Story Comments
Posted by: dissent 6 months, 4 weeks ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
94%
dissent6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
this is, in my opinion, one of two primary points that are pivotal to all our problems in the middle east. as all other problems have stemmed from them, including saddam, iraq, 9/11, bin laden, afghanistan, taliban, pakistan, nuclearization, muslim extremism, war, terrorism, etc.
Reply
the other is israel. and both of them are of our own making-
100%
truthiness6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
while overthrowing iran certainly contributed to most of that list, I would not go so far as to call it the primary source for the al queda related ones which stem from our supporting bin laden against russia in afghanistan and then abandoning him when we were done.
Reply
and if you mean the mere fact that we are aligned with israel has created anger towards us, then that is probably true.. but there is no reason for us not to be allies.. perhaps we should have been a little less unconditional in that friendship. but why would we not be allies with the only democracy in the ME? esp during the cold war? Personally, if I were Clinton, I would have strong armed both sides into a 2 state peace treaty.. but I also would have known better than to have an affair in the white house so..-
-
89%
dissent6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"the mere fact that we are aligned with israel has created anger towards us, then that is probably true.. "
Reply
i personally do not regard that fact as "mere" nor would the entire muslim world or the rest of the world for that matter. that "mere" encompasses a lot of death, destruction, suffering, misery and money.
hardly .... "mere"-
100%
truthiness6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
our alliance with israel is not responsible for all the deaths in the arab-israeli wars.
Reply
I know there are many enemies of israel who like to believe israel could not have survived without the alliance, but those of us who know the stories of how israel faired in the days before the alliance (prior to independence and during the first war) from first hand accounts know this is not true.
my point with the word 'mere' was that some were angry with the US solely due to the fact of the alliance and for no other reason. whether you believe that is justified is not the point (here), I just meant that it was the sole reason.-
80%
dissent6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"mere" has maintained the oppression of the palestinian people by israel
Reply
"On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own."
-
-
-
-
Grumpy63528Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned3 Replies
-
-
25%
Endoscopy6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So when is he going to admit what President Jimmy Carter openly avowed to other world leaders that he was going to take down the Shah. That is what gave us the present regime of terrorists.
Reply
This was a major turning point. Putting the more rabid clerics in charge of the nation.-
Neutral
PapaWolf6 months, 4 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
endo
Reply
>>President Jimmy Carter openly avowed to other world leaders that he was going to take down the Shah.
Having known a member of the Shah's general staff, you're a bit mistaken here. Carter offered the Shah assistance. The Shah turned him down because he didn't want to unleash his military on the population.
As he & his son told me, they could've stopped Khomeni, but there would've been a LOT of civilian casualties.
-
-
Grumpy63528Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
loading ...
chuck-the-canuck
tehranchik
Justice4All
jordan11
dextrase
alakazam
Will1313
Candida
flyonthewallzz
DenCuddy
smithichie
bluetexasvalley
Progressive
Sandmonster
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.