dieseltaylor

There is already a "peace plan" but Israel has consistently been violating the borders established in the peace plan which has just been a matter of rubbing the Palestinian noses in it. And for that matter the international community who supported the concepts. Whilst officially the Israeli's may restrict the settlement to organic growth of existing settlements on Palestinian land the illegal new sttlements by right-wing Jewish groups would go on pretty much unhindered. The chances of a Palestinian being allowed to build a new property in Israeli occupied territory are slim to non-existent apparently: I think the international community has to decide a solution and enforce it by boycotting the Countries that do not buy into it - that is Palestine and Israel. I do not doubt that those Arabs within the Israeli state will subsequently be leant upon to leave but I am sure that sufficient monetary award and passport to a new land will help. However that does leave the problem of a divided Israel where religious Israelis battle out governemnt with secularist Israelis. And there is the matter of the 200 nuclear devices that Israel has - would you feel happy for those to be in the hands of religious zealots? That problem is beyond answering. Anyway one step at a time.

Read this article and weep Runyan: http://www.sephardicstudies.org/iran.html Lets stop confusing respect for the Jewish religion to mean support for the nominally secular state of Israel OR being anti-Israeli to mean anti-Jewish. http://www.jewishmag.co.il/119mag/jews-iran/jews-iran.htm And of course the reports of the Iranian Jews leaving Israel to return to Iran are things we do not like to talk about. http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2006/pourzal280706.html The dislike for Israel is perhaps also not a million miles from the fact that the US has been meddling in Iranian affairs for decades and Israel is the US proxy in the area.

Korea! Palestine But I cannot say that America was involved overtly in all of them.

Interesting site with a different view of what is happening: http://warincontext.org/ The US kid killed with four bullets to the head sounds excessive. Anyway more thoughtful stuff is here Carlo Strenger notes in Haaretz: During the media frenzy of the last days a crucial headline has received close to no attention: Mossad chief Meir Dagan told the Knesset’s Foreign Relations Committee that Israel is gradually turning from a strategic asset into a liability for the United States of America. As it’s a bit difficult to brush aside Dagan as a softheaded idealist, our policy makers will find another way not to listen. They will say, “this would never have happened under George W. Bush; this is only because the Obama administration is not friendly towards Israel. We simply need to wait for Obama to end this term; he won’t get reelected.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I have heard warnings that Israel is becoming a strategic liability for the U.S. from Americans, including high ranking members of the George W. Bush administration, for years. The only difference is that during the Bush years, nobody in the administration would say this on record or for attribution. As if to echo and underline Dagan’s message, Anthony Cordesman, one of the most respected non-partisan national security experts in Washington writes: [T]he depth of America’s moral commitment [to Israel] does not justify or excuse actions by an Israeli government that unnecessarily make Israel a strategic liability when it should remain an asset. It does not mean that the United States should extend support to an Israeli government when that government fails to credibly pursue peace with its neighbors. It does not mean that the United States has the slightest interest in supporting Israeli settlements in the West Bank, or that the United States should take a hard-line position on Jerusalem that would effectively make it a Jewish rather than a mixed city. It does not mean that the United States should be passive when Israel makes a series of major strategic blunders–such as persisting in the strategic bombing of Lebanon during the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, escalating its attack on Gaza long after it had achieved its key objectives, embarrassing the U.S. president by announcing the expansion of Israeli building programs in east Jerusalem at a critical moment in U.S. efforts to put Israeli-Palestinian peace talks back on track, or sending commandos to seize a Turkish ship in a horribly mismanaged effort to halt the “peace flotilla” going to Gaza. It is time Israel realized that it has obligations to the United States, as well as the United States to Israel, and that it become far more careful about the extent to which it test the limits of U.S. patience and exploits the support of American Jews. This does not mean taking a single action that undercuts Israeli security, but it does mean realizing that Israel should show enough discretion to reflect the fact that it is a tertiary U.S. strategic interest in a complex and demanding world. And then comes word from the Canadian writer, Margaret Atwood, whose impartial observations as a first-time visitor to the Jewish state cut to the core when she says: [T]he concept of Israel as a humane and democratic state is in serious trouble. Once a country starts refusing entry to the likes of Noam Chomsky, shutting down the rights of its citizens to use words like “Nakba,” and labelling as “anti-Israel” anyone who tries to tell them what they need to know, a police-state clampdown looms. Will it be a betrayal of age-old humane Jewish traditions and the rule of just law, or a turn towards reconciliation and a truly open society? Time is running out. Opinion in Israel may be hardening, but in the United States things are moving in the opposite direction. Campus activity is increasing; many young Jewish Americans don’t want Israel speaking for them. America, snarled in two chaotic wars and facing increasing international anger over Palestine, may well be starting to see Israel not as an asset but as a liability. "

Long term peace?!!!!! Exactly when did that happen? Incidentally my view is that the American insurrection was a bad thing because it destroyed what would have been an unassailable power in the world. What chance Hitler of Japan thinking of going to war against the British Commonwealth that included most of the world. I doubt that WW1 would have been contemplated as it was a foregone loss for the Central Powers. Incidentally the proper title is now the Commonwealth of Nations: If you look at the Wiki article you will see that non- british colonies have applied to join - including France. Now there is an interesting what-if. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Nations

Pinetree - why would I doubt your post? I was referring to the anecdote that I posted.

Turkey meanwhile http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=177341 And for an insight into how the news is being spun in the US there is this report on Eliot Spitzers cable programme being apparently biased. Spitzer was a great attorney and though Jewish is married to a Souther Baptist. http://www.alternet.org/story/147087/glenn_greenwald_clobbers_eliot_spitzer_in_debate_on_the_gaza_flotilla They refer to the UN report and I felt bad I do not know the details - so here is something to chew on. Seems quite ironic that Israel and Egypt have the worlds largest prison camp. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/9A265F2A909E9A1D8525772E004FC34B So the Gaza strip has a population roughly a third of Israel's and is predominantly made up of people or their descendants driven from their original land.

One might think that Eisenhower's warning has been ignored.

Good point. I wonder if Asian children are more developed. My own hypotheses is that the people being tested are the TV generation and I would have no problems fingering TV for giving yougsters the attention span of a gnat.

Worked for two people know.

I did mean that you have legislation to hinder your private use of the Internet. That must be unprivacy regulation : )

I have often said that young adults brains are not fully developed until they are about 20 with the physical development of the "consequences" part of the brain being last. Now some research pushing the date back over brain efficieincy. http://www.physorg.com/news194674084.html So lets remove the vote until they are 25 or so. : )

Neutron bomb? Getting a bit dark mood here all of a sudden! But trying to get a rational answwer to a religious/nationalist problem is perhaps not possible without a time span of hundreds of years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk Is a good start: "The density of artillery in the salient was unusual; there were more artillery regiments in the salient than infantry regiments. The Red Army was determined to grind down attacking German units with a combination of mines and artillery fire. Indirect fire from howitzers would stop the German infantry, while direct fire from 45mm, 57mm, and 85 mm towed anti-tank guns and 76.2mm divisional field guns would destroy the tanks. In the 13th Army sector (facing the German 9th Army on the northern face of the salient) the density of anti-tank guns was 23.7 guns per kilometre of defended front. In the 6th and 7th Guards Army sectors in the south the density was lower, with about 10 guns per kilometre. The preparation of the battlefield by Red Army military engineers was thorough. Reports indicate 503,993 anti-tank mines and 439,348 anti-personnel mines were laid in the defended area. On average, 1,500 anti-tank and 1,700 anti-personnel mines were laid per kilometre of front. In the sectors eventually attacked, densities were never lower than 1,400 per kilometre and sometimes reached as high as 2,000 per kilometre. Red Army engineers also constructed miles of trenches, laid barbed wire, built anti-tank obstacles, and constructed thousands of gun and mortar positions." The density has to put against the depth of the defences also. The tankers knew who the real danger were and I imagine and artillery and DF would have been used on likely positions so accounting for some before they fired. Also recovering tanks was a German strength so they may have been hit, track damaged etc but ATG's were hit and dead.

Don't worry coe write to Moon and he will review the quality of your posts and put you back to noobie : )

: ) Hahahaha to suit the posting requirements on length of message.

It would be nice to confirm the storyif possible. ANd yea he must have had one 'ell of a life

The US position probably made worse by Obama's chief of staff being in Israel currently for the bar-mitzvah of his son and a nephew. Given Perle's hand in the Iraq war the intertwining of US and Israeli interests is unfortunate. I think what makes things difficult is that religion as in Jewishness is confused with supporting Israel. However in a democracy where voting and donations are the breath of life to politicians pressure groups have great power. Thirteen mmbers of the Senate and 30 of the Representatives are Jewish according: www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/senrec.html Just to get some perspective on the matter there are about 13.3M Jews in the world and about 5.5M in the US and 5M in Israel. http://www.jewfaq.org/populatn.htm Whilst being Catholic means in theory you support the Pope you do not necessarily have to send aid or worry about him grabbing land outside of the Vatican State at the expense of the Roman citizens. If that were the situation would people be worried if the US supported the Pope : ) It is obviously a horribly complex problem but what seems so irritating is that for such a small country the danger it creates to the world in terms of nuclear and non-nuclear war seems inordinately large. I dislike religion as through history a lot of bad has been done in religions name so I am not perhaps the most unbiased of observers. However threats to the World's peace have to be acknowledged. If the US really wishes to solve the crisis admit Israel as a state get the borders sorted and buy off the Arabs who still have land -- or allow them to emigrate to US mainland. As it stands US is taking all the flak whilst Israel misbehaves as it likes under the threat of nuclear usage.

The Aussies have some of the most drastic unprivacy regulations of any democracy. So here is the answer. http://www.startpage.com/au/ Now you might think they know about it as it started yesterday but who knows : )

For those of you who were following the story its finally hit the courts. And a very large German company is looking a bit naughty. http://www.propublica.org/feature/tainted-chinese-drywall-concerns-went-unreported-for-two-years

All I can see happening is perhaps a consumer boycott as Western governments pussyfoot around. In the UK a lot of the produce like tomatoes and herbs are Israeli but I suppse they are seasonal and with Europe in growing mode now perhaps people will have forgotten.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10185247.stm I await the work on cheap placebo medicine and then homeopathy

When it came to designing AtG's the British had two very effective guns. And if you are wise enough to paly with sufficient points and/or casualties then the British battalion is a very good purchase with intrinsic 6 AFAIR 6lbers plus transport. Not to mention they actually get MMg's also.!

Of course the fundamental point is whether the blockade is itself "legal". I think Israel is managing to make itself unpopular everywhere. My concern is that most religions believe that when their people die they go to heaven. People like me believe we die forever and therefore are unlikelyto go for the mass suicide route. http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/ shows the Jewish groups that are opposed to the Israeli state as a concept, that according to the Torah Israel is a no-no. Amusingly there is a lot of letter writing going on to the press saying that democracies - of which Israel is included - are safe to have nuclear weapons and are not warlike anyway. Anyone who thinks the attack on Iraq by the US and the UK would suggest there is not much difference. If those at the top want a war they will concoct one. I think this is Israel playing extreme brinkmanship with the US to force the US to do something otherwise Israel will blow the region apart. However I am not sure that using the US as a hammer for Israel actually solves the long-term problem at all. Is it better than it happens now or in ten years when there will be many more weapons around? Israel cannot make itself invulnerable anymore than any other country in the world can. If it believes it can it's leaders are deluded. Getting rid of all your friends just makes life more difficult - however when pulling the trigger if everyone is deemed to be againsty you it becomes easier I suppose. Does anyone believe that the provision of advanced weaponry to the Israelis has made them anymore likely to seek a peace? Is the constant expansion of its borders by building settlements aimed at breeding goodwill or is it a constant sop to the kingmaker religious groups.

So real life - like a small mortar bomb through an open hatch - should not happen? Normally need more than one shot. It seems BF factored in the size of the vehicle compared to the vulnerable bits and half-tracks can take many more hits than seems reasonable. Armoured cars less so.