<p>Do not be insulted DanC. I actually like you. But I do not think you realize the futility of what you suggest. For one thing, you suggest that those people fight modern and advanced armies conventionally. Do you have any sense of relality? Last time I checked, the US destroyed Iraq, killing tens of thousands of soliders and innocent civilians in the process, and lost fewer than 100 men doing it. A conventional war between the terorist an advanced military would be equal to an ant attacking an elephant! The US and Israel can launch accurate missiles from over 1,000 miles out destroy all of the enemy. Some war that would be! </p>
<p>Most Muslims have no problem with the West. They are honnest, hard working people who just want to be left alone. Those terrorists will kill their own parents at this stage. Look at what they are doing to their fellow Iraqis and their fellow Egyptians. Obviously, most Arabs and Muslims never wanted innocent lives to be lost...Arab, Muslim or foreign. But the small minority of meganomaniac and extreme leaders who will brainwash the weak minded to carry out their destrcutive will will continue to have recruitment material as long as the present trend continues. Like I said, until the US stops intervening in the Middle East and until Israel and Palestine get serious about peace, this horrible trend will continue.</p>
<p>And DanC, the IRA and the Basques are indeed very ruthless. But think of the difference in size. There are fewer than 5 million Irsishmen and Basques in the World. There are over 1.2 Billion muslims. So even if the proprotions were the same, there are 240 times more muslim crazies than Irish and Basque put together. In other words, if you have 10,000 members to the IRA and the Basque separatists...you have over 2 million muslim terrorists.</p>
<p>DanC1986 is one stubborn person.</p>
<p>Here we have a Christian Arab who lives in Dubai (a city known to be extremely multicultural) who is telling him the truth on what's going on.</p>
<p>Alexandre is as close to an unbiased source as there is and yet you refuse to listen.</p>
<p>Guys, come to my thread to discuss this. And please, stop all the flaming!</p>
<p>All i can say is this:
1.) Terrorism isnt because Muslims hate freedom and democracy.
2.) Terrorists have been cheated up by Western countries. No way can they negotiate on their terms.
3.) Sharon was never for peace, unless he knew that it was impossible for the Arabs to accept it. He rejected so many peace agreements, that it'll take pages to describe them all.</p>
<p>I feel more pain for the Iraqis than for the Americans.....</p>
<p>premitive, what you are doing is so wrong. you stick to Sharon, the last PM of Israel, he is there since 2001, the conflict is going on since forever. why not put this way and include both sides? (As we both agreed):"I hate sharon, he is aggressive and doesn't want to see the pals making their own land (actually, i can probably agree with you on that, he really seem to think that a pal country is bad... stupid but oh well), yet, the pal leadership had been since forever a leadership run by a terrorists named Yasser Arafat (agreed on that before), he refused to honor the Oslo agreements, he refused the greatest offer anyone could give him (ask clinton), offered by PM Ehud Barak, he simply refused for any agreement during his time, and he was the ruller of the pals since the begning until this very year. now that he is replaced, wonder wonder, sharon is pulling out from gaza, sharon meets with Abu-Mazen and signs truce in Sharm-A-shech, I still hate sharon, but maybe now I can realize that pal leadership was actually the one refusing agreement since its establishment, and sharon refused to negotiate while in his term (which is the last what? 4 years?!)."</p>
<p>I find that more objective and realistic then just pointing out the last 4 years or so by Sharon. </p>
<p>ha?</p>
<p>collegefreak, swearing isn't the way to express your opinion. all you do since joining this discussion is attacking and being saracstic rather than responding to facts and arguements that are important and relavent.
one more thing, how do you know about my beckground? obviously you don't, and just read what I wrote another person who dismissed my claims and supported alex's just because he's an arab (maybe it actually you).</p>
<p>Sharon always opposed any sort of peace deal, unless he realized that it was on terms in which it was impossible for the Palestinians to accept. He voted against a peace treaty with Egypt. In 1985 he voted against the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. In 1991, he opposed Israels participation in the Madrid Peace conference. In 1993 he voted No in the Knesset on the Oslo agreement. He also refrained from voting in the Knesset on a peace treaty with Jordan. He voted against the Hebron agreement.</p>
<p>You get my point right? (btw, i am not arab)</p>
<p>I agree to that. Look, I am not trying to defend Sharon, he probably opposes the Idea of a pal state. but what you wrote, even more so strenghen my points: sharon was one of many PM in Israe who all sought peace with the pals while the pals were rulled by one terrorists who didn't want peace with Israel. Sharon probably doesn't want a pal state and Arafat never wanted peace with Israel. look at all the events you wrote, funny is that all those actually did take place even though sharon opposes them - so you see, sharon is the leader for the past 4 years (since 2001)...</p>
<p>Israel did singed peace with egypt (by sharon's mentor and party member actually), Israel did pull out of southern Lebanon (even though Sharon didn't like it), Israel did sign the Oslo agreements (even though Sharon didn't like it, but arafat didn't honor those agreements) and Israel signed peace with Jordan. it's important you notice that about Sharon since that shows you great importance of a diverse and free society, If sharon was in power since forever like arafat in the Pal auth. and no one could resist him, I would be appologizing to every person I know (just like pals should regarding arafat).</p>
<p>DanC, as a citizen of Lebanon, I have seen Sharon's handywork in person. Sabra and Shatila was a massacre...and that was before the creation of Hezbollah. The man is a terrorist...no better than Yasser Arafat. If it wasn't for Israel's illegal invasion of Lebanon in 1982, Hezbollah would never have been created..and now, it is the Lebanese who have to put up with those roughnecks!</p>
<p>As for the peace deals the Palestinians have been offered...they were a start, but they weren't reasonable. Any Palestinian peace deal that does not include half of Jerusalem as its capital and land that extends to the sea is intentionally designed to fail.</p>
<p>Alex, If i am not mistaking Barak offered just about that... Clinton gave it a chapter in his book if i'm not mistaking - even clinton claimed to be shocked when arafat refused.</p>
<p>Israel invated in 1982 because of the tension in the northern (southern, depends from where you look) border and terrorists attacks against Israel originated in Lebanon. obviously Israel shouldn't have stayed there for more than a second later after the operation was over. Sabra and Shatila was a massacre, totally, yet, If i am not mistaking (and correct me if i am wrong), the killing was done by arabs towads arabs, and sharon was held responsible since he "let" one group to go against the other. Is this accurate?</p>
<p>jsut to make sure, did you read what I wrote about Sharon?</p>
<p>Sharon should be help responsible just the same way Bin Laden is held responsible for 9/11. Both incidents were pre-meditated.</p>
<p>DanC1986, I've been following your petty arguments. At one point not too long ago your Location said ISRAEL. I don't know why you removed that but you're definitely not going by facts.</p>
<p>are you refering to Sabra and Shatila?</p>
<p>collegefreak, I am going soly by facts, if there is a fact in which you question i'd be happy to give you a link or perhaps to be prooved wrong - ask mekrob, i once wrote somthing and it wasn't becked up with a relyable link so i admitted to be wrong. and again, being offensive ("petty arguments") doesn't make your claim more convincing so i suggest you keep it clean, if you have nothing relavent to add so stay out of this discussion, if you decide to write your opinion and expalin it in a civilized manner then welcome...</p>
<p>You keep asserting that Israel, despite all its wrongdoings, is the victim of this conflict. Israel continuously displays force in the face of the Palestinians. </p>
<p>Again, they have HELICOPTERs, MISSILES, ADVANCED WEAPONRY. The Palestinians have none of this and are left in the dust as Israel, even when extending peace makes the deal so unfair that Palestine has no choice but to refuse.</p>
<p>These are the facts. You're just showing your opinion.</p>
<p>i don't think i can relate to such simplistic and unexplained argument. It's a pleasure for me to debate with alex since we both give facts and one corrects another, or learns another, or try to convice another in his opinion. you are just giving out your opinion and declears it to be the one absolute truth. that is not discussion. btw, just because you start your calim from "now" (Israel has misslies, helicopters etc) shows you don't really try to understand the complexity of the situation - in 1948 Israel had nothing and was attacked by all arab nations, if they had respected the UN decision in 1948 and establish their country like the UN suggested then the current conflict wouldn't exist. BUT! since this is again, a simplistic claim i don't (unlike you) say:"well, the plas started it at 48' so the are to blame and Israel is right". I always said Israel did many mistakes but you just look at it through a POV narrorwed to what you see now (Israel with strong army and pals with almost no army). see my point?</p>
<p>No DanC, Jerusalem was never part of the agreement...nor was continuous lands extending to the sea. Like I said, it was a reasonable start, but without Jerusalem, Yasser Arafat would never have been able to convinve the Palestinians of the plan.</p>
<p>That's the problem, isn't it? A country cannot simply invade another country because of tension at the border and reported terrorist activities taking place without that country's knowledge. Lebanon was in the middle of a messy civil war...the last thing it needed was to be invaded. And occupying Lebanon only made matters worse. </p>
<p>As for who did the actual killing, it was primarily done by the Kataeb led by a piece of excrement called Hobeika...Lebanese cowards. But Sharon and the Israelis were very much involved in the operation, from strategic and logistical planning to actual supplying of the Lebanese troops and going as far as telling Hobaika what to do...although Sharon will never admit that. Whether he was directly involved or not does not make Sharon any less a terrorist than Yasser Arafat. Too bad too. The peace was actually getting somehwere until he came along. Rabin and Barak were interesting characters who actually seemed willing to make peace. I never understood why Perez never stepped up to the plate.</p>
<p>Guys, this is a very serious subject...and we will never be able to fully agree since both sides have their legitimate points...and their illegitimate points too. Here's a Lebanese joke I found funny to lighten up the mood. I hope you guys enjoy it. </p>
<p>A story is told of a Jewish man who was riding on the subway reading an arabic newspaper. A friend of his, who happened to be riding in the same subway car, noticed this strange phenomenon. Very upset, he approached the newspaper reader: </p>
<p>"Moshe, have you lost your mind? Why are you reading an Arabic newspaper?"</p>
<p>Moshe replied: </p>
<p>"I used to read the Jewish newspaper, but what did I find? Jews being persecuted, Israel being attacked, Jews disappearing through assimilation and intermarriage, Jews living in poverty... So I switched to the Arab newspaper. Now what do I find? Jews own all the banks, Jews control the media, Jews are all rich and powerful, Jews rule the world. Their news is so much better!"</p>
<p>just had to write that. Peres is perhaps one of the greatest politicians of our times, I wish with all my heart that he would be the Israel PM.</p>