Should Bangladesh have relations with Israel?

[Banglatiger84]

I am interested in feeling the pulse of Bangladeshis here on this topic.

Should we start having relations with Israel?

Relations does not necessarily mean full recognition, but it may mean having diplomatic exchanges as well as cooperation on economic fronts.

Recognition of Israel may be done later when and if relations warm up.

I hope there are no knee-jerk replies to this question
and that all of you just think about the following points

1) Has refraining from relations all these years helped the Palestinians ?

2) Some object to relations on the ground that Israel oppresses Palestinians. Many Arab countries in the past have killed more Palestinians than Israel, yet we have relations with them, so why not Israel?

3) Israel was the third country to recognise Bangladesh after India and USSR.

Starting diplomatic exchanges doesnt translate to condoning all their acts.
Also, its not that Israel is the only oppresive country out there

Personally, i dont think there is any urgent need for us to do anything presently, but in future, I wouldnt be against having full relations if its beneficial for Bangladesh.

This does not mean I am supporting country at the expense of religion simply because theres nothing unislamic about interacting with Israel.

We need to chalk out a plan to start talks that can be implemented whenever it seems we can extract maximum benefit out of such a move. As i said, now may not be the moment, but in future situations may arise where recognising them will help us.



Edited on, September 15, 2005, 11:19 AM GMT, by Banglatiger84.

[Tigers_eye]

The only relationship we need to have with israel is "humanitarian aid" once they are in need and America and other western world has stopped giving them arms and money. Other than that at this point, my opinion is no relationship at all. They are human being creation of Allah. May be by the grace of Allah they or their next generations will find the truth and chose the right path.

[Dream theater]

Not untill palestinian issues is resolved.

[Kana-Baba]

a little history lession - israel was the 3rd country after india and bhutan who gave us recognition during 1971 war (i think you can search on the net for that, i might be a bit wrong on the name of fisr teo countries)

Edited on, September 15, 2005, 2:32 PM GMT, by Kana-Baba.

[tiger_man]

Should we start having relations with Israel?

no

1) Has refraining from relations all these years helped the Palestinians ?

doesnt really make a difference whether bangladesh has relationship with them or not.....

2) Some object to relations on the ground that Israel oppresses Palestinians. Many Arab countries in the past have killed more Palestinians than Israel, yet we have relations with them, so why not Israel?

because arab killings were caused by zionist imperialism in the area......if someone comes to your home and chuck you out because the ancestor of that guy from some thousand year lived there.....what would you do??? would you sit ducks???

3) Israel was the third country to recognise Bangladesh after India and USSR.

so?? had idi amin or pol pot recognised bangladesh...would you support bangladesh keeping relationship with such country/regime??

Also, its not that Israel is the only oppresive country out there

eversince saddam hussein left....israel is the only opperessive country out there....

This does not mean I am supporting country at the expense of religion simply because theres nothing unislamic about interacting with Israel.

well....we bangladeshis have strong ties wth the palestanian out of muslim brotherhood.....also, yasser arafat was a strong supporter of bangladesh's independence.....so out of respect, it wouldnt be very nice to mingle with a country that was born in the ruins of another country....

[Banglatiger84]

"because arab killings were caused by zionist imperialism in the area......if someone comes to your home and chuck you out because the ancestor of that guy from some thousand year lived there.....what would you do??? would you sit ducks??? "


I talked about Arabs killing palestinians and other arabs.

In 'black september', Gen Zia of Pakistan led troops in a day when almost 7000 palestinians were killed in jordan. In most arab countries. Assad of Syria killed 20,000 "militants" in Hama.

My point is that Israel is oppresive and i personally am fully against uprooting palestinians. However, we have had relations with many bad regimes, and that has not always meant that we supported their acts.


And if we are respecting Arafat by not mingling with israel, then by that logic we are not respecting hundreds of muslims and sikhs who were killed under the Indians govt's watch by having relation with India.

However, just because a govt is murderous doesnt mean that closing our eyes and pretending they dont exist helps either us or the victims

Edited on, September 15, 2005, 3:18 PM GMT, by Banglatiger84.

[Zobair]

OK this is what I had posted in a Pakistani forum in relation to a discussion on Pakistani and Israel's new relationship. The arguements do not directly address those of this thread, but the issue is very similar. My arguments are constructed from an Islamic perspective.

Ok I am not a Pakistani...but a Bangladeshi...yet the arguments in support of Musharraf's actions are very very similar to those I have heard from Bangladeshis (usually in the context of attending portests against Israeli oppression here in North America).

The arguments are as follows:

1) The Arabs treat us like shyte so why should we care.
2) The Arabs never even raised a single voice of concern or protest when Pakistani forces killed and raped so many Bangali Muslims in 1971 (ironic isn't it?!) , so why should we care?
3) Allah will take care of his religion (what a bogus argument!).



For 3) all I will say is brother/sister you need to go re-introduce yourself to your faith.

For 1) and 2), I will repeat here what I tell them:

1) We often tell non-Muslims not to judge Islam by the practises of the Muslims, the same should apply to us. i.e. we should stand up for justice and truth, and not be tribalist in our approach because that is what true Muslims are. As Muslims our relationship is with Allah first and foremost, and our actions are unaffected by those of others. If you are not convinced ask a Muslim convert.

2) Two wrongs don't make a right. Assume that every Arab on the face of this earth treated a Muslim badly (which is definitely not the case in real life), and never stood up for this Muslim when he needed their support. Yet, Allah and his prophet PBUH require this Muslim to stand up and be just when the shoe is on the other foot. On the face of it, it seems hard but not if you submit your will to Allah, as a Muslim should.

So from an Islamic point of view most of the arguments in this thread are wrong and contradictory.

Musharraf's foreign policy is based on the philosophy of real politik. He is doing what he believes will enhance his country's prospects and protect it against malignant intentions. There is no black or white for him. He is certainly not the first leader to do so in history. Some of the strategy arguements, especially about offsetting India's influence, thus make sense. But Musharraf will have to be very cautious. Because such a strategy is a double-edged sword. Sure Pakistan can now hope that Israel will be less likely to promote subversive activities in Pakistan, and sure Pakistan can voice its concern about Israel's policies through the diplomatic channels but there are draw-backs. First of all, the benefits of protests through diplomatic channels are open to discussion since regardless of what Egypt and Jordan have said, Israel has continued to destroy, kill, oppress Palestians, usurp palestinian lands (Muslims or not, and as Muslims we shouldn't care if it is Justice we are after) on a daily basis. Sooner or later, there will be a showdown over Al-Quds. As Muslims, how can we turn our heads from the second holiest place in Islam? The place from the prophet PBUH ascended to heaven, where our beloved prophet led other prophets in prayers, our first qibla? What will be Pakistan's response? Like some one said, Pakistan is engaging in a policy of give and take. How will Pakistan bite the hand that feeds it weapons (US will be some much more helpful with Israel's blessing as someone pointed out) and money (need I explain how?!), assures its security (counter-balancing India)? How far will Pakistan go? On the evidence of what Egypt and Jordan (two of the biggest Israeli (by proxy) aid recipients) have done, it doesnot look very promising.

I couldn't believe someone actually compared Pakistan's ideological background with Israel's? Do Christians need special permits to build their own houses in Pakistan? Are Christians and Hindu houses demolished on a daily basis on flimsy grounds? Would Pakistan or Pakistanis (excluding mob reaction) condone the demolition of an hindu family home because a member of that house kills Muslims, in a court of law? i.e. collective punishment?! Does Pakistan effectively force a Christian out of the country by refusing to grant residence to their spouse just because they are not from Pakistan? I hope and pray that those who compared Pakistan and Israel's ideological background have no idea as to the extent of daily humiliation and oppression that the state of Israel so cynically metes out to the Palestinian human beings in such cunning doses. I hope they do not know what the philosophy of Zionism is all about. How can a human, let alone Muslims, sit still when they witness such injustice?

But for those who feel a need to justify Musharraf's actions becuase they would rather defend their country's policies and their leader's policies, rather than face up to admitting that this could potentially be a mistake, I can't say much. Tribalism is a primal urge, and it does not take well to opposition from the principles of justice, and rationality.

[al Furqaan]

today the state of israel is "evil" an "apartheid state" etc.

i think that perhaps it is time to recognize israel, not just for bangladesh but for all muslim countries. it is true that israel may remain skepitical and not give us palestine and jerusalem. but you can't really fault them. ever since they came we tried not to talk things out but we reverted to our animilastic nature to keep all the land for ourselves. after all we are the ppl who vowed to "push the jews into the sea."

but we should give full recognition to israel, not because we get benefits from it, but because it is the right thing to do. we muslims, are the best of nations because we "enjoin what is right, and forbid what is evil."

the rasool (SAW) said that if your enemy wants to make peace, then muslims are OBLIGATED to make peace even if you know, or think you know that they are just trying to decieve you.

and who knows maybe in the process the whole palestinian-israeli conflict will be genuinely solved. and we all know this is the heart of the conflict between west and muslims.

[mwrkhan]

This is what I wrote about the issue in another Bangladeshi forum.

Muslims are not a monolithic entity and span different nationalities, ethnicities and cultures. While a lot of platitudes have been uttered with respect to muslim unity and so forth, in reality the whole notion of a greater muslim "ummah" is a myth. One only needs to look at the 20th century history of conflict between muslim majority nations to realize this.

I always had existentialist objections towards Israel. If one accepts that statehood could be formed on the basis of a shared religion alone then by that silly logic there ought to be only five or six super-states in the world corresponding to the great faiths. Anyway, thats another topic. Besides, Israel exists and cannot be deconstructed.

In 1988 the PLO recognized Israel's right to exist (look at Yasser Arafat's speeches). Now, regardless of how much antipathy we may have towards Israel, the fact of the matter is that we are not all Palestinians and don't have to live in Palestine. We are not a direct party to the conflict. Consequently, our duty as supporters of Palestine is to work within the framework set up by the PLO which is the officially recognized Palestinian entity. Since the PLO has recognized Israel, our own intransigence in withholding recognition of Israel becomes a non-sequitur.

Israel has technology and scientific knowledge that dwarves that of most other nations. All Arab states are losers in this regard. Israel is democratic, at least in the conventional sense, whereas most Arab states are totalitarian and corrupt absolute monarchies. We could do a lot better than to emulate Arabs.

Several Arab and muslim majority states have diplomatic relations with Israel. A lot is to be gained out of a relationship with Israel, so why not?

The bottom line is that Israel will eventually form diplomatic relations with all Arab and muslim countries whether we like it or not. It is in our best interest to form relations on our terms now rather than be forced to do so because everyone else has.

[Rubu]

Question: Doesn't having a relation with israel is to say, we do not care about how much brutal injustice you are doing to some other human beings?

Well, as a human being we should. Otherwise, whats the difference between us and a monkey?

[ekatturerBangalee]

Originally posted by Rubu
Question: Doesn't having a relation with israel is to say, we do not care about how much brutal injustice you are doing to some other human beings?

Well, as a human being we should. Otherwise, whats the difference between us and a monkey?

Hahaha- good question but you need to search your soul for the answer, IMHO.

If you talk about injustice and brutality, USA will probably rank at the top. Does that mean we became monkeys since we have relation with the USA?

No question that Israel is a brutal country but Pakis killed millions more than what Israelis did to Palestinians. However, we did have relation with Pakis. Don't we? Why this duplicity? Isn’t it about time that we have peace between Muslims, Christians and Jews? After all, we are all descendant of same Patriarch, Abraham. I have this strong opinion that Govt. of Bangladesh is more concerned on how other Arab Nations and fundamentalist in the country will react if we establish a good diplomatic relation. Israel was one of first country to recognize Bangladesh even before Pakistan and USA. And recognizing Israel doesn't mean one is supporting the occupation.

[imtiaz82]

Originally posted by ekatturerBangalee
Hahaha- good question but you need to search your soul for the answer, IMHO.

If you talk about injustice and brutality, USA will probably rank at the top. Does that mean we became monkeys since we have relation with the USA?

No question that Israel is a brutal country but Pakis killed millions more than what Israelis did to Palestinians. However, we did have relation with Pakis. Don't we? Why this duplicity? Isn’t it about time that we have peace between Muslims, Christians and Jews? After all, we are all descendant of same Patriarch, Abraham. I have this strong opinion that Govt. of Bangladesh is more concerned on how other Arab Nations and fundamentalist in the country will react if we establish a good diplomatic relation. Israel was one of first country to recognize Bangladesh even before Pakistan and USA. And recognizing Israel doesn't mean one is supporting the occupation.

What the Pakistanis did is history. They are not commiting any crimes right now. If they were doing what the Israelis are doing to Palestanians right now to some other people(afghanis/Iranians) ofcourse we would not have any relationship with them. It's like severing ties with Germany for what Hitler did!!

If Israel stop their atrocities against Palestanians, we should for sure extend our hand of friendship. ( just because they are Jews, doesn't mean we cannot have friendly relationship with them, even during Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)'s time there was trade between muslims and jews).

Lastly, if having good diplomatic ties with a country does not mean supporting the country's policies, then why did the whole world severe ties South Africa during the apartheid period?

[Banglatiger84]

i agree what Pakistan did is history, even though it hurts to see many of them in a permanent state of denial about 1971.

But i wouldnt fully agree about them not commiting any crimes. The ISI is generally ruthless and makes no qualms over the fact that they murder innocents and will create mayhem in india and afghanistan for their self-interest.
That also explains their somewhat carefree attiude to 1971, to them its just a statistic and they would have happily killed 3 million more if it helped pakistan. Pakistani govt officials are on record saying that indian muslims are bound to suffer as a "price to pay" for Pakistan.

Also, i get the vibe that quite a few in the pakistani govt covertly support an usa attack on iran, why? because they dont want another nuclear power on their border.




Also, what about the US now, and irak in the 80s, we sure had ok relations with that dictator.

dont forget russia, which has definitely killed more far muslims than israel, what about Thailand, where hundreds of muslims were suffocated after being piling up in trucks, and the PM went out of his way to defend this?

the idea is that oppression against other muslims should simply not be a criterion for having diplomatic exchanges, albeit it should be for having "good" relations.
as for fundos reacting, well if we are always concerned about their reaction, then we would have had to support diktators like sadam, and justify rajakars.

The crux is that we should what is islamically and morally right, and overall helpful for Bangladesh.

and no, ur average semi-literate mullah is not the right one to decide what is islamically right.

then again, it would be best to steer clear of them when sharon or bibi is in charge. If and when they move to a more moderate peres-like govt., exchanges will be more feasible.

Edited on, September 16, 2005, 7:24 AM GMT, by Banglatiger84.

[Rubu]

ekatturerBangalee, true. we should not have duplicacy. should not have relation with pakistan. mind it, they did not even said sorry for once for what they did. do they feel sorry, i doubt it. there are many other countries too. ideally, we should treat them same way. but that is not possible in many cases because we depend on many other countries. off those countries, we do not depend on, and in case we do, we have an alternate country to choose from, we should not have a relation. btw, this has nothing to do with religion, in case someone try to take it in that direction.

[Dream theater]

Originally posted by ekatturerBangalee

Hahaha- good question but you need to search your soul for the answer, IMHO.

If you talk about injustice and brutality, USA will probably rank at the top. Does that mean we became monkeys since we have relation with the USA?

No question that Israel is a brutal country but Pakis killed millions more than what Israelis did to Palestinians. However, we did have relation with Pakis. Don't we? Why this duplicity? Isn’t it about time that we have peace between Muslims, Christians and Jews? After all, we are all descendant of same Patriarch, Abraham. I have this strong opinion that Govt. of Bangladesh is more concerned on how other Arab Nations and fundamentalist in the country will react if we establish a good diplomatic relation. Israel was one of first country to recognize Bangladesh even before Pakistan and USA. And recognizing Israel doesn't mean one is supporting the occupation.

Yeah in the same light India did and still kills Bangladeshis nationals in the border area, India does do massacare kashmiris, do carnage in Gujrat? Dont we have relationship with India? We do.

And recognising Israel does mean endorsing what they stand for. Killinf, OCCUPYING for 35+ years , oppressing are the things Israel stands for so far.

the thing about the past is you have to move on sometimes. Like Japan did about Hiroshima and nagashaki, Vietnam did about USA and many others. You have to do that for the better interest of your country. germany did about USA. Look where they are now.

Pakistan said sorry. Did they mean it ? Only they can tell. we have to see whether relation with them serve our purpose or not. If they did goody. We should and keep the relation in tact.

You should broaden up your world view. It does not revolve around Pakistan or their massacare of Bangladeshis. What they did was the biggest crime against humanity.No doubt about that. But a lot has changed since then.

Since you are so sensitive about our country's interest concentrate more on whats really important for us. Like feeding millions who cant do it themselves, millions who does not have health coverage. I am sure our freedom fighters did dream about that day.

[imtiaz82]

Originally posted by Banglatiger84
i agree what Pakistan did is history, even though it hurts to see many of them in a permanent state of denial about 1971.

But i wouldnt fully agree about them not commiting any crimes. The ISI is generally ruthless and makes no qualms over the fact that they murder innocents and will create mayhem in india and afghanistan for their self-interest.
That also explains their somewhat carefree attiude to 1971, to them its just a statistic and they would have happily killed 3 million more if it helped pakistan. Pakistani govt officials are on record saying that indian muslims are bound to suffer as a "price to pay" for Pakistan.

Also, i get the vibe that quite a few in the pakistani govt covertly support an usa attack on iran, why? because they dont want another nuclear power on their border.

I did not know that ISI openly declares that the kill innocent Indians. Every country acts in their self interest, Indians are doing the same in Bangladesh/Nepal, Us all over the world. No reason to single out Pakistan for that matter.

Some quotes by some govt officials cannot be taken as a valid reason to blame a whole country. In that case, the Bangladeshi and Indian politicians go much further than that. Some of the BJP politicians supported the act of the hindu fundamentalists in Gujrat incident..

I do not know much about Pakistani govt's secret plot against Iran. Anyways, these secret plans of a country cannot be used to judge anything. Some Bangladeshi govt officials might be secretely planning on killing hundreds of people in Chittagong Hilltract or maybe exporting "terrorists" to destablize Indian NE region. Who knows!

Also, what about the US now, and irak in the 80s, we sure had ok relations with that dictator.

dont forget russia, which has definitely killed more far muslims than israel, what about Thailand, where hundreds of muslims were suffocated after being piling up in trucks, and the PM went out of his way to defend this?

the idea is that oppression against other muslims should simply not be a criterion for having diplomatic exchanges, albeit it should be for having "good" relations.
as for fundos reacting, well if we are always concerned about their reaction, then we would have had to support diktators like sadam, and justify rajakars.

The crux is that we should what is islamically and morally right, and overall helpful for Bangladesh.

and no, ur average semi-literate mullah is not the right one to decide what is islamically right.

then again, it would be best to steer clear of them when sharon or bibi is in charge. If and when they move to a more moderate peres-like govt., exchanges will be more feasible.

No matter what we are saying here, the matter of Israel does come down to Jerusalem(the second most holiest place in Islam) along with the oppression of Palestanians.. There is thousands of years of history related to this.. A symbolic place for all muslims. Other than Turkey, I think no muslim country have any ties with Israel. A rare sign of unity among muslim nations regarding an issue!

Aside from the religious aspect, if we look at the economic side. It makes sense for us to continue having relationship with US and India(inspite of their actions in Iraq, Kashmir, Gujrat) as our export are heavily relied on them. Infact most of the raw materials for our industries come from India. Having diplomatic ties with Israel will mean worsening relationship with oil rich middle eastern countries like Saudi, Uae etc. I wonder if it is worth it to give up frienship with those countries(from where we get billions of dollar in remittance and financial aid every yr) in exchange of ties with Israel.

[oracle]

Other than Turkey, I think no muslim country have any ties with Israel. A rare sign of unity among muslim nations regarding an issue

not sure, and Mauritania definetely.

Also, Egypt and Jordan, who are pretty close to recognizing Israel. To me the only time I see genuine muslim unity is during haj.

[Dream theater]

Originally posted by oracle

not sure, and Mauritania definetely.

Also, Egypt and Jordan, who are pretty close to recognizing Israel. To me the only time I see genuine muslim unity is during haj.

Egypt, Jordan, Turkey have direct diplomatic relationship. I think I am missing one more country.

[Banglatiger84]

About countries acting in self-interest, I agree that everyone does the same. However, only a few countries self-interest involves bombing and attacking innocents. Pakistan is one of such countries. India, Russia, US, and israel are others.

Here i spoke about pakistan just to show that even though 1971 is history, their military and intelligence do have a propensity towards callous violence. That said, I am not making a point in favor of India. Both India and Pakistan have lost a lot by being obsessed with each other.



Our Gulf workers remit from their salaries. They are not receiving charity in the Gulf countries.

The main issue wrt Bangladesh should be Palestinian refugees and the status of Al Aqsa. The question is whether our policy of pretending israel doesnt exist will help either of these two issues?

[imtiaz82]

Originally posted by Banglatiger84

Our Gulf workers remit from their salaries. They are not receiving charity in the Gulf countries.

The main issue wrt Bangladesh should be Palestinian refugees and the status of Al Aqsa. The question is whether our policy of pretending israel doesnt exist will help either of these two issues?

Yes that's true. But the Arab countries can always move to other workers from Srilanka,Phillippines or African countries, if their relationship with Bangladesh gets sore. We are already facing hard time in Malaysia, South Korea, Brunei etc, are we willing to take more risk?

I agree that the 2 issues are more important(from an Islamic and moral standpoint) than the economic benefit of going with the policies of the Arabs. But the success of the current viewpoint on Israel, depends on the unity of all the muslim countries. If all the muslim countries(including Turkey, Jordan, Egypt) takes the same stance of not recognizing Israel till the issue is solved, I think it does help the cause. But if Bangladesh is the only muslim country, taking this stance, there is not much use of it.

The same can be said about all the other problems muslims are facing all over the world. Be it Kashmir, Chechnya, Southern Thailand or Phillipines. If all the 57 muslim countries take a united stand, it is possible to solve the issues. But unfortunately we are not united, arabs only care about Palestine and do not think much about the suffereings of the people in Niger, Bangladesh or Kashmir. SImilarly, Pakistanis only care for the Kashmir issue and nothing else..

Considering the current state of affairs of the muslim nations, Bangladesh having diplomatic ties with Israel or not makes no difference atall to the plight of the palestanians. The only thing is, we might risk the lucrative man power export to Gulf countries as a result of this. I do not see much economic benefit by having diplomatic relationship with Isreal. They are not a major importer or exporter of any of the product Bangladesh produces or needs..

Edited on, September 16, 2005, 7:19 PM GMT, by nayeem007.

[Banglatiger84]

Arab countries will not consider relations with israel as a factor in determining whether to get labor from us or not.
What they prefer is generally cheap labor. And also, they try not to let any one community becoming too large, which is somewhat understandable

As a result, Sri lankans and filipinos are preferred over bengalis and indians even now, regardless of the non-existence of diplomatic relations.
Also as far as i have heard, even though i may be wrong, is that our workers faced problems in malaysia because of violence, unionism, and marrying malaysian women for passports and subsequently dumping them. The onus is on us to prove ourselves capable workers.

I agree there are no real benefits to starting anything with israel now. My point is that we should chalk out a plan to start relations that can be implemented in the future, when the benefits outweigh the risks, and that theres no real benefit in forever having an ostrich mentaliy vis a vis israel's existence.

Maybe GOB does have such a plan, but feels it wise to keep the lid on for the near future.

[Dream theater]

Originally posted by Banglatiger84
Arab countries will not consider relations with israel as a factor in determining whether to get labor from us or not.
What they prefer is generally cheap labor. And also, they try not to let any one community becoming too large, which is somewhat understandable

Actually It will effect the prospect of FDI in Bangladesh. Some Arab countries in the recent months have shown interest in doing that. We can not afford to loose that and whatever is gonna come in the future.

having a relation with Israel serves no purpose at this point. Every Muslim country Arab or non-Arab will consider having relationship given that Palestinian issue is resolved.

[VladMamu]

yes. What good does it do to not recognize what is. What good does it do to have no relations or dialogue with the one you are having a problem with. Have sanctions, and ignoring cuba helped? No, it is the last remaining communist power, right near the USA. Ironically, the very country they took the hardest stance on due to it being geographically close to them, still has the same politcal government. It didn't work. Time to recognize what is. Cuba and castro and Israel. P.S. I don't know much about Israel at all, but I know they exist, and millions live there, so how can someone say that that is not so?

Edited on, September 16, 2005, 8:25 PM GMT, by whiteguy.

[imtiaz82]

Originally posted by whiteguy
yes. What good does it do to not recognize what is. What good does it do to have no relations or dialogue with the one you are having a problem with. Have sanctions, and ignoring cuba helped? No, it is the last remaining communist power, right near the USA. Ironically, the very country they took the hardest stance on due to it being geographically close to them, still has the same politcal government. It didn't work. Time to recognize what is. Cuba and castro and Israel. P.S. I don't know much about Israel at all, but I know they exist, and millions live there, so how can someone say that that is not so?

Edited on, September 16, 2005, 8:25 PM GMT, by whiteguy.

I think recognizing Cuba and Israel is not the same thing. Cuba is just a communist nation with a dictator, they haven't forced into some other country and claimed that land to be theirs.

It's like Bangladeshi army taking over Nepal(just an example) and start killing the Nepalese people and putting them in specific housing societies. Will the world recognize Nepal as a part of Bangladesh. I bet many countries will severe diplomatic relationship with Bangladesh unless the troops are moved out of there.

I don't understand why all the western powers are complaining so much about muslims not recognizing the state of Israel. After the first world war, Britain and the other powers had to come up with such a sensitive place to put in all the Jews!!( i.e the Balfour Declaration of 1917 when the British endorsed a Jewish homeland in Palestine).

After the second world war, none of the European countries accepted the Jews and they had to flee all the way to Palestine for safety.The liberal minded western socities, should have accepted the Jews in their own countries.

Edited on, September 17, 2005, 5:57 AM GMT, by nayeem007.

[ekatturerBangalee]

Originally posted by nayeem007
What the Pakistanis did is history.

“Kill three million of them and rest will eat out of our hands – President Yahya Khan (Death by Government- R. J. Rummel)”

How can I forget the sacrifice of the millions?
How can I forget raping of nearly quarter million Bengali women and girls by the Pakis?
How can I forget the night when Paki Army attacked the Dhaka University with four M-2 Tanks and shelled student dorms at close range, killing almost all the male/female students?
How can I forget that chilling incident when students who survived until the morning were forced to dig mass graves for the dead and then themselves were lined up and shot?
How can I forget 32 leading professors and department heads were murdered for no reason but being Bengalis in next two days?
How can I forget all those simple Bengalis without a name, address or occupation were indiscriminately shot or bayoneted in the streets?

Overall, in the first days of slaughter in Dhaka, as many as 50,000 (Muhith, 1978) were killed. If we take the lower estimate of 10,000 as the number burned to death or shot in clod blood in Dhaka, this alone would make it an incredible, premeditated act of mass murder.

Please tell me, how can I forget the past? I exist as a Bangladeshi today because of their sacrifice. I exist today because of the spontaneous outburst of anger, spouting venom and supreme sacrifice of the millions.