Jonsa

No, they didn't have a nation given to them and neither did the jews. That partition plan was bogus bullshit and completely unworkable and everyone knew it. The Jews were very very shrewd in first accepting the plan, because they knew sure as shootin' the arabs were gonna reject it, which they did. Hence, the jews declared independence the day before the plan was to go into effect. I do believe that both Egypt and Jordan OCCUPIED Gaza and the WB. The Jordanians going so far as to annex the WB (although recognized by only two countries) and the proferred citizenship rejected by most of the inhabitants. The Egyptians were basically military occupiers just like the Israelis. I agree that the palestinians from the get go have missed opportunity after opportunity to move forward. And even when they seem to make some progress their leadership has failed them - repeatedly failed them.

While disgusting and reprehensible, why is anyone surprised? First, army psychological screening is not perfect. Second, soldiers are trained to kill. Third, some humans develop a taste for killing Fourth, soldiers are conditioned to dehumanize the enemy. Fifth, soldiers see nasty nasty things that can and do traumatize them. Sixth, unit cohesion creates an "infectious" environment Seventh, ain't never been a war where this kind of shit didn't go down.

Spurious analogy. Germany and Italy - nations of long standing existance unconditionally surrendering after all out war. The allies weren't interested in annexing German or Italian land as part of their own country. Do you really think that the palestinians could unconditionally surrender to Israel and not get totally and royally screwed?

Now what would "accepting defeat" look like? Where exactly is the "nation" of palestine? Silly me, Ithought that the formation of the nation of palestine was one of the causes of the conflict.

The palestinians involved in the resistance to the occupation are using terror, because there is no other method of warfare available to them. History has proven that in this conflict the tactic is counter productive and ALWAYS initiates a disproportionate response from the Israelis. This has been Israel's primary response doctrine and its hasn't been all that effective either. I agree that some of these terrorist/resistance fighters (depending on perspective) are only interested in violence and destruction of Israel and not negotiations. I also think that after decades of negotiations going nowhere or making progress only to be screwed up by some idiotic action from either side, there is a whole bunch of bitter, disallusioned, unemployed palestinian youth who have collected martyr cards and and been taught throughtout their school lives that the Jews were evil occupiers of palestine (including occupying that part of palestine that the world recognizes as Israel). It is so simple to pass a moral judgement on these deluded bastards. Hell, they are so ignorant that some cowardly Islamist scumbag can convince them that if they just blow themselves up and take a few evil jews with them they'll get directly to heaven and have 72 virgins lickin' their asses. I don't excuse their activities, but at least I can understand their motivations. I have to say I find your rationale that punishment must be collective to be particularly odious and dispicable. I can see the same argument used by the SS when dealing with maquis terrorists, and dutch terrorists and polish terrorists ... or is that resistance fighters, only instead of bulldozing their houses, they lined up their families and friends and shot them. I believe the going rate was 10 "partisans" for each soldier.

According to The Center for the Ethical Treatment of Terrorists it is 63.5% true. How is that relevant to the fact that Israel engaged in a policy of collective punishment? I believe they no longer bulldoze a terrorist family home. The homes they bulldoze now are illegally built, lacking building permits. A tad drastic, but not unprecedented even in north america.

This notion that the son does nothing without permission is a cultural generalization and certainly nowhere near a universal given. Bulldozing the family home of a 22 year old "terrorist" or resistance fighter - take your pick - is collective punishment. No getting around it.

My story of events isn't cute, its pretty accurate. And of course a lot of points were missed. However, the crux of the story is essentially factually accurate, minus my opinion of arafat and his motives. Trying to simplify 40 years of occupation is precisely what all sides constantly attempt to do. It seems that contemporary support or opposition is couched in "legal vs illegal" and quotes GCIV and UNSCR 242 ad nauseum. But political action is what is important - international law in this regard is frankly irrelevant as it is unenforceable and offers absolutely no consquence to breaking it. It can give one a sense of moral superiority, but doesn't change the "facts on the ground" on iota. The fact of the matter is pretty straightforward. Had the arabs chosen to engage Israel after getting their asses handed to them in 67 for the third time, we would not be discussing the occupation today. Yes, there have been all kinds of financial incentives for people to move into settlements. Anyone who denies that is denying fact. OTOH, there would still be Israeli settlements without government inducements. the first settlements were by ultra=zionists. Orthodox zionists desire to settle near the cave of the patriarchs, rachel's tomb, etc. Granted there wouldn't be 400,000 settlers but there'd still be a whole bunch.

That is a nonsensical analogy. One cannot compare US/Canada and Israel/Occupied Territories. I am always struck by the fact that anti-zionists and pro-palestinians (there is a difference) always scream about the illegality and immorality of the occupation, but never stop to consider why the occupation became the status quo. The fact is in 67 after the Russians told the US and Israel to stop or they'd get involved (seems they didn't like the fact that Israel was 50 miles from capital of one of its very important african clients), a cease fire was established. Israel says okay what now? The Arab League in the Khartoum declaration some 60 days after the cease fire re-iterates its infamous 3 Noes policy towards Israel - No peace, No recognition, No negotiation. Basically and succinctly the arabs tell Israel to "fuck off" to which Israel tells the loser arabs, "No, you fuck off". Three months after that in indirect negotiations thru the UN, UNSCR242 is issued, a document whose intention was good but so fraught with ambiguity and platitude as to be useless. Ya see, to achieve the goal of 242 required NEGOTIATION, but the arab league again re-iterated the 3 noes so, go figure - occupation begins entrenchment. At this point, what unilateral action should Israel have taken wrt the territories? As we move through this sordid history it takes 12 years and another war before the first arab nation pulls their collective head out of their asses and figures out that negotiation and peace will get them their land back. Sadat in a move to appease the arab league (although he still gets killed) says - "nah you can keep gaza we don't want it back, it should be part of the palestinian nation - when and if it ever gets established." What unilateral action should Israel have taken with gaza at that point? meanwhile, somebody figures out that creating facts on the ground - i.e. settlements in the territories, will provide even more leverage in negotiations with the palestinians and their arab brothers and would result in some choice pieces of property accruing to Israel, or at the very least provide a "sacrifice" because sure as hell Israel ain't giving up Jerusalem. Voila an organized government backed settlement strategy takes wing. It takes another 12 or 14 years before the palestinians and their arab brothers actually figure out that even tho he got killed for his efforts, Sadat may have been right. Oslo is born. Now, the palestinians actually have an opportunity to establish their own nation. to throw off the humiliating shackles of occupation, to become masters of their own destiny. Is it a perfect deal? NO does it give in to all of the palestinians demands? NO. Is it something to build on? ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY. What does that scumbag crook Arafat do? COMPLETELY BLOWS IT TRYING TO COVER HIS OWN ASS. Far from being the great leader of the palestinian people, he brings them to brink of success and then competely screws them in a bid to maintain power. Israel doesn't have many options. Not that they are perfect partners or anything. They make it very difficult for the palestinians, continue to increase settlements, maintain humiliating travel restrictions, restrict access, control borders, collect their taxes, bully the population and generally lord it over the occupied. They are also totally intolerant of terror attacks, and believe in both collective punishment and disproportionate response. so while you howl at the sky about Israel and the illegal zionazi occupation and illegal settlements and ethnic cleansing and jeningrad and gazan genocide you might want to consider that Israel didn't get to this position unilaterally. For decades, they were left with little or no choice and being rather pragmatic, decided to make the most of it. Yet another cost of failed arab and palestinian strategies.

Seems to me that the plant design was pretty damn good with the glaring exception of where the back up diesel generators were placed and the low seawall. It wasn't the quake that screwed things up. then, while everyone else was going crazy with panic, the safety and emergency protocols kicked in. Seems the workers there are a pretty dedicated and highly trained. they were able to put plans b, c, d, right up to plan I3(improvise, improvise,improvise) into effect as the crisis continued to develop. In a way this is a very positive event for the nuclear power industry. Many many lessons will be gleaned and a bunch of modifications to existing plants and existing procedures will take place to make them even safer.

What could Israel possibly do to influence things in Syria - wave a magic wand, lend Assad a nuke or two? the winds of change are blowing and its the people that are doing it. Syria will change, Assad and his cronies won't be able to get away with another Hama.

He had to be one of the worst presidents ever. After him, it didn't take much for Regan to look like a good one.

Love to see any example of a state that has used force on any of its citizens to adhere to international law. States have used force against it citizens to uphold their own laws countless times, but international law? don't think so. And the nation that turned a blind eye to extermination of a ethnic group in their own nation, is a lawless nation. Unless you can show me a nation where wholesale murder or genocide is legal. International law is basically a set of moral platitudes, with selective enforcebility and prosecution. Nations with real power are never prosecuted and victors are never prosecuted. Seems the international courts only choose the weak, politically vulnerable and/or the defeated to prosecute. Laws that only apply to some and not to all aren't laws, they are tools of power, punishment and retribution designed to demonstrate the moral superiority of hypocrites.

Ya just gotta love FAUX News for their consistency. In this case its their consistency in criticisizing Obama no matter what. For the past few weeks all the talking heads on Fox were lambasting the "administration" for not doing enough about libya. For not establishing a no fly zone at the very least. To stop talking and start taking action because innocent civilians were being killed. to take steps to depose Mommar. Now, its all about criticizing "Obama's War". Yep, that's what they are calling the current operation. Apparently he acted without authorization and has committed an act of war because to establish a no fly zone you gotta take out the air defenses - who'da thunk? Irony is dead in America.

This would be one of the funniest sites on the net, but in truth its pathetic, its scary and a poingnant reminder of the how intellectually bankrupt the american religious right truly is. Btw I loooveeed the evolution page.

god is ominipotent and omniscient. God creates the universe. God creates heaven and all his minions. God creates evil God infects Lucifer with Evil. God creates Hell. God creates Man. God creates free will. God and lucifer battle for men's souls. God knows what is going to happen. He knew that Lucifer was going to thirst for power 'cause he was so perfect and beautiful. He knew that Lucifer was going to be cast out. He knew that Adam was going to eat the apple. He knows what every person decision is when exercising that free will. He toys with lucifer because he can swat him like a fly at any time, but doesn't. He toys with his human creations creating all kinds of mysterious, illogical and tragic games to play with them. Conclusion: God was bored and needed something to amuse himself with. Kinda like the first multiplayer video game.

I am an atheist, meaning I don't beleive in any God, but will allow that given our limited understanding of the universe and existence that there may be entities and powers beyond our current understanding. I am not an anti-theist although I can be aggressively anti-religious at times. I am repulsed by the self righteousness of these supposed Evangelical biblethumpers, who appear to select the teachings they are willing to adhere by what is convenient and comfortable. They stand up and yell about creationism, abortion, same sex marriage, and a host of other moral issues, claiming devine direction from the invoilate and inerrant words of god yet are perfectly comfortable to reject those same words of god when they are inconvenient or threaten their sense of well being. If the Word of God can be cherry picked, then the Word of God is not, it is the Word of "Some Guys in the olden days".

I was just about to post the exact same response to betsy's lame attempt to twist our words. I re-iterate that anyone claiming that we are descendent from monkeys is simply ignorant. the people who do talk about this idiotic and completely unscientific notion seem to be creationists lamely attempting to ridicule the theory. they are left to ridicule since they haven't a scientific leg to stand on.

I suspect like others that the "cross cultural" thing is mostly linguistic. here's an interesting take on the subject: http://www.livescience.com/2633-sarcasm-evolutionary-survival-skill.html

How ironic.

When your philosophical and ethical positions are presented as given from God and you wage cultural war to enforce your positions on the unbelievers, then it can't just be excused as "everyone is a hypocrite". The Christian right in all their god given righteousness expounds upon the teachings of Jesus and what the bible says to justify their political and social positions, yet they think it perfectly acceptable to be selective about which teachings they adhere too. It just makes me puke when I hear people like Huckabee righteously spew shit.

When you calm down, perhaps you'll see how absurd your above posting is. At the very heart of the matter for the palestinians and their nominal arab allies is the muslim religion. All of historic palestine was part of the ummah. The jews of Israel took it away from the muslims and they don' much like that. They are still bitching about andalusia and that happened 600 years ago (ironically at the same time the jews got kicked out). As for the jews, are you telling me that there isn't a significant faction of orthodox jews who believe that judea was, is and shall always be Jewish/Israel JUST like Jerusalem? shall we discuss Hamas and their covenant? Or how about Likud' Charter.

So the terrorism perpetrated by the various resistance forces in occupied countries in WW2 was dispicable? The terrorism perpetrated by the mujahadin against the Soviet/Afghan government was dispicable? I guess the repugnance for terror depends on what side you are on. While there can be no doubt that palestinian terror has been counterproductive and responsible for the deaths of many more palestinians than israelis, as an occupied people they have every right to resist using whatever methods they have at their disposal. Lacking an army, they are left with insurgent tactics only, and the best of those tactics as history has proven time and again is terror. As a strategy I think the palestinians use of terror is stupid and does nothing to advance their cause. But that doesn't mean they don't have the right to be stupid as they have proven numerous times.

yes of course it was a bunch of civilians in a jirga in Datta Khel. The compound was owned by North Waziristan Taliban leader Hafiz Gul Bahadar, and was hosting a meeting of "elders loyal to Bahadar" who were "trying to mediate between two warring militant groups inside Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/03/us_predators_strike_22.php#ixzz1Gv0FWJ8i But wait there's more: The Datta Khel area is administered by Hafiz Gul Bahadar, the Taliban commander for North Waziristan. Bahadar provides shelter to top al Qaeda leaders as well as terrorists from numerous Pakistani and Central Asian terror groups. Datta Khel is a known hub of Taliban, Haqqani Network, and al Qaeda activity. While Bahadar administers the region, the Haqqani Network, al Qaeda, and allied Central Asian jihadi groups are also based in the area. The Lashkar al Zil, al Qaeda's Shadow Army, is known to have a command center in Datta Khel. Datta Khel serves as a command and control center for al Qaeda's top leaders, and some of them have been targeted and killed there. A strike in Datta Khel on Dec. 17, 2009, targeted Sheikh Saeed al Saudi, Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law and a member of al Qaeda's Shura Majlis, or executive council. Al Saudi is thought to have survived the strike, but Abdullah Said al Libi, the commander of the Shadow Army, and Zuhaib al Zahibi, a general in the Shadow Army, were both killed in the attack. >>>>>>>>>> Might want to read this article. An entirely different perspective.

There are a number of international court rulings on the illegality of Israeli settlements. Naturally these findings are disputed by Israel. There are NO international court rulings regarding Israel ethnically cleansing the territories. This is not surprising since if Israel was engaged in ethnic cleansing they would set a new benchmark for utter failure. Seems the arab population in the WB has steadily and consistently risen every single year since 1967. IMHO, the international court has absolutely no enforcement capabilities for its rulings and any law where there are NO CONSEQUENCES for breaking said law is nothing more than moral platitude.