|
1: Why on earth would they do that? Tell me the last time a country got invaded, beat back the invaders, took some land and then had to give it back??? In any case, even if they did that it couldn't happen without both sides reaching an agreement. Again, Arafat was offered everything he asked for and still rejected it.
2: There are stupid people on both sides.
3: I'm not sure what 'rederic' means. Let's assume 'rhetoric'. Perhaps: but I'm a great believer in peace; I just see no way for that to happen in the current context. I alos belive that if someone says they want to kill you then that is a really stupid time to lay down your weapons and hold out an olive branch.
Whatever it is that the Palestinians want they won't get it unless and until they acknowledge the right of Israel to exist and to unequivocally denounce violence. Oh and to stop threatening to drive all jews into the Med.
You are correct that this is not an easy issue and nor is a solution going to be easy to come by. If I had my way I'd move Israel completely out of the Middle East. So what if there are some ancient sites and some holy places. Are they really worth all the trouble to keep them (for either side)? Not going to happen, of course since I can't see where else they could go. Maybe north of Perth in Oz or New Mexico? Peace is a nice dream.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
Bassam Saoud wrote: The statement that peace has not been achieved because Palestanians keep
rejecting proposals is simply false
I have seen nothing that supports that. Nor the rest of your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
Bassam Saoud wrote: Those peace loving Israeli governments need some love.
Your remark comes off as cynical, and so I suggest the following:
1 - When an Arab country offered to make peace with Israel (Egypt, Jordan), the offer was accepted immediately.
2 -
The day the Arab countries lay down their arms, peace with Israel would break out immediately.
The day Israel lays down their arms, their would be genocide.
Point 1: Historical
Point 2: From their own lips.
Peace has always been available, but there are those making a good living, power, and prestige, so long as they maintain the status quo. What would the leadership of Hamas or Hezbollah do if there was peace? This is not unique to the middle east - I recognize such in my own country, as well - those who's business is fomenting and/or maintaining unrest. It's a lucrative business.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: When an Arab country offered to make peace with Israel (Egypt, Jordan), the
offer was accepted immediately
1- Syria offered peace in return of Israel giving back the golan heights. Its been more then 25 years now.
2- There are geo polical reasons behind peace with Egypt and Jordan. Even though those agreements brought peace to those countries, many argue that the regimes used western support to oppress their people. But that does not change the fact that Israel proved that they can strike a peace deal. I do believe that peace can be achieved. It is not an Israeli problem that most arab countries are ruled by dictators
W∴ Balboos wrote: The day the Arab countries lay down their arms, peace with Israel would break
out immediately.
The day Israel lays down their arms, their would be
genocide.
What do you think is happening today in Palestine? I do agree though that with the current hatred, both will use force and terrorism for political gains
W∴ Balboos wrote: Peace has always been available, but there are those making a good living,
power, and prestige, so long as they maintain the status quo. What would the
leadership of Hamas or Hezbollah do if there was peace? This is not unique to
the middle east - I recognize such in my own country, as well - those who's
business is fomenting and/or maintaining unrest. It's a lucrative business.
Hezbollah/Hamas would be out of business.
|
|
|
|
|
Bassam Saoud wrote: 1- Syria offered peace in return of Israel giving back the golan heights. Its been more then 25 years now.
Actually, they didn't offer peace, but return of the Golan was a condition to begin talks. Similar, in fact, to a global offer made by the Arab world, to the effect: Go Back To 1967 Lines and we'll think about recognizing your existence (and right to exist).
In both cases, it amounted to demanding what should be the point of negotiation as a stipulation for initiation of negotiations. The latter case reminded me (at the time it was proposed) of a child crying 'DO OVER" in some sort of game. Take an example where the peace offer was sincere: Egypt made peace and they got back the Sinai afterwards.
The best common-place analogy I can think of would be a store insisting upon charging you to enter so you could buy things from them. That (at least to me) is craziness.
My (fantasy) belief is imagining if the region accepted Israel peacefully from the beginning. All of that oil wealth and Israeli technical know-how working together. What an awesome place that could have been to live! Instead, I'm left shaking my head.
Going back to an earlier remark (the canon-fodder concept). Prior to 1967, Jordan controlled the West Bank. There was no call for a palestinian state. Neither was there one afterwards, so long as Egypt could be relied upon to sacrifice its children whenever someone stirred up a war.
With the current situation on the ground, I see only one route to a settlement: if the entire Arab world made peace with Israel - and they lived in peace for a reasonable period of time - then a lot of problems about secure borders (etc.) would go away (or certainly be greatly simplified). The problem really is their going about the whole thing backwards.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Actually, they didn't offer peace, but return of the Golan was a condition to
begin talks. Similar, in fact, to a global offer made by the Arab world, to the
effect: Go Back To 1967 Lines and we'll think about recognizing your
existence (and right to exist).
This is simply not true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beirut_Summit[^]
The summit called israel to withdraw its forces from all the Occupied Territories, including the Golan Heights, to recognize "an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital" in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees. In exchange the Arab states affirmed that they would recognize the state of Israel, consider the Arab-Israeli conflict over and establish "normal relations" with Israel.
W∴ Balboos wrote: My (fantasy) belief is imagining if the region accepted Israel peacefully from
the beginning. All of that oil wealth and Israeli technical know-how working
together. What an awesome place that could have been to live! Instead,
I'm left shaking my head.
I personally dont care about Israeli know how. I am more intersted in ensuring the safety of minorities in the middle east. As a minority myself, I think that conflict is used by radicals to advance their theology.
W∴ Balboos wrote: With the current situation on the ground, I see only one route to a settlement:
if the entire Arab world made peace with Israel - and they lived in peace for a
reasonable period of time - then a lot of problems about secure borders (etc.)
would go away (or certainly be greatly simplified). The problem really is
their going about the whole thing backwards.
You got that since 2002. See my first comment. You need to ask Israel whats up with that.
|
|
|
|
|
Bassam Saoud wrote: The summit called israel to withdraw its forces from all the Occupied
Territories, including the Golan Heights, to recognize "an independent
Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital" in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip, as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees. In exchange
the Arab states affirmed that they would recognize the state of Israel,
consider the Arab-Israeli conflict over and establish "normal relations" with
Israel.
And I can only suppose that you think that was a fair and equitable offer to Israel.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, they didn't offer peace, but return of the Golan was a condition to begin talks. Similar, in fact, to a global offer made by the Arab world, to the effect: Go Back To 1967 Lines and we'll think about recognizing your existence (and right to exist).
Strikingly similar to the Israeli position of 'stop resisting our land-grabbing and we'll think about talking to you' (re Palestine, not Syria). Don't try to claim lack of trust and trustworthiness is only on one side.
My (fantasy) belief is imagining if the region accepted Israel peacefully from the beginning.
That was never going to happen when it was imposed from outside and when the locals were displaced to make way for incomers. Would you accept it peacefully if you were kicked off your land to rehome, say, Chechens and give them a country where you used to live?
|
|
|
|
|
BobJanova wrote: Would you accept it peacefully if you were kicked off your land to rehome...
Myself I wouldn't like being kicked out of some place without cause.
But I wouldn't start killing children to protest it either.
|
|
|
|
|
I commend to your reading the Wikipedia article on the "Hebron Massacre".
The lesson between the lines is that the hate is not related specifically to an Israeli state (this happend ca. 1929), but to mindless religious hate.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: I commend to your reading the Wikipedia article on the "Hebron Massacre".
I was responding to exactly what I quoted. And when I say "I" I mean exactly that.
|
|
|
|
|
BobJanova wrote: Strikingly similar to the Israeli position of 'stop resisting our land-grabbing and we'll think about talking to you' (re Palestine, not Syria). Don't try to claim lack of trust and trustworthiness is only on one side.
Other than your use of the term "Strikingly Similar", there's nothing strikingly similar about it. As for land-grabbing and kicking out? That was started by the Arabs (under GB's rule) - check out the Hebron Massacre. It has nothing to do with the creation of a state - it has EVERYTHING to do with a non-Arab state.
The non-Arab state has two major flaws:
1 - It's not Islamic, therefore, unacceptable (see what happened to formerly-non-Islamic Lebanon).
2 - It was (and remains) a very bad example in the region. Religious tolerance, rights for women, a truly democratic government, freedom of speech, technological contributions to the world, and all that other Filthy Western Influence. Actually, to use your phraseology, strikingly similar to Lebanon - before the civil war.
Land Grabbing? Kicked Out? The original proposed border for Israel (via UN) were those delineated by land that was purchased from the locals (i.e., Arabs) prior to the sale of land in that territory be (religiously) forbidden to non-Muslims. As noted in an earlier post, all this camel-turd about a palestinian state didn't exist when Jordan held the West Bank. This I know, not only from the tracks of history, but via personal experience.
In 1969 I was in Israel, particularly Jerusalem. I was actually even offered a job in one of the shops by its Arab owner. In other words, we drank sweet minty tea, dark coffee w/cardamom, and got along famously. They still had nationalistic aspirations. What were they? "You will See! Next year this will be Jordan, again!" That was a Universal opinion. They identified as Jordanians, and NOT the cynically (and amazingly recently) created nationality of palestinian.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
"He started it" is not a valid argument once you pass kindergarten. The illegal settlements and annexing of land by the 'security wall' is clear land-grabbing happening in the present day. (One could argue about political use of building permits and planning law as well, but settlements and the wall are unarguable.) The original proposed border is fine (even Hamas said they'd be fine with an Israel that big a few years ago, at least to the extent of an 'extended ceasefire' which if you read between the lines is acceptance), and if that's all Israel was then there would be no problem.
I'm sure giving the land outside Israel back to Jordan/Egypt would go down just as well as a new Palestinian state.
If you don't see the 'take our position before we'll even begin to negotiate' about the Israeli position on militants (hard to control them when Israel stops you having a functional state), Hamas's charter etc then there is no hope for you. The current Palestinian position is an unfortunate emulation of the Israeli one and a product of the fact that when they did 'compromise' (with Arafat), they got nothing and Israel continued to take more of their land.
(As an aside, I'm pretty surprised this is still in the Lounge.)
|
|
|
|
|
The "He stated it" statement has nothing to do with my point, which you apparently missed entirely. Spelling it out for you, the point is that the hostilities pre-date the existence of the State of Israel.
The wall - which is mostly barbed-wire and electronics - despite what the BBC wants you to see - was erected for the purpose of reducing the bombing of families eating in restaurants. Guess what? Another point you choose to ignore is that since the building of the wall, the bombings in Israel have dropped dramatically (the recent attack was via the Egyptian border).
You claim Hamas said it was 'fine with Israel' - how is the world do you neglect the text of their charter, calling for destruction of Israel? What type of fairy-land argument are you trying to make?
Best of all (or should I say, most obnoxious?) is your continued turning of the facts on-their-head. Israel has already offered Arafat everything he could possibly hope for, including part of Jerusalem - and it wasn't good enough. They have given land, even clearing out their settlements - and all it has received in return is thousands of rockets and mortars. The self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza is rife with corruption, murder, and intimidation. The hardship is of their own making (Arafat, their beloved leader, stole $Billions). As for settlements? A ten-month moratorium had no results . . . until it was about to expire. Then the PA was willing to consider talks - but only for more moratorium. Sorry, kids, that's not how things work.
How would England handle someone lobbing rockets and mortars into Birmingham? Historically, you fire-bombed cities, like Dresden. By contrast, the Israelis dropped leaflets warning civilians an attack was imminent. No wonder you hate them so much! Something more current? These misunderstood friends of yours set off some bombs in your Underground - so you shoot an innocent unarmed electrician to death. The whole EU seems to run and hide (in the states, we'd say drop pants and bend over) because some mullah screams he doesn't like the cartoons you print in your newspapers!
Seems to me that, with that much control on your media, you've been fed quite a feast. My cat would bury such fare. Clearly, a product of your environment.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
No, my point is that when the hostilities started is irrelevant to the current position.
The wall - which is mostly barbed-wire and electronics - despite what the BBC wants you to see - was erected for the purpose of reducing the bombing of families eating in restaurants
Such attacks were always rare, most attacks are unguided rockets. But there's nothing wrong with building a wall to protect you – inside your own territory. I imagine the Spanish would be quite annoyed if we built border structures around Gibraltar two miles into Spanish territory.
You claim Hamas said it was 'fine with Israel' - how is the world do you neglect the text of their charter
I don't think you read my post, since I even mentioned the charter in it. Hamas offered an indefinite long term ceasefire to an Israel within its defined borders. Considering what their charter says that is as close to 'we're fine with it' as the leadership can say without being removed, and that would quickly become de facto acceptance if accepted.
A ten-month moratorium had no results . . . until it was about to expire
All that was was a temporary suspension in taking even more land. The removal of (illegal, let's remember) settlements in Gaza went a bit further, actually improving the situation slightly, but during that time many more were built in the West Bank, so overall Israel took more than it gave back.
Historically, you fire-bombed cities, like Dresden
That is completely different, as it was during a declared state of national war. I also doubt you'll find many Brits supporting that with the benefit of a modern perspective (everyone learnt a lot about the destructive power of air bombing in WW2). A more reasonable comparison would be the IRA, though they were less aggressive than some Islamic groups, and we never sent military forces, bombed cities or assassinated people outside our borders (instead cooperating with the state from which they were originating).
These misunderstood friends of yours set off some bombs in your Underground - so you shoot an innocent unarmed electrician to death.
Laughable. There was a national outcry about that, an investigation and although personal charges weren't levelled against the killer the public certainly doesn't support such things. The Israeli army kills Palestinians (and Lebanese on occasion) as a matter of course; there is no public complaints and no investigation for every death they cause.
I find it hard to believe that you can make such a comparison in a serious post – that and the Dresden reference lead me to believe that you are simply trolling, to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
Trolling - good point - now you can safely ignore anything that you find disturbing to your personalized versions of reality.
The bombings (of civilians) were rare? How quickly you (choose to) forget. They were an all too frequent occurrence. The rocket attacks being (at the time) more than a rare occurrence. They occur now because the Israelis were foolish enough to clear out of Gaza (and for nothing in return, as a symbolic gesture, in hopes of initiating honest negotiations).
Since you bring up 'illegal' settlements - perhaps you ought to take note that there are no recognized borders, but rather, armistice lines, including the 1967 borders, and even the pre-1967 borders. And, as noted earlier, no one screamed 'occupier' when Jordan had the land for decades. No one ever considered these people a national entity until is was convenient to use them as cannon fodder when Egypt made piece (repeat).
BobJanova wrote: The Israeli army kills Palestinians (and Lebanese on occasion) as a matter of course;
That ever amazing logic - you shoot armed people trying to kill you. You shoot people setting up rockets to shoot at your citizens, you shoot people wrapped in explosives looking for a crowd of people to kill, and most important of all, in my opinion, you locate and exterminate the vermin that send them: wherever they hide.
BobJanova wrote: A more reasonable comparison would be the IRA, though they were less aggressive than some Islamic groups, and we never sent military forces, bombed cities or assassinated people outside our borders (instead cooperating with the state from which they were originating).
A rather English point of view: Ireland was not your borders, but an obviously occupied state. You had troops on the ground (or were they imposters). There's not an Irishman I've met who doesn't know you're occupiers of what you refer to as Northern Ireland. And, of course, you should remove those English who are nothing less than occupiers in the area, and who you use as proxies as counterfeits for local support. Was that IRA comment you included in you post as bait for me? The fact is that you can't smell your own.
The analogy of blitz:Dresden vs. Gaza-rockets:Gaza-Siege still stands firm - with the notable difference that the Israelis leafleted the areas to try to minimize civilian casualties. Tens of thousands of dead in the non-Military city Dresden vs. hundreds in the source of the rocket attacks by terrorists who deliberately attack with civilians in the area? You're may be right: there is no comparison. What is apparent that, even in adverse conditions, so far as is possible, Israelis do their best to take the moral high ground.
There is no doubt that innocents were killed - but then, when you shoot rockets from next to a school house, isn't that the real hope? Get more (of your) sympathy with tragic photos? And never do you ask why they not only billet amongst civilians but make it a point to attack from their midst. Face it: Hamas/Hezbollah make good media capital on each human shield that get killed.
Despite your opening, with what you imply are a peace-loving Hamas, I will not label you a troll. Between BBC World reports and short wave news, I know just where you are coming from. Goebbels new well that if you keep repeating a lie, no matter how absurd, it will come to be believed. You are a true believer.
I'll repeat this as often as necessary, for it defines succinctly the Middle East situation:
The day the Arabs lay down their weapons, peace with Israel will break out immediately.
The day Israel lays down its weapons, there will be genocide.
At this point we will clearly be just baring our teeth at one another in a circle. Write what you will in reply, but lets agree on one thing: the Lounge has heard enough of this for the present.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Quite (to the last sentence). I will just make two small points: firstly, Northern Ireland is recognised by the whole international community (including the government of Ireland) as part of the United Kingdom – comparing it with modern occupied territory is not reasonable, whatever you might think of early 20th century (and earlier) events. And secondly, if you're resorting to calling the BBC a Naziesque propaganda instrument, I call Godwin.
|
|
|
|
|
digital man wrote: Big waste of time. Might be easier to relocate Israel to West Texas.
Especially after you factor in the global costs of the conflict going nuclear; IMO not a question of *IF*, but *WHEN*.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
digital man wrote: Might be easier to relocate Israel to West Texas.
I haven’t read your post before posting, but great mind thinks alike. 
There is only one Ashley Judd and Salma Hayek is her prophet!
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
The border question is a tricky one. I think securing it has to be an inside job. Palestanian authority (hopefuly an elected government) would need to be equiped to do the border control. UN can help. Something similar to the job they are doing on the South Lebanon borders.
|
|
|
|
|
I have an idea. It’s obvious that there is no solution until Israel is where it is. They are hated to dead from all their neighbors and from big chunk of their own population. Live the Israel to Palestinians to see what they will do with it (a huge scrapyard) and give the Jews some place somewhere else. Now about 5-6 million Jews live on only 20K square kilometers half of which are deserts and have to have even their women serve in the military and keep nukes just to guaranty some fragile security to their state. What if some big not overpopulated country gives them their 20K square kilometers good land and solves the issue? US and Canada are both over 9 million square kilometers and Russia is 17 million. Also all these countries are responsible for saving the Jews during WW2 so they have obligation to them
I know this is impossible, but it sounds really good! The Jews made a garden from the desert I’m sure they will be even better in a normal land and finally they will find some security and peace. F*** the symbols, Jerusalem and all the sh*ts. The people are more important than the land.
There is only one Ashley Judd and Salma Hayek is her prophet!
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
modified on Monday, September 12, 2011 11:34 AM
|
|
|
|
|
That's what we told the Cherokee.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
What? “It’s gonna be tough but the survivors won’t pay any taxes”? I think it definately will works this time.
There is only one Ashley Judd and Salma Hayek is her prophet!
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
Hadn't seen this before I posted something not dissimilar above.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
