Middle East - Balanced discussion

Quote from alfonso:




LOL.


Looks who's talking.


Review my posts in this thread -- including the above "guess" (one!) -- and compare them to the naked BS that you posted and tell me who is arguing for shit.

Moron.

You are too foolish to be moronic.

Anyone with any sense of history knows that the problems between the Jews and Arabs are religious in nature, and at the core of the struggles in that area.

You deny that, as you are unable to accept that religious belief is at the core of most conflicts in that area.

Lots of countries have been at war with one and other, and have ended up being friends and allies. Not the Arabs and the Jews. They will never bury the hatchet, as long as they continue to practice their respective religions in the light of hate, and not in the light of peace, love, forgiveness, and understanding.

You can't go there, because your life is a Godless communists existence. You don't understand the nature of religious experience, and the degree to which it shapes opinions, especially in the Holy Lands.

You try to be political in your arguments, without understanding that religion is the basis of their political thoughts.
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:



You are too foolish to be moronic.

Anyone with any sense of history knows that the problems between the Jews and Arabs are religious in nature, and at the core of the struggles in that area.

You deny that, as you are unable to accept that religious belief is at the core of most conflicts in that area.

Lots of countries have been at war with one and other, and have ended up being friends and allies. Not the Arabs and the Jews. They will never bury the hatchet, as long as they continue to practice their respective religions in the light of hate, and not in the light of peace, love, forgiveness, and understanding.

You can't go there, because your life is a Godless communists existence. You don't understand the nature of religious experience, and the degree to which it shapes opinions, especially in the Holy Lands.

You try to be political in your arguments, without understanding that religion is the basis of their political thoughts.


Optional, pigs will fly before a dimwit like you can claim to be better informed than me on a topic which I'm debating.

You continue to accuse me of being a communist, even though I have stated, unequivocally, that I'm not; and even though the statements I have made logically rule me out of being a communist (not that logic appears to have much force with you). Then you make childish cracks about my leftist leanings -- as if the issue of political philosophy has somehow been slamdunk settled.

Here's a wake up call Optional, it a bit more than just a "sense" of history, it takes actual studying and understanding of it. Something, needless to say, you appear to thoroughly lack.

If you're just intent on being a mindless little bitch -- and I've no other reason to suspect otherwise -- go and piss on someone else's leg; I'm done with you. (And grow up, too.)
 
Quote from alfonso:




70s was just a wild guess, I must admit. (Well, not all that "wild", but you get it.)

Are we gonna trade horror stories now? I'm not sure exactly what that's going to resolve.

Anyway, rest assured that I'll check out all your sources. I really don't have any stake at all in supporting one side over the other, I'm much more interested in ascertaining what actually happened.

So, in light of that, I'll have to apologize to the likes of you, RS, free, even hapaboy, and recheck what I think I know, as the Arab-Israeli conflict was one of the first international issues to grab my attention, a couple of years ago, and it is possible that I may have been too one-sided in my initial research (which is what I'm basing my opinion on this thread on.)


Maybe there is hope after all? If you're willing to admit the possibility that you've only heard one side of this story, you have a strong chance of re-evaluating your views once you hear the truth. If all you've read about Israel has come from sources like the Guardian/Observer/ www.iap.org (This is the Hamas english website. Very effective propaganda to the uninformed.) ,you've never even been exposed to the truth of the matter.

Good luck... if you successfully change your mind about Israel, you'll have climbed to a much higher level than the typical leftist.
 
Good site for informed views from/on Israel:

http://israpundit.blogspot.com/

Including this long-term view that I think some of you might find interesting - optimistic based largely on the new correlation of forces following the removal of the Baath regime in Iraq:


Time for Optimism

I recently posted Symposium in which the gurus of the Right, John Hawkins, Charles Johnson, Ben Shapiro, John Little, Damian Penny and Allison Kaplan Sommer gave forth. Ben Shapiro was furthest on the right and in favour of transfer. The rest thought it wasn’t in the cards but did favour transfer of extremists. All in all they were pessimistic and didn’t have a solution. Terror would continue.

I beg to differ. There is not only reason to be optimistic but also confident.

The US has broken the mould and introduced instability throughout the world. Before 9/11 both the US and Israel kept getting beat up with their respective policies of containment and things were going from bad to worse. The US and Israel were in retreat and anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism were on the rise. The situation as it then was unacceptable. The EU worshipped at the idol of “stability” and multilateralism. Yet the Islamic world was a seething cauldron with multiple wars on its borders and threatened insurrections within many of them. America opted for instability, change and unilateralism. No one can put Humpty Dumpty together again. At least not the way it was.

American foreign policy for the last fifty years, was based on the following principals;

1. Maintain relationships with the regimes in the oil rich countries Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran no matter how corrupt or oppressive so long as the oil kept flowing and American companies kept making huge profits. This system received its first shock with the Iranian revolution, its second with the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and its third with the Saudi backed attack of 9/11. Key among these relationships was the Saudi one.
2. As a result of this policy, the financial benefits many high placed Americans received and the close relationship with the Bush family and business relationships, Saudi Arabia had much influence over American Middle East policy.
3. America always protected Israel and kept it strong while at the same time prevented Israel from winning. They also sacrificed Israel time and again to serve their own vision for the Middle East which vision was based on maintaining their relationships with the Arabs.
4. multilateralism and coalition building were the vogue.

My optimism is buoyed by the winds of change that are now sweeping the world.

Iraq
America has 150,000 servicemen in Iraq bordering on five Arab countries and Iran. To solidify their hold, they have to neuter Iran, Syria and even Saudi Arabia. Oil production will drastically increase over the next two years thereby lowering the price of oil and the power of Saudi Arabia and the dependence of America. They will open up the society and remove incitement from the curricula. Iraq is no longer a military force or threat and no longer supports Palestinian terror.

Iran
Discussion are already underway to cause a separation of Mosque and State. Iran is in the midst of a debate whether their interests are best served by being confrontational or cooperative. Guess which one they will pick. A survey was done showing 75% of Iranians are pro American and the Student Protest Movement is on the move. Iran has already notified Hezbollah that it won’t be supplying them with weapons any more. Whether that sticks remains to be seen

Syria
Will be forced to get on the “right side of history” and will go on the dole like Egypt did. Already America is turning the economic and diplomatic screws on them. They are starting to crack.

EU
It is already cracked. France Belgium and Luxemberg wanted to set up a coalition of countries that would stand in opposition to the US. This coalition was to include Arafat, Syria, Iran and before the invasion Iraq. New Europe has abandoned them and so has Germany and Russia. This breakdown will have repercussions in Iran and Syria as they see their strategic depth diminish. As a result they will accommodate to the US.

India
India has just this week proposed to the US a strategic coalition or axis consisting of India, Israel and the US. To move this along they have reached an accommodation with Pakistan. They see this coalition as a bulwark to aggressive Islam.

Turkey
Although it didn’t support the US in the war, its ties to Israel and the US remain strong.

Caspian Sea area.
Afghanistan is under US control and oil interests are dictating who gets in bed with whom. Russia is already on board cooperating with the US in joint projects and most of the countries bordering on the Sea, likewise. Turkey has great interest in this and will definitely be on board. That means that Iran is surrounded by pro-American forces. They can’t hang on for too long.

Saudi Arabia
Even with all its support for terror worldwide and for the spread of Wahabbism, they were attacked by terrorists four time in the last month. To add to their woes, the US troops are pulling out and oil prices are dropping and will continue to drop. It needs America more then ever now and America needs it less than ever.

Palestinians.
The only reason they have power is because they have so much support from the EU, the UN, Syria and Iran. As this support disintegrates, as it will, so will its resistance. America also had a major hand in maintaining them in place and so it backed the Roadmap and wouldn’t let Arafat be harmed.. But it was DOA. I believe that America will abandon the Palestinians maximum demands and dictate to them what they can have. It hasn’t happened yet but it will.

USA
They must concern themselves first with stablizing Iraq and now Saudi Arabia too. They will also have to deal with Iran and Syria. No time left for “Palestine”. I think that the US will further distance themselves from the Old ME and will see the solution to the Palestinian situation entirely differently. Thus Israel will come out ahead. The road to peace in the territories runs through Bagdad, Damascus, Tehran and Riyadh before it gets to Jerusalem. There it becomes a cakewalk.

What, me worry. No way.

http://israpundit.blogspot.com/2003_05_01_israpundit_archive.html#200287224
 
Tit for tat.

Optional said : "You argue for shit." and "Fool".

Alfonso responds in kind and that is how endless arguments are started.

Next thing we know we will be sending each other some bombs (viruses) in our PM's.

Anyone will at some time or other feel frustrated but calling someone else names isn't the way to go about a discussion.

I have respect for Alfonso. He is not a Msfe with a closed mind.

Whilst Alfonso was very firm in the way he looked at things, he has stated that he's prepared to look at some websites (offered by Rearden) which put the Israely point of view so much more succinct in providing details than I have seen in the other posts.

freealways
 
The perfect solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Since the Palestinians want a homeland and it doesn't seem that
chopping Israel up even smaller than it already is, is a
satisfactory solution, Let's give France to the Palestinians!

The French have already stated that nothing is worth fighting
for. Besides, France has better irrigation and soil than the
West Bank and Gaza strip. It's the perfect solution. The French
won't even fight back.

And how about a new name for this Franco-Palestine? How about
Frankenstine?

Peace,
:-)RS
 
Quote from Error 404:

The perfect solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

And how about a new name for this Franco-Palestine? How about
Frankenstine?

Peace,
:-)RS
Love it! RS, you are hereby annointed Diplomat of the Year. :)
 
it just goes to show that a bit of brainstorming can help one come up with solutions other than the obvious ones.

Well Error404, considering the fact that France has occupied, colonised, many countries in the past they couldn't possibly object if the shoe was on the other foot for a change, would they now ?

There is already a substantial part of France's population which is Muslim so a slight increase in the number wouldn't be really noticed very much.

freealways
 
Quote from freealways:

Well Error404, considering the fact that France has occupied, colonised, many countries in the past they couldn't possibly object if the shoe was on the other foot for a change, would they now ?

There is already a substantial part of France's population which is Muslim so a slight increase in the number wouldn't be really noticed very much.


Logical solutions always require logical circumstances. :)

Just as long as the indigenous French people keep records of their recipes, the whole transition should be pretty smooth. Most of the better French chefs are probably in NYC already.

Charred goat sandwiches on croissants, and crepes with baba ganoush will become standard fare there. Tourists will have to brown bag it.

Camels will have the right of way on the Champs-Elysées, but other than that, as you say, not much of the change would go "noticed".

We always will have Quebec to keep the language alive.

Peace, and salaam au revoir,
:)RS
 
Back
Top