Bomb Makers have to eat too.

[Dante]

That would be nice...

Still, I have been wondering recently just what exactly are most of these terrorists demanding? I expect to be answered with "The fall of Western civilisation!" "A global Islamic empire!" "The deaths of puppies!" But seriously, in actual fact, have we any demands to work with at all?

[Dude_Doc]

Well, we have a Palestinian state for one, but that is already in negotiation, somewhere... probably the lowest priority. Now that the damage has been made, I don't think the US will ever listen to anyone but themselves.

[nemafakei]

Incidentally, doing something which is (supposedly) a goal of the terrorists (e.g. a sovereign Palaestinian state) does not equate to negotiating with or compromising with terrorists.

The problem is getting that to happen when there are forces that prevent it happening - when both sides are entrenched and closed-minded, nothing is allowed to take place (except that which is clearly offensive) without being seen as 'compromising', even if such things are more properly 'progress', benefiting all concerned - except those who survive on xenophobia and fear of the other side (such as terrorist organisations and Bush).

[GUNWOUNDS]

Incidentally, doing something which is (supposedly) a goal of the terrorists (e.g. a sovereign Palaestinian state) does not equate to negotiating with or compromising with terrorists.

The problem is getting that to happen when there are forces that prevent it happening - when both sides are entrenched and closed-minded, nothing is allowed to take place (except that which is clearly offensive) without being seen as 'compromising', even if such things are more properly 'progress', benefiting all concerned - except those who survive on xenophobia and fear of the other side (such as terrorist organisations and Bush).

you are blaming "both sides" (i assume you mean Israel and Palestianian government)but you arent giving any  blame to those who deserve it.  Namely the terrorists.

When a peace treaty is signed ... but then 15 hours later bombs go off in Israel in cafes and buses, and shopping malls.... and then angry Israelis people demand action, specifically the cancellation of peace treaties and/or invasion of the areas from which the hostility is emerging.

    What you are asking for is that the Israelis just swallow their losses day after day after day.. swallow it down like a jagged little pill..... and uphold a peace treaty and  abstain from invasion procedures while the other side shows no sign of improvement.  That is clearly unacceptable.  And it is the main reason for the current attitudes of Israelis and their allies.

[nemafakei]

"you are blaming "both sides" (i assume you mean Israel and Palestianian government)"

I am saying that the governments could do something about it. Of course the terrorists are wrong to use such violence, do you honestly think I'm disputing that?

[Anathema]

Lol Gunwounds, Israel just swallowing their losses? When Israel murders the leaders of Hamas, or starts another "preemtive strike" it's followed by a wave of suicide bombings. Very few of the attacks are unprovoked.

[GUNWOUNDS]

Lol Gunwounds, Israel just swallowing their losses? When Israel murders the leaders of Hamas, or starts another "preemtive strike" it's followed by a wave of suicide bombings. Very few of the attacks are unprovoked.

Murdering of a Hamas leader?

[Dude_Doc]

What you are asking for is that the Israelis just swallow their losses day after day after day.. swallow it down like a jagged little pill..... and uphold a peace treaty and  abstain from invasion procedures while the other side shows no sign of improvement.

The Palestinians want peace as much as Israel wants it, but occupying their land and driving them out of their homes is not the way to go. 60 years ago, Palestine had the complete land, now they have less. Of course they are pissed off. Of course they don't seem much affected when a terrorist blows himself up inside Israel. Would you care much if you heard that everybody involved in 9/11 along their families had been blown up by a bomb?

Murdering of a Hamas leader?  Murder?  Thats like saying we Murder our Death Row Inmates here in US.  No... killing a Hamas leader is called justice.

Even if that means no peace for another 10 years?

So basically Israel has to be eradicated now to fulfill the Life Debt since Hamas requires exponential revenge.

Well, once bin Laeden said that he would kill all Americans. Many Islamic radicals are saying that they will clean the world of "Satan's agents", so well, guess nobody is safe...

So i guess what i am trying to say is that the terrorists cannot be satisfied once they have been pissed off.... then add into the pot the fundamentalism... and well you got yourself some trouble.

Of course they are crazy with anger and hate... Israel is only fueling that pot by killing off their leaders and occupying their lands.

[Vidi]

If you think about the amount of money going into the army each and every day you can soon relise that if some of that money was diverted to helping people in Africa and other places like that Millions of live could be saved.  Many people need health, food, water and other basic life saving things, does bombing them make that better?  I think not.  Fighting is a natural instink(?) and so you can never stop it but you can stem it and thats the way of the future.  Get off your lazy asses and you can help many people like for

[Dude_Doc]

If you think about the amount of money going into the army each and every day you can soon relise that if some of that money was diverted to helping people in Africa and other places like that Millions of live could be saved.

Hey, have you ever made any money by helping anybody? Ever solved any problems? Nopes. But we are making a great deal of money by spending it on the army and military weapons and research. We invaded Iraq - we got oil - we became rich.

Many people need health, food, water and other basic life saving things, does bombing them make that better? I think not.

But who cares about their situation? All I want is the oil they have in their country.

Fighting is a natural instink(?) and so you can never stop it but you can stem it and thats the way of the future.

You see! We always have to kill someone... I mean, how else would the world turn around?

Get off your lazy asses and you can help many people like for

[Vidi]

Is that all the USA cares about, money using that money you can save lives.  I dont belive in ilegal wars like iraq, but if you say you don't care about whats hapning in Africa then i have to say that your an insensative idiot.

Fighting is a natural instink(?) and so you can never stop it but you can stem it and thats the way of the future.

You see! We always have to kill someone... I mean, how else would the world turn around?

Stem not obey fighting someone we can keep fealings at bay so why do we always let come out.  Killing some one for there goods (money) is wrong acording to your laws.  So killing a contry for its goods (oil) should be wrong.  Bush said we want to get there WMD, but as you said and I quote

All I want is the oil they have in their country.

Thats like saying "Give me all your money 'cos you owe me" and the "Now give me your house 'cos I have all your money" Its just stupid!!  Bush pulled out the inspecters and thay didn't find any WMD's and then he fought them 'cos he said they had WMD's there was no evidence and that's what I call ilegal.

- vidi  :O

[Dude_Doc]

Is that all the USA cares about, money using that money you can save lives.

But according to FOX NEWS all money goes to the terrorists!

but if you say you don't care about whats hapning in Africa then i have to say that your an insensative idiot.

But hey, people in Africa don't want to work and live happily - that is why there are so many wars and deceases there. Besides, they are not Christians - which explains a lot.

Stem not obey fighting someone we can keep fealings at bay so why do we always let come out.

But we have to keep fighting - first it was the Soviet Union, and now there is the threat of al-Quaeda. And as the topic says: "Bomb makers have to eat too."

-Why not use those bombs while they're there?

So killing a contry for its goods (oil) should be wrong.

A country is not a person.

Thats like saying "Give me all your money 'cos you owe me" and the "Now give me your house 'cos I have all your money" Its just stupid!!

Can already do that. I'll buy the company responsible for his house, and then I'll kick him out. And while I'm at it - I'll pay someone to make sure that the one I'm kicking out becomes a criminal. I just love money and power!

Bush pulled out the inspecters and thay didn't find any WMD's and then he fought them 'cos he said they had WMD's there was no evidence and that's what I call ilegal.

Illegal to whom? USA defeated the Germans in World War 2, we defeated the "Communists", we even saved Kuwait from Iraq once before - USA is the single most powerful nation on this and the next nine planets in this solar system. Exactly what is the United Nations supposed to do against us? It is the USA soldiers that wears the UN helmet.

Simple - USA can do what the f**k it wants. You'd have to contact an alien civilization if you want to stop us, buddy. Which, I'm afraid to say, is not going to happen in the next 500 years.

(BIG LAUGH)  8) 8) ;D ;D 8) 8) ;D ;D

[Kiyouta]

You'd have to contact an alien civilization if you want to stop us, buddy. Which, I'm afraid to say, is not going to happen in the next 500 years.

I thought you were Swedish? :O

[ken124578]

cyborg: I think the israeli's / palestinian problems are in a vicious circle.

terrorists blow up (innocent) israeli's -> israeli's destroy some homes -> repeat.

The Palestinians want peace as much as Israel wants it, but occupying their land and driving them out of their homes is not the way to go. 60 years ago, Palestine had the complete land, now they have less. Of course they are pissed off. Of course they don't seem much affected when a terrorist blows himself up inside Israel. Would you care much if you heard that everybody involved in 9/11 along their families had been blown up by a bomb?

Wasn't "palestine" part of the turkish empire before the 2nd WW and after the 2nd WW given to england as a colony?

England gave up that area of the middle east to the UN and the UN later decided to split the area in 2. (the UN was ruling the area in the interest of the people, and 30% of the population was jewish)

But I guess in the end it isn't about who started what and whom's fault is what but who's the first one to stop the violence and come up with a compromise, right?

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

-Bush

What's up with your bush imitations? The war against Iraq is a good thing (the occupation isn't I agree with you on that) and america IS sending aid to africa. :P

[Dude_Doc]

I thought you were Swedish?

I was just being sacrastic.

terrorists blow up (innocent) israeli's -> israeli's destroy some homes -> repeat.

Or perhaps: Israeli colonizes somebody's land -> people feel unhappy, boycotting starts, ends in violence -> Israelis occupy more territories to make them "safer" -> violence continues, etc...?

Wasn't "palestine" part of the turkish empire before the 2nd WW and after the 2nd WW given to england as a colony?

Yes, it was some kind of protectorate. Another example of the wonderful, democratic and just process they had with England before they turned it over to Israel ::) .

England gave up that area of the middle east to the UN and the UN later decided to split the area in 2. (the UN was ruling the area in the interest of the people, and 30% of the population was jewish)

Yes. But since there were less Jews than Arabs in that region, logically - Israel should have been much smaller. The UN was basically "The Alliance" from WW2 at that time, so not many countries had a say in the matter.

But I guess in the end it isn't about who started what and whom's fault is what but who's the first one to stop the violence and come up with a compromise, right?

Even if there will be peace - who will take the blame for the long lasting war? All the people who died, all homes who were destroyed?

But you are right for the time being - for now, peace must be achieved.

What's up with your bush imitations? The war against Iraq is a good thing (the occupation isn't I agree with you on that)

There seems to be a paradox here. You mean that if the US had just dropped by, bombed Saddam and his crooks, and just went back home, everything would be OK? The whole thing was to get their hands on the oil there. Saddam Hussein is just a figure to make the troops think that this is similar to every other dictator alive. I'd understand if the conflict was something like World War 2 or the Cold War, but it wasn't.

And since they took out Hussein, and if that somehow was not about the oil, then how about bombing the hell out of Uzbekistan, or Belarus? Iran and North Korea is already thought about, but then we have PR-China, Vietnam and Laos. On the southern front we have some screwballs in Africa, amongst them the literally chaos in Somalia.

And as if that wasn't enough, how about using all the money that went to war to help the homeless and helpless in the USA itself? My calculations surely show that they had money enough to do so. Guess they just didn't think about it...

:D

and america IS sending aid to africa.

Sweden is too.

[nemafakei]

"(the occupation isn't I agree with you on that)"

What he means, I assume, is that the war was over quickly and did indeed remove Hussein - but the occupation was dreadfully managed - there was no reconstruction plan, the US' allies were led to believe there was a plan, and almost two years on, death tolls are still high.

[Dude_Doc]

What he means, I assume, is that the war was over quickly and did indeed remove Hussein - but the occupation was dreadfully managed - there was no reconstruction plan, the US' allies were led to believe there was a plan, and almost two years on, death tolls are still high.

I don't think it would be wise to tell the troops that they were fighting for an oil company, now would it?

[ken124578]

Or perhaps: Israeli colonizes somebody's land -> people feel unhappy, boycotting starts, ends in violence -> Israelis occupy more territories to make them "safer" -> violence continues, etc...?

Israel used to be quite small until some neighbouring countries started to attack them. Israel won those wars and with them more territory.

Yes, it was some kind of protectorate. Another example of the wonderful, democratic and just process they had with England before they turned it over to Israel ::) .

Not everything was given to israel (none of the holy places)

Yes. But since there were less Jews than Arabs in that region, logically - Israel should have been much smaller. The UN was basically "The Alliance" from WW2 at that time, so not many countries had a say in the matter.

Wasn't israel in the beginning smaller?

Even if there will be peace - who will take the blame for the long lasting war? All the people who died, all homes who were destroyed?

Both sides.

There seems to be a paradox here. You mean that if the US had just dropped by, bombed Saddam and his crooks, and just went back home, everything would be OK? The whole thing was to get their hands on the oil there. Saddam Hussein is just a figure to make the troops think that this is similar to every other dictator alive. I'd understand if the conflict was something like World War 2 or the Cold War, but it wasn't.

The occupation of Iraq is dreadfully managed yeah. What they should be doing is rebuilding the country (faster) and winning the hearts and minds of the local people (not provoke violence by walking around with heavy weapons)

And since they took out Hussein, and if that somehow was not about the oil, then how about bombing the hell out of Uzbekistan, or Belarus? Iran and North Korea is already thought about, but then we have PR-China, Vietnam and Laos. On the southern front we have some screwballs in Africa, amongst them the literally chaos in Somalia.

That's like saying: if you donate money to one charity, you must donate to them all.

And as if that wasn't enough, how about using all the money that went to war to help the homeless and helpless in the USA itself? My calculations surely show that they had money enough to do so. Guess they just didn't think about it...

Maybe Iraq was more important?

[Dude_Doc]

Israel used to be quite small until some neighbouring countries started to attack them. Israel won those wars and with them more territory.

By that logic Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan would be part of the United States now.

Not everything was given to israel (none of the holy places)

Not everything that Swedes did throughout time has been given back to us.

Wasn't israel in the beginning smaller?

Yes, it was.

The occupation of Iraq is dreadfully managed yeah. What they should be doing is rebuilding the country (faster) and winning the hearts and minds of the local people (not provoke violence by walking around with heavy weapons)

If they did that, the "insurgents" would attack everywhere, probably much more than what they do now.

That's like saying: if you donate money to one charity, you must donate to them all.

Mmm, I guess it just happened to be the most powerful, influential and militaristic nation in the world that just happened to "liberate" about Iraq and Afghanistan.

Maybe Iraq was more important?

More important than their own population?  ???

[ken124578]

By that logic Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan would be part of the United States now.

Not everything that Swedes did throughout time has been given back to us.

The US isn't neighbouring with germany, and the interest of the local population was the rebuilding of germany with a democratie & independance.

If they did that, the "insurgents" would attack everywhere, probably much more than what they do now.

If they were on the side of the local population from the beginning those insurgents wouldn't have a reason to fight them.

More important than their own population?

[Dude_Doc]

The US isn't neighbouring with germany, and the interest of the local population was the rebuilding of germany with a democratie & independance.

But since they actually conquered Germany, logically the parts they conquered should rightfully belong to the US - just like the lands Israel conquered now belongs to them?

If they were on the side of the local population from the beginning those insurgents wouldn't have a reason to fight them.

Yes - if they actually consentrated on rebuilding Iraq instead of consentrating on the oil.

Maybe?

Exactly how is Iraq more important?

[ken124578]

But since they actually conquered Germany, logically the parts they conquered should rightfully belong to the US - just like the lands Israel conquered now belongs to them?

What happened

The UN decided to SPLIT the country in 2 (palestinians getting the most) as they were ruling in the interest of the local people (and those wishes are an independant zion/israel and an independant palestine)

Arabian people wage war with israel and israel gains more land with those wars.

Your example

The US conquered Germany in WW2 and as the interests of the people were to be oppressed and to be under another country's rule the US decided to stay.

------

Your example doesn't match at all.

Exactly how is Iraq more important?

I don't know how, it's obviously more important to them because they're spending a lot of money on it.

[Dude_Doc]

The UN decided to SPLIT the country in 2 (palestinians getting the most) as they were ruling in the interest of the local people (and those wishes are an independant zion/israel and an independant palestine)

Ruling in the interest of the local people? The whole Arab world was against the plan, and yet it came into being. Only after that both sides started to fight with each other, beginning in 1948. Then Israel, with their new imported Western weapons, conquered more Palestinian lands.

The US conquered Germany in WW2 and as the interests of the people were to be oppressed and to be under another country's rule the US decided to stay.

This has nothing to do with the interest of the people. The US conquered Germany thus Germany is rightly theirs - just like Israel has conquered Palestinian lands. Wheter people like it or not isn't the question.

I don't know how, it's obviously more important to them because they're spending a lot of money on it.

What a wonderful government - spending more money on sending troops and waging war than taking care of it's own people...

::)

[Wolf]

Again, the US government spends more on Social Security and welfare than it does on the military by a substantial amount.

[Anathema]

According to the CIA factbook, only 3.3 % of the GDP. More then any European country, but hardly overwhelming.