[dante]

build it on your *own* damn property. Can you imagine the response if Canada tried to confiscate US land to build a wall from California to Virginia?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=586&e=1&u=/nm/20040709/wl_nm/mideast_barrier_dc

:mumble:

 

[LordOpie]

Consider two points:

1. Canada was attacked by the US and won -- haha, i know that sounds funny -- and in the process "won" several northern states in the war. To the victor and all that.

2. The US continues to attack Canada with suicide bombers.

EDIT: They are building it on their property. One of the complaints is that it's cutting off the palestinians from basic resources.

 

[dante]

Consider two points:

1. Canada was attacked by the US and won -- haha, i know that sounds funny -- and in the process "won" several northern states in the war. To the victor and all that.

2. The US continues to attack Canada with suicide bombers.

EDIT: They are building it on their property. One of the complaints is that it's cutting off the palestinians from basic resources.

They're not building it on their own property, they're building it on Palestinian land captured in the 1967 war. They refuse to annex all of that land as that would mean they'd have to make all the Palestinians citizens, or have an aparteid state. There's a wall between Israel and Gaza that nobody has any problem with, and that's because it's on the border between them. The court's opinion was "look, if you want a wall, build it within your own borders." Not surprisingly, US politicians from both sides of the isle flipped out, Schumer and Clinton are holding a press conference later today to condemn the ruling.

1. Palestinians didn't attack Israel in 1967, it wasn't a state. Other Arab countries attacked Israel (and again in 1973).
2. A wall on the green line would keep suicide bombers out just as well, if not better than this "fence" as it would be shorter and more easily defended. Have yet to see *one* reason why it's not being built on the green line...

:angry:

 

[LordOpie]

1. Palestinians didn't attack Israel in 1967, it wasn't a state.

If palestine's not a state, then who's land is Israel building the wall on?

 

[dante]

If palestine's not a state, then who's land is Israel building the wall on?

ummm, land owned by Palestinians? most of the world calls it "Occupied Territories", Israel claims that it's "Disputed Territories" because they don't want to assume responsibilities that come with occupation. Regardless, Palestinians own/live on/work the land, and it's being confiscated to build a wall through villages and farmlands. So you didn't answer my question, why can't Israel build it on their own land?

 

[LordOpie]

I didn't answer your question cuz I don't have an answer. I think the idea of whose land is it should be answered first. But if the wall is indeed slowing down the terrorists, then it makes sense that Israel proceeds. As for where the wall should specifically be built, yeah, I don't care. Seems to me there are far greater problems than where the wall is being built and those problems aren't being addressed.

How's that for an answer? :devil:

 

[Toshi]

where the wall is being built does matter, because its current location is basically the israelis thumbing their nose at the palestinians' supposed sovereignty.

 

[Westy]

Did I miss something or wasn't it shown that annexation of land in wars was a bad idea sometime between 1917-1945? Whether or not it is legal does not matter, it just is not a good idea, and so far the Israelis have not proved otherwise.

 

[dante]

route of the fence: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=397420&contrassID=2

does it look like it is being built to keep suicide bombers out, or to annex as many of the settlement blocks as possible?

 

[LordOpie]

well, if they are trying to grab more land, more power to 'em. At least they're killing less people than we are in Iraq :devil:

I heard today that we passed the 1000 US dead soldier mark

 

[dante]

well, if they are trying to grab more land, more power to 'em. At least they're killing less people than we are in Iraq :devil:

I heard today that we passed the 1000 US dead soldier mark

nope. 1000th coalition member... US military dead is 880.

EDIT: and this tag line in the CNN report:

There are no reliable figures for the Iraqi deaths in the war

 

[LordOpie]

nope. 1000th coalition member... US military dead is 880.

EDIT: and this tag line in the CNN report:

There are no reliable figures for the Iraqi deaths in the war

how does my red herring taste? mwuhahahah

seriously tho, does the US make up 88% of the coalition?

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

how does my red herring taste? mwuhahahah

seriously tho, does the US make up 88% of the coalition?

114k US personel, and 23k "coalition" as of march 04 if i dont forget.

from the 23k "coalition", how many are gvmt sent, or how many are foreign mercenaries-contractors i dont know.

but i´d say the term "coalition" is a euphemism.

 

[LordOpie]

but i´d say the term "coalition" is a euphemism.

so you're saying that it's ok for me to walk up to a fine young lady tonight and ask her if she'd like to form a "coalition" with me?

Thanks for the numbers, sounds like the US is taking a bit more than it's share of fatalities. 88% dead vs 83% of the supplied manpower.

 

[dante]

so you're saying that it's ok for me to walk up to a fine young lady tonight and ask her if she'd like to form a "coalition" with me?

Thanks for the numbers, sounds like the US is taking a bit more than it's share of fatalities. 88% dead vs 83% of the supplied manpower.

don't forget, I think Uganda sent over a goat, world-wide coalition of the willing!!!

 

[Slugman]

so you're saying that it's ok for me to walk up to a fine young lady tonight and ask her if she'd like to form a "coalition" with me?

Thanks for the numbers, sounds like the US is taking a bit more than it's share of fatalities. 88% dead vs 83% of the supplied manpower.

Of the coalition, a lot of them are in peace keeping / supply roles only. The US is doing a majority of the fighting, so were probably doing better than it looks on paper.

 

[LordOpie]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50910-2004Jun17?language=printer

 

[Tenchiro]

I just hope one side wins, I no longer care who. But once they do they need to STFU.