Nuclear War

[Acriku]

Can the US intervene at all without the other side murderously enraged at it? Seems like a no-win situation for the US.

[nampigai]

MAybe it's time the EU steps im as a peace making/keeping force, I think the US will somehow favorit the Israelli, not on purpose but the bonds between Israel and the US have always been tight where as the EU has been more neutral.

[Shiroko]

You'd be surprised in hoe many places you can find bombs, no one wants to do it. But bombs have been found in aids, ambulances and more...

Defending yourself by targeting civilians?

By bombing restaurants?

By bombing a Seder of passover?

How would anyone from the USA would feel if a Taliban tried to defend himself by blowing up a thanksgiving dinner?

The majoraty of the palestinians efforts in the war don't concentrate on attacking IDF but on attacking Israeli civilians.

If it's ambushing civilians cars, bombing cafes or other plain terrorist acts, it is not self-defense.

The Israeli opertion's purpose is destroying terror in the palestinians areas. A lot of civilians die in war, this is something you can't avoid, a lot of them died in afganistan, but no one protested there on that. The majority of palestinians killed are armed (And by armed I usually mean an AK47 or a M16).

We have offered a cease fire for many times, but the palestinian leadership won't agree, their idea of cease fire at best, means stopping bombing in cities. A few times now they said they're in a cease fire, so terrorist acts were made only in the settlements, then a terrorist act was commited inside Israel and the cease fire was broken. In fact, the palestinians do not contol their organizations, they cannot force a cease fire on the Hamas, Jihad and their likes. They used to support these organizations and now they cannot control them.

We have no option but to use military force, and the current operation shows just what goes for the palestinians, Arafat's goverment backs up economically all the organizations, fake Israeli money is produced inside Arafat's Mokata (Where he is now sieged) and extremely advanced labs for creating bombs exist with thier knowledge.

Arafat tries to get diplomatic achievements by terror, think for a second, if anyone of you would ever agree to someone that is using terror as a method. Personally, anyone that gives up for terror, simply asks for more terror.

-Shiroko

P.S.

Won't be able to answer anymore, gone for 14 days.

[nemafakei]

"If it's ambushing civilians cars, bombing cafes or other plain terrorist acts, it is not self-defense"

They know hey can't beat the Israeli army, so they attack who they can harm to try and point out that they will go to any length to get freedom. They can not defend themselves in any other way, so they are forced to do this.

150 palestinians killed by the IDF minimum (body count). 3000 are expected to be wounded.

If you are trying to defend Sharon's methods, don't. His forces are no more terrorists than the hamas etc. Each kills to frighten the other off. The israelis happen to wear uniforms, and are better trained and armed.

"In fact, the palestinians do not contol their organizations"

So no-one can insist on a cease fire. Else it won't work.

"Arafat tries to get diplomatic achievements by terror"

"In fact, the palestinians do not contol their organizations"

?

Both sides are resorting to violence where they should not.

[vidiware]

Both of them, is bad

Arrafat, is at least trying to stop, the terrorists, but he dont have police to stop it with, and Sharon, is killing everyone that is not Israelic (or what it is).

Why dont UN stop the fight and, share the land between them, and make jerusalem, a international city, like it was planned??

[nampigai]

Shiroko I understand that you are Israelli and I know that we as bystanders don't have a clue on what it's like down there, yet I try to look at this conflict with as neutral eyes as possible, this is not a personal attack on you or any cicvilians in this conflict what ever they are. It's an attack on

[Anathema]

I'm new in this thread so don't be surprised if I say something said 10 times before.

The conflict in Israeli all started because people of different religions often can't live together very well. People over there are raised with the tought that everyone that is not from their religion is evil. Some people (Palestinians) even go as far to blow up themselves in order to get other people from the other religion (Israelians) killed, because they think they get into heaven for this. This hatred against people from other religions is deep rooted, and a cease fire isn't going to any good. I think the UN should dispatch forces to actively ensure peace in Israeli.

[Digital Guerrilla]

I agree the UN should organize a peace force and provide security where Isreal now has there forces. Isreal has already shown that wht athey do does not fully work. All of their actions have been met with reactions that were of little signifantance. Isreal and Palestine are too prejudice against one another for any progress to take place in between themselves. Isreal and Palestine are going to destroy the Holy Land and themselves because of their indifferences. The United Nations should ask all the other leading nations of the globial community to supply forces in the security measure in the Isreali-Palestine conflict. The United Nations was formed after WWII for such events as the Isreali-Palestine conflict. This is also the first event the UN had to deal with in it's infancy, when the British in 1947 said they wanted to leave Palestine. And today in 2002 this has still no resolve for the matter of the Isreali-Palestine conflict.  

[The_old_worm]

I agree, and I wish the U.N. would step in and take action.  The problem is that the U.N. is so indecisive, that by the time they all agreed and made a plan, it will probably be too late. In fact, I think it is already too late.

The problem is that it would take force to accomplish this, there is no way around that, and there are too many people in this world that don't see the bigger picture.

If the U.N. was more decisive, then I think the U.S. could diminish it's role in world affairs.

[Mordecai]

The blame does not lie squarely on the shoulders of the Palestinians: both sides are at fault.

[Anathema]

Yes both are to blame. What angers me is that Bush, until recently, mainly blamed Arafath for everything.

[quoudam72]

Of course the blame can not be put on the Palestinians shoulders they have been victims of secret deals behind their backs from the beginning. Not to say that I agree with all that has taken place (or their tactics) but I do feel their anger and need for the rest of the world to hear what they have to say. First I think the deals offered to them are slap in the face to begin with. How to you displace a native people from their own land and then turn around to offer them a land deal on their land. What I am referring to is the events occurring towards the end of WWI where the League of Nations placed Palestine under the the Adminstration of Great Britain as the Manstory Power under the Mandates System League.

Five years before receiving the mandate from the League of Nations, the British Government had given commitments to the Zionist Organization regarding a Jewish national home in Palestine because the Zionist leaders had a "historical connection" claim since their ancestors had lived in Palestine 2000 years before dispersing in the "Diaspora".

Palestine, whose forefathers had inhabited the land for 2 preceding millennia felt this design was a violation of their natural and inalienable rights. It was viewed as an infringement of assurances of independence given by the Allied Powers to Arabs leaders in return for their support during the war. The Palestinian Arabs resisted the Mandate, followed by resorts of violence by the Jewish community as the second World War drew to a close.

[Acriku]

How to you displace a native people from their own land and then turn around to offer them a land deal on their land

That is exactly what European purists (pilgrims) and their soldiers did to the Native Americans. Do you think America is going to give US back to Native Americans? Nope, so they made them deals, kind of forcibly though.

[Lord J]

No real opinions, but I do have a few relevent (hopefully ;) ) comments.

First off, Edric, nice timeline.

Second, Hopefully this won't be seen as offensive.  I do not mean it that way.  As I'm sure it says (somewhere) on this site these plans are for educational and entertainment purposes only.  If you have any beef take it up with Michio Kaku.  How To Make An H-Bomb

Third, War is a nessesary staple of sentient life.  Without leaders we have anarchy, which is a crime to oneself.  With leaders we have megalomaniacs bent on world domination.  AKA Bush ;)  Seriously though, no matter how it's argued, War is a probibility.  With or without religion, with or without science and with or without monetary resources.  

Fourth, Anyone here ever read "The Stand" by Stephen King?  ;)

[quoudam72]

That is exactly what European purists (pilgrims) and their soldiers did to the Native Americans. Do you think America is going to give US back to Native Americans? Nope, so they made them deals, kind of forcibly though.

Yes you are very right Acriku but one thing has been overlooked the Native American Indian situation was not in the last 50+ years either where there are better laws for the protection of people. I was not suggesting giving the land back I showing how the current state of affairs came about.

Israel did not have a regard for the Palestine people for a people (Isreal) that had survived the events of WWII how could they turn around and then say they were going to make a "national Jewish home" in Palestine without the Palestines having a say in the matter is ridiculous and appalling to the stomach!

The British empire did not formerly control the land that is in question that we speak (Palestine). The Ottoman Empire had Palestine as an integral part of itself. Great Britian is at fault because they (the British) had already made commitments to the Zionist Organization on land (Palestine) that they had no sovereign rights over, Great Britain had no proprietary interest and it had no authority to dispose of the land to what is now Isreal.

Palestine has been and is continuing to fight for their fundamental political right to self-determination which has been denied. The Palestian land had been colonized from abroad by non-Palestinian Jews by removing Palestinian Arabs and you expect not to have a conflict. Everyone should have a home but Isreal should bow it's head in shame.  Palestine is a political problem at the very heart of the matter.

[nemafakei]

"Great Britain had no proprietary interest and it had no authority to dispose of the land to what is now Isreal"

Well all the other nations who signed the treaties didn't object, either! (And we did control it for a year, until Kemal rejected S

[quoudam72]

Well all the other nations who signed the treaties didn't object, either! (And we did control it for a year, until Kemal rejected S

[Shiroko]

For Nema Fakei:

"They know hey can't beat the Israeli army, so they attack who they can harm to try and point out that they will go to any length to get freedom. They can not defend themselves in any other way, so they are forced to do this."

Now one forced them to a war, the Palestinians were about to get their own land, but they decided they want more, and they decided to get it by using Terror against Israeli civilians.

"150 palestinians killed by the IDF minimum (body count). 3000 are expected to be wounded."

We're degrading to numbers? Bear in mind that these 150 Palestinians were armed, and shot at IDF forces. Each of them could be left alive if he would surrender.

The latest operation's goal was to destroy terrorist networks, and it did it in excellent ways, the most moral ways any country could achieve.

Civilians were killed, but not because IDF soldiers targeted them, believe what you want, but the IDF (Which stands for Israeli Defense Force) is the most moral army existing. No building was destroyed without warning people inside about it. Houses were barely destroyed except for cases where too much boobytraps were on it. Most houses you see destroyed in the news were destroyed because of palestinains bombs. Israeli soldiers are not terrorists, they did their best guarding the civilian population, including cleaning their houses and supplying humanitarion supplies to them.

""Arafat tries to get diplomatic achievements by terror"

"In fact, the palestinians do not contol their organizations"

?"

I see how it seems unclear. Arafat let the riots burst in order to get diplomatic achievements. However, he does not have the power to stop them anymore. Don't be fooled by him, Arafat support terrorists. Documents found at his offices show the funding he gave to all these organizations.

I am very troubled however from the fact you said terrorist acts are legitimate. It bother me a great way, I understand you live at England. Do you see the IRAs terrorism as legitimate. After all they are after what the Palestinians want more or less. Do not distinguish terror and dare say terror is legitimate, by saying it legitimate you are saying acts like 11/9 are also right. Or is there a special border where killing civilians to achieve your target becomes wrong?

For vidiware:

"Arrafat, is at least trying to stop, the terrorists, but he dont have police to stop it with, and Sharon, is killing everyone that is not Israelic (or what it is)."

You seem to know very little of the conflict, Arafat does not try to stop the terrorists. For the last two years he has been sponsoring them with money and ordering secret weapon stocks. And I don't mean just weaposn to arm his "Police" I mean 122mm long range rockets, RPGs, Mines and other weapons, some were purely bought for terrorizing.

Sharon is not killing anyone that is not Israeli, my arguement about the morality of the IDF has been made, if you don't believe me the IDF is just hunting terrorists and civilian deaths are accidents check it out for yourself.

"Yes both are to blame. What angers me is that Bush, until recently, mainly blamed Arafath for everything."

Earthnuker:

The reason for that is mainly because Arafat lied to Bush several times. In a lot of cases the Israeli goverment results to showing goverments that while Arafat says that this terrorist is in jail, it is in fact roaming free.

Being Jewish, is not a religion, it is also a race. Hitler sent anyone that had a jewish grandfather to gas chambers. This is not a war of religion, it's a war of existance to Israelis as well. We have no place to go, you can see what happens in the world now, it is not just becuase of the middle east happenings. It is because of racism. In the beginging of the previous century people said that they do not hate the jews, they hate the fact they are nowhere to go, no Jew wants to have a second holocaust. And don't be naive and think that such a thing cannot happen again.

In 1947 the agreement was for a Israeli country, a Palestinain country and Jerusalem as a UN controlled area. The palestinains did not find this agreement satisfying and went for war.

In 2000 the agreement was about to give the palestinians a country, they did not find it satisfying and went for war.

(Kinda long, no?)

[quoudam72]

In 1947 the agreement was for a Israeli country, a Palestinain country and Jerusalem as a UN controlled area. The Palestinians did not find this agreement satisfying and went for war.

In 2000 the agreement was about to give the Palestinians a country, they did not find it satisfying and went for war.

In February 1947, the British Government presented its own proposals to the Arab representatives joined by representatives of the Palestiian Arab Higher Executive, and to the Jewish Agency, which had entered into unofficial negotiations with the British Government. Both sides rejected the proposals. The Zionist Organization, fortified by new large scale immigration, legal and illegal,well equipped forces, with the Jewish Brigade providing the nucleus, and powerful foreign support would not compromise its objective that it had advanced so close towards- a Jewish State in Palestine. The Palestinian Arabs, with the support of other Arab peoples, were determined to guard and hold their country, and to prevent it from being dominated further by continued Jewish immigration Due to this large scale violence was imminent in Palestine.

This is when Great Britain decided to relinquish its mandatory role and hand over the Palestine problem, after three (3) decades by the Balfour Declaration and the Palestine Mandate, to the United Nations(the United Nations was two (2) years old at this time).

For thirty (30) years Britain (admitted) into Palestine, year by year, a quota of Jewish immigrants that varied according to the strength of the respective pressures of the Arab and Jews at the time. These immigrants could not have come in if they had not been shielded by a British chevaux-de-frise. *If Palestine had remained under Ottoman Turkish rule, or if it had become an independent Arab state in 1918 (as Britain had said it would honor for their aid in the war), Jewish immigrants would never have been admitted into Palestine in large enough numbers to enable them to overwhelm the Palestine Arabs in this Arab people's own country. Israel exists today and why today also 1,500,000 (estimated) Palestinian Arabs are refugees. For a period of thirty (30) years Jewish immigration was imposed on the Palestinian Arabs by British military power until the immigrants were sufficiently numerous and sufficiently well-armed to be able to fend for themselves with tanks and planes of their own. This is not a tragedy of locate portions but of world portions, its an injustice that hampers the world's peace.

*The Zionist Organization knew this being the reason they appealed to Great Britain in the first place also to German, Belgian and Italian forms of government with such far flung locations as Cyprus, East Africa and the Congo were considered but never materialized. The goal of the Zionist movement was clear- the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine. the rights of the people of Palestine themselves received no attention in these plans. The political concept of a Jewish State in Palestine needed to make it reality was the transfer of people to Palestine (Britain allowing the quota for the 30 year period i mention in the above post).

[Frodo_I]

Has anyone brought up the religion card?? During the cuban missle crisis both america and russia had their fingers poised for nuclear war, but neither one went through with it. One of the major reasons why is that americans, and russians believe that if you have a nuclear war thats the end of the world, you may or may not go to heaven, and there's nothing else left

Certain other religions (one is muslim i think) believe if you die in battle you go straight to "heaven".  So if someone like kadafi, or the palistinian president, or saddam hussain got a nuke, he MAY think nothing of setting it off, even on his own soil (if being attacked) cause if he does then he thinks all his people are going straight to "heaven" and others are going to either nothing or hell

Even the communists, true communists, practice more sound judgment when faced with the fact that they will end humanity if they push the button (true communists don't believe in God i'm told). But if you think your going straight to "heaven" if you die in battle, you may not have the same notions

[Anathema]

Civilians were killed, but not because IDF soldiers targeted them, believe what you want, but the IDF (Which stands for Israeli Defense Force) is the most moral army existing. No building was destroyed without warning people inside about it. Houses were barely destroyed except for cases where too much boobytraps were on it. Most houses you see destroyed in the news were destroyed because of palestinains bombs. Israeli soldiers are not terrorists, they did their best guarding the civilian population, including cleaning their houses and supplying humanitarion supplies to them.

This is ridiculous! IDF the most moral army in the world? What moral army would set up their barracks inside a mosque taken away from civilians, burn their books and piss on their walls and sanctuaries? What moral army would march with tanks into civilian towns and blow up buildings while there may only be a handful of legimate terrorists in that town? Arafats hands are not unstained- but neither are Sharons. Sharon recent actions make him a war criminal.

The truth is that the jews never should have been allowed to move in such large numbers to Palestina. For what? Because they lived there centuries ago? The fact that their ancestors lived there, does not give them heritage of that land. Somebody also stated that the Israelians now deserve to live there because they are of the second generation. This argumant proves the first one wrong- why would they have to deserve it if they already had the right to live there? The plain and simple truth is that the jews moved out centuries ago and the Palestinians moved in. Then suddenly the jews come back to drive the Palestinians out of their homes. I am not saying that the Israelis should get out. Nowadays they have as much right to live there as the Palestinians do. But the hatred of the Palestinian citizens are well founded (but terrorist actions are not justified).

Also, not all terrorism is organized terrorism. Often they are normal Palestinian citizens, who feel that they are done wrong by the Israelians. You can't stop people from acquiring explosives if they really mean to.

[nemafakei]

Well, the Soviet Union was atheist anyway, so that point is a little... useless. No offence

"No building was destroyed without warning people inside about it"

1. How would you know?

2. My goodness, there must have been a hell of a lot of warnings. Jenin was decimated.

3. We're resorting to numbers only to prove that Israel is no more guiilty than terrorists.

"Bear in mind that these 150 Palestinians were armed, and shot at IDF forces. Each of them could be left alive if he would surrender"

Dead children surrounded by rubble with no evidence of a weapon near them? There is proof of this, but none to support your case.

"Arafat support terrorists"

And Sharon supports uniformed ones.

"you said terrorist acts are legitimate"

I did not quite mean that... I mean that terrorist avcts are no more legitimate than uniformed military attacks on people.

"Or is there a special border where killing civilians to achieve your target becomes wrong? "

Yes: the border is 1 death (maybe less). If there is a single civilian death by any force, it is wrong. If it is deliberate, it must be stopped.

[TMA_1]

Possetion is nine/tenths of the law. As immoral as it is idealistic ideas wont stop it. The Jews were given the land by the British crown and the U.N. Now that it is a settled state we have to leave them to do what they do. "Peace keeping" by the U.N. is just another form of fascism, which we fought against in WW2. It doesn't matter if its for good or for bad. It is against the freedoms of nation states. They will figure out what to do on their own.

[Anathema]

Facism is when you force your decisions and ideas upon a state. Democracy is when everybody has a vote and that solutions are made so that everybody has had some influance in the process of making that solution. The Israelians and the Palestinians are at war, and have failed utterly in previous attempts to come to a solution. The UN should act as a neutral party to come to a solution that suits both Israel and Palesinia, not forcing the ideas of the UN on both of them.

[nemafakei]

But they will not both agree. There must be some threat (not against people), or they will each not comply in an effort to get more. Besides (I know, this will cause argument) their freedom does not extend to the freedom to kill. Someone MUST intervene to stop killing.