War on Terror is bogus

[MSgt]

Gandhi....There might be, but there isn't. And like I said, there hasn't and never will be a war to end all wars. There will always be wars. Instead of voicing against American tyranny, why don't you voice against the tactics that are used by the opposition that has dragged us into the fight? Americans aren't the ones that seek out civillians to murder. This is a cowards role and their way of life. Civillians are not targets, no matter who is pulling the trigger.

It is clear who is less civilized and who has had to stoop. America doesn't want this war, but neither are we just going to forgive any more terrorism. Even if we up and leave Iraq and leave its people to the mercy of everyone that would punish them, future terrorist attacks will be much less than before, becuase the Middle East knows that we aren't taking it anymore. There are other countries that have clearly sent a message to them saying that any attack on them would be fine because they won't do a thing but continue to look the other way.

This war in Iraq would be so much easier if so many of the ignorant would stop rooting and rallying for the terrorist. Just like the protesters during Vietnam did for the North Vietnamese they are doing it for the terrrorists. To march against this war is to support their actions.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Gandhi....There might be, but there isn't.

That doesn't make sense. "Maybe, but on no..." Those are two conflicting responses. The world has yet to engage this terrorist threat with truly nonviolent means. I don't mean turning a blind eye to it, that's not what nonviolence is. If that is what you think nonviolence is, you should read what Gandhi said about Satyagraha(truth force). There is a difference between a Pascifist and a Passive-ist.

And like I said, there hasn't and never will be a war to end all wars. There will always be wars.

If we continue to think like that, yes there will always be wars. If we truly strive for it, win or lose, the world would be a better place.

Instead of voicing against American tyranny, why don't you voice against the tactics that are used by the opposition that has dragged us into the fight? Americans aren't the ones that seek out civillians to murder. This is a cowards role and their way of life. Civillians are not targets, no matter who is pulling the trigger.

I love America. I'm incredibly proud to be an American. I know what we are capable of, I know how brilliant and intelligent it's citizens are. I get angry when I see how many lives we've thrown into the desert never to return. I get angry because I know we are so much better than war. I can see the potential America has to show the world that to defeat evil you do not have to be evil.

It is clear who is less civilized and who has had to stoop. America doesn't want this war, but neither are we just going to forgive any more terrorism. Even if we up and leave Iraq and leave its people to the mercy of everyone that would punish them, future terrorist attacks will be much less than before, becuase the Middle East knows that we aren't taking it anymore. There are other countries that have clearly sent a message to them saying that any attack on them would be fine because they won't do a thing but continue to look the other way.

Only time will tell the damage we've done.

This war in Iraq would be so much easier if so many of the ignorant would stop rooting and rallying for the terrorist.

If you can find anything I've ever said about wanting the terrorists to win, I will apologize and declare that I am in err. I do not want to see the terrorists win. As a matter of fact, I can't recall any American who stated he wanted the terrorists to win.

It would be easier if it were a dictatorship... hmm... Maybe you're on to something... Maybe we should enact sedition laws? Then everyone whos opinion is'nt exactly with the government or military could be thrown in a gula- I mean concentratio- I mean prison. You know what I mean. Free speech is over rated.

Just like the protesters during Vietnam did for the North Vietnamese they are doing it for the terrrorists. To march against this war is to support their actions.

Hmm...

Gandhi = Terrorist

MLK = Terrorist

John Lennon = Terrorist

Marvin Gaye = Terrorist

Hippies = Terrorists

Hmm..

Nah, that's silly.

 

[MSgt]

Petty insults of grammer.....? I'll move on....

You confuse civil unrest with war. These aren't a bunch of people that are wanting equality. These are militarized thugs that crash airplanes into buildings and blow up civillians as a drastic display of a temper tantrum because we stand between them and the annhialation of another country. This is a war that they started decades ago. We have just been too blind to defend ourselves. 9/11 woke everyone up to what the military has known all along. The wake up call for the Marines was 1983.

We were not in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Saudi or Iran during:

1) 1972 Olympics hostage taking of 13 Isreali athletes
2) 1974 attack on an Israeli high school leaving 26 dead
3) 1974 TWA flight bombing killing 88.
4) 1975 Air France plane skyjacked. Israeli special forces rescue all but 3 hostages.
5) 1979 Tehran American Embassy attacked and 66 American hostages held.
6) 1979 Mosque in Mecca seized and 100s of hostages
taken. Saudi and French military retake Mosque at a high price.
7) 1979 skyjacking and kidnapping of 66 Americans
8.) 1980 Train Station bombing in Italy leaves 80 dead.
9) 1983 Embassy bombing in Beirut kills 63
10) 1983 Gulf Air Flight bombed killing 117.
11) 1983 Beirut Marine Bombing killed 241 Marines and a similar attack on a French barracks killing 58.
12) 1985 TWA Flight skyjacked and 153 civillians held hostage. One U.S. Sailor murdered.
13) 1985 Soviet Diplomats kidnapped and one is killed by Sunni Terrorists.
15) 1985 Egypt Air Flight skyjacked. 60 dead in rescue attempt.
16) 1985 Air India bombed killing 329.
17) 1985 Air Canada Aircraft bombed on the ground killing two in Japan.
18.) 1985 Two seperate attacks in two seperate airports in Italy kills 16 total.
19) 1986 TWA bombing by Palestinians blow a hole in the cabin and 4 Americans are sucked out during the flight including one infant.
20) 1986 German Discotheque in Berlin bombed killing 3
U.S. servicemen and 230 others. America bombs Qadhafi in response.
21) 1986 Pan Am Flight hijacked. Terrorist open fire and kill 22 passengers.
22) 1987 North Korean Operatives plant a bomb on Korean Air Flight killing 115.
23) 1987 Barcelona Bar bombed killing 1 service man.
24) 1987 USO in Naples bombed killing 1 service man.
25) 1988 Pan Am Flight bombed killing 259 over Scotland.
26) 1989 UTA Flight bombed killing 170.
27) 1992 Israeli Embassy bombed killing 29.
28.) 1993 World Trade Center in New York bombed killing 6 and wounding more than a thousand.
29) 1994 Jewish Center bombed killing 86.
30) Saudi Arabia military compound bombed killing 40.
31) 1997 Palastinian gunman open fires at the Empire State Building killing one American.
32) 1997 Four U.S. business men are killed in Pakistan.
33) 1998 Two American Embassy bombings by Al-Queda kill 301.
34) 2001 World Trade Center destroyed and Pentagon attacked by three seperate air planes killing almost 3,000 on American soil.

These are just 34 out of the 100's of terrorist attacks around the globe. I singled the majority of these out, because they were primarily against Americans. Notice that all were on civilians or non combatting military. These listed were by Libyian, Iraqi, Iranian, Syrian, Al-Queda, and the PLO. They were executed by "martyrs" for Allah as a result of the perverted teachings from their country's leaders. How many more cowardly attacks were American civillians supposed to sustain while America looked the other way through futile acts of diplomacy?

Forget all of the political party's soap boxes that would get their candidates elected. Forget that we ever attacked Iraq. What we have left is Saddam Hussein and his regime raping and murdering whoever they please on a mass scale all across Iraq, except, of course, Tikrit. The question is, would you prefer the Iraqi people to live like they were or would you march the streets for equality in Iraq for 10 more years until 10s of thousands more have been raped and murdered? Or would you even care?

Forget all of the political party's soap boxes that would get their candidates elected. Forget that we ever attacked Afghanistan. What we have left is the Tali Ban large and in charge, still oppressing their women and still terrorist organized. The question is, would you prefer that Afghani civillians still be under Tali Ban rule or would you march the streets for equality in Afghanistan for a few days until you're beheaded? Or would you even care?

An enemy that is prepared to kill you for being American and a supporter of Israel does not and will not listen to reason. They count on your apologies and patience. You give them an olive branch and they will take it and slap you in the face. You turn the other cheek and you expose to them their next target. Diplomacy was never going to work. For you to say that we should just leave and try to understand their pain is what they are counting on. They have had over 50 years to bring themselves to the peace table that we have constantly provided in the Middle East. The bleeding heart is what they have alway thrived on.

I've seen these kind of people from country to country over the last 13 years. They are all of the same and subjected to the manipulations of their Koran led leadership and their twisted interpretations of it. I say kill 'em all and let their God rewrd them and let the pascifist cry about them while benifetting from the security it provides. What would be left would be peaceful Muslims and Christians living life just like every where else.

PS - The smiley's as "eights" were not my idea. They went there automatically.

 

[Squawker]

PS - The smiley's as "eights" were not my idea. They went there automatically.

My fault Gunny, I have been meaning to fix that. :3oops: Nice post, btw. 8)

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Petty insults of grammer.....? I'll move on....

I think you mean grammar. Just kidding...

You confuse civil unrest with war. These aren't a bunch of people that are wanting equality. These are militarized thugs that crash airplanes into buildings and blow up civillians as a drastic display of a temper tantrum because we stand between them and the annhialation of another country. This is a war that they started decades ago. We have just been too blind to defend ourselves. 9/11 woke everyone up to what the military has known all along. The wake up call for the Marines was 1983.

You think they want to annihilate Israel simply because they are Jewish? If you think the Israelis are putting forth an effort to coexist with the Palestinians, I would have to say you are very wrong. Google it. I got plenty of hits.

These are just 34 out of the 100's of terrorist attacks around the globe. I singled the majority of these out, because they were primarily against Americans. Notice that all were on civilians or non combatting military. These listed were by Libyian, Iraqi, Iranian, Syrian, Al-Queda, and the PLO. They were executed by "martyrs" for Allah as a result of the perverted teachings from their country's leaders. How many more cowardly attacks were American civillians supposed to sustain while America looked the other way through futile acts of diplomacy?

What diplomacy? If they will not talk, you act. Don't get excited: Action doesn't require a rifle.

Forget all of the political party's soap boxes that would get their candidates elected. Forget that we ever attacked Iraq. What we have left is Saddam Hussein and his regime raping and murdering whoever they please on a mass scale all across Iraq, except, of course, Tikrit. The question is, would you prefer the Iraqi people to live like they were or would you march the streets for equality in Iraq for 10 more years until 10s of thousands more have been raped and murdered? Or would you even care?

Forget all of the political party's soap boxes that would get their candidates elected. Forget that we ever attacked Afghanistan. What we have left is the Tali Ban large and in charge, still oppressing their women and still terrorist organized. The question is, would you prefer that Afghani civillians still be under Tali Ban rule or would you march the streets for equality in Afghanistan for a few days until you're beheaded? Or would you even care?

Do you really believe that the only peaceful way to do anything is to march?

To bring about a regime change peacefully isn't easy, but it can be done. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are countries that, without trade, would stagnate and die. It would happen quick. We knew of the atrocities of Saddam Hussien and the Taliban, yet we said WMD. Are you kidding? Appeal to people's compassion not their fears.

An enemy that is prepared to kill you for being American and a supporter of Israel does not and will not listen to reason. They count on your apologies and patience. You give them an olive branch and they will take it and slap you in the face. You turn the other cheek and you expose to them their next target. Diplomacy was never going to work. For you to say that we should just leave and try to understand their pain is what they are counting on. They have had over 50 years to bring themselves to the peace table that we have constantly provided in the Middle East. The bleeding heart is what they have alway thrived on.

Can I have an example of when someone with a bleeding heart acted with these people? No. There isn't one. No one has ever tried to unmake the hatred. We have only tried to kill, and I tell you: It cannot be done that way.

I've seen these kind of people from country to country over the last 13 years. They are all of the same and subjected to the manipulations of their Koran led leadership and their twisted interpretations of it. I say kill 'em all and let their God rewrd them and let the pascifist cry about them while benifetting from the security it provides. What would be left would be peaceful Muslims and Christians living life just like every where else.

You will never "kill 'em all." Your hatred will only beget hatred(Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.). You will never kill any of these. Killing and occupation will only rally more to their cause. You think they want a bleeding heart? They want a war, and you're playing right into their hand. You refuse to try any other way. I don't know if you're too angry or too scared or maybe both, but either way we're not going to solve this problem with ammunition.

 

[MSgt]

Of course, I'm not scared. I'm still active duty, and next year I will probably return there. I also do not hate. I am simply tired of them and have no patience for what they do in order to be heard. They are like children that lash out in the form of temper tantrums. Only their temper tantrums are deadly. I do not believe they are worth anything and have anything to offer. We see this in the everyday 1st century existence of their lands. If it weren't for oil, the Middle East would have Africa beat for the worst ghetto in the world.

What are you talking about? The last 50 years is mired in failed diplomacy. Any time somebody actually comes to the table, Palestine attacks Israeli civillians. The only Muslim nation that has turned off their senseless violence has been Egypt. And that, is thanks to America's diplomacy.

The Hebrew (Jewish) kingdom was established in Palestine around 1000 B.C. They were subsequently invaded by Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Romans, and Alexander the Great. Arabs took it in 630 B.C. The Christian Crusades began. The Muslims ruled Israel until the 20th Century. The Brits took it from the Turks during WWI and governed the area under a League of Nations mandate in 1923. Hitler's genocide of 6 milliion jews brought increased international interests in a Jewish nation. The State of Israel was proclaimed and admitted to the UN in 1949 by the Brits.

They want to annihilate Israel because the Muslims are claiming the "holy land" that they conguered a long time ago. If we are to entertain their claims, then we should entertain all lands that have been properly conquered through history. Germany should be claiming Europe. Japan should be claiming all of Asia. America...well, America could be claiming all whole hell of a lot that we have given up after wars. The Muslims have a deep rooted hatred and bigotry towards Jews. They are treated like **** throughout the Middle East. Muslims need to get over it just like everyone else in the world that has lost land throughout history. Why should their behavior be excused? No talks will ever pull the Koran out of their asses or make them behave past the barbaric tantrums that they glorify.

I believe that when you receive a fist, you should return it harder. It makes them back up and re-think their aggressions.

 

[arussian]

Even the Russians grew silent from their anti-war chants after suffering a terrrorist attack from their own part of the world in one of their schools last year.

First, one ought never pay attention to what wily and corrupt current government of RF says or says not.

Second, most of the Russian anti-americans applaud to US invasion to Iraq and cry: “Yes, yes, deeper into the trap! Go quicker ahead to the Vietnam”
Third, there were many terrorist attacks in Russia since mid -1990 th, of which most of the Americans are unaware.

But the most important is that ordinary people probably will never know for sure who stands behind terrorist. (At this very forum there is a thread “was 911 inside job”).
Concerning the capture of school, who backed it?
Chechens and Al-Qaida? Perhaps, this mass media version is probable.

But why not US and CIA?
– Reasons? The same war in Iraq. Or plenty of other "top secret".

Or why not dismissed Jewish oligarchs like Nevslin and Berezovsky seeking to revenge Putin. Living in London they have plenty of opporunities to cooperate with radical Islamist leaders plethora of those also dwell there.

Or finally, why not RF government and FSB (former KGB) themselves? The least have had many grounds for doing it also, starting simply from the fact that frightened and hating people is easier to govern.

It is very hard to obtain true information about such kind of things* in order to have solid grounds to blame this or that force. Therefore, mass media and governments have a lot of possibilities to manipulate public opinion.

If we had pulled back within our borders after WWII, would there have been a WWIII? I think so and it would have been against the U.S.S.R. and China. The best defense of any territory is to go out from your borders

.

But there are many ways to “go out of the borders”. What would have been if US would launch a ground operation against USSR or China instead of propaganda, diplomacy, dissidents, money, etc.?

Ground operation is the least and perhaps the most ineffective way from the point of view of the national interests. Soldiers are dying, resistance growing, money wasted, image of a country in the world goes down (even such a country as US). If ground operation is chosen (in the case of the absence of a foreign invasion), then perhaps national interests were somehow betrayed. A little bit strange not to think in this way.

As a non –US resident I don't care much about your national interests. Although, to some extent I do, because I have adjusted to the world where US is the leading power. Therefore, I'm truly concerned with the novelty and strangeness of this policy.
_________
* doubt? Consider the cases of US presidents who were murdered.

 

[akyron]

Terrorism didnt exist until the late 19th century and for a large religion that has divisions to suddenly adobt it is totally innaccurate propaganda.?

Suddenly?
Ever here of Xenophobia?

"The ancient Greek historian Xenophon (c. 431–c. 350 BC) wrote of the effectiveness of psychological warfare against enemy populations.

Roman emperors such as Tiberius (reigned AD 14–37) and Caligula (reigned AD 37–41) used banishment, expropriation of property, and execution as means to discourage opposition to their rule.

The English word ‘terrorism’ comes from the regime de la terreur that prevailed in France from 1793-1794. Originally an instrument of the state, the regime was designed to consolidate the power of the newly-installed revolutionary government, protecting it from elements considered ‘subversive.’ Always value-laden, terrorism was, initially, a positive term. The French revolutionary leader, Maximilien Robespierre, viewed it as vital if the new French Republic was to survive its infancy, proclaiming in 1794 that: “Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is therefore an emanation of virtue; it is not so much a special principle as it is a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to our country's most urgent needs.”
Under such justification, some 40,000 people were executed by guillotine ‑ a fate Robespierre and his top lieutenants would themselves suffer when later that same year, his announcement of a new list of subversives led to a counter-inquisition by some in the Revolutionary government who feared their names might be on the latest roll of ‘traitors.’

The Spanish Inquisition used arbitrary arrest, torture, and execution to punish what it viewed as religious heresy. The use of terror was openly advocated by Robespierre as a means of encouraging revolutionary virtue during the French Revolution, leading to the period of his political dominance called the Reign of Terror (1793–94).

After the American Civil War (1861–65) defiant Southerners formed a terrorist organization called the Ku Klux Klan to intimidate supporters of Reconstruction."

We need to go back to 1886 when a bomb tossed into a mass meeting in Chicago’s Haymarket Square took the lives of eight policemen. In the aftermath, eight anarchists, none of them linked to the actual deed, were hastily tried and convicted. The public and press screamed for the repression of these "desperate fanatics. . .swiftly, sternly and without mercy." Four died on the gallows, one committed suicide, and three were later pardoned by a courageous Illinois governor.

I will not scream at you that you are WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Thats champs job.
Terror has been around in many forms for a couple thousand years.

Sustained conflict in the middle east has gone on just about that long as well.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

What are you talking about? The last 50 years is mired in failed diplomacy. Any time somebody actually comes to the table, Palestine attacks Israeli civillians. The only Muslim nation that has turned off their senseless violence has been Egypt. And that, is thanks to America's diplomacy.

You don't have to have a piece of paper signed to show somebody respect. To feed their hungry, to educate their children, etc. Do it. Just because they want to be your enemy doesn't mean you should let them.

The Hebrew (Jewish) kingdom was established in Palestine around 1000 B.C. They were subsequently invaded by Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Romans, and Alexander the Great. Arabs took it in 630 B.C. The Christian Crusades began. The Muslims ruled Israel until the 20th Century. The Brits took it from the Turks during WWI and governed the area under a League of Nations mandate in 1923. Hitler's genocide of 6 milliion jews brought increased international interests in a Jewish nation. The State of Israel was proclaimed and admitted to the UN in 1949 by the Brits.

I am familiar with such things. A Jewish nation that treats Muslims with injustice, is no better than a Muslim nation that mistreats Jews. Why is not a good idea to create a nation of people over creating a nation of Jews?

They want to annihilate Israel because the Muslims are claiming the "holy land" that they conguered a long time ago. If we are to entertain their claims, then we should entertain all lands that have been properly conquered through history. Germany should be claiming Europe. Japan should be claiming all of Asia. America...well, America could be claiming all whole hell of a lot that we have given up after wars. The Muslims have a deep rooted hatred and bigotry towards Jews. They are treated like **** throughout the Middle East. Muslims need to get over it just like everyone else in the world that has lost land throughout history. Why should their behavior be excused? No talks will ever pull the Koran out of their asses or make them behave past the barbaric tantrums that they glorify.

They want access to their holy sites. They don't want to "recapture the holy land." I'm not asking you to excuse their behavior, I'm asking you to change it. You're right. Words alone will do nothing to sway terrorists. Take action, but leave out all the killing.

I believe that when you receive a fist, you should return it harder. It makes them back up and re-think their aggressions.

No, it makes them want to do exactly what you did, and return with more force. And unless you break this moronic cycle, it will go on forever, just as it has.

Do you see how childish that little foriegn policy is? These things happen on playgrounds. Generally, one of two outcomes emerge. One: Someone more intelligent breaks them up. Two: They fight until there is a loser, then they fight again later, and this keeps happening until roles are established. The roles of "Bully" and "wimp." Then one day the "wimp" brings a gun to school. He returns with greater force.

 

[MSgt]

What you say has a lot of truth to it. However, it is more of a utopian type existence that we can't live in, yet. If we told (asked) the insurgency and pissed off Sunni to leave or just embrace the new government that the vast majority of Iraqi citizens have developed, they wouldn't. If we told Israel and Palestine to behave, they wouldn't. If we told North Korea to stop with their nuclear missile testing and give it up, they wouldn't. If we told Iran not to develop nukes, because the rest of the free world don't trust them, they wouldn't. If we told France to stop wearing their dumb berets, they wouldn't.

It would be nice if Israel would risk letting Palestine come across the border and visit their religious sites, but I don't think it would stop their bickering or fighting. The visit wouldn't be enough. They both want to own something that is spiritually important to each side. If liberals weren't so damn hypocritical and inconsistant about what they believe in from event to event, they would be rallying against the Palestinian's rediculous religious claims over some land. It's what they would do against the Christian Rebublicans. (I claim neither Democrat nor Republican; I vote for the good of the nation.)

A nation of people over a nation of Jews sounds a lot like America. Unfortunately, our country has had the only privilege of starting out with as diverse a culture as you can get and we are the only one of it's kind. One could make a great argument about America being the shinimng light of this Earth, because of our understanding and protections of individual rights. What else can explain why we have come leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else in our short, short, short history? Everyone likes to look at our wars, but fail to realize that war has never been our choice. We are always dragged into it.

Jews are a select of people and a religion. French people have a country. Norwegians have a country. Muslims have a whole region. Why can't the Jews have something, without Muslims crying about some land that they rightfully conquered and rightfully lost?

 

[Tashah]

They want access to their holy sites. They don't want to "recapture the holy land."

Access to The Dome of the Rock (and the Al-Aqsa Mosque) in Jerusalem is unfettered. The Dome of the Rock is considered by Muslims to be the third holiest site in Islam. On any given day, one can witness throngs of Muslims completing this final portion of the hajj journey.

The only caveat here is that Israel has set a maximum limit on the number of people who can be on-site at any given time. The reason for this is safety. To put it bluntly, the structures are no longer sound from an engineering standpoint and without crowd control... portions of the antiquated complex could easily collapse.

The Muslim clergy who manage the holy complex demand no access limits. Yet they refuse to invest in the improvements necessary to ensure the stability of the structures and the safety of those on pilgrimage. You can bet your last shekel that if a catastrophe should occur... Israel would be at fault because it knew of the severe structural/engineering problems and turned a blind eye. Israel has thus opted to limit crowd size to reduce the possibility of injury and tragedy.

On your second point, the Palestinian Authority does indeed demand administrative rights to East Jerusalem. Such an action would, for all practical purposes, bifurcate Jerusalem which is the capital city of Israel. Israel will negotiate on many issues, but splitting Jerusalem is not one of them.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Access to The Dome of the Rock (and the Al-Aqsa Mosque) in Jerusalem is unfettered. The Dome of the Rock is considered by Muslims to be the third holiest site in Islam. On any given day, one can witness throngs of Muslims completing this final portion of the hajj journey.

The only caveat here is that Israel has set a maximum limit on the number of people who can be on-site at any given time. The reason for this is safety. To put it bluntly, the structures are no longer sound from an engineering standpoint and without crowd control... portions of the antiquated complex could easily collapse.

The Muslim clergy who manage the holy complex demand no access limits. Yet they refuse to invest in the improvements necessary to ensure the stability of the structures and the safety of those on pilgrimage. You can bet your last shekel that if a catastrophe should occur... Israel would be at fault because it knew of the severe structural/engineering problems and turned a blind eye. Israel has thus opted to limit crowd size to reduce the possibility of injury and tragedy.

This contradicts a few things I've read, however based on your location, it wouldn't be very intelligent to presume any ignorance :lol: . Out of curiosity: What is education like in Israel? Do Jewish children ever go to school Muslims, Chiristians? Any segregation? Have you yourself seen any mistreatments from any of the parties?

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

What you say has a lot of truth to it. However, it is more of a utopian type existence that we can't live in, yet. If we told (asked) the insurgency and pissed off Sunni to leave or just embrace the new government that the vast majority of Iraqi citizens have developed, they wouldn't. If we told Israel and Palestine to behave, they wouldn't. If we told North Korea to stop with their nuclear missile testing and give it up, they wouldn't. If we told Iran not to develop nukes, because the rest of the free world don't trust them, they wouldn't. If we told France to stop wearing their dumb berets, they wouldn't.

If you wish for these people to stop doing these things, you must find out why they want to do these things, and then you must change it.

It would be nice if Israel would risk letting Palestine come across the border and visit their religious sites, but I don't think it would stop their bickering or fighting. The visit wouldn't be enough. They both want to own something that is spiritually important to each side. If liberals weren't so damn hypocritical and inconsistant about what they believe in from event to event, they would be rallying against the Palestinian's rediculous religious claims over some land. It's what they would do against the Christian Rebublicans. (I claim neither Democrat nor Republican; I vote for the good of the nation.)

Two peoples must be around one another if they are to learn to co-exist.

Jews are a select of people and a religion. French people have a country. Norwegians have a country. Muslims have a whole region. Why can't the Jews have something, without Muslims crying about some land that they rightfully conquered and rightfully lost?

There is a difference between a French nation and a Muslim of Jewish nation. I do not advocate a Muslim Nation any more than I do a Jewish Nation.

 

[MSgt]

Regardless of your non advocations, a Muslim region exists and a Jewish Nation exists. They have existed around each other for centuries. The two seem to not get along and America has been sucked into the middle of it, just because we recognize a nation's right to exist. Nobody can force peace between these people. What we can do is force them to back off of killing our people and try to offer more democracy into the area. It's either that or continue to except terrorism as a part of life. Maybe in the end, that is exactly what we will have to do, but at least we can say that we tried to do something when we realized that they weren't going to change on their own.

You seem to live with your head in the clouds. I do not mean anything insulting. You just don't seem grounded and enjoy fortune cookie philosophy. People's bad behavior on this scale should never be forgiven or forgotten. Letting it go for so long has only encouraged it and allowed it to fester. I believe that deplomacy is only good until it doesn't work. They ran themselves out of time.

 

[Tashah]

This contradicts a few things I've read, however based on your location, it wouldn't be very intelligent to presume any ignorance.

Although I live in the Ramat Aviv section of Tel Aviv, I visit Jerusalem quite often.

Out of curiosity: What is education like in Israel?

Education is excellent. Almost 46% of gymnasium (high school) graduates go on to attend institutions of higher learning. Israel ranks very high in the percentage of physicists, mathematicians, engineers, programmers, and medical personal in the general population.

Do Jewish children ever go to school Muslims, Chiristians? Any segregation?

There are Arab and Christian citizens of Israel. Education is available to all Israeli citizens and is mandatory. The only segregation in education transpires at private Orthodox schools which incorporate a heavy syllabus of religious studies.

Have you yourself seen any mistreatments from any of the parties?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by *mistreatments* here. There are certain tensions sometimes as there are at any school system with a varied composition. However, ethnic discrimination is frowned upon. For my part, I am tri-lingual and a volunteer English tutor at many Palestinian locales in Samaria (the West Bank).


PS. Since you arrarently like to read, I will direct you to some interesting material. At the Dome of the Rock shrine, verses from the Qur'an in Arabic script encircle the bottom of the golden dome. Some of these verses mention the People of the Book (those of the Jewish and Christian faiths). One would assume that a shrine of this importance and caliber would choose Qur'anic verses that proclaim the best ideals of Islam. But then again, one should never assume anything.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Regardless of your non advocations, a Muslim region exists and a Jewish Nation exists. They have existed around each other for centuries. The two seem to not get along and America has been sucked into the middle of it, just because we recognize a nation's right to exist. Nobody can force peace between these people. What we can do is force them to back off of killing our people and try to offer more democracy into the area. It's either that or continue to except terrorism as a part of life. Maybe in the end, that is exactly what we will have to do, but at least we can say that we tried to do something when we realized that they weren't going to change on their own.

They will change on their own. Change inside of a people is not something that can be forced, much like Peace. Though I did not suggest forcing Peace in such away.

You seem to live with your head in the clouds. I do not mean anything insulting. You just don't seem grounded and enjoy fortune cookie philosophy. People's bad behavior on this scale should never be forgiven or forgotten. Letting it go for so long has only encouraged it and allowed it to fester. I believe that deplomacy is only good until it doesn't work. They ran themselves out of time.

Perhaps I should derive philosphy from the end of a rifle, is that where morals are best found? We should never forget what these people have done and neither should they, but forgiveness comes with the higher standard at which we should hold ourselves to. Diplomacy is good until you give up on it. There have been no ACTIONS taken to end terrorism that don't involve killing.

 

[MSgt]

You like saying that America has never tried diplomacy as if you have erased everything that has happened before 9/11. It makes me think that you really don't know the history of it or you refuse to. Did you just start College and have gotten caught up in the typical College kid "save the whale" fad? In what way would you try to bring peace to the Middle East that you think hasn't already been done?

Philosophy from the end of a rifle is what terrorists have always asked for.

 

[alienken]

If you wish for these people to stop doing these things, you must find out why they want to do these things, and then you must change it.



Two peoples must be around one another if they are to learn to co-exist.

I think peace will only be achieved if someone could invent a machine that could suck the hatred and greed right out of the people. Until then there will always be trouble and terrorism. After Sept. 11 it was very hard for Americans to stay neutral in the Palestinian/Israel problem because of the similarities. The Palestinian people hate the Jews for who they are and want to destroy them. Same with Al-quida and anyone who isn't Muslim.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

You like saying that America has never tried diplomacy as if you have erased everything that has happened before 9/11. It makes me think that you really don't know the history of it or you refuse to. Did you just start College and have gotten caught up in the typical College kid "save the whale" fad? In what way would you try to bring peace to the Middle East that you think hasn't already been done?

I hate whales.

We have done everything in our power to kill terrorists, though we have done nothing to stop terrorism. People who resort to this type of violence are desparate. They are hungry and we are obese. They live in poverty and just look at America. It's easy to hate someone who has so much more than you. Someone that sees you oppressed and changes the channel until finally one day, they get their nose bloodied and their eyes opened and they get their billion dollar military and go blow stuff up.

If they blame us for their hunger, it is a simple problem to fix: feed them. I'm not talking about paying for food and giving it to a dictator to disperse as he sees fit. I'm talking about from the hands of an American to the hands of an Arab. Taking an active stance on unmaking hatred, rather than, "hey let's talk." If they don't want to talk, you act. If they blame you for their problems, FIX THEIR PROBLEMS.

Philosophy from the end of a rifle is what terrorists have always asked for.

That does not mean you should give it to them. They expect you to return their actions, their brutality, with equal or greater force. Surprise them.

 

[Tashah]

If they blame us for their hunger, it is a simple problem to fix: feed them. I'm not talking about paying for food and giving it to a dictator to disperse as he sees fit. I'm talking about from the hands of an American to the hands of an Arab.

Your idea sounds wonderful. It also sounds strikingly similiar to the Peace Corps. Could it work? Perhaps. But there is one small problemo...

Out of all the Arab/Muslim countries of the Middle East and North Africa, only Jordan and Morocco will accept American Peace Corps volunteers. Want to volunteer for the Peace Corps and hand out food in Palestine or Egypt? Good luck. I'll even supply the link where you can volunteer and choose your location: Peace Corps

The problem here is not that most Arab/Muslim nations are so well off that they have no need of humanitarian assistance. Nor is the problem a lack of American volunteers. You see, the problem here is that those Arab governments would have their citizenry go hungry rather than blatently accept American assistance... for to do so would only further publicise and underscore their inept governance and colossal corruption.

If they blame us for their hunger, it is a simple problem to fix: feed them.​

Feeding the hungry may satiate Arab stomachs, but it does not address the causal problems of their hunger. What you propose is a band-aid fix for a tourniquet wound. Your heart and humanity are in the right place, but as you can see with the example of the Peace Corps... extending a helping hand on the global stage is not always an easy endeavor.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Your idea sounds wonderful. It also sounds strikingly similiar to the Peace Corps. Could it work? Perhaps. But there is one small problemo...

Out of all the Arab/Muslim countries of the Middle East and North Africa, only Jordan and Morocco will accept American Peace Corps volunteers. Want to volunteer for the Peace Corps and hand out food in Palestine or Egypt? Good luck. I'll even supply the link where you can volunteer and choose your location: Peace Corps

I am familiar with the Peace Corps. I was actually considering joining after college. Would I volunteer to go to Egypt or Palestine? Absolutely.

The problem here is not that most Arab/Muslim nations are so well off that they have no need of humanitarian assistance. Nor is the problem a lack of American volunteers. You see, the problem here is that those Arab governments would have their citizenry go hungry rather than blatently accept American assistance... for to do so would only further publicise and underscore their inept governance and colossal corruption.

I believe that with the proper pressures applied(trade embargos, etc.) they could be convinced to see otherwise. Especially(this is in a world with a functioning UN) if a humanitarian committee were to take action.

Feeding the hungry may satiate Arab stomachs, but it does not address the causal problems of their hunger. What you propose is a band-aid fix for a tourniquet wound. Your heart and humanity are in the right place, but as you can see with the example of the Peace Corps... extending a helping hand on the global stage is not always an easy endeavor.

I believe if they saw Americans giving them food, they would blame their "touniquet wound" on someone else. Perhaps their government? Do you think the government is causing their hunger? If not, what is? If we could move the blame from America to the causes (the ruling powers), we could encourage a revolution. With enough Peace Corps and the proper leadership, I believe it could be a peaceful one.

 

[Tashah]

I believe if they saw Americans giving them food, they would blame their "touniquet wound" on someone else. Perhaps their government? Do you think the government is causing their hunger? If not, what is? If we could move the blame from America to the causes (the ruling powers), we could encourage a revolution. With enough Peace Corps and the proper leadership, I believe it could be a peaceful one.

I personally have few doubts that the majority of sociological and economic problems that ail Arab societies in the Crescent of Islam stem from poor governance, fiscal mismanagement, blatant corruption, and a religiously inspired political agenda that is at odds with modernity and humanistics.

I agree that systemic change is necessary and ultimately unavoidable. But pain often walks hand-in-hand with meaningful change. The ruling Arab governments and clerics will fight tooth and nails to prevail against sociological and governmental rehabilitation. For many, their very lives are at stake here.

The indigenous populations will also suffer drastic short-term deprivations before reform improves their lot. It is a very difficult thing to promote and embrace change when your family is already destitute and hungry.

On the other side of the equation, the rich and prosperous West must place long-term global goals ahead of greed and a nationalistic mindset. Whenever and wherever positive change is in the wind, we must mobilize all of our resources to successfully respond to the challenge. All of us must realize that it will take a global effort to achieve a global peace.


PS. The United Dysfunctional Nations... let's not even go there

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

I personally have few doubts that the majority of sociological and economic problems that ail Arab societies in the Crescent of Islam stem from poor governance, fiscal mismanagement, blatant corruption, and a religiously inspired political agenda that is at odds with modernity and humanistics.

I think the religion is being used to control people. It is being bent and twisted to suit the powers needs, and I think with a little effort the public could be shown such things.

 

[Pacridge]

I think the religion is being used to control people. It is being bent and twisted to suit the powers needs, and I think with a little effort the public could be shown such things.

Lot of truth in that. Well except that whole enlighten the public part, never going to happen.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Lot of truth in that. Well except that whole enlighten the public part, never going to happen.

What makes you say that?