Saving western civilisation for us all

21

of course he is, he is by far more often right than he is wrong[/QUOTE]

Hear, hear! :smiley:

[quote=“farmerinthecity”]Generally I have a problem with these journalists who comment on society in general, the likes of Myers, Waters or that cunt O’Doherty.

Who are they and what gives them the right to cast judgement?

Myers was once on The Last Word lamenting the fact that he can’t see the ‘Dublin’ in O’Connell Street anymore. He went on to say that we will regret opening our borders during the boom times so much as Irishness is being eroded away.

What a retard. What about the generations of Irish that survived on that exact basis. Gobshite.[/QUOTE]

As has been pointed out, this is the purpose of newspaper columnists. Apart from factual news reporting, all papers contain opinion pieces which people know to be just that. Take them or leave them. and just because Myers doesn’t kow-tow to the populist agenda doesn’t make him wrong (or right for that matter, though I believe he often is right).

[quote=“giuseppe”]Illiterate peasants - what a cunt.

America saving the world - who supported Iraq against Iran? Who supported Afghanistan against the Russians? Whatever shower of cunts they put in if they do win will ‘need’ to be got rid of in 20 years anyway. Who arms the the horrible zionist cunts in Israel? America are the biggest threat to our culture as long as we are associated with them and they keep making enemies.[/QUOTE]

Was that the sound of a knee jerking? Check things out properly. The biggest material supporters of Iraq (and Saddam), by a very long way, were France and that bastion of non-involvement Germany, with Russia keen to exand its interests also. Small surprise that France and Germany were the two
main objectors to US policy in Iraq. Their opposition wasn’t based on principles, though they claimed it was, but on the threat to their lucrative commercial interests there.

Yes, the americans did support the Mujahadeen against the Russians. but what’s your point there? The Taliban are not the Mujahedeen.

Yes the US supports Israel (sometimes not sensibly) but the Arab side isn’t without a few quid either (Saudi Arabia isn’t exactly poor is it) and the Iranians (though not Arabs) put huge amounts of money and arms into the region through their support of Hamas and Hezbollah. When the UN partitioned Palestine in 1948 it was the Palestinians, supported by an invasion by 3 neighbouring Arab armies, that tried to eliminate the Jewish state before it was formed. The Israelis, with no help from the US at that stage, and dependent on equipment stolen from the British, defeated the Arabs and since then have repeatedly beaten them.

22

[quote=“Shadow”]Hear, hear! :smiley:

As has been pointed out, this is the purpose of newspaper columnists. Apart from factual news reporting, all papers contain opinion pieces which people know to be just that. Take them or leave them. and just because Myers doesn’t kow-tow to the populist agenda doesn’t make him wrong (or right for that matter, though I believe he often is right).

Was that the sound of a knee jerking? Check things out properly. The biggest material supporters of Iraq (and Saddam), by a very long way, were France and that bastion of non-involvement Germany, with Russia keen to exand its interests also. Small surprise that France and Germany were the two
main objectors to US policy in Iraq. Their opposition wasn’t based on principles, though they claimed it was, but on the threat to their lucrative commercial interests there.

Yes, the americans did support the Mujahadeen against the Russians. but what’s your point there? The Taliban are not the Mujahedeen.

Yes the US supports Israel (sometimes not sensibly) but the Arab side isn’t without a few quid either (Saudi Arabia isn’t exactly poor is it) and the Iranians (though not Arabs) put huge amounts of money and arms into the region through their support of Hamas and Hezbollah. When the UN partitioned Palestine in 1948 it was the Palestinians, supported by an invasion by 3 neighbouring Arab armies, that tried to eliminate the Jewish state before it was formed. The Israelis, with no help from the US at that stage, and dependent on equipment stolen from the British, defeated the Arabs and since then have repeatedly beaten them.[/QUOTE]

Leading figures in the Taliban came to prominence with the mujahideen and sezied control in the aftermath of the Russian war. Theyre not exactly completely separate. Would you not think that their influence came from feats during the war?

Palestinians were dead right to try and stop the jewish state from coming into existence. If the UN decided to from a jewish state in Ireland would you accept it or just set back and give it a chance?

Do you think if America wasn’t involved in the middle east there’d be a threat to our civilisation?

23

Just when I thought the Taliban couldn’t possibly go any higher in my estimation. Legends. :smiley: :smiley: :thumbsup:

24

:thumbsup:

25

[quote=“giuseppe”]Leading figures in the Taliban came to prominence with the mujahideen and sezied control in the aftermath of the Russian war. Theyre not exactly completely separate. Would you not think that their influence came from feats during the war?

Palestinians were dead right to try and stop the jewish state from coming into existence. If the UN decided to from a jewish state in Ireland would you accept it or just set back and give it a chance?

Do you think if America wasn’t involved in the middle east there’d be a threat to our civilisation?[/QUOTE]

That is correct, at least to some extent. But America’s real ally was Sheikh Masood, a well educated and (comparativley) liberal Afgani. But he was assasinated by the Taliban. He could have created a stable country.

The Palestinians seem quite happy with the notion of a 2 state solution now. They didn’t want it then, they gambled and lost, but now they want to go back.

Palestinians never had a state, ever. They’re not even a real ethnic or cultural group. Its just a name for the Arabs that live in the area known as Palestine.

As to the analogy (“If the UN decided to from a jewish state in Ireland would you accept it or just set back and give it a chance”), the UN created lots of states after the breakup of the pre WWI empires. We had partition here, and as the alternative would have been a civil war that would have made the civil war that we did have look like a garden party, it was the best solution at the time.

How did muslims come to be living in the holy land anyhow. Conquest, invasion and conversion of course. Peoples move, it happens. The UN tried to create homelands for two sets of peoples, that’s all there was to it.

26

[quote=“Shadow”]That is correct, at least to some extent. But America’s real ally was Sheikh Masood, a well educated and (comparativley) liberal Afgani. But he was assasinated by the Taliban. He could have created a stable country.

The Palestinians seem quite happy with the notion of a 2 state solution now. They didn’t want it then, they gambled and lost, but now they want to go back.

Palestinians never had a state, ever. They’re not even a real ethnic or cultural group. [B]Its just a name for the Arabs that live in the area known as Palestine.

[/B]As to the analogy (“If the UN decided to from a jewish state in Ireland would you accept it or just set back and give it a chance”), the UN created lots of states after the breakup of the pre WWI empires. We had partition here, and as the alternative would have been a civil war that would have made the civil war that we did have look like a garden party, it was the best solution at the time.

How did muslims come to be living in the holy land anyhow. Conquest, invasion and conversion of course. Peoples move, it happens. The UN tried to create homelands for two sets of peoples, that’s all there was to it.[/QUOTE]

Like the Irish being just the name for the Christians that live in Ireland…

27

[quote=“Shadow”]That is correct, at least to some extent. But America’s real ally was Sheikh Masood, a well educated and (comparativley) liberal Afgani. But he was assasinated by the Taliban. He could have created a stable country.

The Palestinians seem quite happy with the notion of a 2 state solution now. They didn’t want it then, they gambled and lost, but now they want to go back.

Palestinians never had a state, ever. They’re not even a real ethnic or cultural group. Its just a name for the Arabs that live in the area known as Palestine.

As to the analogy (“If the UN decided to from a jewish state in Ireland would you accept it or just set back and give it a chance”), the UN created lots of states after the breakup of the pre WWI empires. We had partition here, and as the alternative would have been a civil war that would have made the civil war that we did have look like a garden party, it was the best solution at the time.

How did muslims come to be living in the holy land anyhow. Conquest, invasion and conversion of course. Peoples move, it happens. The UN tried to create homelands for two sets of peoples, that’s all there was to it.[/QUOTE]

palestinians arent arabs:rolleyes:

28

Imagine that - it seems as though some of the people the Americans armed weren’t all good. Who’d have thought it?

The Palestinians seem quite happy with the notion of a 2 state solution now. They didn’t want it then, they gambled and lost, but now they want to go back.

They are willing to compromise. It’s a sign of how bad life has become and how desperate they are. Anything would be better than the current situation.

Palestinians never had a state, ever. They’re not even a real ethnic or cultural group. Its just a name for the Arabs that live in the area known as Palestine.

How do you define a real ethnic or cultural group?

As to the analogy (“If the UN decided to from a jewish state in Ireland would you accept it or just set back and give it a chance”), the UN created lots of states after the breakup of the pre WWI empires. We had partition here, and as the alternative would have been a civil war that would have made the civil war that we did have look like a garden party, it was the best solution at the time.

Creating a jewish state in Palestine, a predminantly muslim area, because there was a problem in Germany was not the answer.

How did muslims come to be living in the holy land anyhow. Conquest, invasion and conversion of course. Peoples move, it happens. The UN tried to create homelands for two sets of peoples, that’s all there was to it.

Many of the muslims are ethnically the same as the Jews. Islam split from Judaism just like Christianity split from Judaism earlier and Protestants split from Catholics.

As for “that’s all there is to it” - so the outcome doesn’t matter? All that matters is what the UN tried to do. It doesn’t matter how it turned out. Is that what you’re saying? I disagree.

29

of course he is, he is by far more often right than he is wrong[/quote]

:guns: :guns: :guns: :clap::barcasmile:

30

Erm … yes I suppose, but what’s your point? In fact, it makes the point rather well that associating an ethnic tag with a geographical entity can cause problems. What is an “Irish” person? Someone who lives here? Who speaks Irish? Who’s last non-local ancestor was x generations back?

What are they?

Indeed. It’s a pity that the spirit oc compromise hadn’t kicked in earlier, perhaps they’d be in a better position now.

I’m well aware that Israeli policy is terribly flawed. The Settlements are totally unjust and there’ll always be trouble until they come to terms with a divided Jerusalem or even an international mandate in the city, but the notion that the Palestinian position is inherently saintly and always right is a nonsense.

How do you think it should be defined?

[quote=“giuseppe”]Creating a jewish state in Palestine, a predminantly muslim area, because there was a problem in Germany was not the answer.

Many of the muslims are ethnically the same as the Jews. Islam split from Judaism just like Christianity split from Judaism earlier and Protestants split from Catholics. [/quote]

Yes, they are ethnically closely related, but that makes the Arab attitude to Israel just as silly as the Israeli attitude to the Palestinians.

However if you dig a little deeper into the history of the Islamic expansion you will see that, although certainly more tolerant of other faiths than many of the Crusaders for example, there was a targeted policy of conversion based on socio-economic and legal marginalisation of non-muslims. This was based on the Qur’an.

No, I don’t think it doesn’t matter. It hasn’t worked and it does need to be resolved. But just as Israel are wrong in many things, so to are the Arabs. For a start, they have to recognise Israel. They (and you) might not like it but it’s a fact and just as the Arabs won’t give up neither will the Israelis. Remember, the Jordanians kicked the Palestinians out of Jordan because of the trouble they were causing there and the Lebanese initially welcomed the Israeli’s in because they were sick of the harm the PLO were causing to Lebanon.

31

:rolleyes::rolleyes::clap::clap::clap:

To Kevin Myers

The greatest WUM in the glorius history of Wummery

We should all take note