Christopher Pyne Slammed By Palestinian Minister

Remove this Banner Ad

You sound like a person who if things were thieved from you, you would say to the thieves "it's okay, you can keep what you stole from me".

More like, a person went to court and said that your house is theirs, won the court case, and instead of appealing you tried to blow it up.
 
Seems to me like they were all either formerly occupied by European powers and/or had external powers try to interfere with their internal politics for their own economic and other interests.

So why is it that Eastern Europe countries can cope, ditto Asia? They were colonised by Euro powers.

What is the single common factor in the ME being such a gigantic stuff up ex Israel? It doesn't take a genius to figure it out

NB a number of states wanted western help / protection eg Trucial states and Britain.

For other examples see Central and South America

Haiti was independent long before nearly every other country run by Euro powers

By your logic they should be uber rich.
 
So why is it that Eastern Europe countries can cope, ditto Asia? They were colonised by Euro powers.

Like the former Yugoslavia, Ukraine & Chechnya? Also a number of Asian countries are hardly a bastion of personal freedom or stability.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

lol, that's first year arts crap. They aren't stuffed because of so called western interference they just aren't capable of running themselves.

As for Yugoslavia issues there arise from Muslim invasion, likewise the terrorists in Chechnya are Muslim. Odd that apologists never mention that.
 
lol, that's first year arts crap. They aren't stuffed because of so called western interference they just aren't capable of running themselves.

As for Yugoslavia issues there arise from Muslim invasion, likewise the terrorists in Chechnya are Muslim. Odd that apologists never mention that.
OK then how about Northern Ireland then (or Ireland as a whole)? Or the partition of India, Sub-Saharan Africa and Central/South America.
 
So why is it that Eastern Europe countries can cope, ditto Asia? They were colonised by Euro powers.

What is the single common factor in the ME being such a gigantic stuff up ex Israel? It doesn't take a genius to figure it out

NB a number of states wanted western help / protection eg Trucial states and Britain.

Haiti was independent long before nearly every other country run by Euro powers

By your logic they should be uber rich.

Every time the Arabs (and Persians) went to nationalise their oil and generate some wealth for themselves rather than foreigners their governments were overthrown. Puppets were installed. Of course we can never know now, but what might the Middle East be like if leftist civil societies were permitted to grow in these places instead of being violently overthrown?

What if there were no more House of Saud or any of the Gulf Monarchies back in the time before virulent Wahhabism took off?

What we have now is only there through past meddling. We cannot change the past, but we can own up to it.

We, not as individuals but we as in our societal forebears, f*cked up big time. We put our interests first and ahead of those who actually lived in those lands.

We f*cked up. We need to own that. We need to heal things.
 
Were there ever tensions between the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic populations? I think Croatia was largely Catholic, while Serbia was Eastern Orthodox Christian...
If the Ottomans were anything like the British they would have ensured that those tensions existed in order more easily maintain control.

That's another thing that is sometimes missed, what we are looking at least in the near east is the aftermath of the breakup of the Ottoman Empire during the early 20th Century.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Israel had nothing to do with this
But hey look a cat with a fluffy tail

True, but this came up during "an annual Australia-UK-Israel leadership dialogue" to see "how attendees can best support the Jewish state".

You said

Tell em to GAGF
Cut off any aid to Palestine

Surely you can't think Israel is entirely blameless and one hundred percent the 'innocent victim' of completely unprovoked Palestinian aggression?

It takes two to tango. Australia, if it were to cut off Palestinian aid, must follow through with the common sense approach and tell the Jewish State to GAGF unless they change their tune as well.
 
True, but this came up during "an annual Australia-UK-Israel leadership dialogue" to see "how attendees can best support the Jewish state".

You said



Surely you can't think Israel is entirely blameless and one hundred percent the 'innocent victim' of completely unprovoked Palestinian aggression?

It takes two to tango. Australia, if it were to cut off Palestinian aid, must follow through with the common sense approach and tell the Jewish State to GAGF unless they change their tune as well.
Deflect,deflect,deflect

760px-Svensk_lapphund.JPG
 
Were there ever tensions between the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic populations?

Were?? No love lost there at all.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/tennis/serbs-croats-clash-at-open/2007/01/15/1168709659893.html

What we have now is only there through past meddling. We cannot change the past, but we can own up to it.

Was it better run under the Brits? Extraordinarily hard to say no.

So why apologise?

NB what about the trucal states asking the Poms to stay? What is often overlooked is that Western interference has often been asked for eg getting rid of the Turks.
 
NB what about the trucal states asking the Poms to stay? What is often overlooked is that Western interference has often been asked for eg getting rid of the Turks.
And before that they were asking to get rid of the Normans and French and before that the Byzantines and before that Romans and before that the Greeks ect.
 
Look it up
No one gave a rats about so called Palestinian state until 1967

The people there cared. There might be a lot of bad blood there, on both sides, but I think it's NEVER too late for some kind of reconciliation. Northern Ireland is starting to heal. New generations of kids are gonna grow up with a bit less animosity towards 'the other'.

I think Jews and Muslims can do the same.

All it takes is a bit of determined effort and a bit of elbow grease. And an abandonment of the notion of 'divine right of occupation'. They're human, and that's all they ever were. One nation. Many cultures. They HAVE to share the land.

Oh, and here's a picture of a puppy and a kitten.
28768poster.jpg


I think there's something in that for all of us, don't you?
 
NB what about the trucal states asking the Poms to stay? What is often overlooked is that Western interference has often been asked for eg getting rid of the Turks.

I think all those sheikhs and emirs wanted to perpetuate their power. The Poms wanted an end to Portuguese and French influence in the area. This is the history of Oman, for instance;

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/trucialoman.htm

The Trucial Oman was never a single entity with a recognised ruler. It was a collection of disparate Sheikhdoms with different needs and aspirations and each of which dealt with the British in their own way and to suit their own needs. Before the British arrived on the scene, this stretch of coast had been under the influence of the Portugese, the Omanis and then the Persians. The last of these were to be displaced by two tribal confederations that were beginning to exert power in the area: The Qawasim and the Bani Yas. The Qawasim were a seafaring clan based in Ras Al-Khaimah, whereas the Bani Yas were a Bedouin tribe from the interior. The initial contacts of both of these tribes with the British was to be a confrontational one, but for different reasons.

The Qawasim were arch-rivals of the Al-Busaids who were based in Oman and who also sought to assert their control over this part of Arabia. In 1798, the British signed an agreement with the Al-Busaids in an elaborate attempt to keep the French out of the area and so strengthen Britain's claims to paramountcy in the Indian sub-continent. However, this deal with the Al-Busaids made Britain part of the enemy as far as the Qawasim were concerned. This meant that British East India Company ships were fair game and were attacked and pillaged at every opportunity by the Qawasim. This stretch of coast soon came to be known in Britain, India and beyond as the Pirate Coast and the Royal Navy reacted accordingly by launching campaigns and raids against the Qawasim in 1805, 1809 and 1811. Unfortunately for the British, the locals knew the area too well and could quickly escape only to regroup elsewhere.

In 1819, the British decided to try and end the piracy in this area once and for all. A large fleet was dispatched from Bombay and by 1820 it had destroyed and captured every Qawasim ship that it had come across and occupied all the major forts in the area, even going so far as occupying Qawasim hideouts in Persia itself. With the successful outcome of this operation the British imposed a General Treaty of Peace on nine Arab sheikhdoms in the area and installed a garrison in the region.

The treaty did not prevent these princes and sheikhs from continuing to attack each other, which they did with gusto and much to the consternation of the British. In an attempt to reign in the worst excesses of dynastic and tribal rivalry the British imposed a new treaty in 1835. It was named the Maritime Truce and its intended aim was to keep traffic moving in the Gulf region. It was revised in 1839 to include the forceful banning of slavery. In 1853, the truces were upgraded still further to become the Treaty of Peace in Perpetuity. Under which, the British assumed all responsibility for arbitrating in any disputes between the Sheikhs of the area. It was this final truce that gave this part of the Gulf its name for the next 120 years...

The Poms ended slavery in the area, which is a good thing. Credit to them there. Perpetuating these corrupt monarchies and sheikhdoms and emirates though...
 
Look it up
No one gave a rats about so called Palestinian state until 1967

That is an extreme simplification. Palestinian nationalism started in the the 1920s as a reaction to Zionist nationalism and colonialism. The people who had ancestral ownership of the land have been displaced by mainly European Jews. The presence and aggressive policies of Israel has served to radicalise the Palestinians. It was Jewish fundamentalists not Islamists who shot Yitzhak Rabin.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top