If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
It also explains why the US was so furious at the recent concession by Iraq to allow inspectors to visit all sites, including palaces and mosques. There is now a serious 'danger' that UN inspectors may return to their work and war can be avoided. That would ruin the US' carefully laid plans.
Something that people seem to ignore about Mai Lai 4. The incident was self-policed by the US military. Not by some outside source.
In the entire time the US military was in Vietnam, there are no more than a dozen incidents, more like a half-dozen. You can find that many incidents for the NVA/VC in any single month of the conflict.
Read some history.
Likely not covered in Revised History, 101...
I must admit that my memory is failing me upon this one. Exactly how many Vietnamese were claimed to have been thrown from helicopters during that incident?
I must admit that my memory is failing me upon this one. Exactly how many people were claimed to have been thrown from helicopters by the NVA/VC during those incidents?
How many people were claimed to have been thrown from helicopters by the US/ARVN?
ZERO
As someone has already pointed out, that is the land of hollywood, not reality. Then again, some people have got their concept of the Vietnam War from movies like Platoon. It's called "fiction".
Lebanon
from June until August 1982 (3 months) Israel killed over 30,000 people and injured over 200,0000.
Israel owe blood to a lot of people. Think of that
And how many people have the Syrians killed and injured in Lebanon? What do you think should be done to them?
Coming soon to a cinema near you... 'Gulf War II; Oil Be Back'. Starring Robert Redford as Saddam Hussein, Willem Dafoe as George Walker Bush and Jane Fonda as Herself...
You're funny. Stupid, but funny.
Since many in attendence here require the Hollywierd interpretation upon which to base their comprehension, then perhaps the same should view Rules of Engagement, and witness the clandestine type character within the bureaucracy. Very accurate portrayal of what we witness here... and similar ethics...
Its reverse. as in reverse ice pick..
First, please post a source, I did, complete with dates and methods..
But are you are saying, its right for the Palestinians to collect? That leaves the door wide open to collect for WWI, WWII and any place else there's blood owed..
And by blessing the palestinians, that says its OK to target civilians only...
I hope no one here agrees with that....
Uncle Joe
The best answer to your explosive laden babies??
But you are growing as a person, you getting to be funny.. :rolleyes:
What happened is history or are you being funny again?? Twice in a row, that's a marriage between ludricrous and ridiculous.. But speaking of Hollywood...
As Forrest Gump said... Stupid is as Stupid does...
Forrest was in the know, he was at every major event of the era..
After all if you are going to believe Hollywood, swallow it all..
And I like Forrest's version the best... Don't you??
What ever happened to the subject Peace Palestinian Style?? Avoiding the issues, as Forrest would say Again...
Ahhh, you all must admire the terrorists so.. Blowing up innocent men, women and children..
Do you honestly condone that?
Careful, the al-qaeda may come to a theatre near you...
Pleasant surprise to witness your return.
Somehow, I do believe that "reverse ice pick" is somewhat outside of their collective expertise.
Agreed, which is why it is a shame that Arafat didn't take that chance when it was laid on a table for him a couple of years ago.
I do see more than one side. As long as there is terrorism, the attack of innocent men, women and children, there will be no peace..
As MOK said there was an offer of peace, it was ignored. Was it a perfect solution, no, but it was a start, a place to begin...
The one side is not interested in negoiations, just continuing status quo..
However I am sure our supporters of terrorism will offer an excuse.. That is what our supporters of the palestinian terrorists do best, offer excuses.. Point is, there's no excuse.
Forrest was present at many pivotal events, but he was hardly 'in the know'. Role model of yours?
And I'll get back to that 'admire the terrorists' bollocks later, if this thread doesn't get closed because of it...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,65533,00.html
BTW-
Do you really use Hollywood movies to learn history? :rolleyes:
ROTFLMAO!
Uncle Joe
What palestinian territories? No one seems to know of them, but you...
Negotiations are a process..
Mutual intercourse, composing difference etc.. Get it?
What arafat did was get up and walk off, my way or the hiway like a spoiled child..
Spoiled child? Hmmm, at least we see where you are coming from..
That statement demonstrates your revisionist tendencies reverse as just about anyone with an interest to do even minimal research will see that nearly every analyst of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict refers to the enclaves as the "Palestinian terroritories".
Now as for all the blame being levied at Arafat, although not surprising coming from our resident mo, larry and curly of foreign policy (i.e. beat the world into submission since the political class is nothing but a hinderance to plying your trade), that is not only a selective reading of the actual series of events that followed Oslo, but your reference to Arafat walking out of Oslo is also erroneous. He DID walk out of Camp David in 2000 but by then the negotiations by any credible analysis had become a farce.
For thos interested in seeing the actual conditions called for in the Camp David proposal look here:
http://www.btinternet.com/~huq/campdavid.html
Now having already ceded full recognition of Israel, and more land to Israel than it was allotted by the founding UN charter, a willingness to live on 22% of the land provided the Palestinians enjoyed sovereign statehood and the right of self determination, what they got was Ben Netanyahu and his previously declared disregard for the Oslo accords.
Taken in excerpt from the above report, let those who wish to think instead of flame make of it what they will...
___________________________________________________
Why did the peace process fall apart just as it was making real progress toward a permanent agreement?
Palestinians entered the peace process on the understanding that (1) it would deliver concrete improvements to their lives during the interim period, (2) that the interim period would be relatively short in duration - i.e., five years, and (3) that a permanent agreement would implement United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338. But the peace process delivered none of these things. Instead, Palestinians suffered more burdensome restrictions on their movement and a serious decline in their economic situation. Israeli colonies expanded at an unprecedented pace and the West Bank and Gaza Strip became more fragmented with the construction of settler "by-pass" roads and the proliferation of Israeli military checkpoints. Deadlines were repeatedly missed in the implementation of agreements. In sum, Palestinians simply did not experience any "progress" in terms of their daily lives.
However, what decisively undermined Palestinian support for the peace process was the way Israel presented its proposal. Prior to entering into the first negotiations on permanent status issues, Prime Minister Barak publicly and repeatedly threatened Palestinians that his "offer" would be Israel's best and final offer and if not accepted, Israel would seriously consider "unilateral separation" (a euphemism for imposing a settlement rather than negotiating one). Palestinians felt that they had been betrayed by Israel who had committed itself at the beginning of the Oslo process to ending its occupation of Palestinian lands in accordance with UN Resolutions 242 and 338
Doesn't the violence which erupted following Camp David prove that Palestinians do not really want to live in peace with Israel?
Palestinians recognized Israel's right to exist in 1988 and re-iterated this recognition on several occasions including Madrid in 1991 and the Oslo Accords in September, 1993. Nevertheless, Israel has yet to explicitly and formally recognize Palestine's right to exist. The Palestinian people waited patiently since the Madrid Conference in 1991 for their freedom and independence despite Israel's incessant policy of creating facts on the ground by building colonies in occupied territory (Israeli housing units in Occupied Palestinian Territory - not including East Jerusalem - increased by 52% since the signing of the Oslo Accords and the settler population, including those in East Jerusalem, more than doubled). The Palestinians do indeed wish to live at peace with Israel but peace with Israel must be a fair peace - not an unfair peace imposed by a stronger party over a weaker party.
Doesn't the failure of Camp David prove that the Palestinians are just not prepared to compromise?
The Palestinians have indeed compromised. In the Oslo Accords, the Palestinians recognized Israeli sovereignty over 78% of historic Palestine (23% more than Israel was granted pursuant to the 1947 UN partition plan) on the assumption that the Palestinians would be able to exercise sovereignty over the remaining 22%. The overwhelming majority of Palestinians accepted this compromise but this extremely generous compromise was ignored at Camp David and the Palestinians were asked to "compromise the compromise" and make further concessions in favor of Israel. Though the Palestinians can continue to make compromises, no people can be expected to compromise fundamental rights or the viability of their state.
_________________________________________________
So it is not as black and white as our resident hawks would like everyone to believe, Israel has never, repeat never acted with any serious intention of making any proposal or agreement stick, since it would mean the cessation of settlements, and the withdrawal of ALL troops from occupied land. Moreover, it would entail control of water rights to Palestinian control and thus remove one of the strongest political weapons Israel holds over the Palestinian population.
As pointed out above, Barak himself made it pretty clear that the Israeli take on the settlement of the issue by way of the Camp David proposal was absolute and final. No starting point there, nor constructive diplomacy by any stretch of the imagination.
Indeed, Israel's status quo, and we all know what that is! :rolleyes:
Once the interests of the right wings in both Israel and the US met i can not see any balance or objectivity in the US policy in the Middle East or in any other parts of the world unless its for the US interest. Shame Clinton had to leave, I reckon he was one of the best American presidents ever. at least he was no a vampire! like the current one
I can understand you have never been involved with any Negotiation process, but have you ever bought a used car??
Point is, that's where Negotiations begin, both sides try for everything, then they actually negotiate, its a give and take process..
Shame neither side realized you were available to lead them.. :rolleyes:
Whoa there clandestine, what happened to the war they lost??? Once you start a war, all the bets are off, especially if you lose that war...
However your way is interesting.. Now that we lost the war, we want what we had before... That's not only naive, but daft..
And who violated them? Senor Arafat.
BTW-
The best reading is all those documents that the israelis stole from arafat's HQ..
Its called having a life to live...
Point is, that lengthy post would have been much better if it began once upon a time.....
Ta children, get some sleep, school tomoorow...
ROTFLMAO!