A Fundamentalist Israel?

[SirJac]

Israel's ultra-Orthodox Jewish community has come a long way.

No longer are they the inward-looking anti-Zionists who only cared that the government provide them with money for their separate schools, welfare and exemptions from military service. These days, many of the Haredim – the word means “those who tremble in awe of God” – have joined with right-wing religious Zionists to become a powerful political force.

They now are equipped to redefine the country's politics and to set a new agenda.

Two decades ago, they were confined mostly to a few neighbourhoods in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Today, they have spread throughout the country, in substantial numbers in several major communities, as well as building completely new towns only for their followers.

One Haredi leader who almost won Jerusalem's mayoralty race last fall, boasts that, within 20 years, the ultra-Orthodox will control the municipal government of every city in the country. And why not? Of the Jewish Israeli children entering primary school for the first time this month, more than 25 per cent are Haredi, and that proportion will keep growing. There are between 600,000 and 700,000 Haredim in Israel, and they average 8.8 children a family.

A decade ago, there were almost no Haredim in the West Bank settlements. Today, the two largest settlements are entirely ultra-Orthodox, and the Haredim are about a third of the almost 300,000 settlers.

Now that they have tightened the rules on who can be a Jew and have forced the public bus company to provide gender-segregated buses in many communities, a discouraged secular community is starting to emigrate.

Cont...

This is from this morning's Globe and Mail (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

Afte reading it, the idea doesn't seem so far fetched. The Israeli use a very open proportional representation system in how they elect governments, so if you appeal to only 1% of the population, you get one seat. This makes minority interests quite dominant, and if this fundamentalism keeps growing they may dominate the Knesset. A scary thought if they're already segregating buses.

[rickster]

This makes minority interests quite dominant, and if this fundamentalism keeps growing they may dominate the Knesset.

And exactly what would you expect when the world community continues to cheer on or kowtow to the actual enemies of Israel who are fundamentally committed to exterminating Israel?

[SirJac]

It's ok fundamentalists are gaining power in Israel and gender segregating buses like the US segregated on color because they are attacked by arabs?

[Malkavia]

I am EXTREMELY interested to see what happens within the next few years. Time in the Middle East is so different from time in the U.S.

A lot can happen in a year.

I'll be in Jordan starting next summer and I cant even conceive how things could be different just by that time.

[MikeC]

Since when isn't Israel a non-fundamentalist state? However, I do know for sure that fundamentalism is not representative of Israelis in general.

[Hamburglar]

This reminds me of a conversation I had with a young American Zionist-who was gung ho to enlist in the Israeli Army to kill him some Palestinians (coincidentally he believes-from his teachers-that every Palestinian should be exterminated, as well as the liberal Jews in "HIS" country...Israel.). I can say that I was astonished to here a Jew talking about exterminating other Jews and ALL of the Palestinians. Just thought I'd share in case anybody was wondering.

The movement is getting really extreme-and looking outward to define the others who are acceptable. I think it is absolutely ridiculous that they are segregating public space based on gender, but at the same time-that is their sovereign right. I've been to orthodox temples here in America, and I've never heard of these woman complaining-but this might be because of their pushy domineering husbands.

Can't we all just get along? :)

[Malkavia]

Both sides are getting more frustrated. They are going for the "desperate times call for desperate measures."

[Night Runner]

It's typical: as things get worse, people flock toward the extremes. Ergo the rise of evangelical Christians in the States, the overabundance of churches and Mormon (!) temples in Las Vegas, and now this... :rolleyes:

[thod]

And exactly what would you expect when the world community continues to cheer on or kowtow to the actual enemies of Israel who are fundamentally committed to exterminating Israel?

Kowtowing? It seems to me that Israel receives billions in aid and technology transfers whereas the Arab states are either invaded or suffer trade sanctions. The enemies of Israel are not my enemies and Israel is not my friend. They are distant lands and each is equal to the other, to be treated with respect or scorn according to their actions. I am not Jewish, I am not Zionist, I have no reason to support either one side or the other. I am opposed to theocracies, because the historical track record of such shows them to be the most tyrannical regimes. Israel is a theocracy and not a secular regional government. It is not a democracy. You may live there, your family may have lived there for generations, but if you are not Jewish, you don't get a vote and are labelled a Palestinian. I say let every man vote, regardless of his religion or lack of religion. Why won't they do this? because it has to be a Jewish state run to Jewish practice. If separation of the Church and the state is such a good thing in the US, why is it a bad thing in Israel?

[Hamsta]

I think the Haredim have made a lot more noise back in the mid-90's.
Nowadays we even have shops open on Saturday.

Maybe it's the calm before the storm, and the fundamentalist Jews are as much of a time bomb as the Arab-Israeli population, with their higher rate of birth.

thod

You are grossly misinformed.

Orthodox and Haredi make up 20% of the Jewish population, with the rest being far less religious.
Not only can non-Jews vote, they are represented in the Knesset with their own MPs and political parties.

Israel is as Jewish as the USA is Christian.

Palestinians are a special case. Their status as refugees can be blamed on Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria as much as it could be on Israel.

You think this doesn't affect you? Even if your country wasn't attacked by Muslim extremists of the Al-Qaeda variety, even if you aren't afraid to lose your religious freedoms...

Oil goes into your car's fuel tank, into your tupperware, into your medicine, into the fertilizer that grows your food, your clothes and may be producing your electricity.

What if a barrel cost 10 times as much overnight, because OPEC, who control 78% of oil reserves decided the USA was no longer a threat? Israel becomes the launch pad.

[SirJac]

I'm still not entirely sure how this is likely to play out but I'm guessing that Israel is going to go through some major changes in the next 20 years. Besides being the fastest growing demographic, their growing influence over civil laws such as the bus segregation are causing secular Israelis to emigrate en masse.

In 2007, 14,400 immigrants are expected in Israel while 20,000 people are expected to leave the country, according to the report based on figures for the first months of 2007.

The last time emigration exceeded immigration was in the aftermath of the 1973 Yom Kippur War and in 1983 and 1984 when inflation was high.

link (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

The combination of the two demographic forces in Israel's pure representational elections will increase their political clout rapidly in the coming years.

It's hard to say what we can expect from them in terms of external relations. There is anecdotal evidence of extremists among them, but Yosef (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.), the Haredi political leader, has voiced for peaceful negotiations for the last 20 years. Internally though Israel may start to resemble Iran interms of social freedoms, specifically for women. They can follow any laws they want but when they are forcing it on the rest of the population through civil laws there is going to be some backlash internationally. Why are we fighting for women's rights in Afganistan when women are losing them in Israel? Israel gets enough criticism already, women's rights issues could jeopardize their American support. With uncertainty in how the Haredi will act on the world stage, weakened ties to the US might make them vulnerable to muslim extremists. We should also remember that Israel is a nuclear power, raising the stakes for any potential instability or conflict.

I'll have to keep an eye on these guys.

[Night Runner]

Internally though Israel may start to resemble Iran interms of social freedoms, specifically for women.

What a fascinating point! This is probably the best real-life example of what Nietsche meant when he wrote, "Battle not with monsters lest ye become a monster and if you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you." In their struggle for survival, the Israelites just might end up becoming the same as (or worse than) their enemies...

[jesse]

The entire principle on which Israel is founded is arrogant and extremely fundamentalist driven by religious zeal. We are the chosen people of God and God has rewarded us by promising us a piece of land because we are the chosen people of God. That is what I see their claim as boiling down to when you strip all the fluf around their arguments.

Nope, there is nothing fundamental about using this to justify the constant wars, military occupation and slavery.

[rickster]

What a fascinating point! This is probably the best real-life example of what Nietsche meant when he wrote, "Battle not with monsters lest ye become a monster and if you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you." In their struggle for survival, the Israelites just might end up becoming the same as (or worse than) their enemies...

It's nothing new: for decades young Israelis have roamed the world to avoid military service as a protest against their belief that Israel could become like the Third Reich.

The entire principle on which Israel is founded is arrogant and extremely fundamentalist driven by religious zeal. We are the chosen people of God and God has rewarded us by promising us a piece of land because we are the chosen people of God. That is what I see their claim as boiling down to when you strip all the fluf around their arguments.

And that's the fundamental argument used by all anti-Semites with regard to Israel - while conveniently forgetting a couple of thousand years of persecution in Europe, with little or no rights as equal citizens. It's the modern Jewbash.

I hardly call that pissy piece of turf known as Israel prime real estate, and it wasn't seized by the Jews in the name of God. Ever heard of the Balfour Declaration or the ancient and traditional and original homelands of Jews? Or would you rather the Nazi's have just kept going with The Final Solution?

[LaoTzu]

To put it into perspective for you:
Consider all the Latin Americans of Mexican decent pile together into California...because it once belonged to them long ago, according to 'prophecy'.... and then start to terrorize their neighbours to push them out... eventually homogonizing the entire state; raising a flag, and calling it the Democratic Republic of Esse's ?

Israel's birth was a lot more like the 'pioneering' of North America, the Palestinians treated more like the American Indian than like an equal partner.

The Palestinian people were not a savvy political bunch, they were represented by other nations who really didn't care one way or another what happened to them. They DID get screwed over.

Not a bash against Israel, just the truth.

As for terrorism.... it worked for the Stern Gang, Irgun, et. al ....


I think this change in politics would be a bad thing for everyone involved.

[thod]

And that's the fundamental argument used by all anti-Semites with regard to Israel - while conveniently forgetting a couple of thousand years of persecution in Europe, with little or no rights as equal citizens. It's the modern Jewbash.

I have not observed any anti-Semitic feelings in Europe. I have always got on well with those Jews I have met. Most you would never know their religion unless told, they dont wear skullcaps. There are no restrictions based on religion, no different treatment. Your argument about the poor oppressed people is hogwash.

I do not have a problem with people moving to live together some place. It is natural for people to want to be with people of like mind. If it had been an empty land then there would be few problems. They could have taken New Zealand for example, nobody would bother them way out there. Instead they took an occupied land and drove out the people justifying it as God's will.

It was never about protection, it was always about setting up a state where Jewish people could live under Jewish rules. Thus it is no different from the Muslims wanting to live under sharia law. From a protection perspective it was the worst possible move. A few nukes or a vengeful army would wipe out half of the worlds Jews, something not possible when distributed abroad.

I do not even see Jews as a race. They look identical to the other people having interbred for so many generations. They are a religion, should we then allow Scientologists and Amish to have their own states? Perhaps but not by driving out current residents at gun point. They need to accept their responsibilities. They are the government of that area, and that includes all the people that live there. They are not just the government of the Jews. By this argument the US government should drive the Jews from the US and give them no votes since they are not Christians.

[rickster]

I do not even see Jews as a race. They look identical to the other people having interbred for so many generations. They are a religion, should we then allow Scientologists and Amish to have their own states? Perhaps but not by driving out current residents at gun point. They need to accept their responsibilities. They are the government of that area, and that includes all the people that live there. They are not just the government of the Jews. By this argument the US government should drive the Jews from the US and give them no votes since they are not Christians.

The New Anti-Semitism distinguishes itself by a disproportionate focus on the "illegality" and "crimes" of the State of Israel, denial of the Jewish race (which Hitler had no problem accepting) and counter-attacks on Zionism as racist.

Tell your tale of governmental responsibility to the "Palestinians", who most certainly have no claims to race. Tell them to go live in peace with their Jewish neighbors which they did for fifty years. Tell Islam that the Jews have a right to govern - rather than being declared targets of extermination.

And since the United States is not a Christian country, statements about driving Jews from the US kinda sabotages your ridiculously silly point.

[zippikay]

... I guess the news about Iran boasting ability to launch a missile that could reach Israel would not help to ease the situation then...
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ries

[Malkavia]

The New Anti-Semitism distinguishes itself by a disproportionate focus on the "illegality" and "crimes" of the State of Israel, denial of the Jewish race (which Hitler had no problem accepting) and counter-attacks on Zionism as racist.

Can you please tell me how the state of Israel is legal?

Other than the religious I have never seen a legitimate argument.

I think more importantly though, whether the state of Israel was justified or not, it's here and its not going away. No side will be happy with a compromise, but it's going to have to happen or the Palestinians (not the Jews) will eventually fade away.

... I guess the news about Iran boasting ability to launch a missile that could reach Israel would not help to ease the situation then...
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ries

I see this on all the time on the news in America. Iran is not going to bomb Israel. Period.

[thod]

The New Anti-Semitism distinguishes itself by a disproportionate focus on the "illegality" and "crimes" of the State of Israel, denial of the Jewish race (which Hitler had no problem accepting) and counter-attacks on Zionism as racist.

The focus on Israel's misdeeds is because they hold all the fire power. The Palestinians can do little but Israel can at time over-react. The whole problem is you support Israel and that colours your judgement. Consider the activities of China in Tibet. In that situation you can criticize the Chinese when they use their overwhelming power to subdue the Tibetans. You can see why the Chinese are picked on because you are not Chinese and thus not blinded by a desire to support one side.

If we are to accept the Jews as a race, and I have met several blond Jews, then Zionism is by definition racist. There are people in the US who say "We are the white race and the US should be a white man's land". They are racist. But Judaism is a religion, I can convert to Judaism and go live in Israel. I have seen documentaries following the lives of people who did convert to Judaism. I have also met several lapsed Jews who are as atheistic as I am.

[jesse]

And that's the fundamental argument used by all anti-Semites with regard to Israel - while conveniently forgetting a couple of thousand years of persecution in Europe, with little or no rights as equal citizens. It's the modern Jewbash.

I hardly call that pissy piece of turf known as Israel prime real estate, and it wasn't seized by the Jews in the name of God. Ever heard of the Balfour Declaration or the ancient and traditional and original homelands of Jews? Or would you rather the Nazi's have just kept going with The Final Solution?

In other words because Jews were widely persecuted in the last two thousand years now gives them a blank check to commit the same sort of behavior, is this what you've implied?

It's also unbelievable how being against the actions that the state and military of Israel is just about universally deemed to be completely anti-semitic, no ifs or buts to it. There are even small groups of Jews who are against zionism but they won't ever get the time of day because it destroys the current tripe about the jewish cause in Israel as being victims under the onslaught of Palestinians and Arabs.

Speaking of the Balfour Declaration, are you entirely sure there was absolutely no Jewish input on the matter? Did the British monarchy decide out of the blue to declare modern day Israel like spontaneous combustion? I hardly doubt this was done without input from zionists.

[Hamsta]

Even if all Jews revoked their race, and became atheists, there would still be others who would see them as a race.

Denying anyone religious freedom is racist.

Many people in the USA are proud of being from a certain ethnicity/religion as well as being American, and will pull together in times of hardship
Israel is not so different. In my home town of Haifa, we celebrate Chanukah, Christmas and Ramadan at the same week. Druze serve in the Army. You can find Synagogues, Churches and Mosques.

The Jews had a good life in Germany before Hitler needed a scapegoat.
They had a golden age in Spain, before the inquisition needed a scapegoat.
The Jews from Russia have similar stories, as do Jews from the Islamic world.

[pip]

Judaism is one of the least 'offensive' religions going.
The only problem they really have is Israel.
Seriously. WHY for fates sake did these otherwise decent enough people decide to kick Mohammed up his behind, steal his backyard and then pitch tent in it?
As if this was never going to come back with all the fuss and mither at some later date...
The Issies have become the worlds foremost self-appointed victims, and its almost entirely of thier own making.
The worst thing that ever happened for Judaism was the founding of Israel (at least where it is).

The way things are going, I can easily imagine most of the 'holy land' being turned into a glass crater - all in the name of God said so, well no mine said otherwise etc...

[rickster]

The most mindblowing aspect of The New Antisemitism re Israel isn't its racism: its the blind ignorance of how strategically important Israel is to Western interests. In the Eastern Mediterranean there are only two democracies - Israel and Greece, with Turkey pretending to a Muslim Democracy.

Given the fact that Turkey would immediately follow the downfall of Israel - leaving only Greece as a vulnerable bulwark for the West - can anybody explain the desirability of the entire area up to the Black Sea coming under the control of Islam?

The establishment of Israel had its roots in the securing the breaking up of the Ottoman Empire: is it in the West's interests to ignore that historical example, and go ahead and encourage much the same thing to happen again?

[Hamburglar]

rickster, please explain how a democracy protects our national interest. I think it could easily be argued that Israel degrades our national interests in the middle east (our supplier of texas-t).

Arguing that Israel has a right to exist is like arguing that the US should give California back to the Mexicans. As shitty as it is, the Israelis lost that territory, and only got it back by getting the British to bankroll them a homeland and recognize its sovereignty. Unfortunately for them, while the British did buy out the majority of landowners, they didn't buy out the non-land owners. They continue to reside in a little place known as Palestine. The Israelis, if they really believed in Democracy, would separate church and state and negotiate a single state solution with equal protection under the law for Jews and Islamists.

[rickster]

rickster, please explain how a democracy protects our national interest. I think it could easily be argued that Israel degrades our national interests in the middle east (our supplier of texas-t). .

Supporting right-wing democracies has always been seen (by the US) as furthering its international interests. The US is a part of the West - for better or for worse, and that's the way the world is set up. It's highly unlikely the West has anything to gain by not supporting every non-Islamic democracy it can find, plus Turkey and Jordan. (The subject of American isolationism versus internationalism in a national interests context is a different discussion.)

Arab oil supplies aren't - or shouldn't be - a long term consideration since they're finite: when their cash cow runs dry their survival will depend on their expansion into resource-richer Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the sub-continent. Arab / Islamic unity is about much, much more than Allah.

[Hamsta]

Judaism is one of the least 'offensive' religions going.
The only problem they really have is Israel.
Seriously. WHY for fates sake did these otherwise decent enough people decide to kick Mohammed up his behind, steal his backyard and then pitch tent in it?
As if this was never going to come back with all the fuss and mither at some later date...
The Issies have become the worlds foremost self-appointed victims, and its almost entirely of thier own making.
The worst thing that ever happened for Judaism was the founding of Israel (at least where it is).

The way things are going, I can easily imagine most of the 'holy land' being turned into a glass crater - all in the name of God said so, well no mine said otherwise etc...

Maybe it was the Holocaust? The pogroms in Russia? The Spanish inquisition? Dhimmitude in the Islamic world? The KKK is the USA?

[Night Runner]

The New Anti-Semitism distinguishes itself by a disproportionate focus on the "illegality" and "crimes" of the State of Israel, denial of the Jewish race (which Hitler had no problem accepting) and counter-attacks on Zionism as racist.

The most mindblowing aspect of The New Antisemitism re Israel isn't its racism: its the blind ignorance of how strategically important Israel is to Western interests.

Are you implying that everybody who doesn't support Israel 100% is antisemitic? :rolleyes: I know it may be hard to believe, but sometimes people are genuinely concerned about international law and improving the overall quality of life in the region.

[Conservationist]

The Israeli use a very open proportional representation system in how they elect governments, so if you appeal to only 1% of the population, you get one seat. This makes minority interests quite dominant, and if this fundamentalism keeps growing they may dominate the Knesset. A scary thought if they're already segregating buses.

Those who breed dominate the future.

And fundamentalists, who believe in an order larger than themselves, are breeding more than self-absorbed cosmopolitans.

It's a conservative, traditionalist, fundamentalist future.

LOL @ childless hippies.

[Caedus]

Are you implying that everybody who doesn't support Israel 100% is antisemitic? :rolleyes: I know it may be hard to believe, but sometimes people are genuinely concerned about international law and improving the overall quality of life in the region.

To add to Night Runner's post: As American citizens, we have a right to be concerned with the actions of Israel and other parties in the region; especially when billions (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) of the taxpayers dollars has already gone to Israel.

[rickster]

Are you implying that everybody who doesn't support Israel 100% is antisemitic? :rolleyes: I know it may be hard to believe, but sometimes people are genuinely concerned about international law and improving the overall quality of life in the region.

No I'm not implying that. I'm however stating that political discussions about Israel lose a lot of their legitimacy when tainted by second-hand issues about race and religion in relation to the right of Israel to exist. That's the fundamental pro-Arab position, and "genuine concerns about international law and overall peace in the region" need to take that polemic stance into account before their do-gooding becomes suspect.

To add to Night Runner's post: As American citizens, we have a right to be concerned with the actions of Israel and other parties in the region; especially when billions (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) of the taxpayers dollars has already gone to Israel.

And your point is? Iraq is currently second to Israel in receiving foreign aid...

[Malkavia]

And your point is? Iraq is currently second to Israel in receiving foreign aid...

I think his point is...

As American citizens, we have a right to be concerned with the actions of Israel

because

billions of the taxpayers dollars has already gone to Israel.

When it comes to Iraq, I don't even know what to think of it. Its under martial law right? So we kind of control it but not anymore? But we're still hanging out?

[dragonsscout]

@OP

Yep. That's scary, but the minorities like Shas have had a lot of power for a long time. That kinda makes it scarier. :scared:

And your point is? Iraq is currently second to Israel in receiving foreign aid...
Iraq gets aid because it was by and large, the US who screwed over the country so badly. Leaving it in such a state would not only look bad (and be morally questionable), but make the area prone to more instability which affects everyone, not just Iraqis.

Israel, on the other hand, was not screwed over by the US and is much more stable than Iraq. The aid is there for a variety of reasons, both international and domestic, none of which are particularly urgent.

[Caedus]

And your point is? Iraq is currently second to Israel in receiving foreign aid..

My point is that we have a right to look out for ourselves and our interests. if Israel is being accused of human rights by the UN, the US will be blamed, like always. We've funded them over a hundred billion so far. We'll be blamed for turning a blind eye to their actions. I think the US should use that as a tool to put pressure on Netanyahu and the Israeli government. We must keep Israel accountable for their actions.

[rickster]

When it comes to Iraq, I don't even know what to think of it. Its under martial law right? So we kind of control it but not anymore? But we're still hanging out?

From a military strategist POV (not to mention short-term oil control) Iraq serves as the most desirable western wedge because its gain effectively slices an Islamic empire in half, with Western influence from the Black Sea thru Turkey right to the Persian Gulf. It isolates Afghanistan from Syria, and the South Arabian Peninsula from all points east.

A world map which has both Iraq and Afghanistan out of Islam's control contains both Iran and north Pakistan.


Iraq gets aid because it was by and large, the US who screwed over the country so badly. Leaving it in such a state would not only look bad (and be morally questionable), but make the area prone to more instability which affects everyone, not just Iraqis.

Israel, on the other hand, was not screwed over by the US and is much more stable than Iraq. The aid is there for a variety of reasons, both international and domestic, none of which are particularly urgent.

The US isn't in the business of shelling out $$$ because it "screwed somebody over". And, like Turkey and Israel, Iraq will continue to get aid while it hosts a western military presence and/or is an ally serving western interests.


rickster added to this post, 2 minutes and 52 seconds later...

We must keep Israel accountable for their actions.

Or, more correctly, "we" must appear to be holding Israel accountable for their actions.

[Hamburglar]

From a military strategist POV (not to mention short-term oil control) Iraq serves as the most desirable western wedge because its gain effectively slices an Islamic empire in half, with Western influence from the Black Sea thru Turkey right to the Persian Gulf. It isolates Afghanistan from Syria, and the South Arabian Peninsula from all points east.

A world map which has both Iraq and Afghanistan out of Islam's control contains both Iran and north Pakistan.

The US isn't in the business of shelling out $$$ because it "screwed somebody over". And, like Turkey and Israel, Iraq will continue to get aid while it hosts a western military presence and/or is an ally serving western interests.


Frankly, your opinion substantiates the reason why military does not set policy. You are ridiculous to think that the US is fighting a war to stop some sort of Islamic Empire. The irony of your opinion is the more the US tries to dominate and subjugate the Islamic people of the world, the more they actually will unite. Islam is spread throughout the world, from northern Africa to Asia. Even in the US there is a large following. The point is that even though they all follow the Muslim tradition there is no way in heaven or hell that you will get them to agree on some sort of Empire, let alone how to interpret the Qur'an. You cannot live in America and believe in the Self-determinism and then say that the US is wedging apart the middle east in some balance of power effort.

Your middle point is the most ludicrous. As if Iran and Pakistan need Afghanistan or Iraq to accomplish 'your' perceived goal of world domination. You are living in the wrong decade if you are talking about containment as a viable policy for anything, let alone Islam, which the US is not trying to contain. I know it's confusing when your President tells you that we are going to wage a Crusade in Afghanistan, but that was just to sell simple minded folk on fighting the war on terror.

You are partially right on your last point-it doesn't give it simply because we screwed them over. We give it because we did screw them over and without economic stimulus they would fall into destitution and extremism. It's like an investment in preventing a future war.

To summarize, you offer ridiculous opinions that are not substantiated by any sort of reasonable facts. You are entitled to hold them, but just be aware that there might be an alternative explanation to your oddly constructed cold war view of Islamic extremism and the east/west divide. Maybe you are a fundamentalist christian who still thinks the US should be involved in a crusade against the 'barbaric' Muslims????

[rickster]

To summarize, you offer ridiculous opinions that are not substantiated by any sort of reasonable facts. You are entitled to hold them, but just be aware that there might be an alternative explanation to your oddly constructed cold war view of Islamic extremism and the east/west divide. Maybe you are a fundamentalist christian who still thinks the US should be involved in a crusade against the 'barbaric' Muslims????

So why don't you give an "alternative explanation" as to why the west is doggedly dug in in both Iraq and Afghanistan? Altruism? You're throwing around a lot of conjecture to refute my ridiculousness, but it's all really smoke and mirrors.

I simply put forward a reasonable military strategy, based on my knowledge of the region and it's history. I have no religious views on the matter whatsoever.

Now please tell us exactly why the US and its allies are in Iraq and Afghanistan - without all the "as ifs" and rhetoric.

[dragonsscout]

The US isn't in the business of shelling out $$$ because it "screwed somebody over". And, like Turkey and Israel, Iraq will continue to get aid while it hosts a western military presence and/or is an ally serving western interests.

No, but the US is in the business of increasing international security because an unstable Iraq becomes a spawning point for anti-Americanism, extremism, and terrorism. Not to mention the US wants a stable Iraq because of oil interests.

The US isn't giving nearly as much aid to other unstable countries such as Somalia and Sudan, probably because it didn't have much to do the decline in these countries, so instability is not likely to have the same results.

[rickster]

No, but the US is in the business of increasing international security because an unstable Iraq becomes a spawning point for anti-Americanism, extremism, and terrorism. Not to mention the US wants a stable Iraq because of oil interests.

Political rhetoric about "international security" and "unstable" nations is metaphorical nonsense. Iraq was quite stable before the invasion: extremism and terrorism are surging into Iraq to assert opposition to allied presence.

[dragonsscout]

Political rhetoric about "international security" and "unstable" nations is metaphorical nonsense. Iraq was quite stable before the invasion: extremism and terrorism are surging into Iraq to assert opposition to allied presence.

The reasons for the invasion were wrong at the very least, but once the US invaded, the damage was done (special thanks to "shock and awe"). Rather than leave the country in turmoil, in which this extremism and terrorism would thrive, the US and others decided to try to patch up what they had done - pretty successfully so far, I'd say.

Political rhetoric about "international security" and "unstable" nations is metaphorical nonsense.

How so? Just about everything is used for political reasons of some sort. I don't think that necessarily makes it any less legitimate.

[rickster]

The reasons for the invasion were wrong at the very least, but once the US invaded, the damage was done (special thanks to "shock and awe"). Rather than leave the country in turmoil, in which this extremism and terrorism would thrive, the US and others decided to try to patch up what they had done - pretty successfully so far, I'd say.

We'd quickly forget the rights and the wrongs of the invasion if it had successfully met its strategic objectives, which it hasn't yet. Iraq I think will come out of its mess - it has, to with its immediate neighbor Iran emerging by the week as as the major threat to the region.

How so? Just about everything is used for political reasons of some sort. I don't think that necessarily makes it any less legitimate.

Well political rhetoric - especially US political rhetoric - has to play the world stage, as well as a very tough domestic audience. Actions - and lack of actions - very much speak louder than words when it comes to the Middle East.

[Hamburglar]

We'd quickly forget the rights and the wrongs of the invasion if it had successfully met its strategic objectives, which it hasn't yet. Iraq I think will come out of its mess - it has, to with its immediate neighbor Iran emerging by the week as as the major threat to the region.

Well political rhetoric - especially US political rhetoric - has to play the world stage, as well as a very tough domestic audience. Actions - and lack of actions - very much speak louder than words when it comes to the Middle East.

Right, right, yah that was all true when The Bush admin operated under the premise of your second paragraph...I don't seem to recall him accomplishing any diplomatic gains with Iran in his 8 years in office.

Oh, I almost forgot...you should read this. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Of course Iran could be bluffing and preparing to throw a pie in our faces, I'm not naive. But pie in the face is much better than being spit on before you even sit down at the table.