Article

2008-07-11 Israel-Palestine-Jordan

The case for Israel's full NATO membership

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by ryuge 2008-07-11 09:13|| || Front Page|| [11137 views ] Top

#1 Israel needs to be part of a global alliance against the enemies of democracy. However, NATO is no longer that tool since some of those "democracies" are being actively undermined by the very enemy we need to face.

Pull the plug on the UN and NATO. Their time is over and create a new global alliance with the true democracies of the world.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2008-07-11 09:40|| 2008-07-11 09:40|| Front Page Top

#2 One day, someone might actually wake up and discover the wonders of territorial status of the United States. And we're not discussing something specific about Israel. The international organizations suck for security which in turn have to lean on the US for real results. Cut the middlemen out, saving time, money, and lives. It would also have remarkable effect on pathetic neighborhood saber rattlers. You retain significant local autonomy but give up foreign affairs and your monetary unit. In return you get as good as security as there is in the world today.

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-07-11 10:16|| 2008-07-11 10:16|| Front Page Top

#3 Procopius2k, I have thought that for a long time. Does anyone doubt that the US would defend Puerto Rico? Puerto Rico can do what they want, have their own language and culture, and have the trade and stability that has made them a giant in the carribean.

Other nations could easily do the same thing. I don't think the US would begrudge further territories if they joined voluntarily and if they still had the same process towards becomeing states.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-07-11 12:49|| 2008-07-11 12:49|| Front Page Top

#4 No, no, a thousand times, no.

I don't think that we need any more "territories" or "states", especially non-English speaking ones that don't have a similar mindset in regards to basic Constitutional rights (the right to own a gun, search and seizure, etc.)

Posted by Swamp Blondie in the Cornfields 2008-07-11 13:51|| 2008-07-11 13:51|| Front Page Top

#5 If you cut out the leftis elements Blondie, I think most of the people in the world feel that way. I think the western hemisphere is a better place to look for friends than europe or africa. But I think I see where you are coming from with the mindset thingy. The oriental mindset is just too different from ours, for example.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2008-07-11 14:11|| 2008-07-11 14:11|| Front Page Top

#6 I believe territories have to accept the Constitution. They are unable to vote for national elections. Language is only an issue if they are to become a state. People with a drastically different mindset would never consider voting anyway.

If a country votes that they want to dump their leadership and join the US I'm all for it.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-07-11 15:55|| 2008-07-11 15:55|| Front Page Top

#7 Unlike Blondie I believe we have come nowhere near achieving our manifest destiny. Any nation that has incorporated the Bill of Rights into its national constitution should be granted provisional territory status. After five years it should be eligible to apply for statehood.

Language is not an issue for me. I have no idea what language they speak in Puerto Rican government and I could care less. If they want to spend their lives as landscapers, they can speak Spanish. Hell, if they want to send a senator who speaks only Spanish to the Senate, that's OK. The bozo won't be able to accomplish anything, but if it makes them feel good, OK.

Nothing would so quickly return the Federal government to its proper size and purpose as the expansion of the union. Repeal the 16th & 17th Amendments and we'd be back in business.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-07-11 16:18|| 2008-07-11 16:18|| Front Page Top

#8 NS, language does matter.

There would be really no way that we could accept in a large bloc of people who don't speak English without experiencing the kind of lovely situation that the Canadians enjoy with Quebec. No thanks. We would have to recognize their language somehow officially, and that would be a major headache.

Besides, if they want to be Americans that damn badly, there is a way to do that already. It's called immigration.

Yes, it's confusing, irritating and a royal pain in the ass (don't I know it!) The system we have now desperately needs to be reformed. Unfortunately, no one in government is currently willing to get serious and do the necessary work.

But I would rather have people who honestly, truly want to be here and want to contribute than a possibly significant minority who did not want to give up national sovereignty and would resent us taking over.....possibly to the point of rebellion.

Posted by Swamp Blondie in the Cornfields 2008-07-11 19:59|| 2008-07-11 19:59|| Front Page Top

#9 Ideas matter, not language.

There would be really no way that we could accept in a large bloc of people who don't speak English without experiencing the kind of lovely situation that the Canadians enjoy with Quebec.

That is a cultural issue, not a linguistic one. If we can accept the people in Louisiana and Puerto Rico, we can accept just about anything. They won't all progress at the same rate, but as long as they accept and implement the Bill of Rights, they're on my side. (I also think you underestimate how radical and difficult to accept the Bill of Rights is for most people and their governments.)

I think we should be a big tent country. One of the great tragedies of the Civil War was that the variation in state cultures was legally curtailed.

Immigrants are wonderful, but they're not the only way to gain citizens. We should be open to them all.

I would rather gain land. And we will no longer do so by conquest. So the only other way is voluntary incorporation. Or you want the bad guys to inherit the rest of the earth because all the good guys immigrate here?

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-07-11 20:29|| 2008-07-11 20:29|| Front Page Top

#10 NS, we can't even really hold on to the territory of the 48 states. Don't believe me? How else do you explain illegal immigration?

I find it hard to believe that we are going to do any better with more land, especially if it is separated from the mainland.

Let's get our current territory under control first before we start annexing the world, ok?

Posted by Swamp Blondie in the Cornfields 2008-07-11 22:49|| 2008-07-11 22:49|| Front Page Top

23:48 Abdominal Snowman
23:37 Pappy
23:13 Barbara Skolaut
23:08 Classical_Liberal
23:08 Abdominal Snowman
23:01 OldSpook
22:49 Swamp Blondie in the Cornfields
22:45 Pearl Jeager2939
22:45 Frank G
22:42 Leonard Plynth Garnell
22:40 bigjim-ky
22:39 Bright Pebbles
22:37 PBMcL
22:33 KBK
22:32 bigjim-ky
22:31 trailing wife
22:30 KBK
22:28 bigjim-ky
22:27 bigjim-ky
22:26 trailing wife
22:25 trailing wife
22:22 KBK
22:03 john frum
21:51 Old Patriot