Regardless of your theory of the origins, though, America's support for the criminal Israel certainly perpetuates the anti sentiments...

...among people who support the criminal actions of the Palestinians. So it's a wash.

...along with America's habit of having armed forces in Islamic countries (Somalia, for example)....to name but a couple of the ongoing reasons.

Reasons such as all the aid given to Islamic countries like Indonesia & Pakistan when they are devastated by a tsunami or earthquake? Or sending our soldiers to Somalia to make sure food supplies reach the starving people instead of being stolen by warloards? Or bombing the Christian Serbs until they stop their mass murder of the Muslims in Bosnian? You can add to that list freeing Kuwait and making Iraq & Afghanistan free for 50 million Muslims. You may not appreciate it but the women in Afghanistan and the Shia & Kurds in Iraq do as well.

I've been an expat for almost 16 years. When someone asks, "Why did you leave America? Don't you love your country?" I ask them, "Why did you move away from your parents? Don't you love them?". However, while I love my country, not everyone I asked felt the same about their parents.

All fine & well but not even close to the same thing......

First off we are in the Afghanistan Thread.......

It has never been a question of loving your parents/country

It is about foreign policy & the cost of it in lives & $$$ for those who pay for it.

Neither of which affects an Expat who pays lip service only but,does affect those of us who live here & pay for it in both ways.

I've been an expat for almost 16 years. When someone asks, "Why did you leave America? Don't you love your country?" I ask them, "Why did you move away from your parents? Don't you love them?". However, while I love my country, not everyone I asked felt the same about their parents.

All fine & well but not even close to the same thing......

First off we are in the Afghanistan Thread.......

It has never been a question of loving your parents/country

It is about foreign policy & the cost of it in lives & $$$ for those who pay for it.

Neither of which affects an Expat who pays lip service only but,does affect those of us who live here & pay for it in both ways.

You're the one who brought it up in the first place.

At the grave risk of keeping this thread off-topic, I have to comment on this "my side-your side" thing.

I personally am not on UG's side, for example. I just happen to agree with him on the subject of Afghanistan more than I agree with Harcourt or AlexLah, and I think his arguments have been more logical. Venturalaw's arguments certainly have been more logical, in my opinion.

I have disagreed with UG on Israel/Palestine, (although I wouldn't color my posts by referring to Israel as "criminal Israel" as Harcourt has.) I think I have disagreed with him on environmental issues, too. Probably Iraq as I seem to disagree with everyone on that. I have disagreed with koheesti in posts. So I have to point out that I am not a "cohort" of anyone, as was inferred.

On this one issue, I have agreed with many more of UG's, venturalaw's. chuckd's, and koheesti's posts that those of naam, Harcourt, Alexlah, and Flying.

It is the facts of the issues which matter to me, not on which "side" on which I am supposed to be.

Good on you for that. I did not include you in the "cohorts" as you have always been your own man.

I know the cohorts will laugh, as is their want, but I too am concerned with facts, not siding.

YOU will agree with your cohorts no matter what they say.

Not true. All in all, they post factual, logical, and truthful material and are as polite as they can be when dealing with trash talking, raving loons.

I mostly concentrate on pointing out wild conspiracy theories, lies, half truths and dishonest posts and they mostly stay away from all that stuff. I find almost nothing to not agree with. They are good honest men and darn good citizens.

I know the cohorts will laugh, as is their want, but I too am concerned with facts, not siding.

Man oh man. You are right for a change.

Regardless of your theory of the origins, though, America's support for the criminal Israel certainly perpetuates the anti sentiments...

...among people who support the criminal actions of the Palestinians. So it's a wash.

...along with America's habit of having armed forces in Islamic countries (Somalia, for example)....to name but a couple of the ongoing reasons.

Reasons such as all the aid given to Islamic countries like Indonesia & Pakistan when they are devastated by a tsunami or earthquake? Or sending our soldiers to Somalia to make sure food supplies reach the starving people instead of being stolen by warloards? Or bombing the Christian Serbs until they stop their mass murder of the Muslims in Bosnian? You can add to that list freeing Kuwait and making Iraq & Afghanistan free for 50 million Muslims. You may not appreciate it but the women in Afghanistan and the Shia & Kurds in Iraq do as well.

It's not a wash. If someone invaded your home and attacked you, and you retaliated......should you be condemned? Should the attacker be forgiven for "retaliating" because you hit back?

What has aid got to do with it? The current military aid afforded to Pakistan is simply because Pakistan is a gateway for supplies to the US troops in Afghanistan. Purely humanitarian aid is blind when it comes to natural disasters, surely?

At the grave risk of keeping this thread off-topic, I have to comment on this "my side-your side" thing.

I personally am not on UG's side, for example. I just happen to agree with him on the subject of Afghanistan more than I agree with Harcourt or AlexLah, and I think his arguments have been more logical. Venturalaw's arguments certainly have been more logical, in my opinion.

I have disagreed with UG on Israel/Palestine, (although I wouldn't color my posts by referring to Israel as "criminal Israel" as Harcourt has.) I think I have disagreed with him on environmental issues, too. Probably Iraq as I seem to disagree with everyone on that. I have disagreed with koheesti in posts. So I have to point out that I am not a "cohort" of anyone, as was inferred.

On this one issue, I have agreed with many more of UG's, venturalaw's. chuckd's, and koheesti's posts that those of naam, Harcourt, Alexlah, and Flying.

It is the facts of the issues which matter to me, not on which "side" on which I am supposed to be.

Yes I do colour my posts to persist in making a point that some people prefer to ignore. Israel IS criminal in it's constant expansion. It's very clear in international law. There is no mitigation. The settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank are in breach of the law. In fact, it is so clear, that America is currently at least paying lip-service to it.

So, if Israel is committing acts against the law, by definition, it is criminal.

It's not a wash. If someone invaded your home and attacked you, and you retaliated......should you be condemned? Should the attacker be forgiven for "retaliating" because you hit back?

How about a few facts for a change. The Jews did not '"invade". They bought land from Palestinians legally; the Palestinians declared war on them and got whipped - not the other way around. The rest is history.

Isn't this thread supposed to be about Afghanistan?

YOU will agree with your cohorts no matter what they say.

Not true. All in all, they post factual, logical, and truthful material and are as polite as they can be when dealing with trash talking, raving loons.

I mostly concentrate on pointing out wild conspiracy theories, lies, half truths and dishonest posts and they mostly stay away from all that stuff. I find very almost nothing to not agree with. They are good honest men and darn good citizens.

You are wrong again....chuckd was proved to be a liar, so one of your cohorts does not post "truthful" or "factual" material. Not to forget that you have lied also. Furthermore, you alledge lies and dishonesty yet have never exposed one example of it.

Your post(s) reeks of sycophantic, narrow-minded fanatacism.

If chuck was consistant, he'd pull you up on the atrocious grammar.

Israel IS criminal in it's constant expansion.

They are confiscating land that threatens their security from counties that have attacked them without provocation. You reap what you sew.

chuckd was proved to be a liar

Not that I know of, but you on the other hand...

chuckd was proved to be a liar

Not that I know of, but you on the other hand...

Of course you ignore anything critical of your cohorts. Chuck's lie was clearly exposed.

Me on the other hand....remind me, please, if you can, with actual proof, not your very biased opinion/interpretation. You have never been able to do that, so stop making false accusations.

I've been an expat for almost 16 years. When someone asks, "Why did you leave America? Don't you love your country?" I ask them, "Why did you move away from your parents? Don't you love them?". However, while I love my country, not everyone I asked felt the same about their parents.

All fine & well but not even close to the same thing......

First off we are in the Afghanistan Thread.......

It has never been a question of loving your parents/country

It is about foreign policy & the cost of it in lives & $$$ for those who pay for it.

Neither of which affects an Expat who pays lip service only but,does affect those of us who live here & pay for it in both ways.

You're the one who brought it up in the first place.

Yes Koheesti

I did not mean as such it was off topic...quite the opposite.

I meant as I stated ....as such foreign policy has a BIG impact on citizens & virtually none on expats....

At this time

But eventually it will also affect the expats that live off the govt tit

Israel IS criminal in it's constant expansion.

They are confiscating land that threatens their security from counties that have attacked them without provocation. You reap what you sew.

Against international law.......criminal.

The "...without provocation" bit is just plain silly.

(BTW....you "sow" seed and then reap the crop. Sewing involves needle and thread.....Just supporting your cohort in his pedantic need for accuracy.)

I have no idea of what you are talking about concerning Chuck and from what I have seen your opinions can never be relied on.

As to you, I pointed out a real whopper of a fib and you just ignored the obvious and kept denying it. Why waste any time showing anything to someone who chooses to be blind?

It's not a wash. If someone invaded your home and attacked you, and you retaliated......should you be condemned? Should the attacker be forgiven for "retaliating" because you hit back?

How about a few facts for a change. The Jews did not '"invade". They bought land from Palestinians legally; the Palestinians declared war on them and got whipped - not the other way around. The rest is history.

Isn't this thread supposed to be about Afghanistan?

So, the Israelis "bought land", then let the Palestinians live on it for decades, then decided to evict them?

I think MY facts are actual facts, and your delusions are the fiction. Back up your words with actual facts.

I have no idea of what you are talking about concerning Chuck and from what I have seen your opinions can never be relied on.

As to you, I pointed out a real whopper of a fib and you just ignored the obvious and kept denying it. Why waste any time showing anything to someone who chooses to be blind?

I suspect, (but will not alledge as I can not prove what you know...(and lately I have begun to suspect your inability to remember or comprehend things)), that you lie (again) about chuck's lie. It was a fairly contentious issue in this forum, so I find it hard to believe you missed it.

No UG, you did nothing but post an interpretation to which I responded logically to refute you. You ignored that refutation...since then, all you do is ignore my response and harp on about your original fallacious interpretation as if it was factual.

If you want to persist in calling me a liar, bring up the facts, or shut up.

You are the blind one. I think you are selectively and intentionally blind.

bring up the facts, or shut up.

Already done and you were not honest about that either.

So, the Israelis "bought land", then let the Palestinians live on it for decades, then decided to evict them?

What happened during the war of 1948 that caused the Palestinian refugee problem? Did the Jews expel the Arabs?

• The British had wrestled Palestine away from the Ottoman Turks in 1917, and they occupied Palestine until 1947, and shortly thereafter, the United Nations voted to divide western Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab areas. The Jews accepted this plan, and the Arabs rejected it. Not only did they reject the UN partition plan, but 7 Arab nations decided to attack the fledgeling Jewish microstate with public proclamations of Jewish extermination. It was surrounding these events that the Palestinian Arab refugee problem was born:
  
• "According to official records of the League of Nations and Arab census figure 539,000 Arabs left Israel at the urging of 7 converging Arab armies so that they would not be in the way of their attack. They promised the fleeing Arabs they would return and move into the Jews' houses after the anticipated successful annihilation of the Jews.
  "We know that 850,000 Jews were ejected from the Arab countries where they had lived for hundreds of years. This included successful people whose property and assets, including community assets were immediately confiscated. 750,000 penniless Jews from Arab countries fled to Israel.
  "This was a virtual exchange of population. The Jewish refugees were immediately accepted by the new State of Israel. They were provided with shelter (albeit temporary tents) food and clothing.
  "The Arab refugees who had migrated to various Arab nations were not similarly well received. They were regarded not as Arab brothers but as unwelcome migrants who were not to be trusted. Squalid refugee camps were set up as showpieces to induce the West's sympathy and kept that way. The UN through UNRWA (UN Relief Agency) provided assistance to the camps when the host country could not or would not. These camps became a training ground for terrorist youth to be targeted at Israel. The host country, like Syria, would provide training, weapons and explosives, but refused to absorb the Arab refugees as equal citizens. Keeping them in misery made them valuable and irreplaceable as angry front line terrorists attacking Israel as proxies for the Arab armies who lost to the Jews on the field of battle in declared wars. The Twin Pillars supporting Arab Muslim society are "Pride and Shame". Losing to the Jews on the battlefield time and again in 6 wars shattered the self perception of the Macho Man.
  - Emanuel A. Winston, Middle East analyst & commentator http://www.peacefaq.com/refugees.html
  

bring up the facts, or shut up.

Already done and you were not honest about that either.

That's all you can repeat, and not substantiate with facts. As I said, "..you ignored that refutation...since then, all you do is ignore my response and harp on about your original fallacious interpretation as if it was factual...."

Put up or shut up.

So, the Israelis "bought land", then let the Palestinians live on it for decades, then decided to evict them?

What happened during the war of 1948 that caused the Palestinian refugee problem? Did the Jews expel the Arabs?

• The British had wrestled Palestine away from the Ottoman Turks in 1917, and they occupied Palestine until 1947, and shortly thereafter, the United Nations voted to divide western Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab areas. The Jews accepted this plan, and the Arabs rejected it. Not only did they reject the UN partition plan, but 7 Arab nations decided to attack the fledgeling Jewish microstate with public proclamations of Jewish extermination. It was surrounding these events that the Palestinian Arab refugee problem was born:
  
• "According to official records of the League of Nations and Arab census figure 539,000 Arabs left Israel at the urging of 7 converging Arab armies so that they would not be in the way of their attack. They promised the fleeing Arabs they would return and move into the Jews' houses after the anticipated successful annihilation of the Jews.
  "We know that 850,000 Jews were ejected from the Arab countries where they had lived for hundreds of years. This included successful people whose property and assets, including community assets were immediately confiscated. 750,000 penniless Jews from Arab countries fled to Israel.
  "This was a virtual exchange of population. The Jewish refugees were immediately accepted by the new State of Israel. They were provided with shelter (albeit temporary tents) food and clothing.
  "The Arab refugees who had migrated to various Arab nations were not similarly well received. They were regarded not as Arab brothers but as unwelcome migrants who were not to be trusted. Squalid refugee camps were set up as showpieces to induce the West's sympathy and kept that way. The UN through UNRWA (UN Relief Agency) provided assistance to the camps when the host country could not or would not. These camps became a training ground for terrorist youth to be targeted at Israel. The host country, like Syria, would provide training, weapons and explosives, but refused to absorb the Arab refugees as equal citizens. Keeping them in misery made them valuable and irreplaceable as angry front line terrorists attacking Israel as proxies for the Arab armies who lost to the Jews on the field of battle in declared wars. The Twin Pillars supporting Arab Muslim society are "Pride and Shame". Losing to the Jews on the battlefield time and again in 6 wars shattered the self perception of the Macho Man.
  - Emanuel A. Winston, Middle East analyst & commentator http://www.peacefaq.com/refugees.html
  

What relevance is this one-eyed quotation? Jews expelled from Arab countries has what to do with Palestinians evicted from their lands in East Jerusalem and the west Bamk? Are you suggesting that a crime in one country excuses a crime in another?

As to what you highlighted; Are you suggesting that all the Arabs being evicted today are the Arabs or their descendants that left, then returned to occupy Jewish homes?

I still want to know what "purchase" you were talking about.

Too clever for me, because I don't get it.

Or is it just too far below me to get it?

I suspect the latter.

As usual...you can not substantiate your claims. Get some pride in yourself.

Regardless of your theory of the origins, though, America's support for the criminal Israel certainly perpetuates the anti sentiments...

...among people who support the criminal actions of the Palestinians. So it's a wash.

...along with America's habit of having armed forces in Islamic countries (Somalia, for example)....to name but a couple of the ongoing reasons.

Reasons such as all the aid given to Islamic countries like Indonesia & Pakistan when they are devastated by a tsunami or earthquake? Or sending our soldiers to Somalia to make sure food supplies reach the starving people instead of being stolen by warloards? Or bombing the Christian Serbs until they stop their mass murder of the Muslims in Bosnian? You can add to that list freeing Kuwait and making Iraq & Afghanistan free for 50 million Muslims. You may not appreciate it but the women in Afghanistan and the Shia & Kurds in Iraq do as well.

It's not a wash. If someone invaded your home and attacked you, and you retaliated......should you be condemned? Should the attacker be forgiven for "retaliating" because you hit back?

What has aid got to do with it? The current military aid afforded to Pakistan is simply because Pakistan is a gateway for supplies to the US troops in Afghanistan. Purely humanitarian aid is blind when it comes to natural disasters, surely?

It's not really a wash, you're right. Those dam_n murderers in Israel who have been targeting civilians - women & children - on buses and anywhere they are vulnerable can never be matched by what the Israelis are doing - rockets, building flats in Jerusalem.

Aid has A LOT to do with it. The US gives more than probably any country and provides the means in most cases for the aid to be distributed through military air craft & ships. You seem to believe that people should think, "Oh, yes, American food & medical aid has helped me and my family personally survive [fill in name of earthquake, tsunami, drought, other natural & man-made disaster] but I should disregard that because it is their moral duty to care for me and besides, even though they have sacrificed thousands of their own lives and trillions of their own dollars to rid my country of [fill in the name of your favorite dictator or despot] giving me freedom I never before dreamt possible, they support Israel so I must hate them!". Sadly, some of them do feel that way. Can't make everyone happy all the time.

chuckd was proved to be a liar

Not that I know of, but you on the other hand...

Of course you ignore anything critical of your cohorts. Chuck's lie was clearly exposed.

Me on the other hand....remind me, please, if you can, with actual proof, not your very biased opinion/interpretation. You have never been able to do that, so stop making false accusations.

I remember something about Mossad killing handicapped children in NZ for their identities. Since then we have learned from events in Dubai that isn't necessary.

Too clever for me, because I don't get it.

I am not astonished that you don't get it, but his pants are on fire.

YOU will agree with your cohorts no matter what they say.

Not true. All in all, they post factual, logical, and truthful material and are as polite as they can be when dealing with trash talking, raving loons.

I mostly concentrate on pointing out wild conspiracy theories, lies, half truths and dishonest posts and they mostly stay away from all that stuff. I find very almost nothing to not agree with. They are good honest men and darn good citizens.

You are wrong again....chuckd was proved to be a liar, so one of your cohorts does not post "truthful" or "factual" material. Not to forget that you have lied also. Furthermore, you alledge lies and dishonesty yet have never exposed one example of it.

Your post(s) reeks of sycophantic, narrow-minded fanatacism.

If chuck was consistant, he'd pull you up on the atrocious grammar.

I'm getting a little sick of this, Harcourt. I did not lie and I am a little tired of your use of the word. If I misspoke, then an apology is due. If you feel so strongly that you are on the right side, then you may take this as an apology for misspeaking.

You have done the same thing in the past so there should be no problem with it.

In the meantime, stop calling me a liar.

PS: You misspelled "consistent"!

I fully agree with getting Saddam out of Kuwait at the first gulf war and I believe that is where our action stopped at that time other than some no fly zones. The second invasion is a whole different story.

The link and snip I posted was just to show there are more stories than a Wiki article, sure the CIA will never say yeah we are the ones responsible . I would recommend to read the book written by Steve Coll, Ghost Wars that will give a bit more insight on how the CIA funded an Islamic Jihad against the Soviets during their occupation of Afghanistan. How this Frankenstein was created by us that we are now fighting.

From memory it was only after the first gulf war that Islamic terrorist targeted the US and some other countries on their own soil.

(Please correct me if I am wrong).

I believe it is crucial to understand the claims of the Islamic extremists that they commit their crimes/actions as a result of some of our actions and /or foreign policy.

Therefore we need to look in the mirror and ask if we ever committed act's of terror against another country?

I know we did, do any of you?

It is only then when we the people agree that wars are not the way to solve problems that we can start building a more just society with equal chances for everyone.

What we have now are corporations and governments working together to divide us.

AlexLah:

I am afraid your memory does you no favors about terrorists targeting the US on its own soil. You might want to recall the US Embassy takeover in 1979. All Embassies are sovereign property, regardless where located.

The Embassy takeover is the most memorable, but here is a link that details a few others dating back to 1972:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/AmericanAttacks.htm

I also must question your statement that the policies of the US cause the terrorist actions. Anti-Americanism is behind the terrorist actions and the origin of anti-Americanism did not originate with US support for Israel. Unfortunately I have to drive to Udorn this morning and have no time to compose my message. Let me delay the response until either later today or tomorrow. You will be surprised at the response. I'm going to blame the Communists!

PS: I like Ulysses. Keep up the good work. Pithy can be very good.

Pithy can be good, I agree....How does that relate to UG? "Pithy" has connotations of being meaningfull.

It will be interesting to read your ideas about the origins of anti-Americanism.

Regardless of your theory of the origins, though, America's support for the criminal Israel certainly perpetuates the anti sentiments....along with America's habit of having armed forces in Islamic countries (Somalia, for example)....to name but a couple of the ongoing reasons.

As for your rebuttal of Alex's comment about American soil....yes, technically and (as usual) pedantically you are correct, but that was not his meaning, I'm sure. I think it is plain to most readers here (except the liars and the blinkered) that his meaning, in the context of what he was writing, was the contiguous United States (plus Alaska and Hawaii); American soil.

Harcourt:

My crystal ball was down this morning, so I was not able to read AlexLah's mind. I find Alex generally states his intentions and questions rather well and hardly requires you to parse his words for him.

In any event, if you had the temerity to open my link, you would find a laundry list of attacks by Islamic extremists noted on that link reflecting attacks made in the US.

Abraham Lincoln once made this statement and it applies to you.

"He can compress the most words into the smallest ideas of any man I ever met."

I've been an expat for almost 16 years. When someone asks, "Why did you leave America? Don't you love your country?" I ask them, "Why did you move away from your parents? Don't you love them?". However, while I love my country, not everyone I asked felt the same about their parents.

All fine & well but not even close to the same thing......

First off we are in the Afghanistan Thread.......

It has never been a question of loving your parents/country

It is about foreign policy & the cost of it in lives & $$ for those who pay for it.

Neither of which affects an Expat who pays lip service only but,does affect those of us who live here & pay for it in both ways.

You're the one who brought it up in the first place.

Yes Koheesti

I did not mean as such it was off topic...quite the opposite.

I meant as I stated ....as such foreign policy has a BIG impact on citizens & virtually none on expats....

At this time

But eventually it will also affect the expats that live off the govt tit

I am curious.  Except to the level that I am not on US soil to suffer any attack there, why wouldn't I, as a n expat, have the same impact as someone living in the US?  I got recalled into the Marines to go to Iraq while I was here.  I have two homes in the US, so I pay taxes there.  I pay income tax on money earned which is not taxed here.  I vote there.  And so on.  

I am not attacking in this post.  I am just not sure of the logic.