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: Elroy who wrote (189388)	6/15/2006 2:19:57 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

Sounds like Transjordan sucked and would not deserve US support if it existed today It does exist today. It changed its name to Jordan after it took the West Bank, that's all. Same Hashemite ruling family. It gets LOTS of US aid, btw.

To: Elroy who wrote (189388)	6/15/2006 2:28:24 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Arabs and Jews lived together in most ME countries until the formation of Israel. There is your cause. Had Israel not come into existence you would likely have Jews today living throughout Arab lands as they had for thousands of years. The Jews didn't attack the Arabs. They had been there for thousands of years and were no threat the Arabs. Many of them didn't really want to move, they were chucked out. Often with just what they could carry. For example, before WWII, Baghdad was 30%-40% Jewish and it was a prosperous community. They had to leave all their property behind when they left. So why do you act like it is some natural, reasonable cause and effect to suddenly expel a peaceful and prosperous community that has lived among you for thousands of years? I'm sure you wouldn't dream of saying that it would be "cause and effect" if America had deported all its Jews in 1948. Yet from the Arabs, you accept the argument. Why?