Train Wreck Ahead?

Why the U.S. and Israel may be headed for a collision.

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: bighappy @ 05/07/2009 11:10:23 PM

    It is a mistake to think that Israel can not or could not survive without USA, just opposite, they would be better off without USA tough "love". USA was openly hostile to Israel until 1960s - Israel was OK. USA "friendship" did not help much to win in 1967, as we know now US did everything in their power to preven Israel offense.
    So-named USA monetary help - 100% Israel has to spend on unreasonably expensive and often inefficient (remember Patriots?) american weapon which Israel could produce ot buy in Europe much cheaper. In return, Israelis also supply USA with sophisticated military technology (yes, Israeli conventional weapon systems are better, guess why). Israelis provide intelligence to USA, no way around.
    Israeli nuclear weapon was developed and built without any US help.
    It is mutual advantage for both countries to be allies, but Israel can live without US, if Obama wants so.

    • Posted By: DrBrooks @ 05/08/2009 4:22:19 PM

      Dear Big Happy,
      What do you mean "Israel nuclear weapon was developed & built w/out any U.S. help?" The U.S. gives, yes gives (these "loans" have no requirement to be paid back) Israel $3Billion in aid every year.

      • Posted By: bighappy @ 05/08/2009 4:52:24 PM

        Dear DrBrooks.
        Ig you read my whole post, I explained how Israel must spend those $3 billion, on conventional old american weapon, definitely not on nukes. And if you think that Israelis stole the technology or US gave it to Israel - you are wrong again, Jews invented this technology and Israelis probably have more expertize then even americans.

        • Posted By: DrBrooks @ 05/22/2009 12:03:21 PM

          Yes, you must be correct! Israel is superior - that is why they rely on large amounts of money from the U.S. and AIPAC.

    • Posted By: Desert Runner @ 05/08/2009 8:17:18 PM

      Big Happy, go back and check facts, there is a cross polination betwen the US and Israeli militaries. In escesnce they are our testing ground we develop and they refine under combat conditions. As far as "better" conventional weapons they still use the F-15, F-16, C-131 aircraft and Blackhawk and Apache helicopters so in some areas we stil rule. Having said all that the fact is that the Israelis WILL NEVER WIN on straight military force alone, there MUST be a political solution. The current leadership is like Bush and his admin, fighting the wrong war for the wrong reasons.

      • Posted By: bighappy @ 05/08/2009 10:43:22 PM

        Israelis can build excellent airplanes (and they did in past when americans refused to sell them more or less sophisticated planes), but mass production is too difficult for small country, while F16 and F15 are still good enough against barbarians, but they still produce and even sell their own unmanned airplanes. They do not buy american tanks because they produce their own, arguably better ones. They started production of anti-rockets which are much better that Patriots. Israeli Usi is much better athan any american automatic rifle, only Kalashnikov is better. Military gear, aome other gadjets - Israelis have better ones.

    • Posted By: scott63 @ 05/08/2009 7:17:58 PM

      your right BH Obama is not on your side he is a friend to the muslim not the jew Israel should just ignore America for the next four years and do what is in your own best intrest. God will watch over you.

  • Posted By: 3bronzestar @ 05/07/2009 6:09:35 PM

    Unless we desire the wrath of God to be more greatly on the U.S., we should increase, not decrease, our support for Israel vs the islamic extremists. The last time we insisted the Israelies cede territory to the palestinians, by uprooting Jews, our own citizens were uprooted by someone called "Katrina". "...those who bless Israel, I will bless, says the Lord..."

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 05/08/2009 12:37:43 AM

      Are you actually suggesting that Hurricane Katrina happened because America tried to insist to Israel that a Palestinian state was necessary?

      You're paranoid-delusional. This is a fantasy based on your own self-righteous beliefs and has no basis or bearing in fact. I think it's a disgrace and dishonor to the real causes and victims of that catastrophe that you would pull it in to further your own pro-Israeli agenda.

      • Posted By: 3bronzestar @ 05/08/2009 5:00:43 PM

        Nope, just pointing out that it is peculiar that as Jewish settlements were being bulldozed, and residents displaced at the request of our government, that our own residents were also displaced. This sort of thing has happened often in history; biblical and otherwise. I didn't write the Bible, I just read it.

        • Posted By: Klamath @ 05/14/2009 7:04:28 AM

          I know what you mean. I see patterns all the time. For instance, in my pancakes this morning I saw the face of the Virgin Mary. Which got me thinking about marriage, because those two words sound alike. Kinda. Anyway, and that made me think about the gays. And God hates gays. And what a storm of controversy. And that's like Katrina. And God sent Katrina as a punishment because...what was I talking about again? Oh, yeah, we need to bomb Iran. Go, Bulls!

          • Posted By: 3bronzestar @ 05/15/2009 10:12:44 AM

            The only difference would be the Bible says nothing about apparitions of Mary, and He doesnt hate gays, He loves them. But the Bible does say that those who bless Israel He will bless, and those who oppose them He will oppose. In all these responses, this fact remains unchallenged.

            • Posted By: wildechild66 @ 05/15/2009 4:59:15 PM

              I think that refers more to the house of Israel--Israel as a nation believers--and not to a political state set up by the West.

        • Posted By: Peetawonkus @ 05/14/2009 7:09:26 AM

          I know what you mean. I see patterns all the time. For instance, in my pancakes this morning I saw the face of the Virgin Mary. Which got me thinking about marriage, because those two words sound alike. Kinda. Anyway, and that made me think about the gays. And God hates gays. And what a storm of controversy. And that's like Katrina. And God sent Katrina as a punishment because...what was I talking about again? Oh, yeah, we need to bomb Iran. Go, Bulls!

          • Posted By: Peetawonkus @ 05/14/2009 7:10:43 AM

            Who can argue with that?

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 05/09/2009 1:04:19 AM

          I would call it "coincidental", as well as a pretty shitty thing to make something up about. It's pretty goddamn selfish of you to claim think weather patterns in the Gulf of Mexico have a damn thing to do, scientifically, with intercultural conflicts in the Middle East. Jewish settlement had NOTHING to do with Katrina, and the sooner you realize that, the sooner you'll get out of being illiterate about how the natural world actually works.

          • Posted By: 3bronzestar @ 05/13/2009 3:37:22 AM

            I never mentioned science, you did. I only mentioned Biblical principles, which history has borne out concerning Israel, and those who either stand with or against her. It is really not "selfish" of me, because I have nothing to gain either way.

        • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 05/08/2009 5:04:50 PM

          God is make hurricane for Jews because Israel make the illegal settlement, even illegal by Israel law?

          God is playing the joke, I think, Katrina is big punchline?

    • Posted By: MariaMagdaline @ 05/07/2009 9:32:56 PM

      hmm... I'm pretty sure God has a problem with nation's that impeed on Human Rights.

      I have nothing against Jews, but i do have a major problem with Zionism, the Zionist have commited many crimes against human rights, do research. and FYI to every who goes on about Anti-semetism.... ARABS ARE SEMITES TOO. if any has read any of the holy books they should know that the Jews and Arab are COUSINS. Thank you, Issac and Ishmael.

      • Posted By: bighappy @ 05/08/2009 11:08:01 PM

        Zionists are Jews who chose to dedent themselves against barbarians, not rely on God only.I undetstand your point, when your muslims indiscriminately kill "infidels" - it is humanitarian act, but whoever kills "holy warriors "and their simpatizers is "crimilal". I am glad you don't like those Zionist "criminals" and hope you will have more reasons to hate them in future.

      • Posted By: expertowgunner @ 05/07/2009 11:18:25 PM

        Uhhh G_d did not allow Ishmael to be included in Abrahams blessing. He did however say that his ancestors would be considered "wild among men"

        • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 05/08/2009 5:12:32 PM

          Is crap. Muslims is not wild, is not drink or the party.

          Muslims is boring. Aghanistan Saturday night is suck. Only scream like Salizoran monkey and execute the womens on the football field. Why they execute the womens? They like the goats instead. Is crazy, make Uday puke up rice pilaf.

      • Posted By: expertowgunner @ 05/07/2009 11:18:59 PM

        Uhhh G_d did not allow Ishmael to be included in Abrahams blessing. He did however say that his ancestors would be considered "wild among men"

        • Posted By: 3bronzestar @ 05/08/2009 5:07:25 PM

          If you will do more research, you will find that the Jews have been persecuted in far greater numbers, far more often, and by far more people, than they have reacted to. Contrary to popular belief, most of the Jewish settlers in Israel came from middle eastern countries, where their persecution mostly went unnoticed by the rest of the world, and many chose to remain in Germany, where millions had been killed. That says something for how they were treated in the MiddleEast. God does have concerns with how we treat other people, but He specifically mentions Israel. I

    • Posted By: bighappy @ 05/07/2009 11:27:52 PM

      No, we should not increase the monetary help, just let Israel protect itself more freely from our "humanitarian" control. And stop helping Hamas to rebuild its infrastructure.

      • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 05/08/2009 5:05:52 PM

        Why you don't let Israel and Hamas play they game? Is national sport, like bowling in USA.

        • Posted By: bighappy @ 05/08/2009 10:48:48 PM

          What are you talking about? I completely for this "bowling" game, it will last about 3 days (might be coule hours, but Israelis still would try to spare civilians) until full Hamas annihilation.

    • Posted By: Fernadez @ 05/08/2009 1:28:47 AM

      You seems dont know who's knocking your head, just as what Bush got hit,Just because people against the IRAQ war automatically an Arab,Listen here you fool this something to do with own conscience,That Bastard Arab are damn Wealthy but just plain stupid as you're,Arabs may consider ignoring the International Treaties to build his own defense for Nuclear Power.US has shown by Presiding to ignore the International Treaty by refusing to convicts their War criminals (Law of convenient that treats the Arabs as pariahs ),they should Learns form the Chinese,How their capability to fired a single silk worm rocket and did managed to destroy their own satellite with 200% precision from earth to space.(million miles)The Chinese are Nuclear Power Nation,Just Imaging 10,000 Missiles with nuclear war head, to be fire to various Cities in the around world ?that's why recently ,only 5 chinese fisherman able to blocked and caused havoc to American's warship at International Water near Korea.If these were Arab Fisherman they already dead or captured to deported to Guantánamo Bay concentration Camp label as terrorist.MY point here Every Nation should be armed with Nuclear Power bring peace to the world including,,The Big brother attitudes toward Bully can be covert Cowardice.North Korea another good Example Poor Nation but respected because their Nuclear power capability but nobody dares fuc*king around.

      • Posted By: Uday Salizar @ 05/08/2009 5:40:01 PM

        Fernandez is from Salizore, yes?

  • Posted By: missy10 @ 05/15/2009 1:24:41 PM

    Finally.... A direction towards what's fair, rather than what's politically correct.

  • Posted By: 3bronzestar @ 05/15/2009 10:19:38 AM

    Sadly, the current administration is most concerned about the rights of our enemies, at the expense of our relationships with allies. And by increasing our fiscal deficits 4-fold in 100 days, will put us in a position to find it hard to help allies, or even ourselves. But he did promise change was coming.

  • Posted By: diesel300s @ 05/07/2009 4:10:58 PM

    To Frank112
    Why is it that as soon as anyone speaks the truth about Israel they are labeled as an anti-semite. Some times reality hurts and you don't have to be an anti-semite to realize it.

    • Posted By: thirdculturekid @ 05/12/2009 2:53:22 PM

      Deisel,

      Ask then if the Palestinians are Scandanavian?

      Israel has harrassed local Arab Christians as much as, if not more than Hamas. Christianity is treated like a museum piece in Israel with the government destroying contemporary churches that have been used, and disposing of archealogical remains that do not support the Zionist idealogy.

  • Posted By: tommyj7648 @ 05/07/2009 5:59:52 PM

    George Washington on Israel

    "A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification." ~George Washington Farewell Address

    "The nation which indulges toward another habitual hatred or habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interests." ~ George Washington

    "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." ~ Thomas Jefferson

    • Posted By: thirdculturekid @ 05/12/2009 2:50:20 PM

      Tommy7648

      You are saying what I wish someone had been saying for years. God Bless You!!!!!!!

  • Posted By: thirdculturekid @ 05/12/2009 2:39:35 PM

    Well it looks like Christians are not supposed to be Israelis either!

    Was Osirak attacked before or after Jonathan Pollard was arrested for spying for Israel?

  • Posted By: gvillagran3 @ 05/11/2009 11:19:25 AM

    Dear Pastoreo

    What kind of demented comment is this? "defend yourself and you would have saved not only yourself but the middle east and Asia from future holocust" .

    You actually believe that in order to prevent a POSSIBLE hollocust, Israel has to make one in the present by attacking Iran ? That my friend is nuts. You do not prevent a hollocust in the future, by creating one in the present ... What is wrong with you? Or how do you call the results of an attack on Iran today.... The world economy going into a depression, the entire Arab world up in arms Vs. Israel, Our European allies braking ties with Israel making them a world parahia, Iran re-doubling their efforts to produce nuclear weapons after their attack, making Iran's oil quadruple in value and benefiting the regime you are trying to destroy, etc, etc, etc.

    Man I tell you !!! You should have worked for the Bush Administration . Unfortunatelly for you, the time for irrationality is (thank God) behind us and now our foreign policy actually has to account for the CONSECUENCES of an attack.



    In order for your "future hollocust" to work, you would have to count with the kind of absolute irrationality you so obviously have. A future hollocoust would require Iran as a nation, and all their rulers to commit collective sucide so that they can attack Israel. If you can please point to me when in the history of the world has a nation gone to a war knowing full well that such war will result in it's total anhilation I am all ears....... But you can't because no one is that stupid.

    Except of course people spousing demented ideas in the web.

    • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 05/11/2009 4:31:34 PM

      You may want to consider something that I have spent much time trying to reconcile.

      At this time we seem to have come to some new type thinking about the validity of bombing areas that do indeed contain some enemies but also have a population of others who may or may not have sided with these "bad guys", so we have taken this stance that American lives should be put in jeopardy by placing boots on the ground when bombing would accomplish the quelling of said bad guys.

      The question: What do believe will happen when the U.S. is bombed by a nuclear bomb, which no doubt will be delivered by a country or area that contains most likely a population of people that at least 75-95% did not wish for the afore mentioned nuc'ing? I will bet that at that point, even though I know that one or even 10 nuc's would not mean the end of the U.S. population, we will blast away without concern for who did what!

      So, now that we both realize what will happen, why not avoid all of our sides casualties, especially when that was bill of goods the American people have been sold whenever our congress people want to funnel cash to thier constituents and we have only retaliated (including Iraq which was a response to not honoring the cease fire agreement, 17 times)

      • Posted By: Klamath @ 05/11/2009 5:07:00 PM

        What you're saying is: we might (or ought to) consider nuking a country based on what a criminal element inside it does to the United States? In other words, if Al Quaeda sets off a dirty bomb in the US, we might just go off half-cocked and start bombing any country that has a mosque? That would be like attacking Italy because of the Mafia. Striking out with blind, crazed anger isn't the behavior that a great country should indulge in. Whatever happened to: with great power comes great responsibility? There, I did it. You made me quote Spiderman.

        And as far as Iraq goes, how quickly they forget. You are simply and demonstrably wrong. We were told again and again, Saddam Hussein had weapons of destruction and he was coming to get us. We had to hit him first. But, of course, there were no WMDs. And if we attack Iran there will, of course, be found to be no Nuclear Weapons program. You wouldn't listen to the voices of reason in 2003 and you won't listen in 2009.

        • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 05/12/2009 10:01:54 AM

          I am not saying that we should preemptively nuc. anyone, I am saying that since it is inevitable that when we are nuc. striked that our bombing of whole areas with disreguard for the things that keep us from conventional bombing now, that we should conventional bomb any area that is a holder of enemies wether or not someone believes that there are some who do not extend the welcome to those enemies.

          First, I did not initiate the attack of Iraq, and therefore my reasons for what would have been my attack of Iraq bear no comparison to the idiot in chief G.W. Bush's reasons. Also, despite his stated reasons for the preemptive stikes, he was at the U.N. for one reason, the 17th disreguard of a U.N. resolution. Those 17 denials of our ability to make sadaam do as he both was told and what he agreed in contract form were reaffirmed by the multi-national collusion of countries and so called diplomats lining thier pockets while back dooring the United States on what were led to believe was an agreed U.N. position, simply our peace partners screwed us for thier own finanial benifit. This screwing could only mean that we as the largest contributor to the supposed peace group could clearly not trust our own allies.

          Wether or not Sadaam had weapons of mass destruction was then and is now of no importance to me, but of course Bush had to morally justify the attack to his own twisted religous requirements. Sadaam had to be killed but I do not believe that it took a destroying of the entire country and certainly did not require boots on the ground or our childrens lives put in danger and the clearly the connection between removing him and doling out democracy to the savage barbarians that occupy the middle east is something that was in great part the begining of our present economic fate.

    • Posted By: pastoreo @ 05/12/2009 1:57:13 AM

  • Posted By: tennhllblly @ 05/12/2009 8:51:42 AM

    Israel may not have support from the usurper of the Presidency, b. obama, but it has the full moral support of most of the people of the United States. We will pray and stand behind Israel for their peace and safety.

  • Posted By: tennhllblly @ 05/12/2009 8:50:51 AM

    Israel may not have support from the usurper of the Presidency, b. obama, but it has the full moral support of most of the people of the United States. We will pray and stand behind Israel for their peace and safety.

  • Posted By: dushi @ 05/12/2009 7:58:41 AM

    yes, iran undoubtably has an active nuclear program..can anyone honestly blame them..?

  • Posted By: Americanidiotnomore @ 05/11/2009 6:24:17 PM

    America as a democracy should NOT have ever recognized Israel as a "Jewish" state. That is against what we stand for.

  • Posted By: MilitaryMinded @ 05/11/2009 1:02:50 PM

    For Klamath: Based on both of your rants below, it seems that you have no unbiased comments to make on the Iran situation. Your words lead any intelligent person to believe you not only favor Iran unequivicolly, but are a staunch supporter. Be that as it may, I wish to make a comment concerning your obvious bias. You like to make "factual" statements about the media yet fail to realize ALL media outlets are biased dependant on their political views. Western media, as well as those of the Middle East, Asia, Etc.. are all biased to ONE politcal view; or the views of it's government if it is a state controlled media outlet. I am all for people voicing their opinions, but please do not quote media facts from sources that happen to coincide with your personal views; anyone with a modicum of intelligence can find a media sourse to do the same.
    As to relations between the U.S., Israel, and Iran.. my personal view is that the U.S and Israel will never depart from the current state of mutual alliance. That would be bad for both countries. The Iran situation calls for some delicate negotiations, but in the end the outcome will be forced by Iran itself. When one country makes a world public comment about erasing another nation from the face of the Earth, it does make that other nation wary. If that is the complete Iranian standpoint, then Israel has a reason and a right to defend itself. And with the current political ties that exist between the U.S. and Israel, should Iran stay the course with its agressive stand, the U.S. will nost assuredly lend military aid to its ally.

    • Posted By: Klamath @ 05/11/2009 3:26:34 PM

      Well, you're simply wrong on nearly every count. The sad thing about you right-wingers is how you persist in putting words in other people's mouths and then aggressively disagreeing with the strawmen you've set up. Be that as it may, I personally consider Israel an alley of the United States and absolutely agree that there is a special relationship between us. Having said that, we continue to give money to countries that are breeding grounds for terrorism all the while sable-rattling at countries that haven't harmed us in the least. The United States must learn that Israel is not the 51st state, no matter what kind of special relationship we have. Our interests and those Israel do not always coincide and when they do not the United States must not be put into a position where we prop up the political aspirations of some people in the Israeli government to the detriment of our foreign policy. I find very little admirable in the present Iranian government. But there are a lot of countries with less than admirable governments. Are we going to pick fights with all of them? We're already trying to get out of Iraq and, in case you haven't forgotten, we were lied into that war and 5000 Americans died on the back of that lie. The country is bankrupt, our forces are stretched thin around the world and you, sir, seem all too eager to swagger us into yet another war. Another war, I might add, with a country that had nothing to do with 9-11. Naturally any country has the right to defend itself. As we learned--or should have learned--from Iraq, attacking another country preemptively and then calling it "defense" can only have dire consequences in the end.

  • Posted By: AaptAaple @ 05/11/2009 9:43:11 AM

    Israel was founded on an immoral bases and like "legitimate slavery" it should be politically and legally reversed and a one-state solution for the area imposed by the World body. A democratic-republican form of government should be set up, imposed, and administered by the World court in a fashion similar to that used to counter segregation in the US until the Israeli-Arab inhabitants can accommodate to the change and become a self managing democratic style nation with no favored religious or ethnic group. The Palestinians should not continue to be punished for the sins of Europe and the US and the ambitions of power of the Zionists. A two state solution will continue to to that. Additionally, it is only a matter of time before Iran attains the nuclear status it seeks. Look what others have accomplished. A one state solution would protect Jews who wish to live in what they mistakenly believe is their "rightful" homeland from attack by an Arab state based on the presence of a threatening separate Jewish state. Lets us keep in mind the Holocaust and that it was not only directed at Jews, while keeping in mind that what has gone on since under the cover of the Holocaust is equal to it in immorality. Let the US Jewish lobby turn their resources and formidable talents to creating a single nation that works and is not a blot on human history as the current state of Israel is.

    • Posted By: YOUSOCRAZY @ 05/11/2009 2:03:25 PM

      You seem to either be ignorant to or ignoring the fact that much of what is now called Israel was bought and paid for by the extremely wealthy orthodox jews prior to the making of the Israeli state. How do envision that part of the taking away of those lands, they are, due to the actual building of a modern functioning society unlike most of the arab world, now worth billions that almost no middle eastern country could pay? I suppose that these paid for lands would (un)justly be taken for nothing, judging from your post!

    • Posted By: MilitaryMinded @ 05/11/2009 1:24:09 PM

      AsaptAapie: That HAS to be the most anti-semetic comment I have read in a while. Granted, you spew your hatred of Jews and Israel very eloquently, but in the end it is still nothing but unbiased hatred. Unfortunately, I still have a belief in every person's right to voice an opinion, even one as openly filled with predujice as yours.

  • Posted By: MilitaryMinded @ 05/11/2009 1:02:00 PM

    For Klamath: Based on both of your rants below, it seems that you have no unbiased comments to make on the Iran situation. Your words lead any intelligent person to believe you not only favor Iran unequivicolly, but are a staunch supporter. Be that as it may, I wish to make a comment concerning your obvious bias. You like to make "factual" statements about the media yet fail to realize ALL media outlets are biased dependant on their political views. Western media, as well as those of the Middle East, Asia, Etc.. are all biased to ONE politcal view; or the views of it's government if it is a state controlled media outlet. I am all for people voicing their opinions, but please do not quote media facts from sources that happen to coincide with your personal views; anyone with a modicum of intelligence can find a media sourse to do the same.
    As to relations between the U.S., Israel, and Iran.. my personal view is that the U.S and Israel will never depart from the current state of mutual alliance. That would be bad for both countries. The Iran situation calls for some delicate negotiations, but in the end the outcome will be forced by Iran itself. When one country makes a world public comment about erasing another nation from the face of the Earth, it does make that other nation wary. If that is the complete Iranian standpoint, then Israel has a reason and a right to defend itself. And with the current political ties that exist between the U.S. and Israel, should Iran stay the course with its agressive stand, the U.S. will nost assuredly lend military aid to its ally.

  • Posted By: pastoreo @ 05/11/2009 9:54:29 AM

    No uncivilised nation of crude religious narrow view should ever be allowed to possess weapon of mass destruction. If America is tired of policing and protecting the weak let the weak then loose itself from the costly diplomacy of Obama, which he might not survive. Israel should not gamble with such strategic security matter as allowing Iran to buy up america with real threat. Defend yourself if you have to and you would have saved not only your self but the Middle-East and the Asia from future holocust!

  • Posted By: Chaotician @ 05/11/2009 1:25:44 AM

    It would be a nice thought that our government would give up America's support for this criminal nation! It has WMD and has demonstrated that it is more than willing to use them! This nation has used ever pretext imaginable to continue stealing lands that MUST be returned to the original owners and a just compensation paid to those from whom they stole! EVERY international law entitlles people to return to their property after the "war" ends! In this case, it is the Zionist Israel that has launched numerous wars aginst its neighbors, illegally and immorally occupied lands for years, treated the occupied peoples as puppets in its "sly" manipulation of the entralled American people and shamelessly and illegally bought Congressman and woman! They spy on us, steal our millitary secrets, misuse our aid, illegally lobby, attack our ships and planes... and yet we still support this mistake of compassion?

    • Posted By: JustAJoe @ 05/11/2009 5:51:33 AM

      If Iran does not have the capacity to enrich uranium to weapons grade our media has been woefully negligent or worse in not making this clear to the American people. Can anyone provide any citations as to the truth of this claim?

  • Posted By: blackhawk12 @ 05/11/2009 12:18:09 AM

    A travel guide to Palestine and Syria, published in 1906 by Karl Baedeker, illustrates the fact that, even when the Islamic Ottoman Empire ruled the region, the Muslim population in Jerusalem was minimal. The book estimates the total population of the city at 60,000, of whom 7,000 were Muslims, 13,000 were Christians and 40,000 were Jews. "The number of Jews has greatly risen in the last few decades, in spite of the fact that they are forbidden to immigrate or to possess landed property," the book states. Even though the Jews were persecuted, still they came to Jerusalem and represented the overwhelming majority of the population as early as 1906. And even though Muslims today claim Jerusalem as the third holiest site in Islam, when the city was under Islamic rule, they had little interest in it.

    As the Jews came, drained the swamps and made the deserts bloom, something interesting began to happen. Arabs followed. I don't blame them. They had good reason to come. They came for jobs. They came for prosperity. They came for freedom. And they came in large numbers.

    Winston Churchill observed in 1939: "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population." Then came 1948 and the great partition. The United Nations proposed the creation of two states in the region one Jewish, one Arab. The Jews accepted it gratefully. The Arabs rejected it with a vengeance and declared war.

  • Posted By: blackhawk12 @ 05/11/2009 12:05:33 AM

    It should be remembered that in 1918, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were handed 5,000,000 square miles to divvy up and 99% was given to the Arabs to create countries that did not exist previously. 1% was given as a Mandate for the re-establishment of a state for the Jews on both banks of the Jordan River. In 1921, to once again appease the Arabs, another three quarters of that 1% was given to a fictitious state called Trans-Jordan.

  • Posted By: blackhawk12 @ 05/10/2009 11:50:28 PM

    There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1 percent of the landmass...Greed. Pride. Envy. Covetousness. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough...

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse