Stephen Abootman I'm not your friend budday! Mustard Tigers w00t. Friday, March 13th 2009 - 08:15:33 AM

Philadelphia Collins Mustard Tigers for life, I got nothing but love for you and everyone else from Cotey's IR class... We've all been through too much together, from racial slurs in classroom, to presentations being tainted with "brown porn"... just too much history, not to mention the famous Cotey two step. Nothing but love Monday, February 16th 2009 - 09:17:57 PM

Peter Pan Sorry Benjai, I didn't understand what u were doing. I overreacted and corrected your grammar. That was wrong of me. You > me. We're team mates, we shouldn't fight. Mustard Tigers 4 life. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 09:12:34 PM

condoleezza rice HEY!! I had to google my name hahaha... Anyways, tradition has officially started! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 08:16:52 PM

benny the dumb You mean your? You're implies you are. I thought you were smarter than this! :( I didn't want to say anything, but you started it. I'm sorry. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:43:19 PM

Benny the man Well thatS you'RE opinion: Notice the awful use of punctuation: hmm.?... Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:41:00 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez If you're going to correct me, you should at least make sure your own writing is error free, dummy. "it's" = it is FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WHERE'S THE APOSTROPHE?!?!?!? Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:30:28 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez ..actually, if you are going to correct me, make sure you don't have any mistakes either :P "it's" = it is... dummy Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:27:48 PM

Ricky Well, that's your opinion. maybe your a dick. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:27:28 PM

Mrs. Palmer [e] woopsy daisy.. how silly of me. Sorry, dear. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:24:52 PM

Mr. Palmer its like COME ON...hudder Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:21:58 PM

Swearing is a sin [e] Hey! you watch what you say to me. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:21:11 PM

OBMAMA WOOO IS A GOOF IR class was dope... I hope everyone starts posting on here again... this thing is a fucking time capsule eh! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:19:20 PM

Saddam Hussein [e] Aw, COMEON GUYY!! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:11:46 PM

Saddam Hussein [e] AW, COMEON GUYY!! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 06:10:49 PM

Saddam Hussein [e] AW, COMEON GUYY! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 05:30:02 PM

Stephen Abootman I'm not your Guy, Friend! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 12:39:48 PM

Stephen Abootman I'm not your Guy, friend! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 12:31:40 PM

H 2 the double-O D I'm not your buddy, guy! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 12:28:24 PM

reb I'm not your buddy, guy! Monday, February 16th 2009 - 12:26:14 PM

Stephen Abootman I'm not your friend, budday. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:38:41 AM

dundundun <a href="http://tinypic.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i40.tinypic.com/315haig.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a> Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:30:02 AM

abc <a href="http://tinypic.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i40.tinypic.com/315haig.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic"></a> Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:27:47 AM

Obamaaa! WOOOO [e] [IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/315haig.jpg[/IMG] Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:26:12 AM

Obamaaa! WOOOO [e] [IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/315haig.jpg[/IMG] Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:26:01 AM

Chris Hudson [e] Robert Donaldson <3 Stephen Harper Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:22:18 AM

Chris Hudson [e] Robbie Donaldson <3 Stephen Harper Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:16:35 AM

Stephen Abootman 1 2 3 4 CANADA DESERVES MORE MONAY. hudder = gay. Monday, February 16th 2009 - 11:13:38 AM

Condoleeza Rice [e] I'm still up to no good and am currently writing a politics paper for my tutorial tommorow! It reminded me of the good old times at Markville when I used to post at crazy times while doing my work!.... lets get the M-ville tradition going lol Stacey Leimonis Monday, March 6th 2006 - 11:24:43 PM

.. Thursday, October 6th 2005 - 01:35:07 PM

ABU MAZEN!!!! i miss erryone good luck in uni..first week of lectures suck Sunday, September 18th 2005 - 12:46:25 PM

... <img src="http://tinypic.com/b9iuiq.jpg" alt="Image hosted by TinyPic.com"> Sunday, August 28th 2005 - 02:49:35 PM

me [e] <img src="http://tinypic.com/b9iuiq.jpg" alt="Image hosted by TinyPic.com"> Sunday, August 28th 2005 - 02:31:29 PM

roberto wow benny you are right... Cotey u gotta read this and put the marks up! I work 7 days a week during the day so i havent picked up my report card yet, and i want to know my mark! I cant believe im still using this message board haha. Monday, July 18th 2005 - 06:58:21 PM

Benny Hmmmm......... i was looking to see if our final marks were up and stumped upon this message board, seems Ariel Sharon and Shaul Mofaz are some pretty smart cookies eh, wish i could say the same for mamood abbas Thursday, June 30th 2005 - 09:30:57 AM

roberto #2 wow its over eh? godamn that went fast. It still feels like yesterday when i was arguing with jibroni and hudder on this. everyone have a good summer and have a great future, weither it would be university, or college, or working full time. see u at commencement. roberto over and out. Thursday, June 23rd 2005 - 06:41:40 PM

Christopher Hudson [e] I would like to second that motion! Monday, May 2nd 2005 - 03:52:28 PM

Roberto Donaldson I saw this review for a movie, and I was thinkin we should see, it looks like a good movie for politics. Its called "Kingdom Of Heaven". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0320661/ - coming out may 4th i think. Roberto signing out 10-4 over and out. Thursday, April 28th 2005 - 07:46:26 PM

Stacey Leimonis Me... AGAIN!... Great debate is in a few hours hahaha, yes I stayed up all night preparing for this too! It is almost the same time that I posted my last "all nighter" post at. Anyways, I am going to continue... Tah Tah Thursday, April 28th 2005 - 01:15:39 AM

Stacey Leimonis I decided that since I have posted so many times on here at ridiculous times I would continue the trend. Keep the time difference in mind..... yeah, that's right it IS something like 4:15AM... and it is tuesday night... anyways I'm about half way done my homework, and have been reading everyone's madatory posts. Some of the proposals actually make sence, while others are far fetched. Well done everyone :) Tuesday, April 19th 2005 - 01:16:11 AM

Menisha Hodge Mandatory Post #3 (sorry its late, i honestly forgot) In my opinion, the best way to find peace for the Middle East conflict would be to approach the situation from the inside out. By this I mean look at the internal issues before you go and decide boundaries and and other territorial affairs. The tension and hatred that resides in every Palistinian and inside every Israeli needs to be addressed. As I mentioned in a previous post, education is key to making any progress in the peace plan. Educating the communities, government officials and anyone else directly invovled in the situation. And it needs to start soon. Hate breeds hate. Secondly I feel that the International Observation Committee that was propsed during our conference would be a very helpful step. By placing a neutral party, that can look at the conflict objectively, within the Middle East, there will slowly be a shift of power from the hands of the terrorists to the hands of the people. That's what you need to do. Make peace a conscious effort of the people and you will see great results. Thursday, April 14th 2005 - 03:26:10 PM

* h e e l a * [e] MANDATORY POST #3 Peace between Israel and the Palestinians requires not a single solution, but multiple changes as well as efforts to create and maintain peace. The first step that must be taken by not only Israel and the Palestinians but by other states in the region as well is dedication to ending terror and violence. Governments in the region must work internally and with other state governments to destroy the infrastructure of terrorist organizations. The people of Israel, Palestine, and the rest of the Middle East must prove that are not willing to tolerate hate, violence, and terrorism. Re-education and tolerance for other culture and religion are crucial to ending the hate and violence. Next the international community must work with the Palestinians to build and maintain a stable democracy with a constitution for Palestinian statehood. The election of President Abbas in January 2005 demonstrated the Palestinians’ desire for democracy and a responsible government dedicated to achieving peace. The international community must also work to improve the humanitarian situation of the Palestinians. While the Palestinians are working on maintaining democracy, the Israelis must freeze settlement activity in dominant Palestinian regions and withdraw from several areas which they have promised to do in July 2005. As we experienced during our International Relations Simulation, one of the most difficult parts (if not the most difficult part) of the peace process is the creation of an independent and contiguous Palestinian state with definite borders. It is essential for Israel and Palestine to have defined borders as independent states if peace is to be maintained. Jerusalem and other important holy sites in the region are key concepts that must be taken into consideration when deciding the borders of a Palestinian state as there are several disputed territories between Israel and Palestine. The creation of an independent Palestinian state will surely require concessions made by both groups making the process much more challenging. The creation of a Palestinian state will have a need for solid political, economic, and social institutions. Again, the international community must be involved in institution building as well as providing economic and humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. Security and the end of violence in the region are important to the achievement of peace between Israel, Palestine, and the rest of the Middle East. The entire Middle Eastern region must be committed to peace and the end to terror and violence for any of the noted steps to be first taken and the results maintained. Not until all of these steps are taken and completed with success that there can be peace and stability in the Middle East, especially between Israel and the Palestinians. Therefore at this point, I don't believe that there is " THE best solution" for achieving peace between the two groups...which is probably why peace hasn't been achieved in the past several decades but its never too late! ;) Thursday, April 14th 2005 - 02:11:25 PM

Jessica Mendlowitz MAND. POST #3 I think that Israel and Palestine need to stop shutting down each other’s ideas by saying their viewpoints are wrong. Whether or not that method is “the right one” or not, both nations need to be open-minded in order to move forward to a peace between the two. Unfortunately this is not easy to answer, as both places have been trying to find reconciliation for over half a decade on this current conflict. I believe that recognizing Palestine as a state could help more forward to peace, but first and foremost the decision of Jerusalem needs to be dealt with first. Israel once purposed to make it an international city, and I believe that they, as well as Palestine, should open their minds to it again. Lastly, I also believe the proper education of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians will contribute to a greater peace between the two nations. Peace cannot be achieved in a world where hatred is promoted to one another. -Jessica Thursday, April 14th 2005 - 02:03:05 PM

Peggy [e] Mandatory Post #3 As we progressed (or momentarily stalled) through the Israeli-Palestinian peace conference, I have come to one hard-learned conclusion- a solution that satisfies all parties is undeniably impossible. In this case, it was a rather difficult conflict to resolve. Yet now looking back at the conference, it becomes quite simple to find a few small solutions with vast importance that would most definitely alter the current situation in Israel for the better. First and foremost, the issue of terrorism within Israel (by both Israelis and Palestinians) must be addressed. This is most crucial to the shaping of a separate state of Palestine, as it is what is holding back progression (in terms of state division) with the most force. This is not, however, a simple task as terrorism in Israel and many Middle Eastern countries is government funded making the terrorist ties that much more deep-rooted and hard to extinguish. Both Israelis and Palestinians must work to eliminate terrorism by any means necessary. One vital factor they must consider is that you cannot fight terror with terror. Negotiations are necessary amongst Israelis and Palestinians and this issue has gone on far too long. If Israel is so much for peace and negotiations then I believe that the wall in Israel should be taken down. This would give Palestinian people a clear indication that Israelis are willing to live in peace and harmony with them. Progression will be well on its way. Yet we are still left with the contentious question of Jerusalem. Israelis and Palestinians both have close ties to this city in regards to religion, thus neither side is willing to sacrifice it by any means. What I feel would be necessary in this case (although I do not believe that it would ever prevail) is that both parties must come together and agree to make it an international city, providing both Israel and Palestine with what they want individually. However, this is clearly not an option at this point, as both sides have strongly disagreed. Definitely not last nor least, is the issue of dividing the land to create the two individual states, Israel and Palestine. This is by far the most intricate issue in regards to the conflict and has been under the microscope for many years now. As we learned from our in-class simulation, this issue may remain pending for years to come. Yet based on my knowledge of the situation and the result of our simulation, I feel that the best thing to do is give the Palestinians what they are asking for - freedom of life and equality. This proposition, however, proved unsuccessful at varied times during our simulation as well as in the real life conflict of Israel and Palestine. In my opinion, this is so because it seems as though both sides are asking for what they will not provide themselves. In conclusion, I feel that before any progression is seen within Israel that serious negotiations must be made by both sides, in a manner that will essentially satisfy both sides of the conflict. Our in-class simulation showed me that without communication, honesty, and an open mind, nothing is possible. Thursday, April 14th 2005 - 12:28:18 PM

JIBRAN WAHEED Mandatory Post #3 REVISEDD!!!!! In my own belief I think that their will never be peace and their will always be unrest between Palestine and Israel. The fact is that terrorist activities cannot be stopped. A terrorist portrays himself to his people as a freedom fighter, a person who is dieing for his country and religion. This image portrays heroism to many people. Even by locking up terrorist and their leaders will these problems stop, they will just become far more ambitious about their cause. Religion also plays a defining factor in the Palestine-Israel conflict. There is too much controversy between lands and holy sites that no side will be happy with the end result. Palestine wants West Bank and Gaza Strip but the reality is that there is no way that Israel will split that much of their land to Palestine. Also if they say a path to peace has already being made then why is the separation wall still being built? It seems to be there is still unrest in both regions especially Israel. I think the truth is that both regions are not preparing for peace because if they were drastic measure would’ve had being taken by now and the construction of the wall would’ve stopped. Why are they continuing with the Road Map to peace if the Separation wall is continuing to shape the Palestinian borders? In conclusion their will always be political unrest in Israel. The conflict between the Palestinians and the Israeli’s will continue until a solution is made that fits both Israel and Palestine’s desires, which is close to impossible. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 10:57:24 PM

Jibran Waheed Mandatory Post #3 In my own belief I think that their will never be peace and their will always be unrest between Palestine and Israel. The fact is that terrorist activities cannot be stopped. A terrorist portrays himself to his people as a freedom fighter, a person who is dieing for his country and religion. This image portrays heroism to many people. Even by locking up terrorist and their leaders will these problems stop, they will just become far more ambitious about their cause. Religion also plays a defining factor in the Palestine-Israel conflict. There is too much controversy between lands and holy sites that no side will be happy with the end result. Palestine wants West Bank and Gaza Strip but the reality is that there is no way that Israel will split that much of their land to Palestine. Also if they say a path to peace has already being made then why is the separation wall still being built? It seems to be there is still unrest in both regions especially Israel. I think the truth is that both regioins are not preparing for peace because if they were drastic measure would’ve had being taken by now and the construction of the wall would’ve stopped. Why are the continuing with the Road Map to peace if the Separation wall is continuing to shape the Palestinian borders? In conclusion their will always be political unrest in Israel. The conflict between the Palestinians and the Israeli’s will continue until a solution is made that fits both Israel and Palestine’s desires, which is close to impossible. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 10:56:18 PM

Sonal. Batavia MANDATORY POST #3 - @11:57 PM ON WEDNESDAY! After a wonderful week of going back and forth at one another, and finally ending the conference, perhaps with no absolute solution, I can’t say I have quite decided what would be best for finding peace. Realistically, finding peace is not an easy task, no matter what resolution is made; the reality is you can never please everyone ( which was clearly seen in our conference). There will always be those few odd balls that rebel against everything. More so in this conflict, the Palestine and Israel’s brutal past will not suddenly be forgotten. However, I believe a good place to start is ending terrorism. I think that is an extremely positive step for Palestine, and as mentioned in the conference terrorism affects the country as well as all the neighbouring countries. Moreover, Israel’s commitment to withdrawing from the Gaza Strip is also a huge step forward. By making this step, Palestinian citizens may come to see that the country’s can work together as they are figuring out a very real solution for this after 60 years of conflict. Furthermore, Palestine has required a permanent area of their own, as opposed to just regions for quite some time. Now that this will be happening, this is a start for the country to actually be put out on the map. This alone could smooth out creases of stress, anger and grudges that Palestinians have been holding against the Israeli’s now. Surely it will not solve everything, as there is still the major question of Jerusalem. Personally, I completely wanted to see the International state idea that was proposed by Palestine follow through. Being such a holy state for both countries, there really is no fair way to split the country other than giving fair access to both. It cannot be bordered in certain areas because of holy temples. I mean why should one country get more access than the other right? The fact is either way it’s done there will be conflict, and I believe both countries are aware this is a very likely outcome. That said, at least their conflict will hopefully eventually leave them to finding their middle within Jerusalem. Perhaps it sounds better in theory and in words, but I personally do believe this is a great solution for Jerusalem. In the long term, it will be beneficial. Those are my thoughts for now. Batavia. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 08:58:47 PM

Roberto Donaldson [e] MANDATORY POST #3 In my opinion the best way to achieve peace is to listen to both sides of the arguement, and create a settlement from that. Israel's main objective is to have the safety of their people, while the Palestinian people want what they are right fully entitled to, which would be the return of their people, along with the human rights that every human should be able to get. Know from being right in the centre of all of these conferences this past week, I see that peace will not be achieved overnight. It takes time for each part of a peace plan to be planned, agreed, and followed through before the next step is taken. The problem with our conferences is that we could not show those steps being taken, besides both sides agreeing with it, we could not see the action taking place. If we take the time now to map out a peace plan, hopefully our future leaders will follow through and achieve peace. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 08:25:20 PM

Chris Hudson [e] Sorry for posting my revised post twice, my internet was being stubborn. The revised post is the one that i wish to have marked, not the one i posted yesterday. - Chris Hudson Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 08:10:08 PM

Chris Hudson [e] Mandatory Post #3 *Revised* Throughout the IR simulation, we have learned that this is one very difficult conflict to solve. In order to resolve this conflict terrorism must be abolished. Many terrorist groups get their funding from dirty politicians, and in many situations, from other countries. Palestinian leaders must search out those responsible for funding these groups and cut off their money supply. As a sign of trust and willingness to resolve the conflict, Israel should halt construction of the wall, and tear it down. This would show the Palestinians that some progress has been made in bringing peace to the region. Jerusalem is a very hot button topic in the region. Both the Israeli's, and the Palestinians have religious ties to this holy city, and that is why it creates such tension between these two groups of people. The best solution is to make Jerusalem an international city, with neither Israel nor Palestine in control. Creating a single Palestinian state has proved to be very daunting task. The layout of this land makes it very difficult to unite the Palestinian people in a single nation, with borders that they would be agree on. The best possible solution that I thought was proposed during the simulation was to create an international corridor between the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Doing this would create a united Palestinian state and hopefully bring peace to the region. In order for this plan to work Israel would have to be willing to surrender more land. This simulation has given me some insight into how difficult international politics can prove to be, and I feel I am leaving this simulation with a lot more knowledge than when it started. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 07:36:43 PM

Chris Hudson [e] Mandatory Post #3 *Revised* Throughout the IR simulation, we have learned that this is one very difficult conflict to solve. In order to resolve this conflict, terrorism must be abolished. Many terrorist groups get their funding from dirty politicians, and in many cases, from other countries. Palestinian leaders must search out those responsible for funding these groups and cut off their money supply. As a sign of trust and willingness to resolve the conflict, Israel should halt construction of the wall, and tear it down. This would show the Palestinians that some progress has been made in bringing peace to the region. Jerusalem is a very hot button topic in the region. Both the Israeli's, and the Palestinians have religious ties to this holy city, and that is why it creates such tension between these two groups of people. The best solution is to make Jerusalem an international city, with neither Israel nor Palestine in control. Creating a single Palestinian state has proved to be a very daunting task. The layout of this land makes it very difficult to unite the Palestinian people in a single nation, with borders that they would be agree on. The best possible solution that I thought was proposed during the simulation was to create an international corridor between the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Doing this would create a united Palestinian state and hopefully bring peace to the region. In order for this plan to work Israel would have to be willing to surrender more land. This simulation has given me some insight into how difficult international politics can prove to be, and I feel I am leaving this simulation with a lot more knowledge than when it started. - Chris Hudson Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 07:31:06 PM

Benny Adelson [e] Mandatory Post #3 Peace or pacifism is the opposition to war and violence. To achieve peace in the Middle East pacifism will need to be expressed in political movements, along with the ideologies of individuals within the region. Parties in power need to adopt a relative idea towards peace. They must be selective of the wars and violence they oppose, and the precise violence and discipline needed to control hostile groups. Increased targeting of terrorist groups, political extremists and racial extremists needs to be immediately isolated, and completely dismembered. The collective support must be achieved by all nations in the Middle East (Syria, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, etc…). Without the collective effort, and the knowledge that your neighbor nation is committed to the cause, peace will not be achieved. International observers, although expensive and possibly invasive will help insure the political stability over the region. If there is the collective agreement to peace, there must be a collective agreement to take necessary steps to achieve it. Having policies, procedures and administrations under the international microscope will contribute to stabilizing, and repairing ‘damaged’ regimes in the Middle East. Furthermore, educating civilians in an unbiased and regional way, this will contribute to the lessening of hate that is bred in certain areas in the Middle East. In conclusion, to achieve peace without violence is not a reality. Global leaders will have to encourage peace, but at the same time be avid about controlling, and eliminating terrorist threats at any means necessary. Peace in the Middle East can be achieved if we learn to adopt the relative form of pacifism. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 06:54:05 PM

Stacey Leimonis *MANDATORY POST #3* After completing the International Relations Simulation, I developed a better understanding of the conflicts that have developed in the Middle-East. I believe the best way to create peace in this war-torn region, is to first make every attempt to put an end to terrorism. The “Gun for a Job” idea, or “Gun for Food” campaigns could help prevent violence, and harsh penalties for all those who take part in acts of terrorism should be mandatory. Being lenient on murderers is not the way to create peace, and therefore I believe that capital punishment will be effective. Israel has made many efforts to take the first step in creating peace, and I believe that the disengagement plans will help relieve tensions. The removal of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip, and the west Bank will give Palestinians hope and incentive to stop all terrorism in an exchange for peace talks, and possible talks for more land. Negotiations and mediation will be imperative in developing proper Palestinian-Israeli borders, and will be the best way of preventing terrorism, and creating peace. The issue of having a Palestinian state which is divided by Israeli land is impossible to deal with as Israel cannot be expected to give up more land, and fighting over a joining region would mean war, and cause Israel to become a divided state instead. These issues have been ongoing for more than sixty years, and I wish I could say that I had all the answers as to how to create peace in this region, however I do not, and neither does anyone else. Stacey Leimonis Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 06:45:33 PM

Jimmy L [e] The international community hasn’t been able to resolve this problem for many decades. It would have been unrealistic for us to have come up with a peace plan in a week. So to be very honest I do not know a solution to the Israel and Palestine conflict. The best way to come up with a solution is to have both sides full co-operation. I think that Jerusalem is a big part in resolving this conflict, but since both sides are not willing to give this up it is not an option. Another way to settle this dispute is to create a Palestinian State differently. There seems to be no way to connect the Gaza Strip and West Bank without splitting one of the States into two. Therefore if Palestine is willing to give up either the Gaza Strip or West Bank then two one State Nations could be completed. But again Palestine would never do that in reality. Another point to think of is that even if a Palestinian State is created who or what will guarantee the stop of fighting and terrorism towards both groups. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 04:31:54 PM

Jeff J. MANDATORY POST 3 In my opinion, there are three things that must be done in order to finally end the Israeli- Palestinian conflict: discontinuing terrorist activities as much as possible, establishing trust and better relations between the parties, and determining the boundaries of a Palestinian state. As we saw during the simulation, terrorism is major obstacle standing in the way of peace. If neither side feels secure not only will the peace process move slower, it may halt altogether due to animosity. Hamas, a group perceived by many nations as a terrorist faction, and other groups similar to it hold viewpoints that are biased and are based on contempt of the other party. While I recognize that it is hard for a leader to silence these terrorists and change their way of thinking, there are still actions that can be taken. It is important to disrupt the funding to these groups and to tackle corrupt regimes and faulty banking systems that may be economically aiding these factions. In addition, each side must condemn terrorist activities; for Palestine, this means that the accusations that they are affiliated with terrorist factions must be discussed openly. Secondly, the level of trust and respectful relations between the two parties must be heightened. Even though both parties are vastly different in terms of religion and beliefs, some level of tolerance needs to be adopted. Nether side should promote hate against the other; the youth, who are most vulnerable to coercion, mustn’t be taught that the other side is hopelessly evil. A formal treaty in which Palestine acknowledges Israel’s right to exist and in which Israeli makes concessions of a similar nature is needed. Lastly, the boundaries and details of a future Palestinian state must be planned out. The disputed lands – Gaza Strip and West Bank – were seized by Israelis in the midst of an aggressive Arab onslaught, so it is hard to place the Israelis at fault for their reluctance to relinquish the lands throughout the years. Also, the Palestinian’s standard of living and their struggles with refugee status since 1948 warrant the creation of their own homeland. The Palestinian state will inevitably be non-continuous since I think it is unreasonable to ask Israel to relinquish more land. Jerusalem, a city of religious significance to both sides, is perhaps the most complex issue. I would like to see the establishment of international city status for Jerusalem and United Nations peacekeepers will need to maintain a presence in the city. Although this proposal for Jerusalem has failed before, I’d like to see it tried over again as it seems the most sensible of all other possibilities. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 04:27:13 PM

Benita [e] MANDATORY POST #3 The only way to look at the Israel-Palestine conflict is from the perspective of the rights of individuals to their freedom and their acquired property and also the right to self-determination of the communities they have created. Palestinians have been trying to "secede" from Israel's UN-mandated occupation for more than 60 years. Yet Israelis also have a right to live in the "Promised Land" on their justly acquired lands, including land that truly was previously unowned. By trying to resolve these issues of the collective rights of ethnic and religious groups is driving us now to the cause of wars, thousands of weapons are used, and killing possibly millions of people, Jewish, Muslim and Christian. In my opinion, I think the peace plan for establishing a Palestinian-Israeli peace is to strengthen their mutual dependencies and cooperative linkages. Both parties must willing to exploit existing tendencies towards their interdependence. Adoption of an interdependent strategy carries with it an implied willingness to downgrade sovereign freedom of action as a defining characteristic of security. Improving Israeli security requires improving Palestinian security. Neither Israelis nor Palestinians can achieve stable peace alone. In fact, both sides have to make sacrifices, and to achieve common security. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 02:49:47 PM

Danielle Leblanc MANDATORY POST #3 I believe the best way to create peace in the middle east is through the creation of a separate Palestinian state. First though Jerusalem must be made an international city (not a dual capital). Jerusalem should be decided before creating a Palestinian state because it is one of the big issues of the conference. If neither country is fighting over it the rest of the boundary issues will be smoother. Terrorism is a big problem. Palestine should be given funds to support an anti-terrorist campaign and maybe troops if they are willing to accept. Palestine must promise to (try its best to) stop terrorism. There should be an international committee in Palestine to make sure there is none (or at least government funded acts). Israeli settlers should move out of Palestinian occupied land such as Gaza Strip and West Bank. This will be very difficult and will take some time (obviously Israel can't be expected to move all settlers). Since Israel will be moving out of the land, I believe it is only fair that Palestine be cut in two. Israel should have more land (it was there first and it will not accept a huge loss). Palestine should be expanded in such a way that West Bank and Gaza Strip almost touch but the land in between should be Israel. Ideas need to be thought of for how to unite the two parts. Perhaps overpasses or tunnels (maybe even pass through Israel, although that would be far too much of a hassle) but these tunnels would be extremely expensive and unpractical. Geography is the biggest obstacle to securing peace. That doesn’t mean this is impossible. Continued peace talks and negotiations and encouraging trust between these two nationalities will hopefully lead to the conclusion of this conflict. Wednesday, April 13th 2005 - 08:44:21 AM

Chris Hudson [e] Mandatory Post #3 Throughout the IR simulation, we have learned that this is one very difficult conflict to solve. In order to resolve this conflict terrorism must be stopped. This is very difficult to do because these terrorists get their funding from dirty politicians, and in many situations from other countries. Palestinian leaders must search out those responsible for funding these groups and cut off their money supply. As a sign of trust and willingness to solve the conflict, Israel should stop building the wall and tear it down. This would show the Palestinians that some progress has been made. Jerusalem is a very hot button topic in the region. Both the Israeli's, and the Palestinians have religious ties to this holy city, and that is why it creates such tension between these two groups of people. In my opinion, the best solution is to make Jerusalem an international city, with neither Israel nor Palestine in control. However, this idea has already been proposed and turned down. Creating a single Palestinian state has proved to be very difficult. The layout of this land makes it very difficult to unite the Palestinian people in a single nation with borders that they would be happy with. The best possible solution that I thought was proposed during the simulation was to create an international corridor between the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Doing this would create a united Palestinian state and hopefully bring peace to the region. However, Israel is not willing to surrender more land and therefore this is just another failed option, which might of brought peace to these people in turmoil. This simulation has given me some insight into how difficult international politics can prove to be, and I feel I am leaving this simulation with a lot more knowledge than when it started. - Chris Hudson Tuesday, April 12th 2005 - 07:30:21 PM

Simon B MANDATORY POST #3 I dont not think that i can anserw this question appropriatly becuase of a few main reasons. the international community has been looking for peace for 60 years an yet we have nothing to show for it. Aslo any suggestions i have would not be fair to both israel or palestein so it wouldnt work. i think that the issue of terroism has been looked at now in our own sim.From there is belive that we need to recognize a palestinian state, and for that to be done jerusulum needs to be decided over first. The countrys involved needs to take in to concidertaion the land that palestine wants. Then i belive palestine should be made a whole state not 2. i belive this should happen but i cant say how becuase i honestly dont think there is a peacefull way that both israel and palestine will agree on. we have seen this in confrence when we could in no way get past makeing palestine one state. we couldnt get past spliting jerusilum fairly so that both religouse cultures could benifit from thier holy land. i honestly think the only way for there to be peace is complete comprimise as joing palestines gaza strip and the west bank is impossible we should have found a way to join them if it be a intenationl by pass that joins gaza and west bank. Tuesday, April 12th 2005 - 06:16:32 PM

CONTROLLERS We would like to thank you all for attending the Peace Conference this past week. You all put forth your best efforts to achieve peace. However it is fair to say that we were unsuccessful. So as your last post we want to hear your personal views and opinions. The question is as follows: What do you feel, in your own opinion(not your countries) would be the best solution to finding peace within Israel and Palestine. Fee free to use examples from the conference and other ideas that may not have been mentioned in the conference to justify your answer. A maximum of 300 words please! and thanks! As well please have "MANDATORY POST #3" at the top of your post so that we can identify it. Same guidelines for marking will be applied as the previous two. **DUE DATE: THURSDAY APRIL 14 2005, AT 6:12P.M. NO LATER PLEASE! SEVERE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE ISSUED! ** have fun! if u have any questions, do not hesitate to ask your controllers erin or maja. THANKS! Tuesday, April 12th 2005 - 01:52:01 PM

Freedom Fries- Fried Rice (Stacey) [e] I would like to thank the international community for their support at the peace conference, especially on Friday, April 8, 2005. On that day we made great progress, as we completed the first phase of the Roadmap to Peace, and have been able to negotiate terms in a peaceful and successful manner. Not only has Palestine agreed to condemn terrorism publicly, but Israel has once again agreed to stay away from violence, and try to find a peaceful solution to these conflicts. Israel has also reinstated their disengagement plan. The Palestinian government has also held elections since the creation of the road map in which President Abbas became the elected leader. Institution building is also on its way, thanks to the support of all parties. This progress was possible due to the recent efforts put forth by Palestine to meet the requirements set out by Israel and America’s ultimatum. Palestine has followed through with all three requirements of: promising to condemn terrorism publicly, arrest and prosecute all terrorists, and put 100% effort into preventing further acts of terrorism. With support of all members whom attended this peace talks, the International Observation Committee will be set up to promote peace, and reduce conflict. This committee will record observations of the Palestinian government to ensure that they are in fact doing all that they can to discontinue terrorist actions. Observations will be evaluated by the international community to keep things on track. Suggestions may be made to the Palestinian government as to how to deal with terrorism if the community finds that the actions put in place by President Abbas and his fellow members of government are not effective. With all that being said we, the United States, feel that it is now time to move onto Phase two of the road map, and would like to develop boundaries for a Palestinian State. Division of land will be a difficult task to conquer, however we do have hope, and would like to see this phase completed as peacefully as possible. During the talks to conquer Phase 1, there were two preventable attacks, which cost people their lives. To prevent more turmoil we would like to ensure we cover the division of land, including the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Jerusalem and other lands with great thought. We look forward to further negotiations, and hope to continue our progress in our last day of talks, Monday, April 11, 2005. Thank you. GOD BLESS AMERICA Saturday, April 9th 2005 - 02:16:44 AM

Sonal Batavia- PERSONAL OPINION OF MANDATORY POST [e] Terrorism has been a problem for quite some time in areas of the Middle East, and clearly the solution to end it, is not going to be simple. The reality is, often it can take months to track down a group of terrorists or an individuals, as they often create disguises, and flee to other areas. It is evident this is a serious problem, but I believe our main problem is that, all the governments, Prime Ministers, Presidents, kings etc. need to be educated on why terrorism is negative thing. Many of these leaders support it in secrecy, and feel it is the best solution to protecting their country. They need to know and accept themselves why it is only moving away from peace. Although education is positive reinforcement for leaders to implement the ideas and beliefs in the country, I also believe severe punishments should be introduced as penalties of terrorism. Order is kept with laws, if laws are strict than civilians will comply with them out of fear. Although fear is not any leader’s objective for their people, at this point countries with terrorism need rigid structure, and sometimes drastic actions needs to be taken to achieve this. The fact is there will always be rebels, but there is a chance of reducing people’s instincts to suddenly rebel against everything. If death penalties are necessary to keep things in order, then that’s what should be done. Machiavelli said, “You need to be bad in order to achieve a greater good.” Friday, April 8th 2005 - 08:31:56 AM

Christopher M Burns [e] At 10:00 am today, King Abdullah of Jordan made a public announcement to the people of Jordan, expressing a zero-tolerance terrorism policy. He said, "Terrorism in Jordan and Palestine has gone on far too long. Any further terrorist acts will be dealt with strongly and swiftly." Friday, April 8th 2005 - 05:23:53 AM

Bashar al-Assad (leblanc) Syria is having many problems with controlling terrorism; it is rampant within our own government (many reasons, including the fact that there are opposition forces to my government) To stop this, swift action must take place: 1. Find the leaders of organization and outline harsh penalties for further terrorist acts and force them to outline their organization (its organizers, suppliers, etc so as to...) 2. Cut off funds and equipment (this is absolutely crucial and more important than harsh penalties and imprisonment because it is more effective (pre-emptive while imprisonment is useless if suicide bombers are used) May not work for every country but it is relatively easy for Syria because of the close governmental ties Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 09:47:12 PM

Jessica Mand. Post (my viewpoint) As far as terrorism is concerned, I do not believe that it is something that can be overcome in a short period time, such as in this Canadian-American peace conference. Regardless I believe that we can take steps along the way to deal with terrorists. Considering the present, Israel and Palestine could both implement a temporary defence system to deal with and control the attacks made on both lands. Rules have consequences. Consequences act as a deterrent. Consequences set for citizens of Canada will not necessarily “hit them where it hurts” with the people of the middle east, as values and lifestyles are vastly different, but regardless it can be concluded as a possible method to start. I also believe that education is an imperative key to controlling terrorism. Children in Israel and Palestine must not grow up being taught to fear and rebel against one another. They need to be taught what is acceptable on an international level, that way a standard can be set. Overcoming roots of terrorism is another step forward. Syria, Egypt, and Jordan are countries, which have organizations that fund terrorism. Those nations need to find solutions within their land in order to overcome the terrorism disasters in the Middle East. Using military force to ensure people comply with Palestine and Israel’s attempts to achieve peace is not something Canada may agree with. But desperate times call for desperate measures. I do not believe this is the first solution that should be taken to control terrorism, but I do believe that it should be left in the air. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:38:39 PM

Jean-Pierre Raffarin (Jimmy) [e] *MANADTORY POST 2* We must take into consideration that eventhough if we are able to create a Palestinian State in these conferences. The people of Israel may still not live in peace. What is going to gaurantee that terrorist is going to suddenly stop with the creation of the State of Palestine. As I have already said in the second day of these conferences, harsher penalties must be created for terrorist activities. I do not think that by penalizing a single terrorist will do any good. I think that we should all work together to crack down on the "big boys" of the more popular terrorist groups. Without the support of funding governments to supply guns and bombs to them they are sure to be nothing more than toothless tigers. -Nvidia Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:38:09 PM

Jacques Shiraec (Benita) [e] Israel must stand firm and cannot change its posture in any way. The military solution is inevitable and have admitted to preparing for an all out war. But most importantly the military is attempting to use its force to prevent a war. The truth to be told is- there is no solution for the Middle-east not unless one is willing to consider the removal of one party or the other from Israel. While it is possible for Jews, Muslims and Christians to live side by side, and most do want peace, there are fanatics that will never allow it. As long as countries such as Iran, Syria, Libya and other Arab nations are willing to pay for the murder of Jews in Israel, the Palestinians have no reason to negotiate when they believe they can have it all. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:33:14 PM

CONTROLLERS In response to Ben's question, the answer is as Mr. Cotey said, we are looking for quality not quantity. The reason we have put this word restriction is to prevent anyone from just babbling on and on and try and make their post look long and informative when really it consists of pointless information. Posts that are not as lengthy WILL NOT be looked down upon because as long as you have voiced your opinion in an effective manner, than you shall have no problem achieving an AWESOME mark! :-) -Good Luck! Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:25:00 PM

CONTROLLERS In response to Ben's question, the answer is as Mr. Cotey said, we are looking for quality not quantity. The reason we have put this word restriction is to prevent anyone from just babbling on and on and try and make their post look long and informative when really it consists of pointless information. Posts that are not as lengthy WILL NOT be looked upon because as long as you have voiced your opinion in an effective manner, than you shall have no problem achieving an AWESOME mark! :-) -Good Luck! Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:23:58 PM

Stacey Leimonis [e] *DEFINATELY NOT CONDOLEEZZA RICE*- Mandatory Post #2 Terrorism is not an issue that any individual has control over. Throughout history we have seen terrorist groups from nations all over the world, committing these cruel acts of violence against other nations, and even against their own nation. I personally believe in capital punishment and think that if someone is willing to take one person’s life, then they should be prepared to have theirs taken as well. Turning a blind eye to this situation is absolutely unacceptable, and incarceration is not severe enough. There is no point in seeking a terrorist, finding them, and then feeding them after they have taken human life(s). I believe in the “eye for an eye” ideology, as this will decrease the amount of terrorists living among us, and therefore decrease terrorism. Some people may think this is too harsh, however, when faced with people such as Osama Bin Laden, and Timothy McVeigh is it unreasonable to say that they do not deserve a second chance, and they do not deserve to breathe the same air as the innocent civilians whom they destroyed? Terrorism in the Middle East is difficult to deal with because there are so many different groups and nobody is keeping their word when “committing” to cease fires. I believe that funds of known terrorist groups should be put on hold, permanently, and each terrorist should be prosecuted individually, and serve the ultimate sentence. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:23:36 PM

T.Bone (Menisha) It has become painfully obvious to the entire class that solving terrorism with one swift kick is absolutely impossible. In order to find some sort of middle ground that would partially satisfy both sides there are three phases which I believe need to take place. 1) No tolerance policy of violent retaliation publicly enforced by the government in an attempt to rally civilian support. If we show any kind of mercy for the terrorist groups, it is merely telling them that we will accept their behaviour until a point. The truth is their actions should not be tolerated on any level. Investments should be made for intelligence research to seek out the organization leaders and to find where they are hiding. You need to hit them where they live and hit them hard. 2) Education is the key to co-operation from both sides of the conflict. Whether it be the local government or some other neutral party, the citizens need to be informed of future events and the reasoning behind them. All you ever hear about is protecting the innocent civilians yet no one has made a sincere attempt to educate them. Knowledge is the best weapon they can have at this point. 3) Military action (doesn’t need to be violence) needs to be used to ensure that the new guidelines are being met. At this stage in the conflict, people need incentives to do the right thing. If they feel that their lives are being protected from suicide bombings and other such attacks, they are more likely to abide by and support the new regulations established government. It will take the effort of the whole state to make a difference. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:21:50 PM

Jihad- Jibran Jibran Waheed: There is no way that terrorism cannot be stopped. The Mob mentality of a terrorist does not deter just because you jail them or their leaders. The belief that they have is that they have being oppressed all their lives. They wont back down just because they are imprisoned. It will only cause them to become more ambitious about the cause. I believe that the international community should not support Palestine by giving them military support. Instead invest in the human resources of the country. Make Palestine a strong social and economic region. Provide higher level of education, better welfare. The problem wont stop by the crack down of terrorism it will only become tenser. The issue cannot be resolved by military conquest. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:18:32 PM

Jibran Jibran Waheed: There is no way that terrorism cannot be stopped. The Mob mentality of a terrorist does not deter just because you jail them or their leaders. The belief that they have is that they have being oppressed all their lives. They wont back down just because they are imprisoned. It will only cause them to become more ambitious about the cause. I believe that the international community should not support Palestine by giving them military support. Instead invest in the human resources of the country. Make Palestine a strong social and economic region. Provide higher level of education, better welfare. The problem wont stop by the crack down of terrorism it will only become tenser. The issue cannot be resolved by military conquest. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:17:56 PM

Mr. Cotey [e] Don't worry Ben, the controllers and myself are looking at quality and insight, not quantity. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:09:31 PM

Mr. Cotey [e] Just a quick link to take a peak at. We love to talk about the idea of educating the Palestinians so they won't become suicide bombers. While I agree education is necessary, the level of education of many of the suicide bombers is surprising. Take a peak if you wish at the website I've provided and see what you think. You can try to link it but I'm not sure it works so you'll probably have to cut and paste. http://216.26.163.62/2003/me_palestinians_11_13.html Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:07:48 PM

Benny Adelson [e] I would like to bring to the attention of the Controllers that many posts for the second question are clear and concise, while others stretch well beyond the 250 MAX. Will posts be looked down upon because they are not as lengthy as others, although we were simply following your guidelines? Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 08:01:59 PM

Benny Adelson [e] Mandatory Post #2 - Terrorism The best way to deal with terrorists is a zero-tolerance mentality. The government in power needs to re-educate youth and adults to help prevent this hate from breeding within a society. The question at hand is how you punish someone who seemingly has nothing. We need to prevent such ideals to ever enter within a society, to do this we need to educate without bias, or prejudice. Hate is not hereditary, and it is not in your blood. Hate is developed and taught, in order to be successful in the complete disarmament of all terrorist groups from the future, we need to look to the youth in the present. Knowledge is the best tool we have in defense to terror and hate, and we must not fight hate, with hate. As for current states, and nations who fund and aid terrorists, along with terrorist groups, a more drastic approach must be made in order to save lives of innocent civilians. It is the sovereign responsibility of all nation leaders to protect the civilians which inhibit their country. For this, total disarmament of corrupt governments and terrorist organizations is needed. If a regime fails to comply with the full co operation of the disarmament then it needs to be dealt with accordingly, and drastic military efforts should be taken against any country who encourages, and allows terrorism to breed. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 07:58:24 PM

Bill Graham [*Peggy*] [e] MANDATORY POST #2 Let us view this issue for a moment while thinking ‘outside of the box’. Before I commence, let me clarify that I do not feel in any way that this will ever be taken into consideration by any political power in the effort to fight this laborious fight against terrorism that the world is fighting today. Nonetheless, for the sake of academic debate and discussion, I’ll provide my opinion. Let us view this issue for a moment while thinking ‘outside of the box’. Let us reassess the conception that concessions made to terrorist groups and/or individuals can only encourage more terrorism. This is indeed, an exaggerated generalization. Alternately, in order to put an end to terrorism we must meticulously sort through their known aggravation and grievances. This must be done by taking a precisely impartial and unbiased perspective of what may be morally just. Second, openly accept and address those concerns. I feel that if the concessions made were both justifiable and presented with the utmost sincerity, then it would be much more easily believed that the actions already being taken are not out of fear, but because the goal is to do what is ultimately right for the greatest number of people. Once this is done, there would no longer be any means of encouragement of terrorism and terrorism would be immensely weakened. Now let us ponder: what is it that is cultivating terrorism world wide? What is it that is seemingly condoning terrorism? It is quite simple; the refusal to make ANY concessions in order to avoid by any means what may seem to be the rewarding of terrorism. This strategy is consequently motivated by fear of terrorism. The tenacious implications that follow is what is creating more terrorists, more terrorist support and, of course, more terrorism. In conclusion, I feel that the best defense against terrorism is to stop being terrorized by the ideals that are drilled into our minds in regards to what is thought to be what is right for the greatest number of people. Terrorism is not a burden that can be lifted off the world’s shoulders overnight, nor can it be eliminated without a fight. But are we fighting this battle against rebellion in a way that will benefit all in the present? In the future? I don’t presume it will; only time will tell. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 07:43:49 PM

Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz (Stanley) I personally believe that re-education and stricter/harsher regulations are needed to halt the threat of terrorism; the former for the long term, and the latter for the short. The teaching, and acceptance of racial behaviour has allowed it to lodged its roots far too deep for simple conventional punishment. What is needed is a massive overhaul in the attitude and widespread acceptanc,of racist behaviour. If this is not done, then terrorism will continue. For the short term, stricter regulations are needed to prevent terrorist organizations from acquiring the neccessary resources to continue their campaign. Governments must not turn a blind eye towards terrorist activities. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 06:40:00 PM

Dan a.k.a. Hosni Mubarak Message from Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. First of all let me start of my post by saying that it is imperative that we not waste time in the final day of our peace conference, we have discussed how to solve the problem of terrorism and not really found a solution that everyone is happy about. But we must also discuss other aspects of this conflict, if we don’t plan ahead and simply work as we go, the peace process will fall apart, so we must get back on track and forge ahead to peace. To be honest, today all of what was done was fighting. Very little ground gained in the fight to solve the conflict. That being said, to answer the question. In one of the discussions Egypt put forward the idea to use an escalation ladder system in order to deal with the respective terrorist groups because it allows the problems to be solved with the least force necessary instead of jumping to force. This would go as such: Step 1: Do nothing Step 2: Send an ultimatum to the terrorist groups (not government groups) Step 3: Imprisonment of terrorist leaders or high-ranking terrorists Step 4: Military Force (not violent necessarily. And more steps need to be considered by the international community. Another option I believe to be viable would be setting up International security forces to assist the Palestinian security forces disarm terrorist groups. This should prevent more terrorism than simply forcing the Palestinian government to eliminate the terrorist threat with an ultimatum. This possibility can fit into step 4 of the escalation ladder as a logical step. Finally, a possibility that fits together with any peace plan, is the necessity of educating people on both sides of the conflict in order to better understand the conflict thereby making it much easier to resolve in the long run. A large part of the bad blood between the sides of this conflict is due to misconception. I'll leave my ideas to be judged or improved upon by my peers. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 06:35:51 PM

* h e e l a * [e] MANDATORY POST #2 Dealing with terrorism is an arduous task, as terrorism in not only present in the Middle East. However, with the ultimate goal of Middle East peace in mind, there is not one single or simple solution when dealing with terrorism. A series of steps must be taken to end terrorism and ensure peace. (1) Call for an end to violence and incitement which are used by terrorist groups in conjunction with imposing law and order. (2) Re-education is a necessary step in ending incitement through hate and violence which results in terrorism. Incitement through hate and violence is a fueling factor of terrorism, especially in Palestine where there has been anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, and anti-US hate education in place since 1994. The Road Map obliges that both Palestine and Israel call for an end to violence and incitement, as crucial step in ending terrorism in the region as well as having two nations life peacefully as neighbors. (3) Destroy the infrastructure of the terrorist factions by cutting off the funding and arming of such dangerous groups. Without resources, it is much more difficult for these groups to communicate, coordinate, and operate. Governments in the region must crackdown on organizations, companies, as well as individuals who support and fund terrorist groups. There is a definite infrastructure developed by over 60,000 terrorists in the region and regional governments must work together to ensure the destruction of the infrastructure of these groups. (4) Combine security and intelligence forces to find those responsible for not only carrying out terrorist actions but planning and supporting them as well. Arrests should be made once the suspected terrorists are caught and they must be prosecuted for their actions and/or involvement. (5) Military force. It’s not as simple as it may look but it can be effective if it’s not abused. If using military force against groups and individuals who are ready and willing to take the lives of others can put an end to their terror while saving many other lives, then military force is a definite solution. However, I believe it should only be used if all other methods have been exhausted and/or it is necessary to quickly and effectively save the lives of many other people who are innocent civilians. At this point, “the ends would justify the means.” **This post was NOT written in the perspective of George Bush! MORE INFO: http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/perspectives2.html http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/isreport/janfeb04/prospects.html http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/road_map_peace.asp Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 06:16:12 PM

Syrian Vice President (Chris hag) [e] Personally as the vice president of Syria, I believe the best way to attend to these terrorists is discover the root of where it all stems from, and take away their power and money. Most of these terrorist groups receive funding from groups inside of my own country, and many others in the Middle East through elected officials and members of the government. Once these “leaks”(dirty officials) in our own countries and governments are sought out, from there can we take away what these terrorists truly need, funding through rich and powerful people. The largest reason I disagree with the imprisonment idea is because these terrorists are already willing to kill themselves for a greater cause. Imprisonment or death for that matter is not a punishment at all to the terrorists and in fact can lead to a possible revolution if strong figures in the public are arrested and put away. The idea however of re-education is where we need to all be looking at. I don’t believe a swift and strong military action is the correct action at this point in time. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 05:34:32 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez [e] In response to Ariel Sharon: Yes, I can understand that you are only looking out for the good of your own people. However, you must realize that more bloodshed will not bring peace to the region. Military action will undoubtedly increase acts of terrorism not only on Israeli civilians, but on Israeli militants as well. As with the case of the U.S.A. liberating Iraq, there have now been over 1000 American soldiers killed. It is my fear that this may occur to the Israeli forces if military actions are taken. There is no way to tell how the Palestinian people will respond to such military action. It is in the best interest of everyone involved to end this conflict peacefully, and with as little bloodshed as possible. Military action by Israel will increase tension, increase violence, and decrease peace. We are trying to move forward in the peace process, and not take a step backwards. - Faisal Al-Fayez Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 05:15:56 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez - Chris Hudson [e] Mandatory Post: Sadly, terrorism and terrorist organizations have been responsible for the deaths of countless innocent people in the region for many years. So first and foremost I would personally like to condemn any act of terrorism by either side. When discussing possible solutions to ending terrorism in the region there are two questions that must be asked. Where are these groups getting the funding from? And who are the leaders of these terrorist factions? As soon as these questions are answered it will become a lot clearer as how to end terrorism in the region, and achieve the greater goal of peace in the region. This will be achieved by cutting off the funding to the terrorist factions, and the prosecution of all those involved to the full extent of the law. The idea to bring third party nations in as peacekeepers will also help to bring peace to the region. With unbiased peacekeepers in the region, justice, peace, and equality can be achieved peacefully. Also, I would like to offer my condolences to those who lost their lives in the recent attacks. - Faisal Al-Fayez Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 05:03:31 PM

Jihad After consulting with my interior cabinet. i have decided on what my position on the Ulitimatum is. I would also like to show my sincere condolenses to the people of Israel after these disrespectfull terrorist attacts have being taken place. May allah be with them and thier families. Mahmoud Abbas Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 02:28:46 PM

Ahmed Nazif (aka Jeff) MANDATORY POST: A Message from Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif Terrorism and violence have long been a negative part of this conflict. Egypt would like to do its part to help the peace process move forward with little or no violence because this conflict has already seen too much bloodshed. These factions which use violence instead of negotiation only undermine the peace process. Much of Egypt’s recent foreign policy has been focused on confronting international terrorism. Egypt believes that there are three important steps that should be taken in order to deal with the influence of terrorist groups. First, we must take measures to prevent further funding to these groups, and then we must meet with them to encourage co-operation among the groups and thirdly, we must punish them where possible. We must disrupt the flow of funding towards groups such as Hamas if we expect to see a decrease in violence. For example, Egypt has passed anti-money laundering legislation as of last year in an attempt to make sure that our banking system is secure against terrorist infiltration. Other nations, such as Syria, are urged to so the same. In addition, a total of 13 Palestinian factions (including Hamas) have twice gathered in Cairo in recent months and Egyptian officials are discussing the issues with them so that the peace process may move forward. Also where possible, imprisonment is another option. As long as the accused terrorists can be proven guilty, they should be apprehended. Torture and executions, however, will only lead to revolt and outrage. It is largely unrealistic to assume that terrorist activities will halt overnight. The elements and factions that are opposed to peace will try to solve the problem with violence, but the parties who are devoted to peace should not be discouraged and they should not withdraw from negotiations. Egypt believes that both leaders, Ariel Sharon and Abu Mazen, hold peace to be the ultimate goal It is Egypt’s belief that if the peace process moves forward, these factions may diminish in popularity and that once they realize that a genuine effort to achieve peace is underway, they may co-operate. Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 02:12:09 PM

Ariel Sharon [e] In response to Faisal Al-Fayez's second post: So if Israel does not respond correctly to these attacks, what will happen? More deaths of Israelis. If we do not take military action, then Israelis will die. If we do take military action, then Palestinians will die. Who am i most concerned about? Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 01:09:46 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez [e] In response to Mr. Cotey's post: In no way was it my intent to downplay the atrocious slaughter of over 6,000,000 Jews during WWII. I was just making a quick reference to the holocaust because it is something that the Jewish people can relate to. The Jewish people had suffered through this, and then they turn around and sit idly by while innocent Palestinians were being slaughtered (even though it was on a much smaller scale than the Holocaust). They may not have directly fired any weapons, but isn't condoning the attack and doing nothing to stop it almost as bad? The whole reason that this was brought up was due to the fact that Ariel Sharon in his post threatened to take military action against the Palestinian people. It is my fear that military action will lead to the death of countless innocent Palestinians and that is why I brought up old events. I brought it up to show that military action is not a good idea, and should only be a last resort. I personally do not believe that they have exhausted all other ideas and are just looking for a quick fix. Sorry for any misunderstandings that my previous post created. It was not my intention. - Faisal Al-Fayez Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 10:08:07 AM

Mr. Cotey [e] While I usually remain quiet and just read these postings I feel that in this case I must speak up. In response to Faisal Al-Fayez's most recent post I should clarify some things. With regards to the Israelis and Ariel Sharon it is true they are not without blood on their hands but in regards to the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps let us set the record straight. Firstly, while the slaughter that occured in these camps is horrendous, I think it is a stretch to compare it with the carefully planned and state sponsored terrorism and eventual extermination of some 6 000 000 innocent jewish civilians in East and West Europe. What Hitler did in World War Two was on such a scale that it stained Germany for years to come. While I do not mean to downplay the deaths of Palestinian refugees we must be careful not to accuse Ariel Sharon of doing the same thing. It is true Ariel Sharon had his sites set on a Israel friendly Lebanon and that is why they supported the Phalange in the region. After the assasination of Bashir Gemayal, the President of Lebanon the IDF dropped Lebanese Christians off at the camps to "clean out PLO members". From there a slaughter of innocent refugees did take place but not at the hand of Israeli soldiers. The fault on the part of the Israelis is knowing what was happening and doing nothing about it. For that, many Israelis were apalled and there was an official fact finding mission titled the "Kahan Commission" within Israel that in its report on the 7th of February 1983, concluded Israel bore indirect responsibility for the massacre because the Phalange entered the camps with the encouragement of the government. Many of the men involved were subsequently removed from their posts as a result of this incident. What are the lessons learned here? Where to start. Yes, the Israelis have been responsible for the deaths of many Palestinians but in this case it was indirect. The IDF did not do the shooting. Killing in this region has continued for years and at this point when you start to discuss who did what, and who killed who, and who is to blame the lines become very grey. We can always find reasons for our actions if we look hard enough. The terrible cycle of violence needs to stop somewhere and if we continue to retaliate for past actions then where does it stop? You tell me. Next point, why were the Israelis interested in Lebanon? There is a significant portion of the population in Lebanon that is Christian and Israel hoped a Christian dominated government would be more friendly to Israelis and peace might be possible. They also hoped they could pull the Lebanese away from Syrian influence. This is not a strange concept, we have seen it in many nation's foreign policies over the years. Why do you think Syria went in to Lebanon? They are only now starting to pull out after years of veiled occupation. If you want mor examples you need only to look at the histories of the United States in Vietnam, Korea and Cuba and Russia in the Eastern bloc countries and Afghanistan. You could also examine any of the imperialist countries of Europe at the end of the 19th Century and the early 20th Century. You are facing a difficult task and you will certainly get very frustrated at times as we progress further in the simulation. Remember though, you will only be successful in your endeavours if you are "at the table" when the discussions take place. International relations is a tricky business because everyone has a motive. You need to try and transcend these issues and look at the bigger picture. Where you go from there is up to you. See you in class! Thursday, April 7th 2005 - 07:02:25 AM

Faisal Al-Fayez - Chris Hudson [e] This post is in response to Ariel Sharon's last post: Excuse me Mr. Sharon, but we have seen how you have dealt with terrorism in the past. What you did in the refugee camps of Shatila and Sabra did not differ greatly from what Hitler did to the Jews during WWII. For all those who are not familiar with this incident, Ariel Sharon (Defence Minister of Israel at the time) supervised the slaughter of as many as 3000 civilian Palestinians (many of which were women and children). This is the single bloodiest moment in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Mr. Sharon, you may be opposed to Terrorism but Genocide is not the solution. You may not of strapped a bomb to your body and blown innocent people up, but does this greatly differ? What you committed was just organized terrorism. Take a look at your own actions before you condemn the actions of another. For all those that would like to look into this further, I have taken important points from my findings and posted them below. Also, the source is below if you wish to learn more about the slaughter of these innocent Palestinians, supervised by Ariel Sharon. On 6 June 1982, the Israeli army invaded Lebanon in retaliation for the attempted assassination of Israeli Ambassador Argov in London on 4 June. The Israeli secret services had that same day attributed the attempted assassination to a dissident Palestinian organisation backed by the government of Iraq, which was at the time eager to deflect world attention from its recent setbacks in the Iran-Iraq war. The Israeli operation, planned well in advance, was called “Operation Peace for Galilee.” Initially, the Israeli government had announced that its intention was to penetrate just 40km into Lebanese territory. The military command, however, under the orders of Defence Minister Ariel Sharon, decided to execute a more ambitious project that Mr Sharon had prepared several months earlier. Having occupied the south of the country and destroyed any Palestinian and Lebanese resistance there, simultaneously committing a series of violations against the civilian population, Israeli troops proceeded to penetrate as far as Beirut. By 18 June 1982 they had surrounded the Palestine Liberation Organisation's (PLO) armed forces in the western part of the Lebanese capital. By midday, the camps of Sabra and Shatila -- in reality a single zone of refugee camps in the south of West Beirut -- were surrounded by Israeli tanks and soldiers, who had installed checkpoints all around the camps in order to monitor the entry or exit of any person. During the late afternoon and evening, the camps were shelled. By Thursday 16 September 1982, the Israeli army controlled West Beirut. In a press release, the Israeli military spokesperson declared, “Tsahal controls all strategic points in Beirut. The refugee camps, inside which there is a concentration of terrorists, are surrounded and sealed.” On the morning of 16 September, the following order was issued by the army high command: “ the searching and mopping up of the camps will be done by the Phalangists/Lebanese army.” For the next 40 hours the Phalangist militia raped, killed, and injured a large number of unarmed civilians, mostly children, women and elderly people inside the “encircled and sealed“ camps. These actions, accompanied or followed by systematic roundups, backed or reinforced by the Israeli army, resulted in dozens of disappearances. The count of victims varies between 700 (the official Israeli figure) and 3,500 (in the inquiry launched by the Israeli journalist Kapeliouk). The exact figure can never be determined because, in addition to the approximately 1,000 people who were buried in communal graves by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) or in the cemeteries of Beirut by members of their families, a large number of corpses were buried beneath bulldozed buildings by the militia members themselves. Also, particularly on 17 and 18 September, hundreds of people were carried away alive in trucks towards unknown destinations, never to return. http://www.indictsharon.net/massacres-intro.shtml Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 09:31:14 PM

Jacques Shiraec (Benita) [e] The tragic suffering in which Israel is caught is painful for us. I(the of president of France) want you to know that France stands by the deep friendship it has had for Israel since it was founded. It is in the name of this friendship that we wish to develop and deepen our bilateral relations. We wish to make a step forward to this so that we can achieve peace here Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 09:12:59 PM

Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah (Kelvin) The actions committed by these terrorists against the peoples of Israel/Palestine cannot be condoned on an international scale. As command for the National Gaurd of Saudi Arabia I propose the formation of a United Nations Peacekeeping Security Task Force in which all countries provide as much support as possible in the form of viable troops stationed in danger "hot spots" to curb the shadowed threats from within the borders of Israel/Palestine and promote peace and co-operation during these peace talks. (for more information on U.N Peacekeepers visit this link, http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/intro/3.htm) The safety of the Palestinian/Israeli peoples is paramount in these immediate times of fragile political discussion. Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 06:40:56 PM

Shaul Mofaz - Team Dreidel [e] This display on anti-Semitism in the form of a suicide bombing has made many things very clear in the eyes of the Israeli military task force and intelligence. The Syrian government, along with terrorist organizations has a history of involvement with the Palestinians and the PLO, this is an undeniable fact that can be traced back as many as 30 years. There will be a severe reaction taken upon this action of anti-Semitic Arabs and terrorist groups. Israel’s defense will refuse to stand idly by while almost 200 Israelis have been wounded or killed. A further public statement on the stance of Israel’s defense will be given April 7th 2005. Until then no further statement will be given. Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 05:40:57 PM

..... . Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 05:40:05 PM

Ariel Sharon [e] MANDATORY POST The best solution to Terrorism is simple, we must take a few steps to help stop it. First is Co-operation from the other countries involved. The second is to cut off their supplies that are aiding them in their terrorism. The third, if they have not been stopped, is to use military force against them. It is the only way to send a message that we do mean business when it does come to Terrorism, and Israel will not stand by idly while this is occuring. Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 05:28:54 PM

Jean-Pierre Raffarin (Jimmy) [e] As Prime Minister of France, I would like to show my respects for the 45 people who died in the outdoor market in Jerusalem today and the the 12 Palestinians who were shot to death in Gaza Strip. France is willing to give full support towards peace in Israel. We hoped that after these Peace Conferences the Palestinians and Israelis can come together and live in peace. -Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite- (it's in French) Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 03:52:13 PM

Jihad - Ahmed Queri As regarding today's bombing and the Palestinian casualties, I would first like to clarify that the terrorist faction that was responsible for the bombing in Jerusalem, was a Syria-funded faction, and Palestine should not be held completely responsible. I am not saying that Syria is completely responsible, becasue they are terrorist groups and they can act in a blink of an eye without preperation. But what I am saying is that this conflict needs to be resolved as soon as possible, regarding terrorism. I feel that jail time or an ultimatum is not powerful enough to stop or at least reduce terrorism, as every minute of every day matters, and time cannot be wasted anymore. I suggest funding and support from the Middle-Eastern nations, such as Syria, Jordan, Egypt, etc., to upgrade the Palestinian military so that we can shut down terrorism in Palestine as soon as possible, with the greatest effect. I am sorry to hear that Palestinian's and Israeli's were killed today, but it is a great reminder of how we cannot waste anymore time. Let's end terrorism. Thank you. Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 03:22:13 PM

George W. Bush [e] As President of the United States of America, I condemn today’s terrorist bombing in Jerusalem. Today’s incident in which 45 people died and many other were wounded, illustrated not only the danger posed by terrorism but its negative impact on the peace process. I would like to express my sorrow to the people of Israel who in are a state of mourning in wake of today’s tragedy. You have the condolences and the prayers of the American people. Our prayers are with the Palestinian people as well, who also suffered losses today. Thank you and may God bless. - George Bush (Heela) Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 02:02:44 PM

Mr. Cotey [e] I figured it was time for me to post again. Well, we had quite a day didn't we! This post is meant to clarify a few things for tomorrow. 1. The first terrorist bombing took part in the heart of the outdoor market in Jerusalem. It killed 45 people and wounded many others. It is believed Hamas is behind the attack but at his point we do not know. 2. The second incident involved the Israeli Security Forces and some Palestinians. The gunfire exchanged saw 12 Palestinians dead in the end. The Israeli soldiers say they were attacked, the Palestinian survivors said they were fired on after they failed to stop at a checkpoint in the Gaza Strip. It is unclear at this point who fired first or how the fighting escalated. Obviously your ultimate goal is peace. The stakes have been raised and blood pressures are up. The question now is, where do you go from here? Tomorrow come to class and get ready quickly so we can get started. We will all be in our class and the classroom will be set up and ready to go. Tomorrow if you want to speak you will have to go through the controllers and you will have the opportunity to pass notes. Messenger will not be allowed in class for this portion of the activity so if I catch you using it or surfing for something other than related issues you will lose marks for this portion of the exercise. Remember, this simulation will be as good as you make it. So far you are doing quite well! There are some links in our weekly schedule you can look at for some research if you wish. I put them there because I thought they might be of assistance. Good luck tomorrow! Mr. Cotey Wednesday, April 6th 2005 - 11:32:38 AM

Simon Burden anserwing as simon NOT!! king abdulla I belive that a firm action must be taken against the terroist threat. I feel that giving them any lea way eg:- like minor punishments, jail or torture. The firm action i mean is a strong military presence being introduced to make terroist's be persauded. I think an army coming in and killing people is over the top, but if this force came into palestein and israel and said, "any terroist actions will be dealt with appropriatly". Then terrorists will be scared of terrorising and they will disarm themselves. I belive that israel is over looked for terroist action, there has been an increase in israeli terroist actions lately due to the removal of israli's from the gaza strip an west bank. I look at it that both countrys terrorists should be handed the ultimatum an be made to agree or face the consequences. Tuesday, April 5th 2005 - 08:44:21 PM

Freedom Fries :P - Georgie [e] ROAD MAP CLARIFICATION During yesterday’s conference (Day 1), Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin of France noted that Phases 1 and 2 of the Road Map of Peace are completed. I would just like to clarify that Phase 2 is the creation of a Palestinian state which has NOT yet been completed. However, Prime Minister Raffarin accurately stated that the Road Map is to be completed this year, with the cooperation of Israel, Palestine, and the international community. The United States hopes to work with all the delegates during the conference to achieve the creation of a viable Palestinian state, along with the implementation and completion of the Road Map. ROAD MAP (2002) Phase 1 Ending terror and violence Normalizing Palestinian life Building Palestinian institutions Phase 2 Transition (Creation of an independent Palestinian state) Phase 3 Permanent status agreement (Palestinian reform is consolidated) End of Israeli-Palestinian conflict MORE INFO To view specific details about the Road Map, visit: http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/summit/roadmap.pdf GOD BLESS AMERICA!! - George Bush (Heela) Tuesday, April 5th 2005 - 06:39:03 PM

T.Bone (Menisha) I would just like to extend my sincere gratitude to the American and Canadian delegates for preparing such a productive set of conferences this week. I feel that we are getting closer to reaching some type of agreement and honestly appreciate the hard work of all the participants. See you in the afternoon. Tuesday, April 5th 2005 - 05:47:24 PM

CONTROLLERS Hey Everyone, it is time for your SECOND MANDATORY POST! I hope you all are as excited as we are. The same guidelines for marking will be the same as the previous one. As well, please state whether or not you are posting in your own opinion or the opinion of your country. Thanks and good luck! ** This post will be due THURSDAY APRIL 7TH, 2005 BY NO LATER THAN 11:34 P.M! If you fail to meet this deadline, severe consequences will be enforced!** The Question is as follows: The talk about terrorists has been a major target topic during the first day of the Peace Conference and will probably continue to be discussed further on in the week. What do you believe would be the best solution to deal with terrorists? (ie: jail, torture, death, nothing at all?) Be sure to clearly explain your answer and why you feel that this method would be the most successful? Please try and limit your answer to a max of 25Owords. **GOOD LUCK! HAVE FUN! ACHIEVE PEACE!** Feel free to ask the controllers (Erin or Maja) questions if you have any difficulty with the above question. See you in class! Tuesday, April 5th 2005 - 05:27:36 PM

Jihad I would like to thank the United States and Canada for allowing us to have the chance to meet and be aquitanted before the confereces this week. Thank You Mahmoud Abbas Monday, April 4th 2005 - 07:23:40 PM

CONTROLLERS Hey everyone, here is just a reminder for who is responsible for bringing in the food for the conferences this week! Monday: Israel and Egypt Tuesday: Syria and the United Kingdom Wednesday: Palestine and the United States Thursday: France and Jordan Friday: Canada and Saudi Arabia As well, remember to dress up! See you all tomorrow! Monday, April 4th 2005 - 07:18:39 PM

Freedom Fries- Rice Krispies (Stacey) Today we each had a chance to introduce ourselves along with a few of our main concerns. I would like to thank all countries for participating in the first day, and the United States looks forward to further peace talks. GOD BLESS AMERICA Monday, April 4th 2005 - 10:51:46 AM

Stacey Response to Jibron: No, nothing is to be handed in tommorrow...you just need to research info and make a peace plan so that you bring something to the conference and know what you are talking about. Sunday, April 3rd 2005 - 09:06:10 PM

Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah Israel and Palestine were settlements created by formerly greater outside forces and left to fight amongst themselves in the wake of the collapse of larger governing bodies which (although constantly changing) controlled the two for hundreds of years. More recently in on the historical scale (from the early 20th century - present) more and more sovereignty has been given to each of the two groups to settle their differances and conflicts. In a historical sense, neither is more justified than the other for the land; Palestinians being the decendants of former Palaestina created by the Roman Empire in A.D 135 when they drove the Jews from Jerusalem and Israel being the state created by the Executive Committee of the Jewish "Yishuv" (community) in Palestine (despite having been warned of retaliation by the Arab states if such a state were created, which did and violent retaliation ensued). Given the rich history of peace and conflict with the two factions (because that is what they really are), the only plausible and probable solution is to not to "give a little and take a little", but instead "give a little, lose nothing" for both parties. What I mean by "give a little, lose nothing" is that however many treaties and negotiations there are, at the end of the day Palestinians don't want to see more Palestinians killed, and Israelites don't want to see more Jews killed. Giving a little would mean swallowing Arab and Jewish pride and accepting and working towards a seperate Palestinian state from Israel. --- http://www.mideastweb.org/saudipeace.htm http://www.mideastweb.org/israeldeclaration.htm http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm http://www.mideastweb.org/nutshell.htm Sunday, April 3rd 2005 - 07:46:18 PM

Jihad- Mahmoud Abbas-jibby Ok i am confused...do we have to hand in the peace proposal tommorow or do we just have to show it to everyone at the peace conference as reference...plz get back to me Sunday, April 3rd 2005 - 06:50:09 PM

friendly beavers Just a reminder the Canada-US conference is being held tomorrow. (if you don't know about it, you do now) If your suppose to bring food, DONT FORGET! we dont need anymore starving countries on the map! -your friendly canuks Sunday, April 3rd 2005 - 06:31:48 PM

Jihad - Ahmed Qurei My first post, sorry for being late. As Abu Mazen stated, the Palestinians have the Right of Return to live in Isreal. It is not right for Israel to deny that right because they are afraid of cultural seperation and over-population. Palestine and Israel need to come to a conclusion where it is fair for both nations and a reasonable compromise. It is not reasonable, however, for Palestinians to be rejected from their original right to return to their land. Friday, April 1st 2005 - 10:28:52 AM

Jean-Pierre Raffarin (Jimmy) [e] *RESPONSE TO ARIEL SHARON'S POST* I believe that you have misunderstood my post a little because I have not solely based my facts on what the Palestinian's said. Israel, you must remember that we mobilized our people for the creation of the State of Israel. We defended your place in the community of nations. We were one of the first countries to recognize the State of Israel and gave it resolute support during the most difficult years of your rebirth. We are at peace with you, but the Jews haven't immigrated into Israel in 135AD. The Palestinians have a contract with the UN that they have all the rights to live there. Friday, April 1st 2005 - 10:22:30 AM

T-Bone and J-Dawg from UK In the interest of the peace talks beginning on Monday, the UK would like to post a few topics that we feel are imanent to the discussion. 1) To encourage a greater participation and action plan from the UN regarding the Peace Plan being proposed. - Get a car driving on this roadmap. 2) Introduction of mediators after terrorism has been dealt with and the Palestinian State has been established. We thank you all for your participation, the UK looks forward to furthering Peace Plans on a Global Scale. UK.AOK. - See you in Toronto Friday, April 1st 2005 - 10:21:52 AM

Stanley I believe that niether Israel or Palestine is to blame. Each group never had much control over the origin of the situation. The question here is not about who is at fault, but how a peaceful resolution to the present conflict can be resolved. Saudi Arabia wishes, like many other countries, for a peaceful solution above all else. Friday, April 1st 2005 - 10:10:44 AM

Jean-Pierre Raffarin (Jimmy) [e] *RESPONSE TO ARIEL SHARON'S POST* Friday, April 1st 2005 - 09:58:59 AM

Freedom Fries- Rice Cakes (Stacey) RESPONSE to King Abdullah (2nd posting addressed to the United States) Since you were so keen on pointing out phrases that I “said” I figured that I should explain myself further to ensure you did not try to draw your own conclusions that are inaccurate. When quoting somebody you may want to ensure you are quoting them correctly to ensure you do not appear to be misleading. The first “quote” of mine that you posted was "I believe that Israel is justified in the Matter." You did leave out the word MORE, which is actually important because it insinuates that both parties are justified on some scale; however I feel that Israel is MORE justified. I have explained myself over and over as to why that is, and feel that I should not waste my time, or the time of others reading this post explaining that statement for the third time. You are welcome to do your reading of previous posts though. On to the second quote. "The cooperation of Israel should be rewarded" I never did specify which rewards in my first post and I take responsibility for that, however I have since done so in my post responding to Abu Mazen. To save you time: “rewarded in the manner of peace, negotiation, and confidence.” I am sorry if you do not feel that Israel deserves these rewards, however I do, as does every other non-terrorist based nation. For the third quote you seemed to have problems getting my words right yet again. "Giving up acquired lands is ludicrous," you left out ALL which once again is IMPORTANT. They have already given up land; however Israel should not have to give up ALL land. I am not sure if you are doing this intentionally or out of carelessness, I am not sure which is better, however I feel that you should take some more time on what you are entering to ensure information is not lost or altered, causing unnecessary conflict. The United States has indeed met with Israel, as it did with the United Kingdom and Egypt as well. It should be clear considering every nation knows about it. I would consider us partners in this situation, as the United States is partners with all nations not harboring terrorists because being partners leads to being friends and friends create peace. Now that the crack down of terrorist groups has started in Palestine I hope to soon call Palestinians the friends of the United States as well. Today was the first day of peace talks; however we do hope to have more in the future involving a larger array of nations. You have made it very clear that you feel that I am biased and in favour of Israel, however nowhere have I stated that Palestine is to blame, nor have I stated that Israel is not to blame. My statements that you deem as bias concerned who was justified in their actions, and I decided that Israel has been more justified on certain issues up to this point in time. As we all know things do change, and time will tell who will be more justified in the end. Since actions do speak louder than words I hope to see Palestine work alongside Israel in an effort to find peace. The United States has been known to support Israeli actions in the past, and we will continue to do whatever it takes to find a peaceful solution to these conflicts. GOD BLESS AMERICA Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 11:33:59 PM

Freedom Fries- Rice Cakes (Stacey) RESPONSE TO King Abdulla (addressed to The United States) Apparently the statements I made will not help the “Global crisis in this region,” I believe they are called “REGIONAL CONFLICTS,” for future reference. I simply stated my opinion, as everyone else has done and let my stand on the issues be known. My statements were not intended to solve the situation, as I am sure that no individual can say a few magic words and make the problems disappear, although it would be nice. I have not “branded” Palestinians as the "problem within the region” as I am not a cult leader, and do not feel that the blame for this situation falls on the shoulders of the Palestinians. I simply stated that I felt that Israel was justified in their actions. Actions to live in a democratic society, make their nation prosper, start the peace process, and begin to solve the REGIONAL CONFLICTS that we speak of today. This has been an ongoing issue for decades and so I do not understand how you can say I am doing things “before the process has begun.” As President Bush has stated, no disrespect was intended by the exclusion of Palestinian people from the Preliminary Peace Conference, as this Conference had representatives present from the west, Europe, and middle east, with both Arab and non-Arab nations. The four nations present did not discuss conflict resolution, but rather brought issues to light that should be dealt with on a larger scale, involving Syria and Jordan. We, the United States, are sorry that you feel insulted, however we felt that we had the appropriate representation present at the conference, and have no regrets concerning inclusion or exclusion of nations. The conference was a success and we hope that you will see that it was for the greater good of all parties involved in this situation that the selected nations take part. We would be willing to have talks of a future conference with Syria and Jordan if they feel that this will help with future conflict resolution, and put us all a step closer to peace. You speak of the problem being averted. Where may I ask do you propose the Israelis go? Are they all to live upon mountain tops never to be seen again? They had nowhere to go, they needed land to live on, land to call home, land to be free from persecution. I do agree with you when you talk about Palestine and Israel needing to find a way to divide their land fairly. I must also credit you for taking the Israeli people into consideration for the first time yet. (“Whilst not destroying the state of Israel”) I believe that over the years Yasir Arafat may have been seen as a “speed bump” in the peace process. With the new leadership of Palestinian territories I hope to see more negotiations, and less innocent casualties. GOD BLESS AMERICA Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 11:03:05 PM

Freedom Fries- Rice Cakes (Stacey) RESPONSE TO Jihad- Abu Mazen Israel is justified in their actions because when fighting the 6 Days War they conquered the land and staked claims. That is how war has worked since ancient times, and although it may not be convenient for Palestinians war will continue to be a deciding factor over who controls what lands. War however is NOT the solution in this matter and should only ever be seen as a last resort due to the devastation and ambiguousness that it has the possibility of creating. We are here to settle this matter peacefully through conferences and diplomacy. Their cooperation with the United Nation, and Palestine is what I am proposing should be rewarded in the manner of peace, negotiation, and confidence. Israel has taken the first step to creating peace and dividing land fairly. Their movements to withdraw Israelis from the West Bank and give Palestine some land for their people was a step in the right direction, however they cannot be expected to give up ALL land. As for your comment about Israel not willing to split their land, I think that answered it. They are already splitting their land, however defined boundaries are what must be decided. When deciding these boundaries Jerusalem will be a main concern since it does have so much history behind it and religious ties to both Israelis and Palestinians. I hope I have clarified a few issues for you, and made it clear that both Israel and Palestine are going to have to work together, as everyone has said, and that I just simply feel that Israel is making an effort to help the situation at hand. GOD BLESS AMERICA Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 10:19:23 PM

Stacey, not Dr. Rice *Quick note as Stacey Leimonis* I would just like to clarify something about the mandatory post- when speaking in class the Controllers said that the question posted was actually put up incorrectly and it should have read “who is more justified” NOT “who is at fault”…this would be why I came to the conclusion that the actions of Israel were more justifies (Note I NEVER said that Palestine was not justified) Now that we have cleared that up I will continue my role as Dr. Condoleezza Rice. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:56:52 PM

Bill Graham There will be no easy way out of this predicament for Palestine NOR Israel. This was not said to be an easy task: "The reduction of friction will call for an incomparably hard step: changing the deployment of some of the settlements. I want to repeat what I stated in the past: In a future arrangement, Israel won't remain in all the places where we are today. The relocation of settlements will be done, first and foremost, in order to draw the most effective possible security line, which will create the said disengagement between Israel and the Palestinians." - Ariel Sharon (Disengagement Plan) As you can see Israel plans to rid Gaza of specific military installations and diminish from both Gaza AND the West Bank. This is known as TAKING A STEP FORWARD and TAKING INITIATIVE! If Palestine embraces the actions of Israel, and Israelis whom currently occupy parts of the West Bank and Gaza obey the decisions made by Sharon, a plethora of opportunity will arise for PEACE. Isn't that what conflict resolution is all about?? Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:30:37 PM

Freedom Fries - Georgie [e] BRIEF RESPONSE TO KING ABDULLAH: I did not suggest that you see the United States as an enemy, I too am aware of the peaceful relations between our nations. I stated that I HOPE that Jordan does not view us as the enemy based on our exclusive initiation of peace talks (considering our friendly relations). Just wanted to make that clear ;)....Friends?.... GOD BLESS AMERICA!! - George Bush (Heela) Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:27:10 PM

friendly beavers - good ol paul Since 1948, it has been the heart of Canada’s Middle East policy to support Israel’s right to live in peace with its neighbours. We also have recognized Palestine’s right to self-determination, but stand strong to say it should be implemented through negotiation. With respects to “the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel in the war of 1967”, how can we put one blame on Israel or Palestine? Not to point fingers, but the land in which Israel stands was under the rule of the British. The Palestinian’s did not freely get up and move over when the Jews came, but at the same time the Jews weren’t too keen on having to flee persecution either. As Simon said, the British Mandate left the land to the Jews without tying up loose ends. Taking a constructive look at this, Israel has already been established (as well as the settlements within), that Palestine longs for. Can’t Palestine overlook their history and just enjoy the settlements where they are: next door? Now don’t get me wrong, Israel doesn’t have a halo over its head. With respects to East Jerusalem, Canada opposes Israel’s unilateral annexation of the city. Canada is behind both Israel and Palestine to establish a negotiation for peace. Ultimately, both states need to move forward with modern times and create a peace between them so their people can enjoy the land. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:16:32 PM

Freedom Fries - Georgie [e] RESPONSE TO FAISAL AL-FAYEZ: I know your post was directed at Ariel Sharon but I feel that I must clarify a few things because you make references to my mandatory post. Ariel Sharon has not gone back on his word about Israeli withdrawl from the Gaza Strip. The withdrawl for the Gaza Strip is part of the disengagement plan to begin in July 2005. The 30%-60% your refer to, is actually how much of the West Bank Sharon has planned to withdraw from, not the Gaza Strip...the West Bank. Therefore, Ariel Sharon has not stopped moving people out of the Gaza Strip (scheduled for July 2005), nor has he gone back on his word. You may have misread the details about the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, which is why I feel it is necessary to point out that (as of yet) there are no changes to Sharon's plans. I must point out that the only change in plan happened on Feb.8th when Israel only pulled out of 2 West Bank towns instead of an agreed 5. This withdrawl was halted because Palestinians security did not carry out their agreement to disarm fugitives. However, Sharon has agreed to resume withdrawl from partso of the West Bank during the disengagement plan. I hope I've clarified the details stated in my post. GOD BLESS AMERICA - George Bush (Heela) Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:15:09 PM

King Abdullah In response to the US I feel that any one reading the US note would clearly feel let down by statements within the the US note, such as:- "I beleive that Israel is justified in the Matter" of its claim to Jerusalem? "The cooperation of Isreal should be rewarded" Isreal "Giving up acquired lands is ludricous" It is clear that the US has met with its partner - Isreal and Palenstine hopes and dreams could be shattered before the talking begins. I suggest if the USA wishes to lead us to peace then it needs to do more to involve the Palenstine people in the discussion and their plans for peace. International bodies such as the US need to commincate their intentions at all stages of the process or else mis communication happens and like today the US adds fire to a burning problem !!!!. We accept the US did not mean to Snub the Palenstine people but because of their eagerness to engage in the process this meeting was a clear snub to the Palenstine people who had no represenation at the table. The people of Jordon are still committed to the process and will work with the US to achieve peace but before we can accept the US as leads in the peace talks, the US needs to begin to show a balanced view, not the view currently been expressed by Condoleeza Rice which appears to be biased in favour of Isreal. I am looking forward to seeing a balanced US view working as you say "as a member of the international community dedicated to peace, stablity and security!!". My country is renowed for its friendship with the US so to suggest we see you as the "enemy" is niave and unnecessary, but our trust has to be won and today the US did not put its best foot forward and has left distrust in my countrie mind. I dare not think how the hard line countries took these remarks. Please US consult with us, communicate with us and share with us or this process will never work. Dissappionted King Abdullah Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:05:01 PM

King Abdullah In response to the US I feel that any one reading the US note would clearly feel let down by statements within the the US note, such as:- "I beleive that Israel is justified in the Matter" of its claim to Jerusalem? "The cooperation of Isreal should be rewarded" Isreal "Giving up acquired lands is ludricous" It is clear that the US has met with its partner - Isreal and Palenstine hopes and dreams could be shattered before the talking begins. I suggest if the USA wishes to lead us to peace then it needs to do more to involve the Palenstine people in the discussion and their plans for peace. International bodies such as the US need to commincate their intentions at all stages of the process or else mis communication happens and like today the US adds fire to a burning problem !!!!. We accept the US did not mean to Snub the Palenstine people but because of their eagerness to engage in the process this meeting was a clear snub to the Palenstine people who had no represenation at the table. The people of Jordon are still committed to the process and will work with the US to achieve peace but before we can accept the US as leads in the peace talks, the US needs to begin to show a balanced view, not the view currently been expressed by Condoleeza Rice which appears to be biased in favour of Isreal. I am looking forward to seeing a balanced US view working as you say "as a member of the international community dedicated to peace, stablity and security!!". My country is renowed for its friendship with the US so to suggest we see you as the "enemy" is niave and unnecessary, but our trust has to be won and today the US did not put its best foot forward and has left distrust in my countrie mind. I dare not think how the hard line countries took these remarks. Please US consult with us, communicate with us and share with us or this process will never work. Dissappionted King Abdullah Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 09:04:47 PM

Freedom Fries - Georgie [e] RESPONSE TO ABU MAZEN: The fact that Dr. Rice believes that Israel is justified does not mean it is correct to question my standing on the issue. However, I thank you for apolgizing for your misdirected comments. I would also like to point out that Dr. Rice noted that Israel is indeed justified and I did not deny that nor restate it. I explained Israel's efforts at peace in order to show that they are not denying Palestinian people land, which is an undeniable fact with the latest withdrawls from 2 West Bank towns and plans for disengagement in Gaza. In response to your previous post, I questioned where you got your information (and I was right, it wasn't from me) BUT I did not state a position on whether Israel is justified or not. Therefore, it would be incorrect for you to advise that we "coordinate" we each other about where we stand on the conflict, because the statement of position was made by Dr. Rice and was NOT addressed by me. And about the preliminary peace talks, I believe that my post to King Abduallah will address your concerns because I make it clear that we are ready and willing to work with Palestine as we undoubtly agree that Palestine plays a crucial role in peace negotiations. So please understand, that peace talks were not held to begin to solve the problem without key players, but it was an intial meeting to discuss regional ideolgies and beliefs which were clearly represented. GOD BLESS AMERICA!! - George Bush (Heela) I have already made it clear that we will not tolerate terrorist activities. I have ordered a crackdown on Ramallah militants who have defied demands t they lay down their arms under peace moves agreed upon with Israel. And we do welcome the idea of Israel of withdrawing their occupancy from Palestinian dominated territories. And i apologize for questioning the wrong post. But if Miss Rice believes that Israel is justified in their actions, doesn’t that mean you do as well. Or does your administration not know where stand in this conflict and you all have mixed feelings on it. I think you and you secretary of state should coordinate with each other and find out where you stand on this conflict. And when you decide to hold a preliminary conference maybe you should involve the country that will be significantly effected by the decisions of the international community. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:57:06 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez - Chris Hudson [e] In response to Ariel Sharon's post: You claim that you are doing everything possible to create peace in the nation? But didn't you also just say that you have stopped moving people out of the Gaza Strip? You have not only gone back on your word that 30-60% of the Israeli's will be removed from the Gaza Strip, but you are also penalizing the whole Palestinian population for the actions of a small group of people. Your say that a major concern for you is the terrorist activity in the region. Don't you think that this is also a concern for the majority of the Palestinian peoples as well? Abu Mazen has condemned Acts of Terrorism they are not supported. Wouldn't you say that the main political figure for Palestine condemning terrorist activity in the region a step towards peace? You make it sound like Israel is the only one trying to achieve peace in the region. "It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." - Ariel Sharon Excuse me for being blunt but aren't you saying that the only way to achieve peace is the removal of the Arab people from their lands? Also I find it interesting at your use of the word expropriation. The literal meaning of expropriation is to transfer (another's property) to oneself. So basically what is said here is that the only way to solve the problem is to move the Arab people from their own land and make their property your own. That doesn't sound like a man that is devoted to peace to me. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:53:07 PM

Shaul Mofaz - Team Dreidel [e] Leader of the Israeli Likud political party, and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon recently won a referendum in favour to continue with his Gaza Peace plan. Despite the ever growing threat from violent Israeli extremists, Sharon continues to implement the Gaza Plan with the goal of completely removing all twenty-one Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip and four significant Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank. This is a clear indication that Israel is adapting and compromising with their neighbors, Palestine. Sharon is systematically planning to remove almost 9,000 Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip, and at least 400 from the West Bank in July of this year. Among them, Jews who have served in the military, and served in the Israeli government will be removed from these areas. Israel needs to continue to have a security presence in regions involved, however we as Israelis are complying with the requests of our neighbors. The Palestinians want their own viable state, before we can achieve this goal, steps need to be taken. Israel is currently taking the initiative and is taking appropriate steps towards ending this conflict. Israel’s top priority is peace for the people, and to allow our children to thrive in a non-hostile environment. We are taking steps towards achieving this goal, and many other goals to settle tensions in the Middle East. We will achieve what has proven to be so hard to come by, peace, and we will maintain it and learn to live together as humans. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:43:52 PM

Jacques Chirac [e] In my opinion, I don’t feel that one country is more at fault than the other, because I can see there are faults on both sides. Technically, there are times we can put faults on Israel. But look, we are not here to amplify the conflicts; we are here to figure out a solution between the Israel’s and the Palestinian’s. In violation of international law, Israel has confiscated over 52 percent of the land in the West Bank and 30 percent of the Gaza Strip for military use or for settlement by Jewish civilians. From 1967 to 1982, Israel's military government demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes on the West Bank. Over this period, more than 300,000 Palestinians were detained without trial for various periods by Israeli security forces." This took away the human rights and privileges from Palestinians. There are examples of the effects of Israel ‘s occupation, 'water quotas restrict usage by Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, while Israeli settlers have almost unlimited amounts.' John Quigley, "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice." Almost 90 percent of children have experienced many times of the [Israeli] army breaking into their homes, beating relatives, and destroying things. The emotional aspect of the child is affected by the [lack of] security. And also a 35-year-old [Palestinian] man was shocked to find out his house was flattened by an Israeli bulldozer. He was told that a paper given to him the next day by an Israeli soldier stated that he had built the structure without a license. Where else in the world are people required to have a license to build on their own property? Jews can build, but never Palestinians. My response to Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as a denial of self-determination and increasing threat to international peace and security. In this trial, I (the President, Jacques Chirac) want you to know that France stands by the deep friendship for every countries and it is the friendship that we wish to develop in our relations. We are willing to talk things out with other countries. To conclude this, there will be no peace without justice and respect for the rights of Palestinians. But this reality cannot justify confusing issues. We must work together to achieve Peace more effectively. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:38:32 PM

peace? Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:32:45 PM

Dan H. aka Mubarak Statement from Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak (me) Egypt certainly finds itself as a neutral party amidst all the conflict occurring in the Israeli- Palestinian situation, and it is imperative that a solution be reached that favours both sides equally as determined by a neutral 3rd party. It might be impossible to completely appease both sides of this conflict, but it is not impossible to meet halfway. It is good that the Israeli state has recently given back lands such as the Gaza strip and relocated their people from that area, but a problem could occur if the Palestinian state does not reciprocate and make concessions of some kind in return. These concessions could take the form of officially admitting Israeli ownership of some areas or striving to find a way to co-exist with the Israelis in a non-violent atmosphere. Neither side will get exactly what they want, but if both give nothing, then we gain no ground in the struggle to achieve peace. Egypt keeps its stand that Palestine and Israel should have their respective nations, but perhaps some form of peacekeeping presence should be there and would be phased out gradually over time to ensure peace. Lastly, we must make sure that we as negotiators and representatives of our countries remain objective and do not place blame on any single party. We must discover a solution that stabilizes all of the chaos this conflict has inadvertently caused. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:28:20 PM

Freedom Fries - Georgie [e] RESPONSE TO KING ABDULLAH'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE US: The Preliminary Peace Talks were simply that, “preliminary peace talks.” In no way did the United States or the nations in attendance demonstrate a lack of respect for the Palestinian people. To clarify, the peace talks were held not as a start to finding a solution to the Middle East conflict but to bring together voices from the International Community, which was successfully achieved: USA: Western / North American representation UK: Western / European Union representation Israel: Middle Eastern / Non-Arab representation Egypt: Middle Eastern / Arab representation This should make it clear that the United States had no intention of excluding “Middle Eastern countries”, as we included representation from all regions and ideologies! These representatives were not invited to draft plans for Middle East peace without important players such as Palestine, Syria, and Jordan. The peace talks were held as a forum of open discussion so the representatives could discuss the feelings and beliefs from their nations and regions, so we would gain a better understanding of the situation before the international community meets. The USA and all representatives present and the peace talks acknowledge the fact that Palestine and other Middle Eastern nations MUST be involved in peace negotiations. We find it an insult that the Middle Eastern countries would accuse the United States of disrespecting Palestine by having peace talks without them. The United States has made it clear that WE LOOK FORWARD to working with BOTH ISRAEL AND PALESTINE as well as the international community to settle the conflict in the Middle East. We also acknowledge that Palestine is willing to negotiate settlements which is why are committed to achieving peace by working together. You are absolutely right when you that we must figure out how best to divide the lands, but that cannot be done if there is not a clear understanding of all the issues at hand! In order to BEGIN to understand these issues by starting with single regional countries as representatives, the United States initiated preliminary peace talks! At this point, it is crucial to understand that accusing one nation of disrespect and ignorance will not solve any problems, especially when that nation is committed to achieving peace!!!!! I hope that Jordan is willing to accept that fact that the United States is NOT an enemy but a member of the international community dedicated to peace, stablity and security!! GOD BLESS AMERICA!! - George Bush (Heela) Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:20:33 PM

let's try and reach peace! Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:11:07 PM

Jihad I have already made it clear that we will not tolerate terrorist activities. I have ordered a crackdown on Ramallah militants who have defied demands t they lay down their arms under peace moves agreed upon with Israel. And we do welcome the idea of Israel of withdrawing their occupancy from Palestinian dominated territories. And i apologize for questioning the wrong post. But if Miss Rice believes that Israel is justified in their actions, doesn’t that mean you do as well. Or does your administration not know where stand in this conflict and you all have mixed feelings on it. I think you and you secretary of state should coordinate with each other and find out where you stand on this conflict. And when you decide to hold a preliminary conference maybe you should involve the country that will be significantly effected by the decisions of the international community. Abu Mazen. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:05:31 PM

King Abdulla In response to Bill Graham Am i to understand that if a country fights for land, against an indiginous people and wins it has the right to keep this land? So much for the hopes Peace. You suggest the easiest way for Palenstine to win the war, is to step up its Terrorist attacks and win a terrorist war. This can not be right. No country has the right to take the land of another indiginous people. I and the Jordian people will work for a peaceful and equitable solution, but i cannot accept the statement "land won by force of war, is land that must be retained by the agressor during the peace process." Lets look for an equitable solution rather than appeasing the aggressors of the war,Isreal. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:05:09 PM

Ariel Sharon (there should be a limit to posts haha) [e] in response to Faisal Al-Fayez: I do not think that you have read the updated news, I have declared that in July 2005, all Jewish settlers in the Gaza Strip will be removed, and we have already moved two settlements in the Gaza Strip. The reason we have decided not to move more yet is because Palestine has not kept their side of the agreement, so why should we keep on with our side? The one major concern for us is the Terrorist actions against Israel, and they have not been lessened, there are reports that terrorist organizations have stepped up for smuggling weapons into Israel. The only side that has actually been arresting people is the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces), even after Mahmoud Abbas's compound had been attacked by his own forces, the only action that had taken place was that they had been kicked out of the compound without their weapons. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 08:02:25 PM

Bill Graham In order to come to an educated conclusion in regards to this subject, one must take a critical approach to understanding both parties concerned. Furthermore, in respect to the question at hand, I feel that blame cannot be solely put upon either the Israelis or the Palestinians; this is a conflict between two parties, thus both parties are at fault in this instance. Now, in order to come to some kind of resolution both Israel and Palestine must work together in order to resolve this issue in a manner that benefits the both of them. That being said, after researching and delving deeper into the issue I feel that Israel does have the upper hand in this conflict. Both Israel and Palestine want possession of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem but if one observes the history of this tug-of-war, it will become evident that Israel is (or should be) the rightful owner of these areas. Amidst all that is still pending for both parties, it is quite clear that Israel is ready to take a stand and rid themselves and Palestine of any further damage done by means of war and disagreement. Israel has taken a plethora of steps and shown initiative in wanting to obtain peace and solitude in their relationship with Palestine. An excellent example of the attempts at peace keeping that Israel is making would have to be Ariel Sharon’s plan to take the Israelis out of the West Bank in order to show Palestinians that his attentions are to bring peace and security amongst all people involved: “I'd like to emphasize that the disengagement plan is a security move, and not a political one. The steps to be adopted won't change the political reality between Israel and the Palestinians and will not undo the possibility of going back to implementing the road map and of reaching an arrangement through agreement.” –Sharon’s 2003 Disengagement Plan (for complete plan, refer to: www.israelipalestinianprocon.org) That being said, I feel that any and all other land that as of now does in fact belong to the Israelis should still belong to them as it is rightfully theirs. The Six Days War was fought by the Israelis in order to obtain Jerusalem and call it their own- and it 1967 they did just that. Therefore, since they fought for the territory won and obtained the territory I feel that it would be very unnecessary to take away what is rightfully theirs. Since having won the battle for Jerusalem, many Jewish citizens have settled there and it has flourished into a large Jewish society. By confiscating this land from the Israelis, what would be accomplished? Would problems between the two parties be put to rest? Is there an ample amount of reasoning that would lead anyone to believe that this would end this rivalry between Israel and Palestine? No. By giving Jerusalem to Palestine, that would leave the Israelis with nothing. It becomes quite clear at this point that an even bigger war would ensue. What kind of war would that be? A civil war. And I believe that would be a misconstrued point of action for both Israel and Palestine. The actions of Ariel Sharon will prove to be pivotal in the reconstruction of peace within Israel and Palestine. As the search for peace continues to progress, I feel that Palestine should make a conscious effort to understand that Israel is doing what will be – essentially – what is necessary in order to obtain peace amongst Palestine and Israel. This is surely deemed to be a very slow yea gradual process, which if handled with care and with the utmost regard and concern will conclude in success and peace for all. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:50:21 PM

Jihad SORRY i meant to write a reply to STACEYS POST not HEELAS... sorry Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:48:05 PM

King abdulla Response to the usa. I feel that the statment Condoleeza Rice made about her support for Israel will not help is solving a Global crisis in this region. It is clear that if an answer is to be found it has to be agreeable to all parties involved and within the region. By opening with support for Israel, a country formed only by displacing the indigenous people of the region it is clear the USA have branded the Palenstines as the "problem within the region" before the process has begun. This lack of respect for the Palenstine people is apparent in her choice of partners for the pliminary peace talks as no Palenstine representative was invited, not even from my peaceful state of Jordan or Syria. How can we hope to find a peaceful solution whilst we ignore one party within the process. I suggest the USA rethink its position and invite representives from the middle East area to ensure a balanced view of the problem is presented at any pre peace talks. It is insult to think that the USA had pre peace talks with the UK, Egypt and Israel excluding most of the effected middle Eastern countries. In response to your summing up of the issue i find it hard to belieive that any God fearing country believe it is right to conquer and displace an indiginous race. It should be noted whilst Isreal lost lives taking land that was not theirs in 1967 countries like Palenstine and the Arab states lost lives defending their home land. This i believe America holds dear to heart, as the right to defend your home land is embedded in the American constitution. If Isreal had not built upon the land they did not own this "problem could have been averted". Now we need to understand how best to divide the disputed lands to ensure Palenstine land for the Palenstine people whilst not destroying the state of Isreal. I do not agree that Palenstine is unwilling to seek a negocited settlement. In fact after many years of war both sides are ready to consider new inititives to encompass the problem and bring peace to the region. I beleive Palenstine is ready to talk through the process and with the willing partner Isreal, there is hope for a "real solution to the issue". Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:47:50 PM

Faisal Al-Fayez - Chris Hudson [e] Faisal Al-Fayez: To be perfectly honest, I think that it is quite clear that Israel is more at fault. Having said this, I would also like to add that I am not solely blaming Israel for the conflict at hand. Israel has played a larger role in shaping the conflict into what it is today. Ever since the expulsion of the Jews from Palestine in 135 AD this had been a Palestinian state. That is of course until the 1967, six-day war in which the Jewish people violently forced their way into The West Bank and Gaza Strip dividing the state. As a result of this, there is now a population of about 220,000 Israeli's, the majority of which dwell in the West Bank. The Palestinians now have the demand that all Israeli's withdraw from the land that was conquered in the 1967 war. During the negotiations, which were held at Camp David and Taba, Israel made the offer to turn over a large percentage of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. However, the conditions of this offer were that these areas are still to be separated by narrow corridors kept under Israeli control. This is a completely preposterous proposal due to the fact that the state would still be divided which would undoubtedly create further conflict. The ultimate goal here is to achieve peace and unite the Palestinian people, not to keep them divided. It is essential that the Palestinians have a state to call their own, a state that is not divided. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:47:23 PM

Jack Straw Sorry, I would like to apologize for my typo. I meant to say Israel's capital is Jerusluam* in my post below. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:44:18 PM

Freedom Fries - Georgie [e] RESPONSE TO ABU MAZEN'S QUESTIONS/COMMENTS: If you look at back at the post, no where does it state that Israel is justified! In fact, I'm not sure in what actions you are referring to. If you are referring to that fact that they continue to occupy the West Bank, Gaza, and Jerusalem (for the time being) I did not say they were at all justifed. I noted that Israel has made continuous efforts since their occupation of the lands to compromise by providing assistance to the Palestinians on the land in several ways, which I listed. If you are referring to their plans of withdrawing from Gaza and parts of the West Bank, that needs no justification because it is all in effort to achieve peace and give Palestinians a land with which they can begin form and structure a "viable Palestinian state." You also question who justifies them to be rewarded...I don't recall any mention of being rewarded in my post. I believe that disengagement plans and cooperation with Palestine and the rest of the international commmunity to achieve peace is the reward. No party should expect to be rewarded with anything except stablity and peace. I would appreciate it if you pointed out where I insisted that Israel is justified in its actions or that they deserve a reward in for cooperation. I suggest you objectively re-read the post, so you clearly understand that I never indicated that Israel is justified, I stated that they are striving towards peace and have been for several years. You state that Israel should split their land. Again, I don't believe you read my post where I described several situations and plans illustrating Israel's agreement to withdrawal from Gaza in July 2005 and several parts of the West Bank which they have started and plan to continue. This conflict COULD reach a boiling point because the Palestinians continue to recognize terrorist groups who are unwilling accept Israel's initial plans to withdraw from certain lands. I agree that a solution must be reached soon, but there can be no solution if Palestine does not acknowledge the fact that Israel is dedicated to its disengagement plan, working towards building a viable Palestinian state, and achieving/maintaining peace in the region. If the Palestinian people want peace and equality then they should accept and welcome Israel's plans to withdraw from certain lands as well as make it clear that they will not tolerate terrorist actions. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:39:53 PM

T-Bone from the UK (Menisha) MANDATORY POST In my opinion,when a situation like this occurs no one can really be at fault. If you were to ask who is more rightfully deserving of the land then I would have to say the Palestinian people. For years and years their rights as individuals have been over looked and constantly disregarded. All they want is a viable state that they can call their own. A place to reside in peace, controlling their affairs with no outside interference. The trouble ensues because of where they wish to fulfil this aspiration.This situation has very little to do with enemies and war, it is centered on the precedence of rights and obligations. Who deserves the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Jerusalem.The holy land is a very delicate area to dispute, but the West Bank and Gaza strip should be ruled by Palistinian Authority. Yes, they promoted terrorism - which is by no means acceptable, however, when faced with no other options violence is the most likely result.A peace plan is desperately needed for this conflict to even begin to be resolved. Too many innocent lives are being destroyed by a war they were forced into - it needs to stop. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:36:46 PM

Jack Straw Firstly I cannot claim that either country is at fault because I don’t believe the issue on hand is who as at fault but more, which country is deserving of the land of this land. In response to this, I would have to side with neither. At the moment the Palestinians have no home, however Gaza is Israel’s capital. If I recall, I believe that our main goal is to maintain peace. By claiming one side is perhaps more needy or deserving than the other for the land at Gaza and the West Bank, will only create more conflict and steer us further from what we are here to do. We’re here to find Peace and I don’t believe by choosing one over the other is the solution. As for Jerusalem, it is the holy state and both Palestine and Israel have equal ties to it. It is unfair to say one country is more deserving, when the land holds lots or religious meaning for both. Furthermor, both countries have suffered many hardships throughout the ongoing years of this conflict. “From 1987 to 1991 Israeli forces killed over 1,000 Palestinians, including over 200 under the age of sixteen.” On the other hand, “Palestinian militants killed over 250 Palestinians suspected of collaborating with the occupation authorities and about 100 Israelis during this period.” (http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intifada-87-pal-isr-primer.html). As time passed: “… more than 300 Palestinians dead in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (Oct. 25, 2000).” It is one thing when a country defends themselves against another country, but it is shameful when they begin to kill their own people. (http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intifada-87-pal-isr-primer.html). These statistics are only small fraction of the number of deaths that have resulted from this conflict. However what remains constant through the years is that the numbers of casualties are growing, the battle is continuing, and the Palestine’s still have no region of their own. I'd like to believe after advancing so far that we have acquired enough knowledge to find a way to end this, asides from violence. We are civil, intelligent, individuals, and I believe if we put our minds together we will come up with a superb proposition to end this. Jack Straw (Sonal) Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:33:46 PM

Ariel Sharon Don't forget, your talking about hundreds of thousands of people being introduced into a small area. What will be the consequences? It will be bad for everyone, Palestines and Jewish people. Of course my interest lay in the Jewish people, but that doesn't mean i don't think about the good of all people when us Israelites plan ideas. This is one of the many issues that we will have to cover in the conferences we hold next week. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:30:38 PM

Jihad- Abu Mazen ROBBIE ADD ME TO MSN JRWAHEED@HOTMAIL.COM Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:23:17 PM

Jihad The Problem for Palestine is to ensure that our citizens that are situated overseas in refugee camps because of the Zionist movments in the early 1900's to return back to thier homes that were taken away from them. The only reason israel refuses the "Right Of Return" is because they are scared that it might erode thier Culture. Even under the Geneva Convention and other Political documents the right to passage is a highly looked upon resoultion, its a step towards peace and prosperity. How can you deny the land that was stripped away from them? Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:22:07 PM

Ariel Sharon [e] When dealing with the question of the right of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to return to Israel, along with millions of their descendants, most Israelis feel that the introduction of a large number of people into the limited geographical resources of the country would create a demographic shock that would bring about the destruction of the State of Israel. We believe furthermore that this destruction is too high a price to pay to find a solution to the Palestinian refugees, and that it could create millions of Jewish refugees, while not necessarily solving the problems of the Palestinians. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:15:06 PM

Jihad- Abu Mazen REPLY TO HEELAS POST Israel is justified in their actions in what way? Their cooperation to who justifies them to be rewarded? Their cooperation with you? The United States? The Palestinian people where torn away from their homes because of the Balfour Agreement and The White Paper and they are not even allowed their “ Right to Return” back into their land and home nation. If Israel is not willing to split their land and create a "two -state nation" with Palestine, then forces beyond the PLO's control will start to become a huge factor. This conflict is at the boiling point. Something needs to be done that pleases both parties and their citizens. Jerusalem is a holy city to more then the Jews. The Palestinian people won’t rest until they see some equality in the matter where they also can enter their holy land without difficulties. If a solution is not created soon it will just create more tension between the two parties. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:12:58 PM

Ahmed Nazif (aka Jeff) *This is not amandatory post* It is interesting to note the role that public opinion plays in this controversial conflict. Mr. Sharon, Israel's Prime Minister, mentioned that he is facing public opposition in response to the withdrawal plans. However, public opinions polls seem to indicate that a cLear majority of Israelis are in favour of furthering the peace process. "Do you believe Israel should withdraw from Gaza? 79% yes 21% no" "Should Sharon keep working to implement the plan to evacuate Gaza Settlements? 66% yes 29% no" For more, check out the following site: http://www.ipforum.org/serial.cfm?id=10&Sub=57&dis=1 However, this is not to say that Mr. Sharon doesn't have to deal with some extremist viewpoints. Thursday, March 31st 2005 - 07:10:51 PM

|| Sign IR Guestbook | CPW4U World Politics ||