President Bush was quoted as saying " ... when the United States and France say withdraw, we mean complete withdrawal, no half-hearted measures."

It’s fascinating that the US is so intent on getting Syria out of Lebanon. After all, why shouldn't they? Syria is an occupying force. But wait ... So is Israel: Aside from its 50+ years of occupying Palestinian lands, Israeli troops occupied in south Lebanon for 22 years. Did the US ever call for a "complete withdrawal"? Never. Oh, and lest we forget that other occupying force in the Middle East: The USA, which currently has 140,000 troops in Iraq: There is no resolve in sight for this conflict. Over 2,000 US soldiers have lost their lives ... For What? I forgot: Oh yeah, the world was at immediate risk from the elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction, which were Never found. FYI: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has reported that Israel has over 250 atomic and hydrogen bombs in its arsenal.

The irony is extraordinary: 140,000 American troops occupy Iraq - we shall leave the Israeli occupation forces in Palestinian lands out of this equation - while their Prime Minister demands the withdrawal of 14,000 Syrian troops from Lebanon. Democracy? I don't think so.

I say we withdraw every single American troop in every country and then grab a few beers and watch it all go to hell.

Capt.Fantastic :

There've been plenty of threads in this forum dealing with this specific issue. Just do a search. However , if this thread lives (and it will , gathering around 150 replies), you are about to encounter Arab members denying Israel, American members bashing Arabs and many other wonderful "opinions".

Enjoy the best of the worthless threads on A.Net.

You'd think after almost 6 years someone would get tired of the same old argument.

LY7E7, and how has your reply answered the raised questions?

As far as the US forces in Iraq are concerned ... yes, I was against the attack on Iraq, but I feel that in the situation given - pulling out would be the most dangerous thing, since the void left over would provide plenty of space for Islamic fundamentalists to rise to power. And that, unless it would be backed by democratic vote (fat chance), would be a very dangeours thing - and for the Iraqis only the oppressor would change, but the situation wouldn't have changed one bit.

D.

Quoting N5176Y (Reply 1): I say we withdraw every single American troop in every country and then grab a few beers and watch it all go to hell.

I'm with ya. It'll be funny as hell to watch the same people protesting the war today turn into the same people protesting the atrocities that would result. That would be some funny shit right there.

I did a search and I did not find a topic analogous to this one: If this thread already exists(ed), I apologize for the duplication.
This discussion was going on in the aviation forum and it was suggested that I move it here.

I agree with Boeing7E7 (to a certain extent). As simple as his comment is, it makes perfect sense. Let's keep our armed forces out of harms way, until such a time that their service is needed to Defend our country, not to promote special interests and hidden political agendas.

Quote: There've been plenty of threads in this forum dealing with this specific issue. Just do a search. However , if this thread lives (and it will , gathering around 150 replies), you are about to encounter Arab members denying Israel, American members bashing Arabs and many other wonderful "opinions".

LY7E7: Above, you note Arabs and Americans bashing Arabs. What about Israelis insighting such distasteful posts? This is exactly what you did with the above comment. If you don't like the thread, simply don't reply.

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 6): I agree with Boeing7E7 (to a certain extent). As simple as his comment is, it makes perfect sense. Let's keep our armed forces out of harms way, until such a time that their service is needed to Defend our country, not to promote special interests and hidden political agendas.

Ummm....No. Then it will be too late to deploy troops, and more will die as a result. We would lose all progress that was ever made. That is just asinine.

StowAway: I am speaking in reference to the deployment of our forces in Iraq. In my opinion, there should never have been an invasion. The premise for war was to protect the world from weapons of mass destruction. No such weapons have been uncovered; furthermore Iraq never attacked or posed a threat to the USA. When a soldier is killed in Iraq, does he/she die for their country? I don't believe so. I have a great deal of respect for those who serve in our armed forces: They put their lives on the line when the Commander and Chief calls them to duty. I think Mr. Bush and his cohorts could have used better judgement in this Iraq debacle. What does the military tell the families? "Your son died for the placement of puppet regime, pseudo-democracy in Iraq." My heart goes out to the families who lost sons, daughters, husbands, wives.

Former President Clinton stated that he never considered Iraq a priority for the next administration. In meetings with Bush in 2000, Clinton advised him that North Korea deserved more concern.

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 6): What about Israelis insighting such distasteful posts?

Well, I do not. And if you DID make a search for threads dealing with Middle East, then perhaps you should now my views and opinions , yet your accusation simply shows that you did not bother to read.

Oh Boy, here we go again . . . another "Should have never been an Invasion" thread . . . I guess I can write this one off . . . since, obviously, there was an invasion . . .   

Two wrongs don't make it right. Let's suppose that the war in Iraq is/was wrong does this mean that other issues shouldn't be resolved?

Do we have to wait for the US to pull out of Iraq and Israel do so and so and be there peace in Sudan for the Syrian-Lebanese crisis to be solved?

Maybe the invasion of Iraq was wrong in the first place but look at it now. They are trying to build something amid all the terrorist attacks and killings. Some wars are fought very hard. Let's hope the best for the people of Iraq.

Regards.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 5): It'll be funny as hell to watch the same people protesting the war today turn into the same people protesting the atrocities that would result. That would be some funny shit right there.

I think, sir, that you're missing the point entirely. The point is that there are other ways of accomplishing things besides sending in troops - but that it's typical of too many Americans to look no further than the muzzle of their gun for an answer to any problem. The war protests are not protesting the ends... they're protesting the means. I see you've "been there and participated" so it should be easy for you not to forget that there are people dying out there. That means that there are kids my age coming home in pine boxes. That's not noble... that's just a waste.

There's was no reason for us to go into Iraq... there was no threat to us there. You can trot out your oh-so-honorable: "But, we're freeing those people from the chains of tyranny" claptrap all you want... sending in troops was not the best solution to that problem... and I have a hard time believing that it was the foremost goal on anyone's mind when the desicion to invade was made anyway. You're all changing your argument because suddenly the WMD thing blew up in your face (pardon the pun).

At the end of the day? There are 1000+ young adults who are dead now and who were killed for no substantiatable reason. I find it disgusting and the fact that you, apparently, do not speaks only to the quality of your character. It's no wonder the rest of the world looks to us with scorn... when we portray that attitude, who can blame them? Further, the fact that you would dare to "laugh" about the attrocities of war - and the attrocities that are bound to happen when American troops depart Iraq - dishonors you, and all of those dead soldiers and the families who will never see them again. Shame on you.

[Edited 2005-03-12 11:25:02]

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 5): I'm with ya. It'll be funny as hell to watch the same people protesting the war today turn into the same people protesting the atrocities that would result. That would be some funny shit right there.

We protest the fact that you went in in the first place - you can leave when you finish what you started.

Quoting Lekohawk (Reply 12): That means that there are kids my age coming home in pine boxes. That's not noble... that's just a waste.

There are Iraqi kids who are a quarter of your age being buried there.

Quoting Lekohawk (Reply 12): At the end of the day? There are 1000+ young adults who are dead now and who were killed for no substantiatable reason.

Can I ask you Americans a question? I understand that they are your fellow countrymen, but why is it that most Americans don't even bother mentioning the tens of thousands of dead Iraqis? There are many, many civilian deaths on the Iraqi side as opposed to the 1,500 military US deaths, why is it they always go unmentioned? Just something that I think is very unfair to the Iraqis, becasue they have suffered the most in this conflict.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 5): I'm with ya. It'll be funny as hell to watch the same people protesting the war today turn into the same people protesting the atrocities that would result. That would be some funny shit right there.

Yah hilarious.....

The fact is that the US helped create the pre-Iraqi invasion mess in the Middle East.

We would all love for the US to stop interfering with the rest of the world. And that includes exploiting, bullying and intimidating.

Some of you guys think the world would fall into chaos if it were not for the USA. Personally, given the state of affairs I think it would be an improvement.

Quoting Airplay (Reply 14): Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 5): I'm with ya. It'll be funny as hell to watch the same people protesting the war today turn into the same people protesting the atrocities that would result. That would be some funny shit right there.

so this is the extend of american reality tv now then, going in to someone elces country, screwing it up and having a good laugh at it

"So is Israel: Aside from its 50+ years of occupying Palestinian lands"

I believe they won that after being attacked by them and many other countries. So if I am not mistaken, tough luck for them, spoils of war. You attacked, and got your ass whipped.

"We would all love for the US to stop interfering with the rest of the world. And that includes exploiting, bullying and intimidating.

Some of you guys think the world would fall into chaos if it were not for the USA. Personally, given the state of affairs I think it would be an improvement."

Says the guy from a country that huddles under the U.S. Its amazing, all the money we give out with AID, every time something bad happens over seas, it's "what is the U.S going to do", and we do it. So stop your bitching. I have got a great idea, stop asking the U.S. for money. You don't like us, so stop asking for money. Amazing how when we invaded Iraq, India told Iraq that they would help them if they wanted.....then we give them money after the earthquake. Amazing. Big bullies, yep. We are not part of the U.N., or NATO either. We always do things on our own, nothing is ever a joint effort. Give me a break.

"so this is the extend of american reality tv now then, going in to someone elces country, screwing it up and having a good laugh at it"

I think you know as well as I do that THAT was not the intent of his post. His intent was that it would be funny becuase sometimes you just can't win. People want one thing then bitch about it.

After all, why shouldn't they? Syria is an occupying force. But wait ... So is Israel: Aside from its 50+ years of occupying Palestinian lands, Israeli troops occupied in south Lebanon for 22 years. Did the US ever call for a "complete withdrawal"? Never. Oh, and lest we forget that other occupying force in the Middle East: The USA, which currently has 140,000 troops in Iraq:

The US and Israel are democracies. Syria is one of the worst regimes in the Middle East. There is NO moral equivalency.

Yesterday, I had a taxi driver who moved to the US from Afghanistan 25 years ago. I can not describe the feeling talking to this man, who voted in Afghani elections and who voted for George W Bush last year. Let us not forget what this conflict is over--Freedom in the simplest form.

What about Israelis insighting such distasteful posts?

If you bothered to use the search function, you would see that aside from LY7E7, Israeli-Palestinian threads usually involve Americans and non-Palestinian Arabs, not Israelis and Palestinians.

NWA: Quite honestly, I don't believe you shouldn't be posting in this forum. Your use of profanity is not necessary. Furthermore, you complete and utter lack of understanding of what's being discussed here is more reason for you not to post in this thread. If you don't know the history than you can't understand the present state of affairs. If you don't have something intelligent to say, don't say anything. There are people here with whom I disagree, but at least they articulate themselves in a cordial adult-like manner. Maybe you should do the same.

QR332: I am aware of the thousands of civilian deaths in Iraq and it is sad shame. Whether US soldiers or young civilians, any casualty of this war is a life lost. Many who mourn the deaths of our troops also grieve for the innocent people who also perished in this unlawful war. Its sad that GW and his blood thirsty advisors can't equate the value of human life.

btw, if Iraq's major export was grapefruit, do you think GW would be so steadfast on democracy? I think not.

Quoting NWA (Reply 16): I believe they won that after being attacked by them and many other countries. So if I am not mistaken, tough luck for them, spoils of war. You attacked, and got your ass whipped.

You guys really need a good history lesson. The Jews immigrated into Palestine starting in 1918 when Palestine was handed over to Britain, and then they established themselves in Palestine. During the late 30s and early 40s, their terrorist gangs such as the Irgun and the Haganah carried out many terrorist attacks against the Palestinians, and conflict between the Jews and the Arabs lasted until 1948, when the Jews decided to form their own homeland and using their terrorist gangs and armies, expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, massacred thousands, and looted 78% of Palestine. How could we have attacked them if they weren't even a country yet? The armies of the Arab neighbours of Palestine only entered after the occupying and ethnic cleansing of Palestine started. Now, 1948 aside, theres 1967, and Israel is still holding and occupying our land from then in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. They are also still holding the Golan Heights, which is Syrian land.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 17): The US and Israel are democracies. Syria is one of the worst regimes in the Middle East. There is NO moral equivalency.

Democracies, yes, but that does not wipe away the crimes both countries have commited. The tens of thousands of dead in Iraq, and the tens of thousands dead in Palestine, Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan will not all just dissapear because they are a democracy.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 17): If you bothered to use the search function, you would see that aside from LY7E7, Israeli-Palestinian threads usually involve Americans and non-Palestinian Arabs, not Israelis and Palestinians.

Actually, they involve Americans and Palestinians. Me and BA are the ones usually arguing in Palestine/Israel threads, and we are both Palestinians ethnically. Or are you going to tell me where i'm from now too?

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 18): Many who mourn the deaths of our troops also grieve for the innocent people who also perished in this unlawful war. Its sad that GW and his blood thirsty advisors can't equate the value of human life.

I know Capt, all I am saying is i've noticed that many of those against the war fail to mention the Iraqi casualties, which I think is very unfair for the Iraqi civilians who died because of an unjustified war.

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 18): btw, if Iraq's major export was grapefruit, do you think GW would be so steadfast on democracy? I think not.

Try telling all the righties on this forum that.

I think that if there really was instability in the region, the countries nearby would have done something about it, it just seems sooo fishy that a nation 1000s of miles away would come into the middle east and operate with the claim that they had to step in bc there is instability and terror.....

im just saying the world and its people arent that easy to fool anymore and yes while the US is a super powr etc etc etc.....that doesn't stop the rest of the world from hating....
power is limited, hatred isnt....

Quoting NWA (Reply 16): Says the guy from a country that huddles under the U.S. Its amazing

- referring to Canada.


This "huddling" was best demonstrated a few weeks ago when Canada refused to participate in U.S. Missile Defence program.

RJPieces: Turn off FOX News and seek out unbiased, intelligent sources. Try the Guardian or the Independent; both are online. If you are relying soley on US media for your information, you are terribly misinformed.

RJPieces: Turn off FOX News and seek out unbiased, intelligent sources. Try the Guardian or the Independent; both are online. If you are relying soley on US media for your information, you are terribly misinformed.

Please tell me what I said in this thread that was misinformed? That there are no democracies in the Arab world...?

And FYI, I rarely watch Fox News. I much prefer CNN. But even that is biased by your standards.

Quote: Please tell me what I said in this thread that was misinformed?

RJPieces: Most of what you say is vague and based on conjecture, not facts, e.g. you describe Syria as "one of the worst regimes". According to who, and by what standards? You keep harping on this issue of "democracy". Just because a country is democratic doesn't necessarily mean that liberty and justice for all prevails. FYI: The US was a "democracy" during the period of Slavery and when women were not allowed to vote. During WWII, Japanese Americans were taken from their homes and sequestered into concentration camps. Stop with the contention that democracy and GW shall heal the plight of the world. The world is far more complicated, and so is our Foreign Policy.

Quote: Syria is one of the worst regimes in the Middle East. There is NO moral equivalency.

"Moral equivalency"? What do you mean?

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 24): According to who, and by what standards?

Capt - as much as it pains me to do this, i'm going to have to agree with RJ here. Syria's Baath regime is monstrous by anyone's standards; they are responsible for killing thousands of their own citizens, a prime example of which is the Hama massacre where Assad laid seige to the town and killed a huge amount of civilians, becasue they supported the Islamic brotherhood, an opposition group. The Syrian regime have kept political prisoners for the stupidest and most false of reasons for long sentences in their prisons, and it has been responsible for aiding massacres such as the massacre at Tal el Za'atar refugee camp in Beirut. The regime of Hafez Assad was a nasty piece of work.

Bashar Assad was never meant to be a leader, and the responsibility was just thrown at him as far as I know. He is much more open minded than his father was, and he had plans to fix Syria's broken economy, and to open it up so it can properly develop. Unfortunatley, the Hafez-era guys are still in charge, and they use Bashar as nothing but their spokesman, and he has no power to challenge them

[Edited 2005-03-12 23:40:51]

Capt.Fantastic: Please, tell me what I said that was of any less intelligence than yours? BTW, it's 'I don't believe you SHOULD', not SHOULDN'T. Double negative. Before you blast me, how about you use the English language the way it was meant. "Furthermore, you complete and utter lack of understanding of what's being discussed here is more reason for you not to post in this thread. If you don't know the history than you can't understand the present state of affairs. If you don't have something intelligent to say, don't say anything. There are people here with whom I disagree, but at least they articulate themselves in a cordial adult-like manner. Maybe you should do the same. " Please tell me how I was being childish? What you seem to lack is also an understanding of the issue. You can't compare Syria to the U.S.

"This "huddling" was best demonstrated a few weeks ago when Canada refused to participate in U.S. Missile Defence program."

I was more or less thinking along the lines of why you have such a weak military. You have to admit that there IS an advantage of being neighbors to the only super power. Whether you think it's right or not I do not know, but you honestly cannot tell me that Canada, or Mexico, do not benefit from this. When it comes to safety of the country, its assured.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 19): The Jews immigrated into Palestine starting in 1918

The immigration was insignificant before the establishment of the State of Israel. Here are some figures:


Jewish Immigrants to Palestine

1919 1,806
1920 8,223
1921 8,294
1922 8,685
1923 8,175
1924 13,892
1925 34,386
1926 13,855
1927 3,034
1928 2,178
1929 5,249
1930 4,944
1931 4,075
1932 12,533
1933 37,337
1934 45,267
1935 66,472
1936 29,595
1937 10,629
1938 14,675
1939 31,195
1940 10,643
1941 4,592


Source : Palestinian Arab National Movement: From Riots to Rebellion: 1929-1939, vol. 2, (London: Frank Cass and Co., Ltd., 1977), pp. 17-18, 39.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 19): their terrorist gangs such as the Irgun and the Haganah carried out many terrorist attacks against the Palestinians

True with respect to Irgun only, although you shouldn't forget the massacres performed by the Arabs, such as the Hebron massacre of 1929.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 19): using their terrorist gangs and armies

We only had but one army starting with the day of establishment of IDF. Etzel (the official name of the Irgun, which included Lechi) ,a terror group by its nature, was dismantled forcefully by IDF (the famous Altalena ship bombing). That is something Abu Mazen should do with the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, btw.

Let me be clear: I was in no way sticking up for Syria or Assad. Rather, I was just making the point that statements such as the one made by RJPieces should be supported with facts and/or articulated in not such a vague manner.

I should note why I failed (and, I did so intentionally) to mention the Iraqi civilians who have died:

I've found that when arguing with Americans who are pro-war, it does no good to mention the lives of those "nameless" and "faceless" people on the other side of the world who have died as a result of our administration's actions. Their response is usually something along the lines of "Saddam would've killed them anyway"... which is really a crap excuse because had the situation been handled properly (by the US and others), far fewer people could've died.

Apparently, since we've found no WMD's... the reason we're over there is simply to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq (which was - up until we knew there were no WMD's - one of Bush's back burner reasons for being there, in that it was a fuzzy little side effect of the bigger aim, and it played well to all of the soccer moms and dads that are such a huge portion of his constituency)

Suddenly - now that their original reason for the invasion is null and void - they had to pull that back-burner reason and make it into the primary goal of the invasion. It's a bunch of twisty rhetoric that I personally don't really care to argue about with anyone because I've been over and over it with people IRL, and that particular opinion of mine is no longer open for modification.

So: that's why I didn't mention the Iraqis who have died. Rest assured, however, that I have not forgotten of them... even if some of my compatriots here in the States have.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 13): We protest the fact that you went in in the first place - you can leave when you finish what you started.

Although I don't know that we need anyone's 'permission' to leave... I agree with you. We shouldn't leave until we clean up the mess we've made.

Quoting LY7E7 (Reply 27): The immigration was insignificant before the establishment of the State of Israel. Here are some figures:

I don't understand the point you are trying to make, but I have added up your numbers, and they add up to 379,370 immigrants between 1919 and 1941. I don't know about you, but if I were an Arab living in Palestine at the time, and I had over 350,000 immigrants rush into my country in a space of 22 years, all Jewish and all coming to what they believe is their promised land, I would be pretty scared.

Now, here we have about 400,000 Jews in Palestine, with a huge majority of them immigrants. 800,000 Palestinians were expelled to create a nation for these people, and only 150,000 were allowed to stay inside what became Israel. Many moved away from their traditional villages and went to larger cities such as Haifa, Jaffa and Nazareth. So, basically, out of the almost 1,000,000 Arab inhabitants of what is today Israel, only 150,000 were allowed to stay, with the rest being kicked out into either the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.

Quoting LY7E7 (Reply 28): True with respect to Irgun only, although you shouldn't forget the massacres performed by the Arabs, such as the Hebron massacre of 1929.

The Haganah, just like Irgun and Etzel (the IZL), were terrorists. They ethnically cleansed the Palestinians and helped push them out of their land by force, that makes them terrorists. As for the Arabs, it still does not compare to the massacres at Lydd, Deir Yassin, Al-Tantura, etc, etc. I can provide with many examples of horrendous events that occured during the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, all carried out by the ruthless Zionist terrorist gangs.

Quoting LY7E7 (Reply 28): We only had but one army starting with the day of establishment of IDF. Etzel (the official name of the Irgun, which included Lechi) ,a terror group by its nature, was dismantled forcefully by IDF (the famous Altalena ship bombing). That is something Abu Mazen should do with the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, btw.

Etzel (of which former Israeli PM Menachem Begin was part of) was responsible for the massacre at Deir Yassin and many, many other such avents. The IZL might have been dismantled, but the IDF aren't exactly the most peaceful of armies. And I find it highly Ironic they call themselves a "defense force" when they are occupying a neighbouring country, depriving its people of their civil rights and doing many more unacceptable things.

As for Abu Mazen, its not that easy, especially with the huge amounts of popular support they have. The worst thing Abu Mazen could try to do at this stage is that - we have a fragile ceasefire going on, and if Abu Mazin tried to dismantle them, it will collapse and it might result in a civil war between the different factions and the PA. Not a nice thought.

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 29): Let me be clear: I was in no way sticking up for Syria or Assad. Rather, I was just making the point that statements such as the one made by RJPieces should be supported with facts and/or articulated in not such a vague manner.

Thats like asking RJPieces to sympathise with Arabs  

Quoting Lekohawk (Reply 30): I've found that when arguing with Americans who are pro-war, it does no good to mention the lives of those "nameless" and "faceless" people on the other side of the world who have died as a result of our administration's actions. Their response is usually something along the lines of "Saddam would've killed them anyway"... which is really a crap excuse because had the situation been handled properly (by the US and others), far fewer people could've died.

Thanks for clearing that up, agree 100%

Quoting Lekohawk (Reply 30): Although I don't know that we need anyone's 'permission' to leave... I agree with you. We shouldn't leave until we clean up the mess we've made.

I didn't mean to make it sound like you guys need permission, what I meant is that the US would be performing a crime if they withdrew from Iraq and left it to collapse under its own weight.

Quoting QR332 (Reply 31): I would be pretty scared

And that was is called xenophobia. Also , perhaps you've noticed that the majority of immigrants had arrived in the late 30s, trying to save themselves from the Germans. Perhaps an Arabic attitude that would not involved massacres against Jews (that came earlier than Dir Yasin and such) would have result in other attitude in 1948. Etzel's terrorism was pointed mainly towards the British (As their motto used to say : "Fight the Britons like there's no WWII and help them against the Germans like there's no British Mandate in Palestine").

You very much true when it comes the total inacceptance of Jewish immigrants in the Palestine of the first half of the XXth century. You should also understand that most of them were fleeing severe anti-semitism, massacres (as those in Kishinev, Odessa and many others) and the Holocaust.

When you are speaking of 800.000 Arab population of Palestine prior to 1948, mind that it includes the West Bank and Gaza.

And ,once again, acceptance of the Jewish state in 1948 would have resulted in a lesser movement of the native Arabic population, not to mention the fact that they were inspired to migrate by the neighboring Arab regimes.

Wait, we've been through this same argument twice at least. I already know your response , including the maps that you'll post, that will result in me posting various quotes, and that's where will BA join us with the same quotes from a worthless "book" Ben Gurion scandals. I think that'll suggest to lock this thread. (Which will not be done, see my 1st reply in this thread)



...Bored..........

LY, your right, this is gonna go around and around, all i'm going to say is this:

Quoting LY7E7 (Reply 32): And that was is called xenophobia. Also , perhaps you've noticed that the majority of immigrants had arrived in the late 30s, trying to save themselves from the Germans. Perhaps an Arabic attitude that would not involved massacres against Jews (that came earlier than Dir Yasin and such) would have result in other attitude in 1948. Etzel's terrorism was pointed mainly towards the British (As their motto used to say : "Fight the Britons like there's no WWII and help them against the Germans like there's no British Mandate in Palestine").

One thing - the Arabs knew a new Jewish state was to be established on their homeland, thanks to the balfour decleration, so that is why they were afraid, and justifiably so. There were many events from both sides, but none come close to what Israel was responsible for.

As for Abu Mazen, its not that easy, especially with the huge amounts of popular support they have. The worst thing Abu Mazen could try to do at this stage is that - we have a fragile ceasefire going on, and if Abu Mazin tried to dismantle them, it will collapse and it might result in a civil war between the different factions and the PA. Not a nice thought.

QR, please answer me this. If Abu Mazen does NOTHING, there will be no change in the conflict. If Abu Mazen does try to take on the terrorist groups (and yes you are right, this is difficult and may lead to a Civil war/fight for power), and if he does suceed, then Israel will be forced to negotiate with him. and Palestinians will get their state.

The bottom line is that somebody needs to take on these terrorist groups--Israelis would rather it be Abu Mazen, but if he is unwilling/unable to do so, then it falls to the IDF. If you can't understand that, then I dont know what to tell you, but I hope you understand that there can be no change until those terrorist groups are destroyed.

There has been talk of a major IDF operation in the Gaza Strip, similiar to the West Bank spring of 2002, to clear it of all terrorist infrastructure before the pullout. This would be like Sharon doing the job for Abbas, and then leaving him in power when the Israelis leave.

Maybe it's not the worst idea if Abbas isn't able to politically take on the terrorist groups....But honestly, how can Palestine become a functioning democracy if their leader isn't able to enforce basic law?

Thats like asking RJPieces to sympathise with Arabs

It's such a shame that after months of arguing with you, you still do not clearly understand my feelings. I DO sympathize with those Arabs who seek to reform their horrible countries. I sympathize with the refuseniks in the Arab world. I sympathize for the poor Palestinian man who TRULY wants peace. I HAVE NO SYMPATHY for very well off Arabs like yourself and BA, who are willing to continue the conflict for another century just to avoid acknowledging Israel and keeping the hope up of destroying the Jewish state.

Oh, and the whole shame of the immigration numbers above, is the effect that Jewish immigration had on the Arabs of Palestine. While of course there were some major times of tension, on the whole, Arabs were flocking to Palestine because of the economic opportunities there...Opportunities that the Jewish immigration created. Such a shame.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): QR, please answer me this. If Abu Mazen does NOTHING, there will be no change in the conflict. If Abu Mazen does try to take on the terrorist groups (and yes you are right, this is difficult and may lead to a Civil war/fight for power), and if he does suceed, then Israel will be forced to negotiate with him. and Palestinians will get their state.

Or, he could also negotiate with the different groups - a civil war in the Palestine for you is nothing, because you aren't affected by it - in fact, you benefit from it, because it weakens the Palestinians considerably. Don't be an armchair president RJ, you know that a civil war and a fight for power would be the most devestating thing for the Palestinians you supposedly sympathise with.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): The bottom line is that somebody needs to take on these terrorist groups--Israelis would rather it be Abu Mazen, but if he is unwilling/unable to do so, then it falls to the IDF. If you can't understand that, then I dont know what to tell you, but I hope you understand that there can be no change until those terrorist groups are destroyed.

Trying to destroy the groups now would be insane and suicide for the PA, something you don't understand. These groups have popular support, i.e. many people support them. Because they are supported by many people, a move against them by the PA will make the PA look like traitors to the people and a huge mess would be made. Negotiations and talks are the way to go right now.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): There has been talk of a major IDF operation in the Gaza Strip, similiar to the West Bank spring of 2002, to clear it of all terrorist infrastructure before the pullout. This would be like Sharon doing the job for Abbas, and then leaving him in power when the Israelis leave.

You talk about it like its some video game. You do know many, many lives, civilian lives are lost when operations into areas with a high density of people are made? In Jenin and Nablus it cost a lot of the civilian infrastructure, and it was a massacre commited by the Israelis. But, why would you care? You specifically said once you would rather artillery shelling of the camp, which is predominantly civilian.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): Maybe it's not the worst idea if Abbas isn't able to politically take on the terrorist groups....But honestly, how can Palestine become a functioning democracy if their leader isn't able to enforce basic law?

The Lebanese government couldn't control any of Lebanon 20 years ago, which was full of all sorts of factions and groups, but look at them now. After the Israelis withdraw, everything will be difference. Many of the groups specifically said that if Israel withdraw to '67 borders, thats it, its over. And plus, how can a leader enforce basic laws in a country occupied by another country, oppressed by the same country, and where basic civil rights aren't given to Palestinians?

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): It's such a shame that after months of arguing with you, you still do not clearly understand my feelings. I DO sympathize with those Arabs who seek to reform their horrible countries.

First of all, who the hell are you to judge what countries are horrible and what aren't? Second, trust me, I understand your feelings well: They are Anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian and you will find ANYTHING to make the Palestinians look bad.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): I sympathize with the refuseniks in the Arab world. I sympathize for the poor Palestinian man who TRULY wants peace.

READ: I sympathise with the Arabs who support and kiss Western ass 100%.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): HAVE NO SYMPATHY for very well off Arabs like yourself and BA, who are willing to continue the conflict for another century just to avoid acknowledging Israel and keeping the hope up of destroying the Jewish state.

Your either incredibly and unbelievebly thick, or you enjoy the attention from acting stupid. First of all, why am I so well off? How would you know how well off I am? And the same goes for BA. Secondly, you are talking bullshit, we always say that all we want from Israel is to withdraw to 1967 borders. You have no basis for your argument - prove that me and BA want to avoid acknowledging Israel and that we want it destroyed.

Quoting Rjpieces (Reply 34): Oh, and the whole shame of the immigration numbers above, is the effect that Jewish immigration had on the Arabs of Palestine. While of course there were some major times of tension, on the whole, Arabs were flocking to Palestine because of the economic opportunities there...Opportunities that the Jewish immigration created. Such a shame.

LOL! Yup, the Jews are responsible for everything good that ever happened in the world, RJ.   

So what you are telling me is that Palestine only rose because of the Jews? Well, i'll tell you something, the only thing the Jewish immigrants did for Palestinian bussineses is harm them - the best example is my great-grandfather, who owned a company that traded between Jenin, Nablus, Jaffa and Amman. After the fall of Jaffa and most of Palestine, his business, like many others was destroyed and suffered greatly.

Let's use Jaffa's citrus plantations as an example, which many Palestinian companies boxed and shipped to Europe. The Jews had nothing to do with that. They had nothing to do with many other businesses too. Don't try to make it look like the Jews were the best thing that happened to the Palestinians, because they are actually the worst thing that ever happened to them.

Or, he could also negotiate with the different groups - a civil war in the Palestine for you is nothing, because you aren't affected by it - in fact, you benefit from it, because it weakens the Palestinians considerably. Don't be an armchair president RJ, you know that a civil war and a fight for power would be the most devestating thing for the Palestinians you supposedly sympathise with.

If he can succesfully negotiate the complete surrender of terrorist groups, then power to him. I can't recall any time in history when nice words have convinced a heavily armed terrorist group to give up power, but if you think it can happen here, feel free to try.

A civil war is ALWAYS devasting QR. But perhaps it is necessary for those Palestinians who truly want peace to triumph over those who want to continue fighting Israel. The ones who want peace are the ones I care about, I could give a rats ass about the terrorists. I know how you feel about them freedom fighters though.

Trying to destroy the groups now would be insane and suicide for the PA, something you don't understand. These groups have popular support, i.e. many people support them. Because they are supported by many people, a move against them by the PA will make the PA look like traitors to the people and a huge mess would be made. Negotiations and talks are the way to go right now.

QR, from my perspective (and from Sharon, Bush's perspective), the PA is useless if they are not willing to govern democratically--meaning elections, and the rule of law. If they aren't willing to police their own citizens, WHICH THEY ARE EASILY CAPABLE OF DOING (Remember a few weeks ago when those Gaza police soliders magically showed up armed and with uniforms), they aren't a government worth dealing with. That is why President Bush has said that elections are a precondition for negotiating with the PA.

You talk about it like its some video game. You do know many, many lives, civilian lives are lost when operations into areas with a high density of people are made? In Jenin and Nablus it cost a lot of the civilian infrastructure, and it was a massacre commited by the Israelis. But, why would you care? You specifically said once you would rather artillery shelling of the camp, which is predominantly civilian.

Yes QR, I'm not gonna lie about it. I'd much rather see the US Army bomb the shit out of Fallujah than put American boys at risk on the ground. I'd much rather see the IAF drop 500 pound bombs on terrorist areas rather than have IDF troops on the ground.

But my personal opinion aside, you make it sound like the IDF would be raiding an innocent town. If the IDF does undertake a major Gaza operation, it would be to remove terrorist infrastructure that the PA was unwilling to remove. I know that you consider it ok that these madmen have weapons that they will use to kill Jews, but hey, Israel's gonna defend itself.

First of all, who the hell are you to judge what countries are horrible and what aren't? Second, trust me, I understand your feelings well: They are Anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian and you will find ANYTHING to make the Palestinians look bad.

It's very easy for me to say which countries are horrible and which aren't. Take a look at the Freedom House map if you want a better explanation.

READ: I sympathise with the Arabs who support and kiss Western ass 100%.

If democracy and freedom=Kissing Western ass, then you have issues my friend.


First of all, why am I so well off?

Let's see QR. The average internet penetration in the Arab world is 5%. You have about 1,000 posts on A.net. You live in Qatar, vacation in Europe, have fancy American appliances that most American's dont have, and didn't you say last week that you have something like 300 DVDs? If you don't think you're better off than the average Arab then I don't know what to tell you.

Secondly, you are talking bullshit, we always say that all we want from Israel is to withdraw to 1967 borders. You have no basis for your argument - prove that me and BA want to avoid acknowledging Israel and that we want it destroyed.

If it were up to you guys, there would be no Israel. Simple as that. You'd easily kill 6,000,000 Jews if you, or your armies, could.

And I won't get into an argument over the "Arabs of Palestine" before 1948. But I will leave you with this Winston Churchill quote:

"If left to themselves, the Jews will best the Arabs. The progress of Jews in their own homeland will impress the Arab population that the Zionists are their friends and helpers, not their expellers and expropriators. I am told that the Arabs would cultivate their land by themselves. Who is going to believe that? Left to themselves, the Arabs of Palestine would not in a thousand years have taken effective steps toward the irrigation and electrification of Palestine. The fanatical attacks from the Arabs come from Arabs outside Palestine, while the Arabs in Palestine have benefited greatly by the progress of the Zionist pioneers."

[Edited 2005-03-13 19:03:28]

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): If he can succesfully negotiate the complete surrender of terrorist groups, then power to him. I can't recall any time in history when nice words have convinced a heavily armed terrorist group to give up power, but if you think it can happen here, feel free to try. A civil war is ALWAYS devasting QR. But perhaps it is necessary for those Palestinians who truly want peace to triumph over those who want to continue fighting Israel. The ones who want peace are the ones I care about, I could give a rats ass about the terrorists. I know how you feel about them freedom fighters though.

Lets get something clear RJ - you don't know shit about how I feel about ANYTHING related to this conflict. Now, I never said discussing them to disarm, for the time being, he can keep them quiet then disarm them. They are not a full-fledged terrorist force as you seem to think, and I know it won't be easy, but if you think a civil war is in the best interests of the Palestinians you are more crazy than I thought. And you really think people give a rats ass if Israel is attacked? They don't care anymore, after all of what Israel has done to them. So if a civil war happens, don't even think stopping attacks against Israel has anything to with it.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): QR, from my perspective (and from Sharon, Bush's perspective), the PA is useless if they are not willing to govern democratically--meaning elections, and the rule of law.

You, Sharon and Bush can all kiss my ass. Israel has stopped the Palestinians from having any civil rights since 1967, and they were backed by the States, now they whine about deomcracy? In that case, so is Saudi arabia who doesn't democratically rule - oh, wait - Saudi isn't useless, oil and $$.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): If they aren't willing to police their own citizens, WHICH THEY ARE EASILY CAPABLE OF DOING (Remember a few weeks ago when those Gaza police soliders magically showed up armed and with uniforms), they aren't a government worth dealing with.

RJ, which part of its not that easy don't you get? Do you underestimate the power of a combined resistance movement agaisnt the PA. Imagine, the power of Islamic Jihad, Hamas, etc, all backed by the majority of Palestinians who would see the PA as puppets of Israel, against the PA, because that is what would happen. And how can they govern an occupied area, being held by a foreign army? You did not answer that.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): Yes QR, I'm not gonna lie about it. I'd much rather see the US Army bomb the shit out of Fallujah than put American boys at risk on the ground. I'd much rather see the IAF drop 500 pound bombs on terrorist areas rather than have IDF troops on the ground.

Terrorist areas?! Jenin REFUGEE CAMP, aka area where refugee CIVILIANS are. Is it that hard to understand. But why would you care? You think the Deir Yassin massacre and other such events are justified. Also, this doesn't really go with what you usually say about minimizing civilian casualties, dont you think?

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): But my personal opinion aside, you make it sound like the IDF would be raiding an innocent town.

Yes they would! Gaza is one of the world's most densley populated areas, there would be huge amounts of casualties.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): it would be to remove terrorist infrastructure that the PA was unwilling to remove.

Unwilling is different from unable.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): I know that you consider it ok that these madmen have weapons that they will use to kill Jews, but hey, Israel's gonna defend itself.

"Defend", eh? Doesn't get anymore ironic than this. Defense through occupation, RJ?

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): It's very easy for me to say which countries are horrible and which aren't. Take a look at the Freedom House map if you want a better explanation.

The freedom house can also go to hell, they called Jordan partly free and Lebanon not free, that alone lost them all their credibility with me. US organistations have an installed bias in them, and don't expect me to trust anything from the US that is related to freedom, because your definition of freedom recently has been very messed up.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): If democracy and freedom=Kissing Western ass, then you have issues my friend.

What I said was that is who YOU sympathise with, you sympathise with those who support the West blindly. Any other Arab in your book is an evil madman terrorist.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): The average internet penetration in the Arab world is 5%.

Based on what figures? And even if true, yipee, I have ADSL internet which is reletavley cheap and very widespread in Qatar. I see what your talking about   

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): You live in Qatar, vacation in Europe

Ah, so only the "very well off" people vacation in Europe? Many, many Arabs visit Europe every year, and many of them aren't "very well off".

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): have fancy American appliances that most American's dont have

The iPod? There are many, many people here who have iPods, its nothing special.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): and didn't you say last week that you have something like 300 DVDs?

Stop pulling numbers out of your ass, I said 100 - 100 DVDs over about 7 years, so I buy 14 movies a year on average. Your point?

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): If you don't think you're better off than the average Arab then I don't know what to tell you.

What you said wasn't "better off than the average Arab", you said I am "very well off", two very different statements. I still have not seen you show me anything that shows how I am "very well off".

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): If it were up to you guys, there would be no Israel. Simple as that. You'd easily kill 6,000,000 Jews if you, or your armies, could.

If it was up to me, OF COURSE there would be no Israel. The Jews would be back in Europe where they came from, and we would have the homeland that was stolen from me. You expect me to favour the nation that has hurt my country the most over my own country?

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): I am told that the Arabs would cultivate their land by themselves. Who is going to believe that? Left to themselves, the Arabs of Palestine would not in a thousand years have taken effective steps toward the irrigation and electrification of Palestine.

RJ, lets use neighbouring Lebanon as an example, which is the best example because it and Palestine have very similar societies. Lebanon was at the same level of development as Palestine before 1948, but it still managed to become elecrified, they had very good agriculture, etc. What makes you think similar things wouldn't have happened with the Palestinians?

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 36): The fanatical attacks from the Arabs come from Arabs outside Palestine, while the Arabs in Palestine have benefited greatly by the progress of the Zionist pioneers."

After reading the quote, I believe that Churchill is doing nothing more than kissing the ass of the people his country promised a land to in a place that was already taken. What interest would Arabs outside Palestine have in attacking the Zionists, when the people who were in the most danger were the Palestinians? The quote is full of shit. And even if it were true, let me ask you a question. Do you believe that it means the taking over of Palestine by Israel is justified because the Palestinians werent as advanced?

On tonight's news there has been an extensive interview with Abu Mazen. Once again I got the impression of him being a very serious leader, who stands against terror and for democracy.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/551512.html

Quoting RJPieces

Quote: I'd much rather see the US Army bomb the shit out of Fallujah than put American boys at risk on the ground. I'd much rather see the IAF drop 500 pound bombs on terrorist areas rather than have IDF troops on the ground.

For goodness sake. What's your point anyway? Our 140,000 troops are at risk every second of their presence in Iraq. Over 2,000 American service men and women have been killed since March 2004, nearly as many killed in the 911 tragedy.

I wanted to comment to those boasting about how "horrible" Arab countries are: Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is butcher and war criminal. This Zionist sociopath was behind the Sabra and Shitila massacres in Lebanon in 1982, which left thousands of civilians dead. In every sense of the word, Sharon is a "terrorist" and also happens to be the leader of Israel. Yes, some Arab leaders and governments are corrupt and in need of a whoppin', but Israel too has its faults.