War in the Middle East?

[Hasenau]

Maybe a bit late to join in the discussion but anyway...

Aramike, I strongly agree with your statement that the Arabic culture is very violent. I think this is mostly because of the religion they believe in. Don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with believing in Allah in itself, but the fundamentalism there has a very long tradition of violence.

The last word in this affair has not yet been spoken. I hope this goes out well but right now I am pessimistic and it may very well develop in a war that might quickly slip out of control.

[Akira]

DREADA, that's completely on topic. The question I pose, though, is: do you know the answer to your own question? I do. It's a simple matter of religion.

Jews in Israel realize that they must, by command of God, share their holly sites with other religions. They do their best to abide by this.

The Arabs (mostly Islamic) believe that their religion is the only Right religion and are completely unwilling to share ANYTHING.

The unwillingness to compromise breeds a mindset in people. Unfortunately, in this instance, its a violent mindset. Not necessarily by nature, but instead perpetuated by religious leaders that have over time twisted their own faith to meet their desires.

Instead of a religion that does teach peace, they now have a religion that teaches the only sure way to win favor with Alah is to murder the infidel. Words, lies, stones, bullets, explosives, missiles, chemical/biological agents are all tools used by these people in an attempt to gain control over something that was NEVER theirs.

Until human nature changes, the violent will always exist. That's life.

And, DREADA, just to show my own failings, as you say, my opinion is that the whole area, Israel excluded, should be turned via nuclear fire, into one large glass surface.

We will no longer have to deal with the birthing of new terrorists and more importantly the price of gas will drop as the OPEC nations controling things will no longer exist. But that's just my opinion and one I don't even take seriously!

[J.Smith]

Well, IMO I say that some foriegn countries use terrorist to attack the US because they know that if they attack out right they'll most likely end up like Iraq after Desert Storm. So to avoid war they use terrorist so that no one can do anything about it. Think people, we have bases in striking distance of any place on the globe. Not to mention the air power from the US navy's carriers.

Gotta take my Insanity medicine now ....

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

Cmdr. J.Smith

GCV-Rosetta, Starbase Fenrir

Wraith Fleet/Marauder Wing

http://www.geocities.com/jsmit85

[Steve Schacher]

In the US, elections are organized around the two houses of Congress and the Presidency.

The President serves a four year term.

Congress is organized into the House of Representatives (the lower house) and the Senate (the upper house). Each Representative has a two year term. Each Senator has a six year term. The House is considered to be the "People's House," since the Representatives are elected so frequently and come from small districts. The Senate is considered to be the more deliberative body, since they have six year terms (the longest of all elected officials) and are elected State-wide.

Each State receives two Senators. The number of Representatives that each State receives is based on population, so the Census is very important -- every 10 years, the congressional districts are redrawn and each State's electoral votes are redistributed.

On every even year, the entire House is up for re-election. Also, one-third of the Senate us up for re-election. The President is elected on every other even year (coincidentally on leap-years). This creates a series of overlapping terms so that at no one time is the entire government turned over.

Tim: Can you elaborate on the Parliamentary government used in England? As I understand it (weakly), the people vote for the House of Commons (the lower house), and the House of Commons votes for the House of Lords (upper house). The House of Lords selects the Prime Minister. An election is called anytime the government collapses due to votes of no-confidence. How much of this did I get wrong?

[Guest aramike01]

DREADA, I make that statement in complete generalization. The Arabic religions preach peace. The people, however, take that to mean peace within their religion or variant of such. Also, mind the use of the word, inherently. That means what that above photo displays. The violent ways are inhereted from generation to generation.

quote:

---

Aramike, I strongly agree with your statement that the Arabic culture is very violent. I think this is mostly because of the religion they believe in. Don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with believing in Allah in itself, but the fundamentalism there has a very long tradition of violence.

---

Thanks! I was wondering if anyone agreed!

Back on topic, let's look at the actual cause of this tension between Isreal and the Palestinians. The Palestinians attack the Isrealis in a brief war. Isreal becomes an official state as a result. Another attack, Isreal retaliates by expanding their borders. Now, the Palestinians want those lands back. To me, it's their fault that they've lost them (they couldn't stop fighting).

Also, to put things in perspective, what makes these people any different than Hitler? They essentially preach genocide against every culture that doesn't believe in their faith! Worse than Hitler in both that it's not only one man, but a good portion of the culture. Hello, gentlemen, that's us, too. Of course, that's another generalization, though. To answer DREADAs call about my own faith, well, we don't believe in anything like that. Oh, and neither does the Arabic religion.

quote:

---

And, DREADA, just to show my own failings, as you say, my opinion is that the whole area, Israel excluded, should be turned via nuclear fire, into one large glass surface.

---

Sadly, I agree with that 150%. You'd eliminate the part of the world that has been the root of more violence than anywhere else. I know that contradicts my above statement, so better yet, we would never practice any of that.

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

Vice Admiral Michael Kristophers

ICV-Intrepid, Spectre (Antis)

Fleet Leader

Spectre Fleet

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

You can only love or hate what you truly understand!

[This message has been edited by aramike01 (edited 10-15-2000).]

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve Schacher:

Tim: Can you elaborate on the Parliamentary government used in England? As I understand it (weakly), the people vote for the House of Commons (the lower house), and the House of Commons votes for the House of Lords (upper house). The House of Lords selects the Prime Minister. An election is called anytime the government collapses due to votes of no-confidence. How much of this did I get wrong?

---

Unfortunately it's not as simple as that.

The upper house, also known as The House of Lords used to be just that, an unelected group of (mainly)hereditary peers, Lords, Earls, Dukes etc. This also included a number of "Life Peers" who were given titles for government service or because they were friends with the current Prime Mininster.

The upper house exists as such cos the Queen is the Head of goverment. The UK is a Constitutional Monarchy. She signs the bills into law, can dissolve parliament and when a prime minister is elected, she ratifies the election and asks them to form a government.

These rights are formality, but in theory the Queen could take control of the government.

The lower house is elected, and the leader of the party that gains a majority in that house becomes Prime minister, if there was no outright majority there would normally be a coalition government who would then decide who would be Prime Mininster.

The current goverment has been trying to reform the House of Lords to make them more accountable. This means introducing more people chosen by the government to sit. (Personally I don't see how this will work)

The importance of this is that the House of Lords has to agree with any new bill before is is signed into law.

Votes of no confidence are normally only concerned with the leader of a party. If his/her collegeus think that they are doing a bad job they can get rid of them.

General Elections are normally called every 5 years, but this is decided by the party currently in power. There are also things known as by-elections where a seat might become available for election due to illness, the death of an MP etc. These can become very important if the goverment only has a small majority (in the Commons)

I'm not entirely sure how the other Assemblies work,(Wales + Scotland) but they have no upper house.

This probably makes it no clearer, but you did ask =)

[Steve Schacher]

quote:

---

You'd eliminate the part of the world that has been the root of more violence than anywhere else.

---

Unfortunately, you'd eliminate the cradle of Western civilization as well.

Now, wouldn't THAT be a legacy...

[Guest]

While I think of it, I will jam a really big spanner in the works by saying that the modern state of Israel was created at the end of WWII by the British because they had Palestine at the time.

I am pretty sure on that, but I'm sure somone will correct me if I'm wrong.

[Guest aramike01]

Of course you're right, Steve. Just more of a personal feeling. Btw, I wanted to address the following from Cruisin:

quote:

---

free speech may have always been a right, but that was never fully allowed.

---

In what country? In the US, freedom of speech has always been allowed!

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

Vice Admiral Michael Kristophers

ICV-Intrepid, Spectre (Antis)

Fleet Leader

Spectre Fleet

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

You can only love or hate what you truly understand!

[Cruis.In]

hmm, what;s the free speech movement at universities in the 60's then?

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

Captain Cruis In

ICV St. Helens, Sygan Starstation (Sygan)

CEO, Sygan Starstation

Balor Fleet

"You can only love or hate something you truly understand"

[Rattler]

I believe, and I could be wrong here, that during the '60s they started this movement because they felt that they had the right to say and do anything without reprocussion. Our bill of rights, (remember those?) gave us the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Along with those rights came the responsibility to use them as we saw fit, as long as they did not infringe upon another's rights to pursue his own life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. We still have all those rights guaranteed by the constitution. We can say and do anything that we want, we just have to be correct. Those that forget to be correct are generally prosecuted to the fullest extent under Libel charges. That's also another right of ours. We don't have to stand for character assasinations. They had better be right if they say something about you in public forums.

Another Right, under the free speech movement that Cruis.In is talking about, is your ability to burn the American Flag in public. That might still be your right but don't try it around myself or any other Vet out here! You might be speaking with your actions and hands for a lot longer than you counted on. I'm told it's extremely difficult to speak, and eat, with a broken jaw!

Late Add In: While I'm on a roll here I'll also bring up the fact that, during the '60s and '70s, we guardians on the walls stood out there on the line, many dying, far to many I'll also say, defending your right of free speech and spitting on us when we wore our uniforms home through the airports. You had your freedom of speech even back then. We didn't drag you by your collars out into those streets and execute you like many other countries would have done. Nope, we smiled, hurt inside, and climbed back on that wall so that those that had offended us could stay safe at night and do it all over again to us again tomorrow. It might sound like I'm bitter but I'm truely not. I've given the better part of my life (and my wife's as well) defending YOUR right to freedom of speech! If you don't recognize this, then it's all been wasted and I could easily have just stayed at home and enjoyed my family more.

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

Insurgent One, Rattler

ICV Necromancer, Spectre HQ (Antis)

Commander-In-Chief,

Insurgency

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

[email protected]

ICQ 12894104

"You can only love or hate something you truly understand"

[This message has been edited by Rattler (edited 10-15-2000).]

[Steve Schacher]

Cruis.In may be mistaking the "free speech" movement with the "free love" movement of the sixies.

The sixties is a difficult decade to judge the USA by. On the one hand, you had normal generational rebellion, except that this time they were rebeling against the America of Ozzie and Harriet Nelson and Father Knows Best. Free Speech simply meant that things that used to stay behind closed (bedroom) doors was now out in the open for discussion. If the fifties was the embarrassment of puberty, then the sixties was the emancipation of twenty-somethings (remember the phrase "Don't trust anyone over thirty?").

Juxtaposed with this, you had the Viet Nam War and the unrest that came with a divided nation. The youth of the country was experiencing unprecedented freedom of expression (a more accurate phrase than "free speech" and closer to what you meant) at the same time that they were being drafted to fight a war that the government was refusing to call a war. All of the cynicism that you (and we) cite today stems directly from this period. I was only 10 years old in 1969, but I respect the people who served their country regardless of the reasons they were called to serve.

The blame lies with the politicians. If you saw any of the Presidential Debate on Wednesday, when Bush said he wouldn't use the military for nation-building and Gore said that what was done post-WWII was exactly nation-building, he was referring to the Korean Conflict (another war that the government refused to call a war) and Viet Nam.

To bring this discussion back on topic, when you look at what Clinton was trying to do in the Middle East, you see the same kind of disdain for allowing the occupants of a region decide for themselves how the will live and relate to each other. Clinton was trying to secure a legacy for himself by rushing opposing sides into an agreement that neither wanted for reasons that had nothing to do with either party.

If you want a musical reference to listen to (instead of Marley), try the musical "Hair."

Oh, and one more thing -- "Free Speech" actually means that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech..." Individuals have no legal protection of free speech from each other or businesses, only from the Federal government. For example, when John Rocker was sent to a psychiatrist for his comments and people claimed that it violated his right of free speech, it was Major League Baseball that sent him, not Government. It was not a First Amendment issue.

I better stop now, before I sound preachy and arrogant like Gore...

[This message has been edited by Steve Schacher (edited 10-15-2000).]

[Supreme Cmdr]

I don't think a photo of young Palestinian boys with auto weapons is an indication of the violent nature of the Arabs. There are America kids running around with guns right here in the US.

The fact is, violence begets violence and having been pretty much all over the world, including West African and Arab nations, I can say, first hand, that the typical Arab (hardly any exceptions) are inherently violent. Even the culture itself indicates this. eg where you lose a limb for some crimes etc

btw, in case any of you were wondering. Go take a look at my online pic again on the History section of this site. Yes, I have Arabic roots from the Med through several ancestors down the bloodline. And before you go guessing, hehe, I'm not Palestinian or Israeli

[Cruis.In]

ratter your last paragraph was talking in general right?

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

Captain Cruis In

ICV St. Helens, Sygan Starstation (Sygan)

CEO, Sygan Starstation

Balor Fleet

"You can only love or hate something you truly understand"

[Guest aramike01]

quote:

---

There are America kids running around with guns right here in the US.

---

Makes sense, only difference being that our authoritative agencies to promote this, neither does the culture. I used that photo more to illustrate the government soldier teaching young children to kill.

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

Vice Admiral Michael Kristophers

ICV-Intrepid, Spectre (Antis)

Fleet Leader

Spectre Fleet

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

You can only love or hate what you truly understand!

[Cruis.In]

quote:

---

I used that photo more to illustrate the government soldier teaching young children to kill

---

Hmm..how about teaching a child to defend himself? How about teaching a child to defend himself and his family because the place they live in is a frequent warzone and they could be attacked anytime?

Seems more like he's teaching them to use a gun. Not to go kill everyone they see.

Russian children in militia groups also tot guns and are trained to use them, so I don't think that's really valid in the point you're trying to make.

I've been thinking about this, and I believe the Arab culture is not inherently violent at all, but mainly certain bad apple elements within that culture and particular religious sects.

I believe the human race as a whole are a violent culture. Or prone to do violent things and acts. For example Great Britain, great conquerors of the world over...heh they owned my island at one point.

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

Captain Cruis In

ICV St. Helens, Sygan Starstation (Sygan)

CEO, Sygan Starstation

Balor Fleet

"You can only love or hate something you truly understand"

[This message has been edited by Cruis.In (edited 10-16-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Cruis.In (edited 10-16-2000).]

[Guest aramike01]

quote:

---

Hmm..how about teaching a child to defend himself? How about teaching a child to defend himself and his family because the place they live in is a frequent warzone and they could be attacked anytime?

Seems more like he's teaching them to use a gun. Not to go kill everyone they see.

---

What it seems to you and what it is are two different things. Arabic militias have traditionally used children as young as 13 (sometimes younger) to help fight their wars. Also, children are used in many suicide capacities as well. Check your history.

quote:

---

I believe the human race as a whole are a violent culture. Or prone to do violent things and acts. For example Great Britain, great conquerors of the world over...heh they owned my island at one point.

---

I agree with that statement. However, most of the world have evolved to some extent. Law and order is the general ideology. That's not the case in that part of the world.

quote:

---

Russian children in militia groups also tot guns and are trained to use them, so I don't think that's really valid in the point you're trying to make.

---

A Russian militia group is neither endorsed nor condoned by any government. The Palestinian militia group is the government's essential military force. I don't think that's a valid point you're trying to make.

Addition: Btw IMO, you don't give children automatic weapons for defense. That just doesn't make sense. A military is supposed to protect the citizens of a country (especially children), not arm them. In any case, it's horrifying to hear parents teach their children to kill the Jews (check CNN). You may want to do a fact-check, Cruisin.

Another addition:

quote:

---

I used that photo more to illustrate the government soldier teaching young children to kill

---

You responded by saying that it may be for defense. Defense with a gun usually amounts to someone being killed. And, someone carrying a gun becomes a target. That child whom the Isreali military would not consider hurting purposefully becomes a target with that gun in his hands. Sad, really.

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

Vice Admiral Michael Kristophers

ICV-Intrepid, Spectre (Antis)

Fleet Leader

Spectre Fleet

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

You can only love or hate what you truly understand!

[This message has been edited by aramike01 (edited 10-16-2000).]

[Guest aramike01]

Oh, and I wanted to comment on Rattler's post. You guys out there who take the position of passification need to understand what he is saying. There are many men and women out there right now fighting an unofficial war on the behalf of your freedom. Those kids with guns that Cruisin defends have accounted for more than 1 death of those unsung heroes. All of that for an ideology that says that those people have equal moral standards as we do. Take a look around - there is no battling on your lawn. And why is there fighting on that child's doorstep? Because his leaders keep attacking other men for land and religion. You can bet your life that, if someone where to attempt that against the US, that someone would meet and early grave.

Yet people here defend the Palestinians and their ways, when often the result is the death of not only an Isreali, but a Palestinian child. All for what? A religious stone wall? Is that worth the life of one child, regardless of their race or creed?

I don't think so.

Yet, some people will defend the instigators of this continuing conflict. Sure, the rest of the world is violent. Sure, the human race knows violence better than anything else. But still, this isn't happening on your lands, and I doubt that most of you have seen armed conflict first-hand.

To me, a man, woman, and child has one basic, all-encompassing right: life. Yet the Palestinian leaders deny that right. Maybe not directly, but in allowing and encouraging people to fight and die for a cause that can be settle peacefully, that right is violated. Who's going to carry the burden of blame when an Isreali bomb hits a school yard being used to train kids to fight? At the same time, the Isrealis have made many concessions, all denied by their Palestinian counter-parts. Who carries the blame for that?

quote:

---

Hmm..how about teaching a child to defend himself? How about teaching a child to defend himself and his family because the place they live in is a frequent warzone and they could be attacked anytime?

Russian children in militia groups also tot guns and are trained to use them, so I don't think that's really valid in the point you're trying to make.

---

Cruisin, you questioned my validity, now I question yours. Do you see Isrealis arming their children, who are on the same battlefield as the Palestinians? Do you see Isrealis targeting anyone who is Arabic, like the Palestinians are targeting everyone who is Jewish?

Interesting questions, I think. I await your response.

Btw, is this a good discussion or what?

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

Vice Admiral Michael Kristophers

ICV-Intrepid, Spectre (Antis)

Fleet Leader

Spectre Fleet

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

You can only love or hate what you truly understand!

[This message has been edited by aramike01 (edited 10-16-2000).]

[ShoHashi]

quote:

---

Another Right, under the free speech movement that Cruis.In is talking about, is your ability to burn the American Flag in public. That might still be your right but don't try it around myself or any other Vet out here! You might be speaking with your actions and hands for a lot longer than you counted on. I'm told it's extremely difficult to speak, and eat, with a broken jaw!

---

Amen to that, Rattler!

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

Commodore ShoHashi

ICV Aries, New Frontier (Rinaal)

Station Commander, New Frontier

Bishamon Fleet

ICQ 484321

[email protected]

"You can only love or hate something you truly understand"

[This message has been edited by ShoHashi (edited 10-16-2000).]

[Rattler]

Yes, Cruis.In, I was speaking in generalizations. Most of you that are reading this thread weren't alive when that was going on. I can't hold bad feelings for you, as I said, You weren't even born yet. I was just demonstrating that inallienalbe right of freedom of speech, whether it be by verbal or physical process. I'm going to refrain from posting on this thread from this point on. I tend to get heated in this type of discussion when I see someone questioning what I've devoted most of my life defending. In our past, We Americans have done a lot of bad things ourselves. I cite the "Bay Of Pigs" as a perfect example. So, we aren't squeaky clean ourselves. With that, I'll just monitor this thread and watch what unfolds.

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

Insurgent One, Rattler

ICV Necromancer, Spectre HQ (Antis)

Commander-In-Chief,

Insurgency

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

[email protected]

ICQ 12894104

"You can only love or hate something you truly understand"

[This message has been edited by Rattler (edited 10-16-2000).]

[Steve Schacher]

Some random thoughts:

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

A twelve-year-old Palestinian boy is shot dead on international TV by Israeli soldiers during a rock-throwing riot. Question: what was he doing there in the first place? Was this a spontaneous riot and he and his father were caught in the middle of it? Or was it a strategy to push the young ones to the front lines for photo-op sympathy?

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

Israeli soldiers retaliated to the beating death of the two soldiers at Palestinian police headquarters by 1) announcing a missile attack three hours before the intended time, 2) announcing the exact location of the attack, and 3) at the designated time they launched the attack. No one was hurt, although bunkers were demolished. Why did the Israelis make sure that nobody would be harmed by giving a three-hour warning?

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

An old internet-joke from several years ago goes like this:

First Man: Do you believe in the First Amendment right to free speech?

Second Man: Why yes, I do.

First Man: Do you own a gun?

Second Man: No, I don't.

First Man: Then, shut up!!!

[SpacePhish]

Nice debate you all

quote:

---

rattler were you a national guardsman?

---

He was Navy...

[Steve Schacher]

quote:

---

As far as I know, The navy still uses AFS/AFO Ships. That's one of the most important links in the chain of the US Navy's ability to perform it's designated mission.

---

Retired Colonel David Hackworth has been reporting the following (from a Newsmax transcript of Fox News Channel's Hannity and Colms):

Hackworth said the Navy's inability to refuel at sea was a direct result of declining military readiness during the Clinton-Gore years.

"We go to the point of readiness. Admiral Clark, the chief of naval operations, said, 'Look, we had to go there because we couldn't refuel at sea cause we don't have any tankers, any oilers.' So as a result of that, why don't we have any oilers? Why didn't the chiefs of the United States Navy sound off?"

"We've got this argument going on between Bush and Gore," said Hackworth. "Bush says readiness sucks. Gore says everything's peachy keen. All of the brass are sitting there with their mouths shut. But now we don't have enough oilers to refuel that ship and we lose those people because our readiness is not squared away?"

Hackworth confirmed that 22 of the Navy's refueling tankers have been placed in mothballs since 1993, and that the overall fleet had declined from 435 ships to 311 during the Clinton-Gore years.

"That ship that was taken out of the Middle East was part of a battle fleet," Hackworth responded. "They stripped it from the battle fleet, they said go all by yourself, stop at Aden, get some refueling, and then go up in the Gulf. And that shows you how stretched our United States Navy and our total military really is."

"It's a national disgrace and somebody should hang," said Hackworth, who then looked at Andrews and added, "and it should start right with you congressfolks."

Hackworth's latest column: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_hackw...o_more_co.shtml

[This message has been edited by Steve Schacher (edited 10-17-2000).]

[Guest aramike01]

Steve, if anything comes out of this thread, I hope it's an election victory for GW!

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

Vice Admiral Michael Kristophers

ICV-Intrepid, Spectre (Antis)

Fleet Leader

Spectre Fleet

Official Tester, Battlecruiser Series

You can only love or hate what you truly understand!

[Steve Schacher]

If you guys want a gun photo to obsess on, take a look at this! http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.sht...00/10/16/195448

p.s. Mike, you killed my best joke!!!