Steff Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Correct me if I'm wrong, Steff, but didn't you just call me an asshole, for no apparent reason? Not for no apparent reason... And what does that have to do with adding gasoline to your (84,334th) argument on this board about Israel... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 You guys are incredible! You're actually "shedding tears" for Yassin?!?! Try shedding tears for the hundreds of innocent Israelis he intentionally had killed! They are the victims here! WAKE UP!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 And so it begins... :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 You guys are incredible! You're actually "shedding tears" for Yassin?!?! Try shedding tears for the hundreds of innocent Israelis he intentionally had killed! They are the victims here! WAKE UP!!! We shed tears for those victims, and the victims that are going to be killed in the near future because of Sharon's ruthless renegade tactics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 You guys are incredible! You're actually "shedding tears" for Yassin?!?! Try shedding tears for the hundreds of innocent Israelis he intentionally had killed! They are the victims here! WAKE UP!!! I am sheding tears that a lawfull process is not being followed. This leads to revenge and more violence. I have no tears for terrorists. You see the death of one man, I see the deaths of many more and they terrorists will use this terrorist act as justification. I want Israel to take the high road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Should Israel be held responsible? Of course, not. Is Israel responsible? Partly. Should Israel take the upper road and work on building relations? Yes. Is Israel doing that? No. Ironically, I just finished watching HBO's documentary on the 1972 Olympics. So after taking everything into account I have the same opinion I had when we debated this topic in December. Israel needs a new policy towards Palistinians and other militants. It takes more than one party to have negotiations, bro. If the "palis' don't want to negotiate for peace, then you can't make them do so! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 It takes more than one party to have negotiations, bro. If the "palis' don't want to negotiate for peace, then you can't make them do so! Excellent point. It also takes two sides committed to making peace work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 We shed tears for those victims, and the victims that are going to be killed in the near future because of Sharon's ruthless renegade tactics. And if the US killed Bin Laden, would you feel the same way??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 And if the US killed Bin Laden, would you feel the same way??? I would prefer he be captured and made to stand trial. That is US law and I expect the US to follow our laws. I am certain each US soldier would love to be the one to capture Binny. If we are to be the moral leaders of the world, it is important for us to live up to our own laws. If we fail to do that, we are no better than the terrorists. hy·poc·ri·sy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pkr-s) n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies 1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness. 2. An act or instance of such falseness Why create a martry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 It takes more than one party to have negotiations, bro. If the "palis' don't want to negotiate for peace, then you can't make them do so! I am well aware of this. First I believe many negotiations fail because 1) Israel does not make concessions and 2) Israel is not patient. I can recall over the winter when Israel had made a ceasefire with several militant groups. After militant groups not involved in the ceasefire launched several terrorist missions Israel violated the truce. This lack of patience will not achieve anything. As I stated in December if Israel rebuilt Palestinian towns rather than destroy them and leave them or if Israel gave money to the Palestinian government to build a suitable country (I also believe the US should do the same), then attacks would be more frequent. Instead we have poverty, fear, and resentment. That is how hate arises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 I am well aware of this. First I believe many negotiations fail because 1) Israel does not make concessions and 2) Israel is not patient. I can recall over the winter when Israel had made a ceasefire with several militant groups. After militant groups not involved in the ceasefire launched several terrorist missions Israel violated the truce. This lack of patience will not achieve anything. As I stated in December if Israel rebuilt Palestinian towns rather than destroy them and leave them or if Israel gave money to the Palestinian government to build a suitable country (I also believe the US should do the same), then attacks would be more frequent. Instead we have poverty, fear, and resentment. That is how hate arises. That is one of the issues. It would be like negotiating with street gangs. There are so many, and they switch identies with a twist of a hat. I can understand Israels lack of patience and fear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 And if the US killed Bin Laden, would you feel the same way??? I agree with Texsox, I hope he is captured alive and put on trial. If we do hit him with a missle in a populated area I will think it was the wrong approach but I will be glad he is gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 I am well aware of this. First I believe many negotiations fail because 1) Israel does not make concessions and 2) Israel is not patient. I can recall over the winter when Israel had made a ceasefire with several militant groups. After militant groups not involved in the ceasefire launched several terrorist missions Israel violated the truce. This lack of patience will not achieve anything. As I stated in December if Israel rebuilt Palestinian towns rather than destroy them and leave them or if Israel gave money to the Palestinian government to build a suitable country (I also believe the US should do the same), then attacks would be more frequent. Instead we have poverty, fear, and resentment. That is how hate arises. If you remember Oslo, Israel made EVERY concession that was asked of it, and Arafat still turned it down! It is the palis that do not want to negotiate, they want all of Israel! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Looking at the Bin Laden vs. he Palistinian "splinter groups" I wonder if it isn't easier for us to round up expected Al Qaeda terrorists as long as Binny L. is around. It seems these groups are like Hydra and will take a Hurculean effort to destroy if Bin Laden is killed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 What else would you call firing 3 missles from an Apache at a guy in a wheelchair??? pwn3d?!?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 If you remember Oslo, Israel made EVERY concession that was asked of it, and Arafat still turned it down! It is the palis that do not want to negotiate, they want all of Israel! You've made the Oslo reference several times, do you have a good reference for the agreement? I am interested in learning more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 That is one of the issues. It would be like negotiating with street gangs. There are so many, and they switch identies with a twist of a hat. I can understand Israels lack of patience and fear. I understand why they are impatient, but it can not be accepted. Besides, the Palestinians don't back off when Israel launches an attack. So Israel can look at it like this... Option 1- We continue to murder palestinian militants, and level palestinian towns. While doing so we coninue to suffer terrorist attacks in a never ending cycle. Option 2- We participate in a ceasefire and make concessions, and work on building a strong palestine nation. There will be some attacks, but over time stability seems likely. If option 2 fails, Israel can be no worse off than if they had chosen option 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 That is one of the issues. It would be like negotiating with street gangs. There are so many, and they switch identies with a twist of a hat. I can understand Israels lack of patience and fear. Why send more money to the Palis? So Arafat can steal it? Why rebuild pali towns? To "reward" them for their terrorist acts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 You've made the Oslo reference several times, do you have a good reference for the agreement? I am interested in learning more. I will find links for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 If you remember Oslo, Israel made EVERY concession that was asked of it, and Arafat still turned it down! It is the palis that do not want to negotiate, they want all of Israel! No, I do not remember the details of Oslo. But, Arafat is gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Why send more money to the Palis? So Arafat can steal it? Why rebuild pali towns? To "reward" them for their terrorist acts? Since the White House and US State Department have condemned the assassination, why send money to Israel to continue assassinations? The US has rebuilt every country we have ever leveled. Look at Japan. We nuked and rebuilt. Look what we are doing for the Iraqi people. I found this article, what do you think? Oslo Accords (Redirected from 1993 Oslo Peace Accords between Palestinians and Israel) The Oslo Accords were a series of agreements negotiated between the Israeli government and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO, acting as representatives of the Palestinian people) in 1993 as part of a peace process between the countries, officially called the Declaration of Principles. Despite the high hopes expressed in the Accords and in the subsequent agreements, that also promised the normalization of Israel's relations with the Arab world, the problem has not been resolved. Rabin, Clinton, and Arafat on September 13, 1993 The talks leading to the agreement was initiated by the Norwegian government, who were at reasonably good terms with both parties. Main architects behind the plan was Johan Jørgen Holst (the Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs), Terje Rød-Larsen and Mona Juul. The negotiations were undertaken in total secrecy in and around Oslo, with breakthrough meetings taking place in the home of Minister Holst, and was signed on August 20, 1993. There was a subsequent public ceremony in Washington D.C. on September 13, 1993 with Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin. The principles agreed were, in essence, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and the Palestinian right to self-government within those areas through the creation of the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian rule would last for a five year interim period during which permanent status would be negotiated (beginning not later than May 1996). Permanent issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, Israeli settlements in the area, security and borders were deliberately excluded from the Accords and determined as not prejudged. The interim self-government was to be granted in phases. Until a final status accord was made, West Bank and Gaza would be divided into three zones: * Area A - full control of the Palestinian Authority. * Area B - Palestinian civil control, Israeli military control. * Area C - full Israeli control. Together with the principles the two groups signed Letters of Mutual Recognition - The Israeli government recognized the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people while the PLO recognized the right of the state of Israel to exist and renounced terrorism, violence and its desire for the destruction of Israel. In addition to the first accord, namely the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government, other more specific accords are often informally known as Oslo. The Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (also called Oslo 2), signed in September 1995 which gave the Palestinians self-rule in Bethlehem, Hebron, Jenin, Nablus, Qalqilya, Ramallah, Tulkarm, and some 450 villages. Addition Israeli-Palestinian documents related to the Oslo Accords are the 1994 Cairo Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area (May 4, 1994), the 1994 Washington Declaration (July 25, 1994), the Agreement on Preparatory Transfer of Powers and Responsibilities Between Israel and the PLO (August 29, 1994), the 1997 Protocol on Redeployment in Hebron (January 15, 1997) and the 1998 Wye River Memorandum (October 23, 1998). In 2000 United States President Bill Clinton sought to keep the "Oslo Peace Process" moving forward by convening a summit between PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This Camp David 2000 Summit ended in failure, with no resolution to the conflict. The al-Aqsa Intifada that started up in 2000 following the collapse of the summit added to the crumbling of the credibility of the Oslo Accords, to the point that by 2003 the right wing in Israel, and Palestinian Islamic groups such as Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah considered the accords to be dead for all practical purposes, and Israel unequivocally refused to deal with Yassir Arafat, considered a terrorist by the government of Ariel Sharon. In this climate, much of 2001, 2002, and early 2003 saw an escalation of violence by Palestinian suicide bombers and the military re-occupation of the West Bank by the Israel Defence Force that made further discussions unlikely. In an attempt to break this cycle of violence, the Mideast Quartet (the United States, European Union, Russia, and United Nations), devised what they called a "road map for peace" intended to lead to a cease-fire and restart the negotiations and the stalled peace process. Long-delayed, it was finally released by US president George W. Bush on April 30, 2003. See the road map for peace article for further details and analysis of its reception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Why send more money to the Palis? So Arafat can steal it? Why rebuild pali towns? To "reward" them for their terrorist acts? The money would not be going to Arafat. Ahmed Qureia is the prime minister of Palestine and seems much more devoted to peace and the well being of his people. In fact without Qureia secretly working for peace in 1993, the Oslo meeting would have never occurred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 The money would not be going to Arafat. Ahmed Qureia is the prime minister of Palestine and seems much more devoted to peace and the well being of his people. In fact without Qureia secretly working for peace in 1993, the Oslo meeting would have never occurred. Qureia has NO power, Arafat still calls all the shots! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 You've made the Oslo reference several times, do you have a good reference for the agreement? I am interested in learning more. Check out www.mideastweb.org/oslofailed.htm for starters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Qureia has NO power, Arafat still calls all the shots! Unless you can prove otherwise, I believe Queria has a great deal of power if not all of it. This guy is not a figurehead that emerged from nowhere. He has been second in command of PLO, and has alway worked very hard behind the scenes for peace. In fact Israel has invited him to sit in on their parliement meetings several times. I don't think Arafat would use someone with Queria's connections and convictions as a figurehead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.