Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Flipside on November 04, 2004, 09:42:34 am
-
Not sure what the political repurcussions will be for this...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Mideast_Conflict
Yasser Arafat has lapsed into a coma in a French hospital, a senior Palestinian official said Thursday, a day after the Palestinian leader was rushed to intensive care
Well, regardless of peoples personal opinion of him, I wish him well.
-
I wish him a suspicious death.
-
LOL!
'It was Food poisoning, honest guv!'
-
I already see the suicide bomber coming here if Arafat dies, even in the case of a non-suspicious death. :doubt:
Bah, we already dealt with this kind of thing in '95, though not from Palestinians.
Plus, I knew we were ****ed from all side when it was known that Arafat would come here. Whatever happens, I'm sure that all sides will blame us (not that we aren't already used to it, but heck, one can always hope it stops one day).
On this joyous note, later guys. :D
-
I just heard from a friend that Arafat just died. Unfortunately, I have to run out of the house, so I can't confirm this.
-
Damn! :(
This could actually cause a fair bit of destabilisation.
I hope things don't hit the fan for you Sandwich, seriously.
Edit : Oh, and the seriously wasn't a joke :)
-
I just hope the political part of Hamas doesn't get a huge boost from this. They're already pretty popular in Palestinian areas (their charities are needed, sadly), and with the not-so-good relationships between Hamas and Israel... well.
-
maybe this could be a good thing Iseal has been quite opposed to working with him, perhapse this could mean that someone new can come in and resolve this mess
-
Well, I think part of the problem Israel had with him was that he refused to do things their way. I don't see any further Palestinian leaders being any less stubborn with the Israelis.
That said, I hope things can move on smoothly, though, I fear there will at least be one or two 'incidents' before things calm down :(
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
maybe this could be a good thing Iseal has been quite opposed to working with him, perhapse this could mean that someone new can come in and resolve this mess
Could be someone worse, though.
It's certain there will be serious riots in the territories if Israel blocks Arafats burial in the Temple Mount, however.
NB: there is a story on the bbc new website- just a ticker at the mo, no link - where the Paris hospital is denying Israeli media reports Arafat is dead.... it's still unlcear whether he's in a coma or not. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3980903.stm)
-
Compared to who'll probably replace him, Arafat was quite the diplomat.
-
i just heard it.. waiting for a URL
-
BBC is sticking to the line his health is worsening, nothing more. I think this death story might be premature.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3980903.stm
(also in the 'Arafat in coma' thread, may want to merge)
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's health has deteriorated sharply at the Paris hospital where he is being treated for an unexplained illness.
He is in intensive care, but aides have issued conflicting reports about whether he has fallen into a coma.
Israeli TV has reported Mr Arafat is brain dead, although this was denied by the hospital and Palestinian officials.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Israeli TV has reported Mr Arafat is brain dead, although this was denied by the hospital and Palestinian officials. [/i]
He's a world leader... nuff said ;)
-
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/mideast_arafat_dc
Why does this remind me of the 'Cat in the Box' syndrome?
-
Well some places says he's dead, some places says he isn't.
Guess we'll just have to wait and see..
-
I like how the media contradicts itself. One says he is dead, another says he felt into coma and yet another says something quite different. They know how to confuse people.
Originally posted by Zuljin
Well some places says he's dead, some places says he isn't.
Guess we'll just have to wait and see..
All are partially right ... he does not have much left.
-
Isn't that the point?
-
Originally posted by TopAce
All are partially right ... he does not have much left.
Most likely yes.
I would be surprised if he is still alive in a month.
I just hope his death when it eventually comes, doesn't cause too much trouble in the middle east..
-
Oh, it'll cause a power vacuum...
-
And not just a Hoover vacuum, think Dyson kind of scale...
-
Originally posted by Flipside
He's a world leader... nuff said ;)
He's a Terrorist Leader, we're better off without him. Arafat has been the major stumbling block for some kind of peace in Israel.
-
for once i actually (mostly) agree with liberator
-
How about some kind of peace in Palestine? :lol:
-
I think Sharon is a major stumbling block, m'self...
-
/me agree with Raa.
Both were anti-peace anyway. As for Arafat, he's in a state of cerebral death, meaning that the only thing that lets him cling to life are machines, as the brain has irreversably ceased activity.
french linky :
here (http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/etranger/20041104.OBS0690.html)
here (http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/20041104.FIG0454.html) and here (http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3218,36-385799,0.html)
Weather prediction for France : Terrorists bomber anyone ? I'm sure that at least one palestinian organisation will blame us for this, I just can see this happening soon.....:doubt:
-
Originally posted by Raa
I think Sharon is a major stumbling block, m'self...
Well, let's see about that.
Didn't Sharon offer 95% of what they were asking for one time and Arafat turned him down?
-
Merging of the arafat coma/death thread, admin ?
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Well, let's see about that.
Didn't Sharon offer 95% of what they were asking for one time and Arafat turned him down?
Buggered if I know, from the way I read things, it seems like both sides have offered each other so much they should be the cosiest couple of nations on the planet ;)
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Well, let's see about that.
Didn't Sharon offer 95% of what they were asking for one time and Arafat turned him down?
That was Ehud Barak. Sharon merely decided to evacuate the Gaza Strip. :doubt:
-
Peace isn't painless I'm afraid :(
You give, they give, you give, they give, that's the only way to achieve it.
Someone had to make the first move. I watch with interest to see what the second move will be.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Someone had to make the first move. I watch with interest to see what the second move will be.
Heh, I think Arafat just played that move.
-
Oh boy, this isn't going to be good.
No other Palestinian leader, whether it be from the PA, Fatah or Hamas, commands the kids of respect that Arafat does. He's a uniting force, plain a simple,
He may not be Ghandi, but the way I see it, if it wasn't for him, the Palestinian cause would be in far worse shape that it is now. For the time being, all the factions are putting up a united front, but that may not last long.
Sandwich: You know as well as anyone that all the settlements being pulled out of Gaza will be relocated in the Wesr Bank, with several additions, further dividing up the Palestinian lands into isolated cantons. Give $10, take 20.
That is, if Sharon can pull it off without starting a civil war. The way I hear it, the Rabbis, settlers and right-wingers are none to happy, and the military is divided on the issue. Its funny how refusing to evacuate settlers is considered a legitimate moral reason for disobeying orders, while refusing to participate in IDF suppression in the territories isn't.
-
Irgun, Stern Gang, Hamas, Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. Anyone not a terrorist in the Middle East?
-
Well, to be fair, Irgun and their kind are history by now, though you have the IDF to take their place.
as for who isn't a terrorist...well, I guess the Bedouins haven't started any **** lately...though maybe that just means that once it comes, its going to be big. :nervous: :nervous:
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Peace isn't painless I'm afraid :(
You give, they give, you give, they give, that's the only way to achieve it.
Umm, no. The only way to acheive a lasting peace is to utterly destroy the opposition some how. To acquiece is to show a weakness that can be exploited by the opposition.
-
You can't be serious?
If people stuck to that little bit of widom, there would be no human race.
And in any case, do you think you can every defeat those who oppose the US and Israel through force of arms? News flash, there are a billion and a half Muslims on the planet, and more are being born every day. For every one you kill, 10 will take their place. That is, until you address the underlying issues that are the root of their animosity. Besides, you (you as a nation, not you personally) don't exactly have the moral high ground from which to preach.
There is no path to peace, peace is the path.
(dunno who said it)
-
Did I say force of arms? No. I said "some how". It could be cultural integration, economic domination or any number of other "non-violent" ways.
Mankind is primarily a predatory species, thus our fascination with warfare and violence in general. We don't play well with each other unless united by some outside force.
-
To totally anhialate those who would stand against you, in this case, would not be victory, it would be genocide :(
Ah, you've already answered that :)
I think mankind always thinks of itself as units of '1', it's a dichotomy of human nature, we are, by instinct, a tribal race, and yet possesed of a notion of 'I' which will often over-ride the notion of 'Tribe'. This is very rare in any animal that exists in groups.