Iran

[Impactor returns 2.0]

What the hell was that guy saying? is he off his face?

2 things not to do when trying to keep the world happy.

A. make a Nuke programe the world doesnth think u should not have
B. As President state you are going to 'wipe Israel off the map'

Is that guy insane?

[spiderfrommars]

is he off his face?

Yes.

[Professor Smooth]

This could be trouble.

[wideload]

Neither of these things are new. Several heads of state in that region have made this same claim about israel many times. A big reason for why Israel is so defensive all the time.

As for the nuke thing.... once again this has been going on in that region for a long time.

Don't know why everyone is so surprised by all this.

[Best First]

A big reason for why Israel is so defensive all the time.

That and the fact half the land isn't actually theirs...

sorry, i see this whole thing as a big load of double standards, Western leaders, especially in the US brand countries 'evil' and threaten and pontificate and whatnot all the time.

[wideload]

A big reason for why Israel is so defensive all the time.

That and the fact half the land isn't actually theirs...

sorry, i see this whole thing as a big load of double standards, Western leaders, especially in the US brand countries 'evil' and threaten and pontificate and whatnot all the time.

I think what Iran is pushing for goes a bit beyond what western leaders are going for. Its genocide.

As for the land not actually being theirs. There are dozens of ethnic and cultural groups that call the middle east home (Kurds, assyrians, copts, berbers, etc) why do only arabs get to have coutries there? What is your justification for all the land there being arab muslim land? Most Israelis are descendents of refugees from arab courtries, its natural they would want there own country instead of being a minority in another arab one.

[Best First]

I think what Iran is pushing for goes a bit beyond what western leaders are going for. Its genocide.

yeah, Israel would never stoop that low.

Oh look , a big wall, hmm air of Ghetto, eh? Ah well irony's dead anyway. And snipers shooting kids. What? Oh! terrotsit kids, never mind then eh?

As for the land not actually being theirs. There are dozens of ethnic and cultural groups that call the middle east home (Kurds, assyrians, copts, berbers, etc) why do only arabs get to have coutries there? What is your justification for all the land there being arab muslim land? Most Israelis are descendents of refugees from arab courtries, its natural they would want there own country instead of being a minority in another arab one.

Right. Now lets follow that logic to its obvious conclusion and all try and fit back into a valley in Africa shall we? Or the Garden of frigging Eden of you are that way inclined.

"My ancestors owned this thousands of years ago!"

Yeah, well so did lots of other peoples. Get over it. Shunting people off the land they are currently on based on this arguement will never bring about a better world for anyone. Whether its 'natural' for people who want it or not (good basis for policy by the way).

Where do the Palestinians fit into all this by the way? Or was it ok in their case to have their land nicked because they can emply exactly the same arguement. Or is that somehow different?

2 wrongs, etc etc.

I'm not advocating genocide, just an end to selective outrage and manufacturing BS excuses on behalf of some groups ("its natural they would want there own country") and condemning others for exactly the same desires.

They're killing people! Thats terrible!
They're killing people! Here's funding!

Love the idea of countries based on ethnic lines by the way, that's sure to end well.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

just ******* nuke all the ****** midlle east countries because im sick of them making war over religon

[wideload]

I think what Iran is pushing for goes a bit beyond what western leaders are going for. Its genocide.

yeah, Israel would never stoop that low.

Oh look , a big wall, hmm air of Ghetto, eh? Ah well irony's dead anyway. And snipers shooting kids. What? Oh! terrotsit kids, never mind then eh?

As for the land not actually being theirs. There are dozens of ethnic and cultural groups that call the middle east home (Kurds, assyrians, copts, berbers, etc) why do only arabs get to have coutries there? What is your justification for all the land there being arab muslim land? Most Israelis are descendents of refugees from arab courtries, its natural they would want there own country instead of being a minority in another arab one.

Right. Now lets follow that logic to its obvious conclusion and all try and fit back into a valley in Africa shall we? Or the Garden of frigging Eden of you are that way inclined.

"My ancestors owned this thousands of years ago!"

Yeah, well so did lots of other peoples. Get over it. Shunting people off the land they are currently on based on this arguement will never bring about a better world for anyone. Whether its 'natural' for people who want it or not (good basis for policy by the way).

Where do the Palestinians fit into all this by the way? Or was it ok in their case to have their land nicked because they can emply exactly the same arguement. Or is that somehow different?

2 wrongs, etc etc.

I'm not advocating genocide, just an end to selective outrage and manufacturing BS excuses on behalf of some groups ("its natural they would want there own country") and condemning others for exactly the same desires.

They're killing people! Thats terrible!
They're killing people! Here's funding!

Love the idea of countries based on ethnic lines by the way, that's sure to end well.

Honestly I never advocated Israel's actions (I think they've done a ton of things of I totally disagree with and find horrible, but maybe that's easy for me to say since I'm not in their situation), but I think the words of Iran are an excalation that nobody needs right now. I honestly don't think Iran has any immediate intention to attack Israel, but leaders using nuclear war as a political tool isnt really cool. I dont like it when the US does it either.

All countries are based on ethnic lines somehow. For instance, if you can prove English ancestry you get to be a citizen of England. Its not really fair to single out one country as evil.

[Best First]

I don't agree that the words of Iran are an escalation, the actions of certain aspects of the west have been an escalation far more severe for decades. I hardly think some nut from Iran saying he fancise getting rid of Isral is as bad as the US ACTUALLY selling bio weapons tpo Iraq and ACTUALLY giving them the intel to use them, is it?

And if you think being English has anything to do with ethnicity... well either you have never been here or you missed a whole lot when you did. England is a cultural stew and better for it. Ancestry and ethnicity are not that closely linked.

and at no point did i single one county out as evil... in fact, oh look, that was my point in the first place.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

I think the guy needs a lesson in diplomacy.

[Best First]

I think the guy needs a lesson in diplomacy.

why just him?

theme.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

Because we were talking about Iran?

[wideload]

I don't agree that the words of Iran are an escalation, the actions of certain aspects of the west have been an escalation far more severe for decades. I hardly think some nut from Iran saying he fancise getting rid of Isral is as bad as the US ACTUALLY selling bio weapons tpo Iraq and ACTUALLY giving them the intel to use them, is it?

And if you think being English has anything to do with ethnicity... well either you have never been here or you missed a whole lot when you did. England is a cultural stew and better for it. Ancestry and ethnicity are not that closely linked.

and at no point did i single one county out as evil... in fact, oh look, that was my point in the first place.

England is an ethnic stew? ITs just a coincidence that the vast majority of the people there happen to be of English descent. Every major leader, also of English descent.

As for never being to England, my family is from Manchester, I've been there several times. I've seen the people there. Singling out England wasnt my point, just an example. EVERY country in the world does it, and you did single out Israel for it. "Love the idea of countries based on ethnic lines by the way", you were clearly implying that Israel was different than other countries and racist. As for you case about Israrel stealing arab land, would you say the same thing if it was one arab country surrounded by many many jewish ones?

[Predabot]

As for you case about Israrel stealing arab land, would you say the same thing if it was one arab country surrounded by many many jewish ones?

I think he would acctually. Stealing land is never right btw, no matter who's doing it, since somebody is going to be without a home.

[wideload]

As for you case about Israrel stealing arab land, would you say the same thing if it was one arab country surrounded by many many jewish ones?

I think he would acctually. Stealing land is never right btw, no matter who's doing it, since somebody is going to be without a home.

dude, that wasnt the point. Most of the jews in Israel are descended from refugees from arab countries forced out of their land with zero compensation. This happened after the end of WWII. While most palestinian refugees are descended from the construction workers brought in by the early zionists. In order to qualify as a palestinian you needed only to have lived in the area west of the jordan river for two years prior to Isreal's independence or be the descendent of such a person. Yasser arafat himself was born in Egypt, and he qualified because his father was a construction worker doing work in the British mandate of Palestine. In fact the term Palestinian wasnt used to describe the area until the British took control from the Ottoman's after WWI. People did not start calling themselves Palestinians until the PLO brought about Palestinian nationalism in the late 60s. Please dont oversimplify this issue by accusing either side of "stealing". Regardless of what the history is you now have two people who both need peace. Iran making ridiculous comments that threaten Israel's security helps noone.

[Best First]

I don't agree that the words of Iran are an escalation, the actions of certain aspects of the west have been an escalation far more severe for decades. I hardly think some nut from Iran saying he fancise getting rid of Isral is as bad as the US ACTUALLY selling bio weapons tpo Iraq and ACTUALLY giving them the intel to use them, is it?

And if you think being English has anything to do with ethnicity... well either you have never been here or you missed a whole lot when you did. England is a cultural stew and better for it. Ancestry and ethnicity are not that closely linked.

and at no point did i single one county out as evil... in fact, oh look, that was my point in the first place.

England is an ethnic stew?

yes. sorry! We can kick a few peole out if you like? You know, help you shore up your misconceptions. Christ.

ITs just a coincidence that the vast majority of the people there happen to be of English descent.

anyone who has been here more than a generation is of English descent as far as i am concerned.

Every major leader, also of English descent.

You mean the Angles? Or the Saxons? Maybe be Jutes? The Vikings? Celts? Maybe the Normans? Or what about Roman settlers? Russian jews? Irish settlers?

Plus when does the leadership of the country automatcially refelct the ethnic makeup of a country? oh, wait, it doesn't.

As for never being to England, my family is from Manchester, I've been there several times.

well done.

I've seen the people there.

oh, well done again. Which part of manchester by the way? eh?

Singling out England wasnt my point, just an example.

Yes, a sh** one that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Bravo.

EVERY country in the world does it,

does what? invade neigbouring territories and then annex the land? We've stopped that actually. So have a lot of other countries. oh!" but we have a right o this land because we have a right to this land". Get over it.

[qupte]and you did single out Israel for it.[/quote]

No, i used Israli behaviour as an example of why singling out Iran is inconsistant and unhelpful.

"Love the idea of countries based on ethnic lines by the way", you were clearly implying that Israel was different than other countries and racist.

well:

a) That statement in no way implies that Israel is different from all other countries, it implies that states based on ethnic lines are stupid and ultimatley destructive. There are other contries that operate in a imilar fashion.
b) Newsflash: some of the israli governents actions ARE racist.

As for you case about Israrel stealing arab land, would you say the same thing if it was one arab country surrounded by many many jewish ones?

Yes, obviously. My whole point is about the hypocrisy of hammering some nations while condoning other nations for doing exactly the same and similar things, so if i were not consistent in my criticism i would be working against my own point, wouldn't i?

Like the way we have so quickly moved on to the implication that by saying something bad (aka true) about Israel you must have some kind of anti-semitic agenda. Oh, and then you tell Predabot not to simplify the issue. Well played. FFS.

Iran making ridiculous comments that threaten Israel's security helps noone.

Isreal are just as bad. That is the only point. Until all sides are critiqued equally and called to account equally nothing will be resolved:

That or the whole area is given broadband and free porn downloads. That would probably do it.

They're killing people! Thats terrible!
They're killing people! Here's funding!

point stands.

[wideload]

The English are a clear ethnic group. They emerged form the melding of several other groups (celts, romans, danes, anglos etc..). The term ethnic itself is not really a scientific one and does not imply a clear line of genetic purity. Although people may be considered "Bristish" citizens, they will never be of English descent. Every census in Canada offers an "English option". Your idea that English is perfect ethnic stew totally ignores the experience of minorities living there. Once again, not really the point. The point is all countries in the world have been founded on ethnic lines. The United Nations recognizes this, hence the promotion of sovereingty after WWII.

Like the way we have so quickly moved on to the implication that by saying something bad (aka true) about Israel you must have some kind of anti-semitic agenda. Oh, and then you tell Predabot not to simplify the issue. Well played. FFS.

Its not anti-semetic to criticize Israel. It is anti-simetic to state that the people living there are constant foreigners trying to steal from the locals. With capitalist tricks. This might not have been what you are implying, but based on the way you have totally igonred facts to the contrary and taken all Isreal's actions as evil, your actions could be construed differently. You've implied several times that Israel is murdering people in order to steal from them. You've ignored that fact that Israelis are constantly being murdered as well, and maybe their actions are defensive. You've clearly placed blame totally on one side, on what is a controversial issue.

Isreal are just as bad. That is the only point. Until all sides are critiqued equally and called to account equally nothing will be resolved:

when was the last time Israel threatened to blow the conflict into a regional nuclear dispute and wipe another country off the map? If Israel were to state its intention to do this, I guarantee you the response would be overwhelming. In fact, even more so than the one against Iran.

They're killing people! Thats terrible!
They're killing people! Here's funding!

point stands.

point doenst stand. the US gives more funding to the arab world than it does to Israel. Altough on a per capita basis the funding might be more to Israel, when was the last time you heard Isreal threaten to murder the Americans. Also they have similar governments and would therefore be natural allies. Furthermore, Isreal has a history of cooperation with America, which is probably the main reason it is allied. It even managed to overcome the original stigmas attached to it due to its initial association with the soviet bloc.

does what? invade neigbouring territories and then annex the land? We've stopped that actually. So have a lot of other countries. oh!" but we have a right o this land because we have a right to this land". Get over it.

once again your totally ignoring facts. Israel gained land through defensive wars. It didnt invade neighbouring countries, it reppelled attacks from them. Something totally legal. The alternative would be for them to return the land, but ignore the attempts of arab armies to annihalate them. Why should they do that when they are under constant threat? Israel never officially annexed the west bank or the gaza strip (hence their desription as disputed territories). Theoretically, they have full authority to since they were abandoned by jordan and egypt respectively. A motion, however, was passed by the UN security council to withdraw to "defencible borders". Those borders are determined by Israel.

None of this is really important to the argument though. Lets get back to the main point. Iran is trying to get nuclear capability by declaring it is doing it for peaceful means. Then the president declares its' intentino to wipe another country off the map. People are alarmed by this. Your position, as best I can understand, is that nobody should say anything since Israeli jews are thiefs and therefore deserve to be threatened.

[Guest]

The English are a clear ethnic group. They emerged form the melding of several other groups (celts, romans, danes, anglos etc..).

As did the French, Germans, and, hmm... many northeastern Europeans.

Guess that's why we're all collectively known as European.

Oh, and I love the way this:

England is a cultural stew

suddenly turns into this:

England is an ethnic stew?

and then this:

Your idea that English is perfect ethnic stew

Their definitions may not be the most precise, but I'm pretty sure that cultural and ethnicity are not total equivalents.

Your position, as best I can understand, is that nobody should say anything since Israeli jews are thiefs and therefore deserve to be threatened.

You seem pretty sure of what everyone else's position is, so what's yours? Objectivity is ruled out since, like the rest of us, you've been exposed to subjective media in all its forms.

[Best First]

My new position is you don't appear to be able to read, uses facts as you please and ineffectually tries to imply people are racists if you don't like what they are saying if that helps clarify anything.

ill pick your post to tiny pieces later.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

I was interested to hear today that Iran has sacked all of its diplomatic MP's (not sure if they call em MP's etc..) - and have also just signed a big Oil deal with, da da da, China...

WW3 folks

[Best First]

The English are a clear ethnic group. They emerged form the melding of several other groups (celts, romans, danes, anglos etc..). The term ethnic itself is not really a scientific one

and yet the English are a clear group within this unscientific definition. I see, I see.

“I don’t really know what his word means, but it definitely applies here”

Although people may be considered "Bristish" citizens, they will never be of English descent.

But they will be considered English, as long as they were born here. English is not an ethnic concept, it is a cultural one. Thnicity relates to black, white, indian, etc, all of these ethnic types can be English. English is not a clear ethnic group because we have a history based on first invasion and later immigration. You keep accusing me of ‘ignoring facts’ (which you appear to think are synonymous with your opinions) and yet you are lecturing me on my culture and history in an utterly nonsensical manner in a vain effort to support an example that never made sense.

Most people here don’t give much of a **** about whether you can trace your ‘Englishness’ back 50 years or a 1000, and that remains a good thing.

Your idea that English is perfect ethnic stew totally ignores the experience of minorities living there.

I never said England was a “perfect ethnic stew”, saying our culture has a mixed basis doesn’t imply everything is harmonious. Only a moron or someone deliberately trying to skew a point as they are unable to counter it as it stands would draw that inference. What? Oh.

The point is all countries in the world have been founded on ethnic lines.

Utter, utter s***. Most countries, certainly in Europe, didn’t even get ‘founded’, the longest standing emerged through various evolutions of statehood over hundreds and in some cases thousands of years, others are the result of conquest and subsequent carving up of empires (like much of the middle east in fact). A sense of national culture (which you seem to mistake for ethnicity) often emerges later, is often subject to change (notable in the impact the Normans had on the UK). The idea that a nation starts with a clearly defined group of people and then moves from there is a) illogical and b) incongruous with the history of most nations.

Israel sits more as an exception that a norm when it comes to it’s emergence as a nation and your assertions otherwise and little more than nonsense.

The United Nations recognizes this, hence the promotion of sovereignty after WWII.

Mmm, I believe the UN also recognises that Israel really shouldn’t be hanging onto some of (some of, see, not all) the territory that it is.

Its not anti-semetic to criticize Israel. It is anti-simetic to state that the people living there are constant foreigners trying to steal from the locals.

good job I never said anything remotely like that that then

With capitalist tricks.

or that

This might not have been what you are implying,

or saying, but lets not let that get in the way of your poorly constructed attempt to try and portray me as anti-semitic, shall we?

but based on the way you have totally igonred facts to the contrary and taken all Isreal's actions as evil,

ah, there we go.

a) which ‘facts’ have I ignored

and

b) where have I said that ALL Israel’s actions are evil?

What’s that? Nowhere? Mmm, I see.

your actions could be construed differently.

er, what actions?

You've implied several times that Israel is murdering people in order to steal from them.

Actually I’ve implied that the Israel government is hanging onto land that their claim to is rather dubious AND that they are murdering people. I didn’t necessarily cojoin the points. Are you saying Israel aren’t murdering people? Or that all their claims to land are steadfast?

You've ignored that fact that Israelis are constantly being murdered as well,

Once more ladies and gents, utter sh***. The whole thrust of my point has been about singling out certain nations as bad whilst ignoring others is an ineffectual and self destructive ways to approach any issue, the implication obviously being that both sides are more or less as bad as each other which in turn infers that both sides are suffering and offending in a similar manner. Clearly.

and maybe their actions are defensive.

So, just to be clear, I have apparently labelled all Israel’s actions as evil (even though I haven’t), and you took issue with such generalisation (which you manufactured on my behalf) but you are now quite happy to define all Israel’s actions as ‘defensive’. Who’s being accused of bias here again?

You've clearly placed blame totally on one side, on what is a controversial issue.

Once more ladies and gents, utter sh***. The whole thrust of my point has been about singling out certain nations as bad whilst ignoring others is an ineffectual and self destructive ways to approach any issue, the implication obviously being that both sides are more or less as bad as each other which in turn infers that both sides are suffering and offending in a similar manner. Clearly.

Isreal are just as bad. That is the only point. Until all sides are critiqued equally and called to account equally nothing will be resolved:

when was the last time Israel threatened to blow the conflict into a regional nuclear dispute and wipe another country off the map? If Israel were to state its intention to do this, I guarantee you the response would be overwhelming. In fact, even more so than the one against Iran.

[/quote]

and yet the reaction to the ghettoisation of the Palestinians has been… to do **** all.

They're killing people! Thats terrible!
They're killing people! Here's funding!

point stands.

point doesnt stand.

not really in a position to say when you seem to have missed it, are you?

the US gives more funding to the arab world than it does to Israel. Altough on a per capita basis the funding might be more to Israel, when was the last time you heard Isreal threaten to murder the Americans. Also they have similar governments and would therefore be natural allies. Furthermore, Isreal has a history of cooperation with America, which is probably the main reason it is allied. It even managed to overcome the original stigmas attached to it due to its initial association with the soviet bloc.

Doesn’t mean it is morally right or an effective approach to diplomacy in the middle east does it?

Might also be worth considering why people are threatening to kill American’s as well…

does what? invade neigbouring territories and then annex the land? We've stopped that actually. So have a lot of other countries. oh!" but we have a right o this land because we have a right to this land". Get over it.

once again your totally ignoring facts. Israel gained land through defensive wars. It didnt invade neighbouring countries,

Syria? Lebanon?

Who is ignoring facts again?

You keep mentioning the UN but you don’t seem to make reference to the numerous UN resolutions that condemn Israeli behaviour. To use your logic this obviously means you are an Arab hating zionist who believes that the Jews should rule the earth, kittens should be banned and everyone should have to work at weekends.

You are making my point for me – no one in the region is a constructive force for peace and singling out one group as being the problem and the other as not is entirely unuseful.

None of this is really important to the argument though. Lets get back to the main point. Iran is trying to get nuclear capability by declaring it is doing it for peaceful means. Then the president declares its' intentino to wipe another country off the map. People are alarmed by this.

Oh ‘people’. Iran having nuclear capability and their leaders being twats doesn’t worry me any more than Bush having his finger on the button or Blair being a ****. Its all these things in combination that are pointing us in the wrong direction as a species and until these things are addressed in a more objective and less hysterical manner things will not get better. I will leave you now to get back to your delusions.

Your position, as best I can understand, is that nobody should say anything since Israeli jews are thiefs and therefore deserve to be threatened.

Your accusing me of racism for disagreeing with you and seeing things differently to you. You are doing this by attributing words to me I have never said. I’m all for pillorying racism when it is there but manufacturing it on behalf of someone in an attempt to discredit their opinions is about as c**tish as you can get.

Bell.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

If both sides are as bad as each other, yet some are more how shall we say diplomatic then others.
Shouldnt we take it to the logical conclusion and nuke the apposing sides first?

[Guest]

Ummm....

NO!

Foreign policies and United Nations/Human Rights Organisations aside, the geographical location of the nuclear detonation would provide an ideal source for maximum global spread of the resultant fallout.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

I see that what I thought. so when Iran declares its going to nuke first that therefore cannot be equaly as bad as other countrys like the USA.

[wideload]

and yet the English are a clear group within this unscientific definition. I see, I see.

“I don’t really know what his word means, but it definitely applies here”

ethinicity has no bearing in science, it is a sociological construct.

But they will be considered English, as long as they were born here. English is not an ethnic concept, it is a cultural one. Thnicity relates to black, white, indian, etc, all of these ethnic types can be English. English is not a clear ethnic group because we have a history based on first invasion and later immigration. You keep accusing me of ‘ignoring facts’ (which you appear to think are synonymous with your opinions) and yet you are lecturing me on my culture and history in an utterly nonsensical manner in a vain effort to support an example that never made sense.

Most people here don’t give much of a **** about whether you can trace your ‘Englishness’ back 50 years or a 1000, and that remains a good thing.

It doenst matter what most english people think, the socioeconomic factors surrounding ethnicity are very real. Thus making them real. By your logic nobody in England who was born there has ever experienced racism. Unfortunately, the experience of the minority (especially the visible one) is very real.

I never said England was a “perfect ethnic stew”, saying our culture has a mixed basis doesn’t imply everything is harmonious. Only a moron or someone deliberately trying to skew a point as they are unable to counter it as it stands would draw that inference. What? Oh.

The reason why things are not harmonious, is because like all other countries there is a clear majority.

Utter, utter s***. Most countries, certainly in Europe, didn’t even get ‘founded’, the longest standing emerged through various evolutions of statehood over hundreds and in some cases thousands of years, others are the result of conquest and subsequent carving up of empires (like much of the middle east in fact). A sense of national culture (which you seem to mistake for ethnicity) often emerges later, is often subject to change (notable in the impact the Normans had on the UK). The idea that a nation starts with a clearly defined group of people and then moves from there is a) illogical and b) incongruous with the history of most nations.

Israel sits more as an exception that a norm when it comes to it’s emergence as a nation and your assertions otherwise and little more than nonsense.

This is totally not true. Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Poland, India, Bangledesh, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, Croatia, Bosnia, Ukraine, Russia, Sudan, North Korea, South Korea, Cyprus, Austria, Ireland, Jordan, Algeria, Moroco, Kuwait, South Africa... In fact all of Africa, most of Asia, and all of Eastern Europe all arose after WWI from the breakup of larger empires. These borders were drawn based on perceived differences. Example people who identified with Ukraine were given a country seperate from those that identified with Russia. THey claim to be of a different ethnicity, hence why Russians living in Ukraine are still seen as Russian not Ukrainian. For the record all of these nations founding involved people moving from different areas into a zone with other people who identified with them. Its called population transfer. The most notable example is India, Pakistan.

For the record jews do have a sense of national identity. The term jew can describe various religious denominations (orthodox, hassidic, reform, kabalist, etc..) and people from different countries (the largest being russia, US, Poland, Iraq and Morroco). Most jews identify with eachother based on something more similar to nationalism than anything else. It is extremely common to hear jews reffer to the jewish nation. A body independent of Israel.

Mmm, I believe the UN also recognises that Israel really shouldn’t be hanging onto some of (some of, see, not all) the territory that it is.

agreed. there is the issue of security before Israel hands back the rest of the land. Israel handed back huge chunks of land to Egypt after the war of 1973 in exchange for recognition and peace. Why should Israel hand back land to countries that do not recognize its existence.

a) which ‘facts’ have I ignored

all the ones I've stated, which was why I stated them.

b) where have I said that ALL Israel’s actions are evil?

your clearly under the impression by using language like "And snipers shooting kids" and accusing Israel of stealign land and using the fact it was there's 2000 years ago as their motivation that Israel's actions are motivated by evil.

Actually I’ve implied that the Israel government is hanging onto land that their claim to is rather dubious AND that they are murdering people. I didn’t necessarily cojoin the points. Are you saying Israel aren’t murdering people? Or that all their claims to land are steadfast?

oohhhh you were just blaming some abstract concept of government. not the country itself. I dont believe you ever made that clear. Your attacks seem to be directed at the existence of Israel itself.

Once more ladies and gents, utter sh***. The whole thrust of my point has been about singling out certain nations as bad whilst ignoring others is an ineffectual and self destructive ways to approach any issue, the implication obviously being that both sides are more or less as bad as each other which in turn infers that both sides are suffering and offending in a similar manner. Clearly.

I'm totally in agreement with this point. Now please apply it to the Israel and Palestine conflict fairly. That means not accusing them of "And snipers shooting kids" purposely and for no reason. Also could you please reference me to the case of this.

So, just to be clear, I have apparently labelled all Israel’s actions as evil (even though I haven’t), and you took issue with such generalisation (which you manufactured on my behalf) but you are now quite happy to define all Israel’s actions as ‘defensive’. Who’s being accused of bias here again?

notice the "maybe" part before my statement.

Once more ladies and gents, utter sh***. The whole thrust of my point has been about singling out certain nations as bad whilst ignoring others is an ineffectual and self destructive ways to approach any issue, the implication obviously being that both sides are more or less as bad as each other which in turn infers that both sides are suffering and offending in a similar manner. Clearly.

Once again I dont believe your statements reflect that.

and yet the reaction to the ghettoisation of the Palestinians has been… to do **** all.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Your taking the "ghettoision" as a concrete fact and your implying Israel is the sole cause. How does the lifestyle of Palestinians compare to that of other arab nations with similar natural resources and birth rates. What have other arab nations who initiated conflict with Israel done to resolve the issue. Have you taken other factors into account such as the fact women cannot participate in the economy in the same way men can into account. Israel has contributed to the problem no doubt, but you dont seem at all to be considering why Israel has done what it has. Security. Historically most times Israel has given liberties unilaterally, arab states have turned this around on them. Tell me why Israel should give back land without any consideration for security.

Doesn’t mean it is morally right or an effective approach to diplomacy in the middle east does it?

Might also be worth considering why people are threatening to kill American’s as well…

Who defines what morals are right. From the American point of view their morals are right, and they will give money to countries they see as morally right. Israel cooperates with the US to a greater degree and reaps the rewards. Call it whatever you want but nobody in their right mind would give others the means to destroy them.

Syria? Lebanon?

Who is ignoring facts again?

Umm Syria has initiated every war with Israel. The only time Israel struck first was in 1967. This was justified based on the fact that every surrounding army had already lined up on Israel's border. THe reason why they won that war was because Israel destroyed the arab armies air capabilities. How did they do that? they were lined up on the border about to strike making them easy targets.

As for the invasion of lebanon this was done because the Lebanese goverment was funding arab militant groups who were making attacks out of Lebanese territory. After they felt their goal was complete, they withdrew from all Lebanese territory. (some dispute the Sheba Farms area is Lebanese, but technically it belonged to Syria)

You keep mentioning the UN but you don’t seem to make reference to the numerous UN resolutions that condemn Israeli behaviour. To use your logic this obviously means you are an Arab hating zionist who believes that the Jews should rule the earth, kittens should be banned and everyone should have to work at weekends.

You are making my point for me – no one in the region is a constructive force for peace and singling out one group as being the problem and the other as not is entirely unuseful.

all UN resolutions that Israel is not in compliance with were passed in the General Assembly. Resolutions from this body are only suggestions. It makes no sense for Israel to listen to them since they are passed by a large arab and muslim block. Only resolutions passed by the security council are enforcable. Dont you find it kind of odd that despite all the awful things going on in the world (Darfur, Cambodia, North Korea) that Israel gets so much attention. Why all the energy towards the Palestinians but none towards the Kurds (who have experienced deaths 100s of times greater than the Palestinians)?

Your accusing me of racism for disagreeing with you and seeing things differently to you. You are doing this by attributing words to me I have never said. I’m all for pillorying racism when it is there but manufacturing it on behalf of someone in an attempt to discredit their opinions is about as c**tish as you can get.

Bell.

I'm accusing you of racism for clearly refusing to see things from the Israeli point of view and jumping to random conclusions. You've implied several time that jews are nothing but foreigners to that area and dont deserve the right of sovereignty there (all the stealing land remarks). Well its not really racism since jews are not really one identifiable "race". (see above)

[wideload]

I forgot to add that calling Israel racist is riduculous. You have to agree that being a minority has serious downfalls. Now your saying because Israel wants to retain its Jewish character instead of goign back to being a minority they are racist. Your also ignorign the 20% of the country that is already arab muslim. Also like I've mentioned before the group of "Jews" is composed of several different ethnic groups (asiatic, saphardic, Ashkinazi are the three broad terms used to describe them).

Does any country allow unlimited numbers of people to migrate. No. They all want to keep the nature of their country. The nature of Israel, for the most part, is a jewish one, and they should not be forced to be a minority in yet another arab state. If this requires immigration restrictions then so be it.

[Best First]

ethinicity has no bearing in science, it is a sociological construct.

which you are banding round in an entirely incorrect fashion.

It doenst matter what most english people think,

by your own logic; Racist! Racist!

the socioeconomic factors surrounding ethnicity are very real. Thus making them real. By your logic nobody in England who was born there has ever experienced racism.

No! How could you possibly infer this? This is ****ing ridiculous.

The reason why things are not harmonious, is because like all other countries there is a clear majority.

How can you lecture me on race and ethnicity and then make such absurdly simple statements? Tension exists at all kinds of levels, often between minorities, your summary is nonsense

Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Poland, India, Bangledesh, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, Croatia, Bosnia, Ukraine, Russia, Sudan, North Korea, South Korea, Cyprus, Austria, Ireland, Jordan, Algeria, Moroco, Kuwait, South Africa... In fact all of Africa, most of Asia, and all of Eastern Europe all arose after WWI from the breakup of larger empires. These borders were drawn based on perceived differences.

And its all worked out great hasn’t it?

However the point that ALL nations are founded on ethnicity remains refuted, not to mention you seem to be ignoring the historical factors that feed into such senses of difference which in turn inefr its nowhere near as simpleas 'countries are based along ethnic lines'.

For the record jews do have a sense of national identity. The term jew can describe various religious denominations (orthodox, hassidic, reform, kabalist, etc..) and people from different countries (the largest being russia, US, Poland, Iraq and Morroco). Most jews identify with eachother based on something more similar to nationalism than anything else. It is extremely common to hear jews reffer to the jewish nation. A body independent of Israel.

I know all of this.

I love the way you are lecturing me about the Jews in an entirely irrelevant manner as part of your quest to paint me as ignorant because i don’t agree with you.

[ Israel handed back huge chunks of land to Egypt after the war of 1973 in exchange for recognition and peace. Why should Israel hand back land to countries that do not recognize its existence.

Why shoudl countries that see Israel as a threat to their security help to legitimise it? Cuts both ways and equally useles to any peace process.

a) which ‘facts’ have I ignored

all the ones I've stated, which was why I stated them.

disagreeing with you does not constitute ignoring you.

your clearly under the impression by using language like "And snipers shooting kids" and accusing Israel of stealign land and using the fact it was there's 2000 years ago as their motivation that Israel's actions are motivated by evil.

again this is ridiculous conjecture on your part. I would never be so simple as to suggest that such situations are about ‘good’ and ‘evil’. How does the fact something belonged to you ages ago infer that by wanting it back you are evil? Your conjecture is absurd.

Based on the ‘logic’ you seem to be employing I assume you are in favour of shooting Palestinian kids. Racist! Racist!

This is ridiculous.

oohhhh you were just blaming some abstract concept of government. not the country itself.

Yes, I was blaming a land mass for killing kids.

How is government a concept that is any more abstract than a nation? Christ’s sake. When talking about a nations policy and actions freaking obviously comments are pointed at those in power.

The whole thrust of my point has been about singling out certain nations as bad whilst ignoring others is an ineffectual and self destructive ways to approach any issue, the implication obviously being that both sides are more or less as bad as each other which in turn infers that both sides are suffering and offending in a similar manner. Clearly.

I'm totally in agreement with this point.

Great…

Now please apply it to the Israel and Palestine conflict fairly.

This is insane! How can you do anything but apply the point that each side is as bad as the other anything other than fairly?

How can you say you agree with my point but when I apply it by pointing out examples of Israli behaviour AS A COUNTER BALANCE TO CRITCISM OF IRAN WHICH IS ALREADY PRESNT IN THE TOPIC AND BY WAY OF UNDERSCORING THE POINT THAT BOTH SIDES ARE AS BAD AS THE OTHER that I am being prejudical?

By raising one thing it does not infer I am denying or ignoring anything else, or saying anything else is less bad. Obviously this Iranian guy is a bell, but the situation is not as nice as good guy/bad guy which some aspects of the Western Media (and leadership ) like to play with and I don’t think the hysterical response to this really helps. If you are going to be alarmed be alarmed at the situation as a whole and the fact that it is generally thundering in the wrong direction in terms of any resolution.

You’re accusations of anti-Semitism are disgusting and your reasoning is ridiculous.

This is maddening – Transfans has the probably one of the strongest stances on any form of prejudice on the web, certainly in the Transformers community and this is driven by me. The last person we banned was Ultimate Weapon for anti-semitism, he was banned by me.

And yet here I am being accused of racism by you for criticising a country by way of balancing criticism of another country.

Here is a quote from Ultimate Weapon by the way: “Anyway I found the site informative as regards to national socialism. Every tribe should have it's own land and be able to govern that land himself.“

He sounds a lot like you doesn’t he? Given how we are banding round absurd accusations I think its entirely fair to conclude that you must be a Hitler loving Nazi as well.

FFS.

[Impactor returns 2.0]

if i may interupt - on the subject of both sides being as bad as each other, are they really? whilst the USA might invade forigen lands under the banner of 'peace' or somthing, thats still quite different from wanting to 'kill' another countries people on the basis of not liking them is not?

for example Iraq is a [composite word including 'f*ck'] up, but the USA didnt go there to 'wipe it from the face of the earth' - and so even tho other countries might have nuclear programmes, are they not different to Iran?

WOuldnt the USA had merely Nuked Iraq - which is what Iran is saying it will do to?

[Best First]

maybe Iran wouldn't be so keen on nuking people if they didn't feel so threatend by the actions you are descrbing?

Besides - only country ever to use nukes... USA.

thanks for focussing on that rather than the fact i'm being called a freaking racist.