This site says that Israel fulfilled all of its Oslo obligations and Arafat fulfilled none of them. In particular, it says:
So, tomndebb, according to this site, you owe Israel an apology for accusing their new settlements of violating the Oslo accords.
Good grief, December, could you have found a more biased site if you tried? You’re going to have to try harder than that.
Are you kidding me? They didn’t even get a democracy until the Sandinistas came in, and we did everything we could-legally and ILLEGALLY to put the Somosistas back in!
december, Chile’s “suspension” of democracy included some of the worst human rights abuses of the latter half of the century. You’ve got to be kidding me if you think that was a good thing!
by the way, here’s hoping that wasn’t a big chunk of copyrighted Tom Lerher material you posted…
Yes, I am glad!
That’s a perfectly reasonable POV. Maybe it’s not up to the US to provide foreign aid. Maybe we shouldn’t support the IMF and World Bank (which IIRC recently provided some financial support to Argentina.) Maybe we shouldn’t defend the world against such baddies as Hitler, Stalin and bin Laden. Maybe we should kick the UN out of New York City. There are some isolationists who still believe all this.
This reminds me advice from my wife when planning my daughter’s wedding. She told to do just three things: Sit down. Shut up. Shell out. I guess this is the behaviour you would like to see from the US.
Can you support this with cites? I thought Chile’s democracy worked fine now.
Crusoe, if you disagree, you should find cites refuting mine or at least prove that my cite is unreliable. Here’s a cite from someone opposed to settlements, but who does NOT claim that new settlements are barred by Oslo.
Here’s a primary source. From the Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements (September 13, 1993)
(I presume this is all or part of the Oslo agreement, because of the date.)
This confirms what my first cite said: the issue of settlements was left for later negotiations.
I will ask you to apologize Crusoe. It looks as if you and tomndebb have both been misled by anti-Israel disinformation.
The bottom line is that, among the considerations which have influenced the decision made by the US about how to wield its power, the consideration of “getting ourselves liked by others” has not often rated very highly. Even uses of US power which were undoubtedly beneficial to others, such as the Marshall Plan, were not primarily adopted with that end in mind. If, in the modern world, it becomes important to the US to be liked abroad, then that has to become a consideration in US policy and the deployment of US power.
What would this look like? How can we not piss people off and actually get them liking, or at least respecting us? What are the common goals? It seems that we are good at creating alliances and just as good at creating enemies.
Tomndebb - do you think the people that make and have made policy for the U.S. are: a)evil, b)stupid, c)both, or d)other. Your points seem easily understood. Why has the U.S. behaved so poorly? It really could not have been any worse had we just set out to piss everybody off.
You can ask for an apology all you like, December, and I’d be interested to find out how you know what information I’ve been reading. I merely pointed out that the source of your information has an obvious interest and may not be the most reliable source. The other link you posted appears more objective and I’m happy to read it.
What’s to apologise for?
Guin, any human rights abuse is bad. I do not mean to support those that took place in Chile.
Still, please get a sense of proportion. Chile’s human rights abuses were small beer, compared to Stalin, Pol Pot in Cambodia, the Soviet putdowns of the uprisings in Hungary and Czechosolvakia, the Ceaucescu government in Romania, the Argentinian “diappearances,” the Fidel Castro regime, North Korea, Zimbabwe, the Cultural Revolution in China. These are just off the top of my head.
[ul][] You implied without evidence that my source was unreliable. It proved to be accurate. []By questioning the source, you in effect were questioning the statement that the settlements were not covered by Oslo. That statement was correct.[/ul]
[ul][] You implied without evidence that my source was unreliable. It proved to be accurate. []By questioning the source, you in effect were questioning the statement that the settlements were not covered by Oslo. That statement was correct.[/ul]
Rubbish. Questioning the reliability of a single source says nothing about the truth of any such statements. Hence my comment about trying harder.
OK. They didn’t violate Oslo. Instead, they went to Oslo, made vague promises of “someday” and then went on taking land. I’m sure that makes a difference to you in your comfortable American home. I’m not sure how that makes a difference to the Palestinians watching their available land taken by invaders.
(Do not construe this to be a statement that I oppose Israel’s right to exist. But existing and expanding are two different verbs. If they needed the OT as a safe buffer from attack, filling it up with Israelis would tend to reduce the amount of buffer available.)
I think two things happened:
We wound up as the biggest kid on the block and fell into the trap of believing that what we wanted was best for the world.
We had created a bogeyman of communism in the late 1800s that was exacerbated by the Soviet takeover of Russia and that clouded our judgement.
Mind you, I do not think that every action in which the U.S. has engaged for the last 60 years has been evil. I do not believe that the U.S. has done more harm than good. We absolutely should have stood up to the Soviet Union and China. We absolutely should defend Israel’s right to exist. I simply noted in my first post that december’s little in which he blames all the hatred on bad people on our failing to lie to them (VoA) or failing to demand rigid adherence to our party line (the U.N.)needed some counterpoint. The issue is more complex than simply claiming that everyone would love us if we misled or crushed them as we ought to have.
There are, indeed, people who hate the U.S. out of envy.
There are people who hate the U.S. (or the West) for its perceived decadence. (Often because that “decadence” threatens some of their beliefs.)
There are those who hate the U.S. because it has prevented their grabs for power.
You misunderstand me if you think that I do not realize that such hatred exists.
My objection is to setting up a little list in which our only “mistakes” were in being too nice or too honest.
…I wish I could edit that last post of mine.
My point, December, was that you initially quoted a single website that had an obvious favoured viewpoint. I presume you would not accept the word of, say, an obviously pro-Arafat website without independent confirmation of the statements within.
I said nothing about whether your claim was true, and having reviewed a range of other websites I agree; the Oslo Accord left out the issue of settlements since agreement would have been all but impossible at that time.
The only question I would like to add to this discussion is why do all people who hate the US love the US Dollar? How does this happen?
BTW, did Estilicon get special permission to be nasty in every forum on this board? ( I guess that’s more than one question, sorry).
(Try to remain calm Francisco, don’t loose your temper)
Sense of proportion? 1198 persons are dissapeared in Chile (thousands more were murdered with out a fair trial or were tortured, imprisioned, raped, etc). Because there a lot of persons in the world that keep a “sense of proportion” in human rights abuses, today, almost 60 years after Nuremberg there are barbaric acts going in places like: China, Cuba, Israel, Palestina, etc, etc.
What you fail to notice December is that your goverment is a direct responsable of the death of everyone of them. Not only that, all over Latin America the U.S.A goverment have acted in an (Can’t find the word) horrible, disgusting way causing the suffering of thousands.
You asked me to provide a cite for my allegations that in Chile the army is a power over the state, unfortunately all that I found over internet is in spanish. I can say, though, that for example a percentage of the product of the sale of copper (one of Chile’s principal exports) goes directly to the army, then army funding is not decided by the congress, in all effects they are economically independent. Moreover when Pinochet retired, he chose his succesor. The same happens, I believe, with all the high-ranking officers of the chilean army.
Regarding your coment about quitting the IMF, UN, World Bank. etc. You are free to do so (once you rejected being a member of the Nations society) but until you quit you have to play by the rules. If you think that the UN was Hijacked by “countries that hate democracy and the U.S” (as you always mention) get the hell out of it. No one is forcing you to stay. But,again, if you want to stay, respect the rules. Moreover, in the case of the U.N. U.S.A is a member of the security council, you have veto power, in other words you can defend yourselves pretty well.
This is getting long but you mentioned the “IMF” help to Argentina, you are wrong the IMF has not lent us money, they gave money to Chile, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay in an effort to contain the argentinian crisis (they are faling miserabely). I hope they do lend us money in a near future because the crisis is devastating. Fortunately for us Europe is trying to force the IMF to negotiate, unfortunately Europe is not actually in control.
Sorry guys, but I don’t buy it.
If “they” hate us for what we did on Chile, the Philippines, Grenada, etc., why is this happening now?
The OP gives you a good excuse to roll out the standard Jeremiad about how evil the US is, neglecting the evil others have done and the good that the US has brought to the world.
You want to beat your breasts, go ahead, but puh-leeze…do you really think that the September 11 attacks were a response for what we did to Somoza and Lumumba?
I can accept that they hate us for our support of Israel, but contrary to what others may feel, I don’t think this justifies the indiscriminate murder of civilians and children.
Where’s that been said in this thread?
No bizzwire, you are lucky that people in Nicaragua are peacefull. You were not lucky in the mid-east though.
odd that **december ** talks here about a ‘sense of proportion’ and points out that condeming actions in one area doesn’t condone bad behavior in others, but he didn’t seem to want to allow Amnesty International to behave that way.
I re read my post tradesilicon, I forgot where I was. My apologies to December. I don’t regret what I said but where I said it, the fact is I wrote in anger the guy is so biased and close minded that it makes me want to (@@#~~##~~€).