Word: israelã
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...opponents should consider supporting this position to demonstrate the sincerity of their objections to “don’t ask, don’t tell.” In this matter they could take a lesson from the signatories of the anti-Israel divestment petition, who find Israel??s policies racist, colonial, apartheid and any number of equally nasty adjectives. Now most of us have the good sense to see that these charges are utterly wrong. But the Israel-bashers are at least consistent: If you think Israel??s actions are reprehensible, you ought...
...part, the group’s plan calls for an end to Israel??s occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, giving the Jewish parts of Jerusalem to Israel and the Palestinian parts to Palestine and international guarantees of security for a stable new Palestinian state and for Israel...
...would first and foremost harm the American people. On the contrary, this notion does not exist to the petition signers in relation to Israel. Moreover, the petition bluntly ignores the fact that divestment would bring further misery to the Palestinian people, given the strong dependency between their economy and Israel??s. Besides being thus shortsighted, the petition presumptuously claims that its signers know the answer to the problems in the Middle East. They put sole responsibility on Israel for resolving the conflict, entirely ignoring the efforts Israel has made in putting an end to violence, providing copious...
...President Saddam Hussein has promised to do, would Hasan urge restraint upon Israel? Israel truly has a sovereign right to defend itself against foreign attack. Its restraint in 1991 was only possible do to the fact that, miraculously, the 39 scud missiles launched at it did little damage. Furthermore, Israel??s restraint was seen by the Arab states, not as a sign of wisdom and restraint, but as a sign of weakness. This is a show that Israel cannot afford to repeat while engaged in its present struggle for its very existence...
...surprised and dismayed to read your editorial (“Israel??s Inalienable Right,” Sept. 25) suggesting not only that Israel should retaliate in the event of an Iraqi attack, but that the United States should fully support retaliation. The authors point to the bombing of the Osirak reactor over 20 years ago to support this argument, but this misses the essential issue at stake: whereas 20 years ago Iraq had no nuclear capability, today we are at least expected to believe that they may. Certainly, Israel now has nuclear weapons...