Continue The War In Iraq?

[WinePusher]

Iraq, along with the rest of the Middle East, has been the attention of much media coverage the past few months. It seems that the big three concerns are regarding 1) The Syrian Revolution 2) The Destabilization of Iraq and 3) Iran Gaining Nuclear Weaponry.

The most important issue to many is the destabilization of Iraq. Considering the fact that we fought a decade long war in Iraq, lost thousands of brave men and women and spent trillions of dollars it would be very demoralizing to see the country drift back into Islamic tyranny. However, those on the left have brought up valid points regarding the deep religious tensions and conflicts in the region that have caused centuries of warfare and turmoil. So, according to them, it seems to be foolish to think that the United States could resolve such as deep rooted conflict.

Questions for debate:

1) What (if anything) can be done to bring peace to the Middle East?

2) Should the United States abandon Iraq or re-enter Iraq and try to stabilize the situation using military force?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 21:

This is the wall that surrounds Gaza from the Israeli side. It is a prison.

I contend that walls built to keep folks out don't near constitute a prison for 'em them walls seek to keep out, so much as they imprison the ones within.

What Israel has done is to crush Palestinians and put them in "their place." A people who once lived in peace alongside Jews just 100 years ago.

A hundred years ago don't near reflect what happened 'a week and a half ago'. There should be no need to defend myself against those who ain't lobbin' rockets upon my head. Beyond that, there's the issue of the desecrating of Jewish stuff, as history indicates (my data may be lacking).

These "Palestinians" had their chance in Isreal, upon its founding, only to accept promises of "Muslim Nations" that were heck bent to destroy the new nation, only they were inept to incapable of securing "Palestinian freedom".

Now "Palestinian freedom" is, by their own leaders' declarations, the "freedom" to destroy the Jews. To heck with that, and to heck with them.

Long live Israel! Long live the Israelis! Ya big ol bunch o' goofies! I love ya'll! Don't rightly know too much about ya, but I know I ain't ever had to fret me no gettin' blowed up by ya. And seen some of your womenfolk on the internet nekkid. That alone's worthy of respect right there, for how pretty they was, when it was, they got 'em the nekkid picture took.

If you were in the same position, would you just bow down, or fight back?

Fight back. By entering those territories from which all them rockets are a-comin', for to try to ensure they don't.

And would you be a terrorist for fighting back against oppression? Or a patriot?

Don't care what folks call it. The effort to live is above anyone's definition of how I go about it. That includes my opponents and such. I respect they have their take, and hope that reasonable, rational dialogue can fix it.


All said though, I respect your take here. It's a terrible situation over there, but I do, and would, defend the right of the Israelis to have 'em a place for their stuff. I respect that trying as an "outsider" to declare national boundaries is as goofy as what I mighta just said up there.

[Nickman]

From Post 21:

This is the wall that surrounds Gaza from the Israeli side. It is a prison.

I contend that walls built to keep folks out don't near constitute a prison for 'em them walls seek to keep out, so much as they imprison the ones within.

What Israel has done is to crush Palestinians and put them in "their place." A people who once lived in peace alongside Jews just 100 years ago.

A hundred years ago don't near reflect what happened 'a week and a half ago'. There should be no need to defend myself against those who ain't lobbin' rockets upon my head. Beyond that, there's the issue of the desecrating of Jewish stuff, as history indicates (my data may be lacking).

These "Palestinians" had their chance in Isreal, upon its founding, only to accept promises of "Muslim Nations" that were heck bent to destroy the new nation, only they were inept to incapable of securing "Palestinian freedom".

Now "Palestinian freedom" is, by their own leaders' declarations, the "freedom" to destroy the Jews. To heck with that, and to heck with them.

Long live Israel! Long live the Israelis! Ya big ol bunch o' goofies! I love ya'll! Don't rightly know too much about ya, but I know I ain't ever had to fret me no gettin' blowed up by ya. And seen some of your womenfolk on the internet nekkid. That alone's worthy of respect right there, for how pretty they was, when it was, they got 'em the nekkid picture took.

If you were in the same position, would you just bow down, or fight back?

Fight back. By entering those territories from which all them rockets are a-comin', for to try to ensure they don't.

And would you be a terrorist for fighting back against oppression? Or a patriot?

Don't care what folks call it. The effort to live is above anyone's definition of how I go about it. That includes my opponents and such. I respect they have their take, and hope that reasonable, rational dialogue can fix it.


All said though, I respect your take here. It's a terrible situation over there, but I do, and would, defend the right of the Israelis to have 'em a place for their stuff. I respect that trying as an "outsider" to declare national boundaries is as goofy as what I mighta just said up there.

The problem Joey is that Israel came to a country that they did not own and took it over through force. Think about this: Let's say that Blacks rose up and said we deserve such and such land because we have an old book that says so, at the downfall of the people who currently live there. We would be up in arms against that. Israel does not get a pass on this. It is colonialism and a hostile take-over.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 32:

I respect that my friend disagrees, and wish to extend all well wishes and good tidings. I have the utmost respect that Nickman ain't just another anti-semite, and only mention that word so folks know I don't think he is one.

The problem Joey is that Israel came to a country that they did not own and took it over through force. Think about this: Let's say that Blacks rose up and said we deserve such and such land because we have an old book that says so, at the downfall of the people who currently live there. We would be up in arms against that. Israel does not get a pass on this. It is colonialism and a hostile take-over.

Many, many Jews lived in these lands for as long as there was a couple Jews. Though they were eventually under the rule of others, they remained, as Jews, in their "holy lands".

Then, in the Holocaust, those rulers sided with Hitler and that bunch, and got their tails torn off. I find it a simple matter of recompense that those who suffered so much would have them some holy lands. If only to me, Israel represents the horrors of the holocaust, and the promise of people living in peace.

Upon Israel's founding, these "displaced" Arabs / Muslims were allowed to live in Israel, only they took with the other guys who sought the destruction of the young Jewish state. To this day there is little call for peace with the Jews, only calls for their destruction. As a people and as a state.

Count me with the Jews. They are, if allowed to be, a peaceful sort, who have their bad apples, but they sure don't lob 'em by the barrelful at anyone who disagrees.

Nigh on their whole history is this or that bunch of folks bullying 'em around, and I know a bit of what that feels like. I say we keep Israel alive in memory of the millions lost in the holocaust, and the millions lost in other battles for their very existence.

A hostile takeover? I don't doubt many a Jew is a bit hostile, considering that for nigh on as long as there's been a Jew, he's had to fight to exist. Look at the globe. See how much of it's under Muslim rule. See how Muslims treat folks who ain't Muslim. And we should feel bad for 'em pining over a plot of land no bigger'n a Buick?

Wars have consequences. When you side with the Hitlers of the world, let those consequences hurt.

[SailingCyclops]

Then, in the Holocaust, those rulers sided with Hitler and that bunch, and got their tails torn off. I find it a simple matter of recompense that those who suffered so much would have them some holy lands.

Correct. However those who perpetrated the genocide should have been those who suffered. They deserved to lose their land, country, and freedom --not the innocent Palistinians. How was it right that the recompense fell on the Arabs and not on the guilty Germans? Religion was responsible for this miscarriage of justice.

I would have had no problem if Germany had been carved up, making an Israeli state in the west, and keeping East Germany perpetually under the heel of a repressive Soviet government. It would have been justice instead of the beginning of yet another displacement, and abuse of another people. As they say, no justice no peace!

[Nickman]

I respect that my friend disagrees, and wish to extend all well wishes and good tidings. I have the utmost respect that Nickman ain't just another anti-semite, and only mention that word so folks know I don't think he is one.

Thanks Joey, I respect you too. I just happen to disagree on this issue. Hopefully we can come to a meaningful discussion on this matter.

Many, many Jews lived in these lands for as long as there was a couple Jews. Though they were eventually under the rule of others, they remained, as Jews, in their "holy lands".

Then, in the Holocaust, those rulers sided with Hitler and that bunch, and got their tails torn off. I find it a simple matter of recompense that those who suffered so much would have them some holy lands. If only to me, Israel represents the horrors of the holocaust, and the promise of people living in peace.

Upon Israel's founding, these "displaced" Arabs / Muslims were allowed to live in Israel, only they took with the other guys who sought the destruction of the young Jewish state. To this day there is little call for peace with the Jews, only calls for their destruction. As a people and as a state.

What you are claiming here certainly didn't happen the way you say. Yes, Jews were persecuted in the most horrific ways known to man. No, they did not live in the land of Palestine as you say. The population of Palestine 100 years ago was 90% Arab and 10% percent Jew. The Jews had not had a majority there for hundreds of years. Palestinians had property deeds and owned land there for a long time. They also got along well beside their Jewish neighbors. The reason there are calls for Israel's destruction is because under the Zionist movement, Jews decided to exterminate the Arabs in that land to seize it all. The conflict we see today is the result of that extermination attempt.

Count me with the Jews. They are, if allowed to be, a peaceful sort, who have their bad apples, but they sure don't lob 'em by the barrelful at anyone who disagrees.

Nigh on their whole history is this or that bunch of folks bullying 'em around, and I know a bit of what that feels like. I say we keep Israel alive in memory of the millions lost in the holocaust, and the millions lost in other battles for their very existence.

A hostile takeover? I don't doubt many a Jew is a bit hostile, considering that for nigh on as long as there's been a Jew, he's had to fight to exist. Look at the globe. See how much of it's under Muslim rule. See how Muslims treat folks who ain't Muslim. And we should feel bad for 'em pining over a plot of land no bigger'n a Buick?

Wars have consequences. When you side with the Hitlers of the world, let those consequences hurt.

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Arabs were very peaceful and wanted to just live their lives in the land that they owned. Insert a group of people who are dead set on exterminating Arabs from a land that they have owned much longer than Jews and you create problems. Imagine if I went to the home of my grandparents (in which I never lived or owned) and told the new tenant to leave or else I will put them in the basement and lord over them. You would be against that. This is what has happened in Palestine. A group of people are laying claim to land that they never owned or lived in. Only their greatest of ancestors did. All of this at the demise of a people who lived there peacefully for centuries and who actually owned the land that they live on with property deeds to prove it.

Palestine is occupied by Jewish colonialists. The Arabs there have been subjugated and placed into open air prisons (Gaza and West Bank) against their will. If they fight back they are called terrorists. That is ludicrous. It is no different than another country coming to Texas, setting up shop and placing everyone under their control, and if Texans fight back they are labeled terrorists.

[Nickman]

If anyone wants to heard from a voice of the past that lived through it about the Zionist agenda, please watch.

[youtube][/youtube]

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 35:

What you are claiming here certainly didn't happen the way you say. Yes, Jews were persecuted in the most horrific ways known to man.

Agreed.

No, they did not live in the land of Palestine as you say. The population of Palestine 100 years ago was 90% Arab and 10% percent Jew.

My position is that regardless of the ratios, there was a substantial number of Jews who lived in lands that came to be "occupied" by non-Jews. I'm not trying to hate on these "conqurors", just noting that there were Jews living there before, and throughout history.

Where did the Jews fleeing the Nazis try to go? Yes, anywhere, but more importantly, they sought their "homelands" (real or perceived).

The Jews had not had a majority there for hundreds of years. Palestinians had property deeds and owned land there for a long time. They also got along well beside their Jewish neighbors.

I can dig it. My position is that the Jews also owned land, insofar as they were allowed to, or as a "well that's where ya live, so ya kinda own that bit of it".

The reason there are calls for Israel's destruction is because under the Zionist movement, Jews decided to exterminate the Arabs in that land to seize it all. The conflict we see today is the result of that extermination attempt.

What I see is a people struggling for their very existence, on both sides. I would prefer both / all parties get together and stop trying to kill one another. On that note, I notice the pains the Israelis go through to try to limit civilian casualties, and compare that to the Palestinians / Muslims who take pains to ensure civilian casualties.

"Extermination" is, I contend, a perfectly acceptable solution when it is, that'n there's a-tryin' to do it to me. I propose both sides are guilty of some of it, and we should encourage a peaceful solution. Problem is, Israel has repeatedly offered land for peace, only to be denied.

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Arabs were very peaceful and wanted to just live their lives in the land that they owned. Insert a group of people who are dead set on exterminating Arabs from a land that they have owned much longer than Jews and you create problems.

Problem here is that the Jews have kinda always thought of that area as their own. I think you'd be hard pressed to show that Islam began before Judaism, and especially hard pressed to show such is the case in the lands in question.

"Were" is an important notion here. As long as the Arabs were in control, they had little need to be violent, especially given their superior numbers you mentioned above.

Now that there's contention, now that there's calls for broad swaths of the planet to be a "Caliphate", how peacful are they?

I'm just not seeing Jews run about blowing themselves up in buses full of civilians. I'm not seeing Jews fly planes into buildings. I'm not seeing Jews shoot up cartoon drawers.

This whole "extermination" angle of yours is troubling to me. The Israelis have no real motive to do such a thing - considering their paucity of numbers. There is no real argument to say the Jews would continue their "extermination" plans if they'd be left alone.

Imagine if I went to the home of my grandparents (in which I never lived or owned) and told the new tenant to leave or else I will put them in the basement and lord over them. You would be against that. This is what has happened in Palestine. A group of people are laying claim to land that they never owned or lived in. Only their greatest of ancestors did. All of this at the demise of a people who lived there peacefully for centuries and who actually owned the land that they live on with property deeds to prove it.

I respect that argument. I find it strong and compelling.

I would say though, that the Jews, by your own admission, have historical ties to these lands. It ain't like they just every single one of 'em hopped in a boat and set out to take these lands. They feel connected to them, deeply, historically, and religiously.

They, those who lived there, welcomed their brethren to their "historical, holy lands". They didn't just all of 'em show up at the end of WW2.

Palestine is occupied by Jewish colonialists. The Arabs there have been subjugated and placed into open air prisons (Gaza and West Bank) against their will. If they fight back they are called terrorists.

I would like to see the term "terrorist" used / defined more tightly than perhaps it has been. That said, I consider blowing up buses full of civilians to be not just terrorism, but cowardice.

That is ludicrous. It is no different than another country coming to Texas, setting up shop and placing everyone under their control, and if Texans fight back they are labeled terrorists.

You and Davy Crockett both

I propose if your argument should hold merit, we need a good bunch of us leave the countries we call home. But wait, I was born here. Do I dare go invade Denmark, 'cause that's were grampaw came from? Or do I invade Ireland, in the name of my other grampaw? What right do I have to trod on lands other folks used to do their trodding on? Granted, I think the Native Americans had 'em a rough deal, but we can say with some certainty that my forefathers had "deeds" (your term) to the lands they plowed.

You do raise an interesting issue. Is a nation legitimate only because "There's so many of us", or is it legitimate 'cause here I am now?

We still have the issue of the Jews living in these lands for as long as written records exist. Do we dismiss their claims simply because they were overtaken by others? Do we reject their claims simply because they were "outgamed" in a population race?

[Goat]

Let's look at an opinion from an Egyptian Doctor

[youtube][/youtube]

[scourge99]

Let's look at an opinion from an Egyptian Doctor

[youtube][/youtube]

I disagree with the notion that if Hamas became peaceful it would fix everything. I think hostilities are far more entrenched

It seems as silly as saying that if John Boehner and Ted Cruz decided to start supporting ObamaCare then all or most conservatives would suddenly do the same and think ObamaCare is great.

[Goat]

Let's look at an opinion from an Egyptian Doctor

[youtube][/youtube]

I disagree with the notion that if Hamas became peaceful it would fix everything. I think hostilities are far more entrenched

It seems as silly as saying that if John Boehner and Ted Cruz decided to start supporting ObamaCare then all or most conservatives would suddenly do the same and think ObamaCare is great.

it wouldn't fix 'everything'. .. but the leader ship of Hamas does have a huge impact on it.