Peace And Love

[karlunity]

My plan for peace in the Holyland.

 

1) The Holyland is to be divided into three parts.(like Gaul)

One part is to be given to the Jews ..one part to the Muslims and one part to the Christians,

2) Nungs are to be employed to keep the peace and are to be given a free hand to do so.

3) Both sides are to be disarmed, that is they are allowed nothing above sidearms.

4) Each party is allowed to settle only in their own area.

5) If there are any suicide bombing or attacks by settelers the village of the bomber or the settlement of the attacker will be put to the sword by the Nung assisted if required, by ROK Marines.

6) All forms of AID are to be stopped to any side that won't play nice.

 

Karl

[swamprat]

My plan for piece in Holyland

 

1. FATMAN

2. LITTLE BOY

 

 

Swamprat

[Doble Troble]

The Arabs and Palestinians will never be satisified as long as Isreal exists.

[karlunity]

" The Arabs and Palestinians will never be satisified as long as Israel exists."

 

Doble Troble

 

And there are some Israelis and zionists who will never be satisified till they own all the land from biblical times.

 

That is where the Nungs and the ROKs come in.

 

Someone has got to make the children behave.

 

 

What else can you do?

 

We could nuke the Middle East back to a sheet of glass, but you know the liberals are not going to let that be done.

 

Ole Teddy is weeping over the poor terrorists in Gitmo.

Clark, who should know better, wants terrorists respected as POWs in order to win the support of France.!!!!!

 

Can you see the kind of support the Dems would give Bush after CNN covered the carpet bombing of say Tahran or if we layed arty into some Vill and razed the place?

 

I have no wish to leave my Marines or the Army in the MidEast, with their hands tied for the next 20 years.

 

If you won't make war the liberals will not and the GOP will not , make an enforced peace.

 

Karl

[Doble Troble]

I'm not trying to be arguementative, I just don't know as much about the situation as I need to - but am trying...

 

Isn't the disputed territory that Isreal now holds (Gaza, Golan Heights) only occupied for defensive purposes, having been taken after Arab attempts to invade (and destroy) Isreal? I can't fault the Isrealis for holding these areas for defensive purposes after multiple (thankfully failed) invasion/eradication attempts.

 

I don't think the Isrealis are the problem in the Middle East. The problem is an uncompromising homocidal attitude on the part of Muslims in the area -"Palastinians" and the rest of the Arab populations.

 

They feel that Allah, through Muhammed, has directed them to take by force all lands that have ever been under Muslim rule. This also incudes Spain, and so I suspect that if they are ever successful in destroying Isreal and any sort of western-type democracy in Iraq that they will eventually turn their attention West.

 

A solution, although this will never happen, might be to return to colonialism for a few generations, brutally eradicate or otherwise make the fundamentalism responsible for the problematic philosophy a very unsafe idea. There needs to be time for a PC revolution to take hold in the Middle East. Homocidal fundamentalists need to become outcast by the population in general. I suspect that this will only be achieved by killing most of them, and making the remainder appear to be what they are: really stupid.

[Gothmog]

Isn't the disputed territory that Isreal now holds (Gaza, Golan Heights) only occupied for defensive purposes, having been taken after Arab attempts to invade (and destroy) Isreal? I can't fault the Isrealis for holding these areas for defensive purposes after multiple (thankfully failed) invasion/eradication attempts.

 

Actually, the territories held were gained as a result of the 6 Day War, when Israel performed a pre-emptive strike upon its neighbours ... not the result of beating back an invasion. Are they currently held for 'defensive purposes'? Possibly ... it seems a bit cheeky to plead necessity to defend oneself after stealing from one's neighbour though ... and I'm considering from 1947 onwards.

[karlunity]

"A solution, although this will never happen, might be to return to colonialism for a few generations, brutally eradicate or otherwise make the fundamentalism responsible for the problematic philosophy a very unsafe idea. There needs to be time for a PC revolution to take hold in the Middle East. Homocidal fundamentalists need to become outcast by the population in general. I suspect that this will only be achieved by killing most of them, and making the remainder appear to be what they are: really stupid."

 

Doble Troble

 

 

 

I agree but as you write, it is not going to happen.

The West has, at least for the time being, lost it's tast for serious war and colonies.

If you are not going to kill them.

you have got to reason with them., thus the Karl peace and love plan.

 

Karl

 

 

[Dr.Hess]

Why not just tell the Isralies to have at it, do what they want and be done with it? Most of the problems there now are because the US has been giving money to both sides not to finish it off once and for all. We take our money and go home and tell them to "work it out themselves." The Jews will crush the A-Rabs in a few weeks and that will be that.

 

Remember the worst president we ever had? Well his method of getting the Egyptians and Isralies to stop fighting was to give both of them billions of dollars a year if they stop. Well, it just isn't worth it to me.

 

I have previously suggested we do what we do best in the Middle East. I've been around the world three times, been in and out of the Persian Gulf for about 2 years. There is one thing that the US does better than any other country in the world, and that is make parking lots. We should turn the whole PG into a really nice glass lined parking lot with nice wide spaces so you don't get door dings. Wide enough for HUMMV's and everything. Sure, things will be rough here for about 2-3 years with WWII style gas rationing, car pooling, more public transportation, the "sudden" discovery of the largest petroleum reserve in the world under Utah nationalized by the other worst president and the 50 year old technology to use it, grain based Diesel and ethanol fuels, etc. I figure about 2-3 years and things will be back to normal, except we'll have a great parking lot in the Middle East.

 

The "liberals" don't really care about the Sandie. They are just using the Sandie as a cause to rally the useful idiots that follow them. History has pretty much shown you haven't seen a war until a Democrat gets in charge.

 

Dr.Hess

 

[Gothmog]

History has pretty much shown you haven't seen a war until a Democrat gets in charge.

 

Current president and his father excluded I suppose ...

 

Oh yes, and Ronald Reagan too ...

[Doble Troble]

Gothmog,

 

Thanks for the interesting info about pre-emption. I got the following from Wikipedia which suggests that Isreal's preemptive action was provoked by Egypt's closing of the straights of Tiran, which were important to Isreal's economy.

 

I got this from Wikipedia:

 

Israel viewed the closure of the straits with some alarm, and tried various diplomatic routes to try settling them. The U.S. and U.K. were asked to open the straits of Tiran, as they guaranteed they would in 1957. Jordan was asked by the Jewish lobby in the USA through numerous channels, weeks before the war, to refrain from entering the conflict. All Israeli requests for peace were left unanswered, creating a feeling of grave concern for the future of the country. Israelis claimed that the closing the Straits met the international criteria for an act of war.

 

According to Israeli historian Michael Oren it was this situation in which the so-called red telephone" that linked the White House with the Kremlin during the Cold War was used for the first time in history: On May 26, 1967, "Foreign Minister of Israel Abba Eban landed in Washington with the goal of ascertaining from the American administration its position in the event of the outbreak of war. As soon as Eban arrived, he was handed an ultra-secret cable directly from the Israeli government, and in it the information that Israel had learned of an Egyptian and Syrian plan to launch a war of annihilation against Israel within the next 48 hours. Eban met with Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Defense Secretary McNamara, finally with the president himself. The Americans said their intelligence sources could not corroborate the claim; that the Egyptian positions in the Sinai remained defensive. Eban left the White House distraught. Johnson sat around with his advisors and said, What if their intelligence sources are better than ours? Johnson decided to fire off a Hotline message to his counterpart in the Kremlin, Alexi Kosygin, in which he said, We've heard from the Israelis, but we can't corroborate it, that your proxies in the Middle East, the Egyptians, plan to launch an attack against Israel in the next 48 hours. If you don't want to start a global crisis, prevent them from doing that. At 2:30 a.m. on May 27, Soviet Ambassador to Egypt Dimitri Pojidaev knocked on Nasser's door and read him a personal letter from Kosygin in which he said, We don't want Egypt to be blamed for starting a war in the Middle East. If you launch that attack, we cannot support you. Egyptian Minister of Defense, Field Marshall Abdel Hakim Amer consulted his sources in the Kremlin, and they corroborated the substance of Kosygin's message. Despondent, Amer told the commander of Egypt's air force, Major General Mahmud Sidqi, that the operation was cancelled." [3]

 

Within Israel's political leadership, it was decided that if the US would not act, and if the UN could not act, then Israel would have to act. On June 1, Moshe Dayan was made defense minister, and on June 3 the Johnson administration gave an ambiguous statement that was meant to discourage Israel from attacking. Nevertheless, Israel continued its plans for war. Israel's attack against Egypt on June 5 began what would later be dubbed the Six-Day War.

 

 

[Gothmog]

Israel's attack against Egypt on June 5 began what would later be dubbed the Six-Day War.

Well, given this quote your source appears to agree with me ... Israel attacked.

 

I might add that if one were to use denial of the straits as a pretext/justification or even as a first act of war, one might wish to reconsider our view of the celebrated 'Day of Infamy', which after all, was the followup to a complete economic embargo on Japan (never mind the closing of one trade route) by the Allies, including America ... an embargo which would have brought Japan to her knees, economically speaking.

[Doble Troble]

OK...but wasn't the embargo a result of Japan's invasion of China and other mainland countries?

 

To change the subject back, here's an interesting quote from Wikipedia:

 

President (of Egypt) Nasser, who had called King (of Jordan) Hussein an "imperialist lackey" just days earlier, declared: "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."

 

Several days later Jordanian forces were given to the command of an Egyptian general. Israel called upon Jordan numerous times to refrain from hostilities. Hussein, however, was caught on the horns of a galling dilemma: allow Jordan to be dragged into war and face the brunt of the Israeli response, or remain neutral and risk full-scale insurrection among his own people.

 

 

[karlunity]

Let me say that I am not one of those that think Israel can do no wrong.

I recall the The USS Liberty and Pollard but it must be said that the Arab states attacked first in 48. In fact the war that was declared then is still on. So far as I know only Jordan and Egypt have signed peace packs with Israel.

 

So if the Arabs don't want to lose land...don't lose wars.

 

Support Karl's plan for peace and love.

Karl

[Gothmog]

OK...but wasn't the embargo a result of Japan's invasion of China and other mainland countries?

 

It was the result of the disapproval of the US of the war in China, yes ... not directly caused by the war itself if you catch my meaning. The US embargo would have a direct effect on Japan, and to use your reasoning, would imply that the US, not Japan, was the aggressor in 1941.

 

Now I don't agree with that, but neither will I agree that trade actions by Egypt constituted a de facto declaration of war ... there was a lot of sabre rattling and aggressive talk, but Israel struck first and with no warning or declaration of war. I find it odd how one action is considered despicable and the other almost celebrated by some of us.

 

If one wishes to further consider the original source of this trouble and the foundation of the state of Israel through confiscation and terror, well, one might gain some insight into its lack of popularity in the neighbourhood. Add to that the abortive 1956 invasion and attempted take over of the Suez Canal by Britain France and Israel (a military venture triggered by the nationalization of the canal) and one might gain even more insight. Oddly enough, the US intervened to halt the 1956 invasion, insisting that all foreign powers return their forces from whence they came. From then on, US foreign policy appears to have been a balancing act designed to gain control over the canal (through an eventual alliance with Egypt) while appeasing voters sympathetic to Israel in the US.

[Gothmog]

Let me say that I am not one of those that think Israel can do no wrong.

I recall the The USS Liberty and Pollard but it must be said that the Arab states attacked first in 48. In fact the war that was declared then is still on. So far as I know only Jordan and Egypt have signed peace packs with Israel.

 

So if the Arabs don't want to lose land...don't lose wars.

 

Support Karl's plan for peace and love.

Karl

I think it is in the Arab nations interest to stay at peace with Israel ... in time Israel will be overwhelmed by sheer numbers and division within their nation. War is costly and unproductive by comparison ... popular opinion has led them elsewhere, however.

 

I believe that the Likud Party in Israel understands this and has therefor done everything it can to maintain a state of war and tension in the region. It is only in this atmosphere that Israel can continue to maintain relative unity and constant military prepredness .... just my opinion for what its worth.

[Doble Troble]

Hmm...

 

Regarding our agressive discouragement of Japan's plans to colonize mainlain China and the South Pacific. What response would you deem as both (1) effective and (2) not justification for the attack on Pearl Harbor. Presumably something in between a stern letter and the embargo. Was the embargo effective?

 

Regarding Isreal, I see them as a true underdog, fighting only for the right to exist, and hoping only for the possibility that their existence will be peaceful.

 

Their unpopularity is due to their neighbors' unwillingess to accept their right to exist.

 

Unfortunately the only way to deal with large groups of people who have adopted bad ideas (like Isreal shouldn't exist) is by force. Isreal is a tiny country who doesn't have the US's (or even Canada's) luxury of perseverating over a threat. To survive it must quickly eliminate all credible threats. I admire the manner in which they have been able to do this. Isreal seems very similar to the US prior to 1820, or so.

 

I suspect that it wouldn't take too many car bombs in Hyannisport before Teddy jumped on the bandwagon. The problem that we're having in the US dealing with terrorism is liberal morons incapable of percieving that the threat is real.

[Gothmog]

Hmm...

 

Regarding our agressive discouragement of Japan's plans to colonize mainlain China and the South Pacific. What response would you deem as both (1) effective and (2) not justification for the attack on Pearl Harbor. Presumably something in between a stern letter and the embargo. Was the embargo effective?

 

 

The embargo was effective, and I think it not an act of war ... the same as the closing of the strait to Israel. I have no issues with refusal to offer what one nation owns to another ... a military attack, however, is a clear indication of aggression.

 

The only major miscalculation was US lack of foresight with respect to where the attack would come (in 1941).

[Doble Troble]

Is espionage a military attack? How about sabotage?

 

Where is the line?

 

Could it be at an economy-crippling embargo or trade route closure?

 

The lack of rules is really frustrating!

[Gothmog]

Their unpopularity is due to their neighbors' unwillingess to accept their right to exist.

 

You might find it intolerable for foreign nationals to take over a part of America for themselves based on some claim from the distant past ... say Mexicans taking over Texas and sending the current population packing.

 

I daresay you might have some disgreement with that nations right to exist.

[Gothmog]

Is espionage a military attack? How about sabotage?

 

Where is the line?

 

Could it be at an economy-crippling embargo or trade route closure?

 

The lack of rules is really frustrating!

These are all forms of 'attack' ... it is reasonable to respond in kind. For example, espionage can be met with counter espionage and attempts to capture arrest or expel any guilty individuals.

 

Try not to lose sight of the context of this discussion ... you claimed that Israel was essentially acting in its defence to hold territory won through war. I deem this inconsistent when the first act of that war was executed by those presumably 'defending' themselves.

 

Israel has been very successful at propaganda and has IMO played various US governments like a proverbial fiddle. Hence your impressions (and you are by no means alone) of Israel as 'underdog' and valiantly defending themselves .... others might paint quite a different portrait.

[Doble Troble]

Hence your impressions (and you are by no means alone) of Israel as 'underdog' and valiantly defending themselves .... others might paint quite a different portrait.

 

Yes, it's really amazing how the same events are interpreted in completely different ways.

 

I think that the reason I tend to side with Israel is that I haven't seen evidence that they want to eliminate their neighbors (only their neighbor's ability to threaten Israel).

 

Israel's neighbors do seem to support the elimination of Israel. The rationale for this desire is what I cannot understand.

 

 

[karlunity]

"Israel's neighbors do seem to support the elimination of Israel. The rationale for this desire is what I cannot understand. "

 

Doble Troble

 

 

Easy. The Arabs want their land back and their pride restored.

 

 

Karl

[RGRWJB]

The Arabs are their own worst enemies. They steal from each other (like Arafat’s wife skimming 1 million a month from their donations). I agree with the Doc. Let Israel whip their Asses. I can tell you with all the terrorist we are killing over there, that will be less that Israel will have to worry about.

 

The Palestinians area bunch of Gypsy thieves. Their own Muslim people kicked them out of Jordan after killing thousands of them. They didn’t want them there and Israel should not have to put up with them. The Palestinian authority is comprised of a bunch of ex-terrorists thugs too. What a toilet that has not been flushed in years.