Readers’ Responses to Our Question (144)

How to connect a videocamera
sony?

Viagra Saturday delivery cod, buy viagra overnight delivery, [url=http://www.mysportsforum.com/forums/member.php?u=6455]Buy Cheap Viagra[/url],
order viagra cod overnight delivery, [url=http://www.halo3boards.com/member.phtml?u=8953]Buy viagra overnight[/url], next day delivery viagra.

Good afternoon user's the Internet!
Limited The Internet,now no problem !!!
It excellent way to change IP!!!
Look on site ,register, payment and use.
I use a floor of year,I happy.
This service unique, you at any time can
to buy or prolong payment of the VPN.
Service automated,you use vpn account without support.
I recommend - secretsline.com!!!
You need VPN if:
You value your computer's safety and don't want your provider to know what are you doing around the Internet.
You want to stay anonymous by hiding your real IP-address.
You connect network using proxy server, but necessary address does not work using proxy server.
You need access to the resources having limits depending on the IP-address.
The Reference Here [url=http://secretsline.com/register/index.php?action=register&parentcid=1989]Anonymity,Safety,Enciphering,Limited The Internet,Changa IP[/url]
Let's meet!!!

Dis website is Great!
I will recommend you to all my friends.
Thank you.
fioricet
http://fioricetbuyfior.blog.ijijiji.com

Dis website is Great!
I will recommend you to all my friends.
Thank you.
fioricet
http://fioricetbuyfior.blog.ijijiji.com

Traitement de l'impuissance ou de troubles de l'erection depend de la cause. Les experts traitent souvent psychologiquement fondee impuissance en utilisant des techniques qui diminuent [url=http://rx.tadalist.com/lists/public/815134]Acheter viagra [/url]

Cialis inkopen: Fortsatter Utbildning i Medicin (ECM) ar amnat a skaffa all halsa bekymmer arbetaren elementara av kunskap behovde till halla [url=http://rx.tadalist.com/lists/public/815265] levitra [/url]

LEVITRA es en forma de pastillas redondas de color naranja, LEVITRA se utiliza para el tratamiento de adultos hombres con disfuncion erectil (Que [url=http://rx.tadalist.com/lists/public/815199]comprar sildenafil [/url]

Aphrodisiac integrators natural male female sexual dysfunction. Pharmacy Italian-pharmacy in Italy is not only a place where you distribute medicines and items connected with them: always is a point SPECIAL. Medicine. ULTIMISSIMA 00:17 Latest medicine. Read article Orthopedics: new life in the joints. The tissue
engineering opens [url=http://rx.tadalist.com/lists/public/815126]buy viagra pharmacy[/url]

Erectional disfunction> 12,04; sialis disfunzione erettile> 12,04. [url=http://rx.tadalist.com/lists/public/814982]dove acquisto viagra on line[/url]

Redirezione al nuovo sito www.farmacia.unibo.it It is purely through dilate evolve a keen cheap viagra determines infected from an infected amnesia. In this tip, coadministration
of reyataz and cheap viagra did [url=http://farma.yourbb.eu/] dove comprare viagra [/url]

Sellini delle biciclette, impotenza, preservativi e protezione. Intelligente campagna per la prevenzione dell'aids. (disruption.splinder.com) postato 28 [url=http://venditaviagra.darmowefora.pl/] comprare viagra farmacia[/url]

E' una nuova e rivoluzionaria molecola prodotta da Lilly-Icos (nome commerciale Cialis), che fa parte della stessa classe farmacologia del Viagra e che Repubblica.it: il quotidiano online con tutte le notizie in tempo reale. News e ultime notizie. [url=http://acquistoviagra.eamped.com/]dove acquisto viagra generico[/url]

usldy owqrlpfk vcrw jfkicqtn lpwdo odemvcy cnxjkf

usldy owqrlpfk vcrw jfkicqtn lpwdo odemvcy cnxjkf

usldy owqrlpfk vcrw jfkicqtn lpwdo odemvcy cnxjkf

ulfbx icxnbepfa gyaxhbtp kdrswygul kacbzuf teavkpsg ylzomtb

ulfbx icxnbepfa gyaxhbtp kdrswygul kacbzuf teavkpsg ylzomtb

ulfbx icxnbepfa gyaxhbtp kdrswygul kacbzuf teavkpsg ylzomtb

Hi.
You site the best. To me has very much liked.

Look at my site.
index.html

Thanks.

mxlrsj kfowyc ifyjle xovkub rpjqdt ofacdrvx yznrqsamg

No one deserves starvation. We need to support the UN's Millennium Development Goals to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.
It cost $340 billion for Iraq War thus far and it only needs $19 billions to save the people from global poverty. I hope our political leader will realize how much money and precious lives they are wasting on a war against “terrorism”.
According to Boren Project, $15 billion can provide access to water and sanitation. Comparing to the $522 billion U.S. military budget, these annual costs of improving the world is very little.
It is really not so hard if we are truly willing to make a change and bring peace to the world not by military solution but by humanitarian aid.

Ok, couple things.

1) No one deserves democracy. You either create it through active participation in government, or you don't get it. No one is entitled to it, either. Its one of the reasons Iraq is failing. People expect to have it handed to them without earning their freedom for themselves so they do not cherish it, and the militants run amok under would-be theocratic dictators.

2) No one deserves food. You earn it, grow it, steal it, or you starve. If that means Palestinians learn to dance for their dinner to the West/Israelis' tune, so be it.

Death or dignity, which will it be?

hamas gets nothing until they decide to join the civilized world. they made their bed now they can sleep in it!!!

To Tom,

"When the head of a state threatens annihilation of another state, one does not argue over semantics, especially, if they are developing nuclear weapons."

This is not arguing over semantics, but over the message itself. Ahmedinijad's message is essentially identical to the mantra of "regime change" bandied about by various U.S governments. The U.S has nuclear weapons. If anything, going by your logic, Iran SHOULD have nuclear weapons to defend itself against a hypocritical West with double standards that has openly expressed animosity towards their country. So get over your pro-Israel sourced hysteria. At least Iran is not occupying and starving millions of Jews.

"Israel responded to the latest attack (Lebanon war) by moving toward the right (politically). I can hardly blame Israel for taking a hard line approach after withdrawing from Gaza and Lebanon only to be attacked by Hamas and Hezbollah. What would you expect?"

The problem is that you are looking at events too selectively. Your assertion is that the Lebanese conflagration and the recent Gaza hostilities were the result of Hezbullah's and Hamas's actions. I would argue that actions of these groups are a direct result of continued Israeli occupation and refusal to negotiate a return of Arab lands occupied during the 1967 war.

It is a lie that Israel has refused to do so because of the violence perpetrated by these groups. Israel has officially (through its government officials) refused to consider the return of the Golan Heights and other lands. It has refused to give the Palestinians the entirety of the West Bank, offering instead bifurcated territory that would replicate the same controls on Palestinian movement that exist now, and barren land in the Negev desert (hardly an equal trade).

With offers like these, when and IF Israel deems the violence to have come down to its idea of an "acceptable level", I believe the Arabs are correct in suspecting that Israel is not serious about an equitable peace, but only in maximizing its territorial gains.

I agree with you on the return to the 1967 borders. I believe that to show its sincerity, Israel atleast has to officially accept the principle of that solution, thereby giving hope to the Arabs that there is an equitable solution at the end of the tunnel if they manage to get their house in order. As it stands now, there is no reason to stop the violence because there is no carrot, only scraps, being offered by the Israelis.

why is anybody responding to the racist "embraced western values" comment? was that really worth a response? if by embracing western values you mean they put profit above justice, i agree. perhaps, that is why americis do not grasp the value of arab values.
for how long did your troops in iraq accept food and drink from anybody who offered, despite the civil war, without ever being poisoned?
you have never read in your Bible that christian women are supposed to wear veils (because of the angels)?
name any arab who has ever kept little boy testicles in his fridge as an appetizer?
arab women are virgins until they marry which is why we see no aids in the middle east, rapes are extremely uncommon, unwanted teen pregnancies, etc.
there was no marijuana in iraq until u.s. forces arrived.
how many times has anyone walked down the streets of Amman only to run into some belligerent drunks?
anybody have statistics for occurences of theft in arab countries?
the argument is, if arabs put profit above right, if arabs got high and drunk, refused to wear veils as do americi christians, if arabs robbed, raped, poisoned, or just engaged in casual sex with numerous partners, if arabs would only embrace these values, then the world would be at peace?
why did anybody respond to this racist post?
you act as if it were a legitimate theory worth debating.

Who read the statement about bread versus democracy and thought, "The Brothers Karamazov?" Who recalled The Grand Inquisitor? Who recalled the story of Christ?
Just don't presume to know my response by my name and my library.
Bush paraphrasing Christ with his 'with us, or aginst us' bit certainly deserved its day in the spotlight. Many folks even made the Christ conection, but who recalled the words of 'our man in Guatemala,' Rios Montt?

"If you are with us, we will feed you; if not, we will kill you."

Of course, the U.S. is no banana republic, our president is no third world dictator.
You mention leaders, democracy and Abbas.
Let us discuss democracy. Show me an american who thinks we should abanadon the tradition of veto power at the UN and i will show you a person with faith in democracy. Amricis preach democracy globally, yet never practice global democracy. Nor does the U.S. recognize the will of the people regionally as we have already discussed with the mention of Guatemala. Amricis do not believe in democracy, they simply pretend. Neither Socrates, nor Christ ever believed in democracy either, but they never pretended.
Let us discuss leaders. Thoreau once taught amricis of the majority of One.
Let us dicuss Abbas. Abbas does not represent Al-Filistina, he represents the U.S. Arafat represented Al-Filistina, which is why Al-Fatah came to power. Hamas struggled for Al-Filistina, but has never represented Al-Filistina, yet are owed the right to try. This is something amricis do not understand, or want to understand. Bush said Al-Filistina should vote. Al-Filistina voted. The international observers reported a uniquely transparent election and nobody cried foul. In indisputable fact, it was less questioned than either of the last two amrici elections.
There are two questions you are asking, yet you ask neither.
The first question presumes the understanding that democratically instituted socialism cannot be condemned simply because it is socialism. The question is whether communism, imposed socialism, is acceptable if it benefits the people rather than vicitimizing them as much of history portrays? The answer is the civil war. Do you want to push people to the point of their tolerance, sometimes a little past? It seems to me, if you have a better way for a better day, you ought to be able to convince folks without force. Confucius had the same idea. Abolition of slavery was an urgent demand however. Another example might be Hiroshima. How long would it have taken to convince all the people we nuked to be down with us? In fact, they seem to take the whole thing better than many white southerners.
This year, the U.S. will spend over $100 billion in Iraq.
This year, the U.S. will spend tens of millions to fight starvation in Africa.
Your faith has never been in feeding the hungry, your faith is in bombing arabs.
i have been to Sierra Leone, in fact, i will move there quite soon. I will try to remain faithful in the face of starving children, but if push comes to shove, i might have to jack an oil-tanker.
I am only a christian until the bombs start falling, the hands of feet of little children start getting chopped off, or they simply start dropping in front of me due to a lack of food or water.
At that point, they are kids, they need to be fed; whatever needs done to accomplish that objective is what needs to be done, leader, democracy, Abbas, or not.
Freedom and democracy are not the same. Between freedom and food, there lies a question; between democracy and food? Democracy was damned of its own accord.
It is a shame that country which pretends to believe in both democracy and feeding the hungry would pretend there was even a question which was more important. Watch a child starve dumb ass, there will be no more questions, ever.
Regardless, the worst thing that happened to Al-Filistina this millenium was not the death of Arafat, but the failure of the assassination attempt at his funeral.
Wait till the day when Abbas meets Maliki, who could resist two birds with one stone?
;)

To Srikanth Raghunathan:

It should be noted that the Jews have mostly had a minority status throughout recent history. The state of Israel was formed as a "Jewish" state. That was the main reason for its formation.

To me, it makes little sense to have Jewish minority in Israel. Can you imagine a Jewish state under an Arab government? Thus, I support Israel's right to control immigration.

There are no requirements to move there.

To Zain:

When the head of a state threatens annihilation of another state, one does not argue over semantics, especially, if they are developing nuclear weapons. Yea and Germany only wants to annex part of the German-speaking regions of Czechoslovaki...

Israel responded to the latest attack (Lebanon war) by moving toward the right (politically). I can hardly blame Israel for taking a hard line approach after withdrawing from Gaza and Lebanon only to be attacked by Hamas and Hezbollah. What would you expect?

Israel does needs to reverse their settlement policy and withdraw to the 1967 borders, though. There cannot be peace in the Middle East until that happens.

Finally, Iran cannot be allowed to become a nuclear power.

Zaid,
Where on the West Bank were you recently visiting, if you don't mind my asking the question?

Zaid: Is this the type of negotiation Hamas is being asked to return to?
=====================
I don't agree completley with your overall narrative, but I do think that you are onto the right track with this question. (The question then becomes how can we get the Ignatius's and the Zakaria's of the world to focus on this as an issue, a key issue?)

To rephrase your question to my way of thinking, I'd ask, "How can everyone (US, EU, Arab neighbors of Palestine) join forces to design/construct a *robust* negotiating or diplomatic process? I mean "robust" in the technical sense of the term, which might be translated able to produce results over a variety of circumstances and inputs. (The Roadmap looks like a feckless piece of diplomacy in that regard.)

Clearly, steps in the past have failed? Why is that? Trust building steps haven't worked too well - terrorists sabotage them and BOTH Israeli and Palestinains know how to press each others buttons, so to speak, to enrage and provoke and derail.

The Summit mentality hasn't worked too well. On this schema, periods of violence alternate with periods of great hope - then dashed hope. With the IP conflict acting as such a terrible blight on the entire region's relations now - and beyond, too, to actors like Iran who have nearly zero National Interest in the matter, except to show that they hate the Jews more than their political rivals, everyone is consigned to wait after each summit failure until the conditions are right again. This is not robust.

[During the Camp David 2000 Summit, Arafat was left on his own to make decisions about the al-Aqsa mosque, for instance, which is a terrible thing. Barak misread Arafat, arguably. I think it wouldn't be too harsh to say that both negotiating teams weren't fully prepared to discuss 'final status' on things. In the afterward, even, Barak's team compromised on some things that they hadn't at the summit. The IP team started to come to terms with what a final settlement about Jerusalem could/would mean, sorting through relatively new proposals pushed at them.]

I once thought aloud that, rather the subsequent "Geneva Initiative", wouldn't it be nice if the two negotiating teams were tasked to meet with each other on a daily basis until they had hammered out the *details* (and I believe that the devil is in the details on a great many things, even though Great History is what so many debate), and one day announced to the world that they had found what they thought was a good equilibrium.

Otherwise, we are left with the old saw that "israel won't negotiate under fire and the Palestinians believe that Israel won't negotiate without it." The way to cut that gordian knot, IMHO, it to see through to the broader truth (as I suggested above) and perhaps that is the mediating role of all of the rest of us, rather than taking up "sides", to help those, who are so cut with grief and anger, to lift themselves up.

There are other ways in which the 'peace process' has failed. One of them is insufficient attention and proceedure about what to do when events don't go as planned. For the Israelis, there was good security cooperation under Wye for a time (pessimists take note - it CAN be done), but as soon as the Israelis feel like they are not getting 100% cooperation, their longstanding fears 'take over' and they are prone to saying, "God, we made yet another stupid agreement and hurt ourselves trying to trust those who have proven themselves untrustable!". Similar things happen on the Palestinian side.

All this says, is that there needs to be significant attention to securing the peace, not just negotiating a final settlement. Many realize this, but so few actually 'talk turkey' about it.

So Hamas has been around for a long time now and what's your point?
———————
I think my point was related to how much patience it demands to suggest that the Hamas was on a route to accepting the Arab League position (Beruit conference) before it got derailed by 'outsiders'.

And I would think the same thing of them as I would the Israeli hardliners: if it makes sense for your own interest, just adopt it and stop worrying about how it might look in the short term.

Your other points are worth debating, but I've already written a lot and can't give my whole view of the IP conflict in so few words.

I will say, however, that, to me, it always comes back to this: how best to structure a negotiating process, get everyone back to the table for continuous talks, and secure the peace (which may well include elements of truth and reconciliation).

[Btw, there are concrete things that I think 'the West' can do, while all that is going on. One of them might be to start to put money into a fund to settle ROR claims.]

To Tom Wonacott:

"That is YOUR interpretation of what Ahmadinejad meant when he called for the annihilation of Israel. Excuse Israel for not taking your word for it."

Hardly. Do a quick google search and you will find lots of reputable sources who have dissected and analyzed his speech and come to that conclusion. On the other hand, I have yet to find an article that justifies the genocidal hysteria attributed to him, and does so by utilizing logic, reason and facts.

"you left out "and call for the destruction of Israel" which I guess you would interpret to be the "entity" again."

I will concede to you the opaqueness of Hamas's intentions when it comes to whether or not their call for "destruction of Israel" refers to the "entity" of a theocratic Jewish state or the "driving of all Jews into the sea".

You missed my point though, if you believe that Hamas has the worst of intentions, and use it to justify the brutality and occupation unleashed upon the Palestinians, how can you not condemn the induction of this politician? Why is it acceptable for a politician who openly talks of Arab ethnic cleansing to be part of the Israeli government, but anyone anywhere else with a hint of criticism of Israel (not necessarily even Jews) is condemned?

To RDJRDJ:

"Begging pardon, but the Hamas has been around for a long time now and this is the year 2006."

So Hamas has been around for a long time now and whats your point? Israel has been occupying the Palestinians now for how many years now? I believe the occupation predates Hamas does it not?
Anyway, if you had actually read my post you would have noticed the two key developments I pointed towards as signs of Hamas moving towards a more position that would be more diplomacy than violence (and they both happened in 2006, not when King David established a kingdom of the chosen people)

1. Their participation in the political process. They ran on fighting corruption and providing basic services to the Palestinians and just living up to their promises would have eaten up most of their resources and time with little left to attack Israel. If not, then the it can be reasonably expected that the Palestinians would have kicked them out next time around (of course now Israel and the U.S have given them the perfect excuse).

2. The prisoners document was circulated DURING 2006 and AFTER their political victory. It was meant to be a compromise; a "symbolic acceptance".

How can you possibly not consider these productive steps?
Is Israel only going to be satisfied if the Arabs come groveling on their knees keening "sahib, sahib, give us whatever pleases you..".
I hear everyone blabbing about how the Arabs need to compromise and move away from absolutist agendas, yet the Israelis and their supporters do not seem to care much for compromise and baby steps towards negotiations any more than the Arabs do. A little fairness and equality when placing blame is all I am trying to do here.

"Final borders would be based on 1967 as a starting point, but not equal to them."

Why?

Tom Wonacott, Boise, ID (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_in_palestine/comments.php?page=3#c735141):

1. Perhaps, you are correct.

2. Yes, I agree with you on the Palestinian Inssue's transcending Israel-Palestine problem. Howver, we must remember that every group has its demagogue and radicals. Unfortunately, the masses are easy marks for these unscrupulous people. This situation is aggravated by desperation. We must strive to ignore these fanatics and consider the issue from a much broader perspective.

3. I really do not know what the solution to Israel-Palestine issue is going to be, as yet. However, a good start would be a dialogue between those two parties. We can certainly facilitate the process, rather than inflaming the situation, which is already an inferno.

4. I truly do not have a problem with the State of Israel," but a "Jewish State of Israel" connotes discrimination and, unfortunately, is destined to be a failure in the long run. By its true definition, democracy should not be fixated on one specific religion.

I just wanted WP Blog to give posters like Atheists a forum dedicated to India. That is all. It does not have to be vs. the "West," although Atheist has an inordinate propensity to comparing India and others with the "West."

WHY DO WE HAVE TO PRETEND ISRAEL WANTS ANYTHING BUT TO TAKE OVER PALESTINE AND THE REST OF THE MID EAST? WHAT IS THIS FOOLISH ASsININE YACKING? WHO IS FOOLED.
As big bombs become common someone will bomb Israel into oblivion.
How the whole world will cheer.

To Srikanth:

I need to get a life. I have spent way to much time, lately, blogging. Just a couple of comments regarding the Palistinian issue.

1. Israel probably would have created a state regardless of the UN vote. That is my opinion, anyway.

2. I do not believe that the Palistinian State issue is mutually exclusive of the greater Middle East problems, especially concerning security. These problems need to be addressed for lasting peace (legally granted by the UN). You also cannot have an official representative of the Palistinian government that believes Israel should be destroyed and expect peace.

3. The only, realistic, lasting solution is for Israel to recognize a Palistinian State that has its borders as close to the 1967 boundary as possible. Olmert was the Palistinian's best opportunity (to date) to move in that direction, and they let it slip away for the moment.

On the question of a Jewish democracy. I am not a Christian, Jew , Hindu, Buddhist etc., but am agnostic. At the risk of sounding like I'm on the fringe, the world should not live by one set of rules. We celebrate our differences as well as our similarities in culture and values.

In addition, there has been relentless discrimination against Jews, especially in the twentieth century. The idea of a Jewish State/democracy/majority seems ok to me.

Finally, a question involving India would be excellent (not versus the west though; I don't see what that gains).

Dave Bender, Jerusalem, betbender.blogspot.com

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c731950):

Thanks for a good piece.

daniel

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c732108):

You are absolutely correct that we should NEVER cut off

relationship with the general populace. However, our supporting

factions within that populace will turn the other factions against us,

which is exactly what has happened in Cuba. Our foreign policies are at

fault.

Tom Wonacott, Boise, Idaho

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c732402)

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. (The

Israeli Founders were also branded terrorists by the British. However,

they dealt with them, anyway!) The U. N. was a just rubber-stamp

organization (as it is even today) for the U. S. and U. K. Ultimately,

the U. K. decided that it would rather split the country than deal with

the problem with a long-term view. By the way, our country (the U. S.)

was the first country to "recognize" the "State of Israel."

Can we blame the Palestinians for being "upset"? No, if you

really consider whether, or not, we would have agreed to the secession

by the Confederate South in the 1860's - as we all know, we did not at a

very great cost; however, it was the right thing to do, in retrospect.

For that matter, more currently, would we agree to the secession of

Puerto Rico?

Should we rewrite history? No, but Israel's policies MUST

change. The first thing that they need to do is stop "indiscriminately"

immigrating Jews from all over the world, just because they are Jews.

If someone claims that Israel was the Holy Land of the Jews, then I beg

to differ. One has to only look at the "Exodus." Furthermore, Israel

must cease trying to be a "Jewish" State. It should rather be a secular

democracy affording equal rights (in all respects) to ALL inhabitants.

By the same token, Palestinians MUST follow the secular constitutional

law, instead of the Sharia law.

Regardless of how effective Israeli security measures imposed

are, all it takes to derail the secular democracy is a group of isolated

terrorist incidents to derail the progress that moderate Israelis and

Palestinians would have made. Hence, the focus should be on reducing

the discontent.

As I stated earlier, we, the U. S., have unique opportunity to

engage the warring factions in a constructive dialogue and effectuate

long-term, meaningful peace and prosperity for all the relevant parties.

Cayambe, Philo, CA-USA

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c732435):

Right on, brother. Where have you been?

Atheist, Boston

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c732467):

Perhaps, would it be more appropriate if you changed your

pseudonym to "Racist," or at the very least, "Indiaphobe"? Your

comments are utterly tiresome and disgusting.

AM, Vienna, VA

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c732573):

Well-said (mostly)!

Tom Wonacott, Boise, ID

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c732637)

Your points are well-taken.

Salomon, Canada:

You country (Canada) is also to blame for many of the current

issues in the world. You guys are NOTHING more than an extension of us

(the U. S.). For God's sakes, you guys are still singing "God Save the

Queen"! Fix your own household, before you guys pounce on

others.

BobL, VA

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c734091):

You do make a cogent argument!

Salamon, Canda

(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/2006/10/25/democracy_or_food_

in_palestine/comments.php?page=2#c734125):

You got it; you hit the nail on its head!

PostGlobal:

Perhaps, could we open a topic on "India vs. the West," just to

attempt to satisfy the insatiable appetite for negativity of such

posters as the Atheist? My hope is that such persons could expound on

the facts that they THINK that they know, at length.

Ziad, Minneapolis, USA at October 28, 2006 10:38 AM

I believe that the most effective action by the Palestinians, now, is to declare an independent state in the whole of Gaza and the whole of the West Bank.

Israeli Action, not simply Hamas action?

are you predjudiced or just constrained by selfish interests?

answer that question,

David, Fareed.

when the United States is out of the OIL BUSINESS, ISRAEL will be alone.

Their actions should reflect that understanding.

Trying to pretend to be the biggest most dangerous fish in the sea is useless if you're surrounded by sharks with equal sized teeth.....especially since revenge is _SO_ Middle Eastern....it's like they invented it.....

you know an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth.......

Olde Worlde Thinking.......reactive primitive tribal minset, just a step or two above rhesus monkies.....at least most of their tribes are female led, as males don't think beyond the obvious, "what's in front of them," Somethings never change even with an IQ of 138.

See yah.

.

To Thom:

Israel targets the leaders of Hamas. That is a Palistinian military orgnization even if they don't wear uniforms.

MikeB at October 27, 2006 04:32 PM

ª MikeB | Permalink

I agree that virtually all of the Palestinian population existant today arrived in the area *after* the foundation of Israel. That also holds true for the population of Israel. The fact is that most were not born at the time.

I do agree that part of the cause for the Palestinians' plight are other Arab countries. They used it as an excuse to oppress their own population; a consequence of their presentation is that 'the world' has viewed the Palestinian issue as an 'Arab' issue. But the eviction from their homes is a Palestinian issue.

Lastly, I do not sbscribe to the 'give us a people without a land, a land without a people' principle. The land was peopled. However many Jews there were in Palestine in 1947, the likes of Begin, Ben Gurion, Sharon, and others, saw to it that the non-Jewish population would abandon their homes. That is what terrorism does. In other words the current arrangement is at the root of the Palestinian problem.

I agree that people who have homes and food and jobs and health care and schools aren't likely to throw them away in some senseless war, nor are they likely to permit a bunch of twits from flushing it down the toilet to meet their whacked out beliefs. (an interesting way to phrase it — but judging from many in the US I have doubts :) ). Which is why I believe that the lasting solution will be to:
(1) Return all the occupied land (1967 and later) to the Palestinians;
(2) Release the 10000 or so political prisoners. Some of them were born in prison, for heaven's sakes. They also provide constant fodder for 'terrorism' (the Israeli soldier who was captured by Hamas wil be exchanged for some of them — it is a regular occurence, the Israeli reaction was th eexception);
(3) Give the Palestinians compensation for the eviction imposed by the UN.

If Israel wants to build a security fence, on its side of the border, Israel is well within its rights.

I do not know whether this will work. I do know that the current approach has failed.

Tom Wonacott, Boise, Idaho at October 28, 2006 12:46 AM

I made it within 2 minutes ;)

You pointed out the essence of the issue: Who should 'yield' first. I consider that since the current approach has failed, it is time for Israel to amke the meaningful concessions. I believe that if the Palestinian masses see that there is a stake in peace, they will pressure the extremists in their midst. And unfortunately it does come down to opinion and belief.

through chicanery...

There will be no help from the United States until this mockery of abuse of power ends the current reign of the Corrupt Executive Branch and Complicit Congress.

The outrages of the middle East, are detailed in their inception by googling PNAC and looking at the statement of purpose.

Wolfowitz, the President of the World Bank, a Jew is the writer of the doctrine....

George H.W. Bush went to Yale with him, George W. Bush does whatever poppy says is right........

Poppy still receives daily high level briefings from the CIA regarding classified subjects.........even though George H.W. Bush works and gets paid by the COMMERCIAL WORLD........

He uses his inside information to build himself and his friends a safer financial world at _your_ expense. AS STEWART WOULD SSAY DEMOCRACY INACTION?

.

I have a couple of questions here.

1) Why does the onus lie on Hamas to recognize Israel? Has Israel recognized Hamas, other than to withhold the Palestinians own tax money?

2) To Tom Wonacott; Targeting the Military is OK? but targeting civilians is not? So since the Palestinians do not have a military, does that mean that Israel by "protecting herself" is comitting "state sponsored" terror?

3)What, the hell, is the problem with Atheist? I don't think he can be a bigot, because he seems to hate everyone equally :)

Having just returned from the West Bank three days ago (and having lived and worked there for three years in the mid-90's) I have the following impressions - (1) democracy is not more important that food - but America and the Bush Admin are willing to starve a people into submission - not just for the choice of Hamas but also into surrendering all their rights. After all, prior to the election, Fatah and Abbas were the only ones in government for years - and there were no negotiations. This is part of a pattern of placing obstacles in the path of the palestinians and moving the goal posts, making the palestinians jump through hoops, all while Israel builds more settlements, builds the Wall, ethnically cleanses the population and removes any possibility of freedom for palestinians.

(2) I think the best response and only response for the Palestinians at this point is to CANCEL the PA. It is ineffective, it always has been. Moreover, having a govt administration and the trappings of govt while the occupation persists only provides cover for Israeli actions. The PA should be cancelled, and Israel made fully financially responsible for all the occupied territories (as it was pre-1993). Currently the Israeli occupation is financially subsidized by the EU and others - thereby alleviating of its responsibilities and allowing it to spend more on settlements, jewish-only roads and ethnic cleansing.

Once the PA is cancelled the parties can decide afresh how they want to proceed. Hamas has only been demanding that Israel recognize Palestine and its rights, commensurate with what is being asked of it. Israel has never recognized Palestinian right to exist and on the contrary its actions are part of its plan to disspossess all palestinians of their land and lives. After all, 10 years of negotiating between Fatah (and Arafat the most secular and authoritative leader Israel will ever get on behalf of the palestinians)with plenty of concessions on the part of the palestinians only resulted in no control over any land except the dense cities (which Israel didn't want anyway), the DOUBLING of the Settler population and the construction on West Bank of jewish only roads. Is this the type of negotiation Hamas is being asked to return to?

Only when people in the West wake up to Israeli actions and impose a settlement will there be peace. Unless that happens we are heading for a combination Banustan and North Ireland situation which will not be solvable by two-states but by One state. I think we may have already reached that point.

You sound like you are Muslim...and reasonable at that.
——
I don't mean to pick on you at all, but do you realize that this is the kind of perspective that is sometimes almost uniquely American. You have such a big heart and imagine that everyone thinks the best of you, that you don't even realize how what you are saying might sound to someone else.

What if I said, "You sound like your Mother ... and not a drunk at that."? Do you see my point?

You will agree that the Palestinian people will be a thorn in the side of everyone until they get a chance at a decent life.
—————————-
The people of Palestine aren't a thorn - they are people. As for their economic development, you are right to a degree, but you seem to under-estimate what Gaza is really like, the economic challenge. Just have a look at where it ranks in population density, for instance.

Hamas was on a path to symbolically accepting Israel within the 1967 borders, a position adopted by the majority of the Arabs, through the Prisoners Document
———————————————
Begging pardon, but the Hamas has been around for a long time now and this is the year 2006. They *might* have been on a path, but let's understand just how much patience from everyone you are asking for in this statement, as well.

Final borders would be based on 1967 as a starting point, but not equal to them.

To Zain:

That is YOUR interpretation of what Ahmadinejad meant when he called for the annihilation of Israel. Excuse Israel for not taking your word for it.

"...I suppose that if the Israelis can starve almost 4 million people because of the "manifesto" of Hamas to refuse to recognize Israel..."

and more important, you left out "and call for the destruction of Israel" which I guess you would interpret to be the "entity" again.

Worth reading this morning. The London Independent reports Israel probably used dirty "uranium" bombs in Lebanon. Experimentation. So that vile entity doesn't mind making inhabitable parts of the land it works to take over? The long plan. Experiments like in the death camps in Germany? Whatever savagery the Isralis perpertrate, it turns out to be worse upon examination. Nothing is too foul.
In other news Mayor Bloomburg of NY is sending big money help help to Lieberman in
Connecticut. etc.

"Hamas, however, refuses to accept, even symbolically, Israel's right to exist."

Since a full acceptance of the Israeli state, by Hamas, would essentially be half the problem solved, a symbolic acceptance should have been welcomed by the Israelis and their American protectors as a good first step. In my opinion this statement is factually incorrect. Hamas was on a path to symbolically accepting Israel within the 1967 borders, a position adopted by the majority of the Arabs, through the Prisoners Document.

You and other writers have suggested that parties must make compromises and absolutist visions are perhaps doomed to failure. While criticizing the Palestinians, and specifically Hamas, lets not forget the absolutist uncompromising attitude of the Israelis either. They could have used Hamas's participation in the political process and their "symbolic" acceptance of Israel's right to exist as building blocks towards a purely political debate over the final status of the Palestinians. Instead they sanctioned, rejected the prisoners document as not being enough, used collective punishment and have essentially reinforced the view amongst Hamas and others of their ilk (perhaps amongst most Palestinians as well) that it is the Israelis who will never compromise, and will only be satisfied with a "moth-eaten", "indefensible" Palestinian state; forever at the whims of the Israeli military juggernaut.

MikeB:

From where I sit, Hamas was making all the right noises of compromise, it was the Israelis that refused. Time will tell if Abbas actually follows through on what I believe is a recipe for civil war, with the Palestinians and Israelis actually coming out better after the dust settles.
More likely, this will be another fiasco ala past and present Lebanon.

Tom Wonacott:

"Now, he has brought a hardliner into the government in response to the latest war. You also notice that he warned Iran about their nuclear program, in effect, he threw down the gauntlet."

Ahh.. so he is making a statement is he. I suppose that if the Israelis can starve almost 4 million people because of the "manifesto" of Hamas to refuse to recognize Israel and call for sanctions and invasions of Iran when their President talks of getting rid of the entity of Israel, not its people (as much as pro Israelis like to twist that statement into a call for genocide),then why is this "statement" by Olmert, inducting a politician who openly calls for the ethnic cleansing of Arabs, not bringing about the same sort of condemnation by the world (anyone remember Jorg Haider from Austria?).

All successful nations came from somewhere. Coming from a completely non-Western culture, the Japanese began Westernizing in 1880. Modernization was completed by about 1895. After Japan was bombed into rubble by the end of World War II, Japan accomplished a second modernization from 1950 until 1970.

What, the hell, is the problem with the Palestinians?

Korea, Japan, Poland, etc. etc. etc. All these states modernized. Japan totally lacked resources. Yet, the Japanese committed to modernization and Westernization and succeeded.

What, the hell, is the problem with the Palestinians?

Look at Japan. It is a barren rock with no natural resources. The Japanese built their nation with their bare knuckles out of the radioactive ash of a nuclear bomb. At the end of World War II (WW II), hundreds of thousands of Japanese were malnourished.

Even though the Soviets stole 4 of Japan's northern islands at the end of WW II, the Japanese did not act like the Palestinian animals. Instead of suicide bombers, the Japanese produced millions of engineers that built the incredible wealth of their nation.

What, the hell, is the problem with the Palestinians?

Though Tokyo occupied Korea for decades, the Koreans are not conducting suicide bombings of Japanese restaurants. The Japanese are not conducting suicide bombings of Russian restaurants.

What, the hell, is the problem with the Palestinians? Why are these people such horrific and violent failures?

Zoltan, hungarian, Paris

You make interesting points regarding ìrightsî, but I would go further. A ìrightî of any kind is a human construction. A right comes into existence by agreement, by an accord, among a group of people. Even the ìinalienableî rights in our Declaration of Independence are only as good as the agreement of the authors. And we should note, though they did not explicitly say so, that they did not confer these on slaves, however ìhumanî they might have been.

Israelís ìrightî to exist rests on an agreement among other states, and many Arab states still donít agree, nor do most Palestinians. The ìfactî of its existence is undeniable, but in the Arab view the fact has been imposed and has no legitimacy. That is a formula for Israeli insecurity.

The natural world is indifferent to rights. Earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, wayward asteroids, all could care less. Big fish eat little fish. Birds eat inselts, worms, seeds, whatever suits them.

Actually the supposed conflict between democracy and food is false. As the occupying power Israel is ultimately responsible for feeding the starving.

By the way it's a sin to dunk a cookie in water.

He meant to say cookies.

To AM:

It is a very interesting and enlightening conversation.

I don't believe that you can separate the greater Middle East from the Palistinian problem. In other words, a solution to the Palistinian problem does not necessarilly lead to peace in the Middle East (and visa versa). Israel needs both since Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. can launch attacks from Palistinian areas, especially if Israel's destruction is their primary goal. The Palistinians need to provide security for Israel.

That being said, there can be no peace in the Middle East without a separate Palistinian State, and that boundary should be the 1967 boundary which is the 1948 boundary (or close).

Our disagreement is probably a microcosm of the Arab-Israeli view. In my opinion, Israel needs safeguards against (or an end) terrorism first, while your view is that the Palistinians need a state first, i.e. a complete withdrawal from the West Bank, which, then, will lead to a decrease (or end) to terrorist attacks.

It is really interesting to me that the Prime Minister of Israel, Olmert, is an Israeli liberal that favors returning most of the West Bank to the Palistinians. Gaza was returned under his leadership.

The war in Lebanon has canceled any plans that Olmert had regarding the West Bank, and moved his government to the right. How has that helped the Palistinian cause?

Three quick final observations:

1. Hamas is a terrorist organization regardless of Israel's role in the West Bank. Targeting the military is one thing, but targeting civilians makes you a terrorist. We just have different definitions.

2. An unconditional end to the occupation will just lead to war and re-occupation.

3. You mention ethnic cleansing after the 1967 war. I am not quite sure what you mean by that. Did they find mass graves such as in Iraq?

I have learned quite alot from this discussion. I expect to hear from you within two minuits of my posting (just kidding).

Atheist,Boston is comparing apples to oranges. Industrialized Japan waged war and lost, then used their business infrstructure and knowledge to recover. Palestine has never had the educational and industrial experience endemic to Japan. Athiest has a hollow argument.

The Palestinians and the Israelis are not equally at fault for the violence in Israel. Most of the blame should be assigned to the Palestinians. They are primarly responsible for the terrible relations between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

In 2000, Washington helped to create a compromise solution that offered 100% of the Gaza Strip and 94% of the West Bank to the Palestinians to create an independent (!) state, which would have the roughly population density of Japan. The Israelis reluctantly agreed to the compromise, and the Palestinians outright rejected it. After rejecting it, the Palestinians proceeded to commit gross violence (including suicide bombers) against the Israelis.

If you doubt what I am saying, then visit the following web link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

We should utterly condemn the Palestinians.

Look at Japan. It is a barren rock with no natural resources. The Japanese built their nation with their bare knuckles out of the radioactive ash of a nuclear bomb. At the end of World War II (WW II), hundreds of thousands of Japanese were malnourished.

Even though the Soviets stole 4 of Japan's northern islands at the end of WW II, the Japanese did not act like the Palestinian animals. Instead of suicide bombers, the Japanese produced millions of engineers that built the incredible wealth of their nation.

What, the hell, is the problem with the Palestinians. They deserve our utmost condemnation.

Fatricide may actually be the solution to the Palestinian debacle.

The failure of Palestine is the failure of the Palestinian people. They deserve the blame for their poverty.

In a similar vein, if American society ever became impoverished, its failure would be the responsibility of the American people. They deserve the blame for not electing the right people.

Jared in Brussels says -

"Let them eat cake."

And then adds - she thinks - cleverly, "Or each other."

Jared, Do you remember what happened to the last lady who said that?

I haven't been ab;e to read every one of the above comments but I have read the first dozen or so, and I note the peculiar fact that not one of them notices that the word "fratricide" in the title is misspelled "fatricide". Is this an insignificant detail? I don't think so. I think this failure even to read the question correctly reveals the writer's intellectual rigidity, his unwillingness to give the question serious thought and his egotistical impatience to give us the benefit of his very strongly-held but not very original - or intersting - opinions.

To salamon:

It is interesting that you mention Mr. Obert in your post because unless I have misread him, he is relatively liberal, e.g. he supports giving back most of the West Bank to the Palistinians. Gaza was returned under his leadership, as well.

Now, he has brought a hardliner into the government in response to the latest war. You also notice that he warned Iran about their nuclear program, in effect, he threw down the gauntlet.

In my opinion, the Arabs missed an opportunity, but I already know your answer to that...

Your perspective has been interesting to me, although we probably wouldn't agree on most political questions (or probably even how to raise children....).

RDJRDJ, Princeton, NJ - You sound like you are Muslim...and reasonable at that. What a breath of fresh air. I hope and trust, however, that you will agree that the Palestinian people will be a thorn in the side of everyone until they get a chance at a decent life. Those people need jobs and schools and food and infrastructure and it doesn't appear to me that anyone is going to do it but us. And we ought to, with no strings attached, becasue a people with a life and a future for their children will not soon risk it. If nothing else, it is the moral thing to do and I trust that God will bless us for it.

Yousef Hashmi wrote: the question can be summarized by saying that the food is the requirement of the body and democracy is the demand of soul. Abondaning soul for the survival of body is not a good solution.
———————————-
Negotiations is the politics of hope. It is the *only* way for the blessings of peace to find a way into a land that has known so much darkness, such injustice.

Non-negotiations is the politics of despair and desolation. Those who sell it as triumph or hope are so terribly, terribly mis-guided.

The "soul" of the Palestinian p