Subject:
|
Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 15 May 2002 20:07:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
835 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> > > > > > 18 months of suicide bombings will have that effect. I guess Israel • never
> > > > > > should have withdrew in 1997.
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps they should never have invaded in '67?
> > > >
> > > > Well if 5 Arab armies had not attacked them they probably would not have.
> > >
> > > You should have paid more attention in history class. This is not quite • true.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *If* it meant a lasting piece, do you think Israel should hand back the • West
> > > > > Bank, or do you think they should get to keep what god gave them ~3000 • years
> > > > > ago?
> > > >
> > > > *If* it meant peace then yes I do think Israel would hand back the West • Bank.
> > > > That was why Barak was elected and offered peace to Arafat in the first • place.
> > > > (Because the people supported it and thought it would mean peace.) The • current
> > > > political atmoshere in Israel was a direct result of offering peace and • getting
> > > > a terror war instead. That is why Sharon was elected. (Despite his poor
> > > > record) That is the whole mid-east problem in a nutshell. (Maybe you • disagree
> > > > but I do not understand why once you study the history of the past few • years,
> > > > let alone the whole 54 years.)
> > >
> > > Has all the land taken in '67 ever been offered back... I don't think so.
> >
> > Odd? The Arab countries that controled the land (and forced the Arab • refugees
> > now called Palastinians into the refuge camps in the first place) have not
> > requested the land back.
>
> That is a notion which is quite wrong.
>
> > Dispite this 97% of that land has been under direct
> > palastinian control since 1993. (I mistyped 1997 earlier in the thread)
>
> You have *not* answered my question have you? The answer is no!
>
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > > How free is a society if its leaders are in the pocket of an overseas
> > > > > pressure group? I would worry if it were my country. AIPAC supports
> > > > > candidates from your main parties, and even those from groups like the LP.
> > > >
> > > > Therein lies a seperate problem. The people in Washinton are supposed to • be
> > > > representatives of the people not politicans. 99% of the United States • social
> > > > problems would practically disapper if the Constitution were reinstated as • its
> > > > basis of government.
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > > > Of course not. If all your information was based on State Controlled • media
> > > > you
> > > > > > unquestionably trusted, how would that affect your beliefs.
> > > > >
> > > > > That is not the situation though is it? In the occupied territories, the
> > > > > media may not be "free" but the news is all around them - tanks,
> > > > > checkpoints, air raids etc.
> > > >
> > > > Right, but the people are not told that it is because of the suicide • bombings,
> > > > they are told it is because Israelies are evil oppressors.
> > >
> > > To a certain extent they are "oppressors". Check their human rights record!
> >
> > Who forced the Palastinians into refugee camps in the first place? Not • Israel.
>
> Who made them refugee's? I accept it would have been more convenient for
> Israel if the Arab states had accepted them into their population more. But
> why should they? Why should Israel be allowed to steal their land? Would you
> let them steal yours? Really?
This excerpt from one of Mona Charen's articles conters your argument far
better than I can and includes its source:
"A one-stop shopping book puts these myths to rest. Joan Peters set out to
write a sympathetic history of the Palestinian "struggle." Her research soon
persuaded her that nearly everything she thought she knew about the Arab-Jewish
conflict in the Middle East was wrong. Her meticulously researched book, "From
Time Immemorial," was published in 1984 but is still in print.
The Arabs have successfully blurred the true history of what happened when
Israel was formed in 1948. Six hundred thousand Jewish refugees from Arab
nations fled to Israel -- many in fear for their lives, most after having their
property expropriated. They were assimilated by Israel.
About the same number of Arab refugees fled what is now Israel, the West Ban
and Gaza. They were not assimilated by the Arab nations, with whom they shared
a common religion, ethnicity, history and language, but were instead herded
into refugee camps the better to "return" to their homes after Israel was
obliterated by Arab armies.(Since the World War II, more than 100,000,000
people have been forced to become refugees. Nearly all were forced to
assimilate into nations with different cultures and traditions.) Further, these
Arab refugees had no ancient tie to the land of "Palestine." Most were recent
immigrants, a fact implicitly
acknowledged by the United Nations when it altered the definition of refugee to
apply to those who have lived "at least two years" in a location."
>
> Let's get back to my question; does any of that excuse Israel’s shocking
> (excuse the pun) human rights record?
I certainly agree that Israel's human rights record is spotty but the
Palestinian's is far worse. That does not give Israel the right to do some of
the things it does, but at the same time why is no one critizising Palestinian
actions?
>
> > >
> > > > The Saudi-Arabia
> > > > state controled newspaper printed an article durring the Jewish holiday of
> > > > passover. It told the Arab public how "[Jewish Vampires kidnap Arab • Children,
> > > > put them in barrels with hundreds of needles and drain their blood for • their
> > > > evil rituals.]" Why this sort of blatant Arab propaganda did not recieve a
> > > > huge outcry like anything Israel does is quite baffling to me.
> > >
> > > I've not read it, but it sounds rather pathetic. What about the words of
> > > the late Rehavam Zeevi, were his views any more acceptable to you?
> > >
> > > > My local
> > > > newspaper had a small article about it at the time, but it was buried in • some
> > > > obscure place toward the back.
> > > > >
> > > > > > They keep the
> > > > > > masses discontent and have a scapegoat to blame it on. That strengthens • their
> > > > > > power base and gives them lots of mindless volunteers. Heck, if I was • naive
> > > > > > enough to believe innocent women and children were evil and that by • blowing
> > > > > > them up I would go to heaven, I just might sign up.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think Sharon thinks about "innocent women and children". Do • you
> > > > > think he feels he has a place in heaven? Or does he know what he is doing
> > > > > (and has done) is wrong? What about the Israeli electorate? They voted for
> > > > > him knowing his history.
> > > >
> > > > I never said I supported Sharon.
> > >
> > > I did not ask that.
> > >
> > > > I do support Israel's right to fight back
> > > > though.
> > >
> > > Do the Palestinians not have the “right to fight back”?
> >
> > From Israel offering peace?!
>
> No, fight back against Israeli agrression!
So they start a fight and cry 'wolf' when they lose?
>
> > What the heck?! Arafat formed the PLO in 1964
> > with the intention of destroying Israel. Note the date, 3 years before • Israel
> > invaded. Up to that point the only thing Israel had done was exist.
>
> lol
>
> > Arabs do
> > not want the "infidels" in their midst its as simple as that. Everything • else
> > is smoke and mirors.
>
> 2 examples of "smoke and mirrors":
>
> Where did the refugees come from?
> What was Israel's role in Suez?
>
>
> <snip>
> > > > > The Constitution gave you the Government you (the US electorate) did *not*
> > > > > vote for... ;)
> > > >
> > > > Well that is a common fallacy. Gore's supposed popular vote majority was a
> > > > smaller percentage than Bush's percentage win in the recounted Florida • vote.
> > >
> > > There is also the small matter of those who did vote but their votes were
> > > not counted... ... and those who should have been able to vote but could
> > > not! ;)
> >
> > Hence the whole margin of error. Most of the time the people vote for a
> > canidate by a wide enough margin to overcome it. There is no way of knowing
> > who really won the popular vote. That is why the electorate is there.
>
> I can tell you preferred Bush!? ;)
Neither was/is qualified in my opinion. I am simply dispelling myths about the
Electoral College.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
| (...) (Given that this thread-let was about Ms Charen's integrity, I’m bemused that you are using her to justify your argument(!). Have we went full circle?) Even if true, I don't agree it does answer my argument. My questions to you were: 1. Who (...) (22 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
| (...) That is a notion which is quite wrong. (...) You have *not* answered my question have you? The answer is no! (...) Who made them refugee's? I accept it would have been more convenient for Israel if the Arab states had accepted them into their (...) (22 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
93 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
