[vyper]

[q]nope I never said what my solution is but its deffinetly not that... why kill inocent civilians what will that accomplish?[/q]

Tell the IDF that next time they go into the camps.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Splinter



down to personal insults eh? hehe nice.

if thats how it appears to you then you havnt given more then a second glance to my posts because you will find that when I talk about the palestinians and the palestinian terrorists im reffering to 2 very diffrent and distince groups. to bad you had to resort to practically calling me a racist here. quite sad you know. ah well lets hope next time you can keep your cool about you. I would have thought for somone who is apperantly much older then me that would have come naturally. poor show

No, you don't.  You describe all Palestinians as having bankrupted themselves to bomb Israel.  You confirmed it.  If you want to push it, then yes, that is blatantly racist.

That shows how much of a zealot you are.  You don't want peace, you just want to eradicate them.  you're not interesting in trying solutions, just the same failed tactics over and over again, not caring about how many have to die in order to make you think you're winning the unwinnable.

I've made it clear, time and time again that this is not about taking on, or even talking to the terrorists, it's about removing their support.  Removing the people that prop them up.  Beyond that, it's about basic human decency and doing the right thing.

But you ignore it, eventually resorting to tired stereotypes along the lines of 'they started it' and 'they all hate us'.   And then it's 'oh, God put us here, so we have a right' - yet denouncing their own religious reasons for wanting to be there.  Tell me, would God be pleased at the thousands of people on both sides who have died needlessly over a tiny sliver of dust & sand?

 Blaming the UN, the arab nations, everyone - except maybe looking at your own country and asking "is this the right way to go,  if it doesn't work?".  Maybe thinking that actually listening to the rest of the world - who are crying out for a proper, peaceful solution- isn't caving in, but the the right thing to do?

you are in a country, which has the ability to choose its own destiny.  I would have thought you would have chosen trying for a better future, a peaceful future, ahead of repeating the status quo of blood, hatred and violence.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by aldo_14
No, you don't.  You describe all Palestinians as having bankrupted themselves to bomb Israel.  You confirmed it.  If you want to push it, then yes, that is blatantly racist.

[q]the Palestinian terrorists get support from their own people yes. but do they get the support they need to operate from them? no they are too poor they have squandered any money they did have on trying to blow Israel up in the first year. the support these terrorists get is from outside Israel.[/q]

so I said all Palestinians? no, I said the ones who support the terrorists. now you are putting words in my mouth and trying to pass off my comments as racist? hehe nice.  

Originally posted by aldo_14
That shows how much of a zealot you are.  You don't want peace, you just want to eradicate them.  you're not interesting in trying solutions, just the same failed tactics over and over again, not caring about how many have to die in order to make you think you're winning the unwinnable.

I want to eradicate whom? because I don’t subscribe to your theory cause I don’t think it will work that means I’m calling for genocide? I'm not interested in trying solutions?! hell i even said your might work but I don’t believe it will I never said we should or shouldn’t try it and if sure never said we should continue on as we are. yeah and about killing all those people... so all the posts about how the innocent civilians and stuff are stuck and that shooting them is crimes etc etc and all that stuff that just what>? registered in your mind that i was saying "yes kill them all!" wtf dude seriously this is sick, your projecting and its a lame attempt at that. I suggest you watch what you type next if you answer this post.

Originally posted by aldo_14
I've made it clear, time and time again that this is not about taking on, or even talking to the terrorists, it's about removing their support.  Removing the people that prop them up.  Beyond that, it's about basic human decency and doing the right thing.

you are suggesting in principal to do that but when you describe the plan it is not doing that... you will be removing SOME moral support from the Palestinians who do not participate in the acts themselves but like I said they aren’t the money behind the attacks for the most part... you say remove the support I will say again that would be Syria and Iran and some rich oil guys in Saudi Arabia and some rich guys in Europe... so hey if you plan to do all that, sure that might work. but you are simply suggesting you cut out the support they get now from the Palestinian populace which financially is minimal... morally it is huge but then again so is their support from every other Arab nation.

Originally posted by aldo_14
But you ignore it, eventually resorting to tired stereotypes along the lines of 'they started it' and 'they all hate us'.   And then it's 'oh, God put us here, so we have a right' - yet denouncing their own religious reasons for wanting to be there.  Tell me, would God be pleased at the thousands of people on both sides who have died needlessly over a tiny sliver of dust & sand?

They started it yes. they started this latest bit of violence that lasted these 4 years. that all I meant... and yes all the terrorists do hate us... if they didn’t I hardly think they would blow themselves up. When did I say god put us here so we have a right? you went back in history to see who maybe started it and so I went back further to show you that where you went was nowhere near the beginning... and I never denounced their religious reasons for being there... unless you would like to quote a post of mine and show us all you aren’t just lying again. nasty habit that. you know, your intentions are good you are trying to solve the problem here then you go and spoil it by saying all this crap about me and saying i said all this other crap and all the while I was trying to tell you that I didn’t believe your plan would work and why not. seriously.... this is pretty ridiculous don’t you think?

 

Originally posted by aldo_14
Blaming the UN, the Arab nations, everyone - except maybe looking at your own country and asking "is this the right way to go,  if it doesn't work?".  Maybe thinking that actually listening to the rest of the world - who are crying out for a proper, peaceful solution- isn't caving in, but the right thing to do?

again you took me saying that: the PALESTINIAN TERRORISTS would view a peaceful retreat of forces and the claim that we would fight anymore as caving in and a sign of weakness. and you twisted it into saying that i think a peaceful compromise is caving in... if it wasn’t so easy to point out how much you are projecting and twisting my words this would be pissing me off...

Originally posted by aldo_14
you are in a country, which has the ability to choose its own destiny.  I would have thought you would have chosen trying for a better future, a peaceful future, ahead of repeating the status quo of blood, hatred and violence.

well I would love to. but unfortunately because you have gone and lied about what I actually said before I now apparently want to kill all Palestinians I think they are wasteful people all of them I think they all support terrorism I think its all their fault and I think us doing anything peaceful is caving in. thanks you've made me out to be some sort of monster or some sh1t, good thing for me the evidence is right here on the last few pages to disprove you and luckily your a horrible liar. This just gets more and more amusing every post you apparently get more and more desperate. GG

I suggest before this goes any further you examine what’s been said... hey maybe you have deceived yourself into believing I actually said that stuff you said I did. if so I suggest you work that out it can be harmful. think about it before you post a reply again... you’re on wafer thin ice.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Splinter

so I said all Palestinians? no, I said the ones who support the terrorists. now you are putting words in my mouth and trying to pass off my comments as racist? hehe nice.  

Yup, you pretty much did.

Originally posted by Splinter
I want to eradicate whom? because I don’t subscribe to your theory cause I don’t think it will work that means I’m calling for genocide? I'm not interested in trying solutions?! hell i even said your might work but I don’t believe it will I never said we should or shouldn’t try it and if sure never said we should continue on as we are. yeah and about killing all those people... so all the posts about how the innocent civilians and stuff are stuck and that shooting them is crimes etc etc and all that stuff that just what>? registered in your mind that i was saying "yes kill them all!" wtf dude seriously this is sick, your projecting and its a lame attempt at that. I suggest you watch what you type next if you answer this post.

You're the one who's saying the only option is sending in tanks, aren't you?  That there can't be peaceful negotiations?

Originally posted by Splinter
you are suggesting in principal to do that but when you describe the plan it is not doing that... you will be removing SOME moral support from the Palestinians who do not participate in the acts themselves but like I said they aren’t the money behind the attacks for the most part... you say remove the support I will say again that would be Syria and Iran and some rich oil guys in Saudi Arabia and some rich guys in Europe... so hey if you plan to do all that, sure that might work. but you are simply suggesting you cut out the support they get now from the Palestinian populace which financially is minimal... morally it is huge but then again so is their support from every other Arab nation.

Morally, it is key.  Where do you think they get their recruits from?

Originally posted by Splinter
They started it yes. they started this latest bit of violence that lasted these 4 years. that all I meant... and yes all the terrorists do hate us... if they didn’t I hardly think they would blow themselves up. When did I say god put us here so we have a right? you went back in history to see who maybe started it and so I went back further to show you that where you went was nowhere near the beginning... and I never denounced their religious reasons for being there... unless you would like to quote a post of mine and show us all you aren’t just lying again. nasty habit that. you know, your intentions are good you are trying to solve the problem here then you go and spoil it by saying all this crap about me and saying i said all this other crap and all the while I was trying to tell you that I didn’t believe your plan would work and why not. seriously.... this is pretty ridiculous don’t you think?

a) you mentioned the bible as justification for Jews being in Israel, implying that meant the Palestinians (or rather, arab residents) had no claim.
 b) if you go back to the bible as evidence of the origins, then your on very,very shaky ground.  The bible is not guarenteed to be true, for you maybe, but for others it is mere folklore and myth
c) you've not given a proper reason why a peace effort would not work, only spouted nonsense about 'the terrorists hate us' without considering one of the key reasons.
d) Sharon - alleged war criminal visitng a site known to be of contention.  (a nice election ploy, too - the hard man is elected just as he helps set of an intifada)

Originally posted by Splinter
again you took me saying that: the PALESTINIAN TERRORISTS would view a peaceful retreat of forces and the claim that we would fight anymore as caving in and a sign of weakness. and you twisted it into saying that i think a peaceful compromise is caving in... if it wasn’t so easy to point out how much you are projecting and twisting my words this would be pissing me off...

I didn't twist anything.  That's exactly what you said, because you;ve consistently failed to discriminate between the Palestinian populace and the terrorists.

Originally posted by Splinter
well I would love to. but unfortunately because you have gone and lied about what I actually said before I now apparently want to kill all Palestinians I think they are wasteful people all of them I think they all support terrorism I think its all their fault and I think us doing anything peaceful is caving in. thanks you've made me out to be some sort of monster or some sh1t, good thing for me the evidence is right here on the last few pages to disprove you and luckily your a horrible liar. This just gets more and more amusing every post you apparently get more and more desperate. GG

I suggest before this goes any further you examine what’s been said... hey maybe you have deceived yourself into believing I actually said that stuff you said I did. if so I suggest you work that out it can be harmful. think about it before you post a reply again... you’re on wafer thin ice.

So you now agree that most Palestinians have not bankrupted themselves trying to blow up Israel, and actually live in poverty as a consequence of the situation in the Palestinian territories? (specifically the effect of the ongoing conflict on free trade and movement for arabs who work or want to in Israel)

You've talked in what sometimes seems extremist language, without a willingness to understand the point of view of the other side and why they do what they do.

 I've interpreted literally what you've said.

 If you think this is twisted, then maybe you should clearly and explictly state;
a) why peaceful negotiations towards the establishment of Palestine would not lead to peace and security in the region?
b) whether you think a peaceful solution should be attempted?
c) what your solution to this problem would be?
d) whether you can recognise why terrorists want to attack Israel directly and IDF troops in Palestine & what you think that reason is?
e) if the current strategy of disproportionate response is reducing or increasing terrorism?

[Splinter]

Originally posted by aldo_14


You're the one who's saying the only option is sending in tanks, aren't you?  That there can't be peaceful negotiations?

ok I have jsut told you liek 3 times in a row that that is exactly what im not saying! I never said anything about a solution you have never heard me put forth my ideas for a solution. and I never said there cant be peaceful negotiations. I keep telling you that THE (singular) way you are suggesting wont work. that does not mean that there cant be peaceful negotiations... isnt english your native tounge... shouldnt you understand this after it is said just once?

Originally posted by aldo_14
Morally, it is key.  Where do you think they get their recruits from?

currently they have enough recruits to not run out in many many years. have you not ever seen the marches of hammas there are hundreds of thousands... and belive me if we said we would stop retaliating and we sat down gave them thier state and all they would realise that without retaliation they wouldnt have to give up their lives and kill themselves anymore they could just plant bombs and be far away when they go off... and tahts the 2nd time iv said THAT!

Originally posted by aldo_14
a) you mentioned the bible as justification for Jews being in Israel, implying that meant the Palestinians (or rather, arab residents) had no claim.
 b) if you go back to the bible as evidence of the origins, then your on very,very shaky ground.  The bible is not guarenteed to be true, for you maybe, but for others it is mere folklore and myth
c) you've not given a proper reason why a peace effort would not work, only spouted nonsense about 'the terrorists hate us' without considering one of the key reasons.
d) Sharon - alleged war criminal visitng a site known to be of contention.  (a nice election ploy, too - the hard man is elected just as he helps set of an intifada)

a) I did no such thing
b) I go back to the Bible as evidence that you cant just say oh before 1948 the arabs owned it so its thiers I go back that far to show you that you CAN go back taht far and still not decide wholly whose it is. and the bible may not be garunteed truth for you but that part is a truth both arabs and jews belive in so its good enough for them.
c) Fact X
d) what does this have to do with anything? so a guy visits a site and tahts an act of war?! yeah ok man. if for you that means Israel started this then ok I think that wrong but hey lol to each his own. but I ask you (your english right?) if you saw a person from northern Ireland at the... uhh london tower or somthing... would you start 4 year war over it?

Originally posted by aldo_14
I didn't twist anything.  That's exactly what you said, because you;ve consistently failed to discriminate between the Palestinian populace and the terrorists.

exactly what I said? so quote me. show me where I dont know the diffrence...

Originally posted by aldo_14
So you now agree that most Palestinians have not bankrupted themselves trying to blow up Israel, and actually live in poverty as a consequence of the situation in the Palestinian territories? (specifically the effect of the ongoing conflict on free trade and movement for arabs who work or want to in Israel)

I do? now your telling me what I agree to? I suggest you use the quote tool when claiming these things. like so:

[q]so I said all Palestinians? no, I said the ones who support the terrorists. now you are putting words in my mouth and trying to pass off my comments as racist? hehe nice.[q]

See? I just told you there what I thought. now how exacltly do you take that to mean that I agree that "most Palestinians have not bankrupted themselves trying to blow up Israel, and actually live in poverty as a consequence of the situation in the Palestinian territories."

Originally posted by aldo_14
You've talked in what sometimes seems extremist language, without a willingness to understand the point of view of the other side and why they do what they do.

 I've interpreted literally what you've said.

 If you think this is twisted, then maybe you should clearly and explictly state;
a) why peaceful negotiations towards the establishment of Palestine would not lead to peace and security in the region?
b) whether you think a peaceful solution should be attempted?
c) what your solution to this problem would be?
d) whether you can recognise why terrorists want to attack Israel directly and IDF troops in Palestine & what you think that reason is?
e) if the current strategy of disproportionate response is reducing or increasing terrorism?

good god man If what I have said before this post wasnt clear then... well I hope you dont have this kind of trouble understanding people in day to day discussions. I will try one more time to clear this up for you.

A) Why your suggestion wouldnt work? see Fact X. other peaceful negotiations... bring em up and ill tell you but as of yet I havnt commented on them.
B) yes, when possible this is always the better way.
C) I dont see a solution at the moment.
D) I already told you I can think of 1 million and one reasons for them to but you seem to have somthing sepcific in mind and you should share.
E) Dont know. Would have to look at current statistics... I can tell you what IS reducing the terrorist activites although I already have... go back and find my post about the wall.

I hope that thats the last time i will have to repeat myself. what you were doing was taking that because I didnt agree with (a) the meant that I automatically said that I agreed with (c) when actually I didnt comment on what I agreed on and in actuality that I agreed with (b). I suggest you dont do that anymore it can be very confusing and frustrating.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Splinter


ok I have jsut told you liek 3 times in a row that that is exactly what im not saying! I never said anything about a solution you have never heard me put forth my ideas for a solution. and I never said there cant be peaceful negotiations. I keep telling you that THE (singular) way you are suggesting wont work. that does not mean that there cant be peaceful negotiations... isnt english your native tounge... shouldnt you understand this after it is said just once?

why?  All you've said is either a) they would see it as Israeli weakness and b) it's because the terrorists all hate Israel - and b) in particular is not valid if you recognise that not all Palestinians are terrorists.  (a is also highly debatable)

Originally posted by Splinter

currently they have enough recruits to not run out in many many years. have you not ever seen the marches of hammas there are hundreds of thousands... and belive me if we said we would stop retaliating and we sat down gave them thier state and all they would realise that without retaliation they wouldnt have to give up their lives and kill themselves anymore they could just plant bombs and be far away when they go off... and tahts the 2nd time iv said THAT!

Whilst you try and slag me off as if english is not my language, I have to re-read that about 3 times to understand it - so forgive me if i misunderstand.

So... what you're saying is that Hamas has hundreds of thousands of Palestinian recruits.  And if peace was achieved, they'd still want to run out and plant bombs,  because they have nothing better to do.

Perhaps you have not considered the political role Hamas play in Palestine as well as the terrorist role outside?  Namely that the former can be used to gain support from people that would not participate or endorse terrorism?

You should also not I never said no retaliating, I said peace.  i.e. ceasefire, truce, etc.  In other words, seeking an alternative & eventual end to this senseless cycle of violence, rather than helping perpetuate this.  

Originally posted by Splinter
a) I did no such thing
b) I go back to the Bible as evidence that you cant just say oh before 1948 the arabs owned it so its thiers I go back that far to show you that you CAN go back taht far and still not decide wholly whose it is. and the bible may not be garunteed truth for you but that part is a truth both arabs and jews belive in so its good enough for them.
c) Fact X
d) what does this have to do with anything? so a guy visits a site and tahts an act of war?! yeah ok man. if for you that means Israel started this then ok I think that wrong but hey lol to each his own. but I ask you (your english right?) if you saw a person from northern Ireland at the... uhh london tower or somthing... would you start 4 year war over it?

b) So you agree that both sides can have a valid historical claim which goes beyond the point in history where it is verifiable.  Good.
c) see later
d) He should have been aware of the significance of his visit, as nearly everyone else was.  If, as you claim, this is a holy war then he should have been more than aware of what would happen.  I'm not blaming Sharon exclusively for this, but he should have considered that he would be presenting a pretext for further troubles and erred on the sign of caution.

NB: you've shown a complete misunderstanding of the Irish troubles, BTW.  For a long time the UK used similar tactics to that of ISrael in dealing with the IRA - targeted assassinations (SAS shoot on sight), heavy military presence, etc.  It did, of course, differ in its exact nature (it's not a case of entering a ghetto of popular resistance ) - but the only concrete peace has come from long & hard negotiations, such as the Good Friday Agreement.

Originally posted by Splinter
See? I just told you there what I thought. now how exacltly do you take that to mean that I agree that "most Palestinians have not bankrupted themselves trying to blow up Israel, and actually live in poverty as a consequence of the situation in the Palestinian territories."

Exactly that.   In other words, a retraction of your statement that most (nearly all) Palestinians bankrupted themselves trying to bomb Israel.  Followed by an acceptment that the poverty situation of the territories is exacerbated by the roadblocks, etc, and the continuing conflict, and that a permanent solution is required to help correct this & allow these people to rebuild their lives.

Originally posted by Splinter
good god man If what I have said before this post wasnt clear then... well I hope you dont have this kind of trouble understanding people in day to day discussions. I will try one more time to clear this up for you.

A) Why your suggestion wouldnt work? see Fact X. other peaceful negotiations... bring em up and ill tell you but as of yet I havnt commented on them.
B) yes, when possible this is always the better way.
C) I dont see a solution at the moment.
D) I already told you I can think of 1 million and one reasons for them to but you seem to have somthing sepcific in mind and you should share.
E) Dont know. Would have to look at current statistics... I can tell you what IS reducing the terrorist activites although I already have... go back and find my post about the wall.

I hope that thats the last time i will have to repeat myself. what you were doing was taking that because I didnt agree with (a) the meant that I automatically said that I agreed with (c) when actually I didnt comment on what I agreed on and in actuality that I agreed with (b). I suggest you dont do that anymore it can be very confusing and frustrating.

a)  I don't believe that's true.  Firstly, I think the hatred of Zionism is  limited to a select group of die-hards in the terrorist factions and secondly I believe that it can be reduced and removed in the Palestinian population when you remove the main reason behind it (the current situation within the territories).  (NB: and that the main reason recruits join the like of Hamas is because of the situation over the territories rather than a blind hatred)

At the moment there is little to lose for the terrorists - they literally have nothing but hate.  Give them something for peace, and they have a lot more to lose, and a lot less reason to fight.

In other words, reduce the hate by removing the key reasons behind where possible.

b).

c) I see the best solution as trying for peace.  Not, I should emphasise, a universal withdrawl, but a mutual ceasefire with clear 'breakage' conditions and penalties.  This should be very public, to make it exactly clear that neither side will take action and that if they do, then they are aware that the consequence will be further bloodshed.
Followed by this, negotiations between the civillian authorities, Israel and the UN to establish a seperate Palestinian state and which will include the formal diplomatic recognition of Israel by Arab nations (as well as the signing of non-aggression treaties).  Also including the Palestinian (now) government signing an undertaking to ensure Israeli security through the removal of terrorist elements (with UN oversight to ensure this is done), etc.
Areas which are of dual/ equal interest, i.e. contested sites, would be administered by a UN peacekeeping force and be considered 'free cities'.
Um... and other stuff, too.  But it's morning and my head hurts.

d) would you agree a key reason (behind terrorism/militancy) is that they feel oppressed and attacked within the Palestinian territories, and that as a result they justify attacks and hatred of Israel with this?
 (NB mentioned this lots of times before, i'm surprised you've not picked up upon it.  It's a simple case of having a pretext which allows terrorists to justify and gain support for their worst crimes from within their own people/recruit source)

e) But the wall is illegal under international law (and there is a reason for these laws) and will ultimately back fire if not already - it's simple - it's turning the areas it borders into virtual prisons.  This means that deprivation, overcrowding, etc in the enwalled areas will become ever more acute - breeding more resentment and hence more terrorists.  Even if there is a lull, there won't be a halt, and its more likely there will simply be a change in attack methods ala the rocket attacks.

[ffRule]

Originally posted by aldo_14


1/ they live there and did prior to the founding of Israel.  i.e. nationalism
2/ Hatred & fear.  applies to both sides.
3/ Evidence? (NB: Hamas does play a humanitarian role within Palestine as well as being terrorist, that's one of the reasons it gains support within there)
4/Because every time Israel steps back, it launches some form of action to avoid looking weak - be it incursions as the ones we're seeing now, building a bloody great illegal wall round the place, or assassinations of terrorist leaders (who often hold a degree of spiritual support)

I think that the causes of this conflict can be put down to mutual culpability - one side takes an action, and the other seeks revenge to avoid looking wounded.

Neither side will probably make peace offerings without international interference.  But I think - and I've said this earlier - that Israel is in the best position to make the first move, because it holds the cards - the territory &  the military.

1) werent the jews there like from the begginning of time? also why dont indians have a right for terrorizing america ?
2) i dont think israel ever initiated a direct assault to kill civilians, just like america doesnt go around looking for civilians to kill in iraq, its casualties of war, and usually the ones that get killed are people who were all cheering for those with the guns.
3) evidence ? the UN chief said it himself two days ago ? its well established, and i dont see how they control the funds going for hamas "humanitarian support" going to terrorist's.
4) now thats just throwing accusations, if ur talking about the recent event, its about israel backing out and 100 missles getting launched just from where they backed out killing young children, the wall being illegial, is your opinion, assasinating terrorist leaders is wrong ? maybe they should just send them money to keep the action going ?

now here is my opinion, it doesnt take 2 sides to make revenge acts for this circle to go own, it only takes 1 side.
as far as im seeing Israel has only but defended itself for now, and palestinians played the "revengfull" role, lets not forget they started the whole thing and could stop at the minute they want to.
seems rather blinded to blame both sides, thats what you do when you have no idea who to blame.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by aldo_14

why?  All you've said is either a) they would see it as Israeli weakness and b) it's because the terrorists all hate Israel - and b) in particular is not valid if you recognise that not all Palestinians are terrorists.  (a is also highly debatable)

That’s all I’ve said? I haven’t said that ummm FACT X and I also haven’t said it wont work because THE FUNDING THE TERRORISTS NEED FOR SUCCESFULL OPERATION COMES FROM OUTSIDE THIER OWN PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE SHOWN BEFORE BOTH IN JORDAN AND IN LEBANON THEY WILL FIGHT ANYONE IN A CIVIL WAR IF THEY TRY AND STOP THEM! There I added that bit about Jordan and Lebanon... hope that sheds more light on the picture. Terrorists don’t care... they really don’t.

Originally posted by aldo_14
So... what you're saying is that Hamas has hundreds of thousands of Palestinian recruits.  And if peace was achieved, they'd still want to run out and plant bombs,  because they have nothing better to do.

It’s impossible to tell just how many but if you can take any judgment from the marches? Yeah that many... I wouldn’t limit it to just hamas though there is PFLP Islamic Jihad Fatah Hezbollah... no this is the last time I will repeat this. FACT X!!!!!! GOOD GOD READ THIER CREDO. It stats the destruction of all of Israel and the nation of Palestine IN ITS PLACE!!!! You get that?! That’s their goal they will not stop for peace they have never stopped for peace even when it was being negotiated.

Originally posted by aldo_14
Perhaps you have not considered the political role Hamas play in Palestine as well as the terrorist role outside?  Namely that the former can be used to gain support from people that would not participate or endorse terrorism?

Ok and? What’s the point so they have lots of support... I know this... so they will lose moral support among some Palestinians if they get their state so what? The terrorists will still have the ability and desire to try and attack Israeli civilians.

Originally posted by aldo_14
You should also not I never said no retaliating, I said peace.  i.e. ceasefire, truce, etc.  In other words, seeking an alternative & eventual end to this senseless cycle of violence, rather than helping perpetuate this.  

Dude ceasefire and truce that’s the same thing... not retaliating because every time something like that has been called the terrorists break it by attacking over and over and over again what makes you think this time it will stop?

Originally posted by aldo_14
b) So you agree that both sides can have a valid historical claim which goes beyond the point in history where it is verifiable.  Good.
c) see later
d) He should have been aware of the significance of his visit, as nearly everyone else was.  If, as you claim, this is a holy war then he should have been more than aware of what would happen.  I'm not blaming Sharon exclusively for this, but he should have considered that he would be presenting a pretext for further troubles and erred on the sign of caution.

b) Sure I do... I always have.
d) You didn’t answer my question... in the ruff times with the IRA or whatever they are called had one of them come to an English "holy site" (and mind you in this case the place Sharon visited is also holy to Jews) that was also "holy" or beloved to Irish folks would that have justified England going off and killing a bunch of them over there? Would that have even made people that mad as to the point of wanting to kill Irish people? Seriously.

Originally posted by aldo_14
NB: you've shown a complete misunderstanding of the Irish troubles, BTW.  For a long time the UK used similar tactics to that of ISrael in dealing with the IRA - targeted assassinations (SAS shoot on sight), heavy military presence, etc.  It did, of course, differ in its exact nature (it's not a case of entering a ghetto of popular resistance ) - but the only concrete peace has come from long & hard negotiations, such as the Good Friday Agreement.

What’s NB? And I know it’s different in many aspects but just answer the question it’s still valid... or better yet... answer this one. Do you think Sharon’s visit to a Muslim AND Jewish holy site was a justifiable act of war and they had a right to start this whole thing over that?

Originally posted by aldo_14
Exactly that.   In other words, a retraction of your statement that most (nearly all) Palestinians bankrupted themselves trying to bomb Israel.  Followed by an acceptment that the poverty situation of the territories is exacerbated by the roadblocks, etc, and the continuing conflict, and that a permanent solution is required to help correct this & allow these people to rebuild their lives.

Ok you refuse to just take my statements "as are" you HAVE to take them and say that because I said that that means I also mean this. I refuse to answer you when you do that it’s ridiculous and very rude.

Originally posted by aldo_14
a)  I don't believe that's true.  Firstly, I think the hatred of Zionism is  limited to a select group of die-hards in the terrorist factions and secondly I believe that it can be reduced and removed in the Palestinian population when you remove the main reason behind it (the current situation within the territories).  (NB: and that the main reason recruits join the like of Hamas is because of the situation over the territories rather than a blind hatred)

Fact X. it’s their whole purpose. And I wish you not believing it to be true made a difference but it doesn’t fact is what is written by them the oaths they take the reason they kill themselves in the name of Allah. For them this is a very religious based war I suggest you look into what makes it tick mainly the part where if there is ever land/territory that was once Muslim it is forever Muslim land and must be taken back when the opportunity is there as in no matter what Israel must go... also allot of Europe will be under attack soon because of the wars after the crusades where they held much of Europe... also the part where they are encouraged to become Sahadeeds (martyrs who kill themselves along with others who they are fighting) just a bunch of crap that urge them on... its quite interesting if you have Azereaus or something like it I can give you a link to a documentary about some of this I just dled the other day.

Originally posted by aldo_14
At the moment there is little to lose for the terrorists - they literally have nothing but hate.  Give them something for peace, and they have a lot more to lose, and a lot less reason to fight.

In other words, reduce the hate by removing the key reasons behind where possible.

b).

They have plenty to lose! They have families and stuff. The thing is they have everything to gain by doing this. By killing yourself and Jews along with you, you get.
1. A martyrs celebration where your name is praised and murals drawn
2. Terrorist nations send your family an ass load of money
3. You are now a prince of paradise and 72 virgins whose virginity regrows every time you screw them.

They are brought up to have that as their highest aspiration in their schools in their homes. That is what they have to gain.

Originally posted by aldo_14
c) I see the best solution as trying for peace.  Not, I should emphasise, a universal withdrawl, but a mutual ceasefire with clear 'breakage' conditions and penalties.  This should be very public, to make it exactly clear that neither side will take action and that if they do, then they are aware that the consequence will be further bloodshed.
Followed by this, negotiations between the civillian authorities, Israel and the UN to establish a seperate Palestinian state and which will include the formal diplomatic recognition of Israel by Arab nations (as well as the signing of non-aggression treaties).  Also including the Palestinian (now) government signing an undertaking to ensure Israeli security through the removal of terrorist elements (with UN oversight to ensure this is done), etc.
Areas which are of dual/ equal interest, i.e. contested sites, would be administered by a UN peacekeeping force and be considered 'free cities'.
Um... and other stuff, too.  But it's morning and my head hurts.

Dude this offer is already in place it ahs been since the beginning. We beg them stop the attacks so will we and we can broker a deal! Forget it they wont the terrorists DONT CARE!

Originally posted by aldo_14
d) would you agree a key reason (behind terrorism/militancy) is that they feel oppressed and attacked within the Palestinian territories, and that as a result they justify attacks and hatred of Israel with this?

No. I would agree its part of the reason for a select FEW. I will agree however that some supporters of the terrorist acts PRETEND to justify their actions with this so that the international community will not see the blatant FACT X.

 

Originally posted by aldo_14
(NB mentioned this lots of times before, i'm surprised you've not picked up upon it.  It's a simple case of having a pretext which allows terrorists to justify and gain support for their worst crimes from within their own people/recruit source)

The only support THAT gains them is from the outside world. Believe me the Palestinians are not stupid they know exactly what the terrorists are doing. And the terrorists are not hiding it... you would think people would be able to see that.

Originally posted by aldo_14
e) But the wall is illegal under international law (and there is a reason for these laws) and will ultimately back fire if not already - it's simple - it's turning the areas it borders into virtual prisons.  This means that deprivation, overcrowding, etc in the enwalled areas will become ever more acute - breeding more resentment and hence more terrorists.  Even if there is a lull, there won't be a halt, and its more likely there will simply be a change in attack methods ala the rocket attacks.

Ok about the security fence I REALLY REALLY don’t care if its legal illegal I really don’t give a rats tiny ass! Its working that’s what matters. Not one terrorist has gotten out of the Gaza strip since the completion of the partition around them and in places on the west bank that the wall has been completed terrorism is down %50! Would be more except they are just going around to the gaps... but the results speak for themselves and I'm glad Israel is doing it. They are protecting their civilians in the most nonviolent way possible. And it’s working. So. All those who don’t like the wall can piss off. People’s lives are saved and those people right now are flipping you off (not you Aldo "you" as in all those who don't like the wall).

FFRule has the right Idea. :thepimp:

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by ffRule


1) werent the jews there like from the begginning of time? also why dont indians have a right for terrorizing america ?
2) i dont think israel ever initiated a direct assault to kill civilians, just like america doesnt go around looking for civilians to kill in iraq, its casualties of war, and usually the ones that get killed are people who were all cheering for those with the guns.
3) evidence ? the UN chief said it himself two days ago ? its well established, and i dont see how they control the funds going for hamas "humanitarian support" going to terrorist's.
4) now thats just throwing accusations, if ur talking about the recent event, its about israel backing out and 100 missles getting launched just from where they backed out killing young children, the wall being illegial, is your opinion, assasinating terrorist leaders is wrong ? maybe they should just send them money to keep the action going ?

now here is my opinion, it doesnt take 2 sides to make revenge acts for this circle to go own, it only takes 1 side.
as far as im seeing Israel has only but defended itself for now, and palestinians played the "revengfull" role, lets not forget they started the whole thing and could stop at the minute they want to.
seems rather blinded to blame both sides, thats what you do when you have no idea who to blame.

1/ I didn't say they had a right, I said they had a reason to do so.  I'm not excusing their actions, but I feel you have to understand them and tackle that reason to have a proper solution.
2/ Fear, for example, led to the wall.  To people being unwilling to make positive modes.  Mutual distrust, in other words, is a block upon peace.
3/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3719432.stm  (yesterday, 6/10/04).  Besides which, this is not UN funding of Hamas - it is individual sympathisers who, if guilty, are abusing the UN.
4/ The wall was declared illegal by the International Court of Justice.  Not my opinion, it is a legal fact.  The UN also voted to condemn it.

I think history has proven that targeted assasinations don't really work, because the leader becomes a martyr and someone else steps up to take his place.  The result is, of course, attempts at revenge.  So I don't believe assassinations are conductive towards a ceasefire.

EDIT; Israel attacks terrorists as revenge for attacks, terrorists attack Israel for revenge.... you can see where this is going, yeah?

Oh, and I blame both sides when both are at fault.  The Palestinians for terrorism, and Israel for holding this land in contravention of the UNs rulings... http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/security_council.htm

[Ghostavo]

Originally posted by ffRule
1) werent the jews there like from the begginning of time? also why dont indians have a right for terrorizing america ?
2) i dont think israel ever initiated a direct assault to kill civilians, just like america doesnt go around looking for civilians to kill in iraq, its casualties of war, and usually the ones that get killed are people who were all cheering for those with the guns.
3) evidence ? the UN chief said it himself two days ago ? its well established, and i dont see how they control the funds going for hamas "humanitarian support" going to terrorist's.
4) now thats just throwing accusations, if ur talking about the recent event, its about israel backing out and 100 missles getting launched just from where they backed out killing young children, the wall being illegial, is your opinion, assasinating terrorist leaders is wrong ? maybe they should just send them money to keep the action going ?

now here is my opinion, it doesnt take 2 sides to make revenge acts for this circle to go own, it only takes 1 side.
as far as im seeing Israel has only but defended itself for now, and palestinians played the "revengfull" role, lets not forget they started the whole thing and could stop at the minute they want to.
seems rather blinded to blame both sides, thats what you do when you have no idea who to blame.

1 - The land was theirs except for a small part that was owned by members of the jewish community. Politically, Israel as a jewish state hadn't existed for well over a millenia, while multiple nations existed and owned that land. Indians don't have a right to terrorize the US (nor does anyone else has the right to terrorize anybody), besides the fact that they compensated the Indians, created reserves, *gasp* allowed them to enter and leave their (US) cities! *gasp*, etc, etc, etc...

2 - If you iniciate a "war" you are going to have civies dying. I don't think any war in the 20th century had no civilian casualties. By the way, how would you react if for some wierd reason, your countrymen were commiting acts of terrorism in another country while your own was ocupied by that other country?

4 - link?

For the conclusion. It takes both sides to make a circle. If it's only one side attacking it's mearly a full assault. Which I don't remember hearing in the news Israel being under siege by the Palestinian (being "literaly" the other way around ironicly).

And they started it? That's funny...

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Splinter


That’s all I’ve said? I haven’t said that ummm FACT X and I also haven’t said it wont work because THE FUNDING THE TERRORISTS NEED FOR SUCCESFULL OPERATION COMES FROM OUTSIDE THIER OWN PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE SHOWN BEFORE BOTH IN JORDAN AND IN LEBANON THEY WILL FIGHT ANYONE IN A CIVIL WAR IF THEY TRY AND STOP THEM! There I added that bit about Jordan and Lebanon... hope that sheds more light on the picture. Terrorists don’t care... they really don’t.

If there is a civil war, will they be attacking Israel?  No, they'll be fighting in a civil war.  So what are you worried about?  The Palestinains?  If you wre, you wouldn't be so keen on the wall.

Originally posted by Splinter
It’s impossible to tell just how many but if you can take any judgment from the marches? Yeah that many... I wouldn’t limit it to just hamas though there is PFLP Islamic Jihad Fatah Hezbollah... no this is the last time I will repeat this. FACT X!!!!!! GOOD GOD READ THIER CREDO. It stats the destruction of all of Israel and the nation of Palestine IN ITS PLACE!!!! You get that?! That’s their goal they will not stop for peace they have never stopped for peace even when it was being negotiated.

Read my previous reply/s RE: depth of extremism and context for violence.

Originally posted by Splinter

Ok and? What’s the point so they have lots of support... I know this... so they will lose moral support among some Palestinians if they get their state so what? The terrorists will still have the ability and desire to try and attack Israeli civilians.

They'll lose logistical support if they lose moral support.

Originally posted by Splinter

Dude ceasefire and truce that’s the same thing... not retaliating because every time something like that has been called the terrorists break it by attacking over and over and over again what makes you think this time it will stop?

Israel have also conducted raids into the territories during ceasefires, as well as IIRC assassinations of terrorist figureheads.

Originally posted by Splinter

b) Sure I do... I always have.
d) You didn’t answer my question... in the ruff times with the IRA or whatever they are called had one of them come to an English "holy site" (and mind you in this case the place Sharon visited is also holy to Jews) that was also "holy" or beloved to Irish folks would that have justified England going off and killing a bunch of them over there? Would that have even made people that mad as to the point of wanting to kill Irish people? Seriously.

The IRA/ Northern Ireland situation is not analogous to this.  Firstly, there are no holy sites contended by both sides.  Secondly, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been any British political leader accused of war crimes against the Irish.  Thirdly, N.Ireland is not of a single national group but 2.  Fourthly, the Irish troubles were not about the establishment of an independent nation but of unifying an existing one.  Fifth, British troops were never deployed en masse in Ireland to hunt down Irish terrorists (which would be the closest parallel to the IDFs operations within the territories).

In order to be analogous situation, I would imagine the UK would have to be occupying all of Ireland with a strong military force for a very long time (>50 years).  When this was true, it was more or less resolved peacefully - albiet after a long conflict - with the then IRA disbanding.

Now, I've not said this was a valid justification for the intifada.  But in this sort of situation, any justification will be inviting trouble.  It's effectively giving ammunition to the terrorists, and that's not advisable.

Originally posted by Splinter

What’s NB? And I know it’s different in many aspects but just answer the question it’s still valid... or better yet... answer this one. Do you think Sharon’s visit to a Muslim AND Jewish holy site was a justifiable act of war and they had a right to start this whole thing over that?

NB: Nota bine (from latin); means an additional point o relevance.  Like notes jotted in pencil down the margins of a book.

No, I don't believe it was a fair justification.  But, I believe it was also obvious that it would give one to Palestinains, because they have a different mindset which is more prone to anger against Israel, as a result of the long history.

what you may not have noted, is that my argument in this area is two-fold.  1/ you can't allow terrorists to have any justification 2/ the Palestinian mindset is one which, due to history, lives in a seige mentality - so you have to be very careful to avoid this sort of thing.

tip-toeing on eggshels might seem a little undignified, but it's important to avoid violence.

Originally posted by Splinter

Ok you refuse to just take my statements "as are" you HAVE to take them and say that because I said that that means I also mean this. I refuse to answer you when you do that it’s ridiculous and very rude.

So you agree with me then?  I'm only paraphrasing what you said in a number of previous posts;
[q]Originally posted by Splinter
the palestinian terrorists get support from their onw people yes. but do they get the support they need to operate from them? no they are to poor they have squandered any money they did have on trying to blow israel up in the first year. the support these terrorists get is from outside Israel.[/q]
[q]Originally posted by aldo_14
So....all Palestinians are idiots who've went bankrupt trying to blow up Israel?[/q]
[q]all? no. many many many? yeah. but hey i mean that girl the other week that was stopped before the busstop by the soldier and she blew herself up she was the daughter of a wealthy man who ran a public tv station for palestinians and she was the host the kids show every morning... she wasnt poor. [/q]

You said, twice, that many Palestinians are idiots who've bankrupted themselves trying to blow up Israel.   Unless you wish to retract that, of course.

Originally posted by Splinter

Fact X. it’s their whole purpose. And I wish you not believing it to be true made a difference but it doesn’t fact is what is written by them the oaths they take the reason they kill themselves in the name of Allah. For them this is a very religious based war I suggest you look into what makes it tick mainly the part where if there is ever land/territory that was once Muslim it is forever Muslim land and must be taken back when the opportunity is there as in no matter what Israel must go... also allot of Europe will be under attack soon because of the wars after the crusades where they held much of Europe... also the part where they are encouraged to become Sahadeeds (martyrs who kill themselves along with others who they are fighting) just a bunch of crap that urge them on... its quite interesting if you have Azereaus or something like it I can give you a link to a documentary about some of this I just dled the other day.

 

(see previous post rE: this much vaunted 'fact x' vs degrees of extremism)

If you're pointing to Muslim history as a reason for a threat, maybe you should also point out the history of the Crusades themselves?

NB: the 'Muslims' never held much of Europe.  Even the Ottoman empire never covered what is considered mainland europe, reaching about as far north as Hungary IIRC.

Originally posted by Splinter

They have plenty to lose! They have families and stuff. The thing is they have everything to gain by doing this. By killing yourself and Jews along with you, you get.
1. A martyrs celebration where your name is praised and murals drawn
2. Terrorist nations send your family an ass load of money
3. You are now a prince of paradise and 72 virgins whose virginity regrows every time you screw them.

They are brought up to have that as their highest aspiration in their schools in their homes. That is what they have to gain.

Do they have families to lose if their families get caught in crossfire?     Or homes if those are bulldozed?   you've basically described why death is more attractive to them than living in the squalor of the territories, which is exactly my point about why you have to tackle this.

Originally posted by Splinter

Dude this offer is already in place it ahs been since the beginning. We beg them stop the attacks so will we and we can broker a deal! Forget it they wont the terrorists DONT CARE!

No. I would agree its part of the reason for a select FEW. I will agree however that some supporters of the terrorist acts PRETEND to justify their actions with this so that the international community will not see the blatant FACT X. [/B][/quote]

 You say some, I say many.  I don't believe extremism is endemic to Palestinians, but a product of the conditions and political situation they live in.

(Of course, you don't broker the eventual solution RE: Palestine with terrorists, but with the Palestinian civil leaders)

Originally posted by Splinter

The only support THAT gains them is from the outside world. Believe me the Palestinians are not stupid they know exactly what the terrorists are doing. And the terrorists are not hiding it... you would think people would be able to see that.

Originally posted by Splinter

Ok about the security fence I REALLY REALLY don’t care if its legal illegal I really don’t give a rats tiny ass! Its working that’s what matters. Not one terrorist has gotten out of the Gaza strip since the completion of the partition around them and in places on the west bank that the wall has been completed terrorism is down %50! Would be more except they are just going around to the gaps... but the results speak for themselves and I'm glad Israel is doing it. They are protecting their civilians in the most nonviolent way possible. And it’s working. So. All those who don’t like the wall can piss off. People’s lives are saved and those people right now are flipping you off (not you Aldo "you" as in all those who don't like the wall).

FFRule has the right Idea. :thepimp:

What about the innocent people trapped within the barrier who have lost their livelihood (through being unable to get to work within Israel), or their land.  Why do you think the UN and the ICJ have decided the barrier is illegal?

If the barrier has worked as you say, then the only reason it has done so is by turning the enclosed areas into a virtual(?) prison.  Legal?  I think not.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by aldo_14

If there is a civil war, will they be attacking Israel?  No, they'll be fighting in a civil war.  So what are you worried about?  The Palestinains?  If you wre, you wouldn't be so keen on the wall.

Palestinian Civil war would be devastating for them and hurt them more then anything we have or could do atm. yes it just goes to prove that you didnt read the post I made on the wall... I suggest you study it.

Originally posted by aldo_14
They'll lose logistical support if they lose moral support.

ok you just keep refusing to aknowledge that I dont think it will work and you do I differ I HAVE PROVEN WITH FACT why I think your plan wont work accept that and move on any reply to this matter which was already resolved the first time I posted the answer will be ignored. finally.

Originally posted by aldo_14
Israel have also conducted raids into the territories during ceasefires, as well as IIRC assassinations of terrorist figureheads.

during ceasefires? maybe... I would have to see though... go look it up post a link.

Originally posted by aldo_14
The IRA/ Northern Ireland situation is not analogous to this.  Firstly, there are no holy sites contended by both sides.  Secondly, to the best of my knowledge, there has never been any British political leader accused of war crimes against the Irish.  Thirdly, N.Ireland is not of a single national group but 2.  Fourthly, the Irish troubles were not about the establishment of an independent nation but of unifying an existing one.  Fifth, British troops were never deployed en masse in Ireland to hunt down Irish terrorists (which would be the closest parallel to the IDFs operations within the territories).

In order to be analogous situation, I would imagine the UK would have to be occupying all of Ireland with a strong military force for a very long time (>50 years).  When this was true, it was more or less resolved peacefully - albiet after a long conflict - with the then IRA disbanding.

Now, I've not said this was a valid justification for the intifada.  But in this sort of situation, any justification will be inviting trouble.  It's effectively giving ammunition to the terrorists, and that's not advisable.[/B][/quote]

fine ok so the england ireland situation isnt valid and nither was thier justification for going into war. plain and simple they started it weather it was because they didnt like the look of him or because they ahted him dosnt matter they didnt ened to react with war and they did they started it plaina nd simple.

Originally posted by aldo_14
NB: Nota bine (from latin); means an additional point o relevance.  Like notes jotted in pencil down the margins of a book.

ok thanks.

Originally posted by aldo_14
No, I don't believe it was a fair justification.  But, I believe it was also obvious that it would give one to Palestinains, because they have a different mindset which is more prone to anger against Israel, as a result of the long history.

yeah really if peopel though him visitng there would cause somthing like this you really think that we wouldnt have protested his visit? mhm.

Originally posted by aldo_14
So you agree with me then?  I'm only paraphrasing what you said in a number of previous posts;
[q]Originally posted by Splinter
the palestinian terrorists get support from their onw people yes. but do they get the support they need to operate from them? no they are to poor they have squandered any money they did have on trying to blow israel up in the first year. the support these terrorists get is from outside Israel.[/q]
[q]Originally posted by aldo_14
So....all Palestinians are idiots who've went bankrupt trying to blow up Israel?[/q]
[q]all? no. many many many? yeah. but hey i mean that girl the other week that was stopped before the busstop by the soldier and she blew herself up she was the daughter of a wealthy man who ran a public tv station for palestinians and she was the host the kids show every morning... she wasnt poor. [/q][/B]

You said, twice, that many Palestinians are idiots who've bankrupted themselves trying to blow up Israel.   Unless you wish to retract that, of course.[/B]

I didnt call them idiots but I did say many of them squandered money yes. but my gripe was taht you kep claiming i said ALL palestinians are idiots and have squandered money nither of which is true.

Originally posted by aldo_14
If you're pointing to Muslim history as a reason for a threat, maybe you should also point out the history of the Crusades themselves?

I was pointing mainly at their religon.

Originally posted by aldo_14
Do they have families to lose if their families get caught in crossfire?     Or homes if those are bulldozed?   you've basically described why death is more attractive to them than living in the squalor of the territories, which is exactly my point about why you have to tackle this.

if thier homes were bulldozed then they were already dead and thier homes were dozered cause they had died blowing up innocent people. Dude ok tell me you can download torrents PLEASE!!! I need to send you a link for this video it will show you that even people in lebanon syria pakistan iran anywhere who arnt living in squalor belive this is thier highest aspiration and honor! you ahve to understand thier mindset before you can argue about what they are willing to lose gain etc...

Originally posted by aldo_14
[B You say some, I say many.  I don't believe extremism is endemic to Palestinians, but a product of the conditions and political situation they live in.[/B]

(Of course, you don't broker the eventual solution RE: Palestine with terrorists, but with the Palestinian civil leaders)[/B][/quote]

I dont belive Extremism is endemic to Palestinians either... I think it endemic to many Muslims in that region.

Originally posted by aldo_14
What about the innocent people trapped within the barrier who have lost their livelihood (through being unable to get to work within Israel), or their land.  Why do you think the UN and the ICJ have decided the barrier is illegal?

If the barrier has worked as you say, then the only reason it has done so is by turning the enclosed areas into a virtual(?) prison.  Legal?  I think not.

again you obviously have not read my post on the wall. it has the same passage of the checkpoints that the territoires now have the only diffrence is now they cant go around the checkpoints now with the wall they will have to go through them thus preventing terrorists from exiting. go educate yourself by reading my post RE the wall then come back.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Splinter

Palestinian Civil war would be devastating for them and hurt them more then anything we have or could do atm. yes it just goes to prove that you didnt read the post I made on the wall... I suggest you study it.

See links RE: wall below.  If you are worried about a Palestinian civil war, and hence the safety of the civillian community, then surely it's double standards to be so keen on the wall?  
i.e.
Ok about the security fence I REALLY REALLY don’t care if its legal illegal I really don’t give a rats tiny ass!, within the context that the illegality of the wall is based upon its effect upon the populace
- see http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idocket/imwp/imwpframe.htm
     6. With respect to humanitarian and human rights law, the Court has rightly adjudged that both these régimes are applicable to the occupied territories;  that Israel as the occupying Power is under an obligation to respect the rights of the Palestinian population of the occupied territories.  Accordingly, the Court has held that the construction of the wall in the occupied territories violates the régime of humanitarian and human rights law.  To put an end to such violations, the Court has rightly called for the immediate cessation of the construction of the wall and the payment of reparation for damages caused by the construction.

(summary; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3879057.stm )

Originally posted by Splinter
ok you just keep refusing to aknowledge that I dont think it will work and you do I differ I HAVE PROVEN WITH FACT why I think your plan wont work accept that and move on any reply to this matter which was already resolved the first time I posted the answer will be ignored. finally.

I've already stated why I disagee with you.  My previous posts should be enough of a response to indicate why.

Originally posted by Splinter
during ceasefires? maybe... I would have to see though... go look it up post a link.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3173107.stm

This http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3143783.stm is probably a good example of exactly how it broke down.

I'm trying to find another article RE: an incursion into Nablus (I think) which is a more clear cut example.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3149689.stm this may be related, but there's a caveat that it doesn't state if the terrorists had done anything prior to this to break the truce themselves (I'm assuming not, given the content of the story).

 I'm also sure there's also a quote from an Israeli government official stating they will go after militant leaders anywhere & everywhere regardless of truces.  Unfortunately, I can't find this, so I may be incorrect.

Originally posted by Splinter
fine ok so the england ireland situation isnt valid and nither was thier justification for going into war. plain and simple they started it weather it was because they didnt like the look of him or because they ahted him dosnt matter they didnt ened to react with war and they did they started it plaina nd simple.

yeah really if peopel though him visitng there would cause somthing like this you really think that we wouldnt have protested his visit? mhm.

View on the Palestinian view post-Oslo which explains the significance of Sharons' visit to the Temple on the mount.  An Israel perspective is also linked from this article
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/998921.stm

Little more on Sharons' histroy and why he would be hated by the Palestinians
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/190257.stm
( As defence minister he sent the Israeli army all the way to Beirut, a strike which ended in the expulsion of Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) from Lebanon.

The move stopped the PLO using Lebanon to launch attacks against Israel, but also resulted in the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians by Lebanese Christian militiamen in two Beirut refugee camps under Israeli control.

Mr Sharon was removed from office in 1983 by an Israeli tribunal investigating the 1982 Lebanon invasion, finding him indirectly responsible for the killings. )

Also "Israel apportions blame"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/monitoring/media_reports/953507.stm

I think people were well aware of the potential consequences of the visit.  Personally, I think Sharon wouldn't be displeased with the boost to his popularity (bbeing a hard man) that would result from renewed strife.

I would also like to re-emphasis that 'they started it' is no excuse for a war.  It's playground excuse material.

Originally posted by Splinter
I didnt call them idiots but I did say many of them squandered money yes. but my gripe was taht you kep claiming i said ALL palestinians are idiots and have squandered money nither of which is true.

You said 'many many many', implying a large majority.  I gave you the opportunity to rephrase or correct this, by asking 'So....all Palestinians are idiots who've went bankrupt trying to blow up Israel?'.

and you said you agreed that 'many many many Palestinians are idiots who've went bankrupt trying to blow up Israel.'

What i had hoped, that by putting a question for which a positive answer would be deliberately offensive, you'd backtrack and clarify your position and maybe concede that the majority of Palestinians have not bankrupted themselves trying to plant bombs (because this implies you believe they are too stupid to manage their own finances and thus deserve to live in poverty)

Originally posted by Splinter
I was pointing mainly at their religon.

And what exactlywas your point?

Originally posted by Splinter
if thier homes were bulldozed then they were already dead and thier homes were dozered cause they had died blowing up innocent people. Dude ok tell me you can download torrents PLEASE!!! I need to send you a link for this video it will show you that even people in lebanon syria pakistan iran anywhere who arnt living in squalor belive this is thier highest aspiration and honor! you ahve to understand thier mindset before you can argue about what they are willing to lose gain etc...

I'm not interested in the people outside Palestine/the territories when referring to Palestinians.  It's worth noting that the indoctrination of these people to hate Jews/Israel/Zionism is often based upon using Palestine as an excuse/reason to hate.

(example)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3620836.stm
Soldiers then demolished two of the buildings which the army said had been used to fire mortars, rockets and anti-tank missiles at Israeli forces and the nearby Jewish settlements of Gush Katif and Neve Dekalim.

Helicopters fired missiles into the camp, wounding six Palestinians.

Palestinians and human rights groups criticise as collective punishment the Israeli tactic of demolishing houses which it says are used to launch militant attacks.

i.e. punishing the innocent people who are unfortunate enough to have to live where they do.  

I believe this is excessive and breeds resentment, leading new recruits for terrorists.

Originally posted by Splinter
I dont belive Extremism is endemic to Palestinians either... I think it endemic to many Muslims in that region.

I disagree and believe that is a highly erroneous statement with no evidence or proof in either history or the present.  You are mistaking a vocal minority for a majority,

Originally posted by Splinter
again you obviously have not read my post on the wall. it has the same passage of the checkpoints that the territoires now have the only diffrence is now they cant go around the checkpoints now with the wall they will have to go through them thus preventing terrorists from exiting. go educate yourself by reading my post RE the wall then come back.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3111159.stm
I presume you're aware of the Israeli / pro-barrier argument, so i'll show the 'anti' side (some key points in red)
What are the main objections to the plan?
Israel's critics say the plan epitomises everything that is wrong with Israel's occupation of Palestinian land and its approach to making peace with its Arab neighbours.

Palestinian land is confiscated to build the barrier; hundreds of Palestinian farmers and traders are cut off from their land and means of economic survival. Most significantly, it creates "facts on the ground" and imposes unilateral solutions which preclude negotiated agreements in the future.

The impact of the plan has been felt most acutely in Qalqilya itself, once known as the West Bank's "fruit basket", which lies within a tight loop in the wall. It is cut off on three sides - from the farms which supply its markets and the region's second-largest water sources. Access to the 40,000-inhabitant town will pass through a single Israeli checkpoint.

[ffRule]

you guys are grinding water here really..
the "wall" or whatever new political propaganda word you use to compare it to berlin's, is illegial by the UN, but they openly support terrorists like the Hamas.

so by UN laws, terrorisem is legal and defences against terrorisem are illegial. *sigh*

and how can you call killing terrorists before they blow up, ATTACKING the palestinian people.. thats just sad.