Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the suspension of all contacts with the Palestinian Authority on Friday, following an attack by Palestinian gunmen that killed six Israelis civilians, Israeli officials said.
"The prime minister has ordered suspension of all contacts with Palestinian Authority representatives and the closure of all Gaza terminals until real steps are taken against terrorist acts," said the official.
It seems to me like Sharon is grabbing the first chance he gets to avoid having to work with the new prime minister of Palestine. Different Israelis were often quoted as saying 'There can be no peace as long as Arafat is in control' - now that he's gone, it seems there can be no peace as long as Sharon has any say.
IT'S HARD TO PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT; SOMETHING IS WRONG
I'M LIKE THE UNCLE WHO HUGGED YOU A LITTLE TOO LONG
Said it before I'll say it again... Isreal is just as bad as Palestine.
I don't think peace is all that hard, if the two leaders would commit to it. You draw a line, argue over it, agree on it, and thats the fucking end.
They don't want peace. Isreal wants all of palestine, Palestine wants all of isreal. Primitive men in a primitive area believing primitive myths, ensuring that many more generations of their children will continue these pointless holy wars.
Unless the US makes them work together, they dont.
that is really all there is to it, and the Bush administration is pretty much 100% pro-Israeli, so i see no reason to believe there will be any progress on this until at least 2008 at the earliest.
Sharon was a special forces guy back in the early days of the country... Because of that his beliefs about Palestine can't be positive. One of the excuses against peace has been removed. IMHO the ball is in Isreals court. YES, they have to continue to be hard on terrorism but they also have to at least try to bring peace or they are going to continue to loose support from other nations... except the US of course.
Voronwë wrote:Unless the US makes them work together, they dont.
that is really all there is to it, and the Bush administration is pretty much 100% pro-Israeli, so i see no reason to believe there will be any progress on this until at least 2008 at the earliest.
ya b/c it's bush's fault huh? they were killing each other beforee 2000 and they will be still after 2008.
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
the Bush administration has completely disengaged from the Peace process for several years, and there are no signs of a change in direction.
That isnt to say that Clinton, or Bush I, or any other approach is "the right way", what it is saying is that you cannot effect the outcome if you are not involved.
I think you will be hard pressed to find any sober analysis of the last 4 years of the peace process in Palestine and find any substantative involvement by the US.
It isn't Bush's fault that they are fighting, anybody who is interested in the conversation should realize that isn't what I said.
In those 2000 years that Fash said they have been fighting, there have been a few brief spells where there was some progress, and those periods of positive progress were mediated by the United States.
Fash wrote:I agree.. it should 'the US administration for the past umpteen years' supports isreal 100%.
IsrAEL. IsrAEL. IsrAEL. IsrAEL. IsrAEL. IsrAEL.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
the US should do more. i didn't want to give the impression that i thought we should back out. it's a catch-22 though. the US becomes a hypocrite if they tell isreal to be less aggressive and make concessions with palestine. especially while they are supporting them with billions of dollars of military aid and fighting a stupid war in iraq. yet without that support i really don't believe isreal would be able to fend of angry neighbors.
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
the Bush administration has completely disengaged from the Peace process for several years, and there are no signs of a change in direction.
.
Bush Supports Possible Palestinian State
NewsMax.com Wires
Tuesday, Oct. 2, 2001
WASHINGTON -- President Bush on Tuesday said the possibility of a Palestinian state was always part of his administration's effort to negotiate a peace agreement in the Middle East, but that status of Israel would have to be considered.
"The idea of a Palestinian state has always been a part of a vision, so long as the right of Israel to exist is respected,"' Bush said after a breakfast meeting with congressional leaders.
Bush was responding to media reports in the New York Times and the Washington Post that his administration was preparing a peace initiative that would have endorsed a Palestinian state. However, those plans were derailed by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.
The Post reported that Bush also would have met with Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat during the U.N. General Assembly scheduled to take place in late September.
The White House maintained throughout the day that a Palestinian state has always been the possible end product of Mideast peace negotiations, but emphasized that a reduction in violence within the region was first on the administration's agenda.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumseld was expected to leave for the Middle East Tuesday at the president's direction. He was expected to return this weekend, a senior defense department official said. No agenda for the secretary's trip was set and it was unclear with nations he will be visiting.
Rumsfeld is, however, expected to travel into the region aboard a C-17 military transport rather than a conventional aircraft because of continued security threats in the areas. C-17 military transports have the ability to ward off attack.
In his brief session with reporters, Bush did not confirm the media reports, but said his administration was committed to Israeli-Palestinian agreements reached under the Mitchell committee recommendations.
"What I'm telling you is that we are fully committed to the Mitchell process," he said. "And we are fully committed to working with both sides to bring the level of terror down to an acceptable level for both. And I fully understand that progress is made in centimeters in the Middle East. And we believe we're making some progress."
The Times reported that Arab states told U.S. officials that American engagement in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was a condition for their support of Bush’s anti-terrorism campaign. After the attacks, Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was to make the announcement in a speech, signaled to friendly Arab countries that the administration would assume a more visible role in the Middle East, the Times reported.
U.S. involvement in the conflict initially took on a lower-profile role than the previous administration, but in the past six months has escalated to Bush commissioning a fact-finding committee to ascertain how a peace agreement might be forged.
Copyright 2001 by United Press International. All rights reserved.
Actually aren't we as a country being hated for interfering with other countries? People have issue with the US being big brother to the world but now it is expected that we need to step in? I think there is a certain amount of hipocracy in that concept.
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the suspension of all contacts with the Palestinian Authority on Friday, following an attack by Palestinian gunmen that killed six Israelis civilians, Israeli officials said.
"The prime minister has ordered suspension of all contacts with Palestinian Authority representatives and the closure of all Gaza terminals until real steps are taken against terrorist acts," said the official.
It seems to me like Sharon is grabbing the first chance he gets to avoid having to work with the new prime minister of Palestine. Different Israelis were often quoted as saying 'There can be no peace as long as Arafat is in control' - now that he's gone, it seems there can be no peace as long as Sharon has any say.
How about there can be no peace while the Palestinians are still murdering innocents.
Put it in perspective man, you don't start a peace process or expect progress while hostilities are still happening.
Atokal
If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.
Niccolo Machiavelli
Kelshara wrote:Hostilities are happening from both sides, yet at least the Palestinians want peace. Sharon does not.
How can you say that with certainty? I think both sides are equally guilty. I also think this has gone beyond wanting peace so much as wanting revenge.
in front of a camra the palestinian's will say they just want their land and freedom, but one on one they will tell you they want nothing less than the the destrucion of isreal.
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
How I can say that? What was the very first thing the new elected president of the Palestinians said? He wanted a ceasefire. He wanted to work things out. Do I know if it is an honest attempt? Nope I don't, but at least he gives the impression of trying.
Sharon never has. And it is no surprise at all when you read back on the history of the man. That he is the president of Israel is really something every citizen of Israel should be ashamed of.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the suspension of all contacts with the Palestinian Authority on Friday, following an attack by Palestinian gunmen that killed six Israelis civilians, Israeli officials said.
"The prime minister has ordered suspension of all contacts with Palestinian Authority representatives and the closure of all Gaza terminals until real steps are taken against terrorist acts," said the official.
It seems to me like Sharon is grabbing the first chance he gets to avoid having to work with the new prime minister of Palestine. Different Israelis were often quoted as saying 'There can be no peace as long as Arafat is in control' - now that he's gone, it seems there can be no peace as long as Sharon has any say.
How about there can be no peace while the Palestinians are still murdering innocents.
Put it in perspective man, you don't start a peace process or expect progress while hostilities are still happening.
My point is that Sharons statement comes before Abbas was even sworn in as prime Minister. For years, the Israeli have claimed that the first step in any peace process would have to be the removal of Arafat. Now he's gone, and what do they do? They refuse to even meet with the new man. There's been no mention of concessions, of disarmament - of anything. And they (Sharon) grab the very first opportunity to put him out of the picture. Fact is that a fragmented Palestine, a Palestine with no leader of any consequence, suits Israel just fine. A united and organized Palestine would take away any argument that the Israelis have (well, besides 'wah wah you can't have our land'). Sharon is filth. He's a fascist. And I doubt there'll be any peace while he's in power.
nobody wrote:in front of a camra the palestinian's will say they just want their land and freedom, but one on one they will tell you they want nothing less than the the destrucion of isreal.
I really shouldn't even stoop to replying to you. You seem to be one of the people who adheres to the 'Most terrorists are muslims so most muslims must be terrorists' school of thought. I've talked to expatriate palestinians, I've talked to journalists and photographers who lived on the west bank and while there has been a lot of anger and frustration, a lot of emnity and outright hostility, the main point has never been the destruction of Israel or the eradication of all jews. It's been getting a chance to live in peace. To raise your kids in your homeland without fear that a stray bullet will kill them. To be able to build a home without fearing that a bunch of rabid zionists with a fuckton of dollars and a Knesset-mandate will bulldoze your farm and build a fortress where your vegetables were growing a few months before.
edit: grammar from hell
Last edited by Drolgin Steingrinder on January 16, 2005, 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
IT'S HARD TO PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT; SOMETHING IS WRONG
I'M LIKE THE UNCLE WHO HUGGED YOU A LITTLE TOO LONG
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the suspension of all contacts with the Palestinian Authority on Friday, following an attack by Palestinian gunmen that killed six Israelis civilians, Israeli officials said.
"The prime minister has ordered suspension of all contacts with Palestinian Authority representatives and the closure of all Gaza terminals until real steps are taken against terrorist acts," said the official.
It seems to me like Sharon is grabbing the first chance he gets to avoid having to work with the new prime minister of Palestine. Different Israelis were often quoted as saying 'There can be no peace as long as Arafat is in control' - now that he's gone, it seems there can be no peace as long as Sharon has any say.
Im sorry but this would be a GREAT time for Sharon to be shot.
He is just as big if not a bigger asshole then any extreme islamic terrorist...having arafat gone is only a good thing if we can also get rid of sharon, we need a freash start of leadership there
-xzionis human mage on mannoroth
-zeltharath tauren shaman on wildhammer
Kelshara wrote:How I can say that? What was the very first thing the new elected president of the Palestinians said? He wanted a ceasefire. He wanted to work things out. Do I know if it is an honest attempt? Nope I don't, but at least he gives the impression of trying.
Sharon never has. And it is no surprise at all when you read back on the history of the man. That he is the president of Israel is really something every citizen of Israel should be ashamed of.
I don't dispute that Sharon hasn't been the light of peace and isn't the kind of person I would want leading a parade much less a nation. What I questioned I guess is that you said "The Palestinians want peace". I would call that a blanket statement. It would be better if you said that Abbas wants peace instead. If all Palestinians wanted peace then that family wouldn't have been murdered in their home in Gaza. Not that the Israeli armed forces haven't done their share to piss them off.
If they could contain the war to just their borders I'd say let them have it with each other but that wouldn't be the case.
I am willing to bet that the average Palestinian person wants peace. Just like the average Muslim is not a terrorist and the average American is not a KKK member.
Winnow wrote:John Kerry would have already solved the middle east problems and we'd be on our way to 1000 years of peace and prosperity in the region.
(John Kerry is the guy who ran against Bush in the last presidential elections)
People who know who Kerry is: 50 Million.
People who know who Winnow is: 50.
(People who know who Hitler is) > (People who know who Bush is)
People who give a shit about your lame duck troll bait about Kerry: 0
Useless trivia posted herein: 5
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
Winnow wrote:John Kerry would have already solved the middle east problems and we'd be on our way to 1000 years of peace and prosperity in the region.
(John Kerry is the guy who ran against Bush in the last presidential elections)
People who know who Kerry is: 50 Million.
People who know who Winnow is: 50.
(People who know who Hitler is) > (People who know who Bush is)
People who give a shit about your lame duck troll bait about Kerry: 0
Useless trivia posted herein: 5
pwnage: Priceless
Lalanae Burundi High Chancellor for Tourism, Sodomy and Pie
Unofficial Canadian, Forbidden Lover of Pie, Jesus-Hatin'' Sodomite, President of KFC (Kyoukan Fan Club), hawt, perververted, intellectual submissive with E.S.P (Extra Sexual Persuasion)
Zaelath wrote:
People who know who Kerry is: 50 Million.
People who know who Winnow is: 50.
(People who know who Hitler is) > (People who know who Bush is)
People who give a shit about your lame duck troll bait about Kerry: 0
Useless trivia posted herein: 5
My Kerry "lame duck" troll bait will continue for years only to be interrupted by Hillary troll bait from time to time. I admit, it's a cheap thrill to get the Kerry supporters all riled up. You had a good flame going until you ran out of steam and defaulted to a Hitler reference. I've always been concerned with how many people know me. That's why I join all of teh cliques. Comparing how many people know me to a person that ran for the president of the united states is relevant. I better get out there and start shaking some fucking hands! I am the most hated person on VV according to Atokal's endless polls. That's the last thing I involuntarily was entered in with voting involved and at least I won that.
So you remember Kerry? I'm still placing him behind Dukakis and Mondale for least talked about losing candidates starting one day after they lost...and that's even taking into consideration that the internet and broadcast media allow so many more people to be aware of candidates now. It's a shame your resolve of "anyone but Bush" can't be tested again in 2008 by bringing back Kerry for another attempt against him. I want to see how fired up people actually are about Kerry though next election. The "anyone but Bush" campaign backed by Michael Moore and his merry band of slackers went well. I can't wait to see what's in store for 2008.
nobody wrote:in front of a camra the palestinian's will say they just want their land and freedom, but one on one they will tell you they want nothing less than the the destrucion of isreal.
I really shouldn't even stoop to replying to you. You seem to be one of the people who adheres to the 'Most terrorists are muslims so most muslims must be terrorists' school of thought. I've talked to expatriate palestinians, I've talked to journalists and photographers who lived on the west bank and while there has been a lot of anger and frustration, a lot of emnity and outright hostility, the main point has never been the destruction of Israel or the eradication of all jews. It's been getting a chance to live in peace. To raise your kids in your homeland without fear that a stray bullet will kill them. To be able to build a home without fearing that a bunch of rabid zionists with a fuckton of dollars and a Knesset-mandate will bulldoze your farm and build a fortress where your vegetables were growing a few months before.
i only adhere to the "all dane's are whore's" school of thought. i have very close muslim friends, have been to their mousqe's and enjoy learning about their religion. stereotype away if you want. i didnt say the palestinians weren't justified for being angry but their anger is so deep now they want isreal gone from the region and nothing less. not all i realize, but that is a popular school of thought. i agree sharon is a dipshit for not even giving a chance on the first try. i'm not trying to point fingers (exept at the dane's) just stateing what i think is a valid pov
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
All Palestinians most certainly don't want peace. I'd posit that most ordinary ones do but the radicals don't. Abbas cannot control Hamas any more than Arafat did before him. The difference is that the official government of Israel doesn't want peace where the Palestinians' does.
Anyone who thinks the Palestinians murder more innocents than the Israelis needs to look closer as well.
Nothing's going to change with Sharon in control. One of his fellow generals from his army days said he would make a terrible politician as "he is a great soldier but a viscious man and economical with the truth". He also ordered the massacre of several thousand civilian refugees when in command of the army.
nobody wrote:in front of a camra the palestinian's will say they just want their land and freedom, but one on one they will tell you they want nothing less than the the destrucion of isreal.
I really shouldn't even stoop to replying to you. You seem to be one of the people who adheres to the 'Most terrorists are muslims so most muslims must be terrorists' school of thought. I've talked to expatriate palestinians, I've talked to journalists and photographers who lived on the west bank and while there has been a lot of anger and frustration, a lot of emnity and outright hostility, the main point has never been the destruction of Israel or the eradication of all jews. It's been getting a chance to live in peace. To raise your kids in your homeland without fear that a stray bullet will kill them. To be able to build a home without fearing that a bunch of rabid zionists with a fuckton of dollars and a Knesset-mandate will bulldoze your farm and build a fortress where your vegetables were growing a few months before.
i only adhere to the "all dane's are whore's" school of thought. i have very close muslim friends, have been to their mousqe's and enjoy learning about their religion. stereotype away if you want. i didnt say the palestinians weren't justified for being angry but their anger is so deep now they want isreal gone from the region and nothing less. not all i realize, but that is a popular school of thought. i agree sharon is a dipshit for not even giving a chance on the first try. i'm not trying to point fingers (exept at the dane's) just stateing what i think is a valid pov
Pot, meet kettle? You're the one doing the stereotyping, and your generalizations are fallacious in the extreme.
IT'S HARD TO PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT; SOMETHING IS WRONG
I'M LIKE THE UNCLE WHO HUGGED YOU A LITTLE TOO LONG
Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:
My point is that Sharons statement comes before Abbas was even sworn in as prime Minister. For years, the Israeli have claimed that the first step in any peace process would have to be the removal of Arafat. Now he's gone, and what do they do? They refuse to even meet with the new man. There's been no mention of concessions, of disarmament - of anything. And they (Sharon) grab the very first opportunity to put him out of the picture. Fact is that a fragmented Palestine, a Palestine with no leader of any consequence, suits Israel just fine. A united and organized Palestine would take away any argument that the Israelis have (well, besides 'wah wah you can't have our land'). Sharon is filth. He's a fascist. And I doubt there'll be any peace while he's in power.
I officially change my comments/opinion. Sorry with all the death and destruction in south asia I had not been following the Palestinian situation much. I thought Abbas was already sworn in. I agree that at the very least a dialogue with the new Palestian leader is critical. For Sharon to break off contact at this crucial stage is incomprehensible.
My apologies Drolgin.
Atokal
If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.
Niccolo Machiavelli
Kelshara wrote:How I can say that? What was the very first thing the new elected president of the Palestinians said? He wanted a ceasefire. He wanted to work things out. Do I know if it is an honest attempt? Nope I don't, but at least he gives the impression of trying.
So what if Abbas has called for a ceasefire? You know what he's also said? That he has no plans whatsoever to crack down on militants...you know the ones who refused to vote in the election, want Israel wiped out, are continuing to kill Israeli civilians, etc. His "call" for a ceasefire means absolutely nothing precisely because it's only words.
Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:My point is that Sharons statement comes before Abbas was even sworn in as prime Minister. For years, the Israeli have claimed that the first step in any peace process would have to be the removal of Arafat. Now he's gone, and what do they do? They refuse to even meet with the new man.
Why bother meeting with him? He's already made it abundantly clear that he's not going to handle the issue of militants any differently than Arafat (except perhaps to call for a ceasefire more often, a lot of good that will do). In Israel's mind this is Abbas's first real test and the pressure is now on him. If he really wants a ceasefire and wants to be taken seriously as the leader of the Palestians by Israel, he can act rather than just talk.
I'm not trying to say Israel is perfect and defend them no matter what they do (I have a lot of problems with settlements), but a lot of you like to blame them for everything when it's clearly both side's fault.
Freedom of speech makes it much easier to spot the idiots.
So basically you're saying that Israel should be allowed to dictate who leads Palestine, what their policies are? Because a mandate from God tells them that it's their land? Would that mean that the Danes should be allowed to invade Sweden and refuse any peace talks until someone who'd concede everything we wanted was in power? After all, the herulian tribes were forcefully displaced from their homelands 2500 years ago and forced to flee to Denmark. I guess that means we have a proper claim, right?
Of course it doesn't, it's ridiculous. Add to the fact that the palestinians have a perfectly valid claim to the territories - they actually lived there before being displaced by a Euro-dominated UN with a bad conscience the size of Jupiter after WWII. That decision was probably one of the biggest mistakes of post-WW2 international politics and plays a huge part in the anti-western sentiments of the more rabid islamic factions; it was a final act of colonial contempt. And Sharon and his ilk are abusing this. Even if there's no firm grandfather clause in effect, it sure as hell is a lot harder to throw someone off a property they've lived on for five years than to stop them before they dig the first hole. So they allow settlers to spread, gently slapping them on the wrist every 6 months for a while until they've dug in firmly - at which time it's just easier to let them stay.
I once heard a satirist likening the creation of the state of Israel it to giving someone a sweater with the alarm tag still in it. I find that rather apt.
And for the retarded: No, I do not advocate terror as a means for anything. No, I do not hate Israel, jews, zionists or non-religious israelis. I have nothing but contempt for Sharon, but I'm sure he doesn't give a fuck about that - he hasn't seemed to give a fuck about anyone's opinion but his own. No, I do not believe the palestinians are saints. There is no one side that's in the right or in the wrong, however the terror perpetrated by Israel is government-sanctioned, and that scares the hell out of me. And while I'm sure that the palestinians will be as hard-assed about their demands during negotiations as the Israeli are, at least they show a willingness to try.
If there is to be any hope at all of a peace, even a tenuous one, concessions must be made from both sides. And both sides must prove willing to at least discuss these things. If Israel keeps pushing the palestinians as they have been doing, as they are doing now with their unwillingness to even talk with Abbas or his representatives, things are going to go very wrong.
IT'S HARD TO PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT; SOMETHING IS WRONG
I'M LIKE THE UNCLE WHO HUGGED YOU A LITTLE TOO LONG
for there to be any peace in the middle east the danes must withdraw from denmark and give it up to their daddy, sweden.
i agree for the most part with you. to be accurate though the jews began moving into palestine in the 20's after the "Balfour Declaration" by great britain in 1917. it was a pretty steady migration until the nazi's came on the scene in germany. the britt's granted independance to all of the old territories in the region which used to be part of the turkish ottoman empire. all except for palestine b/c they had plans of forming a jewish state before either of the world wars.
both sides are guilty and, from what i've seen, neither side has any reason to trust the other. but to not even try is suicide.
My goal is to live forever. So far so good.
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Benjamin Franklin
So what if Abbas has called for a ceasefire? You know what he's also said? That he has no plans whatsoever to crack down on militants
That's a strange assertion seeing as the first thing he did was order his security forces to crack down on militants and take whatever steps necessary to prevent attacks on Israelis.
. I offer myself to every cute female for free 
