VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]
Subject: Re: Catch 22


Author:
JeffF
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 09:22:10 05/31/02 Fri
In reply to: Mark7 's message, "Catch 22" on 07:05:39 05/31/02 Fri
 Never, as far as I remember, have I suggested you were antisemitic. It's true we have some basic disagreements(and even some occasional agreement) but you are correct that you are entitled to your views in a democracy, whether or not I or anybody else regard them as misguided. If anything you are a little unfair to yourself. You cannot be held responsible for what a President you didn't vote for does, any more than the people in the equally democratic state of Israel who didn't vote for Sharon are responsible for his policies.
Further, let me say I don't believe in group judging. There are Jews I don't like. I don't have to like every Jewish person just because I'm Jewish. As for Arabs, I roomed with a Libyan for a while in college, over the objections of some Jews. Every person should be judged as an individual and I am happy to have lived with a Venezuelan, and an Iranian and a Vietnamese man as well as a Libyan while in college. It gives you a different perspective on the world to spend six months with somebody from a different country.
You want to say Israel is not a democracy because the democracy is flawed and incomplete. Tell me, Mark, was the US a democracy when women couldn't vote? Were we a democracy when blacks in the South were subjected to poll taxes and literacy requirements to keep them from voting?
We were far from perfect, but still more democratic than most places. We have been a flawed democracy ourself and it's a little hypocritical if we hold Israel to a standard we didn't follow ourself for many years.
And the self-defense issue is still critical. I repeat- there is no country that would not react to constant attacks on their civilians.
You are correct that Israel cannot win the war. Nobody can and peace is still there to be negotiated if the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab states ever get serious about it.
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Democracy and Human Rights


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 00:16:11 06/01/02 Sat
Democracy and Human Rights respect begins when people hold their own responsible.

Holding the enemy responsible is just vengeance, or justice, depending on the process. I would like to see Bin Laden brought to justice. I would like to see him and others like him facing their accusers in a court of law, preferably not a US, but an international court of law, like Milosevich is.

I would like the same fate for Sharon and Arafat.

Killing Bin Laden is just revenge. Revenge breeds on itself, and it may be what Bin Laden is seeking -martyrdom. It does not satisfy justice, just an animal instinct alive in all of us.

Real victory for all humanity is when Arabs and Muslims hold Bin Laden accountable and Jews punish Sharon for the Sabra and Shatilla massacre.

That's when human rights start to be respected.

The main victory America won in WW2 is not the military one. It is the fact that most Germans today understand and condemn the wrongs of yesterday.

While you and I can agree that Arafat and many Arabs do not condemn their own leaders' past wrongs, I believe we differ when it comes to Jews.

Jews (at least Israeli Jews, but I believe American Jews as well) refuse to see Palestinians as humans with the same basic rights they have.

Americans are also too quick to forgive our "wonderful military" the "brave gentlemen officers" bombing from their wonderful machines.

When this forgivness is soo easy given, and comes from "men of God" (aka evangelist crooks) our morality is a spit in the face of God instead of a reflection of God.

Murder is murder. Killing a 12 year old child is wrong. Getting away with it is even worse.

As for our Great Idiot Son let me ask you. Do you really believe that dictator Musharaf in Pakistan has nothing to do with the muslim terrorists that seem to act freely throuout his country?

Do you believe that the Saudi King has nothing to do with Al Qada, even though all his little princes and Sheiks do?

I do not believe the Idiot Bush had a comprehensive intelligent knowledge of the 9/11 attack. I am not so ignorant to believe that, nor do I believe that the Mossad did it.

But I do believe that the Idiot is acting in International politics like a damn drunken cowboy in a bar fight.

He is shooting from the hip, and keeps missing the terrorists while killing everybody in the damn room.

The idiot is in alliance with the worse criminals and fundamentalist terrorists of our times - the Saudis, the Pakistanis, and Ariel Sharon the butcher of Sabra and Chattila.

And who do conservative imbecils condemn? Who do our born again criminals want to figth? Europe. Norway, Sweeden, Switserland, Germany and oh, of course the Damn French - everybody hates the damn French.

We liberated their country in 1945 and they never thanked us - except, they liberated our country in the 18th century, gave us the symbol of our national spirit (the statue of liberty) and we never thanked them either.

So we and the French should be sqare.

And we hate them why? Because they don't join us in our Afgan Kamel hunt? Or because they don't buy and sell Palestinian scalps in Paris like we do in the US?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Democracy and Human Rights


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 07:52:53 06/03/02 Mon
"Democracy and Human Rights respect begin when people hold their own responsible."
Ok as far as it goes and our system is set up to do it. Anybody can be voted out, except judges and anybody can be impeached, including judges. The military has courtmartials. At every level, there is accountability.
But how far are you willing to take this? Do you think we owe blacks monetary reparations for slavery even though those alive today were not slaves? When is there a statute of limitation so that we don't hold people today responisible for the past they didn't create?

If you want me to defend Musharaf, you've got the wrong guy. Pakistan was the country that allowed Bin Laden's people to operate freely and that set up the Taliban to rule Afghanastan. Beyond that, he led a coup that threw off the elected leader of Pakistan, who although admittedly corrupt did not need to be thrown over in this manner by military men. The situation between India and Pakistan, both of whom have nuclear weapons, is very dangerous and Musharaf has the major responsibility.

"Killing Bin Laden is just revenge"

In this case, revenge by itself is justified, considering the number of civilian dead, but beyond that it's also justice. The problem with the idea of an international court, rather than the US court is that it would rule out a death penalty. I'm not usually a supporter of the death penalty, but Bin Laden is a special case. Yes, his death could provoke revenge, but he is a greater danger alive, even in prison.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Democracy and Human Rights


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 19:27:39 06/03/02 Mon
"The main victory America won in WW2 is not the military one. It is the fact that most Germans today understand and condemn the wrongs of yesterday."

I just read this same sentiment from theologian Stanley Hauerwas, a Christian pacifist. While the conclusion makes sense, HOW did the Germans come to realize this without the military victory? And would there have been MacArthur and nation-building if there hadn't been the A-bomb?

Can you make peace -- truly a just peace -- without first having victory?

Katherine
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Democracy and Human Rights


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 08:43:21 06/04/02 Tue
That's a good point,KJ and I would again add, can you make peace without a partner for it? Who is there in the Palestinian leadership or the leadership of most of the Arab states willing to sit down and negotiate an actual peace treaty with Israel and then observe it?

We do need to help rebuild Afghanastan, but we need to help get it stable first. We helped rebuild Germany and Japan economically, but we also helped local leaders develop democratic institutions and this is the same thing we need to do now. It's a truism at least in recent times that democracies don't attack other democracies. The more countries that incorporate democratic institutions, the greater the chance for peace.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Question for Jeff


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 23:26:13 06/04/02 Tue
If Israel pretends that all it's doing in Gaza and the West Bank is "defending", please tell me one simple thing:

What are the borders of Israel? Where does Israel begin, and where does it end?

Does it include Gaza and the West Bank or not?

If Gaza and the West Bank are part of Israel, Israel is a racist country, because it only gives citizenship to those of a particular religion.

If Gaza and the West Bank are not part of Israel,and Israel has no plans for territorial expansion, than what is the purpose of the settlements?

And if Israel has the right to self-defense, even outside the borders of it's country, how come Palestinians have no right of self defense even in their own bedrooms?

Why don't you answer those moral questions, before you point the finger of "terrorism" to men trying to defend their homes against F16s, tanks and Appache Helicopters.

I would hope American men would have the same fighting determination should our country and our homes should be invaded by an enemy superior in military power.

Please answer the questions, if you have any answers, and don't give any BS about Arafat and how things are "complicated".

Things are not complicated. They are very simple.

Countries have borders. People born inside those borders are citizens. Citizens have rights in democracies.

Countries occupy territories in war. They sometimes ANNEX those territories, and then give citizenship to all inhabitants of those territories.

Other times, they do not annex terrirories, but then they cannot build PERMANENT CIVILIAN SETTLEMENTS.

If they annex the territories and give citizenship selectively based on religion and ethnicity, countries are not democracies, they are FUNDAMENTALIST RACIST COUNTRIES.

Where is Israel? Where is the Israeli government? Where is the American Jewish community?

With democracy or with fundamentalist racism?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Some answers


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 07:42:05 06/05/02 Wed
"What are the borders of Israel?" "Where does Israel begin and end?"
The answer to this question has not been permanently decided. This can only be fixed through negotiations. Personally, I still hope that security guarantees can be exchanged for giving up the rest of the West Bank and Gaza, but this was the idea of Oslo and so far, Israel is far from secure.

"And if Israel has the right to self-defense, even outside the borders of it's country, how can Palestinians have no right of self defense, even in their own bedrooms?"
Innocent Palestinians have a right to self defense. All civilians of any area who haven't participated in terrorist activities always have the right to self defense.

"Why don't you answer these moral questions, before you point the finger of terrorism to men trying to defend their homes against F16s, tanks and Appache Helicopters?"

Nice diversion, but the people in the disco, the people in the cafes, the people at the Passover Seder, etc were not in possesion of tanks or helicopters. These innocent civilians were the target of terrorists.

"Countries have borders. People born inside those borders are citizens"
Let's remember that the West Bank and Gaza were captured from Jordan. This was all Jordanian territory until it became Israeli territory. The final status of the captured territories is not determined. Some has been given to the PA and some has not at this point. Barak offered them much more and they turned it down. They can still get a lot more territory back. Ultimately, keeping the West Bank and Gaza is not in Israels best interest, but they will need a lot of guarantees of safety and a negotiating partner before they can do this.

"Other times, they do not annex territories, but they cannot build PERMANENT CIVILIAN SETTLEMENTS"

The settlements are not necessarily permanent. Remember that the settlements thought to be permanent in the Sinai were torn down and the settlers moved after the agreement with Egypt. Mubarak says he is coming to the US with new proposals to break the impasse and I'm curious to hear what he has to say.

"Where is Israel?"
Defending itself against attacks on civilians, just as any other country would. Hoping for an international conference including the surrounding Arab states, because no peace will hold if they don't sign off on it and take part in it. Hoping somebody will emerge in the Palestinian leadership who is serious about negotiating peace.

"Where is the Israeli government?"
Deeply divided in the manner of coalition governments. I concede that Sharon is not the person most likely to negotiate peace, but you can't be sure. That's what they said about Begin and he completed the treaty with Egypt. At any rate, Sharon can be voted out at any time if Labor bolts and forces new elections.

"Where is the American Jewish community?
Most American Jews backed the Oslo agreements, which led to the PA coming to power and taking control of some of the West Bank and Gaza. Now, American Jews are uneasy, wondering if it was a mistake since security is not increased on the one hand, but thinking the territories will have to be let go at some point on the other hand. Still hoping that something can be negotiated, but wondering what it will take for the PA to get serious about negotiations. Most American Jews didn't back Sharon's election, but he is the democratically elected head of Israel and entitled to defend his civilians. In favor of democracy? Yes, but also in favor of a real, just and comprehensive peace.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Palestinian Right to Self-defense


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 00:17:02 06/06/02 Thu
How was a Palestinian civilian in Jenin who's house has been teared down by an Israli tank supposed to exercise his right of self defense?

And why should I pay for the Israeli tank or the Appache helicopter that demolished the Palestinian house?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Yesterday


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 07:43:45 06/06/02 Thu
Yesterday, 17 civilians on a bus were killed. Israel reacted and retaliated. What other country wouldn't have done so? It's not an ideal policy by any means, but what choice do they have?

I do say again that I don't like the house demolishments and think this is a counterproductive policy that Israel should do away with. It's very difficult for civilians anywhere to excersize their right to self defense. The people on the bus yesterday didn't have a chance. If unarmed civilians who were not involved in terrorist activity were deliberately hit by Israeli tanks in Jenin, then there needs to be an investigation and charges need to be brought. Soldiers are not immune from charges in a democracy, but we know by now that because the PA says something happened does not mean it happened. An internal investigation of the whole situation in Jenin should take place.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Internal Investigation?


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 22:40:25 06/06/02 Thu
Who would lead the investigation? Sharon's buddies and the orthodox rabbis? You make me laugh Jeff.

What you are telling me is that Palestinians have no right of self defense. According to your own posts, the Israeli army can do with them as it wills, and it should be subject only to "internal investigations".

What do you think would have been revealed if the Nazzi holocaust was investigated by a Wermacht "internal investigation"?

And you are telling me that collective punishments and house demolitions against civilians are legitimate self defense methods because of what Hamas does, but if a bus full of IDF soldiers is blown it is terrorism.

Do you really think Israel can get away with this mentality, this ethics and this morality for ever?

Do you really think the entire world is as stupid as those who voted for Bush? I doubt anybody with any brains has any doubt of the true aims of the state of Israel - ethnic clensing and land robbery. Murder is just the side effect - greed works.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Internal Investigation?


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 07:57:06 06/07/02 Fri
Putting words in my mouth again, Mark? :-)
I say again I don't like the house demolition policy. I think it's counterproductive and punishing innocent families lets the world forget that Israel is the victim here. Plus, it just breeds a desire for revenge. Making people homeless is not a helpful step towards future peace. I think the demolition of houses should be abolished as a policy.
An internal investigation could be conducted by either the judicial system or the military itself(similar to the Mai Lai investigation in this country) or by an independant commission. This is how things are done in democracies, Mark.
If the Nazis had had an independant judiciary or any independant body that could investigate things without being punished by Hitler or his henchman, that would have been different. Remember, that the Israeli judiciary is not subject to the orders of the elected leader of the state.
And Germany did conduct investigations of Nazis after the Nazis were defeated. Only the first few trials were conducted by the allies and the Nazi finance minister who was found innocent at Nuremberg was convicted by a German court later.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Israel is the Victim?


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 21:44:29 06/07/02 Fri
This is where you err. "Israel" is not the victim. The people who were killed by Palestinians are the victims. And the people who's houses are demolished by IDF are the victims. The Palestinians who are killed by "accident" are the victims. But most important, the Palestinian children growing today in Gaza and the West Bank are the victims. Innocent victims of land greed, fundamentalism, racism and American aid.

Where you fail and where America is failing is to see the equalness of those victimized.

But if you just count the victims, there are far more on the Palestinian side. There is a three to one ratio of killings in favor of Israel. There are also the people left homeless and countryless. And as long as America, Israel, and the Jewish community fails to understand their humanity, their suffering, the "war on terrorism" will have the same fate as the "war on drugs".

The one victim I am mostly concerned is democracy and freedom in America. Bush is not above the morals of a dictator.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Civilians?


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 21:41:46 06/06/02 Thu
I read that the yesterday attack was carrying soldiers. Check your reference.

Anyhow, you still didn't answer my question about how should a Palestinian exercise his right to self defense against a Galil tank, driven over his house.

And how is Israel exercising its right of self defense today? By buldozing 3 more Palestinian civilian homes to make room for more settlements.

It seems to me that Israel's right to self defense is to rob it's neighbour of their homes and land and then whine about terrorism.

As for the Jenin investigation, there never was one. There was no investigation because the Israeli government does not believe in any kind of justice for Palestinians.

And our born again idiots agree with them.

But check your facts on the buss. It was a bus loaded with SOLDIERS. The same soldiers who probably kill 12 year olds and demolish homes to build settlements.

Jeff, you can beat around the bush as long as you want, but the truth is very clear.

Israel is the one who doesn't want peace. They want land. And this terrorism business is a good argument made by TV evangelists for the consumption of born again idiots (like Bush).

I say fine, OK - let Sharon do whatever, but let's stop financing Israel. They should kill 12 year old children and rob them with their own money not mine.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: OK


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 07:48:25 06/07/02 Fri
I read more and I concede that a number of the dead on the bus were soldiers. Soldiers who were young people returning from furloughs. Let's try putting names with faces. David Stanislavski, a Ukranian wasn't supposed to be on the bus,but he had a short leave and had gone home to visit his mother. Four of the dead were from Netanya, the same community where the hotel dining room was hit on March 27th killing 29 people. No peace for the tiny coastal community.
One of the surviving soldiers, Tzvika said "We're soldiers but we're young people too. We're supposed to grow up together, dream together. Instead, I'm waiting around here, crying, going from one funeral to another. Is there ever going to be an end to this?"
The truth is very clear, Mark, no matter how much you dodge. Fact one - terrorism exists and the targets aren't just soldiers. It's the people in restaurants, pool halls, celebrating holidays, busses, cafes, etc. It's a nice diversion to bring up evangelists, but Pat Robertson didn't create suicide bombers. The media and education system and Moslem sheiks created them. Fact 2 - Land for peace is and has been the Israeli policy for years. The PA turned down the offer. Nevertheless, it remains the policy that most Israelis long for. Fact 3 - Settlements are not permanent if peace is ever truly available and desired by the PA. They can still be torn down and the settlers moved. This is not a guess. We have a precedent. This is exactly what happened with the treaty with Egypt. It's a cold peace, but it's still a peace and almost nobody has been killed in a battle between Egypt and Israel for years. You would think the PA and Syria would learn something from this. Israel has always been willing to exchange land for peace and the border between Israel and Egypt has been fairly safe for years now. I'm still curious to hear Mubaraks proposal. He has a better chance to break the impasse than most people.
Fact 5 - No matter how much you keep dodging this one - any other democracy would have reacted to the constant attacks on their civilians. We cannot hold Israel to a higher standard than we hold other democracies too. We have reacted to attacks on our civilians. India may justifiably react to attacks on her civilians.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Soldiers are Soldiers in War


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 21:51:18 06/07/02 Fri
If you remember from my antics with Ethan, I said that I believe the army is the most insane institution invented by man. I also said I oppose conscription and I believe that anybody who volunteers for military should know what he/she is getting into.

Soldiers are legitimate targets in war.

How about we put some names and stories behind the thousands of Palestinian children killed by Israeli army? Or about the thousands of "accidents" or maybe about the millions displaced by the IDF?

You denny the right of Palestinians to self defense, you denny them humanity, you denny them the right to live as human beings. Can you understand this at all? Or do you really believe their humanity is less than the Jewish one?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Are they?


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 08:23:45 06/10/02 Mon
First, how are soldiers riding on a bus a legitimate target? It was an ambush by suicide bombers.
Beyond that, you say you oppose conscription and so do I, but soldiers who are concripted don't usually have much of a choice. Not every soldier in Israel's army agrees with the policy of Sharon, any more than a lot of soldiers drafted here have always agreed with the wars this country is in.
Names and stories of the Palestinian children killed? Go ahead, but always make sure it's the whole story. No shooting of a unarmed child by anybody on any side is ever justified.
Deny them the right to live as human beings? Nonesense. I long for the time they are willing to actually negotiate peace and the West Bank can be put totally under legitimate(hopefully elected) Palestinian Authority in exchange for security guarantees. I don't know whether that time will come in my lifetime, but I'm not willing to give up hope.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: They are


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 22:40:47 06/10/02 Mon
Soldiers on a bus are a more legitimate target than residents of Jenin who's homes have been flattened by Israeli tanks.

You have to be blind not to see on TV the plain intention to destroy those tanks had over there. They were driving on purpose over parked cars, rather than in the middle of the road.

Oh, I forgot, what a nice Jewish settlement would be built on that site.

We talk about morals in this country and about 10 commandments, and we aid a country and a military who breakes most of them.

Soldiers on a bus are a more legitimate target than Palestinian civilians in their homes.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Hm


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 08:41:04 06/11/02 Tue
Following your logic, was the Pentagon a legitimate target on the 11th? Where are you going to draw the line? Was it a fair military target, in your opinion, even though there were plenty of civilians working there?
These lines aren't as simple as you may think. Besides, what choice do draftees have but to either serve or go to jail, unless they have an exemption? Of course, the big difference between soldiers serving in Israel and those who served in Vietnam here is that the Israeli soldiers are fighting to defend their country where civilians are attacked by suicide bombers and others. Recruitment is up in the US after the 11th. The desire to join the military goes up when the country has been directly attacked. Nobody knew why we were in Vietnam. Everybody knows why Israel has to defend itself against attacks on their civilians(like any other country).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Hm


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 23:59:21 06/11/02 Tue
Whether you or I like it or not, the Pentagon is a military target. Any military analyst in any conflict scenario would have drawn a situation where the communications headquarters is hit first, more often than not without much of a warning.

This is what we did in Yugoslavia, this is what we did in Iraq, and mostly anywhere else. We would have done the same in Afganistan with the exception that Afganistan didn't have much of a central military communications system.

While I am not happy the Pentagon was hit, if you think a bit, you realize that anybody with half a brain would have expected to have it hit in any conflict situation.

The only reason it was hit was the arrogance of our superpower status.

I am not happy the Pentagon was hit, and I am not happy that Israeli soldiers are killed. The difference between us is that I see that we are treating Palestinian civilians EXACTLY the same Osama Bin Laden treats Americans in the WTC.

We hold them collectively responsible for the deeds of their governements.

We kill Afgan peasants, Palestinian women and cildren in the name of our President's "Cruciade" with his born again fundamentalists.

Osama kills American and Jewish civilians in the name of his Jihad. Sharon kills women and children in the name of Zionism.

The difference between me and you is that you are blinded by your racism and Jewishness and fail to see the humanity of your enemy, and the inhumanity done in your cause.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Clafying my position


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 09:53:03 06/12/02 Wed
I see the humanity of ordinary people, not involved in terrorist activities. I've said before that I think some of Israels policy is counterproductive and will not help establish peace in the long run. I dislike the house demolishments and I dislike people being held without trial.
What you fail to see is that suicide bombers and other attacks on civilians don't just hurt Israel ulimately they hurt the Palestinians. Most of the Isreali public favored peace negotiations, but now, even those on the left have doubts. They see that since Oslo and the installment of the Palestinian administration, peace has not increased and people live in constant fear. I still hope the day comes when the Palestinians can control all of the West Bank and Gaza, but where are the leaders who will step forward and negotiate actual peace with Israel, including a police force that actually stops terrorism, instead of encouraging it?
I'll look for the column of Sharon that Forest mentioned and get back to both of you.
One question though, Mark. How is Israel reacting to terrorism any different than say Britain reacting to Irish terrorism or India reacting to Kashmir terrorists or the Phillipines reacting to Islamic terrorists? I repeat - all countries react to attacks on civilians.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: There is no peace without justice


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 23:54:24 06/13/02 Thu
You cannot rob a people of it's land, it's dignity, it's right to live and it's way of life, keep doing it and expect peace.

Israel needs to offer justice to ordinary Palestinians who's homes it robbed at gunpoint.

You, me, the US, Arafat, the war criminal Sharon, Hamas, and the great fundamentalist retard that rules America cannot change the fundamental fact that Palestinians have lost their homes at gunpoint.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: So they are right/justified to blow themselves up? (nt)


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 13:14:23 06/14/02 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Oh, and murder a few other ppl in the process.


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 13:15:28 06/14/02 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Who's to justify them?


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 12:17:15 06/16/02 Sun
What would you tell your husband, your grown son to do if the enemy would come at the door of your house with a gun and tell you to pack and leave your house so they can own it?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Who's to justify them?


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 11:41:19 06/18/02 Tue
There is a non sequitur in your message, but I'm not smart enough to articulate it.

Katherine
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Who's to justify them?


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 14:04:23 06/18/02 Tue
Can you justify the attack today on another bus, this time it wasn't soldiers. More civilians, many of them children were killed or injured. Do you think this actually helps the Palestinian cause? If they want to keep the focus on whether the settlements are illegal and whether they can have a completely independant state, suicide bombers attacking a bus full of children doesn't help. Put the moral questions aside, and on a purely practical level, it does nothing to get the Palestinians closer to their goal.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Terrorism


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 22:34:21 06/18/02 Tue
Terrorism is terrorism. It is bad no matter if it is a suicide bomber, or a helicopter pilot shooting from a safe distance.

An eye for an eye. Both Arabs and Jews believe in an eye for an eye, and that's why there are so many blind people in the Middle East.

There will be more suicide bombers and more torture in Israeli prisons, more "targetted assassinations".

All those are terrorist acts, weather Burp the great retarded leader can articulate them as such.

What does Israeli and Arab killing each other's children have to do with my paying for it?

Why should American taxpayers pay to support Israeli terror against Arab terror?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: You justify them


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 22:39:56 06/18/02 Tue
Katherine, I cannot distinguish between Zionism and Muslim fundamentalism. I cannot differenciate between Jihad and Crudiade. I cannot see the difference between "targetted assassination", torture of prisoners in Israeli jails and Arab terrorism.

I am not as smart as the great drunken cowboy.

To me, a Palestinian is entitled to the same right to his home as anybody else. I would kill for my home, if I had to.

I don't see why do we support unconditionally Israel, when both Jews and Arabs believe in an eye for an eye.

And I don't give a damn if all Jews and Arabs are killing each other's children in the name of God, or if they are all going blind.

I just refuse to be dupped by Born Again idiots like the Great Retarded Ruler as to the need for Americans to follow the middle east.

Stop aiding either side ASAP. We need the money at home.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Book for you, Jeff:


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 14:32:46 06/07/02 Fri
It's called "But Was it Just?". It's a compilation of essays about the Gulf War. One of the essays discusses the land for peace proposition, and the author states that doesn't work -- you need peace for peace. Trick is how to get that without invoking the "Sharon principle": "When there is victory, then there will be peace."

Katherine
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: There will be no victory, only losses


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 21:54:29 06/07/02 Fri
The more a nation is oppressed, the more it will react.

The "war on terrorism" is a Bush idiocy that cannot be won.

The more we Americans are USED by Israel to pay for their dirty deeds against 5 million people, the more we expose our own loved ones to the anger and retaliation of those we victimize.

Look at history - we will lose against the Palestinians because we are clearly in the wrong. We are paying for the weapons that keep them in bondage.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Strange


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 17:44:32 06/08/02 Sat
the Nazis did worse deeds to 6 million Jews, and the Germans seems to have forgiven us for smashing up Dresden.

Perhaps Rawlin is right and the Palestinians not worth the powder it would take to blow them away after all?

Katherine

(Ignore the other post -- I put it in the wrong place)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: And another thing


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 17:47:30 06/08/02 Sat
I don't think we're being half the "chumps" for Israel that the Palestinians are for the Arab nations.

Katherine
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: I agree with that


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 21:16:05 06/08/02 Sat
Palestinians have been used and abused by other Arabs for the most despicable reasons. Before anybody makes me some Arab lover, try to remember some of my posts on DP related to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

I think our cozy relation with the Saudis and Kuwaitis is just another creation of the Bush Oil cartel and has no bearing to the interests of the people of the US.

Neither Saudis, nor Kuwaitis, Egiptians or Israelis are our friends, and frankly neither justifies in any way the amounts we spend for their upkeep.

That does not mean that we are not paying for the guns that kill Palestinians and rob them of their land.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Book for you, Jeff:


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 08:17:32 06/10/02 Mon
Thanks, KJ. I'll take a look at it when I have a chance.
Sure, you need peace for peace, but how do you get that? You have to make sure both sides are actually committed to peace and not just signing treaties. Remember, a lot of the terms of the agreement at Oslo has been violated by the PA, as most recently in the weapons shipment from Iran for example.
The best hope for peace could come from the next generation. Programs to get teens from among Palestinians and Jews to get to know each other in this country have sometimes worked pretty well.
Nevertheless, when peace is acheived, even a cold peace like the one with Egypt, it has held and that is a precedent of how land for peace can work if both sides are interested.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Hey jeff


Author:
Forest
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 15:46:16 06/11/02 Tue
thought of you when I read Sharon's column in the NYTimes sunday op ed (might have been monday) did you see it? what did you think?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Hey jeff


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 09:42:05 06/12/02 Wed
Hi, Forest,
Thanks for alerting me to the article. I haven't seen it yet, but I'll look for it and get back to you. With Sharon, I'm not going to prejudge what I think of it, until I look at it.
Good to see you here!

To Mark,
It's a treaty issue. The Iranian arms shipment violates the Oslo agreement. It would help get further agreements if this agreeement was lived up to.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Treaties


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 23:58:12 06/13/02 Thu
Just a post or two ago you said that Israel doesn't abide by any international agreements.

So your "moral" Israel refuses to abide by treaties for human rights, treaties for non-nuclear use and proliferation, treaties against weapons of mass distruction, Geneva Convention for rules of modern war, the UN Council resolutions but expects Palestine to abide by Oslo that takes away their right to self defend their homes against Israeli tanks?

Quite hypocritical of Israel if you ask me.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Sharon's article


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 12:30:04 06/12/02 Wed
He is correct that this whole situation is the result of the 1967 war that Israel was forced into(and begged King Hussein to stay out of. As he points out, Israel only entered the West Bank in self-defense after it's cities were under fire.
He is further correct that the UN resolution 242 which established the land for peace principle insisted that Israel had a right to secure and recognized boundaries. This was the basis for the treaty with Egypt and for the Oslo agreement, which put the PA in charge of most of the West Bank and Gaza. The PA leadership started the current war after the failure of Camp David.
He is also right that a regional agreement is needed. I've said before no peace between the Palestinians and Israel will hold unless it is part of a more comprehensive peace and the Syrians and others sign off on it. He's also right that peace is most likely to come through interim steps rather than a rushed and unrealistic timetable. This article is generally Sharon in a more thoughtful mood than usual and I agre with a lot of it. If Mark hasn't seen it, maybe you can post it for him.
However, I disagree that Israel cannot negotiate under fire. That's too blanket a statement. Negotiations are sometimes necessary while hostilities are going on. It would be nice to have a partner in negotiations that you can trust, but even if you don't, you should keep talking and see whether there is a way out of the impasse. I like his idea for a regional conference, but I think it has to include Palestinians, or it won't accomplish much. It still might not, but it's worth a try.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Here we go back to self defense


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 23:50:12 06/11/02 Tue
The most hypocritical issue in the US press is the issue of the arms shipment for Palestinians from Iran.

How many shipments of weapons did we sent to Israel in the last year? God only knows, about 3 or 4 billion with a B worth of Apache helicopters, F16s, A1 tanks and the like.

I don't know if this is an American issue, or an Israeli issue, but in my mind it goes back to a primitive racisism.

Israelis are supposed to have the right to self defense even with an A1 tank through the livingroom of an Arab, while the Palestinians are refused the most basic right of all, the right to defend their homes.

It is racism, pure and simple in it's most primitive form.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here we go back to self defense


Author:
Pam
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 12:56:04 06/12/02 Wed
So if China tried to take over Canada and the US sent weapons to Canada, it would be because we're racist and don't like Orientals? I don't think it's a race issue at all, it's an issue over who the government thinks is right (for whatever reasons, oil, religion, politics).

Pam
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: self defense more like this


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 22:03:59 06/13/02 Thu
In your China taking over Canada example:

China sends troops to conquer Canada. They declare Canada an "occupied territory". Then, they strip Canadians of all rights, they force them out of their homes at gunpoint, confiscate their homes and bring millions of Chinese to live in Canada in secluded "settlements".

When Canadians try to protest they are shot from Apache American made and American paid and donated helicopter gunships.

They buldoze Canadian towns as collective punishment for protest, they restrict the right of Canadians to travel, they take away all mineral rights for Canadians, they restrict building permits to Chinese only.

Canadian protesters, including 12 year old "youth" are shot dead in the streets from tanks and helicopters which are made in the US and donated by our generous Congress to the Chinese so they can stop "Canadian terrorism".

Our Congress votes some 4 or 5 billion US$s to the Chinese in weapons systems every year because of the strong American Chinese lobby who would make it impossible for any American politician to get elected if they refuse this "aid".

And then we will have the damn Bible thumping Right Wing criminals telling us how Canadians have a culture of death, and actually according to the Bible, Confucius received Canada as a gift from God.


Get the picture?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Strange . . .


Author:
KatherineJ
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 17:42:29 06/08/02 Sat
the Nazis did worse deeds to 6 million Jews, and the Germans seems to have forgiven us for smashing up Dresden.

Perhaps Rawlin is right and the Palestinians not worth the powder it would take to blow them away after all?

Katherine
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Did it come from the Dresden bombing?


Author:
Mark7
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 09:05:12 06/04/02 Tue
What would you think? Do you think the Germans realized that from the Dresden bombing that killed more than at Hiroshima?

I don't think so. They were losing more people on the Russian front on a daily basis.

I think it came later, when they met the returning POWs. Both those held by the British the Americans and those surviving the Russians.

Maybe the difference in treatment had something to do with it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: About POWs


Author:
JeffF
[ Edit | View ]
Date Posted: 13:43:39 06/04/02 Tue
Did Germany have propoganda about what would happen to prisoners of war in allied custody? I ask this because I know Japan did. Japanese prisoners in British or American custody were shocked that the tortures they expected did not come to pass. Japanese propoganda had taught soldiers(and nurses) to prefer death to capture, because they made up horror stories of what capture would be like.

I don't think anybody is saying that WWII was won by America alone. That would be absurd. The RAF defense of England was essential. As Churchill said, "never have so many owed so much to so few". Of course, you have a point about the Russians. Hitler essentially lost the war when he opened up a second front and the Russians had to defend their own territory day after day. Of course, if Stalin hadn't signed the nonagression pact with Hitler to begin with, some of history might have been different, like the dismemberment of Poland by both countries.
I'm not going to defend the bombing of the civilians at Dresden, except to point out again that it's hard to think of a war in which civilians were not killed. With modern technolgical capabilities, it was a horrible inevitability that this would get worse and kill more people. Ultimately, the Nazis were responsible for this too. If you care about your own civilians, you don't start an aggressive war against other countries and kill so many of their civilians.
What actually helped was the mercy shown by the allies after the uncoditional surrender of the axis powers. People were put on trial rather than shot and some were found innocent in both Japan and Germany.
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-6
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.