Posted on 10/23/2001 6:55:31 AM PDT by ipaq2000
If Israel doesn't do it the Arabs will.
What they rejected was 98% of West Bank and Gaza plus 2% in the form of Israel's own land. They rejected sharing Jerusalem and acknowledging that Jews have a claim to what is beneath the mosques beneath the Temple Mount. They also rejected Israeli offer to allow the entrace to Israel 150,000 Palestinians forced by the Arab states to be permanent refugees.
Anyway, Israel is a liability to the US and has been.
In what way? Saying so doesn't make it true. How about you substantiate it. The USA is the world's hyperpower. How much more power would we have without Israel?
However, if they cooperate, really cooperate, and help to implement the two state solution, then I support the US being a neutral peace-keeping presence there along with other UN members.
Well I don't want our servicemen sent all over the world to keep the peace between warring peoples. That is certain to mean dead Americans, just like the Americans killed in Lebanon trying to keep the peace. The two sides should make peace. And Israel has made all the concessions. They have always had a 2 state solution in the plans, yet it's impossible to implement unless the 2nd state is going to renounce terrorism and violence, and prevent attacks. If Mexican were sneaking across the border and blowing up discos and pizza joints in El Paso and San Diego, we would hold the Mexican government responsible for breaking up the terrorist cells and helping to secure the borders. Israel demands the same of Arafat, but Arafat does not comply. Until the Palestinian Authority starts to act like a responsible nation, it should not be allowed to become a responsible nation.
Sharon is a worse terrorist than Arafat in many ways.
This is pure nonsense. Are you aware of the 200,000 dead people left in the wake of Arafat's terror and ambition, and how they came to be dead? The man is brutal. Nevertheless, Sharon is a convenient whipping boy for the supporters of Arafat. It's rather sick and cynical to say what you said, without acknowleging that Sharon was elected the 5th Israeli representative to negotiate with Arafat. There have been several doves who tried to negotiate with Arafat to no avail. At what point will you acknowlege that the problem is Arafat. 5 different Israeli leaders have tried to make peace, but the Palestinians have only had Arafat. Sharon, a military man, is a natural reaction by the Israeli populace (65% of the vote!) after 10 years of trying to negotiate peace, and only getting war in return.
Hundreds of years of sitting around their hands, doing nothing, until Israel carves out her own destiny, and suddenly, oh, the poor palestinians want that for themselves. What monumental gaul.
Come on, Arafu@k. Take it. If you can....
Talk about naked propaganda!
It must have escaped you there are nearly five-hundred (500) *more* Palestinians murdered in the past year than the terrorists have taken in Israeli lives. Rationalize that one away--it might be fun to see you try.
Israel's Sharon is evidently a hot head with a very big mouth; he's out of his depth. He *is* undermining our foreign policy. If he assassinates Arafat he's as insane as any warmongering thug has ever been. With its actions and rhetoric, Israel is being no friend to the United States these days.
Did you nod gleefully at the "Bush=Chamberlain" rebuke by your dear Mr. Sharon? Or how about his claim that Israel has always 'stood alone', eh?
What gives any Palestinian reason to trust Israel would be a good and just and peaceful neighbor, rather than an invader and bully in the name of "self-defense" while hiding behind the United States' skirt?
Instead of long ago adopting a strategy which would accept a Palestinian homeland, it arrogantly rejected the very notion and set about a policy of occupation and out-dated imperialistic expansion. And we let it.
It has followed a foolish policy--prolonging conflict, always upping the ante, effectively breeding more terrorists. And now, when we need their cooperation most, Sharon spits in our eye and threatens to foil our good faith efforts to be careful, cooperative, targeted and certainty in dealing with organized terrorism starting with Al Queda. Bush is trying to avoid Israeli-style policy errors and avoid developing an even larger regional or global problem.
The wisdom of Sharon's actions are *critical* to keeping this from spreading into a 3rd World War in terms of open conflict or economic disaster. I'm glad Bush's team can see this.
I see you are new here. This board is great because you can post something, and I can come back tomorrow and self-search, and see what you wrote, and respond, and then you can self-search and reply... we can carry on a conversation for years if we want. I am ready, willing and able. Why don't you start by refuting one thing I wrote with some fact or some reasoned opinion, instead of just being a one-lined contrarian.
But, do you think a man deserves to be murdered for his beliefs?
What you miss here is that you assume Sharon and Arafat are on equal footing, with comparable resources at the disposal. You would (rightly) assume Mexico and the US would be so positioned in the scenario you outline.
I'm not convinced Arafat has the polictical will of his people (more likely he has a price on his head not unlike the President of Pakistan or Saudi leadership) or the resources (made worse in light of IDF's obliteration of several Palestinian police facilities) to meet Israel's demands.
Seems like Israel's not too interested in Arafat's own problams and, not surprisingly, he's not too interested in meeting their demands.
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.