This is a bipartisan cause. And it's not simply the 7 million Jewish-American votes (of whom many don't like the present right-wing government in Israel), it's the Evangelicals which there are tens of millions, who want to support Israel. It's simply a domestic issue, not something chosen because of foreign policy realities. — ssu

US foreign policy isn't guided by domestic opinion.

The only thing 'the Blob' is interested in domestically, is keeping the American populace docile and ignorant - something they've been quite successful at.

There's nothing bipartisan about the US' forever wars in the Middle-East - all directly linked to Israel and the Israel lobby.

Iran is set to become regional hegemon if left unchecked (based on population, there is no question). — Tzeentch

How? — ssu

That's obviously a big topic, but geographically, geopolitically, economically and demographically it is simply the only country that can make a reasonable bid for becoming regional hegemon on the Persian Gulf. It is also in prime position to profit off Iraq's power vacuum.

The only other contender is Saudi-Arabia, which is much smaller than Iran and economically less stable.

Furthermore, Saudi-Arabia is currently in the process of aligning to BRICS, which is probably a long-term mistake for them that will eventually leave them diplomatically isolated and an easy target.

If it wasn't for the Americans/Israelis playing successful divide & conquer and sowing chaos in the region for over half a century, Iran would have already become a regional hegemon.

Why do you think Israel has treated Iran as public enemy #1 for all this time?

Non sequitur nonsense.

Exactly how I feel about the American left turning out en masse on college campuses to support genocidal murderers. Protestors chanting "we are all hamas."

FOX Noise and other right wing propaganda media are disinforming you, BitC. :mask:

"From the river to the sea" is itself a call for ethnic cleansing. A call for a return to dhimmi status. Parents of Columbia students may be questioning their decisions after learning that they've been spending $90k/year to have their children turned into little intifada warriors and while getting lectured & taught by open supporters of terrorist groups.

open supporters of terrorist groups — BitconnectCarlos

like you, BitC, et al (re: Netanyahu's 'mass murdering + mass starvation strategy for settlers lebensraum' regime).

US foreign policy isn't guided by domestic opinion. — Tzeentch

Especially with the case of Israel, I would beg to differ.

The Israeli lobby is very powerful, you could read Mearsheimer's book about it, but this should be general knowledge. Why the Israeli lobby is so powerful is because of a certain part of the US electorate Israel is important and both parties want the support of these voters. This is simply how US domestic politics works.

The only thing 'the Blob' is interested in domestically, is keeping the American populace docile and ignorant - something they've been quite successful at. — Tzeentch

You might argue that for any policy the US has, yet Israel is a very special case for example to let's say the UK, Canada or Australia. None of those countries has such a lobby like Israel that is committed to give US aid to those countries and is vigilant for anybody questioning the American commitment to these countries.

There's nothing bipartisan about the US' forever wars in the Middle-East — Tzeentch

Really? Make your case then. Is it only the democrat administrations or only the Republican administrations that are fault here? Especially in the case of supporting Israel. I think the support for Israel is a genuinely bipartisan policy.

That's obviously a big topic, but geographically, geopolitically, economically and demographically it is simply the only country that can make a reasonable bid for becoming regional hegemon on the Persian Gulf. It is also in prime position to profit off Iraq's power vacuum. — Tzeentch

Yet to be a hegemon, it ought to have then a lot of influence over the Gulf States. It hasn't.

Basically it has good relations only with Qatar... which has had huge problems itself with Saudi-Arabia and UAE. Yet at least technically Qatar is a part of the GCC, which considers Iran as a threat.

The only way you would be right would be if basically Iran and Iraq got so close as Russia and Belarus are. That's isn't very likely. Perhaps after (or if) the US withdraws from Iraq.

Modern day blood libel. Mass starvation? Seriously? :lol: Israel has let in more aid than those idiots at the UN know what to do with. Doesn't it bother you that there there's never a peep of protest when violence occurs in Africa? Christians getting hacked to death by Islamists in Nigeria, not a peep. Not a peep for Assad or Hussein, but the Jewish nation responds to Islamist aggression in a very civil manner and all hell breaks loose. No Jews, no news.

I'd wager less than 10k civilians killed.

How nice it is to see genocide apologists get so worked about anti-genocide protests across the US. College kids, young people generally, the protest votes during the primary, a small number of voices in congress, etc — they really are having an impact, for the first time in my lifetime have I seen a top-ranking senator — not to mention president — make the slightest suggestion that Israel is in the wrong.

They, along with the rest of the world, can see through the bullshit of those who want to complicate something that’s not at all complicated: stop killing innocent people. You don’t like it done to you, then stop engaging in it yourself. End your genocide, and your illegal occupation, and your illegal settlements in the West Bank, stop blocking UN resolutions, stop the “mowings of the lawn,” and you’d easily have the moral high ground. Until then, expect more October 7ths.

I'd wager less than 10k civilians killed. — BitconnectCarlos

Of course you would ... just like any other deluded holocaust denier.

Yet to be a hegemon, it ought to have then a lot of influence over the Gulf States. It hasn't. — ssu

It should be obvious that I am talking about potential, and not the present day.

Even in the present day it would be foolish to understate Iran's influence in the region. It is quite massive, but is mostly targeting players other than the Gulf States - that will change as soon as US power in the region is broken.

Perhaps after (or if) the US withdraws from Iraq. — ssu

The US either goes to war with Iran in the near-future, to prevent exactly what I am talking about, or it will vacate the region in the near-future, which would open the door for Iran to take things over.

The smaller Gulf States aren't really worth mentioning. They only exist by virtue of US presence in the region, and will be absorbed by the bigger Gulf States (Iran and Saudi-Arabia), however between Saudi-Arabia and Iran, Iran is clearly the one with more potential.

Not to mention the fact that Saudi-Arabia's aligning with BRICS will cause it to be diplomatically isolated in the long run, because BRICS will favor Iran over Saudi-Arabia when it comes to blows (which will be inevitable, unless the US goes to war against Iran).

The Gaza Health ministry now reports fatalities at 22k. Israel has killed 13k Hamas, so that brings us to 9k civilians. Then consider that Hamas's rockets will often misfire and hit their own civilians.

And calling it a holocaust is ridiculous and of course only applied to Israel.

Again, much bigger death tolls elsewhere... no Jews, no news. The world has a Jew obsession. Israel is fighting a very humane war here ratio-wise and aid wise.

https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2024/04/09/hamas-run-gaza-health-ministry-admits-to-flaws-in-casualty-data/

There's nothing bipartisan about the US' forever wars in the Middle-East — Tzeentch

Is it only the democrat administrations or only the Republican administrations that are fault here? — ssu

Both sides have been elected on platforms of stopping the forever wars, yet they never managed to change anything, because there's nothing 'bipartisan' about them.

Calling it 'bipartisan' imples these wars are fought on the basis of some agreement between the two sides, when they are in fact fought on a basis that's completely disconnected from the democratic process.

The only role domestic politics plays in it, is the question of whether the American people can be kept docile and ignorant enough to accept that the American government keeps going to war without any proper basis for it.

That would make no sense. The treaty involved Spain, which by itself was already a modern nation-State, but there was Portugal before it, and also Georgia before it dissolved. France was also established as a nation-State before Westphalia. Regardless of when the political ideas around nation-States were developed. — Lionino

Prior to the treaty of Westphalia sovereignty over territory wasn't mutually recognised. So while you may have consistent borders due to the facts on the ground (like Portugal), they were not recognised by other countries. The treaty of westphalia changed this, resulting in a system of nation-states who had sovereignty over their territory and people. This is also the main difference in understanding nation-states and countries. Just read up on the treaty of Westphalia if you're really interested.

The first dictionary definition for country tells me "a nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory", which is a nation-State. If you are using a different definition of country, I am willing to grant your point. — Lionino

In common usage people will us the terms interchangeably. In legal theory and history we don't.

, believing literally ... a few 1000 years ago some people lived 900 years, there was a magical world flood some 1000s years ago, the supernatural Yahweh character spoke commands to the Moses character as a burning bush, Yahweh boomed to His tribe / Moses on Mount Sinai, Moses + 600000 wandered the desert for decades due to Yahweh's trickery ... really isn't smart. Myths, legends, stories, ... But of course anyone is free to believe whatever, that part isn't negotiable. Anyway, stuff for another thread (or not). (And what's with Yahweh being so selective (His special tribe etc) anyway?)

Christians getting hacked to death by Islamists in Nigeria — BitconnectCarlos

Protestant societies don't care about violence against Christians because they aren't Christian themselves :snicker: :snicker:
I only ever hear of massacre against Christians when I visit a Catholic church and the priest happens to be preaching.

So while you may have consistent borders due to the facts on the ground (like Portugal), they were not recognised by other countries. — Benkei

Portugal and Spain very much recognised each other's territory, and even as far as stipulating it, such as Tordesillas.

Just read up on the treaty of Westphalia if you're really interested. — Benkei

I know about it.

Some scholars of international relations credit the treaties with providing the foundation of the modern state system and articulating the concept of territorial sovereignty. — https://www.britannica.com/event/Peace-of-Westphalia

This seems unimportant to whether a sociopolitical structure actually existed, especially when it affected Central Europe especially — a region which was at the time very behind when it came to centralisation. Not only that, but even after the treaty many nation-States' sovereignity was not respected. If we allow the idea that the Westphalian system is the starting-point of nation-States, that leads to the absurd conclusion that to this day Portugal is not a nation-State.

It goes from myths to legends to real history and it's not always clear where the line is. That's what fascinates me. Consider the message/big picture themes of these stories in contrast to other stories of the time. That's what it makes it revolutionary. This is just one tribe's experience with the being known as YHWH ofc it could be described as ethnocentric.

Are you concerned about the rise of anti-semitism on college campuses?

I’m not concerned with right-wing propaganda, nor with those who believe it.

Are you concerned about the rise of Islamophobia?

Are you concerned about the rise of Islamophobia? — BitconnectCarlos

Like the kind I see on this thread? Yeah, very much.

It should start by ceasing the apartheid regime. — Tzeentch

Sorry tp be long in replying. My point was that there is an immediacy and currency to the hostages and accountability for 7 Oct. Do you expect anyone to simply forget them? Would you?

The smaller Gulf States aren't really worth mentioning. — Tzeentch

Now this is something worth debating.

Even if they are tiny, they aren't "really worth mentioning". On the contrary.

Only Kuwait and the "Switzerland of Middle East", Oman, are quite neutral and haven't started to play "The Great Game" in the Middle East of backing various actors.

Just look how Qatar and the UAE throw their weight around ...as they have so much wealth.
UAE is active in Libya, Sudan, Ethiopia and Yemen. Qatar has Al Jazeera, and went on to support the Muslim Brotherhood when it was in power in Egypt. This is why the Saudi's and UAE nearly went to war with Qatar. UAE has intervened directly in Libya and Yemen. Qatar has also supported Hamas.

Qatar is a key financial backer and ally of the Palestinian militant organization Hamas. Qatar has transferred more than $1.8 billion to Hamas.

For example UAE and it's support of Haftar in Libya:



These tiny nations have understood that money talks, money buys weapons, mercenaries etc. This is the one surprising thing that has suddenly happened in this Century. Hence it's not only the Saudi Arabia that can use proxies and intervene in other poorer countries of the region, it's also the smaller Gulf countries too.

Have you considered converting to Islam? I hear they're very welcoming and they've got an imam giving prayers at Columbia right now.

Yeah, yeah…shouldn’t you be justifying genocide or something?

.

:up:

:up: :up:

I don't think you understood my point.

The other Gulf States are clearly artifical states that are a result of US divide & conquer strategy in the Middle-East. After all, the last thing the US wants is for a Arab or Persian state to hold all the strategic areas around the Persian Gulf.

The wealth, power and independence the other Gulf States currently enjoy is indeed artificial and would not have arisen under normal circumstances - they would have simply been incorporated in a greater Arabian or Persian state.

As US power wanes, these states will disappear.

Sorry tp be long in replying. My point was that there is an immediacy and currency to the hostages and accountability for 7 Oct. Do you expect anyone to simply forget them? Would you? — tim wood

You can't use hostage-taking as an excuse to carry on apartheid.

Shouldn't you be outside chanting "from the river to the sea" with your fellow protestors? Calling for Arab domination of Israel like your keffiyeh-clad friends? We don't want no two state we want all of 48. Go do your activism.

And when you do, make sure to equate the deaths of maybe 8 or 9000 civilians to the 11 million killed in the holocaust because it's like totally the same thing.

Run along now, I hear they're giving free keffiyehs.