Writing on Verbage is a lonesome quest. Time spent collating my thoughts into a written waffle which may or may not make sense is time consuming. Does anyone read this stuff? who Knows?

How does a holy man know he is going to get an audience to his sermon?
It is not about the recognition, it is about the turning up and having a go.

Some one said this was a Podium for thoughts….which is very true. All the while I find things to write about, you will find me writing. Agree on my opinions? Disagree? I dont know. Do I care? yes, of course, but not because I would change my mind but because you actually thought long enough about the subject I just pissed you off with. You have the right to reply.

So do so.

Signed

Not the usual suspect.

Iam the wife of UT. All things cleared up?Jolly good!!!!!! This piece will probably only be of interest to U.K people only. As these people may be aware, our fire fighting personnel are considering strike action for a 40 percent pay increase p.a. Well and good. I completely agree with any sort of pay increase for our public sectors. They are the most over expectated, under appreciated people the
British have.
But, at the end of the day, when these people do go on strike,(which they are well within their rights to do) who picks up the tab?
As with any nation, when the going gets tough, the military get going. In my opinion, the most under rated, undervalued force we have is our military. Not only are these people expected to spend long periods of time away,hey!They are also expected to give their lives, support their local community and businesses aswell!!!!
The news teams have announced that should the fire fighters go on strike, they will let the army deal with emergencies instead, who in most likelihood spend more time away from their families and earn a considerably less amount than the fire service… but do they complain??
All British people know that their public services are much undervalued, but do they really appreciate what their military does in times of peace?? So remember, Hail to the bus driver, bus driver man!

An Interactive history of the Arab - Israeli conflict (Brief)

What is the conflict about?
Both sides claim land in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Moderates suggest splitting the territory while extremists want it all. There have been three major Arab-Israeli wars since 1947 when the UN proposed dividing the former British mandate of Palestine between its Jewish and Arab populations with Jerusalem as an “international” city (the Arabs rejected the plan). During each war Israel has extended its boundaries. After the second war - in 1967 - Israel took the West Bank from Jordan and the Gaza Strip from Egypt and began an illegal programme of settlement building in the now occupied territories.

Significantly these were areas that Palestinian refugees had fled to in 1948. The 1967 war had defended Israel against combined Arab armies massed on its borders when its existence appeared to be under threat, but also put a significant Arab population under Israeli rule (in addition to its own Arab citizens). Its rage was demonstrated in the 1980s intifada against Israeli occupation and continues to feed into the violence. Much of the economic life of the West Bank and Gaza has been suspended since September 2000, exacerbating unemployment and poverty as many Palestinians are prevented from going to their jobs in Israel.

The conflict has developed its own logic of hate and anger that perpetuates the killing. On the Israeli side many fear the Palestinians want to drive them into the sea. Many Palestinians feel besieged by Israel and fear the Jewish state will, if not annex the West Bank and Gaza, deny the right of an economically and politically viable Palestinian state to exist.

How did the present situation develop?
The Palestinian uprising erupted in September 2000 after peace talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel broke down over the future status of Jerusalem. But what started as rioting in the aftermath of a visit by Mr Sharon, then the opposition leader, to a contested religious site, soon spiralled into killing that has to date claimed more than 2,500 lives - the vast majority on the Palestinian side.

The months before Israel’s first military incursion to the West Bank had seen an increasing use of suicide attacks by militant Palestinian groups such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas and the al-Aqsa brigades. For its part Israel used helicopter gunships to assassinate militant leaders, put its tanks and armoured bulldozers in Palestinian towns and raided refugee camps. Civilians died on both sides.

Operation Defensive Shield - as the campaign was called - then began on March 29 with a stated aim to dismantle the “terrorist infrastructure” in the Palestinian territories through the confinement of Mr Arafat to the basement of his Ramallah headquaters and the occupation of the other major Palestinian towns. Thousands of Palestinian men were arrested as the Israeli army hunted down - Palestinians allege summarily executed - militant fighters and Mr Arafat’s policemen.

Six weeks later the Israeli army pulled out, only to re-enter and begin its second incursion within a month.

What is the solution?
Few believe there is a military solution to the crisis because defeating the Palestinian militant groups will not mean an end to terrorist activity, and may even put more young people on the path to becoming suicide bombers. If there is an answer it will have to be political, most probably the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

This is not an especially controversial idea: both Mr Sharon and Mr Arafat have supported it (though there are critics of both men who say they want the ultimate elimination of each other’s state). But peace talks and negotiations have to deal with issues such as the status of the Jewish settlements outside Israel’s pre-1967 borders, the rights of the Palestinian refugees, who controls which areas of Jerusalem and exactly how much territory Israel cedes to the Palestinians.

Can the peace process recover?
Palestinian and Israeli officials have met since the current cycle of violence began in September 2000 but have not brokered a lasting ceasefire. The problem is getting to the situation where peace can develop - Israel demands an end to all Palestinian violence before talks can begin but the militant groups appear to reject a negotiated settlement. Suicide attacks frequently coincide with outside attempts to bring peace to the region.

An alternative - largely supported by Arab governments - is the early establishment of a Palestinian state with more detailed negotiations to follow. In ending the 35-year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (a major cause of the intifada) it is hoped that support for the extremists would diminish. King Abdullah of Jordan said in May that negotiations had to give the Israelis and Palestinians “what they want in their hearts” - a Palestinian state and security for Israel in the Middle East - in order to succeed.

The last peace process began in 1993 with secret negotiations between Mr Arafat (then the exiled head of the PLO) and the then Israeli prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, who was later assassinated by a rightwing Jewish fanatic. It continued in the 1990s - and right up to January 2001 - despite suicide bombings in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and, in its latter months, the beginning of the intifada. But critics of this gradualist approach, which envisages a step-by-step progress to a Palestinian state, point out it is vulnerable to being derailed by extremists. King Abdullah described it as “a peace process in which the process has been long and the peace never arrived.”

Is peace possible with Mr Sharon and Mr Arafat in charge?
There is animosity between the two and Mr Sharon would probably rather not deal with Mr Arafat. He calls him a “murderer and a pathological liar” and, as Israel’s minister of defence, led a campaign into Lebanon in 1982 to drive the PLO out of Beirut. Mr Arafat was allowed to flee to Tunisia but Mr Sharon said last year he wished he had “liquidated” the Palestinian leader when he had the chance.

On the Palestinian side, Mr Sharon is regarded as a war criminal for his part in the massacre by his Lebanese Christian militia allies of between 800 and 1,000 people, including many children, in two refugee camps. Mr Arafat says the Israeli prime minister does not want peace. The EU’s foreign policy head, Javier Solana, said it would be better if both men stood down saying “Sharon and Arafat have lived through this conflict for too long”.

But the animosity between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government goes further than the two leaders. Palestinian ministers have said that the true purpose of Israel’s military campaigns is to destroy the Palestinian leadership and replace it with one more to its liking. Israel routinely blames Mr Arafat for suicide bombings and says he is not doing enough to arrest the militants.

What is the international community doing?
The EU and US both played a role in ending the Bethlehem siege and securing the release of the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, from his Ramallah compound. British and US wardens monitor the imprisonment of surrendered Palestinian militants and the 13 Bethlehem fighters are now in exile in the EU.

But it is Washington that holds the greatest sway over Israel and many in the region look to the US for a lead in the peace process. The US president, George Bush, revealed his plans in June for a two-state (Israeli and Palestinian) solution to the conflict to follow a reform of Palestinian institutions, establishment of a western-style democracy and election of a leader “not compromised by terror”. This was widely understood to signal the Bush administration’s refusal to deal with Mr Arafat, leading to a high profile split between the US and EU governments on the issue.

- Simon Jeffery

Sites of Interest:

Bitter Lemons . ORG

Peace Watch

The Middle East: a glossary of terms

Middle East News online

Israel.

I truly understand what WR says about Israel being the unknown element in any future war, and yes, I can agree that I too, think neighbouring countrys are wary of the might that Israel is capable of waving.

I have seen the evidence of forces of Israel in action. They are pro-Brit forces and have been known to train with them, and they arent tin-pot soldiers. Israelis are fully armed, motivated and capable of kicking ass. In world comparisons I rate them highly, with the Germans, Brits ( if it could match numbers of men) and the US.
Should war errupt then it would not been a shock if Saddam launched on Israel, as he did in the Gulf war, however, even he knows he might as well take a bottle of 9mm shower gel into the bathroom because he knows that it would be far worse than he could cope with. Israel is most definately Nuclear and should she unleash on Iraq, I would fear a tradegy that no president of USA could talk them out of.

Does the UK and US premeditate this threat? Probably, but war is all about ifs and buts. Money wont sort out your logistics if the enemy can disable them and its a long trek into Baghdad. Im all for knocking the crap out of Iraq, and I have never said different. I also know the problems it will create when and if it occurs, but niggling in the back of mind is Israel. Sharron has already said that Israel wont be so placid, should Iraq launch upon her, as she did in the Gulf war.

Palestine? WHite Rose?

News for Brits. Do you need a holiday (shameless ad!!). The Guardian and Observer are offering two for one flights to the US as long as you book through the next 2 months for flights up to mid spring 2003. Qualificaion for this offer is dependent on you buying the paper to get the tokens (the catch), but worth it if you or partner aspire to a spot of early xmas shopping abroad. Ill shut up now. I dont get paid for this.

Ah, today I have a smattering of Links for you. Israel next is it?

Go and see this- Its Paul Mathis’ house, which he claims, he has wired to the internet. Well, whatever, but you can at least THINK you are turning his lights on and off :-)
Drive Me Insane

Fascinating collection of articles and information on the possible impending war into Iraq.

Apollo 14 launched in the late afternoon of January 31, 1971 on what was to be our third trip to the lunar surface. Five days later Alan Shepard and Edgar Mitchell walked on the Moon while Stuart Roosa, a former U.S. Forest Service smoke jumper, orbited above in the command module. Packed in small containers in Roosa’s personal kit were hundreds of tree seeds, part of a joint NASA/USFS project. Upon return to Earth, the seeds were germinated by the Forest Service. Known as the “Moon Trees”, the resulting seedlings were planted throughout the United States (often as part of the nation’s bicentennial in 1976) and the world.
They stand as a tribute to astronaut Roosa and the Apollo program.

But I know something about it as I have visited there 3 times and once stayed for a few months.

The Israelis are by a large a peace loving people (like most folks really). It’s democratic (unlike its neighbours) and is industrious and smart. Very smart in fact. I was last there a few years ago and they do love the new, interesting and shiny. They love to build ( :) ) and they are cosmopolitan by and large.

They have a tremendous history even compared to Britain’s exploits through time which I think not even they appreciate. They have a terrific will to survive and an ability to mobilise their people all over the world to get what they want. I like them a whole lot. If I had to be kicked out of here I’d go there if they would have me. (As long as they put me somewhere quiet like the Hula Valley.)

It has only existed as a nation since 1948. Imagine a nation built in just one day. (But this is all history and it’s not what I want to write.)

My feeling about its current situation is that they have just about been pushed too far. I have written about the Palestinian problem earlier (where were you?) I dont think they would stay out of another Gulf war even with immense US backing. Sometimes a nation has to act sovereignly to defend its own. This is what leaders fear most of all; Israel engaged in her own defence. She won’t lose, she never has and I don’t expect she ever will be. She may take a battering but there are more on her side than we can know or see. I suspect Arab nations are scared of her but they would never ever admit to this.

My point is this. Again I say, I feel that the US (and with grim determination) the UK are wrong to pursue the current course of action. Our leaders are getting us used to the idea of war. (In fact I think they are trying to speed it up…) It is the unknown element that I have talked about earlier that is the thing to watch for (if you can see the as yet unseen) and this may be an all-out Israeli manoevre. Is there someone out there who is going to stop this so we can all have some peace?

(Thanks for the shirt Mob, UT!)

Before I get emails to give grief over this post, let me make myself clear. I am not and never have been anything other than pro US, pro British and anything else other than ready to go and do my bit. I say that now as I did then….because I know my thoughts. However, I dont brainwash people and therefore post articles that I find interesting. I am giving you the chance to read these, cos you might not normally. Up those that judge without comment.

In Ulysses, James Joyce disparagingly describes Americans as “the scrapings” of the world. Nearly 100 years after Leopold Bloom and Stephen Dedalus navigated Dublin’s streets, George Bush, of all people, has exacted revenge. In his view, as set out in a definitive new document, US National Security Strategy, just about everybody now wants to be American.
The whole world, Mr Bush argues, is “increasingly united by common values” and “common interests”- and these values and interests, it transpires, are America’s own. He recasts humanity’s entire history as a struggle between an absolute, Founding Father-style concept of freedom and “war, terror, poverty… and the evil designs of tyrants”. Mr Bush (and advisers such as Condoleezza Rice) find, unsurprisingly, that America is uniquely equipped to fight and finally win this battle. After the defeat of communism and fascism, the US represents the “single sustainable model for national success”, declares this philosopher-president. He deems it “our common calling” and a proud “mission”. And like it or not, we are all putative, co-opted Americans now, or else non-persons, to be sustained by a US-tilted “balance of power that favours freedom” and protected by America’s “unparalleled military strength”.

The strategy paper collates Mr Bush’s earlier treatises on weapons of mass destruction, the fate awaiting terrorists and their “rogue state” sponsors, the self- given right to launch pre-emptive attacks, and the determination of the US to defend itself unilaterally if allies or multilateral organisations such as the UN cannot or will not furnish “coalitions of the willing”. It is a document of sweeping scope, untroubled by self-consciousness or nuance. It champions global free trade and environmental protection, unabashed by the contradictions of current US policies. It trumpets alliances such as Nato while unintentionally demonstrating that their importance derives from the degree to which they further US interests. It promotes the creation of global standards and rights yet pointedly rejects the International Criminal Court.

This Bush doctrine is by turns arrogant, patronising, complacent, amazingly presumptuous - but above all, aggressive. It brooks no opposition. It will tolerate no perceived threat. In the world according to George Bush, an irresistible America, convinced of its rightness and its altruism, always decides. Fatally, but in the true, naive American tradition, this doctrine is deaf to history, oblivious to consequences, and wondrously lacking in self-knowledge. But those who ask what, in the shorter term, is in store (and not just in Iraq) should read this document. It marks the moment when the US, shifting up from superpower to hyperpower, unveiled the new age of the have-a-nice-day totalitarians. It’s official: the US rules the world.

Leader
Tuesday September 24, 2002