Feel free to.Quote:
Originally posted by bbobb
Goddammit Sidez... I had just gotten this thread on track... now I'm going to have to post another pic of Laetitia
Printable View
Feel free to.Quote:
Originally posted by bbobb
Goddammit Sidez... I had just gotten this thread on track... now I'm going to have to post another pic of Laetitia
As many times as you feel necessary.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
Feel free to.
You have no experiences of your own and you have shown no proof of anti-semtism being strong in France.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
Heh, this is like saying "if you haven't been a communist for 3 years, then how can you criticize communism?" "If you're not a soldier, how can you command people to go to war?" "If you're not an Iraqi, how can you know whether Iraq should be liberated?"
Your argument != good
It's not JUST about battling evil anymore than it is about NEEDING a good falafel in Baghdad or WANTING to secure the US from WMDs.
It's a conglomeration of a bunch of benefits - look. The Middle East is the most dangerous of all of the various political regions in the world. Saddam is the most dangerous single figure in the Middle East. He's not so strong, yet, that he can threaten our allies (/blackmail us). Iraq offers an opportunity to initiate real political change in the Middle East. THE OIL DOES NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE. If we needed the oil, we would have LIFTED THE SANCTIONS. That point is really, really, unbelievably simple. You people who are still listening to the war-for-oil-shit are deluding yourselves. The point is deeply dumb.
No, we're not going in there like crusaders to battle evil and liberate an oppressed people in any pure sense - it's not pure the way opening a door for some old lady is, no. But, wrapped up within the many political benefits this action offers is the real moral bonus of keeping a bunch of Iraqis from being slaughtered by an evil dictator.
Shit, I'd be willing to place money on that one. But it would be great if we did go try to help those other countries in need instead of forgetting about/dropping them like Afghanistan. However, I think going in there for oil is a DAMNED good reason. I just don't think we'll use that oil to help the Europeans (sans France and Germany) once we get it, which is saddening.Quote:
Look, I understand you want to have faith in your country. But you can't debate bbobb's point - that of all the countries to "liberate", Bush chose the one with a ton of oil. If, after this he goes in and cleans up Ivory Coast and Rwanda and other countries with no political or economic value where people are undergoing far worse suffering than anything in Iraq, then never mind. But I think it's safe to say he won't, so all this comic book gibberish about "battling evil" is a convenient excuse at best, and a flat out lie at worst.
Eh, well, 2004, unnamed Democrat hopefully stands a chance against our goofy President.
no way, the italian women wipe the floor with all of the other european women combined, this coming from an almost full blooded german, italain women win hands down.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
I completely forgot my favorite thing about France:
France has the most attractive women in Europe, by far. I love French women - something about them, even the average looking chicks are still really hot.
Wah, wah, wah - the French that worked against the Nazis in WWII were a minority. Not surprising that the French recognizing and working against anti-semitism will continue to be a minority today. They're out there, and we appreciate them.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
You have no experiences of your own and you have shown no proof of anti-semtism being strong in France.
History's on our side.
I leave Asians to others on these here forums... but I can do Indian.Quote:
Originally posted by Calliander
Eh, I don't find 'em that attractive on the whole. I personally like women with skin darker than mine. You know, women of African descent, Indian chicks, and Asians even though they are sometimes more pale than myself.
Especially the Asians. Heh. (Or my woman might think I want to leave her for a half African/Indian girl.)
;)
You're fucking pathetic.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
Wah, wah, wah - the French that worked against the Nazis in WWII were a minority. Not surprising that the French recognizing and working against anti-semitism will continue to be a minority today. They're out there, and we appreciate them.
History's on our side.
Still waiting for that proof btw. The topic is close to 100 replies and you've still failed to provide any.
If you insist.Quote:
Originally posted by StriderKyo
As many times as you feel necessary.
/me appreciates the nippleage, but italian girls are still hotter.
You're a piece of shit. Go fuck yourself. Eat shit and die. (whee, this is fun.)Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
You're fucking pathetic.
Still waiting for that proof btw. The topic is close to 100 replies and you've still failed to provide any.
You're not actually responding to anything that's been said. It's been made obvious that your idea of "proof" is, what, some sort of divine message that proclaims that anti-semitism is in the hearts of 51%+ of the French. Disregarding some similarly miraculous incident, you'll happily continue ignoring any evidence of growing anti-semitism in Franc.e
I'm sure that's why it was the very first thing the coalition sent troops in to protect.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
THE OIL DOES NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
What's the point, Jimmy - he's going to keep his abortion of a brain closed to this sort of shit as long as it takes.Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
European anti-semitism as a whole
French anti-semitism
More French anti-semitism
Yet more
Thank you Bbobb
Tis okay. I was planning on looking the info up anyway. It's pretty sad when Yahoo! has a section about French anti-semitism.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
What's the point, Jimmy - he's going to keep his abortion of a brain closed to this sort of shit as long as it takes.
Look at what the destruction of oil wells did to Kuwaiti civilians. We protected the oil wells to ensure the future of the Iraqi civilians - those oil wells represent the economic potential that will allow a new Iraqi government to succeed (and to provide some semblance of a good life to Iraqi civilians).Quote:
Originally posted by StriderKyo
I'm sure that's why it was the very first thing the coalition sent troops in to protect.
Shit, think about it. Given that AMERICIHHCA IS GIVING 0IL CONTRAKTS TO HALLIBURTON and things like that, wouldn't it have been in Dick Cheney's best interests (ho ho) to let the oil wells get burnt? More money for Halliburton as it rebuilds the wells, eh? Or, what, no, but...at least keep the claims straight.
bbobb - You got more of those?
Italian is the new request? I'd be more then happy to fulfill with my favorite actress:Quote:
Originally posted by frostwolf ex
* frostwolf ex appreciates the nippleage, but italian girls are still hotter.
You guys ever 'read' Italian Maxim? It's fantastic - great women.
Posting a dozen links related to the destruction of the synagogue in Marseille, the stabbing of Rabbi Farhi and Le Pen's bullshit does not equal proof of anti-semitism in France. There is bound to be tension between muslims and jews given the current world affairs but how the hell does that mean that anti-semitism is on the rise and deep rooted into the French ever since WWII?Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
You're a piece of shit. Go fuck yourself. Eat shit and die. (whee, this is fun.)
You're not actually responding to anything that's been said. It's been made obvious that your idea of "proof" is, what, some sort of divine message that proclaims that anti-semitism is in the hearts of 51%+ of the French. Disregarding some similarly miraculous incident, you'll happily continue ignoring any evidence of growing anti-semitism in Franc.e
You have no proof, you're just a paranoid zionist that only sees things in black or white.
My request is for more Indian chicks. Perhaps you can post two pictures in one?
or an italian /indian girl..in france :D
Of the Beautiful Aishwarya Rai? Here ya go:Quote:
Originally posted by Calliander
bbobb - You got more of those?
Proof's been posted, Spanky. It's your job to choose whether or not you want to believe it.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
You have no proof, you're just a paranoid zionist that only sees things in black or white.
He does have a point about those three things. It is only those three things that keep getting mentioned.
My question, though, is that if the UK and France have Jewish populations within close range of each other, why aren't there articles like that about Britain? Or are there and I just didn't see any links?
It had Asia Argento... so that makes me happy. That Angel Tatoo just blows my mind.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
You guys ever 'read' Italian Maxim? It's fantastic - great women.
AH HA!Quote:
or an italian /indian girl..in france
Brilliant, good sir!
(And by the way, did anyone see my posts about Flyguy and that other nifty Shockwave thing?)
Yeah, you can find them. You can find some about American anti-Semitism, too. And, even Israeli anti-Semitism.Quote:
Originally posted by Calliander
My question, though, is that if the UK and France have Jewish populations within close range of each other, why aren't there articles like that about Britain? Or are there and I just didn't see any links?
I clicked one of your links and saw this in one of the columns:Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
Proof's been posted, Spanky. It's your job to choose whether or not you want to believe it.
"Click here to sign the e-petition -- NATIONWIDE BOYCOTT OF "OLD" EUROPE GOODS! Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld rightly referred to France and Germany as "the old Europe." While the newly democratized countries of Poland, Romania, the Czech Republic, and Hungary have rallied to our side, "old Europe" has turned its back on us.
A boycott of French, German and Belgian goods -- wines, beers, chocolates, art, automobiles [snip]"
Hardly a credible source. Try again.
You're trying to comment on something you know nothing about.Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
Yeah, you can find them. You can find some about American anti-Semitism, too. And, even Israeli anti-Semitism.
Fuck off.
Well, I may be a zionist, but I'm not paranoid. The fact that Europe and the Middle East are fundamentally useless is what lets me go to sleep at night. Look at Chirac's response to the 6-day war, to 48, to 1981.
Is anti-semitism more prevalent in France than in any other major (I'll entertain that joke) country?
YES.
What other 'major' country has as significant a population of muslim extremists?
What other 'major' country has seen as many other significant anti-semitic incidents?
What about Osirak?
Le Pen? ("The French were just tired of socialism and let his anti-semitism slip by!")
http://www.mediareviewnet.com/Call%2...sor%20Ilan.htm
Academic Boycott of Israel.
France has the highest number of incidences of anti-semitic thought and action in any major first-world country. Jewish emigration from France has been on the rise for 3 or 4 years (in one of the BBC articles I posted a few pages back) - it doubled last year.
NOT ALL FRENCH PEOPLE ARE ANTI-SEMITES.
No one's said that, neither me nor anyone else. France has more anti-semitism than any other major country, and incidents of anti-semitism are growing rapidly in comparison to the growth of anti-semitism in other major countries. I dunno how I got away from the whole anti-les-anglo-saxons thing, but that's an equally important issue.
That one would probably take a bit of work. How about another beautiful Indian girl?Quote:
Originally posted by frostwolf ex
or an italian /indian girl..in france :D
There are no large jewish communities in Britain. You'll find plenty of articles though on the tensions between white people and the asian communities.Quote:
Originally posted by Calliander
He does have a point about those three things. It is only those three things that keep getting mentioned.
My question, though, is that if the UK and France have Jewish populations within close range of each other, why aren't there articles like that about Britain? Or are there and I just didn't see any links?
So one could say that since those are more scarce that anti-Semitism is much more prevalent in France?Quote:
Yeah, you can find them. You can find some about American anti-Semitism, too. And, even Israeli anti-Semitism.
Tsk tsk, Sidez, you've really been a dick in this thread. Can't we keep things civil? What's the French word for etiquette?Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
You're trying to comment on something you know nothing about.
Fuck off.
First one's from Time magazine, buckaroo.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
Hardly a credible source. Try again.
... I know nothing about web searches?Quote:
You're trying to comment on something you know nothing about.
Fuck off.
works for me.:cool:Quote:
Originally posted by bbobb
That one would probably take a bit of work. How about another beautiful Indian girl?
Yes. I'd forgotten that's why Baghdad is being turned into a crater. To ensure the future of Iraqi civilians.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
We protected the oil wells to ensure the future of the Iraqi civilians
How does anyone (aside from construction firms) make money having to rebuild a massive petrochemical infrastructure?Quote:
Shit, think about it. Given that AMERICIHHCA IS GIVING 0IL CONTRAKTS TO HALLIBURTON and things like that, wouldn't it have been in Dick Cheney's best interests (ho ho) to let the oil wells get burnt? More money for Halliburton as it rebuilds the wells, eh? Or, what, no, but...at least keep the claims straight.
:lol: Okay, that was a good one.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
What's the French word for etiquette?
I wouldn't really use numbers as a guage, but if you wanted to, and did exact phrase searches, it comes up:Quote:
Originally posted by Calliander
So one could say that since those are more scarce that anti-Semitism is much more prevalent in France?
1. France
2. USA
3. Britain
4. Israel
You're right, pro-Palestine does not equal anti-semitism in the "nazi/racist" sence of the word, but to assert that being pro-Palestine in no way puts one in a possition against Hebrew interests is a bit much.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
Pro-palestine != anti-semitism
I am not commenting on France or "the French view." I am commenting on you insistence that one can be pro-Palestine without any anti-Hebrew sentiment steming from it.
I'd imagine there are a few arab nations who could trounce all four of those put together.Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
I wouldn't really use numbers as a guage, but if you wanted to, and did exact phrase searches, it comes up:
1. France
2. USA
3. Britain
4. Israel
This is true. I was commenting only on the countries I'd given as examples, however.Quote:
Originally posted by StriderKyo
I'd imagine there are a few arab nations who could trounce all four of those put together.
Watch a news channel while we bomb Baghdad. Look at the amount of traffic still on the roads while we turn the city "into a crater". 98% of the craters in Baghdad will be found in either former military installations or the brainpans of Iraqi regime officials.Quote:
Originally posted by StriderKyo
Yes. I'd forgotten that's why Baghdad is being turned into a crater. To ensure the future of Iraqi civilians.
Money pays for goods and services. Rebuilding massive petrochemical infrastructure requires both goods and services. Money goes from the UN and the US (who want the infrastructure to be rebuilt) to Halliburton/rebuilding companies (who provide the services).Quote:
How does anyone make money having to rebuild a massive petrochemical infrastructure?
I wonder if I would think about these things more if I were Jewish?
Well my hijack almost suceeded, but I'm giving up for now. I leave you all with a hot Brazilian chick (I have to move to Brazil some day)
"What other 'major' country has as significant a population of muslim extremists?"
Britain. Far more so than France.
"What other 'major' country has seen as many other significant anti-semitic incidents?"
France is the only country to have such a large number of jews and muslims living in similar areas. For the last time, THERE IS BOUND TO BE SOME TENSION GIVEN CURRENT WORLD AFFAIRS. When serious things like the stabbing of rabbi Farhi happen it's the actions of a few extremists and sadly these things happen.
"http://www.mediareviewnet.com/ Call...ssor%20Ilan.htm
Academic Boycott of Israel."
404
"I dunno how I got away from the whole anti-les-anglo-saxons thing, but that's an equally important issue."
That you even bring this up shows you complete ignorance and inexperience on the matter.
Man, that's nice. (Bbobb's picture, not Sidez's dumbass response).
I know some people who go to Brazil multiple times per year. They're really weird, though.
How do you get this?Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
"What other 'major' country has as significant a population of muslim extremists?"
Britain. Far more so than France.
I've heard from a couple of sources that France's figure of 8% Muslim population is significantly the highest in Europe.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
"What other 'major' country has as significant a population of muslim extremists?"
Britain. Far more so than France.
Follow me as we hop into the Way-Back Machine to visit a German ancestor of Sidez! Back, back, we go...Quote:
France is the only country to have such a large number of jews and muslims living in similar areas. For the last time, THERE IS BOUND TO BE SOME TENSION GIVEN CURRENT WORLD AFFAIRS. When serious things like the stabbing of rabbi Farhi happen it's the actions of a few extremists and sadly these things happen.
TO NINETEEN THIRTY FOUR!
"Germany is rebuilding from World War I! Given the economy poverty of the country, there's BOUND TO BE SOME TENSION GIVEN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POOR GERMAN GENTILES AND WELL-OFF JEWISH MERCHANTS. When serious things like the lynching of Rabbi Goldberg happen, it's the actions of a few political extremists or some political party no one believes in - sadly these things happen, but they're not representative."
Thank you.
We're talking about extremists here. The muslim leaders in England recruiting for jihad and preaching hate from the mosques whilst sponging off benefit are well documented. I've lived in muslim areas all my life so i'm well exposed to it.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
I've heard from a couple of sources that France's figure of 8% Muslim population is significantly the highest in Europe.
Actually, that does suprise me, considering a Desert Storm's worth of ordinance has already been dropped on the place. But I don't think the city's in quite as good a shape as you surmise - bombs and guided missiles simply aren't that accurate yet. But this particular argument can't be backed up with proof in either direction yet (except to say, without question there's a fuckload of explosives being dropped on the place), so I'll drop it.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
Watch a news channel while we bomb Baghdad. Look at the amount of traffic still on the roads while we turn the city "into a crater". 98% of the craters in Baghdad will be found in either former military installations or the brainpans of Iraqi regime officials.
I never meant to imply that the war was being staged in any way for Haliburton's benefit - that is patently ridiculous. I meant that the US would profit long-term both economically and politically from controlling (either directly or indirectly) those oil fields. And those benefits would be both more substantial and tangible than getting rid of Hussein and whatever chemical weapons he has.Quote:
Money pays for goods and services. Rebuilding massive petrochemical infrastructure requires both goods and services. Money goes from the UN and the US (who want the infrastructure to be rebuilt) to Halliburton/rebuilding companies (who provide the services).
Strider - Nah, I mean, that's true, good point, I really don't know how Baghdad's going to turn out. It just gives me confidence (it's almost unnerving) to see how confident the average Baghdadian is in his ability to go about his daily business while we take the city apart.Quote:
Actually, that does suprise me, considering a Desert Storm's worth of ordinance has already been dropped on the place. But I don't think the city's in quite as good a shape as you surmise - bombs and guided missiles simply aren't that accurate yet. But this particular argument can't be backed up with proof in either direction yet (except to say, without question there's a fuckload of explosives being dropped on the place), so I'll drop it.
You're right, we'll get some sort of oil benefit from liberating Iraq. Although I trust that we're not going to have some sort of shell government set up in the country, there will be long-lasting goodwill over the situation. However, I don't see some sort of truly anti-competitive agreement being set up with Iraq, since the eyes of the world will be on the situation - and because France and Germany are already trying to edge their way into some sort of rebuilding coalition.Quote:
I never meant to imply that the war was being staged in any way for Haliburton's benefit - that is patently ridiculous. I meant that the US would profit long-term both economically and politically from controlling (either directly or indirectly) those oil fields. And those benefits would be both more substantial and tangible than getting rid of Hussein and whatever chemical weapons he has.
In addition, Iraq's oil production isn't THAT significant - it's a good amount, but the country is hardly some sort of oil-deal-breaker. You're right, opening up oil markets in a sense will be a more tangible, substantial benefit than getting rid of Hussein - but only because we can't possibly measure the effect of leaving him in power.
In potential magnitude, I'm definitely comfortable with saying that the WMD possibiility is far more significant than spinning Iraq's faucets clockwise.
(You mentioned something about "a Desert Storm's worth of ordinance" - actually, I think we've done at least a few times as much bombing as Desert Storm. We dropped as much on Iraq in (I think) the first two days of this war as we did in all of Desert Storm.)
When the base numbers of Muslims go from 1.5 million in the UK to 3-6 million in France, I have a hard time believing that more radicals base themselves in the UK. I'm not saying anything about the makeup of either country, I'm just looking at base numbers.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
We're talking about extremists here. The muslim leaders in England recruiting for jihad and preaching hate from the mosques whilst sponging off benefit are well documented. I've lived in muslim areas all my life so i'm well exposed to it.
This is going nowhere. I'm going to phone up my god mother's husband (a zionist) and ask for his views. If we can all agree to not being shitheads towards each other i'll gladly post what he says.
I haven't been a shithead. I just asked where you get the idea that France has less Muslim extremists than Britain. If that's being a shithead, then well, whatever. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
You're from the outside trying to look in. Only yesterday we had an Al Quiada cell in Leceister busted by the police. Trust me, muslim extremism is strongest here in Britain.Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
When the base numbers of Muslims go from 1.5 million in the UK to 3-6 million in France, I have a hard time believing that more radicals base themselves in the UK. I'm not saying anything about the makeup of either country, I'm just looking at base numbers.
I'll give you that. But at least I'm trying.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
You're from the outside trying to look in.
What other countries have Maxim? A Hong Kong edition would be fucking class. :)Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
You guys ever 'read' Italian Maxim? It's fantastic - great women.
It's almost 8am, time to welcome in the new morning the right way: with a cigarette, a can of red bull and today's paper. How civilised.
So, who did Israel get their Nukes from?Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
Well, I may be a zionist, but I'm not paranoid. The fact that Europe and the Middle East are fundamentally useless is what lets me go to sleep at night. Look at Chirac's response to the 6-day war, to 48, to 1981.
Is anti-semitism more prevalent in France than in any other major (I'll entertain that joke) country?
YES.
What other 'major' country has as significant a population of muslim extremists?
What other 'major' country has seen as many other significant anti-semitic incidents?
What about Osirak?
Le Pen? ("The French were just tired of socialism and let his anti-semitism slip by!")
http://www.mediareviewnet.com/Call%2...sor%20Ilan.htm
Academic Boycott of Israel.
France has the highest number of incidences of anti-semitic thought and action in any major first-world country. Jewish emigration from France has been on the rise for 3 or 4 years (in one of the BBC articles I posted a few pages back) - it doubled last year.
NOT ALL FRENCH PEOPLE ARE ANTI-SEMITES.
No one's said that, neither me nor anyone else. France has more anti-semitism than any other major country, and incidents of anti-semitism are growing rapidly in comparison to the growth of anti-semitism in other major countries. I dunno how I got away from the whole anti-les-anglo-saxons thing, but that's an equally important issue.
France.
For reactor design and construction, Israel sought the assistance of France. Nuclear cooperation between the two nations dates back as far as early 1950's, when construction began on France's 40MWt heavy water reactor and a chemical reprocessing plant at Marcoule. France was a natural partner for Israel and both governments saw an independent nuclear option as a means by which they could maintain a degree of autonomy in the bipolar environment of the cold war.
In the fall of 1956, France agreed to provide Israel with an 18 MWt research reactor. However, the onset of the Suez Crisis a few weeks later changed the situation dramatically. Following Egypt's closure of the Suez Canal in July, France and Britain had agreed with Israel that the latter should provoke a war with Egypt to provide the European nations with the pretext to send in their troops as peacekeepers to occupy and reopen the canal zone. In the wake of the Suez Crisis, the Soviet Union made a thinly veiled threat against the three nations. This episode not only enhanced the Israeli view that an independent nuclear capability was needed to prevent reliance on potentially unreliable allies, but also led to a sense of debt among French leaders that they had failed to fulfill commitments made to a partner. French premier Guy Mollet is even quoted as saying privately that France "owed" the bomb to Israel.
On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.
Both the scale of the project and the secrecy involved made the construction of Dimona a massive undertaking. A new intelligence agency, the Office of Science Liasons,(LEKEM) was created to provide security and intelligence for the project. At the height construction, some 1,500 Israelis some French workers were employed building Dimona. To maintain secrecy, French customs officials were told that the largest of the reactor components, such as the reactor tank, were part of a desalinization plant bound for Latin America. In addition, after buying heavy water from Norway on the condition that it not be transferred to a third country, the French Air Force secretly flew as much as four tons of the substance to Israel.
Trouble arose in May 1960, when France began to pressure Israel to make the project public and to submit to international inspections of the site, threatening to withhold the reactor fuel unless they did. President de Gaulle was concerned that the inevitable scandal following any revelations about French assistance with the project, especially the chemical reprocessing plant, would have negative repercussions for France's international position, already on shaky ground because of its war in Algeria.
At a subsequent meeting with Ben-Gurion, de Gaulle offered to sell Israel fighter aircraft in exchange for stopping work on the reprocessing plant, and came away from the meeting convinced that the matter was closed. It was not. Over the next few months, Israel worked out a compromise. France would supply the uranium and components already placed on order and would not insist on international inspections. In return, Israel would assure France that they had no intention of making atomic weapons, would not reprocess any plutonium, and would reveal the existence of the reactor, which would be completed without French assistance. In reality, not much changed - French contractors finished work on the reactor and reprocessing plant, uranium fuel was delivered and the reactor went critical in 1964.
The United States first became aware of Dimona's existence after U-2 overflights in 1958 captured the facility's construction, but it was not identified as a nuclear site until two years later. The complex was variously explained as a textile plant, an agricultural station, and a metallurgical research facility, until David Ben-Gurion stated in December 1960 that Dimona complex was a nuclear research center built for "peaceful purposes."
There followed two decades in which the United States, through a combination of benign neglect, erroneous analysis, and successful Israeli deception, failed to discern first the details of Israel's nuclear program. As early as 8 December 1960, the CIA issued a report outlining Dimona's implications for nuclear proliferation, and the CIA station in Tel Aviv had determined by the mid-1960s that the Israeli nuclear weapons program was an established and irreversible fact.
And now some obligatory French Porn:
Because it can (and does) cut both ways.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez and tweaked for Kantian Pleasure
Continue living in your wonderful little dream world where anything anti-palestinian must equal pro-Israel-super-zionist-conspiracy-to-take-over-the-world and where the actions of a few dictate the feelings of the whole nation.
I'm thinking that's the way the world works...there's soooooo much information, information that contradicts or counters other information, and so many passionate, opinionated people that, honestly...?
I don't understand the arguing.
Kinda like this anti-semite thing...you admit it doesn't happen widespread in Europe because there aren't many Jews hanging around. You say the Germans have a Turkish-hate thing going on...the very country who demanded peaceful negotiations all the way to the bitter end.
One and the other add up to look like a front to me. But hey, that's me...
Where are the outcries that Germany should have no right to preach peace when it has its own bigotry? I know America has gotten its fair share of flak for being this perpetually white-capitalist-racist land of the free, and I get to hear that from day to day, so it's kind of suprising to hear that, yes, the same types of going-ons happen outside the US as well.
I thought everyone else was so civilized, and we were like the barbaric cowboys or something. So how could there be such archaic ideas as bigotry, prejudice, and racism outside the country that so many presume to the birthplace and only breeding ground of such - the US?
But I guess it boils down to that information overload thing - you only ever read or hear a fraction of what's going on and allow yourself to only believe a fraction of that. But in reality, with so many contradictions running around, how else do you keep sane?
Urm the bigger the minority the more threatened the indiginous people feel, hence more rascism, it happens everywhere.
For Stone etcetera yes most Jews in places like Paris and antwerp and indeed NYc live in the same areas.
These aint ghetto´s tough and most of them choose to live together in larger comunities for personal and religious reasons.
To somehow blame the French for Jews living in the same neighborhouds is quite revolting and further proof of youre personal biases.
And as for Sidez, at least he is making some sort of argument, wich is much more then can be said of Stone and cohorts who just ridicule and make personal attacks.
Actually, all involved are making very good arguments in all ways. I fail to see, however, what relevance the above comment about Jewish folks living close to one another has in connection with the French being/not being anti-Semitic.Quote:
For Stone etcetera yes most Jews in places like Paris and antwerp and indeed NYc live in the same areas.
These aint ghetto´s tough and most of them choose to live together in larger comunities for personal and religious reasons. To somehow blame the French for Jews living in the same neighborhouds is quite revolting and further proof of youre personal biases. And as for Sidez, at least he is making some sort of argument, wich is much more then can be said of Stone and cohorts who just ridicule and make personal attacks.
"To somehow blame the French for Jews living in the same neighborhouds is quite revolting and further proof of youre personal biases."
That sentence makes no sense in the context of the argument. Nobody was blaming them for that; I believe that the argument was whether it was the Muslim extremists or the anti-Semitic French doing the bad things to Mosques and whatnot.
However, the personal attacks are kind of silly. Are tempers really that flaring that we need to insult one another during a debate?
:/ I didn't read the entire thread but I'm going to guess that "things got out of hand.."
I would guess the message is some French people can be ruthlessly shitty. France is populated with no more or less jerks than any other nation (thats per capita). The USA has all sorts of jackasses who are capable of this sort of thing and France is no diffrent.
I think maybe the US reaction to Frances refusal to go to war has cause another reaction by the French to mislike The USA and the UK as strongly as that is potrayed in the media (O'Riley desires France to be plunged into depression - something that is like wishing Lepercy on a people).
Anyway - I doubt even Stone and Carter think that the French are wholy dispicable, but I don't think that they are suprised.
şTracer
Edit: I just saw Sidez custom stat. Hehe...
Today I talked to one of my French lecturers about this (she is head of French at Cardiff) and she agreed with me 100%. Stone, i've layed the facts before you and done my best to educate you on these issues. Take it or continue your ignorance.
Stone: I'll just wager that if a hard-line Facist-like politician actually ran in the USA and weilded that language well enough he'd get such a precentage as Le Pen. I think Pat Buchanan should run again and prove this right.
şTracer
Sidez... good idea.
From page 5 on all I did was scan through for the chicks.
I respect what everyone in here is trying to do, but just about everyone in these political threads has resorted to name calling or acting like a complete jackass at some point.
This thread tastes like shit.
Merde?
Some people just like working themselves into a fit.
merde = shit?
(atleast from my two minute google search, thats what I came up with)
Good to know.
Learn something every day. :)
Heh, wait, one of your university professors agrees with you? I guess that settles it. You haven't laid anything down - you've just dismissed evidence provided as being circumstantial. Your tolerance for this sort of stuff is absurdly high.Quote:
Originally posted by Sidez
Today I talked to one of my French lecturers about this (she is head of French at Cardiff) and she agreed with me 100%. Stone, i've layed the facts before you and done my best to educate you on these issues. Take it or continue your ignorance.
Buchanan got half of a million votes in the 2000 elections as the Reform Party candidate. He was obviously the most far right candidate in the election. Moving further right would have necessarily dropped his returns. Half a million votes is about 1/2% of the total votes cast in the US. A fair bit less than Le Pen's results, eh?Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer
Stone: I'll just wager that if a hard-line Facist-like politician actually ran in the USA and weilded that language well enough he'd get such a precentage as Le Pen. I think Pat Buchanan should run again and prove this right.
şTracer
Buchanan didn't go far enough to the right -_o
He needs to brandish those ultra-conservitive christan values a little bit more librally :)
Then it looks like I did something right. :) Maybe I'll dig up some more tonight. :DQuote:
Originally posted by Kidnemo
From page 5 on all I did was scan through for the chicks.
I respect what everyone in here is trying to do, but just about everyone in these political threads has resorted to name calling or acting like a complete jackass at some point.
This thread tastes like shit.
Tracer - it just doesn't work that way, unless you think there are millions of people to the right of Pat Buchanan that:
1.) Didn't vote because Pat Buchanan was too liberal.
2.) Would've voted if Pat Buchanan had spouted even more hatred.
I'd kind of like to meet the crowd that considers Buchanan a left-winger.
You're right, but maybe the cliamate is better now?
Maybe I'm cynical but Fox News is the highest rated news station now I belive :)
I'm only being semi-serious now anyway.
There is growing Anti-semitism in France. Look at the growing population of extremist muslims, look at the widespread committed support of Palestine on both the left and right, read articles on the situation by L'Express and Le Monde (http://www.mafhoum.com/press/Attali.htm?). If Le Pen's anti-semitism was an issue, then the French Democracy would have produced a non-anti-semitic candidate.
The French are not all anti-semites - I've never claimed that. I've said that anti-semitism is growing more frequently in France than in any other major country. If you'd like to argue that, give evidence of a similar explosion of anti-semitism somewhere else.
As far as the acceptance of stuff like vandalizing graveyards: think Marxist revolution - I'd point to the 25% returns of the Marxist Communist party of France during the cold war, the extreme parties that garner votes today. A political climate that fosters Marxism is a political climate more accepting of stuff like burning down McDonaldses and vandalizing graveyards.
Read Fanon, read Sartre - France is lacking in an honest neoconservative counterposition to the many, many Marxist scholars and political theorists in the country. For every Chomsky we've got we also produce a Fukayama - there's that balance in US politics. You could write a thesis on this, easily:
I think it's fair to claim that given the support shown to Marxist revolutionary policy on a mass political scale, that given the lack of some sort of significant balance on the other side of the spectrum, given the classic les-anglo-saxons phobia that has been a part of French culture since the revolution, given the growing muslim extremist population, and given the across-the-board support for Palestine, that:
1.) France currently sees a greater number of instances of anti-semitism.
2.) France is in danger of seeing more anti-semitism.
3.) The political center of France is located in a position that leaves many French MORE willing to accept "revolutionary" Marxist-type expressions of their political beliefs.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer
You're right, but maybe the cliamate is better now? If Bush we're so tough a competition for him that is
Maybe I'm cynical but Fox News is the highest rated news station now I belive :)
I'm only being semi-serious now anyway.
I like Fox News.
Nah, man, Fox News is neoconservative, like Bush's cabinet (all those evil warmongering Jews) and me.
Pat Buchanan is a paleoconservative - anti-globalization, anti-war, pro-fencing-off-borders, a bunch of stuff.
The more moderate half of the US Democratic party (think Lieberman, Moynihan, the Clintons) are far more acceptable and far closer to neoconservatives than Palecons are. Bill Clinton, despite his issues, is a good bit closer to modern neoconservative Republicanism than Pat Buchanan is or ever was.
I like President Bush.
I hate Fox news for the record :/
Those terms are new to me, but PB has been on several shows (I mean.. I work for a cable company whose pride is news channels - we provide cable for nearly all local companies like Exxon, Dynegy and Reliant Enron formerlly so keeping the news stations in good order is a priority of mine. Needless to say I see BBC-A, MSNBC, Fox and a bunch of CCN's a Nasa channel and 2 C-Spans all day long) and has seemed very welcome while the subject of Clinton makes thier hackles rise. Clinton might be closer ideologically, PB seems to be a more welcomed guest.
...and I am Unfamiliar with those terms.
I think Buchanan's being more welcome on a lot of news shows now because his paleoconservative positions give him more in common with the true Left than many Democrats.
Hell, Buchanan's magazine, "the American Conservative", is Anti-war, Anti-globalization, Anti-interventionism, pro-Environment, and so on. He's against affirmative action-type stuff and he's against some forms of tax, but there are a surprising number of things in common between "the American Conservative" and "the Nation".
How is he pro-environment?
I am curious is all.
Hm, it can be a bit hard to explain.
Strom Thurmond has always been a paleoconservative. Before 1948, paleoconservatism was a pretty ingrained part of the Democratic party - stuff like protectionism, segregation, and things like that are classic Paleocon issues that were part of the Democratic party platform. In '48, a fissure in the party politics (real Democrats wanted to embrace desegregation) caused the Paleocons to splinter off into a party called the Dixiecrats. The party failed, basically.
When Nixon was running, he decided to embrace those Paleocons (who had been basically left out in the cold) by going against desegregation.
He's pro-environment in the sense that he'd rather strip mine some African country than knock down one US tree - I think I've seen some more honestly conservationist-type articles in the American Conservative, although I can't recall any off the top of my head.Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer
How is he pro-environment?
I am curious is all.
In any case I've always considered Democrat and Republican to be 2 sides to the same infernal coin :/
No offence but I find those who align themselves on either side to usually be super annoying when it comes to discussing politics/economics/moral-issues.
Well, you can't really escape being labelled either Democrat, Republican, Liberal, or Authoritarian...everyone falls somewhere on that wheel.
Doesn't that infringe on American mining jobs? I wouldn't call that pro-environment anyway. It's pro-ameican-environment at best.
Environment issues are very important to me personally, so that's why I asked. I'm scientifically minded (I like to think) and there are numerous alternitives AND the USA has the technology and the money to pursue and quickly adopt cleaner solutions to current 'messy' problems which could (at thier current rate) make our planet uninhabitable without permanent prostheic enviromental controls in the next 50 or so years. Oil will not only not hold out - but the continued consumption of it will engender a grevious htreat to the eco-system. Water is another more dangerous issue (one which could be solved if the planet wasn't getting alarmingly too warm and deforestation wasn't so high).
That won't happen though. We'll be in dire crisis before something is done (as always) because only crisis percipitate change.
Moderate seems nice.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
Well, you can't really escape being labelled either Democrat, Republican, Liberal, or Authoritarian...everyone falls somewhere on that wheel.
Heh, yeah, I don't know - this is why I'm not a paleocon.Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer
Doesn't that infringe on American mining jobs? I wouldn't call that pro-environment anyway. It's pro-ameican-environment at best.
Politically, how would you define or place Carl Sagan / Joseph Cambell for instance? I would like to think that my views fall moreorless squarely in-sync with his / theirs.
I don't know what Sagan's beliefs are, other than his atheism, which doesn't necessarily find its home in any one particular position.
Sagan used to teach at the school I go to (Cornell). He had this fantastic house on top of a cliff, and I walk by it almost every day on the way to school. Neat guy.
Yeah he lived in Ithaca, NY for a while - I belive his wife Ann Druyan lives there still. He taught astronomy there and made some great strides to the understaning of Titan Tholin and the conditions of promordial Earth which was a great contribution from Cornell which had otherwise not been known for its Astronomy program I belive (at least I don't know of any more advances from it).
To call Sagan an Atheist is somewhat lazy - he him self said when presented with the question "do you belive in god" he would always reply "how do you define god" which clearly implys that he is not an atheist (because that would automatically make his answer no).
Were one to say, like Einstein did, that God was the sum total of Physical Laws in the universe his answer would have likely been a string of more questions - but perhaps agreeance. I can't say - he, like myself (not on accident either, Sagan to me is a philosopher whom I have studied 'religiously') would like to pigeon-hole himself on any one thing.
We've got a pretty amazing Astronomy program, actually, we've had a lot of major projects with NASA over the last 20 years.
Coolness, that was the only study I know of that made some signifigant and applied science which should, by the way, be yeilding results in 2004 (soon! yay!) when the Cassini/Titan space probe does its thing. Yay for JPL!
Didn't read everything on this page but I did see the name "Pat Buchanan".
Ha ha ha ha ha...
Thank you. Pat Buchanan is funny.
Hey, I had a big thing to post in this vein, but I feel that we've kind of sauntered away from the original topic of the post. Should I start a new thread or post my long reply here?
Just slap it in here. The political threads never stay on topic anymore.