No need for an immediate ceasefire? NWS or for faint hearts

[Spang]

smoking weed whilst drinking beers!

[Trias]

teeny, everyone is a fuckwad that doesn't agree with you, you are just as bad as what you say about anyone else i'm sure. post your amazing ideas that you think the governments of the world can't agree on at the moment...

this entire board is yet to get some insight into your wisdom on all of the matters you love to post on...you say some drivel then you start flaming.

post a blown up child...then you start with the drivel. you post whines and rants and no ideas or solutions.

as for me; personally i get a huge boner when you cry about me. INTERNET BONER.

lets face it, anyone that lives in the US that does not agree with you needs to just die already so you can stop cutting yourself at night.

[Nick]

Sure Cadalano man I'll give it a shot.

1. In the immediate interim - the UN (and the USA specifically as it holds a massive amount of sway with Israel) demand an immediate ceasefire in the whole region (Israel/Lebanon and Palestine) - for let's say something like 2 weeks.

I include Palestine as it is of course fundamentally relevant to the wider conflict to anyone who has any idea about the situation.

This is optimistic I know - achieving lasting peace sometimes has to be, as it demands both sides desire to progress via diplomacy instead of taking the stupid easy way out and collapsing back into the situation we have now.

On the upside to this, even if it didn't work - there would be 2 less weeks where innocent people died - which we can all agree is a good thing.

2. Symbolic peace offering similar to what happened here in Northern Ireland - that all Israeli's soldiers, and all terrorist/freedom fighters/innocent people be released.

It worked ok here, and symbolically is important as it shows genuine trust and goodwill to all sides from all sides.

3. Create a UN peace force all along the border, 20 miles into on each side of the borders. Putting them only in Lebanon suggests the Lebanese are the only aggressors - which is patently false and is more a show of support for both sides from the international community that they wish for peace without passively blaming either side.

4. The next stage, would be to of course get Israel out of Lebanon, particularly the Chebaa farms, which are a serious bone of contention between the two sides, holding more moral relevance to the situation than strategic.

Israel has no actual right to occupy any other country, no country does and it is predominantly this reason that Hezbollah (and in reality Hamas - although they claim "a complete disregard for the Israeli state) exist today. Hamas would have a lot more regard for Israel if they stopped killing innocent Palestinians and occupying more and more Palestinian land every year.

This also applies to Hamas, and this is where the total cessation of violence in point one comes into play.

5. At the same time, Israel should be forced to immediately further their stagnant peace process with Palestine - they have absolutely no right to occupy Palestine and be so blase about their myriad human rights abuses it carries out on the Palestinian people. If you compare the atrocities the Palestinians exact on Israeli's and vica versa, it is easy to see who the real aggressor is.

Goodwill on Israel's behalf to admit the crimes it has committed against a large number of people is quite frankly the only way the terrorist factions of those communities are going to stop attacking Israel.

You could argue there is a chicken and egg situation - but that is not the case. Israel has gone far beyond reasonable retaliation over many years towards the people of Palestine particularly and Lebanon also.

6. In this show of fairness by the international community, whereby it shows Hezbollah and to a lesser extent Hamas (to this particular "war) that it does not support the illegal occupation of Lebanon and Palestine by Israel (which it has passively done for years - like it or not)

It should therefore be logical that the next step is for Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad to be forced (with communication to their advisors, religious leaders) to also stop murdering people unconditionally, for the time being while the peace process takes it baby steps.

Everyone wants peace, nobody wants innocent people dying and nobody wants to wake up to more bloodshed. Sometimes the harder choice to admit culpability is the better one - for both sides.

There is no reason why both sides cannot do this at the same time, so that one is not forced to "humiliate" itself (or in laymans terms - tell the truth).

This would stop the immediate conflict and also pave the way for a wider cessation of violence throughout the area as both sides have agreed that they will not attack the other.

8. If Hezbollah then goes and attacks an Israeli city out of the blue then they forfeit their right to peaceful democratic diplomacy and should be hunted down in the way Israel are currently doing.

If Israel does the same, they should also face the same punishment.

The UN should state in no uncertain terms there will be severe repurcussions to either side which deliberately tries to fuck over or otherwise corrupt the peace process.

For this to happen, horrible to admit as it may be, the US must take a neutralist stance (which is what they are meant to do - being part of the UN and all) so Israel cannot continue to exploit the situation to their benefit because their big brother is there to fully protect them.

9. In the longer term, I would say that integrating Hezbollah into the Lebanese army, Creating a buffer zone between lebanon and Israel (that affects both countries equally and not just lebanon), a cessation of human rights abuses by the Israeli's on the Palestinians in particular and a bit more general good will and compassion on all sides would lead to if not total peace, then at least a situation that is a fuckload better than the one happening right this minute.

10. Eventual disarmament of terrorist organisations.

I could develop all this a thousand times over, but on a message board that has no actual say in anything it's a bit pointless.

I have left out certain things like the UN doing it's job and holding men to account for their warcrimes, on either side - because we all know the UN in it's current form is completely fucking impotent until the UK and US get onside with it.

Yeah, I know it's optimistic, and it demands that terrorists stop terrorist actions and that Israel stop doing what it has been doing for years - but that is the only way out of this current shitty climate we see in that area.

The chances of that happening are slim to none, mainly due to the fact that the US fully supports Israel no matter what, Israel are too aggressive in their hysterical defense of lands they don't even own and the stupidity of terrorist networks that fail to understand that killing is not helping anything.

I don't imagine any of this will happen in the way the world and various relevant leaders are acting right now, but I do honestly and fully believe that it is the only way for a lasting peace in the Israel/Palestine/Lebanon region.

Optimistic, maybe idealistic, at least it has a direction that doesn't involve massacre after massacre and mindless assault after assault.

What I'm saying isn't something that hasn't been said a million times before, certain world leaders like Tony Blair or people of his ilk just don't seem to get that a desire for peace must involve actual realistic comprimise, instead of stupid one sided defense.

Pretty shitty situation

Edit: Trias, if you did anything but flame me you may see we get on better like we used to mate

[Cartalas]

From what I read your aasking Israel to give up everything?

[Nick]

Not at all?

They have their entire country still intact after that. I'm just asking they, along with Hezbollah and Hamas and the like, stop doing the things everyone knows escalates the situation.

[masteen]

Teeny, there is one small, tiny, insignificant flaw in your plan: neither the Palestinians nor the Israelies (as a people) WANT peace.

Any time in the last 100 years that a moderate has come to power anywhere in that region, he's been assassinated BY HIS OWN PEOPLE.

Your seem to be assuming that those people are just like us. They're not. They've never known peace.

That leaves us two simple choices: we can either ignore the region like we did for centuries after the crusades (and lose out on all that sweet, sweet crude), or we can be involved and get bloody. There is not a happy diplomatic solution that ends with the Jews and Muslims peacefully smoking pot and singing kum-ba-ya together.

[Nick]

Why the hell does everything that involves peace involve singing kum bi fucking ya. You have peace in your country, it doesn't mean problems don't remain or everyones a stupid pot smoking hippy man .

Maybe I have a misplaced faith in the concept that people may want peace when it comes to the importance of their lives or their childrens being in danger.

[kyoukan]

Not at all?

They have their entire country still intact after that. I'm just asking they, along with Hezbollah and Hamas and the like, stop doing the things everyone knows escalates the situation.

that's great, ghandi. now what are you going to do when both sides fail to comply with everything you just posted

[Nick]

Hmm, Ghandi, thanks for the ?compliment? I guess

Well, as I said, the international community needs to show a united force whereby those who fail to follow the reasonable agreements set out above will be reprimanded.

Via sanctions and if necessary a military force.

For that we would need a multilateral peace keeping force (the one that's already in place - but beefed up to enforce the punishments needed on those who wouldn't keep their side of the bargain.

This doesn't actually need to necessarily involve killing thousands of innocent people like Iraq, and unlike Iraq, would actually be a reasonable reason to show a united strength behind certain peoples without the lies and cynical excuses of before.

Given that the above situation has never actually been tried and is a bit more equal than anything that's gone before *and as such actually ends up giving both sides a fair crack at the things they claim to want - as much as possible* it is at least a start.

I did say it was optimistic, I didn't say it wasn't going to be easy to achieve peace. A Punishment for the aggressors after this process exists without actively harming a larger process, whereby the actual inhabitants of the countries feel they are being treated fairly and reasonably doesn't have to be comprimised because certain aggressors (who would be highlighted, arrested, called to account etc).

How about you come up with some alternative that you feel is viable Kyoukan and we can progress the discussion further.

[Winnow]

I'm starting to think we have a real shot at world peace here!

[masteen]

Maybe I have a misplaced faith in the concept that people may want peace when it comes to the importance of their lives or their childrens being in danger.

You do. These are people who believe that becoming a suicide bomber is a wonderful thing for their children. They'll wail and moan and ulalalalalala when little Akbar blows himself up in a crowded train station, but come next week, they're right back out there supporting whatever radical cleric is preaching pure hate.

[kyoukan]

I don't have any alternatives beyond my bathing entire region in cleansing nuclear fire and starting over in 2000 years option.

But if I did I assure you it would be a tad more complex than "tell israel to pull out of lebanon and palestine (ps. there is no palestine) and convince the middle east to leave israel alone."

[Boogahz]

For that we would need a multilateral peace keeping force (the one that's already in place - but beefed up to enforce the punishments needed on those who wouldn't keep their side of the bargain.

This doesn't actually need to necessarily involve killing thousands of innocent people like Iraq, and unlike Iraq, would actually be a reasonable reason to show a united strength behind certain peoples without the lies and cynical excuses of before.

The biggest problem with this part of your idea is understanding that as soon as they start using force, innocent people die. There is no weapon known to mankind which can be used to only defeat an enemy unless all of the people are the enemy. As soon as this multi-national force started backing up their words and one civilian dies, we are back at square one.

A force like this was assembled (fairly) recently. It was the early 1990's and there was a certain dictator who felt the need to take back some land his country had "lost" in the past. It was Saddam Hussein in Iraq taking back Kuwait. The multi-national force drove back the Iraqis and the media was full of stories about the baby food factory being blown up along with the innocents that died during the attacks. Now, if the forces had continued onto Baghdad then rather than a decade later, I do not think things would be much different than they are now (except for troops being able to actually rotate home sooner due to multiple countries being involved).

Ultimately, we just have to agree that something needs to be done in order to start working on a solution. Then we have to get the buy-in from ALL parties involved. That is the roadblock that I can see being in the way. Most of your post assumed that the countries involved were ready for peace. I, unfortunately, do not believe all of them are. There is far too much tension there as long as Israel even exists. It is on land far too holy to far too many people. The hatred which has existed for generations had centuries to go away, yet the creation of Israel brought them all back. How can we expect them to go away in our lifetimes?

Out of all of the images I saw regarding Qana (sp?) over the weekend, I think the one that impacted me the most had no dead bodies in it. It was of a girl around 12-15 years old. She was sitting surrounded by what looked like family and that part of the picture looked normal...Until you saw her eyes. They were wide open and she was moving in an extremely "jerky" manner which was obviously fear. That is what will build within her and other children on both sides in this conflict. That is what will turn to hatred in coming years unless something other than military force can be used to get the people on both sides to recognize the actual human costs beyond those who actually die.

[Nick]

If it's the main problem of my idea, it's still better than the avenue that's being pursued now, with no end to conflict in the immediate future, so although I accept your point, I still don't see how any of this would hinder a lasting peace.

Obviously we need a buy in from all parties involved man.

I think the fact that Israel exists can be overcome as a particular issue if Israel itself stopped committing the acts that inflict such bloodshed and cause such hatred against them. Although a further struggle regarding the actual placement of Israel itself is something that would need to be worked on in some format or another in the coming years, after any initial peace was gained.

People would have to understand it wouldn't be a quick process and ultimately every side has to comprimise - as in every situation where there has been violence, then a process, then a peace.

Northern Ireland is a really good example of somewhere like that, even though it isn't particularly relevant as the issues between the sides here pale in comparison to the situation in the Middle East.

[Winnow]

For starters, I saw this on a Star Trek episode, we need to start simulating wars, determine how many would have died, and then kill that number humanely with lethal injections or perhaps make a public event out of it like in Logan's Run where the selected people enter a "Renewal Carousel" and get vaporized by the latest Star Wars defense technology (gotta get the defense contracts their money somehow).

[Boogahz]

For starters, I saw this on a Star Trek episode, we need to start simulating wars...

Did anyone else happen to buy the shitpack of a game called Wargasm? That was the basic idea of the game. Each side was only allowed to use weapons they really had in the simulation. I can't remember much of the story beyond that.

[Cartalas]

Not at all?

They have their entire country still intact after that. I'm just asking they, along with Hezbollah and Hamas and the like, stop doing the things everyone knows escalates the situation.

that's great, ghandi. now what are you going to do when both sides fail to comply with everything you just posted

Lock them in a room with you!! That will solve it

[Kilrain]

Nick, there isn't an ounce of an idea for peace in anything you wrote. Terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah do not, and will never want peace. They cannot be negotiated with, they must be stopped. It is as simple as that. Anyone who thinks that peace should be brokered between a free democratic state and a terrorist organization implies that they believe that the two opposing parties have equal rights. That could not be a more dangerous message to send to the world. Democratic states should never be forced to compromise with a terror group. And global opinion should never err by granting legitimacy to such organizations by even suggesting a negotiated peace. They are not nations. They are militias operating under their own set of rules. So, I repeat, they cannot be negotiated with, they must be stopped.

How do you do that? Exactly the way Israel is currently doing it... with brute force. You cut off their supply routes, and then you send in ground forces to expel them from the land. Civilian casualties are tragic but expected... it is war after all. The casualties would be greatly minimized if Hezbullah (who deeply care for the Lebonese people - what a joke) didn't hide themselves within the civilian population. THAT is the war crime. No matter what happens they believe they will achieve victory with this brutal tactic. Israel either backs down so Hezbollah lives to fight another day with bragging rights that they took on the mightiest army in the middle east and survived, or Israel presses on and civilian deaths mount thus ensuring a propaganda victory for Hezbollah as Israel takes on the wrath of the world, and is charged with being the aggressor -- particularly when pictures like the one at the start of this thread start circulating.

Tough choice for Israel to make... damned if you do damned if you don't. But the right choice is once engaged, do not relent until Hezbollah is wiped out or diminished to such an extent that they no longer remain as a threat.

Only then can you establish an international force to police the region, ensuring that Hezbollah or some other fundementalist group does not return. Then the peace keeping force slowly works to bring stability back to the country of Lebanon (which will take years), and transfer the policing rights to the Lebanese military, which is what should have happened in the first place. If Lebanon had taken control of their nation and exercised their sovereignty from the north to the southern borders, Hezbollah (a proxy of Iran and Syria), never would have gotten a foothold to begin with. Which brings me to my last few points...

The U.N. must then put extreme political/economic pressure on Syria and Iran, who are the masters of the Hezbollah militia group, to cut ties with Hezbollah effectively cutting off it's cash flow and weapons supply. If U.N. Security Council resolutions are drafted, and Syria and Iran violate them regarding this issue then full sanctions should be the next logical step in attempts to enforce the ruling.

Only then can Israel take another look at the Palestinian issue. They had pulled out of Gaza in an attempt to make a lasting peace, and what was the response? Suicide bombings, kidnapped soldiers and an elected Hamas government. The Palestinians are idiots. They could have had their state if they played their cards right - Israel was planning on pulling out of the West Bank as well. Not anymore.

Maybe in another 10 to 20 years the two sides will be back at the point they were recently and maybe then the Palestinians won't fuck it up for themselves.

This problem will simmer for a long time to come...

[Nick]

Yeah,that's a better idea to be honest, I'm just sadly idealistic about peoples desire for a better world that doesn't involve everyone becoming a fanatical muslim

/great contribution Kyoukan

[vn_Tanc]

Nick, there isn't an ounce of an idea for peace in anything you wrote. Terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah do not, and will never want peace. They cannot be negotiated with, they must be stopped. It is as simple as that. Anyone who thinks that peace should be brokered between a free democratic state and a terrorist organization implies that they believe that the two opposing parties have equal rights. That could not be a more dangerous message to send to the world. Democratic states should never be forced to compromise with a terror group. And global opinion should never err by granting legitimacy to such organizations by even suggesting a negotiated peace. They are not nations. They are militias operating under their own set of rules. So, I repeat, they cannot be negotiated with, they must be stopped.

How do you do that? Exactly the way Israel is currently doing it... with brute force. You cut off their supply routes, and then you send in ground forces to expel them from the land. Civilian casualties are tragic but expected... it is war after all. The casualties would be greatly minimized if Hezbullah (who deeply care for the Lebonese people - what a joke) didn't hide themselves within the civilian population. THAT is the war crime. No matter what happens they believe they will achieve victory with this brutal tactic. Israel either backs down so Hezbollah lives to fight another day with bragging rights that they took on the mightiest army in the middle east and survived, or Israel presses on and civilian deaths mount thus ensuring a propaganda victory for Hezbollah as Israel takes on the wrath of the world, and is charged with being the aggressor -- particularly when pictures like the one at the start of this thread start circulating.

Tough choice for Israel to make... damned if you do damned if you don't. But the right choice is once engaged, do not relent until Hezbollah is wiped out or diminished to such an extent that they no longer remain as a threat.

Only then can you establish an international force to police the region, ensuring that Hezbollah or some other fundementalist group does not return. Then the peace keeping force slowly works to bring stability back to the country of Lebanon (which will take years), and transfer the policing rights to the Lebanese military, which is what should have happened in the first place. If Lebanon had taken control of their nation and exercised their sovereignty from the north to the southern borders, Hezbollah (a proxy of Iran and Syria), never would have gotten a foothold to begin with. Which brings me to my last few points...

The U.N. must then put extreme political/economic pressure on Syria and Iran, who are the masters of the Hezbollah militia group, to cut ties with Hezbollah effectively cutting off it's cash flow and weapons supply. If U.N. Security Council resolutions are drafted, and Syria and Iran violate them regarding this issue then full sanctions should be the next logical step in attempts to enforce the ruling.

Only then can Israel take another look at the Palestinian issue. They had pulled out of Gaza in an attempt to make a lasting peace, and what was the response? Suicide bombings, kidnapped soldiers and an elected Hamas government. The Palestinians are idiots. They could have had their state if they played their cards right - Israel was planning on pulling out of the West Bank as well. Not anymore.

Maybe in another 10 to 20 years the two sides will be back at the point they were recently and maybe then the Palestinians won't fuck it up for themselves.

This problem will simmer for a long time to come...

So your solution is "more of the same shit that's been going on for 50 years"? Israel, brute force, etc?

Nonsense.

You put out a fire by starving it of oxygen, not jumping in and kicking burning debris in every direction. This action might supress Hezbollah but it will do absolutely nothing to reduce the root causes of the problem. If anything they've made matters worse.

As for the rest of your rhetoric? Largely laughable. MANY times "terrorist" organizations have negotiated with democratic governments. And besides, Hezbollah are PART of the lebanese govt.

I'm not automatically vilifying Israel here. I don't think the poor brown people need saving from the evil jews or whatever. I see the self-justification on both sides and both have some weight. It's a mess. But chest-beating bush-ite slogans along the lines of "Never Retreat! Never surrender!" are just as simplistic and unrealistic as the "kumbayah" approach.

[Kilrain]

So your solution is "more of the same shit that's been going on for 50 years"? Israel, brute force, etc?

Nonsense.

You put out a fire by starving it of oxygen, not jumping in and kicking burning debris in every direction. This action might supress Hezbollah but it will do absolutely nothing to reduce the root causes of the problem. If anything they've made matters worse.

As for the rest of your rhetoric? Largely laughable. MANY times "terrorist" organizations have negotiated with democratic governments. And besides, Hezbollah are PART of the lebanese govt.

I'm not automatically vilifying Israel here. I don't think the poor brown people need saving from the evil jews or whatever. I see the self-justification on both sides and both have some weight. It's a mess. But chest-beating bush-ite slogans along the lines of "Never Retreat! Never surrender!" are just as simplistic and unrealistic as the "kumbayah" approach.

Tanc, I noticed that you offered no solution whatsoever. Apparently for you, Hezbollah has a right to exist and a right to be treated fairly. At least treated on an equal playing field. That to me is laughable.

Tell me, what justification does/did Hezbollah have in starting this conflict? There were no justifiable reasons... they were ordered to do this. However, they did not expect this level of response and thus sorely miscalculated.

As for your other points, Hezbollah may indeed have a few seats in the Lebonese parliment, that however does not give them the right to have a fully armed militia force operating within the sovereign borders of an independant state to further the wishes of two foreign countries. Nor does it give them the right to provoke a war with a neighboring country. Surely you can agree with that.

Hezbollah launched another 160 rockets into Israel today. Do you think this should be tolerated? Do you think that the right approach is to say "okay, if you promise not to kill anymore of our citizens we'll give you whatever you wish?" Do you believe that they are even trustworthy enough to honor a lasting comprehensive peace agreement?

Hezbollah must be eliminated or at least driven back to a point that they can no longer threaten Israel. There is no choice in the matter. Only then can you come to the negotiating table. That is not a Bushite view, it is common sense. And I might point out that I am not American, nor will you win any points by attempting to derail an honest debate by inferring that I am a Bush supporter... that comment quite frankly is irrelevent. What we are discussing is Israel's security and reaction to this situation - not American foreign policy. (We can enter that debate if you wish, but it wasn't on my agenda when I posted my previous reply.)

I honestly don't know how you propose to achieve a 'lasting peaceful resolution' with terrorists. If you have that solution, please state it as I'm sure the rest of the world is dying to know since minds far greater than yours or mine can't seem to tackle that one.

To me the only solution is to take out the threat. I'd prefer if Israel didn't do it (or America for that matter.) It would be far more effective if it were a coalition of other nations some of which actually coming from the Islamic world. But that will never happen. So Israel must take up the charge themselves or be subjected to further attacks.

Anything less than this merely allows Hezbollah to fight another day while at the same time claiming a victory in the propaganda war encouraging further conflicts and attrocities.

Is it a simplistic view? Not in the slightest. It is a very difficult choice to make and far harder to execute.

I do agree however, that the kumbaya approach is so outrageously naive that it merits no attention whatsoever.

[Nick]

Despite Radical Islam being a massive threat (at this point a fairly distant one for us all except the odd absolutely horrific case here and there) which we should destroy, it's also imperative to accept the fact that Israel has acted absolutely disgracefully in the area surrounding it's borders for the last 30+ years.

Both sides are a bunch of assholes.

[vn_Tanc]

Tanc, I noticed that you offered no solution whatsoever. Apparently for you, Hezbollah has a right to exist and a right to be treated fairly. At least treated on an equal playing field. That to me is laughable.

I had 5 minutes to post not 5 hours. At no point did I say treat them as equals, but the hard-arse "no negotiation" line is just posturing that achieves nothing. Eventually you have to negotiate. Not that now is the time, though.

I'm not going to address the rest of your points as my original post made my position clear. Most sane people agree on the motivations/justifications and the validity thereof. I was just taking issue with the notion that saddling up and kicking arse is somehow going to solve anything. It won't. At best it's a temporary stop-gap. What good is it to kill 2000 Hezbollah when you create 5000 more lunatic fundies with an axe to grind in the process? When you look at the Big Picture it's a step backwards.

[Metanis]

Tanc, I noticed that you offered no solution whatsoever. Apparently for you, Hezbollah has a right to exist and a right to be treated fairly. At least treated on an equal playing field. That to me is laughable.

I had 5 minutes to post not 5 hours. At no point did I say treat them as equals, but the hard-arse "no negotiation" line is just posturing that achieves nothing. Eventually you have to negotiate. Not that now is the time, though.

I'm not going to address the rest of your points as my original post made my position clear. Most sane people agree on the motivations/justifications and the validity thereof. I was just taking issue with the notion that saddling up and kicking arse is somehow going to solve anything. It won't. At best it's a temporary stop-gap. What good is it to kill 2000 Hezbollah when you create 5000 more lunatic fundies with an axe to grind in the process? When you look at the Big Picture it's a step backwards.

I think you all are missing the big picture here.

The situation for the Democrats in the coming elections was looking too rosy. The Republicans really need that National Security mojo in their back pockets or November is going to be ugly. I'm sure Karl Rove called his homies in Hezbollah and asked them to stir up the Middle East a bit. This will all blow over after the elections.

(Nick and friends, don't blow a gasket, I'm just kidding for God's sake! It's called sarcasm!)

[Shanter]

You want an easier solution nick?

Here's a little help: modernize the Middle East.

[Noysyrump]

Well hell, If you meddling Great Britainers didnt stop the Germans then maybe Isreal would have never formed and all the muslims would be living happily in peace and not blowing up world trade centers... (that was a joke!)

The 5th crusade anyone?

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

You want an easier solution nick?

Here's a little help: modernize the Middle East.

Yep. Modernization will help tear down a lot of the old barbaric religious fanaticism.

[kyoukan]

Yeah,that's a better idea to be honest, I'm just sadly idealistic about peoples desire for a better world that doesn't involve everyone becoming a fanatical muslim

/great contribution Kyoukan

are you trying to make some kind of comment about the quality of my posts in this thread after spending an entire page calling people names?

[Nick]

Yes you're always above criticism I forget under the weight of your ego.

[kyoukan]

Yes clearly my point was that I am above criticism.

I'm just mystified at your last 9000 posts that have been basically FUCK YOU ALL FOR NOT KNOWING ANYTHING AND UR ALL DUMB AND FUCK YOU. Then you attempt to have a rational argument for exactly three consecutive posts, and then try and call out other people for not contributing. I'm curious if you even notice how much of a dipshit you act like?

[Nick]

Yes Kyoukan, you're so fucking different. What a stupid thing to start gaying it up over.

[kyoukan]

This thread was gay before anyone even replied to it.