Defending the Truth

America will protect its interests no matter what the interests are of Iran. Iran is an enemy.

The ME has to change.

It's really very simple.

If Saddam was indeed of our making, then clearly, it was our duty, our responsibility to remove him. We did.

Of course America will do that. But i find it hilarious that America will cry bloody murder when another nation dares do the same.

In any case the US has NO MORAL SUPERIORITY in the field of world politics. The US is guilty ( along with many other nations ) of the grossest violation of human rights, covert assasinations, proxy wars, arms supply to warring nations, unilateral invasion, supporting unpopular dictators, economic and military bullying and the loveliest double standards.

What you try to pass of as resulting from the evilness of muslims, is in part a direct consequence of US idiocy.

Sure the middle east has to change. But you speak as if the US have no voice in the middle east. As if all the problems and solutions lie with the arabs.

You are right about that though. The solutions does lie LOCALLY. but then the US must accept that Syria and Iran are PART of that region and integral to any solution to the problems there. It is pure stupidity on one hand to say "we are not responsible", but on the other also demand that Syria and Iran be excluded from any talks on a solution.

Lastly, if Iran is the enemy, then they have EVERY REASON to develop nukes. If a nuclear power termed me an enemy, refused to engage in talks and just generally wish to toplle the existing system.. then i would get me a nuke..

OF COURSE Iran is not going to listen to their biggest enemy. What surprises me is that the US can get into such a huff when nations enage in Realpolitik.

Maybe, but let's not kid ourselves by claiming that THIS war was based on altruism.

Removing Saddam has only resulted in greater terror alert, greater consensus between US "enemies", increased support for terrorist elements ( it's not easy for a regular Iraqi to believe that the US is less violent than the terrorist extremists.. only diffeence is that the average Iraqi does NOT feel targeted by extremists).

If the US was sincere in wishing to solve the ME crisis, the Iraq war would not have been the method of choice. In fact that US has irreparably damaged its role as arbitrator. No arab or muslim country will ever accept the US as impartial after this war.

So NOW who's gonna try settling the issues? Personally i hope europe takes over. At least Europe has learnt not to be self righteous and arrogant ( at least they have learnt to tone it down)

There is no one more self righteous and arrogant than the Muslims who are claiming to take over the world for Islam!

Europe is in big trouble! Take over? Take over what? They can't solve their own problems, and are about to be taken over by Muslims! The Euopeans are reproducing themselves into oblivion and are fearful of their own immigrant populations who are running amuk. THEY are indeed, hoping those same immigrants will work, pay high taxes, and support their social programs.

The US is always sincere, for the amount of time it takes the media to start whining that it's a bit difficult! Those countries have to learn to live peacefully amongst themselves, and compromise with each other. Just stop killing each other, and all will be well. The US would just like to come home.

The muslims are the problem in the ME. They will not recognize Israel. That is the problem. They have to face reality and learn to live in the present. As long as your brothers think this way, there will always be a problem. Why can't your brother muslims live in peace with Israel?

Well aprt from the fact that Israel violates one UN resoluton after another, encroaches upon palestinian land, bombs Gaza indiscriminately, engages in state terrorism, ISRAEL ALSO denies anybody the right to question their existence.

While i agree that the muslims must come to term with Israel's existence, Israel must accept that outside the jewish faith, the existence of Israel is dubious at best.

The FACT is the Israel is an artificially created nation, torn from the heart of plestinian land. Since it is now a viable state NOW however, it must live on. It CAN NOT BE ELIMINATED.

BUt neither can peace come if the world does not accept that the Arabs questioning the legality of the Israeli state is not an unjust question. It is a basic right for the arabs to ask this question, and they deserve an answer.

carving out a nation from the body of an old nation and populating the nation with immigrants and THEN demnading that none question the legality of such action is unfair and arrogant.

The Muslims MUST live and present and accept Israel. But likewise Israel must accept that it cannot claim divine right to that land. Doing so only forces the arabs to claim divine right to the same land.

If the arabs accept Israel, then Israel must accept the following:

1) UN resolution calling for an immediate stop to illegal settlements
2) The palestinian right to self determination ( this includes electing ANY government they choose. Who is Israel on any other nation to disallow the results of the fairest electiont he ME has seen)
3) Arab disagreement about Israel's right to exist. Accepting that it is a legitimate question is only fair. It is also not a threat to their existence since the question is one of HISTORY. How Israel is TODAY is a different situation which CAN NOT be solved by the dissolution of the Israeli state i.e the Arabs will have to accept that Israel is NOW a viable state and therefore must be taken as a legitimate part of the ME picture today.
4) Blocking Gaza air space, ports and access is NOT THE PROPER WAY. Desperate people dying of hunger and repeated bombings will take desperate measures for their self defense ( like suicide bombings). Would YOU do any different if somebody decided to take califonia and call it their own, after which they proceeded to block and/or bomb the remaining US states?
How can you claim moral superiority over a people that reacts desperately to extreme conditions caused by an encroacher.

RIghto.. No doubt about that. Likewise it is arrogant of the US to claim to spread (read "impose") democracy on other nations WHETHER THEY LIKE IT OR NOT. It is also arrogant to deny the results of a fair election just cuz you don't like the result.
Ur right.. Europe IS facing issues with the immigrants. But they are working on it and trying to reach some form of consensus. There is no imposition of culture on anybody.

That is why Europe is goin to be more stable, more secure from terrorism, with greater consensus in the population than the polarised US. In fact it already IS.

"taken over by muslims". WHat type of silly fear rhetoric is that. Muslims are still a MINORITY. Europe is still DEMOCRATIC. You believe the european democracy cannot hold the threat of "Islamic" totalitarianism at bay? Are the european societies so weak that any bully can come in and take over?

That's not a possibility and claiming that it's about to happen is just not a correct assumption.
Dude.. The US is about as sincere as any other nation in the world. No more and no less. It is foolish to think that the US is always sincere. What is sincere about central american covert operations ( the Contras, Noriega ).. What is sincere about supporting one cruel dictator ( King abdullah of Saudi Arabia) while toppling another ( saddam ). What is sincere about implementing elections in palestine and then refusing to accept the result?

Please don't misunderstand me. i am not calling the US the devil right now. I am only taking issue witht he statement that the US is always righteous and sincere. The US is a state made up of humans. As such it is succeptible to the same weaknesses as any othe rnation. Let's not kid ourselves by saying the SOMEHOW the US has managed to avoid ALL weakness and that the government is run by supermen ( and women).

The nature of International Politics is seedy and dubious at best. In order to be a player, the US has (like other nations ) had to engage in less than ethical actions on numerous occasions. It's called REALPOLITIK.

First, there never was a Palestinian state, the Palenstine was used to refer to a region of land. Israel however, was a recognized kingdom dating back to 900 BCE. Israel was established as a nation by the UN, you remember them don't you in 1947.

1) The land in dispute was taken by Israel in war. Starting first in 1948, followed by the 1967 war. It was the Arab nations that did not recognize Israel's right to exist in 1947. Jordan and Egypt also captured land during this war as well.

2) Let us forget not that it was Israel that accepted the terms of the treaty presented by then President Clinton, including returning land in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Nor should we forget that even more recently, Israel itself has removed some of its own people from land in the Gaza Strip even at the point of a gun. Yet it was the PLO that walked from the table after being given everything they wanted.

3) This is a Muslim problem and not one of Israel. Until such time as the Muslims recognize Israel's right to existence, Israel has the right to defend itself.

4) Perhaps if this land was not used to smuggle in weapons in which there only purpose is the destruction of Israel, Israel would not have a need to act in this manner.

Philistine, Canaan, and Palestine all referred to a region of land. Canaan became Israel after the migration for Egypt. Philistine came about following the fall of Israel, and finally Palenstine came into existence. If we wish to be historically accurate, Israel existed before Palenstine, therefore, its existence is historically more accurate than that of Palenstine. Furthermore, some 56% of the land that should be the State of Palenstine was taken by Egypt and Jordan, where as Israel itself has only taken some 26%. If anything the Palestinians real problem lies with those two countries.

dmk

[quote=sgtdmski;68072]First, there never was a Palestinian state, the Palenstine was used to refer to a region of land. Israel however, was a recognized kingdom dating back to 900 BCE. Israel was established as a nation by the UN, you remember them don't you in 1947.

Well if we are going to discuss the viability of Israel as a state ( which this thread isn't about) then so be it.

PRIOR ownership is NOT a justification. It may be a theological justification, but it can NEVER be a LEGAL justification. If it were, then the Red Indians would have every right to deman dthat all you non-indian folks get the hell out of their land.
OF COURSE the ARAB nations did not recognize Israel's right to exist in 1947. Israel was IMPOSED on the region by ther more powerful western states. That would be like Mexico taking california, transporting millions of mexicans there and then bitching about not being recognized by the US. Come on dude.. that's jsut crazy talk.
Israel has YET to adhere to all UN resolution passed regarding Palestinian self determination. The illegal settlements have not stopped. In fact Olmert has just annouced that new settlements will be initiated in the West bank very soon.

What good is the West Bank and the Gaza strip if it comes with water, air and land access in Israeli control? That is not a sovereign state.. THAT is a RESERVATION ( sort of like how the white immigrants locked up the Indians in their own land. The handover is rhetorical ( so to speak) and not actually of any benefit to anybody.
Well you seem to have a grave misconception. Not all muslim nations refuse to recognise Israel. Eqypt, Jordan and Turkey are already past that crap. As are Malaysia and Indonesia. At the moment the Pakistani government is contacting Israel on a diplomatic level to clear matters out.

So it's not a "muslim" problem. Opposition to Israel is NOT anti-semitism, and it is NOT only muslims who are against the existence of Israel.
Oh ok.. So you assume that a people that is discriminated against, living in refugeee camps, without possibility of self determination, without control of their own land,airspace and water, and without possibility for trade or commerce should shut up and remain silent and peaceful until the great nation of Israel decides they "deserve" a bone.

Man just once in awhile i wish america would find itself in the same situation as the palestinians. I would really like to know if you would remain just as morally superior then.

And does it occur to you that maybe they want weapons to keep Israeli bulldozers from levelling their houses? Israel is so MASSIVELY superior to Palestine militarily that even if the palestinians were free to import any weapons they wish, they would STILL not be able to destroy Israel. That is simple hysteria.
That is actually new information to me and quite interesting. You got a source i can check out?

Even so the problem does not lie with Eqypt of jordan simply because they are not hostile nations. Israel on the other hand IS hostile. And you can't say the palestinians started it. 6000 years away MAKES the jews OUTSIDERS who decided to come and squat on palestinian land.

Imposition of an alien state on foreign land is a HOSTILE action. Would you not feel the same if Mexico did the california thing?