Bin laden: freedom fighter?

[Guest]

<<"It's OK for Israel because ISRAEL WAS ATTACKED and the world is condemning them for fighting back.">>

 

<Funny, I seem to recall the last Balkan war being about Albanian rebels fighting against the Serb government and then Slobo coming in and ethnicly cleansing them out, resulting in his much-deserved war crimes trial.>

 

First of all Slobo hadn't ethnically cleasned anybody before NATO dropped their bombs it was a (perhaps over the top) anti-terrorist campagin against the KLA, which not only wanted to destablise their neighbouring countries but were funded by Al'Queada. Slobo's actions pre bombing were no different to the Israel action in Jenin. It was only aftered the bombing had started that the ethnic cleansing started.

 

Secondly unlike the action is Jenin which lest we forget to all countries except Israel is part of a foreign county, Kosovo was a part of Serbia (indeed the birth place of Serbia) that Slobo had soverignity to do what he like. The fact is all Clinton cared about was getting a distraction from Monicagate and if you look what is happening now the sweet innocent Albainans are ethnically cleansing Kosovo of Serbs and the freedom fighters of the KLA are destablizing FYR Macidenoia.

 

William

[Guest]

This is not a war it is an anti-terrorist campagin and must be treated as such. America needs to liaise with muslim states and people to find out when the next attack is happening...

The fact is The War on Terror is in a mess because its seen as a war. To succed it must be carried out as an international policing and political campagin.

On the contrary, it has been and will continue to be an overwhelming success. We accomplished everything we wanted to in Afghanistan and I fully expect we'll do likewise in Iraq. We'll continue down the list of all other nations that harbour terrorists until none remain. If more appear as a result of our actions we'll add them to the top of the list and continue.

Your proposed approach is exactly wrong. We are going to war, not to court. I don't want some years-long appeals-exacerbated media-circus trial with bin Laden being read his Miranda rights. I don't want our actions to be dictated by polls of Arab Moslems. This isn't a popularity contest. This is war.

Only a fool and a terrorist sympathiser would try to place September 11th in the context of an ordinary criminal act. Have you ever heard FDR's speech after Pearl Harbor? He didn't promise to bring the Emperor to justice. He promised to crush Japan.

Now, as then, we must not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but make certain that such treachery shall never endanger us again. Now, as then, hostilities exist. Now, as then, there is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

And with the same confidence in our armed forces, with the same unbending determination of our people, we will gain a likewise inevitable triumph. So help us God.

 

Yes Bin Laden is a mad man, fueled by a messanic image of himself and a racist hatred of America and Western Civilastion but his followers ARE NOT! No one will willingly kill themself and others unless they think they have reason to!

No one cares.

Bin Laden is not a madman. His disgusting attacks were carefully planned, competently executed, and almost entirely successful. Bin Laden is evil. His followers are equally evil. And we will annihilate every last one who dares to perpetrate acts of terror against the United States.

No negotiation. No "justice." Justice is for criminals. Terrorists and mass murderers are entitled only to death and destruction. Any regime which harbours them must meet the same fate as the Taliban.

This is a time for explicit clarity, not diplomatic fudging or realpolitik. America is awake now, and filled with a cold, unyielding anger. The last time this happened we changed the face of the world. We shall do so again.

You're with us or you're against us. Choose.

 

If you humilate people, if you deny them their statehood then sooner or later someone will come and tell these people who have NOTHING TO LOOSE to fuck them, fuck those who have kept you like this.

And if they then slaughter thousands of innocents, they will die. If you think you have nothing to lose by perpetrating atrocities, you're already beyond human redemption and you deserve death.

 

No terrorist organistaion has ever had the resources to defeat a state, that is why they stop short of civil war. What they try and do instead is to provoke the state into an OTT and brutal response hoping that will cause a swelling in support. This always work it worked in Ulster in regards to British internment, it happened in Ireland after the Easter Rebellion IT WILL HAPPEN IN THE MUSLIM WORLD IF AMERICA DOSEN'T STOP!!!

Let it. Let the entire Moslem world rise as one against us. I can't wait.

 

America has propped up Israel with its money. The only reason Israel can dictat terms to the Palenstinans is because of America and American money.

And rightly so. Israel is our only friend in the region, perhaps our best friend anywhere. I'd like to see the annual military grants increase by $10 billion tomorrow.

 

This support has gifted the internal enemey that all dictatorship need as a safety valve and so indirectly America is responsible for the Lebonan and Syria dictatorshiops.

Dictatorships differ only in form, not in substance. If they didn't find an enemy in Israel they'd look for one somewhere else - perhaps Turkey, perhaps another neighbour. If the people want change they can't continue to look for an external factor as the cause of all their self-inflicted miseries.

 

Dr. Tom says that the Arab world will have to "deal" with America's alliance with Israel, but Why? What does Israel offer you? ...The only gain I can see for Bush is the Evangelical Christian votes that he will get for supporting Israel.

We support Israel because it is the right thing to do. There is both good and evil in the world and the line between them is not hard to draw. Israel is good. The Palestinian terrorists who attack it are evil. We have an obligation to defend the good and destroy the evil. The rest is merely commentary.

 

Arafat is undoubtly neogaiting in bad faith but once he has his nice little state he would be higly unlikely to contentance any terrorist action as he would have something to loose by striking Israel.

Arafat doesn't want a nice little state. He has refused to accept a nice big state. He doesn't want something to lose. He wants to destroy Israel.

 

That is the main thing about terrorism is usually the actions of those with nothing to loose, give them something and they usually stop as they want to mantain their power.

You seem to be fond of quoting European history even when the parallel has no basis. Now let me refer you to a parallel which does.

Munich, 1938. This is called appeasement, and it is evil.

 

Disclaimer: I am an employee of the United States government. However, these views are entirely my own, and should not be construed as an official position in any context.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Okay you don't care about the reasons behind Sept 11th fine! But sooner or later you'll reap the whirlwind. America cannot keep going on like this pretending that nothing can hurt it, that it is automatically right.>>>

 

 

AMERICA IS RIGHT! We did NOTHING to warrant 9/11 and, thus, we should do WHATEVER it takes to make sure that other little monkeys who decide to try something like this hae th fear of God/Allah/whatevr put into them.

 

 

<<<This is not a war it is an anti-terrorist campagin and must be treated as such. America needs to liaise with muslim states and people to find out when the next attack is happening.>>>

 

 

Screw the Muslim states. They will never like us.

 

Fine.

 

If we can't have their friendship, I can easily settle with them being terrified of us.

 

The Muslim States have shown NO ability to honor agreements thus far, so I wouldn't trust them.

 

 

<<<Yes Bin Laden is a mad man, fueled by a messanic image of himself and a racist hatred of America and Western Civilastion but his followers ARE NOT! No one will willingly kill themself and others unless they think they have reason to!>>>

 

 

The reason, of course, being racism and an irrational hatred of Western Civilization.

 

Though, I find it funny---does bin Laden realize how much Western technoloy he used?

 

 

<<<You are all very keen on refering back to the Nazi's well fine, but if look properly it was the western world's refusal to be fair and just with Germany, to give Germany and its people its respect back, its bullying of Wemair to sign to the War Guilt clause that gave Hitler the message, the hook for his facist agenda which was entirely aginst Germany's demorcratic tradition.>>>

 

 

Germany didn't HAVE a democratic tradition. To make that claim is laughable. Germany---in its very brief history (they didn't become a unified country until the 1800's) was a totalitarian state. They were completely incapable of handling democracy.

 

And, yes, the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and idiotically short-sighted. STILL doesn't justify what Hitler did.

 

 

<<<If you humilate people, if you deny them their statehood then sooner or later someone will come and tell these people who have NOTHING TO LOOSE to fuck them, fuck those who have kept you like this.>>>

 

 

What statehood do the Palestinians have? As has been pointed out many times in the past, before 1967, the current "state" of Palestine was actually Jordan and Egypt.

 

They have no claim to the land.

 

 

<<<No terrorist organistaion has ever had the resources to defeat a state, that is why they stop short of civil war. What they try and do instead is to provoke the state into an OTT and brutal response hoping that will cause a swelling in support. This always work it worked in Ulster in regards to British internment, it happened in Ireland after the Easter Rebellion IT WILL HAPPEN IN THE MUSLIM WORLD IF AMERICA DOSEN'T STOP!!!>>>

 

 

OR, we could just continue killing them until they stop.

 

I have no problem with that solution.

 

 

<<<America has with its money propped up Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, etc, etc. If you pulled you money out these dictatorships would collapse.>>>

 

 

Agreed. And we should.

 

Of course, they will be replaced by brutal dictatorships.

 

 

<<<America has propped up Israel with its money. The only reason Israel can dictat terms to the Palenstinans is because of America and American money.>>>

 

 

We give tons of money to Palestine. And, in the end, we support Israel because it's the only democracy in that area and we realize that if Israel gave the assorted monkeys in that area what they want---Israel would STILL be attacked.

 

 

<<<This support has gifted the internal enemey that all dictatorship need as a safety valve and so indirectly America is responsible for the Lebonan and Syria dictatorshiops.>>>

 

 

So we are. Your point is...what?

 

 

<<<Dr. Tom says that the Arab world will have to "deal" with America's alliance with Israel, but Why? What does Israel offer you?>>>

 

 

Um, it's a democracy. It has freedom. It actually has an economy. It's been a loyal ally to us.

 

Basically, it's the antithesis of all the monkey regimes over there.

 

 

<<<It can't be used as a forward attacking base in any war except against Egypt or Jordan (both US allies) and America as plenty of forward bases for middle east action in Turley, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia (not to mention Romania and Hungary) which would be far easier to use if America didn't prop up Israel.>>>

 

 

Just checking---one of the big complaints against us is that we do things solely in our interests (as if that's a bad thing). Now, we get attacked because we support Israel with, apparently, no benefit to us.

 

 

<<<America's ideal of exporting demorcarcy to the Middle East would be far easier if it wasn't containmented in the eyes of the arabs with Israel.>>>

 

 

It would be far easier if those monkeys over there would stop assuming that all of their problems are due to the West.

 

 

<<<Israel has humilated Israel and Bush by refusing to withdraw.>>>

 

 

Why SHOULD they withdraw? Shame on us for asking them to.

 

 

<<<The only gain I can see for Bush is the Evangelical Christian votes that he will get for supporting Israel.>>>

 

 

As opposed to the moronic monkey vote he'd get for abandoning them?

 

 

<<<I agree with you that Arafat is a corrupt dicator but that's a GOOD THING. Arafat is undoubtly neogaiting in bad faith but once he has his nice little state he would be higly unlikely to contentance any terrorist action as he would have something to loose by striking Israel.>>>

 

 

My God are you naive! I don't even have the energy to unleash how naive you are with this statement. I imagine Marney will do a suitable job of it, though.

 

 

<<<You look at the situation in Ireland when Ireland was partitioned in the 1920s it was meant to be a temprary thing with Ulster and Eire eventually being reunited, however it soon became permanet as the former terrorist that now ran Eire got far more interested in keeping what they got. That is the main thing about terrorism is usually the actions of those with nothing to loose, give them something and they usually stop as they want to mantain their power.>>>

 

 

Arafat doesn't want a state.

 

Never did.

 

 

<<<The fact is The War on Terror is in a mess because its seen as a war. To succed it must be carried out as an international policing and political campagin.>>>

 

 

No, it must be a campaign to wipe out the monkeys who feel that terrorism is justified.

                 -=Mike

 

...Still laughing at the spokesman for C.A.I.R, on TV, refusing to say that he opposed the eradication of Israel.

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<"It's OK for Israel because ISRAEL WAS ATTACKED and the world is condemning them for fighting back.">>

 

<Funny, I seem to recall the last Balkan war being about Albanian rebels fighting against the Serb government and then Slobo coming in and ethnicly cleansing them out, resulting in his much-deserved war crimes trial.>

 

<<<First of all Slobo hadn't ethnically cleasned anybody before NATO dropped their bombs it was a (perhaps over the top) anti-terrorist campagin against the KLA, which not only wanted to destablise their neighbouring countries but were funded by Al'Queada.>>>

 

 

Um, NATO dropped bombs BECAUSE he was committing mass genocide.

 

Defending brutal dictators does seem like a left-wing thing to do as of late.

 

 

<<<Slobo's actions pre bombing were no different to the Israel action in Jenin.>>>

 

 

Except that Jenin was a lie.

 

 

<<<It was only aftered the bombing had started that the ethnic cleansing started.

 

Secondly unlike the action is Jenin which lest we forget to all countries except Israel is part of a foreign county>>>

 

 

Um, you are aware that the Jenin "massacre" has been proven, beyond a doubt, to be a total fraud, right?

 

You are aware that Palestinians MADE it all up and have now admitted to, I believe, 52 deaths---not the "thousands" they initially claimed.

 

THe destroyed buildings? According to the terrorists THEMSELVES, they placed explosives to bring them down. The IDF had little to do with that.

 

You DO know that, right?

 

Right?

 

 

<<<, Kosovo was a part of Serbia (indeed the birth place of Serbia) that Slobo had soverignity to do what he like.>>>

 

 

Hm, then I guess the Holocaust wasn't THAT bad since Hitler had rights to all of the lands in Europe since they surrendered to him.

 

 

<<<The fact is all Clinton cared about was getting a distraction from Monicagate and if you look what is happening now the sweet innocent Albainans are ethnically cleansing Kosovo of Serbs and the freedom fighters of the KLA are destablizing FYR Macidenoia.>>>

 

 

The people there are inept and I say we let them kill each other off.

 

No skin off our backs.

              -=Mike

[Guest]

Aw shucks, Mike, you have such faith in me. I'm flattered.

 

CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), for the record, has always been a violently anti-Semitic organisation. According to Steven Emerson in American Jihad, Appendix C:

CAIR has often served as an ideological support group for militants. On May 24, 1998... CAIR co-sponsored an incendiary rally at Brooklyn College that featured speakers spouting anti-Jewish rhetoric. One speaker was Wagdy Ghuneim, a radical cleric from Egypt. He told listeners, "Allah says he who equips a warrior of jihad is like the one that makes jihad himself." He led the audience in a song with the lyrics: "No to the Jews, descendents of the apes..."

CAIR has even refused to condemn the Taliban...

CAIR's executive director, Nihad Awad, explained his views regarding the Palestinian situation in a speech... in 1994: "After I researched the situation inside and outside Palestine, I am in support of the Hamas movement..." In 2000 Awad appeared at a rally in front of the White House... and rejected any peaceful settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians: "[The Jews] have been saying 'Next year in Jerusalem' - we say 'Next year to all Palestine.'" He also stated that Hollywood had distorted its treatment of groups engaged in violence in the Middle East by referring to them as terrorists...

CAIR officials have defended the action of suicide bombers... Omar Ahmad, chairman of CAIR's board of directors, told a youth session: "Someone in Islam is allowed to fight... fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam - that is not suicide. They kill themselves for Islam."

CAIR has several ties to... Hamas-connected organisations and individuals... at its founding, CAIR received funding of $5000 from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development [note: this organisation's assets were frozen by the government in December 2001. The FBI determined that the HLFRD "assists Hamas by providing a constant flow of suicide volunteers and buttresses a terrorist infrastructure heavily reliant on moral support of the Palestinian populace." The founder and CEO was identified as a Hamas member.]

When [a federal judge] ordered the extradition of Hamas leader Mousa abu Marzook in 1996, CAIR coördinated a press conference... to protest the decision.

[The] former chief of the Counterterrorism Section of the FBI and former assistant director of the FBI says: "CAIR has defended individuals involved in terrorist violence, including Hamas leader Musa abu Marzook... the modus operandi has been to falsely tar as 'anti-Moslem' the US government, counter-terrorist officials, writers, journalists, and others who have investigated or exposed the threat of Middle East-based terrorism... unfortunately, CAIR is but one of the new generation of... groups in the United States that hide under a veneer of 'civil rights' or 'academic' status but in fact are tethered to a platform that supports terrorism."

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Marney, I am aware that CAIR is anti-Semitic---but these groups have always done a good job of paying lip service to Israel existing as a state when they appear on TV.

 

Either they're slipping---or they're getting REALLY pissed off at how ineffective the homicide bombers have been to date.

 

Quite frankly, I like both possibilities

                       -=Mike

[Guest]

I was sure you were. <g> But CAIR has an inoffensive, almost official-sounding name, and the media is always so eager to cater to them and invite them to participate in shouting matches on "panels," alongside other "experts" - so other people reading this thread might not have known what they were really doing. I was just elaborating on your reference.

 

Other groups cited as terrorist support networks:

MAYA - Muslim Arab Youth Association

AIG - American Islamic Group

ICW - Islamic Cultural Workshop

AMC - American Muslim Council

ICNA - Islamic Circle of North America

MPAC - Muslim Public Affairs Council

AMA - American Muslim Alliance

ISNA - Islamic Society of North America

[Guest big Dante Cruz]

You know what really gets me?  This whole thing about bin Laden as an Islamic extremist.  Whatever.

 

The man is using Islam as an excuse.  No, he's not a madman, no, he's not a zealot, he's got too much money and he's got a vendetta with us.

 

Now, bear in mind that I'm not defending most of the people in the Middle East.  For them to hate us over misconstrued beliefs does not put them in the right with me, and I don't give a damn if they're just ignorant about the whole situation or not.  Where in the Koran does it say to hate people?  Where does it say to celebrate the deaths of innocents?

 

By the way, as for the whole "religion and creed of peace" thing?  Bulls**t.  What did their great prophet do?  Kicked the hell out of the other nomadic tribes in Arabia or married into them so they could avoid this righteous ass kicking.  (Interesting how the Koran allows most men two or three marriages max or but the prophet himself is allowed like thirty.  How convinient that the Koran is a listing of his speeches.)  By the way, ask the Iranians about that whole peace thing.  For them it was convert or die when the Muslims came through and they were so pissed, they started a new denomination, the Shiites. (sp?)

[Guest]

Quick point Mike I was comparing Jenin and Slobo's actions in Kosovo as two anti-terrorist campagins that got a bit too hairy for Europe. I never thought there was a massacre in Jenin although there was a good enough case for an inquest although the idea it should be the UN who carried it out is crazy as the whole battle was there fault.

 

P.S I'm not a left-winger

 

William

[Guest]

What you got on your hands is an anti-terrorist campain that requires internationial cooperation between Secret Services, Anti-Terrorism branches, etc. You don't know this since you've never fought terrorists (you've supported a few though ho ho) but the likes of the French, the Spainish and most notably the British have fought terrorist and fought them well.

 

However to defeat terrorists you've got to isolate them as all terrorist organisations need public support. Just look at the difference between the ablity of the Tailban to carry on a gurrelia against America and their predeccsors against the Russians. To do this you need to engage with the legitmate concerns of the arab and muslim people. The reason I call on America to be more fair towards the muslim people is not a leftist Uthopian ideal of a free world but a hard headed Realpoltick assement that America's interests are best served engaging with the Muslim poplus.

This is also why America should reconsider its pro-Israel position as it harms its image in that area.

And even your right that Bush was wrong to ask Sharon to withdraw, Surely Sharon should of had the respect to the man  and the country that is all that stands between Israel and a 2nd Holocaust to humour him and retreat, and then make his reservations in private?

Sharon's Israel so reminds me of Poland circa 1939. A bully which has convinced itself it is some sort of great power not just a statialte state of a true power. Israel should shut up and do what America asks which if America has any sense will be the creation of a Palenstinan state.  

 

So Mike I'm "naive" to believe that Arafat will fall into line when he has his own little fiedom? Well what proof do you have? If you go back to the late 90s Arafat more or less did what he was told, arrested miltants etc because he wanted his state but also because these self same miltants were threats to his power (lets not forget Mossad trained Hamas as a counter to the PLO).

 

You look at Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq (pre Gulf War) all of them are (were in Iraq's case) either Islamist or Socialist countries with a great deal of antipathy against America however the elites wanted the money and in the case of Saudi Arabia and Iraq security that America offered so sheepishly made deals with the "Great Satan" and his European allies.

 

Also there is the very true fact that there is nothing like an Arab government for killing Islamists just look at Syria in the early 1980s. Put Arafat secure in power and with assitance (it would be foolish to remiltarise the country straight away) he'll have the likes of Hamas under control.

 

The fact is there is no miltary solution with Israel emerging the winning without America colonising the whole of the Middle East (not that bad an idea actually). Israel beat the Arab armies in 6 DAYS you can't get a more emphatic victory and still the Arabs slunk back to their own countries. Also it should be remeber that Israel can't afford to loose a war against the Arab countries, the first one it looses then its game over. There must be a negoiated settlement.

 

Your entirely right Mike there is no such state as Palenstine, however there are no such states as Bosina, Croatia or Kosovo and that didn't stop America fighting to install them. If the Palenstinans have no claim then give back to Jordan who DO have a claim to it. The fact is the Palenstinas live there under the Ottaman Emprie and then under British manadate for centuries and deserve part of it.

 

<Germany didn't HAVE a democratic tradition. To make that claim is laughable. Germany---in its very brief history (they didn't become a unified country until the 1800's) was a totalitarian state. They were completely incapable of handling democracy.>

 

I am well aware of Germany's youth. But your wrong Germany did have a demorcatic tradition, it had a parliament and elected MPs etc. Now granted this was practically suspended during WW1 but then I can only think of Britian as the only country where its MPs don't exercise self-censorship during war. Germany's demorcracy was just as secure as most mainland European ones at the time, as they all had troubled with a large and powerful army.

 

<And, yes, the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and idiotically short-sighted. STILL doesn't justify what Hitler did.>

 

No but it explians how he was put in a position to do what he did. The lesson from appeasement is that you should never address concerns of a people in a begruding manner  or in a drip, drip way. Go down to your bottom line, say this is what we give you now piss off.

This is what America should do with Palenstine, say okay you've got you state, etc now if the mainstream (Hamas are complete rejectionists so don't count) steps out of line one bit we (America) will march into the West Bank ourselves and kick every single Palenstian out and put the rulers on court marshall with the possiblity of the death sentence, then give the whole stinking lot to Israel, believe Arafat will be as good as gold.

 

Oh and Mike its good how your are so committed against Terrorism so perhaps you might consider withdrawing support for the likes of Eire and of course Israel both states founded as a result of terrorist action.

 

Just a thought.

 

William

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Quick point Mike I was comparing Jenin and Slobo's actions in Kosovo as two anti-terrorist campagins that got a bit too hairy for Europe. I never thought there was a massacre in Jenin although there was a good enough case for an inquest although the idea it should be the UN who carried it out is crazy as the whole battle was there fault.>>>

 

 

But there was NO evidence of a "massacre". ALL the European press had to go on was the word of the PLO---and a less honest group does not exist.

 

 

<<<P.S I'm not a left-winger>>>

 

 

Um, Will, trust me---you're a left-winger.

                     -=Mike

 

William

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<<<What you got on your hands is an anti-terrorist campain that requires internationial cooperation between Secret Services, Anti-Terrorism branches, etc. You don't know this since you've never fought terrorists (you've supported a few though ho ho) but the likes of the French, the Spainish and most notably the British have fought terrorist and fought them well.>>>

 

 

And now we're fighting them and doing a quite good job of it.

 

 

<<<However to defeat terrorists you've got to isolate them as all terrorist organisations need public support. Just look at the difference between the ablity of the Tailban to carry on a gurrelia against America and their predeccsors against the Russians. To do this you need to engage with the legitmate concerns of the arab and muslim people.>>>

 

 

No---these group do what the Nazis did: Recognize that their people wallow in misery and assign blame.

 

In this case, the blame SHOULD be placed solely on Muslim culture which has changed little in the existence of the "religion", but that's neither here nor there.

 

 

<<<The reason I call on America to be more fair towards the muslim people is not a leftist Uthopian ideal of a free world but a hard headed Realpoltick assement that America's interests are best served engaging with the Muslim poplus.>>>

 

 

Screw that. America is best served by having the monkeys that run those countries and feel that homicide bombing is a good idea be so terrified of what we'll do to them that they are too terrified to ATTEMPT an attack.

 

We'll never gain their respect or affection.

 

Thus, their outright terror of us is our best bet.

 

 

<<<This is also why America should reconsider its pro-Israel position as it harms its image in that area. >>>

 

 

Israel is the ONLY free country in that region. For that reason ALONE, we should stand by them to the death.

 

I will ALWAYS support a democracy over a theocracy---and never think twice about it.

 

 

<<<And even your right that Bush was wrong to ask Sharon to withdraw, Surely Sharon should of had the respect to the man  and the country that is all that stands between Israel and a 2nd Holocaust to humour him and retreat, and then make his reservations in private?>>>

 

 

Let's be honest---the Muslim states cannot defeat Israel. God knows they've tried in the past and have been routed.

 

Bush SHOULD have told Sharon to do, and this is a quote here, "whatever the heck you want to annihilate the monkeys that run that inept little shithole".

 

 

<<<Sharon's Israel so reminds me of Poland circa 1939. A bully which has convinced itself it is some sort of great power not just a statialte state of a true power. Israel should shut up and do what America asks which if America has any sense will be the creation of a Palenstinan state.>>>

 

 

Why in the world should we back the creation of a "Palestinian" state? What in the world do the Palestinians bring to the table?

 

We'll have yet another inept dictatorship run by another monkey demagogue who will blame US for the vicious shortcomings that the country will have.

 

I say we let Israel rise up. If the Arab world wishes to fight them, we join in and annihilate the monkeys that run the countries and install people who actually DO know the difference between their collective asses and holes in the ground.

 

 

<<<So Mike I'm "naive" to believe that Arafat will fall into line when he has his own little fiedom?>>>

 

 

I wish there was a stronger term than "naive" for the utter naivete you're showing here.

 

 

<<<Well what proof do you have?>>>

 

 

Oh, gee, a refusal to negotiate shows that he doesn't want a state.

 

And I could give you a quote from Princeton Professor Dr. Bernard Lewis: "Asking Arafat to give up terrorism is like asking Tiger Woods to give up golf".

 

All Arafat would do if that little monkey was given a country woluld be to continue the assault on Israel. That is ALL he'd do and, quite frankly, I will NEVER support that.

 

 

<<<If you go back to the late 90s Arafat more or less did what he was told, arrested miltants etc>>>

 

 

And, God knows, he punished them, right?

 

BWA HA HA HA HA!

 

 

<<<because he wanted his state but also because these self same miltants were threats to his power (lets not forget Mossad trained Hamas as a counter to the PLO).>>>

 

 

Why in the heck should we support the creation of another useless country that exists only to have revolutions on a bi-weekly basis?

 

 

<<<You look at Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq (pre Gulf War) all of them are (were in Iraq's case) either Islamist or Socialist countries with a great deal of antipathy against America however the elites wanted the money and in the case of Saudi Arabia and Iraq security that America offered so sheepishly made deals with the "Great Satan" and his European allies.>>>

 

 

And we were fools to give the monkeys that ran the regimes a dime. I still say we let the Saud family get slaughtered by the monkeys that wish to overthrow them in Arabia.

 

Yeah, the gov't will be anti-American---but at least they'll be open about it.

 

 

<<<Also there is the very true fact that there is nothing like an Arab government for killing Islamists just look at Syria in the early 1980s. Put Arafat secure in power and with assitance (it would be foolish to remiltarise the country straight away) he'll have the likes of Hamas under control.>>>

 

 

Oh, he'll kill the extremists that threaten his power. The others? Why, they'll just be another part of his political machine. Muslim states have a remarkable tolerance for thugs and murderers to be in places of power.

 

Let's look at the story of Abu Abbas. He was a Palestinian thug who was involved in the hijacking of the Achille Lauro. Abbas, during this, decided to have a little fun and SHOT (and then threw overboard) an elderly Jewish man who was wheel-chair bound. He, of course, laughed during all of this.

 

Do you know where he is today?

 

That's right---he's a high-ranking official in the PA.

 

 

<<<The fact is there is no miltary solution with Israel emerging the winning without America colonising the whole of the Middle East (not that bad an idea actually). Israel beat the Arab armies in 6 DAYS you can't get a more emphatic victory and still the Arabs slunk back to their own countries. Also it should be remeber that Israel can't afford to loose a war against the Arab countries, the first one it looses then its game over. There must be a negoiated settlement.>>>

 

 

The monkeys that run the countries cannot be trusted to keep their word.

 

As Marney has pointed out, you're advocating appeasement here---and appeasement NEVER works.

 

 

<<<Your entirely right Mike there is no such state as Palenstine, however there are no such states as Bosina, Croatia or Kosovo and that didn't stop America fighting to install them.>>>

 

 

America fought to end the ethnic cleansing. We had no interest over there whatsoever.

 

More evidence of America being one of the very few "good" countries in the world.

 

 

<<<If the Palenstinans have no claim then give back to Jordan who DO have a claim to it.>>>

 

 

Screw that. Jordan attacked Israel and LOST the war. That's what happens when you start a fight and get slapped around. The land is Israel's---plain and simple.

 

Arafat is lucky that Jordan doesn't still own it. Jordan has little tolerance for him and should he do this to a state run by a monkey (which, and let's be honest here, ALL of the Muslim state leaders are sub-human), you'd quickly learn what an atrocity REALLY looks like.

 

 

<<<The fact is the Palenstinas live there under the Ottaman Emprie and then under British manadate for centuries and deserve part of it.>>>

 

 

Why do they deserve ANY of it? Their "desire" for a homeland is a fairly new one. And they'd be just another inept country run by monkeys.

 

 

<Germany didn't HAVE a democratic tradition. To make that claim is laughable. Germany---in its very brief history (they didn't become a unified country until the 1800's) was a totalitarian state. They were completely incapable of handling democracy.>

 

 

<<<I am well aware of Germany's youth. But your wrong Germany did have a demorcatic tradition, it had a parliament and elected MPs etc. Now granted this was practically suspended during WW1 but then I can only think of Britian as the only country where its MPs don't exercise self-censorship during war.>>>

 

 

That is absolute B.S. Germany had a monarch that had ABSOLUTE power. The Parliament was a weak assembly with NO power to do anything the monarch didn't want.

 

Germany had NO democratic tradition. They were used to a totalitarian state and, as we learned, would choose non-democracy over democracy.

 

 

<<<Germany's demorcracy was just as secure as most mainland European ones at the time, as they all had troubled with a large and powerful army.>>>

 

 

Germany's democracy was a joke. The monarch ran the show. The state of Prussia was deemed to be the only truly imporant state. The military sure as heck didn't listen to the Parliament---they listened to the monarch.

 

Which means the monarch had ALL the power.

 

 

<And, yes, the Treaty of Versailles was unfair and idiotically short-sighted. STILL doesn't justify what Hitler did.>

 

 

<<<No but it explians how he was put in a position to do what he did.>>>

 

 

Explaining WHY a monkey does something is so overrated a theory.

 

Who gives a DAMN why he did it? He was EVIL---trying to explain why is simply trying to excuse it.

 

 

<<<The lesson from appeasement is that you should never address concerns of a people in a begruding manner  or in a drip, drip way.>>>

 

 

No, the lesson from appeasement is that when faced with evil, you strike it down. You don't sign agreements that the evil party has no intention of honoring.

 

 

<<<Go down to your bottom line, say this is what we give you now piss off.>>>

 

 

No, you START off there. You say "This is what is allowed---ignore it and suffer." Hitler should have been stopped the day he started rebuilding the military---but the leftists in power all over Europe were too weak to stand up to him.

 

 

<<<This is what America should do with Palenstine, say okay you've got you state, etc now if the mainstream (Hamas are complete rejectionists so don't count) steps out of line one bit we (America) will march into the West Bank ourselves and kick every single Palenstian out and put the rulers on court marshall with the possiblity of the death sentence, then give the whole stinking lot to Israel, believe Arafat will be as good as gold.>>>

 

 

Why in the world should we do this when we KNOW this will happen?

 

Any Palestine created would, quickly, become another useless country in that region. They will, of course, blame Israel (you know, the only successful country in the region) for all of their problems and---yes---begin attacking them.

 

As is par for the course, Europe will support the Palestinians because they're a bunch of anti-Semites over there anyway.

 

We will stand up for Israel and get tons of world condemnation---which will make our leftists wet their collective panties and push us to stay out of the conflict. The Dems in Congress will block all bills that would provide money for military action, so we'd have to sit back and watch Israel get wiped off the face of the Earth.

 

Why not save ourselves the time and just let Israel do the world a favor and eliminate the monkeys right now?

 

 

<<<Oh and Mike its good how your are so committed against Terrorism so perhaps you might consider withdrawing support for the likes of Eire and of course Israel both states founded as a result of terrorist action.

Just a thought.>>>

 

 

I don't support Sinn Fein/IRA as they're a bunch of murderous thugs.

 

And, before Israel, the Jews had to deal with the world HATING them. They had nowhere to go where they weren't attacked and villified.

 

The world OWED them a homeland.

                -=Mike

[Guest]

<And now we're fighting them and doing a quite good job of it.>

 

I'm sorry but that's bullshit. You invaded a country to catch the leaders of Al'Queda/Tailban and FAILED!!! You have barely captured any of the leaders of Al'Queada nor have you made any serious inroads to the problem of Islamist terrorism/dogma in the Afghanistan nor Israel.

 

<No---these group do what the Nazis did: Recognize that their people wallow in misery and assign blame.>

 

Yes I agree with you but so what? Even as a staunch Unionist I can recognise that the IRA had a point about Catholics being second class citizens. However you don't ossify the problem for ever to spite the terrorists, you engage with the populus and remove that grievance.

 

<In this case, the blame SHOULD be placed solely on Muslim culture which has changed little in the existence of the "religion", but that's neither here nor there.>

 

Okaaay.

 

The fact is until the fall of Muslim Spain, the muslim world was more advanced than the Christian world, however since then it has pretty much stood still.

 

However the thing with the Muslim religons is that unlike Christanity it doesn't have a "Church" system, muslims worship on their own in communities. This means to make generalistaions about Muslims is dangerous. For instance did you know that Turkey has the most women professors in the world? Both Iran and Afghanistan had before their revolutions had women in quite a promient role. The actually problem is the Arab mentality, which is very insular, etc, etc.

 

<Screw that. America is best served by having the monkeys that run those countries and feel that homicide bombing is a good idea be so terrified of what we'll do to them that they are too terrified to ATTEMPT an attack.

 

We'll never gain their respect or affection.

 

Thus, their outright terror of us is our best bet.>

 

First off can I say that the name "Homicde Bomber" is a fucking stupid name. Like surely all terrorists are trying to kill people so that means there all "Homicde Bombers"? Look its fine if don't want to call them "Sucide Bombers" but don't use Bush's fucking stupid name.

 

Secondly let me spell it out to you, the people who are attacking the western world are world who willing to die who  and have nothing either in property or real power. What can threaten them with? Tell them you'll kill them? They don't care. Tell them you'll invade? After the fall of the Tailban they have no state. You can install fear into them when you have nothing to threaten them with.

 

What you can do is by sabre-rattling is allienate the marjoity of the muslim poplus and turn them into Islamists, which seems a fuckings stupid thing to me.

 

Also I find ironic that you think the best way to win a war on "terror" is to make you other people fear you.

 

<Let's be honest---the Muslim states cannot defeat Israel. God knows they've tried in the past and have been routed.>

 

Yes thats right with an Army that the USA PAID FOR!!!

 

Do you see?

 

<Bush SHOULD have told Sharon to do, and this is a quote here, "whatever the heck you want to annihilate the monkeys that run that inept little shithole".>

 

Good job he can't hear you then.

 

<Israel is the ONLY free country in that region. For that reason ALONE, we should stand by them to the death.

 

I will ALWAYS support a democracy over a theocracy---and never think twice about it.>

 

Well I'm sure you'll be apolgizing on behalf of your nation for the Argetine and Venzulain coups led by America?

 

<Why in the world should we back the creation of a "Palestinian" state? What in the world do the Palestinians bring to the table?>

 

The right to self-determination that the US shoved down everyone's throat during the 20th century.

 

<We'll have yet another inept dictatorship run by another monkey demagogue who will blame US for the vicious shortcomings that the country will have.>

 

Most probably will, but just like Saudi Arabia and Egypt he won't DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

 

<I say we let Israel rise up. If the Arab world wishes to fight them, we join in and annihilate the monkeys that run the countries and install people who actually DO know the difference between their collective asses and holes in the ground.>

 

Empire? Man that sounds like a good idea but surely you can get to this happy point (include Africa as well) without starting WW3?

 

<Oh, gee, a refusal to negotiate shows that he doesn't want a state.

 

And I could give you a quote from Princeton Professor Dr. Bernard Lewis: "Asking Arafat to give up terrorism is like asking Tiger Woods to give up golf".

 

All Arafat would do if that little monkey was given a country woluld be to continue the assault on Israel. That is ALL he'd do and, quite frankly, I will NEVER support that.>

 

He refused to agree to a deal that took the best land from the West Bank, divided his "state" into three pieces with settlements criss-crossed around it and didn't deal with Jersualem.

 

He wouldn't ever have been able to get it past the Palestinain people.

 

Also may arguement stands give him a state and he has something to loose if he attacks Israel.

 

Oh, he'll kill the extremists that threaten his power. The others? Why, they'll just be another part of his political machine. Muslim states have a remarkable tolerance for thugs and murderers to be in places of power.

 

<Let's look at the story of Abu Abbas. He was a Palestinian thug who was involved in the hijacking of the Achille Lauro. Abbas, during this, decided to have a little fun and SHOT (and then threw overboard) an elderly Jewish man who was wheel-chair bound. He, of course, laughed during all of this.

 

Do you know where he is today?

 

That's right---he's a high-ranking official in the PA.>

 

The one to know a story? Well one of the leaders of the Zionist terrorists that caused the King David bombing which todya is the biggest act of terrorism in the middle east and guess what HE BECAME PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL.

 

<The monkeys that run the countries cannot be trusted to keep their word.

 

As Marney has pointed out, you're advocating appeasement here---and appeasement NEVER works.>

 

"Appeasement" seemed to work in regards to Eire, Japan (allowing them to keep the Emperor) and Israel.

 

So why not now?

 

<Srew that. Jordan attacked Israel and LOST the war. That's what happens when you start a fight and get slapped around. The land is Israel's---plain and simple.>

 

Sorry but you know as well as I that you the Americans rewrote the rule book on things like that and the Land isn't Israel, no country other than Israel believes it is.

 

<rafat is lucky that Jordan doesn't still own it. Jordan has little tolerance for him and should he do this to a state run by a monkey (which, and let's be honest here, ALL of the Muslim state leaders are sub-human), you'd quickly learn what an atrocity REALLY looks like>

 

Agreed.

 

 

That is absolute B.S. Germany had a monarch that had ABSOLUTE power. The Parliament was a weak assembly with NO power to do anything the monarch didn't want.

 

Germany had NO democratic tradition. They were used to a totalitarian state and, as we learned, would choose non-democracy over democracy>

 

So that Iron Chancellor guy Bismark was a king? Man that's confusing.

 

And no the Germans didn't pick non-demorcarcy over democracy they chose a weak demorcracy that had over 40 parties due to an exterme form of PR.

 

 

<Explaining WHY a monkey does something is so overrated a theory.

 

Who gives a DAMN why he did it? He was EVIL---trying to explain why is simply trying to excuse it.>

 

Those who do not learn the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.

 

<No, you START off there. You say "This is what is allowed---ignore it and suffer." Hitler should have been stopped the day he started rebuilding the military---but the leftists in power all over Europe were too weak to stand up to him.>

 

That shows how ignorant you are of European history. The "leftists" were against Hitler, him being a facist an all it was the right wing that was interested in using his to attack Russia which was why they let him remilartize.

 

As is par for the course, Europe will support the Palestinians because they're a bunch of anti-Semites over there anyway.

 

Man I forgot because we don't support the arch-zionist idea of of a greater Israel we must all be anti-semites.

 

We will stand up for Israel and get tons of world condemnation---which will make our leftists wet their collective panties and push us to stay out of the conflict. The Dems in Congress will block all bills that would provide money for military action, so we'd have to sit back and watch Israel get wiped off the face of the Earth.

 

Heard of Joe Liberman? Well I have and I saw him standing next to Benjamin Netyinamu (man thats bad spelling) and attacking Bush for loosing his "moral calrity" it is absurd to think that the demorcats with their large Jewish vote for allow Israel to be wipped out.

 

<I don't support Sinn Fein/IRA as they're a bunch of murderous thugs.>

 

I wasn't talking about Sinn Fein/IRA I was talking about Eire itself that was founded as a result of terrorism as the Irish PM celebrated a few weeks ago.

 

<nd, before Israel, the Jews had to deal with the world HATING them. They had nowhere to go where they weren't attacked and villified>

 

Well that's exactly like the Palenstians feel like today.

 

Quick point Mike I was comparing Jenin and Slobo's actions in Kosovo as two anti-terrorist campagins that got a bit too hairy for Europe. I never thought there was a massacre in Jenin although there was a good enough case for an inquest although the idea it should be the UN who carried it out is crazy as the whole battle was there fault.>>>

 

 

<ut there was NO evidence of a "massacre". ALL the European press had to go on was the word of the PLO---and a less honest group does not exist.>

 

I NEVER SAID THERE WAS!!!

 

However something went most least how terrorist could have weapons and explosives in a refugee camp. Also there was a need to set the facts staight after the hysteria whipped up by the European Press.

 

 

<<<P.S I'm not a left-winger>>>

 

 

<Will, trust me---you're a left-winger>

 

Yes the only Left-winger to believe in Empire, national soverignity, to be anti-UN and EU and National Idenity.

 

You maybe its just that Left-Winger to you means someone who disagrees with you?

                   

William

[Guest fk teale]

"Appeasement" seemed to work in regards to Eire, Japan (allowing them to keep the Emperor) and Israel.

 

After the USA brought Japan to its knees by military action, Hirohito was forced to personally announce his surrender to the Japanese people and was stripped of political power.  Is this the appeasement you were talking about?  If so, I fully support appeasement for the Palestinian Authority.  APPEASE THEM IN THE MOUTH AND IN THE ASS

[Guest TheMikeSC]

<And now we're fighting them and doing a quite good job of it.>

 

I'm sorry but that's bullshit. You invaded a country to catch the leaders of Al'Queda/Tailban and FAILED!!!>>>

 

 

No, we sought to stop them from attacking again. The Taliban is dead and Al Qaeda is basically dead. You don't get much more successful than that.

 

 

<<<You have barely captured any of the leaders of Al'Queada nor have you made any serious inroads to the problem of Islamist terrorism/dogma in the Afghanistan nor Israel.>>>

 

 

That was not the goal. The goal was to dismantle the groups and we did so---remarkably easily, it should be noted.

 

 

<No---these group do what the Nazis did: Recognize that their people wallow in misery and assign blame.>

 

Yes I agree with you but so what? Even as a staunch Unionist I can recognise that the IRA had a point about Catholics being second class citizens. However you don't ossify the problem for ever to spite the terrorists, you engage with the populus and remove that grievance.>>>

 

 

When the populace is bombing you, engaging them in a dialogue is an absolutely terrible idea.

 

 

<In this case, the blame SHOULD be placed solely on Muslim culture which has changed little in the existence of the "religion", but that's neither here nor there.>

 

Okaaay.>>>

 

 

The Muslim church won't ALLOW anyboy to raise any questions. Researchers attempting to simply find out when the Koran was written get death sentences.

 

 

<<<The fact is until the fall of Muslim Spain, the muslim world was more advanced than the Christian world, however since then it has pretty much stood still.>>>

 

 

Yes, the Muslim world WAS ahead of the Western world.

 

It has regressed. It has become a laughingstock of the world.

 

 

<<<However the thing with the Muslim religons is that unlike Christanity it doesn't have a "Church" system, muslims worship on their own in communities.>>>

 

 

Yet the Muslim communities march in the kind of lockstep unison that the Catholic Church can only HOPE to engender.

 

 

<<<This means to make generalistaions about Muslims is dangerous. For instance did you know that Turkey has the most women professors in the world?>>>

 

 

Did you know that Turkey is one of the few---I think's it's the ONLY one, actually-- country with a Muslim population that is NOT basically ruled by the Church?

 

 

<<<Both Iran and Afghanistan had before their revolutions had women in quite a promient role.>>>

 

 

Hmm, Muslims gain control and, lo and behold, the women are no longer in prominent positions.

 

You're proving my points for me. Thanks, I suppose.

 

 

<<<The actually problem is the Arab mentality, which is very insular, etc, etc. >>>

 

 

It's the Muslim mentality.

 

 

<Screw that. America is best served by having the monkeys that run those countries and feel that homicide bombing is a good idea be so terrified of what we'll do to them that they are too terrified to ATTEMPT an attack.

 

We'll never gain their respect or affection.

 

Thus, their outright terror of us is our best bet.>

 

 

<<<First off can I say that the name "Homicde Bomber" is a fucking stupid name. Like surely all terrorists are trying to kill people so that means there all "Homicde Bombers"?>>>

 

 

"Suicide bomber" is a BETTER name? "Homicide bombers" are purposely committing homicide.

 

Would you prefer "genocide bombers"---which actually is even more accurate?

 

 

<<<Look its fine if don't want to call them "Sucide Bombers" but don't use Bush's fucking stupid name.>>>

 

 

Bush's "fucking stupid name" is also the most appropriate term for the monkeys.

 

 

<<<Secondly let me spell it out to you, the people who are attacking the western world are world who willing to die who  and have nothing either in property or real power. What can threaten them with? Tell them you'll kill them? They don't care.>>>

 

 

Good---then it'd be a mutually beneficial relationship. They wish to die and we'll help them in that route.

 

 

<<<Tell them you'll invade? After the fall of the Tailban they have no state. You can install fear into them when you have nothing to threaten them with.>>>

 

 

You can put the fear in their leaders without a big problem. Arafat certainly turned into a coward quickly when his compound was surrounded. The leaders of the other hellholes would be no different.

 

 

<<<What you can do is by sabre-rattling is allienate the marjoity of the muslim poplus and turn them into Islamists, which seems a fuckings stupid thing to me.>>>

 

 

Then SCREW the Muslim populace. If they refuse to recognize the error of the ways of their church in the Middle East, then getting them "upset" with us is irrelevant. Let them attack us.

 

We could always use cheap oil.

 

 

<<<Also I find ironic that you think the best way to win a war on "terror" is to make you other people fear you.>>>

 

 

Absolutely.

 

You see, unlike the terrorists, we don't target civilians and we don't initiate violence. They do so.

 

If they're too scared to initiate something, peace ensues.

 

 

<Let's be honest---the Muslim states cannot defeat Israel. God knows they've tried in the past and have been routed.>

 

 

<<<Yes thats right with an Army that the USA PAID FOR!!!>>>

 

 

Actually, they won with French weaponry early on---but again, don't let facts get in the way.

 

And the US gives tons of money to the other states in that region---but don't let them get in the way.

 

 

<<<Do you see?>>>

 

 

Nope.

 

 

<Bush SHOULD have told Sharon to do, and this is a quote here, "whatever the heck you want to annihilate the monkeys that run that inept little shithole".>

 

 

<<<Good job he can't hear you then.>>>

 

 

No, it's a shame for the world. Fewer of those monkeys means the world is a better place. They're up there with child molesters in my "Book Of Respect".

 

 

<Israel is the ONLY free country in that region. For that reason ALONE, we should stand by them to the death.

 

I will ALWAYS support a democracy over a theocracy---and never think twice about it.>

 

 

<<<Well I'm sure you'll be apolgizing on behalf of your nation for the Argetine and Venzulain coups led by America?>>>

 

 

Nope. We've done bad in the past. I won't deny it.

 

However, and this sounds a little harsh, Argentina and Venezuela mean approximately squat to me.

 

 

<Why in the world should we back the creation of a "Palestinian" state? What in the world do the Palestinians bring to the table?>

 

 

<<<The right to self-determination that the US shoved down everyone's throat during the 20th century.>>>

 

 

And, as we have seen all other the globe, sometimes it's not a great idea. Can ANYBODY argue that Africa is better off now than they were under colonialism? Slavery, genocide, rampant disease---is that a better way of life?

 

 

<We'll have yet another inept dictatorship run by another monkey demagogue who will blame US for the vicious shortcomings that the country will have.>

 

<<<Most probably will, but just like Saudi Arabia and Egypt he won't DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.>>>

 

 

Which is why we should remove all support from Egypt and Arabia as well.

 

And stop calling it Saudi Arabia. The Saud family is easily replacable---and hardly respectable people.

 

 

<I say we let Israel rise up. If the Arab world wishes to fight them, we join in and annihilate the monkeys that run the countries and install people who actually DO know the difference between their collective asses and holes in the ground.>

 

Empire? Man that sounds like a good idea but surely you can get to this happy point (include Africa as well) without starting WW3?>>>

 

 

Then do so. Sometimes, conflict is NECESSARY. There have been beneficial wars in the past. The US Civil War was beneficial. WW2 was beneficial.

 

WW3 might be also quite beneficial---and, it should be noted, brutally lop-sided since nobody is competitive with the US military.

 

 

<Oh, gee, a refusal to negotiate shows that he doesn't want a state.

 

And I could give you a quote from Princeton Professor Dr. Bernard Lewis: "Asking Arafat to give up terrorism is like asking Tiger Woods to give up golf".

 

All Arafat would do if that little monkey was given a country woluld be to continue the assault on Israel. That is ALL he'd do and, quite frankly, I will NEVER support that.>

 

 

<<<He refused to agree to a deal that took the best land from the West Bank, divided his "state" into three pieces with settlements criss-crossed around it and didn't deal with Jersualem.>>>

 

 

Jerusalem WON'T ever be given to him. He should go ahead and abandon that hope now.

 

As for the rest, it was a NEGOTIATION and he was given a sweet deal.

 

He refused it.

 

Israel should NEVER give him anything and the idiotic land-for-peace strategy they followed at the time simply allowed Arafat---with considerable EU and UN funding---to reinforce his terroristic monkeys.

 

 

<<<He wouldn't ever have been able to get it past the Palestinain people.>>>

 

 

Yeah, because God knows he is up for elections and all. If things go badly, he'd just blame Israel.

 

 

<<<Also may arguement stands give him a state and he has something to loose if he attacks Israel.>>>

 

 

The argument is horribly faulty since he has no desire for a state whatsoever.

 

 

<<<Oh, he'll kill the extremists that threaten his power. The others? Why, they'll just be another part of his political machine. Muslim states have a remarkable tolerance for thugs and murderers to be in places of power.

 

<Let's look at the story of Abu Abbas. He was a Palestinian thug who was involved in the hijacking of the Achille Lauro. Abbas, during this, decided to have a little fun and SHOT (and then threw overboard) an elderly Jewish man who was wheel-chair bound. He, of course, laughed during all of this.

 

Do you know where he is today?

 

That's right---he's a high-ranking official in the PA.>

 

The one to know a story? Well one of the leaders of the Zionist terrorists that caused the King David bombing which todya is the biggest act of terrorism in the middle east and guess what HE BECAME PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL.>>>

 

 

Yup, it was bad.

 

Of course, Israel hasn't really initiated much violence since the '50's.

 

 

<The monkeys that run the countries cannot be trusted to keep their word.

 

As Marney has pointed out, you're advocating appeasement here---and appeasement NEVER works.>

 

 

<<<"Appeasement" seemed to work in regards to Eire, Japan (allowing them to keep the Emperor) and Israel.>>>

 

 

JAPAN? Are you NUTS?

 

We RAN Japan for years. MacArthur was THE man in charge. The Emperor was forced to renounce all power he had. He became less powerful than the British monarchs (no small feat).

 

That's not appeasement---that is (and, heck, it's the term we used at the time) total surrender.

 

The Jewish people have a respect for democratic control---the monkeys in Palestine do not---so the groups are not comparable.

 

So why not now?

 

<Srew that. Jordan attacked Israel and LOST the war. That's what happens when you start a fight and get slapped around. The land is Israel's---plain and simple.>

 

Sorry but you know as well as I that you the Americans rewrote the rule book on things like that and the Land isn't Israel, no country other than Israel believes it is.>>>

 

 

Americans are returning the rules to where they are. And I could care less what the anti-Semites in Europe and Africa think. The land is Israel's.

 

If the monkeys want it---let them take it from Israel.

 

I don't see it happening.

 

 

<Arafat is lucky that Jordan doesn't still own it. Jordan has little tolerance for him and should he do this to a state run by a monkey (which, and let's be honest here, ALL of the Muslim state leaders are sub-human), you'd quickly learn what an atrocity REALLY looks like>

 

Agreed.

 

 

That is absolute B.S. Germany had a monarch that had ABSOLUTE power. The Parliament was a weak assembly with NO power to do anything the monarch didn't want.

 

Germany had NO democratic tradition. They were used to a totalitarian state and, as we learned, would choose non-democracy over democracy>

 

<<<So that Iron Chancellor guy Bismark was a king? Man that's confusing.>>>

 

 

The monarchy was THE ruler of the country. Always had been. The Germans wanted authoritarian regimes. Democracy was forced upon them by the Allies and while the idea was sound, they weren't ready for it and we ended up with the disaster that led to Nazi Germany.

 

 

<<<And no the Germans didn't pick non-demorcarcy over democracy they chose a weak demorcracy that had over 40 parties due to an exterme form of PR.>>>

 

 

No, after 1930, the two leading parties in Europe were the Communists and Nazis---both openly supporting the end of the Republic and a return to an authoritarian regime. Their deadlock led to Germany being ruled in a dictatorial manner for years (the only way anything could become law was by fiat) until they gave Hitler power.

 

 

<Explaining WHY a monkey does something is so overrated a theory.

 

Who gives a DAMN why he did it? He was EVIL---trying to explain why is simply trying to excuse it.>

 

 

<<<Those who do not learn the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.>>>

 

 

Yet you think so highly of appeasement.

 

 

<No, you START off there. You say "This is what is allowed---ignore it and suffer." Hitler should have been stopped the day he started rebuilding the military---but the leftists in power all over Europe were too weak to stand up to him.>

 

That shows how ignorant you are of European history. The "leftists" were against Hitler, him being a facist an all it was the right wing that was interested in using his to attack Russia which was why they let him remilartize.>>>

 

 

They didn't want a conflict. They were scared of having another war and would do ANYTHING to avoid it. Thus, they gave him carte blanche to do whatever he wanted and sold out all of the allies they create after WW1 to appease him.

 

 

<<<As is par for the course, Europe will support the Palestinians because they're a bunch of anti-Semites over there anyway.

 

Man I forgot because we don't support the arch-zionist idea of of a greater Israel we must all be anti-semites.>>>

 

 

No, but when synagogues are getting burned left and right and various governmental leaders are spouting off the kind of anti-Semitism that would make a John Birch Society member proud, then it's not a stretch to say that Europe is anti-Semitic.

 

 

<<<We will stand up for Israel and get tons of world condemnation---which will make our leftists wet their collective panties and push us to stay out of the conflict. The Dems in Congress will block all bills that would provide money for military action, so we'd have to sit back and watch Israel get wiped off the face of the Earth.

 

Heard of Joe Liberman?>>>

 

 

A hyporite who will sell out all of his beliefs in exchange for power (see the 2000 US elections).

 

 

<<<Well I have and I saw him standing next to Benjamin Netyinamu (man thats bad spelling) and attacking Bush for loosing his "moral calrity" it is absurd to think that the demorcats with their large Jewish vote for allow Israel to be wipped out.>>>

 

 

And the moment his power is threatened by any support of Israel, he will abandon them.

 

 

<I don't support Sinn Fein/IRA as they're a bunch of murderous thugs.>

 

I wasn't talking about Sinn Fein/IRA I was talking about Eire itself that was founded as a result of terrorism as the Irish PM celebrated a few weeks ago.

 

<nd, before Israel, the Jews had to deal with the world HATING them. They had nowhere to go where they weren't attacked and villified>

 

<<<Well that's exactly like the Palenstians feel like today.>>>

 

 

Except that Palestinians haven't been the victim of worldwide attempts to wipe them off the face of the earth for centuries.

 

 

<<<Quick point Mike I was comparing Jenin and Slobo's actions in Kosovo as two anti-terrorist campagins that got a bit too hairy for Europe. I never thought there was a massacre in Jenin although there was a good enough case for an inquest although the idea it should be the UN who carried it out is crazy as the whole battle was there fault.>>>

 

 

<ut there was NO evidence of a "massacre". ALL the European press had to go on was the word of the PLO---and a less honest group does not exist.>

 

<<<I NEVER SAID THERE WAS!!!>>>

 

 

You said there was a good case for an inquiry. There was NO case for one. The fact that it became a "story" at all is because the European press has a hard-on for Arafat.

 

 

<<<However something went most least how terrorist could have weapons and explosives in a refugee camp.>>>

 

 

They've ALWAYS had them there---and the U.N has allowed them to have weapons in U.N-RUN institutions.

 

 

<<<Also there was a need to set the facts staight after the hysteria whipped up by the European Press.>>>

 

 

But the hysteria wouldn't have passed. The European press had a story in mind and come hell or high water, they would have gone with it. Israel and the U.S---from the opening moment---said that the casualties were grossly exaggerated and even predicted the casualties (the U.S estimate was 45---darned close). Israel would have been foolish to allow the U.N---or any group with a lot of Muslims in it---to do any investigation.

 

 

<<<P.S I'm not a left-winger>>>

 

 

<Will, trust me---you're a left-winger>

 

Yes the only Left-winger to believe in Empire, national soverignity, to be anti-UN and EU and National Idenity.

 

You maybe its just that Left-Winger to you means someone who disagrees with you?>>>

 

 

Nope. Marney and I don't agree on a lot---I'm relatively sure that she isn't a left-winger on most issues.

                    -=Mike

[Guest]

I'm leaving Israel/WonT for the moment as I plain to come back and right something about that after my exams, so on the minior issues.

 

Germany had a developing democratic tradition, it wasn't as fully formed as America's but it was coming there espeacilly when you consider it against other European countries, for example did you know that only until 1963 did the Queen loose the power to select the Prime Minister from the ruling party if the Prime Minister resigned during the course of his party's term of office. It was like most European countries a form of elect Obligarchary.

 

However, just because Germany was a democracy did not mean that it wasn't authoratian. The German people like a strong leader in charge (similar to the French) and the democracy of Wemair failed because of an exterme form of PR that led to Germany being run like Italy, governments collapsing all the time.

 

On Appeasment, if take Appeasement to mean backing down due to the threat of volence then America appeased Japan. America had a definite anti-monarchist policy which had led to stopping Germany having a monarchy, however it didn't follow this policy in Japan, why? Because it knew the Japanese would riot, hence it had backed down due to the threat of volence, hence it had appeased the Japanese mob.

 

Finally on whether I'm Left Wing or not. Now Mike if you as I guess you do believe in a Republic that will make you a left winger in Britian. You said yourself that terms like conservative are relative (oh and by the way you were wrong on Fortyn he wanted to go further left on homosexuality and drugs) and this true of right and left wing. If you read my posts such as the one on Blair then you will realise (and I'm sure one of my fellow Britions will back me up on this) that I am ultra libertain right wing.

 

On Israel I consider myself again on the Brtish right wing. I believe in Israel and have until Sharon defended Israel, indeed in the old Smarks folder I defended Israel. The fact is most Britions (including that left winger Margrat Thatcher) believe in Israel but realise that the Palenstinains haven't been treated right and there must be a settlement, which whether it is right or left wing is simply right.

 

P.S <Actually, they won with French weaponry early on>

 

Wow and I thought the French were all horrible anti-semites.

 

William