[Newsbot]

Title: US may be seeking Israel 'regime change'
Category: Political
Posted By: DerbyX
Date: 2010-03-17 09:59:02

[martin14]

'regime change' for a well functioning democracy.

Good idea.


Change you can beleive in.

[BartSimpson]

martin14 martin14:

'regime change' for a well functioning democracy.

Good idea.


Change you can beleive in.

The Obama administration is trying to do the same thing in Honduras.

[andyt]

If the US was serious about having Israel follow different policies, it would just eliminate foreign aid. Bada bing. It's all just a show. The muzzies know it which is why they're so pissed.

I don't know how Israel can expect peace tho, when it keeps taking more and more land. I support Israel behind he pre 67 borders - if it's attacked then, the US should help defend it if necessary. But as long as Israel continues its quest for Lebensraum, they should be doing it on their own dime.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

If the US was serious about having Israel follow different policies, it would just eliminate foreign aid. Bada bing. It's all just a show. The muzzies know it which is why they're so pissed.

I don't know how Israel can expect peace tho, when it keeps taking more and more land. I support Israel behind he pre 67 borders - if it's attacked then, the US should help defend it if necessary. But as long as Israel continues its quest for Lebensraum, they should be doing it on their own dime.

The pre-1967 borders are not possible. Were the Golan Heights returned to Syria then you could expect the Syrians to use them to sporadically shell Israel, which is what they used to do with them. The West Bank was used by Jordan as a staging ground to potentially divide Israel in two during the 1967 war and Israel held on to it for those exact strategic reasons.

As for their taking more and more land...whut?

As I recall, Israel gave the Sinai back to Egypt, they ceded Gaza to the Palestinian Authority, they ceded back the northern security zone to Lebanon.

Israel now has LESS than half of the territory they did 35 years ago so where's this BS coming from that they're taking more land? Because they aren't.

[commanderkai]

andyt andyt:

If the US was serious about having Israel follow different policies, it would just eliminate foreign aid. Bada bing. It's all just a show. The muzzies know it which is why they're so pissed.

Israeli foreign aid usually revolves around military purchases, so to cut foreign aid to Israel cuts one of America's largest purchasers of military equipment. The Muslims are always pissed at Israel/America for just about everything, so I don't think either country cares, as long as Egypt/Syria/Jordan doesn't want their asses kicked again in another war.

$1:

I don't know how Israel can expect peace tho, when it keeps taking more and more land. I support Israel behind he pre 67 borders

This is something I never understood. Why Pre-67 borders? Jordan and Egypt lost the West Bank and Gaza, and neither country will be totally jumping for joy to take them back in the fold. Should we just ignore the Six Day and Yom Kippur wars because the Arabs had their asses handed to them? That's the thing, if you want pre-1967, "Palestine" is 2/3 Jordanian, 1/3 Egyptian, and no independent Palestinian.

[DerbyX]

How about because its international law? If that doesn't work then we can safely assume that getting land through military conquest will be perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question yes we should ignore the result of the wars and we should establish a free and sovereign Palestine. No other result will even begin to establish peace and no effort to evict Palestinians from their homeland will result in anything but the (rightfully) eventual destruction of Israel under the very same logic.

[andyt]

Israel claims it seized the west bank as a bargaining chip. If you start putting people on the ground there to build up roots, that means you have no intention of giving it back. Well, the other side is rightly pissed about that. The Palestinians need a state of their own, so let em have it. Then if the Palestinian state continues to make war on Israel, Israel would be perfectly within its rights to blow the shit out of it.

But with what you say, well why doesn't Israel just come out and make that argument and annex the west bank, expel all the Palestinians. Quit he bullshit of painting itself as the victim while it pursues expansionary policies. I guess they learned a thing or two from the Nazis, but in the the end that didn't turn out so well either.

Same with the US. If it wants to ally with Israel to keep a toehold in the ME, or because of internal US politics, well go for it. But then don't act all surprised when the other side, who sees things differently pushes back as best they can. Personally I don't know why the Palestinians bother talking to the US at all - it's not like the US does much for them. I guess the leadership is after the few scheckels they receive, to line their own pockets.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

How about because its international law? If that doesn't work then we can safely assume that getting land through military conquest will be perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question yes we should ignore the result of the wars and we should establish a free and sovereign Palestine. No other result will even begin to establish peace and no effort to evict Palestinians from their homeland will result in anything but the (rightfully) eventual destruction of Israel under the very same logic.

When you guys give Canada back to the First Nations the Israelis will pay a little more attention to this idea of yours.

[DerbyX]

andyt andyt:

Israel claims it seized the west bank as a bargaining chip. If you start putting people on the ground there to build up roots, that means you have no intention of giving it back. Well, the other side is rightly pissed about that. The Palestinians need a state of their own, so let em have it. Then if the Palestinian state continues to make war on Israel, Israel would be perfectly within its rights to blow the shit out of it.

That is right. We let them have it or rather we build it with them and if need be use force to make it happen much like how Israel was carved out. What is good for the goose and all that.

andyt andyt:

But with what you say, well why doesn't Israel just come out and make that argument and annex the west bank, expel all the Palestinians. Quit he bullshit of painting itself as the victim while it pursues expansionary policies. I guess they learned a thing or two from the Nazis, but in the the end that didn't turn out so well either.

Probably because it is an act in violation of said international law and specifically the 4th Geneva Convention. Israel already has already alienated most of the world due to its actions and such an action would not only bring down near universal condemnation but be the prefect rallying cry for the destruction of Israel.

[martin14]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How about because its international law? If that doesn't work then we can safely assume that getting land through military conquest will be perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question yes we should ignore the result of the wars and we should establish a free and sovereign Palestine. No other result will even begin to establish peace and no effort to evict Palestinians from their homeland will result in anything but the (rightfully) eventual destruction of Israel under the very same logic.

When you guys give Canada back to the First Nations the Israelis will pay a little more attention to this idea of yours.

and the US giving the Midwest and Pacific back to the Indians.

and China giving Tibet back.

and Transylvania going back to Hungary.


shall we keep going ?

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How about because its international law? If that doesn't work then we can safely assume that getting land through military conquest will be perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question yes we should ignore the result of the wars and we should establish a free and sovereign Palestine. No other result will even begin to establish peace and no effort to evict Palestinians from their homeland will result in anything but the (rightfully) eventual destruction of Israel under the very same logic.

When you guys give Canada back to the First Nations the Israelis will pay a little more attention to this idea of yours.

You guys? Really? Ignoring your own history here, aren't we? We just slaughtered less of them than you did, so there's relatively more of them to complain about it.

[DerbyX]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How about because its international law? If that doesn't work then we can safely assume that getting land through military conquest will be perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question yes we should ignore the result of the wars and we should establish a free and sovereign Palestine. No other result will even begin to establish peace and no effort to evict Palestinians from their homeland will result in anything but the (rightfully) eventual destruction of Israel under the very same logic.

When you guys give Canada back to the First Nations the Israelis will pay a little more attention to this idea of yours.

When you complain about past US meddling in the affairs of others then perhaps you'll have standing to bitch about Obama which just stinks of hypocrisy as your troops have invaded and effected regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In addition, if you know anything about my posting you should remember that I favour just that. Natives should be given the chance to build their own country if they so desire even if that means large areas be ceeded to them.

[andyt]

DerbyX DerbyX:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How about because its international law? If that doesn't work then we can safely assume that getting land through military conquest will be perfectly acceptable.

To answer your question yes we should ignore the result of the wars and we should establish a free and sovereign Palestine. No other result will even begin to establish peace and no effort to evict Palestinians from their homeland will result in anything but the (rightfully) eventual destruction of Israel under the very same logic.

When you guys give Canada back to the First Nations the Israelis will pay a little more attention to this idea of yours.

When you complain about past US meddling in the affairs of others then perhaps you'll have standing to bitch about Obama which just stinks of hypocrisy as your troops have invaded and effected regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In addition, if you know anything about my posting you should remember that I favour just that. Natives should be given the chance to build their own country if they so desire even if that means large areas be ceeded to them.

Why not the whole country? What areas were "empty" of natives when we got here? Certainly the natives in BC claim more than 100% of the landmass as rightfully belonging to them. Where would be all move to? It's not like we can all go back to Europe - most of us are a mixture, so we don't have a claim on any one nation. Plus what about all those new wave Asians (as opposed to the original Asian settlers) who we've invited to live here?

[DerbyX]

andyt andyt:

Why not the whole country? What areas were "empty" of natives when we got here? Certainly the natives in BC claim more than 100% of the landmass as rightfully belonging to them. Where would be all move to? It's not like we can all go back to Europe - most of us are a mixture, so we don't have a claim on any one nation. Plus what about all those new wave Asians (as opposed to the original Asian settlers) who we've invited to live here?

Well I don't want to go way off-topic but when you get a chance look at a "proposed" map of a sovereign Quebec that doesn't include the very large northern areas. If land like that can remain part of Canada with native support it could serve as a separate country. In fact we could easily set aside large areas of many provinces and give them the option to all migrate to these areas where we could help them build their own country. In fact Nunavut could theoretically just become sovereign if they really wanted to.

I'm not saying it would be easy but in the end if their is strong enough support from the Natives then we could manage it. That doesn't mean they simply all get whatever land they want to claim unless they want very very small countries no longer supported in the least by the Canadian tax-payer, something that has been expressed on this forum before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canad ... ces%29.png

If Canada can be partitioned then so can Quebec and for that means things like this could happen. Of course the natives might very well not want this.