Reeder wrote:
”You aren’t going to list the Israeli’s who won’t be going to school?”
I do not have the numbers and I do not think that these animals that are behind bombing of civilians represent the Palestinian people nor have very high standards of moral.
Yes, I demand a higher moral of a regular army controlled by its officers, than of religious fanatics/brainwashed extremists or in some cases, in some other countries; bandits that pretends to be freedom fighters.
Reeder wrote further:
”What about the American students who won’t be going back?”
I read in a other tread that the terrorists of WTC and Pentagon and the plane that was fortunately not hitting the White House, were from Saudi-Arabia and Egypt. I do not know if anyone of them was from Palestine. I simply do not know.
As far as I understand You are, at least not against the US actions in Afghanistan? (It is not my intention to put words in Your mouth, I just assume).
I am not either.
Even if the terrorists mainly came from Saudi-Arabia and Egypt, I do not think the US government will begin a war there? So, obviously in the question of war against terrorism, it is not a question about from what country they came.
But to begin to make war against countries, seemingly without proof against anything, does not make much sense to me. I mean Irak or whatever is next.
clairobscur wrote:
”But what are these palestinian thinking? That they can actually live on their own land, and not only have have children, but also let them live in their houses or walk in the street? That’s ludicrous.”
Heh. heh. Yes, that is how we get it interpreted through the main media, do we not?
And then we are very astonished when some other countries gives us curious smiles.
december wrote:
“Some Palestinians are killing their own children? That what happens when they send out their children to be suicide bombers.”
Site?
<snip>
december wrote further:
”If the Palestinians would attacking Israel, then Israel will stop retaliating.
Arafat started this war by calling for an Intifada two years ago. Now, having started the war, some Palestinians complain that their children are being killed in the war they started.”
So they begun a war? Site?
Is it legal, in Your eyes, to kill the children of America if US begins a war?
I see that Sharon made a trap for the Palestinians, and they walked straight into it, beginning the Intifada. Intifada is not a proclamation of war. Not even near.
december wrote further:
**”Jews call it “chutzpah”
(In case you don’t know the word, Henry, the quintessential example of chutzpah is the boy who murdered his mother and father, and then asked for mercy because he was an orphan.)”**
Thank You for the information. I did not know that, but in this case it is the children that are killed.
Uncle Toby wrote:
”I am always extremely suspicious when people connect two unrelated things in a statistic such as the number of days in a year and the number of events which are not likely to occur as a function of the passage of time so such as due to the size of a population. Whenever I see this done I smell propaganda.”
Mostly true, I would say. And it is not the number I worry about, it is the process that worries me. With all that power, if Israel know who the terrorists are, where they are at a certain moment, etc., why do they not arrest them? Just how US made in the war against nazis. There was a court in Nurnberg, was there not?
You can not have a war inside a country, even without proclaiming a war, where the civilians are living, and amongst them some criminals/terrorists etc., or can You?
Think if the Mayor, in New York would proclaim a war against criminals, very rightfully, and would take the same measures?
And I bet that through e.g. narcotics are many more killed daily in New York than in Israel and Palestine together.
Think if the Germans would have begun to bomb in Germany and Italy, when they fought (successfully) the Red Brigades. Or when Italy fought their terrorists.
Naturally, the Germans and the Italians are “our race” and that is why it would have been very shocking, if they would have shelled cars, bombed from the air etc.
But to do that in some Islamic country or two. Who would count? (Except Henry that seems to like non-important figures).
msmith537 wrote:
“Are these the Palestinians who murdered a woman for being an “informant”…
I read about this in Reuters news.
msmith537 wrote, continuing:
…”after they tortured a “confession” out of her son or the Palestinians who routinely strap explosives to their precious children and send them off into Israeli markets and bus stations?”
I also condemned these terrorists, who are not the people of Palestine, but I would like to have sites on this last one.
msmith537 wrote further:
"Please stop pretending that the Palestinians have not played a role in the violence. At best it makes you sound as if you have an agenda, at worst it makes you appear ignorent."
Yes some Palestinians are terrorists, but to say so about the whole country (that is not even a country)?
If we take Israel, I do not think that the shelling and bombing are a very good example of Israelian thinking. What worries me on both sides, is that neither side seem to get their extremists into trial.
For Palestinians it is the members of a group that are not able to keep their people working as a democratic country (that they do not have). They should have a country.
They should have a law made by a elected parliament or such organ. That is the only way, as I see it.
In the case of Israel, it is a country. A country with all means to do what they wish, when we speak about law within their own ranks. In other words, if You as a democratic country do not care about the law, You are destroying what Your mothers and fathers has built up, creating the democracy.
And this tendency I see in all “the war against terrorism”. (Except in the war of Germany and Italy, some decades ago).
And that is exactly what the terrorists wants!
We, the western countries, are just playing in the hands of bin Laden!
If we escalate against countries, instead of terrorists, it will end in a total war, a South versus North war.
Sparc wrote:
**”Thanks for reporting the news to us Henry.
What the fuck are we supposed to say to all of that? That it’s terrible? That it’s
unacceptable? That it’s tragic? That it’s despicable?
Count me in as answering yes to all of those things. So what? What was your point? Oh, yeah you asked what we would do… Is it a poll? If so you’re in the wrong forum. I won’t bite cause there is no answer since I think you’ll find that the reality is that we would react like most people do. Some of us would flee.
Some of us would protest. Some of us would fight back. The really desperate and/or screwed up amongst us would answer with the same mint. Most of us would hunker down under our kitchen tables and in our cellars and just pray that it would go away. Or was your point not to get an answer, but that this makes all things all right and even on both sides?”**
Yes, You are naturally right. My point, to what You write is maybe that we seem to have the rights to resistance, but mostly we do not want the other guy to have it. I mean the common opinion in west do not give it to “those other ones”.
From earlier posts I know that You are not thinking in this way.
The rest of Your post: I think I have mainly corrected myself in the earlier post.
(The fact that the whole OP was unclear). I will be more precise next time.
jjimm wrote, in the end of his answer:
”Are you asking “what would you do” as some kind of attempt to justify terrorism?”
Absolutely not. But I hope a country that is occupying at least will do so according to international law. If it wants to represent the western democracy or not is not the issue in the case of international law, but if it do that also…, it is not very good for us others, trying to push our “culture” world-wide.
And maybe we should not do that.
sailor wrote:
**”294 Palestinian children will not be going to school any more. They were killed by Israeli soldiers in the past two years
Sounds like a good reason why Arafat should have accepted the peace terms that were offered him. The longer Palentinians continue to choose to fight, the more Palestinians will die. A bad peace is better than a good war but Palestinians are choosing war.”**
If You mean the Camp David suggestion, I do not think You would accept a peace where You would have been surrounded by another army, in this case the Israelian army, 100%. Totally closed except the few roads that would have been “elevated” to Gaza.
There was another suggestion from Barak, the Taba suggestion, that Arafat would have accepted (in this suggestion there still was some points to discuss, like how and what to swap of the settlements etc). There was elections and Sharon was elected.
How it went after that, we know quite well. (Sharon was, btw., also against Camp David).
There was also the Saudi-Arabian suggestion that Arafat would most probably have accepted.
The west did not seem to be too interested in this suggestion, for reasons that I do not understand.
So who has chosen a war? I can say to this, that if we look at the recent 10 years or so, I do not understand how we can push all the guilt on Arafat and his organization.
It is a more moderate organization, and even the militants, the terrorists, has been murdering his men. Just giving the more extremist elements of Israel a helping hand.
Not to Israel as whole.
As I see there is quite big elements, groups etc. in Israel that wants peace on the terms widely known as acceptable for the majority of both parts. As the Taba suggestion.
I admit I have been answering, not only keeping myself to the OP, but I did not see any other way to answer.
or :mad: or :rolleyes: ?