Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 63

Thread: McCain-Palin

  1. #46
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    Again, the members of the security council, 13 in number, if I remember correctly, all have veto power. The United States, a member of the council, has often blocked resolutions. It doesn't make the UN corrupt. This is simply how the UN operates.

    As for your claim that the UN enters conflicts after they're over, you are confused. The UN has the power to send in military force, if given authorization by the security council. If not, they can't send in troops. What you might be talking about is UN monitors, who document what is taking place, as neutral observers.

    Sean Hannity is an idiot, who, every time a democrat runs for office, attacks the candidate as unpatriotic and evil. What he says about Obama is pretty similar to what he said about John Kerry. If I was Obama, I'd avoid him for the simple fact that he's mentally deficient and not worth the time required to speak to.

    You mention Vietnam and the Middle East. Well, in Vietnam, there was a revolution, kind of like in the 13 American colonies, where Vietnam, then called Indo-China, revolted against French colonial rule and successfully established a communist government. This government was not favored by the US, which, at the time, was practicing the policy of containment, aimed at stopping the spread of communism. End result was 15 million dead Vietnamese. Why were they killed? Because we don't want to give them the RIGHT to CHOOSE their own system of government. We want to force them to have democracy, a contradiction in terms. I won't blame you for that, though, because you weren't alive.

    However, as you have constantly stated that you support the Iraq war, I do blame you, and those who think like you, for every maimed and injured child, every innocent that has been killed. You support the war, in your mind and heart, and you encourage the murder with your twisted will. I hope you enjoy your dinner and bedtime, with the pictures of those people in your head. You want your war, punk, without joining it? Then look at what it does to people.

    As for civil wars, besides the one that we started in Iraq, the last civil war in the Middle East was in Algeria, during the late 90s, between the oligarchy that ruled that nation and an Islamist political party. Car bombs? Those have been used since we illegally invaded Iraq. Paul, I wish someone would come to your town and liberate you from your clothes, make you pile up on top of other naked men, take your arms and legs, and dignity, just like those good Christians did to these people in the above picture.

    Jihad is part of history, not something used today. The reason nutty Islamicists attacked the US is because WE'VE placed dictators into positions of power, in their countries. Look up the Shah of Iran, Mubarak, Sadat: all people installed into positions of leadership in Arab countries, by the US. They know that the US has been involved in this subversion of their right to choose their own form of government, which is why they attacked us. Like Ron Paul said, we have to ask ourselves why we get attacked, and it's not because we love freedom.

    The bible and fox news aren't the world, Paul. You need to formulate your own ideas, based on the truth. Until then, as a result of your ignorance, you are a part of the problem in this world.
    Sean Hannity is biased to certain issues but he repeats day after day, information about Barack Obama that no one has an answer to. Like his association with Bill Aires, American terrorist which to me stands out. Like him saying that our troops bomb and raid villages purposely killing innocent civillians. Your pictures don't prove this, and he has nothing to back up his claims. And his statements at times can be radical. Also I think he is lying when he says that he is totally against Jeremiah Wright, when he said that Wright was his pastor and mentor for 20 years. Usually a person, who has a religious mentor, believes the mentor's religious views. Especially when he has been his mentor for that amount of time. Barack Obama has had bad news time after time about his association with other people, and he always backs out of it and says he was never involved when it is clear as day that he supported them.

    Obama has too many question marks. He has no experience. He has done absolutely nothing to prove that he can be President and lead this country. Even Sarah Palin, who you think is a dumbass, actually has a history of leading a town and state and being successful in doing so. Fighting corruption, lowering taxes, and giving money to the civillians. And not the "rich" civillians, everyone in Alaska got $1,200 for gas money when she was Governor. She has almost an 80% approval rating in the entire state. That is a joke when a Vice President has more credentials than a person running for President. This is why 49% of America voted that she was more experienced than Obama. I don't vote for party, I vote for the person, and a John McCain-Sarah Palin combination is a reforming/Maverick type "i dont give a crap" duo that can fight corruption and has more experience than Obama and Biden. And you know it.

    This is my profile so every Democrat/any person who hates me wants to see!

    IN THE END, I'm the reason for 1 Million dead Iraqi's. Logical conclusion. I killed all those innocent children. Even though I support freedom, I am somehow a murderer. I have no clue what I am talking about because Barack Obama has no credentials to say that he can lead this country. And he ran his campaign in the house of an American Terrorist in Bill Aires, who cares right? My views are crazy because I am a radical Christian who is for killing innocent children even though my belief is the complete opposite and my entire family, including myself, gives as much charity as we can to poor and innocent children every year for as long as they can remember. I am also nuts because I think Iran is a threat when they are lead by a terrorist organization in Hamaas that has a leader that wants to innihilate Israel off the map and destroy any of it's allies, like the USA. I am also a phsyco path because I am Pro-Life and that means that I am not killing innocent children, wow OG, doesn't that sound wierd? How can a guy who supports killing innocent childern be Pro-Life? I dont know, you tell me since you have me figured out. Don't forget that I am crazy because I do not think that the Iraqi people were happy as ever with Saddam Hussein in power. A guy that was inspired by Hitler and killed over 1 million of his own people must have been great before we got there. Those people would have been just fine. Apparently that's what many peolpe on this site believe. And that George Bush is the devil himself and planned 9/11 to go get oil, funny how we already have oil here! so what's the point in getting oil overseas? Well because Republicans are evil and want to kill everyone and block every time the U.N wants to help someone. Funny how their purpose is to stop innocent people from dying, and we wind up fighting all the wars to help innnocents. But i guess freedom isn't worth it. I guess those people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Europe during WW2, I guess all of those people would have been fine without us. Everyone would have been fine with genocides. They would have lived their lives feeding their families in terror, or i guess terror now means peace, since everyone thinks that people lived in peace in all these place.


    In the end....I am a crazy, don't know what I'm talking about, phsyco path. You must be correct, OG and company.

    Great observation. You have me figured out.

  2. #47
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by pat
    That is the whole problem. You won't see them in Georgia because they need Russian permission, you won't see them in Darfur or Tibet because they need Chinese permission. You didn't see them in Zimbabwe, formerly known as Rhodesia because of British "kith and kin" politics, and you will never see them in Palestine because they need American permission. That is the nature of the UN security council.



    This is called egocentric perception of reality. Just because Western democracy works for the US it doesn't mean that it will for a Muslim country with a totally different cultural context. An acceptable form of government has to EVOLVE in those countries and CANNOT be forced upon them violently.
    About the U.N if that is true then the U.N is a joke. It's purpose is to help innocents but a country can have veto power to stop them. The U.N should be it's own organization and should not be required to have permission to help people in need.

    Egocentric perception of reality, interesting, never heard that before. It's true that it might not work. Of course they have to evolve to democracy but wouldn't they realize that life is better when you aren't ruled by a Tyrant who makes you live in fear? Iraqi's are so use to Tyranny and War that they probably see the American government as the same. Well... a Democracy stops the Tyranny, and can fix civil wars if the police force is strong enough to contain it's own country. it's just like Blacks and Whites years ago in America. We had two groups of people that hated each other and caused riots. If you keep the law to arrest people that commit violence, then it will evolve on the people to not commit that violence. Saddam used violence for his power. Democracy gets rid of violence and the more violence taken away, the more power it can have. America is corrupt at many times, but it's basic attitude is to fight crime, with that attitude, Iraq can be something positive for the future. And violence should not be the answer, but some people realize that this violence had to be done to make the Iraqi people not live in terror anymore.
    They now have freedom, it cost many lives, but they have freedom, and that's all that matters. Democracy gives them freedom, and I am for it. Pushing that cause is greater than pushing any other cause. Agreed?

  3. #48
    Veteran TunerAddict's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    2,183
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by Paul1355
    About the U.N if that is true then the U.N is a joke. It's purpose is to help innocents but a country can have veto power to stop them. The U.N should be it's own organization and should not be required to have permission to help people in need.

    Egocentric perception of reality, interesting, never heard that before. It's true that it might not work. Of course they have to evolve to democracy but wouldn't they realize that life is better when you aren't ruled by a Tyrant who makes you live in fear? Iraqi's are so use to Tyranny and War that they probably see the American government as the same. Well... a Democracy stops the Tyranny, and can fix civil wars if the police force is strong enough to contain it's own country. it's just like Blacks and Whites years ago in America. We had two groups of people that hated each other and caused riots. If you keep the law to arrest people that commit violence, then it will evolve on the people to not commit that violence. Saddam used violence for his power. Democracy gets rid of violence and the more violence taken away, the more power it can have. America is corrupt at many times, but it's basic attitude is to fight crime, with that attitude, Iraq can be something positive for the future. And violence should not be the answer, but some people realize that this violence had to be done to make the Iraqi people not live in terror anymore.
    They now have freedom, it cost many lives, but they have freedom, and that's all that matters. Democracy gives them freedom, and I am for it. Pushing that cause is greater than pushing any other cause. Agreed?
    See, you don't exactly get it. Democracy isn't the greatest form of government. Grow up and let down this wall of superiority that leaves you thinking we are the best at every ****ing thing. **** ain't so. You think people in other countries, i.e. Spain, England, France, etc..., all think "Oh, America is the ****. We suck." No. Everyone for the most part thinks they are the best.

    But back on point, government has always been, and always be a two sided sword. There are always huge downfalls to whichever type you have and upsides as well. Just because we as a society have decided that a democratic form of government is best for us, does not make it so for other people in other situations. People call for different needs to be adressed, and democracy is far from the best thing for nation that are HIGHLY religous like these muslim countries. When the majority wants religous laws upheld as the laws of the state, a theocracy or type of totalitarian/authoritarian government is much more suited to fit the needs of the people. It provides more security and generall better economic prosperity. Throughout history, authoritarian governments have flourished the most. Nazi germany's economy pulled out of their depression with Hitler, England of the old monarchy was the most rich, powerful, and advanced civilization on the planet, and ancient China under the Han dynasty, a monarchy, was the greatest civilization during its time. Yes, the republic of Rome and Greece were great civilizations in their own right ,but their strong points were in different areas.

    The point that I'm trying to make is that their are tradeoffs with each form of government. There are its strengths and it weaknesses, and the government needs to change to fit what is needed at that time. Thus, we are in no position to force a form of government on others when democracy may not be what they need from their government.

  4. #49
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by TunerAddict
    See, you don't exactly get it. Democracy isn't the greatest form of government. Grow up and let down this wall of superiority that leaves you thinking we are the best at every ****ing thing. **** ain't so. You think people in other countries, i.e. Spain, England, France, etc..., all think "Oh, America is the ****. We suck." No. Everyone for the most part thinks they are the best.

    But back on point, government has always been, and always be a two sided sword. There are always huge downfalls to whichever type you have and upsides as well. Just because we as a society have decided that a democratic form of government is best for us, does not make it so for other people in other situations. People call for different needs to be adressed, and democracy is far from the best thing for nation that are HIGHLY religous like these muslim countries. When the majority wants religous laws upheld as the laws of the state, a theocracy or type of totalitarian/authoritarian government is much more suited to fit the needs of the people. It provides more security and generall better economic prosperity. Throughout history, authoritarian governments have flourished the most. Nazi germany's economy pulled out of their depression with Hitler, England of the old monarchy was the most rich, powerful, and advanced civilization on the planet, and ancient China under the Han dynasty, a monarchy, was the greatest civilization during its time. Yes, the republic of Rome and Greece were great civilizations in their own right ,but their strong points were in different areas.

    The point that I'm trying to make is that their are tradeoffs with each form of government. There are its strengths and it weaknesses, and the government needs to change to fit what is needed at that time. Thus, we are in no position to force a form of government on others when democracy may not be what they need from their government.
    Maybe I am an optimist when it comes to our government, but what do u think should be the government in Iraq right now?

  5. #50
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    The problem is, Paul, and this is obvious in reading your posts on foreign and domestic policy, that you are wholly unqualified to speak, with any sort of authority, on these issues. People have made sharp, intelligent commentary, on a number of issues, while you respond with completely false information, garnered from a news media run by people who wish to shape the public's perception.

    It's a shame, because people like you get the same say as people who actually think on these issues. I'd recommend you pick up some books on Vietnam, US foreign policy history, etc., so that you actually know what you're talking about. Right now, though, you're helping to maim and kill people through your thought and moral support. You don't have to pick up a gun to help kill, or maim a person. People who conned us into entering this war thought like you do and were uneducated as to the region.

    Tuner tried to educate you on Islam and government, and I'll add a bit to that. Muslims believe in something called Sharia law, laws set down by Mohamed, for Muslims to apply and follow. Most Muslims believe in Sharia being used, in some form or another. You cannot force these people to accept the principles laid down, by Hamilton, Madison and Jay, in the federalist papers

    You have to educate yourself about these matters, or just shut up about it all. You also keep omitting facts brought up by others: US failure to go to Rwanda, Darfur, Cambodia, and other non-European locales, when massacres were taking place there. Why go to Iraq, you ask? Simple: Israel. You say f#ck the UN? Then why isn't the US saving people in those countries? Simple: nothing to gain. Wake up, shake off the mind control.

  6. #51
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    The problem is, Paul, and this is obvious in reading your posts on foreign and domestic policy, that you are wholly unqualified to speak, with any sort of authority, on these issues. People have made sharp, intelligent commentary, on a number of issues, while you respond with completely false information, garnered from a news media run by people who wish to shape the public's perception.

    It's a shame, because people like you get the same say as people who actually think on these issues. I'd recommend you pick up some books on Vietnam, US foreign policy history, etc., so that you actually know what you're talking about. Right now, though, you're helping to maim and kill people through your thought and moral support. You don't have to pick up a gun to help kill, or maim a person. People who conned us into entering this war thought like you do and were uneducated as to the region.

    Tuner tried to educate you on Islam and government, and I'll add a bit to that. Muslims believe in something called Sharia law, laws set down by Mohamed, for Muslims to apply and follow. Most Muslims believe in Sharia being used, in some form or another. You cannot force these people to accept the principles laid down, by Hamilton, Madison and Jay, in the federalist papers

    You have to educate yourself about these matters, or just shut up about it all. You also keep omitting facts brought up by others: US failure to go to Rwanda, Darfur, Cambodia, and other non-European locales, when massacres were taking place there. Why go to Iraq, you ask? Simple: Israel. You say f#ck the UN? Then why isn't the US saving people in those countries? Simple: nothing to gain. Wake up, shake off the mind control.
    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on some issues. Regarding the U.N, and America saving all these people, your view and the view of many others is against war in general unless it's a matter of self-defense. If the U.S went into Africa, people would be saying it's a waste and that it is just pointlessly killing more soldiers. It happens with every war this country gets involved in, there is never a right decision to the American public, that's what's sad.
    Regarding the Muslim belief, there are clear reasons why it is abused by Terrorist. One can be the Jihad factor, I know you talked about this before. Thing is that it is considered the sixth pillar of Islam, so it's believed by many Muslims. This is from wikipedia: "Jihad is usually taken to mean military exertion against non-Muslim combatants in the [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] or [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] of the [Only registered and activated users can see links. ], the ultimate purpose of which is to universalize Islam." This is an example of why Terrorist abuse Jihad and wind up attacking anyone that is a non-muslim at times. To expand their religion. Also from wikipedia: "Only for those vested with authority, especially the sovereign ([Only registered and activated users can see links. ]), does jihad become an individual duty" Any leader, even the President of Iran can call on Jihad and his Hamass group would join his cause. And with a nuclear weapon...i think you know they are a threat, even Obama admitted they are a threat. Also a Muslim is allowed to lie if he or she feels threatned in any way, this is their religious belief, to lie, and this can be abused by anyone. This is why making negoatiations with these countries that don't like us is foolish. We have to always have a plan B.

    Most of our problems with Foreign policy is keeping peace with the countries that hate us like Iran. This is a huge problem, i have made countless points on why they are dangerous and that we shouldn't trust them. They abuse their religion, especially Dr. Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi who published an article in the Hamas weekly Al-Risala in which he called the Holocaust "the false Holocaust" and "the greatest of lies." Whoever denies the Holocaust is spreading horrible propaganda.
    Here's a youtube video to show why this guy has views of a radical.

  7. #52
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Again, Paul, your information is faulty. First of all Hamas is not an organization based in Iran. Hamas is located in Lebanon and receives support from Iran: the center of Shiite Islam in the world.

    As for Jihad, although it calls for armed struggle, in either defense or expansion of Islam, the Muslim kingdoms, nations, etc., have not been, never will be, and don't plan to be, in a position to expand their religion. I've actually been to Islamic countries, the people there don't wish to spread their religious beliefs to others.

    Most Muslims, even the fanatical ones, simply want to maintain Dar Al'Islam, which basically covers the Muslim held lands, now and in the past. Because of this many fanatics believe that Spain should be returned to Muslim hands. However, 99 percent of Muslims know this is not realistic or something that they want to do. You're thinking how the Caliphs and Mohamed did, 1500 years ago.

    Now, as to your assertion that "they" want to attack non-Muslims, this is a lie. Most Muslim fanatics attack other Muslims. The history has been one of Muslims attacking other Muslims. In Egypt, Jordan, and other countries, as well as, by the way, IRAQ, governments have arrested groups related to Al-Qaeda, imprisoned them, deported them, etc. Why? Because they're mainly a threat to regular Arab people, who practice Islam but don't want to be fanatical, like people who are members of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad.

    Considering all of this information contradicts your statements, I don't see your point.

  8. #53
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    Again, Paul, your information is faulty. First of all Hamas is not an organization based in Iran. Hamas is located in Lebanon and receives support from Iran: the center of Shiite Islam in the world.

    As for Jihad, although it calls for armed struggle, in either defense or expansion of Islam, the Muslim kingdoms, nations, etc., have not been, never will be, and don't plan to be, in a position to expand their religion. I've actually been to Islamic countries, the people there don't wish to spread their religious beliefs to others.

    Most Muslims, even the fanatical ones, simply want to maintain Dar Al'Islam, which basically covers the Muslim held lands, now and in the past. Because of this many fanatics believe that Spain should be returned to Muslim hands. However, 99 percent of Muslims know this is not realistic or something that they want to do. You're thinking how the Caliphs and Mohamed did, 1500 years ago.

    Now, as to your assertion that "they" want to attack non-Muslims, this is a lie. Most Muslim fanatics attack other Muslims. The history has been one of Muslims attacking other Muslims. In Egypt, Jordan, and other countries, as well as, by the way, IRAQ, governments have arrested groups related to Al-Qaeda, imprisoned them, deported them, etc. Why? Because they're mainly a threat to regular Arab people, who practice Islam but don't want to be fanatical, like people who are members of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad.

    Considering all of this information contradicts your statements, I don't see your point.
    I see your points as to why it's highly unlikely due to history. The more I argue the more open-minded I become, it's my personality, this is why I even bother arguing. Just so you know.
    But take in fact the views of President Ahmadinejad and look at what he has said in the past. Wiping Israel off the map and any person allied with it, these are non Muslim nations. These are Jewish and Christian nations. And I can see were he abuses this from, which is in the Koran in Sura 5:51.
    This guy wants to make history. And I just think many people don't realize this.

  9. #54
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    The President of Iran really has no power. Power has always rested with the Mullahs, Muslim clergy who actually inspired the Iranian revolution. Law in Iran is based completely on the Koran. Women, for example, cannot divorce their husbands easily in Iran.

    Anyway, my point was that even though Muslim nations, and kingdoms, tried to conquer non-Muslim nations, in the middle ages, they have not tried to do so in hundreds of years. If they had the military strength, and the same type of thinking that they held in the Middle Ages, they might pursue conquest, but Muslim religious leaders, as well as followers of Islam, by and large, do not aspire to world conquest. The fact that Muslims, in your neighborhood, do not go around preaching their religion to you should make this clear.

    As for the Koran, and I studied it and the Bible, at length, as part of an ancient literature course, it does say to disassociate from Christians, it also says that Christians and Jews are people of the book dhimmi and should be taxed, in exchange for being allowed to live amongst the Muslim people. The Koran also says that God will fulfill his promise to the Jews and the Christians. The Koran also says that Christians are the closest, in faith, to the Muslims. The Koran, like the Bible, makes contradicting assertions, which can confuse the reader.

    When I looked up the chapter and verse you gave me, it's quoted by many evangelical sites, all of whom have an agenda. Read the Koran on your own, before you make assertions.

    Muslims radicals, Iran is ruled by them, do want to wipe Israel off of the map, because they feel its existence violates the Muslim principle of Dar al'Islam, which means the domain of Islam. Because this was Palestine, until 1948, a nation inhabited by a Muslim majority, that was basically dissected from its nations by foreigners, many moderate Muslims, a majority of the Muslim population, feel Israel is an illegitimate state. In the past, during the Arab-Israeli wars, 1948, 1957, 1968, 1973, 1982, Arab nations, theocratic and non-theocratic, sought to destroy the nation of Israel and restore Palestine, after the last failure by the Arab nations, support for destruction fell.

    If a people came here, moved us from our homes and into ghettos, enriched themselves while we lived in a third world state of existence, would you not want freedom? And the argument that this is Israel's land doesn't fly, because Israel hasn't existed for a very long time, much longer than when Native Americans ruled this land. Would you support Native Americans expelling all Whites and re-establishing their nations?

  10. #55
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    The President of Iran really has no power. Power has always rested with the Mullahs, Muslim clergy who actually inspired the Iranian revolution. Law in Iran is based completely on the Koran. Women, for example, cannot divorce their husbands easily in Iran.

    Anyway, my point was that even though Muslim nations, and kingdoms, tried to conquer non-Muslim nations, in the middle ages, they have not tried to do so in hundreds of years. If they had the military strength, and the same type of thinking that they held in the Middle Ages, they might pursue conquest, but Muslim religious leaders, as well as followers of Islam, by and large, do not aspire to world conquest. The fact that Muslims, in your neighborhood, do not go around preaching their religion to you should make this clear.

    As for the Koran, and I studied it and the Bible, at length, as part of an ancient literature course, it does say to disassociate from Christians, it also says that Christians and Jews are people of the book dhimmi and should be taxed, in exchange for being allowed to live amongst the Muslim people. The Koran also says that God will fulfill his promise to the Jews and the Christians. The Koran also says that Christians are the closest, in faith, to the Muslims. The Koran, like the Bible, makes contradicting assertions, which can confuse the reader.

    When I looked up the chapter and verse you gave me, it's quoted by many evangelical sites, all of whom have an agenda. Read the Koran on your own, before you make assertions.

    Muslims radicals, Iran is ruled by them, do want to wipe Israel off of the map, because they feel its existence violates the Muslim principle of Dar al'Islam, which means the domain of Islam. Because this was Palestine, until 1948, a nation inhabited by a Muslim majority, that was basically dissected from its nations by foreigners, many moderate Muslims, a majority of the Muslim population, feel Israel is an illegitimate state. In the past, during the Arab-Israeli wars, 1948, 1957, 1968, 1973, 1982, Arab nations, theocratic and non-theocratic, sought to destroy the nation of Israel and restore Palestine, after the last failure by the Arab nations, support for destruction fell.

    If a people came here, moved us from our homes and into ghettos, enriched themselves while we lived in a third world state of existence, would you not want freedom? And the argument that this is Israel's land doesn't fly, because Israel hasn't existed for a very long time, much longer than when Native Americans ruled this land. Would you support Native Americans expelling all Whites and re-establishing their nations?
    To your question, I would answer that if that hypothetically speaking if the Natives didn't all die off and wanted to get land back, i would be for it. For the reason that the situation is quite different being that the Natives were utterly slaughtered by the Whites. Where the Jews were slaughtered by the Nazi's and then joined to fight for land of their own. The thing is that Israel is not a huge chunk of land, it's quite small geographically compared to the nations surrounding it. The thing is that Jerusalem has had religious importance since the time of Jesus and then the Crusades, etc. This is what makes is so important to the Christians, Muslims and Jews still to this day. It's so important that the Bible bases most of it's information relating to that area in some way. That's the Christian side of why it is so important. Also that many prophecies that are yet to be full-filled, are to take place in Israel and especially in Jerusalem. That is what gives it importance over any other place in the world. This is why an alliance with Israel is extremely important to people like me, because of the Bible that teaches about it's importance in the past and future from now.

    You understand where I'm coming from?

  11. #56
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    I'm aware of what you're saying, it's an evangelical thing that I've learned of recently: unwavering support of Israel, in belief that this is all Bible prophecy. As for Native Americans, they're not extinct: most Mexicans and South Americans are Native American, along with certain Caribbean people.

    So, let's do the same thing that was done in 1948, by Britain and the US. If the Jews feel entitled to land that they lost almost 2,000 years ago, then land that was stolen by Europeans, just 500 years ago, should be given to Native Americans in Mexico, Central America, and South America, along with the Native Americans that are presently in the United States. Mexico also had half of the US stolen from them, in the 1840s. This is why so many states bear Spanish names: California, Arizona, Nevada; and cities: Los Angeles, San Diego, etc.Let's go ahead and return those lands to their rightful owners.

    If anything Native Americans have a more legitimate claim to land stolen from them. After all, the Jews who claim Palestine as theirs aren't even the original Jews, they're European converts. This is why they look just like any other European, more or less. Ancient Hebrews looked just like Arabs, and other semitic peoples, do: dark skin, dark, curly hair, a mixture of African, Near East and European features, which is the genetic background of most Semitic people.

    My point is that it is easy to see why Muslims don't support Israel's existence: it's a 60 year old nation, created by European converts to Judaism, after nearly two thousand years of Arab habitation of that land. Just like it's unreasonable to kick out contemporary Europeans, from North American lands, as well as those who live in Latin America, even though their ancestors gained this land through evil acts, it's unreasonable to throw Arabs out of ancient Judea/Israel, especially when it wasn't even Arabs who destroyed the state of Judea: it was the Romans who did.

    Did you know, by the way, that there's an effort being undertaken to remove Palestinians from the areas they presently occupy, as well as to remove them from Israel itself? You see, there are a number of Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship: something like 13-percent, and the majority of the Jewish-Israeli population is in favor of stripping them of their citizenship and forcing them either into Palestine or into the surrounding Arab countries.

  12. #57
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    I'm aware of what you're saying, it's an evangelical thing that I've learned of recently: unwavering support of Israel, in belief that this is all Bible prophecy. As for Native Americans, they're not extinct: most Mexicans and South Americans are Native American, along with certain Caribbean people.

    So, let's do the same thing that was done in 1948, by Britain and the US. If the Jews feel entitled to land that they lost almost 2,000 years ago, then land that was stolen by Europeans, just 500 years ago, should be given to Native Americans in Mexico, Central America, and South America, along with the Native Americans that are presently in the United States. Mexico also had half of the US stolen from them, in the 1840s. This is why so many states bear Spanish names: California, Arizona, Nevada; and cities: Los Angeles, San Diego, etc.Let's go ahead and return those lands to their rightful owners.

    If anything Native Americans have a more legitimate claim to land stolen from them. After all, the Jews who claim Palestine as theirs aren't even the original Jews, they're European converts. This is why they look just like any other European, more or less. Ancient Hebrews looked just like Arabs, and other semitic peoples, do: dark skin, dark, curly hair, a mixture of African, Near East and European features, which is the genetic background of most Semitic people.

    My point is that it is easy to see why Muslims don't support Israel's existence: it's a 60 year old nation, created by European converts to Judaism, after nearly two thousand years of Arab habitation of that land. Just like it's unreasonable to kick out contemporary Europeans, from North American lands, as well as those who live in Latin America, even though their ancestors gained this land through evil acts, it's unreasonable to throw Arabs out of ancient Judea/Israel, especially when it wasn't even Arabs who destroyed the state of Judea: it was the Romans who did.

    Did you know, by the way, that there's an effort being undertaken to remove Palestinians from the areas they presently occupy, as well as to remove them from Israel itself? You see, there are a number of Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship: something like 13-percent, and the majority of the Jewish-Israeli population is in favor of stripping them of their citizenship and forcing them either into Palestine or into the surrounding Arab countries.
    Yea I know, on the whole Native American part, it doesn't bother me, I feel sorry for those people years ago in the time of Columbus and the colonization of this country. It was horrible, I learned about it, my teachers told me that there is no one 100% Native American anymore, that's what I meant by extinct. No true pure blood Native American exist anymore, as far as I know. The United States was formed on force and rebelling the ways of the English. Just that we had leaders that knew how to establish a strong government for the future. Native Americans won't get their land back. Probably because to most politicians, it's like giving Russia back the land that was taken away after WW2. Making other countries in return, this was one of the few things I was confused about when learning about WW2.

    But back on the topic.....

    I can see why Israel is trying to get them out, the wars have been endless....they hate each other...they feel they are a threat if they are in their country because who knows what they might be planning. I haven't looked into the matter, I am just saying how I think the reasons could be from the information you presented me with.

  13. #58
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    That's a lie you've spoken, there are plenty of people who are 100 percent native, in the United States, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala. You've got to research this information, Paul. I don't know why you feel comfortable making assertions, based on what your social studies teacher told you, without looking them up, first.

    As for Russia, you must be speaking about the fall of the Soviet Union, when some of its satellite nations became independent. This isn't the same as with Native Americans, because the ethnic groups that lived in those parts of the USSR still lived there before, and after, the fall of the Soviet Union and the establishing of independent nations.


    Israel was formed 60 years ago, not a long time, by the way. In the process, the Jewish settlers threw people out of their homes, changed the names of cities and neighborhoods and stole Arab property. This is a fact. This is why Arabs don't accept their right to exist. I don't know why you can't understand their point of view. They want to reestablish Palestine, with rights and freedoms returned to the Arabs that had lived there for a very long time and who only lost control of their land 60 years ago, to European colonialism.

    Just like you don't want to give up this country to the Native Americans who still live on the continent, neither do the Arabs. And the Jews who live in Israel aren't even ethnically Hebrews, they're European.
    Last edited by OGKnickfan; Sep 09, 2008 at 14:39.

  14. #59
    Veteran TunerAddict's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    2,183
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Palestinians are second class citizens in their own country. Until 1988 all non-jewish people had a special license plate on their cars so Jews would know who wasn't jewish.

    Palestinians have great reasons to be angry.I'll share with you a paper I wrote, that hopefully you'll read and understand the cultural, economic, and physical oppression that the Israelis are forcing onto the Palestinians.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A number of children are in the street when Israeli soldiers appear. When they begin to throw stones at those they have been raised since childhood to see as their oppressors, the outcome is not pretty. A shout rings out, and one not so lucky child lies alone. This is not the only shot, and it is certainly not the last as Israeli soldiers have frequently gone to extreme lengths to end any uprising. Fifteen year-old Ibrahim Abu Habla is just another tragedy in this Middle Eastern struggle. This is a frequent occurrence as this game of chicken over who will be the first to give up continues, and it seems as though the leaders of each side are fearless when it comes to sacrificing the lives of those whom they represent (El-Sawwaf paras. 10-11). Violence has become the only language that Israelis have come to use when they must deal with these troublesome Palestinians. Palestinians over the past half century have gone through untold acts of violence, discrimination, and the theft of their homeland. The only way to end this needless bloodshed is to finally create a much deserved, separate Palestinian state.

    The issue of an Israel/Palestinian state first appeared after the creation of Israel following World War II by the U.N. which was meant to create a homeland for the dislocated Jewish people who had survived the wrath of Hitler and the Nazi regime in Europe. In 1948, the U.N. mandate expired and the Jewish people declared their sovereignty, which led to the Arab-Israeli war. An armistice was reached and Israel still stood (Muravchik 1).

    In 1967, the infamous Six-Day War began when Israel’s Air Force attacked bases in Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. Overall, approximately 80% of these countries’ warplanes were destroyed by this pre-emptive strike. Israel then deployed its troops to the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights (Smith 220). According to Ersun Kurtulus, many began to argue that this was not a pre-emptive strike, but a surprise attack. In response, Israel claimed that such an attack was necessary to protect itself as Egypt had moved 80,000 of its soldiers into the Sinai Peninsula, believing that this was the early sign of an attack. This combined with the frequent cries for the destruction of Israel had fueled Israel’s fear. However, was an attack justified? Israel’s attack on these different countries and regions did not meet the global criteria of being pre-emptive, making it a surprise attack. However, many countries continued to support Israel’s decision (1-5). The end of the Six-Day War expanded Israel, and ended Palestine. Thus began this long lasting struggle to recreate a Palestinian state.

    A major change that dramatically angered Palestinians was the annexing of the eastern section of Jerusalem, which was ¾ Jewish and ¼ Arab, and had been a sole Arabic city since the 7th century. After the 1948 war for independence, Jews held the Western section and Arabs held the East. After the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel took over the whole city, and the reign of Islamic dominance of Jerusalem ended (Viorst 4). From the end of a Palestine, the remaining Palestinians who did not leave were aliens in what was once their own country. Political parties arose from the fanatical groups, such as Hamas and Fatah (Abusada 4-6). This has led outsiders to see Islam as a violent religion, whereas these groups are the minority. The majority of Islamic groups are peaceful organizations; however, these few have ruined the reputation of the rest (Ayoob 5). The United States’ stand on the issue has changed repeatedly over the past fifty years, from support of Israel to the opposite. Currently, President George W. Bush has supported the creation of a Palestinian state; however, he demands new leadership as he sees the current administration as terrorists or the supporters of terrorists reports David Unger (1). Although there are an abundance of reasons to create a separate Palestinian state alongside Israel, valid reasons to stop its creation do exist.

    One such reason would be that the land on which Israel stands was originally Jewish land. Biblical characters, such as King David, were the earliest rulers of Israel. The city of Jerusalem itself has been a spiritual center for Judaism for over 2000 years. Currently 200,000 Jews live there, making a change to the city’s sovereignty a hard change to make (Unger 5). The amount of land currently held by Arab nations is an astounding forty-four different states with over a billion residents. Israel is smaller than Lake Michigan and has barely five million people living in it (“Independent” 2). These reasons are some of the most logical arguments from a geographical standpoint.

    Another point by those who don’t want to create a Palestinian homeland is that Israelis fear that the Palestinians would not hold true to their promises, as they have done in the past. One example, as explained in “A Demilitarized Palestinian State: Should Israel, Should the World, Rely on it?,” an opinion letter by anonymous, is that the Palestinian people cannot be trusted as they have repeatedly broken the promises that they have made, such as the Oslo Agreement, where they agreed to give up their weapons, yet still today its seems as though rocket launchers and machine guns are more plentiful than cars (1). Others believe that if a compromise was finally reached, they would simply bicker over who would rule what, as no guidelines have been set to determine leadership in such an event. This causes Israelis to fear the very real possibility of a civil war aided by the fact that there are already warring sects who make it seem almost as an inevitability, rather than a possibility (Robinson 4).

    The leading reason that Israelis generally oppose the creation of a Palestinian state however is violence. Terrorism has left the Jewish people fearful, as suicide attacks have been aimed at anyone Jewish, regardless of age or gender, knowing only the hatred of religion. These types of feelings are not new to the Jewish faith, as similarities to the Holocaust are usually brought up in their defense. Once more the general opinion is that Jews fight for survival. To the Jewish people, giving up their land in Israel means endangering their own well-being. They may as well be signing their own death warrants. With this is distaste for anything former Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat has touched, believing that he supported a culture of violence against Israel. All the news attention to terrorism has created a state of fear, where the common notion is that anyone could be a terrorist, and no one can be trusted (Robinson 2-7).

    Violence is also an issue because giving the Palestinians land so near the heart of Israel would allow them an excellent vantage point by which to attack Israel. Palestinian rockets could easily reach well into the Israeli homeland, doing an unparalleled amount of damage to its people and infrastructure (“Independent” 1). When these accusations are denied by the Palestinians leaders, such as the former leader Yasir Arafat had done, they can only point to the uncountable number of weapons that have been smuggled into Palestinian lands, and later discovered. Yet these are only the weapons they have found (“Demilitarized” 1).
    As stated by Mkhaimar S. Abusada in “Palestinian Party Affiliation and Political Attitudes Toward the Peace Process,” groups such as Hamas have made it perfectly clear to Israel that they will not stop until they have wiped it from the map, and such words certainly evoke great feelings of distrust towards any Palestinian, destroying the path to compromise and peace (2). These are very valid reasons as to why Israel should fear and disprove of a separate Palestinian state being so close to itself. However, they are but one side of the argument.
    The first argument that many Palestinians looking for their freedom would make is that the country of Israel was once their own homeland of Palestine. Before the U.N. intervened, they had lived there since the seventh century. For over a thousand years generation after generation called this land home. The city of Jerusalem alone still holds 85,000 Palestinians, yet this number is only the few who have remained after half a century. Many more have left and either moved away or abandoned their homeland completely (Unger 5). The primary point of this argument is whether the takeover of another peoples’ land can be justified. Israelis like to argue that this land was at one time their land, long ago in the past.

    However, it was so long ago, can it be held relevant? It was also not the Palestinians who took the land from the Israelis, as they did not move into the area until the seventh century, and those whom they took the land from were not of Israeli descent, but of Roman heritage according to Milton Viorst, who wrote “Middle East Peace: Mirage on the Horizon?,” which appeared in The Washington Quarterly (2).
    The holy city of Jerusalem also has great religious meaning to the Palestinians, as the Haram al-Sharif is the third holiest site of Islam. This not only brings sentimental value to their land, but religious value as well (Unger 5). Even when Palestinians, such as their past leader Yasir Arafat, have tried to come to compromises with Israeli diplomats, such as Ariel Sharon, such compromises have been refused by Israel because they see the land as theirs, while many Palestinians can still see, feel, and taste Palestine as it once was.
    In 2002, for example, a compromise was proposed by Saudi Arabia, a country that was in total disfavor of Israel altogether that would leave both sides with good amounts of land. However, the Israeli government refused to agree to such a compromise and give up any land, even though said compromise was in accordance with the UN General Assembly Resolution 194 according to Joshua Muravik (2).

    The only real possibility is a compromise and with a return to the borders of June of 67’ the most likely possibility. Such a compromise still needs to be worked out. With the large amount of Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, serious land swaps to create two independent states would be necessary. There would need to be on some level swaps that may include lands owned by opposing sides before the Six-
    Day War. This is still a fair trade, the only problem is that it is all up to the leaders of both sides to finally sit down and draw out the compromise that would dissolve such land disputes that seem to plague a diplomatic solution to this crisis (Unger 1). If a compromise on the land dispute could be reached, peace in Israel/Palestine would be much, much closer.

    Violence plays a key role in Palestinians’ anger towards Israelis as well. While the media in the United States always looks to point out the violence perpetrated on Israelis by Palestinians, the violence coming from the Israelis is just as bad if not worse. After the Six-Day War, any violent actions that have been carried out by Palestinians have been deemed acts of terrorism. However, anything that the Israelis have done has been acceptable. In our own society, police brutality is something that is taken very seriously, however, in Israel, Israeli police have been known to attack or even kill innocent Palestinians without repercussions. This type of hypocrisy can obviously make Palestinians angry, as they feel that they are fighting for their freedom and are being beaten down by those who oppress them, to the point where even innocent children are being put in the crosshairs of Israeli rifles.

    While terrorism indeed exists as Israel claims it does, the amount of it is almost directly proportional to this situation of oppression. If the Palestinian people were free and had their land returned, the Palestinian people would have no need for anymore violence. The creation of a separate Palestinian state would lower the amount of terrorism worldwide by eliminating its prime source (Miskel 2). Some, such as James Petras whose article “Why Condemning Israel and the Zionist Lobby is so Important” showed the real corruption of the Israeli government when it comes to the treatment of Palestinians, feel that the violence by Israel is ethnic cleansing that is supported by the world. Countries such as the United States supplied Israel with weapons to use, for instance, in the recent war against Lebanon. However, it was not solely Lebanon that felt the sting of Israeli bullets, and Palestinians have been subjected to this US funded violence for years. Palestinians are a lower class who have been beaten into submission and segregated just as blacks once were in the United States (2-3).
    All this violence is perpetrated against the Palestinian population, while the majority of the Palestinian population is in favor of diplomacy over violence. Eighty-two percent of Palestinians are in favor of the diplomatic approach used by Fatah, which include peace talks and negotiations, to create a Palestinian state, while only eighteen percent oppose it. On the other hand, only twenty-nine percent are in favor of Hamas’ approach, which include the use of violence to demand the creation of such a state. This is compared with the seventy-one percent who oppose Hamas’ methods (Abusada 6). In general, we can see that violence is not the Palestinian way of solving problems. However, negative images and stereotypes have labeled them as such, and Israel has responded overdramatically.

    Author Edward S. Herman, in his article “Wholesale Terrorism Escalates: The Threat of Genocide,” argues that the general view of massive Israeli deaths caused by few guerilla like Palestinian fighters is quite untrue. Herman cites the fact that “the ratio of Palestinian to Israeli casualties in the first intifada, 25 to 1, has fallen during the second intifada to only three to one” (Herman 4). This however still shows the big difference in Palestinian to Israeli deaths even though the gap has shrunk. With the arsenal that Israel has at its’ disposal, Herman feels that there is a real possibility for further death and destruction. In fact, he views Israel’s actions as “a form of terrorism and ethnic cleansing that rests on Nazi-like quest for lebensraum sought on behalf of a superior race” (Herman 4). These numbers are further supported by reporter Mustafa El-Sawwaf in his article on IslamOnline.net, where in 2003 he reported that the number of Palestinians killed was up to 2,476 since 2000, while the number of Israeli deaths was only 742 (para. 12). This is quite a large discrepancy for the so-called ‘victims.’
    This situation is actually ironic, as the Jewish people, being those who were killed off and forced to find their own homeland, are now doing the same thing to another group of people just as the Nazis had done to them. Israeli officials have even admitted that such actions were unwarranted. Former Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharett stated in his diary that “the long chain of false incidents and hostilities we have invented, and so many clashes we have provoked” when speaking of Israel’s attacks on Palestinian civilians (Herman 2). Ariel Sharon stated in 2002 that they must be “hit hard until they beg for mercy” (Herman 2). Of course, this is the same Ariel Sharon that directed the killings of approximately eight hundred to three thousand women and children in the 1980s at one of the most infamous massacres in history at Sabra and Shatila (Herman 4). This helps to clear up the mystery as to why so many innocent civilians are being killed today. The only real mystery is why Palestinians have stuck with their ideas of peace for so long when such great violence is being used against them.
    The leading cause of the current tensions between Israelis and Palestinians, however, points to the discrimination that Palestinians must endure daily by the Israelis, who have complete control over them. They have been forced into economic and political discrimination that has caused them to be treated as a lower class in Israeli society.

    According to Arie Arnon in her article “Israel: Policy Towards the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the Economic Dimension, 1967-2007,” these feelings of resentment are well deserved. In 2003, the GNP, or Gross National Product, per person in Gaza was below 10%. This highlights the fact that even though there are negligible geographic differences between Gaza and the Israeli controlled Israel, Palestinians are subjected to much more poverty and discrimination. Besides simply the terrible GNP, there was also a severe rise in unemployment in Gaza and the Westbank. According to her research, since the year 2000, unemployment increased to 30% in the Westbank, and a freakishly high 40% in Gaza. The poverty level has also increased dramatically, as the poverty level in the Westbank has increased from 13% to 40% since 2000, and the Gaza went from an even worse 32% to 65% in that same time span. During this time, living standards dropped 30% in just three years. Arnon draws a direct correlation between the failure to reach an agreement at Camp David. Because of Yassir Arafat’s reluctance to give in and compromise, the Israeli government began to discriminate against the Palestinian people more than ever before (2-12).
    According to author Glenn Robinson, Israel has such a large amount of influence over the lives of Palestinians that they even have the ability to close their own borders, which would leave 100,000 Palestinians without jobs as normally they must commute to Israeli areas to find work (2). This goes even further to support the idea that overall, Palestinians are discriminated against by their Israeli neighbors and are forced into terrible conditions where there is little hope ahead, and only a small sliver of chance that they might be able to escape the poverty with which they grew up with. According to Alan Dowty in his article “’A Question That Outweighs All Others’: Yitzhak Epstein and Zionist Recognition of the Arab Issue,” Arab farmers usually find that they must work much harder than their Israeli counterparts for significantly less. He finds that they work harder, and endure harsher manual labor for almost nothing, and then must return home to see their families continue to live in poverty (4).

    Some Palestinians feel, however, that the discrimination that they face daily is much more than economic discrimination. They feel that politically, they have been taken out of the loop. Palestinians have been quoted as even believing that the Israelis control their election systems and abuse their human rights by doing such. They even feel that they cannot be outspoken against these abuses, because doing so would meet them with harsh criticism by the Israeli government. Author James Petras goes as far as comparing Israeli rule to a totalitarian government, rather than a democratic one (2-3). The Palestinian people have endured so many hardships over the years since the initial theft of their homeland, however, it seems as though they shall continue to be oppressed by the Israeli government as long as leaders like Ariel Sharon refuse to work towards a compromise with those which they see fit to discriminate. Discrimination has played a large role in how the Palestinian society has changed over the years, as the young Palestinians of today now look at Democracy as something that they want, because they feel that perhaps they could be the ones to make the peoples’ will heard, and finally save their people (Viorst 10). Discrimination has certainly become the most apparent reason as to why there should be a separate, independent Palestinian state.

    “In the smoke and blood of Israel/Palestine these days one point should be clear, that Israel is the oppressor and the Palestinian Arabs are the oppressed” (Gordon 2). This signifies the general Palestinian outlook on their situation in Israel. They have had their land stolen, their families killed, and those who remained being forced into an inescapable poverty. This goes to simply reinforce the fact that a Palestinian state has been deserved since its original dismantling following the Six-Day War. Long have the Palestinians fought to regain their land, to regain their freedom. It is finally time to end this fight, and restore to them what we so clearly take for granted, freedom.

    Please ignore the poor format, stupid computer...

  15. #60
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,484
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    That's a lie you've spoken, there are plenty of people who are 100 percent native, in the United States, Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala. You've got to research this information, Paul. I don't know why you feel comfortable making assertions, based on what your social studies teacher told you, without looking them up, first.

    As for Russia, you must be speaking about the fall of the Soviet Union, when some of its satellite nations became independent. This isn't the same as with Native Americans, because the ethnic groups that lived in those parts of the USSR still lived there before, and after, the fall of the Soviet Union and the establishing of independent nations.


    Israel was formed 60 years ago, not a long time, by the way. In the process, the Jewish settlers threw people out of their homes, changed the names of cities and neighborhoods and stole Arab property. This is a fact. This is why Arabs don't accept their right to exist. I don't know why you can't understand their point of view. They want to reestablish Palestine, with rights and freedoms returned to the Arabs that had lived there for a very long time and who only lost control of their land 60 years ago, to European colonialism.

    Just like you don't want to give up this country to the Native Americans who still live on the continent, neither do the Arabs. And the Jews who live in Israel aren't even ethnically Hebrews, they're European.
    About the Natives, I didn't know, i never said i was absolutely right, I said that's what I know so far, you attacking me for being mislead is uncalled for. What assertions did I make? I said what I felt based on what you presented to me, I didn't make anything up of the top of my head. I thought they were extinct, I guess they aren't, okay end of that topic.

    For Russia I think I got confused with WW1 and WW2 when Russia had it's land taken away from the West in Eastern Europe to make other nations. I've been talking about this so much im getting confused. let's move on.

    About Israel, I just said that they hate each other, I didn't try to attempt to sound superior in any way, chill out. Your making words up. If I wanted a history lesson I would have asked, I just gave my opinion on the present situation and what might happen in the future.

    end of story...let's go back to what's going on with the political race, that's what this thread was about anyway.

Similar Threads

  1. Obama or Mccain and why?
    By Paul1355 in forum Hangout
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: Mar 16, 2010, 14:39
  2. McCain vs Obama
    By metrocard in forum Hangout
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Aug 13, 2008, 19:12
  3. Replies: 43
    Last Post: Jul 31, 2008, 16:40

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •