Noam

The so-called Road Map to Peace is Bush's plan for peace in the ME, that had in it stopping the settlements and a cease-fire for both of the sides, a few months for Abu Mazen to abolish the Hamas, the Jihad etcetera as a first step. Since Arafat didn't let Abu Mazen use the Palestinian armed forces, he couldn't do it and the first step of the Road Map was never taken. Now let me ask you, lowzeewee - have you ever heard of the Road Map? You don't seem to know what you are talking about. And I never understand your points, what's between the road map and the Palestinian education? Wolfwiz - The Iraqi war had to be. Either now with 94 American soldiers killed in the entire war, or in 5 years, or 10 or 20 or 50 years, when they WILL attack the western world. Don't forget that we're dealing here with fundamentalists. Now the US must establish a democratic stable regime, and when that is done, the war in Iraq is officially a success.

If all that matters is will of the both sides for peace, you have already half of the work done. Despite what is written in israel-sucks.com, the fraction of the Israelis who are convinced that no peace could ever be made with arabs is really small, less than 10%. On the other hand, you got the Palestinians who even after all the attempts made to make peace, still don't teach that Israel exists in their Geography lessons, and they have ceremonies in favour of their martyrs ('Shaheed'), who died while carrying out a suicide bombing. It all starts from up, specifically Arafat. No peace can be made with Yasser Arafat, ever. They said Israel would not be willing to send international troops to its area before, but now there are international troops in the northern border with Lebanon. Israel will not be willing, but might accept troops, since no other solution can be found... Besides, I wasn't speaking of an international peace-keeping force, just mediating in the negotiation, like the US does. Gotta run, Noam

Well, I wouldn't expect much from someone whose Prime Minister said that the jews must be stopped before they succeed in their plan to control the whole world. Nothing personal, you see. More concrete - Wolfwiz, I couldn't agree with you more. The violence must be stopped. Everyone agrees on that, yet nobody suggests a way of doing it. What's an ideology worth, if it is unreachable or very hard to reach? In my opinion, at least, a solution cannot come from inside the Palestinian Authority. The UN and the EU should interfere, if they want to reach somewhere, and do it with close inspection of what is done with their money. While the Palestinian people is extremely poor, Arafat's property is approximately 800 Million Dollars, Which he just took away from the EU's humanitarian assistance.

No support for remote linking. C&P to the URL bar.

By the way, look at that: http://uploaded.fresh.co.il/3fab534f48f82996.jpg ALERT - What happened to his head may be difficult to view. Not for pregnant women / people with high blood pressure. You can read what the Palestinian propaganda people made out of it, while if you look closely at the fourth picture you can notice the blood very easily. What really happened, as it was on the news and on any possible site/magazine/newspaper except for we-love-palestine.com, is that the soldiers took him, identified him, noticed the explosive belt under his clothes, immediately shot his head and then undressed him to remove the explosive belt. You don't have to be a hawk in order to notice that there is a red stain where his head was supposed to be. Pictures may be deceiving... Especially when taken by someone who takes sides.

Excuse me, but diplomacy with WHOM exactly?! We tried negotiating with Abu Mazen's former Palestinian government, and did have a significant progress with the negotiation. Arafat saw this, and made his movement in any direction extremely difficult. Abu Mazen has made a speech in front of the Palestinian parliament blaming Arafat for preventing him from moving on in the way to peace. He quit, and Arafat appoint a new PM. Diplomacy is a really nice word.

Point?

Supreme guy: You are questioning the reliability of my sources, while I question yours. It goes like this - I'm smarter, older, meaner and I FUCKING LIVE INSIDE ALL OF THIS. My sources are the news, the paper, what I see myself. Are you trying to tell me that the bus that exploded right under my house was blown up by innocent people? You don't know anything, and but anything I mean ANYTHING about the situation. I won't even bother retorting this time. Just a waste of time... Sneakgab: I don't care about the ancient history, as I see it what was thousands of years ago shouldn't matter when discussing present. I was just answering the guy who said that there were no jews in Israel before the establishment of the Zionism. Last - The Israeli media is not biased. We have all the information available about our PM's criminal investigation, probably much more than you know actually, we know everything that goes. We're not like the "The American will never get close to Baghdad" guys, the media here is professional. I don't see a reason to doubt it. PS: The Matrix: Revolution is a disappointing movie. Watch only if you can't live without knowing what happens in the end.

Kinda simple. There's a wall in Gaza right now. For the last 2 years or so, there were... 2 terror attacks that originated from gaza strip. 2. It's not that they're not trying, they just can't get past the wall. Hundreds of terror attacks originated from the west bank, so now we're just building a wall between the west bank and Israel as we did in Gaza.

Israel isn't. It's all politics, the settlers have a powerful lobby in the parliament and they demanded that this and that settlement will be behind the wall they're building. I'm not saying that everything Israel does is ultimately good, I disagree with some of the things that we are doing. But who agrees with everything his govenment decides?

It most definitely is correct to destroy a terrorist's or a terrorist's family's house, yes. It is not correct to destroy houses in order to make room to settlers. I'm against the settlements no less, and even more, than you do.

There had been a hebrew state (2 hebrew states, actually) in here from around 5,000 years ago till the Romans banished them. They transferred the jews from the region of Israel and Judea to somewhere in the Roman empire, Don't know exactly where to. That was around 2,000 years ago. A few centuries forward, and we have the Ottomans taking over the area, calling it Palestine. At that time there were severa tens of thousands of jews in here, and much more of that arabs. Bla bla bla, Zionism, Jews started immigrating to Israel. The arabs in here didn't exactly like it, but jews kept coming... World War One. The Ottoman empire falls, the British conquer the place. They didn't permit jews to immigrate to Palestine, because they had interests in good connections with the arabs, but we just kept coming. World War Two. The Nazis killed 6 Million jews. 1943 - The war ends. 29.10.1947 - Seeing the holocaust, the UN had not much choice. A declaration that the land will be divided into 2 countries, called Israel and Palestine. Palestine is to govern the mountain area, the Galil and the West Bank of the river Jordan. Israel is to control the coastal plane, which was mostly marshes at that time, and the Negev, which is pretty much of a desert. Jerusalem - international city. The Israeli Independence War began, between the jewish residents and the arab residents in Israel. 14.5.1948 - Israel declares itself a state. Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Iran join the war. Somehow we survive this. 1949 - Truce. The truce borders are today known as the 'green line' or '1967 border'. During the war, many of the arab residents tried to flee to the surrounding arab countries, that didn't agree to accept them. They settled down in refugee camps. Today they are called Palestinians. Those who didn't run away are today Israeli full-right citizens of the state of Israel, by the way.

We don't demand the land from anyone. The UN decided to gave Israel around a third of the land of Israel, we agreed and declared us a state, they started a war, we won (because we control the world. ask the malaysian PM), they lost, some of them fled, and those who tried to flee to other countries and were rejected settled in refugee camps and are today called Palestinians. Learn the situation before talking about it.

I humbly suggest that you read what I wrote above. I really don't have too much free time to spend on writing again what I have already written.

True. We weren't attacking Syria, if we really wanted to do that it wouldn't be an isolated camp destroyed but more like the Syrian government complex destroyed. Since we (in the 10000th time) DO NOT want a war, we didn't. We preferred to alert Assad that he is playing with fire, and in return we got more threats, actually.

Syria is one big terror organization. The fact that Israel found the Jihad's headquarters/training camp/whatever 70KM from Damascus shows something, doesn't it? Besides, you do not know the entire story. This attack on the Jihad in Syria's territory is merely a warning to the president of Syria, Bshar al Assad. It is in the same group as the sonic boom performed over Assad's vacation-house or whatever when he was there. Bush would've nuked Damascus instead of us, eh? We only attacked a training camp of a terror organization. No, Syria will never attack Israel. Assad may be proud and dumb (again, human) enough to think of such an act, but it will never happen. They prefer doing it indirectly, by supplying terror organization with their needs (Jihad, Hizbullah etcetera), so that afterwards Singaporeans and Europeans who have no real interest or connection to the situation here, would blame Israel. It's much more fun that way.

That's human, i.e dumb. They think themselves humane and enlightened and therefore they support ceasing the suicide bombing, and yet they don't want to feel themselves 'suckers' or dishonoured for not retaliating to Israeli attacks, so they support the suicide bombings at the same time. Some would assume it is a result of a brainwash which caused what Orwell called doublethinking, and this is possible. I personally think that being dumb and having no opinion about something is common among humans, since most humans are dumb... By the way, in case your reliable sources forgot to mention, a charge exploded yesterday under Knesset Member Issam Mahul's car, a member of a left-wing party who objects the Palestinian terror organizations and the criminality in the Palestinian society. He heard a "weird noise" under his car, got out of it and it exploded. Isn't it just wonderful?

Nice to be seeing you. What will you accept? The Israeli media is biased, and the world doesn't seem to care very much about terror and more on violation of human rights which is regularly carried out by the IDF. Would articles from the non-biased Palestinian media work? Here, take these: http://www.freepalestine.com/eyewitness.htm This seems rather futile. I don't have any possible way to prove my point, and you'd rather believe in Palestinian propaganda anyway, because it is much easier and romantic to see the David and Goliath aspect of the story. Question is, if it is true. The difference between us is that I live the situation, I read 2 different Israeli newspapers and usually the whole of them, I listen to the radio, I watch the news. By saying "You can't count on Israeli media", you are actually saying "You don't know anything about the situation", and then claiming I'm wrong adds the inevitable "And I do". Well, I guess it is much more logical to count on sites such as www.freepalestine.com or www.israelis-are-monsters.com or whatever site you linked me to. If you rather trusting those than trusting the local newspapers, we REALLY don't have anything to talk about. By the way, I had a pleasant trip.

Is it a rule of nature that Israelis don't back what they say up? After reading this really long article I'll probably be able to point some important points or facts that will contradict Mr Chomski. But, and it's a big 'but', it will take me a really long time which I simply don't have. You'll have to take my word or to ignore it. See you on Saturday.

What, Noam Chomski? Reading a book of his is like reading Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler. He's 10 steps ahead of 'extremist', he needs a new word to be invented in order to be described. I watch the local news and read the local papers, while you read - and let's face it - propaganda. Your Noam Chomski book is a great example. No, the media here isn't biased. We don't live in Orwell's Eurasia. How can I prove you wrong? Learn Hebrew and read Isareli newspapers. Sharon has made a speech in which he defined the Israeli presence in the Palestinian Authority area as 'occupation' and said it is our interest to end the occupation. He said we cannot continue like it. Everyone here agrees with him. Your image of Sharon as a really large man who eats arabs for breakfast and drinks their blood in dinner was created by no other than the propaganda you continue linking me to. Oh, by the way - I won't be here till Saturday, family vacation.

We don't bomb refuge camps. We go on foot and search houses for terrorists (we come with lists). The tanks are there because rocks don't hurt them, otherwise we'd have to shoot those who throw rocks. I don't know where you got this impression from, but it's entirely wrong. I repeat - Never, in the history of Israel, had a refuge camp (who said refuge camps, by the way? They're more like cities) been bombed. Israel does more than it is safe for it to avoid hitting innocent people. The Palestians terror organizations (why factions? Is Al-Qaeda a faction?), of course, do not.

I disagree with you. In 1938 the Nazis were obviously the bad side, while the allies were the 'other' side. You can't point a good side in a war but you can definitely point the 'worse' side, and in this case it is obvious that the worse side is the Palestinian terror organization. Israel, thus, is the 'better' side. It's all semantics anyway, we all know which side started it and which side wouldn't end it.

Now you're being pathetic. Note that if the Israelis "couldn't stop their bloodlust" or "were just looking for a casus belli", there wouldn't be Palestinians at all by now. There is a big hole in the ground where Afghanistan used to be once, and you let out no word about it, but when Israel kills terrorists? Woohoo, big conspiracy. Looking for casus belli. You are pathetic. Stop reading propaganda materials (such as your Noam Chomski book) and believing weird conspiracy theories. The fact is that Israel wants to get to peace and does everything it could to get this, while the Palestinians do the opposite. If you still rather believe propaganda over believing me, this is where the discussion ends. You go your way, and I go mine, and hopefully our ways won't cross ever again. Have a good day. PS: Stop reading propaganda. It's bad for your health.

Nobody is permitting torture, the orders are to shoot only when there is no other way, and who is exactly taking their houses? I'd really love to see where you've god these ideas from. Israel? Shooting on sight? Pure propoganda. These things happened only once or twice in the history of Israel. If we really shot on sight as you are suggesting there would be tens of thousands of Palestinian casualties. Did you know that we let the Palestinians work in Israel? Accept what I say here as truth. We are in a war, and in war ugly things happen, yet in this particular case they happen really, really rarely. When we assaulted Jenin, Arafat interviewed to the entire world reporting about a massacare and thousands of dead people. When the red cross counted the bodies, it discovered that in this 'massacare' there were 81 casualties. Not 81 thousand, just 81. Do you see the propoganda we've been talking about?

Fancy ideas. What makes you think that when we stop attacking they'll do the same? We've tried that before, in the Oslo agreement era, and what do you know? They didn't stop. Life's hard. Things don't change if you look the other way.