Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 24 Jan '10 19:26 / 1 edit
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8477413.stm
    A tape said to be from al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden has warned US President Barack Obama there will be more attacks if the US continues to support Israel.

    ......

    Is it possible that the US will stop being a target for al-qaida if it stops aiding the israeli state? Isn't it about time the US changes its policy regarding israel, surely it isn't surprising that muslims might disagree with america's apparent unconditional support for israel.

    disclaimer: Im in no way claiming the reasons stated by these terrorists is a valid one, nor do I believe terrorism is the way to solve the israeli-palestinian conflict.
    this question is for argument's sake only.
  2. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    24 Jan '10 19:43
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8477413.stm
    [b]A tape said to be from al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden has warned US President Barack Obama there will be more attacks if the US continues to support Israel.


    ......

    Is it possible that the US will stop being a target for al-qaida if it stops aiding the israeli state? Isn't it about ...[text shortened]... e way to solve the israeli-palestinian conflict.
    this question is for argument's sake only.[/b]
    Sure. If you want to have your foreign (and eventually, domestic) policy dictated by terrorists, by all means, the US should cave into Osama's demands.

    If you want to have your foreign policy be based on what you think is right and in the long run best interests of your people, then you ignore the hateful demands of the terrorists, you hunt them down and destroy them where and when you can, and you never, never, give into a demand on your policy because you're afraid of the terrorists.
  3. Standard member joneschr
    Some guy
    24 Jan '10 20:03
    The U.S. should not stop supporting the Israeli state. It should, however, start making it clear to the Israeli state that it's continued support is conditional on Israel behaving itself, support should be steadily (and publicly) removed if Israel doesn't comply.
  4. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    25 Jan '10 00:16 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8477413.stm
    [b]A tape said to be from al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden has warned US President Barack Obama there will be more attacks if the US continues to support Israel.


    ......

    Is it possible that the US will stop being a target for al-qaida if it stops aiding the israeli state? Isn't it about e way to solve the israeli-palestinian conflict.
    this question is for argument's sake only.[/b]
    bin Laden has put the US into an awkward position. He's putting us into the position that if we stop supporting Israel, it's because he bullied us into it.

    That's not going to work. There's no Communist China and USSR to back him up, as in Vietnam; there's no USA to back him up as in the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

    WE KNOW how to cow fanatics. It was done in 1945. We're trying to be nice now. He's lucky the rest of the Muslim world doesn't support him. That's what's enabling his troops to hide behind civilians; they're not on his side so we don't want to kill them.

    Also, unlike Vietnam and the Soviet invasion, we have our own fanatics this time. Israel is full of them. The US is full of Zionists with political power because they show us respect, unlike the fanatic Muslims. The US is full of fundamentalist, ignorant Christians with plenty of fanatacism of their own who see Israel as central to their religion.

    No, this time the formula's different. Bin Laden is hoping for a miracle that will never come.
  5. 25 Jan '10 01:51
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8477413.stm
    [b]A tape said to be from al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden has warned US President Barack Obama there will be more attacks if the US continues to support Israel.


    ......

    Is it possible that the US will stop being a target for al-qaida if it stops aiding the israeli state? Isn't it about ...[text shortened]... e way to solve the israeli-palestinian conflict.
    this question is for argument's sake only.[/b]
    I hate that man. It's sickening that he considers himself an ally of Palestine.
  6. 25 Jan '10 04:46
    Originally posted by scherzo
    I hate that man. It's sickening that he considers himself an ally of Palestine.
    is it because he also targets and kills Shia or because he cannot tolerate the injustices perpetrated against the Palestinians?
  7. 25 Jan '10 05:00 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by generalissimo
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8477413.stm
    [b]A tape said to be from al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden has warned US President Barack Obama there will be more attacks if the US continues to support Israel.


    ......

    Is it possible that the US will stop being a target for al-qaida if it stops aiding the israeli state? Isn't it about e way to solve the israeli-palestinian conflict.
    this question is for argument's sake only.[/b]
    America and the rest of the world must realize that these terrorist organizations are simply power hungry. Their grab for power is done in the name of Islam with the targets of the Zionists, the Christians, and the secularists. So if they conquer all of them they rule the world. Since this is a daunting task, which of the three is the weakest link? I would think it would be Israel. They are just a speck on the map. Then if they are successful, it will embolden them and energize their base to continue the fight. I compare Israel to the UK during WW2. If they fall, God help the rest of the world.
  8. 25 Jan '10 07:22
    Not supporting "the state of Israel" would be a highly unpopular policy. Even most of the people who are critical of Israel recognize there should be an Israeli state, even if only out of pragmatic considerations.
  9. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    25 Jan '10 09:57
    Originally posted by whodey
    I compare Israel to the UK during WW2. If they fall, God help the rest of the world.
    I think this is absoutely preposterous. In fact, I think it is self-parody, whodey. But I will indulge you with a few queries. What will happen to Indonesia if "if Israel falls"? What will happen to China "if Israel falls"? What will happen to India and Brazil if "Israel falls"? What will happen to Russia and Japan "if Israel falls"? Details please.
  10. 25 Jan '10 10:56
    Originally posted by FMF
    I think this is absoutely preposterous. In fact, I think it is self-parody, whodey. But I will indulge you with a few queries. What will happen to Indonesia if "if Israel falls"? What will happen to China "if Israel falls"? What will happen to India and Brazil if "Israel falls"? What will happen to Russia and Japan "if Israel falls"? Details please.
    The more important question so far as we in the 'Western World' are concerned is, "What is likely to happen if the one outpost of Western civilisation in the Middle East were to be destroyed?".
  11. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    25 Jan '10 11:03
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    The more important question so far as we in the 'Western World' are concerned is, "What is likely to happen if the one outpost of Western civilisation in the Middle East were to be destroyed?".
    Well why don't you hazard an answer to your own question and see if it's as ludicrous as whodey's hollow, detail-less, rhetorical conjecture?
  12. 25 Jan '10 11:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    Well why don't you hazard an answer to your own question and see if it's as ludicrous as whodey's hollow, detail-less, rhetorical conjecture?
    It is you, FMF, who are 'hollow and ludicrous'. The Jews as a nation sre of more importance to us than are the retrograde followers of PBUH.
  13. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    25 Jan '10 11:17
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    It is you, FMF, who are 'hollow and ludicrous'. The Jews as a nation sre of more importance to us than are the retrograde followers of PBUH.
    That's not an answer.

    The question you tabled was "What is likely to happen if the one outpost of Western civilisation in the Middle East were to be destroyed?"

    What is your answer? Details please.
  14. 25 Jan '10 11:31 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    That's not an answer.

    The question you tabled was "What is likely to happen if the one outpost of Western civilisation in the Middle East were to be destroyed?"

    What is your answer? Details please.
    Loss of the one civilised State in that part of the world would weaken our interests there. Also we have no wish to see any increase in Muslim power anywhere in the world, indeed we need to take active steps to curtail it especially in the UK.
  15. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    25 Jan '10 11:39
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    Loss of the one civilised State in that part of the world would weaken our interests there. Also we have no wish to see any increase in Muslim power anywhere in the world, indeed we need to take active steps to curtail it especially in the UK.
    Well 'interests' and alliances and contexts can and do change in geopolitics. Scarcely anyone on this forum advocates the "fall of Israel" - but let's say, for the sake of argument, "if Israel fell" - you haven't explained what these consequences would be for "Western Civilization".

    Islam has been a huge contributor to what we understand by "Western Civilization" as I am sure you'll know if you've read about it.

    As for "Muslim power" in Britain, how many Islamic political parties are there with seats on local councils or at Westminster? How many seats in Parliament do they all have when added together?