I am definitely one of the many people around the world trying to come to terms and understand the whole situation that currently exists in the Middle East. I am not extremely well educated when it comes to the history of the region. Yes, I do know the main facts but have yet to learn the nuances. I am hoping this blog will prompt many to have an open but healthy discussion and provide valuable insight as we all try to understand this complex issue. As I sit here typing this up, I acknowledge that this is a very sensitive issue and am thinking of the best way to pen my thoughts (I have been sitting on this since Friday).
I have read many articles whose headlines are screaming with questions of whether this is the beginning WW III. I would hope not. Somewhere, I am hoping that we as a world have learnt lessons from the past wars to know that war is not always the answer (but then again I am sitting here thinking of the Iraq war, and that’s a whole other issue). Coming back to the whole WW III issue, I do not believe that it will escalate to that level considering the fact that we have the UN and other figureheads of different countries that are trying to broker a peaceful solution out of this. I know many people believe that UN has no real power and that its power has significantly waned over the years (think of all the resolutions passed that have yet to be implemented..). We however have to realize that UN is not the governing body and the countries’ governments need to step it up.
As I was reading and listening to Washington Post/radio, a reporter was talking about how this was not about “land grabbing” but rather about the “existence” of Israel. This is very true. Sharon evacuated the Gaza strip. This should have prompted Hamas to relax on their rhetoric and cut out the violence. This would have put them in a better position to negotiate. They however did not stop their violent attacks. This makes them lose all their credibility (assuming they have any left to begin with). This makes me question their whole “We are fighting the occupation” stance.
Lebanon should dismantle Hezbollah, since they claim that they are not representing the common man in their country. The Lebanese government should reign in these terrorists and represent the “real” them (since they claim to be free of Syria).
a) Why are the Hezbollah still there, and why the hell are they in charge of the border?
b) Why is Lebanon allowing Syria and Iran to run their country (we all know they are!!)?
Israel has every right to defend their citizens and their country from harm. But why is it leading to more land grabbing? The wall is going up and it is cutting deep into the Palestinian territory (as affirmed by the Israeli High Court). The settlements in West Bank are expanding (per the approval of the Israeli Government). It’s almost like a tit-for-tat game. The political and economic agenda is taking over the humanitarian issues on both sides.
That being said, I still think we can prevent the escalation. Will it happen ASAP? No, I think this time it will take quite some time, a lot more civilian casualties, destruction of more infrastructure, for everyone to stand up and say enough is enough. By then, the militants will probably start feeling the wrath of their own people and hopefully a solution will be reached.
One cannot ignore the religious undertones of this situation. You already have many people screaming out saying that Islam is the cause; Islam is a violent religion etc. I beg to differ. Not one religion in the world abides by violence. This is just a gross misinterpretation by certain individuals that have manipulated religion for their own benefit. It is being portrayed as Islam vs. Judaism? Is this accurate? Honestly speaking, I don’t know.
1) The fighting will not stop unless and until both the Hamas and Hezbollah recognize and accept the existence of Israel. The chances of this happening: look at the history.
2) Israel step out of West Bank. The chances of this happening: slim to none.
The bottom line is: this feud is being fueled by outside forces that need to step away and mind their own business (Iran, Syria). Maybe I am an optimist, but I can see a peaceful Middle East, where Israel and Palestine coexist. For this to happen the Arab League needs to play a bigger peacekeeping role and the governments need to stop harboring these TERRORISTS.
The sad thing is, in conflicts such as these the people that suffer the most are the common men/women/children. It’s a shame that we are in the 21st century and still facing the same issues that we have faced in the past centuries..
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
228 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


All of this started when Europe gave a chunk of land to the Israelis back in the mid ’40s, land that belonged to the Arabs. Then along came the Israeli bulldozers, and the uprooting of Olive trees (a dark time for Arabs known as Black ‘48).
The perspective of world leaders upon the Arabs have to change; Whenever I face news regarding the middle east, I’m reminded of Henry Kissinger’s words:
“… oil is too important a commodity to leave to the Arabs…”
While it is not a “one size fits all” answer, it does indeed explain a lot (’oil’ can be exchanged with other possessions, be it land, weapons, money, etc…)
The Bible proclaims that right before the final show takes place on Earth, Israel will be destroyed.
Destruction is not the answer!!!! We need to work towards a peaceful solution. I refuse to believe that God (does not matter what religion) advocates destruction and killing of people!
You seem to advocate that no religion could ever abide by violence… now that you move to say that you refuse to believe that “God… advocates destruction and killing of people”
What do you call the incident of “Sodomy and Gonorrhea”? The “Flooding”?
It’s Sodom and Gomorrah. Sodomy is anal penetration, and Gonorrhea is a veneral disease.
Did people back then know what caused disease? Did they know there were tiny viruses that can only be seen with a microscope? Since they did not, this is why they imagined God was an angry God. Who wouldn’t be horrified by what some diseases can do, such as Smallpox? Who wouldn’t have noticed that those who had frequent sex with multiple partners were most susceptible to disease?
This is why there are the insane notions that God is ashamed of sex, and that God angrily struck at people thousands of years ago.
This is why today’s religions are so confused that they engage in this endless violence. They are basing their morality on the understanding of thousands of years ago. They get so confused they think that God wants his right hand to kill off his left hand.
How quick they are to forget the lesson that God is one. That there is nothing you can conceive, experience, or see in this world that is not a part of God. Yes, even the ones we despise the most.
I didnt say it was the answer, just that the Big Book has it written down, and that it is going to happen at some point.
God never approves of murder, but s/he leaves that choice up to us. We pay for our actions on judgement day.
“Europe gave a chunk of land to the Israelis back in the mid ’40s…”
Really? Who is “Europe”? How did a continent have such power? Maybe you need to study up on your history.
“The Bible proclaims that right before the final show takes place on Earth, Israel will be destroyed.”
Really?? What Bible is that??? I don’t see that in my Bible.
Europe…. that is a gross misunderstanding…
1947, England agreed to leave the region… then the United Nation General Assembly votes and passes the 1947 UN Partition Plan, which lead to the official sovereignty (accordingly to United Nations :-)) of Israeli in 1948.
Isn’t England part of Europe? Did you know that England actually discussed this plan with other European leaders and sought their input? Unless I understood wrong or read falacious accounts, this is why I used the word,”Europe”, instead of “England”.
Mkultra,
You were right, England is part of Europe. However, to state it “Europe” alone will leave confusion to readers. Additionally, England did not “discuss” this plan with Europeans leaders, they discussed it with primary the United States….
Furthermore, England did not want to give up their colony… they had to due to increasingly violence and hostility in the region and England no longer have the willpower to handle the affair because WWII weakened England domestically and internationally.
I just thought it would be best to be more clear in what you meant by “Europe”.
MKULTRA, it started long before that– Zionism emerged in the 1800s, long before the partition in the post-WWII era.
The hatred has always been there, yes. But it was my understanding that the Arabs are upset about the incident in 1948, and use this fact in their argument against Israel (along with 1967).
http://www.masada2000.org/historical.html
Israel’s history when it comes to land. Easy to read maps over time.
Maps are simple, yes, but I agree with Patti- a markedly pro-Israeli website.
Yet, when Israel won the Sinai Peninsula in a war against Egypt. They did the incredible (maybe stupid) by giving it all back to Egypt (the oil fields, infrastructures, etc).
But they were still attacked afterwards.
Israel gives back the Gaza strip (even at Egypt’s objection), Israel was still attacked.
Israel recedes from southern Lebanon. They were attacked.
Btw, the land was given to Israel by the UN in 1947 called “Resolution 181.”
Do you think maybe they were attacked, and gave back the land, because they were too weak to keep it at that point, after 20 years of war and attrition on all sides (Palestine, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Iraq?) Just a thought, but they do seem rather busy…
No.
FYI
http://www.masada2000.org/historical.html is pro-Israeli.
I bet if you had found a website that was pro-Palestine, you’d read somewhat different.
The best way to know the history is to read the official international agreements, and the worst of all agreements had to be the secret agreement between Sykes-Picot in 1916, which led to the partition into British and French Mandates. I believe from that point, things went from bad to worse in the Middle East since then. The secret agreement between Sykes-Picot was pure greed.
In my opinion, the British Peel Commission of 1936 made things worst for everyone living in the Middle East when the Peel Commission advised that the western part of Palestine be divided between Arabs and Jews.
All the agreements that were drawn up concerning Jews hardly included the dialogues or input from Arabs living in these regions. These effects are the causes of what we are seeing today. Most Arabs are angry at the injustices done to them . . .
Biblical and historically, Israelis have ties the land as well. Bottom line, the land was given to Israel in 1947 by the UN.
Now, you’re effectively saying, 60 years later, for Israel to give it back?
I’m just sharing a fact finding mission to illustrate why Arabs are so angry. I present legal pieces of information from the international official agreements that excluded the participation of most Arabs.
Think of actual Lawrence of Arabia–not the Hollywood verison–who tried to work with Arabs during the Great Arab Revolt and the Balfour Declaration of 1917. The Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 as well as Transjordan of 1923 messed up the plan for Arab Nations; and League of Nations which led to the partition into British and French Mandates in 1927.
I found a few flaws in the British Peel Commission of 1936 for suggesting that the western part of Palestine be divided between Arabs and Jews, in which United Nations officiated in 1947.
I’m hoping that whatever happened in the last century might bring a better understanding of the Middle East crisis and perhaps we could find a peaceful solution that is satisfactory to the majority who live in the Middle East regions.
By the way, I took several graduate level courses in the history of Middle East and Ottoman Empire at George Mason University, and I probably understand the Middle East crisis better than some people here on deafdc blog. My knowledge of the history of Middle East goes as far back as 230 AD with the biblical background as an overview which goes farther back in time.
That’s nice.
Still, the UN GAVE ISRAEL their lands with, and rightly so, Israel’s Biblical and historical ties to the lands that are just as strong, if not stronger, than the Arabs.
Are you suggesting that Israel or the UN have a “re-vote” albeit 60 years later that Israel be forced to give back the land that was given to them over to the Arabs?
Just asking…
Please understand that I’m playing the devil’s advocate and visualize a scenario, perhaps not so farfetched.
Supposing, all of sudden Hezbollah, Hamas, Taliban, and al-Qaede successfully invaded the United States and they excluded the political leaders of the United States at the United Nations discussing the partitions of the United States into Iraq, Palestine, Afghan, and Syria Mandates. Northeast of the U.S. goes to Hezbollah of Iran, Northwest goes to Hamas of Palestine, Southwest goes to Taliban of Afghan and Southeast goes to al-Qaede of Syria. Each mandate builds miles and miles of thick walls along the partitioned boundaries.
It had happened, do not be defensive, how would YOU deal with it? Considering the fact that you might be separated from the members of your families in other areas of the U.S. The crops in the Midwest and Southwest are ruined. Over the years the partitioned areas deteriorate so severely that they resemble refugee camps and ghettos. Either you submit your soul, mind, and body to the Mandate or suffer the consequences. This, I mean you have to learn Arabic since it becomes the official language of the United States, no more freedom of speech, freedom to worship, et cetera and you have to convert to Islam. What would you do?
This was what happened when a country was being partitioned. It happened in India, Africa, Middle East, Indo-China, Russia and South America. These countries were highly civilized, in many ways they were far advanced than Europe ever was. Only when the empires like England and France partitioned these countries, they spiraled down and became the “Third World.” See?
So, it is truly constitutive to find a solution that satisfies the majority who are living in the Middle East regions. Peaceful solution is imperative because violence (war) begets violence.
For most people in other parts of the world have a great difficulty to grasp the conception of separation between religion and government. Israelis do not separate the government from their religion, Hebrew; and Arabs govern as according to Koran. That’s the reality we cannot possibly ignore.
So, how do we find a peaceful solution for the majority who live in the Middle East regions? I am not sure.
I asked you a question since I cannot read your mind on what, if any, you are implying (or not) about what you’ve wrote.
My question to you, again, are you suggesting that Israel or the UN have a “re-vote” albeit 60 years later that Israel be forced to give back the land that was given to them back over to the Arabs?
See, The government of Israelis has been practicing the mentality of Mandate, putting up the barriers all around the perimeter of Palestine. As a matter of fact, like anywhere else, these very barriers are choking Palestine.
Naturally, these barriers are enraging Palestine and Arabs. I’m sure if we were experiencing the same thing here in the United States, doubtless some of us would become terrorists fighting for our rights and freedom. That’s human’s nature. Why, our forefathers were terrorists.
As we’re speaking, the government of Israelis is fighting against Hezbollah of Iran in Lebanon and Hamas of Palestine. As long as the United States is helping Israel, we continue to fight against all four, Hezbollah, Hamas, Taliban, and al-Qaede. Iran literally has built its own nuclear power.
As long as the United States is helping Israel, this very action proclaims to the world that the government of the United States supports Israel Mandate against Palestine. From human’s perspective, is mandating reasonable? No! Mandating does nothing but makes the residents very bitter and angry, which led to terrorism.
What if all four groups–Hezbollah, Hamas, Taliban, and al-Qaede–conquer Israel?
It’s not the time to side with anyone. It’s time to work for a peaceful solution! It’s better to salvage what government Israel has than to loose it all, isn’t it?
Can Palestine, Arabs and Jews go back to the pre-partition mentality of 60 years ago? I don’t know.
I already told you that I’m not sure how we could find a peaceful solution that would satisfy the majority living in the Middle East regions.
very well explained. i also took some courses on mid-east history — talk about complicated! but you laid it out quite well.
one must also not forget that occupation leads to resistance.
wanted to add to this discussion this article: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738739.html — its by an israeli journalist and discusses the concept of proportionality - or rather the lack of it in this case.
Uh, those four Islamic groups don’t care about the land. See? When they got their Gaza strip back, what did they do? Turned into a wasteland and made it a weapon cache repository to use against Israeli citizens.
The thing is, you don’t see Israel wanting to expand their land. They like what they have and what was given to them by the UN in 1947. Give back Lebanon. They get bombed. Give back Gaza. They get bombed. Give back the Sinai Peninsula. They get bombed. And, oh, now you want and are trying to force Israel to give up the Golan Heights. And guess what the terrorists response will be if Israel do that? Yep. Bomb Israel since they’d be a lot closer to major cities. It is ironic that Israel is the only non-muslim country surrounded on all sides of their borders with Muslim countries who have tried, repeatedly, take over Israel. I suppose negotiating with Islamic terrorists is acceptable practice, then?
You say Israel does not want to expand their land. What about the land grabbing due to the building of the wall and the expansion of settlements?
Mcconnell and Raswant… not to dilverge the subject, but I happened to notice the word “terrorist” is mentioned. I have read several definitions of “terrorists”, so I am not sure what do you mean by “terrorist”?
Can you elaborate what do you mean by “terrorists”?
Thanks
Okayyyyyyyy. What’s the purpose of the wall? To stop those idiot suicide bombers from coming over. It’s not a land grab per se. And ever since the wall went up, countless lives were saved…on both sides. This isn’t the Berlin wall now but many of you are trying to make it like that. Palestinians are welcomed to come ago if they have legitimate business to do in Israel at key entry points.
Please look at the illustrations before you go any further with these arguments of yours.
You ARE for saving lives, no?
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrar.....fence.html - read the stats. The link also talk about the “land grabbing” as you so eloquently put it. Don’t let your Jewish phobia prevent you from reading the link.
“Before the construction of the fence, and in many places where it has not yet been completed, a terrorist need only walk across an invisible line to cross from the West Bank into Israel. No barriers of any kind exist, so it is easy to see how a barrier, no matter how imperfect, won’t at least make the terrorists’ job more difficult. Approximately 75 percent ofthe suicide bombers who attacked targets inside Israel came from across the border where the first phase of the fence was built.
During the 34 months from the beginning of the violence in September 2000 until the construction of the first continuous segment of the security fence at the end of July 2003, Samaria-based terrorists carried out 73 attacks in which 293 Israelis were killed and 1950 wounded. In the 11 months between the erection of the first segment at the beginning of August 2003 and the end of June 2004, only three attacks were successful, and all three occurred in the first half of 2003.
Since construction of the fence began, the number of attacks has declined by more than 90%. The number of Israelis murdered and wounded has decreased by more than 70% and 85%, respectively, after erection of the fence.”
How do you define terrorism? According to the CIA:
The Intelligence Community is guided by the definition of terrorism contained in Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d):
—The term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
—The term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving the territory or the citizens of more than one country.
—The term “terrorist group” means any group that practices, or has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism.
Terrorist: One who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant. They strap bombs on themselves, and try and get onto buses, or go into restaurants or shopping centers, trying to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible.
Squiggy, they kill Arabs, too. You need to remember that many of these terrorists are equal opportunity killers just to fullfill their political and religious agenda. Many Arabs or Muslims do not like what the terrorists are doing. You can see the responses in http://Iraqthemodel.blogspot.com
It’s nice to see some people sincerely hope for a peaceful coexistence. Clearly, it’ll require a political solution, not military. They gotta talk at some point, so why not now?
For those not familiar with the history of the region, read Tom Friedman’s “From Beirut to Jerusalem.” It’s a great portrayal of the people and politics in both countries. It might be a bit dated but still makes valuable reading.
And check out this link.
http://www.nysun.com/pf.php?id=36160
It’s basically saying that Lebanon’s army must go down south of Lebanon and take care of Hezbollah.
That is true… but the problem is that… many of Lebanon’s army are shia muslims (accordingly to BBC… 60-70 percent: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5191202.stm)… and Hezbollah militants are mostly, if not all, shia muslims…
That is a dilemma of Lebanon government…
Right. A lot of us probably don’t realize that Lebanon survived a civil war that went from ‘75 to ‘90 and spent the last 20 years rebuilding in which Beirut earned the title, “Paris of the Middle East.” Hasta suck to see the country regressing so soon, politically.
You’re almost right. Beirut was known as the Paris of the Middle East BEFORE their civil war. They tried hard to regain that title after the war.
I would very much love to see harmony amongst all people. I have desperately wanted, and prayed for peace in the mid-east.
But since certain Arab factions and a president (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) have called for the complete destruction of Israel, and are in pursuit of this goal, how do you reason with this sort?
Let us not kid ourselves for we know that Israel will never be left alone as long as there are people out there calling for its destruction.
Worse, the same president calls for a conference to prove that the Holocaust was a fiction and consipracy… amazing.
And the funny ironic twist to that? Ahmie said that Israel is acting like “Hitler.”
The Iran president will not stop at anything to destroy Israel. Its sad but the only way to stop him in realty is a .50 caliber used by elite sniper forces.
Israel and Palestine are both guilty of false progagandas! Israel need to learn how to control her own emotions like the recent abduction of two Israeli soliders. Any kind of reaction would worsen the given situation.
I am neither pro-Israel or Palestine. Israel’s failure of helping Palestine to be the modern democratic state. Why don’t Israel be more vigorous in condemning the undemocratic practices within the Palestine government? Israel just let the everyday life in Palestine to be real miserable for Palestine citizens. If Israel really invest in the Middle East peace, then it ought to call for the whole retivalization of Palestine and press the citizenry for outing the corruptible Palestine government under Arafat (real unpopular among the Palestine people). Israel did not do anything constructible for past five years. It just sat for the right moment to exploit the weaking situation.
Israel is well known for grabbing the legitimate homes of Arabs like deceiving the hardworking and honest Arabs coming to the Israeli local offices to resolve the property matter. In the end, Israel illegally grab Israeli-born Arabs’ homes. What kind of country and government doing to the decent citizens? Israel play the hardball games so far. P
If you see several Israeli and human right documentaries/films. You would see the clear pattern of Israel making life miserable for Palestinans. Israel often harass the incoming Palestine citizens at the border points which are not really unncessary in that practice.
Why bomb Lebanon and civilian Palestine homes? That will breed the new generations of fighters against Israel.
Israeli and Palestine gay males often get along very well. Palestine “gay for dollars” guys do prey on Israeli closeted guys. Same thing happened in America like some hyprocritical gay males speak against illegal immigrants, but they would jump to have sex with hot-looking Latinos (illegal ones) from what I recently observed several deaf gays discussed about illegal immigrants as long as they could have sex with illegal immigrants.
That is my analogy about Israeli and Palestine people hating each others, but would do something to enrich themselves.
The Israeli government are running by the hawks too long. The likes of Rabin are not possibly found anywhere in the Israeli political arena.
We better watch out for the growing “authoritism” in America if we keep electing the likes of Bill Frist, Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton to our government. That would define the 21th Century America.
The respectable political magazine (I could not remmy which magazine) recently issued the question of wherebas the Israeli lobby is too strong in our American government.
The Arab people are no better than Israeli like the two-faced Saudi Arabia (real sneaky one who did not stop the Wabbaism in her country), powerful Arab lobbyists.
The legendary “Hatfield and McCoys” feud (West Virginia- Kentucky) is one of perfect example of lunancy and absurdity which the state governments and law enforcements got involved lately without stopping the feud from happened in the first place. The Hatfields and McCoys let their emotions ran high without thinking about the long-term consquences.
This isn’t the McCoys. This is Islamic extremism at it’s worst.
extremism done by groups are still worst.
I don’t recall “Death to all Muslims” by Israelis as their constant rallying cry. Israel doesn’t mind having Arabs co-exist with them.
US will never let the middle east go.. the location is too politically strategic.
it’s Catch 22
oh… that region is so rich with… what do you called it.. hmm… oil? Of course, United States cant keep her hands out of the “cookie jar” of oil in middle east.
Yeah, too bad Israel wasn’t blessed with any.
Squiggy. They did for a very short while. They had the Sinai Peninsula which has a rich oil field. The won that land in a defensive war against Egypt. But as a show of faith (maybe stupidity) they gave it back to Egypt.
The United States get most of her crude oil and petroleum from Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Nigeria, in that order with Canada being #1 exporter of oil to the U.S. The top five exporting countries accounted for 70 percent of United States crude oil imports in May while the top ten sources accounted for approximately 88 percent of all U.S. crude oil imports.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil.....mport.html
And, no, oil did NOT come from decaying dinosaurs.
To What Degree is the United States“Dependent” on Foreign Oil?
•The notion that the United States is “dependent” on Persian Gulf countries for oil is inaccurate. World events do affect the price Americans pay for gasoline, but “dependence” does not accurately portray the relationship between oil consumers and oil producers.
•Of the nearly 20.7 million barrels of oil consumed each day in the United States, only 11.1 percent of it comes from Persian Gulf countries.
•As a percentage of U.S. GDP, the value of Saudi oil consumed by Americans, assuming a price of $70/barrel, is only 0.31 percent.
•The value of Saudi oil sales into the United States accounts for 11.4 percent of Saudi Arabia’s GDP. By that measure, it could be argued that Saudi Arabia is the more dependent partner in this economic relationship.
•Supply disruptions anywhere in the world, whether artificially precipitated by a foreign government, or caused by security threats or natural occurrences, have the same effect everywhere. This is true whether a country is capable of fully supplying its own oildemand or fully depends on foreign supplies.
•For example, the oil shock set off by the Iranian revolution in 1978 had a similar effect on gasoline prices in Great Britain, which produces more oil than it uses, as it did on gasoline prices in Japan, which imports 100 percent of the oil it consumes.
•The power of the so-called oil weapon is overstated. The 1973 oil embargo failed to achieve its political objective of reducing support for Israel, and in the long-run inflictedfar more damage on the instigators of the embargo than on the intended targets.
•Immediate reduction in oil consumption in the United States would likely increase the Persian Gulf countries’ global market share.
We produce nearly 35% of our own oil while the remaining 65% comes from imports, of which about 11% of the total imports come from Persian Gulf countries.
http://kyl.senate.gov/legis_ce.....052306.pdf - May 23, 2006
And if you guys are still wanting to get away from imported oil from the Middle East, then let us drill oil off of Alaska, the Florida and California coastlines (10, 20, 50 miles out), and let us reap the shale oil in the Green Formation in Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado with an estimate of some 1.7 TRILLION barrels of oil locked up in the shale rocks. This amount dwarfs that of Saudi Arabia.
Of course, we have the ever presence NIMBY syndrome one we try and go in that direction in the name of weaning ourselves from depending on foreign sources of oil…namely the Persian Gulf countries.
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/d...../05emd.cfm
The United States get most of her crude oil and petroleum from Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Nigeria, in that order with Canada being #1 exporter of oil to the U.S. The top five exporting countries accounted for 70 percent of United States crude oil imports in May while the top ten sources accounted for approximately 88 percent of all U.S. crude oil imports.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil.....mport.html
And, no, oil did NOT come from decaying dinosaurs.
To What Degree is the United States“Dependent” on Foreign Oil?
•The notion that the United States is “dependent” on Persian Gulf countries for oil is inaccurate. World events do affect the price Americans pay for gasoline, but “dependence” does not accurately portray the relationship between oil consumers and oil producers.
•Of the nearly 20.7 million barrels of oil consumed each day in the United States, only 11.1 percent of it comes from Persian Gulf countries.
•As a percentage of U.S. GDP, the value of Saudi oil consumed by Americans, assuming a price of $70/barrel, is only 0.31 percent.
•The value of Saudi oil sales into the United States accounts for 11.4 percent of Saudi Arabia’s GDP. By that measure, it could be argued that Saudi Arabia is the more dependent partner in this economic relationship.
•Supply disruptions anywhere in the world, whether artificially precipitated by a foreign government, or caused by security threats or natural occurrences, have the same effect everywhere. This is true whether a country is capable of fully supplying its own oildemand or fully depends on foreign supplies.
•For example, the oil shock set off by the Iranian revolution in 1978 had a similar effect on gasoline prices in Great Britain, which produces more oil than it uses, as it did on gasoline prices in Japan, which imports 100 percent of the oil it consumes.
•The power of the so-called oil weapon is overstated. The 1973 oil embargo failed to achieve its political objective of reducing support for Israel, and in the long-run inflictedfar more damage on the instigators of the embargo than on the intended targets.
•Immediate reduction in oil consumption in the United States would likely increase the Persian Gulf countries’ global market share.
We produce nearly 35% of our own oil while the remaining 65% comes from imports, of which about 11% of the total imports come from Persian Gulf countries.
http://kyl.senate.gov/legis_ce.....052306.pdf - May 23, 2006
And if you guys are still wanting to get away from imported oil from the Middle East, then let us drill oil off of Alaska, the Florida and California coastlines (10, 20, 50 miles out), and let us reap the shale oil in the Green Formation in Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado with an estimate of some 1.7 TRILLION barrels of oil locked up in the shale rocks. This amount dwarfs that of Saudi Arabia.
Of course, we have the ever presence NIMBY syndrome one we try and go in that direction in the name of weaning ourselves from depending on foreign sources of oil…namely the Persian Gulf countries.
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/d...../05emd.cfm - info on shale oil in the Green formation.
we get most of our oil from Mexico and Canada. Why are we paying Arab (OPEC) oil prices?
Missed this one.
It’s a myth that OPEC sets oil prices. It is the market that sets the oil prices…not OPEC. OPEC has some limiting influences on oil prices but they do not, per se, set oil prices for the world. What they can do is either to increase or decrease oil production which influences the world’s oil supply and demand market. It’s the oil market that influences prices called “oil futures.” Which is why oil prices go up whenever there is a war going on in the Middle East.
” ‘Opec is not responsible for the rise in prices and is not able to lower’ this upward trend, said Abdulwahab Abu Dahesh, who heads investment research at the Riyadh Bank in Saudi Arabia.
‘According to expectations, Opec and non-Opec producer countries will need many years to increase their production capacity to a level which can reassure the market,’ said Abu Dahesh.”
http://www.energybulletin.net/2288.html
It is important to note that Persian Gulf exports approximately 2,400 barrels per day (”bpd”) to United States (http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/crudebycountry.htm). That is alot of oil being imported to United States. Not to mention, that is approximately 785 bpd more than our single leading importer, Canada. I also take a note that Persian Gulf is comprised of more than 3 or 4 countries, which may contribute to why the gpd of Persian Gulf is higher than Canada. However, it should also be noted that the instability of the Persian Gulf region is troublesome to the United States. Former President Carter recognized the crisis country’s increasingly usage of Persian Gulf oil in the 80’s, and at the same time the region was unstable (still is to this day). Given our increasingly oil comsumpation and unstability of the region, we cannot deny that these two reasons are why the government of U.S. feels is concerned about what is “happening” in that region. Not because they are killing each others, but because their leaders could literally decide “ok, let’s screw America and cut them off”.
They might be depending on us economically, but they can live with that… but can Americans live with that? I highly doubt even when we have the resources here at home.
Canada has a population of 30 million while the U.S. has 300 million. So, the US requires more resources.
The instability that worries the US is because it causes more problems in Europe than in the United States. They pay $6 a gallon while US pays around $3.20 a gallon.
It is false to say that we are more dependent on Persian Gulf countries for their oil. It is the other way around. Why? We have the multitude of resources to fall back on. Plus, we have enough oil on the U.S.for our own to sustain us while we improve better alternative energies and better products that uses energy efficiently.
“the instability that worries the US is because it causes moe problems in Europe than in the United States”… can you paraphrase or elaborate what do you mean by that because it sounds vague. Are you suggesting that we are worried about the instability in the region because our “allies” rely on them nearly twice more? I think I know where this is leading to… but do elaborate what do you mean…
“it is false to say that…” that is another subject I would like to respond… You are rigth, we are improving “better alternatives energies”… but for how long?
Currently, we are losing competition edge in technology and the likes because majority of scientific investors are foreign born legal immigrants on H-1B (”work visa”) status. Those immigrants have been responsible for many advance technologies in this country, however, many of them are driven out of the country because the Government quota on how many H-1B are given annually (i believe the quota lies in percentage of 7). The Senate recently passed a resolution that would extend the number of quota, but it is still a problem. Basically, there is no secret that it takes figuratively forever for even brilliant and smartest foreign born scientific investors to become US citizen (which many of them wanted to stay). Additionally, those H1-B must employed at federal-sponsored workplace (usually at University labs). So, private companies are out of luck with them. Lastly, many countries are starting to catch up with our graduate-level and doctorate-level programs, which meaning we could lose those foreign-born scientific investors. Hence, we will lose our “advanced technology country” status as we enjoyed if we continue at this trend.
So, the “alternative energies” might end up pricey or whatsoever.. one way or other, we will still be depending on Persian Gulf oil.
My response is a bit too lengthy, so I decided to put together a blog. :-)
http://teej42.com/blog/?p=5 - “The Israel Question”
your response completely ignores what its like to be occupied and oppressed. Im going to specifically respond to your choice to claim the Catholic/Protestant conflict in N. Ireland is as simple as poor people misplacing blame. The Catholics of the North were denied the same rights as the Protestants, the British military and the UDF would march through their ghettos, until the 70s Catholics were denied voting rights. Political prisoners were denied political prisoner status (see the hunger strikes of 1981 for more on that). The “Catholic” fight in N. Ireland is a fight against oppression. They have pushed for a working class alliance, but unfortunately the Protestant working class hasn’t come through on that yet.
the details in palestine and other occupied lands are different, but the general concept of being pushed from home and then oppressed is similiar.
It is all well and good to talk about oppression, but while there are still middle east countries who deny Israel’s right to exist, and would like nothing better than to see all Jews pushed into the sea, how can we even talk about peace? Israelis want peace. They did not want a wall, but could not come up with any other way to stop terrorists from going into heavily populated civilian areas and blowing themselves up.
Exactly. And what did UN do when Israel was forced to protect herself with this wall? The UN condemned Israel for erecting the wall. Guess what? Ever since the wall went up, it saved countless lives…on both sides. And before you start whining about Israel’s wall, let’s also not forget that Egypt has built the southern side (face Sinai) of the wall to keep the Islamic terrorists out of Egypt
And what did Reagan say about the Berlin wall?
The wall in Israel is no Berlin wall. Sorry. It prevents or makes really hard for terrorists to walk across the border unimpedded with a bomb strapped to their vest. Palestinians and Israelis are free to come and go at key entry points along the wall. The Berlin wall KEPT PEOPLE INSIDE and from freely moving about to west Germany.
The wall has already saved countless lives….on both sides. Let me put down this link the second time. Don’t let your Jewish phobia stop you from reading this.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrar.....fence.html
The Irish both in NI and the Republic sympathize with the Palestines.
When I lived in Ireland 01-02 people were basically sick of NI issues and want to move on. unfortunately the media concentrated on the negative aspects - the core groups for or against NI and the hardline protestants (with their paramilitaries) wouldn’t budge letting the catholic move without the IRA decommisioning. It’s becoming slowly positive lest bumpy since Sinn Fein (political arm of IRA) attained a number of seats. Let’s hope it’s the same for Hezbollahs in Lebannon in the near future. Both Hezbollah and Israelis aren’t budging and not coming through on peaceful means.
A repeat here from an earlier posting but makes the point clearly.
“Besides not acting like a political party. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah claims that his group is now the de-facto government of Lebanon. Which means Hezbollah has replaced a democratically-elected government of Lebanon that was hostile to Syria and Iran.”
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/ar.....e_id=74159
The Daily Star of Lebanon.
Quite telling.
Israel and Arab countries will never be at peace.
Jewish and Muslim will never be at peace.
So there is no solutions - either leave alone or go to war.
see the main anti-Israel group in the US, Council for the National Interest at http://www.cnionline.org and the main pro-Israel group AIPAC http://www.aipac.org for different view
Got this via e-mail. Hafta be a WSJ member to subscribe this. So the link wouldn’t work for non-subscribers. Instead, am pasting the entire article onto here. Compelling piece by Alan Dershowitz.
Arithmetic of Pain
By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ
The Wall Street Journal Online: July 19, 2006; Page A12
There is no democracy in the world that should tolerate missiles being fired at its cities without taking every reasonable step to stop the attacks. The big question raised by Israel’s military actions in Lebanon is what is “reasonable.” The answer, according to the laws of war, is that it is reasonable to attack military targets, so long as every effort is made to reduce civilian casualties. If the objectives cannot be achieved without some civilian casualties, these must be “proportional” to the civilian casualties that would be prevented by the military action.
This is all well and good for democratic nations that deliberately locate their military bases away from civilian population centers. Israel has its air force, nuclear facilities and large army bases in locations as remote as anything can be in that country. It is possible for an enemy to attack Israeli military targets without inflicting “collateral damage” on its civilian population. Hezbollah and Hamas, by contrast, deliberately operate military wings out of densely populated areas. They launch antipersonnel missiles with ball-bearing shrapnel, designed by Syria and Iran to maximize civilian casualties, and then hide from retaliation by living among civilians. If Israel decides not to go after them for fear of harming civilians, the terrorists win by continuing to have free rein in attacking civilians with rockets. If Israel does attack, and causes civilian casualties, the terrorists win a propaganda victory: The international community pounces on Israel for its “disproportionate” response. This chorus of condemnation actually encourages the terrorists to operate from civilian areas.
While Israel does everything reasonable to minimize civilian casualties — not always with success — Hezbollah and Hamas want to maximize civilian casualties on both sides. Islamic terrorists, a diplomat commented years ago, “have mastered the harsh arithmetic of pain. . . . Palestinian casualties play in their favor and Israeli casualties play in their favor.” These are groups that send children to die as suicide bombers, sometimes without the child knowing that he is being sacrificed. Two years ago, an 11-year-old was paid to take a parcel through Israeli security. Unbeknownst to him, it contained a bomb that was to be detonated remotely. (Fortunately the plot was foiled.)
This misuse of civilians as shields and swords requires a reassessment of the laws of war. The distinction between combatants and civilians — easy when combatants were uniformed members of armies that fought on battlefields distant from civilian centers — is more difficult in the present context. Now, there is a continuum of “civilianality”: Near the most civilian end of this continuum are the pure innocents — babies, hostages and others completely uninvolved; at the more combatant end are civilians who willingly harbor terrorists, provide material resources and serve as human shields; in the middle are those who support the terrorists politically, or spiritually.
The laws of war and the rules of morality must adapt to these realities. An analogy to domestic criminal law is instructive: A bank robber who takes a teller hostage and fires at police from behind his human shield is guilty of murder if they, in an effort to stop the robber from shooting, accidentally kill the hostage. The same should be true of terrorists who use civilians as shields from behind whom they fire their rockets. The terrorists must be held legally and morally responsible for the deaths of the civilians, even if the direct physical cause was an Israeli rocket aimed at those targeting Israeli citizens.
Israel must be allowed to finish the fight that Hamas and Hezbollah started, even if that means civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon. A democracy is entitled to prefer the lives of its own innocents over the lives of the civilians of an aggressor, especially if the latter group contains many who are complicit in terrorism. Israel will — and should — take every precaution to minimize civilian casualties on the other side. On July 16, Hasan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, announced there will be new “surprises,” and the Aska Martyrs Brigade said that it had developed chemical and biological weapons that could be added to its rockets. Should Israel not be allowed to pre-empt their use?
Israel left Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. These are not “occupied” territories. Yet they serve as launching pads for attacks on Israeli civilians. Occupation does not cause terrorism, then, but terrorism seems to cause occupation. If Israel is not to reoccupy to prevent terrorism, the Lebanese government and the Palestinian Authority must ensure that these regions cease to be terrorist safe havens.
Mr. Dershowitz is a professor of law at Harvard.
Sorry. That won’t count. The article is an extremely biased reporting. Noticed the last name of the author of that article? It’s a disguised neocon move in the name of oppression against the Hezbollahs.
Move on. Nothing to see here. Giddyap.
Next article, please.
McConnell,
Claiming that the above article is biased, and deserving of neglect while you have posted links to sites that are biased as well simply astounds me.
Is Karl Rove shoved so far up in your ass that you’ve started to defecate lies, and flushed them down as truths?
I guess recognizing sarcasms isn’t your forte? It was hardly a claim. And, yes, before I responded I waited for 15 minutes after you’ve posted yours on purpose.
Since you’re delusional and “right” all the time, I couldn’t tell. But thank you for posting a sarcastic comment (not even funny or clever) in response to an article that was well conceived and raised valid points in regards to modern warfare tactics.
Save the Karl Rove reference, I retract my comment (10789).
I will simply ignore all of your garbage, err, comments and pray that you stop spending time on your PC and concentrate, with all of your time and might, on flipping ******* tires.
**** me. I realized that I would actually miss McConnell if he no longer commented about. He adds a certain flavor to these discussions.
I apologize for the friggin tire flipping statement, but I do wish you success in tire flipping contests though.
Thanks.
Aside from McConnell’s sarcasm, the most important part of Dershowitz’s article is the following paragraph:
“The laws of war and the rules of morality must adapt to these realities. An analogy to domestic criminal law is instructive: A bank robber who takes a teller hostage and fires at police from behind his human shield is guilty of murder if they, in an effort to stop the robber from shooting, accidentally kill the hostage. The same should be true of terrorists who use civilians as shields from behind whom they fire their rockets. The terrorists must be held legally and morally responsible for the deaths of the civilians, even if the direct physical cause was an Israeli rocket aimed at those targeting Israeli citizens.”
Are terrorists “legally and morally” responsibile for the deaths of Lebanese citizens and other innocent victims in Lebanon?
This is a solid point raised by Dershowitz.
Exactly, JT. Roadblocks have been set up outside some of the villages to prevent Lebanese residents from leaving, while in other villages, Hezbollah is preventing UN representatives from getting in!! But they’re trying to help residents leave.
In two villages, exchanges of fire between residents and Hezbollah have broken out. Why? Because they want to get the heck out of there but the Hezbollah doesn’t care. They want their human shields so they can ensure a higher civilian death count! And why? So they can make a PR spin move and say how Israel is killing innocent citizens of Lebanon.
Blah..blah..blah…!
So, if you hear Hezbollah wanting to announce a cease fire. Don’t believe one word of it.
Even if the terrorists are held legally and morally responsible, the result is the death of innocent civilians. To them it would not matter out of whose responsibilties they died. The bottom line is both sides need to reach an agreement to put an end to the death of innocent people, both on the Israeli and Lebanese side. Hey then again, maybe I am just an optimist…
There is a difference in ascertaining on targeting terrorist groups and minimizing no civilian deaths versus a group who fires rockets indiscriminantly with no care about civilian casualties. In fact, they WANT civilian casualities as much as possible. Why do you think they are arming themselves with chemical and biological weapons? How do you stop rockets fired from a hijacked state? Will the UN ever publicly condemn the Hezbollahs or other terrorist groups to have fired chemical and/or biological weapons?
Simple. Have the Hezbollah return the kidnapped Israeli soldiers for a start. That act of kidnapping is an act of war. They knew that.
—————————————————-
(#10754) | 2006-07-19 12:33:38
Amanda wrote:
“very well explained. i also took some courses on mid-east history — talk about complicated! but you laid it out quite well.
one must also not forget that occupation leads to resistance.
wanted to add to this discussion this article: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738739.html — its by an israeli journalist and discusses the concept of proportionality - or rather the lack of it in this case.”
——————————————————-
Amanda,
Many thanks for sharing the article, “Operation Peace for IDF (Israel Defense Forces) written by Gideon Levy, an Israeli journalist. Very impressive. It must be tough for Levy to maintain a balanced perception of what is happening in Israel and why Israel has problems with Hamas and Hezbollah. After reading the article, I have a better insight into why many Arabs are angry; and Palestinians are bitter against the government of Israel. Also, I was stunned to learn that IDF routinely spirits away civilians (Palestinians) from their homes and confines them for years with or without trials. What a mess!
Patricia Raswant
……………………………………………
(#10770) | 2006-07-19 15:52:48
ahh? wrote:
Mcconnell and Raswant… not to dilverge the subject, but I happened to notice the word “terrorist” is mentioned. I have read several definitions of “terrorists”, so I am not sure what do you mean by “terrorist”?
Can you elaborate what do you mean by “terrorists”?
Thanks”
………………………………………………
Terrorists are desperate individuals who are disgusted with their government and decide to counteract their government, usually in the hope to take power back. When they succeed, they take over and create their own government without interference from the outside—like the United States, United Nations, et cetera.
I mentioned that our forefathers were terrorists. Our forefathers were fed up with the British Parliament for taxing them, for not listening to them, etc. Our forefathers were desperate and decided to go war against England, breaking away from British Sovereignty and our forefathers created their own unique system of government.
From the eyes of conquerors, those who resist are terrorists because their main goal is to break down the conquerors newly formed government. The conqueror knows that terrorists are trying to take back what is theirs.
No matter, conquerors and terrorists are devastating because they use violence to destroy one another. Like I said before—violence (war) begets violence.
No one can suppress another group of people and not expect them to strike back. Conquerors and terrorists are equally guilty of depravity against humans.
Have I clarified?
Patricia Raswant
So, you’re saying that the Islamic terrorists are the equivalent patriots as were our American forefathers?
the British government certainly thought our forefathers were insurgents.
You’re avoiding the question.
In terrorists’ thinking, they are “patriots” of their homeland, as our forefathers were.
Not quite but you are still avoiding my question.
McConnell, I don’t think so. I think what Noelle and Patricia are trying to say is that it’s subjective. In other words, it’s a matter of PERCEPTION. Some Islamic terrorists may think they are better than our forefathers and less of terrorists. Some Americans may excuse our forefathers’ actions, and not those of some Islamic terrorists. Some people have many other opinions to choose from. So there is no way to really answer that question that is objective.
Again, for the 2nd time, my post was a sarcastic one about Dershowitz. For you to respond assuming I was critical and against Dershowitz’s article shows just how much you haven’t read my earlier posts leading up to Dershowitz.
sorry….the above post. Ignore it. It was meant for post #10821
Moi, please. I understand that. The question hasn’t really been answered. Re-read my question carefully.
i hate to take mcconnell’s bait.. as others said it’s a matter of perception but you want specifics. the goals are the same but technology in ‘terrorism’ have since evolved from tarring and feathering into planes or biological weapons.
Again, show me where was the last time that Israeli said “Death to all Muslims.”
Israeli = Israel govt and her people as a whole.
“Terrorists are desperate individuals who are disgusted with their government and decide to counteract their government…”
Problem is that the Muslim governments of Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan never publicly condemned their own Islamic terrorist groups that are living in their country. The government doesn’t seem “disgusted.” In fact, they are encouraging them in more ways than one.
Responding to McConnel’s comment about how an entire article is worthless cuz Dershowitz wrote it -
Oh, much like what I’m starting to do with comments that begin with a blue “mcconnell?”
Again, for the 2nd time, my post was a sarcastic one about Dershowitz. For you to respond assuming I was critical and against Dershowitz’s article shows just how much you haven’t read my earlier posts leading up to Dershowitz.
I certainly hope Israel will help reimburse Lebanon for destroying its civilian infrastructure.
I hope so, and I believe they will…. probably not by the manadate of Supreme Council (of United Nations) resolution, but some sort of agreement…
to avoid confusion… I meant Security Council, and I like to refer it as Supreme Council.
Noelle,
On the realistic side, I’m afraid that Israel might not be able to compensate Lebanon for shelling their civilian infrastructure because half of Israel’s national debt comes from the United States.
On a tangent, this article might be of interest to you … I excerpted a few paragraphs from the article, “Will Americans Join Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestine as Neocon Victims?” written by Paul Craig Roberts, who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. Roberts covers a wide range of issues in his article and his conclusion is to the point.
QUOTE
…the Lebanese Prime Minister said that Israel’s attack has caused “unimaginable losses” and that his government will seek compensation from Israel.
-These dead are not Hezbollah milita. They are not Hamas milita. They are not al Qaeda or Sunni insurgents. They are civilians.
-On July 19 the Israelis turned their air attack on the Christian area of Beirut.
-As of noon July 19, 800,000 people had participated in CNN’s Quick Vote, with the result that 55% oppose Israel’s attack on Lebanon. This result is despite the fact that US television reporting explains the news from the Israeli perspective.
-Similarly, in Israel a survey published by Israeli daily newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth showed 53 per cent of Israelis polled said Israel should hold negotiations to secure the release of the Israeli soldier captured in Gaza, while 43 per cent backed a military operation.
UNQUOTE
The full article is at …
http://www.counterpunch.org
The Unfolding Horror Show
Will Americans Join Iraqis, Lebanese and Palestinians as Neocon Victims?
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Israel shouldn’t pay.
It was Lebanon that allowed Hezbollah to stockpile weapons, and entrench in civillian zones. The whole ******* world knew this. In fact, the current Israeli invasion had been planned since 2000 because they knew this would happen.
??
Israel aims at specific targets and terrorist groups and they try hard to minimize any civilian casualties. The terrorists do not. They are indifferent to their targets in Israel killing anybody with their rockets while destroying buildings and other infrastructures.
These are terrorists who decided to kidnapped Israeli soldiers. Use their own people in Lebanon as human shields and not allow them to leave, forcing some civilians to use guns as force so they can leave the area!!
How about Lebanon reimburse Israel for destroying civilian infrastructure? Eh?
It’s not the Lebanese government that is attacking Israel!!
Technically and legally speaking… since they have Hezbollah member in their Parliament, and good number of Shia Muslims in the office. They failed to act or neturalize the Hezbollah within their terrority, thus the logic says somebody gotta be held responsible… and unfortunately, that “somebody” is the Lebanese government.
Swetha, so, are you suggesting that Israel negotiate with terrorists? Who actually made the first move in kidnapping Israeli soldiers? Would you not consider that as an act of war? All they had to do was turn over the kidnapped soldiers. They refused.
technically they didn’t exactly refuse, they asserted their own demand - to trade the soliders for political prisoners, in particular one prisoner who has been held for 27 years without due process. whether or not its right or wrong, its quite different than an outright refusal.
I really think that there has to be a 3 way dialouge, where Israel, Lebanese Govt. and Hezbollah need to sit down and sort this out. Violence is not the answer, whether it is from the side of the terrorists or Israel. I read someone once say (not exactly sure where) that One’s terrorist, is another’s hero. I AM NOT SAYING THIS OR AGREEING WITH THIS. All I am saying is that many people believe that these “terrorists” are fighting for the people’s rights. Whether or not that is correct or true is a different issue. As long as Israel is seen as being the aggressor (many ppl. will not agree with this I know), this problem will not be solved.
I agree with you… as much as I wish that this come to an end… but reality speaking… it is not possible or feasible at the moment… This guy, Prime Minster Olmert, is not going to stay until he has dismantled Hezbollah. It looks to me that he is no Ariel Sharon, and he is trying to make name for his legacy… He would certainly wants his legacy in Israel to be remembered as the “the man who dismantled the Hezbollah” rather than “the man who negotiated with Hezbollah”.
By the way, what constitutes “aggressor”? Can you explain?
Thanks
i don’t know, he’s reminding me an awful lot of the ariel sharon who helped orchestrate in the attack on Lebanon in the 80s and was even removed from his position as minister of defense.
Hezbollah. Hamas. They are extremist Islamic fundamentalist groups. Their call is to get rid of Jewish people. Period. And they want to start with Israel first.
Look at this picture when Hitler was alive. Do you know who this person is talking with Hitler?
http://img129.imageshack.us/im.....ilesw9.jpg
The person is Sheik Haj Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem during the 1940s. He had very, very close ties to Adolf Hitler. He also set up an Arab-Nazis coalition called the “Handzar Division” which is made up of Croatian Muslims. There were numerous meetings Hitler and al-Husseini where for the first time Hitler revealed his plan to him. Hitler’s plan was exactly the same as al-Husseini. The elimination of the Jewish people. Look up Professor Robert Wistrich. He wrote a book called “The Holocaust.” In the book the reason that Hitler let out the secret to al-Husseini is because they both shared the same ideology, which is the destruction of their common enemy and they both had global genocidal ideologies. And who would that be? The Jewish people of course. Only this time, it’s the fanatical Islamic religion will want to eradicate all non-Muslims or those who do not hold ideally to the religion of Islam.
Nothing changed. Their ideology of today is still the same back then with Hitler’s own. To wipe out the Jewish people and destroy Israel. They don’t really care about the land. It’s the ideology they care. How can it not be so simple to explain this?
Don’t believe me? Look with your own eyes. Visit http://www.memritv.org and watch those clips…all subtitled in English that even deaf people can learn and realize the horror of what Muslim extremists and sympathizers want to do.
And guess where the Memritv organization is located? Look into that one and you’ll be surprised.
Thank you for this link: http://www.memritv.org/ and this shows me what the Islamic people are saying. Its good to know what is really going on over there. We get our information from the news that tends to be biased at most. Thank you mcconnell.
Hezbollah are using the Palestinian situation to justify their attacks on Israel. As long as the Isralei’s continue to occupy West Bank and keep on land grabbing, the local people will see them as being the aggressor. Hence, I think all parties need to be included in talks.
The West Bank was won as a result of a defensive war in 1967 when Jordan attempted to destroy Israel. If Jordan didn’t attack Israel in the first place in pre-emptive fashion, they would still have their West Bank, prospering. Now, you want Israel to give the West Bank back to Jordan? Suppose the Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians won the 1967 war against Israel by invading the whole land. What do you think would’ve happened given their nature and hate towards all Jewish people?
Use your imagination on that one.
But that did not happen. We can sit here and imagine many things, that won’t help anyone. What we can do is deal with the facts we have right now and try to work with that. It would really help if everyone saw and understood both sides of the story rather just one..
The fact is this. Israel won the West Bank as a result of a >defensive
If it was won fairly, why is it known as OCCUPIED land and why are they further building settlements and occupying more land that is not theirs?
Fairly? Choose your words carefully, Swetha. Israel had every right to those land won in a DEFENSIVE war. Israel did not attack the four Arab countries that surrounded Israel in 1967. In 6 days, Israel defeated the four Arab countries when they INVADED Israel in the first place.
It is a disputed territory rather than an “occupied territory” since Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt all lost a part of their territory when they all decided together to invade Israel to wrest Israel of her land. That failed. And in the process of losing the war, they lost a piece of their territory in the process. It doesn’t make any sense on your part of the logic to question whether the war was done fairly. Israel didn’t pre-emptively start the war against 4 Arab countries. It was those 4 Arab countries that started the 1967 invasion.
They lost.
They lost a piece of their land.
And now, you’re saying it wasn’t won fairly???????
If you read my comment carefully, you will notice I DID NOT SAY IT WAS NOT FAIR. I was posing a question where I said if it was fair, why was a resolution passed in UN condemning the occupation of the land. That is what I said.
Ever consider a concept that most of the people in the UN actually hate Jews? Look at the link below when the UN displayed a map of “Palestine” but didn’t include Israel during a November 29, 2005 UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.
http://www.eyeontheun.org/view.asp?l=21&p=142
Ask yourself. Why did the UN do that?
Secondly, how can it be an “occupied territory” if Israel won that land in a DEFENSIVE war? I said this a few times that “occupied territory” was a concocted term by the UN. If it’s anything, the territory belongs to Israel by de facto in a war of which Israel won and now holds claim to those lands.
Again, I ask you. Who attacked Israel in 1967 in the attempt to overthrow Israel and her lands?
Thirdly, you said you didn’t say “unfair” in the context you meant otherwise but what can I conclude from your comment when I’ve already explained earlier that Israel acquired those lands by winning in a DEFENSIVE war against 4 Arab countries who invaded Israel in 1967?
the concept of lands gained in a defensive war is really quite ironic. you do realize that?
So long as you call it DISPUTED TERRITORY, and I call it OCCUPIED TERRITORY, me and you will never meet on the same page.
So, are you saying that the 4 Arabs never invaded Israel in 1967 in a pre-emptive fashion with the sole purpose of eradicating Israel once and for all?
So, Israel cannot claim that land won in a defensive war by pushing back the invading Arab armies? At least Israel gave away some of the lands in a land for peace deal. Guess who reneged on the peace part?
I never said that anywhere in the blog or my comments. I will repeat what I said before, as long as you call it disputed territory and I call it Occupied territory, we will never be on the same page. I guess we will have to negotiate at some level, the same thing the ISRAELI GOVT. and the Palestinian govt. should be doing at the moment!
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp470.htm
Nuff said.
once again, an enlightening and informative web site, McConnell. I learned a lot. Namely, Israel’s legal right to exist within the boundaries of its country was recognized and established by the UN and other legislative and diplomatic bodies. Thus, to say that Israelis are “occupying” the former territory of Palestine is not correct. The only areas of Israel that might be considered disputed are the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. But those areas were legitimately ceded to Israel after a war, and Israel gave them back as part of a peace process, but as McConnell indicated, the Palestinian Authority reneged on that agreement. The real crux of this article is that fanatical Islamic extremists are using the “occupied lands” argument as a defense against their continued violence and terrorism against Israel. That’s all it is. They are not patriots, they are not heroes fighting for their freedom. They are criminals attempting to win sympathy for their cause by playing the occupation card, hoping the world will overlook the fact that religious extremism lies at the root of their motives.
All the sites and articles you present are pro-Israeli. It’s almost like you don’t see the other side’s argument and believe that Israel can do no harm!
Harm: I meant *WRONG*
Er…Israel gave the land back to Lebanon, Gaza strip and Sinai Peninsula for peace for land swap deal. Guess who reneged on the peace deals?
Explain the encroachment of the wall into the Palestinian territory, the expanding of West Bank settlements?
“Disputed territory.” Israel won that land in a defensive war in 1967 when 4 Arab countries invaded Israel with the sole purpose to wipe Israel off the map.
As for the wall, I explained that earlier in my postings. It was stop the constant suicide bombers simply walking across that line into Israel. Saving the lives of both Israelis and Arabs.
http://www.deafdc.com/blog/swe.....ment-10907
Like I said, you say disputed territory, while the UN and pretty much most of the world says OCCUPIED TERRITORY. I never said don’t put up the wall, but putting up the wall and land grabbing at the same time? That definitely has to stop!
Swetha: just to be clear, Israel won the “disputed” territories as a result of the 1967 war, as McConnell pointed out. This is a fact. As part of the peace process, Gaza Strip and West Bank were turned over to the Palestinians and a plan was in place to make them self-governing. It’s not going well, but Israel is still responsible for the external and internal security of *their* territories. This is from the CIA web page on West Bank.
“The West Bank - the larger of the two areas under the Palestinian Authority (PA)- has experienced a general decline in economic growth and a degradation in economic conditions made worse since the second intifadah began in September 2000. The downturn has been largely the result of the Israeli closure policies - the imposition of border closures in response to security incidents in Israel which disrupted labor and commodity market relationships. In 2001, and even more severely in 2002, Israeli military measures in PA areas resulted in the destruction of much capital plant, the disruption of administrative structure, and widespread business closures. Including the Gaza Strip, the UN estimates that more than 100,000 Palestinians out of the 125,000 who used to work in Israeli settlements, or in joint industrial zones, have lost their jobs. International aid of $2 billion to the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 2004 prevented the complete collapse of the economy and allowed some reforms in the government’s financial operations. In 2005, high unemployment and limited trade opportunities, due to continued closures both within the West Bank and externally, stymied growth.”
As McConnell pointed out, the Israelis did not have to give Gaza Strip or West Bank to the Palestinians. They did so to keep the peace. If the Palestinians can refrain from violence, they could be working and could be self-governing. The Israeli military will come down hard on any violence perpetrated against peaceable, law-abiding citizens, Palestinians and Israelis both. It’s too bad the Palestinians can’t tell who is really trying to help them — the UN, the EU, USA, and their moderate Arab allies such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Instead, they behave like puppets controlled by Syria and militant Islamic extremists. When are they going to get a clue that the extremists among them are the cause of their own problems?
With all this destruction, one wonders why the economy is in shambles. How can they sustain themselves in this matter? Why are the poor people paying the price? It all boils down to the fact that both sides must meet and broker a peace deal, DRAW BORDERS (which is a MUST) and ABIDE by them!
it’s simple — the Palestinian militants are paying the price for their actions. There is a consequence for sending suicide bombers across the border, and that’s a heavy Israeli response. One plus one equals two. Since the Palestinians aren’t “getting it,” the next step is the wall. Where to put the border of a wall is a non-issue because the land is technically Israel’s. Since the Palestinians broke their agreement, the Israelis can put it anywhere they damn please.
(Apologies for the bold print above, I errred on the code.)
Curious Eyes,
It’s interesting to realize that you’re being subjective and overlooked the Yom Kippur War of 1973 or known as either Ramadan War, October War, or 1973 Arab-Israel War where a coalition of Arab Nations led by Egypt and Syria invaded Sinai and Golan heights and won them back that they lost to Israel in 1967. So, the matter is no longer about the disputed areas.
In 1988 Jordan gave a section of West Bank to Palestine because at that time a majority of Palestine living in that area and the rest of it was vacant. And guess what happened, a sect of orthodox Jews *illegally* settled in these vacant areas; that was why they had to leave.
The government of Israel, in her role as Israel Mandate occupies Palestine, has violated many treaties with Palestine, which naturally led to insurgents.
Certainly, Israel should not be shocked at the effect of their cause, occupation of Palestine territory.
See, after 40 years under occupation, the insurgency of some Palestinians with Arafat started in 1987.
All the problems we are confronting today might never happen had Israel allowed Palestine to have their own government earlier than 1980s.
Patricia, I appreciate the way you educate me. Could you please name the sources of the information above? My recent posts were based on what I gleaned from the CIA web site. Thanks.
Also, I’ve only been talking about Gaza and West Bank. I haven’t read anything (that I know of) about Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula.
The Palestinians have actually had numerous opportunities to create an independent state, but have repeatedly rejected the offers:
*In 1937, the Peel Commission proposed the partition of Palestine and the creation of an Arab state.
*In 1939, the British White Paper proposed the creation of an Arab state alone, but the Arabs rejected the plan.
In 1947, the UN would have created an even larger Arab state as part of its partition plan.
*From 1948 to 1967, Israel did not control the West Bank. The Palestinians could have demanded an independent state from the Jordanians.
*The 1979 Egypt-Israel peace negotiations offered the Palestinians autonomy, which would almost certainly have led to full independence.
*The Oslo process that began in 1993 was leading toward the creation of a Palestinian state before the Palestinians violated their commitments and scuttled the agreements.
*In 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to create a Palestinian state, but Yasser Arafat rejected the deal.
McConnell, can you comment on the reasons why the Arabs and Palestinians continued to reject all those offers? Was it because they felt entitled to an ownership of the entire country? Are there other reasons besides religious hatred?
Probably a good bit of both. So many opportunities, yet they keep throwing it away.
Curious Eyes,
Just like we are witnessing Israel and Hizbollah attacking each other, I was in my 20s when the 1973 Arab-Israel occurred. Ever since I was 16 years old, I’ve been following the international politics.
But if you wanna me name a source, I would recommend George W. Gawrych’s _The Albatross of Decisive Victory: War & Policy Between Egypt and Israel in the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israel Wars)_. I have read many books on Arab-Israel conflicts.
By the way, the World Fact Book at the CIA website also show that the population of the West Bank is predominantly Palestinian.
On top part of the screen, click whatever country or location you want to look at:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/docs/profileguide.html
I’m for the Palestinian Authority to remain in Gaza Strip and West Bank and be autonomous. I’m against them sending suicide bombers and committing other acts of terrorism against Israel, and I know you are too. I’m also against neighboring Islamic countries, especially state sponsored terrorism (Iran and Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah), interfering in the attempts of Israel and Palestine to resolve their differences. Their reason for continuing to do so is religious extremism. This I see as the root of the conflict. Do you disagree with that?
Curious Eyes,
I believe I explained that Israel has to end her occupation of Palestine before somewhere here, but here goes.
We must ask why Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaede, and Talibans exist. We have the facts showing that these extremists did not exist before 1988. What prompted Araft to rebel against Israel? We all know that Palestinians were fed up with living under Israel-occupied territory and some Palestinians decided to take things into their hands pushing for their own freedom and their right to govern in Palestine.
However, the government of Israel dug deeper into Israel Mandate, this is like cancer promoting extremists to fester against Israel, and eventually almost globally because allies support Israel Mandate.
As of June 27-28 2006 in Vienna, the United Nations supported Israel-Palestinian Peace to resume political negotiations leading to a permanent two-State solution to the conflict. Now that Israel is attacking Lebanon, unfortunately, I guess the two-State solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine has to be put on hold … very disappointing.
Last night on CNN, I watched Paula Zahn interviewing a Syria Ambassador to the United States, Imad Moustapha.
QUOTE
MOUSTAPHA: What we want to do is find a way to solve the core issue. The core issue is the ongoing Israeli occupation of our territories. We want a resolution to this. All problems will disappear once the core issue is addressed.
ZAHN: All right, we’ve got to leave it there this evening. Ambassador Imad Moustapha, thank you for your time.
MOUSTAPHA: You’re welcome.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRA.....zn.01.html
(you’d have to scroll down a bit)
UNQUOTE
Israel has to relish its role as occupying Power, then there’d be hardly any reasons for extremists to continue their fight against Israel and the United States.
I’m somewhat taken aback by this point of view. One, you’re saying that Israel has no right, and never had any right to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine? So, the solution is, they should simply pack up and leave, or turn the entire governance of Israel and all its parts to the Palestinian Authority? Two, I’m stunned that you would quote the Syrian ambassador, and he said that the core issue is the Israeli occupation of “our” territories. Um? Did I miss something here? I’m not aware of Israel occupying any Syrian territories. Please clarify.
Oh, I’m all for a permanent two-State solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine.
It’s extremely important to know what the other sides are saying about Israel-Hizbollah conflict.
What I am trying to say is that from the point of humanitarian view, the government of Israel absolutely can’t occupy and choke Palestine forever and except Palestinians and the Arab Nations to ally with Israel.
The government of Israel can have their land, however they must also respect the existence of Palestianians and their right to govern.
As the United Nations proposed, I am all for resuming political negotiations leading to a permanent two-State solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine, but Israel and the United States seems not comfortable with the two-state solution to the conflict.
Supposing, Israel and the United States don’t put in an honest effort towards a permanent two-State solution to the conflict, then what? Is ethnic cleansing the answer to the conflict?
It was exactly what Glenn Lockhart expressed, and that’s what I’m afraid of.
The longer the government of Israel is clinging to its role as occupying Power and Israel literally flattened the southern Lebanon, believe me, it’s indeed a very bad strategy because now more and more Arabs have less respect for the govenments of Israel and the United States.
Should the Arab Nations flares up, the United States will not be able withstand Iraq, Afghan, and the Arab Nations.
Curious Eyes,
Re: Syria
Golan Heights is far up north-west, south-east of Israel, belongs to Syria but after the 1973 Arab-Israel War, both Syria and Israel to disengage their forces in Golan Heights. Ever since, UN has been mandating Golan Heights and the government of Syria has been waiting to get Golan Heights back.
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/undof/
West Bank at the east boundary line meets Jordan.
Southernmost of Gaza strip meets Egypt.
you’d have to scroll all the way down to see the map
http://www.un.org/apps/news/in.....amp;Body1=
Education has to be reformed in some regions over there. Arabs were taught to hate the Jews from such an early age, and these teachings were supplemented with incorrect interpretations of the Koran. Muslims have said over, and over that their religion does not even condone terrorist tactics. So, they have some calibrating to do.
Of course, Israel should apply the same if they do teach hatred. Even some Christians need to be re-educated (Jesus is for love, and only love. No hate).
Since Hezbollah and other such organizations have repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel, I’d say we should kill them all. I know I would be ostracizing myself within the DeafDC realm for saying this, but tell me, how do you deal with these people? It is their nature.
My reason for educational reform is that, hopefully, it would prevent people from signing up for organizations that employ violence as a means of fostering its policies or agenda.
Mkultra, there is an organization called Arab-Jewish Partnership in Israeli and Palestine who work hard for the non-violence solution. This article might be of interest to you . . .
“They Are Building Walls Around Us”
by Yigal Bronner
published almost two years ago at http://www.counterpunch.org/bronner09152004.html
Bronner is a member of Arab-Jewish Partnership. Bronner had refused to serve on occupied territory as required of Israelis and the consequence for his refusal to serve Bronner spent in Israeli military prison for a month.
If you want to read the current issues at the counterpunch, here goes . . .
http://www.counterpunch.org/
I usually read various sources to consider the different perspectives of others . . . Counterpunch is one of my fave “thinking outside the box” sources.
You want education reform, yet you want to kill Hezbollah and other such organizations. Hypocritcial, don’t you think?
sometime you cannot repair what is already broken… by that… I think Mkultra is adovcating a “clean slate” to start with…
Did I misinterpret you, Mkultra?
Ahh?, you understood me perfectly.
Swetha, nothing is going to stop Hezbollah unless Israel is destroyed. It would be hypocritical to think you can achieve peace with these people.
Take the weeds out, and destroy the roots (Kill those whose aim is to destroy). Plant new seeds (education reform), and nurture them for they will yield a garden of harmony, peace, and love (co-existence).
I just dont agree with that. Killing scores of people is never the answer, atleast I don’t believe it is. If your plan was implemented, killing these terrorists will result in breeding more of the same. You can’t go on killing…
I don’t like it either, but…
I really wonder why Arabic countries aren’t really doing anything to reel in those radicals. If America had an organization like Hezbollah, I know Americans would be outraged, and demand our government to reel those wayward Americans in, and subject them to trial for crimes against humanity.
Iran (at least, Ahmadinejad), instead, supports Hezbollah and its methods.
I believe the KKK still exists in US, and so do the skinheads..they may not be operating at the level of Hezbollah, but they exist nonetheless. I like your solution of education better than erradication..
Uh, MKULTRA, they are already here in America.
http://www.penraker.com/archives/004213.html
You shouldn’t be surprised that they are here given the fact that we had terrorists in America who drove three airplanes into our nation’s most recognized buildings, and one into the ground.
It’s hard to get justices done in an Islamic court of law. The most dangerous society is when religions control their government. The Jews and the Arabs together are impossible remember they tried that and Sadat was killed?
And how come liberated women are not screaming blue in their faces about the fact that many, if not all, Muslim countries oppress women’s right and are not seen as equals as men? They can’t drive. Can’t vote. Must cover their bodies. Does not have a say in divorce. Must walk behind her husband at all times. Cannot look into the eyes of men (vice versa, too). Their education are limited.
These things are true in many of the Islamic countries. Some are true exceptions in some areas such as Kurdistan, or northern Iraq.
http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english.htm
http://www.peacewomen.org/news.....women.html
McConnell,
I meant the scenario where there is an American based organization that attacks people in other countries, not cells of foreigners in our land.
For what it’s worth, here is my take on the situation. I’m not a scholar like Patricia, nor a pundit like McConnell. I agree with McConnell that terrorists, and the governments who support them, cannot be reasoned with. The only thing they respect and respond to is violence, period. Israel was right to retaliate militarily against Hezbollah and Lebanon because they [Israel] cannot let any attack on their sovereignty go unchallenged. A great many words have been said about Israel’s right to occupy Palestine. For good or for bad, the Israelis are there to stay, and they’re not leaving. While I *get* that the Palestinians are angry about being occupied, they’ve had almost 60 years to get used to it. A larger issue is the fact that Israel is surrounded on all sides by Muslim countries who have declared their intention of destroying the country. Religious fanatics can’t be reasoned with, either. On a regional scale, countries like Iran, Iraq, and others, hotbeds of Islamic fundamentalism all, have been sources of conflict and strife for centuries. It all boils down to religious fanaticism. Countries who promote the belief that their citizens will go to heaven for killing “infidels” are not models of peace and humanitarianism. I’m not saying that the USA does everything right either. A lot of its current problems can be laid at its door due to past actions. The point is, I think those fundamentalist Islamic countries should leave each other strictly alone, and that includes keeping their mitts off Israel. Without their interference, Palestinians and Israelis have a good chance of making peace and geting along. People living today cannot undo the consequences of millenia of hatred and antrocities. The only thing they can do TODAY is put a period on the sentence, turn the page, and start a new chapter.
Well put, Curious Eyes.
Curious Eyes,
Of course, Israelis have the right to the ancient land and govern as according to the laws of Hebrew, and so do Palestinaians.
I doubt you’d endure 60 years living under occupation yourself. I know for sure that no one in the world would ever get used to 60 years under occupation. That’s reality.
It’s true that Israel won some parcels of land in the war of 1967 but in 1973 Egypt and Syria fought war against Israel and won back the parcels of land they lost in 1967. In 1988, Jordan gave West Bank specifically to the Palestinians and the UN Partition Plan 181 officiated the State of Palestine. In 1993 Peace Agreement with President Clinton, Israel signed the treaty and agreed to Palestinian self-rule in Gaza strip and the West Bank and other areas of the West Bank that were not settled by Jews.
I think the government of Israel has the habit of recanting on their agreements and ingistative against Palestinians, causing Palestinians and Arabs to stir up troubles so the government of Israel has excuses to build the walls “to protect themselves from terrorism.”
But I believe that the action of Israelis insigiate terrorism, don’t they?
Actions by Israel warranted a full scale invasion by the 4 Arab countries to try and overtake Israel in 1967??
As for the 1973 war? Egypt didn’t win the war. A concession was made on both sides that took several years. If it’s “winning” their land back, it was more like a struggle to get it back.
On January 17, 1974 in accordance with the decision of the Geneva Conference, the Governments of Israel and Egypt, with the assistance of the Government of the United States (Henry Kissinger facilitated the negotiation), reached to an agreement on the disengagement and separation of their military forces.
Again, Israel has no obligation, legal or otherwise, to withdraw from the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Well, McConnell, I disagree with your analysis but you can have it your way.
So, it was warranted for the 4 Arab states to invade Israel in the effort to finally oust them completely? That’s the question I’m asking you.
Patricia, to be occupied for 60 years is not something that’s easy to “get used to.” But it’s also not something that’s going to change either. The Palestinians can go on using terrorist tactics to try and get the Israelis to leave. Not only is it ineffective, it’s no contribution to a peaceful solution. The Israelis and Palestinians can try diplomacy to work out a compromise. That’s obviously the best thing to do, and that’s exactly what the Israelis have been trying to do, as McConnell pointed out. I’m not going so far as to say that the Israelis are always the good guys in this situation. But I would never believe that they instigate terrorism. On the other hand, the surrounding Islamic countries keep inflaming the Palestinians into sending suicide bombers into Israel, among other things. How pathetic is that? All that Israel wants is to be left alone and in peace. It really seems to me that their Islamic neighbors are the ones constantly stirring up trouble. McConnell showed evidence that building the walls saves lives. Duh. Since nothing else has worked, it’s certainly something practical they can do to keep alive.
Exactly, CE.
Israel is the ONLY country in the Middle East which has a free press. Their radio, television and newspapers are openly critical of Israel’s government. Can anyone say the same for the surrounding Islamic countries?
Israel has always been for peace but the problem is that Arab countries cannot stand Israel simply because they do not like Jewish people. I have pointed this out with links time and time again. Israel was FORCED to defend herself in 1967 and acquired lands as a result of winning the 6-day war. Israel has returned most of the lands back in their constant “land for peace” swap deals. Israel kept her promise to swap the land but Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon failed to keep their end of the bargain.
Israel wants diplomacy but how can they when the 4 Arab nations surrounding Israel have never condemned the suicide bombings and specific attacks on Israeli civilians? Or went after these terrorist groups?
Their inaction tells alot and frankly, many people simply do not want to address this or failed to see this.
How come nobody ever addressed the issue of the UN not recognizing Israel by wiping it off the map in 2005?
http://www.eyeontheun.org/view.asp?l=21&p=142
We know why. UN, which is mostly made up of dictators and fanatical despots do not like Israel. Period. Not once has the UN condemned any terrorist organizations.
“In the wake of 9/11, with great fanfare, the UN Security Council took action to become a leader in the war against terrorism. It adopted resolution 1373 on September 28, 2001. (see Security Council resolution 1373 (2001)). The resolution created the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) which was mandated to become the lead UN agent. The Committee is composed of the members of the Security Council, who take off one hat and don another when meetings are convened. Subsequent resolutions have given the Committee greater powers and increased resources.
Since September 28, 2001 the CTC has never named a single terrorist, terrorist organization or state sponsor of terrorism.”
http://www.eyeontheun.org/facts.asp?1=1&p=63
Why not?
The silence is deafening when a simple question is posed. Do we have deaf/hh people who have these anti-semetic feelings?
Just asking….
McConnell, I read that web site and was simply too floored to comment. The fact that Syria was on that CTC committee says it all. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. I never knew that the UN was supporting terrorism simply by their silence and inactivity. I understand it’s a nice gesture to have a day of sorrow for the Palestinian occupation, but to show a map without Israel on it is beyond the pale. This is scary. No wonder the UN is beset on all side by its problems.
I want to reply to your earlier post about the treatment of women by Muslims. I have a good friend who is Muslim and lives in Malaysia. He says that the treatment of women by fundamentalist Muslim countries like Iran and Iraq is related to culture, not religion. According to him, it’s in the Koran that women have equal human rights and men are required to treat them fairly. How the country and culture define their roles is a separate issue. My Malaysian friend says that these Muslim extremists are very far from representing the Muslim majority.
I kidded him about how the fact that he can have multiple wives but I cannot have multiple husbands tells me all I need to know about equal rights for women in the Koran.
fundamentalist christians and fundamentalist muslims aren’t all that different from one another. funny.
However, that’s where you are wrong, Kate. For apostates of their respective former religion, it’s Islamism or Islamic law that will get an apostate killed. Anywhere.
http://64.233.187.104/search?q.....k&cd=3
As for Christians, ever hear of the story of the prodigal son?
No, there is a vast difference, Kate. A chasm.
i SAID “aren’t all that different”. I’ll clarify - in terms of women and oppressing ideas. please think in generalization from our part not in specifics. the fundie muslims are more blatant in oppression while the fundie christians are behind legislation and tv shows. I’m done here.
“aren’t all that different” = fundamentally the same.
What am I and others are to think?
well i interpreted it as they still come from the same extremist frame of mind using religion as their excuse and condemning all who dont agree. christians in certain parts of the world are certainly part of some horrific acts, gential mutiliation anyone? to go back in history, how about the crusades? its fundamentalism, not the religion itself. anyone can take religion and warp it to justify their actions.
I’ve been skimming the responses and posted a couple. Unless I’m mistaken, the one thing overlooked is postcolonialism. The former colonial powers (British, Italians, etc - my IR studies are very rusty) left behind very poor infrastructure and did not train the majority of local people to higher management. The founding of Israel on other hand attracted European and American Jews with valuable work skills and connections to the west. They have better aid and weapons than the Arabs do. Few more - the current and former Middle East and Northern Africans leaders are despots left over from the Cold War. How can one not shake off the remnants and particpate in globalization?
Good question Kate. Many are living in the 14th century and refuse to move forward into the 21st century, other than using 21st century technology/weapons to advance their 14th century causes.
i’m not going there.
I am totally for a peaceful solution to the Middle East crisis …
I do not support war, terrorism, and violence of any kind.
Violence begets violence.
War begets war.
Terror begets terror.
Occupation begets terrorism.
War begets terrorism.
This past 5 years I’ve been on a fact-finding mission and here is what I found.
Statements by the UN agencies working in the occupied Palestinian territory
http://www.un.org/unrwa/news/U.....8Jul06.htm
World Health Organization
World Health Day
Country profiles
The Palestinian Population
http://www.emro.who.int/mnh/wh.....le-PAL.htm
Hezbollah, Hamas and Israel:
Everything You Need to Know
By Alexander Cockburn
http://www.counterpunch.org/Cockburn07212006.html
Vancouver Appeal
International Associate of Peace Messenger Cities
By Alfred Lambermont Webre
http://peacejournalism.com/Rea.....cleID=9730
Peace Journalism is one of my cherished networks, and that’s who I am.
So, McConnell, if you reject a potential peace solution to any kind of terrorism, war, and violence, I’m not interested to discuss further with you. War is NOT the answer to terrorism! Occupation and war begets terrorism.
I already told you that I’m for a peace solution.
I already told you that I disagree with your analysis but you can have it your way, capisci?
Find a UN statement that condemned an extremist Islamic organization(s) or Muslim persons for their activities such as suicide bombers or attacks against innocent civilians, including children. Many of them (ie Islamic extemist groups) have claimed responsibility for many of the attacks. Yet, you don’t hear it from the UN. Then you will see where many of the problems lie.
You see UN roundly condemns the United States and Israel on a consistent basis but never against an extremist Islamic organization bent on targeting and killing innocent civilians, especially Israelis or Jewish people. Even after swapping land for peace when Israel held her end of the bargain but not the Arab country in question. Israel has shown much restraint year after year.
If you want peace, then please get those Islamic extremists to stop saying “Death to infidels!” Get them to stop apostasy killing. Get them to stop honor killing. Get them to stop saying that Israel will be wiped off the map. Get them to honor the agreed to peace-for-land deal that was made over the years when Israel offered the land back after Arab countries invaded Israel in the attempt to exterminate Israel in the first place. Get Saudi Arabia to stop supporting Islamic extremist groups in the United States and worldwide.
One thing though, why didn’t the U.N. condemned the invasion of Israel by 4 Arab countries in 1967 in their attempt to wipe Israel off the map?
But lets go further. The Sabra and Shatila massacre (or Sabra and Chatila massacre) killed by the Lebanese Maronite Christians (not Israel), led by the Phalangist party and militia, in a CIVIL WAR in Lebanon. On December 16, 1982, the United Nations General Assembly condemned the massacre and declared it to be an act of genocide where some 800 were brutally massacred.
800 were believed killed in 1982 massacre and was declared a genocide event.
Then we had the Tutsi and Hutus genocide at work in 1994 where the U.N. carefully refrained from labeling the killings as genocide, which would have forced the U.N. into some kind of emergency intervention. About 800,000 were killed during the genocidal event.
Let’s see. The UN was ready to call it a genocide in 1982 in a civil conflict where one Lebanese Christian group (not Israel) murdered some 800. But in Rwanda, the UN never characterized the killing as a genocide event where plenty of evidences and video footages showed it to be just that. A genocide. But on April 29, 1994, the UN conceded that “acts of genocide *MAY* have been committed.
May have been? Yet, it was shown that the UN favored the Hutus.
http://www.answers.com/topic/rwandan-genocide
Get rid of the U.N.
ten years later, the UN regrets what had happened. Now, is more resolved in stopping the next genocide.
“Secretary-General Kofi Annan today in Geneva unveiled a plan to combat genocide, said it would spur the UN to improve its operations to prevent armed conflicts, protect civilians, end impunity for perpetrators and monitor warning signals.
The plan calls for the designation of a Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide with a mandate including preventing mass murder and ethnic cleansing by reporting looming signs to UN bodies through the Secretary-General, Ms. Fréchette said.”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/st.....a&Cr1=
Now, the Hamas has vowed to kill all Israelis in Israel and wipe them off the map. That is by definition of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
Why hasn’t the UN condemned these Islamic terrorist organizations for the suicide bombings and attacks killing innocent civilians?
Secretary-General condemns Hizbollah attacks across blue line, calls for immediate, unconditional release of Israeli captives
http://www.un.org/News/Press/d.....63.doc.htm
Secretary-General Condemns Hamas Attack
New York, 11 June 2003 - Statement attributable to the Spokesman for the Secretary-General on the situation in the Middle East, including the question of Palestine
The Secretary-General condemns in the strongest possible terms the suicide bombing by the Palestinian militant group Hamas in Jerusalem today, which killed at least 16 Israelis and injured dozens more. He expresses his profound condolences to the families of the victims. As he has made clear repeatedly, the Secretary-General believes that such attacks are utterly reprehensible and only serve to spur further hatred and mistrust.
The Secretary-General calls on the leaders of the Israeli and Palestinian peoples not to be deterred from the path to peace through the Quartet’s Road Map by this attack. He urges Palestinian Prime Minister Abbas to work assiduously to fulfil his pledge to end the armed intifada. The Secretary-General calls on both sides to act with restraint in the face of this terrorism. He believes that the Israeli attacks in Gaza today only contribute to a renewed cycle of violence. The Secretary-General remains firm in his belief that security for both Israelis and Palestinians can best be achieved through the resolution of this conflict through the two state solution called for in the Road Map. http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=388
I said “condemns the organization”…
Notice how UN condemns the attacks by an illegal organization such as the Hezbollah militia but never condemns the organization itself and their leaders for their terrorist activities? Why is the Hezbollah holding Lebanon govt hostage when Israel complied fully in withdrawing from Lebanon?
—————————
http://www.gop.gov/Committeece.....res921.asp -July 18, 2006
On September 12, 2005, Israel completed its unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, demonstrating its willingness to make sacrifices for the sake of peace. More than 1,000 rockets have been launched from Gaza into Israel since Israel’s disengagement. In a completely unprovoked attack that occurred in undisputed Israeli territory on June 25, 2006, Israeli Defense Forces Corporal Gilad Shalit was kidnapped and is being held hostage in Gaza by a Palestinian terrorist group which includes members of Hamas. Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal, in Damascus, Syria, has acknowledged the role of Hamas in holding Corporal Shalit hostage. In a completely unprovoked attack that occurred in undisputed Israeli territory on July 12, 2006, operatives of the terrorist group Hezbollah operating out of southern Lebanon killed three Israeli soldiers and took two others hostage.
Israel fully complied with United Nations Security Council Resolution 425 (1978) by completely withdrawing its forces from Lebanon, as certified by the United Nations Security Council and affirmed by United Nations Secretary–General Kofi Annan on June 16, 2000, when he said, ‘‘Israel has withdrawn from [Lebanon] in full compliance with Security Council Resolution 425.’’. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559 (2004) calls for the complete withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon and the dismantlement of all independent militias in Lebanon. Despite the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, the Government of Lebanon has failed to disband and disarm Hezbollah, allowing Hezbollah instead to amass 13,000 rockets, including rockets that are more destructive, longer-range and more accurate than rockets previously used by Hezbollah, and has integrated Hezbollah into the Lebanese Government.
The Government of Israel has previously shown great restraint despite the fact that Hezbollah has launched at least four separate attacks into Israel using rockets and ground forces over the past year. The failure of the Government of Lebanon to implement all aspects of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559 and to extend its authority throughout its territory has enabled Hezbollah to launch armed attacks against Israel and recently to kidnap Israeli soldiers. Hezbollah’s strength derives significantly from the direct financial, military, and political support it receives from Syria and Iran, and Hezbollah also receives important support from sources within Lebanon. Iranian Revolutionary Guards continue to operate in southern Lebanon, providing support to Hezbollah and reportedly controlling its operational activities.
————————
If Lebanon won’t and can’t do it to stop this illegal militia, Hezbollah, and get them to disband, Israel will. She was finally forced to defend herself….once again! The Hezbollah controls southern Lebanon in the absence of the regular Lebanese army. Now, you know why Hezbollah is an illegal militia.
And now, the Hezbollah is asking for a cease fire? They’ve lost all credibility in showing that they will honor a cease fire.
McConnell, it’s obvious that you are not aware of the politics in Lebanon and Palestine. The United States encouraged these countries to practice the democracy process, and they do. Guess what happened? Hizbollah and Hamas won the seats through the proper democracy process–some citizens of Palestine and Lebanon did vote for the members of Hizbollah and Hamas.
Nothing anyone can do about it but to work for a peace solution.
If it wants to be a political party, it needs to act like a political party and not have in its arsenal things like antiship cruise missiles. Most political parties don’t have that kind of weaponry.
Oh…btw, I’m very aware of the politics going ons for the past several years. Be it to you to assume what I do or don’t know. You have no idea. International politics is one of my most favorite areas for quite some time.
Besides not acting like a political party. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah claims that his group is now the de-facto government of Lebanon. Which means Hezbollah has replaced a democratically-elected government of Lebanon that was hostile to Syria and Iran.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/ar.....e_id=74159
The Daily Star of Lebanon.
Quite telling.
Patricia: don’t you think it’s somewhat telling that Kofi Annan did not appear in public, with the cameras rolling, to state this message live and in person? Instead, it’s “attributable” to him. Smells like cowardice to me. I’m ready to see him appear on TV making a public announcement about some practical action the UN will take.
FYI, I’m finding your and McConnell’s discussions most enlightening. Thank you.
Curious Eyes,
I had seen Annan appearing on the CNN many times, usually around noontime, but I didn’t know why other networks didn’t broadcast him.
Excuse me for the multiple postings …
Curious Eyes
CNN on Annan Kofi
this link includes news video of Kofi
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/.....index.html
If you wanna see more news video of Annan, you could use this search key at CNN:
Annan Seeks ‘Cessation’ of Clash
A few nights ago, Annan was also on Larry King Live …
Thanks, Patricia. I jumped to conclusions when I thought Annan had someone make the announcement for him. I’ll read more carefully next time.
McConnell, are you saying that Hezbollah has asked for a cease fire? I have not heard any mention of returning the kidnapped Israeli soldiers. That’s all Hezbollah and Lebanon need to do. Simple, isn’t it?
Via their master and supporter, Syria.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....refer=home
You should read what Condi Rice said about the cease fire calls.
http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=108104
Also,
“Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary General, has said he wants an international force to take control of southern Lebanon. He also has denounced Israel’s retaliation in a speech roundly criticized by Israel and by John Bolton, American Ambassador to the U.N.”
No kidding.
“Saudi Arabia, normally the most timid of Arab regimes, boldly denounced the Hezbollah (Party of God) raid into Israel - and was followed by Egypt and Jordan. Never before have these regimes sided with Israel in a conflict between it and any part of the Arab world.
One reason: The three countries have all been recent victims of deadly attacks by Islamist groups and have as much to fear from them as Israel does, according to a new analysis gaining growing acceptance among Middle East scholars.
Another is that Saudi Arabia, now under the leadership of a new king, had much invested - politically and financially - in the Lebanon it had helped rebuild, parts of which have been reduced to rubble just as they were by the 15-year civil war that ended in 1990.”
http://www.newsday.com/news/na.....news-print
Will the UN NOW condemn the Hezbollah terrorist organization and other Islamic extremist groups?
http://img56.imageshack.us/img.....oonpc8.gif
First of all none of these troubles would have started, if in 1948, the arabs had, accepted that israel was intitled to the land,if the arabs had of just gone along with the jews, all that land would now be so rich!, and the palestinians would of been part of israel and palestine, living in peace together,the arabs would of been moving in and out of israel, as they pleased, no borders, because love begats love,but because of the arabs, greed, hatred and jealousy, of the jews,they are a poor trodden down people so poor, but they only have themselves to blame eh!they had there chance to live in with the jews and be rich,and don’t forget god is not mocked,there killing in the name of Allah,is nothing but a curse on them, and god knows there hatred, where ever muslims live in the world, there are terrible contrastophies,wars,earthquakes,floods,tsunnamis, desease and death?, have a good look around the world, most of the things happening are in muslim countries maybe their worshipping the wrong god, and are mocking the real god our Lord Jesus Christ, who said “I am the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE”, no one goes to the father but by me,so all these Arabs had better think again, before its too late!!! thankyou……………Paul
Interesting debate. Since 90% of the Middle East population are Muslim (mostly Shiite than Sunni), Israel will always be on guard - not only to defend his holy land, but its political, economic and religious freedoms. I don’t think that will ever change for a long time - Israel will keep fighting for what they believe is theirs.
I constantly remind myself that the governments in these Arabic countries have been deeply rooted in Islamic law. I could be wrong, but I think it is extremely difficult for democratic governments such as Israel to engage in peaceful negotiations with other nations where there is not a separation between church and state.
I already know that there are several terrorists organizations that do not represent the Islamic majority and that includes the Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, but one thing that still puzzles me is the indoctrination of these young Arabic civilians to engage in terrorism.
Surely, many of us want to end the cycle of violence, but new generations are still being taught in schools and families to hate and murder the Jews. If it’s true that the Muslim countries uses propaganda to its citizens, how else would they learn how to peacefully co-exist with others that do not share the same faith? I still reel in the fact that some Muslim governments provide financial incentives to families who are willing to sacrifices their children to be martyred as suicide bombers for the sake of their faith. How can the hell can we address that? I’m not optimistic as Swetha is, but with that kind of mentality over there, I sure don’t see a long-term solution in my lifetime.
Yep. And Iran forking over $100 million a year to the Hezbollah terrorist group in Lebanon will make sure that the Hezbollah will continue it’s sworn statement in their charter….and that’s to wipe out the Jews.
McConnell, knowing that as long the region is committed to razing Israel there will be war. That said, wouldn’t Israel be in effect fighting windmills by forever engaging in defensive warfare? Wouldn’t it then sound advisable for Israel to go on the offensive, like they are now? And isn’t that your entire position?
What some pundits don’t see is that the Israelis are not trapped; they moved there, they chose to be there. An example is that nearly a million of Israel’s 7 million are Russian Jews who moved there in the ’90s (yo relatives, somewhere!). These people are there merely because they can, and the longer Jews mass to immigrate to Israel, the more people are born there with an incontrovertible claim to the land. That is the real strategy; Israel is trying to outlast its neighbors, until a critical mass is reached. Then, nobody can say they don’t belong there, not when there are fifth- and sixth-generation Israelites.
I’ll admit that’s a great strategy. But until then, slaughter. On the defensive, on the offensive. Their militia sponsored by the U.S., with a decidedly different agenda, not really differentiating us from Iran’s $100M pay-in with the Hezbollah.
Everybody for Israel seems to think there are just these two choices: 1) stay amidst tension or 2) stand your ground and fight. I don’t agree, I think you can support Israel AND call for evacuation. For Jews–everybody, really–the prospect of death now should outweigh the prospect of continued exclusive ownership of the holy land.
(As for current ownership, that’s based on man’s law, and not every man’s at that. The neighbors’ beef with Israel is based on their own divine law. So, this isn’t a political war, it’s religious. The UN can only succeed if its members share a common ideological ground, and under current circumstances the UN is unfit to broker peace, and just might always be.)
There is nothing about trying to “outlast” it’s neighbors. In 1947, the UN partitioned a piece of land over to Israel.
The 33 countries that voted in favor of the partition, as set by UN resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, South Africa, Ukraine, United States, USSR, Uruguay, Venezuela.
The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.
The ten countries that abstained: Argentina, Chile, Republic of China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.
One state was absent: Thailand.
Now, are you saying that Israel should simply move out?
Israel has a legal claim. Two generations from now, they’ll also have sentiment, from even Arabs born in, say, 2040 or 2050. To evict Israelites then will be impossible. Arab neighbors will be saying, “Let’s co-exist, they’ve been around since any of us can remember.” Kind of like how nobody can really make a case for our removal from the U.S. and a return to American Indians. Entrenchment.
Yes, I’m saying moving out is an option. I explicitly said that, no need to paraphrase here. In fact, I gave my two “idealistic” solutions a while back (somewhere in Rob’s pretzel blog entry), and both centered on evacuation.
I’m for moving out only because… this much we agree on: For the foreseeable future, as long as Israel is there, there’s going to be warfare, with an irrelevant UN standing by. I’m not willing to sanction a waiting game. “Entrenchment any day now and then the Arabs will let up, any day now, any day…”
My question is, I guess: You think Israel is justified in its offense (I do too), but was it unavoidable (I don’t think so)? You’ve cited history, commented on the present, but offered no direction for the future (a tall order in any case). What would you do if you could have the Middle East your way?
“McConnell, sir, I have Olmert and the Hez on the phone.” What are you gonna say to them? Go…
Well, that’s easy for you to say to tell them they have to move out of all of Israel. 7 Million of them who have Biblical and historical ties to the land.
Whether if it’s avoidable or not, but kidnapping Israeli soldiers is nothing more than an act of war.
Israel has the legal claim to the land as given to them by the UN.
Indeed I have already offered a direction. Look back in previous postings (here and Rob’s pretzel entry).
Turn over the kidnapped Israeli soldiers and give up arms. The Hezbollah is a political party, not a govt entity for all of Lebanon.
Get NATO, as I have said before, to guard and control the borders. Israel move completely out of Lebanon in 2000. Yet, the Hezbollah still attacked Israel with rockets since then. Self defense is justified here.
You do not negotiate with terrorists. Else, you’d just give them more incentives to attack you the next time.
Thanks. Appreciate.
What’s more, UN Resolution 1559, Israel obeyed every aspected of that resolution set forth by the UN by pulling out of southern Lebanon.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/d.....81.doc.htm
But for 6 years both Lebanon and UN failed to enforce that resolution. Including getting rid of Hezbollah or illegal militia.
To be fair, Swetha said that Israel hasn’t been compliant. Just so we aren’t being selective here.
I’ve been approaching this somewhat philosophically. We’re operating on entirely different premises, and that’s fine with me.
Bible.The “Biblical ties” argument doesn’t fly with me since I don’t place credence in the Bible. You obviously do, and that’s a crucial part of your argument. But for me, it’s down to historical ties, and seeing how it’s holy to three religions, I say let them share it. That’s not negotiation with terrorists.
The UN. Wow, I didn’t have a case for this before you supplied the voting record. When you consider the aggregate populations of these voting countries… looks like the 13 who voted against UN Resolution 181 outnumber the 33 who voted for.
I wouldn’t get rid of the UN, but as long as it has a decidely Western and Christian edge, the Middle East will always take its legitimacy with a grain of salt. Power is derived from the consent of the governed - Jefferson. But you might view government differently.
Cloak & Dagger,
Well, the establishment of Israel government, which is Knesset rests on Judaism law.
Both Islamics and Israelis claim that it is not possible for either of them to separate government from religion; however both of them do safeguard freedom of religion in Israel as well as in other Arab nations.
A hearing colleague who is Jew told me that if there was no place for him to live as Jew, he would move to Turkey. The Islamic government of Turkey is well known for respecting freedom of religions, and there is a large Jew population living in Turkey.
Perhaps this link is of interest to you.
Ten Misconceptions About Islam
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/no.....tions.html
Cloak & Dagger wrote:
“one thing that still puzzles me is the indoctrination of these young Arabic civilians to engage in terrorism.”
As long as there’s refguees and poverty in Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghan, it’s very easy for these young Arabs to join al-Qaede, Hizabollah, Taliban, and Hamas. Because of the conditions they live, they could not go to school and are hopeless, so these radical organizations seem the answer to their pitful living conditions and, unfortunately, these radical organizations do boost their self-esteem.
So, the living conditions - poverty and violence - in these countries makes it difficult for these young civilians to attend schools & universities and they are recruited by the terrorist organizations to give some “meaning” in their lives….
Makes sense. Thanks, Raswant.
Patricia, that was an interesting web site you linked to. Everyone reading this discussion should check it out. The content is consistent with what my Malaysian friend, who is a Sunni Muslim, says is in the Koran. You may like to know that Malaysia also practices freedom of religion even though it is a predominantly Muslim country, and Islam is the state religion. The country has Buddhists, Hindus, and Christians also, and there are temples and churches everywhere in addition to mosques.
Just like there is a wide interpretation of Bible among Christians, Shiite Muslims and the violent extremist subsect Wahhadists (of which Osama bin Laden is one), have their own interpretation on the meaning of the Koran, related religious texts, historical events, and the pronouncements of various holy persons over the ages. By twisting the intent of the Koran to suit their own purposes, they justify extreme violent acts.
I suspect that the Palestinians are really the pawns in this religious war. They’re being played by Syria, Iran, and Iraq, to their detriment. None of these countries care a fig about the Palestinians. It’s all about destroying Israel, period. They, along with Hamas and Hezbollah, deliberately disrupted an ongoing, workable peace process.
“Freedom of religion” in Malaysia? Haven’t you looked into it? Malaysia is predominantly an Islamic country. Freedom of religion here in the United States is vastly a different concept as “freedom of religion” in Malaysia. Pole opposites I’d say.
http://pedestrianinfidel.blogs.....world.html
I like this quote:
“Religious freedom is not going to happen in any country that is officially Islam.”
Hey McConnell. You know I agree with you on many things, but regarding Malaysia, I can tell you without hesitation and from first hand experience, you’re quite wrong on this. I’ve visited the country 3 times and at length, met a lot of people, read a lot, etc. I’m a little appalled by the content of that web site you linked to. A bit inflammatory, wouldn’t you say? Consider the source, eh?
Yes, Malaysia is a predominantly Muslim country. Yet freedom of religion is very much like that in the U.S.A. If a Muslim person wants to convert to Christianity, he/she can, and there is no adverse consequences. And vice-versa for any of the minority religions. In its history, Malaysia has had significant cultural and religious strife due to those differences, almost to a point of civil war. However, the government got smart quick and instituted a policy of religious tolerance. It works for them.
I have to tell you, I used to be biased about Muslims. In fact, the first time I set foot in Malaysia, I was ignorant and did not realize they were Muslim until I got there. If I had known, I would never have gone. But once I got there and got to know the people and the culture, I changed my mind and realized that Muslims are not all alike.
Within the Muslim practicioners in Malaysia, though, I have to say that they are pretty strict on each other. But for everybody else, it’s live and let live.
Check out my other comments about the differences between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. It’s the latter who are responsible for most of the problems, I believe.
A minor may not convert to another faith without explicit permission of his or her guardian as described in the Guardianship of Infants Act(1961) and the Federal Constitution (Articles 11 (1) and 12 (3) and (4)) in Malaysia.
Then we have Joshua Jamaluddin was incarcerated under the Internal Security Act for converting to Christianity. He later detailed his torture during his incarceration. Now he is an activist for allowing greater religious freedom in Malaysia.
Muslims who wish to convert from Islam face severe obstacles. For Muslims, particularly ethnic Malays, the right to leave the Islamic faith and adhere to another religion is a controversial question, and in practice it is very difficult for Muslims to change religions. The legal process of conversion is unclear; in practice it is very difficult for Muslims to change their religion legally.
In 1999 the High Court ruled that secular courts have no jurisdiction to hear applications by Muslims to change religions. According to the ruling, the religious conversion of Muslims lies solely within the jurisdiction of Islamic courts.
The issue of Muslim apostasy is very sensitive. In 1998 after a controversial incident of attempted conversion, the Government stated that apostates (i.e., Muslims who wish to leave or have left Islam for another religion) would not face government punishment so long as they did not defame Islam after their conversion. However, whether the very act of conversion was an “insult to Islam” was not clarified at the time. The Government opposes what it considers deviant interpretations of Islam, maintaining that the “deviant” groups’ extreme views endanger national security. In 2005 international media attention focused on the Sky Kingdom sect whose founder Ayah Pin claimed to be God, and whose members - mostly Malays - were accordingly charged with religious “deviancy” and “humiliating Islam.”
In the past, the Government imposed restrictions on certain Islamic groups, primarily the small number of Shi’a. The Government continues to monitor the activities of the Shi’a minority.
In April 2000, the state of Perlis passed a Shari’a law subjecting Islamic “deviants” and apostates to 1 year of “rehabilitation” (under the Constitution, religion, including Shari’a law, is a state matter). Leaders of the opposition Islamic party, PAS, have stated that the penalty for apostasy should be death.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.....n_Malaysia
My main contention was that if a country has an official religion (e.g. Islam) and is part of the govt, then there is no real sense of true religious freedom since the separation between church and govt does not exist. Therefore, this invites potential problems regarding the status of religion in a country.
Actual source:
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2003/23838.htm
Not wikipedia where it has gotten the info from.
A slight correction, Cloak & Dagger. 90% of the world’s Muslims are Sunni, not Shiite. The largest population of Muslims is in Indonesia, not the Middle East. The Sunnis are the Muslim group that tend to be more modern and accepting of new ideas. The Shiites have a long tradition of martyrdom. Most Shiites are in Iraq and Iran. So the strife is not so much with Muslim nations generally, but Shiite Muslims particularly who continue to value martyrdom. That’s the group that encourages suicide bombers, and they are the primary source supply of Islamic terrorists, not the only source of course.
You’re right - the Middle East has more Sunni Muslims. Iraq has more Shiite Muslims than Sunnis. Thanks for the correction.
Latest hits flash animation of rockets slamming, indescriminately so, into Jewish towns (as of July 19).
http://www.conceptwizard.com/n-israel.html
U.N. Chief Accuses Hezbollah of ‘Cowardly Blending’ Among Refugees
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205349,00.html
Nuff said.
And the UN Humanitarian Chief, Jan Egeland, *ALSO* denounced Israel,
QUOTE
During that visit he [Egeland] condemned the killing and wounding of civilians by both sides, and called Israel’s offensive “disproportionate” and “a violation of international humanitarian law.”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205349,00.html
UNQUOTE
From the tone of your posts so far, you are rabid against all Arabs and want to wipe them off the maps, right?
Patricia, even *I* said a few times in DeafDC that even Israel doesn’t mind co-existing with the Arabs. And I have even supplied a citizenship record of Israelis and Arab-Israelis using the population figure. That should be enough of a clue.
As for disproportionality, that is pretty ridiculous play of words here because this is a war. Military actions in war are meant to be “disproportionate” and that leads to victory. And, what’s more, how come “no one cried “disproportionate response” when Hamas demanded 1,200 prisoners in exchange for one Israeli hostage. Hamas and Hezbollah aren’t playing a game of proportions, why should Israel?”
Cox and Forkum express my same sentiments regarding “disproportionate response.”
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000889.html
*sigh*
Why Israel have to shred Lebanon to pieces? It could do much better than engaging in senseless bombings of urban areas.
Israel could do like sending the commandos and Mossad agents to infilrate and surgically eliminate the Hellazaboh people than taking Lebanon back to 50 years ago.
I still stand by my “Hatfields and McCoys” analogy to the current Israeli-Hellozabah strife. The family feud spiraled out of control over little things and dragged almost everybody to the bloody feud.
Civilians in Lebanon do not deserve any displacement or physical attacks.
The slealth maneuvers of disquelling the Hellazaboh people would be more logical and cost-effective.
We should ask the U.N. to bill both Israel and Hellazabah for excessive physical and psychological attacks. That would make other countries think TWICE before enaging in maddening behavior(s). Same thing with the U.S. for her poor post-war plannings in Iraq ought to be considered.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
Well, RLM, I do not agree with any kind of violence. I believe that if the living conditions in Palestine, Iraq, Pakistian, and Afghan were not so desperate, the members of radical organizations in Arab nations would have been insignificant.
agreed. poverty and repression is a breeding ground for discontent and resention. it’s too easy to attract poor and unemployed young men to the call of fundie muslim to overthrow the rich west.
Does anyone know what the poverty and unemployment rates are in these Muslim countries? I assume it is high and that may partially explain the increasing terrorist activities.
I’m curious about the employment trends in these countries - does anyone know?
Check out the CIA website here. This one is for Iraq.
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/iz.html
After 3 successfull democratic elections, I’d say that’s a remarkable feat considering no one in Iraq ever voted freely. Too bad Saddam ignored 17 UN resolutions by violating them over 12 years. Economic sanctions as recommended by the UN didn’t work. In fact, it killed off several hundred thousands Iraqis for the lack of food, medicine and sanitary waters.
if they want to send in an international force for the buffer zone,what could be better than 3000 Millwall supporters there sort em out hooray!!!
When Hezbollah manipulated CNN into doing their anti-Israel propaganda pieces. Later on, CNN’s reporter admits to this gaffe. Goes into CYA mode.
http://newsbusters.org/node/6552
The discussion is really heated. Lemme offer little dark comic relief. Check this out.
Apparently, Slate.com is also confused with the whole Middle East conflict. So they came up with this “buddy” chart.
http://www.slate.com/features/.....eeast.html
Funny! And, I hate to admit it, helpful too.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/.....index.html
What does anyone think about the deaths of the four U.N. investigators and the accusation that it was a “deliberate” attack made by Israel? I assume that it was accidental, but for some reason, I can’t help but wondering if Israel is overreacting at this point? I understand that Lebanon doesn’t have the power to stop the Hezbollah, but aren’t most of the militants killed yet? Are they recruiting more men every day to join? At what point would Israel would stop to get whatever they want?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5217176.stm
These attacks are not stopping Hezbollah (which is Israel’s aim). What are they acheiving? Is this going to plunge Lebanon into another civil war!?!?!
Although the head of Hezbollah (Nasrallah) admitted tha the never expected such a reaction from Israel, what was he trying to acheieve to begin with?
Bottom line: both sides need to quit!! (I guess I am the ever optimist)….
[…] Swetha’s post, Middle East Crisis: Is There A Solution, has garnered more than 200 comments, making it the most discussed post in DeafDC.com history. However, our website servers are having difficulty displaying so many comments, so here’s a new post for you to continue your discussions. No more new comments will be allowed on Swetha’s original post. Continue the discussion here! See related posts:Putting Money Where The Faith Is… Middle East Crisis : Is There A Solution? Showdown? […]
This post has too many comments and is not loading properly anymore; please go to this post to continue the discussion. Thanks!