Deck, what is so "extreme" about Israel? I think justice demands either the arrest or death of Arrafat. Targeting civilians is cowardly and should never buy a spot at the bargaining table.
I should really disable that in this forum. I made that signature four years ago when I was sure the Rockets would make the playoffs. However, my ideology is inherently optomistic as well.
Dude, you did a double misspelling, so now I don't know if you just don't know how to spell or if you are going with the joke!!! The "Wild Bill" rule is to only replace the "i" with the "o"! Ts ts ts... And no, I will DEFINITELY never turn mosogynistic .
The thread was meant to start a discussion on the merits of taking Arafat out. The guy undermined Abbas, did nothing to quell Hamas or Jihad, and is basically the single biggest roadblock to peace in the region. He has been a lier, and a terrorist supporter, meanwhile lining his own pockets with millions of dollars meant to go to his starving people. I see no reason why he is even still considered a leader, marginalizing him is not working, maybe killing him and moving on to a better leader who will work with Israel is the answer. I personally don't really know...but it seems that he and Sharon are destined to keep the killing of innocent people going....and it sickens me. I would not be sad if Sharon and Arafat both died in their sleep tonight. As for the rest of the Arab world would ignite...BULLCRAP, they are all saber rattling and no action. If they really wanted to help the Palastinians, why not grant them land in their own countries...or BETTER YET, why not actually ALLOW the Palastinians to become citizens of those countries..... Bunch of Hypocrits. DD
I replaced the Y with an O I wanted to leave the "istic" untampered to mimick the word used I wasn't sure of the rule, but inferred that using an O for and I was the primary component. The Y as the second letter was a mistake.
Wild Bill, I never said Israel was extreme, I said it's current government is. And I despise Arafat. I agree that targeting civilians is cowardly and shouldn't earn a spot at the bargaining table. Neither should the killing of a militant leader in a teaming civilian area that often kills and injures dozens of innocents to take out one or two targets. And that happens over and over again... as does the bombings of innocent Israeli civilians. I don't know what the answer is. Like Northern Ireland, this may take a decades long crisis before it's resolved. Decades more than we have seen already. But, unlike Northern Ireland, our acquiescence to the current Israeli government's actions is putting a big fat bullseye on our country. Bigger than it already would be. This is not, by any way, shape or fashion, a reasonable Israeli government. As long as it is in power and there is a US administration who does next to nothing to reign it in, this country is being put at even greater risk. In my opinion, anyway. God knows, it's a bloody mess. This is why I usually don't post in Israeli/Palestinian threads. I visited Jerusalem when it was still Jordanian. I've watched the area for a long time. It's a nightmare that is getting worse as time passes, not better, as N. Ireland seems to be. The passions run deep, and almost any stance you take on the subject will be blasted by someone. I don't know how it will ultimately turn out, but I think I can say, without reservation, that the current governments of Israel, Palestine and the US will not be witness to it's solution. In my opinion, all three are doing more harm than good.
Let me change the tone & direction of the thread. <i>Why isn't Arafat exiled?</i> DaDakota, If you are suggesting that Arafat be replaced, then who are you expecting to be the new <i>leader</i>? Dahlan? Marwan Barghouti? Mahmoud Abbas? Jibril Rajub? Sheik Yassin? Rantisi?
An excellent question, Mango. That would make far more sense. I wonder what the reaction would be to that? Not good from many Palestinians, but the moderate ones afraid to say anything might be secretly pleased. Anyone who replaced him, however, would have to be a very brave and wily guy to survive. And he would have to be seen as someone who wouldn't "sellout" for peace and someone with credibility among the general Palestinian public. And how do you get Arafat to leave? As to who takes him, I think that could be arranged. Getting him to leave without killing him could be a tough nut to crack. I can't see him doing it with Sharon in power. It would be hard to find 2 people who hate each other more than those two. Arafat might leave given the right circumstances and pressure, but I can't see him going if Sharon is doing it.
Exactly. Why not kill any elected leader we don't like and then b**** and moan about how undemocratic the middle east is. After we've taken care of Arafat maybe we can go after Chirac.
IF you start the assassination game where does it end . . .. . Why not assassinate that guy in N Korea [oh yea . . he got a bomb] Rocket River
Friendly, you have said you want Israel to hold on to the land they captured. What is to be done with the Palestinians who will soon be equal in numbers to the Jews as immigration to that war zone dries up? Ehtnic cleansing? One secular state with Jews and Arabs as equal citizens? What other alternatives are there?
So all the bombings and killings are just saber rattling? I guess if the US really wanted to help the Palestinians we should just give them part of our own country... how about New Jersey? You so silly.
Timing, They can be citizens in this country...no problem. They can NOT be citizens in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Oman, Egypt...etc..etc...etc... And no I don't think exiling him will work, I think he has to be killed, a permanent solution to a nasty problem. Too late for exile, just end it already. DD
Let's get some Israeli input. ********** How to Say No and Win Praise from Bush Sharon Saved from Threat of Peace By ALUF BENN It used to be said about Yitzhak Shamir that he wanted to wake up in the morning and see newspaper headlines saying, "The threat of peace has been lifted." All the signs now point to Ariel Sharon approaching the accomplishment that the former Likud premier dreamt of. The "window of opportunity" for renewing the peace process, opened after the war in Iraq, has been slammed shut. The efforts for a political deal have once again given way to the routine of managing the conflict, with Israel controlling the territories, and all the settlements in place. U.S. President George Bush has returned to the White House from his Texas vacation a much weakened leader, struggling to save his job. The lightning victory in Iraq has turned into the mud of occupation, regime chaos and mass terror attacks. The 2004 election campaign, which up until recently looked like a stroll to a second term, now looks like a battle for political survival. Internal polls taken by the Republicans show Bush could lose to the Democratic Party's candidate. While trying to avoid the fate of his father, a single-term president, Bush has to fight and win on two fronts. On the foreign policy front, he has to show achievements in Iraq and even Afghanistan, to justify his "global war on terror." Domestically, he has to keep his power base. Both political parties in the United States have already decided that their strategies will be to preserve their traditional voter base instead of trying to court floating voters. To win the elections, Bush needs the money, energy and organizational capabilities of his friends in the Christian right and the Jewish community, strongholds of support for Israel. And to win in Iraq he needs help from his Arab friends. Only the Arab states can grant legitimacy and economic encouragement to the puppet regime that is going up in Baghdad. The big winner apparently will be Syrian President Bashar Assad, who will win a "presidential pardon" for his support of Palestinian terror and Hezbollah, in exchange for helping rehabilitate trade with Iraq. The Israeli defense establishment's hopes that the American cannon in Iraq would turn on Syria, Hezbollah and Iran were overly optimistic. As far as the administration is concerned, the results of that accounting will be keeping a safe distance from the Israeli-Palestinian crisis and de facto shelving of the road map, even if they continue paying lip service to it. A weakened Bush will find it difficult to pressure the Jews and Arabs, whose support he needs. He will also be careful not to take the risk of a political effort that has so far given him only failure and disappointment. The caution is already blowing from the White House. The number of trips to the region by senior officials has dropped, and there are no signs of any urgency in their handling of the collapse of the hudna. Washington's ability to "press the Palestinians" to fight terror is pretty limited. After all the stories about "aggressive messages" and "threats to Dahlan," the administration has been forced to change direction and try to save Abbas' collapsing government so at least he remains with the hollow title. It is difficult to believe that anyone expects "the terror infrastructures to be dismantled." The administration will make do with a request to the sides that they not exaggerate their escalations, to stay out of the way of the American efforts in Iraq. As far as Sharon is concerned, it is difficult to think of better news. The prime minister may have spoken of a Palestinian state and an end to the occupation, but his proposals to the Palestinians have been like an attempt to buy a Kfar Shmaryahu mansion for the price of a Amidar housing project apartment, and to demand the house be renovated before the negotiations even begin (and even that doesn't have a majority in the Likud central committee). In practice, Sharon has done everything possible to rebuff political dialogue, repeatedly toughening his conditions for opening the talks while deepening Israel's grip on the territories. Just like Shamir--but with one big difference. Sharon understood that he shouldn't clash with Washington, and a polite no is better than a determined one. That's how he managed to rebuff "the threat of peace" and even win praise from the Americans. Aluf Benn writes for Ha'aretz. url
