Mid east

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mjřlner @ April 05 2002,14:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You don't understand my point.

My point is, that in a war, none of the fighting parties can look objectively to the conflict. Obviously.<span id='postcolor'>

Why? What was not objective about fighting the Nazis in WWII? You think that no one could tell during the war who is right and wrong and what is bad or good? Really??

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mjřlner @ April 05 2002,14:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,13:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Nice. More even-handedness. The Nazis can be good and bad and so can the allies.

How demented!<span id='postcolor'>

Do you think I am demented for considering all people to be equal? That would be disturbing...and sad.<span id='postcolor'>

One person kills someone opposite him because of the color of his skin. Another person standing right next to the murderer doesn't harm a hair on a similar person next to him.

Will you treat both people equally?

[scout 0]

actually a norwigen diplomat got a nobel prize for setteling a dispute between greece and turkey in 1922.

they exchanged populations.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,13:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1. Then don't talk about transfering the Jewish population out of Judea and Samaria.

<span id='postcolor'>

I never said anything about that, and I think that it would be equally wrong.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Incidentally, Israel, with Ben Gurion as it's Prime Minister, agreed to the population transfers of Israelis that would have been necessary to abide by the UN partition plan, which would have made Israel even smaller than it wound up being .<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, yes, let's do that! While we are at it let's remove all the citizens of all countries that are not the same nationality/race/whatever as the majority. Hmm.. or wait a second.. maybe we shouldn't do that.. how's this for a novel idea: Let Palestinians live in a Jewish state and let Jews live in a Palestinian state?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">when the Arabs refused to accept any Jewish state in the area. Been like that ever since over here<span id='postcolor'>

Well, and now you refuse to accept any Palestinian state, right?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ April 05 2002,14:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">actually a norwigen diplomat got a nobel prize for setteling a dispute between greece and turkey in 1922.

they exchanged populations.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, also refered to in my link above.

[Longinius 1]

"Why? What was not objective about fighting the Nazis in WWII? You think that no one could tell during the war who is right and wrong and what is bad or good? Really??"

Aparantly most Germans couldnt tell. Those that could, didnt have the power to do much about it.

[Mjřlner 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,13:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You think that no one could tell during the war who is right and wrong and what is bad or good? Really??<span id='postcolor'>

Well apparently the issue of good and bad, is causing some confusion in the current conflict.

As it is in every conflict.

[Mjřlner 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,13:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One person kills someone opposite him because of the color of his skin. Another person standing right next to the murderer doesn't harm a hair on a similar person next to him.

Will you treat both people equally?<span id='postcolor'>

No, you do not understand. Let me express more clearly, the logic of my statement:

I will treat the killer equal to another killer.

If the first killer is a jew shooting a palestine and the other killer is palestine shooting a jew, I will consider them equally wrong. Do you agree?

If you say no, then you have proven me right, and I don't blame you. That was the point of my initial post.

If you say yes, then you give me a glimpse of hope.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2002,14:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, and now you refuse to accept any Palestinian state, right?<span id='postcolor'>

Well, let's forget that you almost totally ignored the fact that population transfers have been used as resolutions to resolve conflicts.

Please show me where in the Oslo agreements (of 1993 and 1995) or in the Wye River Memorandum (1998) there is any mention of a Palestinian state.

You and the rest of the world have overlooked something very obvious. This is not a trick or a ploy.

Good luck with your answer. You have 8 years to reply.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mjřlner @ April 05 2002,14:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No, you do not understand. Let me express more clearly, the logic of my statement:

I will treat the killer equal to another killer.

If the first killer is a jew shooting a palestine and the other killer is palestine shooting a jew, I will consider them equally wrong. Do you agree?

If you say no, then you have proven me right, and I don't blame you. That was the point of my initial post.

If you say yes, then you give me a glimpse of hope.<span id='postcolor'>

Assuming equivalent circumstances, i.e., that we are not talking about an attacker versus a defender, then the answer is yes.

Unfortunately, I still don't share your hope.

[Identity 0]

Do you or do you not aknowledge a Palestinian state?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Identity @ April 05 2002,14:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you or do you not aknowledge a Palestinian state?<span id='postcolor'>

Nope. Neither did Arafat himself, when negotiating and signing the Oslo agreements. It doesn't take an attorney to read them either.

Historically, there has never been, nor does there exist right this moment, an Arab run political entity at the level of an independent state, named Palestine. So exactly what do you want me to acknowledge?

And considerring what we've been through here since the Oslo fiasco started, it's simply an idea whose time has not come, if ever.

Carefull of my words and those of the accords that were agreed upon and reclarifed over again between the parties.

[scout 0]

the palestinian have demanded in the Oslo agreements that they demand that no jewish settlement will be in the borders of the palestinian state, means jews-free palestinian state.

that contradicts what u said no?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,13:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2002,14:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, and now you refuse to accept any Palestinian state, right?<span id='postcolor'>

Well, let's forget that you almost totally ignored the fact that population transfers have been used as resolutions to resolve conflicts.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes they have. So has genocide. Just because it has been done before doesn't make it a good solution.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Please show me where in the Oslo agreements (of 1993 and 1995) or in the Wye River Memorandum (1998) there is any mention of a Palestinian state.

<span id='postcolor'>

If I am not mistaken the Oslo agreement was about transfer of control of Gaza and the West Bank to an elected body of PA. This was finally supposed to lead to a referendum on indenpendance for the area.

But, I don't have to point to the Oslo agreement. I can refer to the original UN (1948?) deal with two states - a Palestinian and one Jewish. Or I can refer to the resolution that was passed last week on two states in the area.

Again, I think that the Saudi peace deal was a good one. Recognition of Israel by the arab states and Israel returns what they took in 1967. No need for population transfers. Just a guarantee that all citizens of each country have the same rights.

[Oligo 1]

The Saudi peace deal was an excellent one. But those deals are never even considered, naturally.

[Satchel 0]

It´s becoming pretty obvious that Sharon basically disrespects the Tenet and Mitchell treatys as resolution 1402-after all the israelis have more to loose than the paleastinians, that basically have nothing. As Sharon didn´t comply to Bush´s as the U.N. security councils advice to immediately withdraw his troops, this might indeed be a turning point in power balance in the middle east, if Sharon continues his offensive and disrespects even advice from it´s greatest ally, the U.S..

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oligo @ April 05 2002,15:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Saudi peace deal was an excellent one. But those deals are never even considered, naturally.<span id='postcolor'>

The Saudi "promise" is simply another Oslo, i.e., land for peace. Didn't work once and I hope we have the brains not to try it again.

At least you can be a little bit more imaginative and suggest peace for land. But the Arabs wouldn't dream of it.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Satchel @ April 05 2002,15:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It´s becoming pretty obvious that Sharon basically disrespects the Tenet and Mitchell treatys<span id='postcolor'>

Anyone remember a silly little concept called cease fire? We tried it twice uniliaterally. But of course, this is Sharon's (and previously Barak's) disrespect for agreements - naturally!

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,14:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oligo @ April 05 2002,15:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Saudi peace deal was an excellent one. But those deals are never even considered, naturally.<span id='postcolor'>

The Saudi "promise" is simply another Oslo, i.e., land for peace. Didn't work once and I hope we have the brains not to try it again.

At least you can be a little bit more imaginative and suggest peace for land. But the Arabs wouldn't dream of it.<span id='postcolor'>

Except that the Palestinis could do jack shit without the support of the other Arab states. A recognition of the state of Israel by the Arabs would force the Palestinians to accept Israels borders defined by the agreement.

Ask yourself this: Why are the suicide bombings occuring? Is it really worth that piece of land for so many human lifes? Naturally, it is a naÄf and lame question - but the other possible solution is to kill all the Palestinians.. and that, at least to me, sounds like a worse solution then giving up some land.

[scout 0]

how typical, for 18 months we agreed for every cease-fire that we were offered, but u wont mention that would u?

as u wouldnt mention that every time the PA broke it. now why didnt i hear u saying anything about it?

and i wonder why the Saudi's woke up now? oh and by the way wasn't it the original plan?

nice. there goes objectivity.

and u know what denoir?

i would agree, but can u assure me that there wont be no more attacks? can u?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2002,15:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Except that the Palestinis could do jack shit without the support of the other Arab states.<span id='postcolor'>

Precisely the opposite! In the 70's and 80's, when Israel attempted time after time to offer full autonomy to the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza, the death threats eminating from the surrounding Arab regimes and the PLO itself prevented any such dialogue from getting off the ground.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A recognition of the state of Israel by the Arabs would force the Palestinians to accept Israels borders defined by the agreement.<span id='postcolor'>

Says a silly little piece of paper.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ask yourself this: Why are the suicide bombings occuring?<span id='postcolor'>

Because Arafat wants it all! He wants Haifa, Jaffa, Lod, Jerusalem. Because he's been praising suicide bombers and terrorists alll his life, including immediately after the Oslo accords were signed. Because the benefits of being a shahid are broadcast to them over every media organ in the PA and have been for the last 8 years - not just the last 8 months. Because Oslo was a sham from day 1.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Is it really worth that piece of land for so many human lifes?<span id='postcolor'>

No so please pack your bags and get out of your country so that all of us can move into your homes.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Naturally, it is a naÄf and lame question - but the other possible solution is to kill all the Palestinians.. and that, at least to me, sounds like a worse solution then giving up some land.<span id='postcolor'>

I'll just go back and says those naughty words: "population transfer".

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ April 05 2002,14:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">and u know what denoir?

i would agree, but can u assure me that there wont be no more attacks? can u?<span id='postcolor'>

No I can't. But it seems to be a possible solution - so it's worth a shot. I mean it couldn't be much worse (for Israel) then it is now with the suicide bombings.

[Satchel 0]

I see the point, and i doesn´t speak the palestinians free from disrespecting the "agreements", they have their share too, no question about that.

But i also think that Arafat has little knowledge or control on what ultra radical palestinian terror cells are planning and executing.

However the problem is that israel is helpless against the terror, Sharon is trying to counter it, to speak mild, with a sledge hammer by hitting all palestinians even those unguilty, this is only leading to the agreements becoming less and less likely fulfilled, and he knows it. It´s a neverending circle of hatred and violence.

"The wise man gives in" is a saying we use in germany, if it makes no sense to argue or fight any further. From a modern civilized state like Israel it should be expected to handle the situation better than it does currently.

The greatest threat is that if Israel, or better Sharon, continues his current course, he will loose support of the west without doubt, and eventually sees the agreements being fulfilled by force from outside.

The conflict also interferes with the U.S. Anti Terror campaign, that is still ongoing, what it can use least is even more instability in the region.

[theavonlady 2]

Can anyone confirm this news from Norway:

Three members of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee now say that they regret having decided to award the prestigious prize to -- Shimon Peres…

LOL!

Speaking about Peres, here's one of my favorite sites:

Shimon Says.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 05 2002,14:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2002,15:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Except that the Palestinis could do jack shit without the support of the other Arab states.<span id='postcolor'>

Precisely the opposite! In the 70's and 80's, when Israel attempted time after time to offer full autonomy to the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza, the death threats eminating from the surrounding Arab regimes and the PLO itself prevented any such dialogue from getting off the ground.<span id='postcolor'>

That's what I said. The Palestinans don't have the means or the balls to break with the other Arab states. Convince the Arabs and the Palestinians will follow.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'll just go back and says those naughty words: "population transfer".<span id='postcolor'>

Then what it the difference between what you want to do to the Palestinians and the thing the Serbs did to the Kosovars?