PDA

View Full Version : Int'l Issues Which side is the greater obstacle to peace, Israel or the palestinians?


patteeu
03-28-2011, 06:45 AM
Simple question. Poll is public. Feel free to elaborate.

mikey23545
03-28-2011, 06:48 AM
I assume this is just a rhetorical question.

Jaric
03-28-2011, 06:53 AM
Not really sure I can quantify who is most responsible for a conflict that's been going on for thousands of years in some shape or another.

That said, anyone who wants to claim one side blameless hasn't been paying attention.

Donger
03-28-2011, 07:01 AM
Clearly the side that refuses to acknowledge the other's right to exist. In this case, the Palestinians.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 07:21 AM
I assume this is just a rhetorical question.

LOL, the answer does seem pretty obvious, but there sure are a lot of people these days who don't seem to see that.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 07:23 AM
Not really sure I can quantify who is most responsible for a conflict that's been going on for thousands of years in some shape or another.

That said, anyone who wants to claim one side blameless hasn't been paying attention.

This seems like a cop out to me, with a red herring thrown in to top it off.

mlyonsd
03-28-2011, 07:39 AM
Well the obvious answer is Israel.

They own the ground the other side will never, ever, give up on the quest to steal it back. So if Israel would just do the easy thing and evacuate the entire world would be a better place. I'd like to teach the world to sing.

Maybe we could give California to Israel. I have no doubt they could fix the state's budget crisis. I wonder how much that would lop off the federal deficit if California suddenly was off the books?

Even so, I'm voting for the Palestineans just to tick off Frankie.

Jaric
03-28-2011, 08:43 AM
This seems like a cop out to me, with a red herring thrown in to top it off.

How so?

mnchiefsguy
03-28-2011, 08:47 AM
Clearly the side that refuses to acknowledge the other's right to exist. In this case, the Palestinians.

This. If the Palestinians can't concede this point, then no real negotiations for anything can take place. This is a point that Israel cannot concede and must have.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 08:52 AM
How so?

The conflict between the muslim world and western civilization has been going on for over a thousand years, but I presume you don't have a hard time quantifying whether al Qaeda or the US is more to blame for the conflict between the two.

The ancient history of the middle east is semi-relevant, but the conflict between the palestinians and the Israelis is really focused on the last several decades and the question of whether or not peace can be had is based on even more recent attitudes, offers, and actions.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 08:58 AM
False choice.

Both sides have extremists that want the whole thing. The key is to isolate those folks and work with the others to marginalize 'em. The false choice keeps the dispute endless and on-going.

Of course, US mercantilist interests want it that way to justify continuing our footprint in the area while they use their handmaidens in the press to report what they want and leave other things out. Just like the British Empire did. Same ole, same ole story for centuries. Same ole, same ole story since WWI in that area.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 09:00 AM
Clearly the side that refuses to acknowledge the other's right to exist. In this case, the Palestinians.

Really? No one state has a "right" to exist. Most nations were forged by force including invasions. Take a look at a freakin' map throughout history. If a place can hold it's borders and obtain enough agreement by those around them to be left alone then that's about as much right as there is. Because, IF, that's the case then a good chunk of America has no right to exist.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 09:08 AM
False choice.

Both sides have extremists that want the whole thing. The key is to isolate those folks and work with the others to marginalize 'em. The false choice keeps the dispute endless and on-going.

Of course, US mercantilist interests want it that way to justify continuing our footprint in the area while they use their handmaidens in the press to report what they want and leave other things out. Just like the British Empire did. Same ole, same ole story for centuries. Same ole, same ole story since WWI in that area.

I don't think you know what a false choice is, which doesn't surprise me at all.

It's only a false choice to the extent that you could theoretically argue (although implausibly IMO) that both sides are exactly equal obstacles to peace. If we agree that the status of "exactly equal obstacles to peace" in such a complex relationship is so rare as to be negligible, then it's not a false choice.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 09:10 AM
Shocking poll results so far! Where are Frankie and englander?

Jaric
03-28-2011, 09:36 AM
The conflict between the muslim world and western civilization has been going on for over a thousand years, but I presume you don't have a hard time quantifying whether al Qaeda or the US is more to blame for the conflict between the two.

The ancient history of the middle east is semi-relevant, but the conflict between the palestinians and the Israelis is really focused on the last several decades and the question of whether or not peace can be had is based on even more recent attitudes, offers, and actions.
Our involvement in the dispute in question is less than a hundred years old.

That doesn't even remotely compare to centuries of holy wars that have defined the struggle in the middle east.

It also concerns me how black and white you seem to be making this issue. Both sides have fucked up and it important to recognize that if one wants to go assigning blame.

Unless of course this is just a "Muslims suck, go Isreal" thread in disguise, in which case I will politely bow out.

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 09:43 AM
Uh... I'd say the side blowing people up with suicide bombs and firing rockets into populated areas hoping for civilian casualties.

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 09:45 AM
Our involvement in the dispute in question is less than a hundred years old.

That doesn't even remotely compare to centuries of holy wars that have defined the struggle in the middle east.

It also concerns me how black and white you seem to be making this issue. Both sides have ****ed up and it important to recognize that if one wants to go assigning blame.

Unless of course this is just a "Muslims suck, go Isreal" thread in disguise, in which case I will politely bow out.

What active military conflicts are there in the world in which Muslims are not on either side?

Jaric
03-28-2011, 09:55 AM
What active military conflicts are there in the world in which Muslims are not on either side?

So in other words, your point is Muslims suck?

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 09:58 AM
So in other words, your point is Muslims suck?

What do you think the reason for that fact is?

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 09:58 AM
Our involvement in the dispute in question is less than a hundred years old.

That doesn't even remotely compare to centuries of holy wars that have defined the struggle in the middle east.
Today's conflict is NOT a "holy" war. It's another land dispute happening among very religious people—at least on one side. Israel is mostly atheist and secular. This is common in socialist countries.

If anyone thinks certain western powers got involved in that region for religion then I've got a bridge to sell ya'!


Unless of course this is just a "Muslims suck, go Isreal" thread in disguise, in which case I will politely bow out.

It's another one of these.

Jaric
03-28-2011, 10:01 AM
What do you think the reason for that opinion is?
Fixed. And I'm going to hold true to my word and politely bow out. Enjoy your day.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 10:02 AM
Fixed. And I'm going to hold true to my word and politely bow out. Enjoy your day.

Very wise on this board. It's dominated by a certain side. Hardly anyone is between the two.

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 10:09 AM
Fixed. And I'm going to hold true to my word and politely bow out. Enjoy your day.

It is not a matter of opinion, that if we listed all the open conflicts in the world, how many of them would have a Muslim faction as at least one of the belligerents. Why do you feel that is?

Garcia Bronco
03-28-2011, 10:10 AM
Not really sure I can quantify who is most responsible for a conflict that's been going on for thousands of years in some shape or another.

That said, anyone who wants to claim one side blameless hasn't been paying attention.

The sons of Issac are the victims.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 10:22 AM
It is not a matter of opinion, that if we listed all the open conflicts in the world, how many of them would have a Muslim faction as at least one of the belligerents. Why do you feel that is?

Today's world or historically? Historically, how many would it be? How many today...and are they all part of one conflict?

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 10:23 AM
The sons of Issac are the victims.

The sons of Isaac and Ishmail are the pawns that are the victims.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 10:37 AM
Our involvement in the dispute in question is less than a hundred years old.

I'm not going to quibble over a century or so (see the conflict with the Barbary Pirates), but that's really no different than with the parties involved in the Israeli/palestinian struggle, which was my point. The important aspects of the conflict are recent. The ancient history is interesting, but it's not particularly relevant except for excuse makers.

That doesn't even remotely compare to centuries of holy wars that have defined the struggle in the middle east.

Could you be specific?

It also concerns me how black and white you seem to be making this issue. Both sides have ****ed up and it important to recognize that if one wants to go assigning blame.

Unless of course this is just a "Muslims suck, go Isreal" thread in disguise, in which case I will politely bow out.

As I mentioned before, your attempt to cast this as a one side is pure good and one side is pure evil exercise is a red herring. Asking which side is the greater obstacle to peace implies at least the possibility that both sides present obstacles. Now, it's true that I don't think the two sides are anywhere near equally blameworthy, but I think that pov is supportable by rational argument.

Is there any more virtue in refusing to evaluate the relative merits of the two sides objectively than there is in pretending that all blame lies on one side or the other?

JimBaker488
03-28-2011, 11:03 AM
Judgin from the pole results, looks like the ole Jewish propaganda machine is as effective as ever. And the biggest irony is that most of the suckers buying into their BS are a bunch of Christians whos sons and grandsons have been dying in the MidEast for Israel while the Jews in the US have been sending a heavily disproportionate # of their children & grandchildren to Ivy league universities/graduate schools and a very low disproportionate # of the children/grandchildren into the military to fight for their "motherland". Wake up fools !

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 11:11 AM
Despite Israel's stubborn and selfish insistence on existing, I'd nevertheless have to say that the Palestinians' attitudes and tactics seem to be more of an obstacle.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 11:21 AM
Judgin from the pole results, looks like the ole Jewish propaganda machine is as effective as ever. And the biggest irony is that most of the suckers buying into their BS are a bunch of Christians whos sons and grandsons have been dying in the MidEast for Israel while the Jews in the US have been sending a heavily disproportionate # of their children & grandchildren to Ivy league universities/graduate schools and a very low disproportionate # of the children/grandchildren into the military to fight for their "motherland". Wake up fools !

Interesting how most American Jews are liberal anti-war types—even in the ME!
If you agree with these Jews you're an anti-semite according to some. :doh!:

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 11:28 AM
Not really sure I can quantify who is most responsible for a conflict that's been going on for thousands of years in some shape or another.

That said, anyone who wants to claim one side blameless hasn't been paying attention.

About the perfect answer.

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 11:30 AM
Judgin from the pole results, looks like the ole Jewish propaganda machine is as effective as ever. And the biggest irony is that most of the suckers buying into their BS are a bunch of Christians whos sons and grandsons have been dying in the MidEast for Israel while the Jews in the US have been sending a heavily disproportionate # of their children & grandchildren to Ivy league universities/graduate schools and a very low disproportionate # of the children/grandchildren into the military to fight for their "motherland". Wake up fools !

For being so tolerant, it sure seems like we see a lot of "it's all because of those f*cking Jews" out of our leftist friends.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 11:32 AM
Judgin from the pole results, looks like the ole Jewish propaganda machine is as effective as ever. And the biggest irony is that most of the suckers buying into their BS are a bunch of Christians whos sons and grandsons have been dying in the MidEast for Israel while the Jews in the US have been sending a heavily disproportionate # of their children & grandchildren to Ivy league universities/graduate schools and a very low disproportionate # of the children/grandchildren into the military to fight for their "motherland". Wake up fools !

Wake me up. You seem to be an outlier here. Tell me about your analysis of this situation.

FWIW, I don't have any sons or grandsons and although I attend a Christian (Catholic) church, I'm not really a believer. And I think it's great if Jews are able to send their kids to Ivy League schools. I have nothing against that.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 11:36 AM
About the perfect answer.

It's really more of a non-answer.

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 11:47 AM
It's really more of a non-answer.

It's really a non-question.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 11:59 AM
It's really a non-question.

In what way?

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 12:15 PM
In what way?

In that it doesn't quantify or define anything.

It's basically the broadest scope question of a delicate situation with 2000 years of backstory.

There is no one singular answer, which is what a poll is asking for.

It's basically a Rorshach test -- Do you see Big Bad Israel, or do you see Jihadist Palestinians?

patteeu
03-28-2011, 12:22 PM
In that it doesn't quantify or define anything.

It's basically the broadest scope question of a delicate situation with 2000 years of backstory.

There is no one singular answer, which is what a poll is asking for.

It's basically a Rorshach test -- Do you see Big Bad Israel, or do you see Jihadist Palestinians?

As I said in the original post, feel free to elaborate. It's not like I'm asking you to limit yourself to a single word answer. All I'm asking you to do is draw a final conclusion no matter how complex and extensive your analysis has to be. It's pretty clear you don't want to participate though. There were 24 people who found a way to do that so far and, by my count, only 3 who have balked.

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 12:24 PM
As I said in the original post, feel free to elaborate. It's not like I'm asking you to limit yourself to a single word answer. All I'm asking you to do is draw a final conclusion no matter how complex and extensive your analysis has to be. It's pretty clear you don't want to participate though.

No, I'd rather not provide a comprehensive history of Israel and Palestine, document all potential obstacles to peace, and then assess whether either side (as well as the multiple sides on Palestine's end) meet the criteria for each obstacle and to what degree.

I don't have time for a master's thesis on ChiefsPlaent.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 12:30 PM
No, I'd rather not provide a comprehensive history of Israel and Palestine, document all potential obstacles to peace, and then assess whether either side (as well as the multiple sides on Palestine's end) meet the criteria for each obstacle and to what degree.

I don't have time for a master's thesis on ChiefsPlaent.

You've managed to weigh in on complex issues before without feeling the need to cover all angles in a CP masters thesis. What's different about this one besides the fact that you don't want to take a position?

LOCOChief
03-28-2011, 12:31 PM
Judgin from the pole results, looks like the ole Jewish propaganda machine is as effective as ever. And the biggest irony is that most of the suckers buying into their BS are a bunch of Christians whos sons and grandsons have been dying in the MidEast for Israel while the Jews in the US have been sending a heavily disproportionate # of their children & grandchildren to Ivy league universities/graduate schools and a very low disproportionate # of the children/grandchildren into the military to fight for their "motherland". Wake up fools !

Winner winner chicken dinner. You're maybe the biggest idiot this board has seen, and that's saying a lot.

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 12:32 PM
You've managed to weigh in on complex issues before without feeling the need to cover all angles in a CP masters thesis. What's different about this one besides the fact that you don't want to take a position?

The sensitivity of the subject, mainly, as well with the extraordinary complexity of the subject.

I'm not comfortable saying either side are greater obstacles to peace without much more detail as to what we're talking about, what time frame we're talking about, etc.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 12:37 PM
The sensitivity of the subject, mainly, as well with the extraordinary complexity of the subject.

I'm not comfortable saying either side are greater obstacles to peace without much more detail as to what we're talking about, what time frame we're talking about, etc.

:spock: You sound as committed to public indecisiveness as your favorite current president. I suspect that both of you have drawn hidden conclusions on this question though.

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 12:39 PM
:spock: You sound as committed to public indecisiveness as your favorite current president. I suspect that both of you have drawn hidden conclusions on this question though.

Suspect away. It doesn't affect my drive to work every morning.

I'm not taking a base position that villifies either side. Any and all my complaints about a lack of peace in Israel will be based on specific conditions and events on the ground, not on a base prejudice against one side or the other.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 12:51 PM
Suspect away. It doesn't affect my drive to work every morning.

I'm not taking a base position that villifies either side. Any and all my complaints about a lack of peace in Israel will be based on specific conditions and events on the ground, not on a base prejudice against one side or the other.

It's too late for prejudice. As you've pointed out, we have a pretty long history from which to draw fact-based conclusions.

JimBaker488
03-28-2011, 01:12 PM
Wake me up. You seem to be an outlier here. Tell me about your analysis of this situation.

Anybody whos really done any serious analysis of what the Islamic terrorists hate the most about the West and in particular the US knows it's US support of Israel. General Petraeus was the most prominent individual to recently make these sort of comments. It's arguable IMO that if not for our countrys support of Israel, I really don't think we have a 9/11.
It was always a terrible idea to put Israel, which currently has about 5 million Jews, in a sea of a quarter of a billion Muslims in the MidEast. The Israel-Palestinian problems, especially the continued develpment of Jewish settlements on the West Bank, has long been the flashpoint of the hatred/anger tween Muslims and Jews. As long as we continue to support Israel and their policies (including settlement expansion), we will be the potential targets of attacks by the Islamic extremisits.

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 01:15 PM
It's too late for prejudice. As you've pointed out, we have a pretty long history from which to draw fact-based conclusions.

Ha. It's never too late for prejudice.

The history isn't pretty long. It's dauntingly, historically long. And contains too many x-factors to be summarized by a button click.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 01:58 PM
Anybody whos really done any serious analysis of what the Islamic terrorists hate the most about the West and in particular the US knows it's US support of Israel. General Petraeus was the most prominent individual to recently make these sort of comments. It's arguable IMO that if not for our countrys support of Israel, I really don't think we have a 9/11.


There were no 9/11's for supporting Israel for a very long time—UNTIL Papa Bush started implementing his New World Order speech in PGWI leaving permanent US military bases behind on their Holy Lands. Granted, the Israel support is a factor but I think leaving bases was what broke the camel's back leading to 9/11. That was just going too far. These continued to be built all through the 1990's bringing in other terrorist activity here at home. Until then we primarily policed the area from ships in the Gulf. That's good enough for me.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 02:14 PM
Anybody whos really done any serious analysis of what the Islamic terrorists hate the most about the West and in particular the US knows it's US support of Israel. General Petraeus was the most prominent individual to recently make these sort of comments. It's arguable IMO that if not for our countrys support of Israel, I really don't think we have a 9/11.
It was always a terrible idea to put Israel, which currently has about 5 million Jews, in a sea of a quarter of a billion Muslims in the MidEast. The Israel-Palestinian problems, especially the continued develpment of Jewish settlements on the West Bank, has long been the flashpoint of the hatred/anger tween Muslims and Jews. As long as we continue to support Israel and their policies (including settlement expansion), we will be the potential targets of attacks by the Islamic extremisits.

That's really a different issue. About the only relevant point you raise is the fact that Israel is expanding settlements on the West Bank. Is that the biggest obstacle to peace between the palestinians and Israelis in your view? If Israel agreed to abandon all of it's settlements do you think the two sides could build a lasting peace or do you think there would be another show-stopping obstacle in the way?

patteeu
03-28-2011, 02:25 PM
There were no 9/11's for supporting Israel for a very long time—UNTIL Papa Bush started implementing his New World Order speech in PGWI leaving permanent US military bases behind on their Holy Lands. Granted, the Israel support is a factor but I think leaving bases was what broke the camel's back leading to 9/11. That was just going too far. These continued to be built all through the 1990's bringing in other terrorist activity here at home. Until then we primarily policed the area from ships in the Gulf. That's good enough for me.

I think it's Ronald Reagan's fault. Not only did he contribute to the idea that the US was a paper tiger by pulling out of Lebanon without showing that there's a price to be paid for poking us with a suicide bomber stick, but he also was instrumental in driving the Soviet Union out of business thus depriving Osama bin Laden of a big bad wolf against which he could rally his jihad.

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 02:30 PM
That's really a different issue. About the only relevant point you raise is the fact that Israel is expanding settlements on the West Bank. Is that the biggest obstacle to peace between the palestinians and Israelis in your view? If Israel agreed to abandon all of it's settlements do you think the two sides could build a lasting peace or do you think there would be another show-stopping obstacle in the way?

Of course not. It would be just as hostile as before, as long as Israel exists.

The reason we are hated for our support of Israel is not because of the principle that we're meddling in some other country's affairs and that's wrong. The reason they hate us for supporting Israel is because we are what stands in the way of them destroying Israel and taking the land for themselves.

Anyone who thinks this is about a particular settlement or one squiggly line on a map is a fool.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 02:50 PM
Of course not. It would be just as hostile as before, as long as Israel exists.

The reason we are hated for our support of Israel is not because of the principle that we're meddling in some other country's affairs and that's wrong. The reason they hate us for supporting Israel is because we are what stands in the way of them destroying Israel and taking the land for themselves.

Anyone who thinks this is about a particular settlement or one squiggly line on a map is a fool.

I tend to agree.

JimBaker488
03-28-2011, 02:52 PM
If Israel agreed to abandon all of it's settlements do you think the two sides could build a lasting peace or do you think there would be another show-stopping obstacle in the way?
There's no way they abandon their recent settlements of the West Bank, but the hope is they just discontinue further expansion. And that alone would be huge.
Israel has probably wasted valuable time and opportunites now that Eygyt under Mubarak, their greatest Arab ally, is now history. No telling who takes over next in Arabia's most populace nation ? The Islamic Brotherhood maybe ? Eygypt under Mubarak acted acted as a buffer between them and the more militant Muslims countries.
And with the Muslim population growing much more rapidly than the Jewish population within Israel, their will be a time in the not too distant future when the Jews there are a minority. Then what, Israels own private apartheid ?
It ain't pretty over there, and what's worst of all it's downhill from here.

chiefsnorth
03-28-2011, 02:54 PM
I tend to agree.

Whoops, that sounded like I was blasting you. I didn't mean to direct the fool comment at you, it was just a reply to grab the question at the end

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 02:56 PM
There's no way they abandon their recent settlements of the West Bank, but the hope is they just discontinue further expansion. And that alone would be huge.

I tend to think that it would be exactly what you say: It would be that. Alone. It would change nothing.

Donger
03-28-2011, 04:23 PM
It's actually pretty stunning to me that this is even a question in some minds. Israel HAS demonstrated that she will make peace with enemies, namely Egypt and Jordan. But, there has to be recognition of her right to exist in order for that to happen.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 04:27 PM
It's actually pretty stunning to me that this is even a question in some minds. Israel HAS demonstrated that she will make peace with enemies, namely Egypt and Jordan. But, there has to be recognition of her right to exist in order for that to happen.

Doesn't Egypt and Jordan show some on the other side are willing to make peace too?
Doesn't it take two? Who originated peace with Israel out of these two? I thought Sadat of Egypt made that overture.

Rausch
03-28-2011, 04:29 PM
It's actually pretty stunning to me that this is even a question in some minds. Israel HAS demonstrated that she will make peace with enemies, namely Egypt and Jordan. But, there has to be recognition of her right to exist in order for that to happen.

This...

Donger
03-28-2011, 04:34 PM
Doesn't Egypt and Jordan show some on the other side are willing to make peace too?

Sure. Egypt and Jordan, namely. Do the Palestinians really want peace with Israel? I don't know.

Doesn't it take two? Who originated peace with Israel out of these two? I thought Sadat of Egypt made the overature.[/QUOTE]

I don't recall who originated peace between them both and Israel. I do recall that Jordan expelled the PLO from her soil around the same time as they began negotiating and that Egypt got her ass kicked twice before they came around.

Anyway, it just shows that Israel has demonstrated the capacity to make peace before. But only with an adversary who makes the most basic of recognitions.

KC Dan
03-28-2011, 04:35 PM
Anyway, it just shows that Israel has demonstrated the capacity to make peace before. But only with an adversary who makes the most basic of recognitions.
Besides, how do make peace with someone who doesn't feel that you exist?

Donger
03-28-2011, 04:38 PM
Besides, how do make peace with someone who doesn't feel that you exist?

You don't (or shouldn't).

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 04:39 PM
Sure. Egypt and Jordan, namely. Do the Palestinians really want peace with Israel? I don't know.

Doesn't it take two? Who originated peace with Israel out of these two? I thought Sadat of Egypt made the overature.

I don't recall who originated peace between them both and Israel. I do recall that Jordan expelled the PLO from her soil around the same time as they began negotiating and that Egypt got her ass kicked twice before they came around.

Anyway, it just shows that Israel has demonstrated the capacity to make peace before. But only with an adversary who makes the most basic of recognitions.

Yes it was Sadat. Ass-kicking or not it was a shock to his wife and the Arab world. Sadat wanted the Arab world to join him even per his wife. She gives lecture tours on peace in the ME too. In fact his wife had a family photo taken before he went to Jerusalem to make peace because she was convinced he'd be shot by Palestinians. That's how peace happens in wars anyway. One side gives up.
http://www.thejc.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-features/46027/the-peace-will-hold-says-anwar-sadats-widow

It shows there are people on both sides willing to make peace and there are some on both sides that don't peace until they get all that they want with one side completely defeated.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 04:46 PM
Besides, how do make peace with someone who doesn't feel that you exist?

That would happen though as part of the terms if peace was ever achieved. Like America didn't exist to Great Britain until the Brits surrendered and signed a peace treaty. ( Ya' hear that Donger? )

Donger
03-28-2011, 04:51 PM
That would happen though as part of the terms if peace was ever achieved. Like America didn't exist to Great Britain until the Brits surrendered and signed a peace treaty. ( Ya' hear that Donger? )

And it seems pretty clear that no historical enemy of Israel is going to defeat her in war. So, if they want peace, they must acknowledge her right to exist in order to begin the process.

Simple stuff.

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 04:52 PM
In the case of Israel/Egypt peace, it took two. In the case of Israel/Jordan peace, it took two. In the case of Israel/Arab (and Persian) peace, obviously it takes many more than two.

But this is about the Palestinians and the Israelis. Part of the difficulty here is that Israel can have one definable and official stance. The Palestinians cannot.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 04:58 PM
And it seems pretty clear that no historical enemy of Israel is going to defeat her in war.
Well of course the Palestinians have no army. That's why they use terrorism. They use their own people as bombs. This has been a war of attrition with Israel as a result with people leaving.

The others like Egypt were not backed by a wealthy superpower either. This was another reason Sadat made peace because he realized it was a war that could not be won with the US behind Israel.

So, if they want peace, they must acknowledge her right to exist in order to begin the process.

Simple stuff.

I just said that.

Donger
03-28-2011, 05:01 PM
In the case of Israel/Egypt peace, it took two. In the case of Israel/Jordan peace, it took two. In the case of Israel/Arab (and Persian) peace, obviously it takes many more than two.

But this is about the Palestinians and the Israelis. Part of the difficulty here is that Israel can have one definable and official stance. The Palestinians cannot.

Cannot? Couldn't the Palestinians speak with one voice if they decided to do so?

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 05:03 PM
Cannot? Couldn't the Palestinians speak with one voice if they decided to do so?

Yes, but the problem is that the Palestinians cannot speak with one voice if a violent faction decides not to.

Donger
03-28-2011, 05:06 PM
The bigger problem is that the Palestinians cannot speak with one voice if a violent faction decides not to.

Sounds like the Palestinians should figure out how to become one voice before attempting peace with Israel.

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 05:11 PM
Sounds like the Palestinians should figure out how to become one voice before attempting peace with Israel.

Okay, but where? In an independent and accountable Palestinian state?

Donger
03-28-2011, 05:16 PM
Okay, but where? In an independent and accountable Palestinian state?

Where they are now. Then again, Israel has demonstrated being willing to return territory in order to achieve peace.

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 05:35 PM
Where they are now. Then again, Israel has demonstrated being willing to return territory in order to achieve peace.

Do you think they can pull that off? I'm skeptical.

Without a truly sovereign government and everything that means and represents, I don't see how the Palestinians could ever be expected to speak with one voice. IMO, an unknowable variable is at the heart of the equation precisely because of "where" they are now. The "where" in where they are now precludes any possibility of a central voice reassuring Israel that she will not be in mortal danger. And without that voice of reassurance, Israel cannot be expected to cede territory to an independent Palestinian state. And so, 'round and 'round it goes.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 06:31 PM
Yes it was Sadat. Ass-kicking or not it was a shock to his wife and the Arab world. Sadat wanted the Arab world to join him even per his wife. She gives lecture tours on peace in the ME too. In fact his wife had a family photo taken before he went to Jerusalem to make peace because she was convinced he'd be shot by Palestinians. That's how peace happens in wars anyway. One side gives up.
http://www.thejc.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-features/46027/the-peace-will-hold-says-anwar-sadats-widow

It shows there are people on both sides willing to make peace and there are some on both sides that don't peace until they get all that they want with one side completely defeated.

Egyptians are not the same as palestinians. The fact that Sadat made peace with Israel shows that some Egyptians are willing to make peace, but it doesn't show us anything about what palestinians are willing to do.

I'm sure the truth is that there are some palestinians who are willing to make peace, but so far that sentiment hasn't been strong enough to influence their leadership. If and when it gets to that point, I'm sure they'll find a willing peace partner in Israel whose leadership has already demonstrated it's willingness to make peace with it's neighbors.

patteeu
03-28-2011, 06:48 PM
The most surprising thing about this poll to me isn't it's lopsidedness or that far left posters like kc naive and pittsie sided with the guys whose favorite form of diplomacy is the suicide vest. It's that so many posters like Jaric, BucEyedPea, and Direckshun refuse to weigh in with a position (although at least BEP is willing to expand a little on her non-vote, even if she refuses to take the last step and admit that she thinks Israel is the primary obstacle).

Jenson71
03-28-2011, 07:05 PM
I agree with those who think this is an immeasurable question.

I do think Netanyahu is not interested in peace if it means any amount of Israeli compromise. I don't think he cares much about what the United States wants, and the continued expansion settlement policy is legitimatizing Israel's moral integrity.

mlyonsd
03-28-2011, 07:12 PM
Israel could give up all land won in wars started by Arabs and it still wouldn't be enough.

And to give up that buffer zone land would be idiotic IMO.

Donger
03-28-2011, 07:15 PM
I agree with those who think this is an immeasurable question.

I do think Netanyahu is not interested in peace if it means any amount of Israeli compromise. I don't think he cares much about what the United States wants, and the continued expansion settlement policy is legitimatizing Israel's moral integrity.

Why should Israel do a damn thing against their interest when their "adversary" won't even acknowledge that it has a right to exist? You are a student of history, right?

Sannyasi
03-28-2011, 07:23 PM
The question kind of misses the point. Both sides want peace, but on their own terms.

Jenson71
03-28-2011, 07:24 PM
Why should Israel do a damn thing against their interest when their "adversary" won't even acknowledge that it has a right to exist? You are a student of history, right?

I try to be, and it seems that compromise has been a huge force of good and necessity throughout history.

ClevelandBronco
03-28-2011, 07:25 PM
The question kind of misses the point. Both sides want peace, but on their own terms.

But do both sides want peace side by side?

Sannyasi
03-28-2011, 07:26 PM
I agree with those who think this is an immeasurable question.

I do think Netanyahu is not interested in peace if it means any amount of Israeli compromise. I don't think he cares much about what the United States wants, and the continued expansion settlement policy is legitimatizing Israel's moral integrity.

You hit the nail on the head with regards to Netanyahu, though. Look up some of his statements concerning the Oslo accords, if you have the inclination.

Sannyasi
03-28-2011, 07:29 PM
But do both sides want peace side by side?

I would say the majority of both sides do.

Donger
03-28-2011, 07:32 PM
I try to be, and it seems that compromise has been a huge force of good and necessity throughout history.

Yes, it has. And do you think that it's a good compromise to acknowledge that your opponent actually has a right to exist?

patteeu
03-28-2011, 07:33 PM
The question kind of misses the point. Both sides want peace, but on their own terms.

The question then, is about whose terms are the greater obstacle, so no, I don't think it misses the point.

Jenson71
03-28-2011, 07:33 PM
Yes, it has. And do you think that it's a good compromise to acknowledge that your opponent actually has a right to exist?

I'd say that's a great compromise.

The Mad Crapper
03-28-2011, 07:36 PM
I'd say that's a great compromise.

Did you put flowers on Marcal's grave, yet?

Saul Good
03-28-2011, 07:38 PM
I try to be, and it seems that compromise has been a huge force of good and necessity throughout history.

Israel's side of the compromise is to give up some of its own land. What are the Palestinians willing to give?

Jenson71
03-28-2011, 07:40 PM
Israel's side of the compromise is to give up some of its own land. What are the Palestinians willing to give?

Aren't the settlements on Palestinian land?

Donger
03-28-2011, 07:45 PM
Aren't the settlements on Palestinian land?

You do know why Israel occupied the West Bank, right?

The Mad Crapper
03-28-2011, 07:46 PM
Aren't the settlements on Palestinian land?

http://www.dallasvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tye.jpg

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/q1DDgNCLD84" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Saul Good
03-28-2011, 07:52 PM
Aren't the settlements on Palestinian land?

No more than Oklahoma is on Native American land.

Direckshun
03-28-2011, 09:56 PM
Do you think they can pull that off? I'm skeptical.

Without a truly sovereign government and everything that means and represents, I don't see how the Palestinians could ever be expected to speak with one voice. IMO, an unknowable variable is at the heart of the equation precisely because of "where" they are now. The "where" in where they are now precludes any possibility of a central voice reassuring Israel that she will not be in mortal danger. And without that voice of reassurance, Israel cannot be expected to cede territory to an independent Palestinian state. And so, 'round and 'round it goes.

Great post.

The most surprising thing about this poll to me isn't it's lopsidedness or that far left posters like kc naive and pittsie sided with the guys whose favorite form of diplomacy is the suicide vest. It's that so many posters like Jaric, BucEyedPea, and Direckshun refuse to weigh in with a position (although at least BEP is willing to expand a little on her non-vote, even if she refuses to take the last step and admit that she thinks Israel is the primary obstacle).

I've weighed in with my position. It just can't be pigeonholed into the two crude options you've provided.

Unlike the vast majority of pro-Israel conservatives on this board, I refuse to villify either position.

I agree with those who think this is an immeasurable question.

I do think Netanyahu is not interested in peace if it means any amount of Israeli compromise. I don't think he cares much about what the United States wants, and the continued expansion settlement policy is legitimatizing Israel's moral integrity.

Another solid posts.

Some great posts on a delicate topic on all sides in this thread.

But sadly, none are better than this:

No more than Oklahoma is on Native American land.

I think this is about a perfect reply.

It leaves me a little sad and miserable, but it's a perfect reply.

BucEyedPea
03-28-2011, 10:05 PM
I've weighed in with my position. It just can't be pigeonholed into the two crude options you've provided.
I have too by saying it's a false choice. I saw pat's post via your quote. He's a victim of two-valued logic which is a problem with this whole poll and his own position. He's seen me post extensively in the past about western powers that created this conflict and my seeing both sides as pawns and victims. That I do not see it as just between Arabs and Jews or semites versus semites/ He's also seen me post that I think the all the indigenous semite people's of that land have every right to be there and settle there. ( as well as work out their own disputes and form their own govts) He's also seen me post that I support a two-state solution.

It's the same ole "If you're not for us or with us, then you're against us." He used it on Iraq. He should really be living in Cuba.

Unlike the vast majority of pro-Israel conservatives on this board, I refuse to villify either position.

I wonder if pat would vilify Adept Havelock, who claimed to be ethnically jewish, and who stated he felt the Palestinians had a legitimate complaint or cause.

patteeu
03-29-2011, 06:16 AM
I think this is about a perfect reply.

It leaves me a little sad and miserable, but it's a perfect reply.

In your opinion what makes that a perfect reply? Tell me about your sadness.

patteeu
03-29-2011, 06:22 AM
I wonder if pat would vilify Adept Havelock, who claimed to be ethnically jewish, and who stated he felt the Palestinians had a legitimate complaint or cause.

No need to wonder. You can just "check my archive".

I never hesitated to correct Adept when he was wrong, including at least one time when he was wrong about this issue.

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 07:28 AM
Where they are now. Then again, Israel has demonstrated being willing to return territory in order to achieve peace.
Israel is not returning territory, rather it is expanding it's settlements on the West Bank which is the biggest source of friction between them and the Palestinians. Israel has repeatedly promised thru multiple US adminstrations to stop these expansions so they can continue getting aid from the US, but has failed to keep its promise each time.
You honestly want to continue funding Israel while all the time they continue to renege on their promises to cease & desist their expansion of residences on the West Bank. Oh BTW, the Israel economy is booming while we are basically insolvent. They are playing the Christians in this country who are in love with the baby Jesus for a bunch of sukkers.

The Mad Crapper
03-29-2011, 07:31 AM
Oh BTW, the Israel economy is booming

You would think the arabs would try to copy that formula, instead of trying to destroy it.

patteeu
03-29-2011, 07:52 AM
Israel is not returning territory, rather it is expanding it's settlements on the West Bank which is the biggest source of friction between them and the Palestinians. Israel has repeatedly promised thru multiple US adminstrations to stop these expansions so they can continue getting aid from the US, but has failed to keep its promise each time.
You honestly want to continue funding Israel while all the time they continue to renege on their promises to cease & desist their expansion of residences on the West Bank. Oh BTW, the Israel economy is booming while we are basically insolvent. They are playing the Christians in this country who are in love with the baby Jesus for a bunch of sukkers.

Israel unilaterally withdrew from settlements in the Gaza strip. That's a demonstration of willingness. Of course, the palestinians answered that good faith gesture with a spate of rocket attacks, but somehow people like you continue to believe that Israel is the bigger obstacle to peace.

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 08:15 AM
Israel unilaterally withdrew from settlements in the Gaza strip. That's a demonstration of willingness. Of course, the palestinians answered that good faith gesture with a spate of rocket attacks, but somehow people like you continue to believe that Israel is the bigger obstacle to peace.
Washington was under pressure from Israel and Congress, which has a strong pro-Israel lobby, to use its veto.
**
Nearly half a million Jews live in more than 100 settlements built since Israel's 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. They are held to be illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12512732
**
The Jews settlements have been held to be illegal for some time now, but with a dozen Jews in the US Senate (incredible number given the Jewish population is just 2 % of population in this country), they own the US Senate which is afraid to oppose them.
Jesus-freak George W granted carte blanche authority to Israel while continuing pass foreign-aid payments to them, while to his credit Obama has tried to hold Israel to it's word.

Donger
03-29-2011, 08:17 AM
Israel is not returning territory, rather it is expanding it's settlements on the West Bank which is the biggest source of friction between them and the Palestinians. Israel has repeatedly promised thru multiple US adminstrations to stop these expansions so they can continue getting aid from the US, but has failed to keep its promise each time.
You honestly want to continue funding Israel while all the time they continue to renege on their promises to cease & desist their expansion of residences on the West Bank. Oh BTW, the Israel economy is booming while we are basically insolvent. They are playing the Christians in this country who are in love with the baby Jesus for a bunch of sukkers.

They returned Gaza, did they not? Not to mention the Sinai and a few others. Personally, I don't like the continued expansion and settlements, but I can't really blame them. Israel wouldn't be there at all if she weren't attacked.

Are pro-Palestinian people merely ignorant of these facts or do they just choose to ignore them?

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 08:20 AM
You would think the arabs would try to copy that formula, instead of trying to destroy it.
If we would just get the hell out of the way, Israel could probably work things out with the Muslims, though they'd certainly need to make some concessions. They are a very resourceful, industrious, entrepreneurial people who would probably end up having the Muslims working for them, but fine because everyone would be employed and making money and living peacefully together.

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 08:28 AM
They returned Gaza, did they not? Not to mention the Sinai and a few others. Personally, I don't like the continued expansion and settlements, but I can't really blame them. Israel wouldn't be there at all if she weren't attacked.

Are pro-Palestinian people merely ignorant of these facts or do they just choose to ignore them?
Multiple US administrations have stated the settlements are illegal, and the settlement expansions are the provocation for the attacks.
There's 200 to 300 hundred millions Muslims in the MidEast who have the oil and 5 million Jews in Israel. Wake up man and get your priorities straight !
Do you want this mess between Israel and the Palestinians to continue indefinitely and continually pose a threat to global economic stability ?

patteeu
03-29-2011, 08:34 AM
Multiple US administrations have stated the settlements are illegal, and the settlement expansions are the provocation for the attacks.
There's 200 to 300 hundred millions Muslims in the MidEast who have the oil and 5 million Jews in Israel. Wake up man and get your priorities straight !
Do you want this mess between Israel and the Palestinians to continue indefinitely and continually pose a threat to global economic stability ?

Are you incapable of acknowledging the fact that Israel has demonstrated a willingness to return territory?

The Mad Crapper
03-29-2011, 08:50 AM
If we would just get the hell out of the way, Israel could probably work things out with the Muslims, though they'd certainly need to make some concessions. They are a very resourceful, industrious, entrepreneurial people who would probably end up having the Muslims working for them, but fine because everyone would be employed and making money and living peacefully together.

What do you mean? How are we "in the way"? Isn't our relationship with Israel a mutual agreement?

As for the rest of your post--- IMO it's very naive.

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 09:13 AM
What do you mean? How are we "in the way"? Isn't our relationship with Israel a mutual agreement?

As for the rest of your post--- IMO it's very naive.
We are in the way because the AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) led by Sen Chuck Schumer is cramming pro-Israel decisions down the throat of the US Congress and we vote, for the most part, with a bias towards Israel which often is in direct contradiction to US self-interests.
If you aren't an American-Jew, just what as a US citizen do you get from Israel, I ask you ? Wht Israel gets is top-flight weaponry, tech advise on how to use it, and foreign exchange.
Israel is a spoiled brat among nation-states which always is screaming about being a victim, about being the subject of discrimination. Well pampering them is a luxury this country can no longer afford IMO.

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 09:18 AM
Are you incapable of acknowledging the fact that Israel has demonstrated a willingness to return territory?Are you incapable of acknowledging that Israel is expanding residential settlements on the West Bank which the international community has repeatedly ruled as illegal ?

The Mad Crapper
03-29-2011, 09:27 AM
We are in the way because the AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) led by Sen Chuck Schumer is cramming pro-Israel decisions

ROFL

OK I see where this is going.

The Mad Crapper
03-29-2011, 09:29 AM
Are you incapable of acknowledging that Israel is expanding residential settlements on the West Bank which the international community has repeatedly ruled as illegal ?

Remember what happened the last time the Israeli settlers pulled out:

http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/gaza_green.htm

mlyonsd
03-29-2011, 09:35 AM
Where the heck is Frankie?

patteeu
03-29-2011, 10:07 AM
Are you incapable of acknowledging that Israel is expanding residential settlements on the West Bank which the international community has repeatedly ruled as illegal ?

You disputed the notion that Israel has returned territory. You've been offered proof that you're wrong. The question is whether or not you recognize your error.

By contrast, I haven't denied that Israel is expanding it's West Bank settlements, although I don't personally know how their expansions in the West Bank compare to their surrender of settlements in Gaza so I don't know if it represents a net expansion or a net contraction over that time period. And while I have no problem acknowledging that the international community has condemned Israeli settlement policy, I'm not particularly concerned about what the international community has ruled illegal. I don't believe in international law beyond the extent to which it can be used as a tool of US foreign policy.

So again, are you incapable of admitting that you were wrong about Israel giving up disputed territory?

ClevelandBronco
03-29-2011, 10:22 AM
Where the heck is Frankie?

He changed his name to JimBaker488.

The Mad Crapper
03-29-2011, 10:44 AM
One side is always getting caught altering photographs and lying:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Hajj_photographs_controversy

And one side doesn't.

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 12:28 PM
He changed his name to JimBaker488.
Actually I screwed-up when I failed to make the handle "JimBaker48.8", which was the time he recorded when he set a new Missouri HS state 440 record over 50 years.
So where is Frankie ?

JimBaker488
03-29-2011, 12:43 PM
You disputed the notion that Israel has returned territory. You've been offered proof that you're wrong. The question is whether or not you recognize your error.

By contrast, I haven't denied that Israel is expanding it's West Bank settlements, although I don't personally know how their expansions in the West Bank compare to their surrender of settlements in Gaza so I don't know if it represents a net expansion or a net contraction over that time period. And while I have no problem acknowledging that the international community has condemned Israeli settlement policy, I'm not particularly concerned about what the international community has ruled illegal. I don't believe in international law beyond the extent to which it can be used as a tool of US foreign policy.

So again, are you incapable of admitting that you were wrong about Israel giving up disputed territory?
Just so you understand the important of Israels refusal to stop with the settlements, we're cool. Our country dosen't have the time or luxury of jacking around with Israel anymore because there's just too many things going on in the MidEast now that are far more important than Israel. If things really get crazy over there again and we get into one of these scenarios where oil is at 150 or higher, I don't know if our economy can handle that kind of trauma after all it's been thru in the last 24-36 months ?
Now if you say that Israel has returned some territory in the Gaza strip, OK that's fine. They returned some territory. OK ?

patteeu
03-29-2011, 12:52 PM
Just so you understand the important of Israels refusal to stop with the settlements, we're cool. Our country dosen't have the time or luxury of jacking around with Israel anymore because there's just too many things going on in the MidEast now that are far more important than Israel. If things really get crazy over there again and we get into one of these scenarios where oil is at 150 or higher, I don't know if our economy can handle that kind of trauma after all it's been thru in the last 24-36 months ?
Now if you say that Israel has returned some territory in the Gaza strip, OK that's fine. They returned some territory. OK ?

Sure.

Donger
03-29-2011, 02:00 PM
Multiple US administrations have stated the settlements are illegal, and the settlement expansions are the provocation for the attacks.
There's 200 to 300 hundred millions Muslims in the MidEast who have the oil and 5 million Jews in Israel. Wake up man and get your priorities straight !
Do you want this mess between Israel and the Palestinians to continue indefinitely and continually pose a threat to global economic stability ?

Okay, so which is it? You are ignorant of the fact that Israel has returned territory previously or you choose to ignore it?

JimBaker488
03-30-2011, 07:30 AM
Okay, so which is it? You are ignorant of the fact that Israel has returned territory previously or you choose to ignore it?

Whether or not they returned any R/E in this past is irrelevant, what's necessary now to avoid conflicts in the future and reopen serious discussions with the Palestians to include the division of Israel into 2 states is for them to stop expanding their construction of new dwellings.
I'd also like to see some domestic legislation passed to make it compulsory for American-Jews to serve in the US military in combat zones in the MidEast in numbers that would be proportionate to their % in the national US population, which is about 2 %. That would mirror the policy of their beloved Israel homeland which still has conscription, though no longer universal.

mlyonsd
03-30-2011, 07:37 AM
Whether or not they returned any R/E in this past is irrelevant, what's necessary now to avoid conflicts in the future and reopen serious discussions with the Palestians to include the division of Israel into 2 states is for them to stop expanding their construction of new dwellings.
I'd also like to see some domestic legislation passed to make it compulsory for American-Jews to serve in the US military in combat zones in the MidEast in numbers that would be proportionate to their % in the national US population, which is about 2 %. That would mirror the policy of their beloved Israel homeland which still has conscription, though no longer universal.
Wow.

The Mad Crapper
03-30-2011, 07:52 AM
I'd also like to see some domestic legislation passed to make it compulsory for American-Jews to serve in the US military in combat zones in the MidEast in numbers that would be proportionate to their % in the national US population, which is about 2 %. That would mirror the policy of their beloved Israel homeland which still has conscription, though no longer universal.

I'm pretty sure at least 2 out of every hundred US service-members are Jewish.

I'm not sure, but I don't think the US muslim population percentage wise is represented in the armed forces. It's common knowledge that muslims who are US citizens first allegience is to co-religionists, not fellow Americans.

JimBaker488
03-30-2011, 08:04 AM
I'm pretty sure at least 2 out of every hundred US service-members are Jewish.

I'm not sure, but I don't think the US muslim population percentage wise is represented in the armed forces. It's common knowledge that muslims who are US citizens first allegience is to co-religionists, not fellow Americans.
And I'm positive the representation of Jews in US COMBAT UNITS is well under 2 %. And I could care less about the Muslim population, they obviously aren't big-time supporters of Israel. We are fighting over there in large part because of Israel, the Jewish homeland, and given the virtually monolithic support of Israel/Zionism among US Jews it's only fair and equitible that they
have some significant representation in the combat operations over there.

The Mad Crapper
03-30-2011, 08:07 AM
And I'm positive the representation of Jews in US COMBAT UNITS is well under 2 %.

Prove it.

And I could care less about the Muslim population

Mighty convenient of you.

patteeu
03-30-2011, 08:17 AM
And I'm positive the representation of Jews in US COMBAT UNITS is well under 2 %. And I could care less about the Muslim population, they obviously aren't big-time supporters of Israel. We are fighting over there in large part because of Israel, the Jewish homeland, and given the virtually monolithic support of Israel/Zionism among US Jews it's only fair and equitible that they
have some significant representation in the combat operations over there.

It seems to me that our volunteer system is more fair than your idea. In fact, I'm not sure how you came up with the word "fair" in connection to your plan to single one group out for forced service.

Donger
03-30-2011, 08:41 AM
Whether or not they returned any R/E in this past is irrelevant, what's necessary now to avoid conflicts in the future and reopen serious discussions with the Palestians to include the division of Israel into 2 states is for them to stop expanding their construction of new dwellings.
I'd also like to see some domestic legislation passed to make it compulsory for American-Jews to serve in the US military in combat zones in the MidEast in numbers that would be proportionate to their % in the national US population, which is about 2 %. That would mirror the policy of their beloved Israel homeland which still has conscription, though no longer universal.

It's not irrelevant to the present at all. If the Palestinians want peace, they have to recognize Israel's right to exist. This is so basic that I'm stunned anyone argues it.

Why should American Jews be forced to enlist to fight in the ME? You think that we are in Afghanistan and shooting it up in Libya because of Israel?

mnchiefsguy
03-30-2011, 08:44 AM
LaDaris has returned....as JimBaker488.

patteeu
03-30-2011, 08:53 AM
LaDaris has returned....as JimBaker488.

JimBaker488 seems too laid back to be LaDairis despite the obvious similarity. Besides, JimBaker488 was here before LaDairis was banned so it would take considerable foresight for LaDairis to have created an alt with a different personality in the anticipation of having his primary banned.

The Mad Crapper
03-30-2011, 09:11 AM
LaDaris has returned....as JimBaker488.

No, this could be one of any number of moonbats.

ClevelandBronco
03-30-2011, 09:50 AM
...I'd also like to see some domestic legislation passed to make it compulsory for American-Jews to serve in the US military in combat zones in the MidEast in numbers that would be proportionate to their % in the national US population, which is about 2 %...

I wonder which parts of the Constitution we'd have to repeal to make this plan workable.

JimBaker488
03-30-2011, 11:41 AM
Why should American Jews be forced to enlist to fight in the ME? You think that we are in Afghanistan and shooting it up in Libya because of Israel?
Historically the Islamic terrorists have hated our guts primarity because of our support of Israel, really our role as the sponser/benefactor of Israel and if it were not for that relationship I don't think Al Qaeda attacks our country. They did and of course Bush ("W") invaded Afghan because he was in pursuit of the 9/11 perps, Al Qaeda.
OK then, why are we so devoted to Israel ? That question was purely rhetorical, as I would surely hope you know the answer ?

ClevelandBronco
03-30-2011, 11:43 AM
Historically the Islamic terrorists have hated our guts primarity because of our support of Israel, really our role as the sponser/benefactor of Israel and if it were not for that relationship I don't think Al Qaeda attacks our country. They did and of course Bush ("W") invaded Afghan because he was in pursuit of the 9/11 perps, Al Qaeda.
OK then, why are we so devoted to Israel ? That question was purely rhetorical, as I would surely hope you know the answer ?

Answers. Plural.

Chocolate Hog
03-30-2011, 11:49 AM
If you want to see an obstacle you should see ClevelandBronco trying to find his ass.

JimBaker488
03-30-2011, 11:55 AM
I know it's audacious of me to say this, but the results of this poll are stunning because it's apparent that there's a badly misinformed group here in terms of understanding who's the real impediment to peace is in the ME ?
10 or 11 to 1 ratio. Wow, somebody knows how to brainwash the masses in KC. BTW, I'm formerly from NW Mo. and still very sentimental about the area, obviously in part because of the Chiefs.

mlyonsd
03-30-2011, 12:01 PM
I know it's audacious of me to say this, but the results of this poll are stunning because it's apparent that there's a badly misinformed group here in terms of understanding who's the real impediment to peace is in the ME ?
10 or 11 to 1 ratio. Wow, somebody knows how to brainwash the masses in KC. BTW, I'm formerly from NW Mo. and still very sentimental about the area, obviously in part because of the Chiefs.

Yeah, that's exactly the way I'd read the poll too.

patteeu
03-30-2011, 12:15 PM
I know it's audacious of me to say this, but the results of this poll are stunning because it's apparent that there's a badly misinformed group here in terms of understanding who's the real impediment to peace is in the ME ?
10 or 11 to 1 ratio. Wow, somebody knows how to brainwash the masses in KC. BTW, I'm formerly from NW Mo. and still very sentimental about the area, obviously in part because of the Chiefs.

Yeah, I'm surprised that 4 of you got it wrong too. I expected a unanimous verdict.

ClevelandBronco
03-30-2011, 12:35 PM
If you want to see an obstacle you should see ClevelandBronco trying to find his ass.

I wasn't really looking for you. :moon:

Donger
03-30-2011, 01:09 PM
Historically the Islamic terrorists have hated our guts primarity because of our support of Israel, really our role as the sponser/benefactor of Israel and if it were not for that relationship I don't think Al Qaeda attacks our country. They did and of course Bush ("W") invaded Afghan because he was in pursuit of the 9/11 perps, Al Qaeda.
OK then, why are we so devoted to Israel ? That question was purely rhetorical, as I would surely hope you know the answer ?

I think that our relationship with Israel is certainly a part of the reason that AQ and other radical Islamic groups hate us, but I would argue that it's more our relationship with other Islamic countries in the region that really makes them upset, particularly Saudi Arabia.

We are "devoted" to Israel because she is a solid, historical ally in the region.

Donger
03-30-2011, 01:11 PM
I know it's audacious of me to say this, but the results of this poll are stunning because it's apparent that there's a badly misinformed group here in terms of understanding who's the real impediment to peace is in the ME ?
10 or 11 to 1 ratio. Wow, somebody knows how to brainwash the masses in KC. BTW, I'm formerly from NW Mo. and still very sentimental about the area, obviously in part because of the Chiefs.

Misinformed? How? You really don't see Palestinian refusal to even ACKNOWLEDGE Israel's right to exist as perhaps being a rather large impediment to peace between them? How can it not be?

KC Dan
03-30-2011, 01:17 PM
Oops, meant to vote for the PLO. Until they recognize Israel's right to exist, peace is a non-starter. The whole process must begin with that being resolved.

Inspector
03-30-2011, 02:03 PM
I blame the Hatfields.

Er...I mean the McCoys.

No...I had it right the first time. It's the Hatfields.

BucEyedPea
03-30-2011, 02:59 PM
Misinformed? How? You really don't see Palestinian refusal to even ACKNOWLEDGE Israel's right to exist as perhaps being a rather large impediment to peace between them? How can it not be?

Both sides have to acknowledge each others right to exist.

patteeu
03-30-2011, 03:24 PM
Both sides have to acknowledge each others right to exist.

Israel hasn't had a problem with that.

Jenson71
03-30-2011, 03:26 PM
Israel hasn't had a problem with that.

Do you think actions can speak louder than words?

patteeu
03-30-2011, 03:29 PM
Do you think actions can speak louder than words?

Sure they can. Israel has spoken to it's recognition of the palestinian's right to live in peace through both it's words and it's actions.

Donger
03-30-2011, 06:43 PM
Do you think actions can speak louder than words?

Sure, and Israel could kill all the Palestinians if they so chose.

go bowe
03-30-2011, 11:45 PM
Sure, and Israel could kill all the Palestinians if they so chose.nah, the u.n. would intervene first with a no-fly zone then arming the rebels, oh wait...

JimBaker488
03-31-2011, 06:04 AM
We are "devoted" to Israel because she is a solid, historical ally in the region.
The devotion to Israel in this country comes from the AIPAC, which is a pro-Israel organization supported and funded primarily by American-Jews which passes favorable legislation in Congress for Israel. In case you don't know, and apparently you don't, it's practically a taboo in Congress to be critical of Israel. You are branded an anti-semite and a bigot if you are critical of US policy towards Israel - what's that about ?
And BTW, there's 10 to 12 US Senators who are Jewish, which is basically 5 to 6 times the ratio of Jews in this country (only 2 %). On the other hand there's not a single African-American senator IIRC ? Maybe one Hispanic senator ?
And how has Israel helped us in the MidEast ? We help them all the time, but there's no reciprocity, no quid pro quo. You don't have a problem with that ?
Are the streets of KC lined with synagogues ? Can't you guys think for yourselves, or do you just swallow all of the propaganda they
shove your way ?

patteeu
03-31-2011, 07:01 AM
The devotion to Israel in this country comes from the AIPAC, which is a pro-Israel organization supported and funded primarily by American-Jews which passes favorable legislation in Congress for Israel. In case you don't know, and apparently you don't, it's practically a taboo in Congress to be critical of Israel. You are branded an anti-semite and a bigot if you are critical of US policy towards Israel - what's that about ?
And BTW, there's 10 to 12 US Senators who are Jewish, which is basically 5 to 6 times the ratio of Jews in this country (only 2 %). On the other hand there's not a single African-American senator IIRC ? Maybe one Hispanic senator ?
And how has Israel helped us in the MidEast ? We help them all the time, but there's no reciprocity, no quid pro quo. You don't have a problem with that ?
Are the streets of KC lined with synagogues ? Can't you guys think for yourselves, or do you just swallow all of the propaganda they
shove your way ?

How many examples of benefits conferred upon the US by Israel do you need to hear before you concede that you've been hoodwinked by anti-semite propaganda?

BucEyedPea
03-31-2011, 07:03 AM
Sure, and Israel could kill all the Palestinians if they so chose.

This is true. What do you think would happen them if they did that?