I have a prefect place to move Israel to:
Iran.
Of course, it may take awhile for the glowing rubble to lose it’s radiocativity, but roaches are the most durable creatures on earth, you gotta use strong stuff to clear them out. |
| |
Written By:
shark
URL:
http://
|
|
FWIW, the words Iran and Aryan have the same root. Discuss... |
| |
Written By:
D
URL:
http://
|
Shark, what the fuck do you think this is, LGF? Do you care to explain calling Iranians roaches (and don’t play dumb, that’s what you were implying) is qualitatively different from saying the same thing about Jews?
And Bruce, it’s all well and good to say that Iran shouldn’t have nuclear weapons, but how on earth are you going to stop them? There is no way to do it short of just declaring war and bombing them back to the stone age. If you’re not willing to come right out and endorse this, then we would do better to figure out how this situation can be turned to our advantage and kept from exploding, literally. |
| |
Written By:
Matt McIntosh
URL:
http://conjecturesandrefutations.net/weblog/
|
If you’re not willing to come right out and endorse this, then we would do better to figure out how this situation can be turned to our advantage and kept from exploding, literally.
Do a search Matt ... I believe you’ll find this has already been discussed here. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
|
If you (McQ) want to consider those remarks, why do you have to be scared and distance yourself from Iranian point of view? Being politically correct doesn’t always help! |
| |
Written By:
Truthseeker
URL:
http://
|
If you (McQ) want to consider those remarks, why do you have to be scared and distance yourself from Iranian point of view? Being politically correct doesn’t always help!
Because I think the Iranian point of view is stupid.
Clear enough?
But I also think the "outrage" by the rest of the world is a bit hypocritical. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
"Do a search Matt ... I believe you’ll find this has already been discussed here."
Is a straight answer too much to ask for? Yes, this has been discussed here, recently by Jon, who concluded (correctly, IMO) that our options are pretty thin and that the prospects for stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons were pretty dim (short of total war). I didn’t see you contradict him anywhere, so what exactly is your position about what should be done? I seem to recall you endorsing efforts to foment internal revolution in Iran, which is certainly an idea, but I don’t see cause to be particularly optimistic about that prospect in the short term either. |
| |
Written By:
Matt McIntosh
URL:
http://conjecturesandrefutations.net/weblog/
|
Is a straight answer too much to ask for?
You know what Matt, you can cut the attitude.
I don’t "owe" you shit.
Clear enough? |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
|
You’re the one out of line here, McQ. Matt has been nothing but respectful to you. He asked for a straight answer, and you accuse him of having an attutude? He asked a direct question. You certainly don’t have to answer it, but don’t pretend he’s being a dick about it, or that his question is unreasonable. |
| |
Written By:
Jon Henke
URL:
http://www.QandO.net
|
|
Buzz off, Jon. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
|
"Gentlemen, gentlemen, you can’t fight HERE..." |
| |
Written By:
Joe
URL:
http://
|
No. I’m not wrong, and Matt isn’t being disrespectful. You said "I have a tendency to treat others as they treat me."
Well? |
| |
Written By:
Jon Henke
URL:
http://www.QandO.net
|
Dear Mrs. Kravits, please stick your nose in someone else’s business.
Thank you. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
Except for Soviet immigrants, there would be more Sepharidic, that is Middle Eastern and Mediterranean Jews, than there are Ashkenazic, that is Eastern European Jews, in Israel. Would you send Jews descended from Iranian Jews (by the way there was a huge Jewish presence in Persia going back to THE BOOK OF ESTHER) to Europe??
Joe |
| |
Written By:
joe
URL:
http://
|
It’s unfortunate that he denied the holocaust because that made his entire argument sound dumb.
But he did ask a valid question:
Europeans perpetrated the holocaust and caused the need for the creation of a Jewish state. Since they’re responsible, why shouldn’t they be the ones who must give up land in order to create the state? |
| |
Written By:
Zink
URL:
http://
|
Zink,
Why should the Jews/Zionists (not entirely one and the same) have a homeland in Europe? Their home was/is Palestine/Eretz Ysrael, why shouldn’t they have agitated and received land there?
MODERN Zionism was a movement of "Return" not just Nationalism, or at least in the Post-WWI World that’s what it became. In the beginning there were ideas bruited about placing the Jewish Homeland in various places OTHER than what was then-Trans-Jordan, but after the Balfour Declaration those faded.
The Jews/Zionists began to move into and acquire land in Trans-Jordan and agitate for "statehood" or autonomy from the British. The Zionists didn’t WANT to be in Europe post-1945, they WANTED to be in Trans-Jordan/Palestine/Ysrael and that was where they were fighting to establish their homeland.
To have changed this homeland to, I don’t know, say Alsace-Lorraine, would have required moving the likes of Ben-Gurion and Menachim Begin to Europe, there was already a struggle going on, I think another proposal would have merely INCREASED the violence, not diminished it.
I pray, earnestly, that this isn’t going to become a thread about the fundamental right of the State of Israel to EXIST, because it’s FOOLISH, in the extreme, to make any such arguments going on 60 years AFTER the establishment of the State of Israel. Israel exists, where it does, and wishing otherwise does not vitiate the right of the state to exist, nor advance any solutions to the problems between Israel, the Palestinians, and the various Arab states and political-economic-social groups surrounding Israel.
It would be akin to the British saying, in 1840, "Ok, OK, George Washington, was right. The United States CAN exist, BUT would you mind moving to the Rio del Plata?"
|
| |
Written By:
Joe
URL:
http://
|
|
Whoa, whoa! Time out, gentlemen! Let’s all take a breather guys, I don’t want to be causing any acrimony here. I know I’ve been sparring with Bruce a bit heavily in the comments for the past 24 hours, but I meant no personal offense and I’d rather this not turn more sour than it already has. Let’s all step away from our keyboards for a while. |
| |
Written By:
Matt McIntosh
URL:
http://conjecturesandrefutations.net
|
After 57 bloody years the Jews have still not convinced the Palistinians to surrender Palistine and nobody else wants them as neighbors either.
Palestine?
There’s never been a nation called Palestine.
What are you talking about?
Nobody mentions that Israel has many illegal nuclear weapons itself while it points the accusing finger at Iran. By what Zionist logic can Israel have them and Iran not?
So how many times has Israel used those alleged nukes again?
And you can guarantee us that a nation building ICBMs and nukes, such as Iran, has no intention of using them I suppose?
Stealing real estate from the poor Palistinians is the biggest joke the United Nations ever played upon the world and it is now time for this fun to end.
Pop quiz —- and the capital of Palestine was ________? |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
I am responding to Book, & I hope this response is educational in general :-)
After 57 bloody years the Jews have still not convinced the Palistinians to surrender Palistine and nobody else wants them as neighbors either.
Large majorities in both Israel and the territories have said in polls that they support the peace process. I will paraphrase Daoud Kattab, who recently wrote that pretty much everyone knows what the end result of that peace process would be: two states, Israel and Palestine, with borders that more or less reflect the 1967 borders (give or take some land swaps, e.g. Israel’s Arab-majority Umm al Fahm might go to the Pals in exchange for the large Jewish settlement blocks) and some mechanism for sharing the holy places in Jerusalem (one proposal was to layer control vertically—Israel controlling from depth X down, where the Temple ruins are, and the PA controlling from that point up).
The problem is that there are minorities of violent extremists and gangsters who profit from the current situation, and governments in Syria and Iran who do not want any kind of peace. Don’t get me started about Syria. Talk about bad neighbors... .
Nobody mentions that Israel has many illegal nuclear weapons itself while it points the accusing finger at Iran. By what Zionist logic can Israel have them and Iran not? Both or neither is only fair.
Israel has never signed any treaty banning it from having nuclear weapons. Israel’s nuclear weapons are, therefore, perfectly legal.
Iran DID sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and is bound by it NOT to develop nukes. Iran has abrogated the NPT, and is developing nuclear weapons that are illegal under that treaty.
By the way, do you think the Palestinians like the idea of nuclear strikes against Israel? No way! The West Bank is only 15 miles from Tel Aviv, and any nuclear strike against the Israeli capital in Jerusalem would obliterate the parts of the city that the Palestinians want to use as their capital too. This helps to explain why the PA’s Saeb Erakat strongly condemned Ahmedinejad’s remark about wiping Israel off the map.
And do any of the Arabs like what Iran is doing? LOL. Nobody wants a nuclear war in the Middle East except for the lunatics currently in power in Iran.
Anybody who buys into the holocaust guilt story must then logically also agree that Westphalia is a much more suitable location for a Zionist state.
No. The Nazis may have murdered 3/4 of my extended family in Europe, but the UN created Israel in the right place: the Jewish homeland. While I have enjoyed visiting Germany, it was never the Jewish homeland. For 2000 years, Jews in the diaspora ended the Passover seder with the pledge, "l’shana haba b’yerushalaim"—"next year in Jerusalem."
It was time to go home.
Regardless, Israel is no less legitimate than Egypt, Jordan or any other country that became independent after World War 2. ;-)
Stealing real estate from the poor Palistinians is the biggest joke the United Nations ever played upon the world and it is now time for this fun to end. Move ’em to Westphalia...
If we want to get into that, (1) Jews were buying land legally for a long time. (2) The Arab armies tried to steal it from them in 1948. (3) The result of that war established the State of Israel. (4) Israel has as much right to exist as the USA, Australia, or for that matter the UK or Jordan, all of which also exist on real estate that once belonged to other peoples. I don’t say this in order to open a debate about the right of these other countries to exist; I believe that all of them have an equivalent right to exist, peacefully and securely, precisely where they are now and as they are now.
By the way, "Palestinian" is spelled with an "e."
All the best. |
| |
Written By:
Howard
URL:
http://
|
//Nobody mentions that Israel has many illegal nuclear weapons itself while it points the accusing finger at Iran. By what Zionist logic can Israel have them and Iran not? Both or neither is only fair.//
Book, WTF? Do you think this is MyBlahg—what with your rant about Israel and "Zionist logic"?? You do realize that the Arab world has been trying to wipe Israel—a democracy—off the map for decades and that Iran has been threatening to make Israel extinct for decades, right?
|
| |
Written By:
Canadian Conservative/Libertarian
URL:
http://
|
"Stealing real estate from the poor Palistinians"
Please! This was a perfectly legitimate use of eminent domain. The land was being underutilized by the current residents. It is now a much more prosperous area. It is unfortunate that a few stubborn holdouts had to be evicted, but progress does have a price. So there.
"There’s never been a nation called Palestine"
There was never a nation called Zimbabwe, or Nigeria, or USA, or etc. until it was established.
Speaking of homelands, is there some way I can get the UN to give me some land in my ancestral homeland? I am longing to return to my families village on the Seine. Those damn Romans. And Goths. And Franks. |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
McQ thinks the capital of Palestine should be that crowded concentration camp the Jews created [and still regularly bomb] called Gaza? Or the ever-shrinking West Bank concentration camp behind the land-grabbing Zion Wall?
One more time, slugger, the capital of Palestine is ________?
|
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
The capital of Palestine: Ramla http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramla
"There’s never been a nation called Palestine"
Regardless, this argument can be used for virtually all of Africa, which was colonized by Europeans, so does that mean that Europeans had the right to do with Africa as they pleased to?
I suppose that’s a matter of opinion, but IMHO it would have been wrong to build a nation for persecuted Chinese ... in let’s say Congo.
What bothers me with Israel is that it is a nation very closely related to a religion (i.e. David’s star on their flag, automatic citizenship to people of Jewish faith). In and of itself this fact must have been very hostile to non-Jews; who in their right mind would want to join such a nation if they were not Jewish? Perhaps the situation would have been better if Israel was built with the local population in mind *too* i.e. have no strong ties to any religion. Maybe that way the locals would have felt less inclined to resist and more inclined to join Israel, and have a sense of ownership and pride in Israel ... |
| |
Written By:
Zink
URL:
http://
|
Establishing a Jewish homeland in some place other than the biblical ’Holy Lands’ seems reasonable, but only when taken out of historical context. It was already tried, in many different places, when the Jews couldn’t get a state established in the historical Israel. Jewish states have been attempted or suggested in such unlikely places as Argentina, Siberia, West Africa, and Newfoundland.
Obviously they didn’t succeed then, why would the concept work now, especially when Israel has been an established sovereign nation for half a century?
I personally—far from being a ’Zionist’ and very seldom even a supporter of Israel—think that the most tenable solution to the entire mess is the exact opposite of what has already been suggested here: move the "Palestinians" out of Israel. It seems apparent that Arabs and Jews can’t play nicely together and that moving Israel is not a viable option. Surely those compassionate neighboring Arab nations will take care of them. Since they care about them so much they can even make their own little state for them (yeah, right). |
| |
Written By:
J
URL:
http://
|
Surely those compassionate neighboring Arab nations will take care of them. Since they care about them so much they can even make their own little state for them (yeah, right).
The last time one of them did so, the Palestinians tried to overthrow the government. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
Regardless, this argument can be used for virtually all of Africa, which was colonized by Europeans, so does that mean that Europeans had the right to do with Africa as they pleased to?
Irrelevant and lacking context.
The argument being made was that the "Palestinians" had been robbed of their land in "Palestine". There is no, nor has there ever been a state called "Palestine". Thus a people who never existed historically cannot have been robbed of a land which never existed historically.
That is the point.
What bothers me with Israel is that it is a nation very closely related to a religion (i.e. David’s star on their flag, automatic citizenship to people of Jewish faith). In and of itself this fact must have been very hostile to non-Jews; who in their right mind would want to join such a nation if they were not Jewish?
Why don’t you ask the Israeli arabs who hold citizenship as well as live and work there? They also hold seats in the Parliament. Can you imagine the same sort of privileges extended jews in arab countries?
Perhaps the situation would have been better if Israel was built with the local population in mind *too* i.e. have no strong ties to any religion.
Maybe you ought to bone up a bit on the "local population" which lives in Israel before assuming facts not in evidence. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
www.jewwatch.com
Whoa, dude. You really know how to put a turd in a punchbowl. You must be loads of fun at parties. I only skimmed the site, but you Aryan dudes sure are boring. Even the "Jewish Pornographers" section was disappointing. No pictures at all. I give it a D. The language was awkward, repetitive, and ponderous. Visually it definitely sucked, but it had a good beat you could march to. |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
www.jewwatch.com
You have got to be shitting me.... Shouldn’t you be writing a screed about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or something? |
| |
Written By:
J
URL:
http://
|
Book:
I started by assuming that you were an honest but ill-informed supporter of the Palestinians, and not simply a bigot who hates Jews. Unfortunately, it appears that you may be the latter. What a waste of your time and energy! With an obsession like this, you will always be frustrated and unhappy. ;-)
57 years is long enough to demonstrate that Gaza is nothing less than a concentration camp. The irony.
(1) You fail to draw a connection between 57 years and the present status of Gaza. (2) The Israelis don’t force the Palestinians to stay in Gaza, and (3) the Palestinians control the Gaza-Egypt border.
So the analogy is somewhat ridiculous.
From your reply to me:
Thank you so much Howard for your "educational" response. Please answer a few simple questions in the spirit of furthering our understanding:
*laughs* Do you really want to understand, or do you just want me to hate you back? The former might make a difference, but the latter seems a rather pointless exercise.
1) Why has no one ever heard of an Amish Anti-Defamation League? http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051126/NEWS01/511260450
Because there is none. Of course, there IS prejudice against the Amish, but it mostly consists of taunts and the low-level bigotry of small-minded idiots. The Amish have not been the victims of attempted genocide in recent decades. Nor are there lunatics out there who plan to wipe them from the face of the earth. So self-defense approaches hardly seem necessary.
Exile the Amish from their home, force them to move from country to country where people don’t understand why they won’t act like everyone else, give this situation a couple of thousand years, and see what happens.
2) The Jewish Anti-Defamation League website complains of Jews being evicted from many European villages for centuries and in 17 of those countries the people still don’t want them:
http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4726_13.htm
The survey you cite did not ask whether people would mind having a Jewish neighbor, coworker or friend, so the survey does not support your assertion that "nobody wants them."
What it does show is that some Europeans are thick-headed bigots. Amazing, eh? Of course, the same people who hold such distorted views of Jews frequently hold distorted views of blacks, Muslims, Romany, and even Americans. Bigotry can become a systematic way of blaming others for your own problems instead of doing something about the problems.
On the other hand, there have always been wonderful human beings in all of those countries who were wiser than that.
3) I personally don’t know any Jews so maybe you can explain why nobody apparently wants them as neighbors.
*shrugs* Then perhaps you should reserve judgment until you get to know Jewish people personally. I am sure that you’re an independent-minded guy who likes to make up his own mind about things rather than believing everything you hear. So why base your likes and dislikes on other people’s claims?
All of this is pretty far from the topic of the discussion, though.
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas to you. Enjoy your holiday. |
| |
Written By:
Howard
URL:
http://
|
Maybe McQ himself ought to bone up a bit on the facts relevant to this thread:
WOW!
We’ve got a live one folks.
Cue the "Twilight Zone" theme (and maybe a stanza or two of the "Horst Wessel" song.
We’re done here. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
While you’re there look up "anti-semite". |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
Book:
I think we should all take this subject a little more serious...including McQ who started this thread. At some point the Muslims ARE going to get their hands on nukes. There are over a billion Muslims and they are sitting right on top of 80% of Earth’s oil supply. They are absolutely resolute in removing Israel from "their" neighborhood. Israel nuking Iran will only start Armageddon...not finish it. It’s time for a plan B.
(1) Israel isn’t the problem. It is an excuse. The problem is Islamic extremism. Kow-towing to it will not make you the friend of Islamic extremists, any more than mayor Ken Livingstone’s support for Islamic extremists protected London from being targetted by al Qaeda. In fact, it will mark you as a weakling, which will mark you as a target.
(2) Historically speaking, if you remove one excuse for radical Islamist violence, radical Islamists find a different excuse. Example: what was bin Laden’s core issue? Presence of "Crusader armies" near Mecca, which happened because of Iraq’s 1991 invasion of Kuwait, and NOT because of Israel. The US is, you may note, no longer in the Land of the Two Mosques. But al Qaeda now wants the US out of the middle east altogether. And subsequently it will want all US-friendly governments out of the middle east. And then out of all Muslim countries world-wide. And so on. "Remove the provocation" does not work, my friend, because our open, western society is the provocation, not Israel.
(3) If we are worried about the oil supply, then it would be far better, and far more lucrative for the United States, to turn Kansas into the new Middle East. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiesel
Personally, I’m good with paying American farmers to send their kids to college. I’m less happy about paying for suicide bombings. That’s just me, though.
(4) You’re picking an odd time to make these arguments. Muslim nations are increasingly talking to Israel. Ahmadinejad’s foamy-mouthed announcements are attempting to revive an atmosphere of hatred precisely because the atmosphere of pragmatism that has been growing in certain Muslim countries since the Gaza disengagement scares Iran.
Middle East dynamics are a lot more complex than they appear on the surface.
American taxpayers have spent over $134 billion on this Israel experiment since 1948 and 57 years of our money down this rathole is enough. Staying the course is insanity.
We’ve spent a lot of money arming South Korea, and kept troops on the ground there for decades (which we have not needed to do in Israel). I think that was a perfectly reasonable investment for a global superpower. Unfortunately North Korea just about has the bomb, and unfortunately Kim Jon Il’s regime is no more rational than the one in Iran. However, it’s not going to help for us to abandon South Korea.
I also think it’s perfectly reasonable for a global superpower to invest in Israel (and Turkey, and other friendly nations). In Israel’s case, the US has loaned Israel billions to buy American products, which it has spent in the American economy, bringing jobs to people all over the USA. It has never defaulted on any of these loans; it has repaid every penny, with interest.
Gaza IS a shameful concentration camp.
You are using outdated, empty and inflammatory rhetoric. The PA controls the border, not Israel.
Maybe Howard can suggest some logical ideas without claiming that God Almighty has selected this particular piece of real estate for his [chosen] tribe. After all. they already have NYC, Miami, and Hollywood...
Your comments about NYC, Miami and Hollywood are a bit silly. NYC is a city of 8 million people, of whom about a million are Jews.
I believe that I already presented a concise summary of what rational people in the region think would be a likely agreement. The man whose writing I paraphrased, Daoud Kuttab, is in fact a Palestinian journalist and not an Israeli one. Perhaps I should have made that clear.
...There are two sides to this Middle East problem and they are both equally presently dangerous.
Not true. There are many sides to this Middle East situation, and a wide variety of problems. If you scratch the surface, there are a host of conflicts bubbling in the Middle East that have nothing at all to do with Israel.
* Iran-Iraq (there are deep cultural issues here, way beyond the obvious US thing)
* Iraq-Syria (2 weeks ago the Iraqi DM called the Syrian border "the gateway of evil")
* Syria-Turkey (water disputes and PKK terrorists used against Turkey)
* Syria-Lebanon (Syrian internal media says Lebanon should always have been be a province of Syria; you get the picture)
* Lebanese Christian-Shiite-Druze
* Kurds-Iraq-Turkey-Syria-Iran (Kurdish nationalism and complex international politics)
* Iran-UAE (cold territorial conflict)
* Saudi-Yemen (small war in 1998)
* Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan
* Kuwait-Iraq (non-issue while US in Iraq, but there are issues here)
* Iranian Arabs (riots in 2 provinces 2005)
* Shiite-Sunni issues (Iran, Bahrain and Lebanon have Shiite majorities, while the rest have Sunni; al Qaeda and friends believe that the Shi’ites are heretics and should all be murdered—though al-Zawahiri says al-Zarqawi should delay doing this until after they establish their new Caliphate).
These are only the current conflicts; past conflicts are more extensive.
The GCC countries don’t buy fighter planes from the US to fight the Israelis. They buy them to deter attacks by Iran and Iraq, and sometimes about their other GCC neighbors, and so that if a conflict does occur, they can buy time until the US deploys to rescue them.
In conclusion, Israel is a member state of the UN, in the same way that Germany, South Korea, Kuwait, Turkey and the USA are. It has the same right to exist, whether or not any of these countries contains both immigrants and ethnic minorities, and whether or not someone somewhere thinks that these countries should be dismantled. Let’s work with the world as it is rather than dreaming up alternate realities.
I appreciate your desire to find solutions to middle east problems. I hope that you find a way to divorce this interest from a personal animosity toward Jews.
Okay. This was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long. I’ll stop. |
| |
Written By:
Howard
URL:
http://
|
|
Since when does animosity require personal familiarity? I don’t know any child molesters, but I am pretty sure I don’t like them. How many of the rioters we see on television chanting "death to America" have actually met an American? |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
|
Or as Tony Soprano would say, "Sorry, nothing personal, it’s just business". |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
Since I don’t know any Jews a personal animosity is impossible.
A study in ignorance. Anti-semitism doesn’t require a "personal animostity" since it is directed at an entire race. But someone with any intellectual integrity would know that. I don’t know any Klansmen either, but I do indeed have animosity toward their ideology and their ilk.
|
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/
|
