Israel And Gaza

[GeauxTo]

Violence looms over Mideast talks (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/06/21/mideast.summit/index.html)
(06/20/2005 © CNN)
Israel's plan to withdraw from Gaza this summer is expected to be a key topic as Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas meet in Jerusalem. But a recent spate of violence in the region may cast a shadow over talks.

I can only imagine the exhaustion Israel must feel regarding the war with their neighborhood thugocracy, and this is why they wish to capitulate and end this. But this is precisely the feeling the Islamofascists wish to engender, and reasonable people have no business, and no legitimate compulsion, to negotiate with people whose main ploy is to blow up school buses and pizzerias.

;)

[Volnooga]

With so much didtrust between the two groups and neither wanting the other to think they have "won", getting one to make the first move towards peace is almost impossible. And even if that did happen, the other side would still not accept that there are no alterior motives.

[Cianne]

Both sides need to start over. I don't think Sharon is that much better than Arafat was.

Islamists blow up a restaurant.
Israelis roll tanks in and blow stuff up to a greater degree.

[OmahaBound]

Both sides need to start over. I don't think Sharon is that much better than Arafat was.

Islamists blow up a restaurant.
Israelis roll tanks in and blow stuff up to a greater degree.

yeah, i agree. palestinian terrorists that blow up innocent people are just as wrong and evil as al-quada trying to destroy us. the palestinian gov't itself is highly culpable as well since they do nothing to stop these terrorists. but as long as the israeli response is to shoot a missile into a crowded apt. complex that houses one of the terrorist ring leaders and lots of innocent people, there is zero chance of progress (not that there's much chance of this ever being resolved in my lifetime anyway).

of course there's also the issue of the wall they are building. they're basically cutting several sections of palestinian owned land in half, making it pretty much impossible for farmers to tend to their own land on the other side of the wall. the world court decided the wall was illegal, but since the world court's decisions aren't binding israel simply ignored them.

think about it this way....say we have some militants in the U.S. who decide that Toronto and Montreal should be controlled by the U.S. because that's what God wants. We would all say that these militants are completely wrong to be killing innocent canadiens and should be stopped (which admittedly most of the palestinians don't say, but that's not really the point of my analogy). needless to say canada would be pissed as well, but if they were to fire a missile into my apt. building to kill just one of the ringleaders and instead killed a couple dozen of my friends and neighbors, i would be INCREDIBLY pissed and all of a sudden canada would pretty much become my enemy. if your response would be any different then you're a better person than i.

i'd imagine some would say that since palestinians aren't coming out to stop the terrorists in their land they are just as guilty. i can see how you could make that argument, but the sentence should not be death, and that's why i refer to them as 'innocent' victims of the israeli missiles.

basically when it comes to killing and detaining terrorists, israel has every right to something. but what they have been doing doesn't help the situation at all...at least that's my opinion.

[Tator]

I think they are right to put up the wall. The bombings have decreased significantly since the wall went up and the only recent bombing happened in an area where the wall has not been completed. They are doing what they have to do, in order to stop the murder of their people. I can't speak negatively about that.

[Neo]

I think they are right to put up the wall. The bombings have decreased significantly since the wall went up and the only recent bombing happened in an area where the wall has not been completed. They are doing what they have to do, in order to stop the murder of their people. I can't speak negatively about that.


Tator summed up what I was going to say. :cool:

[Neo]

Both sides need to start over. I don't think Sharon is that much better than Arafat was.

Islamists blow up a restaurant.
Israelis roll tanks in and blow stuff up to a greater degree.


If it wasn't for the Palestinian suicidal bombers, then the wall wouldn't be there in the first place. :cool:

The Palestinians are savages to say the least and Israel has every right to defend herself against such threats. I find it funny that the Islamic countries/people still haven't learned anything from the six (6) day war of 1967.

For those of you that don't know, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iran all attacked Israel at the same time and got their a$$es handed to them in a brown paper bag.

That was also the closest that the Israelis came to using nuclear weapons in the history of the nation. According to what I read, the Israelis had the bombs loaded and ready to go on a moments notice. :cool:

[Cianne]

All of the conflict was furthered by crappy politics in the early 1900s and the inability to share a hill that holds significant value for three religions.

A Palestinian blowing up a restaurant killing 2 or 3 people still doesn't warrant rolling in tanks and blowing up children in the streets by the bucketfulls. I'm not saying either side is right but more like both sides are wrong. It all needs to be re-evaluated. Abbas needs to gain control of the whackjobs that followed Arafat around and Sharon needs to get his hand away from the button.

[Neo]

A Palestinian blowing up a restaurant killing 2 or 3 people still doesn't warrant rolling in tanks and blowing up children in the streets by the bucketfulls. I'm not saying either side is right but more like both sides are wrong. It all needs to be re-evaluated. Abbas needs to gain control of the whackjobs that followed Arafat around and Sharon needs to get his hand away from the button.


First of all, I have yet to hear about a bombing that only killed 2-3 people. Usually it's in the dozens. :cool:

Secondly, there's only one action that terrorists understand. FORCE. :cool: An example would be Moammar Gaddafi. He screwed with us and we put the touch to his head about fourteen (14) years ago. Now he's considered a *Moderate* in the region and we haven't heard a peep since.

You cannot negoitate with a terrorist. You cannot negoitate with someone that has sworn to your death and destruction. I applaud Ariel Sharon for his endeavors and support him 100%. :cool:

[OmahaBound]

i don't have a problem with a wall....i have a problem with the wall they put up.... you can't just separate someone from land that they own like that...how hard would it have been to make the wall a little more curvy to not steal land away from palestinians...it just indicates a complete disdain for all palestinians, not just the terrorists.


as far as gaddafi is concerned, i personally believe that was a monetary decision on his part. i suppose if the 'force' you are referring to would include fiscal sanctions, then i suppose i would have to agree with you. the individual soldiers/terrorists might be fighting for religion and freedom, but the leaders are fighting for power and money.

[uscrebel]

Sorry, but there really are no good guys in this conflict. Not the Palestinians, not the Israelis, not the Western powers. We seem to overlook the fact that the Israelis started out as Zionist terrorists and their history of terror, assassination and intimidation goes back over a hundred years. It was only the immense guilt that the Allied Powers felt after not stopping the Holacaust that enabled the creation of the Israeli State.

Since then, both sides have traded in brutal attack and reprisal with less and less regard for collateral damage as each year passes. I have to agree with Neo on at least one point, a bomb that only kills one or two Israelis is a very rare event.

Our compelling interest in the region is and always has been oil. I actually think that if we were up front about that things would be dramatically different. For instance, instead of saying we support the right of Israel to be an independent nation we ought to say, "We are most concerned that the oil in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East continues to flow at a moderate price. We will kick anybody's a** who stands in the way of that goal."

During the Cold War, when we saw the Soviet Union as a threat, instability in the Middle East really worked for us. The Soviets had to spend a good deal of their very thin profit margins shoring up Arab allies. Now, however, we have no significant enemy, so the instability itself has become our enemy. The list of former allies who are now enemies begins with Sadaam Hussein through Bin Laden and the Mujahadeen.

The greatest thing about this is that it is one of the few areas in which we find bi-partisian cooperation. Yes, both conservative Republicans and Liberal Democrats have had a hand in stirring this pot, as has every administration since Nixon.

As indicated above, there is no solution to this other than admitting that we are in it for the oil and when the oil runs out, so will we.