The countdown for the destruction of Israel has begun: Ahmadinejad (who else?)

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Shouldn't the UK be the ones to provide the housing, education and heathcare for the Palestinians since they're the ones who gave the land away in the first place?

Here's a better idea--how about AnaisNin offer to provide the entire cost of it--since he's big on advocating someone else (or better yet entirely-foreign governments) do it?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

"With God's help, the countdown button for the destruction of the Zionist regime has been pushed by the hands of the children of Lebanon and Palestine," Ahmadinejad said in a speech.

"By God's will, we will witness the destruction of this regime in the near future," he said. He did not elaborate.

Is there any difference between his rhetoric and that of the religious nuts in Washington that worship the sky-god?

There is.

Islamic extremism is largely a creation of the AmeriKans. They did it in Iran. They're doing it in the occupied Palestinian Territories. If your President of your United States was serious on "winning hearts and minds", instead of spending all that money on your War of Terror, he could have provided housing, education, and health-care for every single Palestinian and won favour among the moderate muslims and appeased the extremists.

A Fair Go for the Palestinians.

It isn't the job of the government of the United States to use tax-payers' money to provide "housing, education, and health-care for every single Palestinian." It is the government's job to protect this country.

And, Islamic extremism has been around for several times as long as the United States; we didn't create it.

Shouldn't the UK be the ones to provide the housing, education and heathcare for the Palestinians since they're the ones who gave the land away in the first place?

Actually the UK has and does offer financial and other assistance to its former colonies and territories.

[Robor007 0]

Shouldn't the UK be the ones to provide the housing, education and heathcare for the Palestinians since they're the ones who gave the land away in the first place?

Here's a better idea--how about AnaisNin offer to provide the entire cost of it--since he's big on advocating someone else (or better yet entirely-foreign governments) do it?

Looks like they're asleep under their bridge.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I think everyone should leave Israel to take care of itself, and I'd go so far as to add that the US should cut off Israel's foreign aid. If we're going to bomb the ####### out of Iraq for violating UN resolutions, surely we can at least cut off Israel's foreign aid for doing so for the last six decades.

You're talking about U.S. policies in the Middle East as if they were somehow bound by

international law, and they're not. We didn't bomb Iraq for violating UN resolutions,

we bombed it because we needed to be in control of that part of the ME. We are the law.

Precisely.

And that's a good thing!

[homesick_american 1]

I think everyone should leave Israel to take care of itself, and I'd go so far as to add that the US should cut off Israel's foreign aid. If we're going to bomb the ####### out of Iraq for violating UN resolutions, surely we can at least cut off Israel's foreign aid for doing so for the last six decades.

You're talking about U.S. policies in the Middle East as if they were somehow bound by

international law, and they're not. We didn't bomb Iraq for violating UN resolutions,

we bombed it because we needed to be in control of that part of the ME. We are the law.

No sh!t, mawilson. I was trying to make a point.

Actually the UK has and does offer financial and other assistance to its former colonies and territories.

You can't argue that the UK is largely responsible for the current situation in the Middle East, though. Between the UK and France, we (the USA) never had a chance in hell of making anything better, so we just carried on in the European tradition.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

You can't argue that the UK is largely responsible for the current situation in the Middle East, though. Between the UK and France, we (the USA) never had a chance in hell of making anything better, so we just carried on in the European tradition.

Unfortunately, you have a partly erroneous view.

While the UK and France DID contribute (by grabbing some areas from Ottoman Empire in 1918), they were by no means wholly responsible for the situation.

Previous occupying powers (Macedonian Empires, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire), native despoties (ancient Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Ottoman Empire,...and CURRENT rulers of various ME countries) contributed more (timewise alone) than UK and France--in fact, the in-between-empire native despots bear the biggest responsibility historically.

[homesick_american 1]

You can't argue that the UK is largely responsible for the current situation in the Middle East, though. Between the UK and France, we (the USA) never had a chance in hell of making anything better, so we just carried on in the European tradition.

Unfortunately, you have a partly erroneous view.

While the UK and France DID contribute (by grabbing some areas from Ottoman Empire in 1918), they were by no means wholly responsible for the situation.

Previous occupying powers (Macedonian Empires, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire), native despoties (ancient Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Ottoman Empire,...and CURRENT rulers of various ME countries) contributed more (timewise alone) than UK and France--in fact, the in-between-empire native despots bear the biggest responsibility historically.

Who took control of Palestine with the eventual goal of handing it over to European Jewish immigrants? Who did that? Oh yeah, the UK. What is one of the main number one cause of strife in the Middle East today? Israel. I rest my case.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

You can't argue that the UK is largely responsible for the current situation in the Middle East, though. Between the UK and France, we (the USA) never had a chance in hell of making anything better, so we just carried on in the European tradition.

Unfortunately, you have a partly erroneous view.

While the UK and France DID contribute (by grabbing some areas from Ottoman Empire in 1918), they were by no means wholly responsible for the situation.

Previous occupying powers (Macedonian Empires, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire), native despoties (ancient Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Ottoman Empire,...and CURRENT rulers of various ME countries) contributed more (timewise alone) than UK and France--in fact, the in-between-empire native despots bear the biggest responsibility historically.

Who took control of Palestine with the eventual goal of handing it over to European Jewish immigrants? Who did that? Oh yeah, the UK. What is one of the main number one cause of strife in the Middle East today? Israel. I rest my case.

And they make such wonderful targets for the suicide bombers. Which is Israel's fault I'm sure.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You can't argue that the UK is largely responsible for the current situation in the Middle East, though. Between the UK and France, we (the USA) never had a chance in hell of making anything better, so we just carried on in the European tradition.

Unfortunately, you have a partly erroneous view.

While the UK and France DID contribute (by grabbing some areas from Ottoman Empire in 1918), they were by no means wholly responsible for the situation.

Previous occupying powers (Macedonian Empires, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire), native despoties (ancient Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persian Empire, Ottoman Empire,...and CURRENT rulers of various ME countries) contributed more (timewise alone) than UK and France--in fact, the in-between-empire native despots bear the biggest responsibility historically.

You forgot the Mongol invasion - the middle-east was completely overrun with them during the middle-ages (compared to Europe). That IMO did the most damage, from which much of the region has never really recovered.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

You forgot the Mongol invasion - the middle-east was completely overrun with them during the middle-ages (compared to Europe). That IMO did the most damage, from which much of the region has never really recovered.

I still disagree with you on this one. Even without the invaders, the ME was never actually peaceful (despite of HA's inference that had UK not established Israel the region would be at peace). The situation that would be similar would be that of the Sub-continent during time when neither local nor foreign empires were present--basically, a huge mess!

Basically, had UK and France not gotten the area from Turkey, the Turks would eventually have been pushed out (as the Ottoman Empire was sinking since 1800) on their own and the area would have devolved to a huge mess (no better--and possibly WORSE--than current actual).