PDA

View Full Version : Trouble in Middle East.



bugbear
27-01-2006, 12:12 PM
Hamas has been declared the winner in the Palestinian parliamentary polls, a political earthquake that could bury any hope for reviving peace talks with Isreal soon. :o

The last time peace was about to be achieve in Palestine, the PM of Isreal Ishak Rabin was assassinated and now this. With the rabid regime in Iran flexing its muscle to the east and this victory I can almost see a rise of militanism in the middle east conflic. Please pray for peace.

"Our lives will never be the same," Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erakat said. "Today we woke up and the sky was a different colour. We have enter a new era."

Grim is the word.

chin_wan
27-01-2006, 01:10 PM
Maybe getting them into the political seat would pressure them into using diplomatic ways to solve issues rather than suicide bombers. I say, let's forget the past and work towards a better future, so let's give them a chance.

bugbear
27-01-2006, 05:00 PM
Maybe getting them into the political seat would pressure them into using diplomatic ways to solve issues rather than suicide bombers. I say, let's forget the past and work towards a better future, so let's give them a chance.

I hope that will be the case as you state above. But my gut feeling is that things will be more complicated. Mark my word. For one, Bush refuse to acknowledge Hamas due to their terrorist credential. Second, the emergent of a hard right wing president of Iran who refused to recognise the statehood of Isreal. Thirdly, Syria still remain a big obstacle to peace in the palestinian land as they push for their Golan Height.
As for Hamas, I don't think a Leapard can change its spot. Do you? :D
All in all 2006 will be a very interesting year. Hold the back page.

chin_wan
30-01-2006, 12:44 AM
I have been doing some reading on this issue and found this interesting article. A good read but I am not sure how much of it I agree with.




The Big Lie
" The West Bank is occupied Palestinian land." This phrase is repeated, as a given, by all the governments of the world and by the entire news media, etc., etc. This idea that the West Bank is occupied Palestinian land has been accepted by almost everyone. Yet, it is, in fact, the greatest lie ever perpetrated on the whole of humanity. If you think this is an outlandish statement please read on and decide for yourself.

Palestinians claim that Palestine is their land, and that Jerusalem is their capital, and that Israel is occupying their land. To resist occupation they have the right to send suicide bombers into crowded bus stations, pizza parlors, etc., and kill innocent men, women, and children. And all Arab and Muslim countries support them in their claims and actions against Israel. Because of this occupation of Palestinian land by Israel, because of this crime committed against their Palestinian brothers, all Arabs hate Israel and want to destroy it.

To anyone who is familiar with the facts, and has an objective eye, all this must be fascinating. Because never before has a complete lie, on such a large scale, been so successful.

First, if Arab animosity toward Israel is based on their love and support for their Palestinian brothers, and in wanting their Palestinian brothers to have their own state, where was that love and support before the Jewish state existed? Where were they when the Kingdom of Jordan ruled Palestine? Why were they not accusing Jordan of occupying Palestinian land? Why did not the Arab world and the United Nations call on Jordan to stop occupying Palestinian land? Second, where were the Palestinians themselves, with all their grievances and claims, when Jordan occupied the whole West Bank, including Jerusalem?

Did you know that? Did you know that for 19 years Jordan occupied and ruled the whole West Bank, including Jerusalem? Why didn't they clamor for a Palestinian state then? All this time, did we hear a word about Palestine being occupied by the Kingdom of Jordan? Did we hear anything about a Palestinian state? Or about Jerusalem being the capital of Palestine? No, we did not.
Why not? Because there never existed a Palestinian state. And in the entire history of nations, Jerusalem was never the capital of any country other than that of ancient Israel and modern Israel. So how can there be a claim on Jerusalem as the capital of a state that never existed?

One of the problems here is that so few people know the history of the world. Hence, lies and more lies, repeated often enough, are assumed to be facts.

I have heard many scholars, including an Arab journalist, question the very notion of a Palestinian people. What, they ask, makes a people? Well, there are three elements that define a people: language, religion, and culture. For example, the Chinese and Japanese are both Oriental. Still, they are two different peoples, because they each have a different language, a different religion, and a different culture.

The Palestinians speak the same language, follow the same religion, and manifest the same culture as all the other Arabs. They are really Arabs who happen to live in a region called Palestine.Palestine is not, and never was, the name of a country, or the name of a people.

It is the name of a region - just like Siberia is a region, not a country. There is no Siberian country, nor is there a Siberian people. It is a region. Just like the Sahara is a region, not a country. There is no Saharan country, nor is there a Saharan people. The Arabs living in that region are Libyans, Moroccans, etc., etc. It is a region.

Because Palestine is a region, not a country, England was able to carve out half of it and give it to the Arabs living on the other side of the Jordan River and call it the Kingdom of Jordan. Because Palestine is a region the United Nations was able to divide the rest of it between the Jews and the Arabs living there. Had the Arabs accepted the United Nations resolution there would have been a newly created Arab state called Palestine. Instead they rejected the United Nations compromise and went to war to destroy Israel. They lost the war. Hence, no Palestinian state.

Here are some cold facts.

King David built the city of Jerusalem, and King Solomon, David's son, built the holy
temple.This commonwealth of Israel lasted for a thousand years. There was only one break, when, 400 years after King David, the Babylonian invaders occupied the land for 70 years. Then, with the help of Cyrus the Great of Persia - yes, Persia - Israel came back to the land, rebuilt the temple, and ruled for another 600 years.

Then the Romans came and ruled the land, then the Crusaders ruled the land, then the Ottoman Empire ruled the land, then the British Empire ruled the land, then Israel returned to its homeland and built a modern Jewish state. It was never - repeat, never - a Palestinian state. So what is all this talk about occupied Palestinian land?

They certainly have a right to live there freely and happily. Nobody wants to move them away from their land. But from where comes the right for a Palestinian state? Is it because they live there?

Imagine, if the Mexican-American community in California, whose numbers are greater than the number of Palestinians in the West Bank, decides tomorrow to claim that the United States is occupying their land, because they live there and they want their own Mexican state. Imagine, if when the U.S. government says, "No, you can live here but you cannot have sovereignty, you cannot have your own state," they start sending suicide bombers, shooters, mortars, etc., etc. into the rest of the country, what do you think would happen?

This is precisely why there was never any suggestion of a Palestinian state; not under the Romans, not under the Crusaders, not under the Turks, not under the English, and not under the Arab Kingdom of Jordan, not until after Israel was again established in its homeland.

I believe it is the big lie of our generation and we are all buying into it.

Whatever you believe, don't you think these facts deserve to be raised when discussing Middle East policies?

Original Article (http://www.changingworldviews.com/GuestCommentaries/hilmarvoncampearticle2.htm)

aurora97
30-01-2006, 06:24 AM
I seriously doubt that even if the Palestinians manage to get hold of Isreal (Somehow), they would refuse to put down their guns and their money flushed organisation. Probably they will start another front somewhere else, and start killing more people saying that "hey thats our...". Corruption is rampant no matter under Fatah rule, Hamas, PLA, or even Arafat (which is PLA+Fatah). Millions of Aid money dissapeared without being accounted for, hence we have humans fighting over money. As for religion its only a smoke screen for our greedy human needs, "in the name of ... (religion)" people call out but the real motive has yet to be seen.

Imagine if one day, the Palestinians decide to put down their guns and use their money to educate; get employment for their people wouldnt this make a much bigger difference?

War can only achieve short term goals, i.e. a few suicide boms may give you media attention. Nevertheless, countries do not fall on boms & threat, they just keep getting stronger and more determine to survive.

bugbear
30-01-2006, 09:55 AM
I do believe that article Chin Wan. The Arab has been in a battle of atrision with the Jewish state since biblical time. What happen nowadays is just an extension of pass acrimosity. The problem is the Arab only want the middle east for themselve and their brothers. Isreal is like a pariah in their eye which must be kicked out into the Med. Believe me when I say trouble will continue as long as Hamas did not cease to lay claim to Jerusalem or put away their arms. That is the fact.

isarahim
30-01-2006, 10:38 AM
The Arab has been in a battle of atrision with the Jewish state since biblical time.

This is not true.

There are no Arab-Jewish wars on record until the 20th century. There were wars between Israel (then called Kanaan, Palestine or sometimes simply, but erroneously, Judea) and Egypt and Babylon respectively but this was long before Judaism had split into the Rabbinism, various Christianities and Islam.

isarahim
30-01-2006, 10:44 AM
For one, Bush refuse to acknowledge Hamas due to their terrorist credential. Second, the emergent of a hard right wing president of Iran who refused to recognise the statehood of Isreal.

Well, we can only hope. Remember that when Sin Feinn became a political force to reckon with, IRA started to soften and eventually disappeared entirely. With Hamas as a political power, the moderate members will have a stronger hand than before and the terror elements a weaker one. So I wouldn't give up just yet.

chin_wan
30-01-2006, 10:47 AM
Well, we can only hope. Remember that when Sin Feinn became a political force to reckon with, IRA started to soften and eventually disappeared entirely. With Hamas as a political power, the moderate members will have a stronger hand than before and the terror elements a weaker one. So I wouldn't give up just yet.

The question still remains...will Isreal ever be able to exist in the Middle East?

aurora97
31-01-2006, 12:52 AM
Like Africa, The middle east conflict, India and Pakistan, all of this problems leads to one direction; i.e. a dead end. There is no perfect solution and they all have common issues, no parties are willing to give way to one another; national pride is at stake; tribal feud brewing for generations; poverty; guns; money; corruption; land; religion and the list goes on...

The only way forward is peace, and if people are willing to sit down and talk without having to point their guns at each other to send the msg.

African's willing continue to kill each other,
Middle east would like to destroy Isreal,
India and Pakistan would probably end up nuking each other.

To sum it all up, its just a hopeless scenario.

chin_wan
31-01-2006, 10:02 AM
I don't believe in dead end. Somehow from every chaos in the end there is a solution. Sure millions may die before we reach that solution but in the end, life will find a way.

bugbear
31-01-2006, 03:50 PM
Well, we can only hope. Remember that when Sin Feinn became a political force to reckon with, IRA started to soften and eventually disappeared entirely. With Hamas as a political power, the moderate members will have a stronger hand than before and the terror elements a weaker one. So I wouldn't give up just yet.

I suppose you are right to point out that there are no Arab-Jewish conflic in the biblical time but nevertheless, there are conflic with the local Cananite tribe residing in the palestine area. However, on the Jewish state return to Palestine the whole conflic took a different tone with the Arabs (Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Iran and Syria) hell bent on pushing Isreal out of the middle east. After numerous failed wars against the Jewish state, the Arabs knowing that they are powerless against the Jewish state begun to fight a proxy war against them by highlighting the Palestine isssue while supplying arms and money to them. I doubt the Arabs really care for the Palestinian in the first place. To some they are consider second class Arab.

Among the offspring of this proxy war is the creation of Hamas. Hamas is a particularly violent sect that is hellbent on pursuing their agenda that is to eradicate the Jewish state by bearing arms and among their most vial tactic is the human bomb. Maybe they are hope of peace in the long term as and when Hamas will become moderate but for now I just cannot see that being the reality. For one, they must give up their arm struggle in order to be deem legitimate by the USA, UN and the powerful EU. One hope these are powerful enough voices of moderation to force them to change.
Let's wait and see.

tempuadua
31-01-2006, 07:44 PM
I have been doing some reading on this issue and found this interesting article. A good read but I am not sure how much of it I agree with.
Any attempt to understand and to comment on the Middle East conflicts inevitably require one to understand the history of the region. And doing so, one need to be cautious on the personal background of the historians writing it. As Harry S. Truman rightly pointed out: "No two historians ever agree on what happened, and the damn thing is they both think they're telling the truth." And in discussing the Middle East conflict, one will ineviatbly come into the question of who has more right to settle on the land called palestine: The Jews or Palestanians?
It is an oversimplification of things to say that that the Jews has more rights because historical record shows that King David did not "ESTABLISHED" Jerusalem. He "CONQUERED" Jerusalem about 1000 B.C. and established an Israelite kingdom over much of Canaan including parts of Transjordan. The kingdom was divided into Judea in the south and Israel in the north following the death of David's son, Solomon. Jerusalem remained the center of Jewish sovereignty and of Jewish worship whenever the Jews exercised sovereignty over the country in the subsequent period, up to the Jewish revolt in 133 AD. From who did he conquered it from? Historical records shows that the area were settled by different tribes including Semitic peoples, Hittites, and Philistines, peoples of the sea who are thought to have arrived from Mycenae, or to be part of the ancient Greek peoples that also settled Mycenae.
The creation of Israel was done by the British and the American to solve two of their main problems i.e to rid their countries of the Jews and to reward the Jews communities in Europe and US for their assistance during thw first and second world wars.
The US and British's role in the creation of Israel in 1947 obliged them to support and side with the Israeli government in their conflict with the palestanians, until now!

tempuadua
31-01-2006, 07:51 PM
Well, we can only hope. Remember that when Sin Feinn became a political force to reckon with, IRA started to soften and eventually disappeared entirely. With Hamas as a political power, the moderate members will have a stronger hand than before and the terror elements a weaker one. So I wouldn't give up just yet.
We must not forget that throughout its existence, Hamas has been always overshadowed by Arafat's Fatah. Terror is the weapons of the weak, and Hamas used to be weak (compared to Fatah). Now that Hamas is strong, they may change their modus operandi in retaining the people's support. Just like Isarahim, I also wouldn't give up just yet.

bugbear
01-02-2006, 01:12 AM
The creation of Israel was done by the British and the American to solve two of their main problems i.e to rid their countries of the Jews and to reward the Jews communities in Europe and US for their assistance during thw first and second world wars.
The US and British's role in the creation of Israel in 1947 obliged them to support and side with the Israeli government in their conflict with the palestanians, until now!

That exactly is why Isreal is where it is today. It has a legitimate right to exist because of historical events that put them back there again. Imagine for once if the Jewish was never ousted from their land since the time of King David. Would that land be call Isreal today? Yes of course. Unfortunately, due to war and historical event as documented in the bible, the Jews was scattered throught out the world. The nation Isreal cease to be. That land previously known as Isreal now was taken over by myriad normadic tribe of people but none form a legitimate government. Until the British and American allow the Jewish people to return to their homeland. This is a historical fact and event. Now compare to Sabah where there is a claim by the Sultant of Solo which however farfetch is quite legitimate since there was a legitimate rule over Sabah. But we all know how the British manipulate the Sultant of Solo to gain Sabah for His Majesty King George V. In world war II, Palestine was govern by the British and after the war in 1947, she cedes it over to the Jews who then form a legitimate government. That to my mind is as fair as a claim to legitimate sorvereignity as any. If Isreal is illegal then Malaysia too is illegal.
The struggle for existence of the old kingdom of Isreal is against the tribes of canaanite, Hittite, Peruzide, Amalakite and the Philistine people where the mighty will subjugate the weaker and form nation. However the modern Isreal's struggle is a different struggle for existence. Increasingly their struggle is more of a religious nature now. Previously it is against pagan tribes but now it is against Islamic nations. One can't help noticing the similarity of the two conflic but different ideology behind them. The most striking similarity between these two conflic is the endurance presence of Isreal against all odds. If I was to choose between Hamas and Isreal as to whom will be victorious, than my bets is on the later. I do hope that Hamas do see reason in forming their government and in negotiation so as to prevent further blood shed. But before that day come much blood would be shed. :o

tempuadua
01-02-2006, 03:03 AM
That exactly is why Isreal is where it is today. It has a legitimate right to exist because of historical events that put them back there again. Imagine for once if the Jewish was never ousted from their land since the time of King David. Would that land be call Isreal today? Yes of course. Unfortunately, due to war and historical event as documented in the bible, the Jews was scattered throught out the world. The nation Isreal cease to be. That land previously known as Isreal now was taken over by myriad normadic tribe of people but none form a legitimate government. Until the British and American allow the Jewish people to return to their homeland. This is a historical fact and event. Now compare to Sabah where there is a claim by the Sultant of Solo which however farfetch is quite legitimate since there was a legitimate rule over Sabah. But we all know how the British manipulate the Sultant of Solo to gain Sabah for His Majesty King George V. In world war II, Palestine was govern by the British and after the war in 1947, she cedes it over to the Jews who then form a legitimate government. That to my mind is as fair as a claim to legitimate sorvereignity as any. If Isreal is illegal then Malaysia too is illegal.
The struggle for existence of the old kingdom of Isreal is against the tribes of canaanite, Hittite, Peruzide, Amalakite and the Philistine people where the mighty will subjugate the weaker and form nation. However the modern Isreal's struggle is a different struggle for existence. Increasingly their struggle is more of a religious nature now. Previously it is against pagan tribes but now it is against Islamic nations. One can't help noticing the similarity of the two conflic but different ideology behind them. The most striking similarity between these two conflic is the endurance presence of Isreal against all odds. If I was to choose between Hamas and Isreal as to whom will be victorious, than my bets is on the later. I do hope that Hamas do see reason in forming their government and in negotiation so as to prevent further blood shed. But before that day come much blood would be shed. :o
Interesting points to ponder:
(1). A referendum organised by the United Nations known as the Cobbold Commission was done in Sabah before Sabah joined Malaysia. 99% of the people in Sabah choose to join Malaysia. This referendum therefore legalised Malaysia's "acquisition" of Sabah.

(2). The Sultan of Sulu's claims to Sabah is strictly on the restoration of the Sultan as the government/ruler of Sabah only. In Israel's case, Israel forcibly and illegally expelled the larger part of the Palestinian population from its land when the state of Israel was established in 1948, and continued this during the 1967 Israeli Arab wars. Palestanians were literally thrown out of their homes and Jews took over their homes. Remember, one of the crucial issue in the conflict is that Palestinian refugees have been denied their right of return to their ancestral villages and homes. In fact the "Sabra and Shatila" incident was nothing more than an "ethnic cleansing" exercise perpetrated by the Israeli army lead by Arial Sharon himself.

(3). UN recognised Sabah's entry into Malaysia. UN Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979 stated that Israel settlements in Palestine are illegal: "Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."

(4). The Sultan of Sulu's claims is not valid as the present Phillipine government is not the successor-in-title to the Sulu Throne. Using the same arguement, the Jews cannot be claiming Palestine because King David's son, who later become their king was not a Jew. Solomon was an Arab (A person is a Jew only if the mother is a Jew) because he was born out of sexual relationship between David and an Arab-Hittite woman who was the wife of one of David's field commander named Uriah. Therefore, Solomon is considered as an Arab. When he succedded David on the throne, the Kingdom was no longer a Jew kindgom.

(5). Malaysia, Southern Thailand, southern Phillipines and Brunei were once part of the Indonesian Sri Vijaya empire based in Jawa. This was long before the existence of the Melaka sultanate, Sulu Sultanate and Brunei sultanate. Can the present Indonesian government claims all this territory based on historical ties?

(6). With the exception of Hamas, most of the other factions in Plaestine and the surrounding Arabs countries has accepted that Israel has the right to exist. The main issues in the middle east conflict now is Israeli's refusal to hand back the occuppied territories that they won from the Arabs in 1967 war.

USJ27Resident
01-02-2006, 07:28 PM
The Star Online:
World Updates
February 1, 2006
Hamas bombs house of Gaza security chief - officials

GAZA (Reuters) - Hamas militants detonated a bomb outside the house of a senior Palestinian security chief in the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, hurting no one but causing extensive damage, Palestinian security officials said.

The attack in the town of Khan Younis was the first against a leader of the Palestinian security service since Hamas won the Jan. 25 parliamentary election by a landslide.

There has long been bad blood between Hamas and the Palestinian security forces, dominated by President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction.

The bomb blew the front door off the house of Suleiman Abu Mutleq, director-general of the Preventive Security Agency in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian officials said, blaming Hamas militants for the incident.

Tension has risen in Gaza since Hamas's election victory amid concerns by members of the Palestinian security forces that the militant Islamic group will try to assert control over the Palestinian Authority's 60,000 paramilitary police.

Tempers were also high after a senior leader of Hamas's armed wing was critically hurt by unknown assailants in a drive-by shooting near the southern Gaza town of Rafah on Monday.

The Preventive Security Agency was established to curb the activities of militant groups. It was responsible for arresting Hamas militants during a crackdown in 1996 ordered by the late Palestinian president, Yasser Arafat.


Don't bother....

These fanatics that call themselves freedom fighters, nationalists, islamists cannot even agreed amongst themselves... now they are targetting each other....
Bunch of loons... :mad:

What irks me is that only the innocent blood is indiscriminately shed with their agendas...

isarahim
01-02-2006, 08:18 PM
I agree with most of your points, but this one is seriously flawed:

Using the same arguement, the Jews cannot be claiming Palestine because King David's son, who later become their king was not a Jew. Solomon was an Arab (A person is a Jew only if the mother is a Jew) because he was born out of sexual relationship between David and an Arab-Hittite woman who was the wife of one of David's field commander named Uriah. Therefore, Solomon is considered as an Arab. When he succedded David on the throne, the Kingdom was no longer a Jew kindgom.
This is flawed logic, since it confuses bloodline and religion. Regardless of his real mother (which is heavily contested), Salomon/Sulaiman was respected as a Son of Zadok by people of Judaic religion. The Maccabees and the Hasmoneans traced their lineal descent from Salomon, despite the fact that many were also descendants of the Queen of Sheba. So did John the Nazareene and Jesus. All of them were Jews.

If we focus on Judaism as a religion for a while, one should also bear in mind that classic Judaism and the contemporary post-Temple destruction in AD70 Judaism are very much different though they sprung out of the same source (like the Christianities and Islam). The classic Judaism was a temple cult with cermonial high priests, merging monotheism with elements from pagan worship of deities like Baal, Astarte etc. The high priests were also of royal descent, typically royal cousins and therefore also sons of Zadok (later referred to as Zadockees or Sadducces with the same meaning). Modern Judaism, however, does not have any such elements. Instead, the guardian of the religion and the cermonial centrepoint is the Rabbi. Therefore, some historians refer to contemporary Judaism as Rabbinism, not Judaism.

bugbear
02-02-2006, 09:31 AM
Interesting points to ponder:
(1). A referendum organised by the United Nations known as the Cobbold Commission was done in Sabah before Sabah joined Malaysia. 99% of the people in Sabah choose to join Malaysia. This referendum therefore legalised Malaysia's "acquisition" of Sabah.

(2). The Sultan of Sulu's claims to Sabah is strictly on the restoration of the Sultan as the government/ruler of Sabah only. In Israel's case, Israel forcibly and illegally expelled the larger part of the Palestinian population from its land when the state of Israel was established in 1948, and continued this during the 1967 Israeli Arab wars. Palestanians were literally thrown out of their homes and Jews took over their homes. Remember, one of the crucial issue in the conflict is that Palestinian refugees have been denied their right of return to their ancestral villages and homes. In fact the "Sabra and Shatila" incident was nothing more than an "ethnic cleansing" exercise perpetrated by the Israeli army lead by Arial Sharon himself.

(3). UN recognised Sabah's entry into Malaysia. UN Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979 stated that Israel settlements in Palestine are illegal: "Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."

(6).With the exception of Hamas, most of the other factions in Plaestine and the surrounding Arabs countries has accepted that Israel has the right to exist. The main issues in the middle east conflict now is Israeli's refusal to hand back the occuppied territories that they won from the Arabs in 1967 war .

Very interesting points made, tempuadua. UN recognised the existent of Sabah and therefore Malaysia which we all agree is history. But the same UN also agree to the existent of Isreal too don't you think so? Like it or not our very own legitimacy of existent is based upon what the UN think and should be respected by all. Hamas in refusing to acknowledge this simple fact will never ever go the peaceful route in whatever future there is.

As for the territories seized by Isreal after the 1967 war with the Arabs, I think they have the right to hold on to whatever land that they gain as spoils of war. Unlike the Golan Height, Isreal has since given the Sinai back to Egypt when they sign the peace accord. Syria has steadfastly refusing to sign a peace accord with Isreal till now. How do you expect Isreal to hand back your land? In fact Golan Height holds a strategic Military position from which Syria could launch future military strike into Isreal if given back to them without signing any peace accord don't you agree? In this regard, Egypt is the smarter nation to acknowledge the existent of Isreal and in return got their land back.

You point out that the Isrealies forcibly expelled Palestinian from their land. Whose land? UN by agreement with the British and American has given that piece of land to the Jews as their homeland. It is not like there are totally no Jewish population in Palestine at that time. In fact the very existent of the West Bank and the Gaza strip show that the Jewish did not totally expelled the Palestinian do they?

Hamas if they want legitimacy will have to agree with the quartet (UN, EU, Russia and USA) to recognise the existent of Isreal as a prerequisite to future aids. I don't see how hamas could ever pass this acid test since the very foudation of hamas does not recognise Isreal at all? :eek:

tempuadua
06-02-2006, 02:06 AM
Very interesting points made, tempuadua. UN recognised the existent of Sabah and therefore Malaysia which we all agree is history. But the same UN also agree to the existent of Isreal too don't you think so?
I suggest that in future you should do some reading before engaging on topics like this. It seems that your knowledge on the middle east conflict are gathered mostly from reading newspaper headlines only. Do you know that on 28 April 1980 the UN Security Council propose a Resolution which affirms:

(a) That the Palestinian people...should be enabled to exercise its inalienable national right of self-determination, including the right to establish an independent State in Palestine;
(b) The right of Palestinian refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours to do so, and the right of those choosing not to return to receive equitable compensation for their property;
3. Decides that appropriate arrangements should be established to guarantee, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all States in the area, including the sovereign independent State of Palestine, as envisaged in paragraph 1 (a) above, and the right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries.

The resolutions were defeated, even though 14 out of the 15 members of UN Security Council agreed to it, because US used its veto power to defeat it. Israel cannot use UN Resolutions selectively, selecting only those favouring Israel. So, who is in charge of the middle east conflict? the UN or the US? Are you aware that between 1947 to 2001, the US used its veto power to protect/help Israel on 40 occassions.
Are you also aware that Israel flatly refuse to comply the following resolutions, and UN cannot do anything because US threatened to veto any follow-up resolutions by the UN?

Resolution 106: " condemns' Israel for Gaza raid".
Resolution 111: " condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
Resolution 127: "recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem".
Resolution 162: "urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
Resolution 171: "determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria".
Resolution 228: " censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
Resolution 237: " urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
Resolution 248: "condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
Resolution 250: " 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
Resolution 251: " 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
Resolution 252: " 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
Resolution 256: " 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation".
Resolution 259: " 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
Resolution 262: " 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport". *
Resolution 265: " 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan". * Resolution 267: " 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
Resolution 270: " 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
Resolution 271: " 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
Resolution 279: " 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon". Resolution 280: " 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 285: " 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
Resolution 298: " 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem". Resolution 313: " 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 316: " 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon". Resolution 317: " 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
Resolution 332: " 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
Resolution 337: " 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
Resolution 347: " 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
Resolution 425: " 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon". Resolution 427: " 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
Resolution 444: " 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
Resolution 446: " 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
Resolution 450: " 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
Resolution 452: " 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
Resolution 465: " 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
Resolution 467: " 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon".
Resolution 468: " 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
Resolution 469: " 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians".
Resolution 471: " 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
Resolution 476: " 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
Resolution 478: " 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
Resolution 484: " 'declares it imperative' that Israel re- admit two deported Palestinian mayors".
Resolution 487: " 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility".
Resolution 497: " 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
Resolution 498: " calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
Resolution 501: " 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
Resolution 509: " 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
Resolution 515: " 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in".
Resolution 517: " 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
Resolution 518: " 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
Resolution 520: " 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
Resolution 573: " 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters.
Resolution 587: " 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw". *
Resolution 592: " 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
Resolution 605: " 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians.
Resolution 607: " 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Resolution 608: " 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
Resolution 636: " 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
Resolution 641: " 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.
Resolution 672: " 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
Resolution 673: " 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations.
Resolution 681: " 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians.
Resolution 694: " 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
Resolution 726: " 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians.
Resolution 799: 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for there immediate return.


In this regard, Egypt is the smarter nation to acknowledge the existent of Isreal and in return got their land back.
Again, this shows you shallow knowledge on the middle east conflict. Middle east conflict is not merely a question of returning occupied land, but also the right of return of around 2 millions displaced people. Have you ever heard about the "Sabra and Shatila" incident? If you connect it with Israel's refusal to comply with UN Resolution 237, you will understand why Syria (homes to around 1 millions Palestanian refugees) refuse to sign the peace acord with Israel.


You point out that the Isrealies forcibly expelled Palestinian from their land. Whose land? UN by agreement with the British and American has given that piece of land to the Jews as their homeland. It is not like there are totally no Jewish population in Palestine at that time. In fact the very existent of the West Bank and the Gaza strip show that the Jewish did not totally expelled the Palestinian do they?
To answer your question, please do some reading. You should have such facts before making any comment on the conflict. And please don't try to speculate the answer with your logic and "general knowledge". Leaders like Menaham Begin, Arafat, Yitzak Rabin, Aziz Alrantisi who spent their life time to try to settle the middle east conflict did not see peace in middle east during their lifetime. You may not like some of them, but give them the due respect simply by acknowledging that the conflict is far more complex than what you think it is.
Middle East conflict could be "too heavy" subject for you. May be you could contribute more to the knowledge enrichment of USJ forumers by making comments on other topic, say, Iran's right to develop its nuclear industry.

bugbear
06-02-2006, 11:28 AM
Tempuadua, that is a very nice lesson on the UN resolution on Isreal that you have just posted above. I do admit that I am no UN expert when it comes to the above but you are no expert either. ;)

What I would like to reiterate here is that Hamas should accept the UN decision here at present. I am not too interested in the past resolution so to speak as it is now history. Lets look at the fact of the matter now.

1. Isreal is recognise by UN as a sovereign nation althought Malaysia still refuse to recognise this fact. Whatever happen before that is best confine to the historian alike. Can you accept that tempuadua? :rolleyes:

2. Palestinian has the right to form a government of their own side by side with Isreal.

3. Hamas just won the election in Palestine and can form their own government.

4. Hamas is also responsible for suicide bombing against Isreal.

5. USA is the biggest supporter of Isreal in term of political, monitary and military aspect.

Like it or not, the United State has been backing Isreal to the hilt come what may which result in the state of Isreal of today. Like it or not the UN also recognise this as fact. I don't want to speculate what might have been if the US has not intervene in this matter.

The fact here is that Hamas must comply with the UN if they want to be legitimate in the eye of the world, that is to lay down arm and start to negotiate failing which more blood shed will occur all over again. :o

I sincerely hope that Hamas will see the rationality of this matter for the greater need of peace to prevail. With the existent of a Palestinian state, perhaps those displace people can now come back again. :)

tempuadua
06-02-2006, 01:42 PM
I do admit that I am no UN expert when it comes to the above but you are no expert either. ;)

1. Isreal is recognise by UN as a sovereign nation althought Malaysia still refuse to recognise this fact. Whatever happen before that is best confine to the historian alike. Can you accept that tempuadua?

Definitely I am not an expert, but I am a keen follower of the Middle East conflict and do my readings on the issue before posting anything in this forum. In term of "expertise", I am definitely a few rungs above you. :)

With the exception of a few Arabs countries neighbouring Israel, nearly all the Muslim countries in the world don't recognised Israel (until and unless a full soverign and independent Palestanian state is established).
Can I accept it? Not only I can accept it, I also fully support our government's stand on this issue.

Dr. J George
06-02-2006, 02:19 PM
trouble in Middle East already lah, no need, in usj.com.my! :)

PC, Orchi Son and Lord, how about some Coconut Water session - these days very hot lah, we can invite some of our friends here too! :D

Where is the best place in Subang Jaya? :D

My treat! I mean for coconut water Lord! :D

isarahim
07-02-2006, 08:26 AM
In term of "expertise", I am definitely a few rungs above you.
In fact at least one rung above me too. Thanks tempadua for the information. I think my expertise is more on the ancient history of this region, but you beat me hands down on the more recent events.


Not only I can accept it, I also fully support our government's stand on this issue.
I don't. I think we should recognise Israel, but still demand from them that they comply with UN resolutions and international accords.

I think we should also, unilaterally if necessary, recognise the Palestinian state with the addition that we see the West Bank and Gaza as an integral part of that state.

tempuadua
10-02-2006, 01:30 AM
In fact at least one rung above me too.
Isarahim, thank you. Such statement coming from you makes me feel like I am a professor. :)

bugbear
19-04-2006, 03:32 AM
Israel blames Hamas for bombing

Tensions have risen between Israelis and Palestinians recently
Israel holds Hamas responsible for a deadly suicide bombing in Tel Aviv but will not hit back against the Palestinian Authority, officials say.
A special cabinet meeting ended with agreement to increase security efforts but not launch a military strike.

Instead it backed plans to revoke the Jerusalem residency of several Hamas MPs, adding to the group's isolation.

Hamas described Monday's bombing by Islamic Jihad, which killed nine people, as an act of "self-defence".

Palestinians feel the pinch
Witnesses tell of shock
The BBC's Caroline Hawley, in Jerusalem, says Israel seems to have decided for now not to embark on a collision course with the Hamas-led government.

Three Hamas MPs living in East Jerusalem, occupied by Israel, appear set to have their residency permits revoked.

Borders between Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip will also see increased security, reports said, but officials revealed few details.

Israeli forces also arrested more than 20 Palestinians in raids across the West Bank. The father of the Tel Avivi bomber was reported to be among those detained.

Hamas defiant

At the White House, President George W Bush said he deplored the attack, but he also urged restraint saying all parties should be "mindful of the consequences" of their actions.

Despite international criticism, Hamas has refused to retract its support for the suicide bombing.

"The reason behind this cycle is the continuation of the occupation and by the continued Israeli assaults against our Palestinian people," said Prime Minister Ismail Haniya,

"We say that ending this cycle and achieving stability, security and calm in this region is dependent on ending the occupation and the achievement by our people of their full rights."

Monday's attack at a falafel restaurant in Tel Aviv occurred during the Jewish festival of Passover.

Nine people died and more than 50 were injured.

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has condemned the attack.

However, a joint statement read by a masked militant at a news conference in Gaza City demanded that Mr Abbas apologise for his condemnation, reported AFP news agency.

The statement was signed by the Popular Resistance Committees and three cells of the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, an armed offshoot of Mr Abbas's Fatah faction.


Well, folk...it looks like the middle east is back in the limelight all for the wrong reason again after a breather. As I have foreseen, trouble is not too far with the present Hamas lead gov. :o

AllUrban
19-04-2006, 09:33 AM
Israel has been forcing the so-called government of the so-called Palestinian state into a corner ever since it was created.

Israeli armies attacked PA police stations and bases during invasions, effectively reducing the capability of the PA.

Israeli armies cut of access to Isreal for Palestinian workers irregularly, weakening the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Villages.

Israeli governments blamed (perhaps legitimately) Yassar Arafat for not doing enough to combat terrorism, pinning him into his compound at Ramallah.

Israel, led by Ariel Sharon and now Ehud Olmert is going ahead with a plan to take territory from the West Bank for Israeli settlements, through the construction of the new barrier.

The Palestinian Authority has never really had a chance...and Instead of resolving the conflict by diplomacy, the Israeli and Palestinian governments have been playing for ever higher stakes, pushing each other to the breaking point.

Well, now the breaking point has come.

m