Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

U.S. encouraging the

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Sep, 17 2003 @ 10:37 PM
link   
news.yahoo.com.../nm/20030918/ts_nm/mideast_dc

"The United States on Tuesday vetoed a Syrian-led United Nations (news - web sites) Security Council resolution demanding Israel not act against the Palestinian leader.
Arafat shrugged off the veto saying it is "not the first veto against the Palestinians and will not be the last." But other Palestinian officials said they feared that Israel could see the U.S. move as a license to kill Arafat."


I'm not expert on this subject, but in reading this article, I see the US almost seeming to take a stand of "do what you gotta do" in Israel's desire to "remove" Arafat.
Granted, the man has caused many of his own problems, but if Israel does take him out of the picture, wouldn't that be the great inspiration that those who seek to use violence to attain their goal have been looking for?


Peace,
BG


[Edited on 18-9-2003 by beergoggles]

[Edited on 18-9-2003 by beergoggles]




posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:44 AM
link   
I respect how you "view" this as "the US almost seeming to take a stand of "do what you gotta do" in Israel's desire to "remove" Arafat," but I don't see it that way.

Here's a question for you.
Why do the Palestinians have a seat at the UN and not Tibet or Taiwan?

I personally think that the US and Ambassador John Negroponte made the appropriate 'call'. Why?
Well lets look at this:
The US was the only one of the 15 countries on the Security Council to oppose the resolution, with three - Britain, Germany and Bulgaria - abstaining.

Well, why's that?

""There hasn't been one resolution condemning the killing of 860 Israelis through suicide and homicide bombing," Gissin said. "One hundred and twenty suicide bombers penetrated Israel in the past three years -- not one condemnation of that."
In other words.......
The reason the US vetoed the resolution is because it did not condemn Palestinian terrorism not because the US objected to the condemnation of Israel saying it will expel Arafat. The resolution failed to contain language that condemned Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It was nothing more than an anti-Israeli resolution and the Arab states trying to score political points. When, by chance, if ever has the idiotic and biased UN, ever condemn or pass a resolution against Palestine for their attacks against Israel?!? Let me answer that for you and others......never.

Immediately after the vote, America's U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte reiterated that the United States doesn't support the elimination or forced exile of Arafat and believes that his diplomatic isolation is the best course. The US continues to oppose killing or expelling Arafat, continues to oppose the security fence, and remains committed to this suicidal roadmap which has already cost the lives of 79 Israelis.

He further said the United States was forced to use its veto because the resolution failed to name groups such as Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, which has claimed credit for numerous suicide bombings and other attacks against Israelis.

For decades the UN and Europe, thats right, have run interference for Yasser Arafat. When Israel responded they demanded restraint and condemnation. When the Israelis were being attacked, they turned a blind eye. With this action/resolution by the UN today...they have proven it but once more.

regards
seekerof














[Edited on 18-9-2003 by Seekerof]



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:49 AM
link   
i thought usa was unhappy about israel saying their gonna kill arafat? now they veto the thing trying to stop it? wtf is going on



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by banjoechef
i thought usa was unhappy about israel saying their gonna kill arafat? now they veto the thing trying to stop it? wtf is going on



Did you even read what I wrote?
I placed in it what the US Ambassidor said.....let me quote it for you:

"Immediately after the vote, America's U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte reiterated that the United States doesn't support the elimination or forced exile of Arafat and believes that his diplomatic isolation is the best course.

He said the United States was forced to use its veto because the resolution failed to name groups such as Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, which has claimed credit for numerous suicide bombings and other attacks against Israelis."

............................!!

regards
seekerof



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Seekerof,

You have done a damn good job on this. You said it all. My hat's off to you.

I agree, the US made the right move. Even though Isreal is talking of "removing" Arafat, the US is trying to make a point. You cannot condemn Isreal without condemning everything that has happened to Isreal. Most everything Isreal has done to "provoke" this anyway, has been done in either defense or retaliation of what has been happening for decades to their country.



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 02:52 PM
link   

The reason the US vetoed the resolution is because it did not condemn Palestinian terrorism not because the US objected to the condemnation of Israel saying it will expel Arafat. The resolution failed to contain language that condemned Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It was nothing more than an anti-Israeli resolution and the Arab states trying to score political points. When, by chance, if ever has the idiotic and biased UN, ever condemn or pass a resolution against Palestine for their attacks against Israel?!? Let me answer that for you and others......never.


I concur...excellent job of reading between the lines for the truth here....

I too, have often wondered why there even is a Palestinian seat.... My only guess is that it deals with the fact that Jerusalem is recognized internationally as a separate entity from Isreal...



posted on Sep, 18 2003 @ 07:43 PM
link   
First of all, my apologies for the incomplete subject title. It was to read "US encouraging the "removal" of Arafat?". I was attempting to correct this when I was suddenly unable to access the site.

seekerof,
It wasn't until I read what you said that I understood what was going on with this. This was an opportunity play the victim once again.
I disagree with the whole Idea of the "roadmap" and wonder when they will finally see the reality of the fact that it is not going to work.
But I ask this: realistically what will work?
They have been at this for so long, that I wonder if it will ever be resolved. I think that no matter what possible solutions to this are presented and set into motion, there will always be a fraction who are unhappy with it and the cycle of violence will continue.
You mentioned the security fence do you think it would be feasible?

p.s. As for Tibet and Taiwan, I think China would have a stroke. But I see your point.

Respectfully,
BG



posted on Sep, 20 2003 @ 03:56 AM
link   
I even read some # about how President Bush said that Palestine needs a new leader and that it's about time they got one. Was some crazy shiite. But I'm pretty sure we all agree that Arafat needs to be iced, and hopefully soon!



posted on Sep, 20 2003 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Beergoogles,

have to agree with you, it is time for Arafat to go, take his billion dollars or whatever he is worth these days and just leave.

Seekerof,

come now, we know why Tibet and Taiwan don't have seats at the UN, it is due to China, backed by Russia.

I was an early supporter of the fence. It worked in Berlin.

What is funny about this is that I think that Arafat retook policing in Palestine eg. his own personal mob, and used that to threaten Abbas. Arafat was afraid of being squeezed out of control of Palestine because he would not be the number 1 palestinian to keep exploiting it for money!

With Abbas gone, he was negotiating with Israel primarily on a 'first world re: economic cooperation level' the only cards left on the table for Arafat is the wall being down as you suggest. But it is not just to let suicide bombers through, but illegal workers, spies and what all. Furthermore, the Palestine (Mexico) and Israel (US) type dynamics we have going there are going to be more in Israel's favour if the wall goes up.



[Edited on 21-9-2003 by THENEO]






top topics



 
0

log in

join