If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   If you were a country the size of New Jersey and got billions in subsidies per year to "keep the peace," you probably wouldn't want to discuss the reality of the core issues that cause the violence in the first place either   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 98
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2073 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Jul 2007 at 10:58 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



98 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-07-17 10:44:11 AM
Certain presidential candidates, who will remain nameless, do not think that billions of dollars in subsidies gives us any say in the matter.

We call such people "wrong."
 
2007-07-17 10:50:34 AM
get yer nomex fire suits here, folks - it's gonna get mighty warm in here!
 
2007-07-17 10:53:07 AM
Does anyone else think that this is a particularly odd time to be holding peace talks, given the current Palestinian intenal divisions?
 
2007-07-17 11:01:56 AM
First thing on the table: that PLO jihad bee on the kids show has to go.
 
2007-07-17 11:09:50 AM
Is there a particular reason why criticizing Israel is "verboten?" I mean, we criticize countries all the time...Iran, Iraq, ourselves, China, most of Europe.

Why is Israel off-limits? You can criticize a country subjectively and without bias, and every single country has flaws.
 
2007-07-17 11:10:31 AM
Jon Snow

...given the current Palestinian intenal divisions?


... or given the crisis we have created in Iraq?
 
2007-07-17 11:13:05 AM
Snarfangel: Certain presidential candidates, who will remain nameless, do not think that billions of dollars in subsidies gives us any say in the matter.

We call such people "wrong."


Oh come on, who? I don't want to vote for that person and don't know this li'l factoid.
 
2007-07-17 11:13:48 AM
DarthBrooks: First thing on the table: that PLO jihad bee on the kids show has to go.

Al-Aqsa TV is farking disgusting. I hate the indoctrination of children.

PainSorrowLoss: Is there a particular reason why criticizing Israel is "verboten?" I mean, we criticize countries all the time...Iran, Iraq, ourselves, China, most of Europe.

Why is Israel off-limits? You can criticize a country subjectively and without bias, and every single country has flaws.



It's not off-limits to reasonable people. However there are some bigots who use criticism of Israel as an excuse to bash Jews, and there are others that have used this to conflate any criticism of Israel with antisemitism in order to silence Israel's critics.

Reasonable people can ignore these two fringe elements and have rational discourse about Israel, including criticisms of its policies.
 
2007-07-17 11:13:59 AM
PainSorrowLoss: Is there a particular reason why criticizing Israel is "verboten?" I mean, we criticize countries all the time...Iran, Iraq, ourselves, China, most of Europe.

Why is Israel off-limits? You can criticize a country subjectively and without bias, and every single country has flaws.



Why do you hate the Joos?
 
2007-07-17 11:14:04 AM
There's only one core issue: the insanity of islam.

What's to discuss?
 
2007-07-17 11:14:09 AM
Why is everyone complaining about Israel? I would have no problem if they came and evicted me and killed anyone who fought them because I'm living on the land that some old book says is theirs!
 
2007-07-17 11:17:55 AM
costa: Why is everyone complaining about Israel? I would have no problem if they came and evicted me and killed anyone who fought them because I'm living on the land that some old book says is theirs!


but the silly brown arabs weren't using the land effectively, so its ok that isreal took it away and put it to good, western use.
 
2007-07-17 11:17:55 AM
Mighty_Dog: ere's only one core issue: the insanity of islam Religious Fundamentalists.

What's to discuss?


FTFY... the orignal was trolling.
 
2007-07-17 11:17:56 AM
Jon Snow: Does anyone else think that this is a particularly odd time to be holding peace talks, given the current Palestinian intenal divisions?

No, this is a good time for Israel to discuss "peace", FATAH is weak and in place only with the support of Israel and by extension the USA. They can get a lot of concessions from a weak opponent.

The people the need to talk to are HAMAS, they can actually deliver peace, but Israel don't want peace, they want more of the West Bank.
 
2007-07-17 11:18:35 AM
bwesb: Jon Snow

...given the current Palestinian intenal divisions?

... or given the crisis we have created in Iraq?


Other than displaced Palestinians who had moved to Iraq, is that war really affecting Palestinians or Israelis?

DarthBrooks: First thing on the table: that PLO jihad bee on the kids show has to go.

Also, I forgot to mention, that Al-Aqsa TV is a Hamas station, not a PLO station.
 
2007-07-17 11:19:26 AM
"But we have been very clear that we are not willing to discuss at this stage the three core issues of borders, refugees and Jerusalem," Eisin added.

So uh...what's left?
 
2007-07-17 11:20:08 AM
I'm anti-semantic!

Why Verboten? It sounds so.. i dunno... oppressive. Try to be a bit more PC in your terminology. Prohibited has a nice friendly government feel to it without being so overbearing.
Das ist verboten.... That's Prohibited... see my point?

/ don't have a point really.
 
2007-07-17 11:20:18 AM
Lard_Baron: No, this is a good time for Israel to discuss "peace", FATAH is weak and in place only with the support of Israel and by extension the USA. They can get a lot of concessions from a weak opponent.

The people the need to talk to are HAMAS, they can actually deliver peace, but Israel don't want peace, they want more of the West Bank.


The whole point of the article was that Israel isn't going to discuss anything right now, so I am not sure where you're coming from with that.
 
2007-07-17 11:24:19 AM
Have you ever noticed how none of the people who normally complain about government intervention and welfare are suggesting to stop sending billions of dollars to the middle east each year to keep the peace there? Why not simply cease all outside intevention and regulation and let the 'invisible hand of the free market' sort it out?
 
2007-07-17 11:24:23 AM
PainSorrowLoss: Why is Israel off-limits? You can criticize a country subjectively and without bias, and every single country has flaws.

It isnt. But what are your criticisms? Valid criticisms are fine, but people get angry when it is placed on a pillar and told how to act.

Here as an Israel supporter:
-Run by a minority of well organized orthodox Jews that want to keep their ideas or perfection in line so the rest are forced to take bad decisions
-Where there are no new leaders that can actually run the government without sucking the cock of group mentioned above.
-Made a horrible mistake invading Lebanon, it killed thousands of people in a conflict that should not have broken out.
-the settlements are oppressive and need to be removed
-Classicism and racism by Jews from Europe against the Jews from Arab and Soviet countries
-It is taking water and mineral resources away for stupid projects that help no one
-And it is too willing to let Palestinians suffer and not sign away the land. they are the lone superpower in the region and can beat the shiat out of any Arab country easily.
 
2007-07-17 11:26:05 AM
Lard_Baron: No, this is a good time for Israel to discuss "peace", FATAH is weak and in place only with the support of Israel and by extension the USA. They can get a lot of concessions from a weak opponent.

The people the need to talk to are HAMAS, they can actually deliver peace, but Israel don't want peace, they want more of the West Bank.


Hamas has no interest in talking with Israel, nor have they shown that they can be trusted. Realistically, Hamas is still interested in attacking Israel and has been behind many attacks. Worse, the way they deal with their own people (brutal infighting between the various Palestinian factions) shows that even when they are working with someone, they are quite capable being duplicitous.

The PA, on the other hand, is weak, propped up by Israel and the US, and incapable of making binding agreements for the Palestinian people.

So with whom should Israel discuss these core issues? And what would Israel gain, by talking to either someone who lies or someone who can't deliver?
 
2007-07-17 11:27:00 AM
PainSorrowLoss: Is there a particular reason why criticizing Israel is "verboten?"

Verboten is a German word. Germans caused the Holocaust. Why are you an anti-semite?

/I fell into a burning ring of fire
//I went down, down, down
 
2007-07-17 11:28:27 AM
IamSpartacus

I am confused about your post. Are you making those statements or listing them as common griefs?
 
2007-07-17 11:29:48 AM
Jon Snow

Other than displaced Palestinians who had moved to Iraq, is that war really affecting Palestinians or Israelis?

My concern is that if Iraq were to truly deteriorate, it could be a sort of base of operations for Al-Qaeda to threaten and further destablilize countries like Jordan, Egypt Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Peace talks somehow - to me - just don't seem to fit in with other Middle East events right now.
 
2007-07-17 11:30:12 AM
Mighty_Dog: There's only one core issue: the insanity of islam.

What's to discuss?


Please qualify and quantify this with evidence of the insanity of islam, as opposed to a handful of it's followers.
 
2007-07-17 11:30:13 AM
Jon Snow: Does anyone else think that this is a particularly odd time to be holding peace talks, given the current Palestinian intenal divisions?

According to this article: the Israeli government. They're probably right.
 
2007-07-17 11:31:00 AM
Playinodds: IamSpartacus

I am confused about your post. Are you making those statements or listing them as common griefs?


Stating them as criticisms.

I could go on, but thats as much was on top of my head.
 
2007-07-17 11:31:54 AM
Doctor Hooey
Oh come on, who? I don't want to vote for that person and don't know this li'l factoid.


I'll give a hint:

But in the end, we also know that we should never seek to dictate what is best for the Israelis and their security interests. No Israeli Prime Minister should ever feel dragged to or blocked from the negotiating table by the United States.

The problem is, he's actually the best candidate on the Democratic side, IMO. Most candidates -- on both sides of the aisle -- seem to have marched down to the particular soiree this was given at, so my guess is they said similar things.

Personally, I'd like a top-tier candidate to come out and say "I have great affection and admiration for the people of Israel, but if elected President, my first and foremost responsibility will be to the people of the United States, and to our Constitution."
 
2007-07-17 11:32:35 AM
Loki-L: Have you ever noticed how none of the people who normally complain about government intervention and welfare are suggesting to stop sending billions of dollars to the middle east each year to keep the peace there? Why not simply cease all outside intevention and regulation and let the 'invisible hand of the free market' sort it out?

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
 
2007-07-17 11:32:40 AM
bwesb: My concern is that if Iraq were to truly deteriorate, it could be a sort of base of operations for Al-Qaeda to threaten and further destablilize countries like Jordan, Egypt Saudi Arabia and Israel.

How would it be a base of operations? AQ is barely even there, and it is a home grown movement not a foreign jihadi movement as the real AQ is.
 
2007-07-17 11:35:41 AM
kenchilds.com

That is all.
 
2007-07-17 11:38:10 AM
Playinodds:
Hamas has no interest in talking with Israel, nor have they shown that they can be trusted.


Hamas: We'll recognize Israel within '67 borders

Faction's spokesman at Palestinian parliament voices pragmatic, surprising declarations during Ramallah conference; 'we, Hamas, are committed to calm up to this moment,' he says

you need to read more.
 
2007-07-17 11:38:37 AM
bwesb: My concern is that if Iraq were to truly deteriorate, it could be a sort of base of operations for Al-Qaeda to threaten and further destablilize countries like Jordan, Egypt Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Peace talks somehow - to me - just don't seem to fit in with other Middle East events right now.


Terrorism will undoubtedly grow in the region as Iraq continues to descend into chaos. So far it doesn't seem to have had that much of an impact on Israel and the occupied territories. I am not dismissing Iraq's role in the stability of the region itself, but I don't know that it is a specific issue in the way of peace for the Palestinians and Israelis at this time.
 
2007-07-17 11:39:33 AM
I have a perfectly good solution to the problems of Israel/Palestine. It's a compromise that will piss everybody off a little bit, but which most will eventually live with-a sign of a good compromise.

Better still, Israel can do it all by itself-the Palestinians don't even need to be involved directly.

The main problem here is that Israel wants to have thier cake and eat it too. They want to control all of Israel and the Palestinian territories (because "God gave it to them"), but they don't want to actually annex Gaza and the West Bank, because then there would be more Muslims than Jews in the combined territory, and the Jews would just lose at the ballot box.

So, a good compromise would be that Israel needs to set a border between Israel and not-Israel. The only restrictions would be is that everybody within Israel would get citizenship, and the border could not be gerrymandered like a Texas congressional district (so the settlements deep within the West Bank would have to go). I imagine such a border would consist of the existing border to Gaza, and the existing border to the West Bank with minor changes. Jerusalem would certainly be in Israel.

Then Israel withdrawals completely from not-Israel and gives up all rights to it, and builds a huge honking wall on the border. The Palestinians would then be free to do whatever in thier territories. The Fatah/Hamas split actually helps this proposal-Fatah would probably get the West Bank, and Hamas would get Gaza-two seperate countries. This eliminates the problem of having the new Palestinian country being in two pieces with Israel in the middle-there would be two new countries instead.

Now, this makes no provision for the right of return, nor does it give any of Jerusalem to the Palestinians, but both of those demands were never going to be met as long as Israel exists (some limited right of return could be added to this).

It's the best realistic compromise the Palestinians could hope for, and it's decent for Israel too. Not everybody (on either side) would accept it fully, but, in time, 99% of both sides would.
 
2007-07-17 11:42:37 AM
shpritz: According to this article: the Israeli government. They're probably right.

I think this is little more than an attempt by the Bush administration to say "We tried" and lend even more unwarranted "credibility" to Abbas.

I think Israel is making the right call here.
 
2007-07-17 11:44:54 AM
Lard_Baron:

Hamas: We'll recognize Israel within '67 borders

Faction's spokesman at Palestinian parliament voices pragmatic, surprising declarations during Ramallah conference; 'we, Hamas, are committed to calm up to this moment,' he says

NO. They did not agree to that, and the policy of it has changed.

Your article was from last year, and even then only provides for a temporary "truce".

Playinodd is correct. Who does Israel deal with? The only viable party is the Arab League, and that is only if they withdraw the right of return clause.

YOU NEED TO ACTUALLY READ
 
2007-07-17 11:46:02 AM
Mighty_Dog: There's only one core issue: the insanity of islam. What's to discuss?

BrotherThaddeus: Please qualify and quantify this with evidence of the insanity of islam, as opposed to a handful of it's followers.



Oh yes, it's only a handful that are the problem; only the 'handful' in Pakistan, only the 'handful' in Afganistan, only the 'handful' in Iran, only the 'handful' in Iraq, only the 'handful' in Lebanon, etc., etc., etc.

When you're dressing up little kids as suicide bombers in parades and school plays (not to mention martyrdom mickey mouse), I think we're talking about more than a 'handful'.


The fact is that there wouldn't be any 'occupation' had not the 'handful' of muslim countries that surround Israel attacked it in 1967, because they are muslim, BTW.

In fact, there wouldn't even BE any 'palestinian refugees' had not those same muslim countries attacked in 1948, because they are muslim.


So I repeat: the sole issue is the insanity of islam. What else is there to discuss?
 
2007-07-17 11:50:38 AM
Mighty_Dog:

So I repeat: the sole issue is the insanity of islam. What else is there to discuss?


Ah Might_Dog. Fark's brickwall that people still feel a need to yell at.
 
2007-07-17 11:53:34 AM
Looks like Mighty_Dog is seriously threatening FlashLV's position as Fark's resident idiot neo-con pig.
 
2007-07-17 12:00:17 PM
Lard_Baron I believe Iamspartacus took care of that for me. Also, I wouldn't take anything they say at face value. It's great press to make statements that you most likely wont have to keep.

Geotpf And when Hizbullah shells israel from southern lebanon, or al aqsa martyrs brigade launches rockets from gaza, what course to mediation? Is it an act of war?
 
2007-07-17 12:00:55 PM
Skeptos: Looks like Mighty_Dog is seriously threatening FlashLV's position as Fark's resident idiot neo-con pig.

You're not adding anything to the conversation other than bashing people who vote differently than you. GTFO.
 
2007-07-17 12:01:00 PM
PainSorrowLoss: Is there a particular reason why criticizing Israel is "verboten?" I mean, we criticize countries all the time...Iran, Iraq, ourselves, China, most of Europe.

Why is Israel off-limits? You can criticize a country subjectively and without bias, and every single country has flaws.


Because they have good bagels there...and a very powerful lobby here.
 
2007-07-17 12:01:04 PM
Notice how Mighty_Dog doesn't have a solution to the problem? He can only rain hate on muslims.
 
2007-07-17 12:02:38 PM
Mighty_Dog: Mighty_Dog: There's only one core issue: the insanity of islam. What's to discuss?

BrotherThaddeus: Please qualify and quantify this with evidence of the insanity of islam, as opposed to a handful of it's followers.


Oh yes, it's only a handful that are the problem; only the 'handful' in Pakistan, only the 'handful' in Afganistan, only the 'handful' in Iran, only the 'handful' in Iraq, only the 'handful' in Lebanon, etc., etc., etc.

When you're dressing up little kids as suicide bombers in parades and school plays (not to mention martyrdom mickey mouse), I think we're talking about more than a 'handful'.


The fact is that there wouldn't be any 'occupation' had not the 'handful' of muslim countries that surround Israel attacked it in 1967, because they are muslim, BTW.

In fact, there wouldn't even BE any 'palestinian refugees' had not those same muslim countries attacked in 1948, because they are muslim.


So I repeat: the sole issue is the insanity of islam. What else is there to discuss?


Alright, I suppose that makes sense, except that it really doesn't. You're basing a judgement on a religion on a specific cultural set. Indonesia, India, and Bangladesh have the highest populations of Muslims, how do they fit into your statement? What about Muslims in Germany, Turkey, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Russia, Canada, the US? How many are involved in violence and how many are not? For that matter how many in Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are involved in the violence and how many are not?

You have not yet quantified nor qualified Islam as insane, instead you've made a half-assed case for those who created a sick tv show in Palestine. And your reasoning why the wars against Israel occurred is way too over-simplified. The influx of refugees into Syria, Lebanon and Jordan (not to mention the West Bank and Gaza strip) in the 1930's and 40's did not help. Nor did the indifferent British and French rule over the region. The root of the problem is not merely religious, there are economic, social, and national issues for which religion is happens to be the easiest medium to communicate through.

So again, please quantify and qualify how Islam is insane, not those who practice it.
 
2007-07-17 12:07:37 PM
Treygreen13

Skeptos: Looks like Mighty_Dog is seriously threatening FlashLV's position as Fark's resident idiot neo-con pig.

You're not adding anything to the conversation other than bashing people who vote differently than you.

www.robsell.com
Fark.com politics threads generally don't have the same standards of decorum as a House of Lords debate. More at 11.

GTFO.

[too lazy to post Internet Tough Guy pic]
 
2007-07-17 12:07:47 PM
Geotpf:

That plan basically guarantees internal Palestinian strife and continued attacks against Israel, while requiring Israel to give up territory it has no intention of doing so.

In short, it redresses none of the Palestinian desires (one Palestinian nation with East Jerusalem as its capital, right of return), and gives Israel Jerusalem, obsolves them of displacing Palestinians within Israel, and proposes no clear determination of what settlements they are allowed to keep in the West Bank (which is a potential deal breaker for Israel).

Mighty_Dog: The fact is that there wouldn't be any 'occupation' had not the 'handful' of muslim countries that surround Israel attacked it in 1967, because they are muslim, BTW.

Ignores secular Pan-Arabism as a driving force in the cause of the Six Day War: fail.
Ignores the that the Six Day War was largely an extension of the Cold War, and the Soviets basically forced Egypt to move into an attack position: fail.
 
2007-07-17 12:10:02 PM
Playinodds: Geotpf And when Hizbullah shells israel from southern lebanon, or al aqsa martyrs brigade launches rockets from gaza, what course to mediation? Is it an act of war?

Of course it is. That would be an act of war from one state against another. The goal here would be to provide a situation where peace could occur (hopefully recogized by Europe and Saudi Arabia and the UN). If other countries then wish to attack Israel, then war it is, with all the consequences of those actions. That would need to be made clear-that this would be "the last, best hope for peace", to quote Babylon 5 randomly.
 
2007-07-17 12:15:55 PM
IamSpartacus: Your article was from last year, and even then only provides for a temporary "truce".

Playinodd is correct. Who does Israel deal with? The only viable party is the Arab League, and that is only if they withdraw the right of return clause.


The point is, there where HAMAS members ready to talk to Israel,
but its never enough is it?
Israel, if it was serious about peace to follow the well trod path, like that taken by the British v the IRA.
Talk to the moderates, isolate the extremists, allow the economy to grow ( Those with a stake in society tend not to want to instabilty) and progress.

But Israel does not peace so much as they want the West Bank. they are more than willing to pay the price in a few deaths per year to keep the West Bank.

West Bank settler growth
www.fmep.org



Heres a good idea!.
Why cant Israel obey the UN international law and the Geneva Convention?
Why are they getting a pass on that?
 
2007-07-17 12:22:53 PM
moops: Notice how Mighty_Dog doesn't have a solution to the problem?


A 'solution' to islamic rage?

The solution for all of the abject miseries that the 'palestinians' (They used to be called Egyptians and Jordanians) suffer is to grow up.

They don't need a 'state'. They've already got one.

In 60 years, Israelis have transformed a worthless desert territory in a mighty and vibrant nation that economically, socially, culturally and in every other way, dominates the region. And you know what? They didn't do one damned thing that the 'palestinians' can't do for themselves.

Instead, all these people do is squander everything that's given to them, along with their futures, while they steep their children in an insane culture of muslim hate, violence and death - and that's when they're not killing each other.

'Solve' what? There isn't anything for Israel to do but defend itself. End of story.
 
2007-07-17 12:23:44 PM
Geotpf: Then Israel withdrawals completely from not-Israel

I think I see the flaw in your plan. Israel wants to keep the West Bank. See the settler expansion. see the pass and nationality laws, the check points, Israeli only roads etc etc..
 
Displayed 50 of 98 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report