• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Ariel Sharon warned his government would not tolerate the slightest Palestinian violation of the roadmap for peace,

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
Sharon might want to buy a mirror and look at the violations he is currently engaged in

Sharon won't tolerate roadmap violations
01/08/2003 10:17 - (SA)


Jerusalem - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon warned his government would not tolerate the slightest Palestinian violation of the roadmap for peace, the Israeli media reported on Friday.

"The experience of the past shows that the worst mistake, after reaching an agreement, is ignoring violations in implementation, even if they appear small," Sharon said in a speech to the national defence college on Thursday.

The premier argued that France and Britain's tolerance of violations by the German Nazi regime of all signed agreements led to war rather than peace.

"We are at the beginning of the implementation of the first stage of the roadmap, which is based on a ceasefire and specific steps toward a total cessation of violence, terrorism and incitement," Sharon said.

"There is no progression from one phase to the next before the full implementation of the previous one," he stressed.

The roadmap for peace, which was drafted by the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia, was presented to both sides in late April 2003 and its implementation officially started with the June 4 Aqaba summit.

The first stage of the three-phase blueprint, which was due to have been completed by in May 2003, calls on the Palestinian Authority to crack down on militant groups but also requires Israel to dismantle all settlement outposts erected since March 2001 and freeze all settlement activity.

Each side says the other has failed to take even these first steps.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1396094,00.html
 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,878
0
76
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,469
1
76
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
Sad thing is is that he is a moderate by his party standards
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
Sad thing is is that he is a moderate by his party standards
he is not realy a moderate, he is just alot smarter and more subtle than the radicals
 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,878
0
76
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
Sad thing is is that he is a moderate by his party standards
I don't think they are the only ones to blame. The US could say "If you don't follow the plan, we will cut aid off". They don't.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
17,234
7,373
136
A sad comment on the power of Jewish lobbyists here in the States. :frown:
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: kage69
A sad comment on the power of Jewish lobbyists here in the States. :frown:
They run the show. If you point that out though, you're anti-Semetic. Accept the fact that we are Israel's bitch. We will never tell them not to do anything that they will do anyway, it will make us look like, well, their bitches. So we don't put our foot down on issues like settlements, collective punishment, etc.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
0
0
I am Jewish, and I don't think the US is doing Israel any favors by not cutting off aid to force a peaceful solution.
Israel is currently an apartheid state. They basically want to retain control of west bank for security purposes, but they don't want to give citizenship rights to Palestinians for fear of losing Israel's Jewish majority status. They want to have it both ways, West Bank is part of Israel, yet those living in West Bank are not Israelis. This can't go on in perpetuity. At some point, Israel will have to let the Palestinan areas go in order to keep the Jewish majority.
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
I am Jewish, and I don't think the US is doing Israel any favors by not cutting off aid to force a peaceful solution.
Israel is currently an apartheid state. They basically want to retain control of west bank for security purposes, but they don't want to give citizenship rights to Palestinians for fear of losing Israel's Jewish majority status. They want to have it both ways, West Bank is part of Israel, yet those living in West Bank are not Israelis. This can't go on in perpetuity. At some point, Israel will have to let the Palestinan areas go in order to keep the Jewish majority.
Oh but if only more held your point of view. One of my best friends is Jewish and he feels the same way, but whenever he articulates these views in a debate setting, he is often accused of being a self-hating Jew, a Jewish Anti-Semite. It's sad that the term "anti-Semite" has lost all its meaning and power in the wake of the ME crisis.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
Sad thing is is that he is a moderate by his party standards
I don't think they are the only ones to blame. The US could say "If you don't follow the plan, we will cut aid off". They don't.
Can we do the same thing to the Palestinians?

 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
Sad thing is is that he is a moderate by his party standards
I don't think they are the only ones to blame. The US could say "If you don't follow the plan, we will cut aid off". They don't.
Can we do the same thing to the Palestinians?
What, cut off the pittance that we give them? Aid that amounts to a minute fraction of what we give Israel? Yeah, I guess we could.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Lets take a look at the good news. He's in his mid 70's and grossly overweight. He's a walking stroke/heart attack.
Sad thing is is that he is a moderate by his party standards
I don't think they are the only ones to blame. The US could say "If you don't follow the plan, we will cut aid off". They don't.
Can we do the same thing to the Palestinians?
What, cut off the pittance that we give them? Aid that amounts to a minute fraction of what we give Israel? Yeah, I guess we could.
You guess we could? So the next time some Palestinian staps some C4 around his waist and blows up a bus or pizza parlor full of civilians you are going to lobby your congressman to remove funding from all Palestinians?

Sure you are.

 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
0
0
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: SuperTool
I am Jewish, and I don't think the US is doing Israel any favors by not cutting off aid to force a peaceful solution.
Israel is currently an apartheid state. They basically want to retain control of west bank for security purposes, but they don't want to give citizenship rights to Palestinians for fear of losing Israel's Jewish majority status. They want to have it both ways, West Bank is part of Israel, yet those living in West Bank are not Israelis. This can't go on in perpetuity. At some point, Israel will have to let the Palestinan areas go in order to keep the Jewish majority.
Oh but if only more held your point of view. One of my best friends is Jewish and he feels the same way, but whenever he articulates these views in a debate setting, he is often accused of being a self-hating Jew, a Jewish Anti-Semite. It's sad that the term "anti-Semite" has lost all its meaning and power in the wake of the ME crisis.

Self-hating or not, but by giving Israel money, we are signing off on their policies, and are accomplices if they do something wrong with the weapons we give them. It's our responsiblity to make sure we are not paying for anything wrong or unjust.
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: SuperTool
I am Jewish, and I don't think the US is doing Israel any favors by not cutting off aid to force a peaceful solution.
Israel is currently an apartheid state. They basically want to retain control of west bank for security purposes, but they don't want to give citizenship rights to Palestinians for fear of losing Israel's Jewish majority status. They want to have it both ways, West Bank is part of Israel, yet those living in West Bank are not Israelis. This can't go on in perpetuity. At some point, Israel will have to let the Palestinan areas go in order to keep the Jewish majority.
Oh but if only more held your point of view. One of my best friends is Jewish and he feels the same way, but whenever he articulates these views in a debate setting, he is often accused of being a self-hating Jew, a Jewish Anti-Semite. It's sad that the term "anti-Semite" has lost all its meaning and power in the wake of the ME crisis.

Self-hating or not, but by giving Israel money, we are signing off on their policies, and are accomplices if they do something wrong with the weapons we give them. It's our responsiblity to make sure we are not paying for anything wrong or unjust.
I agree with you 100%. Much of the hate directed towards the US stems from our unconditional support for Israel, even when we know that they are blatantly in the wrong. We are seen as impotent in our dealings towards the country and our claim of being an "honest broker" is ridiculed as the joke of the century, which, IMO is largely true.

 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
I agree with you 100%. Much of the hate directed towards the US stems from our unconditional support for Israel, even when we know that they are blatantly in the wrong. We are seen as impotent in our dealings towards the country and our claim of being an "honest broker" is ridiculed as the joke of the century, which, IMO is largely true
So you two are saying that the entire blame for the I/P problem rests with Israel and the Arabs are entirely blameless for any of the history that has occured. Also since the US has supported Israel that the US is then the Great Satan and deserves to be attacked for that support.

Is that about it?
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: etech
I agree with you 100%. Much of the hate directed towards the US stems from our unconditional support for Israel, even when we know that they are blatantly in the wrong. We are seen as impotent in our dealings towards the country and our claim of being an "honest broker" is ridiculed as the joke of the century, which, IMO is largely true
So you two are saying that the entire blame for the I/P problem rests with Israel and the Arabs are entirely blameless for any of the history that has occured. Also since the US has supported Israel that the US is then the Great Satan and deserves to be attacked for that support.

Is that about it?
etech, you know exactly what I mean and where I stand on this issue so don't try to just make casual conversation, we've talked about this issue to no end. I never said the Arabs are blameless, just that we need to stop acting like the Israelis are. Do yourself a favor and don't try to put words in peoples mouths.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
0
0
Originally posted by: etech
I agree with you 100%. Much of the hate directed towards the US stems from our unconditional support for Israel, even when we know that they are blatantly in the wrong. We are seen as impotent in our dealings towards the country and our claim of being an "honest broker" is ridiculed as the joke of the century, which, IMO is largely true
So you two are saying that the entire blame for the I/P problem rests with Israel and the Arabs are entirely blameless for any of the history that has occured. Also since the US has supported Israel that the US is then the Great Satan and deserves to be attacked for that support.

Is that about it?
The problem is that Israel is occupying the west bank, and there is no Palestinian state. There are things that occupied peoples can do that occupiers cannot.
For example, during WW2, the partisans in Russia did some very nasty things to both germans and suspected sympathisers. And it was not considered wrong, because they were fighting for liberation. However, when germans did same thing to partisans and soviet sympathisers, it was considered wrong, because they were the occupying power. If Palestinians were not being occupied, and they went to blow up Israelis, that would be unjustifiable act of agression, but since they are being occupied, they are just bringing the fruits of occupation to the Israeli population which supports it.
It's common sense. When someone breaks into your house, and you kill them, that's self defense, but if they kill you, that's murder. Same action, but by virtue of them breaking into your house, you are justified, and they are not. So there is no point in comparing Israel to Palestinians while the occupation is ongoing.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
So long as abbas and/or arafat refuse to reign in the terrorists and disarm them, then israel has no choice but to continue to build the fence. If abbas is afraid to stop terrorists from coming to israel and blowing themselves up, all in the vain hope of averting a palestinian civil war, then the fence should be built to stop the terrorists. Fencing off Gaza worked perfectly. Now it's the West Bank's time.

Hell, if the terrorists continue to call the shots in the Palestinian circle, then I see no problem with either annexing the whole damn territory or giving it back to Jordan and Egypt so they can do israel's dirty work.
 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
So long as abbas and/or arafat refuse to reign in the terrorists and disarm them, then israel has no choice but to continue to build the fence. If abbas is afraid to stop terrorists from coming to israel and blowing themselves up, all in the vain hope of averting a palestinian civil war, then the fence should be built to stop the terrorists. Fencing off Gaza worked perfectly. Now it's the West Bank's time.

Hell, if the terrorists continue to call the shots in the Palestinian circle, then I see no problem with either annexing the whole damn territory or giving it back to Jordan and Egypt so they can do israel's dirty work.
I can see why you like that. In scenario one, the Pals try to reign in terrorists by force, start a civil war and basically destroy themselves. In the second scenario, the onus of security shifts from Israel to Jordon or Egypt. If one of them does not go out of its way to protect Israel, Israel can launch a "defensive" attack and use its overwhelming military superiority to destroy either country. Either way Israel wins and more Arabs die, a NeoCon's wet dream.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Dari
So long as abbas and/or arafat refuse to reign in the terrorists and disarm them, then israel has no choice but to continue to build the fence. If abbas is afraid to stop terrorists from coming to israel and blowing themselves up, all in the vain hope of averting a palestinian civil war, then the fence should be built to stop the terrorists. Fencing off Gaza worked perfectly. Now it's the West Bank's time.

Hell, if the terrorists continue to call the shots in the Palestinian circle, then I see no problem with either annexing the whole damn territory or giving it back to Jordan and Egypt so they can do israel's dirty work.
I can see why you like that. In scenario one, the Pals try to reign in terrorists by force, start a civil war and basically destroy themselves. In the second scenario, the onus of security shifts from Israel to Jordon or Egypt. If one of them does not go out of its way to protect Israel, Israel can launch a "defensive" attack and use its overwhelming military superiority to destroy either country. Either way Israel wins and more Arabs die, a NeoCon's wet dream.
like it or not, my friend, the palestinians have to go through some type of internecine conflict to resolve once and for all who truly lead them. All this pussyfooting around is only delaying the inevitable. A strong and true leader has to emerge from the current list.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: etech
I agree with you 100%. Much of the hate directed towards the US stems from our unconditional support for Israel, even when we know that they are blatantly in the wrong. We are seen as impotent in our dealings towards the country and our claim of being an "honest broker" is ridiculed as the joke of the century, which, IMO is largely true
So you two are saying that the entire blame for the I/P problem rests with Israel and the Arabs are entirely blameless for any of the history that has occured. Also since the US has supported Israel that the US is then the Great Satan and deserves to be attacked for that support.

Is that about it?
The problem is that Israel is occupying the west bank, and there is no Palestinian state. There are things that occupied peoples can do that occupiers cannot.
For example, during WW2, the partisans in Russia did some very nasty things to both germans and suspected sympathisers. And it was not considered wrong, because they were fighting for liberation. However, when germans did same thing to partisans and soviet sympathisers, it was considered wrong, because they were the occupying power. If Palestinians were not being occupied, and they went to blow up Israelis, that would be unjustifiable act of agression, but since they are being occupied, they are just bringing the fruits of occupation to the Israeli population which supports it.
It's common sense. When someone breaks into your house, and you kill them, that's self defense, but if they kill you, that's murder. Same action, but by virtue of them breaking into your house, you are justified, and they are not. So there is no point in comparing Israel to Palestinians while the occupation is ongoing.
I have never seen terrorism justified in such a cold blooded heartless way before. Congratulations. That is sinking to a new low on this board.

Tell me what the killing of the civilians by the Palestinians will accomplish.

 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Dari
So long as abbas and/or arafat refuse to reign in the terrorists and disarm them, then israel has no choice but to continue to build the fence. If abbas is afraid to stop terrorists from coming to israel and blowing themselves up, all in the vain hope of averting a palestinian civil war, then the fence should be built to stop the terrorists. Fencing off Gaza worked perfectly. Now it's the West Bank's time.

Hell, if the terrorists continue to call the shots in the Palestinian circle, then I see no problem with either annexing the whole damn territory or giving it back to Jordan and Egypt so they can do israel's dirty work.
I can see why you like that. In scenario one, the Pals try to reign in terrorists by force, start a civil war and basically destroy themselves. In the second scenario, the onus of security shifts from Israel to Jordon or Egypt. If one of them does not go out of its way to protect Israel, Israel can launch a "defensive" attack and use its overwhelming military superiority to destroy either country. Either way Israel wins and more Arabs die, a NeoCon's wet dream.
like it or not, my friend, the palestinians have to go through some type of internecine conflict to resolve once and for all who truly lead them. All this pussyfooting around is only delaying the inevitable. A strong and true leader has to emerge from the current list.
Fair enough, and in the mean time, Israel need to do SOMETHING to give said leader some leverage to gain the support of the people. As long as Israel keeps building settlements, all of which are illegal, as long as it continues extrajudicial killings and collective punishment, no leader is going to have the foothold to rally for peace. As long as the average Palestinian experiences the continuing injustices of the occupation, they are going to continue alligning themselves with people who are agressivly targetting Israel and making them feel like they are getting some pay back. It always takes two to tango, so like it or not, the Israelis are going to have to get their a$$ in gear as well, and it is up to us, their reason for existence, to put the pressure on them.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Dari
So long as abbas and/or arafat refuse to reign in the terrorists and disarm them, then israel has no choice but to continue to build the fence. If abbas is afraid to stop terrorists from coming to israel and blowing themselves up, all in the vain hope of averting a palestinian civil war, then the fence should be built to stop the terrorists. Fencing off Gaza worked perfectly. Now it's the West Bank's time.

Hell, if the terrorists continue to call the shots in the Palestinian circle, then I see no problem with either annexing the whole damn territory or giving it back to Jordan and Egypt so they can do israel's dirty work.
I can see why you like that. In scenario one, the Pals try to reign in terrorists by force, start a civil war and basically destroy themselves. In the second scenario, the onus of security shifts from Israel to Jordon or Egypt. If one of them does not go out of its way to protect Israel, Israel can launch a "defensive" attack and use its overwhelming military superiority to destroy either country. Either way Israel wins and more Arabs die, a NeoCon's wet dream.
The BS is strong with this one.

 

LilBlinbBlahIce

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2001
1,837
0
0
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce
Originally posted by: Dari
So long as abbas and/or arafat refuse to reign in the terrorists and disarm them, then israel has no choice but to continue to build the fence. If abbas is afraid to stop terrorists from coming to israel and blowing themselves up, all in the vain hope of averting a palestinian civil war, then the fence should be built to stop the terrorists. Fencing off Gaza worked perfectly. Now it's the West Bank's time.

Hell, if the terrorists continue to call the shots in the Palestinian circle, then I see no problem with either annexing the whole damn territory or giving it back to Jordan and Egypt so they can do israel's dirty work.
I can see why you like that. In scenario one, the Pals try to reign in terrorists by force, start a civil war and basically destroy themselves. In the second scenario, the onus of security shifts from Israel to Jordon or Egypt. If one of them does not go out of its way to protect Israel, Israel can launch a "defensive" attack and use its overwhelming military superiority to destroy either country. Either way Israel wins and more Arabs die, a NeoCon's wet dream.
The BS is strong with this one.
Yeah but you can't deny the possible outcomes can you? Easy to dismiss something you have no answer for as BS, you're a master at it.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY