You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #162: Arafat agreed to the two state solution in 94 [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-22-04 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #159
162. Arafat agreed to the two state solution in 94
and recognized the Jewish character of the state. Even the members of the mossad have admitted Barak and Sharon trumped up the no partner for peace business.

I didn't argue no fence was needed, to protect Israel. It isn't just protecting Israel because it isn't on the border between Israel and the West Bank. It protects West Bank settlements that don't belong to Israel. Until Israel relocates to wall to the green line, it is just land theft and and deliberate attempt derail of the two state solution. Sharon admits he doesn't want to give the Palestinians the west Bank and that he intends on keeping the settlements, yet you support his government. How can you claim to support two states and do that? Kerry and Bush have conceded the settlements to Sharon. This means two states are not possible. Since the settlements only expanded even in the Oslo era, I see no evidence of any commitment to two states on Israels part, even when Labor is in power. The actions of the neoliberals betray their true intentions, as far as I am concerned. There actions result in the same land grab as Sharon's, so I think they are dishonest in their claims to support the two state solution. Their actions will never lead to a two state solution, so we are not on the same page and politicians who think like you don't and can't represent me.

The right doesn't just want oil flowing from Iraq. They want to own the oil flowing from Iraq, and make the profits from that Oil. They couldn't do that because Iraq's oil was nationalized. They invaded as part of a privatization scheme.

I don't want to see labor, and and environmental standard or social safety-nets relaxed anywhere on the planet, to accomodate trade. if they are to be relaxed it should be the idea of the voters and not corporations.

James Carville criticizes dems like me because he says we are bolting from candidates we agree with 90%. I don't believe I agree with them on even 60% of the issues. I am not represented by the neoliberal Dems. I believe my issues would resonate with the majority if presented, and I am planning to bolt, if the dems don't offer them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC