The beginning of the jihad in Europe?

UN security council resolutions aginst Israel242,338,446,478 - all ignored.Israel even complied with 425 and 426 and then reinvaded 4 years later!Resolutions with regard to Iraq660,678,687,1284,1441 - all acted upon, or being acted upon at this moment. And other actions not endorsed by the UN.UN security council is 15 members(5 permanent) - how many are muslim?Week after week Israel ignores international calls to stop building the wall for the sake of a possible long term peace, time after time Israel has been asked to stop retaliating to terrorist attacks for the sake of a long term settlement. Israel has done little to promote stability in the middle east (and I accept that the other countries surrounding Israel have done little either - Syria, Egypt, Iran and even Saudi Arabia), but the message is loud and clear it is either Israel's way or no way.As for Israel falling foul of UN resolution-making, it is not so much the one-off resolutions, but the consistent falling foul and ignoring of resolutions.(China not-withstanding - but that is surely another topic)BTW propaganda and what it is! The UN is a bunch of well-meaning amateurs in the peace-promoting business that is all. To suggest a bias in the same post as suggesting that Palestinians are nihilist and suicidal is short sighted and a little, shall we say, biased.

seriously - is this what you mean - "If Israel truly wants to end its problem with the Palestinians, it must adopt the opposite approach: convince Palestinians not of its niceness but its toughness. This means not replanting Arab olive trees but punishing violence so hard that its enemies will eventually feel so deep a sense of futility that they will despair of further conflict."and again - "A historical analogy comes to mind: when World War I ended, German armies remained intact and their capital city unoccupied. Not convinced they had really lost the war, Germans harbored a deep discontent that led to the rise of Hitler. In contrast, Germans emerged from World War II utterly defeated and without any illusions to confuse them. This time, understanding the need for a fresh start, they turned to Konrad Adenauer and built a peaceful, successful country."The Palestinian Authority is hardly Germany, but the analogy does hold: Palestinians will not give up on their aggressive ambitions vis--vis Israel until fully convinced that these cannot succeed. Only then can they build a polity and an economy commensurate with their dignity and talent. Ironically, then, Palestinians need almost as much to be defeated by Israel as Israel needs to defeat them."He finishes with - "In brief, far from thinking the Palestinians a miserable people, I call attention to their dignity and talent, then propose how to liberate them from their demons so they can build a civil society and decent lives."So to conclude - to liberate the Palestinians (for their own sake presumably) is to defeat them so utterly and completely that all further resistance is pointless. (any similarity to this and the Borg in Star Trek is completely futile).Thank you Steve for providing me with the link.

Again: the vilification of Israel, born of cynical self-interest, is to the UN's and the world's eternal shame. (BTW, have you noted that as koffi Anna desperately tried to rebuild the demolished credibility of the UN, he has begun ot reverse some its anti-Semitism?)

You're welcome. One day you'll even understand his comments, like many well-regarded moderate, democratically muslims do.

Steve I was being sarcastic - the quotes were all from his own website. Anybody whose viewpoint is supported by statements calling for complete and utter defeat should be ashamed. [Daniel Pipes' statement about Germany is also wrong, it was humiliation in the Versailles agreement after WWI that contributed to the rise of Nazism and WWII, not the absence of defeat. Only the Nazis potrayed it as such.]The day that any moderate anybody regards his comments well is the day that I hang my head in shame for humanity. Well researched is ok, but well-researched hatred is still hatred.

Pipes is saying that the palestinians will keep fighting a terrorist and annihilist war until they surrender hope of defeating Israel. he argues, convincingly, I believe, that germany and japan were, as they needed to be, utterly defeated and exhausted, in order to accept their reality. Out of that they became democracies. the palestinians, he reasons, need to undergo the same experience, in order to accept a land for peace deal. There is nothing angry, mean-spirited or vindictive in his reasoning, whether one agrees with him or not. Personally, i think when the western world regains its moral compass, i.e., the EU quits tacitly supporting the palestinian terror campaign for reasons of immediate cynical self-interest (like having geopolitical influence, big business deals with Arab oil producers, and mollifying their Muslim voters, of whom they're afraid), then that will be a vital first step. If Arab nations truly democratize, that will be the final step to induce the palestinians to finally surrender hope. That is, without international support to destroy Israel, they'll give up. Which means Israel won't have to defeat them as thoroughly as the Allies beat Germany and japan - as if the world would ever allow Israel to do that anyhow.

I am, as well as others on this forum, are sick to the back teeth of you portraying anti-semitism as being anti-Jewish or anti-Israel. Arabs are semitic, Syria is semitic, Turkey is 99% semitic.Anti-Israel is anti-zionist.BTW what is the UN's self interest? And Kofi Annan was made Secretary-General of the UN before any of the UN security resolutions I mentioned were made.A minor point perhaps but I happen to think that he is a bit of a muppet myself, but more out of incompetence than self-interest.

so true, CS....good posts on this thread btw

I've provided you with dictionary definitions of anti-Semitism.The self-interest includes the following:isalmic nations will support another islamic nation.Most non democracies, including Islamic nations, are deathly afriad of a democratic revolution, so despise Israel for that reason.Arab oil means big, big business deals. Most nations want to be in on them, whether legal or illegal. That includes Europe.European politicians vie for Muslim votes. They're also afraid of their Muslim population, as we see why in france right now.Europe, especdially Old Europe, wants geopolitical influence. By siding with Islamic nations, they get varous favours which include influence vis a vis the US.

Stop, for the love of Mike, stop!Where is the cynical self interest in the EU?The British government supported the war in Iraq and several cabinet members of recent years have visited Israel and offered support. France is, well, France. Germany over the last 50 years has offered more support and cover for Israeli operations than any other European nation. Italy is in the thrall to US opinion. Spain up until mid-seventies has been irrelevant and remains peripheral to EU policy up to the present day.As a political bloc they have been a lot less pro-Israel than the US, but stating that the EU is pro-palestinian terror is a bit of a stretch, more than a stretch, a downright bullshit inspired lie.

Most of those nations have a substantial Muslim population, whose votes are wanted, and whose potential violence scares governments into appeasement policies, such as supporting islamic nations at the UN against Israel. All want to avail themselves of Arab business. being a a part of the EU, they support one another with respect to geopolitical influence vis a vis the US.Yes, Blair, being the true principled democrat he is, supported the war in iraq. he also was tired of the endless costs and military tie-up in maintaining the no-fly zone protecting the Kurds from Hussein. nonetheless, GB, like others, has self-interest in voting against Israel.the simple truth is that israel has nothing to barter for UN votes. the Un is not a moral institution. Nations vote out of cynical self-interest, and Israel, being tiny, with no oil, with little business to offer others, and opposed by the islamic world, is a very convenient and expedient target. as said before, to the eternal shame of this world.

Arab oil means big business.Hmm where does that lead to?Saudi Arabia. No hands in pockets there, no self-interested parties suggest themselves.Conspiracy theories apart, which major power is currently leading an occupying force in a leading oil producer? Which leading power led an invasion to protect another leading oil producer in '90. Any finger-pointing in the big business department points only one way.Islamic nations will support other Islamic nations - so what? Christian nations tend to side with other christian nations. Like sides with like - nothing insidious or unusal with that.The non-democratic argument - well you got me there - US, lover of democracy, except when it is not their flavour. Chile, Venezuela, El Salvador. The US has favoured middle of the road and right-wing dictatorships over socialist democracies. So do not get me started on the US and its view of several post war left-wing governments in the UK.A revolution couldn't be called democratic by the way, a revolution is a revolution, a sudden overthrow of government and replacement with another. (although the election of Bush in 2000 is a contender - only kidding)European politicians vie for Muslim votes. No kidding. All politicians vie for the votes of the voters. "Vote for me, Ill do what you want!" Odd that. UK has a significant Muslim population, especially in some Labour seats. Blair sides with Bush. Blair still gets elected. I can see it now, you have opened my eyes Steve.I can almost guarantee that France would be against any pro-Israel movement whatever the muslim population. The socialists in Spain got elected after their promise to withdraw from Iraq following the Madrid bombing, yet they are struggling less than 2 years later. Whilst Germany has problems of its own, and seems to have abrogated any responsibilty concerning muslims, or war on terror (although the recent election seemed to point to a more hard-lined Blair-type approach). Italy continues, publically anyway, to support the current anti-terrorism movement.Europe has geo-political influence or it does not. If it does not and it sides with the muslim world as an expedience to curry favour, how come it has influenced an anti-Israeli stance by the UN for over 50 years? If it has already got geo-political influence, ie influencing UN resolutions these past 50 years what would be the necessity of appeasing these nations?With reference to a previous point regarding UN resolutions against China, would no resolutions have anything to do with garnering support against Russia (in the old cold war days) or economic favours in light of their emergence as a major economic player.Anyway this is probably getting boring for everybody else so hands off keyboard and go to bed. Good night all.

We appear to be in agreement that nations vote according to self interest at the UN, rather than according to principle, and that voting for Israel is seldom in other nations' self interest. (But I think democracies are making a huge long-term self-interest error in voting for and supporting tyrannies against a western liberal democracy.)Good Night.

I'm still up and congratulate you - a single point we agree on (I think!).Israel as it stands and what it stands for is in nobody's interest, least of all the Israelis. Be that as it may, I still hope for a peaceful co-existance of Israel and Palestine. (But I think western democracies will make a terrible mistake if they side unconditionally with the current Israeli government and their current aims)

well, we also both fervently wish for peaceful coexistence. Presumably you, like me, support the Israeli government's decision to withdraw from gaza (also supported by western governments) - even if, maybe, for different reasons.