Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by datalol-jack, Nov 21, 2016.
There's no such place. There's the Palestinian-occupied territories, but that's about it.
A difficult question.
The main question I'd ask is are the 500,000 probable casualties in Iraq (with a million people protesting the war in the UK alone) justified by previous terrorism?
One of the major complaints at the time (as I recall) was that such an intervention would create a focal point for radicals and that, If handled poorly the war would increase (not decrease) the problem. It's pretty hard to suggest that the war didn't play out exactly the way some feared.
I really get the feeling that Trump is going screw us over in any Brexit deal, and I can't really blame the guy. As much as I do not like the guy, if he does put the American people first, any trade deal the the UK is going to be completly one sided. And we will have to take whatever we get because at that moment we will be little britain.
Which begs the question why some posters here clearly are not American so eager to support him.
Actually no, it's official name is the "State of Palestine".
Unless you're Israeli and don't believe in a two state solution.
In one of first Trump administration orders, Department of Housing & Urban Development suspends reduction of Federal Housing Administration's annual mortgage insurance premium rates.
So, anyone buying a house for the first time or with a low income now has to pay an additional $500.
Firstly, let me state very clearly that I am strongly opposed to the Iraq War, and believe it was not justified at all.
Secondly, Iraq Body Count estimates 169,964-189,386 civilian deaths from violence since the 2003 invasion.
It's worth noting that even if we accept the figure of 300,000 deaths by violence (according to the study in the article you've linked to) it doesn't change the fact that civilian casualties in Iraq are almost exclusively caused by terrorism and infighting between militias—not Western forces.
I don't know why you're asking if these deaths are justified by previous terrorism, since the stated justification of the 2003 invasion was Saddam Hussein's possession of WMD (which turned out to be a lie, as all sensible people had realised long before the war even started).
But for the record: no, they are not justified by previous terrorism. They're not even relevant to previous terrorism.
However, note that the terrorism resulting from the Iraq War is confined to the Middle East. Muslim terrorists aren't attacking the West in retaliation for the 2003 invasion. They're mostly attacking other Muslims, and non-Muslim groups in their own region. In fact, the vast majority of Muslim terrorism casualties are Muslims.
Well actually it's more illegal Israeli occupied territories.
Just stating that attacks since the Iraq war are unrelated dosent make it so.
How so?Israel has been lived in by the Jews far longer than the Muslims
you can make historic arguments about many borders.
Educated by the Daily Mail/Express/Leave Campaign into believing that soundbite, nationalistic populism is good, so they should support anyone taking a reactionary stand against progressive, intellectual, socialist sympathies. Although separated by thousands of miles and billions of dollars, they are as brothers in their fight against the "liberal elite".
And the page on disabilities has been vanished too...
Yes your totally right, throughout time it's has mostly been the first occupants of the land became the land owners but he said
"Well actually it's more illegal Israeli occupied territories"
So I was pointing out the the Jews got there before the muslims so it must be the other way around
Well, it's a de facto non-physical state that doesn't officially exist as an actual country yet. Palestinians born outside the Palestinian territories can't even apply for Palestinian passports because you have to be born in the Palestinian territories to qualify. Most Palestinians use Jordanian passports because the Palestinian passport is virtually useless. Some use Israeli passports instead.
I am not an Israeli, and I am a strong supporter of the two state solution. In fact, I go further than most people: I believe the new Palestinian state should consist of the Golan Heights, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Sinai Peninsula.
I didn't say that all attacks since the Iraq War are unrelated.
But note that the biggest attack—9/11—came two years before the Iraq War, and the justification given for it was Western support for Israel.
Right, but Obama was very popular and won the presidency in a landslide. He also set the record for most attendance at the inauguration. I doubt that record will be broken any time soon.
I don't think the figures have been released yet for Trump, but he was estimated to have similar numbers to Bill Clinton, and twice as much as George W. Bush.
Standard for every president, including Obama.
It's a new presidency, the website is the face of that presidency. I'm not sure why some of you are so shocked that the website has been changed?
Well actually it's more complex than that.
The Israelis do not occupy the Gaza Strip.
Israeli occupation of the West Bank is legal (Jordan renounced her claims to the West Bank for the PLO in 1988) although the West Bank barrier is illegal.
Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem is also illegal.
Do you avcept thar 9\11 as an attsck wasnt born out out of IRAQ?
Separate names with a comma.