I don't get your 1995? question. I don't know if you are being funny or ignoring the fact that Rabin was killed by a Jewish radical.usmarine2007 wrote:
huh?sergeriver wrote:
What?
On November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir,sergeriver wrote:
I don't get your 1995? question. I don't know if you are being funny or ignoring the fact that Rabin was killed by a Jewish radical.usmarine2007 wrote:
huh?sergeriver wrote:
What?
a right-wing Orthodox Jewish radical who had strenuously opposed Rabin's signing of the Oslo Accordsusmarine2007 wrote:
On November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir,sergeriver wrote:
I don't get your 1995? question. I don't know if you are being funny or ignoring the fact that Rabin was killed by a Jewish radical.usmarine2007 wrote:
huh?
That would be fact. I was talking about the theories.sergeriver wrote:
a right-wing Orthodox Jewish radical who had strenuously opposed Rabin's signing of the Oslo Accordsusmarine2007 wrote:
On November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir,sergeriver wrote:
I don't get your 1995? question. I don't know if you are being funny or ignoring the fact that Rabin was killed by a Jewish radical.
Fact > Theory.usmarine2007 wrote:
That would be fact. I was talking about the theories.sergeriver wrote:
a right-wing Orthodox Jewish radical who had strenuously opposed Rabin's signing of the Oslo Accordsusmarine2007 wrote:
On November 4, 1995, Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir,
I know.sergeriver wrote:
Fact > Theory.usmarine2007 wrote:
That would be fact. I was talking about the theories.sergeriver wrote:
a right-wing Orthodox Jewish radical who had strenuously opposed Rabin's signing of the Oslo Accords
We should not make assumptions and wait until the talks begin.usmarine2007 wrote:
I know.sergeriver wrote:
Fact > Theory.usmarine2007 wrote:
That would be fact. I was talking about the theories.
LOL. It seems to me a lot of people are blinded to anything bad an Israeli might do. Quite sad really.sergeriver wrote:
Read above your post.usmarine2007 wrote:
That is more believable than the other theories being tossed around.rawls2 wrote:
Or This:
"Just hours after signing a monumental peace accord a Palestinian suicide bomber killed 59 men, women, and children."
Erm...no. Unlike some of you, I could give a shit less about Israel or Palestine.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. It seems to me a lot of people are blinded to anything bad an Israeli might do. Quite sad really.
Reread your link it tells why:Whiser wrote:
What are you saying? Take a look at the story below.Stingray24 wrote:
Israel will sign their death warrant if they make too many concessions. That said, hope the peace process actually works this time, but I'm not holding my breath.
Israel rejects Arab peace plan
Why did Israel reject Arab peace talk?
"One obstacle is the the right of return of the Palestinians who fled or were driven from their homes during the creation of Israel in 1948, and of their descendants."
And the Israeli prime minister stated that further negotiations were needed. They didn't push back from the table completely, they simply disagreed on the specific terms.
Seems you're blinded to anything good Israel might do. Quite sad really.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. It seems to me a lot of people are blinded to anything bad an Israeli might do. Quite sad really.sergeriver wrote:
Read above your post.usmarine2007 wrote:
That is more believable than the other theories being tossed around.
That's what is so sad about the Israel/Palestine situation, there are so many nut jobs at the grass roots level on both sides that fully achieving peace is exceedingly difficult.
^^^ Qft
Hmmmm, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel pulled out of the West Bank or Gaza, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel enforced the pullout by forcefully removing those that tried to resettle. Israel was rocketed after the pullout as well. So precedence has been established.sergeriver wrote:
It will go very well credited as soon as they show they want to negotiate, and you are making assumptions on the rocket attack. Olmert is more likely to get killed by a Zionist extremist than by a Muslim extremist. So, wait and let's see which part doesn't want to negotiate. Last time it was Israel.lowing wrote:
Yet another olive branch by Israel, that will go uncredited to them, and responded to, by yet another rocket attack.sergeriver wrote:
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has proposed holding a regional peace conference following the revival of an Arab peace initiative.
Someone please check the link just in case I didn't read it right.
Damn, those Israeli terrorist bastards!!!!
Last edited by lowing (2007-04-02 17:46:39)
If they are to move forward they should be talking about what will happen and not what has happened. If anything this thread has helped to illustrate how challenging that can be. Change can not occur when you continue to base your presumptions on the past.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Pulled out, are you kiddin' me? They have settlements there. They never pulled out. And last year they destroyed Lebanon, I'm not giving Israel any credit.lowing wrote:
Hmmmm, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel pulled out of the West Bank or Gaza, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel enforced the pullout by forcefully remaining those that tried to resettle. Israel was rocketed after the pullout as well. So precedence has been established.sergeriver wrote:
It will go very well credited as soon as they show they want to negotiate, and you are making assumptions on the rocket attack. Olmert is more likely to get killed by a Zionist extremist than by a Muslim extremist. So, wait and let's see which part doesn't want to negotiate. Last time it was Israel.lowing wrote:
Yet another olive branch by Israel, that will go uncredited to them, and responded to, by yet another rocket attack.
Damn, those Israeli terrorist bastards!!!!
QFTKmarion wrote:
If they are to move forward they should be talking about what will happen and not what has happened. If anything this thread has helped to illustrate how challenging that can be. Change can not occur when you continue to base your presumptions on the past.
You quote this for truth:
Isn't this basing your presumptions on the past.
But you said this first:sergeriver wrote:
QFTKmarion wrote:
If they are to move forward they should be talking about what will happen and not what has happened. If anything this thread has helped to illustrate how challenging that can be. Change can not occur when you continue to base your presumptions on the past.
??sergeriver wrote:
Pulled out, are you kiddin' me? They have settlements there. They never pulled out. And last year they destroyed Lebanon, I'm not giving Israel any credit.
Isn't this basing your presumptions on the past.
Last edited by rawls2 (2007-04-02 17:14:00)
This is a reply to a wrong comment of Lowing. Quote everything, not only my answer.rawls2 wrote:
You quote this for truth:But you said this first:sergeriver wrote:
QFTKmarion wrote:
If they are to move forward they should be talking about what will happen and not what has happened. If anything this thread has helped to illustrate how challenging that can be. Change can not occur when you continue to base your presumptions on the past.??sergeriver wrote:
Pulled out, are you kiddin' me? They have settlements there. They never pulled out. And last year they destroyed Lebanon, I'm not giving Israel any credit.
Isn't this basing your presumptions on the past.
LOL - Serge you damn agitator. We locked up on this issue twice in the last week. How did you switch over to the dark side so quickly?sergeriver wrote:
QFTKmarion wrote:
If they are to move forward they should be talking about what will happen and not what has happened. If anything this thread has helped to illustrate how challenging that can be. Change can not occur when you continue to base your presumptions on the past.
Edit: Actually I got lost up there ^^^^ with the misquote...nvm.
Last edited by Pug (2007-04-02 17:34:33)
Bear with me a sec...
Serge - you got an MBA - you took a negotiation class right?
Serge - you got an MBA - you took a negotiation class right?
Yes, we didn't have a Negotiation class (not by that name), but several classes implied negotiating. Why?Pug wrote:
Bear with me a sec...
Serge - you got an MBA - you took a negotiation class right?
Last edited by sergeriver (2007-04-02 17:55:13)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/ … index.htmlsergeriver wrote:
Pulled out, are you kiddin' me? They have settlements there. They never pulled out. And last year they destroyed Lebanon, I'm not giving Israel any credit.lowing wrote:
Hmmmm, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel pulled out of the West Bank or Gaza, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel enforced the pullout by forcefully remaining those that tried to resettle. Israel was rocketed after the pullout as well. So precedence has been established.sergeriver wrote:
It will go very well credited as soon as they show they want to negotiate, and you are making assumptions on the rocket attack. Olmert is more likely to get killed by a Zionist extremist than by a Muslim extremist. So, wait and let's see which part doesn't want to negotiate. Last time it was Israel.
not being a smart ass here serge, but what exactly am I missing??
That was the plan, but a lot of settlements remain today in the OT.lowing wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/ … index.htmlsergeriver wrote:
Pulled out, are you kiddin' me? They have settlements there. They never pulled out. And last year they destroyed Lebanon, I'm not giving Israel any credit.lowing wrote:
Hmmmm, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel pulled out of the West Bank or Gaza, no credit by you or anyone else when Israel enforced the pullout by forcefully remaining those that tried to resettle. Israel was rocketed after the pullout as well. So precedence has been established.
not being a smart ass here serge, but what exactly am I missing??
http://www.redorbit.com/news/general/21 … index.htmlsergeriver wrote:
That was the plan, but a lot of settlements remain today in the OT.lowing wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/ … index.htmlsergeriver wrote:
Pulled out, are you kiddin' me? They have settlements there. They never pulled out. And last year they destroyed Lebanon, I'm not giving Israel any credit.
not being a smart ass here serge, but what exactly am I missing??
Why do I keep reading about "finished with pullouts"???
I havve also read that Israel is enforcing the settlement pullouts when settlers try to re-enterlowing wrote:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/general/21 … index.htmlsergeriver wrote:
That was the plan, but a lot of settlements remain today in the OT.lowing wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/23/west.bank.pullout/index.html
not being a smart ass here serge, but what exactly am I missing??
Why do I keep reading about "finished with pullouts"???