Quote Originally Posted by FutureEmperor
Ok it was jewish land IN LIKE THE YEAR 100B.C. its like the italians claiming all of europe because of the roman empire, or the french claiming germany because of Napoleons france. These people were displaced there, its not like they were living there before the war.
Actually, many were. There are quite a few Jews who never left the area -- I'm sure War Angel would be able to tell you more about that. And there was no "alright, you have to leave so we can fit some Jews in", either. Nobody was pushed out of their land to form Israel. I could be wrong, but I believe even some Muslims are in Israel, though not the extremists that surround Israel praying to Allah that it would be pushed into the sea (which is a stated goal of many of the groups you're supporting).
Personally from my view, California is the most sane state there is right now.
That says a lot. And nothing good.
Ok, before the crusades christian pilgrims often went to the holy land, after the crusades (which i remind you is the christians fault) then there was tension and you probably wouldnt want to go there.
Was it this thread where I mentioned not to bring up the Crusades unless you know what you're talking about? Happens all the time. The Crusades were launched to reclaim land that was taken by the Muslims earlier. It would have only been an "invasion" if the land had always been Muslim...consider it a delayed counterattack.
Now adays everything was fine until after WWII when Isreal was formed.
Not formed. Re-formed. Of course the Muslims there were happy when there was no organized Jewish country -- when they started having millions of Jews around them, that caused problems. Damn Jewish, right? What's next, did they cause WWII too?
personally i think it would work, only the radicals on BOTH sides would need a time out, Its a vicious cycle that could have been avoided with level headed thinking in the first place.
Radicals on both sides? Tell me, how many Jews declare it their life goal to kill as many Muslims as possible? When was the last time a rabbi declared a jihad on Muslim "infidels"?
There are only terrorist because of unjustice done to Palestine, I DO NOT CONDONE what these terrorist are doing but seriously once again if isreal was never formed, there would be no radical terrorist.
Damn those Jews, causing trouble again! How dare we give their homeland back to them after millions of them were slaughtered by one of the most brutal regimes in history, look at what we've done! If it weren't for the Jews being there, the Muslims wouldn't have any problem, right?
Personally id rather have another country with the bomb, (and im highly leftist.) the last thing i want is a country with out a useless weapon (when would any level headed or even radical person use an atomic weapon... NEVER) resentment and brooding over the inability to conduct its own affairs.
A. Highly leftist? You don't say?
B. When conducting its own affairs means threatening millions upon millions of people with nuclear weapons, no, we won't let that happen.
C. Nuclear weapons would only be used if the user didn't think there would be a chance of counterattack. Now, whether that means wiping out the country entirely so they can't counterattack, or being in a sitation where they won't be able to find who to counterattack, it still means the same thing. We're not worried about Iran so much as we're worried about the well-established terrorist connections Iran has. A hostile Muslim country with nuclear weapons is a bad enough idea. A hostile Muslim country with nuclear weapons and the means, motive, and opportunity to provide terrorist organizations with nuclear weapons is a terrible idea.
Any ways the world would be alot more dangerous if there was only one super power with the bomb, even if it was the united states (probably more so as they have the delivery systems.)
In theory, yes. You could also look at the idea that, well, first of all, that would never happen, and second of all, I'm sure if anything like that were to happen, the UN would finally get off its collective coward lazy ass and stop it. Let's hope something would motivate them, anyway.
The way i see it the US only wants to disallow Iran the bomb because it would make Iran that much more easy to invade. This is why north korea still hasnt been invaded (that and the global resentment felt after no WMD's were found after a war was started on that assumption alone.)
That assumption alone? Don't read the news much, do you? And nuclear weapons would mean MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), meaning if they used any on an invading force, it would be devastating, then we'd nuke the hell out of them. Not to mention (since War Angel already did) that a nuclear weapon wouldn't be extremely useful against an invading force, unless (possibly) it was still staging and not a declared invasion yet, in which case it would be a preemptive strike with nuclear weapons, which would turn most of the rest of the world against them.