11
   

Helen Thomas announces her retirment

 
 
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 09:20 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
HAMAS "Islamic Resistance Movement" = TERRORIST


You really ought not to be casting aspersions upon others when your country, the ole US of A, is the top terrorist state in the world. You could take every Islamic Resistance Movement, combine them all together and their actions wouldn't amount to one tenth the terrorist actions propagated by the US. Hell, the USA has even tested biological weapons on its own citizens.


Can I assume you are not familiar with the world-wide responsibilities of a world-power that has human rights and democratic politics as its core values?

Regarding the terrorism you allude to above, do you include losing 500,000 U.S. military lives in freeing Europe from Nazism and the Pacific Rim from Japanese Imperialism? Do you include losing 50,000 U.S. military lives in protecting South Korea from North Korea? Do you include losing 55,000 U.S. military lives in trying to keep South Vietnam free from the North Vietnam communists?

The above reflects an awful lot of U.S. families that lost a loved one in fighting in behalf of other nations' freedom. I do not equate that with terrorism, since the ultimate goal of terrorists is to take over a country. I do not see the borders of the U.S. having expanded with all the above military involvment during the 20th century. Perhaps, the correct indictment of the United States is to call the U.S. a bunch of freedom loving altruists?

If I was religious, I would pray for you to see history in it correct perspective.

Also, I believe, few emigrate to a terrorist state, since one never knows what can be waiting for one there; however, notice how many people, world-wide, come to the U.S. legally and illegally. Millions of people cannot be wrong, in thinking that the U.S. is a better country to live in, and raise one's family.



firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 11:45 am
@Foofie,
Quote:

The Big Lie
Are the "occupied territories" really occupied territories?

What are the facts?

A Brief History: Most of the area now called the Middle East was part of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire before World War I. Germany lost the war and so did its ally Turkey. The Ottoman Empire ceased to exist and the League of Nations assigned Britain and France as the mandatory powers.

France assumed mandatory control over what is now Syria and Lebanon. Britain assumed mandatory control over all the rest, including "Palestine," which comprised all that is now Jordan and Israel, including the "West Bank." The Golan Heights, which Syria now claims as its age-old patrimony, was originally part of Palestine.

In 1917, the British issued the Balfour Declaration, under which Palestine was to be the homeland for the Jewish people. In 1921,Winston Churchill, who was then Colonial Secretary of Great Britain, separated all the land east of the Jordan River from the territory designated to be the Jewish homeland, and awarded it to the Hashemites, who established the kingdom of Transjordan.

The Arabs, whipped up by their fanatic clergy, fiercely opposed the presence of the Jews on what they considered "sacred Moslem territory." There was constant warfare between the two groups, which the British tried to arbitrate, always favoring the Arabs, whom they considered more important to their imperial interests.

In 1947, the British decided that they had enough and resigned the Mandate. They left the Arab-Jewish antagonists to their own devices and turned it over to the United Nations. Their solution was to partition Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state. The area west of the Jordan River (the "West Bank") and the Gaza Strip were allotted to the Arabs. Jerusalem was to be an "international" zone. After much soul searching, the Jews accepted the partition and, in April 1948, declared their independence in the area allotted to them by the partition. The Arabs rejected the partition out of hand. On the very day of Israel's birth, five Arab armies invaded the nascent Jewish State. In what must be considered an almost Biblical miracle, the rag-tag Jewish forces decisively defeated the combined Arab might. But Israel had suffered enormous casualties - 6,000 dead, about one percent of its population.

Israel not an "occupier:" Israel stayed in control of most of the area west of the Jordan River, except for the Gaza Strip, which stayed under Egyptian control. The "West Bank" and the eastern part of Jerusalem stayed under the control of Transjordan, which promptly renamed itself Jordan and proceeded to ruthlessly expel all Jews and to obliterate all vestiges of over 2,000 years of Jewish presence in that land.

In the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel recovered the "West Bank," the eastern part of Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, conquered Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, and conquered and annexed the Golan Heights. During the 19 years that Jordan and Egypt were in possession of the "West Bank" and the Gaza Strip, it didn't occur to them or to anybody else that the Palestinians should have a state or even that they were a distinct nationality. The claim for that did not arise until after the Six-Day War.

Jews have been living in Judea/Samaria since Biblical times. The area was made judenrein (free of Jews), following the Nazi model, by Jordan, when it was in possession of the territory. After 1967, Jews moved back into the territory and a great hullabaloo was raised and is still being raised about the not more than 200,000 "settlers," who do not occupy more than 2 percent of the area. But there is no concern about the hundreds of thousands of Arabs, who, lured by the prosperity of Israel, have flooded into the area, nor of the more than one million Arabs who live in Israel proper and who enjoy full rights of citizenship.

Israel acquired the territories (the "West Bank" and Gaza) in defense of an aggressive war waged against it. No country in history has ever been asked to return such territories. Do the Poles return the huge chunk of Germany that they acquired in the wake of World War II? Do the Czechs return the Sudetenland, do the French return Alsace-Lorraine? Of course not! Only Israel is being asked to return such territories. The last sovereign of the "West Bank" and of Gaza were the Ottomans. The "West Bank" and Gaza are unallocated territories. To speak of Israel as "occupier" is preposterous; to speak of it, as Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the UN does, as "illegal occupiers," is poisonous slander. He knows better. But unfortunately, the Big Lie of Israel's "occupation " has been repeated so long and so often that even people of good faith have come to believe it and to accept it.

http://www.factsandlogic.org/ad_72.html

rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 04:14 pm
@dyslexia,
Damn, Om beat me to it Dys!
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 09:43 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
Can I assume you are not familiar with the world-wide responsibilities of a world-power that has human rights and democratic politics as its core values?


That's a crock of ****, Foofie. Forget the just wars. Stop trying to make out that the USA is some great savior of mankind. There were all sorts of countries involved in WWII. They gave their all too.

It is completely unjustifiable to attempt to cover war crimes/terrorism by pointing to one's good deeds. The war crimes, the terrorism stand on their own.

Quote:
Also, I believe, few emigrate to a terrorist state, since one never knows what can be waiting for one there; however, notice how many people, world-wide, come to the U.S. legally and illegally. Millions of people cannot be wrong, in thinking that the U.S. is a better country to live in, and raise one's family.


Another bit of nonsense. People emigrate to wherever they feel they have a better economic chance. That still doesn't absolve the USA of the war crimes and terrorist actions committed.

If you were able to look at historical events in an honest fashion, you would see that the USA has been the cause of millions of deaths to innocent peoples the world over. All simply to grab more wealth.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Jun, 2010 10:11 pm
@dyslexia,
dyslexia wrote:

rabel22 wrote:

When I see the words "embarrassment to the U.S." the first name that pops into my head is Bush Jr.
... just as I'm inclined to think of Plato as the "embarrassment of western civilization",


This is an interesting comment Dys, since our current president, which I believe you favor, couldn't be more Platonian.

0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2010 07:13 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
Can I assume you are not familiar with the world-wide responsibilities of a world-power that has human rights and democratic politics as its core values?


That's a crock of ****, Foofie. Forget the just wars. Stop trying to make out that the USA is some great savior of mankind. There were all sorts of countries involved in WWII. They gave their all too.

It is completely unjustifiable to attempt to cover war crimes/terrorism by pointing to one's good deeds. The war crimes, the terrorism stand on their own.

Quote:
Also, I believe, few emigrate to a terrorist state, since one never knows what can be waiting for one there; however, notice how many people, world-wide, come to the U.S. legally and illegally. Millions of people cannot be wrong, in thinking that the U.S. is a better country to live in, and raise one's family.


Another bit of nonsense. People emigrate to wherever they feel they have a better economic chance. That still doesn't absolve the USA of the war crimes and terrorist actions committed.

If you were able to look at historical events in an honest fashion, you would see that the USA has been the cause of millions of deaths to innocent peoples the world over. All simply to grab more wealth.


No. The U.S. has not "been the cause of millions of deaths to innocent peoples the world over. All simply to grab more wealth." I believe the U.S. has been fighting to save the freedom of millions of innocent peoples the world over who were denied their freedom by despotic regimes or invading foreign powers.

I am deeply saddened by your pejorative opinion about the greatest country on Earth.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2010 10:24 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
I am deeply saddened by your pejorative opinion about the greatest country on Earth.


That's not opinion, Foofie, it's fact.

Quote:
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class thug for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler


Quote:
No. The U.S. has not "been the cause of millions of deaths to innocent peoples the world over. All simply to grab more wealth." I believe the U.S. has been fighting to save the freedom of millions of innocent peoples the world over who were denied their freedom by despotic regimes or invading foreign powers.



You mean like the invading foreign power in Vietnam, which, after the USA supported France there, then invaded it herself. The result, three to four million dead in Vietnam, 1.5 to 2 million in Cambodia and Laos.

Quote:
On 2 September 1945, Ho Chi Minh, the leader of the Viet Minh, declared the independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam before a crowd of 500,000 in Hanoi.[34] In an overture to the Americans, he began his speech by paraphrasing the United States Declaration of Independence: All men are created equal. The Creator has given us certain inviolable Rights: the right to Life, the right to be Free, and the right to achieve Happiness.[34]

However, the major allied victors of World War II, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union, all agreed that the area belonged to the French.[34]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War


All the Vietnam people wanted was freedom. Why is it that USA always manages to save so many people by putting them in their graves?
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 10:53 am
@JTT,
JTT, you cite instances of war profiteering, and the influence of big business on military policy, but, while you might view such actions as reprehensible, they constitute neither "war crimes" nor "terrorism" on the part of the U.S. government. All countries act in their own best self interest, and the U.S. is no more or less altruistic than any other nation in that regard. On the other hand, the United States also sends a great deal of aid throughout the world, and these humanitarian efforts should also not go unrecognized.

Your "history" of Vietnam suggests that time stopped in 1945. The U.S. involvement in Vietnam was based on a policy of stopping the spread of communism in S.E. Asia. We were involved in the Cold War, and we did believe that communism represented a threat to the people of that area, as well as a threat to the security of the United States.
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

War always kills people. Only idiots would advocate for unnecessary wars. If possible, all wars should be avoided. The United States has never claimed to be a pacifist nation--we were founded as the result of a revolutionary war. However, compared to other world powers, the U.S. has generally acted with military restraint. The ill-conceived invasion of Iraq marked a clear departure from long-standing U.S. policy to respond only defensively, rather than to make pre-emptive military strikes.

Similarly, Israel, the nation which is related to the subject of this thread, has had to wage an aggressive and unrelenting war for survival since the very first day of its independence in 1948. National security must always be Israel's first priority. Israel has repeatedly been forced into defensive wars. The alleged "occupied territories" are lands acquired as a result of these wars, not land which Israel "stole" in order to expand its borders. It is the Palestinians who have repeatedly blocked any peace process to resolve this situation.

Helen Thomas is certainly free to feel that Israel should leave what she sees as "occupied territories". That opinion is neither offensive nor outrageous. The comments that incited controversy were her remarks that the Jews should go back, not to Israel, but to Poland and Germany--the very places where they had been murdered in the millions. It is virtually impossible not to view such statements as insensitive, offensive, and essentially anti-Semitic. It is also impossible to ignore the fact that Israel was founded partially in response to the atrocities of the Holocaust, in order to give the Jews a homeland in which they would not be slaughtered or driven out. The Jews had also been driven from their homes in the Arab countries, forcing them to forfeit their property, something not mentioned by those who lament the plight of only the Palestinian refugees.

To deliberately raise the specter of the Holocaust, as Thomas did in her remarks, and as Hawkeye did in this thread, with his allusions to a "final solution" in the Middle East, by getting the Jews out of Israel, reveals such deep hatred and anti-Semitism that it should offend any person of decency, regardless of how they politically view the Israeli-Palestinian situation. It should also remind them why Israel needs to exist.

One can criticize Israel without being anti-Semitic. One can disagree with Israeli policies and actions without being anti-Semitic. But, when one talks about "final solutions" and sending Jewish Israelis back to places like Poland and Germany, a line is definitely being crossed, and this type of coded hate speech should not be tolerated or accepted. Israel exists, and will continue to exist, and its mere presence may always be an irritant in that part of the world. The resolution of the conflicts in the area will require compromises on all sides, and all parties have to be willing to accept diplomatic solutions if they want to achieve anything resembling a lasting peace.

rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 03:45 pm
@firefly,
This rant could have been condensed to ' If the Isralie government kills you its ok.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 05:51 pm
@JTT,
I cannot agree with you. I hope that does not upset you. I really have my own mind to think with, and possibly I have had that mind longer than you have had your mind. Also, perhaps, my views reflect my set of experiences and observations.

I do not mind if you do not agree with my views. However, I wonder if you mind if I do not agree with you? If yes, I cannot understand why, since in this big world who would expect everyone to agree with oneself?

Have a nice summer.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2010 06:00 pm
@rabel22,
rabel22 wrote:

This rant could have been condensed to ' If the Isralie government kills you its ok.


Try to spell "Israeli" correctly; it might give more credence to your position.

Unfortunately, the nations of 300 million Arabs have tried in four wars to end Israel's existence. That makes for many enemies, I believe. That makes the "rant" you refer to as just good historical chronology. But, do not let that get in the way of any firm beliefs. I do not believe in controlling others' thoughts.
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jun, 2010 11:34 am
@Foofie,
Save the spelling crap for school. So you are saying that its OK for the Isralie government to steal palistian peoples land and indescrimintaly kill them because of the holocaust? How does that work?
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jun, 2010 01:48 pm
@rabel22,
rabel22, I guess you save the "reading crap" for school too, since you've failed to either read, or understand, my previous posts.

The alleged "occupied territories", that Helen Thomas referred to, were gained in wars that Israel was forced into fighting--Israel did not start these wars. This land was not stolen from anyone. Countries have gained land as the result of warfare throughout all of history.

I have no idea what you are referring to in terms of indiscriminate killing being done by Israelis, nor does the Holocaust have anything to do with the current Israeli-Palestinian situation.

The Holocaust was mentioned, by me, in response to the insensitivity of Thomas' remarks and Hawkeye's comments in this thread. I also think that the atrocities of the Holocaust should help to remind the world why Israel needs to exist, although those events were not the only reasons that the state of Israel was created.

rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jun, 2010 06:14 pm
@firefly,
Something people like you forget is it wasent only jews who were killed during the holocaust, 6million were jews 8 million were other ethnic groups. But the majority have been brainwashed by people to view the holocaust as a strictly jewish event. I dont believe that the holocaust gives the Isralie government the right to murder anyone they want too.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 12:01 pm
@rabel22,
rabel22 wrote:

Save the spelling crap for school. So you are saying that its OK for the Isralie government to steal palistian peoples land and indescrimintaly kill them because of the holocaust? How does that work?


Here is what I said:

"Try to spell "Israeli" correctly; it might give more credence to your position.

Unfortunately, the nations of 300 million Arabs have tried in four wars to end Israel's existence. That makes for many enemies, I believe. That makes the "rant" you refer to as just good historical chronology. But, do not let that get in the way of any firm beliefs. I do not believe in controlling others' thoughts."

Now, nowhere in the quote of my previous post did I say anything you are guessing. You should not guess that I said something that I did not say. I assume you are guessing, since you could not come to your thoughts, about what I might have said, as logical inferences from anything I said.

I personally prefer not to post to a person that misspells Israeli and Palistinean. Also, neither to someone that questions my beliefs, beyond what I put into print. You have no need to know the nuances of my thinking on this topic.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 12:08 pm
@rabel22,
rabel22 wrote:

Something people like you forget is it wasent only jews who were killed during the holocaust, 6million were jews 8 million were other ethnic groups. But the majority have been brainwashed by people to view the holocaust as a strictly jewish event. I dont believe that the holocaust gives the Isralie government the right to murder anyone they want too.


Six million Jews; six million Gentiles. The total was 12 million. The Holocaust and the situation in the Middle East are two mutually exclusive events.

And, Israel does not "murder anyone they want too [sic]." In fact they murder no one, if one knows/understands the definition of "murder."

0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Jun, 2010 05:47 pm
@JTT,
C'mon, guy. Some people hang on to a bit of dignity. Not that I plan to be among them...
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 10:17 am
@firefly,
Not surprisingly, factsandlogic further add to "The Big Lie" with its version of "the facts."

factsandlogic wrote:
The Arabs, whipped up by their fanatic clergy, fiercely opposed the presence of the Jews on what they considered "sacred Moslem territory." There was constant warfare between the two groups, which the British tried to arbitrate, always favoring the Arabs, whom they considered more important to their imperial interests.


The Palestinians are comprised of a number of peoples of various religious affiliations, the largest being Muslim, but also Christian, Druze and Samaritan. What these Palestinian peoples fought against was their disenfranchisement and marginalization through Britain and the Zionists' efforts to create a homeland for the Jews in Palestine. British policy was geared towards that goal effectively prejudicing the Palestinians' right to self-determination in Palestine. It was only after the implementation of the White Paper of 1939 that major concessions to the Palestinians were made by Britain such as the abandonment of the partitioning of the Mandate for Palestine between Jews and Arabs in favor of a more democratic state governed in proportion to their numbers, and the curtailment of Ashkenazi immigration to Palestine. The White Paper was formally repudiated in 1948 on the day after the state of Israel had declared its independence.

Quote:
In 1947, the British decided that they had enough and resigned the Mandate. They left the Arab-Jewish antagonists to their own devices and turned it over to the United Nations. Their solution was to partition Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state. The area west of the Jordan River (the "West Bank") and the Gaza Strip were allotted to the Arabs. Jerusalem was to be an "international" zone. After much soul searching, the Jews accepted the partition and, in April 1948, declared their independence in the area allotted to them by the partition. The Arabs rejected the partition out of hand. On the very day of Israel's birth, five Arab armies invaded the nascent Jewish State. In what must be considered an almost Biblical miracle, the rag-tag Jewish forces decisively defeated the combined Arab might. But Israel had suffered enormous casualties - 6,000 dead, about one percent of its population.


What factsandlogic left out of its little history is the fact that the Haganah, the precursor to the IDF, and the terrorist organizations Irgun and LEHI carried out massacres and wholesale cleansing of entire Palestinian villages and towns such as Deir Yassin, Tiberias, Haifa, Safed, Beisan, Jaffa and Acre that came under their control in the civil war that preceded the 1948 war and lasted between November 1947 to May 14,1948 upon the termination of Britain's Palestine Mandate, and the declaration of independence by the state of Israel. The Arab countries surrounding Palestine subsequently sent in their armies to support the beleaguered Palestinian population. That was the beginning of the 1948 war.

Quote:
Israel not an "occupier:" Israel stayed in control of most of the area west of the Jordan River, except for the Gaza Strip, which stayed under Egyptian control. The "West Bank" and the eastern part of Jerusalem stayed under the control of Transjordan, which promptly renamed itself Jordan and proceeded to ruthlessly expel all Jews and to obliterate all vestiges of over 2,000 years of Jewish presence in that land.

In the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel recovered the "West Bank," the eastern part of Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, conquered Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, and conquered and annexed the Golan Heights. During the 19 years that Jordan and Egypt were in possession of the "West Bank" and the Gaza Strip, it didn't occur to them or to anybody else that the Palestinians should have a state or even that they were a distinct nationality. The claim for that did not arise until after the Six-Day War.


It's pretty simple. Israel never had control of the West Bank before the Six-Day War, therefore, they didn't "recover" the West Bank. They arrogated it and now occupy it. Ergo, Israel is an occupier. The rest of factsandlogic's tortured history is irrelevant to this fact. To continue their tangent, though, Jordan does regard the Palestinians as a distinct nationality. After the 1948 war there were over 400,000 Palestinian refugees east of the Jordan River. The Palestinian nationalist movement, Fatah, was formed in 1954--13 years prior to the 1967 War--by Palestinian refugees. They perpetrated their first major guerrilla attack against Israel in 1965, two years before the war. The Palestinians--as regarded as a distinct nationality--and the West Bank were to become the central issues of Jordanian domestic and foreign policy for the latter half of the 20th century.

Quote:
Jews have been living in Judea/Samaria since Biblical times. The area was made judenrein (free of Jews), following the Nazi model, by Jordan, when it was in possession of the territory. After 1967, Jews moved back into the territory and a great hullabaloo was raised and is still being raised about the not more than 200,000 "settlers," who do not occupy more than 2 percent of the area. But there is no concern about the hundreds of thousands of Arabs, who, lured by the prosperity of Israel, have flooded into the area, nor of the more than one million Arabs who live in Israel proper and who enjoy full rights of citizenship.

The Arab (and Persian, for that matter) response to the Zionist arrogation of Palestine was petty, revengeful and regressive what with the expulsion of Jews from the former’s countries. That being said, it was an effect of a cause: the Zionist takeover of Palestine.

To clarify for the more obtuse, like those at factsandlogic, the problem is that Israel accommodates these settlers by walling off large areas of the West Bank, slowly circumscribing it and any chance for an independent Palestinian state through the farcical so called "two state solution." This process of circumscription entails the martial control and oppression of the Palestinian populations that lie just outside of the walled settler communities.

Who are these "hundreds of thousands" of Arabs that have flooded into the area, "lured by the prosperity of Israel"? Israel severely restricts the immigration of Arabs into the area.

The "full rights of citizenship" for the Palestinian Israelis that factsandlogic touts amounts to the right to vote, and freedom of religion. Israel is otherwise officially segregated through preferential treatment of Jews in regard to housing and community infrastructural investment, the prohibition of Arab immigration, etc.; all of this in the name of the ethnocentric existence of the state of Israel.

Quote:
Israel acquired the territories (the "West Bank" and Gaza) in defense of an aggressive war waged against it. No country in history has ever been asked to return such territories. Do the Poles return the huge chunk of Germany that they acquired in the wake of World War II? Do the Czechs return the Sudetenland, do the French return Alsace-Lorraine? Of course not! Only Israel is being asked to return such territories. The last sovereign of the "West Bank" and of Gaza were the Ottomans. The "West Bank" and Gaza are unallocated territories. To speak of Israel as "occupier" is preposterous; to speak of it, as Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the UN does, as "illegal occupiers," is poisonous slander. He knows better. But unfortunately, the Big Lie of Israel's "occupation" has been repeated so long and so often that even people of good faith have come to believe it and to accept it.


So now factsandlogic reverts to describing Israel's arrogation of the West Bank as an "acquisition," whereas previously it referred to this arrogation as a "recovery." Like all other Israel apologists factsandlogic themselves have a muddled view of the conflict.

One thing is asserting that the West Bank and Gaza are unallocated territories. Another thing, which is the crux of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, is the former's oppression of the latter as it has sought to wrest control of Palestine in the name of an ethnocentric state that is necessarily oppressive and discriminatory towards the Palestinian peoples.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 01:29 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
JTT, you cite instances of war profiteering, and the influence of big business on military policy, but, while you might view such actions as reprehensible, they constitute neither "war crimes" nor "terrorism" on the part of the U.S. government.


No, not war profiteering, FF, deliberate invasions, deliberate aggression, deliberately changing governments, those are all war crimes and textbook examples of terrorism, in order to reap benefits for the USA and US businesses.


Quote:
All countries act in their own best self interest, and the U.S. is no more or less altruistic than any other nation in that regard. On the other hand, the United States also sends a great deal of aid throughout the world, and these humanitarian efforts should also not go unrecognized.


First, let's get the facts straight. The USA is the stingiest country on the planet. Most of the "aid" given is of a military nature. Further, what aid the US gives is usually tied aid where US goods and services must be bought; just another example of these humanitarian efforts [that] should also not go unrecognized.

Quote:
Your "history" of Vietnam suggests that time stopped in 1945. The U.S. involvement in Vietnam was based on a policy of stopping the spread of communism in S.E. Asia. We were involved in the Cold War, and we did believe that communism represented a threat to the people of that area, as well as a threat to the security of the United States.


That was a crock of ****, hysteria whipped up and swallowed by a gullible people. Clearly the threat in that area was from the USA - 3 to 4 million Vietnamese and 1.5 to 2 million Cambodians and Laotians.

The USA has no business trying to determine countries' choice of government. With regard to Vietnam, they didn't want communism, but the USA didn't want the people's clear choice as leader. That again, is textbook terrorism, as defined by the US government itself.

Vietnam is hardly the only situation like this. It has been repeated many times, the USA installing its own right wing brutal dictator. I mean, for god's sake, the facts sit naked dead in front of everyone and still this nonsense persists that the USA is some savior of mankind.

If that's the best the USA can do, mankind wishes to be left alone, alive, not terrorized by bombs, torture, the spread of virulent diseases, ... .

Quote:
However, compared to other world powers, the U.S. has generally acted with military restraint.


The numbers clearly tell a much different story.

Quote:
The ill-conceived invasion of Iraq marked a clear departure from long-standing U.S. policy to respond only defensively, rather than to make pre-emptive military strikes.


That is absolute bullshit, FF. I doubt that you can name a conflict where the USA didn't lie itself into an illegal invasion.

Candid admissions from US government sources admitting numerous acts of terrorism against the tiny defenseless country of Cuba and its people.

The US talks a good game and the vast majority of the populace buys into that crap, but the facts indisputably show that the USA is a terrorist nation.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 05:58 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
That is absolute bullshit, FF. I doubt that you can name a conflict where the USA didn't lie itself into an illegal invasion.


Does the attack on Pearl Harbor qualify as a legitimate reason we declared war on Japan?

JTT, the only thing you have convinced me of is that you dislike the United States.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 05:34:49