More on France

[capt_zman]

How dare you trivialize the death of 3000 innocent Americans. Making comparisons to a baseball stadium? What is wrong with you? It would be a different story if somebody you loved was in those buildings. And please, spare me the b.s. of how you knew someone who was killed. How can you so easily forget?

The "out of sight, out of mind" principle may apply to rest of the world, but not here.

So go back and play your stratocaster, smoke a bowl, and enjoy the freedoms that you have. Let the real men go and protect those freedoms.

 

[LR25]

I think the 40% of the people that you are talking about, also probobly just follow there nose around to what ever they hear, not facts.

These are the same folks that also would want the UN to make the decisions for us.

Singlecoil, I'll ask the same question I ask any left wing liberal. What would it take to justify going to war? What would it take to defend our country? What is your answer?

If our Republican Pres was not in office, but instaed a Democratic Pres., would the anti-war setiment be as strong, I dont think so. The liberal reasonings are so transparent.

I dont think you grasp the reality of this new type of war. The soilgers we are fighting against have the same uniform as most Americans, blue jeans and a button down shirt. It is the job of our counrties leadership to take the threat away and those who harbor them and aid them.

SH is a terrorist, Arofat is a terrorist, OBL is a terrorist, hence, the war on terror. Iraq is just the begining of a long campaighn, there will most likely be others.

3000 people died, I didnt know any of them, the reason I didnt know any of them was becuase my brother was late for work that morning on a ferry coming accross from New Jersey going to the WTC complex where he worked, instead he was watching airplanes streak accross the Manhattan skyline.

Thank God none of these back sliding talking heads were not around during the Cuban missle crisis, or all of us would grubs fighting for seniority at the local slime hole.

 

[Singlecoil]

I
Singlecoil, I'll ask the same question I ask any left wing liberal. What would it take to justify going to war? What would it take to defend our country? What is your answer?

If our Republican Pres was not in office, but instaed a Democratic Pres., would the anti-war setiment be as strong, I dont think so. The liberal reasonings are so transparent.

Its very simple. Attack us, we will retaliate and destroy your country. It was clear that Afghanistan was harboring terrorists, and we wiped them out with the full support of the world. We also screwed up and let many terrorists escape into Pakistan. I'm sure everyone involved would by hindsight liked to have had more of a U.S. presence on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Now it is not at all clear that Hussein contributed materially to 9/11, that is why many people around the world are dismayed. Bin Laden has repeatedly said that he hates Hussein. Hussein is a secular leader, Islamic extremists can't stand that anywhere, they demand total control of government.
Like many Americans, I was frothing at the mouth when we bombed and overthrew Afghanistan; I thought it was fantastic. Why is this new war so hard for the President to sell?
If Belize attacked us we would annihilate that country. Then would we attack Mexico, because we perceived them to be a greater threat to us?

I am actually very middle of the road politically and refuse to be so easily dismissed as a "left-wing liberal". It is so much easier to label a viewpoint than listen to it.
What happens next year when China invades Taiwan? We are going to be laughed at when we say, "You can't do that, they are a sovereign nation!"
China will say, "But they were developing weapons of mass destruction and clearly sought to overthrow our government."
Then what do we say? We're Americans, we have our own rules?
The point is, we are going to be on the otherside of this argument in the not so near future, then we will be the ones who are easily dismissed.

 

[metrodriver]

singlecoil wrote:
'What troubles me is the lack of debate in this country about this important topic. This thread is an excellent example, you are either with the administration, or you should go live somewhere else'.
When you have the choice to be with the administration or to go live somewhere else than there will be no debate! It also violates some of the founding principles of this country: freedom of speech,and freedom to think differently (although that one is not in the constitution). That's what democracy is all about.

 

[Khirsah]

Just a slight correction. France is not the largest importer of Iraqi oil. The United States is the largest importer of Iraqi oil. The United States accounts for almost 45% of Iraqi oil exports. France accounts for only 10% of Iraqi oil exports.

The economic reason France would want Saddam in power is that they have a virtual monopoly over goods going INTO Iraq. France exports about $2.5 billion worth of goods to Iraq each year. If Saddam were out of power, France might actually have to compete for Iraqi business.

And France isn't even the largest European importer of Iraqi oil. That illustrious title falls upon Italy, taking 12% of Iraq's oil exports. Spain comes in third with 9%.

 

[Flywrite]

Thank God none of these back sliding talking heads were not around during the Cuban missle crisis, or all of us would grubs fighting for seniority at the local slime hole.

If the diplomatic prowess of Messrs. Bush and Rumsfeld had been around during the Cuban Missile Crisis our world would have ended in the fall of '62. (I'm assuming that your use of a double negative was unintentional)


Singlecoil, It's kinda tough to make an intelligent argument on this thread, isnt it?

For the genius who said there was proof of a meeting between al queda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in the Czech Republic...even George Tennet has stated that this is a false report.

 

[LR25]

Coil, you still didnt answer the question I posed to you.

What will it take to defend our country?

What will it take to justify war?

I dont think we are on the stance of, "if you attack our country, we will retaliate and destroy your country". You honestly cant believe in that?

Heres how I look at it. The rest of the world should rejoice that we are a peace loving nation.

People talk about oil and thats what we want.

If we really wanted something and if indeed we were the great infidels, would we take it?

Wouldnt we thumb our nose at the world and just do what we wanted?

So, what are your answers to those questions I pose? There not easy ones.

Its time to defend "our"/ "your" freedom once again.

Just becuase this country hasnt seen a war like WWII in 58 years doesnt mean we have to be a bunch pansies.

The time is now, history will show we are acting correctly.

My brother in living in a tent in the desert, Keep all the troops in your thoughts.

 

[RFtech]

The sad thing...

as chicken $hit as the frogs are...

its not whats keeping them out of this.

They are Iraqs #1 trading partner.

Russia is #3

is it just the money or maybe thier afraid of what well find when we get in there?

humm...

 

[fredflyer]

Its very simple. Attack us, we will retaliate and destroy your country. It was clear that Afghanistan was harboring terrorists, and we wiped them out with the full support of the world. We also screwed up and let many terrorists escape into Pakistan. I'm sure everyone involved would by hindsight liked to have had more of a U.S. presence on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Singlecoil,
Let me ask you a question. I heard Rumsfeld ask this and I'm only paraphrasing, but....

Let's say in July 2001, Bush came out to the world (or UN or whoever) and said " We have information that there is a terrorist threat to the USA. We believe that they are going to attack us in the next month or so. We know that Al-Quaeda is involved and OBL is the leader of that orgainzation. We want your support to for a coalition and go into Afghanistan with military force and destroy the Al-Quaeda network and capture OBL. Will you help us?" How many countries would have jumped up and said, "sure, we'll go"? I think you know the answer to that question, because that's what Bush is doing right now, and look at the world reaction.
You talk about hindsight and how we "screwed up" and let lots of terrorists go. That is the problem with most of the people who think like you, it's all based on hindsight. I guess if some terrorist kills another 3,000 Americans, and the subsequent investigation ties Saddam to it, then you'll be OK with going into Iraq. Personally I'm not willing to risk it, we finally have someone with the gumption to do what he thinks is best for the US and to be PROACTIVE in stopping the threat, instead of reacting.

Oh, by the way, in the weeks preceeding Bill Clinton's cruise missile attacks on Iraq in the late 90's, Bill himself stated several times that he felt any terrorist that wanted some type of weapon of mass destruction could just drop into Baghdad and pick one up, and that Saddam had to be stopped.

 

[metrodriver]

Let's say in July 2001, Bush came out to the world (or UN or whoever) and said " We have information that there is a terrorist threat to the USA. We believe that they are going to attack us in the next month or so. We know that Al-Quaeda is involved and OBL is the leader of that orgainzation

If that was the case than someone was sleeping, and yes they were. The FBI never acted on the Minneapolis whistle blowers about the guy that was taking 747 training. If they had done so, they might have prevented the whole thing. The Clinton administration was already (secretly) hunting for OBL, and they almost got him when he checked into an overseas US (militairy) hospital, but he left just before they tried to capture him

 

[Singlecoil]

Well, let me first say, that after four weeks of sitting on my backside, cruising the internet on reserve, I am finally gainfully employed on a three day trip.

Let's start with Lear25...

What will it take to defend our country?

Think of the word defend. First we have to be attacked. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. This country is strong enough to take the high ground and say, "We will not be intimidated, we will not change our way of life, we will not stand by and watch attacks on OUR SOIL without standing up as a nation."
We just showed the world that in Afghanistan. Saddam wants to live in his palaces. He knows that if he is in any way responsible for an attack against Americans, that he will be destroyed. Look at it this way; Saddam has a gun in a holster and is standing six feet from you. You and six of your buddies have locked and loaded guns in each hand pointed at his head. Do you still feel threatened? I don't.

If we start running around the world attacking nations that we think might someday threaten us, then I think we are proceeding down a very slippery slope.

by Lear25
"Heres how I look at it. The rest of the world should rejoice that we are a peace loving nation."

The rest of the world is not exactly in our corner right now, can we agree on that? What I am trying to do here is to get you to wonder why that may be. After 9/11, everyone was on our side, now they are not. I think we have made some rather large diplomatic blunders. First we said the weapons of mass destruction must go, then it was regime change, then it was because of 9/11, then back to regime change, now Saddam must go again. Its kind of like the tax cut: we have a surplus, you should get your money back, then it was, the surplus is gone, we need a tax cut to stimulate the economy, then it was because it is morally wrong to tax dividends twice. What messages are people supposed to filter out of these schizophrenic ideas? Other countries think we want to attack Iraq just because we want to. We have failed to articulate a clear vision of our purpose in the region and are suffering because of it.

Fredflyer, I think I asked your question above. I think if we stand for freedom, then that means we have the confidence to say to the world that we will weather your dissent, and we will overcome your opposition or respectfully disagree. But if you raise a hand against us, then we will cut it off.

This hotel dial-up is killing me...

 

[Scube3]

i knew that saddam was nuts in 1989, before the gulf war. then we had the gulf war and i knew the usa was in trouble (with conventional vs unconventional war). sadly i was right

the usa has a military economy; end of subject

 

[airmack]

French Justice!!!

How many of you guys remember back in April 1986 when we sent several F-111’s to pay the Libyan terrorist Qaddhafi a visit. Well you can only guess what country refused to allow us to fly through their airspace. Hummm was it Spain??? No!!! It was our loving friends the FRENCH! But I must say that apparently since our F-111’s flew around France, I think pilot fatigue caused them to accidentally blow up their Embassy! Ooops!!!! Sorry! ~food for thought

 

[Flylo]

You know,

You people that think we should wait until we're attacked again and even then would have to have a notarized, time stamped, recorded at the courthouse, PICTURE of Saddam Hussein blowing out some babys' brains before you MIGHT consent to move in on Iraq; need to get your heads up where you can hear something beside your own wind roaring past your ears.

We are NOT STARTING a war with Iraq! Saddam Hussein STARTED a war with Kuwait 12 years ago! He surrendered. He agreed to several conditions among which were the disarmament of Iraq. He has instead REARMED and HAS supported terror. He has had TWELVE YEARS to straighten up and has not done it. TIME'S UP! If for no other reason, we are going back to Iraq to finish THAT war and Saddam Hussein.

Thanks God for George W. Bush who, unlike a sniveling, ulterior motived, minority; has the guts to do what's right.

In your quest to become better informed and more educated citizens you might want to check out the following link. Although, since it's a Limbaugh link, you'll probably declare it doctored information; you should read it, just so you can be better
prepared to call it a pack of lies. Maybe you can tell us what that airplane is doing in the middle of the desert?


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/da...tween_iraq_and_al_qaeda_terrorists.guest.html


Time to get on the freedom train boys and girls. She's pulling away from the gate and getting ready to delver her message to your poor 'ol mistreated buddy SH. You need to be on it.

 

[350DRIVER]

.

I just think this administration is doing a terrible job of justifying it to us and the world.

That is one he!! of an understatement, a p!ss poor job.. but wait what else can they make up.? Atleast he will be a one termer and we won't have to worry about him in 04'.


3 5 0

"wubya" eghhh"?

 

[capt_zman]

350,

A pi$$ poor job because he won't share all of his information with the general public and the rest of the world? Boy, get a grip. It doesn't matter if he showed smoking gun photos of ICBM's, there would still be liberals who would cry about war and spew tails of fabrication.

So why don't you be a good American and stand by your leader, instead of pi$$ing and moaning about what you do or don't know.

Singlecoil, you're a chronic worry-wort who will always find some worst-case scenario to compare an argument with. One who is always searching for a solution that doesn't exist.

The time has come where Iraq has crossed the perverbial line in the sand, so lace em up, take a deep breath, and get ready to rock and roll. That's what it's going to take to solve this problem.

 

[350DRIVER]

So why don't you be a good American and stand by your leader, instead of pi$$ing and moaning about what you do or don't know.

I do stand by him, however I am just one of the millions of "good" Americans that just disagree with his policy and where he stands on this issue.... Free speech my man

have a wonderful weekend

3 5 0

 

[LR25]

350, I hate to discuss politics with anybody, becuase you just get into an argument.

But what would Gore have done in this situation, my belief is that we would have had another attack by now if he was in office?

What would President 350 do in this situation?

Whether or not you disagree with "W", he has a moral obligation to defend the greatest nation on the planet.

I think he is doing a descent job, I just think it should be a little quicker.

A war for oil, for occupation, money, power, wagging the dog, is all just pablem puking liberal garbage.

Liberalism only works in a perfect world, that aint here.

 

[2000flyer]

1441 passed at the U.N. This gave authorization to take care of SH by any means necessary. He's discounted 17 past resolutions. 1441 means nothing to him. SH is either the luckiest ***** on this planet, or and I hate to say this, very intelligent. For 12 years he's succeeded in continuing his death grip over Iraq, rebuilt or repaired many military programs and now is rejoicing at fracturing the United Nations, a body which he loathes with every breath. It's time to finish this once and for all.

The only reason the U.S. is seeking yet another resolution is to appease the whiners of the world who want U.N. inspections to continue for eternity.

As far as politics are concerned, the previous administration launched attacks on: Afghanistan, Iraq, Samolia, Kosovo, Basnia (sorry about the spelling), and so on. Not once did they consult or ask for a U.N. resolution to do so!!

As I've said before, not one of us here want to see the U.S. at war. However, it's time to bring this to a conclusion. Rumsfeld said it best when he asked "isn't it too late when the gun is already smoking"?

2000Flyer

 

[350DRIVER]

LR25-

I dislike discussing politics as well for many reasons, especially on a message board directed towards aviation concerns. I feel that "we" take away from the aviation community as a whole when we do so BUT I will bite on this one....

I have absolutely no idea what Mr. Gore would have or not have done if he was in office today.. It is a topic that really does not interest me to discuss because Mr.Gore is not the one calling the shots present day. I guess as in a horse race with no "great one" in the race you must pick the better of the field so here we stand present day with "W" in office. I just tend to agree with many other millions of Americans when it comes to Iraq. They pose no threat towards this country what so ever from the facts that we currently know. We attack them and we are going to create many more enemies towards this country than we really need (we already have enough). I am not anti-war at all BUT as many others have asked just "show the proof" that Iraq is a major peace/security threat and why it is justified to attack then I will be 100% "sold" on this war.

Check the following website out for kicks and just take a look at a few "facts".....- some may agree, many others will disagree.

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.ph...mass_deception

I personally try to keep my mind as open as possible and digest information on all issues before I side with one party or another. I did find the site very informative and tend to agree with the information that I came across.

What would President 350 do in this situation?

I probably "first" would be a tad concerned with the current economy, unemployment rates, national security, homeless figures, etc, etc, before I did anything else in a foreign land. I do not fault "W" at all but just tend to disagree when it comes to factual evidence that Iraq continues to have weapons of mass destruction and they pose this huge threat to world peace. IF Iraq is hiding this along with many other things that violate resolutions made by the UN then by all means we should/need to remove this man from power asap and move on- evidence just does not support this thus far.

Whatever happens is going to happen, your opinion and mine are meaningless with regards to this issue so let's just agree to disagree.

c h e e r s

3 5 0

 

[Cardinal]

This isn't "Sponsoring" terror?

Hussein Pays Families of Palestinian 'Martyrs' $10K, Including Homicide Bomber

Thursday, March 13, 2003

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Saddam Hussein has given $260,000 to 26 families of Palestinians killed in fighting with Israel, including the family of a Hamas suicide bomber.

In a packed banquet hall on Wednesday, the families came one-by-one to receive $10,000 checks. A large banner said: "The Arab Baath Party Welcomes the Families of the Martyrs for the Distribution of Blessings of Saddam Hussein."

The money -- handed out by the Arab Liberation Front, which is affiliated with Saddam's Baath Party -- was distributed as the United States tried to get U.N. Security Council support to use military force to rid Iraq of banned arms and oust Saddam.

Among the families were those whose children and relatives died carrying out Islamic Jihad and Hamas attacks. Both groups are on the U.S. State Department list of terrorist organizations. Other families had relatives killed during Israeli raids on Palestinian towns and refugee camps.

Iraq gives $10,000 within 30 days to the families of those killed. In total, Saddam has given more than $35 million to West Bank and Gaza Strip families of Palestinians killed during the fighting, said Ibrahim Zanen, spokesman for the Arab Liberation Front in Gaza.

"President Saddam considers the Palestinian people as part of his Arab nation. Both of us, the Iraqis and the Palestinians, are in the same trench facing an ugly aggression," Zanen said. "The President considers this small gift to the families as just a symbol of support for those who have reached the highest degree of martyrdom."

Israel said the payments prove Saddam's link to terrorism.

"It shows that Saddam is involved in every activity that is terrorism and murderous and leads to instability in the Middle East," said Amira Oron, a spokeswoman for Israel's Foreign Ministry.

Tahseen Maghani's son, Hamas militant Karam, was killed when trying to infiltrate the Jewish settlement of Netzarim. He said he would use the money to plant crops and build a house.

"These are tough times for Saddam, but his kindness will help us a lot. Saddam is the only one that has stood with us," Maghani said, adding that he is proud his son died for his nation.

Ihdiya Akawi, whose brother, Iyad, was killed during an army raid on a Gaza neighborhood, said her mother was too depressed to attend the ceremony. Iyad fought Israeli troops along with other gunmen from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a militant group affiliated with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80961,00.html

If that doesn't leave an impression on you, follow it up with this:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/isrl-pa/ISRAELPA1002.pdf

 

[metrodriver]

That was the post I was waiting for. It's the exact reason the arab world hates the US. Back in the late 40's/early 50's the UN appointed a piece of land to the jews in Palastine. What do these folks do? Immediately start a war to concur more land. Israel right now is double the size of what is was supposed to be. Until this day they create new settlements, expanding their territory and influence. People who live in these areas are simply displaced. So they start attacking their concurrors (Israel) and Israel of course fights back. The whole arab world of course sympathizes with their Palastinian brothers.
Every peace agreement will be killed deliberately by the Israelis, and the solution is relatively simple: pull out of the occupied territories. If that happened I think things would be a lot more peaceful. Now where does the US fit into this picture? This country provides billions of dollars in militairy and economic aid to Israel yearly. The military aid that kills Palestinians, upsets the arabs, who go out and attack the US. Can we say our own tax dollars killed the 3000 people in NYC?
I think a lot will change if G Doubya would play some hard ball with Israel and get them out of the occupied territories and accept a peace plan. Of course, that ain't going to happen.....

 

[350DRIVER]

BUT it is OK for those "jews" to continue to kill many innocent young Palestinian women and children day after day... It goes both ways (and will continue), Sharon is a war criminal with a nice track record to prove it. I can only hope the support continues for these families of the martyrs since it is a fact that Palestine has absolutely NO defense against Sharon and his killing ways-


3 5 0

Arafat and Palestine have too much PRIDE not to retaliate back after their own people are being killed brutally time after time.


What do you expect them to do.?? Sit back and watch.?? He!! would freeze over first, you can't fault Arafat for not stopping this since they have NO army, NO air force or anything else to "protect" themselves against a crazed jew army moving in and killing them weekly.

 

[Cardinal]

Guess I found the 350 hot-button. As much as I'd love to delve into this, the outcome would be predictable. I'd say the Jews were there first, you'd say the Palestinians were there first, we'd both be right in a sense, and it would go one for pages. I don't want to make the hijacking of this thread any more egregious.

Israel has treated the situation in a measured, tit-for-tat manner. As childish as that behavior might seem, it is predictable. The weaker party here(the Palestinians, as you claim) knows the formula. Blow up a bus = Get bulldozed and shot at. Repeat. They could stop the cycle if they wished, and be no worse off.

Anyway, what was this thread about? Oh yeah, don't buy Airbus...

 

[A Squared]

I'd say the Jews were there first

Ummmm, yeah the jews were there about 2 thousand years ago, then they were thrown out by the Romans and had little significant presence there until the late 19th century. That sounds like a rather tenuous claim to "owning" Palestine.

Israel has treated the situation in a measured, tit-for-tat manner.

Measured? Measured?

Measured like bands of roving armed "militias" in 1948 driving palestinians from their villages where they'd been living for centuries, leveling the villages and driving them into exile? or in the case of Dair Yasin, slaughtering 250 of the villagers?

Measured like the Mossad planting bombs in public libraries in Syria?

Measured? Like the Israli Army surrounding and sealing off the palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila and shelling them, then sending in Phalangist militia and pretending not to notice them slaughtering 3500 unarmed civillians over a 3 day period (even though the israelis had a 6 story command post overlooking the massacre) The Israeli soldiers even kept the women and children from fleeing the massacre, sending them back into the camps to their deaths.

Is that your idea of measured ?

Look, buckwheat, the Zionists have had the openly stated and well documented goal of driving the palestinians out of palestine since the 1890's . They have been largely sucessful in acheiving this goal using mass murder of civillians and other atrocities which have been flagrant violations of international law and basic human rights, and they have doen this with the United States' complicity and assistance.

I have no love for the Palestinians, but if you'd read a little about the real history of Israel, you'll see that the Palestinians have been handed a pretty raw deal.


regards

 

[capt_zman]

Boo hoo, cry me a river. I don't see American Indians blowing up buses and shopping malls.

Hate to say, but its nature, survival of the fittest. Nobody owes anybody anything.

So goodbye Mr. Hussein, your number just got called.

 

[LR25]

Yeah, don't buy Airbuses.

I dont see any reason to get on a message board and start slaming someone, geez, we dont even know each other, heck I could be an 80 yr old grandmother, you never know.

Why dont we keep it to a debate.

It is an aviation board after all, so I will mention something dealing with airplanes every time for now on. I did mention the word Airbus, LOL.

But atleast we are not talking about PFT.

I'll be back when I have more energy.

 

[A Squared]

Boo hoo, cry me a river. I don't see American Indians blowing up buses and shopping malls.

If you lived 1n the 19th century, you would have seen the American Indians doing the equivalant. Eventually, we were able to beat them into submission. Keep in mind that there are plenty of living palestinians who remember when they and their families were lawfully living on the land which they were forced from.

Hate to say, but its nature, survival of the fittest.

Now there's an enlightened world view .... if you're strong enough militarily, anything you chose to do is acceptable.

Nobody owes anybody anything.

Well, actually, yes they do. Under international law, persons fleeing thier homes to escape war are entitled to have them back. See, this is one of the primary tactics the Israelis used to push the Palestinians out and take thier land. When the palestinians would flee to escape the fighting, their land would be declared "abandoned" and jewish settlers would be brought in following the end of hostilities.

Under international law, and fundamental moral law, an army, any army, "owes" it to the non-combatants not to massacre them by the hundreds for no other reason than to take their property.

Tell me something. How is it that we can grasp that it is wrong for Saddam Hussein to invade and occupy Kuwait, but we can't seem to wrap our minds around the concept that it's wrong for the Israelis to do exactly the same thing with the Palestinian partition zones in 1948, and later the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank?

Explain to me how it is that you can (presumably) understand that it was morally reprehensible for the Germans to exact reprisals on the french civillians for the actions of the resistance, but you seem to be untroubled by the israelis "measured" reprisals. The situation is almost identical, an organized military force killing non-combatants in a territory occupied in violation of international law, in response attacks by an non-unifomed guerrilla force.

Perhaps you can explain how it is that we get all worked up(and rightfully so) about Hussein ignoring UN resolutions, yet we appear completely oblivious to the fact that israel has ignored scores of UN resolutions, begining in 1948 with violating the UN resolution partitioning palestine into jewish and palestinian zones, and continuing right up to the present, ignoring all resolutions which have to do with them withdrawing from the occupied terretories. Perhaps violating UN resolutions is only bad when it's done by a country which we are not arming and supporting?

The trouble with people like you, zman is that you are unable to view the world any but the most simplistic and flawed black and white terms ie: Israel good, palestine bad.
Yeah it's hard to scrape up too much sympathy for people who are blowing up busses full of civillians, but ignoring the fact that the israelis have done exactly the same thing (terror bombings of civillians) and far worse does the situation a complete injustice. As long as we continue to view the israelis as a benevolent and just soceity, we will continue to be mystifyed why the Arab world is so violently agains them. The simple and appealing answer is to blame it on pure, unadulterated anti-semitism. Certainly there is an element of that, but to put it all down to that ignores the grim reality of the israel/palestine conflict. The situation won't ever be resolved until we start examining what really happened, not the comforting ficton that so many believe now


regards

 

[Aerosmith]

Hate to say, but its nature, survival of the fittest. Nobody owes anybody anything.

One million people murdered and sliced up by machetes in Rwanda.....Survival of the fittest!

Thousands of Kosovoalbanians slaughtered by Serbs....Survival of the fittest!

Holocaust....Survival of the fittest!

Soviet Gulag.....Survival of the fittest!

100000000 estimated deaths caused by communism....Survival of the fittest!


What a wonderful and naive way to view the world!!??!!