i guess ill make this an editorial of sorts

[selftitled85]

Israel has been at the center of controversy recently with the way they have been going about their war/invasion of Gaza and Lebanon. Many non-military personnel have been killed including a large number of women in children. They have adopted the American tactic of strategic air strikes using guided missiles. Though this has a large success rate, you do not know who is in the building and there have been many "mistakes."

Now the question is who is to blame for this? Lebanon and Palestine have reasons to gripe. Israel seems to be aiming at locations found in highly residential areas leading to a high amount of civilian casualties. But the only reason they are aiming in these locations are because they had been used as locations where the insurgents mobile missiles had been fired from. Unfortunately, the term "mobile" deems that once these missiles are fired the fighters as well as the weapons could easily be moved to a different location.

So what is Israel to do? Do they keep doing what they do and blatantly kill innocent civilians who are in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or should they invade and try to weed out these men from hiding? Or should they give up and maybe these men will give up?

And what is there for Lebanon and Palestine to do? Most of the people located in the two locations are civilians. Should they themselves stand up to the insurgents or is it right for them to follow the insurgents as they are the men fighting what they see to be an "evil" opponent who has no regard for innocent life?




so what does everyone think

[alcoholandirony]

I think we should pray to this guy and hope for the best:

http://sc.tri-bit.com/images/b/b5/4TOMPDIT4JPOCP767WKWH6NNE6WTGZGT.jp g

[dangets]

the people in Lebanon should start by not allowing their culture to be overtaken by religious fanaticism. then maybe they won't be so sympathetic to groups like hezbolla and won't invite the scorn of extremely powerful and paranoid nations like israel.

[selftitled85]

the people in Lebanon should start by not allowing their culture to be overtaken by religious fanaticism. then maybe they won't be so sympathetic to groups like hezbolla and won't invite the scorn of extremely powerful and paranoid nations like israel.
but when you live in such poverty and the only people that are trying to help you are the ones who are religious fanatics then what do you do?

[A picasso blue]

I feel that Israel really overreacted to the abductions

[Justin_stacy]

but when you live in such poverty and the only people that are trying to help you are the ones who are religious fanatics then what do you do?

so would you give the german people a pass too for what happened under nazism? Or are people accountable for what their "chosen" leaders do, irrgardless of financial setting?

[dangets]

but when you live in such poverty and the only people that are trying to help you are the ones who are religious fanatics then what do you do?

critical thinking?

it seems that if people are living in such poverty that they don't care about dying, and they're going to kill people who do care about dying, then the people who do care about dying should kill the people who don't. that is, until the people who don't care about dying stop posing a danger to others.

and if they can come up with a political system that doesn't support terrorism, maybe they could get some goodwill donations from their muslim brothers in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. and in that case, maybe even Israel and the US. it's in everyone's best interest to have a system in power that doesn't favor indiscriminate killing as a political strategy.

though i will agree that it's hard for people who are living in poverty to think critically about the long term... maybe they should try just for a little while.

[selftitled85]

so would you give the german people a pass too for what happened under nazism? Or are people accountable for what their "chosen" leaders do, irrgardless of financial setting?
they are accountable but lets look at this in another light.

germany became one of the most powerful nations in months. while under the weimar republic there was hyperinflation and poverty all around.

hitler brought to the table a new hope. germany became a force to be reckoned with and not to mention the people started to get back on their feet. if one group had to suffer for the rest to succeed than so be it.

now lets put a different spin on this...

fdr took over the presidency and led america out of the depression and was voted into office for a third term. why? because the people loved him and he had saved them from the depression. he could have been president for many more years and im sure the mass would not have cared.

if you are going to tell me that in desperate times you will not be willing to follow some extreme person if they were able to bring good fortune for you than i say you are a break from most people.

[cal1082]

they are accountable but lets look at this in another light.

germany became one of the most powerful nations in months. while under the weimar republic there was hyperinflation and poverty all around.

hitler brought to the table a new hope. germany became a force to be reckoned with and not to mention the people started to get back on their feet. if one group had to suffer for the rest to succeed than so be it.

now lets put a different spin on this...

fdr took over the presidency and led america out of the depression and was voted into office for a third term. why? because the people loved him and he had saved them from the depression. he could have been president for many more years and im sure the mass would not have cared.

if you are going to tell me that in desperate times you will not be willing to follow some extreme person if they were able to bring good fortune for you than i say you are a break from most people.

I dont understand how fdr fits into the mix?

Bottom line is hard times does not excuse terrible actions or behavior

[FScott]

Bottom line is hard times does not excuse terrible actions or behavior

indeed

[JezisHChrist]

I feel that Israel really overreacted to the abductions
If you really think that Israel's attacks are strictly because of those abductions than you're just being silly.

[fedhed7]

If you really think that Israel's attacks are strictly because of those abductions than you're just being silly.Haha, seriously. Let's not overlook the constant barrage of terrorist attacks in Israel over the past few years. After centuries of defending themselves, the abductions were the last straw.

[selftitled85]

I dont understand how fdr fits into the mix?

Bottom line is hard times does not excuse terrible actions or behavior
you're right they do not.

but when you see some poor person in a city begging for money. or even trying to pick pocket you. it is not because they are evil. it is because they have fallen on hard times and they are trying to scrape by.

[cal1082]

you're right they do not.

but when you see some poor person in a city begging for money. or even trying to pick pocket you. it is not because they are evil. it is because they have fallen on hard times and they are trying to scrape by.

i dont understand your point

[gillianhsieh]

i dont understand your point
i think he means that, it's true, atrocities are never justified, but when people are desperate, sometimes that kind of behavior can be a rational/understandable decision. and i agree.

and i hate these comparisons w/ hitler. the global environment 60 years ago is nothing like today's. for one, communication was terrible back then, and there was a serious depression. i know from visiting that lebanon is a pretty progressive nation, like yea it's not really like here, but things are improving. i don't think something liek that could happen today, and to say that it's going to be another like... WWII holocaust style is v. slippery slope, don't you think, a lot of these scenarios are very implausible. this isn't to say i have some ridiculously liberal stance on how america should be reacting to israel/lebanon but i just think that these comparisons to the third reich are ridiculous/naive.

[cal1082]

i think he means that, it's true, atrocities are never justified, but when people are desperate, sometimes that kind of behavior can be a rational/understandable decision. and i agree.


Completly seems as if ya'll are contradicting yourself in the same posts.

You say it's not justified but then you provide justification for it by saying "well if they're desperate it can be a rational/understandable decision".

I guess you can read what your saying in another way but that's what I'm not understanding.

[FScott]

I think what he is trying to say is that Lebanon was some kind of poverty hole and Hezbollah came along and saved them. I for one do not think that the Leboneze people rely on Hezbollah nearly to that extent.

Hezbollah does provide some funding for schools and other various institutions and they do this to gain public appeal so when the time comes for attacks (and terrorist activites) such as what we have seen in Israel, the Leboneze in return then feel obligated to support them.

[Justin_stacy]

they are accountable but lets look at this in another light.

germany became one of the most powerful nations in months. while under the weimar republic there was hyperinflation and poverty all around.

hitler brought to the table a new hope. germany became a force to be reckoned with and not to mention the people started to get back on their feet. if one group had to suffer for the rest to succeed than so be it.

now lets put a different spin on this...

fdr took over the presidency and led america out of the depression and was voted into office for a third term. why? because the people loved him and he had saved them from the depression. he could have been president for many more years and im sure the mass would not have cared.

if you are going to tell me that in desperate times you will not be willing to follow some extreme person if they were able to bring good fortune for you than i say you are a break from most people.

I guess I'm missing your point.

What I'm saying is people have every right to choose their leadership, but the accountability for its (the leadership) actions go along with the choose, irregardless of poverty, education or religion. The Lebanese people have only themselves to blame for this current round of attacks, just as the Palestinians have no one but themselves to blame for their current lack of a nation. Israel's accountability ends with the actions of the Israelis, not the actions of another people.

[gillianhsieh]

Completly seems as if ya'll are contradicting yourself in the same posts.

You say it's not justified but then you provide justification for it by saying "well if they're desperate it can be a rational/understandable decision".
.

hey something being a rational decision doesn't mean it's not justified ie killing is never justified, but when in self defense, it's rational.

also for justin_stacy im really sorry to be an ass about this, but this is like the 3rd time ive seen you say "irregardless" which isn't a word, it's just "regardless"

and then on the other side of that argument you could also say that if people are accountable for their leadership, then israel should stop bombing the fuck out of their neighbors with bombs that say "Made in USA" and they only have themselves to blame that everyone in the middle east hates them.

[selftitled85]

Completly seems as if ya'll are contradicting yourself in the same posts.

You say it's not justified but then you provide justification for it by saying "well if they're desperate it can be a rational/understandable decision".

I guess you can read what your saying in another way but that's what I'm not understanding.
no. i am not contradicting myself. the actions are never justifiable. BUT to these people...when they are desperate a decision that is a bad decision in the long run can be seen as a rational/understandable decision.

[selftitled85]

hey something being a rational decision doesn't mean it's not justified ie killing is never justified, but when in self defense, it's rational.

also for justin_stacy im really sorry to be an ass about this, but this is like the 3rd time ive seen you say "irregardless" which isn't a word, it's just "regardless"

and then on the other side of that argument you could also say that if people are accountable for their leadership, then israel should stop bombing the fuck out of their neighbors with bombs that say "Made in USA" and they only have themselves to blame that everyone in the middle east hates them.
thank you.

[FScott]

When you support terrorism you get fucked. A lesson the leboneze are learning.

[gillianhsieh]

when you refuse to alter your political views to coincide with those of the world's supposed "superpower" you get fucked too - a lesson the lebanese, and the rest of the world, are learning/have learned over the last 50 years.

and with political intolerance and a lot of money, you win! omg! we're winners!

don't confuse this with me being unpatriotic, i don't hate america; dissent is a pure form of patriotism.

also, again, sorry to be a complete bitch, i know, but it's not "leboneze" it's "lebanese". yea just fyi.

[selftitled85]

When you support terrorism you get fucked. A lesson the leboneze are learning.
when you bomb innocent civilians you are doomed to be hated by the world and made an enemy of many people

a lesson the us and israelis are learning.

[FScott]

I don't know what fantasy world your living in but the world never exactly liked America or Israel. Especially the middle east.

Hey maybe we should just call for a cease fire with Bin Ladin too.

[FScott]

and maybe we should just call it quits with this whole "war on terror" thing, to many people are getting hurt

[gillianhsieh]

hey, the world once did like america, back after WWII when americans provided everyone with EVERYTHING because the world was war torn and americans were generous. but then we ripped them off and set up oppressive puppet governments to protect american interests (honestly, this is blameless because all countries have a primary obligation to protect their own interests). so we sort of took all their $ and took a dump on them, which is okay, i support that, but then we forgot to wipe our collective ass... oh no. <-- this is where shit goes down.

now they dislike us. but i swear, a lot of them do like american culture, and i am optimistic that we can turn this around if we play our cards right. also, i think the argument that the world never exactly liked america or israel is both fatalistic and unpragmatic AKA a bad argument for someone who cares about policy. we have to pursue policies that ALLEVIATE this egregious situation.

[cal1082]

no. i am not contradicting myself. the actions are never justifiable. BUT to these people...when they are desperate a decision that is a bad decision in the long run can be seen as a rational/understandable decision.

I guess then I'm not seeing the point in pointing that out if it's not justifiable? I just dont see how it affects the argument.

[cal1082]

hey, the world once did like america, back after WWII when americans provided everyone with EVERYTHING because the world was war torn and americans were generous. but then we ripped them off and set up oppressive puppet governments to protect american interests (honestly, this is blameless because all countries have a primary obligation to protect their own interests). so we sort of took all their $ and took a dump on them, which is okay, i support that, but then we forgot to wipe our collective ass... oh no. <-- this is where shit goes down.

And the reverse of what you're arguing is that the US being the only other superpower had the decision to stand up against the USSR and their aggression into Latin America. You choose a path..........the path we chose or allowing what happened in Cuba to spread across Latin America and actually threaten US security.

[born to expire]

when you bomb innocent civilians you are doomed to be hated by the world and made an enemy of many people

a lesson the us and israelis are learning.

Hezbollah uses civlian shelter as cover for firing their rockets. Almost all of the civilian casualties are Hezbollah's fault. Israel dropped leaflets out of planes warning civlians of future attacks, and Hezbollah prevented the civlians from evacuating the area.

It amazes me that so many people are blinded by Hezbollah's bullshit. They use civlians for cover and then try to gain the world's sympathy by blaming it on Israel.

[Justin_stacy]

when you bomb innocent civilians you are doomed to be hated by the world and made an enemy of many people

a lesson the us and israelis are learning.

Who is to blame when residential areas are used for storage, lauching platforms and as shields for military operations? And who should be learning a lesson from it?

How is Israel to blame for where its attacker places their military facilities.........?


also for justin_stacy im really sorry to be an ass about this, but this is like the 3rd time ive seen you say "irregardless" which isn't a word, it's just "regardless"

.

Grammar and spelling have about as much importance on a message board as someone’s shoe size does. Besides if WORD is ok with my word choice and doesn't green-underline it I feel comfortable enough using it here.

I'd point out to that if you’re going to be a bitch about spelling, grammar or word choice for god sake at least make sure your own post is free of childish errors......http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/irregardless

[dangets]

the ultimate goal of US foreign policy is not to have other countries "like" us

[cal1082]

the ultimate goal of US foreign policy is not to have other countries "like" us

Simple point, but good point.

Every country is out for their interests.

[gillianhsieh]

the ultimate goal of US foreign policy is not to have other countries "like" us
how is it good foreign policy in a globalized world if other countries don't like us? how is that in our best interests at all? when a country has no allies what are they going to do with themselves? When a world superpower is no longer respected, doesn't have moral high ground, has little political credibility, etc, how can you expect other countries to have enough faith that the country remains a superpower for very long? Give me a break.

and for whomever was talking about cuba, it wasn't the USSR's fault that cuba became communist, obviously fidel castro, the PM at the time, was receptive to the idea, and he was well liked in both Cuba and the US. it was because they became communist that the US, angry that castro wasn't doing what they wanted because of the expulsion of many corporations AND on bad terms w/ the USSR, grew dissatisfied with castro *while he was still PM* and started making him look totally evil. cuba isn't even doing badly. yes they're communists. but they have one of the best healthcare systems in the world, fidel castro allowed anyone who wanted to leave to do so on the mariel boatlifts, and the anti-castro movement in cuba was unsuccessful, which, i know you are going to say "it's because he oppressed them" but 1) no, just because he's a dictator doesn't mean he's oppressive 2) you can't stop masses with biopower, so if a movement failed it's not because he crushed it. of course i don't support dictatorships. and no, i don't support castro. but i don't think it's the end of the world if other countries want to establish socialist republics, it seems to be working for a lot of EU nations.

political intolerance is not okay, the point of a democracy is that you stop fucking with people and give them equal representation and if we can't champion a global democracy and instead constantly destroy other people in favor of "our interests" then what is the point of claiming to be a democracy at all?

[gillianhsieh]

ya, i forgot, also, you can't pretend that you're a global mediator when you pick favorites.

[dai the flu]

Hezbollah uses civlian shelter as cover for firing their rockets. Almost all of the civilian casualties are Hezbollah's fault. Israel dropped leaflets out of planes warning civlians of future attacks, and Hezbollah prevented the civlians from evacuating the area.

It amazes me that so many people are blinded by Hezbollah's bullshit. They use civlians for cover and then try to gain the world's sympathy by blaming it on Israel.

i agree completely.
but you know what bugs me? all the people that criticize israel for civilian deaths never even acknowledge or respond when this point is brought out. they completely ignore these facts, then after sitting quiet for a couple days, once again pop up and say "israel's killing civilians blah blah blah..."

[selftitled85]

Simple point, but good point.

Every country is out for their interests.


well then why doesnt america just come out and say it then. instead of being like
"we are doing this for the world." they should say things like "we are doing this for ourselves and you guys are along for the ride."

true every country is out for their own interests. but because of globalization many countries are beginning to come closer and closer economically and culturally. because of this...what one country does can effect many countries. so when a country is out for their own interests they can hinder a lot of other countries.

american foreign policy will be and needs to change soon

[cal1082]

how is it good foreign policy in a globalized world if other countries don't like us? how is that in our best interests at all? when a country has no allies what are they going to do with themselves? When a world superpower is no longer respected, doesn't have moral high ground, has little political credibility, etc, how can you expect other countries to have enough faith that the country remains a superpower for very long? Give me a break.

No one is saying it is our best interest if they dont like us. But it should not be our policy and that's the point.

and for whomever was talking about cuba, it wasn't the USSR's fault that cuba became communist, obviously fidel castro, the PM at the time, was receptive to the idea, and he was well liked in both Cuba and the US. it was because they became communist that the US, angry that castro wasn't doing what they wanted because of the expulsion of many corporations AND on bad terms w/ the USSR, grew dissatisfied with castro *while he was still PM* and started making him look totally evil. cuba isn't even doing badly. yes they're communists. but they have one of the best healthcare systems in the world, fidel castro allowed anyone who wanted to leave to do so on the mariel boatlifts, and the anti-castro movement in cuba was unsuccessful, which, i know you are going to say "it's because he oppressed them" but 1) no, just because he's a dictator doesn't mean he's oppressive 2) you can't stop masses with biopower, so if a movement failed it's not because he crushed it. of course i don't support dictatorships. and no, i don't support castro. but i don't think it's the end of the world if other countries want to establish socialist republics, it seems to be working for a lot of EU nations.

And that's where the argument should end.................

You look at Castro's history and you tell me if that's oppresive? We'd see what you consider it if the government was to come in and take your land without compensation, killing political opponents, imprisoning your own civilians without trial, and shutting down the press.

What do you consider this? Tough love?

Now to the point I was making................it's not why Cuba went communist, it's the fact that they did. As a product of that Cuba became a communist satelite for the USSR and the US came as close to a nuclear than ever before.

That brings me back to my point. You had other possible communist revolutions going on in Guat., Africa, and Ven. among others. The US made the choice to stop these possible revolutions for our security reasons. Obviously it's not gonna help everyone and it affected many negatively, but the US interest was it's citizens and its status.

It's a sad fact, but it's a fact. The alternative was soviet aggression. The reasons cuba went communist has nothing to do with the argument.

[cal1082]

well then why doesnt america just come out and say it then. instead of being like
"we are doing this for the world." they should say things like "we are doing this for ourselves and you guys are along for the ride."

true every country is out for their own interests. but because of globalization many countries are beginning to come closer and closer economically and culturally. because of this...what one country does can effect many countries. so when a country is out for their own interests they can hinder a lot of other countries.

american foreign policy will be and needs to change soon

You keep saying "needs to change" but where do you want this change to take affect? What do you expect to be done?

Foreign policy right now is based on the Bush doctorine, and the old policy was based on containment and deterrence. The Bush policy evolves around spreading democracy. Where does it need to change?

[dangets]

how is it good foreign policy in a globalized world if other countries don't like us? how is that in our best interests at all? when a country has no allies what are they going to do with themselves? When a world superpower is no longer respected, doesn't have moral high ground, has little political credibility, etc, how can you expect other countries to have enough faith that the country remains a superpower for very long? Give me a break.

and for whomever was talking about cuba, it wasn't the USSR's fault that cuba became communist, obviously fidel castro, the PM at the time, was receptive to the idea, and he was well liked in both Cuba and the US. it was because they became communist that the US, angry that castro wasn't doing what they wanted because of the expulsion of many corporations AND on bad terms w/ the USSR, grew dissatisfied with castro *while he was still PM* and started making him look totally evil. cuba isn't even doing badly. yes they're communists. but they have one of the best healthcare systems in the world, fidel castro allowed anyone who wanted to leave to do so on the mariel boatlifts, and the anti-castro movement in cuba was unsuccessful, which, i know you are going to say "it's because he oppressed them" but 1) no, just because he's a dictator doesn't mean he's oppressive 2) you can't stop masses with biopower, so if a movement failed it's not because he crushed it. of course i don't support dictatorships. and no, i don't support castro. but i don't think it's the end of the world if other countries want to establish socialist republics, it seems to be working for a lot of EU nations.

political intolerance is not okay, the point of a democracy is that you stop fucking with people and give them equal representation and if we can't champion a global democracy and instead constantly destroy other people in favor of "our interests" then what is the point of claiming to be a democracy at all?

There is a difference between being "liked" and being respected. A country doesn't have to "like" us in order to be our ally. France doesn't like us. You can bet a whole lot of countries didn't like us very much during the Cold War, but they were on our side anyway and willing to deal. Alliances work just as well when they're because of other reasons outside of being "liked". Try Iraq: do you really think they "like" us? That they envy our culture and seek to emulate us? No. They're our ally because they need to be. And China. Since when do we support Communist Dictatorships on an ideological level? And since when does China support free market democracy? We don't like them, and they don't like us, but they're not invading us with their billion people, and we're not hitting Beijing with cruise missles, because we have a trade relationship.

And there's something that realist political theorists, like the kind Bush listens to, believe in called the Democratic Peace Hypothesis, which says that democracies are less likely to be warlike, and therefore are less threatening to us. Spreading democracy doesn't have to be an ideological mission.

And the only reason states exist is to protect their citizens. If a state's main purpose is not to ensure the well being of its citizens, there's no reason for it to exist. If we don't choose our own side, who will?

[selftitled85]

You keep saying "needs to change" but where do you want this change to take affect? What do you expect to be done?

Foreign policy right now is based on the Bush doctorine, and the old policy was based on containment and deterrence. The Bush policy evolves around spreading democracy. Where does it need to change?
well im not saying i have all the answers. im a naive college student like all of us. i just know something should be done. we have a lot of people smarter than all of us who can figure out what to do.

[cal1082]

well im not saying i have all the answers. im a naive college student like all of us. i just know something should be done. we have a lot of people smarter than all of us who can figure out what to do.

Where is the foreign policy wrong now?

Do you think the whole thing is wrong (bush doctorine and strategies of implementing it)?
Is the concept just wrong and strategies right?
Is the strategies wrong and the concept right?

I mean it doesnt help the conversation when you just say, wrong, and that leave it at that.

I myself think the concept is dead on (ecspecially in our times since hte fall of the USSR), but I do think there is room for argument when it comes to implementation.

[gillianhsieh]

this is the biggest trash i've read in my life :

"Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told reporters that she believes Israel and the international community share the same goals in Lebanon.

"The idea is to disarm Hezbollah and to assist the Lebanese government exercise its sovereignty on the entire Lebanon. This is not a simple task but I believe the international community will stick to its goal," she said. "

how does bombing civilians accomplish that at all? if anything it gives hezbollah moral high ground.

[gillianhsieh]

There is a difference between being "liked" and being respected. A country doesn't have to "like" us in order to be our ally. France doesn't like us. You can bet a whole lot of countries didn't like us very much during the Cold War, but they were on our side anyway and willing to deal. Alliances work just as well when they're because of other reasons outside of being "liked". Try Iraq: do you really think they "like" us? That they envy our culture and seek to emulate us? No. They're our ally because they need to be. And China. Since when do we support Communist Dictatorships on an ideological level? And since when does China support free market democracy? We don't like them, and they don't like us, but they're not invading us with their billion people, and we're not hitting Beijing with cruise missles, because we have a trade relationship.

And there's something that realist political theorists, like the kind Bush listens to, believe in called the Democratic Peace Hypothesis, which says that democracies are less likely to be warlike, and therefore are less threatening to us. Spreading democracy doesn't have to be an ideological mission.

And the only reason states exist is to protect their citizens. If a state's main purpose is not to ensure the well being of its citizens, there's no reason for it to exist. If we don't choose our own side, who will?

we're not even well respected. i think the US can do a better job protecting its citizens if people don't find the country flaky and ridiculous ie we have any international credibility at all. condoleeza rice thinks we can have cease fire this week? what planet is she from?

[gillianhsieh]

You look at Castro's history and you tell me if that's oppresive? We'd see what you consider it if the government was to come in and take your land without compensation, killing political opponents, imprisoning your own civilians without trial, and shutting down the press.

What do you consider this? Tough love?

alright, so this is particularly relevant because castro just stepped down, cubans are panicking. a lot of cubans think castro is the best thing since sliced bread. the only cubans who are celebrating are the ones who left cuba, and he def left time for them to do it.

[RememberFminus2]

israel and americas undying support for them disgust me.

[gillianhsieh]

americans have to support israel. 1) we created israel 2) the jewish influence in america is disproportionately large 3) israel is our strongest source of influence in the middle east

[RememberFminus2]

americans have to support israel. 1) we created israel 2) the jewish influence in america is disproportionately large 3) israel is our strongest source of influence in the middle east

well no shit.

[gillianhsieh]

ya, sorry for stating the obvious. ugh, you're right the entire thing is sickening.

[Reiver]

americans have to support israel. 1) we created israel 2) the jewish influence in america is disproportionately large 3) israel is our strongest source of influence in the middle east
America has always supported Israel, but we did NOT create Israel! Everyone beleives we made Israel after WWII, and though Israel didn't gain independence until after WWII, jews had been flocking there since the 1800s trying to create a jewish state.

But, whatever, anyways... After 9-11, the world supported us when we attacked Afghanistan who was then under the control of the Taliban who protected Bin Laden and Al-Queda. Nothing wrong with that. But when Israel does the same thing after their country is attacked (MANY times over the last few years) by Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations, they're not allowed to retaliate? Its so fucked up. Fuck the EU and the UN.

I was planning to go to an Israeli kibbutz this winter, and at this point am not sure if the kibbutz I was going to will still even be there because what the news doesn't show/tell you is that Hezbollah is killing a buttload of Israelis. Its not the Israeli army against a bunch of stone throwing Palestinians anymore, its well armed (probably funded by Iran and Syria) guerillas with guns and rockets.

[Justin_stacy]

americans have to support israel. 1) we created israel 2) the jewish influence in america is disproportionately large 3) israel is our strongest source of influence in the middle east


well no shit.


Talk about two people desperately in need of an "I'm with stoopid t-shirt".......

[selftitled85]

America has always supported Israel, but we did NOT create Israel! Everyone beleives we made Israel after WWII, and though Israel didn't gain independence until after WWII, jews had been flocking there since the 1800s trying to create a jewish state.

But, whatever, anyways... After 9-11, the world supported us when we attacked Afghanistan who was then under the control of the Taliban who protected Bin Laden and Al-Queda. Nothing wrong with that. But when Israel does the same thing after their country is attacked (MANY times over the last few years) by Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations, they're not allowed to retaliate? Its so fucked up. Fuck the EU and the UN.

I was planning to go to an Israeli kibbutz this winter, and at this point am not sure if the kibbutz I was going to will still even be there because what the news doesn't show/tell you is that Hezbollah is killing a buttload of Israelis. Its not the Israeli army against a bunch of stone throwing Palestinians anymore, its well armed (probably funded by Iran and Syria) guerillas with guns and rockets.

wrong.

after ww2 the zionist movement lobbied around the world for a jewish state. we agreed to form a country but we didnt know where. initial plan was to put the country in australia. in the end they put it is today. but...just like what happened in africa when the imperialist countres took it over...they didnt talk to the people already living there and just selected boarders they thought were good.

if was ian illegal set up because of how it was formed.


and then you say "probably" funded by iran and syria. how do you know? maybe they are funded by private organizations like how osama initially got his start?

dont make assumptions like that unless you have some type of proof.

[Justin_stacy]

wrong.

after ww2 the zionist movement lobbied around the world for a jewish state. we agreed to form a country but we didnt know where. initial plan was to put the country in australia. in the end they put it is today. but...just like what happened in africa when the imperialist countres took it over...they didnt talk to the people already living there and just selected boarders they thought were good.

if was ian illegal set up because of how it was formed.


and then you say "probably" funded by iran and syria. how do you know? maybe they are funded by private organizations like how osama initially got his start?

dont make assumptions like that unless you have some type of proof.

No actually he's right. Jews from Europe and the Middle East started flocking to the uninhabbited areas of the Palestine region, with the permission of the Ottoman empire, in the early 1880's these travels were called Aliyah, and there were Five of them prior to WWII. The Ottoman empire gave them a country within a country, they controled commerce, education, regional government and had freedom of religion. The counter was that they had to pay higher, then normal, taxes, and were open to conscription. This was the foundation of the Jewish state that would become Israel, under the UN mandate. There was a precedent in the area for a Jewish state and that is why Israel was legally "created."

Like with what you said above, statements are just like assumptions don't make them unless you know what you're talking about.

[selftitled85]

No actually he's right. Jews from Europe and the Middle East started flocking to the uninhabbited areas of the Palestine region, with the permission of the Ottoman empire, in the early 1880's these travels were called Aliyah, and there were Five of them prior to WWII. The Ottoman empire gave them a country within a country, they controled commerce, education, regional government and had freedom of religion. The counter was that they had to pay higher, then normal, taxes, and were open to conscription. This was the foundation of the Jewish state that would become Israel, under the UN mandate. There was a precedent in the area for a Jewish state and that is why Israel was legally "created."

Like with what you said above, statements are just like assumptions don't make them unless you know what you're talking about.

i do. it is illegal. talk to any international law major or any international lawyer...israel was created illegaly. they had no right to take lands from surrounding countries and piece together israel.

[Justin_stacy]

i do. it is illegal. talk to any international law major or any international lawyer...israel was created illegaly. they had no right to take lands from surrounding countries and piece together israel.

Again you're wrong in your assertions. The only land "taken" was from a country that no longer existed where Jews had already lived. The Ottoman Empire ceased to be in 1918/22.

Legality is also in the eye of the beholder, so that statement alone holds no bearing unless you can back it up with a valid point or unchallengeable conclusion. So far you've done neither (while ignoring factual counter points).

The truth of the situation was that either the international controlling body (the UN) was to set up an independent partition based on population centers or a civil war was going to break out among the three major groups (Muslims, Jews, Christians) to decided the partition, regardless the Jewish minority was going to have a say in the government to be formed. You need to get it out of your head that the Jewish population was somehow planted in Palestine following the holocaust, that is not the case, the migration had started almost a 100 years prior.

Remember there is no historic Palestinian, Jews are by definition Palestinians and the land in question prior to the 1880's was mostly uninhabited and unused and the Ottoman Empire "welcomed" cultivation.

[cal1082]

i do. it is illegal. talk to any international law major or any international lawyer...israel was created illegaly. they had no right to take lands from surrounding countries and piece together israel.



Great Britain (not the US) had chief control of the land after the fall of the Ottoman empire and control was given to Israel by the League of Nations. Talk to any international law major or any international lawyer....israel was created legaly.

[open mind]

i'm sure it was deemed legal to displace and eradicate countless native american tribes, but that doesn't make it right.

[mochieay]

Its Israels fault. they shouldn't be targeting civilian areas, they should be more concerned with their governments foriegn relations. I am apalled that so many people must needlessly die before thi conflict is resolved. :bazooka::stars:

[boysdontcry17]

Its Israels fault. they shouldn't be targeting civilian areas, they should be more concerned with their governments foriegn relations. I am apalled that so many people must needlessly die before thi conflict is resolved. :bazooka::stars:

you are a misinformed whore and i hate you

[xvszero]

and then on the other side of that argument you could also say that if people are accountable for their leadership, then israel should stop bombing the fuck out of their neighbors with bombs that say "Made in USA" and they only have themselves to blame that everyone in the middle east hates them.

If by "only have themselves to blame" you mean "are Jews." Because that is the sole reason the rest of the middle east hates them.

[richter915]

If by "only have themselves to blame" you mean "are Jews." Because that is the sole reason the rest of the middle east hates them.
uhm

ya

stfu kthx.

[MPS_]

you are a misinformed whore and i hate you

Haha, thanks dude. That was awesome.

[selftitled85]

Its Israels fault. they shouldn't be targeting civilian areas, they should be more concerned with their governments foriegn relations. I am apalled that so many people must needlessly die before thi conflict is resolved. :bazooka::stars:

the reason they fire on residential locations is because the terrorists strike from residential locations.