Dylan dude...you said that so good, and i admire you as a Jew to take that stance. There are more n more Jews taking that position, and i find it crazy that the Jewish state can't find it in their heart to give these people their own land and sovereignty. After all, the Jews were without their own land too. I would love to see a groundswell of Jewish support to give the Palastinians their own state. no, it will NOT make every Palastinian love Jews, but it would be a beautiful way of showing them that YOU are a people too, with children, with aspirations, with freedoms, etc
We (America and Israel) cannot stop terrorist by holding people hostage, or occupying them... it must come through extension of love, and even then, we will not make em all go away. If i'm elected President, i will fight with tolerance and acceptance......corny, huh??? ; ) tony ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dylan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Quad-List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 7:09 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] How Much Do You Really Know About This Country > Feeling self-righteous and violent is easy. Being thoughtful and > acknowledging that all is not as we are told by our government, takes > intelligence and isn't always easy. For instance do we accept any > responsibility for supporting Israel's undemocratic use of military power > to subjugate and denigrate a minority population? (and I'm Jewish but I > don't automatically support Israeli government positions)What about the > role that our insatiable need for oil plays in the equation? Just because > we have might doesn't make us reasonably and morally right. Perhaps the > right thing to do is admit/acknowledge that our wielding of our might in > the past has been very undemocratic and that by doing so we contributed to > this situation. That is too difficult to do. The US foreign policy could > never have been wrong.. right? We have the most trustworthy democratic > leaders who never abuse anyone's democratic rights for its own profit and > interests.. right? my opinion, Dylan > > At 05:57 PM 8/28/2004, you wrote: > >Keith, > >You want simple? > >Sadamned signed a treaty in 1991 which stipulated ALL WMD's and the > >equipment to make them were to be destroyed under UN Supervision. > >After a DECADE of playing mouse games with Hans Blix & Co. UN > >resolution 1441 was fully supported by the UN with a final date for > >compliance. > >Sadamned refused to fully comply. > >He refused to accept exile instead of armed enforcement. > >We forced compliance. > >9/11 changed how we deal with those who actively support or harbor > >terrorists. > >We ARE in a war we didn't start. > >Blame bin hidden. > >He started WWIII. > >If you think Terrorists want to listen to reason, I'll help take up a > >collection for a ticket so that you can try. > >Words of wisdom and a warning, don't try. > >They will only kill you in front of a camera. > >Stuntman > > > > > > > > That is a rather tenuous and convoluted explanation. I would also > >hope that your assertion that American foreign policy is based, at > >least in part, upon retribution is wrong. American foreign policy > >should be based upon what is truly in the best interest of our country, > >but I would have to conclude that under the current Administration, it > >is indeed upon retribution. > > > > > > Keith > > > > > > Stuntman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Stuntman, your knowledge of World history is truly remarkable. I > > > would be very grateful for you to educate me, as to how our support > >of > > > Iraq in its war of aggression was in any way whatsoever related to > >the > > > Cold War.< > > > > > > If RUSSIA had not built Sadamned up, he never would have had the > > > ability to take on Iran. Once that war was started it also was seen > >as > > > an opportunity to pay back Iran for the Hostage crisis by the USA. > > > So if it hadn't been for the Cold war, Sadamned would never have been > >a > > > major player in the Mid East. > > > The USSR was great at playing one side against the other, trying to > > > weaken both sides untill they could achieve a solid relationship > >which > > > would lead to their control or dominate influence. > > > Sadamned was a player switching sides to get what he wanted, and was > > > never even considered real ally material. The political mindset > >during > > > the Cold war caused many mistakes to be made, however we couldn't do > > > nothing. It is a little Yin/Yang that luckily never ended in > >Communist > > > domination or nucleur winter. > > > > > > > The geopolitical situation at the time was that the United States > >was > > > concerned more about the spread of a fundamentalist Shiite revolution > > > from Iran than the growing power of the brutal dictator, Saddam > > > Hussein. In point of fact, Saddam Hussein, was much more closely > >allied > > > to Russia than Iran had ever been.< > > > > > > Who are they playing footsy with now? Like I said, they played both > > > sides. Just look at Irans military hardware history. > > > Stuntman > > > > > > > Stuntman wrote: > > > > The US has been actively involved in addressing this issue. It is > > > > within our best interests to get China to put him in check. After > >all > > > > Sadamned WAS our problem, we helped him (for a brief period) when > >he > > > > was fighting a war with Iran (due to influnces of the cold war). N. > > > > Korea IS China's problem because they helped build them up during > >and > > > > after the Korean conflict (part of the cold war). > > > > A lot of "Hot Spots" all over the globe are remanents of the Cold > >War. > > > > Now that it looks like those planes in Russia were acts of > >Terrorism, > > > > they will become active partners in cleaning up all the messes > > > > created during almost half a century of cold war activities. > > > > Big question! > > > > If the treaty of Versilles had been enforced, would there have been > >a > > > > cold war? > > > > Lots of little pieces to this puzzle. > > > > Stuntman > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > >It's not the fall that hurts. >
