jbg Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 Maybe so, but in my view, one that deserves the right, just as any other community, to live in peace within their adopted country.I am Jewish and proudly so. And if Canada has a significant Jewish community (which I doubt it does) of course it should have right to live in its adopted country, and contribute to the adopted country as well.Fair enough, even though there has never been (in modern times) a Palestinian state, but in my view, one should take a “Quebec” approach to any statehood. If Israel is divisible, so are the occupied lands.Totally agreed. And I probably would require them to be disarmed, as Japan was for many years after WW II, for the same reasons.And your above point (which I put in bold) is why I feel apprehensive about Palestinian statehood. Would an independent Palestine be peaceful towards Israel?Not a chance. Would a strategy of encirclement and isolation, with increased security fences, manned watchtowers, anti mortar/rocket radar and minefields ala the Korean DMZ be effective? Better than nothing. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
August1991 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Nope....any such posturing is political theatre. Canada does not have direct interest or influence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.When Chretien opposed Bush Jnr and the Iraq war, Canada's Left applauded Chretien's "statement of independence".Now, when Harper opposes the policy of a different American regime, Canada's Left disagrees with our PM. Maybe, b_c2004, America is not the centre of the universe; or maybe Canada's Leftists are just anti-semites, to use an old term. In the victim hierarchy, the Left's anti-semitism (Palestinian victims) trumps their anti-Americanism. The "Canadian" politically correct are grovelling at the feet of Obama so, given their philosophy of 'do as we say, not what makes any sense whatsoever', Harper must agree with Obama at all times. WTF? Edited May 23, 2011 by August1991 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 ...Maybe, b_c2004, America is not the centre of the universe; maybe Canada's Leftists are just anti-semites. Canada's prime ministers in either case would have nothing to say in this regard without America setting the pace. Domestic discourse for either topic within Canada had/has little impact outside of the border. Politics is fun that way in Canada...the Americans can do a lot more damage. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 I am Jewish and proudly so. And if Canada has a significant Jewish community (which I doubt it does) of course it should have right to live in its adopted country, and contribute to the adopted country as well. I honestly don't know the size (in number terms), but you'll find sizable communites in all the large urban centers (Montreal, Toronto & Vancouver). Totally agreed. And I probably would require them to be disarmed, as Japan was for many years after WW II, for the same reasons. That though would require a blockade and inspections, basically what we have now. What I see as the major difference, Japan was soundly defeated in war, there constitution set-up by the American occupation and the Americans still have presence within the country. If you insert Israel and Palestine into this equation, minus a truly irrefutable defeat, you have basically the current situation. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 Canada's prime ministers in either case would have nothing to say in this regard without America setting the pace. Domestic discourse for either topic within Canada had/has little impact outside of the border. Politics is fun that way in Canada...the Americans can do a lot more damage. That is a fair point. Quote
August1991 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Canada's prime ministers in either case would have nothing to say in this regard without America setting the pace. Domestic discourse for either topic within Canada had/has little impact outside of the border. Politics is fun that way in Canada...the Americans can do a lot more damage.b_c, you missed my point, and a better dig. Who cares whether Canada follows America; Canada's viewpoint is irrelevant.IOW, Harper's opinion of Israel is entirely for home consumption. And despite Harper opposing America's policy, Canada's Leftists still defend Palestinians and oppose the oppressive Jews. Edited May 23, 2011 by August1991 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 b_c, you missed my point, and a better dig. Who cares whether Canada follows America; Canada's viewpoint is irrelevant. Not within Canada....this is a free play for PM Harper. IOW, Harper's opinion of Israel is entirely for home consumption. And despite Harper opposing America's policy, Canada's Leftists still defend Palestinians and oppose the oppressive Jews. I think we agree on this...Canada has a free trade agreement with Israel, not Palestine! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
RNG Posted May 23, 2011 Author Report Posted May 23, 2011 Throw a Republican in power... see how quickly he kneels, begs and rolls over Sex and travel. Quote The government can't give anything to anyone without having first taken it from someone else.
RNG Posted May 23, 2011 Author Report Posted May 23, 2011 I would reword this sentence somehow. It makes no sense in either English or Canadian. I detect that "he Harper" is a typo and you meant "Harper". Also, I think "chose" should be "choose" in either language. I am not sure if you are saying that the POTUS, or Israel, would win if Harper had to choose between them. Please clarify. You haven't already noticed that Topaz has literacy issues? Quote The government can't give anything to anyone without having first taken it from someone else.
BC_chick Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 or maybe Canada's Leftists are just anti-semites, to use an old term. In the victim hierarchy, the Left's anti-semitism (Palestinian victims) trumps their anti-Americanism. When Clinton was brokering a peace deal between a progressive Israeli leader (Rabin) and the PLO, the left was neither anti-America nor 'anti-semite' (yawn). When America and Israel are/were led by a war-mongers who do not believe in compromise, the 'left' has generally disagreed with their tactics. I know you're smarter than this August, but if I'm giving you too much credit, I'll give you a hint. It's nothing personal against Americans or Israeli Jews. Oh never mind, I'll spell it out for you. The criticism is sticly against the leader's policy - not the nation and not the people of that nation. Please tell me you understand the difference. Quote It's kind of the worst thing that any humans could be doing at this time in human history. Other than that, it's fine." Bill Nye on Alberta Oil Sands
August1991 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Oh never mind, I'll spell it out for you. The criticism is sticly against the leader's policy - not the nation and not the people of that nation. Please tell me you understand the difference. You mean Canadian Leftists hate Harper, the federal Conservative leader? BC Chick, if that's what you mean, you've said nothing new.If you mean that Leftists disagree with the current Israeli PM Netanyahu, then you also have said nothing new. ---- Maybe I'm wrong but BC Chick, in this Leftist opposition to Israel, there is an undercurrent of anti-semitism. It goes beyond current politicians, or even the typical leftist oppressor/victim ideology. Edited May 23, 2011 by August1991 Quote
betsy Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Canadian leftists hate Harper for his ideology. When Harper stood up in the Commons to voice his support for Bush and the US, they loathe him! They'd never forgiven him for that! And yes, that undercurrent of anti-semitism really exists! The left looks the other way when other neighboring nations attack Israel (e.g recent Lebanon war), and rebukes Israel when it retaliates and defend itself. Btw, didn't Ignatieff made a big blunder by publicly castigating Israel for that Lebanon war? Harper, in his first foreign meeting with other world leaders refused to sign the piece of paper (can't remember what) unless that paper acknowledge Israeli victims. I remember applauding him....he kept those blasted world leaders waiting and fuming, and in the end Harper got his way! So, yes Harper's stance against this so-called peaceful resolution being brokered by Obama is consistent! Edited May 23, 2011 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Both sides provoked each other into war. That's highly debatable! And no... it doesnt give them any right to that territory at all besides the kind or "right" that might makes. Three nations against a lone-standing Israel! Palestinians doing its share by covert guerilla tactics. All sought to remove Israel from the map! That Israel whacked all three of them in just 6 days, - a great show of might and power - Israel could've just as easily pounded all three and fully occupied all those nations. Had the situation's been reversed, you think all those three nations wouldn't have finished off Israel? You think they'd listened to other world leaders who would've pleaded for Israel? Those borders are the "spoils of war!" Israel has every right to keep them. Israel deserved them fully. Israel demonstrated its rightuousness by the tremendous show of self-restraint from finishing all those nations once and for all! Furthermore, why should Israel even entertain such questionable so-called "peace" policy from Obama, when these nations openly refuse to accept Israel to exist as a nation???? Refusing to accept Israel to exist as a nation - do you realize the full implication of that??? Edited May 23, 2011 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 It's so easy for you guys to say that Israel ought to listen to Obama just so to have a "peaceful" resolution. Will you be willing to let go and give up our right to the Arctic if Obama brokers that resolution so to avoid any conflict? Quote
betsy Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government also suggested on Friday it was not backing the U.S. call for Israel to withdraw to the 1967 demarcation lines. Instead, government officials said that Ottawa supports a "negotiated solution involving both Israel and the Palestinian authority." Well I do hope that Harper will be clear on a very specific term for this "negotiated solution": That these nations will fully recognize and accept Israel's right to exist as a nation. Nothing less than that! Of course these nations could do some lip-service and say they will.....well world leaders should be prepared to make sure they - every nations involved , including those who brokered it - do abide by that negotiation resolution. It should be enforced! Edited May 23, 2011 by betsy Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 That's highly debatable! Three nations against a lone-standing Israel! Palestinians doing its share by covert guerilla tactics. All sought to remove Israel from the map! That Israel whacked all three of them in just 6 days, - a great show of might and power - Israel could've just as easily pounded all three and fully occupied all those nations. Had the situation's been reversed, you think all those three nations wouldn't have finished off Israel? You think they'd listened to other world leaders who would've pleaded for Israel? Those borders are the "spoils of war!" Israel has every right to keep them. Israel deserved them fully. Israel demonstrated its rightuousness by the tremendous show of self-restraint from finishing all those nations once and for all! Furthermore, why should Israel even entertain such questionable so-called "peace" policy from Obama, when these nations openly refuse to accept Israel to exist as a nation???? Refusing to accept Israel to exist as a nation - do you realize the full implication of that??? I think you are forgetting that Israel was just placed on the map. Israel would have become "the spoils of war" for the surrounding Arab nations if it wasn't for being propped up by western nations with miltary technology. It's easy to roll over infantry with tanks. Not noble or anything like you suggest above in bolded part. Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
betsy Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 Btw, does anyone know how Israel was given that very particular land? Did they refer to the Bible? The reason I asked is because that place was specifically designated to Israel and Judah in the Old Testament. Quote
Topaz Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 There's one two way peace can come between these two countries, one, they BOTH want it more than war and two, Israel becomes part of the USA. Since they give millions and millions of dollars to them I wonder why is hasn't happen. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 Btw, does anyone know how Israel was given that very particular land? Did they refer to the Bible? The reason I asked is because that place was specifically designated to Israel and Judah in the Old Testament. Given? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 I think you are forgetting that Israel was just placed on the map. ..and I think you are forgetting about the Ottoman Empire, Palestine Mandate, and Balfour Declaration. Israel would have become "the spoils of war" for the surrounding Arab nations if it wasn't for being propped up by western nations with miltary technology. Nope...Israel's enemies were just "propped up" with inferior hardware, training, and leadership. It's easy to roll over infantry with tanks. Not noble or anything like you suggest above in bolded part. That's what tanks are for....better tactics prevailed at Jenin....very noble. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
dre Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 It's so easy for you guys to say that Israel ought to listen to Obama just so to have a "peaceful" resolution. Will you be willing to let go and give up our right to the Arctic if Obama brokers that resolution so to avoid any conflict? Will you be willing to let go and give up our right to the Arctic Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 That's highly debatable! No its really not. Prior to the war both sides were trying increase their share of water flowing from the Jordan basic at the expense of the other. Israel started that by building its national water carrier which reduced the flow of water to the hashemites. Arabs responded with a water diversion project of their own. Israel also launched the first major military action late in 1965 when they bombed the arab project, which set off steady string of skirmishes along the border which lead directly to the war. The fact is both sides have provoked the other every chance they have gotten, and both sides have intentionally squandered any chance at peace. While most jews and arabs in the region are basically innocent people caught in the crossfire between insane zealots, the people in charge on both sides have basically been sub-human maggots. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
jbg Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 You haven't already noticed that Topaz has literacy issues? I didn't know whether what he/she/it said makes sense in Canadian? It makes no sense in English. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Tilter Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 Not within Canada....this is a free play for PM Harper. I think we agree on this...Canada has a free trade agreement with Israel, not Palestine! Ahhhhh---- there is no Palestine--- it doesn't and never has existed Quote
Saipan Posted May 23, 2011 Report Posted May 23, 2011 No its really not. Yes, it's really simple. Arabs called for extermination of Jews. No Jews called for extermination of Arabs. Hitler's Mein Kampf was the bestseller in Arab countries as nowhere else. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.