Yes, and propping up government has a bad history of bitting us back in the ass. Remmember Iran?

Do you really think the conflict in the Middle East is rooted in religion?

Honestly, most likely it wasn't.

It began as an economic issue, and I'll contend to this day that it exists in the same way. (Look waaaaay back to the '30s . . .)

US support for Isreal is fine - but even Rudey will agree that the point of US funds to Israel is to "stabilize the region" (and, via this, create lower oil prices for the US).

Let's not lie and pretend it is what it is not. The US has provided great economic (and MILITARY) opportunities for Israel, and it HAS DEFINITELY HELPED THE US. Issues between Palistine (sic) and Israel (sic again) will exist w/ or w/out US support for either side. There's no way for the US to 'bail' on Israel right now w/out being as hypocritical as possible (and killing thousands) . . . however, that doesn't give Israeli foreign policy free reign to suck.

What a fantastic situation for us all to have worked into . . . I'll openly boo both sides for using the other in a near-sighted manner.

Yes, I feel that it is partly religious, but I do also feel that it is partly economic, but not one or the other by itself.

You guys should read the works of Homer-Dixon. He argued that most conflicts in the world has to do with resources. Israel-palestine is about Land and Water. Gulf War was about Oil and land. The Rwandan genocide has to do with land. It's a shame that the media does not go deeper into conflict, instead going more for the quick news. Kinda like a cheap thrill.

One of my fave quote:
"If you only listen to the news, you don't know anything."

Good point, Arya - from the end of the 19th century to today, I'll argue that the conflict over the Israeli land mass ends up being based in economic opportunities, as well, which for all intents and purposes is a resource.

The first wave of Jewish 'zionists' (before the name was coined) started about that time. At this time, the area was less than 1/4 Jewish, and the existing (Arab) peoples controlled the agriculture etc through a quasi-feudal system of rich owning the land, and poor working it.

The Jewish settlers began taking the agriculture jobs from the poor inhabitants, and that truly began the issues in the area, IIRC - the racial/religious aspect to it comes into play purely as consequence (obviously it's a point of contention, but not the root of the problem).

The interesting part is how it mirrors (partly) the plight of settlers in the US in the mid-1800's - Irish, Polish, etc - but obviously has reached entirely new proportions.

My post
 

Iran was a different situation. The US was more than right in supporting the Shah's government in my opinion (I'm Iranian). However, the US wasn't the only global player in the region. Ask me and any other Iranian how we feel about the French or, even more, about the British.

And yes K Sig, the US isn't in the business of handing out money without having their own interests first. Every single country in the world is like that. The fact is that Israel (please spell the name of the country correctly as it makes me feel whomever spells it "Isreal" doesn't know what they're talking about) is one of America's greatest assets and serves their military and economic interests.

Israel was the first country to destroy Iraq's nuclear capabilities through a raid via their elite air force. Scientists all over claimed that Iraq would have another 8 years before having a functional nuclear warhead. The Israeli Mossad (intelligence) showed otherwise, and, in the midst of peace negotiations with Egypt, Israel ran a full raid destroying everything Iraq had built up. Almost immediately Israel hurt diplomatically around the world - including with the US.

In Operation Desert Storm, it was US officials that were grateful to Israel for knocking out Iraqi nuclear capabilities. And it was the US that learned they cannot wait and allow nuclear proliferation in hostile nations. Currently scientists say Iraq will be nuclear capable within 5 years - once again, intelligence shows a different story (Janes Defense article on this) and that's why battle operations will be exercised in the region.

The only reason America hasn't attacked Iraq this year is the fact that elections are coming up and it's best to wait after election time. Once again it's personal interest that comes to play. The fact is that Iraq also contains many biological and chemical weapons. What our generation has been brainwashed into believing is that these weapons are nothing compared to nuclear weapons - many of them are just as powerful. Iraq has a record of war crimes in targetting innocent population areas within the Iranian borders, the Kurdish regions, Kuwait, and Israel so it's not questioned whether they will use these weapons offensively as opposed to defensively.

This time there is no longer a slew of Arab allies to support America. Tensions are too high for that, so Israel is the ONLY friend it will have in this war. The goal is to destroy the ability of Iraq to use these weapons within the first stages of the war. The latter stages will involve the overthrow of the government to make sure such weapons are not developed again.

But the question that begs to be asked is what to do with nations like Russia and China. They are essentially like the British 50 years ago. It is their technology in Iraq. It is their technology building nuclear "energy plants" in Iran - a country with vast oil reserves that needn't even consider alternative forms of energy at this point.

-Rudey
--An even bigger question we should ask is whether or not to outlaw camel racing in the region.

Ok, just to get on the same page, I don't think that I made myself all that clear.

I believe that the conflict between Israel and Palestine is a battle rooted in religion and a claim to land/water and whatnot.

I also agree that U.S. support of Israel is Economical/Political. I like the views of ksig rc, rudey and arya, you all have valid arguments.

But the question is, do other arab countries in the region view the U.S. support of Israel as an economical approach or a religious approach? I tend to view them taking favor to a religious backing over an economical backing. That can be up for argument either way.

To get back on track, should the U.S. go to war with Iraq once again? I believe yes for a few reasons. Hussein is a threat not only to our country but also to Isreal and since we are an ally to Israel we have that responsibility to help protect them, do we not? He may soon have the capability to use nuclear weapons not only on us, not only on Israel, but also on other countries that we call our allies. Not to mention the extreme danger that will come to a nuclear war in such a small region.

There is also the tactics of Hussein to pay suicide bombers and their families to plan and execute terrorist attacks. If we have an active campaign in Afghanistan/Pakistan, should we not also widen the campaign to include the prevention of terrorism in Isreal - I think yes.

You know, I was thinking and I wonder why it is that threads like these hardly get replied to, but when kate spade comes up, there will be 200, 300, 400 replies?

MENSA!
 

The Palestinian problem is the biggest horse arab nations have to ride.

When Iraq feels threatened, what does it do?
It sends $25,000 to the family's of suicide murderers and then goes and complains to the UN about those nasty little sanctions that leave its people poor...all the while there are 5 year olds raised in the west bank talking about how great Saddam is.

When Iran feels threatened what does it do?
It sends millions of dollars in illegal weaponry to Hamas and Hizbollah and sets up camps all across the middle east for training to spread its influence even deeper.

When Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Syria, and Pakistan feel their dictatorial and brutal regimes are threatend what do they do?
They have words of hate broadcasted throughout mosques and schools (as if there was a difference). It is this hate that makes the people forget about their own troubles.

And what about Arafat, what does he do when he feels threatened?
Arafat steals from his people and tells them it's the Israelis that are keeping them poor. Arafat invites Iran to send millions of dollars to the PA where 50% goes to him, 25% goes to his other cronies in the terrorist Palestinian Authority, and the remaining 25% go to weaponry the likes of which was found on the massive Karine A ship. But hate alone won't keep people quiet you see. So he gives Hamas and the Islamic Jihad free reign. They distribute food purchased with their own terrorist funds to buy the loyalty of the Arabs. When Arafat is feeling threatened about where his people's loyalty is, he sanctions terrorist actions through his own paramilitary, Fatah. Currently Arafat alone is worth $1.3 BILLION (US dollars).

So what should America do?
Topple Iraq's government and install a democratic government that is non-violent and finds no need to rely on hate. Tell the EU, Russia, and China to put up or shutup - it is their meddling in the region that is causing a lot of the problems. Iran's will fall on its own and might need some pushing to bring it about but it's already on the verge of collapse. The rest of the middle east is also just as unstable as Iran.

-Rudey
--Damasa, I told you we're in MENSA!

Not quite
 

What you provided isn't exactly true. The reason I say that is because you use the term "area". There really never was a sovereign nation called Palestine. There was definitely an Ottoman empire, a Trans-Jordan, and a British mandate in the middle east. You have to define the area first before you make a statement using a number. In many cities of "current Israel", Jews were the majority.

Also, the Jews and Arabs did not work side by side. There was no "taking of jobs". The early zionists set up camp in desert land and swamp marshes. They took the land that NOBODY wanted...not even the poorest of the poor.

-Rudey

Re: MENSA!
 

Good question...

Keep up this thread though...this subject is very interesting

Re: Re: MENSA!
 

In the end they are terrorist groups. There are also charities around the world that support Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda also funneled a lot of money into "education". They are one and the same.

That's approach is simplistic at best and violating international law at it's worst. You may be able to get by under the "Torture Treaty" (I don't remember the full name of the treaty) but it was hard to justify trying Pinochet, it'll be harder to justifiy killing Hussein.
And what will America do? Not attack Iraq? Not change the government? The fact is that International Law is a joke. It doesn't exist as each country has tried to twist it into their own version.

-Rudey

When I posted this thread I didn't expect any responces, let alone 2 pages of them. Thanks a lot guys, GC rules!

wow Rudey, you certainly don't want any misunderstanding of your position so you wrote us a book. Very informative, thank you. Though I do not draw these facts to many of the same conclusions as you do. I also enjoy your little quips at the end of your arguments. the one about the camel racing was pretty funny.

I understand that Israel plays a role in the middle east as our chief ally, which I suppose keeps oil prices down. Is it justified to have our jewish puppets dance in a battle field just so that we can drive our SUV's comfortably in this country? I drive a Honda Civic, and I don't own oil stock so I don't force myself to justify this.
I'm not an anti-semite for not supporting Israel. Palestinians are more racially Semetic than most jews (who are mostly slavic) and I support their right to a state of Palestine.

Most importantly I see from this thread that there is much support for the war against iraq amongst the youth (greek youth: THE LEADERS OF TOMMOROW).

Also thanks to the moderator who pointed out my spelling mistakes. Yes, I need to get in the habit of using a spell checker; I hope the point still got across as well (PS, I'm still not usin' a spell checker)

definately not Kosher
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rudey


You know absolutely not one iota of information in regards to Israel nor international relations/politics so please keep your ignorant posts to yourself. Work on possibly doing some more reading rather than pretending your hard-earned fifth tier education gave you the right to speak on GreekChat.

-Rudey [/QUOTE

I resent that. Even if I didn't know anything about Israel I'd be able to recognize that Sharon is a fascist and Oil prices are a shody excuse for involvement with such regimes.
Don't Critisize my education either. I attend one of the top 5 Institutes of Technology in the country with a 3.2 GPA, and went to one of the best private High Schools in the Northeast. So suck my balls!

------------------------------
My god this is gonna turn into some 5'th graders discussion over who's dumber. I think we're both pretty smart people with a lot to contribute to GC; as long as we realize that just because someone has a different oppinion doesn't make them dumber/smarter!


no hard feelings

Re: definately not Kosher
 

I love statements that start out with "Even if I didn't know anything about Israel I'd be able to recognize that..."

You made a bunch of comments in regards to the middle east (It's not simply about oil and SUV's). Then you extended it with a nice little attack on Israel and Sharon. You're free to think whatever you want, but perhaps you should realize there is a difference between fact and presenting false facts in the name of "opinion".

-Rudey
--Now I would like to talk about Iraq so if you have an opinion on Israel I would be more than happy to discuss it over PM with you in a mature way. Cool?