Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

Josh Cryer · 2004-10-30 08:26:51

Bill,

Did you see how politically astute bin Laden was?
Leave us alone and we will leave you alone
First, he is lying.

Absolutely agreed. But I do not think Bin Laden is in control, per-say, of any organization. He is now at this level where all he has to do is talk, and he will be mostly listened to. Few people in the world reach this status. The thing is, not everyone will listen (indeed, if only they would; don't take that as an endorsement, please), and the both sides will continue to kill people.

Cindy,

Apparently we should have let the fundie Palestinians round up and slaughter all the Israelis ala Nazi Germany.

This is a reactionary position, Cindy, and I love ya, but you know it's not fair. If anyone is "rounding up" anyone, is the absolute other way around, if only because of Israeli superiority. If you have any knowledge of history, the Israeli state just popped up out of no where (just as the Palestinian authority to any extent- neither one existed to any extent before the Israeli's just magically appeared there, this is a fact of history, which I can document quite easily). The "terrorist suicide bombers" are of miserable sods who have had their misery exploited by some bastards (and it looks like Israel has suffeciently taken Hamas out to a very large extent). We forget all too easily that these people were humans too, humans most likely coerced into doing something horrific to themselves and a group of people around them. You don't just magically turn into a firecracker overnight, someone has to give you the explosives, and light the fuse.

But really, you know what my evil solution to the Palestinian problem? Just offer to fly them off to Mecca somewhere, get them the freak out of there. Most would leave, I am absolutely sure of this, if provided with the assistance. It wouldn't cost that much either (I guarantee it would cost less than our military budget to Israel), people aren't that expensive to maintain, and can be self supporting once they're moved about. But this is diverging from the topic at hand.

Bin Laden has said it doesn't matter who is President.

Bin Laden is fudging matters. For his ultimate demands, neither Bush nor Kerry are going to do squat. However, Kerry's foreign policy is much better than Bush's. Kerry has said he would invade Iran (completely counter to OBL's demands), but I don't see this happening, because of that world support that Cobra and others were perplexed about; it's a powerful thing, guys.

On a simple level, though, Bush is better for OBL, because he has shown that he has no real interest in OBL, but rather stirring the pot.

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2004-10-30 08:40:34

There is a very serious health care crisis in the USA, the costs of Iraq have been massive, so will either Bush or Kerry be able to fix this? There have been more jobs lost than in any four years in the US since the Great Depression and sadly a new record with some of the worst deficits ever. Another import new item has surfaced the most wicked and biggest SOBof our times is indeed very much alive and well and videotaping in his own personal blockbuster studio again! What is disturbing is rather telling how the current operation against bin Laden is going or how either person plans to kill Osama , Bush and Kerry have instead decided to attack each other with mud slinging tactics ? !! :rant: Osama Bin Laden Is Alive, and making threats against Americans. The tone quickly devolved into partisan sniping over who would be worst for stopping the terrorist attacks...Bush and Kerry throwing the dirt, and both of them appear to be exploiting the tape of the world's biggest Terrorist for political gain. Let's hope they start taking this issue serious soon and not put political spin doctoring on it, twisting such a serious security issue and using bin Laden's tape for political gain is a bad idea and bad for the country as Bush himself said "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we " what the heck ??!!?
Meanwhile there are many other madmen and tyrants out there who know that the US forces are streched and Bush is stuck in the pit of despair called Iraq. There are other dictators out there who seek to strenghten their might and bash the US policy with harsh remarks and bad actions. The Iranians have not agreed to suspend uranium enrichment, the IAEA says there are still doubts concerning Iran's nuclear ambitions including the nature of work on advanced centrifuges and plutonium separation experiments that were kept secret from the agency :rant: :down: there are many in Washington who feel Iran is trying to get hold of more weapons such as Nuclear bombs. A number of serious questions raised by the debacle in Iraq is whether it has crippled the ability of the world's leading powers to contain dangerous states. Iran's nuclear program is a prime case in point: so far, neither threats nor inducements have persuaded its leaders to suspend their uranium enrichment program
Meanwhile there is a madman in North Korea who openly defies the USA and comes out with outrageous outbursts almost every week. There a nuclear crisis with North Korea their statements have been often cryptic in the past but sometimes quiet clear...with N.Korea basically saying at times in the past " come on USA, come get us you son-of-bushes, we've got Nukes and we're going to build more" . With North Korea threatening to bolster its atomic arsenal and the Bush administration under pressure to force a breakthrough nobody knows what dictators in what part of the world will be doing next. The Europeans and Chinese also don't want more powerful nuclear bombs falling into the hands of Kim , however Europe and China can only do so much, they can only make so many threats and say so much. More often the madman in North Korea will not listen to reason, and he doesn't really see the Chinese and Europeans as an enemy but clearly speaks out with hatred against the US policy. China and South Korea would like to see North Korea dismantle its nuclear weapons programs. Pyongyang has suggested Powell's trip is merely to keep up the appearance during Bush's re-election campaign that he is committed to the six-party talks. North Korea demanded the United States drop what it sees as a confrontational policy.
The tyrants of the world know uncle sam has some trouble, North Koreas might see that the USA is streched and is already fighting at certain limits so it seeks to enchance its nuclear weapons program as Iraq gives Bush a N.Korean blindspot, Iran , Sudan and others have also barked loudly at the USA while the Taliban appears to be making a strong come back. There has been a hug cost in Iraq, that might be having a very negative effect on the US economy. There si now the new charge that he failed to secure a huge cache of high-grade explosives that are now missing in Iraq. There have been other horrible videos made against the USA, one aired a video from an alleged American al-Qai'da member threatening "the streets of America will run red with blood matching drop for drop the blood of America's victims". unwillingness to stay long the dollar ahead of an uncertain pre-election weekend. Is it that the iraq war has diverted U.S. attention from clearer nuclear threats in Iran and North Korea and the capture of Osama bin Laden. The stock market and dollar seems to have taken a hit, the new video tape broadcasted on Arabic TV station al-Jazeera showed Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden accusing President George W Bush of deceiving the American people in the years following the September 2001 attacks. Bin Laden said the security of the US people laid in their own hands and not in those of any leaders. The news sent the dollar to shakey levels. US markets are very wary ahead of election , the appearance of a new video tape from Osama bin Laden has scared people. Deep-seated market concerns about the huge record of US current account deficit also continue. The pricier oil and mixed economic data left investors wary Some say ' We're in the calm before the storm -- the storm being the election and the true finance and real economic data that comes out after the election. :down: It should be intresting to see how the election goes, the left-wing independent Ralph Nader might take votes away as people don't want to vote for either party. Well it should be a close election if anything.

Cobra Commander · 2004-10-30 09:12:43

Moving right along... Just some (relatively) quick comments.

Iraqis have been beheading western contractors so deal with them by pulling out suddenly. It’ll leave Iraq in chaos lead to civil war; don’t they deserve that?

No more than they deserved a murdering dictator and his rapist sons, decades of repression and terror... Following this reasoning it could be argued that precipitating a civil war, while vile and wrong, is no worse than simply not doing anything in the first place. Is a thousand quick deaths today worse than five thousand torturous ones over the next month?

Just a bit of Devil's Advocate here, but it's a valid question. Moral judgments about American conduct in liberating Iraq, even accepting the wild numbers of the Left, are on very soft ground when compared against the alternative of doing nothing.

As usual, Shaun has managed to say what I was thinking in a more... tactful manner. :;):

OMG, Shaun is actually advocating initiating aggressive action against Iran? The U.N. was created specifically to prevent that sort of thing. You can't claim the other guy is trying to destroy you when they haven't launched an assault but you have.

Does one prevent wars by pledging never to engage in them? Or does such a course invite aggression?

League of Nations...

Most importantly, hasn't anyone learned their lesson from Iraq? Isn't 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths and 1,112 Americans enough? You know the situation in Iraq isn't going to get any better. Vietnam didn't.

I dispute the 100,000 number, particuarly when you consider the cause of death and by whom, but that's open for extensive wrangling on its own. My real question here is why is it always Vietnam? How do we know the sitaution in Iraq will never get any better? Afghanistan is getting better, Germany, Japan and France got better. America got better after our own uprisings.

If we look at everything through our "Nam glasses" every conflict is hopeless. Seal the borders and let the world burn!

You're confusing completely different organizations. Al Qaeda is responsible for all of the attacks on America, except the barracks in Lebanon 1983; I don't know who's responsible for that one. Al Qaeda is also responsible for the incidents in Russia and Spain. Remember I said focus on taking out Al Qaeda?

I notice I'm singling out Robert's posts for comment, Just working out that way, nothing personal.

What is al Qaeda? More importantly, where does their funding and support come from? They are not a self-contained organization that can entirely provide for itself from its own secret volcano lair like a James Bond super-villain. They were backed and harbored by the Taliban, they recieve backing from various channels in and through Iran. There are Saudi angles. If we focus on al Qaeda proper to the exclusion of the other connections we can never root them out entirely.

If we kill bin Laden does anyone truly believe that the rest of the world's Islamic terrorists will just give up? Throw down their arms, say "F*ck it" in Arabic or Farsi and go home? Al Qaeda is part of the problem, not the whole of the problem itself. Osama bin Laden has been reduced to little more than a symbol. Sure, I want to see him killed or preferably captured, but it's not the guage by which we should judge the entire war. "Bin Laden's on the loose, we failed miserably. Oh, we caught him. Victory parade." No. We aren't fighting a man, or an organization, or a state. We're fighting an ideology, and that is very hard to do. We can't win relying exclusively on killing those who espouse it, nor can we win without killing some of them. Our theater of operations is not Afghanistan or Iraq or Iran or any other single nation, but all of Dar al Islam. The enemy blends with those who are not our enemies and the borders drawn by British officials in the last century are meaningless. We can't always rely on mass armies and occupations, sometimes we need political approaches, sometimes we need a midnight "heads on poles" approach, sometimes we need to improve economic conditions for people in a region, and sometimes we actually need to do nothing. Any approach that continues to look at this in fragmentary nation-state terms can't succeed, and in that sense neither Bush nor Kerry can win this. Hopefully in time whoever wins the election will figure it out, but I expect it will be another four years regardless.

If someone holds a big sharp knife to my throat and tells me they're going to slit it no matter what, my only choices are to start fighting like hell or say my prayers.

Which leaves me only one possible course of action.
The atheism thing tends narrow the options.

This is a reactionary position, Cindy, and I love ya, but you know it's not fair. If anyone is "rounding up" anyone, is the absolute other way around, if only because of Israeli superiority. If you have any knowledge of history, the Israeli state just popped up out of no where (just as the Palestinian authority to any extent- neither one existed to any extent before the Israeli's just magically appeared there, this is a fact of history, which I can document quite easily).

Yeah, I blame decolonisation. Screwed everything all up.

Stirring...

But really, you know what my evil solution to the Palestinian problem? Just offer to fly them off to Mecca somewhere, get them the freak out of there. Most would leave, I am absolutely sure of this, if provided with the assistance.

Aside from the fact that no one wants them, how can you be so sure they would want to leave? And if they did, that they would be content and forever give up the cause of taking back "their" lands?

DonPanic · 2004-10-30 09:16:28

LO

I'm tired of this. According to popular world opinion:
Apparently America is/has been always evil and horrible, the other guy has always been misunderstood and picked on.

Please, stop it with that paranoïa !
All Europe and main allies were in best terms with USA during Clinton mandacy, and majority of arab public opinion did support Clinton's efforts for peace between Israel and Palestinians.
May be the 9/11 attacks wouldn't have taken place if Bush hadn't supported Sharon systematic colonisation and ultraviolent retaliation politic.
When we saw 9/11 attacks, we were crying and were as horrifyed as any NewYorker to see desperate people jumping out the twins for a long fall towards death, and we sent among our best mountain commandos to help chasing Bin Laden.
All the civilized world from Beijing to Paris was with USA by these days.
So, if 70% of Europeans now reject USA, blame Bush.
If south american countries of el Mercosur try to sign free trade agreement with Europe rather than with USA, that's because Bush will to violate non military use of Space treaties shows that this administration care a dim about international treaties and will tear them up at any time.
We are angry at Bush because our arab and our jew communities never had conflicts before Bush and Sharon administrations, now they fear and hate each other.
If there is a rising Euro-Indian-China informal alliance, it is pushed by Bush's administration.
Now it's up to US citizens to decide either to be again the best among the world community of nations or to be regarded as among the the roguest ones.

BWhite · 2004-10-30 09:42:01

Now it's up to US citizens to decide either to be again the best of world community of nations or to be regarded as among the the roguest ones.

USA versus the world? We LOSE that battle.

= = =

Cindy, Shaun. You are both too tired to THINK or read what I am saying.

bin Laden is acting SMARTER and being MORE CLEVER than Bush. Therefore being "resolute" is a recipe for disaster.

Hang tough, be strong, close you minds, AND LOSE THE WAR ON TERROR!!!

Example:

Just today, in Iraq, "they" blew up an Arabic language TV station because the station was broadcasting "lies" in the Arabic language.

Evil? Yes. Clever? Profoundly Clever.

Killing translators is an ingenious evil strategy we have yet to find a solution for. Bush merely pounds his chest and says "Be Strong!"

Nothing we say will ever be heard by the average Iraqi UNTIL we learn to speak Arabic. AND unless we talk to the avergae Iraqi our only other choice is to kill them.

= = =

Cobra knows better. He's just trolling. :;):

BWhite · 2004-10-30 09:45:13

But really, you know what my evil solution to the Palestinian problem? Just offer to fly them off to Mecca somewhere, get them the freak out of there. Most would leave, I am absolutely sure of this, if provided with the assistance. It wouldn't cost that much either (I guarantee it would cost less than our military budget to Israel), people aren't that expensive to maintain, and can be self supporting once they're moved about. But this is diverging from the topic at hand.

Too many politicians both in the Arab world and the West benefit from "endless war" - - that is why the Palestinians do not have a secure homeland.

= = =

Guys, its not about WHETHER we fight the terrorists like bin Laden is about HOW we fight the terrorists.

Bush's heart is in the right place (maybe) but his strategery is a recipe for disaster.

BWhite · 2004-10-30 10:08:48

And here is why I say Cobra's just trolling:

He and I openly disagree on the morality of "going Roman" and imposing US will by blatant use of military power. No problem, its a free country, thus far. . .

But he and I agree it is very unlikely the American people have the stomach to "go Roman" to the extent needed to win the "War on Terror" with military firepower.

We will invade Fallajuh, again. Kill lots of people and still fail to eradicate the insurgency. Why?

Because we will be "too tough" while at the same time not being tough enough. We Americans haven't got the stomach to be sufficiently Roman.

Therefore we need a different strategery.

= = =

George W. Bush is a "weak Roman" strategerist. Worst possible option we have.

Palomar · 2004-10-30 10:18:08

Josh: But really, you know what my evil solution to the Palestinian problem? Just offer to fly them off to Mecca somewhere, get them the freak out of there. Most would leave, I am absolutely sure of this, if provided with the assistance.
Aside from the fact that no one wants them, how can you be so sure they would want to leave? And if they did, that they would be content and forever give up the cause of taking back "their" lands?

*I will agree with Josh on one thing: This aspect of the ongoing regions-wide conflict is ultimately about religion.

Both the Muslims and the Jews believe they have exclusive dibs on Jerusalem. The Jews believe Israel is their Promised Land. I don't know the Muslim side of it as well...I do know they have a mosque in Jerusalem in which they claim the bones of Abraham are laid to rest and no unbeliever dare touch a pinkie finger on.

The Muslims won't leave a place considered so holy to them. Neither will the Jews (now...thanks to President Truman especially).

I suppose President Truman's actions in 1948 was based in some part on his being a Christian. Most Christians believe the Jews are God's Chosen People and that the Bible prophecised the formation of Israel, the return of the Jews to the Promised Land, etc., etc. I know of a certain sect of Christians who believe the United Kingdom was punished by God for opposing the formation of the State of Israel in 1948; their "proof" of this is the decline of the British Empire around the same time, which also saw the upswing and growth in U.S. strength (they claim the U.S. was "blessed" for supporting the Jews and Israel).

Once again, religion is to blame. So what else is new?

America should NEVER have gotten involved in the Pals/Israel thing to begin with. So now what do we do?

Now what?

And for how long will bin Laden and ilk like him consider us fit for punishment? They've been fighting and going 'round and 'round with the Jews for millenia over there. If we dropped our support of Israel tomorrow, would that appease them? I'm not suggesting we do that, by the way. Or would they find yet another trump card to flash around?

--

DonPanic:

We are angry at Bush because our arab and our jew communities never had conflicts before Bush and Sharon administrations, now they fear and hate each other.

*So your Arabic and Jewish communities are both so weak-minded and weak-willed they can't try and get along in spite of Bush being in the White House? How sad is that? Can't they take responsibility for their actions and reactions, be friends in spite of everything? Does Bush really have that much power? Maybe those persons in your population should consider themselves FRENCH first, instead of continually dragging problems from thousands of miles away into their homes in France and allowing it to effect them to that point?

And given the history of interaction between those two groups of people for the past millienia...nah, I'd better not say it.

--Cindy

C M Edwards · 2004-10-30 10:50:41

Re: Osama bin Laden and the US presidential election...

When I give a darn about what bin Laden thinks, I'll get back to you.

As for who to vote for on Tuesday, I can't offer a fresh take to anyone, because my own decision was made by Benjamin Franklin two hundred years before I was born:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Unfortunately, I believe that my state Department of Health and Hospital has begun requiring an entry for "Political Party" on children's birth certificates. The outcome of the election will be entirely determined by the 10% of our population that decline to answer.

BWhite · 2004-10-30 12:20:07

And for how long will bin Laden and ilk like him consider us fit for punishment?

Until we KILL him!

Palomar · 2004-10-30 12:28:58

And for how long will bin Laden and ilk like him consider us fit for punishment?
Until we KILL him!

*Well yeah...

but then someone else will step in to fill his shoes...

There are plenty of Arabs fighting mad (with us) about Israel and they likely will be for a long time to come (their grudge with the Jews has carried on now for well over 3000 years...).

So what do we, the U.S., do now as regards our involvement with Israel?

That's what I'd really like to know. What should we do? Isn't that THE crux of our problems?

--Cindy

DonPanic · 2004-10-30 12:41:54

LO

We are angry at Bush because our arab and our jew communities never had conflicts before Bush and Sharon administrations, now they fear and hate each other.
*So your Arabic and Jewish communities are both so weak-minded and weak-willed they can't try and get along in spite of Bush being in the White House? How sad is that? Can't they take responsibility for their actions and reactions, be friends in spite of everything? Does Bush really have that much power? Maybe those persons in your population should consider themselves FRENCH first, instead of continually dragging problems from thousands of miles away into their homes in France and allowing it to effect them to that point?
--Cindy

It's the power of media reporting day after day news of violence in the Middle-East.
The fact is that it's not so much Bush than Sharon, who sent zionist activists preaching installation in Israel, telling them a Bible is some kind of property bill over palestinian soil and now, if many Jews stay in France because Israel has poor economy, lot of french jews have become some kind of religious extremists, as in my flat of appartments, a family that want all doors opened on friday because they say their religion forbids them to ring a door bell or make the entry code number, trying to impose their will to other inhabitants.
That wouln't be a problem except that if anybody can enter the flat, that doesn't help feeling secure.
All their children are sent in jewish schools were they will not mix up with rest of population, so that their mind is opened on only what is jew.
If you ask that kind of family for whom they vote, the answer might be "likhoud" instead of a french political party.
Here as we say, we think they have their ass between two chairs.
The massive support of this community to Sharon's politic has led some young muslims to harassment towards kippa wearing jews, and by a kind of symetric attitude, young muslims girls started to wear islamic veils, and media made a whole story about them, leading the french government to make a law about veils in public schools.
Be conscious that with media and internet, what happens in any part of the world is known and can have a tremendous influence

Euler · 2004-10-30 13:07:52

There are plenty of Arabs fighting mad (with us) about Israel and they likely will be for a long time to come (their grudge with the Jews has carried on now for well over 3000 years...).

Um... Islam is less than 1400 years old. And the Muslims had undisputed rule over the area from the end of the crusades until the Ottoman Empire collapsed during World War 1(at the time, the Jews made up less than 10% of the population). It was not until the Zionist movement in the early-mid 20th century(especially after WW2) that the Jews became a large segment of the ME population. The actual fighting started when the British pulled out in 1948. They divided the middle east into two sections- Muslim and Jewish. The Muslims thought that all of it should be Muslim since they were there first, and the two sides fought a war. The Jewish side won, and they claimed much of the territory that had been given to the Palestinians. Much of the local Arab population had fled during the fighting, and when the fighting ended they became refugees because the Israelis would not let them return home. The surrounding Arab countries have fought many wars with Israel trying to take back the territory that they lost, but Israel (with US help) has won every war and gained even more territory. That is why all of the Arabs hate the Isrealies. This is basically a 60 year old war, not a 3000 year old war.

Palomar · 2004-10-30 13:15:50

There are plenty of Arabs fighting mad (with us) about Israel and they likely will be for a long time to come (their grudge with the Jews has carried on now for well over 3000 years...).
Um... Islam is less than 1400 years old. And the Muslims had undisputed rule over the area from the end of the crusades until the Ottoman Empire collapsed during World War 1(at the time, the Jews made up less than 10% of the population). It was not until the Zionist movement in the early-mid 20th century(especially after WW2) that the Jews became a large segment of the ME population. The actual fighting started when the British pulled out in 1948. They divided the middle east into two sections- Muslim and Jewish. The Muslims thought that all of it should be Muslim since they were there first, and the two sides fought a war. The Jewish side won, and they claimed much of the territory that had been given to the Palestinians. Much of the local Arab population had fled during the fighting, and when the fighting ended they became refugees because the Israelis would not let them return home. The surrounding Arab countries have fought many wars with Israel trying to take back the territory that they lost, but Israel (with US help) has won every war and gained even more territory. That is why all of the Arabs hate the Isrealies. This is basically a 60 year old war, not a 3000 year old war.

*We have a communication gap.

Are you familiar with the Old Testament of the Bible?

In my post which you quoted I -wasn't- referring to Islam...I was referring to the Arabic people (the descendants of Abraham and a handmaiden whose name I forget right now) versus the descendants of Abraham and Sarah (who became known as the Children of Israel, i.e. the Jews). They started fighting with each other from the get-go, as Abraham was a VIP of the time (wealthy, influential, etc.).

The fight over the State of Israel is, yes, nearing 60 years old.

But the story of Abraham and his descendants by 2 different women goes back approximately 3000 years. Who Abraham's rightful heirs are and who are truly blessed of God (supposedly God told Abraham he would bless the world through him, and that his descendants would be as numerous as the grains of sands on the beach...however, that only applied to the descendants via SARAH).

The Old Testament writers basically black-listed the descendants of Abraham by the handmaiden, referring to them as "wild as the jackasses in the hills," on and on.

There's been a lot of hatred and animosity between these two branches from Abraham for a long time. What we're seeing now is just another manifestation of it.

Ishmael (son of Abraham and a servant) = Arabic peoples.
Israel (son of Abraham and Sarah) = Jews.

--Cindy

::EDIT:: The handmaiden/servant's name was Hagar. Just checked it on Google.

p.s. -- and no, I'm NOT religious. I'm citing this from the historical perspective.

MarsDog · 2004-10-30 13:53:52

Ishmael (son of Abraham and a servant) = Arabic peoples.
Israel (son of Abraham and Sarah) = Jews.

Ismaelies are Hindu descent converted to Islam.

Jews are http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/hittites.htm]not Jewish descent also ?

Palomar · 2004-10-30 14:03:03

Ismaelies are Hindu descent converted to Islam.

*Ishmael and his descendants predate Islam by many, many years -- according to the OT history.

By the way, what's your source? (I named mine)

--Cindy

MarsDog · 2004-10-30 14:46:07

There is the Ismaeli religion. The leader is very rich.
It is different from the Biblical descendents of Ismael.

DonPanic · 2004-10-30 15:02:24

LO

There's been a lot of hatred and animosity between these two branches from Abraham for a long time. What we're seeing now is just another manifestation of it.
Ishmael (son of Abraham and a servant) = Arabic peoples.
Israel (son of Abraham and Sarah) = Jews.
--Cindy
::EDIT:: The handmaiden/servant's name was Hagar. Just checked it on Google.
p.s. -- and no, I'm NOT religious. I'm citing this from the historical perspective

Yes, but a very lackful "historical perspective", the following must be added :
Not the Arabs, but the Romans destroyed the Jerusalem Temple and obliged the Jews to leave Israel.
Though dominant, Muslims did tolerate Jews as well as Christians as religions with the same God. The evidences are in the Coran.
Sure there have been wars at Muslims from Christians in southern and oriental Europe against muslim expansion, then with crusades in middle east, but if Christians submitted, the Muslims would let them live and practice their own religion.
The muslim domination in Spain led to one of the brightest period of the history of Spain, when people of all Europe came to spanish arab universities to study medecine, astronomy and mathematics.
For centuries, there have been Synagogues in the main arab cities, Alexandria, Cairo, Bagdad, Damascus, Algiers, Rabat.
Lot of Jews lived there peacefully.
When the Jews where told by Christians to leave Spain, or to convert or die, many of them found a place to settle in Arab countries, mainly Morocco and Algeria, where Jews did'nt suffer racism and ostracism as in Europe.
Therefore, the violence of 1948 zionist settlement has been seen by all arabs as a treason.
The fact is that zionists came from northern Europe, mainly Germany and poland, and didn't knew anything about the Arabs.
And when Israel was founded, many Jews from middle-east arab cities were rewarded by Israel to come and settle.
Most of them are Labour and against Sharon, and many of them are regretful of the past time they lived in peace with the Arabs.
I must add that I have visited Israel as well as some arab countries, and I'm not talking about what I don't know.

Palomar · 2004-10-30 15:18:18

LO
There's been a lot of hatred and animosity between these two branches from Abraham for a long time. What we're seeing now is just another manifestation of it.
Ishmael (son of Abraham and a servant) = Arabic peoples.
Israel (son of Abraham and Sarah) = Jews.
--Cindy
::EDIT:: The handmaiden/servant's name was Hagar. Just checked it on Google.
p.s. -- and no, I'm NOT religious. I'm citing this from the historical perspective
Yes, but a very lackful "historical perspective", the following must be added :

*Fine. Thanks for adding it. My intention wasn't to write a book. :;):

My intention was simply to explain (briefly) the origin of the Arab and Jewish peoples and how far into the past some mutual animosities extend (the OT only flattered 1 of these peoples...guess who?)

--Cindy

DonPanic · 2004-10-30 15:36:58

LO

Fine. Thanks for adding it. My intention wasn't to write a book.
My intention was simply to explain (briefly) the origin of the Arab and Jewish peoples and how far into the past some mutual animosities extend (the OT only flattered 1 of these peoples...guess who?)
--Cindy

OK, but a "mise au point" was necessary, because the Arab Muslim expansion started 7 centuries after Israel was destroyed by the Roman Empire, and before the Roman Empire there have not been any confrontation between arabs tribes who lived in the desert and the Jews, and it is a very modern and false interpretation to call "Arabs" the local peoples which lived in and around Palestine in the biblic ages.

BWhite · 2004-10-30 16:05:32

Andrew Card said http://www.boston.com/news/nation/artic … rent/]this:

NEW YORK -- White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card said yesterday that President Bush views America as a ''10-year-old child" in need of the sort of protection provided by a parent.
* * *
''It struck me as I was speaking to people in Bangor, Maine, that this president sees America as we think about a 10-year-old child," Card said. ''I know as a parent I would sacrifice all for my children."

Actually this is = EXACTLY WHY = I cannot vote for Bush.

He won't listen to us because he's the daddy!

DonPanic · 2004-10-30 16:40:51

LO

I think it's time to take off the gloves and I just hope the Europeans will abandon their extraordinary anti-Americanism and wake up to who the real enemy is. If they imagine they can somehow curry favour with Islamofascists by opposing the U.S., I'm afraid they will have a very much ruder awakening to look forward to. The terrorists have stated they're not looking for concessions from the West, their aim is to destroy us - simple.]

C'mon Shaun ! Engage yourself, join the army and lead the fight ! Nuke them all ! :band:
The more you post these merry go war bills, the less we want to be ally of yours, and friends, less again.
You're so reprentative of that bunch of Dr Folamours which spread oil on fire in order to extinguish it !

DonPanic · 2004-10-30 16:53:23

LO

Actually this is = EXACTLY WHY = I cannot vote for Bush.

Sure Daddy's gonna steal your candies for himself

Palomar · 2004-10-30 18:11:02

Andrew Card said http://www.boston.com/news/nation/artic … rent/]this:
NEW YORK -- White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card said yesterday that President Bush views America as a ''10-year-old child" in need of the sort of protection provided by a parent.
* * *
''It struck me as I was speaking to people in Bangor, Maine, that this president sees America as we think about a 10-year-old child," Card said. ''I know as a parent I would sacrifice all for my children."
Actually this is = EXACTLY WHY = I cannot vote for Bush.
He won't listen to us because he's the daddy!

*Bill: No one likes being talked down to.

However, I'll bet 95% of all politicians and power-brokers look down their noses at "ordinary citizens" as much as Bush seems to; they're just smoother and more polished (that includes Kerry), more adept at hiding it.

I was shocked to read these two quotes today:

"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society."
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans ..."

Can you guess the two powerful, influential Americans who said that? One was a U.S. President. These two people, one of whom came from a more humble home than I and who should know better.

Most people don't seem very immune to being corrupted by power. No matter how humble their direct ancestors' circumstances or what they came from, suddenly *they're better* and everyone else is an ape. Madonna came from a home similar to mine; I wouldn't doubt, though, that her kids are under the impression she's a member of the Royal Family (just with a slightly different accent).

There are no political saviors and most of them don't give a damn about "the little people." They just care about power, perks and privilege; and they have to "endure us" when they need our votes. 95% of them at least.

-*-

DonPanic: What if Shaun's is the correct viewpoint? Bin Laden has expressed a desire to kill every living American. His organization wishes to make our streets run red with blood. I don't take those threats lightly.

I think it's time to take off the gloves and I just hope the Europeans will abandon their extraordinary anti-Americanism and wake up to who the real enemy is. If they imagine they can somehow curry favour with Islamofascists by opposing the U.S., I'm afraid they will have a very much ruder awakening to look forward to. The terrorists have stated they're not looking for concessions from the West, their aim is to destroy us - simple.]

*What if he is correct? Isn't it possible, at least?

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-10-30 18:39:32

LO
I think it's time to take off the gloves and I just hope the Europeans will abandon their extraordinary anti-Americanism and wake up to who the real enemy is. If they imagine they can somehow curry favour with Islamofascists by opposing the U.S., I'm afraid they will have a very much ruder awakening to look forward to. The terrorists have stated they're not looking for concessions from the West, their aim is to destroy us - simple.]
C'mon Shaun ! Engage yourself, join the army and lead the fight ! Nuke them all ! :band:
The more you post these merry go war bills, the less we want to be ally of yours, and friends, less again.
You're so reprentative of that bunch of Dr Folamours which spread oil on fire in order to extinguish it !

If Europe and USA truly joined forces with a spirit of mutual respect and equality towards each other, I believe we could eradicate Islamic-fascism rather easily.

Problem is Bush wants to be the senior partner with Europe as the junior partner. Or Bush the Promise-Keeper husband and the EU as the obedient wife.

I say, EU and USA as equal partners. If we did that, bin Laden will soon be discarded into history and fundi-Islam terror would be the stuff of bad dreams, not reality.

My wife and I, we are equals. I wouldn't want it any other way.

= = =

PS - - After 24 hours my opinion on the OBL video tape is this:

All OBL is attempting to do is waggle his tongue at Bush and gloat: "I am not dead, yet. . ."

GWB: Maybe you can run, but you can't hide?

OBL: Actually, I am hiding quite nicely and am enjoying life. What was that book anyway, "My Pet Goat?"

N'ah N'ah Na'h

= = =

So I ask - - we can send a man to the Moon. Why can't we find this OBL guy?

Oh yeah, Bush took a detour . . .

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#201 2004-10-30 08:26:51

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#202 2004-10-30 08:40:34

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#203 2004-10-30 09:12:43

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#204 2004-10-30 09:16:28

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#205 2004-10-30 09:42:01

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#206 2004-10-30 09:45:13

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#207 2004-10-30 10:08:48

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#208 2004-10-30 10:18:08

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#209 2004-10-30 10:50:41

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#210 2004-10-30 12:20:07

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#211 2004-10-30 12:28:58

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#212 2004-10-30 12:41:54

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#213 2004-10-30 13:07:52

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#214 2004-10-30 13:15:50

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#215 2004-10-30 13:53:52

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#216 2004-10-30 14:03:03

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#217 2004-10-30 14:46:07

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#218 2004-10-30 15:02:24

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#219 2004-10-30 15:18:18

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#220 2004-10-30 15:36:58

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#221 2004-10-30 16:05:32

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#222 2004-10-30 16:40:51

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#223 2004-10-30 16:53:23

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#224 2004-10-30 18:11:02

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#225 2004-10-30 18:39:32

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

Board footer