For the record, let me say I have no opinion on this whole discussion of Israel in general. But the Rachel Corrie thing I did hear about on NPR and looked it up, and from what I can see, it seems the driver of the bulldozer definitely saw her and made a conscious choice to run her over... even to the point of backing up over her to make sure he did the job right. I don't care what nationality the driver was, my opinion of him would remain the same.
http://www.flashpoints.net/index-2003-03-18.html
Hugs*
Nicole
This is an article by Charley Reese published 3.7.03
There is only one nuclear power in the Middle East: Israel.
There is only one country in the Middle East that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Israel.
There is only one country in the Middle East that refuses to allow international inspections of its nuclear facilities: Israel.
There is only one country in the Middle East that stands in defiance of more than 60 United Nations resolutions: Israel.
There is only one country in the Middle East that invaded and continues to occupy land belonging to its neighbors: Israel.
I am not setting out to bash Israel, but merely to point out undeniable facts that most of the America media and American politicians studiously ignore. Is it too difficult for Americans to grasp that the United States has a blatant double standard and that the people in Arab countries justifiably resent that double standard? The Arabs do not expect or demand that the United States become the enemy of Israel. They recognize the close ties between the two countries. All they ask for is simple fairness.
It's not fair to threaten Iraq with war for allegedly violating U.N. resolutions while protecting Israel from any consequences for violating more U.N. resolutions. It's not fair to go to war to undo the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq while condoning the continued occupation by Israel of portions of Lebanon, Syria and Palestine. It's not fair to threaten Iraq and Iran about weapons of mass destruction while remaining silent about those possessed by Israel. It's not fair to harp on the crimes committed by Saddam Hussein while rationalizing the crimes committed by Israel. Do you realize that in just the past week, as of this writing, the Israelis have killed 33 Palestinians?
Do you realize that if the United States announced that its policy is to rid the entire Middle East of weapons of mass destruction, including those possessed by Israel, that the United States would receive the overwhelming support of the Arab world?
Fairness was once the characteristic of the American republic. It consists simply of doing exactly what our great founder, George Washington, recommended: treat all countries the same, showing neither favoritism nor enmity to any. Moreover, he pleaded, do not involve yourself in other people's feuds and quarrels. And finally, he warned against the evils of foreign influence in our domestic affairs.
Every single foreign-policy problem we face, including the threat of terrorism, is a result of violating those three admonitions: We don't treat all nations the same; we do involve ourselves in other people's quarrels; and we have allowed foreign influence to exert tremendous influence on our policies. Far from being the republic Washington and his contemporaries gave us, we have become an empire, very much like Rome.
There are nearly 40,000 permanent lobbyists in Washington, swarming over our 535 elected officials like flies on roadkill. We have the bizarre ritual of practically every candidate for president making a visit to the Israeli lobby and pledging undying support for a foreign country. While millions in Africa and Latin America suffer terrible poverty, not to mention 30 million of our own people, we pour billions of dollars of aid into Israel, which has a comfortably high standard of living. Again, foreign influence is the reason.
The truth is, we have no natural enemies except the North Koreans, who are taught from the cradle to hate us. Islam is not our enemy. The Arab world is not our enemy. Iran is not our enemy. Russia and China are not our enemies. Except for the North Koreans, the only enemies we have in this world are those we created with our unjust policies and actions.
President Bush fancies himself a Christian. It's too bad he isn't, but then most Christians would not be recognizable to Christ if he returned to Earth. Peace, love and justice are not very fashionable in many Christian circles these days. Many of them prefer war, provided they don't have to fight it.
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 11:43:47 AM
"I am not setting out to bash Israel,..."
Really? Why not just be honest, Adolph!
The double-standard of moralty that Israel is held to by the world community is blatantly hypocritical. The strident and relentless outcry against Israel, a country acting in self-defense, is generally silent when confronting true aggression and brutality. Those same voice are rarely, if ever, heard in protest against muslim atrocities like the genocide of the East Timorese or the enslavement and murder of non-muslims by muslims throughout North Africa (particularly the Sudan). The Kurds are brutalised and murdered by Iraq and their are peace marches to save Saddam! What about the Chinese occupation of Tibet or Russia's sadistic repression in Chechnya? On the other hand, Israel gained those territories while repelling and defeating an overwhelming force comprised of 5 arab nations. Those territories have acted as a buffer zone against another such invasion. Israel has negotiated "land-for-peace" and has honored those agreements. It is Arafat and his death-cult masquarading as a cause that continually rejects peace. The "aid" we give to Israel is matched by the money given to Egypt and various other Arab entities, except, with Israel that investment is returned many times over in trade. The other money goes into a bottomless pit.
Anti-semetic? Hardly. Perhaps addressing the points raised in that article would be more constructive than straw-man arguments and blanket statements amounting to a belief that Israel, being aggrieved, is given absolution for any human rights violations it may commit in the name of survival or retribution.
The author's point, and least the point I took from the piece, is that it serves no one to pretend we are the aggrieved and completely blameless. A coherent and consistent foreign policy would go a long way towards promoting peace. What's good for our arab policy should be good for our israeli policy.
Oh, yeah - and before I'm labelled as one who is defending Hussein, I think he's a piece of shit who desperately needs to be removed. We simply must understand just why it is that so many people hate us or we will never be able to deal with them effectively. Stupid statements like 'They hate us because we are free' rank right up there with the propaganda tales of enemy soldiers unloading truckloads of babies with bayonets as a test for just how stupid the general public can be.
We all have to live in this world: christian, muslim, jew, agnostic, hindu, etc - perhaps if we dealt honestly and consistently there would be far less hatred and mistrust.
Or you can just call me an anti semite, which of course means I love Saddam, and feel good about a war that may be right but has been started for all the wrong reasons. Your choice.
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 1:55:16 PM
From the article you posted:
"Every single foreign-policy problem we face, including the threat of terrorism, is a result of violating those three admonitions: We don't treat all nations the same; we do involve ourselves in other people's quarrels; and we have allowed foreign influence to exert tremendous influence on our policies. Far from being the republic Washington and his contemporaries gave us, we have become an empire, very much like Rome."
Regardless of ones feelings on Iraq, Israel, going to war or not it is this type of baseless propaganda that is so amazingly off key it is infuriating. To suggest that we as Americans are solely to blame for our troubles including terroist attacks is laughable...funny, I don't remember one American flying a plane into the WTC or the Pentagon or crashing one in PA. I don't remember an American murdering innocent passengers aboard cruise ships, I don't remember an American bombing foreign embassays (other than during an avowed time of war when the call to remove had already been made), I don't remember an American shooting 2 Canadiens working for BP in the mideast...the list is countless. Using the same logic as above the Kurds probably deserved to be gassed by Iraq b/c their foreign policy consisted of a little bit of manifest destiny and a desire for freedom. For that matter, those of us that enjoy this hobby would probably deserve an infection of some sort b/c our domestic agenda has us engage with multiple partners. The logic is just plain twisted.
I've tried to stay far away from the political discussions on this board but at this time - as hundreds of thousands of soldiers are massing to take out a dictator, my younger brother being one of them, this post made my blood boil.
I'm disgusted by the paragraph above and things like it. Today, 17 Iraqi's surrenedered to Kuwait - not a bullet has been fired and those that can in Iraq surrender to get from under the Regime. Do you think those 17 men would be treated more fairly by their own government?
If you support the troops, support them now in word and action (or inaction if that suits you better). What does it do for troop morale to have Americans bashing their mission, to have Tom Daschle call what they will embark upon the result of failure? If you don't support the war, do what you will but do not believe that you are doing anything but damaging the psyche of the young men and women of America with your kind of "support."
To paraphrase Bill Clinton on Saddam in 1999, if we let Saddam go unchecked and have a UN system that allows him to flaunt his illegal behavior we will pay a greater price than we can imagine. For what other reason will we go to war? Oil? Come on, no President - I don't care if you like any of them or not, would willfully let the sons and daughters of America die for oil. Politics? This war will likely cost GW a 2nd term.
And just for shits and giggles if you think we are such a nosy and interferring country take a look at the budget of USAID - the wing of government that gives money to countries for humanitarian efforts ALL over the world...where does most of that money go? To Africa and South America. You can't have it both ways...either we let the poor and opressed across the world suffer or we don't. What about North Korea? Take a look at South Korea and the difference in quality of life...reminiscint of East and West Germany isn't it? Thousands of South Koreans marched through their capitol last week carrying Old Glory...hmmmmmmm....let's see, Democracy, freedom, Big Mac's and blue jeans or an oppressive govt. that doesn't even feed its own people...wonder how that one will turn out...
Using my own righ of speech, I'll tell you to kindly shut your god damned pie hole and deliver your message when you vote or in the least post your political garbage on a forum designed for that level of debate.
Lastly, I sign on here to be seduced, to seduce, to sometimes laugh and generally to just have a good time. Why do you have to make this board something that it isn't. I know that I've continued the thread and for that I apologize to everyone but for God's sake can't you post this on some news discussion board?
Posting the equivalent of 'kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out' is an acceptable sentiment, but asking that we look within AS WELL AS WITHOUT for the root causes of unrest is blasphemy. OK, I've got it. Back to getting laid.
Puck is a mental pygmy, and dealing with him is like dealing with a cement wall.
Puck:
I won't waste my time with more and better arguments in dealing with you. I wouldn't waste my time telling someone in the KKK why they are wrong. You are an anti-Semite. Period.
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 2:49:52 PM
Isreal I dont care if you want to call me names I however do agree that sadam needs to be stoped and everyone here and in the un,washington spent to mutch time debating this thing and not enough time kicking his ass all the way to the hague. You cant justify Isreal's actions over what happened 40 years ago. Look at reality both sides are at fault but Isreal has tanks they use I know some of them are "terrorist" but rember the brit's thought the same thing about a bunch of amreican farmers once, By the way David Corresh, Tim McVieh rember them American terrorist.You did not see it cause you are blinded by what? Yes we have home growen terrorists. I sincerly think the biggest reason for all the problams in are country is that people cant handle looking at more than one side of a issue and if asked to there antisemetic, or unpatriotic or some other type of insult, Hasent anyone noticed when politicans debate the guy who looses always takes a agressive stance on whatever issue? This discusts me what have we become? I have a dad who was in ww2 a grandpa in ww1 on back to the revolutionary war and I'm shure of 1 thing they all would take a honest look at stuff .
Israel is right. Always. Any criticism of Israeli policy or action is a direct attack on Jews everywhere. Rachel Corrie was a dangerous terrorist who was ferreted out and crushed to death in a completely justified defensive move, the Israeli use of a bulldozer to snuff her was a brilliant tactical use of available resources. The King David Hotel bombing was not a terrorist act, in fact there was no bomb and I'm pretty sure there has never been anyplace called the King David Hotel anywhere in the Middle East. Car bombing was not popularized as a tool of political terrorism by Menachem Begin. Turkey is not a democracy, so that makes Israel the only democracy in the Middle East. Hamas was not an invention of the Mossad that backfired on them. The United States has treated Israel in exactly the same manner as all Arab states. Palestinians restricted to ghettos are lucky to have such benign masters. Meir Kahane was the soul of restraint and never preached a radical form of Jewish nationalism which reflected racism, violence and political extremism. Israel has no nuclear weapons, and if they did it would be OK because we know they'd never be used for anything but cooking hot dogs for a mass feeding project to support indigenous arabs. Israelis have never and will never bulldoze the homes of Palestinians so they can move in and take over the neighborhood in direct contravention of international treaties and agreements. Israel has always complied with any and every U.N. resolution and anyone who says different is an anti-semetic piece of dung.
We all OK now?
...glad I responded to your post. Next I'm taking on the editors of the Village Voice.
Israel has to fight for its life EVERY DAY. Israel has had nuclear weapons since, at least, l965, but has shown restraint and never used them. And they won't, unless the country is overrun. Do you honestly believe that Arab countries would behave with the same restraint? If you do, you are even more badly informed than you have shown so far. Like it or not, your posts reek with anti-semitism, which immediately negates anything you have to say on the subject. As best I can tell, Hitler is probably your hero!
Isn't Rachel Corrie the one (by all witness accounts)that ran in front of a moving bulldozer? I didn't realize that she was a terrorist besides being a fool.
the unidentified Chinese who walked in front of a moving tank at Tienamen Square. What's that you say, he was hailed by the world as a hero standing up to the aggression of an oppressive government? I guess the distinction between a hero and a fool depends on your politics. Your post speaks volumes - perhaps you can find her family's address and send them a nice 'your daughter was an idiot' card.
-- Modified on 3/20/2003 6:01:33 PM
Yes an oppressive government versus a country that has to endure unprovoked terrorist attacks. Your posts lately have spoken volumes also.
I feel sorry for her family, she was in a foreign land taking on a cause that had no bearing on her, hmmmm, that sounds familiar doesn't it? Yet you think she was a hero and the USA is in a foreign land for no reason. I'm confused now. No not really.
-- Modified on 3/21/2003 6:57:36 AM
For the record, let me say I have no opinion on this whole discussion of Israel in general. But the Rachel Corrie thing I did hear about on NPR and looked it up, and from what I can see, it seems the driver of the bulldozer definitely saw her and made a conscious choice to run her over... even to the point of backing up over her to make sure he did the job right. I don't care what nationality the driver was, my opinion of him would remain the same.
http://www.flashpoints.net/index-2003-03-18.html
Hugs*
Nicole
**If** it's true that she was murdered, then I hope Israel fries the ass of the bulldozer operator.
But I will be honest and say I don't trust the source of the information. I don't know KPFA but based on their web page they seem fairly radical in the traditional Marxist/Leninst/Maoist sense -- and that gets up the hair on the back of my neck. Main quote on the Corrie story seems to be coming from Adam Shapiro -- he's a real piece of work -- when Israel was holding Arafat in his compound in retribution for attacks, Shapiro is the one who entered to break bread with Arafat as a show of "solidarity".
I did some searching on this topic and I have to admit, it does look like it was a horrible thing. All articles of reference I found seemed to be linked to a common author. I have looked at the pictures and read the stories and have my own opinion (it probably won't sit well with a lot of people). She commited suicide, the first photographs show pictures of her in front of the 'dozer, and with a photographer alongside her. Then she climbs on top of a mound of soil the 'dozer is pushing, at this point that photographer had the common sense to move out of the way. The 'dozer continues, she disappears and a sad tragic ending.
So I was wrong about her running in front of the 'dozer, she walked, and then climbed onto the mound of dirt that he was pushing, all caught on film.
Nope, Israel is not always right. But to throw an allusion to UNSCR 242 and Kahane in the same breath is just ridiculous. How can anyone take you seriously? Maybe all you want to do is inflame positions? Perhaps that is how you get your jollies.
Say anything you want about Kahane and I don't think I will say you are wrong, but yes, I will still think you are an anti-Semite -- you showed that in your first post.
Rachel Corrie? A tragedy, but even one of the ISM folks said she was acting irresponsibly. No, I don't think the bulldozer operator saw her. (Have you ever seen one of these bulldozers when they are outfitted with armor. She fell down before the bulldozer got to her and the operator didn't see her.) That said, I have no respect for the ISM. They compare the Israelis to the Nazis -- a comparison absolutely beyond the pale. The ISM is not some "do good" group -- they have a clear anti-Israeli agenda. Say what you want about the Israelis --- they are no Nazis!!
And you're a blinkered, racist, single minded fool. Now that we've both called each other names, I'll try to get back to reason.
Your persecution complex blinds you to the point of my post, which was not that Israel is a bad country. It was a criticism of our foreign policy of the past 50 years wherein we stuck our noses in a lot of places it didn't belong, played favorites and generally acted like the big swinging dick of the world. Israel was simply a glaring example. I could as easily point to Chile, El Salvador, Iran (our pet monarch Reza Pahlavi was a gem, wasn't he?) or Cambodia, the list just goes on. The end result is a whole lot of people who have damned good reasons to hate us. As Jackson Browne so eloquently put it:
On the radio talk shows and the T.V.
You hear one thing again and again
How the U.S.A. stands for freedom
And we come to the aid of a friend
But who are the ones that we call our friends--
These governments killing their own?
Or the people who finally can't take any more
And they pick up a gun or a brick or a stone
And now we're going to war yet again to clean up a mess that we had a big hand in making. Yes, it needs to be done, yes he's a dangerous madman - didn't we know that Saddam was a madman 12 years ago? Then why is it that no one talks about the 73 million dollars in Iraqi contracts Halliburton enjoyed under Dick Cheyney's chairmanship post-Desert Storm? How do we know he has chemical and biological weapons? We kept the receipts, of course. Am I the only one who saw the pictures of Rumsfeld with his arm around Saddam in the weeks following his use of the gas we sold him on the Northern Kurds?
The Iraqi people deserve liberation, but how long will it be before they recall the torture and murder they endured in the wake of Desert Storm when we abandoned them after inciting them to rise up?
Actions produce consequences, and it doesn't mean treason to ask what our part in creating this dangerous world is and to suggest that we have some things to atone for. Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. It's about time the American People took a page from those murdered by the Nazis and stood up to our government to say "Never Again".
I pray for our troops in the Middle East - they're my brothers and sisters, both as an American and as a veteran. I pray for the innocents in Iraq, and Israel, and Palestine. I pray for all the misguided political pawns in this world who have to pay for the arrogance and avarice of their leaders with blood and pain. And I pray for all those blinded by hatred who celebrate and cherish their victim status, keeping them forever estranged from the rest of humanity.
I'm done.
sorry puck You lost me as a supporter now. Do you think we are responsable to police the entire world.For God's sake the romanians did it! We do not bear the responsability for those stuck in bad governments they have some responsabillity to rise up on there own the idea of holding the us government and thus the american people responsable for these kinds of things is pie in the sky there are alot more world citizens than US citizens and they have there own backs! Are policie regarding Isreal (the country not Judasm the religion) is wrong ,racist and africa but even those damn french frogs and the rest of Europe are the same mabie it is cause none of us wanted them after ww2. But you or knowone has any right blaming all the problams in the world soley on us get real.
If you'll re-read my post I suggest that we look at our part. Situations such as this rarely arise because of one country - but we certainly helped produce the environment that encouraged it.
Are you done, Puck? I really hope you are! Because of support from people like you, little Israeli babies get killed in their cribs, and much of the Arab world rejoices. Hindus kill thousands of Muslims and no-one says boo, but if the IDF kills one Arab in defense of their people, it's publicized all over. Israel is a tiny little country encompassing 0.1 of 1% of the land area of the Middle East, and the Arabs still won't recognize it and want to destroy it. What is Israel supposed to do - let the Arabs walk in, obliterate it, and kill all the Jews? Is that what you want? Would that make you happy? Perhaps you should check population statistics of what is today Israel as of 1917 when the British took over "Palestine," and compare the mix as of today and examine the reasons for the differences. I could go on and on, but TER is NOT the place for it. I suggest you read up on the history of this conflict and educate yourself - you're in dire need of it!
According to Amnesty International Palestinian deaths have led Israeli deaths at a rate of 3 to 1 in the past 2 years. Of course, when one side uses rocks and bombs and the other side uses F-16s, you'd expect a wide disparity.
Please check the source for yourself:
http://web.amnesty.org/web/web.nsf/pages/IOT_home
Of course, Amnesty International is a source that can't be trusted for some vague reason I'm sure you'll point out.
-- Modified on 3/24/2003 12:45:56 PM
You didn't refer to ANYTHING in my prior post. By the way, Muslims outnumber Israelis by about 200 to 1, which has as much relevance as the numbers in your post. Like I said, give it up already. You started something that is much bigger than you thought it would be. But I'll leave you with one thought - Israelis put their women and children BEHIND them for protection, whereas the Arabs put them IN FRONT of them for protection. I also don't hear of Israelis going into Arab cafes, nightclubs, etc. and blowing themselves up. This should be obvious, but to you it apparently isn't. You want facts? Digest the above.
Some 1,800 Palestinians have been killed, most of them unlawfully, by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), who routinely use F16 fighter jets, helicopter gunships and tanks to bomb and shell densely populated Palestinian residential areas. The victims included more than 300 children and some 80 individuals killed in targeted state assassinations.
TER can't keep with my posts, so I hope this one gets through Puck. From the tone of your posts, you fancy yourself as an intellectual. But I think that those who are following all this can clearly see that you are, indeed, an anti-semite. Israel targets terrorists - Arabs target innocent civilians. You are trying (quite unsuccessfully) to make it appear that only Israel is doing any killing. Give me a break! A few years ago, Israel was wiling to give the Arabs 90% of what they wanted. Did that satisfy them? No sir, they wanted ISRAEL! When Israel refused to let 4 MILLION ARABS WHO HATE THEM come into Israel, what did the Arabs do? They started the suicide bombings. Israel responded by electing Sharon. Well Puckie boy, let me tell you something. Israel will continue to defend itself against terrorist bombings. As the expression goes, NEVER AGAIN!!!
Until adherents of both sides can admit errors it will never end. Sharon is as much a criminal as Arafat, Begin as much a terrorist as any PLO bomber. History judges successful terrorists to be 'freedom fighters' and unsuccessful ones to be criminals.
Unless you can somehow justify the King David Hotel bombing in 1946 it is intellectually dishonest to condemn suicide bombers. In the past 2 years Palestinian acts of terror have claimed the lives of 82 Israeli children, an abhorrent fact. In the same time frame IDF acts of terror have killed 300 Palestinian children - an act no more or less abhorrent. Both sides perpetrated their crimes in heavily populated civilian areas as calculated acts of terror. Which children are more valuable? Which murders were justified? To excuse either side is to condone the attempted extermination of a people. Shame on both sides, and shame on us for supporting either side. And shame on you for obviously counting one child as more worthwhile than another. You advocate and excuse the killing of children as long as they are not Israeli.
You make a lot of assumptions, and most of them are wrong. Show me where I advocated the killing of children. Shame on you for even suggesting that I did. Israel will fight for its survival and self defense. I will support that until the day I die. People like you would love to see Israel just disappear. It won't, but I sincerely hope that you do. By the way, I'm glad to see you have EXACT numbers on the number of children killed. I must say, I question your sources. Your false intellectualism does not impress me. Indeed, I find it repulsive. To conclude this post (there will be more I'm sure), it's hard to imagine a more disgusting individual than Arafat. Sharon is tough and far from perfect, but at least he only goes after terrorists. He doesn't condone or send in suicide bombers to kill innocent civilians at random.
Puck:
In reading and re-reading your post, it never ocurred to me you were delivering a general indictment of American foreign policy. You quoted an article by Charley Reese (no friend to Israel) which pontificated solely on Israel -- no other country was mentioned (well, one throwaway sentence on NK was there, in all fairness).
Honestly, what else was I supposed to think?
I really have no opinion on this discussion in general... truly, I do not think I have enough information to take sides... but this Rachel Corrie thing really does seem horrible.... from the pictures, this guy absolutely knew he was running her over, more than once. Take a look and see what you think.
http://www.flashpoints.net/index-2003-03-18.html
I'm Jewish so please don't say I'm anti-semitic! There are bad people of every race, color and creed and recognizing that someone made a bad decision doesn't mean I have a problem with an entire race of people.
Hugs*
Nicole
....I'm Jewish so please don't say I'm anti-semitic! There are bad people of every race, color and creed and recognizing that someone made a bad decision doesn't mean I have a problem with an entire race of people....
Based on all of your postings that I have read on this board, I can't imagine you would harbor hate for anyone!!!
In personally attacking Puck, I had reached my limit with Israel being a convenient place to put resentment for those angry about the current war.
As an example, the anti-war group A.N.S.W.E.R. barred Michael Lerner (and he's very lefty) from speaking at their anti-war rally in Israel, because they didn't want anyone "pro-Israel" speaking at their rally. For the record, Lerner is "pro-Israel" but very (and I mean VERY) "anti-Sharon".
If you (the general you -- not Nicole) are against the war, then STAY ON TARGET and don't inflame emotions by the old chant of "kill the Jews" or "Israel is the REAL problem" or some other such canard. The Left still has a problem with sleeping with anti-Semites -- something Lerner in a recent column in the Wall Street Journal said they have to overcome. He compared it to the problem the Left used to have with racism (e.g., Senator Byrd (D-WV) and his association with the KKK) and homophobia. These days the Left is on the vanguard of SPEAKING OUT against such actions. I hope they can one day overcome their issues with Jews and Israel.
"kill the Jews" or "Israel is the REAL problem"
Please show me where anyone here has posted any such hateful and abhorrent speech. If you'd learn to read and give up on being a professional victim perhaps you might learn to understand another point of view. Notice I did not say that you might change your mind or have some sort of epiphany. You might just be able to stop living the injustices of the past and be able to contribute in a positive sense to the enlightenment of the future.
I doubt it, though. You believe that your heritage has given you a special charter to hate and attack anyone who might disagree with you. In fact, you seem to prefer to shoot first.
For the last time, IT'S NOT ABOUT ISRAEL - IT'S ABOUT THE US.
Of course, for you everything is about Israel and your own paranoid agenda. If your earlier post is truth, I await your apology for calling me anti-semetic. I won't hold my breath.
-- Modified on 3/21/2003 3:10:45 PM
Oh, now it's not about Israel, eh? Then why did you start this whole thing by bringing up Reese's article? What did you think, that no-one would notice, or everyone would agree? You reap what you sow. By the way, I thought you said you were through! I wish you would just acknowledge 3 words - "I was wrong!" Because you certainly are! Now, please, just disappear!
" Fairness was once the characteristic of the American republic. It consists simply of doing exactly what our great founder, George Washington, recommended: treat all countries the same, showing neither favoritism nor enmity to any. Moreover, he pleaded, do not involve yourself in other people's feuds and quarrels. And finally, he warned against the evils of foreign influence in our domestic affairs.
Every single foreign-policy problem we face, including the threat of terrorism, is a result of violating those three admonitions: We don't treat all nations the same; we do involve ourselves in other people's quarrels; and we have allowed foreign influence to exert tremendous influence on our policies. Far from being the republic Washington and his contemporaries gave us, we have become an empire, very much like Rome."
Oh, now you're a statesman, huh? You certainly weren't thinking like one when you started all this with your initial post. George Washington would be diametrically opposed to some of the things you previously posted, and he certainly would be laughing at your attempts to weasel out of some of your original statements. I suggest you bone up on both your history and political science before you next discuss Israel and the Middle East.
Can you read? You certainly have a problem with comprehension and rational thought.
That quote was the central point of the original post. Rather than 'attempts to weasel out of' my original post it is a direct cut-and-paste from it.
It's not about Israel. It's about US foreign policy. Israel was the example chosen, likely because it is the most familiar to the majority of readers.
Oh, let's see, "It's not about Israel......Israel was the example chosen...because it is the most familiar to the majority of readers." Yeah, right. That's why you started your original post by ragging on Israel. Do you really think people will believe that? Judging from all these posts on the subject, the answer is very clearly NO. Had YOU used rational thought (to say nothing of common sense), you would have approached the subject differently, and in a less confrontational manner. Sorry Puck, your excuse doesn't fly, and neither do weasels.
Puck:
Am awaiting a reply to this-- http://theeroticreview.com/MsgBoard/ViewMsgBody.asp?BoardID=12&Page=1&Messageid=42358
-- Modified on 3/23/2003 2:14:13 PM
"Fairness was once the characteristic of the American republic. It consists simply of doing exactly what our great founder, George Washington, recommended: treat all countries the same, showing neither favoritism nor enmity to any. Moreover, he pleaded, do not involve yourself in other people's feuds and quarrels. And finally, he warned against the evils of foreign influence in our domestic affairs.
Every single foreign-policy problem we face, including the threat of terrorism, is a result of violating those three admonitions: We don't treat all nations the same; we do involve ourselves in other people's quarrels; and we have allowed foreign influence to exert tremendous influence on our policies. Far from being the republic Washington and his contemporaries gave us, we have become an empire, very much like Rome."
When I first read this article the above quoted paragraphs struck me as the central point of the piece. Not having any particular axe to grind vis-a-vis Israel (contrary to a popular belief unsupported by any other post I've ever made) this is what I was trying to point out. We as a nation are to some degree responsible for the myriad troubles we've gotten ourselves into over the years. A hoax in the Gulf of Tonkin got us into Vietnam with a vengeance, while black-and-white messages from our government kept us there.
Those who tag me as anti-semetic leapt to a conclusion, and when I explained my purpose for the post I was jeered at as 'weaseling'. If I were the slavering Jew hater I'm accused of being I'd say so - this is an anonymous forum and most of the goose-stepping Aryan pukes I've run across are quite proud of their twisted beliefs.
One thing is true - I am far more concerned about my country than I am about Israel, or Iraq, or any other nation. I'd like for us to present a consistent face to the world, not supporting dictators when it suits our political purpose of the moment.
I am awaiting a reply to this - http://theeroticreview.com/msgBoard/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=42369&boardID=12&page=1
and re-read your statement. And then I re-read it again. And then I re-read it a third time.
And no way are you and I going to agree. Ever.
The essay could have started in any possible manner. It could have presented the thesis you think it has ("The US is unjust in meting out foreign policy"). It could also be construed as a thinly-veiled attack on Israel, as I saw it. And I still see it that way. Just by the essay opening with one particular example (the conditions of Israel), and then harping on Israel four additional times, sets-up a hostile tone towards Israel.
I will add some additional context as I was reading some other Charlie Reese materiel.
Reviewing these articles in reverse chronological order:
On http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030324/index.php , Mr Reese says Israel is ungrateful for the foreign aid gets from the US (and Israel does not an extremely generous amount by any standards). His proof is the tragic death of Rachel Corrie. He says this in the context of an article on the cost of war. (What does the cost of foreign aid have to do with war? Why are no other countries to which we give foreign aid mentioned?)
On http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030321/index.php , Mr Reese delivers a column on our war plans in Iraq. He has time to throw in a criticism of Israel that we are fighting Iraq ONLY because of Israel. Really? Got an entire military doing that for a bunch of smelly Jews? No kiddin'?!
On http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030307/index.php , well, you know that one.
On http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030305/index.php , Mr Reese says Bush has surrounded himself with Likudniks.
On http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030224/index.php , Mr Reese says the Iraq war is about Israel and the US controlling the Middle East. That's way too paranoid even for me.
So, I am left with you thinking we have an unfair/uneven policy towards other countries, but you present your views with someone known to be hostile to Israel, and you take one of Mr Reese's most vitriolic pontifications on Israel.
And you wonder why I react so?
-- Modified on 3/24/2003 8:50:20 PM
that you couldn't possibly have the grace and honor to acknowledge that you were wrong in immediately branding me anti-semetic. There will never be room in your mind for any thought but your own, any purpose but your own. You've built the walls, I hope you're happy behind them. Funny - you have a lot in common with Arafat and the PLO, who can't see any injustice but the ones done to them.
I never heard of Reese before I read that article. I am unaware and unconcerned with his motives, I only posted it because it articulated a thought I've had regarding America's bewilderment by the hordes of people around the world who seem to hate us.
Iraq has a great deal to answer for, as do Israel and Palestine. I'd just as soon we hadn't been involved with any of them in back-room deals that produced animosity and emnity rather than gratitude and cameraderie. We made our bed, and the $75 Billion Bush just asked for is the easiest part of the bill we will have to pay.
The truth is I don't give a damn about any of them at the cost of American lives, because none of them have been rushing to put themselves in harms way for any American.
As an aside, the Bush administration has made the first down payment to their masters:
KBR IMPLEMENTS PLAN FOR EXTINGUISHING OIL WELL FIRES IN IRAQ
- Company tapped for proven track-record, expertise -
HOUSTON - KBR (Kellogg Brown & Root) has been awarded a contract from the US Army Corps of Engineers to put into action a contingency plan the company originally developed at the Department of Defense's (DoD) request for assessing and extinguishing oil well fires in Iraq and evaluating and repairing, as directed by the US government, the country's petroleum infrastructure. KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton (NYSE:HAL).
What a surprise.
I think Israel would very much want to join in the hostilities against Iraq after Being forced on the sidelines during the Gulf War. We all know why they haven't (thus far). So don't say that no country is rushing to put itself in harm's way. Israel would join America in a nanosecond if asked.
Actually, I have to correct you here PUCK. Turkey is not a democracy. The military controls the government and religious rights are heavily limited. Human rights violations by the government are a frequent occurrence. Every time a muslim gains any sort of political power, the military steps in and takes over. In fact, Turkey's actions in the past 50 years are far more reprehensible than Israel's.
"The Republic of Turkey is a democratic, secular and social State governed by the rule of law; bearing in mind the concepts of public peace, national solidarity and justice; respecting human rights and loyal to the nationalism of Ataturk. The Turkish State, with its territory and nation, is an indivisible entity. The official language of the Turkish State is Turkish and its capital is Ankara."
http://www.turkishembassy.org/governmentpolitics/politics.htm
Please do your homework. If you'll recall, teh Bush administration was having trouble gaining flyover rights from Turkey because it was voted down in the Turkish Parliament. Voting is a practice peculiar to democracies.
As an interesting aside, isn't it curious that after one of the two existing democracies in a region that the US wants to become more democratic voted against the Bush administrations wishes, Bush insisted they vote again. NOW Mr. Florida 2000 wants a recount.
Just because a country has a parliament doesn't make it a democracy. Turkish democracy continues to exist ultimately at the pleasure of the Turkish military, lingering well behind the scenes as long as things proceed swimmingly, yet asserting its authority during troubled times; as when the economy had shown signs of faltering or when Turkey's Islamicists gain a plurality of seats in the Parliament.
Contrary to the Charter that you cited, human rights organizations have repeatedly identified Turkey as among the worst human rights violators on earth, where the military continues to rule, Oz-like, behind a thin veneer of democracy.
For the fifth consecutive year the Turkish state leads the world in imprisoned journalists ahead of China and Syria and has recently admitted to killing as many as 14,000 people from the 1980's to the present through the use of death squads and paramilitary groups -- almost five times as many dissidents as were killed under Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.
The vast majority of the 35,000 deaths resulting from Turkey's war against its Kurdish separatists have been Kurdish fatalities, and Human Rights Watch attributes nearly six times as many civilian casualties to government forces than to Kurdish fighters. According to the State Department, up to 3 million Kurds have been ethnically cleansed by Turkey's military. In 1974 Turkish forces ethnically cleansed 200,000 Greek Cypriots after invading the north of Cyprus, which Turkey continues to occupy.
Women's rights in Turkey are suppressed. Among the most notorious and widespread of such practices is the imposition of forcible virginity control examinations. The Human Rights Watch Women's Rights Project recently released a report condemning the Turkish Government for the imposition of these highly intrusive involuntary medical procedures on Turkish women. The women subjected to these range from women applying for government jobs, female state dormitory residents, female complainants in sexual assault investigations and female hospital patients, to female political detainees and criminal suspects in police custody. In the case of female detainees of political crimes (which under the now infamous Article 8 ``Anti-Terrorist Law'' often include activities as innocuous as writing in the Kurdish language or publishing a news item regarding the military's ethnic cleansing of Kurdish villages) the forcible virginity control examinations take on a more menacing dimension. As stated by a Human Rights Watch Summary of the Women's Rights Project report:
In the case of political detainees, the exams are themselves abusive. Women victims of virginity exams report that the exams are degrading and often painful. In most instances, they involve the actual or threatened use of force and the insertion of a speculum or hand into the vagina. In one case Human Rights Watch investigated, two female journalists were detained for their suspected political activity and twice forced to undergo virginity exams after a state doctor threatened, ``You better do this or they [the police] will force your legs apart for you.'' Political detainees are often taunted with the exams' results, threatened by guards that they will have their ``virginity removed'' (the report documents cases of custodial rape) and, on occasion, are subjected to exams as a form of punishment.
The summary further states that the report:
details how [the] police abuse their power to monitor public behavior by detaining women arbitrarily and forcing them to undergo exams to determine their virginity or whether they have engaged in recent sexual activity. In August 1992, Istanbul police detained a thirty-nine year-old grandmother and two of her friends while they were eating in a restaurant. Never charged, the women were subjected to vaginal exams against their will and held in state venereal diseases hospital for over one week.
Even more disturbing than the forced virginity controls is that (according to a 1994 report by the UNHCR):
women in detention are susceptible to rape by the security forces or the police in order to force information out of them, such as the case of a woman suspected of collaborating with the PKK, who claimed to have been raped by six men from Istanbul's anti-terrorist squad in December 1993, and was subsequently forced to sign a deposition to the effect that the rapists were not policemen but that the rape had been committed by another young man detained the same day with her (Inter Press Service, 7 February 1994). Another source indicates that a woman lawyer belonging to the Turkish Human Rights Association reported being ``slapped, kicked, stripped, hosed with freezing water, and sexually insulted'' during interrogation (Index on Censorship, July/August 1994).
Many are becoming increasingly aware that it is not American interests that have been driving our reckless policy of appeasement towards Turkey but a confluence of parochial and short-sighted agendas. These include advocacy by the weapons industry for one of its most lucrative markets, and dogged support by the Israeli lobby in the wake of Turkey's upgraded axis with Israel.
The article is very well put. It is as simple as "eyes wide shut". It is easy to overlook the faults of "friends", but quickly see the shortcomings of "others". So why can't we all be friends! At the same time keep our eyes wide open too. And not have double standards.
I prefer to make love, not war. It's too bad that in this world, occasionally war is inevitable in order to keep the peace. Just my two cents.
If you want us to think about anti-Semitism, your diatribe was totally unnecessary. There are plenty of anti-Semites, in addition to you, that give us plenty of pause.
Given all that Israel has gone through, I think they have shown incredible restraint. My, we have a short memory. Remember the 39 scuds that Saddam launched at Israel during the 1991 war? And how did Israel retaliate???? ______________. Exactly.
Oh, and guess what. Which country in the Middle East has Arabs **elected** into the government. Israel! None other. Which country, in the Middle East, tolerates protests against the government, regardless of who is doing the protests? Israel.
Any democracies in the Middle East? Oh, yeah..hmmmm...Israel.
The 33 Palestinians you say were killed this week? Any of them engagd in planting bombs? Making bombs? None of them could have been Hamas leadership, could they? http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=274302&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0 .
You conveniently leave out a lot of facts.
With Passover coming up in April, maybe you would like to discuss next the old canard about Jews using blood from Christian babies to make matzah.
Your distortion and bias truly makes me ill.
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 1:25:50 PM
Why is every discussion of Israel's politics turned around into an accusation of anti-semitism?
Israel as a political nation was created by UN sanction after WWII, with attacks led mostly by the British. Over 50 years battles are still being waged because one peoples' lands were stolen by another's.
Israel can, and should be closely examined as aggressors in the current conflict, given that they are in violation of UN resolution to give back lands they have taken.
Israel is the closest thing to a politically free society in the Mideast, but unfortunately may not be in a position to influence some of the less free nations.
IMO Israel and Palastine both are behaving badly.
...it is anti-semetism. Traditional European anti-semetism has been transformed into the more marketable "anti-Zionism". Arafat's homocidal death-cult is misrepresented as victims of Israel when the reverse is the truth. The impossible double standard of morality that Israel is held to IS an insideous manifestation of anti-semetism.
You are conveniently leaving out the following facts...
- the same actions that lead to the creation of Israel already led to the creation of one Palestinian state, i.e., Jordan.
- the partition plan of 1947 called for the creation of two more states: a Palestinian and a Jewish state. The Palestinians rejected the move for two states and heeded their Arab brothers calls to leave the area so the other Arab states could come in and wipe out Israel, i.e., the war that ocurred on the founding of the state of Israel. The Arabs didn't plan on losing that war. Too bad for them. Guess what a country does when attacked?
- the long and the short is that Britain owned the land (the "Mandate") and ceded it to the will of the UN. The UN then setup the partition plan of 1947 (see above). That the Palestinians didn't want to play nicely was to their detriment. And as Abba Eban once said "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity". They would have had their own state free of British colonial rule, but the offer of wiping out the Jews was too tempting.
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 2:50:35 PM
Your wright but that was 2 -3 genarations ago what serious threat have they faced seince? none they take this under the premace that "they need it for defence pourpace? or god said they could???
What serious threat could Israel have faced? You're kidding, right? You need to do some basic reading. This isn't even about debate at this point. Pick a paper -- left, centrist, or right and you will see the dangers Israel has faced since 1947. We can debate the finer points, but with Israel having borders with countries that do NOT recognize her right to exist...that's a serious defense issue.
I think you drastically underestimate the might of the Israeli military They are the strongest in the middle east by a huge amount! What attacks have they had since Reagan was in office by a government besides in Gulf 1? I dont know of any I could be wrong but I think they have no problem holding their own these days. If I don't have this right I guess I do need to read more, but in the past 10 to 20 years all I remember is disorganized terrorist groups. I can understand why they do it I just think It is not anymore a threat jorden, seria ,etc... The muslams have decided to have the Palistenians as their soldiers in this and maybe this could change their situation. Something needs to happen to make them realize suicide bombing is not the ambitions their children should have and someone needs to come up with something else.
Israel needs its military to handle the Palestinians (Hamas, Islamic Jihad), and other groups, e.g., Hezbollah. These are real and serious threats.
Why is it that when someone questions the actions of Israel, that person is always called an anti-Semite? There was nothing hateful about PUCK's message...simply stating facts, which are easily verifiable if you would do some research.
To equate Israel holding nuclear weapons (an ally of the US) versus Saddam developing nuclear weapons (and being a known supporter of terrorism) is not a fact.
I won't dispute facts. I will dispute spin, bias, and sloppy moral equivalency. That "article" is full of half-truths and spin.
Indonesia has a elected Government and now Afganastan more muslems in indo, than any other and Isreal did not retaliat because we told them not to so get real they would have probably killed are guys.
If you want to disagree with what I posted (hopefully on reasoned grounds) fine, but you didn't read the post carefully. I was addressing countries in the Middle East. You brought up Indonesia and Afghanistan -- neither of which is in the Middle East. Indonesia is in southeastern Asia. Afghanistan is in southern Asia.
The last part of your sentence -- I don't know what point you are making so I ask you to clarify.
HootOwl, I think you're wasting your time. Just reading bd96's illiterate posts make that very obvious!
Hey staff...how bout giving this bonehead the boot!!
But he might just be right!
The most irritating thing about having discussions about different perspectives and points of views are the boneheads who instantaneously take a race/creed/nationalism tangent distracting from the issues, ideas, facts or misconceptions presented. If one is not able to debate the issues, ideas, facts, or misconceptions with rational arguments and discussion, then they should refrain from comment, or appear as a raving lunatic, which you so inelegantly demonstrated.
Playing a “race/creed/nationalism” card in discussions, especially with the vehemence put forth in this particular thread, places those opposing the things put forth in the beginning of this thread in the position of appearing as no more than a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum. Name calling and isolation or “booting” as you’ve proposed detracts from any arguments, clarifications or other ideas you might bring to bear on the discussion.
Oh, and I can’t be anti-Semitic, unless you believe I can be against myself in some way.
I shouldn't even dignify this post with a reply. But, it occurs to me that Israel is the only democracy in the region. She excercises extreme restraint in the use of force against its savagely belligerent neighbors and avowed destroyers, striking only in measured retaliation for their incursions into Israel. If they had a mind to, what would the Palestininan territories really look like? Talk about a humane society? Look at Israel.
If they do have nuclear weapons, and I believe they do, they have never so much as tested them, let alone threatened to use them. Tell that to India, China, Pakistan and the rest of the nuclear community.
They possess at least the same technological ability as we do, and in some areas better. In times of stress and war they are willing to share any and all data they can to assist us. Those of us who remember can remember the Israeli raid on an Egyptian SAM site during the Vietnam war in an effort to gain technical intel regarding countermeasures, so that the USAF would not be shot out of the North Vietnamese skies. From that raid comes the term "Black Box", and any US airman from that era owes a debt of gratitude to the Israeli airborne troops that risked THEIR lives for the USAF. Their intel community is the finest there is, and at times I wonder why we don't listen to them more often.
The US can count its true friends in this world on less than 1 handful of fingers, and Israel is the index finger.
So take your anti-semitic shit and stick it you know where.
Just because they are are friends dosent mean we should support them when they are wrong In fact it is the best reason of all to take them aside as would a true friend I'm not saying the other guys are right but it is clear continuing to be in the occ, ter, only give them a reason/ excuse to continue their behavior and then we are back to square one the people of both country's deserve better semotimes you have to be the bigger man like Began and Sadat were.
Isn't that was the US was doing with the Oslo peace process and the last round of talks between Barak and Arafat before Arafat left the table and started the intifada?
The Police Departments of each US City should give up its guns and hope that all the criminals will do the same.
The fact is that Israel has only used its weapons defensively. They did not start the four previous wars with their Arab neighbors. They do not plan and execute terrorist attacks against small school age chiloren. They did not dance in joyful glee on 9/11.
The only reason the surrounding Arab nations do not do to Israel what they have done to the Kurds (slaughter) is because Israel has the means to defend itself.
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 3:07:59 PM
I am not Jewish nor a fan of Israeli settlement policy. Having said that, the article you quoted is a common argument presented by a small branch of paleoconservatives and isolationists.
Below is my point by point rebuttal.
1. Israel is only nuclear power in Middle East “right now” – many others are seeking the same thing, e.g. Iraq, Iran, Libya.
2. Israel refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – a treaty is meaningless if the nation doesn’t plan to follow the spirit of it. Iraq and Iran are secretly developing nuclear weapon. Does anyone serious think Israel would sell any nuclear material or weapons to other countries? To Turkey, China or US? Be real, Israel doesn’t have many friends in the world. It is very fashionable to hate Israel nowadays.
3. Israel refuses to allow international inspections of its nuclear facilities – everyone knows that Israel has nuclear weapons. Iran, N. Korea and Iraq let inspectors check their nuclear facilities while secretly underwent their nuclear program. What good are nuclear inspections anyway if the countries are determined to develop nuclear weapon? e.g. N. Korea.
4. Israel stands in defiance of many UN resolution – looking at the way UN Security Counsel dealt with Iraq and the complicity of France and Germany, how could Israeli have confidence in UN protecting the interest of Israel? BTW, if I remember correctly, those UN resolutions are non-binding ones. How can anyone take UN seriously with Libya currently chairing the Human Right committee and Iraq scheduled to chair the Disarmament committee? What a joke!
5. Israel is the only country in Middle East that invaded and continues to occupy land belonging to its neighbors – false. Syria is in de facto occupation of Lebanon. Many don’t know that Saudi Arabia had annexed border lands of Yemen and Oman. A counter argument – Israel is the only country in Middle East that had returned large area of land – the Sinai Peninsula for the sake of peace. Israel has been on and off in negotiation of ending the occupation of the West Bank for over a decade. The simple statement by Charles Reese is misguiding at best.
6. American politicians are ardent supporters of Israel – too much so in a few circumstances, e.g. Jerusalem as capitol, in my humble opinions. However, many in the press have extensive coverage of both sides of the Israeli – Arab conflicts. Many in the academia are increasingly anti-Israel which most of the media ignored. Since many Arab countries have horrible human right records and refuse to formally/sincerely recognize the right of Israel to exist, US has to use it clout to protect Israel. That is what ally and friend meant in the real world instead of some abstract high minded principles developed in ivory towers.
Many US presidents and editorials called for Israeli withdrawal of occupied territories. George H. W. Bush pressed hard on Israel to end settlement in 1991. Clinton had tried hard in the peace process. Where’s the Arab support for peace, in their media and their governments, with the exception of the Jordanians?
Talking about double standards, many Israeli critics in US/Europe and Arabs denounce accident deaths of innocent children at the hand of Israeli soldiers but are silent or rejoice to the murder of innocent Israeli civilians at the hand of homicide bombers. Those critics are not asking for fairness. They just want their side to prevail. It is as simple as that.
7. US would only receive the overwhelming support of the Arab world when it abandons Israel. WAM in Israel has nothing to do with it since there is never any doubt that Israeli nuclear weapons for defense purpose only.
8. Different era requires different global strategies. George Washington’s advice was good at the beginning of this republic. It is partly because of the desire of US not to involve in other people’s feuds and quarrels in the 30s that France was overrun, Britain nearly lost to Nazi Germany. Unfortunately, the same attitude resurfaced again 50+ years later in Bosnia and Rwanda. Hundreds of thousands were unnecessarily dead from genocides and ethnic cleansing because the desire of US and Europe not to involve in other people’s feuds and quarrels. Compare to other civilizations at the time with the exception of China, Roman Empire did quite well in its contribution to the advancement of civilization and human condition. Yes, it falls eventually, but what a glorious few centuries.
9. The Jewish lobby is indeed very powerful. The Japanese and Chinese lobbies are not bad either – most of them are commerce related instead of security related as in the case of the Jewish lobby. One of the reasons why many ordinary Americans support the foreign aid to Israel is because Israel is our ally under constant attack from Arabs in the last 4 decades. Most African countries are not our allies. The foreign aids we gave them, think food aid, are fallen to the hands of corrupt leaders. With the exception of loan guarantee for expanding of settlements which US stopped a decade ago, most of the foreign aids to Israel are in military hardware for their defense which in the context of helping an ally is quite proper.
Similarly, that is the case in Latin America. In fact, people in Latin America resent American influence in their countries. US governments over many administrations have force US banks to forgive billions of dollars of loan to Latin American countries. Unlike countries in South East Asia with the exception of Chile, Latin American countries refuse to adopt market economy. Their huge population growth, elite attitude and populist politics hampered economic developments. Any foreign investments and technology transfers are met with suspicion. Foreign aids are the answer to those countries.
10. The government of Iran is our enemy – I guess you forgot the hostage crisis. Russia and China are not our enemies but they want to be rivals to us in their sphere of influence. Many people around the world don’t like us, e.g. French and many muslims, because of our cultural impact on their societies, not our policies.
French and French Canadians are afraid and envious of the spread of English language in the world – witness the absurd banning of the use of deviance of English words in their cities. Mexicans don’t like us because of our economic power and their need to work on low wage jobs in US. Their government’s inability to provide good jobs and moderate living standards forces Mexicans to seek better pay across the border. The contrast of the two societies bred envy and resentment. Similarly, the socialist leaning of Latin America and Europe do like the more market oriented business practice of US.
Many Muslims around the world don’t like us because of our belief of women’s right and liberal thoughts (in the classic sense) threaten their patriarchal social order.
10. Democracies advocate civilian control of militaries. Those arguments against the so called “chick hawks” are simply wrong. Judgment by former soldiers are not necessary correct, advocacies of the use of force by civilians are not necessary wrong. If I remember correctly, Lincoln and FDR had never been in combat. It didn’t mean that their judgments on going to war are wrong.
Peace and love are for civil societies. They are not the tools to counter evil and tyranny. The fortitude to stand up for Justice and the willingness to fight for freedom are some of the noblest attitudes of the human race. Jesus’s teaching is probably good for the next world for those who believe in it. In this world, powers, efforts and sacrifices are required to maintain a civil society and a peaceful world.
Really well-written; thank you.
A clarification, though: what is WAM?
Like you, I don't agree with the policy of settlements, but if Israel does abandon her settlements, I don't think it will really make a difference. I hold this belief for many reasons, including but not limited to that the PLO still has yet to remove the destruction of Israel from its charter. Israel needs to address the settlements issue as a matter of moral and ethical course, but I can't help but wonder if it's not just whistling past the graveyard.
squandered many many opportunities to peace. They let their hatred of Israel and Jews clouded their judgments, even among their intellectuals.
For a while, many ordinary Palestinians seem to trust Izak Rabin and there might be a simmer of hope. Too bad they let the propaganda of Hamas and Islamic Jihad incite them.
Obviously the expansion of settlements create another ingredient to incite rage among Palestinians.
Condoning and participating in homicide bombings have stripped Palestinians the moral high ground necessary for the return of occupied land. It is sad that there is no MLK among Palestinian intellectuals. Hopefully with the installation of the post of PM, they will start the process of self examination and walked away from the self destruction of terror. I personally think that will be a generation long project (at least 20 years.)
Only when they are ready to forget the past and deal with the reality on the ground will there be peace.
Israel is the PROBLEM in the middle east. Israel wants control of the entire middle east and is concerned when anyone presents a threat to them, WE are going to war for them.... and OIL....
Rays500
Israel wants to be left the hell alone. That's about it. If Israel was about land domination, they sure as hell would not have given back the Sinai Peninsula.
And if this really were about Israel, Saudi Arabia (of all countries) certainly wouldn't be allowing us to use their land for war purposes.
it is completely divorced from reality.
I don't lose a wink of sleep because of Israel's actions.
Islam isnt our enemy, sure. Who ever said we were going to war with Islam? We arent.
I don't know if you are anti-semetic or not, but you sure don't like Israel, and are willing to turn a blind eye to all the stuff the Arab countries are going. Israel is the only democracy in the area. I think that says something and we should stand with them.
Add this one to your facist list:
There is only country in Middle East with a deomcratically elected government: Israel.
One does not have to hate Israel to point out the atrocities that it consistently has committed. You have very eloquently stated the truth. Thanks for the great post!
"Atrocities that it consistently has committed." What atrocities? Since when is fighting for survival considered an atrocity? Israel does NOT target innocent civilians, unlike the Arabs. There is absolutely NO moral equivalence here. This should be obvious, but your biases blind you to that fact. I use the word "biases" out of politeness, but I suspect other words might be more appropriate.
THE STATE OF ISRAEL
There are 21 Arab countries in the Middle East and only one Jewish state: Israel, which is also the only democracy in the region.
Israel is the only country in the region that permits citizens of all faiths to worship freely and openly. Twenty percent of Israeli citizens are not Jewish.
While Jews are not permitted to live in many Arab countries, Arabs are granted full citizenship and have the right to vote in Israel. Arabs are also free to become members of the Israeli parliament (the Knesset). In fact, several Arabs have been democratically elected to the Knesset and have been serving there for years. Arabs living in Israel have more rights and are freer than most Arabs living in Arab countries.
Israel is smaller than the state of New Hampshire and is surrounded by nations hostile to her existence. Some peace proposals—including the recent Saudi proposal—demand withdrawal from the entire West Bank, which would leave Israel 9 miles wide at its most vulnerable point.
The oft-cited UN Resolution 242 (passed in the wake of the 1967 war) does not, in fact, require a complete withdrawal from the West Bank. As legal scholar Eugene Rostow put it, "Resolution 242, which as undersecretary of state for political affairs between 1966 and 1969 I helped produce, calls on the parties to make peace and allows Israel to administer the territories it occupied in 1967 until ‘a just and lasting peace in the Middle East’ is achieved. When such a peace is made, Israel is required to withdraw its armed forces ‘from territories’ it occupied during the Six-Day War—not from ‘the’ territories nor from ‘all’ the territories, but from some of the territories."
Israel has, of course, conceded that the Palestinians have legitimate claims to the disputed territories and is willing to engage in negotiations on the matter. As noted above, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered almost all of the territories to Arafat at Camp David in 2000.
Despite claims that the Israeli settlements in the West Bank are the obstacle to peace, Jews lived there for centuries before being massacred or driven out by invading Arab armies in 1948-49. And contrary to common misperceptions, Israeli settlements—which constitute less than two percent of the territories—almost never displace Palestinians.
The area of the West Bank includes some of the most important sites in Jewish history, among them Hebron, Bethlehem, and Jericho. East Jerusalem, often cited as an "Arab city" or "occupied territory," is the site of Judaism’s holiest monument. While under Arab rule (1948-67), this area was entirely closed to Jews. Since Israel took control, it has been open to people of all faiths.
Finally, let us consider the demand that certain territories in the Muslim world must be off-limits to Jews. This demand is of a piece with Hitler’s proclamation that German land had to be "Judenrein" (empty of Jews). Arabs can live freely throughout Israel, and as full citizens. Why should Jews be forbidden to live or to own land in an area like the West Bank simply because the majority of people is Arab?
In sum, a fair and balanced portrayal of the Middle East will reveal that one nation stands far above the others in its commitment to human rights and democracy as well as in its commitment to peace and mutual security. That nation is Israel.
-Bill Bennett, Jack Kemp and Jeanne Kirpatrick
Puck, Is this what you wanted?
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 11:12:14 PM
-- Modified on 3/19/2003 11:13:29 PM
To hell with the Arabs and Israel. It's time that Americans start questioning and taking our members of Congress to task and start asking why we give billions of our hard earned tax money to lunatics on both sides of this divide who have no interest in making true peace.
On one hand you have the corrupt Arab despotic regimes who crack down and smother any kind of democratic notion among their populace and on the other you have a fanatical right wing government led by a war criminal. How is it that we give any of these people our tax money? Why do we blindly support Israel and her actions when they go contrary to our own "supposed" beliefs? Why do we support corrupt, brutal Arab dictatorships when they do the same thing?
It's time for the foreign aid to these nations and to that region to stop. We have enough problems here in the states that we need to sort out and that money could be used right here first and foremost as it should be already. Why is it that an argument even needs to be made for this?
And to those of you who will call me anti-Semitic or anti-Arab or any other sort of name calling, I'll respond and say that you're anti-American and a traitor to this nation. How dare you put the interests of ANY nation or people above the United States of America and her citizens. People are getting sick and tired of the bullshit that keeps on going on over there and ALL parties are at fault. The Middle East is NOT black and white and there is no good guy/bad guy. It's just one giant drain where billions of our tax dollars disappear annually when there are more important things to take care of right here at home.
desmo
--And to those of you who will call me anti-Semitic or anti-Arab or any other sort of name calling, I'll respond and say that you're anti-American and a traitor to this nation.--
This part I think you got absolutely wrong. In a country such as ours, free speech is a virtue. I called Puck anti-Semitic, but I sure as hell didn't call him anti-American. As wrong-headed as I think Puck is, he has a right to state his opinion.
Questioning where foreign aid is going is a damn good question. I am obviously a strong supporter of Israel, but I don't think she has any "right" to our tax dollars. But, the post above wasn't saying they had a right to such. The post was a defense of Israel in opposition to the vitriolic posting by Puck.
-- Modified on 3/21/2003 1:20:23 PM
Dont you know that Iran Has Nuclear capabilities (As announced in The New York times 3/19/03.) Same for Several Saudi Countries (And supplied with our aid) Suggest you get the facts straight before throwing erroneous bullshit out into the public.
Several Saudi countries? Last time I checked, the Saud family has one country, Saudi Arabia.
North Korea is, by most accounts, no more than a few months away from producing weapons-grade plutonium in amounts sufficient to create 1-2 nuclear bombs per month. As one of the poorest countries in the world, North Korea will likely sell this plutonium to the highest bidders - some of whom will no doubt be well-funded terrorists.
How did we get to this point with North Korea? In part when the Bush administration (prior to 9/11) repudiated existing treaties with North Korea (executed in the 1990's under the Clinton administration AND ratified by a Republican congress)
What are we doing now about this imminent threat to our security? Well, we are refusing to talk with North Korea, we are refusing to negotiate with North Korea, and we are focusing most, if not all, of our military and political efforts on Iraq - at best a 3rd rate military power since the Gulf war.
Iraq's threat to the U.S. & the world is what exactly?
1) Iraq most definitely has biological & chemical agents.
2) Chemical & biologic agents certainly pose a threat to Iraq's neighbors and its own people, but are really not a significant threat to the US or Europe. Chemical agents require sophisticated delivery systems which Iraq lacks. Biological agents are more problematic, but are also quite difficult to use in conventional warfare.
3)Even though biologic agents could be used in terrorist activity - who in the world community would be most threatened by the release of botulinim toxin or small pox virus? The industrialized nations who have ample resources to treat and vaccinate their populations? Or the 3rd world (including Iraq and many of its Arab neighbors) who lacks those resources?
4) Does Iraq currently possess nuclear capability? No - the CIA has already admitted lying last fall about Iraq's nuclear weapons capability in a failed and exposed effort to garner votes in the UN Security council.
5) The US Port Authorities have been extremely concerned for over a decade with the very real possibility/eventual probability of a terrorist group or country hiding a conventional nuclear weapon or dirty bomb in one or more of the millions of cargo containers that pass through American ports on a daily basis. The US Port Authorities and other international Port Authorities have been working hard to develop technology to allow them to effectively screen for "obnoxious materials" (a.k.a. Weapons of mass destruction) in these cargo containers. That technology exists today, along with very sophisticated early warning systems and security systems - BUT THIS TECHNOLOGY HAS NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED! Why not? The Bush administration has CUT funding to the Port Authorities preventing the purchase of this new & expensive technology. State & local govts which provide most of the funding to the various US Port Authorities are hemorrhaging red ink and lack the financial resources to make up for this cut in funding.
Would anyone like to hazard a guess as to the human, economic, political, and social devastation to the US (and to the world) if a nuclear weapon detonates in a port in LA, San Diego, Seattle, New York, etc - effectively shutting down all commerce from all ports indefinitely thereafter?
So again I ask the question - exactly how and why is Iraq such a threat to us at this time that we should focus all of our energy & attention on them to the exclusion of other threats that, IMHO are far more real and tangible?
As a side-bar, does any one have an opinion how much profit the oil companies have made the past month or so by selling their oil reserves (purchased at pre-2003 prices) at the current prices in the current market? They are currently not purchasing new oil, which in part accounts for the DROP in crude oil prices the past week or so.
Could this really all be about the oil?
Just my $0.02
Geez -- I don't know where to begin with these issues; I will start with your blaming Bush for North Korea going nuclear. North Korea was working on its uranium enrichment program in 1998/1999 -- that's during Clinton's administration. Clinton attempted to buy off North Korea -- but it didn't work.
And, yes, Iraq is a clear and present threat (or was). Saddam himself said that the greatest mistake he made in invading Kuwait was that he did it before he had nuclear weapons. This is not the kind of madman we want to take out when it is too late. One mad period in history with Neville Chamberlain was enough.
Now I dont need to bother.
Dittos to what you said.
Only thing I would add is that for all these guys hot to attack North Korea instead of Iraq, Saddam just happened to draw the short straw from the terrorists club. Well get to NK soon and you guys can lead the charge. We'll see how worried you are about that potbellied tyrant then.
Finaly someone else in this country who I can agree with however I will say this Isreal has never used wepons of mass destruction sadam has more then the entire history of modern warfare rolled into one to compair. mabie 900,000 died in both atomic bomb attacs of ww2 he alone killed 1.2million in Iran with chemical wepons I think my # are wright not positive but he had to really work at that not just 2 bombs you konw like us it took him 10 years not to mentoin his own people.He is a real ass. The thing about the terrorist tho I could'nt have put it better my self and to think the us , brittan , And those damn frence frogs put them there cause knowone in Europe or the us wanted them after ww2. That could not have bitten us on the ass harder if we had bent over.
BTW, I am reading a certain book for the first time and have just gotten to Section III, Chapter VII "This is John Galt Speaking".
-- Modified on 3/21/2003 1:59:23 PM
Its a great book.
One of the best I have ever read.
I agree with you. I do think Iraq represents a threat and I believe that the military action is necessary but I question the timing of it. North Korea is a much greater issue and Bush's Korean policy is non-existent. To allow North Korea to be able to produce weapons grade plutonium is utterly unacceptable.. I really don't know how we are going to solve this issue.. One thing is for certain, we are not going to get anywhere by not talking to them.. Powell's assertion that it is a regional problem and therefore should be done in a multi-lateral context is absurd. It is a national security issue that we need to deal with right now!!!
The other major issue that you touched upon is homeland security.
You are 100% correct. We are NOT prepared for another attack. The Federal government has not released the funds to state and local levels to provide them adequate ability to inspect the ports or have response preparedness. Only 1 to 2% of the containers that come into this country get inspected!!!
In many ways, I think this President who has sworn to protect our security is squandering precious time.
Ferangi -- just to be clear, you really think Iraq does not present itself as a threat and we should take unilateral action against NK right away?
Hootowel,
I believe that Saddam is a threat and that the action we are taking is justified. My problem with it is that I don't think it is the right focus at this time. Hussein, thug and murderer that he is, does not have nuclear capability at this time. North Korea is 6 months from being able to produce weapons grade plutonium that it WILL sell to get cash..
If that happens, whatever we do in Iraq will not matter, because if that stuff gets out of North Korea, we will be goners..
I feel that the Bush adminstration's stubborn refusal to engage with North Korea is just escalating the situation. I am not suggesting that we give into Blackmail, but we cannot afford to sit back and do nothing because China won't come into the sandbox.
Frankly, I don't know what we are going to do about North Korea but I think this administration will ultimately be judged by how
well it protected the security of this country. To allow North Korea to develop Nuclear capability would be unconscienable??
Get real, puckie boy. If the Arabs decided that the world was flat, they'd get 80 votes for it in the UN. The UN is worthless. Why should Israel allow inspections? Have they threatened anybody with nuclear weapons? Should they allow others who may not be their friends the chance to expose their defenses? Have the Arab countries (with the possible exceptions of Egypt and Jorden) ever given Israel any reason to trust anything they say? Have the Arab countries recognized Israel's right to exist? Is Israel on any Arab maps? Do Arabs finance anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda? Israel is a tiny little country, but I'd bet that you too would like to see it disappear. Well puckie boy, it won't. It will continue to fight for its survival despite anti-Jewish feeling in large parts of the world, to say nothing of your own.