Israeli airstrikes in Syria [Archive]

Sayhey

Oct 5, 2003, 09:22 PM

jefhatfield

Oct 5, 2003, 09:26 PM

K4NN4B15

Oct 5, 2003, 09:38 PM

Sayhey

Oct 5, 2003, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by jefhatfield
it can't be that black and white

some arabs may paint a bad image by being violent and waging war and some people in america then think that's what arabs are about...to kill jews or destroy or take back israel

the situation with the arab-israeli conflict today is very different than world war II when hitler tried to exterminate the jews

It was never that black and white. There are forces within Israeli and Palestinian societies that want a peaceful settlement. There are also forces in both societies that view the other as less than human and of deserving no rights. Right now that hatred is in danger of spilling over into more countries in the region. Some wiser heads must prevail and unfortunately, Bush has placed himself outside the role of "honest broker" with his statements around Syria. This has continued even in the discussions at the Security Council. Now what happens if the Syrians use their right to self-defense and strike back?

Inu

Oct 6, 2003, 03:51 AM

Originally posted by Sayhey
This has continued even in the discussions at the Security Council. Now what happens if the Syrians use their right to self-defense and strike back?

Well. Syria cant strike back. It would be like US vs Iraq technology wise. As a matter of Fact, it would be EXACTLY like that. And we all know how thats going to look like.

On the other hand, they cant go to the UN with their complain. Hm. Let me correct this: they can go to the UN with this. The UN would put together a resolution to look at Israel in a funny way - and the USA would veto it out. Nice.

And you guys renamed french fries because someone had the guts to veto against a premature (and, as it turns out, unjust) war.

abdul

Oct 6, 2003, 04:59 AM

Originally posted by Desertrat
Well, the same answer exists now as it did 55 years ago: Arabs oughta quit killing Jews. They particularly oughta quit killing Israeli Jews, 'cause they kill back.

But the Arabs don't want peace in the old Trans Jordan. What they want now is what they've always wanted: No Israel; all Jews dead.

'Rat

from last forum i thought you made some good point....but in this one your talking a whole lot of ****. First of all can you let me know how Jews got to morrocco?

ill let you know cos the Jews were treated with respect ever since Islam came and were welcome to travel within their empire. In recent history the opposite the palestinians are humiliated and not even given basic huma rights.

Secondly how many Saudis have killed Israeli jews? How many Egyptians habe killed Israeli Jews and How many Turkish people have killed Israeli jews. Heck how many syrains have killed Israeli jews in the last 20years. the point im trying to make is not all arabs are palestinians and not all arabs even share a border with Israel and some arab countries e.g Turkey (yes it is an arab country cos their ethinic group it Arab....ottomon empire= arab empire) even have very friendly relations with israle.

All Jews dead.....remember the Jews lived within Arab controlled society for over 500 years. Is Arabs wanted you all dead im sure they would have killed all Jews off in that region by now off by now. (sorry they are mostly immigrants from the rest of the world arent they...sos my misytake),...but like i have said Jews were treated good...as equals under the Khalifah.

The Israel you talk about with such passion contains so many parts of occupied land which even the Israelis have admitted, and should give back under the UN is the US doesnt stop veto any resolution against Israel! Not just the occupied Palestinians terroitories but parts of Syria as well.

secondly, please dont refer to all of them as 'Arabs'. It is mostly Palestinians Israel has a problem with as they took their land and left them as regufees in the land where their forefathers were even before Judaism was around. If you are talking about countries who greatly disagree with the actions of Israel as Arabs then i thin you should include Europe and Russia under that heading as well.

Arabs oughta quit killing Jews

Forgive me if im wrong...and im never wrong. But didnt all the Palestinian organisations agree to a ceasefire. Within the first week of the ceasefire ISRAEL decided to attack one of the people at the top of one the Palestinian organisations.......Was that stupid or pure and utterly stupid! so your comment can be reversed to:
Jews oughta quit killing Palestinians, 'cause they kill back.

oisrale had a chance of peace there but they killed it. The bus blast was tragic but a revenge attack was proimised after the israeli killing.

It is said that people who are obviously educated cannot see the facts and are blinded by nationality. Hey another day in the US!

Ill just ley you know what i expect, i expect you to make stupid insults cos you lost the discussion, but thats waht i always get....it makes me feels good knowing i just totally threw someones view out the window and they have to result in insults .....ie mac______

Desertrat

Oct 6, 2003, 08:40 AM

I have no idea why the creation of Israel in 1948 caught my imagination the way it did. Back then, 14-year-olds just weren't all that much interested in politics. Regardless, I've watched the situation there with interest, over the years.

What I orignally posted reflects my observations.

One problem with decrying violence is that (IMO) all too many regard retaliation as the same as initiation. I don't.

Sure, not ALL Arabs support genocide. Trouble is, most of the Arab countries are ruled by people who have openly supported the violence against Israel on the terrorist level, as well as having invaded it twice with military force.

Lebanon, controlled by Syria, has always been a sort of haven for anti-Israel murderers. Syria's Golan Heights were long used as a place from which to use rockets and artillery against Israeli villages. Iran has furnished money and training for anti-Israeli efforts; Saudi Arabia has long been a money-source for those against Israel.

What chance does a peace-loving Arab have to influence his government's policies? Vote?

Lord knows that the average Palestinian wants nothing more than to live in peace; to have a job with decent pay and a decent home and a hope for a decent future for himself and his kids. To me, that's universal. I have no quarrel with the "Joe Sixpack" of the Arab world...

'Rat

Backtothemac

Oct 6, 2003, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by Sayhey

The point of the thread, however, is not to get caught up in the history of the Israeli - Palestinian dispute, but to look to the danger of the expansion of that dispute into Syria.
Ok, if that is the point of the thread, then what else is Israel supposed to do? Continue to let the terrorists that train in Syria come into Israel and kill their civilians?

Sometimes, sadly, it is kill, or be killed. That is the case here. If they train in Syria, and they come into Israel, and kill civilians, and children, etc. Does Israel not have a soverign right to defend itself, reguardless of borders?

Inu

Oct 6, 2003, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Ok, if that is the point of the thread, then what else is Israel supposed to do? Continue to let the terrorists that train in Syria come into Israel and kill their civilians?

Sometimes, sadly, it is kill, or be killed. That is the case here. If they train in Syria, and they come into Israel, and kill civilians, and children, etc. Does Israel not have a soverign right to defend itself, reguardless of borders?

Oh please. Is it ok to fly into a souvereign nation and bomb some facilities you claim to train terrorists? What the hell happened to proper politics?

Israel already has the most restrictive border controls (for pete's sake, they are rebuilding the berlin wall!). Thats the way you go and protect your civillians, not by bombing some camp you suspect of training terrorists (what if they trained their own military there and intelligence was faulty (i know, it never is, despite the facts prooving otherwise))

jefhatfield

Oct 6, 2003, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by Desertrat
I have no idea why the creation of Israel in 1948 caught my imagination the way it did. Back then, 14-year-olds just weren't all that much interested in politics. Regardless, I've watched the situation there with interest, over the years.

What I orignally posted reflects my observations.

One problem with decrying violence is that (IMO) all too many regard retaliation as the same as initiation. I don't.

Sure, not ALL Arabs support genocide. Trouble is, most of the Arab countries are ruled by people who have openly supported the violence against Israel on the terrorist level, as well as having invaded it twice with military force.

Lebanon, controlled by Syria, has always been a sort of haven for anti-Israel murderers. Syria's Golan Heights were long used as a place from which to use rockets and artillery against Israeli villages. Iran has furnished money and training for anti-Israeli efforts; Saudi Arabia has long been a money-source for those against Israel.

What chance does a peace-loving Arab have to influence his government's policies? Vote?

Lord knows that the average Palestinian wants nothing more than to live in peace; to have a job with decent pay and a decent home and a hope for a decent future for himself and his kids. To me, that's universal. I have no quarrel with the "Joe Sixpack" of the Arab world...

'Rat

hey desertrat,

i too support israel...my wife is half jewish and we just came back from a bar mitzvah and one of the guests came back all the way from israel...when we got a chance to talk, she told us how most israelis want an end to violence and they think that PM sharon is just as bad as the terrorists playing tit for tat

the jews lived side by side with the arabs for many years, hundreds in fact, so peace is not impossible but it cannot be achieved through military force...the israeli army should not play the role of schoolyard bully

through my time serving our government in clandestine service and the defense department and my father's time in the OSS, we both came to the conclusion that israel has the best kick butt forces and intelligence, per person, than any military in the world and that because of that, they have to watch out for the tempation to misuse that superiority in resources, both human and equipment wise

Backtothemac

Oct 6, 2003, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by Inu
Oh please. Is it ok to fly into a souvereign nation and bomb some facilities you claim to train terrorists? What the hell happened to proper politics?

Israel already has the most restrictive border controls (for pete's sake, they are rebuilding the berlin wall!). Thats the way you go and protect your civillians, not by bombing some camp you suspect of training terrorists (what if they trained their own military there and intelligence was faulty (i know, it never is, despite the facts prooving otherwise))

Sorry, but I have to say that if their intel says that it is a training camp, them more than likely it is. They have the right to defend themselves, and that is all that this is.

toontra

Oct 6, 2003, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Sorry, but I have to say that if their intel says that it is a training camp, them more than likely it is. They have the right to defend themselves, and that is all that this is.

You have a lot more faith in "intel" than a lot of people. Would you estimate this intelligence to be as good as, say, that which led the US to invade Iraq?

Also, that is not "all that this is". This threatens to escalate the middle east conflict to new heights, possibly leading to a war with Syria.

raschild

Oct 6, 2003, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Sayhey
Now what happens if the Syrians use their right to self-defense and strike back?

The only way the Syrians would have a right to self-defense is if Israel had attacked Syria--but they didn't. They attacked a military target within Syria's borders (terrorist training camp). If Syria had taken it out like they were asked to, Israel wouldn't have had anything to attack inside Syria, and Israel would have looked elsewhere for targets. Nations in that region need to take responsibility and do everything in their power to shut down the terror groups, like Hamas, to prevent Israel from having cause to attack outside its own borders.

'Rat is right about Palestinians/Arabs not liking Israelis. I think the feeling is mutual. I don't think the region will see lasting peace until one of the groups is eliminated.

toontra

Oct 6, 2003, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by raschild
I don't think the region will see lasting peace until one of the groups is eliminated.

That's quite a statement. Which group do you think most merits "elimination" and why, and do you think this is likely.

Dont Hurt Me

Oct 6, 2003, 01:11 PM

all i can say its amazing the restraint israel has shown,from the first gulf war till now. with these attacks coming from the countless terror groups i would be wiping them out big time! not a little strike on a camp. I wonder how long it will take them to take out the IRAN nuclear bomb plants??? they are the only ones with the balls to go after these guys meanwhile countries like syria are portrayed in the UN like the good guys when the truth is they are a terrorist state sponsering,funding,harboring,training etc terrorist to go into israel and blow themselves up. I would bet Saddam and his WMD's are in there somewhere.

zimv20

Oct 6, 2003, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by Backtothemac
They have the right to defend themselves, and that is all that this is.

an extreme example, but does it follow that you support north korea's right to nuke DC?

Dont Hurt Me

Oct 6, 2003, 01:56 PM

dont change subject, this is about terrorist blowing themselves in israel and working out of syria.

zimv20

Oct 6, 2003, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
dont change subject, this is about terrorist blowing themselves

now _that's_ a change is subject!

Backtothemac

Oct 6, 2003, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by zimv20
an extreme example, but does it follow that you support north korea's right to nuke DC?
That has nothing to do with this!

Desertrat

Oct 6, 2003, 06:56 PM

I remember my startlement the first time I learned of the tiny physical size of Israel. Not much over 100 miles, the long way; at it's narrowest, ten miles. Why would anybody blame Israel for wanting to keep the land they got by repelling the 1967 invasion? Heck, it made the country almost 25 or 30 miles wide!

They earned that land in blood, and now people redefine it as the "occupied territories". PC at its slimiest, sez I.

Anybody who thinks the Israelis haven't been gentle with their Arab neighbors must not realize that had the Israelis wished, they could have taken Cairo and Damascus. There was nothing left to stop them. (Obviously, occupation would have been an insurmountable problem.)

I watched Abba Eban's comment at the UN, when the various losers were whining. I loved his, "There are three million Jews. There are 200 million Arabs. Is the distinguished delegate from Egypt trying to say we surrounded them?"

It took the failed invasion of 1973 to get the slow-learning Arab political leaderships to figure out that they had no hope by killing all the Israelis by "honest warfare". So, the next step was to help create and support such groups as Hamas, as well as support Arafat and his PLO.

The Arabs know no restrictions as to time and space for their own survival. They can try various methods to finalize the efforts at their publicly called-for genocide.

The Israelis, in losing just one battle, are done. Gone. Dead.

It's all well and good to talk of national sovereignty--until your own life or death depends on how you deal with murderers who would use that national sovereignty for their own ends.

'Rat

Sayhey

Oct 6, 2003, 08:12 PM

Sometimes, it is hard to hear all of the venom directed at "Arabs." Excuse me, but I think it is incredibly ignorant to value the life of one person over the other because of their nationality. I believe the act of hatred and the desperation of the young woman who walked into that Haifa restaurant and blew herself up and killed all those innocent people was horrible and despicable. The bombing of apartments in the Gaza, the shooting of teenage kids on the West Bank, and the denial of an entire population of their basic rights is also horrible and despicable. The one sided nonsense in response to these acts only helps to feed them.

What is new and dangerous is the attack of Israeli jets into Syria. That action has ramifications for the entire region. The Arab League is meeting now as well as the UN. Do you think this will strengthen the hands of those in the region that wish to have good relations with the US? What happens if Israel's adoption of the US foreign policy includes more and greater attacks? Is the US going to use the presence of offices of groups they don't like as pretext to take the War in Iraq into Syria? If nothing else, this action and the US support of it through a UN veto would only confirm in every Arab State that the US has no real interest in Arab grievances. We will win lots of friends in Iraq with this policy.

Inu

Oct 7, 2003, 12:46 AM

Might I point out that to get a "Terrorist-learns-to-blow-himself-up-Camp" all you need is a propaganda cassette and a video player with a TV (and power). I guess this qualifies for about 60% of the syrian housings (minus the propaganda cassette, but thats copied easily for about 1 $). Gotta bomb them all! (Pikachu goes Bush)

Of course, having a dummy training belt could help too, but you could rip off the top of a c64 joystick and fill a belt with sand filled Bags. There you go. Not exactly difficult or bombing - worthy i think.

What Sharon&Co have to realize is that the terrorist is made on the streets with no future, not in training camps.

abdul

Oct 7, 2003, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
all i can say its amazing the restraint israel has shown,from the first gulf war till now. with these attacks coming from the countless terror groups i would be wiping them out big time!

firstly little restraint was ever given to the Palestinians. They were not allowed Israeli citizenship from the time of Israels creation. The refugees were not allowed to go back home and had to live in what are now known as permanent refugee camps like Jenin. The Palestinians were treated like crap. it could be argued who had the most restraint. If you remeber Israel weas created in 1948 the Fatah organisation was created in 1968, thats 20 years!

Still the Palestinians are not allowed to return home, plainly for the reason that they are not Jewish. The Israeli government says that Israeli cannot allow tht many citzens cos the country cannot handle it. But countless thousand use the 'Right of Return' to get citizenship, as well as 78% of the population lives within a certain area, which is i cnnot remeber now but it is quite concentrated, so they have plenty of space. The right of return of the Palestinians who have been in that land even before judaism was around have no right of return....ironic.

Plus when Israeli pm Sharon came into power that is when the attacks increased further, when Israel started their policy of using fighter jets, army helicopters and missiles to attack terrorist home within these highly populated towns.

Everyone knows that Israel has Nuclear weapons, countless reports. what makes you thing they can have the restraint of not using those weapons?????

Israel has the right to exist, i dont think it should be all Palestine, but i expect a land of the Palestinians to exist as well. the oslo accord only gave them 22% of their orignal land which in my eyes is a masssive sacrifice. Israles offering less than 22%.

Ask yourselves which population has given up to try and achieve peace throughout history. agreeing to 22% of orignal land, 20 years of no teroist activity and a ceasfir which was broken when Israel attacked them first.

on the other hand what has Israel doneto achieve peace? iover less that 22%, is that just petty or what, trying to bargain by reducing the amount!

as well as a British cabinet minister said whenver we ask syria for help in reduce terrorist activity it just manages to reduce in syria.

Desertrat

Oct 7, 2003, 09:06 AM

abdul, one point: Those Arabs who fled Israel in 1948 were not allowed by their "brother Arabs" to assimilate into those nearby Arab countries. (Yes, some were, in Jordan.) SFAIK, it's the first time in any modern era that refugees weren't allowed some sort of asylum and/or assimilation after reaching some sort of safe-haven country.

Ever see any of the Life Magazine photos of the refugee camps in, say, Lebanon? A large part of their food supply and the majority of the medical personnel came from the U.S., via the UN, back in the 1940s/1950s.

And the mullahs worked busily, preaching Jihad...

'Rat

abdul

Oct 7, 2003, 09:39 AM

UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) is a relief and human development agency, providing education, healthcare, social services and emergency aid to over four million refugees living in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and the Syrian Arab republic.

four million....sorry what were you saying.

And its also the one of the few times when refugees during a war were not allowed to go back to their homeland, for Gods sake even the Jews of germany were even welcomed backafter ww2.

so sorry you still havent told me how Israel has made sacrifices for peasce

Dont Hurt Me

Oct 7, 2003, 10:01 AM

bottom line is there will be no peace untill suicide bombing stops. period. as long as this continues and arafat & his terrorist buddies keep nursing it along Israel shouldnt change a thing. if they really wanted peace they would have had it all ready but what they want is to eliminate israel.

mactastic

Oct 7, 2003, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by raschild
The only way the Syrians would have a right to self-defense is if Israel had attacked Syria--but they didn't. They attacked a military target within Syria's borders (terrorist training camp). If Syria had taken it out like they were asked to, Israel wouldn't have had anything to attack inside Syria, and Israel would have looked elsewhere for targets. Nations in that region need to take responsibility and do everything in their power to shut down the terror groups, like Hamas, to prevent Israel from having cause to attack outside its own borders.

'Rat is right about Palestinians/Arabs not liking Israelis. I think the feeling is mutual. I don't think the region will see lasting peace until one of the groups is eliminated.

So if Saddam had managed to mount an attack against a US military base that was getting ready to attack him, you are saying that's ok, and that we would have no right nor reason to respond? You can say that has nothing to do with this, but you would be missing the whole anaological process of ad absurdum.

And we need to remember here... there are FACTIONS on both sides who want to see the blood of their enemies flow onto the desert sands, but there are also factions on both sides who desperatly want peace as well. Lumping "them" all together is unfair and a serious oversimplification of the problem.

My fear is that we have just joined Israel in a war against terrorism that is as unwinnable as the war on drugs. If it was possible to militarily suppress terrorism, don't you think the Israeli's would have done it already? They've been trying pretty hard for a good while now, and the problem is worse than it has been in quite a while now.

Sayhey

Oct 7, 2003, 10:25 AM

Actually the goal for quite some time has been to win a state in the Palestinian lands occupied after the 1967 war. All this nonsense about "Arab goals of genocide" just shows a complete ignorance of the history of the Palestinian attempts to win their rights. Yes, for there to be peace the suicide bombings must stop. There also must be a stop to the killing of Palestinian youth. There must be a stop the destruction of Palestinian homes. There must be a stop to the building of settlements on land that was occupied in '67. Shall I go on? All we see in this country is the tragic deaths of innocents in suicide bombings. We should never forget those innocents, but that doesn't mean we can forget the innocents killed on the other side.

Dont Hurt Me

Oct 7, 2003, 10:34 AM

hey sayhey it all starts with stopping the suicide bombings. and the 67 lands arent occupied they were won win israel was attacked by all of its peace loving arab states. again if i was israel i wouldnt do crap until the bombings stopped,a real govt being formed and civil behavior from all those peace loving arab states. After that happens then i would see about forming a independent palastine. but as long as this crap is going on i would say go to the devil arafat and start doing some major construction in those areas that israel won when they were attacked. palastine has everything to loose by staying on its present path and everything to gain by following peace.

zimv20

Oct 7, 2003, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
hey sayhey it all starts with stopping the suicide bombings.

actually, it all starts w/ respect and fairness.

Sayhey

Oct 7, 2003, 10:55 AM

OK, for the sake of argument let's follow your advice. Israel continues the settlements on the land it "won" in '67 -what follows after that? If the Palestinians are denied a state of their own they are still there in what, under your plan is now a part of a greater Israel. Given the demographic trends the Palestinians will soon be in the majority (that doesn't count the Palestinians in exile). So now we have a state where a majority of its people are ruled by a minority based on their ethnicity and religion. Or perhaps your think Israel should "ethnically cleanse" the West Bank and Gaza? Let us get real. The only way for a peaceful settlement is towards the restoration of a Palestinian homeland on the basis of the UN resolutions, that means the 1967 borders.

mactastic

Oct 7, 2003, 11:02 AM

Or, as I have heard suggested, all the Palestinian arabs should be relocated to Jordan, Syria, Egypt, etc.

Yeah that'll help cut down on terrorism. Right.

eclipse525

Oct 7, 2003, 11:06 AM

Same Crap....different Day.......

problems....

• EGO's
• Blinded by Religion and Blinded by Hatred
• Religion and Politics are one in the same.

solution...

• The children with new belief's NOT based on the present system of Religion and Politics of the region.

• Abolish ALL religion and start practicing SPIRITUALITY! OH...I dare me say that! The nerve.

~e

Sayhey

Oct 7, 2003, 11:15 AM

The great irony in all of this is that for years Israel's greatest fear was what the PLO advocated in the formation of a "democratic secular nation in all the lands of Palestine." If the policies of Sharon are followed it will lead to one of three possible conclusions: one, an aparthied-like state in Israel (complete with a "bantustan" or two); two, the expulsion of all Palestinians and the creation of a ethnically "pure" Jewish state; or three, the creation of a new state not based on ethnicity or religion (ie the old PLO stand.)

eclipse525

Oct 7, 2003, 11:24 AM

The problem with these people is everyone is MICRO-Analyzing the whole situation and are so caught up in this and that. Whatever happens it's going to get REAL ugly before it settles down and becomes as great as it should be.

I challange anyone to live by the philosophy of "What Works".

Theirs a whole freakin world out there and everybodys squabbling about a miniscual. I know...I know....it's insensative........BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. Think about it!

~e

mactastic

Oct 7, 2003, 11:26 AM

Seems to me that one of the problems stems from the size issues. (Yes, here is a situation where size DOES matter.) The land area being argued over is tiny. A two-state solution (seen as the most politically viable solution) will most likely leave two states with economies so small they are not likely to prosper. Sure Israel will continue to get heavy amounts of aid from the US and with that may give them a decent chance at creating an economy that is sustainable on its own, but the Palestinians would be left with a divided state that would be far to small to prosper. They could survive, but who wants to settle for surviving? We all want a chance at the brass ring right?

Ironically, I think the only real good economic solution is to put aside the religious and political tensions and work together for the good of future generations. One large state would have a far better chance of success than two small ones. That's the least likely to happen though.

eclipse525

Oct 7, 2003, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by mactastic
Seems to me that one of the problems stems from the size issues. (Yes, here is a situation where size DOES matter.) The land area being argued over is tiny. A two-state solution (seen as the most politically viable solution) will most likely leave two states with economies so small they are not likely to prosper. Sure Israel will continue to get heavy amounts of aid from the US and with that may give them a decent chance at creating an economy that is sustainable on its own, but the Palestinians would be left with a divided state that would be far to small to prosper. They could survive, but who wants to settle for surviving? We all want a chance at the brass ring right?

Ironically, I think the only real good economic solution is to put aside the religious and political tensions and work together for the good of future generations. One large state would have a far better chance of success than two small ones. That's the least likely to happen though.

Aaaaahhhh.....unity. Now, there's a concept.

~e

abdul

Oct 8, 2003, 05:32 AM

I dont think im blinded by religion. i have many jewish friends some agree with me other dont. but thats what being an individual is all about you can decide on what your beliefs are in certain dicussions.

about unity, that would be great but not likely to happen. about palestine being to small to be economically good for the people is rubbish. England is way smaller than palestine, prob the size of the Gaza strip and thats arguably the 4th largest economy. it matters how tjhe palestinian government decide to educate the public. two examples like saudi where they dont really bother and the eonomy relies heavily on oil or like Iran where for decades they have been investing in education and had the largest growing economy last year when the rest of the world was in decline (may be cos their not that connected with rest of the world....dont know)

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
bottom line is there will be no peace untill suicide bombing stops. period. as long as this continues and arafat & his terrorist buddies keep nursing it along Israel shouldnt change a thing. if they really wanted peace they would have had it all ready but what they want is to eliminate israel.
thats a more modern view ignoring all the trauma the palestuinian people have been through. The only way peace is ever going to be reached if Israel for once make a honest whole-hearted approach to peace, to which the Palestinians cannot argue with. It is no good saying in Oslo we agreed you have 22% of the land orignal land but now in 2003 we are offering you 97/98% of that 22%. The Palestinans have waited loing enough when terrorist attacks were extremely rare in Israel. It is now Israels turn to move first and not keep using the terrorist as an obsticle to something they know they have to do.....give up the occupied land.

By the way a Israel has agreed that border can no longer be changed, and will remain the same, as International law statses. What do you think we should do to Israel for violating this law sinece 1967? (sorry we cant cos the US keep using their veto against any resolution that involves Israel!)

Zaid

Oct 8, 2003, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by abdul

about unity, that would be great but not likely to happen. about palestine being to small to be economically good for the people is rubbish. England is way smaller than palestine, prob the size of the Gaza strip and thats arguably the 4th largest economy. it matters how tjhe palestinian government decide to educate the public.

Just a bit of nit-picking, England is actully quite a bit larger than either Israel or the occupied territories. England is about 130,000 km2 (i.e. England not the UK), wheras Israel excluding the occupied territories is about 20,000 km2. I'm not sure about the size of the occupied territories, but i don't think they could be much more than 10,000 km2 if that.

But you are right in that it is not the size of the country that will necc. determine how feesible an economy it will have. Though the size of its population will have considerable impact on the size of its domestic market.

Desertrat

Oct 8, 2003, 08:09 AM

Gotta agree about geographic size not being a criterion for economic success. Singapore and Hong Kong come to mind.

Political structure, education and work ethic seem to be the important factors, aside from myriad other, lesser things.

'Rat

Inu

Oct 8, 2003, 08:15 AM

I think it is save to say that the palestine state - would there be one in the near future - would not have anything of those "ressources".

So, even if they get their state tomorrow, they would need israel to sell it cheap labour.

eclipse525

Oct 8, 2003, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by abdul
I dont think im blinded by religion. i have many jewish friends some agree with me other dont. but thats what being an individual is all about you can decide on what your beliefs are in certain dicussions.

Ok...let's clear this up. Religion and Politics are one in the same. Religion has been the advisor of Politics for God knows how long. Not to get too into it, but any exisiting scriptures(the Bible and such) have been grossly distorted and have lost the real message in the years and years of translation by MEN. Religion has given God human attributes because it's the only thing they understand and found it is good way to control the people by fear(if you don't do this God will be angry.....yadda..yadda...yadda) I can garantee you that if everyone was practicing Spirituality(not RELIGION) that we'd all be on the same page. NO Rules...NO Guidelines.......just Love. See BUT the concept of LOVE seems so Corny to most people but yet HATE is more acceptable. HATE seems real to most people because that's all we've been brought up with and know. HATE is cooler in some way. Who can you blame.....the Media, Educational system, Politics, Religion.......who really knows. Perhaps a little of all.

You change a nation by changing their beliefs.

Being an individual has nothing to do with you're Religion. Everybody is going to have their own take on a subject, as they should but where it is coming is the key.

~e

Dont Hurt Me

Oct 8, 2003, 12:42 PM

didnt jesus preach love?? 2000 years ago? all of them just dont get it. I see it has to start somewhere and that is no more suicide bombings but love thy neighbor isnt in eithers philosophy......Jesus was so ahead of his time its amazing when you think about it. all they have to do is both sides listen to his teachings. pretty simple to read hard to live by.

eclipse525

Oct 8, 2003, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
didnt jesus preach love?? 2000 years ago? all of them just dont get it. I see it has to start somewhere and that is no more suicide bombings but love thy neighbor isnt in eithers philosophy......Jesus was so ahead of his time its amazing when you think about it. all they have to do is both sides listen to his teachings. pretty simple to read hard to live by.

Jesus, along with many others in history were WAY ahead. They showed us the best in humanity. The also showed us how little we have evolved as a species and how far we have to go. We all think that we are the greatest, smartest and wisest. Man are we kidding ourselves. We need to wake up and get it right. The current way of doing things is obviously failing. I think most are just covering their eyes and hope it will go away.

~e

mactastic

Oct 8, 2003, 04:58 PM

Size isn't the determining factor, however it does provide a few benefits that only come from numerical advantage. Malta, with an area of only 320 sq km will never muster a standing army of a million. It's GNP will never compare to that of the US, although its GNP/per capita may be very good.

Many small countries prosper because they function as tax shelters or sit on a bunch of oil, or provide anonymity to fugitives. Others, like Taiwan and Hong Kong (I though at least one of those was a 'part of the One-China' everyone recognizes?) have managed to become financial or import/export capitals.

Nor is it true that all large countries are well off. It's a matter of resources and an ability to protect ones borders and internal security. Countries without all 3 in abundance are in jeopardy to some degree.

Anyway, just for some perspective, here are the numbers: Gaza Strip (land area 320 km^2) and the West Bank (land area 5640 km^2) with a total of less than 6,000 km^2 of land area, and Isreal with a land area of 20,330 km^2. Taiwan is actually larger than all 3 of them put together, and while Hong Kong is smaller than the West Bank, it is nearly 3 times the size of Gaza. Looking over the list, I see some Sultanates like Brunei and Kuwait (Emiriate?), tax havens like the Cayman Islands, the Mairianas Islands, and Luxemborg as countries whose citizens are among the very wealthy. Otherwise it's a whole lot of little island nations among the very small countries. Perhaps the Israelis and Palestinians can find ways to make a good economy, but I would say they odds are against them.

If the Middle East was peaceful it could probably survive off tourism alone, although that doesn't really provide much in the way of high-paying jobs and low-priced housing.

jefhatfield

Oct 8, 2003, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
didnt jesus preach love?? 2000 years ago? all of them just dont get it. I see it has to start somewhere and that is no more suicide bombings but love thy neighbor isnt in eithers philosophy......Jesus was so ahead of his time its amazing when you think about it. all they have to do is both sides listen to his teachings. pretty simple to read hard to live by.

i know many will disagree with me, but religion is meant to be separate from politics and the mixing of the two comes from

1) man's evil nature
2) evil itself perpetuating the mixing of religion and politics to make religion look bad

our founding fathers were for the most part very religious and that is why they decreed a separation between church and state and some were victims of a church state megaforce like the church of england at that time

my big fear is that the original founding father's checks and balances on religion and politics is being eroded by the christian right who wants to toss away the wisdom of the founding fathers just so they can get votes...a religious left as an institution would be just as evil and damaging to democracy and all americans

pseudobrit

Oct 8, 2003, 05:44 PM

Give Palestinians a vote and Israeli citizenship.

Watch how quickly the problems go away.

Dont Hurt Me

Oct 8, 2003, 05:51 PM

i dont think that will happen, how about give em some land and own govt when they stop the bombing

Pinto

Oct 8, 2003, 06:51 PM

Can someone please explain to me the rationale of how bombing Syria is going to stop Palestinians from blowing themselves up?

How many of suicide bombers trained in Syria?

How much training is required to pull a pin or push a button?

Getting sick of hearing all these lame arguments explaining why it's ok for the US and Israel to bomb sovereign countries and develop WOMD. But anyone else who does so is evil.

America is the home of hypocrisy.

Sayhey

Oct 9, 2003, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by Pinto
Can someone please explain to me the rationale of how bombing Syria is going to stop Palestinians from blowing themselves up?

How many of suicide bombers trained in Syria?

How much training is required to pull a pin or push a button?

Getting sick of hearing all these lame arguments explaining why it's ok for the US and Israel to bomb sovereign countries and develop WOMD. But anyone else who does so is evil.

America is the home of hypocrisy.

There is no tie of the old PFLP camp to the suicide bomber in Haifa. This is a calculated attempt on the part of Sharon's goverment to utilize the "Bush Doctrine" to place pressure on one of its foes in the region. There is also currently a move afoot in Congress to put sanctions on Syria. It is all part of a drumbeat to make Syria the next on Bush's list of states he wishes to undergo "regime change."

eclipse525

Oct 9, 2003, 01:37 AM

Originally posted by Pinto
America is the home of hypocrisy.

The biggest!........Double standard.

~e

jefhatfield

Oct 9, 2003, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by Pinto
Can someone please explain to me the rationale of how bombing Syria is going to stop Palestinians from blowing themselves up?

How many of suicide bombers trained in Syria?

How much training is required to pull a pin or push a button?

Getting sick of hearing all these lame arguments explaining why it's ok for the US and Israel to bomb sovereign countries and develop WOMD. But anyone else who does so is evil.

America is the home of hypocrisy.

as an american, i have a hard time trying to explain why our president is doing what he is doing

many of us have felt duped by what he has told us concerning iraq and bush has less and less of a favorable rating among americans...if he attacks any more countries, he will look like an imperialist and surely lose the coming election or actually get booted from office...his father seemed justified in the first gulf war, but jr's little war in iraq is such a shame and in the end, we have no idea where saddam hussein is and all we might have done is really pissed off the arab world and given someone over there a reason to really hurt us

we live in scary times

abdul

Oct 9, 2003, 05:40 AM

Originally posted by eclipse525
Ok...let's clear this up. Religion and Politics are one in the same. Religion has been the advisor of Politics for God knows how long. Not to get too into it, but any exisiting scriptures(the Bible and such) have been grossly distorted and have lost the real message in the years and years of translation by MEN. Religion has given God human attributes because it's the only thing they understand and found it is good way to control the people by fear(if you don't do this God will be angry.....yadda..yadda...yadda) I can garantee you that if everyone was practicing Spirituality(not RELIGION) that we'd all be on the same page. NO Rules...NO Guidelines.......just Love. See BUT the concept of LOVE seems so Corny to most people but yet HATE is more acceptable. HATE seems real to most people because that's all we've been brought up with and know. HATE is cooler in some way. Who can you blame.....the Media, Educational system, Politics, Religion.......who really knows. Perhaps a little of all.

You change a nation by changing their beliefs.

Being an individual has nothing to do with you're Religion. Everybody is going to have their own take on a subject, as they should but where it is coming is the key.

~e

well i agree in somepoints and totally disagree in other. the whole point of us living in a liberal society is that we can choose what we want to believe and still be respected and be totally acceptable in society. What you are saying everyone should leave their faith which is wrong, if people choose to that is different but Budha did preach about spirituality and but also acceptance of all religions.

Changing the nation is achieved by changing tjhe way we think rather than changing our faith. Faith and belief could be argued as being two very different things.

jefhatfield

Oct 9, 2003, 05:48 AM

Originally posted by abdul
well i agree in somepoints and totally disagree in other. the whole point of us living in a liberal society is that we can choose what we want to believe and still be respected and be totally acceptable in society. What you are saying everyone should leave their faith which is wrong, if people choose to that is different but Budha did preach about spirituality and but also acceptance of all religions.

Changing the nation is achieved by changing tjhe way we think rather than changing our faith. Faith and belief could be argued as being two very different things.

faith is so essential for many people

my faith is different than my beliefs...my beliefs stem from facts i can prove where my faith has no science to back it up and is counter to rational thought...yet i feel my faith in a god i have never seen gets me through tough times

my faith is the only thing someone cannot take away from me...i will get old and my muscles will weaken, my possessions will deteriorate, i will lose my looks, and my mind will eventually most likely diminish...but my faith can stay as new as the day i let god into my life...i think in these unsure times, it is so important to believe in something you can't see or can't prove and some will call believing in god blind faith...and even if that's what it is, it is my most prized possession

abdul

Oct 9, 2003, 07:00 AM

just out of interest what are you trying to say. people should leave their belief for but still retaint their faith? you just lost me by saying

'You change a nation by changing their beliefs.'

and then saying how important faith is for you. Faith and belief are very stronmgly interlinked even in your case. you will have certain things you should do and others you shouldnt. you faith being you should love holds up boundaries and rules in itself, so i dont know where you going with this but hey what the heck the threads about 'Israeli airstrikes in Syria'

Inu

Oct 9, 2003, 07:16 AM

Well, Threads get de-railed, thats the nature of them. But in this case, we could argue if its actually been de-railed or not.

The whole believe isnt faith isnt spirituality is pretty hard to follow - if i translate it to german it believe and faith are same word (!). From what i understand in this discussion is spirituality mudded up converts into religion (something to have faith in) and believe is somewhat a spin off that can be rationally explained (most of the time).

That said, if people would stop beliving in the bible, the quran or the jewish bible (how is it called?) and start to believe in god/allah/jehova they could stop fighting over crumbs that fell of the table of divine spirituality and actually take a seat and feast.

eclipse525

Oct 9, 2003, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by abdul
well i agree in somepoints and totally disagree in other. the whole point of us living in a liberal society is that we can choose what we want to believe and still be respected and be totally acceptable in society. What you are saying everyone should leave their faith which is wrong, if people choose to that is different but Budha did preach about spirituality and but also acceptance of all religions.

Changing the nation is achieved by changing tjhe way we think rather than changing our faith. Faith and belief could be argued as being two very different things.

What I am trying to convey is not that all religion is bad. Inheritely, most are good. Most have been warped and twisted to serve their leaders purposes and own point of view. In a way, they are trying to convince you of their interpretations and either you agree or disagree. If everyone where to just forget about the Micro-Management of their own religions and believe in the one underlining thing that they can all agreed on and that "GOD". A simple belief that most religions can agree on. Religion doesn't define who you are as an individual but most people believe that and that is the illusion.

~e

eclipse525

Oct 9, 2003, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by abdul
just out of interest what are you trying to say. people should leave their belief for but still retaint their faith? you just lost me by saying

'You change a nation by changing their beliefs.'

and then saying how important faith is for you. Faith and belief are very stronmgly interlinked even in your case. you will have certain things you should do and others you shouldnt. you faith being you should love holds up boundaries and rules in itself, so i dont know where you going with this but hey what the heck the threads about 'Israeli airstrikes in Syria'

"Belief" is formed through the environment, society and what you've been taught through the years. It is a perspective based on what you "Believe" is fact.

"Faith" is not formed. "Faith" is part of our being. It's like breathing. You don't think about breathing, you just do. You don't go to bed every night worried you won't wake up, you just do.

~e