Probably. The legal system in this country affords that people are innocent until proven guilty. I always think the best of people until proven otherwise. I'll consider results, but not interpretations. I don't think that's true in Roman Catholicism. I always thought that the cause was basing interpretation of the words of God on a humanistic, self-centered reference regardless of environment. Of course the church lady would just blame Satan. Rock03: I agree. They lost their houses because they had no money, and they had no money because they couldn't work, and they couldn't work because they were arab. I was trying to say that if I couldn't pay for my house, I would expect to be kicked out, too.
United States put the Ba'ath Party in Power in Iraq which Saddam was one of the leaders of. United States put Qaddafi into power. United States supports Mubarak with billions of dollars. And regardless as the saying goes if you don't stand up for injustice your committing injustice yourself. Why does Saudi get money when they jail people in their country who have a different interpretation of Islam as they do? And the biggest b*stard of them all, Sharon, is in power with the blessing of the United States. and the the record numerous Palestinian 'resistance' organizations have Christians in them too. Edward Said isn't Muslim. Hanna isn't Muslim. The list goes on.
I have never said (at least on this board) that Israel should be destroyed. I don't see why it was made but I don't think destroying it now is all that moral either. Palestinians could not have accepted the deal. It wasn't a state. They had to airspace, no connecting road to two parts of their country, no water, no military, a buffer zone between them and jordan, no jerusalem, no right of return, etc etc etc. that wasn't a truce or a settlement that was a bully beating the crap out of a lil kid and than taking his money and spitting on his face. US hasn't condemned it but hundreds of other countries including Britain have. here
Palestinians want their own freedom. I think every American can understand that. However, the means of achieving this goal, i.e. suicide bombers, does not help their cause AT ALL....especially after the WTC and Pentagon attacks. So, you will garner little more than being branded terrorists using those tactics. It doesn't matter that this is their only way to fight back. It is an act of terror regardless of the reasoning which noone should condone. If the Palestinians don't understand that, then that is their problem and they will continue to suffer until they do realize these are dead end methods. The fact remains that no serious talks can be achieved until the violence stops. Granted, Israel...in my opinion...is not being fair about the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state. Israel should not be the one dictating to the Palestinian people what the conditions are. They should be arriving at these decisions without tipping the scales and keeping them in balance. This is the only way a peace accord will work and Palestinians will be happy with a sovereign state of their own. I do not believe Israel to be an innocent victim in all this as apparently our government does. Why is it that our government almost seems to unconditionally support Israel regardless of what they do...I do not fully understand? Could it be the Jewish influence in politics and the media here in the US? Probably somewhat. Could it be we have been suffering our own terrorism at the hands of suicide bombers for decades? Probably. Could it also be the suffering and plight of the Jewish people in the Holocaust where they were almost wiped out and lost 4 million of their own....which most Palestinians seem to disregard as myth? Could be. Could it be the US doesn't believe in dictatorships as we always end up in a spat with any dictator(e.g. Saddam, Omar, Castro, Hitler, etc.) and their state who try to exert their influences outside their state using violence? Could be. Could it we our into protecting our own interests in the Middle East and protecting democratic societies? Could be. Both sides are victims in this and they feed off of each other's violence. Until the violence and war drums cease, there will be no peace. So, how do we get to that point where the violence is in check. I think a peacekeeping force between the two sides is the only way. If one side attacks the peacekeeping force, then they get whatever comes to them and it will be seen as an act of war against those countries represented in the force. The peacekeeping force would not be there to play favoritism to one side or the other. They would be there to keep the peace and ensure both sides are treated equal and fairly. One thing I am SICK AND TIRED of hearing from Israel is how they don't want a peacekeeping force and can protect themselves. That is NOT what the peacekeeping force would be there for. They would be there to protect the Palestinian people as much as they are there to protect Israel. Israel is, in my opinion, coming across as the selfish, arrogant part of the problem in not allowing a peacekeeping force. How our government does not see this is beyond me? I mean....an international peacekeeping force will be in Afghanistan when the Taliban and Osama's terrorist network are defeated there. Why? To protect the government and people from another vacuum of violence which may arise. The fact is if they want billions of dollars and to be re-built...they will have to accept the force there in Afghanistan. Israel must accept a peacekeeping force in order for headway to be made in this process....i.e. keep the peace. Why is that so hard to see? If a peacekeeping force from the UN or whereever is the only way to quell the violence, then it should be done. I believe this is the only way to get anywhere because this "eye for an eye" garbage is going to continue for another 250 years. Then and only then...can talks begin. And, these can't be talks of Israel dictating what the Palestinians can and cannot have such as boy pointed out in his last post. Israel cannot bulldoze their way into Palestinian areas and park their tanks there to do as they please. Then, expect to talk peace. This policy of Israel shooting young kids for throwing rocks at tanks....come on...what is that? Maybe shoot a warning shot but kill a kid with a bullet in the head over a rock thrown at a tank? That is not right. Although I don't agree with the suicide methods, I am not in their position to agree or disagree. Israel is pushing these people to great despair while limiting their opportunities at life and freedom. Apparently, it is so bad that they would rather die and kill Israelis than continue to live in their hell. They have to be severely distraught to believe that suicide killing of themselves and others will lead them to paradise. No God is going to reward you for committing suicide....especially with malicious intent to kill others who are unaware bystanders. Get the peacekeeping force in there....then if one side attacks that force or circumvents it, then that side will suffer the consequences from the international community. That is my two cents....like it or not. Surf
<A HREF="http://palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20011205230912497">Hamas Fighters Clash With PA Police in Gaza City</A> <i> GAZA CITY, Palestine: Members of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, have reportedly clashed with Palestinian police outside the home of the group's spiritual leader, whom Palestinian forces placed under house arrest Wednesday. Thousands of supporters are gathered outside the Gaza City home of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, demanding his release. Gunfire erupted early Thursday between Palestinian fighters and PA police involved in the hours-long stand-off. Sheikh Yassin's detention came as President Bush again called on Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to do everything in his power to prevent future attacks. On Wednesday, visiting Norwegian Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik gave President Bush a note from Mr. Arafat appealing for more time to prove he is trying to quell the violence. The Norwegian prime minister also says Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon assured him Wednesday that he has no intention of continuing Israeli retaliatory strikes on Palestinian targets for Saturday and Sunday's suicide bombings. In Washington, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a non-binding resolution urging Mr. Bush to cut ties with the Palestinian Authority and Mr. Arafat unless they move to halt the violence. The resolution passed by a vote of 384-to-11. Meanwhile, another Palestinian group, Islamic Jihad, claimed responsibility for a Wednesday suicide bombing that wounded three bystanders outside a Jerusalem hotel, and killed the bomber. An Islamic Jihad statement says the bomber intended to detonate his explosives inside the hotel, where Israeli leaders were reported to be meeting. </i> What is the next thing that happens after the detention of Sheik Yassin? With the large protests against that action, Arafat is stepping into risky territory. Mango
Excellent post Surfguy. Could not agree more. Mango, do you think Arafat is in the same situation as Musharaf was a while back? A minority in Pak wanted to do away with Musharaf, but it looks like he is going to survive. Arafat, I think is in the same kind of predicament. A vocal minority might want him out of power for detaining Sheik Yassin, but I am guessing (hoping) that somehow he survives this incident.
Surfguy: Inserting a peacekeeping force into an area where neither side wants them is the surest way to create a disaster. If a Western and/or American peacekeeping force were to be inserted, then the Palestians would undoubtedly attack it. And if it were to come to blows with the IDF the result would be catastrophic. The Israelis would themselves attack any non-Western peacekeeping force. Any peacekeeping force inserted would come under attack by one or both sides, and that wouldn't accomplish much in the way of peacekeeping. The only way - the only way - for there to be a peace-outbreak in the ME would be for Arafat to actually arrest and neutralize Hamas leaders (and not release them two days later) in order to stop the flow of suicide bombers. We can't pressure Israel into making a deal when the Palestinians are sending suicide bombers at them. I guarantee you that until that happens there will be no peace. Like it or not, that's the way it is.
Treeman, We CAN'T pressure Israel into making a deal?????? Now i'm sure ANY country in the world would love to recieve close to $3 billion dollars in money and military aid annually without any pressure to act in our best interests. If our support of Israel is one reason for a backlash in the middle east against America, then we need to put pressure on them to find a peaceful solution or cut off their money. You talk about a strong percentage of the Muslim world holding animosity towards America; well the main reason is Israel's treatment of the Palestinians and their actions in the Occupied territories. I say we Tell Israel to find a solution, or we'll cut off your money...we're sick of this b.s. And not some solution such as the Barak Plan which basically makes Palestine a police state with no structure and a puppet state of Israel. My thoughts are that Israel wants to settle less than the palestinians because they want to continue to expand their size and help their incoming population.
F.D. Khan If the Palestinians are still sending suicide bombers into Israel, then any attempt to exert financial or political pressure on the Israelis would be counterproductive, to say the least. If israel is given a choice between recieving our aid and allowing the suicide bombings to continue (which is what would happen), and not recieving our aid but stopping the suicide bombings, the choice will be easy for them: they will give us the finger and go after Hamas. I still think that the accusation that we "support" Israel implies that we support Israel, and that is simply untrue. Every govt in the ME with the exceptions of Syria, Iraq, and Iran receives substantial US military and economic aid every year - the Palestinians included. The argument that we "support" Israel in a war against the Palestinians is not only unfounded in reality, it's flat dangerous. If we removed all economic and military aid to Israel, we would have no leverage at all with them, and they would still be a relatively rich country able to defend itself. They do not need our assistance, but who are they to turn it down? It is not vital to their national survival. The point is that they'd get along just fine without our "support", and removing it would simply remove our only form of leverage over them. The day we withdraw our "support" from Israel is the day that they are unleashed to deal with the Arabs in whatever matter they see fit, regardless of what we think. And if you think that the Israelis want peace less than the Palestinians, you are sorely mistaken. Just look at who has violated every ceasefire for the past 8 years. That is exactly the kind of thinking that has gotten them where they are today.
When did I say that? I just think you're naive if you think that peacekeepers will solve the problem. Virtually everyone who has ever looked at the situation agrees that sending in unwanted peacekeepers would be disastrous. When peacekeepers are unwanted by both sides, they are regarded as invaders by both sides and treated accordingly. That is just common sense. Excuse the f* out of me for pointing out the obvious.
The situation seems to be that Hamas and the Palestinians are sending suicide bombers because they are not free, do not have their own state, retribution for a killed individual or frustration in their apartheid land. Essentially a Palestinian self governed state would cure those ills. Instead of fighting the end result of the problem, let us solve the problem itself and destroy these roots of violence. It seems its a chicken before the egg scenario, and just as Palestinians are sending suicide bombers, the Israeli's are sending helicopters and secret police and bulldozing homes. I'm sure the Palestinians would say that they want Israel to stop building in the occupied territories and stop the violence and give them the right of self-determination to stop the suicide bombings. Unfortunately there is too much pride and ego on both sides to come to an amicable conclusion it seems...
And I'd like anyone to explain to me how they can realistically see a peace-outbreak until Hamas stops sending suicide bombers? Anyone??? Stopping the suicide bombings is a prerequisite to peace talks. They cannot go forward until Israel is assured that the Palestinians will negotiate them with serious intent. If you believe otherwise, then I've got some swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you...
Is that entirely true? Aren't some of the Palestinian organizations sworn to destroy Israel? BTW, why doesn't anyone ever mention the money we send the PLO? If it is determined that PLO leadership is behind some of the terrorist attacks, should Israel become irate that we have 'supported terrorists'?
F.D. Khan: I agree on the roots of the problem, and I personally don't really blame the Palestinians for doing what they're doing. They are fighting back the only way they can. But I'm simply being realistic in saying that the Palestinians are at a distinct disadvantage in terms of their negotiating position, and it is up to them to make the first gesture towards peace. I also agree that the settlements must stop and be rolled back. The occupation will end as soon as the Palestinians stop the attacks; the IDF does not enjoy occupying their land, and will pull out as soon as it's safe. There are of course other issues that must be worked out, but there can realistically be no way to achieve those goals unless there is a cease fire, and there can be no cease fire until the Palestinians stop blowing up school buses and shopping malls. Israel would probably even stop killing Hamas leaders if the Palestinians would just make a real move to reign in Hamas.
Arafat and members of the PA said they wanted a peacekeeping force. Israel are the ones who did not. So, to say both sides don't want them is false. If Israel cannot be persuaded into accepting them, then they lose support which they probably don't care too much about anyway. I said "I forgot...you know everything" because you were sitting there saying "THE ONLY WAY...THE ONLY WAY". It sounded to me like you were being arrogant and a know-it-all. So, excuse the f#*k out of me right back. And, I don't think your in a position to say someone is naive for something that hasn't been worked on and tried yet. Whatever....I'm done here.
The Palestinians want an Arab peacekeeping force under the UN banner. I'm sure the Israelis would accept a Jewish peacekeeping force under the UN banner... But everyone who has seriously studied the situation - every nonbiased analyst - agrees that peacekeepers are a bad idea unless both sides accept them. Historically, it's a really bad idea to send in peacekeepers unless both sides accept them. That's just a major no-no in international political/military affairs, and everyone knows it. And the Palestinians cracking down on terrorists and stopping the suicide bombings is the only way. It sucks, but there it is for those of us who live in the real world.
There have been recent interviews with Arafat and members of the PA saying they would accept an American peacekeeping force. The Israelis have said they don't want one but, if they were persuaded to accept one, then I don't see why they wouldn't accept an American one as well. Even so, the US has said they don't want to put an American peacekeeping force there. The more Arafat cracks down on Islamic Jihad and Hamas...the more in danger he is of being murdered by his own people who support these groups. Then, where would the situation be? Who would there be to broker peace then? As much as Arafat may try to reign in the militants, he has failed to do so thus far. Even if he arrests the top militant members, there are always more suicide bombers ready to strike who participate in those organizations. When Arafat fails and with Israel proclaiming this is his last chance, then I fear it's going to get even worse. Also, once they broker a peace(if they ever do), who is going to enforce it? Surely, some third party is going to have to get involved. Are we supposed to take it, at face value, that peace means no more militants or terrorists of any kind will strike a blow to the peace accord? That's like everyone trusting the Afghani govt will hold together without a stabilizing presence to ensure it does...which there will be.
If both sides were to agree to accept an American peacekeeping force, then I don't think we could refuse. Even though our troops would undoubtedly come under attack from radical elements from both the Israeli and Palestinian sides, I'd still support it for the simple reason that both sides accepted it under the assumption that it would allow the peace process to get back on track. Our troops would likely conveniently (for the two combatants involved) draw Palestinian fire that would otherwise be directed at the Israelis, which would alleviate their security concerns somewhat... But I still say that it is extremely unlikely that any peacekeeping force would be used until both sides agreed upon it. To think otherwise is unrealistic. As for Arafat reigning in the militants, he simply has no good choices right now. Yes, they will turn on him, but if he doesn't then the IDF is going to kill him themselves this time. They are out of patience with him. He has not tried "110%", as he put it, to reign in the militants because he has known that they'd turn against him. In the past he has made arrests and then quietly released the detainees a couple of days later, so it's misleading to say that he has tried to deter them. This time, he has a choice of running afoul of Hamas or running afoul of the IDF. That will be a surprisingly easy choice for him to make, because the IDF will certainly kill him, while Hamas could possibly try and fail... His main problem right now is that he doesn't totally control the militants - particularly Hamas and Islamic Jihad. He really can't be counted on to totally reign them in. But he does know who most of their operatives are and where they are, and he can arrest most of them if he tries. A demonstrated effort would probably safe his life on the IDF side. But if he doesn't get his act together and put his money where his mouth is - and pronto - then he is going to be a memory in a few weeks. And unfortunately, he probably is the Palestinians' best hope for peace (and survival) at this point. That is not encouraging.
It seems to me that if you have one side saying "Yes we will accept a peacekeeping force" And the other side saying"No we will not accept a peacekeeping force" Then you have to wonder which side really wants peace. And treeman, I watch a lot of political talkshows and have yet to see one analyst say a peacekeeping force was a bad idea. I've seen plenty of people representing the government of Israel who say they don't need one, but thats not the same thing is it? Not saying your lying or anything, but maybe you should back that point up with a link. I'd like to see there reasoning on this issue.
