BF2S Forums What do you think of Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld?

Hellfire(Fish) wrote:

It's one thing to check out a guy who is ON A TERRORIST WATCH LIST, and wants to learn to fly a plane, not land it.
It's a completely different one to perform warrantless searches using secret courts with no real overwatch. (not to mention circumventing our constitution.)

And by the way, this is quoted from that forum topic I was mentioning earlier:

CameronPoe wrote:

The UN did not 'establish' Israel. Jewish immigrants 'established' Israel through violence and through the driving of hundreds of thousands of people from their homes and land. After they had stabilised the area, countries then began to start recognising them as a state. The UN plan of which you probably speak was never implemented.

And actually, on 9/11 we were attacked by an AMERICAN HATING RADICAL TERRORIST GROUP.
Not alot we can do about that but try to look out for attacks like it.
It's completely another thing to try and keep OTHER terrorist groups and the like from beginning to hate us too for interfering in their country/etc.

And also, I was not suggesting the U.S. established Israel, I was stating that we didn't even sanction the damn country for their actions. We just congratulated them and recognized them as a state.

It is one thing to play by the rules when all involved is doing so. It is quite another to play by the rules, and expect to win, when everyone else is playing dirty. Did it ever occur to any of you that it will be impossible to win this war and protect our citizens with BOTH hands tied behind our backs, BY OUR OWN CITIZENS?

Then Cameronpoe needs to fight it out with Wikipedia because they say differently, and since I wasn't there, all I have to go on is internet sources.

Ummm I defy you to show me an Islamic terrorist group that didn't HATE US prioir to 911!!

what is it you want to sanction Israel for, DEFENDING THEMSELVES???

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Then Cameronpoe needs to fight it out with Wikipedia because they say differently, and since I wasn't there, all I have to go on is internet sources.

LOL. If you can find for me anywhere on the internet that the UN actually established the state of Israel then I'll eat my hat.

PS Israel should be sanctioned for war crimes and human rights violations, seen as you asked...

On November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the establishment of a Jewish State in Israel, requiring the inhabitants of Israel to take such steps as were necessary on their part for the implementation of that resolution. This recognition by the United Nations of the right of the Jewish people to establish their State is irrevocable.


"On the issues of sovereignty and self-determination:

This right is the natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their own sovereign State.
Thus members and representatives of the Jews of Palestine and of the Zionist movement upon the end of the British Mandate, by virtue of "natural and historic right" and based on the United Nations resolution ... Hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in the land of Israel to be known as the State of Israel."

taken from... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratio … _of_Israel
am I mis-understanding something here Cameronpoe??

Last edited by lowing (2006-08-20 13:59:59)

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

LOL. If you can find for me anywhere on the internet that the UN actually established the state of Israel then I'll eat my hat.

PS Israel should be sanctioned for war crimes and human rights violations, seen as you asked...

On November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the establishment of a Jewish State in Israel, requiring the inhabitants of Israel to take such steps as were necessary on their part for the implementation of that resolution. This recognition by the United Nations of the right of the Jewish people to establish their State is irrevocable.


"On the issues of sovereignty and self-determination:

This right is the natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their own sovereign State.
Thus members and representatives of the Jews of Palestine and of the Zionist movement upon the end of the British Mandate, by virtue of "natural and historic right" and based on the United Nations resolution ... Hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in the land of Israel to be known as the State of Israel."

taken from... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratio … _of_Israel
am I mis-understanding something here Cameronpoe??

You are mis-understanding things indeed. Read the 'Fact-finding Israel/Palestine' thread for enlightenment.

I skimmed it, then I re-read wikipedia here, this seems pretty straight forward as to the UN's intentions. Tell me how I am mis-interpreting it Cameronpoe.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

I skimmed it, then I re-read wikipedia here, this seems pretty straight forward as to the UN's intentions. Tell me how I am mis-interpreting it Cameronpoe.

By the very language you used in your sentence you have just stated how you have misinterpreted it: "UN's intentions". Those intentions came to nothing. The UN didn't actually establish Israel at all. Israel established its own state outside of any UN plan. You need only look at the 1948 borders to see that.

On November 29, the UN General Assembly voted 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions, in favor of the Partition Plan, while making some adjustments to the boundaries between the two states proposed by it. The division was to take effect on the date of British withdrawal. Both the United States and Soviet Union agreed on the resolution. In addition, pressure was exerted on some small countries by Zionist sympathizers in the United States.[1]


██ AbsentThe 33 countries that voted in favor of the partition, as set by UN resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, South Africa, Ukraine, United States, USSR, Uruguay, Venezuela.

The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

The ten countries that abstained: Argentina, Chile, Republic of China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.

One state was absent: Thailand.

FOLLOWINg THE ADOPTION OF THE PLAN, Arab countries proposed to query the International Court of Justice on the competence of the General Assembly to partition a country against the wishes of the majority of its inhabitants (it would place 36% of the Arabs inside the Jewish state). This was narrowly defeated. [2]

taken from the same source.....Sorry Cameronpoe, I really am not following you, It sounds like it was voted on and passed to me.

Last edited by lowing (2006-08-20 16:14:10)

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

By the very language you used in your sentence you have just stated how you have misinterpreted it: "UN's intentions". Those intentions came to nothing. The UN didn't actually establish Israel at all. Israel established its own state outside of any UN plan. You need only look at the 1948 borders to see that.

On November 29, the UN General Assembly voted 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions, in favor of the Partition Plan, while making some adjustments to the boundaries between the two states proposed by it. The division was to take effect on the date of British withdrawal. Both the United States and Soviet Union agreed on the resolution. In addition, pressure was exerted on some small countries by Zionist sympathizers in the United States.[1]


██ AbsentThe 33 countries that voted in favor of the partition, as set by UN resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, South Africa, Ukraine, United States, USSR, Uruguay, Venezuela.

The 13 countries that voted against UN Resolution 181: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

The ten countries that abstained: Argentina, Chile, Republic of China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.

One state was absent: Thailand.

FOLLOWINg THE ADOPTION OF THE PLAN, Arab countries proposed to query the International Court of Justice on the competence of the General Assembly to partition a country against the wishes of the majority of its inhabitants (it would place 36% of the Arabs inside the Jewish state). This was narrowly defeated. [2]

taken from the same source.....Sorry Cameronpoe, I really am not following you, It sounds like it was voted on and passed to me.

You aren't following me. The motions, etc. were passed but the plan wasn't implemented. If that were the case then UN forces would have ensured a formal handover of powers and proper partitioning of the country. What happened was that the Brits left the region in May 1948 (in light of increasing jewish terror attacks against them), leaving the region to its own devices. What ensued was the driving out of Palestine of hundreds of thousands of arabs by the jewish terror organisations Haganah (later the IDF), Irgun and Lehi. That's why Palestine doesn't look like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … estine.png

and instead looks like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … s-map2.gif

If you're gonna tell me Jerusalem is under UN admin right now then I'm afraid we'll have to part ways on this topic!

The way I read it is, the UN passed the resolution setting up the partition, the US and other  UN nations recognized Israel as a state, and about 15 seconds later the Arabs invaded Israel on May 15, 1948. The beginnings of the modern day Arab Israeli crisis.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

You aren't following me. The motions, etc. were passed but the plan wasn't implemented. If that were the case then UN forces would have ensured a formal handover of powers and proper partitioning of the country. What happened was that the Brits left the region in May 1948 (in light of increasing jewish terror attacks against them), leaving the region to its own devices. What ensued was the driving out of Palestine of hundreds of thousands of arabs by the jewish terror organisations Haganah (later the IDF), Irgun and Lehi. That's why Palestine doesn't look like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c … estine.png

and instead looks like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … s-map2.gif

If you're gonna tell me Jerusalem is under UN admin right now then I'm afraid we'll have to part ways on this topic!

The way I read it is, the UN passed the resolution setting up the partition, the US and other  UN nations recognized Israel as a state, and about 15 seconds later the Arabs invaded Israel on May 15, 1948. The beginnings of the modern day Arab Israeli crisis.

Well I have to disagree with you there. Nobody recognised Israel until it looked certain that they had stabilised a region, through warfare, that could be declared a state. There was no immediate recognition of Israel as a country.

Then explain this, what am I missing here??

"Recognition Of Israel
11 minutes after the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel at 6 o'clock pm (Washington D.C. time) on 14th May 1948, the USA formally recognized the State of Israel, followed by Guatemala, Nicaragua & Uruguay. The Soviet Union recognized the State of Israel on 17th May 1948, followed by Poland , Czechoslovakia (formally), Yugoslavia (formally) & South Africa ."

same source

Last edited by lowing (2006-08-21 03:26:12)

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Well I have to disagree with you there. Nobody recognized Israel until it looked certain that they had stabilised a region, through warfare, that could be declared a state. There was no immediate recognition of Israel as a country.

Then explain this, what am I missing here??

"Recognition Of Israel
11 minutes after the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel at 6 o'clock pm (Washington D.C. time) on 14th May 1948, the USA formally recognized the State of Israel, followed by Guatemala, Nicaragua & Uruguay. The Soviet Union recognized the State of Israel on 17th May 1948, followed by Poland , Czechoslovakia (formally), Yugoslavia (formally) & South Africa ."

same source

Yes Israeli militants declared an independent state. Not the UN. Thereafter countries chose whether or not they would recognize it as a nation. Many Arab countries did not recognize it and still don't to this day.

But the UN drew up the resolution 181, the UN members voted on its approval, declaration of independence was voted on and approved and Israel is a nation followed soon after by recognition as such, followed soon after by war initiated by the opposing Arab nations.

Not being a smart ass here, but are you sure you are not dissecting my words a little too much?

lowing wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

Interesting! So you're saying that Bush subconsciously wants to harm our country.

If not, what else could you possibly mean by Freudian slip? Or did you use the term even without fully understanding it?

In reviewing his 6 yrs. I'd have to say yes.  You may disagree, however his track record speaks for itself.  Do you remember no child left behind and how much he was going to do for education.  Ask any teacher if they are further ahead than before his initiation of this project that has been left behind.  I believe his presence as a leader of the USA has hurt the American people and our reputation abroad.  Which if you haven't looked lately is suffering.  Like it or not we need the rest of the world.  Times have changed from the United States being the providers to the world to the United States being the consumers of the world.  The only way to turn this back around is through education.  Something this administration has neglected.

Is there any chance at all that the decline of education is directly proportional to the decline of parental responsibility toward raising their kids?? Any chance at all that is directly linked to the rapid decline of the moral fiber of our citizens and not necessary Bush's fault that our citizens are raising stupid kids.

We have literally taken the responsibility for shitty behavior of our youth away from the parents and gave them a convenient "medical" reason for it. We now say they are A.D.D. or some other bullshit syndrome. Then we drug our kids to control them...MIND ALTERING DRUGS, so our parents don't have to be bothered with discipline.

We now live in a country where a kid can hire a lawyer and sue their parents. We now live in a country where you can be arrested for child abuse for disciplining your kid in public.

I hate to break it to you all, but this decline was well under way long before Bush. So unless you are Sergeriver or Shipbuilder, you can't blame Bush.

I would agree with your statement.  However BushII initiated the "No child left behind"  If you'll recall BushI was the war on drugs.  Both have failed. My point was the president made a point to put money toward education.  He's failed, miserably.  One area where the money is needed is to fund after school programs.  The pressures of two working parents takes it's toll.  These kids need an active learning environment after school, rather than going home to sit in front of an idiot box.  There is money needed for the inner city schools.  Jeez, I could go on and on, but the gist is this, if a President is going to fund a program, he should do so.  I'm wondering what we could do with a month's worth of funding that we are currently spending in Iraq.

GATOR591957 wrote:

lowing wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

In reviewing his 6 yrs. I'd have to say yes.  You may disagree, however his track record speaks for itself.  Do you remember no child left behind and how much he was going to do for education.  Ask any teacher if they are further ahead than before his initiation of this project that has been left behind.  I believe his presence as a leader of the USA has hurt the American people and our reputation abroad.  Which if you haven't looked lately is suffering.  Like it or not we need the rest of the world.  Times have changed from the United States being the providers to the world to the United States being the consumers of the world.  The only way to turn this back around is through education.  Something this administration has neglected.

Is there any chance at all that the decline of education is directly proportional to the decline of parental responsibility toward raising their kids?? Any chance at all that is directly linked to the rapid decline of the moral fiber of our citizens and not necessary Bush's fault that our citizens are raising stupid kids.

We have literally taken the responsibility for shitty behavior of our youth away from the parents and gave them a convenient "medical" reason for it. We now say they are A.D.D. or some other bullshit syndrome. Then we drug our kids to control them...MIND ALTERING DRUGS, so our parents don't have to be bothered with discipline.

We now live in a country where a kid can hire a lawyer and sue their parents. We now live in a country where you can be arrested for child abuse for disciplining your kid in public.

I hate to break it to you all, but this decline was well under way long before Bush. So unless you are Sergeriver or Shipbuilder, you can't blame Bush.

I would agree with your statement.  However BushII initiated the "No child left behind"  If you'll recall BushI was the war on drugs.  Both have failed. My point was the president made a point to put money toward education.  He's failed, miserably.  One area where the money is needed is to fund after school programs.  The pressures of two working parents takes it's toll.  These kids need an active learning environment after school, rather than going home to sit in front of an idiot box.  There is money needed for the inner city schools.  Jeez, I could go on and on, but the gist is this, if a President is going to fund a program, he should do so.  I'm wondering what we could do with a month's worth of funding that we are currently spending in Iraq.

This would suggest that education does get its share of tax dollars.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/c … 052203.asp

lowing wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Is there any chance at all that the decline of education is directly proportional to the decline of parental responsibility toward raising their kids?? Any chance at all that is directly linked to the rapid decline of the moral fiber of our citizens and not necessary Bush's fault that our citizens are raising stupid kids.

We have literally taken the responsibility for shitty behavior of our youth away from the parents and gave them a convenient "medical" reason for it. We now say they are A.D.D. or some other bullshit syndrome. Then we drug our kids to control them...MIND ALTERING DRUGS, so our parents don't have to be bothered with discipline.

We now live in a country where a kid can hire a lawyer and sue their parents. We now live in a country where you can be arrested for child abuse for disciplining your kid in public.

I hate to break it to you all, but this decline was well under way long before Bush. So unless you are Sergeriver or Shipbuilder, you can't blame Bush.

I would agree with your statement.  However BushII initiated the "No child left behind"  If you'll recall BushI was the war on drugs.  Both have failed. My point was the president made a point to put money toward education.  He's failed, miserably.  One area where the money is needed is to fund after school programs.  The pressures of two working parents takes it's toll.  These kids need an active learning environment after school, rather than going home to sit in front of an idiot box.  There is money needed for the inner city schools.  Jeez, I could go on and on, but the gist is this, if a President is going to fund a program, he should do so.  I'm wondering what we could do with a month's worth of funding that we are currently spending in Iraq.

This would suggest that education does get its share of tax dollars.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/c … 052203.asp

Actually, in the public schools here in Alabama, We spend something like 1.4k per child.
and our schools are DEFINATELY under-funded.

lowing wrote:

OK I bow to the literal nature of your posts, however, the spirit of mine was the UN voted on and approved the state of Israel. The UN recognized Israel. Israel agreed to the resolution and the only reason that it was not implemented was because the of the Arab nations. They did not and DO NOT want Israel to exist. Which is why the Arab nations have been FUCKING with Israel since its birth. That land is as much a part of the Jews as it is the Muslims, Israel has every right to exist.

That land may be historically part of the jews and muslims, BUT, that's just like saying if the indians started using terrorist attacks against us, and pushed thousands of our citizens off of land they've owned for decades,
It's ok, because it's just as much theirs as it is ours.

Last edited by Hellfire(Fish) (2006-08-22 06:51:16)

Hellfire(Fish) wrote:

lowing wrote:

GATOR591957 wrote:

I would agree with your statement.  However BushII initiated the "No child left behind"  If you'll recall BushI was the war on drugs.  Both have failed. My point was the president made a point to put money toward education.  He's failed, miserably.  One area where the money is needed is to fund after school programs.  The pressures of two working parents takes it's toll.  These kids need an active learning environment after school, rather than going home to sit in front of an idiot box.  There is money needed for the inner city schools.  Jeez, I could go on and on, but the gist is this, if a President is going to fund a program, he should do so.  I'm wondering what we could do with a month's worth of funding that we are currently spending in Iraq.

This would suggest that education does get its share of tax dollars.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/c … 052203.asp

Actually, in the public schools here in Alabama, We spend something like 1.4k per child.
and our schools are DEFINATELY under-funded.

lowing wrote:

OK I bow to the literal nature of your posts, however, the spirit of mine was the UN voted on and approved the state of Israel. The UN recognized Israel. Israel agreed to the resolution and the only reason that it was not implemented was because the of the Arab nations. They did not and DO NOT want Israel to exist. Which is why the Arab nations have been FUCKING with Israel since its birth. That land is as much a part of the Jews as it is the Muslims, Israel has every right to exist.

That land may be historically part of the jews and muslims, BUT, that's just like saying if the indians started using terrorist attacks against us, and pushed thousands of our citizens off of land they've owned for decades,
It's ok, because it's just as much theirs as it is ours.

I have always been honest about not denying the hypocrisy of US history. However, I refuse to endorse the destruction of an entire nation and the deaths of all who support Israel.

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

Hellfire(Fish) wrote:

lowing wrote:

This would suggest that education does get its share of tax dollars.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/c … 052203.asp

Actually, in the public schools here in Alabama, We spend something like 1.4k per child.
and our schools are DEFINATELY under-funded.


That land may be historically part of the jews and muslims, BUT, that's just like saying if the indians started using terrorist attacks against us, and pushed thousands of our citizens off of land they've owned for decades,
It's ok, because it's just as much theirs as it is ours.

I have always been honest about not denying the hypocrisy of US history. However, I refuse to endorse the destruction of an entire nation and the deaths of all who support Israel.

That's funny, because the government you endorse has destroyed so many peoples in this world.

I can not control the events of our country's history. I can say, as a nation we have grown and are a far more humane and charitable nation that ANY of the ME nations you defend so vigorously. If you don't think so, that one way ticket to paradise is still on the table for you.

FesterTheMolester wrote:

can i say EVIL???

Who?? The Isamic radicals??? Yup you can say that, and I will agree