• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bin Laden offers truce

teacher said:
How? The wall looks like the best idea so far. Lock it down long enough for the old to die and the young not know hate. Generations. 50 years at least.

I don't believe a wall would solve this problem. Too much of a prison vibe. I think it would only cause more resentment of the west, and I don't think the hatred would die, not even in 50 years.

Or how about the US pour money and resources into infrastructure and industry and farming for the Palestinians? Make them prosperous and self sufficient. Pour billions into their nation to make it a paradise that they can call their own and forget about wanting to take what the Jews have built. Pay them well to build for themselves. pay them to build their own homes and Mosques. Just thought of that. Where's Gandhi, I going to go tell him this.

While developing infrastructure in these countries is something I really support, if we do divert funds for that, the loving and compassionate PLO will probably not allocate it properly on top of not having to spend their own money on such a thing, meaning it will go else where... probably to Hamas' efforts to take down that nasty wall and go kill some people and I think it's time to end this disgusting run on sentence.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
I don't believe a wall would solve this problem. Too much of a prison vibe. I think it would only cause more resentment of the west, and I don't think the hatred would die, not even in 50 years.

We just will never agree on this.



While developing infrastructure in these countries is something I really support, if we do divert funds for that, the loving and compassionate PLO will probably not allocate it properly on top of not having to spend their own money on such a thing, meaning it will go else where... probably to Hamas' efforts to take down that nasty wall and go kill some people and I think it's time to end this disgusting run on sentence.

Oh no, we don't give them money. We go in there with an agreement. We ship them materials. We hire workers and pay and guide them. We start as foremen and such and train them. Free cities on our dime. of course they will say no but, that would prove something too.
Better they try to blow up a wall than people. And have you seen this thing? it's not a chain link fence with no tresspassing signs. They ain't getting through, over or under it.
I see you are also fond of the runon sentence as I am if not only it's annoying as hell and you don't have to waste time punctuating and capitalizing and such and it gives your adversary the chance to say you point is not valid because you missed a coma and then you know you've won and don't have to bother with them anymore unless they want to sell you a monkey.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
I don't believe a wall would solve this problem. Too much of a prison vibe. I think it would only cause more resentment of the west, and I don't think the hatred would die, not even in 50 years.
Yeah...

gotta hate that "prison vibe"...

That might mean they are just gonna be so pi$$ed off they'll blow themselves up in the middle of a bus station or something...

Oh wait...that's what they're doing already...

never mind...

"More resentment"...

How the hell can you have more resentment than blowing yourself up in a public square with women and children?!?!?

I wanna live on your planet...you know...The one that doesn't work in reality...:roll:
 
Capturing UbL and giving him the Saddam treatment w/ the public delousing and the the underwear model shots on the covers of the tabloids is prob'ly the best outcome. At least better than the 'at-large' and the 'martyr' outcomes. Coupled w/ the release of select sound bites that reveal the lunacy of his worldview.
 
TimmyBoy said:
Al-queda has alot of skilled people. I don't think Al-queda will have a problem replacing Bin Laden and his henchmen with skilled, determined people.

We haven't seen evidence of that.

Bin Laden's replacements might be more evil and more determined than Bin Laden ever was.

Well if we are going to engage in "might be"'s then they might be more prone to ending the terror.


The replacements likely will be worse.

Not likely at all.


I am not saying "give up" nor am I saying that we should negotiate with Bin Laden and his henchmen.

Negoatiate for what? We do we give up and what to they give up? That's insanity.

What I am saying is that the US needs to address these root causes of terrorism

They oppose freedom and liberty and western culture and want to kill you to stop it.

and plan a long term, permenant solution to reduce the terrorist threat in the future.

We do what we are doing.

I have not seen this happen. I see, short term, temporary solutions that only tackle the symptoms rather than the cause of terrorism.

These are not short term and the President has been quite clear on that.

We need to attack the cause of terrorism in order to provide a viable, long term, permenant solution to this threat. It is a very serious threat, a threat that could possibly bring about the end of mankind in my view, if not probably addressed and a long term solution that addresses the roots of terrorism implemented.

We give into them or we defeat them, which is your choice?
 
teacher said:
Oh no, we don't give them money. We go in there with an agreement. We ship them materials. We hire workers and pay and guide them. We start as foremen and such and train them. Free cities on our dime. of course they will say no but, that would prove something too.

That's basically what the plan is/was with Iraq. I like the idea, I do. If it can be done without appearing at all like western will imposed on Arabs or an occupation, I think its a great idea.

Better they try to blow up a wall than people. And have you seen this thing? it's not a chain link fence with no tresspassing signs. They ain't getting through, over or under it.

Where there's a will, there's a way.
 
cnredd said:
"More resentment"...

How the hell can you have more resentment than blowing yourself up in a public square with women and children?!?!?

The support for organizations for Hamas is high as it is in parts of Gaza and the West Bank, this wall would be the perfect propaganda to raise those approval ratings. If you leave these people no options rahter than murder, that's what they're going to do. If you treat these people like they are criminals, then like criminals is how they will act. I'm not talking about Hamas and only its supporters, I'm talking about everyone in the area and every Arab with access to a television anywhere else in the world.

There is a problem in the West Bank and in Gaza. It is the ideas of the father being swallowed whole by the mind of his child. There is a way to combat this, and I don't see how you could do that if you lock a child away with his father and like minded men. A father tells his child that the Israelis have stolen their land, killed their people, and have imprisoned them in refugee camps. Do you think seeing a wall everyday would help combat acceptance of such ideas?

The way to fight it is the internet and cable TV. It sounds trivial, but if everyone in Gaza had a dish on their roof and a computer with unfettered access to the Google, I think this whole thing would sort itself out. The problem of course is alot of people don't want it, most probably including the PA, Hamas, and everyone else who would have something to lose if radicalism died in Gaza and the West Bank.

I wanna live on your planet...you know...The one that doesn't work in reality...:roll:

Good one.
 
Stinger said:
With chocolate icing!

I am glad to see that the staunch conservative, I assume white, southerner is open minded enough to recognize his attraction to the black ladies.
 
Last edited:
teacher said:
How? The wall looks like the best idea so far. Lock it down long enough for the old to die and the young not know hate. Generations. 50 years at least.

Or how about the US pour money and resources into infrastructure and industry and farming for the Palestinians? Make them prosperous and self sufficient. Pour billions into their nation to make it a paradise that they can call their own and forget about wanting to take what the Jews have built. Pay them well to build for themselves. pay them to build their own homes and Mosques. Just thought of that. Where's Gandhi, I going to go tell him this.


I don't know. The horrible truth is that the powers that be don't know either. For the Palistinian/Israeli conflict to come to an end, the Palistinian people need to be willing to roll their sleeves up and go to work. It is not such an issue for Israelites. Israel is not leaving. The sooner they get that fact in their heads, the sooner their society can grow beyond the temper tantrum'd, blaming, and stagnate existence they now flourish in.

The problem with those ideas is that they are unwiling to do any of it. The ruling powers and the Radical element see infrastructure as giving up. If they no longer fight for "what is theirs" they have surrendered the "holy land" over to the zionists. I don't think that would sit well with "Allah," or at least the Radicals version of him. America currently gives more financial aid to the Palestinian people than any other nation. This includes Muslim nations. As long as the Arab elite and the Persians (Who really could give a damn about Palestinians) continue to encourage Palestinian violence, the conflict will go on. Ironic, how we are seen as the enemy, when their own Muslim brothers use them for violence and don't really help them at all.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
That's basically what the plan is/was with Iraq. I like the idea, I do.
Why thank you Gandhi. See? I'm not so bad. Now don't let that get out. I've a reputation to downhold.

If it can be done without appearing at all like western will imposed on Arabs or an occupation, I think its a great idea.

When the infrastructure, schools, hospitals, Mosques, homes etc. are done, we beat feet. Maybe, just maybe, if they have a decent place to live and uphold, they might not try so hard to take what the Jews have. Gives them a sense of pride, self worth. If they can go to work and return home to inside bathrooms instead of a busy day throwing rocks at tanks to return to a tent, they just might be distracted long enough to forget their hate, their envy, and be more concerned about making some cash to buy a new dish. Which in turn gives them access to information other than what the Mullahs and Clerics tell them. Maybe they'll stop beating their women with sticks long enough for them to vote.

More than likely though we will tell Hassan "look Hassan, your new home is almost done." Later that night Hassan goes and blows up his new home because it was infidels that helped him build it. Hassan's son is injured in the explosion but he can't take Hassan Jr. to the new hospital because Hassan blew it up the night before. Then Hassan Jr. dies. in which case Hassan rejoices in his son's, the mayrter's death, and calls for a Jihad. Then the Mullahs and Clerics will tell Hassan, "you see, if not for America, your son would still be alive." Hate lives on.

I think the second paragraph is the more likely of the two Gandhi.

Who's fault would that be?
 
TimmyBoy said:
Wars are not won on the battlefield or by inflicting more casualties on the enemy. Wars are won in the hearts and minds of people.

pffft tell that to Adof Hitler pal.

Wars are won on the basis of inhibiting your enemies capabilty to wage war. It is won the premise that you make the outcome as such that your enemies absolute gain is less than their losses.
 
teacher said:
Why thank you Gandhi. See? I'm not so bad. Now don't let that get out. I've a reputation to downhold.

When the infrastructure, schools, hospitals, Mosques, homes etc. are done, we beat feet. Maybe, just maybe, if they have a decent place to live and uphold, they might not try so hard to take what the Jews have. Gives them a sense of pride, self worth. If they can go to work and return home to inside bathrooms instead of a busy day throwing rocks at tanks to return to a tent, they just might be distracted long enough to forget their hate, their envy, and be more concerned about making some cash to buy a new dish. Which in turn gives them access to information other than what the Mullahs and Clerics tell them. Maybe they'll stop beating their women with sticks long enough for them to vote.

More than likely though we will tell Hassan "look Hassan, your new home is almost done." Later that night Hassan goes and blows up his new home because it was infidels that helped him build it. Hassan's son is injured in the explosion but he can't take Hassan Jr. to the new hospital because Hassan blew it up the night before. Then Hassan Jr. dies. in which case Hassan rejoices in his son's, the mayrter's death, and calls for a Jihad. Then the Mullahs and Clerics will tell Hassan, "you see, if not for America, your son would still be alive." Hate lives on.

I think the second paragraph is the more likely of the two Gandhi.

Who's fault would that be?

I believe if the area was industrialized, especially by Americans, there would be an element of people that would oppose it and probably do what you have suggested, but then they would be criminals. Flat out, no doubt about it, criminals. It's like what happened in Jordan. There is no way to appropriately spin the bombing of a wedding party. Clarify what is right and what is wrong and let the people decide. They will choose what is right.

As far as anti-Israel goes, I don't see those ideas leaving any time soon at all. The fact that Israel exists is a slap in the face to Arabs. After all, it used to be their home too. You know how I think the problem will be solved.

The problem is that history will always say that Arabs were displaced as Israel was born. Unless something else happens to history to allievate the tension there, it will always be read with disgust and resentment by Arabs and anyone else who can sympathize with that position.
 
Back
Top Bottom