|
Grex > Agora41 > #125: Peace plan details, from Camp David to Taba | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 173 responses total. |
mdw
|
|
response 75 of 173:
| 
May 24 03:15 UTC 2002 |
"Barbary Coast: north Africa states of Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and
Tripoli where Muslim beys, deys, pashas, sheiks, et cetera held sway as
pirates aka corsairs; pirates put down
...
From http://www.xservicemen.com/glossary.htm
"THE ARAB League was established in 1945. It has 22 members: Algeria,
Bahrain, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya,
Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia,
Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen."
From http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/league.htm
I don't know klg's geography, but as far as I can tell, it's generally
accepted Arabs haven't been confined to the Arabian penninsula for the
past 1000 years, and it was only with some difficulty that the spanish
kept them from occupying most of spain. Indeed, it was the successful
conclusion of their campaign that the spanish were able to bankroll
Columbus's "scientific" expedition to the new world (aka "get rich off
the natives quick".)
It seems Samuel Clemens visited Palestine in 1867. A random chapter is here:
http://www.shechem.org/machon/mtwain/49.htm
the only residents he mentions in this particular chapter are bedouins,
a nomadic sort of arab. By modern standards, of course, Clemens was not
at all PC.
Bedouins are further described in
http://lexicorient.com/e.o/bedouins.htm
It seems they started out in Arabia, but spread out over north africa.
There are, of course, many other sorts of Arabs.
A modern Israeli perspective on Bedouins can be found here:
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/Bedouin.html
Basically, they're still to be found in Israel [also], and supposedly
their numbers have increased quite a bit, despite (or perhaps because)
of various difficulities described in the site.
Actually, american blacks have some interesting genetic differences from
african blacks. Many of their ancestors came over in very crowded ship
holes with limited water. Some died, some survived, selection took
place. I can't remember what the difference was, exactly, but I think
it was something to do with high blood pressure, sodium/salt, or some
such.
|
lk
|
|
response 76 of 173:
|
May 24 06:02 UTC 2002 |
So the "selection" was in the ships -- but not in the hundreds of years
since? Perhaps the same was true in Israel? Those who didn't heed Arab
calls to abandon the country (lest they be considered "collaborators"
and swept into the sea along with the Jews by the invading Arab armies)
were those who were more inclined to live in peace with the Jews.
Maybe those who were recent arrivals, not realizing that Arab governments
would not allow them return to their previous homes but would lock them
up in "refugee" camps for generations, were those who were more willing
to quit -- most without ever having seen an Israeli soldier.
As for the Bedouins of Israel, here's some info from the site you mention:
a comparison of the situation of the Bedouin in Israel to that in Arab
countries will show that Israeli Bedouin enjoy conditions that their
brethren lack, mainly in two areas: welfare and land ownership.
The Bedouin population has increased tenfold since the establishment
of the State (1948), due to a high natural increase - about 5% - which
is unparalleled in Israel, or elsewhere in the Middle East. A high
fertility rate related to traditional social values regarding size
of family and/or tribe as a political advantage, as well as modern
health and medical services with easy access, which reduced infant
mortality and increased life expectancy, are responsible for this
figure.
Within a single generation, the Bedouin of Israel have succeeded in
reducing illiteracy from 95% to 25%; those still illiterate are aged
55 and above.
The Bedouin in Galilee and the Jezreel valley, numbering about
50,000, unlike those in the Negev and in the Central region, hail
from the Syrian desert. At the beginning of the century their
nomadic way of life and militancy put them in a position to harass
villages and demand tribute, giving them a sense of superiority over
the fellahin (farmers). During the British Mandate the Galilee
Bedouin were encouraged to purchase small plots of land and such
purchases were recorded in the Land Registry as legal possession.
Towards the end of the British Mandate and during the struggle for
the establishment of the State of Israel, many Bedouin joined the
Jewish forces, believing that the Jewish state would be generous to
them. This also explains the continued good relations after the
establishment of the State, as manifested, first and foremost, in
volunteering for the security forces and serving on the front lines;
volunteering is considered by the Bedouin to be part of their
blood-pact with the State of Israel.
Sure hope you weren't thinking that the Bedouins were Canaanites, but
is this what you are terming "selection"? (and not the sinister suggestions
you made previously.)
|
bdh3
|
|
response 77 of 173:
|
May 24 07:27 UTC 2002 |
More irrelevent chatter. Sure in general the arabs in Israel
probably live better than arabs in the occupied territories.
Just like blacks in the USA probably live better than blacks
in Africa. Doesn't excuse descrimination/oppression in
either the USA or Israel. And it also doesn't matter what
percentage of Israeli colonists in the west bank live 'just
over the border' the fact is they live over the border.
Look at a map sometime Leeron, doesn't matter population wise,
the fact is that currently Israeli colonists are pretty much
evenly and tactically/strategically distributed through out
the west bank 'protected' by IDF forces, driving on Israeli
roads supervised by IDF chokepoints/checkpoints. That is
a geographic fact that no matter what spin you put on it is
nonetheless a fact. (I'm sure if you dispute that fact
Aaron will be glad to repost the URLs.) It is a legitimate
tactic of an occupation force to behave such. It is not
a legitimate way for one nation to behave towards another.
(The reasoning the PRC uses re Tibet is very similar to Israel
towards the occupied territories - most supporters of Israel
I suspect oppose the PRC re Tibet)
|
other
|
|
response 78 of 173:
|
May 24 12:57 UTC 2002 |
Who ther doggy! In what war of aggression against China was the
territory of Tibet captured and held to prevent its use as a strategic
launch point for attacks against Chinese people and cities?
|
bdh3
|
|
response 79 of 173:
|
May 24 13:37 UTC 2002 |
Who ther doggy! Why do you think the PRC is really in Tibet?
I *did* say it was similar, not the same.
|
lk
|
|
response 80 of 173:
|
May 24 14:42 UTC 2002 |
Brian, what "border" are you talking about? The CEASE-FIRE lines where
the armies happened to be in 1948? Lines that the 1949 Armistice agreements
state are not permanent boundaries? The point of UNSCR 242 is that final
borders must be NEGOTIATED. (The internationally recognized border, at
present, is the Jordan River between Israel and Jordan and the Egyptian-
Israeli border at the edge of Gaza.)
If part of Tibet remained independent and part was occupied by China,
and then China attacked Tibet in an effort to destroy its independence
but lost the section it previously and illegally occupied, would you claim
that Tibet was occupying Tibet? That Tibetians from independent Tibet
couldn't "colonize" the section of Tibet that was illegally occupied by
China -- but that ethnic Chinese who migrated to Tibet in recent memory
were entitled to self-determination?
|
mdw
|
|
response 81 of 173:
|
May 24 18:30 UTC 2002 |
Arguments crossing borders. Geographical spaghetti spills like violated
intestines. Dates flung like holy orbs. People wander aimlessly to &
fro, exterminating, mixing, breeding. Here & there a flag pops up,
always a different color, only to get plowed under, only to pop up
elsewhere, changed yet unchanging. The will of many depends on the will
of few. But which way the dependency? What does it all mean?
|
bdh3
|
|
response 82 of 173:
|
May 25 05:51 UTC 2002 |
re#80: Who ther doggy. First off, the current 'border' is I
will grant you rather nebulous in many peoples minds although
I am not sure just how well 'internationally recognized' the
Israeli border being the jordan river is. The fact is that the
vast majority of Israeli colonys inside the occupied territories
hold land that no matter how flexible you are exist outside 'the
border' before Israel moved in in 1967. Thats a fact you cannot
dispute.
As for PRC and Tibet I was merely making the observation that
the official justifications today for that situation seem pretty
similar to Israeli justifications today and that the irony is
many supporters of Israel are at the same time supporters of
an 'independent' Tibet. At least the PRC is more honest about
it.
re#81: Wow. Don't crush that dwarf, hand me the pliers.
|
lk
|
|
response 83 of 173:
|
May 25 06:31 UTC 2002 |
Brian, the point was that "'the border' before Israel move in in 1967"
was merely a cease-fire line. Commenting on UNSCR 242, then President
Johnston stated:
We are not the ones to say where other nations should draw
lines between them that will assure each the greatest security.
It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of June 4,
1967 will not bring peace.
Lord Caradon, author of 242, stated:
It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to
its positions of June 4, 1967, because those positions were
undesirable and artificial.
So forgive me if I don't accept your rendition of what was conventional
wisdom 35 years ago: you are attaching importance to a line that in its
time was not treated with such importance.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 84 of 173:
|
May 25 07:04 UTC 2002 |
My point is that it is irrelevent where exactly the Israel border
is finally decided up +/- some feet of 1967. My point is that currently
the Israeli colonies exist through out the occupied territories such
that unless one actually does draw the final border *today* *at* the
jordan river, the vast majority of them have to go.
I would suggest that the Israeli colonies - 'like a metasticized
cancer in the body of the nacient palastinian state' - are the
biggest single impediment to peace. One might even go so far as
to suggest they are the root cause of the current unpleasantness.
Consider yer current PLA 16-year old non-citizen of anywhere. He
looks out in any direction and sees Israeli colonist living far
better than he backed up by hugely overpowering military and
roads he cannot travel on. Sure and he doesn't even know that
his 'authority' is systematically looting the aid money that should
be going to make his lot better. All he can see are the Israeli
colonies. No wonder he straps on a bomb and tries for a little
terminal self expression.
|
lk
|
|
response 85 of 173:
|
May 25 18:25 UTC 2002 |
Damn, I hope people in Detroit's ghettos don't look out to Ann
Arbor and engage in similar "terminal self expression" at the
Necto, at Zingermann's, at Briarwood, etc.
As for "The obstacle", well no. At Camp David Israel agreed to
dismantle the majority of settlements. That wasn't enough for Arafat.
The reason Jews living under Arab rule is a big deal (cancer?) is
that everyone knows that their lives would be at great risk. This
is what you want to call "peace"? That is the problem that makes
the simple solution -- that these Jews would become PA citizens, just
like Arabs in Israel are Israeli citizens -- unworkable.
|
scott
|
|
response 86 of 173:
|
May 25 21:24 UTC 2002 |
I don't think Ann Arborites need to worry about suicide bombers from Detroit,
at least as long as there's no Ann Arbor Defense Force setting up checkpoints
and closing down roads inside Detroit. :)
|
mdw
|
|
response 87 of 173:
|
May 26 00:47 UTC 2002 |
The notion of "borders" in the middle east is very much a 20th century
invention. For that matter, the notion of nation-states is pretty much
a 20th century development as well.
|
lk
|
|
response 88 of 173:
|
May 26 16:24 UTC 2002 |
Except for one minor thing, Scott: the checkpoints were a RESPONSE to
terrorism. If a bomber from Detroit blew up the farmer's market yesterday,
and Whole Foods last week, don't you think we might see checkpoints
along M-14, I-94 and Michigan Ave?
|
scott
|
|
response 89 of 173:
|
May 26 16:42 UTC 2002 |
Leeron, how long has the IDF been setting up checkpoints in the occupied
territories? Quite a bit longer than the recent (within the last two years)
increase in terrorism.
|
slynne
|
|
response 90 of 173:
|
May 26 17:30 UTC 2002 |
What came first, the chicken or the egg?
|
mdw
|
|
response 91 of 173:
|
May 27 03:31 UTC 2002 |
The dinosaur. Apparently they still roam the middle east.
|
russ
|
|
response 92 of 173:
|
May 27 04:09 UTC 2002 |
Re #43: You mean, the Caspian Sea? (It ain't the things you don't
know that hurt you, it's the things you know that ain't so.)
I'm not in favor of making ourselves dependent on oil from the Caspian.
It's just going to send money to an alternate set of dictators, and I
doubt that the results will be all that different. I'd rather see a
big conservation/conversion program instead, but I don't have the pull
to make that happen; the path of least resistance is to use oil until
it becomes so expensive that conversion is not an option.
Re #50: After hearing your neighbors say that they want to push you
into the sea for 50 years, wouldn't you be ready to return the sentiment?
|
scott
|
|
response 93 of 173:
|
May 27 04:15 UTC 2002 |
Got a cite for that "push into the sea" quote, Russ?
|
bdh3
|
|
response 94 of 173:
|
May 27 05:12 UTC 2002 |
re#93: That language or pretty similar is part of the PLO charter.
To this day Arafat hasn't removed the language nor in arabic even
repudiated it. Just because Arafat is a bad guy doesn't excuse
Israel and the IDF when they misbehave.
|
lk
|
|
response 95 of 173:
|
May 27 10:01 UTC 2002 |
Sperpetratecott, there were NO checkpoints and NO Israeli soldiers within Area
A in September 2000, when the intifadah began. There was NO "occupation";
administration of these *autonomous* areas was in the hands of Arafat's PA.
Recall Aaron's criticism, an echo of the Nation's Rabbi Lerner, that the
worst thing that Israel has done to the Palestinian Arabs was to foist
Arafat upon them. It's a valid criticism, except for one thing: Israel
attempted to avoid Arafat but was forced to deal with him by international
pressure at the Madrid conference (prior to Oslo). Elections were called
for and Israel hoped that another viable (local) candidate would step forward.
None dared to do so and Arafat was elected, forcing Israel to deal with him.
Look, your first "justification" for suicide bombings was economic disparity.
Yet if people from Detroit's ghettos would carry out suicide bombings at the
food co-op and the Blind Pig, you'd probably be calling for checkpoints.
Once these checkpoints were established would you argue that they were the
cause of the suicide bombings?
If the Detroit police said it was powerless against the "gangs" who were
behind the bombing (even as the City Council funded them, the mayor called
for a million martyrs to march on Ann Arbor and many gang members were also
part of the police force, and if on the rare occasion that gang members were
arrested they would be released a few days later), what would you do?
Would you blame the people of Ann Arbor, saying they must have done something
to deserve this?
[Per capita, for every officer in Detroit there are about 4 in the PA -- about
40,000 total as against only a few thousand terrorists.]
|
scott
|
|
response 96 of 173:
|
May 27 13:29 UTC 2002 |
Re 94: Beady, I'm going to need a *quote* about "pushing the Jews into the
sea". Shouldn't be too hard to find... provided it actually exists.
|
lk
|
|
response 97 of 173:
|
May 27 17:38 UTC 2002 |
Today we can add Stucci's to the list of homicide bomber targets.
While so far there are "only" 3 dead, many of the ~50 wounded are
children and infants.
Scott, perhaps if you familiarized yourself with the conflict you
would be well acquainted with this slogan (once again we see that
a Grexer wants to dispute what even Arabs grant as true. In fact, in
another discussion forum, one Arab participant told me I had better
"learn to swim" while another was "kind" enough to "toss" me an
inflatable duck with a Star of David & Swastika on it).
|
scott
|
|
response 98 of 173:
|
May 27 17:46 UTC 2002 |
C'mon, Leeron, you must have a source for that alleged quote. Care to
enlighten the rest of us?
|
mdw
|
|
response 99 of 173:
|
May 28 01:19 UTC 2002 |
There we go with "area A" again. Isn't that supposed to be the red
painted outline of where the boxes aren't supposed to go in some
warehouse in the american south-west? The one next door to the flying
saucer parts?
|