shut up
2006-06-20 11:08:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by ben s 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are no Islamofascist???? If there is say an theocratic Islamic extremeist regieme practicing oppressive fascism on its people... Oh say be selecting only hardline candidates & denying reformers applications when the people have repeatedly elected the most reform minded candidate on the ballot; say they've repeatedly shut down any press that criticizes them; arrested clergy that preach tolerance & reconciliation; people that toss coins into wells & say that long dead Imams in direct consultation with God have ordered them to make war on teh free world.... Would it not be fair to call such people Islamofascists?
As for the rest, the UN is worthless. It was never designed to solve problems, literally. It was designed to have people talk till they're blue in the face & hopefully allow time to forget whay they were so mad at each other. They knew from the start that if countries were going to go to war that the UN surely couldn't stop them. They have no troops & certainly cannot occupy Jeruselm. If you want to create an Israeli state & a Palestinian state, and a third tiny state of Jeruselm dedicated to neutality in the way the Swiss have been, that seems okay to me, but all sides would have to work it out & deal with the movement of people through each other's territory while preventing terrorism. Such an arranggement could only exist on trust, where none exists now.
2006-06-20 11:30:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by djack 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
How do you know that the other 6200 want, or do not threaten, peace?
However, it is easy to answer your question as it was easy to end World War II. You know how difficult to be in charge of the World Peace. But who is really responsible for this? Is America the only guard of world peace? The Middle East easily forgets favors. They forgot what America did for Muslims in Bosnia. Now America is hated by the Middle East, even if its governments pretend to love her. Do you think that abolishing the former Iraqi government was the only solution for the problem? And what was the problem? Do you think is it fair to try Sadam now? How many people did Sadam kill? And how many peole have been killed since Sadam's fall which coincides with the realse of religious fanaticism there?? Who are the victims of both situations?? Poor people who do not have anything to do with politics or religion except some promises of "the absolutes" beyond death which is called sometimes martyrdom, self-sacrifice, or anything absolute in which the tool of death belive and is not ready to use the "reason" or "logic". All wars and conflicts can be easily settled if peole come down to earth and realize that everything on it is proportional and there are no absolutes on our planet simply because it is impossible for two absolutes to co-exist on one place. And if it happens that two absolutes existe in one place they will fight until the one gets rid of the other. There may be temporary peaceful intervals(truces), but these are times to take breath to continue war again. However, one STRONG man, one POTENTIAL group or even a country or a group of countries can maintain peace. It is very important that someone must have POWER to maintain peace. But the most dangerous threat is that POWER can not settle in one place or with one person or with one country for ever ..... What would the world be like if AMERICA fainted away???
2006-06-20 12:19:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by rambahan_1953 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
First of all, I cannot agree with you that all Jews and all Arabs / Muslims are aggressors. You simply cannot generalize. there are the good and there are the bad.
Zionism is not all Jewish people and many Arabs are Cristian, Jewish, Muslims and yes, some are even atheists.
If the world stops adopting double standards to the Israeli / Palestinian conflict and Israeli genocide, then I am sure the region will be much more stable.
Israel was granted Palestinian land by the British - The Israelis do not want to "share" this land. They want it all for themselves and to extend its borders to create their "promised land".
The middle east has always been a politically and economically desired region - religion has been used as the weapon to wage war.
2006-06-20 12:23:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by nevine99 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Ideally, in my opinion anyway, Jerusalem would be turned into a UN-controlled neutral state, with all government under the UN. Thus, no one group, religious or otherwise, would have control of it and it could be shared by all people. As for the religious zionists v the arabs issue, they are fighting a war that has been going on for centuries. Any religious zealot will be willing to pick up arms for his or her cause; that's why we need to stop having them around.
2006-06-20 11:08:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dave A 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Looks like you and the guy who wants the UN to deal with this matter should work with each other. Like the UN food for oil and the UN men raping women and children. May be John Kerry can join you in a meeting in France. GET A LIFE
2006-06-20 11:15:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I wish I had a definitive answer, but I suspect if you look around you, you will see that the businesses, Congress, and secret societies of this world are Jewish owned and based. maybe that has something to do with it.
2006-06-20 11:10:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
your question is self-contradicting .... why are PEACEFUL people TOLERATING??? uhm ... because they're peaceful? and btw ur numbers are WAYYY off on the jews and muslims.
2006-06-20 11:09:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Gahhhhhh 3
·
0⤊
0⤋