"So examples of your supposed opposition to war include backing the fascist government in Ukraine's assault on the East (by the way Poroshenko said 100s of Russian speakers must die for every Ukrainian soldier killed, what a nice guy) and continuing support for the festering civil unrest in Syria.

Thanks for clarifying."'

Well, actually Putin, your namesake and China have been stonewalling relief aid to Syria for years, and again, Assad gassed his own people...I kinda sorta blame that and the Assad regime itself for the "civil unrest" in Syria.

See, you have no problem supporting Hamas, a terrorist organization, against Israel, the legitimate government, but you DO have a problem with demonstrators in Ukraine overthrowing an unpopular leader and then fighting off pro-Russian insurgents.

Double standard, or just a lapse in judgement? Heck, why choose...

"How much blood on your plate is enough for you?"

How many oversimplified (and badly mixed) metaphors are enough for you, Nigee?

You, when putin is wrong i'm not so sure it's because of being indocrinated. Castro is actually quite good, obi, i can recommend you some enlightening books if you would like.

And noone likes pol pot?

You in one breath happily cheer on the overthrow of the legitimate government of Ukraine and the assault on the resistance to that fascist coup while denouncing Hamas for opposing the "legitimate government" of Israel. Newsflash, Hamas was elected. I know you hate elections unless you can rig them on behalf of NATO. But guess what, not everybody adores neoliberal subjugation.

"Assad gassed his own people"

No proof whatsoever. And nevermind that IS aren't "Assad's own people" and that the rebels had every incentive to use the gas themselves.

"Well, actually Putin, your namesake and China have been stonewalling relief aid to Syria for years,"

The governments you adore have been funnelling weapons to Islamist cannibal rebels for years now, every time the war is about to end you and your buddies arm these thugs and prolong the bloodshed. This is on you.

I was indoctrinated to be a Marxist in the United States. That makes a lot of sense. Obiwan is turning into a tea partier I guess.

"Meaning anything that doesn't have the stamp of approval of the West, because unless Obiwan can appeal to popular opinion in the West he won't take up a position. He's that much of a fucking zombie. "

I like Japan, and South Korea but they've been influenced heavily by the West, so moving on...
Plenty of South American countries...
India...
Plenty of Asian countries that aren't harming anyone, or forcing one-child policies or concentration camps on anyone, and I like them...

I like Russian art, literature and music--I like their culture...just not their politics.

What's more, I'd say that, like it or not, the West has kind of imposed its stamp on the majority of the First World, and much of the developing world, and thus a good deal of the places many would find the most attractive places to live have a Western influence to some degree or another.

Doesn't make that good, but it does mean that you can buy Coca-Cola in just about any country...so like it or not, Putin, that Western stamp is pervasive, and I merely recognize that as a fact.

Welcome H.H , and thank you for deeming to speak with us. ברוכים הבאים

I'm very sorry for what's happening in Israel and hope things will improve soon. Reading your posts is informative.

"I was indoctrinated to be a Marxist in the United States. That makes a lot of sense. Obiwan is turning into a tea partier I guess."

O.o You SAID you were a Marxist...

And actually, Socrates is right, I forgot--

What about Pol Pot, Putin, in response to my question if there's a communist regime out there you won't turn apologist for? Not saying there aren't good ones, but you seem to back them all...including the extremely nasty ones, and then turn around after supporting those bloody regimes and claim I'm the one with a violence problem, when I'm not the one supporting Orwellian dictators, but a democratic state.

I'm usually right ;)

So you love rich countries and hate developing ones, got it. I knew that already, though. You comfort the comfortable like it's your job.

"Newsflash, Hamas was elected. I know you hate elections unless you can rig them on behalf of NATO. But guess what, not everybody adores neoliberal subjugation."

1. As I've said repeatedly they were elected, your news is a bit late.

2. Really? The guy who supports the valid elections of the Kims and the Crimean vote of 95%...you're going to be the one to claim *I* am the one with a vote-rigging problem?

3. I notice you merely flipped my point rather than answer it--you take issue with protesters in Ukraine, but have no problem with terrorists in Gaza?

"So you love rich countries and hate developing ones, got it. I knew that already, though. You comfort the comfortable like it's your job."

I know not skewering the point is hard for you, but do try...you look rather illiterate otherwise.

I said that most of the places most of us would want to live have the stamp of the West, because most of the West is in/has influenced the First World and First World standards of living.

I don't hate the many African, Asian, and South American countries that are tragically below the poverty line and in the Third World--I simply wouldn't want to live there.

Are you going to tell me you'd like to live there? (I'd be fine with it if you wanted to go and give it a shot...you might have a harder time finding an Internet connection to continue your inane arguments, though.)

On Assad and his gassing people, I turn you over to that oh-so-conservative newspaper, The New York Times...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/world/europe/syria-united-nations.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

"Not saying there aren't good ones"

Yes, in fact that's exactly what you've said over and over again. Not one scintilla of praise for anything socialism has achieved anywhere in the world. Education? Nah. Healthcare? Nah. They're all terrible only western neoliberalism is good. Nevermind all the impoverished countries who have been operating according to neoliberal principles for decades.

"and claim I'm the one with a violence problem, when I'm not the one supporting Orwellian dictators, but a democratic state."

You cheer on the violence perpetuated by these so-called 'democratic states' and the only way you can define yourself as supporting democracy is if you dismiss all democratic elections you don't approve of as being undemocratic. You hate Hamas, they're democrats. You hate Yanukovich. He's a democrat. You hate the Bolivarian revolution, etc. You hate democrats except when they're NATO's puppets.

"What about Pol Pot, Putin, in response to my question if there's a communist regime out there you won't turn apologist for?"

Pol Pot was a CIA lackey, created by Nixon in the aftermath of the bombing of Cambodia. Zbigniewski makes no apology for supporting the Khmer Rouge. They aren't communist at all and were never recognized as communist by the socialist bloc.

If I criticize socialist countries, I do so internally. I don't make a habit of targeting the targets of western aggression, making their case easier to wage yet another messianic war for neoliberalism...excuse me..."democracy". There is plenty I disagree with about all of them but I sure as hell ain't going to talk about it with the likes of you.

"http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/world/europe/syria-united-nations.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0"

Yeah the same paper who sold us a bill of goods on Iraq's WMDs. They never lie us into war. Does Judith Miller still have a pulitzer? I wonder if she'll share it when Ahmad Chalabi?

Hi H.H. and welcome to the forum. As obi thinks it is relevant i should say, I'm not a Jew.

Whilst one can never compare different conflicts, there always being more differences than similarities, I think it is important to remember that conflicts are resolvable. South Africa and Northern Ireland spring to mind as conflicts that once seemed insurmountable.

In the case of the North of Ireland one of the most professional armies in the world who once had the largest empire ever seen could not militarily defeat a handful of committed terrorist. Sure they could hold the line and in the main, did a great job. But there is no military solution. The longer military action goes on they more the other side see injustice and the harder the eventual peace becomes. Both sides have had to give enormous ground. Even today there is concern about how some people who did terrible things were 'let off' (for want of a better term). Peace isn't easy, but it should remain the target.

What concerns me is how the two sides are now perceived. Many in the west perceive Palestinians as terrorists and Israel as oppressors. This can only change if you guys start talking to one another seriously. Enlist international mediators if needs be, agree to talk about everything, don't set preconditions on talks and don't set out to win or to humilate the other side. A sustainable peace should benefit both sides. aim to make peace better for the other side than what they have already.

I wish you the best of luck.

Obi & H.H. - I'm asking the most basic of questions, what body count will be enough?
Do you even care how many people die, is 1000 too many, is 5000 too many, how about 10,000?
Is it that hard a question?
I appreciate you don't want to answer it because it reveals a truth you don't want people to hear, your propaganda is amusing because that is how serious you take this situation, I can appreciate that it is more important that Hamas learn a lesson than actual numbers killed which seems to be secondary in importance.

@nigee , are you asking how many Hamas should die or Hamas and Palestinian people together?

@ ssorenn: Israel has already demonstrated that it is unable to kill only Hamas operatives. Israel's terrorist bombing of Gaza is primarily killing Palestinian civilians. Asking only how many Hamas members should die is therefore pointless as Israel has no means to ensure only they are targeted.

ssorenn - all the people that are dying are Hamas because the IDF do not target the innocent you silly billy !!
Of course if they were not previous Hamas supporters they will be once you have wiped out half the family so in effect every is an enemy or a soon to be enemy so all legitimate targets.

@ Jamie, I know what is going on in the region, and no, the question is not pointless. Hamas's use of civilians as shields is terrible, and as I empathize with the peaceful Palestinians. I think all of Hamas should be destroyed without mercy. Think what you want, but I wish this for all militant terrorist groups everywhere. Kill them all. But to Nigee' s point, the endless cycle of violence with continue to perpetuate as the younger generations are brought in and learn to hate the otherside because of the family destruction that happens. The animosity will never stop in our lifetime.

@ ssorenn: Just to clarify your position:

Do you believe that all organisations who use terrorism as a tactic, should be destroyed?

The problem is Israel/USA/EU have a bigger agenda than peace for the Palestinians and the region .... the USA need a reason to continually pump more arms and weaponry into the area, very strategic.
Us mere mortals just think it is nasty old Netanyahu blowing up a few baby A-rabs but for the USA to swallow their pride and take the diplomatic beatings they do from Israel you know they support something much bigger, the Palestinians only crime is to not be important enough for anyone to really care, I'm talking about countries like Russia and China as well here, they don't seem to give a fuck about Palestine either.
Netanyahu is just another puppet leader doing the killing by proxy, after all they are not paying so it is good practice for the IDF.

When Russia & China obstruct US/EU machinations in Syria and Iran you complain but now you want them to do something about strategically unimportant Palestine? As if they don't have enough US/EU fires to put out in the Middle East and elsewhere.

And Russia was part of the quartet, not that they'll get credit for that.

@jamie, I think any militant terrorist group that bases their hate on ethnicity should be extinguished , yes

@ ssorenn: But other organisations who use terrorism but do not have an ethnic agenda are ok with you?

Most terrorists are based on ethnicity. Other organizations that are against a certain political regimes are only considered terrorists by said regime because of their different ideologies, and don't have the forum of free speech and press to get their POV across

Most terrorist groups are explicitly anti-national. IS is multinational. Al Qaeda is multinational. There is a reason why foreign fighters are all flocking to these places to fight. There's nothing ethnic about it.