jimmy carter to meet with hamas

the former.
refusing to talk to them is just stupid.

Totally agree with you there, there are two sides to every conflict, and in virtually all of them including this, both sides are partially at fault. If our governments in the West, especially the US, is willing to spend billions of tax-payer money on Israel's 'safety' at the expense of that of the Palestinains, and all the weapons we give them, I believe it is the least we can do to talk to Hamas at the very least.

Pure violence has never helped us reach a solution, the harder we fight them, the more desperate and miserable they become - so much so that they are willing to commit suicide just to kill as much Israeli civilians as possible. There's only two solutions to situations like this were the people have been oppressed and suffered so much for so long. We either kill them all, or reach a solution. I know which I prefer...
 
1) Comon guys - Dick well put about Arab views - although I think with Al Jazeera is changing that for sure. Its no hold barred and thats probably the reason why its constantly being expelled from various arab countries. They put everyone's opinon up front for everyone to see. I would further agree that Arab governments ARE corrupt and dont reflect the viewpoints of the masses for the most part. But if they did - you would certainly have an even more extreme government in Saudi Arabia and if the Egyptians were not throwing every Muslim Brotherhood member in jail, they would probably be ruling Eypt right now.

2) As far as the UN goes - you must remember, in the standoff with Iran I hear all the time, Israeli government officials stating that Iran is thumbing its nose at the international community and that the international community needs to confront Iran etc etc - but when the international community passes resolutions against Israel its suddenly anti semetic and anti Israel? Comon - you cant have it both ways.

Whether you like or dislike Hamas does not justify the cutting off of energy 3) and fuel and electricity, and food and medicine to an entire population is UNJUSTIFIABLE and disgraceful. Jimmy Carter noted in a speech this week that the average Gazan receives less food than that of the poorest African nations. This measure of "mass punishment" is deplorable to say the least. Israel tried the same tactic recently in Lebanon by bombing all parts of Lebanon's infrastructure in an attempt to turn public opinion against Hezbollah and get the Lebanese to reign them in. It didnt work. Starving the population of Gaza in an attempt to turn public opinion against Hamas wont work either. History proves that but they do it because the U.S. gives them the green light. Time is not on the side of Israel or US foreign policy in the Middle East. Movements like Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood and similar movements are only growing. Look, we tried to remove the Ba'athists from all aspects of Iraq life and it failed miserably..remember/?? Now we are trying to get them back in the police and army. We cannot remove Hamas from the scene - they are an inherent part of Palestenian life. I think we could take the approach of the IRA and include them and convince them to become more political. Its working albeit slowly and surely in Northern Ireland - so why not Hamas too??As I said...more and more Israelis recognize this because they live in the neighbourhood and are more pragmatic - its jews here who are extreme in not dealing with Hamas and since they have broad power in deciding OUR foreign policy, its the Jews in the US who drive our stance.

Good debate! cheers!

1) When the medias are manipulated by a hord of savage ben ladenists and are watched by illiterate and unable to think people, you have people that are brainwashed and that believe in the extreme.

2) Instead of pressuring Israel, the UN should see who is responsible and who encourages bombing against civilians. And giving millions of $ to a government that advocates killing innocent civilians and backs up terrorism, that tells a lot about how "fair" is the U.N. The U.N. is full of shit and Kofi Annan is a fucking utter piece of dog shit, same comment goes for U.N. representatives who voted to put the unjustified pressures against Israel. Israel will certainly destroy Iran's nuclear plants one day or another, it will be a good lesson for Iran because you don't fuck with Israel. When you encourage pressure and unjustified sanctions in, any form against Israel, you are anti semite, end of story. Most members of the U.N. are a disgrace for their own country.

3) The lovely U.N. gave them billions and in what went these billions? To build kassams, buy ak 47s and other terrorist plans. A population who can't think by its own and who accept hating another one and even killing other people because they don't have the same beliefs is a doomed and irresponsible population. Hamas people are terrorists who are backstabbers, backstabbers need to have their head cut off, once the head is cut off, the threat is neutralized for ever.
 
I have Jewish blood, although I'm not a Jew since I was never raised as one, and crucially, the blood is entirely on my father's side. I have extended family living in Israel too. So my criticism of Israel is never ever an endorsement for those terrorist groups to perpetrate those criminal acts against innocent civilians.

But to answer your question, I don't there's any real difference between the terms 'terrorism', 'intentional murder' and 'collateral damage'. Collateral damage is usually a euphemism for mass murder. The idea that you can regularly drop bombs into extremely crowded neighbourhoods, and then say, 'well, we were only targeting the bad guy who lives on that corner of the street - we didn't mean to kill all those women and children!' is completely repugnant to me. It's like the police driving down the street mowing down scores of innocent people just to get to the one dangerous lunatic with a gun.

I am a cosmopolite when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- I believe in the duty of human beings towards other human beings regardless of which national or ethnic group they belong to. I think the very ideology of Zionism was morally evil and unjustifiable, but that peace is the only solution in the current climate. Both sides have committed atrocities, and consequently, diplomacy is required of both groups of murderers and terrorists -- those in the Israeli government and those on the council of the Palestinan Authority.

Exellently put, I can't agree anymore with you there. It's great to see someone intelligently considering both sides so objectively, especially with it being such a sensitive matter. :)
 
1) When the medias are manipulated by a hord of savage ben ladenists and are watched by illiterate and unable to think people, you have people that are brainwashed and that believe in the extreme.

2) Instead of pressuring Israel, the UN should see who is responsible and swho encourages bombing against civilians. And giving millions of $ to a government that advocates killing innocent civilians and backs up terrorism, that tells a lot about how "fair" is the U.N. The U.N. is full of shit and Kofi Annan is a fucking utter piece of dog shit, same comment goes for U.N. representatives who voted to put the unjustified pressures against Israel. Israel will certainly destroy Iran's nuclear plants one day or another, it will be a good lesson for Iran because you don't fuck with Israel. When you encourage pressure and unjustified sanctions in, any form against Israel, you are anti semite, end of story. Most members of the U.N. are a disgrace for their own country.

3) The lovely U.N. gave them billions and in what went these billions? To build kassams, buy ak 47s and other terrorist plans. A population who can't think by its own and who accept hating another one and even killing other people because they don't have the same beliefs is a doomed and irresponsible population. Hamas people are terrorists who are backstabbers, backstabbers need to have their head cut off, once the head is cut off, the threat is neutralized for ever.

If I made those comments about the state of Israel I would probably be labelled as anti-semetic :p What your words demonstrate are as I said before, there are extremists on both sides - and ur views are extreme and lack fact. So let me clarify a few things...

Al Jazeera is the ONLY truly free press in the Arab world. We should all encourage freedom in that part of the world, because free press expresses differing viewpoints and allows the masses to begin to think and define their own viewpoints as a result. The fact that Al Jazeera has aired Bin Laden tapes (and only parts of them) is not an extreme view. I can find them on the internet. But by airing tapes and messages we can get the full story - not just the half CNN puts out. We have all seen horrific images of bus bombings inside Israel on CNN and other American stations - but how often do we see the daily killing of innocent Palestenians being aired on CNN? Do u recall the family at the beach in Gaza (7 in all having a picnic) that was bombarded by the Israeli navy? It was covered briefly here - but I cannot tell you the names of any one of those people - but we all know the single Israeli soldier held by the Palestians - Gilad Shalit - can you or anyone else name ANY Palestenian prisoner? Some of which by the way are under the age of 10 as documented by Amnesty International and the Red Crecent. I am glad to get the other view point - to see the costs of war. We are bombing Iraq but we truly dont know what war is like because we havent experienced it here in this day and age - but isnt better to see what life is really like? To know the full costs and benefits of war? To make a more informed decision about using it in the future? Bin Laden, is responsible for 9/11 and yes I want to know what he is doing or planning and if the only place I can get that info is AL Jazeera then so be it - i would rather be in a position of knowledge than not. I wont comment on ur point about illiterate etc etc - that sounds like hate speech where if anyone said it about Jews u would surely say they were anti semetic...so then what are you? I will stick to logical arguments.

About the UN - are you aware of how Israel was founded? It wasnt on roses and daffidils. Israel bombed the Brits and the Arabs ....what you might call terrorism to establish their state - there were no negotiations. So if you want the UN to look at who encourages and kills civilians look no further than Israel's founding for a good starting point. Furthermore, the Oslo meetings will always be famous for the Syrian foreign minister pointing out at the time that the most wanted man in Britain for more than a decade on terrorism charges, was Yitzak Shamir (Prime minister of Israel at the time). He was to the Brits as Bin Laden is to us. Dont forget the history because making points out of context is a mistake - there is tremendous history involved here. So terrorism in the Middle East was actually introduced by the Zionists in the British mandate of Palestine - so I gues what comes around goes around.

As far as Iran goes, Iran has no interest in Israel. When the president of Iran says Israel will be wiped off the map what he is referring to is the fact that the demographics of the area are changing such that Israel will not exist in its currnet form. In fact, Ehud Olmert, stated the same thing - again just check back in the press to see yourself. Everyone understands that Palestenians will outnumber Jews in a few years and Israel will have to accomodate them or be branded an Arpatheid state which no one in the world will tolerate or do business with. So yes, there is a chance Israel will not exist in its present form. In a desperate attempt, we see a disengagement plan, building of a wall, Bush's peace plan etc all being rushed before that happens - but one thing is missing....PEACE! You cannot have peace with yourself.

Hamas is popular why? becuase they believe in unity through religion. THey see the arab language as a secondary unifying theme. What they espouse is that religion is what unites them and they are offering an alternative to secular governments who have failed their peoples. I dont support Hamas but I can see their popularity when Fatah who ruled for 4 decades brouught nothing. Any people's would vote them out. If Israel doesnt like what they have created (and lets remember what role Ariel Sharon played in the development of Hamas - as he championed Hamas as an alternative to Fatah years ago) maybe they should search for a JUST and FAIR peace. A more pragmatic view would be useful. American Jews who are extreme are hindering the process more than helping it. Hamas doesnt kill others because they dont have the same belief as them - that again is an irreponsible statment. If this were true they would have killed off the Palestenian christian population which has not happened, as well as journalists of other faiths and beliefs who travel to the Gaza strip. In fact, the facts show that Israel has killed more foreigners then Hamas including an American peace activist by the name of Rachel Corrie - who was run over by an Israeli bulldozer because she was trying to stop the bulldozing of a Palestenian home of a family with which she was staying. The reason for that bulldozing was to create a "buffer" zone. Look at the videos and details and tell me that was not intentional - videos are irrefutable evidence. The problem is I never saw her case on CNN...but if she was on a bus blown up by Hamas I am sure we would have gotten to know her intimately. So if you wish to make an argument lets try to keep the "anti-arab" sentiment out of it and base arguments on facts and theories rather than on "hate" speech.

Thanks
 
Hmmmm. If the United States were surrounded on all sides by aggressive nations/organizations committed to it's destruction, and under frequent terrorist attack....I'm quite certain we wouldn't show nearly the restraint Israel has in dealing with such provokation. And if ...[insert arab nation or terrorist organization of choice] ...possessed Israel's weapons arsenal, chances are that barring U.S. military intervention Israel would cease to exist. So I think on balance, rather than criticize her, I'll praise Israel for taking the high road relative to what others would do.
 
When the president of Iran says Israel will be wiped off the map what he is referring to is the fact that the demographics of the area are changing such that Israel will not exist in its currnet form.

Oh is that all he meant?
Gee then I wonder why, in the same context, he referred to Israel as a "disgraceful blot"?
 
The past has proved us how trustworthy was Arafat and how trustworthy was Iran with Khomeiny. Can you deal with terrorists? Not, me. Hafez El Assad as well as his son Bachar El Hassad are far to be the best leaders for Syria. That state was always antisemitic and always refused to give Alois Brunner to Justice.
What about Ron Arad? What about the Jewish Athletes that were murdered cowardly in Munich in 1972? Did you forget these people? What about terrorists blowing themselves in buses or opening fire at children in schools?
Look at Egypt, Jordan or the Emirates, they live in peace with Israel for many reasons: the children in these states have an education, the medias are not so manipulated as opposed to Iran and Syria and there is a freedom a speech. Iran is a dictatorship as much as Syria. Syria is also responsible for the troubles that happened and happen in Lebanon. I support democraties but not states and no organizations supporting and sponsoring terrorism.
 
Oh is that all he meant?
Gee then I wonder why, in the same context, he referred to Israel as a "disgraceful blot"?

Could be due to Israel's policies, violation of international law, thumbing their nose at UN resolutions and the Geneva convention - or maybe for the inhumane treatment of the Palestenians on Palestenian land, the killing of innocents, treating arabs within Israel proper as second class citizens with virtually little to no rights etc etc - take ur pick.

The fact that it has never been held to account due to American vetos and money and arms and the argument that anyone who speaks out against it must be an anti-semite. So yes, it could be classified as a disgraceful blot for the international community - Its a rogue state that practices state sponsored terror and the international community's record on the matter has been abissmal due to our foreign policy. Not even our allies should be allowed to trample international norms and standards - regardless of the circumstances.

Typical Israeli killings involve firing missiles at cars. But then when the crowd gathers and the ambulance comes more missiles are fired killing and injuring dozens of innocents. See the documenatar entitle Dispatches: The Killing Zone - produced by a British TV station - not some radical Hamas run station. As I said, in this day and age, everything is available online. Doesnt that practice seem disgraceful to put it mildly? THe second missile is fired delibrately at the crowd - what...they cant see a few hundred people gathered around the target AFTER it has been struck and destroyed?? Comon - get serious!

I surely wouldnt refer to the state of Israel as a model for other countries to follow or espouse to emulate. By the way its worth noting that there are more Jews living in Iran than in any other Middle Eastern country - including Egypt and Jordan with which Israel has a formal peace treaty with. Pretty strange for a country that supposedly hates the existence of the Jewish race.

There is a difference between Zionists and Jews - you must distinguish between the two.
 
^^^^^
So then it wasn't just a comment about the natural progression of demographics? OK I'm glad we got that straight.
How do you feel about the Iranian president being a holocaust denier? Is that ok with you too or does that make you question if he just might maybe possibly be dangerously out of touch with reality?
 
Why not mention any of the Palestinian violation of evrey treaty that they agreed to? Why not mention Arafat's looting of the foreign aid donated to the Palestinians?
 
Carter did not sign any agreements,all he did was open up some dialogue that led to the agreement made during the Clinton administration.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A01E3DC1131F935A25752C0A9659C8B63

And while that did not stop the North Koreans from further development of nuclear weapons I do think it was something worth trying.I don't think Carter does not see a world with dangers in fact he sees them very well IMO.But we really need to stop thinking in terms of good guys ,bad guys where everything is so black and white.Everyone has interests and motives,are ours always so admirable?Is it really any surprise that other nations want nuclear capability.I really think that it would be very helpfull for all nuclear countries to renounce the possesion of them and move towards disarmament.It is a tough arguement for the US to make that we have a right to possess them but other nations don't.The existence of all these weapons and the further proliferation almost insures that someday one will be detonated eithier by design or by accident.We just had a recent case of a B-52 that flew within the US with 6 armed nukes on board and the crew of the plane didn't even know it.Everyone agrees pretty much that any nuclear exchange would be a holocaust and could very well be the end of mankind.As LBJ said more than 40 yrs ago in the famous daisy ad "we must eithier love each other or we must die".

1964 LBJ Political ad - Daisy H-Bomb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyVn9k6d1og

Thankfully we and the Russians found a way not to destroy each other and we were moving towards disarmament once in negotiations with them.And I think there is no doubt that it is the US that has moved away from that path with our continued development of new weapons and the withdrawl from treaties we had signed like the AMB treaty.The russisans were broke and couldn't match our spending on such things any longer,that was a real opportunity to be rid of them.We choose a different path unfortunately.

Carter seems to think it was all about him. I stand corrected on him going there without presidential approval though. He was sent but he was not supposed to make any agreements. He went there and gave them a sweetheart deal that they used to be very naughty. There are some bad people in this world (Hitler, Stalin, et al) that nobody would disagree were evil. So why is it so hard to call someone evil now? Do we need to wait until it's history before someone is evil?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/opinion/11carter.html
 
^^^^^
So then it wasn't just a comment about the natural progression of demographics? OK I'm glad we got that straight.
How do you feel about the Iranian president being a holocaust denier? Is that ok with you too or does that make you question if he just might maybe possibly be dangerously out of touch with reality?

I am not making excuses for the Iranian president. I am simply referring to his interview with Charlie Rose which can be found at www.charlierose.com and I certainly dont agree with much of what he says. I am simply summarizing what he said in his interview. Anyone can access it at the site. I just thought it was good to hear what he has to say about those statements in person rather than through second hand sources. I like to hear things straight from the horses mouth. If anything can be said about his statement about Israel being wiped off the map - it would be that OUR media seemed to suggest that he was referring to blowing up Israel with nukes or the like. Isnt that what you thought when u listened to reports about those statements from our media? I certainly did.

Secondly, lets understand something. Israel is known to have nukes on submarines. Any attack by Iran on the state of Israel would result in Iran's certain destruction. In the most horrible of all circumstances, if Iran did strike Israel with a nuke, those subs would be able of responding and it would be bye bye Iran. Iran is a nation of carpet makers and chess players...they are incredibly patient. They dont need to do anything with respect to the state of Israel because demographics will change the game completely. Hell, we helped Iran get more influence in the Middle East by invading Iraq then they could have ever dreamed of, and they did it all without firing a shot! Listen to the interview by the NBC correspondent (I forget his name right now)on Charlie Rose's site too. He states that in southern Iraq they dont speak arabic, but rather Farsi (Iranian). Talk about unintended consequences.
 

Facetious

Moderated
Late in getting to this thread :o

If I could handily post negator's ava. (in full screen) in response to thread title . . . well . . nothing further.





What's amusing is how these outspoken intellectual types think that they have the words to remedy this long livid ordeal.

You don't !
 
Israel is an illegal colonial settler state, one whose only claim to the land it now inhabits derives from its five-thousand-year-old book of mythology. They are the aggressors in the middle east and have always been so. Any and all action the Palestinians take in self-defense is 100% justified.
 

dick van cock

Closed Account
Israel is an illegal colonial settler state, one whose only claim to the land it now inhabits derives from its five-thousand-year-old book of mythology. They are the aggressors in the middle east and have always been so. Any and all action the Palestinians take in self-defense is 100% justified.
I agree! It's really too bad that some of them kikes survived the holocaust... :rolleyes: :ban: :violent:
 
Israel is an illegal colonial settler state, one whose only claim to the land it now inhabits derives from its five-thousand-year-old book of mythology. They are the aggressors in the middle east and have always been so. Any and all action the Palestinians take in self-defense is 100% justified.

One day, you will bite a good bullet of cal 50 and join in hell those terrorists whom you worship so much:ban: :ak47: :violent:
 
Top