twinsoft
|
posted on May 7, 2002 07:15:32 PM new
At Rishon Letzion, at least 16 killed and many critically injured. CNN Article Here.
Arafat promises action. Yeah, I'd like to see it. Where was he when a bomb factory was discovered in practically every home in Jenin? He was out spreading lies about a so-called massacre.
Bush for all his talk is full of crapola. He's kissing Arafat's ass. What ever happened to the get tough on terrorism rhetoric?
Sharon's approach was correct and showed what needed to be done to stop terror. The idea that Israel should sit down with Arafat and chat about peace while the killing of civilians continues for months and months is ridiculous.
|
stusi
|
posted on May 7, 2002 07:31:15 PM new
Israel will VERY soon decide to ignore all U.S. backed peace efforts and do what it should have done a long time ago-an all out attack on its enemies.
|
KatyD
|
posted on May 7, 2002 07:46:45 PM new
Bush doesn't have a clue. I guess what's good for the goose ISN'T good for the gander. He can't have it both ways. His own "Bush Doctrine" states, you're either against terrorism or you're with the terrorists.
Personally, I think he's been listening too much to Powell. Terrorists don't understand "diplomacy". They only understand violence. It is time time to speak to them in the only language they understand. Unless the world wants to be held hostage to them forever.
KatyD
|
nycyn
|
posted on May 7, 2002 07:50:06 PM new
It's arright. It's over, in spite of what I told Wolf ("There Goes Another one" Blitzer.)
[url]http://www.theonion.com/onion3816/god_re-floods_middle_east.html[/ur] If the winkie guy is still there I don't know why!
[ edited by nycyn on May 7, 2002 07:52 PM ]
[ edited by nycyn on May 7, 2002 07:54 PM ]
|
Borillar
|
posted on May 7, 2002 11:54:53 PM new
"Terrorists don't understand "diplomacy". They only understand violence."
Could be right about that. I recall back in the 1980's in Beirut. You know, the local terrorists (Intafada, etc.) kidnapped westerners, but did you ever notice the lack of Soviet Russians being kidnapped in the news? It wasn't because the media or the Russians were hiding it. It was because the first time that Soviet citizens got kidnapped in Beirut, the next day, a couple of KGB agents pushed a couple of boxes off the back of a military truck at the Syrian Embassy. In it, were the body parts of the kidnappers. Needless to say, terrorists in Beirut left Russians alone after that.
|
Borillar
|
posted on May 8, 2002 12:08:58 AM new
"Personally, I think he's been listening too much to Powell."
I think it's because he's in such a tough spot. There's a lot of "hands" involved. On the one hand, Bush wants to attack Iraq and for that, he needs the support of the local Arab nations. He won't get that by appearing cozy with Sharon and hard on Arafat. On another hand, he also won't win any Brownie Points with his own political party, whose leadership tends towards the anti-Semitic train of thought. He can't win either way on a different hand with the hard-line, right-wing Fundie Christian supporters, who also tend to be both anti-Jew AND anti-Arab/Muslim. To top it off, there's his big, bold mouth that has gotten him into a foot-chewing frenzy, due to he and his party's lack of foresight into foreign affairs. After all, Bush & Co. thought that merely pushing around the smaller kids on the playground was all that they needed to do: nothing fancy in the way of talking, nor kid-gloves on any matters, and they sure as hell weren't going to compromise! No, Bush has put himself - and America, between the Hammer and Anvil with his desire to correct his father's mistake. I think that he ought to give up on Iraq right now and go after Somalia or Angola and other easy pickings first. He sure as hell isn't going to get to attack Iraq, because the Arab nations don't want him to and they will continue to make excuses. In the meantime, they are trying to drive a wedge between America and Israel; or at least weaken American prestige and creditability there.
|
gravid
|
posted on May 8, 2002 03:21:26 AM new
Or to put it another way - he shot his mouth off about zero tolerance for terrorism and found out his mouth wrote a check his butt can't cash.
If he wants to really do that "you are for us or against us" thing he has to take on the whole region.
Look at a map - from Lybia to Pakistan the whole sweep.
|
stusi
|
posted on May 8, 2002 05:26:14 AM new
Borillar- Why does he "need the support of the local Arab nations"? Who gives a rat's ass? Are we prostituting ourselves for precious oil?
|
gravid
|
posted on May 8, 2002 06:49:13 AM new
well - of course
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 07:01:42 AM new
if you take a body count against who has lost the most the Isrealis are doing pretty damn well.....
|
Helenjw
|
posted on May 8, 2002 07:13:02 AM new
"Are we prostituting ourselves for precious oil?"
I can't believe that anybody asked that question.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on May 8, 2002 07:15:41 AM new
It's the Republican administration's reason for being.
|
REAMOND
|
posted on May 8, 2002 08:35:16 AM new
Why do I see on the news Hamas and Hezbulah at funerals and having parades with weapons, all grouped together with their leaders ?
Why don't we see them grouped together at parades and funerals and then a half dozen cruise missles exploding sending them to martyrdom ?
I think Bush did write a check he is unwilling or unable cash.
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 08:51:41 AM new
what about the Isreali's who killed alot of people in Jenin. Why not kill all them also?
I think both sets of people need to stop killing and start talking but you know this will never happen. 
In the end the people of Palestine lose out by not coming to the table to talk they will continue to live in 3rd world conditions.
|
stusi
|
posted on May 8, 2002 08:55:21 AM new
Helen- the question about oil was obviously rhetorical. But I did want to know why Borillar thinks we need Arab support to attack Iraq!
mrfoxy76- in what sense are the Israelis doing well? That they have killed more of the enemy? Until they eradicate all the terrorists they can't be considered to be doing well!
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 09:00:37 AM new
in the sense that the isreali "terrorists" who went into Jenin and killed over 400 people are deemed heroes......
|
twinsoft
|
posted on May 8, 2002 09:04:39 AM new
if you take a body count against who has lost the most the Isrealis are doing pretty damn well.....
In the 1970s Israel's unspoken policy was for every Israeli killed, ten Hezbollehs would be killed in reprisal. As awful as that policy was, it curbed terror attacks. Israel finally invaded southern Lebanon and kicked Hezbolleh out.
The PLO has changed its tactics. They now raise their children from birth to become martyrs for their anti-Zionist cause. Israel's options are limited. They can go in and bulldoze a few houses. Israel has the might to destroy the Palestinians utterly. What we're seeing now is the result of having to run plays past the U.S. government, including whichever yahoo president is in power at the time.
It should be obvious to even the most casual oberserver that the PLO's primary goal is not the creation of a Palestinian state. Their goal is to prevent peace. Continued suicide attacks on Israeli civilans only hurt the Palestinians' cause. Militarily those attacks accomplish nothing.
Any way you slice the pie, Israel has as much claim to that land as anyone. IMO Israel should have razed Jenin to the ground and either exiled or killed Arafat. Arafat needs to be made accountable.
One problem is the younger generation of Israelis naively think they can trade land for peace, and are unwilling to make the tough call. For all his talk, Bush is too busy packing the Saudis' pipe to care about the real root of terrorism. Bush is a fool to think he can negotiate with Arafat and the Arab nations. America won't stand for it.
The Enron scandal and 9-11 happened on Bush's watch. Enron manipulated energy prices and caused the power shortage in California last year. Very likely Bush & Co. knew about it. America won't tolerate Bush playing patty-cake with special oil interests.
|
Borillar
|
posted on May 8, 2002 09:23:16 AM new
"But I did want to know why Borillar thinks we need Arab support to attack Iraq!"
First, I read it in an analysis in Time Magazine (March 27, 2002). Since then, it's been openly discussed on CNN and other news shows. Your question comes up once in a while. You might want to pose that question to CNN's e-mail thing they have for their poltical discussion groups.
|
stusi
|
posted on May 8, 2002 09:26:39 AM new
mrfoxy76- Anyone who thinks the Israelis are looking to kill civilians is a fool. They are going after terrorist strongholds and there may be collateral losses. I believe that anyone who defends the Palestinians in any way is either a terrorist, an idiot or an anti-semite who doesn't have the balls to say so.
|
stusi
|
posted on May 8, 2002 09:31:33 AM new
Borillar- It is one thing to say it is preferable to have Arab support, it is quite another to say we must have it! I don't often agree with Bush, but his efforts to open up a small parcel in Alaska for drilling to help us become less reliant on OPEC were commendable. Shame on my fellow Democrats for panicking on overblown environmental concerns.
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 09:50:18 AM new
i just feel that killing each other will get nowhere. perhaps i am an idiot not to condone the killing of innocent children, women in Jenin then again there might be alot of idiots out there.
Also I do not condone the suicide bombing y'day in Isreal.
All boils down to a waste of human life that could have been prevented.
|
KatyD
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:08:34 AM new
perhaps i am an idiot not to condone the killing of innocent children, women in Jenin
I am glad to hear that should an army or police force be after you, that you would not hide behind your wife and children, nor boobytrap your grandmother's house with explosives on the chance that soldiers will look for you there. Neither would you strap explosives to your 12 year old son and send him out to lure the soldiers into Granny's boobytrapped house. Of course, your son will not mind too much if you did, because he has been told since he was a toddler that his life is expendable for the martyrdom cause and he knows that he is worth more to his family dead than alive.
KatyD
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:17:27 AM new
KatyD is this is the case then why is a UN investigation team not allowed in to inspect the devistation?
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:25:11 AM new
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point/newsid_1974000/1974664.stm
|
KatyD
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:29:13 AM new
Don't you read the news, MrFoxy? Kofi Annan disbanded his so-called investigation team because human rights groups found the allegations of atrocities and massacres by Israeli military to be untrue. Just the usual lies and distortion put out by the Palestinian propaganda machine. Was it you keeping track of the body count? The final tally ended up something like 56 Palestinian dead to 33 Israeli dead. 56 is such a far cry from 500 massacred as the Palestinians tried to claim. Even the Palestinians have admitted it was all hogwash.
KatyD
|
stusi
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:31:32 AM new
The last confirmed civilian count in Jenin was 22.
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:36:53 AM new
i apologise for being mistaken
|
yellowstone
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:37:07 AM new
Any way you slice the pie, Israel has as much claim to that land as anyone.
How do you figure that when the Palestinians have owned land and houses for generations. Should they be expected to just give up their land without a fight. Israel is kicking Palestinians off their lands without compensation to build new settlements for Jews. If I was a Palestinian I would probably feel the same way they do, I would be pissed and ready to fight.
As far as the "terrorist attacks" go, the Palestinians do not see them as terrorist attacks. They are fighting back the only way they can. They don't have heavy military equipment like tanks, jets etc. In news reports that I have seen or read, no Palestinian, Arafat or otherwise refers to their attacks as terrorism. We the USA and Israel need to understand this before peace talks can proceed.
The Arab nations have a misunderstanding that the USA has some sort of control over what Israel does, we really don't. Our only interest in Israel is in their right to exist and as an ally. Our interest in Isarel probably extends to whatever oil reserves are under Israel lands but they can't be tapped until there's peace in the region.
[ edited by yellowstone on May 25, 2002 12:43 PM ]
|
Schauspieldirektor
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:39:47 AM new
Israel gets what they give. There are no innocents in Israel.
|
KatyD
|
posted on May 8, 2002 10:40:41 AM new
There's no oil in Israel, yellowstone. And if you think blowing up civilians is "fighting back the only way they can", then obviously you see no problem with Al-Queda killing over 3000 of our civilians on 9/11. After all, they were fighting back the only way they can so it makes it okay.
KatyD
|
