| Author | Message | ||
     Ivan |
On the History of Once and Future Wars. What better place to write history than now, today, to determine the victors? They say history is biased by the victors. Let it be biased, because we will write who they the victors are, and the history remembered of past events will be determined by the present into the future. What we think and do, and write, today will determine what will happen tomorrow. So this is a discussion dedicated to the future of war. Will it be defined by human understanding and truths, or will it be defined by failures and conflicts? War had been with us from time unremembered, and still it persists today. To those who accuse historians of distorting human events, we will answer that we are the writers, and they the humans who bring events. In the end we will see, can they, or us, conquer war? What better place to start than with today? So here is a speech by General Casey, US Army Chief of Staff. He speaks the Army Family. "Soldiers, civilians and families of the United States Army, Let us fight for our freedoms, while the enemy will fight to take our freedoms away from us. Our freedoms are hard won, and those who fight for it, our men and women with courage, will place their mission first, to preserve them into the future of our children and their children, for all history. We are the righteous who pursue freedom for all humanity, and though the enemy brought this fight to our doorstep, it will be our doing to bring humanity's freedom to theirs. There is no bargaining on how the future will look for our humanity, for we will be free. Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1647618.ece The above link was found in the article referred to by Ivan on the right column. I quote: === “This recognises that our forces are stretched. There’s no question about that,” Mr Gates said. But he said that there was no way to orchestrate the “surge” of an additional 21,000 troops into Iraq and still give soldiers a clear 12-month break between tours of duty. ... Senator John Warner, a former Navy Secretary and one of the party’s most respected elder statesmen, said: “I feel strongly that we must carefully monitor the possible risks to the [all-volunteer] system that these extensions may generate.” === Let me put in my words one 'Thirukkural' - a great Tamil literature that has 1,330 couplets. What follows is the meaning of just one couplet. === The bullock cart has a very strong axle. In contrast the peacock feather is very light. Still the axle would break if we continue loading the cart with peacock feathers without limit. === The Iraq war was started on false excuses. It does not seem to be going in the right direction. Should we persist in a folly? Is it not wise to own up our mistake in attacking Iraq and withdraw? I wonder what would be the stand of Gen. Casey once he is free of the duty and discipline of the Armed Forces. | ||
| Ivan |
Will the Iraqis find their true path to freedom if American and Allied forces were to withdraw suddenly without having accomplished their mission? That is the great unknown of history being written today. Who should determine their fate? We, or the Iraqi people? But if the Iraqi nation is weakened by the enemies of freedom with persistent and heinously inhuman violence, some of whom are foreigners with their own agenda, then should we help them? That is the conundrum faced in Iraq today. Who will write their history, Mohideen? Power of will, desire for freedom, or appeasement to those who wish them to remain under tyranny? Was it right to have deposed an evil dictator and his even more evil sons? What kind of legacy will this deposing leave in Iraq? Are the people desirous of freedom, or do they prefer oppression? And what are our responsibillities to their desires? Should we help them? Or do we leave them like fallen comrades in battle? But we don't leave our comrades, do we? Yes, we must pull out of Iraq, and leave their destiny to themselves, since the war's mission was to depose Saddam Hussein, along with any 'safe havens' for those who would work terror to bring back their own form of tyranny, religious extremistic or otherwise. But do we do a stupidly wrong and cowardly thing, and abandon them as fallen in battle? The Iraqi people have suffered greatly by the doings of their religious fanatics who suicidally kill. Do we turn our back on them? No. We must pursue that evil empire on all fronts, including Iraq, until the freedom loving Iraqi people, those who we all agree are not different in their desire for freedom than we are, and pursue those who are evil until they are vanquished. Do we do this stupidly, when there is no chance of our changing the hearts and souls of the evil empire? Why not give it a short time more, fulfill our duties begun, help the Iraqis who desire freedom to have a fighting chance at winning? Then, if this battle is turning out wrong, despite ours and their best efforts, then withdraw in a disciplined manner, not in a route, and regroup to fight them on another day, another front, for their viciousness knows no bounds. As Casey said, it will be a very long war. But fighting evil is a long war, is it not? And religious evil that knows no bounds to its violence and cause for suffering is the most difficult to fight. Ours is not to run from this battle, but to pursue it to the ends of the Earth. This is how history will be made, when we are victorious and evil is vanquished. Freedom will win. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
BTW, Mohideen, please answer this question. Do you have a sinister insinuation in your words above? Are you implying that Gen. Casey is practicing deceit, in that his support for this Iraq war brought to finality is only an expedience of the moment, because he is in charge? Or is his position because he believes in his words spoken to the families of the US Army, that he believes in freedom? Which is it Mohideen, in your words above? Please explain, or else that line and post will be deleted, since it implies Casey is dishonest. Please explain. Thank you. Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
it implies Casey is dishonest Posted on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 02:50 pm: Ivan Casey is not dishonest. The founder of Budhdhism - Gautama Budhdha won a war; then he reflected on that war and concluded that attachment to worldly goods was the root of evil and founded Budhdhism. Was Budhdha dishonest when he led his troops to victory? When he led his troops to victory all his concentration was on winning the war. Likewise Gen. Casey is 100% honest in claiming that he is, and we are "ARMY STRONG." Remember we are talking about 'future history.' I expect a similar change of outlook in Casey as was in Budhdha. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Ours is not to run from this battle, but to pursue it to the ends of the Earth. Posted on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 02:45 pm: Ivan Tactical withdrawal is not running from the battle. This Iraq war was started on false premises and is tainted because of that. When we withdraw from a tainted war we are demonstrating our higher morals and not running from battle. As regards Muslim war mongers if and when they attack us or even attempt to attack us we shall retaliate with full force, conviction, justice, and moral on our side. Then victory would be ours, not when continuing a tainted war. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Security/11152.htm === In his sermon, translated by Palestinian Media Watch, Radwan said it was important to "remind our Arab and Muslim nation, its leaders and people, its scholars and students, that Palestine and the Al Aqsa mosque will not be liberated through summits nor by international resolutions, but it will be liberated through the rifle." === The Muslims believe that the Jews would hide behind the rocks and the trees to escape the smell of the body of Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him. This is expected after the descent of Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him. Now we call those who believe in Jesus as the Messiah as Christians. By that reasoning, the people who would hunt the hiding Jews to kill them follow the orders of Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him. Who are they: Christias or Muslims? When Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, would descend from Heaven is known to God alone. There is no point in fighting over a future incident which might happen tomorrow or might even be millions of years away. Peace is achieved by living under the current circumstances and establishing justice today. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Casey is not dishonest. Posted on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 10:41 pm: Mohideen Ibramsha Was Robert McNamara dishonest? http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20070414/cm_huffpost/045854 === Robert McNamara went to the World Bank after directing the Vietnam war which, he later admitted, he knew at the time the U.S. could not win. === | ||
| Ivan |
Muslims would fight over fairytales? Come on, Mohideen, act like a modern sensible human, not some primitive 7th century superstitious desert Arab. When you write: Do you really expect that anyone should fight over such gibberish drivel? Why would anyone fight over a fairytale? Get real. Your response to my question on Gen. Casey was good, in that you expressed a 'personal opinion' on his future thoughts. Naturally, that is not how it read, which expressed that he is 'not free' in his duty to think as he does. I object to this line of reasoning, and bringing in Buddha or McNamara does not in any way reflect the freedom Casey has in pursuing battle to preserve our freedoms. Your statement was explicit: "I wonder what would be the stand of Gen. Casey once he is free of the duty and discipline of the Armed Forces." It's the 'once free of duty' that implies he is not sincere in his statement while on duty. How can you justify such an assumption on your part? By what evidence? As far as hunting Jews or Christian because of the 'smell of the body of Prophet Jesus' is concerned, there is nothing in what you say that even begins to approximate sanity. First of all, many people of this world believe Jesus was not a prophet but the Messiah. However, this discussion should continue on the Religious Dialogue thread, not here. So I agree with yours: "There is no point in fighting over a future incident which might happen tomorrow or might even be millions of years away." Or how about it is never to happen? It's all fairytales, and if you wish to believe in such, and then propose actions based on such beliefs, they are totally your own. To act on killing Jews and anyone on such fairytales may get you off by claiming insanity. No sane and reasonable man would ever act on such sickening gibberish. Ivan | ||
| Naive |
Is war really about defending our perception of freedom from those who have a different perception of freedom? If so can there be compromise? It is apparent from what I read above about Jesus and Jews and the "dishonesty" of U.S. government and military commanders, that a difference in perceptions is to blame. Mohideen you are right. Jesus will not return for at least 4.5 billion years (when the sun burns out)  . And as far as U.S. military commanders being honest . . . well lets just say all leaders (of countries) have agendas and most times military commanders have to bend to fit into those agenda. Ivan you are right, we may not be able to pull out of Iraq because of the mess WE created! Mohideen is right, the war was started and tainted because GW Bush had an agenda. So WHO is wrong in this situation?!! Why haven't we (peace lovers on both sides) placed blame, found these culprits and brought them to justice? Do we fear the collapse that might follow making wholesale changes to our current political, religious, and governmental systems? Of course we do. We fear economic collapse. We fear invasion from others if we weaken our government and military. We fear anarchy. We fear change. Thus we do nothing. Thus WE ARE the culprits. Whether we are the educated or the ignorant. WE ARE the culprits, and this long drawn out war is the JUSTICE that we must face, for we have brought it down upon ourselves with inaction, apathy, and ignorance. Naive P.S. Mohideen the common people can be galvanized once they decide to give up archaic patterns of thought and ritual. That requires education and an independent sense of freedom, ethics, and morality. This is not a jab at your faith, but ask yourself how much harder it would be to inspire people who follow ritual and words in religious text zealously. Furthermore, the perception of ideals cannot come from holy books (in other words faith based logic), because those who follow will then fall right back into the trap of dogmatic behavior. They will be FOLLOWERS. I believe citizens earn the right to be citizens through some type of civic duty. We have abandoned rites of passage which usually taught an individual the value of earning a place in society. People who feel like they have earned their spot on the team, usually care more about the team. This is the problem here. People feel entitled and are thus apathetic in terms of punishing corruption as long as it doesn't affect them. We need some new means (not a ritual) to make people feel responsible to and for the actions of their government (which does act in their name). Those are 2 means of galvanizing the common folk, but they would take time. Usually some charismatic leader appears and the ignorant follow. That has been the general, and most effective short term pattern for galvanizing common folk. But alas it is also the most short lived. | ||
| Ivan |
Wars are for men to power over men. Think how different a war when men fight so that men cannot power over men. That, I think, is the difference between war for conquest and war for freedom. Not a different perception of freedom, but a different perception of the right to defend our freedoms from conquest, from those who would power over us, to take freedom away. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
People who feel like they have earned their spot on the team, usually care more about the team. This is the problem here. Posted on Sunday, April 15, 2007 - 12:34 pm: Naive Unfortunately birth seems to be sufficient to become a citizen. In US it is worse. An immigrant becomes a permanent resident; a permanent resident becomes a citizen. Such a citizen can become a Governor of a state but is not qualified to become the President of America. If we desire that a citizen feels like a member of a team we should abandon the practice of granting citizenship on the basis of birth. How many would approve such a move? | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
To act on killing Jews and anyone ... Posted on Sunday, April 15, 2007 - 10:43 am: Ivan There is absolutely no justification to kill anyone now on the basis of the belief that Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, would descend and then in his reign the Jews would be killed before his descent has actually occured. If any Muslim recommends the killing of any person on the strength of a future event before that event has taken place he or she commits the gravest sin in Islam. A life could be taken only by due process of law for a crime already committed by the guilty who gets killed because of that crime. Future is known to God alone and none else. Since Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was the last prophet none could know the future after him. This is violated by Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, after his descent as he would be a prophet. Until then the predictions made are just extrapolations of past. Such predictions might turn out to be true but there is no guarantee. All predictions are just approximations of the future. The approximation of one might be closer to that of another after the prediction's time has passed. No action could be taken on the basis of a prediction. This is one reason why the war on Iraq was wrong. The war on Iraq was started on the presumption that Iraq would attack and we started a pre-emptive war. We are in a mess may be probably because we started a pre-emptive war. Let me repeat there is no justification to kill a Jew just because he or she happens to be Jew. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
We venture a suggestion on the basis of the following two quotes. Quote 1: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/13/war.czar/ === WASHINGTON (CNN) -- White House aides, with U.S. President George W. Bush's blessing, are actively trying to hire a new point person to help pilot the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an administration official told CNN. "There's an urgency to get this done," the official said, in referring to the administration's new security plan for Iraq. "Implementation and execution are critical now." The "war czar" would report directly to Bush with the power to tell Cabinet secretaries what to do -- and yet have the diplomatic skills not "to use that tone of voice," the official said. ... The official title would be assistant to the president for Iraq and Afghanistan policy implementation, the official added. The idea behind the post is to make sure "Washington is responsive to military and civilian needs" on a timely basis and reduce bureaucratic problems that have hampered war efforts, the official said. Pressed on why the new position is being created now, after more than five years of war in Afghanistan and four years in Iraq, the official acknowledged that "implementation and execution is as important" as "policy development." === Quote 2: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/washington/16bank.html?ref=business === Officially, Mr. Wolfowitz and the bank are now to wait for a full report by the bank’s board on his leadership and charges of favoritism in dealing with Ms. Riza, who was employed at the bank until 2005. But bank officials said that in delaying a finding, the board seemed to be buying time for Mr. Wolfowitz to consider resigning. === Mr. Wolfowitz was one of the architects of the Iraq war. Under the circumstances President Bush should invite the current World Bank President Wolfowitz to take up the responsibility of 'War Czar.' We know that President Bush has confidence in Mr. Wolfowitz. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
3255%2Cft.html,http://biznes.onet.pl/14,1405259,,3255,ft.html === The US position will be critical. It has voiced its “full support” for Mr Wolfowitz and is determined not to let staff protests and newspaper leaks run him out of the bank. While it is in Mr Bush’s power to stop anyone else from driving Mr Wolfowitz out, it is not in Mr Bush’s gift to give him a manageable institution to run. If this becomes a domestic political issue – which it need not do, as Mr Wolfowitz is not a member of the administration – the White House will almost certainly refuse to let him go, regardless of the cost to the bank itself. If it does not, and the turmoil at the bank continues unabated, the US will have to decide whether at some point to whisper in Mr Wolfowitz’s ear that the game is up. Much will rest on the counsel of Hank Paulson, the Treasury secretary, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. === When would the US whisper? | ||
| Ivan |
Turkish ruling party warns army http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6603377.stm But what if this 'democratic' process interferes with secular freedoms in order to establish a religious theocracy? Then is this not self-canceling to warn the army to not interfere with the politics that undermine human freedoms? Why is the EU even involved in Turkey's internal affairs? No, it is not inconceivable for the army to protect its right to safeguard secular freedoms if these freedoms are being undermined by religious fundamentalists who want to impose Sharia. In fact, it is their duty to protect society's freedoms from such a 'democratic' process, if the process is committing 'social suicide' where freedom is lost. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
In fact, it is their duty to protect society's freedoms from such a 'democratic' process, if the process is committing 'social suicide' where freedom is lost. Posted on Saturday, April 28, 2007 - 11:39 am: Ivan The Turkish government has effectively deflected the army's reason for intervention by suggesting a change in the constitution to get the President elected by the people. If - for argument's sake - the people elect Gul as President would the army intervene? Should it? Let me say this: In 1965 when we as students agitated against the imposition of Hindi, the then Congress Government used its force to break-up the strike. The result: Congress is yet to form government in Tamilnadu. If any army goes against the people, eventually that very army would either be transformed or be destroyed. We hope that the Turkish Army and her supporters would not be foolish to challenge the people. | ||
| Ivan |
No, they would not "go against the people", but rather would support the people's right to be free of religious oppression and slef serving corrupting powers. Freedom can be undone democratically, hence Hitler rose to power through a vote, but once freedom is gone, it is very hard, and often bloody, to get it back. If the democratic process in Turkey destroys its own freedom to hold elections, what had they gained? Nothing. If that is the risk to society, then the military and police have the right to safeguard the public interest, to not self destruct and lose its freedoms. Education here is more important than guns, but in Turkey's specific condition, there is a competing ideology of government that wants to impose religious Sharia law, what they imagine in their simple minded ideas that it is God's word, rather than finding agreement democratically to rule themselves as a free people. Once they fall under the spell of religious fanaticism, they will be lost. Most of the voters are simple peasants from the country who believe whatever their religious masters tell them, while most who are secularists are educated people of a different strata of society. How does one leak such desire for freedom to the masses who obey the masters? That, I think, is the greatest challenge to modern Turkey. Can it remain modern, or will it regress back to a Taliban like society of the first millennium? What happened in Afghanistan? What happened in Iran today? Turkey is watching, and their military do not want to have to fight their own people to avoid such primitive regressions for their society. No, Mohideen is wrong. The army would not be destroyed by the people if it safeguards their freedoms. Rather, they will thank them when the religious theocratic oppressors are vaquished, and their freedoms are ensured. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Iran deports thousands of Afghans http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6615585.stm
Could this be Europe's 'final solution' to its agitating criminally inclined new immigrants? If Iran can do it, why can't they? Mass deportations of 'undesirables' had occurred in the past. It's a heartless thing, but no society can long survive if it allows its social predators reign. Multiculturalism must take that into account, or else the consequences will be dealt with more painfully in the future, when civil war results. Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Most of the voters are simple peasants from the country who believe whatever their religious masters tell them, while most who are secularists are educated people of a different strata of society. Posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2007 - 10:04 am: Ivan The above statement clearly illustrates the dilemma the turkish military faces. The masses are not educated. The military possibly accepts educated only in its cadres - I do not know - I presume. The media by its very nature is of the educated, for the educated and by the educated. So what was and is happening in many countries with less than 50% literacy is that two or more elite groups compete for power duping the uneducated majority. Decades back in India, the poor were offered financial rewards for a promise to vote for a particular candidate. Their votes were bought. In the most advanced democracy in USA the votes are not bought but through perception management the votes are steered the right way. That was what happened in 2004. Ed saw through the game and ensured that such perception management does not succeed in 2006. Coming back to Turkey the real solution - as Ivan recommends - is education. Unfortunately education takes generations to change society. However democracy is short on patience. So if the current Turkish government succeeds in its attempt - say perceived attempt - to annul Attaturk and bring a different form of government, either the Turkish military accepts that or there would be bloodshed. Another development is much more worrying than the struggle inside Turkey. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070508/65086382.html === MOSCOW REGION, May 8 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Strategic Missile Forces will complete the deployment of silo-based Topol-M ICBMs by 2010, the SMF commander in chief said Tuesday. "Alongside the deployment of Topol-M mobile complexes, we are planning to finalize the deployment of fixed-site Topol-M systems by 2010," Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov said. ... Gen. Baluyevsky also said Russia does not intend to use the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty to provide an asymmetric response to U.S. missile shield plans. "If someone thinks Russia's position on American missile defense and the CFE are linked, they are wrong," he told a briefing in Moscow. He said Russia could respond with less expensive options, adding that the missile defense program was onerous even for the American budget. He said Moscow will respond without fail if it sees missile defense as a threat to its national interests. "Exactly what measures will be taken is a technical matter," he said. Gen. Baluyevsky said should it break out, a new "Cold War" would set U.S.-Russian relations back 50 years, adding it is vital to prevent such a situation. === If the current Bush administration restarts the cold war we can as well write off the UN. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Could this be Europe's 'final solution' to its agitating criminally inclined new immigrants? Posted on Friday, May 04, 2007 - 09:53 am: Ivan No. Illegal workers could be deported, not unintegrated immigrants. These two - illegal workers and immigrants clinging to their old way of life - are very different entities. Europe's problem is with her immigrants. Europe should not adopt the Iranian solution. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
When would the US whisper? Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 08:51 am: Mohideen Ibramsha We think the time to whisper has arrived. The US got estranged with Europe when it launched the Iraq war. We are given to understand that France and Germany went along with the US decision to appoint Wolfowitz as World Bank chair to mend their estranged relations with US. Now virtually all seem to be looking forward to Wolfowitz leaving the World Bank. If President Bush and VP Cheney are indeed friends of Wolfowitz they should invite him to become the War Czar before the Board of Directors of the World Bank meet to decide. If they invite him now to become the War Czar it would not look as 'face saving.' Further as the Europeans now agree for US to nominate the replacement for Wolfowitz Bush would not draw a blank as he did with 'War Czar.' See http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/washington/08wolfowitz.html?_r=1&ref=business& oref=slogin for details of the deal offered by Europe. | ||
| Anon Anon |
THE INTERNET'S ROLE IN FORT DIX PLOT Where is the countervailing message from Islam on the Internet?," he asked. "They aren't going to believe anything we in the West have to say. It has to come from Islam." http://dailynightly.msnbc.com/2007/05/the_internets_r.html Here an alliance of free men and women bound by the Constitution of the United States, lead by decendents of the founding families, whose linage goes back to the dawn of Christianity raised a banner in opposition to the Jihadists. One master tactician gifted by analytic brillience opposed the game masters and tacticians of Al Qeada, prediction by prediction while exposing the deceptions of the current administration. Here the voice, a whisper in the dark of moderate Islam that opposes the Jihadists is given freedom to speak. Do we agree with that voice's views, no. But we can agree to disagree and argue in peace with no bombs. Here starts the opposition to the Jihadists, not on Jihad Watch or a dozen other such sites. A safe place has been given to voices in opposition. The anti-Jihadist voices are weak and whispers in the dark now, but will grow over time. The Internet binds them. Learn from the Alliance of Patriots and the ancient families of Christianity with regards to what is possible to do within the confines of a secular state with seperation of church and state. Anon Anon | ||
| Ivan |
Posted by Mohideen, Posted on Tuesday, May 08, 2007 - 09:19 am: Here was my full quote: The emphasis added is the 'criminally inclined' portion of the statement, not whether or not the immigrants were integrated into European society. Europe's social consciousness is large and generous enough to accomodate the sons and daughters of their unassimilated parent immigrants. But when these children of immigrants turn against their adopted country, such as we saw in recent riots, and loot and burn cars, or otherwise attack European citizens from Norway to Italy, then they are not merely 'unassimilated', but actually criminal hostiles. It is these criminal acting out immigrants who should be expelled, en masse, without any regrets. Their parents were given a chance, and their children respond with criminal acts, or some insipient maladjusted mentally retarted jihad, then they can go. Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
It is these criminal acting out immigrants who should be expelled, en masse, without any regrets. Posted on Wednesday, May 09, 2007 - 09:31 am: Ivan Iran is expelling illegal immigrants and thus they could be deported to their country of origin. As regards temporary workers they simply have to return to the country of their origin once the temporary visa expires. The problem is with the permanent residents and citizens. Even in the case of permanent residents there could be some justification in cancelling their permanent residency and thus they should return to the country that issued them passports. However once a person becomes a citizen of one country, often the other country withdraws the citizenship. Such citizens - immigrant citizens - must remain within the territory of the country of their current citizenship. As regards those who are citizens by birth they also need to remain within the territory of the country of their birth. Historically the undesirables from Britain were sent to Australia. Then Australia was under the control of the British and they were actually transferred from one part of their country to another part. The British criminals were not sent to non-British territory. Likewise Europe or any other country is free to carve out some space exclusively for the criminals and restrain them inside that carved out space. We have no objection to the action taken by a country with respect to her criminal citizens as long as they do not become the burden of another country. | ||
| Ivan |
Not necessarily true. There can be cases so undesirable to society that citizenship is stripped away, no voting rights, no right to legal recourse, and the criminals are either imprisoned for life, or sent out of the country. In the case of recently arrived immigrant families that have spawned odious offsprings who want to hurt and blow up people for their illbegotten political-religious causes, they can be sent back to their countries of origin. First choice is either imprisonment or forced emmigration, second choice is some God foresaken land in the Arctic circle, like outer Siberia. These had been done historically, so no reason why Europe cannot do it again. Knowing European mentality, I think they had shown immense restraint to not have done this already! Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
First choice is either imprisonment or forced emmigration, second choice is some God foresaken land in the Arctic circle, like outer Siberia. Posted on Wednesday, May 09, 2007 - 10:35 pm: Ivan Is outer Siberia without a government? http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Tomsk,_Siberia_(Government) === TOMSK, a government of western Siberia, extending from the Chinese frontier northwards to 6° N., and bounded by the government of Tobolsk on the N.W., by Yeniseisk on the N.E. and E., by north-western Mongolia on the S.E. and by the province of Semipalatinsk on the S. and W. Its area, 327,284 sq. m., is more than one and a half times that of France. === http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Yeniseisk,_Siberia_(Government) === YENISEISK, a government of E. Siberia, extending from the Chinese frontier to the shores of the Arctic Ocean, with an area of 986,908 sq. m. It has the governments of Tobolsk and Tomsk on the W., Yakutsk and Irkutsk on the E., N.W. Mongolia on the S. and the Arctic Ocean on the N. Its southern extremity being in 51° 45' N. and its northern (Cape Chelyuskin) in 77° 38', it combines a great variety of orographical types, from the Sayan alpine regions in the S. to the tundras of the Arctic littoral. === When criminals are sent from one land to another the government of the other land should accept them. It looks like even Outer Siberia has government. Unless these governments are slaves to Europe, Europe cannot send her criminal citizens there. Europe has to manage her criminal citizens within her own territory. Isn't there a rule regarding sovereignty of governments? | ||
| Ivan |
But what if the Europeans are invaded by a hostile ideology from outside their terrirory? Should this inner enemy not be sent back from whence they came, put ouside the gate if you will? They can always return to the countries from which they escaped, regardless of how well received they are in their land of origin, if they fail to appreciate the largess of European society, or are so miserable in the lands of freedom that they cannot stand it anymore. Let them return 'home' of their own free choice first. But if they persist in destabilizing the peace of their adopted country, there is no obligation for Europe to keep them. Send them back home with a one way ticket and no return. Fair enough? Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Syrian reformer 'jailed 12 years' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6641949.stm This is fighting 'Communism' all over again? If anti-freedom forces loom large in countries like Syria, or other Middle Eastern countries, or north Africa, or Asia, are we not back to fighting the same war we fought against Soviet Communism? The Evil Empire continues to stifle human freedoms, and it must and will be fought for as long as it takes to set humanity free of this regressive tendency towards oppression of minds. Our minds, as a new and conscious humanity, demand that we have the rights to freedom, our inalienable universal human rights, protected by law. Any government that fails to protect our freedoms is a tyranny. And that war against tyranny is not over, it simply moved to another place. Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Send them back home with a one way ticket and no return. Fair enough? Posted on Thursday, May 10, 2007 - 09:19 am: Ivan How about giving them life jackets; taking them by ship beyond Europe's marine border and throw them into the sea with the stern warning that any attempt to reenter Europe would be met with force. I am all for removing the criminals. I am not for their home country getting burdened with them. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
This is fighting 'Communism' all over again? Posted on Thursday, May 10, 2007 - 09:43 am: Ivan When did we defeat Communism? All that happened after the Afghan war was the disintegration of the USSR. Still the veto power was transferred to Russia, which was communist waiting for the right opportunity. Communism was indeed wounded through military action. It was not defeated through debates and discussions. As long as the business class tries to squeeze the labor of its due wages and reduce them to 'economic slaves' the poor would regroup in one place or another. There is one way to really bury communism. Make the labor a partner with capital. The profits are shared equally between the share holders and the workers. In this model, the salary given to the worker is treated as an advance from his share of the profit. In this model there is no owner and there is no worker. Given this model there would be no communism as well. | ||
| Ivan |
No Mohideen. They came here, they get sent back. No 'lifejackets' or anything, they already soaked up enough welfare state largess as is. One way ticket is the last piece of money offered to them, and after that it is for them 'inshallah' and goodbye. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Who today wants to admit he or she is a true Communist? Fidel Castro? North Korea? Really, you are so out of touch with reality, Mohideen, that it is laughable. No defeated with dialogue? Are you kidding? What do you think the whole Cold War was about, from intellectuals to the man on the street? Get real, your lack or reality is ridiculous! Afghanistan or the Taleban, or al Qaeda, didn't defeat Communism. We who love freedom, we did. And don't forget to answer my direct question to you on the Religious Dialogue thread... Do you believe in the separation of church and state, or the separation of religious powers and secular government, as safeguarded by our Constitution? You live in America, so answer the question! Ivan BANNED for Mr. Ibramsha failiure to answer the question. 5/11/2007 - Eds. | ||
| Le Chef |
Hello Mon, did I miss somethin?  Keep smilin Mo, don't mind "I and I". Listen to Jah! "Ain't no rules, ain't no vow, we can do it anyhow I and I will see you through, 'Cos every day we pay the price with a little sacrifice Jammin till the jam is through." Le Chef | ||
| Ivan |
Sentenced Home http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/sentencedhome/ Deportation had been going on since 2002, even for second generation children of refugee asylum seekers, when they go afoul of the law. Since 9/11 freedom is earned, not guaranteed for decendents of immigrants. If they join violent gangs, they may be shipped 'home' to their parents' country of origin. This is fact, and legal. Congress passed a law. See: US Immigration Policy See more on 1996 Immigration Act, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_Immigration_Reform_and_Immigrant_Responsibility_Act_of_1996 | ||
| Ivan |
New France in search of national unity and cultural pride, as a free people. Guy Moquet in this (translated to English) Wiki article writes in his famous letter, as he was about to be executed for his resistance to Nazism: "My small mom cherished, He was executed 16 August 1941, in the cause of freedom. This is the letter Nicolas Sarkozy, France's new president, will read to all the school children of France as his first act. Let freedom of the new France ring true. Vive la France! Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Europe also cracking down on illegal workers, with deportations and fines. EU targeting illegal employment http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6660077.stm They would be tougher still on 'human taffickers', those who profit from hauling this dismal cargo. It's about time, with tougher border security too. This mass immigration of demographic conquest of Europe will not succeed. A precedence is set, new arrivals may not always be allowed to stay. Some may be sent home.
Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
US immigration deal struck, 'Z visas' would allow illegals in, eventually. Here is the American solution, though not finalized: Democrats strike immigration bill deal with the White House http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immig18may18,1,629195.story ?coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true Also increased border security. Now employers will become liable with new identity cards: It looks like a compromise Americans, like their European counterparts, both invaded by illegals, can live with. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Rap with a conscience? French rapper relishes moral role http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6670069.stm  Al Malik feels enriched by his cross-cultural experience
There is hope for France and its multi-cultural future, when philosophy blends with music. "We shouldn't be excessively pessimistic or positive, but fair. The best thing you can do to make the world a better place is to improve yourself. I think in France we have all the tools available to do that." -- Abd Al Malik It doesn't have to be a 'war of cultures', but it can be a peaceful coexistence where equal values are equally respected. We are all human beings of equal worth, when not coercing one another, to make the world a better place. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Lock and chains on the internet? This is not surprising news, judging from the nations involved. Feedom of thought is simply not allowed there, no surprise. The internet to tyrannical regimes is an obvious threat, it means free flow of information, even dialogue. How they must hate this. Global net censorship 'growing' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6665945.stm#list | ||
| Ivan |
Reciprocity in accusations of 'Islamophobia'? From WSJ OpEd by Tawfik Hamid, How to End 'Islamophobia' http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010123 Dr. Hamid says: Worst? Killing innocents is worse, including suicide bombings of children in Israeli pizza parlors, aboard London buses, Marid and Mumbay trains, Bali nightclub, Beslan school... these are much worst. He says further, intelligently: To 'not be punished' by rigid interpretations of religious dogma, that is the key to end 'Islamophobia' for everyone, reciprocally. He ends: The last line should be in bold, that "Sharia law should have no binding legal status in free, democratic societies." Hear hear! Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Swiss move to ban minarets http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6676271.stm This is a development worth watching in the upcoming Swiss elections, which may send a message to the rest of Europe. Not extreme, a statement of fact, that Islamists may not 'take over' European culture or laws with their aggressive Sharia law, or its symbols. Better to call it now, then fight a bigger war later on. The Swiss, as does all Europe, believe in a separation of church (mosque) and state, and all religious adherents must be subject to the secular laws of the land first, even if these conflict with their religious practices. Else they will be made feel unwelcome, if the law is broken, and they may be forced to leave. Ivan | ||
| anonymous |
Yeah, go fish. http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/016689.php Now can you understand? | ||
| Ps/Ivan & Eds |
"Off the air" for a reason (PS to 'go fish' post above), and a voice of reason. There's a reason why we felt we should go 'off the air' for the summer. We sensed a "witch hunt" coming, and now that a new Jihad terror threat materialized in the UK, and the world, with more likely, this is exactly what is happening. Part of it is already evident with major corporate onlines shutting down access to JihadWatch. So we will stay 'below the radar' for the time being, with a planned reopen on Sept. 1st. Hopefully by then the current confusion and hysteria in response to the new Islamic Jihad attacks on our western civilizational freedoms will have calmed down. But in this there is always some voice of reason and moderation, even if firm. We found this in the comments to "Irshad Manji and insulting Muhammad": These are not insults to Islam, but a proclamation of what are our 'boundaries in reciprocity' with Islam. The message is clear, either accept our Western freedoms and live with us in peace, or demand Sharia and be labeled trespassers of our "boundaries of reciprocity". A separation of church and state, and mosque, indeed. But lay low for now, the hunt for the 'witches of confusion' is on. We hope everyone enjoys their 4th of July Independence Day, and remember the value of our freedoms in this beautiful land called America. Ivan & Editors, Humancafe | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
I venture to write because I believe this forum had an impact on the 2006 elections that mandated the withdrawal of our sons and daughters from Iraq. It is unfortunate that the numbers in the Congress and the Senate are not conducive to force the hand of this administration by passing a law that cannot be vetoed. To me this implies the people have to wait for a change in the Administration itself possibly after the 2008 election. President Bush ended his message a few minutes back indicating that he would go by principle and not politics in deciding the actions to be taken by him as Commander-in-Chief. He had virtually declared that he would continue to ignore the opinion of the people and execute the war in Iraq. Now the people have to act. We are a democracy and we are law abiding. How could the people act? Should the people act? President Bush talked of the dangers of losing the war in Iraq due to withdrawal. He feels that withdrawal would bring attacks to our homeland. He hopes - possibly believes - that he has the forces to secure victory in Iraq. I would wish him well. But I would also consider the facts on the ground. One weapon used by the terrorists to which we have not found an answer is the suicide bomber. I wish there is one answer to that, but I do not see any now. So I would not rule out the possibility of defeat in Iraq. I consider three possible outcomes: 1. Victory in Iraq. 2. Defeat in Iraq due to withdrawal. 3. Defeat in Iraq without withdrawal, that is, a military defeat in Iraq. As regards the first outcome, victory in Iraq, we would be very happy. As regards the second outcome, defeat due to (say premature) withdrawal from Iraq, we might lose face. However we would retain our prowess. The military would not be defeated; the military simply obeyed the civilian masters and withdrew. The fact that the military is in shape and is not broken would deter any adversary from attacking our homeland. The third possibility of a military defeat in Iraq would embolden the enemy because then the military is broken. If I were the Commander-in-Chief, I would retain the military muscle intact by withdrawing from Iraq as soon as the Iraqis fail the bench marks. Given the current situation, the people of USA have to act. The Commander-in-Chief cannot continue the war if Congress withholds funds. However that is not going to happen. Our army is a volunteer army. Here is where the people have a role to play. Advice the sons and daughters not to enlist in the defence forces until withdrawal from Iraq is complete. The same applies to National Guard because this administration has converted the National Guard into a defacto army on reserve. This is a call to the parents, husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, and children: Let there be a civil movement to boycott the enlisting in the Army until the withdrawal from Iraq is done. Once that is done, we would join the Armed Forces in large numbers and build our strength. God willing, I would be happy to enlist then, if that would help. === (posted by Ivan on behalf of Mohideen, per request) | ||
| Ivan/avert WW III |
When Deterrence of War fails... Trying to prevent WW III.  Atomic weapons test Caroline Glick writes a powerful argument in her Real Clear Politics web page, arguing that the present US administration missed some important cues to overcome the worldwide growing threat of Sharia Jihad, whereby a theocratic system of government based upon a specific type of interpretation of Islam is aggressively pursuing world domination. In her article: Trying to Prevent Word War III (which was lifted out of the discussion Islam and the nation-state at Dhimmiwatch), she offers a very clear eyed analysis of where America needs to go. Currently, in response to Iran's nuclear ambitions there is a flurry of 'shuttle diplomacy' by heads of state in response to this potential threat, both to Israel and the world at large. She says: This shuttle-diplomacy is further followed by Turkey's Erdogan: Which somehow connects, though it is not clear how, with the recent Saudi King's visit to England. Why such a flurry of activity now? Is there a present threat of which we will not know until after the fact? Also, per Caroline's web, there is the question of how effective is current military strategy in controlling the Jihad interests in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. In her article: America's Strategies for Victoy & Defeat she says: This supposed "deterrence" strategy, "signaling them in a threatening way, and on the other hand by trying to appease them where possible," looks flawed from the start. In fact, the American advantage gained by a quick military victory in Iraq was not pressed to advantage, so opportunity was lost. She writes further: So what started as a "stunning success" turned into an Iraqi quagmire, as we now know in retrospect. If American policy was more clear eyed, like Ms. Glick, perhaps we would not have wasted 4 plus years trying to straighten out the Iraq mess, nor seen both Iraq and Afghanistan go the way of a Sharia based constitution, which is a major loss for the cause of Freedom. So the tenets of war were flawed enough to create conditions that ensure a continuation of war, since the defeat of the enemy never really took place. Will they do any better in Iran, when time comes? That will be seen. Now Pakistan is getting tripped up by its own duplicity ("war is deceit" spake Mohammed), by allowing a growing cancer inside their borders as well, both Taliban and Al Qaeda safe havens. How will all this play out in future wars? If America, and the Western Alliance, keeps dropping the ball whenever they have both momentum and advantage, what can we expect? We are fighting a primitive simple people whose ideology based on 7th century philosophy of total obedience is a pushover. Can we not fight and subdue slaves? They are slaves, so fight them for what they are, and beat them. They will lay down their arms when it dawns on them that they are weaker. Do not stop half way, because they do not understand. That is all it will take, to make them accept their primitiveness and weakness in the face of a superior cultural enemy. Beat them! Can we do it? We had better, or else WW III is here. Ivan | ||
| ANON ANON |
Baghdad Comes Alive http://www.newsweek.com/id/70990 Following the horror of sectarian violence unleased by failure to understand what we were walking into a fragile peace emerges. Al Qeada understood well the forces pent up in Iraq and with a few well placed strikes ignighted a firestorm. It was only with and by the near superhuman efforts of our soldiers that this storm was contained. While the leaders played politics soldiers welded turrets onto Hummers made from scrap metal. They built improvised IED resistant trucks and died waiting for the military political leaders of this nation to relalize what they walked into. Wounded they waited at Walter Reed in squalar while politicians dined on fine foods with access to the best of medical care. It was not the President or the surge that brought this peace. It was the American soldier with his blood. Such is the nature of the men and women that defend this nation and the make up of those that have lead it during this time. | ||
| Ivan/moderates trust |
Whom do you trust? -- jihadi fanatics, or moderates? Amil Imani, Freedom of Iran, writes: Who’s the Bigger Threat: The Moderate Muslims or the Jihadists?
So not much room for doubt as to jihadis intents, if their Allah told them to follow Mohammad's "book is not to be doubted", which means of necessity anything in the Quran against the infidels and making the world safe for Allah must be followed to the letter.
The war with Islam against the West is already from within, with clever use of our laws to undo our freedoms and cultures. Should the West pay attention?
The next war is built on the foundation of a 7th century based superstitious fanaticism, the one followed by the jihadists, and not answered for, or to, by the so called moderates of Islam. If they cannot hold their own mad fascists in check, then we will need to do it for them, but it will cost them, perhaps dearly. There is always a price to be paid for war. In this case, their price for failing to reign in their own deviants is their loss of power, liberation of their women from semi-slavery, and introduction of western values of culture, especially our culture of religious freedom and personal responsibility. All this will cost the mullahs dearly. Whom do you trust? The mullahs and their armies of fanatic jihaidsts, or the quiet moderates and their armies of quiet jihadists? Tough one... Read it all, excellent piece by Imani. Ivan | ||
| Ivan/Bhutto |
Great woman killed, a tragic loss. Benazir Bhutto killed in attack 
There's our answer to Imani's above on jihadi fascists. Ivan | ||
| Ivan/Pak |
When fear rules a nation. Now that Benazir Bhutto is killed, the Islamic nation of Pakistan responds: 'God help us' - Pakistanis react Read all the comments people wrote in to BBC, ie., by FAISAL MAMSA, PSYCHIATRIST, KARACHi:
When fear gains over reason with religious jihadi-militant certitude, then there is reason to fear outcome. Pakistan is a 'pure' Islamic state, and fear rules, at least for now. Does reason, with ethical upright stature, have a chance? It depends on her people. Ivan | ||
| Ivan/Castroism ends |
Fidel Castro quits after a half century  A new history can be written for Castro's Cuba, where a Socialism based government ruling a small Caribbean state for half a century may now develop into a modern free democratic state, if it is the will of the people. Castro said to his countrymen:
Will this be a new paradigm shift of Cub'as Emergent mass consciousness? History is being written today. In BBC News, Fidel Castro announces retirement Carry on ol' boy, fighting like a good soldier of ideas. We all do, whether or not we know we do. Ivan | ||
| armageddon |
Countdown to Armageddon 91,000,000 potential jihadists may not seem like much, only 7% of the whole Muslim world population. Think again if the mullahs's army of the Umma is mobilized as one war machine. That is larger a population than most countries. But relax. It's the other billion we should worry about: Jihad-armageddon? discussion on JWatch. Armageddon | ||
| believe it or else |
Believe it or else!  ...no comment, no joke. | ||
| Fitna |
FITNA  Watch it all. | ||
| Prince of Peace |
Who is Earth's guardian Angel of Peace?  Capture of Jerusalem (interactive) -Byzantium We pray for peace. Who do we pray to? Who is Earth's guardian angel of peace, our Prince of Peace? Those of us who pray to Jesus think of the Christ as the overlord angel of peace on Earth. Buddhists think of Buddha as the embodiment of peace within and without. Followers of other great historic spiritual figures and leaders all think of their own visions of peace as they pray to their overlord Spirit, or guardian spirits, from saints to gods. We had always done this, and we do it still today. We will always do this, because there is a larger psychic 'Being' of our 'emergent' collective consciousness, so when praying we are in effect praying to our own collective creation. That is the overlord guardian Spirit of the planet, the Christ figure as the Prince of Peace.  (interactive) 12th century mosaic at Hagia Sophia, Constantinople Some worshippers of separate faiths will tell you there are no differences in our worship to 'God' for peace. The Mohammedan praying for "Islam is peace" is as much praying to his overlord god Spirit of peace as is the Hebrew or Christian, or Hindu. And some genuine Muslims will truly believe this, that their prayers are for peace. But to make it true they at the same time must drop any ideas of world domination with Islam for Allah, in their thoughts and actions, if they are to be equal to others who want peace. A world dominating theocracy is not the way to world peace, if it divides the world between 'slave and free', or true believers and infidels. We are all free. It is delusional if by praying for peace to a Man, and not a Spirit of collective Earth consciousness, it is praying to a false world oversoul. Praying to a Man is calling on Earthly powers to overcome others by force, while praying to God, or an earthly overlord Angel guarding over us, is to pray to a higher power of consciousness to protect us from being violated by force. This latter, to "not be violated by force" is the prime definition of Peace. Who do you pray to? Not Man! If anyone says to you, you must be 'punished' for failing to pray correctly, that person is not praying to the Angel of Peace but to a human Man. Beware of to whom you pray, or world peace will continue to be illusive. Two thousand years of war has proven we had been praying wrongly. The Prince of Peace is not a Man. Ivan | ||
| anon |
Interview on "Islamism" with Daniel Pipes: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021853.php Daniel Pipes: Islam is a personal faith, and there are many different ways of understanding what it means to be a Muslim. One can be a Sufi, a mystic, one can be someone who lives by the law in a very strict way, one can be a nominal Muslim, who does not pay that much attention to his faith; all these and other ways are possible within the religion of Islam. We cannot fight a religion, because we are not "crusaders", but we can fight against Fascist like politicized ideologies like "Islamism", a popularized brand of aggressive islam introduced nearly one century ago after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and Caliphate. Read it all. | ||
| al-Naqbah |
Take back Egypt from the "Islamic Crusades" and Constantinople's "Catastrophe"  St Sophia surrounded by minarets of conquest Raymond Ibrahim: Today in History, Constantinople saves Western Civilization from Islam http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022228.php "All they saw were Muslims in their midst screaming ‘Allahu Akbar!’ Allah planted terror in their hearts…. The men were crucified over the course of 24 km.” (Al-Tabari goes on to explain that they did so, and were successful, in accordance to Koranic verse 3:151: “We shall cast terror into the hearts of infidels!”)" That was "... on August 15, 718, the siege was lifted, and the dejected Muslim army made its way back to Dar al-Islam." "Delivery for Constantinople came from the least expected source—the Egyptian crew of the Alexandrian ships. During the night, they all fled to Constantinople, acclaiming the Christian emperor. Why? Because they were all primarily still Christian—Copts—and, contrary to the many apologetics that suggest the Copts “welcomed” the invading Muslims, as this anecdote clearly reveals, had no great love for Islamic rule. Theophanes says that, as the Copts were fleeing in desertion to the city, “the sea looked entirely made of wood.” Taking advantage of this, Leo released from the citadel once again the fire-ships. Considering the loss of manpower with the Copts’ desertion, the confrontation was more a rout than a battle."  Famous Coptic church in Cairo Read it all... it was our history right down to "al-Naqbah". ... and then there's Russia: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022251.php Take back your freedoms from the barbarians! | ||
| Pakistan, what now? |
Musharraf is down, now what Pakistan? After Musharraf, the Deluge by Robert Spencer
If this is the 'wish of the people' to have Sharia Law, then how can Pakistan refuse to comply? Then there is this: Pakistani women burned by acid LA Times article
 Horror of their suffering is pictured here: la denuncia: ecco i volti della violenza sulle donne CAUTION: AVISO AI LETTORI/ GRAPHIC HORROR OF CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN 75% want WHAT in Pakistan? Have they asked the women? | ||
| Why our $$? |
Why are We supporting Pakistan and other Islamic states, when the Real wealth is being transferred to Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, etc?... with our petrodollars! !!! Read Fitzgerald: Why is the American government funding Pakistan?
Read it all. | ||
| Israel's Naqbah |
Israel's al-Naqbah, the real Mandate for Palestine. Fitzgerald: The situation of Israel is changing What will really solve the Jihad (holy war) by Arabs against Israel?  The real al-Naqbah "Catastrophe" is Israel's survival. "This understanding is not being brought about by any great improvement in Israel's efforts at explaining itself, nor by any great improvement in the largely atrocious and biased coverage of Israel's attempts to defend itself, but rather by the behavior of Muslims toward Infidels around the world. Each bomb attack on a bus in London, each slitting of the throats of Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia, each murder or threat of murder in Amsterdam or Denmark, each example of Muslim outrage in turn forces people, nolens-volens, to realize how absurd is the presentation of Islam as merely a "religion," and to listen more keenly to the articulate defectors from Islam, such as Wafa Sultan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ali Sina and Ibn Warraq, and to those who, having grown up within the Muslim world as non-Muslims, have also managed to survive, get to the West, and to testify. Territorial concessions by Israel is not the answer. Breaking up Gaza and West Bank into two annexed areas for Arab control by Egypt and Jordan is the better way, as it should have been in the original Mandate for Palestine. Jerusalem remains firmly in Jewish hands with a small concession to the Arabs for their al-Aqsa Mosque, only, and the "Palestinian State" dissolved. Yes, the "absurd peace talks" are dead. There is no "holy war" here but Arab supremacist land grabbing with a 1300 years history of conquest for their so-called religion. Israel as a Jewish homeland is not the problem. Read it all, with commentaries in link. | ||
| Ivan/Israel land issues |
The trouble with "annexing" Gaza and West Bank to adjoining states will not remove the problem of Arab call for Israel's annihilation. Furthermore, much of Israel's water comes from the West Bank, so without absolute guarantees (which in the Arab world never exist) of access to water source, there can be no surrendering this territory to anyone else. Just some points, but important ones. Agreed, the Jewish homeland is not the problem, but the problem of hostile neighbors and internal Arab populations (who think the Middle East can ONLY be Arab Muslim) cannot be solved with land grants. I don't know what solution can work there... Big problem for not only Israelis but for whole world. So there must be some way to preserve Israel's existence in this hostile Arab sea of jihad "holy war" against the infidel presence in the M.E. One way is to decommission our oil dependence on that region, and start pulling away from Arab oil. That makes the most sense, and therefore weaken the jihad internally, while offering less financial aid to those whose posture towards their neighbors is warlike, calling for their annihilation. If they don't change their warlike nature, then cut them off entirely... even if it means a humanitarian crisis. Let Arabs take care of Arabs in that case. Ivan | ||
| Anon |
"Let Arabs take care of Arabs in that case." They do not want to for very good reasons, it is better to keep the Pali Arabs in a state of victimhood as perpetual refugees, poor and violently angry, to serve the Arab cause. Why would they help? Pali Arabs are human sacrifice to Allah's jihad against the infidels and Israel. Anon | ||
| Anon |
'Tutu must consider Arab fanaticism'
Let there be fairness in criticism, and call the perpetrators of fanatic fundamentalist terror where the real blame belongs, on the 57 Arab nations dominated UN, which is the real obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Read it all. |