|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 26, 2006 14:54:49 GMT -5
Damn. This doesn't look good. A militant Islamic terrorist faction taking over the PLA?
|
|
Ratwar
Squire
Horkers Rule!
Posts: 1,981
|
Post by Ratwar on Jan 26, 2006 16:39:28 GMT -5
The IRA has disarmed, I think this gives Hamas a chance to peacefully disarm as well. Though it is definitely not a good sign for the Israel Palestinian peace process, it could turn out to be a good happening, if Hamas becomes more political than militiant.
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 26, 2006 16:42:06 GMT -5
Hopefully. But that was more gradual. And there's no sign Hamas even wants peace.
|
|
|
Post by illicit on Jan 26, 2006 18:52:54 GMT -5
I dont think palenstine should have a right to exist at all, but thats a different point I will make only if someone needs me to elaborate. However I do believe Hamas is a bad thing for Isreal, he seems like the man who will try and hurt everything between Isreal and Palenstine, as he believes in destroying Isreal. Now even if Hamas doesnt win his support will mean many people in the other guys cabinet will be Hamas supporters.
|
|
mastab
Gallant
Orgasmic Flooding
Free hugs!
Posts: 2,781
|
Post by mastab on Jan 26, 2006 19:28:50 GMT -5
While I certainly would not have voted the leader of a terrorist group which regularly assasinates other countries' leaders into office, I respect the publics opinion to vote for who they want to. If we take away their right to vote just because they elected somone who's beliefs are different than our's, does that make us better than their leader?
|
|
Ratwar
Squire
Horkers Rule!
Posts: 1,981
|
Post by Ratwar on Jan 26, 2006 19:35:41 GMT -5
Hopefully. But that was more gradual. And there's no sign Hamas even wants peace. No sign? I'd call running for political office a step toward peace. I respectfully disagree, though there is no reason to elaborate, I know you're wrong.
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 26, 2006 19:44:24 GMT -5
I dont think palenstine should have a right to exist at all, but thats a different point I will make only if someone needs me to elaborate. However I do believe Hamas is a bad thing for Isreal, he seems like the man who will try and hurt everything between Isreal and Palenstine, as he believes in destroying Isreal. Now even if Hamas doesnt win his support will mean many people in the other guys cabinet will be Hamas supporters. Er, Hamas isn't one guy... it's an organization. A terrorist organization, or political faction with a militant wing, depending on who you're asking. Mahmoud Abbas is still Prime Minister, but without a Fatah-controlled legislature he can do practically nothing. And Ratwar, I don't think Hamas is entering the political field to further democracy. They're just trying to utilize the system to help their aims. Like Al-sadr.
|
|
Ratwar
Squire
Horkers Rule!
Posts: 1,981
|
Post by Ratwar on Jan 26, 2006 20:00:07 GMT -5
And Ratwar, I don't think Hamas is entering the political field to further democracy. They're just trying to utilize the system to help their aims. Like Al-sadr. And that is exactly what I'm so excited about. Everyone who participates in the political system is doing just that! Yeah, I know you didn't mean that, but there movement toward official government will only serve to moderate their position. The international community is going to have to deal with them sometime, and the sooner the better.
|
|
|
Post by illicit on Jan 26, 2006 20:16:40 GMT -5
Hopefully. But that was more gradual. And there's no sign Hamas even wants peace. No sign? I'd call running for political office a step toward peace. I respectfully disagree, though there is no reason to elaborate, I know you're wrong. Ok, whatever you say, but I respectfully disagree and think your wrong.
|
|
|
Post by morty14 on Jan 26, 2006 20:22:39 GMT -5
I think they have the right to exist, but I don't think they should get it because they are terrorizing innocent civilians. Instead how about they try: 1) Vote for a leader in Israel who would support giving them a portion of land to start their own nation; 2) Openly rebel against the Israeli government and earn the right to nationhood in the same way tons of other nations have; or 3) Find somewhere that they can settle and make their own nation, possibly by using one of the above solutions.
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 26, 2006 20:30:22 GMT -5
And Ratwar, I don't think Hamas is entering the political field to further democracy. They're just trying to utilize the system to help their aims. Like Al-sadr. And that is exactly what I'm so excited about. Everyone who participates in the political system is doing just that! Yeah, I know you didn't mean that, but there movement toward official government will only serve to moderate their position. The international community is going to have to deal with them sometime, and the sooner the better. I'm actually more excited about Muqtaqa Al-sadr. That guy is hilarious. But Hamas is bad for everyone. And with Sharon dying, and Hamas in control of the government, the Israelis are going to be nervous, and probably lockdown the checkpoints, and stuff. And Morty, the problem in Israel is that the Israelis won't let you vote/run for office unless you're Jewish. And the Palestinians refuse to accept what Israel lets them have. Neither of them will compromise, and each thinks they're being wronged. It's really depressing. One of my friends in the Middle East (living in Egypt ATM) says Israel is one of the most depressing places he's seen especially Palestine. And the problem with the Palestinians is that nobody wants them. The Arab countries will front the costs for their militant groups, but their refugees cost too much.
|
|
|
Post by illicit on Jan 26, 2006 20:53:19 GMT -5
I think they have the right to exist, but I don't think they should get it because they are terrorizing innocent civilians. Instead how about they try: 1) Vote for a leader in Israel who would support giving them a portion of land to start their own nation; 2) Openly rebel against the Israeli government and earn the right to nationhood in the same way tons of other nations have; or 3) Find somewhere that they can settle and make their own nation, possibly by using one of the above solutions. 1) Isreal has no obligation to give them anything, they won it fair and square 2) That is something I would agree with, they want palenstine openly rebel! Dont go around with strapped with dynamite from head to toe! 3) Most areas are claimed except mabye a few islands, hmmm, palenstine an island, that sounds kinda cool.
|
|
|
Post by thaddius on Jan 26, 2006 21:45:48 GMT -5
What is bad about that, the group that the people wanted overwhelmingly won the election. Seems like fair democracy to me. This country should be happy that there is a functioning democracy in the Middle East.
|
|
Ratwar
Squire
Horkers Rule!
Posts: 1,981
|
Post by Ratwar on Jan 26, 2006 22:34:03 GMT -5
1) Isreal has no obligation to give them anything, they won it fair and square So if I came to your house, killed you and took it, it would be mine, since I won it fair and square, right? That argument deservese a cookie...
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 26, 2006 22:45:36 GMT -5
I think they have the right to exist, but I don't think they should get it because they are terrorizing innocent civilians. Instead how about they try: 1) Vote for a leader in Israel who would support giving them a portion of land to start their own nation; 2) Openly rebel against the Israeli government and earn the right to nationhood in the same way tons of other nations have; or 3) Find somewhere that they can settle and make their own nation, possibly by using one of the above solutions. 1) Isreal has no obligation to give them anything, they won it fair and square 2) That is something I would agree with, they want palenstine openly rebel! Dont go around with strapped with dynamite from head to toe! 3) Most areas are claimed except mabye a few islands, hmmm, palenstine an island, that sounds kinda cool. I actually learned something (sort of) about the formation of Israel... apparently, a wealthy Jewish banker (who bought land in Palestine and was the de-facto governor I guess) offered the British a TON of money, if they'd declare Israel an official state. After WWI, the British convinced the League of Nations to pass it. The major influx of immigration came after the Second World War. Of course, that was Al-Jazeera's point of view. But it's certainly plausible. Probably done for slightly less corrupt reasons, but the claim has some merit. And the Palestinians have revolted. Several times. But they don't get billions of dollars, and weapons from the most powerful nation on earth. A few million from some Arab nations, that's it.
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 26, 2006 22:47:09 GMT -5
What is bad about that, the group that the people wanted overwhelmingly won the election. Seems like fair democracy to me. This country should be happy that there is a functioning democracy in the Middle East. Yes, it is. However, a terrorist organization known for being militant and volatile taking over the PLA isn't good for US interests, or for the peace process. Bush actually said he was pleased with how the elections were conducted... I'm sure that lie was accompanied by a forced smile.
|
|
|
Post by morty14 on Jan 27, 2006 11:34:39 GMT -5
1) Isreal has no obligation to give them anything, they won it fair and square 2) That is something I would agree with, they want palenstine openly rebel! Dont go around with strapped with dynamite from head to toe! 3) Most areas are claimed except mabye a few islands, hmmm, palenstine an island, that sounds kinda cool. 1) I agree they have no obligation. Israel doesn't have an obligation to do a lot of stuff. But they do it because they want to. I think the Israelis probably want to help these people, or at least get them off their backs. To say they won it fair and square is something different, but I do agree with the no obligation part. 2) Yep, that's what I'm talking about. Fight the army not the civilians. 3) Yeah I know. But I'd bet there is a nation somewhere that'd give a small track of land for them to form a nation. But then again I doubt the Palestinians would accept any land besides the fricking capital of Israel. *sigh*
|
|
|
Post by thaddius on Jan 27, 2006 16:06:13 GMT -5
What is bad about that, the group that the people wanted overwhelmingly won the election. Seems like fair democracy to me. This country should be happy that there is a functioning democracy in the Middle East. Yes, it is. However, a terrorist organization known for being militant and volatile taking over the PLA isn't good for US interests, or for the peace process. Bush actually said he was pleased with how the elections were conducted... I'm sure that lie was accompanied by a forced smile. U.S. interests being Israel?
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 27, 2006 16:10:27 GMT -5
Yes, it is. However, a terrorist organization known for being militant and volatile taking over the PLA isn't good for US interests, or for the peace process. Bush actually said he was pleased with how the elections were conducted... I'm sure that lie was accompanied by a forced smile. U.S. interests being Israel? Israel and stability in the Middle East. I read this (linky below) about militants from both sides going into the streets and burning cars and firing off their weapons, apparently displeased with the results. Now, tell me how the PLA, already mired in corruption, and bankruptcy, and a police force without weapons and outnumbered by militants, can maintain order with Hamas in control? Israel now refuses to deal with the government at all, gunmen shot up Mahmoud Abbas's house... Palestine is either going to go into Civil War, or ramp up attacks on Israel. And that's BAD. Forgot link. link
|
|
|
Post by Hunessai on Jan 27, 2006 18:10:04 GMT -5
I think that Bush might be genuinely pleased with this. It gives us another reason to fight another Islamic country with oil.
|
|
|
Post by darkhelmet on Jan 27, 2006 20:42:24 GMT -5
I think that Bush might be genuinely pleased with this. It gives us another reason to fight another Islamic country with oil. No. He's anything but happy. I'll try to find a link, but Bush was forced to admit the government gave tons of money to Fatah in hopes they'd win.
|
|
|
Post by illicit on Jan 27, 2006 21:52:56 GMT -5
I think that Bush might be genuinely pleased with this. It gives us another reason to fight another Islamic country with oil. No. He's anything but happy. I'll try to find a link, but Bush was forced to admit the government gave tons of money to Fatah in hopes they'd win. Yea, I heard a speech where Bush talked crap about Hamas. He stuttered a bit so I think he either didnt rehearse or is very passionate about being against Hamas.
|
|
Ratwar
Squire
Horkers Rule!
Posts: 1,981
|
Post by Ratwar on Jan 27, 2006 22:43:17 GMT -5
No. He's anything but happy. I'll try to find a link, but Bush was forced to admit the government gave tons of money to Fatah in hopes they'd win. Yea, I heard a speech where Bush talked crap about Hamas. He stuttered a bit so I think he either didnt rehearse or is very passionate about being against Hamas. So when he sutters on his State of the Union address, can I call him stupid for not rehearsing?
|
|
|
Post by illicit on Jan 27, 2006 22:46:37 GMT -5
Yea, I heard a speech where Bush talked crap about Hamas. He stuttered a bit so I think he either didnt rehearse or is very passionate about being against Hamas. So when he sutters on his State of the Union address, can I call him stupid for not rehearsing? No, its also probably hes not a very good public speaker(Which is indeed very important in presidents), it has nothing to do with his IQ.
|
|
|
Post by morty14 on Jan 28, 2006 15:41:57 GMT -5
No, its also probably hes not a very good public speaker(Which is indeed very important in presidents), it has nothing to do with his IQ. Bush is 'not a very good public speaker'. Can we just give out the award for biggest understatement of the decade right now? We'll be sure to keep that on the records for a definite run at biggest understatement of the century. "If you're a single mother with two children, which is the toughest job in America as far as I'm concerned, and you're working hard to put food on your family." "Rarely is the question asked, are, is our children learning." "There's an old saying in Tennessee; I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee. It says fool me once.....shame on.....shame on you. Ya fool me, ya can't get fooled again." That isn't all that great. I think I've heard 6th graders that are better public speakers.
|
|