Im not even going respond to moronic statement,I will however show you what I think of the arab "Peace Plan"
Posted on 03/30/2002 6:54:44 AM PST by veronica
Every American President, both Republican and Democrat, is constantly pressuring Israel to commit suicide. America condemns Israel every time she engages in even a puny, pathetic retaliation for the endless murders, bombings, shootings, and stabbings perpetrated on their innocent citizens by the muslim maniacs who live among them. America is constantly appeasing the Saudi Oil Shieks.. Pretty sick if you ask me to appease the very Saudi's who promote anti American hatred and who fund the very weapons programs and terror networks that plegdge to destoy America eventually. It's also pretty sick to continue to buy Saudi oil which funds the terror network and the muslim weapon of mass destruction programs. But then again, as long as America is pressuring Israel and calls for so a called "Palestinian" state in the middle east, then America itself will continue towards self-destruction.
Yes, they held Arafat at bay for months on end, but there was little pressure to stop them. Eventually, they pulled out. They pulled out under Oslo. They pulled out a long time ago after going in after Oslo. They pulled out again just recently after Zinni arrived, as they did the last time Zinni arrived.
It's a precarious situation, you are implying they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. So they might as well do. This is also a big test of the other side. What will the Arabs do, how will the react-- not initially, but say 3 days from now? 3 weeks from now?
From the second link -
In the 1993 Oslo Agreement, by recognizing Israel’s right to exist, Palestinians already gave up 78 percent of their land and accepted the formula “land for peace” within the context of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which calls for the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories.
THEIR land? Oh the author must mean the land they were to get in the UN partition plan (the plan the Jews accepted) had the Arab world accepted it in 1947. Seems to me that in that case, the Palestinians gave up ALL their land when their Arab brothers rejected the UN's plan and attacked Israel.
This meant Palestinians were willing to settle for 22 percent of originally mandated Palestine. To put it bluntly: You take $100 from me and later offer to repay $22. I cut my losses and give up $78. Still later you want more of my remaining $22.
Pardon me, but that's crap. Use of the word "mandate" is misleading. The ORIGINAL MANDATE for Palestine consisted of all of what is now Jordan and all of what is now Israel. East of the Jordan River was given to the Arabs, West of the Jordan was given to the Jews. Of course, this was simply unacceptable and the British caved to the Arab demands. If the author is referring to the UN Partition Plan, we've already established that they rejected the land given and chose instead to try to take all of it.
Which brings me to one of the best questions of all in this conflict. Why is it that it is demanded that Israel return land acquired as a result of defense? I would love the author to name just one other historical incident where a country that gained ground by defeating an attacker was made to return the land.
In short, Arafat felt Palestinians had made real concessions in settling for the territories occupied since the 1967 war. Sheer ineptness and internal squabbling among Palestinian negotiators confounded the Palestinian presentations.
Oh please. Those "territories occupied as a result of the 1967 war" were "occupied" by Jordan for 20 years - technically Jordan took it a step further for they had NO intention of EVER returning the West Bank (they made it permanently part of Jordan in 1950 over the objections of the rest of the Arab League) but of course it only became "occupied territory" when Israel captured it in 67.
Land for peace is a one-sided cheat and such is proven by the fact that when there is violence, Israel is chastized for encrouching upon the land she's already given up for peace. If it were an honest agreement (although how could it be - land for peace??? Think about it, it's absurd on its face), Israel would be allowed to snatch back, in defense, what was already given up for the sake of peace. But instead the world community moans and groans about escalation of violence as if there is actually any moral equivalance with hotel bombers who kill babies on Passover.
Arafat is a lying, cheating terrorist thug and everyone knows it. He will settle for nothing less than all and has made it his life's work. Israel's first mistake was ever engaging him in the first place.
End of response. Any thoughts? I never heard from luvzhottea.
Yeah, imagine the U.S. giving away 85% of the lands west of the Mississipi to Osama bin Laden.
As a matter of policy, I would not send U.S. troops to ever protect any Muslims from anyone unless the people we were fighting were also threatening the U.S. America needs to wake up: Muslims across the world hate us because we represent republican government, individual freedom, and religious liberty, all of which are antithetical to Islam. We should not pretend that Muslims are our friends.
Check out this article.
What was sharon doing going with a 1000 soldiers to a sacred Dome of the Rock. He has no right in a Muslim holy place.
Are you Muslim? Because that is the only reason I can think you'd have for such a comment. Beware, I'm about to tell you things you no doubt already know. :) First of all, the Temple Mount is the most sacred holy place in all of Judaism and has been for about 4000 years. Second of all, Israel is a sovereign country. Last time I checked, they still owned the land that dome sits on, and it is only out of the goodness of their hearts (or the feebleness of Moshe Dyan's) that the Arabs have any control over the property at all.
Imagine if Muslims got control of the Bassilica, built a mosque in the courtyard, and told Catholics that they could no longer worship there, and if they tried, the Muslims responded with rocks and riots, utterly indignant at the brazen acts of Catholics. Sounds outrageous doesn't it.
Another example - Arafat and the Palestinians are currently in total control of Bethlehem, birthplace of Jesus Christ. What if tomorrow they decided that Christians couldn't come there? And who cares how precious the place is to all of Christendom. Islam is supreme over all, and Christians visiting Bethlehem will upset and enrage the Palestinians, inciting them to throw rocks at the Christians, who deliberately provoked the Palestinians!
Shame on you, Sharon, for daring to set foot on the most holy place in all the world for Jews, and driving the poor Palestinians to such desperation. How dare you defy the fragile temperments of so many Arabs who can't possibly be expected to stomach that a Jew might walk where you insist he can't. You tried to warn him, didn't you, Palestinians, but he didn't care about anyone but himself, threw away all hope for peace, and started this whole bloody mess.
Gimme a break. And the most galling thing, no doubt, is that he went and got himself elected Prime Minister a few months later. :)
These people are apparently very powerful: according to some posters here on FR and in the Arab press, the two tenth of one percent have enslaved the whole world.
Boris, Boris, Boris...
Given your figures Jews comprise 0.225% of the population of the world.
Im not even going respond to moronic statement,I will however show you what I think of the arab "Peace Plan"
--Boris
NEWSFLASH!!! Israel withdraws its recognition of the Palestinians' 'right to exist'! Palestinians will cease to exist on April 1, 2002!! 'It seems fair' says Condoleesa Rice, 'they never existed before 1947!'
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.