Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

For your info fred.

banal - adjective - tediously unoriginal or ordinary. Which bit don't i understand?

But the story has changed - A new man at the top who is not an oil man. He doesn't benefit like his predecessors and will not be held to ransom by oil. I see changes in relationship between Iran and US but not the way you see them.

'Raw, Do some broader reading. Might widen your perspectivel' I have to say that coming from you, the most blinkered man I have ever come across, is an absolute classic statement worthy of the history books. What reading do you suggest?

'even i think your thinking is unthinking' have you done any thinking about that statement because you do come out with some rubbish. Don't insult my intelligence.

Fred - you're special!

Raw, In the 60s,70s,80s, a frequently public "myth" was continually being trotted out that Israel was the beginning of the world and its Armageddon.

The repetition of similar is boring. Read a little recent history.

Check meaning of banal.

Fred:

What on Earth are you talking about? That post makes no sense whatsoever.

Have you overdone the medication?

Yours, concerned,

MM

Myth before my time MM.

I wasn't actually referring to armageddon, i was referring to the tribal instincts that will come to a head when the governments can no longer support their economies. I believe they are squealing at low oil prices now. When the world no longer uses so much oil the trouble will start. A few years off yet though.

Don't see my thinking as the original armageddon myth therefore it is different to what has been said before and cannot be banal.

edit - israel was the beginning of the world only if you believe in creationism but lets not go there.

glad i'm on the right side of this dow fall :)

The weekend chat fred will drop down the order, so here, for posterity, Special Fred.

Gausie;-)))))

Yes, brilliantly funny video, but people with brain injuries can't help themselves, it's not their fault..........and I feel sorry for them.......they don't mean to be obnoxious, unlike some who shall remain nameless............ ;-)
Richard

.

Just been reading this to catch up.
Mighty Micro - you ask about the justification for the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The justification is quite simply that while a war is being waged any side's first aim is to win it. That simple. However I can see the moral dilemma. But no surrender was made after Hiroshima, despite the terrible consequences, which was the justification for the second atomic bomb.
There's also the responsibility to save as many of you own side's lives as possible, and historians, whether in favour of the bombs or not, generally agree that Allied soldiers' lives were saved - especially as it was the belief (generally justified) that the Japanese army was likely to fight to the last man.
Of course Hirohito was badly advised and was certainly pressurised, and probably actually believed at one time that he really was a god. In which case the refusal to surrender after Hiroshima could have been justified in his eyes.

As for the subject of this thread, there's no doubt that Hamas contains lots of fanatics - and logic and moral responsibility hold little sway when you have a red mist in front of your eyes.

Maggot: I happen to agree with you completely. I posed the question to provoke comment.

It's very easy for latter-day revisionists to preach about the morality of the atomic bombs on Japan, but they weren't sitting where Harry Truman was sitting in 1945.

The difference is that now nobody has used nuclear weapons again. My own belief is that it will be a rogue state or a terrorist organisation that will next do so.

And as we all know, Iran is potentially top of the list for being one of those.

And Iran are helping Hamas.

So...if you want to pick a side for any forthcoming fight, who are you going to pick?

Bomb Eye-Ran back to the stone age !
Turn it into a radio-active desert !
No more kid gloves !
Strike !
Now !
OK !

What we need in the world is more 'innocence'.

eg, There is a moment in a video interview with 13 yr old father, Alfie Patten, who has just hit the news headlines recently, when he is asked: What will you do financially?

He looks up, his cherubic face crumpled with bewilderment, and replies: What's financially'?

Yeah. Let's all make love, not war.

Alfi for Prime Minister!

:-)

.

Cypriot divers armed with sensors and infrared gear began exploring the Cypriot-flagged Iranian arms ship docked at Limassol on orders from the UN Security Council Sanctions Committee. The Cypriot official said sending the shipment back is not an "available option." This would be the first time an Iranian arms ship has been detained and its freight confiscated.

US and British marine experts have joined the search of the vessel.

Friday night, the UN sanctions committee concluded in a special session in New York that the consignment violated UN Security Council Resolution 1747 banning Iranian exports. It acted on a report from Cyprus that initial searches of the concealed parts of the ship had turned up different types of rockets believed destined for Hamas. Half the 60 containers have been examined.



To get back to the subject.........UK media have ignored the above completely, just as they have ignored the UN report saying that UN school was NOT shelled by Israel and there were no casualties in that school - totally the opposite of the first "reports" !

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/13/hamas-gaza-murders-abduction-torture

does one trust the guardian any more than say telegraph or bbc? ...... a rhetorical question only

ExecLine - "And as we all know, Iran is potentially top of the list for being one of those."

Err - is that the same as we knew that Iraq had the potential to release a Weapon of Mass Destruction within 45 minutes? And that Saddam Hussein was hiding WMDs somewhere in Iraq? And that the whole of Iraq would rejoice when he was overthrown?

Experience (66 years unfortunately) has shown me that of all lies perpetrated, the biggest are ALWAYS pedalled by governments. And desperate governments tell the biggest lies. Of course the law of averages says that some statements by governments are true...probably unintentionally so!

There may be some sense in the Israeli leadership.

From Weekend FT

Ms Livni
When she entered politics in 1996, she turned to her natural political home, the rightwing, nationalist Likud party. It was the party of Ariel Sharon, Israel's military and political strongman, who rewarded her talents with a series of ministerial posts. No one knows what caused her and other Likud leaders to re-examine their core beliefs. But, over the past decade, Ms Livni realised that her dream of a Jewish state covering all of historic Palestine was turning into a nightmare. She recognised that Israel could survive as a Jewish and democratic state only if it pulled back from the occupied Palestinian territories and allowed some form of Palestinian state. That re-- alisation led to Mr Sharon's creation of the Kadima party in 2005.
The need to draw Israel's final borders quickly has become the driving force behind her ambition. She has, some say, the zeal of the convert. "Tzipi believes in the two-state solution much more than anyone who grew up in a leftwing home," says an official who works with her. "It is like someone who has taken on the Catholic faith." Though she has given up the dream of "Greater Israel", Ms Livni "doesn't feel she is rejecting her parents' heritage. In her mind, she is finding ways to realise that dream, not rejecting it," one person who knows her well says.