| Home | Community | Message Board |
|
You are not signed in. Sign In New Account | Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery » |
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
NextShop:  Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag  Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order  Spores for European Microscopy  Bulk Substrate |
| |||||||
 germin8tionn8ion enthusiast Registered: 04/14/04 Posts: 399 Last seen: 22 years, 3 months |
| ||||||
Then you'd have to question the legitimacy of every other nation that the Brits made after they won WWI and took over the Ottoman Turk Empire. I suppose that you won't do this, because they aren't Jews or Americans and as such ,are the greatest gift tot his world ever.
Hah, whoa, did you just say that Jews didn't live in Israel?
No, it wasn't. It never was "Arab land", it was part of the ottoman turk empire. The Brits somehow managed to kick their ass and took it over. Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Syria, none of these nations existed before the brits made them exist. Why aren't the arabs bombing the UK nw, since they are more responsbile for breaking up the middle east as it is today than the USA is?
So, wait, the Palestinean people who aren't extremists, as you said a bit ago, favor Hamas? That sounds slightly extreme. Let me check, um, yea, favoring a group that blows up women on crowded busses, that falls squarly into the "extreme" category.
I don't think it's that large at all. Wasn't Iraq's military the bestin the region?
The same "majority" of palestineahs that, two paragraphs ago, supported Hamas? Interesting.
If they own the land, they can do whatever the fuck they want. *gigantic propaganda snip*
Yea! Remember, if they aren't the USA or Israel, they aren't doing anything wrong. And what they are doing wrong is because such nations as Israel and the US obviously don't value freedom and negotiation as much as those peaceful middle eastern arabs. Geez, read the rules. "1) The USA is always wrong 2) even if the US is right, we are always wrong" ss7 - bad rejoinder.
| |||||||
 silversoul7 Chill the FuckOu   Registered: 10/10/02 Posts: 27,301 Loc: mndfreeze's pupp |
| ||||||
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=284171
No shit? Let's just say I don't think highly of human rights abuses. That doesn't mean I want the destruction of Israel.
Our support of Israel's illegal occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and other human rights violations is usually cited by Arabs as their number 1 grievance against the U.S. I'm inclined to take their word for it. Bin Laden's main issue, however, is our military presence in Saudi Arabia, which probably is more personal for him than it is political, although there are legitimate reasons for us pulling out of there. Other reasons for hating us include the sanctions against Iraq as well as our current occupation of the country, and our support for unpopular dictators, but Israel and Saudi Arabia are the two main issues.
Easy. They wanted to get Spain out of Iraq. It was a strategic decision to weaken the military occupation. --------------------  
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire 
| |||||||
|
silversoul7 Chill the FuckOu Registered: 10/10/02 Posts: 27,301 Loc: mndfreeze's pupp |
| ||||||
What makes you think I wouldn't question other countries' legitimacy? I think the Ottoman Empire should never have been broken up.
No. Prior to the 20th century, there were small communities of Arab Jews. The Russian and European Jews who now make up the majority of the Israeli population came later.
Because the UK has not continually supported Israeli atrocities like America has. The UK certainly fucked up that region, but there's nothing that can be done about that now. However, the US continues to this day to be the number 1 provider of military aid to Israel. Also, I'm not 100% positive, but I'm fairly sure that the UK is on Al Queda's list of targets as well.
It's not that they support all of Hamas's agenda. They just see Hamas's methods as being more effective.
Every Israeli man and woman between 18 and 30(I think), with a few exceptions, is in the Israeli military, which is armed quite extensively by the U.S.
They support Hamas's methods because they've seen negotiations fail. That doesn't mean they support all of Hamas's agenda.
First of all, no. Second, they don't own the land. They're occupying it illegally.
I never said the Arabs were peaceful. I don't endorse terrorism, whether it's individual terrorism by suicide bombers or state terrorism by Israel. --------------------
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
| |||||||
|
phi1618 old hand  Registered: 02/14/04 Posts: 4,102 Last seen: 16 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
|
The UK is not such a big target because the terrorists target us for present, not past, greivances.
The two main problems many Islamic extremists, such as Al-Qaeda, have with the US is our continued support of Israel and our military presence in the Middle East, particularly the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. Now, this is just a first step. With us out of the region, the religious fanatics would like to topple the various secular governments of Saudi Arabia (and the old Iraqi regime, as well as whatever will replace it), and build a pan-Arab Islamic state. Claims that they hate us because of our lifestyle are not entirely groundless, but are far from the conflict we now face. Islamic radicals would like to see the whole world under Muslim law, just as Christian fundamentallists strive to see the fulfillment of their prophecies, rapture, armageddon, and all. However, this is a distant target. If our publications and military strength were out of the region, they would turn their attention inward, and wait to move on to world domination untill they achieved greater unity and strength. It is important to realize that radical Islamists have a great deal of influence in the Arab states, even more than Christian radicals have influence in the US. This does not mean that all Muslims are our enemies, any more than moderate protestant religions are the same as the radical fundamentalist Christians, that are presently in the midst of a revival in the US. There are a number of moderate Muslim Arab intellectuals, however they face represive government and religious opposition. For example, Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses. These academics support internal force for democritization and reform in Iran and in Egypt, as well as many other places in the Muslim world. The point is that we do have philosophical allies in the Middle East, but they are not strong right now. We also have allies of convenience, such as the Saudi royal family, that are our philosophical opponents there. In the past, our military interventions have not had a consistently positive effect on the region, from either a philosophical or practical standpoint - Shah of Iran, anyone? On the subject of Israel - they are too strong and well established to eliminate. Additionally, the Jews have maintained a cultural identity in foreign lands for a long time, and it is right that they should have a homeland. It is a shame that people were living there. I think that many Israelis and many Palestinians would be satisfied with a two-nations solutions, but that it is radicals on both sides (settlers vs. terrorists) who drive the conflict on. In fact, most people on both sides feel that the tactics of their side are morally wrong but necessary, or understandable. While travelling, I met a number of Israelis that served in the military. One man had served in the West Bank - he was not a racist (we ate many times at a Pakistani restaurant), and felt that what the Israelis did was wrong, but forced by circumstance. Like many Israelis, he lost his grandparents in WWII. Although we talk about how "hate crimes" are silly, the fact is that the holocaust was devastating to the Jews, and remains a sensitive issue with many Israelis that lost family there. Another fact is that, while we would like to believe that our world is kinder and gentler, there are dark things that lurk in the recesses of our hearts, and another holocaust is not beyond possibility. Many Jews feel they need their own home, whatever the cost. I have met Palastinians as well. A group of young women visited a summer camp (in the US) I attended in high school - several years ago. They talked about suicide bombings. In their view, the main factor in young men blowing themselves up is hopelessness. Young Palestinian men have little prospects to use their abilities, to work, to raise happy families. The hopelessness of their situations lead them into the religious trap of martyrdom - they die for virgins in heaven, because life on earth is hell. So, that was one long and rambling post. If you read it all the way through, I sallute you 
| |||||||
|
zappaisgod horrid asshole  Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 10 years, 4 months |
| ||||||
|
I read it all. You mis-spelled salute.
Good post. Never forget that we have boots on the ground (as opposed to material support as in Israel) because they begged us to come to push Saddam out of Kuwait. BEGGED. The problem is that the rulers of those nations have utterly plundered their nations resources for themselves and have totally fucked their own people. Why don't they slit the throats of their own rulers? -------------------- 
| |||||||
|
Divided_Sky Ten ThousandThin  Registered: 11/02/03 Posts: 3,171 Loc: The Shining Void Last seen: 18 years, 4 months |
| ||||||
I do not have time to respond to the rest of your allegations but I think this one has a simple answer. Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and has murdered hundreds of Israeli civilians and soldiers. Hamas is at war with Israel and therefore Hamas leaders and operatives are combatants under the rules of engagement and legitimate targets. Hamas is engage in a guerrilla campaign against Israel and Israel has a right to fight back. It is not an assasination but a military counter-attack. It seems absurd to complain about one combatant in a war to kill another that is trying to murder its civilians. There is nothing unlawful about that. -------------------- 1. "After an hour I wasn't feeling anything so I decided to take another..." 2. "We were feeling pretty good so we decided to smoke a few bowls..." 3. "I had to be real quiet because my parents were asleep upstairs..."
| |||||||
|
phi1618 old hand Registered: 02/14/04 Posts: 4,102 Last seen: 16 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
Two reasons - 1) the rulers have the guns and bombs. 2) many places, like Iraq, there is no unified competing vision opposed to the despots who own the place. Some people might not like a secular dictatorship, wanting to replace it with a religious oligarchy; some might want a strict democracy, so that they can trample the rights of minorities; some might want independence; some might just want to kick out the present ruler so that they can take over. So, even if the unified will of the people would be sufficient to overthrow despotic governments, no such unified will exists. This is different from the situations we faced in the aftermath of WWII, where Germany and Japan had very strong unified wills, and the problem was simply to redirect the consensus into productive chanells. Our own (European and American) liberation from our Kings and Popes was a very long process, involving alot of debate and fighting. While Europe was undergoing Renaissance, Reformation, and Enlightenment, the Ottoman Empire was a strong, stable and conservative state. It never saw the expansion in innovation and trade that the social rehabilitation of Europe after the Middle Ages produced. In the latter half of the 19th century, Europe and America were socially, politically, economically, and technologically far past the Ottomans; reforms were too little, too late. At this point, the question in Europe was "who gets the wealth of the Ottomons when their empire collapses"? In light of the long and acrimonious history between Christian European states and the Muslim states of the eastern Mediterranian, it is understandable that they would be shamed to simply accept Western "best practice", particularly under duress. However, I believe that the exclusion of religion from the affairs of state is a necessary prerequsite to the free exchange of workers, goods, and ideas, and that trade is prerequisite to prosperity. Unless some Muslims get off thier asses and read Locke, Hobbes, Roussou, and the rest of the great Enlightenment thinkers, they're totally screwed. They better learn to swallow their pride and emulate what works. However, we can't force them to do so. If they don't choose freedom, we can't enslave them to make them free. If we try to force them, and take an oppositional stance, we'll put up the hackles of religious patriots that would like to see real reform, and make ourselves even more enemies. It would be nice if we could sit back and just lend a helping hand to the forces of reform, while defeating terrorists through propaganda and minimal violence. However, the Persian Gulf has the world's largest oil reserves, which complicates our foreign policy in the region. I am a liberal, but anybody who thinks we can just ignore Middle Eastern oil is just wrong. Without it, we will die. How does this translate into a practical foreign policy? I have no fuckin' clue. Good thing I'm not president. Edited by phi1618 (05/03/04 05:15 PM)
| |||||||
|
GazzBut Refraction  Registered: 10/15/02 Posts: 4,773 Loc: London UK Last seen: 1 year, 1 month |
| ||||||
Are you labouring under the misapprehension that the Israeli's only bulldoze the houses of the families of known terrorists? Wrong. They bulldoze houses that are in the way of where they wish to build illegal settlements or "security" fences. And anyway didnt you say: "People just need to take responsibility for their actions and stop claiming somebody else made them do it. " No one makes the Israelis bulldoze a house or an olive grove that is somebodies livelihood. -------------------- Always Smi2le
| |||||||
|
GazzBut Refraction Registered: 10/15/02 Posts: 4,773 Loc: London UK Last seen: 1 year, 1 month |
| ||||||
link -------------------- Always Smi2le
| |||||||
|
TrueBrode Stranger  Registered: 11/03/03 Posts: 287 |
| ||||||
|
I can't believe anyone here actually sympathizes with these people. They want to force Islam on everyone. No booze, no shrooms, no porn, no video games, hardly any movies or TV, no debate, no arguing with the imam, women are chattel, forced prayer 6 times a day. They are the worst fascists the world has ever seen
Maybe you should take the time to actually listen/read and study what Muslim extremist groups demand and the general sentiments of Muslim countries before you start classifying entire groups of people and causes. Obviously, you haven't done that yet, but by the air of your juvenile post, it's understandable why.
| |||||||
|
germin8tionn8ion enthusiast Registered: 04/14/04 Posts: 399 Last seen: 22 years, 3 months |
| ||||||
Are you serious? I don't know anything about said empire, so I don't know if that is sarcasm or what. My ignorance on pre-WWI Ottomania is now known by all
Explain the nation of Judea.
They didn't hijack planes and crash them into Big Ben or some other significant part of UK history or commerce.
So supporting Hamas suicide bombers, but not Hamas's agenda, makes them less extreme?
I'd still like to see some numbers, really. We have over 1,000,000 troops active duty, hafl million reserve, half million Nat Guard. Rough estimates there on my part.
According to the Palestinean extremists, all of isreal is being occupied illegally. HAven't they offered to give it back? didn't they do that with Jordan, Syria and Egypt? doesn't that show somewhat of a good track record dealing with arab dictatorships to end terrorism and give back land?
Killing an enemy combtant isn't terrorism. Blowing up a bus filled with noncoms is.
| |||||||
|
silversoul7 Chill the FuckOu Registered: 10/10/02 Posts: 27,301 Loc: mndfreeze's pupp |
| ||||||
I'm serious. Most of the current problems in the Middle East can be traced back to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.
I'm a little rusty on my history, so I'm not 100% sure on this, but here goes: It was an ancient Jewish state populated by Semitic(Middle Eastern) Jews and was broken up by the Diaspora. Millions of Jews fled, and the Arab population there later converted to Islam, remaining the majority population in that area until the 20th century.
Because they're concerned more about current injustices than past ones.
Somewhat, yes. If I said I'd like to see Bush killed, I'd be less of an extremist than someone who actually goes out with a sniper rifle and tries to assassinate him, and I wouldn't necessarily have to support all the assassin's ideals in order to approve of what he's doing.
I'm having trouble finding numbers at the moment, so I'll get back to you on that. Perhaps instead of saying they one of the biggest armies, it would be more accurate to say they have one of the most powerful armies in the region.
Those were some good steps, but they're still occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and denying basic human rights to the people that live there.
Killing the enemy combatant's family and bulldozing their home, or even entire neighborhood is something I would consider terror. --------------------
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
| |||||||
|
germin8tionn8ion enthusiast Registered: 04/14/04 Posts: 399 Last seen: 22 years, 3 months |
| ||||||
I'd agree with that, from what little I know. Maybe if the breakup had been completed with more concern for the peoples of the area, it would be a little bit better. A Kurdistan, Sunistan and Shiiitestan instead of one Iraq probably would have lead to less Kurds being gassed and other racial atrocties commited in the area.
That is like saying that Native Americans are more upset by the taxes they have to pay in their casinos than at us for, shall we say, long term aquiring their land and our campaign of genocide against them.
Point taken.
It's ok, I think that your intent was "most powerful", and I'll agree with that.
I think that if I were Mohammed Q Palestinean, I'd notice how the treaties with Egypt and other nations worked so well, and demand that Arafat make a treaty. I think that this shows that Israel is willing to make peace with anyone that wants a peace with them. I doubt that Sharon and the Egyptian president (I forgot his name) go playing golf and drinking Manschweitz very often, but at least they aren't bombing each other, and each is happy with the others land possession. That shows that Isreal is willing to negotiate for peace, what shows that the Palestineans are?
Well, if you hide your bomb factory in your mothers house or in your brothers mosque, thats just kind of what happens. Again, Israel doesn't SPECIFICALLY target these innocents, it just sort of happens. If the terrorists had the chuztpah to come out and fight on the front lines, this wouldn't happen.
| |||||||
|
silversoul7 Chill the FuckOu Registered: 10/10/02 Posts: 27,301 Loc: mndfreeze's pupp |
| ||||||
Ya, probably.
Last I checked, we didn't have a problem with Native Americans committing terrorist acts against the U.S. I think you'd have to go all the way back to Sitting Bull or Crazy Horse to find that kind of stuff.
Israel has always recognized the statehood of Egypt and other nations. Not so with Palestine.
Yes, they do target innocents. They punish the families of suicide bombers regardless of whether or not they were in on it or even approved of it. It has nothing to with any "bomb factories" in people's houses. The bombs are provided by the terrorist organizations. --------------------
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
| |||||||
|
d33p Welcome to Violence  Registered: 07/12/03 Posts: 5,381 Loc: the shores of Tr Last seen: 13 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
Well the Ottoman Empire was quite unstable. When that many different factions of Arab population are gathered under one rule it spells trouble. Also inflation was tremendous which left it with an economy in shambles. The rulers were also astoundingly intolerant. Many of the 17? or so providence leaders attempted to stop technological advancement completely. Although this is based off memory, correct me if i am way off base.
This is one of the points people use in supporting the nation of Israel. There was no defined "people" hailing from that area. Many just moved around fairly nomadically. I believe that what we call a "Palestinian" today is rarely someone originally from the area. Rather other Arabs who poured into the surrounding Area after Isreal was created.
As ss7 is saying although small Isreal is very powerfull due the help it has recieved from the us as well as the resolve of its people. Just take the 6 day war and the yom kippur war as evidence. -------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
| |||||||
|
phi1618 old hand Registered: 02/14/04 Posts: 4,102 Last seen: 16 years, 5 months |
| ||||||
|
ss7:
There is no way the Ottoman Empire could still exist today. Also, there it is pointless to critisize the actions of pre-WWII Eurpean nations based on modern standards. The Ottoman Empire had an outdated social structure that was a strongly conservative force in its decline. The Ottomans wealth came from trade - advanced European ships and technology had thouroghly circumvented them by the 19th century. Further, the conservative social forces in the Ottoman Empire were too strong. They were unable to industrialize, because industrialization involves a shift in the way things are produced and a corresponding shift in the social and power structures involved, from guilds to corporations. Even without the wars with a strong, expanding, and internally violent Europe, the presence of the Eurpean powers was enough to thouroughly disrupt the Ottoman Empire. The problems of the middle east are exacerbated by poorly formed countries and the wages of colonialism, but they find thier root in the enourmous success of the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century. The Ottomans were too successful to change. Also, don't forget that the Ottomans were hardly a bastion of democratic principles. In the 16th century, they had one of the best governments going. However, they were a monarchy, and an empire. Part of the reason the Ottoman empire fell apart was that, as the central power weakend, parts of the perifery rebelled. In 1875, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, and Bulgaria rebelled. By the standards of old-old style empires, it was a pretty good one. But could you really see violent wars of succession in the modern world? The essential Liberal argument is for a New Order, which is better than what came before. Until WWII and American acendancy, nations opperated pretty much on power principles. They existed for their rulers, who wanted more power and would send the enslaved people of the world into battle. If a nation became weak, it was conquered. Strength was the only way to maintain freedom. The horror of the modern weapons used in WWII, combined with the development and construction of nuclear weapons, caused the estimation of the costs of war to rise dramatically. The spread of democracy also reduces the incentive for war. The people bear the cost of war; if the state is run for the people, rather than the rulers, war becomes a less attractive option. Part of the dispute between liberals and conservatives (i'm a self-labeled liberal) in foreign policy is the role that war should play in the modern world, and how to deal with old-world powers like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea in the modern world. One of the defining characteristics of the Neo-Conservative is a radical (not conservative - for the US, at least) doctrine of preemption - if a state poses a percieved threat, this alone is sufficient justification to take over. The rationalle for this is twofold: 1) Nuclear and biological weapons are easy to get; 2) Dictatorships don't act rational by the standards of democracy. They act to fulfill the desires of their rulers, not to better thier people. No democracy would ever drop a nuclear bomb on the US, because it would clearly be bad for thier people. A dictator, caring for nothing but his own power, survival, and satisfaction, would not necessarily refrain from committing national suicide. Combine this with non-state based violence, ie. terrorism, and the high risk of the modern world justifies the selective use of violence. While the above argument is persuasive, I fear the ambitions of our leaders. The future I envision based on the above policy is one where the energies of the young, the force of change in society, is increasingly directed into the military. The populace is sedated by TV and pulled increasingly into the millitary, while those on the top of society secure thier positions and the reenforce status quo. If the state is truely run for the good of the people, who bear the cost of the war, then war is an unattractive option. We put too much energy into the military, to the detriment of more worthwhile projects such as basic scientific research, education, and health care. While there is some threat from "rougue nations", I believe that this threat can be overstated, as it was in Iraq. What was I talking about, again?
| |||||||
|
germin8tionn8ion enthusiast Registered: 04/14/04 Posts: 399 Last seen: 22 years, 3 months |
| ||||||
Well, you don't fuck with gods chosen people it seems 
| |||||||
|
Jellric altered statesman  Registered: 11/08/98 Posts: 2,261 Loc: non-local |
| ||||||
|
This shit is all about god and wealth and the UK isn't as wealthy and powerful as we are
Americans also have bigger dicks than the rest of the world. -------------------- I am what Willis was talkin' bout.
| |||||||
|
zappaisgod horrid asshole Registered: 02/11/04 Posts: 81,741 Loc: Fractallife's gy Last seen: 10 years, 4 months |
| ||||||
|
That goes without saying
--------------------
| |||||||
trendal J♠   Registered: 04/17/01 Posts: 20,825 Loc: Ontario, Canada 
|
| ||||||
|
Maybe it has something to do with the 20-30 years of almost constant US military action in the region?
-------------------- But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
| |||||||
| |||||||
[Re: 
Edit 
Reply 
| Shop: Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order Spores for European Microscopy Bulk Substrate |
|
| Similar Threads | Poster | Views | Replies | Last post | ||
 |
 |
Israel states that killing Arafat is "an option". (  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all ) |
 Snobrdr311 |
11,833 | 163 | 10/01/03 06:47 PM by Phred |
|
|
Terrorists get free ride in the UK |  Phred |
1,102 | 12 | 05/22/06 10:15 AM by GazzBut |
|
 |
U.S. to Israel on Rantisi Killing ( 1 2 3 all ) |
 Swami |
4,825 | 51 | 04/23/04 10:43 PM by luvdemshrooms |
|
|
UK Govt Sources Confirm War With Iran Is On ( 1 2 all ) |
 MAIA |
2,819 | 28 | 07/29/06 04:00 AM by RosettaStoned |
|
|
UK cabinet minister resigns |  Xlea321 |
686 | 7 | 03/19/03 02:50 AM by Ellis Dee |
|
|
Israel responds to Gaza/Hamas with deadly air raids ( 1 2 3 4 ... 19 20 ) |
KillerPicklez |
16,693 | 385 | 01/07/09 09:14 PM by Phred |
|
 |
Israel exposing her true colors ( 1 2 all ) |
Zahid |
2,748 | 36 | 09/01/04 12:29 AM by Divided_Sky |
|
|
Iran president "Israel will be Destroyed" ( 1 2 3 4 all ) |
 lonestar2004 |
8,567 | 62 | 10/30/05 06:22 PM by Redstorm |
| Extra information | ||
| You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa 4,356 topic views. 2 members, 8 guests and 18 web crawlers are browsing this forum. [ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ] | ||