14
   

Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

 
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:46 am
@oralloy,
they won't work. they won
t solve the problem. it'll still be on israel's head. they've got the land. they're the ones violating the law.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:48 am
@MontereyJack,
Wrong again. The Palestinians are the ones who are violating the law. The law requires the Palestinians to make peace with Israel.

Israel has complied with the law. Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a two-state solution in exchange for peace.

The new guy's plans have great potential to solve the problem. The Palestinians will be broken up into separate groups and all of them will be under strict military control.

And everything bad that happens will be solely on the heads of the Palestinians. It's the Palestinians who are violating international law and refusing to make peace.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:52 am
@oralloy,
offers them a small fraction of the land they've taken from them. It's kind like your next door neighbors moving into yiour house too, throwing all your stuff out into the street and then offered you just the garage and saying, "see. we're offering you land."
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:53 am
@MontereyJack,
Israel has offered the Palestinians all of the Gaza Strip, 97% of the West Bank in one contiguous block, and East Jerusalem for their capital.
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:54 am
@MontereyJack,
and then parks their car in the garage.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:56 am
@oralloy,
ha to tke away lanwith the balfour declaration and 1947 to shrink it to 1967.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:57 am
@oralloy,
and kept it for themselves.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 12:03 pm
@MontereyJack,
Israel is only going to give up land if they get peace in return.

So until peace is on offer, Israel will be keeping the land for themselves.

Get back to me when peace is actually on offer and maybe then the Palestinians will get some land.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 12:08 pm
@blatham,
It also ignores the huge power balance and overplays the enemies.

There’s the Palestinians and really that’s about it. It’s not like they don’t have good reason, they were either occupied or kicked out into another country.

The ongoing illegal occupation of the West Bank is brutal, an apartheid state in all but name.

Despite that, the Palestinian Authority is committed to a two state solution, it’s only Hamas that wants to get rid of the Israeli state. Not the people, the state. Palestinians would have the right to return and all citizens would have the vote.

It would be like South Africa after apartheid, and would mean the wiping out of the Jewish state in that the Palestinians would be a majority. However, that is what is meant by the destruction of Israel, and it’s a far cry from the pogrom type threat that Israel’s apologists would have us believe.

Other than that, who are Israel’s real enemies? The two neighbouring countries are Jordan and Egypt, both heavily reliant on American aid and wary of any trouble with Israel. In short both countries have problems of their own, concerns with Democracy and an increasingly oppressive military government are more pressing concerns than what is going on in Israel.

And there’s a Peace accord that the Egyptians do not want to **** up.

There is sympathy for Palestine, but it’s not going to be anything more than support for human rights organisations and representation at the UN.

Then there’s Lebanon, still recovering from a civil war and heavily factionalised. There is a real threat from Hezbollah, but realistically speaking it’s the only party likely to take direct action against Israel, and the last time it did Israel’s military might destroyed parts of Lebanon.

Then there’s Syria, Assad is too much in the thrall of Putin to risk any bother with Israel especially as he’s having problems with Erdogan right now.

Many gulf states, like the UAE, and African Arab nations, like Morocco, have recently signed peace deals with Israel and there’s been opening of flights.

That leaves us with Iraq, Iran, Yemen and Saudi Arabia, all of which are marked by the Sunni Shia conflict. That’s the reason for the strife in Yemen and Iraq right now. Concern about Israel is very much in second place to that. It’s what Trump was banking on when he got all those gulf states to sign peace deals.

That leaves us with Iran, which is a threat to Israel, but it’s also the only voice of Shia Islam in the region. It’s more concerned about its own survival, and its greatest enemy has always been Saudi Arabia. Again Israel takes second place.

Iran has good reason to dislike Israel as well. Israel was the Shah’s greatest enabler in the persecution of the Iranian people. Once again the treatment of the Palestinians takes second place.

Then tucked up in Bahrain there’s the United States Fifth Fleet, with all the military power that projects.

So surrounded by enemies really means Palestine, Hezbollah and Iran.

That’s it, compared to the huge military infrastructure of Israel and the Fifth Fleet.

That’s the reality behind the rhetoric.

Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 12:12 pm
Abbas, the leader of the United Arab List and new deputy minister in the prime minister's office, told the Italian daily La Repubblica on Friday: "There will be difficult decisions to be made, including security decisions. We have to juggle our identity as Palestinians and citizens of the State of Israel, between civil and nationalistic aspects."

But I doubt that he will and can speak for Israel's 21% Arab minority - Palestinian by cultur, heritage and nationality, but Israeli by citizenship. (Other Arab politicians preferred to remain outside government, having sincere differences with Bennett and other right-wingers to tip the scales against Netanyahu).
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 12:17 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
The ongoing illegal occupation of the West Bank is brutal, an apartheid state in all but name.

Nonsense.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 12:33 pm
Conservative American Catholic bishops are pressing for a debate over whether Catholics who support the right to an abortion should be allowed to take Communion.

Vatican Warns U.S. Bishops: Don’t Deny Biden Communion Over Abortion
Quote:
ROME — The Vatican has warned conservative American bishops to hit the brakes on their push to deny communion to politicians supportive of abortion rights — including President Biden, a faithful churchgoer and the first Roman Catholic to occupy the Oval Office in 60 years.

But despite the remarkably public stop sign from Rome, the American bishops are pressing ahead anyway and are expected to force a debate on the communion issue at a remote meeting that starts on Wednesday.

Some leading bishops, whose priorities clearly aligned with former President Donald J. Trump, now want to reassert the centrality of opposition to abortion in the Catholic faith and lay down a hard line — especially with a liberal Catholic in the Oval Office.

The vote threatens to shatter the facade of unity with Rome, highlight the political polarization within the American church and set what church historians consider a dangerous precedent for bishops’ conferences across the globe.

“The concern in the Vatican,” said Antonio Spadaro, a Jesuit priest and close ally of Francis “is not to use access to the Eucharist as a political weapon.”

Pope Francis, who has explicitly identified the United States as the source of opposition to his pontificate, preached this month that communion “is not the reward of saints, but the bread of sinners.” His top doctrinal official, Cardinal Luis Ladaria, wrote a letter to the American bishops, warning them that the vote could “become a source of discord rather than unity within the episcopate and the larger church in the United States.”

The result is a rare, open rift between Rome and the American church.

Opponents of the vote suspect a more naked political motivation, aimed at weakening the president, and a pope many of them disagree with, with a drawn-out debate over a document that is sure to be amplified in the conservative Catholic media and on right-wing cable news programs.

Asked about the communion issue, Andrew Bates, a White House spokesman, said, “As the American people know well, the president is a strong person of faith.”

Pope Francis, along with the rest of his church’s hierarchy, explicitly opposes abortion, which they consider among the gravest sins, and incessantly speaks out against it. But that is not the same as punishing Catholic lawmakers with the denial of communion, which many here believe would be an intrusion into matters of state.

That effort is being led by Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, who has been passed over repeatedly by Francis for elevation to the rank of cardinal.

“The focus of this proposed teaching document,” Archbishop Gomez wrote in a memo, “is on how best to help people to understand the beauty and the mystery of the Eucharist as the center of their Christian lives.”

The conservative American bishops are largely out of step with Francis and his agenda of putting climate change, migrants and poverty on the church’s front burner. But Rev. Thomas J. Reese, a Jesuit priest, and a senior analyst with Religion News Service, said conservatives constitute at least half of the American bishops’ conference and could have the votes to begin the process of drafting a teaching document about who can receive communion.

It is unlikely the conservatives would be able to ultimately ratify such a document, which would require unanimous support from all the country’s bishops, or two-thirds support and the Vatican’s approval. But the debate promises to keep the issue alive and present a nagging headache for President Biden and other Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.

A good portion of the bishops want to avoid the question altogether. Already, 67 American bishops, about a third of the conference, and including top cardinals aligned with Francis, signed a letter on May 13 asking Archbishop Gomez to remove the item from the virtual meeting’s agenda.

One of those signees, Cardinal Wilton Gregory, the archbishop of Washington, has the ultimate decision on whether to deny communion to President Biden in the archdiocese of Washington. He has made it abundantly clear he will not.

Cardinal Gregory’s authority in the matter is a result of a compromise in 2004 when he himself led the bishops’ conference.
[...]
But if anything, America’s church politics have become more polarized in the last 17 years. Some clergy close to Francis in the Vatican say privately that elements within the American church have become political and extremist.

Francis himself has said it is “an honor that the Americans attack me.” But on this issue, he, like Mr. Kerry, would prefer to talk about something else.

Sandro Magister, a Vatican expert with L’Espresso magazine, said that the issue was uniquely American, and was basically unheard of in Europe. He said, “The pope himself would rather not have this vivid debate.”

But the conservative American bishops have for weeks made clear they want to do more than talk.

On May 1, the archconservative bishop of San Francisco, Salvatore J. Cordileone, issued a letter arguing that “erring Catholic” politicians who supported abortion rights should be excluded from communion. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic and staunch supporter of abortion rights, is a parishioner in his San Francisco diocese.

Soon after, Archbishop Gomez sent a letter to the Vatican’s chief doctrinal office informing it that the American bishops’ conference was preparing to tackle “the worthiness to receive Holy Communion” by Catholic politicians who support abortion rights at their June meeting.

The Vatican apparently had seen enough. On May 7, Cardinal Ladaria wrote Archbishop Gomez urging caution. He said it would be “misleading” to present abortion and euthanasia as “the only grave matters of Catholic moral and social teaching.”

If the American bishops were going to crack the door open on the communion issue, Cardinal Ladaria added ominously, they should be prepared to consider extending the policy to all Catholics “rather than only one category of Catholics.”

The matter seemed settled. It wasn’t.

Rebelofnj
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 01:45 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
I shouldn't be surprised that the American Bishops are using communion denial as a political weapon.

It would be difficult to enforce that on the general public, with the possible exception of the more devout members. There is no way for the Church to know if I support abortion unless I tell my priest.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 01:55 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
HaJamin HeChadasch only got three seats in the Knesset. Even when you look at the Yamina alliance - all these right-wing parties just got seven seats out of the 120 in the Knesset.

Don't forget Likud. There are plenty of rightwingers there.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 01:58 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
The left might work very well i topics over which there are no dramatic controversies (Bennett noticed such in his speech), mainly on economic, social welfare and education issues, and in every area in which the emphasis is on improving service and civil life in Israel.

That will be good for Israel if it works out that way.

I'd like to see a situation in the US where our Democratic Party was free to tax the rich and use the money to create a strong social safety net, but at the same time was unable to wage political witch hunts, dismantle our military, or run around violating people's civil liberties for fun.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 03:01 pm
@Rebelofnj,
Might be schism time.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 07:52 pm
https://michaelpramirez.com/uploads/3/4/9/8/34985326/mrz042221-color-copy1-1mb_orig.jpg
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 08:37 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
It also ignores the huge power balance and overplays the enemies.
Agreed. Good post. I once saw figures comparing Israeli deaths due to this conflict versus Palestinians' deaths. If I recall correctly, it was about 30 dead Palestinians for every dead Israeli.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 08:49 pm
@blatham,
The point of self defense is not to harm the other side equally to the harm imposed on your side.

The point of self defense is to harm the other side sufficiently so that zero harm is done to your side.
goldberg
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 11:36 pm
@blatham,
Muslim terrorists are terrified of Netanyahu, not least because Netanyahu wants to eradicate terrorist groups like Hamas or Hezbolla, which is in cahoots with Iran. Even North Korea tried to sell nuclear technology to Muslim nations, according to the New Yorker, which is a liberal publication. Mossad founded it out and scuppered the deal.

Like it or lump it, Netanyahu will be back. Which means craven Muslim terrorists still have to shudder at the thought of dealing with a tough-cookie like him.
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.09 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 04:15:15