Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

I don't agree on your stance about Britain's role in creating Israel; the public opinion in the UK has always been quite pro-palestinian, and the establishment seconded this because they always saw Israel as the US operation it actually is.

This said, Ahmadinejad is being criminally stupid in his poker game. He feels emboldened by the quagmire that Bush created next door, and free of any balance now that the main regional enemy, Iraq, is gone for good. However, these are gratuitous kicks to the European governments, the only people standing between him and a full-scale confrontation with the US. He's making it difficult for Paris and Berlin to help him, and I don't really understand why... unless he really is another little Adolf.

Don't you ever miss those old, predictable Soviet leaders...?

by toyg (g.lacava@gmail.com) on Fri Dec 9th, 2005 at 07:44:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Who said "public opinion"? I am talking about the Empire.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Dec 9th, 2005 at 07:45:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
From the Wikipedia Article on the British Mandate:
British interest in Zionism dates to the rise in importance of the British Empire's South Asian enterprises in the early 19th century
During World War I the British had made two promises regarding territory in the Middle East. Britain had promised the local Arabs, through Lawrence of Arabia, independence for a united Arab country covering most of the Arab Middle East, in exchange for their supporting the British and Britain had promised to create and foster a Jewish national home as laid out in the Balfour Declaration, 1917.
In June 1922 the League of Nations passed the Palestine Mandate. The Palestine Mandate was an explicit document regarding Britain's responsibilities and powers of administration in Palestine including "secur[ing] the establishment of the Jewish national home", and "safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine".

The document defining Britain's obligations as Mandate power copied the text of the Balfour Declaration concerning the establishment of a Jewish homeland

Like I said before, the US effectively took over where the British Empire left off. If the British public opinion see Israel as "the US operation it actually is" it is because they don't look back beyond WWII. The US senate never ratified the League of Nations charter, nor did the US join it, so they had no part in the mess that was the British Mandate.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Dec 9th, 2005 at 07:57:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The problem is that the hardliners in Iran probably are all too willing to sacrifice their people's lives and well-being if it gives them the chance to harm the U.S. further. "Bring it on!" Tiny minds think alike, you know.

Besides, do you really think the European leaders will do anything more than informing bush about how it is a royally bad idea to invade Iran, regardless of holocaust-denying or not?

by Johannes on Fri Dec 9th, 2005 at 10:09:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, they'll do more. They'll allow the US to use European airspace and military bases, commit ships for logistic support, and maybe even some troops, too.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Dec 9th, 2005 at 10:12:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]