Several Middle Eastern nations actively fund terrorist organizations.
Funding, electing, and/or promoting an organization which turns out to have a terrorist agenda ≠ Supporting terrorism.
Also, the U.S. alone has enough nuclear weaponry to kill every living thing on the planet. Russia has a similarly large nuclear arsenal.
Destroy ≠ Kill everything living upon ≠ Render into glass.
And thorium is plentiful enough to produce enough fissionable materials to glass a continent if someone was willing to put that much effort into it.
No, it doesn't. Consider how much mass comprises the arabian peninsula alone. Then consider the effectiveness of nuclear armaments for vaporizing silicate. Then consider how much silicate stands between the highest prominence and sea level.
You can't avoid fixing your mistakes just because you might screw up. I've already pointed out to 09philj that there was a valid reason to go to war with Iraq. But even if our only reason was to fix the mistake of supporting Hussein it was the right thing to do.
I think what he's getting at is that going to war is not an effective means of fixing a mistake, something which is generally true unless the opposition has little or no military power.
Pretty much all cultures glorify the people who will risk their lives to protect others and this extends to warriors. There's also a desire to protect others and a sense of camaraderie that comes into play. The latter are probably most noticeable when someone is dealing with survivor's guilt. Actually experiencing war tends to quickly remove the idea of glory some people are expecting, but those who fight to protect others take it better. This is something that was depicted fairly well in the movie American Sniper if you want a point of reference.
Yes, but but that explains the will to enlist, not the will to initiate wars. I mentioned this because someone was hinting the the public wants war.
From 1700 to 2015 the UK has had one "extended" period of peace. That's from the Adwan Rebellion (1923) to The Great Arab Revolt in Palestine (1936-1939)
And even in those years there where minor fighting across the colonies.
Yes, but but that explains the will to enlist, not the will to initiate wars. I mentioned this because someone was hinting the the public wants war.
There's a marked difference between not wanting to initiate an unecessary war and not wanting to end a war that's already started. Mickeyryn was talking about the latter, as his post was about the Israeli people not wanting to "back down". Perhaps a more accurate analogy would be World War era America. With a diverse population, mostly made up of European immigrants, the public and politicians were wary about entering either of the World Wars. Then Germany sunk a couple cruise ships with a bunch of civilians on board in 1917, and the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941. After those incidents the public practically demanded the government to declare war on Germany and its allies.
Middle East is very complex area. If you do a smallest thing terecan be a war. And personally I am not glad with allie troops on ME because it feels like rulling the world politics by force. Israel is maybe the most interasting country in the world because no nation has such a strange history. And their character is very interasing to. They will rather die for their country and kill 5 arabs then peacefully backdown. But why can't they let Palastins have there own country? Why not let a nation have their own country on which they were living before other nation camed again? Is it hard to give a pice of land to others? Are people that selfish?
There's a marked difference between not wanting to initiate an unecessary war and not wanting to end a war that's already started. Mickeyryn was talking about the latter
And maybe you are right, but the point i was trying to make is the public would rather want there to be no war at all. I heard people more then once speculating Israelis want war for revenge or profit of some sort.
They will rather die for their country and kill 5 arabs then peacefully backdown. But why can't they let Palastins have there own country? Why not let a nation have their own country on which they were living before other nation camed again? Is it hard to give a pice of land to others? Are people that selfish?
I hardly consider being "pushed to the sea" a 'peaceful backdown'.
For the last questions, its not about that anymore. Now its countless security, cultural and economic interests colliding. But in the 40's it was. So the answer to that last question is yes, but risking your life for your country or ideology can hardly represent the word selfish (even for terrorists). People tend to see their greater group (their country, ethnic group, social class, etc) as the only thing they are part of, not as people in general. So their selfless decisions are according to their greater group's interest, not for that of mankind.
09philj You cite a blog post by a blogger partisan on gun control. My statistics come from the FBI and research conducted by a third-party group.
Well, he actually cited something. Thus far, we have nothing but your word that this research (1) existed, (2) generated your statistics, and (3) arrived at the conclusion you claim.
Why not let a nation have their own country on which they were living before other nation camed again?
- they came with that option AFTER they occupied the country and changed the name...
- it would make the effect of killing over 1 million palestinians pointless.
- if we allowed old countries to rise again, then that would be world war 3.
(there is always a country that existed before a other country did in the same spot... what timezone are we going to get back to? the roman empire and the mongolian empire for example did share some ground. but before them there have been other countries right there aswell... soo... what country should we allowe back on the field? and what existing countries should stop existing for it?)
but risking your life for your country or ideology can hardly represent the word selfish
I meant that Izrael should give part of land on wich there is much more Palestinians back to Palestinians. Diing for your country is not selfish at all but why can't a nation (Izrael) give land to other nation (Palestina) if on that part of that first land is much more other nations (Palestinas) mans?
@partydevil I was talking other way around. Izrael should give land crowded with palestinians to Palestina.
As an Israeli citizen I couldn't care less if the places they are the vast majority of are no longer in my country. Hell, I'd probably get stabbed if I ever went there anyway.
But that's hardly the point for me. I don't want that to happen because I believe there's a high chance their country will turn into a terror powerhouse in a matter of years (tops). I don't want a terror powerhouse right next door from me.
That's partly why I never vote for left wing parties.
Also, they want all sort of stuff other then a right to rule. Such as removing all the Israeli settlements in the West bank, half of Jerusalem, the "right of return" (giving a few million Palestinians the right to Israeli citizenship), control of religious sites, strategic grounds, some other mostly economic things.
I was talking other way around. Izrael should give land crowded with palestinians to Palestina.
yes,
- they came with that option AFTER they occupied the country and changed the name...
- it would make the effect of killing over 1 million palestinians pointless.
- if we allowed old countries to rise again, then that would be world war 3.
point 1: granted that they didn't give this exact option, but something like it.
point 2: a reason, that makes it harder to decide if the option would be a right choice. now they did die for a reason. (no good reason, but a reason.) give the land back and it's been pointless...
point 3: a reason, any government not willing to give up some land for that reason is able to use.
sorry for rushing, i often don't write down my full thoughts... =)
Who will guarentee peace? As for today there are far too many organizations that represent the palestinians. From communists to exreme religious facist. Who will guarentee that after the next coup d'ate the next group wont burn the papers and it will be a giant war again?
I back Israel 100%, they are Gods people and anyone who supports them are backed by the big man upstairs. Praise God. I feel bad for them No one is standing with them anymore scared for their countries, but in the end God is gonna restore and renew everything that was stolen from his people and Israel will become the bride shining on the hill.
