Lib Dem British MP Castigates Israel

Defend itself from stealing land from others. Yup! If they resist, kill them.

Israel should buy South or North Dakota…and set up shop there; I am sure the particulars could be worked out by our congress.

Both sides in this discussion are making reasonable, valid points, but that is all irrelevant.

The best guess that can be made is:

There will never be peace in that area so long as there is a state of Israel…and any Arabs or non-Jews living there. The notion of a homeland for Jews was not inappropriate; calling the state, Israel, and putting that state where it is now located was one of the most absurd mistakes humans have ever made.

Israel should buy South or North Dakota…and set up shop there; I am sure the particulars could be worked out by our congress.

The Middle East should become a protectorate of the United Nations…and any Jews or Arabs who want to live there should be able to do so in relative peace…which will NEVER happen while the state of Israel exists there.

The state of Israel...where it is located...IS THE PROBLEM.

There are arab countries and groups that will definitely use any weapon they manage to get. I think that someday one of these countries or groups will get a nuke and use it on Israel. There is no effective defense that would stop this.

While it is true that the USA has been a very militaristic country,

its bombing of Japan was justified. First, Japan was beastly in what it did in China, Korea, et al., as well as its treatment of POW's.

Second, we would have lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers, and Japan would have lost millions, had we invaded rather than use the nukes.

Your ability to see other cultures as being brutal seems hypocritical when you can't see what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians; your ability at selective violence belongs in psycho analysis.

Quote:

While it is true that the USA has been a very militaristic country,

That's another one of those euphemisms meant to disguise the evil that the US has visited upon the poor countries of the world.

Quote:

its bombing of Japan was justified. First, Japan was beastly in what it did in China, Korea, et al., as well as its treatment of POW's.

Japan was merely following the example of the US, a country that has been as beastly, in what it had been doing in the Philippines, Cuba, Hawaii, Nicaragua, Wounded Knee, Chile, Argentina, China, Korea, ... .

Do you think that sending home skulls of Japanese soldiers to girlfriends isn't beastly?

Quote:

Second, we would have lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers, and Japan would have lost millions, had we invaded rather than use the nukes.

More of those lies that Americans love to believe. You can't commit war crimes, crimes against humanity to stop other war crimes. Before the atomic bomb war crimes, the US had already committed untold war crimes by firebombing myriad Japanese cities. The US specifically targeted civilians, another war crimes. The US gave the worst Japanese and German war criminals free passes in exchange for the results of the evil research they were doing.

The list goes on and on. The US, and you, Advocate, have no business pointing fingers at others for their beastly nature when it is the US that has the longest and arguably, the most beastly nature of all.

However, the beastliness of Japan was standard MOS, and much worse than what the USA did.

Published on Monday, November 17, 2003 by CommonDreams.org

Resistance to US Military Occupation: The Case of the Philippines

by Heather Gray

...

As Howard Zinn notes in his People's History of the United States, the "Filipinos did not get the same message from God" and the resistance to US military intervention began in 1899 in what has remained, up to the present time, organized efforts by Filipinos in opposition to US interference.

Initially, Filipinos thought that the Americans were there to help them kick out the Spanish and end 400 years of repression. After fruitless attempts to negotiate, however, the reality of the US intention became clear. The Filipinos were forced to acknowledge that the Americans intended to replace the Spanish as the colonial rulers. In The Philippines Reader, Daniel Schirmer and Stephen Shalom provide first hand accounts of this period. On February 5, 1899 Philippine President Emilio Aguinaldo urged his people to fight in response to the "outbreak of hostilities between the Philippine forces and the American forces of occupation, (which were) unjustly and unexpectedly provoked by the latter.... The constant outrages and taunts, which have caused the misery of the people...and finally the useless conferences and contempt shown the Philippine government prove the premeditated transgression of justice and liberty."

The American reaction was swift and the slaughter by US forces is legendary. Philippine scholar Luziminda Francisco refers to that brutal imperial American war that launched the 20th century as the "first Vietnam War" in which estimates of from 600,000 to a million Filipinos died. She states that the estimate of up to a million deaths might "err on the side of understatement" as one US congressman, who visited the Philippines at the time, was quoted as saying "They never rebel in Luzon (Philippines) anymore because there isn't anybody left to rebel...our soldiers took no prisoners, they kept no records, they simply swept the country and wherever and whenever they could get hold of a Filipino they killed him."

In response to a massacre of 54 Americans by the Filipino resistance in Samar, Francisco describes how US General "Howling Jake" Smith launched a "reign of terror" on the island. "Kill and burn..." Smith said "the more you kill and burn the more you'll please me." When asked the age limit for killing, he said, "Everything over ten." The order from Smith was that Samar becomes a "howling wilderness" so that "even the birds could not live there." The Americans had begun to utilize the deadly "water torture" against Filipinos - forcing huge amounts of water into their stomachs to then gather information - and Smith insisted on its use in Samar.

There were four US regiments of Black soldiers in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War. Many were outraged at the abuses and attitude of the white soldiers toward the Filipinos. Zinn refers to a letter from a volunteer from the state of Washington who wrote: "Our fighting blood was up, and we all wanted to kill 'niggers'.... this shooting human beings beats rabbit hunting all to pieces." David Fagan, one of the Black soldiers, left the US ranks to fight along side Filipinos and "for two years wreaked havoc upon the American forces."

The Philippine resistance fought valiantly against the well-armed Americans. Francisco states that the "Filipinos had to adapt to their limitations as best they could...with darts, the ubiquitous bolo, and even stones, prompting (US) General Lawton to remark, 'they are the bravest men I have ever seen'...."

...

http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1117-11.htm

Quote:

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5270195)
Frank Apisa wrote:

Both sides in this discussion are making reasonable, valid points, but that is all irrelevant.

The best guess that can be made is:

There will never be peace in that area so long as there is a state of Israel…and any Arabs or non-Jews living there. The notion of a homeland for Jews was not inappropriate; calling the state, Israel, and putting that state where it is now located was one of the most absurd mistakes humans have ever made.

Israel should buy South or North Dakota…and set up shop there; I am sure the particulars could be worked out by our congress.

The Middle East should become a protectorate of the United Nations…and any Jews or Arabs who want to live there should be able to do so in relative peace…which will NEVER happen while the state of Israel exists there.

The state of Israel...where it is located...IS THE PROBLEM.

Practically speaking, you are correct.

What concerns me the most is the proliferation of nukes.

There are arab countries and groups that will definitely use any weapon they manage to get.

I think that someday one of these countries or groups will get a nuke and use it on Israel.

There is no effective defense that would stop this.

Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5270537)
I should have referred to "Muslim" countries that would readily use a nuke on Israel, even though unnecessary.

Of course, every country with nukes would use them if they need to.

BTW, how could the use of nukes be prevented?