Political Crossfire Forums

[Venom]

Quote: We will not rest from our Jihad until we are under the olive trees of Rumieh and we have destroyed the dirty black house -- which is called the White House," al-Muhajir said
I guess it's time to pull back again, negotiate and just wait for another attack?
When will the left understand you cannot negotiate with these people.
Just like the people that believe Palestine will be some peaceful utopia if Israel left occupied areas... they would still attack.

[smo69]

I was just about to start a topic on this article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061111/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_061110194349
Looks like you beat me to it with something similar.

I'll add an excerpt from the article for further information on this topic...

Quote: BAGHDAD, Iraq - A new recording Friday attributed to the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq mocked President Bush as a coward whose conduct of the war was rejected at the polls, challenging him to keep U.S. troops in the country to face more bloodshed.

"We haven't had enough of your blood yet," taunted terror chieftain Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, identified as the speaker on the tape.

He gloated over Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's resignation, claimed to have 12,000 fighters under his command who "have vowed to die for God's sake," and said his fighters will not rest until they blow up the White House and occupy Jerusalem.

My opinion is we now know for certain that terrorists are present in Iraq. If this is suppose to be an attack on Bush and you interpret it that way then you are mistaken. This is a threat to all Americans, left and right.

What Al-mufajawirjewrjewrio doesn't realize is that this election was about the dissatisfaction of progress in the war, not the decline in American efforts and morale. The beef that American citizens have with their President is between them and no one else. When Hugo Chavez came to the US during the time when he was addressing the UN, he visted a church in the borough of the Bronx here in NY. Chavez made his comments about the President being "El Diablo." The Bronx borough president, a Democrat, responded with "I don't care what kind of dissatisfactions I have with my President; that's between me and my President, but don't come to my country and walk into my churches insulting my President with disgusting and childish insults such as those."

I think the Democrats have been hiding their Iraq intentions all along. You'd have to be stupid not to see what kind of enemy it is we're dealing with.

[Ellron]

Yes...thats great and all..

Now give me the qoute where a democrat says we should negotiate with Al-Qaeda..

Wait wait

Ill save you 4 or 5 more posts.

YOU CANT!!

[Plato & Socrates]

Venom wrote: Quote: We will not rest from our Jihad until we are under the olive trees of Rumieh and we have destroyed the dirty black house -- which is called the White House," al-Muhajir said
I guess it's time to pull back again, negotiate and just wait for another attack?
When will the left understand you cannot negotiate with these people.
Just like the people that believe Palestine will be some peaceful utopia if Israel left occupied areas... they would still attack.

This is the type of mis-information and mis-direction the A.I.P.A.C loving, pro-Israeli apologist just love to give. The intellectual dishonesty is staggering beyond Belief. This idea that all terrorists have the same goal is absurd. This idea that Al-Qada is equatable with Hezbollah or Hamas is a outright lie. It is a outright lie for political reasons and Israel and many of the diaspora Jews, just love to make this non-sensical link.

Why not throw the Tamil tigers in there as well? Why not throw ETA or the REAL IRA in there as well.
Al-Qada is the enemy, that is the only group for now I would join you in a fight with. Hezbollah is a nasty organisation in some parts. But Hezbollah is a organisation of its time. It would never had existed not for one of Israels, yet again past illegal occupations, this time of Lebanon. Hamas was statrted by Israel in 1973 as a alternative to Arafats PLO/Fatah. Yes all embarrassing and yet another major mis-calulation and blunder by Israel. (surprised are we Venom?) That Hamas was a Israeli creation?

There is for the foreseeable future no dialog we can have with Al-Qada, to reach some sort of political settlement. These guys are just beyond the pale. But your attempt to equate the organisations of the Palestinians with Al-Qada is just dishonest. On numerous occasions The Palestinians have shunned Al-Qada's advances. Your lies belong in the same bin as Saddam Insane was linked to Al-Qada and 9/11.

You hold the same view like many did of Egypt. Are you a student of history? The cries of Egypt was the mortal enemy of the Jews and peace could never be achieved, blah blah blah. It took a semi-brave Israeli leader to give back the land and hey-presto, peace between Israel and Egypt. If people like you had there way. There would be settlements all over the Sinai and people like you would be screaming that Egypt never ever wanted peace etc etc. Give your lies a break Venom just for once. :roll:

[Venom]

Quote: This idea that Al-Qada is equatable with Hezbollah or Hamas is a outright lie
Let's see all 3 groups wish for the destruction of Israel and the United States... seems pretty similar to me. :lol:

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Why not throw the Tamil tigers in there as well? Why not throw ETA or the REAL IRA in there as well.

:lol:

[Plato & Socrates]

Venom wrote: Quote: This idea that Al-Qada is equatable with Hezbollah or Hamas is a outright lie
Let's see all 3 groups wish for the destruction of Israel and the United States... seems pretty similar to me. :lol:

Simplistic soundbites and no meat to your arguement.

[cap'n queasy]

It's the truth, simple or not. :lol:

There's no real difference, at least not one that matters to me.

[Saracen]

Plato & Socrates wrote: Venom wrote: Quote: This idea that Al-Qada is equatable with Hezbollah or Hamas is a outright lie
Let's see all 3 groups wish for the destruction of Israel and the United States... seems pretty similar to me. :lol:

Simplistic soundbites and no meat to your arguement.

Certainly. Hamas and Hizbullah were formed out of terrorism towards one people. Israel created Hamas and Hizbullah by committing terrorist acts against innocents. If these things did not happen, Hamas and Hizbullah wouldn't be around. Al Qaeda is certainly different.

Also, Israel and the American government can't be compared with either, for both have more blood on their hands.

[Rankor and Pissing]

All I can say is, the rhetoric has already started. AQ, and every two bit pissed off or brainwashed Muslim will be mobilized when and if we pull out of Iraq before that country can keep order on it's own.

We'll see recruitment of terrorists go up 1000x since the terrorists will undoubtedly claim victory. It's already starting. Before people "get it", hundreds of thousands will have to die and the UK and US will probably have to burn for a while...

If that's what has to happen... so be it.

[superskippy]

Quote: Certainly. Hamas and Hizbullah were formed out of terrorism towards one people. Israel created Hamas and Hizbullah by committing terrorist acts against innocents. If these things did not happen, Hamas and Hizbullah wouldn't be around. Al Qaeda is certainly different.

Hamas started out as divergent political group opposed to the PLO while later reaffirming it's charter to the destruction of Israel and clear Islamic militant views declaring a Jihad over all of Israel. It has carried out dozens of attacks killing hundreds of civilians with pure intent.

Hezbollah was formed as one of dozens of militant groups in Lebanon branching off from Amal also a militant Shia group funded by Iran and in the vaccuum of the 1982 war it emerged to shell Israeli towns and attack IDF positions and to combat Maronite and other militia factions. It has stated goals of annihilating Israel and of non-reconciliation and deep ties with their backer in Iran.

These groups wouldnt have existed had Israel not existed perhaps that is true enoguh but to blame their existance on Israel's actions is simply grasping for an excuse to rebound the debate on Israel.

[Saracen]

superskippy wrote: These groups wouldnt have existed had Israel not existed perhaps that is true enoguh but to blame their existance on Israel's actions is simply grasping for an excuse to rebound the debate on Israel.

The state of Israel, not the Israeli people as a whole, have been responsible for much of the plight of the Palestinians. Yes, I know that it was the choice of the founders of Hamas and Hizbullah to found these organizations and do what they do, but Israel's actions have been the main factor that drove their establishment.

[emerald]

Quote: That doesn't excuse their irrational actions that only bactrack their causes.

no it doeasnt, but in the same way Israel believes in defending it's land and people, Hamas and other groups beleive in defending their land and people, i dont excuse the way they do it, or targetting of civilian areas, but i can certainly understand why some would go to that extreme.

the US may not want to neogtiate and thats their choice (wrong choice in my opinion) and they may continue fighting, but they will just be fighting for a hell of a long time, Afghansitan is still not sorted, and iraq is probably in more of mess than when you first started. has the fighting decreased? no. is anyone backing down? no. people still getting killed, soldiers on the coalition forces attacked and killed on a pretty daily basis....dont negotiate, just fight forever, that solves everything.

[The Comrade]

emerald wrote:

no it doeasnt, but in the same way Israel believes in defending it's land and people, Hamas and other groups beleive in defending their land and people, i dont excuse the way they do it, or targetting of civilian areas, but i can certainly understand why some would go to that extreme.


the problem with negotiations is the united states isn't willing to compromise and the demands made by militant groups are way too off base.

[emerald]

Quote: the problem with negotiations is the united states isn't willing to compromise and the demands made by militant groups are way too off base.

that maybe true, but thats always going to be the case, you start negotiations, no one agrees, thats fine, it's not a problem thats going to be sorted easily, but you still continue negotiations, one groups lessens their demands, then the other does the same and so on. All we have are two stubborn sides, both belieiving they are doing what is 'right' for everyone else, both fighting and pushing the we'll keep on fighting lingo going to encourage their supporters and fighters, and along with that we get more a more deaths...is that jsut meant to carry on? there has to be some other way or sorting out the situation, war and death are not the way forward.

[superskippy]

Quote: The state of Israel, not the Israeli people as a whole, have been responsible for much of the plight of the Palestinians.

It is not Israel but the Palestinians themselves, they have always been their own worst enemy doing more damage to themselves then we have ever attempted to do. They lost their chance at a state for the first time ever in 1948, they lost everything after rising in arms in 1949, they continued to launch raids through to 1967, they lost the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, instead of negotiating at the best possible moment they embarked on a crusade of terrorism and attacks and signed onto the Arab 3 no's agreement, they destroyed their goodwill in Jordan and lost everything they had gained, they were evicted from Egypt due to incessent attacks, they lost everything once more in Lebanon due to bringing on engagement with Israel losing any negotiating chance for more than a decade, they stepped up attacks in the 1990's and lost their chance to get gains in negotiations, their leadership walked away from Camp David, they topped it off with a renewed campaign and gained nothing, and now they have elected Hamas and have alienated both moral and monitary support from the West and suffered a heaver campaign with no prospect of statehood in sight having been snatched away.

[Saracen]

superskippy wrote: Quote: The state of Israel, not the Israeli people as a whole, have been responsible for much of the plight of the Palestinians.

It is not Israel but the Palestinians themselves, they have always been their own worst enemy doing more damage to themselves then we have ever attempted to do. They lost their chance at a state for the first time ever in 1948, they lost everything after rising in arms in 1949, they continued to launch raids through to 1967, they lost the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, instead of negotiating at the best possible moment they embarked on a crusade of terrorism and attacks and signed onto the Arab 3 no's agreement, they destroyed their goodwill in Jordan and lost everything they had gained, they were evicted from Egypt due to incessent attacks, they lost everything once more in Lebanon due to bringing on engagement with Israel losing any negotiating chance for more than a decade, they stepped up attacks in the 1990's and lost their chance to get gains in negotiations, their leadership walked away from Camp David, they topped it off with a renewed campaign and gained nothing, and now they have elected Hamas and have alienated both moral and monitary support from the West and suffered a heaver campaign with no prospect of statehood in sight having been snatched away.

All these are arguable. The idea here is that I differentiated between Israel and her government. You didn't differentiate between the PLO and the Palestinians. The war in 1948: they were evicted forcefully, starting with western Palestine, et al. The same thing goes for most other wars. The thing with Jordan primarily has to do with the PLO's resurgence and senseless terrorism that I have no support or love for. The issue with Lebanon was that Israel's government wanted to invade it anyways, creating a state that would support Israel's whims. The Oslo and Camp David agreements were farcical. The election of Hamas was unavoidable primarily because they were ruled by a govt. that didn't represent them and didn't provide for them. Hamas was seen as the better alternative.

Also, the Palestinians don't need any "moral" support from the Western governments, because the Palestinians know that the Western governments will support any Israeli action and unfair division of Palestine, in any case. If you're telling me that the Palestinians are the ones bulldozing their own homes, causing more poverty and radicalism... killing their own children... instilling curfews and taking away their own freedoms... and bombing and missling their own towns... then I can't say that I agree with you there, because ultimately, it is the actions of the Israeli government that have been responsible for the Palestinian deaths. Likewise, it is the actions of Palestinian terrorists that have been responsible for Israeli deaths.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: The idea here is that I differentiated between Israel and her government.

That would only mean something if the Israeli people didn't choose their government by electing them.

If you go in and try to change it for them you'll find out that it is Israelis you are really against, not their "oppressive" government.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: You didn't differentiate between the PLO and the Palestinians.

Same concept. Elected governments represent their people's interests. They are not separate from the people. They are the people's chosen leaders.

[slitedeviance]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: You didn't differentiate between the PLO and the Palestinians.

Same concept. Elected governments represent their people's interests. They are not separate from the people. They are the people's chosen leaders.

The PLO weren't an elected government as far as I recall...