babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » One US Rule for Israel, Another for Saddam

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: One US Rule for Israel, Another for Saddam
evenflow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3493

posted 17 February 2003 04:48 PM      Profile for evenflow        Edit/Delete Post
One US Rule for Israel, Another for Saddam

This article speaks about the US's inconsistency in dealing with Israel as opposed to other countries in the same part of the world.

I sincerely hope this thread gets a chance for meaningful discussion before it is inevitably derailed and ends up in "two babblers-bickering about something other than the issues" hell, as so many babble posts regarding the middle east do.

Here's looking forward to all your comments!


From: learning land | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Zatamon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1394

posted 17 February 2003 04:58 PM      Profile for Zatamon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So Americans want it both ways. That is not unusual for the world's dominant power, but to claim that a disarmament of Saddam should be undertaken primarily to secure peace in the region is to neglect the permanent threat to peace caused by Israel's intransigence. There are many good arguments for toppling Saddam, especially the treatment of his 23 million subjects, but to Arabs they will not carry much weight until the West squares up to Israel and insists on compliance of 242.
Excellent article, evenflow, I appreciate the facts and examples. It is very hard not to see the glaringly obvious hypocrisy, and I think this is one reason why so many people openly protest these days. Enough is enough!

From: where hope for 'hope' is contemplated | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 17 February 2003 08:32 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, the double-standards are so glaring, and the mainstream media seems to ignore this issue entirely. Why is there no debate on enforcing 242, why is there no comparison made between Israel's outright flouting of resolutions and Iraq's semi-cooperating?

Good journalists would be pointing out these inconsistencies.


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Zatamon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1394

posted 17 February 2003 08:46 PM      Profile for Zatamon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
They are not allowed to. They would lose their jobs if they dared to report against policy and orders. And it still would not be printed (with a very few exceptions). Our media is muzzled and prostituted. If we did not have the Internet, we would have no idea what is going on in the world.

Just like it was in communist Hungary. We knew that the 'official' media was pure propaganda and we did not believe a word of it. But we had no alternative source to find out the truth. Here and now we have this option. Lets make the most of it!


From: where hope for 'hope' is contemplated | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 18 February 2003 10:50 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There is a difference between the resolutions for Israel and the one's for Iraq. Israels's resolutions fall under Chapter 6 while Iraq's fall under Chapter 7. Chapter 7 gives the UN the option of using force while Chapter 6 does not. Also, resolution 242 states land for peace, not land for nothing. Israel has to give up land it obtained during the War of '67 in exchange for peace. That in itself sounds like blackmail to me, but that's not the point. One last thing I don't understand is whenever people bring up Iraq for breaking resolutions, immediately people point to Israel. Why is that ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 February 2003 10:55 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The self-evident hypocrisy, I should have thought.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 18 February 2003 10:57 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
skadadl, did you not read my post ? The resolutions are completely different. And why not point to other countries ?

[ 18 February 2003: Message edited by: Cracker Jack ]


From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 February 2003 10:58 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But CJ, I often do.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 18 February 2003 11:27 AM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And why not point to other countries?

Okay. Bush's fast-track EU candidate Turkey.


From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
LionKeeper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3728

posted 18 February 2003 11:27 PM      Profile for LionKeeper     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
242 is only one of many… Israel has the most U.N. resolutions passed against it in the entire world. Do you think that means anything? Or is it a coincidence?

There is more evidence of state sponsor terrorisms in regards to Israel than there is on the tyrant in Baghdad! As a matter of fact I would have to suggest that the state of Israel was incepted through means of terrorism, which is well documented One person who sticks out in my mind when I think about it, is the man who pioneered the car bomb, Menachim Begin who was also Prime Minister of Israel when neighboring Lebanon was invaded. We cannot forget that he was also member of the Infamous “Stern Gang” who caused terror and mayhem before and during the creation of Israel. Or what about his Chief of Defense at the time and current Prime Minister “The Butcher of Beirut” Ariel Sharon. Not to suggest that criminals like Arafat, or Saddam are any better but we should understand that terrorism (by definition) will bread terrorism. And no matter how many resolutions are passed and how much outcry there is, without a solution addressing the root causes of the Middle East phenomenon this will continue until it is opposed by an equal or greater force. What does that mean? I don’t know but the laws of mathematic tell us that this is so.

I would also agree with ronb about Turkey but let us look at an example where the search for true freedom and peace did work Glorious “one man one vote”! The South Africa system of apartheid was beaten because the world was informed and was concerned that humanity was still practicing apartheid. The resolutions were achieved by asserting pressure on this country. What are we doing now? Giving Turkey loan guarantees in excess of 15 billion dollars to give us the green light use their land for war, and in turn use that money to slaughter Kurds, or Israel billions in military aid every year to do the same to the Palestinians.

So yeah based on hard facts I guess I would have to agree that there is a sever lack of balance when it comes to defining terms, and seeking justice for the Arabs, when compared to Israel.


There is a definite problem here, and it is unfortunate that us as humans, as a species have failed to save ourselves from ourselves.


From: The Lion's Den | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
evenflow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3493

posted 19 February 2003 01:31 PM      Profile for evenflow        Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for the post LionKeeper! Very insightful.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with your last statement.


From: learning land | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca