Mid east

[bogo 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SpeedyDonkey @ Jan. 03 2003,11:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">interesting it took from Jan. 02 2003,23:58 to Jan. 03 2003,06:19 to find a post that wasnt directly negative towards Israel<span id='postcolor'>

Do you even read the articles or you gest blur out without any reson. If you read those to quotes then you would know that it has nothing negative towards israel.

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you even read the articles or you gest blur out without any reson. If you read those to quotes then you would know that it has nothing negative towards israel. <span id='postcolor'>bogo, o bogo please read my post before you replay to it! Here it comes again...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">interesting it took you from Jan. 02 2003,23:58 to Jan. 03 2003,06:19 to find a post that wasnt directly negative towards Israel<span id='postcolor'>That sentence simply means that it took him a very loong time to find anything that wasnt negative agains Israel

[Guest]

Ok, now drop it! I've about had it with you!

One more personal attack from anybody here and posting restrictions will follow and I will close this thread. This thread has remained pinned and open for so long because the people posting here were having a mature flame free discussion. I hope that it hasn't changed. If it has this thread will go.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Jan. 02 2003,21:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">On the topic of news sources, I've just begun tuning into:  http://news.google.com/

Google News compiles and groups articles from ~4000 sources using software algorithms instead of human editors, greatly reducing the potential for bias.  You can read more about it here.

Question for theavonlady:  Which news sources do you consider to be trustworthy?<span id='postcolor'>

I'll bump this just in case theavonlady missed it.

[Jinef 2]

It does seem that some people are choosing sides, Israeli or Palestinian.

From knowledge of experiences in the British Army where bad mistakes or unlawful events have taken place i would see it unlikely that soldies of the IDF has never fired upon unarmed civilians intentionally or the IDF is the model fighting force where prejudice is swept aside and soldiers enforce legal policies without bias etc. etc.

I would not choose a side, Israel obviously has been 'naughty' and Bernadotte relentlessly comes up with sources of info to prove this (not that you really need experts to decide whether a palestinian child that has a 5.56mm round hole in his head has been shot by someone with a 5.56mm rifle, like the M4 carbines carried by the IDF) but then Palestine isn't exactly helping things. Although lot's of the militia are as someone said extremely motivated and will not stop when the law tells the too. Is that Palestines fault though? Could it be stopping them? Would it be easier to stop them if the Israelis did not restrict law enforcement agencies in Palestine and keep blowing up the prisons they put rebels into?

I call the rebels mainly because Israel has broken UN resolutions and even international law by being in some areas and therefore constitutes any resistance to be rebellion. That is a fact unlike what the media spews out. Most of your references are going to be twisted to reflect your goverment's stance on the situation and to manipulate into believing that one faction is better than the other.

Btw. I have been quite busy recently doing the festive stuff but now i'm ranting on again so beware. Yes - The Bitch Is Back!

[Guest]

Terror attack in Isreal kills at least 23

[DracoPaladore 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ April 04 2002,15:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Like I said, the U.N. should rough up BOTH sides a bit, then keep them seperated by force, and rip Jerusalem out of both Israel AND Palestine.

Brute force, but it works better than using TV reporters as human shields and blowing up cafes and cinemas.<span id='postcolor'>

Woulden't that go against he point of the UN in the first place?

[Bernadotte 0]

From today's Guardian:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ariel Sharon accused Tony Blair of "legitimising terrorists" by hosting a meeting of Palestinian leaders in London next week. <span id='postcolor'>

- a few hours and 1 double suicide bombing later -

From today's Ha`aretz:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Israel decides to keep Palestinian delegation out of London<span id='postcolor'>

However, George Bush said that he would not allow this latest act of terrorism to bring recent peace moves to a halt.  I wonder what "peace moves" he is referring to.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Jan. 06 2003,09:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">From today's Guardian:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ariel Sharon accused Tony Blair of "legitimising terrorists" by hosting a meeting of Palestinian leaders in London next week. <span id='postcolor'>

- a few hours and 1 double suicide bombing later -<span id='postcolor'>

He's right. Nothing new under the British Empire's sun. Source: The Daily Telegraph (must be registered to view).

And then the Europeans wonder why we have no trust in them.

[Bernadotte 0]

Interesting article.  I saw it the other day in the Jerusalem Post.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It is self-evident that the hijacking is a manifestation of the Palestine problem. This is a problem which the Israelis are trying to solve in two main ways: one by pretending it does not exist (hence their claim that Amman is the capital of the Palestinians), the other by hitting the Palestinians so hard that they cease to exist, militarily if not physically.

-- British Foreign Office, 1972<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Palestinians should be hit with a decisive blow that would make them forget war for hundreds of years.  What the Americans are planning for Saddam is nothing compared to what we should do to the Palestinian Authority.

-- Israeli political leader, 2003<span id='postcolor'>

But last March:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Israel's Operation Security Imperative, its biggest ground operation in 20 years, has abated - at least for the time being.  Israeli officials say the offensive was aimed at destroying the terrorist infrastructure, by rounding up militant suspects.  And analysts say the government and the army is describing the operation as a success.

-- BBC<span id='postcolor'>

Which was followed by an even BIGGER operation in April and May, which was described as an even GREATER success.

But don't try and tell that to the loved ones of those who died yesterday in Tel Aviv.  

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Jan. 06 2003,12:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Interesting article.  I saw it the other day in the Jerusalem Post.<span id='postcolor'>

Funny how you didn't mention here such an interesting article you knew about. The article doesn't exactly fit in with your agenda, I suppose.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Palestinians should be hit with a decisive blow that would make them forget war for hundreds of years. What the Americans are planning for Saddam is nothing compared to what we should do to the Palestinian Authority.

-- Israeli political leader, 2003<span id='postcolor'>

Indeed true. Sharon's government has not fought this war decisively.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But last March:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Israel's Operation Security Imperative, its biggest ground operation in 20 years, has abated - at least for the time being. Israeli officials say the offensive was aimed at destroying the terrorist infrastructure, by rounding up militant suspects. And analysts say the government and the army is describing the operation as a success.

-- BBC<span id='postcolor'>

Which was followed by an even BIGGER operation in April and May, which was described as an even GREATER success.

Now try and tell that to the loved ones of those who died yesterday in Tel Aviv. <span id='postcolor'>

Three answers:

1. Many of us here said all along that it was a LITTLE success and would not resolve the problem.

2. Indeed, Israel's indecivesness to fight this war as it should be done will cause more Israelis to be killed by terrorists.

3. Though the operations were of LITTLE success IMO, the fact is that hundreds of terror attacks of the worst kind have been prevented since Israel went on a heavier offensive.

[Jinef 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Palestinians should be hit with a decisive blow that would make them forget war for hundreds of years.  What the Americans are planning for Saddam is nothing compared to what we should do to the Palestinian Authority.

-- Israeli political leader, 2003 <span id='postcolor'>

This guy should learn from other's mistakes, especially ours!

Hitting the harder with a 'decisive blow' is just going to make everything worse, everybody should be able to see that. When an IRA bomb went off in a shopping area killing civilians the British did go in hard with SAS assasinations. It did not help in my opinion, just more people cheered when a British soldier gets blown to pieces by a bomb.

I can see this happening in the ME. Israel launches huge offensives and just gets bogged down in streetfights with kids. The world looks down on Israel then because of it's look it conveys when seen shooting children in ruined cities. Then of course Israel will have to start policing Palestine and a steady stream of bodies will trickle out after shootings and bomb blasts.

Plus you will probably get helpful America funding both sides of the equation, it happened in Northern Ireland.

It's fine just looking at the news and discussing it but predicting what's going to happen is more interesting by looking at the reactions of the people. Okay some people died in Israel, so? They are dead now, they were killed by Palestinians, this fuels hatred in Israel, killing Palestinians won't fuel hatred in Palestine though will it?

Does anybody really believe that a larger offensive will help 'defuse the situation'?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ Jan. 06 2003,18:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I can see this happening in the ME. Israel launches huge offensives and just gets bogged down in streetfights with kids. The world looks down on Israel then because of it's look it conveys when seen shooting children in ruined cities. Then of course Israel will have to start policing Palestine and a steady stream of bodies will trickle out after shootings and bomb blasts.<span id='postcolor'>

There were much fewer and smaller incidents in the past when this was done.

Learn from people who did it right. It may come as a surprise to you but wars have been decisively won in the past.

What you describe has only increased since Israel stopped dealing with the problems in the mid-80's until today's Oslo War.

[Badgerboy 0]

I saw that a Israeli delegation is in the US at the moment, to secure a 12 billion dollar 'aid package'.

I've seen no mention of this as a loan, so I assume its a freebie. In that respect, what do the US get out of this deal? (Apart from the 1/3 of it which will be spent on military hardware). My country has taken loans off the US in war time, but we not only had to pay them back, but surrender many islands over the world to the US for 100 years, as well as many other concessions.

Surely that amount of money would be better going to a country where people are starving to death, or even back into the US economy, which is looking rather ill at the moment. Do the US feel they have to pump money into Israel for some reason, or do they actually profit out of the deal? (Bearing in mind countries only ever interact with others for their own benefit)

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Indeed, Israel's indecivesness to fight this war as it should be done will cause more Israelis to be killed by terrorists.<span id='postcolor'> More Israelis killed by Palestinians. Or more terrorists killed by terrorists. You can't make the Palestinians look worse than the IDF, as much as that is the spin. One testimony from a Canadian woman getting targetted by IDF soldiers is anready enough proof of terrorism on part of IDF. Time to change names: IAF or ITF.

Why is there no decisive action? Because not all Isrealis back such crazy actions. How many Israelis have been asking for peace and the end of the occupation? None?

By the recent flow of events, it is the Palestinians who are the true victims, physically, psychologically, and economically.

Build a wall, on a proper line, get it over with.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Jan. 06 2003,12:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I saw that a Israeli delegation is in the US at the moment, to secure a 12 billion dollar 'aid package'.

I've seen no mention of this as a loan, so I assume its a freebie. In that respect, what do the US get out of this deal? (Apart from the 1/3 of it which will be spent on military hardware). My country has taken loans off the US in war time, but we not only had to pay them back, but surrender many islands over the world to the US for 100 years, as well as many other concessions.

Surely that amount of money would be better going to a country where people are starving to death, or even back into the US economy, which is looking rather ill at the moment. Do the US feel they have to pump money into Israel for some reason, or do they actually profit out of the deal? (Bearing in mind countries only ever interact with others for their own benefit)<span id='postcolor'>

I would like to know also, what is the essence of supporting one of the most advanced states in the mid east? Do you know how much 12B could do for South African countries. What is it doing in Israel.

EDIT: Israeli adminstration better use the 9B dollars for a nice big Berlin wall. Stop the stupid cycle of violence.

[Pukko 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Jan. 06 2003,18<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Learn from people who did it right. It may come as a surprise to you but wars have been decisively won in the past.<span id='postcolor'>

At first I was about to mention an other nation who have 'successfully' dealt with a ethnic problem some 50 years ago, but thats rather untasteful and incorrect I recon - since one can not call that a war; but on the other hand the mideast conflict is not a real war either.

But what I wanted to say was that you better stop living in the past. The times of expanding borders by military force (no matter how justified) is probably forever gone.

Can anyone mention one single nation that have successfuly been able to keep occupied territory, gained by military force, in the 20'th century? I guess there are some case indeed, but among the 'sacred' western nations?

My point is, do you really think it is possible for Israel to keep the occupied territories in modern and postmodern times? Or will that kind of stuff, even in the future, only be found in wars that "have been decisively won in the past"? I know that the westbank and Golan heights has strategical importance. And that the conflict, at least the old one - now maybe almost forgotten, cannot be said to only be about the occupied occupied territory (outside the old UN borders), but its non the less a major part in the present conflict.

I recon the only way to create an empire in modern times is to follow USA:s model; the 'symbolic influence way' rather than military way.

btw, the other day I heard that the 'IDF refuseniks' has been outlawed....

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Jan. 06 2003,11:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Jan. 06 2003,12:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Interesting article.  I saw it the other day in the Jerusalem Post.<span id='postcolor'>

Funny how you didn't mention here such an interesting article you knew about. The article doesn't exactly fit in with your agenda, I suppose.<span id='postcolor'>

Agenda?  Hmmm... Sounds a bit paranoid, no?  Are you suggesting that my contributions to this thread are not as balanced, unbiased and objective as yours?

If I had an "agenda" that this 30 year-old collection of British Gov. memos didn't fit in with then I probably wouldn't have referred to it as interesting or even acknowledged it.  And if I posted here about every interesting article I read each day then I'd soon be crowned the OFP Spam King.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Jan. 06 2003,11:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sharon's government has not fought this war decisively.<span id='postcolor'>He may soon have his chance to act decisively (...As if 3 eyes for an eye and 3 teeth for a tooth weren't enough).  The corruption scandals will probably force Sharon into bed with the religious right-wing parties.  But this time he won't be able to blame the Labour party if the Palestinians refuse to be beaten into submission.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Jan. 06 2003,18:o1)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Learn from people who did it right. It may come as a surprise to you but wars have been decisively won in the past.<span id='postcolor'>Who did it right?  Whose example should Israel follow?  (I like surprses. )

[mr. Duck 0]

I would believe the 2nd world war... Right? I mean, there are no more nazi's now running the show in Germany...

Napoleonic times too... Waterloo... It sure finished the little French dudes rule. (hmm, maybe bad example, way too back in the past)

Bwaa, there were too many wars in the last century, surely some of them were decisive.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mr. Duck @ Jan. 06 2003,22:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would believe the 2nd world war... Right?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, that would be a good example if it had been the Palestinians who tried to invade another country.  But that's not what happened.

[Bernadotte 0]

I would like to know what theavonlady thinks about the following opinion taken from the front page of an Israeli newspaper (Yediot Ahronot*):

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am sure of one thing: Sharon is not smiling. Like every decent Israeli he is angry and hurting, and he understands the trap his government has fallen into: It cannot end this war by force, it is not prepared to try to end it by negotiation, and it is unwilling to end it by true separation, which entails the evacuation of settlements. It is a prisoner of the status quo, without a glimmer of hope on its horizon.

-- Nahum Barnea, political analyst<span id='postcolor'>

* translated and quoted in The Daily Star

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Jan. 07 2003,00:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mr. Duck @ Jan. 06 2003,22:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would believe the 2nd world war... Right?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, that would be a good example if it had been the Palestinians who tried to invade another country.  But that's not what happened.<span id='postcolor'>

No. A liitle history refresher, professor?

1. 1948 - Israel declares independence. Arabs declare war. Goal is to annihilate the Jewish state. Arabs lose but their goals remain unchanged.

2. Arabs continue to refuse to recognize Israel. Military provocations against Israel continue. During this time, there is no state or nation named Palestine in either Gaza or the West Bank, fully under Arab control.

3. 1956 - Egypt blocks Straights of Tiram and Suez Canal. Israeli shipping from south crippled. Egypt coordinates fedayeen terrorist sabotage attacks murders. Israel goes to war and capturing Gaza and much of the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt. Arabs lose.

4. Arabs continue to refuse to recognize Israel. Military provocations against Israel continue. During this time, there is no state or nation named Palestine in either Gaza or the West Bank, fully under Arab control.

5. 1964 - PLO, the mother of international terrorist organizations, founded. Charter includes annihilation of Jewish State. Israelis are nowhere to be seen in Gaza or the West Bank, fully under Arab control.

5. 1967 - Once again, Egypt blocks the Straights of Tiran. Arab armies on all borders mobilized against Israel. Israel begs Jordan's Hussein not to join in. Hussein decides otherwise. Arabs lose. In 6 days, Israel captures the entire Sinai Peninsula, Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan Heights.

6. Arabs continue to refuse to recognize Israel. Arabs refuse Israel's attempts to negotiate a mutual settlement. Military provocations against Israel continue. During this time, there is no state or nation named Palestine in either Gaza or the West Bank, now fully under Israeli control.

7. 1973 - Egypt and Syria, with tactical support from most other Arab nations, attack Israel on Yom Kippur. Israel manages to land on the other side of the Suez Canal, threaten Cairo and encircle Egypt's second army.

8. 1977 - Israel and Egypt enter a peace agreement. Israel returns all areas of the Sinai, including disputed areas in Taba, south of Eilat, to Egypt.

9. 1982 - after yeras of numerous attacks emniating from terrorist camps in Lebanon, especially Arafat's PLO and its subfactions, Israel invades Lebanon. Decisive defeat of Arafat and his terrorist cohorts prevented by international pressure, especially the US. Arafat allowed to sail off in celebration and establish terrorist training camps in Tunisia.

10. 1987 - Arabs in Gaza start the Intifada. Israel reacts indecisively. BTW, at this time, Amram Mitzna, currently the left wing Labor party candidate for PM in Israel's upcoming elections, was commander of the West Bank at this time.

11. 1993 - Israel signs the Oslo agreements. Withdraws from 40% of the West Bank and most of the Gaza Strip. Over 90% of the Arab populations in these areas are under the control of the PA. Terrorism increases from the very start and terrorist organizations thrive like they never had before. Israel limist responses, in an attempt to continue the Oslo agreements.

12. 2000 - Arafat and the PA unilaterally (whom attacked whom, Professor?) set off spontaneous rioting and weapons attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians, going on to this day. Until that time, the IDF was nowhere to be seen in Areas A, under sole PA control. Israel responds, enters and then widraws from towns, enters again and withdraws from towns, letting the situation go on and on, with no decisive conclusions.

Bye bye, children. I've had enough of this. Maybe I'll be back on this thread in the future. Hopefully, not.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Jan. 07 2003,11:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Blah blah blah... professor?

1. 1948 - Blah blah blah blah blah...

...etc...<span id='postcolor'>

Thanks for the dissertation, but maybe it would have been easier for you to answer my questions.  Maybe not.

And saying the ME conflict started in 1948 is like saying the Falklands war started when Britain attacked Argentina.  You will never reach the end of your war if you can't even find the beginning.

Here's yet another question:  What sort of passport or citizenship did people acquire who were born in Jerusalem in 1947?

[Bernadotte 0]

Something interesting from the US State Department's Consular Information Sheet for Israel, the West Bank and Gaza:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">American citizens of Palestinian origin who were born on the West Bank or Gaza or resided there for more than three months, may be considered by Israeli authorities to be residents, especially if they or their parents were issued a Palestinian ID number.  Any American citizen whom Israel considers to be a resident is required by Israel to hold a valid Palestinian passport to enter or leave the West Bank or Gaza.<span id='postcolor'>

In other words, Israel will not recognise your US passport if your parents were born in Palestine and if you spent more than 3 months in the occupied territories.  They won't recognise your parents' US passport at all.  However, they will recognise your 3 billion US tax dollars sent each year.