ChatterBank0 min ago
keyplus
21 Answers
I apologise to everyone for putting this thread here, but the remark i'm referring to, was made in this topic.
Anyone who likes to can come on with what you think if you like.
keyplus, you mentioned in my earlier thread, that the events in the Middle East wouldn't be happening, if it wasn't for the support of Jews living outside Israel, and I asked if Muslims outside Palestine were supporting Hamas.
And if so, what is the difference?.
Anyone who likes to can come on with what you think if you like.
keyplus, you mentioned in my earlier thread, that the events in the Middle East wouldn't be happening, if it wasn't for the support of Jews living outside Israel, and I asked if Muslims outside Palestine were supporting Hamas.
And if so, what is the difference?.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Lonnie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think there's a difference in scale Lonnie.
The US gives Israel $3 billon a year in military aid, and has been funding it's military in the billions for over 20 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel-United_Sta tes_military_relations
US intelligence reckons Hammas to receive about $50 Million from various sources.
Israel has also developed nuclear weapons yet far from receiving pressure to disarm and sign the non-proliferation treaty is being funded!
Not only that but Israel develops Chemical and Biological weapons at Ness Ziona.
Israel is also believed to have used forms of nuclear weapons against Palestinian targets and is currently accused of using chemical weapons such as white phosphorus in areas of high civillian concentration.
It is the US's continued political and financial backing of Israel that gives it the ability to continue to hold out against demands for it to talk to Hammas.
Until Israel does talk to Hammas there will be no prospect of peace and more and more civillians will die on both sides.
Personally I think the US needs to engage with Iran and Syria and Saudi Arabia and agree an embargo of military funding on both sides in order to force both to negotiate a settlement.
But whilst the US was going around banging drums and shouting "Axis of Evil" that was never going to happen.
Maybe it can now
The US gives Israel $3 billon a year in military aid, and has been funding it's military in the billions for over 20 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel-United_Sta tes_military_relations
US intelligence reckons Hammas to receive about $50 Million from various sources.
Israel has also developed nuclear weapons yet far from receiving pressure to disarm and sign the non-proliferation treaty is being funded!
Not only that but Israel develops Chemical and Biological weapons at Ness Ziona.
Israel is also believed to have used forms of nuclear weapons against Palestinian targets and is currently accused of using chemical weapons such as white phosphorus in areas of high civillian concentration.
It is the US's continued political and financial backing of Israel that gives it the ability to continue to hold out against demands for it to talk to Hammas.
Until Israel does talk to Hammas there will be no prospect of peace and more and more civillians will die on both sides.
Personally I think the US needs to engage with Iran and Syria and Saudi Arabia and agree an embargo of military funding on both sides in order to force both to negotiate a settlement.
But whilst the US was going around banging drums and shouting "Axis of Evil" that was never going to happen.
Maybe it can now
jake-the-peg is frankly what I would call a traitor.
British and living in Britain eh jake? Nice comfy armchair from which to spout your lefty rubbish?
Yes, one day Hamas (=Islam) will destroy Israel, it has to happen, aided by woolly thinkers by you.
Israel is fighting a war against a force that would if it could, and will when it can, obliterate Israel, anything vaguely Jewish, and of course the whole West, and replace it with ragheads, bums bowed in the sand towards Mecca, veiled subjugated women, public execution of homosexuals.
Great achievment jake.
British and living in Britain eh jake? Nice comfy armchair from which to spout your lefty rubbish?
Yes, one day Hamas (=Islam) will destroy Israel, it has to happen, aided by woolly thinkers by you.
Israel is fighting a war against a force that would if it could, and will when it can, obliterate Israel, anything vaguely Jewish, and of course the whole West, and replace it with ragheads, bums bowed in the sand towards Mecca, veiled subjugated women, public execution of homosexuals.
Great achievment jake.
First of all, sorry for the delay as I am not in UK. And I d not have a regular access to the internet. Then Lonnie, what can I say after Jake has explained to you. Only thing Palestinians get from Muslims is moral support. A couple of countries might be aiding Hamas with small weapons as well. But there is difference between Palestinians and Hamas and surely there is also difference of the support they get as compared to the support Israel gets.
I'm not Israeli Gormless (or even Jewish) so I hardly see how by lack of support for a particular foreign country makes me a traitor.
You're angry because I don't share your views - grow up!
Keyplus you're being very naughty! - As I pointed out Hamas gets about $50 million a year that's a bit more than moral support.
Lonnie Don't you think too many people are already dead from matters of principle?
You may very well say what's good for one is good for another - The US was funding Israel before Hamas was formed
Ghandi said an eye for an eye results in the whole world blind.
If we were still bound up in matters of principle there would still be IRA bombings.
It is not the principle that is important it is future resolution whilst both sides are being fed arms and whilst people like Gormless are spouting the hawkish claptrap children will continue to be shot by soldiers and killed in rocket attacks.
So stop blindly supporting anything Israel does and support the peace process instead.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/appeals-for-action/t ime-accountability-gaza-and-southern-israel
I dare say Gormless would call you a traitor too but I'm sure you're big enough to bear that!
You're angry because I don't share your views - grow up!
Keyplus you're being very naughty! - As I pointed out Hamas gets about $50 million a year that's a bit more than moral support.
Lonnie Don't you think too many people are already dead from matters of principle?
You may very well say what's good for one is good for another - The US was funding Israel before Hamas was formed
Ghandi said an eye for an eye results in the whole world blind.
If we were still bound up in matters of principle there would still be IRA bombings.
It is not the principle that is important it is future resolution whilst both sides are being fed arms and whilst people like Gormless are spouting the hawkish claptrap children will continue to be shot by soldiers and killed in rocket attacks.
So stop blindly supporting anything Israel does and support the peace process instead.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/appeals-for-action/t ime-accountability-gaza-and-southern-israel
I dare say Gormless would call you a traitor too but I'm sure you're big enough to bear that!
That naomi is why there needs to be an arms embargo in the area.
At the moment the two sides have a choice to fight or talk.
They are chosing to fight.
We need to take away that choice.
To do that though the US has to have the political courage to both take on it's own pro-Israel lobby and to talk to Syria and Iran.
Whether Obama is up for that remains to be seen
At the moment the two sides have a choice to fight or talk.
They are chosing to fight.
We need to take away that choice.
To do that though the US has to have the political courage to both take on it's own pro-Israel lobby and to talk to Syria and Iran.
Whether Obama is up for that remains to be seen
Lonnie, I hope you don't mind me saying this, but I find that so very sad. You're saying, in effect, that your principle is worth everything - and that's exactly what the other side is saying. Can you see that? So where does it all end? Is it really so hopeless that the only solution can be the total destruction of one or the other?
Hi naomi, I don't mind you questioning at at all.
I believe principles are everything, its what we live by, our standards, fairness, some are higher than others, and some are rigid, and people die for them, and unfortunately, I fear your prognosis could very well be correct.
A small example of the way I think on this subject, my daughter, in our area, if someone the same as her is getting a special benefit, and she is not, even though she could do without it, i'll fight on principle to see that she gets the same treatment.
You've hit the nail on the head, and as usual, gone straight to the heart.
To me, principle is fairness, and I would hazard a guess that you have certain principles yourself that you would fight over?.
I believe principles are everything, its what we live by, our standards, fairness, some are higher than others, and some are rigid, and people die for them, and unfortunately, I fear your prognosis could very well be correct.
A small example of the way I think on this subject, my daughter, in our area, if someone the same as her is getting a special benefit, and she is not, even though she could do without it, i'll fight on principle to see that she gets the same treatment.
You've hit the nail on the head, and as usual, gone straight to the heart.
To me, principle is fairness, and I would hazard a guess that you have certain principles yourself that you would fight over?.
Yes, you�re right Lonnie, I do have strong principles, and, yes, some I would fight over. I also have a strong sense of fairness which I like to think is well-reasoned and unbiased. However, I don't agree that principle equates to fairness. Principles are often founded on individual aspirations and desires, whereas genuine fairness is altruistic, and as such, can only be achieved by the honest and impartial application of morality and ethics.
It seems that the principles are causing the problem. With a weapons embargo, Israel will become even more defensive, perhaps even aggressive since it needs US backing and support to survive as a separate state or a two-state nation, in the Levant.
The two-state solution is something that seemingly the rulers of neither country want to achieve, although it would appear to be what Palestinians, the Arab world and Israeli civilians want. Israel would need to rescind its old borders and some control of east Jerusalem, since this is what would stifle support for armed attacks by Hamas. But to do so would probably open up a security threat that Israelis and it needs heavy support from outside of the Middle East to take that risk for peace. Hamas is a paramilitary organisation after all, their covenant calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories and lets not forget their own in-fighting with Fatah in 2007.
An arms embargo might bring temporary peace, but if the two sides refuse to give up on their principles, then unrest will recommence with lack of progress in agreement, and then only a matter of time before we get more suicide bombs in Jerusalem, massive military reaction by Israel and the continued cycle of ti-for-tat violence that we have seen before. All for the sake of political ideology softened by the claim of �principles�.
Confucius say, To see what is right, and not do it, is want of courage, or of principle
The two-state solution is something that seemingly the rulers of neither country want to achieve, although it would appear to be what Palestinians, the Arab world and Israeli civilians want. Israel would need to rescind its old borders and some control of east Jerusalem, since this is what would stifle support for armed attacks by Hamas. But to do so would probably open up a security threat that Israelis and it needs heavy support from outside of the Middle East to take that risk for peace. Hamas is a paramilitary organisation after all, their covenant calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories and lets not forget their own in-fighting with Fatah in 2007.
An arms embargo might bring temporary peace, but if the two sides refuse to give up on their principles, then unrest will recommence with lack of progress in agreement, and then only a matter of time before we get more suicide bombs in Jerusalem, massive military reaction by Israel and the continued cycle of ti-for-tat violence that we have seen before. All for the sake of political ideology softened by the claim of �principles�.
Confucius say, To see what is right, and not do it, is want of courage, or of principle
Octavius, thats a very good summary, I don't think many could find fault with that.
naomi, altruism would be the thing to aspire to, but unfortunately, because we are all different, it may differ from some to others, Fairness and principles, again, to some people they mean the same thing, and to others, they don't.
Personally, I think in some cases, they can equate to the same thing, and in others not,
If we take the case of the Middle East, but only the support of outsiders for the protagonists, I think if one side only gets support, thats not fair, but if both sides get it, thats fair, but it can also be turned to a matter of principle for the outside supporters.
naomi, altruism would be the thing to aspire to, but unfortunately, because we are all different, it may differ from some to others, Fairness and principles, again, to some people they mean the same thing, and to others, they don't.
Personally, I think in some cases, they can equate to the same thing, and in others not,
If we take the case of the Middle East, but only the support of outsiders for the protagonists, I think if one side only gets support, thats not fair, but if both sides get it, thats fair, but it can also be turned to a matter of principle for the outside supporters.
Lonnie, Fairness and principles, again, to some people they mean the same thing, and to others, they don't. Personally, I think in some cases, they can equate to the same thing, and in others not,
They can only ever equate to the same thing if the initial principle is fundamentally fair. It isn't a choice. When someone believes wholeheartedly in a principle, bias comes into play, often provoking a determined refusal to even attempt to see another point of view, which results in an inability to understand and appreciate any suggestion of an alternative.
They can only ever equate to the same thing if the initial principle is fundamentally fair. It isn't a choice. When someone believes wholeheartedly in a principle, bias comes into play, often provoking a determined refusal to even attempt to see another point of view, which results in an inability to understand and appreciate any suggestion of an alternative.
