Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sim chambers who wrote (12899)	12/5/2001 9:03:11 PM
From: jjkirk	Respond to of 281500

Well written post..especially the profiling analogy. Your argument against our position re Israel is shoveling against the tide...You don't read OT do you? Re: Did a peaceful Muslim leader get asked to speak? You forgot to list those that fit that category and would not blame us for 9/11. I do not buy your chastisement that we should listen to such argument as information that we needed at the time. Your phrase is almost oxymoronic...I certainly would have deemed it so on 9/11. Now that the worm is turning, the tide is returning to our shores. Just read through this gentleman's essays to Muslims and see the shift in his rhetoric toward assigning Muslims some of the blame. ijtihad.org Ciao...jj

To: sim chambers who wrote (12899)	12/5/2001 9:43:53 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

Y'know... I just spent 1/2 an hour typing my response to you and here you present something that makes far more sense and is much more difficult to dispute. I found myself agreeing with almost everything you stated, which makes me wonder why you had to discuss the Jewish conspiracy in your previous post. This is much more readable and certainly less inflammatory. But I do wish to comment on several of your points. 20. We in America have to prioritize American lives over Israeli lives. (if my country cannot prioritize the life of my son and his sons and daughters over the life of an Israeli, we have lost track of the duties of our country…..that is to protect its own citizens!!) ******** I believe this is EXACTLY what we are doing. The fact that we originally pressured Sharon not to retaliate for previous suicide bombings in order to pursue our offensive in Afghanistan was a clear case of choosing US interests over Israeli. But considering that so much of this conflict and turmoil is due to the inability to achieve a peace between Israel and the Palestinians, it is DEFINITELY in our interest to facilitate it happening (which is what the Mitchell Plan is all about). Again, Arafat's under pressure to deal with his extremists. If he succeeds, it's a clear sign that he was previously unwilling to take such steps to halt the violence that would have led to the implementation of the Mitchell Plan. If he fails, it's a clear sign that he WAS NEVER IN A POSITION to offer a Palestinian peace proposal because of the power of the extremists. Now read that paragraph again Sim, so there's no doubt you understand it. Either he is the head of the Palestinians, or he's a figurehead engaged in a delaying action that makes the extremists more powerful day by day. 23. We as a country cannot penalize all who live here, by our unconditional support of Israel, without considering making a Palestinian state. Israel is a country that is defined by one thing…..religion. This is FALSE. Israel is defined by his NATIONALITY, not religion. There are MANY secular Jews who are not practicing, but they are still Jews by nationality. Israel exists because everywhere Jews have lived, they have been oppressed and subjected to progroms and genocide. This is CLEARLY NOT THE CASE WITH PALESTINIANS. Thus, the reason the UN, and the rest of the world, at the time, was supportive of an Israeli state. Because unless they had a land they could call their own, which would serve as a "homeland", Jews would have no where to go to avoid the intolerance that has historically been displayed against them. (which has particularly been the case in the Arab world as some 1 million "oriental" Jews who have been forcibly expelled throughout the Mid-East have discovered since 1947). They had no where else to go. As for point #25, I answered that already by discussing Jordan's role in preventing a Palestinian state in 1947. As for Prince Waleed, he's a man who was born into a priviledge that no common Saudi enjoys. He has access to the wealth and power that oil has provided the Saudi royal family, while the average Saudi has no such rights. Futhermore, Waleed's priviledged position of power is endangered by the fundamentalist Wahabbis who hold control over the religious minds of the common Saudi, and who are threatening the overthrow of the Saudi family should they NOT support the destruction of Israel (and not just the establishment of a Palestinian state). Finally, the Saudis and Jordanians, and in fact, every other Arab state had the ability to integrate any Palestinian refugees into their own nations, but they have not done so. They left them to suffer in refugee camps for decades, paying them money to keep them complacent and not a threat against them. Because THEY ARE A THREAT TO THE AUTHORITARIAN ARAB STATES IN THE REGION. The very concept of an Arab people, with no royal lineage, receiving statehood, is a threat to their own claims of "divine right". Just as Saddam Hussein, Assad, and Nasser were/are a threat their royal claim to authority. They are SECULAR leaders, with no religious or royal claims of authority. And this scares the BEJEEZUS out of the Saudis and Hashemites, who cherish their lives of priviledge. So when Waleed tells us that we have to solve the "Palestinian problem", you have to realize that he is now more afraid of the fundamentalists, than he is of the secular authoritarian leaders of the Mid-East. He's afraid this "red herring" that was used to distract their own people from questioning their royal status, is about to blow up in their faces, leaving them exiled to the west. Waleed certainly is not be "objective" when he tells us we have to favor the Palestinians over the Israelis, or to apply pressure upon Sharon, while they are unwilling to pressure Arafat. Other than that, I can find much to agree with in your comments. Hawk