Jump to content

Terrorism and palestinian problem


Recommended Posts

Now USA and some UK troops are trying to take Ben Laden "dead or alive". I have no doubts that they will succeed.

I doubt it will be it the following weeks, I would guess they will catch this man in a few years after a longue and difficult hunt.

But they will catch him. And some of his officers. In fact I am sure that his organisation will be completely destroyed.

And these bastards deserve their fate.

But then ?

Will it prevent just another madman to step in Ben Laden's shoes ? Will it prevent another murderer to create another terrorist organisation ?

Of course not.

USA is the country who brings the largest help to Egypt to take a case. And yet USA is there the most hated state just after Israel. Where Egypt's leader fully understand their best interest to be allied to US the population just keep disliking USA (at best). Which takes us to the two pending problems :

- Irak

- Palestinians


Most of middle east find unfair the current situation where the blocus is mostly harming the population. And S. Hussein is still in power, and abseloutely not repenting.


From Arab view, Europe and USA created Israel at the expense of Palestinian. The popular meaning is then some arabs are homeless because jews stole their land.

So the Irak problem will start to be solved when S.Hussein is dead. I would guess that a state without Hussein's family at its head would be much less threatening. Which would lift the blocus and allow for internationnal funding.

On the other hand, the Palestinian problem is way more dangerous. It is very interesting to see that when an arab leader want to put the opinion with him, he starts saying that his doing are to help the Palestinians. Even if he did never took care of them before. And it works ! It works ! Just look at middle east population opinion. Take Egypt, very few people agrees with the hidjacking and the virus-bombing. But a vast majority say they can understand why it was done.

Well the point is that anybody who think that this crisis will be resolved by weapons only is dreaming. As long as Palestinian and Irak issues will remain, there will be an ENDLESS supplie of "ready to fight" terrorists. As there has been in Northern Ireland with United Kingdoms.

Now here is my question : what do you think of this situation, what is your analysis of it especially from USA and Israel point of view ?

I know I have an Europeen view, so I am eager to read what other country think this whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, obviously things would be alot easier if we just didn't have to deal with the middle east. However it's there and what else can we do?

Those in the middle east accuse us of meddling in their affairs, and in response we take a hands off approach to the whole thing. The more they accuse us the less we get involved over there.

We realize the Middle East is a war waiting to happen - is happening, and that Israel is our ally whom we must defend. People don't understand that the Palestinians will not stop until every single Israeli citizen is dead or homeless. Israel is showing remarkable constraint due to pressure from us, though I'm sure Israel would like nothing better than to wage a genocidal war on Palestine and wipe it off the face of the earth.

Sometimes I think it would be easier if we did just that, but the easiest path is usually the wrong one. Those people have a right to life just as we do, but we have a responsibility to protect those who cannot defend themselves.

As far as Sodamn Insane, I'm sure that whenever he does fall another Islamic Fundamentalist group will take over and we will have another in addition to IRAN and Afghanistan right next to each other.

It's a never ending struggle against those who don't know any better. They are uncivilized and barbaric. We simply try to help them along - even if they don't want our help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how many of you are aware of the significant British involvement in palestine after the end of WW2, in which 100s of British Police and members of the armed forces were killed by Palestinian and Israeli terrorists, some of whom went on to form the Israeli government (Menachim Begin for one).

Unfortunately, is was all part of our own making, we'd promised Palestine to both the Jews and Arabs and then the whole thing got out of our hands.

Personally, I don't think we owe the State of Israel squat, but that's just my opinion.

For some information on this period, go here.

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Paddy Gregory ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe I read a commentary on this issue concerning bin Laden and his associates. Can't remember where....

It said that effectively, the reason why he launched his attacks on the US, were because of events that happened back in the 20s.

Apparently, the main source of anguish in his eyes, is the fact that Britain started divvying up the land down there, because the Ottoman Empire was no more. Dividing the Arabs into separate states. And of course, the culmination of this, was the creation of Israel. Which to him, was completely unacceptable. Some of this was supported by the USA. Israel in particular was, because of WWII. Now, to make matters worse, we (Europe and the USA) continued to support certain states, mostly due to oil reserves. So now, after 80 years, bin Laden decides it's time to strike. Most of us weren't alive back then. NONE of us had anything to do with what happened back then. All we have, are the recent events. US foreign policy in the region supporting Israel and the "moderate" Islamic nations. Which considering many of these are our allies, it's no surprise we'd support them...

So effectively, we are being blamed for something our great (and possibly great-great) grandfathers did.

My opinion on the matter, is basically, that we are in for the long haul. I sincerely hope that a few things happen.

#1 That the USA and other free nations in the world do not become police states "to protect their citizens from terrorists".

#2 That no nuclear weapons are used, ever.

#3 That the war on terrorism is actually effective, unlike the "war on drugs".

#4 That terrorism is actually eliminated without having to kill more people. And even more importantly, that we kill no more people than died on Sept 11. Especially civilian.

#5 That terrorists get the message that they are not welcome on this planet any more.

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Gomez ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what I think is going to happen,

Arafat is in a world of hurt right now, he either needs to shut down the terrorist organizations that he hides or he will be destroyed and the Palestinians will be driven into the sea.

Palestine as a state has never existed, there is and was no such thing as a palestinian, they are arabs without a country, they had thier own land at one time, but the Arab countries came through it to attack Israel in the 6 day war, and when Israel won that war they held onto the land for security. They could have kicked all the people out of that land, but they didn't, a good portion of the "Palestinians" went to Jordan, which is in fact where a majority are from, but were kicked out when they threatened the royal family.

As far as Bin Laden, he has all kinds of reasoins he uses for his attack on September 11th, main one being that we have ground troops in Saudi Arabia, and means that the infidels are on holy ground. He wants us out of the middle east, PERIOD, that's it pure and simple. Problem is we have to stay there, we are in his way of a fundamentalist middle east. As long as we are there, he cannot get those governments going. If he can get us out, he can destabalize the region and get his dream governments in place.

And by the Way, Bin Laden could care less about the palestinians, he just wants Israel destroyed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My stance on the Nuclear issue is that if ANY Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical attack on the USA is linked to any state - we have a right to retaliate using any of the above.

Sadly we are in for the long haul, but however many people die in this war, it is for a cause so that we can live in peace without fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the terrorists groups need to be found and destroyed, or at least as many as we can find and desroy. That means that after Afganistan there will be some other middle eastern country. It's no use just getting osama (don't even want to type his name with first letter uppercase). What I am worrying about is if we get him too soon then the people will start saying "Ok, we got him, what are we still doing in middle east". So that's why I think we need to set the stage, say if you will not give up your terrorists and destroy their camps your country will be destroyed. If they don't comply, nuke thier country and then move on to the next middle eastern country with the same proposition. Less time, less American and other allied country life wasted while all the terrorists and other scum that supports them and hates the civilized governments will die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem...many of our allies are also in that region. 1 nuke, and their destroyed too...

Nukes are a VERY bad idea in this situation. NBC warfare in general is a VERY bad idea (probably why the BC part of it is banned by the Geneva convention). IMHO Nuclear weapons should also be banned by similar conventions. But that's unlikely in todays political climate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another small concern...Terrorism is not unique to the middle east. What about Ireland? Are you aware of exactly how many Irish Americans there are? Ireland is known to have at least a dozen terrorist groups....We can't just nuke Ireland. Heck, we'd have a hard time rationalizing invading Ireland....But the problem still exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally posted by Soback:

I haven't heard about Irish terrorists planning to kill American citizens, destroy US insfrastructure and wanting to wipe us off the face of the earth.

Believe me, if it would serve their interests, they would do it.

What Gomez is pointing out, is that every country with a terrorist problem just can't go around nuking them and those who harbour them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a thought for you guys,

Spanish dictator Franco was not able to wipe out ETA, nor is Spanish democracy.

France is not able to wipe out Corse terrorism.

UK is not able to wipe out IRA.

Almost all of the above posts speak about destroying terrorism. This has been tryed before, but always failed.

Would some of you would be shocked if I say that USA could loose the war by always winning battles ?

That means that as it took place for IRA, ETA and Corse movement, the state dismantled and destroyed countless numbers of terrorist squads, but there was has always been some fresh terrorists volonteers to start again the whole process.

What is your reaction on this point ?

[ 10-23-2001: Message edited by: Unknown_Enemy ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other factor I am trying to point out by bringin up Ireland, is that the UK fully backed us. What is to say, that the next time the UK is hit by an IRA (or whatever group) terrorist attack, they don't call us in to help eliminate the problem?

How can America fight Ireland? We can't really. Too many Irish in the country who've been citizens for generations. Heck, the police department in some areas is completely Irish. So my guess is, that the USA is hoping it doesn't come to that. That Ireland's terrorist groups disband and never reform. Of course, the discussion that Paddy Gregory posted about the head of the IRA calling for a disarm, is hopeful news related to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally posted by $iLk:

The IRA is starting to disarm today. Saw it at CNN (Commie News Network).

Yes, it's been confirmed by General de Chastelain that weapon decommissioning has indeed begun. At long last. Let's hope this is followed up by some positive reaction by the Unionists and the British government.

Just a point Gomez, Gerry Adams isn't 'officially' the head of the IRA, but he is the president of their political wing Sinn Fein. However, there are many people who would agree with your description

If we want to discuss this further, we should take it to the other thread I started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now

  • Create New...