Arafat is dead, may Allah rest his soul in peace.
Whoever comes next will not only inheret the millions of problems the Palestinians are suffering from, peace and security being paramount, but will have to learn to be the butt of American and Israeli blame games!
Comments
NEXT!
Seems to me there is more than enough blame to go around for the last 50 years of misery and death on all sides. There is no doubt Arafat was caught between a rock and a hard place, mostly of his own making, and there was no way for him to get out of the mess.
The facts remain that the PA got billions over the years from the UN and other countries for education, commerce, refugee camps and reconstruction and very little of it actually reached the people. Could we have not bought them all a villa in the south of France for that money?
I see no hope of anything changing but the faces involved. It would be nice if the world stepped up to the plate to resolve this conflict once and for all so everyone in the region could look forward to seeing their grandchildren grow up, but the human race doesn’t have a very good track record.
Re(1): NEXT!
Zed,
Not all of them are crying and many knew very well what was going on. He robbed his people blind and his thugs went around beating up those who criticized him. A leader that accomplished nothing for his people in 25 years and wouldn’t step aside for a leader who could is not a leader. ‘Nuff said.
NEXT!
For better or worse, Yasser Arafat’s involvement in the Palestine struggle for self-determination has brought us all to the point we are now.
Whether the journey has had highlights for you or otherwise, his actions have had a profound effect on millions of people, and millions to come. The chapter closes on him, and whatever your feelings are towards him will be drops in the ocean.
His place in history is cemented and his life will be studied and debated for decades to come.
May God Almighty see fit to have mercy on his soul.
RIP Arafat
RIP Arafat. You were a flawed leader but you did much to put the plight of the Palestinians at the top of the world’s agenda.
NEXT!
Just curious but how many days of mourning will there be in Bahrain for Arafat??
[size=18]Eid Mubarak Everybody![/size]
[Modified by: Bonsaimark (Bonsaimark) on November 11, 2004 04:50 PM]
Re(2): NEXT!
Accomplished nothing for his people in 25 years ?? Sorry ???
Arafat is the one who managed to put the palestinan issue on the top of the international agenda. Without Arafat, nobody would have ever talked about a palestinian state.
As for “robbing his people”, you should read Shimon Peres’s column in Le Monde newspaper today. He said:
“Arafat appréciait l’amour et le respect que lui portait son peuple. Cet amour lui était cher. Il menait une vie modeste et demandait peu pour lui-même. Il vivait pour son peuple.”
translation:
“Arafat appreciated the love and respect of his people. This love was precious to him. He lived a modest life and asked a little for himself. He was living for his people.”
These are the words of Simon Peres.
Salam.
NEXT!
Or maybe Arafat’s successor can put his people’s interest ahead of his own and not favor violent chaos to keep himself in power at his people’s expense. He might even use some of the billions given to benefit Palestinians to actually benefit the Palestinians rather than stuff it in his own private bank accounts. He can go far in gaining American respect by not killing our diplomats nor by slaughtering people at the Olympics.
Steve
NEXT!
Arafat’s actions greatly exacerbated the problems of the Palestinians. He made one misjudgment after another, particularly in choosing to attempt a solution through violence rather than politics and diplomacy. Hopefully whoever replaces him will be a much wiser man.
Re: NEXT!
You should probably let the palestinians themselves be the judge.
If Arafat was so corrupt or so power hungry at the expense of its people interest, why all the palestinians are crying his death ? why is he such an emblematic symbol of their cause ?
After all, they should have known by now !
You should probably learn to hear the other side’s story instead of reciting you pre-formatted theories.
salam.
Re(2): RIP Arafat
Arafat wasn’t effective at all. The world, sadly, equates the Palestinian struggle with young men blowing themselves up in stores and supermarkets. Ghandi accomplished a lot more with non-violence. Notice how the Kuwaitis didn’t send any representative to the funeral. Arafat supported Saddam’s invasion of their country, and the killing of thousands of Kuwaitis. Not exactly the most enlightened attitude for a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
Too many dictators and “ineffective” leaders die comfortably in their beds.
NEXT!
wow, did you see that burial? unbelievable…
Re(2): RIP Arafat
[quote]Jasra: Hitler did not put the plight of the Germans on top of the agenda .. the Germans were not really in any real struggle for self determination… there was no ‘plight’ that needed the media and the world’s for legitimacy![/quote]
I disagree, my precious buttercup. The Allies stuck it to Germany in the Versailles Treaty. Hitler carried part of the treaty around and cited it in his stump speeches to whip up the crowd at the Allied perfidy. He effectively used the Allies’ bad faith at Versailles and the subsequent hardships the treaty imposed on the Germans to undermine and evade the provisions of the peace. The Allies thought it was all settled when they walked out of Versailles in 1919. In the 1930s, Hitler showed them it wasn’t settled at all.
Arafat was not very effective at all. He killed and maimed a lot of innocent people for nothing. He was just another thug dictator who ruled through his own private mafia, trying to grab as much as he could. He made the name Palestinian synonymous with “terrorist” and torched the good will and political capital that would have served his people.
If a good man had been in his place, there would not be Palestinian children carrying suicide bombs in a futile guerrilla war but Palestinian lawyers carrying their case forward in a successful legal battle and Palestinian politicians making their case in a successful political campaign to the world while Palestinians created successful businesses and schools, instead of bombs.
Steve
Re(3): NEXT!
I’ll admit he is not their equal in quantity but he is arguably their equal in quality.
Steve
Re(4): NEXT!
Listen Vietnam Vet, stick to what you know about – ie carpet bombing 3 million north Vietnamese, emergency airlifting your diplomats from the roof of your Saigon embassy and undergoing years of counselling for defeat induced Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
How much?
Really effective as “the symbol of the palestinians identity and their struggle” wasn’t he?
Re(5): NEXT!
[quote]Posted by: Zed on November 12, 2004 12:11 PM
I’m sure Mahmood you will have a much bigger contribution to history. [/quote]
The amount Arafat “contributed to history” has no bearing on his worth as a human being. Look at Hitler and Stalin.
[Modified by: Ash (Ash) on November 12, 2004 05:08 PM]
Re(5): NEXT!
That’s quite a bit of nonsense packed in one paragraph. First, I’m not a Vietnam War vet. Second, Vietnam was never carpet-bombed nor has anywhere else for half a century. Third, I have no stress at all in my life.
My guess is that you say such stuff to avoid addressing my points because Arafat is rather difficult to defend. I mean, really, how do you defend somebody who signs off on blasting teenagers shopping at the mall full of screws soaked in rat poison. It’s not combat. It’s just pointless murder.
Steve
[Modified by: Steve The American (Steve) on November 12, 2004 10:27 AM]
Re(3): NEXT!
Never talk bad of the dead, could be one explanation why the knives are still blunt, but give it a few days, weeks, months and you will most probably see the level of corruption that this individual is quagmired in.
25 years and no contribution? I personally don’t think so, just as much as 30 years with Saddam, both will be thrown in the rubbish pile of history.
NEXT!
This is a genuine question and I’d be grateful if anyone could answer it for me. “Palestine” was divided up between Israel and Jordan (Transjordan). The majority of Jordanians are apparently Palestinians but Jordan is ruled by the Hashemite Royal House. What I’m curious about it why Palestinian self-determination only involves regaining autonomy from Israel and not also regaining autonomy from the Hashemites in Jordan.
Serious question.
Re(1): NEXT!
Zed,
[quote]You should probably let the palestinians themselves be the judge.[/quote]
Who’s stopping them from judging Arafat? Certainly not me. However, you are certainly trying to dismiss criticism of Arafat rather than addressing it, aren’t you? When you kill Americans, we become very judgemental.
[quote]If Arafat was so corrupt or so power hungry at the expense of its people interest, why all the palestinians are crying his death ? why is he such an emblematic symbol of their cause ? After all, they should have known by now ! [/quote]
This is very unconvincing rhetoric. Plenty of people were crying when Stalin died. He was one of the biggest mass murderers of all time. And when Kim Il Sung died, North Korea was drenched in tears, except for the prison camps. History is full of examples of deluded people sorry to see a dictator who did them dirty go.
[quote]You should probably learn to hear the other side’s story instead of reciting you pre-formatted theories. [/quote]
Maybe you should consider that people who disagree with you may have good reasons for doing so. Your current approach is intellectually sterile.
Steve
Re: RIP Arafat
Hitler put the plight of the Germans at the top of the world’s agenda, but it was no cause to celebrate.
Steve
Re(1): RIP Arafat
Steve Steve ..
What were u saying about an argument being intellectually flawed? Hitler did not put the plight of the Germans on top of the agenda .. the Germans were not really in any real struggle for self determination… there was no ‘plight’ that needed the media and the world’s for legitimacy!
But, in a weird way, Hitler did end up putting the plight of the Jews on top of the agenda, and were it not for the very effective use of European and American guilt over the Holocaust during WW2, we wouldnt have an Israel …
So … whilst Arafat as a leader may not have been very effective in bringing peace and propsperity for the Palestians in recent history, noone can deny that Arafat as a symbol of the Palestinian struggle of self determination was a very strong (and effective) one. And, it will also be very hard to deny that what strenghthened that symbol was our beloved Sharon’s wisdom and judgement.
For better or for worse, may his soul rest in peace. He did give his life up for the Palestinians. Not effectively, nor with any real results. And unlike Sadat or Rabin, he did not die a hero’s death fighting for a real cause .. perhaps a good reminder to our leadership that at the end of the day, we are all mortal.
Re(2): NEXT!
Comparing Arafat to Staline or Hitler.. Sure this is a very intellectually honest approach.
Re(4): NEXT!
I’m sure Mahmood you will have a much bigger contribution to history.
Arafat was a flawed leader, never managed to be a strong stateman fighting corruption and cracking down on the extremists so obssesed he was by keeping the palestinian unite. But he spent his life fighting for his people and brought the dream of a Palestininan state alive. He forced Isreal to accept that there is a country called palestine and there is people called palestinians. without him, the world would be still seeing the palestinian problem as just another refugee problem.
At the the time of his death, one should respect that. The palestininas do and so do most of the world.
Re(5): NEXT!
Let’s not resort to calling names and going off the wire shall we? I respect your opinion of the man, I have a different read on the situation. If you have anything to contribute to the discussion, then please do so without resorting to belittling others, it just discredits you and your argument.
Re(6): NEXT!
Probably.. as much as it discredits you to say that the very symbol of the palestininas identity and their struggle will be “thrown out to the rubbish of history”.
Al Urdun
Just to throw some fat into the fire here,
Nearly everything east of the Jordan valley is desert, but historically the valley itself has been a thriving center of population.
Amman is built on the Ancient Greek cCity of Philadelphia, Ma’an had been an imortant crossroads for trade routes up and down the levant as well as between the Med and Red seas and the hinterland. And let’s not forget the ancien Kingdom of Petra.
The east bank has been continously populated for millenia. Jordan is an artificial state with an imported royalty, but they made it work as a modern state. This is to be expected, the Arabs of the Jordan Valley have been adept at staying with global developments
Re(2): NEXT!
As you can tell, I don’t know anywhere near enough about it but from the few brief histories I’ve read, East Palestine became present-day Jordan and West Palestine became present-day Israel. But I guess that if East Palestine/Jordan is mostly desert then the focus on Israel reflects the need for the more viable territories to form the basis of a re-formed Palestine???
Re: Al Urdun
Please keep throwing the fat on the fire. I like reading the Cliff’s Notes version of the history of the region.
By the way, whoever mentioned “Inside The Mirage” by Thomas Lippman a few weeks ago, thanks. I ordered a used copy through Amazon (THREE BUCKS!) and am about five eighths through it. It is one of the clearest, most readable books about the Middle East I’ve read, which tend toward academic-ese. I recommend it for anyone who wants to know about the US-Saudi relationship. It won’t make you respect the Saudis more, by the way.
Steve
NEXT!
Interesting question .. but some of the premises behind your question are wrong.
It is not correct to say that Palestine was divided up between Israel and Transjordan. There was no Israel (and therefore no Israelis) and there was no Jordan (and therefore no Jordanians). There were Palestinians (and therefore a concpet of Palestine), and if you go back and look at the coins that were minted in the 1920’s, you will notice that they say “Palestine” on them .. written in Arabic, Hebrew and English.
Jordan and Israel were artificial states. The Hashemites as a people and a race actually came from Arabia, from Hijaz to be exact. One brother went to the area now known as Jordan, the other went to Iraq.
Pre 48, there was a systematic immigration policy of the critical mass of Jews into what was then known as Palestine, and what is now known as Israel.
History wil tell you that there were 3 thrusts of foriegn policy happeneing in the early 1900’s that paved the way for an Israeli state born in 1948. There was the Balfour Agreement, which promised a homeland for the Jews. (And incidentally, British West Africa was one of the proposed sites). There was the Sykes Picot Agreement which divided up the area between the French and the English. And there was also another agreement which gave Arabia the promise of a separate entity in exchange for their support with the Brits against the Turks in WW1 methinks.
So, Israel was never eretz Israel until 1948 after a systematic immigration influx of Jews into the ‘chosen’ area of Judea and Sumaria. The indigenous population was always the Palestinians, who were removed from their land forcibly by the incoming Jews. If you delve into history and find out what was done with the land deeds of land owned in what is now known as Tel Aviv etc; you will realize that there was a system pre 1948 that actually recognized Palestinian soverignity and administraative rule that was completely ignored and destroyed in the zionist desire to create Israel.
Where did this old ‘Palestine’ revolve? Around the spiritual center of Jeruslalem.
And that, m’dear Ash, is a very brief answer to what no Palestinians would ever want Jordan – it aint a substitute.
Re: NEXT!
Thanks. I should have said divided up [i]into[/i] Israel and Jordan rather than “between” Israel and Jordan; I know that neither existed as such previously.
Your answer is interesting and useful but I’m still somewhat bewildered as to why the Palestinian land now called Jordan and ruled by the Hashemites is not of at least some concern to Palestinians. I can see why they regard Israel as the No. 1 offender, but not why there seems to be a complete lack of interest in establishing a Palestinian-governed Jordan (especially given that Palestinians are supposedly the majority population there).
Re(1): NEXT!
Ash, I’m not an expert but this is how I’ve understood the situation.
I believe that the administrative region called “Palestine” by the Ottomans, and later the British Mandate stretched from the Mediterranean up to the Jordan River, so it didn’t overlap the current day territory of Jordan. The Palestinians who are in Jordan today are essentially refugees from Palestine after Israel was formed, and particularly after 1967 war. So the land that comes under Jordan’s territory today was never “Palestinian land”.
Much of Jordan is desert and it historically (since the Islamic period at least) has not had any real urban centres, so the indigenous population was tiny when the Palestinian refugees came along. Neither are the Hashemite Rulers true “sons of the land” since they came from the Hejaz. King Abdullah’s great-grandfather was the Sharif (custodian) of Mecca and Medina and the Hejaz region that lies on the West coast of the Arabian peninsula. The British made one of the Sharif’s sons ruler of this newly carved out entity called Transjordan which was supposed to have consisted of Jordan as it is today, plus the West Bank, plus the Hejaz. However the Sharif’s son got screwed over when the Saudis annexed the Hejaz, and the British didn’t do much to stop them.
So the Hashemites ended up ruling a territory that they didn’t traditionally have influence over. However the Hasemite rulers were culturally closer to the native bedouins of Jordan, than were the Palestinian refugees.
OKay, I’m not sure if I recalled of the facts correctly, so do correct me. Maybe Haitham will want to comment since he is one of those Palestinian Jordanians.
Re(6): NEXT!
I am a vietnam vet and yes we carpet bombed the hell out of the jungle. You could literally feel the ground shake and see the light from miles away.
You really should learn the history of your own country Steve and read it without preconceived opinions. You might actually figure out why so many people really dont like America. We overthrew the legitimate government of our 50th state for a bunch of missionary kids who wanted to do busisness their way rather than by the laws of the country they lived in not to mention gods laws. We supported how many dictators who murdered their own people. We have invaded how many countries, sent how many kids off to war for economic policies or political agendas. We have shot down workers in our own country , shot college kids stole land from spanish settlers who were on the property before we were a country, didnt allow women or blacks to vote. I can go on and on.
I dont think much of Arafat but people have the right to decide their own destiny.
Re(7): NEXT!
billT,
You’re wrong. We did not carpet bomb Vietnam nor any other country, except perhaps North Korea, since WWII. You probably don’t know what carpet bombing is. You need to go look it up so you know what you are talking about. What’s galling in your case is that you haven’t done your homework on this issue and yet you abuse those who have.
Likewise, expressing my negative opinion about Arafat is not telling the Palestinians how to run their country. You are not arguing honestly to imply that anyone who criticizes Arafat is trying to take over Palestine. It is a dishonest attempt to stifle dissenting opinions by mischaracterizing them.
If you do support the Palestinians right to determine their own destiny, then how can you support Arafat, who denied them that right? He did not exactly hold fair and free elections for them to decide their leadership and destiny. Palestine is in chaos right now because Arafat, not the Palestinians, controlled the destiny of Palestine and made no provision for succession. He stole the billions intended for Palestinian benefit.
Arafat ran Palestine like a mafia state, killing anyone who disagreed with him. There was no rule of law in Palestine. If you ran afoul of Arafat’s thugs, they dragged you out on a public street and shot you, then told everyone you were a spy for Israel. Arafat’s men talked kids into blowing themselves up without their parent’s knowledge. That is the ultimate theft of the Palestinian’s destiny, using their children as artillery, fired for effect. And the parents could not say a thing against it for fear of their lives. Their destiny ends with them, thanks to Arafat.
Steve
Re(8): NEXT!
I was there but dont take my word, run a search on google or any other search engine on ‘carpet bombing vietnam’ and see what comes up. Take it easy with the galling or youll get heartburn 🙂
The problems in the middle east are a direct result of the meddeling by the English, French, Russians and Americans and Arafat is just what you should expect to occur when foreign national interest collide.
Mahmood hit the nail on the head when he said “One of the most challenging changes the Arab and Muslim worlds are facing now more than ever is the modernisation and moderation of their curricula in order to raise responsible and world-aware people for the next generation.”
Untill that happens we are going to see leaders like Arafat.
[Modified by: billT (billT) on November 18, 2004 07:03 PM]
Re(9): NEXT!
Bill,
You’re wrong. There was no carpet bombing in Vietnam nor anywhere that I know of for the last half century, no matter how many half wits post about carpet bombing in Vietnam on the Internet.
I’m willing to accept that you served in Vietnam but I’m not willing to accept that makes you knowledgeable about all aspects of the Vietnamese War. About 1.3 million military people served in Vietnam and one million of those don’t know squat about the air war there. You’re one of them.
Carpet bombing was a tactic unique to B-17s and B-29s in WWII. The Norden bombsight used on both was the most accurate of its day but still not accurate enough to place bombs reliably on target from high altitude. Only about half the bombs dropped fell within a half mile of the target. Part of this problem was due to crude navigation by dead reckoning, part of it judging the effect of various currents of wind on the bomb at different altitudes.
To resolve this problem, the Army Air Force massed its bombers, as many as a thousand at a time, in tight formations that dropped their bombs all at once on cue from the lead bombardier. With a mile square formation dropping a carpet of ten thousand bombs from 30,000 feet, there was a good chance that a dozen bombs might strike the target directly.
These problems were solved by the time B-52s flew over Vietnam. They navigated by radar, LORAN, and TACAN to arrive more precisely over target and had much improved bombsights. B-52s carried many more bombs than B-17s, up to 102 500 pound Mk-82s. One bomber could more than do the job.
The most B-52s bombing in formation that I have read about have been three pounding an area target, which is to say troops. And it was impossible to fly a thousand bomber raid with B-52s because only 774 were built. There were no carpet bombing missions in Vietnam that dropped ten thousand bombs on anything. If there were, there would be no Vietnamese cities left in the North.
Furthermore, your assertion that we carpet bombed the jungle is just crazy. You don’t throw ten thousand bombs in the jungle. There is nothing there to bomb. You carpet bomb factories, oil refineries, and transportation hubs, not palm trees.
Wild talk about American carpet bombing is the rhetoric of pinhead peaceniks, clueless liberals, and rabid anti-American foreigners. You should know better to parrot them. Accusations of using such an obsolete tactic is the equivalent of accusing America of pouring boiling oil on its enemies or trampling them with war elephants.
Steve