Yes, the palestianians are indeed the only bad guys in the middle east.

[Incongruous]

Are you prepared to assert (and support) that this is evidence of a larger, programatic effort by the IDF? That those in leadership among the IDF are tacitly authorizing/encouraging the use of violence in this manner in what amounts to a de facto (albeit never publicly acknowledged) policy?

Is this sarcasm?

I'd like to add that the only, one and single reason Isreal exists at all, is the U.S.A so perhaps the Palestinians should just wait till that bird is done and dead?
Or perhaps the U.S could soilve the major rallying point of Islamists everywhere and and tell Israel to shove it?
I mean, I am really interested as to why you people support that country. But then again you do support fascists.

[Husar]

Tell Israel to shove it where?
Where should they go? Should they commit mass suicide, migrate to the south pole or invade some other country that is not palestine?

[HoreTore]

Tell Israel to shove it where?
Where should they go? Should they commit mass suicide, migrate to the south pole or invade some other country that is not palestine?

The only true solution to the middle east problem is that the Israelis and Palestinians learn to live together in the same country. A two-state solution won't solve the problem, both sides will always want more land from the other one. They have to learn how to live together. Or one side has to be exterminated.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Is this sarcasm?

I'd like to add that the only, one and single reason Isreal exists at all, is the U.S.A so perhaps the Palestinians should just wait till that bird is done and dead?
Or perhaps the U.S could soilve the major rallying point of Islamists everywhere and and tell Israel to shove it?
I mean, I am really interested as to why you people support that country. But then again you do support fascists.

Well, well. The Magyar responds with a gauntlet. Fair enough.

No, my response to Tribes' was not sarcasm, but a statement rendered in the form of a question -- admittedly a leading question -- which ample evidence indicates is a format with which Tribes' is comfortable. He certainly didn't demur from making a response -- though his response stopped short of a supported argument that it was IDF policy while hinting that he thought they were leaning that way. I was reminding him that the more likely "answer" would be found in the realm of mistake or poor thinking by those involved and not in a programmatic policy.

Banquo's excellent post above, the one referencing his own experiences and frustrations, is quite telling and explored the reasons "why" this instance happened in a far better and more moving way than I could have done. Banquo's assessment (and his prescription of a Ghandian effort as more likely to generate success for the Palestinian Arabs) match closely with my own thinking. Under prolonged stress and pressure, it is far too easy for those enforcing a policy to "take things into their own hands" just a bit. It shouldn't happen, and should never be condoned, but it does occur. I think Banquo's proferred explanation fits the facts and situation nicely.

We are no more likely to tell Israel to "shove it" than we are likely to say the same thing to England or Australia. While the USA was one of the prime movers in the formation of Israel, and certainly has provided more funding for its continuance than anyone else, we are not solely responsible for its creation -- it was a UN mandate. You might want to spare a little of your spleen for the old USSR -- after all they could have scotched the whole thing with a simple "Nyet" if they'd bothered to attend the meeting.

The bond with Israel was forged on a number of levels. Guilt over the Holocaust was one component -- we had turned away Jews who went back to die and according to some might have bettered our time in defeating Germany instead of going after Italy. Another was America's love for the underdog, which role fit Israel admirably in 1948. Then, as the Cold War deepened, Israel became our proxy in the Middle East as the Arab nations turned toward the Soviets for material. As you should be aware, the manner and "rules" by which we conducted the Cold War dictated a lot of US policy -- and led us to support a number of tyrannical regimes, provided they were anti-Soviet. Into this, you can also add the depradations of Islamic terrorists in the 1970s, early 1980s, and then again beginning in the 1990s (The terrorist efforts of Jewish separatists in Palestine in the 1940s did not get much play in the USA, so they carry no stigma of terrorism in this country). The Embargo of 1973 and the Hostage Crisis of 1979-1980 were also episodes that were designed to humiliate and/or make us throw up our hands in frustration over the cost of supporting Israel. Each and every time the backlash has enhanced Israel's position. Howevermuch we may find some of Israel's policies and actions galling, we admire their determination. We'll argue with them, try to convince them to change their behavior sometimes, but all in all we are committed to that alliance.

The one and ONLY way I can see the Arab world de-coupling this alliance, or more likely shifting it to a format where ALL of the US efforts would be to push Israel towards a negotiated resolution, is the strategy outlined by Banquo above. Once the Palestinians are nothing but martyrs -- no acts of vengeance ONLY non-violent defiance -- then the cell phone camera will win what no number of Kalishnikov's can hope to achieve.

I'd suggest that the Palestinians change tactics soon. Waiting for the American Eagle to be "done and dead" is likely to be a bit of a wait. We may not be the Colossus our imaginations sometimes believe, but we're not staggering along in our death throes by a long chalk. Underneath all of our celebrophilia silliness and consumerist hedonism is a bit of steel. Too many in the past have missed that part -- to their regret. And, if you and yours seek to take us off our perch, you are welcome to try.

[Fragony]

Waiting for the American Eagle to be "done and dead" is likely to be a bit of a wait. We may not be the Colossus our imaginations sometimes believe, but we're not staggering along in our death throes by a long chalk. Underneath all of our celebrophilia silliness and consumerist hedonism is a bit of steel. Too many in the past have missed that part -- to their regret. And, if you and yours seek to take us off our perch, you are welcome to try.

Perfection lives.

[Incongruous]

Well, well. The Magyar responds with a gauntlet. Fair enough.

No, my response to Tribes' was not sarcasm, but a statement rendered in the form of a question -- admittedly a leading question -- which ample evidence indicates is a format with which Tribes' is comfortable. He certainly didn't demur from making a response -- though his response stopped short of a supported argument that it was IDF policy while hinting that he thought they were leaning that way. I was reminding him that the more likely "answer" would be found in the realm of mistake or poor thinking by those involved and not in a programmatic policy.

Banquo's excellent post above, the one referencing his own experiences and frustrations, is quite telling and explored the reasons "why" this instance happened in a far better and more moving way than I could have done. Banquo's assessment (and his prescription of a Ghandian effort as more likely to generate success for the Palestinian Arabs) match closely with my own thinking. Under prolonged stress and pressure, it is far too easy for those enforcing a policy to "take things into their own hands" just a bit. It shouldn't happen, and should never be condoned, but it does occur. I think Banquo's proferred explanation fits the facts and situation nicely.

We are no more likely to tell Israel to "shove it" than we are likely to say the same thing to England or Australia. While the USA was one of the prime movers in the formation of Israel, and certainly has provided more funding for its continuance than anyone else, we are not solely responsible for its creation -- it was a UN mandate. You might want to spare a little of your spleen for the old USSR -- after all they could have scotched the whole thing with a simple "Nyet" if they'd bothered to attend the meeting.

The bond with Israel was forged on a number of levels. Guilt over the Holocaust was one component -- we had turned away Jews who went back to die and according to some might have bettered our time in defeating Germany instead of going after Italy. Another was America's love for the underdog, which role fit Israel admirably in 1948. Then, as the Cold War deepened, Israel became our proxy in the Middle East as the Arab nations turned toward the Soviets for material. As you should be aware, the manner and "rules" by which we conducted the Cold War dictated a lot of US policy -- and led us to support a number of tyrannical regimes, provided they were anti-Soviet. Into this, you can also add the depradations of Islamic terrorists in the 1970s, early 1980s, and then again beginning in the 1990s (The terrorist efforts of Jewish separatists in Palestine in the 1940s did not get much play in the USA, so they carry no stigma of terrorism in this country). The Embargo of 1973 and the Hostage Crisis of 1979-1980 were also episodes that were designed to humiliate and/or make us throw up our hands in frustration over the cost of supporting Israel. Each and every time the backlash has enhanced Israel's position. Howevermuch we may find some of Israel's policies and actions galling, we admire their determination. We'll argue with them, try to convince them to change their behavior sometimes, but all in all we are committed to that alliance.

The one and ONLY way I can see the Arab world de-coupling this alliance, or more likely shifting it to a format where ALL of the US efforts would be to push Israel towards a negotiated resolution, is the strategy outlined by Banquo above. Once the Palestinians are nothing but martyrs -- no acts of vengeance ONLY non-violent defiance -- then the cell phone camera will win what no number of Kalishnikov's can hope to achieve.

I'd suggest that the Palestinians change tactics soon. Waiting for the American Eagle to be "done and dead" is likely to be a bit of a wait. We may not be the Colossus our imaginations sometimes believe, but we're not staggering along in our death throes by a long chalk. Underneath all of our celebrophilia silliness and consumerist hedonism is a bit of steel. Too many in the past have missed that part -- to their regret. And, if you and yours seek to take us off our perch, you are welcome to try.

Oh dear...
I do not see the U.S a a bumbling giant trying to do good, your nation is nothing of the sort and you know it. The U.S is a tyrant to the weak. You picked apart Latin America and left it to the desires of your state educated fascist pigs. You also support a fascist regime in the Middle East, that is what it is really. The underdog? Idrael has not been the underdog for a long time, it has held the whip hand over the Palestinians for decades and it has used this to kill and terrorise innocents with your silent approval.
You admire their determination? What aspect? The rabid determination to ethnically cleanse the Holy Land? or to allow their soldiers to shoot old ladies on their way to hospitals? Or their determination to allow women to die while giving birth at an Israeli check point to a hostpital? Which aspect is it?

I suggest that the U.S.A changes its tactics in the Holy Land because a toss load of good they have done so far.

Maybe you should switch off the flame of liberty, we all know its fake, it probably says Made In China somehwere...

[Don Corleone]

Seriously, Bopa, how do you really feel?

I'm curious, do you believe in a 2-state solution?

[Fragony]

The U.S is a tyrant to the weak.

This annoys the crap out of me and I am not even american, if you have to chose between what they are and what they could be what would it be? They have that choice but are what they are, nothing but humanitarian respect to america. What is it that they are doing so wrong I don't get it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Oh dear...
I do not see the U.S a a bumbling giant trying to do good, your nation is nothing of the sort and you know it. The U.S is a tyrant to the weak. You picked apart Latin America and left it to the desires of your state educated fascist pigs. You also support a fascist regime in the Middle East, that is what it is really.

We are both a "bumbling giant trying to do good" and an aggressive "playuh" pursuing our own interests -- I wasn't putting us up for international sainthood. We marginalized our abo' population (sometimes murdering them, even a few quasi-pogroms though we never had the stomach to follow it through methodically), we picked one war with a neighbor (Mexico 1842/1843), tried to conquer Canada every time we fought with Great Britain, and threw our weight around in China and in Latin America on a haphazard but pretty frequent basis from 1880 through 1940. During the Cold War we supported a number of loathsome regimes in order to out-compete the Soviets in that global conflict. On the other hand, we've had the whip hand over many nations in the last few decades and have not run amuck or fashioned ourselves much of an empire. It even pays pretty well to lose a war to us (Sellers' did a wonderful send-up of this in The Mouse that Roared). We're a far cry from perfect, but other nations who held a club have used it far more visciously -- Belgium's playfulness with the Congo, Japan's co-prosperity sphere, the Mongols savaging Europe etc. We may get it wrong, but a surprising portion of the time, we really do believe we're doing some of these things for the greater good.

The underdog? Idrael has not been the underdog for a long time, it has held the whip hand over the Palestinians for decades and it has used this to kill and terrorise innocents with your silent approval.

I was referring to the early days of Israel to explain why we had such an attachment to that ally. The "underdog" mindset still strikes a chord with many in the US audience, even if it really isn't accurate anymore. As you are aware, perceptions continue to influence evaluations even if the perception is no longer fully valid unless and until a more accurate perception is internalized by the audience in question.

You admire their determination? What aspect? The rabid determination to ethnically cleanse the Holy Land? or to allow their soldiers to shoot old ladies on their way to hospitals? Or their determination to allow women to die while giving birth at an Israeli check point to a hostpital? Which aspect is it?

No, the part that appeals is that they forged a nation with a democratic tradition while having to fight for their existence for more than a quarter century. Israeli mis-applications of justice rarely get much media play in the USA, so they do not influence public opinion as broadly as the earlier, "plucky underdog" perceptions. This is why, in my opinion, Banquo is in the right of it, however difficult it would be to effect a Ghandian stance in practice. Once Israel is the ONLY participant acting violently (note, not defiantly as Ghandian tactics are quite confrontative albeit non-violent), the media coverage would have to change and support for Israeli hardliners would erode both in Israel and in its biggest financial backer, the USA.

I suggest that the U.S.A changes its tactics in the Holy Land because a toss load of good they have done so far.

Now that is an interesting comment. While I disagree with your overall opinion of my nation (I believe Decatur had it right), you make a fair critique when you point out that the previous strategies employed certainly haven't created any meaningfully different results in the past 20 years. I'm still waiting for a new idea that can work on a practical level -- but it's a tough playing field for rationality.

Maybe you should switch off the flame of liberty, we all know its fake, it probably says Made In China somehwere...

Reminds me of the Communard who commented about our bidding on rope sales. Now who was that....Kruschev?

I live in a country where your birth is only tangentially relevant and you can, with hard work and a dash of luck, make yourself the richest person on the planet and be lauded for doing so. Or, conversely, you can found a movement calling for the abolition of private property and the scrapping of the Constitution in favor of Pastafarianism and the government will not prevent you from preaching your ideas or garnering followers even though you are calling for the destruction of that government. On the whole, we've got a fair handle on the freedom thing.

If you want to revel in the joys of an anarcho-syndicalist commune, go rent The Holy Grail or re-read your copy of the Little Red Book. I'll happily stick with the US of A.

[Goofball]

I live in a country where your birth is only tangentially relevant and you can, with hard work and a dash of luck, make yourself the richest person on the planet and be lauded for doing so. Or, conversely, you can found a movement calling for the abolition of private property and the scrapping of the Constitution in favor of Pastafarianism and the government will not prevent you from preaching your ideas or garnering followers even though you are calling for the destruction of that government. On the whole, we've got a fair handle on the freedom thing.

If you want to revel in the joys of an anarcho-syndicalist commune, go rent The Holy Grail or re-read your copy of the Little Red Book. I'll happily stick with the US of A.

Well said and with remarkable restraint as well, given the hate that Bopa has been spewing.

I am another non-American that has been quite incensed by some of the crap you've been throwing around this thread, Bopa.

Sounds like a simple case of penis envy to me...

[Don Corleone]

Well said and with remarkable restraint as well, given the hate that Bopa has been spewing.

Well, yeah...

but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Some people see faults and call them out when they see them. Others look for fault and call it out whether they see it or not. America has a litany of "Wish we hadn't done that" actions, but honestly Bopa, we are not the Fourth Reich you seem zealously convinced we are. But with all that cotton in your ears, I doubt you can hear me.

By the way, for all you "George Bush is satan" types, why don't you go see what those Nazi wannabes Bob Geldof and Bono have to say about Bush's Africa policies.

On topic: I actually heard a fascinating debate today on NPR on my lunch hour that really has altered my whole view of all of this, but as it deals more with militant Islam and less with the Palestinian question specifically, I should probably start a new thread.

[Tribesman]

I was referring to the early days of Israel to explain why we had such an attachment to that ally. The "underdog" mindset still strikes a chord with many in the US audience, even if it really isn't accurate anymore.

Just wondering Seamus , from the time of the underdog when your president was wondering about what to do with the seemingly impossible situation of carting off a large number of people to where they were not wanted and making them at home...what was it he said was inevitable about the underdog when he got a seat at the head of the table ?

[KrooK]

Guys talking that Israel always had to defend itself is just a b...t
Into 1956 they just attacked Egypt without shadow of reason - they wanted stop Nasser from taking control on Sues Channel. Into 1948 and 1967 they were outnumbered but with much better soldiers and weapon. Every year USA is giving 100.000.000.000 USD to Israel - thats why they have so good army.

Anyway watch on Israel policy into Lebanon. Last years when Hezbollah absolutely controlled that country everything was ok and Israel did not attack Lebanon. But when Hezbollah influences fallen at the beginning of this century (due to good economical development of Lebanon), Israel attacked Lebanon - of course official reason was "save our soldiers". Hezbollah was not destroyed, regained its influences (few months later they took absolute control over country) and now everything is calm on noth border (strange :D).

I have to mention previous attack on Lebanon into early 80ties when Jews helped into killing 20.000 civilians. I wonder why do we want catch Karadzic for 7000 people into Srebrenica and we never wanted Sharon for these 20.000.


Tribesmen would call it WORLD JEWISH CONSPIRACY. I never belied it but TRIBESMEN OPENED MY EYES.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Just wondering Seamus , from the time of the underdog when your president was wondering about what to do with the seemingly impossible situation of carting off a large number of people to where they were not wanted and making them at home...what was it he said was inevitable about the underdog when he got a seat at the head of the table ?

Don't know that one Tribes'. Please give us the quotation.

I assure you, as an American raised in the latter 60s and early 70s, I'm not mis-representing the mindset of most Yanks on this issue -- even if they're beliefs not well grounded in fact.

[Incongruous]

We are both a "bumbling giant trying to do good" and an aggressive "playuh" pursuing our own interests -- I wasn't putting us up for international sainthood. We marginalized our abo' population (sometimes murdering them, even a few quasi-pogroms though we never had the stomach to follow it through methodically), we picked one war with a neighbor (Mexico 1842/1843), tried to conquer Canada every time with fought with Great Britain, and threw our weight around in China and in Latin America on a haphazard but pretty frequent basis from 1880 through 1940. During the Cold War we supported a number of loathsome regimes in order to out-compete the Soviets in that global conflict. On the other hand, we've had the whip hand over many nations in the last few decades and have not run amuck or fashioned ourselves much of an empire. It even pays pretty well to lose a war to us (Sellers' did a wonderful send-up of this in The Mouse that Roared). We're a far cry from perfect, but other nations who held a club have used it far more visciously -- Belgium's playfulness with the Congo, Japan's co-prosperity sphere, the Mongols savaging Europe etc. We may get it wrong, but a surprising portion of the time, we really do believe we're doing some of these things for the greater good.

I was referring to the early days of Israel to explain why we had such an attachment to that ally. The "underdog" mindset still strikes a chord with many in the US audience, even if it really isn't accurate anymore. As you are aware, perceptions continue to influence evaluations even if the perception is no longer fully valid unless and until a more accurate perception is internalized by the audience in question.

No, the part that appeals is that they forged a nation with a democratic tradition while having to fight for their existence for more than a quarter century. Israeli mis-applications of justice rarely get much media play in the USA, so they do not influence public opinion as broadly as the earlier, "plucky underdog" perceptions. This is why, in my opinion, Banquo is in the right of it, however difficult it would be to effect a Ghandian stance in practice. Once Israel is the ONLY participant acting violently (note, not defiantly as Ghandian tactics are quite confrontative albeit non-violent), the media coverage would have to change and support for Israeli hardliners would erode both in Israel and in its biggest financial backer, the USA.

Now that is an interesting comment. While I disagree with your overall opinion of my nation (I believe Decatur had it right), you make a fair critique when you point out that the previous strategies employed certainly haven't created any meaningfully different results in the past 20 years. I'm still waiting for a new idea that can work on a practical level -- but it's a tough playing field for rationality.

I live in a country where your birth is only tangentially relevant and you can, with hard work and a dash of luck, make yourself the richest person on the planet and be lauded for doing so. Or, conversely, you can found a movement calling for the abolition of private property and the scrapping of the Constitution in favor of Pastafarianism and the government will not prevent you from preaching your ideas or garnering followers even though you are calling for the destruction of that government. On the whole, we've got a fair handle on the freedom thing.

If you want to revel in the joys of an anarcho-syndicalist commune, go rent The Holy Grail or re-read your copy of the Little Red Book. I'll happily stick with the US of A.

A democratic tradition? Sounds like bollocks to me, the democratic ideal to brutalise and torture thousands of people? Pull the other one mate.
You are spouting the ususal American crap about democracy and oh well we tried so hard but we just got wrong stuff, you never tried anything that did not seem to advance selfish national interest. But you know what, I am not blaming you for it, you are the super power and great powers do as they want, I am disliking you for falling for you're own bollocks. When the U.S.A is no longer top dog I expect that you guys will have it tough because you believe in this lie so much. If you are going to act like realists at least think like one aswell.

I really enjoyed your bit on America the Land of the free and all that, but its just Hollywood isn't it?
I am not condemning your actions at home, yep you people do have freedom. I am condemning your actions in Latin America and your support for tyranny in The Holy Land, you see there if you are born a Palestinian you cannot make of yourself what you will, because of American funded Fascism. Just think a while on that.

And when in heck have I ever been in support of commies or anarchists?
You missed the point of my jibe.
re-read perhaps? Or even better, re-think...

@Frag
You gonna actual;ly say something of worth or point the finger at the undefined Euro-elites?
Surprise you that I do not like the EU, that I do not hate Americans? I just really hate Israel.

@Don, no I actually want Palstinians to be incorporated as citizens of Israel, thus and end to Israel.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

A democratic tradition? Sounds like bollocks to me, the democratic ideal to brutalise and torture thousands of people? Pull the other one mate.
You are spouting the ususal American crap about democracy and oh well we tried so hard but we just got wrong stuff, you never tried anything that did not seem to advance selfish national interest. But you know what, I am not blaming you for it, you are the super power and great powers do as they want, I am disliking you for falling for you're own bollocks. When the U.S.A is no longer top dog I expect that you guys will have it tough because you believe in this lie so much. If you are going to act like realists at least think like one aswell.

Its a democratic tradition if you VOTE IN the next leadership cadre and those REPRESENTATIVES authorize those brutal and torturous policies. The morality of a government's actions is not necessarily guaranteed by free and fair elections. So, you find the governmental actions of the state of Israel to be loathesome and immoral -- fair enough. You'll find that quite a few people agree with you on that. Even those who are supportive of Israel don't approve of all of their actions.

I really enjoyed your bit on America the Land of the free and all that, but its just Hollywood isn't it?
I am not condemning your actions at home, yep you people do have freedom.

Okay.

I am condemning your actions in Latin America and your support for tyranny in The Holy Land, you see there if you are born a Palestinian you cannot make of yourself what you will, because of American funded Fascism. Just think a while on that.

Our actions in and regarding Latin America are a rather mixed bag. We've aided in the overthrow of governments and fought to free some countries. We've supported factions using death squads and worked to bring death squad participants to justice. We've spent millions on aid when disasters occur but spent billions to import (and try to stop the importation of) illegal drugs. Our intentions haven't always been honorable, but many times they were (which didn't necessarily mean what we were doing was effective). We conquered Mexico but gave most of it back. We've invaded a goodly number of the nations bordering the Carribean -- but never stayed (save Panama, and that we eventually gave back as well).

Our current support for Israel does help to keep Israel in business -- though not to the extent that this once was true. I'm not sure I'd label it fascism, though I can see how you'd interpret a number of their policies and actions as a form of tyranny (whatever the label). A Palestinian living in the Authority is facing a heap of difficulties that do restrict their freedom on a number of levels. After 60 years, it is difficult to say what level of suppressive tactics are justified by previously demonstrated threats coming from the other direction. Still, many of the policies and actions I see taken by Israel are harsh, whatever the justification, and you could make an argument that many of them are counterproductive as well.

And when in heck have I ever been in support of commies or anarchists?
You missed the point of my jibe.
re-read perhaps? Or even better, re-think...

You never claimed to support communism. You do seem, however, to be falling into the trap of perfect idealism in your political thinking that the examples I jokingly referenced do represent. Ideals are important goals to strive for, but expecting a perfect consistency between those ideals and policies and actions in practice is almost a pipe-dream.

@Don, no I actually want Palstinians to be incorporated as citizens of Israel, thus and end to Israel.

So Jews may live wherever they wish as individuals but have no right to a Jewish state? Why?

Have they abrogated this right through their tyrannical actions? If so, and we apply this rubric globally, there will be very few states left aside from Costa Rica and Monaco.

Have they abrogated this right by taking land which wasn't theirs in the first place? If so, and you believe the U.N. was wrong to assign part of the mandate area to a state of Israel, then who was responsible? The Brits? The Turks? It is not as though an autonomous non-Jewish state of Palestine has existed since the time of the Philistines.


You deride me for America's not living up to its own ideals but also for us "falling for our own bollocks." Don't the two points run counter to one another? Besides, its those "delusional" values that we've "fallen" for that have kept us on a better course of action than we might have taken at many points in our history. Do you REALLY want to see a USA that takes power as its sole objective and views all others as targets or obstacles? Don't mock the angels of our better nature -- the world would be worse of without them.

[Incongruous]

I am not following an Idealistic point of view in terms to Palestine, I know that nothing will ever get done that way. I am being very realistic, I understand that you as superpower can do what ever you like. That is how I approach any problem involving the U.S.A. You are the idealistic one, you have fallen for your own bollocks time and time again, not me.
The best example is that U.S leaders have the audacity to call themselves Leaders of the Free World.I almost vomit when I hear it, its just so awful and funny at the same time.

As for Latin America your School of the Americas defines for me your feelings towards the continent, Fascists are us. You are not alone in this, my own dear home country is just as complicit.

As for the right for there to be Jewish state, well I don't know about that bust it most certainly does not have the right to exist on stolen territory. But it is there to stay, and so I await for the day when Paletinians are goven citizenship and peacefully dismantle that fascist state. It would be good for the West if it was complicit in this.

Your Ideals do not keep your agression unchecked but merley allows it to be given a nice shiny gloss.

@Redleg, ok so democracy is all good with the U.S.A even though nut cases are often elected, so why hate Hamas?
Because they hate Israel right? Its all very realistsic really.

[Redleg]

A democratic tradition? Sounds like bollocks to me, the democratic ideal to brutalise and torture thousands of people? Pull the other one mate.
You are spouting the ususal American crap about democracy and oh well we tried so hard but we just got wrong stuff, you never tried anything that did not seem to advance selfish national interest. But you know what, I am not blaming you for it, you are the super power and great powers do as they want, I am disliking you for falling for you're own bollocks. When the U.S.A is no longer top dog I expect that you guys will have it tough because you believe in this lie so much. If you are going to act like realists at least think like one aswell.

Oh someone seems to have trouble understanding what a democratic tradition is. Since Seamus explained it very well, I will just mock this statement for the utter bollucks that it is. Where is my mocking emoticon......

I really enjoyed your bit on America the Land of the free and all that, but its just Hollywood isn't it?
I am not condemning your actions at home, yep you people do have freedom. I am condemning your actions in Latin America and your support for tyranny in The Holy Land, you see there if you are born a Palestinian you cannot make of yourself what you will, because of American funded Fascism. Just think a while on that.

Oh another half thought out mis-representation of what happened in Latin America. So we were bad in Latin America for periods of time, just like we did lots of good in Latin America during other periods of time.

As for support of the Holy Land the biggest backers of Israel up until the late 1960's was not the United States, but a few other European Nations. Now that criticism is valid for the time period after the 1973 war, when the United States started provided the majority of finicial and military aid to Israel.

But then if your born a Palestinian you also have to deal with your own internal organizations fascism, so its a lose-lose situation to be born Palestinian in Israel. And Jordan, and Syria, and yes even Lebanon.

And when in heck have I ever been in support of commies or anarchists?
You missed the point of my jibe.
re-read perhaps? Or even better, re-think...

Ah the pot calling the kettle black. If you speak bullocks dont be surprise if sarcasm results from such use.

@Frag
You gonna actual;ly say something of worth or point the finger at the undefined Euro-elites?
Surprise you that I do not like the EU, that I do not hate Americans? I just really hate Israel.

Oh so the venom in your use of language is not hate but severe criticism. Sorry there, when one uses venom its not severe criticism.

@Don, no I actually want Palstinians to be incorporated as citizens of Israel, thus and end to Israel.

You cant have both - Palstinians becoming citizens of Israel makes them Israelis. Now you might be arguing that you want the end of the current Israeli government's mindset toward the Palstinians but you have lost that point with the amount of bullocks that you have spewed regarding the subject.

Emotional arguements are all well and fine, and even useful - but it often loses its logical flow because of the emotion involved.