Steeles Royal
Toronto Escorts

Dead at 75

hornyharry

New member
Sep 30, 2003
389
0
0
3rd rock from the 3rd rock
Amen...but I think we should be praying for the people in the middle east that are still alive...Arafat was one of the biggest reasons that part of the world has not been blown to bits...so what will happen next??
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
Argocock said:
So now that he's dead, what are the chances of peace between Palestine and Israel?
ZERO
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
Doesn't actualy matter how history views him.

After all in the long run we are remembered only by those we touch. So to answer your question he will be remembered as both.
 

Argocock

9 Inch Member
Aug 17, 2004
2,023
23
38
Between Oakville and Oshawa
I think that the Palestinians need help in public relations.

Most people around the world would actually side with them, and I really do feel sorry for the Palestinians, but how can you side with them when all you see on the news is little kids throwing rocks, and babies dressed like suicide bombers, and guys with AK 47's and ski masks to hide their face, screaming like maniacs all the time. And the suicide bombers don't help win them any sympathy either.

If you can remember the Chinese when they massacred all those students in whats it called square in Beijing? The most famous image of that whole massacre was the student standing defensless in front of a tank. And look at how much China has changed just 15 years later?
 

DATYdude

Puttin' in Face Time
Oct 8, 2003
3,762
0
36
I don't think big dogie forgot that some would see Arafat as a freedom fighter, I think he decided which opinion he has.

I'd call Arafat a fighter, but not a freedom fighter, since he squandered MANY opportunities to help his people, and spent much of his time fighting Israel and fighting to maintain his grip on power, even when the fight was a mistake.

Arafat was a throwback to an older tribal style of rule. Let's hope that Palestinians will leave that behind and create some viable civil institutions.

His symbolism to his people was much more important than anything he did for them since probably 1974.

He was reponsible for the killing of a lot of people, and specifically the targeting of women and children. I don't care what you say about the crimes of Israel's army or leaders, they never targeted women and children, and have gone to great lengths NOT to harm women and children. Can't say that about Arafat.

Flame away, freedom fighters.
 

scouser1

Well-known member
Dec 7, 2001
5,666
94
48
Pickering
On the one side Arafat was a lousy leader of an oppressed people who he stole from and had his thugs suppress on the other he did keep them in the forefront of world news, as by the 1950's the Palestinians were almost relagated and forgotten by the international community.
 

booboobear

New member
Aug 20, 2003
2,580
0
0
DATYdude said:
.

He was reponsible for the killing of a lot of people, and specifically the targeting of women and children. I don't care what you say about the crimes of Israel's army or leaders, they never targeted women and children, and have gone to great lengths NOT to harm women and children. Can't say that about Arafat.

Flame away, freedom fighters.
I won't defend Arafat for killing children but the Americans are doig the same now. Of course they have a good reason don't they, so they say.

The Israelis won't give up anything so the fighting will continue.
The Palestinians resort to terror because they don't have Israels weapons of mass destruction , if they did maybe there would be peace.
 

DATYdude

Puttin' in Face Time
Oct 8, 2003
3,762
0
36
Whoa booboo that's some crazy stuff you're asserting.

1. I won't defend the Americans but you can't say they're TARGETING children, which Arafart's people have long done.

2. Israel has already agreed to give up plenty. But I agree that they have not yet agreed to cut their own throats, which is what many Palestinians still fantasize about.

3. Your last comment about weapons of mass destruction is, I'm sorry to have to say it, STUPID. 1. If the Palestinians had WMDs, let's say nukes, you think they wouldn't have used them on Tel Aviv by now? This isn't the peace I'm hoping for. 2. The Palestinians resorted to terror because it kept them in the headlines and aroused sympathy and even admiration from plenty of fools. They still do it because, well, who the hell knows? Maybe they're just murderous idiots with a cause. I don't know, that last comment was so stupid I just have to leave it alone at this point.
 

booboobear

New member
Aug 20, 2003
2,580
0
0
DATYdude said:
Whoa booboo that's some crazy stuff you're asserting.

1. I won't defend the Americans but you can't say they're TARGETING children, which Arafart's people have long done.

2. Israel has already agreed to give up plenty. But I agree that they have not yet agreed to cut their own throats, which is what many Palestinians still fantasize about.

3. Your last comment about weapons of mass destruction is, I'm sorry to have to say it, STUPID. . I don't know, that last comment was so stupid I just have to leave it alone at this point.
You really need to read more carefully I did not say the Americans were targetting children , no , they are just killing them and I would guess they have killed more in Iraq than the palestinians have in lets say 5 years.
Of course we will have to guess won't we because the Americans will not willingly tell you how many they have killed.


I suppose my comment about WMD is stupid because you say so.
The point I am making is that when another country has equal weapons they are more likely to negotiate . You choose to believe they will automatically drop a bomb and be anihilated.
Notice that the U.S. dare not try to push China around. The point is terrorism is the only weapon these people have . They believe they have a cause whether you agree or not . Israel has no reason to negotiate because they have superior weapons.
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
It'll be interesting to see what happens. Arafat marginalized any reform minded leader that sprang up over the past few years. Basically the only leaders the people trust are Hamaas. Arafat turned the Palestinian Security Forces (or whatever they're called) into separate groups of warlords who basically acted like the mafia in their little sections of power. Perhaps the Palestinian factions will end up in a civil war, which in the end might be what they need to do to get rid of the terrorists among them...
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
guelph said:
You seem to forget one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter
According to most news sources Arafat was not considered a freedom fighter by the Palestinians. Apparently they saw him as someone who was only concerned with his own grip on power and money.
 

Cobra1

New member
May 7, 2004
162
0
0
DATYdude said:
I don't care what you say about the crimes of Israel's army or leaders, they never targeted women and children, and have gone to great lengths NOT to harm women and children.
I guess you seem to overlook Qana and Sabra/Chatilla - couresy of Ariel Sharon, an operation specifically targeting women, children and old people.

Sharon has killed more than 20x as many civilians as Arafat and co have - just to make you aware of the facts.
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
booboobear said:
The Palestinians resort to terror because they don't have Israels weapons of mass destruction , if they did maybe there would be peace.
That only makes sense if the Israelis are actually using WMDs, which they are not.
And what makes you think the Palestinians have WMD would bring peace? They are suicide bombers, hell-o! Anything short of the destruction of Israel is not good enough for them. They would not be detered (as the US & USSR were) by Mutually-Assured-Destruction (MAD) since as long as they destroy the Jews they believe they are doing God's will!

Secondly, everyone seems to forget that the Palestinians were offered their own homeland back in '48 and they rejected it and called instead for the destruction of Israel. All that "occupied land" that is in dispute Israel did not posses UNTIL Israel was invaded via those lands. Israel just pushed back the invading armies past the militarily strategic land.
The fact remains that the Palestinians have had several chances to set up an independent nation state and each time have squandered it. Apparently they prefer blowing themselves up and taking women and children with them rather than have their own nation...
 
Toronto Escorts