Pages: 1 2
Since they first performed in the Eurovision Song Contest ...Cybargs wrote:
And since when is Israel a European country?
If we continue to interfeer they will always be nothing more than a shithole, it's about time Africa starts to evolve on their own ... of course we can help them but not without them asking for help ...Cybargs wrote:
bla bla Africa is a shithole bla bla
The UN were the first in Bosnia. The first NATO involvement was the enforcement of the no-fly zone mandated by the UN security council. Pilots from a number of NATO countries were involved in this from day one. The US did not get in first. The UN were there, after a UN resolution NATO went in.Cybargs wrote:
Why didn't the Euro part of NATO go in before hand? NATO only got fully involved when the US started dropping bombs. Yugoslavia should be dealt without US involvement, the Euro's should've done something first, hell it was in your own backyard. If some shit goes down in Mexico or Central America, you can bet your ass the US is gonna go in..Sup wrote:
Eufor is in Sudan no? Israel is a European country and if such a country would want to wipe out another then I'm pretty sure EU wouldn't just watch it happen.Cybargs wrote:
NATO only started doing shit after the US went in. What about Sudan? What about Africa as a whole. Euro military my ass.
And "NATO only started doing shit after the US went in."? US is IN NATO, part of it. The order to attack Yugoslavia was given by a European official.
UNAMIS is in Sudan, which is UN led, EU isn't doing much, hell the US much either.
And since when is Israel a European country?
Edit:
About AU... If most African nations cannot sustain themselves economically, how do you expect them to send in a proper equipped military? AU Army has shit for all equipment and training. Africa as a whole is a shithole.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-06-15 02:39:55)
Of course they were. They're part of NATO. A BIG part.Kmarion wrote:
The US was there under the UN resolution as well.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-06-15 03:04:49)
The way you worded your last few sentences made it sound otherwise.Bertster7 wrote:
Of course they were. They're part of NATO. A BIG part.Kmarion wrote:
The US was there under the UN resolution as well.
They were also involved in the humanitarian effort preceeding NATO involvement, along with 20 other countries.
I'm not saying the US weren't involved, or even that they weren't heavily involved, but they didn't act unilaterally. They acted as part of a team under UN mandate. Textbook stuff, the way it's supposed to work.
I don't see there as being a distinction. I said NATO, the US is part of NATO. Why split hairs?Kmarion wrote:
The way you worded your last few sentences made it sound otherwise.Bertster7 wrote:
Of course they were. They're part of NATO. A BIG part.Kmarion wrote:
The US was there under the UN resolution as well.
They were also involved in the humanitarian effort preceeding NATO involvement, along with 20 other countries.
I'm not saying the US weren't involved, or even that they weren't heavily involved, but they didn't act unilaterally. They acted as part of a team under UN mandate. Textbook stuff, the way it's supposed to work.
That's why there was the sentence about the US not going in first, just to be clear.Cybargs wrote:
NATO only started doing shit after the US went in. What about Sudan? What about Africa as a whole. Euro military my ass.
His 'concession' is way short of the mark. He needs to be given the same treatment as Hamas: he needs to be frozen out. If you ain't serious about peace and justice then you should be marginalised and sidelined.Macbeth wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526222,00.htmlIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu endorsed an independent Palestinian state beside Israel for the first time on Sunday, dramatically reversing himself in the face of U.S. pressure but attaching conditions the Palestinians swiftly rejected.
A week after President Barack Obama's address to the Muslim world, Netanyahu said the Palestinian state would have to be unarmed and recognize Israel as the Jewish state — a condition amounting to Palestinian refugees giving up the goal of returning to Israel.
Hell froze over. Too bad it'll still never happen or work.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-06-15 05:38:55)
I dunno about that. Genocide is one thing but to completely wipe out a race/group of people is pretty impossible. Besides nukes or no nukes, European intervention or no European intervention, I doubt all the Muslim countries in the world (not just the usual suspects of Egypt/Syria/Jordan) would just idly stand by should such a scenrio have occurred. You would've probably ended up pulling in countries like Pakistan and even the more Eastern Asian Muslim countries like Bangladesh/Malaysia/Indonesia - It would probably be one of the very few legitimate reasons for the Muslims around the world to go on an actual "Jihad"ATG wrote:
ffs, if the Jews wanted to wipe out the Stinians they WOULD ALL BE DEAD 20 YEARS AGO!
Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-06-15 05:53:20)
Protip:ATG wrote:
ffs, if the Jews wanted to wipe out the Stinians they WOULD ALL BE DEAD 20 YEARS AGO!
These terms are not serious, and any "concessions" given from this proposal won't be, either. If you're serious about peace and coexistence, you don't come to the table suggesting submission and subordination, just like if you're serious about buying a brand new car, you don't offer the salesman $1 and work from there.Kmarion wrote:
You never show your full hand when you enter into negotiations. I would anticipate some concessions.rammunition wrote:
The terms were
1- The Palestinian state would not be allowed a military
2- they wouldn't have control over their own air space, and Israel can feel free to fly over it with whatever they wish.
3- No right of return for Palestinian refugees
4- If Palestine signed any treaties with countries Israel deemed as their enemies, this would be considered an act of war
no mention was made of whether or not Israel would continue to divert the natural resources from Palestine into Israel, I am guessing they probably would. Also, according to the last 'offer' of a state, Israel would not allow Palestine control of their own trade borders, I am assuming that will not change either.
Also, lets not lie, Netanyahu doesn't and never has wanted a two state solution, hence this really rubbish 'offer' that anyone would be mad to accept. It was designed for failure. Lucky for us, the world isn't stupid, and they will see this for what it is. Only the ignorant and biased will consider this a legitimate 'offer'.
Ask yourself this, had this been the offer for Israel to start a state, would they have accepted it? I think not!
thats it from me now. im off to college in 10 minutes
Which UN operation are you talking about specifically?Bertster7 wrote:
I don't see there as being a distinction. I said NATO, the US is part of NATO. Why split hairs?Kmarion wrote:
The way you worded your last few sentences made it sound otherwise.Bertster7 wrote:
Of course they were. They're part of NATO. A BIG part.
They were also involved in the humanitarian effort preceeding NATO involvement, along with 20 other countries.
I'm not saying the US weren't involved, or even that they weren't heavily involved, but they didn't act unilaterally. They acted as part of a team under UN mandate. Textbook stuff, the way it's supposed to work.That's why there was the sentence about the US not going in first, just to be clear.Cybargs wrote:
NATO only started doing shit after the US went in. What about Sudan? What about Africa as a whole. Euro military my ass.
Last edited by Braddock (2009-06-15 15:34:19)
Pages: 1 2
