Nobel Peace Prize Recipient Says ‘I Would Love to Kill George Bush’

[Harmageddon]

Originally posted by CSM:
In some cultures, he would be king! Yes that is a rather obtuse reference to European monarchies.

Yes, and European monarchies are prime examples of the abuse of power by the elite – hell, the Netherlands is known to have been a brutal colonial power. Those pages in history are mostly swept under the carpet however, and only the tales of bravery are commemorated.

Originally posted by CSM:
It takes two to have a fight. What empowers the populations of the Muslim countries in the Middle East? How are their leaders held accountable? It seems to me the Arab leaders have some responsibility in the world situation.

Of course they are also accountable for the present world-situation. Although to me it seems to a lesser extent. When the Netherlands occupied Indonesia, it was not as if the king of Indonesia had much of a choice – he was executed, and a puppet was bought to rule the country in our name. It just wasn’t a fair fight.

The same is happening in Lebanon – the current president is told that he should have disarmed Hezbollah and the fact that he didn’t is presented as an invitation for invasion by Israel. Fact is the guy has no power over Hezbollah at all. Hezbollah is the group that came into existence after Israel invaded Lebanon the last time around, and they kept on fighting their primitive war until Israel departed. Thus Hezbollah became the symbol of the fight against foreign occupation – and with a reputation like that, it was impossible for the president to take them out of power. The people would simply have rebelled and displaced the president instead. Hezbollah only started firing their “croquettes” this time after Israel invaded the Gaza strip.

Originally posted by CSM:
I sincerely hope that your disdain extends to the Muslim leaders with as much (or more) vitrol.

Yes, Saudi royalty are not the most honest people you could have as friends, and Aghmed Zinidine Jihad of Iran is no different. You know I despise Saddam (as should be obvious) – yet he was a perfect stooge for American interests as long as he came in handy. He could torture his people to his heart’s desires, as long as he kept obeying orders from Washington whenever Iran needed to be pushed around. Only when Saddam overstepped his freedom to act and decided to invade Kuwait (which he at first received approval for by Bush senior) he was considered a threat.

The invasion was not about 9/11, and least of all about concerns for the suffering Iraqi’s. It was about Saddam’s will to do as he was told. Once he refused orders, the game was over. Game – set – match. Did Saddam stand a chance? No of course not.

Originally posted by CSM:
Your opinion is noted....
Blaming only the US leadership is rather shortsighted.

I would think so. I believe the Western powers (first Europe, now America) have had their reign – it’s time to step down from our self-proclaimed greatness and treat others with the same courtesy that we display to fellow westerners. I’m saying we should maintain our cultures, as they are as varied as impressive, yet we should show our greatness by being courteous instead of constantly falling back to our colonizing roots.

I think the world has seen enough western style cruelty for now. We should remain vigilant as others may try to have their go at world-domination. I do not intend to become Chinese. I believe we capture more hearts and minds with honey than with vinegar. Show them our greatness by showing them our cultural achievements and compassion with the weak. Take the entire continent of Africa for example, still torn apart by Europe’s colonizing adventures. Is the Middle East destined to go the same way?

I think they will accept the west as a beacon of progress more this way, than the current option: we start bombing the crap out of their infrastructure, killing indiscriminately – since bombs cannot flow around kids – and demanding some respect for the west.

Time and time again, that has shown to create only hatred,
not sympathy, nor awe.

 

[dmp]

blah, blah, blah..

You need to put down the crack-pipe little brother. wow.

 

[CSM]

Yes, and European monarchies are prime examples of the abuse of power by the elite – hell, the Netherlands is known to have been a brutal colonial power. Those pages in history are mostly swept under the carpet however, and only the tales of bravery are commemorated.

Yep, I agree.

Of course they are also accountable for the present world-situation. Although to me it seems to a lesser extent. When the Netherlands occupied Indonesia, it was not as if the king of Indonesia had much of a choice – he was executed, and a puppet was bought to rule the country in our name. It just wasn’t a fair fight.

The point is, nothing will be resolved without the HONEST participation of all concerned. I do not believe for one second that any party will come to the negotiating table without their hidden agenda; ESPECIALLY the Muslim states. They have always used negotiations and cease fires as a time to rearm, recruit and reconstitute their forces so they can attack again.


The same is happening in Lebanon – the current president is told that he should have disarmed Hezbollah and the fact that he didn’t is presented as an invitation for invasion by Israel. Not quite true. The "invitation" to invade came when the Hezbullah deliverd it via daily bombardment with katusha rockets. the fact is, they have been doing this (as well as kidnapping Israeliis) since Israel withdrew its forces from Lebanon. Fact is the guy has no power over Hezbollah at all. Hezbollah is the group that came into existence after Israel invaded Lebanon the last time around, and they kept on fighting their primitive war until Israel departed. Thus Hezbollah became the symbol of the fight against foreign occupation – and with a reputation like that, it was impossible for the president to take them out of power. The people would simply have rebelled and displaced the president instead. ITA...Hezbollah is the defacto government in Lebanon...and bears full responsibility. Hezbollah only started firing their “croquettes” this time after Israel invaded the Gaza strip. Again, not quite true.
Yes, Saudi royalty are not the most honest people you could have as friends, and Aghmed Zinidine Jihad of Iran is no different. You know I despise Saddam (as should be obvious) – yet he was a perfect stooge for American interests as long as he came in handy. He could torture his people to his heart’s desires, as long as he kept obeying orders from Washington whenever Iran needed to be pushed around. Only when Saddam overstepped his freedom to act and decided to invade Kuwait (which he at first received approval for by Bush senior Umm...got any proof of that?) he was considered a threat. All nations will attempt to use other nations and their weaknesses to their advantage. I seem to recall that Saddam had a few stooges of his own which included such notables as the UN, France and Germany.
The invasion was not about 9/11, and least of all about concerns for the suffering Iraqi’s. It was about Saddam’s will to do as he was told. Once he refused orders, the game was over. Game – set – match. Did Saddam stand a chance? No of course not. Yep, can't argue that. I guess he should have done as he was told.
I would think so. I believe the Western powers (first Europe, now America) have had their reign – it’s time to step down from our self-proclaimed greatness and treat others with the same courtesy that we display to fellow westerners. I am not of that opinion... courtesy, maybe...step down? absolutely not. I’m saying we should maintain our cultures, as they are as varied as impressive, yet we should show our greatness by being courteous instead of constantly falling back to our colonizing roots.

I think the world has seen enough western style cruelty for now. You would replace western style cruelty with Arabic/Muslim cruelty...no thanks. We should remain vigilant as others may try to have their go at world-domination. Indeed they are, the islamic religion has stated their goals as such. Mere debate, rhetoric and negotiation will not stop them. I do not intend to become Chinese. More immediate, I do not intend to become a Muslim. I believe we capture more hearts and minds with honey than with vinegar.
I believe that if you grab them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow. Show them our greatness by showing them our cultural achievements and compassion with the weak. They are jealous of both. Take the entire continent of Africa for example, still torn apart by Europe’s colonizing adventures. Then perhaps Europe should remedy the situation in Africa! They choose instead to ignore it while at the same time blaming the US. Is the Middle East destined to go the same way? The Middle East is destined to either disintegrate completely into chaos or become the renewed Arab Empire. Make no mistake, the Muslims have begun their colonization...ask Paris how that feels!
I think they will accept the west as a beacon of progress more this way, than the current option: we start bombing the crap out of their infrastructure, killing indiscriminately – since bombs cannot flow around kids – and demanding some respect for the west. I would rather they fear us since we know damn well they will NEVER espect us no matter what we do.
Time and time again, that has shown to create only hatred,
not sympathy, nor awe. Tell that to the terrorists. I am sure they will actively embrace your philosophy...until they figure out how to kill you.

Much better debate when you keep your head, eh?

 

[Nienna]

Nienna, as much as I would like to believe this, I just cannot.
I cannot stand idly by watching the powerful turn the lives of the meek, the powerless and the weak into a living hell.

Then, I surmise, that you have not seen the Power that can make the powerless and the weak victorious over the powerful.

It is not that I constantly feel the need to kill your president or vice president, or Saddam for that matter. But sometimes it feels like it would really be the most honorable and just thing to do. Then again, I will not do it only if my own country is being invaded.

Well, it is nice to know that you aren't truly intent on murder. There is a time for capital punishment and war, when the "weak" rise up to defend themselves.

I know that Gandhi did do just that: seize to be violent, and thus seize to feed the British soldiers their anger that they needed to beat him to a pulp. It was very effective and speaks volumes about the sheer willpower of Gandhi.

An amazing man.

As I have posted before, I do not believe there is a God, because I do not see the point of a God existing at all. The only reason I can come up with is that it gives us (the weak) a sense of justice beyond our control that will make up for all the suffering we endure by the hands of the wicked (and powerful). But this is just what the powerful want us to believe, because it stops us from questioning or acting against them.

The point of God's existence? That's a new tactic... usually I hear of people pondering the point of their own existence. God doesn't exist for US; we exist for HIM.

But, belief in God does not necessarily stop people from questioning those in power or from rising against them. Rather, it gives a sense of righteousness and justice BEYOND those in power, whom often believe they are the last word. Many, many people are led to war BECAUSE of their belief in God. Check out this old B&W movie, Sergent York. Very cool film.

And thus we bring the suffering upon ourselves. We fail to grasp the one thing that (according to the bible) God has trusted us with: the ability to distinguish between good and evil. We have it, yet we discard it all the same. Thanks, but no thanks, God.
You can judge everyone later.

Not my cup of tea. Sorry.

I'm sorry. Very sorry that you feel this way.

What I do like is the teachings of Jesus Christ, for I believe they ring true to this day.

Yeah... He's a good guy.

Sadly, Jesus has also failed to reach the masses’ hearts – they sing the hymns, they preach together at Sunday, yet they do not grasp the full meaning of his teachings: stand up to injustice and the corrupt elite, stand up to those that say they have true knowledge of the scriptures, for they are lying. Everyone can understand them by themselves.
Trust in yourself. Really.

I disagree that this is the full meaning of Jesus' teachings. Jesus came for one purpose: to reconcile people to God, to make possible a relationship with one's Creator. In fulfilling God's plan for one's life, someone may HAVE TO stand up to injustice and the corrupt elite. But this is to be done in love, to restore justice and peace, not to "stick it to the Man."

 

[Bonnie]

Why do you hate Dick Cheney so much? What did he ever do to you?

Really I wondered the same thing?? Even our media and Mickey Mooore do not hate him that much...

 

[MtnBiker]

What I despise about Cheney is that he is one of those shrewd people that profit from wars they convince other people to fight.

In your opinion are there other persons in the position to profit from war? Other people in other countries beyond the USA?

 

[Annie]

Apparently you are either weak, or you fail to grasp this womans wish.
I can understand her completely.

I would not mind at all to grab Dick Cheny by the throat and rip it out of his neck with my bare hands, and then I would wiggle his vocal chords at him and do some silly voices yapping at him with his own throat.

"Welcome to hell, Dick".

Now, let me tell you why you are here, staring at your throat.

"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides with the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and good will shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon those with great vengeance and with furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know that my name is the LORD when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
- Ezechiel 25:17

And as much as I would like to believe that there is a divine judgement for all of us when we die, in which Dick Cheney is tortured for eternity, screaming in agony next to the torture rack that holds Saddam. A place in hell for all the other world-leaders, a.k.a. m*therf#ckers that are the embodiment of "the selfish and the tyranny wielding evil men".

Sad really that there is no such thing as God.
And even if there is, is not out purpose to become like God, and in this, serve justice ourselves? Why is Saddam not dragged through the streets by his entrails? Why is Cheney not tortured to death?

Because there is no such thing as justice.
Because there is no such thing as God.
Because there is only power and weakness.

Am I wrong, or is this the best arguement for 'disproportionate force'? Wipe out Gaza, Syria, Hezbollah (sorry civilians caught in the crossfire, sucks to be poor)...

 

[Said1]

In your opinion are there other persons in the position to profit from war? Other people in other countries beyond the USA?

Apparently, he abhors Royal Dutch Shell's ability to profit from high oil prices among other things and his country's arms dealers.

 

[MtnBiker]

and his country's arms dealers.

Exactamundo!!

 

[Said1]

Exactamundo!!

But that's not the subject of this thread.

 

[Harmageddon]

People, people, people… nice to see you’re interested, but these are too many responses for me to answer all. I am a busy man, trying to get my Master’s degree in neurobiology in a few weeks, so I’ll only answer some of the points raised by you all.
However, I will not walk away from any response, just be patient...

Originally posted by CSM:
The point is, nothing will be resolved without the HONEST participation of all concerned. I do not believe for one second that any party will come to the negotiating table without their hidden agenda; ESPECIALLY the Muslim states. They have always used negotiations and cease fires as a time to rearm, recruit and reconstitute their forces so they can attack again.

True, all countries have hidden agendas. False: Muslim countries no more than others (that is a racist remark). Every country has used ceasefires as times to re-arm, Russia, the United States, Muslim countries.
All of them do. In fact, the more powerful countries do it faster, since they have more resources.

Originally posted by CSM:
Not quite true. The "invitation" to invade came when the Hezbullah deliverd it via daily bombardment with katusha rockets. the fact is, they have been doing this (as well as kidnapping Israeliis) since Israel withdrew its forces from Lebanon.

Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, and their brutal occupation of Lebanon ended after 22 years. In fact, the Hezbollah was founded as a resistance movement to combat the Israeli invasion – and although they were not solely responsible for Israel’s retreat, they trumpeted their self-proclaimed victory to the people of Lebanon, which should not come as a surprise. Also their popularity with the Lebanese is hardly surprising.

Since the Israeli retreat the pinpricks have been going back and forth between them – do not omit the Israeli violations of the truce, both parties violated it more than once, although on a relatively small scale. The current outburst of violence is due to the following: Israel shelled a Gaza beach, Palestinians captured an Israeli soldier, Israel invaded Gaza, Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers and Israel invaded Lebanon. Now, both have been planning this escalation for a while: the Palestinians had been digging a tunnel for months to capture a soldier, Israel had been planning to invade Gaza and Lebanon for at least a year and Hezbollah has been eager to fight Israel since their founding days.

Thing is, Israel has got ~10.000 Palestinians and Lebanese in jail, for years, without a trial and without apparent future other than the occasional torture. That probably stings these people, and they have successfully negotiated the release of Israel’s prisoners before by trading a captured Israeli soldier.

Originally posted by CSM:
ITA...Hezbollah is the de facto government in Lebanon...and bears full responsibility.

Nice, but not quite true: they are a PART of the government. They are not affiliated with the political party that provides the president – a.k.a. he is powerless over them. And both Hezbollah and Israel have been occasionally fighting one another over the past years. Both bear equal responsibility.

Originally posted by CSM:
Again, not quite true.

Quite true, I’m afraid. Hezbollah started firing croquettes in earnest after Gaza was invaded by Israel.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2006/07/13/hezbollah_attack_puts_israel_on_a_second_front/
“SHOMERA, Israel -- A deadly cross-border attack by Hezbollah gunmen into northern Israel yesterday opened a second front in Israel's battle with Islamic extremists, just two weeks after Hamas fighters crossed into southern Israel and kidnapped a soldier.”

Originally posted by CSM:
Umm...got any proof of that?

Not really, other than the fact that it has been stated that Saddam asked the US whether they were opposed to the idea that he would handle Kuwait as he saw fit, and diplomatic language by then US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie and Saddam, might have been interpreted by Saddam as a “green light” for invasion – since Glaspie stated it was a non-issue to the US.
Therefore, it is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.

Originally posted by CSM:
All nations will attempt to use other nations and their weaknesses to their advantage. I seem to recall that Saddam had a few stooges of his own which included such notables as the UN, France and Germany.

More like the other way around. Remember oil-for-food? Everyone was involved, including the US, and since the US was the wealthiest, it was by far the deepest into the scandal. Still, not a single country with power (i.e. the entire West) has clean hands on that issue.

Originally posted by CSM:
I believe that if you grab them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

That my friend, sounds exactly like the bully mentality that is your country’s foreign policy today – and it is the main reason for increasing contempt throughout the world for America and its people. If all America can do is wave its guns in your face and demand respect, well, I’m sorry, but that don’t play with me. In fact, I take it as a display of weakness on America’s behalf. As do most of the world.
The same shit happens here in the Netherlands with young, angry, Muslim males. Some of them get together in groups of 10-20, kick some lone dude’s ass and subsequently demand respect. That tune doesn’t play here. In fact, they are humiliated in public, or even sent back to where they came from – and good riddance too.

Originally posted by CSM:
1) You would replace western style cruelty with Arabic/Muslim cruelty...no thanks.
2) Indeed they are, the islamic religion has stated their goals as such. Mere debate, rhetoric and negotiation will not stop them.
3) More immediate, I do not intend to become a Muslim.
4) They are jealous of both.

I grouped these replies, since they point to a general conclusion: Arabic/Muslim people are basically savage barbarians that have no clue about human rights, decency or any other virtue. That is bull. They may have a completely different culture, where women’s rights are yet to be invented for the most part, but they also are very generous people, willing to share what little food and drinks they have with foreigners. They enjoy bargaining – so much in fact that Westerners are often taken aback or insulted by it.

I’m just saying they are people, like you and me. They are not some rag-tag semi-humanoid, half animal alien droids bent to take over the world. Sure, they exist, as do such people in Asia (Kim Jung Il) and America (Cheney and Rumsfeld).

And you know it’s true, you know the Project for the New American Century’s documents on foreign policy, written by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others: “America will fight a multi-theatre war to remain the sole military power in the world and secure energy resources throughout the world to fuel this operation” – or stuff like that.

 

[Harmageddon]

Originally posted by CSM:
Then perhaps Europe should remedy the situation in Africa! They choose instead to ignore it while at the same time blaming the US.

Well, I do agree with the notion that Europe should pay dearly for the situation in Africa, although that is an ancient matter. Not that it is any less repulsive, but it gets on my nerves every time people point to the sticks in Europe’s eyes – after I mention them myself – and fail to acknowledge the sticks in their own eyes.

The same goes for Israel – Oh they are so helpless the Israeli, they have been reviled throughout history as they form an easy target to focus the population’s dismay at – they are small in number and easy to identify – and they have had a holocaust up their asses. So we should all feel sorry for Israel as they invade the Gaza strip and blow the infrastructure to smithereens – killing hundreds in an orgy of violence.
F#ck the holocaust! Yes, it’s bad, it’s sad; it’s humanity at its worst. But instead of focusing on the obsolete 50 years old one, why not turn our heads to a new genocide in Sudan – it’s fresh, it’s new, it’s NOW!!!

… It’s not as if we will ever learn from our mistakes, is it?

Originally posted by CSM:
The Middle East is destined to either disintegrate completely into chaos or become the renewed Arab Empire. Make no mistake, the Muslims have begun their colonization...ask Paris how that feels!

Grin. That is some colonization effort. If that is all they have to dish out, I’ll stop worrying right now and pop open a can of beer while I grin about the child play.The invasion of Iraq, that’s more like it, although that is also poorly executed. I wonder should Europe once again set the example of degrading human standards, to show the world that if colonization is the route we are willing to take, we should do it industrial and surgical: maximum efficiency, maximum profits.
Call 0800-colonize. At your service! (Couldn’t help myself)

Originally posted by CSM:
I would rather they fear us since we know damn well they will NEVER espect us no matter what we do.

Why would they not respect us without fearing us? I don’t get it.
I have respect for many people, including scientists, theologians, politicians (surprising), street-workers, nurses and whatnot, without fearing any of them. Same goes for Christians, Muslims and whatnot that I can communicate with on a respectful level – what goes around, comes around.
If you want to demand respect by inducing fear, be prepared to be afraid of them. I

Originally posted by CSM:
Tell that to the terrorists. I am sure they will actively embrace your philosophy...until they figure out how to kill you.

I have figured out how to kill potential terrorists that wish to kill me years ago.
If they still haven’t figured it out, I cannot possibly be scared of such a witless terrorist.
Now why would they want to kill me, you suppose?

Originally posted by CSM:
Much better debate when you keep your head, eh?

True. :halo:

 

[CSM]

People, people, people… nice to see you’re interested, but these are too many responses for me to answer all. I am a busy man, trying to get my Master’s degree in neurobiology in a few weeks, so I’ll only answer some of the points raised by you all.
However, I will not walk away from any response, just be patient...


True, all countries have hidden agendas. False: Muslim countries no more than others (that is a racist remark). Hardly racist if it is true. In no way was I implying that other countries do not engage in the same tactic; the Arab countries just happen to be at the forefront at this time in history.Every country has used ceasefires as times to re-arm, Russia, the United States, Muslim countries. All of them do. In fact, the more powerful countries do it faster, since they have more resources.

Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, Yes they did...do you remember why? and their brutal occupation of Lebanon ended after 22 years. In fact, the Hezbollah was founded as a resistance movement to combat the Israeli invasion – and although they were not solely responsible for Israel’s retreat, they trumpeted their self-proclaimed victory to the people of Lebanon, which should not come as a surprise. Also their popularity with the Lebanese is hardly surprising. I can agree with that. The fact that they are"popular does not make them any less terroristic.
Since the Israeli retreat the pinpricks have been going back and forth between them – do not omit the Israeli violations of the truce, both parties violated it more than once, although on a relatively small scale. C'mon, part of the agreement for Israel's withdrawal was the disarmament of Hezbollah which did not happen so "violations of the truce" is smoke and mirrors.The current outburst of violence is due to the following: Israel shelled a Gaza beach, care to explain WHY Israel shelled that beach?Palestinians captured an Israeli soldier, Israel invaded Gaza, Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers and Israel invaded Lebanon. Now, both have been planning this escalation for a while: the Palestinians had been digging a tunnel for months to capture a soldier, Israel had been planning to invade Gaza and Lebanon for at least a year and Hezbollah has been eager to fight Israel since their founding days. True enough, good thing the Israeliis know how deceitful the Arabs are! They knew they would have to escalate because of the actions of those nasty Arabs!

Thing is, Israel has got ~10.000 Palestinians and Lebanese in jail, for years, without a trial and without apparent future other than the occasional torture. That probably stings these people, and they have successfully negotiated the release of Israel’s prisoners before by trading a captured Israeli soldier. Yes, and those appeasement gestures simply encouraged their enemies. I do believe that Israel has finally decided that enough is enough.

Nice, but not quite true: they are a PART of the government. They are not affiliated with the political party that provides the president – a.k.a. he is powerless over them. Exactly, which makes Hezbollah the de facto government...they control the country and not the paper president they allow to stand. And both Hezbollah and Israel have been occasionally fighting one another over the past years. Both bear equal responsibility.

Quite true, I’m afraid. Hezbollah started firing croquettes in earnest after Gaza was invaded by Israel. How many rockets fired indicate earnest intent? Hezbollah has been firing rockets into Israel almost daily since Israel withdrew.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2006/07/13/hezbollah_attack_puts_israel_on_a_second_front/
“SHOMERA, Israel -- A deadly cross-border attack by Hezbollah gunmen into northern Israel yesterday opened a second front in Israel's battle with Islamic extremists, just two weeks after Hamas fighters crossed into southern Israel and kidnapped a soldier.”

Not really, other than the fact that it has been stated that Saddam asked the US whether they were opposed to the idea that he would handle Kuwait as he saw fit, and diplomatic language by then US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie and Saddam, might have been interpreted by Saddam as a “green light” for invasion – since Glaspie stated it was a non-issue to the US.
Therefore, it is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. Hardly. Saddam underestimated US reaction. Lack of concern does not mean acquiessence. He chose to interpret it that way.
More like the other way around. Remember oil-for-food? Everyone was involved, including the US, and since the US was the wealthiest, it was by far the deepest into the scandal. Really? Got any proof that the US was involved in that? Still, not a single country with power (i.e. the entire West) has clean hands on that issue.

That my friend, sounds exactly like the bully mentality that is your country’s foreign policy today – and it is the main reason for increasing contempt throughout the world for America and its people. Contempt my butt! The rest of the world is jealous...period. If all America can do is wave its guns in your face and demand respect, well, I’m sorry, but that don’t play with me. And whiney namby pamby appeasement don't play with me. That is more an indication of weakness than anything the US does. In fact, I take it as a display of weakness on America’s behalf. As do most of the world. Yeah, and the rest of the world conveniently forgets all the economic aid for disaster victims, etc. that the US donates yearly...even then there are those that screech "It is not enough!"
The same shit happens here in the Netherlands with young, angry, Muslim males. Some of them get together in groups of 10-20, kick some lone dude’s ass and subsequently demand respect. That tune doesn’t play here. Really? Seems to me that the Islamic fanatic tune plays quite well in Europe. Hell a couple of cartoons created an international crisis that had Europe tap dancing all over the place. A lively tune indeed! In fact, they are humiliated in public, or even sent back to where they came from – and good riddance too.

I grouped these replies, since they point to a general conclusion: Arabic/Muslim people are basically savage barbarians that have no clue about human rights, decency or any other virtue. That is bull. No it isn't. When was the last time you heard of a public beheading, an honor killing, etc. in a civilized Western country? They may have a completely different culture, where women’s rights are yet to be invented for the most part, but they also are very generous people, willing to share what little food and drinks they have with foreigners. They enjoy bargaining – so much in fact that Westerners are often taken aback or insulted by it. How charming...hardly exonerates them from their actions and public policy which calls for the death of all infidels and the destruction of Western culture.
I’m just saying they are people, like you and me. They are not some rag-tag semi-humanoid, half animal alien droids bent to take over the world. Heh... yes they are...their religion demands it...well maybe not the "alien droid" part, but there is no doubt in my mind that they want to do for the rest of the world what they have done for the Middle East...which is to put somewhere in the middle of the 14th century. Sure, they exist, as do such people in Asia (Kim Jung Il) and America (Cheney and Rumsfeld). Horse puckey and you know it. Your European arrogance is showing . Comparing Cheney and Rumsfeld to Kim Jung Il is just plain emotionalism on your part.And you know it’s true, you know the Project for the New American Century’s documents on foreign policy, written by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others: “America will fight a multi-theatre war to remain the sole military power in the world and secure energy resources throughout the world to fuel this operation” – or stuff like that. "or stuff like that???" How very creative of you! I have read the documents and NOWHERE did I see the quote you post here...got a link?

Good luck on the neurobio thing! I mean that too.

 

[Harmageddon]

Originally posted by CSM:
Hardly racist if it is true. In no way was I implying that other countries do not engage in the same tactic; the Arab countries just happen to be at the forefront at this time in history.

If true it isn’t racist. However, I disagree with your assertion that this is the case. I agree there are several Muslim groups of fanatical people that wish to see the world turned into one grand Muslim theocratic paradise. But there are people of this creed under the Christians as well, as are there communists and capitalists that strive for a one-world, one-system ideology.

If in the current time in the world-history the Arabs are in the forefront of hiding their “goals”, I would like to know how you would picture them at the back. Because to me, they seem to be just a little beyond African ******* – no racism intended – and African ******* are considered the world’s dispossessed. Sure, the Arabs are in the news as they are fighting to gain a place beyond that of the dispossessed (in Sudan, at the cost of the truly dispossessed), but that can hardly be considered a “hidden” agenda – as it is plain for all to see. So tell me, what is their hidden plot? The “take over the world” agenda seems more befitting the United States at this point in time.

Originally posted by CSM:
Yes they did...do you remember why?

Yes, although there are as usual two sides to the story. According to the Israeli’s they responded to rocket attacks by the PLO from southern Lebanon. According to the UN the Israeli’s performed several air strikes in southern Lebanon, triggering the PLO rocket response. Whoever started it that time, fact is that Lebanon came under the brutal occupation of Israel for 22 years.

Originally posted by CSM:
C'mon, part of the agreement for Israel's withdrawal was the disarmament of Hezbollah which did not happen so "violations of the truce" is smoke and mirrors.

True, it is all smoke and mirrors. However, Israel is hardly in a position to demand disarmament of its neighbors, while it maintains the largest army in the Middle East, including nuclear weapons.

Originally posted by CSM:
Care to explain WHY Israel shelled that beach?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/09/mideast/
According to Israel it was to prevent Palestinians from firing their croquettes. However, even though other radical Palestinian groups continued firing croquettes at Israel (for which Israel retaliated with Apache strikes), Hamas had maintained a one-sided ceasefire for over 15 months and they had just been democratically elected into the Palestinian government. Instead of applauding what seemed constructive moves on Hamas’ behalf, they were immediately rejected by George – promoting democracy in the Middle-East – Bush and Israel.
And while this was going on, the Israeli’s were shelling Gaza on a daily basis, and this finally reached the world press when an entire family was blown to bits on the Gaza beach. And Israel denied any involvement of course. This was only later debunked when shrapnel proved Israeli shells were the cause of the craters.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...SFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/06/14/wmid14.xml
As for the “hidden agenda”, promoting democracy is a blatant lie on Bush’s behalf. The American government has nearly always sponsored dictators and puppet-regimes in foreign countries (Saddam, Pol Pot and whatnot) and concerns for the population have never played a role in foreign policy. It is nothing but “smoke and mirrors” to get the soldiers to feel good about what they’re doing.

Originally posted by CSM:
True enough, good thing the Israelis know how deceitful the Arabs are! They knew they would have to escalate because of the actions of those nasty Arabs!

Both sides knew this and were secretly planning for it. As I said, Hezbollah is all too eager to fight Israel once more (they won the last time in their minds). Besides, if Israel is forced to retreat with their high-tech army, this will only bolster support for Hezbollah and their croquettes-army, and will show the world once more that the bigger army is not destined to prevail in war.

Originally posted by CSM:
Yes, and those appeasement gestures simply encouraged their enemies. I do believe that Israel has finally decided that enough is enough.

I believe Israel is retreating already – their ground forces are now being pulled back and they revert to aerial assault once more. This means that civilian death-tolls will once again rise significantly, that Hezbollah feels they are winning and that the escalation is in Hezbollah’s favor. But instead of negotiation, Israel (like the US) chooses to dismiss Hezbollah as a force to be taken seriously, and the refusal to meet with them in a diplomatic setting (although Hezbollah has shown their willingness to talk on numerous occasions) will only strengthen their resolve. In short, I think the Israeli are fools in this. Their push for war will get them more than they can chew – and well, they are asking for it.

Originally posted by CSM:
Hardly. Saddam underestimated US reaction. Lack of concern does not mean acquiessence. He chose to interpret it that way.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by CSM:
Really? Got any proof that the US was involved in that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme#Allegations_of_abuse
“The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations assigned to investigate the scandal has also concluded that "The United States (government) was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions. On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales."
The report also found that individuals and companies in the United States accounted for 52% of all oil-voucher kickbacks paid to Saddam Hussein. The largest of these recipients, Houston based Bayoil and its CEO, Bay Chalmers have been indicted by the US Department of Justice for their actions.”

There you have it. More to follow in a day or two.

Originally posted by CSM:
Good luck on the neurobio thing! I mean that too.

Thanks! Much appreciated.

 

[CSM]

If true it isn’t racist. However, I disagree with your assertion that this is the case. I agree there are several Muslim groups of fanatical people that wish to see the world turned into one grand Muslim theocratic paradise. But there are people of this creed under the Christians as well, as are there communists and capitalists that strive for a one-world, one-system ideology. I submit that the Christians, communists and capitalists are not running around blowing things up (at least not at this point in current events). You make it sound like those "several Muslim groups" has only 20or thirty memebers! They have hundreds of thousands of members and millions of backers...
If in the current time in the world-history the Arabs are in the forefront of hiding their “goals”, I would like to know how you would picture them at the back. Because to me, they seem to be just a little beyond African ******* – no racism intended – and African ******* are considered the world’s dispossessed. Sure, the Arabs are in the news as they are fighting to gain a place beyond that of the dispossessed (in Sudan, at the cost of the truly dispossessed), but that can hardly be considered a “hidden” agenda – as it is plain for all to see. So tell me, what is their hidden plot? The “take over the world” agenda seems more befitting the United States at this point in time.

Puleeez!!! You know darn well that, yes, overall they Arabs have a stated goal of world domination and that the hidden agenda I refer to is in the specific negotiations. I also dont think that just because the Arabs are open about it that we should allow them to do it! By the way, when the US finally conquers the rest of the world, I'll put in a good word for ya!
Yes, although there are as usual two sides to the story. According to the Israeli’s they responded to rocket attacks by the PLO from southern Lebanon. According to the UN the Israeli’s performed several air strikes in southern Lebanon, triggering the PLO rocket response. Whoever started it that time, fact is that Lebanon came under the brutal occupation of Israel for 22 years. How can you ignore the motivation for that occupation? You bash the heck out of Israel and the US and yet excuse their enemies? As for the UN...well, you know how I feel about that organization!


True, it is all smoke and mirrors. However, Israel is hardly in a position to demand disarmament of its neighbors, while it maintains the largest army in the Middle East, including nuclear weapons. Good thing they do! What do you suppose would happen to Israel if they did not have the military force that they have? We already know the answer to that...off to the ovens they go!
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/09/mideast/
According to Israel it was to prevent Palestinians from firing their croquettes. However, even though other radical Palestinian groups continued firing croquettes at Israel (for which Israel retaliated with Apache strikes), Hamas had maintained a one-sided ceasefire for over 15 months (so what? Their history showed it was only a matter of time before they went back to their old tricks...) and they had just been democratically elected into the Palestinian government. Instead of applauding what seemed constructive moves on Hamas’ behalf, they were immediately rejected by George – promoting democracy in the Middle-East – Bush and Israel. You want G. Bush and Israel to recognize a terrorist organization? I dont think so! Just because they were elected doesn't mean they should get US support! And while this was going on, the Israeli’s were shelling Gaza on a daily basis, and this finally reached the world press when an entire family was blown to bits on the Gaza beach. And Israel denied any involvement of course. This was only later debunked when shrapnel proved Israeli shells were the cause of the craters. Refer to your first sentence in this paragraph. You are extremely quick to denigrate Israel and accept the terroristsw propaganda as truth!http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...SFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/06/14/wmid14.xml
As for the “hidden agenda”, promoting democracy is a blatant lie on Bush’s behalf. The American government has nearly always sponsored dictators and puppet-regimes in foreign countries (Saddam, Pol Pot and whatnot) and concerns for the population have never played a role in foreign policy. It is nothing but “smoke and mirrors” to get the soldiers to feel good about what they’re doing. Now you are just making me laugh. You are right, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc were devious plots b the US to further our own interests. Obviously, you have an intense dislike for the US
Both sides knew this and were secretly planning for it. As I said, Hezbollah is all too eager to fight Israel once more (they won the last time in their minds). Besides, if Israel is forced to retreat with their high-tech army, this will only bolster support for Hezbollah and their croquettes-army, and will show the world once more that the bigger army is not destined to prevail in war. I agree with that.
I believe Israel is retreating already – their ground forces are now being pulled back and they revert to aerial assault once more. You are assuming that Israel intended a full scale ground war...that is not necessarily true. This means that civilian death-tolls will once again rise significantly, that Hezbollah feels they are winning and that the escalation is in Hezbollah’s favor. Civilian death tolls will indeed rise, thanks to Hezbollah using them as shields. But instead of negotiation, Israel (like the US) chooses to dismiss Hezbollah as a force to be taken seriously, I doubt that...there is no doubt in mind that the Israelii military takes Hezbollah very seriously! and the refusal to meet with them in a diplomatic setting (although Hezbollah has shown their willingness to talk on numerous occasions) will only strengthen their resolve. Talking to any terrorist organization only encourages them to continue their tactics... In short, I think the Israeli are fools in this. Their push for war will get them more than they can chew – and well, they are asking for it. We will have to simply agree to disagree. In my opinion, Israel had made concessions to appease Hamas and Hezbollah in the past...trading land for peace, etc... and all it has gotten them is more rockets in the ass!

Fair enough.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme#Allegations_of_abuse
“The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations assigned to investigate the scandal has also concluded that "The United States (government) was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions. On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales."
The report also found that individuals and companies in the United States accounted for 52% of all oil-voucher kickbacks paid to Saddam Hussein. The largest of these recipients, Houston based Bayoil and its CEO, Bay Chalmers have been indicted by the US Department of Justice for their actions.”

"individuals and companies" is hardly the United States government...I suspect that those "occassions" where the US facillitated the illicit oil sales were not what is implied in that statement. In other words, the US did not KNOWINGLY facillitate illicit oil sales and I have yet to see anything proving such.
There you have it. More to follow in a day or two.


Thanks! Much appreciated.

I'm off on a mini vacation...see ya Tuesday!

 

[Harmageddon]

Originally posted by theHawk
So "Cheney represents corporate greed, power and utter disregard for the weak and powerless", and thats good enough for you? Is there any proof of this "utter disregard for the weak and powerless"? Not sure what that really means, but I'm assuming you can elaborate. You seem to be echoing the generalizations about powerful and rich Republicans, but aren't backing any of it up with evidence.

Cheney is a former CEO of Haliburton (oil and military hardware), Rice is a former member of the board of Chevron (oil) and the Bush family has close ties to various oil businesses…and so on. They all have vested interests in these companies.

In other words, most people in the United States government stand to gain from increasing oil prices as well as destruction and reconstruction efforts in Iraq. Seems to me this is reason enough for a war in Iraq or anywhere in the Middle East where there is oil. Besides, the US had been bombing Iraq almost continuously since the Gulf War, which means they knew there was hardly any military hardware to speak of. Additionally, the sanctions on Iraq that were to be lifted soon would probably move Saddam to reward contracts to any country but the US and Britain, since they had been bombing the crap out of Iraq for over a decade.

The utter disregard for the weak and powerless refers to the Iraqi people that are currently dying at a rate of over a 100 a day and to a lesser extent, the increasing gas-prices that drive poor people across the globe over the edge into real poverty.

It is the eternal struggle between the powerful elite (Cheney is but an example) and the powerless masses. In feudal times these were kings and barons and such, today they are powerful corporations and corporate politicians.

We do need people to represent us (i.e. governments) but these people need to be restrained to prevent them from power-tripping their way into oppression and wars. Alas, only an informed and educated public can do that. This is probably the reason for the current decline in education.

 

[Harmageddon]

Originally posted by CSM:
I'm off on a mini vacation...see ya Tuesday!

Hey man, hope you enjoyed your mini vacation.
I'll be cooking first, I'll reply later this evening (or afternoon in your case).

 

[Harmageddon]

Originally posted by CSM:
I submit that the Christians, communists and capitalists are not running around blowing things up (at least not at this point in current events). You make it sound like those "several Muslim groups" has only 20or thirty memebers! They have hundreds of thousands of members and millions of backers...

True. I was referring to the ease with which all these groups (communists, capitalists, Christians and Muslims) resort to violence. In fact, it is inherent in this sort of “group-think” that the people that do not belong to the group are easily dismissed as somehow lesser human beings. And from this disdain for non-group members comes the ease to mobilize the group to war.
The most prominent example is of course still Hitler’s Germany – in which Hitler’s charisma convinced the German people easily of their superiority as “ubermenschen”, better than everyone else. This is mass-psychology which is often wielded by those in power to mobilize the masses. The masses are easily swayed to the bidding of the leaders this way. Tell them they are perfect, that others are not, and that these others despise their perfection and wish to bring it all down. Presto! An enemy is created.
That is what has been happening in America and in the Muslim world as well for the past few years. However, the Muslim world is not as united as you fear they are. The only way to drive them together into a common alliance is to attack them, have their leaders scream out this injustice on their perfect way of life (which won’t be easy) and the propaganda machine is geared for a holy war.
It seems like your government is handing the Muslim leaders the torch to light the fuse.

Originally posted by CSM:
Puleeez!!! You know darn well that, yes, overall they Arabs have a stated goal of world domination and that the hidden agenda I refer to is in the specific negotiations. I also dont think that just because the Arabs are open about it that we should allow them to do it! By the way, when the US finally conquers the rest of the world, I'll put in a good word for ya!

Yes, and you know the US has stated a similar goal. Now, as much as I’d prefer the US over Muslim domination, I’d rather keep my own freedom. Seems my ancestors fought hard enough for it. But if need be, I’ll honour their resolve by throwing my own life on the heap of corpses that is human history.
However, until that day, I prefer diplomacy and common sense.

Originally posted by CSM:
How can you ignore the motivation for that occupation? You bash the heck out of Israel and the US and yet excuse their enemies? As for the UN...well, you know how I feel about that organization!

I stated the motivation twice, since it depends on the eye of the beholder. I do not excuse any Muslim fanatics, I just said that Hezbollah did not exist prior to Israel’s occupation of Lebanon, period.

Originally posted by CSM:
Good thing they do! What do you suppose would happen to Israel if they did not have the military force that they have? We already know the answer to that...off to the ovens they go!

No, CSM, they won’t. They went to the ovens in WWII because a superpower (Nazi Germany) found them an easy scapegoat to rally the populace behind the war-machine. If Israel did not have its military it would not have come into existence after WWII in the first place: only because of western (American) military backing could they carve out a country of their own. At present, it functions as a deterrent, and from the last accounts, as leverage for war.

Originally posted by CSM:
You want G. Bush and Israel to recognize a terrorist organization? I dont think so! Just because they were elected doesn't mean they should get US support!

I think they should have gotten the support. Denying it undermines the pretext for the American war in Iraq (we come to bring democracy, we shoot to kill, we shoot to kill – a flimsy excuse to begin with, now fully exposed for the lie it is). In other words, America shot itself in the foot because of this denial.
And with support I do not mean military backing, but a serious recognition as a partner in trade, to advance the agenda for peace and stability in the region.

Originally posted by CSM:
Now you are just making me laugh. You are right, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc were devious plots b the US to further our own interests. Obviously, you have an intense dislike for the US.

No, the US has been doing very good things across the globe, to facilitate peace and stability and the US has contributed greatly to technological and scientific advancements. At the other side of the coin, the US is notorious for its backing of vicious dictators, the overthrowing of leftist democratically elected governments and the support of terrorism when it suits the US’s needs (Iran-contra affair for example).
The myth that the US is solely a force of good is ridiculous. The myth that the US is solely a force of evil is equally absurd. The same goes for other nations. The black and white world of make-belief is somewhat more complex than that.

Originally posted by CSM:
You are assuming that Israel intended a full scale ground war...that is not necessarily true.

Not necessarily. However, the offensive is as of yet increasing.

Originally posted by CSM:
Civilian death tolls will indeed rise, thanks to Hezbollah using them as shields.

Hezbollah came into existence after Israel occupied Lebanon – it is thus comprised of Lebanese. They have families that will probably shelter their sons. The Jews were often kept in cellars throughout Europe to protect them from the Nazi scourge – and the Nazis did not use the “human shield” excuse to bomb villages to rubble.

Originally posted by CSM:
Talking to any terrorist organization only encourages them to continue their tactics...

I disagree. Some terrorist groups are probably beyond negotiation, but most have clear demands. Demands are an opening for dialogue – they can be met or not. In the past, these demands have usually been the release of prisoners from Israel’s jails, in exchange for captured soldiers: when they were finally met, the conflict ended. At present, the United States has said that peace is only an option when Israel is ready for it. This unilateral stance only fuels the conflict.

Originally posted by CSM:
We will have to simply agree to disagree. In my opinion, Israel had made concessions to appease Hamas and Hezbollah in the past...trading land for peace, etc... and all it has gotten them is more rockets in the ass!

Seems we do disagree completely about the cause for this ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
Look, you know this all started when Europeans (primarily the British) were guilt-tripped in appeasing the Jews because of the Holocaust in WWII – something I can imagine. But instead of granting them a normal life in Europe, they were displaced (partly because of their own wishes) to the Middle East. Some ethnic cleansing and map-drawing did the rest: the state of Israel was born: a theocracy if there ever was one. Now, most Israeli’s or Jews for that matter think it is nothing but common sense to live together with the Palestinians (as do the Palestinians) but most political figures (i.e. those in power) think not. The fact that the current Gaza strip is the world’s largest outdoor prison according to Human Rights Watch does not help the situation.

When a rocket is fired from Gaza, the international press is all over it: the poor Jews have suffered enough as it is. When Israel bulldozes the infrastructure (demolishing electricity and clean drinking water facilities), dispossessing the entire Gaza population, i.e. collective punishment, it ends in the UN security council with a veto from the United States that stops any condemnation of Israel’s actions. Israel has defied dozens of UN resolutions with the help of the American veto power: no wonder the Muslim world sees this for what it is: blatant state sponsored racism.

I’m not saying I think the Palestinian rocket attacks are excusable, but neither are the Israeli actions that demolish the lives of so many people. As long as this double standard (i.e. hypocrisy, in the words of Jesus) is maintained, there will be no ending of the bloodshed.

Actually, there will probably be only escalation. But since that generates large profits for people with ties to the arms industry that is not a big deal, as long as the escalations are containable (fight them over there). This policy will at one point blow up in our faces (it somewhat did on 9/11), and we have no-one to blame for it but ourselves, in my opinion.

 

[CSM]

True. I was referring to the ease with which all these groups (communists, capitalists, Christians and Muslims) resort to violence. In fact, it is inherent in this sort of “group-think” that the people that do not belong to the group are easily dismissed as somehow lesser human beings. And from this disdain for non-group members comes the ease to mobilize the group to war. True enough. One thing has not changed over the centuries and that is human nature.
The most prominent example is of course still Hitler’s Germany – in which Hitler’s charisma convinced the German people easily of their superiority as “ubermenschen”, better than everyone else. This is mass-psychology which is often wielded by those in power to mobilize the masses. The masses are easily swayed to the bidding of the leaders this way. Tell them they are perfect, that others are not, and that these others despise their perfection and wish to bring it all down. Presto! An enemy is created. Agreed.
That is what has been happening in America and in the Muslim world as well for the past few years. However, the Muslim world is not as united as you fear they are. When the citizens of this country are shown live video of Muslims around the globe celebrating in the streets at the deaths of 3000 Americans, it is kind of hard to believe they are not united in their hatred of the US. The only way to drive them together into a common alliance is to attack them, have their leaders scream out this injustice on their perfect way of life (which won’t be easy) and the propaganda machine is geared for a holy war. That is true too. and the Muslims buy into it lock stock and barrel.It seems like your government is handing the Muslim leaders the torch to light the fuse. How we handle the situation is where you and I disagree. Obviously, in my opinion, negotiation and appeasement have failed time and again.
Yes, and you know the US has stated a similar goal. No, I don't "know" that. I have no doubt that there are some who think that way, but I do not believe that the vast majority of my fellow citizens think the US should be the world conquerer. Now, as much as I’d prefer the US over Muslim domination, I’d rather keep my own freedom. Don't blame you for that! Seems my ancestors fought hard enough for it. But if need be, I’ll honour their resolve by throwing my own life on the heap of corpses that is human history. I'm with you...and apparently that is how the US has acted in the past...WWII comes to mind.
However, until that day, I prefer diplomacy and common sense. So do I but when diplomacy fails, what then? It does fail occassionally you know...It didn't stop Hitler for example.
I stated the motivation twice, since it depends on the eye of the beholder. I do not excuse any Muslim fanatics, I just said that Hezbollah did not exist prior to Israel’s occupation of Lebanon, period. Granted, Hezbollah did not exist prior to the occupation of Lebanon, but there were others with the same philosphy under different names.
No, CSM, they won’t. They went to the ovens in WWII because a superpower (Nazi Germany) found them an easy scapegoat to rally the populace behind the war-machine. If Israel did not have its military it would not have come into existence after WWII in the first place: only because of western (American) military backing could they carve out a country of their own. At present, it functions as a deterrent, and from the last accounts, as leverage for war. That may be, but the reality is that if Israel disbanded their military tomorrow and the US or some other nation did not protect the people there, the next day they would cease to exist. The Jewish people would soon be on their way to extinction....
I think they should have gotten the support. Denying it undermines the pretext for the American war in Iraq (we come to bring democracy, we shoot to kill, we shoot to kill – a flimsy excuse to begin with, now fully exposed for the lie it is). In other words, America shot itself in the foot because of this denial. Again, we will have to agree to disagree. There is no way in hell I want our government to negotiate with terrorists, no matter how much "legitamacey (sp?)" they appear to have.And with support I do not mean military backing, but a serious recognition as a partner in trade, to advance the agenda for peace and stability in the region. If that had been their agenda you would have a point. Unfortunately, I do not believe that was/is their agenda. Their idea of peace and stability incoporates the destruction of Israel and the death of all infidels...sorry but that is how I see it.
No, the US has been doing very good things across the globe, to facilitate peace and stability and the US has contributed greatly to technological and scientific advancements. At the other side of the coin, the US is notorious for its backing of vicious dictators, the overthrowing of leftist democratically elected governments and the support of terrorism when it suits the US’s needs (Iran-contra affair for example). True. Every nation has its good and bad side of the coin. The myth that the US is solely a force of good is ridiculous. The myth that the US is solely a force of evil is equally absurd. The same goes for other nations. The black and white world of make-belief is somewhat more complex than that. No agurment from me there. So why should the Europeans or any other nation for that matter single out the United States for villification?
Not necessarily. However, the offensive is as of yet increasing.

Hezbollah came into existence after Israel occupied Lebanon – it is thus comprised of Lebanese. They have families that will probably shelter their sons. Understandable, but they shouldn't pe surprised or outraged when their house gets blown up! The Jews were often kept in cellars throughout Europe to protect them from the Nazi scourge – and the Nazis did not use the “human shield” excuse to bomb villages to rubble.

I disagree. Some terrorist groups are probably beyond negotiation, but most have clear demands. Demands are an opening for dialogue – they can be met or not. When the demands insist on the genocide of entire ethnic or religious populations, there is no "opening for dialogue, particualrly when the demands are presented as non-negotiable. In the past, these demands have usually been the release of prisoners from Israel’s jails, in exchange for captured soldiers: when they were finally met, the conflict ended. Yes, temporarily...until the terrorists rebuilt their strength. At present, the United States has said that peace is only an option when Israel is ready for it. This unilateral stance only fuels the conflict. I see, so the Hezobollah and Palestinians are open minded and more than willing to negotiate..right? No unilateral stances on their part, eh?

Seems we do disagree completely about the cause for this ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
Look, you know this all started when Europeans (primarily the British) were guilt-tripped in appeasing the Jews because of the Holocaust in WWII – something I can imagine. But instead of granting them a normal life in Europe, they were displaced (partly because of their own wishes) to the Middle East. Some ethnic cleansing and map-drawing did the rest: the state of Israel was born: a theocracy if there ever was one. I cannot disagree with that entirely; however, there is some historical precedent that when you lose the war, the victor gets to keep your land, your resources, etc. and divy it up as he sees fit. Now, most Israeli’s or Jews for that matter think it is nothing but common sense to live together with the Palestinians (as do the Palestinians) but most political figures (i.e. those in power) think not. I also agree that those in power are often at odds with the true feelings of the people. The fact that the current Gaza strip is the world’s largest outdoor prison according to Human Rights Watch does not help the situation. I agree ...lets just get rid of Gaza altogether and give the place to Israel...problem solved!
When a rocket is fired from Gaza, the international press is all over it: the poor Jews have suffered enough as it is. When Israel bulldozes the infrastructure (demolishing electricity and clean drinking water facilities), dispossessing the entire Gaza population, i.e. collective punishment, it ends in the UN security council with a veto from the United States that stops any condemnation of Israel’s actions. Israel has defied dozens of UN resolutions with the help of the American veto power: no wonder the Muslim world sees this for what it is: blatant state sponsored racism. And no Muslim nation has ever ignored a UN resolution, right? Again, you single out the US and Israel and ignore the other parties.
I’m not saying I think the Palestinian rocket attacks are excusable, but neither are the Israeli actions that demolish the lives of so many people. As long as this double standard (i.e. hypocrisy, in the words of Jesus) is maintained, there will be no ending of the bloodshed. The double standard applies to both sides. That is why you are exactly correct, the bloodshed wont end until BOTH sides have decided that they have had enough....not likely to happen in our lifetimes.
Actually, there will probably be only escalation. But since that generates large profits for people with ties to the arms industry that is not a big deal, as long as the escalations are containable (fight them over there). This policy will at one point blow up in our faces (it somewhat did on 9/11), and we have no-one to blame for it but ourselves, in my opinion. Maybe, but I have to ask why you dont think that Hezbollah's or other terrorist policies could blow up in THEIR faces? It makes me wonder that you are in agreement with the terrorist/Muslim state policies and therefore inconceivable that they should fail or suffer repercussions for their stance?

I do see where you are coming from. I just wonder why you are so supportive of the terrorists? Not being critical but truly curious.

 

[Harmageddon]

To answer your last question:

Originally posted by CSM:
I do see where you are coming from. I just wonder why you are so supportive of the terrorists? Not being critical but truly curious.

For clarification, I do not support terrorism unquestioningly.
First of all, I would like to point out that a lot of the problems nowadays are because of the Orwellian double-speak in politics: democracy holds no true meaning anymore in the media (since it refers to Iraq as being close to a democracy, whereas the Palestinians or Hezbollah, which are both elected into government, are referred to as terrorist groups).

The same goes for terrorism - the calculated use of violence to obtain goals that are either religious, political or ideological in nature: it is only called terrorism when the enemy of the one calling the shots is doing it. If the one calling the shots is committing the same sort of atrocities, it is called liberation, or even promotion of democracy. Everybody does this.

When a people are condemned to live their lives under oppression of a foreign occupation, and fighting erupts, I tend to be in favor of those that are occupied: they are fighting for the basic right for self-determination, a fight I can sympathize with. The occupier that wishes to impose its rule on the occupied, I cannot sympathize with, because I regard the right for self-determination as a very crucial measure of freedom. (This is also why I am opposed to religion dictated from above, such as the Catholic church - it quenches free thinking).
The people fighting for the right of self-determination are called freedom fighters or revolutionaries (by the population they represent) and they are called terrorists by the occupier.

Take Vietnam or Iraq. Both were invaded by the United States to topple regimes deemed unfavorable to the United States – one communist, the other a dictatorial stooge that went against his master’s biddings. In both cases, we see that the population resists the foreign occupation with all their might – even though it seems insignificant compared to the occupation army.

As people said about Vietnam – the Vietnamese will not stop fighting until every last one of them is dead. The Vietnamese perceived the Americans to be occupiers rather than liberators, and people fighting for their freedom will not stop – it took Europeans (I say European, but I mean Dutch, French, Germans and whatnot) over 1,000 years of vicious fighting before we got to the level of personal freedom where we are now.

And if you stop keeping watch, those freedoms will gradually erode once again, because “leaders” can lead a restrained population more efficiently. Take Nazi Germany – some engine of efficiency that was – personal freedoms were few and in between.

No one likes to feel like they are occupied, or as George Walker Bush said it, referring to the escalating situation in Iraq:
”Of course they’re not happy being occupied, I wouldn’t be happy if I were occupied either.”
The Iraqi’s will not stop fighting the American forces – all the mumbo jumbo about a liberation army that is only there to bring freedom and democracy has gone down the drain; the Iraqi's feel they’re being occupied, and rightly so. Everyone has been lied to: for example the bands of South African mercenaries in Iraq, that obey no rule but money - those are the guys responsible for most of the atrocities committed by the invading forces, would be my guess. They destroy any effort on American marine's side to display some sort of liberation movement.

Same goes for the Palestinians, in their Gaza prison. And Hezbollah sympathizes with them, since they know what it is like to be under Israeli occupation. They’ve tasted the sweetness of victory they will therefore keep on fighting. In a sense, Israel has already lost this battle: military, diplomatically and politically. Although economically Lebanon has lost.

That is my answer.