Arsenal vs Tottenham Hotspur: Match Thread.

Thanks for expanding on this point.

The problem is our government/media is only interested in painting them as religious fanatics who have no reason for their actions beyond hatred, racism, and jealousy for our wonderful utopian existence. They won't report facts like "Iran has the second largest population of Jews in the Middle East (after Israel), and Jews have a reserved seat in the Iranian parliament" because it doesn't agree with their agenda. We're supposed to believe that the West has done nothing wrong in these countries, the "terrorists" have no reason for their actions, and our enemy is an irrational entity that cannot be reasoned with and must be killed. I know it's stupid to draw Third Reich comparisons, but Goebbels would be bloody proud.

 

Israel is a country that has been at the mercy of others far too often in it's History. When you walk around the cities there are armed soldiers everywhere. You can't go into a shopping centre or onto any mode of transport without going through scanners and check-points. It's like a wierd feeling of being on the edge of conflict, yet at the same time it just seems a very normal part of life and no-one seems remotely bothered by it.

It's a very interesting country and i don't think i had nearly the same grasp of that region of the world prior to visiting earlier this year. I'd recommend it to anyone interested in history, religion, politics etc...

 

And the backing will reduce as America's dependence on foreign oil is reduced (and Saudis know it). Saudi Arabia has always been reactionary and very religious (and an exporter of their regressive brand of Islam), and the government there is actually the one pushing for reforms but the people won't have any of it. They were always going to be rich of their oil wealth too, with or without the backing of America. What America's backing has done is at least keep them at bay in geopolitical terms as a country, despite individuals from there being able to finance the advancement of twisted ideologies (which would have happened anyway).

I've always been critical of the Iraq invasion as damaging to the interests of the civilized world ('ahem), but I think the backing of the Saudis has been very pragmatic and well handled. Now with the shale gas revolution happening in the US and Canada (assuming alarmist Eco-nuts don't do too much damage there with their anti-scientific exaggerated claims) the power of the Saudis will further diminish and they will come to terms with their reality.

 

True enough, the Saudis are in a precarious situation with regards to oil and were always going to be, considering it's finite nature. It makes you wonder though, if the US becomes more energy independent and their reliance on Middle Eastern oil dwindles, how much will this affect relations between the US and Israel? I get that the latter lobbies furiously in the US and that the evangelical Christians there have their own motives for maintaining a healthy relationship, but if the area loses economic interest for the US Israel might find themselves quite lonely.

Heh, this is a whole other discussion, and one I really doubt we see eye-to-eye on. Maybe it's best kept for another time, but feel free to expand on it if you want...

 

That depends on whether you're talking about the modern State of Israel or the ancient lands of Judah and the Holy lands of Palestine. Certainly in recent times, since the creation of the state after the second world war, Israel has been supported by the US and Europe to carve up this land and impose draconian conditions on Palestinian communities via an unchecked rule of martial law, backed with their money and weapons.

The point is though that whole area is an ethnic melting pot. Jews and Arabs are relatively modern incumbents, the lands there have been under Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Roman and Byzantine rule. Israel today is a state created for disparate Jews to have a homeland, but there is no ethnic or religious claim to the land.

 

I'd also be interested to hear how eco nuts arrive at their conclusions via anti-scientific means.

 

That's why I said Israeli apologists, idiots in the west have invented their own myths into supporting Israel, such as Israel supposedly holding down the fort for Europe.

Yes, they might weaken Syria to hurt Iran, but the ones who are also going to benefit from that are the Al-Qaeda types who will fill most of the power vacuum, most experts agree that right now it's the Al-Qaeda linked fighters in Syria that are the most organised, disciplined, well armed, well financed, and making inroads into society. They've already established their own mini governments ruling over the towns-villages they've captured, the districts of major cities they've captured such as Aleppo etc.

What the whole conflict in Syria has shown is that when it comes down to it, the whole 'war on terrorism' is just a big pile of sh!t, and when it comes to convenient western foreign policy to hurt a country we don't like, Al-Qaeda become useful mercenaries to use to destroy and weaken an enemy country.

 

That's an astute observation.

 

Even if the US is no longer reliant on Saudi oil, which for a large part, they aren't, they'd still have a very strong interest in KSA. Because the U.S. might not need the oil, but if the Saudi oil market is effected or substantially damaged, that hurts the oil economy in general, and has a negative affect on the world economy as a whole, and everyone gets affected and hurt.

 

You are but a google search away at finding plenty of articles from reliable sources which debunk the early wildly exaggerated claims of the risks of extracting natural gas via fracking.

It reminds me of the whole nuclear power fiasco. One of the cleanest energy sources that had the biggest chance to make a huge dent in reducing CO2 emissions, but it now has no chance of a revival due to the public perception through decades of misinformation.


Plenty of influential environmentalists like Mark Lynas, Stewart Brand, etc, have since changed their mind, but the damage has already been done. Let's hope it's not the same story for shale gas, which also is a lot cleaner that many of its alternatives.

 

Looking at it from a 'sectarian' perspective, there was no way in hell that either Syria or Iraq had a chance to peacefully transition into a representative democracy, or another form government that equally represented all groups. Fact of the matter is that both countries were ruled and dominated by minority sects, and the majority sect felt disadvantaged, and in Iraq's case clearly discriminated against for decades.

These two countries were going to end bad in any case, and Al-Qaeda would be there to pounce on that opportunity.


I don't support western countries getting involved in these two places, but I'm not going to lie and say the reason for that is because I think that's best for the people of that place (there's going to be bloodshed no matter what).

I didn't support the Iraq war, but if the calls of elected Iraqi representatives are of any indication is that they seem to think that the violence and casualties between the sects there would be much higher and more difficult to handle without western militaries there, and they are urging for US troops to remain longer. But I still don't think it's worth it even if for the fact that all the blame in the end gets thrown to the US and the UK.


But you're lying to yourself if you think that when Sadam would have died of natural causes in an alternate reality, Shias would go like "hey you know all those decades you treated us, the majority, as second class citizens? Yea it's all forgotten, let's all go play representative democracy and live happily ever after".

 

Fukuishima and Chenobyl disprove that it isn't public disinformation, but I do agree that nuclear energy, if you could harness cold fusion would be a good energy solution.

The point though surely is not about trying to meet the insatiable demands for more and more energy, but to work out what is sustainable for our needs, not wants.

Fracking, ultimately is just another crude and dangerous attempt to plunder finite fossil fuels. It's not really an intelligent solution.

 

Well Jews where settled in the region prior to WW2 despite it not being the current Israel. There claim is more than just it being where all the jews where put because of what europe let happen to them.

And since WW2 it's hardly been plain sailing for them as a nation. There is constant hostility from the region towards them, despite who is right or wrong in the disagreements over land, they are naturally very defensive in there attitudes towards things. I think recently they have overstepped this though, particularly with some of the new settlements they have built which clearly take the piss with land boundaries.

Despite having heard about it beforehand i was shocked by the large military presence on the streets there, it does feel like they are constantly ready for something to happen. And not so shocked that i was questioned thoroughly at passport control after they saw the arabic stamp in my passport (i'd been to Morocco a week or so earlier), which to my amusement terrified my girlfriend.

In Jerusalem in the old town, on the road leading to the Muslim Golden dome (the point where Muhamed reached enlightenment) i saw a stall selling Palestinian flags. I hadn't seen any mention of Palestine my whole time in Israel and we had even been warned not to talk to any Palestinians we saw as it could lead to us being questioned. And two boys, one muslim who worked there and one i assumed possibly jewish where fronting up to each other and looked like it was going to kick off (i'm pretty sure he was saying they should take the flags down, but do not speak arabic so could have got it wrong). The older man on the stall noticed i was watching and went and broke them up, clipped the muslim boy round the ear and sent the other one away. Not sure if this was because they don't like tourists to realise there is any tension and like to play it down, or if they where just worried about getting in trouble for the Palestinian flags. But the tension is obvious.

It absolutely amazed me just how close the most holy places for Jews, Christians and Muslims are together. You can walk in 5 minutes to any of the 3 (wailing wall, golden dome, church of the sepulchre). They are right on top of each other. As you say it's a melting pot and because of that it will remain a place of contention.

 

Chernobyl is a joke compared to how modern nuclear power plants are managed (though not having economy and reality ignoring political ideologies rule countries would also help), and Fukushima type events can be easily prevented by a policy limiting the construction of nuclear power plants near fault lines or other areas with know natural disaster risks.

 

It's a real shame that those nuclear accidents occured. Nuclear really is the way forward for Energy. Fussionis the future, but our current methods should be used. I hate it when science is held back by fear. You just have to make sure the drive for returns on investment do not cause the safety aspects to be overlooked. For example Japan get earchquakes etc all the time, they should have been more prepared for Fukushima.

 

I suppose my point it is that it's misleading to define conflict as 'Terrorist' activity vs 'Western Democracy'. That's a media / govt descriptive framework for trying to define the region based on their own particular agenda. The ethnicity of the area is too varied to fit into those definitions.

 

Well I can agree with you on that at least. Most of those Eco-nuts are aging hippies looking to revisit their youth. Their drug-rotted minds know nothing about the science. All they have is some preconceived idea about what is evil, and if something has the word "nuclear" in it, they get whipped into a frenzy. Morons like that give other liberals a bad name.

 

True, but then you're talking about an economic equation again. Why wasn't Japan prepared, it's one of the richest countries in the world and yet even then market forces failed to deliver a safe energy.

For me though, the answer to energy is more about needs versus wants - and that equation is demand. The problem is that we think demand should be high to meet our increasing energy needs, but this comes about because we're not looking at it in a sustainable way.

 

Sounds like you want to scale back human progress. We should want it all, but we should also look for the best way to have it all. Fossil fuels are not the answer, and I wonder if better alternatives are being held back by the oil companies.

 

Hydrogen is the way forward. Clean, efficient, and when converted to electricity, offers a higher output than fossil fuels.

The hippies would find a way to whine about Hydrogen though, they managed to ruin Nuclear power. I wonder if they really care about the environment, or if they just want to enjoy that fleeting feeling of holding an entire planet by the balls.