Palistinean civil war

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Rival factions Hamas and Fatah have been going at each others throats for the past few days. Hamas has taken over alot of buildings and political offices in Gaza. Some say that this might escalate into a more regional war. As usual commodities traders are using this to speculate on oil prices.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070615/wl_mideast_afp/mideastunrestarab

[FezPaul]

Rival factions Hamas and Fatah have been going at each others throats for the past few centuries.


Fixed it for ya.

[moochcassidy]

Fixed it for ya.

huh?

Fatah is a political organisation from the 50's, Hamas is a terrorist group founded in the late 80's. as far as i know its only since the 05 elections theres been violence between the two.

some scary developments recently tho. if it does spread to the west bank and they get rid of Abbas, Baraks first job might be to flatten the whole area.

[S0S]

some people are really never happy

[A.J.]

"These things are good: helps get rid of the bad blood."

http://www.crimelibrary.com/graphics/photos/gangsters_outlaws/mob_bosses/the_godfather/Richard-Castellano150.jpg

[WRESTLINGFAN]

"These things are good: helps get rid of the bad blood."

http://www.crimelibrary.com/graphics/photos/gangsters_outlaws/mob_bosses/the_godfather/Richard-Castellano150.jpg


Israel is sitting on the sidelines probably saying let them kill each other

[A.J.]

Israel is sitting on the sidelines probably saying let them kill each other

That, and "this is what the U.S. should be doing in Iraq".

[torker]

That, and "this is what the U.S. should be doing in Iraq".

Survey says...number one answer on the board!
http://static.flickr.com/41/119484753_3ec464346f_m.jpg

[FezPaul]

huh?

Fatah is a political organisation from the 50's, Hamas is a terrorist group founded in the late 80's. as far as i know its only since the 05 elections theres been violence between the two.




I don't care if they were both formed last week.

It's the same lunatics fighting over the same crap.

[moochcassidy]

I don't care if they were both formed last week.

It's the same lunatics fighting over the same crap.

no its not. thats a vast oversimplification that typifies the ignorance that will perpetuate the attacks on your people for generations.

if you continue to believe this issue is a matter of 'savages' killing each other thousands of miles away, youre in for a longer slog with this 'Operation Freedom' bullshit than any of you imagine.

until there is fair solution in Palestine, Israel and America will never be safe from terrorism.

Palestine is the problem, yet the current administrations solution is the invasion and occupation Iraq.

for this reason your most recent foreign adventure will be a failure, terrorism and violence has been fuelled elsewhere in the region, breaches of International Law and Conventions on Human Rights have alienated you from rest of the globe, and your children will continue to come home in bodybags.

[KnoxHarrington]

If a stable, at least somewhat democratic Palestinian state that was friendly -- or at least tolerant towards -- Israel existed, a good deal of the turmoil in the Middle East would evaporate. Organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah would lose a great deal of their reason for being.

But, yet, this incompetent and criminal administration gave up on peace in Palestine and decided that a better way to spread "democracy" (sic) in the Middle East would be to overthrow Saddam and establish a "democracy" in Iraq. It's a crazy-ass neo-con fantasy that George Bush, like a rube heading for the ring toss, fell for.

(I believe there are conflicting motives for the war in Iraq. I think that for Bush, it truly is about making the world a better place, and/or hastening the rapture. For Cheney and his boys, it's about making money for Halliburton, Blackwater, and other friendly companies. They found the perfect rube for this plan, a President who wouldn't say "Why should we invade Iraq? al-Qaida's in Afghanistan! Get the fuck out of here!" like just about anyone else would.)

[FezPaul]

no its not. thats a vast oversimplification that typifies the ignorance that will perpetuate the attacks on your people for generations.


until there is fair solution in Palestine, Israel and America will never be safe from terrorism.




Yes, of course, the terrorist attacks are the fault of the victims.

[TheMojoPin]

Yes, of course, the terrorist attacks are the fault of the victims.

That's not what he said. He said it's a reason, not the sole cause.

[Yerdaddy]

If a stable, at least somewhat democratic Palestinian state that was friendly -- or at least tolerant towards -- Israel existed, a good deal of the turmoil in the Middle East would evaporate. Organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah would lose a great deal of their reason for being.

But, yet, this incompetent and criminal administration gave up on peace in Palestine and decided that a better way to spread "democracy" (sic) in the Middle East would be to overthrow Saddam and establish a "democracy" in Iraq. It's a crazy-ass neo-con fantasy that George Bush, like a rube heading for the ring toss, fell for.

(I believe there are conflicting motives for the war in Iraq. I think that for Bush, it truly is about making the world a better place, and/or hastening the rapture. For Cheney and his boys, it's about making money for Halliburton, Blackwater, and other friendly companies. They found the perfect rube for this plan, a President who wouldn't say "Why should we invade Iraq? al-Qaida's in Afghanistan! Get the fuck out of here!" like just about anyone else would.)

You're wrong. There is no fucking way you're in Kentucky.

And this is one of my favorite sentences ever posted on the board: "I think that for Bush, it truly is about making the world a better place, and/or hastening the rapture."

[jetdog]

Israel is sitting on the sidelines probably saying let them kill each other

Apparently theiir going to try and hasten things a little... (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21920774-663,00.html)

[Yerdaddy]

Yes, of course, the terrorist attacks are the fault of the victims.

That's exacly what many Muslims say about Palestinians and Iraqis. And they are just as right and just as wrong as you are. And that probably also why mooch didn't say anything like that - he talked about problems and solutions. Those are the only terms these issues can be discussed in becuase human beings don't give a fuck about victims. They give a fuck about power. That's why all the parties involved - Palestinians, Israelis and Americans - have turned from victims to aggressors. Ninety percent of the time I hear someone lamenting their side's "victims" all they're really doing is rationalizing their side's aggression.

[KnoxHarrington]

You're wrong. There is no fucking way you're in Kentucky.

And this is one of my favorite sentences ever posted on the board: "I think that for Bush, it truly is about making the world a better place, and/or hastening the rapture."

Well, I've tried the "George Bush is actually a genius who knows exactly what he's doing" way of thinking of this administration, and it doesn't make sense to me. I don't see Bush as this cold, calculating, Machiavellian schemer; I think he believes in absolute right and absolute wrong, seen through a fundamentalist Christian prism, so he's very susceptible to pitches from dudes like Wolfowitz and Pearle and the rest of those Project For a New American Century scumbags.

I used to wonder if he believed the shit he was spewing about "spreading democracy" and "freedom". Now I'm pretty sure he really does, and that scares the hell out of me. And with his religious beliefs -- and I grew up in the midst of many, many people who believe as he does -- I'm also scared he believes that this is heading towards Armageddon, when Jeebus is going to come back and kick the fuck out of the liberals, and it's his duty as a Christian to help bring that on.

Now Cheney, on the other hand, probably doesn't believe shit beyond increasing his power and wealth. He probably jacks it to Halliburton financial statements.

[Yerdaddy]

I agree with everything you say. But you must be about as popular in KY as Ru Paul. That sounds nasty.

[FezPaul]

That's exacly what many Muslims say about Palestinians and Iraqis. And they are just as right and just as wrong as you are. And that probably also why mooch didn't say anything like that - he talked about problems and solutions. Those are the only terms these issues can be discussed in becuase human beings don't give a fuck about victims. They give a fuck about power. That's why all the parties involved - Palestinians, Israelis and Americans - have turned from victims to aggressors. Ninety percent of the time I hear someone lamenting their side's "victims" all they're really doing is rationalizing their side's aggression.

Everyone's a victim/aggressor.
Everyone has the right to take/keep anything.
No one has the right to take/keep anything.
There is no right or wrong.
History doesn't count.

The Palestinians want Israel destroyed, period.
They will not stop with acts of terrorism until they do so.
If they do destroy Israel they will then turn on each other.

Have a nice day.

[sailor]

That's not what he said. He said it's a reason, not the sole cause.

i believe it's absolutely what he said.

[moochcassidy]

The Palestinians want Israel destroyed, period.
They will not stop with acts of terrorism until they do so.
If they do destroy Israel they will then turn on each other.

Have a nice day

and my point is that gross assumptions like these, fostered by a bias media and unnecessarily aggressive political elite beholden to the military industrial complex, are what is bringing this issue to your doorstep.

i didnt say 'the victims are to blame for the terrorists'. thats ridiculous- and the type of hyperbole that you dont hear outside the US.

my argument is that the current administrations foreign policy, particularly its continued support of a brutal and illegal 30 year occupation of Palestine, are the reason for the deaths of innocents on US soil.

sailor ive been quite clear mate, im not sure where your interpretation of my words come from..

"until there is fair solution in Palestine, Israel and America will never be safe from terrorism."

Thats why to take some sort of glee from this violence, or claim its 'inevitable' is to not understand the nature of the peace process that has been under way since Clinton. Fatah was possibly the last chance at a coherent, legitimate Palestinian government capable of bringing the arabs into a future negotiation over the settlement basically hammered out in the Oslo Accords.

with Arafat dead, and Fatah immobilized by the occupation, any future deal will have to be made with Hamas. Israel will baulk at this and your global military commitments will continue to snowball indefinitely.

Your 'War on Terror' is an illusion. it is THESE events in one of the poorest regions in the world that will decide how long you will fight and how many of your citizens will die.

EDIT- scratch that- 'OUR' citizens, thanks to Tony fuckin Blair

[FezPaul]

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!

[moochcassidy]

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!

http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/corbis/DGT231/CB055846.jpg

"theyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfre edomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateou rfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyha teourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomth eyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreed omtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourf reedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhate ourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomthey hateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedom theyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfre edomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateou rfreedomtheyhateourfreedomtheyhateourfreedom"


call me a hippy if you want paul, if all you have is that and "push Israel into the Sea" rhetoric from the 70s fire away old chap.

some of us are having a semblance of a grown up debate here maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan.

[jetdog]

While I hold to the broader point that you make Mooch, I really wish I 100% disagree with Fez Paul. My media sources are generally the big corps, CNN, ABC, CBS etc., with outside reporting thrown in whenever I get the opportunity (it's a matter of conveniance unfortunately). What I see is factional feuding, and a violent political group, Hamas, who have vowed to work towards the destruction of Israel period (which I can't condone, even though I agree Israel's occupation and tactics are dispicable and illegal), brutal violence between Sunni and Shiite, and brutal violence of Afghan warlords, the Taliban (who I think should be wiped off the face of the earth), and the general population stuck in the middle. I guess my question is, is it really that big of an assumption to say that we are not at the center of the violence in Palestine? and that the violence will continue whether or not we support Israel? further, isn't it true that factional violence has plagued the middle east and the *stans for many years, without the interference of the US?
i don't beleive the majority of the middle eastern population wants this at all, but I do beleive that the violence is in some degree, not dependent on US interference.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Arafat stole billions from the Palistineans, He lived like a king while the rest of the population lived in poverty with high unemployment, little education and hopelessness, but its so easy to blame those "Damn Israelis" all the time

[FezPaul]

call me a hippy if you want paul, if all you have is that and "push Israel into the Sea" rhetoric from the 70s fire away old chap.

some of us are having a semblance of a grown up debate here maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan.

I'm not suggesting we support the people who want to push Israel into the sea.

Just the opposite.

My point is that the people who hate Israel do so for reasons that have nothing to do with the state of the Palistineans or a Palistinean State.

Muslims hate Jews. Always have, always will.

All the kings horses and all the kings men haven't been able to solve this problem in all the centuries it's exsisted.

People have talked and talked about this situation forever and nothing has changed.

The people with real power and real inside information are incapable of solving the issues.

Which means however adult the discussion is nothing will change.

Unless...yes...now I see it...and the Nobel Prize for Peace goes to...ronfez.net.

[moochcassidy]

i appreciate your frustration. and youre free to take shots.

i know what your saying, im claiming that your buying into hardline Arab rhetoric from the 70's.

Arabs dont instinctively hate Jews- exactly like Catholics dont instinctively hate Protestants here. no matter how long theyve been killing eachother

i 'hate' Israel's involvement in Palestine, purely for political reasons. the International Community detests its actions, not out of anti-semitism, but out of exasperation at the laws and conventions their government have defied for the past 3 decades.

'all the kings horses' is an interesting analogy because far from this assumption that theres been centuries of Arab/Jew conflict, the last few hundred years has been characterised by Arab struggle against British colonial occupation - the King WAS the problem until 1948.- King David Hotel bombing comes to mind (and that was by Irgun- zionist anti-colonialists)

jewish/arab violence in its 'modern' context has been post '48 and is a direct consequence of Zionist immigration and British, then American, intervention.

this idea that a compromise is impossible in a historic conflict is a fallacy, thats been proven.

[FezPaul]

You're dreamin' mate.

[moochcassidy]

You're dreamin' mate.

where am i inaccurate there?

[FezPaul]

where am i inaccurate there?

Arabs don't hate Jews.

This started in '48

There is a political solution.

[sailor]

"a brutal and illegal 30 year occupation of Palestine"

how so? the u.n. partitioned palestine, israel then went on to declare their independence. they were swiftly attacked by the arabs. as part of the peace treaty ending the war, (1949) palestine ceased to be an independent state, being absorbed in part by syria, egypt and jordan. when israel was subsequently attacked again (1967) they captured some of the lands of former palestine (remember, palestine didn't even exist at this point due to other arab countries not caring if there was an independent palestine). that's what happens. you attack someone and lose and some of your lands may become forfeit. where was israel doing anything illegal? if anything they've gone out of their way to give back this land (they had zero obligation to) in the hopes that it might bring peace.

[moochcassidy]

i dont know the exact number but i think it goes into the hundreds of UN resolutions against the legality of the occupation since 67.

here (http://www.jatonyc.org/UNresolutions.html)


"Israel's occupation of Palestine is Illegal.
Security Council Resolution 242, Nov. 22, 1967

Calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied in the war that year and "the acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized "boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Israel's settlements in Palestine are Illegal.
Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979

"Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."

Palestinian have the right to Self-Determination.
General Assembly Resolution 3236, November 22, 1974

Affirms "the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine...to self-determination without external interference" and "to national independence and sovereignty."


Reaffirmation of a Palestinian State
Security Council Resolution 1397, March 12, 2002

Affirms "a vision of a region where two states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders."


"if anything they've gone out of their way to give back this land"- elaborate

[sailor]

i dont know the exact number but i think it goes into the hundreds of UN resolutions against the legality of the occupation since 67.

here (http://www.jatonyc.org/UNresolutions.html)


"Israel's occupation of Palestine is Illegal.
Security Council Resolution 242, Nov. 22, 1967

Calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied in the war that year and "the acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Israel's settlements in Palestine are Illegal.

Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979

"Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."


Palestinian have the right to Self-Determination.
General Assembly Resolution 3236, November 22, 1974

Affirms "the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine...to self-determination without external interference" and "to national independence and sovereignty."


Reaffirmation of a Palestinian State
Security Council Resolution 1397, March 12, 2002


Affirms "a vision of a region where two states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders."

but the u.n. never cared about palestine when it was held by the other arab nations? hmm. interesting.

the u.n. is a vast majority of third world nations that hate the west (i know, i'm crazy).

again, what of the arab occupation pre-1967?

[WRESTLINGFAN]

"a brutal and illegal 30 year occupation of Palestine"

how so? the u.n. partitioned palestine, israel then went on to declare their independence. they were swiftly attacked by the arabs. as part of the peace treaty ending the war, (1949) palestine ceased to be an independent state, being absorbed in part by syria, egypt and jordan. when israel was subsequently attacked again (1967) they captured some of the lands of former palestine (remember, palestine didn't even exist at this point due to other arab countries not caring if there was an independent palestine). that's what happens. you attack someone and lose and some of your lands may become forfeit. where was israel doing anything illegal? if anything they've gone out of their way to give back this land (they had zero obligation to) in the hopes that it might bring peace.


Yeahhh mmmannnnnnn Give Aztlan back to Mexico mmmannnnnnnnn. The US stole the southwest from Mexico

[DolaMight]

but the u.n. never cared about palestine when it was held by the other arab nations? hmm. interesting.

the u.n. is a vast majority of third world nations that hate the west (i know, i'm crazy).

again, what of the arab occupation pre-1967?

here-here, true indeed

[moochcassidy]

but the u.n. never cared about palestine when it was held by the other arab nations? hmm. interesting.

the u.n. is a vast majority of third world nations that hate the west (i know, i'm crazy).

again, what of the arab occupation pre-1967?

"never cared" howso?

Resolution 181 is testament to the fact that the UN started out very much on the Israeli's side. they forced the partition, encouraged jewish immigration (for their own economic reasons) and carved up the region giving disproportionate land to the new zionist state

Terrorism by jewish hardliners, displacement and expulsions drove arabs from the region forcing neighbouring nations to fill the political vacuum. Jordan and Egypt were INVITED by the Int community to act as protectorate over the Arab section.

I think you'll find the creation of Zionist State and the resultant partitioning of Palestine was a priority for the UN in its early stages and was pro-active in its attempts to pacify the Jews by preventing the establishment of a Palestinian Government and relying on other Arab nations

got a chuckle out of 'vast majority of third world nations that hate the west' conspiracy theory tho.

put it in the real world and say 'global community of nations that, in general, disagrees with current US/Israeli foreign policy' and youre spot on.

[Yerdaddy]

Look at mooch go! Like Gulliver swiping the tiny but numerous Liliputians away like ants but they just keep on coming!

It's a valiant effort and I'm very impressed with your arguments. Unfortunately I think the rest of the rational people on ths issue don't see the point of weighing into a debate so full of "Muslims hate Jews. Always have, always will" "You're blaming the Israelis for everything" "You're blaming the victims" "You said what I say you said - not what you really said" blah blah being a dick is the only valid argument blah! I've had my fill of that horseshit. So I'll just say I'm with you in spirit all the way brother. Radical moderates in solidarity forever! We shall undercome!

Except for this: "the u.n. is a vast majority of third world nations that hate the west (i know, i'm crazy)." That's actually true. I've been beheaded in all nine Third World countries I've been to in the last two and a half years for being a Westerner. In Malaysia I just had it put back on with velcro so I wouldn't miss another bus because of all the sawing and hacking with the dull machetes. It's really time consuming.

[sailor]

Look at mooch go! Like Gulliver swiping the tiny but numerous Liliputians away like ants but they just keep on coming!

It's a valiant effort and I'm very impressed with your arguments. Unfortunately I think the rest of the rational people on ths issue don't see the point of weighing into a debate so full of "Muslims hate Jews. Always have, always will" "You're blaming the Israelis for everything" "You're blaming the victims" "You said what I say you said - not what you really said" blah blah being a dick is the only valid argument blah! I've had my fill of that horseshit. So I'll just say I'm with you in spirit all the way brother. Radical moderates in solidarity forever! We shall undercome!

Except for this: "the u.n. is a vast majority of third world nations that hate the west (i know, i'm crazy)." That's actually true. I've been beheaded in all nine Third World countries I've been to in the last two and a half years for being a Westerner. In Malaysia I just had it put back on with velcro so I wouldn't miss another bus because of all the sawing and hacking with the dull machetes. It's really time consuming.

if you look back, he definitely blamed the victims for the terrorist attacks. whatever your views on anything, the words used were pretty straightforward. if it's not exactly what he meant, so be it, but he never did actually come out and say "i didn't mean that" unless i missed it.

and the machetes point, cute, but not exactly what i was going for.

[moochcassidy]

sailor, since you seem to be trying to misrepresent me

i havent said " i didnt mean it" - because i didnt say it pal.

where did i claim 'the victims are to blame for the terrorist attacks' or even imply that? show me a quote where i did.

to assume that is my opinion is to misunderstand what was actually said, infact a few people jumped on fezpaul for being off base with his conclusion

my analysis was that the administrations current foreign policy, crucially the continued support of the illegal occupation of Palestine, is the most important factor in bringing the terrorist attacks to US targets.

(i suppose there is an argument that policy in Iraq and breeches of the Geneva Convention at Guantanamo have become a more important factor in fuelling future attacks on US soil. time will tell. so ill keep 'foreign policy' in general in there.)

[Yerdaddy]

if you look back, he definitely blamed the victims for the terrorist attacks. whatever your views on anything, the words used were pretty straightforward. if it's not exactly what he meant, so be it, but he never did actually come out and say "i didn't mean that" unless i missed it.

Post #21.

And his words were straightforwardly NOT blaming the victims for terrorism. You and FezPaul are only making that claim because he doesn't share your Manichean view of the issue. It's a substitute for honest debate.

and the machetes point, cute, but not exactly what i was going for.

I know what you were going for: the U.N. is run by a bunch of Third World countries who hate us so I can ignore your evidence of UN resolutions in making your point. It's bullshit.

The majority of UN member states only hold seats in the General Assembly. The General Assembly is not empowered to make binding security resolutions. Only the Security Council can do that. That gives virtually all power - inlcluding those to create an Israeli state and not a Palestinian state - to the five permanent Security Council members: The US, Britain, France, Russia and China.

And the rest of the world doesn't hate us and everything I've posted about my experience attest to that.

So your point was so far off the mark - it was literally the opposite of the facts - I didn't take it seriously.

[Yerdaddy]

sailor, since you seem to be trying to misrepresent me

i havent said " i didnt mean it" - because i didnt say it pal.

where did i claim 'the victims are to blame for the terrorist attacks' or even imply that? show me a quote where i did.

to assume that is my opinion is to misunderstand what was actually said, infact a few people jumped on fezpaul for being off base with his conclusion

my analysis was that the administrations current foreign policy, crucially the continued support of the illegal occupation of Palestine, is the most important factor in bringing the terrorist attacks to US targets.

(i suppose there is an argument that policy in Iraq and breeches of the Geneva Convention at Guantanamo have become a more important factor in fuelling future attacks on US soil. time will tell. so ill keep 'foreign policy' in general in there.)

LIAR! You said you didn't say it in post #21. Not that I expect it to matter. They've only heard what they want to hear to this point.

[sailor]

sailor, since you seem to be trying to misrepresent me

i havent said " i didnt mean it" - because i didnt say it pal.

where did i claim 'the victims are to blame for the terrorist attacks' or even imply that? show me a quote where i did.

to assume that is my opinion is to misunderstand what was actually said, infact a few people jumped on fezpaul for being off base with his conclusion

my analysis was that the administrations current foreign policy, crucially the continued support of the illegal occupation of Palestine, is the most important factor in bringing the terrorist attacks to US targets.

(i suppose there is an argument that policy in Iraq and breeches of the Geneva Convention at Guantanamo have become a more important factor in fuelling future attacks on US soil. time will tell. so ill keep 'foreign policy' in general in there.)

blaming the "administration" for causing terrorist attacks is the same as blaming the people. if you folks don't want to see that, i have nothing further to say. and i forgot no one is allowed to disagree with yerdaddy. my bad.

[FezPaul]

Name one great Palestinian baseball player.....












....I rest my case.

[TheMojoPin]

blaming the "administration" for causing terrorist attacks is the same as blaming the people. if you folks don't want to see that, i have nothing further to say. and i forgot no one is allowed to disagree with yerdaddy. my bad.

So all "terrorist attacks" simply appear out of the ether?

To use your own jump to conclusions mat, you're seemingly saying that there is simply no cause and effect on ANY level when it comes to motivating/inspiring/whatever terrorists and terrorist organizations.

[high fly]

i dont know the exact number but i think it goes into the hundreds of UN resolutions against the legality of the occupation since 67.

here (http://www.jatonyc.org/UNresolutions.html)


"Israel's occupation of Palestine is Illegal.
Security Council Resolution 242, Nov. 22, 1967

Calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied in the war that year and "the acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized "boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Israel's settlements in Palestine are Illegal.
Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979

"Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."





SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
If Bush finds out, he'll want to invade!
We all know how touchy them right-wingers are when it comes to violating UN resolutions!


What we se now reminds me of Iraq which reminds me of Pat buchannon's spot-on prediction before the invasion that we would "take unto ourselves a California-sized West Bank to call our very own."

Look, the bloodshed has gone on so long over there and so many of the people are still in the Dark Ages, there is just no way we or anyone else are going to briing peace to the region. It's just one big nasty blood feud and there is no end in sight.

We can be some of the ones being killed or we can get the hell oit and let-em have at each other instead of us.


What we see on tv and read about in the papers should convince us and motivate us to understand we need a crash plan to cut the Mideast oil umbilical cord.....

[fohat]

Name one great Palestinian baseball player.....


Wait for it... (http://sports.yahoo.com/top/news?slug=ap-israelbaseballleague&prov=ap&type=lgns)

[Yerdaddy]

blaming the "administration" for causing terrorist attacks is the same as blaming the people. if you folks don't want to see that, i have nothing further to say. and i forgot no one is allowed to disagree with yerdaddy. my bad.

Arabs don't see it that way. They blame our government for their grievances but give the people a pass. As I've said many times, in the Middle East seemingly every Arab you meet asks you: "Hellowelcomewhereyoufrom?" It gets annoying as fuck. I never say "Canada". I say I'm American. And the standard response is "Ahhh! American people tamaam (good)! [Gives big thumbs up.] American govenment mush tamaam (not good)!" And then there's often elaborations of "American and Yemeni (or wherever I'm at) people like brothers [holds up crossed fingers]. Or explainations of how our governments steal elections and do what they want just like theirs.

So there is a clear distinction between our people and our government among Arabs. Why would mooch be incapable of making that distinction?

And you are allowed to argue with me. But if I disprove your arguments, (there are in fact no Third World anti-American countries who are permanent members of the UN Security Council - the source of the posted resolutions), you can't assume it's personal. What's the point of debate if nobody listens to the other guy, but is only trying to win by any means? I can understand personal connections to political issues that lead to emotional and one-sided arguments. But to treat bad and unfair arguements as legitimate is a waste of time and, certainly on this issue, makes the quest for understanding and viable solutions even harder to reach.

Trust me. I stopped taking this issue personal a long time ago.

[Yerdaddy]

Name one great Palestinian baseball player.....












....I rest my case.

I got hit on by a gay Palestinian in Yemen. Does he count?

[A.J.]

Name one great Palestinian baseball player......

I got hit on by a gay Palestinian in Yemen. Does he count?

Was he a pitcher or a catcher?

[Yerdaddy]

Was he a pitcher or a catcher?

You must have learned this about the Arabs in SA: only the catcher is gay. So this is actually a perfectly legitimate thing to say in the ME: "So I'm fucking this disgusting evil sinner faggot - may God burn him in a pit of fire - in the ass the other day out in right field and the batter hit one to me and we lost the game."

[ShapopoJoe]

Simply put...ANIMALS...SAVAGES....a good nuke enema would put all of those knuckle draggers in line....Jeezus , whats next? Britain wants Rhode ISland back and are willing to kill babies to get it? Friggin irrational whackjobs...

[moochcassidy]

Simply put...ANIMALS...SAVAGES....a good nuke enema would put all of those knuckle draggers in line....Jeezus , whats next? Britain wants Rhode ISland back and are willing to kill babies to get it? Friggin irrational whackjobs...

that is some well-put stupidity there professor. :thumbup:

im gonna steal that little passage.

priceless.

[FezPaul]

that is some well-put stupidity there professor. :thumbup:

im gonna steal that little passage.

priceless.

some of us are having a semblance of a grown up debate here maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan.

:unsure:

[moochcassidy]

there's your demo right there mate.

[FezPaul]

there's your demo right there mate.

Because all of those who disagree with you are all alike.

[TheMojoPin]

Simply put...ANIMALS...SAVAGES....a good nuke enema would put all of those knuckle draggers in line....Jeezus , whats next? Britain wants Rhode ISland back and are willing to kill babies to get it? Friggin irrational whackjobs...

Wow, way to resurrect a thread for some random and pointless ignorance.

[ShapopoJoe]

Wow, way to resurrect a thread for some random and pointless ignorance.

Shock and Awe baby

[FezPaul]

Wow, way to resurrect a thread for some random and pointless ignorance.

My ignorance is specific and pointed. :king:

[moochcassidy]

Shock and Awe baby

im in neither of those states

... did make me chuckle though

[FezPaul]

im in neither of those states




We demand a moochean state or we will start blowing things up!

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Palestinean kids these days. They blow up so quickly

[scottinnj]

You see, you don't need an American presence to start a civil war.
But there is no chance for peace without one.

[scottinnj]

Israel is sitting on the sidelines probably saying let them kill each other
No shit...they are probably stunned that the media hasn't found a way to blame them for it either.

[scottinnj]

If a stable, at least somewhat democratic Palestinian state that was friendly -- or at least tolerant towards -- Israel existed, a good deal of the turmoil in the Middle East would evaporate. Organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah would lose a great deal of their reason for being.

But, yet, this incompetent and criminal administration gave up on peace in Palestine and decided that a better way to spread "democracy" (sic) in the Middle East would be to overthrow Saddam and establish a "democracy" in Iraq. It's a crazy-ass neo-con fantasy that George Bush, like a rube heading for the ring toss, fell for.

(I believe there are conflicting motives for the war in Iraq. I think that for Bush, it truly is about making the world a better place, and/or hastening the rapture. For Cheney and his boys, it's about making money for Halliburton, Blackwater, and other friendly companies. They found the perfect rube for this plan, a President who wouldn't say "Why should we invade Iraq? al-Qaida's in Afghanistan! Get the fuck out of here!" like just about anyone else would.)





Look at my thumb.......gee your dumb.

[scottinnj]

Simply put...ANIMALS...SAVAGES....a good nuke enema would put all of those knuckle draggers in line....Jeezus , whats next? Britain wants Rhode ISland back and are willing to kill babies to get it? Friggin irrational whackjobs...



Ditto for this one too.