UN Resolution

[Zeke]

Screw Israel if/when they're wrong.

1. I have no issues with abstaining or voting "no."
2. I have no issues with supporting or voting "yes."
3. Situationally.

I have issues when we're expected to go along just because it's Israel.

Entitled elitist bastards...

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Classic. Here we see the term "security interests" used as a gittering generality.

Here are some glittering specifics for you, Captain Clueless.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/p...-united-states

http://www.cfr.org/israel/israel-str...-states/p26300

[Oerets]

I do feel the Israelis are entitled to exist, and it is to late to fight over some of the land given without consent of the inhabitants after WWII. I say it is time for the Israelis to stand on their own two feet without them threatening the US intervening. Then the Israelis if smart would finally concede and broker a deal with their neighbors.
Now the neighbors also need to realize the Israelis are there to stay and accept half a loaf for peace.
Will this happen? Not in my lifetime, you still have my God is better then your God crowd telling their followers they are the true ones entitled to the land. Then also willing to die to prove it.

Barney

P.S.
We have had many faith based wars over the centuries. Many innocent's killed or harmed and destruction. What has it helped? Are we any closer to what core those religions preach? Ask yourself if there could be a better solution?

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Here are some glittering specifics for you, Captain Clueless.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/p...-united-states

http://www.cfr.org/israel/israel-str...-states/p26300

OK. Whell's first reference is to washingtoninstitute.org, which is the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, or WINEP.

Martin Indyk, an Australian-trained academic and former deputy director of research for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, helped found WINEP in 1985. (wikipedia)

Note: American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.

As for whell's second reference , it points to cfr.org, which is of course the Council on Foreign Relations. The cite is to a downloadable report, by Robert D. Blackwill, 'former deputy national security adviser for strategic planning,' (Bush admin, 2003-2004), and by Walter B. Slocombe, former undersecretary of defense for policy (Clinton admin). Slocombe was also Senior Advisor for Security and Defence to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad (2003).*

Anyway, the last thing the referenced page says is that the Blackwill/Slocombe report was "sponsored by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy."

In other words, it's AIPAC all the way down, folks!


* Slocombe is 'credited' for the policy that kicked 300,000 Iraqi Army personnel out of service with no sustenance, a policy that fueled the insurgency and, it turns out, ISIS.

[donquixote99]

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE! When I found the institutional source, I blew off the first cite, but then I clicked on it after posting the preceding, and guess what? It goes to the very same report the second one goes to! Whell gave us two links to the very same Israel-advocacy-sourced report! But it looked good. 'Glittering sourcenality' one might say.

[whell]

So, in a classic lefty Don maneuver, he criticizes the source without taking on the substance of the argument...the argument that HE instigated about whether or not the US has a strategic interest in maintaining a strong relationship with Israel. He then selects a a couple of members of the organizations that were the source of the references, and attempts to throw a bit of dirt on them to.

So, Don, other than throwing some crap around, are you capable of independent thought? Let's see:

Tell me what you actually think about the US abstention on the Resolution: good idea or bad idea and why? France is set to host an international conference next month where 70 countries, over Israeli objections, hope to endorse an international framework for Mideast peace. Is this a good idea? Why? Will the creation of a Palestinian state result in "Middle East peace"? How and why?

[MrPots]

The US has an even more strategic interest in keeping it's citizens healthy and well educated but we don't give a flying fuck about that now do we?

The US has a strategic interest in and updated and modern infrastructure but we ignore that issue in favor of using tax dollars to bomb and re-building third world countries for corporate profit.

The US has a strategic interest in a clean environment but we cave to corporate complaints that it's more profitable to poison our people than to be clean.

Fuck Israel......

[Oerets]

The smart US Strategic thinking would be eliminating dependence on crude oil. The country or countries who find this out and switch over will be the leaders and power brokers of this century.


Barney

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

So, in a classic lefty Don maneuver, he criticizes the source without taking on the substance of the argument...the argument that HE instigated about whether or not the US has a strategic interest in maintaining a strong relationship with Israel. He then selects a a couple of members of the organizations that were the source of the references, and attempts to throw a bit of dirt on them to.

So, Don, other than throwing some crap around, are you capable of independent thought? Let's see:

Tell me what you actually think about the US abstention on the Resolution: good idea or bad idea and why? France is set to host an international conference next month where 70 countries, over Israeli objections, hope to endorse an international framework for Mideast peace. Is this a good idea? Why? Will the creation of a Palestinian state result in "Middle East peace"? How and why?

So in a classic whell maneuver, you castigate me for not reading and responding to the lengthy report that you obviously never even looked at--else you wouldn't have linked twice to the same thing.

You flatter me with your request for MY report on wide-ranging mid-east topics, but before I go to all that work, tell me, who are you representing? Will you pass on the report if it seems worthy to you? Who will get it?

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by MrPots

The US has an even more strategic interest in keeping it's citizens healthy and well educated but we don't give a flying fuck about that now do we?

The US has a strategic interest in and updated and modern infrastructure but we ignore that issue in favor of using tax dollars to bomb and re-building third world countries for corporate profit.

The US has a strategic interest in a clean environment but we cave to corporate complaints that it's more profitable to poison our people than to be clean.

Fuck Israel......

Fuck government of the billionaires, by the billionaires, and for the billionaires.