Author Topic: Bush Fucks up the Israel/Palestine peace process for a couple of extra votes!  (Read 155 times)

Don Rizzle

  • Capo Di Tutti Capi
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4485
  • Karma: -4
man this guy just went too far, and why is no one on here talking about it? he has endorsed illegal israeli settlements and has shut palestine out of negotiations, being very public in his support for israel to please the jewish voting population. he could've waited a couple of days for blair to get there and advice him how stupid he is and how much this angers the international comunity including Britain. Basically bush needs to show us more respect and consult us more because he seems to be making up his foreign policy as he goes along. Bin laden need not worry cos bush is driving a wedge between america and europe all on his own, relations have deterioted after the overwelming support for america after 9/11

Quote
Bush hails 'historic' Sharon plan
President George W Bush has backed Ariel Sharon's controversial template for the future of the Middle East.
He called the Israeli leader's plan to withdraw from some Palestinian territory "historic and courageous".

Mr Sharon proposes unilaterally pulling Israelis out of the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank - and keeping some Palestinian land in the West Bank.

Palestinians reacted angrily, with leader Ahmed Qurei saying it "kills the rights of the Palestinian people".

The Palestinian prime minister said Mr Bush had apparently given "himself the right to make concessions on behalf of the Palestinians... we cannot accept this under any circumstances".

"He is the first president who has legitimised the settlements in the Palestinian territories when he said that there will be no return to the borders of 1967."


If all parties choose to embrace this moment they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest-running conflicts
US President George W Bush

Meanwhile UN Secretary General Kofi Annan advised against unlateral statements.
"The secretary general reiterates his position that final status issues should be determined in negotiations between the parties based on relevant Security Council resolutions," a spokesman for Mr Annan said in a statement.

"He strongly believes that they should refrain from taking any steps that would pre-empt the outcome of such talks."

But the BBC's Jon Leyne in Washington says Wednesday's announcement will be popular among both Democrat-voting US Jews and the Christian right who make up a crucial part of his own power base.

The concessions will be difficult if not impossible for a future US president to repudiate, our correspondent says.

'End to conflict'

The "disengagement" plan envisages Israel uprooting all settlements on the Gaza Strip but keeping six settlement blocs in the West Bank.

After a meeting between the two men at the White House, Mr Bush said: "If all parties choose to embrace this moment they can open the door to progress and put an end to one of the world's longest-running conflicts."



West Bank settlers (not including East Jerusalem): 240,000
Settlement block populations:
Maale Adumim - 30,000
Ariel - 18,000
Kiryat Arba - 4,000
Hebron enclave - 500
Givat Zeev - 10,000
Gush Etzion - 30,000
It could lead to a "peaceful, democratic, viable Palestinian state," he added.

But he seemed to disregard Palestinian insistence that the borders of a new state should be negotiated between the two sides, and should be based on the 1967 borders, before Israel took control of the West Bank and Gaza.

He said the "realities on the ground and in the region have changed greatly" and should be reflected in any final peace deal.

In another concession to Mr Sharon, the president said any Palestinian refugees who wanted to return should be accommodated on Palestinian land.

The solution to the Palestinian refugee problem, he said, "will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state and the settling of Palestinian refugees there - rather than Israel".

'New life'

Mr Sharon said his plan would create "a new and better reality for the state of Israel", and would form the basis of renewed negotiations with the Palestinians.

In Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed Mr Sharon's ideas, and called on the international community to "inject new life into the peace process".

Observers say he hopes that Mr Bush's endorsement - which coincided with Israeli prime-time television - will sway critics in his own Likud party and among settlers.

But Palestinians fear the Sharon plan could scupper the "roadmap" peace plan and with it, their chances of establishing a state that includes all of the West Bank and Gaza.

Palestinian negotiations minister Saeb Erekat slammed the US, saying the plan "violated UN resolutions".


Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said US support would mean "clearly the complete end of the peace process", and warned it would lead to a "cycle of violence".

About 92,500 Jews live in the six West Bank settlements Mr Sharon wants to keep - out of a total of 240,000 in the West Bank, or 400,000 if east Jerusalem is included.

Another 7,500 live in enclaves in the Gaza Strip, alongside 1.3 million Palestinians.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3627001.stm

Quote
Gaza expects little from pullout
By Wyre Davies
BBC, Gaza

It is not without some justification they call Gaza the "world's biggest prison" - 1.3 million people crammed into an area only 360 km square.
Since the beginning of the second Intifada, or popular uprising, in September 2000, it has been virtually impossible for many Gazans to travel outside the occupied territory because of strict Israeli frontier controls.

Even moving within Gaza, from north to south, is a nightmare because of military checkpoints around Israeli settlements like Netzarim and the Gush Katif bloc.

But will all this change under Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement plan" for Gaza? It appears not.

While virtually all Palestinians welcome Mr Sharon's plan to withdraw troops and some 7,000 settlers from Gaza, they remain deeply suspicious of his motives and doubt if there will be any greater freedoms arising from the initiative.

Hindering development

Once the settlers have gone it will of course be easier for students to travel from Khan Younis and Rafah in the south of the Gaza Strip to universities and colleges in Gaza City, and for families within the territory to visit each other.


But many fear that is as far is it will go.
Mohammad al-Qord does not anticipate that travelling outside Gaza for work or pleasure will be any easier.

"It will become even more of a prison where Sharon will be able to dump Palestinians," says the 20-year-old student.

Indeed, Israel is threatening to tighten its stranglehold around the Gaza Strip.

Mr Sharon says he will also keep control over Gaza's southern border with Egypt and will deny the Gazans the right to rebuild their airport and develop a commercial port.

Palestinian leaders have already warned that such moves will seriously inhibit the ability for social and economic development in Gaza, where male unemployment runs at about 60% and the United Nations says 70% of people live in poverty.

Frustrated dreams

As for the wider prospects for peace, few Palestinians in Gaza believe that Mr Sharon's plan will have any short- or long-term benefits.

The Israeli prime minister says it is based purely on security concerns, to lessen Israel's exposure to militant attacks and improve life in the Palestinian territories.

But Palestinian leaders have criticised him for not involving them in the discussions over Gaza and the West Bank.


They say that Israel should adhere to the internationally-sponsored "roadmap" - a staged process to peace and the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories - leading to a negotiated two-state settlement.
The chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said Mr Sharon was closing the door on the peace process. The intention to keep thousands of Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank was a recipe for disaster, he said.

Ahmed Hejazzi, another Gaza student, said the "disengagement plan" was, "...only good news for Israel".

"Although there may be more freedom for us inside the Gaza Strip, by keeping so many illegal settlements in the West Bank, Sharon is still denying us Palestinians basic rights."

Palestinians have urged President Bush to push the Israeli prime minister back to the roadmap.

But many here are worried that a tight Israeli grip around Gaza and the continued presence of large settlements in the heart of the West Bank will continue to frustrate their dreams of freedom and a viable Palestinian state.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3626225.stm
« Last Edit: April 16, 2004, 06:13:00 AM by Don Rizzle »

iraq would just get annexed by iran


That would be a great solution.  If Iran and the majority of Iraqi's are pleased with it, then why shouldn't they do it?
 

Don Rizzle

  • Capo Di Tutti Capi
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4485
  • Karma: -4
Quote
Bush endorses Sharon plan
US President George W Bush has backed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "disengagement plan" with some significant shifts in Washington's policy in Israel's favour, although he has tried to allay some Palestinian fears. BBC News Online's Martin Asser looks at the key issues.
What has President Bush agreed to?

Mr Bush has welcomed the essence of the Sharon plan which intends to pull out of the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank.

Israel will dismantle all its settlements in Gaza and some in the West Bank and pull its military back throughout the occupied territories.

Mr Bush also went further than any previous US president in recognising Israel's settlements in the West Bank and countering the claim that millions of Palestinian refugees have the right of return to their homes in what is now Israel.

The president justified this departure from long-established policy positions based on UN resolutions by saying that Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have reached the same conclusions in past peace talks.

How exactly has US policy shifted?

Because of "new realties on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centres", the president said a full withdrawal from land captured by Israeli in 1967 was now "unrealistic".


FUTURE SETTLEMENT BLOCS
Settlement block populations:
Maale Adumim - 30,000
Ariel - 18,000
Kiryat Arba - 4,000
Hebron enclave - 500
Givat Zeev - 10,000
Gush Etzion - 30,000
Gaza map in detail
Past US administrations have said Israeli settlement activity which led to establishing these population centres - illegal under international law - was incompatible with peacemaking.
As for the Palestinian refugees, Mr Bush said a "just, fair and realistic" way to end their five decades in exile was for them to settle in a future Palestinian state, not in Israel.

These positions pre-empt the international peace plan known as the roadmap, which stipulates negotiations to decide all the so-called final status issues - refugees and settlements, as well as permanent borders and the status of Jerusalem.

There was another subtle departure from the roadmap text - Mr Bush said Israeli commitments included "progress towards a freeze on settlement activity".

The roadmap text actually states Israel must freeze "all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements)".

Was there anything for the Palestinians?

Palestinians are reeling from Mr Bush's denials of their strongly-held negotiating positions - complete Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza, the illegality of settlements and right of return of refugees under UN resolution 194.

Their leaders are indicating that the US can no longer be held to be an honest broker.


They can only console themselves with the fact that Mr Bush insisted the barrier Israel is building in the West Bank should be a temporary security measure, not the basis of a permanent political boundary.
He also spoke at length in support of Palestinian aspirations to gain statehood, calling for "a viable, contiguous, sovereign and independent" state.

But he did not address Mr Sharon's recent assertion that "in the unilateral plan, there is no Palestinian state".

All this will do little to mitigate the fact that President Bush has endorsed a plan which if implemented effectively settles all of Israel's issues, and hardly any of the Palestinians', without the need for further negotiations.

Where does it leave Mr Sharon?

Surely even the Israeli leader's most optimistic fans cannot have hoped for a better result from his trip to Washington.

But the disengagement plan - whose success could yet determine the survival of Mr Sharon's government - has still got to clear some hurdles before it is implemented.

Firstly, on 2 May, the 200,000-strong rank and file of the ruling Likud party get to vote on it, with some leading party members having pledged to oppose the plan.

If Mr Sharon wins, the plan will be presented to the cabinet and then parliament.

He will probably have to rebuild the government in the face of resignations from entrenched pro-settlement coalition members.

Shimon Peres, the Israeli Labour party leader, has already said he will back the disengagement plan in parliament, and may join a national unity government should Mr Sharon need to form one.

But Mr Bush's enthusiastic endorsement will boost the plan's chances considerably.

This is something Mr Sharon badly needs after facing increased discontent about his performance and the possibility of being indicted over a bribery scandal.

What happens if the disengagement plan is implemented?

The hope for Israelis is that the problem of suicide bombing will diminish considerably, without their having to wait for a Palestinian leadership to emerge with whom the Israeli government can resolve the conflict.

Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, meanwhile, will escape from a crushing military occupation. Although the Israeli army will maintain its capability to invade from new positions encircling the territory they withdraw from.

The danger is that the new arrangement will become crystallised without any further progress towards further Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking, let alone moves to end the wider Arab-Israeli conflict.

Gaza would become a single Palestinian entity, but without controlling its own land or sea borders or airspace.

Palestinians in the West Bank might be enclosed in several cantons divided by the six settlement blocs that Mr Sharon has said he will hold onto.

Hebron might remain a serious flashpoint, with three Jewish settlements in the heart of the southern West Bank's largest Palestinian town.

The status of Jerusalem would be almost impossible for Palestinians to put back on the negotiating agenda as the city would be separated from the West Bank on three sides by the Givat Zeev, Gush Etzion and Maale Adumim settlements.



Click here to return

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3462461.stm

also here are some comments made about it on the bbc website

Quote
Bush And Sharon have again said they can defy international law. In effect, might makes right. This is wrong and dangerous for the world. This has gone beyond Palestine. The international community must act to re-establish the direction of moving the world toward being based on laws, not on men.
Steve, USA

Mr. G W Bush has spoken about "the new realities on the ground" to endorse Mr. Sharon's plan paying no attention to the Palestinian's legitimate rights. The realities on the ground mean, among other things, the Israeli occupation achieved by the overwhelming Israeli force supported by the USA and other western countries in the face of the Arabs' weakness and divisions. So the message Mr. Bush is sending is "Force - not justice- makes the realities on the ground. The helpless desperate Palestinians have no such force at the moment, except sacrificing their lives as "suicide bombers" or in Mr. Bush's view: as "Terrorists".
Hussain Elsayes, Egypt

The only thing that will bring peace is Israel withdrawing totally from occupied areas, including the entire West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights, and treating Palestinians like human beings instead of third class citizens or worse. World leaders, from Sharon to Bush, need to realize that terrorism does not happen in a vacuum, nor because terrorists "do not approve of freedom and liberty," but as a reaction to misguided policy and oppression.
Kevin, Maputo, Mozambique

The plan is only for the good of Israel. Sharon will continue his apartheid regime and keep Gaza a virtual prison. Well done George for a 'Historic and Courageous' Jewish vote winner.
Simon G, London UK

The proposed Sharon plan should push the Palestinians to put their own house in order and start to negotiate seriously. If not they risk a fait accompli for a greater Israel.
Edward Bryant, Paris, France

I don't understand. Why now? And secondly why isn't the whole world asking Israel and Palestine to work for peace under a UN resolution. It looks like this is all just a pact made between Sharon and Bush for their own political gain in coming elections.
Mushtaq, Virginia, USA

Sharon's sole purpose is to annex as much of Palestinian territory as possible. Retaining the aforementioned West Bank settlements and the shameful wall, will effectively still control 60% of Palestinian territory. Only the establishment of a Palestinian state will bring peace not only to Palestine but to the entire Middle East region.
O Mak, Greece

I do not, and will not, believe that Sharon will ever do any deed with peace as the motivator. He is definitely up to something that is not in the best interest to Palestine. He might give something to placate GW Bush while in the end Israel will walk away with the lion's share of the benefit.
Tom, Anchorage, USA

I don't think that disengagement as Sharon puts it, is a genuine effort at trying to make peace. If he was after peace, Israel should withdraw from all the Palestinian territories it currently holds. The problem here is that Israel has never been willing to concede any of the occupied lands and until then, I don't see any lasting peace if any.
Jacobo Mwasi, Georgia, USA

We, Israelis, suffer from our inability to take strategic decisions regarding the WB/GS since 1967. Two main exceptions are Rabin's decision to go for the Oslo process, and Sharon's current plan. I hope that this plan will not end in massive bloodshed as the Oslo process did. One thing is clear, while Rabin hoped for peace with the Palestinians, I believe, Sharon does not follow such illusions.
Haggay, Israel

Justice brings peace. The key question is if the plan will bring a just and durable solution, then it will bring peace. The plan is not complete and may bring more unjust actions towards the occupied territories of the West Bank, thus making the situation even more explosive than it is now.
Vicken Aslanian, Amman, Jordan

Farid Ahmad, Peshawer, Pakistan  
I think Mr Sharon does not try hard enough to barter a peace with the Palestinians. It will result in more alienation for the Palestinians and thus more threats to the Israelis. Sharon is basically playing into the hands of people who do not want peace, whether they are Israelis or Palestinians.
Farid Ahmad, Peshawer, Pakistan

It will only work if Sharon is not the leader of Israel. Let another Prime Minister implement the plan, one who has more of an inclination towards peace than a former military officer, and the plan might be successful.
Frank, USA

srael should leave all settlements beyond the green line. Just walk away leaving intact all homes and businesses. There will be no peace unless this happens.
Jack Sturiano, Island Park, New York, USA

Sharon and peace can never be combined. As long as Sharon is in charge, there can't be peace.
Alina, Helsinki, Finland

As long as Sharon or anyone like him stay in power there will never be peace in the Middle East! The US should stop supporting the current government of Israel!
Hamze, Latvia


Jason Robinson, Dublin, Ireland  
I don't think anyone would be too confident of something that Ariel Sharon is putting his name to. Hopefully this can bring peace, but the plan should be practical and a Palestinian state should be a given. It's about time Sharon realised that soldiers and tanks won't solve his problems, diplomacy, compromise and reconciliation will.
Jason Robinson, Dublin, Ireland

It the Palestinian basic right by international law to have all the west bank, anything less than that cannot be called a peace plan, it is simply an occupation plan, in my view, this is an outrageous declaration of war by Sharon and a challenge for every Arab to respond by calling for sanctions against Israel and fighting the occupation by all means within international law as applied by the Americans in Iraq against Saddam
Ahmad Hmoud, Jordan, Amman

Sharon and peace are two incompatible words. Peace has its foundations in justice. And as long as the Palestinians are deprived from their own land and rights, there will never be peace.
Ali Machrafi, Sidi Hajjaj, Morocco

Sharon isn't the kind of person to do anything for the sake of peace. This is an obvious ploy to boost Bush's popularity before the elections, as he had promised to be actively engaged in the Mid East peace process. Up until now, he hasn't done a thing! Both Sharon and Bush are not in the business of peace. They need conflict to remain in power. Without conflict, what else have they achieved? As for the disengagement plan, only 7000 illegal settlers live in Gaza, whereas 280,000 in the West Bank. If Sharon really wanted peace, he would look at moving those also. This is just another token gesture by Sharon.
Junaid Ali, London, UK
« Last Edit: April 16, 2004, 02:26:38 AM by Don Rizzle »

iraq would just get annexed by iran


That would be a great solution.  If Iran and the majority of Iraqi's are pleased with it, then why shouldn't they do it?
 

M Dogg™

  • Greatest of All Time
  • Made
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12112
  • Thanked: 13 times
  • Karma: 330
  • Feel the Power of the Darkside
I don't believe you, bush would never.
 

Don Rizzle

  • Capo Di Tutti Capi
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4485
  • Karma: -4
I don't believe you, bush would never.
lol i gotta give you props for that one

i wanna see how trauma comes to defend his hero

iraq would just get annexed by iran


That would be a great solution.  If Iran and the majority of Iraqi's are pleased with it, then why shouldn't they do it?
 

willie_d

  • 'G'
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 182
  • Karma: -3
  • You ready? Here come the pain!
George W. is even dumber than his pops. Sharon and Bush are alike: they like twin brothers.
It's time that someone stops these madmen from ruling our world. I'm getting fed up with it!
The only way you can fuck with me, is in a orgy.
 

I TO DA GEEZY

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2630
  • Karma: 185
  • Humankind will thrive on compassion
these 2 r using our world?....what about Arafat  , he must be the big hero than....the one who in fact ended the peace process, even with Barak's Radiculous good will to give'm 97% of the demand in Camp David...
« Last Edit: April 16, 2004, 10:59:26 AM by I TO DA GEEZY »
We are all human beings isn't that a good enough reason for peace?
 

Woodrow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4329
  • Karma: 158
Why does nobody ever talk about how, for one, Jordan is sitting on more of the historical land called "Palestine"? Or ask why, for two, aren't they suicide-bombing them? Or, for three, why their "Arab brothers" won't let them settle or work in their lands, but will let them sit in concentration camps until they get pissed enough to join Hizbollah?

I mean, I'm not one of those folks who think Israel can do no wrong, but damn.

Now maybe, just maybe, Arab leaders want this thing to keep going so they'll have something to distract their people from the fact that they have shiatty infrastructure, shiatty education, zero science, culture, art, influence, yet the "royals" are sitting on platinum bidets?
 

Don Rizzle

  • Capo Di Tutti Capi
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4485
  • Karma: -4
yea its no secret arab coutries have appalling human rights records. i don't know much about the jordan boarders, did they take it in recent memory or hundreds of years ago?

iraq would just get annexed by iran


That would be a great solution.  If Iran and the majority of Iraqi's are pleased with it, then why shouldn't they do it?
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Why does nobody ever talk about how, for one, Jordan is sitting on more of the historical land called "Palestine"? Or ask why, for two, aren't they suicide-bombing them? Or, for three, why their "Arab brothers" won't let them settle or work in their lands, but will let them sit in concentration camps until they get pissed enough to join Hizbollah?

I mean, I'm not one of those folks who think Israel can do no wrong, but damn.

Now maybe, just maybe, Arab leaders want this thing to keep going so they'll have something to distract their people from the fact that they have shiatty infrastructure, shiatty education, zero science, culture, art, influence, yet the "royals" are sitting on platinum bidets?



Good post.
 

King Tech Quadafi

  • His Royal Highness
  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7323
  • Karma: -221
  • i think you betta recognize...
for those that dont know, 755 of Jordans population is palestinian and the west bank was occupied by jordan in 1948

but these things are not mentioned until the fundemental issue is adressed, namely the plight of the Palestinians vis a vis Israel as the occupier
"One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire cat in a tree. "Which road do I take?" she asked. "Where do you want to go?" was his response. "I don't know," Alice answered. "Then," said the cat, "it doesn't matter."

- Lewis Carroll
 

Woodrow

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4329
  • Karma: 158
193111 of Frances population is UDI....

These thing aren't mentioned until the fundemental issue is adressed...