Re: Worried Israel: Encircled by enemies again?
I call that state Terrorism as do most people... a truly great nation can still rise afterbeing hit first... as did Russia after operation Barborossa, The US after Pearl Harbour and Egypt in1973 under Shaazly.
Terrorism is when someone commits violence to achieve a political objective. If a state acts in self defense and targets a non-state actor, which is clearly planning to target its citizens, then most international relations’ experts agree that it is not terrorism. It is true great nations can and do recover after being attacked but the price to pay--for both the country being attacked and the one that attacks it, and sometimes especially for the latter, as for Japan after the Pearl Harbor attack-- is sometimes so profound, so devastating that it is better to act beforehand.
Really now... It's clear you hate Arabs we get the picture... :)
There is no reason why I should. I do not hate Arabs; if anything, I somewhat pity them. The citizens that is, not the autocratic leaders of many of the states. And that is only because of their lost potential. I think many Arabs need to sort out their priorities. They have been manipulated and fed decades of hogwash that somehow Israel is behind the woes inflicting their nations and the constant fixation with Israel has stunted their progress. I am sure Arabs are not intellectually impaired in any way; they too can achieve the success in science, arts and innovation and development and be at par with or ahead of the Europeans or Americans as they once were a few centuries ago. :)
So you arein favour of Dictators and have no belief in democracy right? Really and you think it should be me who thinks before I post? You do realise how pathetic and petulant you sound right now dont you?
I think drawing too many conclusions is inadvisable because public policy has not been under discussion. A person, including a policy maker, can personally and secretly differ even if the majority does not agree; that does not mean that person imposes *his/her opinion on others. And therein lays the key difference: between believing in something and imposing that belief on anyone who doesn’t agree. You might have wanted to sway my opinion by carrying some sort of a poll to show the majority doesn’t agree with me. I said I can't be convinced of something just because the majority says so. What I believe as right or wrong does not ultimately depends on the permission or the views of others. So long as I am not *shoving my opinions down others' throats, it should not affect or concern anyone else what I believe in.
Mate the Arab Isreali issue cannot be discussed without making refference to one side or the other... you cannot blameme for thinking your some kind of Zionist thug due to your stance (which I'm sure your not becuase even those thugs have better knowledge than yourself) likewise I cannot blame you for assuming I am some right wing islamist Arab going Jihad on you... which is also incorect I am merely trading your lies with thruths :)
Let’s not make assumptions, shall we. And let’s not get into petty fights by suggesting that you are “merely trading your lies with thruths” because that is clearly not being done. And I am sure you know that so it was probably said in humor! By the way I never assumed “you were right wing islamist Arab going Jihad.”
I think we can both agree that our opinions differ and we do not agree on this particular issue. However, I
am sure there are a lot of other issues on which we see eye to eye on. And that I think is alright if we don’t on this one. As they say ”I might not agree with what you say but I will fight for your right to say it.” :)
