Originally posted by shavixmirI'm not saying that we haven't supported some ugly people in the past.
Uh... yeah...
Like the US isn't guilty of any such matters? Or England. Or France. Or Germany. Or Russia.
Diplomacy is a long term thing. The lack of diplomacy is selling OUR (and your) rights down the drain.
My question is, do you honestly feel that Europe should be funding a group that is currently visiting tyranny upon its own people?
Originally posted by MerkWell, the US is still funding some ugly people in the present...
I'm not saying that we haven't supported some ugly people in the past.
My question is, do you honestly feel that Europe should be funding a group that is currently visiting tyranny upon its own people?
I've already expressed my opinions about Europe funding Hamas.
Hamas builds...well... built schools, playgrounds, etc. They built the building blocks of society while Fatah was screwed over by the Israeli government. That's why they were elected in the first place.
Helping them fund the choice of the people (and who are you to judge?) will help build stepping stones between us and them, it will help the Palestinians to understand that we support them in what they want and not what WE want. This is a diplomatic situation which will bare fruits in the future.
By neglecting the government of their choice you show them that their opinions don't count at all. You force them into a position of fear and oppression. You show them that the West has its own agenda, and in supporting Israel in this, you show them that the West has Israel's interests in mind (and Israel has divided their country and shoved them into poverty...in their eyes, at least).
This is a diplomatic nightmare.
What you are doing is creating a no-win situation.
Originally posted by shavixmirI question the wisdom of funding tyranny.
Well, the US is still funding some ugly people in the present...
I've already expressed my opinions about Europe funding Hamas.
Hamas builds...well... built schools, playgrounds, etc. They built the building blocks of society while Fatah was screwed over by the Israeli government. That's why they were elected in the first place.
Helping them fund ...[text shortened]... ast).
This is a diplomatic nightmare.
What you are doing is creating a no-win situation.
Isn't that what we did with the Shah? What happens when the people overcome the tyranny?
What you're advocating is a no win. Well, not completely, its a loss for Europe and the Palestinian people. The only winner here is tyranny.
Originally posted by MerkNo. What you did with the Shah was totally different.
I question the wisdom of funding tyranny.
Isn't that what we did with the Shah? What happens when the people overcome the tyranny?
What you're advocating is a no win. Well, not completely, its a loss for Europe and the Palestinian people. The only winner here is tyranny.
The people don't see Hamas as tyranny. They see it as their democratically elected government. If you were to stop financing tyrannies, then nobody would have qualms about it.
What I'm advocating is supporting an elected representative.
Originally posted by shavixmirHitler was elected. Should we have funded him?
No. What you did with the Shah was totally different.
The people don't see Hamas as tyranny. They see it as their democratically elected government. If you were to stop financing tyrannies, then nobody would have qualms about it.
What I'm advocating is supporting an elected representative.
Originally posted by shavixmirHamas took the political opposition outside and shot them, Shav.
Hitler wasn't elected.
And no, we should not have funded him, even if he was.
However, by have funding Gernany properly in the 20's, you could have stopped the situation ever getting so out of hand.
See you sure this is the actions of a group that should be funded?
Originally posted by MerkDid they do this before they were democratically elected?
Hamas took the political opposition outside and shot them, Shav.
See you sure this is the actions of a group that should be funded?
And even if they did, what do you hope to achieve by not funding what the Palestinians want?
See? This is what we're talking about. Not your morals, not mine, but those of the Palestinians. And the whole world is watching dude.
There are so many covert operations going on that nearly nothing is credible anymore. What do YOU want to achieve?
What's your goal? Go on. Spell it Merk!
Seriously, you know I respect your opinion, but I want to know what you think should be achieved. And I want you to weigh the actions to date to see if that's adding to the goal or just pushing it away from you.
Originally posted by shavixmirI think goals get set aside if they require funding a political entity that takes its opposition outside and pounds a round into their heads. Some things are not acceptable.
Did they do this before they were democratically elected?
And even if they did, what do you hope to achieve by not funding what the Palestinians want?
See? This is what we're talking about. Not your morals, not mine, but those of the Palestinians. And the whole world is watching dude.
There are so many covert operations going on that nearly nothing ...[text shortened]... igh the actions to date to see if that's adding to the goal or just pushing it away from you.
Do you not complain about western governments funding these types of groups in the past? How do you balance that with wanting them to do exactly that now?
Originally posted by shavixmir"YOU could have stopped the situation ever getting out of hand"
Hitler wasn't elected.
And no, we should not have funded him, even if he was.
However, by have funding Gernany properly in the 20's, you could have stopped the situation ever getting so out of hand.
This, "YOU" , to whom you refer, is who? Surely you are referring to the royal YOU? If the Swiss had not stolen all the Jews money, maybe Hitler could not have funded his war!