.S.) to meaningfully mediate and enforce the exchange, but it dictates the terms of the exchange to be payment first only, and the goods will only be delivered when Israel is good and ready. Would YOU do this deal on EBay? I suspect that if the Palestinians did have the resources to fight a regular war, targeting only soldiers, they would. In the mean time, they resist in the only way they can, asymmetrically ... terrorism is the only option for people who have no other options. what else have the palestinians got to fight with, rocks and spit balls? (of course, this way, you get shot anyway...) These people aren't doing it for money or malice, they're doing it for their homeland and their people, albeit tarnishing their own image and giving their lives in the process... i guess you could say that they would have the moral high ground if they stopped terrorism and gone the non-violence route... but look where non-violence has gotten tibet in the last 50 years. i mean i'm not a historian, but i don't recall a magnanimous move by israel to grant palestinian statehood in the 30-40 years without an intifada? palestinians will never stop resisting until they get their homeland. and the only effective way they can resist is through terrorism. to stop terror is equivalent to giving up resistance. so unless you believe there can be no peace ever in palestine, then it is a logical corollary that Israel must yield first before terrorism can stop.
Lil, I was reading along in some agreement with what you wre saying about Israel's difficult 'negotiating' stance, until I got to your part that supports terrorism. Isn't your logic the same that obl uses to attack us? Sorry, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Terrorism against innocent civililians is always wrong. In this instance (other than being morally wrong as it always is), the terrorism works against the goals of the Palestinians. The Israelis will become more difficult to negotiate with because they will trust the Palestinians even less. Is that your solution? And FWIW, I consider your support of terrorism disgusting.
99%? What poll is that from? Prove it. obl did not even mention the Palestinian cause for years...until he realized it's political capital. He got pissed when we put troops close to Mecca because we're 'infidels'. Because many Arabs/Muslims remember the Crusades like they were yesterday. I think we should pressure Israel to move forward towards peace to help all parties involved (including the US), but don't spread unfounded assumptions.
This BBS has spun out of control when IDIOTS and FOOLS can post lies in thread titles, and then spew anti-Semitism unchecked.
A couple of points. 1) The nature of OBL terrorism and PLO terrorism are fundamentally different. The PLO and other Palestinian terrorists targets almost exclusive Israel, an aggressor nation presently illegally occupying its lands. OBL targets Westerners the world over. The PLO publically states clear finite objectives, the establishment of an Palestinian nation and Israeli withdraw from occupied territories. OBL just does it for his hatred of America and the West's policies in the Middle East and against the Muslim world, and he will not stop until the West is totally defeated. One is fighting for the restoration of one's homeland. One is fighting for the destruction of another civilisation. To equate the two is quite simply wrong. 2) To accuse me of supporting terrorism is foolish. I find it as disgusting as you or anyone else would. For that matter, I find war disgusting too. When the interests of different nations (or coalitions) clash, and the conflict cannot be resolved, there is a continuum of actions which can be taken, depending on the relative strengths of the two parties: 1) Economic sanctions - when one side is economically dependent, often economic sanctions alone will force one side to concede. 2) War - when one side is militarily comparable, war will force the loser to concede. 3) Guerilla action - when one side is militarily disparate, the weaker side, can resist underground, like the Vietcong or Afghans vs. USSR. 4) Total asymmetry - when one side is militarily non-existent, the weaker side, can then take two paths: a) passive (nonviolent) resistence b) active (terrorist) resistence And the Arab states and Palestine has tried EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE OPTIONS over their history. Nothing has worked. In fact, their infrastructure is so utterly destroyed and their resources so utterly exhausted now that they cannot conduct anything besides resistence at the lowest level. And since nonviolent resistence (protests, moral entreaties) obviously don't work, now they rely on the last resort, suicide bombing. Is that right? NO! But do you honestly expect them to lie down and die? THEY WILL RESIST IN ANY WAY THEY CAN. Nearly all of these types of conflicts result in "innocent civilian" casualties, whether direct (bombs) or indirect (starvation, disease). America's sanctions against Iraq killed far more "innocent civilians" than all the Palestinian suicide bombers combined. In fact, Israel has killed far more Palestinian "innocent civilians" than the other way around. So what's your point? I wrote this entire thing to point out that there can be hope for a just PEACE IN THE HOLY LAND, and you say that I endorse terrorism? thanks a lot, man. p.s. i don't have numbers on how many terrorists actually became one because of Israel. all i know is that in EVERY arab terrorist testimony I've ever read in the media (5 or so), Israel is ALWAYS listed as a main concern. For every muslim friend I know (20 or so), Israel's brutal regime is always a burning issue. I'm not saying that is a significant sample, but I think the point is that it is COMMON SENSE! Are you saying that Israel's barbaric policies DOESN'T encourage terrorist activity?
No, Ramit is the liar, and you are the fool. The thread title is a lie, just as the AP story title is a lie.
Your powers of deductions are lacking. Please explain to us all why I hate Israel. The point of my post was the sheer stupidity of the "we make rules now" and the "with us or against us" statements.
your statement has four errors: 1) one, you don't realise that arabs are semites too. 2) two, you don't realise that we aren't talking about jewish people, but about the Israeli state (specifically the Sharon administration) 3) three, we're not spewing anything unchecked. we're making reasoned arguments and articulate responses in the face of plenty of challengers. 4) and four, as No Worries pointed out, there is not a single lie in the thread title dude, that's a lot of mistakes in just one sentence...
I have never engaged in a transaction where the goods were delivered, before payment was rendered. I can't go to the grocery store, get 4 eggs, and then say if these work out for me then I will come back and give you the money and pick up my other 8 eggs. They would laugh in my face. I guess you missed Oslo. Was it a great deal? Probably not. But it was an offer of statehood, one that occured before the intifada. What the Palestinians (and apparently you) don't seem to be getting is that Israel is never going to give in to terrorism. Every suicide bomber only hurts their cause. The stated goal of Hamas is the total destruction of Israel. They are exactly the same as al Queda. I have never seen any evidence of this. Israel has killed more Palestinians than the other way around, but I would bet the vast majority were not innocent civilians. The fact is that Israel targets terrorists, the terrorists hide among the civilians (with the help of the same civilians, I might add), and so some civilians die. It is called collateral damage. The Palestinians, on the other hand, deliberately target innocent men, women, and children. No matter what the circumstances, that is always wrong. I have suggested many times a road to Palestinian statehood. You leave the borders as is. The builing of new settlements ends now. The IDF pulls out of all Palestinian territory. A total cease fire is called. The first incidence of terrorism results in the forfeiture of the Palestinians statehood and all future claims to same. If the terrorists goal is truly statehood, then they will get it. Otherwise, there is no recourse but the annihilation of said terrorists.
What if Israeli's commit the violence. Statistically, they have been much more prone to violence. This includes the settlers, individuals and the IDF. I think that if the Palestinians are given their own state it is very fair for them to have to control extremist groups, and that they should be held accountable for violence against Israel if they have a state. But the fact is that Israel has continued to build settlements and has shown a reluctance to agree to tear them down even though they are illegal as stated by the UN. The Oslo accords failed because of the Israeli unwillingness to give up the settlements and allow the Palestinian's true independance, and not a police state.
Beggars can't be chosers. Isn't it obvious that Israel doesn't have to give up a thing. They are negotiating from a position of strength. Palestine will probably never get a better deal than Oslo. If that wasn't good enough, they are proper fooked.
False. The Oslo accords failed because Yasser Arafat is a terrorist and many Palestinian leaders are terrorists. If Israel had torn down the settlements, would the terrorists become nice folks? I don't think so. Clinton and Barak got a nice dose of reality when Arafat rejected peace based on questionable reasons.
