Hamas Victory in Palestine?!

[Idaho]

Whoa... not quite sure what will play out here.

I think it was probably good that Fatah were given the boot. They were too corrupt and had failed after too long.

I'm all in favour of militant groups bringing fresh impetus and then being moderated by power. If allowed to run it's course it usually ends well.

[BDC]

Hopefully. It's a bit hard to continue the military aspect when you're expected to take responsibility.

I too heard Fatah went because of corruption. So another good aspect potentially there.

[Kommodus]

Interesting. I recall that the Palestinian Authority was originally the PLO, itself a terrorist organization. Optimistically speaking, Hamas may change in a similar fashion. However...

The realist in me suspects that this is nothing short of a catastrophe. Hamas has yet to show any inclination that it intends to pursue peace with Isreal, or even accept the very existance of Isreal. This situation is likely to lead to another escalation of violence which will last for another several decades at least.

Even when the PLO "went legit" and became the PA, violence remained prevalent for a long time, as the PA was unable/unwilling to reign in militant Palestinian groups. We may simply see a repeat of that debacle. Worst-case scenario: Hamas uses its new-found power to actively mobilize more and more Palestinians into its armed campaigns in its continuing efforts to "destroy Isreal"; Isreal responds with brutal force, re-occupying land ceded to the Palestinians and destroying fragile Palestinian government infrastructure. The region is returned to full-scale guerilla war and the peace process is set back by decades, resulting in thousands of deaths on both sides, increased oppression of the Palestinians, and a lasting legacy of hatred and fear.

Oh yes, it's a very happy day for the Palestinians...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Oh great now the terrorists are in charge. This looks really bad to me. Doesnt show much sense on the part of the Palestinians.

[Watchman]

Yes, thank you for your deep and insightful analysis.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Yes, thank you for your deep and insightful analysis.


Whats to analize? Its pretty obvious. Is Hamas a terrorist organization or not? Do they want peace with Isreal or Israel one piece at a time?

[Idaho]

If the Palestinian people have chosen to elect a more extreme party it just shows that Israel has over-egged the pudding with regards to destabilising the palestinian state. They control the economy and so by relentlessly destroying infrastructure have created a failed state.

How anyone can expect the Palestinian areas to be anything other than f*%$£d is beyond me. Roads are checkpointed. Exports are prevented from being shipped/moved/sold. Palestinian land is appropriated. Most is under curfew. Tanks rumble up and down broken up streets. Hospitals operate with walls missing.

It's a total basketcase. The question is really why did it take so long for an extremist politcal party to get elected in Palestine when there has been one in Israel for so long?

[Watchman]

Probably mainly because old man Arafat was more of an ace politician than he's commonly given credit for and it took a while for his influence to dissipate. Mind you, I've read Palestinian dissidents decry him (back when he was still alice and kicking) as the hired thug of Israel and its backers who keeps the place about under control in exchange of a hefty cut from the assorted aid funds.

*shrug*

That's certainly one way of looking at it.

[Hurin_Rules]

If the Palestinian people have chosen to elect a more extreme party it just shows that Israel has over-egged the pudding with regards to destabilising the palestinian state. They control the economy and so by relentlessly destroying infrastructure have created a failed state.

How anyone can expect the Palestinian areas to be anything other than f*%$£d is beyond me. Roads are checkpointed. Exports are prevented from being shipped/moved/sold. Palestinian land is appropriated. Most is under curfew. Tanks rumble up and down broken up streets. Hospitals operate with walls missing.

It's a total basketcase. The question is really why did it take so long for an extremist politcal party to get elected in Palestine when there has been one in Israel for so long?

I have to agree. While this is not the only cause of the victory-- Fatah itself must shoulder much of the blame for its notorious corruption--one has to ask what exactly the Israelis expected. They isolated Arafat, besieging him in his compound so that he could not govern the country, then went about systematically dismantling the Palestinian Authority, bulldozing their buildings, making incursions into their cities, destroying their police stations. Is it any wonder his party and government were perceived as ineffectual? By the time Abbas got in, the situation was virtually untenable. Sad, it surely is, but what else could they have expected?

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

this will be interesting.

Thoughts from a Jewish (may as well call him an Israeli wannabe) friend:

Israel'll give a big chunk of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority soon.

Hamas being in charge'll mean that Israel will be under constant attack again.

But now when they retaliate there won't be much international backlash as the Palestinians will basically be an attacking foreign state (as seems to have been happening with Gaza).

Also, civil conflict in the nascent Palestinian state looks distinctly possible.

[Kommodus]

Roads are checkpointed. Exports are prevented from being shipped/moved/sold. Palestinian land is appropriated. Most is under curfew. Tanks rumble up and down broken up streets. Hospitals operate with walls missing.

Granted. But additionally, how can one expect the security situation to be any different, when every week another Palestinian walks into a crowded Isreali bus or restaurant and blows himself and scores of Isrealis to pieces?

Now I realize that this isn't currently happening as frequently, but I remember when reports of terrorist attacks were coming several times a week. Then there would be a lull, and security restrictions would be relaxed - maybe some checkpoints removed - but then it would happen again, and Isreal would retaliate and reestablish the security, and the same story would repeat itself.

What we have here is an impasse. Isreal won't relinquish control until the terrorism stops. The Palestinians can't build a successful state with all those restrictions in place. The failure of the Palestinian state and the feelings of oppression, in turn, fuel more terrorism. Would the terrorism stop even if the Palestinians did get a free, viable state? Not according to Hamas and other militant groups - they'll settle for nothing less than the destruction of Isreal.

Now, prolonged periods of peace, aided by patience and restraint on both sides, could eventually break this impasse. As violence subsides, Isreal has shown a willingness to cede land back to the Palestinians, giving them increasing self-rule. Unfortunately it only takes one major terrorist attack to reverse months of hard-won progress.


It's a total basketcase. The question is really why did it take so long for an extremist politcal party to get elected in Palestine when there has been one in Israel for so long?

Well, for a long time there weren't free Palestinian elections. Also, for a long time Arafat was the face of Palestinian resistance, and he was the man his people looked to for leadership. The peace process, and the Palestinian quest for self-rule, has made more rapid progress under Abbas than it ever did under Arafat, but unfortunately I think the Palestinians attribute that to Hamas, which claims to have "driven out" the Isrealis from Gaza.

The Palestinians apparently want to see what Hamas can do for them that Fatah couldn't. I guess they're about to find out.

[Viking]

I think it was probably good that Fatah were given the boot. They were too corrupt and had failed after too long.

You believe that a terrorist organisation will have less corruption? I don`t think so..


The true solution to the middle east conflict is to evacuate the Israelian state, and whoila: problem solved.
The stupidest move of the UN ever, was to establish the Israelian state. :wall:

[doc_bean]

The true solution to the middle east conflict is to evacuate the Israelian state, and whoila: problem solved.
The stupidest move of the UN ever, was to establish the Israelian state. :wall:

I'm afraid that's almost purely the fault of the US...

About Hamas: this might be a good thing, they might try a peaceful approach and when they fail, another, now smaller terrorist group will rise again and call them sell outs. In the long run it won't matter much, but it might give a little peace in the short run, and who knows, save a few lives.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

that's right, the Jews are the problem...

...removing them all from Israel (including the indigenous Jewish community) would fix it.

:help:

[doc_bean]

that's right, the Jews are the problem...

...removing them all from Israel (including the indigenous Jewish community) would fix it.

:help:

Well removing all the Arabs would work to, what's your point ? If two parties are fighting, pulling them apart is the easiest way to end the fight.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Well removing all the Arabs would work to, what's your point ? If two parties are fighting, pulling them apart is the easiest way to end the fight.

My point is that nobody's suggesting that all Arabs be removed to fix the problem.

:2thumbsup:

[Slyspy]

Turning back the clock and removing the nation state of Israel is not an option. It will be interesting to see how Hamas will run things. Although labelled a terrorist organisation they have been the prime source of social support and local authority in Palestinian settlements, especially since the PA has either been, or has been reduced to being, ineffectual in so many ways under Fatah.

It is possible to work with the political elements of terrorist organisations. Just look at Northern Ireland. The closest it has ever been to peace since Sinn Fein were included in the political makeup of the province. Of course even in NI this has not worked perfectly and in Palestine, as in NI being viewed as a legitimate political force goes hand in hand with disarming the militants. This is the true test of Hamas' character and power.

[Viking]

My point is that nobody's suggesting that all Arabs be removed to fix the problem.

:2thumbsup:


There`s a hell lot more Arabs than Jews in that region,; but most important is that the Arabs were in the middle east before the Jews, who didn`t arrive until 1940`s or something. Do not get me wrong on this statement.

[Slyspy]

I think you mean Israelis, not Jews.

[Vladimir]

There`s a hell lot more Arabs than Jews in that region,; but most important is that the Arabs were in the middle east before the Jews, who didn`t arrive until 1940`s or something. Do not get me wrong on this statement.

You mean 1940 BC right?

[Viking]

I think you mean Israelis, not Jews.


Pretty much the same. 76% of Israels population are Jews.



You mean 1940 BC right?

Until the 1940`s AD and from some centuries back in time, Jews was only a miniority in the Middle East. Then, suddenly in the 1940`s AD, they make up the majority again.

[Bar Kochba]

just shows the stupid pressure the world puts on israel to give away there land to staisfy these "palastinins" is wrong and that theyare even more hostile to jews as jews r to them

[Ironside]

You mean 1940 BC right?

Not really, the Jewish community that was there after the diaspora was quite small and lived in peace with the locals. Then the Zionism and Arabic nationalism started to show it's ugly face, starting in the late ninetinth century (primarly zionism at that time, the arabic nationalism is of later date).

As for the election, hopefully the election will shatter Hamas is such a way that the more moderate element will get support by the Palestinians and be able to destroy the pure radicals. Hard to pull off but can be done.

Worst case scenario is that Hamas can actually rule well and that a few political mistakes by Israel will rally the Palestinians in a way that will set-back the peace-process several decades.


Most likely scenario is that chaos will erupt though.

As for the Isrealis, tough situation.
The only thing I can recommend is that when it comes to terrorist attacks try hard to maintain ceasefire, endure some attacks without retaliation (make sure that they don't any real reason for "justification" of those attacks), but make it very clear that a continuation will be retaliated hard, very hard. If attacks continues, hit hard, swiftly and focused and then quickly stop and ask: "Wanna play again?".
A few of these should make the Palestinians catch the message and the terrorist organisations should get it quite a bit harder.

But playing true hardballs with Hamas because of the election won't work, as long as the Israelis is seen a the enemy and not "a nature force (or reactant)", Hamas will be fed by such actions.


just shows the stupid pressure the world puts on israel to give away there land to staisfy these "palastinins" is wrong and that theyare even more hostile to jews as jews r to them
The problem is that both sides have failed to present a stable solution, that doesn't feels like it's going to fall apart.
And IMO the West-bank and the Gaza-strip isn't Israeli territory, not because of the occupation, but because Israel doesn't treat the area as thier own territory, but acts as a occupier in it. Israel will never try to annex that territory either, or the new Israeli president would come from Hamas.

[Reverend Joe]

Jews were living throughout the Middle East, in large numbers, long before there was an Israeli state. After Israel was formed, almost all of those Jews were forced to move to Israel, for fear of reprisal by their fellow countrymen.

If we really want to solve the problem, let's just pull all of them out and give the land back to Egypt- or, better yet, let's reform the Assyrian Empire! Assyria shall rise again! :charge:

Sometimes, I feel like the only Jew in the world who thinks the Israeli state was a really bad idea.

:idea2: :idea2: :idea2: :no: :idea2: :idea2: :idea2: :idea2: :idea2: :idea2: :idea2:

[Bar Kochba]

Not really, the Jewish community that was there after the diaspora was quite small and lived in peace with the locals. Then the Zionism and Arabic nationalism started to show it's ugly face, starting in the late ninetinth century (primarly zionism at that time, the arabic nationalism is of later date).

As for the election, hopefully the election will shatter Hamas is such a way that the more moderate element will get support by the Palestinians and be able to destroy the pure radicals. Hard to pull off but can be done.

Worst case scenario is that Hamas can actually rule well and that a few political mistakes by Israel will rally the Palestinians in a way that will set-back the peace-process several decades.


Most likely scenario is that chaos will erupt though.

As for the Isrealis, tough situation.
The only thing I can recommend is that when it comes to terrorist attacks try hard to maintain ceasefire, endure some attacks without retaliation (make sure that they don't any real reason for "justification" of those attacks), but make it very clear that a continuation will be retaliated hard, very hard. If attacks continues, hit hard, swiftly and focused and then quickly stop and ask: "Wanna play again?".
A few of these should make the Palestinians catch the message and the terrorist organisations should get it quite a bit harder.

But playing true hardballs with Hamas because of the election won't work, as long as the Israelis is seen a the enemy and not "a nature force (or reactant)", Hamas will be fed by such actions.

but how can u tell the israelis to wait they have been having terrorist attacks since the start of the state the should be more aggresive and stop prostetuting the country to meet amirecas need to be seen as the peacemaker of the world

[Ironside]

but how can u tell the israelis to wait they have been having terrorist attacks since the start of the state the should be more aggresive and stop prostetuting the country to meet amirecas need to be seen as the peacemaker of the world

Because the guy that uses the sledgehammer after some very, very serious provoction on that annoying bastard that tries to get into a fist fight so that his friend will join in and kick ass, looks like a very patient guy and the dork that provokes gets more of a suit yourself response, compared to the situation with the guy that jumps into the fist-fight right away.

The intent is to endure them temporarly (and to be very clear that avenging 5 attacks will be 5 times worse then avenging 1) to make them finally stop in the end.

As for a more aggresive Israel, were do you want them to go? Occupying large parts of the Middle-east? This would either mean Iraq hundred times worse or a nice little genocide. Tougher on the Palestinians? Read above, but not as messy or not as bloody.
It seems that actually suffering from a genocide does make you think twice before preforming one.

As for the US support to the peace process. It would be better for thier public relations if one of their closest allies wasn't seen with such poorly reputation in an important econimical area (read oil). US truly aiming for a peacemaker rep? :laugh4: That's a new one.

[King Henry V]

Yes, another peace loving party elected by peace loving Palestinians! I love liberals...:no:

[Bar Kochba]

so u want israel to just smile and take punches like a jack ass

how would you like it if some eight foot bully was pushing u the small 2 ft hobbit around

[Proletariat]

I'm all in favour of militant groups bringing fresh impetus and then being moderated by power. If allowed to run it's course it usually ends well.

:laugh4:

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/dictator.htm

[Goofball]

Yes, another peace loving party elected by peace loving Palestinians! I love liberals...:no:

Erm...

What the hell does this have to do with liberals?

Other than the fact that liberals are pretty much to blame for anything conservatives don't like, anyway...

[Crazed Rabbit]

Because the guy that uses the sledgehammer after some very, very serious provoction on that annoying bastard that tries to get into a fist fight so that his friend will join in and kick ass, looks like a very patient guy and the dork that provokes gets more of a suit yourself response, compared to the situation with the guy that jumps into the fist-fight right away.

Normally. But it seems world opinion is always against Israel. Witness the reaction to pulling out of Gaza, unileterally, without demanding anything from the Palestinians. The world*, which consistently insists that the whole thing is Israel's fault, says nothing and hardly bats an eye when the terror strikes continue. Israel will always be blamed for whatever problems the Palestinians have. Never the palestinians, who started the recent intifada, nor the rich Arab states around them that don't open their doors or provide assistance for bettering their lives.

If Hamas doesn't become immediately moderate, and launches even one strike, I say destroy Palestine. Just invade, occupy, and flatten anything that resists. Much of the intellegenstia of the Western World hates Israel already, why worry if they write even more venehment editorials?

Crazed Rabbit
*World, as in world opinion of the Western World, which is, with the exception of America, mostly anti-Israel/

[Bar Kochba]

at least someone understands wat israels goin through

[Goofball]

If Hamas doesn't become immediately moderate, and launches even one strike, I say destroy Palestine.

I'm inclined to agree. Until now, the Palestinian government and population could hide behind the thin veil of saying "but we don't support terrorist attacks against Israel, those attacks are made by fringe extremists." But now, it is abundantly clear that the majority of Palestinians do support the idea that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth. Moreover, now that Hamas is the legitimate government, any further terrorist attacks on Israel can be legally considered not terrorist attacks, but acts of war against Israel. They would be fully within their rights to wage war against the perpetrators of those attacks with the full extent of the military might at their disposal.

[A.Saturnus]

I'm inclined to agree. Until now, the Palestinian government and population could hide behind the thin veil of saying "but we don't support terrorist attacks against Israel, those attacks are made by fringe extremists." But now, it is abundantly clear that the majority of Palestinians do support the idea that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth. Moreover, now that Hamas is the legitimate government, any further terrorist attacks on Israel can be legally considered not terrorist attacks, but acts of war against Israel. They would be fully within their rights to wage war against the perpetrators of those attacks with the full extent of the military might at their disposal.

Only, they're already doing that. Driving tanks through towns blowing up houses and children with stones in their hands is already more military might they could possibly have a right to. The Palestinians have chosen the hard way by electing terrorists, but they already had the hard way anyway. They don't know anything else.

[LeftEyeNine]

Not surprising at all. The Palestinian nation is worn and poor. Such a nation who has nothing to lose would like to choose some guy scattering flowers all around and singing "Give Peace A Chance" ? Hamas is the true power dictating the state over there and after Arafat's "departure" it was inevitable that Hamas would gain an official and political rank of power.

What will happen next ? Well, the Middle East's fate is "designed" that way, chaos is "dictated" and wanted, new conflicts created gradually. Pray the Lord for the sake of the Holy Lands, and the cradle of many civilizations, maybe that helps..

[Bar Kochba]

so you think israel started easy that i came to peace with love and flowers 20 min after the state is declared we are at war with every arab nation around us in 1967 war withall the arab around us and many more times how can you say poor plastinians when they blow up israel restarants at some points in israel people were scared to go onbuses in case someone blow themselves up

"poor palastinens" i say no poor israelies to have tolive with almost the whole world hating them

[Goofball]

Only, they're already doing that. Driving tanks through towns blowing up houses and children with stones in their hands is already more military might they could possibly have a right to.

What can I say? I guess those hotheaded Jews take it a little too personally when 5 Palestinian "heroes" surround a civilian vehicle occupied by a pregnant Israeli mother and her three children and empty their AKs into it, or some noble Palestinian "freedom fighter" blows himself up in the middle of an Israeli wedding reception.

Yep. Blowing up the houses that these lovers of freedom and peace are using for their operations is definitely out of line. Shame on the Israelis.

But it doesn't matter what the Israelis do. If they retaliate, they are are attacked by terrorists. If they don't retaliate, they are attacked by terrorists. If they give up territory and pull out unilaterally, they are attacked by terrorists. And no matter what they do, the rest of the world condemns them, while giving Nobel Peace Prizes to the Palestinian leader.

Cripes, I bet if the Israelis decided en masse that for the good of world peace they should all just kill themselves by taking poison, the headlines in the next day's papers would all read "Israelis Commit Genocide."

[LeftEyeNine]

deathtoallhumans,

Poor is "poor", man. They have "nothing", I mean. So you can get the idea why one arms his torso with explosives and dive into a restaurant and blow the whole place up ?

This is gonna be another target practice so I have to say what I've forgotten to add in my first post: I don't have a point of view that looks Palestinians in a symphathical way. I'm not defending anyone's right here, however that's what the reality is. He has nothing to lose, he will fight to death. Is this so hard to understand ? I don't like the Israeli state, nor the Palestinian drama, as to be clear.

[Bar Kochba]

why dont you like the israeli state wat has it ever done to you

[LeftEyeNine]

why dont you like the israeli state wat has it ever done to you

I'm a member of a nation that is disliked by those that were never involved in what they claim about it.

Let's call it.. The human nature..

[Incongruous]

Hey why do you hate Palestine what has it done to you?

The fact is that Isreal is only in existance due to the U.S.A and British bumbling. No one else seem's to think they have a leg of moral to stand on.
Palastinians blowing up cars is like Isreal tearing down entire villiages. I thought Hamas had recently gotten rid of the destruction of Isreal as a party policy, is that not true?
Isreal should pull back to it's UN borders, if it deosn't why the heck should the rest of the world give a damn what they want?

[Goofball]

I thought Hamas had recently gotten rid of the destruction of Isreal as a party policy, is that not true?

No, it's not. In fact, they have now stated that they firmly intend to keep that little tidbit as an integral part of their charter.

[Paul Peru]

Yes, another peace loving party elected by peace loving Palestinians! I love liberals...:no:
:dizzy2: Hamas are like so liberal. :help:

I don't blame the Palestinians for being desperate, though.:wall:
Fatah government has been fraught with corruption and cronyism, and has not been able to give them any semblance of safety withing their bantustans and townships, so they are trying something else.

[Bar Kochba]

get ur facts right

the arabs refusedthe treaty in 1948 so how can we go back to orignal borders when the arabs refused it
btw another fact the jews were supposed to have jordon aswell they had an agreement to give the whole of british mandae palistine to the jews so tell the bloody arabs to go back to the orignal borders

[Leet Eriksson]

Well Hamas does provide the palestinians with a lot of things, healthcare, food, a roof. No one ever did that besides them, thats why they got voted in.

Its just a matter of wait and see, Hamas doesn't seem hostile at this moment...

[Proletariat]

Well Hamas does provide the palestinians with a lot of things, healthcare, food, a roof. No one ever did that besides them, thats why they got voted in.


'Cept for the aid they recieved from America and tax funds from Israel. See how much cash from the international community Hamas is able to bring in. (Not counting donations from Hezbollah, mind you.)

"In my country we have problem,
And it's name is transport"

[Kommodus]

Poor is "poor", man. They have "nothing", I mean. So you can get the idea why one arms his torso with explosives and dive into a restaurant and blow the whole place up ?

I understand that anyone would be frustrated and angered by living in poverty; however, there is no direct connection between that and the atrocities committed by terrorists. Many people all over the world live in poverty, and yet choose to live peaceful, virtuous lives. Therefore, there is a clear relationship between poverty and violence, but there are several steps required in-between to connect the two.

I believe that unfortunately the problem only gets more difficult the deeper you look. That's because it's not ultimately found in social or economic conditions (those are only catalysts or contributing factors) - it's found in the human soul (or heart, mind, or will - choose what you prefer).

Reconciliation occasionally requires a man to give up some of his own rights (real or perceived). It requires giving up some claims to possessions and powers he believes should be his. It requires giving up the right to vengeance. It requires the ability to forgive past wrongs and no longer demand restitution. It requires the ability and willingness to see things from another's point of view, to restrain one's anger, to reexamine old prejudices, and to change one's habitual thinking patterns. It requires the willingness to look for the good in others, and to view them from as positive a perspective as possible. Simply put, reconciliation requires grace.

How can a people who have had hatred and prejudice so deeply ingrained in them from the beginning, who have always lived under the assumption that strength is the key to success and that "turning the other cheek" is for the weak, who have been brought up to always insist on their own rights, ever be made to change from lovers of violence to lovers of peace? This problem goes far, far deeper than external conditions. We all choose to do what we will with the conditions we've been given - many who have been given poor conditions choose good, and some who live in idyllic conditions choose evil.

[Xiahou]

If Hamas doesn't become immediately moderate, and launches even one strike, I say destroy Palestine. Just invade, occupy, and flatten anything that resists. Much of the intellegenstia of the Western World hates Israel already, why worry if they write even more venehment editorials?Something that I don't think has been mentioned is "if Hamas doesn't become immediately moderate, and launches even one strike" isn't it likely to guarantee a Netanyahu win in the next Israeli election?

If Palestinians elect a terrorist organization bent on Israel's destruction, who could blame the Israelis for putting their hard-line party back in power? Afterall, where did the unilateral withdrawal get them?

[Bar Kochba]

"In my country we have problem,
And it's name is transport"

are u implying we should throw the jew down the well

btw the guy who sung that song is jewish

[Leet Eriksson]

'Cept for the aid they recieved from America and tax funds from Israel. See how much cash from the international community Hamas is able to bring in. (Not counting donations from Hezbollah, mind you.)

"In my country we have problem,
And it's name is transport"

Why does the US and Isreal donate money to hamas again?

[Proletariat]

I know who Borat is. It was a sarcastic joke.

[Proletariat]

Why does the US and Isreal donate money to hamas again?

I don't know if you're joking, but what I meant was the taxes collected by Israel that went to the Palestinians, and the aid money the Americans sent to them, will now be cut off with Hamas running the show. The PA is already bankrupt and it looks like they're heading towards an even worse financial situation.

[Papewaio]

Hamas is on a tight rope now.

They now have all the problems of any party that has gone from the opposition to being in charge. When in opposition you can say what you like and not have to deliver. Now Hamas is in charge the people will expect their lives to get better. So if Hamas goes down a more peaceful road they will have to make life better for the Palestinians... not the easiest thing to do even if all the fighting stops. Just the lack of infrastructure and education is going to be massive hurdles to overcome. Hamas may even have to make deals with Israel to get more water... a basic thing in any industry.

If Hamas goes down the violent path then as a democratically elected leadership of the country it will no longer be the position of fringe elements. A terrorist act will be an act of war. Then who could blame Israel going to war agains the Palestinans and expelling them all? The warhawks on both sides may like this idea. As both warhawk sets can see their powerbases diminishing if lasting peace was to occur.

So Hamas is screwed. If they are violent say goodbye to Palestine. If they are peaceful they have to perform some economic miracles that would rely on education and infrastructure... these are long term solutions and the people may have shorter term expectations.

[Leet Eriksson]

I don't know if you're joking, but what I meant was the taxes collected by Israel that went to the Palestinians, and the aid money the Americans sent to them, will now be cut off with Hamas running the show. The PA is already bankrupt and it looks like they're heading towards an even worse financial situation.

are you serious?

No really, becuase even my money went to the PLO, and i'm not pleased. What did American aid or isreali aid do, besides inflating arafats account?

Hamas cutting it off doesn't change anything really. Hell maybe they could even benefit from it like the PLO did.

[Strike For The South]

Screw Isreal and screw Palastine. If they cant share let them blow themselves into oblivion. See if I care. This whole suitation is about idiots who belive God promised them this so they wont give it up. The USA gives so much money to Isreal to perputate the suitation when the money could be used for something infinitly better. The US is Isreals lap dog. Let them kill eachother

[Proletariat]

are you serious?

No really, becuase even my money went to the PLO, and i'm not pleased. What did American aid or isreali aid do, besides inflating arafats account?


It wasn't Israeli aid per se, but money forked over according to however many Palestinians were taxed by Israel. They aren't going to hand this money over to Hamas.

The American money always went to NGOs when Arafat was around. Then, sort of recently (6 months I think? A year?) America donated big sum of money to the PA to try and bolster Abbas. That worked out pretty well. :furious3:

[Redleg]

are you serious?

No really, becuase even my money went to the PLO, and i'm not pleased. What did American aid or isreali aid do, besides inflating arafats account?


Are you attempting to blame the givers of the Aid to the PA for the actions of Arafat and his corrupt cronies in padding thier bank accounts with the aid money?



Hamas cutting it off doesn't change anything really. Hell maybe they could even benefit from it like the PLO did.

I would like to see Hamas stop their self declared plan to destroy Israel as a state and concentrate on building a better Palestine State.

Shall we take bets about which way Hamas decides to go. Tough choices now face them as someone as alreadly mentioned. Its easy to be the blacksheep when your not in charge. But its completely different when the rest of the flock is counting on you for leadership.

The cards are on the table. Will Hamas bluff or will they show their cards, and make real progress happen for their people?

[Bar Kochba]

Screw Isreal and screw Palastine. If they cant share let them blow themselves into oblivion. See if I care. This whole suitation is about idiots who belive God promised them this so they wont give it up. The USA gives so much money to Isreal to perputate the suitation when the money could be used for something infinitly better. The US is Isreals lap dog. Let them kill eachother

oh i see have you read the protacols of the elders of zion you we jews we control the whole world

apparently according to some of the people who dont deny the holocaust we were the people who called it to get israel for the jews

and also somehow jews are responsible for killing king charles the first of england by paying olivar cromwell money

se the jews rule the world and we take punishment for fun ha ha ha

[Watchman]

Far as I'm concerned both of the sides involved are big ultranationalist asses and playing the "who threw the first rock" game is more than a little pointless as it's all fait accompli anyway. I sympathize with the Palestinians mainly because they're by far the worse off of the two and I always tend to root for the underdog, and because the American Right is manifestly against them and that means there must be pretty good reasons for me to be on their side.

That said, those two packs of zealots will eventually have to learn to coexist, because Israel isn't going to go away and can't quite go about ethnically cleansing the Palestinians either. Neither of the two just appears to be willing to acknowledge the facts - there's more than enough hardline idiots in both camps. The Israeli ones just have the bigger guns and backers.

[Strike For The South]

oh i see have you read the protacols of the elders of zion you we jews we control the whole world

apparently according to some of the people who dont deny the holocaust we were the people who called it to get israel for the jews

and also somehow jews are responsible for killing king charles the first of england by paying olivar cromwell money

se the jews rule the world and we take punishment for fun ha ha ha

I never denied the holocuast. As Watchman says in his post below all this is ultra nationalistic bull and the USA are in the middle of it. I frankly dont care what happens to that strip of land that has foolishley wasted so many lives. Thats not my problem. My problem is the amount of captial that the USA gives its rediculos.

[LeftEyeNine]

Screw Isreal and screw Palastine. If they cant share let them blow themselves into oblivion. See if I care. This whole suitation is about idiots who belive God promised them this so they wont give it up. The USA gives so much money to Isreal to perputate the suitation when the money could be used for something infinitly better. The US is Isreals lap dog. Let them kill eachother

It is more convincing an American saying this rather than a Turkish.

[Bar Kochba]

so strike for south are u an atheist by the way haw does america spending money in israel effect you if they dont spend it on israel they spend it on somthing rubbish

[Strike For The South]

so strike for south are u an atheist by the way haw does america spending money in israel effect you if they dont spend it on israel they spend it on somthing rubbish

im not an atheist nor should that have any place in this thread but if you must know I am a southern baptist. Well there wasting tax dollars and we give an amazing amount to Isreal its not like its a drop in the bucket. No to mention Isreal has way to much control over the USAs forigen policy desicons and it needs to stop.

[Watchman]

I'm under the impression most of what the US gives Israel goes under "military aid", which in practice means weapons. Given the number of references to Israeli Apache attack helos I've seen, I suspect this "military aid" is used as a neat and politically convenient way to dispose of excess military hardware.

Which hasn't exactly been uncommon in Great Power foreign politics anyway. Dumping your older stuff to allies, or selling it at discount prices, beats letting it rust in some forgotten supply dump which gains you nothing.

[Bar Kochba]

if it wasn't israel in the middle east communism might of spread further

[Strike For The South]

if it wasn't israel in the middle east communism might of spread further

1. Its not communism.
2. If by strech further you mean take over the little land Isreal is that isnt much. Not to mention with out the USAs backing Isreal would be just like palistine. I hate to break it to you but Isreal is not some sort of holy state protecting the world from anything. All it does is cuase problems becuase of the insane and stupid amount of resources invested in it.

[Papewaio]

if it wasn't israel in the middle east communism might of spread further

If the only reason Israel existed was to fight communism that is a stretch.

That it had utilitiy in fighting communism is true. But if that is its only one, then what use does Israel now have when there are no communists?

I think Israel has other reasons for its support from the West.

As for USA... I think its money would have been better spent on a space program.

[Watchman]

'Course, without Israel smack in the middle all those Arab countries might've also had a fair bit less motivation to pony up to the USSR in search of support too...

All that is contrafactuals though. Cool historians dislike contrafactuals. Contrafactuals aren't good.

[silencio]

I'll try to be an optimist. Until now Arafat and Fatah were expected to deliver. So Hamas pretended the failure was not their fault. They did not have to bring peace, territory, order and law and economic growth. But they could always point out that Fatah was not delivering. Now the ball is in the Hamas court - soon they'll face demands to improve the economy, to establish law and order, to get the economy going. And those demands will be from their own supporters.

The only way they can get this done is by striking a deal with Israel. Because if they fail - they'll be on the fast track to marginalisation and will lose Palestinian support quickly. At least Hamas, unlike Fatah, has a better chance of stopping the terrorist attacks. They've organizing most of them anyway

To turn to the parallel with Northern Ireland - the peace process started moving seriously only after the IRA got involved in the peace process. I remember there was a time, when a breakaway formation called the "True IRA" kept the attacks despite IRA's decision to go for peace. They soon received a stern message from their former comrades (Who knew all about them) "Stop! Or the British police will be the least of your worries." Might work in Palestine too...

[Watchman]

'Course, they can't really start trying that unless the Israelis also make a serious gesture at dislodging their collective heads from their arses. I doubt the Hamas can afford to "lose face" by looking like softening up for no gain.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

There`s a hell lot more Arabs than Jews in that region,; but most important is that the Arabs were in the middle east before the Jews, who didn`t arrive until 1940`s or something. Do not get me wrong on this statement.

Your joking right?



Originally Posted by Slyspy
I think you mean Israelis, not Jews.



Pretty much the same. 76% of Israels population are Jews.



And there was a state of Israel ruled and inhabited by jews long before Islam was even invented.

So going by your rule of he who there first gets the land it belongs to the Jews. They were the only indigenous peoples to ever have a state there. The Palestinian state was made up by the same dastardly ones who made up Israel and all the rest of the middle east. Yet most of you only have a probem with Israel. 99% of the middle east belongs to Muslims or arabs. They cant stand jews in their own countries nevermind having their own country among Islam.

I look for war to breakout soon unless Hamas changes its charter.

[Papewaio]

So going by your rule of he who there first gets the land it belongs to the Jews. They were the only indigenous peoples to ever have a state there.


I'm pretty sure Israel wasn't empty when Moses turned up...


Observe thou that which I command thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Per'izzite, and the Hivite, and the Jeb'usite. Quite a few other people where driven out first...

[Xiahou]

I'm pretty sure Israel wasn't empty when Moses turned up...

Quite a few other people where driven out first...They sure werent Muslims. :wink:

[Watchman]

The usual story, in other words. It's not like Finland was empty either way back in the distant Stone Age when *our* ancestors arrived - the ancestors of the Sami were here first (probably the first people to arrive after the glaciers retreated), and got booted up north for their trouble.

Comparing who was where first a zillion years ago is rather pointless and has preciously little bearing on present-day issues except in the minds of the chronically ultranationalist, but those folks always read these things extremely tendentiously anyway and are not to be listened to.

It's of rather greater importance who was where last, and in that departement the Arabs win hands down. I must say I actually don't know why most of the Jews went elsewhere in the meantime - to my knowledge there was still a whole lot of them around to greet the Arabs as liberators from the decidedly more antisemitic Byzantines, and the Muslims and the Jews tended to get along pretty well - but the fact is the majority of the people in the region up until about 1948 (when many of the Arabs fled for their lives) weren't Jewish.

That's a pretty irrelevant now - Israel is a fait accompli and not about to go anywhere - except to rebuke silly pro-zionists with weird ideas about the relevancy of things.

[Tribesman]

get ur facts right

the arabs refusedthe treaty in 1948 so how can we go back to orignal borders when the arabs refused it
btw another fact the jews were supposed to have jordon aswell they had an agreement to give the whole of british mandae palistine to the jews so tell the bloody arabs to go back to the orignal borders
Deathtoallhumans , perhaps it might be an idea if you get your facts straight first as what you have written is absolute rubbish , try reading the Balfour declaration for a start .
Or perhaps you might start with looking up the meaning of the word "fact" , it may help you somewhat .



As for the subject at hand .
Wow , they didn't expect that did they . Does this result show a genuine support for Hamas or is it just a political backlash against Fatah ?
They have done fairly well on their NGO programs and their positions on other elected boards , but governing the two territories is a different kettle of fish all together .
A wise move now would be to seperate the armed wing from the political wing . Which should not have the same problems as the PLO faced as Hamas is one organisation unlike the PLO which was a grouping of many different parties and armed groups each with some similar but some very different aims .

Bopa I thought Hamas had recently gotten rid of the destruction of Isreal as a party policy, is that not true?

The amendment was proposed but not carried, but at least that shows that there are some in the group with a brain , like other groups in Palestine and elsewhere there are a few who understand the reality and slowly move towards it , the PLO took many years and many votes before they removed theirs as a party policy .

So Goofball No, it's not. In fact, they have now stated that they firmly intend to keep that little tidbit as an integral part of their charter.

They have not firmly stated it , in fact there is another motion for acceptance of the pre '67 borders , and another for unilateral ceasefire , and one more for negotiated settlement .

So , are they up to the job and how far are they willing to go to accept the reality of the situation ? Who knows .
And more importantly , how will this election influence the outcome of the Israeli election ? I hope that idiot Netanyahu doesn't benefit too much .:no:

[Reenk Roink]

OoooH OoooH lemme join in


so strike for south are u an atheist by the way haw does america spending money in israel effect you if they dont spend it on israel they spend it on somthing rubbish

Uh? what does him being an atheist or not have to do with anything?


if it wasn't israel in the middle east communism might of spread further

If it wasn't for the Mujahadeen (part of which splintered into al-Qaida and Bin Laden mind you) communism might have spread further...


And there was a state of Israel ruled and inhabited by jews long before Islam was even invented.

So going by your rule of he who there first gets the land it belongs to the Jews. They were the only indigenous peoples to ever have a state there. The Palestinian state was made up by the same dastardly ones who made up Israel and all the rest of the middle east. Yet most of you only have a probem with Israel. 99% of the middle east belongs to Muslims or arabs. They cant stand jews in their own countries nevermind having their own country among Islam.


Yep, and the Islamic armies took Jerusalem from the Byzantines, and I'm quite sure were more hospitable to the Jews for the first 1300 years of their control then any of the other rulers of the Holy Land. Besides, weren't the Caananites there first?

Call me Panglossian, but here is what I see happening in the future, just like it happened 9 months ago:


"A love song performed by an Israeli and a Palestinian has been broadcast simultaneously on Israeli Army Radio and Voice of Palestine, in a sign of thawing relations after years of bloodshed.

The duet In My Heart was sung in Hebrew and Arabic on Sunday by Israeli David Broza and Palestinian Wisam Murad.

Broza, who co-wrote the lyrics with Murad's brother Said during sessions in Jerusalem that started two years ago, is famous in Israel for his folk and rock songs. One of his compositions has become an anthem of the left.

The Murads, Palestinians from Jerusalem, are known internationally as part of Sabreen, a group whose songs have addressed the lives of Palestinians under Israeli occupation.

"When I was 16, my grandfather said you simply had to dream it and work on it and it would come," Broza, referring to peaceful co-existence with the Palestinians, said after the broadcast."

[Slyspy]

I'm with SftS on this one*. Though I hope for a peaceful solution, I fear it will not happen. I'm in a bleak mood at the moment!

* Though I, along with SftS, do not deny the Holocaust. Thought I'd mention that before a certain individual with no punctutation and a chip on his shoulder chimes in....

[Reenk Roink]

Gah, you got the wrong idea reading Candide.

[Just A Girl]

Oh great now the terrorists are in charge.

Why dosent any 1 call them rebels any more?

The only reason there not out there rebelling like they did in medieval time using pich forks and stuff is becous, a pitch for dosent help much agains a F16 fighter pilot.

Any way, Americans are terrorists in there own right.
they demand people adheer to western rules. by force of terror.

And i really dont know why people stick there noses in to other countrys buisness.

personaly I think western rules are messed up.

its a system based on the principal that every 1's a money grabbing, self serving, self oppinionated, self obsessed, obese white male, aged 25-48

If i were you id just let them get on with it.
and stop thinking that america should go make things right.
Cos honestly..
as far as countrys go.
They dont come much worse than america (north)

So just leave em to it
"Que Sera, Sera"

[Gawain of Orkeny]

It's of rather greater importance who was where last, and in that departement the Arabs win hands down

No the Jews still do as they own it now and have for over 50 years. Again is there a time limit or not. The Jews owned it first and they own it now. That pretty much settles it in my mind. Besides the Palestinains nation never existed. So how could it have been theirs. The same for every other occupier before Israel. They were not a nation as such but just a bunch of tribes. You know like Bedouins.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

There was a continuous Jewish presence in what would become Israel even after the Jews got dispersed. They were still there before Islam and they were there after the Muslims seized that area. They are still there.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Wow.

If current estimates prove correct, Hamas now forms a majority government without the need for a coalition.

Even counting for the likelihood that some of this support must have developed in response to Fatah's "dropping the ball," this level of support for Hamas among their fellow Palestinians betokens a degree of radicalism that bodes ill for the region.

The U.S.A. has no equivalent to this for comparison. No political party with that radicalized an agenda could do much of anything within our system -- at least within recent memory. Even Huey Long and the American Bund were more or less marginal, and that was during the depression era that saw the rise of Nazism in Germany and the Fascisti in Italy and Spain.

There is talk on this sight that suggests that Hamas will now become accountable, unable to play the "opposition" and forced to moderate their methods and behavior in order to retain their surprising support. I hope that this proves to be the case.

[NodachiSam]

Perhaps it's part of Bush's plan to bring democracy to the middle east, Hamas just happens to be a known terrorist group. I seriously wonder if it was a coup or voter fraud. Apprently exit polls showed a victory for the ruling party.

[Viking]

if it wasn't israel in the middle east communism
might of spread further

If it wasn`t for the State of Israels existance, there is a possibility that Al Qaeda would never`d existed, nor the war between east and west(the crusades were long gone in 1948).



Your joking right?

I stated in a later post what I meant by that statement.
When the Israeli state was established in 1948, the arabs had made up the majority of the popoulation in what is today Israel for centuries. Thus, the jews "arrived" later. The palestines were driven out of the new Israelian state, so the Jews sort of occupied their territory.


Besides the Palestinains nation never existed. So how could it have been theirs. The same for every other occupier before Israel. They were not a nation as such but just a bunch of tribes. You know like Bedouins.


If a people doesn`t have a nationality, doesn`t it mean that you can just go and occupy the areas they live on.

[Watchman]

I don't give jack **** about whether they "had a nation" or not (I consider those things to be mostly modern artifacts anyway) - the fact is that there were more Arabs living there than Jews all the way between, well, whenever the Jews dispersed and 1948. And it's not exactly kosher to start booting out your more numerous neighbors from the locale just because *you* want it all as some sort of wacky pseudo-biblical pseudo-ethnically-homogenous pipe-dream nation-state, and your supposed ancestors a zillion years ago happened to dominate the region through the old and crude expedient of having driven previous occupants away.

That kind of logic is like saying the French and English have a legit claim to much of northern Germany because their ancestors were pushed away from there during the Migrations. :dizzy2:

Jews I have nothing against, but Zionists I despise as much as any other odious nationalist zealots. And specifically because they always seem to come up with this kind of crap to try to justify the assorted Lebensraum fantasies.

[Adrian II]

The stupidest move of the UN ever, was to establish the Israelian state. :wall:
I'm afraid that's almost purely the fault of the US...Almost purely the fault of the U.S. -- who gave you that idea?

Originally Joseph Stalin was the staunchest supporter of an Israeli state-to-be, which he counted on as a future ally because of its Socialist character, whereas as the U.S. and Great Britain were much more involved on the side of Arab nationalism as a counter-weight against Communism.

Later on, from the 1950's to the war of 1967, the French played an important role in securing the strategic independence and security of Israel. As a main supporter of Israel the U.S. only entered the picture in the 1970's.

[Watchman]

Wasn't Churchill a major figure in getting it going ? I think that was between the Wars, tho'.

[Redleg]

Almost purely the fault of the U.S. -- who gave you that idea?

Originally Joseph Stalin was the staunchest supporter of an Israeli state-to-be, which he counted on as a future ally because of its Socialist character, whereas as the U.S. and Great Britain were much more involved on the side of Arab nationalism as a counter-weight against Communism.

Later on, from the 1950's to the war of 1967, the French played an important role in securing the strategic independence and security of Israel. As a main supporter of Israel the U.S. only entered the picture in the 1970's.

From the Truman Library

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/israelchrono.htm


September 17: Secretary of State George Marshall, in an address to the United Nations, indicates that the United States is reluctant to endorse the partition of Palestine.





From Wikipedia


Creation of the plan
The United Nations, the successor to the League of Nations, attempted to solve the dispute between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine. On May 15, 1947 the UN appointed a committee, the UNSCOP, composed of representatives from eleven states. To make the committee more neutral, none of the Great Powers were represented. After spending three months conducting hearings and general survey of the situation in Palestine, UNSCOP officially released its report on August 31. A majority of nations (Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, Uruguay) recommended the creation of independent Arab and Jewish states, with Jerusalem to be placed under international administration. A minority (India, Iran, Yugoslavia) supported the creation of a single federal state containing both Jewish and Arab constituent states. Australia abstained.

On November 29, the UN General Assembly voted 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions, in favor of the Partition Plan, while making some adjustments to the boundaries between the two states proposed by it. The division was to take effect on the date of British withdrawal.

The 33 countries that voted in favor of UN Resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukraine South Africa, USSR, USA, Uruguay, Venezuela.

The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

The ten countries that abstained: Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.

One state was absent: Thailand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan

But what the hell Adrian its easier to believe that its the fault of the United States then to actually read the history of events.

[Watchman]

Ain't it grand being popular ?

[Bar Kochba]

Deathtoallhumans , perhaps it might be an idea if you get your facts straight first as what you have written is absolute rubbish , try reading the Balfour declaration for a start .
Or perhaps you might start with looking up the meaning of the word "fact" , it may help you somewhat .

what facts have i got wrong did the arabs not go to war in 1948 because they wanted the whole land and did'nt want to share or about the jews were supposd to be given jordon aswell.

Foreign Office
November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely, Arthur James Balfour

you can see by this that they wanted to give jews the land of palestine and what was part of palestine pre war ........................... jordon

[Adrian II]

But what the hell Adrian its easier to believe that its the fault of the United States then to actually read the history of events.I guess people confuse the historic role of the U.S. with its present position with regard to Israel.

[Redleg]

I guess people confuse the historic role of the U.S. with its present position with regard to Israel.

I believe you are correct with this assumption.

[Proletariat]

A few seem to be confusing the Jew's historic position. Hooray for a government basically centered on genocide. :balloon2:

[Devastatin Dave]

Anay mutha bumpa out dar dat bolives in Democracy shud be sending mad luv to dis. Now if de muthas getz all actin' a foo and all den we gotz an address of dar crib to bust a cap in dat azz. So befo' we get all chimpy and start playin' hatin' on dis, letz see wut up befo we getz crazy stupid and don't give dis a chance. Word is bond...

[Goofball]

So Goofball No, it's not. In fact, they have now stated that they firmly intend to keep that little tidbit as an integral part of their charter.

They have not firmly stated it , in fact there is another motion for acceptance of the pre '67 borders , and another for unilateral ceasefire , and one more for negotiated settlement .

Depends what news source you listen to I guess. I made that statement because listening to the news on the radio on my way to work yesterday, I heard something to the effect of "Even amid calls from other nations to delete the requirement for the destruction of Israel from their Charter, Hamas representatives state that this goal will remain an integral part of their party's policy."

[King Henry V]

Erm...

What the hell does this have to do with liberals?

Other than the fact that liberals are pretty much to blame for anything conservatives don't like, anyway...
Because liberals tend to be Palestine's staunchest supporters (you being the obvious exception).

[Idaho]

The 33 countries that voted in favor of UN Resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukraine South Africa, USSR, USA, Uruguay, Venezuela.

The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

The ten countries that abstained: Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.


I didn't know all that. All the countries that were nowhere near and probably wouldn't have to deal with the ramifications thought it was a good idea. And all those who were near it and thought the idea sucked were outvoted. Heheheh.. do you think perhaps it should have been up to the countries it would actually effect?

[Goofball]

See how much cash from the international community Hamas is able to bring in. (Not counting donations from Hezbollah, mind you.)

I'm glad to see it looks like $$ might already be drying up. Nothing definite yet, but our new Prime Minister designate seems to be moving in the right direction, as far as I'm concerned:


OTTAWA -- The new Conservative government wants clear evidence that Hamas rejects violence before recognizing the Palestinian group's democratic credentials, Stephen Harper says.
He said yesterday he'll have more to say about the Palestinian election after he is sworn in as prime minister on Feb. 6.
While the Conservatives support the creation of a democratic Palestinian state, "for a nation to be truly democratic it must renounce any use of terrorism," he said.
Mr. Harper is keeping details of his Palestinian policy under wraps until he can implement it. But a proposed Liberal government aid package of $50-million for the Palestinian Authority could be at risk.

[Ser Clegane]

I'm glad to see it looks like $$ might already be drying up.

Indeed

Palestinians Face Possible Cash Crunch (http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,397637,00.html)


Several politicians from the European Union -- the largest donor to the Palestinians -- have called for an end to Europe's financial support should Hamas take part in a government while refusing to renounce violence.

The parliamentary foreign policy spokesman for Germany's ruling Christian Democrats, Eckart von Klaeden, said international aid to the Palestinians would only be possible if Hamas recognized Israel's right to exist, which the group -- designated as terrorist by both the United States and the European Union -- has so far refused from doing. "Hamas in now forced to play a constructive role," von Klaeden told SPIEGEL ONLINE.

Let's see how the situation in Palestine develops. In combination with the saber rattling from Iran, my optimism that Hamas will change fundamentally is currently somewhat limited ... but who knows ...

[Goofball]

The 33 countries that voted in favor of UN Resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukraine South Africa, USSR, USA, Uruguay, Venezuela.

The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

The ten countries that abstained: Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.I didn't know all that. All the countries that were nowhere near and probably wouldn't have to deal with the ramifications thought it was a good idea. And all those who were near it and thought the idea sucked were outvoted. Heheheh.. do you think perhaps it should have been up to the countries it would actually effect?

Another way of looking at it is that the countries that voted against it were for the most part Muslim/Arab nations who were motivated mainly by a hatred of Jews.

I'm just throwing that out there.

[Reenk Roink]

Another way of looking at it is that the countries that voted against it were for the most part Muslim/Arab nations who were motivated mainly by a hatred of Jews.

I'm just throwing that out there.

I'm thinking that most of the "hatred of Jews" came AFTER the creation of Israel...

[Viking]

I'm thinking that most of the "hatred of Jews" came AFTER the creation of Israel...

Yeah, exept from the Nazis..I agree with that. If the Jews that were scattered all over world had stayed scattered, I think we`d had a better Middle East situation than today.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Anti-Semitism has a long and proud (but not really) history throughout Europe and the Middle-East (by pagans, Christians, Muslims and atheists).

You'll find it existed in the the Islamic world long before the establishment of the state of Israel.

[Leet Eriksson]

Arab governments today stressed that hamas must change its policies for peace talks, either way Hamas seems like its in very deep **** day 1, becuase politically they don't know how to run the state. They even asked fateh to co-rule with them but fateh refused... it will be interesting how it all turns out.

Reminder: in 1992 an islamist party won the elections in jordan, of course jordan is a monarchy but they do elects different adminstrations each 4 years, and they did absolutely terrible, after their term was done it was all over for them. Hamas might also end up like them.

[LeftEyeNine]

They even asked fateh to co-rule with them but fateh refused...

I thought they had to form a coalition, didn't they ? Is it only because they don't know how to rule a state ?

[Reenk Roink]

Anti-Semitism has a long and proud (but not really) history throughout Europe and the Middle-East (by pagans, Christians, Muslims and atheists).

You'll find it existed in the the Islamic world long before the establishment of the state of Israel.

Definitely not at the levels today...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Definitely not at the levels today...


Oh please. Ever hear of the inqusition? Jews have been persecuted ever since Rome tossed them out. Everyone wanted them to go back to their own land until they got it. Its sort of like a prison. Everyone knows we need them but not in my neighborhood.

[Reenk Roink]

I was speaking of Arab hatred of Jews....

[Viking]

Oh please. Ever hear of the inqusition? Jews have been persecuted ever since Rome tossed them out. Everyone wanted them to go back to their own land until they got it. Its sort of like a prison. Everyone knows we need them but not in my neighborhood.

The Jews did actually leave peaceful side-by-side with Muslims in back in the 13th(believe so) century. The peaceful co-existence existed until the Muslims were thrown out of Spain, and the Christian took over the rule. The Jews were then horribly persecuted. This was also the case on early crusades were the crusaders killed every Jew they could find on their way.

[Don Corleone]

I thought they had to form a coalition, didn't they ? Is it only because they don't know how to rule a state ?

Hamas won 72 seats, out of I believe 122. That is a stand alone majority, not requiring a coalition.

Hamas cannot remove the call for the destruction of Israel and the removal of all Jews from the Middle East. It is who they are and it is where they draw their recruiting support from. For them to get elected and immediately declare that they support a 2-state solution would more than likely cause widespread riots in Palestine. Palestinians voted for the end of Israel by putting Hamas in power. Even if Hamas wanted to backpedal on their tough talk, they are in a very sticky wicket indeed.

The best they could have hoped for was Fateh to have agreed to a power sharing agreement, and then they could have used Fateh as a boogeyman. Fateh was wise to allow Hamas to own this mess all alone. I don't think Iran and Saudi Arabia can single handedly support the fledgling Palestinian state, but it will be interesting to see.

My prediction is a compromise by Russia and the EU over the exact stance required of Hamas. Hamas cannot drop the language calling for the end of Israel, but they could (and probably will) call for an end to violent efforts to achieve this goal. That will be enough to soothe the EU, Russia, China and the aid will continue. The US will most likely halt it's aid and be blamed for an act of war against the Palestinians. Iranian support will now begin to go directly to Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad, who are under no sort of obligation to develop infrastructure or economic development. Much as with Fateh, Hamas's efforts to restrain the terrorism will wax and wane in an endless tide of public sentiment from the West, where the money comes from, and at home, where the political capital comes from.

At the end of the day, Palestinians will not be happy with any government that deals with Israel or acknowledges their right to exist. Any talk of a 2 state solution will be grounds for Hamas to leave just as quickly and decisively as Fateh. Next in power could be Islamic Jihad or some as yet unnamed group. In summary, it's the violence and anger the Palestinians want, not the hospitals and the schools.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

dhimmitude surely sounds like it wasn't at all based on the fact that they were Jews (although it applies to other non-muslims too).

Second class citizenship based on religion anyone?

[Don Corleone]

dhimmitude surely sounds like it wasn't at all based on the fact that they were Jews (although it applies to other non-muslims too).

Second class citizenship based on religion anyone?

Dhimminitude would have to improve to be 2nd class citizenship, but in truth, it was a superior treatment to the way non Christians were treated in pre-Enlightment Europe. The obvious caveat there is the Enlightenment occurred 400 years ago. Hopefully, some movement of ecumenical tolerance will evolve within Islam, if it hasn't already.

[Dâriûsh]

...With this ongoing campaign, I am almost certain that they (the Hamas) will eventually supplant the PA.


The Hamas will continue to inflame the masses with rhetoric and promises. They have already had armed clashes with the Fatah and the PA loyalists. And while they're building their power, the PA, in its declining state, brought down by armed conflict and corruption, is losing its grip on the people. Yet I doubt the Hamas will manage any better, despite their financial support from the Oil States, Syria, and the rest of the usual suspects.

The Hamas now have the power to change things. But will they change it for the better or the worse? Right now, I have no idea where Palestine is heading, but I am hoping for the best.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Don C:

What a depressing analysis you've added to this. Very much a SSDD assessment -- and I fear an all too accurate one.

[Leet Eriksson]

I thought they had to form a coalition, didn't they ? Is it only because they don't know how to rule a state ?

Hamas asked for coalition, but fateh refused.

[Nerouin]

Let's put up some facts here:

Hamas was not started as a vehicle for the creation of a Palestinian state. It was started as a vehicle for the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Muslim state in its place.

18% of Israel's citizens are Arabs. Most of those 18% are Muslims.

Israel's security measures are not intended to oppress Palestinians, but to protect Israelis. In this regards they have been fabulously successful, preventing 95% of terrorist attacks and in doing so saving many Palestinian as well as Israeli lives. The fence around the West Bank and Gaza has been the most effective of these measures-- since it was built, terrorist attacks have dropped precipitously.

When Israel was first voted into existence, along with an Arab state from other territory within the British territory of Palestine, Arab violence against Jews began immediately. As a result, much of it became Arab vs Jew. Many Arabs were chased from Israel. Every last Jews was evicted from the West Bank. Revealingly, in 1967 there were hundreds of thousands of Arab Israeli citizens living in Israel, but not one Jew in the West Bank.

Palestinians receive the most per-capita aid of any people in the world. Adjusted for inflation, they have received twice as much aid per capita, for twice as long, as Europe did under the Marshall Plan after WWII. This amount of money would be plenty to ensure than every Palestinian was given at least the basic necessities. However, much of it was stolen by the PLO, and very little found its way to the Palestinians. Draw your own conclusions for why this was done, but had it not been, the Palestinians would not be in nearly as dire straits economically as they are today. Hence, while security measures do restrict the Palestinians economically, they are not as poor as they are today because of the Israelis, but rather because of their corrupt leaders.

Before the start of the intifadeh, Palestinians were better off than Arabs in almost every Arab country in the world.


The Jewish population in the British territory of Palestine grew from 60,000 in 1914 to 474,000 in 1941. This was before any whisper of a Jewish state. One may bring up the Balfour Declaration, but this was later nullified by the White Papers, which also restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine.

Whatever one may want to believe, immigration is not immoral. However, the rise in Jewish immigration in the early 1900s saw corresponding anti-Jewish race riots perpetrated by Arabs. Dozens of Jews were killed, and the Jewish community in Hebron was wiped out.

Arab Israelis have always been allowed political representation in the Israeli Parliament, the Knesset.

Jewish population everywhere in the Arab world (yes, there were millions) has declined 98% since 1948, while the Arab population in Israel has grown.

The Jewish settlements in the West Bank have only been allowed on:
a)Land in pre-existing Jewish communities, or
b)Land that was unowned (that is, was previously owned by the Jordanian government and had no private owner), or
c)Land purchased from established owners.
NO settlements were established on private Arab land.

Before the creation of the state of Israel, of the British territory of Palestine 11% was owned privately by Arabs (mostly landlords), 8% by Jews. The rest was the property of the British government.

The U.N. Partition Plan of 1947 created an Arab state from the territory of Palestine as well as a Jewish state. This Arab state's borders enclosed most of the fertile areas of Palestin

[solypsist]

how come bush isn't touting this election as part of his "democracy is on the march" in the middle east?

/edit - ninja'd (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1049232&postcount=83)

[Tribesman]

Deathtoallhumans . very good you know the document . Now could you explain what the "It being clearly understood....." part means .

Nerouin , your figures there are a very long way off from the facts of the British territory of Palestine 11% was owned privately by Arabs (mostly landlords), 8% by Jews. The rest was the property of the British government.
.
Try well over 40% for the arabs not 11% , and the rest was not the property of the British government neither was it British territory , it was held in trust for the inhabitants of Palestine to be allocated on an equitble basis .
The majority of inhabitants were arabs . So by allocating the vast majority of the land held in trust to the minority population there is a clear violation of the terms of the mandate , to add to the violation of the Balfour declaration and the White paper , the revised White paper , the Green Paper the king/Crane commision findings (though they were a bit dodgy anyway) , and the pledges given to both the local councils and the Arab League .
In fact just about every clause from every document concerning the creation of the Jewish Homeland was broken by the creation of the State wasn't it .

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Tribesman:

Jordan was part of the British mandate of Palestine too.
So I guess the majority did get the most land.

[Tribesman]

Jordan was part of the British mandate of Palestine too.
So I guess the majority did get the most land.
Nope the relevant figures do not include any of the territory of transjordan , neither do the population figures (though of course the creation of that State was also a violation of the terms of the Mandate and a violation of the "promise" that had been given to the Hashemites, but then again as they had also "promised " the land that they had " promised " them to someone else it just shows that the "promises " were not worth anything anyway ) .

The land held in trust and the arab owned land were pretty even in the high 40% bracket , the Jewish owned land and the land held by the Jewish agency amounted to a total of 8% at the highest figures and 6% at the lowest .
In the territory concerned they amounted to just over 30% of the population . Therefore in the mandated terms they should have recieved just over 30% of the trust land to add to their 8% . But they didn't did they . Plus prior to partition they siezed land that they hadn't been allocated ...... for "security reasons" which sounds somewhat familiar doesn't it .

Anyhow , back to topic .
It seems that the surprise scale of the electoral victory has caught Hamas completely off guard . They are now talking about forming a coilition instead of a majority government .
I wonder if this is because they feel they want to be inclusive or because they want a coilition partner to blame when things go wrong .

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

yes, but the British Mandate of Palestine included Jordan.

The Jews in the area that is now Israel may have got more land then their population warranted (if divied up equally according to population proportions)but the non-Jewish majority population of the BMP still got most of the land:
Jordan covers 92,300 km²
whilst Israel has 20,770 km².

Edit: by the way I know this just word play, you know exactly what I mean and I get the gist of what you're saying so let's not go around in circles.

Unless you want to dance :)

[Proletariat]

how come bush isn't touting this election as part of his "democracy is on the march" in the middle east?

/edit - ninja'd (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1049232&postcount=83)

Bush quite publicly acknowledged the democratic nature of this shift. Just because something's democratic doesn't mean it's good, obviously.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry

I'm not a great Bush fan, but this is just a potshot.

[Slyspy]

Bush quite publicly acknowledged the democratic nature of this shift. Just because something's democratic doesn't mean it's good, obviously.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry

I'm not a great Bush fan, but this is just a potshot.

There are two types of democracy: Good democracy and bad democracy!

[Tribesman]

Unless you want to dance :)
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
hey , might as well ,.
Going by that premise Taffy then the allocation of land is even more imbalanced since the proportion of the Jewish owned land becomes miniscule and the land held in trust diminishes massively as a proportion (not much of the land West of the river was either State owned , church owned or in the ownership of defunct companies) . So the arabs got screwed even more in the allocation of the trust land .
Plus the Jewish proportion of the population becomes even smaller .
I don't think even the most rabid Zionist would try to use those figures as a justification :laugh4:

[Proletariat]

There are two types of democracy: Good democracy and bad democracy!

And both are preferable to the alternative, but you knew that when you responded.

[kataphraktoi]

Blaming Israrel's existence for the region's problem is myopically blind. There were always problems in the region with, or without Israel. Either it is between Muslim states or a clash of religions (Crusades).

I'd say the period before 1948 was worse than whats been happening now with immense suffering for Christians, Muslims and Jews during:

a) 7th century Arab Invasions
b) The civil wars within the Muslim Empires
c) The wars between breakaway states - Ikshidites vs Abbasids, Tulunids vs Abbasids, Hamdanids vs Tulunids, Fatimids vs Hamdanids, Fatimids vs Seljuk Turks.
d) Byzantines vs Hamdanids, Abbasids, Ummayads, Fatimids, Seljuks, Crusaders.

Now, you wouldn't say that removing Islam would give the region peace would you?

What Israel has done is the same every single nation has been established.
Might of arms. To say Israel is evil for fighting with another race is the same as saying your own nation did not fight with another race for that territory you live.

Does that its right? Well, politics has never been about right and wrong, its about what gets done.

Israel is not the problem, it is a sympton of centuries conflicts between people, religion and culture. Israel is merely, an extension a manifestation of a phenomena that is connected to the diaspora. Unfortunately, like ALL POLITICAL AND HISTORICAL CONFLICT, there is always a conflict of interest.
Palestinians were the losers like many losers over the centuries. And like losers of conflict, they are vulnerable. Be it to Israel, but more dangerously, to manipulative governments like Egypt, Syria, etc, etc who used these people as vehicles for perpetuating bloodshed.

The whole argument over who was here first is irrelevant. To use it would be utterly hypocritical as Arabs weren't known to have lived in their current political borders (as a majority) before ISLAM with exception to Jordan and the Arabian peninsular. It was only by CONQUEST and OCCUPATION as the Israelis have done that they have been recognised as legitimate owners of the land. WIll you then apply this same criteria if Israel owns this land fo 800 - 1000 more years? Or, is Israel and exception because you erroneously think it is a convenient scapegoat?

[Proletariat]

Excellent post.

[AntiochusIII]

Gah! I hate it when the Israel-Palestine topic comes up. The usual suspects of pseudo-Zionists who seem to think Israel equates God and Jews are t3h ch053n 0n35, anti-Israel Palestinian apologists who seem to think that state has to go, anti-liberals who want some jab at them for no apparent reason, among others, come up. :dizzy2:

Enough already. The point has been made: Hamas is now the leading figure of the people of Palestine, like it or not, and they will have to go through this mess they themselves helped created. And the side point has also been made, a million three hundred thousand ninety-fourth time, that the state of Israel, and many Jews, accordingly, are there right now, like it or not, and nobody can just remove them "like that."

[Samurai Waki]

Why can't they just... HUG!~:mecry: :dancing:

[Reenk Roink]

Exactly, honestly, I am quite fed up with some of the Arab states. It's really their own fault that they are in their predicament. The force of arms agreement is always valid, as too bad, Israel was stronger...(don't think I'm any Israel fanboy mind you)

The Arab states have nobody but themselves to blame for their losses...Perhaps they should take an example from their own history. Right after Mohammed, those Arabs were unstoppable. With a combination of military zeal and moral force, they were the new superpower of the world. Now you see groups like Hamas, who go and suicide bomb night clubs because they don't want to face the Israeli army. Honestly, I understand why they would want to resist, but they're going about it the wrong way...If the Palastinians think that Hamas will be able to drive Israel away, they're dead wrong...

[Kaiser of Arabia]

So we have another terrorist state. Good job Israel, you are officially ****** (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=906318&postcount=1)

/edited for language

[Strike For The South]

Its not the fact that there fighting its the fact America puts wat to much resources into Isreal and I am still at a loss for why. Why dosent this happen in other place many of them where the violence is 100 times worse?

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Its not the fact that there fighting its the fact America puts wat to much resources into Isreal and I am still at a loss for why. Why dosent this happen in other place many of them where the violence is 100 times worse?
Because Israel is the only nation in the middle east that doesn't slaughter Christians and Jews?

[Strike For The South]

Because Israel is the only nation in the middle east that doesn't slaughter Christians and Jews?

Funny I havent heard of the UAE or Turkey or Kuwait or Dubai doing that lately and that

[Nerouin]

Jordan was part of the British mandate of Palestine too.
So I guess the majority did get the most land.
Nope the relevant figures do not include any of the territory of transjordan , neither do the population figures (though of course the creation of that State was also a violation of the terms of the Mandate and a violation of the "promise" that had been given to the Hashemites, but then again as they had also "promised " the land that they had " promised " them to someone else it just shows that the "promises " were not worth anything anyway ) .

The land held in trust and the arab owned land were pretty even in the high 40% bracket , the Jewish owned land and the land held by the Jewish agency amounted to a total of 8% at the highest figures and 6% at the lowest .
In the territory concerned they amounted to just over 30% of the population . Therefore in the mandated terms they should have recieved just over 30% of the trust land to add to their 8% . But they didn't did they . Plus prior to partition they siezed land that they hadn't been allocated ...... for "security reasons" which sounds somewhat familiar doesn't it .

Anyhow , back to topic .
It seems that the surprise scale of the electoral victory has caught Hamas completely off guard . They are now talking about forming a coilition instead of a majority government .
I wonder if this is because they feel they want to be inclusive or because they want a coilition partner to blame when things go wrong .


From where did you learn that Arabs owned 30% of the land?

Oh, and FYI-- the partition plan that created the two states gave the Arabs their fair share. Any overflow from the Jews` mandated-by-you 30% included the Negev Desert, which made up more than 2/3 of the Jewish state's total area-- I wouldn't call the Jews being given that quite unfair, as the land was and still is after almost 60 years largely worthless.

For "security reasons" the Jews seized land?? You make thus sound so malicious. Uhh.. prior to the official partition in May 1945, Jews in Palestine had already been under attack by Arab-nation-supported Palestinian irregular militias, who were in the process of blockading Jerusalem, a task that would be completed by the Arab Legion after the declaration of war. War virtually began right around the time when the partition plan was voted into existence in Nov 1947, and there had been violence-- started by Arabs-- even before that. So.. what should the Israelis have done? Let themselves be overrun? In times of life-or-death, people tend to take land that they can defend. In addition, I'd be willing to be the "seized" land you mention included the Castel-- even if that wasn't included in your argument, it's still a good example. Whilst the Arab militias were in the process of starving out the Jews in Jerusalem
in late 1947-1948, the Jews (not yet officially Israelis, as the country was not yet a country yet) were sending convoys from Tel Aviv into Jerusalem. The Arabs were using the Castel and Latrun as points from which to destroy the convoys and kill everyone in them. Thus, the Jews were kind of forced to attempt a takeover of those points to ensure that the Jews in Jerusalem did not starve to death or be forced to submit.

So yes, for "security measures." Sounds familiar, yes-- the present security measures are just as necessary to protect Israeli lives. I'm truly (sarc) sorry that they neither now nor then will keel over and allow themselves to be killed. Your facts are perversions of the truth.

[Nerouin]

Palestinians kept poor by Israelis? So the Palestinians, thus, have a reason to resist?

Think about it. Israel has nothing to gain and much to lose with a poor, and thus desperate, Palestinian population. Such a situation creates extremists, and no national population in their right mind wants to border a group of violent, desperate extremists.

It is unfortunate that the Palestinian economy, being dependent on the Israeli economy, has been broken by the security measures implemented as a result of terrorism. However, this was necessary for the security of Israel, not a goal unto itself.

Also, consider that recent (before the intifadeh) times in which the terrorists have been inactive have seen prosperity for both groups. Palestinians were, in fact, better off in 2000 before the start of the intifadeh than Arabs in any of the bordering Arab states, or indeed almost every Arab state in the world.

Finally, consider that with the amount of aid that the Palestinian people get (by far the most per capita in the world), there is no reason that they should be in such dire straits. However, their leaders seem to have stolen billions. They also insisted on a resort to violence in 2000, starting this whole conflict. So, who has been keeping the Palestinians poor?

[Phatose]

Well, this just goes to show you, when you hold elections, the terrorists win.

[kataphraktoi]

Israelis didn't keep Palestinians poor, both the Israelis and their "gutless cowardly corrupt inept shortsighted traitorous" Palestinian leadership did.

My invective is against the Palestinian leadership because they invited Israeli retaliation which hurt the Palestinian civilians more than the leadership.

Lets look at it this way.

Israel strikes Palestinian infrastructure because of their frustration that the PLO has shown time and time again their careless enforcement of law and order. It was not Israeli destruction of infrastructure that preceded PLO inability, it was PLO inability that preceded the Israeli response against Palestinian infrastructure which:

a) ignored Israeli's requests to curb militants
b) actively supported it
c) inflamed civilians against Israel
d) withheld foreign AID from NEEDY PALESTINIANS by pocketing it. Arafat was one rich FAT SCROOGE who cared not a JOT about his own people.

I do not by any means condone Israelis surgical dismantlement of Palestinian infrastructure. The infrastructure existence served no purpose for the cause of peace in the first place.

Ask this:

Which side has offered the Olive branch time and time and time again to their enemy? Was it the Israelis or the Palestinians?

Ask this:

What kind of leadership bleeds it own people and blames it on their enemy which iinflames their own civilian population into people who have no hope, no future but to embrace the afterlife as opposed to this one?

Ask this:

What kind of leadership still keeps the "destruction of Israel as a state" on its covenant charter while signing and "committing" to peace accords and processes.

I'm sick and tired of Israel being the scapegoat for Arab problems. I'm no Israel fanboy, I care not a jot if Israel concedes land to the Palestinians because I'm no Zionist fan club president. But I can't tolerate one-sided polemic against a state that clearly does not have EASY decisions to make.

If land for peace was the solution, we would all be happy. But this is one big freaking frustrating quagmire of grudging interdependence between the Israelis and Palestinians, each side are so intricately tied that each of their actions invite negative consequences - even land for peace as we have just found out in the Gaza pullout.

Israeli withdraws unilaterally from Gaza. Palestinians see it as a consequence of ARMED FORCE. Israel had hoped for a consequence of dialogue but as I said before "land for peace" is not a solution.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE SOLUTION MIGHT HAVE TO BE SOMETHING WHICH HISTORY AND POLITICS HAS MADE DECISIVE WHENEVER THERE IS CONFLICT:
MAY THE STRONGEST SURVIVE.

Its sucks for sure, but its the natural human dynamic for conflict resolution. Its just like using Total War as a vicarious vehicle to shape history to our fictional favour? Fortunately we use a mouse not a gun.

[Tribesman]

From where did you learn that Arabs owned 30% of the land?

Oh Nerouin , get it right will you , it was between 44 and 47% depending on which report you read , try the Israeli board of statistics if you want confirmation from a purely "anti Isreali source " , or you could try the British survey , the anglo/American report or the UN commission on partition .:dizzy2:

For "security reasons" the Jews seized land?? You make thus sound so malicious. Uhh.. prior to the official partition in May 1945, Jews in Palestine had already been under attack by Arab-nation-supported Palestinian irregular militias, who were in the process of blockading Jerusalem, a task that would be completed by the Arab Legion after the declaration of war.
Get real , the land seized prior to partition were the enclaves that were entirely surrounded by the proposed Jewish State , they didn't want Arab enclaves within the new State .
uhhhh,...prior to partition arabs had already been under attack by Jewish iregulars , and guess what... Jerusalem wasn't going to be part of the Jewish state so how does a blockade of Jerusalem = an atack on the Jewish State ?

You mention the Arab Legion ...well hey bubba the emerging Israeli authorities had already done a deal with the arab Legion and the Legion was keeping to its side of the bargain and did throughout the conflict .

Your facts are perversions of the truth.
"My" facts put down here are a matter of public record from the Israeli government itself .....so are you saying that the Israeli government is perverting the truth ?
Or is it just that the truth doesn't fit in your mind ?

[Reenk Roink]

Because Israel is the only nation in the middle east that doesn't slaughter Christians and Jews?

Yeah, haven't heard any nation in the region do that...Perhaps I should watch more FOX...

[Leet Eriksson]

Funny I havent heard of the UAE or Turkey or Kuwait or Dubai doing that lately and that

ARRRRR WE DO ALRIGHT WE STOMP IM LIKE BUGS :furious3:

by taking their monies... :skull:

[solypsist]

i went skiing in iran two years ago and had a great time - everyone was great.

i was in dubai six months ago, for 48 hours, and it was great, too.

governmental responses to each other should not be used as the general picture of peoples' attitudes towards one another. neither should polarized incidents: when i was in iran the gov't made a common practice of using u.s. prison stats and imagery to show how the u.s. treated its citizens, which of course is a misrepresentation of everyday life for the average person here.

[Nerouin]

Tribesman-- much of what you are saying is either very vague or plain baseless conjecture. Much has no actual examples. Would you please provide some, rather than just expecting all to go on your word?

Also, you may care to take into account the fact that the other side had its stuff, too. Such situations generally cause bad results. If you look on the Arab side of the conflict, you will find even more injustices-- but you don't seem interested in that, you seem interested only in villifying Israel.

As for the land debate, people seem to be forgetting that those areas which were predominantly Arab still are. This leaves the rather racist rail of thought that it is not acceptable for Muslims to be ruled by Jews. Also, the Negev, which made up the majority of the original Jewish state, was almost entirely under Jewish or public
control. I concede that perhaps my figures are incorrect, after further research-- but the fact remains. Also, see the hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Arab Jews expelled from Arab Muslim countries. Israel was not really the uncommon villain that you make it out to be. In fact, it was and still is the most humane country in the region. Is no other of the surrounding countries villified because such terrible things as all have done are expected of them?

In any case, regardless of the history, we have the situation we have now. Again, you seem more interested in throwing attacks in the direction of Israel than in discussing any real topic of importance.

[Tribesman]

. I concede that perhaps my figures are incorrect, after further research-- but the fact remains.
Nerouin , you concede perhaps ??????
We have had this discussion before , last time the initial figures you used were even further from the truth than the ones you used this time .
Why persist in trying to use "facts" that you already know are false , or do you forget that they are false or something ?

Tribesman-- much of what you are saying is either very vague or plain baseless conjecture. Much has no actual examples. Would you please provide some, rather than just expecting all to go on your word?


Really , take a look at the partition map and locate Arab enclaves entirely within the borders of the proposed Jewish State . Now how many places could I possibly be refering to ? It is not vague at all . I even specify that it was before the partition went through .
The same for the deal between the emerging government and the Arab Legion , there is only one deal that could possibly be , unless there are other deals that still remain classified by both Jordan and Israel .
There is no conjecture in the post to which you refer , and it is based on information from the Israeli government and its archives which is freely available , so that rules out any anti israeli bias in the source .


Again, you seem more interested in throwing attacks in the direction of Israel than in discussing any real topic of importance.
Nope , I am throwing attacks , as you put it , at the use of "facts" that are completely false .

Yep ,it is clearly evident that I wil only attack Isreal and will totally ignore the subject of Hamas and the elections as is illustrated by my total avoidance of statements starting withAs for the subject at hand ......or.....Anyhow , back to topic .
:no: :shrug:

[Bar Kochba]

[QUOTE=solypsist]i went skiing in iran two years ago and had a great time - everyone was great.

i was in dubai six months ago, for 48 hours, and it was great, too.



are u rich???

[Viking]

Blaming Israrel's existence for the region's problem is myopically blind. There were always problems in the region with, or without Israel. Either it is between Muslim states or a clash of religions (Crusades).

But it wouldn`t it be less violence if wasn`t as a high consentrations of Jews in the Middle East as it is today? I think the Palestines would either have lived peacefully side-by-side with the Jews, or the Jews would have fled the region since they were merely a miniority. Now, of course, the solution isn`t to remove the state of Israel; that`s near impossible and pointless. The solution is to have Israel give back the occupied territory, and return to the original borders they were given by the UN.

[AntiochusIII]

are u rich???What kind of ad hominem is that?

Wait, is it at all? You don't need to be rich, you know, to visit different countries in the world.

[Bar Kochba]

teah but some of those hotels in dubai are like 2000 pounds a night or somthing

[Gawain of Orkeny]

But it wouldn`t it be less violence if wasn`t as a high consentrations of Jews in the Middle East as it is today?


And there would be much less violence aound the world if there wasnt as high a concentration of Arabs in the Midddle East . In fact far less than if Jews dominated that region. Whats your point?

[Reenk Roink]

Warning, we are entering a racism zone...on both sides...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Warning, we are entering a racism zone...on both sides...

Im glad you caught my drift. Actually this whole thing is racist. Insisting that a nation belongs to one group or the other because their Jewish or arab.Arabs have always been allowed in Israel while no Jews are allowed in Palestine or most of th rest of the middle east . It seems pretty much a one way street. Listen to tribesman claiming that it should belong to the Palestinians because there were more arabs there. An arab once more does not a Palestiniann make. Its like claiming the US should only allow white christian people to live here because theres more of us and we settled here first. The Palestinians must learn to accept Jews in their midst or there will never be peace.

[Adrian II]

But it wouldn`t it be less violence if wasn`t as a high consentrations of Jews in the Middle East as it is today?High concentrations of Jews in the Middle East? A couple million against circa 300 million Arabs? Apart from one major concentration (guess which?) there are almost no Jews (left) in Arab countries. The advent of Arab nationalism took care of that.

[kataphraktoi]

Viking, didnt you read my post?

There was more violence even before 1948, before the concentration of Jews in the Middle East. What does that tell you? It tells you that whether Jews are there or not, there is always conflict with a degree of violence worse. Despite the Pan-Arab unity rhetoric, each Arab state has their own interests at heart. Look how the Egypt-Syria union turned out, or the Egypt-Yemen war. Or, how about the Lebanon Civil War? Wait, wait, how about the internal strife in those countries as well?

[Reenk Roink]

Im glad you caught my drift. Actually this whole thing is racist. Insisting that a nation belongs to one group or the other because their Jewish or arab.Arabs have always been allowed in Israel while no Jews are allowed in Palestine or most of th rest of the middle east . It seems pretty much a one way street. Listen to tribesman claiming that it should belong to the Palestinians because there were more arabs there. An arab once more does not a Palestiniann make. Its like claiming the US should only allow white christian people to live here because theres more of us and we settled here first. The Palestinians must learn to accept Jews in their midst or there will never be peace.

Gaiwan, you make it seem as if Arabs living in Israel or in its territory have such great lives...Surely this is not the case seeing how so many Arabs fled to neighboring countries everytime a war broke out. And the Israeli Arabs, though they have much better rights and lives than the occupied Palastinians, are still second class at best. Obviously they would be, as Israel is a Jewish State. It's not a one way issue, and I have already pointed out the Arabs fault in this situation, as it seems that the European anti-Semitism in the early 20th century has spread to Arab lands. But blame is on both sides. I wish someone would actually point that out.

[solypsist]

there are plenty of palestinian jews.



Im glad you caught my drift. Actually this whole thing is racist. Insisting that a nation belongs to one group or the other because their Jewish or arab.Arabs have always been allowed in Israel while no Jews are allowed in Palestine or most of th rest of the middle east . It seems pretty much a one way street. Listen to tribesman claiming that it should belong to the Palestinians because there were more arabs there. An arab once more does not a Palestiniann make. Its like claiming the US should only allow white christian people to live here because theres more of us and we settled here first. The Palestinians must learn to accept Jews in their midst or there will never be peace.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Gaiwan, you make it seem as if Arabs living in Israel or in its territory have such great lives...Surely this is not the case seeing how so many Arabs fled to neighboring countries everytime a war broke out.

Maybe they dont like living in a war zone. If its so bad why dont they flee in times of peace? Even the Palestinians themselves were better off than most arabs in the region until the last intafada.


And the Israeli Arabs, though they have much better rights and lives than the occupied Palastinians, are still second class at best. Obviously they would be, as Israel is a Jewish State.

And still better off than arabs in most any other place. Its much like the claim that blacks in the US are second class citizens.


Israeli Arabs
It is widely believed throughout the world that Arabs living in Israel are reguarded as second class citizens and have less rights than Israel's Jewish citizens. Some go as far as calling Israel an apartheid state. While there definitly is a sizeable amount of anti-Arab sentiment and discrimination, these accusations of aparatheid are outragously false. Arabs/Muslims in Israel represent 1.2 million out of a total population of 6.25 million. That is about 20%. These Muslims are the only Muslims in the middle east that have the right to free speech, the right to vote for the head of their government, and have the highest standard of living then Muslims in any other middle eastern country. Muslims in Israel enjoy more freedom of relgion than Muslims in many other Muslim country (such as Iran and Saudi Arabia). The only difference in citizenship rights between Jewish and Arab citizens, is Arabs are not required to serve in the I.D.F when they turn 18, as Jews are. However many of them, especially the Druze and the Bedouin, choose to serve to protect their country.

Some people point out the large income gap and the higher infant mortality rates between Israel's Arab and Jewish citizens. It should be noted that despite the higher infant mortality rates of Arabs in Israel, Arabs STILL tend to have more children than the Jews. In Arab society women are discouraged from working. This reduces the average income of Arabs in Israel.

Despite some of Israel's shortcomings towards its Arab citizens, Arabs and Muslims in Israel are treated much better than Jews and Christians in most Arab/Muslim countries. Unlike Christians and Jews in Muslim countries, Arabs/Muslims in Israel are not subject to any form of state sponsered discrimination. Arabs and Muslims actually have protection from employment and housing discrimination similar to the protections enjoyed by minorities in the U.S. and Europe. In case the rights of Arabs/Muslims are violated there are many groups, such as Adalah, which defend Arab victims of discrimination in Israeli courts. This type of protection is not available to non-Muslims in most Muslim countries.

Arabs/Muslims make up a large part of Israeli society. For example:

- Many Arabs play on the Israeli soccer team
- 10% of the Israeli Kessenet is Arab/Muslim
- An Arab Justice, Salim Joubran, holds a seat on the Israeli Supreme Court
- The Israeli government is currently implementing a 4-year, 4 billion shekel plan to develop infrastructures in the Arab sector
- Israeli Arabs attend and lecture in every Israeli university (despite contrary claims of the British AUT)
- Diplomatic posistions are filled by Arabs in Finland, many South American countries, and even the Israeli consulate in Atlanta
- The Israeli constitution clearly encourages Israel's Arab citizens to stay in the country and live among the population in peace and clearly calls for equal civil rights for the Arab minority:
WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.
From the Israeli Declaration of Independance




there are plenty of palestinian jews.



There sure are. Ive always maintained that. The thing is now they all live in the part of Palestine called Israel or in what many of you deem conquered land and no where else to speak of.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

sorry dbl post

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Circletime, just for Tribesman.


yes, but the British Mandate of Palestine included Jordan.

The Jews in the area that is now Israel may have got more land then their population warranted (if divied up equally according to population proportions)but the non-Jewish majority population of the BMP still got most of the land:
Jordan covers 92,300 km²
whilst Israel has 20,770 km².

Edit: by the way I know this just word play, you know exactly what I mean and I get the gist of what you're saying so let's not go around in circles.

Unless you want to dance :)

Edit: just to clarify, some earlier posts made it sound like Israel consisted of most of the BMP. I merely pointed out that it did not.
I have no beef with your figures. Like I said, this all just wordplay.

Edit: just a random question, do you like lucky charms? I like leeks.

[Tribesman]

Listen to tribesman claiming that it should belong to the Palestinians because there were more arabs there.
OMG what is it with these imaginary statements this week , now Gawains at it . Is there something being added to the water over there?
So come on Gawain , where did I say make that claim ?
Or are you also using a copy of "the ultimate book of word definitions" ?

just a random question, do you like lucky charms?
I don't know , never tried them :shrug:
I like leeks. Mmmmmm leeks fried with fresh coriander and ginger :2thumbsup:

Oh , just noticed this bit .....Maybe they dont like living in a war zone. If its so bad why dont they flee in times of peace?
Did you miss what happened as soon as the Southern border in Gaza was opened Gawain , thousands fled .

[Gawain of Orkeny]

OMG what is it with these imaginary statements this week , now Gawains at it . Is there something being added to the water over there?
So come on Gawain , where did I say make that claim ?
Or are you also using a copy of "the ultimate book of word definitions" ?


Always with the thinly veiled personal attacks. You just cant help starting a reaply without a dig can you? You continue to argue that because the majority of Palestine was either Arab or Muslim that it belonged to them. I dont see any other way to interpret your posts.You claim there were palestinians before Israel came to be but seem to thing only arabs and Muslims should be allowed to have a nation there. I take it then that only arabs and Muslims are Palestinians with a few token christians thrown in to show how tolerant they are.


Did you miss what happened as soon as the Southern border in Gaza was opened Gawain , thousands fled
And do you think there better off for it? I never claimed they were smart, in fact just the opposite.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Gaiwan, you make it seem as if Arabs living in Israel or in its territory have such great lives...Surely this is not the case seeing how so many Arabs fled to neighboring countries everytime a war broke out. And the Israeli Arabs, though they have much better rights and lives than the occupied Palastinians, are still second class at best.

Wrong. Before the Iraqi elections, it was the only country in the middle east where Arab women could vote. They have the same rights as Jews.



Obviously they would be, as Israel is a Jewish State.

So? You sound as though it were well kown fact that all Jewish states discriminate. Obviously, there is no such evidence.

Crazed Rabbit

[Reenk Roink]

Wrong. Before the Iraqi elections, it was the only country in the middle east where Arab women could vote. They have the same rights as Jews.

So? You sound as though it were well kown fact that all Jewish states discriminate. Obviously, there is no such evidence.

Crazed Rabbit

There is one "Jewish state." It is a fairly secular state as well, with the ETHNICITY being emphasized.

Lets look at some of the rights that Arab Israeli's (not the Palastinians in West Bank and Gaza) have:

"The Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel can be viewed as a national (Palestinian), ethnic (Arab), religious (Muslim, Christian and Druze) and linguistic (Arabic) minority in a state where about 80% of the population is Jewish.

In 1948, in what Palestinians call al-Nakba (the Catastrophe), the Palestinian populations of more than 450 of the 550 towns and villages that had existed within the area that became Israel (as defined by the Green Line, thus excluding East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza) were driven out by the Israeli army, and in many cases their homes were destroyed. Of a pre-1948 Palestinian population of 950,000, two categories of refugees emerged: 800,000 Palestinians were expelled from the country and forced to become refugees in the neighbouring Arab states, and of the 150,000 Palestinians who remained within the boundaries of the new state of Israel, approximately 25% were displaced from their homes to other locations, thus becoming internal refugees. Until today, the Palestinian IDPs inside Israel hold the status of being "present absentees", a legal absurdity created by the Absentees' Property Law in 1950.

Meanwhile, successive governments have regarded the Arab community as a hostile element in the context of the ongoing violence between Israel and the Occupied Territories. Israel has been in an officially declared state of emergency from 1948 to date, with the state's Arab citizens subjected to military rule from 1948 until 1966. Various pieces of emergency legislation authorise the state to suspend the Arab citizens' civil rights. Especially after the events of October 2000, when 13 Arab citizens of Israel were killed by the Israeli security forces, the situation of the Arab minority has worsened.

The steady right-ward movement of Israeli politics in the new millennium has devastating consequences for the Arab Palestinian minority, and its effects are reflected on all levels of society. The interconnected socio-political developments become manifest in the legal, political and institutional sectors as well as in the Jewish Israeli public.

On the legislative level, the Nationality and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order), also referred to as the Family Reunification Law, raised major concerns both within the Arab minority and the international community. The law was passed by the Israeli Parliament (the Knesset) in July 2003. It states that it is illegal for an Israeli citizen to marry a spouse who is nationally Palestinian.

Furthermore, the law implies distinctions based on ethnicity. In this context,
the issue of Jewish settlements outside Israel.s borders . in the Occupied Territories . is worth noting. An Israeli citizen can live in Israel and marry a resident of the Occupied Territories if this resident lives in an "Israeli community in the region." The only such communities that exist are referred to internationally as settlements, and are without exception only available to people who are Jewish. However, the same Israeli citizen living in Israel cannot marry a resident of the same region . the Occupied Territories . who is Palestinian by ethnicity, nationality, or residence.

Discrimination and racially motivated violence is inherent in Israeli state institutions as well. Institutional discrimination is exemplified by Israel's segregationist school system. Moreover, the appalling increase in police violence against Arab citizens of Israel proves the worrying trend of growing racism.

Arab Palestinian pupils in Israel are educated in a school system wholly separate from the Jewish majority. Due to biased budget allocations and curricula, the Arab education sector offers fewer facilities and educational opportunities than its Jewish counterpart, which leads to a general education deficit among the Palestinian minority citizens. According to a Human Rights Watch Report (Second Class: Discrimination against Palestinian Arab Children in Israel's Schools, 2001); "Palestinian Arab students drop out of school at three times the rate of Jewish students and are less likely to pass the national exams common to the two systems for a high school diploma.
Only a handful make it to university. [.] Israeli government authorities have acknowledged the gaps between Arab and Jewish education but have failed to equalize the two systems."

The growing number of cases of police violence against Arab citizens is another serious institutional problem. Since 13 minority citizens have been killed by Israeli police in October 2000, 15 more Arab citizens have died by the hands of the police. Currently, the HRA.s Research and Reporting unit is investigating the worrying increase of police violence against the Arab minority.

Especially in connection with house demolitions, excessive violence is being used. On February 25, 2004, Israeli police demolished five houses in the Arab village of Bea’na in the Galilee. Witnesses reported that about 1,500 policemen invaded Bea’na, shooting teargas into the village. Police then entered the village with three bulldozers. Dozens of people were injured by teargas and beatings by police officers. About 30 people had to be hospitalised.

In connection with government policies, references to Arabs inside Israel as a .demographic threat. and the growing acceptance of 'transfer' as a legitimate population policy have upset the Arab minority citizens.

In 2002, the Israel Council for Demography reconvened after five years of inactivity, to formulate a policy that will preserve the Jewish character of the state. The council is a government agency, and one of its main aims is "to increase the Jewish birth-rate by encouraging Jewish women to have more children using government grants, housing benefits and other incentives." The Council’s work is supported by public funds. Its reconvening aroused extensive Arab protests against the characterisation of Arab birth as a demographic danger.

In January 2003, the Sharon government announced it had developed a five year plan, backed by a budget of NIS 1.175 billion (over US$ 250m), to bring an end to the Bedouin land issue in the Negev. Despite current economic concerns, this considerable sum was allocated in the 2003 state budget. The Sharon Plan, as it is referred to officially, is a comprehensive strategy to remove the Bedouin of the unrecognised villages from their land and concentrate them into three townships. A total of 395 million NIS (app. US$ 90m) has been allocated for house demolitions and land expropriation. Since the plan has been launched, house demolitions have increased in the Negev. It should be noted here that the phenomenon of unrecognised villages and regular house demolitions does not only affect the Bedouin in the south. It occurs all over Israel.

In December 2003, a conference on security issues, organised by the Institute of Policy and Strategy of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herziliya, proved that demographics have become a popular topic among Israel.s political elite. Minister of Finance and former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated, "if there is a demographic problem, and there is, it is with the Israeli Arabs who will remain Israeli citizens.[.] We therefore need a policy that will first of all guarantee a Jewish majority . I say this with no hesitation, as a liberal, a democrat, and a Jewish patriot." He further declared that additional funds will be allocated for the building of the separation wall which is to prevent a .demographic spill-over. from the Occupied Territories.

This trend towards treating the Arab minority as a demographic threat, the enemy from within, certainly has a major impact on the Jewish Israeli public as well. The prevailing hostile attitude of members of the Jewish majority towards their fellow-citizens is expressed by both prominent members of the Israeli intellectual establishment and the general public.

In January 2004, Ha'aretz Magazine published an interview with Benny Morris, a famous historian, in which he stated that "[...] he [Ben-Gurion] made a serious historical mistake in 1948. Even though he understood the demographic issue and the need to establish a Jewish state without a large Arab minority, he got cold feet during the war. In the end, he faltered. [.] If he was already engaged in expulsion, maybe he should have done a complete job."

Moreover, the Israeli Democracy Institute's 2003 Democracy Index Project revealed that these political sentiments are no longer isolated in the views of hardliners and extremists. For example, the survey found that 77% of Jewish Israelis maintain that there must be a Jewish majority on all critical decisions concerning the state; 57% think that the state must encourage its Arab citizens to emigrate from Israel to other countries; and 69% are against the inclusion of Arab political parties in the government, including having Arab ministers in the Cabinet.

Recently, hate crimes committed by Jewish Israelis against their Arab fellow citizens have increased considerably. The most alarming sign is the current police investigation of a suspected Jewish terrorist cell in Haifa, which has already led to several arrests of Jewish Israelis.

The politics of the current Israeli government have intensified the vicious circle of fear, suspicion and discrimination inside Israel, leading to grave violations of the human rights of 20% of Israel's citizenry, the Arab minority. The current situation is highly alarming and may escalate; the events of October 2000 are still present in our minds. Therefore, we call upon the international community to follow the political and social developments with scrutiny and remind Israel of the international norms it agreed to comply with by ratifying the major human-rights conventions."

Now keep in mind, I know the weakness of "International Law" and am a stronger believer in the "powerful make the rules." This is the only practical approach. But I sure ain't a Israel fanboy.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Link please. Sounds like a bunch of Palestinian propaganda. Can you back these claims up?

[Reenk Roink]

My browser automatically clears history and cookies once I close it, so I can't get the link right now, but I surely will search for it. It came from some Arab organization, but if you really want to dismiss it as propaganda go ahead. I don't much care for their mission, but I certainly know that what they say goes on in Israel. Here's another link and maybe since it's not Arab it will be more credible in your eyes:

http://www.jfjfp.org/

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Not in the least.

[Reenk Roink]

Very well then, I think this discussion is finished.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

You think because the site says its from Jews that it makes it true?

Show me something that backs this up?


In 1948, in what Palestinians call al-Nakba (the Catastrophe), the Palestinian populations of more than 450 of the 550 towns and villages that had existed within the area that became Israel (as defined by the Green Line, thus excluding East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza) were driven out by the Israeli army, and in many cases their homes were destroyed. Of a pre-1948 Palestinian population of 950,000, two categories of refugees emerged: 800,000 Palestinians were expelled from the country and forced to become refugees in the neighbouring Arab states, and of the 150,000 Palestinians who remained within the boundaries of the new state of Israel, approximately 25% were displaced from their homes to other locations, thus becoming internal refugees. Until today, the Palestinian IDPs inside Israel hold the status of being "present absentees", a legal absurdity created by the Absentees' Property Law in 1950.

[Reenk Roink]

No, I think because both sites cite Human Rights Watch studies and findings, (the very same used in places like North Korea and Iran which I see no arguement from some people) that they are credible.

It's funny, I see some people asking me to "prove" that Israel does naughty things...yet no one asks for proof for statements such as "Because Israel is the only nation in the middle east that doesn't slaughter Christians and Jews?"

[Nerouin]

But it wouldn`t it be less violence if wasn`t as a high consentrations of Jews in the Middle East as it is today? I think the Palestines would either have lived peacefully side-by-side with the Jews, or the Jews would have fled the region since they were merely a miniority. Now, of course, the solution isn`t to remove the state of Israel; that`s near impossible and pointless. The solution is to have Israel give back the occupied territory, and return to the original borders they were given by the UN.

The Arabs of the region (or at least enough of them) proved their inability to live side by side with the Jews through several venues, including

A) Seeking a limit to Jewish immigration
B) Multiple anti-Jewish race riots, in which hundreds of Jews were killed. It was in response to these riots that Jewish defense forces were first formed-- the British refused to do anything to prevent them, or to protect the Jews.


Now tell me-- were the West Bank and Gaza considered "occupied territory" between 1948 and 1967, when they were owned by Jordan and Egypt, respectively? No-- this classification only came about when it became the Jews governing Arabs, rather than Arabs governing Arabs.

Also, please outline your plan to remove 350,000 Israelis and hundred of billions of dollars of infrastructure from the West Bank.

Plus, please explain your rationale as to why peoples should flee any area in which they are minorities.

Finally, keep in mind that, not counting the Arab/Israeli Wars, which were (with the exception of the almost-forgotten Suez War of the 1950s, a rather tiny affair) all started by the Arabs, the surrounding Arab countries have killed more than 50x as many of their own people than Israel, at least. They have also killed more Palestinians (also Arabs, but somehow distinct in the eyes of the world), by far, than the Israelis have.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

No, I think because both sites cite Human Rights Watch studies

Well find a link to them that states this.



It's funny, I see some people asking me to "prove" that Israel does naughty things...


I now Israel does naughty things as does almost everyone else. Thats not what Im disputing. Im disputing


Of a pre-1948 Palestinian population of 950,000, two categories of refugees emerged: 800,000 Palestinians were expelled from the country and forced to become refugees in the neighbouring Arab states, and of the 150,000 Palestinians who remained within the boundaries of the new state of Israel,

Thats a lie.

[Nerouin]

No, I think because both sites cite Human Rights Watch studies and findings, (the very same used in places like North Korea and Iran which I see no arguement from some people) that they are credible.

It's funny, I see some people asking me to "prove" that Israel does naughty things...yet no one asks for proof for statements such as "Because Israel is the only nation in the middle east that doesn't slaughter Christians and Jews?"

No, I think the issue is that Israel is expected to act angelic in the midst of an extremely difficult and rather unique situation. In any other situation like this that the world has seen in the recent past, one side has simply massacred the other. No doubt the terrorists would do so if given a chance. Israel has obviously chosen not to.

[kataphraktoi]

Do Israelis know what it feels like to be dispossessed like the Palestinians? Sure they do, they lived in various Arab countries for centuries only to be kicked out with their houses taken away and their goods , belongings and separated from loved ones (sound familiar?)

The interesting contrast is the response of Israel to incorporate these Jewish refugees, while the Arab states exploited refugees.

We KNOW IT IS FUTILE TO RIGHT WRONGS, DO AS HISTORY AND POLITICS DOES AND ADAPT!!!

[Tribesman]

Wrong. Before the Iraqi elections, it was the only country in the middle east where Arab women could vote.
Rabbit ...WRONG :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Try Egypt , Syria , Iraq ,Iran , Jordan , Qatar , Yeman where women have equal voting rights , oh and Lebanon (though only if they have been to elementary school which isn't equal).
So where are all these countries where women don't have the vote ?
Oh I see you mean Oman where they didn't get the vote till 2003 .
Yep , Israel is the only country over there where women can vote :dizzy2:

Always with the thinly veiled personal attacks. You just cant help starting a reaply without a dig can you? You continue to argue that because the majority of Palestine was either Arab or Muslim that it belonged to them. I dont see any other way to interpret your posts.You claim there were palestinians before Israel came to be but seem to thing only arabs and Muslims should be allowed to have a nation there. I take it then that only arabs and Muslims are Palestinians with a few token christians thrown in to show how tolerant they are.


Once again you argue against imaginary claims that I have not made , So ......whassup can you not counter the points that I have made .

Oh and in regards to this at Reenk Roink.
Thats a lie.
Not quite , he has used the higher figures that are cited from many sources .
In this case it is often better despite the inherant bias of the source to use the figures from the Israeli government , would you care to guess what that sources figures are ?
And since you claim that the Israelis give their arab population equal treatment could you explain , in regards to the internally displaced refugees ,
how the Government has refused to follow the repeated rulings from the Israeli supreme court that have come down in favour of the internal refugees ,
or the repeated rulings against the use of the absentee laws .


Now tell me-- were the West Bank and Gaza considered "occupied territory" between 1948 and 1967, when they were owned by Jordan and Egypt, respectively? No-- this classification only came about when it became the Jews governing Arabs, rather than Arabs governing Arabs.

Nerouin , sorry to urinate on your bonfire yet again , but they were considered occupied territories and there are numerous rulings dealing with them as occupied territories .:oops:
Finally, keep in mind that, not counting the Arab/Israeli Wars, which were (with the exception of the almost-forgotten Suez War of the 1950s, a rather tiny affair) all started by the Arabs,
Oh dear , you really should study Israeli history a little more .:book:

Now back to the topic at hand :sweatdrop:
It seems that the militants attatched to the PLO/Fatah groupings are not happy with either the result of the elections or with their political leadership .
Could this signal a return(though it has never really stopped) of internal conflict within those groups and also against Hamas .
If conflict does come about between hamas and the various PLO groups do you think that given the fundbase , its radical nature and its wealthy foriegn supporters that Hamas would rise to military ascendancy as well as political ascendancy in Palestine . Or do you think that its radical nature would turn the population against it in the event of conflict ?

[Reenk Roink]

Well find a link to them that states this.

Umm, if you read closely, or even search for the words "HRW" it's in the text...


Thats a lie.

Hmm, you may beleive what you wish, but the Israeli government even states that 500,000 refugees were displaced, Palestinian organizations state 900,000, and here you are, the UN states 711,000:


15. The estimate of the statistical expert, which the Committee believes to be as accurate as circumstances permit, indicates that the refugees from Israel- controlled territory amount to approximately 711,000. The fact that there is a higher number of relief recipients appears to be due among other things to duplication of ration cards, addition of persons who have been displaced from area other than Israel-held areas and of persons who, although not displaced, are destitute.

http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/93037e3b939746de8525610200567883!OpenDocument

And it's silly to think that the region has always been so turbulent, as it has not. The entire region in the middle east pre-Treaty of Versailles when the Ottoman Empire was defeated was much more stable, and even after the winners carved out countries, pre-1948 middle east was still a hell of a lot stabler than any point afterwards.

And yes, I know it's futile to right wrongs as we can't even agree who is right and who is wrong, but I am frankly pissed off with both Israel and the Arab states for creating the current world climate I am living in. And honestly, if say the Arab countries unite and simply overwhelm Israel like Israel did to them previously, we will see the exact people in the opposite spectrum whining.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Hmm, you may beleive what you wish, but the Israeli government even states that 500,000 refugees were displaced, Palestinian organizations state 900,000, and here you are, the UN states 711,000:


But none of these supports the claim made by the article you posted.


Of a pre-1948 Palestinian population of 950,000, two categories of refugees emerged: 800,000 Palestinians were expelled from the country and forced to become refugees in the neighbouring Arab states, and of the 150,000 Palestinians who remained within the boundaries of the new state of Israel,

Even if the numbers were correct they werent all expelled or did the Israelis pick which 150000 to let remain?

PS I wasnt callimg you a liar but the article.


And honestly, if say the Arab countries unite and simply overwhelm Israel like Israel did to them previously, we will see the exact people in the opposite spectrum whining.

Thats what started this whole mess. What makes you think they would do any better vs Israel today. Israel could probavly take over the whole middle east if they really had a mind to and no outside power intervened. Again it amazes me how restrained the Israelis are.

[Reenk Roink]

But none of these supports the claim made by the article you posted.

It's an estimate by that organization, and pretty close indeed to the UN estimate.


Even if the numbers were correct they werent all expelled or did the Israelis pick which 150000 to let remain?

All I can bring up is numbers. I was not there and did not see the event.


Thats what started this whole mess. What makes you think they would do any better vs Israel today. Israel could probavly take over the whole middle east if they really had a mind to and no outside power intervened. Again it amazes me how restrained the Israelis are.

Firstly, I simply brought up a hypothetical situation, I did not mean to imply that the Arabs could defeat Israel today as they are. Of course not, I made that clear in my previous rant in this thread. The only thing fighting Israel are some terrorist organizations that can't face up to the Israeli army so they pick on soft civilian targets. The Arab wars against Israel have been poorly planned, poorly manned, and that is why they got their ass handed to them (excuse my language).

If indeed there WERE NO OUTSIDE INTERVENTION meaning just Arab states vs Israel, then Israel would have a tougher time defending itself in those wars.
The only reason Israel is what it is today is because of US aid and military supplies. Israel is the number one buyer of military goods from the US. Think about why the Palestinians hate America, they know that those tanks aren't Israeli built, they're from America.

Also, even with American support, I do doubt that Israel would go far in conquering the middle east. Look at Iraq...


PS I wasnt callimg you a liar but the article.

Of Course Gaiwan, I know you would never call me that, you're RTK. ~;) :bow:

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

just to be knit picky but, despite buying many military supplies from the U.S., many Israeli tanks and other armour are the result of Israeli research and development e.g. Merkava

P.S. they are Israeli built too.

Edit: do they hate France too? seeing as some of the Israelis' defence technologies are upgrades of French originals (e.g. Mirage based aircraft)

[Gawain of Orkeny]

The only reason Israel is what it is today is because of US aid and military supplies.

Thats not quite so. As has been pointed out the have one of the best arms industries in the world. Also many mistakenly believe the US supplied them in 1948. Fact is we embargoed both sides while the british armed the arabs.On paper Israel should have been destroyed.


All I can bring up is numbers. I was not there and did not see the event.


My point is claiming they were all expelled is bogus.

[Viking]

And there would be much less violence aound the world if there wasnt as high a concentration of Arabs in the Midddle East . In fact far less than if Jews dominated that region. Whats your point?

If the Jews hadn`t been adviced(and actually did so) to move to the newly established Israeli state, I don`t think there would be as much conflicts between the Palestines and the Jews as we see today; because the Jews couldn`t supress the Palestines because they[the Jews] would`ve merely been a miniority in what is todays Israel.



High concentrations of Jews in the Middle East? A couple million against circa 300 million Arabs? Apart from one major concentration (guess which?) there are almost no Jews (left) in Arab countries. The advent of Arab nationalism took care of that.

High consentration in Israel, sorry.



Viking, didnt you read my post?

There was more violence even before 1948, before the concentration of Jews in the Middle East. What does that tell you? It tells you that whether Jews are there or not, there is always conflict with a degree of violence worse. Despite the Pan-Arab unity rhetoric, each Arab state has their own interests at heart. Look how the Egypt-Syria union turned out, or the Egypt-Yemen war. Or, how about the Lebanon Civil War? Wait, wait, how about the internal strife in those countries as well?


You pointed out incidences way back in time; besides, you didn`t mention any wars with Jews involved.
I am not saying that there wouldn`t be violence in the area without Jews(the State of Israel), I am just saying that we wouldn`t have this large scale heated conflict between Jews and Arabs. We would have less conflict in the are of what is today Israel; the rest of the Middle East`s political situation do not really have anything to do with Israel, apart from the conflicts regarding Israel in itself.



The Arabs of the region (or at least enough of them) proved their inability to live side by side with the Jews through several venues, including

A) Seeking a limit to Jewish immigration
B) Multiple anti-Jewish race riots, in which hundreds of Jews were killed. It was in response to these riots that Jewish defense forces were first formed-- the British refused to do anything to prevent them, or to protect the Jews.


Give me a date for these events, and more info in general, please.


Now tell me-- were the West Bank and Gaza considered "occupied territory" between 1948 and 1967, when they were owned by Jordan and Egypt, respectively? No-- this classification only came about when it became the Jews governing Arabs, rather than Arabs governing Arabs.


No, it didn`t.


Also, please outline your plan to remove 350,000 Israelis and hundred of billions of dollars of infrastructure from the West Bank.

I think we already have gotten a demonstration on that such a thing is possible, although in a much smaller scale. If this is necessary for peace, it should be done. I`m not sure about Palestine demands(apart from Hamas), so I wont comment any further.


Plus, please explain your rationale as to why peoples should flee any area in which they are minorities.

If you are being persecuted by the great majority, it might be a good idea to flee. But I don`t think the Jews would`ve been persecuted if they had stayed a miniority.


Finally, keep in mind that, not counting the Arab/Israeli Wars, which were (with the exception of the almost-forgotten Suez War of the 1950s, a rather tiny affair) all started by the Arabs, the surrounding Arab countries have killed more than 50x as many of their own people than Israel, at least. They have also killed more Palestinians (also Arabs, but somehow distinct in the eyes of the world), by far, than the Israelis have.

There are one Jewish/Israeli, but many Arab interests in the area.
There are also far more arabs there.
Besides, this has little to do with the Israeli state.

[Reenk Roink]

Thats not quite so. As has been pointed out the have one of the best arms industries in the world. Also many mistakenly believe the US supplied them in 1948. Fact is we embargoed both sides while the british armed the arabs.On paper Israel should have been destroyed.

Well, it's well known that the Israeli army got stronger as the war progressed, and also that the Arab might was inflated on paper, as many of the planes and tanks that their armies had were actually unservicable. Besides, that's why battles are fought, there are many examples in history when the seemingly stronger force is defeated.


My point is claiming they were all expelled is bogus.

So they left the land out of their free will? I think not.

[Redleg]

Some interesting stuff is now beginning to appear at Aljazeera




Israel has stepped up its tough talk against Hamas, ruling out contacts with a Palestinian government led by the group and threatening to liquidate its fighters if attacks on Israeli targets resume.


Ehud Olmert, the acting Israeli prime minister, said on Sunday that Israel will stop the monthly transfer of tens of millions of dollars in tax rebates and other funds to the Palestinian Authority if a Hamas government is installed.


With the latest comments, Israel showed no signs of backing down from the hard line it has taken since Hamas won a landslide victory in Palestinian legislative elections last week.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/85556D32-8078-4790-890E-1E9A181AEDE0.htm

This article has some interesting links to other stories.

[Papewaio]

The Arabs of the region (or at least enough of them) proved their inability to live side by side with the Jews through several venues, including

A) Seeking a limit to Jewish immigration
B) Multiple anti-Jewish race riots, in which hundreds of Jews were killed. It was in response to these riots that Jewish defense forces were first formed-- the British refused to do anything to prevent them, or to protect the Jews.


So Americans seeking to limit Mexican immigration means that the Americans have an inability to live side by side with Mexicans?

Since you are referencing the British period you may want to note whose terrorists were attacking which ethnic groups...

[Don Corleone]

Uhm, Reenk Roink, you do realize that Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt don't drive homemade tanks themselves, right?


If indeed there WERE NO OUTSIDE INTERVENTION meaning just Arab states vs Israel, then Israel would have a tougher time defending itself in those wars.
The only reason Israel is what it is today is because of US aid and military supplies. Israel is the number one buyer of military goods from the US. Think about why the Palestinians hate America, they know that those tanks aren't Israeli built, they're from America.

Egypt's air force is comprised of 67 F-16s, 33 F4Es, 16 Mirage fighters, and a large inventory of older (pre-1985) MIG fighters from Russia and China. No mention of a domesticly built fighter.

Egypt's tank forces are comprised of M1A1 tanks (American) as well as some antiquated T-72s (from former USSR).

As for Syria, here's the straight dope on their air force:

The Air Force, which was independent of Army Command, consisted of about 100,000 regular and 37,500 reserve officers and men. In 1985 its 9 fighter-ground attack squadrons and an estimated 15 interceptor squadrons totaled approximately 650 combat aircraft. Almost all combat planes were Soviet manufactured and included 50 MiG-25 and MiG-25R (Foxbat) interceptors and nearly 200 MiG-23S/U (Flogger) and Su-17 FitterK ground-attack and multirole aircraft. In 1986 there were reports that the Soviet Union had agreed to provide Syria at least two squadrons of the advanced supersonic MiG-29 Fulcrum fighter aircraft equipped with top-of-the-line avionics. The air force was equipped with approximately ninety attack helicopters of the Mi-24/Mi-25 Hind and SA-342 Gazelle types. As part of an effort to upgrade its command-and-control network, the air force was reported to have the Tu-126 (Moss) AWACS.

and their ground forces:

In addition to being the largest, the army was the best equipped of the three services, with over 4,100 Soviet-built tanks (including 1,000 of the advanced T-72's) and a formidable air defense system of SAM batteries and myriad antiaircraft guns and artillery. In 1987, Syria was scheduled to receive 500 new Soviet SS-23 ballistic missiles with a range of 500 kilometers. Syria was also reported to have begun producing its own chemical weapons, including nerve gases, with the capability to use the chemical agents in missile warheads. The Air Defense Command, within the Army Command, but also composed of Air Force personnel, numbered approximately 60,000. It served in twenty air defense brigades (with approximately ninety-five SAM batteries) and two air defense regiments. The Air Defense Command had command access to interceptor aircraft and radar facilities. Air defenses included SA-5 long-range SAM batteries around Damascus and Aleppo, with additional SA-6 and SA-8 mobile SAM units deployed along Syria's side of the Lebanese border and in eastern Lebanon, and short-range SS-21 surface-to-surface missiles with conventional warheads. The 1,800-man Border Guard (sometimes designated as Desert Guard or Frontier Force) was also under Army Command and responsible for patrolling the nation's vast border areas.

So, as you can see, if you're going to remove every foreign built weapon from the Middle East, Israel, with it's unique position as a domestic designer/manufacturer of weapons systems, not just and importer, would have a decided advantage.

[Tribesman]

Some interesting stuff is now beginning to appear at Aljazeera

Interesting indeed .
Israel has stepped up its tough talk against Hamas, ruling out contacts with a Palestinian government led by the group and threatening to liquidate its fighters if attacks on Israeli targets resume.

They are at the moment (Hamas) respecting the ceasefire . So thats just sabre rattling .
Ehud Olmert, the acting Israeli prime minister, said on Sunday that Israel will stop the monthly transfer of tens of millions of dollars in tax rebates and other funds to the Palestinian Authority if a Hamas government is installed.

Hmmmm..... if the PA follow the democratic process then Israel will not follow its democratic obligations , interesting .

Since Israel openly and covertly funded and supported Hamas when it was not an elected body , yet will not deal with it now it is an elected body .
Then whatever happened to this beacon of democracy in the middle east that people call Israel ?

Khalid Mishaal, Hamas's supreme leader, said on Saturday that the group would not disarm, but suggested that it could fold the thousands of fighters in its armed wing into a Palestinian army.

"We are ready to unify the weapons of Palestinian factions, with Palestinian consensus, and form an army like any independent state,"

Merging the terrorists into the States forces ....now isn't that Western policy in Iraq , and what they hail as a sign of "success" , and isn't that what they are pressuring the groups in Lebanon to do ?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Think about why the Palestinians hate America, they know that those tanks aren't Israeli built, they're from America.

Um, no. Israeli uses domestically designed and built tanks, so they wouldn't have to rely on the US for parts:
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/merkava/


Merging the terrorists into the States forces ....now isn't that Western policy in Iraq , and what they hail as a sign of "success" , and isn't that what they are pressuring the groups in Lebanon to do ?

No. They have to stop being terrorists first, and I doubt they're going to be using the 'Palestinian Army' to fight Islamic Jihad, like the Iraqi army is fighting terrorists.

Crazed Rabbit

[Kaiser of Arabia]

And there would be much less violence aound the world if there wasnt as high a concentration of Arabs in the Midddle East . In fact far less than if Jews dominated that region. Whats your point?
lol I'd so sig that quote but I can't because soly took my sig away because I was bad :dizzy2: :2thumbsup:

[Don Corleone]

Tribesman, is it your position that once you begin giving aid to a group, you're obligated to do so, even when they threaten your existence? Hamas has called for the violent end to Israel by any means necessary. You think Israel should have to foot the bill for it's own destruction?

Yes, the Palestinians should have the sovereign right to determine their own leadership. But why do we have to support their choices, when we don't agree with them? Respecting Palestine's right to self determination and funding a group that calls for the massacre of Israeli civilians are two different things.

This sounds a lot like a whiny college dropout, they want the freedom to make their own decisions, but when their decisions turn out poorly, they still want mommy and daddy to pick up the tab. Freedom with absolutely no resonsibility. Freedom of choice does not mean freedom from consequence. It doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want and everyone else has to support you in it.

Nobody's asking for all that much. All Hamas has to do is renounce violence and say they think that Israel has a right to exist, the 2 state solution that got the money flowing from EU & USA in the first place, and the money continues. Is it your position that we should have to fund Hamas, even when they claim they're going to jerk the Palestinians away from the roadmap?

[Don Corleone]

By the way, here's how well these people respect other people's sovereignty... they're rioting and beating Danish people because of a cartoon that ran in a Danish newspaper....

We'll tell you what you can print and what you can't (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060130/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_prophet_drawings_5)

[Reenk Roink]

By the way, here's how well these people respect other people's sovereignty... they're rioting and beating Danish people because of a cartoon that ran in a Danish newspaper....

We'll tell you what you can print and what you can't (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060130/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_prophet_drawings_5)

Honestly man, look at your tone..."these people" :rolleyes2:

And as I read in the article, the violent acts were much less than I expected. I mean, most people are just protesting and boycotting Danish goods. Remember the reaction after 9-11, the racially motivated killings against Arabs and Sikhs, the vandalism against mosques? Of course there will be screwballs...

Oh and Crazed Rabbit...it's futile to deny the miltary aid and trade between us and Israel.

I do agree with the Hamas points some people made, but really, some things said are taking it too far...

[Don Corleone]

Not sure I get your point, Reenk Roink. How many documented cases of racially motivated killings against Arabs and Sikhs can you provide evidence of? I know it's 'common knowledge', but maybe a link or two to some actual evidence? What's more, your defense is that it wasn't as bad as you expected? Really, sometimes in your efforts to 'defend' the average Arab, you dehumanize them. Rioting and beating several people half to death because of a cartoon, published in ANOTHER COUNTRY, isn't all that bad? That's the best you can come up with?

Seriously, I really would like some documentation on cases where Arabs in this country were killed after 9-11, just for being Arabic. And no fair using the CAIR site, too many of their claims have been debunked already. Pick a verifiable news agency of some sort.

[Bar Kochba]

plz click on this bloody helirious https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEQc2y3BR30

[Reenk Roink]

Not sure I get your point, Reenk Roink. How many documented cases of racially motivated killings against Arabs and Sikhs can you provide evidence of? I know it's 'common knowledge', but maybe a link or two to some actual evidence? What's more, your defense is that it wasn't as bad as you expected? Really, sometimes in your efforts to 'defend' the average Arab, you dehumanize them. Rioting and beating several people half to death because of a cartoon, published in ANOTHER COUNTRY, isn't all that bad? That's the best you can come up with?

Seriously, I really would like some documentation on cases where Arabs in this country were killed after 9-11, just for being Arabic. And no fair using the CAIR site, too many of their claims have been debunked already. Pick a verifiable news agency of some sort.

"beating Danish people" and beating "several people half to death"

First of all, I'll be willing to bet that those employees beaten are Arabs...

Hmm...the story didn't say anything about half to death...are you just inflaming the situation?

And the hate crimes things...

Ok:

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.hate.crimes/

Uh-Oh, it mentions CAIR, seems that CNN thought them worthy enough to put in their story, but you seem to claim that they are "debunked" ...

Heres another explicitly about the Sikh killed:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/ARC/valarie/editorial.htm

Here's another case:

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/10/16/rec.justice.antimuslim/

CAIR can't be in this one:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/08/03/bombings.racism/

Want more....?

Oh and really, it is MUCH better than I expected, I really expected a radical to do something much worse considering the magnitude (which you downplay quite a bit) of what was done to them...

[Tribesman]

Tribesman, is it your position that once you begin giving aid to a group, you're obligated to do so, even when they threaten your existence? Hamas has called for the violent end to Israel by any means necessary. You think Israel should have to foot the bill for it's own destruction?

Well for starters Don , the first money mentioned is not aid money , it is revenue of the Palestinian territories that is collected by Israel on their behalf . They either have the obligation to hand the money over or to stop collecting it for the PA .
As for footing the bill , Israel funded and supported Hamas , Hamas , like the group from which it emerged , has always had the same stated objectives , if anything they have watered down their claims lately(though they still claim that the protocols is a genuine document:dizzy2: ) . If you don't want to foot the bill then don't start paying the bill in the first place .
If you pay for a terrorist group to grow then you must expect that terrorist group to grow , to then complain that the group gets elected is plain hypocracy .
If you don't like terrorists then don't support terrorists .
Its like a farmer who buys chicks then complains that they grew into chickens instead of ducks ....what can you say ????buy some bloody ducklings you fool unless you want chickens .~:doh:

No. They have to stop being terrorists first, and I doubt they're going to be using the 'Palestinian Army' to fight Islamic Jihad, like the Iraqi army is fighting terrorists.

Stop being terrorists ? how many groups in Iraq or the Leb have totally disbanded , how many have changed their manifesto or their claimed objectives , none . All that has happened is that certain governments no longer call them terrorists .

[Proletariat]

Emirates' Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs Mohammed Al Dhaheri said publishing the "blasphemous" cartoons was "disgusting and irresponsible," according to comments released Monday by the official WAM news agency.

"This is cultural terrorism, not freedom of expression. The repercussions of such irresponsible acts will have adverse impact on international relations."

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

These people are out of their minds. It's a frigging cartoon. Can we quit comparing the reactions to this cartoon to the reaction towards 3,000 innocents dying? Not exactly apples to apples, thank you.

[Reenk Roink]

plz click on this bloody helirious https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEQc2y3BR30

Wow...I really hope none of the muslims on this forum see that...

Quite possibly the most bigoted thing yet posted...

[Proletariat]

Besides that, it wasn't even funny. It was really boring. I couldn't watch after the first two minutes.

[Tribesman]

Wow...I really hope none of the muslims on this forum see that...

Quite possibly the most bigoted thing yet posted...
Its OK , I am sure he will post one based on the Torah and another based on the Bible for balance:no:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Don C:

Be careful, you're falling back into the trap of discussing things with Tribe.

Tribe has already decided that the Israelis are a group of collective bustards and that the modern incarnation of Israel was begat illegaly. He thus views the Israelis as the principal cause of the violence and problems in the region.

Since his basic framework is: Their country never should have been in the first place and they are nasty people anyway -- there is little that you can do to suggest other concepts.

He has already framed his thinking on the issue in a fashion wherein any argument you put forward is invalid from the outset.


Prole':

Any depiction of THE prophet is blasphemous, didn't you know. Anybody is fair game for insult save he. Perhaps we should riot against or attack anyone who says mean things about Paul of Tarsus....Oh never mind.

[Reenk Roink]

Don C:
He has already framed his thinking on the issue in a fashion wherein any argument you put forward is invalid from the outset.

And that makes him different from other here because...? Why just pick on one who doesn't agree with you, certainly there are others with the same mindset...

*mental note: retire from the backroom, it's just getting really bad...*

[Seamus Fermanagh]

And that makes him different from other here because...? Why just pick on one who doesn't agree with you, certainly there are others with the same mindset...

*mental note: retire from the backroom, it's just getting really bad...*

Well, there is some truth to that, as all of us are prone to putting on intellectual blinders at times.

Tribe, over several threads, seems to be more locked in to a given position at the outset of a thread than most. On the other hand, when he's having a go at some of the "lighter" threads, he can be quite funny.

[Strike For The South]

plz click on this bloody helirious https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEQc2y3BR30

man do you like setting yourself up. before you come back with the "oh its just a video line" There are a coupla jokes I know that I think are funny as hell but you would probably cry:laugh4:

[Tribesman]

Tribe has already decided that the Israelis are a group of collective bustards
Not at all , the vast majority of Israelis want peace and a viable two a state solution .
that the modern incarnation of Israel was begat illegaly.
The conditions set down for the creation of the State where not adhered to , actions taken prior to and after the establishment of the State are illegal and violations and contradictions of the very arguements that are being used to justify peoples positons on this complex subject.
That is an irrefutable fact no matter which side of the fence you choose to sit on . To State otherwise is to be peddling falsehoods .
To repeatedly state falsehoods long after they are shown to be false is either pig headed ignorance or a plain desire to spread lies .

Since his basic framework is: Their country never should have been in the first place and they are nasty people anyway -- there is little that you can do to suggest other concepts.

False , completely false on so many levels Seamus :no:


He has already framed his thinking on the issue in a fashion wherein any argument you put forward is invalid from the outset.

Any arguement put forward that contains falsehoods shall have those falsehoods plainly addresed , any other arguement put forward will be addressed on its content alone .
So would you like me to criticise Hamas ,the PLO or any of the Arab nations in particular ?
Well read the topic and you will find it , or any of the many topics regarding the mid-east .
The reason there is more criticism of the pro Israeli position by me on this forum is because more people use false "facts" to try and make their point .

[Crazed Rabbit]

Oh and Crazed Rabbit...it's futile to deny the miltary aid and trade between us and Israel.

I wasn't denying the aid ( $2Bn a year, isn't it?) that the US gives, just the contention that Israel uses US made tanks.

On a slightly different note, it is funny to see how people get all hot and bothered whenever Christian 'fundamentalists' complain about a TV show, using letters and peaceable means, that insults Christianity and falsely portrays Christians and the teachings of Christ. Those same people rush to apologize for the actions of Muslims - killing and rioting - whenever they percieve an insult.


Heres another explicitly about the Sikh killed:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/A.../editorial.htm

Here's another case:

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/10/16...ce.antimuslim/

CAIR can't be in this one:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/eu...mbings.racism/

Please. Only one man was killed (very unfortunate), and there were only two people arrested-not convicted-and a handful of incidents. That in a country of ~250m people, after a despicable, cowardly, terrorist attack that killed thousands. And the English incidents? Perhaps that had something to do with 25% of British Muslims supporting the bombings.

Compare that to how Muslims react when offensive cartoons are published. Heck, the UN even started investigating it to make sure the cartoons didn't violate one of the UN charters. I wonder if freedom of speech is in any of their charters? Probably not.

Crazed Rabbit

[Reenk Roink]

I wasn't denying the aid ( $2Bn a year, isn't it?) that the US gives, just the contention that Israel uses US made tanks.

Hmm...I'll maintain that not only does Israel posess US made tanks, but also planes and helicopters. Israel posesses the 2nd largest fleet of f-16's (next to America) and is ordering more from a US manufacturer Lockheed Martin...


On a slightly different note, it is funny to see how people get all hot and bothered whenever Christian 'fundamentalists' complain about a TV show, using letters and peaceable means, that insults Christianity and falsely portrays Christians and the teachings of Christ. Those same people rush to apologize for the actions of Muslims - killing and rioting - whenever they percieve an insult.

Are you implying that I did this? I am not religious, but do respect people of all religions, my sister is a muslim convert, my grandparents are devout Christians, my dad is an atheist.

Please, go have another look in that thread, and in other threads critical of Christians. Here, I shall post some of them:

"The first part of the discussion was quite interesting (in an untasteful sort of way), as we discussed the different theories of origin and incest's role in them. By the time it got to spelling and grammar and a little religious flame, I gave my little fly-bye and got out of there."-Religious people maybe should not read this"

"More religion bashing, which will lead to a staunch counterattack, which will lead to a war???"-Drawing the line on divine intervention"

"This probably has to top all frivilous lawsuits.

I'm scared to see who wins..."-Catholic Church gets sued over existence of Christ.

"I can certainly see why some Christians would be offended by the stuff on TV..."-You crazy Christians

If you would like more, simply search through the threads again, and please, if you find something I said remotely antagonistic to Christians, do point it out. Now, you say this about certain people on this thread, but I have seen the exact same thing on the opposite spectrum, people who criticize muslims while defending their own religion. Come now...

Also, what is this about "rioting and killing." Who was killed due to these cartoons? (much more offensive than most of the anti-Christian things floating around IMO) I read about boycotts and protests, but not riots... Only a few incidents of violence (against Arabs NOT Danes as was misleadingly posted).



Please. Only one man was killed (very unfortunate), and there were only two people arrested-not convicted-and a handful of incidents. That in a country of ~250m people, after a despicable, cowardly, terrorist attack that killed thousands. And the English incidents? Perhaps that had something to do with 25% of British Muslims supporting the bombings.

Compare that to how Muslims react when offensive cartoons are published. Heck, the UN even started investigating it to make sure the cartoons didn't violate one of the UN charters. I wonder if freedom of speech is in any of their charters? Probably not.

Crazed Rabbit

Really, "a handful of incidents?" Check the FBI website for the REPORTED incidents...

And was this the British Poll you speak of...?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2005/07/23/npoll23big.gif;jsessionid=VDCFHECR1LNHBQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0

[kataphraktoi]

Its easy is to pick on people who aren't likely to strike back at you isn't it?

SO who is more tolerant? BUT i am willing to space for culture. Obviously, people who resort to violence have been raised in a culture where honour is imperative. Where does that leave space for tolerance then?

Or, are we going to use the tagline "extremist minority", does every person have to commit a violent act to be an extremist? Is it not possible that there are people who have extremist views and yet find it convenient that there are others who have done it for them already?

While it is true that "extremists" don't represent the majority, do we blindly conclude that the "minority" of people of who nice things represent the "majority".

Theres too much blind faith!

Modern society is so hypocritical that free speech is only free if it is within pre-set, pre-defined borders.

[Xiahou]

On a slightly different note, it is funny to see how people get all hot and bothered whenever Christian 'fundamentalists' complain about a TV show, using letters and peaceable means, that insults Christianity and falsely portrays Christians and the teachings of Christ. Those same people rush to apologize for the actions of Muslims - killing and rioting - whenever they percieve an insult.

As an aside, I understand that waste of dump TV show was cancelled. :bow:

[Major Robert Dump]

What Tv show? (I don't watch tv)


The idea that allah cannot be depicted in any way, shape or form -- positive or negative -- to prevent idoltry is, well, silly. Maybe they need a new testement in the koran. Imagine how many people would be dead if christians were the same way with god and jesus.......my grandma would have been murdered for that crucifixion painting, the guy who did the far side cartoons would be dead, Goerge Burns would be dead, Mel Gibson would be dead, wait, george burns is dead nevermind.

My life is boring right now, I could use some spice. I think I'll write a one-man musical about allah and see if I could get some gigs.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Can you imagine a show on Broadway "Mohamed Superstar"? :idea2:

How about a comedian doing Mohamed and Allah jokes?

Do you think South Park will ever be on Arab TV?

[Nerouin]

[B]
Israel has stepped up its tough talk against Hamas, ruling out contacts with a Palestinian government led by the group and threatening to liquidate its fighters if attacks on Israeli targets resume.

They are at the moment (Hamas) respecting the ceasefire . So thats just sabre rattling .


I find this, and indeed most of this post, to be a quite incredible attempt at getting at Israel at any cost, whilst completely ignoring the other side's shortcomings.

No matter Hamas's current political front, it is a terrorist group which in the last several years has carried out attacks responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Israeli CIVILIANS. Men, women and children butchered in markets, on buses, and in nightclubs. When taken alongside the fact that 90% of terrorist attacks are prevented by Israeli security forces, this becomes of especially large proportions.

Hamas's agenda is the destruction of Israel and they have killed hundreds. Yet you only make every effort to defend them at the cost of villifying Israel. I challenge you to find any country that will cooperate with and send funds to a group dedicated to that country's destruction. Are you mad?

I find your one-sidedness and defense of this group of terrorists sickening and unbelievable.

[Nerouin]

Also, pray tell, why on earth would a government covertly or overtly give funds to a group dedicated to the destruction of that government and its people? Another conspiracy?

[kataphraktoi]

Also, pray tell, why on earth would a government covertly or overtly give funds to a group dedicated to the destruction of that government and its people? Another conspiracy?

Politics is complex, its not a matter of logic, but pragmatic logic which does not see things as simply as black and white, good and evil. It is rather Machiavellian the way Israeli politics works. I'm not justifying (and won't) Israel's covert funding of Hamas, it is reprehensible but these things still stand:

a) Hamas is a liberation organisation which is simultaneously a terrorist organisation dedicated to the destruction of Israel as a state and as a national identity

b) Islam will never accept a Jewish state because of established legal jurisprudence regarding former Muslim territory (once captured, it remains in perpetuity to Allah)

c) Israel does not have easy choices, it must do things that seem superficially contradictive and bewildering, but it is the end, not the means that important to them.

d) How do you change a thousand year old culture when Muslims were used to being the superior power in Palestine/Israel?

e) Force is the unfortunate answer. Survival of the fittest is the bottom line of all politics and history, no amount of liberal dialogue and idealism can change that.

[Tribesman]

Hamas's agenda is the destruction of Israel and they have killed hundreds. Yet you only make every effort to defend them at the cost of villifying Israel. I challenge you to find any country that will cooperate with and send funds to a group dedicated to that country's destruction. Are you mad?

Is Israel mad nerouin ? they funded and supported Hamas .
Do you not know that , or can you not believe that they are that mad .

Another conspiracy?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
There is no need for conspiracy theories , the truth is crazy enough as it is .

I find your one-sidedness and defense of this group of terrorists sickening and unbelievable.
Where do I defend this group ? I have simply pointed out some "facts" that people have used are not factual at all .


Kataphphaktoi
e) Force is the unfortunate answer. Survival of the fittest is the bottom line of all politics and history, no amount of liberal dialogue and idealism can change that.
That is the answer some will not accept . As has often been the case in this particular situation the legal arguements have not stood up .
So they assert that force and military might are the justification .
If they accept that then they must also accept that force and military might are justified to change the situation .
If terrorism and military conquest are justified to create an entity , then terrorism and military conquest are justified to to remove that entity .
That is a major failing of the "might is right" line of thought .

[Adrian II]

Kataphphaktoi
e) Force is the unfortunate answer. Survival of the fittest is the bottom line of all politics and history, no amount of liberal dialogue and idealism can change that.

That is the answer some will not accept. As has often been the case in this particular situation the legal arguements have not stood up. So they assert that force and military might are the justification.
If they accept that then they must also accept that force and military might are justified to change the situation.
If terrorism and military conquest are justified to create an entity, then terrorism and military conquest are justified to to remove that entity. That is a major failing of the "might is right" line of thought.For this little gem and the sublimated wisdom it represents, I hereby re-elect you as President for another term, Mr Tribesman. Long may you rub the 'realists' noses in reality!

[Proletariat]

"beating Danish people" and beating "several people half to death"

First of all, I'll be willing to bet that those employees beaten are Arabs...

Hmm...the story didn't say anything about half to death...are you just inflaming the situation?


I'm sorry, but what about them beating arabs makes it any better?

[kataphraktoi]

That is the answer some will not accept . As has often been the case in this particular situation the legal arguements have not stood up .
So they assert that force and military might are the justification .
If they accept that then they must also accept that force and military might are justified to change the situation .
If terrorism and military conquest are justified to create an entity , then terrorism and military conquest are justified to to remove that entity .
That is a major failing of the "might is right" line of thought .

I don't believe might is right, all I'm saying is that force is the answer. That doesn't mean I support, and I hope you don't think I support it!

Yes, I am a realist, but not a willing one. Idealism is the one always gettings its nose "rubbed" so to speak because it is illusory and misguided (although I do applaud their good intentions) with negative consequences when it comes to solving problems.

Eg. Neville Chamberlain's "peace in our times" - Idealistic, applaudable, yet sadly horrific in the end when the real unfortunate solution was a total war.

[kataphraktoi]

Please dont think of it as an attack on you :D

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

I'm sorry, but what about them beating arabs makes it any better?

Apparently Reenk Roink believes that Arabs are more deserving of a beating than Danes.

[Husar]

Apparently Reenk Roink believes that Arabs are more deserving of a beating than Danes.
Aren´t they?:oops:

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Aren´t they?:oops:

the Danes are so inoffensive that I'd hazard a guess that most people are more deserving of a beating than they.

Edit: just for the sake of making vast generalizations

[Husar]

Ok, next time one of those muslim infidels will say that Jesus was just a prophet... :furious3: ...I will beat up some muslim friends?:dizzy2:

edit: I just thought about it, in case Jesus would´ve been only a prophet, one could say that the old testament counts again. And the old testament says "an eye for an eye", so beating up a muslim because they beat a christian would be ok, while on the other hand, being christian would make no sense anymore.......well, you can guess what my point is.~D

[Don Corleone]

"beating Danish people" and beating "several people half to death"

First of all, I'll be willing to bet that those employees beaten are Arabs...
Fair enough, I didn't read as clearly as I should have. I still stand against beatings, even those given out to Saudis, even those that happen to work for a Danish company, as justified in light of a tasteless cartoon printed 1/2 a world away.




http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.hate.crimes/

Uh-Oh, it mentions CAIR, seems that CNN thought them worthy enough to put in their story, but you seem to claim that they are "debunked" ...

Heres another explicitly about the Sikh killed:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/scbs/ARC/valarie/editorial.htm

Here's another case:

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/10/16/rec.justice.antimuslim/

CAIR can't be in this one:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/08/03/bombings.racism/

Want more....?

Oh and really, it is MUCH better than I expected, I really expected a radical to do something much worse considering the magnitude (which you downplay quite a bit) of what was done to them...

Your first link is one saying that CAIR, a group who's honesty and accuracy I put no faith in, claims that the numbers of incidents of harassment, qualifying as "go home", rose from 150 to 300. In a nation of 300 million people, the odds of experiencing harassment, even according to CAIR, are approximately 1 in million. Even when you limit to the total number of arabs and/or muslims in this country, the likelihood of being harrassed is < 1 in 13,000. You're more likely to be involved in a serious traffic incident.

Your second link is an editorial by a Sikh woman who says that she feels racism against Sikhs has grown. Hardly an unbiased viewpoint, and very short on anything but anecdotal evidence. Yes, there is the terrible case of Balbir Singh Sodha, who was shot on the grounds of being mistaken for an Arab. But that's one case.

Your 3rd article states that Ashcroft held a summit with Muslim leaders to discuss hate crimes, again defined as offensive language or creating a feeling of discomfort, which totalled 160. I think transvestite clown rape had more incidences in 2001.

Your final article claims that hate crimes, again defined as offensive speech or acts rose after the London Train bombings.

I'm not going to claim that life was easy for Arabs after 9/11 here in the USA. Unfortunately, they probably did receive some ugly treatment. But the numbers of actual documented physical violence, perpetrated in the US after 9/11 on Muslims, Arabs or those mistaken as such that I could find in your links, is at a grand total of 1, namely Mr. Singh. Add to that 1 documented case of damage to a mosque in Seattle, from your Ashcroft article.

Apparently, in your eyes, a tasteless cartoon of Mohammed equates with the London train bombings and the hijacked plane assaults on the Pentagon and the Twin Towers. Interesting perspective, Reenk. Mean spirited cartoon = 3000 dead... hmmm. Guess it depends on which side you're on.

[Sjakihata]

What will happen if you speculate, will Hamas recognize Israel or will EU stop donating money to Palestine?

[Ser Clegane]

What will happen if you speculate, will Hamas recognize Israel or will EU stop donating money to Palestine?

I sure hope that the EU will be firm on this. If Hamas is not willing to change on such crucial issues they should not receive any aid.

If they seriously intend to govern Palestine, I expect Hamas to slowly back down (as soon as they find away how they can do so without losing their face)

[Don Corleone]

I think I mentioned this earlier. I think Hamas will go halfway, they'll still call for the end of the Israeli state, but will claim to only work towards it through peaceful means. That won't be enough for Israel or the US, but will be for the EU, who will continue their 500 million of extortion money. (Yes, I know, Israel is paying a tax rebate, it's the US and the EU that are paying extortion). If Iran's going to pick up the US's share, they're going to expect some favors in return, namely some acts of 'non-traditional diplomacy', as an internal Syrian memo referred to it one time.

It's all rather ironic. I think now that they're in charge, Hamas probably will get the big picture and realize the best thing for Palestine (and themselives for that matter) is to work towards a 2 state solution, but that's not an option. Any mention of '2 states' and right out of office they go. I'm sure they're more aware of that than I am.

[Redleg]

I sure hope that the EU will be firm on this. If Hamas is not willing to change on such crucial issues they should not receive any aid.

If they seriously intend to govern Palestine, I expect Hamas to slowly back down (as soon as they find away how they can do so without losing their face)

I image that there will be a split in Hamas between the hardliners who still want to continue with the goal of destroying Israel by violence, and a moderate group that decides that to govern the populace they will have to make some changes to how they operate.

[Just A Girl]

Some 1 should just push that big red button and see what happens.
Theres a saying that I often use in these situations.

"either shit or get off the pot"

Personaly i think its about time some 1 wiped out most of the human population Over some Stupid ideal.

That would undoubtedly make the world a better place.

[Sjakihata]

I agree, I think it is actually a good thing Hamas won - because they are legitimated by the people, and they, Hamas, will understand what is best for Israel-Palestine, namely one big state where they all can live peacefully, this is, obviously, quite utopic - nonetheless I hope for that.

[Viking]

Some 1 should just push that big red button and see what happens.
Theres a saying that I often use in these situations.

"either shit or get off the pot"

Personaly i think its about time some 1 wiped out most of the human population Over some Stupid ideal.

That would undoubtedly make the world a better place.


I`m not so sure about that. Conflicts follow the human race whatever you do.

[Reenk Roink]

Apparently, in your eyes, a tasteless cartoon of Mohammed equates with the London train bombings and the hijacked plane assaults on the Pentagon and the Twin Towers. Interesting perspective, Reenk. Mean spirited cartoon = 3000 dead... hmmm. Guess it depends on which side you're on.

No, it does not equate. I never thought so, please bring out the argument that implies I did, and I will clarify.

But let me tell you this, 30000 lives (and this is only an extremely conservative figure of Iraq excluding Afghanistan) are more important than 3000 on numbers alone. Some may not think so because of the fact that the 30000 lives don't matter because "it's a part of war" and they're muslims. Well, I guess that would be the same mindset as Al Qaeda "hey they're Americans, and we are at war with them."

Your dismissal of my articles is funny. OK, so you think CAIR is bad, well you know what? CNN seemed not to. Since I really didn't know then what CAIR even was, I trust a reputable media source over an individual.

It's bull to dismiss hate crimes as merely offensive words. I live near Dearborn, Michigan, (in Farmington) where a whole lot of Arabs live, and on my local news, I have seen incidents of violence against them, rocks thrown in their windows. That's not words. And those are only reported incidents. I'd bet that 99% of the crap said to them doesn't get reported...

And Proletariat: What could you possibly find in my words that would suggest that I would imply that beating Arabs is any better? I was pointing out a quick, jump to conclusions, on a sepertae statement....

And Taffy is a Taff: What possibly do you know of my beliefs? I have never addressed you on these forums, really, I did not even notice a unique user called Taffy is a Taff until today. Please go and read my statement clearer. And please, don't flame me. I don't see you pointing out Mr. Husar, who was the only one to comment directly on whether it is better to beat a certain ethnicity over another...

[Tribesman]

[Please dont think of it as an attack on you :D/B]
Not at all ~:cheers:

[B] I hereby re-elect you as President for another term, Mr Tribesman.
Bugger that for a laugh , I resign , unless you can throw in a decent intern who swallows .(must hide the evidence):laugh4:

Now then , for all those who are unable to accept facts or who accuse me of bias or onesidedness .
A simple question .
Do you agree with terrorism ?

[Proletariat]

And Proletariat: What could you possibly find in my words that would suggest that I would imply that beating Arabs is any better? I was pointing out a quick, jump to conclusions, on a sepertae statement....


I don't understand why you pointed it out. It's just as bad, so who cares? It had nothing to do with however you interpreted Don's post.

[Reenk Roink]

I don't understand why you pointed it out. It's just as bad, so who cares? It had nothing to do with however you interpreted Don's post.

I pointed it out because, in response to your topic, others actually believed that I thought it was better. I don't like being slandered...

[Proletariat]

I pointed it out because, in response to your topic, others actually believed that I thought it was better. I don't like being slandered...

You misunderstood me here, but it's a silly detail anyhow so I'll just stop hijacking the thread.:burnout:

[Don Corleone]

No, it does not equate. I never thought so, please bring out the argument that implies I did, and I will clarify.

But let me tell you this, 30000 lives (and this is only an extremely conservative figure of Iraq excluding Afghanistan) are more important than 3000 on numbers alone. Some may not think so because of the fact that the 30000 lives don't matter because "it's a part of war" and they're muslims. Well, I guess that would be the same mindset as Al Qaeda "hey they're Americans, and we are at war with them."

Your dismissal of my articles is funny. OK, so you think CAIR is bad, well you know what? CNN seemed not to. Since I really didn't know then what CAIR even was, I trust a reputable media source over an individual.

It's bull to dismiss hate crimes as merely offensive words. I live near Dearborn, Michigan, (in Farmington) where a whole lot of Arabs live, and on my local news, I have seen incidents of violence against them, rocks thrown in their windows. That's not words. And those are only reported incidents. I'd bet that 99% of the crap said to them doesn't get reported...

Calm down, and read what I actually wrote. I never said hate crimes are nothing but offensive words. I said that using offensive words counts as a hate crime, so when you hear X number of hate crimes, that doesn't mean X number of people were physically attacked. I could, but it's way off topic, go into pages of innacuracies put out by the Council for American Islamic Relations (which is not a media source at all, but a political advocacy group with ties to Hamas and Hizbollah), but you'll note I didn't actually dispute anything they said. I counted up the number of incidents of physical violence from all of your links, including the one from CAIR, and gave you a better picture of the "masses of equivalent attacks that happened in the US after 9/11". Your original claim was
And as I read in the article, the violent acts were much less than I expected. I mean, most people are just protesting and boycotting Danish goods. Remember the reaction after 9-11, the racially motivated killings against Arabs and Sikhs, the vandalism against mosques? Of course there will be screwballs... Through all of your articles, you had one documented case of a physical assault, a shooting, and one of property damage, to a mosque, so you should make those shootings and vandalsim against mosques, singular, as you only provided one instance of each. No other incidents were specifically mentioned.

As for 3000 Americans vs. 30,000 Iraqis, I think it's pretty unfair of you to count the number of Iraqis killed by the insurgents and Al-Queda in Iraq (that according to the Democrats, isn't Al-Queda or terrorism at all ) as victims of American aggression. Furthermore, at the riots in Saudi Arabia and in Gaza, the point was not the Iraq war, it was the cartoon of the prophet, which for the umpteenth time, I agree was in poor taste.

[Reenk Roink]

Calm down, and read what I actually wrote. I never said hate crimes are nothing but offensive words. I said that using offensive words counts as a hate crime, so when you hear X number of hate crimes, that doesn't mean X number of people were physically attacked. I could, but it's way off topic, go into pages of innacuracies put out by the Council for American Islamic Relations (which is not a media source at all, but a political advocacy group with ties to Hamas and Hizbollah), but you'll note I didn't actually dispute anything they said. I counted up the number of incidents of physical violence from all of your links, including the one from CAIR, and gave you a better picture of the "masses of equivalent attacks that happened in the US after 9/11". Through all of your articles, you had one documented case of a physical assault, a shooting, and one of property damage, to a mosque. No other incidents were specifically mentioned.

As for 3000 Americans vs. 30,000 Iraqis, I think it's pretty unfair of you to count the number of Iraqis killed by the insurgents and Al-Queda in Iraq (that according to the Democrats, isn't Al-Queda or terrorism at all ) as victims of American aggression. Furthermore, at the riots in Saudi Arabia and in Gaza, the point was not the Iraq war, it was the cartoon of the prophet, which for the umpteenth time, I agree was in poor taste.

1) No need to worry, I am calm. I am just in debate mode...

2) The media source was CNN...

3) Here are some more examples (truly I didn't wish to flood the thread with these, thinking that a few incidents would be enough to drive the point, but obviously not for some):

These are incidents that occured 36 hours after the 9-11 attacks:

-Six bullets shattered windows of a mosque in Irving, TX. $3,000 in damage was caused.

-A bag filled with blood and labeled 'Pig's blood' was thrown at the door of a mosque in San Francisco, CA.

-Four bricks were thrown through the windows of a Muslim bookstore in Alexandria, VA. Also in Virginia, two mosques reported vandalism.

-In Canada, the front doors at mosques in St. Catherines, ON and Montreal, PQ were fire-bombed, with minimal damage.

-The British Broadcasting Commission (BBC) reported that there had been many death threats and assaults against Muslims.

These are incidents that occured weeks after the attacks:

-On the afternoon of Saturday, September 15, a gunman killed the 49 year old owner of a gas station in Mesa, AZ. He was a Sikh. His family believes that he was killed because he "looked Middle Eastern." Additional shots were fired at a Lebanese clerk and at the home of an Afghan family.

-On the evening of Saturday, Sep 15, a gunman killed a Pakistani Muslim store owner in Dallas, TX.

-Also on Saturday, a Christian of Egyptian origin was shot dead in California.

-Adel Karas, 48, an Egyptian-American grocer was shot and killed near his International Market store in San Gabriel, CA. He was a Copt and not Arab. No money was taken. Police are investigating the murder as a possible hate crime.

-A man drove his car through the front entrance of Parma Mosque in Cleveland OH.

-Near Chicago, IL, there was a march in which about 300 anti-Arab youths waved flags, shouted "USA, USA," and attempted to march on a mosque in Bridgeview, IL -- a suburb southwest of Chicago. Colin Zaremba, 19, said: "I'm proud to be American and I hate Arabs and I always have." Three demonstrators were arrested.

-In Chicago, a Molotov cocktail was thrown t an Arab-American community center. There were no injuries and little damage.

-In Huntington, NY, Adam Lang, reportedly a drunken driver, 75, allegedly tried to kill a Pakistani woman with his car. He later followed the woman into a store and threatened to kill her for "destroying my country."

-In Gary, IN, a man wearing a mask pumped over 20 bullets from a high-powered assault rifle at a Muslim, Hassan Awdah. He survived. Hassan is a U.S. citizen, born in Yemen.

-In Lynnwood, WA, a mosque was vandalized.

-In Suffolk County, NY, a man allegedly made anti-Arab threats and pointed a handgun at the employee of a gas station. He was arrested.

-A gasoline bomb was thrown into the home of a Sikh family in California.

-Two mosques were firebombed with Molotov cocktails during the weekend of October 20, 21. They are located in Burlington and Mississauga, near Toronto ON Canada. Kendrich House, 35, from Oakville ON has allegedly been charged.

-The Samaj Hindu temple in Hamilton, ON, Canada was firebombed by an arsonist, causing $600,000 in damages. Police speculate that the perpetrator mistook the temple for a mosque.

-Firebomb attacks on Canadian mosques causing minimal damage have occurred in Montreal, Quebec, St. Catherines, ON and Oshawa, ON.

-In Australia, a school bus containing Muslim children was stoned.

-Vandals tried set fire to a Lebanese Christian church, also in Australia.

Let me be the first to note that there was an outpouring of support and brotherhood after these attacks as well. I hate only depressing news.

4) Anyway, I absolutely agree that many Iraqis are killed by the suicide bombers in Iraq (don't really see why you brought the dems in but...).

5) Yes there is an outcry, but most of it really translates into protests and boycotts.

I also know that there have been many other papers and whatnot that have put racist/bigot things about Arabs and Islam too. This one has gotten a wide media coverage, and so it is causing the most stir...

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Would you like me to give you some examples of anti semitism here? Or even better in Europe? And they didnt attack us at all. That is unless you believe they were behind 911 as some Muslims claim.

[Reenk Roink]

Would you like me to give you some examples of anti semitism here? Or even better in Europe? And they didnt attack us at all. That is unless you believe they were behind 911 as some Muslims claim.

Why? This thread is not about that, and the question asked was not about that. I fully accept that there is plenty of anti-Semitism still around (unlike some people who don't accept the claims of muslim hate). There were still more hate crimes against Jews in America than Arabs or the like. That's expected, as Jews outnumber Arabs. And of course the largest group of victims of hate crimes were against blacks. As blacks outnumber both groups... At least that's what the FBI reports say and think...

And some extreme Christian groups and Neo Nazi groups believe the same thing about the Jews involvement... But you only say that muslims claim that...Come on, why are some people so dead set against muslims?

Oops, not supposed to be here...

[Tribesman]

And they didnt attack us at all. That is unless you believe they were behind 911 as some Muslims claim.
Gawain are you trying to claim that Israel as a State has never attacked the US or its oversea interests ?
Or are you trying to claim that Jewish terrorists have never attacked the United States ?
Either way both claims are completely ludicrous .

So do you support terrorism ?
Or do you only support terrorism as long as it is not carried out by people who claim to be Muslims ?

Would you like me to give you some examples of anti semitism here? Or even better in Europe?
Would you like to post some examples?
There are many sources that you can use , your government compiles a comprehensive list every year not only for incidents in your own country but for every country out there , so does the UN , the Israeli government does aswell .
So post away , they are interesting reading .

[Just A Girl]

Sombody PLEASE just Push the damn Button and end this Madness once and for all.

about 60 tonns of Nukes should do it. "say 30 or so 2 tonn nukes"
just stick a few nicley spaced out on every continent.
make sure there on ground level for Maximum fall out.
then detonate them,

:2thumbsup:

[Reenk Roink]

Yeah, I really need to take over the world right now...:crown:

It needs me more than ever...:worried:

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

And Taffy is a Taff: What possibly do you know of my beliefs? I have never addressed you on these forums, really, I did not even notice a unique user called Taffy is a Taff until today. Please go and read my statement clearer. And please, don't flame me. I don't see you pointing out Mr. Husar, who was the only one to comment directly on whether it is better to beat a certain ethnicity over another...


lighten up, it should have been obvious that I was joking (yeah, in a let's wind up Reenk way but still I was joking, I guess my suspicions about you getting wound up over that were correct, sorry if it really did bother you).

I'd hope that Husar was doing the same.


Considering my participation in this thread I'm shocked that you never noticed me before.

What could I possibly know of your beliefs? well, I could make some informed guesses based on your posts here but I won't as you could just be pretending to hold those opinions, I know that I sometimes do that.

look, no flame, I'm not the sort to do that.
:2thumbsup:
~D

[Reenk Roink]

My apologies for getting riled up.

Anyway I've since quit the Backroom, and I would like to personally invite you to the "love zone" (no not THAT kind of love zone) in the Frontroom.

:iloveyou:

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

~:cheers: Reenk,

my friend,

I have also been known to desert the backroom for the peace and love room .

you will be back, you will miss the unpleasantness of the B-room.



:furious3: :skull: :furious3: :skull: :furious3: :skull: :furious3:

or


~:cheers: ~:grouphug: ~:cheers: ~:grouphug: ~:cheers:

?

Is there any contest?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

And they didnt attack us at all. That is unless you believe they were behind 911 as some Muslims claim.
Gawain are you trying to claim that Israel as a State has never attacked the US or its oversea interests ?
Or are you trying to claim that Jewish terrorists have never attacked the United States ?
Either way both claims are completely ludicrous .

Tribe':

While the air attack on our electronic surveillance ship was a purposeful (though claimed as a mistake) attack on the U.S., I could not find any instance of Jewish terrorists attacking the U.S.

KACH is on our watch-list, but hasn't acted against the U.S.A.

Example/cite for this?

[Just A Girl]

~:cheers: Reenk,

my friend,

I have also been known to desert the backroom for the peace and love room .

you will be back, you will miss the unpleasantness of the B-room.



:furious3: :skull: :furious3: :skull: :furious3: :skull: :furious3:

or


~:cheers: ~:grouphug: ~:cheers: ~:grouphug: ~:cheers:

?

Is there any contest?


Personaly.
I love the backroom.

When thereads get closed its usualy for a good reason.
you get to express your real oppinion(s),
And although its sometimes hostile in here. Im sure we all get along Adequatly enough for us Not to kill eachother if we ever met in real life.

So yeah I love the backroom.

And any way.

I think im the only member who was given warning points and Banned from the front room when still alowed to enter the backroom.
So this place is cool.

Its my second fave section of the forum,
1st being the apothecary.

Who needs A kingdom of peace and love.
when you can have a babarian state where nearly anything goes. !!!

its like heaven or hell.
You can go to heaven and live in peace and bliss. but all the good things like alcehol, random sex, drugs, and rock & roll, are over in hell.
Sure theres some suffering involved,
But who Would want to sit on a cloud and play harp for eternety?

Suffer in hell where its worth while.
or suffer in heaven where its just boring.

You all know yuor little devils at heart:2thumbsup:

[Adrian II]

Bugger that for a laugh , I resign , unless you can throw in a decent intern who swallows .(must hide the evidence):laugh4: Now now, be nice to your only constituent. I can not afford such an intern. And if I could, you know very well that she would be mine. Now be a man about this, Mr President. Your duties await you. I have already spotted a nasty Gawain at five o'clock and elsewhere some of the Brits are heating up over the subject of free speech. Have at 'em!

[kataphraktoi]

arguing for argument's sake...battle lust...backroom beserkers

[Tribesman]

Seamus , you must understand that Israel is like any other state , it has its own agenda .if you would like an example of it using terrorism against America look at the Lavon affair . Bomb American property with the intent that someone else gets the blame so that when you attack the people who got the blame America will not object too much .
Turned out to be a hell of a ballsup which directly led to over 50,000 Jews being expelled from the country that Israel was trying to get the blame passed to . Oh look a middle eastern country threw its Jewish popualation out , thats outrageous , that just shows how evil the arabs are .
Or for another example try your countries domestic terrorist list , or perhaps look up the name I mention in the "Condolances" thread that was locked .

Slightly off topic , but did anyone come across the MKs statement today complaining about the police and army and the way it was treating some of the illegal settlers ......"it is treating them like Arabs" ....hmmmmm .....I thought everyone got equal treatment out there . :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Then again if it was treating them the same as the arabs then they would have been shot for what they were doing .:skull:

[Ser Clegane]

This morning I read an interesting article in the F.A.Z. (actually it was the Sunday newspaper, I just didn't find the time to read some of the articles yet)

It was about the Palestinian town Kalkilija were Hamas already won the local elections last year (so the town now has a Hamas mayor).
Interestingly, in this town, Hamas clearly lost to Fatah during the "national" elections. Apparently the locals weren't happy at all about how Hamas ran the place. Corruption isn't a bit better than with Fatah (surprise, surprise) and according to some statements the people there are also slightly miffed about some rather strict rules that Hamas introduced (e.g., a music festival was canceled, there are now separate days for boys and girls for going to the library) for religeous reasons.
This might be an indication that Hamas will face quite some difficulties in the population if they run a strict religeous regime and do not live up to the expectations of the population (i.e. decrease in corruption).

Another interesting aspect of the article was, that the Hamas-mayor has no problem actually working with Israeli authorities to keep the place running, although he points out that as a "good" Hamas member he actually shouldn't talk to them or cooperate with them (and of course he "officially" supports the overall Hamas vie on Israel).
This shows that, when the sobering reality of having to govern a place makes it necessary to cooperate, even Hamas suddenly seems to be able to do so - perhaps the same will happen on a larger scale once the dust settles.

I am somewhat optimistic, that in the end common sense will prevail and that the peace process still has a chance - either with a Hamas government that changes, or with a changed government in Palestine.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I'll look that one up. "Disinformation" efforts take all shapes and sizes, but I had never read about that one.

While I consider the Israelis to be excellent allies, I am well aware that they are such for reasons of their own. As far as I can tell, only the US-UK alliance would involve one party throwing themselves in front of a truck to protect the other (and even that alliance has had its strained moments). Mostly, nations have "interests" more than "friendships."

I actually thought the Israeli expulsion of the Gaza settlers had been handled fairly smoothly. Most of the silly stuff was, I am given to understand, staged by what we call in the USA "outside agitators." MK's phrasing was, at the least, unfortunate.

So, just to toss out some more red meat for the discussion....

What would be your "ideal" result that you would like to see happen following the ascension of Hamas to power -- and why?

And --

What do you think is likely to happen at this juncture -- and why?