Lets come up with some peaceful, economic solutions to the Israeli/Palestinian issue

[AKDejaVu]

I really think we should just teach all of them to sing "Kumbaya".  How could they possibly want to keep killing each other while they are singing "kumbaya"?

AKDejaVu

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by AKDejaVu
I really think we should just teach all of them to sing "Kumbaya".  How could they possibly want to keep killing each other while they are singing "kumbaya"?

AKDejaVu

That's patently rediculous.  The singing of Kumbaya drives people to kill, not make peace.

[Tac]

"Bomb 'em all
Bomb 'em all
The Taliban, the Iraquis and all..
Bomb Bin Laden and his bunch of turds..
Bomb anything in Iraq that Bush tells us to!

For they tried to go over the wall!
Raising our gas prices and blowing our skyscrapers y'all!
For it was us they came across , and their butts we burnt off
Cheer up lads! Bomb em all!

Oh Bomb 'em all
Bomb 'em all
The Israelies, the Palestinians and all!
Bomb all the Rabbi's and Martyr's with Turbs,
Bomb all the dipshits we tired of hearing in the tube!

Well, bomb em all! bomb em all!
Bomb all those terrorists and their bloody hosts!
Bomb em so they're not a threat
To our interests and those of most!

If our resolve should ever stall,
well we're due for one hell of a brawl..

BUT Bless them all!
Bless them all!
Bless the Husseins, the Ladens and Arafat's
For letting us test our guns.

No lillies or violets for those dead fanatics
Cheer up my lads, bomb em all!

BUt Bless them all!
Oh, Bless them all!
The US the UN,  UK and U' all!
Bless all their efforts and their diplomats
Especially the fat headed ones!

For we are saying goodbye to them all...
The peacenicks , the mullahs and their tiny balls!

So here's to you and lots others,
You can Shove it Up brothers,
We gonna bomb you blokes in the fall!
"

[Dowding]

lol

Some of the fervent 'bomb 'em all' campaigners on this board - you know the real protagonists of the tough-guy approach - ought to start listening to some of the REAL victims over there and their thoughts on the issue.

I saw an interview on the news the other day with 20 year old Israeli girl. She was perfectly sane and reasonable. She had an artificial leg, removed in a suicide bomber's explosion.

Yet did she call for death to all Palestinians? Did she call for harsh military action against the Palestinians?

No. She said the only way forward was a negociated settlement through diplomacy, not through violence.

I find it laughable that a bunch of people so distant from the conflict can spout such fire and brimstone, yet a girl who lost a limb as a direct consequence of that same conflict can be so forgiving and reasonable.

Here's an idea - let's ship Sharon and Arafat to the EU to answer for their respective crimes (war atrocities and terrorism respectively), and let leaders who are not blinded by personal vendetta have a crack at finding a solution.

[StSanta]

A sad state of affairs.

If Arafat really wanted peace with Israel, he would have taken the chance Barak gave him. In the middle east, chances don't get any bigger than that.

Yet, he refused. And he refused to denounce the terrorist ways which have taken him from a small time terrorist to a position of authority; a leader of a nation in exile.

Then, Sharon. The Israeli public was very disappointed that despite the major concessions made by Barak and his willingness to compromise, Israelis were still blown up by bombs. The natural reaction: if they do not want peace, then we need a leader who will ensure they get war.

This whole thing in the Middle East has no chance of settling until both Arafat and Sharon are gone. Even Netanyahu would be preferrable.

It's quite odd, however, how the Palestinians are viewed around the world. In Denmark, there's a split between those who see them a group o displaced people with a very substantial population of extremists who murder innocents, and those who see them as opressed people being brutally opressed and waged war against by a mighty country.

And then there's the view on Palestinians who live in Denmark. 92% unemployment rate amongst Palestinians in Denmark is a good indication about how they're seen from a work ethics point of view. Of course, this is just one side of the coin, but what a side it is.

And in the Arab world, they don't seem to be particularly liked. Sure, Arab nations will encourage tem in the war against the jews: the more Jews that die, the better. Yet they are extremely unwilling when it comes to housing Palestinian refugees, or perhaps giving up some land to help them out. Where is the brotherly love they talk about?

Israel is the only democracy in the region. Perhaps that is why it is even more scary, the tactics they're using. I might be called an antisemite for this, but Jews in general in my experience are pretty exclusionary. Throughout history, this has been the case; always keeping outsiders out, and the own group a very tight knit community. An example: a friend has a Jewish girlfriend. Her father refuses to let her marry him, because he's a Christian - he'll have to convert to Judaism first.

The Israelis need security, the Palestinians land. If it was *this* simple, the situation would have been solved long ago.

Either the Israelis want more than security, or the Palestinians want more than land. I seem to recall some Palestinian groups, *including* Mr Arafat's own, mumbling on about the destruction of Israel.

My heart is with the secular-minded Palestinians AND Israelis. It is in them the hope of peace exists.

[Dowding]

My heart is with the secular-minded Palestinians AND Israelis. It is in them the hope of peace exists.

Amen, brother. Amen.

[Voss]

Uh, didn't Clinton get the Israeli's to offer Palestinians (Arafat) all of the land he requested? IIRC, Arafat was offered all but 3% of the west bank (that 3% being sacred land in Jerusalem) and he walked away from the table?

The real problem is in finding someone to replace Arafat that will support peace with the Israeli's. Surely, not all Palestinians want this martyrdom-to-the-last man policy? Whoever can come forward to make peace happen will have to be a very brave man indeed.

I got an email today from a friend in South Florida that was just over there. He witnessed Israel's soldiers killing innocent civilians, so this has seriously modified my view of Sharon's agenda. I believe this man, as he's an Israeli/American and not a Palestinian (not that being Palestinian would negate his testimony). His observations of civil rights violations (woman and children stripped bare in the streets in detecting bombs) really says a lot. Other things he wrote about are just too terrible to relate.

It looks like both sides have severe corruption occuring in positions of power. I don't see a solution. To paraphrse StSanta, any hope of peace is going to HAVE to come from the people of both lands.

I would have backed Sharon's use of military power had he been able to maintain discipline within the ranks, had he had the intelligence information to go directly to weapon strongholds, etc. But the house-to-house searches, and abuse of civil rights is just too much.

[Nashwan]

Uh, didn't Clinton get the Israeli's to offer Palestinians (Arafat) all of the land he requested? IIRC, Arafat was offered all but 3% of the west bank (that 3% being sacred land in Jerusalem) and he walked away from the table?

The ISraelis offered about 90%, although they wouldn't put it in writing.

However, the sticking points as far as the Palestinians were concerned were that the territory was split up into 4 blocks by Israeli settlements, meaning the West Bank was split up by two Israeli controlled internal frontiers. To go from north West Bank to Sout West bank would mean passing through two Israeli border crossings. The past hast shown the Israelis will close internal borders for long periods to apply pressure to the Palestinian population.

The other main point was that all external borders were also under Israeli control. To go from the West Bank to any other country again required passing through Israeli border crossings.

In other words, all Palestinian movement was to be controlled by Israel, both within the "independant" Palestinian state they were offereing, and between Palestine and the outside world.

Some areas of East Jerusalem were offered, but only individual neighbourhoods, again split up by Israeli territory.

[streakeagle]

Imagine there was an Arab leader who tried to defeat the Israelis militarily and finally realized the futility. In fact, he decides it is better to make as good a peace as possible in order to save lives and enjoy the military and economic benefits of being friendly with the US.

Any Arab who fills those shoes is a dead man. Ask Anwar Sadat of Egypt (hope I got the spelling close). Even if Arafat had turned over a new leaf and accepted a deal with Israel, he would have been killed by his own people and replaced by someone with a taste for Jewish blood.

[~Caligula~]

got an email today from a friend in South Florida that was just over there. He witnessed Israel's soldiers killing innocent civilians, so this has seriously modified my view of Sharon's agenda. I believe this man, as he's an Israeli/American and not a Palestinian (not that being Palestinian would negate his testimony). His observations of civil rights violations (woman and children stripped bare in the streets in detecting bombs) really says a lot. Other things he wrote about are just too terrible to relate.

Can You tell us how that gentleman got to see all these things?
I`m not saying it`s untrue,I just want to make sure the source is valid before I take it for granted.
It`s very sad what`s going on there,but I still think it`s the arabs fault,by not wanting to accept that Israel is there to stay.