NationStates Jolt Archive


## Hezbollah success.. what no Army has been able to do before.

OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 12:30
Hezbollah success and -in a way- Iran success.. for their support.

Israel offering to surrender Golan Heights.
Fri Jun 8, 4:42 PM ET

JERUSALEM (Reuters) -Israel has told Syria it is willing to trade land for peace and is waiting to hear whether President Bashar al-Assad would cut ties with Iran and hostile guerrilla groups in return, Israeli officials said on Friday.

One said Syrian officials had so far indicated a willingness to conduct discreet contacts that might lead to a resumption of formal peace talks after a seven-year hiatus. In two weeks, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is due to meet President George W. Bush, who would play a crucial role in any such process.

A former Israeli diplomat who has taken part in efforts to revive dialogue said Olmert -- deeply unpopular after last year's inconclusive war with Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon -- was preparing his voters for possible concessions to Syria in a process that will probably need strong U.S. support to succeed.

Sources: Yahoo/Reuters/OccNEWS
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070608/wl_nm/israel_syria_dc
Kryozerkia
09-06-2007, 12:36
Syria has the chance to lead the way. Hopefully they will.

All the nations involved at this moment have some sort of vendetta and desire for revenge and it's not healthy for the peace process. If they can start with talks, it's an improvement over allowing the cycle of violence to continue, killing people and disenfranchising the general population who sees violence as the only solution and has stopped believing peace is possible.
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 12:42
Syria has the chance to lead the way. Hopefully they will.

All the nations involved at this moment have some sort of vendetta and desire for revenge and it's not healthy for the peace process. If they can start with talks, it's an improvement over allowing the cycle of violence to continue, killing people and disenfranchising the general population who sees violence as the only solution and has stopped believing peace is possible.I join my wishes for peace.
The Potato Factory
09-06-2007, 12:50
I join my wishes for peace.

If by "peace", you mean "the complete annihilation of Israel and it's non-Arab people", then yeah, you wish for peace.
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 13:03
If by "peace", you mean "the complete annihilation of Israel and it's non-Arab people", then yeah, you wish for peace.LOL..
i see the Godwhiners are up early this Saturday morning

Good Morning to you too.. Mr Potato. ;)
UN Protectorates
09-06-2007, 13:05
I wouldn't call this a success for Hezbollah specifically, perse...
Chiloe
09-06-2007, 13:33
Israel stole the Golan Heights along with all of Palestine!

The thing about the Golan Heights though is that it was NEVER part of biblical Israel!
So why did they begin resettlement programs there then??????

In 1967, They drove out all the Syrians there...except the Druze Syrians. Then they begun planting Jewish settlers there.

Since Israel begun it has rid places of Arabs by many methods, such as :

Demolishing 60,000 homes
Killing 50,000 Palestinian civilians alone
Tomzilla
09-06-2007, 13:44
Israel stole the Golan Heights along with all of Palestine!

The thing about the Golan Heights though is that it was NEVER part of biblical Israel!
So why did they begin resettlement programs there then??????

In 1967, They drove out all the Syrians there...except the Druze Syrians. Then they begun planting Jewish settlers there.

Since Israel begun it has rid places of Arabs by many methods, such as :

Demolishing 60,000 homes
Killing 50,000 Palestinian civilians alone

While not disputing the last part of your post, as others may, I have this to say:

You REALLY need a history lesson.

Who cares if the Golan Heights are not biblical? When the Syrians and Egyptians threatened to bring about the mass destruction of Israel in 1967, the Israelis decided to strike first. I guess "stealing" means "winning in conventional warfare against a hostile neighbor". Why did they begin resettling? They are removing a hostile populace, and reinstalling their own, so that the area may become more peaceful.

Oh, and the only reason Israel has "East" Jerusalem and the West Bank is that the Jordanians listened to some BS Egyptian propaganda that lied about the fact that the IDF had just smashed the Egyptian Air Force, and decided to go to war with Israel. Very foolish move, with consequences we still see today.
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 13:52
While not disputing the last part of your post...

Who cares if the Golan Heights are not biblical?would you dispute the fact that: the Palestineans got fucked in a biblical way. ? :cool:
RLI Rides Again
09-06-2007, 13:53
Israel stole the Golan Heights

How dare those theiving Jews be attacked by Syria! They should be ashamed of themselves! :rolleyes:
Chiloe
09-06-2007, 14:03
Why did they begin resettling? They are removing a hostile populace, and reinstalling their own, so that the area may become more peaceful.


Do you honestly believe that is just? To ethnically cleanse a whole place just to get rid of a considered threat?

So say if Germany won World War 2 (with you living in Britian or America) and rebels started fighting back. Do you honestly believe that they removing you from your home (with you most likely never having fought before) and forcing your whole neighbourhood somewhere else just because a few rebels attacked the German occupiers is just?

Since it has begun, Israel has ethnically cleansed over 500 villages. It forced the Arabs out into unfertile land and stole and demolished their homes (as I said, 60,000).

So please tell me, if you were forced somewhere else because your neihbourhood was considered a threat. Do you really believe that would be just??????????????

If not, please take back your comment.
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 14:22
Why did they begin resettling? They are removing a hostile populace, and reinstalling their own, so that the area may become more peaceful.Forcibly replacing your neighbors? the more you do that the more hostile is going to be the rest of the Middle east.. and ultimately the rest of the world (with the exception of LA-LA land.. also-known-as US.. we live in a parallel universe.. we took the blue pill)

Forcibly replacing your current neighbors and taking over their land, is going to move your borders, AND its going to -understandably- lead to more hostility from your New neighbors...

...Are you planning to forcibly take over the whole middle east?
The_pantless_hero
09-06-2007, 14:27
What the fuck does the US have to do with this, and why would Bush play a crucial role?
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 14:29
What the fuck does the US have to do with this, and why would Bush play a crucial role?Good question.
What the fuck indeed.
Chiloe
09-06-2007, 14:46
Israel only exists because of America. That is one of the reasons why so much of the Middle East dislike the american government....

Well that and invading Iraq on a WMD lie, invading Afghanistan, installing the shah in Iran, supporting Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war......and loads of other reasons.

But lets focus on Israel for now.

Oh and Tomzilla, you STILL haven't replied to my message lol. Guess you've realised what Israel is finally like.
Tomzilla
09-06-2007, 15:07
I shall respond to your analogy, with another one which you will probably recognize, and can be used for several different positions:

You and people like you move into a new country trying to find a release from persecution. However, the people in that country, when your numbers keep increasing, decide to try and massacre your people and force them into submission. Eventually, your people are able to overthrow this repression. What do you do with those that have done this harm against you?

Oh, and no "happy-feely" BS, I mean a real what do you do.
RLI Rides Again
09-06-2007, 15:09
Israel only exists because of America. That is one of the reasons why so much of the Middle East dislike the american government....

Nonsense. Israel has the strongest economy in the region with a GDP of nearly $200 billion and the best educated work force. Of all the countries in the Middle East, Israel is probably the least likely to collapse. US aid made up just 0.15% of the GDP in 2006.

What's more, US military aid only began after Israel's victory in the Six Day War. Israel is fully capable of surviving without the help of the US, both in economic and military terms.

Oh, and I take it you've never heard of 'nuclear deterrent'?
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 15:10
While not disputing the last part of your post, as others may, I have this to say:

You REALLY need a history lesson.

Who cares if the Golan Heights are not biblical? When the Syrians and Egyptians threatened to bring about the mass destruction of Israel in 1967, the Israelis decided to strike first. I guess "stealing" means "winning in conventional warfare against a hostile neighbor". Why did they begin resettling? They are removing a hostile populace, and reinstalling their own, so that the area may become more peaceful.

Oh, and the only reason Israel has "East" Jerusalem and the West Bank is that the Jordanians listened to some BS Egyptian propaganda that lied about the fact that the IDF had just smashed the Egyptian Air Force, and decided to go to war with Israel. Very foolish move, with consequences we still see today.

That's not the version I heard. Can you support your 'reason why Jordan got involved'?

The way I hear it, the Jordanian leadership kind of got wedged into mutual peeace assurances with Egypt, and found themselves facing the choice of being the frontline between warring factions, or remaining uninvolved and facing a rebellion at home.
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 15:11
Hezbollah success and -in a way- Iran success.. for their support.

It might be nice to see some peace break out in the region... although, with the King of Foreign Policy involved, it might not be more than a castle in the sky.
The Lightened Humanity
09-06-2007, 15:18
what Israel really do? they wanna live. look at the numbers. the Arab League's population is about 250m, Israel's is 7,5m, and only about 5m jewish. so they only wanna lower the number of enemy in their own region at all costs, doesnt matter arabs say, because arabs do the same with jewish ppl. i think thats the fact...
The Lightened Humanity
09-06-2007, 15:22
and the nuclear deterrent is the Jerikho-series, the nuclear project of Israel.
Chiloe
09-06-2007, 15:33
I shall respond to your analogy, with another one which you will probably recognize, and can be used for several different positions:

You and people like you move into a new country trying to find a release from persecution. However, the people in that country, when your numbers keep increasing, decide to try and massacre your people and force them into submission. Eventually, your people are able to overthrow this repression. What do you do with those that have done this harm against you?

Oh, and no "happy-feely" BS, I mean a real what do you do.

Oh yeah it is totally natural for Israel to demolish 60,000 homes and kill 50,000 Palestinian Civilians.
And you move to another country that is well...kind of already full of Arabs.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 15:39
Oh yeah it is totally natural for Israel to demolish 60,000 homes and kill 50,000 Palestinian Civilians.
And you move to another country that is well...kind of already full of Arabs.

Shit happens. The arabs were rioting against Jews as early as the 1920s. Yeah, there was a Jewish population there back then, albeit a minority.

Israel is there now. It's not going anywhere. Those people, Israeli and Arab need to learn to live with one another. This back and forth shit is getting tiresome.
The Lightened Humanity
09-06-2007, 15:44
arabs did the same with them 1400 years before. arabs can say, thats the past, jewishes can say, thats the past that they did with palestins...
Sabote
09-06-2007, 16:02
Oh, and I take it you've never heard of 'nuclear deterrent'?


So why is Israel allowed to continue their illegal nuclear WEAPONS program but Iran is being told to stop its nuclear POWER program.
Hell if it wasn't for Mordacci Vanunu (a jew) we wouldn't even know about Israels secret nuclear weapons. At least Irans acknowledges they have a nuclear program.
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 16:03
arabs did the same with them 1400 years before. arabs can say, thats the past, jewishes can say, thats the past that they did with palestins...

I'm really trying to understand what you are saying... but I'm finding it hard to pull something coherent from your posts. I realise there are a lot of ESL posters on the forum, so I don't want to sound heavy-handed... but it would really help if you could make your posts a little more... understandable?

If we are going to talk about historical precedent (is that what you were talking about?), the 'Jewish' claim to modern day Israel is based on the first major recorded anti-Semitic genocide - as the 'Children of Israel' exterminated the native Canaanite population. If we are going to accept the logic of scripture, so long as someone's 'god' tells you it's okay, it's fine to occupy any part of the Holy Land by just about any means.

So - modern Israel has no better claim to the land than any other local group... and certainly can't play the 'we were here first' card.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 16:07
So why is Israel allowed to continue their illegal nuclear WEAPONS program but Iran is being told to stop its nuclear POWER program.
Hell if it wasn't for Mordacci Vanunu (a jew) we wouldn't even know about Israels secret nuclear weapons. At least Irans acknowledges they have a nuclear program.

Because Israel is surrounded by people who want to destroy them and Iran isn't. Also because Israel is trusted by Western nations to not do anything stupid with it's nukes, while many people don't trust Iran's government.
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 16:12
Because Israel is surrounded by people who want to destroy them and Iran isn't. Also because Israel is trusted by Western nations to not do anything stupid with it's nukes, while many people don't trust Iran's government.

I don't trust Israel to not do anything stupid with nukes. Hell, I don't trust our OWN regime to not do anything stupid with nukes.

I don't trust any nation with nuclear technology, because regimes can always change. And the US could have a powermad theocrat in the White House after the next election (again, perhaps?)... just like any other nation.

As for the claim that Iran isn't surrounded by people who want to destroy them... I've seen arguments made in the last 12 months, by the powers-that-be in this nation, that it would be only right and proper to overthrow or invade in Iran.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 16:19
I don't trust Israel to not do anything stupid with nukes. Hell, I don't trust our OWN regime to not do anything stupid with nukes.

I don't trust any nation with nuclear technology, because regimes can always change. And the US could have a powermad theocrat in the White House after the next election (again, perhaps?)... just like any other nation.

As for the claim that Iran isn't surrounded by people who want to destroy them... I've seen arguments made in the last 12 months, by the powers-that-be in this nation, that it would be only right and proper to overthrow or invade in Iran.

Nobody's going to invade Iran any time soon. The US military is kind of tied up at the moment. As for who you trust, well, that really doesn't matter. What matters is that the governments of Western nations trust Israel more than Iran.
Sabote
09-06-2007, 16:20
Israel may be trusted by the wests governments but it certainly is not trusted by the majority of its population and by almost no one else in the entire world. Surely there is a reason for this mistrust. Maybe its because their government continues to sanction the murder of civillians and refuses comply with numerous UN resolutions.
The Lightened Humanity
09-06-2007, 16:20
1. i meant, that the arabs in the 7th and 8th century arabs killed millions in the name of Allah, and captured the region, killing those who lived, and than they settled there. but 1 thing is not the same. the territory has never been arab before, so, arabs destreyed everything from Spain to India, than u say, that the Jewish are "evil" when they resettle to there home? if u see every casulties, u can that that 50k palestins are a "collateral damage" as the US air force loves to say after failed bombs...
2. Israel did nukes before the anti-nuclear weapon treaties, like SALT I and II, but Iran and the PRK did it in the 21st century, when most of the world wanna keep peace, so a lot nation say that they are evil...
oh, i forgot. Israel didnt say that they bomb every big arab cities, but Iran says, that they will bomb Israel.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 16:22
Israel may be trusted by the wests governments but it certainly is not trusted by the majority of its population and by almost no one else in the entire world. Surely there is a reason for this mistrust. Maybe its because their government continues to sanction the murder of civillians and refuses comply with numerous UN resolutions.

In my opinion, considering the constant threat that Israel lives under and the near constant rocket attacks from Gaza among other Arab terrorist attacks Israel has been very lenient in dealing with the "civilians" who want them wiped out.
RLI Rides Again
09-06-2007, 16:28
So why is Israel allowed to continue their illegal nuclear WEAPONS program but Iran is being told to stop its nuclear POWER program.

Strictly speaking Israel never signed the NPT so the legal grounds are shaky. Besides, once a country has nuclear weapons there isn't much anyone can do about it.

Anyway, to use a nuclear weapon you need two things:
1. A nuclear weapon.
2. An nutty leader with a lot of executive powers.

In a democracy there are a lot of checks and balances in place to stop a nuclear war starting (although not as many as I'd like). There aren't sufficient checks in Iran, where too much power is held by the Supreme Leader.
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 16:32
Nobody's going to invade Iran any time soon. The US military is kind of tied up at the moment. As for who you trust, well, that really doesn't matter. What matters is that the governments of Western nations trust Israel more than Iran.

You said "many people don't trust Iran's government".

Many people don't trust Israel's government, or the US government. Distrust of other governments is kind of universal.. and it was a criteria you suggested. So - maybe it "doesn't matter"... but that means it "didn't matter" when you said it either, right?

I like your optomsitic stance on invading Iraq... I just think you are choosing to see what you want to believe, rather than actually looking at the actions of the regime. I'm not putting any extreme act of stupidity beyond the regime that is actively trying to restart the Cold War.
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 16:33
Strictly speaking Israel never signed the NPT so the legal grounds are shaky. Besides, once a country has nuclear weapons there isn't much anyone can do about it.

Anyway, to use a nuclear weapon you need two things:
1. A nuclear weapon.
2. An nutty leader with a lot of executive powers.

In a democracy there are a lot of checks and balances in place to stop a nuclear war starting (although not as many as I'd like). There aren't sufficient checks in Iran, where too much power is held by the Supreme Leader.

I wonder how hard it would actually be for our elected leader to launch a nuclear strike on Iran... not talking about the aftermath, just how difficult it would be to get to it.
Sabote
09-06-2007, 16:41
In my opinion, considering the constant threat that Israel lives under and the near constant rocket attacks from Gaza among other Arab terrorist attacks Israel has been very lenient in dealing with the "civilians" who want them wiped out.

There is a guy in my town who threatens me. Are you saying I should go out and murder his family?
RLI Rides Again
09-06-2007, 16:43
I wonder how hard it would actually be for our elected leader to launch a nuclear strike on Iran... not talking about the aftermath, just how difficult it would be to get to it.

Not hard enough. Presumably there must be checks in place, even the USSR had fail-safes to stop their leaders from kick-starting a nuclear armageddon without good reason, but I'd still feel happier if there were less nukes around.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 16:54
There is a guy in my town who threatens me. Are you saying I should go out and murder his family?

Totally different. Let's say the guy has tried to kill you and your family. Maybe killed one of your relatives before. There is no law to go to to have him arrested. You can't walk up to him and shoot him because he's surrounded by armed supporters. You have a helicopter and a hellfire missile. You shoot the rocket at his car and kill him. Some of his supporters are near enough to the car and some are injured, one or two die. That's the situation Israel deals with.

They need to eliminate the people launching rockets into their cities. They could invade in force with thousands of troops, air support and tanks, that would kill a whole shitload of Palestinians, civilians and terrorists alike. Instead they use a rocket from a helicopter or plane. They limit civilian casualties in this way.
The Lightened Humanity
09-06-2007, 16:55
any1 read what i wrote?
Grave_n_idle
09-06-2007, 16:55
Not hard enough. Presumably there must be checks in place, even the USSR had fail-safes to stop their leaders from kick-starting a nuclear armageddon without good reason, but I'd still feel happier if there were less nukes around.

Agreed. The problem is... we practically encourage proliferation of nuclear weaponry when we think it is in our interest... but we balk at proliferation of non-weapon nuclear technology when we don't 'like' the people involved.

I'm just waiting for one of the little nations to build nanite defusers. It won't be the big powers, at least - not before they have a next gen weapon in place.
RLI Rides Again
09-06-2007, 17:08
Agreed. The problem is... we practically encourage proliferation of nuclear weaponry when we think it is in our interest... but we balk at proliferation of non-weapon nuclear technology when we don't 'like' the people involved.

I'm just waiting for one of the little nations to build nanite defusers. It won't be the big powers, at least - not before they have a next gen weapon in place.

Yep. To be honest, I think nuclear weapons are rather useless anyway: if you're facing an enemy who doesn't have the bomb, then you can't use nuclear weapons while there's any hope of victory or you'll be pilloried by the international community. If you're facing an enemy who does have the bomb then you can cope just fine without nukes based on the above principle. A nuclear weapon is only useful if you've got an unhinged leader who acts unpredictably and might just push the button, for anyone else it's pointless.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 17:15
Yep. To be honest, I think nuclear weapons are rather useless anyway: if you're facing an enemy who doesn't have the bomb, then you can't use nuclear weapons while there's any hope of victory or you'll be pilloried by the international community. If you're facing an enemy who does have the bomb then you can cope just fine without nukes based on the above principle. A nuclear weapon is only useful if you've got an unhinged leader who acts unpredictably and might just push the button, for anyone else it's pointless.

How about if you're a tiny nation, about ten miles wide at a certain point, surrounded by bigger nations that have attacked you several times in the past? I could see how a nuclear deterrent would be useful in that situation.
Sabote
09-06-2007, 18:03
Oh my god! If we people on this forum cannot agree, what chance is there for palestine/israel agreeing on anything.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 18:07
Oh my god! If we people on this forum cannot agree, what chance is there for palestine/israel agreeing on anything.

I think the vast majority of the people on this forum agree that there should be a two state solution. Now if someone could get Hamas to agree to that maybe some progress could be made in the middle east.
RLI Rides Again
09-06-2007, 18:12
How about if you're a tiny nation, about ten miles wide at a certain point, surrounded by bigger nations that have attacked you several times in the past? I could see how a nuclear deterrent would be useful in that situation.

Israel know they can never use nuclear weapons against their enemies, and their enemies know that Israel knows. Imagine the reaction if Israel had used nuclear weapons when the Yom Kippur War broke out: they would have become international pariahs overnight. I suspect Israel's world-class army and air-force are a stronger deterant than any number of nuclear warheads.

EDIT: Israel probably had at least two bombs by 1967 and 13 by 1973.
New Vandalia
09-06-2007, 18:17
Oh my god! If we people on this forum cannot agree, what chance is there for palestine/israel agreeing on anything.

Or if we on this forum cannot recognize that "##" at the beginning of a thread title these days means "Beware: Insane Hatred of Israel Ahead," well...
Nodinia
09-06-2007, 19:33
Why did they begin resettling? They are removing a hostile populace, and reinstalling their own, so that the area may become more peaceful.


And thats ok....But when the Serbs do its called ethnic cleansing and is "bad". Why does Israel not do "bad" when doing the same thing?

You and people like you move into a new country trying to find a release from persecution. However, the people in that country, when your numbers keep increasing, decide to try and massacre your people and force them into submission. Eventually, your people are able to overthrow this repression. What do you do with those that have done this harm against you?


And what place does that analogy refer to? The only thing overthrown by the Israelis was the British administration by - O NOES - "Terrorism". Coincidentally this seems to have been "good" terrorism, a bit like the way the ethnic cleansing referred to above.


Shit happens.

What would happen if somebody said that at a "9/11" commemoration, do you reckon?
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 19:40
Or if we on this forum cannot recognize that "##" at the beginning of a thread title these days means "Beware: Insane Hatred of Israel Ahead," well...If you are going to accuse someone like "Oh my God he hates me !!!" :rolleyes:

.. at least post some Quotes to prove your silly accusation.
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 19:42
<snip>


What would happen if somebody said that at a "9/11" commemoration, do you reckon?

Yeah. I only get pissed off when people dance in the streets over 9/11. Shit does happen. People get killed.
Nodinia
09-06-2007, 19:46
Yeah. I only get pissed off when people dance in the streets over 9/11. Shit does happen. People get killed.

Yeah, and if some take pleasure in the fuckers that vetoed sanctions against the people stealing their farms and shooting their childer for forty odd years "getting some" well they probably deserve it then, don't they?
Drunk commies deleted
09-06-2007, 19:49
Yeah, and if some take pleasure in the fuckers that vetoed sanctions against the people stealing their farms and shooting their childer for forty odd years "getting some" well they probably deserve it then, don't they?

Who deserves what? The US deserved 9/11? I don't think so. 9/11 was the product of an Islamic supremacist ideology. That same ideology prevents Hamas from recognizing Israel's right to exist and making an effort at real peace negotiations.
Dontgonearthere
09-06-2007, 20:18
Yeah, the thing is, Israel isnt going to go away no matter how hard you wish.
In the odd event that some united force of nations DOES manage to take it down, it'll either result in WWIII or a fun campaign of worldwide terrorism, 'cuz, y'know, Israel pretty much invented modern terrorism. So, assuming their army is somehow defeated AND nobody gets nuked, nobody wins anyway.

So, maybe its time Israel's neighbors just accept that they got their asses kicked multiple times and maybe Israel can accept that the Palestinians have been there for a good long time.
Most likely not, but its certainly a better solution than "LOLZ DISOLVE TEH IZRAIL! J00Z R TEH EBIL!"
OcceanDrive
09-06-2007, 20:27
Yeah. I only get pissed off when people dance in the streets over 9/11.I bet you do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci-tkaPrMA4
Uber101
09-06-2007, 20:35
I live in Israel, and there are really few people who are willing to give the Golan Heights.
Giving them to Syria is a suicide and Olmert is doing it only to extend his tenure.
Nodinia
09-06-2007, 22:37
Who deserves what? The US deserved 9/11? I don't think so.

Reread what I said, considering its context please.
Brunsgard
09-06-2007, 22:58
At the end of the day poverty and religion are the biggest problems, I include Christian fanatics who want to see the Temple rebuilt to bring on Armageddon in this along with all the other fanatics who believe they have every right to wipe any non-believer from the face of the earth. Also the Palestinian refugee camps get more funding from the EU than other Arab countries who have refused to take refugees in to further there own Political ends
OcceanDrive
10-06-2007, 02:41
At the end of the day poverty and religion are the biggest problems.. What should the World do.. to reduce poverty in Palestine?
Prumpa
10-06-2007, 03:01
Israel is starting to engage in a land for peace policy. They gave up Gaza, and I was supportive of that move. Yet that wasn't ideal for Israel. Now they're giving up Golan Heights. Does this ring faintly of appeasement?
IDF
10-06-2007, 05:11
Hezbollah success and -in a way- Iran success.. for their support.

You are an idiot OD.

It's a loss for Hezbollah and Iran because both are going to lose their best friend if this deal goes through.

I will say I'm skeptical about Assad still.
OcceanDrive
10-06-2007, 05:23
It's a loss for Hezbollah and Iran because both are going to lose their best friend (Assad) if this deal goes through.the best friend of Iran is.. Iran.
Iran does not trust Assad. ;)

You are an idiot OD.LOL.. why do you keep downgrading me ?

from Nazi to Anti-Semite
from Anti-Semite to terrorist-supporter
from terrorist-supporter to idiot.

you need to be more consistent with your childish name calling. :D
Kinda Sensible people
10-06-2007, 05:36
Good for Isreal. By giving back the Golan Heights they can establish some level of peace with Syria, which will mean that they have peace with their 3 largest neighbors. Lebanon nominally goes where Syria goes. This means that only Hamas stands between Isreal and peace.

However, I won't start rejoicing any time soon. The old city will always be a point of contention, and neither Hamas nor Isreal will blink on this issue. Jerusalem needs to be made a seperate city-state which both groups have access to.
Sel Appa
10-06-2007, 05:56
This has nothing to do with Hezbollah and I hope this deal doesn't go through.
OcceanDrive
10-06-2007, 06:04
This has nothing to do with Hezbollah...http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=denial
.

.. and I hope this deal doesn't go through.Why?
Kinda Sensible people
10-06-2007, 07:21
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=denial

Actually, he's technically correct. This has to do with Syrian troop movements and rumors of war.

It's just that he's forgetting the fact that the summer war left Isreal's military in no shape to fight a war with Syria and put Olmert in a very uncomfortable political situation. And the fact that Hezbollah has massive political sway and connections in Southern Lebanon and part of Syria. Technically, however, direct cause falls on Syria.
OcceanDrive
10-06-2007, 08:42
It's just that he's forgetting the fact that the summer war left Isreal's military in no shape to fight a war with Syria .You think Israel Army is hurting?
I dont know.. Maybe its psychological more than physical.

after all.. how many tanks were lost to the Hezbolla missiles?
I guess we will never know.
Kinda Sensible people
10-06-2007, 08:47
You think Israel Army is hurting?
I dont know.. Maybe its psychological more than physical.

after all.. how many tanks were lost to the Hezbolla missiles?
I guess we will never know.

I have heard from a number of people who are more expert than myself on the subject that the Isreali Army is not in good shape. I don't know if they meant this in the sense of equiptment, or merely in the sense of exhaustion (it is possible to run your soldiers into the ground).
OcceanDrive
10-06-2007, 08:51
I have heard from a number of people who are more expert than myself on the subject that the Isreali Army is not in good shape. I don't know if they meant this in the sense of equiptment, or merely in the sense of exhaustion (it is possible to run your soldiers into the ground).fair enough.
Andaras Prime
10-06-2007, 09:04
You think Israel Army is hurting?
I dont know.. Maybe its psychological more than physical.

after all.. how many tanks were lost to the Hezbolla missiles?
I guess we will never know.

I think the main reason the war is regarded as an Israeli defeat by some is that they literally accomplished nothing, they barely did any damage to Hezbollah, because of the war Hezbollah's recruitment numbers are far up and beyond what they had prior to the war, and they have replaced their munitions and weapons losses via rearmament, their political wing now have a strong position in parliament and their social services wing has made them very popular among many communities.

I think the war showed a relatively small militia could challenge and attack the IDF with little consequence to their own power. I believe the IDF suffer about 500 casualties (killed and wounded), and quite a few tanks by mines and anti-armor rockets, many more civilians died of course. IDF lost alot strategically because it got so caught up in reaching the Litani because they thought if they reached it the rocket fire would cease and they would capture the Katushkas, they didn't realize Hezbollah could just double back as they were vehicle mounted and they could have easily just gone into Syria. And in the rush to the Litani IDF forces pretty much left Hezbollah bunkers and positions behind them still operating, which caused alot of chaos and were the casualties came from. Essentially when they reached the Litani, they realized they hadn't accomplished anything, plus most of the world was now condemning the IDF for indiscriminate bombing.
Andaras Prime
10-06-2007, 09:09
I have heard from a number of people who are more expert than myself on the subject that the Isreali Army is not in good shape. I don't know if they meant this in the sense of equiptment, or merely in the sense of exhaustion (it is possible to run your soldiers into the ground).

Well for a country of seven million to be running a military budget for over 50 years has to hurt economically, even if you have foreign support, plus Israel doesn't really have manpower reserves as of much.
United Beleriand
10-06-2007, 10:36
What should the World do.. to reduce poverty in Palestine?First of all, the Palestinians must be allowed to use their natural resources. Did you know that in the West Bank only around 10% of the water is used by Palestinians, and the rest is used up by Israel?
link (http://mondediplo.com/maps/israelwater2000) Water in the occupied territories has been under military control since 1967. The Arab inhabitants are forbidden to dig new wells, while the Jewish settlements may drill for water without restriction. According to World Bank figures, 90% of the water in the West Bank is used for Israel’s benefit and only 10% remains for the Palestinians.
Btw the Golan heights are also a part of the water resources issue.
United Beleriand
10-06-2007, 10:43
...They gave up Gaza, ...Israel never gave up military control of Gaza, and they still do with it as they wish (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/10/gaza.violence/index.html).
Andaras Prime
10-06-2007, 11:15
Btw the Golan heights are also a part of the water resources issue.

Yeah, I believe it's the only actual place in the region in which it snows.
Chiloe
16-06-2007, 23:47
Shit happens. The arabs were rioting against Jews as early as the 1920s. Yeah, there was a Jewish population there back then, albeit a minority.

Israel is there now. It's not going anywhere. Those people, Israeli and Arab need to learn to live with one another. This back and forth shit is getting tiresome.

In the 1920's and up until the 40s Jews started a terrorist campaign against the local Paltestinians.

Israel is the only country in the world to have a shrine to a terrorist:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GzNPZf-5aO4

How can you justify the killing of 50,000 Palestinian civilians, the demolishment of 60,000 Palestinian homes, the ethnic cleansing of over 500 villages, etc, etc????
Gauthier
16-06-2007, 23:57
LOL..
i see the Godwhiners are up early this Saturday morning

Good Morning to you too.. Mr Potato. ;)

Tater's just a Kimchiteer who tried to convince people he was at one point an Athiest and even a "Muslim".
Gauthier
17-06-2007, 00:00
How can you justify the killing of 50,000 Palestinian civilians, the demolishment of 60,000 Palestinian homes, the ethnic cleansing of over 500 villages, etc, etc????

Because like a lot of Busheviks and Kahanists, he thinks Muslims are just insectoid lifeforms with a hivemind link to Osama Bin Ladin that need to be gunned down to protect the galaxy.
The Lone Alliance
17-06-2007, 00:22
Watch Syria fill it full of Artillery again. Forcing Israel to ONCE AGAIN, blow the place to hell. :rolleyes:

But hey if the artillery causes some Zionists to die it's all good, right OD?

But another plus, Hezbollah STILL isn't getting that, land Syria is! Now Hezbollah has to attack them.

.
Israel is the only country in the world to have a shrine to a terrorist:
False. There are others. But it depends on how you consider 'terrorist'
Andaluciae
17-06-2007, 00:28
Maybe, just maybe, the people of Israel are yearning for peace, and they hope that this is one method by which this peace could be achieved. What a shocker. They're sick of the cycle of violence.
Chiloe
17-06-2007, 11:49
Because like a lot of Busheviks and Kahanists, he thinks Muslims are just insectoid lifeforms with a hivemind link to Osama Bin Ladin that need to be gunned down to protect the galaxy.

From what I've seen in many reality tv shows, etc, there is a huge amount of racism against Muslims in the USA, especially in certain parts.

I'm not a Muslim myself, I'm just saying.
Chiloe
17-06-2007, 11:54
Israel is not the only democracy the Middle East has ever had - I hate when Americans say that.

In 1953, the CIA helped overthrow the democratically-elected president of Iran. They then installed the Shah of Iran who was eventually overthrown in 1979. Iran had a democracy! It was America that took it away!

Imposing a democracy in Iran and Afghanistan which has limitations (e.g. not being able to protest, has to support america) is not what I call a democracy!

And MOST OF ALL, holding democratic elections in Palestine and then refusing to recognise the majority, Hamas, just because they do not agree with what America thinks is absolutely disgraceful! Then Israel punished the Palestinians for not voting for who they wanted them to vote! So what if Hamas does not recognise Israel? Are they not entitled to their belief? Why must America always be right?

Seriously?
Andaras Prime
17-06-2007, 11:57
Israel is not the only democracy the Middle East has ever had - I hate when Americans say that.

In 1953, the CIA helped overthrow the democratically-elected president of Iran. They then installed the Shah of Iran who was eventually overthrown in 1979. Iran had a democracy! It was America that took it away!

Imposing a democracy in Iran and Afghanistan which has limitations (e.g. not being able to protest, has to support america) is not what I call a democracy!

And MOST OF ALL, holding democratic elections in Palestine and then refusing to recognise the majority, Hamas, just because they do not agree with what America thinks is absolutely disgraceful! Then Israel punished the Palestinians for not voting for who they wanted them to vote! So what if Hamas does not recognise Israel? Are they not entitled to their belief? Why must America always be right?

Seriously?
Why do you hate America and freedom, you Muslim liberal.
Chiloe
17-06-2007, 12:30
I'm an Irish Catholic with American frienda and family!

Seriously though -America's taken away so many other democracies.

Please just look at this video - it will give you an idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37CXEk4wIVY

See how many democracies your country has taken away?
Nodinia
17-06-2007, 12:34
I'm an Irish Catholic

A FENIAN!!11!!! That explains it then.....
Chesser Scotia
17-06-2007, 12:42
Israel is not the only democracy the Middle East has ever had - I hate when Americans say that.

In 1953, the CIA helped overthrow the democratically-elected president of Iran. They then installed the Shah of Iran who was eventually overthrown in 1979. Iran had a democracy! It was America that took it away!

Imposing a democracy in Iran and Afghanistan which has limitations (e.g. not being able to protest, has to support america) is not what I call a democracy!

And MOST OF ALL, holding democratic elections in Palestine and then refusing to recognise the majority, Hamas, just because they do not agree with what America thinks is absolutely disgraceful! Then Israel punished the Palestinians for not voting for who they wanted them to vote! So what if Hamas does not recognise Israel? Are they not entitled to their belief? Why must America always be right?

Seriously?

The US is always right because they have more guns, more money and a less stable leader than most of the Arab world.
The only real reason the US hates Iran is becasue Iran will not bow down to pressure to conduct its affairs in a way that makes the US feel like the boss. Iran is not scared to conduct its business in the way it wants so as to actually make itself stronger in the process. Oh my, what a bad nation! Lets smack its bum!
Any talk of Democracy by "western" nations or Isreal is a joke. The US President won with less votes than his opponent and a better lawyer, Israel took the huff when democracy in Palestine elected the "wrong" leaders.
Palestine doesn't always help its cause internationally by clumsy posturing and quite an intransigent stance, however its not difficult to see their point as they are a tiny nation getting persecuted simply because they are Muslim and are not ashamed of that. Lets look at numbers here. How many Palestinians have been killed in the past 5 years by Israeli action and how many Israelis by Palestinian action?
Can someone please tell me how what the Palestinians do is terrorism and what is done to them is warfare? Surely they are both one and the same? If the argument is that Palestinians are indescriminate about who they kill, can I cite the blanket bombing of Dresden as british precedent? The nuclear bombing of Nagasaki as American precedent, more recently, the indescriminate slaughter of Iraqis over the past 10 years by "allied" forces?

Cheers
AMK
ZaKommia
17-06-2007, 20:57
their "victory" was not being vaporized, all they did was to get half their nation crushed to pieces and many of their members + civilians killed
when I look at what was left of their HQs, I dont see a victory
Andaluciae
17-06-2007, 21:38
I'm an Irish Catholic with American frienda and family!

Seriously though -America's taken away so many other democracies.

Please just look at this video - it will give you an idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37CXEk4wIVY

See how many democracies your country has taken away?

Your provided film has some half truths and exaggerations...if you know what I mean.

It also ignores the reality of the circumstances.
Chiloe
17-06-2007, 22:47
The US is always right because they have more guns, more money and a less stable leader than most of the Arab world.
The only real reason the US hates Iran is becasue Iran will not bow down to pressure to conduct its affairs in a way that makes the US feel like the boss. Iran is not scared to conduct its business in the way it wants so as to actually make itself stronger in the process. Oh my, what a bad nation! Lets smack its bum!
Any talk of Democracy by "western" nations or Isreal is a joke. The US President won with less votes than his opponent and a better lawyer, Israel took the huff when democracy in Palestine elected the "wrong" leaders.
Palestine doesn't always help its cause internationally by clumsy posturing and quite an intransigent stance, however its not difficult to see their point as they are a tiny nation getting persecuted simply because they are Muslim and are not ashamed of that. Lets look at numbers here. How many Palestinians have been killed in the past 5 years by Israeli action and how many Israelis by Palestinian action?
Can someone please tell me how what the Palestinians do is terrorism and what is done to them is warfare? Surely they are both one and the same? If the argument is that Palestinians are indescriminate about who they kill, can I cite the blanket bombing of Dresden as british precedent? The nuclear bombing of Nagasaki as American precedent, more recently, the indescriminate slaughter of Iraqis over the past 10 years by "allied" forces?

Cheers
AMK

Exactly, and who is the west to say whether or not Iran can have nuclear weapons or not?
Who is the west to decide what Iran must and must not do?

The USA has tens of thousands of nuclear weapons and a huge number of nuclear power plants.

Where was the UN sanctions to stop them being built???

Iran is not the one invading all the countries!

The west has bullied Iran and so many other smaller nations for years. Well Iran is standing up to the bully and I applaud it on that.
IDF
17-06-2007, 23:03
Your provided film has some half truths and exaggerations...if you know what I mean.

It also ignores the reality of the circumstances.

Yeah. The US did some bad things, but so did the Soviets. The Soviets did the exact same thing the US did. Of course critics of the US conveniently forget the facts of the Cold War.
Gauthier
18-06-2007, 01:59
Yeah. The US did some bad things, but so did the Soviets. The Soviets did the exact same thing the US did. Of course critics of the US conveniently forget the facts of the Cold War.

Except for two things. One, the Soviet Union never pretended to be a bastion of democracy spreading egalitarian ideals throughout the world. And two, the Soviet Union isn't around anymore. Nice try at damage and spin control though.
Sominium Effectus
18-06-2007, 02:21
A success for Hezbollah? It looks to me like Israel and Syria may (hopefully) be about to make peace; which, to me, would be a success for both natios.
Andaras Prime
18-06-2007, 03:46
Yeah. The US did some bad things, but so did the Soviets. The Soviets did the exact same thing the US did. Of course critics of the US conveniently forget the facts of the Cold War.

Putting blame on a now non-existent entity, nice.
Occeandrive3
18-06-2007, 04:09
A success for Hezbollah? It looks to me like Israel and....Israel has always said they are never going to surrender the Golan heights to Syria.

Something -lately- has changed Israel's mind.. Surely you don't think its the awesome Power demonstrated by the Syrian Army :D
The Lone Alliance
18-06-2007, 04:14
Exactly, and who is the west to say whether or not Iran can have nuclear weapons or not?
Who is the west to decide what Iran must and must not do?
Uh people who have a relativly free governments that allows people to believe whatever they want to believe? Governments that aren't run by a bunch of religious nut jobs (well except for the US)? Government that have leaders that are more mature than some whiny ass idiot (well with the exception of the US AGAIN) I put more faith in The west, then people who believe in honor killing.

The west has bullied Iran and so many other smaller nations for years. Well Iran is standing up to the bully and I applaud it on that. Then enjoy Nuclear winter. I for one don't want that.

Israel is not the only democracy the Middle East has ever had - I hate when Americans say that.
Saudi Arabia:Monarchy
Lebanon: Powerless Republic, Hezbollah has controlled much of the southern section for years, Syria continues to try and control the government.
Oman: Monarchy
Kuwait: constitutional emirate (Monarchy)
Iran: theocratic republic
U.A.E.: federation of several Emirates. (Multiple Monarchy)
Syria: Military Dictatorship
Jordan: constitutional monarchy (Monarchy)

Wait I found one!!
Yemen: Republic...

In 1953, the CIA helped overthrow the democratically-elected president of Iran. They then installed the Shah of Iran who was eventually overthrown in 1979. Iran had a democracy! It was America that took it away! No one here has fogotten that, people like you beat that drum constantly since that MUST everything since the US fault. If I remember the Iranians took back their government 30 years ago.

Imposing a democracy in Iran and Afghanistan which has limitations (e.g. not being able to protest, has to support america) is not what I call a democracy! Partly right there, sadly any protests that DO happen are interrupted by a carbomb or a machine gunning or etc.

And MOST OF ALL, holding democratic elections in Palestine and then refusing to recognise the majority, Hamas, just because they do not agree with what America thinks is absolutely disgraceful! Wow how DARE they refuse to work with a group that wants the total destruction of Israel!

Then Israel punished the Palestinians for not voting for who they wanted them to vote! They voted for Israel's arch enemy, I think that's a good enough excuse.

So what if Hamas does not recognise Israel? Are they not entitled to their belief?Not if it means he wants the death of every Israeli.

Why must America always be right? They aren't, but in this case they are.

Israel has always said they are never going to surrender the Golan heights to Syria.

Something -lately- has changed Israel's mind.. Surely you don't think its the awesome Power demonstrated by the Syrian Army :D
Dont' forget hezbollah loses whatever excuse to fight Israel and gains NO land from it.

You know that smily face just reinforces your hatred. Makes me want hope that someone :sniper: you.
Andaluciae
18-06-2007, 05:22
Israel has always said they are never going to surrender the Golan heights to Syria.

Something -lately- has changed Israel's mind.. Surely you don't think its the awesome Power demonstrated by the Syrian Army :D

It's part of a new Israeli strategy: Retrenchment and dialogue. Hezbollah is no serious threat to the territorial integrity of Israel, it is not an existential threat to Israel, but it is a nuisance that must be dealt with. To do this, the Israelis have, wisely in my opinion, concluded that by cooperating with the Lebanese and Syrian governments, they can deal with and isolate Hezbollah far more effectively (and financially less costly, I might add) than they could with their military force.

Israel is trying to cut a deal with the Syrians and Lebanese, but it is going to be a costly deal. The amount of ill will that Israel has accrued with these two governments must be overcome by dramatic good-faith efforts. Returning the Golan to Syria is just one such effort.

Israel is entering a process of consolidating its position; permanently. This deal is part of a program to limit Israeli investment in certain flashpoints, such as the Golan. Further efforts will doubtlessly be undertaken in the coming years to resolve other disputes, possibly even the issue of Palestinian statehood, even if the outcome is not necessarily the most desirable for Israel.
Andaluciae
18-06-2007, 05:29
Putting blame on a now non-existent entity, nice.

Mainly because the primary blame for the Cold War rests with the USSR, as Gaddis showed so thoroughly.
Andaluciae
18-06-2007, 05:30
Except for two things. One, the Soviet Union never pretended to be a bastion of democracy spreading egalitarian ideals throughout the world. And two, the Soviet Union isn't around anymore. Nice try at damage and spin control though.

The US was far, far less bad than the USSR.
Delator
18-06-2007, 05:56
In 1953, the CIA helped overthrow the democratically-elected president of Iran. They then installed the Shah of Iran who was eventually overthrown in 1979. Iran had a democracy! It was America that took it away!

True enough...but don't forget that we only did it because Churchill told us the place was full of commies, just so he could get Britain's control over Iranian oil interests back.

Thanks Ike! :rolleyes:
Andaras Prime
18-06-2007, 06:32
Mainly because the primary blame for the Cold War rests with the USSR, as Gaddis showed so thoroughly.

Bull crap, the blame rests entirely on the US and it's allies, you can't expect to remain a bulwark of reaction and not be opposed.
United Beleriand
18-06-2007, 09:24
The US was far, far less bad than the USSR.How?
Gauthier
18-06-2007, 09:55
The US was far, far less bad than the USSR.

Let's see then:

The Soviet Union subverted the Eastern Bloc countries, all of which dropped Communism like a fad once Mother Russia went belly-up. Proving the Domino Theory in an ironic manner.

There's also Afghanistan, but we know how that turned out in the 70s and 80s. Let's not forget the United States provided material support to the Mujahedeen, among which included future members of the Taliban and one Osama Bin-Ladin.

China? Decided their way of Communism was better than Russia's and split off. Slowly becoming more of an authoritarian capitalist society than a "true" Communist state.

And for the U.S.:

Cuba - Quarter-assed support on the Bay of Pigs coup invasion. Castro calls upon the Kremlin to back his ass up in response expecting extra military support, but instead gets offered ICBMs which touches off the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Vietnam - Refused to legitimize Ho Chi Minh's election as leader of Vietnam in order to not upset the French. Instead recognized a sordid bastard by the name of Ngo Dinh Diem who was probably one of the first corrupt pet dictators that Uncle Sam would support in the name of fighting communism. This of course made Uncle Ho turn to the Soviet Union and go commie. And we saw how Vietnam turned out.

Chile - CIA involved in the coup and assasination of Allende, installating Augusto Pinochet as American Pet dictator. Pinochet's regime is trademarked for brutal arrests, torture and murder of political dissidents.

Iran - Deposed Mossadegh and reinstated the Shah - another American pet dictator in order to give the British their ripoff oil deal. Shah's political oppression and secret police (SAVAK) results in the Iranian Revolution, and the start of Iranian resentment of the United States which culminated in the infamous Great Satan rhetorics.

Iraq - CIA assists a small time thug named Saddam Hussein in his rise to power. Hussein tops off his inauguration by reading off a name of accused enemies at the speech who are then lead outside to be executed. Ordered numerous atrocities which were conveniently overlooked while Iraq was being played up as human shield against the Islamic Fundamentalism of Iran which was ironically caused by American support of the Shah, but were suddenly brought up by Beloved Dear Leader Bush George-Dubya as a backup excuse for invading Iraq. Iraq of course is now a symbol for sectarian explosion and the backfiring of U.S. foreign policy under Dear Leader.

Now can you prove to me how the Soviet Union was worse than the United States?
ZaKommia
18-06-2007, 11:39
There is alot of understandable confusion. Democracy means rule of the people. yes, democracy is more then just elections! a country which performs elections but executes political prisoners isnt a democracy! Iran where elections take place bans women and non-muslims from elections, they execute journalists and shoot at protestors, they are not a democracy.
Lebanon where oppossition leaders keep getting assassinated and half the nation is controlled by religious muslim terrorist organization is not a democracy.
etc.. etc..
If you'll check, EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD(except 2) claim to be a democracy and actually hold some form of elections (even if they are fabricated) does this mean everyone is democratic?
Chiloe
18-06-2007, 14:00
There is alot of understandable confusion. Democracy means rule of the people. yes, democracy is more then just elections! a country which performs elections but executes political prisoners isnt a democracy! Iran where elections take place bans women and non-muslims from elections, they execute journalists and shoot at protestors, they are not a democracy.
Lebanon where oppossition leaders keep getting assassinated and half the nation is controlled by religious muslim terrorist organization is not a democracy.
etc.. etc..
If you'll check, EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD(except 2) claim to be a democracy and actually hold some form of elections (even if they are fabricated) does this mean everyone is democratic?

What are you on????

In Iran women CAN VOTE!!! Other facts you said are wrong aswell!
Hamilay
18-06-2007, 14:07
How?

Maybe the 20 million dead?
Andaluciae
18-06-2007, 14:07
Bull crap, the blame rests entirely on the US and it's allies, you can't expect to remain a bulwark of reaction and not be opposed.

Bull crap, the USSR was merely Russian nationalism using a leftst ideology to justify their actions abroad.
Chiloe
18-06-2007, 14:13
Your provided film has some half truths and exaggerations...if you know what I mean.

It also ignores the reality of the circumstances.

What reality? You invaded countries and put up dictators, don't try to justify anything. your country did wrong.

Yeah. The US did some bad things, but so did the Soviets. The Soviets did the exact same thing the US did. Of course critics of the US conveniently forget the facts of the Cold War.

Oh that really justifies all America's invasions because the Soviets did 'the same thing'.

The US was far, far less bad than the USSR.

No they weren't! And yes thats justify's everything the USA did..

Bull crap, the blame rests entirely on the US and it's allies, you can't expect to remain a bulwark of reaction and not be opposed.

Exactly.

I see Americans justifying putting up dictators all the time.

Why can't you just admit your country's military has done bad?

I've seen Americans finding out about the overthrow (by CIA) of Iran's democratically-elected president in 1953 and the installation of the dictator shah.
Then they justify it by saying he was westernising Iran and that he was secular.

Seriously lads. Your always going on about freedom and democracy. Just admit your country did wrong and stop denying everything.

You've seen the facts.
Hamilay
18-06-2007, 14:16
Oh that really justifies all America's invasions because the Soviets did 'the same thing'.

Seriously lads. Your always going on about freedom and democracy. Just admit your country did wrong and stop denying everything.

You've seen the facts.

"America is TEH EVILZORZ, since just because the Soviets did the same things the USA isn't excused.

However, the USA is far more evil than the USSR."

WTF?
Nodinia
18-06-2007, 14:23
Let's see then:

The ....(SNIP) .....prove to me how the Soviet Union was worse than the United States?

Not forgetting involvement in Nicaragua, Panama, Guatamala and El Salvador etc. Good old Ronnie Raygun - never let a nun-raper go into the field without a bit of training at Fort Benning.....
Andaras Prime
18-06-2007, 14:29
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37CXEk4wIVY
Andaluciae
18-06-2007, 14:50
How?

Prague Spring, Budapest '59 and Berlin '53 were what happened when an ally of the USSR was insubordinate...meanwhile, what happened when France withdrew from NATO? Paris...Summer? Not so much.

Soviet domestic policy was one of repression, deportation, state terrorism. The people of the USSR found themselves constantly wanting for basic economic goods. Soviet offensive military expenditures eventually impoverished the nation and its people.

Meanwhile, American involvement in the third world is routinely exaggerated by the left, whilst ignoring many of the reasons for what occured. Whilst the US played a role in such events as the coup against Allende, we were not the primary participant (the local leaders were) nor the primary force causing the coup. Poor understandings of the situation on the ground, and blind faith and reliance on those who did receive our support caused bad situations to result...but our actions in the third world were far less than those of the USSR.

Even our dictators were less nasty than the pro-Soviet dictators. Pinochet disappeared 3,000 persons, Castro over 10,000. That's merely an example amongst many. Ethiopia was impoverished by a Soviet stooge dictator. The actions of Hussein, Assad and Nasser were carried out with the blessing of the USSR.

And I could go on and on. You can only come to the moral equivalency hypothesis by ignoring the realities of history.
Andaras Prime
18-06-2007, 14:51
Prague Spring, Budapest '59 and Berlin '53 were what happened when an ally of the USSR was insubordinate...meanwhile, what happened when France withdrew from NATO? Paris...Summer? Not so much.

Soviet domestic policy was one of repression, deportation, state terrorism. The people of the USSR found themselves constantly wanting for basic economic goods. Soviet offensive military expenditures eventually impoverished the nation and its people.

Meanwhile, American involvement in the third world is routinely exaggerated by the left, whilst ignoring many of the reasons for what occured. Whilst the US played a role in such events as the coup against Allende, we were not the primary participant (the local leaders were) nor the primary force causing the coup. Poor understandings of the situation on the ground, and blind faith and reliance on those who did receive our support caused bad situations to result...but our actions in the third world were far less than those of the USSR.

Even our dictators were less nasty than the pro-Soviet dictators. Pinochet disappeared 3,000 persons, Castro over 10,000. That's merely an example amongst many. Ethiopia was impoverished by a Soviet stooge dictator. The actions of Hussein, Assad and Nasser were carried out with the blessing of the USSR.

And I could go on and on. You can only come to the moral equivalency hypothesis by ignoring the realities of history.

Not to mention harboring former SS officers who tortured and sexually abused political dissidents.

And please don't say 'disappeared' I think we all know what happened to them.
Occeandrive3
18-06-2007, 14:56
what happened when France withdrew from NATO? Paris...Summer? Not so much.Good question.

Washington has always been ready to attack and bomb a weaker side into Submission..

But not France.
I guess Iran and North Korea noticed that too.
Nodinia
18-06-2007, 15:33
Meanwhile, American involvement in the third world is routinely exaggerated by the left, whilst ignoring many of the reasons for what occured..

An effort to reform = O NOES, COMMUNISM = guns and support from the states for El Presidente. A simplification, yet nonethless accurate.



Whilst the US played a role in such events as the coup against Allende, we were not the primary participant (the local leaders were) nor the primary force causing the coup. Poor understandings of the situation on the ground, and blind faith and reliance on those who did receive our support caused bad situations to result...

So Pinochet comes to power in 1973...and for 17 years the US fails to realise that its supporting - and giving a cloak of respectability to - a fairly nasty piece of work.

Guatemala - despite reports from CIA on the ground "poor understandings of the situation on the ground" stop people realising whats going on. 7 or 8 dead priests and a Bishop but no, all is well.

El Salvador - CIA reports say bad things are going on but its no problem. 10 Nuns raped and thrown down a well but no, nothing to see here.......

Even our dictators were less nasty than the pro-Soviet dictators. Pinochet disappeared 3,000 persons, Castro over 10,000. ...

El Salvador 30,000, Guatemala around 300,000. I could go on too.

At least we didnt have to see some smug sanctimonious bastard from the USSR telling us about being the light of the "free world".

And who used veto sanctions against Apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia? Who vetoed the earliest moves at enviromental measures? Who has vetoed virtually every international effort at solving the Palestinian problem by peaceful sanctions?