The Moroccan Wall...

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-12-19 08:26pm

Linka

The Moroccan Wall, dubbed by the Sahrawis The Wall of Shame, is a 2,500km-long system of defensive walls, known as berms: sand walls about three meters in height with bunkers, fences and landmines, running mainly through the Morocco-occupied Western Sahara. A minor section is located in southeastern Morocco.

The barrier is longer than the Israeli West Bank barrier and the Berlin Wall. It was gradually built from 1983 to keep the guerrilla fighters of Polisario out of Morocco and the economically interesting two-thirds of the Western Sahara. Effectively, Polisario controls all areas to the east of the barrier; however, these areas are mostly uninhabited.

Many Sahrawis live on both sides of the barrier, including a large number of Sahrawi refugees in Tindouf, Algeria. Since, at many places, the barrier is a double one, with a significant distance between the two halves, many Sahrawis are forced to live in this no-man's-land with constraints on mobility and accessibility.
[edit]

International reaction

Western attention to the Moroccan Wall, and the Moroccan annexation of the Western Sahara in general, has been minimal, apart from Western Sahara's ex-colonizer Spain. Once a year, a small demonstration is held against the barrier, with the participation of few – mainly Italian – human rights activists.

In Africa, the occupation has attracted somewhat more attention: Algeria, which for a long time effectively used the Polisario to wage a proxy war against Morocco (partly in revenge for Morocco's attack on Algeria in September-November 1963) continues to support the Polisario, and the Organization of African Unity/African Union and United Nations have repeatedly proposed negotiated solutions.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-12-19 08:37pm

That's how long it is.

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2004-12-19 10:14pm

It is only a horrible crime if the US or Israel is involved, you should know that by now.

Murazor · Post by **Murazor** » 2004-12-20 04:56am

Not news. The Polisario was fucked the nanosecond Morocco launched an invasion of Western Sahara with two hundred thousand civilians. Now the best they can hope to achieve is some kind of poor autonomy within Morocco.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-12-20 02:36pm

CJvR wrote:It is only a horrible crime if the US or Israel is involved, you should know that by now.

Indeed it would be. Just like the 'Peace Lines' in Belfast are perfectly acceptable because they are British built.

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2004-12-20 05:18pm

Sea Skimmer wrote: Indeed it would be. Just like the 'Peace Lines' in Belfast are perfectly acceptable because they are British built.

Those peace lines would be built on British territory, the other two examples are built on what is argued to be somebody else’s territory.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-12-20 05:46pm

Dear God, I've taken part in effects to build berms. It can get near back breaking, the sheer amount of labor needed to build this wall... *glibbers*

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-12-20 07:40pm

CJvR wrote:It is only a horrible crime if the US or Israel is involved, you should know that by now.

That's so right all those anti-Semitic, anti-American bastards at Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B'Tselem and so forth only care about human-rights violations committed by Israel and the poor persecuted US.

I mean it's not as if Amnesty has 64 Documents currently posted on it's web site about Human Rights abuses in Morocco and Western Sahara or anything. Or criticises the crimes of Palestinian militants against Israeli civilians.

It's not as if B'Tselem documents and condemns Attacks on Israeli Civilians by Palestinians or violations of Human Rights by the Palestinian Authority.

Those so called “human rights” workers are clearly prejudiced bastard who have it in for Israel and the US and should hang their heads in shame

Sea Skimmer wrote:Indeed it would be. Just like the 'Peace Lines' in Belfast are perfectly acceptable because they are British built.

Damn right, the walls the UK Gov reluctantly built to try and limit sectarian violence in Northern Ireland (entirely on sovereign British territory) are just as worthy as condemnation as the imperialistic land grabs of the Israeli and Moroccan states I'm just amazed I never saw that before

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-12-20 11:52pm

TheDarkling wrote:Those peace lines would be built on British territory, the other two examples are built on what is argued to be somebody else’s territory.

So I guess it would be okay with y'all if the US decided to build a series
of giant walls dubbed "Anti-Ghetto" walls around the inner cities of America?

After all, it's American territory after all, and we wouldn't be losing much

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-12-21 12:25am

MKSheppard wrote:
TheDarkling wrote:Those peace lines would be built on British territory, the other two examples are built on what is argued to be somebody else’s territory.
So I guess it would be okay with y'all if the US decided to build a series
of giant walls dubbed "Anti-Ghetto" walls around the inner cities of America?

After all, it's American territory after all, and we wouldn't be losing much

Absolutely because “giant walls” encircling entire city centres, collectively punishing millions of people are the moral equivalent of the so called “peace lines” which range between a few hundred metres to over 3 miles in length which serve to keep to keep the warring nutters belonging to two sectarian groups apart during the hours of darkness

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-12-21 12:32am

Plekhanov wrote:Absolutely because “giant walls” encircling entire city centres, collectively punishing millions of people are the moral equivalent of the so called “peace lines” which range between a few hundred metres to over 3 miles in length which serve to keep to keep the warring nutters belonging to two sectarian groups apart during the hours of darkness

Why, as you put it that way, yes.

Because we need to keep the warring nutters who inhabit the inner cities
out of the rest of America during the hours of darkness.

I love playing devil's advocate

TheDarkling · Post by **TheDarkling** » 2004-12-21 05:43am

MKSheppard wrote: So I guess it would be okay with y'all if the US decided to build a series
of giant walls dubbed "Anti-Ghetto" walls around the inner cities of America?

For what purpose?
I don't see the inner cities across America raising up and attacking those outside the inner city on a regular basis, nor do I see much happening in the other direction.

Those peace lines are there to keep both sides in Northern Ireland from killing each other during the night when it is more difficult for the army to keep them from each others throats.

After all, it's American territory after all, and we wouldn't be losing much

No I don't suppose you would, but I still fail to see the justification for such a wall matching those for the same in Northern Ireland.