HyperionTheEvil wrote:
I'm saying that in effect the claims of both have no relevance with regards to the reality of today. The 'claims' they both have are more used for political headway for support from one point to the other. Which is why i don't support either. The claims are basically of 'we were here first' and 'god said this land is ours'. Whether you can fault the west for creating and supporting Israel in the first place after the experience of the Holocaust from a modern point of view is debatable. The reality is that exists and it exits where two groups of people are using questionable claims as an excuse to kill each other.
The problem there is that the Palestinians who were living there at the time aren't making ancient claims and there aren't arabs coming from all over the world making that claim. They had been living there for a long time. The majority by a large margin of Jews who immigrated to the region pre and post UN creation of Israel used that claim as a way of making their migration and statehood legitimate. Now all 3 branches of Abrahamic faith make some sort of claim to specific cities like bethlehem and jerusalem but by and large the main conflict is a land and resource war rather then a religious one. Muslims always use religion as a rallying cry because thats how they are. We use patriotism in the same way.
You are right that both sides have to deal with the reality that each other is there. The problem is for most the initial act of outrage (the creation of Israel) is within living memory and just as the holocaust survivors with actual memories aren't going to forgive and forget easily neither are the Palestinians who had their land and rights simply taken away by the UN and their families butchered when they refused to simply leave.
Thats why a neutral 3rd party is needed.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
And it's ironic that you wold say to Jews that they should have gone to somewhere in the western nations and that Israel should never have been created. A point worth considering but if my point is that both the claims of the Palestinians and Israelis is based upon that neither of their claims mean anything. If they want to sort out the problem they if they really want they'll have to live together. The same holds true for indians in North America, it can just as easily be said that they can go back to their original starting point of what is today eastern Russia.
Except that again we are dealing with very different degrees of timing. People who were there for thousands of years if not 10000 vs our few hundred and in the case of most of the Jews in Israel/Palestine, less then 50.
If it were 20 or 30 years ago I say send in a military force and remove the mistake the UN made and return all Jewish immigrants to their country of origin or give them free passage to any western nation should they have great reason why they can't go back.
Quite frankly the stupidity and arrogance of western nation leaders who didn't want waves of Jewish immigrants in their own nations who then decided to simply create one in the land of another people in an area they knew would cause conflict just boggles the mind.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
Which is my point, both sides are involved in a conflict that has repercussion outside of their own immediate area. And some of the outside actors are not in position of a rational response. Several nations in the Middle East are dangerously religious, much as the Israelis and Palestinians are right now. Further , as I've pointed out at least one nation in the middle east already wants nuclear weapons Pakistan and another - Iran – wants them very badly and will likely have them soon. I don't think either one of these nations could care a less of nuking Israel, and the collateral damage to the Palestinians would be least concern. The Palestinians have more or less been a tool of other Arab nations for decades. Which leaves us with the possibility that unless the Palestinians and Israelis start acting rationally what they may find is that some other Arab nation who might have a different agenda with Israel threatens the jewish state with massive attack.. At that point the west, and that includes Canada will have to decide if were willing to go to war over a Israeli Palestinian problem
no thank you
We are supposed to be learning from past mistakes not repeating them. We lived for about 50 years under the cold war threat of nuclear annihilation. I'm sure more then a few people thought we aught to just have it out to the finish and end this madness.
Personally I think if both states can't exist then neither should. As you said, the Palestinians are often a tool, well again thats a perfect reason to intercede. We stop them being used as such and since none of them want to go to war with Israel over Palestine why would they go to war against us (and Israel) just because we are helping establish a Palestinian nation?
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
We can do do change, the same cannot be said for the middle east – and gain i include Israel. The most dangerous countries are all driven a mythical religious dogma by which is very nature inhibits rational thought. While it would be ideal if we could sit passively by and wait for that change. With do have to deal with the day-to-day reality that even if the west is the root of all evil (which is disagree) we have to protect ourselves. It's real politics
What? (bold). Sometimes people need help to change. Thats why we have interventions, addiction programs, etc. I think you are putting to much stock in their religious reasons for the conflict. I'd venture to say that those people are far fewer in number then you think. I think there are far more secular moderates on both sides else I'd say "fuck em" too. If they want to blow themselves up in the name of their god then MPTT.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
As you have noted we tolerate ourselves better than most. And yes as i have pointed out we do invade countries. We do have our own interests at heart, if they mesh with another countries of a bloc of countries that's where alliances and exchanges of ideas flow. In time we have grown to to the point where we accept homosexual marriages, inter racial marriages, gay adoption. That is the west strength is that it can see it's failures and move to fix themselves. The critical difference is that today virtually no country is isolated, even North Korea requires aid from the west and yet still within those countries repression is state policy. When we invade a nation its rarely out some altruistic thought that we do so. We do because we perceive a a threat to ourselves and our way of life. While it might be a much better world if all countries could sit down at a negotiating table somewhere and hash out differences, it ignores the human factor is that there are some people who just want power, and others like the west would like to have the lifestyle and freedoms we have.
It also took us a long time and a lot of people are still against some of the things you mentioned. Despite all the rhetoric spewed by some on this forum Christians and Jews lived peacefully alongside Muslims in places like Iraq, until the US invaded that is.
You are correct about how rarely it is we use military help for altruistic reasons. To me thats simply one of the largest reasons why we should not use force unless to defend ourselves or allies (in a real situation not the phony war on terror).
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
Which doesn't really mean anything, if we truly feel that freedom of expression and human rights are universal. Have a culture that represses those very things does not make for an excuse
Just because our culture values those things more importantly then others doesn't mean we are right. I don't value any of the religious nonsense that other people think is the most important thing in their life.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
I'm saying welcome to the world of real politics, Every nation on Earth and every people on earth and every religion on earth has supped with the devil, and more often than not with a very short spoon. If what you're saying is the the west should along flagellate themselves for their wrong doings, then i'm saying it's totally unrealistic to open ourselves to further problems by saying ' The West has been bad” when virtually no other nation or group of nations would happily follow suit. Again real politics Another issue at hand here is that within the west there is difference of opinion, even on this issue.
Its more like the west should stop being hypocrites by bitching when other countries do things they themselves did. Kinda like how useless it was for your parents to convince you that smoking was bad all the while shaking their lit cigarette at you. Do as I say not as I do is a motto I don't believe in. Lead by example however is.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
If you're looking someday where the western nations someday rub ashes in their hair and beg forgiveness for looking out for their own best interests then it will be a long long long time coming if it all.
We don't need to ask forgiveness but we should mind our own buisness. That alone might alleviate a whole slew of problems.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
Again people of all nations have their own motivations, i didn't think there was any WMD's or terrorists within Iraq. But i had no problem with the killing of Saddam. And yes we turn a blind eye to bad acts allies and enemies alike. I'm saying that if you think we should intervene the side of bad and good is relative to not only the participants themselves, but also to us. Which has special significance in Israel , to my own thoughts their both bad. We have , or shouldn't have any interest in siding with one or the other. But if we are talking about absolute altruism then of course we do have to make a decision , and again within the west at least there is many opinions on who is bad , who isn't, and perhaps they both are.
Except for all the innocent people killed then yes it was great. Now of course because Iraq deserved invasion because Saddam was a bastard so to does the US. If Russia, China, and anyone else who cared enough decided to invade the US under the same pretext then all we could do is say "fair is fair". Fair is fair and the US deserves a large kick in the ass for its crimes and bush deserves to be hung by the same rope as Saddam does.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
Yes we are, my position is that in real politics we don't have any interest in helping the Palestinians or Israelis. It's their problem, they both claim the same thing from the same sources, all specious. It's their problem, let them sort it out. Not to mention the fact that neither the Palestianians or Israelis have anything to offer us that justify the risks of taking a reali side in whats is esentially a grudge
Who is "we"? Some have interest and others don't. Your position is one I can appreciate because by and large I take that position for other areas like Afghanistan. Nothing stops us from offering our help though. I don't have to help out my neighbours either but I'm a better person when I do.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
Which again involves taking sides, it would mean hoping that both sides agreeing to a settlement. With all of the various meetings over the last 20 years between Palestinians and Israelis have zero confidence in. And since we would be working outside the UN , where the US has veto power we would be on our own since it's unlikely that Nato would be willing to chip in since they're barely wanting to contribute to Afghanistan anyways
"Always with you it cannot be done." (DerbyX proceeds to lift the X-wing out of the swamp). If my plan goes like it should then the idea isn't to take sides but to act as the anvil to hammer out an agreement both sides can agree too and provide the necessary tools to see it implemented.
HyperionTheEvil wrote:
is not to mention that it's fair to say that the Palestinian and Israeli lobbies within North America would be highly unlikely to want to give political force to this unless both sides could be convinced that both sides would benefit. And i say the lobbies within north America since the Israeli lobby within the US government is far stronger there than it is in Canada. How you would Israeli and Palestinian citizens within Canada to go along with the idea and act as 'reps' beyond compulsion of one side or the other is beyond me. Which again we regress to picking one side or there other.
But in the unlikely even we do manage to do this within Canada , what if either lobby in the US decides that they don't want this?. Since the majority of funding and aid to Israel comes from the US i can guarantee you that Israel would simply ignore the Canadian decision and go with their biggest supporter. So then what, do we damage our reputation with the US in favor of our own solution? Do we fly in the face of political pressure from the US and send troops anyways to the Gaza strip and proclaim “We're here to save you? What benefits in real political terms do we gain from this action other than potentially destroying a political relationship with the American that we depend on for our own standard of living?
Which aludes to an earlier paragraph, what exactly would the Palestinains and Israelis offer us to break or at the very least seriously damage the relationship with US? We dont need oil, food, raw metals, water, trade or anything else from them What exactly would we get?
Frankly doing anything like this is worse than doing nothing at all, we should stay out of it completely. If the US wants to get mired down in this problem it's their business. We don't' need to be a Saviour here because the people in question don't really want to be saved, they would just like to go on killing one another, all fine and dandy, but keep Canada out of it
I don't see the US as a problem at all. If anything I'd think they would give us silent approval and any under the table aid we needed. Think about it. Canada gets both sides willing to allow 2500 Canadian peacekeepers supported by all the admin, police, and engineering support needed to secure and police the area while allowing infrastructure to be built. They develop their govt with our aid if necessary and our troops maintain order and make every effort to minimize any attacks on Israel. Unless Israel is delibertately going to sabotage the effort because deep down they don't want peace then they won't do anything against us and the worst Hamas or like group could do would be equivalent to the Taliban and we are prepared to deal with that.
Unless the theory that Israel and the US are only interested in seeing all Palestinians evicted so that a pure Israel can exist with nice neat borders then I see no reason why it could not work let alone be attempted.
CKA Uber 
CKA Elite 
