Why are we propping up Israel?
z
Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
the USA in particular to keep Israel alive? I really dislike
places with state religions, and the whole thing muddies
the waters with respect to the Islamic Fundamentalists, whom
I believe, simply use Israel as an excuse.
A better plan would be to offer all Israeli Citizens
immigrant status in the USA, Canada, and other Western
countries who are interested in acquiring skilled hard working
people. Then, let the state of Israel fend for itself.
The place is demographically doomed anyway.
Matta:Bin Laden=McVeigh:??
people we let in.
On 16 Oct 2001 19:26:12 -0700, z
<z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote:
::
::Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
"Here's the paradox: The fact that we live under a
political system that honors the right of individuals
to object conscientiously to engaging in war is one
of the reasons why ours is a system worth defending.
Osama bin Laden's world does not allow for pacifists.
Ours does. To stand up for pacifists -- even when
you disagree with them, and especially when they're
unpopular -- is to protect this moral difference."
------E. J. Dionne, Washington Post, Oct 5, 2001, p. A37
Stephen H. Kawamoto
escaped the Mounties by hopping on a plane back to his kibbutz in Tel Aviv.
--
Overgrow the State!
White hat hackers: keeping the worldwide web secure...
PGP key fingerprint: 7F49 566F DB34 DC11 5BEA 0BC3 C47A A982 8C65 6D0E
--
"Matta:Bin Laden=McVeigh:??" <Bush...@andlovin.it> wrote in message
news:o2tpstkfv1ekhafop...@4ax.com...
Stephen H. Kawamoto
a USWest subsidiary
Used by "Matta:Bin Laden=McVeigh:??" <Bush...@andlovin.it>
to write anomymously
Wesley Moxam
"z" <z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:9qiq8...@drn.newsguy.com...
>
> Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
> the USA in particular to keep Israel alive?
Easy. Because the 'west' needs to have a strong ally in the mid-east
to ensure their oil supply from the region. Conversely, Israel needs
strong outside support because there is no way that they can make
a strong alliance with any other the surrounding countries.
If the US depended mostly on another country such as Saudi Arabia,
then a sudden change in attitude, or change in government could leave
the US without a major ally since the Saudis really don't need the US,
there are plenty of other potential allies to the Saudis in the region.
(Note: that the current Saudi gov't DOES need the US, since it
may be toppled if the US were to leave the country).
Hartmann Schaffer
"Stephen H. Kawamoto" <shkaw...@hotmail.com> writes:
> Yes, like that nasty young Israeli soldier who beat up a Toronto youth and
> escaped the Mounties by hopping on a plane back to his kibbutz in Tel Aviv.
apparently you forgot that his escape was only temporarily: israel
extradited him
hs
--
Apart from the obvious disagreement about who the good guys are, what
is the difference between "You are either with us or against us" and
"There are only good muslim and infidels"?
z
>
>Yes, like that nasty young Israeli soldier who beat up a Toronto youth and
>escaped the Mounties by hopping on a plane back to his kibbutz in Tel Aviv.
No asshole, like that Canadian from Nova Scotia who
murdered so many women that he lost count.
z
>
>
>"z" <z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:9qiq8...@drn.newsguy.com...
>>
>> Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
>> the USA in particular to keep Israel alive?
>
>Easy. Because the 'west' needs to have a strong ally in the mid-east
>to ensure their oil supply from the region. Conversely, Israel needs
>strong outside support because there is no way that they can make
>a strong alliance with any other the surrounding countries.
So we support an idea, a regime, that is fundamentally wrong.
I really don't like being on a side that is morally indefensible.
>
>If the US depended mostly on another country such as Saudi Arabia,
>then a sudden change in attitude, or change in government could leave
>the US without a major ally since the Saudis really don't need the US,
>there are plenty of other potential allies to the Saudis in the region.
>(Note: that the current Saudi gov't DOES need the US, since it
>may be toppled if the US were to leave the country).
The Saudis are just another problem. Some one suggested we give
Saudi to the Palestinians. At least the Palestinians know how to
work. If you sell your soul for oil, you're car runs but your karma
stinks. Oil has no value if you can't sell it. What we really need
is a gov't in Saudi that is not composed of 7000 princes.
z
To Kilroy 911:
If you weren't such a coward you'd post your messages in a form
that could be replied to directly.
Para 1:
An excellent example of an ad homonym attack of the type called
poisoning the well. I will disregard the stupidity contained therein.
Para 2:
Yes but the French etc didn't appropriate their country from
someone else.
Para 3:
I am an American expatriate you idiot. I pledge allegiance to the
flag of the United States of America and to the country for which
it stands, one nation, under god, with etc. I was born in Detroit.
I don't see anything else to reply to in your stupid post.
In article <9qiq8...@drn.newsguy.com>, z says...
SteveL
<wmo...@scs.ryerson.ca> wrote:
>
>Easy. Because the 'west' needs to have a strong ally in the mid-east
>to ensure their oil supply from the region.
??? And you think alienating the providers of that oil by choosing to
back their sworn enemy (who incidently has no oil), is the best way to
achieve that?
>Conversely, Israel needs
>strong outside support because there is no way that they can make
>a strong alliance with any other the surrounding countries.
Maybe there's a good reason for that.
Kilroy911!!!
SOUND LIKE A MUSLIM FROM THE MIDDLE EAST.
YOUR ISLAMIC FANATICISM JUST CAN'T BE CONCEALED
FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME!
KILROY911!!!
Kilroy911!!!
basic truth is that EVERY COUNTRY in modern times
has been TAKEN FROM SOMEONE ELSE!
I'm sure the indians would really like us to deed the entire
country back to them. Ain't gonna happen. Saddam tried
to take Qwait. Then Iran tried to take Iraq. Wars of
conquest have been fought though out history. The Roman
Empire subjugated all of the civilized world of its day.
No one walked up and said, "Gee you should give Egypt
back to the Egyptians." They would have laughed their
heads off as they raped his wife!
It has ALWAYS been the survival of the fittest. Qwait would
now be part of Iraq if we and the Arab would had simply
looked the other way. But they had their good friends so
their fat was pulled from the fire, as it were.
With all the lands in the African continent it certainly is sad
that the Arab countries can't get together and donate a few
thousand square miles.
And besides. Who says who owns any piece of land? Why
do the Palistenians have any superior claim than the Jews?
The american indians laughed at the silly white man. Trying
to OWN land that has been here 4.5 billion years and will
probably be here 4.5 billion years after we have annihilated
ourselves. And then we had to go and educate them. They'll
probably have it all back in another hundred years or so.
The Arabs have tried to kick them off several times and got
there butts sorely whooped! What they could not do by force
of arms they now want to try to accomplish be stealth and
MURDER! That too shall FAIL!
As to you being an American? Do we REALLY know that?
Maybe you are an Iraqi exchange student from Detroit! I've
never known anyone that was actually born their and ever
ADMITTED TO IT in public!
I fear that all we have accomplished is to awaken a sleepingYeah! What he said!
giant and fill him with a terrible resolve!
Kilroy911!!!
SteveL
<z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>So we support an idea, a regime, that is fundamentally wrong.
>I really don't like being on a side that is morally indefensible.
That's a refreshing attitude.
>
>The Saudis are just another problem. Some one suggested we give
>Saudi to the Palestinians. At least the Palestinians know how to
>work. If you sell your soul for oil, you're car runs but your karma
>stinks. Oil has no value if you can't sell it. What we really need
>is a gov't in Saudi that is not composed of 7000 princes.
One reason for Arab distrust of the US is a perceived American
arrogance. Think about what you just said there: "Some one suggested
we give Saudi to the Palestinians.At least the Palestinians know how
to work.". *We*??? Like it's ours to give??
The News Guy(Mike)
"Stephen H. Kawamoto" <shkaw...@hotmail.com> writes:
>> Yes, like that nasty young Israeli soldier who beat up a Toronto youth and
>> escaped the Mounties by hopping on a plane back to his kibbutz in Tel Aviv.
On 17 Oct 2001 02:21:00 -0400, h...@heaven.nirvananet (Hartmann Schaffer) wrote:
>apparently you forgot that his escape was only temporarily: israel
>extradited him
Don't think the truth and actual facts would get into this hate-mongers way.
Stephen is a puke filled bag of air and his name should be in everyone's filter
"killfile"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The News Guy(Mike) - Seinfeld Lists
http://www.geocities.com/tnguym
All things Seinfeld; scripts, trivia, lists,
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Peter H. Proctor
>From: SteveL <Ste...@stevelon.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Why are we propping up Israel?
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:23:35 GMT
>>Conversely, Israel needs
>>strong outside support because there is no way that they can make
>>a strong alliance with any other the surrounding countries.
>Maybe there's a good reason for that.
Actually, Israel has a fairly close relationship with Turkey. And provides
a handy scapegoat for systemic problems in the Arab middle east.
PHP
Peter H. Proctor
>From: SteveL <Ste...@stevelon.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Why are we propping up Israel?
>One reason for Arab distrust of the US is a perceived American
>arrogance.
Mainly, it is displaced anger at their own governments....
Dr P
exroofer
"Kilroy911!!!" <kil...@screwbinbaby.org> wrote in message news:3BCD08AE...@screwbinbaby.org...no comment on your discussion. just liked the pic. very appropriate.
JMD
rights and democracy, we are obliged to support states that share this
belief. People have been saying Israel is doomed for more than 50 years.
It continues to defy those who would write its obituary.
John Dowell
JMD
>
> So we support an idea, a regime, that is fundamentally wrong.
> I really don't like being on a side that is morally indefensible.
Explain what is fundamentally wrong with Israel, a pluralistic, democratic
state. Why is support for such a state by like-minded countries morally
indefensible?
John Dowell
SteveL
Proctor) wrote:
[Israel]
> provides
>a handy scapegoat for systemic problems in the Arab middle east.
Leaving aside whether that is true or not (and if true it means the
Arabs understand their own grievances less well than some Americans
claim to on their behalf (arrogance?)), is it wise to fan the flames
of Arab hatred, even if it is so conveniently misguided, by continuing
to blindly support Israel - to the tune of billions of dollars in aid
and military hardware - which is then deployed against those same
Arabs?
Is it wise to further alienate the Arabs by vetoing over 500 UN
sanctions against Israel. That's every single one (bar one, which
passed accidentally). Doesn't that show an arrogance and a fully
automated dismissiveness of Arab concerns?
Or contrastingly *using* a UN resolution to justify continued actions
against Iraq for 10 years, in which the UN estimates claim 500,000
Iraqi children have died?
Ok you can say Saddam brings it on himself by not surrendering to
outdide demands, but even so, over 1 million dead and 500,000 children
included is a hell of a price to charge for compliance.
PeopleEater
> Easy. Because the 'west' needs to have a strong ally in the mid-east
> to ensure their oil supply from the region. Conversely, Israel needs
> strong outside support because there is no way that they can make
> a strong alliance with any other the surrounding countries.
Not that easy. Israel doesn't have any oil, and the surrounding states
that do have oil are decidedly antigonistic towards the Israeli state.
Our support for Israel is yet another Cold War relic. During the
1950's, the USSR found support from many of the Arab countries that
had at one time or another, been colonies under the British or the
French. Since Western Europe was an ally of the US, its logical that
many of the Middle Eastern states would look to the USSR.
-PE
Russil Wvong
> Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
> the USA in particular to keep Israel alive? I really dislike
> places with state religions, and the whole thing muddies
> the waters with respect to the Islamic Fundamentalists, whom
> I believe, simply use Israel as an excuse.
Here's my take on it.
1. The primary interest of the US in foreign policy is *stability*.
Democracy and human rights are at best a secondary objective.
(I wish US leaders would come out and say so; at least that way
they wouldn't be accused of hypocrisy.)
2. In particular, the US has a strong interest in not seeing a
volatile situation blow up. Particularly since Israel has
nuclear weapons. That's the biggest reason.
Some secondary reasons:
- More generally, the West supports Israel because, well, because
of the Holocaust. It doesn't have anything to do with oil;
US oil interests were opposed to the creation of Israel in the
first place.
- There's also a strong Jewish lobby in the US. American Jews
generally take a strong interest in politics, and they definitely
don't want to see Israel destroyed.
- The US also gets some benefits from its relationship with Israel,
it's not an entirely one-way street. Israeli intelligence,
for example, is very, very good.
3. There's no easy solutions.
From the US point of view, it'd be ideal if the Israelis and the
Palestinians were willing to make a deal, to compromise and to give
up some of their goals in order to achieve others. Unfortunately,
so far they haven't been. It may not be possible to reach a deal
until both sides are exhausted. In the meantime, all the US can
do is try to restrain both sides as much as possible and keep
pushing for a deal.
Emigration isn't a solution. The Israelis regard Israel as their
home, and most of them aren't going to be willing to leave; they're
going to fight. Because of the Holocaust, they're highly motivated,
much more so than the French settlers in Algeria. And they have
nuclear weapons. An all-out war would be a disaster.
I should also point out that it's not just a matter of religion,
it's also nationalism. There's secular nationalists on both the
Israeli and Arab sides who are as bitter as the religious
fundamentalists.
4. If you're interested in learning more about the problem, William R.
Polk provides a detailed discussion of the creation of Israel and
the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict in "The Arab World Today"
(1991). As far as I can tell, it's reasonably balanced.
He concludes with
... it seems likely to me that we are watching the last act
of a long drama, a true tragedy, in which good people are locked
in a struggle that, ultimately, will certainly severely harm and
may even ruin them both.
It's an ugly problem with no easy solution.
Russil Wvong
Vancouver, Canada
www.geocities.com/rwvong
z
>
>
>--------------B09B4F8617C6E18D9726E3D9
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>.....lack of mental understanding rears it's ugly head! The
>basic truth is that EVERY COUNTRY in modern times
>has been TAKEN FROM SOMEONE ELSE!
ahh... willing to fight like a man. Is mental understanding
meant to differentiate it from anal understanding?
>
>I'm sure the indians would really like us to deed the entire
>country back to them. Ain't gonna happen. Saddam tried
>to take Qwait. Then Iran tried to take Iraq. Wars of
>conquest have been fought though out history. The Roman
>Empire subjugated all of the civilized world of its day.
I must agree with you here. But look at the cost. This
is costing us our freedom. Is it worth our while to
keep Israel and Saudi going under these circumstances.
Note that I don't think we should retreat to placate
terrorists.We should destroy them. Then we should look at our
options. Saudi must sell its oil to someone.
>
>No one walked up and said, "Gee you should give Egypt
>back to the Egyptians." They would have laughed their
>heads off as they raped his wife!
>
>It has ALWAYS been the survival of the fittest. Qwait would
>now be part of Iraq if we and the Arab would had simply
>looked the other way. But they had their good friends so
>their fat was pulled from the fire, as it were.
We needed to reduce Iraq's power. But perhaps this
could be done more efficiently by targeting
the middle east with nukes and letting them know
that if we are hit with any further terrorism
that we will turn Islam into the world's most rapidly
shrinking religion.
>
>With all the lands in the African continent it certainly is sad
>that the Arab countries can't get together and donate a few
>thousand square miles.
>
>And besides. Who says who owns any piece of land? Why
>do the Palistenians have any superior claim than the Jews?
>The american indians laughed at the silly white man. Trying
>to OWN land that has been here 4.5 billion years and will
>probably be here 4.5 billion years after we have annihilated
>ourselves. And then we had to go and educate them. They'll
>probably have it all back in another hundred years or so.
>
>The Arabs have tried to kick them off several times and got
>there butts sorely whooped! What they could not do by force
>of arms they now want to try to accomplish be stealth and
>MURDER! That too shall FAIL!
>
>As to you being an American? Do we REALLY know that?
>Maybe you are an Iraqi exchange student from Detroit! I've
>never known anyone that was actually born their and ever
>ADMITTED TO IT in public!
>
> I fear that all we have accomplished is to awaken a sleeping
> giant and fill him with a terrible resolve!
Lets not start believing our own propaganda.
>--------------B09B4F8617C6E18D9726E3D9
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
><html>
>.....lack of mental understanding rears it's ugly head! The
><br>basic truth is that EVERY COUNTRY in modern times
><br>has been TAKEN FROM SOMEONE ELSE!
><p>I'm sure the indians would really like us to deed the entire
><br>country back to them. Ain't gonna happen. Saddam tried
><br>to take Qwait. Then Iran tried to take Iraq. Wars of
><br>conquest have been fought though out history. The Roman
><br>Empire subjugated all of the civilized world of its day.
><p>No one walked up and said, "Gee you should give Egypt
><br>back to the Egyptians." They would have laughed their
><br>heads off as they raped his wife!
><p>It has ALWAYS been the survival of the fittest. Qwait would
><br>now be part of Iraq if we and the Arab would had simply
><br>looked the other way. But they had their good friends so
><br>their fat was pulled from the fire, as it were.
><p>With all the lands in the African continent it certainly is sad
><br>that the Arab countries can't get together and donate a few
><br>thousand square miles.
><p>And besides. Who says who owns any piece of land? Why
><br>do the Palistenians have any superior claim than the Jews?
><br>The american indians laughed at the silly white man. Trying
><br>to OWN land that has been here 4.5 billion years and will
><br>probably be here 4.5 billion years after we have annihilated
><br>ourselves. And then we had to go and educate them. They'll
><br>probably have it all back in another hundred years or so.
><p>The Arabs have tried to kick them off several times and got
><br>there butts sorely whooped! What they could not do by force
><br>of arms they now want to try to accomplish be stealth and
><br>MURDER! That too shall FAIL!
><p>As to you being an American? Do we REALLY know that?
><br>Maybe you are an Iraqi exchange student from Detroit! I've
><br>never known anyone that was actually born their and ever
><br>ADMITTED TO IT in public!
><blockquote>I fear that all we have accomplished is to awaken a sleeping
><br>giant and fill him with a terrible resolve!</blockquote>
>Yeah! What he said!
><p>Kilroy911!!!
><br>
><br>
><p>z wrote:
><blockquote TYPE=CITE>To Kilroy 911:
><p>If you weren't such a coward you'd post your messages in a form
><br>that could be replied to directly.
><p>Para 1:
><p>An excellent example of an ad homonym attack of the type called
><br>poisoning the well. I will disregard the stupidity contained therein.
><p>Para 2:
><br>Yes but the French etc didn't appropriate their country from
><br>someone else.
><p>Para 3:
><p>I am an American expatriate you idiot. I pledge allegiance to the
><br>flag of the United States of America and to the country for which
><br>it stands, one nation, under god, with etc. I was born in Detroit.
><br>I don't see anything else to reply to in your stupid post.
><p>In article <9qiq8...@drn.newsguy.com>, z says...
><br>>
><br>>
><br>>Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
><br>>the USA in particular to keep Israel alive? I really dislike
><br>>places with state religions, and the whole thing muddies
><br>>the waters with respect to the Islamic Fundamentalists, whom
><br>>I believe, simply use Israel as an excuse.
><br>>
><br>>A better plan would be to offer all Israeli Citizens
><br>>immigrant status in the USA, Canada, and other Western
><br>>countries who are interested in acquiring skilled hard working
><br>>people. Then, let the state of Israel fend for itself.
><br>>
><br>>The place is demographically doomed anyway.
><br>></blockquote>
></html>
>
>--------------B09B4F8617C6E18D9726E3D9--
>
z
A state with a state religion, whose territory
was taken from Arabs in a religious war. A state
that cannot defend its own boarders without
the help of the USA, the cost of which is becoming
increasingly steep. A country which will soon
be minority Jewish and will have to resort to totalitarian
measures for its own survival. That's what's wrong.
z
z
Saudi would be long gone without the the USA. It is
our puppet to give away. Saudi can not defend its own borders.
This is not about arrogance... it is about fact.
z
because it will soon be minority Jewish. Israel can not
defend its own boarders. It needs us. But is it worth it
to us. I would say no. You seem to think yes. Just because
it is democratic doesn't really cut it. Why do I want to
make sacrificices to keep it going, considering how it
came into existance.
>
>
Ashland Henderson
> .....lack of mental understanding rears it's ugly head! The
> basic truth is that EVERY COUNTRY in modern times
> has been TAKEN FROM SOMEONE ELSE!
Iceland. Unoccuppied when the Norse arrived.
> I'm sure the indians would really like us to deed the entire
> country back to them. Ain't gonna happen. Saddam tried
> to take Qwait. Then Iran tried to take Iraq. Wars of
> conquest have been fought though out history. The Roman
> Empire subjugated all of the civilized world of its day.
Nope. The Roman Empire got a lot of the world but by no means
all of it, or even all of the civilized world.
> No one walked up and said, "Gee you should give Egypt
> back to the Egyptians." They would have laughed their
> heads off as they raped his wife!
>
> It has ALWAYS been the survival of the fittest. Qwait would
> now be part of Iraq if we and the Arab would had simply
> looked the other way. But they had their good friends so
> their fat was pulled from the fire, as it were.
>
> With all the lands in the African continent it certainly is sad
> that the Arab countries can't get together and donate a few
> thousand square miles.
Give them time.
> And besides. Who says who owns any piece of land? Why
> do the Palistenians have any superior claim than the Jews?
> The american indians laughed at the silly white man. Trying
> to OWN land that has been here 4.5 billion years and will
> probably be here 4.5 billion years after we have annihilated
> ourselves. And then we had to go and educate them. They'll
> probably have it all back in another hundred years or so.
Doubtful.
> The Arabs have tried to kick them off several times and got
> there butts sorely whooped! What they could not do by force
> of arms they now want to try to accomplish be stealth and
> MURDER! That too shall FAIL!
Israel, if it continues to rely on military force only, will
eventually fall.
> As to you being an American? Do we REALLY know that?
> Maybe you are an Iraqi exchange student from Detroit! I've
> never known anyone that was actually born their and ever
> ADMITTED TO IT in public!
That is apparently because you live an isolated life.
Rest snipped for bandwidth
Don
> In article <Bcgz7.276451$j65.72...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com>, "JMD"
says...
> >
> >"z" <z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
> >news:9qj91...@drn.newsguy.com...
> >>
> >> So we support an idea, a regime, that is fundamentally wrong.
> >> I really don't like being on a side that is morally indefensible.
> >===========
> >Explain what is fundamentally wrong with Israel, a pluralistic,
democratic
> >state. Why is support for such a state by like-minded countries morally
> >indefensible?
> >
> >John Dowell
> >
>
> A state with a state religion, whose territory
> was taken from Arabs in a religious war.
Who's and ws taken by the Arabs centuries ago. It's a viscious circle.
> A state
> that cannot defend its own boarders without
> the help of the USA, the cost of which is becoming
> increasingly steep.
Sounds like Saudi Arabia
> A country which will soon
> be minority Jewish and will have to resort to totalitarian
> measures for its own survival. That's what's wrong.
How is that?
z
>
>
>"z" <z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:9qk64...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> In article <Bcgz7.276451$j65.72...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com>, "JMD"
>says...
>> >
>> >"z" <z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>> >news:9qj91...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> >>
>> >> So we support an idea, a regime, that is fundamentally wrong.
>> >> I really don't like being on a side that is morally indefensible.
>> >===========
>> >Explain what is fundamentally wrong with Israel, a pluralistic,
>democratic
>> >state. Why is support for such a state by like-minded countries morally
>> >indefensible?
>> >
>> >John Dowell
>> >
>>
>> A state with a state religion, whose territory
>> was taken from Arabs in a religious war.
>
>Who's and ws taken by the Arabs centuries ago. It's a viscious circle.
>
>> A state
>> that cannot defend its own boarders without
>> the help of the USA, the cost of which is becoming
>> increasingly steep.
>
>Sounds like Saudi Arabia
My point exactly.
z
fenr...@hotmail.com says...
Yes indeed. Not only a relic but a costly relic, in
terms of its irritant effect. This is no longer a
profitable strategy for the USA>
z
>
>....SORRY BUT YOU DO NOT SOUND AMERICAN. YOU
>SOUND LIKE A MUSLIM FROM THE MIDDLE EAST.
>YOUR ISLAMIC FANATICISM JUST CAN'T BE CONCEALED
>FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME!
>
>KILROY911!!!
Geez, I recited the pledge, I want to Nuc terrorist states
what more do you want? I'd like to point out that this threat has
worked reasonably well for Israel. No anthrax there.
tHewHiz
<z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote:
Hey besides resentment and greivences what Does Israel actually
produce to support itself, you know actual real productions for the
world Markets? I don't ever recall seeing anything marked Made in
Israel.
J
Politics as with most things in life are better served in moderation
Don
"tHewHiz" <i...@ataboy.net> wrote in message
news:471659ef...@netnews.att.net...
Computer software, better chocolate that they produce in the US, amazing
cherry tomatoes
John A. Stovall
wrote:
Yes, Computer software like Checkpoint's Firewall I which may or may
not have had a back door in it for Israel.
****************************************************
"The World's in a bad way, my man,
And bound to be worse before it mends;
Better to lie up in the mountain here
Four or five centuries, ............."
Said the old father of wild pigs,
Plowing the fallow on Mal Paso Mountain.
The Stars Go Over the Lonely Ocean
Robinson Jeffers
tHewHiz
wrote:
>
They support an entire civilization on that?
Heck, I'll even throw in the obvious, you forgot to mention Olive
trees, you know for the oil, I hear that's a real CASH COW too. And,
with the way Ariel Sharon is tearing out his most direct rivals
(neighboring Palestine) trees, next years crop promises to be even
better. I suppose the problems in the Israeli and Palestinian affairs
is much the same as it is everywhere in the Middle East, it all still
boils down to oil, it's just a different type of oil that's all. <g>
Does Israel's chocolate rival Germany's? I some how doubt it, I've
always heard German chocolate was the very best? Besides as an
American, I'm always forced to ask Hey, what's wrong with a little
Milk in your chocolate?
As far as their software goes I heard the other day that Bill Gates is
quaking in his proverbial boots at the mere thought of having to
compete with them.
Finally before closing I would be remised if I failed to mention that
I can and have grown Cherry tomatoes; if I can do it, you need no
further proof that it doesn't require a lot of commitment or ingenuity
to get it done. <g>
In summary:
No wonder they're a perennial feeder at our national feed troughs.
J
Shirley errrr Surely you Jest.....<g>
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
*WE* gave Trans-Jordon to the Hashemites and it was a large part of
Palestine. Maybe the Hashemites should go home and give it back to the
Palestinians. The Hashemites didn't even have a 'historical' claim to
Trans-Jordon.
>
>
E. Barry Bruyea
<z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote:
It seems to me that 'we" (the U.N. etc) have helped the Arabs more
than we have the Israelis. When the Arabs were winning in '48, 67' &
73 nobody was trying to force a cease fire or truce, that only
happened when the Israelis were winning. And as we fade into history,
people tend to forget that in the first war of 'independance' Israel
didn't get help from anyone to speak of. They soundly trounced every
Arab army except the Arab Legion and even fought them to a draw.
>>
>>
>
E. Barry Bruyea
And never in the U.N. or any other deliberative body do we question
the right of Jordon to exist or its legitimacy, when, in fact, it was
a very large part of Palestine when it was given to the Hashemites for
their 'help' in WWI.
>
>
>
>
E. Barry Bruyea
<z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>In article <Bcgz7.276451$j65.72...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com>, "JMD" says...
>>
>>"z" <z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>news:9qj91...@drn.newsguy.com...
>>>
>>> So we support an idea, a regime, that is fundamentally wrong.
>>> I really don't like being on a side that is morally indefensible.
>>===========
>>Explain what is fundamentally wrong with Israel, a pluralistic, democratic
>>state. Why is support for such a state by like-minded countries morally
>>indefensible?
>>
>>John Dowell
>>
>
>A state with a state religion, whose territory
>was taken from Arabs in a religious war.
Wrong. A state with a state religion that was given a part of
Palestine, as were the Palestinians and only fought to protect that
area assigned to them by the U.N. The problem was the Arabs
(Palestinians) wanted it all.
A state
>that cannot defend its own boarders without
>the help of the USA, the cost of which is becoming
>increasingly steep.
A State that without any help from any country, with a rag tag
airforce, a virtually untrained civilian army defended its right to
exist against four well equipped, trained Arab armies.
A country which will soon
>be minority Jewish and will have to resort to totalitarian
>measures for its own survival. That's what's wrong.
An assumption based on what?
>
SteveL
Bruyea) wrote:
>
>*WE* gave Trans-Jordon to the Hashemites and it was a large part of
>Palestine. Maybe the Hashemites should go home and give it back to the
>Palestinians. The Hashemites didn't even have a 'historical' claim to
>Trans-Jordon.
>>
>>
And that has what to do with Saudi Arabia exactly?
So tell me. Are you saying Saudi Arabia is a sovereign nation or not?
Are you laying claim to it on behalf of the US or something?
The other guy's arrogance was a slip of the tongue. Your's is
deliberate.
SteveL
Bruyea) wrote:
>
>It seems to me that 'we" (the U.N. etc) have helped the Arabs more
>than we have the Israelis. When the Arabs were winning in '48, 67' &
>73 nobody was trying to force a cease fire or truce, that only
>happened when the Israelis were winning. And as we fade into history,
>people tend to forget that in the first war of 'independance' Israel
>didn't get help from anyone to speak of. They soundly trounced every
>Arab army except the Arab Legion and even fought them to a draw.
>
'67? What for all of two hours maybe?
I agree the UN has been quite pro-Arab in comparison to the US, but
it's never mattered since the US has vetoed anything with a hint of
criticism about Israel.
Which makes the US's reverance and super-tenacious application of UN
resolutions with regards to Iraq all the more remarkable.
SteveL
Bruyea) wrote:
>
>Wrong. A state with a state religion that was given a part of
>Palestine, as were the Palestinians and only fought to protect that
>area assigned to them by the U.N. The problem was the Arabs
>(Palestinians) wanted it all.
So you agree they should give back the territories not sanctioned by
the UN?
>A State that without any help from any country, with a rag tag
>airforce, a virtually untrained civilian army defended its right to
>exist against four well equipped, trained Arab armies.
Great. They don't need all that aid then. Let's leave them to it. And
try to generate some goodwill with the Arabs.
The US does nothing but step on its dick in the middle east. It's time
for a change.
JMD
inclination to educate you.
Just one point. Israel seems to have done rather well at defending its
borders against various Arab attempts to wipe it from the face of the earth.
Sure it has had US support but the strategy and fighting have been all
Israel. Many times they have prevailed against formidable odds.
John Dowell
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
And your ignorance seems quite deliberate.
E. Barry Bruyea
SteveL
Bruyea) wrote:
>>
>>And that has what to do with Saudi Arabia exactly?
>>
>>So tell me. Are you saying Saudi Arabia is a sovereign nation or not?
>>
>>Are you laying claim to it on behalf of the US or something?
>>
>>The other guy's arrogance was a slip of the tongue. Your's is
>>deliberate.
>
>
>And your ignorance seems quite deliberate.
Oh I'm so hurt.
I'm asking you a serious question. Do you think the US (or the west in
general) has some sort of legal or sovereign claim to areas of the
Middle-East. You certainly seem to think so. If so then let's get it
out into the open. I'm sure the Arabs would like to know.
My point above was that Arabs believe the West treats them with
arrogance and a lack of respect, and that to casually imply you have
some sort of dominion over their lands (now, in the twenty first
century, not 80 odd years ago) was an indication of that. The orignal
poster "z" just said that in thoughtless moment and I pulled him up on
it.
Instead of agreeing with an obvious bit of common sense, you seem to
actually lay that sort of claim, by mentioning how we've done just
that in the past.
That raises the obvious question and I asked it.
If that seems ignorant to you then so be it.
Answer the question please.
res0l616
complaining. Its when they come back to bite us that anyone talks about our
mistakes. America makes so many mistakes, because we are impatient, and
prefer miltary actions over diplomacy in so many instances. Only thing
about israel is that Israel is so closely tied to America. In the American
power structure, Jews have a huge influence. If we want a new foreign
strategy, elect new representatives.news:9qkhp...@drn.newsguy.com...
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
> Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
> places with state religions, and the whole thing muddies
> the waters with respect to the Islamic Fundamentalists, whom
> I believe, simply use Israel as an excuse.
We support Israel because it is the only point of light in a sea of
Islamic darkness. Over and over again, the Arabs provide us proof that
this is so.
One exmple only: In Israel, no-one is subject to a forced conversion
to any religion not of their choice. Unlike the Islamic states.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
> One reason for Arab distrust of the US is a perceived American
> arrogance.
Tough shit. Compared to the Arabs, if we're "arrogant", we have good cause to be.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
> I'm asking you a serious question. Do you think the US (or the west in
> general) has some sort of legal or sovereign claim to areas of the
> Middle-East.
Of course we don't, and we've never behaved over there as if we do.
> My point above was that Arabs believe the West treats them with
> arrogance and a lack of respect
Really? And how does they explain away the numerous wars America has
been involved in from Afghanistan vs. the Russians to the Gulf War to
Somalia to Bosnia when it seems that we've spent a great deal of time
and money DEEFENDING Moslems (sometimes from other Moslems!).
But I now think the next time some fascist decides to butcher "good
Moslems" that we should just let it play out. A pox on all of them.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
>
> A state with a state religion, whose territory
> was taken from Arabs in a religious war.
A religious war? Don't make me laugh. Only the seriously deluded
think it was a religious war. And you conveniently forget that -
thanks to the Mufti of Jerusalem (a nazi sympathizer in WW2) who was
on the radio scremaing for the Islamists to LEAVE - no land had to be
taken: it was voluntarily ceded as the idiot Palestinians (believing
the old man's lying froth) packed up and LEFT.
Since you get this wrong every time, the rest of your flap is rightly
suspect.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
This is why an Arab apologist like "z" is funny as hell when he says
Israel was created from land taken in a religious war.
Given the Arab track record in their wars with the Israelis, and if
they really ARE "religious wars" like the Islamists want to believe,
it appears that God is definitely on Israel's side.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
>
> Is it wise to further alienate the Arabs by vetoing over 500 UN
> sanctions against Israel. That's every single one (bar one, which
> passed accidentally). Doesn't that show an arrogance and a fully
> automated dismissiveness of Arab concerns?
>
No - the only arrogance here is the Arab's attempts to hijack the UN
for their own purposes.
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
Actually, your question is either born of ignorance or a lack of
reading comprehension, given that nowhere in my post did I claim any
U.S. sovereignty over Saudi Arabia or anywhere else in the Middle
East.
>
E. Barry Bruyea
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>The almighty Americans think they can screw the whole world how much longer can
>this go on.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
"Screwing the World" was a German intention. Twice in a row. Three
times if you count the invasion of France. Guilt getting to you, is
it?
>==============================
>"SteveL" <Ste...@stevelon.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:2Snz7.784322$NK1.71...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
DaveS
<z_me...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>Why is it to the benefit of the West in general and
>the USA in particular to keep Israel alive? I really dislike
>places with state religions, and the whole thing muddies
>the waters with respect to the Islamic Fundamentalists, whom
>I believe, simply use Israel as an excuse.
>
>A better plan would be to offer all Israeli Citizens
>immigrant status in the USA, Canada, and other Western
>countries who are interested in acquiring skilled hard working
>people. Then, let the state of Israel fend for itself.
>
>The place is demographically doomed anyway.
Agree with that last part. OK, here's my take on the mid-east
problem. Too many people for too small a region. Possibly also too
much in-breeding. They should outgrow the sand-box mentality and use
existing de-salination technology for irrigation to convert the desert
to the south into fertile (or at least liveable) land within 10 years.
I'm sure they wouldn't have too much resistance from the few
inhabitants living there now.
As for their attachment to certain relics in the sand-box that they
are holding on to from the infancy of their civilization, they could
create virtual 3d computer models of them and everyone could play with
them whenever they wanted. After all, it's the thought that counts,
isn't it? Or perhaps that is too spiritual and intelligent for them?
DaveS
SteveL
Then why did you make the response you made in the first place. It
seemed you were challenging or disagreeing with my "arrogance" point.
SteveL
Lindsay-O'Neal) wrote:
Yeah. Love that. The all-powerful Arabs manage to fool the rest of the
world and con them into passing anti-Israel resolutions. Not once, not
twice but 500+ times. And only the heroic United States has the sense
to recognise the real agenda and put a stop to it. Thank God for that
veto. What does the rest of the world know eh?
PeopleEater
The irony in the atmosphere here is so thick you could cut it with a
knife...
And I bet you acted all surprised when the terrorist attacks happened.
Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
more attacks will be coming.
-PE
Peter H. Proctor
>From: SteveL <Ste...@stevelon.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: Why are we propping up Israel?
>Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 13:24:49 GMT
>Yeah. Love that. The all-powerful Arabs manage to fool the rest of the
>world and con them into passing anti-Israel resolutions. Not once, not
>twice but 500+ times. And only the heroic United States has the sense
>to recognise the real agenda and put a stop to it. Thank God for that
>veto. What does the rest of the world know eh?
It's a game. Each country has one vote in the general assembly, no
matter how large, its status, etc.. So they pass these resolutions without
particularly considering them, knowing they US will veto them in the security
council. Great way to have cake and eat it too.
Dr P
Panhead
>
> ak...@citycom.com (Allan Lindsay-O'Neal) wrote in message news:<605088ea.01101...@posting.google.com>...
> > SteveL <Ste...@stevelon.demon.co.uk> wrote
> > >
> > > One reason for Arab distrust of the US is a perceived American
> > > arrogance.
> > Tough shit. Compared to the Arabs, if we're "arrogant", we have good cause to be.
>
> The irony in the atmosphere here is so thick you could cut it with a
> knife...
Hope you have a registered one.
> And I bet you acted all surprised when the terrorist attacks happened.
You weren't?
Seeing it actually happen, yer damn right I was surprised.
So was the overwhelming vast majority of the worlds thinking
population.
Oh wait. That explains it!
> Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
> more attacks will be coming.
I see, now.
You are also one who approves of what they did, right?
Thanks for making yourself crystal clear.
SteveL
wrote:
>> Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
>> more attacks will be coming.
>
> I see, now.
> You are also one who approves of what they did, right?
>
That conclusion doesn't even satisfy basic logic.
So warning about cause and effect implies approval for the effect?
If you warn a child that poking a dog will make it bite, you're not
glad when it happens.
> Thanks for making yourself crystal clear.
Shame that doesn't apply to your thinking.
Attila
"Kurt Knoll" <kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote in message
news:3bced6b1@nubby2....
> I was right when I said you have a primitive Mentality go and check who
declared
> war on whom.
Yes, we all know that WW2 started with an act of blatant Polish agression.
Somebody should cut your phone line; you're too damn stupid to be allowed
into Usenet.
JMD
> In a way you are right the Israelis have don rather well. Considering the
help
> they
> get from the states in tune of billions of Dollars plus the extortion
money they
> received from Germany. It has been at lest 3 times the German government
> did have to vote to pay more money to Israel or get Black mailed again and
> again.
>
> I know of one German elect said we paid enough to Israel in compensation
over
> the last 45 years
> but he was forced to resign because of Jewish pressure. How is that for
> Democratic.
>
==================
Uh, Herr Knoll, there is that little matter of the Final Solution and all
the bother it caused. You see a few folks were inconvenienced by your
forebears rounding up people and shipping them in box cars to death camps.
Maybe their survivors feel entitled to compensation from the state that
committed this massive crime. To its credit, Germany has acknowledged this
debt and honoured it. It is called trying to make things right.
John Dowell
tHewHiz
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>No country should have Veto Power it is being misused to often especially by the
>US
>all members should have equal rights lat the vote of the majority count.
So Delaware, Rhode Island or Oklahoma should have the same amount of
Power as say Texas, California or New York, in the US?
Sorry but that is not Democracy, that my friend is Tyranny of the
lesser upon the greater.
There needs to be some counter balance to keep the minority from
dictating to the majority and when you take these thoughts to the next
level (international) then those countries surrendering or carrying
(whichever the case may be), the greater amount of power to the
overall body of the assembly of nations, should have that fact
reflected in the overall voting rights inside that assembly or the
necessary goals set out to be achieved by that assembly will never be
met.
Voting in and of it self is irrelevant if you lack the power to
enforce the results of the vote, it is really only effective if
everyone involved is subject to the consequences of that vote. (Our
recent Presidential election actually bears this fact out only to
well). Whereas Al Gore actually won the Popular vote and most likely
received the majority of Votes in Florida which would've wielded him
the actual requisite electrical votes, lacking the Power to enforce
those votes (see USSC decision), the GOP candidate, having that power
(see voting habits of USSC and their political party affiliations),
resulted in Bush number forty three prevailing.
Since there are nations that have more economic and militaristic
powers in the real world any international body designed to harness
that power as it relates to world affairs needs to reflect this fact
in their voting procedures, particularly if that body wishes to impact
world affairs in a meaningful way. Other wise those Nations who weld
the greater amount of power will simply withdraw away all their
support for said coalitions and the international gathering of nations
with the intentions of bringing about World stability would fail in
their overall mission.
J
Politics as with most things in life are better served in moderation.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
>======================================================
>"Peter H. Proctor" <ppro...@neosoft.com> wrote in message
>news:9D891FCF264DD847.A4C5A80D...@lp.airnews.net...
PeopleEater
> > Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
> > more attacks will be coming.
>
> I see, now.
> You are also one who approves of what they did, right?
The difference between me and the rest of you ass-clowns is that I'd
rather know why these attacks happened in the first place rather than
bombing the shit outta Afghanstan. The best way to stop these attacks
by extremists is to change our foreign policy, not kill their wives
and children. That's why they're attacking us in the first place.
> Thanks for making yourself crystal clear.
Yeah, you're not a dumbass...
SteveL
Proctor) wrote:
>
> It's a game. Each country has one vote in the general assembly, no
>matter how large, its status, etc.. So they pass these resolutions without
>particularly considering them, knowing they US will veto them in the security
>council. Great way to have cake and eat it too.
>
>Dr P
>
There's a lot to that point. Politics eh? Who'd have it? :-)
You seem to be a very reasonable person.
But I think using this to explain 500+ instances is stretching it
beyond breaking point. Clearly the world has a problem with Israel's
actions, and it's only the US that fails to acknowledge it.
Another interpretation of your comment is that the world has a problem
with the US view of the middle-east as well, and that the resolutions
are passed to show up the US when they veto them everytime. But again,
500+ occasions is pushing it, and it hasn't affected US behavior at
all.
There's clearly a reason for this terrorism that goes beyond "They
hate us because we're free". Believe me, that line has got a lot of
laughs in the pubs in Britain. The US government has lost some respect
there by trying on such blatant propaganda. No-one says the US
*deserved* Sept 11th, but a lot of reasonable and generally
pro-America people have questioned US policy for decades and think
it's time for the US to acknowledge that they've been kicking sweaty
dynamite in the Middle-East for too long. Some of it went bang on Sept
11th.
Cheers.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
> > > arrogance.
> >
> > Tough shit. Compared to the Arabs, if we're "arrogant", we have good cause to be.
>
> The irony in the atmosphere here is so thick you could cut it with a
> knife...
>
> And I bet you acted all surprised when the terrorist attacks happened.
> Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
> more attacks will be coming.
Given the nature of what we're dealing with, I was surprised the
attacks hadn't happened long before.
Once again, we have to be conscious of the superiority of our
civilization over Islam.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
>
> Yeah. Love that. The all-powerful Arabs manage to fool the rest of the
> world and con them into passing anti-Israel resolutions. Not once, not
> twice but 500+ times. And only the heroic United States has the sense
> to recognise the real agenda and put a stop to it. Thank God for that
> veto. What does the rest of the world know eh?
Bingo. Thanks for appreciating out innate good sense.
JMD
> My Brother worked in a French slave labor camp million worked in the
Russian
> slave
> Labor camps where does his leave them.
>
> I agree compensating must be paid. It has been paid once before this is
the
> second time around
> how many times should it be ?.
>
> Should Germany have the right to see the records or should it just sign a
blank
> check.
>
> Kurt Knoll.
> =======================================================================
French slave labour camp? I realize English may not be your first language
but I don't know what you are talking about. When did France have slave
labour camps?
John Dowell
SteveL
Lindsay-O'Neal) wrote:
>
>Bingo. Thanks for appreciating out innate good sense.
That attitude, writ large to national policy levels is the reason for
Sept 11th. And it's starting to come home to roost. Hope you enjoy
opening your mail with rubber gloves from now on. If anyone deserves
it it's "sensible" people like you.
Peter H Proctor
wrote:
> The best way to stop these attacks
>by extremists is to change our foreign policy, not kill their wives
>and children. That's why they're attacking us in the first place.
The emerging picture is that this wierd meld of Arab
nationaluism with.religious fanaticism is really a reaction to decades
of misrule in the Arab world by assorted dictators, monarchies, etc.
who by now are pretty well invulnerable to physical attack.
Somehow, we Americans are responsible for this
situation, not a culture which has had difficulty coming to terms
with modernity. Since our free societies make us vulnerable, we
get attacked. The shrinks call this "displaced anger". I.e.,
they are gong to attack us no matter what we do or don't do. There
is nothing we have to give them that they would accept.
Further, in the past our backing down ( e.g., after a
terrorist incident killed 200+ marines in Lebanon ) is interpreted as
weakness and vulnerability. So there is not much point in trying to
come to an accomidation. At least not without kicking the ever-loving
shit out of them first.
PHP
E. Barry Bruyea
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>I was right when I said you have a primitive Mentality go and check who declared
>war on whom.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
Who invaded Czechoslovakia? Who invaded Poland? You're just one more
pathetic German trying your damndest to shake off the guilt of
barbarity your country has saddled you with.
E. Barry Bruyea
And I'll bet when you lose your last tooth, you'll still leave a
quarter under your pillow. You pathetic Nazi.
>
>
Fred Faust
"JMD" <jdowe...@home.com> wrote in message
news:V6Hz7.286907$j65.74...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
======================================================================
> French slave labour camp? I realize English may not be your first
language
> but I don't know what you are talking about. When did France have slave
> labour camps?
>
> John Dowell
>
If you did not know that that France had such camps, I recommend to read
Ralph Franklin Keeling's book which was published in 1946 under the title: "
Gruesome Harvest."
>
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
Gruesome Harvest does tell a terrible story; but it also has a very
strong message if you care to hear it. Don't start a war you can't
win.
>>
>
>
Attila
> An other one with a one sided mentality it would be nice to read both
sites of a
> story
> before we make up our mind. The difference between you and me is that I am
> open minded.
So....."open-mindedness" means claiming that blatant Polish aggression
kicked off the war?
> I have never in my life said to someone I do not want to hear it
> and this is the difference between me and you. If you are stupid enough
> to believe in the Bible then you can believe anything else about wars do.
Who said anything about the Bible? Man, talk about non-sequiturs.....
> Kurt Knoll.
Blather on, apologist, but everybody notices that you got your head handed
to you on this one.
> =============================================
> "Attila" <att...@tisd.net> wrote in message
news:3bcf113c$1...@news.tisd.net...
Attila
"PeopleEater" <fenr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:719e2bbc.01101...@posting.google.com...
> snip
> > > Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
> > > more attacks will be coming.
> >
> > I see, now.
> > You are also one who approves of what they did, right?
>
> The difference between me and the rest of you ass-clowns is that I'd
> rather know why these attacks happened in the first place rather than
> bombing the shit outta Afghanstan.
So you DON'T support taking out mass-murderers. So nice to know.
> The best way to stop these attacks
> by extremists is to change our foreign policy, not kill their wives
> and children. That's why they're attacking us in the first place.
Uh, really? How many of bin Laden's progeny have we killed?
Honest John
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>My Brother was Captured by the Americans and the transferee to the French.
>The were first transferred to the French coast in Normandy into a labor camp.
>
>There they hat to strip necked and to march thru a life minefield because there
>were not enough
>shovels around. Many of his comrade were blown up. He told me the French said
>you Germans but the Mines in there so you can take them out.
>
>In other instances were Americans handed over Prisoners to the French the bead
>some
>of the German Prisoners to death while the Americans were looking on( Reference
>James Basque Other Losses.
I don't usually defend the French but all this must be looked at in
the context of the well known gently behavour of the Gestapo and the
SS and the unfortunate demise of well over 6 million people in those
German rest camps like Aushwitz.
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
> That attitude, writ large to national policy levels is the reason for
> Sept 11th. And it's starting to come home to roost. Hope you enjoy
> opening your mail with rubber gloves from now on. If anyone deserves
> it it's "sensible" people like you.
My, my. Making terrorist threats yourself? Is that the best that
someone from a country that knowingly threw away it's freedoms can do?
Or is it you found out that Grandad was actually a smooth talking GI
with a pair of nylons and a chocolate bar?
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
> The difference between me and the rest of you ass-clowns is that I'd
> rather know why these attacks happened in the first place rather than
> bombing the shit outta Afghanstan.
Oh, do let us know what you've determined after we've finished the job.
> The best way to stop these attacks
> by extremists is to change our foreign policy, not kill their wives
> and children. That's why they're attacking us in the first place.
>
In other words, even MORE appeasement?
Allan Lindsay-O'Neal
ended by saying:
>
> Further, in the past our backing down ( e.g., after a
> terrorist incident killed 200+ marines in Lebanon ) is interpreted as
> weakness and vulnerability. So there is not much point in trying to
> come to an accomidation. At least not without kicking the ever-loving
> shit out of them first.
Hear, hear. It's the only thing that gets through to them. The Arabs
are a "show me" culture.
E. Barry Bruyea
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>My Brother was Captured by the Americans and the transferee to the French.
>The were first transferred to the French coast in Normandy into a labor camp.
>
>There they hat to strip necked and to march thru a life minefield because there
>were not enough
>shovels around. Many of his comrade were blown up. He told me the French said
>you Germans but the Mines in there so you can take them out.
>
>In other instances were Americans handed over Prisoners to the French the bead
>some
>of the German Prisoners to death while the Americans were looking on( Reference
>James Basque Other Losses.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
And your point it?
>=========================================================================
>"JMD" <jdowe...@home.com> wrote in message
>news:V6Hz7.286907$j65.74...@news4.rdc1.on.home.com...
E. Barry Bruyea
Knoll et all a wallowing in the self pity of the losers. Their ilk did
the same thing after WWI. The wars and their aftermath is everyone's
fault but the barbarians that started the damn war. It's enough to
make you barf.
>
>
E. Barry Bruyea
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>Now that's funny.
>
>You should read Roosevelt.
>
>While he was talking to his people he will never again enter into a war with the
>British in 1940.
>he was also talking to Winston Churchill his remarks to Churchill were. I will
>try to do anything
>to engage Germany into a Conflict even when it means he has to cheat and lie.
>Shortly
>thereafter the Americans sunk on of their on ships and blaming and German U Boot
>done it.
>
>In Politics and war there are no angels.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
And in you, Germany has found a poor apologist. Have a look around
and at least find a spokesman for the Germans that knows a little
about the war. Your ignorance is appalling.
>=========================
>"E. Barry Bruyea" <al...@brokenmoon.com> wrote in message
>news:3bcf5609...@nntp.uunet.ca...
SteveL
What a dickhead! How many different ways can you be wrong?
>My, my. Making terrorist threats yourself? Is that the best that
>someone from a country that knowingly threw away it's freedoms can do?
I wouldn't threaten you. You're threatening yourself. That's my point.
You're just too arrogant, abrasive, and self-satisfied in your
"Americanness" to see it.
>
>Or is it you found out that Grandad was actually a smooth talking GI
>with a pair of nylons and a chocolate bar?
Wrong again. Keep it up.
I'm American born and bred. I'm just working abroad.
And as for the Brits "throwing" their freedoms away, from what I've
seen they're far more free-thinking on average than many Americans,
certainly you. You're a walking advertisement for American
indoctrination. And you don't even realise it, it's been that
successful.
It's sad to see someone so young rooted into such inflexible thinking
patterns already. I'm guessing you're young because you say "grandad"
to describe a GI in Britain. In fact my *Dad* is a retired USAF career
officer. I was brought up to think just like you. Exposure to other
cultures has made me realise the world is much more complicated than I
was brought up to believe.
You need to get away more. Shake the cobwebs from your head. Join the
human race, and stop feeling superior to everything you disagree with.
'Cause you're not.
JMD
hear something even more shocking? There were Canadians who landed on the
Norman coast to try and kill your brother and other innocent German visitors
in 1944. Sheesh! Talk about someone in denial.
John Dowell
E. Barry Bruyea
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>You are about as primitive as it gets. It seems do me there is only one example
>to
>talk about and that is your site of the story. You behave like a bully all
>muscle
>and no Brain. Would it be Niece if can read something from beginning to the
>end analyze it by butting your Brain into gear and then and oly then open your
>mouth.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
It would be nice, if after all these years you would at least make an
attempt to learn the language properly.
>=========================================================
>"E. Barry Bruyea" <al...@brokenmoon.com> wrote in message
>news:3bcfe3c0...@nntp.uunet.ca...
Peter H. Proctor
>From: ak...@citycom.com (Allan Lindsay-O'Neal)
>Subject: Re: Why are we propping up Israel?
Also, a religious Moslem would interpret a through defeat as God's will (
( Inshalla -- "God wills it" ) and a possible sign of the deities disfavor
with the events of 9/11.
PHP
John LaVoy
SteveL wrote:
>
>
> Ok you can say Saddam brings it on himself by not surrendering to
> outdide demands, but even so, over 1 million dead and 500,000 children
> included is a hell of a price to charge for compliance.
You appear to be missing a major point. The recent attacks show clearly
that there are elemnts in the Islamic world which would use weapons of
mass destruction is they were available. Bin Laden would have used a
nuclear weapon if he had one. He would use biological or chemical weapons
as well. The attacks show that aggressive measures to prevent such
weaponry from falling into the hands of lunatics are necessary. The
attacks justify what was done in Iraq. Teh proximate blame falls to
Hussein.
Peter H. Proctor
>From: "JMD" <jdowe...@home.com>
>Subject: Re: Why are we propping up Israel?
There is no question that surrendering Germans and German POWs were
occasionally killed by US troops in the field. In fact, this been a
constant feature of War movies about the war in France since "The Longest
Day". It was a major issue in "Private Ryan", where a released prisoner
ended up killing the hero. And the series 'Band of Brothers" on HBO showed
such a scene.
But once taken prisoner, Germans were treated quite well. In
fact, ones shipped back to the US often ended up forming personal
relationships with their "captors' and maintaining contacts after the war.
BTW, I have my uncle's diary from WW2 descibing how he and his
buddies had to restrain one of their fellows form killing the guards at a
concentration camp they came across...
Dr P
E. Barry Bruyea
Conditions for German POW's in Allied custody (except USSR) couldn't
have been that bad. Look at their escape record. One or two in the
whole damn war, compared to literally thousands of Allied prisoners
who escaped.
>
>
E. Barry Bruyea
The constant refrain concerning the number of children dying in Iraq
being done at the 'hands' of the U.S., or members of the Gulf War
Co-alition is totally bogus. Neither Food nor Medicine has been
included in the embargo. That fact that it is ending up supporting
Saddam's army is his decision.
>
>
Attila
> What constitutes a denial.
>
> Actually he did the same thing as you why were you there from thousand
miles
> away.
>
> Was it the same reason you forefathers waged the Holy Crusades.
>
> But on the other hand you only want do hear what you like to hear but
this
> would
> be very one-sided to portray History.
>
> Kurt Knoll.
Oh, now I get it.....Germany killed millions of people, set up death camps,
and devastated Europe as a perfectly legitimate reaction to blatant FRENCH
aggression.
Whatta dumbass.
Attila
> As for the Concentration Camps the conditions were Deplorable one of the
> reason for being that way was the Constant Bombing around the Camps
> and the Bombing of the rail lines so no food could get into the Camps.
You apologist asshole. The main reason for the deplorable conditions was
that they were MEANT to be that way.
I repeat.....you filthy, apologist asshole.
Attila
> Some of the weapons of mass Destruction are being tested right now
> by the Americans in Afghanistan.
Really? Which.....nukes, nerve agents, or biologicals?
Put your money where your sewer is, asshole.
PeopleEater
I think your explanation is rather simplistic. I read a book by Edward
Said about media coverage of the Iran Hostage Crisis ("Islam and the
Media" I think it was). He criticized the Western media, in a vain
effort to educate the American public about our new enemy, for giving
one or two minute synopsises of Islam's beliefs, history, and culture.
Imagine trying to give a history of Europe from 500 to 2000 CE in 2
minutes. Rather silly, don't you think?
I think there's a lot more to these 1 billion Muslims than just that
"they're a violent culture." I'm sure arbitrary bombings, crusades,
and support for Israel have more to do with the attacks than them
"coming to terms with modernity."
-PE
PeopleEater
> > > >
> > > > One reason for Arab distrust of the US is a perceived American
> > > > arrogance.
> > >
> > > Tough shit. Compared to the Arabs, if we're "arrogant", we have good cause to be.
> >
> > The irony in the atmosphere here is so thick you could cut it with a
> > knife...
> >
> > And I bet you acted all surprised when the terrorist attacks happened.
> > Your attitude, the one that most Americans suffer from, ensures that
> > more attacks will be coming.
>
> attacks hadn't happened long before.
>
> Once again, we have to be conscious of the superiority of our
> civilization over Islam.
Care to be more specific?
E. Barry Bruyea
<kkn...@yellowhead16.net> wrote:
>You better do your homework while food or medicine is not on the embargo.
>
>There are a lot of other things that lead to people are starving and children
>are dying.
>
>And do not give me the Bulshit what he should do.
>
>You better watch what Scott Ritter said in his last interview> his word were
>there are no weapons of mass destruction any more. What America wants is
>accountability for every nut and bolt and the Americans will never be happy
>regardless.
>of what is found.
>
>Kurt Knoll.
Ritter was a fucking corporal in the military. Who the hell is going
to pay attention to what he says?
>==============================================================================
>"E. Barry Bruyea" <al...@brokenmoon.com> wrote in message
>news:3bd0550e...@nntp.uunet.ca...