Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

The United States having fought in two world wars in the 20th century, to the benefit of England, seems to be lost on some people? And, let's not forget about Lend Lease.

If I am correct about the history, American GI's were all over the island nation one calls Britain, so if the Nazis decided to attack by ship, they would have met more than just Archies. But, as I have read, British girls did teach American GI's how to fornicate in alleys standing up. And, many a war bride that returned to the U.S., after the war, had the benefits of living in towns unscathed by the V-2's. Smart girls.

I guess there are some Brits that do understand it is wiser to be friendly to Americans, since the day could come when the United States might have to protect them again. Perhaps, not in this century, but who knows what the future holds. Britain, in the eyes of some land hungry people, might be prime real estate that looks very appealing? Again, it would be wise to not burn one's bridges behind oneself, especially if one got so much utility from a nation only in the last century. Possibly, not just my opinion?

Well the truth is we did make the British pay us back for much of the Lend Lease program - pennys on the dollar, to be sure, but it was indeed significant to them after all the wealth of centuries of colonialism, industry and captive markets had been exhausted in two world wars. There was more than a little bitterness involved in the negotiations leading up to the Breton Woods negotiations in 1947 at which the financial structure of the post war world was negotiated. The respective British and American negotiators were John Maymard Keynes and Hary Dexter White, the former a controversial but reknowned economist with high academic credentials and some aristocratic pretentions, and the latter the son of immigrant Russian Jews with suspected Communist affiliations. It's an interesting story. Roosevelt, ambiguous as ever, was determined to see the inevitable (in his view) break up of the British Empire and the end of the restrictive Sterling zone for international trade. The British were desperately trying to restore the status quo ante, despite all the signs indicating its day was done.

I think most historians underestimate the regrets and resentments most Americans had after WWI and the punitive peace inposed in Paris by the Allies (and their stooge, our idiot President Wiulson). Those feelings persisted during WWII and came to fruition in the world order that emerged afterwards.

Izzy is desperately trying to change the subject by throwing some distracting "gorilla dust" in the air.

If I had the time George I could produce some of those kinds of attacks on me by you so dont get too saintly.

Produce them. I don't think you will find anything that comes close to Izzy's above.

Oh we are back to talking about Palestinians now ?

Dear dizzythetush
your rant reminds me of the drunk who inhabits every bar and sits at the corner yelling at no one . Now its all the fault of those born with status ? I thought it was the Jews and I who were the curse of the world ? It can be really confusing as to who you hate the most . Maybe you are just a hater full stop .
Have a nice day !

Fine words ! Fine bewildering strange words ! To whom are you addressing now, little miss bad temper ?

I'm a staunch supporter of the USA but lets not get carried away . The major war plans the USA had drawn up in the '30s were to attack Britain . It wanted to destroy the Empire system that excluded it from trade . The Lend Lease did exactly that...continuation of policy by another means . Over 30 countries signed lend lease programs that guaranteed "a new world economic order" (insert opportunities for the USA business world) .

Britain also had to hand over scientific discoveries . The English Electric Canberra became the Martin B-57 Canberra, and the Hawker Siddeley Harrier became the Boeing/BAE Systems AV-8B Harrier II . Of course these were loudly touted as being improved with "American know-how" but in truth the USA couldnt come up with anything near the British technology . Rocket technology, jet engine technology, all things the USA now does very well but owe their origins in the Lend Lease .

Dismantling the colonies became a USA priority, something Africa still suffers from . Wars in Asia were ok, there was business to be made there, but Africa can go get stuffed . Many colonies in Africa were benefitting from having a European overlord . Now look at them, all helped to disaster and ruin by bleeding hearts who look at the sky whenever freedom is mentioned .

Aren't they pathetic? A bunch of hypocritical shits running about desperate for my attention. It's the only way their life has any meaning.

I'm going to have to disappoint them. I'm done talking to ****, and they're just going to have to accept it.

Until they do expect a load more tantrums.

Poor Izzy is projecting his obsessions and insecurities on others. I often go days at a time without thinking of him. While he invades a (fairly) polite and rational discorse with his invective and name-calling, and then exits while vowing never to do it again. The whole silly scene has been repeated many times before on these threads.

There were more bombs dropped on Vietnam than on the whole of Europe during WW2. It was unprecedented, and to try to mitigate it by comparing it to Kenya and NI reeks of desperation and delusion.

Gob1 conveniently ignores the fact that the majority of Northern Ireland is Unionist. In the last General election 10 of the 18 seats up for grabs went to openly unionist parties and Sinn Fein only got 4. There were atrocities on both sides, and much to the dismay of the likes of Gob1 there's now a peace process. Cameron has apologised for Bloody Sunday and there's moves to prosecute some perpetrators.

As for Kenya, I've already started a thread on it, a long time ago. All those opposed to the idea of compensation for Kenyan victims are American, worried about the precedent it would set.

http://able2know.org/topic/215727-1<br />
We're coming to terms with our imperial past. It will be a cold day in Hell when Gob1 starts a thread that asks if compensation paid to Vietnamese victims.

Like most aristocrats Gob1 is opposed to Universal Health care because he thinks American children should die from preventable diseases if they're not from a highly privileged background like him, just so he can get his snout further in the trough.

Gob1's about as low as it's possible to get.

Well he's back already !! This time quibbling about issues no one has raised.

It may be disappointing for Izzy to learn I'm no aristocrat - we have few here and social & economic mobility are such that few last for more than a couple of generations anyway.

My grandparents were poor farmers in Claire and Kerry who left with their surviving children during the rebellion in the early last century and came to the United States with virtually nothing. In the case of my mother's family their farm was destroyed, and two of her older brothers killed, by British irregulars then known as "Black and Tans" for the distinctive uniforms they wore. Like many immigrants here, they worked hard and saw to it their children got an education. I served in the Navy and then got into the engineering and construction business, later. with a few partners, starting our own company.

What this type of person wants is to ferment arguments. I have found that a one or two sentence insulting post and than ignoring them until their next lie, which is usually only one post further seems to work best.

I do have him on ignore, I don't read his posts. I read Walter's post responded to that, then read Gob1's response. That's all I've read.

He wanted to come in and spout his usual sanctimonious tripe, and now he's got a few home truths to contend with. That's why he's throwing a tantrum.

I could be wrong, but I believe we do not see this country the same way. While those living here can contribute up to their abilities, and live much more comfortably than those in many other countries, including the British commoners, this country is still in the business of making money for those that own and run the country. And, who might that be? In my opinion, white Protestants; specifically those that sociologists call the in-groups, i.e., Episcopaleans and Presbyterians. Methodists running second, and Baptists not so much. Jews and Catholics, again in my opinion, live comfortably, but only are in positions of power if they serve the needs of the WASP power elite.

If you notice, that from the time that Kennedy was assassinated, we have had no Catholic Presidents, and the current Catholic VP, in my opinion, really is not the same as earlier VP's that ultimately might run for the Presidency. Do you see a need for a Catholic VP for the current administration?

So, since there is still a WASP majority in the country that looks back nostalgically to mother England, there will be interest in the Royals and England for a long time to come.

Is it by coincidence that so many Catholics make the Navy their career? Not in my mind. Going back to WWII, the Navy was considered the branch of service that was most "ethnic friendly," as I have heard time, and time again.

I do not expect you, or anyone, to agree with my perceptions, but that is my opinion, from my observations in the military where one's social class seemed to be a palpable reality most often to upper-class Protestants.

And Catholics have their own social distinctions; however, it seems to revolve around the Church and its programs/charities/orders/concerns.

This in no way makes me less happy to be an American. I believe what makes Jews different is that they may be the one group where a majority do not see the Presidency as something they want a co-religionist to be in. I believe many other groups do want one of theirs to one day be in the Oval Office.

So, Izzy should not see you as some sort of aristocrat, in my opinion. You, like me, are not in the running. In my opinion, you optimized the system well, since the U.S. allows people to be "included," rather than Europe's historical "exclusion." Just my opinion.

Lastly, I always felt that just because there is no real "No Nothing Party," it doesn't mean that I, or many others "arrived." Under the surface, I believe there are still divisions that are alive and well. But, fortunately, we are living in the U.S.; that's the good news.

Why are you so hung up on dividing people up according to their religion? Now you are even separating Christians according to their denominations as though all the people in those denominations actually have some kind DNA in common or something. According to your odd notions, where do atheist fit in the world? Or people who just believe in God, but don't really belong to an organized religion? What are these people, rogue elements in society?

And what for goodness sake, does all this have to do with the subject at hand? This thread has managed to stay on topic a long time, I would hate to see it end.

Rev, he is a conservative republican who believes the bible should take presidence over the constitution. In other words a religious nut posing as a citizen who believes in the constitution.

I don't think that the distinctions among religious and ethnic groups you make here have nearly the meaning or significance they did a few decades ago. The melting pot continues, and more and more the cultural manifestations of ethnic backgrounds significant then are simply diasppearing (and perhaps being replaced by others). In addition, throughout the Western world, religion has become far less visible generally and certainly far less significant as a distinction among people.

All of that has changed significantly during my lifetime. When I was growing up we had two homes; one in Detroit and one in Washington DC, and we moved between them frequently. Detroit was an ethnic stew where most of the kids I knew had parents or grandparents at home who spoke the language of "the old country" (Polish, Italian, Hungarian, Yiddish, German or Greek) and neighborhoods had fairly well-deined ethnic and religious boundaries. WASPs there were rare, and, in that world, they had to be tough. Washington was more homogenious and WASPish, but in the Jesuit schools there we imagined we were the elite - I didn't learn that wasn't true until much later, but by then it no longer mattered.

The Navy was then more Irish and Catholic than the numbers in the general population, but the establisment tradition there was indeed somewhat WASPish. I recall thinking of all that as a merely harmless background. I do remember that the majority of the pilots in my first squadron were Irish. But even there, individual differences trumped group distinctions by a wide margin.

I truly don't recall being chafed by any establishment in my life. In our own groups we were isulated from all that. In addition, as I moved around the country I discovered significant local/regional differences in the characters of the local establishments, and as Navy folks we were a bit apart from all of them.

I agree the U.S is about economic mobility above all other considerations. I believe that is the secret of our relatively greater success in assimilating immigrants of every stripe. Every new group was looked down on by the local establishment and every one was assigned an offensive epithet (and I used them all). Each formed its own defensive barriers and worked hard to rise economically, thereby earning their self-respect and finally the (usually grudgingly given) respect of others. After two or three generations it didn't matter anymore, and another new vegetable had been added to the cultural stew.

I've had a couple of encounters with people who were part of the Eastern elite, but they seemed to me to be from another, largely irrelevant planet. For the most part that is a thing of the past in this country (certainly in California) and is dying fast.

In my business career I've encountered but one guy (an associate) who is from an elite background in Baltimore and still plays the role. He likes to recruit new staff from Ivy League schools and the Claremont Colleges in California (while the rest of us prefer hungry middle class kids from State schools). I and the other partners see that as a weakness in him.

Anyway, poor Izzy would be disappointed to learn that in my 70s I still work full time.

In your 70 and still working? You have a military retirement, social security, and probably a business pension. Why not retire and let some poor bastard with a family and kids have your job so they can make a decent living? And dont give me that **** about needing something to do because I have been retired for 17 years and have donated my time and effort to many charity and civic activities that dont impact jobs for the younger among us.

I can just imagine you serving food to the poor..."come on you pieces of ****, hurry up...my time is too valuable to waste...I have to get on the internet and abuse people....and for God sake would it kill you to have a bath ? "