View Full Version : America's irreplaceable ally
Gawain of Orkeny
06-18-2005, 07:41
America's irreplaceable ally
Caroline B. Glick (archive)
June 18, 2005 | printer friendly version Print | email to a friend Send
In an in-depth article entitled "How we would fight China" published in the June issue of The Atlantic Monthly, military correspondent Robert D. Kaplan analyzes the encroaching specter of a cold war between the US and China. He also sets out the strategies and tactics that the US military's Pacific Command is constructing to contend with the emerging reality.
In his words, "the center of gravity of American strategic concern is already the Pacific, not the Middle East." From the US military's perspective, "the current epoch of Middle Eastern conflict... will start to wind down during the second Bush administration."
Kaplan quotes a US Marine general in the Pacific Command who explains that the nascent US strategy for dealing with China will be based on multilateral military cooperation, or as he put it bluntly, it will be "military multilateralism on steroids." As its Atlantic alliances with NATO countries are breaking down in the face European rejection of America's decision to fight Islamic imperialism rather than appease it, the US is quietly building deep military alliances with countries such as Singapore, India, Australia, Japan and Thailand, which will all play key roles in containing China in the coming cold war in the Pacific.
Kaplan notes that one of the US's Achilles' heels in building this alliance structure is the technological gap between the US military and these crucial allies in the Pacific. As he writes, "Getting militarily so far ahead of everyone else in the world creates a particular kind of loneliness that not even the best diplomats can always alleviate, because diplomacy itself is worthless if it's not rooted in realistic assessments of comparative power."
Kaplan's report points to a strategic reality that US policymakers in Washington seem intent on ignoring. Israel's military sales and strategic military ties to linchpin states in the Pacific, like Singapore and India, have made it possible for these states today to center so prominently in American long-term strategic planning for its emerging cold war with China.
Israel was the first state to offer military assistance to Singapore, back in 1965 when that tiny island nation's entire military amounted to one battalion. For the next 10 years Israel was the only state assisting the Singaporeans, who one US military official interviewed by Kaplan referred to today as "just awesome in every way."
Israeli military officials involved in strategic cooperation with Singapore explain that the relationship has advanced to the point where most of the arms sales take the form of joint military ventures. Israel sells Singapore weapons systems that are tailor-made for its needs, and Singapore finances much of the research and development of these systems. Until it was outpaced by India, Singapore was the Israeli military industries' largest client. Sales range from hundreds of millions to billions of dollars per year.
While military cooperation with India has only become prominent in recent years, Israel was assisting India militarily as early as the 1960s, during its war with Pakistan. Today, between multi-billion dollar annual military sales and joint training exercises, Israel's strategic importance for the modernization of the Indian military is undeniable.
In cultivating its relationships with countries like Singapore and India, Israel's defense planners have followed a clear rationale that fuses commercial and strategic concerns. On the one hand, for Israel to maintain its military superiority over the Arabs, it must have a cutting-edge arms industry. For the industry to remain state-of-the-art, Israel must develop export markets to make its research, development and production costs manageable and sustainable. On the other hand, Israel has a strategic, long-term interest in developing ties with countries like India and Singapore, which share similar threats and concerns, because at the end of the day, these states form natural alliances with Israel.
Today, rather than thank Israel and India and Singapore for their forward thinking, whose importance to the US is unquestionable, the US is punishing them. This week it was reported that following Israel's misguided sale of Harpy aerial drones to China, Washington is now demanding control over its weapons exports to India and Singapore.
There can be no doubt that Israel's decision to sell advanced weapons systems to China was strategically blind. China does not only threaten US interests. Through its missile sales to Iran and Saudi Arabia, it also threatens Israel's national security interests. In the wake of US wrath over the Harpy deal, Israel has corrected its behavior and agreed not to sell weapons systems to China in the future.
It is more than possible that the US attempt to take away Israel's independence in developing its exports markets is simply an attempt to hitch a ride on the current crisis with China to advance the interests of US weapons manufacturers, who have trouble competing with their Israeli counterparts. Yet in so acting, not only is the US harming its relations with Israel and damaging Israel's reputation internationally, it is also insulting Singapore and India by acting as though there is something wrong with these US allies' acquisition of advanced weapons systems.
In comparing the ease of crafting a strategy for contending with China to the difficulty of formulating policy on the Middle East, Kaplan makes one of the most common American mistakes in characterizing the constraints on their actions in the Arab world. Kaplan writes, "Our actions in the Pacific will not be swayed by the equivalent of the Israel lobby; Protestant evangelicals will care less about the Pacific Rim than about the fate of the Holy Land."
Yet what Israel's cultivation of its own bilateral strategic ties with countries like Singapore and India shows is that when Israel is behaving in a strategically responsible way, it is also advancing America's strategic interests. This is the case because, at the end of the day, the two countries share the same enemies and therefore are drawn to the same potential allies.
That is, the foundation of the US-Israel alliance is not American altruism or domestic political pressure to save God's Chosen People from destruction. The rationale behind the US-Israel alliance is the fact that Israel is a strong, self-sufficient democracy whose strength and stability, both locally and globally, enhance US national security.
When, as happened this week, Palestinian Authority cabinet ministers insanely announce that Israel is trying to poison the Palestinians by selling them cancer-causing juices, there should be no place for doubt as to who America's ally is in the Middle East. Indeed, the levels of cultural anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism in Palestinian society and the Arab world should make it absolutely clear to Washington that a strong Israel is a national security necessity.
Yet, in the Americans' haste this week to humiliate Israel and emasculate its arms industry, even at the expense of its other allies, we see a disturbing indication that as the Bush administration slogs through its second term, it is intent on ignoring the strategic realities of the region and indeed of the global strategic environment, preferring instead to try to appease the Arabs and the Europeans at Israel's expense in the hopes of receiving their cooperation in the future.
This latest American move was not carried out in a vacuum. It comes against of backdrop of a disconcerting pattern of behavior by the administration that leads inexorably to the devastating conclusion that the US is moving to abandon its alliance with Israel. The publication of the federal indictment against former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin this week is case in point.
From a perusal of the charges against Franklin, the following picture emerges: Franklin, a hawk on Iran's nuclear weapons program, sought to bring his views to the attention of decision-makers. In so doing, he did what countless Washington policy analysts do on a daily basis. He sought to build a coalition with like-minded thinkers outside the government.
According to the indictment, Franklin passed no significant classified information to AIPAC officials or to Naor Gillon at the Israeli embassy. He received no compensation for his relationships with them. All he did was talk about Iran with people who share his concerns in the hope that they could – through their official dealings with administration officials – advance his views.
Franklin's one crime, it would seem, was his unquestioning view of Israel as a strategic ally of the US at a time when powerful circles in Washington are trying to disengage from this alliance. Had he conducted identical conversations with British diplomats or pro-Japanese lobbyists, there is little doubt that he would still be sitting behind his desk at the Pentagon.
Franklin has pleaded innocent to all charges submitted against him. His trial is set to start on September 6. To a degree, what will really be on trial will be the question of whether the US does or does not view Israel as its ally.
And so the question necessarily arises: If the Bush administration is planning to abandon Israel, who does it think will replace it? Egypt, an economic basket-case run by a dictator who galvanizes popular support by cultivating societal hatred of America? Saudi Arabia, which is now pushing a policy with the International Atomic Energy Agency that will allow it to accumulate small quantities of uranium and plutonium which it could easily transfer to terrorist organizations for the purpose of attacking the US?
Israel was wrong to sell weapons systems to China. But the damage done to US national security interests has been effectively brought under control. The damage that the US's increasingly hostile position toward Israel is doing to US national security interests will not be so easily contained. The positive consequences for America of its alliance with a strong and secure Israel are enormous and unique. The negative consequences of an abandonment of Israel will be equally vast.
Why would Singapore or India or any other US ally trust an America that would abandon Israel? And how will the US be more secure if it increases its dependence on Arab regimes that are inherently hostile to it and everything it stands for?
I doubt Bush will abandon Israel.
Tribesman
06-18-2005, 10:18
I doubt Bush will abandon Israel.
I agree , no matter how many spies are caught , how much US technology is stolen , how many secret WMD programs it has , how much weaponry it sells to countries that he considers a threat to America , how much money it costs tax payers to prop up the State he will never abandon Israel .
The rationale behind the US-Israel alliance is the fact that Israel is a strong, self-sufficient democracy whose strength and stability, both locally and globally, enhance US national security. ~D ~D ~D
Is Caroline on drugs or something ? It seems she must be because she writes
Egypt, an economic basket-case run by a dictator who galvanizes popular support by cultivating societal hatred of America? Saudi Arabia, which is now pushing a policy with the International Atomic Energy Agency that will allow it to accumulate small quantities of uranium and plutonium which it could easily transfer to terrorist organizations for the purpose of attacking the US?
But they are your allies and you help prop up their rulers . ~;)
"“Every time we do something, you [Shimon Peres] tell me America will do this and will do that... I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.”"
Ariel Sharon
"“Every time we do something, you [Shimon Peres] tell me America will do this and will do that... I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.”"
Ariel Sharon
I also used that quote here, but I had to take it back because there is no evidence that he really said that.
America is Israel's friend, but I am not so sure about the other way around. Use and abuse.
America is Israel's friend.
America is Israel's bitch.
America is Israel's bitch.
That is what I said ~;) I don't understand america's dedication, Israel didn't mind sinking one of their ships or buldozering their citizens. The jewish lobby is either very strong in America or americans are fools, and I don't think americans are fools.
The Jewish lobby in the US is second only to the gun lobby. No other country on Earth can manipulate the US as well as Israel. Even Americans cannot manipulate America as well as Israel can.
One day, I swear...
"I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United Sates and Israel."
Ser Clegane
06-18-2005, 11:31
Hmm ... the "Jewish lobby" - an argument that is brought forward very often.
If there really is such a powerful "Jewish lobby" - does anybody know what it actually would be based on?
According to the CIA World Factbook Jewish and Muslim people each account for ca. 1% of the US population - so voting power does not seem to be the issue here.
Is it the "Jewish capital" and its economic power in the US?
I do not have any numbers here but it seems that Arab investors hold quite a significant share in the US economy - adding to that there is the dependency of the US economy on oil from muslim countries.
I would like to understand what exactly the often mentioned "Jewish lobby" is based on in the US - if there is one - I, quite frankly, do not really know ... it just sometimes seems to have a little bit of an "urban lengend" character.
edyzmedieval
06-18-2005, 11:36
America's irreplaceable ally:
Romania ~D
it just sometimes seems to have a little bit of an "urban lengend" character.
That I have to agree with.
The Jewish lobby in the US is second only to the gun lobby. No other country on Earth can manipulate the US as well as Israel. Even Americans cannot manipulate America as well as Israel can.
Hmm, really? I thought it was the fundamentalist Christian zealots who were supposed to be running everything in the US, but now we're being run by the Jews.... Im so confused. :dizzy2:
Hmm, really? I thought it was the fundamentalist Christian zealots who were supposed to be running everything in the US, but now we're being run by the Jews.... Im so confused. :dizzy2:
fundamentalist christian zealots support the state of israel.....
am i wrong or doesn´t it say somewere in the bible that if at the end of the world the state of israel must be in existante or no one is getting into heaven?...i saw a documentary about this source of support some time ago....but can´t remembber the source.....it was stated that the christian right wing were big supporters of israel´s position in the states..
fundamentalist christian zealots support the state of israel.....
am i wrong or doesn´t it say somewere in the bible that if at the end of the world the state of israel isn´t in existante no one is getting into heaven?...i saw a documentary about this source of support some time ago....but can´t remembber the source.....it was stated that the christian right wing were big supporters of israel´s position in the states..
When the country of Israel is established the messias will come and he will convert all jews to christianity, no kidding ~D
it is a reborn christian thing.
When the country of Israel is established the messias will come and he will convert all jews to christianity, no kidding ~D
it is a reborn christian thing.
uhmm......born again christian´s.....
i´m somewhat familiar with the fenomenon.....that´s like.....extra strenght crazy right? ~D
Ok, I think I get it now... the fundamentalist Christians who run the US are in cahoots with the Jews and are their "bitch" because they believe that state of Israel is necessary for their salvation.
It's all so perfect, yet so insiduous.... :book:
uhmm......born again christian´s.....
i´m somewhat familiar with the fenomenon.....that´s like.....extra strenght crazy right? ~D
Born again christian is a strange thing, they want to get back inside but reject oral sex! Head first gentlemen, it takes a lot of effort to be reborn.
Hurin_Rules
06-18-2005, 15:43
Christian interpretations of the bible do indeed state that the conversion of the Jews to Christianity will mark the onset of the last days and final judgement. In the Middle Ages, popes protected Jews, and one of the reasons was that they believed that if there were no Jews around, the prophesies of the last days could not be achieved. This belief continued in an unbroken line into modern times. It was still around when Cromwell decided to let some Jews back into England, and it is still around in many evangelical denominations today.
Is the whole Jewish cabbal thing exaggerated by Arab media? Surely. But Jews and Israel do have power in America disproportionate to their population. For one, the Jews in America tend to be far wealthier than their Arab counterparts, even when the odd oil-rich sheik is included, and far more prominent in the civil service and public interest organizations. Second, powerful Jewish lobby groups like Bnai Brith combine with disproportionate Jewish representation in the Film, television, newspaper and other forms of media:
http://www.ihr.org/leaflets/jewishlobby.shtml
So no, there is no single, all-powerful 'Jewish lobby,' but Jews do have a degree of influence on American media far out of proportion to their population. Combine this with the religious views of the evangelicals and the US military's strategic alliance with Israel, and you have a nation of Israel that has much more power over the USA than one would expect.
China can't attack America. It's entire economy relies on exports to the US and the rest of the world, and none of its 'allies' are going to help it if the US attacks are they?
Plus the country would fall apart if the leadership was distracted with a war. The distant parts would rebel and it'd just become a messy civil war again.
Who cares about the so-called Jewish lobby. You'd think they all had a group mind and acted as one by the way it's described.
Taffy_is_a_Taff
06-18-2005, 23:35
they act as one because it's all being directed by a massive conspiracy.
It's all outlined in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion".
Or Jews are actually bees in disguise.
PanzerJaeger
06-19-2005, 00:20
"“Every time we do something, you [Shimon Peres] tell me America will do this and will do that... I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.”"
Ariel Sharon
Could you give the time and place where he said that and to whom he said it?
sharrukin
06-19-2005, 00:38
This is all I could find on it.
"The quote is attributed to Kol Israel radio. Attributed by the Independent Palestinian Information Network and it seems to come from a press release from the pro-Hamas group, the IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine).
In a May 10, 2002 column ("Now Isn't the Time for Bush League Moves"), nationally-syndicated columnist Georgie Anne Geyer included these allegations against Prime Minister Sharon and Israel's supporters in America.
Finally, Geyer's syndicate disseminated the following Editor's Note which appeared on June 14 in the Chicago Tribune and Sarasota Herald Tribune and will likely be published by other papers that ran Geyer's May 10 column."
Editor's note: Georgie Anne Geyer's May 10 column included a quote from Ariel Sharon, 'I control America.' This quote was widely reported in the Palestinian press but cannot be confirmed in independent sources. Geyer and Universal Press Syndicate regret not having attributed the quote more specifically.
"Extensive Nexis and Internet searches have found that no mainstream news organization reported as true the fabricated quotation.
Kol Yisrael confirmed that no such broadcast occurred."
This is somewhat paraphrased.
MWHAHAHAH
You'd better watch out Bireit the Vaste jewish conspiracy is now out to get you!!!
Next we may even babtise your children!!
Better get together another progrom soon or who knows what we devil worshipers will get up to!
PanzerJaeger
06-19-2005, 07:38
Figures.. Check your sources before posting palestinian propaganda please!
Hmmm, I could have been mistaken. :embarassed: Seems he might have said "We control America" as opposed to "We the Jewish people control America."
I regret my possible error and say that I feel much better about him now. I feel like giving him a big hug to celebrate his humanitarianism. Really-really. :love:
Mind you, given Sharon's history of directly participating in the killing of women and children, I have to admit to not feeling that bad about painting an ever so slightly skewed portrait of him.
Don Corleone
06-19-2005, 13:18
There's no suggestion, from any independent verification, that he said any such thing: that Israel controls America or that he personally controls America. Beirut, one of these days you're going to have to learn that while hyperbole can be a useful tool in particular situations, employing it into your coherent view makes your coherent view unpalatable and you lose fence sitters who might have agreed with you.
As far as America being Israel's bitch, well, yes, it is certainly a one-sided love affair. But what do they really have to offer? It would be nice if they didn't steal US state secrets we decided not to share with them, but as there's very few of our allies, Israel included, that we do not spy on, it would be a bit hypocritical to cry foul too loud.
What DOES anger me in these situations is when they attempt to dictate to us how to deal with American citizens caught collaborating. Johnathan Pollard committed multiple counts of treason. The fact that he did it to aid an ally and not an enemy is why he should be incarcerated for the rest of his natural life (as opposed to facing a firing squad). When Laura Bush went over there last month, and the ever so grateful Israeli's booed and protested her over Pollard, that DID make my blood boil. How we treat Pollard is none of their
F%#@&NG business :furious3: and it implies we have no right to sovereignty when they take their interest in Mr. Pollard to that level. Mrs. Bush should have promptly called her trip short and told Sharon "When you're ready to treat me like the first lady of the United States, I will consider returning". Shame on her and her husband for disrespecting the office by laying down and 'taking it with a smile'.
Also, as long as Israel continues to sell our weapons systems to China, they need to be placed under technology control. I don't think Singapore, Japan, South Korea or India are particularly pleased with this new development, or the United State's decision to turn a blind eye to it. Either Bush has decided that China is not a strategic threat, or Israel wields entirely too much power within this administration. There's no 3rd alternative on that one.
And this is from somebody who actually supports Israel as one of our closest allies. I just wish they'd start acting like it...
Tribesman
06-19-2005, 13:48
Mind you, given Sharon's history of directly participating in the killing of women and children, I have to admit to not feeling that bad about painting an ever so slightly skewed portrait of him.
That is an unproven allegation Beirut . :stop:
And it will remain unproven since the main witness (A Lebanese colonel who led the massacre oops security operation) who claimed to have evidence of Sharons complicity had the misfortune to walk into a bullet just before he was due at the war crimes tribunal .
Now , what were Ariels comments about that little assasination ? ~D ~D ~D
Edit , my mistake , it was a bomb not a bullet .
caesar44
06-19-2005, 22:09
The Jewish lobby in the US is second only to the gun lobby. No other country on Earth can manipulate the US as well as Israel. Even Americans cannot manipulate America as well as Israel can.
One day, I swear...
"I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United Sates and Israel."
waow "the jew control the world" all over again ...............
oh america , the big bad israel is cotroling you
america be ware israel is going to eat you
tommorow you should accuse israel to blast your WTC
loby shmoby suddenly bush is zionist ah ?
Taffy_is_a_Taff
06-19-2005, 23:03
you do realise the Jews are using MTV to destroy the Western World
Steppe Merc
06-19-2005, 23:28
caesar44, Beirut's a Canadian. ~;)
While I don't think there is any big conspiracy for Isreal to control the world, I do not think we ought to support a country that has commited so much state sanctioned murder and destruction. I'm not saying we should cut off all communication or anything, just stop selling them weapons and stuff.
Oh, and move them from our "friend" list to "neutral" list. That'll teach em. ~;)
Papewaio
06-20-2005, 00:35
"...with countries such as Singapore, India, Australia, Japan and Thailand, which will all play key roles in containing China in the coming cold war in the Pacific."
Well 3 of those countries are members of the British Commonwealth.
Singapore, India and Australia.
Nor has it been Israel propping up those countries and getting their economies more technologically advanced. Pakistan certainly didn't get a hand up from Israel and it has been exporting nuclear technology.
Singapore is its own business and technological powerhouse and that is definitly a fusion of all the cultures that make up Singapore and a strange cross of benign dictatorship / democracy that it is.
India is a massively poor nation yet it gleefully spends billions on nuclear weapons. Its high tech industry is massive and this has more to do with outsourcing of banks and IT companies then influx of weapons technology.
Australias arms industry peaked at the boomerang. I don't think its modernisation is too far behind the rest of the World barring travelling to work on Kangaroo back.
I think the 'facts' in this article ignore the larger picture. The friendship that the US has with these other countries is just like that it has with Israel, based on mutual benefit and trust. These are obviously enhanced with Commonwealth countries.
sharrukin
06-20-2005, 01:22
caesar44, Beirut's a Canadian. ~;)
While I don't think there is any big conspiracy for Isreal to control the world, I do not think we ought to support a country that has commited so much state sanctioned murder and destruction. I'm not saying we should cut off all communication or anything, just stop selling them weapons and stuff.
Oh, and move them from our "friend" list to "neutral" list. That'll teach em. ~;)
I assume you would include every Arab country in the world as well? There is not one of them who hasn't done far worse than Isreal.
Mind you, given Sharon's history of directly participating in the killing of women and children, I have to admit to not feeling that bad about painting an ever so slightly skewed portrait of him.
That is an unproven allegation Beirut . :stop:
And it will remain unproven since the main witness (A Lebanese colonel who led the massacre oops security operation) who claimed to have evidence of Sharons complicity had the misfortune to walk into a bullet just before he was due at the war crimes tribunal .
We discussed this at great length in a previous thread. I'll see if I can find it.
Mind you, if we play Ol' Whatshisnames game and simply say that all my sources, up to and including the Jerusalem post and the major Israeli universities and their faculties, are all biased against Israel and the Jews and therefore irrelevant, then there's not much point in going over any of this again.
Don Corleone
06-20-2005, 01:42
Come on now, Beiurt, no fair mixing arguments. Nerouin did in fact employ the tactics you're discussing here, but if I remember correctly, the only source you could ever produce for assessing that quote to Sharon was Fatah's newspaper, and sorry, I will call that a source of questionable objectivity. Yes, there were tons of quotes in the Jerusalem Post claiming Sharon was complicit with the slaughter in those camps up in Lebanon, and based on that, I find it hard to believe he didn't play some role, but that doesn't mean you automatically win every point you and Nerouin ever debated.
Papewaio
06-20-2005, 01:46
All news sources are biased... its like a boat you need some ballast on the right and on the left... so all you need is two politically different news sources stating the same information and wham you have a fact sandwich.
Multigrain Rye Liberal spread with all organic butter on a base of Enriched White Conservative Bread smeared with a good helping of special interest (TM) oil based magarine. With just the facts meat inbetween.
I agree that I may be mistaken for the quote I assigned to Sharon and I'll take my lumps for it. If I am wrong than I am wrong. What else can I say?
I did not say I won every argument with Ol' Whatshisname, I merely said that when the other side in a debate has nothing to say except "your sources are biased" no matter what the sources are, than a debate turns quickly into an elementary school argument with an intellectual depth of what kind of boots your mother wears.
If you will remember, Ol' Whathisname hit me with a question concerning something I wrote and for ten straight posts said nothing towards my responses "your sources are biased and therefore irrelevant". I think that gives me some small license to draw attention to that style of debating in order to avoid it again.
PanzerJaeger
06-20-2005, 01:56
Hmmm, I could have been mistaken. Seems he might have said "We control America" as opposed to "We the Jewish people control America."
Could you give the time and place where he said that and to whom he said it?
PanzerJaeger
06-20-2005, 02:00
I agree that I may be mistaken for the quote I assigned to Sharon and I'll take my lumps for it. If I am wrong than I am wrong. What else can I say?
Heh, posted at the same time as me.. :rolleyes2:
Don Corleone
06-20-2005, 02:14
Oh, I don't disagree Beirut. The reason I dropped out of the whole debate was because I really disagreed with Nerouin's tactic. Hell, I was waiting for him to claim the Wall Street Journal was a pro-Palestinian biased source. ~:)
All I'm saying is that was a pretty explosive quote, and without proper documentation, you might want to save it. You've got better weapons in your arsenal.
Example: I cannot believe I'm the only Bush supporter who was shocked and disgusted by the shoddy treatment the First Lady received. And never an apology! It was clear to me that Sharon orchestrated the whole thing at the Wailing Wall to pander to his lunatic fringe, and it was unforgivable. What we do with Americans caught distributing state secrets, especially ones they have been specifically ordered not to share with the desired recipient, is our business. For Sharon to pull that crap, and then shake his head and say "What are you going to do..." Sorry, I haven't calmed down yet...
:furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3:
Crazed Rabbit
06-20-2005, 06:15
Example: I cannot believe I'm the only Bush supporter who was shocked and disgusted by the shoddy treatment the First Lady received.
You're not the only one. I know of this fellow who agrees with you, and boy is he nuts!
~;) Actually, I agree with you. Bush should have said something like, "If you don't want to get caught, don't do it! And if you want to keep gettin $3Bn a year, then you had best shut your ugly mouth and apologize no matter what the (*&% we do with him."
And Beirut, I expected better of you than to drag out the dead horse that is the "Jews control America" arguement. It's like they can't accept that millions of citizens of the greatest nation, and democracy, on earth have decided to support Israel, the only democracy in the middle east, of their own free will. So they claim we are being tricked, oblivious that anyone could disagree with them could actually have thought about it on their own and come to a conclusion as a rational human that they don't agree with. Nope, anyone that doesn't agree with them has been manipulated by that large, shadowy, evil conspiracy. Sheesh.
Crazed Rabbit
caesar44
06-20-2005, 07:13
USoA , jews and israel :
1. in the cold war all the arab and islamic world was supporting the soviets (americas no 1 enemy) and israel (very small state in the middle of the islamic world) ah yes , was a base of operations for the americans
2. ten of thousands jews served in the US army from WW1 to this day while the arabs were serving under the mufti in hitler's army
3. most of the terror attacks on the US came from arabs and islamic people and there is a good cooperation between the CAI and the MOSAD against it
4. US is a democracy and israel is the only democracy from the the atlantic coast of africa to india !!! so whom the US should support ? the afganians ?
5. israeli-palestinian conflict - israel want's to stay in the "territories" and the palestinians want a state in it - whom the US supports? the palestinian demand !!!!!!
israel want's jerusalem to be it's capital and so the palestinians - whom the US supports ? the palestinian demand
israel want's to stay in the golan and syria want's it to - whom the US supports ? the syrian demand
6. the american intelligence got informations on the mass murder of jews in europe in 1942 to 1945 - not a singalbombing on the concentrations camps !!!
the US is the most hated state in the world (after israel) so if it's leaders decided to have some friends and israel is one of them don't let some arab propaganda to influence you , just see the american flags burning from mauritania to afganistan
And Beirut, I expected better of you than to drag out the dead horse that is the "Jews control America" arguement. .
Crazed Rabbit
I expected better of the US. The horse is not dead by a long shot. It's not that the Jews control America, it's that America [...snip...] I'm sorry if that upsets you, but you should blame your government for doing it, not me for pointing it out.
What other country can sell US weapons technology to the highest bidder, tell the US to stuff their concerns in their collective national rectum, and then turn around and tell the US they better not be ten minutes late with this year's $3,000,000,000 handout?
:furious3: "Because last year's $3,000,000,000 was fifteen minutes late and we're still mighty pissed about it! Oh, and we'll need more F-15s and access to your most secret spy satellites again."
wow,
This is the first time I've seen beirut back down and make a post that isn't blantantly racist and offending....
Good job mate.
Well thank you.
We do appreciate your support. ~:cheers:
I wonder what would happen if the United States withdrew its support from Israel?
I wonder if those who are against Israel think about what exactly would happen in the Middle-East if the United States withdrew its support from Israel?
Think about it for a minute or two - which country insures that Israel will survive? And its not America even if that is what many who are against Israel think.
Do some of you honestly think Israel will go quietly into the night if the United States halts it support of Israel? It will continue to exist - surrounded and besieged by its enemies. The actions of Israel against the Palenstine people and other arab countries would become worse if the United States removed its support.
Sometimes one must think beyond a pure emotional level about an arguement and think about the whole picture.
Such accusations as this show nothing more then an hostility - and a failure to think beyond one's own postion on the issue.
It's not that the Jews control America, it's that America [...snip...]
That Beriut is nothing other then an emotional appeal arguement bording on being insulting to all Americans - not just the government. It seems that one could accuse you of being anti-american when you spout such emotional charged arguements.
I'm sorry if that upsets you, but you should blame your government for doing it, not me for pointing it out.
When stating the country of America - one can assume you are refering to not only the government but the people of the United States at the same time. If you want to direct your comment at the American Government then state so - when one just states the country one is also talking about the people who live inside that nation.
Edit: Since the moderators edited out Beriut's comments - it still does not change the fact that such comments are on the borderline of insulting and attacking not only the government - but the people as a whole. And I appreciate the moderators editing out such comments since they generally would lead to a "flame war".
KukriKhan
06-20-2005, 14:59
Moderator Notice
Gentlemen, make your points with less "colour", if you please. PG ratings apply. Further colorful language, or allegations of racism, will result in official sanctions.
Thanks for your attention.
English assassin
06-20-2005, 15:19
I wonder what would happen if the United States withdrew its support from Israel?
I wonder if those who are against Israel think about what exactly would happen in the Middle-East if the United States withdrew its support from Israel?
Think about it for a minute or two - which country insures that Israel will survive? And its not America even if that is what many who are against Israel think.
Do some of you honestly think Israel will go quietly into the night if the United States halts it support of Israel? It will continue to exist - surrounded and besieged by its enemies. The actions of Israel against the Palenstine people and other arab countries would become worse if the United States removed its support.
Hmm, so we have to defend Isreal no matter what, because otherwise they will go nuclear (quite literally, probably) and REALLY hand it out to those palestinians.
Lets reduce that argument to its basics. I have evicted my neighbour and I now live in his house. I have a gun pointed at his head because he is understandably a bit annoyed at this turn of events. You had better give me lots of money or I will shoot him.
Redleg, your analysis of what might happen may be correct but do you really think the USA should base its foreign policy on appeasing blackmailers? When Bin Laden does it to 4000 Americans its war on terror, when Isreal might do it to arabs its, quick, pony up the bunce?
I don't think this is how the white house is rationalising it.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-20-2005, 15:33
Redleg, your analysis of what might happen may be correct but do you really think the USA should base its foreign policy on appeasing blackmailers? When Bin Laden does it to 4000 Americans its war on terror, when Isreal might do it to arabs its, quick, pony up the bunce?
You totally twisted what he said. Its not that Israel threatens the arabs but the other way around. It is the US that stops both sides from going to war. Only we stop Israel from doing what any other country in its position would do. That is defeat its enemys who would see it destroyed. Their not blackmailing us, were bribing them.
Hmm, so we have to defend Isreal no matter what, because otherwise they will go nuclear (quite literally, probably) and REALLY hand it out to those palestinians. That is not what I stated - one must think through the possiblities before deciding on a course of action. The United States can do a better job of applying pressure to Israel through the economic channels that we provide them - but to completely cut them off would have drastic effects on the Middle-East. Which is exactly what I stated - and is most likely the course that would be taken if the United States government cut off its aid to Israel. Not withstanding the internal political pressure in the United States to prevent any such action - not from just any "jewish' lobby group - but many others
Lets reduce that argument to its basics. I have evicted my neighbour and I now live in his house. I have a gun pointed at his head because he is understandably a bit annoyed at this turn of events. You had better give me lots of money or I will shoot him.
Try again that is not the basics of the arguement concerning Israel and the Palenstine issue. Its far more then that. It would actually take several paragraphs to boil the arguement down to a basic prinicple - and it would not even do that then - there are many factors and issues involved in the Israeli-Palenstine issue - and that is only one of the issues involved. How many Arab countries have advocated the destruction of Israel, both in the past and the present?
Redleg, your analysis of what might happen may be correct but do you really think the USA should base its foreign policy on appeasing blackmailers? When Bin Laden does it to 4000 Americans its war on terror, when Isreal might do it to arabs its, quick, pony up the bunce?
Explain how my statement states that we should appease backmailer's - ie I am assuming you mean Isreal.
Or are you talking about the money the United States gives Egypt every year, or are you talking about the little amount the government gives the Palenstine Authority every year. The pitance we give the Palenstine authority is appeasement also, since its based upon the Palenstine Authority attempting to halt the terror attacks of Palenstine people into Israel.
At least if your going to accuse the United States of something - get the facts straight. The United States provides money to Egypt to insure the peace between the two nations - that is appeasement or more correctly a bribe to both nations, Israel and Egypt. Its been done for over 20 years now - we don't see anyone protesting against that now do we.
One must look beyond the narrow scope of just Israel-Palenstine that some of you are looking at. What nation in the Middle-east is truely an ally of the United States? Is it Saudi Arabia - nope - that country has been playing both sides against the middle for decades. Is it Egypt - getting better but still not an ally. Jordan - another country that plays both sides against each other. And the list goes on. Israel is not the perfect country - nor is it our best ally. Nor if you go into my past arguements about Israel - will you find that I believe Israel is truely in the right. However I find the actions of the past have influenced Israel - ie three attacks by Arab nations to destroy the state of Israel and a continued terrorist campaign by the Palenstine terror groups since before 1970, led by the PLO and now other groups.
I don't think this is how the white house is rationalising it.
I am not the white house - I am an American who took issue with Beruit's attempt at insulting not the government of the United States - but all Americans with his comment which the moderators have now edited. Nor is it an attempt to rationalize anything - you can not rationalize irrational violence - especially when its advocated by both sides. There are Israeli citizens that call for the destruction of anything to do with the Palensitne Authority - just as there is a group of Palenstine people who will not be statified until the state of Israel is destoried.
English assassin
06-20-2005, 16:41
At least if your going to accuse the United States of something - get the facts straight.
I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I wasn't even citing any facts. I'm observing that whereas this may be true:
The actions of Israel against the Palenstine people and other arab countries would become worse if the United States removed its support.
Its a dubious moral basis for supporting a regime. That's all
I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I wasn't even citing any facts. I'm observing that whereas this may be true:
Its a dubious moral basis for supporting a regime. That's all
And in that you are incorrect - its not a moral bais for supporting a regime. It is a statement of preception of an individual based upon his understanding of what is happening over in that part of the world.
Goofball
06-20-2005, 18:05
The Jewish lobby in the US is second only to the gun lobby. No other country on Earth can manipulate the US as well as Israel. Even Americans cannot manipulate America as well as Israel can.
One day, I swear...
"I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United Sates and Israel."
*hands Beirut a beer, a calculator, a Speak-n-Spell with no batteries in it, and 50 pages of spread sheets containing random letters and numbers*
You're right Beirut. You've stumbled onto the edges of the Global Zionist Pentavorate for Badness and Meanness In General. Our operatives have obtained these documents, which we believe contain the secrets of the Jewish mind control machine. We have also managed to capture one of these machines, but haven't figured out how to use it yet. We figure you are just the man to get to the bottom of this for us. Let us know how you make out, and just call out whenever you need another beer.
*locks Beirut in a small, padded room with the above-mentioned items*
~D
_Martyr_
06-20-2005, 18:13
If Beirut has ever seen MacGyver he'll have noo problem getting out of that padded room with all that equipment you just gave him! ~D
If memory serves, the Israelis are the ones who manufacture the uzi. We need those so we will always be friends with our Jewish neighbors.
Tribesman
06-20-2005, 20:18
Yes, there were tons of quotes in the Jerusalem Post claiming Sharon was complicit with the slaughter in those camps up in Lebanon,
Don , the original inquiry found that he was complicit through negligence , incompetance, inaction and failure in duty . But not complicit in the actual slaughter . The person who was assassinated claimed to have evidence that he was complicit in the actual massacre , but as he was killed before he testified and the evidence he claimed was in safe hands just in case such an event occured has never surfaced .
Though of course unless he did have real evidence to back up his claims I don't think his testimony would have stood up to much as he could hardly be described as a reliable witness .
It may be true , but it may be not , which is why I wrote "unproven" not "unfounded" .
Don Corleone
06-20-2005, 20:31
I said complicit, not directly resonsible. I agree, I don't envision Sharon allowing the Israeli troops to assist in the refugee troops back in 82, but I'm also convinced he knew exactly what was coming next when he allowed the Christian militia groups to occupy them.
You can't throw a rabid dog into a nursery, lock the door, and say "Well, how did I know it was going to bite somebody?"
caesar44
06-20-2005, 20:31
Hmm, so we have to defend Isreal no matter what, because otherwise they will go nuclear (quite literally, probably) and REALLY hand it out to those palestinians.
Lets reduce that argument to its basics. I have evicted my neighbour and I now live in his house. I have a gun pointed at his head because he is understandably a bit annoyed at this turn of events. You had better give me lots of money or I will shoot him.
Redleg, your analysis of what might happen may be correct but do you really think the USA should base its foreign policy on appeasing blackmailers? When Bin Laden does it to 4000 Americans its war on terror, when Isreal might do it to arabs its, quick, pony up the bunce?
I don't think this is how the white house is rationalising it.
oh please before attacking israel on its atomic bombing (what ? where ? how ? when ?) explain us why england have an atomic bomb .....
and yes before talking about the palestinians please get out of north ireland ................................................. my god what a self righteousness
Don Corleone
06-20-2005, 21:03
Northern Ireland is not a good corrolary for many, many reasons, but in your case, primarily because a majority of the people that live there wish to remain subjects of the Crown.
Steppe Merc
06-20-2005, 21:34
I assume you would include every Arab country in the world as well? There is not one of them who hasn't done far worse than Isreal.
Yes. Fair is fair.
Proletariat
06-20-2005, 22:20
I love this place when Don C, Redleg, Xiahou are back to battle with and against Goofball, Beirut, Gawain, EA, and the rest of you din and tumult wreakers.
:happyg:
GUILTY!
It would seem I have offended more than one person with my choice of words and careless generalizations. I would like to apologize to those who feel slighted and I will try to chose my words more carefully in future posts.
I stand by the general intent of what I said - I fully believe that the American government acquiesces to Israeli demands far too easilly and with careless disregard for the consequences, but obviously I should have taken more care in saying it as to not paint my individual American friends as anything but the fine folks I know them to be.
Y'all may consider me spanked. :embarassed:
Papewaio
06-21-2005, 02:09
America's irreplaceable ally
Surely the title should be:
Israel's irreplaceable ally.
As I have already stated the British Commonwealth are at the top of the list of America's allies.
If America walks away from Israel, Israel will be the one in most danger not the USA. If anything USA would be better off as far as AQ type of terrorists. However doing it for that reason in itself is reprehensible.
Israel is completely replaceable.
What other country would refuse to be the US's best friend if told they'll receive three billion a year in outright grants, unlimited support at the UN, hundreds of top of the line US fighter jets, access to the highest levels of US intelligence and political power, the willingness to overlook nuclear weapons treaty violations, and told the US will wage war against their enemies?
Hell, North Korea, Syria and Iran would be flying the Stars and Stripes tomorrow if offered all that.
sharrukin
06-21-2005, 02:42
Israel is completely replaceable.
What other country would refuse to be the US's best friend if told they'll receive three billion a year in outright grants, unlimited support at the UN, hundreds of top of the line US fighter jets, access to the highest levels of US intelligence and political power, the willingness to overlook nuclear weapons treaty violations, and told the US will wage war against their enemies?
Hell, North Korea, Syria and Iran would be flying the Stars and Stripes tomorrow if offered all that.
Very few would refuse such an offer.
There is a world of difference between the kind of friends you buy and the kind you support. Bush made the mistake of mixing these two up when he went to war with Iraq. Allies like Turkey, Germany, France, Canada and others did not care to be bought. Others who were not really allies had no problem with it. Israel is an actual ally of the United States and is willing to back the US when it is not in their interest to do so. Getting hammered by SCUD missiles and doing nothing because the Americans asked them not to act, is an example. And the reason the Americans asked them is that the Arab 'allies' were fair weather friends and Bush Senior (the smart one) knew it.
What Arab country who pretends to an alliance with the west would back us when the chips are down?
caesar44
06-21-2005, 06:51
syria iran north korea............
hmmmmmmmm
syria iran and north korea aha
yes yes syria iran and north korea yes now i have got it !!!!!!!!
syria iran and north korea yes that's it !
what about some common sense ha ?
"the main reason for human mistakes is in prejudice..." (rene dekart)
Papewaio
06-21-2005, 07:06
Well it has been done in the past... Noriaga, Saddam, Osama Bin Laden, they all got money and/or intelligence and all turned out to be really firm allies.
With North Korea, I think 3 billion dollars in rice and vegetables would be a good bribe.
syria iran north korea............
hmmmmmmmm
syria iran and north korea aha
yes yes syria iran and north korea yes now i have got it !!!!!!!!
syria iran and north korea yes that's it !
what about some common sense ha ?
"the main reason for human mistakes is in prejudice..." (rene dekart)
I thought I would provide you the common sense you asked for.
Here are all the capital letters and punctuation marks you forgot to use:
SINKHSINKSINKISINKWH
,,.,,,,.,,,...
Free of charge my friend. :bow:
caesar44
06-21-2005, 15:02
thanck you !!!!!!! sorry
Thanck you !!!!!
chi sorry
Chi what a strong argument !!!!
~:handball:
Ser Clegane
06-21-2005, 15:04
I think this thread would greatly benefit if this Kindergarten behaviour that went over the last couple of posts stopped ... like now
Divinus Arma
06-21-2005, 15:51
Just a simple common sense argument on the realtionship between American and Israel:
Israel is pretty much the only democracy in the region.
While I cannot speak for my government, I can speak on the perspective of many Americans.
We want a free and independant Palestine living side by side with Israel.
Further, we want democracy in the middle east. Not theocracy or dictatorships that fake democracy.
Nobody has a problem with Islam. After all, the United States was one of the first countries in the world to allow and promote freedom of religion. Yes, ignorant citizens persecuted many of their fellow citizens for following different religions, but it was not the case with the government. But we do have a problem with someone that tells us or others what to believe in or die.
I believe there is a strong Jewish lobby in the US but exactly how much control it exerts over our foreign policy I'll leave to the others here to debate.
Looking beyond the ethnic factor supposedly at work in this political relationship let's examine some glaring geopolitical facts...
Israel is...
1) The only functioning and thriving democracy in the region.
2) The only nation in the region that does not possess a fanatical fundamentalist minded political party or movement (of weight and/or note) that desperately wants to chuck democracy and common sense out the window in favor of an 'our god knows best approach' to all matters foreign and domestic.
3) One of two nations in the region that can offer major port facilities and airbase access to the US military. The other being Turkey.
4) The only nation in the region that shares mutual interests and concerns with the only NATO nation in the region (Turkey).
Tribesman
06-21-2005, 20:27
2) The only nation in the region that does not possess a fanatical fundamentalist minded political party or movement (of weight and/or note) that desperately wants to chuck democracy and common sense out the window in favor of an 'our god knows best approach' to all matters foreign and domestic. ~D ~D ~D
Classic Spino , when did you take up comedy ?
3) One of two nations in the region that can offer major port facilities and airbase access to the US military. The other being Turkey.
There are many countries that can and do offer facilities in the region to the US and to other nations as well .
Gawain of Orkeny
06-21-2005, 20:32
Classic Spino , when did you take up comedy ?
He hasnt but apparently you have.
There are many countries that can and do offer facilities in the region to the US and to other nations as well .
Name them.
I think this thread would greatly benefit if this Kindergarten behaviour that went over the last couple of posts stopped ... like now
Well I was going to correct the grammar in your post but given the bold qualities used in the word "now", maybe I should just let it pass. :lipsrsealed2:
Anyhoo...
The US has military bases all over the area, as well as carriers and other assets that can be utilized. During the first Iraq war, Israel was, if anything, more of an impediment than an asset. The US had to constantly keep them under control and then divert resources to protect them. In the second Iraq war, I'm not sure what benefit Israel provided at all. Perhaps someone here could enlighten me.
Israel is utterly replaceable, and there is no question concerning who is in charge in this relationship and who benefits the most. The US pays and Israel plays.
With the billions and billions and billions (and billions and billions...) the US has handed over to Israel, the US could have built an aircraft carrier the size of Long Island and parked it right in the middle of the Persian Gulf. In the long run, that might have been a much better idea.
It is a complete farce that the UN allowed Israel to be created in the middle of an inherently hostile area and then for the past fifty years the US has had to foot the bill (in the many tens of billions of dollars) and the political fallout (including the hatred of everyone in the region) in order to finance and protect them.
The US shot itself in the foot (several times) by playing Israel's game. People talk about democracy, which is all fine and dandy, but what advantage, at least in the Machiavellian sense, does Israel's (apartheid) democracy hold for the US? If power is the be all end all of foreign relations, which it is, it would seem that it is clearly Israel who is benefiting more and it is the US who is paying the price for it. Odd. I just don't see the advantage for the US in this "relationship".
Tribesman
06-21-2005, 22:48
He hasnt but apparently you have.
yeah right Gawain , would you like to examine some of the 15 current parties in the Knesset or some of the independant MKs , or how about some of the nearly 100 parties who are currently without seats but have had them in the past . Some of them fit Spinos comment perfectly .
Name them.
Where would you like to start , East or West , there are 9 countries at the moment with US military facilities , plus 2 more on the northern periphery , then 4 four more to the west that are used for the middle east , then there are the 3 new deployments to the south soon to be followed by 6 more .
Proletariat
06-21-2005, 23:52
...and then turn around and tell the US they better not be ten minutes late with this year's $3,000,000,000 handout?
:furious3: "Because last year's $3,000,000,000 was fifteen minutes late and we're still mighty pissed about it! Oh, and we'll need more F-15s and access to your most secret spy satellites again."
You know, Egypt's been getting 3B USD from us for years too.
[/url]
[url="http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200506211501.asp"]
Those who accept $3 billion in yearly benefactions will have to put up with an occasional lecture, and Condoleezza Rice put her heart into it, and ours. (http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200506211501.asp)
A great article by WFB Jr.
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 00:00
Good article , glad that this bit was included
A second, that the true opposition party had been ignored because Mubarak had outlawed it, and therefore Ms. Rice was not even talking to the relevant people
So many media commentators are ignoring that little thing .
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 00:05
Where would you like to start , East or West , there are 9 countries at the moment with US military facilities , plus 2 more on the northern periphery , then 4 four more to the west that are used for the middle east , then there are the 3 new deployments to the south soon to be followed by 6 more .
Again name them. Even Turkey wouldnt let us use their bases or are they our bases?
You know, Egypt's been getting 3B USD from us for years too.
Yes, they have. You will notice that they frequently aid the US in one way or another as well.
What this proves is that Israel is not a special case at all. Promise the Egyptians a steady flow of billions (and billions and billions and...), several hundred F-15s, the highest of high tech intelligence and gadgetry, unlimited backing in the UN, unlimited access to the highest levels of power in the US, and a myriad of other forms of assistance and I assure you Joe Egyptian might just turn into GWB's best friend.
Proletariat
06-22-2005, 00:11
Sure, but then aren't we doing what you find most despicable in America's history? The ole 'help out of a piece of hhit' routine?
(I guess from your point of view you feel that way now.)
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 00:14
Next he will be trying to tell us that Egypt is a better ally of the US than Israel LOL.
Sure, but then aren't we doing what you find most despicable in America's history? The ole 'help out of a piece of hhit' routine?
(I guess from your point of view you feel that way now.)
Well, you would be applying a Harry Trumanism to foreign relations. Certainly not the first time that's happened.
Gawain,
You should at least wait to laugh until I actually say the thing you are laughing about since I never actually said it.
Mind you, during the '67 war, far as I know, it was only Israel who destroyed US Navy ships and killed American servicemen. Not Egypt. ~;)
Hurin_Rules
06-22-2005, 01:25
1) The only functioning and thriving democracy in the region.
Besides Turkey.
2) The only nation in the region that does not possess a fanatical fundamentalist minded political party or movement (of weight and/or note) that desperately wants to chuck democracy and common sense out the window in favor of an 'our god knows best approach' to all matters foreign and domestic.
You have heard of the Israeli settler movement, right?
3) One of two nations in the region that can offer major port facilities and airbase access to the US military. The other being Turkey.
??? Many nations in the region have major port facilities and airbases.
??? Many nations in the region have major port facilities and airbases.
Give me $3,000,000,000 a year and I'll build you a major port and airbase in my backyard.
Gee, I wonder how hard it is for Israel to have major ports and airbases when the US pays for their construction and upkeep. Give the penguins in Antarctica $3,000,000,000 a year and they'll have an airbase for you there inside a week.
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 01:51
Again name them.
Look them up yourself , they are all in the public domain . Try here for a starthttp://www.globemaster.de/bases.html
Even Turkey wouldnt let us use their bases or are they our bases?
Yes , would that be because it wasn't sanctioned by the UN or because it wasn't part of their Nato obligations , was it because you were siding with terrorist groups that it has been fighting for decades or because the whole action was based on a pile of crap and was seriously lacking in the comprehensive planning and post conflict departments ? ~:cheers:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 02:25
Yes , would that be because it wasn't sanctioned by the UN or because it wasn't part of their Nato obligations , was it because you were siding with terrorist groups that it has been fighting for decades or because the whole action was based on a pile of crap and was seriously lacking in the comprehensive planning and post conflict departments ?
You know as well as I do that its because we wouldnt give them the money they demanded.
Look them up yourself , they are all in the public domain . Try here for a starthttp://www.globemaster.de/bases.html
Too many. Your the one who says there are so many in the middle east. Once more name them.
Divinus Arma
06-22-2005, 03:19
Why does everybody hate Israel?
Why does everybody blame the Jews?!
Don Corleone
06-22-2005, 03:37
Come on, Beirut, Tribesman, Hurin, be honest.
As you freely admitted, we give as much, if not more military and foreign aid to other countries. Including, unless I'm mistaken, to the Peoples Republic of the Maple Leaf.
Yet I can count on one hand the number of countries that have done what we've asked, when we've asked, the way we've asked, and the PRML ain't one of them, and Ireland sure as shit ain't. Ireland wouldn't even prevent Nazi U-boats from floating around off their coast. I've done some reading, and perhaps I was a bit harsh to imply they were sympathetic to the Nazis, but they sure weren't weighing into the matter.
As somebody pointed out, Israel sat there and took SCUD after SCUD without retaliaiting. Who else would do that? Egypt? Turkey? They constantly defame us, refuse to offer aid, and in the case of Turkey, cost us several billion dollars and the use of a division by bending over for France at the last second. Turkey is no US ally, believe me.
When you come right down to it, the US can count on, in this order, the UK, Australia, and Israel. Canada, Poland, Czech Republic & Italy are good friends and about 85% reliable. That's it for allies for us. Everybody else... Germany, France, Turkey... well, on Sept 12th "Aaah, yes, we feel your pain. We will not stand for this". On Sept 14th "You're not actually going to DO anything about it are you? Don't be mad!"
And for all you saying "We were right in Afghanistan but wrong in Iraq"... dont' be so revisionist. At the time, you were griping about that too.
Why does everybody hate Israel?
I don't hate Israel. I do hate many of the things Israel does though. First and foremost their endless persecution and dehumanization of the Palestinians. 99% of my complaints against Israel are based on their brutal occupation and subjugation of the Palestinians.
Why does everybody blame the Jews?!
As someone who is probably viewed by some as the boards leading anti-Semite, I would say with all honesty that I do not hate nor blame "the Jews" for anything. The three kindest, most compassionate and friendliest people I have ever met were all Jewish. Two of them were very Jewish, having roots in the Middle East or family lost in the Holocaust. (If that can be applicable.)
The thing is that many Jewish people, by the nature of their religion and customs, do tend to stand apart from the crowd. At worst, that makes them targets for discrimination. At best, topics of discussion. In either case, Jewish culture is very much in the foreground and constantly under some level of observation if not downright scrutiny. That observation/scrutiny can either be mistaken for blame or at least make the Jewish people feel conspicuous, which in itself can make one nervous and prone to feeling blamed for... something.
Hurin_Rules
06-22-2005, 03:47
Come on, Beirut, Tribesman, Hurin, be honest.
As you freely admitted, we give as much, if not more military and foreign aid to other countries. Including, unless I'm mistaken, to the Peoples Republic of the Maple Leaf.
If by aid you mean money, then the USA gives nothing to Canada. We pay for everything we buy, unlike Israel, which receives billions in handouts.
When you come right down to it, the US can count on, in this order, the UK, Australia, and Israel. Canada, Poland, Czech Republic & Italy are good friends and about 85% reliable. That's it for allies for us. Everybody else... Germany, France, Turkey... well, on Sept 12th "Aaah, yes, we feel your pain. We will not stand for this". On Sept 14th "You're not actually going to DO anything about it are you? Don't be mad!"
Canadian forces continue to fight and die in Afghanistan. You may remember the incident when American pilots were told by their own commander not to fire on some infantry they spotted; the pilots fired anyway, killing four Canadians, and then got away with a slap on the wrist. Canadian forces are still, however, fighting in Afghanistan, even after being killed by their own 'allies'. We just don't go in for preemptive, illegal wars that are based on false premises and have nothing to do with 9/11. Are you looking for allies, who will tell you when you are wrong and try to stop you from committing colossal military blunders, or sycophants, who will rubber stamp your worst mistakes?
Don Corleone
06-22-2005, 03:52
No, I don't look for sycophants, and if you guys felt the Iraq war was morally conscionable, you did the right thing by not participating.
When it comes to defense aid, no, we don't send you weapons systems carte blanche. But we do patrol your coasts, maintain an early warning system and keep a division in Alaska. It's a mutually beneficial relationship.
But, Iraq aside, there's times you guys haven't stood with us when we could have used it. Mulrooney left us hanging in the breeze a few times when Reagen & Gorbachev were doing their dance. Maybe I should have put you guys in the first category, but honestly, if the Danes started launching missile attacks out of Greenland, and we asked you to sit tight and take it for a bit, do you really think you would have?
Edit: Actually, I KNOW I was wrong to put you guys in the second category, and I apologize. One good example of how deep our relationship goes is it was Canada patrolling some of our domestic airspace when we launched the first strikes against Afghanistan and had to send some domestically based wings overseas. I apologize. :bow:
Proletariat
06-22-2005, 03:54
You may remember the incident when American pilots were told by their own commander not to fire on some infantry they spotted; the pilots fired anyway, killing four Canadians, and then got away with a slap on the wrist.
What the hell? 'Got away'? Friendly Fire isn't something you 'get away' with. For Christ's Sake, it's like 'getting away' with running your car into a pet animal. It sucks for everyone involved and it was never intended.
You make it sound as if the pilots were high fiving afterwards, cackling to themselves, "Hah! We'll simply tell those Canadians fools we didn't mean it! They'll buy it hook line and sinker and then we walk! Mwaha"
sharrukin
06-22-2005, 04:35
As somebody pointed out, Israel sat there and took SCUD after SCUD without retaliaiting. Who else would do that? Egypt? Turkey? They constantly defame us, refuse to offer aid, and in the case of Turkey, cost us several billion dollars and the use of a division by bending over for France at the last second. Turkey is no US ally, believe me.
When you come right down to it, the US can count on, in this order, the UK, Australia, and Israel. Canada, Poland, Czech Republic & Italy are good friends and about 85% reliable. That's it for allies for us. Everybody else... Germany, France, Turkey... well, on Sept 12th "Aaah, yes, we feel your pain. We will not stand for this". On Sept 14th "You're not actually going to DO anything about it are you? Don't be mad!"
That's not the entire story.
Many nations and people had no problem with the United States pounding the terrorist networks into dust. I myself was hoping for exactly that, thinking that finally someone was going to do what needed doing for so long.
And then we watched as you started preparation for war with Iraq and we wondered what was going on. It seemed rather opportunistic on the part of the Bush Presidency to use the 911 attack as a reason to settle old scores that had only a loose connection to terrorism. Iraq was far from a large or significant terrorist supporter. In fact they seemed to have had only a little to do with it at the worst.
So the attack on the terrorist networks in Afghanistan got almost universal support from your real allies. The attack in Iraq did not because we could not see any real connection in that case. A HUGE amount of sympathy and support was wasted by the American demands in regard to Iraq. When later it was revealed that much of what was used as evidence for the connections turned out to faked or intelligence misjudgements much of the remaining sympathy evaporated.
Putting Rumsfeld in charge of American diplomacy was also a rather amateurish blunder and he all by himself probably helped to lose support from several countries.
The United States at the same time as proceeding in their anti-terrorist efforts asked the Isreali's to negotiate with known terrorists like the PLO did not help their case. The Chechens, the PLO, the IRA, etc are the ones that should have been targeted and instead we got the Iraqi mess.
This is what your real allies like Canada, France, Germany and Turkey were telling you. We ALL would have stood by you if you had ever actually attacked terrorists!
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 08:48
Yet I can count on one hand the number of countries that have done what we've asked, when we've asked, the way we've asked, and the PRML ain't one of them, and Ireland sure as shit ain't. Ireland wouldn't even prevent Nazi U-boats from floating around off their coast.
Well maybe you should read some more Don . Believe it or not Ireland made it onto the list of the "coilition of the willing" or more accurately "the coilition of the whores who could be bought" and Bertie Ahern was a very cheap whore , even though it was in breach of the constitution and against the will of the population .
If you want to talk about U-boats then perhaps examine the air corridor that was used during the Battle of the Atlantic , it was quite a concession from that "dumb yank" who had a deep rooted hatred for Britain and all it stood for , and who had plunged the country into civil war over , amongnst other things , the retention of naval facilities by Britain .
You make it sound as if the pilots were high fiving afterwards,
Prole , wasn't that the case where they were not high fiving it , but they were "high" .
You know as well as I do that its because we wouldnt give them the money they demanded.
That says it all Gawain , some people agree with you because you pay them to agree with you , thats real democracy in action . ~D ~D ~D and I thought you were concerned about what your government does with your tax dollars ~;)
Too many Yes far to many , Qatar , UAE , Cyprus , Macedonia , Bosnia , Saudi Arabia , Crete/Greece , Kuwait , Iraq( ~;) ) , Diego Garcia . then onto Georgia , Kyrgystan , Uzbekistan . then you have the new ones , Chad , Niger , Mali , Mauritania , Morocco ..... do you want to go on ???
how about Yemen , Oman and Bahrain do their facilities that have been used count.....Its funny though Pakistan isn't in there at all , I thought that was a great ally , but of course great allies don't have terrorist training camps 20 miles outside the capital where they train people who went to try and kill your ambassador in Afghanistan last week do they , and they certainly don't get their Army to shoot at US patrols hunting for Al-Qaida along the border do they , maybe you should offer them some more money to get them to stop . ~D ~D ~D
caesar44
06-22-2005, 09:08
Well I was going to correct the grammar in your post but given the bold qualities used in the word "now", maybe I should just let it pass. :lipsrsealed2:
Anyhoo...
The US has military bases all over the area, as well as carriers and other assets that can be utilized. During the first Iraq war, Israel was, if anything, more of an impediment than an asset. The US had to constantly keep them under control and then divert resources to protect them. In the second Iraq war, I'm not sure what benefit Israel provided at all. Perhaps someone here could enlighten me.
Israel is utterly replaceable, and there is no question concerning who is in charge in this relationship and who benefits the most. The US pays and Israel plays.
With the billions and billions and billions (and billions and billions...) the US has handed over to Israel, the US could have built an aircraft carrier the size of Long Island and parked it right in the middle of the Persian Gulf. In the long run, that might have been a much better idea.
It is a complete farce that the UN allowed Israel to be created in the middle of an inherently hostile area and then for the past fifty years the US has had to foot the bill (in the many tens of billions of dollars) and the political fallout (including the hatred of everyone in the region) in order to finance and protect them.
The US shot itself in the foot (several times) by playing Israel's game. People talk about democracy, which is all fine and dandy, but what advantage, at least in the Machiavellian sense, does Israel's (apartheid) democracy hold for the US? If power is the be all end all of foreign relations, which it is, it would seem that it is clearly Israel who is benefiting more and it is the US who is paying the price for it. Odd. I just don't see the advantage for the US in this "relationship".
"it is a complete farce that the un (sorry that is UN) allowed israel to be created in the middle of ..."
well (Well) in the name of the jewish people i thank you beirut (Beirut) to let us exists ~:cheers:
i (I) thank the canadian people who fought for us in 1948 against 7 arab states and established our jewish empire
i (I) thank the usa (USA) for its war against sadam in 1991 that saved us from iraqi occupation (ah sorry the war was in kuwait for some oil gallons)
i (I) thank you again dear beirut for showing us again (in 2005 ce) that a small nation that have a big empire (1/26 of the size of Texas) could create such a hatred as if we are in 1930' germany , you know the nazis also did not understood how the jews control everything
another (Another) thing - please don't analyse us , we are 12,000,000 individuals and our enemies did it for 2,000 years now
~:cheers: ~:cheers: ~:cheers:
Productivity
06-22-2005, 09:49
Nice way to take a quote out of context there...
So you think the US should be footing the bill so you can exist? I'm not from the US and I find that idea repulsive. I would hate to think how someone from the US themselves would feel about it.
caesar44
06-22-2005, 10:56
where have you seen this ? usa is giving money to dozens of countries so why just attacking israel ? did israel could not exists with out the 3 billions$ ?
did israel ever put a gun on the heads of the us presidents to give her money ?
where is the argument ? if the us wont give israel some money (0.00001 of its budget) what do you think is going to happened ? nothing !!!!!!!!!
to blame he who receives money ? to blame he who gives money ?
what is the point ? let the americans to decide what they want to do with their money
the usa is not going to fight for israel and israel like any other nation don't expect her to do that so again all the pleas should go to the capitol and not to sharon peres or shmeres
Ironside
06-22-2005, 11:13
Too many. Your the one who says there are so many in the middle east. Once more name them.
In 2001 and the middle east.
Pakistan
Uzbekistan
Tajikistan
Afghanistan
Kyrgyzstan
Oman
Saudi-Arabia
Kuwait
Quatar
Bahrain
Egypt
Turkey
We can add Iraq to that list now.
No Israel BTW.
Link (http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302map1.pdf)
Happy now?
But we do patrol your coasts, maintain an early warning system and keep a division in Alaska. It's a mutually beneficial relationship.
Preparations for invasion! Gah! ~:eek:
But, Iraq aside, there's times you guys haven't stood with us when we could have used it.
Likewise, I'm sure. ~;)
Mulrooney left us hanging in the breeze a few times...
Better hanging in the breeze than what he did to us. That guy was the worst of the worst of political scum and he robbed us blind for eight years. Except for perhaps several of our more notorious serial killers, Mulroney will go down in history as the most hated man in our country's existence.
...but honestly, if the Danes started launching missile attacks out of Greenland, and we asked you to sit tight and take it for a bit, do you really think you would have?
Well, we did accept all the flights heading towards the US and let them land here the day of 9/11. God knows at the time we thought one or two might be flying bombs. I'm not fishing for a national thank you, just saying that we truly were prepared to take one on the chin for you.
Also, concerning Israel's desire to strike Iraq and their agreement not to, it's not like they knew where they going, they would have had to search a vast area that was already full of US aircraft and Allied special forces looking for the Scuds. They would have ended up tooling around like everyone else and the coalition would have dissolved and Israel would have been in more danger as their would have been less military assets and international cohesion intact to defeat Iraq and their Scuds. And Israel was paid off in cash and weapons for their patience as well as far I know. Although I completely agree Israel showed great patience to sit back and take it, there is little evidence their involvement, short of nuking Iraq, would have made any difference.
One good example of how deep our relationship goes is it was Canada patrolling some of our domestic airspace when we launched the first strikes against Afghanistan and had to send some domestically based wings overseas. I apologize. :bow:
Those were our preparations for invasion. :wink3:
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 11:45
it is a complete farce
Ceasar , how would you describe the creation of the State of Israel as anything other than a farce ?
Ironside
Happy now?
Shhhhh ... I think he may have difficulty with counting , don't rub it in ~;)
caesar44
06-22-2005, 12:00
what ? i really really really don't have the ability to understand such a complexed argument
i let it to be just a sarcasm
caesar44
06-22-2005, 12:06
In 2001 and the middle east.
Pakistan
Uzbekistan
Tajikistan
Afghanistan
Kyrgyzstan
Oman
Saudi-Arabia
Kuwait
Quatar
Bahrain
Egypt
Turkey
We can add Iraq to that list now.
No Israel BTW.
Link (http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302map1.pdf)
Happy now?
you forgat iran north korea libya syria russia sudan china but no , no israel
where had gone the common sense , where ? maybe we will find it in the next arab who is going to blast himself on american soldiers .........
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 12:07
what ? i really really really don't have the ability to understand such a complexed argument
Its a simple fact , nothing complex about it at all Ceasar , from the Balfour Declaration , the controls on immigration , the allocation of land and the drawing of borders . An absolute farce .
And the US Presidents writings on the creation of the State sum it all up perfectly .
caesar44
06-22-2005, 12:11
between holocaust and "farce" (?????) i prefer the second
well (Well) in the name of the jewish people i thank you beirut (Beirut) to let us exists ~:cheers:
No thanks needed. As far as I have heard, the Jewish people existed prior to my birth. So as much as I appreciate the thought, I cannot in good conscience accept all the credit.
i (I) thank the canadian people who fought for us in 1948 against 7 arab states and established our jewish empire
Don't forget Canadians like my father who fought (and beat!) the Nazis in WWII.
i (I) thank the usa (USA) for its war against sadam in 1991 that saved us from iraqi occupation (ah sorry the war was in kuwait for some oil gallons)
Yes, I believe Israel owes the US a great deal of thanks. A great deal indeed. Perhaps one day that gratitude will actually appear in the light of day.
i (I) thank you again dear beirut for showing us again (in 2005 ce) that a small nation that have a big empire (1/26 of the size of Texas) could create such a hatred as if we are in 1930' germany
My dearest Caeser44, again, no thanks needed. Mind you, I'm not certain as to what hatred you imply. Do you speak of the hatred of the Palestinians towards Israel for Israel's decades long subjugation of the Palestinian people? The hatred for the torture? The hatred for the humiliations and beatings and arrests and detentions without trial? The hatred for the theft of land and water and resources? The hatred for the apartheid? The hatred for the denial of the basic necessities of life? The hatred for the bulldozing of homes? The hatred for the thousands and thousands of Palestinian children injured, maimed and crippled by Israeli weapons.
If you could narrow it down, I would most certainly appreciate it. :bow:
you know the Nazis also did not understood how the jews control everything
I should correct you and state that the Jews did not "control everything" regardless of what you might have heard. The Nazis were mental nincompoops and racists. Many people with inferior qualities have had the same exagerated thoughts as them.
another (Another) thing - please don't analyse us , we are 12,000,000 individuals and our enemies did it for 2,000 years now
~:cheers: ~:cheers: ~:cheers:
Actually, the analysis is not mine. After watching Schiendler's List, The Piano, Life is beautiful, The Holocaust, and a myriad of other movies about the Jewish existence, and reading about the history of Israel in books by Jewish professors from Israeli universities, and reading countless newspaper editorials by Jewish writers and countless letters to the editor by Jewish readers, as well as listening to many, many stories of Jewish life from my Jewish friends and my parent's Jewish friends, I am simply relating what I have heard from jewish people themselves.
Three beers cheers! I am thankful my dear sir. But those precious brews will have to wait until after work. :bow:
maybe we will find it in the next arab who is going to blast himself on american soldiers .........
Doth he who oposeth cultural generalizations and analytical stereotypes speaketh them himself?
Aghast are we.
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 12:31
between holocaust and "farce" (?????) i prefer the second
But the holocaust was over , what has that got to do with any of this ? This farce started before the holocaust and continues today long after it ~:confused:
Ironside
06-22-2005, 12:49
you forgat iran north korea libya syria russia sudan china but no , no israel
where had gone the common sense , where ? maybe we will find it in the next arab who is going to blast himself on american soldiers .........
Little edgy here aren't we?
As I understood it the argument was the importance of Turkey and Israel as stagepoints for American troops and as allies (more or less).
3) One of two nations in the region that can offer major port facilities and airbase access to the US military. The other being Turkey.
Thus I namned those countries with American bases that Gawain asked for several times and pointed out that the ally Israel don't got any.
I'm aware that it would be stupid for the Americans to place bases in Israel, for several reasons, but that wasn't the question.
Outside the Palestina-issue I don't have any problem with Israel, infact they got some policies I like. Havn't been there, so I don't know about the people.
caesar44
06-22-2005, 13:43
about the hatred -
in a single day there are hundreds of people who get killed by dictators (including arab dictators and palestinians against palestinians) and you beirut took the most convenient case - blame the jew !!! blame israel !!! no it is not interesting to blame englishmen about their doing in north ireland or to blame the turks about the kurds or to blame the chinese about tibet or to blame the syrians about the sunni or to blame russia about the chechenians (whatever) or or or or
as simple as that
now not one word about 1,200 jews who were murdered by the palestinians in the last 3 years - if not hatred then what is it ~:confused:
Ser Clegane
06-22-2005, 13:56
:stop:
Before this thread degenerates in flaming and personal attacks (it sure is on the brink of it), I'd like to point out that this thread is about Israel and its status as an important US ally.
In this context it seems a bit strange to accuse another patron of focussing his attention in this thread on Israel.
I would appreciate if the participants of this discussion (and that is generally directed at all participants) would take a step back and calm down for a moment.
If you come to the conclusion that you would like to continue the discussion on the issue, please do so in a civilized manner. If anyone the feeling that this is rather turning into a personal issue, perhaps it would be a wise decision to refrain from further posting in this thread until things chill down a bit.
I would not like to have to close this one... :bow:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 13:59
Originally Posted by Ironside
In 2001 and the middle east.
Pakistan
Uzbekistan
Tajikistan
Afghanistan
Kyrgyzstan
Oman
Saudi-Arabia
Kuwait
Quatar
Bahrain
Egypt
Turkey
We can add Iraq to that list now.
No Israel BTW.
Link
Happy now? ]
Hell no Im not. You havent named 1 major base yet. Besides the original statement was
One of two nations in the region that can offer major port facilities and airbase access to the US military. The other being Turkey.
You notice its a two part statement. You also havent given me any major port facility. Also you havent shown that any of these countries would let us step up our use of any of these facilities Turkey again is the best of these nations and they REFUSED to let us use our own bases there.
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 14:04
as simple as that
now not one word about 1,200 jews who were murdered by the palestinians - if not hatred then what is it
Well there is this...
The Jews, I find are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as D[isplaced] P[ersons] as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog. Put an underdog on top and it makes no difference whether his name is Russian, Jewish, Negro, Management, Labor, Mormon, Baptist he goes haywire. I've found very, very few who remember their past condition when prosperity comes.
Then this...
"Jesus Christ couldn't please them when he was here on earth, so how can anyone expect that I would have any luck?"
How about ...
"I've had it with those hotheads. Don't ever admit them again, and what's more, I also never want to hear the word Palestine mentioned again."
So are those the words of someone with a hatred of Jews Ceasar ?
Farcical is it not? ~;)
just to finish some of his quotes ... "let them all go to hell."
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 14:08
You also havent given me any major port facility.
Ask General Zinni about port facilities Gawain ~D ~D ~D
Would you like a clue ? USS Cole :book:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 14:09
The Jews, I find are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as D[isplaced] P[ersons] as long as the Jews get special treatment.
You really do hate Jews dont you? How can you make such a blanket statement?
Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog
Comparing Israel to these regimes is both wrong and disgusting and makes you look silly. Maybe you should hang out with Dick Durbin.
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 14:14
You really do hate Jews dont you? How can you make such a blanket statement?
Learn your History Gawain , they are each taken word for word from President Truman .... you know the man who pushed through the craetion of the state and the partition of Palestine ~D
Comparing Israel to these regimes is both wrong and disgusting and makes you look silly.
Hey he was your President , not mine ~:cheers:
caesar44
06-22-2005, 14:38
said moses (our great rescuer) - "love the foreigner as you love yourself"
now leave it ...
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 14:59
Learn your History Gawain , they are each taken word for word from President Truman .... you know the man who pushed through the craetion of the state and the partition of Palestine
I dont care who said it. Its still wrong.
Hey he was your President , not mine
I was 6 months old at the time. I couldnt even comprehend what a president was.
Hurin_Rules
06-22-2005, 16:29
America's 'irreplacable ally' just resumed its policy of assassinations. The funniest part is, they did it WHILE ABBAS AND SHARON WERE HOLDING PEACE TALKS. They also talked about having to launch attacks with massive collateral damage in civilian areas if their assassinations don't work the first time. So, you can pretty much say bye bye ceasefire, hello holy war once again.
Unbelievable, you say? Not at all:
Israel resumes assassination policy
'Targeted killings' of Palestinian extremists had been suspended
Updated: 9:48 a.m. ET June 22, 2005
JERUSALEM - Israel said on Wednesday it had resumed an assassination policy against some Palestinian militants and could mount air strikes with the risk of civilian casualties to ensure its Gaza pullout does not come under fire.
The Israeli threats, prompted by a flare-up of Islamic Jihad militant attacks on Jewish settlers in Gaza, underscored the deterioration of a four-month-old cease-fire and followed an acrimonious Israeli-Palestinian summit.
Israel shelved “targeted killings” of militants in February as part of a truce deal. But resurgent violence has raised the specter of disruption to Israel’s planned August withdrawal from Gaza and dimmed hopes for “road map” peace talks afterwards.
Word that the assassination policy had been dusted off came with Israeli confirmation of a failed missile strike on Tuesday while Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas were holding tense talks in Jerusalem.
Missed 'opportunity'
“There was an attempt in Gaza to intercept an (Islamic Jihad) activist yesterday. It was unsuccessful,” Public Security Minister Gideon Ezra said. “An opportunity presented itself. Any means to neutralize the organization are relevant and possible.”
Islamic Jihad has resumed mortar bomb and rocket salvoes against Jewish settlements in Gaza in what it calls retaliation for continued Israeli raids to capture wanted militants.
“The attempt yesterday to kill an Islamic Jihad leader in Gaza signaled the resumption of the targeted killing policy,” an Israeli security source told Reuters.
Khaled al-Batsh, a senior Islamic Jihad leader, warned of “terrible consequences” if Israel carried out assassinations.
“The calm would thereby end. We will not be dictated to by Israel,” he told Reuters in Gaza.
Later, a senior adviser to Sharon said Israel could stage air strikes in Gaza, even at the risk of Palestinian civilian casualties, if militants tried to attack departing settlers in a bid to show they were chasing them out of occupied territory.
'Major collateral damage' possible
“Israel will act in a very resolute manner to prevent terror attacks and (militant) fire while the disengagement is being implemented,” said Eival Giladi, head of the Coordination and Strategy team in Sharon’s office.
“If pinpoint response proves insufficient, we may have to use weaponry that causes major collateral damage, including helicopters and planes, with mounting danger to people in the surrounding area,” Giladi said.
Withdrawing from Gaza under fire would be political poison for Sharon, strengthening rightist foes who have said the pullout would be perceived by the Palestinians and Arab world as a sign of weakness after four years of bloodshed.
Israeli air force drones have been hovering at low altitude over Gaza since Monday evening in an indication of preparedness for renewed lightning strikes on militants.
Tense summit
At their summit, Sharon complained to Abbas that the moderate Palestinian leader was doing little to rein in gunmen from whom he wrung a pledge of “calm” after his election in January on a platform of non-violence and peace negotiations.
Other militant groups including the most powerful, Hamas, have generally respected the truce pact. The overall level of violence is much lower than during the Palestinian revolt launched in the occupied West Bank and Gaza in 2000.
Sharon and Abbas agreed at their meeting to cooperate for as smooth as possible an evacuation of 8,500 settlers from Gaza and a few hundred among 230,000 in the West Bank set for August.
But aides to Abbas said Sharon brushed aside his requests for gestures to relieve burdens of occupation, including open borders for Gaza, a removal of a roadblock network in the West Bank and further releases of jailed Palestinians.
Abbas says such gestures would help him isolate militants.
However, Sharon stuck to his position that Abbas act first to disarm militants and ruled out diplomatic progress otherwise.
Washington counts on what would be Israel’s first uprooting of settlements on land Palestinians want for a state. Israel captured Gaza and the West Bank in the 1967 Middle East war.
Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8315567/
Hurin_Rules
06-22-2005, 16:34
Edit: Actually, I KNOW I was wrong to put you guys in the second category, and I apologize. One good example of how deep our relationship goes is it was Canada patrolling some of our domestic airspace when we launched the first strikes against Afghanistan and had to send some domestically based wings overseas. I apologize. :bow:
No problem, apology accepted.
:cheers:
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 17:51
I dont care who said it. Its still wrong.
So no apology for implying that they were my words Gawain ~;)
I was 6 months old at the time. I couldnt even comprehend what a president was.
Well whats strange is that you didn't recognise his words since you seem to consider yourself an "expert" on the policy that those quotes are about and everything surrounding it .
Or don't they include those statements in your usual propoganda sources ? do they only contain his ones about the Arabs (yes there are plenty of those as well) ?
Perhaps you should view facts from both sides of the fence every once in a while .
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2005, 17:58
So no apology for implying that they were my words Gawain
Nope you didnt post them as quotes from Truman at first but they appeared to be your own.
Well whats strange is that you didn't recognise his words since you seem to consider yourself an "expert" on the policy that those quotes are about and everything surrounding it .
Yes I know every word spoken by everyone on the matter. Id like to see that statement in context. If thats what he believed why would he back Israel?
Perhaps you should view facts from both sides of the fence every once in a while .
I always do ~;)
Tribesman
06-22-2005, 18:20
Nope you didnt post them as quotes from Truman at first but they appeared to be your own.
:book:
So are those the words of someone with a hatred of Jews
just to finish some of his quotes ... "let them all go to hell."
Or are you adding faulty eyesight to your faulty memory ?
Id like to see that statement in context.
Which one, one of them , which you describe as silly , he used several times in different situations .
I'll tell you what , if you type in Truman into your search engine you may find some information , I think there may be one or two sites on him as I believe he may have been slightly well known for some reason or other .
Or you could go to the bookstore and buy one of the many biographies that have been written .
sharrukin
06-22-2005, 20:07
Pakistan
Uzbekistan
Tajikistan
Afghanistan
Kyrgyzstan
Oman
Saudi-Arabia
Kuwait
Quatar
Bahrain
Egypt
Turkey
Of all these nations the only one that is reliable is Turkey. Yes I know the Americans didn't get to use the air bases during the Iraqi war but the cause was dodgy and under the false colours of an anti-terrorist crusade.
You lied, threatened, bullied and bribed nations and the reaction from your friends and allies was a hostile one. You seem to think that if you lay enough money on the table that you can buy friends. It doesn't work that way. Yes some nations will take your money and do your bidding because that's what mercenaries do!
If things got bad Turkey is the only one on that list who would be there as would Isreal.
PanzerJaeger
06-22-2005, 21:04
If things got bad Turkey is the only one on that list who would be there as would Isreal.
Yea right. Turkey is just as much a fair weather friend as France.
Do you honestly believe that if there was any doubt about the outcome of a war that Turkey would really help the US?
Israel, Britain, Japan, and maybe Australia are our only true allies. Everyone else in the world would love to stab us in the back as the rest of the world has never really liked America. Sure they'll take our money and lives when their backs are to the walls, but I cannot honestly see France or Germany helping America in a time of need without significant financial persuasion.
Unfortunately Americans are very naive about our position in the world. They seem to forget that the majority of their ancestors are over here because Europe, Asia or South America didnt want them. They think that because the US helped in the World Wars and fought Communism in the cold war the rest of the world loves them - not true. There has always been a deep seeded resentment toward American prosperity.
This country took the rest of the worlds "trash" and turned it into a powerhouse like none before it, to the dismay of many.
about the hatred -
in a single day there are hundreds of people who get killed by dictators (including arab dictators and palestinians against palestinians) and you beirut took the most convenient case - blame the jew !!! blame israel !!!
I disagree. I did not take the most convenient case at all. I took the most difficult case. A case that has seen an entire people, the Palestinians, reduced to a less-than-human abberation, seen only as a death statistic on the news, a people who's supporters are yelled at, blacklisted, and decried as Jew hating anti-Semites, as "worse than Hitler", as supporters of terrorism, simply for supporting the human rights of the Palestinian people. There is not one other group of oppressed people on Earth who's supporters are instantly cited as being evil simply for supporting their right to live.
no it is not interesting to blame englishmen about their doing in north ireland or to blame the turks about the kurds or to blame the chinese about tibet or to blame the syrians about the sunni or to blame russia about the chechenians (whatever) or or or or
If you would care to start a thread concerning those matters I will be delighted to assist you in condemning all forms of oppression. Hell, I was supporting the Irish back when Bobby Sands was on a hunger strike in the Maze prison. I always support Tibet freedom at every opportunity, and I personally attacked the Soviet consulate in Montreal ~:cheers: with my friends, causing one hell of a mess and ruckus, after the Soviets shot down the Korean airliner. There were only five of us and at least a dozen cops showed up with siren's screaming. They freaked when they saw the mess we made of the place.
now not one word about 1,200 jews who were murdered by the palestinians in the last 3 years - if not hatred then what is it ~:confused:
You are more than welcome to peruse my previous posts and you will see many instances where I have not only condemned the Palestinians for targeting Israeli civilians (soldiers are fair game) but have also supported Israel's right to go after them and kill them.
You have cited me as taking the easy road by blaming Israel for its actions, perhaps you might focus on those who take the easier road and support Israel regardless of the transgression.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 01:16
I disagree. I did not take the most convenient case at all. I took the most difficult case. A case that has seen an entire people, the Palestinians, reduced to a less-than-human abberation, seen only as a death statistic on the news,
BS. We are constantly shown pictures of wounded Palestinian children or Israeli tanks rolling through a Palestinian town with kids throwing rocks at them. I dont know of anyone who thinks of Palestinians as you have described. Now ill led and maybe a little stupid as a people . Thats another story.
There is not one other group of oppressed people on Earth who's supporters are instantly cited as being evil simply for supporting their right to live.
So the Plaestinans are called evil because they support their right to live or is it because they believe its their their right even their duty to murder Jews?
Don Corleone
06-23-2005, 01:23
PJ, I might consider adding Japan to my list, it's hard to say as they have no standing army, so it's hard to say what they'd do with it.
But you can't leave Canada off. I made that mistake, and it was unfair. They may not have supported us in Iraq, but we've come too far, fought too many battles together, to just write them off as a fair weather friend.
I may have been a little harsh in my use of the term 'fair weather friend' to describe other NATO members last night, and you might be too, but I think the 'ally' days are surely over. More akin to 'friendly rivals'.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 01:25
But you can't leave Canada off. I made that mistake, and it was unfair. They may not have supported us in Iraq, but we've come too far, fought too many battles together, to just write them off as a fair weather friend.
And lets face it, they dont have very much fair weather up there. ~D
Israel, Britain, Japan, and maybe Australia are our only true allies. Everyone else in the world would love to stab us in the back as the rest of the world has never really liked America.
There are not sufficient adjectives in the English language to describe the many levels at which that statement is not only blisteringly wrong, blatantly wrong, historicaly wrong, but just simply... wrong.
Never mind WWI, where we showed up three years before you. Never mind WWII where we showed up two years before you. Never mind Korea where we fought side by side. Never mind the day after 9/11 when thousands of stranded Americans were welcomed in Canadian's homes and treated like family. Never mind the incredible sympathy and empathy we felt for you after 9/11. Never mind the memorial gatherings across our country in honour of those killed. Never mind the sea of American flags that flew across Canada the day after. Never mind our troops fighting right beside you in Afghanistan. Never mind any of that. Because it's infinitely easier to hide in the corner and say everybody hates me.
My God in Heaven...
BS. We are constantly shown pictures of wounded Palestinian children or Israeli tanks rolling through a Palestinian town with kids throwing rocks at them. I dont know of anyone who thinks of Palestinians as you have described. Now ill led and maybe a little stupid as a people . Thats another story.
Yes, we do see those pictures and it is about time for the truth to be seen by all. For decades all of this was hidden from view, and anyone who dared expose it was screamed at, blacklisted, and called an anti-semite in hopes of scaring them into silence. Those tactics are still being used but we are fighting them. And winning! :knight:
So the Plaestinans are called evil because they support their right to live or is it because they believe its their their right even their duty to murder Jews?
Well, since far more Palestinians have died at the hands of Jews, Israelis I should say perhaps, than Jews at the hands of Palestinians, I would say your question/statement holds as much water as a sieve.
Papewaio
06-23-2005, 02:32
Israel, Britain, Japan, and maybe Australia are our only true allies. Everyone else in the world would love to stab us in the back as the rest of the world has never really liked America. Sure they'll take our money and lives when their backs are to the walls, but I cannot honestly see France or Germany helping America in a time of need without significant financial persuasion.
I think Canada, Australia and Britain are definitly true allies. I suggest you read more about Japan (Sony's chairman for instance) view on the USA before I would state that they are a true ally.
As for Israel, it may be a true ally it may be doing it out of pure necessity.
As for Australia maybe being an ally, Australia has backed up the US far more then most other countries.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 02:37
Well, since far more Palestinians have died at the hands of Jews, Israelis I should say perhaps, than Jews at the hands of Palestinians, I would say your question/statement holds as much water as a sieve.
I see the side that suffers the most casualties is the most moral.
Productivity
06-23-2005, 03:12
and maybe Australia are our only true allies.
Maybe? Maybe? FFS we've been involved in every major war America has been involved in, justified or not, and we're still only at maybe. We've diverted resources to Iraq to you, when they are desperately needed in our own region.
We may not be able to contribute many personel, but then again we are a relatively small country population wise. In terms of per-person, I think Australia contributes plenty.
Excuse me if I don't support your (personal, not American) causes again, the way you (personal again) treat your countries allies is well out of order.
Alexander the Pretty Good
06-23-2005, 03:15
dgb, I appreciate Australia.
In fact, I'd be willing to make it the 51st state, since you guys have been so cool. ~:)
Papewaio
06-23-2005, 03:36
We will give you Canberra and the ACT as the 51st state and some cash as well. ~:cool:
Alexander the Pretty Good
06-23-2005, 03:40
ACT?
~:confused:
Don Corleone
06-23-2005, 03:40
Come on now.. Maine, the Ozarks & Tasmania are one people, waiting to be reunited.
I see the side that suffers the most casualties is the most moral.
Casualties do not equate with morality. I was merely saying that more Palestinians have been killed by Israelis than Israelis killed by Palestinians.
Since morality figures so heavilly in this matter, and since killing innocent people is immoral, then it is fair to point out who is killing the most innocent people.
The answer is Israel.
Productivity
06-23-2005, 03:54
ACT?
~:confused:
Australian Capital Territory
It's where our capital is. It's sorta close to the border of Victoria and New South Wales, so it was viewed as an acceptible compromise of where the nations capital should be.
It's also quite small, and the city is boring unless you are a politician. Nice design and some nice architechtrue, but I wouldn't want to live there...
Alexander the Pretty Good
06-23-2005, 03:58
Ah. Sounds like cardboard. ~D
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 04:35
Since morality figures so heavilly in this matter, and since killing innocent people is immoral, then it is fair to point out who is killing the most innocent people.
Not on a percentage basis. Also the Palestinian deaths are acciddents or shall we say colateral damage for the most part while the Israeli ones are intentionaly targeted at civilians. I for the life of me cannot see how any reasonable person could back the Palestinains in this matter. But thats just me. Again if anyone did this to the US we would wipe them off the planet.
Not on a percentage basis.
Did you factor in the GNP as well? What about interst rates?
Also the Palestinian deaths are acciddents or shall we say colateral damage for the most part...
Sure... fire a Hellfire into an open market and the twenty five killed and fifty five injured are, how did you say it, accidents?
How about this one - the suicide bomber on the bus was only after the driver. the other dozen people killed were, wait for it...
Accidents.
Wow, it's like Moral Magic. ~:eek:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 04:49
Did you factor in the GNP as well? What about interst rates?
Im talking of innocents vs legitinate targets.
Sure... fire a Hellfire into an open market and the twenty five killed and fifty five injured are, how did you say it, accidents?
Why are they firing this rocket? Did they just decide to go kill some innocent Palestinians or were they reacting to some terrorist acts? The problem begins and ends with the terrorism. Believe anything else and your in a dream world.
Productivity
06-23-2005, 04:50
Also the Palestinian deaths are acciddents or shall we say colateral damage for the most part
I don't htink you can say they are collateral damage. Collateral damage in my view is the unavoidable losses, due to the nature of war and conflict. Collateral damage is bad, nobody likes it, but it is clearly unavoidable. What Beirut is reffering to is not collateral damage. It is a cold, cynical judgement, that it is worth a number of civilian lives to kill a terrorist.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 04:53
It is a cold, cynical judgement, that it is worth a number of civilian lives to kill a terrorist.
I guess the allied bombing in of German and Japanese cities in WW2 wasnt the same? Thats always the rational when attacking a target in an urban enviorment.
Don Corleone
06-23-2005, 05:06
Yeah but Gawain, to DGB's point, we didn't go firebomb Dresden just to go get one guy. Don't get me wrong, I still haven't figured out the timeline, so I'm not weighing in on this latest round, but you can't claim we were moral because we freed Europe in one breath, and in the next claim because we freed Europe from Germany, we must have been moral.
No offense, but your logic is getting a little cyclical.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 05:44
but you can't claim we were moral because we freed Europe in one breath, and in the next claim because we freed Europe from Germany, we must have been moral..
I dont think thats quite what you wanted to say but I never claimed we were moral when we bombed those cities. I asked a question. It has always been my stance that they were immoral for doing so.
Yeah but Gawain, to DGB's point, we didn't go firebomb Dresden just to go get one guy.
Thats the point. At least the Israelis have a legitimate target in most case. You think killing hudreds of thousands indiscriminatly is any better than what the Israelis do? It is truly a dark day in our history. But again these dessions have to be made anytime civilians get in harms way. Also you seem to forget that these terrorists surround themselves with human shields for just such a reason. They know they cant win the fighting war so their only hope is propoganda. Thats why they have so many more deaths. Theirs is a culture of death. To die for Palestine is to have a place in heaven. It doesnt matter if have to kill 20 or 30 innocent women and children to get there. In fact thats the only way you can kill yourself and still get to paradise. How convinient. I guess thats a loophole in Muslim law.
caesar44
06-23-2005, 06:05
Yes, we do see those pictures and it is about time for the truth to be seen by all. For decades all of this was hidden from view, and anyone who dared expose it was screamed at, blacklisted, and called an anti-semite in hopes of scaring them into silence. Those tactics are still being used but we are fighting them. And winning! :knight:
Well, since far more Palestinians have died at the hands of Jews, Israelis I should say perhaps, than Jews at the hands of Palestinians, I would say your question/statement holds as much water as a sieve.
so in your opinion , in a conflict , the side who have more casualties is always the right side - that is a good theory ...... if so the americans were the bad side in the war against the nazis ! and against japan hhmmmmm good thinking beirut now sharon should tell IDF soldiers to get killed to allow the canadians to love israel ......... you should realise that after more then 2,000 years of persecutions the jews took in consideration that some people wont like us - don't worry they are going to manage that
sharrukin
06-23-2005, 09:22
Yea right. Turkey is just as much a fair weather friend as France.
Do you honestly believe that if there was any doubt about the outcome of a war that Turkey would really help the US?
Yes! It is one of the few countries outside of NATO that can be relied upon.
Israel, Britain, Japan, and maybe Australia are our only true allies. Everyone else in the world would love to stab us in the back as the rest of the world has never really liked America. Sure they'll take our money and lives when their backs are to the walls, but I cannot honestly see France or Germany helping America in a time of need without significant financial persuasion.
Unfortunately Americans are very naive about our position in the world. They seem to forget that the majority of their ancestors are over here because Europe, Asia or South America didnt want them. They think that because the US helped in the World Wars and fought Communism in the cold war the rest of the world loves them - not true. There has always been a deep seeded resentment toward American prosperity.
This country took the rest of the worlds "trash" and turned it into a powerhouse like none before it, to the dismay of many.
History did not start on September 11, 2001 and it isn't going to end there. You seem to think that your true friends and allies were revealed by your by who would support you in the Iraq adventure. Your friends and allies supported you in your declared aim to destroy terrorism. Iraq had nothing to do with that and was in fact a major setback in the war on terror.
And as for taking your money, well France, Germany, and Canada don't take your money, and Turkey didn't take the bribe you offered them did they? And yet these are the nations you are so upset at. You don't want allies, you want yes men and spearcarriers! I can tell you right now that those sorts tend to vanish when the real trouble starts. Iraq wasn't real trouble by any stretch of the imagination and to use it as a benchmark for who your friends are is an exercise in foolishness.
France fought side by side with you in the first gulf war. How exactly is that a stab in the back? Germany, Turkey and Canada sent soldiers to Afghanistan when you asked for them. Oh yes the betrayals keep coming fast and furious don't they? Canada accepted all flights carrying Americans into Canada after the 911 incident knowing full well that the reason you didn't want them was because they might crash into a skyscraper. Do you really think some terrorist nutjob wouldn't have crashed his plane into a Canadian skyscraper instead? We certainly had no such illusions, and we took them anyway! And by the way. Those were your citizens and by implication your responsibility, not ours. But when Americans were in trouble we took action just like we did during the Iranian hostage crisis. What treacherous villains we are!
I hope Vanuata and Moldavia live up to your expectations as our replacements when they take their place at the kings table!
so in your opinion , in a conflict , the side who have more casualties is always the right side - that is a good theory ...... if so the americans were the bad side in the war against the nazis ! and against japan hhmmmmm good thinking beirut
Read post #137.
now sharon should tell IDF soldiers to get killed to allow the canadians to love israel .........
I'm sure that's not necessary. Getting out of Palestine and stopping the tortures and killings and bulldozings and theft of land and water would be more then enough thank you. ~;)
you should realise that after more then 2,000 years of persecutions the jews took in consideration that some people wont like us - don't worry they are going to manage that
I'm sorry, I don't really understand what you're saying here.
Im talking of innocents vs legitinate targets.
As mentioned before, Israel has killed more innocent Palestinians than Palestinians have killed innocent Israelis. IDF soldiers are fair game.
Why are they firing this rocket? Did they just decide to go kill some innocent Palestinians or were they reacting to some terrorist acts? The problem begins and ends with the terrorism. Believe anything else and your in a dream world.
Why did they fire the rocket? Sometimes the reason is pretty specious. Something happens in Lebanon or the West bank or on the moon and a day later Hellfires are hitting an open market in Gaza. Sometimes, when you're mad, you hit what you can, not what you have to.
The problem begins with the brutal occupation of Palestine and ends with terrorism. Both are equally immoral.
My dream world, just so you know, is full of booze & broads - not bombs and bullets. :bow:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 13:53
As mentioned before, Israel has killed more innocent Palestinians than Palestinians have killed innocent Israelis. IDF soldiers are fair game.
You just dont get it. Among the Palestinian dead you will find a large proportion of combatants , in the case of the Israelis you will be hard pressed to find any.
Why did they fire the rocket? Sometimes the reason is pretty specious. Something happens in Lebanon or the West bank or on the moon and a day later Hellfires are hitting an open market in Gaza. Sometimes, when you're mad, you hit what you can, not what you have to.
So you admit the Israelis use it as a reprrisal for somethig the Palestinians do first?
The problem begins with the brutal occupation of Palestine and ends with terrorism. Both are equally immoral.
The problem began with the arab invasion of Israel. The current problems once more begin and end with terroism. How you fail to see that is beyond comprehension. No terroism no brutal Israelis.
Tribesman
06-23-2005, 14:23
The problem began with the arab invasion of Israel.
No , the problem predates the creation of the State of Israel .
The current problems once more begin and end with terroism.
The current problems are just a continuation of a long running problem that began with terrorism .
No terroism no brutal Israelis.
No brutal Israelis , no terrorism ...catch 22 ...so which way forward ?
No terrorism and no brutality .
Among the Palestinian dead you will find a large proportion of combatants , in the case of the Israelis you will be hard pressed to find any.
Care to post any figures to support that statement Gawain , you can find them at the IDF website . Oh but they will not support your claim . ~;)
Gawain of Orkeny
06-23-2005, 15:20
Well i didnt see any figurs at the site. Maybe you could post a link. I did find this interesting though
http://www1.idf.il/SIP_STORAGE/DOVER/files///7//31537.jpg
Armed Palestinian boarding a UN ambulance. Picture by Channel 10
Israel channel 10 aired yesterday Inon Maga'l item showing armed Palestinians use UNRWA ambulances to flee undercover.
Photographs taken at the Gaza Zeintun neighborhood about two weeks ago, on the same night the first APC was exploded, clearly show armed Palestinians boarding a UN-marked ambulance with a UN flag, and flee the scene.
The reporter stressed that this was not a Palestinian Red Cross ambulance, known to have transported armored Palestinians since the outbreak of events, but rather a supposedly neutral ambulance of the UN.
Nice
Ironside
06-23-2005, 16:52
]
Hell no Im not. You havent named 1 major base yet.
Ok this is only ports and airbases (there's more bases).
Pakistan:
airfields used:
Shamsi
Dalbandin
Jacobabad
Pasni
Uzbekistan:
Airfields used:
Tuzel
Chirchik
Airbases:
Karshi-Kanabad (K2) Airbase
Tajikistan
Airfields used:
Dushanbe
Afghanistan
Airbases:
Khost
Bagram
Kandahar
Mazar-e-Sharif
Kyrgyzstan
Airbases:
Ganci (IAP Manas)
Oman
Airfields used:
Thumrait
Seeb
Al-Masanah
Masirah
Ports:
Port Salalah
Mina Qabus
Saudi-Arabia
Airfields used:
Taif
King Faisal Air Base
Riyadh
King Abdul Aziz International Airport
King Khalid Air Base
King Abdul Aziz Air Base
Ports:
Yanbu' Al Bahr
King Abdul-Aziz Naval Base
Jeddah
Dammam
Kuwait
Airbases:
Ali Al Salem
Ahmed Al Jaber
Camp Udairi
Camp Doha
Airfield used:
Kuwait International Airport
Ports:
Kuwait Navy Base
Camp Doha (it's both)
Camp Arifjan
UAE (missed this one)
Airbases:
Al Dhafra
Airfield used:
Fujairah International Airport
Ports:
Port Rashid
Mina Zayed
Mina Jebel Ali
Fujairah
Quatar
Airfields used:
Al Udeid Air Base
Ports:
Mesaieed
Umm Said
Doha
Bahrain
Airfields used:
Muharraq
Shaikh Isa
Ports:
Manama
Mina Sulman
Egypt
Airfields used:
Cairo West Air Base
Beni Suef
Ports:
Port of Suez
Port Said
Hurghada
Turkey
Airbases:
Incirlik
Izmir
Link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/)
The link didn't have any info for Turkey. The airbase classification is from Tribesman's link.
Want me to list the name on every person in these bases? ~;)
] You notice its a two part statement. You also havent given me any major port facility. Also you havent shown that any of these countries would let us step up our use of any of these facilities Turkey again is the best of these nations and they REFUSED to let us use our own bases there.
How should I prove that? As Pakistan and Uzbekistan is allowing thier bases to be used even now, they are better allies than Turkey, according to what you say here. So unless anyone signed something saying that US can do anything they want to inside that country, it fall into individual cases. So I can only do massive speculation.
PanzerJaeger
06-23-2005, 17:09
Ok I should have said Australia was a true ally, not just maybe a true ally, my mistake- but Canada? Yea right.
Beirut, your country is a true ally of Britain, not the US. Simply because we were on the same side in WW2 doesnt mean it was for any reason except a mutual goal. Hell, Stalin was on our side. Canada undermined America during Vietnam and has had an anti-US stance for a long time(except when it benefits your economy to agree with us). Do you think the fact that you allowed American planes to land after 9/11 makes us allies? Id call that common courtesy.
Now mind you Im not bashing Canada for not being a good or real ally of America. Every nation does whats in its best interest. I just dont like this smile at our face/talk behind our back type of "friendship".
Hurin_Rules
06-23-2005, 17:14
Ok I should have said Australia was a true ally, not just maybe a true ally, my mistake- but Canada? Yea right.
Beirut, your country is a true ally of Britain, not the US. Simply because we were on the same side in WW2 doesnt mean it was for any reason except a mutual goal. Hell, Stalin was on our side. Canada undermined America during Vietnam and has had an anti-US stance for a long time(except when it benefits your economy to agree with us). Do you think the fact that you allowed American planes to land after 9/11 makes us allies? Id call that common courtesy.
I guess Korea, NORAD, NATO, Gulf War I and Afghanistan don't mean anything then? We're not allies, just a couple of countries that happen to live next to each other?
PanzerJaeger
06-23-2005, 17:24
Yes! It is one of the few countries outside of NATO that can be relied upon.
We are talking about Turkey right? Ive never seen them as particularly reliable allies - but maybe im wrong. Ill take your word for it as you seem to know more than me about it. :bow:
History did not start on September 11, 2001 and it isn't going to end there. You seem to think that your true friends and allies were revealed by your by who would support you in the Iraq adventure. Your friends and allies supported you in your declared aim to destroy terrorism. Iraq had nothing to do with that and was in fact a major setback in the war on terror.
Not only did they not support america - many of our "friends" cough *the french* cough actively campaigned against the war and tried to subvert america to protect their own interests and connections with a dictator.
The rhetoric and actions of many of these countries didnt signify a disagreement between allies, but open hostility toward America.
Im not bashing them for this attitude, they can say and do whatever they want, but they shouldnt still claim to be "allies".
And as for taking your money, well France, Germany, and Canada don't take your money, and Turkey didn't take the bribe you offered them did they? And yet these are the nations you are so upset at. You don't want allies, you want yes men and spearcarriers! I can tell you right now that those sorts tend to vanish when the real trouble starts. Iraq wasn't real trouble by any stretch of the imagination and to use it as a benchmark for who your friends are is an exercise in foolishness.
Hehe, France and Germany were all too happy to take American money after the World Wars. I dont buy into that "principled stance" argument. Many of our former freinds had deep connections to Iraq. They chose their own interests over the transatlantic alliance, so be it.
France fought side by side with you in the first gulf war. How exactly is that a stab in the back? Germany, Turkey and Canada sent soldiers to Afghanistan when you asked for them. Oh yes the betrayals keep coming fast and furious don't they? Canada accepted all flights carrying Americans into Canada after the 911 incident knowing full well that the reason you didn't want them was because they might crash into a skyscraper. Do you really think some terrorist nutjob wouldn't have crashed his plane into a Canadian skyscraper instead? We certainly had no such illusions, and we took them anyway! And by the way. Those were your citizens and by implication your responsibility, not ours. But when Americans were in trouble we took action just like we did during the Iranian hostage crisis. What treacherous villains we are!
Oh please, it was well established that those planes didnt have terrorists in them. Dont try and act like we passed off terrorists riddon planes onto Canada. Your acceptance, while a nice thing to do, was no heroic act.
Whats really scary is how much pride you take in it! Its as if you are saying "If we werent such good friends, we may not have let them land." ~:eek:
PanzerJaeger
06-23-2005, 17:29
I guess Korea, NORAD, NATO, Gulf War I and Afghanistan don't mean anything then? We're not allies, just a couple of countries that happen to live next to each other?
For the last 60 odd years America and Britain have shared basically the same strategic goals. If and when that situation ends, for example if Britain sides with France/Germany, we both know where Canada's loyalties would be.
Again, for the record, Im not bashing Canada! Every country should choose the path thats best for them. Im just trying to be realistic.
Tribesman
06-23-2005, 18:12
Well i didnt see any figurs at the site.
Really , well perhaps you can try the Knessett website , or the Israeli ministry of foriegn affairs website , they all publish them , I only suggested the IDF one as it has very easy to view graphics on attacks and casualties so you cannot get confused by the long lists that the other sites contain .Plus they have a big sign on the homepage saying Terrorism and another saying Statistics , they work like magic if you click on them .
Because as you correctly stated in the case of the Israelis you will be hard pressed to find any. but you forgot to add UNLESS YOU LOOK AT THE FIGURES PUBLISHED IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN BY THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT .
You might be interested to note that they also give breakdowns of Israeli civilians killed by Palestinian security forces , Palestinian Security forces killed by Israeli civilians, Palestinian civilians killed by Isreali civilians , Palestinian securiy forces killed by Israeli security forces and Israeli security forces killed by Palestinian security forces .
So lots of information there ... but try and remember what you read ~;)
Easy Graphics (http://www1.idf.il/dover/site/mainpage.asp?sl=EN&id=22&docid=37572.EN)
Tribesman
06-23-2005, 18:20
For the last 60 odd years America and Britain have shared basically the same strategic goals.
(cough)Suez(cough)
Hurin_Rules
06-23-2005, 18:50
Again, for the record, Im not bashing Canada! Every country should choose the path thats best for them. Im just trying to be realistic.
I'm not criticizing you for that. I'm just questioning the statement that the Canada is not a 'real' ally of the USA
For the last 60 odd years America and Britain have shared basically the same strategic goals. If and when that situation ends, for example if Britain sides with France/Germany, we both know where Canada's loyalties would be.
I'm not so sure. Anglos and Francophones are a smaller and smaller percentage of the Canadian population every day, and there are many Americans living in Canada. Anyway, one can be a real ally of the USA even if one has other allies. Australia is still an ally of Britain, for example, even though it has been supporting the USA. Would you say Australia is no longer an ally of Britain?
Ok I should have said Australia was a true ally, not just maybe a true ally, my mistake- but Canada? Yea right.
Beirut, your country is a true ally of Britain, not the US. Simply because we were on the same side in WW2 doesnt mean it was for any reason except a mutual goal. Hell, Stalin was on our side. Canada undermined America during Vietnam and has had an anti-US stance for a long time(except when it benefits your economy to agree with us). Do you think the fact that you allowed American planes to land after 9/11 makes us allies? Id call that common courtesy.
Now mind you Im not bashing Canada for not being a good or real ally of America. Every nation does whats in its best interest. I just dont like this smile at our face/talk behind our back type of "friendship".
Your beginning to reach there PanzerJager
When I was in the Army we not only trained with the Canadian Army - but shared officers with each other. Just like we do with Australia, Germany, Britian, and yes even France.
Ok I should have said Australia was a true ally, not just maybe a true ally, my mistake- but Canada? Yea right.
Beirut, your country is a true ally of Britain, not the US. Simply because we were on the same side in WW2 doesnt mean it was for any reason except a mutual goal. Hell, Stalin was on our side. Canada undermined America during Vietnam and has had an anti-US stance for a long time(except when it benefits your economy to agree with us). Do you think the fact that you allowed American planes to land after 9/11 makes us allies? Id call that common courtesy.
Now mind you Im not bashing Canada for not being a good or real ally of America. Every nation does whats in its best interest. I just dont like this smile at our face/talk behind our back type of "friendship".
Well, all I can say is that you (singular) obviously hate us. That's clear. But this concept of yours that we are not true friends is beyond comprehension. I think you have put yourself (singular) so far into a corner of isolationism that you wouldn't know a real friend if he showed up with an armload of Christmas presents and a dozen women.
But if that's the way you feel, fine. We'll just stay friends with the other 299,999,999 Americans.
http://www1.idf.il/SIP_STORAGE/DOVER/files///7//31537.jpg
Armed Palestinian boarding a UN ambulance. Picture by Channel 10
Nice
Israeli assassins in New Zealand with forged Canadian passports.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/horsesass/NZass.bmp
Nicer.
PanzerJaeger
06-23-2005, 19:53
Whoa, you think because I had a somewhat humorous(to me) sig picture that involved Canada I hate the country - nothing could be farther from the truth.
If I had to hate Canada for their attitude toward America Id have to hate Germany as well, and many other countries. Political differences are never a reason for hate in my book.
Whoa, you think because I had a somewhat humorous(to me) sig picture that involved Canada I hate the country - nothing could be farther from the truth.
If I had to hate Canada for their attitude toward America Id have to hate Germany as well, and many other countries. Political differences are never a reason for hate in my book.
No, I thought your sig was great. We are well able to laugh at ourselves. It's one of our hobbies.
But your very strong beliefs that our two countries have only a superficial connection and friendship, to me it truly astounding. I am very vocal about what I do not like that the US does. I do not like a great deal of what the US does. And there is not one country in the world I would rise up on my feet and help defend (truly defend, not this Iraq and Vietnam stuff) faster then the US. You may rest assured that many millions of my fellow Canadians have the exact same sentiments.
caesar44
06-23-2005, 20:54
[QUOTE=Beirut]
I am sure that's not necessary. Getting out of Palestine and stopping the tortures and killings and bulldozings and theft of land and water would be more then enough thank you. ~;)
you must be joking ha ? if the jews get out of "palestine" (just a roman name as you know in contrass with the hebrew name from the biblical times - the land of israel) where there are going to live ha (some 5,000,000) ? in canada ? nop , canada is the home of the native americans .... sorry... the home of the canadians ha ? so maybe in the USA ? no no there are some 5,000,000 jews there already so maybe in germany ? no , the jews have a bad experience there (one of my bigest understatements) maybe in france ? no they have some 10,000,000 arabs there and it is going to be the same as in "palestine" , so maybe in china ? no no there is some 1,200,000,000 people there , so maybe in egypt ? no the hebrews just left it with moses hhhmmmm maybe afghanistan ? nop there is the problem of bin (eben) laden , so , let me think.... ah yes .. in the mediterranean ? yes yes that's it !!!!!!!!!!! exactly as the arab plan !!! throw the jews to the sea !!! well beirut , i shall recommends you to the nobel peace price committee ............
"UN SHMUEN" (david ben gurion 1889 - 1973 , israel first PM and the man who learned ancient greek in 3 weeks)
~:cheers: again
[QUOTE=Beirut]
I am sure that's not necessary. Getting out of Palestine and stopping the tortures and killings and bulldozings and theft of land and water would be more then enough thank you. ~;)
you must be joking ha ? if the jews get out of "palestine" (just a roman name as you know in contrass with the hebrew name from the biblical times - the land of israel) where there are going to live ha (some 5,000,000) ?
so , let me think.... ah yes .. in the mediterranean ? yes yes that's it !!!!!!!!!!! exactly as the arab plan !!! throw the jews to the sea !!! well beirut , i shall recommends you to the nobel peace price committee ............
"UN SHMUEN" (david ben gurion 1889 - 1973 , israel first PM and the man who learned ancient greek in 3 weeks)
~:cheers: again
Um, well if they get out of Palestine they can always live in Israel. :dizzy2:
Palestine is the West bank and Gaza. You know, where all the Palestinians are.
Decaf my friend. Decaf.
And thanks for the beer!
caesar44
06-23-2005, 21:58
oh you really do not know what are you talking about ha ? sad thing...
"palestine" my dear beirut is one geographic territory , from the litani river to eilat on the red sea and judea and samaria ("palestine" for you) is in the middle of it !!!!!!! please read some books before talking about my land
you really don't know what the british mandate was ? it was all over "palestine" including judea and samaria , there was never a "palestinian" entity , you must know that ha ? now israel is willing to compromise and give these "territoties" to the "palestinians" just to stop the killing
it is that simple , but alas , sharon just want's to kill "palestinians" childrens for breakfast , you should look at him , about 150 kl' ~:handball:
I am late but I want to intervene in the actual discussion, even (or because) it deviated from the original aim.
English Assassin, the Israelis didn’t evict their neighbours. Their neighbours refused to recognised their property and decided to take it back without lawyer. The Arabs started the war immediately after the Israeli Declaration of Independence and they clearly intend to kill all the Jews… They lost the war… All the wars… However, the refusal to deal with Palestinian Authority under the pretext they were (are) terrorists is a little bit weak considering that the Haganah, Irgun and Stern were Israeli Terrorist Groups (against the Brits and Arabs).
On the other hand, the Arabs can’t ignore the fact that to go back to the Ante Bellum situation isn’t really realistic. Israel won’t give up the Golan (water). The 6 Days War started because the Syrians wanted to deny water to Israel.
Redleg, Israel attacked as much the Arab countries as the Arabs Countries attacked Israel. On this aspect, they are equal.
And when the Irgoun (I think) destroy the Hotel King David, full of British Officers, it was also terrorism… But I agree with you on the terrorist aspect of the Palestinian Resistance. I remember Munich, Lodds and Antebe, and other. BUT, I disagree on the actual Israeli politic based on humiliation of the Palestinian…
Redleg, did I train with you? Yes, we did manoeuvres with our US allies in Germany (it was a MP unit, don’t remember which one).
Beirut, unfortunately for your analyse, the US was not the first to support Israel, but USSR and France. If you have a careful look at the Israeli material during Suez and 6 Days War, you will notice that the modern tanks and planes (for the times) are French: AMX 13, Mirages, Ouragans (Dassault Aircrafts) etc… Or perhaps France is also secretly manipulated and controlled by the Jews… If it is the case, you will a problem in explaining the slight misunderstanding between France and the US today.
Don Corleone, I find your charge against France and Turkey quiet funny…. If you want to speak about allies and who betrayed who, we can speak about US training the future Vietcong against the French during the 1st Vietnam War (1945 to 1951, start of Korean War), the US (and USSR) ultimatum against the French, the British and…. Israelis during the Suez crisis…. When France had the terrorist attack in Paris and other towns, the US refused to extradite the suspects who took refuge under the pretext that the French justice wasn’t impartial, couldn’t be trusted… What about the hundred of French citizens exploded over the Chadian desert … You are the revisionist, you are re-writing history…
PanzerJager, read comment above comments: in Korean, French and Turks (among others) sent troops against a clear aggression… And the significant financial persuasion? Except after the WW2, the French paid the bills for the WW1 until 1940 (reason why Versailles treaty was so hard on Germany)… About Turkey, they accepted medium range nuclear missile on their territory (the same that Kennedy had to withdraw in exchange of the Cuban Missile). If that is not to be an ally, what is it for you?
Gawain of Orkeny, I worked 10 years in Humanitarian Help, in 3 wars… It is the first time I see a UN ambulance. A sticker is a sticker, not a proof of UN involvement… My own vehicle was stolen and used by fighters. I don’t thing they took the time to remove the logo, and I don’t thing my organisation was part in the conflict…
Caesar44, there isn’t 10,000,000 Arabs in France. Stop reading the extreme right French newspapers… French population is around 60,000,000 (including all ethnic backgrounds) and, by the way, has the biggest Jewish population in Europe…
oh you really do not know what are you talking about ha ? sad thing...
"palestine" my dear beirut is one geographic territory , from the litani river to eilat on the red sea and judea and samaria ("palestine" for you) is in the middle of it !!!!!!! please read some books before talking about my land
you really don't know what the british mandate was ? it was all over "palestine" including judea and samaria , there was never a "palestinian" entity , you must know that ha ? now israel is willing to compromise and give these "territoties" to the "palestinians" just to stop the killing
it is that simple , but alas , sharon just want's to kill "palestinians" childrens for breakfast , you should look at him , about 150 kl' ~:handball:
My dearest sir, I must say I enjoy your posts greatly. Between the utter lack of punctuation, the non-existent grammar, the complete abuse of the English language, and the non-adherence to any form of conventional sentence structure, added to this the great gusto with which you write, I think your posts are just wonderful. Picasso with a pen. ~:)
Your land? Do you live there? or does the whole place really belong to you?
Also, and it pains me to have to point this out, once the Palestinian people gain their independence from Israel, where they live, the Palestinians, will - be - called - wait for it - Palestine. it is this "geographic territory" that the Israelis must get out of.
I didn't know Sharon liked to eat babies. I thought he was into bagels and eggs, just like me.
PanzerJaeger
06-23-2005, 22:41
I didn't know Sharon liked to eat babies. I thought he was into bagels and eggs, just like me.
Nope.. the man cant function without at least two babies-over-easy before he starts his day.
caesar44
06-23-2005, 22:58
dear beirut
do you want to talk hebrew ? if you have not noticed english is not my language , wow such an arrogance !!
if a tourist will come to israel and talk with me in hebrew as bad as he can , the last thing i will do is to make remarks on his language
never mind , we the jews follow our tradition and forgive a man's mistakes
i hope you are learning some hebrew words just to bring smiles on the faces of your jewish friends ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:)
ah yes i am living "there" ups i just saw a plane attacking some innocents "palestinians" , now i am feeling good !!!
i hope that you can distinguish sarcasm...
grammar shramar - "people tends to relate to meaningless things when they have no real argument" (caesar 44 , 2005)
Snowhobbit
06-23-2005, 23:06
One could argue that grammar is important since it aids in conveing the message...
:thinking2:
dear beirut
do you want to talk hebrew ? if you have not noticed english is not my language , wow such an arrogance !!
Not arrogance at all, since I didn't know where you were from, I thought you might just be one more person who gets lazy when writing on the net. My apologies therefore. :bow:
we the jews follow our tradition and forgive a man's mistakes
No doubt. That would be in keeping with the translation of the word charity into Hebrew which would be "duty" in English.
i hope you are learning some hebrew words just to bring smiles on the faces of your jewish friends ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:) ~:)
Hell, most of them can't speak hebrew either.
ah yes i am living "there" ups i just saw a plane attacking some innocents "palestinians" ,
Well damnit man, tell them it to stop!
grammar shramar - "people tends to relate to meaningless things when they have no real argument" (caesar 44 , 2005)
And yet you apply correct grammatical English idioms while dismissing grammar and follow it with a quote. Interesting.
caesar44
06-23-2005, 23:50
[QUOTE=Beirut]
No doubt. That would be in keeping with the translation of the word charity into Hebrew which would be "duty" in English.
What ? ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused:
Charity in hebrew is "tsedaka" , from the hebrew word "tsedek" , and "tsedek" means justice !
"Let the gentile speak's as he wish , what is important is what the jews do" (popular jew saying when prosecuted , that is -always)
:book:
caesar44
06-23-2005, 23:52
One could argue that grammar is important since it aids in conveing the message...
:thinking2:
so you did not understood my message ..... damn ~;)
sharrukin
06-24-2005, 00:05
History did not start on September 11, 2001 and it isn't going to end there. You seem to think that your true friends and allies were revealed by your by who would support you in the Iraq adventure. Your friends and allies supported you in your declared aim to destroy terrorism. Iraq had nothing to do with that and was in fact a major setback in the war on terror.
Not only did they not support america - many of our "friends" cough *the french* cough actively campaigned against the war and tried to subvert america to protect their own interests and connections with a dictator.
The rhetoric and actions of many of these countries didnt signify a disagreement between allies, but open hostility toward America.
Im not bashing them for this attitude, they can say and do whatever they want, but they shouldnt still claim to be "allies".
What do you think an ally is? Ohio? Do you think they are supposed to do exactly what you want them to do, when you want it? Is that what you call friendship? I ask because you will never find it any more than Soviet Russia did. They held that point of view and the allies they had were made so by the barrel of a gun. There is no other way to find that sort of ally.
They don't claim to be allies they simply are your allies. And the open hostility was toward the Bush Junior administration not Americans are your nation. BTW your own government and Haliburton have more than a few connections themselves to the "dictator" you refer to.
You talk about "Old Europe" and how feeble and ineffectual they are, and then are enraged when it turns out they can still fix your little red wagon. You are belligerent and abusive towards them are then shocked and surprised when they give you a return poke in the eye, by thwarting you at the UN.
You know it's interesting the difference between Bush senior and Bush junior. They both had a war against Iraq to fight and an international coalition to build. There the similarities end.
Bush Senior;
"THE first President Bush has told his son that hopes of peace in the Middle East would be ruined if a war with Iraq were not backed by international unity."
"He also urged the President to resist his tendency to bear grudges, advising his son to bridge the rift between the United States, France and Germany.
“You’ve got to reach out to the other person. You’ve got to convince them that long-term friendship should trump short-term adversity,” he said."
Bush Junior;
"Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists."
The Donald Rumsfeld comments on "Old Europe"
Rumsfeld lumping Germany in with pariah states like Cuba and Libya. And this just before a visit to Germany
Belgium is ridiculed because it blocks NATO equipment being shipped to Turkey before NATO has given its approval.
American vilification of the Europeans and the French in particular.
Meanwhile the American Congress decides to take stern action against French Toast and French Fries by renaming them Freedom Toast and Freedom Fries. That a honourable institution should have ever seen it's halls trivialized by such utter nonsense, is an insult to the far better men who once graced it's halls.
The incompetence of the Bush Junior administration is manifest.
Bush Senior knew about consensus building and he built alliances when no one thought he could. Ronald Reagan was also adept at this. Bush Junior destroys them with an almost willful glee, and is bewildered when he's almost alone at the moment of decision. Bush Junior's big achievement; A sizable minority of Americans and the populace of every nation on the planet Earth was opposed to the war in Iraq. That is first rank incompetence, no question about it. Compare that to the father!
George Bush Junior is a badly educated fool with as questionable a military record as Bill Clinton. His decision to not show up for National Guard duty is not really an option he is going to allow for the guardsmen being sent to Iraq is it?
Clinton at least was so self involved he was hardly dangerous, besides his wife had brains and she could rein him in if he got out of hand. George Bush Junior IMO is one of the worst American Presidents in history.
Bush Senior; TBM Avenger pilot with VT-51, he flew 58 combat missions off the decks of the USS San Jancinto. Took part in the "Marianas Turkey Shoot," Shot down over Chi-Chi-Jima, in the Bonin Islands until rescued by the submarine USS Finback. Awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, amidst other decorations.
I seem to have a lot more respect for the Presidency of the United States than you do, as this man is simply not worthy of the office. Men like George Bush Senior and Ronald Reagan (IMO one of the best you ever had) are worthy and to have that buffoon sit in their place is a disgrace.
Hehe, France and Germany were all too happy to take American money after the World Wars. I dont buy into that "principled stance" argument. Many of our former freinds had deep connections to Iraq. They chose their own interests over the transatlantic alliance, so be it.
And you, the Americans were all too happy to take the money from desperate nations fighting the Nazi's before the war.The list of those who were there facing the Nazi threat includes Canadians, Australians, Czechs, FRENCHMEN, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Norwegians, Poles, Yugoslavs, Greeks, South Africans, Indians, Chinese, and New Zealanders. You sat by while others did the dying and raked in the cash from arms and munitions sales. Real nice! A fine example of sterling character if ever I have seen one.
And while WE were fighting and dying in battle against the Germans you were spending OUR money getting ready for the upcoming battles, upcoming for you that is. You see, you knew perfectly well that a war was coming with Germany and you still didn't do what was right. Many others did and they didn't have to be dragged kicking and screaming into making a moral choice.
Pearl harbour is what finally got you involved and you then proceeded to talk about the 'Great Moral Crusade' you had embarked on. The need at the time was too desperate for us to point out the obvious. And you have been marching off ever since going on and on, about how you 'rescued Europe' and about how ungrateful they are.
And in fact the Americans never declared war on Germany. Even after the pearl harbour attack, they didn't. It was Germany that declared war on them! You didn't even break off diplomatic relations with them. This while the death squads were busy at work eliminating jews, Gypsies, and slavs as fast as they could. You, like Stalins communist regime, had to have the Germans make the first move because you didn't care to step up when it counted. Unlike the French, British, Canadians, Australians and others who did step up when Poland was attacked. France lost 120,000 dead and 200,000 wounded in 6 weeks. Where were you? France helped you in your revolutionary war. They were your allies in World War One, so where were these 'noble' Americans when it mattered? Oh yeah. Counting your Francs, Pounds and Dollars.
So if you want to begin a conversation about shitty allies, start at home. I am sure the Poles could tell you a few stories about the wisdom of trusting Americans (Yalta), as could the South Vietnamese. The ex-Shah of Iran probably has a few stories himself. Leaving aside whether or not you should have given your word to some of these folks, is the outstanding fact that you broke your word to them. Give me a list of French betrayals and compare it to your own and then talk to me about honour!
You as a nation are hardly in a position to talk about moral purpose, true allies and trust. You don't have the credentials.
And to be honest neither do we, or the Europeans. Their failure to act when they should have, does not give them, or us such credentials either. Bosnia and Kosovo, and Rwanda are examples of our failures. We are, none of us, perfect.
Oh please, it was well established that those planes didnt have terrorists in them. Dont try and act like we passed off terrorists riddon planes onto Canada. Your acceptance, while a nice thing to do, was no heroic act.
If that was the case Panzerjager then why didn't you take them? If there was no danger what the heck were all those Americans doing here? Your entire national airspace was shut down for a reason, and that reason is that your government had no idea if there were more suicide planes out there or not. Your government was in hiding, in an at the time undisclosed location because they feared exactly that. Are you saying you believe this was some form of elaborate prank on the part of the American government?
Whats really scary is how much pride you take in it! Its as if you are saying "If we werent such good friends, we may not have let them land." ~:eek:
No, in fact we would have let them land regardless, as we have let other flights land that the American government has concerns about since the 911 incident.And yes I do take pride in helping our American friends because it was what we should have done.
You may not see Canada and these other nations as allies and friends but we see America as a friend and ally. If ever a threat materialized to the United States, we and the others, France included, would go to the mat for you. If you see us as disposable allies of convenience, that is to your shame, but if the day comes when you need us, you will find out how wrong you are!
PanzerJaeger
06-24-2005, 01:02
What do you think an ally is? Ohio?
An ally is a nation that doesnt actively work against America on the global stage and run elections based on anti-american rhetoric.
You would think the European nations would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator - especially since all they had to do was approve of it, no troops or anything.
But no, not only did they not even tacitly approve of removing a dictator, they actively worked to keep him in power. As a former German im ashamed that my old country hasnt learned anything. :no:
I wont even adress all that Bush-bashing. Its tired and old. If the guy is such a bad leader, why did he get elected again?
The funny thing is - the same stuff was said about Reagan. He was dumb, a cowboy, blah blah blah.
And you, the Americans were all too happy to take the money from desperate nations fighting the Nazi's before the war.
LoL - do you not realize how hypocrytical you are being? You bash America for going in and taking out a dictator who attacked his neighbors, now you bash America for not going in and attacking a dictator who hadnt done anything to us! In some people's eyes America is just bad - all the time. Welcome to the Blame America First club, enjoy your stay.. :dizzy2:
You as a nation are hardly in a position to talk about moral purpose, true allies and trust. You don't have the credentials.
Ohh now your just trying to earn brownie points!
The difference is that these days America is the one taking down tyranical governments and Europe is the one fighting to keep them in place.
If that was the case Panzerjager then why didn't you take them? If there was no danger what the heck were all those Americans doing here? Your entire national airspace was shut down for a reason, and that reason is that your government had no idea if there were more suicide planes out there or not. Your government was in hiding, in an at the time undisclosed location because they feared exactly that. Are you saying you believe this was some form of elaborate prank on the part of the American government?
The airports were closed so no terrorists could board anymore aircraft. But I dont want to push this point. It was a good thing you did - and we all apreciate it!
You may not see Canada and these other nations as allies and friends but we see America as a friend and ally. If ever a threat materialized to the United States, we and the others, France included, would go to the mat for you. If you see us as disposable allies of convenience, that is to your shame, but if the day comes when you need us, you will find out how wrong you are!
Yea right. Its great that you feel that way but I doubt a majority of your countrymen or your government do. I will be shortly posting a new thread about how much our allies hate us. Look for it soon.
"Let the gentile speak's as he wish , what is important is what the jews do" (popular jew saying when prosecuted , that is -always)
:book:
I always enjoy racially motivated sayings. South Africa had many saying like that.
sharrukin
06-24-2005, 03:15
What do you think an ally is? Ohio?
An ally is a nation that doesnt actively work against America on the global stage and run elections based on anti-american rhetoric.
You would think the European nations would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator - especially since all they had to do was approve of it, no troops or anything.
But no, not only did they not even tacitly approve of removing a dictator, they actively worked to keep him in power. As a former German im ashamed that my old country hasnt learned anything. :no:
You mean like the election Bush and the Republicans ran on anti-french rhetoric? And what about your active work against the French, Germans and others?Or do these 'standards' for what an ally is, and is not only apply when it's to your benefit?
You would think the Americans would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator's like the one in Rwanda who killed hundreds of thousands. Once again where was the moral outrage on your part OR ours when that was going on? It seems that there is direct relationship between the economic benefits and the level of indignation. You and the French are remarkably similar in that regard!
I wont even adress all that Bush-bashing. Its tired and old. If the guy is such a bad leader, why did he get elected again?
You should address the Bush bashing because he and his keystone cops administration is what has angered so many people and nations and NOT the American nation or people. Bush Junior is not America and trying to link the two just won't cut it!
And how in God's name did Clinton get elected again? His wisdom and upright moral character? You Panzerjager obviously believe that Bill Clinton was a terrific leader, right?
The funny thing is - the same stuff was said about Reagan. He was dumb, a cowboy, blah blah blah.
A lot of nonsense was said about Reagan just as it is said about any political figure. One thing he never did was to alienate his allies or ignore advice he didn't want to hear. He knew how to lead and in fact did exactly that on the issue of cruise missiles in Europe which was a VERY unpopular move in Europe but he had the tact and wisdom to make it happen despite all that opposition.
Quote:
And you, the Americans were all too happy to take the money from desperate nations fighting the Nazi's before the war.
LoL - do you not realize how hypocrytical you are being? You bash America for going in and taking out a dictator who attacked his neighbors, now you bash America for not going in and attacking a dictator who hadnt done anything to us! In some people's eyes America is just bad - all the time. Welcome to the Blame America First club, enjoy your stay.. :dizzy2:
I thought America sat back and sold weapons to the Iraqi's along with the French when Iraq attacked it neighbour Iran. Where were the bugles and the banners then? Didn't you filter cash and assistance through Kuwait and the Saudi's to Iraq? It's the same old song with different players! When Iraq threatened your oil supply suddenly it becomes a whole different story, so I guess I can understand why you get :dizzy2: . I don't blame America for acting in their own best interests but I don't mistake it for some Moral Crusade either. There's nothing hypocritical about seeing you, as one country among others, with your fair share of faults. You are not God's gift to the nations, nor are you the chosen people!
Quote:
You as a nation are hardly in a position to talk about moral purpose, true allies and trust. You don't have the credentials.
Ohh now your just trying to earn brownie points!
No. I am trying to point out that America is no more virtuous than any other nation and trying to make a moral stand on such shaky ground is not a good idea.
The difference is that these days America is the one taking down tyranical governments and Europe is the one fighting to keep them in place.
Fighting in Afghanistan you mean? Wait, no...I suppose that doesn't fit the preconceived notion of European villainy so we shouldn't mention that. American support for numerous tyrannical governments is well documented just like European support is!
Quote:
If that was the case Panzerjager then why didn't you take them? If there was no danger what the heck were all those Americans doing here? Your entire national airspace was shut down for a reason, and that reason is that your government had no idea if there were more suicide planes out there or not. Your government was in hiding, in an at the time undisclosed location because they feared exactly that. Are you saying you believe this was some form of elaborate prank on the part of the American government?
The airports were closed so no terrorists could board anymore aircraft. But I dont want to push this point. It was a good thing you did - and we all apreciate it!
Then why not just stop any planes from taking off? Pretty simple solution, and then let all those planes low on fuel land as they want to. The answer is obvious. And I am glad you appreciate it as I aim to please!
Quote:
You may not see Canada and these other nations as allies and friends but we see America as a friend and ally. If ever a threat materialized to the United States, we and the others, France included, would go to the mat for you. If you see us as disposable allies of convenience, that is to your shame, but if the day comes when you need us, you will find out how wrong you are!
Yea right. Its great that you feel that way but I doubt a majority of your countrymen or your government do. I will be shortly posting a new thread about how much our allies hate us. Look for it soon.
Ahh, the man of constant sorrow. Betrayed by so many and loved by so few. And all you were trying to do is save the world from itself. The majority of my countrymen DO feel that way, even the ones who don't much like the United States. There is an element of anti-americanism in Canada. We couldn't exist as a nation if there wasn't IMHO. But that is a far cry from hating you, or not coming to your aid if ever you needed it.
Productivity
06-24-2005, 04:19
grammar shramar
Actually, you are on a forum, of which the primary language is English, so the onus is upon you to write in a way that is vaguely comprehensible.
Regardless, as a trend I've found those who learn a language, as a second language, tend to have better grammar than native speakers, because they learn the technicalities of the grammar. So that argument really doesn't hold sway.
PanzerJaeger
06-24-2005, 05:12
You mean like the election Bush and the Republicans ran on anti-french rhetoric? And what about your active work against the French, Germans and others?Or do these 'standards' for what an ally is, and is not only apply when it's to your benefit?
Hehe, the guy ran on a lot of issues but none of which were Anti-french.
You would think the Americans would be in full support of removing a vicious dictator's like the one in Rwanda who killed hundreds of thousands. Once again where was the moral outrage on your part OR ours when that was going on? It seems that there is direct relationship between the economic benefits and the level of indignation. You and the French are remarkably similar in that regard!
So its your opinion that if we cant remove all dictators, we shouldnt even attempt to remove any?
A lot of nonsense was said about Reagan just as it is said about any political figure. One thing he never did was to alienate his allies or ignore advice he didn't want to hear. He knew how to lead and in fact did exactly that on the issue of cruise missiles in Europe which was a VERY unpopular move in Europe but he had the tact and wisdom to make it happen despite all that opposition.
Its also interesting to note that the European allies had the soviets breathing down their necks. Now that an immediate threat is gone, theyre singing a different tune - as usual.
I thought America sat back and sold weapons to the Iraqi's along with the French when Iraq attacked it neighbour Iran. Where were the bugles and the banners then? Didn't you filter cash and assistance through Kuwait and the Saudi's to Iraq? It's the same old song with different players! When Iraq threatened your oil supply suddenly it becomes a whole different story, so I guess I can understand why you get . I don't blame America for acting in their own best interests but I don't mistake it for some Moral Crusade either. There's nothing hypocritical about seeing you, as one country among others, with your fair share of faults. You are not God's gift to the nations, nor are you the chosen people!
Even with all those words you didnt adress the main point. You criticise America for going in and taking out a vicious dictator in 2003, yet you criticise America for not going in and taking out a dictator in 1939. You cant have it both ways.
No. I am trying to point out that America is no more virtuous than any other nation and trying to make a moral stand on such shaky ground is not a good idea.
I think America is more virtuous than many countries. Thats the problem these days, everyone has a UN type attitude. Thats how Iraq got on the commission for human rights. Dont give me that "Everyone's just as good as everyone else" BS because its not true. When was the last time America gassed a group of people it didnt like?
Fighting in Afghanistan you mean? Wait, no...I suppose that doesn't fit the preconceived notion of European villainy so we shouldn't mention that. American support for numerous tyrannical governments is well documented just like European support is!
Saddam has killed far more people, and invaded far more countries than the Taliban ever did. Even after WW2 - Europe fought to keep him in power.. thats something to be proud about.. ~:rolleyes:
Ahh, the man of constant sorrow. Betrayed by so many and loved by so few. And all you were trying to do is save the world from itself. The majority of my countrymen DO feel that way, even the ones who don't much like the United States. There is an element of anti-americanism in Canada. We couldn't exist as a nation if there wasn't IMHO. But that is a far cry from hating you, or not coming to your aid if ever you needed it.
Please refer to my thread about shifting alliances. Our so called "allies" in Europe and Canada would rather be allied with communist China. Considering those numbers, i think you are in the minority if you truly mean what you say about coming to America's aid. In any event, there are other countries in the world who havent taken their freedoms for granted.
Franconicus
06-24-2005, 07:47
Its also interesting to note that the European allies had the soviets breathing down their necks. Now that an immediate threat is gone, theyre singing a different tune - as usual.
Do you talk about Europe or the US. When we both fought cold war there were common ideals. No one was thinking about preventive wars or hurting human rights. Yes, this has changed now that the threat is gone!
[QUOTE=PanzerJager]Please refer to my thread about shifting alliances. Our so called "allies" in Europe and Canada would rather be allied with communist China. QUOTE] Did you think before you wrote this?
They create deserts and call it peace.
caesar44
06-24-2005, 16:28
Actually, you are on a forum, of which the primary language is English, so the onus is upon you to write in a way that is vaguely comprehensible.
Regardless, as a trend I've found those who learn a language, as a second language, tend to have better grammar than native speakers, because they learn the technicalities of the grammar. So that argument really doesn't hold sway.
when some one is calling me (that is my nation , race , people etc') a murderer , a thief and so on, i really wont expect myself to be dr' grammar considering that english is not my language
and if you read my posts and did not understood it - that is your problem
and please don't be so arrogant like "primary language is english" ... give me a break i am not on trial here
Tribesman
06-24-2005, 18:27
when some one is calling me (that is my nation , race , people etc') a murderer , a thief and so on,
Yes Caesar , and your nation has a little dispute (well several really) over what land actually is your nation and what land is not .
If you take something that is not yours and claim it as your own , then thief is an appropriate word .
After all , your nation did sign up to the international agreements that forbid a country siezing territory did it not ?
Oh , and it signed up to the agreements that forbid the transfer and settlement of its civilian population onto occupied territories did it not ?
So as well as calling your nation a thief we can call it a liar too ~:cheers:
As for calling it a murderer , that would have to go on a case by case basis , sometimes it would be an appropriate label , other times it certainly would not be .
Papewaio
06-25-2005, 08:39
Guys take a chill pill, head to the frontroom, gaze at the babethread and find out which one you both think is cute.
Israeli girls are cute. ~:cheers:
If Canada invades Israel, as one gentlemean put forth we might, it would only be for the food and the women. :chef: :kiss2:
Papewaio
06-25-2005, 13:05
Israeli girls are cute, but why a bloke dressed as one for the Eurovision song contest???
Well, if the historical stats of homosexuality are to be believed, 1 in 10 Israelis bats for the other team.
Maybe he's one of the one.
caesar44
06-25-2005, 16:39
when some one is calling me (that is my nation , race , people etc') a murderer , a thief and so on,
Yes Caesar , and your nation has a little dispute (well several really) over what land actually is your nation and what land is not .
If you take something that is not yours and claim it as your own , then thief is an appropriate word .
After all , your nation did sign up to the international agreements that forbid a country siezing territory did it not ?
Oh , and it signed up to the agreements that forbid the transfer and settlement of its civilian population onto occupied territories did it not ?
So as well as calling your nation a thief we can call it a liar too ~:cheers:
As for calling it a murderer , that would have to go on a case by case basis , sometimes it would be an appropriate label , other times it certainly would not be .
Wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwoooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!
Such a hard words , even for an arab ~:)
PzJg, when did Schroeder win the elections on American Bashing? He won the election on no war position… In doing that he just surfed on the Germans public opinion which is what we call normally democracy… ~;)
Ah, the US went in war to remove a dictator… So, why this one and why now (well, two years ago)? In my (humble) opinion, North Korea is more dangerous…
I thing you are right not to address the Bush-Bushing. Too difficult to defend the guy, who just lied, blackmailed, tried to bride, disdained all his potential allies and allies (see the poor Tony now) and was too quick to claim victory…
To re-elect a bad leader isn’t a proof by itself of quality: the French elected Chirac twice (for the same reason than the Americans, no better choice). ~D
For sure Saddam attacked his neighbours. But when it was Iran, the US didn’t care, in fact enjoyed it. I can’t blame them but… So, perhaps, you are also a little bit of a hypocrite. Because it wasn’t question to remove a dictator, it was question of WMD. Links with Al-Quaida, and immediate fears…
I can’t believe you wrote that; for me, just to approve an intervention without sending troops is even worse than to be against the operation. I think a song from the Green Berets says something like that: You have to believe what you are saying, and to speak only if you act, to be brave and to be proud, to win your Green Beret… Of course, the original words are probably better, but it is a translation from a translation… :book: :devil: :devil:
Yeah, the US is taking down dictators, like in Kazakhstan or Thailand for example…
I like your new poster. So France is part of the Axe of Evil now… Just because the French were/are reluctant to follow orders… What a promotion… They will love it… I just hope they won’t go for a pre-emptive action, they can nuke a large part (if not all) the US (at least, they have the capacity)… :devil:
PanzerJaeger
06-25-2005, 22:40
PzJg, when did Schroeder win the elections on American Bashing? He won the election on no war position… In doing that he just surfed on the Germans public opinion which is what we call normally democracy…
You dont think I can get German media in the US? He took an anti-american stance.
Ah, the US went in war to remove a dictator… So, why this one and why now (well, two years ago)? In my (humble) opinion, North Korea is more dangerous…
Saddam was both an enemy of the US and slaughtered his own people. Ive never said we went in simply to remove an evil dictator - our own interests are considered, but why didnt Europe take an opporatunity to help in removing an dictator?
I thing you are right not to address the Bush-Bushing. Too difficult to defend the guy, who just lied, blackmailed, tried to bride, disdained all his potential allies and allies (see the poor Tony now) and was too quick to claim victory…
Blah Blah Blah. Thats called diplomacy..
For sure Saddam attacked his neighbours. But when it was Iran, the US didn’t care, in fact enjoyed it. I can’t blame them but… So, perhaps, you are also a little bit of a hypocrite. Because it wasn’t question to remove a dictator, it was question of WMD. Links with Al-Quaida, and immediate fears…
If you hadnt noticed, the American government changes every 4 or 8 years. Bush wasnt in power when we supported Saddam..
I can’t believe you wrote that; for me, just to approve an intervention without sending troops is even worse than to be against the operation. I think a song from the Green Berets says something like that: You have to believe what you are saying, and to speak only if you act, to be brave and to be proud, to win your Green Beret… Of course, the original words are probably better, but it is a translation from a translation…
If the Europeans had any sense of their own history, they would have at least taken an opporatunity to be supportive of removing an evil dictator from power. America wasnt even asking for troops, just support.
Yeah, the US is taking down dictators, like in Kazakhstan or Thailand for example…
2 countries in 3 years isnt bad, especially since Europe is against the US.
I like your new poster. So France is part of the Axe of Evil now… Just because the French were/are reluctant to follow orders… What a promotion… They will love it… I just hope they won’t go for a pre-emptive action, they can nuke a large part (if not all) the US (at least, they have the capacity)…
You need to check with the Lost&Found here at the .org. They may be able to help you find your sense of humor!
Tribesman
06-25-2005, 23:25
Such a hard words
Do you dispute anything that I wrote in that post Ceasar ?
And if so on what basis ?
PanzerJaeger
06-26-2005, 02:39
After all , your nation did sign up to the international agreements that forbid a country siezing territory did it not ?
Was that before or after the arab wars? Not disputing, just wondering.
caesar44
06-26-2005, 06:10
Such a hard words
Do you dispute anything that I wrote in that post Ceasar ?
And if so on what basis ?
I tend to belive that people have perspective , and you certainly don't have it , your world is divided in to black and white , something like "the xxx are evil and the yyy are good" , you know , we are not talking about a new Hollywood movie here....
"Always ask questions" (socrates , ca. 400 BCE)
:book:
Ironside
06-26-2005, 09:01
2 countries in 3 years isnt bad, especially since Europe is against the US.
Yes, Europe was really against the Afghanistan war ~:rolleyes:
If the Europeans had any sense of their own history, they would have at least taken an opporatunity to be supportive of removing an evil dictator from power. America wasnt even asking for troops, just support.
The problem is that the Iraqi war project felt fishy.
It felt that the hole preparation for the was the WMD (remind you that the British reasons for support was much bigger in the media here), the Al-Quida links, threat to the US etc and then lastly it was like oh, and Saddam is a really evil dictator. Putting the evil dictator argument first (and not last) would have reduced that feeling quite much. That the humanitarian issue got more and more room when all other arguments was found to be more or less false, doesn't exactly improve the issue.
So as it stands now, it felt that the war was wanted and would have been started anyway, for unknown reasons (why do you think the oil argument is so popular?).
Would you jump on a big, important, long lasting project (war) that you in principle agrees with, but you can't trust the leader of this project?
Tribesman
06-26-2005, 09:05
we are not talking about a new Hollywood movie here....
Is what I wrote true or false Ceasar ? Its as simple as that .
I tend to belive that people have perspective , and you certainly don't have it
~D ~D ~D And your perspective is so clear and unclouded , maybe you should take a step back from your closeness to the situation to obtain a better perspective view .
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 09:16
You dont think I can get German media in the US? He took an anti-american stance.
Sorry to be that blunt - but that is nonsense. Brenus is completely correct - Schroeder managed to safe the re-election by taking a strong anti-war position, of which he knew that the vast majority of ther German people would agree on it with him.
I challenge you to show me any quotes that would support your claim that he had an anti-American election campaign.
I think you are (again) mixing up opposing the policy of the Bush-administration with being anti-American...
caesar44
06-26-2005, 11:53
[QUOTE=Tribesman][B]
~D ~D ~D
Well , that is a good a argument...
Your views are so absolute , that arguing with you is like arguing some one who belive's that the Earth was build in 6 days... :wall:
But be my guest , and continue to throw accusations without asking any questions .
My comfort is in the fact that the conflict between israel and its enemies won't be solve by people like you ~:handball:
caesar44
06-26-2005, 12:11
How i have not noticed that tribesman , you are an irishman and you are just angry because of the last football match between Ireland and Israel (2:2) ha ??? ~:)
I rest my case :duel:
Tribesman
06-26-2005, 13:36
Your views are so absolute
When its a simple case of true or false then how can it be anything other than absolute .
I rest my case
I see you are mistaking me for someone that actually gives a toss about the results of a game like soccer and all the sectarian bullshit that goes along with it .
Great "perspective" you have there Ceasar .
and continue to throw accusations without asking any questions .
I stated an opinion , are you going to show me that the opinion is based on falsehoods ? Or what exactly are these questions that you would like people to ask ?
that arguing with you is like arguing some one who belive's that the Earth was build in 6 days...
Well it would help if you could raise any valid points in your arguements .
If you cannot then it does seem that you are pissing into the wind . ~:cheers:
caesar44
06-26-2005, 16:28
Your views are so absolute
When its a simple case of true or false then how can it be anything other than absolute .
I rest my case
I see you are mistaking me for someone that actually gives a toss about the results of a game like soccer and all the sectarian bullshit that goes along with it .
Great "perspective" you have there Ceasar .
and continue to throw accusations without asking any questions .
I stated an opinion , are you going to show me that the opinion is based on falsehoods ? Or what exactly are these questions that you would like people to ask ?
that arguing with you is like arguing some one who belive's that the Earth was build in 6 days...
Well it would help if you could raise any valid points in your arguements .
If you cannot then it does seem that you are pissing into the wind . ~:cheers:
Pissing ? not very academic word....
Questions ? OK ! here are some :
1. Why the palestinians were not satisfied when the British empire divided "palestine" in 1923 , that is 78% of the land as an Arab kingdom (Trans-Jordan) and the rest (22%) for the Jews and the "palestinians" ?
2. Why the "palestinians" rejected all (that is , ALL !!!) the the League of Nations proposals in the 20' and the 30' about dividing the 22% between the Jews and them ? (the Phill committee etc') ?
3. Why the "palestinians" rejected the UN 181 resolution about a Jewish state living side by side with a "palestinian" state in 1947 (that is 65% of the original 22% for the "palestinians" and 35% of the original 22% for the Jews) ?
4. Why , after the British mandate was over , in 1948 , 7 Arab states attacked Israel together with the "palestinians" even though israel was not holding Gaza , Judea , Samaria and Jerusalem (the so called "territories") ?
5. Why , in 1964 , the "palestinians" established the "Phatah" movement for creating a "palestinian" state in "palestine" even though the Arabs were holding the "territories" ?
6. Why 4 Arab states attacked Israel in 1967 while it was with out the "territories" ?
7. Why since 1967 the PLO always (that ia always) declared the its main goal is to eliminate Israel ?
8. Why since the beginning of the negotiations between the 2 sides ' in 1993 , the "palestinians" never ever stoped sending bombs and "holly warriors"
against israeli hospitals and schools ?
9. Why , in 2000 - 2001 , when Ehud Baraq gave to the "palestinians" 99% of the "territories" , they refused to accept his offer ?
10. Why , today , when Sharon is ordering the Israeli army and the Israeli settlers to move from Gaza with out requesting anything but peace , he gets "holly warriors" again and again ?
The unswear is very simple and if you will ask any Arab or Muslim , from Mauritania to Indonesia , you will get it - they want's to eliminate us ! simple , as I said , but a FACT ! no matter what Israel is doing , we still gets the same unswear - "we want you out of here !!!"
Now , who started ? this is the wrong question , because the unswear for that is meaningless and just preserve the situation . when you are dealing with people who sends their little childrens to explode on others , there is no future . to say "just give them the territories and it is going to be nice" is childish . but , still , the state of Israel is going to give to the "palestinians" every inch of the "territories" in the next few years , and then we are going to find ourselves in the same situation that was before 1967 - do you remember what happened then ?
"There is no country for the Jew to feal at home but the land of Israel" (A. D. Gordon)
The answer to many of your questions come from the mouths of the original Zionist leaders. Men like Hertzl and Ben-Gurion made it very clear from the beggining that the partition and sharing of Palestine was only a temporary measure, and the true goal was to take over the entire country. Don't you think the Palestinians living there could sense this? Don't you think they felt it? Don't you think they heard people talking about it?
So I don't think it's reasonable to say the original Zionist settlers were benevolent nice guys intent on being good neighbours and then getting all bent out of shape because the locals were nasty to them. In most cases invasions are not peaceful affairs. The Zionist invasion of Palestine is no different.
By the way, Israel has blown up it's fair share of hospitals and schools. And there are thousands and thousands of injured, maimed and crippled Palestinian children to prove it. Even at the farthest stretches of logic it cannot be said that Israel has taken the moral high ground. The only high ground Israel takes is the airspace over Gaza when they lob Hellfires into open markets full of civilians.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-26-2005, 17:11
The answer to many of your questions come from the mouths of the original Zionist leaders. Men like Hertzl and Ben-Gurion made it very clear from the beggining that the partition and sharing of Palestine was only a temporary measure, and the true goal was to take over the entire country. Don't you think the Palestinians living there could sense this? Don't you think they felt it? Don't you think they heard people talking about it?
Not this crap again.How about the fact that the Israelis asked them not to leave in the first place and that those who did became Israeli citizens and the fact that Israel could have easily taken all the land and chased the Palestinians totally out like the Jews have been chased out of the rest of the middle east. Ypur argument holds no water at all. You blame the Palestinians atrocities on what you call a few radicals while you seem to believe the state of Israel wants to take over all of Palestine. Again something they could easliy achieve if that was their goal. Maybe it was clear to you but it certainly begs the facts. Bye tyhe way even if Israel were as terrible as you make it out to be and stole the land from the Palestinians that still in no way justifies them using their children as human bombs to kill Israeli children. If I steal my neighbors home does that give him the right to strap bombs on his kids and send them over for a visit? The Palestinians are morally bankrupt at the moment. In fact Palestine reminds me very much of Sicily under the Mafia. The people are so terrorised by their own Mafioso. Their tactics are exactly the same.
PanzerJaeger
06-26-2005, 18:06
Sorry to be that blunt - but that is nonsense. Brenus is completely correct - Schroeder managed to safe the re-election by taking a strong anti-war position, of which he knew that the vast majority of ther German people would agree on it with him.
I challenge you to show me any quotes that would support your claim that he had an anti-American election campaign.
I think you are (again) mixing up opposing the policy of the Bush-administration with being anti-American...
Come on, what other war would he be taking a stance against? Now I wasnt over there during the elections, but I dont think France was asking for another beating. ~;)
I dont blame him for saying what the German people wanted to hear, but dont try and tell me his stance had nothing to do with America.
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 18:29
Come on, what other war would he be taking a stance against? Now I wasnt over there during the elections, but I dont think France was asking for another beating. ~;)
I dont blame him for saying what the German people wanted to hear, but dont try and tell me his stance had nothing to do with America.
So, again, anti-iraq-war is equal to anti-American?
Don Corleone
06-26-2005, 18:34
Not at all. Of course you all were free to make up your own minds as to where you stood on the war. PJ's over simplifying the case (and dude, while some of your sigs are hysterical, the current one is pretty offensive).
But that's hardly the only issue Europe in general, and Germany in particular takes with us. It almost seems that whenever we exercise our rights of self-determination, on matters that don't even affect or impact you (personal firearm ownership for example), you're all worked up into a tizzy about what a bunch of barbarians we all are and how the UN needs to reign us in. I could get elected to almost any office over there, regardless of my political clout or party affiliation, but saying "And I will teach the Americans we are not going to lay down for them! I will show them they are every bit as responsible to the world government as we are". True?
caesar44
06-26-2005, 18:48
The answer to many of your questions come from the mouths of the original Zionist leaders. Men like Hertzl and Ben-Gurion made it very clear from the beggining that the partition and sharing of Palestine was only a temporary measure, and the true goal was to take over the entire country. Don't you think the Palestinians living there could sense this? Don't you think they felt it? Don't you think they heard people talking about it?
So I don't think it's reasonable to say the original Zionist settlers were benevolent nice guys intent on being good neighbours and then getting all bent out of shape because the locals were nasty to them. In most cases invasions are not peaceful affairs. The Zionist invasion of Palestine is no different.
By the way, Israel has blown up it's fair share of hospitals and schools. And there are thousands and thousands of injured, maimed and crippled Palestinian children to prove it. Even at the farthest stretches of logic it cannot be said that Israel has taken the moral high ground. The only high ground Israel takes is the airspace over Gaza when they lob Hellfires into open markets full of civilians.
So , no problems in Quebec ? no attacks on jews in Canada ? already forgat the native Americans ?
Oh , self-righteousness here I come again !!!!!!!!
By the way , is "History twisting" is your middle name ?
Proletariat
06-26-2005, 18:52
Caesar, do you ever post on the ornery american forum?
caesar44
06-26-2005, 19:04
Caesar, do you ever post on the ornery american forum?
No , this is the first time I am hearing about it
I realise that you meant www.ornery.org ? seams nice ~:cheers:
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 19:08
You blame the Palestinians atrocities on what you call a few radicals while you seem to believe the state of Israel wants to take over all of Palestine. Again something they could easliy achieve if that was their goal. Maybe it was clear to you but it certainly begs the facts. Bye tyhe way even if Israel were as terrible as you make it out to be and stole the land from the Palestinians that still in no way justifies them using their children as human bombs to kill Israeli children. If I steal my neighbors home does that give him the right to strap bombs on his kids and send them over for a visit? The Palestinians are morally bankrupt at the moment. In fact Palestine reminds me very much of Sicily under the Mafia. The people are so terrorised by their own Mafioso. Their tactics are exactly the same
The way I see it, Palestinians doesn't have a legal government that is actively attacking innocents. Palestinians aren't morally banckrupt, but the ones that are killing people are. To me the actions of the terrorists don't represent the whole of the Palestinian people, while the Isreal's actions are legally sanctioned by a government we recongnize and (I believe) the people support. That's a difference to me.
How much of a leadership do they have? Do the people of Palestine have any say in their "leaders"? I honestly don't know, but I don't think they have much of a say. And if that is the case, how can you blame the entire populace for something they have no say in?
Proletariat
06-26-2005, 19:13
No , this is the first time I am hearing about it
I realise that you meant www.ornery.org (http://www.ornery.org) ? seams nice ~:cheers:
It's a pretty good forum. You remind me in quite a few ways of an Israeli poster over there, so I was just curious.
Nice to meetchya.
caesar44
06-26-2005, 19:25
The way I see it, Palestinians doesn't have a legal government that is actively attacking innocents. Palestinians aren't morally banckrupt, but the ones that are killing people are. To me the actions of the terrorists don't represent the whole of the Palestinian people, while the Isreal's actions are legally sanctioned by a government we recongnize and (I believe) the people support. That's a difference to me.
How much of a leadership do they have? Do the people of Palestine have any say in their "leaders"? I honestly don't know, but I don't think they have much of a say. And if that is the case, how can you blame the entire populace for something they have no say in?
In your logic , we should have to welcome human bombs , only because there is no democratic government that sends them...explain that to the 3,000 americans who "died" by a "freedom fighters" and "holly warriors"
You know , reading the post's in this treads remind's me how hitler came to be what he was , he just used the stupidity and the pseudo liberalism of the west
Wake up and acknowledge your enemies !
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 19:53
But that's hardly the only issue Europe in general, and Germany in particular takes with us. It almost seems that whenever we exercise our rights of self-determination, on matters that don't even affect or impact you (personal firearm ownership for example), you're all worked up into a tizzy about what a bunch of barbarians we all are and how the UN needs to reign us in.
I'll have to admit that this is to some extent true and partly this has to be blamed on the media. I am actually quite shocked how successful Michael Moore became over here (I guess he is feeding some prejudices that already existed to some extent - and isn't it great if you have some prejudices on a nation, and some guy from the very same nation comes to confirm them? :rolleyes: ). Frquently hearing about amok runs where some guy with a guny goes on a killing spree are not really helping either (please note that I am aware that such incidents are not as frequently as media reports make it appear).
I could get elected to almost any office over there, regardless of my political clout or party affiliation, but saying "And I will teach the Americans we are not going to lay down for them! I will show them they are every bit as responsible to the world government as we are". True?
I have to admit I am not quite sure what you want to say here. If the message is that it would be enough just to oppose the US to win an election or to gain some additional percentage points I would disagree. Opposing the current administration only helps because the population here opposes large parts of the foreign policy of this administration - but again, IMO that has nothing to do with anti-Americanism.
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 20:00
In your logic , we should have to welcome human bombs , only because there is no democratic government that sends them...explain that to the 3,000 americans who "died" by a "freedom fighters" and "holly warriors"
You know , reading the post's in this treads remind's me how hitler came to be what he was , he just used the stupidity and the pseudo liberalism of the west
Wake up and acknowledge your enemies !
No, that is not my logic. I am saying that you can't blame all Palestinians. You can blame only the Palestinians that support or are a part of terrorist units. On the other hand, you can blame the Isreali government because it is a legal government, that is supposedly on "our" side, that murders innoccents. That is what I am saying.
And I don't understand what the hell Hitler has to do with anything I've just said...
Don Corleone
06-26-2005, 20:01
I believe the anti-American sentiments transcend just our government. You feel it's limited to that. I think we have to agree to disagree here. I certainly know enough Germans that are friendly enough with Americans to say it's not a universal opinion. Suffice it to say, have you ever asked yourself why Germans (or Dutch or French, or Italians) seem to care so much about domestic American issues, such as gun control or our domestic sales taxes? Why is it so important to you all to disarm us and force us to change from a sales tax to a VAT? I think I know the answer...
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 20:13
Yeah, they're all going to invade us... :help:
~;)
But America isn't exactly the most hands off with foriegn countries... So isn't it fair for them to try and influence us while we do it to others?
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 20:16
Suffice it to say, have you ever asked yourself why Germans (or Dutch or French, or Italians) seem to care so much about domestic American issues, such as gun control or our domestic sales taxes? Why is it so important to you all to disarm us and force us to change from a sales tax to a VAT? I think I know the answer...
Uhm ... I can only (to some extent) speak for Germans, but you can believe me that your sales tax is of extremely limited interest to the general population here (personally I never met a person interseted in that topic).
Regarding gun control - it's intersting because the way you handle it in the US is rather alien to us and because it's in the media all the time (and it's in the media all the time because news from people who go on a killing spree with a gun see - as simple as that). Makes people feel comfortable to see something like that on TV and then lean back to think "well - fortunately this is not gonna happen here".
By and large the things about American policy that interest people here in Germany are the things that actually have an effect on us. Just because we discuss certain issues of US politics with an American (like on this board) does not mean that these issues are a topic when we talk with other Germans - rest assured, in my "normal" life, German politics are my primary concern - and the same is true for most of my fellow countrymen ~;)
caesar44
06-26-2005, 20:24
No, that is not my logic. I am saying that you can't blame all Palestinians. You can blame only the Palestinians that support or are a part of terrorist units. On the other hand, you can blame the Isreali government because it is a legal government, that is supposedly on "our" side, that murders innoccents. That is what I am saying.
And I don't understand what the hell Hitler has to do with anything I've just said...
It is not so complicated , the muslims as a whole (you know what , 90% of them) are believers of "Jihad" against the western world , I am sure you know that . now , instead of realise it , you and other pseudo liberals and self-righteousness , choose to attack the only "western" state in the muslim East with out knowing the real danger even after 9/11 . I am sure that you never heard a muslim preaching and calling his men to go and become holly warriors against the "little satan" (the Jews) and against the "big satan" (the christians)
You can think want you want , but remember , every time that the biased CNN is reporting about some "innocent" palestinians that were killed by Israeli soldier , they don't (ever ever) explain why - you can compleat the picture
:book:
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 20:25
It is not so complicated , the muslims as a whole (you know what , 90% of them) are believers of "Jihad" against the western world , I am sure you know that .
Is that just your "personal" rough estimate or can you give us any actual facts that would support that hypothesis?
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 20:33
It is not so complicated , the muslims as a whole (you know what , 90% of them) are believers of "Jihad" against the western world , I am sure you know that . now , instead of realise it , you and other pseudo liberals and self-righteousness , choose to attack the only "western" state in the muslim East with out knowing the real danger even after 9/11 . I am sure that you never heard a muslim preaching and calling his men to go and become holly warriors against the "little satan" (the Jews) and against the "big satan" (the christians)
I'm sure Faisal and bmollosm will be glad to know about how evil their religion is. :bow:
I find it very funny that the same people who talk about anti Semitism make such obviously biased and untrue statements about Muslims.
And when did I talk about attacking Isreal? And how are Palestinians the "real danger"?
And no I have not heard any sort of Islamic sermon.
You can think want you want , but remember , every time that the biased CNN is reporting about some "innocent" palestinians that were killed by Israeli soldier , they don't (ever ever) explain why - you can compleat the picture
CNN is biased. Biased towards to government and Isreal, as is all American media.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-26-2005, 20:36
Is that just your "personal" rough estimate or can you give us any actual facts that would support that hypothesis?
Again Ibelieve its very similar to Sicily under the mafia. The people are so terrified of the radicals that they have become complicent in their affairs. I doubt there are many Palestinians who have a love for the Jews. Not that I can blame them after whats been happening for all these yeears as both sides have been used by the other arab states for their own purposes. That is the destruction of Israel. It is only the other Arab states that profit from this conflict. How much again does Egypt get not to fight with Israel?
Don Corleone
06-26-2005, 20:49
Uhm ... I can only (to some extent) speak for Germans, but you can believe me that your sales tax is of extremely limited interest to the general population here (personally I never met a person interseted in that topic).
Regarding gun control - it's intersting because the way you handle it in the US is rather alien to us and because it's in the media all the time (and it's in the media all the time because news from people who go on a killing spree with a gun see - as simple as that). Makes people feel comfortable to see something like that on TV and then lean back to think "well - fortunately this is not gonna happen here".
By and large the things about American policy that interest people here in Germany are the things that actually have an effect on us. Just because we discuss certain issues of US politics with an American (like on this board) does not mean that these issues are a topic when we talk with other Germans - rest assured, in my "normal" life, German politics are my primary concern - and the same is true for most of my fellow countrymen ~;)
I'm not talking about discussing things on here. That would be pretty small of me to say "how dare you have an opinion". I picked the 2 specific examples I did, because it's things that Europe (specifically France and Germany) have tried to affect domestic American policy on, through the UN and the WTC.
The sales tax vs. VAT was actually brought to the WTC, with France & Germany wanting to slap punitive tariffs on the US until they added a VAT, claiming a sales tax wasn't sufficent. The WTC didn't see things your way.
The gun control issue got played out when a UN resolution got introduced calling for all member states to require their citizenry be disarmed. I'm afraid I'm not even certain what the status of that resolution is these days.
Call me paranoid, but this is why most Americans are NOT interested in a world government. We don't want a bunch of beauracrats from another country dictating how we are allowed to live here at home. As far as I know, America generally does not involve itself in the domestic policies of Western Europe.
caesar44
06-26-2005, 20:55
Ser
Read the koran and then ask any muslim if he belive's it
So simple
"Religion is necessary for the education of clumsy nations..." (Jiobani Gentile)
:book:
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 21:00
Um... I'm very confused. :help:
What exactly are you trying to say?
caesar44
06-26-2005, 21:18
I'm sure Faisal and bmollosm will be glad to know about how evil their religion is. :bow:
I find it very funny that the same people who talk about anti Semitism make such obviously biased and untrue statements about Muslims.
And when did I talk about attacking Isreal? And how are Palestinians the "real danger"?
And no I have not heard any sort of Islamic sermon.
CNN is biased. Biased towards to government and Isreal, as is all American media.
1. what is a "bmollosm" ? you have just invented a new Arab name...
2. "biased and untrue statements about muslims" said the new Laurence of Arabia whom , I imagine , is living in Europe or North America
3. "attacking israel" with words , OK ? we are just talking here...
4. the palestinians as a very very important part of islam
5. CNN is biased towards israel - aha , now we entered to the humoristic part of the thread...
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 21:25
sorry, meant bmolsson. He and Faisal are both Muslim members of this forum, as well as others that don't post that often in the backroom.
2. "biased and untrue statements about muslims" said the new Laurence of Arabia whom , I imagine , is living in Europe or North America
If you are reffering to me, I am living in New Jersey. And I never claimed to be Lawerence of Arabia.
3. "attacking israel" with words , OK ? we are just talking here...
Oh. Ok.
4. the palestinians as a very very important part of islam
How do Palestinians fit in with the religion? Or are you saying that Palestinains make up a large amount of Muslims?
5. CNN is biased towards israel - aha , now we entered to the humoristic part of the thread...
I'm not that good at humor, but I try. ~;)
caesar44
06-26-2005, 21:31
What it is going to be with the Nets , ha ? That is the question
~:cheers:
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 21:41
Ser
Read the koran and then ask any muslim if he belive's it
So simple
Why don't you just say what you are getting at? Even simpler.
caesar44
06-26-2005, 21:45
Why don't you just say what you are getting at? Even simpler.
Just a moment , you really don't know what is written in the koran and still arguing about the whole subject ???????????? ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused:
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 21:47
I'm not talking about discussing things on here. That would be pretty small of me to say "how dare you have an opinion". I picked the 2 specific examples I did, because it's things that Europe (specifically France and Germany) have tried to affect domestic American policy on, through the UN and the WTC.
The sales tax vs. VAT was actually brought to the WTC, with France & Germany wanting to slap punitive tariffs on the US until they added a VAT, claiming a sales tax wasn't sufficent. The WTC didn't see things your way.
The gun control issue got played out when a UN resolution got introduced calling for all member states to require their citizenry be disarmed. I'm afraid I'm not even certain what the status of that resolution is these days.
Call me paranoid, but this is why most Americans are NOT interested in a world government. We don't want a bunch of beauracrats from another country dictating how we are allowed to live here at home. As far as I know, America generally does not involve itself in the domestic policies of Western Europe.
I have to admit that I am not aware of either of these cases. Could you provide any background information (i.e. links to articles) that would expand on these issues? This seems a bit to vague to comment on.
I have a hard time believing that France and Germany would try to meddle with the US tax system if they did not feel that it actually would effect their economy - that the WTC ruled against them does not mean that there is no reasonable interest.
I think there are also cases where the US briught issues to the WTC and lost - should I interpret that in such a way that the US is also interested in EU matters that are none of their business?
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 21:56
Just a moment , you really don't know what is written in the koran and still arguing about the whole subject ???????????? ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused:
Uhm ... I never claimed to know the Quran by heart. You claimed that muslims as a whole believe in a Jihad against the Western world and I asked you to back up that statement.
I would think the onus to point out the relevant quotes from the Quran is on you not on me.
If you think that is to much to ask, please forgive me if I have some problems to take your sweeping statements seriously.
caesar44
06-26-2005, 22:05
Just for the start -
Muhhamad said :
[5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
OK another one -
Muhhamad said:
[5.78] Those who disbelieved from among the children of Israel were cursed by the tongue of Dawood and Isa, son of Marium; this was because they disobeyed and used to exceed the limit.
And another one -
muhhamad daid :
[5.13] But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard; they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others).
I am tired now and my kid ia crying , so...
Don Corleone
06-26-2005, 22:07
Like maybe I'm making this stuff up as I go? ~;)
It's okay, I know, it gets pretty hard to believe sometimes:
I discovered the UN's attempt to dictate terms to the US on gun issues on National Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-lott071103.asp. The link to the U.N. conference to "Prevent, combat, and eradicate the Illicit Trade in small arms and Light Weapons in All Aspects" (sorry: can't do any html text on my home computer for some reason...) http://disarmament.un.org:8080/cab/poa.html
The link to the story on how you want to force a VAT down our throats:
http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/view_art.asp?Prod_ID=837. To be fair, you probably have heard of it, in another form... since you charge a VAT on your software manufacturers and we don't, you've taken to calling it a tax subsidy of Microsoft, even though they receive no money from the federal government (and indeed, the federal government doesn't charge any American software companies a VAT). The government DOES charge a corporate income tax, which affects the price of the software, and Microsoft DOES pay this, but apparently that's not good enough for the EU tax wizards. They want to set America's tax policy for us.
I don't have a problem with you guys going to the WTO because you think something is an unfair trade advantage. But it was shown repeatedly no advantage existed. You wanted to force us to adopt a VAT, so it would be easier for you to do comparisons of national taxation load on the competing products' market value.
Sorry mate, you didn't catch me this time... keep trying though. ~;)
Edit: Sorry, sorry, sorry. I made a major faux pas that drives me nuts in real life. Please forgive: The WTC is the buildings that came tumbling down 4 years ago. I meant to say the WTO.
caesar44
06-26-2005, 22:12
good night
JEWS IN THE KORAN AND EARLY ISLAMIC TRADITIONS Dr. Leah Kinberg Lecture delivered in May 2003, Monash University, Melbourne -I- INTRODUCTIONAccording to Islam, the verses of the Koran were revealed to Muhammad gradually, within a period of 22 years. Twelve years in his home town of Mecca, and ten years in Medina, the town to which he migrated in 622, after being persecuted by the unbelievers of Mecca. While still in Mecca, the koranic verses focused on the idea of the One God, reward and punishment, Heaven and Hell. The verses of Medina were entirely different. They dealt with judicial matters, but also with some of the old and familiar stories about the creation of the world, Adam and Eve, Noah’s ark, Pharaoh, Abraham, Moses, David,Jesus, among other figures. A special place was reserved for the Jews. About 100 koranic verses mention the Jews by name, either as “Jews” or as the “children of Israel”, or yet as “those who followed the right path.” Aside from these verses, there are many others that deal with the Jews without mentioning them by name, and only the commentators draw our attention to the fact that the people described in those verses are no other than the Jews. Generally speaking, it is possible to say that about a third of the verses that have been revealed in Medina, deal with Jews. Before getting into the specific statements that the Koran makes about the Jews, attention should be drawn to the ambivalent way in which the Koran treats the Jews. A few koranic verses consider the “Children of Israel” the chosen nation. The others refer to the Jews as deceivers, treacherous, distorters of the truth, and – above all – infidels. The term “infidel,” however, is not aimed towards the Jews in particular, but rather means those who did not embrace Islam, i.e. Christians, Pagans and others. The interest of the Koran in Jews, and especially its reaction against them, its criticism and defamation, can be explained in the light of Muhammad’s interaction with the Jews of Medina.The city of Medina had five tribes, two pagan and three Jews. Within a few years, the pagan tribes embraced Islam and the Jews were expelled or massacred. When Muhammad first came to Medina he thought that the Jews would join him and made some overtures towards them. Muhammad stated that his new followers’ fasting day would be on the 10thof the first Month, equivalent to the Jewish Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, and while praying he faced Jerusalem, as he saw the Jews doing. The Jews refused to join Muhammad, but he did not give up easily. Only after 16 or 18 months, when he saw how stubborn the Jews were, did Muhammad begin to go against them, first by changing the one day of fast into a full month fast, Ramadan, then by changing the direction of the prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca, and later on by getting rid of the Jews, first by expulsion and then by massacre. Within a few years, the Arab peninsula was clean of non-Muslims, and Muhammad, being strong and successful, was able to abolish the presence of any religion except Islam in the holy land of the Arab peninsula.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
These details should be kept in mind while consulting any of the koranic verses that deal with Jews, especially those verses that have recently been used as political arguments. -II- APES AND PIGSI will begin with some current statements made by Islamic fundamentalists, who would frequently refer to Jews as the sons of apes and pigs. Such descriptions can be heard in sermons at mosques in the Palestinian territories, inspeeches of Saudi religious leaders, as well as in Iraqi sermons: On the 5thof May 2001, after Mr. Shimon Peres visited Egypt, the Egyptian al-Akhbar Internet paper stated that “lies and deceit are not foreign to Jews. The best evidence that Jews go back on their word is their denial of the principles on which they signed in the Oslo and the Madrid Accords. For this reason, Allah changed their shape and made them into monkeys and pigs”. http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/antisemitism/arabpress0501.htmlOn the 13thof December 2002, Palestinian television used the occasion of the Muslim month of Ramadan to broadcast programs with a distinctly anti-Jewish theme, including a sermon in which Jews were called “the brothers of monkeys and pigs”.The sermon opened with: “Praised be Allah, who has cursed [the Jews], the brothers of monkeys and pigs, by a flow of curses that will go on until the Resurrection of the dead.” In one of his sermons, the Saudi sheikh Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, imamand preacher at the al-Haraam mosque – the most important mosque in Mecca – beseeched Allah to annihilate the Jews. He also urged the Arabs to give up peace initiatives with the Jews because they are “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs.” http://www.alraialaam.com/20-04-2002/ie5/frontpage.htm#03In another sermon (19thof April 2002), the same imam declared “Read history and you will understand that the Jews of yesterday are the evil fathers of the Jews of today, who are evil offspring, infidels, distorters of [others'] words, calf-worshippers, prophet-murderers, prophecy-deniers... the scum of the human race 'whom Allah cursed and turned into apes and pigs...” www.alminbar.cc/alkhutab/khutbaa.asp?mediaURL=5544Comparing between the ancient and the contemporary Jews, seems to be a central issue in these sermons. A Saudi sheikh, Ba'd bin Abdallah Al-Ajameh Al-Ghamidi, in one of his sermons in Taif, explained that “The current behavior of the brothers of apes and pigs, their treachery, violation of agreements, and defiling of holy places ... is connected with the deeds of their forefathers during the early period of Islam – which proves the great similarity between all the Jews living today and the Jews who lived at the dawn of Islam.” www.alminbar.cc/alkhutab/khutbaa.asp?mediaURL=4331I will consider one last example. According to Education in Saudi Arabia, a 1995 book published by the Saudi Cultural Mission to the United States, the roots of the contemporary Saudi education policy date back to the 18thcentury when Abd al-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
Wahhab called for the return of Muslims to the fundamentals of Islam as preached by the Prophet Muhammad. The book cites 236 principles that explain how students should promote loyalty to Islam by denouncing any system or theory that conflicts with Islamic law.The students are also taught to understand Islam in a “correct manner,” how to establish and spread Islam throughout the world, and how “to fight spiritually and physically for the sake of Allah.” One of these principles of the Saudi education system has been the teaching of hatred of Jews and Christians. A textbook for eighth graders explains why Jews and Christians were cursed by Allah and turned into apes and pigs. Both Jews and Christians have sinned by accepting polytheism and therefore have incurred Allah's wrath. To punish them, Allah has turned them into apes and pigs. On the 7thof May 2002 the Saudi television channel Iqraa featured a talk show called“Modern Muslim Woman,” in which a three and a half years old girl was interviewed. The interview was filmed by state-controlled Saudi television and broadcast to Muslims around the world. This is how the interview was conducted: - What's your name?- Basmallah.- Basmallah, how old are you?- Three and a half.- Are you a Muslim?- Yes. - Basmallah, are you familiar with the Jews?- Yes. - Do you like them?- No. - Why don't you like them?- Because . . . - Because they are what? - They're apes and pigs. - Who said they are so? - Our God.- Where did he say this? - In the Koran. At the end of the interview, the girl was blessed by the following words: May our God bless her. No one could wish Allah would give him a more believing girl than she is. May Allah bless her and her father and mother. The next generation of children must be true Muslims. We must educate them now while they are still children so that they will be true Muslims.http://memri.org/video/segment1_basmallah.htmlThe idea of the Jews as descendants of pigs and apes is drawn from the Koran that knows to tell about a group of Jews who did not keep the Sabbath and were
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
consequently punished: God made the members of this group as despicable as monkeys, pigs and idol worshipers. The story is told in the 7thchapter of the Koran, verses 163-166: [163] Ask them concerning the town standing close by the sea. Behold! They transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath. For on the day of their Sabbath their fish did come to them, openly holding up their heads, but on the day they had no Sabbath, they came not. Thus did We make a trial of them, for they were given to transgression... [165] When they disregarded the warnings that had been given them, We rescued those who forbade evil; but We visited the wrong-doers with a grievous punishment, because they were given to transgression. [166] When in their insolence they transgressed (all) prohibitions, We said to them: “Be ye apes, despised and rejected.” Koran 2: 65-66 reads: [65] And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath; We said to them: “Be ye apes, despised and rejected.” [66] So We made it an example to their own time and to their posterity, and a lesson to those who fear Allah.Commentaries do not explain the process of this transformation, but rather present the reader with anecdotes to demonstrate it, while mentioning also rats and lizards. Thus we find the next story, put in the mouth of the prophet: We were in an army with the Apostle of Allah . We got some lizards. I roasted one lizard and brought it to the Apostle of Allah and placed it before him. He took a stick and counted its fingers. He then said: A group from the children of Isra'il was transformed into an animal of the land (reptiles ?), and I do not know which animal it was. He did not eat it nor did he forbid (its eating). (Sunan Abu Dawud 27/3786). It is interesting to mention that such transformation into pigs and monkeys could be also the fate of Muslims who immersed themselves into the carnal pleasures of this world. Allah would supernaturally transform them into monkeys and pigs:I heard the Prophet saying, “From among my followers there will be somepeople who will consider as lawful illegal sexual intercourse, wearing of silk, drinking alcohol and listening to music. … Allah will transform them into monkeys and pigs. Thus they will remain to the Day of Resurrection” (Bukhari 7/494B
Gawain of Orkeny
06-26-2005, 22:16
I find it very funny that the same people who talk about anti Semitism make such obviously biased and untrue statements about Muslims.
How about what Muslims have to say about it
January 03, 2004
"All Western countries are enemies of Islam"
Who said that? Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, whom the New York Times identifies as "the father of the Pakistani [nuclear] bomb."
The story reveals that "as investigators unravel the mysteries of the North Korean, Iranian and now the Libyan nuclear projects, Pakistan — and those it empowered with knowledge and technology they are now selling on their own — has emerged as the intellectual and trading hub of a loose network of hidden nuclear proliferators.
"That network is global, stretching from Germany to Dubai and from China to South Asia, and involves many middlemen and suppliers. But what is striking about a string of recent disclosures, experts say, is how many roads appear ultimately to lead back to the Khan Research Laboratories in Kahuta, where Pakistan's own bomb was developed. . . .
"Dr. Khan, a fervent nationalist, has condemned the system that limits legal nuclear knowledge to the five major nuclear powers, or that has ignored Israel's nuclear weapon while focusing on the fear of an Islamic bomb. 'All Western countries,' he was once quoted as saying, 'are not only the enemies of Pakistan but in fact of Islam.'
"In the years before Pakistan's first test in 1998, Dr. Khan and his team began publishing papers in the global scientific literature on how to make and test its uranium centrifuges. In the West, these publications would have been classified secret or top secret. But Dr. Khan made no secret of his motive: he boasted in print of circumventing the restrictions of the Western nuclear powers, declaring in a 1987 paper that he sought to pierce 'the clouds of the so-called secrecy.' . . .
"For now the world is left watching a terrifying race — one that pits scientists, middlemen and extremists against Western powers trying to intercept, shipload by shipload, the technology as it spreads through the clandestine network. Mr. Bush remains wary of cracking down on a fragile Pakistan, for fear pressure could tip the situation toward the radicals." (Thanks to LGF.)
Unfortunately, the goal of our Islamifascist enemy is the establishment of a global reign of Islam. This is what our political leaders refuse to admit or are unable to comprehend, that our enemy has declared war against the West. It is essentially a nihilistic enemy, deaf to appeals to reason or mercy, malignantly inoculated by blind faith against all rational persuasion, and consequently and pathologically committed to the conquest of the West. Iran and Syria are the chief source of funds behind the campaign to force the West to bow to Mecca, or face misery, death and destruction by an enemy bent on world domination.
This last is something many of you seem either to deny or ignore.
LINK (http://www.capitalismcenter.org/Initium/09-28-04.htm)
More
Islamism (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/I/Is/Islamism.htm)
Certainly all Muslims are not a like in every manner just as all other people are different from eachother. However we do know that millions of them feel this way and we are told that more are thinking this way everyday and that we are to blame for it. Just how many really believe this. I think many more than any of you would believe. In fact I would say in the Middle east more than half.
Steppe Merc
06-26-2005, 22:26
From around 7 to 11th Century CE, most Islamic nations were very tolerant towards Jews and Christians, and many played an important role in government. The whole Jihad idea was pretty much extinct until it was revived as a response to the Crusaders.
And it's not like Christianity or Judiasm or any major religion has had a spottless past.
How about what Muslims have to say about it
Some Muslims. Not all Muslims. I really don't understand how all Muslims could be condemmed by the words and actions of a minority of crazy hate spewing people, any more than all Christians could be considered the same as some of those crazy people who were Christian that were on that site that Faisal posted a bit back.
edit: Not saying that you did condem them all, but it seems to me a very slippery slope.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-26-2005, 22:29
From around 7 to 11th Century CE, most Islamic nations were very tolerant towards Jews and Christians, and many played an important role in government. The whole Jihad idea was pretty much extinct until it was revived as a response to the Crusaders.
Thats the modern revisionist take for sure. It is not reality however.
Ser Clegane
06-26-2005, 22:29
They want to set America's tax policy for us.
I guess that would be along the same line as the US administration trying to force the EU to allow GM food without being labeled?
I'd like to disagree with you that this VAT case is a very good example of European anti-Americanism and/or the European obsession to meddle with domestic US legislation.
It's a typical trade issue that we regularly see from both sides of the Atlantic Ocean.
Regarding the other case - as it is getting a bit late here I did not have the time to thooroughly read through the UN program. After a first screening I did not have the impression that it aims to disarm US citizens, but that it is meant to prevent illicit trade and manufacturing of guns.
I will have to go through it in detail though to build an opinion about how this would affect your personal right to carry a gun...
Tribesman
06-26-2005, 23:43
Bloody hell Ceasar even in my exremely inebriated state I can rip it apart (your questions)
#1 what state in 1923
#2 what 22%
#3 the fact that the majority of the parties concerned rejected the proposal , the proposal broke every "safety measure" included in any proposals , or any conditions of achievment for those proposals .
#4 7 States? what States ? (remember that one of those States was in a pact with Israe to divide the land between them) (though it is normally written in the history boks as an agreement to not launch military offensives in territory allocated to the State of Israel )...NAME THEM.. (copyright Gawain 2005) besides which the future Israel was holding non-Isaeli cities and towns that it had not been allocated under 181
#5Territories , Now are you talking about Israeli territories allocated under 181? Territories held upon signing up to the UN Charter ?territories that were assumrd to be part of Israel when they were not mentioned in the '67 resolution?
Territories ???? What territories ? what is Israel ? Is it every piece of land as far as the birthplace of Abraham ?
#6 '67 now then Ceasar , simple question ... who attacked Egypt as the first move in that war....?
#7 now forgive me if I am wrong , but wasn't that removed from the policy many years ago ?
#8 Hospitals and schools ? Now that is a real bugger , lets see .... oh yeah , after a great deal of thought and absolutely no need to re-consult the figures ...more non-Israelis in the area known as "Palestine" Have been attacked , intimidated , abused , delayed , imprisoned , threatened and endangered than Israelis . More schoolchidren have been killed or wounded , more hospital patients have been affected from that side of the fence .
#9 & 10 You tell me .
Which do you consider the greatest sticking point .Right of return (that works bothways)Territory , Settlements , Prisoners , Compensation , Trade access or Tarifs , Jerusalem , Water , Representtion , Free movement /corridors , Soveriegnty ? .... come on ......which??
Note to self ....drink and keyboard do not work well together , a 20 second rant took a hell of along time to write......slan
By the way , is "History twisting" is your middle name ?
Actually, my middle name is Kennedy.
As in John F. Kennedy.
My mother was American. (But I forgave her.) Check out my birth date in my profile.
*Oh, Caeser44, do you know George & Martha?
Steppe Merc
06-27-2005, 01:16
Thats the modern revisionist take for sure. It is not reality however.
I just know what I've read in history books, whose authors would have gained nothing by lying about it. And there is a lot of proof of Jewish and Christians serving Muslims. Besides, each nation was different, and each of them treated their subjects differently at different times.
There was certaintly Jews present when the Crusaders took Jeruseleum, and they were expelled. Now if the Muslims had all killed the Jews, where did they come from?
And the Europeans didn't treat the Jews that well either. On the way to the first Crusade, a bunch of Crusaders killed a whole bunch of Jews in a German town.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-27-2005, 04:32
And the Europeans didn't treat the Jews that well either. On the way to the first Crusade, a bunch of Crusaders killed a whole bunch of Jews in a German town.
And on another they sacked Constantanople. I guess they hated Christains also.
And there is a lot of proof of Jewish and Christians serving Muslims.
Exactly. Serving is the nicest thing you could call it.
Christians and Jews have always been second class citizens in any of these countries at best.
Franconicus
06-27-2005, 07:59
I believe the anti-American sentiments transcend just our government. You feel it's limited to that. I think we have to agree to disagree here. I certainly know enough Germans that are friendly enough with Americans to say it's not a universal opinion.... I did not follow the complete discussion. Maybe someone mentioned this before:
There was a poll about the popularity of different nations. Whatever popularity means in this context. I think the question was 'Is this country good?'. The US pop decreased after the Iraq invasion. In Germany it dropped from some 75 to 45%. In this poll the Germans were most critical against the US of all non-muslim nations. But still 45% think that the US is good. Most of the voters saiid that not the US or the US people are bad but that they do not like the Bush government. After the last election this changed a bit. Popularity of the US is increasing again after their tsunami help.
By the way. Germans had a quite good popularity. Lowest values were reached in the US. However, the Germans judged themselves the same way the Americans did.
Summery:
Germans do not agree with America's Iraq politics
They know the difference between politics and people. There are no anti-American sentiments.
The US is also critical against Germans
The Germans are as critical against themselves
Suffice it to say, have you ever asked yourself why Germans (or Dutch or French, or Italians) seem to care so much about domestic American issues, such as gun control or our domestic sales taxes? Why is it so important to you all to disarm us and force us to change from a sales tax to a VAT? I think I know the answer...
Once I saw an American TV docu about Germany. Everything they showed was right; but they just picked some extremes and stereotypes and put it in the wrong context. A guess it is the same over here. Media show us just what is absurd and strange to us. So we have the impression that the Americans are a strange kind of people, all deaking with drugs, shooting policemen with big guns, killing indians, eating fast food, live in their cars, waste energy, ...
Want me to go on?
Ser Clegane
06-27-2005, 08:12
@caesar44
So based on this article and a Quran quote that refers to Jews as "apes and pigs" you are claiming that muslims as a whole believe in a Jihad gainst the Western world?
I think you are stretching things a little bit here.
But I will keep in mind the next time I talk to or work with muslims (e.g., from Turkey, the UAE or Malaysia) that they are actually secretly (or not-so-secretly as you would like to makes us believe) planning to launch a Jihad against us.
However, reading quotes from radical muslims about Jews and then your obvious prejudices against muslims as a whole, I guess the road to peace in the Middle East will be indeed a long and bumpy one :no:
Ser Clegane
06-27-2005, 09:21
@Don
So, I finally found some time to have a more detailed look at the cases you provided (BTW, it was not my intention to imply that you made these things up, I seriously was not aware of them and wanted some background information so I could reply in a meaningful manner ~:) )
Let me recapitulate what the subject of our short discussion was.
You suggested that there is a broader anti-Americanism in e.g., Germany that is not only directed at your current government but at the US population and its lifestyle in general.
In this context you suggested that e.g., France and Germany seem to be rather keen on meddling in domestic US issues. Given the context of our discussion (and correct me if I'm wrong here) your post implied that the rationale for this meddling is no a real political/economic interest but anti-Americanism (which would mean that it only happens because we kind of don't like you and your lifestyle and therefore decide to pester you).
To support your case you brought forward two examples.
a) The VAT issue brought forward to the WTO
As I said before, I do not see what this has to to with anti-Americanism or meddling with US domestic affairs that do not affect us.
You might disagree with the EU that the US tax system gives an unfair advantage (and, at least according to the articles you linked to, the WTO disagrees with your view on the issue), however, this is hardly a case of meddling with domoestic US affairs as the issue is obviously foreign trade.
I think the US as well as the EU both have a track record of calling the WTO in such issues, so quite frankly I do not quite understand why this issue is an example of anti-Americanism or an attempt of European to influence domestic US affairs.
b) The UN gun control proposal
Fristly, I read through the proposal and I have to admit that I still do not see how this would be an attempt to take away your gun from you. I understand that the proposal calls for a strict regulation regarding the registration of guns, but don't you already have such regulations in place?
Secondly, I seriously fail to see anything here that is specifically targeting the US. What makes you think that is proposal has anything to do with anti-Americanism? I think it would be a bit self-centered to believe that this proposal is an EU-led conspiracy to undermine the lifestyle of US citizens.
Sorry, but I still have to disagree with you that these are examples of anti-Americanism.
caesar44
06-27-2005, 09:32
@caesar44
So based on this article and a Quran quote that refers to Jews as "apes and pigs" you are claiming that muslims as a whole believe in a Jihad gainst the Western world?
I think you are stretching things a little bit here.
But I will keep in mind the next time I talk to or work with muslims (e.g., from Turkey, the UAE or Malaysia) that they are actually secretly (or not-so-secretly as you would like to makes us believe) planning to launch a Jihad against us.
However, reading quotes from radical muslims about Jews and then your obvious prejudices against muslims as a whole, I guess the road to peace in the Middle East will be indeed a long and bumpy one :no:
"They don't want to see the truth" (Many , always)
"radical muslims" OH , yes , some 1,000,000,000 people
Again , and slow , so you can understand , IF THE KORAN IS SPEAKING ABOUT A JIHAD (against who ? against the martians ?) AND ONE BELIVE'S IN IT , HE (simple logic) BECOMES A JIHAD BELIEVER , ASK ANY MUSLIM IF HE BELIEVES IN THE KORAN AND JUST STOP COVERING YOUR EYES .
YOU KNOW WHAT , THIS IS A WASTE OT TIME , THE JEWS ARE BAD AND KILLING INNOCENT'S ARABS AND THE ARABS ARE LIBERALS , WHO DON'T KILL THEIR WOMANS JUST FOR KISSING , WHO LOVES HUMAN RIGHTS , HAVE DEMOCRACIES EVERYWHERE , THEY DON'T SEND'S THEIR CHILDRENS TO DIE IN A HOLLY WAR , THEY DON'T CUT SOME ONE HANDS JUST FOR STEALING BREAD AND SO ON
HERE IN THE "HOLLY LAND" WE HAVE WITH IN US AND AROUND US 10,000,000 PALESTINIANS , 300,000,000 ARABS , AND 1,000,000,000 MUSLIMS , BUT NO , YOU IN THE WEST ALWAYS TALK ABOUT NICE FAISAL OR ACHMAD (I am sure they are nice) BUT DON'T HAVE ANY , ANY , ANY IDEA OF "OUR" FAISAL'S AND ACHMAD'S
SOMETIME'S I WISH THAT ISRAEL SHOULD LOST ITS WARS JUST TO SHOW THE WORLD HOW THE ARABS WILL TREATS THE JEWS , BUT THE COST'S WILL BE HUGE (something like a second holocaust) AND FOR WHAT ? FOR THE WEST TO LOVES US ? GIVE ME A BREAK... THE CHRISTIANS KILLED IN THE LAST 1,900 YEARS MORE THEN THE MUSLIMS WOULD EVER .
Ser Clegane
06-27-2005, 09:49
caesar44
I am aware that this a very emotional topic for you, and that there is much more at stake for you than for most other people on this board who are exchanging opinions on here but are not actually personally involved in the problem themselves.
Personally I am happy to see you participating in these discussions in the Backroom, as we had a lot of discussions obout the Israel/Palestine situations here in the past, without having somebody who actually has to live in this conflict contributing to the discussions.
If you think that I am taking sides here and would like to paint the Jews/Israelis as the perpetrators in this conflict you are rather wrong.
What I do have a problem with, are broad generalizations that are meant to slander whole groups of people. I do have a problem when people keep referring to some rather vague concept of "Jews controling the US" without actually providing any facts to support this allegation, but I also have problem when you refer to all muslims as "radical muslims" that only live to start a Jihad against the Western world and to eradicate the Jewish people.
BTW, writing in capital letters does not make any argument more convincing, it just makes it rather inconvenient to read.
caesar44
06-27-2005, 10:21
caesar44
I am aware that this a very emotional topic for you, and that there is much more at stake for you than for most other people on this board who are exchanging opinions on here but are not actually personally involved in the problem themselves.
Personally I am happy to see you participating in these discussions in the Backroom, as we had a lot of discussions obout the Israel/Palestine situations here in the past, without having somebody who actually has to live in this conflict contributing to the discussions.
If you think that I am taking sides here and would like to paint the Jews/Israelis as the perpetrators in this conflict you are rather wrong.
What I do have a problem with, are broad generalizations that are meant to slander whole groups of people. I do have a problem when people keep referring to some rather vague concept of "Jews controling the US" without actually providing any facts to support this allegation, but I also have problem when you refer to all muslims as "radical muslims" that only live to start a Jihad against the Western world and to eradicate the Jewish people.
BTW, writing in capital letters does not make any argument more convincing, it just makes it rather inconvenient to read.
AgReEd !
I hate generalization as well , but this was to make a point after some people in the forum accused all the Jews to control the USoA , all the Jews as murders , all the Jews as thiefs and so on
Belive me , ser , I have tried and tried to convince posters to stop dividing the world in to Black and White , but alas , it is hard...
"Be ware of the ignoramus" (I am sure I heard that before)
~:)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.