• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bush backs Sharon Peace Proposal

among this interesting topic and hot replies I found some nutual points which every body agreed on such as that the new plan of sharon is very dissappinting and it might distroy the last hope of peace in the middle east however for those who are claiming that israel is a democratic country holding a civilized society who have the right to vote which means they can decide who is gonna lead thier country and make decisions on thier behalf and this chosen leader is the one responsible for all this mess in this situation, so please correct me if i was wrong since i'm a new student in this forum and new for posting on net in general

Why, yes, israel is a democracy, so, yes, israelies in general are responsible for Sharon, the same way Americans in general are responsible for Bush, etc.

This is one of the advantages of being ruled by despotic thugs, like all the Arab nations are: when the leader decides to start a war of annihilation against somebody else (like Kuwait or israel), the nation can dance from joy in the streets celebrating the coming end of the "zionist occupiers" (or the "reunification of Iraq with its historic provinces", etc.) while then, if the war goes badly, claim that it was all the evil leader's, and that they were just forced into it.

It's yet another way the Arabs can disavow any responsibility for the consequences of their actions. In fact, I still haven't found ONE thing the Palestinians, for instance, actually admit was their fault. Apparently EVERYTHING that is wrong is israel's, or the USA's, or the west's, or colonialism's fault--including Arafat stealing $2 Billion from his people to his swiss bank accounts.
 
Yes, and wouldn't it be cheaper if all those darkies in white neighborhoods just move out, instead of wasting money in buying apartments that the Ku Klux Klan is going to burn down anyway? Remember, folks: it's not REALLY racism if you only want to destroy and expel jews.
Click to expand...

whos houses being destroyed REALLY , in other words how many new houses are being built for israelies compared to each palestinian house being destroied by the occupieres beldozers.
if jews moved to the US they won't be expelled or holicosted, they're goona live with there best friends in peace.

But it's nice to see what kind of "peace plan" you have in mind...
Click to expand...

despite all the problems that you may come up for arafat, i don't think he is lucky or blessed being in such position and i know that he is the only arabic leader who is realy supported by the majority of his nation, thus arafat cannot accept any peace plan that sharon or bush emposes to him unless it could be accepted by palestinians whom in turn in thier weakest position to get what they want.
 
if this is proven why is he still the leader?

Many reasons, but to name one, because saying "Arafat is corrupt" is (in practice) punishable by death.
 
if this is proven why is he still the leader?
Click to expand...

i think the question should be: what kind of palestinian leader does israel prefer? because they are the only side complaning about arafat while i don't see many palestinians complanning about him that much.
the other question is would sharon propose another peace plan that could be accepted by palestinians if they elected another leader to replace arafat
 
originally posted by epepke
How, exactly, does a normal democratic society treat non-citizens? Is it written somewhere? Are there some normal democratic societies in the region we can compare too? Is the US a normal democratic society? I think the US treats Palestinian immigrants pretty well, but five minutes in here, and I get the impression that the US is responsible for all evil. So what is this normal democratc society that treats Palestinians well? Do they have a similar track record with respect to Jews?
Click to expand...

Apologies for late answer. Indeed the answer is written somewhere. It's called the law. A normal democratic society treats everyone according to the law as best it can. It does not murder people when the head of state decides he doesn't like them. It also doesn't commit extra-judicial assassinations in circumstances where innocent children are guaranteed to be murdered as well. It doesn't collectively punish people by stealing their land or bulldozing their houses or building apartheid walls on their land without their permission.

Can one group break the law because it's neighbours break the law? Have you tried that in the US? I am afraid your impression doesn't equate with my impression.

As to which countries treat Palestinians well, I don't recall the Republic of Ireland assassinating them without trial. Unless you know different. I also don't recall the Republic of Ireland doing the same thing to any other religious group either.
 
i don't see many palestinians complanning about him that much.

Of course not. They don't allow cameras in the torture chambers the PA set up to deal with those who complained about him.

the other question is would sharon propose another peace plan that could be accepted by palestinians if they elected another leader to replace arafat

Since when is there such a thing as "elections" in the Palestinian Authority? Nobody except Arafat is allowed to run, let alone win.
 
Skeptic said:

This is one of the advantages of being ruled by despotic thugs, like all the Arab nations are: when the leader decides to start a war of annihilation against somebody else (like Kuwait or israel), the nation can dance from joy in the streets celebrating the coming end of the "zionist occupiers" (or the "reunification of Iraq with its historic provinces", etc.) while then, if the war goes badly, claim that it was all the evil leader's, and that they were just forced into it.
Click to expand...

Why does the point you tried to make above seem to be contradicted by the one you made below?

Skeptic said:

Many reasons, but to name one, because saying "Arafat is corrupt" is (in practice) punishable by death.
Click to expand...

:confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom