SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Raymond Duray who wrote (7673)10/26/2001 8:11:30 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (3) of 281500
 
You read something from Friedman and all of sudden Israel an imperialist?

Aren't we being a bit free with our demagoguery Raymond?? <GG>

Especially when there's an imperialist power just to the north of them known as Syria, engaged in attempting to create "greater Syria" out of Lebanon and Jordan (Syria attacked Jordan in 1970 in just such an attempt).

And being constantly at some state of war, or conflict with a whole host of nations seeking its destruction hardly falls into the category of imperialist power.

And it's a p*ss poor example of an imperialist that legally captures tremendous territorial gains, only to turn around and give them back once a peace treaty is implemented.

I'm afraid that, as much as we've agreed on other issues, you're a bit lost here... :0)

If you look back at the history of Palestine, especially the West Bank, after it was captured from the Turks, you'll find that the British intended to permit Jewish settlement in all of Trans-Jordan, the territory that included Israel, the West Bank, and present day Jordan.

However, in 1948, the Jordanians conquered the West Bank and ANNEXED it as part of their aggression against the Jews, and held it for 19 years as part of their sovereign territory. And under such occupation, the Jordanians made it a crime punishable by death, for a Palestinian to sell his land to a Jew, denying them their rights under the British Mandate and San Remo accord passed by the League of Nations (predecessor to the UN, as you know) to settle other parts of the British Mandate (there was plenty of uninhabited land to settle), .

And as an Arab neo-colonialist power, they proceded to milk the relatively prosperous west bank for tax revenue, but providing very little infrastructure improvement in return. When the Israelis occupied the West Bank in 1967, after Jordan, ONCE AGAIN attacked Israel and again lost, they found that few Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem enjoyed the basic benefit of indoor plumbing. The Israelis, in fact, immediately implemented measures to integrate Jerusalem into their own sewage and power network.

Thus, it can hardly justify anyone, let alone you, calling Israel an "imperialist" power. And I can't figure out why, after 50 years of constant aggression and threats against them from all of its Arab neighbors, as well as being forced to spend huge sums of money and national effort, maintaining sufficient military power, people find it incredible that they would want to retain control over the West Bank.

After all, the West Bank has been the lauching pad for over 3 separate invasions of Israel in 1948, 1956, and 1967, as well as being a base for guerilla attacks in the years between. And given that Jordan lost the territory due to their RECKLESS aggression, and HAS SINCE CEASED THEIR CLAIM ON THE TERRITORY, it would seem to me that Israel has the right to control any disposition of the territory as a Palestinian entity.

Certainly none of Israel's Arab neighbors are willing to sacrifice anything for the benefit of the Palestinians, and certainly not Jordan, which is 66% Palestinian, but ruled by a Hashemite Arab.

If you want to discuss Imperialism again, ask why an Arab KING is ruling over a Palestinian population.

If anything's imperialistic, that is.

And btw, the reason Solar and Hydrogen are not be advanced as a solution for the nation's energy dependence is because neither the technology, nor the infrastructure, has been properly developed sufficiently to expedite the transition.

I mean, face some facts here... If we move to a hydrogen economy, just who do you think will be the primary player in that industry? It will be the existing energy companies. They could care less if they sell gasoline, or hydrogen. What they care about is making a profit.

And you know my feelings on wind power... nice... but too expensive and not a good way to power the nation when you have to worry about whether there is a breeze or not.

As for Joint Strike Fighter, Lockheed Martin got the contract. And they have made a production order, but only taken to the next step in pre-production.

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext