Palestinians Go House to House Killing Israelis

Fox News Website ^ | 4/27/02 | Fox News

[TheLurkerX]

JERUSALEM

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

Are you in favor of one side or the other being eradicated?

Since your idea will not occur until after the abolition of original sin, and since Israeli defeat will mean their necessary extermination, and since Palestinian defeat will not mean their extermination, but only their expulsion, at worst, I favor the Palestinians military defeat and occupation, including the installation by Israel of a puppel government, as was done in Germany and Japan after WWII. If the Palestinians continue to do violence, I favor their expulsion to some other Arab country (Syria seems a good choice). If this occurs, and Palestinians cross the border, invaders should be shot.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

The 2 possibilities you mentioned are the same. (I don't think either party will go quietly)

If you think that there is no difference between forcible expulsion and extermination, please take it up with the Cajuns of Louisiana, who were known as the Acadians of Canada before they were forcibly expelled by the Brits after the French and Indian War. I do not expect that the Cajuns are happy about this expulsion (the one's in Longefellow's Evangeline were not), but they are not currently making violent attacks against their old homes, in what is now Nova Scotia, so far as I know.

[Democrats are liars]

I guess you are just plain stupid afterall.

Personal attacks are a nice touch. Why not try debating me with some facts and not the standard bushbotic speculation. Maybe try a new tactic. This is some of what I have already heard. We don't know what Bush is saying behind closed doors. Bush says one thing but he really means another. Without delay really means whenever they feel like it. He is doing everything for the good of America. This is all orchestrated. Give it time, he knows what he is doing. Bush is walking a fine line and does not want to be biased. etc. etc.

Well, the bottom line is: When the terrorists crashed planes in to buildings here in the USA, we asked the world to help us fight terrorism world-wide. We asked everyone to come and help us. Bush even said you are either with us or you are with the terrorists. OK - Made sense. But now, when Israel gets attacked over and over and over again, we call for restraint. We don't care. It is not happening to US citizens so it really is no big deal. But if it happens to us that is a different story. It is called BS. Hypocrisy.

Then the Bushbots here on FR. This is a conservative web page; not the "I believe everything Bush does is 100% brilliant" web page.

I am ashamed that the US is not backing Israel in stamping out the terrorists. So go ahead, call me stupid. I detest hypocrisy and I detest cowards and coward terrorists who kill innocent un-armed people without any notice whatsoever.
 

[Texasforever]

No $hi*. So why don't you stick with the crap he is saying in public. You Know, like telling Israel to stop their war against terrorism so we do not upset our great rich Arab friends!

I will try to educate you just a bit here. We, the USA, were attacked. We, the USA, got our stuff together and went into the first phase of an operation to wipe out the international terrorist cells. We, the USA, had plans to move from Afghanistan on to the next vipers nest. Israel started having an increase in suicide bombings. Bush told the world, that was screaming for us to put our plans on hold and mediate a "peace" whose quest has consumed the time of countless US presidents to the detriment of our own country's pressing needs, that he had no dog in the fight at that time and that Israel had the right to self-defense

. Sharon was off the leash and what did he do? He knocked down a couple of empty PA police stations. The bombings continued and Sharon then placed Arafat under house arrest but that was it. In the meantime our operation in Afghanistan was quickly coming to an end and far from maintaining ours and the country's focus on the next target, the entire international attention turned to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as if it was a brand new development and not an on-going low level war that has lasted 50 years. It was clear that Sharon was NOT going to finish the job and wipe out Arafat and the PLA so something had to be tried to shift the focus from Israel to the next phase of our war. Bush DID NOR WANT TO GET INVOLVED but Sharon would not do his job and take care of his own internal war

. The United States and Bush know we cannot abandon Israel because if we did they would be extinct in a decade. However; Bush has his own responsibilities because we ARE going to take on Iraq and we do not have the forces to fight multiple front wars. Israel had better understand that once we are engaged in Iraq, possibly Iran and Syria, they have to stand up and use the vast military capabilities we have provided them with. The state of Israel had better live up to their vow of "never again" because their only friend in the world may be a bit too busy to provide the political cover Israel wants before the solve their problem.

[Democrats are liars]

What would you like to see done different?

I would like the US to support Israel's war on terrorism just as they have supported us. I would like to see Colon Powel stop meeting with terrorist leaders and stop pandering to them. I would like to see Bush tell the Arabs to go to hell. That would be a nice start I think.

[Democrats are liars]

I don't think Americans are ready to go to war with Iraq. I know the military is not ready. And if we go after Iraq, why not go after Iran and Syria too. And why are we going to attack Iraq? Why didn't we attack them last year or 3 years ago or 6 years ago. Why is it important that we attack them now? Not saying that I don't think we should or should have already. But what is the reason?

[lowbridge]

Arm the settlers!

What? And prove Chuck Schumer wrong?

[Twodees]

The Sec'state is a liberal surrender monkey for the Saudis. No "trashing" of such a trashy critter is possible. Need some new kneepads?

[Texasforever]

hy is it important that we attack them now? Not saying that I don't think we should or should have already. But what is the reason?

The answer is simple, the memory of 911 is still fresh. I believe at this point the American public is in favor. The fact is, we will have to do it sooner or later and later is not a good option. This war has a battle plan and Afghanistan is just the warm up pitch. Those yelling that Bush has lost his focus are wrong, the focus being lost is by a world that now believes that peace between the Israelis and Palestinians will solve the problem in the Middle East. Bush is impatient as hell to do what he promised his country he would do but it is hard to keep that promise if his entire foreign policy is centered around two factions that cannot live on this earth together. One faction has to take the bull by the horns and wipe the other one out. It appears that the Israelis do not have the belly for it yet. I hope they don’t wait too long.

[Democrats are liars]

1. CRAWFORD, Texas, April 26 (AFP) - An impatient President George W. Bush on Friday told Israel to halt its incursions into Palestinian areas "now"
2. "(The) Israelis understand my position. I've been very clear and there has been some progress, but it's now time to quit it altogether; it's time to end this," Bush said, making his second such appeal in two days.
3. The comments came one day after Bush's talks with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, in which the two leaders discussed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its implications for US relations with Arab countries.
4. Bush spoke amid signs of a rift within his foreign policy team, as several State Department officials admitted privately they were demoralized by administration infighting over the Middle East.
5. Pressure from the White House meanwhile, prompted Congress to delay legislation which branded Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a "terrorist" after Bush aides said it could hamper their peace efforts.
6. Bush first called for an end to the incursions, which Sharon's government says are targeting suicide bombers, on April 4, but later said he was satisfied with Israel's limited withdrawal.
7. The White House said Friday that Crown Prince Abdullah had presented Bush with an eight point list of Middle East peace objectives.
8. "There is a feeling that we are directionless, and that has created a lot of resentment and some anger," said one official, referring to a "generally gloomy mood" at the State Department as it battles the White House and Pentagon for control of Middle East policy.

   

    

   Where are your facts???? What do you base your opinions on???

[ClancyJ]

Look, maybe you would put people on the slaughter block so that your relatives could have speaking fees - but George Bush would never do that. He was raised better than that by George H and Barbara and you know it. He has never given the slightest indication he is the type man you describe. You are worse than the Democrats in trying to tear down his reputation and I for one do not in the least appreciate it.

You are insulting a man based on what you THINK he might do. No evidence, no facts - nil - just because world events happened. Just what in the world makes you think Bush controls anything in the Middle East?

[Democrats are liars]

1. CRAWFORD, Texas, April 26 (AFP) - An impatient President George W. Bush on Friday told Israel to halt its incursions into Palestinian areas "now"
2. "(The) Israelis understand my position. I've been very clear and there has been some progress, but it's now time to quit it altogether; it's time to end this," Bush said, making his second such appeal in two days.
3. The comments came one day after Bush's talks with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, in which the two leaders discussed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its implications for US relations with Arab countries.
4. Bush spoke amid signs of a rift within his foreign policy team, as several State Department officials admitted privately they were demoralized by administration infighting over the Middle East.
5. Pressure from the White House meanwhile, prompted Congress to delay legislation which branded Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a "terrorist" after Bush aides said it could hamper their peace efforts.
6. Bush first called for an end to the incursions, which Sharon's government says are targeting suicide bombers, on April 4, but later said he was satisfied with Israel's limited withdrawal.
7. The White House said Friday that Crown Prince Abdullah had presented Bush with an eight point list of Middle East peace objectives.
8. "There is a feeling that we are directionless, and that has created a lot of resentment and some anger," said one official, referring to a "generally gloomy mood" at the State Department as it battles the White House and Pentagon for control of Middle East policy.

   

    

   Where are your facts???? What do you base your opinions on???

[supercat]

The point is, they are Arabs. If their plight is so important, maybe one of their fellow Islamic countries should give them a place to settle, with plenty of space away from Israel to prevent further conflict. If Sharon does agree to give back the land they took in 67, it should be given to Jordan, and then let Jordan decide whether they want to give it to the so called Palestinians.

I think you're missing something: other Arab countries don't WANT the Palestinians to have a homeland. They'd rather have the Palestinians hate Israel. Even if every Palestinian were to blow themselves up the other Arab nations wouldn't shed a tear except insofar as they failed to destroy Israel.

If Jordan can be shown to have been helping terrorists, I would suggest that Israel should capture some land from Jordan and give THAT to the Palestinians. Then the Palestinians might recognize who their true enemies are.

[d14truth]

"...finding another recourse is NOT pacifism..."

Give me a recourse/solution that is neither war, nor pacifism. The last 8 years of 'diplomacy' yielded nothing but time for 'terrorist' buildup and escalation. You can appease until you achieve either total rebellion(war) or total surrender(pacifism). You can try a million things. The results are three things, a winner, a loser, and the start of another struggle.

'Blessed are the 'peacemakers', and sometimes peacemakers must fight wars and rumors of war to achieve the peace that is sought for ALL.

[Demidog]

Hey, I don't think the suicide bombers are any more morally superior than the IDF.

[Texasforever]

My "opinions" are based on the time line as it unfolded. Those are facts. Bush is now saying "Israel you had your chance, we backed your right of self-defense in the world court of opinion, and you squandered it, Since you are satisfied with keeping Arafat in a building with the lights cut off I have better things to do than run interface for you?. That is what he is saying, and by God I agree with him. I do not support Israel on religious grounds and do not believe we have a Biblical requirement to support them. I do not support Israel for some hidden collective guilt of the Holocaust. I support Israel because they have been brave in the defense of their homeland . I respect them as a nation but their destiny is theirs and theirs alone. A nation unwilling to do what it takes to survive will not. The ball is in the court of Sharon and the Israelis.

[Demidog]

You are saying that every bus driver with a gun is a reservist or military man??

Show me the law. Bus drivers work for the government last time I checked.

[ClancyJ]

Why in the world is Bush at fault - nobody over there - the Arabs, Arafat, the Palestinians or the Israelis listen to anything he says. He is merely trying to get a peace settlement and then to have the Arabs with us as we go after Iraq. Better to have them with us then have them side with Saddam.

Of course, you won't look at anything other than blaming Bush for every wrong you see in the world. Your hate knows no bounds. Why don't you go help the democrats spill their trash. We know better here. You are learning nothing from this site - maybe you will do better there. I'm sure they believe like you do and you will have so many more to help you trash Bush.

I frankly get tired of having to counter the trash you and those like you spew about Bush. You don't know this man and it might pay you to study him.

[Demidog]

Further tragedy was averted when a woman shopping in the packed supermarket apparently saw the terrorist trying to set off a second explosion and shot him twice in the head from close range.'

And you are convinced she wasn't an IDF reservist or veteran why? The paper doesn't say. The quotes about the law do say however that only those associated with the military and police are allowed to keep guns in their homes. Who am I to believe? Veronica who ignores what is reported about the law? Or the reports about the law?

[Demidog]

It is clear what the law says according to reports. It is also clear that your stories do not tell us whether or not these "civilians" are ex-military and thus allowed by law to carry weapons.