A few posts back you were complaining about CNN etc being pro israel.
Complaining about CNN being pro-israel and ignoring articles posted by CNN are two entirely different things. And I'd still appreciate it if you could link to where I complained about CNN being biased.
I think israel has the right defend itself against terrorists.
If you break into someone's home, and they point a gun at you and tell you to not move because you have threatened their home and that they are calling the police, it is not self-defence if you shoot the person pointing the gun at you. Similarly, Israel loses all justifiably for its actions when its illegal behaviour is the prime cause of the terrorism in the first place. The occupation came first, the violent resistance by the palestinians came second.
Im not talking about military support but who they wanted to win the war. Which was obviously for the arab states. If they had supported israel the region wouldnt be in the current mess.
Just how the hell do you think a group of people living within what was british mandate territory, who had no central government, no central authority, and NO standing army was supposed to stop a handful of other nations from launching an attack against Israel???
Seriously, what could the Palestinians POSSIBLY HAVE DONE?
Things have only gotten worse for the palestinians since they have been firing rockets and using suicide bombers. Why do you think there was a blockade in the first place.
The timeline clearly shows that the Palestinians had their basic human rights trampled first. It is the height of hypocrisy to blame the Palestinians for reacting negatively to this condition, and trying to claim that its their fault that all this is happening.
Sanctions hurt iraq but the occassional bombings did no significant damage to their military capability.
So you are claiming that the US did not harm the Iraqi military capability when they were at war with them?
And besides, even if there were no sanctions they still stood no chance against the US.
Probably because their military was decimated in the first gulf war and they were never allowed the opportunity to rebuild and faced sanctions so crippling that you couldn't even find a plain old HB pencil within the borders of Iraq?
As I said before, if you saw someone breaking into your house, would you wait for him to break in and attack you or would you do something before he got in? There was no legitimate reason for hamas to be digging tunnels anywhere near the border.
They don't need a "legitimate" reason. Gaza is theirs, they can do with it what they like. But I find your logic interesting. Using your reasoning, it seems that the Palestinians should have attacked Israel before Israel could occupy their land, before Israel set up the countless checkpoints within the west bank, before Israel started stealing and trying to annex Palestinian land...
Because that's what you do when someone is about to break into your house, right?
Those links detail stuff which COULD happen. And it is blatantly obvious that the US is not bankrupt. As I keep saying RECESSION RECESSION RECESSION. Countries recover from them.
Or they don't. Plenty of Empires have falling in the past, the last one to fall was the British Empire. Are they still a nation? Yes. Do they still dwarf the rest of the world in terms of economic and military might? Hell no.
What are you talking about, I've given my view on every issue discussed. As usual, just more insults and accusations because I won't agree with you.
You give your views, and then when someone provides evidence which shows why your views are unlikely, you merely say "I believe what I believe", however if someone doesn't provide evidence, you mock them for not being able to find proof. Does this strike you as mature behaviour?
Actually in 1933 the unemployment rate was about 25% while it is only 7% now.
Yes, that was after 5 years after the first crash. Compare apples with apples please. (Hint, you should be comparing the 2013 unemployment rate with the 25% figure you have quoted.
As the unemployment rate is a major indicator of how well an economy is doing, you are clearly wrong.
No, you are cleary misrepresenting the occurance of the great depression to suit your viewpoint.
Also, the way the US measures its unemployment rate has changed drastically since the great depression. It used to be that everyone who was unemployed was counted as a straight figure. Nowadays, only people that are actually claiming unemployment benefits are counted as "unemployed". When your benefits end, the government claims that you're "not looking for a job anymore" and removes you from its statistics. The end result is that the ACTUAL unemployment rate is much MUCH greater than the official statistics would have you believe.
I think a few trillion. Large losses are common throughout the world today caused by the global recession. As I said before it will recover. Government around the world are introducing stimulus packages to do just that. It will take a few years but there is no need to panic.
Why don't you actually look up the solid figure?
Here, I'll do it for you :
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page95?oid=251389&sn=Detail
For the year, the Dow fell 33.8 percent, for its bleakest year since 1931; the S&P skidded 38.5 percent; and the Nasdaq posted its worst year ever, with a 40.5 percent drop.
Sign up with Google
