You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 04, 2016, 02:14:37 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?  (Read 9843 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KateTopic starter

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #150 on: November 16, 2009, 06:35:24 PM »
Quote
Provoked is provoked, if someone swings at you, hit or miss, you've got provocation right there. Hamas and Palestine constantly "swing" at Israel and the second Israel beats their ass they whine to the UN.
- Odin

My statement of provocation concerned "Justified" actions in retaliation. What constitutes "excessive" equaling war ?

Quote
Also respecting the UN's descion doesn't mean you don't veto it or don't disagree with it. That's a horrible short sighted way to see things. I can respect your opinions but if I disagree I am going to say something. And the UN garners very little respect from anyone.
  - Odin

I am not saying the USA can't VOTE (ie have their say, make their case to others etc) in the UN. What I meant was they should avoid using VETO (weird those two words share the same letters), and if the end finding (after all votes are tallied) is not the way the US voted... to accept the UN's "democratically" deduced position.

If the USA chooses stances which frustrates what the UN deems as aiding the "Uniting of Nations", respect is not deserved in that forum.

*
I don't think ANYONE really believes that any party is "good" from their own values of what good is 0 enough to justify something "very bad". Historically in any place mankind can go back and say "oh look that land which was rightfully ours ... wasn't really at this point we thought /did something selfish and assumed ownership"

If you give animals rights ... a bunch of cave men clearing a place of wolves so they can make a few huts and start a village because their wifes are pregnant or whatever is not "fair".

To them "peace" = I dont have to worry about wolves killing my family because I killed them all. My familiy's unmoderated dreams are more important than the dreams of that wolf pack, to give the best environment for my families dreams - wolves must be gone, poisonous snakes gone, spiders gone ... Oh I need to enslave some horses and some cows or goats perhaps. Once I do that I "own". I only "own" though to be free - free of having to moderate my wants to be in synergy with what else is here. For that to happen I need to be dominate - this ideal dream is a requirement. Mine. Me. This feels right.

Claiming that is the way of things is just dismissing its releavence to those that see those actions as a choice of principals that can change into something better which is still workable.

We don't live in harmony with anyone or anything, we often dont get along with our own family or lovers or even ourselves. Every emotion we have had feels justified to ourselves at the time while someone else looking on may "rightly" think "your insane" - a true view of what the observer believes is what that person should be managing regarding their own best interest.

I think everyone is sick to death of hearing about the middle east in the news our own bordem of the topic forms hard principals as the minds excuse not to think about it anymore.

A lot of my understanding of history is wrong, a lot of historians understanding of history is wrong. A lot of an individualks understanding of something private within them that justifies certain extreme feelings may not be based on "objective" reality.

nothing is "right or wrong", justified or otherwise from an "objective perspective".

Something that is objective has no vested interest in an event's interpretation of meaning, likely the only objective view is one that is not active and does not care.


Debating what is "right" ,, for america's involvement here is more trying to work out what america wants, expects and the conditions where these wants are revisited.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2009, 06:38:20 PM by Kate »

Offline Zakharra

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #151 on: November 17, 2009, 11:01:42 AM »
I am not saying the USA can't VOTE (ie have their say, make their case to others etc) in the UN. What I meant was they should avoid using VETO (weird those two words share the same letters), and if the end finding (after all votes are tallied) is not the way the US voted... to accept the UN's "democratically" deduced position.

If the USA chooses stances which frustrates what the UN deems as aiding the "Uniting of Nations", respect is not deserved in that forum.

 I'm a bit confused.  You're saying that the US should not use it's veto power if  the UN wants to do something it disagrees with? Then if the UN  does something the US disagrees with we should just , essentually, bend over and take it?

 That is NOT the way for an effective democracy (which the UN isn't. It's more of a debate club) should work.  By your reasoning, if the UN body and Security council decided to disband some nations to form a larger nation, or decided to vote on a resolution to take over a nation or nations, the US should not veto that resolution? Each nation uses it's veto power as that nation sees fit. As it fits that nation's self interests.  In this instance the US is doing what every other nation in the UN and on the US Security council is doing.

 The UN is not a world government, even if some people wish it was. It has no military, no capital. It rules no nation. It's mostly a glorified debate club that has some powers that the members can disagree with and go against in ways.

Offline KateTopic starter

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #152 on: November 23, 2009, 11:35:48 PM »
by ignoring the UN and doing as you please the USA
is expecting others to "bend over and take it."

Granted less so than some other nations that have been more warmongering,
but not by as much as what many American's would deem good.

People - what do you all beleive the UN is for - and why VETOS existed for some countries at all ?

Offline Zakharra

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #153 on: November 24, 2009, 01:19:28 PM »
by ignoring the UN and doing as you please the USA
is expecting others to "bend over and take it."

Granted less so than some other nations that have been more warmongering,
but not by as much as what many American's would deem good.

People - what do you all beleive the UN is for - and why VETOS existed for some countries at all ?


 As is everyone else that uses their veto. The veto option is there for that nation to use for it's national interests. China and Russia have used their vetos many times. Why? Because it's in their nation's self interest to oppose the proposal.

 I believe the UN is nothing more than a debate club. A place for the nations of the world to talk things over in a somewhat civilized  manner.  The UN certainly cannot enforce any of it's resolutions or rulings.

Offline Elven Sex Goddess

  • All doorways lead to adventure.
  • Lady
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Location: In the mind's canvas of life's eroticism.
  • Gender: Female
  • "Imagination is the fruit of sensuality"
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #154 on: November 24, 2009, 02:10:19 PM »
I  have a question on the vetoes Kate.   You continuously try to portray the United States as the bad guy.   

Yet when I look up the number of vetoes used over the years.  The USSR/Russia has a commanding lead on vetoes used.   124 to 82 for the US.     So what excuse would you offer for this.  Would it be by chance the explanation given by Zakharra.    Then that be pretty hypocritical to your argument. 

Here is the link providing this information.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security-council/tables-and-charts-on-the-security-council-0-82/use-of-the-veto.html

I tend to agree with Zakhara on this.  It is nothing more then a debate club.   Another avenue of diplomatic means.  Though not such that it precludes national interests.   That holds  no real power in truth.


Offline KateTopic starter

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #155 on: November 24, 2009, 07:56:44 PM »
As is everyone else that uses their veto.[/quote]

Quite right.

That's the problem.

This could be addressed first with the phasing in of "anti-vetos" that some countries can earn.

Offline Moreth

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #156 on: December 06, 2009, 01:02:18 PM »
I personally do not like the idea of involving American lives in anything in the middle east. While our government might be corrupt and the world may hate us. Just about every government or regime on earth is corrupt, America just gets the bully tag because we are currently the only hegemony. China may also be closing in on that title, I have not researched in a while. Israel is one of the most powerful small states on the planet, and I believe that can handle their own affairs now. I would like to see the U.S. disengage itself from conflicts that are religiously motivated. That area of the world will never be peaceful as long as 3 major religions call one piece of real estate sacred, and that's fact.

We should mind our own business and work on our problems at home like the war on drugs, prison overcrowding, finding energy alternatives, educating our citizens.

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #158 on: December 30, 2009, 04:26:43 PM »
 I'll tell you why America constantly backs Israel is because if Israel ever thinks its back is to the wall and it''s going to lose its nation. They have no reservations about launching nukes at every major Middle Eastern city they don't particularly like; or their oil fields which will break the world economy like a rotten egg.


Offline Windfall

Re: America what is with your current stance between Israel and Palestine ?
« Reply #159 on: January 25, 2010, 09:26:25 AM »
I think it is going to be a deadlock for a long time, I used to be quite supportive of Israel because I felt they were getting undue condemnation by the world, when neither Israel or Palestine were more right than the other, but I don't get Israel anymore if they're still continuing to build settlements and limit the area for the Palestinians, I hope there will be a solution, just to hope and see.