News From The Begging Bowl Comments - Brought to you by JoeUserhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/rss/comments© 2006 - 2008 Stardock Corporation. All rights reserved.Political and topical news and commentaryen-us2008-07-05T01:32:552008-07-05T01:32:55http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rss/rss.htmlStardock Rss Generator v1.0, Andrew Powellinfo@stardock.comapowell@stardock.comDr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/317068
Evil people are not going to become good just because you legitimize them.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/317068http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/317068Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Cowards!momijikihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928Yeah.  The smile continues until the day the guy finds out that what he paid for is an STD because  his wife went to the doctor and got test result (assuming of course that she wasn't fooling around on the side... and I know the reverse situation can happen).

Was this supposed to be funny? I think it misses the mark.  Then again, I don't find that kind of stuff humorous at all.  It just reminds me that some people are shitty people. 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56momijiki on Having an affair?Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Having an affair?Locamamahttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928No, but my husband (for how long, I'm not sure) is, has and I don't think there are words for how much agony this has caused me.   It is a horrible thing to do to the person who you committed to love and cherish, forsaking all others, until death do us part.  I just can't find the humor in any of it anymore. 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/316928Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Locamama on Having an affair?SanChoninohttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572I still find Colbert a pain in the butt!

I think, with the passing of George Carlin, Stephen Colbert may be the funniest man alive.

You don't believe me? Go watch the 3-part YouTube video of his speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2006.

The man is a genius. Just look at the expression on Bush's face as everything he's done and every policy he's backed is eviscerated.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56SanChonino on The Colbert Report.Artysimhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572adnauseam-

You may or may not know this so I'm writing to assume that you don't. If you do, then my apologies and regardless I do not intend for this to come out the wrong way (condescendingly)

Colbert is about as liberal as they come. The whole point of his show is to make fun of and parody ultra-right wing media hawks like O'reilly (with his show "The O'reilly Factor", Colbert Report, see the similarity?)

His whole on-stage ego is a projection, meant to parody folks like O'reilly and Limbaugh. Take for example when he has guests on the show- entrance music plays for him while he bounds across the stage to his guest waiting off to the side (thus keeping all the attention on him while the guest is simply there as a side show) He then asks ridiculous questions, purposefully interrupts his guests and ridicules anything they say that doesn't fall in lock-step with the official party line. Again, a parody.

Rest assured he is about as anti-Guantanamo as one can get!

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Artysim on The Colbert Report.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/315572Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on The Colbert Report.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/314860http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/314860http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/314860Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Civil War in Zimbabwe.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/314274http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/314274http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/314274Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Mugabe is mad, insane, stupid.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312292It's obvious to all of you that I'm getting old and I don't want to. Do any Joeusers feel that way too.

Yes. If I knew then, what I know now.....

But I remember the TNG episode, Tapestry. And everytime I start to think of "I shoulda, coulda, woulda" I remember that pulling a thread may unravel all of my life, and I dont want it all gone. SO I am content with what I have done and have.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312292http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312292Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on What would you change?OckhamsRazorhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312292Good article and good question.  There are definitely some choices I would make differently.  Most of it is due to 20-20 hindsight.

 

But over all, I have tried to be a good person.  Sometimes I have succeeded, and sometimes I haven't.  I've been happy for the former and tried to make ammends for the latter.

 

I'll depart with you on wanting to be young again.  I'm 45, and maybe my opinion will be different when I'm 61, but I doubt it.  I DO want to learn more, though.  As much more as I can stuff in in the time I have left.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312292http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312292Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56OckhamsRazor on What would you change?ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Myanmar a mess.CharlesCShttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065
I'm sure someone is doing some kind of investigation that will lead to blaming the US for the cyclone. Probably global warming for our refusal to clean up our act (wait it's now called climate change), or maybe some kind of new weapon we're testing like the one that caused the Tsunami in Southeast Asia a few years ago.

We bad to the bone.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56CharlesCS on Myanmar a mess.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Ted, I'm gonna respectfully disagree here. I don't see Palestinians being the problem here. It is Hamas. Their election resembled to the Soviet style elections. There is a fundamental difference between Palestinians and Hamas.

Hamas today, the PLO yesterday, blah blah blah. The fact remains that the whole doctrine of Palistinian world view is that Israel has no right to exist and Israelis are to be exterminated.

They aren't a race or an ethnic group, they are a political entity made up of Arabs who have decide taking on the name Palistinians gains them some sort of historical relevance.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Palestinians are nothing but todays Nazis, trying to exterminate the Jews. We shouldn't treat Palestinians any better than we would treat a Nazi thug.

Ted, I'm gonna respectfully disagree here. I don't see Palestinians being the problem here. It is Hamas. Their election resembled to the Soviet style elections. There is a fundamental difference between Palestinians and Hamas. ]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Dude: I'm not saying that Israel is innocent in all this, however, only one side is fighting out of the concept that the other has no right to exist at all.

Palestinians are nothing but todays Nazis, trying to exterminate the Jews.  We shouldn't treat Palestinians any better than we would treat a Nazi thug.

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815The latest Hamas rocket attacks on Israel shows how naive this statement is. How do you "negotiate" with people whose only demand is your extermination?

Yeah I noticed that too Ted but there is also a report that IDF killed 5 Palestinians and wounded 30 in searching for rocket launching sites. I'm keeping a close eye to see if they are related because this one happened first (at dawn). I will let you know what I find out.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Ahh yes, it's all up to the Palestinians to make the choice to live in peace and everything will be rosy. Thanks for clarifying! Meanwhile, the Israelis will continue to practice their form of "tough love" until the attitude change you spoke of comes to pass?

The latest Hamas rocket attacks on Israel shows how naive this statement is. How do you "negotiate" with people whose only demand is your extermination?
]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065It is shameful but not surprising.

Indeed.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Myanmar a mess.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065
I stand in agreement with you (well, actually I'm sitting at my computer). ]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Myanmar a mess.Locamamahttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065It is shameful but not surprising.  The military junta's human rights violations were already horrific and this is just another illustration of their "hold onto power and control at any cost" philosophy.  It's just heartbreaking that so many are suffering when there are those who are willing to help. 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Locamama on Myanmar a mess.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065It's simple, if the thugs that run the country can't make a propaganda ploy out of it, then they would rather see a high body count.  I wouldn't be surprised if the thugs are telling the people that there would be more aid if only countries like the US would help out.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/312065Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Myanmar a mess.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815But Israel has long retaliated in very measured responses - instead of whole sale war.

Always interesting when you look at the order of events. Interestingly how even in the global world we still seem to punish the second one (who gets caught)?

Anyone know the ratio of UN sanctions against Israel vs surrounding countries?]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Ahh yes, it's all up to the Palestinians to make the choice to live in peace and everything will be rosy. Thanks for clarifying! Meanwhile, the Israelis will continue to practice their form of "tough love" until the attitude change you spoke of comes to pass?

As I said before, if it was any other nation on the face of the earth, there would be no Palestinians, as no nation would tolerate that kind of agression against their citizens (and last for long). You may love them, and think they are poor and picked on. But Israel has long retaliated in very measured responses - instead of whole sale war.

You just proved it.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815
You can't bow down to a turd without putting your face in the sewer.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Artysimhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815
Or until the Palestinians stop listening to meglomaniacs and start trying to live in peace. It is their choice after all, and even Soloman could not fix the problem until their attitude changes.

Ahh yes, it's all up to the Palestinians to make the choice to live in peace and everything will be rosy. Thanks for clarifying! Meanwhile, the Israelis will continue to practice their form of "tough love" until the attitude change you spoke of comes to pass? With occurrences like this- http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/the-bomb-squads-2/ happening to the civilian population on a regular basis I can't possibly understand why folks would want to rise up in armed resistance!

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Artysim on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815And may remain until a wise Statesman gives some solutions.

Or until the Palestinians stop listening to meglomaniacs and start trying to live in peace. It is their choice after all, and even Soloman could not fix the problem until their attitude changes.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/309773I think we should police the world, personally

Unfortunately most of th US, and the rest of the world disagree with you. It is what the UN was created for, although they are useless as well.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/309773http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/309773Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Coup in Zimbabwe.stealthyonehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/309773http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/309773http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/309773Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56stealthyone on Coup in Zimbabwe.Island Doghttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815
I simply have a difficult time accepting the proposition that the vast majority of Palestinians would prefer an endless cycle of violence and bloodshed to reaching a peace agreement with the Israelis that grants them land of their own and a mutual assurance that neither one will raise arms against the other.

That's not really difficult to believe.  They make no secret that they want to be destroyed.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Island Dog on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815The Nobel committee has some strange notions of 'peace' (see Arafat, Yasser; Gore, Al).

Kofi Annan (he probably bribed them), UN Peace keeping force (see a gun, and run!), Le Duc Tho (Lie long enough).

Yea, I would say Carter is in very good company.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Carter is a Statesman.Leaukihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815

I know it is historically a post 1948 niggle that irritates both sides. I know it is probably the most complicated of situations in the World to arbitrate.

Arab nationalism started long before 1948, as did Arab attacks on Jews (and other minorities).

I also don't see what's so complicated about that. Jews on the brink of destruction is not a rare occurence.

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Leauki on Carter is a Statesman.Daiwahttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815He must have been effective somewhere to earn the Nobel Prize.
The Nobel committee has some strange notions of 'peace' (see Arafat, Yasser; Gore, Al).]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Daiwa on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Hamas has to have a seat at the table because of its present role in the Palestinian government.

Eh, not really. If Israel was virtually any other nation on earth, there would be no Palestinian problem. There would be no Palestinians.

How many countries would not resort to all out war to erradicate a group of terrorists on its border murdering their civilians? Show me one, and I will show you history.

BTW: France does not count. ]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Carter is a Statesman.LifeSomewhereElsehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Meh.. too bad it was all a big waste of time and taxpayer money.  Fortunately the old fool did not get himself killed and beheaded.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56LifeSomewhereElse on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815
Yes, I'm being facetious, but I'm only throwing your own lack of understanding of how the Government works in your face.

If you don't see what I mean... it figures.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Adventure-Dude, I guess the reason I would state is that, for better or worse, Hamas has to have a seat at the table because of its present role in the Palestinian government. It makes up part of the government that the Israelis would have to negotiate a settlement with. Whatever its leaders may say, I simply have a difficult time accepting the proposition that the vast majority of Palestinians would prefer an endless cycle of violence and bloodshed to reaching a peace agreement with the Israelis that grants them land of their own and a mutual assurance that neither one will raise arms against the other. Maybe it's just my weirdly optimistic outlook on life and humanity, but I don't believe the natural condition of Man is war. If I did, I don't really think I'd want to be one.

Warreni, there are many issues here to address:
-Hamas doesn't WANT a seat at the table. They want Israel to go away. It is in their charter and history has repeated itself too many times. Trust me I want peace in this area. But it is Israel who has repeatedly offered the hand of peace and truce it is the other that continues to nullify and spit in their face. Quite frankly, it is Hamas' time to step up and show EVIDENCE of sincerity not this hint or potential 'peace' crap.

-Palestine elected Hamas. They KNEW who they were during elections. They may 'prefer' it not to be an endless cycle of violence but they elected them. Just like Germany bringing Hitler to power.

-Hamas teaches at a young age that Jews are no better than pigs. They are taught to hate them early on. It is the ONLY thing some of them know. While I agree it isn't their nature but manipulation has been successful in this case.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Carter is a Statesman.Leaukihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815

I simply have a difficult time accepting the proposition that the vast majority of Palestinians would prefer an endless cycle of violence and bloodshed to reaching a peace agreement with the Israelis that grants them land of their own and a mutual assurance that neither one will raise arms against the other.

I have a difficult time accepting that too. But that is what has happened several times.

 

Leauki, I think we keep coming back to the same point, which is this: Khalid Meshaal has stated that Hamas will not recognize Israel as a sovereign state. While this is indisputable, it is not equivalent to calling for the extermination of all Israeli Jews.


No, that's not the point at all. You THINK I base my opinion on that particular statement. I don't.

I base my opinion on the history of the "Palestinian cause", going back to the 1930s, and the opinions and statements of their leaders who are still revered as heroes by Arabs today.

I base my opinion on "Palestinian" television and its claims about Jews.

And I base my opinion the fact that "Mein Kampf" and the protocols, as I said, are best sellers in the Arab world.

Don't believe me? What evidence do you need?

 

I don't care if Hamas have a seat at the table. Israel does not want to discuss the terms of its death with the executioner and that's fine with me.


There is no "cycle of violence", by the way. If there was a "cycle", Israel would have continued to grow, not shrunk again. Arab propaganda claims that Israel wants to annex the land from Nile to Euphrates. In reality that land claim is a legend Zionists hear about from Arabs, not their own sources.

There were often periods of peace until the Arabs attacked again. That's not a "cycle". It's simply a "series" (of attacks).

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Leauki on Carter is a Statesman.warrenihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815I haven't seen any arguments that convince me that I am wrong yetThen you might try Hooked on Phonics sometime.As this is the second time you brought up being an ex-paramedic, I will say that I can see a variety of legal and ethical reasons why someone who is not certified would not be allowed to practice emergency treatment, and probably the most basic reason is that a person who has lost certain skills or abilities through disuse or lack of updated training (and I'm certainly not arguing that this is the case for you--I know nothing about your personal situation) may inadvertently kill someone in medical distress. I find this to be an odd analogy, because I don't see how talking to people or bringing people together to talk with one another ever killed anyone. It is actually a great analogy. My skills as a paramedic didn't deteriorate the day my license and certifications expired, but I still couldn't go treat people in the field. Why? Because I no longer had the authorization to do it. Carter doesn't have authorization anymore either.He is being just as wreckless as I would be also. If you don't think people could die because of his wannabe diplomat stupidity, then why are you arguing that him doing so might save lives? If succeeding saves lives, then failing costs them.Carter's talking got a lot of people killed, from the embassy guards in Tehran to his screwed up failure of a rescue mission for the hostages.The ONLY thing that fool ever accomplished during his presidency was win 52 people a 444 all expense paid vacation in Tehran, giving away the Panama Canal for no reason whatsoever and showing the people who lived through it what a real recession is like.

I won't respond to your first comment, as it seems needlessly ad hominem in nature.

As to the validity of your analogy, I don't see the situation as this black-and-white. You say that if it doesn't save lives, it costs lives? Did someone literally die this week because Carter went to Egypt? And if I accept your "if not A, then B" statement, how do you measure that against the cost of doing nothing? Once more, it appears to me that your real argument is that it is simply better to do nothing than it is to talk.

Adventure-Dude, I guess the reason I would state is that, for better or worse, Hamas has to have a seat at the table because of its present role in the Palestinian government. It makes up part of the government that the Israelis would have to negotiate a settlement with. Whatever its leaders may say, I simply have a difficult time accepting the proposition that the vast majority of Palestinians would prefer an endless cycle of violence and bloodshed to reaching a peace agreement with the Israelis that grants them land of their own and a mutual assurance that neither one will raise arms against the other. Maybe it's just my weirdly optimistic outlook on life and humanity, but I don't believe the natural condition of Man is war. If I did, I don't really think I'd want to be one.

Leauki, I think we keep coming back to the same point, which is this: Khalid Meshaal has stated that Hamas will not recognize Israel as a sovereign state. While this is indisputable, it is not equivalent to calling for the extermination of all Israeli Jews. I guess my bottom line is that I don't see how you achieve a positive result by not talking to your opponent. As to the problem in question, to me it is the use of guerilla attacks by Palestinian militants and the subsequent use of broader military power by Israel as a response (which frequently causes collateral damage, to use another favorite military term). I believe that the majority of Palestinians and Israelis do want this cycle to end and so all I'm arguing in favor of is promoting bi- or multilateral talks among the parties involved. ]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56warreni on Carter is a Statesman.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Israel is also not dealing with "asymmetrical warfare", or at least wasn't during most of the time. The current situation is the most peaceful it has ever been. I am not sure which problem you want to solve.

Agreed, however I don't agree that this is the most peaceful it has ever been. Many times before a 'peace' deal we have seen this same peaceful period before it's finalized. Hamas is usually on the 'gainin' end of the deals and Israel usually has to give something up.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Carter is a Statesman.Leaukihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815

you don't give up on peace after one or two or three tries--I would cite the efforts to secure a lasting peace in Ireland/Great Britain as a better example than your references to World War II-era Germany. Why? Because both of these are situations where you are dealing with what the U.S. likes to term "asymmetrical warfare."

It's not two or three tries. It was DECADES of offering peace. Israel is STILL offering peace.

Ireland and Great Britain is different because neither population wanted to exterminate the other. You can always make peace with Britain. Gandhi did it by ignoring them until they went away. That doesn't work with Arab nationalists and Muslim fundamentalists.

Israel is also not dealing with "asymmetrical warfare", or at least wasn't during most of the time. The current situation is the most peaceful it has ever been. I am not sure which problem you want to solve.

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Leauki on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815I haven't seen any arguments that convince me that I am wrong yet

Then you might try Hooked on Phonics sometime.

As this is the second time you brought up being an ex-paramedic, I will say that I can see a variety of legal and ethical reasons why someone who is not certified would not be allowed to practice emergency treatment, and probably the most basic reason is that a person who has lost certain skills or abilities through disuse or lack of updated training (and I'm certainly not arguing that this is the case for you--I know nothing about your personal situation) may inadvertently kill someone in medical distress. I find this to be an odd analogy, because I don't see how talking to people or bringing people together to talk with one another ever killed anyone.


It is actually a great analogy. My skills as a paramedic didn't deteriorate the day my license and certifications expired, but I still couldn't go treat people in the field. Why? Because I no longer had the authorization to do it. Carter doesn't have authorization anymore either.

He is being just as wreckless as I would be also. If you don't think people could die because of his wannabe diplomat stupidity, then why are you arguing that him doing so might save lives? If succeeding saves lives, then failing costs them.

Carter's talking got a lot of people killed, from the embassy guards in Tehran to his screwed up failure of a rescue mission for the hostages.

The ONLY thing that fool ever accomplished during his presidency was win 52 people a 444 all expense paid vacation in Tehran, giving away the Panama Canal for no reason whatsoever and showing the people who lived through it what a real recession is like.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Gideon MacLeishhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815
Bob: "I want to kill Larry!"
Larry: "I want to play on the slide."

The teacher, exercising US diplomacy, comes up with a compromise: Bob cannot kill Larry, but he can MAIM him instead!

The Israeli struggle is one for its own existence. The Palestinian struggle is one for the complete destruction of Israel. Which has the more reasonable request?

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Gideon MacLeish on Carter is a Statesman.Adventure-Dudehttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Israelis do not "hate" Arabs. And, in fact, Israeli Arabs are not afraid to walk in Jewish neighbourhoods. Israel has won every conflict and her enemies are still alive. And Israeli television does not demonise Arabs either.

Leuki, all I can say is BULLSEYE! Nice catch and clarification.

That's true, but the point of negotiations is in fact to win concessions from the other side. What the article did suggest is that Hamas is in fact willing to accept the coexistence of Israel and a Palestinian state if the majority of Palestinians vote for it.


Warreni, I do believe that your heart is in the right place on this issue but I see nothing that would actually lead me to believe that there was ANY evidence of Hamas to accept coexistence in the past nor in the present. I read that article several times and I get the feeling that it has a significant bias towards Palestine. The problem here is that this is nothing new from Hamas.

Knowing their past record...PLEASE tell me one reason WHY Israel should even consider a deal with Hamas and Palestine when there is NO suggestion of a change of heart?

In my opinion, Israel's 'peace' treaty should be more or less this. Stop attacking us and there will be peace. If you refuse then we WILL come in and take over. We gave you the Gaza and West Bank in order for peace, you broke your end of the deal....we take our land back.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Adventure-Dude on Carter is a Statesman.warrenihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815unless someone is willing to take a chance on working toward a lasting peace.

Israel has proposed peace in 1948.
And offered to give back territories won in war in 1967 in exchange for peace.
Israel offered peace again in 1994 and 2000.
What exactly are you talking about when you say "taking a chance"? Israel took the chances. And every single time Israel was attacked again.
What do you want Israel to do? Take the chance again?
At what point would you concede that you are wrong about this?
 
 

I haven't seen any arguments that convince me that I am wrong yet, Leauki. My opinion is this: you don't give up on peace after one or two or three tries--I would cite the efforts to secure a lasting peace in Ireland/Great Britain as a better example than your references to World War II-era Germany. Why? Because both of these are situations where you are dealing with what the U.S. likes to term "asymmetrical warfare." The IRA used vicious bombing tactics and cold-blooded murder to advance its Republican agenda. Are the Palestinian terrorists any different? There is no real "Palestine" at this point in our history where Israel could simply declare war, battle its military with its own military forces, and sign an armistice when the war is over. This is why your World War II analogy doesn't hold up. Also, I frankly fail to see how you can equate negotiation with appeasement; this just isn't the second world war, and Jimmy Carter is not Neville Chamberlain.

While history has shown that a minority group can force nations (note my use of the word "nations" here) to commit terrible actions (I won't get into the obvious parallels with current U.S. actions overseas, as that's another thread), it doesn't have to be that way. And, in any event, do you really think that Hamas has the organizational ability or the resources or the manpower to "exterminate the Jews"? While some in that group may view such an action as a wonderful objective, I don't think it's realistic. What we know is this: Israel, like a select few nations around the globe, has nuclear weapons. I don't believe for one second that if the Israeli government truly believed that the state were in danger of being annihilated by any group that it would hesitate to use those weapons.

ParaTed2K,

Clearly we simply disagree about this: I don't think his presidency was fiasco, and I certainly don't believe that he should be ashamed of anything he's done subsequent to his time in office. While he may not have official diplomatic status, he is a good negotiator, and contrary to what Dr Guy suggested, he never had any intention of "signing a treaty." Obviously, we all agree here (as does the former president) that he has no authority to sign treaties on behalf of the U.S.

As this is the second time you brought up being an ex-paramedic, I will say that I can see a variety of legal and ethical reasons why someone who is not certified would not be allowed to practice emergency treatment, and probably the most basic reason is that a person who has lost certain skills or abilities through disuse or lack of updated training (and I'm certainly not arguing that this is the case for you--I know nothing about your personal situation) may inadvertently kill someone in medical distress. I find this to be an odd analogy, because I don't see how talking to people or bringing people together to talk with one another ever killed anyone. ]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56warreni on Carter is a Statesman.ParaTed2khttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815ParaTed2K, I hate to sound snide about it, but honestly, do you see George W. Bush doing anything besides retiring to his ranch after his presidency is over? It would indeed surprise me greatly if he did. But no, my comments are not motivated by "sour grapes," as you put it. Obviously, I have numerous and substantial disagreements with Bush's policies, but it is pointless to deny that he is the president. And to be honest, if he were willing and able to accomplish even a fraction of the things that Carter has done since he left office after his presidency ends, I'd nominate him myself for a Nobel Prize. The fact is that my comments are motivated not by a desire to "Bush-bash," as I could start my own thread or join countless others for that, but by a sincere admiration for the diplomatic skills and humanitarian efforts of President Carter and an indignant reaction to the hostility with which the current administration and other commentators have viewed the former president's visit to the Middle East.

There's a reason the U.S. Constitution doesn't mention the role of Former Presidents. They aren't supposed to have a role. They are supposed to go back to being John Q. Sixpack.

Carter has done some great things since his fiasco of a presidency. He's also done and said a lot of things that he should be ashamed of... and this is one of them.

He is no longer a diplomat, so he should quit acting like he is one. He is doing nothing more than what I'd be doing if I went around treating people in the field because I "used" to be a paramedic.

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56ParaTed2k on Carter is a Statesman.Leaukihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815

unless someone is willing to take a chance on working toward a lasting peace.

Israel has proposed peace in 1948.

And offered to give back territories won in war in 1967 in exchange for peace.

Israel offered peace again in 1994 and 2000.

What exactly are you talking about when you say "taking a chance"? Israel took the chances. And every single time Israel was attacked again.

What do you want Israel to do? Take the chance again?

At what point would you concede that you are wrong about this?

 

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Leauki on Carter is a Statesman.Leaukihttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815

Leauki, do you really believe that all or even a majority of Palestinians simply hate and wish to exterminate Jews?

Their election results suggest it, as does the fact that "Mein Kampf" and the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" are major bestsellers in Arab countries.

(Note that in my experience it is non-Palestinian Arabs who hate Jews a lot more than Palestinian Arabs.)

History has also shown that a vocal minority who wants to exterminate a people can make a nation do exactly that when given the chance.

Have you read some of the things Arab leaders said before they went to attack Israel?

 

If so, where is the starting point for peace? What does "defeating the enemy" mean to you precisely?

I grew up in West-Berlin.

My life, my parents' lives, all the lives of fellow Germans born after World War II are a testament to what "defeating the enemy" can mean.

Talking to Hitler was wrong. Bombing Germany into the stone age did the trick.

Give the Arabs a choice; the same choice Germany had and didn't take!

Sadat was smarter than the Germans, Nasser was not. But the Egyptians neither paid for their attacks nor did they enjoy the enormous benefits Germany enjoyed since losing the war.

You can either call for the extermination of the Jews or not. But both should have different and very clear consuequences.

See http://www.netneurotic.net/Extrablatt/ for a humorous take on the issue of starting and losing a war over an idiotic and wrong ideology (and how some people make it sound as if blatant racism is simply another opinion we have to take into account).

And as I said, a good idea would be this:

I believe we can make progress by giving all the aid money we are currently giving to the "Palestinian cause" to poor Africans instead.

 

]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Leauki on Carter is a Statesman.Dr Guyhttp://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815I will agree with SilentPoet that the article of the Constitution that you cite is not relevant because Carter never claimed to be travelling anywhere as a representative of this or any other government.

The problem with laws is not in what you claim your purpose is, but in what your actions are. You cannot be convicted of riding around the world and claiming you are god emperor of the USA (you may be committed, but I dont think you will be legally penalized). But when you stop and sign that treaty with the Grand Poobah of Eurasia, then you can be.

What Carter is doing could very well be unconstitutional based upon what he is doing. That is for the administration and the courts to decide, but it is also not without precedent if the administration were to bring charges against him.]]>http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815http://adnauseam.joeuser.com/article/308815Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:32:56 -04002008-07-05T01:32:56Dr Guy on Carter is a Statesman.