SeVeR

The fact that the US lied about Iran's current capability means nothing to you? You'll still believe the US when they say Iran "want" nukes and are "developing" nukes when they've lied about the very things they're trying to prove? You'd have to be re!@#$%^&*ed or incredibly !@#$%^&*-bent on believing the US government to trust the source of these allegations after they've lied to you. I think it's a bit of both. Are you in denial? The US is the country slamming Iran all the time and telling everyone that Iran want nukes and then they go and lie to you about the capabilities of Iran to produce nukes... and all the while i;ve been trying to hammer it into your head that the US is falsely incriminating Iran before this latest evidence even came to light! How can you be so ignorant?!?!?! I'm almost ready to say i'm done with you, Your recent inability to answer arguments without insult, racism accusations or complete side-tracking stupidity were the mark of an ignoramous, but now your defiant reluctance to re!@#$%^&*ess your point of view based on this proof of what i've been saying all along just takes the cake. You're a re!@#$%^&*, you're a dumb!@#$%^&*, and i don't often say those thinngs to people. Aileron: Zero evidence for this claim. The only evidence is Iran's defiance of the US demands which means nothing other than that they don't agree with what the US thinks. Your implication here is that they're a scheming (chess piece) and irrational (sacrificial) country, You have absolutely no good reason to think that. Prove it if you can. Small WMD wielding nation?

So the country that is making all the noise about nukes turns out to be full of !@#$%^&* and you still believe that they're making nukes but just "haven't got round to stuff the US is lying about yet". Who the !@#$%^&* do you think got you believing all this crap about nukes in the first place! Put the pieces together for Christ's sake!

Hate to say i told you so, but: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5346524.stm Astro, i'll get to your post in due time. -EDIT And here is the actual IAEA response to the US's report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/14_09_06_iaea.pdf

So this means they are? Please, its this kind of distrust that makes Iran think so little of us. 1. Iran are no more holy than the US. I don't care for religion, all specialise in the irrational. 2. Saying "they know nuclear weapons give them power" is obvious, irrelevent and a poor attempt at incrimination. Does knowing this priceless nugget of information make Australia want nukes too? You seem to be implying that a knowledge of what brings power (no matter how obvious) somehow means that they want that kind of power. Your logic is completely !@#$%^&*ed. 3. Oil runs out. I'm sure they want to sell as much oil as possible when the other countries around the world get desperate, economically for Iran it is very favourable to build a nuclear power plant since the price of selling more oil will more than equal the costs of construction and operation. You claim to know alot about economics... The basic interpretation of the comment "The Jews are a wealthy people" is "On average Jews are wealthier than many other peoples". I can't help it if your interpretation is clouded with your desire to pigeon-hole me as anti-semitic. The average income is the best representation of wealth for any people! Name me a better one! And its the same for every other country in the world... you telling me Israel is a special case of 1% rich vs 99% in poverty (or something similar)? Otherwise your point here means nothing. So here's some more stats for you to digest about poverty levels in Israel: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_pop_...ow-poverty-linePoverty Levels in Israel are 18%, for comparison in the UK its 17%. Point won, and this better be the last time you call me re!@#$%^&*ed over something you are completely and utterly wrong about. Europe is on average a richer continent! For Christ's sake, you're attacking me on this now? Do i have to pull more stats out of the bag? I threw it in because thats the sort of money that would be distributed to Israeli citizens if their country was dissolved you inflammatory cretin. I know it has nothing to do with income because i'd just posted the income stats above! For your interest the USA's bank balance is minus 860 billion or something ridiculous. Name me a period of peace then!! Your whole argument seems to be based solely on calling me a racist or calling me re!@#$%^&*ed, yet i'm easily showing you where you are wrong and trying very hard not to sling an insult back in the process. It is their right. So what? That doesn't mean they're going to build one. Its the right of all countries in the world to build nukes, although many realise they don't need them and many realise that bigger more powerful countries don't trust them with one. None of this relates to nuclear power which is what Iran is trying to develop (and has been for many years). Palestinians are an ethnic group, look them up... -EDIT- I respected you before that post, despite your opinions. When you insult me at the same time as showing me your complete ignorance of the very subject that caused your insult, well... there's only so much idiocy i can take.

Astro: Well: 1. Iran never said they want nuclear weapons. 2. There is no evidence that Iran are building a nuclear weapon. Those are my reasons/FACTS for thinking Iran don't want a nuclear weapon. What are your reasons for thinking they do want nukes that go beyond the !@#$%^&*umptions created through the character assassination of the Iranian government and it's Muslim population? Did i say "all"? Stop twisting words. I guess i'm gonna have to pull out a source and show you: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_...per-capita#restThe Israeli people are ranked 30th on the highest earners list. Lebanon 58th Syria 116th Jordan 104th Saudi Arabia 44th India 136th China 115th They're also ahead of Portugal, South Korea and the Czech Republic. The countries ahead of them are mainly Europe or USA/Canada. They are richer than all their neighbours and richer even than some Europeans. Their country also has a significant bank balance of around 2.3 billion (CIA World Factbook). So please lets put it to rest already. Calling racist everytime i call the Jews a rich people is very inane and a poor attempt at pigeon-holing me into the Anti-Semitic camp. Constant unrest and monthly attacks for 60 years qualifies as a war in my book. Even if it doesn't qualify as war for you, you can't deny that since Israel's creation there have been hundreds of thousands of people who have waged war on Israel in the last 60 years and still do today. There haven't been any periods of peace as far as i know. No, its because they know there's no evidence to suggest Iran want nukes! What the heck?!?!? Iran is not developing WMD's! Iran is not gladly talking about it either! What the heck are you smoking? Palestine was wiped off the map right?

Astro: Do Iran WANT nuclear weapons? If you honestly think they want nuclear weapons, what made you believe that? They have a right to nukes although i understand that we can't trust them with one, however they've only expressed a desire for nuclear power. What made you think that? Uh, no, i don't have any religious preference. They are wealthy! This is not a racial sterotype lol.... and as for evil, certainly not! This is a matter of who lived on the land for 1300 years prior to the last 60. Since 60 years ago a war has been raging. Its up to us to take a side. A very many rational people want Israel removed. Once again, no-one's said they want nukes, the only reason you're talking about nukes right now is because the issue has been raised by the US government who want people to fear Iran for the sake of guaranteeing public opinion. Its complete poppy!@#$%^&*, Iran has never said they want nukes. Actually its an obvious statement that you seem to be very dismissive about. If China and Russia agree to set a deadline yet won't agree to sanctions then they are appeasing the US. As sanctions won't get passed without China and Russia it means the UN is appeasing the US. Its like a police officer agreeing to "have a word" with the person who attacked you but not arresting them because there is no proof they did attack you. That's appeasement, it doesn't mean the police officer agrees you you just like it doesn't mean China and Russia agree with the US when they agree to set a deadline for Iran. We know this since China and Russia won't agree to sanctions. Yes! To think you know anymore than that is extremely presumptious! Ail: What a God-send that is. The US may finally decide to butt-out of other countries affairs.... yeah right! Worthless: ..the US and Israel" Then yea, thats about it. Who else is fighting the US and Israel? I think he covered the Taliban in another speech. We can change that "everyone" to "most" if you like, i don't care, my point still remains. You're just being a parrot again, picking away at insignificant detail. You're the most inflammatory person on this board but then again i never expected you to know what the word means, you spelt it wrong afterall. I mean, every post you make on this board contains an insult, earlier in the Lebanon topic you even expressed a desire for an "internet reputation", it's incredibly funny, i bet you even have a myspace page aswell, will you ever stop compensating for real-life failure? Is that what "worthless" means? Tiq: Well maybe you're right. I think he's keeping the option open though. Look at the build-up to the war in Iraq. All of a sudden Iraq was hitting the news when in actuality Iraq had done nothing new in recent years to trigger that kind of attention. For some reason though the media was doing story after story about Iraq until suddenly Bush invaded. Bush needs to sway public opinion before going to war, only now are we all asking the question "why the !@#$%^&* did we go there in the first place". The same thing is happening with Iran, Iran have been developing nuclear power for many years but only now is it plastered all over the news with implications that Iran wants a nuke. Its no reason to think he will invade but Bush has got the preliminary process done within the media.

If Bush puts car-bombers and Hezbollah in the same boat as 9/11 terrorists then he is clearly attempting to sway public opinion in favour of putting all these groups into the same boat as the terrorists who we all condemn as being the closest thing to absolute evil. It cannot be more clear and i ask you to explain where you think there is bias. You need only look at history to see the parallels with previous wars. The enemy is always portrayed in the worst possible light through propaganda and choice of words. The word of choice to imply absolute evil since 9/11 has been the word terrorist. Bush shouldn't be allowed to use this word to describe everyone who just happens to be at war with the US and Israel. It's blatent propaganda designed to harness public opinion for the war. I cannot be anymore clear. You can say i'm anti-Bush or anti-american all you want, it won't make this any less obvious to the historians and the political analysts out there. We all know who brought this issue to the forefront, pushed for sanctions, incriminated Iran through the press and even threatened military action. The US holds sway over Britain and those two countries hold sway over many others. If it wasn't for China and Russia things would be alot different. The UN "declaring" something means very little, they declared it because the US and Britain wouldn't rest otherwise, it was the diplomatic way of saying "ok we'll go along with it for now and hope Iran and the US can come to an agreement in the time being". The fact that Iran has said "no thankyou, we won't suc!@#$%^&*b to your threats and are insulted by your incrimination of our country" means that now the UN has to decide whether to act or not and i firmly believe that China and Russia won't let that happen, i even hope that France and Germany come through in the end too. Making a deadline is a diplomatic act to appease the US, nothing more, it doens't mean the UN will stop Iran getting nuclear fuel at any cost and it doesn't mean they think its wrong for Iran to get that power either. Exactly NBV, this is exactly what i'm trying to say! This is a difference of opinion and not the good vs evil fight the US is making it out to be by putting everyone in the same boat as the 9/11 terrorists! I'm not saying i'm absolutely right to have my opinions, i only disagree with the propoganda being used by Bush to imply that he is absolutely right and they are absolute evil (9/11 terrorists being the closest thing to absolute evil). He is using 9/11 hatred to harness public opinion for his wars! If there was no reason for them to disarm then i wouldn't support it. If the Islamic world didn't "trust" the US with bombs then i wouldn't support it either. My values are universal - a lack of trust is no reason to deny a right. ThunderJam: There are always civilian casualties from weapons intended for soldiers, just look at the recent conflict in Lebanon. Yes, i want the UN to come to a consensus about the removal of Israel. The UN should then supervise the evacuation of the Jewish population from Palestine before giving the land back to the people who occupied it for 1300 years prior to to 1947. If the UN does anything more than appease the US by setting deadlines, i'd be very surprised. Iran has a right to nuclear power, there should be no discussion about that. I don't want to see this lack of trust for Iran bring about another war.

Is anyone else tired of Bush throwing around the word "terrorist" to describe every individual fighting America in the same way as the 9/11 attackers? Hasn't he tapped into public anger enough? It's bad enough that he got the go-ahead for questionable wars based on public desire for vengeance, but when will his definition of the word terrorist come under scrutiny? Not everyone fighting America and Israel is a terrorist who would gladly fly a plane into a building, very few would do that. The enemy is not absolute evil, the enemy is those who disagree with US foreign policy enough to fight the US. Fighting the US is something that comes alot easier to those directly affected in the Middle East. Comparing those who fight with the US to the 9/11 terrorists is a disgrace. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5301720.stm He said those who brought down the World Trade Center in New York five years ago were united with car bombers in Baghdad, Hezbollah militants who shot rockets into Israel, and terrorists who had recently attempted to bring down flights between Britain and the US. And there you have it. If you disagree with the creation of Israel enough to fight Israel then you're a terrorist. If you disagree with the occupation of Iraq enough to fight America then you're a terrorist. !@#$%^&*... if i lived in either of those countries i'd probably be a dead "terrorist" right about now. Car bombs are not terrorist attacks, they're attacks on occupying soldiers by militants who cannot fight in the conventional way against a technologically superior force. Firing rockets into Israel after Israel bombs your cities and kills civilians is not a terrorist attack either. "Despite their differences, these groups form the outline of a single movement, a worldwide network of radicals that use terror to kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian ideology," he said. Now he has established that anyone who fights America is a terrorist, he is attempting to consolidate these people into one single organised movement that is out to kill you if you don't want to be under their totalitarian rule. If anything "their ideology" is to be free of the US and Israel. "And the unifying feature of this movement, the link that spans sectarian divisions and local grievances, is the rigid conviction that free societies are a threat to their twisted view of Islam." Islam allows people to fight occupying powers such as America and Israel. Those that fight are not twisted. Those that fly planes into buildings are, there's a difference. Free societies are America's view of what is right, it's not Islams. Islam see's corruption in America's society. You can't "free" Islam since they're a religious society which is not supposed to be free even if they did believe America's society to be uncorrupt. We would be handing Iraq over to our worst enemies - Saddam's former henchmen, armed groups with ties to Iran, and al-Qaeda terrorists from all over the world who would suddenly have a base of operations far more valuable than Afghanistan under the Taleban." So America leaving would apparently make things worse? Worse than the 100,000 people that have died in Iraq in recent years? If we leave they'll fight eachother for some sort of power until maybe Iran invades and brings the peace that exists in their country. The president also condemned the government of Iran, which he said was supporting terrorist groups like Hezbollah and defying the international community with its nuclear activities. I support Hezbollah too, they're not a terrorist group. If i had American oil money to p!@#$%^&* around to my allies i'd probably give some to Hezbollah too, since they agree with my opinion that Israel should be geographically wiped off the map. "It is time for Iran to make a choice. We've made our choice - we will continue to work closely with our allies to make a diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran's defiance and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon," he said. There is no proof that they want a nuclear weapon!!! Iran have the same opinion they had at the beginning in that they have a right to nuclear power. For the US it doesn't matter that they actually do have this right, all that matters to them is that they don't TRUST Iran, and that is enough for them to force-feed the population of the US with incriminating crap about Iran whilst attempting to force sanctions through the UN. Thankfully China and Russia won't stand for it. Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. Agreed. There is no evidence that they want one. Consequences for defiance?!?! I don't care how powerful America is, no-one should be forced to give into these threats. If all you reading this can't see it then i don't know what to say anymore, Bush has put everyone fighting America into the same boat as the 9/11 terrorists to bring them all into that nice little group labelled "absolute evil". He's incriminated Iran who have not done anything illegal and have never pledged to do anything illegal. The propaganda used by this man is incredibly offensive and i feel sorry for all those who believe it. Thoughts?

For the people being displaced it makes no difference where the intruders are coming from. Historical claims mean next to nothing when the claim is from 1300 years ago. Britain has as much of a claim from the crusades. Who cares if Palestine wasn't recognised by some people as an actual country, the Palestinians still lived there, it was still their homeland. Would you give up your home over a techinicality? Yes, it would be risky to stay in Palestine after Israel being wiped off the map. There are 20,000 Jews in Iran, so no it doesn't destroy my argument. Iran you say?!?!? Yes, not as bad as you've been led to believe is it. And you're right they moved to Israel from other Middle East countries, that only means they were given preferential treatment in Israel, it doesn't mean they were persecuted, they existed in those countries to start with! Maybe the anger has made it more difficult in the last 60 years but thats not the fault of the Arabs, especially if they have a right to be angry. We won't have to oppress them and who said anything about taking away their hope? There are already Jewish communities in America and Europe and no-one "acts" to destroy them. I'd like to see America or Western Europe openly do something "terrible". Look at America, they can't do anything terrible without an event like 9/11 to give Bush the public outrage he needs to go into a questionable war in Iraq, which even then required reason after reason to justify it. massacring Jews in your own country just wouldn't happen. This is the same paranoia about authority i get from pro-gunners thinking we need guns to combat genocidal governments. Its as if they think a democratic government could become a dictatorship which somehow has power over the army and police, which incidentally has to be made up thousands of mindless, immoral, order-following drones. The army wouldn't follow an order to massacre Jews even if the government suddenly decided it was the right thing to do. To make this even more blindly obvious think about what happened after 9/11? We tried even harder not to discriminate against Muslims, even though all the terrorists were of that origin. There was no massacre and the political correctness went into overdrive. Do you think some Jews immigrating to the US will do anything warranting a massacre unless they decided to overthrow the American government or attempt to conquer land within the US? Firstly,WTF are you talking about when you say "racist sterotype"? Is this because i said "6 million wealthy people will have to go back to the countries they left 60 years ago or less". Saying the word wealthy warrants calling me a racist? This is exactly what i've been talking about when i refer the OTT political correctness, does the fact that they actually ARE a wealthy country with wealthy citizens mean nothing? As for the economical situation it won't change much, if they were refugees then maybe but they are educated people who would probably boost the economy, opening businesses and filling jobs. America already has thousands of Mexicans entering each year and they're doing it illegally! (no massacre there either, we even talk about giving them citizenship). Ok, but they're still valuing their ethnic group to make it more important than other groups. White supremacists are no different, they want all the blacks gone to preserve the "American Race". Did political correctness make our view so lob-sided? Preservation of race for Jews means not wanting to marry a non-Jewish person, which is the same as valuing your own race as better than other races. Anyway, i think we both know its not a big enough reason to decide the stay-or-go issue. An elected official who happens to belong to Hezbollah was elected to the Lebanese government, this does not mean Hezbollah make military policy decisions for Lebanon on behalf of the government. That official is apart of the government because Lebanon is a democracy. Hezbollah do not take orders from the Lebanese government! They do not give orders either. The elected official is a member of Hezbollah but Hezbollah itself is not apart of the government. They are interested in helping Lebanon, in that way they agree with the government, but their policies do not match and neither do their allegiances. What proof is there that Hezbollah are a puppet? They get weapons from Syria and Iran just like Israel gets weapons from the US, is Israel a puppet too? I'll say it again, Hezbollah are not a tool of the Lebanese government and therefore are not an enemy of Syria. - As they aren't attacking Syria this is further proof to what i already believed to be true about the objectives of Hezbollah as a completely separate en!@#$%^&*y to the Lebanese government.

I'm far from an expert. You speak like the other three or four people on this board who are dismissively critical without countering any of my arguments. Its as if some people here are angry that i'm not pro-Israel, i only want people to recognise this as a war of opinions rather than "good vs evil" or "democracry vs terrorism". The opinion of the American government is not my own, i'm not asking you to disagree with them, i'm only asking you to recognise that they want you to think they are the good team in a "good vs evil" war. -EDIT- I mean how obvious is it when Bush starts comparing his fight to the fight against Hitler... ! Anyone who debates a fair bit knows this as the usual ploy of uneducated cretins attempting to imply absolute evil.

Europe is a success story. In my opinion its because of what we went through. We fought for so long and at the end of it peace, democracy, freedoms and rights meant (and still mean) so much to us, as they do to Americans who fought their own wars after separating from the Europeans. If you just give a people democracy and peace and expect them to understand its importance then you're doomed to fail. True the natural course has been altered but in terms of the development of democracy and peace we haven't really had much effect. They just have better weapons to kill eachother with now and different religions to justify doing it. In such, they are still untouched in terms of social development and withdrawing completely from their conflicts is still something that can be done without feelings of obligation to put things right. To put things right in the same interfering ways we put things wrong is not the answer. We do not understand how societies develop enough to interfere like that. All we do know is that societies develop at their own slow pace, interfering in any particular way hasn't been shown to help thus far. If the side of democracy and peace cannot win by itself then the people are not ready for democracy since they don't believe in it enough to fight for it.

Could they have used peaceful resistance to get a months worth of news on American TV? However you know what their initial aims were, so do you think they could have used peaceful resistance to get their comrades out of Israeli prisons?

Astro: First, the Arab world wouldn't be in charge of wiping Israel off the map because it would only happen through the UN. The withdrawal would take place under UN supervision by UN countries. The land would then be given back to the Palestinian people after all the Jews who want to leave have left. Certain guarantees would be required from Palestine to give equal rights to those Jews who stay. Westerners would be wiping Israel off the map. What i object to is your !@#$%^&*umption that when Iran says it they mean "kill em all in cold blood". Secondly, you've !@#$%^&*umed that Arabs would kill as many Jews as possible. We know that there are Jewish populations in Middle East countries who are not slaughtered routinely. You're condemning Arab future actions based on your opinion, again. That's sidetracking from the original issue though. If China sent hundreds of millions of immigrants to the US and treated everyone humanely (when the UN decided they should have the country) we'd still be fighting them. Nationalism for what? They can't ever hope to get a Jewish state made in their new (originally old) countries. Also they could campaign all they want to get Israel back and no-one would persecute them because it doesn't concern the country they're now in. Its a poor excuse for persecution. Secondly there wouldn't ever be persecution of Jews in the US and Western Europe, our societies and governments simply wouldn't allow it and you know that. Giving back stolen propety, apoligising, compensating and admitting faults is the tried and tested way of reconciling. I'm not !@#$%^&*uming it will end all conflict but i think its the best chance we have, and at what cost? 6 million wealthy people have to relocate back to the countries they left 60 years ago or less. That's progress in my opinion. Preservation of race is basically saying that your race is better than everyone elses. There are 6 million Jews in America, whats another few million gonna do to change things? Unfortunately this will probably take longer than 50-100 years and by that time oil will be gone. Will our interest in the region remain then? Because Hezbollah is not Lebanon, Hezbollah is not an ally of Lebanon (the government), and they are a military organsation funded by Syria and Iran which just happen to operate in Lebanon because it has a border with Israel and has recently been in conflict with Israel. Hezbollah is an Israeli hating organisation. If the Lebanese government dislikes Syria then Hezbollah don't give a crap since they don't work for the Lebanese government. In fact Astro, this proves what i've been saying all along about the "objectives" of Hezbollah. SVS: You're a parrot.

Because its not our business to act. To make a country better the people have to rise up against this kind of action by themselves. Like what should have happened in Iraq for democracy to take hold. What great speakers of peace and democracy are there in Africa that command armies of people who are against genocide and suffering? None, there are only politicians who have been put in place by the West. The reason there isn't alot done is because the West goes in there and does the job for them but then pulls out and leaves again, the people don't learn anything, they don't fight for anything, they wait for the next genocide. But look at how we turned out in the end. You can't just change the formula for success. We fought for our rights, independence and democracy and now they really mean something to us. Aileon: How can you know that you are correct in the absolute sense? As much as i hate to say it, lives are insignificant, trillions of people have lived, died, and gone back to the Earth. Its not your job to fight for someone else's life if they won't fight for it themselves. If they are fighting for it then a victory should be their's alone. They could just as well be fighting for something else that they deem right, like Islam. I've noticed our reluctance to help then. We are taking away from the victories that really mean something to us by doing the fighting for them.

You like to conclude the future based on your opinion of organisations and governments in the present, so how come Hezbollah in your mind only had this war to grab power, without a care in the world for the Lebanese people, when they appear to be largely responsible for helping the Lebanese people at the ground level. Words from your mouth.

candygirl: "The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham." 1. The Palestinians were settled in the region up until 60 years ago and were there for at least 1,300 years. They farmed the land which without a huge influx of money from the US is the best that could be done to develop it. 2. The UN voted and the countries that rejected par!@#$%^&*ion 181 were almost all Muslim. This division along religious lines should have been indicitive of the conflicts to come. Alot can be said for the US bias in the decision and their campaigning obviously went a long way to securing votes. If you don't believe me, read it from Truman, the President responsible. U.S. diplomats from the Mid-East urged Truman not to heed Zionist urgings. He replied: "I'm sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism: I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my cons!@#$%^&*uents." (This quote is hard to find because it shows the racial favouring of an American President who is largely responsible for the creation of Israel and the resultant creation of the continuous fighting in that region) http://www.commondreams.org/views/112800-106.htm At a Chicago rally in 1944, then Senator Truman said, "Today, not tomorrow, we must do all that is humanly possible to provide a haven for all those who can be grasped from the hands of Nazi butchers. Free lands must be opened to them." (Opened? ..and the sympathetic justification scorned by anyone who objects to the premise that two wrongs make a right) He wrote to Senator Joseph Ball of Minnesota on November 24, 1945: "I told the Jews that if they were willing to furnish me with five hundred thousand men to carry on a war with the Arabs, we could do what they are suggesting in the Resolution [favoring a state] - otherwise we we will have to negotiate awhile. Hundreds of thousands of Jews arrived in Palestine between 1880 and 1950, much to the dismay of the Arab population who had lived in that area for 1,300 years. The Jews bought up the land while Truman urged countries across the world to relax laws allowing this m!@#$%^&* immigration of Jews into Palestine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Zionism_and_Immigration To draw a parallel think what it would be like if 300 million Chinese people immigrated to the USA in the next 70 years. Following this m!@#$%^&* arrival they then got a UN vote that gave them a significant chunk of the USA. The United States people would then rise up against the Chinese leading to a war where China claims the rest of the land reserved for the US people; going against the very organisation that gave them land in the first place. 3. Territory cannot be captured defensively. 4. "God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham" The Jews wrote the old testament!!!! !!!! How dumb are you if you think of this as a reason.

Well said NBV. I wholeheartedly agree.

Look at what you're saying! You're telling me how a government would act in the future based on your opinion of them. I happen to agree with alot of what Iran says and does, just because i don't like Bush it doesn't mean i'll pretend to know his future actions to incriminate him in the here and now! That's what you're doing, guilty by future possible actions that are determined by opinion. Considering that in your opinion "wiping Israel of the map" means m!@#$%^&*-murder rather than what it would mean when any Westerner would say it, I have to conclude that your opinion is not your own. What? I need an interpreter because that made no sense. Again, your use of the English language is deteriating. I cannot understand. I think you're criticising my belief that Israeli's will be able to move to other countries. Well, they are wealthy, have relatives in the countries of their origins, have the combined wealth of their country to distribute to their citizens... i think they'll do pretty well for themselves. You tripped the caps lock button. I admitted i don't know alot about the Native Americans since i've never had to learn (and never chose to learn) American History. This is actually really relevent to a point in my previous post that you completely ignored. When a people do not fight for what they believe to be theirs they will be in danger of being ignored and even thought of as acceptant of what they now have. The history of Anti-semitism is overblown. The Jewish have always been an educated race and as a result were prolific writers. Other ethnic groups have been persecuted in similar ways. The only reason the history of Jewish persecution spans such a large period in time is because they've always chosen to segregate themselves. Their very religion only recommends Jewish-Jewish marriage to preserve their race, they segregate themselves in that way choosing only to integrate in the ways that suit them. Of course this is no excuse for their persecution but it is the reason. Any group choosing to exist in this way should have expected persecution throughout history. However none of this relates to our current world. Jews are not persecuted in the USA, UK, most of Europe and Russia. We are in the age of political correctness, liberalism and capitalism and as a result minority groups are not persecuted. There are hundreds of thousands of Muslims in the UK who are not persecuted, there will always be some people who hate minorities but not on a national scale in all of the Western World, Australia and NZ. To say they will be persecuted is the same as saying we need guns in public hands to stop our government from committing genocide against us. Times change. There are 6 million Jews in the US! And as you can see from this source there are hundreds of thousands of Jews in other countries too. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsourc...ism/jewpop.html Are there racial hate crimes against Jews in the USA, Canada, UK, France on a scale unequalled by other minorities? No. By the way there are more Jews in America than in Israel. They were from those countries before they came to Israel! I'm only asking to correct something that happened 60 years ago. Again, you are appealing to their deep-routedness in Israel and that means nothing to me, and it certainly means nothing to the people fighting Israel with those who want their land back. What evidence do you have of the supposed problems Palestinians caused in other countries? Oh and by the way before you come out with rampant refugee stories take a little look closer to home (Hint: New Orleans). Why would we want to do that? A Null point. Israel actually still denies they have them (are you going to start believing that now?) but its obvious that the US and Israel would have them removed. And i object to you calling a future Palestinian country an extremist state, what right do you have to say that? Again, you're theorising about the future and telling me that this is a certainty. Its not. We struck first and they will keep striking us until we put things right. You talk about a war if we give back Israel, but there will always be a war if we don't. Its obvious that Islam won't just "get over it" in the near future so unless we act there will always be a war there. The more ""terrorists"" we kill the more recruits Al-Qaeda get and the more soldiers Hezbollah get. With 1000 civilian casualties you have 1000 grieving families and hundreds of potential terrorists. How many did Israel kill? How many more will they have to kill in the future now that they've taken out all these civilians in the process? There are two ways to end this conflict. 1. Kill every Muslim in the Middle East who hates us, and potentially make even more people in the Middle East hate us in the process, meaning we have to kill more and more and more, until we've spent all our money on war and our economy is falling apart. 2. Realise what we've done wrong, give back Israel, apoligise and admit the mistakes of the Truman administration and governments since then, compensate the families of those killed with American weaponry, withdraw from all territory in the Middle East, leave the place alone operating only through trade. I'm all for two, what are you for? Yes, ALL religions breed extremists. You don't have to be an extremist to want Israel gone.

What crimes in Africa do you speak of and how can we correct them? I don't know alot about Africa politically and racially other than that both Islam and Christianity are attempting to conquer it. My limited knowledge tells me that problems in Africa are a result of Western interference. Would further interference be wise, is it possible for us to make a change there?

Then we agree. However with the US dictating what gets done in the world they probably wouldn't even get heard about on the news. In fact many people might even think that because Hezbollah stopped fighting they are happy with their situation. If Hezbollah and Hamas weren't attacking Israel all the time then we'd probably think that the creation of Israel wasn't a big deal and people are happy enough to coexist in the current world. This war has given Hezbollah alot of attention and unfortunately the violence has helped raise public awareness of their cause. Would we pay attention otherwise? Do we pay attention to the Kurds? (Your other topic). The US is the dictator of much of what happens through the UN and the US is flexible (somewhat) based on public opinion. How do you reach the American public? Through TV. How do you get on TV? You get on the news. How do you get on the news? You go to war. Its unfortunate and i disagree with the violence. You need only look at the likelihood of success from the alternative to see why there is a war. You tell me that this is a war that can't be won. Physically yes, but that horrible phrase used in Iraq has alot of meaning here: "hearts and minds" is what they're aiming for. Everyone now knows about Hezbollah and everyone knows they feel very strongly about Israel, everyone is asking why and looking at history now. The US is convincing us not to look at history by dismissing them as terrorists who are unprovoked, irrational, extremist, madmen who are not worth the time of educated people. I agree with much of what the President of Iran has said. While there must always be some level of suspicion, we can not condemn the man based on the presentation of him in the media. What has Iran actually done? They want Israel gone, they've supplied a group with weapons who also want it gone, and they want nuclear power. What has the US done? They want Israel to stay, they've supplied Israel with weapons to eliminate those who want it gone, and they've condemned Iran and threatened them with sanctions with the unwarranted unproven !@#$%^&*umption that Iran wants nuclear weapons. What is there here other than a difference of opinion? Yet somehow you believe there is something more. When did he say "destroy the West"? Yet they do it anyway AND get away with it... at least in the minds of enough people. How do you know? All i'm saying here is Israel was allowed to have nuclear weapons and was one of the earliest countries to do so. Those are facts. Only the US, UK, China, France, and India had nukes before Israel. Israel was only 30 years old at the time, are you telling me they already had a nuclear weapons construction lab set up and had developed the bomb by themselves whilst acquiring all the materials by themselves? Commom sense would say that the US had a large part in Israel's acquisition of nukes. Either through specifications, materials and knowledge or through directly selling/giving them the completed hardware. You can't manufacture a refugee crisis because people don't want to be refugees!!! You're going way overboard now to justify your opinions. You're accusing the Palestianians of being 'made' into refugees by Palestinian leaders? I can't understand how someone could be so bent to a particular way of thinking, you're incredible. The millions of people would leave or be governed within Palestine. They'd go to wherever they can, since they shouldn't be where they are now. This would probably be Europe, Russia and the US. A large perentage of the Jews in Israel arrived from Russia initially, many others from Europe and some from the US. They would go back to what they left behind, they have money, they would be welcomed back to the communities they left behind 50 years ago. Islam is not more important, whats important is: 1. There is a war going on between Israel and Islam 2. We must take a side based on who lived on that land while it was still at peace. I don't give a flying !@#$%^&* how developed Israel is. -Is this another of your excuses for holding your opinion? If somebody steals my seat in the cinema then i don't care if they have a jumbo pack of popcorn, an extra large coke, a pillow, a large anorak and a god-!@#$%^&*ed footwarmer that they've carefully set up on MY seat. I don't care if they're Muhatma Ghandi's love-child, an AIDS doctor or the most rational person on Earth, if they won't give my seat back then i'm taking it no matter how fantastic they seem and no matter how much time and effort they've put into making my seat their home. Get it? These things are no excuse for the initial crime. Jews inciting people to hate the Middle East so that we go to war? Not gonna happen... especially as its only public opinion that will change the government of the US. Muslims don't get persecuted in the UK, US and most of Europe, i'm willing to bet the Jews could probably do even better. We don't live in Nazi Germany, even back then though, 60 years ago, Jews lived reasonably well in most countries barring Germany.

Yes, and that's suppported by the role Hezbollah plays in the Lebanese community.

I say leave Africa alone, no matter what goes on there. We (The West) had the benefit of being the first society to make all the mistakes that are being made in Africa. Ever heard someone say "Learn from your mistakes"? It's really important to do that without someone just telling you what right and wrong are. If a more powerful society had stepped in and tried to influence our devlopment we would have fought them, rejected them and never learnt our lessons. You can't give democracy, you can't enforce democracy, they have to want it enough to fight for it. "Mostly" at least means you're open to the possibility that Christianity may also be a major factor in African wars.

1. I want Israel wiped off the map through the eradication of corruption in the international community. A consensus could then be reached within the UN to remove Israel from the Middle East as much as is physically possible before giving the land back to the people who lived there before the invasion occurring after WW2. The Jewish community would have to either choose to remain under new leadership or leave. This is my stance, and its so far from "kill em all". So please Astro, stop putting words into people's mouths. I know it's nice to believe we think that, your own opinion would not stand up otherwise, but its not going to get you any credit with people on this thread who can remember what was written one or two posts ago (this is why i use quotes). 2. I don't support Hezbollah's actions. I do understand that their distaste of Israel would largely go ignored if there were not conflicts like these to raise public awareness. I think that there are other ways to get attention. I do not know what good is but i try my best, i personally would not attack Israel so Hezbollah are far from being my idea of the good guys in this conflict, but to brand them with the "evil/terrorist" tag is far from fair. When you think for one second WHY they are fighting rather than doing what you're doing, -reducing their motives to unprovoked irrational behaviour-, you'll realise that this is a conflict where good and evil do not play any role, the only difference is a difference of opinion. The Muslims believe that Israel should not exist and if you studied the creation of Israel beyond "the UN said its ok" then you'll likely end up agreeing with them. Unfortunately its hard to agree when you're led to believe that they're a bunch of extremist/evil/terrorists. 3. I'm not reversing the good and evil labels. Israel and its people are not evil and Hezbollah is not good. If anything i've been trying to dispel the whole belief that there is such a thing in this conflict as good and evil because it seems to be a large factor in your way of thinking. Its as if you're refusing to ask yourself the crucial question of why they're fighting Israel and resigning yourself to the promotional opinion that Hezbollah are unprovoked, irrational and evil. Israel were allowed to produce nuclear weapons and were given or sold the materials to do so by the US. If you sell a kid a gun and he happens to melt down some metal into bullets then are you blameless when he kills someone? Where did Israel get their cluster bombs from? Their fighter planes? You think Israel just developed and built all this weaponry? Its no different from Iran supplying Hezbollah. A larger percentage of Lebanese deaths were civilians compared to Israeli deaths. Many of the Israeli deaths were from that rocket aimed at an Israeli military staging point. How are you differentiating between Israel and Hezbollah here? Is it that little preconceived notion that Israel are rational/good, and Hezbollah are irrational/evil? So you suggest Hezbolah should build military bases? What would happen then? I'll tell you, they'd all be wiped out in hours. They operate within built up areas to avoid detection because of Israel's "superior" weaponry sold to them by the US! If Israel wasn't armed by the US then Hezbollah might be more tempted to fight a more traditional war rather than this strike-and-hide one. Oh my God... so Iran is an extremist-Nazi-like state now? They have an opinion that goes against yours so you're calling them Nazis? You're completely brainwashed! And going way back, Israel has targetted Christian areas. Look it up on your own news sites (other than Fox, i don't trust them) As for Iran wanting to "dominate the region", so what? The US has dominated the Western World, is that wrong? No? Then why is it wrong for Iran? Oh thats right... they're "evil"

Ok so you're using it as an excuse to call them power-hungry. Hezbollah never could get a victory so this is a bid by the Hezbollah leadership to get more power. This is just as much an example of skip-a-step logic as inferring they're terrorists for the same reason. Can you for one second open your mind to see the excuses you're using here to justify your opinions?

Absolute genius, finally another perosn who hasn't bought into the good vs evil, democracy vs terrorism crap thrown at you by American News Corporations... wasn't that guy from Fox News promoted into the government not long ago as Bush's spokesperson? It's that kind of dismissive at!@#$%^&*ude that really pisses me off, you don't have anything to say other than the regurgitation of propogandist opinion. I don't have time for a more extensive reply, that will come tomorrow.