Arabs Feck It up Again!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Letterwritingman, Feb 26, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Promising peace process, initiatives that looked like they had legs (Cliches courtesy of PTP and Mr C.Kennedy!) withdrawal etc and then some fecker goes and blows himself /herself up in the middle of a group of young people enjoying themselves.

    Who truly has sympathy for the Palestinian/Arabs now?.............What on earth did they hope to achieve?

    You cant label them as Politically unaware...they've so far played an anti-semite majority to the end of the acceptable reel!

    So Mr Bliar and MR uuuuuuuum Kannaedoe will spout words of disgust and Mr H will be the only one to feel any empathy.
     
  2. I think we should collect all the bits of the Berlin wall up, relocate it to the Middle East, add about 50' to it and let the inbreds get on with it. They have demonstrated that they care little about each other so, rather than the rest of the planet getting entangled into their morose and childish games, let them get on with it. Prior to this, we need to find another means of fuel. I suggest boiling mongs and using their tantrums as a means of powering our households. Im pretty sure I can come up with a solution to powering the Flashearts fleet of limos using the dribble and sputum of the space hopper headed ones.

    If countries choose not to be civilised, we should allow them to have that form of democracy. Play ball or get te feck.
     
  3. It's the fault of that Iraqi Abraham bringing his tribe out of Ur or Sodom & Gamorah or where ever, been a year or two since I read the book.
    Where was King George when ya needed him, yeh I know no oil in them days and no camels also, they didn't cum till long after Hesus.
    john
     
  4. Rumor has it that the syrians had a hand in the attack. Isreal are mighty pissed at them, but i think they are willing to give peace a chance and not rise to the blatant red flag that the camel lovers have waved at them.

    A_S
     
  5. The fact is that there are so many different factions, all of which say they are acting on behalf of the palastinian people, some of which are so far to the extreams of the politaical spectrum as to be classed as fanatical. There is no way that anyone can bring all these groups into line and unite them.

    Until that is achieved there will not be any peace in the middle east, even if Isreal were to hand power over to the Arabs they would fight amongst themselves causing more misery and suffering for their own people.

    There is no solution that would be acepted as humanitarian or even legal.
     
  6. but this time the pals seem a little pissed with the maytr and his controllers.
    maybe slowly the message is getting through
     
  7. To label "Arabs / Palestinians" as undeserving of peace now is as moronic is declaring the entire population of Ireland undeserving of peace as a result of the IRA.

    There will never be peace with Sharon in power.
     
  8. Or even 'blackop' from across the pond giving the local branch of GWB's fan club an excuse to kick off? .... would they stoop that low?
     
  9. Your tin foils come unwrapped 8O
     
  10. Luke, welcome.

    We always enjoy a banter with U75 member.

    Sharon has gone out of his way to try and give the peace proccess every chance to succeed. He has held back from retalitory attacks on the palastinians after numerous cowardly suicide bombings/rocket attacks/civilian ambushes. He has also gone again the wishes of a large chunk of his electorate and government in order to remove the jewish settlers in the contested areas, which the palestinians want to take back.

    Tell me of all the efforts that Arafat ever made when he was still alive. None that i can recall, apart from pulling back from peace negotiations time after time :roll:

    A_S
     
  11. Absolute shawwwaaa the lot of em hurrummph

    Let them all burn
     
  12. A_S

    Sharon, has a lot of history

    1. He was a damn good General, he was involved in the capture of the west bank.

    2. He developed the logic of civ/mil out posts along the borders of the occupied territories (I lived in one for 7 months).

    So is accused by those who settled there of selling them out....

    He is no angel....

    1. I seem to remember that he went out of his way during an election campaign to piss the Palestinians off by trekking around the Al Aqaza Mosque, the rioting which followed directly lead to the 2nd intafada.

    2. He ordered the dismantling of the CIA trained PLO militia that was responsible for security after the Oslo accords. The reason given because some were loyal to extreme parties. [ A similar problem is being experienced in Iraq. ] This vacuum lead to a strengthening of Hamas and Hibzollah.

    3. Leaving aside Jerusalem, in finding a political solution he has to resolve the Golan heights problem, so an US lead invasion of Syria or regime change in Damascus would almost resolve all his problems because he will Never Ever give up the Golan Heights.

    BTW his super duper wall did not stop the bomber from getting out the W Bank.

    I am not saying the Arab have not buggered there chances but it cuts both ways....Sharon would love to see Syria broken and a weak unstable palestinian state, no need to hand back the Golan or Jerusalem

    Sadly the PLO call to back Saddam during GW1, lost a great deal of support from their backers. Personally, I think that any deal cut by US/EU should require a 1:1:1:10 (US:EU:Israeli:Arab) ratio of money invested into the Palestinian Authority and none of this should be used for weapons. They have enough, sadly they do not have enough work..... the Arabs, particullarly the Gulf States have not paid their share and what money has been given has been wasted, stolen or used for weapons.
     
  13. I realise that sharon is no angel, and that he did piss of the muslims by walking through their mosque (slightly insensitive!), but so far it seems that the isrealis (over the last 10 yrs) have done all the bending over to accomodate the palestinians, and yet it gets thrown back in their face when arafat (may he burn in hell with his 72 shirt lifters!) decided he wanted more.

    Hence why dubya got pissed off with him and said that their would be no peace when arafat was in power. Hopefully they can now control the terrorists from both sides and actually get to somwhere resembling peace. Despite this, i find it hard to believe, when one side still ritually teach their young children that to kill isrealis is their god given right and only by driving isrealis (particularly the jews) to the sea, can their country achive their own vision for palestine.

    A_S
     
  14. Wasn't sure which thread to post this on; anyway, more good stuff from Mr Steyn in the Telegraph today...

    Three years ago - April 6 2002, if you want to rummage through the old Spectators in the attic - I wrote: "The stability junkies in the EU, UN and elsewhere have, as usual, missed the point. The Middle East is too stable. So, if you had to pick only one regime to topple, why not Iraq? Once you've got rid of the ruling gang, it's the West's best shot at incubating a reasonably non-insane polity. That's why the unravelling of the Middle East has to start not in the West Bank but in Baghdad."

    I don't like to say I told you so. But, actually, I do like to say I told you so. What I don't like to do is the obligatory false self-deprecatory thing to mitigate against the insufferableness of my saying I told you so. But nevertheless I did.

    Consider just the past couple of days' news: not the ever more desperate depravity of the floundering "insurgency", but the real popular Arab resistance the car-bombers and the head-hackers are flailing against: the Saudi foreign minister, who by remarkable coincidence goes by the name of Prince Saud, told Newsweek that women would be voting in the next Saudi election. "That is going to be good for the election," he said, "because I think women are more sensible voters than men."

    Four-time Egyptian election winner - and with 90 per cent of the vote! - President Mubarak announced that next polling day he wouldn't mind an opponent. Ordering his stenographer to change the constitution to permit the first multi-choice presidential elections in Egyptian history, His Excellency said the country would benefit from "more freedom and democracy". The state-run TV network hailed the president's speech as a "historical decision in the nation's 7,000-year-old march toward democracy". After 7,000 years on the march, they're barely out of the parking lot, so Mubarak's move is, as they say, a step in the right direction.

    Meanwhile in Damascus, Boy Assad, having badly overplayed his hand in Lebanon and after months of denying that he was harbouring any refugee Saddamites, suddenly discovered that - wouldja believe it? - Saddam's brother and 29 other bigshot Baghdad Baathists were holed up in north-eastern Syria, and promptly handed them over to the Iraqi government.

    And, for perhaps the most remarkable development, consider this report from Mohammed Ballas of Associated Press: "Palestinians expressed anger on Saturday at an overnight suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that killed four Israelis and threatened a fragile truce, a departure from former times when they welcomed attacks on their Israeli foes."

    No disrespect to Associated Press, but I was disinclined to take their word for it. However, Charles Johnson, whose Little Green Footballs website has done an invaluable job these past three years presenting the ugly truth about Palestinian death-cultism, reported that he went hunting around the internet for the usual photographs of deliriously happy Gazans dancing in the street and handing out sweets to celebrate the latest addition to the pile of Jew corpses - and, to his surprise, couldn't find any.

    Why is all this happening? Answer: January 30. Don't take my word for it, listen to Walid Jumblatt, big-time Lebanese Druze leader and a man of impeccable anti-American credentials: "I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, eight million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Berlin Wall has fallen."

    Just so. Left to their own devices, the House of Saud - which demanded all US female air-traffic controllers be stood down for Crown Prince Abdullah's flight to the Bush ranch in Crawford - would stick to their traditional line that Wahhabi women have no place in a voting booth; instead, they have to dress like a voting booth - a big black impenetrable curtain with a little slot to drop your ballot through. Likewise, Hosni Mubarak has no desire to take part in campaign debates with Hosno Name-Recognition. Boy Assad has no desire to hand over his co-Baathists to the Great Satan's puppets in Baghdad.

    But none of them has much of a choice. In the space of a month, the Iraq election has become the prism through which all other events in the region are seen.

    Assad's regime knocks off a troublemaker in Lebanon. Big deal. They've done it a gazillion times. But this time the streets are full of demonstrators demanding an end to Syrian occupation.

    A suicide bomber kills four Jews. So what's new? But this time the Palestinians decline to celebrate. And some even question whether being a delivery system for plastic explosives is really all life has to offer, even on the West Bank.

    Mubarak announces the arrest of an opposition leader. Like, who cares? The jails are full of 'em. But this time Condi Rice cancels her visit and the Egyptian government notices that its annual cheque from Washington is a month late.

    Three years ago, those of us in favour of destabilising the Middle East didn't have to be far-sighted geniuses: it was a win/win proposition. As Sam Goldwyn said, I'm sick of the old clichés, bring me some new clichés. The old clichés - Pan-Arabism, Baathism, Islamism, Arafatism - brought us the sewer that led to September 11. The new clichés could hardly be worse. Even if the old thug-for-life had merely been replaced by a new thug-for-life, the latter would come to power in the wake of the cautionary tale of the former.

    But some of us - notably US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz - thought things would go a lot better than that. Wolfowitz was right, and so was Bush, and the Left, who were wrong about the Berlin Wall, were wrong again, the only difference being that this time they were joined in the dunce's corner of history by far too many British Tories. No surprise there. The EU's political establishment doesn't trust its own people, so why would they trust anybody else's? Bush trusts the American people, and he's happy to extend the same courtesy to the Iraqi people, the Syrian people, the Iranian people, etc.

    Prof Glenn Reynolds, America's Instapundit, observes that "democratisation is a process, not an event". Far too often, it's treated like an event: ship in the monitors, hold the election, get it approved by Jimmy Carter and the UN, and that's it. Doesn't work like that. What's happening in the Middle East is the start of a long-delayed process. Eight million Iraqis did more for the Arab world on January 30 than 7,000 years of Mubarak-pace marching.