A new start in Afghanistan?
The Obama plan for Afghanistan and Pakistan: lots more troops, lots more advisers, lots more money. But will it be enough to defeat al-Qaeda? There's a useful analysis here. We canvassed reaction from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Washington. The majority verdict: not bad.
Click below to hear our coverage.
(broadcast on The World Tonight, BBC Radio 4, 27 March 2009)
© MMX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~10~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
...............we must compel the Afghan government to reduce the "corruption that causes Afghans to lose faith in their own leaders."
What about the corruption in the EU and the contempt with which British and European politicians treat their citizens?
Maybe President Obama feels able to criticise the Afghan government.
EU leaders should look in the mirror.
Complain about this comment
America confidently sent in it's trained troops, taking sophisticated weaponry, aided by computer technology, guided by satellite communication systems, backed up by USAF F16's - all commanded and co-ordinated by the best officers West Point Military Academy can produce. Yet seven long years has passed and they still haven't been able beat Osama bin Laden and friends. There's not been one success - unless you want to count the wedding parties, schools and the few caves they've destroyed.
It's a choice between maintaining the illusion they're achieving something or recognising what everyone else can see - an embarassing fiasco. The American public can't handle humiliation - so I guess the Administration will play along a bit longer hoping for a lucky strike.
Complain about this comment
Obama has yet to address why he is disrespecting Pakistani sovereignty. No mention whatever made of illegal missile strikes!
If you have an ally attacking targets in your own country ... you have to ask yourself what is that alliance worth?
The real situation in Afghanistan will probably be revealed to many by the looming Presidential Election (or lack thereof).
Why do no world leaders learn from the mistakes of history? Invading Afghanistan has never played particularly well for the aggressive power.
Complain about this comment
Is it not obvious that Obama intends ground action in PAKISTAN?
We are being "prepared" for the fact.
The Pakistanis do not approve.
It seems he hopes that billions in aid will mollify them.
Ready for a wave of suicide bombers?
Complain about this comment
"Yet seven long years has passed and they still haven't been able beat Osama bin Laden and friends. There's not been one success - unless you want to count the wedding parties, schools and the few caves they've destroyed."
Big words from someone whose country in less than a century lost an empire on which the sun never set and four world wars. It was only luck that it won the war against Argentina over the Malvinas Islands. If the British had fought in the South Atlantic with the same valor the Royal Marines had when Iranian speedboats took 15 of them prisoner right off their own ship in broad daylight in Iraqi waters without so much as a single shot being fired in their defense, Britain would now be a colony of Argentina. At least Brits might have learned to dance the Tango.
Complain about this comment
Ah classic Marcus. I see you've recycled your Royal Marines anecdote, again. Very sustainable and all that. I'd love for you to meet them one day.
Have you noticed that no one bothers to bring you up on your ''four world wars" tripe and plainly stupid statements about the Falklands War?
Maybe you're jealous that within the not too distant past, Britain fought a war with clear objectives against an enemy that had invaded its territory. Most people would actually be glad that their country had not had to do the same, regardless of outcome. Just remember it's not your fault that the USA never gets a chance to do the same and has to invade other countries with a whole load of rather mixed up motives just to test its military hardware. At least you can be proud of dragging us in with you.
So any actual comments on Afghanistan???
Complain about this comment
Sounds like Afganistan is going to be Obama's first major error.
Time and again the US have gone into an area throwing troops, finance and other resources at a terrorist or insurgency problem.
Time and again they have failed.
I can't see any difference in strategy this time.
Complain about this comment
#7
Yes, repeating an unsuccessful approach
raises questions.
New approaches are needed.
Consider how the Saudis are seeking to convert "terrorists", for example.
As Obama makes his land attack into the tribal areas of Pakistan, there will be a wide reaction- one for which there will not be a military answer.
Are we ready for it? Undoubtedly not!
Complain about this comment
Lets face it - you cannot win in Afghanistan, in part because there is no such entity as "Afghanistan" except on the Presidential seal and international maps.
(As someone without a vote in the U.S.) I have to say thus far Obama's foreign policy has been very disappointing, only a promise to stop torturing at illegal base in Cuba, then he effectively throws Eastern Europe to the Russians, and starts downplaying the importance of human rights in U.S. allied countries.
Complain about this comment
The instability of Pakistan is probably the greatest current threat to international peace. As a state with nuclear weapons and delivery system, one must be very concerned about the consequences of extremist fanatics taking control. What does the international community plan to do about such an eventuality?
Complain about this comment
#10
It appears that Obama plans to invade.
The consequences of such action should be prepared for.
Complain about this comment
crosseyes;
I am certain the sheep who constitute the majority of inhabitants of the Malvinas will be forever grateful to the British military service that ever since the war, they can rest assured that they will only be slaughtered and eaten by Brits, not Argentines.
Complain about this comment
#10
"It appears that Obama plans to invade.
The consequences of such action should be prepared for."
He's been saying it all along. People just haven't been listening. They were so captivated by Obama the candidate especially in places like Berlin last summer, that they just didn't pay attention to the message. Let's hope this time it isn't outsourced to local warlords who have mixed loyalties and poor fighting skills compared to the enemy the way it was in Afghanistan and we don't take on any junior partners with "special relationships" whose idea of how to run things is to muddle through them. If the job has any chance of getting done right, the United States military should take on the job all by itself and should devise aq strategy to win no matter who gets hurt or killed, no matter what the outrage in world public opinion. If you want to win a war, that is how you have go about it. If you won't fight to win, you shouldn't get involved in the first place. As things are going now, there appears to be no choice, not even the self delusion for a chance of a negotiated settlement the way some see Iran.
Complain about this comment
"I am certain the sheep who constitute the majority of inhabitants of the Malvinas will be forever grateful"
MAII, good to see that you're principles are as confused as your grasp of history...
So at what point would you step in? Maybe if one of the smaller US States was invaded, Hawaii for example? What about a small city, or perhaps just a country town, or heaven forbid, a single homestead in New York State? At what point does it become just too much trouble for you?
Very funny that you appear to be blaming the fiascos that is IraqII and the problems in Afghanistan on the involvement of your coalition partners. I only wish we'd had a PM with a backbone at the time Georgey decided he wanted a trip to the desert, that way we could have sat back and watched the US Military attempt to forge success out of a mission doomed to failure.
Still, at least you're consistent. You actually seem to think some kind of US military presence in Pakistan is a good idea. You honestly think that it's going to end well? Just what is it that you propose? What are the objectives, timescale, means of achieving success?
Complain about this comment
crosseyes, isn't it obvious? The government of Pakistan can't or won't eliminate al Qaeda or the Taleban which gave them sanctuary in Afghanistan and would do it again on a moment's notice if the US left. Unless the US wants to fight this stalemate indefinitely until al Qaeda devises and executes its next attack on the US, America will have to eliminate them itself no matter what it takes and that means no matter what it takes. The alternative is to wait for that attack and respond afterwards. At that point, neither American people nor its government will care if half the world is blown away or not to prevent yet another one. You've seen the rage in the US over money in the wake of an economic nuclear 9-11 by a home grown financial al qaeda. Imagine the aftermath of a physical one by an alien malevolent relentless religious force. The world as we know, badly flawed and troubled as it is, will not survive it.
Complain about this comment
Marcy, I genuinely feel sorry for you.
Ignoring your evasiveness, inability to answer a point and frequently offensive tone, it must be terrible to live in a world of fear as you appear to do. Maybe that attitude of fear explains your attitude? Luckily not all your countrymen share it.
Before you say it, I'm not saying that terrorist attacks don't happen. But I'm bright enough to realise that your approach to stopping them will never be successful.
Complain about this comment
#8, #10, #11
There is a rationale for ground "intervention" in Pakistan.
There are also consequences:
a) Thousands more jihadists created throughout the World.
b) More jihadi cells throughout the World
c) High probability of bombings in the UK and Canada and possibility of mass civilian damage in the USA.
The military problem of the tribal areas is one matter. The international consequences are another matter.
Do we foresee and are we prepared for the consequences?
Complain about this comment
#17 luosquery
Not to mention antagonising the millions of Moslems in Nuclear India (which is also relatively unstable).
Complain about this comment
"A new start in Afghanistan?"
Robin
Don't you mean "yet another false start in Afghanistan"!
A military solution, failed when we we last there when it was the Northwest Frontier, It failed when the Russians tried it and it is failing again.
The terrain makes military action very difficult for an aggressor (us) and very easy for a defender (them).
If the Taliban are able to launch attacks against police barracks (see today's news) in Pakistan's cities what hope is there of using military force to persuade them to agree with our hegemony in the towns let alone the hills and mountains?
The people (Taliban) see that they have nothing to lose thus the only logical thing to do is to make sure that they have something to lose and the only way to achieve that is by economic and social development. You do not need many suicide bombers to entirely disrupt any society. The trick is to ensure that there are very very few individuals who are so alienated to want the be suicide bombers. Military force at the levels or even the potential raised levels envisaged, does not achieve this. It really is a case of 'keep your friends close but your enemies closer'!
Complain about this comment
#16. paulcrossleyiii wrote:
"Marcy, I genuinely feel sorry for you."
I think his/her peptic ulcer is playing up ....
Complain about this comment
#19 John
I agree. Violence is not going to remedy the problems in the region - in fact it's only going to make them worse. If we really want to 'win the war' against the extremists they'll have to eradicate poverty and greatly improve education in the region. Intertwined is the peaceful resolution of Israel-Palestine conflict based on the pre-1967 borders. We can waste money killing them, but not to feed and educate them!
Complain about this comment
# 19
This comment should be accorded much wider distribution!!
Complain about this comment
This unique and highly informative posting (by a retired officer) is worth perusing:
[url]http://www.atlargely.com/2009/03/yes-we-have-no-bananastan.html[/url]
Essentially, he cites a lot of inside information to illustrate that the generals are playing politics and have no idea what they are doing.
Complain about this comment
Off topic, but thats kind of the point ...
Can someone please send a memo up to BBC-Scotland/Labour Propaganda Division A and tell them to report some of the facts of the Dunfermline story?
26 million (with a M) needed to save it - a loan which would be repaid in full within a 5 year schedule. Instead, Gordon Brown - with his scorched earth strategy to prevent Scottish self-determination - hands the best bits to Nationwide (and dumps the country as a whole in another 1.6 billion {with a B} of debt).
The man is an imbecile.
Stand by for more "saved the world" nonsense this week too.
Meanwhile, rather than reporting the news BBC Jock-land is signing Gordon Brown and his minion Iain Gray's praises for "saving jobs" (just too bad for the couple hundred people at the Fife HQ).
Were Broon still a Dunfermline MP you could be sure he would have saved the business as a going concern. Were Dunfermline currently held by a Labour MP, you could be sure of the same.
Complain about this comment
crosseyes, you're so clueless, you'd try to negotiate with cancer. As for Europe, it is so spineless it would surrender to a troup of girl scouts. Eurabia is just around the corner. If you don't believe it, just walk around the corner. If you're in the UK, you're likely within spitting distance of an al Qaeda Imam signing up recruits this very minute.
Complain about this comment
Touched a nerve did I Marcy?
I can assure that I didn't negotiate with cancer, but maybe that's something those without health insurance in your own country have to resort to?
Your approach would presumably be to blast chemotherapy and radiotherapy around randomly, just in case cancer attacks you?
Once you've been to the UK, rather than basing all your knowledge on a single CNN documentary, just maybe you'll have something worthwhile (or even accuarate!) to say. Maybe, but I doubt it.
Complain about this comment
#25, #26
Speaking as one who was born in Scotland and has lived for almost 50 years in the U.K., I agree with Marcus.
Complain about this comment
crosseyes, I understand the waiting lists for health care in the UK have gone down a bit. Still not so much to have impacted the parallel "private" medical system which offers service on a fee basis for those who can afford it. Perhaps if America hadn't spent trillions defending Europe for 45 years during the cold war, It could have afforded a lavish social safety net too. Time for the US to stop wasting its money there and see to it's own needs instead.
Complain about this comment
#27 Scotch-git, be careful when agreeing with Marcus! Just what do you agree with?
#28 For emergency procedures and serious illness, very few choose to 'go private'. That's not the point anyway, the point is that the option of free treatment is there for all.
Others have already more recently corrected you on the motives and extent of US providing defence for Europe. Besides, it's a pretty lame excuse for a powerful country like the US to admit it got its priorities so wrong that it forgot to sort out healthcare at home because it was too busy looking after a bunch of countries with far better systems of their own. Where's the 'perfectly balanced' system of government when you need it eh?
A final question - does the fact you've been chased so far from the original topic mean you haven't got a clue about how throwing more US military at Afghanistan/Pakistan might actually work?
Complain about this comment
#29
I find his remark about 'trying to negotiate with cancer' to be particularly apposite. It is as futile as trying to negotiate with people who are intent upon your destruction.
Marcus has a talent for cutting through the B.S. and getting to the heart of the argument.
Complain about this comment
#30
Actually, I tend to disagree. What you see as cutting through the BS looks more to me like over-simplifying a situation, mocking those who dare to present an alternative yet failing to provide any evidence that his own solution will work.
As for getting to the heart of an argument, his usual approach is to make some off-hand comment (usually easily refuted) then drift further off-topic using a series of worn out anecdotes and clichés.
Add to this, that dear old MAII usually manages to use offensive hate-filled language and make assertions about those he's attacking (the cancer one fell on particularly unimpressed and inappropriate ears here) and you've got someone I'd really not be nailing my colours to (something else, maybe?)
Complain about this comment
# 31
there is also a question as to where the "cancer" is.
I suggest that it is Israel and its Neo-Nazi ethnic cleansing.
Complain about this comment
#32
Talk about worn out cliches.................
I regard your suggestion as disgusting and deeply offensive.
Complain about this comment
#33
Be disgusted and offended- the Palestinians are more seriously harmed.
Like the "cancer" introduction, this is mostly off-topic. Otherwise, we can show how the Nakbah is like the Holocaust and that the denial of either is obscene.
Complain about this comment
The world is exactly as it should be. Many may not be happy with it but that doesn't change things. It is the result of all of the forces that made it what it is. It will always be that way, the only way it can be. Personally....I have no complaints. Do you Israel and America bashers lose sleep over world events? I hope so. I don't. Most calamities that happen to people and nations have been brought about by...themselves.
"The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves"
As bad as things are, they are likely only to get even worse.
Complain about this comment
#35. Deep, man.
Complain about this comment
#35 MostlyErronousII
Most calamities that happen to people and nations have been brought about by...themselves.
Does that include 9/11? New Orleans? What did the Iraqi people do to deserve getting shot at?
Complain about this comment
cecilia, it does.
The US ignored ALL of the warnings professional intelligence people who testified before congress time and again told them about. 9-11 was a wake up call. If it goes unheeded, the next time will be even worse. Sooner or later the US will learn its lesson and when it does, heaven help anyone who plots against it or is even suspected of it.
The government knew for over 40 years that the levees restraining Lake Poncitrain would one day fail leading to a disaster. The Army Corps of Engineers warned over and over again. Nobody took it seriously, nobody did anything about it. Meanwhile FEMA was a ghost of what it was advertised to be, should have been, and everyone pretended it was. No real plans were in place. If they don't learn, incidents like that will happen again too. Southern Florida is one place headed for disaster. A direct hit by a level 5 hurricaine will kill large numbers of people. They are so indifferent to their vulnerability that many, possibly most don't even consider leaving when known danger is near and approaching. Southern California is another. And while American business and government played with their economic get rich quick financial toys that led to the current economic crisis, the nations physical infrastructure both public and private has been allowed to go unattended and is crumbling. Even if there were sufficient money available to repair it, the number of people around with the skill and knowhow aren't there and you don't create them with a six week seminar in engineering or a year or two in a community college they way you can with computer programmers.
Iraqis supported Saddam Hussein. His armies of soldiers, secret police were made up of ordinary people who had ordinary families. They all cooperated with him either tacitly or actively. Had the entire nation revolted against the brutal tyrant, there would have been nothing he could have done about it. When Roumania's government for example no longer had the military backing of the USSR to stay in power, Caucesceau and his wife were soon taken out and shot. Iraqis hatred for each other when unrestrained is the real reason for the civil war, not American presence. Yes they are getting exactly what they deserve and when the US leaves, with any luck it will trigger a regional civil war between the Shia and Sunni. Letting them at each other would be an excellent strategy, the same one the US used when it supported Saddam Hussein against Iran. At any given time, we should back whichever side is losing.
Are the Palestinians getting what they deserve? No, so far they've been let off easy. That won't last forever though.
Complain about this comment
Shia and Sunni in Iraq: "Letting them at each would be an excellent strategy"
"The Palestinians have been let off easy" ...
What kind of genocidal maniac posts something like that?!
Regarding the Palestinians: their land has been stolen repeatedly and in stages, the Israeli's "bravely" rocket their homes with pinpoint precision from Helicopters several miles away, their elections (which Hamas democratically won) have been overturned simply because we don't like the result.
Meanwhile Israel has just elected Attilla the Hun (again) who doesn't even recognize the Palestinian's right to exist, and has stuffed his cabinet full of religious fundamentalists.
The west has a severe problem with Democracy is the Middle East - Hamas and the Iranian President were fairly elected to lead their countries, yet they are seen as "unacceptable" pariahs in the West. Were any Western country to chide the people of a European or North American nation for electing who they do, imagine the reaction. Also, under a truly democratic system Hamas and co. would be joined by Hezbollah in Lebanon and the The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Truth is the Arab countries that the West gets on best with are the dictatorships: the Kingdoms of Saudi Arabia and Jordan, Egypt's "democracy" (where all effective opposition parties are banned) and the various minor states around the outskirts of the Arabian Peninsula.
Yet, Israel's new foreign minister is a racist - and not a word has been said by Western Governments.
Iraq - the U.S. and U.K. have created such chaos, which will be unleashed again after they leave, that the most viable solution may end up being (unfortunately) another Saddam Hussein like figure - which both country's would no doubt support (a bit like what Karzi is attempting to become in Afghanistan).
Complain about this comment
#39 pattymkirkwood wrote:
"What kind of genocidal maniac posts something like that?!"
MAII - and he/she has been doing so for as long as I have seen his/her posts, but being a genocidal maniac filled with bile and hate is nothing new for the poster - hence my name for him/her of Billious Maximus.
He/her does represent a view of the World, no matter how repellent and abhorrent and the rest of the sane World does well to remember it. There are many like him/her not locked up in asylums!
His/her posts are particularly rabid in his/her morning I have found and I do wonder if he/she is suffering from some physical ailment to explain such unbridled, illogical and baseless hatred. (A peptic ulcer perhaps!)
Basically, my advice is: don't bother with him/her as even when he/she is cornered he/she just goes off at a tangent and continues his/her rant and hatred.
Complain about this comment
peppermintpatty;
"Regarding the Palestinians: their land has been stolen repeatedly and in stages"
It's not their land anymore, just as the American colonies no longer belong to Britain. Britain's lucky it still owns the Malvinas. The Arabs who call themselves Palestinians or whatever, should do well to make the best use of the land they still have. When they got Gaza back, all they did with it was to use it to launch attacks on Israel. For this they do not need more land and given what they've shown they do when the get some, they should not be given any more.
"Israeli's "bravely" rocket their homes with pinpoint precision from Helicopters several miles away"
I see your problem. You're just angry that Palestinian cowardly rockets usually miss their mark entirely, anonymous civilians while Israelis usually get their intended targets, terrorist criminals. Just be grateful they aren't targeting London. They probably have more nuclear weapons than Britain and France combined by now. I wouldn't get them angry at me if I were you. They know who there enemies are and sooner or later if they are irate enough about them, they find them and kill them. Maybe they are finally learning something from the Russians.
Complain about this comment
The above post (#41) demonstrates no understanding of the Middle East beyond the Israeli Lobby sponsored bile routinely given publicity by Fox News over here in the U.S. The writer does, however, seem to be aware of the existance of other countries (such as Britain, France and Russia).
62% D- Must do better.
The truth is it is the Israeli’s who cower behind their technology … Illegal Gaza Invasion 2008: Israeli civilians killed 3, Israeli soldiers killed 10; Palestinian civilians killed 926, Civilian Policemen killed 255, "militants" (that's "freedom fighters", had they been white, for you MA) 236.
Complain about this comment
#42
IDF figures for Arabs killed during recent offensive.
Source:- Jerusalem Post
1,166 total, of whom 709 were Hamas terrorists, 162 men not yet classified.
295 non-combatants, including 49 women and 89 children under sixteen.
Complain about this comment
#43 exactly IDF figures, so anyone old enough to conceiveable hold a gun or grow a moustache is a terrorist.
The Policemen, 255 listed above, for example are not a part of the Hamas movement, many of them fought alongside Fatah against the Hamas takeover.
Complain about this comment
Palestinians including terrorists killed in fighting, about: 1000.
Innocent Sudanese Black civilians murdered in cold blood by the Arab Sudanese government and their Arab terrorist gang allies to ethnically cleanse Sudan: 200,000 to 300,000. Where's your outrage at that pattywagon your tongue?
Complain about this comment
#45 You realise that isn't even a sentence?
Arab Sudanese Govt. until recently backed by the U.S. and still heavily supported by key U.S. ally Egypt.
I notice you don't want to talk about the Middle East now because your losing.
Arabs are not exceptionally bad people M.A. and applying the word terrorist to that situation is really a misnomer. The ethnic clensing going on there is brutal, but hey what can we in the Western World do about it? ... there is very little of value in Darfur (unlike Iraq).
How many Afghans and Iraqis were "murdered in cold blood" by Coalition Forces? How many were killed in firework Shock and Awe display at the outset of the Iraq War to crowd please at home?
How many innocent Lebanese and Palestinians were gunned down by frustrated IDF troops, tanked up on half-baked religious fundamentalism, and unable to find the real enemy?
Complain about this comment
pattywagonyourtongue;
"Arabs are not exceptionally bad people M.A. "
Fortunately, Europeans are there to make Arab terrorists look less bad by contrast than they otherwise would. Europeans haven't beheaded people in a few centuries though.
Now how would I know how many people were killed in those conflicts, who they were (many were terrorists, Baathist sodiers, and insurgents who needed to be killed) and how many were killed by al Qaeda in Iraq or other insurgents? Probably most who died. The ones Americans killed were well publicized but likely the small minority. I don't know what difference it makes. How many innocent Germans were killed by the RAF such as the fire bombing of Dresden? Who cares what the numbers were?
What makes you think "we" are losing? The war in Iraq has turned out better than we could possibly have hoped for. The entire middle east has been lit up. We now face the prospect of a regional civil war between Shia and Sunni. What more could one on our side hope for? The Saudis are probably more frightened of Iran than Israel is. They'll be only too happy to sell us oil if we agree to protect them. Look at the recent divisions even between Shia in the meeting in Qatar last week. When did you see things like that before?
How many Arabs were killed by IDF troops tanked up by half baked religious fundimentalism? Not nearly as many as were killed by Moslems tanked up by half baked religious fundimentalism.
Complain about this comment
#47 Do you even read your posts? Surely you can't, otherwise you'd realise how idiotic they sound. I only hope you don't speak to 'real' people in every-day life like this.
Complain about this comment
#47, no facts, just further assertions that Arabs are a "uniquely evil" people.
"How would I know ... numbers"
Well you were claiming apparent absolute knowledge of the Darfur situation a couple posts ago, which again you don't want to talk about any more because the conversation has gone beyond every 3 minute segment, starring George Clooney, you've ever seen on the conflict.
Also, notice I don’t need to throw slurs at you to destroy your argument, whereas your pathetic attempts to mangle people’s names have no impact just like the "world-view" you are trying to forward!
You continue to support Israeli and their racist policies of ethnic clensing if it makes you happy, but don't dare pretend "the West" is on your side. You are clearly just the sort of religious crusading nut that you so despise on the Islamic "side".
BTW here is some of that evidence – look the word up - for radical racism and fundamentalist religion in the IDF,
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/03/20/idf-t-shirts-boast-of-killing-babies-pregnant-women-sodomizing-hamas-leaders/
"Religious education" and army training combined in Israel, - now, unless you want to claim that women should never, ever sing presumably this news is also "bad"?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1073722.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1059520.html
Of course in your terms, MA, the murder of women and children, use of illegal chemical weapons, possession of nuclear weapons and widespread war crimes committed by Israel are all explained by the fact that all Palestinians/Lebanese/various other Arabs are "evil".
You mention the Saudi's again the Saudi's exemplify the sort of religious fundamentalism you claim to despise in the Muslim world. The Saudi Govt. is the one which cuts off most heads, hands, etc ... in the world. Yet you are prepared to treat with them as they have oil.
Go on, admit it for all you talk about Darfur and the "nasty, bad, evil" Arabs there, the real reason for no-intervention is no oil or a commodity of similar value (unlike Iraq and unlike the crucial pipeline across Afghanistan).
Complain about this comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7979666.stm
Complain about this comment
pattywagonyourtonguesomemore, wow are you clueless.
"You are clearly just the sort of religious crusading nut that you so despise on the Islamic "side"."
Actually, I've been an atheist all of my life.
"You continue to support Israel"
Yes I do but I wouldn't characterize them the way you have. They have been an exemplary paragon of tolerence and patience looking for every possible avenue towards peace and have found none facing an implacable enemy that denies their very right to exist. Under the circumstances, they would be completely justified in fighting a war to eliminate their enemies off the face of the earth...just the way Britain and America eliminated the Nazis in WWII. IMO, they've been too restrained for far too long. Under comparable circumstances, I know America wouldn't be. Britain like the rest of Europe on the other hand would already have surrendered....they already acknowlede that Sharia law will in part likely be adopted in Britain. Just ask the Archbiship of Canterburyy, Dr. Williams. He's already said it. Eurabia is just around the corner. How nice that when they take it over, we will have bankrupted it first.
Complain about this comment
#51, However, you justify your backing of genocide ... I am not interested. "Eurabia" and whatever other racist nonsense you have dreamed up is nothing but a figment of your overactive imagination.
Detail is obviously not your strong point since whenever any is brought up you a) change the subject b) throw a new insult c) retreat.
The Israeli's have once again elected a government that would shame several historical fascist regimes, I don't think they deserve our support for doing so. In fact, the current Govt. leader doesn't even want peace with the Palestinians.
The Palestinians have no partners for peace: and they haven't since the assassination of Rabin.
Complain about this comment
#52
You're having a laugh. The Israelis know what kind of peace the Arabs would like to give them.
Hamas do not even pretend otherwise.
Complain about this comment
#53, Presumably the "create a desert and call it peace" that the Israeli's have currently imposed on the Palestinian and Lebanese people?
Complain about this comment
#54
I don't expect you to take anything I say seriously, but Hamas, Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad make no secret of their intention to finish what Hitler started.
God forbid!
Or perhaps you dismiss this as mere rhetoric ?
Complain about this comment
MAII, Here's an idea. Why not actually post something that doesn't revolve around WWII or your interpretation of the integration of a particular religious group in a country you've never been to and has nothing to do with the Middle East?
#52 "Detail is obviously not your strong point since whenever any is brought up you a) change the subject b) throw a new insult c) retreat." Spot on.
Complain about this comment
#55, Ah yes comparison to Hitler, a sure sign of a lost argument.
Why is it Hamas made repeated offers of a ceasefire ranging between 1 and 10 years prior to the Gaza invasion?
More to the point: why were those repeatedly refused by an Israeli political class determined to spill blood with an election looming?
Complain about this comment
#56 Paul your support is appreciated in confronting this ignorant ideologue.
Complain about this comment
pattywagonstillrunningoffatthemouth;
"Presumably the "create a desert and call it peace" that the Israeli's have currently imposed on the Palestinian and Lebanese people?"
The only ones who have imposed anything on the Lebanese people from the outside are Syria and Iran. Much to our eternal regret and eventually Israel's, Israel failed to follow orders from the Bush Administration in 2006 to wipe Hezbollah out no matter what it took. They showed more spine in Gaza but they still don't display the tenacity and ruthlessness necessary to fully vanquish their enemies. That will have to end when Iran approaches becoming a nuclear power. Otherwise it will be left to our new spineless president to do something. Don't hold your breath. He's just showed how weak a leader he will be in London.
", However, you justify your backing of genocide ..."
Some talk coming from someone who lives in a nation that accumulated almost all of its wealth from stealing the sweat and property of others for centuries running a slave empire on which the sun never set. I have to feel some sympathy for Vlad Putin's sentiments towards the UcK.
"the current Govt. leader doesn't even want peace with the Palestinians."
Why bother. It's been tried over and over again and failed. Peace on Palestinian terms means complete surrender. The Palestinian government makes no bones about its position that Israel has no right to exist. They can choke on it at their sNAcKBAHr.
Complain about this comment
"Some talk coming from someone who lives in a nation that accumulated almost all of its wealth from stealing the sweat and property of others for centuries running a slave empire on which the sun never set. I have to feel some sympathy for Vlad Putin's sentiments towards the UcK."
Yeah, actually I am living in the U.S. at the minute ... so there is an even worse history of slavery, and genocide (the Brits generally didn't wipe people out altogether, that is why certain native american tribes were so keen to get to the Canadian border) right there to deal with.
Yes, I am sure you find the Nakbah is hilarious! Now tell us one on the Holocaust, or perhaps the U.S.'s role as one of the last slave states in the western hemisphere, or the genocide of the native people of an entire continent (North America)?
Complain about this comment
#57
'Why is it Hamas made repeated offers of a ceasefire ranging between 1 and 10 years prior to the Gaza invasion?'
The answer to your question is: because the IDF beat the hell out of them every time! Hamas only calls for ceasefire when the going gets tough. Once the Israelis withdarw, the Hamas terrorists continue with their openly declared goal of destroying Israel.
Complain about this comment
#57
".......comparison to Hitler, a sure sign of a lost argument."
This is a silly statement.
The Mufti and the Fuerher would be so proud of you.
Complain about this comment
I find it so amusing how angry the bad guys and those who support them are these days. It's a sure sign the right side is winning. Israel today, Israel tomorrow, Israel forever. At the rate things are going, the chances of a so called "Palestinian State" ever emerging are so remote that we should just forget about it. In all likelihood, some terrible fate will befall those who live in Gaza, maybe a plague or something and there won't even be enough survivors to talk about it anymore. They are bringing it on themselves just as they have always done. As I've said previously, in most cases, people and nations get exactly what they deserve more or less. That is no different here. Palestinians' so called "leaders" have turned the entire population into what amounts to a mind state of terrorism. There is only one possible end to such mass insanity. Germans once befell the same fate only this time, Uncle Sam won't come around to pick up the pieces. The US should not waste its time on this unimportant issue. It has far more pressing concerns to deal with now.
Complain about this comment
pattystillrunningoffatthemouth;
"Yeah, actually I am living in the U.S. at the minute ... so there is an even worse history of slavery, and genocide"
The colonists learned from their European masters well indeed. It took a long time for them to unlearn it. Most of what is said by Europeans about the time frame of the US ending slavery is a bad distortion of the facts out of ignorance or deliberate lying. Some parts of the US ended slavery long before Europe did. In the south, the economy depended on slave labor in the cotton industry to survive. That economy was deliberatly created by the British government when it settled the south and continued to profit from slave trade to the south decades after it had abolished slavery in Britain.
But slavery was eliminated in all places in America within 90 years of the creation of the US Republic while it took many centuries in Britain and the rest of Europe.
There was so much genocide committed by Europeans over the centuries it is almost impossible to catalog it all. Only 10 years ago it was still occurring in Europe, in the Balkins while the rest of Europe stood by impotent as ever to stop it. Only the US had the will to do something which is why Western Europe begged President Clinton to send in America's military under the cover of NATO. What worthless trash Europe is and always was.
Complain about this comment
#38 Mostly
I am not talking about the lapse of security in the US leading up to 9/11, but rather the motives behind the killers. According to your original statement I quoted:
Most calamities that happen to people and nations have been brought about by...themselves.
Did the USA bring it on themselves as a result of her policies towards the Arab world?
Complain about this comment
#64, Americans by definition are the "worst" of the Europeans who carried out the genocide in the New World. Strangely enough, the power centre at home was not to blame for that, but individuals on the ground were. You can see this in the immediate disrespect shown for the Proclamation line of 1763, after the Revolution .
As to your characterization of slavery, that is just plain wrong! You are either ignorant or knowingly lying, or a combination of both.
The Somerset case in England, 1772, abolished internal slavery there, Scotland followed suit in internal slavery in 1778. Since 1807 Britain was policing the seas to stop slave trafficking, and it took the U.S. many decades to catch up. Indeed, U.S. traders attempting to run the embargo was common in the early years. Slavery was ended throughout the British Empire in 1833 - a good 30 years before that happened in the U.S., so again you clearly have no knowledge of the trade or its abolition outside the borders of the U.S.
If Europe is "worthless trash", most of the immigration to the U.S. was the unwanted element of that "worthless trash" – what does that make modern Americans under your twisted system?
Complain about this comment
#66 patty
Yes, at least the UK did something!
During the bicentenary celebrations of the UK's 1807 Act I read some of the appalling accounts of the slave trade in the US (as well as other places I might add).
Owners insured their slaves; so after they were worked to exhaustion their owner shot them and claimed the insurance money. This helped fund more building projects using slave labour and so on.
Lloyds' records state about 15 million slave insurances were paid out during a twenty year period (and that's just one insurer).
That's a holocaust in anyone's book.
Complain about this comment
#62, tell me do you have anything to offer the debate other than comparing anyone disagreeing with you to Hitler?
Complain about this comment
#55 gin
I don't expect you to take anything I say seriously, but Hamas, Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad make no secret of their intention to finish what Hitler started.
Rubbish. None of these groups want to exterminate European Jewry. This is childish hyperbole.
Complain about this comment
59. MarcusAureliusII wrote:
I have to feel some sympathy for Vlad Putin's sentiments towards the UcK.
They can choke on it at their sNAcKBAHr.
Great stuff. Thanks for the laugh.
49. pattymkirkwood,
I see you are trotting out the typical lefty mantra of no oil = no western intervention.
Problem with that little theory is that Sudan in fact has plenty of oil and currently the Chinese and the Russians, in their lust for blood money, are the ones ignoring the genocide and arming the Khartoum killers. And of course blocking anti-Sudan resolutions in the UN Security Council.
Here's a simple Google for you so that you can learn something:
Sudan oil China Russia
57. pattymkirkwood wrote:
#55, Ah yes comparison to Hitler, a sure sign of a lost argument.
68. pattymkirkwood wrote:
#62, tell me do you have anything to offer the debate other than comparing anyone disagreeing with you to Hitler?
If you read up a little on the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict you would be less at risk of making a fool of yourself.
*The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem met and adored Hitler and plotted to engineer a "final solution" for the Jews of Palestine.
*Iraq had a pro-Nazi government in the 40s.
*Nazis who had fled Germany helped Egypt develop weapons systems against Israel.
*Hezbollah does the Nazi salute.
*The remaining population of Jews of Arab countries is around 1% of the pre-1948 figures. In most cases the Jews were driven out with only the shirts on their backs.
*The ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands has been more complete than that of Nazi Germany, with many Arab countries being completely free of Jews, many of whose ancestors lived in those countries for centuries.
*The Hamas charter mandates the killing of Jews (not simply Israelis) and the destruction of Israel.
*The state-controlled media in Egypt, Israel's "peace partner" produces anti-Semitic cartoons identical to those of the Nazi era.
*The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an anti-Semitic forgery, is immensely popular in the Arab world.
*"Moderate" Arab clerics preach that Jews are the sons and daughters of pigs and monkeys.
That's just scratching the surface of the evidence of Nazi-like attitudes and actions from the Arab side of the conflict. Feel free to ignore it, but don't expect anyone to take your comments on the conflict seriously.
Complain about this comment
MarcusAureliusII,
I see Xie_Ming is back in his latest incarnation as luosquery. Same wooden, robotic style, same inability to communicate directly using names, instead referring to numbered comments, same bias. I was thinking this was a more restrained, less venomous Ming until I saw no. 32.
When it comes to the Israeli-Arab conflict, he just can't help himself.
To get back on topic, Robin I note your polite, respectful style of inquiry re Obama's policy on Afghanistan. I would like to suggest that the BBC adopt this style throughout its coverage. To this end, you could tap your colleague Gavin Esler on the shoulder and explain to him that it's not acceptable to insult Israeli government spokesman, Mark Regev, as Esler did on a recent Newsnight programme, while treating Hamas and company with kid gloves.
Either give everyone an equally easy ride, or be equally blunt and aggressive. Nothing proves the BBC's bias as conclusively as the different attitude it adopts to different political figures. Be consistent in your attitude and you will find yourselves able to confront your bias. You probably wont be able to eliminate it altogether, but at least be professional enough to put it aside while doing your job.
Complain about this comment
#70, Sudan's oil is nowhere near Darfur, it is in the eastern and south central region ... how is the West to justify action on behalf of those in Darfur and then grab those regions?
Also, please don't lecture me on history when you clearly know so little about it and are twisting this little you have access to.
Most of your list is purely irrelevant, and yes people do bad things on both sides ... look at some of the links above for evidence of Israeli war crimes in the last illegal invasion of Gaza.
Complain about this comment
72. pattymkirkwood,
As if it matters where in Sudan the oil is. You should at least be big enough to admit that you had no idea that Sudan had any oil at all. The Chinese especially are complicit in arming the genocidal Islamists in Khartoum so as not to endanger their oil contracts with the murderers.
You could obviously use a few lectures in history. I try not to commit myself to a debate on a subject without at least knowing something about it.
Most of your list is purely irrelevant....
Anyone can make bland, sweeping statements. Backing them up with logic and proof is a little more difficult. You come across like one of these short-attention-span wonders, big on bravado but woefully lacking in knowledge.
The pan-Arab Islamists in Khartoum have for years been engaged in a steady programme of genocide against the Africans of Darfur, even though they are fellow citizens and fellow Muslims.
Some two thousand survivors have fled the killing fields to Israel, which has no obligation at all to accept them since Sudan is a hostile country but takes them in purely on humanitarian grounds. Many of these desperate refugees have been shot and killed by Egyptian border guards while trying to cross into Israel. Others have been shot in Egyptian camps where they live in appalling conditions.
We see no Sudan bashing on these blogs from the anti-Israel crew. I wonder why that is the case.
And I'm sure the supreme irony of Muslims fleeing their fellow Muslims to find sanctuary and comfort among the Jews is lost on you since it doesn't suit your Israel-bashing agenda.
Complain about this comment
#65 do let me know if you ever get a decent answer out of Marcus on this one. I suspect not as he seems to flee quickly from the scene after being brought up on the ridiculous statements he often makes.
Complain about this comment
#73 "Anyone can make bland, sweeping statements.",
Indeed, such as your,
"As if it matters where in Sudan the oil is."
Sudan is 4/5ths the size of the EU geographically ... so, it is rather important as to where the oil is, don't you think? Also, don't project your total ignorance as to location on to me.
"Israel bashing agenda": if you care to read something of the above discussion, rather than simply spew bile as seems your wont, then you will clearly see I have no anti-Israeli agenda. I merely point out the inconsistencies in the double standard applied by the media in the Western world. Why no talk of the long history of Israeli terrorism against internationally mandated troops, that led to the creation of the Jewish state? Inconvenient for you to acknowledge.
How about your ignorant, anti-Arab agenda?
There was no "logic" or "proof" to your above answer, just a list which you could have quietly slipped Ancient Romans, Lazio fans, and 1930s American children in your idiotic comment on the "Nazi salute"!
Truth is Hezbollah and Hamas are the largest charity organizations in their respective countries, while Israel concentrates on destroying whatever progress is made by Lebanon and Palestine toward a normal state and society. Why do you think the people congregate to them?
It is ignorance such as yours that has gotten the West into this position, where Hamas and Hezbollah take over the position of the state in provided for the poor masses and earn their political (and in a limited number of cases military) loyalty.
Its sad. Like your lack of basic knowledge of Africa with which you feel empowered to make huge judgements, based on nothing.
Don't lecture me on history, when you clearly know so little yourself!
Complain about this comment
As promised 1930s American school pic (this one calls it the "Bellamy salute"),
http://bkmarcus.com/blog/images/flags/pledge.jpg
Suppose you think their in on it too now, TT?
Complain about this comment
pattytalkingoutofbothsidesofhermouth;
"Yeah, actually I am living in the U.S. at the minute"
You couldn't stand it in the UK either. You're in good company. Sometimes it seems from the accents, half of Britain's indigenous population is here as ex-pats...and that's just the BBC employees.
"most of the immigration to the U.S. was the unwanted element of that "worthless trash" ? what does that make modern Americans under your twisted system?"
We are the descendants of what other nations considered the scum of the earth, the lowest of the low. They fled Europe's famines, debtors prisons, pogroms, wars, discrimination, inquisitions, religious persecution, and hopelessness. We their descendants are their revenge on the rest of the world, especially Europe. What we have done is nothing compared to what we are going to do. We don't do it consciously, it is inherent in our nature to detest the alien cultures that treated our ancestors like so much human trash that they were forced to flee. Before we are done, there will be nothing left of the rest of the world, certainly not Europe. It's happening right now. That is how and why we invented so many terrible things. From nuclear armaments to nuclear financial bombs. I think hear one exploding in Eastern Europe this very minute. You can sense the shock and awe 6 thousand miles away. If our last village fool of a president wasn't bad enough, our new neophyte beginner president will finish the job. That Europe loves him erases any lingering doubt that he is incompetent that was left in my mind.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
re #77 & 78,
Advocating the end of the world (excluding the U.S.) is OK, pointing out someone is doing so is not?
Perhaps if I had thrown more out and out playground insults, like some other posters, I would not be subject to this censorship?
BBC logic - "go figure".
Complain about this comment
#69
Again, I don't expect anyone to take my word for it. They are not shy, you're just not listening to them.
Nasrallah recently said that he hoped all of the world's Jews would move to Israel. He seems to think it will assist his genocidal ambitions if they do so.
Complain about this comment
80. Scotch-git wrote:
Unfortunately that pertinent observation will be like proverbial water off a duck's back for the Israel-bashing crew.
75. pattymkirkwood wrote:
Obviously it doesn't matter where the oil is since it's under the control of the genocidal Islamists in Khartoum (though the Christians of South Sudan will take a considerable proportion along with them if they manage to secede.) I'm sure you knew that's what I meant, but carry on grasping at straws and making more sweeping statements to try to discredit my arguments.
Nobody is fooled by these transparent attempts to divert attention from the fact that you not only didn't know Sudan is swimming in oil, but thought Sudan had no oil whatsoever, when oil has been at the heart of much of the conflict there. The comparative size of Sudan and the EU has nothing to do with this debate.
Unfortunately for you, your comment at no. 49 stands:
"Go on, admit it for all you talk about Darfur and the "nasty, bad, evil" Arabs there, the real reason for no-intervention is no oil or a commodity of similar value (unlike Iraq and unlike the crucial pipeline across Afghanistan)."
A desperate Google or two on your part won't conceal your lack of knowledge about Sudan. I'm not fooled, and neither would anyone else be, having followed this debate.
Your Israel-bashing agenda is obvious from your comments. Perhaps you should go back and read them yourself. A bit of self-knowledge never did anyone any harm. You bash Israel while absolving Islamic terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah of all blame.
"Why no talk of the long history of Israeli terrorism against internationally mandated troops, that led to the creation of the Jewish state?"
Your ignorance of the situation in Palestine then is evidently as profound as your ignorance of Sudan now. I have discussed this plenty of times on these blogs and we could talk about it again now, but I'm not sure what that would achieve. You would just insist on having your prejudices reinforced.
I’m not "anti-Arab" - just anti-Arab terrorists and their supporters, such as yourself.
Yes, there were Nazi-supporters in America. They were also evident in Britain – Oswald Moseley for example. If you think taking one example from my list and trying to trash it constitutes a valid argument you have a lot to learn about debate.
Today's Hezbollah terrorists have nothing in common with indoctrinated American schoolchildren of the 1930s. Do try to stay within the limits of reasonable debate.
Complain about this comment
Many people come to America from all over the world. They bring the cultural baggage they were inculcated wtih in their own country with them. We usually tolerate it, ignore it, but there reaches a point where we find it so offensive we no longer put up with it. And if it breaks our laws we prosecute it vigorously.
The good news is that the children of those who emigrate to the US will be instantly assimilated, as different from their parents as night and day. They will grow up as we do and be one of us in every possible way often much to the horror of their parents. They will not share their parents alien values. Within one or two more generations, all but the faintest vestiges of their ancestry will be wiped away.
Many of the values and expectations of life of the Islamic world are sharply antithetical to the American social ethos. Some of their practices are felonious in the US such as forced child marriages, honor killings, and sexual mutillation of girls and women. Many of their culutral trappings are abhorrent to Americans. There is no compromise with them once they cross a clearly defined line. Unlike Europe, America will not compromise with it and it will not accept that because it is normal in their societies, we have to make allowances for it in ours. The same can be said of our relationships with Europe, we do not share many of their values no matter how hard some "liberals" try to paper over it. Beyond our biological needs as an animal species, we often have little in common.
You'd better get accostomed to the fact that America's cultural ties to Israel are stronger than they are to any other foreign country although we have our differences with them too. This is not just my opinion but that of Britain's former ambassador to the US Sir Christopher Meyers who said so explicity in his interview with BBC. You may not like it pattywagonyourtongue but you will not change it. And if Obama looks like he might even try, he will have a domestic political war on his hands that is the last thing he wants or needs right now.
I did not advocate the end of the world, I just pointed out it is happening right before our eyes. The physical environment is being destroyed by among other things global warming quite possibly due to CO2 emissions. The US is the world's second largest emitter, China is the largest. Modern China is an invention engineered by Henry Kissinger around 1973, a Jewish American just in case that escaped you. The world has also been destroyed financially. Compared to the inventions of large American finance companies, the damage inflicted on America's and the world's economy by al Qaeda was a pin prick. They couldn't possibly have impacted the world the way the instruments of financial destruction we invented have. No deliberate plan could have been more stealthy or successful to wipe out the world's economies than the one that was inadvertently invented and detonated by them. And what did one of the chief architects of the plan Alan Greenspan another American Jew have to say in his own defense in his testimony before Congress recently? "There is something about markets I don't understand." Talk about wry wit and irony, Shakespeare himself could hardly have done better.
Complain about this comment
#81
I find comment #81 to be an abusive and personal attack.
It is clearly designed to personally denigrate a poster.
If the TT poster were concerned about whether Darfur has oil, etc., he could have elucidated this point.
Instead, the lengthy comment is filled with derogatory references to the poster he wishes to provoke and discredit.
I would ask that, in the interests of a better and more informative Forum, the moderator remove such posts.
Rather than complaining about the comment and seeking thereby its immediate removal, I will entr this so that all posters may express their opinion concerning this sort of posting.
Complain about this comment
#80
"Nasrallah recently said that he hoped all of the world's Jews would move to Israel. He seems to think it will assist his genocidal ambitions if they do so."
This asserts that Nasrallah has genocidal ambitions. Is any proof of this offered?
Orthodox rabbis also hope that all the World's Jews will move to Greater Israel, also, for they are now living in [i]galut[/i] (exile).
Do the rebbim think that will assist their genocidal ambitions?
The comment #80 by "SGrit" was clearly designed to provoke hatred against Nasrallah, who, as the leader of Hezbollah, has led successful opposition to Israel's ambitions in the Lebanon.
There is a question of what standards the moderator of this Forum wishes to establish.
Is it fair game to seek to arouse hatred by making unsubstatied claims that a foreign leader has genocidal ambitions?
Complain about this comment
Locutus of Borg;
It is for the moderators alone to determine if a posting has broken the rules.
As I read it, posting #81 did not, it was a simple statement of an opinion of facts, facts you evidently don't like. TT's criticisms that some were waggin' their tongues uselessly again were well justified IMO.
Any news of Ming, the little emperor recently? Eaten any Canadian bacon lately? Eaten any crow? That's often desert after an entre' of tongue waggin'.
Complain about this comment
#81, another post displaying astounding ignorance, with a pathetic attempt at stringing an "argument" together.
Again your total lack of basic knowledge shines through. I am able to distinguish between Darfur and Sudan (as my #49 does) and it infuriates you because you are only beginning to learn the difference! Again, Sudan is 4/5th the size of the EU, so what you casually dismiss as the same country is the equivalent of pointing to oil fields in, say, Poland and justifying an invasion of France in those terms!
You may not think "your fooled", but your clearly being proven to be one.
Israel deserves criticism for its illegal invasions of its neighbours and war crimes ... I make no apology for daring to criticise your favoured country.
Just because I actually acknowledge that Hamas and Hezbollah have extensive popular support (due to their charity work) and damn Israel for the war crimes it routinely commits in its "incursions" does not mean I am supporting one side over another. I am merely saying what others (principally the Western media) dare not for fear of having the Israeli lobby set on them, shouting "Hitler", "Anti-Semite" and "Holocaust" for the remainder of time.
Israel used chemical weapons in the latest incursion into Gaza. Israel possess (illegal) nuclear weapons. Israel admits to using torturing high-up Palestinians who are captured. Are you just another pro-Israeli extremist (who believe they can do no wrong, or that "the ends justify the means"), or are you capable of acknowledging that at least some of the above is morally repugnant?
The "Nazi salute" you sighted as practiced by Hezbollah has no more linkages to the real Nazi's than the Bellamy salute practiced by American schoolchildren in the 1930s.
Yes there were proto-Nazi groups in Britain but what exactly does that prove? There were proto-Nazi groups in Ireland, Switzerland, Hungary, Romania (plus the U.S. as you mention) etc ... etc ... and then there were actually those which grew to prominence under Nazi occupation (The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark etc ...)
The point is: the modern Israeli-Arab conflict has nothing to do with the Nazi's, and your use of that term shows the weakness of your supposed "argument".
Now here is a radical idea for you: Arabs are capable of having their own political ideas, thoughts and traditions distinct from the Western European bogeymen you want to portray them as the successors to ...
So either accept that, and try debating in a decent manner (as your insane companion MA is clearly incapable of), or take your total ignorance of history, and toddle back to whatever shadow you emerged from.
#83 luosquery,
I personally don't want the hateful posts such as #81 removed, as it shows that poster as he (or she) truly is.
Indeed, I would not be surprised if on his/her next visit back he/she will report it herself in an attempt to get such baseless hate struck from the record! As I say, I hope that doesn't happen.
Complain about this comment
#82, Another post confirming your extremely loose grip on reality!
I have no desire to change cultural norms in the U.S., just to get you to acknowledge that you do not and cannot accurately represent them.
The rest of your maniac ramblings regarding the end of the world are not worthy of a response, with the following exception:
You now claim your not advocating the destruction of the rest of the world excluding America, yet,
"Before we are done, there will be nothing left of the rest of the world, certainly not Europe. It's happening right now." (#77),
... aye, right.
Complain about this comment
PattyMKirkwood has been making some highly cogent posts, for example this one:
"You continue to support Israeli and their racist policies of ethnic clensing if it makes you happy, but don't dare pretend "the West" is on your side. You are clearly just the sort of religious crusading nut that you so despise on the Islamic "side".
BTW here is some of that evidence ? look the word up - for radical racism and fundamentalist religion in the IDF,
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
"Religious education" and army training combined in Israel, - now, unless you want to claim that women should never, ever sing presumably this news is also "bad"?
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1073722.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1059520.html
Of course in your terms, MA, the murder of women and children, use of illegal chemical weapons, possession of nuclear weapons and widespread war crimes committed by Israel are all explained by the fact that all
Palestinians/Lebanese/various other Arabs are "evil".
Since points are both cogent and serve to expose the line of Israel, the usual individuals will begin their tactic of personal insult, provocation and denigration,
rather than speaking to the points at issue.
In the interests of a better Forum, I would hope that the moderator could be alert to and discourage the personal insults and attacks.
Complain about this comment
I see that comment #88 has "been referred to the moderators"
It quoted part of a PattyMKirkwood post (above).
And noted that the cogency of her comments
would result in the usual tactic of personal attack, provocation and denigration.
One should also mention the other desperate tactic of the pro-Israel crew:
Abuse of "referring to moderation".
When the truth hurts the cause, shoot the messenger!
Complain about this comment
wigglewaggle;
"Before we are done, there will be nothing left of the rest of the world, certainly not Europe. It's happening right now."
I know from your postings you have difficulty following logical arguments but where does that say I advocate the end of the word? For all you know I oppose the end of the world, after all, when it ends so will my life. You are so caught up in your emotions that you cannot even make a distinction between a neutral observation and an advocacy of a policy.
Here's another of your countless mistakes. IF, and that is only if Israel has nuclear weapons, they are no more illegal than America's, Britain's, France's, Russia's, or China's. Israel is NOT a signatory to the NPT and is therefore exempt from it. Obama will have an impossible case to make for worldwide nuclear disarmament so long as Isreal feels it might be invaded again by its neighbors without them. Nor were Israeli, would I trust the US to live up to any committments to defend Israel from another war of Arab aggression to wipe Israel off the map as they tried four times in the past. The US proved in Vietnam among other places that its committment to see a war through to its successful conclusion and win at all costs no matter what the consequences, died with the end of WWII. Israel is ultimately responsible for its own defense and security and IMO, given the huge disparity between its numbers and size and the numbers and size of those who want to destroy it, Nukes are the weapons of choice.
Arab genocide in Darfur is only protected because China derives great benefit from Sudan's oil exports to it. The whole world knows it. Russia doesn't particularly care one way or the other but would not support a UN Security Council resolution to invade.
At the moment, France and Britain probably have about 200 or fewer nuclear weapons each. Israel was believed to have about the same 12 years ago. Despite President Carter's recent statement that it probably still has about 200, I think by now it is closer to 400 or more. That would mean it has the third largest arsenal of them in the world, only Russia and the US have more. And while ten years ago its weapons were believed to have been "fusion boosted" by now it probably has full thermonuclear capability. That means if faced with extinction, it not only has the power to wipe out all of the middle east with it but all of Europe as well. Something to think about for Europeans who favor helping the Moslem world finish the job Hitler and the Nazis started. I don't think Europe's views have changed much over the decades. Not where it counts most.
Complain about this comment
This is another sort of "school yard insult".
Is this the sort of thing that should be permitted in an adult discussion Forum?
"At 00:05am on 04 Apr 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
pattytalkingoutofbothsidesofhermouth;
"Yeah, actually I am living in the U.S. at the minute"
You couldn't stand it in the UK either..."
One should put a stop to this sort of thing when it begins, or open the floodgates wide.
Again, what do you say about what our standards should be?
Complain about this comment
In the matter of nuclear weapons:
Pakistan, India, North Korea and China have as much right to them as Israel does.
In fact, any contry has a legal right to any weapon, because any sovereign nation may withdraw from any treaty at any time.
Complain about this comment
The argument that a country's leaders are "fanatics" and that therefore the state should not have powerful weapons is invalid on several grounds.
No one nation has a monopoly on fanatics.
Post #90 alludes to what is called in Israel the "Samson Option". This is the fairly common idea that Israel, if seriously threatened, will destroy the whole World, as Samson brough the temple down upon his enemies.
You see that idea again presented in Post #90.
Complain about this comment
"Post #90 alludes to what is called in Israel the "Samson Option". This is the fairly common idea that Israel, if seriously threatened, will destroy the whole World, as Samson brough the temple down upon his enemies."
Can you think of one good reason why they wouldn't?
How many nuclear weapons would it take to destroy all human life on the surface of the earth? Actually, detonated in the right place, just one. And that place would be the reactor building of a nuclear power plant. While a nuclear weapon has about 20 pounds of enriched uranium or plutonium, the core of a nuclear power plant has about 100 tons or around 200,000 pounds of it (though not weapons grade in the sense of sustaining an uncontrolled chain reaction like U235, every bit as deadly to human life.) Should that find its way to the stratosphere, it would only be a matter of time until we were all dead, just a few years at most I'd think as it falls all over the world as radioactive fallout. Fallout from weapons testing and the consequent rise in human cancers including bone cancer and leukemia was the reason for the test ban treaty in the early 1960s.
There is no such thing as a right to have nuclear weapons or even of international law. The reason we have an NPT is because it allows a country to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without frightening its neigbors into believing it is developing nuclear weapons instead. This is what Iran is doing right now, frightening many nations including the US and Israel into thinking it is developing nuclear weapons. When that threat appears to loom close, the US and Israel will each face the choice of allowing the threat to fully mature and risk possibly becoming the targets of Iran's crazy Ayatollahs or pre-emptively destroying that capability which probably means destroying all of Iran at the same time as well. In the case of Israel, it's only option would be a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the entire country. There is no right or wrong about this, no legal or illegal. That subterfuge doesn't count for a row of beans in the real world. But the risk of that would be setting Iran's oil fields ablaze in fires unlike those in Kuwait after Saddam Hussein set them ablaze could never be put out. That too could be the end of the world. 100 years of global warming in six months. Faced with that dilemma, Israel I'd guess would probably decide to take its chances on attacking anyway. It would feel it had nothing to lose.
Complain about this comment
85. MarcusAureliusII wrote:
TT's criticisms that some were waggin' their tongues uselessly again were well justified IMO.
I appreciate that. Xie Ming is obviously annoyed that I've busted him yet again. This new identity of his is about the sixth that I know of.
86. pattymkirkwood,
You're taking a long time and a lot of space to dig yourself deeper into the hole you've been digging. I suppose now you are going to tell me that Darfur is a separate country from Sudan. Or perhaps you genuinely believe that? Anyway, they discovered oil in Darfur in 2005. Your original theory that non-intervention in Darfur was because of no oil has been shown to be a fantasy. As I said, sometimes in life you have to be big enough to admit your mistakes and move on.
The Arab side of the Israeli-Arab conflict took the genocidal baton from the Nazis and hasn't stopped running with it since. I gave you many examples of this in comment no. 70. You ignored all of them except for the Nazi salute. For the last three decades the Arabs have been backed by their ideological brothers, fellow Muslims of Iran. Ahmedinejad hosted a Holocaust denial conference, has threatened to destroy Israel and Iran trains, arms and funds Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists for the killing of Israelis and other Jews. Note that Israel has never attacked Iran.
And please, try to become a little more clued up on the subjects that you are obviously so passionate about.
Complain about this comment
#80, #84, #89
Ask Hassan Nasrallah. He said it.
"When the truth hurts the cause, shoot the messenger!"
Complain about this comment
This issue is really gonna take some time. And I mean don't know when it'll ever end. A lot of factors contribute to this issue but not one of the factors seem to cooperate for the better.
reverse cell phone lookup
Complain about this comment
#95, Again, do you actually have anything to say; or do you just want to repeat points that have already been disproven. You clearly have no idea about what is happening in Sudan, and little but dogma and bile to spew on the Israeli-Arab conflict.
"As I said, sometimes in life you have to be big enough to admit your mistakes and move on."
… still awaiting your admission that you had no idea of the geography of Sudan. I am a member of a group campaigning on just that issue, and my views on Darfur in no way impact on my views on Israel/Palestine as they are completely distinct. I do not ideologically take the view "they are the bad guys" as you appear to do with Arabs.
Also, note that Iran has never attacked Israel or indeed any of its neighbors - the only war (a brutal one costing over 1 million lives) was started by the U.S. (and U.K.) backed Saddam regime of Iraq against the Islamic Republic.
I notice from your twisted viewpoint it is quite alright for the U.S. to massively fund Israel and equip them with state of the art weaponry, but Iran providing money to Hezbollah (and possibly Hamas, that is disputed) is not.
As to your post 70, rarely have I seen such a collection of lies and half-truths strung together to justify the continued system of apartheid and land seizure in Israel/Palestine. Nazi scientists - heard of NASA? heard of the competing Soviet program? Praise of Hitler: Chamberlain, Lloyd George, Churchill on occasion in the early years. Churchill even "wrote that Jews may 'have been partly responsible for the antagonism from which they suffer', inviting terms of abuse such as 'Hebrew bloodsucker'."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/mar/11/highereducation.race
Truth is all your listed "evidence" doesn't amount to a hill of beans!
Also, please note as offensive as your and MA's posts are, it is only people on your side of the debate (I don't know who) who are childish enough to refer posts that they simply disagree with!
Here is the difference, I actually know something of the history. Indeed, I earn my crust teaching history, so please go away and learn something that you didn’t pick up on the sensationalized version broadcast on the history channel or fox news.
You are linking events in different parts of the world, at different times, involving different peoples, and presenting it as part of a wider grand conspiracy … this is simply not true, and it makes you look ridiculous.
#94 why on earth would Iran's "crazy" Ayatollahs be any worse than the "crazy Rabbis" currently in the Israeli Govt.?
Also, how many nuclear weapons have been detonated in anger since there was more than a single nuclear power?
Irony of this is the West was actually helping the Shah with nuclear research before his overthrow. Now there is a democratic regime in Iran we are against them having it. What does that say about the U.S., U.K. and the rest of "the West"? Also, lets remember who has nuclear weapons trained on who here.
Complain about this comment
#89 luosquery,
Not a big deal but that would actually be "his comments". Simple contraction of Patrick, common in the west of Scotland, far preferable to "paddy" or similar.
I see you were referred to the moderation neverland too ... judging by the responses of BBC mods on other blogs, it will remain there for a long time before any decision is made.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#100, Don't dare impugn my career. University learning is a key part of a young person's life in the modern world and especially so considering some of the standards of education at lower levels in the U.S., and I am proud to be a part of helping them better themselves.
If you attack how I earn my living again, I will use the refer button myself against my better instincts.
Again, you show yourself incapable of distinguishing Sudan from Darfur. It is pathetic. This is simple stuff, admit you were wrong and move on.
Also, please note I said I don't know who is referring the posts ... it may well be your deranged compadre, or some third party (as my #98 made clear).
#70, "Nazi-like attitudes and actions from the Arab side of the conflict". & #95 "The Arab side of the Israeli-Arab conflict took the genocidal baton from the Nazis and hasn't stopped running with it since."
Seriously, get a grip, if that isn't a lie in your book: then you have no idea what that simple concept means!
I am sorry that the reality on the ground does not reconcile with your crackpot extreme-right agenda, but you will just have to deal with that yourself. One day it will occur to you, where are the ghettoes in modern-day Israel-Palestine?
Complain about this comment
pattycake;
"You clearly have no idea about what is happening in Sudan"
I guess the BBC is not doing its job of keeping us informed. Bad Robin Lustig, BAD, BAD, BAD!!! Now get out there and get us the facts and don't come back until you do!
"I am a member of a group campaigning on just that issue, and my views on Darfur in no way impact on my views on Israel/Palestine as they are completely distinct. I do not ideologically take the view "they are the bad guys""
Then you are also at odds with the Secretary General of the United Nations and the International Criminal Court which indicted Bashir for crimes against humanity. The Arabs at their recent meeting said they would not turn him over to the ICC. They will protect this criminal suspect in violation of your precious international law. Don't complain when the US protects those like Rumsfeld that people of your ilk would like to see indicted too.
"Also, note that Iran has never attacked Israel or indeed any of its neighbors "
What do you call Hezbollah's attacks on Israel and its aggression against Lebanon? I call it Iran attacking Israel and Lebanon under another name. What do you call Hamas' attacks on Israel. I call it Iran attacking Israel under another name. So do a lot of Arab countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. That fact is proven by them being so frightened of Iran that they can barely bring themselves to support the Palestinians publically. Privately they are hoping that Israel will defeat Iran. If and when that happens, they will publically condemn it...after they privately breathe a huge sigh of relief.
"Here is the difference, I actually know something of the history. Indeed, I earn my crust teaching history,"
You mean indoctrinating people into your twisted lies about history. You'd better be careful. There is a fine line between telling people these kind of lies and jihad advocating the programs of terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas and becoming an enemy of the United States Government. If you do cross that line and are found out, you could be deported or wind up in a place just like GITMO to be interrogated and kept prisoner until the war on terror or whatever Obama wants to call it now is over. GITMO may be closing but don't kid yourself, there are plenty of other places you've never heard of just like it and other equally unpleasant method of interrogation to waterboarding the US government still views as legal. Don't wind up in one. You are not as immune to it as you may think. Freedom of speech in the United States has clear legal limits that have been upheld by the courts. Don't test the system, you will lose.
Complain about this comment
#102, "Yes dear, time for your medication ... lie down and remember those 'nasty' Muslims are far away; who knows your family might just visit today?"
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The tactic of insulting and provoking individuals should be discouraged.
It is, unfortunately, a standard operating practice of some apologists of Israel here.
Certain posters are obviously a bit deranged (e.g. threatening to destroy the World, threatening a poster with CIA torture cells, etc). However, that is to be expected in public Fora.
More reprehensible is that practice of willful personal denigration and provocation, engaged in with careful intent.
In these discussion fora, the tactic is unnecessary. It is illustrated in this thread.
I would ask that the moderator try to review and eliminate posts which contain unnecessary personal insult and provocation.
[If you would like specifics, then I will point out such phrases in the thread, but this should not be necessary for a competent moderator].
Complain about this comment
Again, Post #81 is an example of a personal attack, composed and presented to denigrate and provoke.
The poster even explains that as his purpose- a personal attack against someone he accuses of supporting Arabs.
This mindset evidently does consider individual posters, as distinct from their ideas, as targets.
Whether the BBC wishes to tolerate this tactic on its blogs is for management to decide.
Perhaps, however, the general feeling is that our society has reached the point where such tactics are considered acceptable?
Complain about this comment
Referring again to comment #84.
The assertion is made that Nasrallah has genocidal ambitions, but no evidence is offered in support.
Are such statements to be published?
What criteria are to be applied?
It is possible to have an adult and informed discussion forum, but this becomes difficult under the present circumstances.
Complain about this comment
locutus of Borg, here's your evidence.
From the Jerusalem Post of March 14, 2009;
"In a recorded speech aired Friday evening in Beirut in honor of the Prophet Muhammad's birthday, Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah rejected a US condition for talks and stressed that his group will not recognize Israel, "even in 1,000 years."
"Today, the United States comes and says to us: You are terrorists and we are willing to forgive you for what has been, under the condition that you recognize Israel," Agence France-Press quoted Nasrallah as saying.
Nasrallah stressed that the Lebanese people are "capable of defeating this entity [Israel] and can make it disappear," and therefore, Hizbullah will not recognize Israel, "not today, not tomorrow, not even in 1,000 years."
According to AFP, after harshly rejecting the Obama administration's conditions for dialogue, according to which the group must denounce terrorism and recognize the Jewish state, Nasrallah touched on Hizbullah's ties with the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1236764180823
Anyone who talks about peace in the Middle East has not reckoned with people of this mindset in control over so many people and so many weapons. There will not be any peace so long as this kind are around.
Complain about this comment
Re: #107
luosquery,
You are correct. I should have quoted my source on #80. My apologies.
The following is an extract from 'Celsius 7/7' by Michael Gove.
'As its leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, has made clear, he is prosecuting a war of extermination. The man who has said: "If they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide" is not a leader with whom it is easy to negotiate.'
Complain about this comment
Scotch-git #109
This is where so many people including our political leaders make a mistake.
"(Nasrallah).... is not a leader with whom it is easy to negotiate.'"
No! Wrong! Dead wrong in fact! Nasrallah is a leader with whom it is IMPOSSIBLE to negotiate. You cannot reach any kind of satisfactory agreement with someone whose unwavering objective is your destruction. Any agreement with an individual or organization with this view is at best a temporary arrangement they will use to their advantage to buy time to become even stronger in seeking your ultimate destruction anyway. This was the lesson of Munich in 1938. The only sane course of action when you are locked in a cage with a pathological murderer bent on your death is to kill him first. That is the logical thing to do but it is the one thing sane people find most unpalatable. But if they refuse to accept that fact and act on it, the longer they wait, the greater the jeopardy they put themselves in. It was Hitler's lesson to the world in World War II it did not learn. The continued existance of al Qaeda and the current governments of Iran and North Korea are proof we either never understood it, refused to accept it, or forgot it. It is a fatal mistake that has only one possible inevitable outcome, a war in which nothing short of survival is at stake.
Complain about this comment
#110
Marcus,
The quote is an example of classic British understatement.
In the West we are taught to exhaust all other options before we resort to violence.
We are learning the hard way that for our enemies violence is the first option.
Complain about this comment
A column in today's Jerusalem Post may be of interest.
David Klinghoffer writes about George Gilder's forthcoming book 'The Israel Test'
Complain about this comment
Scotch-git
The problem with waiting is that the ultimate price you pay becomes incrementally greater as time goes on. Once the determination is made that no compromise is possible, the opportunity should be seized to eliminate the threat completely at the earliest feasible moment. In this way the cost in suffering in human life on your side and usually on the other side is minimized. Imagine how many lives would have been saved if Britain and France had attacked and defeated the Nazis in Germany in 1934 or 1935. Not just British and French lives but German lives as well. Many millions. Right now we are making exactly the same mistakes. There is only one word for people who do not learn from past mistakes, not just their own but others and that word is stupid. It's also why we are in the financial crisis were are in now, we did not learn from the causes of the great depression and its aftermath.
Santyana was prescient when he said those who do not learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.
The worst thing about Europe is not just that it will not stand up and fight when it needs to but that it would stop others who are less timid about confronting dire threats facing them from fighting in their own defense. Iraq was proof of that if there was any doubt. So is pressure put on Israel to stop fighting just short of total victory every time it is attacked. If the threat is not eliminated, it will only come back at a future time more determined than ever.
Complain about this comment
'Life must be understood backwards; but...it must be lived forwards.' - Soren Kierkegaard
Alternatively - 'Go figure.' >8-D
Complain about this comment
#108 and #112 impartial evidence of Arabs evil intentions from the Jerusalem post there ...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#112, #115
Mr. Klinghoffer's column does not mention Arabs.
Perhaps the book he was reviewing does. I'll let you know.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_252.shtml
Just one example of why people support Hezbollah, and how Israel has used collective punishment (slaughtering thousands) in the past.
Complain about this comment
Why is it only Jewish voices calling for peace?
Their Mission Statement is interesting.
They want 'An end to all violence against civilians.'
'Peace among the peoples of the Middle East.'
They demand that 'Palestinians must stop suicide bombings and other attacks on Israeli civilians.'
Mr. Kirkwood, you are preaching to the converted.
Now, go tell it to the Arabs!
Complain about this comment
#120, I selected the piece, because I know something of the audience. It is not only Jewish voices calling for peace, but it is easier to take such a detached view when you are living in safety yourself rather than in the front lines as all Palestinians and many Southern Lebanese are.
You seem to have missed out the following from their Mission Statement (for some reason),
1) A U.S. foreign policy based on promoting peace, democracy, human rights, and respect ?for international law
2) An end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem
3) A resolution of the Palestinian refugee problem consistent with international law and equity
4) Racism and bigotry cannot be tolerated, whether in the U.S. or abroad, whether against Arabs or against Jews.
If only Israeli's were prepared to compromise to achieve peace, rather than electing Attila the Hun and his religious fundamentalist allies.
Complain about this comment
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iOyfJZGMrNGKq_zb4C5G_7edTo4gD97AT0NO1
Complain about this comment
There is hardly a day that goes by when we don't hear a report of at least one incident of Islamic terrorism somewhere in the world. Often the victims are other Moslems. And you don't hear wisespread vociferous and persistent condemnation of it by many Moslems leaders. Many in the Moslem world seem to accept it as a normal part of life. Some even try to rationalize and in fact justify it. Perhaps that is why so many of us in the non Islamic world have come to associate Islam with terrorism. It's an association that's beginning to stick.
Complain about this comment
To #123 MAII:
If an American or Christian carries out an atrocity, what is it that stops you from generalizing and applying that as a label characteristic of all Americans and Christians?
Complain about this comment
_marko
Simple, we condemn him, we hunt him down, we put him on trial, and after he is convicted, we we punish him. He's not a hero, he's a villain. Example, Timothy McVeigh who blew up a building in Oklahoma City and killed nearly 200 people. He was executed for it. The American soldiers in Iraq who murdered those innocent people were recently convicted. They will go to prison for a long time. There is no equivalence here. We are not like them. Nobody pays the families of the villians a reward for their crimes the way Arab governments like Saddam Hussein's did.
Complain about this comment
125. MarcusAureliusII,
Quite. And when Sami Kuntar was released from an Israeli prison he received a hero's welcome from Hezbollah.
Kuntar murdered an Israeli father in front of his young daughter and then bashed her head in against a rock with his rifle butt.
See the difference _marko?
Complain about this comment
I should add the Hezbollah is now in fact the government in Lebanon, with veto power over government decisions and contemptuously ignoring the odd feeble attempt by the UN to stop it rearming in terms of the post-war resolution of 2006.
Complain about this comment
To #125
Thanks for your reply.
yes, but if that person is a member of a larger group or cult, you don't then extrapolate that group's actions to the whole of America or the Christian world. I was trying to identify what specific quality(s) prevents you from doing so (which is absent on the "other side")
When you use the phrase "we are not like them" how far are you generalizing? How much of the US or Christian population are you claiming to understand? How much of the Arab, Muslim or Afghan population are you claiming to understand?
To #126 TT
I'm not sure that one attrocity justifies another so it may not be that productive quoting attrocities. Isn't the natural reflex action of a vicitim of an attrocity to become more imperialistic and racist?
Complain about this comment
The planners at CENTCOM must despair every time they're asked to produce a new strategy for Afghanistan. How many "new starts" have they had in the last seven years?
What started back in October 2001 as an attempt to deal with a couple of hundred al Qaeda has grown out of all proportion. It grew into a war against 30 million in Afghanistan, and is well on the way to de-stabilising 170 million in Pakistan. How many troops will that entail?
In October 2001, the Taliban offered to handover bin Laden to an international court. USA refused - it would get better results by going down the military route. Well that was seven years ago - and its still trying to achieve what was available at the time.
Complain about this comment
128. _marko,
Your reply to MarcusAureliusII's no. 123 and to my 126/7 is a cop-out, as I'm sure you know.
Why don't you deal with the points that we raised?
Complain about this comment
My reply in #128 is asking for clarification and context for MAII's opinions.
Why do you think he doesn't extrapolate a group's actions to the whole of America or the Christian world? What specific quality(s) prevents him from doing so (which is absent on the "other side")?
When he uses the phrase "we are not like them" how far do you think he is generalizing? How much of the US or Christian population is he claiming to understand? How much of the Arab, Muslim or Afghan population is he claiming to understand?
My point about #126:
"I'm not sure that one attrocity justifies another so it may not be that productive quoting attrocities. Isn't the natural reflex action of a vicitim of an attrocity to become more imperialistic and racist?"
addresses the issue of completely unacceptable behaviour directly.
Complain about this comment
_marko
Your deliberate lie is obvious. The crimes committed in Abu Gharib, Oklahoma City, and other places by people from the civilized world were widely and loudly condemned both by leaders and among the public at large everywhere who found them repugnant as a matter of incompatibility with our cultural values. They had few apologitsts. Exactly the opposite is true of Moslem terrorists by those in the Moslem world. On rare occasions when they condemn an act of Moslem terrorism against non Moslems, ther is always a "but." This proves the lack of equivalence. For them, terrorism is the norm, not the exception and they not only accept it, they sympathize with it when they don't like the victims. Every act of Arab terrorism against Israelis under any circumstance has always found many apologists among Moslems. I for one reject this and if Islam doesn't change, the four fifths of the world's population may eventually have to outlaw Islam as incompatible with civilization as the only viable recourse for survival.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS