And we're supposed to "talk" to these folks

[sirs]

Seriously Miss Henny, I have.  I know precisely what you and Js are trying to do.  Now, I'd ask you do something for me.  Explain to me HOW YOU HAVE A RATIONAL CONVERSATION with a country and leadership who, not only demands (read: not questions) proof of the holocaust, but is also on record largely pledging to assist in the destruction of Israel. 

Please tell me what "talk" accomplishes with such a predisposed mindset, and how that "talk" brings about a radical change in their policy, that would cause Iran to cease all forms of aide and facilitation towards the current instability of Iraq.  Not being a psychiatrist myself, I'd love to know how "talk" alone fixes this

Ah, now we're back to the crux of the matter. Now I respond to you, how can you have a rational conversation with a country that has worked for over 50 years to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians from the region? How can you have a rational conversation with a country whose flag represents their goal of land from the Euphrates to the Nile?

Because this isn't about Isreal (unless of course you're on board with the idea of destroying Israel), it's about Iraq/Iran, and if the Israeali really wanted to ethnically clense" the region of Palestinians, we'd have come across a mass of mass graves, and examples of lining up hordes of Palestinian men, women, and children, being shot dead where they stood.  Your dislike for Israeli policy, as egregiously unfair as you see it, towards Palenstinians, shouldn't be confused with an agenda of ethnic clensing, which is a whole other ball game. 

But you're right in this manner, this is the crux of the matter to you ... Israel.  Apparently in your mind, Israel is as bad, if not worse than Iran.  So, if we can talk to Israel, consider it a significant partner & ally, then by God we can talk to Iran, right?

The problem being that's your perception of how evil Israel is supposed to be.  Perhaps you can help me out here, as I haven't read any reports of the mass killings by Israelis, mass grave sites of Palestinians, Government declarations of how Israel is to rid the region of the Palestinian scurge, etc.  Quite the contrary in fact, as I see & read example after example of Arab/Palestinian/Persian homicide bombers targeting and killing as many innocent civilian men/women & children as they possibly can.   I hear of examples of Palestinian children being taught history that doesn't include Israel as being part of the region.  I see examples of rhetoric coming from Arab leaders,  concluding not their contempt, but active goal in ridding the region of Israel (read; ethnic clensing).  A certain Iranian president comes to mind

Can you you show me these comparable acts, to bolster the notion of how evil Israel is, Miss Henny?  No one is saying that Isreal is perfect, or even correct in their foreign policy positions.  But as the converstations with Js have gone, simply trying to survive, while surrounded by folks who want to drive you into the mediterranean is a far cry from some nefarious effort to ethnically clense the region of Palestinians.

On the other hand, did you know that Iran is a very well educated and advanced society? Did you know that the majority of even women pursue higher education? That they have a well trained and developed military? Or are they just a bunch of idiots riding around on camels? Lunatics, all of them? The idea of not talking to them is what is absurd.

I'm gonna pretend you aren't being serious with those last "questions".  Especially since you have yet to answer how and what kind of "talk" would bring Iran into the realm of the rational & reasonable, as you answered that question with another question

[_JS]

In fairness Sirs, you have yet to even show that the Iranian Government is heavily involved in Iraq.

The most we have is the Defence Secretary saying "possibly" from a few markings on a few rifles that may be from Austrian guns sold to Iran. The other is material on a small percentage of IED's that may be from Iran. Neither of which necessarily proves that the Iranian government is responsible for anything.

You are on step 52 and have we have yet to confirm step 1.

[sirs]

In fairness Sirs, you have yet to even show that the Iranian Government is heavily involved in Iraq.

I never said heavily involved.  I said disruptive, assistive to insurgents/terrorists, and something you've even conceded, a desire for more power and pull in the region.  "Why wouldn't they" I believe were your words. 

[_JS]

I never said heavily involved.  I said disruptive, assistive to insurgents/terrorists, and something you've even conceded, a desire for more power and pull in the region.  "Why wouldn't they" I believe were your words.

I did, because it is logical. But I still would not proceed without evidence.

You have none. You're just screaming about them questioning the Holocaust, when other countries have done similar actions. Then you pronounce we can't talk to these guys, they aren't rational.

You don't know that.

And talk to them about what? There's nothing to talk about. They haven't done anything. All you have is conjecture. 

[Amianthus]

You are on step 52 and have we have yet to confirm step 1.

Don't liberals call this "connecting the dots" and "reading between the lines"?

[_JS]

I'm not sure.

I call it "jumping the gun" or "hysteria."

[sirs]

I never said heavily involved.  I said disruptive, assistive to insurgents/terrorists, and something you've even conceded, a desire for more power and pull in the region.  "Why wouldn't they" I believe were your words.

I did, because it is logical.

BINGO

But I still would not proceed without evidence.  You have none.

There are a myriad of reports and articles, that have been linked here, demonstrating the levels of involvement by both iran 7 Syria, which you have frequently poo-poo'd, as not being enough.  So "none" isn't the right qualifier here.  "none to your satisfaction" would be more accurate.

You're just screaming about them questioning the Holocaust, when other countries have done similar actions. Then you pronounce we can't talk to these guys, they aren't rational.   You don't know that.

Yea, I do.  I listen to them and have concluded LOGICALLY, given the exact same references to them DEMANDING PROOF (read; not simply "questioning") of the holocaust, as being wholly irrational.  Illegal?, no.  Irrational?, absofrellinloutely

And talk to them about what? There's nothing to talk about. They haven't done anything. All you have is conjecture. 

Yea, that's wholly "logical", when you yourself have conceded precisely the opposite above        But, since they've apparently "done nothing", no helping to arm insurgents, no supplying of miltary hardware and explosives, no conduits for terrorists to enter-exit Iraq, you're right, no reason to talk to them, is there

[Henny]

But wasn't Jordan part of the palestinian homeland?

It was called the Transjordan, created by the British and part of the Mandate of Palestine. Why?

[Henny]

Because this isn't about Isreal (unless of course you're on board with the idea of destroying Israel), it's about Iraq/Iran...

Sirs, you're the one who keeps bringing the Jews and Israel into it. The original idea was that you are expressing selective outrage because you feel it's ok to talk to other countries who have done far worse, but don't think it worth the time to talk to Iran because they denied the Holocaust.

But you're right in this manner, this is the crux of the matter to you ... Israel.  Apparently in your mind, Israel is as bad, if not worse than Iran.  So, if we can talk to Israel, consider it a significant partner & ally, then by God we can talk to Iran, right?

I am pragmatic. Technically, I see it as beside the point entirely because U.S. interests are so strongly tied in with Israel now. But in theory, you are correct.

The problem being that's your perception of how evil Israel is supposed to be.  Perhaps you can help me out here, as I haven't read any reports of the mass killings by Israelis, mass grave sites of Palestinians, Government declarations of how Israel is to rid the region of the Palestinian scurge, etc.  Quite the contrary in fact, as I see & read example after example of Arab/Palestinian/Persian homicide bombers targeting and killing as many innocent civilian men/women & children as they possibly can.   I hear of examples of Palestinian children being taught history that doesn't include Israel as being part of the region.  I see examples of rhetoric coming from Arab leaders,  concluding not their contempt, but active goal in ridding the region of Israel (read; ethnic clensing).  A certain Iranian president comes to mind

Sirs, that's because you don't see a damn thing... and that is not your own fault. Between the apartheid wall and the laws against the Palestinians, it is a slow purge. Even before the apartheid wall. The general idea is to frustrate them so badly they just keep moving out. Demolish their homes, cut down their olive trees. Refuse to give them permits to build new homes. Turn the region into Swiss cheese so that they have to drive 100 miles to visit Grandma who literally lives 10 miles away. Encite them by doing things like their most recent digging by the Al Aqsa Mosque, threatening the foundations (protests all over the region on this one right now). If they try to retailiate in any way for anything done to them, the American press points a finger and says "look what those horrible Palestinians have done now." I've seen Michael Tee say it, and it's one thing I agree with him on - if, say, Canada, did this to the U.S., you would fight just as hard, if not harder. But you just don't and won't see the other side of the coin.

You know what, I have an idea. If you and the Mrs. ever want to come visit the Holy Land and see some beautiful things, let me know. We have a guest apartment here that you can stay in, and we would be happy to be your own personal tour guides. During your visit, we'll tour through the West Bank and Gaza... maybe spend some time. Truly, something you will never forget Sirs. (And I am not being sarcastic, you are always welcome to visit!

I'm gonna pretend you aren't being serious with those last "questions".  Especially since you have yet to answer how and what kind of "talk" would bring Iran into the realm of the rational & reasonable, as you answered that question with another question

Look. President Ahmadine... whatever... is a royal ass. But he WAS elected to his position, which says something for efforts the region is making towards democracy. He has said absolutely stupid things. But this is not a broken down country - like Iraq - that can be trampled down quickly by Americans (even without an insurgency that drags on for years and years). They are very powerful in the region. I believe - truly believe - that it would be foolish to do anything BUT talk to them.

[_JS]

If they try to retailiate in any way for anything done to them, the American press points a finger and says "look what those horrible Palestinians have done now

It is amazing to see the difference in how the American media handles stories on Israel as compared to other media. The view of the Israeli Government on both the left and right here in the United States is...interesting. It is as if the Israelis are barely and nobly holding on to a scrap of land in the Middle East. The reality is that they are the power in the region. They dictate the terms and they have built an apartheid system that I cannot imagine any American supporting in any other region of the world (except perhaps neo-fascists). I'm not even going to get into it all, but to say that you wouldn't likely wish to live in a nation where when you get home this evening your entire home and neighborhood has been completely destroyed by armored bulldozers. And you may be given some compensation.

They are very powerful in the region. I believe - truly believe - that it would be foolish to do anything BUT talk to them.

Ms. Henny, this is perhaps the best point I've read in this discussion (would that I'd thought of it long ago!).

Sirs, if you don't want to talk to Iran (and clearly you don't even before this article), then what do you propose?

[BT]

It was called the Transjordan, created by the British and part of the Mandate of Palestine. Why?

Is there a cultural, ethnic or sociological difference between jordanians and palestinians?

[Henny]

Is there a cultural, ethnic or sociological difference between jordanians and palestinians?

No, and that is the argument of those who politically consider themselves to be nationalists - Arabs are Arabs, period. They say it doesn't matter that they were formed into countries by the west - these borders shouldn't matter.

However, the borders were formed. Palestinians living on the west side of the river were uprooted. Jordan was the only Arab country to give them citizenship instead of just a refugee status. They did that because they believe that Arabs are Arabs. But that still doesn't address the problem of the huge burdens on the country caused by the refugee situation. And it doesn't change the fact that there are Palestinians who lost their homes and everything they owned on the other side of the river and want to go back home.

[BT]

So the israel-palestinian problem is really an israel-Jordanian problem since palestinians are essentially jordanians? It wasn't palestinians who were uprooted it was jordanians. and they were jordanians because of lines on a map?

[Henny]

So the israel-palestinian problem is really an israel-Jordanian problem since palestinians are essentially jordanians? It wasn't palestinians who were uprooted it was jordanians. and they were jordanians because of lines on a map?

BT, I'm sure they don't care what name you call them as long as they have an option to go home.

What is your point here? You are nit-picking the issue.

[BT]

What is your point here?

Don't have one. yet.

You are nit-picking the issue.

If asking questions is nit picking - so be it.

But i am curious, if palestians are really Jordanians wouldn't Jordan be home?