Author Topic: Israel v Hamas  (Read 8424 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #75 on: November 21, 2012, 06:27:09 PM »

Offline billgiddens

  • MarShon Brooks
  • Posts: 15
  • Tommy Points: 4
Israel has every right to defend itself against groups that are launching missiles into its cities.


Lasting peace will not come no matter how much land it gives away as long as Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood and the nuts running Iran exist. Some of you need to stop falling for the lie that Hamas is made up of a group of peace loving victims.

Israel should be able to act as a sovergin nation and deal with the consequences. My major problem, aside from the loss of life on both sides, is the amount of money we are forced to spend on this cause.

Where will our fincial support in dropping these bombs lead us? Are folks here willing to fight and die for Israel?

We should always be concerned about money spent. Desired outcomes should be clear and results should be assessed.

Somehow Americans were willing to fight and die for the people of Iraq and Afghanistan (and Vietnam, Korea, and others). I'd hate for it to happen, but rhetorically speaking, the answer to your question is historically 'yes if we have to'.

When are Israelis ever asked to do anything useful to the US, nevermind dying in great numbers. Netanyahu says that God gave the rest of Palestine to the Jews. Because taking 70+% wasn't enough land I guess. The Israeli policy is slow motion ethnic cleansing, with almost 1 million settlers now squatting outside their borders.

Google Catastrophic Zionism, which is the foreign policy of Israel. US traitors like Richard Perle wrote what ended up being the Bush Doctrine of preemption for Netanyahu in 1996. The same guy tasked with writing the Bush Doctrine of Preemption was the same guy in charge of gutting anti-terrorism efforts in the Bush transitional team. He also stated flatly that the US invaded Iraq to protect Israel, but that it wasn't an easy sell to the US public, so they made up other reasons.

Oh, this guy also became the Director of the 9/11 Commission, which was described by even the two Chairmen as a whitewash.
9/11 Commission Director: Iraq War Launched to Protect Israel: "Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 – it's the threat against Israel," Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of 9/11 and the future of the war on the al-Qaeda terrorist organization.

Quote
"And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell," said Zelikow. 
It was on his wikipedia page for a while, but they scrubbed it. http://www.antiwar.com/ips/mekay.php?articleid=2208
Think about that for a minute, research whether or not Israel-firsters were in every key position on and after 9/11, and then tell me you want to send other US goys to go die for Israeli land grabbing.

Catastrophic Zionism is the policy, destabilizing the entire middle east and all the terror that requires, while installing puppets.
General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned - Seven Countries In Five Years

Our country has been taken over by spies, and nobody is allowed to point it out.

All they needed was a New Pearl Harbor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_D._Zelikow
Philip Zelikow:

1990s:
"In writing about the importance of beliefs about history, Zelikow has called attention to what he has called "'searing' or 'molding' events [that] take on 'transcendent' importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene."

In the November–December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs, he co-authored an article Catastrophic Terrorism, with Ashton B. Carter, and John M. Deutch, in which they speculated that if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had succeeded, "the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it. Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America’s fundamental sense of security, as did the Soviet atomic bomb test in 1949. Like Pearl Harbor, the event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with draconian measures scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force. More violence could follow, either future terrorist attacks or U.S. counterattacks. Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently." [18]


Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #76 on: November 21, 2012, 06:35:46 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6923
  • Tommy Points: 905
I don't have a "good guy/bad guy" stance on this, because any informed attempt to make that distinction turns into a debate about the particular shade and thickness of the considerable amounts of blood on each side's hands.  The only "good guys" in this mess are the non-combatants on each side who have been swept up in the conflict.

But it seems like in the long run there are only three real options - separate, independent Palestinian and Israeli states, an Israeli state where Palestinians are permanently second-class citizens subjugated by the government, or a true shared state where Israelis have to allow the possibility that Palestinian interests will have a strong voice, maybe even a majority at times, in the government.  The only other option is genocide/mass exile.

That's what it boils down to for me - personally I lean toward a true shared state, although truly independent states would be fine if there was a way to do it fairly.  But it's very alarming to me to see how many Americans seem to prefer permanent subjugation or even eradication.  Seems to fly in the face of every value we're supposed to hold dear.
That's nice in theory, but there already was separate states and the Arab State (and many of the surrounding nations) continually and constantly attacked the Jewish State.  When the Jewish State (backed by Britain and U.S.) won war after war and conflict after conflict, they took more and more land as punishment for the wars (not atypical mind you).  You see therein lies the problem.  The Muslims have consistently shown that they will not stand for Jews being in "their" homeland, which has made peace a pipe dream.  For me, I think that is the problem.

And for the record 18.5% of Israel is populated by Muslims and they get along just fine (for the most part) with the 77.2% of Israel that is Jewish.  4.3% are others (mostly Christians).  If the 1.3 million Arabs in Israel get along fine with the Jews, I don't see why the 3.8 million that live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip can't either, of course the Arabs in Israel aren't influenced by the Hamas either.  Therein lies the problem.

Why do you act like this conflict started immediately after Jewish terrorists drove 750,000 Palestinians from their homes in 1948?

If I moved into your house, told you God gave it to me, then killed your wife, let you and the rest of the family live in the basement, and told you it was a fair deal, what would you think? How long would it take me to decide that God gave me the basement too, and that you and your family down there were terrorists? What if I put you and your family on a diet down in the basement and you all started showing signs of malnourishment? Dirty terrorists, not even thankful that you got to stay in the basement without proper food or medicine, in your own house.

THE ORIGINAL SIN OF THIS CONFLICT WAS THE ETHNIC CLEANSING BY JEWISH TERRORISTS THAT CREATED ISRAEL!

Try to put yourself in the brown people's shoes.

That's a good idea.  In this hpothetical if my view of history is that my people were 'ethncally cleansed' by Jewish terrorists and my land taken from me, leaving me to starve, it would likely be my only option to fight the enemy to my death or theirs. I would choose never to accept the prospect of Israeli sovereignty and could not accept any kind of shared state or be peaceful neighbors in a 2-state system.  My only goal would be to annihilate the enemy or at least leave them powerless.


Now you try:
Imagine you are an Israeli living (as many do) with these premises guiding their lives and decision-making: 1. My friends and members of my family have been hurt, murdered and terrrized by acts of Palestinians, 2. This has been happpening my whole life and I've been told my whole life that the people who do this to us are the enemy  3. I understand that the Palestinians were moved from their land so that my people could have a sovereign homeland after 6 million jews were murdered in Europe; 4. The people who are throwing rocks, blowing up busses and hurling missles have as their primary goal the destruction of the Israeli state. 

What would you do in these shoes?

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #77 on: November 21, 2012, 06:46:41 PM »

Offline billgiddens

  • MarShon Brooks
  • Posts: 15
  • Tommy Points: 4
Who else wants to spend more trillions of dollars and push more thousands of US kids to diefighting for Israel?

Zionists Planned Wars In 7 Countries - General Wesley Clark

‘Catastrophic Zionism’: How Turmoil Benefits Israel
Quote
The program—which amounted to “balkanizing” the various Arab republics, splitting them into religious enclaves in which, for example, Shiite Muslims or otherwise Sunni Muslims would predominate—was an agenda
that Israeli dissident Israel Shahak said, quite simply, was designed “to make an imperial Israel into a world power,” by disrupting the Arab states and thereby setting the stage for Israeli dominance in the Mideast.

The formula was founded on the idea of creating chaos among Israel’s Arab neighbors, hardly a policy any decent, well-meaning neighbor could be credited for fostering. In fact, the current-day political and religious divisions and devastation in Iraq—the consequence of the American invasion of Iraq demanded by the pro-Israel lobby in Washington—mirrors precisely what the Zionist position paper laid forth as the ideal state of affairs for Iraq, from an Israeli point of view, that is.

But where does Egypt fit into all of this? Reflecting on the Zionist strategy paper, Ralph Schoenman—an eminent American Jewish critic of Zionism—writing in 1988 in his book, The Hidden History of Zionism, pointedly noted the paper’s intent of “double-crossing Mubarak” and emphasized that the Yinon paper hoped for “the downfall and dissolution of Egypt,” despite the 1979 Camp David peace agreement.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/catastrophic_zionism_257.html

Shalom, what can you do for me today to pay for the sins of the Goyim before you.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #78 on: November 21, 2012, 06:47:34 PM »

Offline billgiddens

  • MarShon Brooks
  • Posts: 15
  • Tommy Points: 4
.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #79 on: November 21, 2012, 06:48:03 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9373
  • Tommy Points: 408
I don't have a "good guy/bad guy" stance on this, because any informed attempt to make that distinction turns into a debate about the particular shade and thickness of the considerable amounts of blood on each side's hands.  The only "good guys" in this mess are the non-combatants on each side who have been swept up in the conflict.

But it seems like in the long run there are only three real options - separate, independent Palestinian and Israeli states, an Israeli state where Palestinians are permanently second-class citizens subjugated by the government, or a true shared state where Israelis have to allow the possibility that Palestinian interests will have a strong voice, maybe even a majority at times, in the government.  The only other option is genocide/mass exile.

That's what it boils down to for me - personally I lean toward a true shared state, although truly independent states would be fine if there was a way to do it fairly.  But it's very alarming to me to see how many Americans seem to prefer permanent subjugation or even eradication.  Seems to fly in the face of every value we're supposed to hold dear.
That's nice in theory, but there already was separate states and the Arab State (and many of the surrounding nations) continually and constantly attacked the Jewish State.  When the Jewish State (backed by Britain and U.S.) won war after war and conflict after conflict, they took more and more land as punishment for the wars (not atypical mind you).  You see therein lies the problem.  The Muslims have consistently shown that they will not stand for Jews being in "their" homeland, which has made peace a pipe dream.  For me, I think that is the problem.

And for the record 18.5% of Israel is populated by Muslims and they get along just fine (for the most part) with the 77.2% of Israel that is Jewish.  4.3% are others (mostly Christians).  If the 1.3 million Arabs in Israel get along fine with the Jews, I don't see why the 3.8 million that live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip can't either, of course the Arabs in Israel aren't influenced by the Hamas either.  Therein lies the problem.

Why do you act like this conflict started immediately after Jewish terrorists drove 750,000 Palestinians from their homes in 1948?

If I moved into your house, told you God gave it to me, then killed your wife, let you and the rest of the family live in the basement, and told you it was a fair deal, what would you think? How long would it take me to decide that God gave me the basement too, and that you and your family down there were terrorists? What if I put you and your family on a diet down in the basement and you all started showing signs of malnourishment? Dirty terrorists, not even thankful that you got to stay in the basement without proper food or medicine, in your own house.

THE ORIGINAL SIN OF THIS CONFLICT WAS THE ETHNIC CLEANSING BY JEWISH TERRORISTS THAT CREATED ISRAEL!

Try to put yourself in the brown people's shoes.
You mean when Palestinians lost the war in 1948 and as a result of the war many of them left and some were forced out as a consequence of the war.  Wars suck, but don't go around starting them and not expect their to be consequences when you lose.  And lets be clear Palestine had attempted numerous other wars during British occupation and before that during the Ottoman period.  The British finally said, hey we are giving up control, but as a condition we want to create a jewish state in some of our land.  Of course that angered the Palestinians as they wanted it all and wouldn't dare have Jews in "their" homeland.  At the conclusion of the war they had a conference between the sides to work out what to do with the displaced palestinians but neither side was really able to reach an agreement.
2014 Pick 2 Draft 18th pick of 20
Sacramento Kings
Starters - Isaiah Thomas, Eric Gordon, Jimmy Butler, Dirk Nowitzki, Demarcus Cousins
Bench - Kendall Marshall, Michael Carter-Williams, Vince Carter, Wesley Johnson, Marcus Morris, Miles Plumlee, Nerlens Noel

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #80 on: November 21, 2012, 07:08:30 PM »

Offline billgiddens

  • MarShon Brooks
  • Posts: 15
  • Tommy Points: 4
I don't have a "good guy/bad guy" stance on this, because any informed attempt to make that distinction turns into a debate about the particular shade and thickness of the considerable amounts of blood on each side's hands.  The only "good guys" in this mess are the non-combatants on each side who have been swept up in the conflict.

But it seems like in the long run there are only three real options - separate, independent Palestinian and Israeli states, an Israeli state where Palestinians are permanently second-class citizens subjugated by the government, or a true shared state where Israelis have to allow the possibility that Palestinian interests will have a strong voice, maybe even a majority at times, in the government.  The only other option is genocide/mass exile.

That's what it boils down to for me - personally I lean toward a true shared state, although truly independent states would be fine if there was a way to do it fairly.  But it's very alarming to me to see how many Americans seem to prefer permanent subjugation or even eradication.  Seems to fly in the face of every value we're supposed to hold dear.
That's nice in theory, but there already was separate states and the Arab State (and many of the surrounding nations) continually and constantly attacked the Jewish State.  When the Jewish State (backed by Britain and U.S.) won war after war and conflict after conflict, they took more and more land as punishment for the wars (not atypical mind you).  You see therein lies the problem.  The Muslims have consistently shown that they will not stand for Jews being in "their" homeland, which has made peace a pipe dream.  For me, I think that is the problem.

And for the record 18.5% of Israel is populated by Muslims and they get along just fine (for the most part) with the 77.2% of Israel that is Jewish.  4.3% are others (mostly Christians).  If the 1.3 million Arabs in Israel get along fine with the Jews, I don't see why the 3.8 million that live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip can't either, of course the Arabs in Israel aren't influenced by the Hamas either.  Therein lies the problem.

Why do you act like this conflict started immediately after Jewish terrorists drove 750,000 Palestinians from their homes in 1948?

If I moved into your house, told you God gave it to me, then killed your wife, let you and the rest of the family live in the basement, and told you it was a fair deal, what would you think? How long would it take me to decide that God gave me the basement too, and that you and your family down there were terrorists? What if I put you and your family on a diet down in the basement and you all started showing signs of malnourishment? Dirty terrorists, not even thankful that you got to stay in the basement without proper food or medicine, in your own house.

THE ORIGINAL SIN OF THIS CONFLICT WAS THE ETHNIC CLEANSING BY JEWISH TERRORISTS THAT CREATED ISRAEL!

Try to put yourself in the brown people's shoes.

That's a good idea.  In this hpothetical if my view of history is that my people were 'ethncally cleansed' by Jewish terrorists and my land taken from me, leaving me to starve, it would likely be my only option to fight the enemy to my death or theirs. I would choose never to accept the prospect of Israeli sovereignty and could not accept any kind of shared state or be peaceful neighbors in a 2-state system.  My only goal would be to annihilate the enemy or at least leave them powerless.


Now you try:
Imagine you are an Israeli living (as many do) with these premises guiding their lives and decision-making: 1. My friends and members of my family have been hurt, murdered and terrrized by acts of Palestinians, 2. This has been happpening my whole life and I've been told my whole life that the people who do this to us are the enemy  3. I understand that the Palestinians were moved from their land so that my people could have a sovereign homeland after 6 million jews were murdered in Europe; 4. The people who are throwing rocks, blowing up busses and hurling missles have as their primary goal the destruction of the Israeli state. 

What would you do in these shoes?

Do you know who the Netanyahu's #2 is? It's Defense Secretary Ehud Barak:
Quote
"If I was [a Palestinian] at the right age, at some stage I would have entered one of the terror organizations and have fought from there, and later certainly have tried to influence from within the political system," said Barak, replying to a question from interviewer Gideon Levy.

Barak immediately offered clarification. "You're in essence asking if there is legitimacy for a Palestinian to fight. From our standpoint, their methods are very abominable, villainous, inhumane and inappropriate," he said, including the killing of innocent women and children.

Despite that attempt at damage control, the comments have caused glee in Netanyahu's Likud Party and embarrassed Labor stalwarts.
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/mar/11/news/mn-27709

Do you know who the founder of Israel is? David Ben Gurion:
Quote
"There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"
-- Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp. 121-122.

Quote
"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.
Quote
"If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel."
-- David Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth's Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation).


So it's really not as complicated as so many people want us to think. And then they made up the lie that the fight between Jews and Muslims had always been ongoing. Total lie!

Read Scars of War, Wounds of Peace, by Ehud Barak's former Foreign Minister, Shlomo Ben Ami, PHD.

The real story is told explicitly by Israel's leaders since before it was even a country. But media outlet will ever show you these quotes, or anything negative at all, ever, about Israel or the power of the Jewish community over media, government, and the private Federal Reserve cartel. If something's "good for the Jews", you'll hear all about it though, which is why it's now cool to hate muslims.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #81 on: November 21, 2012, 07:41:48 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6923
  • Tommy Points: 905

So it's really not as complicated as so many people want us to think. And then they made up the lie that the fight between Jews and Muslims had always been ongoing. Total lie!

Read Scars of War, Wounds of Peace, by Ehud Barak's former Foreign Minister, Shlomo Ben Ami, PHD.

The real story is told explicitly by Israel's leaders since before it was even a country. But media outlet will ever show you these quotes, or anything negative at all, ever, about Israel or the power of the Jewish community over media, government, and the private Federal Reserve cartel. If something's "good for the Jews", you'll hear all about it though, which is why it's now cool to hate muslims.

Confused as I have been all along by your posts, I won't respond again nor read this thread again. It's clear you didn't understand, or chose not to address, my point.  I am sure it is true that Palestinians have been wronged.  If you think this fact has been hidden from Americans you are not only incorrect, I might suggest that this is paranoid thinking. It doesn't surprise me that Ben Gurion and others understood the view from the other side, but it does leave me wondering about whether there has ever been a similar understanding of the Israeli perspective by Palestinians.   You clearly gave no thought to seeing any of this from an Israeli perspective. Hopefully leaders on both sides at some point can be more like the Ben Gurion that you suggest in your quotes -- leaders who are able to see and respect the others' perspective and act with some level of compassion and understanding.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #82 on: November 21, 2012, 07:55:36 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Bob Cousy
  • **************************
  • Posts: 26710
  • Tommy Points: 1970
This whole "the Jewish money in America controls the American government and media" to me is hogwash.

America helped and was complicit in the creation of Israel. America decided it was going to make Israel its ally and the relationship was important to America as America wanted a strong ally in THE most tumultuous and incendiary area of the world.

You aren't going to hear bad things about America's closest allies in the US very often. Great Britain isn't criticized here in America very often. Neither is Japan.

Israel received tons of criticism in the newspaper media in the 60's and 70's. In the internet world, there's tons of criticism of Israel's handling of the current and recent past handling of the Palestinian situation.

This administration has received criticism for not giving Israel enough support as they attempt to build a peace in the Mideast. I don't see how that shows they are controlled by the Jews. During the Carter administration when he was trying to build a peace with Sadat and Begin, were the Jews telling Carter to do that too?

The Bush administration has never been very honest about Iraq, but I find it difficult to believe it was for Israel or that they conspired to have 9/11 happen so they could have a reason to invade Iraq to protect Israel. I mean I am a conspiracy theorist but that's way, way, way, way, way to out there to give even the slightest bit of credence to it.

I really have no side I want to support in this struggle. I just hope it doesn't lead to Nuclear Armageddon and I hope the American government realizes that both sides have a ton of blood on their hands and it is because the Allied powers after WWII decided to give someone else's lands to a religious group and call it a nation.
2015 CB HISTORICAL DRAFT: COMING THIS OCTOBER
FORMAT:
3 players from 1960-73
3 players from 1974-86
3 players from 1987-00
3 players from 2001-Pres
1 player from any era

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #83 on: November 21, 2012, 09:16:11 PM »

Offline IndeedProceed

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37682
  • Tommy Points: 1859
  • You ain't the boss of the freakin' bedclothes.
Israel is cool in my book, but I get why the Palestinians get mad at them. I wish they would be more sympathetic to each other and approach the problem without religion totes blocking the whole thing, you guys.

That's how I feel about the whole thing.

DKC Portland Trailblazers Team Card
Questions about the DKC? Ask here: LINK
Free Agency Tracker: Link

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #84 on: November 22, 2012, 01:08:57 AM »

Offline Change

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6666
  • Tommy Points: 544
Happy to see and end to the violence. Lets hope this one brings lasting peace to the region. Muslim brotherhood guys aren't so bad after all  8) Credit to our secretary of the state as well as Egyptian government mediating the talks. Leaders stepped up when needed.

Happy Thanksgiving to all :)

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #85 on: November 28, 2012, 06:47:45 PM »

Online JSD

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7861
  • Tommy Points: 359
  • Anything is possible


To me this is the only sensible position.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #86 on: November 28, 2012, 07:33:44 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23248
  • Tommy Points: -29392
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .


To me this is the only sensible position.

I don't mind his position in terms of foreign aid.

I do object to him suggesting Israel is to blame.

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks. - Rick Pitino

Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012

Please send all DKC Cleveland trade ideas to riah32.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #87 on: November 29, 2012, 07:34:25 AM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 2182


To me this is the only sensible position.

I don't mind his position in terms of foreign aid.

I do object to him suggesting Israel is to blame.
Ron Paul was my man, but I firmly agree with Roy on this one.
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #88 on: December 02, 2012, 10:11:39 PM »

Offline Brendan

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2988
  • Tommy Points: 72
    • Self Assay
I'll worry about cutting aid to Israel, after we stop propping up the UN and all the countries that are rabidly anti-America. Then I'll worry about Israel. At least we're getting a return on that investment.

Re: Israel v Hamas
« Reply #89 on: December 03, 2012, 08:58:22 PM »

Online JSD

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7861
  • Tommy Points: 359
  • Anything is possible


To me this is the only sensible position.

I don't mind his position in terms of foreign aid.

I do object to him suggesting Israel is to blame.

That's neither here nor there when it comes to the main point: We should not be involved.

Right now we are very much one sided and it will no doubt backfire. Israel should be recognized and be able to function as an independant nation.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog