1
   

Yasser Arafat Is Dead

 
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:36 pm
Australian PM John Howard gets it:
Quote:
Mr Howard says many people regard Yasser Arafat as a terrorist and it is hard to believe that he could not have done more to restrain militant Palestinian groups.

"I think history will judge him very harshly for not having seized the opportunity in the year 2000 to embrace the offer that was very courageously made by the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barack, which involved the Israelis agreeing to 90 per cent of what the Palestinians had wanted," he said.
0 Replies
 
Adrian
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:38 pm
That was a different girl.

Quote:
But Israeli media, quoting unnamed soldiers at the scene, said the girl was shot at close range and that the outpost commander even delivered a "coup de grace" to ensure she was dead.
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:41 pm
Ticomaya, i said I didnt remember exact details, why would I make up such an event - I have nothing to gain from it!!!. But it was a documentary shown by Englands Channel 4. The people who filmed it had no selfish interest in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Sorry thats not enough for you - but hey, atleast you got to dodge another issue!!!
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:43 pm
That's like the school girl they shot a couple of weeks ago - thought her satchel was a bomb, or some such. This is one of the difficulties in fighting the kind of war that the Palestinian/Israeli war is.

Thing is LOTS of innocent Palestinians are killed - either through nervous Israeli gunfire, or when they shell a Hamas leader in a busy street - and on and on.

I think it likely that the Israelis seldom actually knowingly target innocent civilians - which, to me, makes an ethical distinction between them and avowed terrorists.

I doubt it makes much difference to the dead, though.
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:43 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Australian PM John Howard gets it:
Quote:
Mr Howard says many people regard Yasser Arafat as a terrorist and it is hard to believe that he could not have done more to restrain militant Palestinian groups.

"I think history will judge him very harshly for not having seized the opportunity in the year 2000 to embrace the offer that was very courageously made by the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barack, which involved the Israelis agreeing to 90 per cent of what the Palestinians had wanted," he said.


Ye just dont get it!!!. No offence to the Aussies but Howard is a f**kin puppet...of course he will say that!!!
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:45 pm
dlowan wrote:
That's like the school girl they shot a couple of weeks ago - thought her satchel was a bomb, or some such. This is one of the difficulties in fighting the kind of war that the Palestinian/Israeli war is.

Thing is LOTS of innocent Palestinians are killed - either through nervous Israeli gunfire, or when they shell a Hamas leader in a busy street - and on and on.

I think it likely that the Israelis seldom actually knowingly target innocent civilians - which, to me, makes an ethical distinction between them and avowed terrorists.

I doubt it makes much difference to the dead, though.


Lowan are you serious when you suggest that the Israelis dont know the risk to civilians when they fire a fookin rocket into a civilian area? Kop on will you!!!
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:46 pm
gav wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Australian PM John Howard gets it:
Quote:
Mr Howard says many people regard Yasser Arafat as a terrorist and it is hard to believe that he could not have done more to restrain militant Palestinian groups.

"I think history will judge him very harshly for not having seized the opportunity in the year 2000 to embrace the offer that was very courageously made by the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barack, which involved the Israelis agreeing to 90 per cent of what the Palestinians had wanted," he said.


Ye just dont get it!!!. No offence to the Aussies but Howard is a f**kin puppet...of course he will say that!!!


Lol - none taken!!!

But, in this, I do not think Howard is a puppet. I think that is great rhetoric, and something I want to believe, cos I despise where his leadership has taken us, in lots of instances.

However, I think his genuine and long held beliefs are guiding him - (though I think he holds his tongue when he disagrees with American policy way too much - and I think he is getting his political rocks off by cosying up to Bush - yecccchhh.)
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:46 pm
gav wrote:
Ticomaya, i said I didnt remember exact details, why would I make up such an event - I have nothing to gain from it!!!. But it was a documentary shown by Englands Channel 4. The people who filmed it had no selfish interest in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Sorry thats not enough for you - but hey, atleast you got to dodge another issue!!!


Hold up. I never accused you of making anything up. And you never said you didn't remember details - you said you couldn't remember the channel or the name of the program. I thought you would remember the basics of whether you watched a video of this killing, or just a retelling of the story. Are you saying you forgot those details?
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:48 pm
gav wrote:
dlowan wrote:
That's like the school girl they shot a couple of weeks ago - thought her satchel was a bomb, or some such. This is one of the difficulties in fighting the kind of war that the Palestinian/Israeli war is.

Thing is LOTS of innocent Palestinians are killed - either through nervous Israeli gunfire, or when they shell a Hamas leader in a busy street - and on and on.

I think it likely that the Israelis seldom actually knowingly target innocent civilians - which, to me, makes an ethical distinction between them and avowed terrorists.

I doubt it makes much difference to the dead, though.


Lowan are you serious when you suggest that the Israelis dont know the risk to civilians when they fire a fookin rocket into a civilian area? Kop on will you!!!


Not at all - I am sure they know the risks - and I think they often ruthlessly pursue their policies in great disregard of the very likely results - what I am saying is that I do not think they deliberately target civilians as a means of instilling terror.
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:49 pm
Two years ago I found a site listing statistics showing not only the numbers of children killed or injured on both sides, but also in the case of gunfire where the bullets had hit.

An alarmingly high number of Palestinian children injured or killed had been hit in the head, and several more in the central torso. This suggests the Israeli's shoot to kill. A friend of mine with a diametrically oposite wiewpoint thought it was all because a lot of palestinian children injured but not killed never made it innto the statistics. They would be tended to at home possibly by a visiting doctor. Also the confusion and flood of injured people folowing an incursion would allow a lot of those who did seek proffesional care to escape the statistics. Bodies are still around when the dust clears.

His explanation makes sense but it still makes me wonder. Site doesn't exist anymore. Can't really vouch for it as a source either, I just remember thinking it credible at the time.

Anyway, several accounts of Israeli soldiers shooting palestinian children unprovoked or relatively unprovoked exist. In som cases there is an explanation, in other cases there is none. I remember a video of some casual stuff going on in an apartment, hearing a single shot, camera turning to look out the window, and seing a single child laying in the middle of an open area, other children scatterign. No sign of the shooter or of any militants on the video. Child survived, bullet matched the type used by the IDF. Doesn't constitute proof though.

Israel always denies these charges, and I don't think a single soldier has been reprimanded. Not surprising though, as even if the Israeli's uncovered such a crime they would likely cover it up to avoid the bad publicity.

I think the incident gav mentions was shown to be an accident on some thread in International news a while back. Some firefight outside, and a stray bullet enters a classroom. At least that was the Israeli story.

If I were you I would not try to make the case that no Israeli has ever murdured a palestinian child unprovoked, I would moderate the statement to say that it is not a common practice. I'm quite sure at least some instances has occured.


I don't usually debate this stuff as I really consider it to be inconsequential to the conclution I reach about this war. I like to focus on who demands what.

If I were to attack an Israeli claim to moral highground in terms of how fighting is carried out I would probably attack them for using collective punishment, especially in their early years. Best example I've got is a newspaperclipping where it is reported that, folowing a suecide attack by two men with guns, (this was before the time of suecide bombers) killing 11 (i think) settlers in a settlement in gaza, Israel proceeded to have the navy bobmbard the refugeecamp these people came from for two days. (there had been numerous other attacks from the same camp earlier)

The bombardment was random, and the camp had a population numbering in the thousands.

There was no attempt to persuade the civilian population to leave the camp prior to bombardment, which was initiated without warning.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:50 pm
dlowan wrote:
That's like the school girl they shot a couple of weeks ago - thought her satchel was a bomb, or some such. This is one of the difficulties in fighting the kind of war that the Palestinian/Israeli war is.

Thing is LOTS of innocent Palestinians are killed - either through nervous Israeli gunfire, or when they shell a Hamas leader in a busy street - and on and on.

I think it likely that the Israelis seldom actually knowingly target innocent civilians - which, to me, makes an ethical distinction between them and avowed terrorists.

I doubt it makes much difference to the dead, though.


Very true.

And Arafat's role in the deaths of countless innocent Palestinians and Isrealis over the past 30+ years is without question.
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:52 pm
Einherjar, that is commendable research but unfortunately it won't prove enough for some people on this site. See what you want to see and hear what you want to hear - seems to be the MO of some in here. And as I daid to Ticoyama: I defy you to try and defend this!!!

F**k this...

Oiche mhaith mo chara!!!
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:57 pm
gav wrote:
Einherjar, that is commendable research but unfortunately it won't prove enough for some people on this site. See what you want to see and hear what you want to hear - seems to be the MO of some in here. And as I daid to Ticoyama: I defy you to try and defend this!!!


It is, indeed, very interesting research.

Do you believe the Israelis purposely target civilians as a strategy, Gav?

Just say they do not - ethically, as opposed to practically, do you think that makes a difference?

I tend to believe it does - though I am sure, as I said, that it makes no difference to the dead - so I teeter around the thought...

Thing is - whatever the rights and wrongs, Israel ain't going anywhere.

A serious question is - could Arafat have realised this, and, in recognition of brutal reality, whether he liked it or not, done more to make a peace process happen - and get his people less dead and dying, and more able to live a normal life???

I believe that he could.

I think he sacrificed them on the altar of ideology - and sometimes that is a sacrifice that achieves worse than nothing.

What do you think? In all reason.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 11:58 pm
Einherjar wrote:
If I were you I would not try to make the case that no Israeli has ever murdured a palestinian child unprovoked, I would moderate the statement to say that it is not a common practice. I'm quite sure at least some instances has occured.


I would never try to make that case. I'm sure there have been unprovoked IDF attacks on Palestinian children. But as you say, I think it is isolated, definitely not a common practice, and most certainly not condoned by Israeli government.

On the other hand, Arafat and the PLO/PA condoned and encouraged terrorism.

In your statistical analysis of number of children killed on both sides, what percentage of the Isreali children were killed by pieces of shrapnel exploding from the bomb of a suicide bomber?
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:01 am
dLowan go research Padraig Pearse's idea of "blood sacrifice". This is as far as Arafat went, he didn't IMO sacrifice innocents.

Once again Oiche mhaith.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:01 am
gav wrote:
dLowan go research Padraig Pearse's idea of "blood sacrifice". This is as far as Arafat went, he didn't IMO sacrifice innocents.

Once again Oiche mhaith.


We disagree. Good night.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:07 am
gav wrote:
dLowan go research Padraig Pearse's idea of "blood sacrifice". This is as far as Arafat went, he didn't IMO sacrifice innocents.

Once again Oiche mhaith.


Do you think his policies have nothing to do with the deaths of innocent Palestinians at the hands of Israelis? If he could have recognised reality - as even the IRA, it seems, have done - would there be fewer of his own folk dead and hopeless?

I am not assuaging the Israelis of guilt - I genuinely want to know what you think - without us needing to descend into polarities - I am really exploring this issue - and I do not think black/white helps anyone, anywhere...
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:12 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Einherjar wrote:
If I were you I would not try to make the case that no Israeli has ever murdured a palestinian child unprovoked, I would moderate the statement to say that it is not a common practice. I'm quite sure at least some instances has occured.


I would never try to make that case. I'm sure there have been unprovoked IDF attacks on Palestinian children. But as you say, I think it is isolated, definitely not a common practice, and most certainly not condoned by Israeli government.


But I have never been able to find evidence that any Israeli soldier has been punished for such an offense, which would suggest they might be sweeping it under the rug. None of the people trying to proove me wrong have come up with anything either, other than the sugestion that the IDF might be punishing people, but keeping it from the media for PR purpouses.

Quote:
On the other hand, Arafat and the PLO/PA condoned and encouraged terrorism.


So did Sharon and Irgun.

Quote:
In your statistical analysis of number of children killed on both sides, what percentage of the Isreali children were killed by pieces of shrapnel exploding from the bomb of a suicide bomber?


(NB I just found it on the web, its not like I did the research)

In newer times, the vast majority. Before that there was more gunfire. The proportion of children to adults had also drifted toewards more children as time passed.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:15 am
Hmmmm...

"If an architect could be ascribed to the ensuing mayhem, it would be poet and schoolteacher Padraig Pearse, who won his co-conspirators over to an ideology of "blood sacrifice"---the notion that if a small cache of committed men died public martyrs' deaths, then the island's entire population would join in the struggle for independence."


"After all, why does a supposedly democratic party need to hang on to guns and bombs if it truly is a democratic party? Like lots of simple questions in Ireland the real answer is complex and mired in myth, murder and political strategy.

The first part of the answer lies in history and the actions of the man the present Irish Republic, and the Provisionals, revere as the founding father of the State. When Padraig Pearse, and his doomed rag-tag rebel army, took over the General Post Office on O?Connell Street in Dublin at Easter in 1916 and walked outside to proclaim an Irish republic, he wasn?t trumpeting the greatness of parliamentary politics.

The Easter Proclamation was, and is, a chilling semifascistic rant that is heavy on the power of arms, blood sacrifice and dead children to bring a united Ireland into being. Killing ?alien? British soldiers was, Pearse declared, the ?fundamental right? of all true Irish republicans. Guns and bombs were the way forward.

In the end, Pearse got what he wanted, a honourable execution by baffled British Army generals, but his poisonous legacy lived on, inspiring generation after generation of young Irishmen to take up the gun.

The proclamation is still read out, usually by a child, at every republican Easter commemoration, traditionally held at the graveside of dead IRA volunteers. Peace process or no peace process, there will be the same bitter words at Easter 2003 as there were in 1916."


Not too impressed yet, Gav. Got anything to add?

And - 'tis not just a small group of committed men dying in palestine.
0 Replies
 
Moishe3rd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:19 am
Hi ho.
In case anyone is interested in the biography of Arafat the Dead But Unmourned, this Was His Life (so to speak):

Key Events in Yasir Arafat's Terrorist Career
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/24/2024 at 08:26:20