Moonbox

I think you're failing to understand WHY militant activity is reduced. It's because Israel takes incredibly harsh preventative measures and retaliates decively. Don't mistake it for peaceful intentions. That's a joke. It's the selection and choice of facts that you deem relevant that I take issue with. The conflict is not an equation and you can't break it down numerically. Your argument is basically: Israeli settlements > Arab killings of Israeli, therefore Israel is in the wrong. There's sooo many more issues to this mess and breaking it down like you've tried to is a joke. The extreme right of Israel doesn't run the country, nor do religious zealots. Palestine IS run by Hamas. Statements like this are echoed across Arabia and Persia. If I absolutely NEEED to I'll look some more up for you. Check your 'facts' again because no formal plan to recognize Israel or lasting peace was ever offered. The closest we've had is Hamas offering hudna, which is a temporary truce, which is no better than a ceasefire. They've been very clear they will NOT recognize Israel's right to exist nor will they consider lasting peace. TEHRAN, Iran — Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh told thousands of Iranians on Friday that his Hamas-led government will never recognize Israel and will continue to fight for the "liberation of Jerusalem." I'm insisting from this podium that these issues won't materialize. We will never recognize the usurper Zionist government and will continue our jihad-like movement until the liberation of Jerusalem," he said. http://ctestp.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20061208/hamas_haniyeh_061208?hub=CP24Entertainment That's just Hamas, only a fraction of what Israel has to deal with. Here's Hezbollah: Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah reiterated on Friday that Palestine belongs to the Palestinian people and not to the Zionist entity, stressing that recognizing Israel’s existence is forbidden and calling on all Arab and Islamic governments and people to adopt the choice of stead fasting in the face of the Israeli enemy. http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=203566 Since Iran finances them, let's see what they have to say: Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map for great justice and this was a very wise statement.....whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/weekinreview/30iran.html?_r=1&ex=1161230400&en=26f07fc5b7543417&ei=5070 Apparently the translation was botched and instead of saying 'wiped off the map' he actually said 'erased from history' but either way he makes his point. Comment on those FACTS please. I've made it pretty clear that I think Israel isn't going to leave territory it's occupied for decades, nor do I think they should. I haven't pretended I don't lean one way on this issue. Clearly you don't either, though you have trouble admitting it. What are you getting at here? I'm pro Israel I think it's clear. You're very anti-Israel and everything you've said has made it clear. Let's dispense with the pretenses of objectivity and get to discussing what it would take for both sides to bury the hatchet and move on.

You're right but a relationship doesn't need to be sexual for that kind of bond to be built. A very close friend could instill the same sort of loyalty and somehow the military withstands that. Even so, I largely agree with you.

Okay thanks that only proves my point. Palestine can police its militants. Great. The Israeli ceasefire was unilateral. The only reason Hamas stopped firing rockets was because Israeli counter attacks were swift and brutal. Sorry Myata, but the conflict unfortunately cannot be reduced to an equation. Get real. As mentioned above, militants from Palestine etc cannot act without fear of retaliation from Isreal. It's purely this fear that has kept their militancy in check. As for 'factual reality' as you so eloquently put it, perhaps you'd like to comment on this: 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 That's a nice little highlight of the Hamas Covenant and I invite you to read the whole thing yourself. That's the governing authority of Palestine. That's their 'Charter'. You can bleat and carry on about the standing joke that is international law, but it's absolutely pointless. Both sides haven't a leg to stand on in that regard and the only way you're going to negotiate peace is if both sides are willing to make concessions. Israel has no reason to dismantle its settlements or halt expansion. Give them one or the whole process is a joke, much like the international law you keep bringing up.

This is adolescent crazy talk. Take your tinfoil hat off, stop exaggerating and come back to reality.

Exactly. If you actually looked at the budget numbers from those times smallc you might see that the majority of the actual spending cut decisions had to be made by the provinces. I'll give credit to Paul Martin and Chretien for not spending, but I'll give them only marginal credit for cuts in expenditures. Mike Harris and his contemporaries had to do the dirty work.

The Palestinians themselves could more or less put a stop to this. Once support, both official and unofficial, dries up for militant action against Israel, it becomes extremely difficult for them to operate. The arab side has more or less been able enforce ceasefires so extending that to a peace treaty isn't inconceivable.

If things got nasty enough Israel's armed forces could roll over the entire region with impunity. At present they strike at will and it's only their restraint as well as their respect/fear of the international community that keeps them from doing so. Again, it's not an ongoing land grab. The land grab happened several decades ago after they embarrassed the attempted invasion of their land. At this point I'd say their goal is to hang on to land they've already occupied and claimed. As far as I can tell, they've not expanded their borders since the last attempted invasion against them. Read the Hamas charter. Read the statements its leaders have made in regards to peace with Israel. They themselves have specifically stated they will NOT negotiate peace with Israel. Get a clue about what you're talking about before you start asking for referenced facts. Nope. It's more like if your neighbors are going to try to kill you regardless of what you do (their intentions made clear in their OWN words) you probably wouldn't really give a damn if you piss them off or take their stuff. Myata get this through your head please. You're really struggling with this concept I know...but: I AM NOT SAYING ISRAEL IS INNOCENT. Read that to yourself slooowly a couple of times and maybe it might sink in for you. That's the trouble isn't it? From the way you speak on the subject I'd say you're one of the least objective people I've spoken to on the matter, yet you somehow claim to be.... I think you have a really skewed view of what objective and principled actually mean in the context of an actual real world setting. I don't mean to be insulting but I truly and sincerely believe you really don't have a realistic view of the situation nor any grasp of how practical negotiations would take place. You can go on and on about objectivity and principles but pragmatism and realism are every bit if not more important to the process. In previous discussions you've indicated that for any credible peace process to begin then Israel needs to unilaterally withdraw hundreds of thousands of settlers out of annexed land. You've indicated that in return Israel should not even expect the other side to indicate a willingness to discuss peace. The suggestion itself is ludicrous. To suggest that one side should have to make huge, expensive and far-reaching concessions and to not expect the other side to even consider long term peace discussions is patently insane. It will never happen. No. I'm saying that international law is about as credible as 'democracy' is in Iran. Not only is it applied selectively, but as a cohesive institution it's completely impotent. The fundamentalist Islamic world brings up 'international law' only when it suits their purposes. Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Sudan etc are all human rights disasters and operate so far outside international law in the first place that to bring it into the discussion is pretty pointless. Applying and enforcing grossly unfair standards on one side alone isn't going to move things forward. For peace to succeed both sides are going to have to come to the table and talk about it. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

Sexual relationships amongst soldiers are fine I think. Sexual relationships with underlings are not. I didn't read the whole story but a brigadier general fooling around with subordinates is inappropriate in the same sense that a professor sleeping with one of his students is inappropriate. In the military, however, this is faaaaaaaaar more serious because there are life and death implications involved. A commanding officer may make emotionally based combat decisions in order to keep his lover safe which can have very realistic implications not only on the success of the mission itself, but on the morale of the troops as a whole. How would you feel as soldier if you were constantly being put in harms way while a similarly ranked peer was being given the easy assignments on a regular basis because of a relationship with a superior?

What are you even talking about??? Both sides have a right to feel threatened. One side, however, is in a position to act against and neutralize threats against it to some extent. One thing that you might REALLY want to investigate is the reality of the situation in regards to the intents of each side. One side has made it clear that its intention/goal is the destruction of the state of Israel. That's their intention, yet they lack the means to make it so. The other side clearly has the means to wipe the other off the map, yet does not do so, which would suggest some restraint on their part and at least respect for the notion of peace. These are facts and you only need to do about 30 seconds of research to confirm this. There's nothing idealogical about it. The idealogical distortions hold on both sides. Israel annexed territories like East Jerusalem something like 40 years ago after they were pre-emptively invaded. I won't argue that international law forbids this, but I wonder what it would have said about the invasions themselves? At this point there are hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlers in some of these territories (who've been living there for many years now) and in any realistic and logical world you'd have to give Israel a good reason to withdraw and resettle those people. Launching an invasion (and subsequently getting your ass handed to you) and then bitching about lost territories after the fact is pretty ironic I think. What makes it even more contemptible is the righteous indignation and demands the Arab world places on Israel while at the same time stubbornly refusing ANY notion of long-term peace and co-existence with them. Myata we've been over this about a hundred times. I don't think Israel is innocent in any way. I don't think they believe in the peace process there and a lot of what they do is just sand in the Arab world's eye. I simply take issue with people like you who've decided that Israel is the instigator and the main source of blame in a conflict when for 50 years the militant Arab world has done nothing but threaten and inflict violence on Israel and never even entertained the idea of long term peace. One final thing I'll mention is how the Arab world will point towards Israeli breaches of 'international law' when the majority of Arab nations in the area have no respect for human rights, freedom or international law in the first place. If we're going to get into 'international law', let's take a broader view of things and investigate the idea that realistically there's hardly an Arab state in the area that could be held to the same standards that you and people like you hold Israel to.

Very articulate. You're a real asset here.

Well there's an interesting notion and one worth investigating. Whose land is it? Obviously the inhabitants of the land back in the 1940's have some claim to it, but then so too wouldn't the people born and raised there who've lived there for 60 years? It's an absolutely useless argument at this point because it does nothing to move the peace process forward and instead holds everyone back in the past. Don't try to get into 'logic' Myata because that's generally where your arguments start to crumble. Why are we even talking about whose fear takes 'precedence'? That doesn't make sense in the first place. The fact of the matter is that Israel is surrounded by enemies. It has a long history of its neighbours attacking it and it DOES get struck by suicide bombers and rocket attacks. This is enough to make them fearful. It makes ABSOLUTELY no difference to the people of Israel that Arabs in the area are also scared and I have no idea why you would think it should. That's really the point isn't it? Who ARE we talking about in respect to the 'other side'. In that I'd say it's the cowards who hide behind the honest people of Palestine and encourage violence and violent rhetoric against Israel at all costs. Those are the only people that MATTER when it comes to the peace process and unfortunately it's rather hard to bring them to the table. We're not talking about just Palestine here. We're talking about the entire angry militant Arab world. Israel is constantly being condemned. Europe is condemning them. The Arab world condemns them. The UN condemns them. Unfortunately toothless condemnation by international bureaucrats matters little to either side. What sort of 'action' do you suggest? Sending a UN military mission? Sanctions against Israel (in which case you'd have to sanction most of the middle east as well)? It's not going to happen. Israel and Palestine have to figure this out themselves.

That's easily the dumbest thing you've ever said on the issue Myata. Just because you're well-armed doesn't mean you're not scared, especially when we're talking about suicide bombings and random rocket attacks. It's not 'funny pretext'. I'm not trying to 'justify' either side's actions. We've been over this a hundred times before but both sides have to WANT peace for the process to be anything less than a joke. You could certainly make the argument that Israel doesn't want peace but at the same time you'd have to admit that the other side has ZEEERO interest in the peace process, especially considering they've endlessly STATED as such. This is where you're so-called unbiased approach to the argument gets HILARIOUS. Your focus and blame has been undeniably on Israel and its supporters, with little to no attention to the fact that Israel's opponents are STILL calling for its utter destruction, regardless of whether there's been settlement encroachment.

yeah really haha

Let them be haughty all they want. In 40-50 years nobody will need their oil anymore anyways. Then it's back to good 'ol Ontario to carry the nation...

While I'm pretty happy to see Mulroney cut up like that I'd be more interested in seeing him in jail. This really has nothing to do with the present government (the reform formed out of disgust for Mulroney's CPC) so I'm confused why people are trying to make this score points. Let's all just be happy that a crook has finally been found to be a crook.

It's the responsibility of the 'innocents' you speak of to curb their militants. The instigators you speak of don't operate in a vacuum. They need places to hide, funding and support from the 'innocents' that get 'dragged' into the conflict. Unfortunately, religious leaders and fanatics have a really easy time brainwashing populations who've endured literally centuries of religious indoctrination. It further complicates matters that a lot of the leadership and funding come from outside the area in the first place. No, until Palestine and the surrounding area rejects violence and violent rhetoric as a whole, Isreal is going to continue feeling scared and lashing out. It's natural and instinctive.

It's rather galling that you'll say that when you've months, perhaps years of posting proving you do the same. I hope you recognize the irony of your statement.

Hmmm....I don't mean to be particularly offensive but sometimes I wonder how much you really know about economics. The above comment really puts it into question considering: Avery Shenfeld is a Managing Director and Chief Economist with the wholesale banking arm of CIBC, having been with the firm since 1993. He holds a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University. Avery follows economic developments and their implications for financial markets. He was recently named by Bloomberg as one of the top five forecasters of the US economy in the past two years, is a two time winner of Dow-Jones Market Watchs award for most accurate US forecaster, and has been ranked by fixed income investors among the leading five economists in Canada. http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/AveryShenfeld.pdf

When you lump Israel in with North Korea and Iran, you're really making it hard to take you seriously.

You've chosen to take a VERY narrow view of the conflict and it's something you and I have disagreed on fairly regularly. While I'll agree Israel's settlements etc don't help the peace process, I don't think the peace process has any chance regardless until Israel's neighbours in the Middle East make an effort to marginalize and police their militants. Both sides have to have a vested interest in peace for any negotation to work. Israel and its direct neighbours have this. Iran and the people funding Hezbollah etc do not. If I had to chose a side, it would be the democratic and relatively secular Israel sorry.

As we have discussed maaany times before, these principles are very easily to carry on about when you're not afraid of having your bus bombed.

They're both important. The central banks are all in contact with each other on a regular basis because nobody wants the boat to get rocked to hard. Foreign currency volatility can directly affect domestic stability (imports/exports/jobs gained/lost) and any central banker has to take these factors into account. I still think this is a really silly question and a silly thread altogether.

I don't think that's the case at all. I think most people think of Israel when they think of Israel. There's nothing religious about my support for them.

That's the point I'm trying to make. Currency stability is based on both internal and external factors, and you can't talk about one without the other. Also, there are lots of simple reasons to devalue your currency. Some popular ones are to encourage exports and to artificially reduce fixed-rate debt. Predictability is important to everyone. If it affects businesses, it can affect workers as well. Rapid/unexpected currency appreciation can run companies out of business and thousands out of their jobs.

How about you spend 30 seconds looking it up yourself before you start swearing at him champ. Regardless, wind and solar power are SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive and we're being ripped off with the wind and solar farms being build all over the place now. Guaranteed profit for farmers and rip off rates for us and the gov't? Obviously this is good for Ontario........