LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Linux Power User Bundle
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 12-13-2017, 06:18 PM   #31
RadicalDreamer
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2016
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 548

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247

Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
If being an "ally" of Israel means that we continue to be locked into a conflict that is basically never going to end, should we maintain that alliance?

I don't mean to sound insensitive, but this situation isn't moving and it hasn't moved in a very long time.
The US is trapped because lobbies and moneyed interest want it. The rest of the world can possibly maneuver but the US is stuck. This is Trump's America First: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm5Je73bYOY
 
Old 12-13-2017, 06:38 PM   #32
ntubski
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Debian, Arch
Posts: 3,272

Rep: Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
You can, of course, determine if a person is "Jewish" using a DNA test.
For some definitions of "Jewish".

Quote:
But there is no test for "Evangelical."
Polls will pretty much always use the "self-identify" test, i.e., just ask them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalDreamer View Post
Technically Israel isn't a US ally.
For some definitions of "ally".

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ally
Quote:
A state formally cooperating with another for a military or other purpose.
No "mutual self-defense treaty" required.
 
Old 12-13-2017, 07:45 PM   #33
RadicalDreamer
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2016
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 548

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247
Quote:
ALLY, international law. A power which has entered into an alliance with another power. A citizen or subject of one of the powers in alliance, is sometimes called an ally; for example, the rule which renders it unlawful for a citizen of the United States to trade or carry on commerce with an enemy, also precludes an ally from similar intercourse. 4 Rob. Rep. 251; 6 Rob. Rep. 406; Dane's Ab, Index, h.t.; 2 Dall. 15.
http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/ally

Quote:
ALLIANCE, international law. A contract, treaty, or league between two sovereigns or states, made to insure their safety and common defence.
http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/alliance
 
Old 12-13-2017, 08:37 PM   #34
ntubski
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Debian, Arch
Posts: 3,272

Rep: Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456
@RadicalDreamer: yes, like I said for some definitions of ally. I think it's totally fine to argue that the US should stop supplying arms to Israel, or change its policy, etc. Just don't hide behind a dictionary to do so.

Last edited by ntubski; 12-13-2017 at 09:16 PM. Reason: typo
 
Old 12-13-2017, 08:45 PM   #35
jsbjsb001
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere on earth? Maybe I'm a figment of your imagination?
Distribution: A number of them over the years...
Posts: 944

Rep: Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
...
You won't have a meaningful peace process while you have a US backed state with high tech weaponry vs what amounts to a stateless people who have little or no international support, no real power or influence and who live in an effective apartheid state. When the 'mediators' are Israel's allies and when neighbouring Arab states do pretty much nothing except funding paramilitaries, this sad farcical mess can only continue as it has been.
Absolutely. Spot on!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalDreamer View Post
Technically Israel isn't a US ally.
...
Regardless of what any dictionary says is or isn't an "ally", the US considers Israel as an ally (and has even said so publicly), full stop.

And as cynwulf was rightfully saying, as long as the US continues to blindly back Israel, nothing is going to change as far as their concerned.

But...

Will the Arabs get there own back on Trump?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42335751
 
Old 12-14-2017, 01:19 AM   #36
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,302
Blog Entries: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767Reputation: 1767
as soon as i read the first reply to this thread i knew it was going to kick off in a direction very different than i intended it to, and was soon taken over by the usual suspects with their usual bickering.

i have to resist congratulating some posters for being closer to my personal opinions on this matter and want to get back to what compelled me to start this thread:
It isn't the first time that D. Trump did something abroad that cannot possibly have been useful for global politics (including the USA), but this time people are suffering and dying for it immediately and will continue to do so for a long time.

When I first heard about it on the news, they also listed reactions of foreign press and statements issued by several governments (not individual politicians!) - NONE supported Trump in this blunder, be they conservative, liberal or socialist.
ALL of them predicted (the moment it was issued) that this move would impair the peace process in the region and beyond.

So how could Trump (and his aides i presume) go through with this?
Because for US Americans, the next election is more important (entertainment! sexual abuse, yay!) than the global political situation and americas place in it?

Last edited by ondoho; 12-14-2017 at 01:35 AM.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 03:35 AM   #37
RadicalDreamer
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2016
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 548

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntubski View Post
@RadicalDreamer: yes, like I said for some definitions of ally. I think it's totally fine to argue that the US should stop supplying arms to Israel, or change its policy, etc. Just don't hide behind a dictionary to do so.
I'm not hiding behind a dictionary. I've stated my position earlier in the thread. I was pointing out that under international law Israel isn't an ally. Its not an ally in the legal sense.

I think its a frenemy: It has stolen American nuclear technology, killed American sailors, stole vital information such as how America goes about collecting signals intelligence, and it gave information to the Soviet Union like the US attack plan on the Soviet Union. The Balfour Declaration is argued to be a cynical ploy by Britain to get the US into World War I. Mossad pretended to be CIA and worked with terrorist group Jundallah against Iran. Every election American politicians cower before the Israel lobby and then cower and obey while in office with few exceptions. The Iran deal was an act of courage from a cowardly president. Israel keeps trying to push the US into war with Iran. Israel is doing its best to attack freedom of speech in the United States right now with its agents. Neocon pundits support wars for Israel, they support infringing on American civil liberties, and they are multicultural in the US but are hypocritically racialist when it comes to Israel. It provided medical aid to Al Qaeda fighters in Syria. It wanted groups like Al Qaeda to win in Syria. It is one of the top espionage threats the US faces along with China and Russia. One of the main reasons angry Muslims join an insurgency against the US is because of Israel's policies towards the Palestinians. 9/11 was revenge for American foreign policy, particularly its support for Israel's policies towards the Palestinians. This is why the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks Khalid Sheikh Mohammed planned the attacks according to himself. The recent terrorist attack in New York was reported as a response to Trump's Jerusalem declaration. I'm sure I could dig up more. This was at the top of my head.

I don't want the US to have anything to do with Israel. I don't want to fund Israel's colonialism nor the Palestinian prison guards anymore.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 05:36 AM   #38
jsbjsb001
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere on earth? Maybe I'm a figment of your imagination?
Distribution: A number of them over the years...
Posts: 944

Rep: Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512Reputation: 512
ondoho, While you may not see my post (if I'm on your ignore list - not saying that I am, but only you know the answer to that), I wasn't trying to be sarcastic in my posts to this thread. I do believe what I posted and would not have if I didn't. I do totally agree with you about the fact that every US President bar Trump, has not done what Trump has done. I also totally agree with you that if this doesn't kill the peace process, it will come very close to it (and in all likelihood set it back for, probably decades). And moreover, that it is the wrong decision (and one of the worst ones I've ever seen), and it is in no way in the interests of peace.

I'm not trying to flatter you or anyone else. I do honesty believe the things I've said. I also apologise to you if I did come off as being sarcastic.

And despite whatever differences we have had in the past, I don't doubt that you do have some good knowledge of both Linux and ICT in general. And it's a credit to you (and everyone else here) that you give up your time for others, absolutely.

Just thought I'd tell you that anyway. Hope you can see this post.

Edit:

While it's completely up to you, if you would ever like to discuss anything with me in private; your welcome to PM me if you wish. I'm happy to clarify any mis-understandings with you - completely up to you, once again.

Last edited by jsbjsb001; 12-14-2017 at 05:47 AM. Reason: typos/additions
 
Old 12-14-2017, 08:18 AM   #39
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Walsall, England, UK
Posts: 2,028
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083Reputation: 1083
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
Maybe comment on how "own kind" is defined by you.
I didn't use the phrase "own kind".

Israel is a 'Jewish state'. Citizenship is automatically afforded to foreign nationals based on some kind of Jewish heritage (according to Halakha). Search the web for the "Law of Return". In fact the law was revised a few times since the 50s, arguably to help ensure Jewish colonists outnumber Arab Muslims and other groups, but certainly as an effort to boost Jewish migration to the state.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 08:42 AM   #40
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,800
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
I want to get back to what compelled me to start this thread:
It isn't the first time that D. Trump did something abroad that cannot possibly have been useful for global politics (including the USA), but this time people are suffering and dying for it immediately and will continue to do so for a long time.

When I first heard about it on the news, they also listed reactions of foreign press and statements issued by several governments (not individual politicians!) - NONE supported Trump in this blunder, be they conservative, liberal or socialist.
ALL of them predicted (the moment it was issued) that this move would impair the peace process in the region and beyond.

So how could Trump (and his aides i presume) go through with this?
Because for US Americans, the next election is more important (entertainment! sexual abuse, yay!) than the global political situation and americas place in it?
I think we all heard you well enough the first time. There never will be "peace in the Middle East," because the people who live there don't want it. If they did, they would have found a way to get it, long before now. There is no "peace process" unless both sides of the argument seriously want to resolve that argument ... and, why should they? The parties there aren't maneuvering for peace. Instead, they're using the faux prospect of peace to lead other countries around by their nose. And the strategy is working marvelously well.

Read your Old Testament – they've been doing it for thousands of years. There was frankly a reason why one conquering party after another after another seized them, carted them off, and tried to get them to inter-marry with other races, and why King Artaxerxes was specifically warned, "don't let them come back!" Well, of course, they did come back, and soon enough it was the Roman's turn. (I'm quite sure that Pontius Pilate felt that he had been assigned to the butt-end of the galaxy. His boss didn't want to hear from him that night.)

The policy of the US has effectively been one of appeasement, but, "this really isn't 'our' war." We can put our embassy anywhere we want to, and if someone wants to make that decision to be a chess-move in their game, that's their interpretation, not ours. America would just like for its embassy to be close to a big airport.

If two peoples are determined to fight, they're going to do it and keep doing it. There will never be any peace until they want it. No other country can cause it to happen, no matter how well-intentioned they might be and no matter what representatives of either side says to them. They'll only find themselves being manipulated in the attempt, over and over and over again.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-14-2017 at 08:45 AM.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 08:58 AM   #41
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,800
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadicalDreamer View Post
[...] 9/11 was revenge for American foreign policy, particularly its support for Israel's policies towards the Palestinians. This is why the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks Khalid Sheikh Mohammed planned the attacks according to himself. The recent terrorist attack in New York was reported as a response to Trump's Jerusalem declaration. I'm sure I could dig up more. This was at the top of my head.
He might have planned part of the attacks, or he might well have been lured into his small part of the day's activities for entirely plausible-to-him reasons. (Much as Oswald was lured into a warehouse holding a rifle, and didn't catch-on until much too late the reason why.) He was only a bit-player in the game: the airliners turned out to be nothing more than a diversion for something vastly bigger and nastier. Unfortunately, anyone who wants to walk around with a bomb in his pants can cough up any sort of reason for doing it, I suppose.

Nonetheless, what many people here aren't considering is just where "the Middle East as we know it today" came from. It came from the fact that the Ottoman Empire went into World War 1 on the side of Germany, and then Germany lost. In addition to enslaving the German people under the Treaty of Versailles, the victorious Allies promptly carved-up the spoils throughout the theater. They drew lines in the sand that had never before existed, seizing resources such as oil and minerals for themselves and putting it under the control of what were to be vassal states. Those states never entered World War 2 when it came: they were content to be battlefields, and to sell oil to both sides. The creation of the State of Israel was a very late-in-the-game act of similar imperial nation-building, this time following World War 2 when basically the British didn't want Palestine anymore. (I guess they didn't like being the successor to the Romans/Ottomans, and ruling over what their own God called "a stubborn and stiff-necked people?") Once again, an occupying force – once again, "the victorious Allies" – drew lines in the sand where lines never existed before.

If a third party draws your map for you, and especially if your people have the tribal heritage that's important for survival in desert country, you're probably not going to accept those borders – ever. And no "third party," not even the United States, can make a difference. Only you can, and then only if you want it. These people don't recognize these borders – or maybe, "borders" at all. And a third-party once-occupying country can't make them do it.

I submit that the USA has merely wasted vast sums of money in the attempt.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-14-2017 at 09:05 AM.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 09:55 AM   #42
ntubski
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Debian, Arch
Posts: 3,272

Rep: Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456Reputation: 1456
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
I think we all heard you well enough the first time.
Seems like you ignored what he said both times though.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 12:15 PM   #43
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware has beern Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,554

Rep: Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514Reputation: 1514
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
I didn't use the phrase "own kind".
Correct...the phrase is mine but I think implied by your Us vs/ Them POV. So choose whatever defining phrase you like. I'd just like tyo see your definition of what constitutes the sides in conflict. For example is it Nationalistic? Political? Cultural? Religious? You tell me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf View Post
Israel is a 'Jewish state'. Citizenship is automatically afforded to foreign nationals based on some kind of Jewish heritage (according to Halakha). Search the web for the "Law of Return". In fact the law was revised a few times since the 50s, arguably to help ensure Jewish colonists outnumber Arab Muslims and other groups, but certainly as an effort to boost Jewish migration to the state.
Thanks but still I have no answer from you as to whether any group or any one is acting to in effect dispossess any people of their land/homes? Exactly how do you view the importance of where the line is drawn or what is considered The Capital of a nation whose very existence you apparently choose to ignore/dismiss/negate etc.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 12:28 PM   #44
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,800
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082Reputation: 3082
The partition of the Ottoman Empire created the first division of this region, which had asked for alliance protection with the Allies before World War 1 broke out but was denied. When, predictably, the Ottomans then turned to Germany, and Germany subsequently lost the war, the Ottoman Empire itself was destroyed to the benefit of the victorious parties. This is where the entire modern subdivision of the Middle East came from – except for the State of Israel. None of these lines represented these peoples' perceptions of themselves: the Ottoman Empire was the closest thing that ever came near it.

The SOI came into existence in a very similar manner – by a proclamation of the victors in another world war – and another arbitrary set of lines were drawn in the sand. It should really not come as a surprise to anyone that those lines were not honored by the actual residents. In fact, the very right of the SOI to exist is not recognized by some.

But, in the end, only the residents of this region can decide what must happen next. SOI predictably responded by arming itself to the teeth, and short-range missiles are a routine part of each years' events, with the repeated promise to turn nuclear. If any third-party attempts to "negotiate a peace," they're simply seen as yet-another occupying power throwing its weight around. "Blood is thicker than water" here as several competing groups of people – all with mutual ancestors – continue to fight with each other as they have done for thousands of years. The movement of the US Embassy is "read into" by parties on all sides of this feud as somehow supporting their position, whatever their position might at the time be. You're never going to take the guns out of these people's hands. They derive their identity from whom they want to kill in the name of some god or another. Babylonians, Cannanites, Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians, Romans, Europeans – they've all tried, and they've all failed.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-14-2017 at 12:32 PM.
 
Old 12-14-2017, 04:19 PM   #45
RadicalDreamer
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2016
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 548

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247
sundialsvcs, the former station chief of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit Michael Scheuer explains why Al Qaeda wants to kill us:
https://youtu.be/XHl1JnQoIWQ?t=7m1s

This is his critique of Obama and Trump's foreign policy. He slams Trump for his Jerusalem decision: http://non-intervention.com/3084/pre...a-first-means/

The US supports states that have supported terrorism against the United States. Saudi Arabia funded the 9/11 hijackers and supported them inside the United States prior to September 11th. Their citizens made up around 40-50 percent of the foreign fighters in Iraq. All the Gulf States and the Obama administration aided terrorist in Syria. Obama did it as a peace offering for his Iran deal.

I agree that the modern Middle East was invented by Western powers. The US could impose a peace if it wanted to. It could make a desert and call it peace if need be, but that isn't in modern America's nature. I think they will be fighting for thousands of years more. If Saudi Arabia and Israel are successful in using the last vestiges of American power to destroy Iran then the Salafi Jihadist will turn on them with the United States out of the way. That will be an interesting war.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[US-Politics] This has gone way too far ... sundialsvcs General 25 01-21-2017 09:57 PM
Sending package to USA - how does it work inside USA? Skyer General 21 06-09-2012 01:47 PM
LXer: FOSS: time to stop the navel-gazing LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-27-2008 07:10 PM
politics mepisismydistro General 1 08-20-2007 02:37 AM
politics gordonb007 General 22 03-01-2004 05:03 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:52 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration