MOSCOW – Israel does not intend to bomb Iran, Israel's foreign minister said Wednesday, stepping back from suggestions it might attack a major foe it says is bent on developing nuclear weapons.

Speaking at the end of a three-day visit to Russia, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tehran's nuclear program is the world's problem, not just Israel's, and that its Arab neighbors should be even more concerned about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel is. He said other nations should not expect Israel to solve this problem for them.

"We do not intend to bomb Iran, and nobody will solve their problems with our hands," Lieberman told reporters. "We don't need that. Israel is a strong country, we can protect ourselves.

"But the world should understand that the Iran's entrance into the nuclear club would prompt a whole arms race, a crazy race of unconventional weaponry across the Mideast — that is a threat to the entire world order, a challenge to the whole international community," he said, in Russian. "So we do not want a global problem to be solved with our hands."

The remarks from Lieberman — a leading hawk in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's hardline government — sounded strikingly softer than previous statements suggesting Israel might take military action against Iran. Netanyahu has repeatedly said Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons, and has refused to rule out the use of force.

After his recent meeting in Washington with President Barack Obama, Netanyahu said he and Obama agreed Iran must not obtain nuclear weapons, and attempts to solve the problem through negotiations could not be unlimited in time.

Iran, whose president has expressed hatred of Israel, maintains its nuclear programs are only designed to provide electricity. But Israel, the United States and other nations fear the effort is aimed at acquiring nuclear weapons.

Lieberman suggested Iran's closer neighbors should be more concerned about a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel.

"It's clearly not an Israeli problem — it's the problem of the whole Middle East, and those who are most concerned about the Iranian nuclear problem are the Arab countries," Lieberman said.

"I think that those Iran's nuclear program frightens most of all are the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and all the others," he said. "Iran is a factor of instability in the Middle East, without any connection with Israel."

Lieberman also criticized Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for denying the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly questioned the extent of the Holocaust and called for Israel to be "wiped from the map," said Wednesday that the Holocaust was a "deception."

It was unclear if Lieberman had been informed of Wednesday's remark.

But he said the president of Iran sponsors an annual conference in Tehran on Holocaust denial and said, "this is unacceptable, and we must fight against all these phenomena."

Ahmadinejad told a gathering of international scholars in Tehran on Wednesday that Israel uses the "big deception of the Holocaust" to sway allies in the West. In April, he accused the West of using the Holocaust as a pretext for aggression against Palestinians.

Ahmadinejad has unabashedly kept up his rhetoric during his campaign for June 12 elections, despite the fact that his main pro-reform rival says the president's constant questioning of the Holocaust has undermined Iran's international standing.

Lieberman spoke as Obama began his first Mideast trip as president. He said Israel and the U.S. have "very friendly relations" but that friends can have misunderstandings and disagreements, and sounded a defiant note in Israel's dispute with Obama's administration over settlements in Palestinian areas.

"I think that the biggest mistake (is the) understanding that settlements are an obstacle to any peace solution ion the Middle East," he said.

Lieberman met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov during his Russian visit, the first since he — a Soviet native — became Israel's foreign minister two months ago.

Israel wants Russia, which has close ties with Iran, to increase pressure on Tehran over its nuclear program. Lieberman's statement that Israel does not intend to bomb Iran will please the Kremlin, which has warned that attacking Iran would be a potentially catastrophic mistake.

But his visit brought no sign of a shift in Russian policy on Iran or Moscow's engagement with the violent Hamas group, which angers Israel.

"Doubtless, there are disagreements," Lieberman said. "But these disagreements were very clearly laid out and we will continue our dialogue with Russia."

He warned that Israel will not attend a Mideast peace conference Russia wants to host this year if Hamas or Hezbollah participate.

"Two organizations that have declared as their main goal the destruction of the state of Israel cannot be legitimate partners in any negotiations," he said.

Lieberman was heading from Russia to neighboring Belarus, where the Israeli Embassy said he would express concern about the government's close ties with Iran. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko have exchanged visits and warm words of solidarity.


Source:  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090603/ap_on_re_eu/eu_russia_israel_iran;_ylt=Avd6nALNMbZQ0hCnBe6aGd6yFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTJxYjZrbWg0BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNjAzL2V1X3J1c3NpYV9pc3JhZWxfaXJhbgRwb3MDNARzZWMDeW5fYXJ0aWNsZV9zdW1tYXJ5X2xpc3QEc2xrA2lzcmFlbG5vdGdvaQ--

This is just a bluff; Isreal has to hit Iran very hard

they will bomb iran, its a matter of time.

Speaking at the end of a three-day visit to Russia, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tehran's nuclear program is the world's problem, not just Israel's, and that its Arab neighbors should be even more concerned about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel is. He said other nations should not expect Israel to solve this problem for them.

Wow! I am shocked that an Isrsaeli Foreign Minister would make such a statement. Is Israel truly ready to play a major role in International affairs? This statement is too elementary from the foreign minister of a nuclear nation. This sound like some statement you would expect from someone like Idi Amin back in the days. It lacks strategy, it lacks focus!!!

Give us ur own strategy, Then?

yeswecan:

This is just a bluff; Isreal has to hit Iran very hard

Isnt it morally wrong for a nuclear state to hit another one for trying to have one. Where is the balance in justice ?

Its so wonderful the neo cons are out of the white house and Obama is moving to the center left by his conilatory moves to Iran and his acknowledgement that no nuclear state has the right to dictate to another state not to have it.

Lagosboy:

Isnt it morally wrong for a nuclear state to hit another one for trying to have one. Where is the balance in justice ?

Its so wonderful the neo cons are out of the white house and Obama is moving to the center left by his conilatory moves to Iran and his acknowledgement that no nuclear state has the right to dictate to another state not to have it.

Take off your religious cap son. Israel isn't using her nuclear weapons to attack her neighbors, Iran sponsors terrorism and seek nuclear weapon mainly to attack Israel…. Israel has nuclear weapons and never intimidated anyone with it; Iran without any nuclear weapons has made out intentions to hit  Israel.

Iran sponsors two terrorist groups to attack a "nuclear state", what if she acquires nuclear weapons? Lagosboy are for real? Oh I see how you underpins the “Islamic Ideology” and cover up truth with political theories.

Lagosboy:

Isnt it morally wrong for a nuclear state to hit another one for trying to have one. Where is the balance in justice ?

Its so wonderful the neo cons are out of the white house and Obama is moving to the center left by his conilatory moves to Iran and his acknowledgement that no nuclear state has the right to dictate to another state not to have it.

What an idiot you are . . . Obama is firm on the fact that Iran MUST NOT have nuclear weapons. The US has the largest stockpile of nukes so just exactly what were you saying by the highlighted? Virtually every other nuclear armed nation is against Iran obtaining nukes . . . it seems you're only worried when it is Israel staking the claim.

davidylan:

they will bomb iran, its a matter of time.

davidylan:

What an idiot you are . . . Obama is firm on the fact that Iran MUST NOT have nuclear weapons. The US has the largest stockpile of nukes so just exactly what were you saying by the highlighted? Virtually every other nuclear armed nation is against Iran obtaining nukes . . . it seems you're only worried when it is Israel staking the claim.

You always ramble when it comes to this issue. Honestly please tell me what is your point?

Is it that Palestinians dont deserve a state?

Is it that you love extrimism?

Or its just that you are a war touting individual?

Which of the above? 

All those who would sow a seed of hatred would reap just that.

You know when Yeswecan quoted you in that last thread I was waiting for a grand response. 

Low and behold it was just you. Davidylan.  Nice username though.

The only one that upsets me is Tayo-D.

Im no sabi politics, religion no way, history na zero. 

Even what he writes in Notre Damn thread is quite horrible. 

The guy is a good replica of one of those guys that seat at the back of the room and make a lot of noise.

You know some sort of exciting distraction.  He will be here soon.

I pray he does not throw insults at me. 

Ikomi:

You always ramble when it comes to this issue. Honestly please tell me what is your point?

Is it that Palestinians dont deserve a state?

Is it that you love extrimism?

Or its just that you are a war touting individual?

Which of the above? 

All those who would sow a seed of hatred would reap just that.

You know when Yeswecan quoted you in that last thread I was waiting for a grand response. 

Low and behold it was just you. Davidylan.  Nice username though.

The only one that upsets me is Tayo-D.

Im no sabi politics, religion no way, history na zero. 

Even what he writes in Notre Damn thread is quite horrible. 

1. yeswecan and i are two different individuals . . . you can go on pissing in your pants thinking its one person using dual usernames. There are more important things to life than that.

2. I love the way you ignorant blowhards frame your "questions" . . . this is NOT an issue of whether "palestinians" deserve a state of their own (infact no one BUT THEMSELVES have begrudged them that right) but whether the "palestinians" want a state that doesnt include the obliteration of Israel as a sovereign Jewish state.

The following reasons:

1. When the PLO was founded in May 1964 by an EGYPTIAN national (note he wasnt a "palestinian" then) this was what they wrote in article 24 of the PLO charter - This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, [or] on the Gaza Strip,

What changed between 1964 and now? Simple! Gaza and the WestBank changed hands from Egypt/Jordan to Israel . . . now ALL OF A SUDDEN the PLO is agitating for those lands as a "homeland"?

FATAH, the military wing of the PLO was founded in Gaza (then under Egyptian control) in 1956 . . . but NOT ONCE do we hear of FATAH fighting Egypt to control Gaza as part of "palestinian" homeland which it now decietfully claims today.

So WHAT EXACTLY was the motive of the PLO in 1964? Well article 19 of its founding charter explains in detail -  The establishment of Israel is fundamentally null and void, whatever time has elapsed ,

So this is NOT about a homeland . . . its about the destruction of Israel.

But of course you can just go ahead and accuse me of "rambling" while providing ABSOLUTELY no substance to your own counter-argument.

davidylan:

1. yeswecan and i are two different individuals . . . you can go on pissing in your pants thinking its one person using dual usernames. There are more important things to life than that.

2. I love the way you ignorant blowhards frame your "questions" . . . this is NOT an issue of whether "palestinians" deserve a state of their own (infact no one BUT THEMSELVES have begrudged them that right) but whether the "palestinians" want a state that doesnt include the obliteration of Israel as a sovereign Jewish state.

The following reasons:

1. When the PLO was founded in May 1964 by an EGYPTIAN national (note he wasnt a "palestinian" then) this was what they wrote in article 24 of the PLO charter - This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, [or] on the Gaza Strip,

What changed between 1964 and now? Simple! Gaza and the WestBank changed hands from Egypt/Jordan to Israel . . . now ALL OF A SUDDEN the PLO is agitating for those lands as a "homeland"?

FATAH, the military wing of the PLO was founded in Gaza (then under Egyptian control) in 1956 . . . but NOT ONCE do we hear of FATAH fighting Egypt to control Gaza as part of "palestinian" homeland which it now decietfully claims today.

So WHAT EXACTLY was the motive of the PLO in 1964? Well article 19 of its founding charter explains in detail -  The establishment of Israel is fundamentally null and void, whatever time has elapsed ,

So this is NOT about a homeland . . . its about the destruction of Israel.

But of course you can just go ahead and accuse me of "rambling" while providing ABSOLUTELY no substance to your own counter-argument.

I guess with this you have shown a depth of wisdom. What you have just stated up there is like saying Blacks in Africa started existing the day the OAU which is now AU was formed. Or tribes in Nigeria never existed until the 1914 Amalgamation, until independence in 1960.

O boy go siddon abeg. I know fit laugh. 

Ikomi:

I guess with this you have shown a depth of wisdom. What you have just stated up there is like saying Blacks in Africa started existing the day the OAU which is now AU was formed.

O boy go siddon abeg. I know fit laugh.

It is no surprise that for some . . . empty emotionalism is all they have to offer. It is not about showing "wisdom" . . . it is about laying down FACTS.

I dont read ANY facts from you, i dont read any bit of HISTORY from you, all we get is empty drivel, loud noise-making, insults and irrelevant moral relativism. As i used to say, its not by force to post on threads like this if you are largely bereft of the fundamental issues fueling the mid-east conflict.

To equate the PLO to the OAU is to play the fool and expose yourself for being unable to comprehend simple logic.

If the PLO claims to be fighting for territorial integrity . . . then why did its first charter virtually gift away the West Bank to Jordan in 1964?

but of course i only expect senseless talking points in response.

davidylan:

It is no surprise that for some . . . empty emotionalism is all they have to offer. It is not about showing "wisdom" . . . it is about laying down FACTS.

I dont read ANY facts from you, i dont read any bit of HISTORY from you, all we get is empty drivel, loud noise-making, insults and irrelevant moral relativism. As i used to say, its not by force to post on threads like this if you are largely bereft of the fundamental issues fueling the mid-east conflict.

To equate the PLO to the OAU is to play the fool and expose yourself for being unable to comprehend simple logic.

If the PLO claims to be fighting for territorial integrity . . . then why did its first charter virtually gift away the West Bank to Jordan in 1964?

but of course i only expect senseless talking points in response.

Lol,

You would not be there when the Palestinians get there State.

And like it was said in Egypt yesterday we would not tolerate fanatics from both sides. 

My question still stands, where would you be when the state of Paletine comes to be, and Iran was never bombed?

I wont waste time on you, when your ramble comes to make sence then you shall see facts from me.

But are you sure you are not yeswecan, Tayo-D you all seem to agree to the same thing and very good in logic, better than those that invented algebra. 

Those same arabs.

Ikomi:

Lol,

You would not be there when the Palestinians get there State.

And like it was said in Egypt yesterday we would not tolerate fanatics from both sides.

My question still stands, where would you be when the state of Paletine comes to be, and Iran was never bombed?

I wont waste time on you, when your ramble comes to make sence then you shall see facts from me.

But are you sure you are not yeswecan.

More empty rhetoric and the usual escapist excuse when these folks reach the tether of their intellectual inadequacy. No "facts" can come from you that i havent read before . . . facts dont lie.

If the "palestinians" havent gotten a state now since the last 61 yrs you think they are going to get a state now? You must be deluded. Pls read the "palestinian" demand . . . it includes a ROR, something Israel and the USA are fundamentally committed against.

But of course i dont expect much from blowhards . . . besides the irrelevant conspiracy theory. Pls see yeswecan . . . perhaps he has enough time to help you with reasons why we are not the same person.

Ikomi:

Lol,

You would not be there when the Palestinians get there State.

And like it was said in Egypt yesterday we would not tolerate fanatics from both sides. 

My question still stands, where would you be when the state of Paletine comes to be, and Iran was never bombed?

I wont waste time on you, when your ramble comes to make sence then you shall see facts from me.

But are you sure you are not yeswecan, Tayo-D you all seem to agree to the same thing and very good in logic, better than those that invented algebra. 

Those same arabs.

believe you me, i couldnt fathom the sense behind this question.

davidylan:

believe you me, i couldnt fathom the sense behind this question.

I do believe you, fanatics cant see.

Ikomi:

I do believe you, fanatics cant see.

the question had nothing to do with fanaticism . . . how would Iran being bombed or not affect where i live? That doesnt sound like it came from a mind that is rational as against one pre-occupied with senseless conspiracy theories.

Shld the "palestinians" get a state today . . . would that stop me from having a life? Seriously . . . did this question come from an adult?

davidylan:

the question had nothing to do with fanaticism . . . how would Iran being bombed or not affect where i live? That doesnt sound like it came from a mind that is rational as against one pre-occupied with senseless conspiracy theories.

Shld the "palestinians" get a state today . . . would that stop me from having a life? Seriously . . . did this question come from an adult?

Then please shut up and go live your life, leave affairs of the state to those who understnad it, instead of sowing your seed of hatred on this thread. Plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Ikomi:

Then please shut up and go live your life, leave affairs of the state to those who understnad it, instead of sowing your seed of hatred on this thread. Plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

the usual response when they get exposed for being empty loudmouths. And i suppose you understand affairs of the state even though you know NOTHING about the histories of the events you expend so much emotional energy on?

Politics is about facts and not empty emotions and talking points.

davidylan:

What an idiot you are . . . Obama is firm on the fact that Iran MUST NOT have nuclear weapons. The US has the largest stockpile of nukes so just exactly what were you saying by the highlighted? Virtually every other nuclear armed nation is against Iran obtaining nukes . . . it seems you're only worried when it is Israel staking the claim.

The embodiment of facts showing low moral values, that is what you started the thread with. I only asked a question what do I get.

davidylan:

1. yeswecan and i are two different individuals . . . you can go on pissing in your pants thinking its one person using dual usernames. There are more important things to life than that.

2. I love the way you ignorant blowhards frame your "questions" . . . this is NOT an issue of whether "palestinians" deserve a state of their own (infact no one BUT THEMSELVES have begrudged them that right) but whether the "palestinians" want a state that doesnt include the obliteration of Israel as a sovereign Jewish state.

The following reasons:

1. When the PLO was founded in May 1964 by an EGYPTIAN national (note he wasnt a "palestinian" then) this was what they wrote in article 24 of the PLO charter - This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, [or] on the Gaza Strip,

What changed between 1964 and now? Simple! Gaza and the WestBank changed hands from Egypt/Jordan to Israel . . . now ALL OF A SUDDEN the PLO is agitating for those lands as a "homeland"?

FATAH, the military wing of the PLO was founded in Gaza (then under Egyptian control) in 1956 . . . but NOT ONCE do we hear of FATAH fighting Egypt to control Gaza as part of "palestinian" homeland which it now decietfully claims today.

So WHAT EXACTLY was the motive of the PLO in 1964? Well article 19 of its founding charter explains in detail - The establishment of Israel is fundamentally null and void, whatever time has elapsed ,

So this is NOT about a homeland . . . its about the destruction of Israel.

But of course you can just go ahead and accuse me of "rambling" while providing ABSOLUTELY no substance to your own counter-argument.

Davidylan thats a very good sign of a looser.

Ikomi:

The embodiment of facts showing low moral values, that is what you started the thread with. I only asked a question what do I get.

the good thing about FACTS is that they have no bias. Where you saw high or low moral values beats me.

I wonder what you consider "moral" values. Maybe HAMAS throwing FATAH members from rooftops is your own idea. considering the level of your own moral relativism and depravity i would not be surprised.

davidylan:

the good thing about FACTS is that they have no bias. Where you saw high or low moral values beats me.

I wonder what you consider "moral" values. Maybe HAMAS throwing FATAH members from rooftops is your own idea. considering the level of your own moral relativism and depravity i would not be surprised.

The fact that there are persons who have robbed there way to riches does not justify robbery.

You could go and look in your encyclopedia and come here to pour it down telling us you read it all.

Your facts does not justify denying a people their right. That is all I want you to understand shameless fanatic.

Ikomi:

The fact that there are persons who have robbed there way to riches does not justify robbery.

You could go and look in your encyclopedia and come here to pour it down telling us you read it all.

Your facts does not justify denying a people their right. That is all I want you to understand shameless fanatic.

You keep recycling the same empty emotionalism with NO JUSTIFICATION. Who denied who their "rights"? What are these "rights"? Why did these people start claiming a "right" THEY OPENLY DENIED IN 1964?

Please answer these questions. Thank you.

davidylan:

You keep recycling the same empty emotionalism with NO JUSTIFICATION. Who denied who their "rights"? What are these "rights"? Why did these people start claiming a "right" THEY OPENLY DENIED IN 1964?

Please answer these questions. Thank you.

That is all you should have said that you need to be informed instead of Rambling.

The original PLO Charter (issued on 28 May 1964[3]) stated that "Palestine with its boundaries that existed at the time of the British mandate is an integral regional unit" and sought to "prohibit, the existence and activity" of Zionism.[4] It also called for a right of return and self-determination for Palestinians. Palestinian statehood was not mentioned, although in 1974 the PLO called for an independent state in the territory of Mandate Palestine.

The charter was written while statehood was omitted, what it wrong with asking for a state, within this boundaries that was marked out during the British leadership of the region? Just because your fellow not peace loving friends in Isreal would not allow it, they would rather hold on to seized territories, in Gaza and the West bank. They then turn on to claim the seizure on the activities of Hamaz, now Hamaz has toned down hoping for you and your fellow fanatics in Isreal to show the same goodwill. Now you turn around and say, lets look at Iran. If Iran should tone down am sure you and your fellow fanatics would find another reason. Maybe Somalia.

Your nonsence facts, which would rather take us back has no place here, among the forward looking, high spirit youths of this forum. You can go and sow your evil, hateful seed somewhere else.

To start with, you again exposed your incoherence and ignorance of basic facts . . .

You said and i quote:

The original PLO Charter (issued on 28 May 1964[3]) stated that "Palestine with its boundaries that existed at the time of the British mandate is an integral regional unit" and sought to "prohibit,  the existence and activity" of Zionism.[4] It also called for a right of return and self-determination for Palestinians. Palestinian statehood was not mentioned, although in 1974 the PLO called for an independent state in the territory of Mandate Palestine.

The key is in the portion i highlighted. now the first question is WHAT STATES EXISTED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF PALESTINE AS AT THE TIME OF THE BRITISH MANDATE?

[size=18pt]Prior to 1922 they were - Israel + Gaza + West Bank + Jordan.[/size]

Now isnt it funny that when FATAH was formed in 1956, it IGNORED to fight Egypt for Gaza?
Isnt it even more ridiculous that when the PLO was formed in 1964, it COMPLETELY ignored the fact that the British reneged on its earlier plan and GAVE 75% of Palestine to the sons of the Sharif of Mecca (pple who had NOTHING to do with palestine at all) to form what is now Jordan? Isnt it even more interesting that this same PLO completely ceded any sovereign rights to both Jordan and the West Bank . . .

So EXACTLY WHAT boundaries of Palestine under the British mandate where they seeking in 1964? Well by a process of elimination we are left with an arid tiny desert called Israel!

Infact the latter portion i placed in bold helps us understand the basis of the formation of the PLO . . . it was NOTHING to do with "palestinian" statehood (infact the term "palestinian" did not exist for arabs until 1988!) but this - [size=15pt]sought to "prohibit,  the existence and activity" of Zionism[/size]

In other words - the destruction of the only Jewish state on earth. Isnt it funny that you half-heartedly acknowledge that in 1964 the PLO NEVER agitated for statehood? Why are they suddenly agitating for one?

Ikomi:

The charter was written while statehood was omitted, what it wrong with asking for a state, within this boundaries that was marked out during the British leadership of the region?

Again one is forced to ask . . . what are these "boundaries" marked out by the British? Pls do tell.

Ikomi:

Just because your fellow not peace loving friends in Isreal would not allow it, they would rather hold on to seized territories, in Gaza and the West bank.

But we already know that:

1. The West Bank and Gaza were NEVER seized from "palestinians" but from Jordan and Egypt.

2. Both Jordan and Egypt have STEADFASTLY REFUSED to take back both lands.

3. That in 1964, the PLO CEDED territorial sovereignity of the west bank to Jordan and FATAH did not ask for Gaza in 1956 . . .

so EXACTLY HOW is Israel not allowing "palestinian" statehood?

Ikomi:

Your nonsence facts, which would rather take us back has no place here, among the forward looking, high spirit youths of this forum. You can go and sow your evil, hateful seed somewhere else.

The sad portion is i cant even see YOUR OWN facts.

Your a major fool who would rather go back to events that happened when you were not born. I stay with the ones I witnessed.

A peace accord was signed by Arafat and Rabin in the lawn of washington on the 13 of may 1993.

The peace accord proposed an Isreali withdrawal from Gaza and Jericho on the west bank by 13 December of that same year. the areas would come under Palestinian self goverment. The PLO central council at a meeting on 12 October ratified the agreement.

Detailed negotiations with Isreal over witdrawal stalled when Isreal demanded the right to protect Jewish settlers who were there before the peace accord, to control border crossing and to determine the exact extent of Jericho. So you see how they were tactically trying to withdraw from the accord. To let peace reign the PLO agreed that the deadline for implementation could be extended for a further ten days.

Implementation came to an abrupt halt when on 25 Febuary 1994 Baruch Goldstein an Isreali settler and an army officer, perpetrated a massacre at the Ibrahim mosque, gunning down 48 Palestinians. It was later revealed that basically the Isreali army had no orders to stop any Isreali settler who decides to open fire on Palestinians.

Now idiot Davidylan tell me how is that just?  Now would we be right if we say the attack could even have been master minded by the state of Isreal in other to halt the peace process since they know what will follow.

What did the Isreali authority do after this incident, they clamped a curfew on Palestinians, while Isreali settlers moved freely, and in some cases applaud Goldstein.

The massacre was only avenged on 6 April by Hamas when it killed seven Isreali civilians.

Though talks continued after this events between Rabin and Arafat in their determined effort to find peace. But what did those your fanatic friends do in other to stop the move again.

They killed Yithak Rabin. There own prime Minister, in other to make sure there would be no peace in that region.

I have said it before you are an idiot. That would go back to 1964, and bring up events you can only read in books.

I saw Rabin shake Arafat. These two fought wars on different sides but still saw the reason for peace, but idiots like you who have never seen war would seat at the comfort of your couch and shout bomb bomb bomb Iran.

Idiot why dont you go fly a plane yourself and do the bombing. Ewu Ocha.

davidylan:

I wonder what you consider "moral" values. Maybe HAMAS throwing FATAH members from rooftops is your own idea. considering the level of your own moral relativism and depravity i would not be surprised.

Your an idiot. Let me remind you war touting idiot. For every single war, it is someones father, son, friend uncle, brother, mother, aunt, sister and daughter that dies.

Maybe you should think about loosing a loved one before you shout your bomb bomb bomb Iran.

I would not shed a single tear to see your likes falling off a burning air plane though.

Idiot.

you are an idiot, you are a major . . . bla bla bla . . . no facts, no logic, no attempt to address the issues. What a shame.

Ikomi:

Your a major fool who would rather go back to events that happened when you were not born. I stay with the ones I witnessed.

A peace accord was signed by Arafat and Rabin in the lawn of washington on the 13 of may 1993.

The peace accord proposed an Isreali withdrawal from Gaza and Jericho on the west bank by 13 December of that same year. the areas would come under Palestinian self goverment. The PLO central council at a meeting on 12 October ratified the agreement.

Detailed negotiations with Isreal over witdrawal stalled when Isreal demanded the right to protect Jewish settlers who were there before the peace accord, to control border crossing and to determine the exact extent of Jericho. So you see how they were tactically trying to withdraw from the accord. To let peace reign the PLO agreed that the deadline for implementation could be extended for a further ten days.

Implementation came to an abrupt halt when on 25 Febuary 1994 Baruch Goldstein an Isreali settler and an army officer, perpetrated a massacre at the Ibrahim mosque, gunning down 48 Palestinians. It was later revealed that basically the Isreali army had no orders to stop any Isreali settler who decides to open fire on Palestinians.

Now idiot Davidylan tell me how is that just?  Now would we be right if we say the attack could even have been master minded by the state of Isreal in other to halt the peace process since they know what will follow.

What did the Isreali authority do after this incident, they clamped a curfew on Palestinians, while Isreali settlers moved freely, and in some cases applaud Goldstein.

Israel has since withdrawn fully from Gaza . . . and where is the PLO government there?

davidylan:

Israel has since withdrawn fully from Gaza . . . and where is the PLO government there?

The specific impediments to the establishment of a Palestinian state is because Israel declares that its security demands that a Palestinian entity would not have all attributes of a state, at least initially. Israel may be therefore said to agree (as of now) not to a complete and independent Palestinian state, but rather to a self-administering entity, with partial but not full sovereignty over its borders and its citizens.

Oslo Accord did it only say Gaza? What about West Bank?

I knew you know nothing now that it has come down to specifics, you start talking bla bla bla, was that all I said.

You are still an idiot for trying to misinform people.

Palestine is nothing but an Islamic plot to erase Israel. Most people who call themselves palestinians are Islamic nomads (mostly from Egypt) who were sent out by Imams to go and "re-occupy" Israel since the Arab world has seen that warfare will always bring them to shame when it comes to Israel.
Arafat was born in Egypt. Does that sound like a conspiracy to you?
The aim of Islam internationally is to take over Britain and US. For Britain, they will likely suceed. Britain has officially allowed sharia law. For US?
NO WAY!

As for Iran, what is wrong in preventing a man who has openely declared that he wants to rob from getting a gun?
Its just like someone who is a convict being prevented from holding government positions. You cannot come out openely and say "Why should Mr A. be allowed to contest and Mr.B (who is a convict) dissallowed?"
Iran is a "convict" because of the statement of the president that Israel should not exist.
A convict should should not have a nuke because we know what he is capable of.
Simple!
Again: Even with the nuke, Isreal can still clear Iran in one day. Ask Ahmadinejad what happened to the Egyptian president who made a similar speech earlier - Heart attack leading to his death.
Isreel is Blessed and you just have to accept it. Even the US will struggle to defeat them in war.

Davidylan, Islam is full of lies and deception. Don't waste much energy arguing. Arguements are only worthwhile when it is done with logical, rational and sane people of whom the Moslems are not.

Obrigado.

If the Zionist extremists in Israel bomb peaceful Iran, Iran must retaliate to protect herself.

The Iranian military should do whatever it can right now to get the most advanced surface-to-air missiles so they can shoot down Israeli jets/bombers that enter their airspace. This must be a top priority among military planners in Iran.

Iran should also consider investing in military satellites that can watch over the Zionist/Apartheid state of Israel. This will help give the Iranians advanced warning should the extremists go ahead with their nefarious plans of carrying out a first strike against a nation that has never invaded a neighbor in recent memory. If the cost of owning and maintaining a military satellite is too high, they should work out an agreement with the Russians. The Russians may lease out a satellite or two to the Iranians. This will go a long way in protecting innocent Iranians from evil extremists in Israel.

When one is dealing with die-hard extremists like the Zionists that control Israel, no amount of preparation is too much.