Responsible investing

As with a coin, there are always two sides of the story. He who holds Baghdad, holds the Middle East. I agree that we need to do more for the states, so lets cut all funding for Indonesia and Vietnam to help pay for the bills we are incurring. There are two ways of looking at Iraq...First is the holding action that keeps the jihadists occupied because they definitely know that Baghdad is the key that we are engaged in. Second is what happens if it falls.

The Question? Could it get worse? Just about every Imam out there preaches hate against the US, they were doing it before 9/11 and more so after we responded. So we MIGHT have gone after the wrong dog in the kennel, but they are all attack dogs. I have postured before that it might become necessary to kill them all to get a resolution. Iraq in the hands of an Islamic militant government is and would be the writing on the wall for an elimination. They would do something around the world and the country if able would do something about it. If its a NATO country then you can bet that there would be a massive response.

It isnt Iraq. They have been attacking western interests since the 1930's or if you rally want to go back then drop back to the 15th-16th centuries for a primer. They hate us as a rule and only because someone tells them to. So its an informed decision on their part to do so.

What can we do about it? Well they dont like Clintons either because they bombed embassies and tried to drop the WTC's back on his watch. They certainly dont like GWB. But we do know negotiating with them doesnt work either. So whats that leave? Exactly what we are doing now. What can we expect in the future? It depends. If Iran gets the bomb then we will have to remove their leadership and their facilities from the face of the earth. There will be collaterals. There will be dissent. But, you wont see Tel Aviv or Haifa go up in a smoking ruin, nor will you see 100 dollar a barrel oil.

We are moving away from the reason for actions as being oil. Its now moving back into "national security" as it should have from the beginning. I have posted before that they simply didnt kill enough people in New York for it to stay on peoples minds. I certainly didnt forget as I was on a three way telephone conversation with a friend in New York who had someone in the towers. They got out in time thank God but many didnt.

We certainly arent killing enough in Iraq because their people who are attacking us are strictly from Iran. So what are we waiting for, another 9/11? There are three scenario's involved in this and two of them include a Islamic superstate running from Pakistan to Syria and may or may not include Iraq. That is going to cost one hell of a lot of money to stop too. We could end this quickly in several massive strikes against their one big oil refinery and their eight little ones. There were mass protests in the last week there because of the price of gas rising. Its 38 cents there. They were arresting dissidents.

We need of course to weather the storm of a pandemic. Not necessarily the Avian Flu. But its the only one on the horizon for the time being. What we have on the horizon for sure though is a group of committed people that only want to do one thing and that is to subvert and submit the West to their will. We cant have any of the things that you assert we have to have Revere unless we have domestic security. You cant have economic security which is what this falls under without it.

"We certainly arent killing enough in Iraq because their people who are attacking us are strictly from Iran." Strictly from Iran? Evidence? Real evidence and not just Fox News?

I think the best thing we can do for the US healthcare system is enforce our existing immigration laws and deport all the illegals.

To me all the other things that are the bread and butter of making a community more resilient would include plots of land where people grow their own food.

If the "war" were dealt with in a swift fashion then the soldiers would be home protecting our soil. Sadly it will probably take another 9/11 before the magnitude of this situation is truly understood.

I think the rest of the world deserves some responsibility for the current mess...

...they said they wouldn't assist in Iraq because there were no terrorists there...well now, every terrorist in the world is there...so what's the excuse now.

So it was a bad idea...big deal..time for all to pitch in and fix the problem...

...its time for France and the others to step up and help for the benefit of the whole world...and it is time for the powerful Middle Eastern States like Egypt etc. to take care of their own home grown problem and take 'their' terrorists out...one way or another...and don't bother telling us you can't do it either.

We Canadians are doing our best to assist in Afganistan.

Tom: It's time for the U.S. to get out. Now.

Revere.

We have lost 60 young people in Afghanistan and you have lost thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan...to what end...I'm not sure.

...maybe their friends-comrades should decide whether to stay or go...

...anyway, I shouldn't have commented at all...I apologize.

Randy,

We are the ones who invaded Iraq and brought the terrorists in, if there, are, in fact, any there. You provide no proof. What we have is a classical insurgency and an occupied population who wants us out. It is long past time for you to go rent The Battle of Algiers. You demonstrate your ignorance of military history at every turn. You clearly aren't reading Defence and the National Interest and don't know squat about Fourth Generation Warfare.

Educate yourself. Read J.F.C. Fuller and then we can talk. Right now, you're just an uneducated rightwingnut who doesn't know anything about military history. And your ignorance is showing.

He who holds Baghdad, holds Baghdad (assuming he can actually "hold" Baghdad. Trying to hold a country by clutching the capitol is like trying to squeeze water in your hand.

But lets say we continue on that quest. The real question is whether we allocating our tax dollars where they can actually protect us the most? If we need to spend on both, then we should spend on both and find both spending cuts and revenue increases to make that work.

Revere, I have said it before it doesnt matter WHERE they come from, the fact is that they are there now. We leave Iraq and then they have the springboard of money, the Islamic Super State, and it puts Jordan and Saudi Arabia on the chopping block. We were going to go in there anyway. All we needed was an excuse. If we leave its going to upset the apple cart in the world and there aint that much green available to go green in this country that fast.

If you are an environmentalist I can tell you for sure that one thing we know will happen, kiss the ANWAR and underbelly of the So. states and the Florida reserves goodbye. Hmmm... reduce dependence on foreign oil the Dems have said... Okay, how bout developing OURS for a change?

ITW-I wouldnt leave Baghdad if there were 20,000 in the graves of Arlington and believe me I can make that statement as a military person. I earned it. Those guys that are there know the score like I do and if they wont let us win it they had better plan to beef it up and heavily as they have now. If you want to go the oil route then okay, hold it until they are pumped dry and then move on to the next hole. If the Iranians are the bad actors and I believe they are, then hit them and bring them down. Simple enough. Thats allocating the tax dollars and dont think too much about this creating a terrorist army...Its been there for years. Musharraf is currently engaged in a full on attack on the Red Mosque in Pakistan. Those are Persians and Taliban that are in there and he means to kill them all. Perhaps we should take note?

The reason we are losing wars against Muslims is because we fight them using the ethics of our culture. Muslims understand Christian/Jewish culture, but we have not taken the trouble to understand their cultural ethics. By doing this we treat them as though they were ignorant barbarians, which they most certainly are not. In many ways, their culture is superior.

For instance, we consider "Democracy" to be the best method of government. In fact, what we have is best described as "periodically elected dictators" or, to be kind, "representative democracy". Although methods vary, many arab governments use a tribal/oligarchic method of government, which probably represents the interests of the individual better than our "democracy".

IMHO we could bring the various terrorist actions to a rapid close by adopting the Koranic prescribed penalty of "blood money", also known as "Qisas" or "Diyya" for which see wikipedia..

To this end we should take genetic samples from the remains of a attackers, and look to tracing the relatives of the attacker and demanding "blood money" of the family. As I understand it, "blood money" is within the legal code of Sharia government (and specifically in Iran, Iraq & Saudi Arabia), so those nations would completely understand the concept, & have difficulty in refusing such legal actions mounted against their citizens by US citizens.

I can see that the liberals among us might be upset at this approach, but consider the rules of cultural equivalence. Are we so superior to Muslims that we consider people who apply the principals set forth by Mohammad as the recited word of their God as primitive & barbaric? Rather we should adopt elements of their culture, thus showing them that we consider them to be our cultural equals. At the moment, Muslims must feel supremely insulted that we consider them to be cultural barbarians by so denigrating their culture.

Although I hardly dare to suggest it, applying this principal in our own culture might have some interesting outcomes. For instance, the assailant who stabs a person fatally might be called upon to contribute organs in place of those destroyed, thus allowing survival of the victim.

Randy, bar: Your opinions. The same opinions that got us there. Mine is that if we leave things get better, on balance. We'll find out soon because we will be leaving. Not before lots more people die but we will leave. Then you two can say we didn't fight it hard enough which is why we lost. Just like Vietnam. Where the dominoes never fell.

bar:
For the US try corporate oligarchy, it seems to be a fairly accurate label

Revere, I believe that it was a given that we or someone else would be in there for "stability" of the worlds economy way before GWB. Clinton enforced a no fly zone at a cost of 1 millon a day. We saw a dictatorship formed in Pakistan, and they got the nukes. None of the Gulf States want us to go as a rule because they are Persians in Iran and Iraq. If we leave there is going to be a bloodbath with the default winner being Iran. It will be a nuclear tipped Iran in control of the remains of what was Iraq and Syria will be kowtowing to Teheran. Jordan would be destabilized or taken if they dont bend to the wishes of the Persians.

No one likes to lose. We leave it will be only because like Vietnam we didnt want to win it. I will humbly back off only after we hit Teheran, its nuke facilites, and refineries. We did Afghanistan and Iraq because it pincered Iran. They responded by going East and tried to topple Pakistan who were very cozy with the Taliban. Didnt work out so far. If it does we are going to be in the furball that I described more than once here.

If they do topple it, Teherans fate is sealed as will be Pakistan. Winning it in either of the two will result in one Hell of a lot of dead civilians. Or we could sit back, let everything happen and wait on them to show up here or the EU. By then it will be too late as the dice will be thrown just waiting for them to land.

You don't know what national security means nor do you particularly care, so stop pretending.

Well I guess if Laos and Cambodia didnt have troops in there we would just call them aid workers perhaps. Vietnam controls all of Laos and part of Cambodia, with the Thai's controlling the areas around their border.

Cool picture links of their army siting in Phnom Penh and Vientiane are out there from as late as two months ago.....

http://countrystudies.us/vietnam/59.htm

http://www.dailyinfo.co.uk/polcaus/confsum.html

I guess there are differing opinions on what a domino constitutes.

The message of Osama is "I will keep on killing you in bigger and more spectacular ways until you submit to me and Islam."

This following is an email I got from my sister a few days past. And I am in full agreement with it.

"You Worry Me"
This pilot hit the nail on the head in his open letter. He needs to be awarded a Medal for having the TESTICULAR FORTUITUDE to say all this in a very profound way!

The paper stated today that some Muslim doctor is saying we are profiling him because he has been checked three times while getting on an airplane.

The following is a letter from a pilot. This well spoken man, who is a pilot with American Airlines, says what is in his heart, beautifully.... Read, absorb and pass this on.

"YOU WORRY ME!"
By American Airlines Pilot - Captain John Maniscalco

I've been trying to say this since 9-11, but you worry me. I wish you didn't. I wish when I walked down the streets of this country that I love, that your color and culture still blended with the beautiful human landscape we enjoy in this country. But you don't blend in anymore. I notice you, and it worries me.

I notice you because I can't help it anymore. People from your homelands, professing to be Muslims, have been attacking and killing my fellow citizens and our friends for more than 20 years now. I don't fully understand their grievances and hate, but I know that nothing can justify the inhumanity of their attacks.

On September 11, nineteen ARAB-MUSLIMS hijacked four jetliners in my country. They cut the throats of women in front of children and brutally stabbed to death others. They took control of those planes and crashed them into buildings killing thousands of proud fathers, loving sons, wise grandparents, elegant daughters, best friends, favorite coaches, fearless public servants, and children's mothers.

The Palestinians Celebrated, The Iraqis were overjoyed as was most of the Arab world. So, I notice you now. I don't want to be worried. I don't want to be consumed by the same rage and hate and prejudice that has destroyed the soul of these terrorists. But I need your help. As a rational American, trying to protect my country and family in an irrational and unsafe world, I must know how to tell the difference between you, and the Arab/Muslim terrorist.

How do I differentiate between the true Arab/Muslim-Americans and the Arab/Muslim terrorists in our communities who are attending our schools, enjoying our parks, and living in OUR communities under the Protection of OUR constitution, while they plot the next attack that will slaughter these same good neighbors and children?

The events of September 11th changed the answer. It is not my responsibility to determine which of You embraces our great country, with ALL of its religions, with ALL of its different citizens, with all of its faults. It is time for every Arab/Muslim in this country to determine it for me.

I want to know, I demand to know, and I have a right to know, whether or not you love America. Do you pledge allegiance to its flag? Do you proudly display it in front of your house, or on your car? Do you pray in your many daily prayers that Allah will bless this nation, that He will protect and prosper it? Or do you pray that Allah with destroy it in one of your Jihads? Are you thankful for the freedom that only this nation affords?

A freedom that was paid for by the blood of hundreds of thousands of patriots who gave their lives for this country? Are you willing to preserve this freedom by also paying the ultimate sacrifice? Do you love America ? If this is your commitment, then I need YOU to start letting ME know about it.

Your Muslim leaders in this nation should be flooding the media at this time with hard facts on your faith, and what hard actions you are taking as a community and as a religion to protect the United States of America.

Please, no more benign overtures of regret for the death of the innocent because I worry about who you regard as innocent. No more benign overtures of condemnation for the unprovoked attacks because I worry about what is unprovoked to you. I am not interested in any more sympathy. I am only interested in action.

What will you do for America - our great country - at this time of crisis, at this time of war?

I want to see Arab-Muslims waving the AMERICAN flag in the streets. I want to hear you chanting "Allah Bless America " I want to see young Arab/Muslim men enlisting in the military. I want to see a commitment of money, time, and emotion to the victims of this butchering and to this nation as a whole.

The FBI has a list of over 400 people they want to talk to regarding the WTC attack. Many of these people live and socialize right now in Muslim communities. You know them. You know where they are. Hand them over to us, now! But I have seen little even approaching this sort of action. Instead I have seen an already closed and secretive community close even tighter. You have disappeared from the streets. You have posted armed security guards at your facilities. You have threatened lawsuits. You have screamed for protection from reprisals.

The very few Arab/Muslim representatives that HAVE appeared in the media were defensive and equivocating. They seemed more concerned with making sure that the United States proves who was responsible before taking action. They seemed more concerned with protecting their fellow Muslims from violence directed towards them in the United States and abroad than they did with supporting our country and denouncing "leaders" like Khadafi, Hussein, Farrakhan, and Arafat.

If the true teachings of Islam proclaim tolerance and peace and love for all people, then I want chapter and verse from the Koran and statements from popular Muslim leaders to back it up. What good is it if the teachings in the Koran are good, and pure, and true, when your "leaders" are teaching fanatical interpretations, terrorism, and intolerance?

It matters little how good Islam SHOULD BE if huge numbers of the world's Muslims interpret the teachings of Mohammed incorrectly and adhere to a degenerative form of the religion. A form that has been demonstrated to us over and over again. A form whose structure is built upon a foundation of violence, death, and suicide. A form whose members are recruited from the prisons around the world. A form whose members (some as young as five years old) are seen day after day, week in and week out, year after a year, marching in the streets around the world, burning effigies of our presidents, burning the American flag, shooting weapons into the air. A form whose members convert from a peaceful religion, only to take up arms against the great United States of America, the country of their birth. A form whose rules are so twisted, that their traveling members refuse to show their faces at airport security checkpoints, in the name of Islam.

We will NEVER allow the attacks of September 11, or any others for that matter, to take away that which is so precious to us: Our rights under the greatest constitution in the world.

I want to know where every Arab Muslim in this country stands and I think it is my right and the right of every true citizen of this country to demand it. A right paid for by the blood of thousands of my brothers and sisters who died protecting the very constitution that is protecting you and your family. I am pleading with you to let me know. I want you here as my brother, my neighbor, my friend, as a fellow American. But there can be no gray areas or ambivalence regarding your allegiance and it is up to YOU, to show ME, where YOU stand. Until then . "YOU WORRY ME!"
............

Lea: Do a global search and replace of Christian Crusader for Muslim Fundamentalist and you will have your mirror image "over there." We have already allowed the attacks of 9/11 to take away our freedoms. They won that one. Now they are winning the one where we get debilitated and bogged down in a hopeless war. We have become impotent at their design. No one has the right to demand of another what their opinion is. It is un-American and a graphic demonstration of how the terrorists have won. It used to be Italians and Poles. Now it's Muslims. Maybe you will be next.

But Revere, none of those groups you mention have nukes except for the Pakistani's. If they can topple that government they will get what they havent been able to build just yet in Teheran. Whatever the case, once lobbed they cant call it back. They will certainly use one to prove their cahoonies are as big as everyone elses in the club. Once they get fission, they can get fusion shortly thereafter. Pakistan is out of range for the Israelis for the time being. They are though setting up a possible B707 under belly sling to launch their Jericho 2 missiles. They wont be dropping pamphlets and peace leaflets on anyone I can assure you.

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/artillery/jerich…

You are right about one thing, we have become impotent in that war because we wont just go out and do a whole neighborhood because we are so politically correct. That PC will be our undoing and will lead to a much bigger exchange of either conventional or nuke weapons later.

If you fight a war then go, win it and come home. If we dont like what we see happening in Baghdad or Iraq afterwards, we simply go in and whack 'em every couple of years. One thing is sure, we are getting our asses kicked by a rag tag army that is not unlike the one that Lawrence put together to harass the Turks. So the only way to eliminate that is to ensure you get them and get them all when you do. If they are being funded by the Iranians, then make it so costly they wont think about it. Dont have to hit hospitals and schools, hit their refineries. That one big one they have at Qeshm Island would be a majorly good start. It might take their economy 20 years to recover from it.

Give it a week and let them burn their reserves down and then cakewalk into their nuke facilities as their generators go dry. Cant target an airplane with a Hawk battery if there is no power.

http://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/qeshm/

The nuke facilities at Natanz and other places can be dug up by just peeling the onion with conventional weapons. Hit after hit with even thousand pound penetrators would within a week yield pay dirt. That would be airborne detection of radiation. We would know we got it, we would also know that they wouldnt be able to approach the place again for about 3 million years. Syria would likely run for cover after that. Or we can ruin someones day there too. So we can do it my way or we can negotiate with terrorists again and that has worked out so well for us. How do you buy off a country. They'll use economic aid to just grow more terrorists.

As I said before... win it and it will bring a lot more stability to the region. I say it again, dead people do not attack you. We might be condemned for it, but unilateral in a world body UN that masturbates over every issue except the important ones is the way to go. They certainly wont be upset that Iran is off the board for a while even though their rhetoric will be loud and noisy. Might not have to hit them again for two generations, or not at all.

Oh and Revere, what freedoms have you lost? The freedom to wear shoes on a plane and just walk in when someone tried to blow up a plane with their shoes? Thats a procedure in response to a problem not a freedom. You could always drive as long as you didnt speed and break the law. The legitimate investigation of people who are of interests is not a loss of freedom. That could be interests in medicine in the UK, or wanting to vist your cousin Marwan in Jersey who is also a chemical engineer who just got back from Islamabad. What specifically have you lost except the right to be checked to see if you are a possible threat? Sorry, if it sounds rough but there isnt anything there. I get pulled over when I appear to be going 80, not when I am doing 55. Its the 55's who scare me because they are the ones who will likely sneak something in.

Wanted bar to read what the pilot had to say, knew you would lash back revere.
Have you ever thought or considered that we wouldn't be having this conversation if the war had been fought the way MRK suggests?

Rather a hundred-thousand dead than cities in the U.S.A. gone where millions of us will be dead. We are walking on the razor's edge right now.
Too many have lost sight of what America is all about.

"Too many have lost sight of what America is all about."

I must agree. And what is America "all about"? Being as bad as they are? Kill them before they kill us? Get them to act just as you are acting? We are doing far more of it than they are. I am ashamed of the America you want us to be "all about." It's not my America.

Thank you Lea.

I concur with that pilot's view. I was in Taylor's Square, Sydney just after 9/11. There were a lot of Lebanese about. I saw their celebrations, it was not pretty.

MRK. FWIW, I was against going into Iraq. My suggestion above was for group responsibility for the actions of the individual. A bit like the Israelis practice when they destroy the paternal home of suicide bombers.

Is it my imagination, or have the Palestinians much reduced suicide bombing since that Israeli policy was introduced?

bar: Xenophobia is xenophobia. It just changes targets. Used to be Jews. Now Muslims. Sigh. The Israelis have been destroying Palestinian homes for decades and creating suicide bombers in the process. That kind of group punsihment was considered horrendous when Nazis did it. It still is.

Did we knowingly wrongfully go into Iraq or was it to set the left flank for a bigger deal for the next American President whomever that would be. I have said it before that M. Sheen was a hero of mine, being the left wing, never bending, misguided that he is. Why a hero? Because he never waivers from what he believes. That takes guts. Its one of the reasons I respect Revere/revere so much. They dont bend with the wind and stay their course.

Personally I believe that the idea IS to set the stage for an Iranian bringdown. Fine by me. We have to take hits while we do it and the only way to ensure that it doesnt disintegrate into an Islamic regional dictatorship is to reach out and touch someone. We can no longer negotiate with these people and Revere would have us just pull back, then start negotiating with them. Well negotiators are people who give things away and supposedly give up something in return. Okay, then it gets to what is acceptable for supposedly "both parties" or if there are more than two parties for however many there are.

The deal Hamas, Hezbollah etc. in Gaza proves that there are factions that will never deal unless Israel is gone, we are subjugated to the will of the Islamic fascists, and they have converted or killed us. Its as simple as that. This is not your average Joe Muslim we are speaking of, its the fringes and that means fringe Christians and fringe Muslims. There are Christians here that I have listened to that make about as much sense as the Muslims. To a large degree they are Republicans of which I am. I am a centrist Republican and to bring up religion in a conversation is instant religicontroversy (sounds like a GWB word). They just aint happy unless you are fundamentalist Christian. The other side of the world is fundamentalist Muslim. Okay, as with Saladin they are now recruiting by Mafia tactics. They are increasing their numbers by telling families that they have to "donate" a male freedom fighter, or else. Whats the difference between us them..... uh... not much.

Revere makes some damned fine points at times and I disagree with most of them... you have noticed right? But in the same breath it makes me think to wonder what in goddamn Hell GWB and the boys are thinking? I think that this is the reason that T. Franks retired.... Pure, unadulterated, unrelenting and unmitigated Bullshit. IMO he saw a Vietnam starting and because of European you killed our customers action he told them to go eff themselves. Write a book, make 30 grand a week on the lecture tour. Fine man, true warrior like Schwartzkopf. Likely the reason that C. Powell bailed too. Then there is Rumsfeld. Rummy was a half baked B.S. pie because as any good SecDef, he should have pulled out all the stops and launched into those areas that shot at us and leveled. The President is the CIC, but by God the SecDef is in charge of running the wars. He was and is a peacetime SecDef. He had all the toys and refused to use them. That may be modified later but when you start pulling back on the units you would send to subjugate an area then thats scuse my French...fucked up!

So I think long and hard often about what Revere/revere say because even with the tinge of anger that always accompanies it, it always has some sense to it. We have proven we can be had. They took the WTC's, the embassies, the airplanes and we responded by attacking a country that was probably only slightly to moderately involved. There is no complicity and taking Iraq which was the smaller of two evils in the region was a good thing. It would have taken all of our divisions to subdue Iran/Iraq at the same time, had a two front war as the Germans did and tenous supply lines. It also got rid of one of the largest assholes on this planet. Some would say GWB was too but militarily it was a good op. We lost too many because we started calling it a slaughter. Fuck that. I am big on slaughter when you are on the ground and getting hammered by artillery or air attack. They always have the opportunity to PC and raise the white flag, but they didnt and we stopped it ourselves. Those leaders that were Republican Guard are still in Iraq, waiting for us to leave. They are being assisted by the Iranians in the slow, steady, even pressure to remove us.

So whats next? ONLY two things will happen. One is that we stay and hit Iran, the other is that we dont and leave. There are side angles to this but I want you all to understand that Revere aint wrong. He is right but he is one of those that would apply a police department action to a war and that is where the disconnect starts between libs and conservatives. That stupid shit Sean Penn thinks that all we have to do is beef up the police departments and that will take care of terrorism. Revere isnt as naive as that but he just wants our troops home. I dont blame him. I do too. One way we could do it is to simply say okay, any more terrorist attacks and we find out whose country did it and we will take a large economic target off the map. A billion here, a billion there, sooner or later they will get the message. It would make our two faced EU partners happy because they would get to constantly sell them replacements. The conservatives would be happy because it will stimulate the economy for defense, and we dont have to lose a soul if we use cruise missiles.

It still doesnt get rid of the baseline root of the problem though and that is that those radical Muslims want to kill us and their "religious' leaders are telling them to kill us.... So what do we do about that? Its not xenophobia Revere not to want Americans dead. It will get to Nazi tactics soon enough, there will be an action, a reaction that will establish one or the other in the pecking order and destroy or severely limit the others ability to foment their ideals on the world. Me, I pick us by whatever means necessary and if we hit them now, it will limit what happens later for both sides. Its Mafia tactics they use a knife, we use a gun, they use a gun, we use a bomb, they use a rocket and we use a bigger one, then when we see them making a nuke, we kill them all and that settles it, or they get a shot in and kill a bunch of us and then we kill them all. Mean spirited? Not really... its a balance of terror and fear.

This is one hell of an interesting blog!

Very interesting blog. A key point has been missed in this debate, in my opinion.

The situation in the middle east around Israel/ Palestine is a festering sore that needs resolution. It is this, and the daily injustices seen in the Palestinian territories throughout the muslim world that breeds hatred of the west and terrorist attacks against its people and interests as much as anything else. A tenet of being muslim is that you must stand by and defend your brother msulims no matter where they are - it is a primary duty of being a muslim.

What breeds muslim anger and resentment is the way that we (the west) demand on the one hand that other countries follow international law, and then blatently disregard those same laws when applied to our interests or our 'national' friends. A prime example of this is demonstrated on a near daily basis in our handling of the Israeli/ Palestinian sitation.

Much like the problems in Ireland, the problem was created in history - in other words, decisions were made that were expedient at the time they were made, and we are still reaping the reprecussions of those decisions and how they were enacted in the past. There is no point debating the rights and wrongs of that situation, it is, and now something has to be done to resolve it. What, I don't know - that is another debate.

However, we (the west) are demanding that non western countries follow the rule of international law, and yet we continue to support Israel when it blatently disregards those laws. The demolition of paternal homes of those deemed to be terrorists - something that has actually been happening a very long while - is in fact a crime under international law, and a very serious one at that. Yet where is the outcry from the west over this? Where are funds being cut to the israeli government and support of their economy? They are not. Most such actions are barely, if at all, criticised, especially by the US.

We want these muslim and developing countries to live under the rule of international law (which were created to be an impartial adjudicator and preserve peace), and yet we do not enforce these laws even handedly. Resolutions to censure Israeli bad behaviour are repeatedly blocked by Western countries. If international law has no teeth, then where do those aggrieved individuals have recourse? Not in international law - so they take to guns and terrorism when their sense of outrage reaches a level that they feel that something must be done. And the resentment grows and festers as the 'tit for tat' activity goes on, leaving fertile breeding grounds for new generations of fanatics to take up thier struggle, which has become as much of a way of life for those populatons as it did for the youth and younger generations of Ireland, north and south. There is much to be learnt from a close study of the situation there, and how it was ultimately resolved. It was more about resentment of disproportionate wealth between north and south, as well as religion, which was used as the primary rallying call. Only when the standards of living of the south exceeded those of the north of Ireland, did it become possible for certain resentments to fade enough to take away the support of the fanatics, such that 'the struggle' as it was termed could be brought to a negotiated end - and it has not been easy. Politicians can decide what they like - if they dont have the support of their peoples, then whatever is proposed will fail.

I would point out that the present living standards of the palestinians is now so low that most children in the territories are clinically malnourished, and poverty is extreme. The territories have become a giant 'ghetto', bigger than anything the Nazi's dreamed up. What is being done there is unjust. An entire population is being punished. Even those who would not choose to take up arms feel it is the only avenue left to them, especially when they cannot physically leave the territories to get work, and are struggling to feed their families who are gently and slowly starving, quite literally. Ask yourselves what you would do in a similar situation? And what would you do if you were watching a similar situation happen in a neighbouring state in the US, how would you feel about it?

If we want to diffuse the situation in the arab world, Western nations must stop being selctive in which international laws we choose to follow, and these laws must be adhered to even handedly. This is vital, if the system is to have any credibility restored to it, and if aggreived populations are to have any faith in the system's abilities to protect them. The alternative is an unravelling of global society, that will eventually lead to even greater chaos, war, and instability; quite possibly on a far greater scale than anything we have seen to date. The world, and especially the US, must be consistent in how it applies those laws, and not turn a blind eye to activities for any reason in any country. And we, the world collectively, must be willing to ensure that those international laws are upheld, everywhere. The UN is there for this purpose if we wish it, but we need to give it back some teeth.

We, the west, must be willing to uphold international law in Israel and the Palestinian territories as much as Iran and Iraq. If this is seen to occur, a great deal of the fanatasicm that breeds terrorism will, in time, go away. And along with it much of the hatred of the US and the west.

Revere. Me xenophobic? Objectivity is what I do.

Those who think otherwise are either xenophobic or lack an empathy of other's feelings towards themselves.

Jules. I do not accept that injustice was done to the Palestinian people.

It is truly said that you can prove anything with statistics, just by choosing the appropriate starting point.

The same is true for history.

The Palestinians must accept that the UN division of Palestine between two warring peoples (a division that should have been done in Rwanda and Sudan) was legitimate. It does not matter that hundreds of millions of Arabs want it otherwise, or that they wield the political weapon of oil. The division of 1948 was just. Any injustice since done by Jews was in response to Arabs attempting to reverse that UN partition by the use of force. It is a precept of the common law that reasonable force may be used to oppose an illegal act.

Jules: I agree completely. We have discussed this here a number of times. There is an Israel/Palestine category in the left sidebar where you can see previous posts.

bar: The Palestinians didn't accept a Big Power partition when it happened and I expect if you were a Palestinian you wouldn't have either. But if you think that should be the basis, then the Israelis should accept it now, which they won't. They have occupied Palestinian territory. So you can't have it both ways. Or I should say, you can only have it both ways be force. Suppose we give a part of New Zealand to Palestine? It's mainly empty and they need a place to live. If the UN decided that, would you be accepting?

Bar. History is history.

What I am saying here is that, now, in the present, if we want to get away from terrorism and the rule of force, then the rule of law must apply, to all, equally, and without exception. It does not at present, which is why the US is often accused of supporting terrorism by the arab world, not without some cause.

Either the rule of law dominates, or the rule of the gun and force. We must choose what sort of world we want to live in.

Lea: " want to know where every Arab Muslim in this country stands and I think it is my right and the right of every true citizen of this country to demand it. A right paid for by the blood of thousands of my brothers and sisters who died protecting the very constitution that is protecting you and your family. I am pleading with you to let me know. I want you here as my brother, my neighbor, my friend, as a fellow American. But there can be no gray areas or ambivalence regarding your allegiance and it is up to YOU, to show ME, where YOU stand. Until then . "YOU WORRY ME!"

I laughed when I read your post of the internet open letter attributed to American Airlines Pilot - Captain John Maniscalco, imagining all the fever driven terrorists confessing their identities and allegiances simply because "you" are worried.

What worries me are people who would demand that my Muslim neighbors and friends demonstrate, beyond their individual comfort levels, loyalty to a country where freedom of speech includes the freedom to remain silent.

Hate mongers scare me more than terrorists.

Well its come full circle. There isnt much that just changed here or there for that matter. We still have people out there that would do just about anything to destroy an American or UK city, or a mass of people. Some say its retaliation, others will of God. Its a mad dog scenario and since we are always trying to take the moral high ground we can sit and be upset all we want when one does go up or the people fall. Then the inevitable retaliation will happen again and again. Know how I know it will happen? Because they kill the ones over there that do try to end the endless cycle..... We just talk bad about them here.

This is the part that make Revere right and in the same breath people like me a necessary evil. I have done this aggression/pacificism exercise many time but the end result has always been that it like most things cycle. This is one of them. If we leave we will be back in bigger numbers, losing bigger numbers and in response to something that has become "unacceptable." Its not Iraq, we have been engaged in a war with Islamic radicals since the 60's. It just got to a level that we could no longer bear.

I wonder what the next level will be?

Revere: As an Oztralian, I am not particularly worried if the UN gave away all of NZ to the Palestinians. The 10% of Kiwis who were not already in Australia could then migrate here, rectifying the mistake they made by not joining the Commonwealth in 1901. In context, if the UN wanted to settle a war between Aboriginals and Australians by partitioning off part of Australia, then let them. We have (more or less) already done that in Arnhem Land.

I am sure that many Palestinian Arabs (probably a majority) originally agreed to the partition.

What we are looking at here is one of the failings of pure democracy, which is a lack of protection for the rights of the minority. Putting it starkly, The small majority (51%?) of pre-partition Palestinians that were Arab felt that it should be able to enslave the large minority (49%?) that were Jewish. The minority Jewish objected to that scenario, and started a civil war.

Of course the majority Palestinians objected to the UN partition. They were the democratic majority, so everything that they did was, by the rules of democracy, just, right and legal. Just as it was arguably legal for the majority Hutus to slaughter the minority Tutsis in Rwanda. Just as it is arguably legal for the majority Arabs in Sudan to slaughter the minority colored people (whom they label "terrorist").

I stated earlier that the Israelis appeared (anecdotally) to have reduced suicide bombing by the deliberate destruction of the paternal homes (and relocation from Israel of the families) of Palestinian suicide bombers. That destruction should be distinguished from the collateral destruction during military action against suspected terrorist households.

As such, this destruction and relocation of the families of suicide bombers first happened about 5 years ago, it has not "gone on for decades". It is a strategy that makes families responsible for the actions of members, which is a part of Muslim Arab culture.

Neither of these destruction activities is, to my mind, in any way comparable in rationale to the targeted destruction of Jewish homes by Nazis.

Jules: In our law courts there are armed policeman. Are you saying that Justice is not enforced with a gun in your country?

Jules, in a courtroom it comes full circle quickly. In a military situation it does even more quickly. You are attacking me for instance. I become your judge, jury and executioner because you in my opinion are breaking my laws.

This is the reason I say that to do the IMO unthinkable is what certain people have to do to bring order. They have to become Judge, jury and executioner of a block if you will of people who would oppose this. This is one of the things that you learn in War Colleges around the world. Elimination of the threat rather than suppression of the threat. Dead would be attackers make no new children to become new attackers kind of thing. Their cousins attack you and you put them into the bag too. After a while they understand accountabiilty for their actions. It matters not one whit if you are as their J, J, and executioner are right in the eyes of anyone but yourself or your command structure. You have taken the problem out and if necessary for generations to come.

I believe that in Iraq we are at that level of violence and that tactics used by the various militaries of the world are warranted at this stage of the game. If they are unwilling to use them to effect a change in who is in charge and what is happening then like Revere I think that we should leave. When it falls to Teheran later in the year, we will return a short time later and take Iran out of the picture. Even the stupid assed French will get that big picture that the jump in oil prices would be nothing compared to what TOTAL hit them with after the fall of Saddam.

This is of course if we dont see a Iraq nuke or a fall of Pakistan. That will see an immediate response.

The Paki army has stormed the Red Mosque and done major damage to it. As I said, Musharraf wanted those people dead and he pretty much got what he wanted.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288762,00.html