FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
  
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Pro-Israel ad on US TV (Page 1)

  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Pro-Israel ad on US TV
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
I hate not having a sound card (or headphones) at work. I'm going to have to wait until I get home to watch this.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob_Scopatz
Member
Member # 1227

 - posted      Profile for Bob_Scopatz   Email Bob_Scopatz         Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, that wasn't so much Pro-Israel as it was anti-land-for-peace deals. As such it must target the parties in Israel's government who are in favor of such deals.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pelegius
Member
Member # 7868

 - posted      Profile for Pelegius           Edit/Delete Post 
To Lisa, with whom I have had many unproductive discusions on the topic, the two are the same.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Valentine014
Member
Member # 5981

 - posted      Profile for Valentine014           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
In 2000, Israel turned over south Lebanon to terrorists. The terror threat grew larger. In 2005, Israel turned over the Gaza Strip to terrorists, including Al-qaeda. The terror threat grew larger still. Now, Israel proposes to turn over nearly all the West Bank to our terrorists enemies. Albert Einstein defined insanity as, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." We cannot afford any more of this insanity.

Posts: 2064 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Pelegius:
To Lisa, with whom I have had many unproductive discusions on the topic, the two are the same.

Well, duh. They are.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Valentine014:
quote:
In 2000, Israel turned over south Lebanon to terrorists. The terror threat grew larger. In 2005, Israel turned over the Gaza Strip to terrorists, including Al-qaeda. The terror threat grew larger still. Now, Israel proposes to turn over nearly all the West Bank to our terrorists enemies. Albert Einstein defined insanity as, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." We cannot afford any more of this insanity.

Was that really Einstein? Huh. I guess he was smart.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Well, duh. They are.
[Roll Eyes]
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Blayne Bradley
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
wow I actually like that commercial, I agree 100%.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
Looks like a fairly effective ad. Though I don't think there's really much point to it. You'd have to blanket the major population centers of the US, and even then they won't really find enough people who care to get a sizeable amount to actually call their congressman. People rarely ever call their congressman even when something effects them personally, let alone when something effects a foreign nation.

Plus, it assumes that the Knesset gives two hoots about the opinion of even a hundred congressman. I'd be incredibly surprised if they did.

As a close, I could easily see a counter argument saying that the last dozen or so years of Israel's policies have either kept the status quo of the terrorist threats they face, or made it worse. Which would make Einstein's argument true, only working to the antithesis of the ad's stance.

Giving the West Bank to Palestine is a huge majority of what they want. It puts the international ball in their court. The question "What next?" is firmly on their side. If they squander it, and things get worse, Israel can do what they've always done anyway and simply reoccupy the land to restore order, or the world can look upon the situation, firmly side with Israel and consider it's options.

Other than the question of the illegal settlements in the West Bank, I don't really see what the bruhaha is over removing military forces from the area. They can move back in with impunity whenever they want if they don't like the situation. Hell, it's what they ALWAYS do whenever a pullout or ceasefire is called. Some idiot murderer drives a car into a pizzeria and there's tanks, apaches and hornets all over Gaza.

Pulling out of the West Bank is a win/win for Israel. Either they get peace from a satisfied Palestinian people, or they get universal world appreciate of their moral supremacy, and support for any policy (short of genocide or forcing a mass exodus) they wish to employ it fixing the problem at hand.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Giving the West Bank to Palestine is a huge majority of what they want. It puts the international ball in their court.

Pardon me, Lyrhawn, but weren't you one of the many, many people who less than a year ago were saying, "Pulling out of Gaza puts the international ball in the Palestinians' court"?

Because, you know, that turned out so well. And there's so much pressure on the Palestinians to counter the Gaza pullout with something -- anything -- to show their own good faith.

Unfortunately, they have none.

A week hadn't gone by after 9000 Jews were rendered homeless for this insane gesture before the Palestinians started firing missiles into Israel from the ruins of Jewish towns.

Now Israel is supposed to make another 100,000 Jews homeless in order to give the Arabs a staging ground right in the heartland of Israel?

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
The question "What next?" is firmly on their side. If they squander it, and things get worse, Israel can do what they've always done anyway and simply reoccupy the land to restore order,

Sure. Like they've done with Gaza. "What they've always done anyway" is vile and dishonest, Lyrhawn, particularly in the face of Israel not doing so with Gaza.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
or the world can look upon the situation, firmly side with Israel and consider it's options.

You said almost the same exact thing last year, Lyrhawn, with regards to Gaza. Do I need to pull up your posts and rub them in your face?

Einstein was right about insanity. So what does that say about someone like you, Lyrhawn, who makes grand sounding claims like this about Israel pulling out of Gaza, and then repeats the same exact claims about pulling out of Judea and Samaria even after they turned out to be completely untrue with Gaza?

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Other than the question of the illegal settlements in the West Bank, I don't really see what the bruhaha is over removing military forces from the area.

They aren't illegal. The very few that are illegal by Israeli law are a drop in the bucket. We're talking about established cities. Not even towns, but cities.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
They can move back in with impunity whenever they want if they don't like the situation. Hell, it's what they ALWAYS do whenever a pullout or ceasefire is called.

Crap. This crosses the line from misunderstanding to intentional lying, Lyrhawn. The Arabs have been waging war against Israel from Gaza since the pullout. Has Israel gone back in? Don't look now, but I think your dishonesty is showing.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Some idiot murderer drives a car into a pizzeria and there's tanks, apaches and hornets all over Gaza.

Hasn't happened. And you may think that repeating the lie over and over again will make people believe it to be the case (and you may be right -- that technique certainly worked in Germany), but I'd hope that the people on Hatrack are bright enough to see through your deceptions.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Pulling out of the West Bank is a win/win for Israel. Either they get peace from a satisfied Palestinian people, or they get universal world appreciate of their moral supremacy,

Like they did when they put 9000 Jews into refugee camps last year? You made this same ludicrous claim last year. I told you at the time that it wouldn't happen, but you insisted it would.

People like you have been repeating this same mantra for years:

"Give them autonomy, and the world will applaud!"

Um, no.

"And if they abuse the autonomy, you can just roll back in and end it."

Um, no.

"Give them rifles so that they can keep order. If they use the rifles against Israel, you can just roll back in and take them back."

Um, no.

"Pull out of Gaza, and the world will applaud!"

Um, no.

"And if they use Gaza as a staging ground for terrorist strikes, you can just roll back in and put a stop to it."

Um, no.

And when Israel has gone in in limited force to try and fight against the terrorists without completely reversing the mad concessions that we made, the world has gone berserk in its condemnation. And claimed that any action whatsoever on Israel's part to defend herself is a provocation that is morally equivalent to the Arab butchery and atrocities that spurred it. And now, it's:

"Pull out of Judea and Samaria and put another 100,000 Jews into refugee camps, and the world will applaud!"

Um, no.

"And if they use Judea and Samaria as a staging ground for terrorist strikes, you can just roll back in and put a stop to it."

Um, no.

You know Heinlein's Razor, right? "Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity." It's true. But a friend of mine recently pointed out to me that even if that's true, "Any sufficiently harmful stupidity is indistinguishable from malice."

I don't know if you're malicious, or whether you really believe the things you say, Lyrhawn, but it's indistinguishable from malice.

Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
calaban
Member
Member # 2516

 - posted      Profile for calaban   Email calaban         Edit/Delete Post 
It is tough to appease a group that aligns itself with the fundamentalists of a religion that has beleifs such as these:

“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity [i.e. embrace Islam], then open the way for them: for Allah is oft forgiving, most merciful” (Koran 9:5).

You cannot bargain with a group thats only belief of fair compromise is death, or enslavement by means of heavy taxes placed upon the heads of the infidel.

Any concessions made by Israel will not be interpreted by extremists in the Arab world as a peace gestures. Instead they will be received as a weakening resolve and the hand of god delivering the land to them.

I don't think that Islamic extremism is a problem the west can peacefully resolve. Unfortunately because of thier willingness to be brutally and unhumanly violent, these are the people that hold sway in that region. Until those within the faith that want peace stand up to them and choose to overcome thier terror driven tyranny, the problem will remain. Israel can only defend itself; appeasement will bring only thier distruction.

Posts: 686 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Xavier
Member
Member # 405

 - posted      Profile for Xavier   Email Xavier         Edit/Delete Post 
So we are quoting scripture now to show that a given religion is evil? Well, perhaps those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

quote:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Can you guess where this pearl of morality comes from? Which religious leader was ordered by god to give his men this order?

I will give you a hint, it is not in the Koran.

Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bokonon
Member
Member # 480

 - posted      Profile for Bokonon           Edit/Delete Post 
Except Jews aren't usually considered Pagans by standard Islam (and neither are Christians).

-Bok

Posts: 7021 | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
calaban
Member
Member # 2516

 - posted      Profile for calaban   Email calaban         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not saying that there is no blame to go around. If you carefully read what I wrote, I also don't even include all of Islam. What I did say is that there are extremists within Islam who use that scripture to kill people today. Now. They consider it thier devine right and responsibility to scourge nonbelievers from the face of the planet.

If we want to turn this into a discussion of religion and the horrible things that have been done by parties related to religions centered around God, Allah and science alike I really don't have the time.

However the current discussion is about the potential fruit that appeasement can produce for the state of Israel. And despite the good intentions that might exist within many living the region, the Islamic people who define policy there are barbaric in thier methods and have no concern for human life. They don't want peace and will do all that is within thier means to make sure there is none.

There are those who decry the efforts of Israel to defend itself. While they have not been wholely blameless in thier efforts, my observation is that they are much more willing to show good faith than thier counterparts.

Posts: 686 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
calaban
Member
Member # 2516

 - posted      Profile for calaban   Email calaban         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Bokonon:
Except Jews aren't usually considered Pagans by standard Islam (and neither are Christians).

-Bok

True: However they are infidels, and many use this and similar passages as the motivation behind thier anti-western sentiment.
Posts: 686 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Luet13
Member
Member # 9274

 - posted      Profile for Luet13   Email Luet13         Edit/Delete Post 
I think there should be a Jewish home state. However, I think we can all see the difficulties in the way Israel was created.

It's always reminded me of what happened in Europe after WWI when the Allies carved up the continent in such a way that another war was inevitable.

Israel was created in a similar way. All those Palestinians were already there. I DON'T think they've gone about fighting their cause in the right way. Not in the least. It's not okay to blow oneself or others up in the name of God.

But don't the Palestinians deserve a homeland too?

AGAIN: DON'T GET ME WRONG. I believe that there should be some way to compromise so that the Jews, the Palestinians, and the Christians can live together in the Holy Land. It is, after all, holy to all three groups.

Posts: 511 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post 
Point of order: Many Palestinans are Christian. I believe you meant to say that the area is sacred to Jews, Muslims, and Christians.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stephan
Member
Member # 7549

 - posted      Profile for Stephan   Email Stephan         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Luet13:

AGAIN: DON'T GET ME WRONG. I believe that there should be some way to compromise so that the Jews, the Palestinians, and the Christians can live together in the Holy Land. It is, after all, holy to all three groups.

How come I never hear, "Jews, Muslims, and Christians living together in peace in the Holy Land." Its always, "Jews, Palestineans, and Christians."
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
They have one. About 3/4 of Palestine was given to Amir Abdullah (great-grandfather of the current King Abdullah) as the Emirate of Transjordan. Which is now the kingdom of Jordan.

So the Arabs got 3/4 of Palestine. And then in 1947, they were offered half of what was left. That would be 7/8 of Palestine. But they weren't willing to let the Jews have even 1/8 of the land, despite the fact that the Jews had actually bought the land they were living on. Despite the fact that the land they bought had been theirs before the Arabs came in and conquered it.

The fact that they're calling it Jordan these days doesn't make it any less the area known as Palestine. Why is it that the Jews have to give up their homeland so that the Arabs can have yet another state? There's already a Palestinian Arab state. A Palestinian homeland. But that's not what they want.

They were given Gaza. As a gift. As a reward for all the terror and murder they'd committed. Did they declare a state in their now fully independent land? No. Nor will they if, God forbid, they are given Judea and Samaria. Because a state isn't what they're after. They're dogs in the manger, Luet. They don't want a state; they want us not to have one.

As to your last line, it is absolutely not holy to Islam. It never has been. They never claimed it to be until the state of Israel came into existence.

Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by dkw:
Point of order: Many Palestinans are Christian. I believe you meant to say that the area is sacred to Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

Point of order: That land has never been considered holy to Islam. Except insofar as any land that was once controlled by Islam is holy to them, it indicating that Allah is on their side.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Luet13
Member
Member # 9274

 - posted      Profile for Luet13   Email Luet13         Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks dkw, I did mean Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

Oops. [Blushing]

I reiterate my orginal point: I don't think ANYONE has gone about this correctly. That includes all sides. And no I don't think extremists should be rewarded with land, but not all Muslims are extremists. Also, Muslims have Holy Sites in Jerusalem. It's a fact. I don't think it has anything to do with former control.

Posts: 511 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Xavier:
So we are quoting scripture now to show that a given religion is evil? Well, perhaps those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

quote:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Can you guess where this pearl of morality comes from? Which religious leader was ordered by god to give his men this order?

I will give you a hint, it is not in the Koran.

I think that scripture is the most oft quoted scripture in the entire bible. You do not prove anything by quoting it other then you think you are the first clever anti christian to come across it.

If you want to compare modern day Islam with middle ages Christianity or even Ancient Judaism, you do more of a disservice to Islam then to Christains or Jews. Why don't you go find the last instance of a man/woman being officially condemned by either religion for converting or leaving islam and then do the same for Christians/Jews. Oh what a month ago a man was almost officially executed by the Afghanistan government for converting to Christianity? Oh what the Salem Witch trials are the last time you found Christians doing similar things?

I grew up in Malaysia (majority muslim) and I remember my 3rd grade teacher (an American) announced he was getting married to a native Malaysian, and that because his wife was muslim he had to convert. I remember even at that young age being confused and asking "why can't she convert to your religion, or why can't you just keep your own religion." His response was "Thats just not how it works." I was VERY disattisfied with that answer.

I agree it was shameful, the manner that Israel was formed, but that is WW2 history, nobody is going to stand for the eradication or mass exodus of Israel. Its there to stay now, yes the did not get along with their Palestinian neighbors, and its both side's fault that there is so much bad blood. But all that aside, Israel HAS given up land to Palestine, The people in Palestine who want to offer the olive leaf are hard pressed to control the extremism that demands the destruction of all Jews.

The US and other European Countries have told Hammas "We cannot work with you unless you renounce your goal to destroy Israel." These countries are all telling Israel, "We cannot work with you unless you recognize Palestine." Hammas cannot agree to that because they used their anti Israeli platform to win election. If you wan't to argue Israel has done nothing, you are simply ignoring the facts. If you want to argue they do not do enough, well thats fine, you can have an opinion. But why don't you list out what Palestine is doing as a sovereign country and then list what you expect from Israel. I think you will find the 2 lists embarassing when placed together.

Palestine deserves respect, its own land, its own government, and help from the international community (all of which it has received by the way). Israel deserves at least 1 year free from suicide bombings and missile launchings, before we can tell them to stop retaliating. If the US had Mexico sending in 1 suicide bomber a YEAR, we would wig out and crush them into submission. Israel can hardly go a month without something happening.

Israel deals with countries like Iran saying "We will destroy Israel." And it allows countries in Europe and America to fight the diplomatic battle before resorting to violence. If Iran said "We will destroy the US as soon as we are able." Do you think the US would let Europe say, "Let us handle this?"

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Luet13:
Thanks dkw, I did mean Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

Oops. [Blushing]

I reiterate my orginal point: I don't think ANYONE has gone about this correctly. That includes all sides. And no I don't think extremists should be rewarded with land, but not all Muslims are extremists. Also, Muslims have Holy Sites in Jerusalem. It's a fact. I don't think it has anything to do with former control.

Israel respects the holy sites of others. The Muslims, by contrast, trash Jewish holy sites whenever they manage to gain control of them.

They don't get to take our land just because they have holy sites on them. Particularly when those "holy sites" were built atop the single most holy site in the world for Jews.

Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Xavier
Member
Member # 405

 - posted      Profile for Xavier   Email Xavier         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I think that scripture is the most oft quoted scripture in the entire bible. You do not prove anything by quoting it other then you think you are the first clever anti christian to come across it.

If you want to compare modern day Islam with middle ages Christianity or even Ancient Judaism, you do more of a disservice to Islam then to Christains or Jews. Why don't you go find the last instance of a man/woman being officially condemned by either religion for converting or leaving islam and then do the same for Christians/Jews. Oh what a month ago a man was almost officially executed by the Afghanistan government for converting to Christianity? Oh what the Salem Witch trials are the last time you found Christians doing similar things?

Excuse me, sir, but where did I try to compare Islam to anything?

Someone posted a piece of the Koran, in what appeared to be an attempt to show that Islam is, by its nature, violent against non-Muslims (though, of course, I could have misinterpreted the intent).

I responded by (attempting) to point out that someone could make a similar case for both Judaism and Christianity by using the scripture recognized as canon for both religions.

I did this to show the flaws in the statement about Islam based on their scripture, not to make any similar claims about Christianity or Judaism from their scripture.

Perhaps I could have written it in a manner which more clearly displayed my intentions, but sometimes I get flippant [Wink] .

I've seen far too many people point to the violence in the Koran to "prove" that Islam is an evil religion, when Judaism and Christianity both have scripture which is as violent as is possible. (Though I do not claim that calaban was doing such.)

Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
If you want to compare modern day Islam with middle ages Christianity or even Ancient Judaism, you do more of a disservice to Islam then to Christains or Jews. Why don't you go find the last instance of a man/woman being officially condemned by either religion for converting or leaving islam and then do the same for Christians/Jews.
1977 , for example? Or, let me guess, those aren't True Christians (tm).
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
calaban
Member
Member # 2516

 - posted      Profile for calaban   Email calaban         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:
If you want to compare modern day Islam with middle ages Christianity or even Ancient Judaism, you do more of a disservice to Islam then to Christains or Jews. Why don't you go find the last instance of a man/woman being officially condemned by either religion for converting or leaving islam and then do the same for Christians/Jews.
1977 , for example? Or, let me guess, those aren't True Christians (tm).
Wow. I marvel at how wholly unrelated that article is to Appeasement and Israel. Fringe lunatics? Might as well site Jeffery Dahmer or the Unibomber. You will find wackos everywhere, but you don't find mainstream christians beating women to death for voting or people killing family members for joining another religion. Those things happen in Muslim nations, among those that can be considered mainstream Muslims. If you really want an example of christans willing to be horrible in the name of thier religion you only have to look at some of the underlying motivation of the "troubles" in Ireland.

That we can find no shortage of the inadequacies encompassing all of the parties is not in debate. We are talking about the potential for appeasment in the middle east to produce any other fruit but the destruction of Israel.

I would like some compelling arguments that there can be a peaceful outcome in the region, with supporting actions of good faith from the Palestinian party as examples of how it can possibly work. To me it seems Israel gives and gets nothing I return but empty promises and more dead people.

Posts: 686 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
Well, I certainly don't want to dispute that it's more common in Islam; what I objected to was the Salem hangings as the last instance of it. If nothing else, there were witch burnings for quite some time after Salem, in Europe; which was at the time way more 'mainstream' than any exiled lunatic fringe clinging to the American coastline.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Israel respects the holy sites of others. The Muslims, by contrast, trash Jewish holy sites whenever they manage to gain control of them.
She's certainly right about that. Throughout history in fact, Muslims have trashed or converted the holy sites of others en masse. Thousands of churches across Northern Africa were either converted to mosques or razed to the ground during their conquest. The Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, arguably one of the modern wonders of the world, a building that almosted bankrupted Byzantium under (I think) Justinian, was turned into a mosque by the conquering Muslim Turks. Other than individual sites, which for historical reasons they have left sacrosanct, Muslims more than I think most any other religion have defiled the holy sites of others.

If you want a recent example, check out what the Taliban has done in Afghanistan.

starLisa -

I'm not going to point/counterpoint you on your lengthy repetitive post from above. It'll just waste my time and yours. But I think you misunderstand part of what I said. Since the pullout of Gaza, no, there hasn't been a major incursion of Israeli forces, but how long as that been? Less than a year? I'm talking about all the time before it, unless you're trying to deny all the Israeli military actions in Gaza and the West Bank over the last couple dozen years, and more specifically, since the most recent round of hostilities started in the 90's.

Go ahead and refuse it if you want, I might have some time this weekend to find a couple dozen articles that talk about Israeli military incursions into Gaza. If you want to define the scope of my argument for me, you can go ahead and do so, it just makes it that much easier to point out how you're trying to warp my words to fit your argument.

I think you even called me, or at least compared me to Nazis in your post above, which was sweet of you, thanks. I know how much you like to call other people horrible names, so I'm glad I gave you the chance to do so. "Today I called someone a Nazi." Snaps for starLisa!

There's nowhere for Palestine to go after this. And while I'm sorry about the 9,000 refugees, all of whom were given nice sums of money, and help from the Israeli government, don't you think it's a little ironic to be trying to throw that in my face, coming from a person who has little or no sympathy for the 1.3 MILLION Palestinian refugees in Jordan? Just thought I'd ask.

Feel free to call me a liar again, or worse, a malicious Nazi. I don't get that from anyone else, so it's always nice to have a source of invective hatred to amuse me.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by King of Men:
Well, I certainly don't want to dispute that it's more common in Islam; what I objected to was the Salem hangings as the last instance of it. If nothing else, there were witch burnings for quite some time after Salem, in Europe; which was at the time way more 'mainstream' than any exiled lunatic fringe clinging to the American coastline.

I am glad you at least agree its more prominent in Islam KOM. I just threw the Salem Witch Trials out there because it was the last official purging of unbelievers that I could think of off the top of my head. I admit I took alittle bit of opinion liscence with that statement.

Just trying to make the point that Islam is STILL very aggressive when it comes to its neighbors, and retaining its devotees. The only places that have such strict policies for missionaries of other faiths are Muslim nations and Communist China/Korea. The larget Buddha in the history of the world used to be in Afghanistan until some Muslim militants blew it up with dynamite.

I knew a certain man in my congregation when I lived in Hong Kong who was from Afghanistan, they claimed to have geneology all the way back to Mohammed. His roommate was a Mormon in college and he was naturally curious as to the Book of Mormon his roomie was reading. His roommate let him read it and he was converted by it. He informed his family of his conversion and his family hired men to seek him out and kill him "to save his soul."

After 15 years of hiding and trying to talk to his family, he is able to talk to some of his siblings. His parents still will not speak to him, and he cannot visit Afghanistan as he has been black marked and would most likely be killed.

I do not hate Islam at all, I LOVED living in Malaysia. The Muslims I had as friends, as teachers, and who my parents hired as drivers and gardeners were awesome people.

My point is that I think RECENTLY Israel has been trying to make peace with Palestine, and right now they are seeing no benefit for doing so. The attitudes of Israel/Palestine 10,20,30,100,1000 years ago to me are irrelevant. People need to look at whats going on RIGHT now. And right now I fail to see significant moves by the Palestinian nation towards peace. I admire Abbas ALOT, I think he is definately trying hard to make this work. But 1 and his party are not enough, I am looking at Hammas the apparent (representatives of the popular vote) and what their goals and actions are.

Peace is more than the absence of violence, but I think that abscence is still more than Hammas has been able to handle.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
starLisa -

It's "Lisa". The "star" is silent.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Since the pullout of Gaza, no, there hasn't been a major incursion of Israeli forces, but how long as that been? Less than a year? I'm talking about all the time before it, unless you're trying to deny all the Israeli military actions in Gaza and the West Bank over the last couple dozen years, and more specifically, since the most recent round of hostilities started in the 90's.

Of course there have been. What there hasn't been was a reversal of the concessions Israel made. Those who said that the Palestinian Authority wouldn't dare commit acts of war against Israel, because after all, Israel is so much stronger, were full of it. They, like you, are full of grandiose claims about what will surely happen if Israel just gives a little more and a little more. You, and they, have a track record of exactly zero. And we're the ones who pay for your mistakes. In blood.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
I think you even called me, or at least compared me to Nazis in your post above, which was sweet of you, thanks.

I compared your use of the big lie technique to the German use of that same technique during WWII. Deal with it.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
There's nowhere for Palestine to go after this. And while I'm sorry about the 9,000 refugees, all of whom were given nice sums of money,

Another lie. The Sharon government claimed that such would be the case, but it wasn't. Those evicted from their homes were not only not paid for those homes, but are still required to pay the mortgages on those homes. Even though the homes are now rubble.

And before you ask, they can't just default, because mortgages in Israel impose a lein on all your property. Not just the object of the mortgage.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
and help from the Israeli government,

Equally false. Check your facts, rather that parroting what you'd like to be true.

quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
don't you think it's a little ironic to be trying to throw that in my face, coming from a person who has little or no sympathy for the 1.3 MILLION Palestinian refugees in Jordan? Just thought I'd ask.

You mean the Palestinians who are there, in Palestine? But who insist on our part of it as well? No, I have no sympathy whatsoever for them. To the extent that they have any right to this area at all, they are in their homeland.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob_Scopatz
Member
Member # 1227

 - posted      Profile for Bob_Scopatz   Email Bob_Scopatz         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The Sharon government claimed that such would be the case, but it wasn't. Those evicted from their homes were not only not paid for those homes, but are still required to pay the mortgages on those homes. Even though the homes are now rubble.

And before you ask, they can't just default, because mortgages in Israel impose a lein on all your property. Not just the object of the mortgage.

I've read a LOT of articles about the settlements and about the evictions. This is the first I've heard of any of those folks having mortgages, let alone having to pay them back after the government kicked them out.

I wonder a few things:

1) I wonder about the wisdom of anyone giving a mortgage to someone to build in disputed territory.

2) I wonder where all the tales of people being paid to move into those areas came from. Surely this wasn't all just propaganda since it seemed to be coming from all sides -- like a commonly acknowledged fact that many of the settler areas were populated by new arrivals from foreign lands, and by people specifically recruited to go live there many in exchange for a home free of cost.


I do think it's appalling if these people are being made pawns in the game of government interactions. Even if they were willing pawns in the first place, they don't deserve financial disaster as a result.

Surely before they built they were warned that the area was a likely bargaining chip? Surely whoever gave them a mortgage understood the risk that the title to the land wasn't free and clear...

This really does defy logic, sL. Unless someone was funding those settlers to prove a point, regardless of what the government was saying.

Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
You mean the Palestinians who are there, in Palestine? But who insist on our part of it as well? No, I have no sympathy whatsoever for them. To the extent that they have any right to this area at all, they are in their homeland.
As opposed to the Israelis who are still in Israel? Sounds like the same thing to me.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy
Member
Member # 9384

 - posted      Profile for Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Unless someone was funding those settlers to prove a point, regardless of what the government was saying.
That's exactly what was going on. For a long time, there was a widely-held sentiment among the more extreme right-wing segments of the Israeli population that Israel could not (in the "what is possible" sense, not the "what is politically expedient" sense) pull out of the disputed areas if there were Jews living there.
Posts: 87 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
I've read a LOT of articles about the settlements and about the evictions. This is the first I've heard of any of those folks having mortgages, let alone having to pay them back after the government kicked them out.

Read here. Or here. What, you thought they were given homes for free?

Refugees. Refugees in our own land.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
I wonder a few things:

1) I wonder about the wisdom of anyone giving a mortgage to someone to build in disputed territory.

The whole damned state is "disputed". People aren't supposed to live their lives?

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
2) I wonder where all the tales of people being paid to move into those areas came from.

Israel has a policy of giving preferred mortgage terms to people buying in areas that are higher priority, and to people to whom it wants to give perks.

For example, new immigrants get special terms. Those who have served in the army get better terms (which is most people, but there are exceptions; Olmert's son didn't serve). If you get a mortgage for property in a development town, you get better terms than if you buy in a city like Jerusalem or Tel Aviv. And so on.

When we bought in Beit Shemesh, they wouldn't allow us to buy together. You have to be relatives of the first degree, and they didn't consider me and my partner to be relatives of any degree. So we did it all in my partner's name. Why? Because legally, she was a single mother, which pushed her priority up. Ironically, had they recognized us as a couple, we wouldn't have gotten as good terms.

One piece of the mortgage was a conditional grant. Like $10K or so. If we kept the place for X years without selling, it was forgiven. Otherwise, it was to be paid back like everything else. But it was a small fraction of the whole.

The mortgages in the territories are a lot like that. Some small component might be a conditional grant, and maybe another piece might have a lower interest rate. But it certainly wasn't free.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Surely before they built they were warned that the area was a likely bargaining chip? Surely whoever gave them a mortgage understood the risk that the title to the land wasn't free and clear...

It was free and clear. And it was not intended to be a bargaining chip. You're reading your 2006 view of things into how they really were.

Do you know that in Israel, you can't actually buy land? No, you lease land. You can own the structure on it, but the land itself gets leased for 99 years. I kid you not. And when you buy land in the territories, they do a title search to ensure that the land isn't registered to anyone else. Including Arabs, btw, regardless of the nutty things some people claim. I worked in a mortgage bank and saw this myself.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
This really does defy logic, sL. Unless someone was funding those settlers to prove a point, regardless of what the government was saying.

The government never considered that land to be a bargaining chip. Never. I don't know where you got the idea that it did.

Now, you can ask, legitimately, in that case, why not just annex it? Doesn't refusing to state, legally, that the land is a part of the State of Israel send a mixed message? Doesn't it imply that we don't really see the land as a permanent possession?

It's a valid question. Generally, when a government or a company comes up with something stunningly stupid and inconsistent, it's the result of a compromise. One group pulling one way, and another pulling another way.

Israel didn't want to annex the territories, because then we would have had to give citizenship rights to the Arabs living there. Which I think is pretty understandable.

Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy:
quote:
Unless someone was funding those settlers to prove a point, regardless of what the government was saying.
That's exactly what was going on. For a long time, there was a widely-held sentiment among the more extreme right-wing segments of the Israeli population that Israel could not (in the "what is possible" sense, not the "what is politically expedient" sense) pull out of the disputed areas if there were Jews living there.
Among those Israelis with a moral sense left. You label them as "the more extreme right-wing segments of the Israeli population" merely to demonize them. It's crap.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
More abuse for the refugees.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bob_Scopatz
Member
Member # 1227

 - posted      Profile for Bob_Scopatz   Email Bob_Scopatz         Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks for the links sL. I read them all and have come away with the firm conclusion that Israel's government sucks.

Question about the source -- I gather their bias is toward the conservative side of things. Has their position been rebutted by the government or are there contrary news reports that would give a different side of things? I mean, this stuff is pretty damning, but as we've seen in the US, the news is often slanted by the policies of the editors & owners of the media outlets.

Lastly, I'm perplexed about your response to the "bargaining chip" thing. I've been hearing about land-for-peace deals, disputed settlement areas, and give-backs for a long, long time. Are you saying that last summer's implementation really came as a big surprise to people, especially bankers? Or was it that these particular areas were never up for discussion before? I'm not really strong on recent history of the various regions and their fate in the political process. But I was under the impression that the first settlers were removed from areas that had been the most fiercely disputed and criticized in international circles. You know, the ones that we in the west kept urging Israel to stop settling in at all...


Oh...one other thing. Is it true that settlement in disputed areas is still going on? I know you said the "whole country" is disputed, but I think you understand what I mean -- the areas taken over in 1967 -- are settlements still going into those places? And how many of those places are also under discussion for turn over to the PA?

Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Thanks for the links sL. I read them all and have come away with the firm conclusion that Israel's government sucks.

No argument here. But it's worth considering why the Israeli government sucks. They're trying to be all things to all people. Engaging in half measures, because they're afraid of the repercussions of full measures.

I absolutely do blame Israel for a lot of Palestinian suffering. But not the same way most people do. If they'd simply annexed Judea, Samaria and Gaza in 1967, and moved the local Arabs into Jordan and Egypt and Syria and Lebanon, the world would hardly have screamed too badly. Instead, they did exactly what I referred to in that essay I wrote over on Ornery. They refused to accept victory. And the world has gone to hell ever since.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Question about the source -- I gather their bias is toward the conservative side of things. Has their position been rebutted by the government or are there contrary news reports that would give a different side of things?

You can check out HaAretz, which always gives the extreme left wing position on everything. For stuff more in the center, there's the Jerusalem Post (which used to be called the Palestine Post before the state was declared in 1948, for those who think that "Palestinian" meant "Arab Palestinian" back then).

But you won't find rebuttals in those papers. They prefer to simply downplay the problem (Post) or ignore it altogether and blame it all on the refugees themselves (HaAretz).

While it's true that Arutz 7 has a national bias, that merely means that they report things that other papers may not see as newsworthy. I'm sure the opposite is true as well. Arutz 7 is unlikely to trumpet stories that are embarrassing to us, as HaAretz would.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
I mean, this stuff is pretty damning, but as we've seen in the US, the news is often slanted by the policies of the editors & owners of the media outlets.

True enough. But every news outlet has to choose how to emphasize what. Those that claim to be utterly impartial are engaging in deception. Often self-deception, I'll grant you, but deception nonetheless. Someone decides whether an item goes on the front page with a banner headline or whether an item gets buried on page 38.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Lastly, I'm perplexed about your response to the "bargaining chip" thing. I've been hearing about land-for-peace deals, disputed settlement areas, and give-backs for a long, long time.

Sure. Some land. Not all land. And even the "some land" has been a matter of major dispute among Israelis.

Israel used to have an iron rule against negotiating with terrorists. A sensible one, in my opinion, and one which, when it was finally broken, has led to nothing but tragedy. If you agree to negotiate with terrorists, you proclaim to the world that terrorism works.

I know it's 2006, but surely you can remember how these things were dealt with originally. Everyone recognized the fact that the PLO was a terrorist organization. Only radical lefties like Hillary Rodham supported their kind of nihilistic violence. People used to have a gut revulsion to that kind of thing.

Israel, the US, everyone else... they used to have a policy that forbade ever giving in to such barbarity. Regardless of the cost. Because they knew the cost of giving in to it would be unimaginably greater. As it has been.

The PLO, which was created in 1964, when the "Palestine" that they wanted to liberate was the lands inside the Green Line. When the "West Bank" was held by Jordan, the Gaza Strip was held by Egypt, and the Golan Heights were in Syrian hands.

They were nothing but a terrorist group. They tried to overthrow King Hussein of Jordan in 1970, because Jordan is the greater part of Palestine, and Hussein put them down violently. They went to Lebanon, where they kept attacking Israel until Israel finally invaded in 1982. And while Israel got bogged down there, they did succeed in making the PLO flee to Tunis. Where they sat, powerless, until Rabin and Clinton decided to rehabilitate them and give them autonomy.

The Oslo Agreement was the first big proclamation that you can be an unrepentant, active terrorist, and be rewarded. You can even get a Nobel Peace Prize without ever renouncing your intent to obliterate another country and support terrorist attacks against it.

And Israelis... Israelis have grown weary. And they're willing to accept almost anything, if it can be spun in such a way as to make it look like the Arabs will finally just leave us alone.

Don't underestimate the power of fatigue to cloud people's minds.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Are you saying that last summer's implementation really came as a big surprise to people, especially bankers?

Of course it did, Bob. Sharon was elected in a landslide, campaigning against withdrawing from Gaza. You can try and blur that by saying that politicians lie, but this wasn't just a lie. This was a Trojan Horse of major proportions. The outrage against pulling out of Gaza was so extreme that he won an enormous victory in the polls. And then proceeded to do exactly what the electorate had demanded not be done.

Israel isn't America. Compared to the Arab regimes, it's a wonderful democracy. But it's a young country, and still heavily influenced by the founders, who were die-hard socialists. Stalinists, in many cases. There's no actual representative government. You vote for a party list, rather than individuals. If a party wins 10 seats, the top ten people on the list take seats in the Knesset. If they later decide to leave the party, they retain their seats (!) even though they never won them in the first place.

Sharon wasn't even elected. The Likud Party was, and he had the first place on that list. When he left the Likud, because the Likud itself was fighting him on leaving Gaza (since it's against not only the party platform, but a violation of the party's constitution), he remained as Prime Minister. He kept his seat. And when he had his stroke, the Prime Ministership passed, not to #2 on the Likud list, but to #2 on the breakaway party that he founded.

It's not like when Gerald Ford was President without ever having been elected. That, at least, went according to the Constitution, and the duly elected representatives of the American people. This was more like a junta.

When you live in chaos, it's very difficult to plan for the long term. With this politician saying, "We're going to do X" and that politician saying "We're going to do Y", do you expect banks to change their policies? It's not really realistic. Furthermore, the banks only have a small say in these mortgages. The government dictates what mortgages have to be given.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Or was it that these particular areas were never up for discussion before? I'm not really strong on recent history of the various regions and their fate in the political process. But I was under the impression that the first settlers were removed from areas that had been the most fiercely disputed and criticized in international circles.

You know, the ones that we in the west kept urging Israel to stop settling in at all...

The west doesn't want Israel doing anything outside of the Green Line. That includes people putting an addition on their house. There are neighborhoods of Jerusalem itself, like Gilo and Armon HaNetziv, which are outside of the Green Line and are considered "settlements" to the West. I used to live in Maaleh Adumim, a large city in Judea. If you went there, you'd wonder what the word "settlement" even means. I'm sure you have an image of tents or prefab buildings with dirt streets and the like. We're talking actual towns and cities.

Check this out.

quote:
Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Oh...one other thing. Is it true that settlement in disputed areas is still going on? I know you said the "whole country" is disputed, but I think you understand what I mean -- the areas taken over in 1967 -- are settlements still going into those places? And how many of those places are also under discussion for turn over to the PA?

The Olmert government is mostly preventing even the expansion of infrastructure in existing towns and cities. New ones are not being created.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Robin Kaczmarczyk
Member
Member # 9067

 - posted      Profile for Robin Kaczmarczyk   Email Robin Kaczmarczyk         Edit/Delete Post 
Jews and Pelestinians.. Are they not all Semitic?

Brothers.. Cain and Abel.. Time to GIVE IT UP!

Maybe Mexico should take over the whole Middle East in the name of the United Nations.

Posts: 379 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
Robin, you win the prize for the most pointless and off the wall post. Muy congratulations.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David G
Member
Member # 8872

 - posted      Profile for David G   Email David G         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Robin Kaczmarczyk:
Brothers.. Cain and Abel.. Time to GIVE IT UP!

Maybe you meant, instead, to refer to Isaac and Ishmael?
Posts: 195 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bean Counter
Member
Member # 6001

 - posted      Profile for Bean Counter           Edit/Delete Post 
Hidden in Israel is a highly skilled war machine that can and will tear Iran, Syria and any collection of Arab States apart. However in order to unleash this war machine backed as it is by the United States she needs a provocation of the first order.

This strategy of giving the Palestinians the tools and confidence they need to go after Israel in total war is simply that, a strategy that urges the Arab States to action while they can still be beaten. It has to happen every couple of generations, in order to give Islam such a taste of defeat that they dare not come back until an entire generation has died with the shame and fear they always learn.

The only real fear is that the opening sally will involve a nuclear weapon, given the priceless nature of the cities and the close areas involved that is a chance Israel will not accept. So the division is not about the need for war, it is about whether a nuclear threat exists that will force Israel to act as aggressor.

I am sure that President Bush is under a great deal of pressure from Israel to act as aggressor on their behalf in the Iran situation as will any President committed to the existence of the State of Israel. If the danger reaches a certain threshold Israel will go after Iranian production facilities and let the chips fall as they will. If this unites the Arab world against Israel then they are more then able to defend themselves. If we are the aggressors in Iran, think on this... we will save the lives of a million Arabs who will then not need to throw themselves against Israel in a hopeless war.

BC

Posts: 1249 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stephan
Member
Member # 7549

 - posted      Profile for Stephan   Email Stephan         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Bean Counter:
Hidden in Israel is a highly skilled war machine that can and will tear Iran, Syria and any collection of Arab States apart. However in order to unleash this war machine backed as it is by the United States she needs a provocation of the first order.

This strategy of giving the Palestinians the tools and confidence they need to go after Israel in total war is simply that, a strategy that urges the Arab States to action while they can still be beaten. It has to happen every couple of generations, in order to give Islam such a taste of defeat that they dare not come back until an entire generation has died with the shame and fear they always learn.

The only real fear is that the opening sally will involve a nuclear weapon, given the priceless nature of the cities and the close areas involved that is a chance Israel will not accept. So the division is not about the need for war, it is about whether a nuclear threat exists that will force Israel to act as aggressor.

I am sure that President Bush is under a great deal of pressure from Israel to act as aggressor on their behalf in the Iran situation as will any President committed to the existence of the State of Israel. If the danger reaches a certain threshold Israel will go after Iranian production facilities and let the chips fall as they will. If this unites the Arab world against Israel then they are more then able to defend themselves. If we are the aggressors in Iran, think on this... we will save the lives of a million Arabs who will then not need to throw themselves against Israel in a hopeless war.

BC

I personally don't think Palestine has any connection with the other Arab nations other then religions, especially Iran. Sure they talk loud, but none of them really care about the fate of the Palestineans, other then being a thorn in Israel's side. Iranians don't even consider themselves Arab, but Persian. Egypt has even stopped Palestineans from crossing their borders seeking refuge.

I don't see the Arab nations joining forces ever because they can't agree on anything themselves.

[ May 24, 2006, 04:54 PM: Message edited by: Stephan ]

Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bean Counter
Member
Member # 6001

 - posted      Profile for Bean Counter           Edit/Delete Post 
I agree that the Palestinians are just an excuse, and the Arab Nations are separate from Iran and do not trust it, but they have all traditionally agreed on the goal of the destruction of Israel. It seems to bring them all together. Iraq and Iran fought for years to determine who would get to do the honors.

None of that changes the fact that unilateral action by Israel will be seen as justification for war, and any action that includes Israel will be portrayed as being lead by Israel.

BC

Posts: 1249 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lisa
Member
Member # 8384

 - posted      Profile for Lisa   Email Lisa         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Bean Counter:
Hidden in Israel is a highly skilled war machine that can and will tear Iran, Syria and any collection of Arab States apart.

That's ridiculous. The myth of the Israeli super-army/super-soldier was invented after 1967. And the current Israeli government doesn't have the will to do any such thing.

quote:
Originally posted by Bean Counter:
This strategy of giving the Palestinians the tools and confidence they need to go after Israel in total war is simply that, a strategy that urges the Arab States to action while they can still be beaten.

Bean Counter. Acid Dropper. Whatever it is you're taking, I want some of that. Israel is not engaging in some grand strategy. It's running in fear.

quote:
Originally posted by Bean Counter:
It has to happen every couple of generations, in order to give Islam such a taste of defeat that they dare not come back until an entire generation has died with the shame and fear they always learn.

Hmm. "Always", you say. Without meaning any offense, might I ask what color the sky is on your planet?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
Not totally ridiculous. Israel does have a highly trained, powerful army and air force. Especially their air force is an asset, they are more than a match for a combination of any two air forces in the region, excepting maybe the Egyptians.

But it isn't 1967 anymore. The surrounding Arab nations have had more training, and have much better equipment than they had before. Saudi Arabia alone would put up a good fight. They aren't helpless, but they certainly couldn't take on the entire ME by themselves.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
Abbas Gives Hamas 10 Days

quote:
Palestinian rulers have been given 10 days to recognize Israel implicitly or face a territory-wide referendum on whether effectively to accept the existence of the Jewish state.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas urged the Hamas-led government on Thursday to accept the national goal of establishing a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank alongside Israel.

"In 10 days, you have to decide; you have to agree," Abbas told a conference of Palestinian leaders, including Hamas and his Fatah Party, meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

"If you don't agree, then I will say that frankly none of us will be responsible, and in 40 days I will call for a referendum. I will ask my people directly whether they accept or do not accept this [plan]."

Nice to see Abbas getting tough, hopefully he won't be assasinated for his trouble. But from the sound of the article, Hamas will probably turn him down and face a referendum in 40 days, which will either settle the issue, or start a civil war. At least progress is being made, one way or the other.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
Israel is also handing weapons to Abbas' inner circle in order to provide protection for him. I thinks Abbas is making an extremely hard move, and I applaud him for it. I am not sure how Hammas will handle the ball now that its in their court, but I do hope they realize recognizing Israel is a better option than civil war.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
Recognizing Israel might cause one anyway. I'd rather Hamas stick to their guns and they just let the people choose. If the people decide on recognizing Israel, that gives Hamas an out, rather than having it looks like they've betrayed their base.

Besides, a democratic referendum gives the entire move more legitimacy.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Valentine014:
quote:
In 2000, Israel turned over south Lebanon to terrorists. The terror threat grew larger. In 2005, Israel turned over the Gaza Strip to terrorists, including Al-qaeda. The terror threat grew larger still. Now, Israel proposes to turn over nearly all the West Bank to our terrorists enemies. Albert Einstein defined insanity as, "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." We cannot afford any more of this insanity.

Albert Einstein also refused the position of Prime Minister of Israel.

What. A. Coinkidink.

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

   Open Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2