IDF will occupy Gaza and uproot Hamas

[Sirotnikov]

Speaking of those 12 points, It's interesting when you take your own assumptions as proof. Sounds like you're going in circles with your own arguements supporting your other arguements.


As for le-monde, what have you ever quoted besides le-monde, one time?

[Sirotnikov]

I'd say Sharon is worse than Saddam.

You say it, but you know you don't mean it

[Ramo]

Damn, see what you guys have done. I've been working on my physics homework for a couple hours now, and still have done absolutely squat. This'll be my last post tonight... I hope.

I do.
But their most important effect is making it harder for suicide bombers from entering Israel.

Do you have any statistics from a (relatively) controlled study?

I will risk the possibility of creating another suicide bomber, to stop someone who I know is on his way to blow me up.

But you don't know this person is on his way to blow you up. You're stopping all people regardless of what they're going to do.

Plus, what makes for 95% of the motivation for sucide bombers is the education and incitement.

I read a caught suicide bomber's interview once. She decided to do this because she flipped after one of her best friends was killed by an Israeli.

I'm sure in some cases, ideological indoctrination can motivate someone to become a suicide bomber, but do you really believe so many think this way, particularly given the oppression these people have faced?

No, I'm suggesting not giving them any money until we can see where it goes.

How do you propose seeing where the money from every transaction beetween Israeli and Palestinian goes? What is the Israeli gov't actively doing to see where it goes and are they getting anywhere?

and the EU seems to agree with me.

The EU's horrible wrt the amount of trade barriers they have...

US immigration policy is also restrictive. I'm poor. I will probably not get in. Does it mean i should somehow feel justified to use terror?

No one is ever justified in using terror and that includes the Palestinians.

The Palestinains technically have Jordan which is 78% of Historical Palestine, and has a 85% Palestinian majority.

But let us leave that alone.

Jordan doesn't want them. Jordan should take allow them in, just as Israel or the US should, but they won't.

Once they get an independant state in the west bank and Gaza - they will have a place in which they can prosper as much as they want - so no reason to go back to Israel.

Job opportunities, reuniting with families, there's plenty of reasons to go to Israel.

A recent survey made by a palestinian body, showed that a large part of palestinians (around 40-50% i think) saw the intifada as a means to free "the entire land of palestine".

I'm not sure what the phrase means (I don't think it implies kicking Jews out), but that isn't comparable. How many Israelis think Israel should control the entire land?

Do tell me what you think have they been proposing?

I forgot the name that has been assigned to it, but basically it amounts to kicking Palestinians out.

If any goal is achieved via terror, and terror is rewarded, it gives a positive reinforcement to use terror for other goals.

Since Israel's independence was achieved through terror, should Britain never have given independence to Israel?

I was sure there are checkpoints on the US borders. I was also thinking that immigration laws exist and are observed.

Perhaps I'm wrong, or is the US mexico border un-democratic and opressive??

You are not wrong. It is both undemocratic and oppressive.

The use of illegitimate means (intentionall harming non-combatant innocent civilians)

You don't consider the Israeli policies I mentioned to be harmful to non-combatant innocent civilians?

They either fled or were evicted because they refused to accept the legitimacy of the new country.

You seriously believe this? You don't think some were scared ****less that an Israeli army might come to massacre them as in Deir Yassin or their village might become a battlezone?

That terror is a bit different.

I've so far haven't heard of martyrdom being as sacred in the Irish culture.

I think martyrdom is sacred to some extent in just about every culture...

Furthermore, there is general acceptance of the Irish, that the brittish are in Ireland to stay.

Perhaps, but I think you're exaggerating the Palestinian desire to drive out Jews.

Not so with the Palestinians, and I bring the survey I quoted above as evidence. That and the fact that all palestinian maps depict Israel as a whole palestine,

I'm not sure how dated this information is, but I've read that soldiers in the IDF get a map (a standard gift that all recruits get) that showed no Palestine.

and most non-official Palestinian sources (ie not propoganda) state that they want to liberate "all" of palestine.

Bring "all of Palestine" under their government or kick Jews out of "all of Palestine?"

[Sirotnikov]

Because I believe in justice and civilization

LOL

Your idea of justice, is that every Israeli civilian is a legitimate target for an attack for every palestinian with a rusty stick.

You said so your self.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Of course I mean it.

Saddam invaded a country with the idea that he would be backed by the US. He never anticipated a backlash of that magnitude.

Sharon KNOWS what the response to his actions will be and doesn't care. He doesn't care that he is enraging the Arab world.

That blatent disregard and recklessness makes him MUCH worse than Saddam.

[CyberGnu]

Siro, the first was in our previous thread on the subject (you know, the one you abandoned?)

The second was a while ago, do a search yourself.

Or maybe just learn from your betters. Ask Ned for a lesson...

[Urban Ranger]

Siro, you are nuts if you think that's going to work. It has never worked anywhere else in history around the world. 8 years of IJA occupation did not end Chinese resistance. The Soviets failed to end Afghani resistance.

The only thing the IDF will accomplish is to make Hamas stronger, a lot stronger.

[Sirotnikov]

Do you have any statistics from a (relatively) controlled study?

No.

But I do follow the news. And when there is an absolute closure - there are usually almost no terrorist acts.

But you don't know this person is on his way to blow you up. You're stopping all people regardless of what they're going to do.

I know it is a person and he is going to blow up.

It's like evacuating a whole airport because you have an intelligence source saying that there's a person which is intending to make a terrorist attack.

I read a caught suicide bomber's interview once. She decided to do this because she flipped after one of her best friends was killed by an Israeli.

I'm sure in some cases, ideological indoctrination can motivate someone to become a suicide bomber, but do you really believe so many think this way, particularly given the oppression these people have faced?

I've seen about a dozen interviews with would be suicide bombers.

The one thing they all had in common is that they believed that being a martyr would being them and their family fame and respect, a good after life, and fortune (25,000$ from saddam).

Israel has captured in the operations about 100 suicide bombers and has been bussy making psychological analysis.

The wreckage of family homes and their deportation to Gaza was the solution devised and it is proving itself.

Several terrorists gave them selves up, and several families have gave in thier family members, to avoid the Israeli reprisal.

How do you propose seeing where the money from every transaction beetween Israeli and Palestinian goes? What is the Israeli gov't actively doing to see where it goes and are they getting anywhere?

I'm not in charge of details. There are methods of transparancy.

The EU's horrible wrt the amount of trade barriers they have...

come on, that's dodging the issue.

The EU agrees that there must be transparansy.

No one is ever justified in using terror and that includes the Palestinians.

Great. You again avoid the issue.

You said that immigration policies make people resort to terror. If it is logical that the pals would resort to terror due to Israel's policy, why shouldn't I over Russian or US policy?

Job opportunities, reuniting with families, there's plenty of reasons to go to Israel.

There are tons of job opportunities for my family in America.
Why won't they automatically take me?

Reuniting with families was cancelled after several people used it to get legally into Israel, and then set up bombs.

I'm not sure what the phrase means (I don't think it implies kicking Jews out), but that isn't comparable. How many Israelis think Israel should control the entire land?

That's a misrepresentation of the question.
The question the palestinians were asked was, what do you think is your current strategy.
Over 40% thought that driving jews out was the strategy.

In Israel, maybe 3% would say that the Israeli actions are done with the intention to drive the arabs out.

forgot the name that has been assigned to it, but basically it amounts to kicking Palestinians out

Well i think i know what you're talking about and it has nothing to do with the Likkud.
It was a small fringe party, that suggested giving deserters large monetary compensation. At some point they also suggested making life unbearable for those who stayed, but it was never an official stand, as that would keep them from being part in the Knesset (illegal - duh).

Since Israel's independence was achieved through terror, should Britain never have given independence to Israel?

When has Israelis targetted non-combatant civilians, with the intention of killing them?

the closest thing is King David hotel, which was a local command, and not a civilian building, and it, together with the press were given a half hour heads up.

You are not wrong. It is both undemocratic and oppressive

then you are being silly.

There is nothing undemocratic about immigration policies. Democracy is state based, not international.

And even in a state, there can't be any real law against private clubs. I'm entitled to pick my friends as I see fit.

You don't consider the Israeli policies I mentioned to be harmful to non-combatant innocent civilians?

Opressive? yes.

Harmful? assuming they follow instructions (ie stay in curfew) and are not participants in terrorist activity then it shouldn't be harmful, except for accidents which may occur, and always occur in wars.

If you can name me several military operations against targets in city territory, which had no civilian casualties, I'd rethink my position.

You seriously believe this? You don't think some were scared ****less that an Israeli army might come to massacre them as in Deir Yassin or their village might become a battlezone?

Yes - some were. Tough.

Many left even before, in 1947, fearing that the area will be a battle zone. Infact not fearing - knowing, since their comrades explicitly stated their intention to clear the land of Jews.

I think martyrdom is sacred to some extent in just about every culture...

another evasion.

I'm talking about martyrdom when you kill yourself together with innocent and defenseless people and go to heaven for that.

Perhaps, but I think you're exaggerating the Palestinian desire to drive out Jews.

Heh, it's based on their own messages. Their media. Their internet sites. The speeches of their leaders. The content of their school books.

I'm not sure how dated this information is, but I've read that soldiers in the IDF get a map (a standard gift that all recruits get) that showed no Palestine.

First of all, there factually isn't a palestine.
Second, even the likkud maps, show areas A and B.

I'll try to check this information.

Bring "all of Palestine" under their government or kick Jews out of "all of Palestine?"

To the best of my understanding both.
Be it non PLO factions (hamas, jihad) or even simple people or organizations.

Many internet sites say "we are maybe currently fighting over nablus, but we remember haifa and jaffo".

Hell, even Arafat is known to have said that in several speeches.



Look, the only way out I see is the following:

1) the current PA is dismantled and arrested and imprisoned,
2) the hamas and jihad groups are cleared to the root.
3) a new - democratic leadership, with international observers is set up.
4) a whole new government and system of education, finance, labour etc is set up.
5) they are given the territory, but without actual statehood for several years (1 - 2). (what the americans called pre-statehood or something).

Then they get statehood.

[Sirotnikov]

Of course I mean it.

Saddam invaded a country with the idea that he would be backed by the US. He never anticipated a backlash of that magnitude.

Sharon KNOWS what the response to his actions will be and doesn't care. He doesn't care that he is enraging the Arab world.

That blatent disregard and recklessness makes him MUCH worse than Saddam

huh?
when has saddam cared for the arab world, except when his ass was on the line?

Sharon knows that the entire arab world uses the palestinians as a scape goat against israel, and doesn't actually give a **** about them.

Sharon knows, that the entire arab world, despises Arafat, because Arafat tried to set up a country in Jordan and in Lebanon before that, and caused civil wars in both places. Because Arafat is an egyptian who used the Palestinian cause for his interests of megalomania.

Sharon knows that the entire arab world already hates Israel, and nothing Israel will do will make it really worse.

Siro, you are nuts if you think that's going to work. It has never worked anywhere else in history around the world. 8 years of IJA occupation did not end Chinese resistance. The Soviets failed to end Afghani resistance.

The only thing the IDF will accomplish is to make Hamas stronger, a lot stronger.

I seem to remember you saying the same thing about the incursion into the west bank.

And guess what? This "failed" incursion, made the Jihad much much weaker. It made the Tanzim much much weaker. It made the Hamas weaker, but up to a point - since it's still strong in Gaza.

Siro, the first was in our previous thread on the subject (you know, the one you abandoned?)

I'm sorry but I don't really remember you bringing le monde in the last month or two.

And as for abandoning threads - I have a personal life.

The second was a while ago, do a search yourself.

What should I search for

"the second of two times CyberGnu ever used sources" ?

Or maybe just learn from your betters. Ask Ned for a lesson...

Ned is simply new, and has the patience with you that I had for the first year.

Neither chegitz nor ramo invented things from the top of their head, blamed the israeli media of zionist lies, or used their own arguements to support thier other arguements.

Nor have any of them were concerned of Israel corrupting the world using it's media dominance and bribe money.

Do you smell something fishy about yourself?

[The Mad Monk]

I'd say Sharon is worse than Saddam.

You believe Sharon relaxes by watching tapes of torture sessions, Imran?

[Carver]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
You believe Sharon relaxes by watching tapes of torture sessions, Imran?

Relaxation might not be the best word, but Sharon obviously enjoys using brute force against weaker peoples.

The whole idea that we are going to invade Iraq due to Iraq's supposed human rights violations is absurd. While the US berates Iraq for their human rights record it pats Shah Pervez Musharaff on the back for denying the rights of free speech and free assembly to Pakistanis.

Such Iraqi abuses are wildly exaggerated in the US media anyway.

Sharon is a greater danger than Iraq: he has more weapons and is stronger relative to his neighbors than Iraq is - therefore Sharon is more likely to use the military option.

[CyberGnu]

Oooh, nice rhetorical trick there...

"Show me one single time you gave a source"

"well, how a bout a week ago, when I quoted and linked 'le Monde'?"

"well, then, eh, right... Yeah, show me the second time you ever gave a source!"


so after I give you the list of NYT, WP and not to mentioned EB articles I've quoted in the past, what then?

"yeah, but show me the 68'th time you ever gave a source. That'll shut you up, huh? Huh? "


Look, it is called projection, ascribing your faults to everyone else. You can get help for this. Therapy sessions with a qualified professional can do wonders.


I actually pity you.

[CyberGnu]

Carver, I don't know if 'enjoy' is the right word. I don't know if Saddam actualy enjoyed gassing kurds, or whether the Chinese party leaders enjoyed killing Falun Gong members.

They percieved them as threats to their country and power, and had to liquidated. I think it shows a lack of human emotions more than anything else. Anti-social in psychology terms, I believe. Unable to understand that other people are people too.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Look at how fast terror declined from the IRA when the British gov't decided to treat the Irish decently, for instance.

That terror is a bit different.

I've so far haven't heard of martyrdom being as sacred in the Irish culture.

Plus... the IRA was targetting the British government, not British people in general. They would usually attack military targets or government institutions, not random groups of civilians on a bus or at a market. If they did plant a bomb in a public place like a shopping center with lots of people around, they would call in a warning and allow some time to get the civilians out before blasting the place.

Oh yes, it's still terror. But it is different.

[Guardian]

Originally posted by CyberGnu

I believe in justice and civilization.

So, blowing up civilians is a just and civilized thing to do in your opinion?


By the way, I believe Sweden is still occupying some land they took from Norway a couple of hundred years ago...

-Perhaps I ought to get my butt over to Stockholm and plant some bombs...