Slashdot Mirror

You can relax, there is no genocide occurring in Israel, it was foiled despite the intent.

Azzam's Genocidal Threat

An October 11, 1947 report on the pan-Arab summit in the Lebanese town of Aley,[9] by Akhbar al-Yom's editor Mustafa Amin, contained an interview he held with Arab League secretary-general Azzam. Titled, "A War of Extermination," the interview read as follows (translated by Efraim Karsh; all ellipses are in the original text):

Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha spoke to me about the horrific war that was in the offing saying:

"I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre[10] or the Crusader wars. I believe that the number of volunteers from outside Palestine will be larger than Palestine's Arab population, for I know that volunteers will be arriving to us from [as far as] India, Afghanistan, and China to win the honor of martyrdom for the sake of Palestine You might be surprised to learn that hundreds of Englishmen expressed their wish to volunteer in the Arab armies to fight the Jews.

"This war will be distinguished by three serious matters. First—faith: as each fighter deems his death on behalf of Palestine as the shortest road to paradise; second, [the war] will be an opportunity for vast plunder. Third, it will be impossible to contain the zealous volunteers arriving from all corners of the world to avenge the martyrdom of the Palestine Arabs, and viewing the war as dignifying every Arab and every Muslim throughout the world

"The Arab is superior to the Jew in that he accepts defeat with a smile: Should the Jews defeat us in the first battle, we will defeat them in the second or the third battle or the final one whereas one defeat will shatter the Jew's morale! Most desert Arabians take pleasure in fighting. I recall being tasked with mediating a truce in a desert war (in which I participated) that lasted for nine monthsWhile en route to sign the truce, I was approached by some of my comrades in arms who told me: 'Shame on you! You are a man of the people, so how could you wish to end the war How can we live without war?' This is because war gives the Bedouin a sense of happiness, bliss, and security that peace does not provide!

Or are you referring to the specious claim that there is some "genocide" of the Palestinian Arabs?

The Palestinian ‘Genocide’ Lie

Here’s the difference between us,” Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained on Fox News Sunday. “We’re using missile defense to protect our civilians, and they’re using their civilians to protect their missiles.” It’s a classic talking point. It’s also objectively true, and that truth is very frustrating for Israel’s critics. . . . .

If the Israelis are, or have ever been, interested in genocide, they are utterly incompetent at it. As slanders go, it’s almost funny, like the old paranoid delusion that George W. Bush was simultaneously an idiot and a criminal mastermind. On the one hand, the Israeli military is supposed to be ruthlessly competent and determined to wipe out the Palestinians. On the other, the Palestinian population has grown more than 100 percent since 1970. The population in the Gaza Strip has grown nearly threefold since 1990. The Palestinians themselves expect the population to double over the next two decades. “Genocide” is a loaded political term, but under any remotely reasonable definition, shouldn’t those numbers be going the other way? It’s just a hunch, but if the Israelis

The current Israelis are from Eurpoe, and simple thieves and murderers. I'm in no way anti-Semitic, I'm anti asshole. It's the normal typical wolf cry of a thouroughly discredited bunch of muderous theiving liars to make that claim.

You're "anti asshole"? How do you live with yourself? Well, at least we have it on your authority that you are, "in no way anti-Semitic." @@
.
Israeli Jews, by Region of Origin

2003
14% Asia
16% Africa
15% Europe
  4% Americas
22% Former USSR
29% Israel (Native)
Total Population 5,165,400

Operation Solomon - one of several rescues .....

Ethiopian Jews and Israelis Exult as Airlift Is Completed

Israel fell into joyous celebration tonight as the Government announced the successful conclusion of an emergency airlift of 14,500 Ethiopian Jews, nearly the entire Jewish population, in just under 36 hours.

At the airport this morning, it was difficult to tell who was more joyful -- the barefoot Ethiopians who cheered, ululated and bent down to kiss the tarmac as they stepped off the planes, or the Israelis who watched them aglow, marveling at this powerful image showing that their state still holds appeal, even with all its problems.

"We've stood up to our obligation and completed the operation bringing all the Jews," Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declared tonight. "It gives us a feeling of strength."

Israelis were no less wondrous at the operational accomplishment of ferrying so many people more than 1,500 miles in 40 flights over so short a time. The air force said 35 civilian and military airplanes, including one Ethiopian airliner, had been used in the operation.

---------------

Why Jews Fled the Arab Countries

COORDINATING A PROGRAM OF EXPULSION

In a key address before the Political Committee of the U.N. General Assembly on November 14, 1947, just five days before that body voted on the partition plan for Palestine, Heykal Pasha, an Egyptian delegate, made the following key statement in connection with that plan:

The United Nations . . . should not lose sight of the fact that the proposed solution might endanger a million Jews living in the Moslem countries. Partition of Palestine might create in those countries an anti-Semitism even more difficult to root out than the anti-Semitism which the Allies were trying to eradicate in Germany. . . If the United Nations decides to partition Palestine, it might be responsible for the massacre of a large number of Jews.

Heykal Pasha then elaborated on his threat:

A million Jews live in peace in Egypt [and other Muslim countries] and enjoy all rights of citizenship. They have no desire to emigrate to Palestine. However, if a Jewish State were established, nobody could prevent disorders. Riots would break out in Palestine, would spread through all the Arab states and might lead to a war between two races.1

Heykal Pasha's thinly veiled threats of "grave disorders," "massacre," "riots," and "war between two races" did not at the time go unnoticed by Jews;2 for them, it had the same ring as the proposition made six years earlier by the Palestinian leader Hajj Amin al-Husayni to Hitler of a "final solution" for the Jews of Arab countries, including Palestine. ... "3 . . . more

The current Israelis are from Eurpoe, and simple thieves and murderers. I'm in no way anti-Semitic, I'm anti asshole. It's the normal typical wolf cry of a thouroughly discredited bunch of muderous theiving liars to make that claim.

You're "anti asshole"? How do you live with yourself? Well, at least we have it on your authority that you are, "in no way anti-Semitic." @@
.
Israeli Jews, by Region of Origin

2003
14% Asia
16% Africa
15% Europe
  4% Americas
22% Former USSR
29% Israel (Native)
Total Population 5,165,400

Operation Solomon - one of several rescues .....

Ethiopian Jews and Israelis Exult as Airlift Is Completed

Israel fell into joyous celebration tonight as the Government announced the successful conclusion of an emergency airlift of 14,500 Ethiopian Jews, nearly the entire Jewish population, in just under 36 hours.

At the airport this morning, it was difficult to tell who was more joyful -- the barefoot Ethiopians who cheered, ululated and bent down to kiss the tarmac as they stepped off the planes, or the Israelis who watched them aglow, marveling at this powerful image showing that their state still holds appeal, even with all its problems.

"We've stood up to our obligation and completed the operation bringing all the Jews," Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declared tonight. "It gives us a feeling of strength."

Israelis were no less wondrous at the operational accomplishment of ferrying so many people more than 1,500 miles in 40 flights over so short a time. The air force said 35 civilian and military airplanes, including one Ethiopian airliner, had been used in the operation.

---------------

Why Jews Fled the Arab Countries

COORDINATING A PROGRAM OF EXPULSION

In a key address before the Political Committee of the U.N. General Assembly on November 14, 1947, just five days before that body voted on the partition plan for Palestine, Heykal Pasha, an Egyptian delegate, made the following key statement in connection with that plan:

The United Nations . . . should not lose sight of the fact that the proposed solution might endanger a million Jews living in the Moslem countries. Partition of Palestine might create in those countries an anti-Semitism even more difficult to root out than the anti-Semitism which the Allies were trying to eradicate in Germany. . . If the United Nations decides to partition Palestine, it might be responsible for the massacre of a large number of Jews.

Heykal Pasha then elaborated on his threat:

A million Jews live in peace in Egypt [and other Muslim countries] and enjoy all rights of citizenship. They have no desire to emigrate to Palestine. However, if a Jewish State were established, nobody could prevent disorders. Riots would break out in Palestine, would spread through all the Arab states and might lead to a war between two races.1

Heykal Pasha's thinly veiled threats of "grave disorders," "massacre," "riots," and "war between two races" did not at the time go unnoticed by Jews;2 for them, it had the same ring as the proposition made six years earlier by the Palestinian leader Hajj Amin al-Husayni to Hitler of a "final solution" for the Jews of Arab countries, including Palestine. ... "3 . . . more

Which is precisely why Iran getting nuclear weapons would be a good thing. It would deter Israel from its constant aggression and would bring some semblance of stability to the Middle East since neither would want to do anything stupid to tick the other off.

Excuse me, but that is a load of libelous crap. Israel and Iran were allies before the Islamic revolution. It was the Islamic revolutionary government of Iran that declared Israel to be their mortal enemy, that they were at war, and proceeded to back terrorism and war against Israel. Israel did nothing to deserve that. The Iranian leadership continues to make thinly veiled genocidal threats against Israel for which the Secretary General of the UN has rebuked them. Their attempt to get nuclear weapons* has only made the situation more ominous. This "constant aggression" by Israel you refer to is at most Israel trying to defend itself before yet another genocide is imposed on its people. The Germans attempted genocide and nearly accomplished it, the Arabs intended it (see below), and the Iranian leadership aspires to it. Now they want nuclear weapons and you think it is a good thing if they get them? It isn't.

War of Extermination

An October 11, 1947 report on the pan-Arab summit in the Lebanese town of Aley,[9] by Akhbar al-Yom's editor Mustafa Amin, contained an interview he held with Arab League secretary-general Azzam. Titled, "A War of Extermination," the interview read as follows (translated by Efraim Karsh; all ellipses are in the original text):

Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha spoke to me about the horrific war that was in the offing saying:

        "I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre[10] or the Crusader wars. I believe that the number of volunteers from outside Palestine will be larger than Palestine's Arab population, for I know that volunteers will be arriving to us from [as far as] India, Afghanistan, and China to win the honor of martyrdom for the sake of Palestine You might be surprised to learn that hundreds of Englishmen expressed their wish to volunteer in the Arab armies to fight the Jews.

* Yes, they did have an active nuclear weapons program. Their plans for a nuclear warhead to fit on their missiles was found. At best that program is on hold.

Quite a few of the problems in the Middle East today can be traced back to actions taken by the Arabs themselves. It was Arab leaders that told the Arabs in Palestine to flee so that they wouldn't get in the way of the great massacre of Jews that they planned. Unfortunately for them the Jews had other plans and the massacre never happened as planned, and many of the Arabs that fled never returned. You are also mistaken if you believe that there wasn't a continuous Jewish presence within the confines of the area that formed the Kingdom if Israel that the Romans occupied.

You also misunderstand the coup in Iran. The actual coup was Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh dissolving parliament, faking an election, ruling by decree, and rejecting the usual control of a head of government (Prime Minister) by the head of state (president/king/etc.) which in the case of Iran was the Shah. The counter-coup returned the Shah to power. Mark that - the Shah was in power both before and after the counter-coup which restored the Shah to power.

You also have things wrong about Iraq. If the US had stayed in Iraq, even if in reduced numbers, it is very unlikely that the so-called "Islamic State" would have been able to threaten the Iraqi government's control. As to Bin Laden, more troops in Afghanistan wouldn't have found him since he was hiding in a Pakistani city near the national military college.

According to history, and the people involved.

Time Now for a Declaration of Mideast Peace; Doomed Arab Refugees

In ''Semites and Anti-Semites'' (New York, 1986), Bernard W. Lewis quotes (page 270) from the memoirs of Khalid al-Azm, Prime Minister of Syria in 1948-49, listing the factors that led to Israel's success:

''Fifth: the summons of the Arab governments to the population of Palestine to leave the country and take refuge in the neighboring Arab countries . . . this collective flight served the Jews and strengthened their position without effort. . . . Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes when we ourselves were the ones who induced them to leave them. . . . We doomed a million Arab refugees, by calling on them and insisting that they abandon their land, their homes, their work and their occupations, and we made them unemployed and homeless.''

The Arabs had considerable enthusiasm for mass slaughter of Jews.

Azzam's Genocidal Threat

An October 11, 1947 report on the pan-Arab summit in the Lebanese town of Aley,[9] by Akhbar al-Yom's editor Mustafa Amin, contained an interview he held with Arab League secretary-general Azzam. Titled, "A War of Extermination," the interview read as follows (translated by Efraim Karsh; all ellipses are in the original text):

Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha spoke to me about the horrific war that was in the offing saying:

"I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre[10] or the Crusader wars. I believe that the number of volunteers from outside Palestine will be larger than Palestine's Arab population, for I know that volunteers will be arriving to us from [as far as] India, Afghanistan, and China to win the honor of martyrdom for the sake of Palestine You might be surprised to learn that hundreds of Englishmen expressed their wish to volunteer in the Arab armies to fight the Jews.

"This war will be distinguished by three serious matters. First—faith: as each fighter deems his death on behalf of Palestine as the shortest road to paradise; second, [the war] will be an opportunity for vast plunder. Third, it will be impossible to contain the zealous volunteers arriving from all corners of the world to avenge the martyrdom of the Palestine Arabs, and viewing the war as dignifying every Arab and every Muslim throughout the world

Did you take notice that I was quoting actual sources there? It isn't just my "opinion."

...then some theories about German itself falling out of favor. The US leads the world in research spending, while Germany is fourth. No language conspiracy theories needed to explain this. Also, means we better continue outspending China and Russia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

This is a similar reason as to why the Islamic world fell behind, after having such an early lead in science and math. They simply spent less on research than the other nations around them.

http://www.meforum.org/306/why...

Ignoring some fact there, aren't ya Sparky? BTW they have a name for the kind of fallacy you're trying to pull, its called Tu quoque, also known as the "You lynch negroes" fallacy for the fact that it was used often by Stalin's supporters to cover over his atrocities...nice company you keep.

As for what you are selectively ignoring is the fact that Israel has attempted to broker a cease fire with hamas several times only to be met with more rockets filled with nails aimed at civilian centers, the last of which was last week BTW, it lasted all of 42 minutes before iron Dome was activated by incoming shells. I won't even bother with your hypothetical Christians, because I can find a whacko or two that calls for the killing of any race and that is frankly a fucking joke compared to the murder of rape victims and cutting the hands off alleged thieves, but lets go straight to your "majority of Muslims are peaceful...shall we? Boy I'm betting after this you'll wish you can kept your mouth shut because the facts? NOT on your side. Try reading a little bit before you speak because it will frankly make you look less foolish.

The second link BTW even explains WHY Muslims are violent, its because unlike the Torah and the Bible it was written extremely vague, so that its easy for Mullahs to continue the violence, quote" God commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusitesâ"all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At no time did God give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by extension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill gentiles. On the other hand, though Islam's original enemies were, like Judaism's, historical (e.g., Christian Byzantines and Zoroastrian Persians), the Qur'an rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book "until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled"and to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them."

But of course you will likely ignore the facts because it isn't from a site like HuffyPo that fits your preconceived (most likely ultra left) biases, just like how the ultra left was making for some hilarious entertainment by the way they kept tapdancing trying to continue to support their theory that Brown was "executed by teh man" despite ever mounting evidence he was a violent criminal. Just like them I'm sure you'll ignore the evidence and continue to pretend that Islam and the other religions are equal, which is as delusional as saying crime is the same in poor and rich neighborhoods because once, five years ago, a rich woman killed her cheating husband on the nice side of town! Shock!

Meanwhile anybody with more than 2 functioning braincells will be able to see through your bullshit by simply turning on any news outlet from any place on the planet and watch the beheading of the week, maybe enjoy a few stonings...BTW since the religions are equally violent, perhaps you can show me the Christian equivalent of Farfur? Because I have seen a LOT of western kid's shows over the years and I don't remember EVER seeing one teaching lovely songs like how I should get into heaven with the heads of Jews and Muslims on my belt...perhaps you can provide a link to that show?

During WW2, multiple nations and groups were savagely "victimized" (that's an understatement but we'll go with that as an euphemism): Jews, Gypsies, Poles, homosexuals, etc. It is clear that the most affected were the Jews.
WW2 ended, the deeds were documented, everybody eventually moved on. Everybody but Jews.

Two years after the end of World War 2 in Europe the Jewish people were again threatened with genocide.

Azzam's Genocidal Threat

Of the countless threats of violence, made by Arab and Palestinian leaders in the run up to and in the wake of the November 29, 1947 partition resolution, none has resonated more widely than the warning by Abdul Rahman Azzam, the Arab League's first secretary-general, that the establishment of a Jewish state would lead to "a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacre and the Crusades."

That threat hasn't really gone away, and if anything it is expanding.

UN chief denounces Iran to its face over calls to destroy Israel

So my advice to Jews and anyone else who acts like that: stop blowing things out of proportion!

Perhaps you can forgive their concern about being the victim of real genocide given that they have both experienced it within living memory, and have been realistically threatened with it repeatedly since then.

That mandate is false and debunked since two weeks already, it never existed.
Hint: genital mutilation is not an islamic thing but an africans natural religions/tribal thing.

Well, that's a relief. After all, if you can't trust Islamist extremists, who can you trust? Now we only need to worry about crucifixtions, massacres, and depopulating the country of Christians under threat of death.

Is Female Genital Mutilation an Islamic Problem?

... at the village level, those who commit the practice believe it to be religiously mandated. Religion is not only theology but also practice. And the practice is widespread throughout the Middle East. Many diplomats, international organization workers, and Arabists argue that the problem is localized to North Africa or sub-Saharan Africa,[4] but they are wrong. The problem is pervasive throughout the Levant, the Fertile Crescent, and the Arabian Peninsula, and among many immigrants to the West from these countries. Silence on the issue is less reflective of the absence of the problem than insufficient freedom for feminists and independent civil society to raise the issue.

Iraq crisis: End 'very near' for Christianity after Isis takeover, says Bishop

For those Christians who did not comply with the decree by 19 July, Isis warned that "there is nothing to give them but the sword.” Many have since fled their homes and Rev. Andrew-White told BBC Radio 4 Today desperate Christians were trapped in the desert or on the streets with nowhere to go.

"Things are so desperate, our people are disappearing," he said. "We have had people massacred, their heads chopped off.

-----

I don't know many 'arabs' got killed in this YEAR in Syria, but I know the death toll in Palestine was over 1000 in the last two weeks, perhaps you can enlighten us how that will scale for the rest of the year?

Most likely until Hamas decides to declare another phyrric "victory" and stop firing rockets. And lets not overlook the difference: Hamas deliberately targets civilians, the Israelis don't.

Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims.

So, yes there are some evil Hindu and Sikhs, but it is not entrenched as a specific commandment in the religion like in Islam

No. But it does equate to a double standard. A different standard is applied to Israel than to everyone else. What's worse is that the other Arab countries are treating their own people like shit.

Despite your flamebait moderation, you are essentially correct.

As far as a double standard against Israel, the UN is a great example of that.

From: Middle East Quarterly - Winter 2004
The Case for Israel

... The Case For Israel ... Dershowitz points out that a full 27 percent of the U.N.'s country-specific resolutions critical of a state have been directed against it. In contrast, no resolution in the history of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights has condemned Syria, China, Saudi Arabia, or Zimbabwe, all of which are self-evidently far worse violators of human rights. Israel, asserts Dershowitz, has a "far better record on human rights than any other nation in the Middle East and most other nations in the world." As evidence, he notes that "Israel is the only nation in the world whose judiciary actively enforces the rule of law against its military during wartime" and that "Israel has killed fewer innocent civilians in proportion to the number of its own civilians killed than any country engaged in a comparable war."... The Case for Israel

Fighting the Lies Harder Than Fighting the War - Israel does not "deliberately" target civilians.

Regarding the mistreatment of Arabs by Arabs, two interesting cases that immediately come to mind:

Black September - In Context
Hama 1982 – The Syrian massacre you never heard about (Not for those of weak constitution. The SS had nothing on the Syrian Army.)

For some reason you never really hear about those. What makes it doubly interesting is that Black September was specifically against the Palestinian Arabs.

No. But it does equate to a double standard. A different standard is applied to Israel than to everyone else. What's worse is that the other Arab countries are treating their own people like shit.

Despite your flamebait moderation, you are essentially correct.

As far as a double standard against Israel, the UN is a great example of that.

From: Middle East Quarterly - Winter 2004
The Case for Israel

... The Case For Israel ... Dershowitz points out that a full 27 percent of the U.N.'s country-specific resolutions critical of a state have been directed against it. In contrast, no resolution in the history of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights has condemned Syria, China, Saudi Arabia, or Zimbabwe, all of which are self-evidently far worse violators of human rights. Israel, asserts Dershowitz, has a "far better record on human rights than any other nation in the Middle East and most other nations in the world." As evidence, he notes that "Israel is the only nation in the world whose judiciary actively enforces the rule of law against its military during wartime" and that "Israel has killed fewer innocent civilians in proportion to the number of its own civilians killed than any country engaged in a comparable war."... The Case for Israel

Fighting the Lies Harder Than Fighting the War - Israel does not "deliberately" target civilians.

Regarding the mistreatment of Arabs by Arabs, two interesting cases that immediately come to mind:

Black September - In Context
Hama 1982 – The Syrian massacre you never heard about (Not for those of weak constitution. The SS had nothing on the Syrian Army.)

For some reason you never really hear about those. What makes it doubly interesting is that Black September was specifically against the Palestinian Arabs.

>None of this can be justified in any way by the alleged rhetoric of some ill-defined "arabs" saying something that - if you are understood correctly - would amount to: "If you leave your property that you own, and your orchards and shops, then after you are refugees, you might be able to squat on the couple of Kibbutz those Poles stole from your parents, instead!"

You are on the wrong side of history, and pretty much all of the nonsense you refer to is coming from you. The Arabs in Palestine were following the orders of the Arab leaders to evacuate. They had been making it clear that a genocide was coming, and who wants get pulled into a genocide? If the Israelis hadn't been able to defend themselves and stop the many attacking Arab armies, it is very possible that any Arabs that had remained behind and ignored the commands to leave would have been killed along with the Jews.

Time Now for a Declaration of Mideast Peace; Doomed Arab Refugees

In ''Semites and Anti-Semites'' (New York, 1986), Bernard W. Lewis quotes (page 270) from the memoirs of Khalid al-Azm, Prime Minister of Syria in 1948-49, listing the factors that led to Israel's success:

''Fifth: the summons of the Arab governments to the population of Palestine to leave the country and take refuge in the neighboring Arab countries . . . this collective flight served the Jews and strengthened their position without effort. . . . Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes when we ourselves were the ones who induced them to leave them. . . . We doomed a million Arab refugees, by calling on them and insisting that they abandon their land, their homes, their work and their occupations, and we made them unemployed and homeless.''

Azzam's Genocidal Threat

An October 11, 1947 report on the pan-Arab summit in the Lebanese town of Aley,[9] by Akhbar al-Yom's editor Mustafa Amin, contained an interview he held with Arab League secretary-general Azzam. Titled, "A War of Extermination," the interview read as follows (translated by Efraim Karsh; all ellipses are in the original text):

Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha spoke to me about the horrific war that was in the offing saying:

"I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre[10] or the Crusader wars. I believe that the number of volunteers from outside Palestine will be larger than Palestine's Arab population, for I know that volunteers will be arriving to us from [as far as] India, Afghanistan, and China to win the honor of martyrdom for the sake of Palestine You might be surprised to learn that hundreds of Englishmen expressed their wish to volunteer in the Arab armies to fight the Jews.

"This war will be distinguished by three serious matters. First—faith: as each fighter deems his death on behalf of Palestine as the shortest road to paradise; second, [the war] will be an opportunity for vast plunder. Third, it will be impossible to contain the zealous volunteers arriving from all corners of the world to avenge the martyrdom of the Palestine Arabs, and viewing the war as dignifying every Arab and every Muslim throughout the world

"The Arab is superior to the Jew in that he accepts defeat with a smile: Should the Jews defeat us in the first battle, we will defeat them in the second or the third battle or the final one whereas one defeat will shatter the Jew's morale! Most desert Arabians take pleasure in fighting. I recall being tasked with mediating a truce in a desert war (in which I participated) that lasted for nine monthsWhile en route to sign the truce, I was approached

Its the UN, have they EVER been anything but worthless, expensive, and ineffective?

Depends on your point of view. You could view it as a "convenient" place to bash Israel, or an institution with an enormous time wasting obsession with Israel.

From: Middle East Quarterly - Winter 2004
The Case for Israel

... The Case For Israel ... Dershowitz points out that a full 27 percent of the U.N.'s country-specific resolutions critical of a state have been directed against it. In contrast, no resolution in the history of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights has condemned Syria, China, Saudi Arabia, or Zimbabwe, all of which are self-evidently far worse violators of human rights. Israel, asserts Dershowitz, has a "far better record on human rights than any other nation in the Middle East and most other nations in the world." As evidence, he notes that "Israel is the only nation in the world whose judiciary actively enforces the rule of law against its military during wartime" and that "Israel has killed fewer innocent civilians in proportion to the number of its own civilians killed than any country engaged in a comparable war."... The Case for Israel

I think that anti-Israel resolutions as a percentage of the cumulative total number of resolutions has actually fallen quite a bit over the last couple of decades. It might in fact be major progress getting it down to only 27%. On the other hand, what would the UN be if it didn't have Israel to bash? Would the 57 OIC - Organisation of Islamic Cooperation members still bother to show up?

Somehow it seems oddly important for its size: Israel is only 1/6 of 1% of the landmass of the Middle East

I can see how the UN might appear to be largely worthless.

Its the UN, have they EVER been anything but worthless, expensive, and ineffective?

Depends on your point of view. You could view it as a "convenient" place to bash Israel, or an institution with an enormous time wasting obsession with Israel.

From: Middle East Quarterly - Winter 2004
The Case for Israel

... The Case For Israel ... Dershowitz points out that a full 27 percent of the U.N.'s country-specific resolutions critical of a state have been directed against it. In contrast, no resolution in the history of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights has condemned Syria, China, Saudi Arabia, or Zimbabwe, all of which are self-evidently far worse violators of human rights. Israel, asserts Dershowitz, has a "far better record on human rights than any other nation in the Middle East and most other nations in the world." As evidence, he notes that "Israel is the only nation in the world whose judiciary actively enforces the rule of law against its military during wartime" and that "Israel has killed fewer innocent civilians in proportion to the number of its own civilians killed than any country engaged in a comparable war."... The Case for Israel

I think that anti-Israel resolutions as a percentage of the cumulative total number of resolutions has actually fallen quite a bit over the last couple of decades. It might in fact be major progress getting it down to only 27%. On the other hand, what would the UN be if it didn't have Israel to bash? Would the 57 OIC - Organisation of Islamic Cooperation members still bother to show up?

Somehow it seems oddly important for its size: Israel is only 1/6 of 1% of the landmass of the Middle East

I can see how the UN might appear to be largely worthless.

http://www.meforum.org/3147/al-jazeera

http://www.meforum.org/3147/al-jazeera

hudna reading:

http://www.meforum.org/1925/tactical-hudna-and-islamist-intolerance

What does this mean for the present hudna, or any that is likely to follow it? The jihad is waged against the entire world, but Israel has become its focus. Since the jihad is deemed unending, and since Israel is going to stay, there will be no end to the religiously-inspired struggle. The Hamas covenant, for example, is unequivocal: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through jihad. Initiatives, proposals, and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors

Agreed. There are large groups in the UK who want to suppress free speech, down to the point where it would be illegal to say that most "honour killings" are carried out by Muslims. They claim that the truth and news reporting is "offensive", if they are allowed to have people arrested for causing offence (as would happen in Muslim countries) then they will be one step closer to bringing in sharia by the back door.

how long? before Iran retaliates and the whole thing escalates into WW3

You mean like seeking regional hegemony, running terrorist campaigns worldwide, threaten to close the Strait of Hormuz, threaten Europe's energy supplies to freeze people, use suicide boats to attack gulf shipping, arm Hezbollah to attack Israel with and ultimate goal of destroying Israel, attack US troops, send suicide bombers to Europe and America, aid America's enemies, threaten attacks on nearby countries and cities with missiles, kill diplomats, subvert nearby countries, unleash the suicide bomb brigades (serious), and the ninjas (you decide), perhaps adding some WMDs to the attacks?

I doubt that many people will buy it.

how long? before Iran retaliates and the whole thing escalates into WW3

You mean like seeking regional hegemony, running terrorist campaigns worldwide, threaten to close the Strait of Hormuz, threaten Europe's energy supplies to freeze people, use suicide boats to attack gulf shipping, arm Hezbollah to attack Israel with and ultimate goal of destroying Israel, attack US troops, send suicide bombers to Europe and America, aid America's enemies, threaten attacks on nearby countries and cities with missiles, kill diplomats, subvert nearby countries, unleash the suicide bomb brigades (serious), and the ninjas (you decide), perhaps adding some WMDs to the attacks?

I doubt that many people will buy it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaswinder_Kaur_Sidhu

Not Hindu, but Sikh.

This article gives more examples:

http://www.chakranews.com/honour-killings-in-canada-an-undeniable-reality/2035

Another report points out that 16% of honor killings in North America are not by Muslims:

http://www.meforum.org/2646/worldwide-trends-in-honor-killings

I couldn't quickly find cases of Christian immigrants to the US/Canada, but it's much easier to find Christian honor killings in their home countries in the Middle East. In Jordan, for example, on a per capita basis, honor killings are more common among Christians than among Muslims.

If there are such cases, then the religion of the perpetrators would be relevant in those cases as well.

I'd love to hear the logic behind that, given that the correlation with geography is much greater than that with religion. Parts of the Muslim/Chrisitian world do not have honor killings, and there isn't anything in their texts in support of it.

I believe in freedom of speech. If some individual wants to stand up in public and say that he supports depriving every citizen of free speech and due process of law to help save the profitability of a 90 year old mouse cartoon - then I will defend his right to do that.

and then that individual will find/brainwash others like him, increase in numbers, become an economical/political power, and then really shut you up. democratically. all that will end up happening will be the irony of letting democracy be destroyed 'through democracy'.

that is what most of the islamist groups that are dubbed as 'mild islamist' by the west are doing by the way.

http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition

http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition

still a very mild description of what goes on.

its because you people are so naive, unable to believe that such organized agendas can exists that these agendas actually do exist.

And yet 91% of the world's honor killings are done by Muslims but not their Infidel neighbors. That includes people on all income levels, and is by no means restricted to the poor amongst them

Modern Islam is not exactly a hotbed for scientific exploration and discovery, the reverse is true. This has not always been the case however as you'll probably know. While Europe was ravaged by norsemen and later held by the leash by restrictive and vindictive Christian churches in the early middle ages, the Islamic world was a place where scientific curiosity was not only allowed but even encouraged. Standing on the shoulders of earlier scientists from eg. Greece, India and China, scholars in the Islamic world produced many works which are still held in high regard. This was the Islamic golden age.

And then, something happened. Religious intolerance was probably one of the factors in the decline of scientific discovery in the Islamic world, led by theologists like Abu Hamid Muhammad al-Ghazali (1059-1111) who used the tools of the philosophers to undermine philosophical and scientific inquiry.

Of course these developments happened in a span of centuries, not decades. It would not surprise me though if the decline of scientific learning in the Islamic world started just like it seems to happen in the United States of America, by religious zealots trying to undermine and discredit science and scientists and subverting science teaching to their own purposes.

Where is there any connection between the Shia Iranian government, and the sternly (as in "we hate the Shia") sunni terrorists of Al-Qaeda?

I read about it in a book last year the name of which name escapes me, but a simple Google search yields the following results:

http://www.meforum.org/670/irans-link-to-al-qaeda-the-9-11-commissions
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,664967,00.html

It's an the-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend type situation. They may be on opposite sides of the Islamic conflict but that doesn't mean they don't have similar end goals in mind.

Is this another of those "WMDs in Iraq" things you people pull to justify the failed attempts at neo-colonialism?

Ahem. Fuck you. Call it what you will, America will put the interests of its people first and foremost in deciding on courses of action when it comes to judgment of foreign nations based on credible intelligence. I stand by former President Bush's actions 100%, and think that the invasion was justified even without the consideration of WMDs. America is the leader of the free world and has a moral responsibility to take care of unstable, evil dictators like Saddam Hussein. Deal with it.

Below is a cut-n-paste from the following website. The author seems to make the case that terrorists are *not* covered by the Geneva Convention. In what way do you refute?

Some pundits and journalists condemn U.S. policy as a flagrant violation of the Geneva Conventions. Writing in the Guardian, a left-wing British broadsheet, professor of human rights law Conor Gearty proclaimed U.S. policy to be "cruel, unnecessary and as dangerous now as it was when first introduced."[22] But Gearty's criticism is more emotional than substantive. Nothing in the conventions requires that all captives receive prisoner of war status. In fact, article four of the Third Geneva Convention stipulates a number of requirements that must be met before a captive irregular combatant can qualify as a prisoner of war.

The drafters of the 1949 Geneva Conventions sought to base the treaty on past precedent. While the 1907 Hague regulations stipulated that "the laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps," those same regulations also presented a four-part test to determine eligibility of those irregular forces for lawful combatant status.[23] In order to be recognized as legitimate combatants, the Hague regulations required irregular units to "be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; to have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance; to carry arms openly; and to conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war."[24]

The drafters of the Third Geneva Convention adopted this four-part test as part of the criteria to determine eligibility for POW status. The delegates drafting the convention made quite clear in their debates that they did not want to confer automatic POW status on irregular forces. After much negotiation, a special committee of the conference resolved this question by crafting article 4(A) so as to differentiate between regular armed forces, constituent volunteer corps, and militias on one hand, from irregular resistance movements, on the other. The drafters agreed to apply the Hague four-part test to the latter.[25]

Terrorists groups ranging from separatists like the PKK in Turkey, Chechen rebels in Russia, or the Pakistani-backed Harakat ul-Mujahideen in India; to Palestinian groups like Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, to the numerous cells that comprise the Al-Qaeda network all fail the four-part test. Hijacking civilian airliners and flying them into office buildings is not "in accordance with the laws and customs of war," nor is using human bombs to blow up buses, nor is lining up and executing school teachers. On these grounds, as well, the Taliban also forfeited claim to POW status. While they did carry arms openly, they neither observed the international humanitarian law, nor wore any recognizable sign to distinguish themselves from civilians.[26]

http://www.meforum.org/651/does-human-rights-law-apply-to-terrorists

Citation needed. I'll assume you're referring to Putin (surely not Yeltsin or Gorbachev). But 'Russian policy toward the Middle East is often disjointed and has little in the way of military or economic strength to support it' citation here.

This line of thinking is completely flawed. The "mullahs" may be religious but they are certainly not trigger happy fanatics. Iranian leaders are concerned about maintaining their own power. For example their support for hezbollah is a geo-political calculation serving as an insurance against hostile powers and certainly not driven by extremist Islamic ideologies. A good article about the 2006 war that gives an insight into iranian intentions is here

Iran in fact has a (relatively) fair degree of political freedom. Iranian leaders (in spite of ahmedijenad's rants about israel) are primarily concerned about their own power and survival and that is more rational and markedly different from the virulent islamic ideologies found in wahhabism and sunni/saudi world.

Your argument would fit the taliban but not Iran.

I love it. The "agenda" is destruction of terrorists, which is exactly what has been happening. Yet idiots such as yourself gripe about ONE GUY who no one even knows if he's alive or dead anyway, and who is not in any position to do anything about it.

(Yet your messiah, B. Hussein Obama, insists that all the "bad guys" from the 1993 WTC attacks are "incapacitated." Yeah, right).

Which trick?

Really, Pappe just twists around facts to draw wild-ass conclusions. When that isn't enough, he really does just rely on complete fiction to further his agenda.

I'm just not sure what it would take for you to realize Pappe is nothing short of a complete and utter crackpot--unless you are on an agenda, yourself. So tell me, are you?

The document describes things like increased GNP, decreased infant mortality, increased investment, and other increases in standard of living from 1967 until 1984.

In 1987 everything changed. That was the beginning of the first intifada. The wiki article on the 1st intifada tells a story of israeli brutality that does not match with the UN document on living conditions in the occupied terrotories.

What was the real root cause of the intifada? Could part of it be the corruption of the leaders of the PLO, like Arafat, who was filling swiss bank accounts with aid money that were supposed to go to the people he was supposed to represent?

I agree with above posters that the cycle of retaliation has to end. The only way it can end is with education to end the mutual hatred.

As well, there are many jews and non-jews inside and outside israel who are critical of israeli policy. Being critical certainly doesn't make one an anti-semite. But the tone of some of the posts in this discussion belie an undercurrent of prejudice.

FYI, Juan Cole is not a "reliable source" here. He may be an academic, but he is, in fact, a major shill for Muslim propagandists and frequently makes anti-Semitic remarks. http://www.meforum.org/article/789 SO I would take anything this guy says with a pinch of salt.

This may come as a great shock to you, but "fox news" isn't a magic phrase that negates anything you choose not to believe. The Carter Center is a tax-exempt organization which has to file annual reports. According to the Carter Center's filings, he's collected millions from the Saudi royals, for a start.

The sad fact is, Jimmah's a Jew-hating redneck. Pity, because he was doing so well at pretending to be a civilized human being for many years.

read and learn

-jcr

Quoting Louis Farrakhan or Malcolm X to define Keith Ellison's views is like quoting Richard M. Stallman to define my views -- I've taken actions which support his organization where we have goals in common, but by no means do I support his more radical policies (or believe that they have a prayer of a chance of taking place in the Real World, even with my support of his organization as a whole). As such, you're throwing a bunch of irrelevant BS into this conversation. I don't care what Malcolm X believes; if I'm deciding whether to vote for Keith Ellison, I care what Keith Ellison believes. As for the source you've quoted, its description of the Million Man March as a "hate fest" is sufficient for me to consider it irreparably biased.

FYI the folks "we" (by this i mean the non muslim world) are fighting is islam. islam is not a religion it is a manifestation of fascism. There is no moderate islam since there has been no reformation movement. Religions do not dictate interest rates on loans or have detiled political systems (the caliphate). The iraq war is incredibly succesful in one regard and that is sunnis and shites hate each other even more..

Demonstrably false. The Catholic church traditionally forbid usury (lending with interest, or, later, excessive interest) as a sin; would you claim that Catholicism is not a religion? In any event, what is it that makes interest rates exempt from the scope of a legitimate religion's moral code (while such mundanities as diet are fair game)? It strikes me as an awfully arbitrary distinction. Moderate islamists demonstrably exist. See Azar Nafisi, Bassam Tibi, Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour, and others.

I think this thread is over: I can argue with reasonable people, but the kind of twisted worldview necessary to believe your own claims is alien to me.

Fascists were totalitarians that tried to control how people lived there lives and devalued the individual. Islam -- as taught by Mohammad -- does/did the same. The term "Islamofascist" is rather appropriate when you look at how Mohammad governed.

See http://www.meforum.org/article/713.

I think it will be a long time before we will be able to view these events with any clarity or impartiality. But just to provide a counter point for the discussions here are three articles that site sources that support the claim the contraband weapons did exist and explains what happened to them.

NY Sun article
http://www.nysun.com/article/26514

Middle East Forum
http://www.meforum.org/article/755

Washington Post
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041028-1 22637-6257r.htm

Israel? North Korea comes to mind, but the Resolutions were blocked by china AFAIK

BZZZT. There are no other countries that have UN resolutions passed under the 7th chapter of the UN charter. If you had any clue about the UN, you would know that Chapter 7 resolutions are the only kind that allow member states that are not party to the resolution to enforce with military or economic action.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-02 -un-wmd_x.htm

I see your link, and raise you one:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/: Saddam Husayn so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone. He wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/200 3/david_kay_10022003.html: We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN.

http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Anthropology/pu blications/General_Powell.htm
think YOU are making a fool of yourself by claiming "well known facts" without backing

Without backing, huh? The only thing you have provided is an op-ed that directly contradicts your own claim. You said "Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. And THAT is well known and documented" and then "backed" that up with piece called "Al Qaeda-Iraq Connection Tenuous at Best". Which are you arguing? That there was no connection, or that there was a tenuous connection?

Here are some more sources:
Iraq-al Qaeda link comes in focus
Terrorist behind September 11 strike was trained by Saddam
The Clinton View of Iraq-al Qaeda Ties
Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam
The proof that Saddam worked with bin Laden
US State Department Indictment
Not so long ago, the ties between Iraq and al Qaeda were conventional wisdom. The conventional wisdom was right
Saddam Hussein offered Bin Laden asylum
Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties
UN envoy confirms terrorist meeting
Ansar al-Islam: Back in Iraq

The proof that Saddam worked with bin Laden

Iraq-al Qaeda link comes in focus

Terrorist behind September 11 strike was trained by Saddam

The Clinton View of Iraq-al Qaeda Ties

Has Iraq sponsored terrorism?

Ansar al-Islam: Back in Iraq

Baath party officials smuggled weapons from Afghanistan and delivered them to Ansar al-Islam groups on northern Iraq

Kurdish military seized TNT from Ansar al-Islam that was produced by the Iraqi military

Abu Wa'il was an Ansar al-Islam operative, and he was also an employee of Saddam

Abu Musab az-Zarqawi is an Ansar al-Islam leader, and he received medical treatment from Saddam in Baghdad

After the US invaded Iraq, 8 foreign Ansar al-Islam operatives were taken into custody after a gunfight in northern Iraq. All 8 had valid Iraqi visas, meaning the Iraqi government approved of their presense.

(source, source)

Is that 100% proof that Saddam supported al Qaeda? Of course not, but you are still missing the point. Even if Iraq has nothing to do with al Qaeda, they have supported many other terrorist organisations (like Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, the PKK, the Abu Nidal Organization, and Hamas). We are in a war against terrorism, not only al Qaeda.

And they matter how?

I just got finished reading on MSNewsweek that the US economy is as large as the next 3 added together (Japan, Germany and Britain). Our military budget (4% of our GDP, lowest in any wartime in history) is as large as every UN member country's added together (191 countries). What I see is a majority of the world ruled by nationalist gov's trying to protect THEIR interests who don't let their people express views like we are allowed to here --- with state-owned medias, who don't show us what their citizens really think, only what CSPAN with its anti-american biases filters for the local audiences.

I see Iraqis who fled their homelands actively protesting Saddam, and supporting american liberation of their country.

I see Turkey opressing their Kurdish populations, with a government against the US because they don't want the Iraqi Kurds to have their own nation-state.

I see Arabian & OPEC countries protesting the US because they are about to lose their dominance of the oil market -- Iraqi freedom fighters have already said they will not honor Geman & France's existing contracts for oil exports when Iraq is democratized. Iraq has the worlds's second largest oil reserves, most of which are still untapped. Middle eastern nations live in fear of this reserve coming under US control.

I see Germany's socialist government on shaky ground about to collapse with an almost 11% unemployment rate. Don't forget that in Germany's January elections, the existing anti-american socialist party lost LOTS of electorates. Not to mention that Iraq is a good customer for German weaponry... Germany doesn't want the world to discover that they are arming these tirants.

I see France living in fear of the "National Front" party, consisting of Islams who are persecuted by the French government, like African-Americans were in the US in the 40's and 50's. They will not do anything to anger this sector of population, or Chirac and his socialist party are sure to be kicked out (which if you recall he almost was, two years ago by Le Pen during a run-off)

Then you have Britain... All these stories about Blair being in danger of being removed for supporting Bush. Don't forget that they have a parlimentary system -- the people don't vote for Blair, they vote for the party, and the party appoints Blair. And the labor party hates Blair now, even though 75% of likely voters would support the war if the UN says go.

The united states is experiencing a surge in support rallys, but the television won't show them. The rally in Atlanta yesterday (of several thousand people) was reportedly larger than the one in Washington DC, but the anti-war ralley got the 12 hours of TV time in CSPAN. Today's ralley in Valley Forge PA is expected to be even larger.

Ask yourself, who is really against the united states? the governments (who only wish to protect their personal interests), or the populations themselves who don't have a voice? As long as the anti-conservative media controls what we see, we'll never have the real picture presented to us. Only those that bother to keep themselves know that the citizens of the world NEEDS the US to act, and that these misguided governements need to fall.

all reports indicate they are decades away from producing Nukes

Huh? All reports indicate that they are a few months to a couple of years away from producing nukes.

Sigh. I think it's a good war. But that's based on knowing a hell of a lot more stuff than I can put into a posting.

But just because I'll fail is no excuse not to try:

1. Saddam IS so oppressive that we should go in and liberate the country. I know we're all too damn cynical these days to use words like "liberate" but that's the damn reality. Our grandparents weren't too sophisticated to believe that you can liberate a country, but were too damn "smart".

2. The middle east is a fucking hell hole. Saudi Arabia has 1/4 of all of the world's oil and for them it's fucking free, on tap. But the Saudi princes claim to be descendants of Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab the founder of an Islamist cult that teaches it is the duty of his followers to invade the entire earth, subjugate all infidels and convert by the sword. Guess what the Saudis spend their oil money on? Spreading the good word. That's why oil matters. The Saudis are our enemies, but whenever they raise the price of oil a little our economy completely tanks. We need enough independent sources of oil that we are no longer reliant on our enemies and can put them in their place.

3. In other ways I'll say it again, "the middle east is a fucking hell hole." It's very hard to describe what you'll read if you read Arab newspapers.

It's a constant stream of what, to western eyes, looks like nonsensical hatred and lies about the west, about Americans and about Isralies. Their sense of history is SO screwed, and they really don't consider non-mulsims to be human beings worthy of survival. I hate to bring up the big old German Fuerer again, but he is a hero over there - every now and then you can find an article moaning that it's too bad he didn't get to finish the holocaust.

Anyway the problem is this. Remember Soviet newpapers? They printed nothing but propaganda too, but there's a difference. No one believed Soviet propaganda, not even the folks back in Russia. They were too well educated and Soviet propaganda was dry, it didn't stir up passion.

Arab's are different. They are very poorly educated when they are educated at all (50% illiteracy) and their propaganda is pure passion. The mob wants blood and lots of it.

Despite all the oil, the regular people in the Arab world are very poor, mostly because they're governments are archaic and becase they've rejected everything the rest of the world has learned over the past couple of hundred years - it's absolutely beneath their dignity to learn anything from us non-muslim trash.

But their newspapers have a ready excuse for every failure. It's a conspiracy. They believe that the Jews (and to a lesser but significant extent, the Americans and other westerners) have stolen them blind. It can be funny. When a poorly constructed radio tower in Afganistan blows over in the wind, the authorities say Massad (Israeli intelligence) must have destroyed it. When the date crop in Saudi Arabia doesn't bring good money on the world market, it must be because the Israelis (who's crop is 1/100th the size) must have spitefully undercut their price.

The place is drowning in ignorance, foolishness, oppression, misery and unimaginable violence.

Oh the violence... I'll get to that in a second, but I want to finish my point.

* The people there are living in a closed society. It's not changing from within. They're stuck.

* They're under terrible oppression.

* Because of Militant Islam, the Suadis, Al Qa'eda etc. they're a danger to us. We need to mess with their society so that, in the eyes of 100 million Militant Mulsims and 400 million Militant Muslim sympathizers around the world, modernity, with 3 squares a day, freedom, tolerance, prosparity and peace look better than destroying all infidels for Allah. I know it sounds crazy, but they don't all believe that right now.

We need to shoehorn a good example into the middle east as soon as possible.

I don't know as much about Korea. On thing I keep hearing is that we can't fight on two fronts at once, so Korea gets a temporary pass.

I should write more but I've got to go...

Rocky J. Squirrel

Here's a very old article on why we are attacking Iraq.

The original is no longer available for free on Strategic Forcasting's web site (it costs $120/year to join these days and it's worth it if your rich). So here's a link to a usenet posting of it post

After eight months of searching I've only turned up four sane Arabs. Since I've included all of their web sites this will give you an unrealistic view that of the sanity of Arab society, but these have to go on any list of the best web sites on the Middle east.
Other good sites:
http://www.memri.org/index.html
(best selection of translations from the Arab press)

http://www.mideastweb.org/LessonofIraq.htm
(other articles by Mahamad Mosaad)
http://www.mideastweb.org/arabpeacenow.htm
http://www.mideastweb.org/Arabpeace.htm
http://www.mideastweb.org/nothinghappened.htm
http://www.mideastweb.org/onlythem.htm

http://www.danielpipes.org

http://www.amarji.org/index.htm

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/articles.php3?ty pe=1
(this should be their translations of the arab press)

Tarek Heggy (Egyptian writer)
http://www.heggy.org
turn down your sound card before
going there

Ali Salem (an Egyptian writer and playwrite).
My favorite articles so far are at
http://www.meforum.org/pf.php?id=130 ,
http://sol.spaceports.com/~melinks/site2/ali_salem .html and
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/july-dec0 1/playwright_11-27.html

You can also look up Arab newspapers with english translations on Google Web Directory under newspapers. There's one fake Saudi newspaper to look out for. The editor lives and writes in California if that tells you anything.

You know, like what's described here