Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Israel (Score:3, Insightful)

    Israel is the only country in the world that is able to commit so many atrocities without anybody stopping them.

    Israel is the only country in the world that is not at peace with its neighbors in the region. It is also the only country in the world where its neighbors have tried to annihilate them no less than 4 times in 50 years. It is also the only country in the world where a militant, determined, suicidal terrorist group is adamantly trying to deny its right to exist and actively attempts to kill

    • by autarch (914) on 2003.03.18 16:27 (#18044) Homepage Journal
      If this were even remotely true, there would have been a united, sustained global outcry, followed by sanctions and a policy of containment or regime change, or UN-sanctioned military action. None of those has happened.

      Huh? This has happened. Most of the rest of the world has repeatedly condemned Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians. This goes back a long way. There was a UN resolution condemning the 1967 war of expansion. More recently, in September of 2002, a UN security council resolution calling on Israel to pull out of Palestinian territory was, as usual, ignored by Israel, with no consequences whatsoever, also as usual.

      There have also been numerous security council resolutions proposed that have been vetoed by the US, including one condemning Israel [bbc.co.uk] for the December 2002 death of 3 UN staff in Gaza and the West Bank.

      Earlier in May 2002, the US also vetoed a SC resolution [cnn.com] calling on Israel to cease building a settlement in East Jerusalem. 13 members voted in favor, 1 abstained, and ths US vetoed.

      There is a fairly long history of this sort of thing, both in the Security Council and the General Assembly. In the General Assembly, it's fairly common to see resolutions condemning Israel which received near-unanimous support except for the US and places like Micronesia and the Marshall Islands. And Israel, of course.

      These things tend to receive only minimal reporting here in the US, of course, because it doesn't fit the state myth ("Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East").

      The rest of the world would gladly have done something about Israel a long time ago, except for the US's protection.

      The only danger in the world to day that is as great or greater than Saddam Hussein are the endless stream of constant protests that put forth the proposition that terrorists are somehow innocent bystanders who have been horribly wronged and are most certainly undeserving of the massive and assymetric state-sponsored retaliations they face on a daily basis.

      Straw man alert! C'mon, Adam, you're smarter than that. You sound like a typical radio talk show host, trying to reduce an incredibly complex issue down to a cheap attack on people you disagree with. I have yet to hear one protester say that "terrorists are innocent bystanders", and I probably pay a lot more attention to left publications than you do. And to suggest that even if there were such people they could somehow be more dangerous than Saddam Hussein is pure insanity.

      What I _do_ hear is people pointing out that terrorism is _bred by oppression_. I'd hardly think that was such a controversial position. It's pretty rare to see terrorists who come from places with reasonable levels of freedom and comfortable standards of living. A suicide bomber is someone with literally nothing left to lose and no political freedom. People with a grievance don't usually turn to violence as their first option for achieving political goals.