So we can all agree that they are text book examples of religious wackos? The thing is groups like this are trying to draw violence against themselves to show themselves as the true victims. It is far better to simply drown out their message by exercising our own free speech rights in a more positive fashion. The same goes for any hate group. On this I can agree. I never expected to change your opinion, as religious beliefs are normally very solidly held unless one didn't truly believe them to begin with (hence they are called beliefs). I simply wanted to express a different point of view than I saw dominating this forum. When it comes to issues like this what I really want to try and encourage is moderation. That is to say I think everyone should be trying to find some middle ground such that we can then counter the extremists of all religions that threaten our way of life and are a threat to peace, security and the well being of our families. Of the three billion (plus/minus) Christians, Jews and Muslims on this planet, there are probably less than a few hundred thousand who are truly violent and a threat to the rest of us. If we can all agree to allow the peaceful to live and let live we can then focus all of our attention on the violent minority whom we really need to deal with. Fussing and fuming over an oath is a distraction from things that are a real threat to civilization at large.
Generally? Yes. Always? Definitely not. There are a fair number of anti-abortion fanatics that quote the bible, thus trying to invoke Christianity, who also kill abortion clinic workers, and some of them even bomb abortion clinics. We don't often hear about the protests of hard core anti-abortion Christians, unless the rallies get really big, or someone gets bombed though. I doubt anyone from another country would hear about an anti-abortion protest here in the states in their local news... but an anti-abortion bombing? That's quite a bit more likely. Still, I do agree that there is a large amount of violence going on today, especially in the middle east... violence that I would like to see a lot less of. As for the comment about swearing on budda's belly, I concur. I don't really care what a person swears an oath on all that much. There are a few items I might make exception to, but those are few and far between. As for that group of protesters... *Sigh* This is why I have to defend my religion so often to my pagan friends. Most of them were Christian at one time, but were driven away by exclusionary extreme points of view that they experienced locally.
Which term did I use? Fair number? Such as? I recall one, a "lone bomber" from the 90s. Ferret's buddy, above. Rudolph. Somehow, a lone nutjob that blew up a few clinics always seems to be the center piece of comparison and equivalence when it comes to islamic terrorism. I'm not sure how, but I guess I don't view it in such a shallow way. Try this search out in google news: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=abortion+clinic+bombing&btnG=Search+News Were you able to see a pattern? I believe the days of comparing a lone nutjob who blew up a few clinics in the 90s is long over. What this nutjob did over six years pales in comparison to what islam as a religion did last week. I believe we can "be aware" without the need to trivialize through weak and virtually pointless comparisons.
so what should we do Gtech? kill all the muslims? make islam illegal? in your perfect world what would we do?
You're doing a fine job! Just keep posting pics and maybe sprinkle a few cartoons in. In a perfect world? For starters, stop pretending it isn't a problem. Stop masking the problem with moral equivalence. Stop referring to "it" as a "tiny minority" when everything indicates otherwise. Fortunately, we have an administration that takes the issue seriously. What the next election brings, is anyone's best guess. Fortunately as well, we have Spain as a role model that appeasement and "if only we would reach out and be kind to terrorists, they would see the light" mentality doesn't work. What can we do? Be aware and not make excuses. It may actually take another *wake up call* for some.
I think he was adding emphasis. With that said we should remember that we are looking at this from the perspective of being Christian and living in a primarily Christian society. If we were Muslim and living in a primarily Muslim society, like maybe Indonesia, our prospective would be very different. We would see all of the non-violence of Muslims on a day to day basis and look at the violence as the exception to the rule. We would also see the U.S. invasion of Iraq and U.S. support of Israel while it attacks Palestinians as examples of Christians attacking Muslims and examples of the violence of Christianity. Perspective is everything. This is why it is important to look at the actions of one's own country (especially military actions) with an extremely critical eye and to try to encourage the exercising of restraint and diplomacy above all else. In the eyes of others our actions are perceived very differently than they way we perceive them. Negotiating and holding diplomatic talks with Iran and Syria may not be appealing, but it is necessary. Again remember it is a matter of perspective. We may not look at Clinton's launching of cruise missiles against a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan as an act of Christian aggression, but in much of the Muslim world that is exactly the way it is perceived. Israel killing something like a hundred innocent Palestinians due to an errant American made missile fired from an American made aircraft is also looked at as a Christian facilitated act of terrorism perpetrated upon Muslims as is every errant missile that slams into a civilian neighborhood in Iraq because we have gone to such great lengths to boast about how accurate and "smart" our weapons are. If our military goes out and trumpets daily "gun sight" footage of missiles going through a specific window of a specific building then obviously we meant to blow up that school, hospital, bomb shelter, etc. that contained innocent Muslim civilians because we are Christians and we want to wipe Islam off of the face of the earth. From our perspective all of these military actions are a government (e.g. non-religious) response to threats to our national security, but this is not the way our military actions are perceived elsewhere. Perspective is everything. I do not agree that those comparisons were pointless because they clearly show violence committed in the name of Christianity. Their weakness lies in the fact that these were acts of violence by Christians committed on Christians, which is slightly different from acts of violence between peoples of different religions (which may or may not be committed for religious reasons).
so what should we do gtech? come on ok gtech you win the muslims are evil and violent ... now what should we do?
I'm not convinced cowtowing to terrorist perceptions is a reasonable solution. I do agree that some have such limited and weak perception of Isreal/Palestine, that they completely ignore the suicide attacks and who recently started a war there. But there is a completely different side of the coin there. Indonesia has it's own problems. This was originally a yahoo news story, but one in ten indonesian muslims back violent jihad. 19 million is not a "tiny minority." This is in essence what Spain did. Appeasement doesn't work. Spain was rocked with a train explosion then a threat (that changed the course of an election) to pull it's troops out of Iraq, or face more. Spain appeased, and has countered numerous threats since, despite appeasement, including this recent one. I don't believe extremists are interested in whether we look for self-blame or not. They were doing what they do long before Iraq. I believe there was a simple condition place upon them for such? I do not believe "self-blame" or rather (self-loathing) is what they are looking for. I believe it's naive to think that is what interests them. While I can appreciate that *some* may only take their point of view, in real or *supposed* events as described above, I do not. Appeasement to perceptions and over sensitivity to such when dealing with people whose ideology is to kill infidels, is dangerous. It's dangerous to think they need an excuse or that being kind and sensitive to their perceptions will change their attitude. If one were simply looking for a rare case of supposed Christian extremism, you might have a point. But to draw upon such as a means of moral equivalence, to attempt to equalize islamic terrorism, is futile. There is no comparison. That a lone nutjob bombed a few clinics ten years ago is the best example to portray of such, to say "see, it's ok, *we* have them too" is a welcome argument for me. When Christians start flying planes into buildings, bombing planes, trains, subways, blowing up buildings, cars and killing others in the name of their God and threaten to wipe out entire countries, I'll be the first one to take issue with them as well.
I don't care about terrorist perceptions. They are irrational to begin with and there is no reasoning with them. I am all for an all out campaign in Afghanistan to capture or eliminate a certain group of individuals (which I believe Iraq has distracted us from). I do care, however, how moderate non-violent Muslims perceive of our actions. In the case of Israel we have been anything but balanced and Israel has been very brutal in their oppression of Palestinians for around forty years now while we turned a blind eye. Even some Jewish groups are starting to question Israels actions this past summer (e.g. the use of American made cluster bombs in civilian neighborhoods). The U.S. really does need to stand aside and allow some serious investigations into possible war crimes be conducted against Israel's actions this past summer and historically speaking. Maybe nothing would come from them and I think the investigations should search for the truth, not a political agenda, but our consistent protecting of Israel regardless of their actions is indefensible and really does paint us in a hypocritical light even among the most moderate Arabs in the Middle East (note I do not say Muslims because we do not only look like hypocrites to Arab Muslims). What is the difference between suicide bombers blowing up civilians and using cluster bombs to kill civilians? Civilians still die. Don't give me the who started it crap either -- killing civilians is killing civilians. Oh no doubt as does so much of the Muslim/Christian/other parts of the world. We're just lucky to have been born in and live in a rich, mostly peaceful country. We should never forget that 99% of humanity is very poor and poverty breeds violence. I never stated appeasement. Talking with and negotiating with does not mean one has to appease the other side. Talking with and negotiating with one's adversaries does help the two sides learn to better understand each other better. This can lead to a building of trust without any need to appease. Oh and how can we even begin to demand that Middle Eastern countries not pursue nuclear weapons when Israel has had them for so long and finally admitted it this past week (either intentionally or by a slip of tongue - Google this if you like). If we are to expect Iran to submit to IAEA inspections then we must also expect Israel to do the same. Again I don't give a rats ass about extremists. They are by definition impossible to negotiate/reconcile with. What I care about is the the average Arab, Iranian, Pakistani, Indian, Indonesian, etc. who cares about the same basic things that anyone else cares about (peace, security and prosperity for their family). Those conditions are disingenuous red herrings otherwise known as poison pills. There is no way Iran or Syria could ever comply with the Bush administration demands because the Bush administration would: a) refuse to acknowledge their compliance; or b) change the rules. You don't place conditions on opening talks with your adversaries. Talks are about finding ways to achieve one's objectives peacefully and finding ways to peacefully coexist (without either side having to "appease" the other). The Bush Administration's refusal to talk with Iran and Syria will prove to be a huge political blunder. By refusing to talk with Iran, we are helping to support the Iranian President's efforts to paint us as unreasonable and helping his efforts to convince his people that we are not to be trusted. By holding talks without preexisting conditions, we would be calling the Iranian President's bluff and could begin to effectively undermine the hard liners' efforts to paint us as the great Satan. By agreeing to talk we can show ourselves as trying to hold out an olive branch and will force the Iranian President to back up his rhetoric about being willing to talk. This is not about self-blame or self-loathing. This is about taking the time to understand how one's adversaries view us and how the Arab world views our actions. In order to successfully resolve the issues that are impeding peace we must take time to "know our enemy" and how others view our actions. Unfortunatly our President has been running around like a cowboy trying to dish out cowboy justice without understanding the greater dynamics in the Middle East. Iraq is an absolute disaster and it has made us less safe than if we had kept our eye on the real objective and focused all of our military might on tracking down and eliminating Bin Laden and the Tellaban. Maybe instead of having an Iraqi disaster on our hands, we would have a dead Bin Laden. I have never promoted appeasement, I'm suggesting we take time to understand those of other cultures and that we take time to understand what helps radicalize the Middle Eastern world against us. This understanding would significantly help us make our world safer for ourselves by enabling us to work on eliminating what radicalizes people and help us find ways to isolate and eliminate extremist elements. I do not see how the Bush Administration's policies or preaching about how evil Islam is is going to help make our world safer for ourselves in the long run. All both are going to do is continue to further radicalize people and create more enemies that will will have to protect ourselves against.
When you have 1/4 of British muslims proclaiming that the 7/7 attacks were justified, 50% (according to a poll on al jazeera) of muslims polled proclaiming support for bin laden and 1 in 10 muslims in Indonesia claiming they support violent jihad, it's hard not to take notice. And people should be aware. We cannot ignore such. If that many, and we're talking millions now (not a tiny minority) in various random places in the world hold such convictions, you can be sure it's not isolated to just those areas. This becomes a HUGE problem. Millions, with the same mentality as terrorists. I would not call palestinians "moderate non-violent muslims." Sure, there may be some. They do not deserve a balance based upon their actions. While you may wish to portray them as victims, they are far from such. Time and again, they have been offered terms for peace and Israel has more than bent over backwards for them. They (palestinians) have lost wars in which they themselves have lost and Israel has gained land as a result and Israel has given lands back. Unprecidented. When in history do nations that conquer others, let alone those that were attacked in the first place, give back land? Not everything deserves balance. If anything, the Israel/palestinian conflict proves the concept that islam is not peaceful and tolerant of others. To suggest turning a blind eye is to suggest they deserved something for all the terror and violence they have brought an ally during such times. Time and again we (the US) and Israel have attempted to negotiate peace. They do not want peace. They want what virtually all muslims want, to see Israel destroyed. They make this painfully clear every 4-5 years, yet some refuse to see it and portray them as victims. hezbollah, hamas, Europe, the UN, Arab states and others that bow down as dhimmis to the islamic establishment need to stand aside and allow serious investigations into why hezbollah used the UN and civilians as human shields and why they started the war in the first place. France needs to sit it's tiny little "do nothing" ass down and stop complaining about Israel trying to prevent Syria, via way of Iran, from restocking hezbollah. hezbollah and hamas officials that started this war and hid like cowards behind the UN and civilians and fired indiscriminate rockets into Israel with the sole intention of killing civilians with rockets filled with ball bearings need to be investigated for war crimes. News agencies that deliberately doctored photos, staged and orchestrated events, misreported and openly admitted they were reporting under the direct control of hezbollah need to be investigated for one-sided reporting and held accountable. Israel took great effort to not only inform it's own country of incoming hezbollah rockets that were soley targeted at civilians, filled with ball bearings, but to also broadcast through loud speakers and dropping leaflets in areas to warn Lebanon civilians. Did hezbollah do the same? No, they did not. They hid directly among the civilian population to elicit the same response you are giving here. To elicit sympathy and portray themselves as victims. And some actually fell for it. And media outlets ate it up. But they also got called on it as well, for staging events, doctoring photos, etc. They are well trained in "victimhood" and some easily buy into it. Actually there was a lot more to it, then the single sentence cropped out. My point was to one, dispell the victimhood of being a "tiny minority" and to counter the remark you made regarding Indonesia. As for poverty, was looking for a link I had where a study confirmed that most of al qaida's terrorists were from fairly well off families. It's buried in a thousand bookmarks on the subject that I'll have to spend a day sometime categorizing. I keep them handy for just such occasions. It doesn't have to be stated to be recognized. With normal adversaries, you might have a point. We are not dealing with traditional adversaries. They do not seek "mutual understanding" and trust. They seek to convert the world into islam. Simple, really. Though Israel has had a policy of ambiguity, most have known. And to that, it's quite simple, really. If in fact Israel does have nukes, they have more than proved responsible with such over how many years they've had such. Not everything is equal and not everything deserves equal treatment. Iran's nutjob has made clear, time and again, that he intends to destroy israel, wipe them off the map. That is not responsibility and that is not the type of country *anyone* wants with nuclear bombs. To even suggest, in such a twisted manner that "well, they have them, so should Iran" is dangerous thinking. There are a lot more "extremists" than I believe you would like to admit. As I've demonstrated, just from a few published links, there are millions. I believe you care about them, but inadvertantly, because you cannot come to grips that there are so many. Which conditions do you believe they were? I didn't specifically mention any, but I'm aware of at least one. It is not unrealistic to place conditions on adversaries to come to the table. Especially when they are reasonable. I don't believe Syria or Iran want to accomplish anything peacefully. Has anything either has done or said led you to believe they seek peace? Does wiping a country off the face of the planet sound peaceful? If one were under the misguided notion that either actually seek peace, you may have a small point. Sending the President (Bush) a Da'wa was not very peaceful. Google "da'wa" to note meaning. They are not interested in olive branches or peace. I believe those in office understand our enemy very well. I also believe liberal democrats do not have a clue about them. This was more than exemplified during the Clinton administration and liberals are working hard today to prove they do not have a clue about our enemies. Iraq has not made us less safe and it's delusional to suggest such. The administration has twarted numerous plots, not only here, but abroad. Countless terrorists have been captured and we have systems in place (despite weak liberal's concerns for making sure America fights with both hands behind it's back) that are very effective. The illusion is, that because this administration has bee SO EFFECTIVE in making sure another 9/11 never happens again, liberals take it for granted and openly make statements that we are not safer, making it appear that is what they actually wish for. We've been understanding other cultures for a very long time. If you want to understand what radicalizes these people, read the quran. I know that's not the answer you want to hear, but it would give an insight. Preaching the evils of islam is not going to radicalize otherwise unradicalized people. Religious leaders in islam incite their followers to such and they do so based upon the quran. Again, not an answer you want to hear, but if we can put aside "political correctness" and seek reality, that is a major reason. We are infidels. The kaffir. In islam, you are either a believer or a non-believer. If you are non-believer, you are a second class citizen. A dhimmi. They don't seek eqalization. The cause of Allah is converting all to islam by any means necessary. You either submit and convert, die, or if you are lucky, become a dhimmi (second class citizen) and pay the jizya (infidel tax). Appeasement doesn't work. We must be aware. Even moderate muslims sometimes offer a reasonable voice. And sometimes when they do, the most unusual things happen that make you realize if a voice of moderation right here at home speaks out, and this is the punishment he gets over what some wish were true in the first place, we have problems.
GTech, it is very obvious from your last post that your view of the Israeli Palestinian issue is colored only by the past ten years of history and the general bias of our media. When you look at the forty or fifty year history of the issue like Palestinians being forcibly evicted from their homes which where then given to Jews to create a Jewish state, Palestinians being forced to live in refugee camps for decades because they have no where else to go, Jewish settlements being illegally built (even by Israeli law) in Palestinian territory, "security" fences being built that separate Palestinians from their farm land (again decride by the international community, the UN and I believe Israeli courts but ignored), the fact that around 10 times as many Palestinians have died in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, etc., etc. etc. it is impossible to say that Israelis are innocent victims. This is not to justify terrorism but to say Israel is just as guilty of committing terrorism and is guilty attempting to commit ethnic cleansing through the economic devastation of of Palestinians, the forcible eviction of them from their own homes, the long term destruction of their lands, etc., etc., etc. There is no difference between an Israeli gunship blowing up buildings and a Palestinian suicide bomber blowing up a bus. They are both killing innocent civilians. The only difference is that the Palestinians can't acquire real weapons of war. I'm not saying these things about Israel because it is what I have heard from Muslims, I am saying it because it is what I have seen watching the news and taking time to learn about the issues there throughout my life over the last twenty-five to thirty years. There are several Israelis including Ariel Sharon who should have been brought up on war crimes for their actions. Do some research on the man and what he did. Really look at this issue, not as a Christian or from the stance that you believe that Jews have some biblical claim to the land but look at it as an impartial human being. Israel was born of violence committed on others who were killed and or forcibly removed from their native lands. What would you do if the UN suddenly decided that they wanted to create a special state for an ethnic group and decided that it was your home town and state that would be given to that group? Would you peacefully walk away to move into a refuge camp where your children and grandchildren would be condemned to live in squallered conditions or would you fight against the invaders with everything at your disposal? Any one who claims the Israelis are the victims here are blind to the injustices committed to the Palestinians at the end of WWII and continued to be committed on them ever since. I'm not saying that Israel can or should be now abolished I am simply saying we must recognize that this issue is way more complex than the simple Jews defending themselves against terrorists because they too have been committing acts of terror for fifty years. In regards to the cluster bombs, it was a violation of international conventions and Israeli agreements with the U.S. to use cluster bombs against civilian targets. Never mind that "warning" was given, those munitions have a very high failure rate and they are and will be killing innocent civilians for a long time to come because Southern Lebanon is blanketed in them. There should be hell to pay with war crime charges being sought for whomever ordered the use of those munitions because a lot of innocent people (especially children) will be dying for a very long time to come because of them. Personally I think such munitions should be fully banned just like chemical weapons.
Oh in regards to Israels responsible stewardship of nuclear weapons. Bull crap. If history has shown anything Israel is more than willing to use whatever weapons they have at their disposal (e.g. cluster bombs on civilians). I feel no safer knowing Israel has nuclear weapons than I would knowing Iran or Syria had nuclear weapons. They plain fact of the matter is nuclear weapons do not belong in the Middle East (or anywhere else). Eventually somebody in the Middle East is going to attack somebody else and nuclear weapons will be used in return. At least if there were no nuclear weapons in that theater the damage inflicted would be contained in that theater. If nuclear weapons are discharged, however, the effects will be felt well beyond the Middle East. Of course this is what the Christian Fundamentalists really want so that it will fulfill the prophecies laid out in Revelations. No Christian fundamentalists aren't going attack others, they simply want to make sure that there is enough discord in the Middle East and the Israelis have enough weapons that Armageddon will be sparked in their lifetime.
So what is the solution? Do we allow congressmen from now on to take an oath on any book of their choosing? Should atheists be able to take an oath on their "there is no God books"? Or do we just get rid of the oath completley? Its not like politicians are the most honest of people anyways.
KLB, I reject virtually your entire revision of the history. Not everything has a "just as guilty" to it. Whether it be islam vs Christianity or whether it be Israel vs. palestinians. Moreover, the vision offered does not portray, in the least bit, a "just as guilty" spectrum. It is, IMO, as biased and flawed as that of Carter's. There is no media bias in favor of Israel. We see that, time and again, as we did most recently this summer when media outlets, once again, exuded their anti-semitic coverage and some were under the direct control of hezbollah. Staged events, doctored photos, unproven allegations (such as cluster bombs). Above, you mention an investigation should take place to determine if they were used, but you've also used such in context, as if there is some sort of final conclusion. All the while, skipping right over what hezbollah fired in and their hiding behind civilians. If you have conclusive proof that such were used, and they were against internation laws, then I welcome a reference. The easiest way for civilians not to die when hezbollah is involved, is for media outlets (some did) and the UN (actually filed numerous reports) to put pressure on them to stop hiding behind women and children. I reject your ethnic cleansing allegation as well. Many muslim Arabs, of palestinian descent, live in Israel and enjoy freedoms unheard of in neighboring countries. When neighboring countries or territories attack Israel, as they have repeatedly done, Israel will fight back. How many times must land captured when Israel is attacked be given back? One might think they would learn their lessons. If you want investigations, let's investigate and hold responsible those who kidnapped citizens of Israel and started the war. Let's investigate those staged photo ops, those doctored photos, those flagrant biased news reports, the hiding behind women and children, the weapons smuggling from Iran to Syria into Lebanon. Let's investigate why hezbollah and hamas fired rockets into Israel with the sole intention of killing civilians, using ball bearing filled rockets. Let's investigate why neither warned Israeli citizens of such, in the same manner that Israel did. The solution is really simple. Stop blowing shit up. Stop following the quran which incites hatred towards Jews. palestinians have more than had their opportunities for peace. They do not want peace. They want to kill Jews in the cause of allah. They long could have built their own country up and made it prosperous. But no, killing Jews is all they are interested in. Israel has bent over backwards so many times over the last 50 years and every time they do, it's rewarded with violence. That's the culture thing you mentioned earlier. Show a sign of weakness in that culture, and you are history.
Not bull crap at all. More than demonstrated. It's not about your personal feelings of safety, it's about fact. The fact is, if in fact Israel does have nuclear weapons, they have more than demostrated restraint from using such. Contrast, you have Iran who IS working to develop nuclear weapons and continuously telling the world how they will wipe Israel off the map. Ah, but we should be kind and seek understanding. Well, let's see. We have a nutjob, who continuously calls for the destruction of Israel and who the world knows is desperately working towards nuclear weapons. He denies the holocaust and I don't think anyone in the world state otherwise, that he hates Jews with a passion. Now some might say "well, we deserve to be blown off the map by Iran," but that's in America. Lots of self-loathers here, always seeking to find blame with the US for everything. Now, will Israel self-loathe and try to seek understanding to why Iran wants to wipe them off the planet? I don't think so. When push comes to shove, and Iran is doing a lot of shoving right now, Israel is going to take care of it's survival. And to that, I say: Good for Israel. I hope they do not listen to appeasers and people like Carter when it comes to the likes of Iran's leadership.
THAT IS THE PROBLEM. My history is not revisionist history. IT IS FACT UNEQUIVABLE UNDENIABLE! The history you want to believe is the revisionist history here. The entire problem is that people like you refuse to look at the chain of events that started with the founding of Israel and continued through modern times. The Jews with the backing of Western Christian nations invaded Palestine, evicted the Palestinians to over crowded refuge camps and have since systematically denied them any ability to normalize their society or build their own state. The "peace" deals offered to the Palestinians have been very one sided and would in essence force the Palestinians to appease and submit to Jewish invaders yet get very little in return. Yet you say WE should never appease -- this to is one sided. We can not undo what was done some fifty years ago, but we should recognize that Israel and the Palestinians have been at a state of low level gorilla war for decades now and that it was the Jews who fired the first shots. It is a tit for tat war where BOTH sides have committed atrocities and both sides have targeted civilian populations with the express desire to expel the other side through any means necessary. Rather than rejecting what I say, take some bloody time to educate yourself about the entire history of that area and to look at what has been happening there for the past fifty plus years. Not from the viewpoint of a Christian who has a special affinity to the Jews, but as an impartial historian trying to understand a region and trying to learn the truth. The TV program "Frontline" (on PBS) and the History Channel have had some very good documentaries on this issue and those programs are sure to repeat eventually. We can not resolve the Israeli - Palestinian issue until we and our government start really look at the issue and honestly set forth to deal with the issue in a fair and equable fashion, which means we MUST stop protecting Israel from sanctions and investigations at every turn in the UN. Israel should be investigated and if appropriate sanctioned for their use of cluster bombs in Lebanon this past summer. Oh and by the way experts estimate that there are hundred of thousands of unexploded bomblets all over southern Lebanon and while you might hear of every single act of Palestinian violence against Israel you will rarely here about all of the Lebanese children and civilians who are and will be continually killed or maimed because of stumbling over, picking up or plowing over those unexploded munitions. As long as this was the same for EVERYONE (e.g. the Bible could not be used either) I could full heartedly agree with this.
Demonstrating restraint would have been NOT using cluster bombs in Southern Lebanon as this is a violation of international norms. Israel's response to this summer's actions were disproportionate and excessive and the U.S. was way to happy to stand aside and say nothing while massive numbers of innocent Lebanese civilians were killed. Showing restraint would have been aggressively trying to pursue peace with the Palestinians on fair and balanced terms without falling for the bait of extremist groups (funded by Iran) bent on derailing a peaceful settlement. While not at all constructive, the kidnapping of Israeli solders were military targets. Israels subsequent actions did nothing but weaken their hand, weaken their "moral" justification and strengthen Hezbollah. Launching military strikes against clearly marked and announced convoys of humanitarian supplies by the societies of the Red Cross and Red Crescent is not exercising restraint. Attacking well established UN outposts maned by UN Observers is not exercising restraint. Israel has very little history of demonstrating the ability to exercise restraint. Except for the first Gulf War, which was absolutely amazing. How convinently you ignore the fact that I stated that NOBODY should have nuclear weapons in the Middle East. The area is much too unstable and Nuclear weapons will not help to stabilize the area and would most assuredly be used by someone (probably Israel first). Oh there is no doubt that he is a "nutjob" but right now Bush and the Israelis are playing right into his hands. Thus far every move Bush has made as President has strengthened the Iranian position. First we attacked and eliminated Iran's enemies to the north who were the Tellaban and then we eliminated their enemy to their west Saddam Husein. We then created a massive power vacuum in Iraq that Iran has been more than able to exploit with the assistance of Syria. At the same time Bush's rhetoric about the axis of evil and Iraq being an example have strengthened the hand of the Iranian hard liners and made it possible for this "nutjob" to become president in Iran. In essence we have given the Iranian hard liners everything they could have ever wished for. At the same time Israel has taken the bait of every terrorist act committed by Iranian and Syrian backed groups. Iran doesn't care about the Palestinians, they only see the Palestinian situation as a good way to destabilize Israel and really only want to see continued instability and bloodshed between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Yes Iran wants to eliminate Israel, there is no question about it, but everything that is happening in the Middle East is strengthening Iran and weakening Israel. Israels lack of restraint this summer was a massive disaster from all respects. It strengthened their enemies in Lebanon while weakening those in Lebanon who would be quite happy to peacefully coexist with Israel. It demonstrated Israeli disregards to international norms in regards to the use of non-conventional weapons (using cluster bombs against civilians). And it gave Iran exactly what they wanted.