Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sayhey, Apr 14, 2004.
This column is worth a read on the statement of Dubya coming out of his meeting with Sharon.
No doubt this will also go over in the Middle East like the proverbial fart in a spacesuit. Score another one for W.
I think we have our new poet laureate!
It will take the American public and the press a while to understand what this really means. But I agree with both of you that this will resonate in the Middle East. The idea of "winning over the Arabs" is dead for good.
Is the Bush administration, sick of fighting two wars, trying to create one massive regional war instead?
'Surely there must be other Muslims we can piss off'
I think its a good thing.
This sets the ground for a permanent Palestinian state, hopefully one that won't be destroyed and enveloped by its neighbors again. Israel is talking about a permanent pull out of Gaza. With the wall up the two sides can cool off for a couple of decades and everything will be sane
What it means, from the Palestinian perspective, is the "two state solution" is no longer a possiblity. The leadership will quickly go back to the demand for one "democratic, secular state" in all the lands of what used to be Palestine. It means no negotiated settlement in our lifetimes. That is not a good thing.
They should've stopped the suicide bombings for then they would've been more likely to get allot of the stuff they wanted. With the suicide bombings fewer and fewer people are going to listen to anything they have to say.
nice of you to walk the moral high ground when neither you nor your country has been in the weaker position of asymmetrical warfare. at least not since the revolutionary war.
how'd you like it if france and canada conspired to give california to canada?
that does not justify terrorism.
That does not justify walking into a movie theater full of women and children and setting off a bomb.
That does not justify walking up to a school bus stop and setting off a bomb.
Having bad things happen to you does not justify you doing bad or worse things to someone else.
and this is a valid argument how?
this in no way realtes to the wrest of the thread
and is completely off topic.
I do wish we had a President who didn't have the biblical, apocalyptic view of the world.
Perhaps his use of the word "crusade" right after 9/11 wasn't just an insensitive slip of the tongue after all?
Why are we giving the terrorists, sorry, Palistinians everything they want? Why should that be the goal?
Why are we giving the terrorists, sorry, the Israeli's everything they want? Why should that be the goal?
They are both guilty as sin, both wrong as sin, and both going to cause the deaths of thousands of American's over time.
I never thought so. You might call it a Freudian slip. The article recently posted here (from the LA Times) suggests that Bush's view of the world is deeply biblical, and you can't be deeply biblical without believing in the bible's forecasts of end-times.
it is a direct answer to his post. He made a statement and I replied to that statement. Because his statement does not justify terrorism. Simple fact.
given the original name of "Operation Infinite Justice," i find it hard to believe that "crusade" was an accident
How many suicide bombers are Jewish?
Fact over half of Palestinians are christians.
How many suicide bombers are Christians?
Israel is fighting terrorist they are not terrorist.
Killing civilians that are being used as shields by terrorist is not terrorism.
Bulldozing houses or plants in houses front yards that are covering up tunnels used to smuggle weapons is not terrorism.
Returning fire on terrorists firing from within a mosque or other religious building while not recomended is not terrorism.
Bulldozing homes built on soil claimed to be owned by Israel because they didn't have a building permit (something we Flordians do to people in everglades from time to time) is not terrorism even if they are wrong about who actually owns that land.
Setting off explosions at a bus stop to committ "terror" is terrorism.
You are correct in your eyes, they are not, in mine they are not, but in the average Palistinians eyes, they are. Terror is in the eye of the beholder. One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
The use of terror by the Israelis goes unnoticed by most Americans. When children who have rocks for weapons are gunned down by Israeli occupation forces or when Israeli helicopter gunships fire rockets into housing complexes and open streets then the Palestinians see that as terrorism. How many innocents were killed when the leader of Hamas (a despicable man IMO) was blown up by such a rocket? I have no sympathy for those who organize terror. That goes for Palestinian Islamic Fundamentalists who would trick children into carrying bombs or Israeli military forces that have no regard for Palestinian lives in the indiscriminate fire of shells and missiles. We should be about ending the support of such actions on both sides and then we might have some credibility in the Arab world.
I've got plenty of sympathy for the situation in which Israel finds itself. But the problem in this part of the world is 50 years of placing blame and pointing fingers. I actually thought Bush was on the right track with the so-called roadmap. No one plan will ever succeed but having an overarching plan provides for some hope of an equitable resolution some day. The US will never be seen as a totally unbiased party in this conflict, but I think what Bush has done now is throw his hand in completely with the most militant parties in Israel, insuring that the US will never been seen by the Palestinians as an honest broker.
A freedom fighter targets military targets not movie theaters and bus stops.
Note the target was a viable military target. The civilians that died while terrible weren't the target thats the difference between the correct way of fighting and the wrong way of fighting. The terrorist ignore military targets and only hit civilians. That is what makes them terrorists.
If the Palestinians had stopped the suicide bombings then the US would have taken their side in the conflict. Israel would not of had an excuss to strike back and if they continued to do so then the US would not look the other way. Maybe before they would've but not now, not with the cameras watching.
if you are from the third world, poor, and live in what is essentially an armed encampment over-which you and your people have little to no control, then you strap on a bomb and go for the soft targets. It is much more effective because you are fighting not only against the physical presence of you oppressors but also against their mindset of domination, control, and superiority. Few things make a people reflect upon the totality of a situation like the blood of their sons, brothers, sisters, fathers, daughters, and mothers flung like petals into the wind in a public and often used place. It serves not only to fight but also to create a lasting image of carnage and fear etched into the minds of your oppressors.
When fighting for liberty and the god given right of self determination you use what weapons and tactics you must in order to effect the necessary outcome.
The palestinians did not stop suicide bombings because Israel did not stop their strikes (for more than like 18 hours, at any rate). To stop fighting back against a country that already has the US's support... that's admitting defeat.
I'm not surprised bush did this, he's been a puppet of israel just as much as a puppet for big corporations. Israel can do no wrong in our eyes, because the Jews have suffered so much throughout history, surely they're still suffering. Unfortunately, an awful lot of Jews reject Israel's actions, of course the Torah forbids the creation of a Jewish state while they are in exile-- the whole country is a blasphemy. I have immense respect for the (predominately orthodox) Jews that are willing to say, "not in my name".