Didn't the Israeli-Syrian peace talks wind up going no where or did I miss a peace treaty? If there is no treaty then US could just up the ante and get any resolution amended that in the interests of furthering peace and disarmament and mandate that all Middle Eastern countries must sign peace treaties with every other Middle Eastern country in New York. I'm sure the thought of their restless populations seeing them on Al-Jazeera sitting next to with the Unilateralistani Imperialist Shrubbery and his Zionist Master/Lackey (not sure which way that street is purported to go) the Bulldozer himself will be enough to get Assad and his ilk to shut the **** up and I'm sure some of his neighbors would be happy to tell him as much as well. The failure to sign up to a peace treaty provision with their neighbors would provide enough political cover for any veto.
Not that it matters anyway, I mean what the **** would vetoing do? Oh no, that would prove we have a double standard, there goes our credibility in a region where no one (rightly or wrongly) thinks we have any anyway. Pffft, who cares.
Besides this is so stupid anyway. Like the Israelis aren't smart enough to hide that shit from UNMOVIC. They could be looking at a naked Christy Turlington bent over ready for the porking of her life and those UN guys couldn't even find their willies to schling a schlong.
Oh, no, that's right, it's not. It's the Syrians and other Arab states that have agreed to officially sponsor, outfit, supply and give haven to groups who's stated goal is the liquidation of the Jewish presense in the middle east.
Well perhaps the Israelis don't say it, but when they bomb Arab children it means pretty much the same thing.
Except that, right or wrong, Israel's actions are rooted in an attempt to defend and provide security.
Israel's 'targeted killings', like the one where they dropped a bomb on an apartment block in an attempt to kill one Hamas leader and killed fourteen men, women and children, are undertaken regardless of the danger to civilian life and with contempt of judicial process (which is what should make 'us' better than 'them'.) They're beyond 'security' because actions like these make you every bit as bad as the people you're trying to kill.
They are also made in defence of a state engaged in a violent and illegal occupation against international law in the first place. This isn't security, it's a defence of racism.
Israel is as bad as any country that funds terrorism as long as they behave like terrorists themselves.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
Syria's actions are not "support to terrorists to fight against Israel's brutal supression of an occupied populace, etc.". They are however support for terrorists to fight for the complete and total erradication of the Jews in Israel.
You seem to think that the anger directed against Israel from the Arab world is attributable to anti-semitism alone. I can assure you that the oppression in Palestine is violent and awful. So is the response, but it hardly comes from a vacuum.
They are also made in defence of a state engaged in a violent and illegal occupation against international law in the first place. This isn't security, it's a defence of racism.
The Israelis are occupying land captured during a war to annilate them.
Good. Now that gives the U.N. legal recourse to react.
We've already gone over this ground. North Korea signed the treaty in 1985 as a non-nuclear-weapon state. It obviously made absolutely no difference to their nuclear ambitions. China will make the difference in North Korea - not the UN.
Well, here it goes. Why are we the great powers that be in the World (US,China,UK,Russia and France) trying to disarm the little countries. Well, all of these great nations, along with many smaller nations signed the NPT (Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty) along with dozens of smaller countries.
Theoretically, all of the large nations are to eventually dispose of all of their nuclear arsenal. It doesn't play well politically or in deterence policy for any of these large countries to take the lead by disposing all of it at once. Also theoretically the production of new nukes is supposed to be outstripped by the pace of dismantlement of old nukes. Now, in policy, none of these large nations has a chem or bio war program, remember I said in policy, more than likely there is a small bio and chem warfare prog, even if only to study for counter measures and counteragents.
Well the thing is many of these nations we threaten political reprecussions upon are signees of the NPT, so we have political recourse to admonish them against such actions. The second reason why we try to disarm these smaller nations is either their track record or their regional stability. Iraq - known to use chem weapons, India & Pakistan - in a very tense political and military standoff, N. Korea - the economic and political situaltion for the DPRK is desparate
As for Israel's purposed Nuclear arsenal, there has never been substantiate proof of it, only speculation, hell, most countries when they develop a nuke, they usually test it somewhere remote also they test their delivery systems, Israel has conducted no such tests
It is not going to get better. The desire for power by all and at any cost be they terrorists or Europe or America or Russia we are in times written about in Bible prophecy.
Human nature can be ugly absent of those who have the fruit of the spirit.
History should have much to provide to back up this claim.
It is not going to get better. The desire for power by all and at any cost be they terrorists or Europe or America or Russia we are in times written about in Bible prophecy.
omfg, do you believe that the apocalypse is actually just around the corner?
On another note, isn't Israel still occupying a vital part of Syria? Illegally setteling it and stealing the water by redirecting it form Syria and into Israel?
Could this be a part of why there is no peace agreement? 'cause if there was an agreement, they'd have to give Golan back, right?
omfg, do you believe that the apocalypse is actually just around the corner?
There have always been religious nuts who believe that God is just about to save them and kill everyone else in an almighty blood bath.
"DAMN he's good ..." WTF? What are you, 13? This is some little pissy diplomacy snap of the fingers. I don't blame syria for being pissed off, but it's not like this is a stroke of genius or anything. If YOU can see through it, then all the diplomats can and will treat it accordingly.
People have been calling for Isreal to disarm for years. Sure, I'm more comfortable with Isreal having nukes that Hezbolla (spelling?), but no-one should have nukes. It's impossible to have someone decide who should have nukes and who shouldn't, because there would be huge disagreement. The only way nations/people agree is blanket "no-nukes" treaties like NPT.
As for Israel's purposed Nuclear arsenal, there has never been substantiate proof of it, only speculation, hell, most countries when they develop a nuke, they usually test it somewhere remote also they test their delivery systems, Israel has conducted no such tests
1) Certain people in solitary confinement in Israel might disagree with you there.
2) Iraq never tested a nuke. It was enough to get that country invaded.
Comments
Not that it matters anyway, I mean what the **** would vetoing do? Oh no, that would prove we have a double standard, there goes our credibility in a region where no one (rightly or wrongly) thinks we have any anyway. Pffft, who cares.
Besides this is so stupid anyway. Like the Israelis aren't smart enough to hide that shit from UNMOVIC. They could be looking at a naked Christy Turlington bent over ready for the porking of her life and those UN guys couldn't even find their willies to schling a schlong.
Originally posted by Tulkas
Oh, no, that's right, it's not. It's the Syrians and other Arab states that have agreed to officially sponsor, outfit, supply and give haven to groups who's stated goal is the liquidation of the Jewish presense in the middle east.
Well perhaps the Israelis don't say it, but when they bomb Arab children it means pretty much the same thing.
Originally posted by Tulkas
Except that, right or wrong, Israel's actions are rooted in an attempt to defend and provide security.
Israel's 'targeted killings', like the one where they dropped a bomb on an apartment block in an attempt to kill one Hamas leader and killed fourteen men, women and children, are undertaken regardless of the danger to civilian life and with contempt of judicial process (which is what should make 'us' better than 'them'.) They're beyond 'security' because actions like these make you every bit as bad as the people you're trying to kill.
They are also made in defence of a state engaged in a violent and illegal occupation against international law in the first place. This isn't security, it's a defence of racism.
Israel is as bad as any country that funds terrorism as long as they behave like terrorists themselves.
Originally posted by Tulkas
Syria's actions are not "support to terrorists to fight against Israel's brutal supression of an occupied populace, etc.". They are however support for terrorists to fight for the complete and total erradication of the Jews in Israel.
You seem to think that the anger directed against Israel from the Arab world is attributable to anti-semitism alone. I can assure you that the oppression in Palestine is violent and awful. So is the response, but it hardly comes from a vacuum.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
They're beyond 'security' because actions like these make you every bit as bad as the people you're trying to kill.
You're dead on these boards now.
Originally posted by bunge
You're dead on these boards now.
It's a suicide attack.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
They are also made in defence of a state engaged in a violent and illegal occupation against international law in the first place. This isn't security, it's a defence of racism.
The Israelis are occupying land captured during a war to annilate them.
Now who caused the problem?
Originally posted by ena
The Israelis are occupying land captured during a war to annilate them.
Now who caused the problem?
Not the people living there.
Lets make a choice for Israel:
1) (<-I like those) annex the occupied territories and make the people living there citizents of Israel
or
2) Let the people living there create their own state.
I could live with both senarios.
Originally posted by ena
The Israelis are occupying land captured during a war to annilate them.
Now who caused the problem?
Does this change the legality of the occupation? No.
The proposed resolution calls on all countries in the Middle East to ratify the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the nuclear test ban treaty...
Big deal. North Korea signed the NPT...
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
Big deal. North Korea signed the NPT...
Good. Now that gives the U.N. legal recourse to react.
Originally posted by bunge
Good. Now that gives the U.N. legal recourse to react.
Theoretically, all of the large nations are to eventually dispose of all of their nuclear arsenal. It doesn't play well politically or in deterence policy for any of these large countries to take the lead by disposing all of it at once. Also theoretically the production of new nukes is supposed to be outstripped by the pace of dismantlement of old nukes. Now, in policy, none of these large nations has a chem or bio war program, remember I said in policy, more than likely there is a small bio and chem warfare prog, even if only to study for counter measures and counteragents.
Well the thing is many of these nations we threaten political reprecussions upon are signees of the NPT, so we have political recourse to admonish them against such actions. The second reason why we try to disarm these smaller nations is either their track record or their regional stability. Iraq - known to use chem weapons, India & Pakistan - in a very tense political and military standoff, N. Korea - the economic and political situaltion for the DPRK is desparate
As for Israel's purposed Nuclear arsenal, there has never been substantiate proof of it, only speculation, hell, most countries when they develop a nuke, they usually test it somewhere remote also they test their delivery systems, Israel has conducted no such tests
It is not going to get better. The desire for power by all and at any cost be they terrorists or Europe or America or Russia we are in times written about in Bible prophecy.
Human nature can be ugly absent of those who have the fruit of the spirit.
History should have much to provide to back up this claim.
Peace
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
It is not going to get better. The desire for power by all and at any cost be they terrorists or Europe or America or Russia we are in times written about in Bible prophecy.
omfg, do you believe that the apocalypse is actually just around the corner?
On another note, isn't Israel still occupying a vital part of Syria? Illegally setteling it and stealing the water by redirecting it form Syria and into Israel?
Could this be a part of why there is no peace agreement? 'cause if there was an agreement, they'd have to give Golan back, right?
Originally posted by New
omfg, do you believe that the apocalypse is actually just around the corner?
There have always been religious nuts who believe that God is just about to save them and kill everyone else in an almighty blood bath.
"DAMN he's good ..." WTF? What are you, 13? This is some little pissy diplomacy snap of the fingers. I don't blame syria for being pissed off, but it's not like this is a stroke of genius or anything. If YOU can see through it, then all the diplomats can and will treat it accordingly.
People have been calling for Isreal to disarm for years. Sure, I'm more comfortable with Isreal having nukes that Hezbolla (spelling?), but no-one should have nukes. It's impossible to have someone decide who should have nukes and who shouldn't, because there would be huge disagreement. The only way nations/people agree is blanket "no-nukes" treaties like NPT.
Barto
Originally posted by LiquidR
As for Israel's purposed Nuclear arsenal, there has never been substantiate proof of it, only speculation, hell, most countries when they develop a nuke, they usually test it somewhere remote also they test their delivery systems, Israel has conducted no such tests
1) Certain people in solitary confinement in Israel might disagree with you there.
2) Iraq never tested a nuke. It was enough to get that country invaded.