Bush backs down from the Road Map

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Dreadsox said:
Hello, it is a war. Do we put soldiers on trial before we fire? No.

So do we kill drug-dealers without a trial because there is a war against drugs?

This was not some innocent Palestianian walking down the street.

I agree 100%!
But i think the Israeli government and military should be powerful enough to imprison terrorists instead of killing them without a fair trial.

Klaus
 
Klaus said:


So do we kill drug-dealers without a trial because there is a war against drugs?

I do not think some children riding on a bus being blown up is the same as someone chosing to buy drugs from a drug dealer.

Sorry....
 
Klaus said:
But i think the Israeli government and military should be powerful enough to imprison terrorists instead of killing them without a fair trial.

How many men are you willing to put at risk to "arrest" this individual? It is not like the locals would respect an arrest and trial of this guy.
 
Dreadsox:
"I do not think some children riding on a bus being blown up is the same as someone chosing to buy drugs from a drug dealer."

Right, but i also don't think that war and terrorism is the same.

nbcrusader:
"How many men are you willing to put at risk to "arrest" this individual? It is not like the locals would respect an arrest and trial of this guy."

As many man as necessary.
It's the job of a country to care about laws, i don't like "wild-west-style" actions.

I think Israel would do a great job if they could stay on "the white side" and sharon wouldn't go to the gray or black areas then the whole world would see that there is only ONE side responsible for the violence down there.
 
I guess I should have asked: How many fatalities would you accept to "arrest" this individual?


I think we have the luxury to care about laws because we live in free, stable societies. Police can lawfully arrest suspects without the fear of attack by an entire community.
 
Dreadsox said:


I do not think some children riding on a bus being blown up is the same as someone chosing to buy drugs from a drug dealer.

Sorry....

Some would argue against this. How long has the war on drugs lasted and how many casualties has it taken? I don't agree with how either one of these "wars" are being approached, but many would have argued they are the same.
 
"I guess I should have asked: How many fatalities would you accept to "arrest" this individual?


I think we have the luxury to care about laws because we live in free, stable societies. Police can lawfully arrest suspects without the fear of attack by an entire community."

He had been imprisoned 3 times by Isreal prior to this. The difference is they felt restrained by the US and the international community on their methods.
Sharon has had no action taken against him for his prior tactics of retaliation, including the death of an American girl, not even an investigation by the US on her death, so why should he follow the rule of law.
Bush by silence condones his methods.
 
nbcrusader said:


How many men are you willing to put at risk to "arrest" this individual? It is not like the locals would respect an arrest and trial of this guy.

Israel has already arrested and imprisoned Rantissi on more than one occassion. Doesn't that suggest that "risk" involved in arresting him wasn't the main reason for Israel's decision to assassinate rather than arrest him?
 
Scarletwine said:
I'm aware of the US militia's history and I do not find the comparison absuird from King George's point of view.

BowlingforFallujah-X.gif
 
Last edited:
IMO What a bunch of crap. I understand you have great compassion for hte soldiers being one yourself, however, understanding the feeling of the Iraqis doesn't mean we want our soldiers to be hurt. I have loved ones there. We shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Now our "coalition of the bribed" are backing out and we will be alone with the freakin mess.

A few viewpoints that are only hurting the situation. I know you dislike Kerry but Bush has only made things more unstable in the region. He could f**k up a wet dream. (expression only I'm a girl).

Mubarak: Arabs Hate U.S. More Than Ever
Tue Apr 20, 2004 09:00 AM ET

PARIS (Reuters) - Arabs in the Middle East hate the United States more than ever following the invasion of Iraq and Israel's assassination of two Hamas leaders, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said in comments published Tuesday.
Mubarak, who visited the United States last week, told French newspaper Le Monde that Washington's actions had caused despair, frustration and a sense of injustice in the Arab world.

"Today there is hatred of the Americans like never before in the region," he said in an interview given during a stay in France, where he met President Jacques Chirac Monday.

He blamed the hostility partly on U.S. support for Israel, which assassinated Hamas leader Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi in a missile strike in the Gaza Strip Saturday weeks after killing his predecessor, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

"At the start some considered the Americans were helping them. There was no hatred of the Americans. After what has happened in Iraq, there is unprecedented hatred and the Americans know it," Mubarak said.

"People have a feeling of injustice. What's more, they see (Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon acting as he pleases, without the Americans saying anything. He assassinates people who don't have the planes and helicopters that he has."
...

Analysis / Creating a Bantustan in Gaza

By Akiva Eldar

South Africa will be very interested in the Israeli disengagement plan published yesterday. The political, military, and economic aspects of the plan for the Gaza Strip and the enclave in the northern West Bank are amazingly similar to the homelands, one of the last inventions of the white minority in South Africa to perpetuate its rule over the black majority. The black and colored people that were concentrated in 10 isolated enclaves had limited autonomy, but their economic well-being depended on the good will of the white government.
The disengagement plan's states "there will no longer be a basis for the claim that the Gaza Strip is occupied territory (Article 2.A.3). Thus Israel releases itself from legal-political, moral, and economic responsibility for the Strip and transforms it into an independent entity. However the plan removes only the responsibility, together with its few citizens and its many soldiers. Other than that, control of the Gaza Strip stays in its hands. Israel will continue to control all international passages (Article 2.A.1, and Article 12). The "independent" entity will not be allowed to invite international forces to exercise control unless Israel - which will no longer be responsible for 1.3 million Gazans - agrees. Although Israel has ensured that the Palestinians have no say in the disengagement plan, it demands that Gaza be demilitarized, stating that the presence of weapons "is not in accordance with the existing agreements" (3.A.2).

Basic services (water, electricity, fuel, etc.) will remain the same. The perpetuation of these arrangements contradicts the divestment of responsibility stated by the disengagement plan. But it points out that Israel cannot permit a humanitarian disaster.

The most interesting article in the plan concerns the evacuation of the northern West Bank enclave, to allow "transportation contiguity" (2.B.4) for Palestinians. This term is also taken from the South African precedent. The white South Africans, too, thought this would allow them to continue ruling on the ground, building bridges and tunnels for the natives. Only Israel and Taiwan had ties with the homelands. Foment there deteriorated into a series of rebellions, and a decade ago the homelands became part of united South Africa, governed by a black majority.
 
Last edited:
Now all out US santioned assassination. What have we become?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/19/1082357118446.html
Israel to target Hamas in exile
By Ed O'Loughlin, Herald Correspondent In Jerusalem
April 20, 2004

Print this article
Email to a friend



Following this weekend's killing of the Hamas leader, Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi, the Israeli Government plans to resume targeting enemies living in countries beyond its control, according to reports from the Israeli cabinet.

Israeli Army Radio reported that a cabinet minister, Gideon Ezra, told Sunday's meeting the next target would be Hamas's main leader in exile, Khaled Meshaal, who lives in the Syrian capital, Damascus.

"The fate of Khaled Meshaal is the fate of Rantissi," Mr Ezra told the meeting. "The minute we have the operational opportunity we will do this."

The threat comes at a time when Israel feels it has received a free hand from its main ally, the US. Sunday's cabinet meeting was the first since last week's summit in Washington, when Israel received US agreement to its demand for the unilateral annexation of Palestinian territory in the West Bank and its denial of any right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes in Israel.

According to reports in the Israeli media, Sunday's cabinet meeting duly moved to reinstate and accelerate the Israeli Government's original planned route for its barrier inside the West Bank.

Plans to loop the barrier deep inside the occupied territory to carve out big Jewish settlement blocks were dropped before a recent hearing on the legality of the project at the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

According to media reports, the salients into the West Bank have all been reinstated following President George Bush's written assurance that Israel will be able to keep big settlement blocks in any final solution.

Palestinians, human rights groups and United Nations reports have all strongly criticised the route of the barrier, saying it amounts to the unilateral annexation of large chunks of Palestinian territory and will severely disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands of West Bankers who will be cut off from jobs, homes, schools, farmland, schools and hospitals.

Israel says that the 600-kilometre complex of walls, fences and cleared fire zones is designed solely to prevent attacks, which have killed hundreds of Israeli citizens.

The Israeli Government announced last month that it no longer felt bound by a promise to the US not to kill the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, who remains under de facto house arrest in his office in Ramallah.

Israeli ministers have also made numerous threats to assassinate the leader of the Lebanese Islamic resistance group, Hezbollah, which Israel, the US and Australia - but few other countries - officially regard as a terrorist organisation.
 
"IMO What a bunch of crap. I understand you have great compassion for hte soldiers being one yourself, however, understanding the feeling of the Iraqis doesn't mean we want our soldiers to be hurt. I have loved ones there. We shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Now our "coalition of the bribed" are backing out and we will be alone with the freakin mess."

"A few viewpoints that are only hurting the situation. I know you dislike Kerry but Bush has only made things more unstable in the region. He could f**k up a wet dream. (expression only I'm a girl)."


Saddam's regime has been removed from power and if you take a look at what that regime did to the region and Iraq, you'll see the massive benefits for security and stability in the region by having Saddam removed.

Yes, lets pay attention to what Iraqi's have said. The latest polls of Iraqi citizens have shown that the majority approved of the coalitions removal of Saddam and want the coalition to STAY! Most Iraqi people say their lives are better today than they were before the war started in March 2003.
 
Sting,

Do not let facts get in the way of a good argument.....:wink:

Scarletwine,

We agree then that Michael Moore was spewing out a bunch of crap?
 
As for Mubarak.....Fine...hate us...and I fully support the $2 Billion in our tax money not be sent to your country.

See...it is easy...they hate us...support extremist Islam....yet want the $$$$$. Screw em. Lets keep the money here.
 
Dreadsox said:

The neocons just want to institute a different kind of fascism. I'm utterly disillusioned with everyone. Look for "good vs. evil" all you want, but all I see are assholes everywhere. The Middle East can fuck itself; the only reason we don't ignore it into oblivion like Africa is because of oil. I await the coming of hydrogen fuel for this reason alone. And Bush? I haven't believed one word out of that man's mouth since he started campaigning for the first presidency. The fact alone that everyone saw Gulf War II from miles away, both before and after 9/11, means that this campaign isn't all altruistic.

I believe that American soldiers' hearts are in the right place; it is our "commander-in-chief" that I distrust. We all know the ultimate outcome of Iraq--either an Iran-like pseudo-democracy or an Afghanistan-like pseudo-democracy. The only difference will be whether or not the U.S. or an ayatollah pulls the strings behind the curtain.

Melon
 
Dreadsox said:
As for Mubarak.....Fine...hate us...and I fully support the $2 Billion in our tax money not be sent to your country.

See...it is easy...they hate us...support extremist Islam....yet want the $$$$$. Screw em. Lets keep the money here.

That's a bit of an extreme reaction to the comments. :huh:

If you read the article again, you'll notice that Mubarak doesn't give his opinion of the US, but rather makes a comment about public opinion in the Middle East.
 
Dreadsox said:
As for Mubarak.....Fine...hate us...and I fully support the $2 Billion in our tax money not be sent to your country.

See...it is easy...they hate us...support extremist Islam....yet want the $$$$$. Screw em. Lets keep the money here.

The reality, though, is that removing the money will essentially lead to what happened in Haiti with Aristide. Bush knew this; that's why he pulled the money out of Haiti to all but ensure the nation's instability.

The money, of course, will stay put.

Melon
 
At this point...why is it our responsiblity to keep Egypt stable?
 
Dreadsox said:
At this point...why is it our responsiblity to keep Egypt stable?

Why was it our responsibility to keep Iraq stable?

I'll leave it open-ended.

Melon
 
Back to the original topic:

So jaws dropped across Washington when Kerry responded with just one word after host Tim Russert asked him on "Meet the Press" whether he supported Bush's promises to Sharon.

"Yes," Kerry said.

"Completely?" Russert followed.

"Yes," Kerry said again.

Not much ambiguity there. Kerry probably hasn't answered an important question in so few words since his wedding day.


Kerry Skips Nuance on Mideast Policy When It's Needed Most
 
Back
Top Bottom