As Israelis, Palestinians head to Annapolis, Syrians sign up »
Posted By JamesMarcus 1 year, 7 months ago in NewsPresident Bush will preside at a dinner on Monday night in Annapolis, Md., that will mark the beginning of the first major international peace efforts between Israelis and Palestinians since the Clinton administration. The Associated Press reports that Bush is scheduled to make a speech that reiterates his support for the peace process, but that is unlikely to contain any new proposals.
Read Full Story at csmonitor.com »
483 Views Share Story 38 Comments Report
Submitted By:
JamesMarcus
James Marcus is a writer, translator, critic, and editor. He is the author of Amazonia: Five Years at the Epicenter of the Dot-Com Juggernaut and ...
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 232 of 235 Comments (view all)
-
0%
nikkibabe1 year, 7 months ago
The result will be a big "0". You cannot invade, occupy and destroy a muslim country and hold a peace conference for the same region.
Reply-
0%
Endoscopy1 year, 7 months ago
LOL
I agree with you about the results but for a different reason. Since 1948 when Israel, Jordan, and some others were created the Arabs surrounding Israel have had several Jihads with Israel. They still give Israel no right to exist. There were several wars to drive the Jews into the sea and kill them there.they have shelled and bombed Israel during times of "peace". Palestinians were created by the Muslim countries when they refused to allow the Muslims who left the war zone as requested in 1948. They did what they were told to do and then hung out to dry.
How do you negotiate with someone who says they need to kill you. That is what Palestinians and Muslim countries around Israel are saying.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
PapaWolf1 year, 7 months ago
>>When was Bush ever interested in peace?
on the Palestinian issue, twice. Once when he needed Arab support to invade Iraq, and now when he wants to invade Iran.
Isn't it amazing that he only wants to talk peace in the ME when he wants to invade someone in the ME?
Reply
-
-
0%
rumple4skin1 year, 7 months ago
Hamas, an uninvited player, was not included in the guest list.
"President Bush will preside at a dinner on Monday night in Annapolis, Md., that will mark the beginning of the first major international peace efforts between Israelis and Palestinians since the Clinton administration." This is a very expensive dinner that will net nothing but further meetings. A complete waste without ALL the players.
Reply-
0%
rightfromwrong1 year, 7 months ago
why would they want Bush anywhere near the place. He is an idiot and has the Israel lobby stuck up his you know where
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
MRCOFFEECAKE1 year, 7 months ago
I hope he doesn't serve pork..THAT is the ONLY thing that Jews and Muslims agree on!
Reply
-
-
0%
fabio20071 year, 7 months ago
The only thing the middle east understands is strength. Anyone who doesn't understand this obviously doesn't understand 9/11.
Reply-
0%
PapaWolf1 year, 7 months ago
>>The only thing the middle east understands is strength. Anyone who doesn't understand this obviously doesn't understand 9/11.
You don't know many Middle Easterner's, then. Do you?
Arabs (Christian, Muslim, Jewish AND other), Israelis (again, Jewish, Christian, Muslim & other), Persians, Afghans, etc., etc., etc., are the most open & friendly people in the world. They open their homes to you, feed you & clothe you.
BUT... and it's a BIG "but"...
If you pis$ them off, you are in BIG trouble.
We found that out on 9/11 because we were warned to get our military out of Saudi Arabia. Since we didn't, OBL attacked.
Reply
-
-
0%
marshx1 year, 7 months ago
Nice try, though i think there would've been progress if they invited Hamas. They control Gaza, how can they abide by anything decided without their participation?
Reply-
0%
Thinker221 year, 7 months ago
> ...i think there would've been progress if they invited Hamas. They control Gaza, how can they abide by anything decided without their participation?
As long as they deny the right of Israel to EXIST it means that ANYTHING can only be decided WITHOUT their participation. After all, what can you discuss with someone who does not agree with your RIGHT TO LIVE?
Further, if Palestinian President Abbas CAN control Gaza there is no need to invite Hamas to Annapolis as the Palestinian President will take care of them. On the other hand, if Abbas CAN NOT control Gaza then it makes no sense to talk to Abbas, either, as he will not be able to comply with the obligations he will, supposedly, sign.
Reply -
0%
nostalgia1 year, 7 months ago
Didn't we hear for year after weary year that if the Israelis would dismantle their settlements and give the land to the Palestinians there would be peace???
Well they now have total control of Gaza and what has been the result - daily missle attacks on towns in Israel from Gaza.
If that is your definition of peace, how do you define war??
Reply
-
-
-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 7 months ago
Do you think that the Nazis in Germany had the right to exist or that it is better that the world ended that failed form of government?
Don't you think the world should end the third remaining vestige of eastrn european racism, totalitarianism and colonialism (Nazism, stalinism and zionism), especially since zionism has created the biggest refugee problem in the current world (one in three refugees world wide is a palestinian)?
Once the zionist form of government in israel has been ended then an acceptable, modern form of government can be introduced.
Palestine: Democracy, Not Zionism
Do No Evil â;; No one would suggest that the moral, ethical and intellectual transformation necessary to achieve a decent "one-state solution" will be easy. However, more and more people now recognize that a decent "two-state solution" has become impossible.
http://donoevil.propeller.com/story/2007/11/26/...
Reply
-
-
0%
splitrch1 year, 7 months ago
"(Bush will) make clear that Mideast peace is a top priority for the rest of his time in office through January 2009, but he is not expected to advance any of his own ideas on how to achieve that, Bush national security adviser Stephen Hadley said Sunday."
How can this be a top priority if he plans to do nothing? He has an opportunity to do repair his image. Should his legacy be one of needless war and missed opportunities? Not every President has opportunities like this. He shouldn't squander it.
Reply-
0%
SpazMat1 year, 7 months ago
"How can this be a top priority if he plans to do nothing? He has an opportunity to do repair his image. Should his legacy be one of needless war and missed opportunities? Not every President has opportunities like this. He shouldn't squander it."
Do you think anyone is willing to give him the political capital of saying he has a good idea?
I think he hears what so many here say: If he comes up with an idea, it can only be in support of Shell Oil, Blackwater, et al. So he wants all those people who are fair, unbiased and looking for true peace in the ME, like Hamas, Fatah, Syria, Iran, Israel, Egypt, to come up with their unbiased and fair ideas. Then everyone will hold hands and sing around the camp fire.
Reply
-
-
0%
MonkeyBiz1 year, 7 months ago
"(Bush will) make clear that Mideast peace is a top priority for the rest of his time in office through January 2009, but he is not expected to advance any of his own ideas on how to achieve that."
The notion that peace in the Mideast will be a top Bush priority is absurd and surreal.
Of course he won't be advancing any ideas on how to achieve peace in the Mideast. He doesn't have a clue on how to achieve peace, nor does he probably want to.
Bush is desperately searching for something, (anything!) that will give his presidency a positive legacy. He had seven years to do something about the Israeli/Palistinian problem, and did nothing. All he accomplished in that time was to convince all the Arabs that the US was not an honest broker of peace.
If anything comes of this meeting, it will be from the efforts of the mideasterners, not Bush, though he will no doubt attempt to take the credit.
Reply-
0%
MonkeyBiz1 year, 7 months ago
My comment above was meant to be standing on its own, not under any other comments.
Reply -
0%
Thinker221 year, 7 months ago
> Of course he won't be advancing any ideas on how to achieve peace in the Mideast. He doesn't have a clue on how to achieve peace, nor does he probably want to.
I disagree. Everyone knowing something about the Middle East and knowing how to use his/her brains knows that the only way to achieve peace in the Middle East is PEACE NEGOTIATIONS. Unlike you, Bush DOES understand this simple truth and this is the reason he is trying to promote peace negotiations.
The basic problem, however, is the simple fact that the Palestinians and Arabs in general REFUSE to negotiate because they DO NOT WANT peace with Israel. This brings us to the realization that in order to achieve peace in the Middle East it is necessary to MAKE the Arabs to start wanting peace with Israel; to CONVINCE them (using force if necessary) to ASK for peace.
Reply
-
-
0%
Edmar141 year, 7 months ago
I find that if you block and ignore Hyperbola, the conversation becomes much more reasonable and although opinions may vary, they are on a much more intelligent level.
Those who can understand the concept of the decolonialization of the Ottoman Empire after WWI can appreciate the fact that while most of the middle east became Arab/Moslem countries covering vast areas of land, the little area of Palestine was divided into a Palestinian homeland and a Jewish homeland as it should have been. The equality lies in the fact that 1 billion Moslems have numerous countries of their own which is Moslem in character, politics and culture. Israel is a tiny piece of property in this sea of Islam and it should retain it's Jewish character, politics and culture the same as the arab countries retain theirs. Any additional homeland for the Palestinians beyond Jordan should solve any existing problem. A right of return for displaced persons should be in a new Palestinian state or Jordan, not Israel.
Reply-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 7 months ago
That old zionist propaganda again Erdmar? Let me ask you this. You claim that israel is the land of the jews. By your argument this means that anyone who wants to can steal jewish property in america or anywhere else in the world? After all the jews can go to israel.
Sorry Erdmar, but until you admit your crimes and begin the restitution, there will be no peace. If you zionists were smart, you would get palestinians on your side before it is too late.
Reply -
0%
SpazMat1 year, 7 months ago
"I find that if you block and ignore Hyperbola, the conversation becomes much more reasonable and although opinions may vary, they are on a much more intelligent level."
Here Here! On my browser, there is only one line of text between you comment and my reply.
Reply
-
-
0%
NelsonR1 year, 7 months ago
Hamas the governing body elected by the majority of citizens, (Democracy) is devoid within this conference, what does anyone expect? Another Bush administration and with the acquiescence of Rice, a joke. We are led by idiots who would keep the Arabs in check while continuing the favoring of Israel. Too many Israeli's dictate the agenda in American politics without fair and bi partisan treatment.
The West which includes France, Britian and the U.S. have sown the seeds of the Middle East dilema, live with it until a fair and unbiased leader and Representatives represent America and the world fairly.
Reply -
0%
NelsonR1 year, 7 months ago
A conference of Peace while the true governing body, Hamas is ignored. I thought a Democracy was the governing of the majority of the people by the people. Here we are awaiting good news while the main participant is absent. What is leading the world, idiots. No good will come of this conference and it is becoming apparent that the Israeli lobby is controlling the American agenda.
France, Britain and the U.S. have instituted the problems within the Middle East yet they persist in remedying the situation with more Israeli dictates. Fair and balanced is not part of the equation, Israel is our 51st state and the Arabs be damned. NOT FAIR. Again, how can you have a peace conference without the duly elected leaders in office?
Reply-
0%
Thinker221 year, 7 months ago
> I thought a Democracy was the governing of the majority of the people by the people.
Yes, it is. In Gaza the Palestinian Arabs elected Hamas as their leader and the Palestinian Arabs of Gaza will have to take responsibility for their decisions. They had the right to elect Hamas and the US Government had the right to NOT invite them to the conference in Annapolis. It makes no sense to invite them to a conference supposed to promote peace for as long as they do not accept the right of Israel to exist.
Reply
-
-
0%
Thinker221 year, 7 months ago
> Without money Hamas or President Abbas, who is not the true Democratically elected representative, cannot continue to function.
Please consider that in case the Palestinians (no matter WHO represents them) will sign a peace agreement and will be able to comply with it they will be WASHED in money coming to them from the US, Europe and, yes, Israel.
Reply -
0%
kobzikov1 year, 7 months ago
There will be no peace until Israel wants peace. And it doesn't, at least not right now. I mean let's ignore the issue of $4 billion in military and other assistance that US gives annually to Israel, which hinge on continued conflict. Likewise, let's ignore all the UN resolutions that Israel is in violation off and has been for some time.
As van Clausewitz said: "war is a continuation of politics by other means." So what are Israel's policies in relation to Palestinians? Complete economic and even humanitarian blockade in Gaza. In West Bank: a separation wall, continued construction of settlements, more roadblocks, checkpoints, and construction of infrastructure for exclusive use by Israeli settlers, in other words colonial occupation. Let's ignore the treatment of Palestinians on their own land for now as well.
So the question is why should Israel sue for peace? It gains nothing of value, but has to give up a multitude of its colonial gains and grant concessions.
Reply-
0%
kobzikov1 year, 7 months ago
Who would agree to such a deal? US certainly wouldn't. And I'm not talking just now. It wouldn't have agreed to such a proposition during Indian Removal either, which bares striking resemblance to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
And don't tell me that Israel gains peace. Israelis don't believe that they would and even if they did, that's not really high on their wish list. There isn't a popular groundswell for peace in Israel in the first place, so politicians who actually make the decisions wouldn't risk anything by talking and doing nothing, which is what the meeting is for. Showing that politicians in Israel care.
The only time colonial powers give up their ambitions is when they become untenable. So until then Israel will smile and nod and go along with the proposal, only because it's headed by Uncle Sam "the great moneybags" and if time ever comes to sign on the dotted line it will introduce a condition that even Abbas wouldn't swallow.
Reply -
0%
Thinker221 year, 7 months ago
> There will be no peace until Israel wants peace. And it doesn't, at least not right now. I mean let's ignore the issue of $4 billion in military and other assistance that US gives annually to Israel...
A pretty strange conclusion. So, if your Aunt Mollie gives you a $500 allowance it means that you don't want peace?
> ...the question is why should Israel sue for peace?
The answer is pretty obvious. You see, the US aid to Israel amounts to 3% of Israeli budget and to 20% of Israeli military expenses. Peace would save Israel the remaining 80% it will be able to spend elsewhere as well as thousands of Israeli lives... to say the least. In addition, peace will open huge local markets Israeli economy needs.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
MisterX1 year, 7 months ago
Some are arguing that this meeting could lead to the peace treaty described in the Book of Revelation, that begins seven years of outright hell throughout the Earth. It would suck if that were the case. It's bad enough that life outright blows to begin with. It'll be icing on the cake to get short-changed to boot.
Reply -
0%
hyperbola1 year, 7 months ago
The best hope for peace between the peoples of palestine is the abandonment of 19th century racist totalitarianism by israelis AND the condemnation by american jews of 19th century racist totalitarianism by american zioncons. This is proceeding faster than most americans are aware.
Jewish Glasnost Update: Zionist Panic!
... When the Zionist right in America "defends Israel" by going after one of Israel's most respected newspapers which happens to tell the truth about the occupation and related matters, it's not hard to see why Pipes & co. have little cause for optimism. The Zionist moment is over, because most Jews around the world (and even many in Israel) are not inclined to a nationalist view of their Jewishness. And remember, Zionism is not much more than 100 years old, arising along with the nationalist currents of late 19th century Europe that accompanied the breakup of the Hapsburg empire.
Reply-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 7 months ago
cont'd
It's hardly surprising that in a 21st century where we have had a free choice, almost two thirds of us have chosen to live not in a "Jewish State" but wherever in the world we choose to. Many Israelis today are excercising the same choice. And Jews who are not prone to nationalism have no need to rationalize Israel's abuses against others. ...
http://tonykaron.com/2007/10/23/jewish-glasnost...
Reply
-
-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 7 months ago
Well Slate, the latest charade in Annapolis has so far not sdhown any indication of being a talk about peace. Too many crimes against humanity have once again been ignored.
The Myth of Middle East Peace
Do No Evil â;; This week in Annapolis the Israeli colonialist state meets to consider the fate of its Palestine colony, the one carefully preserved behind its apartheid wall of infamy, to attempt once again the fraud perpetrated on the American people and the United Nations that Israel is sincere in wanting peace...
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2007/11/26/t...
Reply-
0%
jimdoze1 year, 7 months ago
Hyperbole, in your opinion, does Israel have a right to exist? A simple "yes" or "no" will be sufficient.
Reply
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.