BS: Giuliani: Israel Should Join NATO

Subject: RE: BS: Giuliani: Israel Should Join NATO
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Sep 07 - 07:28 AM

Giuliani thinks if he puts Israel's interests ahead of America's if will get him the Jewish vote. It worked for Joe Lieberman.

Subject: RE: BS: Giuliani: Israel Should Join NATO
From: Barry Finn
Date: 25 Sep 07 - 11:37 AM

It won't work for Lieberman again. I'll bet this is the last term he'll ever hold as an elected official unless he's going to go for town sheriff in Dogpatch. He's a disgrace

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Giuliani: Israel Should Join NATO
From: Wolfgang
Date: 25 Sep 07 - 11:56 AM

from UNSCR 242:

Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

    * Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
    * Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

The same resolution asks for (1) withdrawal from occupied territories and (2) recognition of the territorial integrity of all states. That is more than an implication that they should be dependent on anything else being done by other countries.

Just BTW, Ahmadinejad has made clear once more in his Columbia talk that he does not agree with the second part of what I have quoted. As usual his language was meant to feed his supporters and to fool others.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Giuliani: Israel Should Join NATO
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Sep 07 - 12:33 PM

Those two conditions sound like exactly the right 2 conditions to me, Wolfgang. Very sensible.

I think what we have in the case of the Middle East is two intransigent sets of opponents, both too proud and too paranoid and too selfish to bend, both of whom are essentially saying something like..."Well, we would be willing to do that IF the other guys weren't bad people who can never be trusted...and IF they would do their half of it FIRST...(ha! ha!)...in other words, we are not willing to do our half, so forget it. It's not going to happen."

It's kind of like getting two people on this forum who argue perpetually about politics to both agree to respect and be reasonable to the other person and NOT try to get the LAST word in on the subject. In other words, forget it. It's not going to happen. ;-)

The trouble, you see, is that most people do not want a reasonable accomodation with an opponent...they want a decisive and final victory over him (or her)!

I don't think the Israelis or their various Muslim enemies are going to find a decisive and final victory...nor are the arguers on this forum, as far as that goes.