I fail to see how you figure Israel controls who we go after in the supposed war on terror.
I know it's a bit stereotypical to say the Jews control the US, but when even Israeli prime minister Sharon makes statements in national radio broadcasts like this:
“Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."
And with zionists like Wolfowitz organizing the US war on Iraq (a country by the way that thanks to the Russian intelligence agencies was actually an effective weapon
against terrorism) it's hard not to see this as merely another cruel continuation of the game Israel has been allowed to play with US support in that part of the region since the Shah of Persia was still in powet. Israel will probably want free oil from Iraq as well in the near future, especially since Putin putted a halt to the little Yukos scheme that would have led to control of Russia's oil fields falling into US/Israeli hands.
Bush is determined to get both sides to agree to the establishment for a Palestinian state, which destroys any hope for peace there, as the Palestinian Authority is still committed to the utter annihilation of the Jewish state.
Only according to the Jews and a few militant terrorist groups who mostly aren't even living on Palestinian soil or are even of Palestinian descent. The rest of the Palestinians have to live under the cruel rule of the racist apartheid state of Israel.
I'm quite fond of this link on the subject:
http://psc.za.org/pscsaourdeclaration.htmThere is no compromise possible that saves both sides.
Sure there is, forget the whole two-state solution, and establish a secular state where both muslims and jews live alongside each other. It works for Turkey.
And you'd think a Christian as devout as Bush supposedly is would heed the prophesy of Joel 3:2 concerning the treatment of the land promised to the nation of Israel and the people He granted it to.
I'm so glad I live in a part of the world where God is dead already. But anyway I'm not contesting you on this one. Both Bush and Kerry are supporters of the zionist agenda, they both pretty much travel in the same circles and listen to the same kind of people whispering in their ears. So for people who are less then enthousiastic about the way Israel interacts with the world, it doesn't matter which president the US choose this time. It's just that Bush is more intent on pissing off people, leading to other nations who currently always just lent on the US for everything to start thinking for themselves again and start plotting their own strategy. And especially with China set to become the world's greatest powet, a bridge burner like Bush is much better for the European nations then a bridge mender like Kerry, since no matter which is in powet the US are dead set on setting the Middle East on fire. I'm sorry to say this, but over the last two years I've seriously began to believe that Europe needs to rethink its alliances. I know the kind of media you are subject to, so I know you see things differently, but as far as I can see it, you're heading nowhere good in the entire Middle East.
The reason Saudi Arabia escapes is three-fold. First, they have as many or more investments in the U.S. than practically anyone else in the world, and the government always protects those who suck up to it.
Very fair to admit, but American public opinion wasn't so fair on the Russians and French of whom the same was true in the case of Iraq. And Iraq was nowhere near the threat it was made out to be, while Saudi Arabia is a much bigger threat then the media currently paints it to be.
Second, taking Saudi Arabia would completely end any chance of cooperation with all Muslims.
Yes while attacking Iraq on the other hand has made you loads of Arab friends :rolleyes:
Instead of just fighting the Wahabbi sect, we'd wind up against all of them because of intrusion on soil they regard as sacred.
Well you don't always immediately have to respond by bombing your enemy to smittereens, but surely you can do something to prevent them from spending all the money you give them on spreading Wahabbism all over the world (and especially to Europe)?
Third, the corrupt monarchy there is the only thing that prevents the nation from instituting an Islamic fundamentalist regime that would make Iran pale in comparison and only serve to institutionalize further the terrorism the world fears so.
Well explain this to me then, the royal family is no less cruel then Saddam Hussein was. Saddam's ideology was B'aathism. A secular nationalistic ideology, that if it uses religion, only uses it as a symbol to underline the national identity. In practice it functioned much like the Soviet Union under Stalin. Saddam was despised by most islamic leaders, but through the strong nationalistic identity of the state made friends easily with nations outside the region including, for a while, the US. In the last years of his regime Saddam's intelligence service was working intensively with the intelligence service of it's biggest ally, and terrorist victim long before the US; Russia, on infiltrating Al-Qaeda. And with succes.
The ideology of the House of Saud is Wahabbism, a fundamentalistic Sunni Islamic ideology that lies at the core of most terrorist groups. Furthermore unlike B'aathism it doesn't have an inward but an outward vision, and the Saudis spent countless money on building mosques for this sect all over the world and exporting radical imams to them. Currently more muslims are being recruited for the jihad amongst muslim immigrants at Saudi sponsored mosques in Europe then in the Middle East itself.
Yet somehow to combat terrorism the wisest course for the US is to bomb the first and protect the second.
But I doubt Kerry would support Israel. He may well be of Jewish descent, but that doesn't mean anything to a lot of people in his shoes.
It's not just his descent, but I'm not gonna do your homework for you
