Our government is just saying that we have left Iraq so they can attack Iran soon. We really arn't out of Iraq. Three wars just sounds like too much even for The CIA/Pentagon brass. 2 wars is apearantly Ok.
If we dont start up with Iran, Isreal will drag us in, I'll bet in less then 1 month from now.

Another Militarized Crazy Middle Eastern Theocracy, we need to stop supporting Isreal.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Well - that's certainly the radical anti-war left's perspective.
I've always been of a mind that the war on terror has had two operating justifications. 1. It was the metaphysical equivalent of the Domino Theory by establishing non-Isreal pro-democracy states in the middle east. 2. A means of concentrating hostile violent Muslim factions in areas the U.S. wanted them. Whether either of these reasons is justifiable or effective is open to debate.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda_link_allegations

Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations were made by some U.S. Government officials who claimed that a highly secretive relationship existed between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamist militant organization Al-Qaeda from 1992 to 2003, specifically through a series of meetings reportedly involving the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS).[1] In the lead up to the Iraq War, U.S. President George W. Bush alleged that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and militant group al-Qaeda might conspire to launch terrorist attacks on the United States,[2] basing the administration's rationale for war, in part, on this allegation and others. The consensus of intelligence experts has been that these contacts never led to an operational relationship, and that consensus is backed up by reports from the independent 9/11 Commission and by declassified Defense Department reports[3] as well as by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, whose 2006 report of Phase II of its investigation into prewar intelligence reports concluded that there was no evidence of ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.[4] Critics of the Bush Administration have said Bush was intentionally building a case for war with Iraq without regard to factual evidence. On April 29, 2007, former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet said on 60 Minutes, "We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al-Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America, period."[5]

Well - that's certainly the radical anti-war left's perspective.

I've always been of a mind that the war on terror has had two operating justifications. 1. It was the metaphysical equivalent of the Domino Theory by establishing non-Isreal pro-democracy states in the middle east. 2. A means of concentrating hostile violent Muslim factions in areas the U.S. wanted them. Whether either of these reasons is justifiable or effective is open to debate.

Nice links! Would be interesting to see that fallout map correlated with cancer prevalence per capita....

>> ^alizarin:

1) They forgot Israel and South Africa in 1979... that would make it 2054.
2) This diagram is awesome.
Looks like the atmospheric vs underground count vs underwater counts are:
US 206/912/5
USSR 223/756/3
UK 21/24
France 50/160
China 22/26
India 0/6
South Africa/Isreal 1/0
Pakistan 0/7
North Korea 0/1
3) The fallout map is fun.
4) The Nevada and Kazakhstan need to surrender already

1) They forgot Israel and South Africa in 1979... that would make it 2054.

2) This diagram is awesome.
Looks like the atmospheric vs underground count vs underwater counts are:
US 206/912/5
USSR 223/756/3
UK 21/24
France 50/160
China 22/26
India 0/6
South Africa/Isreal 1/0
Pakistan 0/7
North Korea 0/1

3) The fallout map is fun.

4) The Nevada and Kazakhstan need to surrender already

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Since 2001 there have been 34 deaths from Palestinian rocket attacks plus injuries and damage. Why artificially limit the rocket fatalities only to ones linked to Hamas? Who knows how many splinter groups of Palestinian militants are involved? It is ridiculous to suggest that Isreal could only blockade 'Hamas' and not all the others.
The peace process has to start with the Muslim world. The Palestinians and all Arab states & religious leaders must acknowledge Isreal as a legitimate state with the right to exist. They must condemn all violence and imprison or execute any of their people who commit acts of terror. They must stop praising the actions of violent militants. They must stop supporting terror groups with arms and material. They must stop teaching their children to hate others. Until these things happen then the Muslim world has no reasonable grounds on which to expect Isreal to ease up on their efforts to provide security to their citizens by any means necessary.


i think you took that out of the the AIPAC brochure verbatim.
yeah..palestine should just sit down,shut the fuck up and ignore the 8 ft dildo rammed up their ass and anyone who doesn't?..kill em.
HAMAS is a violent terrorist group.and?your point is?
they are also the democratically elected leadership,who just happen to not be too american friendly.
and if we are going to be sticklers on definitions..america is ALSO a terrorist nation,by definition.
your solution ignores 100 years of history,human rights violations and violent atrocities perpetrated by isreal.

how about we go back to kindergarten since we are using such banal and un-imaginative choices...
play nice with the other kids and SHARE, otherwise we are taking all your toys away.

Since 2001 there have been 34 deaths from Palestinian rocket attacks plus injuries and damage. Why artificially limit the rocket fatalities only to ones linked to Hamas? Who knows how many splinter groups of Palestinian militants are involved? It is ridiculous to suggest that Isreal could only blockade 'Hamas' and not all the others.

The peace process has to start with the Muslim world. The Palestinians and all Arab states & religious leaders must acknowledge Isreal as a legitimate state with the right to exist. They must condemn all violence and imprison or execute any of their people who commit acts of terror. They must stop praising the actions of violent militants. They must stop supporting terror groups with arms and material. They must stop teaching their children to hate others. Until these things happen then the Muslim world has no reasonable grounds on which to expect Isreal to ease up on their efforts to provide security to their citizens by any means necessary.

While we're dreaming, I like my solution of turning the entire Isreal/Palestine area into an international museum managed and run by Switzerland.

It is indeed a lamentable plight. But Gaza is controlled by Hamas - an ultra-violent terrorist organization that openly uses deadly force and refuses to acknowledge Isreal as a state. Isreal just might have a good reason to want to blockade such a violent organization.

Y'think? Isreal started building walls in the mid-90s due to spates of vehicle bombings, suicide bombings, and other atrocities. The walls were effective and by the mid-00s had reduced terror attacks to historic lows. Before the walls, Gaza rocket attacks were crude. In 2006 after the walls went up all of a sudden MAGICALLY the Palestinians started getting long-range rockets. So Isreal blockaded Gaza to keep Hamas from getting these long-range weapons. Gawlee Sgt. Carter! The long-range attacks went down to a trickle.

Quite clearly the Isreali policies are EFFECTIVE at providing security to Isreal at the cost of decreased living standards in Palestine. There is a simple, obvious solution here... Arabs & Muslims need to take strong action to control their own people and remove Isreal's need for security actions.

I won't hold my breath... As long as Arab/Muslim violence is justifed by biased media coverage then nothing will ever change. This is exemplified by things like this video, the news media portrayal of the "violence flotilla", and crones like Helen Thomas. Good riddance to bad rubbish with that particular specimen getting a stake driven through her anti-semitic heart. Senility? Alzheimer's? Dementia? Who knows what finally gave us this peek at her true heart. But the same sentiment of hatred exists more cleverly wrapped in the bulk of the leftist news media.

You're missing the point there. They boarded at international waters, that is a crime

This statement is factually incorrect. The blockading of a group involved in an armed conflict is legal. Hamas (controlling Gaza) and Isreal are in a state of armed conflict. Maritime law allows the boarding, siezing, and ATTACKING of ships in international waters - even those flying neutral flags - when there is reasonable cause to believe their intent is to violate a blockade. Greta Berlin (flotilla spokesperson) openly stated the purpose was not to deliver relief, but to make a polical statement. The flotilla refused repeated offers to unload the goods in Ashdod. The vessel captains ignored repeated warnings and orders to divert courses - which were all full steam ahead to violate the blockade. There were videos previous to the ships leaving port of groups of known militant activists shouting death threats about Isreal. The passenger manifests were filled with persons with known histories of anti-Isreal activity, Hamas ties, and other terrorist affiliations.

The picture some people are trying to paint of the flotilla being an innocent bunch of peaceful college professers and celebrities on their was to deliver food is a blatant lie. There were probably some of that kind of useful idiot along for the ride, but the overt stated purpose of the entire flotilla by its sponsors and leaders was to illegally violate the blockade to Hamas and provoke a confrontation with the intent of obtaining sympathetic media coverage. End of story.

Krauthammer - no lockstep conservative - nails it this way...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/03/AR2010060304287.html

Basically the only people trying to claim the blockade is 'illegal' are the Turks - who sponsored the flotilla. Everyone else recognizes that Hamas (Gaza) and Isreal are in a state of armed conflict (kind of hard to deny with 4000+ rocket attacks) and that the blockade is a legal effort by Isreal to prevent the re-arming of Hamas. Ships flying neutral flags in international waters can be legally stopped, searched, diverted, and even attacked if there is reasonable cause.

In this case, the cause was far more than reasonable for many many reasons. Isreal offered to have the goods unloaded at Ashdod, but the offer was refused. Very suspicious if the 'intent' is to provide relief... Greta Berlin (flotilla doyanne) plainly stated the flotilla was not about delivering aid... Videos of the flotilla participants as they left port showed them brandishing weapons and shouting anti-semitic death threats. Radio communications and warnings were ignored or got responses of arabic curses & threats.

I know that the far-left really Really REALLY wanted this to be all Isreal's fault - but those darn pesky facts just keep cutting the legs out from under the lies. The facts are clear. The deaths were primarily the fault of (in order of culpability...)

#1: The flotilla sponsors for deliberately putting their people in danger when they had numerous other options...
#2: The boatniks for behaving like a bunch of stupid moron idiots...
#3: The IDF for not going in with a lot more force so as to cow an obviously hostile mob... Dropping those guys in 1 at a time by helicopter was just not smart & this would have all gone down different if they'd just shot the propeller out and towed the thing to Ashdod.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

What if Israel sponsored an "aid convoy" to the pro-democracy factions inside of Iran? And when stopped at the border by the Iranian military the activists ran at the soldiers with knives, screamed anti-Muslim slogans, threw flash grenades, and assaulted the soldiers? The resulting news that "Iranian soldiers shoot 9 Isreali militants posing as aid workers for violating thier borders..." wouldn't get so much as a mention on page 50 behind the classifieds. Isreal shooting 9 militants posing as aid workers who violated their borders gets international attention. Its bull crap.
Countries have borders for reasons. If groups of people (Mexican illegals, Muslim activists, whoever) choose to violate and disrespect those borders then they subject themselves to justified retaliation. Don't want problems? Don't violate borders. And don't try and justify the dumb@$$es who disrespect borders. They're criminals.
When I travel I have a passport that has to go through a verification process 6-ways from Sunday. Yes - in EVERY civilized nation I've been to I am asked the question, "Undt do you haff your PAPERS?!" I have no problem whatsoever showing my passport because I have nothing to hide and I've FOLLOWED THE RULES. I expect (and respect) every nation to vigorously enforce their laws. If I ran screaming into a port of duty waving a knife I would fully expect to be either shot or locked up forever. But I'll never do that because I'm not a stupid moron idiot like these boatniks.


Not sure what you're on about. The attack happened in international waters, no one violated any borders.

Es ist "Und haben Sie ihre papiere". Nicht das Kuhscheiße Sie schrieb.

What if Israel sponsored an "aid convoy" to the pro-democracy factions inside of Iran? And when stopped at the border by the Iranian military the activists ran at the soldiers with knives, screamed anti-Muslim slogans, threw flash grenades, and assaulted the soldiers? The resulting news that "Iranian soldiers shoot 9 Isreali militants posing as aid workers for violating thier borders..." wouldn't get so much as a mention on page 50 behind the classifieds. Isreal shooting 9 militants posing as aid workers who violated their borders gets international attention. Its bull crap.

Countries have borders for reasons. If groups of people (Mexican illegals, Muslim activists, whoever) choose to violate and disrespect those borders then they subject themselves to justified retaliation. Don't want problems? Don't violate borders. And don't try and justify the dumb@$$es who disrespect borders. They're criminals.

When I travel I have a passport that has to go through a verification process 6-ways from Sunday. Yes - in EVERY civilized nation I've been to I am asked the question, "Undt do you haff your PAPERS?!" I have no problem whatsoever showing my passport because I have nothing to hide and I've FOLLOWED THE RULES. I expect (and respect) every nation to vigorously enforce their laws. If I ran screaming into a port of duty waving a knife I would fully expect to be either shot or locked up forever. But I'll never do that because I'm not a stupid moron idiot like these boatniks.

The sponsors of this so-called 'aid flotilla' freely admit the whole thing was a political effort designed to provoke a response. They may not have expected the severity of the Isreali response. But after having viewed the videos, it must be said that they had it coming. When you are brandishing knives and charging at soliders you have no right to whine when you get shot at.

The 'aid convoy' was filled with bunches of known militants and other activists with histories of anti-Isreali sentiment. And many of them were armed. They KNEW they were going to be boarded. They also refused several offers to deliver their so-called 'humanitarian aid' at a port to be trucked to the supposed destination. They deliberately refused any offer of a solution that would have resulted in a safe outcome.

This outcome was more than likely. It went down as designed, and somewhere there are a bunch of these smug bastards who are secretly GLAD their own people were killed so as to generate a strongly negative story and get more PR. There's a special circle of Hades reserved for sleazeballs that sponsored the flotilla. The blood is on their hands as much or more than on Isreal's.