GameBanshee Forums

There really is not easy solution in the MidEast, IMO. I think the Palestinian inhabitants of the land can be said to have "title by occupancy" for hundreds, possibly thousands of years, but the Israeli families have been there, probably forcibly, for more than fifty years. At this point, throwing out other group is untenable. Possible for the Israelis to do the Palestinians; and the Israelis love to see themselves as the victims in every situation, which blinds them (at times) to acts of moral outrage. But the Israeli public would never condone that kind of act.

Which leaves 'em back at square one. They have to live together. They don't want to live together. Each side hates the moral strutting that the other side performs. Some Israelis believe the Palestinians are a sword above their heads just waiting to drop at an appropriate moment. Some Palestinians regard the Israelis as usurpers who stole their property on the basis of a book whose belief system they've never accepted.

This isn't a matter of "idiots" throwing stones. Those "idiots" are Palestinian youths who see the wealth of Israelis everyday, made off the land their parents formerly occupied. They hear repeatedly about the death of their friends and families by the Israeli Army. Stay at home quietly, maybe lie down and let the tanks role in? No, sir. The Palestinians see this from a perspective ironically similar to that of the Jews who rose up in the Warsaw Ghetto during WWII, and fought back savagely as the Nazis ruthlessly crushed them.

Is nobody wrong? Sure, everybody's wrong. That's the depressing thing about the Israeli/Palestinian situation. There are no right paths forward. The best way involves hardship and sacrifices on both sides, which neither side is prepared to make, particularly under such political animals as their current leaders.

Anyway, that's my opinion, for what it's worth.

[ 09-04-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

grrr...

[ 09-04-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

why the second growl fable??

Originally posted by THE JAKER:
<STRONG>Hey Eminem - I think your signatures are punctuated in a confusing manner -

Shouldn't it be:

Go, Dubya, Go!
Go, Rehnquist, Go!

Why, Jeffords, Why?

(or alternately
Why, Jeffords? Why!?)
</STRONG>

Correctly puncuated, it would be:

Go, Dubya! Go!
Go, Rehnquist! Go!

(the 'alternate' you gave of the last one is correctly puncuated)

Originally posted by nael:
<STRONG>and i do agree that americans should leave texas so we can be our own country once again...
</STRONG>

I agree with that, too. In fact, I came this ~~~> <~~~ close to trying to do something about that.

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>I agree with that, too. In fact, I came this ~~~> <~~~ close to trying to do something about that. </STRONG>

please explain...

Correction, the hebrews were ther much earlier than the palestinians. How about the fact that they were there more than 4000 years ago?

The police officer analogy was not meant to make Israel seem on the right side of the law. It's simple common sense. You don't hit someone who has a gun!. That's exactly how the latest string of violence started. Yes, that's right, the Palestinians started this string of violence. That means they broke the cease-fire.

Whether or not you agree with Israel's actions since then, it is a fact that the Palestines started this string of violence.

The reason I argue for the side of the Israelis is not because I agree with them. They overreact too much, and it will get worse with Sharon in office. However, everyime this argument comes up, everyone else conveniently ignores the fact that the Palestinians 1)started this string and 2)are still commiting violent acts.

Did you guys see the picture of the joyous kids with blood on their hands after they killed an Israeli cop? Did you here about the car bombs? The mortars? Have you noticed that everything that Israel does is in reaction to one of these events?

Israel has a twitchy trigger finger. They need, or rather want, an excuse to attack the Palestines. All the Palestinians do is give them excuses to do just that. Until the Palestinians learn what a peaceful protest is, they will always be oppressed by Israel. The instant they are peaceful with Israel still attacking them is the instant that the US becomes neutral and that all other countries are for Palestine.

Oh, yeah: the Holy Roman Empire did consist of Germanic Tribes. I told you they weren't Roman.

so...let me ask you something...if, for example, let's say that a handful of Mexican citizens were angry at the US for not lettign more of them into the country and they attack a border patrolman. according to the israeli example, the US should then proceed to launch a massive assault on Mexico City killing dozens of innocent people.
or, let's say a British guy kills yoru entire family. so...in retaliation, under the ideals of the israeli government, you go out and just kill any british people you happen to find.

the state of Palestine has NOT been the first to break a cease fire. the israeli government perpetuates the violence because they antagonize the citizens of Palestone by murdering innocents. i agree that thosee responsible for carbombings should be held accountable, but so should the israeli government for murdering peaceful citizens and bulldozign their homes.

I never said Israel was right for fighting back as violently as they do. I said they will never be held accountable for it unless the Palestinians stop themselves.

For the last time, Israel did not start this string of violence. The P.L.A did. That's Arafat's organization, at once terroristic, once peaceful, now terroristic again. They kill innocent Israelis, then hide behind innocent Palestinians. I read an article where many people of Palestine are angry because of the terrorists in their midsts. The terrorists take popshots at Israel, then hide behind thier 'fellow mans'' farmland - thus getting it and it's residents destroyed while they still live to kill another day. Get rid of the Palestinian terrorists and I guarantee that this violence will stop. Sharon cannot attack the Palestinians without an excuse, lest he loses the only alliance he has.

Quark, are there any sources for this information? I would like to read any articles that you have. (if possible)

Quark, I've checked the UN documents, the Human Rights Watch, The BBC and The Times news archive and a few neutral Mideast websites, and I find no support for your claims. Please post some references. I'll post more on this subject later, I'm in a hurry right now.

Btw, I still think it's derogatory to that you refer to the whole Palestian people as "not understanding peace talks" and being "stupid". I would find it derogatory to refer to any group of people with these words.

[ 09-05-2001: Message edited by: C Elegans ]

Well actually if Sharon hadn't gone into the area i forget last year, the fighting wouldn't have started.

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
<STRONG>Well actually if Sharon hadn't gone into the area i forget last year, the fighting wouldn't have started.</STRONG>

I'm not sure about the English term, it would translate to the "Temple Mount" from Swedish.

Last time I checked Sharon didn't commit any violence on that trip. Him going there didn't give any right for anyone to commit violence.

Sorry for my comments, but it wasn't directed towards all the Palestinians. Only the ones who are involved in the violence. In which case they are stupid, because they are handing the lives of all innocent Palestinians to Sharon on a silver platter.

As for my information, most of it comes from [url="http://inquirer.philly.com/"]The Philadelphia Inquirer[/url]. They had a reporter in the Mid East interviewing peaceful Palestines (article was 1.5-2.5 months ago IIRC). During the first few weeks of violence, the front page had a picture of some extremely happy teens screaming out of a window with blood on thier hands - the target of thier screams being a jubilant Palestinian crowd. This was less than a minute after they brutally murdered a local Israeli cop after he took a wrong turn.

A quick check and

[url="http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/09/05/national/05RACE.htm"]France and Racism Summit[/url]

[url="http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/09/05/national/MIDEAST05.htm"]Another Bombing[/url]

Now even France agrees that Israel was being abused. That's in addition to Israel, US, neutral Canada, and one other neutral country (Norway IIRC?)

Edit: read the last few paragraphs of the France article. Sums up alot about the UN quite well.

[ 09-05-2001: Message edited by: Quark ]

Originally posted by nael:
<STRONG>please explain...
</STRONG>

I'm not exactly sure what I would've done; but if Bush hadn't won the election last year, I was going to try to convince the Texas government to succede(sp?) from the Union. Not that anyone in the Texas government would've listened to a little 17-year-old girl just out of high school, at least, not without the proper motivation.

Okay...I seem to be having a problem with double posting. I think I figured out what the problem is. I just went from 96MB RAM to 190+MB RAM and now it is fast enough to register my accidental double clicks.

[ 09-05-2001: Message edited by: Sailor Saturn ]

we actually were illegally forced into the union.
there are a lot of Republic of Texas whacko's out there, but there actually is a fundamental reason behind it all. we really shouldn't be a part of the US.

There's not many places in the world that were not 'illegally' forced into one nation or another.

The entire continent of North America (Native Americans!). All of Europe. South America, Africa were colonies. India. Taiwan. Shall I keep going?

And now African countries are at war, India and its neighbors are at war, Native Americans have been wiped out.
i thought taiwan became a country after the democratic guys ran off from the communist in China and claimned the island their country.