Jophiel wrote:
there isn't much the Palestinians can offer us
Us no, but they've been providing the most effective propaganda weapon imaginable to the other side, for the last 40 years.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Negotiations with Hamas
Negotiations with HamasFollow
Us no, but they've been providing the most effective propaganda weapon imaginable to the other side, for the last 40 years.
Smasharoo wrote:
"Terrorism" is the only effective tactic for smaller poorer groups to advocate their beliefs against larger, richer groups.
Not even sure how to respond to this Smash.
And I suppose "robbing liquor stores" is the only way that poor Totem-hued men can get ahead in the white mans world?
That's rationalization and you know it. Or at least I hope you do...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
"Terrorism" is the only effective tactic for smaller poorer groups to advocate their beliefs against larger, richer groups.
Not even sure how to respond to this Smash.
And I suppose "robbing liquor stores" is the only way that poor Totem-hued men can get ahead in the white mans world?
That's rationalization and you know it. Or at least I hope you do...
You can't have just typed that with a straight face.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Not even sure how to respond to this Smash.
No shit. I have read your other posts, you know.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
With regard to the OP: Well in my opinion you have to ask the question as to whether or not negotiating with Hamas will improve the situation? Hamas are a legitimate politicial party with extreme views. Views that were recently endorsed by the majority of the Palestinian people. Side-lining them is not going to resolve the situation indeed probably make them more attractive to people already feeling pretty alienated.
You also have to be aware that to the Palestinian people Hamas are not terrorists but freedom fighters. If you declare you have no interest in including them in negotiations because they are terrorists then you are making it perfectly clear even before you begin that you side with the other party.
If you want an example of parties who previously held extreme, terrorist ideals now actually 'working' together then you have to look no further than the DUP and Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland.
Edited, Jul 23rd 2007 7:08pm by dashwoe
You also have to be aware that to the Palestinian people Hamas are not terrorists but freedom fighters. If you declare you have no interest in including them in negotiations because they are terrorists then you are making it perfectly clear even before you begin that you side with the other party.
If you want an example of parties who previously held extreme, terrorist ideals now actually 'working' together then you have to look no further than the DUP and Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland.
Edited, Jul 23rd 2007 7:08pm by dashwoe
dashwoe wrote:
Hamas are not terrorists but freedom fighters.
"Fighting for Freedom" doesn't make targetting random civilians in cafés, bus stations, hotels and night clubs sound any more noble, if that's what you were after.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
dashwoe wrote:
With regard to the OP: Well in my opinion you have to ask the question as to whether or not negotiating with Hamas will improve the situation? Hamas are a legitimate politicial party with extreme views. Views that were recently endorsed by the majority of the Palestinian people. Side-lining them is not going to resolve the situation indeed probably make them more attractive to people already feeling pretty alienated.
You also have to be aware that to the Palestinian people Hamas are not terrorists but freedom fighters. If you declare you have no interest in including them in negotiations because they are terrorists then you are making it perfectly clear even before you begin that you side with the other party.
If you want an example of parties who previously held extreme, terrorist ideals now actually 'working' together then you have to look no further than the DUP and Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland.
You also have to be aware that to the Palestinian people Hamas are not terrorists but freedom fighters. If you declare you have no interest in including them in negotiations because they are terrorists then you are making it perfectly clear even before you begin that you side with the other party.
If you want an example of parties who previously held extreme, terrorist ideals now actually 'working' together then you have to look no further than the DUP and Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland.
all valid points, but also IIRC Sinn Fein renouced terrorist activities. after that, then the process for peace was able to start. not before.
Quote:
targetting random civilians in cafés, bus stations, hotels and night clubs sound any more noble
No I agree, but then living in abject squalor since your people were up-rooted is hardly noble either. But then I believe the burden falls upon the British, French and Ottoman empire.
Quote:
Sinn Fein renouced terrorist activities...after that, then the process for peace was able to start. not before.
Not according to the DUP or at least until recent events. Even the British government negotiated with the PIRA during their mainland bombing campaigns.
dashwoe wrote:
No I agree, but then living in abject squalor since your people were up-rooted is hardly noble either. But then I believe the burden falls upon the British, French and Ottoman empire.
Well I think we'd all agree that the British are a cruel race...and no one likes the French...or those other guys.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
dashwoe wrote:
No I agree, but then living in abject squalor since your people were up-rooted is hardly noble either.
Personally, I say no.
Edited, Jul 20th 2007 3:09pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
dashwoe wrote:
Hamas are not terrorists but freedom fighters.
"Fighting for Freedom" doesn't make targetting random civilians in cafés, bus stations, hotels and night clubs sound any more noble, if that's what you were after.
If we're going to do away with violence we can't pick and choose which types of violence are ok and which are not.
If we really want to negotiate peace in the middle east I'd say our chance of success WITHOUT bringing Hamas to the table would be next to nothing.
Seriously though...doubt that Hamas would negotiate with us anyways.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Jophiel wrote:
dashwoe wrote:
No I agree, but then living in abject squalor since your people were up-rooted is hardly noble either.
Personally, I say no.
That's only because you've never lived in abject squallor. Consider it Chicken Soup for the Poor Soul.
@Dashwoe: Pay no attention to the skin puppet known as Singdall, he's so full of **** he has to carry a bucket with him.
...and that would be the point where you and Hamas would diverge.
I do not advocate their methods and given the choice (in their minds) I'm sure they would not want to pursue their goals through such means. But if we ignore them what choice do they have? They have no other forum to voice their discontent than through the bomb.
dashwoe wrote:
...and that would be the point where you and Hamas would diverge.
Quote:
They have no other forum to voice their discontent than through the bomb.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
dashwoe wrote:
singdall wrote:
Sinn Fein renouced terrorist activities...after that, then the process for peace was able to start. not before.
Not according to the DUP or at least until recent events. Even the British government negotiated with the PIRA during their mainland bombing campaigns.
they were in talks IIRC before the bombings and it maintained during the attacks. but the process for peace did not start in ernest until the renouncing of terrorist activities correct?
been a while and i did not follow those bombings all to much back then so my times, dates, and facts could be very off. i still seem to remember the britsh parliament shunning and refusing to talk with "terrorist" during that time as well.
either way, talking with terrorist does nothing but empower them to continue doing more and more violent acts. cutting them off from ALL outside help forces them to deal with the situation. by ALL i mean ALL. financial, political, military, etc... any group, country, gov. that aids a terrorist group should be cut off from everything. if that means full embargoes of a country then so be it. if that means cutting their lines of communication to the outside world, so be it. isolate them truly so they can gain no help from outside forces and cause them to own up to the mess they have created through their crimes against humanity.
In the end the aim for all parties concerned is to resolve the conflict. I think it is foolhardy to discount their input and at the very least we should try to emphathize with the point of view of the majority of the Palestinian people.
Continuing to alienate groups like Hamas will make them all the more the focus for the extremists. I know politicians such as Dr. Rice have to be heard to be saying the morally right thing by western ideals but who benefits from this in the end? Not the Isreali's - the Hamas bombs will continue to explode; not the Palestinians as their elected party will still be pariahs.
dashwoe wrote:
In the end the aim for all parties concerned is to resolve the conflict.
The Hamas Covenant, Article 13 wrote:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."
[...]
There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with.
[...]
There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
"Fighting for Freedom" doesn't make targetting random civilians in cafés, bus stations, hotels and night clubs sound any more noble, if that's what you were after.
Nothing makes it sound more noble, because it's not a noble endeavor. No war is.
No, it's not. The question then becomes "Is intentionally targetting and murdering random civilians a justifiable response to living in abject squallor?"
Personally, I say no.
Murdering random civilians with a cruise missile isn't any less "intentional" or more "justifiable" than suicide bombing, and it certainly isn't any less "terrifying" to think that people who dislike you can literally kill you about as easily as they can think about it.
Terrorism works. It's an effective strategy. It was an effective strategy in 4000 BC, it was an effective strategy in when the Vandals sacked Rome, it was an effective strategy when the US firebombed Tokyo, Dresden, etc. It will continue to be an effective strategy. Effective in getting attention, effective in increasing morale, and while all sides of any conflict engage in it, it has the advantage of not requiring superior military force, being cheap when compared to conventional armed conflict and almost guaranteeing a positive kill/loss ratio.
The absolute only reason it's so reviled by powerful states is that it can be effectively practiced by less powerful ones. This position has absolutely nothing to do with civilians being killed, "evil" or anything else.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
In theory, they'd have the forum of diplomacy if they could shelve the bombs and stop advocating the destruction of Israel.
They won't. They'll fight for 1000 generations to destroy Israel. This, however, doesn't mean we shouldn't negotiate with them to further our interests in the area. It would mean that we'd have to differentiate our interests from Israel's, though, and therein as they say, lies the rub.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
Murdering random civilians with a cruise missile isn't any less "intentional" or more "justifiable" than suicide bombing, and it certainly isn't any less "terrifying" to think that people who dislike you can literally kill you about as easily as they can think about it.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Article 13 could be read as an affirmation of their right to determine their own destiny and not have it decided by international conferences. It might also be a more direct criticism of the Oslo accord agreed by the then PLO. an accord that Hamas refuses to acknowledge.
Negotiations often start with so called 'insurmountable obstacles' preventing progression. I don't advocate Hamas or their methods. But we should do our best to resolve the problem and that will not be solved unless we attempt to engage all parties.
G'night all.
Read through it and pretend that we're saying it again today because I don't really have the enthusiasm to run through it again.
Do you realize how infrequently I'd post if I didn't rehash things I'd discussed three years ago here??
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
dashwoe wrote:
Article 13 could be read as an affirmation of their right to determine their own destiny and not have it decided by international conferences. It might also be a more direct criticism of the Oslo accord agreed by the then PLO. an accord that Hamas refuses to acknowledge.
When Hamas wants to renounce the violence of its "militant wing" and cut them off, acknowledge Israel's right to co-exist peacefully and engage in open discussion, let me know. Until then, stop pretending that they secretly want to have peaceful chit-chat and this "blowing up pizza parlors" bit is all a big misunderstanding.
There's no "t" in Israel.
Edited, Jul 20th 2007 4:13pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Smasharoo wrote:
Terrorism works. It's an effective strategy. It was an effective strategy in 4000 BC, it was an effective strategy in when the Vandals sacked Rome, it was an effective strategy when the US firebombed Tokyo, Dresden, etc.
Ironically, it was also an effective strategy in creating Israel, through the bombing of the King David Hotel.
Edited, Jul 20th 2007 10:22pm by RedPhoenixxx
Recent Visitors: 298
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (298)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Negotiations with Hamas
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC