U.N. offers assistance to Israel

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
Original article: http://www.canadiancontent.net/commtr/article_685.html
U.N. offers assistance to Israel

By Canadian Content Staff
Saturday June 12, 2004

In a not so surprising move today by the United Nations, the secretary-general of the UN has offered assistance to Israel with resources to exit from the Gaza strip.

Kofi Annan, UN secretary-general, spoke to the Israeli prime minister recently stating that the UN's resources would be available to assist.

The Israeli administration all of a sudden seems very committed to ending conflicts in the region, and to halt the Jewish settlements which are increasingly infringing on Palestinian land and rights.

Currently, Arial Sharon and his team are devising plans to offer Jewish settlers a cash reward for moving out of Palestinian land.

The recent developments in Israeli-Palestinian relations have stunned many, which bring a change in the Israeli position on many topics. The supposed roadmap to peace, the refusal of Israel to comply with simple Geneva conventions and the continued violence contributed in part by military forces which occupy Palestinian land.

The move from Palestinian land by about 7,500 would start sometime in August, but a deadline remains later, at mid-2005.

Several question marks remain around the subject, but what would stop Israel from changing their mind in the move out? Conflicts will still ensue in the eastern Palestinian sector of the country, which is continually seeing its borders breached by a growing number of Israeli settlers.

The roadmap to peace has shown how much President Bush is involved in a peace process in the Middle East. The US supported roadmap has basically failed up until now.

It would be hard to determine if the recent moves by Israel were just International shows to hide their real objectives of invading more Palestinian land in the east and possibly access to the ultimate prize; Jerusalem.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
Andem said:
It would be hard to determine if the recent moves by Israel were just International shows to hide their real objectives of invading more Palestinian land in the east and possibly access to the ultimate prize; Jerusalem.

This is the bottom Line, Andem. There are different objectives in the Isreali mind than they are pretending to say. The ultimate goal is Jerusalem, take the best part of west bank, leave Gaza for the Eygptians to police, no right of return to refugees which is against every UN resolution. This will leave a palestinian state that will look like a piece of Swiss Cheese.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
Moghrabi, you're not making sense.

Since 1967, Israel has been offering land for peace-- as per UN res 242. It was the CHOICE of the Arabs not to negotiate, as set out in the Khartoum Declaration-- all of which is a result of a war started when Egypt kicked out UN peacekeepers. blockaded the Gulf of Aqaba and massed troops along Israel's borders in tandem with Syria.

Here we are, almost 40 years later at the same place we were in 1967, and the 'lightbulb' finally goes on in the Arab world.

Let me tell you a secret. Isrealis don't care about Gaza, the West Bank or any other Arab territory, save for a few religious fundamentalists-- and they're about to be 'bought out'.

As for Jerusalem, the best the Arab world can hope for is a shared city. When the destruction of holy sites and cemetaries was revealed and documented in 1967, can you blame the Israelis for not being so enthusiastic about any return of Holy Sites? Even Christians in pre 1967 Jerusalem were subject to, shall we say, almost dhimmi status.

All the conspiracy theories in the world can't change reality. One shrewd Arab observer wrote, "The real Naqba was the introduction of video cameras and video tape into the region."

While press manipulation is a sport engaged in by all in the region, in the end, the policymakers are keenly aware of the realites.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
researchok,

I think you are being naiive about this subject. Arabs do want peace. It is called a just and comprehensive peace. Not wishy washy (will give you what we want peace). As per your statement, Isreal does not care about any Arab Land, this is total nonsense. The Isreal's have their plan already planned. From river to river to make Greater Isreal. That means from the Jordan River to the Euphrates River.

Tell what UN resolution (Out of 63) did the Isreal obey? None. They don't give a damn about the UN. If they follow the UN resloutions, Arabs as well as Isreal's will be very happy. These resolutions say that Isreal must go back to Pre-1967 war and give the Gaza and all of the west bank to the Phalastinans. Also, the return of the refugees.

Waht israel is offerring in: No right of return, not all of west bank, Gaza will be monitored by Eygpt, no armed police or army for the state of Phalastine.

Let me ask you one question. If you were an Arab, will you accept these condition for your future country.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
moghrabi, I don't think I'm being naive-- I'm a realist.

Firstly, Israel is NOT in violation of 63 UN resolutions.

UN resolutions come in 2 flavors-- binding and non binding. Virtually all of the 'condemnations' of Israel are just that-- non binding resolutions. The fact that the UN has censured Israel is of little consequence, as the UN has remained silent on far worse atrocities in the region. A million and half dead Christians in Sudan, the ongoing slave trade in Mauritania, the unfolding tragedy in Darfur, the policy of rape and dismemberment gy the GIA in Algeria-- the list goes on and on.

As for the right of return (UN 338) that does NOT specifically call for the return of refugees. It also makes provisions for the compensation of refugees. More importantly, the refugee issue is not limited to the Palestinians. There is the matter of non Muslim refugees from the Arab countries that must be addressed as well, as per UN 338. I won't get into the polls of Palestinians who actually want to return, but I'm sure you're aware of the numbers.

You also neglect to mention the hard reality that the Israeli occupation has been the most benign in history. Israel has built the hospitals, health care, sanitation infrastructure, schools and power plantsa that didn't exist prior to 1967, just to mention a few improvements-- not the least of which was a viable economy, now in ruins.

As for what Isreal is offering-- well, there are consequences to war. Virtually every state came about as the result of conflict and subsequent negotiation.

It also is worth mentioning that when Israel left the West Bank and Gaza after Oslo, the PA virtually let the entire infrastucture collapse, resulting in very diminished health care, educational resources, less government provided services (e.g., mail, sanitation, etc). While Suha Arafat may get $100,000 per month spending money, and Arafat himself has squirreled away between 8-12 BILLION dollars, that alone does not qualify the PA as a responsible government. Nor does it make for a responsible 'peace partner'.

I noticed you didn't argue any of the points I made-- which is probably best.

If the Palestinians want a responsible free state, they're going to have to earn it. No state can allow terror as a form of political expression. A simple reading of the Arab and Palestinian press continue to highlight CHOICES made, including the CHOICE to glorify terror. Many hundreds have been killed in the Intrafada which is ongoing to this day as Palestinian groups use terror and murder against each other.

The Palestinians CHOSE the intifada. They CHOSE to reject Oslo and Baraks deal. They are in the situation because of CHOICES the PA made.

As a matter of fact, that holds true throughout the region. Reforms will come only when they are earned and fought for. Until that time comes, the region will continue to spin its wheels.

As I mentioned earlier, a good case can be made for the real Naqbah being the advent of video and audio tape.
 

Numure

Council Member
Apr 30, 2004
1,063
0
36
Montréal, Québec
Isreal does care about the PAlestinian lands... Forget about does ever growing settlements? They arnt about to give does up. Actually, the hole reason this issue hasnt been resolved with the last peace plan, is exactly because of that.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
You're right.

After almost 40 years, the settlements are indeed, a 'fact on the ground'.

Still. the fact remains it has been almost 40 years since the 'land for peace' formula as proposed by UN 242 was rejected by the Arabs.

I do favor removal of the settlments-- but that in no way is binding on Israel, of course. The choice of rejection by the Arabs was made. Do you seriously think that you can look at the settlements or any other issue in the region in a vacuum? In point of fact, the rejectionist posture taken by the Arab world has only helped to legitamize Israel's claim to determine it's own fate-- a posture taken and influenced by decades of terror against Israeli civilian population and the constant barrage of violent and anti Jewish rhetoric in the PA press, in school scurriculums and the pulpit. The notion that the problem is the fault of of only one of the parties involved (Israel) is rather simplistic.

On a personal note, I do believe there is much to hold Israel accountable for-- including an inherently unfair peace process--but oversimplifying the situation by ignoring realities Israel has faced everyday since it's inception isn't one of them.

Simply stating that the settlements are the problem is a clear denial and recognition of what the real issues are.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
You are being oneside when it comes to terror. isn't destroting the homes, causing thousands to be refugees, targeted assisinations a form of terror. Also, you said that Arafat (in which I am not a fan of him) took 10-12 Billion dollars. how about the scandels that Sharon is involved in.

As per UN resolution, every resoultion is binding. However when a resloution is there against Israel, the US either kills it or abstain from it. Not once the US told Israel to abide by the resolutions.

Massacares in Sabra and Shatila, Ginnen, Qana. The worst kind of massacres and against humanity go unpunished.

WMD. Only when it is in a country that does not support the US then they are OK. Israel has over 200 WMD and God knows what else.

Lets talk reality here. Israel gets away with everything because it is protected by a bigger evil, if you get my gist.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
Yes, Israel is destroying homes-- homes that are used as tunnel junctions for the importation of weapons and explosives used to blow up innocent civilians.

You neglect to mention that there were no homes being blown up prior to the Intifadah.

Targeted assasinations may not be pretty, but they work, as is evident by the fewer terror attacks committed. As in any war, anywhere, leaders are fair game-- especially leaders that call for mass murder and wanton killings. In other words, 'you wanna play, you gotta pay'.

I'm glad you brought up the massacres in Sabra and Shatilla. Why do you suppose the Christian Phalange committed those atrocities? Out of love for the Palestinians? Or perhaps it was because of the way they (Christians) were treated by the Palestinians?

As fro weapons of mass destructions, well, it seems Israel may have reason to remain tight lipped. Former Iranian Persident Ali Rafsanjani has advocated the use of a nuclear weapon against Israel. His rationale (if you can call lunacy a 'rationale') was that using a nuclear weapon might damage Islam, but would eradicate Israel. Seems to me and every rational human being that in this case, the fear of retaliation should keep the lunatics in line. It is interesting to note that the Arab world (governments) actually applauded this Neanderthal.

As for the 'bigger evil', to whom are you referring (I know the answer, of course)?

So once again, the Palestinians are the victims of a conspiracy and are not at all responsible for their own fate.

Same old song.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
By the way, i forgot to suggest you learn the distinction between UN resolutions.

They are referred to as series six and series seven reslutions-- those that are binding and those that are not binding.

http://economist.com/world/na/displ...onomis[/i]t that may clear things up for you.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
researchok said:
So once again, the Palestinians are the victims of a conspiracy and are not at all responsible for their own fate.

Same old song.

We agree to this point so far. But who is creating this conspiracy. As i mentioned in a prior thread, I lost 11 memebers of my family in Sabra and Shatila. We are not palatinians. My family was massacred by Isreal's army not by the christian. If you want a witness, you have him here.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
Thanks for the link. But when you see things first hand, no article is going to convince me otherwise.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
a quote from the article you sent me for all to read.

"What, though, about Israel's nukes? Does its status as an undeclared nuclear power put it on a par with Iraq, which has tried to become one? No. In 1981, Resolution 487 scolded Israel for sending its aircraft to destroy Iraq's Osiraq reactor, which Israel said was being used to manufacture a nuclear weapon, despite having been given a clean bill of health by inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Noting that Israel had not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), as Iraq had, the UN called on Israel to put its own nuclear facilities under the IAEA safeguards, as the NPT requires.

Two decades on, Israel has still not signed the NPT. This infuriates the treaty's supporters, who have been striving to make it “universal”. But, as with any other treaty, governments are free not to sign. What they are not free to do is sign, receive the foreign (civilian) nuclear help to which signing entitles them, and then try to build a bomb secretly. This, it is now ruefully accepted, is what Iraq tried to do, and may still be trying to do. Israel is thought to possess a large nuclear arsenal, about which it is not being open and honest, and this is provoking to its neighbours. But it is not evidence of “double standards”. Being a nuclear-armed power is not, by itself, a breach of international law."
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
I couldn't agree more.

I've been to Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

I've also been to the region and have seen it all up close. I've been to Amman, Damascus, Riyadh, Tehran, (needed a new passport!)etc., and I've talked to people in the region. You might be surprised at what some really think about the Palestinians and even Israel.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
to me they are both crazy. They have hatred that goes way back to God knows when.

I like the information you are providing and I can argue every single one of them. But this is fruitless. For the past 55 years, they've been trying to resolve this problem. I don't think we are going to make a dent in it here in this forum.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
So what exactly is your point?

Israel is not REQUIRED to sign the NPT. Further, as my previous post indicated, the Arab world applauded the idea of actually USING nuclear weapons against Israel. Deterrance it would seem, is in Israel's best interest. Further, Isreal has stated she would not be the first to introduce WMD in the region.

One could say, "if the missiles fly, you'll know why".

So what's the problem?

Further, as you point out in the Economist article, vis a vis Iraq, "What they are not free to do is sign, receive the foreign (civilian) nuclear help to which signing entitles them, and then try to build a bomb secretly. This, it is now ruefully accepted, is what Iraq tried to do, and may still be trying to do. Israel is thought to possess a large nuclear arsenal, about which it is not being open and honest, and this is provoking to its neighbours. But it is not evidence of “double standards”. Being a nuclear-armed power is not, by itself, a breach of international law."

Case closed, as they say.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
That's true.

We won't make a dent on solving middle east problems in this forum.

On the other hand, the more clarity we have, the better off we all are.

What I don't understand is why Arabs don't take Israel to task for those things she should be held accountable for.

Maybe one day, they'll figure it out.
 

researchok

Council Member
Jun 12, 2004
1,103
0
36
We agree to this point so far. But who is creating this conspiracy. As i mentioned in a prior thread, I lost 11 memebers of my family in Sabra and Shatila. We are not palatinians. My family was massacred by Isreal's army not by the christian. If you want a witness, you have him here.[/quote]

My 'conspiracy' point was sarcastic.

As for your family, I'm truly sorry, but the massacre in Sabra nad Shatilla has been well documented

In point of fact, Arafat brought the death of tensd of thousands throughout the region-- Lebanon, Jordan, etc.

Simply blaming Isreal is simplistic, as I said.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
Is only Arafat responsible for the death oh thousands or both parties are. From Ben Gorion to the current evil man (Sharon)? Sharon is responsible for more death than any other person I know of. We might diagree there, but i am sticking to my guns in this case.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
We also need more voices from this forum to get involved. This is a very big issue and would like to hear what others think. All invited.