Printable View
Why not make a "Israel An Palestine, Long Live Peace" thread where every one makes solutions for peace, muslims of k-lite world break bread with jews of k-lite world, then after 2 days a Jew will claim one of the threads as his rightful land, then a suicide spammer will hit his thread then a flame war will break out which will engulf us all. In the end the UM (United Moderaters) will have to make a new resolution and a Post map to peace.
Very imporart and historical time frame. I was working for a relief agency then and stationed there at that time.Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@19 October 2003 - 06:40
Is it possible that Arafat doesnt trust Sharron bacause the last time he did, in Lebanon, early 80's....he left 1000's of Palestinian women and children in his tender care, at the insistance of the USA, while he removed all the Palestinian fighters.
He did this....10,000 Palestinian fighters left Lebanon, leaving their wives and children behind under Israeli "Protection"...
The Israelis then invited the Christian and Muslim "Militia" there into the refugee camps and watched them massacre them....... 3000+, before the population of Israel found out what was happening and forced their government to stop it.
The Americans didnt even say they were bad boys.....
Clocker,
If it had been you.....would you trust the man again?
When Araft and his army left Beirut in summer of 1983, he went to Tripoli, Lebanon. Then Syria's army came in surrounded Tripoli to capture Arafat, dead or alive. 2 weeks of massive fighting between the PLO and the Syrian Army, hundreds of civillians died and thousands were injured.
Phillip Habib was sent back and struck a deal with Syria to allow a safe passage for Arafat and his followers thru their land to Jordan. Syria agreed to it. Neither the US, Israelis, nor Arafat trusted Hafez Al-Assad that Arafat will pass thru Syria without killing or capturing him first. So Habib struck another deal to have the PLO forces leave thru Syria and Arafat to go to Morroco via the Israeli Navy (were he stayed there several years before going back to Palistine.
And that's exactly what happened. Our agency was responsible for the assistance of supplying medical & food products to the PLO.
As for the Sabra & Shatila, the Palestinian camps in East Beirut, was setup by Sharon & the "Kata'ab" led by Eli Hobaika & Samir Jaajaa who are "christian" maronite and "muslim" factions didn't take any part of those massacres.
I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?
:)
hmm good questionQuote:
Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 07:18
I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?
:)
PIRA, UDA et al were terrorists, no matter what happens in the future they were terrorists. Whether they "win" or not. Though in these situations it is a practical impossibility for anyone to "win".Quote:
Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 08:18
I'd like to ask Clocker And JP a question:
If a person was a terrorist, and part of a terrorist organisation, and killed innocent people for a "cause" that was eventually won, is that person still a terrorist? Or does the fact that they won, and now have their state, mean they are no longer terrorists?
:)
When they stop carrying out terrorist acts and are accepted into the normal mainstream politic, they are no longer terrorists. If there is a sufficiently large proportion of the electorate who wish to be represented by them.
That does not mean that the acts which were committed are, in retrospect, no longer considered to have been terrorist. They always will be.
Unless all parties can accept this, then it is impossible to find a solution.
Compromise is also necessary - In the Irish situation, the Government of the South also removed it's constitutional claim on the North (as I understand it). This was part of the compromise to the "Loyalists" in the North. On the other hand the RUC was disbanded and replaced by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (not sure on name but that's not really important). This was something which the "Nationalists" wanted.
The solution must be acceptable to all sides and they must be willing to give and take. If any one is so entrenched that they will not budge, then there can be no solution.
yes good answer jp. can i ask why you blending in the northern ireland situation? it is good however to give other examples. B)
Bearing what you say in mind, and in light of the fact that Israel was born out of terrorism, and "won", is it not also fair that Palestinians use the same tactics that robbed them of their country, to help them regain it? And what if they also "win", would that make the fight worthy?
:)
lol i dont rekon they will win unless the bush administrations foreign policy is changed
Quote:
Originally posted by Billy_Dean@19 October 2003 - 11:40
Bearing what you say in mind, and in light of the fact that Israel was born out of terrorism, and "won", is it not also fair that Palestinians use the same tactics that robbed them of their country, to help them regain it? And what if they also "win", would that make the fight worthy?
:)
To answer your point, neither side will "win". Unless and until that sort of attitude is put to one side.
Chinook,
This is why I use the Irish example. For all of my life I thought that the problem was beyond solution. It was a succession of bombings, shootings, assassinations, whatever. We certainly called it terrorism well before 9-11, so I don't know where you got that from.
We are now in the position of a cease-fire which has lasted for a long time. Tensions rise and fall, granted and the situation is far from resolved. However people are not being murdered in the name of freedom and equality.
As long as people keep talking and compromising there is every prospect of a peaceful solution being reached. I also think that ever day we get further away from the violence makes it less likely to return
ok...well since the world domination of bush and his cronies namley blair i think terroism and insecurity has risen. you now have the US stuck in iraq. what happened to shock and awe?? we have like 1 US soldier dead everyday and remind me what they went to war on? have they found what they went for?