Its getting aweful quiet...

RenUnconscious

Quantum Scribe
With all that has been going on and peace now between israel and palestine, it seems odd nothing has happened yet.

Anyone else expect major political/world events taking place, other than the recent tsunami natural disaster?


"The pink blanket on the window ledge was to keep the light out."
 
Could it POSSIBLY be that the policies of the Bush Admin, just MAYBE, are having their intended effect, and the world is becoming a better place as a result of "Peace Thru Strength"?

I know that Dems and people with Dem-leanings would not ever want to give Bush even one ounce of credit, but I guarantee you that part of the Bush Admin strategy in Iraq was also to send a CRYSTAL CLEAR signal to terrorists in the Middle East. They knew Arafat and his murderous terrorists were watching, and they wanted to make the message as clear as possible. The Iraq war, combined with continued American and Israeli cooperation in marginalizing Arafat is part of what lead to these conditions being possible, once Arafat was out of the picture.

Face it...everyone knows it, but few are afraid to tell the truth: Arafat was NEVER about peace, and for all the years he was supposedly the legitimate president of the Palestinian people, he was a bigger obstruction to peace than he was a proponent....and what, in terms of results, did he EVER deliver to "his people"? (Recall Arafat was actually born an Egyptian!)

RMT
 
I don't think Isreal or Palestine care about western politics and as soon as Isreal pulls out of Gaza there will be trouble (because it's just the military pulling out, some isrealies will stay no matter what), and they'll have to go back in. The cycle will continue. Does Bush get credit for that?
 
I don't think Isreal or Palestine care about western politics
I agree. But I also believe both sides are tired of the bloodshed, and both sides are seeing that they HAVE to make peace if they are ever to get what they want.

as soon as Isreal pulls out of Gaza there will be trouble (because it's just the military pulling out, some isrealies will stay no matter what), and they'll have to go back in. The cycle will continue. Does Bush get credit for that?
You make this prediction based on the the past cycles, where Arafat was at the helm. There's a new sheriff in town, and this one certainly has a LOT more credibility than Arafat ever had, even on his best day. Let's not just assume your prediction will come true.

I will say this: The world is watching. If the Palestinians continue their violence, you are going to see Bush give Sharon the nod to "wipe them out". Israel is not the government with credibility issues here.

RMT
 
I will say this: The world is watching. If the Palestinians continue their violence, you are going to see Bush give Sharon the nod to "wipe them out". Israel is not the government with credibility issues here.

I don't know why they'd stop, I thought they were fighting over land. If the military leaves what do you expect will happen. The other side will just give up and go home?
 
I don't know why they'd stop, I thought they were fighting over land. If the military leaves what do you expect will happen. The other side will just give up and go home?
Once again it seems you are over-simplifying the analysis of this clearly political situation. You seem to make these kinds of statements as if there were absolutely no "framework" for how both parties get what they are looking for.

I suggest you read (or re-read) the roadmap to peace put together and supported by the US, Europe, Russia, and China. As with any political agreement intended to resolve disputes, there are remedies in the event of either party not living up to their side of the bargain.

Remember the Oslo Accords? Yes, it WAS about land, and Arafat had almost all of his demands on the table there in Oslo... but that is when Arafat decided it was about "more than land". He had what he wanted (pretty much) but got greedy. What I would like to know is what is it about Arafat or the previous Palestinian leadership that gave you such confidence in them that you would give them more credit (or even an equal amount of credit) as the Israeli leadership? You seem to display an anti-American/anti-Israeli sentiment, and I would like to know upon what foundation such a sentiment is based? If you are from Canada, do you not believe in the democratic process and democratic governments?

RMT
 
Once again it seems you are over-simplifying the analysis of this clearly political situation. You seem to make these kinds of statements as if there were absolutely no "framework" for how both parties get what they are looking for.

I suggest you read (or re-read) the roadmap to peace put together and supported by the US, Europe, Russia, and China. As with any political agreement intended to resolve disputes, there are remedies in the event of either party not living up to their side of the bargain.

No I'm not over simplifying, nor am I knocking the roadmap for peace. My opinion is that the cause for all the violence is still there, so I don't expect it to stop.

What I would like to know is what is it about Arafat or the previous Palestinian leadership that gave you such confidence in them that you would give them more credit (or even an equal amount of credit) as the Israeli leadership?

I'm not giving either side credit. All it could take is one rougue soldier who kills an innocent person and the other side would want to retaliate. A mistake could happen on either side and that prompts a response.

You seem to display an anti-American/anti-Israeli sentiment, and I would like to know upon what foundation such a sentiment is based? If you are from Canada, do you not believe in the democratic process and democratic governments?

Ok now your calling me a racist?? What did I say that exhibits that kind of sentiment?

There are different amounts of "democracy" and different ways to apply it. I don't believe in the democratic process we have today. I think that's only fair. In 2000 years mankind will look back at how primitive our system was.

Although I must say, Pierre Pettigrew friggen rocks. I hope he runs for leader some day.

I think the current system could be improved with proportional representation and direct access to votes on every issue for every citizen. GO ahead, laugh. I'm still gonna want it.
 
well i'd say iran is looking like the next place of things to come... if u saw today in the news, iran basically said if the u.s. or anybody at that matter messes around and invades them, that they will strike that country.
 
I have always heard of Iran and Saudi Arabia as the centers for extremist muslims. I always hear about Saudi Arabia regarding every middle east conflict, but we always appear to get along with them so well.

We should maintain our close ties with the saudi royals and israel otherwise the whole middle east could errupt in violence, spreading out from Iran no doubt.
 
well i'd say iran is looking like the next place of things to come... if u saw today in the news, iran basically said if the u.s. or anybody at that matter messes around and invades them, that they will strike that country.

Quite possible.
 
When flags and banners are gloriously raised in the middle of nowhere, deep in the forest primeval, it might be the squirrels that notice?
 
Actually Keven, the missile defense system fails quite often, I remember hearing one of the most recent incidents, we fired a missile and had the interceptor ready to go but the software failed, the interceptor failed to deploy and the missile had to be blown up. Cost to the American Tax Payer, something like 65 million bucks.

There are only a few locations where the interceptors have been deployed, and there are only a few of the interceptors. Our missile defense system is currently very poor, offers little coverage and no guarantees. Just 2-3 Mirvs (multiple impact re-entry vehicles) would be more than enough to overwhelm our entire network. Right now its probably only good enough to catch a long shot ICBM with plenty of warning.
 
Back
Top