# Bush Regime Helps Palestine?

• News
member 5645
Bilal,if I respond to your posts, will you actually respond to me this time, please? I do not want to spend the time again going down the list to have no response.

Bilal
Dear phatmonky,

If you want peace in ME, just let UN resolutions active. Palestinian are under occupation without real authority on ground. Their cities are isolated by walls, check points and settlements, so how they can control the groups that attack Israel?

USA and Israel claim that the wall is to protect Israel: if this true , so why they do not build it on the border and withdraw?! Also what the goal of the illegal settlements on 60% of the land of WB?

phatmonky said:
Bilal,if I respond to your posts, will you actually respond to me this time, please? I do not want to spend the time again going down the list to have no response.

Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
omin said:
Gokul,

there has been no attempt to avoid the war by Bush regime.
How about the ultimatum offered to Saddam Hussein, that if he turned himself in, there would be no war. If the collateral damage was inevitable, shouldn't Saddam have simply resigned and given himself up, in the better interests of his country ? But we all know that Saddam was only interested in his own power.
Resulting in there being no attempt to avoid collateral damage. All the damage is collateral in Iraq. Murdering civilians is collateral damage. Destroying their infrastructure is collateral damage.
How is this different from any other war ?
Murdering those honorable Iraqis who defend against the murder of civilians is murder.
Strange. These "honorable Iraqis" have themselves murdered a good number of (Iraqi) civilians. I wonder what those numbers are like ?
Do you understand the cost of rebuilding? Do you understand the cost of lack of diplomacy? Do you understand what that does with the subsidized price of oil? Bush is inferior in economics. What was it Gokul that should be avoided? Perhaps the simple answer, waste of resources and making diplomacy impossible? That wasn't what avoided, becuase that would have meant avoiding war. Based upon the physical evidence of Bush regimes actions, what do you see, not think, what do you sense that Bush has accomplished that is better than what existed before when Saddam was in power?
I myself was opposed to the war (and still think this is a huge mess) , and it's not time yet to tally accomplishments...but sometime in the future we might know better. As of now though, Iraq won't be ruled by Saddam, Uday or Qusay Hussein.

The popular American misconception is that Saddam was a lunatic. You obviously have only put faith in the American one-sided and misleading propaganda.
Really ? And you know this...how ?

Hmmm...so what about the invasion of Kuwait ? And what about giving himself up to avoid this war ?
He had only the interest in making Iraq a powerful independent state and making the Arab a world not to be terrorized.
But it's okay to offer incentives for terrorists/suicide bombers.
Selling oil on the world market was Saddams intersts, not terror. Without selling oil, Iraq couldn't progress.
That's perfectly understandable. How about selling food to buy arms, when thousands of children are starving to death ?

Last edited:
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
kat said:
LOL, and we had "moral authority" before?

Well, you had more than you have now. But honestly, the problem isn't with the palestinians for the moment: they are in a state-size prison and their leaders had house arrest. The only way out of the problem is FIRST create a Palestinian state (no matter whether there are terrorists or not ; consider their victims to be the collateral damage of peace :-) ; the nasty problem is of course all those colonists, so I'd say, with international aid, they get the choice between getting some money and moving back into israel, or to stay, but as citizens of the Palestinian state. Then have a kind of Marshall plan to get the Palestinian economy up and running. Yes, there will still be terrorism, but once all that is done, I'm sure that 1) they will have less incentives to do so and 2) the new palestinian state will ALSO have as it interest that this stops. Until the Iraqi war, the US could have played a major role in this. Now I think that the Palestinians will not even come to the table when the US tries to be the negociator.

What you are asking now is that a people which is badly treated and oppressed should FIRST crack down on terrorists and then you'll see. That's bound to failure.
It is a bit like burning someone with a red iron bar, and tell him that if he stops screaming, you will stop burning him.

kat
vanesch said:
Well, you had more than you have now.
well, honestly if Iraq does hold elections in the coming months succesfully and an Iraqi chosen government is in place, the U.S. will gain a certain amount of credibility and strength in the ME. Perhaps not with the common people but with the leadership, which in the end is where it needs to be for serious change within Palestine and other countries.

But honestly, the problem isn't with the palestinians for the moment: they are in a state-size prison and their leaders had house arrest.
I think the problems are beyond palestine and amongst their leaders as well as at least a decade of indoctrination of death cult mindset amongst their youth. The damage of this is directly the responsibility of the leadership of the community and will take a generation to cure even with the creation of a viable state. IMO
The only way out of the problem is FIRST create a Palestinian state (no matter whether there are terrorists or not ; consider their victims to be the collateral damage of peace :-) ; the nasty problem is of course all those colonists, so I'd say, with international aid, they get the choice between getting some money and moving back into israel, or to stay, but as citizens of the Palestinian state. Then have a kind of Marshall plan to get the Palestinian economy up and running. Yes, there will still be terrorism, but once all that is done, I'm sure that 1) they will have less incentives to do so and 2) the new palestinian state will ALSO have as it interest that this stops. Until the Iraqi war, the US could have played a major role in this. Now I think that the Palestinians will not even come to the table when the US tries to be the negociator.

What you are asking now is that a people which is badly treated and oppressed should FIRST crack down on terrorists and then you'll see. That's bound to failure.
It is a bit like burning someone with a red iron bar, and tell him that if he stops screaming, you will stop burning him.
Well, I see a compendium of problems here although i agree with much of it. Can we start with an outline of what you believe to be neccesary for the creation of a viable state?
Also, if the U.S. tries to negotiate and offers $$I will place big bets against your big bets that Palestinian leaders will come to the table...even if they later undermine every bit of success they had found there. vanesch Staff Emeritus Science Advisor Gold Member kat said: well, honestly if Iraq does hold elections in the coming months succesfully and an Iraqi chosen government is in place, the U.S. will gain a certain amount of credibility and strength in the ME. Perhaps not with the common people but with the leadership, which in the end is where it needs to be for serious change within Palestine and other countries. Those elections are going to be a joke. What parties are there ? What are their programmes ? Did they inform the electorate ? Were there debates ? Come on. That will be Chechenya style elections, and I can imagine that the US will be popular with the "leadership" that will come out of it. I think the problems are beyond palestine and amongst their leaders as well as at least a decade of indoctrination of death cult mindset amongst their youth. The damage of this is directly the responsibility of the leadership of the community and will take a generation to cure even with the creation of a viable state. IMO I agree. However, the death cult is a result of the miserable conditions in which these younsters grew up, together with a toxic dose of religious fundamentalism (which wouldn't have had a chance if the conditions would have been better). When they regularly saw Israeli tanks destroy houses, helicopters raid over camps and so on, it is understandable that you want to fight and give your life for revenge, out of despair and maybe, in the hope that it will change something. The main problem is with the attitude of Israel, who put the palestinians in this situation. Let us not forget that it was Sharon who provoked the first intifada. He lives politically of the violence: there more violence he can provoke, the more the israeli citizens are scared and ask for revenge ; and who's there to do that ? Sharon. But I agree that now there has been so much blood on both sides, so much hate and desire for revenge, that it will be difficult to get out of the situation, and it will probably take a generation to cool down. But that is why it is important to get those Palestinian younsters out of that miserable prison that Sharon is building, in order not to get a new generation of bombers. You will have to live with the damage from the past (including some terrorists remaining). That shouldn't refrain people from setting up a state. Well, I see a compendium of problems here although i agree with much of it. Can we start with an outline of what you believe to be neccesary for the creation of a viable state? Also, if the U.S. tries to negotiate and offers$$ I will place big bets against your big bets that Palestinian leaders will come to the table...even if they later undermine every bit of success they had found there.
Hey, if I have to give a working peace plan, I want to be paid for it
It seems that, apart from the colonists, that the main difficulty is Jerusalem.
Now I happen to be born in a country where there is a very similar problem (happily, no bombers yet). In Belgium, there are 2 communities (Flemish and French) which have always argued with eachother (it dates back to the 13th century). So the state became a federal state, with two sub-states (called regions) Flanders and Wallony. However, the problem remained: both wanted to have Brussels. Well, a solution which more or less works, is: make it a third region!
So I propose that Israel gives up Jerusalem, and that Jerusalem becomes an independent state. A bit like Monaco.

kat
vanesch said:
Those elections are going to be a joke. What parties are there ? What are their programmes ? Did they inform the electorate ? Were there debates ? Come on. That will be Chechenya style elections, and I can imagine that the US will be popular with the "leadership" that will come out of it.
I don't think they will be a "joke". It's a very serious matter which has and is being given serious thought and action by Iraqi's. I have friends who had the great opportunity to be able to talk and well...ask many, many questions of the iraqi's who are will be participating in running the elections. They have been traveling and observing elections throughout the world. At the time my friend was able to meet the IRaqi's, she was supervising the elections in Indonesia. Democratic elections have already been held in many of providences of Iraq already. The biggest issue will be security...registration began the day of our election...I believe parties are formed..I will be glad to look into more accurate answers for you.

I agree. However, the death cult is a result of the miserable conditions in which these younsters grew up, together with a toxic dose of religious fundamentalism (which wouldn't have had a chance if the conditions would have been better). When they regularly saw Israeli tanks destroy houses, helicopters raid over camps and so on, it is understandable that you want to fight and give your life for revenge, out of despair and maybe, in the hope that it will change something. The main problem is with the attitude of Israel, who put the palestinians in this situation. Let us not forget that it was Sharon who provoked the first intifada. He lives politically of the violence: there more violence he can provoke, the more the israeli citizens are scared and ask for revenge ; and who's there to do that ? Sharon.
But I agree that now there has been so much blood on both sides, so much hate and desire for revenge, that it will be difficult to get out of the situation, and it will probably take a generation to cool down. But that is why it is important to get those Palestinian younsters out of that miserable prison that Sharon is building, in order not to get a new generation of bombers. You will have to live with the damage from the past (including some terrorists remaining). That shouldn't refrain people from setting up a state.
This is probably a subject better suited for it's own thread. I will say this..with the hope that a response will be in another thread.. actually..first....are you saying that Sharon provoked the first or second intifada?

Hey, if I have to give a working peace plan, I want to be paid for it
It seems that, apart from the colonists, that the main difficulty is Jerusalem.
Now I happen to be born in a country where there is a very similar problem (happily, no bombers yet). In Belgium, there are 2 communities (Flemish and French) which have always argued with eachother (it dates back to the 13th century). So the state became a federal state, with two sub-states (called regions) Flanders and Wallony. However, the problem remained: both wanted to have Brussels. Well, a solution which more or less works, is: make it a third region!
So I propose that Israel gives up Jerusalem, and that Jerusalem becomes an independent state. A bit like Monaco.
I'm sorry, perhaps my question wasn't clear... I'm asking what you think to be the neccesary pre-requisites for the formation of a state...any state in order for it to be a viable functioning state........