I don't think it's what they WANT. I think it's what they'll DO. And
no, Jeruselum and the surrounding area are less than 1% muslim. All
those of Islamic persuasions were pushed out using tactics that border
on a war crime in and of itself.


With the way modern Islamic extremists act- I'm quite certain they'll
take a "if we can't have it, no one can" approach. If they think they
can take the city back by force, without the use of atomics, they
certainly are going to try. But if they fail- or if they go against the
U.S., or another unreasonably superior mility- then they're going to
remove the city from the earth.

poet-
im not saying your wrong wrong, but you might want to check your
figures... 1% ? dont think so.. do buy into the "we've been oppressing
the little guy" mentality of the isreal conversation, its inacurate and
doesnt give you credit.

and, nah, still dont think they'll ever hit the town like that.
they lose their 72 virgins.

No, ISRAEL has a population of about 50% muslim. The city itself is
almost devoid of them. And the ones that are there are in the extended
locations (those built later in the millenia, and not parts of the "holy
city" itself).

PS- I don't mean "those present at any given time" population. I mean
"those with permament residence".

Poet
I've clipped some of your comments for review here.

About America you said"
America's foreign policy is, literally, insanity.
we're getting fat and lazy in our power and
position. Like the spoiled rich kid who nobody likes,

Then you say:
You don't understand much about Iran, do you?
and,
they're one of the most liberalized governments in the
world that aren't part of the westernized culture

I think you don't know much about them and that you ignore the facts to
support an absurd position.

You say:
And them getting the Bomb is the surest way to make the feel
like out equals. So it'll work out quite nicely if done with any
modicrum of respect.
and
Iran, of course, ends up with the nuke- but with our *blessings*
and
Of course. I'm at a loss on how to save Israel in this mess.

Finally you say, referring to Iran:
And how do you propose a "regime change" without starting World War
Three?

Regarding Iran bombing Israel you say:
I don't think it's what they WANT. I think it's what they'll DO.

I wonder how you find that to be acceptable.
I wonder how you expect that to happen without starting WW3

Arguing these points with you would be ridiculous because your mind is
clearly closed to the interests of your own country and the problems of
others that you will never see the truth. Good luck. The best thing you
can do, in my opinion, is to go spend some time in the middle east and
learn about the area and the governments there. Then when you say such
things you will have some experience about what you say. That way it
will be clear to you in your own mind that you are lying and you can be
a proper hypocrite, or a proper Iranian loyalist, take your pick.

Well, if you didn't deliberately misquote me, it'd make a whole lot
more sence. Oh well, you're not worth wasting the time explaining myself
to. I'll just assume the others on this site will be smart enough to
understand the contexts properly.

Poetnartist,

About what you said,

"... Well, if you didn't deliberately misquote me, it'd make a whole lot
more sence. Oh well, you're not worth wasting the time explaining myself
to. I'll just assume the others on this site will be smart enough to
understand the contexts properly."

These forums are not 'boxing arenas' where one side would pick a fight
with an imaginary 'ennemy' side, and where there would have to be a
'surviving' winner, and a 'dead' loser.

These forums are designed to exchange views: 'come in wth a particular
perspective, and come out of the exchange with an enriched
perspective', regardless of the prevailing point in the end.

You have absolutely argued and counter argued your position with
intelligence, and you have included the position of others. In doing so
you have addressed the question that was originally raised by
'TheLonelyWalker', which by the way was a great opportunity for
self-criticism: the healthiest of criticism.

Also, IMO, you attracted several other 'posters' whom have enriched this
debate tremendously.

That being said, these forums should not be expected to be perfect.
They are 'open', to 'all'. Some of those 'all', will not respect the
most elementary terms of civilized and intelligent exchange. And we
must all accept, and deal with that when entering the World Wide Web.

Highjacking the subject by never addressing it; proposing a different
question than the one posed; short, biased and loaded arguments;
incomplete or erroneous citations, and when all fails, and the 'ennemy'
keeps coming back, insults, name calling and ridicule are used in
desperation.

So again, thanks to you and many 'friends', whom sometimes agreed,
and sometimes disagreed with some of your arguments, for sticking to the
topic andits spirit. The debate took place IMO, in spite of the
'neutralizing-factor', ...and who knows, might grow from this point on!

And I agree with you. But when someone pulls out dirty tricks like
misquoting, I make it clear they're breaking all protocol of polite
debate- as an explanation to them and others as to why I'm no longer
bothering with them in the topic at hand.

And so you should 'PoetnArtist' !

Oh well, I feel compelled to cut him apart once again. Just so everyone
else will see what I'm saying with clarity. I may have been vague, and
it can't hurt any.

I've stated that, with the current policies- a Third World War is
almost innevitable. We *will* come into conflict with Iran, if we don't
treat them as deserving of respect. They *will* fight back, as we would
in their position. Israel *will* be a target for the Bomb- it's far
closer than America- harder to intercept at close range- and the
Arab/Muslim world hates them anyways.

However, if we embrace Iran, they'll come to think of us as, if not
friends, at least trustworthy allies. Preventing them from assaulting
Israel may be impossible- but they won't use atomics if they think they
can win conventionally. And there's always that thin sliver of hope that
we CAN negotiate a peaceful co-existence. But that'd take a better mind
than I to achieve.


Regardless. If we don't change our relationship with Iran. It will mean
Nuclear war, without possible exception. The middle-east will be
rendered uninhabitable. We can only pray the other atomic powers don't
join in.

oops, problem with that misquoting thing poet. I didn't only quote you,
I clipped and pasted your exact words, with typos and all. I was simply
tying all the odd comments into a group to try establish more clearly
the position you have taken, as I understand it. No dirty tricks there
as they are your words. If you did not mean them then I don't know why
you would say them.

Having said that, I'm tolerant overall and don't mind that we disagree
about this matter, as we clearly do. I know that there are others who
share your opinion and that no matter how much I think it is flawed,
people get at their positions based on their own experiences and such.
So, no offense, I just disagree and think that your opinion is contrary
to the interests of my country. I find the your comments troubling and
difficult to resist responding to. Really I'd prefer we just move on
though and agree to disagree, as I prefer not to argue.

Oh. And I don't support Iran. But I like them a helluva lot better than
most of our so-called allies. If you weren't so prejudiced, you'd be
able to see that.

Well lets see here, I kind of like France, they have issues, but they
are our allies ultimately. They developed a huge piece of Canada, they
can't be all bad. Helped us in the French Indian war and other times. I
like the Netherlands, nice people, intelligent too. I like England, our
heritage started there largely, Germany too. Germans and English are all
over this country, to our benefit. Spain is alright, nice and decent
people. Italy too. Switzerland? Ireland? Yes I prefer them to Iran too.
Are we seeing a trend here? hmmmm.

If you don't like those countries I wonder what they have done to
provoke your ire.

Hmm. Ok, so you're going to nit-pick. You know exactly what I mean.

I'm refering to countries like Columbia. Venezuela. South Africa.
Uganda. China. Various chunks of the former USSR. You get the idea.

Greetings, everyone!

Taxes done, time for some fun here.

I've tried to read through the postings in this thread, and will make a
couple of comments.

1. Someone asserted that more Muslims kill Jews than Jews kill Muslims:

In fact, the kill ratio is about 1:8. That is, Israelis kill about 8
times more Muslims -- Palestinians -- than Palestinians kill Israelis.
The press does not cover the killings proportionately, and ofter covers
the death of Israelis as feature stories, so it is easy to take away a
different sense of what is going on. These numbers cover the 2001-2006
period.

2. Iran. There is no evidence at all that Iran is pursuing a nuclear
weapon. Zero. Iran IS enriching uranium, which it needs to do to operate
a nuclear electrical power system, but the centrifuge technology is is
using cannot achieve the purification levels required of a nuclear
weapon. Its centrifuge installation is solely apprpriate for enriching
uranium to the levels required for electrical plant fuel.

US intelligence and UN inspectors have studied the matter in great
detail and have concluded a) that Iran is about a decade away from being
able to have a nuclear bomb IF they wanted one, that there is indication
at all they they do, and that IF they did it would be easy to determine
the fact from future developments in Iran's nuclear indistry.

3. The very same people who manouvered the US into attacking Iraq are
now trying to manouever the US into attacking Iran. We now understand
their motives, and we know in detail how they succeeded within the Bush
administration. (References upon request.) It is these folks who do not
have US interests at heart.

4. It would be both folly and unnecessary by any standard of need or
intrest for the US to attack Iran, but is is quite possible that in the
dying moments of the Bush administration the 'attack Iran' fanatics
within the administration will get something of their way. My guess is a
cruise missile strike against Iranian 'nuclear targets' and
infirastructure. It will only dig America's standing in the world a
deeper hole.

5. America needs to live at peace in the world, and rpectfully of
others. Our dollar is tumbling, US international influence is at an
all-time low, our military is being forced out of several international
basis, Afgahistan is turning bad (for the US), things are getting worse
for the US in Iraq, US corporations continue to globalize and outsource,
realizing that the US economy is souring, China mow produces far more
engineers than the US does, our medical system is now among last in the
Industrial world..... The list goes on and on.

We need to get our act together at home, regain some competitivity,
abandon the myth that we are the world's policeman, bring our troops
home and retrain them so that they can actually hold down worthy jobs
here, etc. etc. This is full-time work for many decades ahead, and the
sooner we get cracking at it the better off we will be.

:conversing:!


Oceans

I don't agree with you on the conspiracy part, but otherwise your
points are all accurate.


I don't think it's a conspiracy. I think it's fear. Bigotry. Racism.
It's a problem, but it isn't a hijacking.

And in all fairness, Iran is enriching the stuff to enough of a degree
to use it in nukes. There's no doubt they'll make the bomb- they're
backed into a corner. That NEED the bomb. If they have any sanity at
all, they're making it.

I'm not sure your posts were addressed to me, Poet?

In case they are:

1. Manipulating US foriegn policy: Yes there is a lot of bigotry and
ignorance pertaining to how people are viewing Iran, but it is
aggravated and exploited by a few people who really do know what they
are doing: Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby (even now), Ledeen, Krauthammer,
Kristol, Wurmser, Frum. I am happy to give you citations if you want to
delve into this. This is not some goofy-woofy conspiracy; these are all
folks who share the same goal and who hold senior positions in the
government thanks to Bush.

2. Enrichment: there is a VAST difference between the enrichment levels
needed for power plants and nuclear bombs. The latter can run on 5-6%
enrichment; the latter, the bombs, need about 95% for a decent
explosion. No comparison, either from a technical point of view or a
monitoring one.

Oceans

What happened poetnarcist, I agreeed with you on a couple points
earlier, like the current US policy towards Iran. I still think, not
just in Iran, but also in other countries, our policies are not working,
and we need to find a different tactic. Kuodos Ocean, I agree with you
on all points except #2. I heard the other day that Iran is also
cranking up a heavy water plant, that once going can produce enough
material to build 2 Nukes a year.I havent looked it up but my Geography
Instructer mentioned it while lecturing about Iran at school.
I did read where Iran did not currently have enough centrifuges to build
more than 1 nuke in the next 10 yrs. They are currently planning on
starting up and running 8000 though.
Now Israel-7 million Jews, Palestinians- 4 million, almost all of which
are confined in the Palestinian territories. Much smaller area than
Israel, and Israel has built a wall around most of it. All of this
despite that in 1947, the UN thought it was fair and drew up a
resolution to divide the territory into 54% Israel, 46%
Palestine,although at that time the pop was 30% Jewish and 70% muslim.
The only reason there were that many Jews is bacause Britain who's
territory it was then had started a program called Zionism. It the
Websters dictionary it defines Zionism as, "advocacy of the
establishment and support of a Jewish Nation in Palestine. (now Israel),
We accuse the musilums of carrying on a religous war??? Hmmmmm...
Next the City of Jerusalim is divided into 4 Quarters, Armenian,
Christian, Jewish, and Muslim. Just thought Id put that in since someone
said the city was almost devoid of Jews, it is actually 1/4 Jewish..