| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 11/23 |
| 2007/4/5-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:46204 Activity:very high |
4/5 What do you think about Pelosi's Middle East diplomatic efforts?
Yay Nancy? Violation of Separation of Powers? Good job? Naive and
screwing things up?
\_ Pelosi was a super hottie when she was in her early 20s. Man
those Italian women are HOT HOT HOT (when they're young).
\_ on the whole it's not a big deal. plenty of republicans
have gone to Syria. I myself would never send the
1st 2nd and 3rd in line for presidency to Iraq or Syria
or Israel but we appear to do it all the time.
\_ Not to be argumentative, but not at the same time we don't.
\_ Why doesn't she just have a picture of her hugging Assad? Of
course it is violation of powers. Unless it is at the behest
of the President, like with Bill Richardson, no member of
Congress should engage in foreign policy, period.
\_ You're an idiot.
\_ Demonstrating one's own high level of intelligence by
name calling is without further comment.
\_ Your first sentence is a non-starter. Your second sentence is
incorrect: a fact-finding mission is not diplomacy; as such, it
is not in violation of the separation of powers. If she made a
trade deal while she was there, _that_ would be diplomacy and
invalid under the constitution.
\_ In other words, he's an idiot.
\_ She's trying to kick start some sort of peace deal between
Israel and Syria and made statements about her view of Syria's
role in the region. That doesn't seem like mere fact finding.
But even so, any sort of official state visit *is* diplomacy,
so sorry, no dice there. I don't think anyone is seriously
claimed this isn't a diplomatic trip.
\_ There's diplomacy and there's Diplomacy. I'd argue (and so
would Pelosi) that her visit doesn't constitute Diplomacy
as exclusively reserved to the Executive Branch.
\_ Uh huh. Can you please define the difference between
the lower and upper case versions of the word? While
you're at it can you tell us what the definition of
the word "is" is? There are countless links from all
sorts of news sources, blogs, etc, from all over the
political spectrum in this and other countries that
refer to her 'engagement' and 'discussions', etc with
Assad. That is [Dd]iplomacy. And if you're going to
make a claim about what Pelosi would call it, how about
a quote or paraphrase from her on what she calls it?
You're past pulling at straws. The haystack is empty.
There isn't even a needle to find. (Cool, I just got
two overlapping cliches into the same reply.)
\_ I stand by my statement: What Pelosi has done does
not constitute any of the powers reserved to the
Executive Branch. You do get wacky cool points for
the overlapping cliches.
\_ Thanks for the wacky cool points. I'd still like
to know your definition of Diplomacy vs.
diplomacy. Without that there isn't much to talk
about.
\_ At this point, and since it seems to be the
bone of contention, I'd define the D as those
powers reserved exclusively to the Executive
Branch.
\_ Can I, as a private citizen with no political
standing whatsoever, go to Syria and try to be
friendly to people there, as a totally personal
attempt at peacemaking? If so, why can't Nancy
Pelosi?
\_ Because she is not a private citizen and did not
go there as a private citizen.
\_ Please demonstrate where it says that Speaker
of the House Pelosi cannot visit another
country, even with a view to initiating peace
negotiations between two other nations.
\_ By "it" I assume you mean the USSC. It
doesn't refer to the "Speaker of the House
Pelosi" but it obviously doesn't say the
Speaker can not visit a foreign country.
That is not the point of contention which
you are also aware of. If you want to
seriously discuss the USSC and the SoPs
then I've got the URLs ready to go. If you
want to do little rhetorical dances, I don't
have time for that. It's also boring.
\_ I'm generally leery of congresscritters visiting terrorist-
sponsoring nations.
\_ I'm specifically leery of people who use catchphrases like
"terrorist-sponsoring nations."
\_ Are you saying Syria doesn't sponsor terrorists? The State
Department would disagree.
\_ Which terrorists does Syria sponsor? (I know the answer
to this, but I want you to spell it out. Just saying
"terrorists" oversimplifies the situation past the point
of meaningful discourse.)
\_ Primary sponsor of Hezbollah in Lebanon for last
umpteen years. Responsible for assassination of
democratically elected leader of Lebanon. Secondary
funding source for other groups such as Hamas or
primary for numerous militia style groups likely to be
in-name-only spinoffs of Hezbollah. And if you want to
get fussy about it the Syrian army sat on Lebanon for
decades holding the entire nation as a slave state. If
you want to go back further, the only reason Jordan
exists is that Israel threatened to attack if Syria
crossed the Jordan/Syria border. Should I go on? The
Syrians are a bunch of thugs on a good day, terrorists
and supporters of terrorists on most days with no signs
of change. When Assad jr. took over from Assad sr.
many believed Syria was going to enter an age of
enlightenment since jr. was educated in the west and
thus wasn't a brutal thug like dad. Ooops. Maybe
*his* son will be better.
\_ Hamas is the democratically elected leadership
of Palestine. By definition, they are not terrorists.
\_ You're being sarcastic, right?
\_ No, the state department definition of
terrorism requires that the actors be not
state sponsored. What is your definition?
\_ http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3580.htm
Sorry but you're SOL on that one.
\_ By State Department definition, terrorism
cannot be peformed by state actors.
\_ Oh ya? URL please. And while you're
looking, try this and find HAMAS:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/65462.pdf
\_ "Premeditated, politically motivated
violence perpetrated against
noncombatant* targets by subnational
groups or clandestine agents, usually
intended to influence an audience."
Still waiting for your definition.
\_ I'm going by the State Department
definition which I already posted
in the link you obviously didn't
read.
\_ Hamas is neither subnational
or clandestine, therefore they
cannot, by definition, be
terrorists. Your link states
the exact same, word for word
definition as the one I posted.
Q.E.D.
\_ Try again. You'll find Hamas
listed right there by the USSD
as a foreign terrorist org.
\_ So, the Bush State Department
is hypocritcal and breaks
their own rules for politcal
\_ So, the Bush State Dept. is
hypocritcal and breaks [its]
own rules for politcal
reasons. And this is a
surprise to you because..???
\_ Sorry, that the USSD
doesn't follow your
rules and definitions.
That might be
inconvenient for you but
Hamas winning an
election in Gaza doesn't
get them off the
terrorist list. The
alternative would be to
say that Gaza has
declared war on Israel
and the gloves come off.
No one wants that to
happen. Hamas is a
terrorist org. Welcome
to reality. Falling
back on Bush bashing is
pretty weak, btw.
\_ When around 70% of the
public disagrees with
how Bush et al are
doing things, you
still try to call
pointing out the
obvious "bashing"?
\_ You're ducking.
Hamas = terrorists.
Deal with it.
\_ Nope.
Sorry. Should have
said "!pp". Bush
is racing to the
bottom in the
presidenting game.
To accuse people
of Bush-bashing
is meaningless.
said "!pp".
\_ If you go far up
this thread youll
see where they
claim that using
the USSD def. of
terrorist that
Hamas is not a
terrorist. So I
found the USSD
list of terrorists
and they whine that
the USSD is now the
Bush USSD and is
somehow corrupt or
unreliable. Sorry,
can't have it both
ways.
\_ Sorry, but Bush
can't have it
both ways
either. His
admin. has
played fast and
loose with
definitions,
laws, and
history. Calling
them on it is a
valid point.
\_ Uhm yeah,
this has turned into, "I can't win on the merits of my evidence and
logic so I'm going to slam Bush". Hamas sends bomb laden people into
Israel. They attack and kill their own citizens. They lob rockets
into Israel. They rob their own people. Since you don't believe the
USSD and have decided these do not constitute terrorist acts simply
because the people of Gaza elected them what are they? Was the IRA
not a terrorist org? They had a political wing, too. If Hamas gets
kicked out of office or doesn't run at all in the next election and
thus has no one in government do they suddenly change from your
non-defined non-terrorist state of terrorism into real terrorists?
"I don't like Bush or his State Department" is not a valid point,
especially so when the person I was discussing this with started with
a claim that their definition was the USSD's. That changed real fast
once they got caught with their rhetorical pants down. Just let it go.
It's beyond sad now.
\_ Nope, my definition never changed. I said that state actors could
not be terrorists, by definition, and have consistently maintained
that position. You keep wriggling around on yours, trying to
figure out one that defines Hamas as terrorists. You have made
up your mind on this and are attempting to fit the evidence to
your point of view, which is trivially wrong. Give it up. And yes,
they used to be terrorists in the past and could be in the future,
but for now they are a legitimate State government that is acting
in a provacative and violent manner, which is what many state
in a provocative and violent manner, which is what many state
governments do, including the United States.
\_ So you're saying that the Palestinian state is now in a state of
war with Israel since Hamas has called for Israel's destruction
and acts on that desire with in their abilities? No. Hamas is
not a state actor. Palestine is not a state. No more than the
IRA was a state actor since they had a political wing. You've
ignored every question and point I've made that you found
inconvenient, still haven't answered what Hamas *is*, just what
you think they're not and yes, they have been on the USSD terror
list and will never come off until they lay down their arms and
declare that Israel has a right to exist. And rightly so because
they are a terrorist organisation. No different than the PLO was
still a terrorist organisation and Arafat still a terrorist even
after they renamed themselves the PLA and took over Gaza/WB. At
best you are quibling over dictionary definitions (which you have
misread, IMO) and have yet to answer any of the serious questions
I've raised about Hamas if they are, as you claim, not a bunch
of terrorist thugs. The fact that you ignore the USSD's list
because it doesn't fit your agenda (BUSHCO IS EVUUUL!) is just
childish and laughable. Go ahead and make some final comment
which I assume will answer none of the questions or points I've
raised and then we're done because you stopped being interesting
went you went Bush bashing instead of sticking to facts. Bush
could be Satan or a monkey but that has no bearing on Hamas'
long standing and well earned status as a bunch of killers and
terrorists.
\_ If Palestine is not a state, then what citizenship do the
Arab residents of the West Bank and Gaza hold? I agree with
you that this goes to the crux of the issue: If Palestine
is not a state, then the leadership of the State of Palestine
cannot be state actors. But this begs the question then:
what is the citizenship status of the people of Gaza? Sorry
for not answering your earlier question about Hamas, I had
to think about it for a while. I think that Hamas is a
political party though I am kind of curious what they consider
themselves. And I guess I can see where you are going with
this, if the GOP elected leadership of the United States
routinely engaged in burning crosses on black people's
lawns, killed people trying to vote and then called for
the destruction of Canada, you would be justified in calling
them terrorists. But calling for the destruction of Canada,
would not, in and of itself, be a terrorist act. I know this
is kind of whacky, but hey, I don't write the rules. Please
answer my question about Palestinian citizenship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine
Over 100 nations recognize The State of Palestine, including
the overwhelming majority of the world's population. You,
and the Bush Administration, do not.
and the Bush Administration, do not. And oh, the state
department list that you quoted, which you apparently believe
is the exhuastive and definitive reference for what
is the exhaustive and definitive reference for what
"terrorism" is, does not include the PLO or PLA, so I guess
you are wrong on that point, too.
you are wrong on that point, too. And as to your final
point about the IRA, history is replete with examples of
"terrorist" organizations that become part of the national
government after their victory. See the Irgun in Isreal,
the Vietcong in Vietnam, the Falangists in Spain, all just
in the 20th century. I am kind of embarrassed for you that
you don't already know this. Did you ever take any
world history?
\_ And _this_ is the level of detail I want instead of
meaningless phrases like state-sponsors-of-terrorism.
This paragraph lays out specific charges that can be
argued against (unsuccessfully, since the charges are
correct) or substantiated. Thank you for indulging
me.
\_ I'm not the one who originally used the s-s-o-t
phrase you didn't like but my pleasure to fill
in the gaps for anyone reading. I think the
reason phrases like SSOT are used is because we
all kind of assume we know what we're talking
about when discussing a place like Assad's Syria
and it just becomes a short hand way of talking
about it. I don't think it's intended to be
vague and non-specific in the sense you're
talking about.
\_ This is rapidly (and appropriately) getting
off-thread, but I think you're overestimating
most people's understanding of the situation
in Syria (and the Middle East). Phrases like
s-s-o-t have a real meaning but more often
get used as propagandistic terms to mean
people the Admin doesn't like. I mean, at core,
how is it that Pakistan is not listed as a
s-s-o-t?
\_ They were first designated as sponsoring terrorists by
Carter in 1979. |
| 11/23 |
|
| www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3580.htm Background Notes A-Z Background Note: Syria Flag of Syria is three equal horizontal bands of red at top, white, and black, with two small green five-pointed stars in a horizontal line centered in the white band. Terrain: Narrow coastal plain with a double mountain belt in the west; hot, dry, sunny summers (June to August) and mild, rainy winters (December to February) along coast. Religions: Sunni Muslims (74%), Alawis (12%), Christians (10%), Druze (3%), and small numbers of other Muslim sects, Jews, and Yazidis. Languages: Arabic (official), English and French (widely understood), Kurdish, Armenian, Aramaic, Circassian. Government Type: Republic, under Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party regimes since March 1963. Branches: Executive--president, two vice presidents, prime minister, Council of Ministers (cabinet). Judicial--Supreme Constitutional Court, High Judicial Council, Court of Cassation, State Security Courts. Administrative subdivisions: 13 provinces and city of Damascus (administered as a separate unit). Political parties: Arab Socialist Resurrection (Ba'ath) Party, Syrian Arab Socialist Party, Arab Socialist Union, Syrian Communist Party, Arab Socialist Unionist Movement, Democratic Socialist Union Party. Industry: Types--mining, manufacturing (textiles, food processing), construction, petroleum. Major markets--EU, Arab countries, United States, New Independent States, Eastern Europe. Major suppliers--Germany, Turkey, Italy, France, US, Japan. Syria's population is 90% Muslim--74% Sunni, and 16% other Muslim groups, including the Alawi, Shi'a, and Druze--and 10% Christian. Arabic is the official, and most widely spoken, language. Arabs, including some 500,000 Palestinian and 100,000 Iraqi refugees, make up 90% of the population. Many educated Syrians also speak English or French, but English is the more widely understood. The Kurds, many of whom speak Kurdish, make up 9% of the population and live mostly in the northeast corner of Syria, though sizable Kurdish communities live in most major Syrian cities as well. Armenian and Turkic are spoken among the small Armenian and Turkoman populations. Most people live in the Euphrates River valley and along the coastal plain, a fertile strip between the coastal mountains and the desert. Schooling consists of 6 years of primary education followed by a 3-year general or vocational training period and a 3-year academic or vocational program. The second 3-year period of academic training is required for university admission. Total enrollment at post-secondary schools is over 150,000. The literacy rate of Syrians aged 15 and older is 88% for males and 74%for females. Ancient Syria's cultural and artistic achievements and contributions are many. Archaeologists have discovered extensive writings and evidence of a brilliant culture rivaling those of Mesopotamia and Egypt in and around the ancient city of Ebla. Later Syrian scholars and artists contributed to Hellenistic and Roman thought and culture. and the writings of Posidonius of Apamea influenced Livy and Plutarch. Syrians have contributed to Arabic literature and music and have a proud tradition of oral and written poetry. Although declining, the world-famous handicraft industry still employs thousands. HISTORY Archaeologists have demonstrated that Syria was the center of one of the most ancient civilizations on earth. Around the excavated city of Ebla in northern Syria, discovered in 1975, a great Semitic empire spread from the Red Sea north to Turkey and east to Mesopotamia from 2500 to 2400 BC The city of Ebla alone during that time had a population estimated at 260,000. Scholars believe the language of Ebla to be the oldest Semitic language. Syria was occupied successively by Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Arameans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Nabataeans, Byzantines, and, in part, Crusaders before finally coming under the control of the Ottoman Turks. Paul was converted on the road to Damascus and established the first organized Christian Church at Antioch in ancient Syria, from which he left on many of his missionary journeys. Damascus, settled about 2500 BC, is one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world. Immediately thereafter, the city's power and prestige reached its peak, and it became the capital of the Omayyad Empire, which extended from Spain to India from AD 661 to AD 750, when the Abbasid caliphate was established at Baghdad, Iraq. Damascus became a provincial capital of the Mameluke Empire around 1260. It was largely destroyed in 1400 by Tamerlane, the Mongol conqueror, who removed many of its craftsmen to Samarkand. The Ottomans remained for the next 400 years, except for a brief occupation by Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt from 1832 to 1840. French Occupation In 1920, an independent Arab Kingdom of Syria was established under King Faysal of the Hashemite family, who later became King of Iraq. However, his rule over Syria ended after only a few months, following the clash between his Syrian Arab forces and regular French forces at the battle of Maysalun. French troops occupied Syria later that year after the League of Nations put Syria under French mandate. With the fall of France in 1940, Syria came under the control of the Vichy Government until the British and Free French occupied the country in July 1941. Continuing pressure from Syrian nationalist groups forced the French to evacuate their troops in April 1946, leaving the country in the hands of a republican government that had been formed during the mandate. Independence to 1970 Although rapid economic development followed the declaration of independence of April 17, 1946, Syrian politics from independence through the late 1960s were marked by upheaval. A series of military coups, begun in 1949, undermined civilian rule and led to army colonel Adib Shishakli's seizure of power in 1951. After the overthrow of President Shishakli in a 1954 coup, continued political maneuvering supported by competing factions in the military eventually brought Arab nationalist and socialist elements to power. Syria's political instability during the years after the 1954 coup, the parallelism of Syrian and Egyptian policies, and the appeal of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser's leadership in the wake of the 1956 Suez crisis created support in Syria for union with Egypt. On February 1, 1958, the two countries merged to create the United Arab Republic, and all Syrian political parties ceased overt activities. Following a military coup on September 28, 1961, Syria seceded, reestablishing itself as the Syrian Arab Republic. Instability characterized the next 18 months, with various coups culminating on March 8, 1963, in the installation by leftist Syrian Army officers of the National Council of the Revolutionary Command (NCRC), a group of military and civilian officials who assumed control of all executive and legislative authority. The takeover was engineered by members of the Arab Socialist Resurrection Party (Ba'ath Party), which had been active in Syria and other Arab countries since the late 1940s. The Ba'ath takeover in Syria followed a Ba'ath coup in Iraq the previous month. The new Syrian Government explored the possibility of federation with Egypt and Ba'ath--controlled Iraq. An agreement was concluded in Cairo on April 17, 1963, for a referendum on unity to be held in September 1963. However, serious disagreements among the parties soon developed, and the tripartite federation failed to materialize. Thereafter, the Ba'ath regimes in Syria and Iraq began to work for bilateral unity. These plans foundered in November 1963, when the Ba'ath regime in Iraq was overthrown. In May 1964, President Amin Hafiz of the NCRC promulgated a provisional constitution providing for a National Council of the Revolution (NCR), an appointed legislature composed of representatives of mass organizations--labor, peasant, and professional unions--a presidential council, in which executive power was vested, and a cabinet. On February 23, 1966, a group of army officers carried out a successful, intra-party coup, imprisoned President Hafiz, dissolved the cabinet and the N... |
| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine Leila Shahid, envoy of the PLO to France since 1984, was named in November 2005 representative of the PNA for Europe). The declaration is generally interpreted to have recognized Israel within its pre-1967 boundaries, or was at least a major step on the path to recognition. Declaration of Principles, which along with subsequent agreements between the two parties provided for the establishment of a Palestinian interim self-governing authority with partial control over defined areas in the Palestinian territories. Palestinian National Authority (PNA), however, does not claim sovereignty over any territory and therefore is not the government of the "State of Palestine" proclaimed in 1988. Map showing nations which have recognized or have special diplomatic arrangements with the State of Palestine or other Palestinian delegation. Map showing nations which have recognized or have special diplomatic arrangements with the State of Palestine or other Palestinian delegation. By this resolution, "seating for Palestine shall be arranged immediately after non-member States and before the other observers." |