Matt, there's a separate forum for your rants against me. Here:
http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/foru...splay.php?f=37

Please use it, but let us discuss topics in a serious way. Thank you.

Oh Matt, pleaeaeaeaeaease

To play the Angel here, especially when it comes to arms dealing, is simply ... ludicrous.

You're having the same kind of one-sided, inconsiderate and rude statement as EuroSocialist. If you do not like his way of debating, please do not use it yourself.

At the moment, there are civilans killed, cities destroyed, complete lives, the efforts of the entire last years going up in smoke. And no way to see that Israel is any safer.

So, now, concretely, what's your Solution ?

__________________
______________________Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag.”___________________Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Matt..... do you believe anybody would care much if one has Israel as a customer for military equippment? Israel is a tiny country and the market is accordingly small, too small to give economic considerations like yours any importance.

Not only in the 70's, even today some european countries supply Israel with military equippment (including Switzerland).
The criticism of Europe on Israel today is certainly not due to changed economic circumstances, it's simply an altered perception of Israel. 30 years ago everyone has considered Israel to be the small poor victim,fighting for it's survival, surrounded by a more powerful, hostile neighborhood. Today Israel is considered to be more the agressor, the goliath fighting with high tech weapons against many davids armed with hayforks (I know I'm exxagerating), that's where the hard stance from europe towards Israel comes today.
It has nothing to do with Israel buying a handful of US-fighters instead of a few Mirages.

Why? The more instability and chaos around Israel, the more stable and safe place Israel looks like. If economical and political stability sustains too long, the neighbours of Israel with the run of the time might become prosperous and strong independent states one day. That is danger. The strong independent states will not tolerate terrorist organizations on their territory and share their political decisions to some extremist marginals-provocateurs ruled from abroad. The absence of terrorists will force Israel to use diplomacy and economy in regional affairs instead of military threat. And without military ace in it's sleeve Israel will turn into very small mediocre secondary participant of globalisation process in M.East, being the last number in the list of favour of all regional society. The economic and political exile, boycotted absolutely legally and democratically on the all directions.
Now everything gonna be good. The shelling of foreign cities is best way to produce thousands of suitable enemies - very evil and terrible in TV reports, but really scattered and not able to hurt Israel seriously. If even this mess will not touch Syria, the Lebanon now produce itself enough young terrorist-revengers to give Israel at least 15-20 yers to speak about the terror from outside and legitimize it's profitable position of assaulted victim.

Hell, no. This shit in the region is going on for decades now and unless ALL sides really want peace, it will go on and on. If we send more UN troops, they will only be one more target.

... and so it will go on and on for more decades. There is no peace in view in our life time and the one of our children.

__________________
______________________Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag.”___________________Alexander Solzhenitsyn

What happens in Iraq has a great influence in what happens on this border.
Iran bitterly opposes a moderate Arab governence in Iraq, which is why they provide funds and training for insurgents.
If Iraq succeeds (looks somewhat favorable) in attaining and maintaining a moderate government this helps a great deal in someday having peace in the middle east.
WHich is why it is so sad that the UN has taken themselves out of the picture in Iraq along with France and Germany..whether you agree or disagree with the war, Iraq having a free government is without question good for all of us!
The relevance in my saying this?
UN soldiers on the Southern border of Lebanon is a very distant second in importance of having better chances to resolve Isreali conflicts by having a moderate Iraq.
If the UN wants to help (doubtfull) then send humanitarian and engineers to Iraq.

Comes down to oil does it not? If Europe has an interest in stability in the Mideast whence the oil comes, they will send troops. The Germans are reticent due to historical circumstances, but any idiot knows that today's German's troops are not SS troops rolling trhough Kiev in 1941.

__________________

Don't startle him, Joe - it's almost full!

Once again you are essentially full of shit. Belgium had nothing to do with Lebanons recent foray into democracy. Frankly that was because for once in his life Bush put his personal feeelings aside and did what was right when he joined with Chirac in sponsoring the resolution on Lebanon. Ultimately however had Syria not overplayed its hand in the assassination they would still be there and in control of the Lebanese government behind the scenes.

Euro later in this thread you chide Matt for not discussing anything intelligently. Well two points come ot mind. First one is why bother with you on the other end of the discussion? Second point is when you make a intelligent observation, and one frankly grounded on facts not fantasy, perhaps you will merit being added to the ranks of people deemed worthy of being engaged in intelligent conversation. Until then you are simply a characature of the stereotyypical Euo Socialist

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

IAM frankly why should they? They didn't create the problem. Now you want them to bail us out? If I were them I would tell you to go piss up a rope, basically.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

The UN frankly has been ineffective here and there is no reason to think that more UN troops would change the equation. The UN in its current guise is utterly ineffective in these types of situations. They can barely keep the peace when everyone agrees that it shouild be kept, they definately can't make peace.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

I am not sure a EU peace keeping force would be the best solution, but if it is decided that one will be set up, I believe Germany should participate.

In the historical context, German participation would actually be a way for German soldiers to prove they are nothing like the soldiers of the Third Reich.

I do not believe it would be a good idea to have Turkish participation in the peace keeping forces. Turkey was the colonial power for centuries up until the First World War. Turkey also has an alliance of sorts with the Israeli, based on the fact that both countries borders Syria. Turkish soldiers would probably not be considered neutral.

__________________
President Josiah Bartlet: Sweden has a 100% literacy rate. 100%! How do they do that?
Leo McGarry: Maybe they don't and they can't add.

I think in the current situation it would be crazy to send UN troops there. But that's not the fault of the UN. If all sides really wanted peace, then it could be a sensible way ... but that's not the case. What should these troops do? Fight Hesbollah? ... not even Israel seems to be capable to defeat them ... shoot down Israeli warplanes that attack Lebanon? ... ridiculous idea .... either way, it doesn't make sense.

I voted with no.

I whish we never had have participated in the Libanon conflict ...

Germany cannot be really neutral in that conflict because of the Holocaust (imagination what will happen, if a German soldier have to shot an Israeli soldier. The whole world would blame Germany if this happens. It would be horrible. So every German commander knows that and will be very carefully in relation to the Israeli Troops.

And now six Israeli F-16 fired a warning shot over a German ship, only because a German Helicopter missed to notify the Israelis abou his flight (in international waters, not behind the Israeli border... ) And the Germans do: Nothing! (http://www.heute.de/ZDFheute/inhalt/...992112,00.html i don`t found an english article sorry). Ok conceding, it was a spy boad full of modern technology ... But it shows the political charged situation for the Germans in this mission.

It`s a shame and a big blame to be there... and i think it would be the best, the German gouvernment will remove the Forces and sent them back home. But surely they don`t do that - actually they can`t because it`s like an contract.

So at all, most of the Germans don`t want their forces involved in the Libanon conflict:

http://www.n-tv.de/705340.html
(The translated Question: Do you consider the delegation of the German Federal Armed Forces into the Near East as correct? "Abgegebene Stimmen" = n = 7413 Edit: "Ja" = Yes "Nein" = No)

Althir

Germany cannot be really neutral in that conflict because of the Holocaust (imagination what will happen, if a German soldier have to shot an Israeli soldier. The whole world would blame Germany if this happens. It would be horrible. So every German commander knows that and will be very carefully in relation to the Israeli Troops.




The German´s mandate is not to keep the conflict parties apart or to defend Israel but to keep smuggle of arms for Hisbullah across the Mediterranean from happening, in lebanese waters. Their mandate is a robuste one and that rules neutrality out. Although most experts agree that it is unlikely the Germans will ever have to fire a shot and ever end up with a single ottoman rifle since the arms smuggle is mostly taking place via Syria and on the land.
The majority of Lebanese soldiers guarding the border are shiites , badly paid and too a significant amount Hisbullah sympathizers. Enough said ?
So my main argument against the action would be that it most likely doens´t accomplish anything only costs a lot of money and is making nobody safer...