|
-
May 26th, 2003, 05:27 AM
#11
-
May 26th, 2003, 07:05 AM
#12
Here's just two, and in case you can't figure it out, they ARE links.
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/07/24/israel020724
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/356
It seems concessions were made. A response to those concessions was made briefly following by the Palestinians.
And every time Israel makes a gesture, they are met with bombings and so forth.
It's not off topic and if you'd spend maybe 4 seconds searching the web you'd come up with dozens of links for info you're searching for, but maybe I ask too much, eh?
P.S. I don't give a flying rats ass about what first impression you wanted to make.
P.S.S. Do you have something to say or are you just playing "devil's advocate"?
Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant than would take even a little trouble to acquire it.
- Samuel Johnson
-
May 26th, 2003, 08:24 AM
#13
-
May 26th, 2003, 09:11 AM
#14
Originally posted here by FAQ
I'm only new here (and love the place!) and don't wanna "rock the boat" so to speak.......BUT... could you please point out exactly what concessions Israel has made in the past? I understand that they recently voted to grant a Palestine state. It's the first time EVER in history that Israel has said it would recognise a Palestinian state. Only 12 out of the 23 members of the Israeli senate that voted actually voted for this. Other than that I haven't really been aware of any concessions made by the Israelis... 
You are quite right that this is the first time that Israel has agreed to a Palestine state, which I think is a very positive move. However this needs to be reciprocated by the Arab world in agreeing that Israel, too, has a right to exist as a sovereign state, something that much of the Arab world has not done. And Palestine needs to take action against the extreme Islamic groups that are attacking Israel, something they have refused to do in the past.
Curiously, I think Sharon was actually disappointed he won the vote.
Why? Because, if he had lost the vote he could have dissolved the current coalition which includes extreme right wing parties, and formed a new coalition with the left wing Labour party, who initially rejected him, but have since had a change of leader.
The difference with a new coalition would be that Sharon would have a much freer hand to negotiate.
-
May 26th, 2003, 02:10 PM
#15
The point I was trying to make was that it would be nice to see arguments backed up with supportive links, that's all. It gives it more "oomph"...so to speak.
I gave you the name of the page i got that from, i just thought you might have been able to figure that out. "bridgesforpeace" 
-
May 27th, 2003, 12:58 PM
#16
now we will see who is serious about peace or not. Should we even cross our fingers and hope?
Trappedagainbyperfectlogic.
-
May 27th, 2003, 01:10 PM
#17
You have to admit though, the Israeli's are exercising alot of patience here, they are still willing to meet with Abu Mazin at that summit in Jordan after 5 "homicide" bombing's. I know my country pretty well, and i can say that if the U.S was bombed 5 times in a row that we would go kick some ass very promptly, so you got to hand it to them for being patient.
-
May 27th, 2003, 02:38 PM
#18
Originally posted here by gold eagle
now we will see who is serious about peace or not. Should we even cross our fingers and hope?
HTis will not happen until both sides can ignore the bombings and move on. Their are people on both sides of the Israli/Palistinialn conflict that are in power/stay in power bcause of it, it is in their best intrest to make sure peace dosn't happen. Untill the yare removed from Isrial and Plaistine there will be no lasting peace.
-
May 27th, 2003, 07:37 PM
#19
Hello,
Not that i woudl want to start up again on the whole issues of concessions again, but all the links refer to western media and thus biased toward isreal....
Sorry to point that out but should you go to arabic web site you would get a whole other story....
the bottom line is that isreal doesn't want to allow the 5 Million(? + ?) palestinian back on their land. so even if this is the 3% of non concession that is still too much no ?
to support that i'll add that only the isrealis have put reserve to the road map (12 if my memory is right ...) not the palestinian... why ?
In any negociation, you got to look at what each part is willing to give up to get what they want. who has a better position and who needs a solution rather then the other side ?
make you own opinion for that and use diferent sources...
Pragmatic: in all cases neither side will be happy with the outcome and there will be much more blood before there is peace and both side will claim to have been riped off.
there is always 3 sides to a truth: theirs, the others', and the unknown's. which one do you choose ?
assembly.... digital dna ?
-
May 27th, 2003, 08:05 PM
#20
to support that i'll add that only the isrealis have put reserve to the road map (12 if my memory is right ...) not the palestinian... why ?
I'm sure it had something to do with Israeli security concern's. 
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Reply With Quote
ROFLMAO
Like I said. I apologise if I've offended. I'm new here and didn't mean to tread on any toes. I was out of line... 