Netanyahu is spouting hate speech again.

[Lemon law]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePresence View Post
JOS, why do you bother with these threads? It just serves to raise your blood pressure. I left P&N a long time ago. It's like talking to a brick wall here.
It amuses me a bit i guess. I don't really take it as seriously as it might seem except when people call me a Nazist or keep stalking me for years just to repeat the same thing.

No one will ever change their mind though, i do understand that and you are right, it's like talking to a brick wall.

Shalom and thanks for the sentiment
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for me, I will direct myself to both ThePresence and JOS. And the question is trying to change opinions on P&N futile?

And why it may be so. Because when we have complex political problems with many dimensions, we simple will not get simple mathematical equations like 1+1=2 answers.
And because the various histories and considerations are so complex and diverse, and in turn bear on other complex and diverse other political questions, it ends up being some what infinite and beyond the capacity of the human mind to all take in.

So its somewhat in grained human nature to cut the problem down to size, by ignoring some considerations while focusing on any one given poster thinks. Some amount of bias is inevitable in us all, and when one such biased poster meets another with an opposite bias, the fireworks of futility begin.

But in the case of at least JEDIY and JOS, who are self confessed Jews, some of the bias comes with the religion. But since I am the son of such a "full blooded Jew" that grew up in areas of almost zero antisemitism, it fails to explain my bias the other way. I would like to flatter myself that I only seem so anti the State of Israel because I am constantly being forced to point out how FOS various pro-Israeli fan clubbers are as they post a totally false revisionist history that totally concentrates on semi true Arab and Palestinian sins while totally ignoring a long and rich history of total State of Israel villainy.

But I am more a realist, to some extent Israeli critics and Israeli fan clubbers will never convince each other or change the minds of the biased. So at best one side can at best
cancel the other out. Which is better than one side or the other being the last group standing.

But my goal is quite different, my target audience is the less biased, and its my goal to educate the more open minded that there are more than one version of the total truth out there. And my other goal I am proud of is to correctly predict the end outcome.
It may not come as fast as I predict, the force of change is agonizingly slow, and progress has an annoying habit of going into reverse now and then, before it changes back, but I will stack my forecasts up against the record of anyone.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Gaza was conquered by the Egyptians and existed under Egyptian rule for 20 years.
Egypt allowed the PLO to exist in Gaza acting against Israel. Egypt was at war with Israel, the Palestinians were at war with Israel; yet the Egyptians were also keeping the Palestinians under the boot.

Land that Israeli settlers had was turned back to the Palestinians in Gaza in hope that land for peace would work.

All the Palestinians did was to increase attacks against Israel and destroy the infrastructure that the Israeli settlers left for the Palestinians.











__________________

Finally a voice of reason!!

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePresence View Post
JOS, why do you bother with these threads? It just serves to raise your blood pressure. I left P&N a long time ago. It's like talking to a brick wall here.
It amuses me a bit i guess. I don't really take it as seriously as it might seem except when people call me a Nazist or keep stalking me for years just to repeat the same thing.

No one will ever change their mind though, i do understand that and you are right, it's like talking to a brick wall.

Shalom and thanks for the sentiment
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for me, I will direct myself to both ThePresence and JOS. And the question is trying to change opinions on P&N futile?

And why it may be so. Because when we have complex political problems with many dimensions, we simple will not get simple mathematical equations like 1+1=2 answers.
And because the various histories and considerations are so complex and diverse, and in turn bear on other complex and diverse other political questions, it ends up being some what infinite and beyond the capacity of the human mind to all take in.

So its somewhat in grained human nature to cut the problem down to size, by ignoring some considerations while focusing on any one given poster thinks. Some amount of bias is inevitable in us all, and when one such biased poster meets another with an opposite bias, the fireworks of futility begin.

But in the case of at least JEDIY and JOS, who are self confessed Jews, some of the bias comes with the religion. But since I am the son of such a "full blooded Jew" that grew up in areas of almost zero antisemitism, it fails to explain my bias the other way. I would like to flatter myself that I only seem so anti the State of Israel because I am constantly being forced to point out how FOS various pro-Israeli fan clubbers are as they post a totally false revisionist history that totally concentrates on semi true Arab and Palestinian sins while totally ignoring a long and rich history of total State of Israel villainy.

But I am more a realist, to some extent Israeli critics and Israeli fan clubbers will never convince each other or change the minds of the biased. So at best one side can at best
cancel the other out. Which is better than one side or the other being the last group standing.

But my goal is quite different, my target audience is the less biased, and its my goal to educate the more open minded that there are more than one version of the total truth out there. And my other goal I am proud of is to correctly predict the end outcome.
It may not come as fast as I predict, the force of change is agonizingly slow, and progress has an annoying habit of going into reverse now and then, before it changes back, but I will stack my forecasts up against the record of anyone.

The deer is quite teal.

There is no use reading your words, you know nothing and don't matter at all, you make shit up and claim it is truth then change your story when proven wrong and claim you were right all along.

I'm sorry but the days of discussing with you are long gone now.

 

[Lemon law]

Oh well JOS, I consider you a negative barometer also, but I will still continue to read your posts, and continue to point out areas your your information is quite flawed.

I never felt that the correct strategy was to close my eyes and ears to reality would ever make reality go away. But JOS, if you want to still be a legend in only your own mind, feel free to call anyone who disagrees with you a twat, or better yet simply ignore them. Where I come from, that never got anyone any mileage if they were older than eight.

 

[Freshgeardude]

Therefore it is okay for Israel to support a dictator?

If we use the same analogy that you have said, then it is okay for China to support North Korea, Iran to support & sponsor violent in the ME, and it is okay for the Japanese to support the Nazi during WW2 at killing Jews.

Hypocrisy at work!

We don't know what will happen after this mess as well as who is going to run the country. And, IMHO this dire situation in Egypt needs positive international support instead of negative knee jerk reactions that we are seeing from the dictatorship Israeli camp.

The US acts as the police dog of the world. Israel does not.


and by your analogy,

the recent Wikileaks already showed china wouldnt mind seeing NK collapse.


Iran supports terrorist groups which attack a different country. a country not in any way threatening to iran.

Israel doesnt attack or fund terrorists to attack neighboring countries because they personally dont like it.





I'll repeat it again. Israel acts to protect its own citzens. not any other countries citizens.


china supporting NK or Iran supporting terrorists groups do not under any circumstance help their own people live their life better.

 

[Freshgeardude]

As a clear picture emerges from Egypt, we learn 100% of the violence is coming from the Mubarak side as he empties prison, recruits agents to use violence against peaceful protesters demanding his ouster. So Bozo Netanyuhu is only stupid enough to be the only one calls for the retention of Mubarak?

With a giant hollow argument of panic panic panic, if that lovable thug Mubarak falls, we will get an Egypt ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood. And worse yet, Netanyuhu tries to sell
that crapola to Obama, the entire Arab League, and the international community after disrespecting calls from almost everyone in that same target audience to extend the settlement freeze in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. As Netanyuhu basically told everyone to go fuck themselves, including Mubarak, who never did much to help the Palestinians anyway.

But there were a number of good articles in the NYT, basically saying the Muslim Brotherhood has very little support in Egypt. With no more than a 100,000 supporters in Egypt, totally miserable small given Egypt has a population of more like 75-80 million. Nor are street protesters paying much attention to the Muslim Brotherhood as they try to gain any notice. The Mubarak protesters are young, educated, pragmatic, and in many of their minds, the MB and Mubarak are simply relics of the past that no longer have any use. Nor are they chanting anti-Israeli slogans, their prize is getting rid of Mubarak corruption and thuggery. They want economic and political reforms, and not a return to failed policies of the past. Worse yet, the MB has no social outreach that earns them any Egyptian support.

Because while Israel has been snoozing, their entire neighborhood has been changing. No longer can a group shout anti-Israel slogans and expect to earn any support. Israel gains less and less mileage with demonizing the military wings of Hamas and Hezbollah.
When the social wings of Hamas and Hezbollah are much larger and are the go to guys for everyone in Gaza and Lebanon to get social support help. Fatah in the West Bank has transformed itself into an very effective social support group. And has done much to prevent almost all anti-Israeli violence.

And we can take a Lesson from the recent democratic and non-violent change of Government in Lebanon. And when the Christan community in Lebanon had to choose either R. Harri or Hezbollah, they sided with Hezbollah. Maybe some Israeli pay back from its rape of Lebanon in 2006. Israel, as an equal opportunity did not have to bomb the Christians in central Lebanon, far from the Hezbollah strong holds in South Lebanon, but Israel choose to anyway. And when, R. Harri choose to throw in his lot with the Israeli desire to rid itself of Hezbollah, well alas poor Harri, we can bid him farewell. Nor is Hezbollah over playing its hand, instead of seeking control, it seeks to be only a part of a broad based Government. And to add to Israel losing its last large regional allies in Turkey and Egypt, the King of Jordan is frankly disgusted with Israel.

Israel knew how to deal with corrupt despotic Arab governments, but seems clueless about dealing with a mid-east that is transforming itself toward democratic social and political reforms. What good does it do Israel to have a kick ass military, when the mid-east is not playing Israel's game. As Israel is embracing the role of mid-east villain #1, now out of step with a modern world.

what in the hell are you talking about??

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/01/25/lebanese-rally-hezbollah-day-rage/

was it fair? I didnt see elections held?

im not familiar with the lebanese system of government, but from that article, it stated the president chose the leader.

no elections.

how is that democratic?



Hezbollah started the war with israel in 2006. when you realize that, come back and talk because all you did was rant on about israel doing this and that.

 

[Freshgeardude]

Oh well JOS, I consider you a negative barometer also, but I will still continue to read your posts, and continue to point out areas your your information is quite flawed.

bahah at this point, i think you just ignore my posts completely.

never do you answer my posts. I think its maybe a 1/6 ratio of my posts proving yours wrong to you actually answering.


tryign to debate with you is beating a dead horse.

You come up with some claim, i rebut. half the time you answer, i rebut.

then you never come back.

All the things i say have been/ can be proven through wikipedia, a pretty well established source.


what next? you going to start denying wikipedia?

 

[Lemon law]

The FGD delusion is clinging to, "Hezbollah started the war with israel in 2006. when you realize that, come back and talk because all you did was rant on about israel doing this and that."

And the problem with that is two fold.

1. That was in 2006 and now this is 2011. Because Israeli disproportionate violence in 2006 ended up back firing against Israel. Because in 2006, Hezbollah popularity inside of Lebanon stood at 25% percent, after Israel raped Lebanon, it stood at 75%. Since then Hezbollah has given Israel no reason to retaliate against Lebanon, other than the normally expected minor border incidents. And now in 2011, when R. Harri decided to see if he could agree with Israel and take out Hezbollah, it backfired on R. Harri, as a broad based coalition of Lebanese legislators democratically removed R. Harri by democratic means. By giving R. Harri what amounts to a vote of no confidence, which is the normal means to remove an established government under Parliamentary style democracies. Then the existing government falls, a new interim government is often installed, and then new elections may be called at a future date. And since both England and Israel are Parliamentary systems, it may be hard for us in the USA to understand that form of democracy.

2. Israel, in the year 2011 is having a hard time adjusting to mid-east regional changes.
As the older style despotic and corrupt Muslim dictatorships and monarchies are now facing new challenges from new younger better educated leaders less concerned about Israel and more concerned with economic and political reforms that benefit their nations. At exactly the same time as Israel is about the lose or has already lost their only regional allies in the mid-east. And exactly the same time that Netanyuhu is seemingly leading Israel to disaster. Because the Netanyuhu position is leaking world Israeli credibility at a rate never seen before. And in just one single year, Israel has lost its last three regional allies that took 30 years to gain.

 

[EagleKeeper]

What regional allies did ISrael have.

You yourself stated that Egypt was bribed.

What did Jordan do for Israel? Turn over the West Bank because the Palestinians were a PITA?

What use was Turkey beside economic? And Turkey is still economic.
The Islamic faction is what caused/encouraged the fighting on the blockade runner.

If allies are that fickle, then they are allies of convienence, not allies of ideals.

Israel realize that change is coming. Israel also realizes that when change last came to the Middle East, it made matters worse and Israel was not even involved.

 

[Lemon law]

I never expected you, EK, to be able to read the tea leaves in any realistic way, but your two following statements are quite meaningless to me as you say, "If allies are that fickle, then they are allies of convienence, not allies of ideals.

Israel realize that change is coming. Israel also realizes that when change last came to the Middle East, it made matters worse and Israel was not even involved."

And let us examine them one by one. In terms of Israel ever having any mid-eastern allies of ideals, that may be a distant goal Israel NEEDS in terms of any viable future, but meanwhile any Israeli allies of convenience is not only being presently lost by Israel, and allies of convenience beat the hell out no regional allies at all. Regardless if the allies of convenience may be gained by US bribes, fear of Israeli retaliation, or whatever.

But then your next question is more vague than anything else, by saying the last time change came to the mid-east, Israel was not involved. To start out, its hard for anyone to even address that contention when you you don't specify when that last change occurred, and what you think it was. If you think it was Iran giving the Shah the ole heave ho, say so and we can respond. Or are you talking about GWB and co taking down Saddam, partly for the benefit of Israel say so, but vague is hard to deal with.

But the mid-east question #1 in my mind is the new winds of change blowing as old style despotic and corrupt dictatorships are now longer tolerable to new Pan Arabic leaders. And there are really to main questions that don't directly involve Israel at present. (1) How far will the change spread, already its toppled Tunisia, Mubarak is unlikely to hold on, King Abdullah in Jordan is trying to get in front of the needed reforms, and its destabilizing Yemem and Sudan. Turkey was already angry at the present mid-east order, but will its in turn now spread to Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.
As it is, the Mullah's of Iran could go the same way as the Shah, as they really pissed off their younger generation after the last rigged election, Iraq is sadly a country that never should have been as it composed of three major ethnic groups unwilling to see eye to eye, And its very possible reform demands will soon come to even Saudi Arabia.
And the second question is what will happen in Egypt? Israel may be correct in predicting that old style Muslim radicals will be the eventual winners, while moderate Arabs, Obama, and other regional powers are seeking some way to send a post Mubarak Egypt on a path of new Leadership that will can lead to a actual democratic government in Egypt seeking political and economic reforms. But still the down side for Israel no matter what, is that they will lose any mid-east entities willing to enforce that other half of an Israeli embargo of Gaza or the West Bank.

 

[EagleKeeper]

I never expected you, EK, to be able to read the tea leaves in any realistic way, but your two following statements are quite meaningless to me as you say, "If allies are that fickle, then they are allies of convenience, not allies of ideals.

Israel realize that change is coming. Israel also realizes that when change last came to the Middle East, it made matters worse and Israel was not even involved."

And let us examine them one by one. In terms of Israel ever having any mid-eastern allies of ideals, that may be a distant goal Israel NEEDS in terms of any viable future, but meanwhile any Israeli allies of convenience is not only being presently lost by Israel, and allies of convenience beat the hell out no regional allies at all. Regardless if the allies of convenience may be gained by US bribes, fear of Israeli retaliation, or whatever.

But then your next question is more vague than anything else, by saying the last time change came to the mid-east, Israel was not involved. To start out, its hard for anyone to even address that contention when you you don't specify when that last change occurred, and what you think it was. If you think it was Iran giving the Shah the old heave ho, say so and we can respond. Or are you talking about GWB and co taking down Saddam, partly for the benefit of Israel say so, but vague is hard to deal with.

But the mid-east question #1 in my mind is the new winds of change blowing as old style despotic and corrupt dictatorships are now longer tolerable to new Pan Arabic leaders. And there are really to main questions that don't directly involve Israel at present. (1) How far will the change spread, already its toppled Tunisia, Mubarak is unlikely to hold on, King Abdullah in Jordan is trying to get in front of the needed reforms, and its destabilizing Yemem and Sudan. Turkey was already angry at the present mid-east order, but will its in turn now spread to Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.
As it is, the Mullah's of Iran could go the same way as the Shah, as they really pissed off their younger generation after the last rigged election, Iraq is sadly a country that never should have been as it composed of three major ethnic groups unwilling to see eye to eye, And its very possible reform demands will soon come to even Saudi Arabia.
And the second question is what will happen in Egypt? Israel may be correct in predicting that old style Muslim radicals will be the eventual winners, while moderate Arabs, Obama, and other regional powers are seeking some way to send a post Mubarak Egypt on a path of new Leadership that will can lead to a actual democratic government in Egypt seeking political and economic reforms. But still the down side for Israel no matter what, is that they will lose any mid-east entities willing to enforce that other half of an Israeli embargo of Gaza or the West Bank.

Iran
When the Shah was deposed, it was the public unrest that brought a new government to power. Then the religious fanatics usurped that government and turned it into something that is questionable. From Israel's POV; the new government is more threatening than Syria. It supports the terror groups that attack Israel with weapons and funding. It wields economic power to affect the world economy just by words; it has the technical expertise to create weapons that can harm Israel and in theory attack her. the government leaders are verbally against Israel. In other words, Iran makes her nervous.

So while the removal of the Shah may have been good for the country, the following government did not become democratic and does harm to the country.

Iraq
Saddam encourage attacks against Israel both in the Middle East and abroad. He provided economic incentives for attacks. In Gulf War I, he attack Israel which was doing nothing - neutral observer.

From Israel's POV, it was good that he is gone. However, the resulting government is in complete disarray and is an unstable force in the area.
As you stated, three different main groups are fighting for some control; there is no real law & order - Saudi and Iran are both trying to influence the country and the US can not do anything because it is internal.

So while the removal of Saddam was good for Israel; the resulting disarray of the weak government (if really democratic) does not allow anyone to have confidence in where it will go or will it self imploded.

Egypt
Because of the last two examples of democracy in action; Israel is reasonable to raise the warning flag on how such changes of government may end up affecting the stability. The ideals of educated protesters can become overridden by either religious fervor and/or infighting which can destroy the country easily or economic reality that will take a couple of lifetimes to correct. Egypt may not have the natural resources that some of the other countries have. They have the tourism allure and the Canal. As they learned before the Canal is considered to be owned by the world which allows Egypt to operate it. Tourism can drop based on the perceived safety within the country.

Whoever stands up a new government needs to take into account economic issues as well as political and religious.

The West Bank and Gaza are minute players in what a new Egypt will be and may end up being ignored. Egypt may not want to worry about Gaza; the status quo will suit them fine. They were already embarrassed by released documents showing that their perceived support of Gaza was an illusion.

Looking at the reasons why there is such type of support for Gaza; does a new government jsut trying to be stood up, want the hassles/headaches that the previous one was trying to avoid.

The Palestinians in Jordan took advantage of a weakening government to try to put their own stamp/influence; can Egypt afford the same especially from a more militant group? Opening up Gaza puts such on the table.

Iran would love it if Gaza was able to influence the new Egyptian government - puts the squeeze on Saudi from three sides.

 

[Lemon law]

It does not surprise me the EK wants to read the mid-eastern tea leaves in the manner he does, when one is forecasting the future anything is possible.

But still, change is inevitable, and if we look back to 1948, Arab leaders tried the NIMBY
treatment of Israel. We all know how that worked out, and now younger Arabs have no illusions that Israel is going anywhere. The end question is will Israel conclude the only way to maintain their mid-east position is through a combination of military hegemony and intimidation, or will it make solid efforts to prove their presence in the mid-east can be of mutual benefit to all.

So far, sadly, Israel is proving to be more like the neighbor from hell former, at exactly the same time the rest or the world has to pick to side with Israel or the Arabs.

Israel has somewhat survived because Arab stupidity, corruption, and autocracy has kept their own economies down, but when the winds of change does bring new leadership, Israel might find itself in a more hostile neighborhood with economies far better able to start new arms races with Israel. Its the problem with military hegemony, today's state of the arts weapon is tomorrows antique.

And as former Israel allies are discovering, supporting Israel bought them nothing, and when a ingrate nation of Israel, led by an idiot tells all their former allies to fuck themselves, they are not going to help Israel anymore. Then it will finally come down to a nation of less than six million Israeli Jews resisting the will of 280 million Arabs with rapidly growing economies.

 

[EagleKeeper]

You are posting in double tongue

First you acknowledge that the younger generation of Arabs

now younger Arabs have no illusions that Israel is going anywhere.

(ie. not going away).

I notice that you do not include the Palestinians in this. Nor the Iranian leadership which is comparatively young.

Then you imply that these same Arabs will want to challenge Israel

but when the winds of change does bring new leadership, Israel might find itself in a more hostile neighborhood with economies far better able to start new arms races with Israel.

If they are willing to accept Israel, what will a new arms race accomplish for them?

The allies were not told to go fuck themselves (your words); that is your biased interpretation.
All that was stated was to beware of the change of government; one may get something different that what is expected. The devil you know vs the devil you do not.

 

[Lemon law]

It may seem to you that I am posting in double tongue, but that may be because you have a limited view of the future.

For the limited say5-7 year future, the goal of new mid-east leadership is likely going to concentrate on building their own economies and eliminating corruption, but in the longer range future, and if Israel has not moved towards a Palestinian State, then the States surrounding Israel are likely to take a very dim view of Israel.

But in the immediate future, new Arab leaders may isolate Israel but still give Israel no reason to attack them.

As for your last statement of, "The allies were not told to go fuck themselves (your words); that is your biased interpretation.
All that was stated was to beware of the change of government; one may get something different that what is expected. The devil you know vs the devil you do not."


And that is the question is delusional on your part. No I was not talking about Netanyuhu's warning about Egypt, I was talking about Israel's refusal to extend the settlement freeze. No one believes Israel anymore regarding their delay of an Palestinian State, except a few last remaining pro-Israeli fan clubbers.

 

[EagleKeeper]

When the freeze was in effect, the Palestinians did not show.

Now we know why - their leadership is to weak to make any type deal.

So what does it accomplish by a one sided agreement. Israel could freeze for years, but the Palestinians do not have the ability to commit to peace. so the status quo would not be accomplishing anything toward peace.

And now the Arab population as well as the rest of the world has been show the feet of clay of the Palestinian leadership on the West Bank.

Get new leadership that has the authority to work for peace and then come back to Israel with valid proposals.

Until then, it is the Palestinians that are suffering because of their choices in leadership.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Until then, it is the Palestinians that are suffering because of their choices in leadership.

I have always stated and will continue to state that the Palestinians are their own worse enemy!!

 

[werepossum]

When the freeze was in effect, the Palestinians did not show.

Now we know why - their leadership is to weak to make any type deal.

So what does it accomplish by a one sided agreement. Israel could freeze for years, but the Palestinians do not have the ability to commit to peace. so the status quo would not be accomplishing anything toward peace.

And now the Arab population as well as the rest of the world has been show the feet of clay of the Palestinian leadership on the West Bank.

Get new leadership that has the authority to work for peace and then come back to Israel with valid proposals.

Until then, it is the Palestinians that are suffering because of their choices in leadership.

Well said. Democracy gets you the leaders you deserve, not the leaders you need. Just when the Palestinians had within their grasp an Israel actually willing to commit to a Palestinian state, they elected leadership committed to the destruction of Israel - but without the means to accomplish it. This merely sentenced the Palestinians to more years in hell.

 

[Lemon law]

JediY always sticks with that old Israeli propaganda line that the Palestinians are their own worst enemy. And thus its the right of Israeli to deny them all human rights.

The problem is, the times they are a changing, and now it begins to look like the Israelis are their own worst enemy.

 

[bfdd]

The Palestinians ARE THEIR OWN WORST ENEMY. They are completely unwilling to compromise so they've left the Israelis in an awkward position. If Israel compromises they look like a weak nation caving to some idiots who can't manage themselves, if they don't compromise they look like assholes for not caving to some idiots who can't manage themselves.

This has seriously been the situation I have witnessed for like the last 10 years.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Oh well JOS, I consider you a negative barometer also, but I will still continue to read your posts, and continue to point out areas your your information is quite flawed.

I never felt that the correct strategy was to close my eyes and ears to reality would ever make reality go away. But JOS, if you want to still be a legend in only your own mind, feel free to call anyone who disagrees with you a twat, or better yet simply ignore them. Where I come from, that never got anyone any mileage if they were older than eight.

You don't seem to understand what i am telling you.

It's not that i ignore real information or refuse to debate based on that, but i do reject your deranged thoughts that you put into print as if they had anything to do with reality.

I'm trying to be nice by not poking the retard, that's all...

 

[iGas]

UK to Israel: Drop negative stance on Egypt -- Yet News

British Foreign Secretary Hague urges Jewish state to tone down its 'belligerent' language in wake of uprising in neighboring country. This attitude means efforts at peace could 'be a casualty of uncertainty in the region,' he warns...

Between Egypt and Iran
The British foreign secretary made these remarks on the backdrop of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's statement that Egypt may follow in Iran's footsteps, oppress its own people and threaten neighboring countries...

Time to pack up the negative rhetoric and let the people to determine their democracy future.

.

 

[EagleKeeper]

UK to Israel: Drop negative stance on Egypt -- Yet News



Time to pack up the negative rhetoric and let the people to determine their democracy future.

.

How is Israel's comments having any impact on the Egyptian people?

If/when a new government is formed; then one can see. Until then, there is no impact.

 

[Lemon law]

How is Israel's comments having any impact on the Egyptian people?

If/when a new government is formed; then one can see. Until then, there is no impact.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even you EK should be able to see the downsides of the recent Israeli statement. If the Egyptian people do get rid of Mubarak, Israel automatically starts out on the wrong foot with a new Egyptian government because Israel supported and advocated Mubarak. If Netanyuhu would have kept his big yap shut, at least Israel would start out neutral with a new Egyptian Government.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Yet Israel can not point ouit that people of Egypt should not allow external influences to setup their government. Warning that something like Iran could create damage.

Idealism when it trumps common sense/logic can be extremely hazarous