8/12: Palestinian getting kicked (thx sapienza)

[elSicomoro]

I wouldn't say that Israelis don't have to be there, for they consider it their homeland. Unfortunately, they're not the only ones who consider it home--look at the conquerors of Palestine over the years. I think it's reasonable to deduce that a lot of gentiles were originally born and grew up in Palestine over the hundreds and thousands of years.

100 years ago, there were few settled countries in that region--it was mostly occupied by the Turks. Now, the Middle East and North Africa are composed of many countries that were occupied by European colonial powers after WW1--and if I'm not mistaken, the people that live in these countries are considered Arab, with a few exceptions. What sets Moroccans apart from, say, Qatarians? I'm sure that while they are all Arabs, they have something that gives them a national identity.

There's no doubt that the Jewish people have suffered horrible atrocities at the hands of others throughout history. But given what has happened to them, certainly they can understand the anger and rage of the Palestinians, can't they?

[min-ra]

I think we can all agree to that compromise is necessary.

But what is the Israeli incentive to compromise? They have all the trump cards: 7 Billion (last I checked) per year in direct US subsidies, the most modern weaponry (including <I>stolen</I> nukes, and a guaranteed support base in the US (how many US legislators are Jewish? how many media outlets are Jewish-owned?).

The vaunted "peace process" is no more than a smokescreen thrown up by Zionist leaders to show the world "we are doing something" while continuing the creeping annexation of Palestinian property. The conflict is perfectly planned, not "out of control". Israel has no need for genocide when slavery is so profitable.

In order to get your population to support such atrocities, you merely have to teach them that they are "God's Chosen People (tm)" or the "Master Race (tm)" (take your pick).

To paraphrase Robert Anton Wilson, the mark of an effective conspiracy is that you've been conditioned to reflexively reject the idea of it.

This is why substances that enlighten the individual and erase social conditioning are among the most feared and repressed substances on earth. But I stray...

Thanks to all who participate in this forum - this is the most intelligent group of posters I've seen on the internet. Cheers to all <clink!>

[kaleidoscopic ziggurat]

Originally posted by Xugumad

That's the whole point. There was no palestinian state, just a lot of often nomadic settlers and arabs occupying that land. As they had no government but instead preferred their way of life, somebody simply took their land away and gave it to somebody else. Those other people then started arriving and pushed out the 'natives', often using extremely violent measures.

wasn't the ottoman empire controlling that area of the world for a while? its not as if palestine was peaceful and doing alright before european intervention... being right in the fertile crescent it is a hot piece of property. who owns the right to any particular piece of land? the guy who has the biggest gun, apparently. it isn't something i agree with but that seems to be the way it is, non?

Palestinians are being wiped out the same way Native Americans were killed. Without global media coverage and the necessity of Israel to keep the US happy so they can get more tanks, planes, and nuclear weapons, they'd have wiped out all of the Palestinians long ago. Instead, they lead a stealth war on them - see also the slave-like treatment comment I made earlier.

i don't feel that comparison is accurate... native americans were a thousand years behind the europeans and had nowhere to go. what do you think... should we give a giant chunk of north america back to the natives?

i don't think that would be such a bad idea for certain areas... up here in canada there is always a lot of talk about quebec seperatism. sometimes the point is brought up that the northern portion of the province is nearly entirely populated by cree. would they also be allowed to have their own nation state? quebec would not allow that, given the amount of natural resources that could be exploited in the region.

hey if i had a magic wand i'd go around granting land to whoever can live on it while remaining in harmony with their surroundings. i'd dump the bad americans and their lifestyle of rape & pillage into the ocean, or the depths of space.

What nationality were Washington, Jefferson, Adams? Oh, that's right. They had no country - they took it upon themselves to free their land from the oppression of someone who had no right to tell them what to do.

yeah, and now what is america notorious for? oppression. telling other countries what to do, ruthlessly raping the earth, profit at any costs...

What a remarkably enlightened approach. National boundaries mean nothing, you can just grab whatever you need, all because the Britain/US axis decided to simply 'start' a state in the middle of a place where they had no business meddling with, and then provided those people with weapons and money.

You don't seem to understand: The Israelis had no business being there. None. Whatsoever. If somebody started a 'state' in my backyard, all of my neighbours and yours truly would be out there RIGHT NOW to kick him out. And no, it doesn't matter that Mr. Jackson down the street told him that my yard was a great place to put up a tent and gave him a weapon. Which he then used to shoot me with. DUH. And the fact that he shot me when I tried to kick him out WOULD STILL BE WRONG.

so is there some particular year in which boundaries should have been solidified? the entire area was fluid around the time of WWI and the fall of the ottomans if i'm not mistaken... i wouldn't sit here and say that what the brits/US folks did is RIGHT but that's the situation, and at this point, they've got the land. no one's going to uproot them now. israelis have been without a homeland for hundreds of years, and suddenly they inherited their old one. i'd be lying if i said i didn't respect the hebrew meme and its ability to remain true over the years.

Welcome to Generalizations 101, students. Please pick a seat.
Come on. You should know that the violent extremists only make a relatively small portion of the Palestinian populace. The vast majority are people who would just like to live their lives without being 'detained' randomly, without being banned from traveling, without having all of their products and exports taxed highly to prevent them from making a living, without being spied upon and assassinated by the Mossad for daring to speak out against Israel, and without being kicked by children and teenagers in the middle of the street because you are about 70, female, and an Arab. LOW LOW LOW?

Yes, terrorism is LOW LOW LOW, but most Palestinians DO NOT ENGAGE IN IT. The worst 99% of Palestinians do is throw stones at well-armoured Israeli soldiers. Those soldiers then shoot and kill the kids who throw the stones. LOW LOW LOW? Ah, double standards.

i am not entirely without compassion... like i stated, it is a terrible situation for both sides. yes, violent extremists are not the majority... yet hate is taught as far back as in the womb. is it another case of the few ruining it for the many? i wonder if they'd be able to live in harmony without the religious aspects of the problem.

Right. Sit back and watch the slaughter, whilst Russia etc. continue providing the Palestinians with weapons, and while the US happily continues shipping tanks, planes, and other amusing tools to Israel. Why exactly does the US do that with Israel, and nobody else? Why does more than half of US foreign aid go to Israel? Why does the US artificially keep the state of Israel alive?

Sure, sit back and watch. And whoever loses is a cry-baby. Jesus, do you even KNOW what you're talking about?

oh sorry, what -should- i be doing? go join the peace corps? protest israeli action in the area? deny the holocaust?

obviously US interests in israel are due to the strong jewish presence in that country... i don't think i need to explain the nature of that situation.

with respect to the cry-baby comment, i feel there is a certain validity to the situation... israel was created as a nation state... later it was invaded -- hostile military action on all fronts. not only did they defend their new land, but they pushed back the invaders into their own territory. when you begin a military engagement of that sort maybe you should think about your people living in the territories right near the contested lands. i think it was gracious enough of israel to give the sinai back. the rest -- too bad. decisions were made at a high level and those people had to live with the consequences.

How melodramatic. I am sure the thousands of US soldiers suffering from Gulf War syndrome, and their occasionally deformed and crippled babies would feel differently. How many people had to die and suffer what were ultimately US oil and Israeli security interests?

If this misinformation and 'oh well shit happens' attitude continues, God help us all.

that's the first i've heard of gulf war syndrome... my understanding is that the war was a lot tougher on the iraqi people, which is terribly unfortunate. i'm of the mind that it's about time that US got off its oil kick, so it is particularly bad that bush is in power now. oil is just another one of the elements of american crapocracy. oh well. can't change that right now either.

'oh well shit happens' is a better attitude for someone with his own problems on this side of the ocean who has absolutely no influence or power to change events or mold history. well, better than a frustrated bleeding-heart position that really solves little. if you have some magical thing a person can do that can ease the tension in the middle east, by all means, share it. the world would be better for it.

i'm no brilliant political analyst... i don't claim to be an expert on the issue. we're having a discussion -- i'm not trying to win favours or make people switch sides in some hypothetical battle of wits. honestly, if you know more about this issue, do more than simply negate what i speak of... state your opinion. i assume from your comments that you feel the israeli nationstate should simply dissolve and the jews should go back to wandering? please clarify..

[Xugumad]

Originally posted by kaleidoscopic ziggurat

wasn't the ottoman empire controlling that area of the world for a while? its not as if palestine was peaceful and doing alright before european intervention... being right in the fertile crescent it is a hot piece of property. who owns the right to any particular piece of land? the guy who has the biggest gun, apparently. it isn't something i agree with but that seems to be the way it is, non?

I hope that's not the way it is - and if it becomes that way, we must stop it. We can't live in a world where national boundaries and populations can be redrawn at gunpoint because somebody's arsenal is better than yours.

That's why Wilhelm II's aspirations were fought. That's why Adolf Hitler's desires had to be beaten back. (even though western Oil interests dictated military action) That's why - ultimately - Saddam had to be restrained. That's why the US can't simply annex Canada, although it has the weapons and army to do so.

Yeah, World Peace is a distant hope - but we can't stand buy and nod sadly when armed conquest SUCCEEDS. We must stop it. At any cost. That's the whole concept of civilization, that's what sets us apart from animals. The biggest and most silver-haired gorilla will get the most fertile female, even if it means killing other males. Are we more than that?

i don't feel that comparison is accurate... native americans were a thousand years behind the europeans and had nowhere to go. what do you think... should we give a giant chunk of north america back to the natives?

Nomadic Palestinian settlers were, arguably, a thousand years behind the jewish settlers who arrived and soon received military support ranging from the most modern tanks to nuclear weapons. My comparison didn't claim that NAmerica should be given back to Native Americans. It just showed that the way 'the west was won' is somewhat similar to the way the Palestinians were pushed out. Besides, giving anything back to Native Americans apart from the few reservations that they have right now would be an outright admission of guilt, which many people simply aren't comfortable with. Clinton can feel guilty and sniff sadly, but most white Americans would rather worry about where to get the money for their SUV's gas needs.

And by the way - the reason why I brought up Washington etc. is because of the claim that Arafat is Egyptian (and thus by implication shouldn't be messing around with the Palestinians that much anyway). Washington, Jefferson etc. fought for the freedom and independence of a country that they THEMSELVES had to found. They weren't 'American', Arafat isn't 'Palestinian', all of them fight for what they perceive to be their homeland.

so is there some particular year in which boundaries should have been solidified? the entire area was fluid around the time of WWI and the fall of the ottomans if i'm not mistaken... i wouldn't sit here and say that what the brits/US folks did is RIGHT but that's the situation, and at this point, they've got the land. no one's going to uproot them now. israelis have been without a homeland for hundreds of years, and suddenly they inherited their old one. i'd be lying if i said i didn't respect the hebrew meme and its ability to remain true over the years.

The BIG zionist immigration to what is now only a small part of Israel started AFTER World War TWO, not ONE. Israel declared independence in 1947. No Ottomans there. The situation was fluid as mud. The Balfour declaration was in 1917, yes, but many things happened around that time. To artificially create a Jewish state in the middle of a hostile Arab sea borders on megalomania on the side of the British. Not that anyone would accuse them of that, of course. Rule Britannia!

i wonder if they'd be able to live in harmony without the religious aspects of the problem.

Doubtful. 'God's chosen people', as obnoxious as the term is, would still claim land that isn't theirs to take, and oppress those who want to kick them out. A lot is religious, yes, but the Israeli state still remains an artificial creation that wouldn't exist without $7 BILLION of US funding every year. And that's just the official, disclosed foreign aid. Nobody knows how much more is pumped into Israel, especially in illegitimate weapons aid.

oh sorry, what -should- i be doing? go join the peace corps?
protest israeli action in the area? deny the holocaust?

obviously US interests in israel are due to the strong jewish presence in that country... i don't think i need to explain the nature of that situation.

Learn to read critically. Don't just watch TV news, read some independent media. Try reading some British news sources - ironically those are a lot more in-depth and critical than the US ones. I recommend www.indymedia.org www.worldnews.com and www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest

with respect to the cry-baby comment, i feel there is a certain validity to the situation... israel was created as a nation state... later it was invaded -- hostile military action on all fronts. not only did they defend their new land, but they pushed back the invaders into their own territory. when you begin a military engagement of that sort maybe you should think about your people living in the territories right near the contested lands. i think it was gracious enough of israel to give the sinai back. the rest -- too bad.

And again - you do not CREATE nation states. There was no nation. There was no state. There was an artificial transplant of Jewish people into an area of the world where they did not belong. Nobody there cared about what happened 2000 years ago, apart from the jewish interests in the countries that sponsored AND STILL SPONSOR that move. Israel didn't beat back any Arab onslaught - US weapons did. Now ask yourself why a 'good Christian' US would want to cause problems to Islamic countries. (especially 40-50 years ago) HMM.

well, better than a frustrated bleeding-heart position that really solves little. if you have some magical thing a person can do that can ease the tension in the middle east, by all means, share it. the world would be better for it.

Knowing the truth and telling more people about it will do a lot more than shrugging and turning your back. That's what this is all about.

i assume from your comments that you feel the israeli nationstate should simply dissolve and the jews should go back to wandering? please clarify..

No. I don't want Israel to stop existing - there are a LOT of people there who are completely innocent of any of the idiocy that has led to this mess.

I just want people to realize that Israel is being kept alive artificially by US interests. $7 billion at least, as stated earlier. Ever wonder why the US is now dipping into social security funds to try and stop the renewed deficit slide? Ever wonder how it's going to pay for Star Wars X? Ever wonder how many homeless people there are? Or how many are dying of AIDS and other fatal diseases because so many people shrug and say 'they should have had health insurance'? Do you have ANY clue how ridiculous it is to be accused of being a 'bleeding heart liberal' when you see people dying not just around you but thousands of miles across the planet just because of vested US interests and fucked-up lobbyist groups?

Without US aid, Israel would be wiped off the face of the planet in less than a decade. It would have never come into existence, and it's been kept alive for over half a century now. The formerly oppressed Jews have instituted a racist and authoritarian regime, oppressing the Palestinians in one of the most ironic tragedies of the last century.

I am not complaining about Israel. I don't dislike the Jews. I just wonder WHY all of the above is going on.

[jaguar]

*straps on Kevlar fire suit and wades into the fray*

Xugumad
You don't seem to understand: The Israelis had no business being there. None. Whatsoever.

I seem to remember Jewish people have been round that area...oh.....3000 odd years...
[rant]
Gulf War syndrome. *blows his top* Fucking Americans, this is the same as Vietnam, wade into somewhere, get nasty, sue nasty weapons, give their own troops radioactive armor then when they come back and sue make front page over it. NEVER MIND THE PEOPLE STILL THERE. Want me to post some pics of Iraqi kids with cancers destroying their eyes? Or the astronomical cancer/leukemia rates, or the lack of food?

50,000 US soldiers died in Vietnam, 3 MILLION VIETNAMESE DIED and millions more have been born deformed, lost limbs to landmines not to mention emotional/mental damage.

[/rant]

dhamsaic thanks for that link - cleared things up for me a bit.

Seems to me that unless something is done *fast* this is never going to be solved.

a: People will refuse to compromise after a few more of these attacks and assassinations by BOTH sides.

b: A wise man once said about the Balkans trouble that the only way to solve it is to shoot all the grandmothers. Until you stop generation after generation being indoctrinated in hate (BOTH sides) this will continue to happen.

On one side I have to say arguing whether the state of Israel has a right to exist or not is pretty pointless - like arguing whether globalization should happen. It’s not WHETHER it happens, its how.

But what is the Israeli incentive to compromise? They have all the trump cards: 7 Billion (last I checked) per year in direct US subsidies, the most modern weaponry (including stolen nukes and a guaranteed support base in the US (how many US legislators are Jewish? how many media outlets are Jewish-owned?).

Well I’m not sure whether you've ever lived in total fear but personally I wouldn't like to be wondering whether the Palestinian standing over there has a few kilos of C4 and ball bearings strapped to him or not. It is the same tactic used by the IRA in the 80s, mass bombings across Brittan, it scared the living shit out of the British because it brought something that they read about in the newspaper and didn't give a fuck about into their lives in a very scary way.

Xugumad, while what you are saying has some merit you’re missing a few points, I mean you could say well gee, Mecca was pretty important a few thousand years ago, fuck the fact it’s still holy they don't need that bit of land. That area is holy to the Jews, don’t overlook that. As well as that Israel is no struggling on-the-brink-of-poverty state, while they work closely with the US, and sure, get some cash, a:7billion is reality is not that much, look at the size of the us budget, in TRILLIONS, get the picture? Israel is a world leader in high tech development, where do you think ICQ came from? A new type of metal press that takes up 1/10th of the space, much highly advanced military hardware of their own all which they export, and this is just a small sample.

The formerly oppressed Jews have instituted a racist and authoritarian regime, oppressing the Palestinians in one of the most ironic tragedies of the last century.

That I have to agree with though.

Give back the west bank and Gaza to the Palestinians and share control of Jerusalem and stop killing. Even the fanatics would die down without public support; the majority of Palestinians just want to live their lives in peace.

Yes there are some flaws in this post – I know some of you addressed issues I pointed out but I’m in a hurry and just *couldn’t* resist

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by kaleidoscopic ziggurat
i don't feel that comparison is accurate... native americans were a thousand years behind the europeans and had nowhere to go. what do you think... should we give a giant chunk of north america back to the natives?

First off, I have to disagree with the statement--Native Americans were actually rather advanced. I'm not sure whether they had guns though, which would have made a difference I think.

And for the record, you're damned right that America should give some of the land back to the Natives...for my piece, I'd like a little swath in Oklahoma, in Ozark country.

Seriously though, Natives have been fortunate enough to get SOME concessions from the US, particularly the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma.

i don't think that would be such a bad idea for certain areas... up here in canada there is always a lot of talk about quebec seperatism. sometimes the point is brought up that the northern portion of the province is nearly entirely populated by cree. would they also be allowed to have their own nation state? quebec would not allow that, given the amount of natural resources that could be exploited in the region.

But Canada itself carved off part of the NW Territories for the Inuit in the form of Nunavut. Overall, there are WAY too many issues for the Quebecois to ever separate from Canada.

with respect to the cry-baby comment, i feel there is a certain validity to the situation... israel was created as a nation state... later it was invaded -- hostile military action on all fronts. not only did they defend their new land, but they pushed back the invaders into their own territory. when you begin a military engagement of that sort maybe you should think about your people living in the territories right near the contested lands. i think it was gracious enough of israel to give the sinai back. the rest -- too bad. decisions were made at a high level and those people had to live with the consequences.

I'm not so sure of that...I can remember as a young child that Israel had much more support from the US than they do now. Sadat and Begin opened the door. The PLO has become more diplomatic. We see a lot more of the entire tragedy than we did 10 years ago, thanks to more news programming and the internet. In addition, we witnessed the crumbling of Yugoslavia over ethnic interests, which I think has highlighted the situation in the Middle East even more.

that's the first i've heard of gulf war syndrome... my understanding is that the war was a lot tougher on the iraqi people, which is terribly unfortunate. i'm of the mind that it's about time that US got off its oil kick, so it is particularly bad that bush is in power now. oil is just another one of the elements of american crapocracy. oh well. can't change that right now either.

I don't doubt that UN sanctions are hurting innocent Iraqis, but it doesn't help that they have a village idiot running the country. Given that access to Iraq is limited, I wonder how many Iraqis really support Hussein.

It's not just the US that needs oil either, although we are the greediest when it comes to want. I don't understand how a country that makes its own oil (and even has oil rigs on the grounds of the Oklahoma State Capitol) has to use so much from everybody else. *gives evil eye towards SUV drivers* I can understand those with cars from the 70s and early 80s...nobody knew better then, and some people can't afford anything better. But this push for bigger is better again...*rolls his eyes* Jesus, do you really NEED that much vehicle?!

[serge]

One more important point.. why I think civil war will come to Israel.

a) U.S. aid will dwindle/dry-up at some near point in future. Why? Well I think the more the spotlight shines on Israel's crimes against humanity.. more U.S. politicians will be uneasy signing on to aid packages.
b) The ultra-religious Jews in Israel do not have to work by law if they are considered a sort of life-time student (of Torah, etc.) and are on a sort of welfare. Let's face facts.. they do not participate in "family planning" at all and many couples have >5 children. Now compare that to your (more or less) secular Jewish couple who have none or 1 or 2 children. Now draw a chart of the ratio of working people to non-working ones.

How (without expanding U.S. aid, not even reducing..) can the %-wise shrinking working population support %-wise growing welfare one ?

Another point to consider.. immigration of Jews from former USSR and North African region is (has?) drying up. So less cheap (and many times qualified) workhorses! They (will) need Palestinian labor to sustain the welfare coffers!

[Whit]

And for the record, you're damned right that America should give some of the land back to the Natives...for my piece, I'd like a little swath in Oklahoma, in Ozark country.

Heh, as I live just across the river in Arkansas (read as Oklahoma Lite) I can tell you there is a small piece, the local Amercian Indians I work with call it "The Mountain". Though from the stories they tell me I have no intention of ever visiting...

It's not just the US that needs oil either, although we are the greediest when it comes to want. I don't understand how a country that makes its own oil (and even has oil rigs on the grounds of the Oklahoma State Capitol) has to use so much from everybody else.

Okay, this is mostly hearsay but... Oil cost's more to ptoduce here than it does to import. It's another case of being able to get money from the Gov for not producing as much as you can. In this area where you meet actuall oil field workers it's common knowledge that they drill and cap oil wells constantly. Again this is heatsay but I've heard that gas prices would have to hit two bucks a gallon to make it truly profitable. Also remember that while Bush has ALOT of money in oil, so did Gore. Anybody know what SOL means? I don't see the U.S. moving away from oil anytime soon.

I'm actually amazed at how contained things still are right now. I mean if this kind of rampant killing on both sides hasn't already started an open war then what will? Honestly, how long can things go on before the wholesale "Kill every one of them you see" begins?

[elSicomoro]

Good points, Whit.

If the US raised it mandatory fuel economy standards, then maybe we COULD produce our own oil and keep it cheap. Did they not just pass over the standards for this year? Not to mention, you would have to pay the Americans Union wages to produce the oil.

I can proudly say that my little putt-putt (Geo Metro) contributes to gas bliss in the United States.

I think the only reason things have not gone into full-scale war in the Middle East is BECAUSE of the United States. The US gives a ton in aid to Israel, but the US has been the one to extend the olive branch to Israel and the PLO. I don't think it would be in Israel's best interest to push things too much further.

[dynamo]

Xugumad said:
Yeah, World Peace is a distant hope - but we can't stand buy and nod sadly when armed conquest SUCCEEDS. We must stop it. At any cost. That's the whole concept of civilization, that's what sets us apart from animals. The biggest and most silver-haired gorilla will get the most fertile female, even if it means killing other males. Are we more than that?

I can't agree...we are not the police of the world. And when we act like it, the rest of the world sees us as arrogent and patronizing. No matter our intentions, we need to leave some matters up to the parties involved. We've got plenty of problems right here at home that need more attention that we can give. Until our strongest allies come calling, our foreign policy should be one of isolationism.

[ndetroit]

Why Israeli murders and Palestinian suicide bombings make sense....



http://slate.msn.com/HeyWait/01-08-17/HeyWait.asp



(yeah, I thought it was a pretty compelling headline, too....)

It's actually quite a good article, and worth a read. May not be the whole truth, but the attempt to justify (or at least explain) the psychology is nice.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by dynamo
Until our strongest allies come calling, our foreign policy should be one of isolationism.

As a whole, that is impossible in our current world. We tried to do that during the early years of World War I only to have to come in and clean up. The US, selfish as it may be, needs to be the major player in the world. At the same time, the US must realize that there are other, rather powerful countries in the world other than itself. No, we can't play world police, that's what the UN is for. But given that we have the world's 3rd largest population, and are the world's most well-off population, it is almost a given that we are going to be a main power, if not the main power.

At the same time, there is one body that can keep the US in line--the Security Council. Russia and China usually align on one side, the US and the UK on the other, and France...it just whines. It's not much, but it IS a limiter.

[jaguar]

Originally posted by dynamo


I can't agree...we are not the police of the world. And when we act like it, the rest of the world sees us as arrogent and patronizing. No matter our intentions, we need to leave some matters up to the parties involved. We've got plenty of problems right here at home that need more attention that we can give. Until our strongest allies come calling, our foreign policy should be one of isolationism.

THe rest of the world does cozof the way you tend to do it - let look at recent history.

Koyoto - Screw you all we care more about the wealth of a few than the abiality of all to be able to breathe.

ABM Treaty - Were so worreid about keeping our compaign donaters happy we're gonan scrap a fundamental document ot ending the cold war over it! All hail the gods of the national economy.

International court - Were going to try and hold the United Nations to ransom until you make us exempt to a cornerstone of globalisation because we don't like it and its not primarily designed to suit our interests.

If you tell the rest of the world to go fuck themslves, what do you expect. until the US learns that they can't bully everyone else, learn to be PART of a global police force, not a global bully..

This issue itself is not a morally based one for the US, Isreal is thier base in the MIddle east, and a strong partner in weapons develiopment and testing.

Policies of "splendid isolation" that britan pursued at the turn of the centuary did noone any good, and iwll be worse in a era of global interaction.

[Undertoad]

Going a much different direction with this: scientists have now proven that Israelis and Palestinians come from identical genetic stock about 7800 years ago.

I dunno whether that means anything to anyone, but there it is.

[dynamo]

jag, I honestly believe that those policy decisions that you pointed out are a matter of US cockiness. I think this administration and the last have the attitude of "We know best, trust us, we're America" and our current lack of involvement of those endevours is the US saying, "those treaties are because you are the offenders, not us, *scoff* WE are the United States of America, you can trust us to handle these issues on our own, the imortant thing is that you're following these rules we set out." It's arrogance.

I don't think the US "bullies", because the intentions are good ones, but that doesn't make the actions right. Quite the opposite actually. And forcing things through the united nations REALLY looks like bullying though.

I believe the US should stop all foriegn aid, resign from the security council, and interfere in international affairs only when requested to by our strongest allies and/or the united nations. Biggest and strongest, so what? A benevelent dictator is STILL a dictator.

I'll add that I think the ABM treaty is an artifact and doesn't have a lot of application in today's world, but that's a completely different argument, and it doesn't invalidate your point that the US's handling of that issue was cocky and arrogent.

That got long
dynamo