Tweet
Originally posted by BlackStone
There was discrimination long before people started blowing themselves up.
There was discrimination long before people started blowing themselves up.
-
Your point?
...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - Snotty -
Originally posted by Caligastia
Your point?
Why thank you
. Have another go if you like.
Cheese eating surrender monkees - Chris 62
BlackStone supporting our troopsComment
-
Agreed. The USSR was one of the first countries to recognize Israel. However, by 1967, the USSR was extremely hostile. It had plans to invade Israel unless it called a halt to its invasion of Syrian, a Soviet client state.Originally posted by Dalgetti
No. the first left wingers were following the decisions of their respective parties , with the communist parties of many countries being under the control of the USSR. before the 56' war, Israel was non-alligned. but after 56' with the Soviets backing Nasser, Israel joined Britain and France against the Egyptians. (
).
The tone of all UN SC resolutions up until 237 and 242 was balanced as are most UN resolutions calling for a halt in a war. However, the Soviets labeled Israel the aggressor in the Six Day War. That label stuck. These SC resolutions do not simply call for a halt to the war and negotiations, they call for Israel to give back the land it took.
As Lyndon Johnson said, these resolutions, taken literally, are not a formula for peace, but a formula for continued war.
It is a wonder that Johnson did not veto these resolutions. Our "ally," Saudi Arabia must have really been putting the pressure on.http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=enComment
-
Mobius:
I make no claim to being an "intellectual heavyweight", but here is an argument I posted earlier in this thread, it involves no name-calling, and nobody has responded to it. Care to reply?Originally posted by MOBIUS
Interesting also to note that some of the self proclaimed 'intellectual heavyweights' can only resort to name calling instead of actually trying to counter some very real and valid arguments...
Just to pick up on a point that HisMajestyBob touched on, how many of the conditions cited in Israel would also apply to other countries in the region or the world, and possibly to a much greater degree?
Off the top of my head possible suspects include:
Lebanon (christians vs. moslems)
Syria (campaign by Assad the Elder against minorities in the country)
Iraq (Kurds)
Turkey (Kurds)
Iran (much more theocratic government than Israel)
Ditto Afghanistan under the Taliban
India (moslems)
Sub-Saharan Africa (any number of countries with tribal issues)
By raising the issue specifically with respect to Israel, does this wind up supporting the Isreali argument that whatever standards are applied selectively to them when there are many other and possibly much worse cases to be considered?Old posters never die.
They j.u.s.t..f..a..d..e...a...w...a...y....Comment
-
Originally posted by BlackStone
Why thank you . Have another go if you like.
We're not playing racquetball in case you didnt notice...
...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Originally posted by Caligastia
We're not playing racquetball in case you didnt notice...
Cheese eating surrender monkees - Chris 62
BlackStone supporting our troopsComment
-
That is a very good point, but then this is a thread about Israel - perhaps we should be having individual threads about each of these nations...Just to pick up on a point that HisMajestyBob touched on, how many of the conditions cited in Israel would also apply to other countries in the region or the world, and possibly to a much greater degree?
Off the top of my head possible suspects include:
Lebanon (christians vs. moslems)
Syria (campaign by Assad the Elder against minorities in the country)
Iraq (Kurds)
Turkey (Kurds)
Iran (much more theocratic government than Israel)
Ditto Afghanistan under the Taliban
India (moslems)
Sub-Saharan Africa (any number of countries with tribal issues)
By raising the issue specifically with respect to Israel, does this wind up supporting the Isreali argument that whatever standards are applied selectively to them when there are many other and possibly much worse cases to be considered?
To me, the emotive issue of Israel is how the nation came into existence. Zionists were able to lobby the World into enabling them to dislodge people from and steal the land of Palestine. IMO Israel had no right to come about as a nation - certainly not at the expense of millions of native Palestinians and their descendants!
The fact that it has means that we have to accept that this 'nation' is here to stay - we can however try to address Israel's illegal occupation of the '67 conquests... We can address the fact that even today *%&$ing Israeli settlements are being built and expanded in occupied East Jerusalem!!!
If you persecute a people so much and on such a grand scale (www.btselem.org) that they can't even see the point of living - is it any wonder that some of these people decide to try to take the lives of the invader when they put an end to their own misery!!?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these suicide tactics a fairly recent development in this 50+ year old conflict?
Anyway - I digress...
Perhaps the major thing wrong with all these other nations is that the plight of their peoples do not get the same media attention. Without being in the spotlight, it is all too easy to forget that the same barbarism that Israel is perpetrating against the Palestinians is being perpetrated eslewhere...
The other point is that most of those countries are in the arse end of beyond, or are our allies (such as Turkey!) where we are then guilty of double standards.
Occassionally there is a 'success' such as East Timor (success here is measured at a cost of the near total destruction of it's infrastructure and the murder of thousands of its people!!!
), but then it has been 27 years since Indonesia invaded the place to the apathy of the World (well you see, it was a US ally after all!)...
Of course, apathy is measured in such things as being remote and not having any valuable resources...
Kuwait of course was a different matter indeed, despite the fact that they started it because they had vast oil reserves the West was happy to jump in and liberate them!
As for the list, well at least Afghanistan has been rid of the Taliban. Indian persecution of Moslems I didn't realise was that bad (it is the 2nd most populous moslem country in the World!) - but perhaps that is a symptom of the issue you allude to, I am frankly too ignorant of the situation through lack of knowledge to comment...
What irks me though is what to do with the likes of Mugabe in Zimbabwe? He is obviously screwing his country and the World stands by and lets him! But then is it our place to intervene and interfere with the affairs of another sovereign country???
Of course, if we don't, we run the risk of another Yugoslavia or, worse yet, Rwanda!
Perhaps though, the major difference between Israel and the others is that Israel has the backing of the World's premier power (land of the free etc...) in its Zionist agendas!
If Israel has this kind of backing, then surely the Saddams, Milosevics, Mugabes etc... have a role model to look upon from guidance?
Maybe Saddam is a bit more crude and clumsy - but essentially he's been doing the same thing as Israel. He was fighting back against Kuwait's theft of oil, just like the Israelis fought the Arabs. Iraq does have a territorial claim to Kuwait (the 19th province IIRC), just as Israel has a 2000 y.o. claim to Palestine. Sure, Chemical weapons are nasty - but then so is being buried alive as your house is demolished by explosives while you're still in it; or you are rounded up and butchered by Israeli allied militias while being prevented from escaping by Israeli troops (Sabra & Chatilla)... Saddam/Sharon what's the difference? Sh*t, the US wants to finish Saddam off because he's trying to develop nuclear weapons - what about Israel? Sharon's already got them!
The other thing is that as a Brit, I feel at least partly responsible in the fact that my country allowed the Zionists to back it into a corner of conflicting undertakings vis a vis a Jewish (not secular) homeland in Palestine...Comment
-
Mobius-
If youre so tolerant...then why do you hate jews?...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Me, hate Jews?Originally posted by Caligastia
Mobius-
If youre so tolerant...then why do you hate jews?
Where did I say that?
*scratches head*Comment
-
Well you seem to be on a real rant about their right to exist as a nation.Originally posted by MOBIUS
Me, hate Jews?
Where did I say that?
*scratches head*...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Caligastia-
Why you keep asking those moronic questions?Que l’Univers n’est qu’un défaut dans la pureté de Non-être.
- Paul ValeryComment
-
If youre so intelligent...then why do you sound like an imbecile?Originally posted by laurentius
Caligastia-
Why you keep asking those moronic questions?...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Mobius-
Why do you think its ok for arabs to steal the land of Israel, yet you condemn Jews for taking it back? Sounds like you have something against jews to me......people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
I'm sorry, Mobius, but this is beyond the pale. You either do not know the history of the region or you are a racist, slandering ****.Originally posted by MOBIUS
To me, the emotive issue of Israel is how the nation came into existence. Zionists were able to lobby the World into enabling them to dislodge people from and steal the land of Palestine. IMO Israel had no right to come about as a nation - certainly not at the expense of millions of native Palestinians and their descendants!
The fact that it has means that we have to accept that this 'nation' is here to stay - we can however try to address Israel's illegal occupation of the '67 conquests... We can address the fact that even today *%&$ing Israeli settlements are being built and expanded in occupied East Jerusalem!!!
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=enComment
-
We're talking about Apartheid in Israel, and then you wonder why I think a Jewish state, and not a secular state is wrong...Originally posted by Caligastia
If youre so intelligent...then why do you sound like an imbecile?
Comment
Comment