Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "What you REFUSE to accept is that the Arab states have attempted to use the existence of Israel (not just the displaced Palestinians) as a means of deflecting their own population from unleashing their frustration and anger upon their own regimes."
Wrongo, dude. Not only do I admit it, I proclaim it right here on this thread for all to here: HAWKMOON SPEAKS THE TRUTH WHEN HE SAYS THAT ARAB GOVERNMENTS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE HATRED FOR ISRAEL ETC.
There, now how did that change our situation any? The problem is that we have to make a foreign policy that operates in a collection of nations that are run by morons and criminals. Too bad.
But notice that you STILL won't admit that our foreign policy has been tilted towards Israel. What you believe, and you have reasons for it, is that our foreign policy SHOULD be tilted towards Israel, but you nevertheless don't seem to want to admit that it IS tilted towards Israel.
Re: "How about forming an alliance with Arafat? Will that make you happy?"
Of course not. Arafat is a murderer. We shouldn't support the Palestinians at all. Or the Israelis. Let them fight their own war. And if you want to go over there and carry the Israeli's water, you're welcome to it. My complaint is when you start using my money and my relatives to fight your unwinnable war.
Re: "And now, no matter how much the various hard-core Arab states might want to make peace with Israel, they have created the conditions where doing so would undermine their legitimacy. So they continue to support the intolerant factions within the PA."
I agree completely. That's why Israel is doomed. The terror will continue until Israel is sufficiently hobbled economically that they, like the South Africans before them, are forced to make peace from a position of weakness.
Re: "So since you honestly believe that these suicidal Islamo-fascists will eventually have a bomb and use it, you are trying to tell us that they are less of a threat than Hitler was?"
No, silly. The Islamo-fascists will always be too weak to take over the world. They don't have the industrial might to do it. Sure they'll end up with nukes, but nukes don't control territory, LOL. It's boots on the ground that control territory, and boots require boatloads of supplies and ammunition. All nukes can do is frighten people, but people are damned hard to frighten (except the neocons).
If nukes allow countries to control other countries how come we're not controlling Iraq? We've got thousands of nukes, or we did at least the last time I looked. We've been getting rid of them because it turns out that you don't have to have very many of them to have "enough".
Re: "Let the Israelis build their security fence/wall, and then pull out their settlements. That will separate the both antagonists and provide a cooling off period for both while Arafat (or whoever replaces him), gets their act together."
Good idea. But it shouldn't be up to us to "let" the Israelis do anything.
Re: "Let Arafat be faced with the burdens of running a country without being able to depend upon perpetuating the constant conflict between the two countries."
This is contrary to your oft repeated comment to the effect that failed states with high unemployment create terror problems.
-- Carl |
