|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bignate
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Hell's Ditch
|
 Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 8:07 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| sundubuman wrote: |
As long as over 70% of Palestinians dream of blowing up themselves along with Jews, there won't be any peace.
from this site
http://www.teachkidspeace.com/ |
The problem with this arguement, is that it only focuses on the result of what the real problem is - it doesn't look at the root of or the causes of the problem.
It would be nice if the issue could be resolved on such a simplistic and myopic level, but rarely are there such solutions feesible. Sure stop them from using suicide as a weapon, one could just as easily say stop them from fighting for their rights as humans - the solution isn't there it rests in the reason for such hatred. It is easy for some of us to sit here read a news clip about yet another suicide bombing that killed Israelis and condemn it.
However the news rarely goes into the details of the issue - it doesn't tell us that the young man or woman was recruited into Hamas at a young age, that his/her family was killed by IDF missle attacks or that her baby died in need of medical while she waited in line at an IDF check-point - of course they don't because that would give the bomber a human side, and the media doesn't want that.
Palestinians don't wake up in the morning one day and say - "Hey, I think I'll strap a bomb to myself and blow up a bus load of people" It is deeper than that it comes from a culture in which such an act - that any of us can hardly fathom - has become almost reactionary in the collective psyche of an entire people. It comes from hopelessness, it comes from mistrust, it comes from suffering and pain, and it comes from exploitation, by their enemies, and those who are supposed to be their friends.
It often comes down to a discussion of equality, however, there isn't much equality in the issue. We have two peoples, each treated and viewed differently by the media and by the culture that we in the West live in. Equality, sure, it is a simple idea - Israelis and Palestinians are humans equal in form - but that is where the equality stops.
We berate Palestinians for not doing enough for the "peace process" for purchasing explosives to blow people up, yet it is perfectly OK in the eyes of the Western Media and discourse that the United States provides (at very little cost) the most advanced means of lethality invented for their "defence". On one side it is called defence, on the other it is called terrorism.
The IDF are one of the best trained and most lethal armed force in the world with virtually unlimited access to advanced weaponry - Palestinians cannot hope to ever fight against such odds - they are forced to live where they are told, behind a wall that restricts freedom of movement within the country they live in, faced with unequal laws that leave them humiliated - in the end Humiliation, Hoplessness, Fear, Inequality, all form the Culture of Violence that we see today. Israelis kill Palestinians - Palestinians kill Israelis - but even there the inequality exists - many more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis.
Sure, easy to say - Peace will come if Palestinians stop hating and bombing. But peace for whom? and peace at a cost for whom? This conflict will never end, because niether side trusts one another, and this inequality exists. As Brigadier-General Osama Al-Ali of the Palestinian Authority once put it : "We are the rabbit, they are the elephant. The rabbit will not be able to strangle the elephant no matter how hard he tries."
As long as this inequality exists, and the power differential that it creates, their will exist a situation of abject desperation and hoplessness. This is what breeds the kind of hatred that allows a person to willingly give up ones life, because in the end - it seems like the most reasonable alternative.
This is not to say that the problem exists only due to the actions of one side. Fundamentalist groups, like Hamas and Islamic Jihad know that in order to provoke this kind of hatred and heedlessness of not caring anymore - people need to see and experience horrific things - thus the Intifada is a useful tool - it exposes people to daily fear and pain and death that makes Palestinians want to get revenge. Is the Intifada a useful tool for fighting the IDF? Of course not - a rabbit against an elephant right?
But, it does make people outraged when their family is killed or when their home is bulldozed in the inevitable Israeli reaction. Why suicide bombing? Because it takes limited resources and training to blow ones self up. To Hamas and the other terrorist organizations - it is the perfect weapon and they know that people in such a situation as the Palestinians find themselves - there are plenty of people willing to do it, because there are so many who have nothing and are going no where.
It is cyclic, dialectical and it will continue this way, because this is what the leaders want - because neither side is willing to compromise, and neither side will ever get what they truly want a Greater Israel/Palestine, the two goals are diametric and can never exist instantaneously.
The solution - fundamental changes in ideals and goals - something that cannot occur while one side has such an overwhelming control over the situation while the other is in such a position where they feel that the only solution is to fight back with any means neccessary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| That's a load of BS. Arafat DID give up war, and look what happened. The illegal settlements doubled, Israel got a better grip on the Palestinian resources, and the Palestinians ended up with even worse living conditions than before. This was all after the Oslo accords and before the second intifada. Blaming Arafat is so convenient. Successive Israeli governments have all had Greater Israel as an end goal. Don't think they are going to give up the occupied territories if they can help it |
.
that is just nonsense he did not give up his war.
He demanded right of return and a bunch of other stuff - not just Israeli withdrawal
both sides violated the Oslo accords , but at any rate all of the settlements would have been gone as part of any final deal.
| Quote: |
Doesn't seem to matter how much the Europeans cough up, they are totally ignored and sidelined anyway. Another good reason not to cough up the dough. Let the yanks and the Israelis pick up the tab. |
fine just make sure that their opinon means very little. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I wouldn't bother arguing with Joo about this one, it just won't be very productive. No matter what evidence you show him, he will just regurgitate all his previous posts and it just gets tiresome. What's next Joo? Taba right?
But to each his/her own have fun kids... |
well it does get tiresome when people believe Arafat and refuse to believe Clinton.
But hey Mohammad Abbas said he unlike Arafat would accept an claim of responsiblity and compensation.
Why would he say such a thing if such a thing had been offered before? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bignate
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Hell's Ditch
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
I wouldn't bother arguing with Joo about this one, it just won't be very productive. No matter what evidence you show him, he will just regurgitate all his previous posts and it just gets tiresome. What's next Joo? Taba right?
But to each his/her own have fun kids... |
well it does get tiresome when people believe Arafat and refuse to believe Clinton.
But hey Mohammad Abbas said he unlike Arafat would accept an claim of responsiblity and compensation.
Why would he say such a thing if such a thing had been offered before? |
I don't see it as believing one over the other, but the realization that neither is wholey truthful, or dishonest. All sides want what is best for themselves, each has its goals and they are in constant opposition. Politicians lie, I believe it is somehow inherent to their positions and believeing what either side says over the other doesn't make sense. They are both wrong - and the majority of the debate regarding the issue is basically off the mark, because it tells us that all this anger and all this hate can end by fast tracking the process - but it can't hate doesn't end with a withdrawl of troops - the damage is done and those responsible hope to come out of this smelling like roses.
The backhandedness of the whole operation is sickening. You have the US leading talks between the two, while selling Israel bulldozers and weaponry that is to be used against the other. At Camp David Clinton shook hands with Arafat and then turned around and signed weapons over to Israel to be used against the Palestinians with the same hand - that is trustworthy. You have an Israeli government that signs the Oslo accords and has Sharon state that Israelis should "move, run and grab as many hilltops as [you] can to enlarge the settlements, because everything we take now will stay ours." You have Arafat stating peace and supporting terrorism at the same time. How can you trust one over the other.
You always state that Clinton is better than Arafat, when they are both the same in my books. The problem isn't amongst the rhetoric of the politicians, or the fundamentalism of the terrorist organizations - it's on the ground in the settlements, in the fear that people feel daily, and in the hatred and the stereotypes bred out of the propaganda that these leaders and their respective medias perpetuate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I don't see it as believing one over the other, but the realization that neither is wholey truthful, or dishonest. All sides want what is best for themselves, each has its goals and they are in constant opposition. Politicians lie, I believe it is somehow inherent to their positions and believeing what either side says over the other doesn't make sense. They are both wrong - and the majority of the debate regarding the issue is basically off the mark, because it tells us that all this anger and all this hate can end by fast tracking the process - but it can't hate doesn't end with a withdrawl of troops - the damage is done and those responsible hope to come out of this smelling like roses. |
there is no reason to believe Arafat on anything.
Even Sari Nussebiah and Mohamad Abbas and Mohamad Dihlan didn't think he was for peace.
| Quote: |
| The backhandedness of the whole operation is sickening. You have the US leading talks between the two, |
so what
| Quote: |
| while selling Israel bulldozers and weaponry that is to be used against the other. |
US company sold bulldozers - oh big deal. Besides sometimes (not all the time ) Israel was right to use them to knock stuff down like when they were fighting hamas. As for weapons I guess Isreal shouldn't be allowed weapons while Syria , Libya Iran should?
Embargo Israel but allow nations with even worse human rights records and who refuse compromise to buy weapons.
Kind of selective if U ask me.
| Quote: |
| At Camp David Clinton shook hands with Arafat and then turned around and signed weapons over to Israel to be used against the Palestinians with the same hand - that is trustworthy. You have an Israeli government that signs the Oslo accords and has Sharon state that Israelis |
should "move, run and grab as many hilltops as [you]
Again Israel can't have weapons but its enemies can?
You have a Palestinian govt that signs accords but keeps teaching hate against Israelis and has its opposition bombing buses.
| Quote: |
| can to enlarge the settlements, because everything we take now will stay ours." You have Arafat stating peace and supporting terrorism at the same time. How can you trust one over the other. |
Both sides violated the agreements but as I said before all those settlements would have been gone if Arafat had accepted Bill Clintons' offer.
| Quote: |
| You always state that Clinton is better than Arafat, when they are both the same in my books. The problem isn't amongst the rhetoric of the politicians, or the fundamentalism of the terrorist organizations - it's on the ground in the settlements, in the fear that people feel daily, and in the hatred and the stereotypes bred out of the propaganda that these leaders and their respective medias perpetuate. |
Clinton is a flawed politician that tried to bring peace to the region - Arafat is a life long terrorist turned corrupt leader. There is no comparison.
Of course it seems like many are willing to accept Arafa'ts word over that of any Israeli leader. Tell me what compromise was Arafat willing to make? Cause it seems to me that he wasn't willing to make any at the end.
Tell me also why Arafat moved against Palestinians who really wanted to compromise. He fired Sari Nussebah. Explain that please. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bignate
Joined: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Hell's Ditch
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| US company sold bulldozers come on? |
| Quote: |
| (New York, November 23, 2004)--Caterpillar Inc., the U.S.-based heavy-equipment company, should immediately suspend sales of its powerful D9 bulldozer to the Israeli army, Human Rights Watch said today. As Human Rights Watch documented in a recent report, the Israeli military uses the D9 as its primary weapon to raze Palestinian homes, destroy agriculture and shred roads in violation of the laws of war. |
| Quote: |
As for weapons I guess Isreal shouldn't be allowed weapons while Syria , Libya Iran should?
Embargo Israel but allow nations with even worse human rights records and who refuse compromise to buy weapons.
Kind of selective if U ask me. |
Joo, don't put words in my mouth - I never said that, when did I say that Israel should not be allowed to have weapons or that it should have an embargo set against it - don't change the topic. I said that with the US providing Israel with weapons, while talking peace is hypocritical
| Quote: |
| Again Israel can't have weapons but its enemies can? |
Never said that. I believe that both factions have the right to defend themselves, the fact of the matter is that Israel has a greater capacity to do so, because of its more advanced weaponry and substantial military and economic aid from the United States.
| Quote: |
| You have a Palestinian govt that signs accords but keeps teaching hate against Israelis and has its opposition bombing buses. |
Absolutely, but why do they continue to do so.
| Quote: |
| Both sides violated the agreements but as I said before all those settlements would have been gone if Arafat had accepted Bill Clintons' offer. |
Agreed both have violated agreements, however, if you think that if they had accepted the offer under Clinton, that the settlements would be gone, you're not paying attention
| Quote: |
| Clinton is a flawed politician that tried to bring peace to the region - Arafat is a life long terrorist turned corrupt leader. There is no comparison. |
True the comparison may be a little severe, I am just trying to show that the agendas of all sides are and always have been against peace.
| Quote: |
| Tell me what compromise was Arafat willing to make? Cause it seems to me that he wasn't willing to make any at the end. |
I've told you before on other threads, when Arafat compromised, the Israelis took advantage, when the Israelis compromised Arafat took advantage, and the US was there taking advantage of both. Arafat agreed to renounce terrorism and to formally aknowledge the Israeli state. At Oslo he conceded 78 percent of the land that had been historically Palestine, and had all but given up the idea of the right to return of those driven out in 48 and 67 (though it has come up subsequently) As soon as these concessions where made, Israel expanded the settlements and continued to assassinate "suspected" terrorists. I am not saying that the Palestinians are in the right all the time, nor that Israel is always wrong - it is much more grey than right and wrong. That is the point I am trying to make Joo - God, I should have just listened to may own advice   |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote]
| Quote: |
| (New York, November 23, 2004)--Caterpillar Inc., the U.S.-based heavy-equipment company, should immediately suspend sales of its powerful D9 bulldozer to the Israeli army, Human Rights Watch said today. As Human Rights Watch documented in a recent report, the Israeli military uses the D9 as its primary weapon to raze Palestinian homes, destroy agriculture and shred roads in violation of the laws of war. |
I wasn't questioning that Catapiller sells Israel bulldozers.
What I did say is that some things Israel knocks down should be knocked down.
| Quote: |
| Joo, don't put words in my mouth - I never said that, when did I say that Israel should not be allowed to have weapons or that it should have an embargo set against it - don't change the topic. I said that with the US providing Israel with weapons, while talking peace is hypocritical |
but that in effect would be an embargo on Israel.
| Quote: |
| Never said that. I believe that both factions have the right to defend themselves, the fact of the matter is that Israel has a greater capacity to do so, because of its more advanced weaponry and substantial military and economic aid from the United States. |
Sure.
| Quote: |
| Absolutely, but why do they continue to do so. |
because there are bad guys on the Palestinian side and because of bad guys on the Israeli side. I never said there weren't.
| Quote: |
| Agreed both have violated agreements, however, if you think that if they had accepted the offer under Clinton, that the settlements would be gone, you're not paying attention |
well nearly all of them.
| Quote: |
| True the comparison may be a little severe, I am just trying to show that the agendas of all sides are and always have been against peace. |
Clinton wanted to make peace, he cares about his legacy.
| Quote: |
| I've told you before on other threads, when Arafat compromised, the Israelis took advantage, when the Israelis compromised Arafat took advantage, and the US was there taking advantage of both. Arafat agreed to renounce terrorism and to formally aknowledge the Israeli state. At Oslo he conceded 78 percent of the land that had been historically Palestine, and had all but given up the idea of the right to return of those driven out in 48 and 67 (though it has come up subsequently) As soon as these concessions where made, Israel expanded the settlements and continued to assassinate "suspected" terrorists. I am not saying that the Palestinians are in the right all the time, nor that Israel is always wrong - it is much more grey than right and wrong. That is the point I am trying to make Joo - God, I should have just listened to may own advice |
When did Arafat compromise on Right of Return? I mean that is where it is at isn't it. If there isn't then there are just two Palestinian states instead of one.
I am not saying the Palestinians are in the wrong all the time what I am saying is that Arafat never really compromised on anything because if there isn't any compromise on ROR then there really isn't anything.
The new leader Abu Mazen is weak among the Palestinians but he has credibilty as a peace maker - Arafat had none. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bignate wrote: |
| That is the point I am trying to make Joo - God, I should have just listened to may own advice |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Big Bird how about a link to show your assertion that Arafat gave up his war?
As for Big Nate he is one of the smarter people on this board and I like reading his posts , and I even agree with a substantial number of things he says. No one could accuse him of being uniformed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| That's a load of BS. Arafat DID give up war, and look what happened. The illegal settlements doubled, Israel got a better grip on the Palestinian resources, and the Palestinians ended up with even worse living conditions than before. This was all after the Oslo accords and before the second intifada. Blaming Arafat is so convenient. Successive Israeli governments have all had Greater Israel as an end goal. Don't think they are going to give up the occupied territories if they can help it |
.
that is just nonsense he did not give up his war. |
What are you talking about. After the Oslo talks and before the intifada the PLO were quiet. Only Hamas extremists waged war.
| Joo wrote: |
but at any rate all of the settlements would have been gone as part of any final deal.
|
Joo, you are really living in Cuckoo land if you believe that. Why did the Israelis accelerate the settlement building like crazy (with US acquiescence) if they really thought they were all going to pack up and go home a few years later. Please explain away that part to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
What are you talking about. After the Oslo talks and before the intifada the PLO were quiet. Only Hamas extremists waged war. |
When did Arafat say to Israel if you just withdraw the war will be over?
| Quote: |
| Joo, you are really living in Cuckoo land if you believe that. Why did the Israelis accelerate the settlement building like crazy (with US acquiescence) if they really thought they were all going to pack up and go home a few years later. Please explain away that part to me. |
For political purposes. As part of Bill Clinton's offer almost all of them would have been gone.
Why don't you tell us about Bill Clinton's offer in Dec 2000. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Why don't you tell us about Bill Clinton's offer in Dec 2000. |
As I recall the deal was very much in Israelis favour and stiffed the Palestinians up the you know what. Clinton was no saviour of the Palestinians - that was for sure. But you and I went around in circles discussing that last year - so there's little point in doing so again. Those were the days before I had a baby and I had time to dance around in circles. However being so time poor, I'm going to take bignate's advice and end things here. Someone else can argue with you about it. I simply do not have the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Why don't you tell us about Bill Clinton's offer in Dec 2000. |
As I recall the deal was very much in Israelis favour and stiffed the Palestinians up the you know what. Clinton was no saviour of the Palestinians - that was for sure. But you and I went around in circles discussing that last year - so there's little point in doing so again. Those were the days before I had a baby and I had time to dance around in circles. However being so time poor, I'm going to take bignate's advice and end things here. Someone else can argue with you about it. I simply do not have the time. |
really do you have a source so I can learn more? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat May 28, 2005 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Why don't you tell us about Bill Clinton's offer in Dec 2000. |
As I recall the deal was very much in Israelis favour and stiffed the Palestinians up the you know what. Clinton was no saviour of the Palestinians - that was for sure. But you and I went around in circles discussing that last year - so there's little point in doing so again. Those were the days before I had a baby and I had time to dance around in circles. However being so time poor, I'm going to take bignate's advice and end things here. Someone else can argue with you about it. I simply do not have the time. |
really do you have a source? |
Not offhand no. If I had a few hours of free time, I'm sure I could google some stuff up. Unfortunately, I don't even have to time to write this reply really.
I followed it with great interest at the time. The mideast has always been of great interest to me - especially knowing both Israelis and Arabs - some as good friends some mere acquaintances. I like to follow what's going on - though it's so bloody depressing at the moment I'm afraid I don't follow things like I did. But I remember being very disappointed with Clinton's lack of even handedness - but not very surprised. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 2:31 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| As long as there aren't 2 independent, internationally-recognized states, I think it's impossible to guage who intends to do what. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
