Unhappy Israelis
- Thread starter lozina
- Start date
Israelis deserve to be unhappy. They picked Sharon . . . they surely did not expect a peacemaker. Sharon was perfectly honest. He said he would deliver security by force and the Israeli populace clearly thought his methods had merit despite decades of failure.
The Israeli people deserve peace and security but their fortunes are inextricably tied to the plight of the Palestinians. The cycle of violence will not end until good people on both sides of the Green Line decide the tyranny to the Likud AND Islamic Jihad (et al) will end.
The Israeli people deserve peace and security but their fortunes are inextricably tied to the plight of the Palestinians. The cycle of violence will not end until good people on both sides of the Green Line decide the tyranny to the Likud AND Islamic Jihad (et al) will end.
israeli's have always been critical of sharon (and every other leader they have had). they know he may not be the best PM in many respects, but he deals with the terrorists in the way they see as the best.
I disagree. Peace has failed for a variety of reasons over the years but peace will ONLY come through a negotiated political settlement. "Peace through strength" is macho BS.
When Sharon "deals with" the terrorists often the innocent suffer the most. The occupation of the West Bank/Gaza are allegedly means of "dealing with" the terrorists but the greatest hardship has fallen upon the Palestinians that want nothing more than a country of their own and the opportunity to live peaceful and productive lives. New settlements, codifying the presence of outposts, and building a wall separating Palestinians from their farms and jobs is definitely a prescription for conflict . . . not peace . . . or "dealing with" the terrorists.
When Sharon "deals with" the terrorists often the innocent suffer the most. The occupation of the West Bank/Gaza are allegedly means of "dealing with" the terrorists but the greatest hardship has fallen upon the Palestinians that want nothing more than a country of their own and the opportunity to live peaceful and productive lives. New settlements, codifying the presence of outposts, and building a wall separating Palestinians from their farms and jobs is definitely a prescription for conflict . . . not peace . . . or "dealing with" the terrorists.
the isrealis have tried the carrot and the stick. sharon will give them the stick until they earn the carrot. the isreali doves
know they cannot present a re-election platform with new peace initiatives because the p.a. will embarrass them (again)
and innocent isreali civilians will die regardless. sharon needs to ratchet up these strikes until the p.a. learns their lesson.
as for the article, entitled 'cracks in support for sharon', the reporter overstates isreali disaffection. in fact, the writer creates
a bogus impression that there is an imminent sea change in isreali public opinion. he gathers critical opinion of sharon (how hard
is that ?) and packages it to paint more than mere 'cracks'. the article concedes the obvious: 'sharon has approval ratings of
over 50%'. it doesn't tell you how much over 50% or what the subsequent comment 'fallen dramatically' means. no recent polls
are cited - and for good reason. sharon's methods rule because hamas et al have made the isreali doves appear cowardly and
stupid. the p.a. will destroy hamas or sharon will.
Poor sygyzy. You will hate till the end of time. You will never learn that there will always be somebody who can hate more than you. You feed the fire that burns and burns and burns. In fact it is you who is the fool. The lesson you teach is the lesson you are being taught. have you figured it out yet? But never mind. It's the children who will die.
ThePresence
Elite Member
- Nov 19, 2001
- 27,727
- 16
- 81
ThePresence
Elite Member
- Nov 19, 2001
- 27,727
- 16
- 81
The negotiation was never with the terrorists . . . per se . . . it was with people within Palestine willing to work for peace. It was through the UN. The US is largely responsible for the escalating violence. In the absence of US weaponry/funding and US cover at the UN, Israel would have been hard pressed to continue their campaign and settlement of the West Bank. Get real, there are less than 7000 Israelis living amongst several hundred thousand Palestinians in Gaza. It's an untenable situation but the US has kneecapped the UN at every turn and makes no effort to restrain Sharon.
The destruction of the PA infrastructure that Sharon initiated in late 2000 and continued throughout 2001 essentially guaranteed there would be minimal opposition to militant insurgents. Arafat is no gem but once the PA was dismantled there was no way Arafat could dream of opposing Hamas or Hezbollah (assuming Arafat would have the deceny/intestinal fortitude to stand up to them . . . I doubt it). But at the very least the courageous Palestinians that want peace and are willing to negotiate (and oppose the militants) to get it . . . were not gone any favors by Sharon or the Bush administration. We intentionally mettled in the internal affairs of the PA and Israel (including delaying the Road Map so it wouldn't interfere with Sharon's election).
I like to think of myself as an optimist but I doubt we will see much progress until Arafat is gone (by any means necessary), Sharon is gone (preferably by near term election), and Bush is gone (2004). There's no guarantee that their replacements will be better but it's hard to imagine much worse.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
carrot and stick?
since the 60's the palestinians have used terror in countless hijackings, olympic athlete killings, attacking synagogues, even as far away as europe, and yet they gain sympathy and concessions. european countries spent their time releasing these terrorists when caught, giving arafat peace prizes, letting him address the UN, all while attacks continued and got more brutal. its not in their interests to stop terrorism, its gotten them this far. all extremist terrorists have seen this and learned the lesson, kill as many civilians as possible, you have nothing to lose. after all, the suicide bombers in iraq are created by decades of US occupation and dispair right?? or does it just help expose the big lie that palestinian terrorisms brutality is evidence of their just cause
indoctrinate your population with nazi like hatred that dehumanizes your enemy, glorify marytredom, glorify all terrorism, reward such terrorism, and what else can you expect. the palestinains unlike other stateless groups like the armenians or kurds were actually offfered their own country at the beginning, they turned it down. they turned down future offers that gave them most of what they wanted, thats not desperation, thats blackmail for political gain through simple indescriminant murder. the palestinians know very well any palestinain deaths are in their favour, and any jewish deaths are in their favor too. no incentive to stop. don't even pretend the world has not tried the dovish approach, the world has done nothing but reward the palestinian terror to this point
do the palestinians suicide bomb arab countries that oppress them? hundreds of thousands living in refugee camps that deny them citizenship, ownership of land, basic rights for 3 generations already, 20,000 killed by their arab bretheren in jordan which is far more then killed by israel, and through this dispair, only jews are killed. funny huh?
there will be no peace as long as the world rewards terror. if its not the palestinians, some other group with percieved grievences will also use terror until rewarded. it will never end.
since the 60's the palestinians have used terror in countless hijackings, olympic athlete killings, attacking synagogues, even as far away as europe, and yet they gain sympathy and concessions. european countries spent their time releasing these terrorists when caught, giving arafat peace prizes, letting him address the UN, all while attacks continued and got more brutal. its not in their interests to stop terrorism, its gotten them this far. all extremist terrorists have seen this and learned the lesson, kill as many civilians as possible, you have nothing to lose. after all, the suicide bombers in iraq are created by decades of US occupation and dispair right?? or does it just help expose the big lie that palestinian terrorisms brutality is evidence of their just cause
indoctrinate your population with nazi like hatred that dehumanizes your enemy, glorify marytredom, glorify all terrorism, reward such terrorism, and what else can you expect. the palestinains unlike other stateless groups like the armenians or kurds were actually offfered their own country at the beginning, they turned it down. they turned down future offers that gave them most of what they wanted, thats not desperation, thats blackmail for political gain through simple indescriminant murder. the palestinians know very well any palestinain deaths are in their favour, and any jewish deaths are in their favor too. no incentive to stop. don't even pretend the world has not tried the dovish approach, the world has done nothing but reward the palestinian terror to this point do the palestinians suicide bomb arab countries that oppress them? hundreds of thousands living in refugee camps that deny them citizenship, ownership of land, basic rights for 3 generations already, 20,000 killed by their arab bretheren in jordan which is far more then killed by israel, and through this dispair, only jews are killed. funny huh?
there will be no peace as long as the world rewards terror. if its not the palestinians, some other group with percieved grievences will also use terror until rewarded. it will never end.
So by your logic, then, all Israelis should be judged by the actions of those few among them who committed acts of terror and violence? Should they be judged by the actions of Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who, in 1994, walked into a mosque as people were praying and opened fire with a machine gun, killing about 50 people and wounding nearly 200?....Or by the actions of Yigal Amir, who, in 1995, felt that it was his religious duty to assassinate Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin?
Or perhaps you are referring only to acts done by those who purport to represent the Palestinians and Israelis, in which case we can look at Irgun Zvai Le?umi the organization that, under the leadership of Menachim Begin, who would later be elected Prime Minister and even win a Nobel Prize, blew up the King David Hotel, the headquarters for the British civil/military administration, in 1946. Irgun would later follow this up with the bombings of a British police station and, later, of a cafe in 1947. No?
Then how about judging all Israelis by the actions of an Irgun offshoot, Lehi (aka the Stern gang), among whom was future Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir... a group that assassinated British Mideast Representative Lord Moyne because they disagreed with his immigration policies... and later assassinated UN Mediators Folke Bernadette because she insisted that Palestinians had a right of return. But no, no... we shouldn't even judge any members of the Stern gang... they were granted amnesty and cleared of all charges in 1949.
Then how about Sharon, who was found to be "indirectly responsible" for the massacres at Sabra and Shatila by an Israeli tribunal (not being directly responsible didn't work as a defense when Eichman was rightly tried, convicted, and hanged in Jerusalem, nor does it for Sharon), only to go on to be elected Prime Minister and be called "a man of peace" on many occasions, by our president... after Jenin, for example. No, that wouldn't be fair, either.
No matter how many examples you and I and everyone else can rattle off of Muslims who've committed terrible acts and Jews who've committed terrible acts and Christians who've committed terrible acts and whatever other group you can think of who have examples of people who've committed terrible acts... it would not be fair to judge the many by the actions of the few. It would not be fair to label all Germans, for time immemorial, as evil because of the actions of Hitler and the Nazis. It would not be fair to label all Americans as slave-holders and butchers because somewhere along the line, Americans held slaves and waged the most successful campaign of genocide in recorded history against the tribal nations.
And it would not be fair to call all Jews or all Israelis evil because of the actions of some Israelis. And it is no more fair when you lump all Palestinians into a category, together, as being terrorists because of some acts of terrorism that have been committed, whether they be hijackings or assassinations or bombings or the suicide bombings that you'll now mention in your response to this message, if you choose to respond at all (Want to know how to stop people from being suicide bombers? Easy... give them something to live for. Once you make living preferable to dying, you'll find far fewer people who can be swayed into killing themselves).
I'll close with some words that I like to quote, once in a while, from Ray Bradbury, who, when asked if he had a single gift to bequeath the next generation, what it would be, said: "...The gift to see that not all Republicans are evil, that not all Democrats are evil, that not all Communists are evil, that not all Negroes are evil, that not all anything is evil. The ability to see the paradox in every person."
cumhail
Or perhaps you are referring only to acts done by those who purport to represent the Palestinians and Israelis, in which case we can look at Irgun Zvai Le?umi the organization that, under the leadership of Menachim Begin, who would later be elected Prime Minister and even win a Nobel Prize, blew up the King David Hotel, the headquarters for the British civil/military administration, in 1946. Irgun would later follow this up with the bombings of a British police station and, later, of a cafe in 1947. No?
Then how about judging all Israelis by the actions of an Irgun offshoot, Lehi (aka the Stern gang), among whom was future Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir... a group that assassinated British Mideast Representative Lord Moyne because they disagreed with his immigration policies... and later assassinated UN Mediators Folke Bernadette because she insisted that Palestinians had a right of return. But no, no... we shouldn't even judge any members of the Stern gang... they were granted amnesty and cleared of all charges in 1949.
Then how about Sharon, who was found to be "indirectly responsible" for the massacres at Sabra and Shatila by an Israeli tribunal (not being directly responsible didn't work as a defense when Eichman was rightly tried, convicted, and hanged in Jerusalem, nor does it for Sharon), only to go on to be elected Prime Minister and be called "a man of peace" on many occasions, by our president... after Jenin, for example. No, that wouldn't be fair, either.
No matter how many examples you and I and everyone else can rattle off of Muslims who've committed terrible acts and Jews who've committed terrible acts and Christians who've committed terrible acts and whatever other group you can think of who have examples of people who've committed terrible acts... it would not be fair to judge the many by the actions of the few. It would not be fair to label all Germans, for time immemorial, as evil because of the actions of Hitler and the Nazis. It would not be fair to label all Americans as slave-holders and butchers because somewhere along the line, Americans held slaves and waged the most successful campaign of genocide in recorded history against the tribal nations.
And it would not be fair to call all Jews or all Israelis evil because of the actions of some Israelis. And it is no more fair when you lump all Palestinians into a category, together, as being terrorists because of some acts of terrorism that have been committed, whether they be hijackings or assassinations or bombings or the suicide bombings that you'll now mention in your response to this message, if you choose to respond at all (Want to know how to stop people from being suicide bombers? Easy... give them something to live for. Once you make living preferable to dying, you'll find far fewer people who can be swayed into killing themselves).
I'll close with some words that I like to quote, once in a while, from Ray Bradbury, who, when asked if he had a single gift to bequeath the next generation, what it would be, said: "...The gift to see that not all Republicans are evil, that not all Democrats are evil, that not all Communists are evil, that not all Negroes are evil, that not all anything is evil. The ability to see the paradox in every person."
cumhail
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
carrot and stick?
since the 60's the palestinians have used terror in countless hijackings, olympic athlete killings, attacking synagogues, even as far away as europe, and yet they gain sympathy and concessions. european countries spent their time releasing these terrorists when caught, giving arafat peace prizes, letting him address the UN, all while attacks continued and got more brutal. its not in their interests to stop terrorism, its gotten them this far. all extremist terrorists have seen this and learned the lesson, kill as many civilians as possible, you have nothing to lose. after all, the suicide bombers in iraq are created by decades of US occupation and dispair right?? or does it just help expose the big lie that palestinian terrorisms brutality is evidence of their just cause
do the palestinians suicide bomb arab countries that oppress them? hundreds of thousands living in refugee camps that deny them citizenship, ownership of land, basic rights for 3 generations already, 20,000 killed by their arab bretheren in jordan which is far more then killed by israel, and through this dispair, only jews are killed. funny huh?
there will be no peace as long as the world rewards terror. if its not the palestinians, some other group with percieved grievences will also use terror until rewarded. it will never end.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
the only example you cited that equals the palestinian level of barbaric terrorism is the isolated goldstein incident who acted alone. the stern gang concentrated on british troops, the king david hotel was a command center for the british, and i think warning was given to evacuate it to boot.
arafat is the head of the palestinians, he has had his hand in a great deal of the terrorism from the very beginning, and he has been rewarded for his decisions. almost 90% of the population supports his actions, and supports suicide terrorism, and supports the idea of palestine as all the land in the area, israel shouldn't exist. you don't see 90% of jewish support for actions like goldsteins, which is why they don't happen often at all.
arafat is the head of the palestinians, he has had his hand in a great deal of the terrorism from the very beginning, and he has been rewarded for his decisions. almost 90% of the population supports his actions, and supports suicide terrorism, and supports the idea of palestine as all the land in the area, israel shouldn't exist. you don't see 90% of jewish support for actions like goldsteins, which is why they don't happen often at all.
I really didn't expect you to see any point or validity in my post, 0roo0roo. I've seen enough of your posting to know that if we were to give you a dictionary and twenty minutes to look the words up, you still couldn't tell us the definitions of 'objectivity' and 'open-mindedness.'
But thankfully, for every one one of you, there are more who, whether or not they agree with others' points of views, are at least willing to listen to what they have to say. And my posts, while they often come in response to something posted by someone like you, are meant more for them.
cumhail
But thankfully, for every one one of you, there are more who, whether or not they agree with others' points of views, are at least willing to listen to what they have to say. And my posts, while they often come in response to something posted by someone like you, are meant more for them
.cumhail
And my posts, while they often come in response to something posted by someone like you, are meant more for them.
I, for one, appreciate it too.
I, for one, appreciate it too.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
considernig you only consider the opinions of those that are morally relativistic to the point of meaningless as valid, you cannot claim to be open minded. nothing changes the fact that your examples are absurd stretches and do not hold up, so stop with the patronizing personal attacks.
Originally posted by: cumhail
I really didn't expect you to see any point or validity in my post, 0roo0roo. I've seen enough of your posting to know that if we were to give you a dictionary and twenty minutes to look the words up, you still couldn't tell us the definitions of 'objectivity' and 'open-mindedness.'
But thankfully, for every one one of you, there are more who, whether or not they agree with others' points of views, are at least willing to listen to what they have to say. And my posts, while they often come in response to something posted by someone like you, are meant more for them
cumhail
ThePresence
Elite Member
- Nov 19, 2001
- 27,727
- 16
- 81
"The Horror in Hebron." New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Feb 26, 1994. p. 22 (1 page)
This article, written a day after the massacre, states "more than 40," while this following one (from the same date as the first):
"New Clashes Likely." By CLYDE HABERMANSpecial to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Feb 26, 1994. p. 1 (2 pages)
stated that the "Jewish settler killed at least 40 and possibly 50"
A headline on the Toronto Star's front page, on February 26, 1994, read "Riots spread after 48 killed"
And an article on page 3 of the News section in the February 26, 1994 edition of the Jerusalem Post stated, in its last line:
"Only in the early afternoon, both Palestinian hospital officials and the IDF put the number of killed in the massacre and ensuing clashes in Hebron, at 49. By last night, Channel 1 reported that a total of 54 people had died."
All this can be found and/or verified using LexisNexis... And if you need more citations, there are thousands more to be found, some of which report more or less, but most of which report somewhere in the area of 50 deaths and about 150-200 wounded.
But as you say, it really doesn't make much of a difference, as 29 would not make it any less horrendous an act. I just wanted to support the facts I quoted.
cumhail
This article, written a day after the massacre, states "more than 40," while this following one (from the same date as the first):
"New Clashes Likely." By CLYDE HABERMANSpecial to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Feb 26, 1994. p. 1 (2 pages)
stated that the "Jewish settler killed at least 40 and possibly 50"
A headline on the Toronto Star's front page, on February 26, 1994, read "Riots spread after 48 killed"
And an article on page 3 of the News section in the February 26, 1994 edition of the Jerusalem Post stated, in its last line:
"Only in the early afternoon, both Palestinian hospital officials and the IDF put the number of killed in the massacre and ensuing clashes in Hebron, at 49. By last night, Channel 1 reported that a total of 54 people had died."
All this can be found and/or verified using LexisNexis... And if you need more citations, there are thousands more to be found, some of which report more or less, but most of which report somewhere in the area of 50 deaths and about 150-200 wounded.
But as you say, it really doesn't make much of a difference, as 29 would not make it any less horrendous an act. I just wanted to support the facts I quoted.
cumhail
And if I search for Baruch Goldstein and 20, I get Baruch Goldstein 12500 hits... so clearly that must be the correct number. Let's try some more... If I search on "Bill O'Reilly" and "idiot," I get 16,900 results. Hey, this is fun! After all, if it's somewhere on the internet, it must be true. And look! The words "Ariel Sharon" and "criminal" return 67,800 results... wow.
I did a search of news paper articles from major publications and news sources using LexisNexis to find what was being reported, and cited them as sources of information, and you think that reporting the number of results you get doing a search on all pages containing the strings "Baruch," "Goldstein," and "29" is comparable?
You are amusing
,cumhail
considernig you only consider the opinions of those that are morally relativistic to the point of meaningless as valid, you cannot claim to be open minded. nothing changes the fact that your examples are absurd stretches and do not hold up, so stop with the patronizing personal attacks.
=====================
This is an absurd stretch and I'm an absolutist so I'm right. Why not just say neener neener, it would sound as right.
=====================
This is an absurd stretch and I'm an absolutist so I'm right. Why not just say neener neener, it would sound as right.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter