posted on April 4, 2002 04:07:20 PM new Item: Scotland -- dinky, tartaned,golfing Scotland -- has some very vocalMPs who are calling for a boycott ofall Israeli trade goods until Israelstops its aggression towards the Palestinians.
Since there's no "poll" feature here, I'm simply going to ask if your support of Israel or the Palestinians has changed recently? i.e.: Were you "pro" one or the other and not so now?
I used to be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause while at the same time supportive of Israel's right to exist. Now I'm 100% on Israel's side.
You?
(I realize that we all have strongfeelings about the turmoil in the MiddleEast. I'm mainly interested, though, inwhere you stand, not why;but obviously, you're welcometo explain yourallegiances/sympathies if you care to do so.)
posted on April 4, 2002 05:21:29 PM new
I'm where you used to be.... sympathetic to the Palestinian cause while at the same time supportive of Israel's right to exist
I see the Palestinians as oppressed people while the Israelis live in a relatively safe and stable state enjoying the benefit of our support. It seems to me that Israel has used a disproportionate military attack in response to the suicide bombers.
posted on April 4, 2002 05:38:09 PM new
Good to see you Pat!
Based on what I know, I sympathize with them both. Palestinians are owed land. They don't think they are being heard, so they use more frightening tactics to further their cause. I see Sharon as being a tyrant and a Palestinian hater, which is why he was voted in imo. On the other hand, I see the PLO having close ties with Iran, Iraq, Korea, etc., which makes me wonder how far the Palestinians will go to solve their "problems".
On CNN last night, I heard that these suicide bombers are paid handsomely ($25,000.00) to the family, plus they are guaranteed to have 72 virgins waitng for them at Heaven's gate....not a bad deal for the hopeless....
"Sometimes when we touch, the honesty's too much....."
posted on April 4, 2002 05:49:38 PM new
I still have the same opinion I always did. I think both sides are wrong in what they do. They are like the fire ants of the middle east.I do believe the Palestinians have been really oppressed but the suicide bombers are not any way to solve the problem.
So, if the men get 72 virgins what do the women get? I can't imagine why any woman would be party to any of that and be a suicide bomber.
[ edited by rawbunzel on Apr 4, 2002 05:51 PM ]
posted on April 4, 2002 05:58:48 PM new
Nycyn, I'm delighted to learn that your son has become a world traveller at so young an age. Given that you're raising him amidst a world in turmoil, have you no views about the Palestinian/Israeli issue?
It's ironic, Helen. As recently as one month ago I was "for" both sides, but several factors made me change my mind:
1) The tepid "offer" brokered by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah.
2) The (Passover) week of suicide bombings claimed as victories by everyone from Al Aqsa to Hamas.
3) The knowledge that millions of dollars are funnelled to the Palestinian terrorist organizations by Muslim nations.
4) The fact that neither Jordan, Syria or Egypt will give an inch of anything but "containment" (refugee camp) land to their Muslim brothers, the Palestinians.
5) My new awareness that Muslims really DON'T believe that Israel/Jews deserve to live.
6) Ideologically, I am more aligned with a culture that values the education/advancement/spiritual upliftment of its people. The Jews have a long and proud history of making advances in and for myriad societies, despite tremendous opposition and hatred. In contrast, the only Muslim I've ever had occasion to admire and mourn was Anwar Sadat.
posted on April 4, 2002 06:14:30 PM new
I wrote them both off a long time ago. That comes from reading their history. The only thing that these two groups have in common is their inspired hatred for each other. Every powerful nation in history has tried to control the region and to make them peaceful. The Romans were bewildered at the bazaar locals who more often fought and killed each other than attacked the roman occupation. That's what prompted the British Empire to get out of the game as fast as it could. Britain tried to make up for the lack of power once the Ottoman Empire was gone at the end of the First World War. Only a couple of decades and they were crying for someone else to take over. Then, the loud-mouthed Americans are there and decade after decade, we've gotten it from both sides in so many nasty ways. And there aren't any nations on earth who want to replace us, not even the Saudis or Egyptians.
Now, with Bush, we've taken steps back and let them begin to kill each other off. Bush's response: shrugs his shoulders and goes about his other evil ambitions. I like the response: when we are in there decade after decade after decade trying to bring a permanent peace to the region, we get sh*t on, pissed on, sworn at, laughed at, jerked around, lied to, spied upon by, bombed, blown-up, and generally had a nasty time of it. When we decide to pull out and let them both go at it and we just watch, who do you think comes to our embassy doors and DEMANDS that we get back in there between the two of them? Can you believe it?
I think that we should stop sending all that money over there and let them settle their own problems their way, the way that they have for thousands of years of hate, murder, and ultra-violence. Why should it be US that gets it?
posted on April 4, 2002 06:24:31 PM new
Borillar,I've been thinking about that myself. We had our twin towers destroyed because of our "policy" in the Middle East [at least that is the excuse of the day] then when we try to stay out of it they are all on CNN and FOX news saying "The US is the only country that can fix this, you have to do more". Why? So we can have more of our counrty blown to bits and more of our citizens murdered? No one can fix the problem but them and they have to want to. They really don't want to or it would be done by now.
So now we send Colin Powell to be the sacrifical lamb. They [The republicans]need to make him look bad anyway so why not send him where he can only fail?
I feel both throw ALL the blame on the other side and fail to accept responsibility for their actions.
Both are hateful and murderous and if either side is allowed to "win" it will result in the other side being wiped out without mercy.
Since I find both sides without significant moral merit I have to ask - "Which side would it be better to deal with after they sort out their problems and there is a winner?"
I have to say that I would rather see the Israeli's in charge when the smoke clears because they have produced a stable state with a working economy and some elements of a nation based on law.
The Palestinians have never had anything but a government of personality that does not promote business or make a systematic effort to make services available to it's people. That is the usual way Middle Eastern countries are run. By strongmen. There is no work ethic like in European nations. Without oil none of those countries would be able to feed their own people or have a working modern economy.
If the Palestinians win by massive intervention of their surrounding Arab neighbors then the active economy and participation of the country in the global economy will disappear and The Palistinian State will be another no-oil Arab state with their hand out for alms from the Saudis and other oil states. I can't see that as a base for any long term improvement.
However if they ever allow their extreme Orthodox Jews as large a voice in government policy as the fundamentalist Muslims have they will also not function as a modern industrial nation.
Religeous extremes are the death of a industrial society with a place in the global economy. They depend on ignorance and control of the population.
You can't promote jobs and education and recruit suicide bombers.
It is a well know tactic of extremists to actually preserve the depressing sense of hopelessness in their people as a means of control. They actively work to keep the sense of oppression alive because it is the only source of their power.
People who have jobs and a taste of a normal life don't strap on explosives and go to die for $25,000.
This IS tied up with religeous belief. And no matter how often Bush says it is not about religion it is. Even the Craziest Ultra Orthodox Jew is not going to come here and fly suicide planes into skyscrapers because we broke sabbeth. It is not in the culture or the religion. They may nuke us in cold blood but they won't condone suicide.
But I am also worried that the Jews won't go down without such a hard fight - including nuclear weapons - that the whole region will be devestated and MY air here even will be polluted from the exchange. So again I'd hate to see the Jews go down and go out in a nuclear blaze of glory.
posted on April 4, 2002 08:16:30 PM new
I agree with this statement by Gravid:
[b]I feel both throw ALL the blame on the other side and fail to accept responsibility for their actions.
Both are hateful and murderous and if either side is allowed to "win" it will result in the other side being wiped out without mercy.[/b]
So, I support neither. Both sides need to acknowledge the other's right to exist, without occupation and without suicide bombings. If they put as much effort into working out a peace agreement and building a method of co-existing, as has been put into provoking and attacking the other side, they'd be amazed what could be achieved for their people.
Right now I despise both Sharon and Arafat. For me that's what has changed the last few months. I used to find fault with both sides, just thinking they were merely stupid or shortsighted, yet still supporting the rights of the Palestinians and at the same time supporting Israel's right to exist. Now, after this latest round of bombings, and war, I actively despise both leaders. Neither wants peace or a positive life for their countrymen. Both want to win at any cost.
posted on April 4, 2002 08:42:06 PM new" ... because they have produced a stable state with a working economy and some elements of a nation based on law."
Without massive donations from Jews around the world, plus the Billions of $$ dolars per year that we just hand to them, they would be just another non-oil middle-eastern state with their hands out as well as would the Palistinians.
posted on April 4, 2002 08:52:02 PM newArabs are Not Lazy (Title of Article)
This explanation of why Arabs are not lazy is in reference to Gravid's mention of the Middle Eastern work ethic...an excerpt from a news article in Arabia.
"Let me put it in black and white. The reason for this state of inactivity is that you simply got used to relaxing. As a result, you no longer develop your skills and abilities. You just like to sit at a desk, reading the paper and drinking tea or coffee. Also your wife no longer cooks or washes but sleeps till noon. You and your family spend your time in front of the TV watching a football match as you hold the shisha and smoke."
posted on April 4, 2002 08:58:57 PM new
Borillar - While I agree with you that the Israeli's could not exist as they are in a state of siege without massive donations I still have bought carbide tools and diamond tools that said made in Isreal in them. I have seen oranges for sale and electronics.
I have bought diamonds that were cut there. I wish I had some numbers of how much each country produces but from the Arabs I pump gas once a week which is probably about 20 or 30% dependant on them and I have bought pistasio nuts from Iran and my Uncle has brought 18kt gold jewelry back from the Kingdom.
I just get the sense that industry and trade are of much more concern to the Isrealis than their neighbors. But I admit I don't have hard numbers.
posted on April 4, 2002 11:25:02 PM new
In which case the United States government ought to stop sending a penny there, they being so self-sufficient and all. Heck what do they need the money for?
posted on April 4, 2002 11:32:00 PM new
You know I'm sick to death of both of them. As a matter of fact I feel that way about that whole part of the world! If they're not fighting a religious war, it's for land or any other cause they can find to keep up the battle. It seems everyone hates everyone else, and what's going to change that? Nothing! Nothing has changed it for years and years. Give them land, money, education? Police them? Occupy their countries? Take their children away from them so you can isolate and reeducate them to undo the generations of hate? What?
posted on April 5, 2002 03:53:56 AM new
Borillar - Now that you bring up the point - Why is it the US gives Billions of dollars to Israel every year but it is the Arab nations
who get very little in comparison that allow the US the use of forward bases and listening posts etc?
posted on April 6, 2002 12:12:05 AM new
I'm not sure I understand the sentiment here. It's ok for this country to wage war in Afganistan to protect American citizens against terrorism but it is not ok for Isreal to do the same?
I'm not interested in taking sides in this mess but I'm just amazed at how hypocritical it all seems.
Maybe Bush should set an example for Isreal and withdraw from Afganistan.
[ edited by outoftheblue on Apr 6, 2002 12:15 AM ]
posted on April 6, 2002 01:40:21 AM new
Now I have a question. Did any of you see the demonstrations in New York and San Franciso? How do you feel about that? It was only a shouting match between the Palestinians and Israelis this time. But, the name calling, and some of the vile comments were very disturbing to me. How soon will it escalate into more?
Talk about taking sides! Now, are we going to have to join them on our own streets and pick a side? Are they going to spill their blood and spread their hate for each other here to? Didn't they come here to get away from that? I'm sorry, but I don't want their war on my streets!
posted on April 6, 2002 04:07:38 AM new
Let me tell you the coverage of any such demonstrations here was shallow enough I never saw it - and I am a real newsie.
posted on April 6, 2002 06:49:42 AM new
>>Now I have a question. Did any of you see the demonstrations in New York and San Franciso? How do you feel about that? It was only a shouting match between the Palestinians and Israelis this time.<<
I haven't because I don't have cable so I haven't had any reasonable reception since The Day the Earth Stood Still, but I would wager that that shouting match was between Americans.
posted on April 6, 2002 09:10:44 AM new
In Washington, DC I didn't hear about demonstrations in New York and San Francisco. April 20, there will be an Anti War march in DC . You probably won't hear about our march either.
The cherry blossoms are blooming and I'll bet we hear about that event. Otherwise, it appears that while bombs over Bethelehem explode, Washington is 'just chillin'
posted on April 6, 2002 09:46:04 AM new"I'm not sure I understand the sentiment here. It's ok for this country to wage war in Afganistan to protect American citizens against terrorism but it is not ok for Isreal to do the same?"
outoftheblue, please show me the number of hands of posters in this thread so far who think it's ok for us to go wage war in Afganistan.
posted on April 6, 2002 09:55:45 AM newNow I have a question. Did any of you see the demonstrations in New York and San Franciso? How do you feel about that?
I didn't see those, I did see the one outside the courthouse in Seattle the other day.
What do I think? Its not making any difference in anything
I'll raise my hand in support of the US going to Afghanistan
In France, they burned out a couple Synagogues... how long before that catches on in other places?
What does that French Jew have to do with Isreals fight against Palistinine or rather their suicide bombers? He lives in France not Israel.
posted on April 6, 2002 10:27:27 AM new
To answer the question of what a female suicide bomber receives in heaven- she gets to pick 72 of her family memebers to automatically join her in heaven when they die.
I haven't changed one iota on my position. The only thing that changes is the tactics that must be used and the conditions that must be present for a Palestinian homeland.
I fully support Israel. I fully support Israel as long as it remains a liberal western style democracy. Sharon's popularity has went up 16 points to almost 72% since the IDF police action on the West Bank.
I think Palestine should have a state. But it must be premised/conditioned on a complete ceasing of hostilities toward Israel.
If you think that just forming a Palestinian state will solve the problem, I think not.
Giving the PLO a state under the present circumstances just menas that the PLO/Hamas etc., have a safer base of operations against Israel.
If there is to be one state in the region, I want it to be Israel. If there are to be two states, the PLO has first to demonstrate that it can be trusted with a state.
If the suicide bombings continue, Israel has every right to defend itself. At some point, the Palestinians will have suicide bombed their hopes for a state into oblivian.
Arafat was offered a state- he turned it down. I can only conclude that Arafat and followers want Israel destroyed. If that is the case, Israel can use whtever means it finds necessary to protect its people.
If the evidence of Arafat supplying and controlling the suicide bombers and terrorist organizations is true, he should be tried, and if found guilty, executed.
Israel should have no less right than the U.S. or anyone else to takes the steps to protect its country.
I also think that Isreal is an enemy of the PLO and other Arab nations because it is a western liberal democracy in a region that is filed with despotic and murderous regimes from the dark ages. The real threat from Israel to these countries is if Israel is successful as a country. It would be a shinning light to the people of the region for democracy and freedom. None of the Kings and despots in the Arab world want that to happen.
Were there to be peace in the region, there would be people from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Palestine (should it become a state) flocking to Israel seeking jobs and a better life.
It may be hard to imagine now, but Israel at peace will be the most prosperous and freest place to live in the region. Arabs will be standing in line to immigrate to Israel.
This topic is 6 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new
