logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> Hamas and the new Palestine, How can we engage?
Titus
post Jan 27 2006, 03:19 AM
Post #1


*******
What's crackalackin?

Group: Members
Posts: 631
Member No.: 1,872
Joined: November-29-03

From: So Cal
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: None



Hamas has routed the Fatah party in Palestinian parliamentary elections. They've won over 76 seats in the 132 seat house and Fatah office holders have resigned.

Hamas is now, for all intents and purposes, leading the Palestinian people.

Questions:

Can the U.S., whether on it's own or as a part of the international community, engage Hamas in maintaining a level of peace in the region with successfull results?

What must each side do to be successful?

Do you think Hamas can be engaged the same way the IRA was?




Editied to add link.

This post has been edited by Titus: Jan 27 2006, 03:22 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
moif
post Jan 29 2006, 08:05 PM
Post #41


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,690
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Female
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Lesly)
Interesting you should bring those other groups up, Moif. Titus demonstrated Fatah has terrorist ties. And yet, assuming the U.S. was aware of the moderate to liberal alternative parties in the running, why did she fund Fatah's campiagn instead of the parties you listed?
Why are you asking me? I never listed Fatah among the other choices available.

I don't care if the Palestinians don't want to vote for Fatah. I'm not peddling Fatah's virtues.

I can only assume that the USA will deal with terrorists, if only those terrorists have a mandate from the people and have renounced their terrorist intentions.


QUOTE(Lesly)
Is it perhaps because the U.S., understanding the alternatives had a snowballís chance in hell of getting majority status, dispensed with idealism and threw its support behind the lesser of two evils by playing a game of public services catch-up with Hamas?
Yup. Looks like that to me too.


QUOTE(Lesly)
Why donít you tell me what Iím supposed to take away by your comparison between Germans electing another National Socialist Party and Hamas winning a majority of seats for the first time.
Nothing, for there is no such comparison... I asked if the world would sit idly by and watch another nazi party come to power. I don't think it would.

The point being there are some groups and ideologies that are just not acceptable and merit no reciprocation.
I don't automatically include Hamas in this catagory. I would advoate the rest of the world waits to see what Hamas's first move will be. Whether or not they will recognise Israel, or as their leader has already suggested, they will stick to their principle of destroying Israel.


QUOTE(Lesly)
I donít necessarily consider a vote for Fatah altruistic. In fact, I would expect those who have benefit from Fatahís political connections to vote for Fatah. But Iím not the one associating a vote for Fatah to mean a vote for peace, or a vote for Hamas to mean a vote for war. The only way I can interpret the campaign results in such stark terms is by looking at it strictly from Israelís point of view, and that does neither side any favors.
I hope your not trying to portray me as having said I believe 'a vote for Fatah to mean a vote for peace, or a vote for Hamas to mean a vote for war'. For I have not made this claim.

Nor am I looking at this from a 'pro Israeli perspective'. I'm bound to look upon this, as all other matters from the heights and depths of my own perceptions.


QUOTE(Lesly)
Where have I heard such a simplistic justification before? Oh, thatís right. I donít need inspectors to explain anything, Saddamís belligerence speaks for itself. Thatís your prerogative, Moif.
My prerogative it may be, but those aren't my words Lesly. Those are yours.

You can put any spin on the election results you wish to, but your position is no less simplistic than mine. The Palestinians have voted and their election results speaks for itself. The Palestinians have put a terrorist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel into power.

The failure to recognise or understand the implications of this indicates you don't want to accept it for what it is. The idea that Hamas has something more to offer the Palestinians because it runs pseudo welfare systems for those it considers needy ignores, utterly, the basis for Hamas's entire existence.


QUOTE(Lesly)
Yeah. How terrible of those Palestinians to put their own self-interests ahead of Israelís, the United Statesí, and the rest of the world. Someone needs to inform those ungrateful people that theyíre the only ones on the planet who canít flip the bird at the rest of the world when they go to the polls.
Well I wouldn't put it quite like that, but yeah.

If you vote for terrorists, even if they're nice to you, then you can't expect a great deal of sympathy from the rest of the world.

Also, I don't agree at all that the Palestinians have voted in their own self interest here. Ignoring legitimate political parties in order to vote for a terrorist faction is not voting in your own best interests.


QUOTE(Lesly)
I'm not saying some of those who voted for Hamas don't want a bigger fight, but as for the rest that contributed to Hamas' majority status, is it that surprising that Palestinians are more interested in a pseudo-welfare state looking after their immediate needs?
And I'm not saying that every one in Hamas is a cold blooded murderer...

I'm just saying that if you hang out with people you know are cold blooded murderers, support them, approve of them, idolize them and vote for them, then don't be complaining when some one drops a five hundred pound bomb on you.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lordhelmet
post Jan 29 2006, 08:05 PM
Post #42


********
Millennium Mark

Sponsor
June 2005

Group: BANNED
Posts: 1,177
Member No.: 4,185
Joined: January-3-05

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE(bucket @ Jan 29 2006, 02:40 PM)

snip

 
What I think many here neglect to consider in evaluating this situation is that to many Palestinians social justice is nothing unless their true struggle or objective is achieved.  They have for years been told that they all must suffer, even suffer death, for the struggle of defeating Israel.  To try and view this event and the political ideals of this nation absent of it's largest, most prominent and recognized cause is to avoid a really big piece of the picture.  Surely not the entirety of it..but the focal point.
 
Sure the Palestinians have chosen Hamas for her social generosity, I can accept that argument but nations and individuals around the world have chosen to afford Hamas this means to be generous because of Hamas'  fight against Israel.  They are intertwined and you can not effectively discuss their power or appeal without recognizing that their objective to destroy Israel has a lot of appeal to many.
*



Yes, that exactly was their appeal. You are exactly right as to the underlying reasons behind the victory of Hamas. The same mentality shown by the people who cheered when Bin Laden attacked us on 9/11 and killed 3,000 innocents are the ones who elected Hamas.

Why? Because terror has "worked" in their minds. Israel is retreating from the settlements and continues to give up land. Why turn back a winning strategy? The more suicide bomb vests explode, the more Israel caves and the more Europe and liberals in the US clamor for Israel to give up even more in the interests of "peace" (not to mention the calls for cut-and-run in Iraq from the same people for the same reasons).

The thing about free elections, and freedom in general, is that people have the freedom to make stupid choices. The Palestinians clearly have here. They have chosen, as their official representatives, terrorists who promise both the destruction of the state of Israel and the return to an ancient religion that offers nothing in the form of western style "individual" rights.

I hate to sound pessimistic, but the Palestinians committed national suicide with their choice. Not only have they defeated any real chance to form their own independent state, but they have likely moved very, very close to an all-out war with Israel which will see them suffer severely. The likely next leader of Israel is Netanyahu and that guy will not fool around with Hamas. The first attack, since it has now come from a "state", not a group of insurgents, will result in crushing attacks on the entire leadership of the Palestinians.

And who will step in? I suspect Iran. And if Israel suspects that they've already built the bomb they keep bragging about, an Israeli nuclear device could be deployed to take out Tehran before they launch on Israel.

I'm a Bush supporter and believe he did the right thing, given the available information, intelligence, and analysis with respect to Iraq. Our country just can't afford to sit back and allow nations like Iraq to flaunt cease fire agreements, UN resolutions, and even attempt to kill one of our ex-presidents. But, I must admit that the one aspect of Bush that I feel most uncomfortable of is his idealism. Bush is not a fascist as some on the fringe left claim. Instead, he's an "idealist". A person who really believes in the human heart, human nature, and the power of good if given the chance to flourish.

I'm more cynical. We're dealing with an ancient mind-set here that is taught to children the day that they are old enough to understand. That mentality has counteracted, and will counteract, any "natural" tendency toward good.

I also believe that these fights simmer for decades because they are unresolved. There will be no peace in the middle east until one side or the other prevails. What we, as free western societies have to ask ourselves is which side should prevail as far as our interests are concerned?

The side that wants to return to a 7th century-style totalitarian world or the side that has represented freedom, democracy, and a modern economy and society?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psyclist
post Jan 29 2006, 09:01 PM
Post #43


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
September 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 352
Member No.: 4,200
Joined: January-5-05

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(bucket @ Jan 29 2006, 02:40 PM)
QUOTE(Lesly)
We hold the Palestinian people to a different standard when itís time to vote. We want them to give up self-interest for Israelís sake. And lest Palestinians assume the ridiculous political alchemy that supposes it is easier for hardliners to make concessions applies to them, that sort of reverse psychology is only fit to be employed by Western nations and nations aligned with Western interests.


I don't agree with this at all, I happen to believe in the standard of universal human rights. I think the problem is we hold the Palestinian people to the same standard and that is where the conflict begins. They seem to feel they have some deep religious obligation of resistance and are not obliged by the standard of accepting and viewing Israel as a legitimate nation. And if any lowering of standard is being made it is most often made in favor of the Palestinian people not as you claim against their own self interests. I think you should look to the elections in the west such as Austria's election of Haider or France's run off election of Le Pen and then tell us all again how the west only applies these standards upon the Palestinians...explain to us why we should have been accepting of these democratic "self interests" of the nation-states of Austria and France...do you feel the condemnation and pressure to reject these political outcomes on our parts was also "ridiculous" ?


Let's see, who else has a deep religious convictions that they use to justify the occupation of land... hmmm.gif

If you believe in this standard of universal human rights, then why don't you apply those same rights to the Palestinian people? Don't they have human rights? Should the Israeli's be allowed to build a wall that is in violation of UN resolutions and International humanitarian law and causes the loss of jobs, movement, and livelyhood? Should a major source of income, olive trees, be torn from their roots? Should Palestinians water be taken away or under the control of an occupying power? It's water! The most important aspect of a country's domestic, industrial, and agricultural needs. Should IOF/IDF forces be allowed to kill women and children through excessive force, enter houses at will, enforce curfews and jail Palestinians at will?

Please, if there is anyone we need to start holding accountable for violating univeral human rights, it's Israel.

link
link
link
link
link

edited to remove inflamitory statement.

This post has been edited by psyclist: Jan 29 2006, 09:17 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Titus
post Jan 29 2006, 11:04 PM
Post #44


*******
What's crackalackin?

Group: Members
Posts: 631
Member No.: 1,872
Joined: November-29-03

From: So Cal
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: None




QUOTE
Moif

QUOTE
(Lesly)
Interesting you should bring those other groups up, Moif. Titus demonstrated Fatah has terrorist ties. And yet, assuming the U.S. was aware of the moderate to liberal alternative parties in the running, why did she fund Fatah's campiagn instead of the parties you listed?


Why are you asking me? I never listed Fatah among the other choices available.

I don't care if the Palestinians don't want to vote for Fatah. I'm not peddling Fatah's virtues.


I think she's pointing out that campaigns need money to be successfull, and since the US chose to support another terror group instead of a small, unknown independent party, what do you expect?

Hamas has money. Hamas can provide. I don't think any of the alternatives you listed can do what Hamas has.

In other words, the road to Ramallah is paved with good intentions. It'd be nice if these small groups could provide social programs as well as Hamas, but they don't, and ideas don't put bread on the table. Intentions don't vaccinate children. Promises don't give them shoes.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moif
post Jan 30 2006, 12:24 AM
Post #45


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,690
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Female
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Titus)
I think she's pointing out that campaigns need money to be successfull, and since the US chose to support another terror group instead of a small, unknown independent party, what do you expect?

Hamas has money. Hamas can provide. I don't think any of the alternatives you listed can do what Hamas has.

In other words, the road to Ramallah is paved with good intentions. It'd be nice if these small groups could provide social programs as well as Hamas, but they don't, and ideas don't put bread on the table. Intentions don't vaccinate children. Promises don't give them shoes.
But apparently democracy is about who has the best funding?

Well, I suppose that is a very American way of looking at it...

Where I'm from though, people vote according to their political beliefs and forgive me if I am being obtuse, but I have always assumed that the people of Palestine were at least intelligent enough to understand that funding is available from a wide range of international sources....

but of course, you're probably right, it's all about us again. Those poor Palestinians can't do anything by themselves... unsure.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vermillion
post Jan 30 2006, 01:05 AM
Post #46


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,547
Member No.: 2,065
Joined: December-23-03

From: Canada
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Liberal
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(moif @ Jan 30 2006, 12:24 AM)
but of course, you're probably right, it's all about us again. Those poor Palestinians can't do anything by themselves...  unsure.gif


In American elections, UK elections, French Elections and Canadian elections (and probably other I can't find studies on) it has been proven time and time again that while foreign policy makes great headlines, people make their decisions to vote on issues closest to home. Economy, education, the next paycheck, the next meal, the next visit to the hospital, and so on.

I love how some people here choose to presume that the exact opposite is the case with Palestine, with no basis whatsoever. By verbaly diminishing the activities of Hamas within palestibe by calling them 'a couple of soup kitchens', or 'some first aid clinic', you entirely miss what is far and away the most likely cause behind the election victory.

For 15 years if a young person was educated in Palestine, there is a good chance it is because of hamas. If someone received medical care, there is a good chance it was from Hamas. If someone lost their family to an Israeli rocket, relief for the survivors was provided 100% from Hamas.

No, of COURSE this does not excuse their terrorist activities, or the estimated 350 people Hamas has been directly responsible for killing with terror attacks, but that is not my point.

My point is to try an explain that maybe, just MAYBE this was not a vote of national suicide by the Palestinians, maybe, just MAYBE the entire Palestinian population are not idiots as some of you would make them out to be. Maybe the decision, just like elections in the rest of the world, was based on local close to home issues. Fatah was corrupt and associated with terrorists, it took huge amounts of money from international donors like the US and where did they spend it?

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_...lestinian%20Aut

http://cfrterrorism.org/havens/palestine_print.html

This quote is from a report issued BEFORE the elections:
"Independent observers and international donors have repeatedly criticized the authority for a series of bribery, patronage, and cash-skimming episodes. Experts say that many PA institutions are not so much corrupt as inefficient, which has given Hamas a chance to fill in the gap by providing social services and thereby win significant popular support."


Almost all the International Aid was being spent on security forces and salaries, with each salary having an automatic 2% kickback to the Fatah party. This is not corruption, it is outright theft. Fatah supported terrorism and the famous 'Martys brigade'.

In the meantime, Hamas, another terrorist organisation, was feeding the Palestinians, educating them, healing them and supporting families of those killed by Israelis.


So many people here rant on and on about the stupid choice by the Palestinians, the foolish choice, the choice that proves they want war, the choice that proves they want death...

In fact they had the choice between TWO terrorist organisations.

One was backed by the US, including 2 million dollars of money spent DIRECTLY by the US campaigning for Fatah in the days before the election, and was renowned for corruption, theft, graft and lining their own pockets at the expense of the Palestinians.

The other ran social services throughout Palestine taking care of its people.


Do you really think that the fact that one terrorist group the US liked, and the other one the US didn't like would sway the vote? Fatah was better at concealing their terrorist activities I suppose, though not very well.

The Palestinians made what I can see as the ONLY choice available to them. Now it is up to Hamas to decide what to do with their power. The West needs to give them the chance to do the right thing, no matter how many people suspect (possibly rightly) that they will choose to do the wrong thing.


But to pretend that helping the Palestinian government NOW would be 'supporting terrorists' and helping the Palestinian government 2 weeks ago was NOT is hypocracy.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blackstone
post Jan 30 2006, 04:26 AM
Post #47


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,995
Member No.: 5,539
Joined: October-13-05

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Titus @ Jan 29 2006, 03:11 AM)
QUOTE
Blackstone

And you disagree with that general assessment? Do you think the voters were ignorant of Hamas's activities? If not, then indeed they either didn't care, or actively supported it. There aren't too many other possibilities.


Well, I think my frustration with that scenario is based, in part, on the idea that if they did brush aside the fact that Hamas is a terror group, that it was out of malice. I think if there is a disregard, it's because Palestinians are too busy wondering if they're gonna find work. I think it's because they're more concerned about gettin their kids proper medical care rather than what some other jerk with a TNT vest does.

One common trait that transcends cultures is the idea that a man lookouts for numero uno. He looks out for he and his. If that means choosing between a terror group that's run the country into the ground, and a terror group that provides social programs, they're gonna choose what benefits them.

To fault them for it is another hypocritical position.

There's nothing hypocritical about it at all, at least speaking for myself. For Americans as well as Israelis as well as Palestinians as well as anyone else, voting is a heavy responsibility. There are consequences for voting a certain way, and it's the voter's responsibility to keep that in mind. So now the Palestinians may not have voted for Hamas with the intention of having them bomb Israelis, but there's no way they could not have been aware of their activities. Hence, they have to accept responsibility for it, regardless of what their intentions were when they voted. That's just an inextricably necessary attribute of self-government.

My most essential point here is in response to the fact that a few people on this thread have been suggesting that because Hamas was the people's democratic choice, it's entitled to some kind of special reverence. But in reality, democracy doesn't sanctify Hamas. Democracy is only a tool for making a government respectable, but like any tool, it's only as good as those who use it. The fact that a government is democratically elected does not in itself make it respectable.

QUOTE
QUOTE
Blackstone

But the fact that we were duped into playing along with Fatah's make-believe game doesn't mean we have any obligation to let ourselves be duped even further. Instead, it's time to wake up to the reality of the situation there, and do away with the folly on our part that has allowed it to continue and worsen.


We were duped? blink.gif I dunno, you'd think all the Israeli airstrikes, helo-attacks, and surrounding Arafat's compound for ages would tip us off? blush.gif

Yes, we (generally speaking, the American people) were duped into thinking that Arafat and the PLO had "reformed", and that Israel was irrationally and recklessly overreacting by going after. The links between the Fatah and the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade were consistently played down, as they continue to be played down after Arafat's death. If these things about Fatah get hidden from view, just think of what's being ignored about Hamas.

QUOTE
And what's even better is that you appear to suggest to face reality by walking away from the table altogether. The reality is we have no choice but to deal with Hamas when it comes to brokering peace. Are we to just turn our noses and walk out of the room?
*

Of course we have a choice. Keep in mind that the Palestinians have a lot more to lose than the Israelis from a breakdown in relations between the two sides, especially now that Israel has its security barrier up. Their choice is either to try to move forward by establishing peaceful relations with the Israelis, or continue to fester in their bitter hatred and misery.

It's Hamas's choice whether to come to the table, not ours.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bucket
post Jan 30 2006, 06:31 AM
Post #48


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,259
Member No.: 1,459
Joined: October-14-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(psyclist)
Let's see, who else has a deep religious convictions that they use to justify the occupation of land... hmmm.gif


Whose land is it? Is it a sovereign nation..the Gaza Strip? Is the West Bank a part of the nation of Palestine? Because from what I understand just the general concept of there being a recognized Palestinian state is still a conflict. Only something like half of the world officially recognizes Palestine as a sovereign nation...and it is mostly the non-western half. I think you treat this issue far too casually and that when speaking or debating about it with others you should remember how basic and fundamental this conflict is.

QUOTE(psyclist)
If you believe in this standard of universal human rights, then why don't you apply those same rights to the Palestinian people? Don't they have human rights? Should the Israeli's be allowed to build a wall that is in violation of UN resolutions and International humanitarian law and causes the loss of jobs, movement, and livelyhood? Should a major source of income, olive trees, be torn from their roots? Should Palestinians water be taken away or under the control of an occupying power? It's water! The most important aspect of a country's domestic, industrial, and agricultural needs. Should IOF/IDF forces be allowed to kill women and children through excessive force, enter houses at will, enforce curfews and jail Palestinians at will?



Did I privately share with you my personal opinions or thoughts on the welfare and basic human rights of the Palestinian people? Because I know I havenít shared them here in this debate and I know I rarely if ever discuss the Israeli Palestinian conflict here at ad.gif at all...so I am curious as to how you have come to the conclusion that I have forgotten or feel it unnecessary to bother myself with my stated universal belief of a human rights standard universally. I guess you are calling me a liar, that when I say universal you must imagine I really donít mean it and exactly where have you gained this insight on me?

In a conflict one side wants you the viewer to appeal to itís cause, they want you to identify with their suffering and their need in order to gain your support but they also require and want you to identify with their perceived image or concept of their enemy.

Contrary to your perception of me..I havenít chosen a ďsideĒ

Universal is to me something I believe needs to happen all over the world, for everyone. I just donít recognize the Palestinian peopleís human rights as including their right to seek the full and total destruction of Israel, as much as the Palestinians have the right to exist, govern and control their own nation in peace...the Israelis do too.

I supported the international rejection for the democratic election of Haider and so why would I not again support my view or belief that progressive and liberal government is the desired form of government? Why should I have to lower my standards when it comes to the Palestinians?

This post has been edited by bucket: Jan 30 2006, 06:36 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Artemise
post Jan 30 2006, 08:55 AM
Post #49


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 668
Joined: April-15-03

From: Alaska
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



What really do any of Us know of Palestine? A few miles strip which has been stripped of wealth, carted off by Israelis, bombed and bulldozed to levels none of us can imagine, used, abused, and constant murder of a people with no civil or human rights, a wall dividing the useless desert from the already taken 'good' parts, and that itty bit left being fought over- by a (false) nation that was bequeathed the land by western influence. Fake, and falsely thought of as 'Israel' because we westerners had a bad concience about Hitler and WW2.

Does one wonder WHY the people elect extremists? Let me ask YOU, IF you lived THERE, what would you choose? Walk in someone elses shoes, not in your shoes from here. Palestinians had no say or choice but have lived there all there ancestral lives. Jews were nomads, designated to wander in the desert for 40 years by GOD himself.

We asked for democracy in the Middle East. Its just too damn bad that democracy doesnt fit our expectations on this side of the world.

So far, life under Isreali rule has not been anything but complete and total rape and pillage. Palestinians are second class citizens. Allowed to come clean Israeli homes, clean Israeli dung, make selling business and locked up at night on the other side of a wall, by the military.

Please tell me, HOW anyone can consider THAT a life? IF it were me Id fight against this lifetime of slavery and injustice. All of you would!
Every single last one of us would! IF it were us.

They are not us, they are living it. You are not living it. You are not a slave. You are not locked up like cattle at night on the 'bad' side of the fence, like animals.
We, are having a hard time 'getting it'.
Strange because we fought so hard for freedom, yet we are so willing for others to be slaves, as long as the slave traders look similar to ourselves.
Israel HAS a nuclear bomb, we didnt get so uppity about THAT, did we?

This post has been edited by Artemise: Jan 30 2006, 09:00 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lordhelmet
post Jan 30 2006, 12:13 PM
Post #50


********
Millennium Mark

Sponsor
June 2005

Group: BANNED
Posts: 1,177
Member No.: 4,185
Joined: January-3-05

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Private



QUOTE(Artemise @ Jan 30 2006, 03:55 AM)

What really do any of Us know of Palestine? A few miles strip which has been stripped of wealth, carted off by Israelis, bombed and bulldozed to levels none of us can imagine, used, abused, and constant murder of a people with no civil or human rights, a wall dividing the useless desert from the already taken 'good' parts, and that itty bit left being fought over- by a (false) nation that was bequeathed the land by western influence. Fake, and falsely thought of as 'Israel' because we westerners had a bad concience about Hitler and WW2. 

Does one wonder WHY the people elect extremists? Let me ask YOU, IF you lived THERE, what would you choose? Walk in someone elses shoes, not in your shoes from here. Palestinians had no say or choice but have lived there all there ancestral lives. Jews were nomads, designated to wander in the desert for 40 years by GOD himself. 

We asked for democracy in the Middle East. Its just too damn bad that democracy doesnt fit our expectations on this side of the world. 

So far, life under Isreali rule has not been anything but complete and total rape and pillage. Palestinians are second class citizens. Allowed to come clean Israeli homes, clean Israeli dung, make selling business and locked up at night on the other side of a wall, by the military.

Please tell me, HOW anyone can consider THAT a life? IF it were me Id fight against this lifetime of slavery and injustice. All of you would! 
Every single last one of us would! IF it were us. 

They are not us, they are living it. You are not living it. You are not a slave. You are not locked up like cattle at night on the 'bad' side of the fence, like animals. 
We, are having a hard time 'getting it'.
Strange because we fought so hard for freedom, yet we are so willing for others to be slaves, as long as the slave traders look similar to ourselves.
Israel HAS a nuclear bomb, we didnt get so uppity about THAT, did we?
*




This is mis-statement of the history of the region. The radicals who now call themselves "Palestinians" were in Jordan until the Jordanian king got sick of Arafat's troublemaking, killed hundreds of them, and shipped them out of his country in 1971.

The "land" that is Israel now is not "Palestinian" land any more than Michigan is "Chippewa" land. The west bank and Gaza have been occupied by both Egypt and Jordan and I didn't see any international outrage against their "slavery" of the Palestinians.

The so-called "Palestinians" have adopted a mind-set of terror and violence. They refuse to negotiate in good faith with the Israelis or they'd have their own country by now given the endless efforts of the United States and the West to force Israel to give up lands that they were given by the UN or by the spoils of self-defensive wars.

Who held that land in ancient times is irrelevant. The Palestinians are not "victims", they are the people who have supported terrorists like Arafat and elected terrorists like Hamas. They have rewarded a mind-set that demands the outright destruction of Israel, a clinging to ancient traditions and an ignoring of the actual history of that region.

I say, enough is enough with the "plight of the Palestinians". Their plight is the result of THEIR Actions. Israel have attacked them, for sure... but in self-defense. Israel have taken a previously worthless chunk of land that nobody did anything with and built a modern civilization based on the best traditions of individual freedom and democracy. And, the result is an endless barrage of attacks from the arab countries who's track record of peace toward their own neighbors is anything but stellar.

It's time to move into the present. The United States isn't going to give Michigan back to the Chippewas and Israel isn't going to give their state back to the "Palestinians". With respect to the past, there is plenty of "Palestinian" blood on Arab hands to go around. The Palestinians "have" a homeland. It's called "Jordan". They've been offered even more than that, their "own" state which they'd have already if they didn't keep pursuing their unrealistic agenda of destroying Israel.

We need to be on the side of civilization, freedom, and democracy. Not on the side of a 7th century religious orientation based on strict totalitarian rule, lack of rights for women, and a reliance on violence and terrorism.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Renger
post Jan 30 2006, 12:23 PM
Post #51


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 379
Member No.: 5,226
Joined: July-5-05

From: Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Socialist



Artemis I have to correct you on some points here:

QUOTE(Artemise @ Jan 30 2006, 09:55 AM)
... by a (false) nation that was bequeathed the land by western influence. Fake, and falsely thought of as 'Israel' because we westerners had a bad concience about Hitler and WW2.
[...]
Palestinians had no say or choice but have lived there all there ancestral lives. Jews were nomads, designated to wander in the desert for 40 years by GOD himself.


This is a historical inaccuracy. Maybe you forgot but the Jews have always lived in this part of the world? King David, Salomon?? Ring any bell? In fact there is no other part of the world were Jews feel more connected to than that region. It is their historical birthplace!

Apart from that, lets take a close look at the creation of the state Israel.

1917: Balfour Declaration; druing WWI the British, in reaction to the ever growing anti-semitic movement in Europe, supported a Jewish homeland in Palestine, but also supported emergent Arab nationalism against the Ottoman occupation of the region.

1919-1930's: after the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of Nazism the Jewish migration swelled, but was limited by the British to placate the Arabs.

1945: homeless survivors of the Nazi Holocaust sought refuge in Palestine, the only place on earth were they feel at home, but were turned away by the British because of Arab protests. Britain failing to work out a compromise, terminated its League of Nations mandate of 1918 and turned the matter over to the newly formed U.N.

1947: the U.N. divided Palestine into a Jewish and Arab zone, placing Jeruzalem under international control. The "tolerant" Arabs rejected the partition.

1948: The Zionist leaders, with support of the U.S., proclaimed the Republic of Israel. The Arab nations (Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq) invaded, but were defeated by Israel.

1949: at the cease fire Israel extended its territory by a half and established West-Jeruzalem as its capital. Jordan annexed central Palestine, including the West Bank, and assumed control of East-Jeruzalem and barred Jewish worshippers. Furthermore the Arab states refused to absorb the half-million Palestinian refugees who had fled.

In the decades after independence Israel under parliamentary government succeeded in building a modern, Western-style, urban industrial and democratic society with a large role for labor unions and extensive social services. Through ingeniously engineered irrigation schemes they reclaimed vast stretches of the Nigev desert.

Although they tried to develop a peacefull society, the Israelis were multiple times attacked by its neighbours:

1956: war with Egypt over the Suez Canal
1967: the Six-Day War
1973: the Yom Kippur War
1982: Lebanon War

It is only some years after the outrageous Yom Kippur War and the PLO, that Israel saw the rise of the nationalistic Likud Party and the whole dirty conflict developped itself as we know it today. It was a reaction against agression that Israel became more and more agressive herself.

But lets go back to those poor Palestinians who fled to countries like Jordan. Did they receive a good treatment ... were they supported? The answer, sad but true, is no, they were kept in camps (they are still there!) and were NOT allowed to settle themselves in these countries. This is a side which is often overlooked. While 1.5 million Palestines were living relatively well in Israel, the rest of them were treated poorly by their own "Islamic Brothers", put away in camps in border regions!! It is in these camps the PLO recruted most of its followers! It is in these camps organizations like Hamas could flourish!

Source: Plamer & Colton, A History of the Modern World
editted:

Oops it seems I went a little off-topic, sorry about that Jaime. blush.gif flowers.gif

This post has been edited by Renger: Jan 30 2006, 01:26 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaime
post Jan 30 2006, 12:26 PM
Post #52


Group Icon

**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Admin
Posts: 5,941
Member No.: 4
Joined: July-25-02

From: Down where the River meets the Sea
Gender: Female
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



TOPIC REMINDER:


Can the U.S., whether on it's own or as a part of the international community, engage Hamas in maintaining a level of peace in the region with successfull results?

What must each side do to be successful?

Do you think Hamas can be engaged the same way the IRA was?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Billy Jean
post Jan 30 2006, 06:36 PM
Post #53


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,173
Member No.: 805
Joined: June-16-03

From: Athens, Georgia
Gender: Female
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



http://www.debka.com/

QUOTE
European Market foreign ministers decide to continue aid to Hamas-ruled Palestinian government despite the terror groupís refusal to relinquish violence and its advocacy of Israelís destruction

January 30, 2006, 5:11 PM (GMT+02:00)

ďWe give them three months to assess the situation. We donít want chaos and we want to go on with the peace process,Ē said EU foreign executive, Javier Solana at the end of the foreign ministersí meeting in Brussels.


It looks like Hamas may have 90 days to figure out what they want to do. I think three months is long enough.

This post has been edited by Billy Jean: Jan 30 2006, 06:50 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TruthMarch
post Jan 30 2006, 07:25 PM
Post #54


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 265
Member No.: 5,806
Joined: January-27-06

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



Let's consider something here. Hamas was prevented, by the Israelis, from campaigning in Bethlehem and another city I don't recall at this time, yet their candidates still won. Imagine the Republicans running for election, and not being allowed to enter their constituency to campaign for votes, and still winning the election. Do you think people would say Americans are stupid and don't know who they're even voting for, or would people say "wow they won the election even though they weren't allowed to campaign. They must really know what they want".
Hamas militancy is a small cog in their social wheel. No one likes to hear that but it's a fact. Death is more glamorized than birth, so it's easy to see why westerners think "terrorism" when referencing Hamas. Health care. Education. Social assistance. That's Hamas' appeal. They provide for their people when their "true" leaders won't. Don't see it as a vote for terrorism. See it as a vote for a full stomach and a hope for a new beginning in the latest chapter of the Middle East saga. Any terror attack on a helpless population is an act of evil no matter the stripe, Americans included. It's a repulsive act which, short term, may achieve their objective, but, long term, degrades we humans entire. When looking at a terror event, it's paramount (though never done in the West) to look closely at the reasons for the event, not just who, but why. Think about something here closely for a moment. And this is really an important fact and can serve as a clue to the less informed. The Israeli occupation, deemed illegal by international laws, is a harsh and brutal occupation where the occupied suffer greatly through the most basic of means i.e. standard of living. We all can agree on this. And it took 29 years (!) before any one single "Palestinian Suicide Bomber" detonated their first "suicide bomb" against Israel. If the shoe were on the other foot (ha! it always is and I notice no one in the west really trusts in that) we would be saying Israel displayed great great patience and personal physical restraint while hoping and waiting for a peaceful political settlement. No one cares to think of it in that (absolute and total) aspect of it; that the Palestinian suicide bombing in Israel is one of the later if not latest chapters of their history book, hardly anywhere near the first.
While many will consider this truth and reality a travesty or whatnot, I always come back to an unsettling issue. Rachel Corrie. Run over by an American bulldozer, not a peep from the US media. Imagine a US citizen run over callously by a Palestinian and the media being silent. I know. Hilarious thought.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bikerdad
post Jan 30 2006, 10:14 PM
Post #55


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,834
Member No.: 715
Joined: May-8-03

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(usisaterrorstate @ Jan 30 2006, 02:25 PM)
While many will consider this truth and reality a travesty or whatnot, I always come back to an unsettling issue. Rachel Corrie. Run over by an American bulldozer, not a peep from the US media. Imagine a US citizen run over callously by a Palestinian and the media being silent. I know. Hilarious thought.
*



Yup, not a peep from the US media...

Rachel Corrie Memorial Website In Memoriam
:::NEWS REPORTS:::
A Tribute to Rachel Corrie - MIFTAH (Photo Essay)
Celebrating Rachel Corrie's Life - Seattle Times
Photo story: Israeli bulldozer driver murders American peace activist - Electronic Intifada
Mideast fight hits home - Israeli bulldozer crushes Olympia protester in Gaza - The Olympian
Daughter of Charlotte couple killed in Gaza - Charlotte Observer
Israeli bulldozer kills American woman - USA Today

Israeli soldiers kill American peace activist in Rafah - The Palestine Monitor
Israeli bulldozer kills U.S. student - The Globe and Mail
Israeli bulldozer kills American protester - CNN
American peace activist killed by army bulldozer in Rafah - Ha'aretz
Activists are no strangers to conflict - The Olympian
Corrie's death stokes both sides in Mideast conflict - The Olympian
Death of a Human Shield - Seattle Weekly
The Dead American - workingforchange.com
Activist's memorial service disrupted - The Guardian
Israel holds US woman's body - AFP/Cape Argus
Israel Violently Disrupts Rachel Corrie's Gazan Memorial Service - Electronic Intifada
Activist Had Soft Spot for Underdogs - Los Angeles Times
Rachel Corrie's Echo - The Nation
Activists: Death was no accident; Arafat offers condolences - Seattle Times

Your ignorance of basic facts such as these, which can be ascertained in less than 10 seconds on Google, provides all the credibility your argument can handle.


********************************************************************************
********************


Can the U.S., whether on it's own or as a part of the international community, engage Hamas in maintaining a level of peace in the region with successfull results? While I hope we can, I seriously doubt it.

QUOTE
What must each side do to be successful?
To be successful, Israel must survive. To be successful (if we're to believe their charter), Hamas must destroy Israel. Not a lot of room in there for peace.

Do you think Hamas can be engaged the same way the IRA was? Unlikely. One key difference between Hamas and the IRA is that Hamas has a lot of competing terrorist organizations to contend with, as well as a lot of outside "backers" to satisfy. In order for Hamas to "engage" a la the IRA, they must first eliminate any challengers, and then wean themselves from outside money. I don't see that happening.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TruthMarch
post Jan 30 2006, 10:32 PM
Post #56


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 265
Member No.: 5,806
Joined: January-27-06

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



Ok so you misinterpreted my meaning as most do. When I say not a peep from the media, I am not refering to a tucked-away headlines, I am speaking of editorial outrage. I thought maybe people would have known what I meant, so sorry for the wrongful assumption.
As we know, since 911 the mainstream media has played a gigantic part of the run up to the war on terror and still continues to play a huge part in the post war occupation of Iraq. Editorial commentary post-911 was extreme and effective; to the point where important truisms were deliberately ignored. Recently we learned the NYTimes held damning evidence for over 1 year as a favor to Bush and Co. So we know the media is an umbrella which is able to manipulate the viewers/listeners and influence what they believe.
Don't list the token headlines but rather list the mainstream media's top echelon-righteous indignation against Israel for their actions. I don't think you can find it.
And thanks for the obvious amount of time you put into your response. It's always appreciated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bikerdad
post Jan 30 2006, 11:35 PM
Post #57


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,834
Member No.: 715
Joined: May-8-03

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



QUOTE(usisaterrorstate @ Jan 30 2006, 05:32 PM)
Ok so you misinterpreted my meaning as most do. When I say not a peep from the media, I am not refering to a tucked-away headlines, I am speaking of editorial outrage. I thought maybe people would have known what I meant, so sorry for the wrongful assumption.
Then perhaps you should have said "a lack of editorial outrage, no legions of pundits bloviating" instead of a characterization that every reasonable reader will take to mean "silence."

QUOTE
Don't list the token headlines but rather list the mainstream media's top echelon-righteous indignation against Israel for their actions. I don't think you can find it.
And thanks for the obvious amount of time you put into your response. It's always appreciated.
*

Well, on the same page I've already linked, you'll find the Boston Globe has done editorials. Of course, not linked are the numerous editorials that are less than flattering of Rachel Corrie, editorials that have appeared in numerous venues, including the Wall Street Journal. Perhaps the MSM's reluctance to champion this story is because, well, they figured that most Americans are going to look at it and realize that, at best, Rachel Corrie was a foolish kid who's stupidity got her killed. Perhaps the MSM had bigger stories to tell.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaime
post Jan 30 2006, 11:54 PM
Post #58


Group Icon

**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Admin
Posts: 5,941
Member No.: 4
Joined: July-25-02

From: Down where the River meets the Sea
Gender: Female
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



Don't make us close this because some of you can't stay on topic. Let's stay focused and civil.

TOPICS:

Can the U.S., whether on it's own or as a part of the international community, engage Hamas in maintaining a level of peace in the region with successfull results?

What must each side do to be successful?

Do you think Hamas can be engaged the same way the IRA was?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TruthMarch
post Jan 31 2006, 04:53 AM
Post #59


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 265
Member No.: 5,806
Joined: January-27-06

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



True to a point I suppose, but her stupidity was based on the thought that the Israeli bulldozer operator would have acted in a humane way i.e. not running her over nonethelesss, for that is exactly what happened. We can ignore the whitewashing that was done in typical fashion. I don't know. I just think that there should be some sort of anger about her murder. Lacking that, either the public is callous and dangerously detatched from humanity, or the public is highly misinformed by a highly controlled media. I choose the latter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bikerdad
post Jan 31 2006, 07:30 AM
Post #60


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,834
Member No.: 715
Joined: May-8-03

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



JERUSALEM -- The incoming Hamas government will move quickly to make Islamic sharia "a source" of law in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and will overhaul the Palestinian education system to separate boys and girls and introduce a more Islamic curriculum, a senior official in the movement said yesterday. The Stern Face of the New Palestine

This certainly does not bode well for relations with Hamas. A commitment to sharia is indicative of a commitment to the rest of the dark side of the "religion of peace." rolleyes.gif

hmmm.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: December 2nd, 2021 - 09:16 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.