Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was a debate recently where Cain cleaned the floor with the other republicans, he wasn't being taken seriously before that but is now.
Which is honestly a really good thing for the Republican party. He (by getting people enthusiastic and turning out to vote) and Huntsman (by swinging moderates) are the only two Republican primary candidates with a realistic chance to win the general election (although Huntsman would be better, but, it doesn't look like that is happening). Anyone-but-Obama only flies if you have a decent alternative, and Romney would just end up as Kerry-2012-version.
there is peace in israel. It's palestine that has the problem. There won't be peace between israel and palestine under cain. Or under obama. Or under anyone. The palestinians don't want peace. They want the complete destruction of all jews.
There is peace in Israel. It's Palestine that has the problem. There won't be peace between Israel and Palestine under Cain. Or under Obama. Or under anyone. The Palestinians don't want peace. They want the complete destruction of all Jews.
No one has any more fundamental "right" to land or natural resources than anyone else. Marx said private property is theft, and he's easy to dismiss since it's clear wealth built through innovation, or hard work, or living below your means is not theft, but, the private ownership of things created by god/nature/whatever is. Why should Saudi Arabia be able to effectively tax the entire world because they happened to live above a bunch of oil? Why does America (and not, say, the remaining Native Americans) have the moral right to all our land? Seriously, it is a legitimate question.
In practice, the concept of state sovereignty over territory and private ownership of land is USEFUL. Why would you ever invest in building a house if you didn't own the underlying property? Why work a farm if anyone can pick the harvest? This extends through the individual and national level.
In a nutshell, the entire debate as to who has more of a "right" to the land is silly. Arabs owned a lot of it under the ottomans and before them, the Israelis own it now and owned it before way back in antiquity, but, in the end there is and never can be a compelling moral argument for the "right" to natural resources.
Which in the end, reduces the issue to the practical dimension. Israelis, and not Palestinians, live on that land now. Israelis, and not Palestinians, cultivated the desert land and built a backwater into a first-world state. Those are darned good practical claims to ownership. Moral though? Neither side has one, neither side could have one, no one can -- no one made the land, it was there before there were people on it and will be there afterwards as well.
So there will never be peace in Isreal under Cain.
How long have we been giving to the palestinians? How's that "peace" going for you?
There will NEVER be peace, until one is thoroughly defeated, and begs for peace without conditions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
