The United States of Shame

[imyourbiggestfan]

Subtle differences are important. And even if there were no differences, group identity would still matter.

Subtle differences are not important. Not important enough to spread hatred because of them. You can either support institutions that seek to make light of differences or to support those that exaggerate differences. You do the latter. And as GJ pointed out in one of his lucid moments, that makes you everything that you despise in others.

[imyourbiggestfan]

Well... there seems to be a slight element of misreporting here. To say that the pPalestinian areas were to be surrounded by Israeli land is slightly inaccurate. They would be surrounded by land that would be transferred from Israeli to Palestinian control in a phsed way.

Now, that is a real distinction.

How possible would it be to achieve the transfer of land without phasing control in this way?

Yes, it does make the Palestinian state vulnerable to all sorts of security issues - the same kind of issues that face the Israelis now. And it is incumbent on the US and Israelis to recognise that and to try and provide some kind of guarantee.

One cannot help but feel, though, that an outright rejection of the plan and a return to conflict was perhaps too big a price to pay for its many imperfections.

[formosa]

Littleiron: I am with you all the way. Ignore that troll. He will go away once he figures out we're not paying attention to him.

[Tigerman]

Well... there seems to be a slight element of misreporting here. To say that the pPalestinian areas were to be surrounded by Israeli land is slightly inaccurate.

IYBF, I'm glad you pointed this out. I suppose some will be shocked at the slight inaccuracies hock: in reports regarding Israeli treatment of Palestinians. Does anyone even remember the stink the British press made regarding "atrocities" and the "massacre" committed by the IDF in Jenin last year?

[Gavin Januarus]

Tigerman,

I've got plenty of evidence that you're harboring anti-Arab prejudices.

It's a well-known fact by everyone here at Segue.

It's not up to me to provide any "smoking gun" evidence though.

It's up to you to prove that you're not anti-Arab.

Your pattern of denial is really proof enough though that you're trying to hide your prejudices.

Very smart. Very witty. But the comparison is fatally flawed.

The UN knows Saddam has used weapons of mass destruction in the past. The UN has the first proof of the existence of such weapons and of the willingness to use them. If you want to make an analogy to legal process and the burden of proof, I suggest the following is imperfect but more accurate:

"We know Saddam is dangerous. He has done this before. We have convicted him and locked him up (sanctions). Now, the onus is on him to show that he is no longer a danger to the community, otherwise we will make sure he is not let out. EVER."

'fan and Tigerman,

Who said anything about Saddam Hussein? I was just talking about Tigerman and his anti-Arab prejudices. Now that you mention it though I see the connection.

BTW, I'm getting sick and tired of all the lies and deception. If Tigerman doesn't start cooperating soon about coming clean about his prejudices and the way they're polluting the Segue community I'm going to be forced to take action.

I'll have to go to the moderators and have him banned. If the moderators prove too impotent to do the right thing, I'll have to take unilateral action in conjunction with my allies Vincent, Sandman and Poagao.

Vincent, of course, will do the right think purely out of conviction. Sandman will cooperate because I'll have bribed him with a good bottle of homeboy Scotch. Poagao, who knows where all the wires are plugged in, will cooperate because I'll make sure he gets his US passport back.

Time is running out, Tigerman. It's up to you.

(BTW, Tigerman, I agree whole-heartedly with every point you made in rebuttal to the rules of evidence/due process accusation I made against you.}

[Tigerman]

I'm getting sick and tired of all the lies and deception. If Tigerman doesn't start cooperating soon about coming clean about his prejudices and the way they're polluting the Segue community I'm going to be forced to take action.

Oh no.... not... "action" hock:

I'll have to go to the moderators and have him banned. If the moderators prove too impotent to do the right thing, I'll have to take unilateral action in conjunction with my allies Vincent, Sandman and Poagao.

Yawn...

Time is running out, Tigerman. It's up to you.

YAAAAWN...

[daltongang]

Our current aid distribution is, ridiculous. we give how much to the israelis then another big chunk to the arabs to pay them off for it. I say we should cut out aid to Israel and egypt by an equivalent and maximum amount, phased over years. redistribute the rest to more deserving donors. let nations in the middle east develop true self-reliance and stop being their never-ending patsy. anyone advocating such a plan, or anything similar, will immediately get my vote, assuming he is sound on china-taiwan.

[imyourbiggestfan]

I say we should cut out aid to Israel and egypt by an equivalent and maximum amount, phased over years. redistribute the rest to more deserving donors.

I'm not sure we should be giving aid to donor nations.

But, not to be pedantic for a nanosecond, the problem is that quite often "more deserving" nations are the least efficient users of aid. Lacking the proper investment environment in their native countries, the capital too often gets wasted or spirited off to Switzerland.

Your post does raise another interesting point, though. Is the provision of US aid a disincentive for countries in the Middle East to change their ways? There could be several arguments for this, i.e., if countries believe aid will be turned off if the region ceases to be a "hot spot" there is an incentive to keep things bubbling over.

But, nah, surely the gains from stability and increased trade far outweigh the amount of US aid and doesn't the US have an interest to support democratic Israel and moderate Egypt as examples for the region to follow? It also gives the US a bit more leverage, too.

[imyourbiggestfan]

Juba, Mr. T.

There was an exchange of a couple of posts between you in the Flame Forum under "garbage" I think they would be a valuable contribution to this thread. Any chance of re-posting them here?

[Gavin Januarus]

Tigerman,

I don't mean to bore you. I'm just trying to make the simple but important point:

What goes around comes around.

So beware. If you encourage your government to use a one-sided, dishonest, absolutely hypocritical set of standards for settling its external disputes, one day, when those external disputes are all settled and it turns its attention back to its many internal disputes, it's inevitable it will want to use those same standards on its own citizens.

It will think, 'well, why not? they're fair -- and it certainly will save us a lot of time and trouble compared to the way we used to have to do things.'

(On a side note, I see that you haven't gone back and changed your posting of 7:35 yesterday now that its true intentions are clear. I respect that. Many men of lesser character would have been tempted to go back and change the facts to suit the moment. You may be wrong, but you're a man of character. There's hope for you yet.)