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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (25233)	7/15/2003 9:46:40 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

That takes the cake, you comparing the partition of people and land already on the ground after the breakup of the Ottoman empire to the partition of Palestine and filling it with foreigners from other continents. Hmm.. what's the difference between the meaning of "partition" and "break-up"? Palestine was partitioned by the United Nations after the British exited the area. Is that not "breaking-up" geographical boundaries into smaller entities? Is it the fault of the Israelis that Jordan conquered, occupied, subjugated, and annexed the Palestinian partition? Was that not an act of aggression by the Hashemites against whom the UN took NO BINDING ACTION? Whether you choose to accept it or not Len, the fact is that the entire region which formerly was ruled by the Ottoman Empire, now consists of states arbitrarily carved out of that entity. And in carving out these states, entire ethnicities and nations were subjugated to the rule of others who never previously ruled over them. The Copts of Egypt immediately come to mind, as well as the Kurds of Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. But you don't to even bother shedding a single tear-drop over those ESTABLISHED NATIONAL AND CULTURAL ENTITIES. Yet, you cry buckets of crocodile tears over a group of people who NEVER previously existed as any form of national or ethnic entity. By proclamation the UN created a nation of people from a group of individuals who never felt a particular common bond previously (except for tribal and clan identities). The Arabs, whether they exercise their rights and wishes for the type of government they want or not, is their choice. Tell that to the Copts of Egypt, who would desire nothing more than to have their own nation/state. Tell that to the Shiite Arabs of Saudi Arabia, who were subjugated to Wahabbist militants in league with the Saud tribe. Tell that to the Sunni Muslims of Syria who were subjugated to the rule of a brutal minority Alawite Muslim clan. All of them would LOVE to have there own homeland too.. But FIRST there HAS TO BE a political mechanism that permits that choice to be recorded and heard, and the laws that require these choices adhered to. You use the same mindset the Christian missionaries used in that Isra'El is better than the Arabs, they contribute more to civilization, therefore they deserve the land. By their fruits you shall know them. Look at the economic progress Israel has made WITHOUT possessing huge oil reserves. If you want a historical comparison, review why the Spanish empire, flush with Incan/Aztec treasure, was eventually eclipsed by the Mercantilist English. Hawk