> > However. And it's a big however. There is no doubt that Israel has also given its neighbours a rough ride since its inception. A quick search on the net reveals that there have been some terrible atrocities committed by Israeli terror groups (Shtem, Irgon and Haganah come to mind)
>
> I can find no evidence that any of those exist today. The only reference I can find to Shtem is an incident from 1948. The other two, I can only find in reference to incidents in the 40s. And I cannot find any credible reports (and by credible, I mean from something that is NOT some skinhead's Geocities website. I mean something from Western, non-state-controlled media, or other credible institution, providing some sort of actual documentation. Though I will admit: I can't be bothered at this particular moment to search very deeply) of the Israeli government supporting terrorist groups in the manner that Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbullah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, The Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade, are supported by the likes of Syria, Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, etc.

There's a good chance the Israeli groups don't exist today, given that I'm getting that information from coursework I did on the Arab-Israeli conflict a couple of years ago. Basically, I'm hugely out of my depth already, so maybe I shouldn't be getting into arguments like this. Oh well.

> Again, the United States isn't giving Israel support so that they can go and occupy territory. The United States supports Israel because no support means no Israel. It's the lesser of two evils, I suppose, though, of course, I'm not intimating that supporting Israel is evil.

Mmmm...I agree that the military aid being given to Israel is not for the *purpose* of settling in, for example, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but that is what it *is* being used for. I'm not suggesting, by the way, that the US stops all aid to Israel and leaves it to its fate; I'd just like a close look given to whether it's OK to supply military aid that is being used for territorial expansion rather than defence.

> Once again: world opinion is by NO means in Israel's favor. Not by *any* stretch of the imagination. And yes, I do feel that Israeli supporters are rather loose with tossing about anti-Semitic claims, but in many regards, they're right. (i.e.: the Arab governments.)

You're right, I obviously wasn't thinking when I said "world" opinion. What I *meant* to say (or rather, what I should have said in the first place) is that opinion in the US and UK (at least) is swayed by Hollywood and by TV. Palestinian terrorists are always taking the parts of bad guys in movies, and when was the last time you saw a Jewish villain, outside an old Nazi propaganda film? The reason for this is that there would be howls of "anti-Semite" and "Nazi", and although it would be offensive to use the Jews as the bad guys, is it any less offensive to use Palestinians? As regards state-sponsored terrorism on the part of the Palestinians, I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that Yasser Arafat frequently condemns suicide bombings by Palestinian militants, and publicly deplores terrorism. I don't know about the other Arab governments, but Arafat is certainly the face of the Palestinians as seen by the West.

> I've never once heard Ariel Sharon proclaim that he wishes to see the Arab world driven into the sea. But it is not a rare occurence to hear such proclamations from the lips of Arab governments.
>
Yes, that was too flippant on my part. Sorry about that.

> > Then why the hell is there an international body that exists to pass resolutions that don't actually mean anything?
>
>
> Perhaps one ought to ask France that question. ;-)

Or ask the League of Nations.

> Votes in the General Assembly are not the ones being vetoed by the United States. The United States vetoes Security Council resolutions, which also happen to come from the same Security Council that Israel *is not permitted to join*. And yet, every other nation takes a turn on the rotating, non-permanent, seats.

So the US *is* vetoing Security Council resolutions, and still accusing France of making the UN "irrelevant"? Even if Israel was on the Security Council, I very much doubt they'd have a veto, and if world opinions stayed against them they would still lose when voting against resolutions to make them leave the occupied territories.
>
> And again, I've not looked real deeply into reasons for Israeli incursion into Palestinian territories. Nor have I, more importantly, looked into why the United States opposes the U.N. demanding Israel withdraw. However, I believe that the Bush administration is actually in favor of creating a Palestinian state, which would help to (hopefully) eliminate some of these issues.

I really hope so. On the other hand, is having *two* artifical states next to each other really such a great idea?

Si-"But then again, what do I know"-gi