Guest Commentary

US needs to remain on Israel’s side

In a column in Thursday’s edition of The Daily Cougar titled “U.S. needs to sit down for punch and pie with other countries,” columnist David Brooks portrayed the U.S.–Israel relationship as a liability to the safety of our troops.

The article concluded that the Israeli government’s policies endanger American troops and that Israeli “whims” subvert our foreign policy needs.

While it is certainly true that the U.S. and Israel will not agree on everything, open and contemptible disagreement is far more dangerous to our foreign policy agenda in the Middle East. The announcement regarding new construction in East Jerusalem made during Biden’s visit was recognized as a deeply regrettable incident, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately apologized for the timing of such an announcement.

As in any relationship, there will be times of tension and disagreement. However, disagreements between the U.S. and Israel should be handled directly and privately, in a manner befitting the close relationship between the two nations.

As Biden said during his trip, “Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel.”

The interests between the U.S. and Israel are not merely based on mutual qualities of democracy and freedom.

The U.S. and Israel face many of the same threats, including nuclear proliferation in Iran and state-sponsored terrorism. Israel has served as an anchor in the region, preserving moderate regimes without the type of deployment of U.S. forces required in Europe, East Asia, Iraq or Afghanistan.

If the goal is truly to advance U.S. foreign policy interests, we must remain inseparable from Israel.

The Israelis have taken steps toward peace; it’s time the U.S. demands the same of the Palestinians. Let’s not let this simple disagreement between two friends cloud our view of the real issues that are of paramount importance to U.S. foreign policy interests: the prospect of a nuclear Iran, the expansion of state-sponsored terrorism and the stabilization that Israel brings to the Middle East region.

What’s good for Israel is good for America’s foreign policy agenda, and all rhetoric aside, we should remain ever cognizant of this fact when future disagreements arise between these two great allies.

Open disagreement only sets the peace process back and emboldens those who wish to hurt the U.S. — outcomes that truly place our troops and our nation’s interests in danger.

Frank Carroll is a first-year law student and may be reached at [email protected]


  • It was General Petraeus that said that the US relationship with Israel was putting American lives at risk, and this is not some wild statement.

    What does Israel do for the United States, other than incite hatred for the US? Two Israeli spies sit in US prison today. As Israel pressures the US to attack Iran, Israel itself ignores the fact that what they accuse Iran of doing, Israel did with Dimona, and Mordechai Vanunu, already.

    The US has received nothing but grief as a result of supporting Israel for the last 50 years. It was the worst policy blunder of the United States ever.

    The idea that the US needs Israel is ludicrous.

    If Israel wants to build a bunch of new Jewish only settlements, let them, but they should do it without US support, without US intervention, and without US money. If Israel can continue expanding their territory and continue stealing land from non Jewish people, that’s their business. It shouldn’t be the business of the United States.

    • First of all, Petraeus said he did NOT make those statements.

      Second, “What does Israel do for the United States?”

      1) Israel supplied the majority of the intelligence during the Cold War; the US may have lost without Israel’s help.

      2) Israel has taken many pieces of US military equipment and made it technologically better and then gives those improvements to the US FOR FREE, i.e., SCUD missiles, F-15/F-16 fighter jets.

      3) Israel provides top-level training for specialized military personnel and for Homeland Security personnel.

      And on, and on, and on …..

      It would be great if the leadership of Israel would recognize they don’t need the US’s permission to run their own country. No, they don’t need US aid, they don’t need permission to build. They are a sovereign nation, just like the US.

      • > First of all, Petraeus said he did NOT make those statements.

        This is exactly what Patraeus said:

        “Israeli-Palestinian tensions often flare into violence and large scale armed confrontations. The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile Al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizbollah and Hamas.”

        The reason you are claiming that General Patraeus “did not make those statements” is because of this article:

        In which this was the quote they provided as “proof”

        “all three items…were wrong, frankly.”

        You have to wonder what the dots in there have omitted.

        And I have run into the American Spectator several times. They are less reliable than Fox News or MEMRI for factual information. They are the most pro Zionist site I’ve seen on the Internet, and they are unabashedly so, and that’s their only concern. Read them for a while.

  • Instead of launching into an ad hominem attack on the Spectator, why don’t you just watch the video for yourself:

    When questioned by The American Spectator in a press conference on his purported view that U.S. support for Israel hinders America’s national security interests, Gen. Petraeus stated that that proposition “was wrong, frankly” and explained that the quote that bloggers attributed to his Senate testimony was actually plucked out of context from a report that Central Command had sent the Armed Services committee. Petraeus then alluded to a speech given by Secretary Clinton to state the proposition that our policy is one of “strong support” for Israel. Finally, to further dampen the controversy, Gen. Petraeus spoke to Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, and reassured him that the reports were inaccurate. Hope this fills in the “…” for you.

    • I read the original quote, and I know it’s accurate – and so do you.

      Petraeus is back peddling because NOBODY is allowed to criticize Israel when it’s offcial US policy to support them regardless of what they do. Petraeus is not a leader, he follows orders and gives recommendations to help inform his superiors. Anybody that studies war or intelligence for that matter knows there is a public statement, and there is the internal actual reality. The actual reality poked through for a minute, that’s all. Now it’s damage control and pretending it never happened.

      Furthermore: Ad hominem is attacking a person’s integrity. The American Spectator reprinted the “mistranslation” of MEMRI in which MEMRI had claimed that any state that voted for Bush during the 2004 election would be targeted by binLaden, a complete falsification. The American Spectator is nothing more than a propaganda machine and they have no credibility. You will never find them criticizing any Israeli policy and it’s pretty damned rare for them to be discussing any policy that doesn’t concern Israel at all.

      Lastly it’s rather ludicrous to claim that Israel was some sort of bulwark in the cold war. Israel was passing on information that Pollard sent to the USSR. Israel was caught selling US drone technology to China. Do you know what the Maki party is?

      The USSR went bankrupt for the same reason the US is going to go bankrupt, the spent too much money on the military. The military isn’t a productive expenditure of money, it’s a complete waste of money.

      But if you think Israel is so damned important, nothing prevents you from sending money to that corrupt country – go ahead. My problem is simply being forced to be involved with a conflict that will inevitably lead to the destruction of the Jewish people as a cohesive group.

      Oh and “training for HOMELAND security” Achtung! Neocons have become brazen fascists today.

      • My problem is simply being forced to be involved with a conflict that will inevitably lead to the destruction of the Jewish people as a cohesive group.

        Would you mind clarifying what you mean by that statement?

        • “Would you mind clarifying what you mean by that statement?”

          What do you think is going to happen here?

          Do you really believe that a bunch of modern propaganda is going to stand up to what is actually going on?

          In the Middle Ages, Europe had an inquisition against mostly Jewish people – the MIddle East was a safe haven during this time. In the 20th Century the birthplace of the Reformation, where Martin Luther was born and the ruling point of Catholicism started fascism. During this time, the Middle East again was a safe haven and you people accuse the Muslims of the area with working with the Nazis when the Irgun made an offer to ally themselves with the Nazis.

          Then these “Jewish” people go to the Middle East, where they were traditionally protected from all this stuff, warred with their neighbors, displaced the indigenous population claiming they were thieves, made the world’s largest refugee population, continually went to war with all their neighbors, brought nuclear weapons to the area and claimed to be victims – what do you really think is going to happen?

          You need to look back more than just 50 years.

          Zionism isn’t Judaism – if it is, Judaism is going to be wiped out.

          You don’t study history enough to see what is going to happen. No country can be at continual war with their neighbors. The US will lose it’s power to protect Israel, Israel will be wiped out. Russia can kill them by simply cutting off oil supplies to them – Russia supplies Israel with 80% of their oil. China can wipe out Israel.

          Israelis are just as insane as the Nazis were. Nazis claimed a high degree of morality as well, did you know that? Did they have high moral standards? Israel is no different, and they are repeating the same stupid mistakes.

          • Who’s “you people”? You claim that both Russia and China can wipe out Israel, but will they? Is it in their best interest to do so?
            Also, proof please? You claim this and that and don’t back it up with solid information.
            I agree with you, Zionism isn’t Judaism, but how that pertains to the argument is hard to understand.

          • Yosef:
            Who’s “you people”?

            Who do you think?

            I view Zionists in the same exact way I view the the KKK, you don’t. You think a group of people who want to create a country controlled and run by a single ethnic group, as long as they are Jewish, and not say hicks wearing white sheets over their heads who are anglo saxon protestants, are respectable people. Moral people.

            You people – you RACISTS. You morons.

            The country you defend allied itself up with the Apartheid South African government when the rest of the world had them under sanctions. It was only natural for Israel to do this, lacking any sort of ethics at all.

            You claim that both Russia and China can wipe out Israel, but will they?

            They will if they feel Israel has threatened their oil supplies with countries like Iran.

            Is it in their best interest to do so?

            See above.

            Also, proof please?

            I’m going to pass on that, because frankly, at this point, there isn’t any going back now. This bed is already made. If you don’t know the geopolitical setup, I don’t care. It doesn’t matter to me, and I’m not here to help you escape the wrath you bigots incurred.

            You claim this and that and don’t back it up with solid information.I agree with you, Zionism isn’t Judaism, but how that pertains to the argument is hard to understand.

            Zionists have intentionally confused Zionists with Judaism. This confusion protects racist Zionists from being stopped by shielding them any criticism. A few jewish people were smart enough to realize this, but most aren’t.

            As a result, Zionists have threatened all Jews because Jewish people are going to be lumped in with Zionists, and Zionists are bad people and will be recognized as such in history.

            You freely do this association between Zionism and Judaism, condemning innocent people, because of your political bigotry. You’re just absolute scum to me. Zionism will ultimately do what Hitler wasn’t able to do, it will destroy the Jewish community. When it’s over, everybody will be just like the Germans were after Nazi Germany fell, denying they ever had anything to do with Zionism which in the minds of most people, thanks to Zionists nuts, is Judaism.

  • Yosef,

    Wicks is beyond reasoning, When a KKK’r accuses others of being KKK’rs then you know it’s time to back away, for that path will lead nowhere worth travelling.

    Here are some articles on “apartheid” that I thought you would find worthwhile. (Wicks, of course, wil twist them and the facts contained in them into something that will say more about his twisted mind than about reality.)

    And here is a terrific commentary on Cast Lead, which will be wasted on the likes of Wicks.

    And finally here is a short history lesson that most of us were never taught. It conveys the core reason necessitating the Crusdaes, i.e., Islam’s ruthless and never-ending aggression.

    • Arafat:
      Yosef,Wicks is beyond reasoning,When a KKK’r accuses others of being KKK’rs

      Look, if you want to believe that when Jews want to create a nation for Jews, run by Jews, giving Jewish people superior rights, is some sort of equality, and that I’m a “KKK’r” for pointing out that it isn’t, really, how am I supposed to respond?
      The simple fact of the matter is that Israel is doomed to fail. No nation in history has ever survived in any situation when they were at permanent war with their neighbors, Israel will be no exception.
      Israel, by it’s demanded exclusivity has created this situation. This situation was recognized to exist in 1948, when the UN passed UN Resolution 191 – after Yitzhak Shamir murdered the UN mediator, Count Bernadotte.
      If you want to call me a “KKK’r” go ahead, I’ve been called worse, anti-Semite is the most common one. I’d rather be in the company of Norman Finkelstein than with the likes of you, who don’t even realize how objectionable and immoral you are.
      I don’t care if people are Jewish, Arab, White or Black – when people discriminate based on some perceived difference, it’s wrong. I can’t make it more simple than that, and if you want to say that’s what the KKK thinks go ahead. People like you have already reduced the charge of anti-Semitism to meaninglessness, do you want to do the same to other bigots?
      Probably, ethics and consequences have never stopped you lunatics before.

  • Arafat:
    Wicks,Like your hero Norman it’s my opinion the two of you should move to one of the following countries

    It’s a strawman to argue about other countries. I don’t think Arab countries would be so bad if it wasn’t for the fact that the United Stated interferes with their politics and sometimes controls them directly like keeping the Sa’ud Family in power, or overthrowing the Iranian Democracy like the US did in 1953 with Operation Ajax.
    The core problem is my country. I ought to change that.

  • WIcks,

    It’s little wonder people like Finkelstein and Chomsky are your heros. You love hypocrites because they make you feel normal.

    So according to your/their logic pretty much all the problems in the world are caused by post-colonialism or imperialistic BS. That’s convenient and more importantly it appeals to simpletons.

    Sudan is colonialism’s fault. So is Nigeria, Somalia, Egypt (imperialism), Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, southern Russia Islamists, NW China’s Islamists, beheadings by Islamists in Dagestan, killings of thousands of Buddhists by Islamists in Thailand, murder and mayhem in Kashmir by Islamists and in Mumbai and Bangladesh too, Saddam Hussein was our fault as is Aytalloh Khomenei. The house the Saud’s built is our fault as are the woman haters in the UAE. Hamas is our fault. Hezbolah is our fault. Al Qaeda is our fault as are the Taliban too. The Islamists group in the Philipines and Indonesia and Malaysia are also our fault. It is never Islam’s fault: It is always someone elses fault for the warrior prophet, Mohammed, was a perfect man.

    Like the simpletons Wicks is, he chooses to ignore the precepts that are Islam, he chooses to ignore the FACT that Mohammed was a warrior, a rapist, an aggressive, maniacal imperialist without equal; a man who founded THE most imperialistic, supremacist force that mankind has known. It takes a guy like Wicks and Finkelstein to turn the obvious on its head and to call freedom, apartheid and unprecedented caring self-defense as a war crime.

    Let’s take a quick look at the “imperialistic” barbarism Mohammed set in motion and then let’s close our eyes and blame it all on ourselves, just as the pyscho Wick and Finkelstein does:

    The Crusades

    The Muslim Game:

    Muslims love talking about the Crusades… and Christians love apologizing for them. To hear both parties tell the story, one would believe that Muslims were just peacefully minding their own business in lands that were legitimately Muslim when Christian armies decided to wage holy war and “kill millions.”

    The Truth:

    Every part of this myth is a lie. By the rules that Muslims claim for themselves, the Crusades were perfectly justified, and the excesses (though beneath Christian standards) pale in comparison with the historical treatment of conquered populations at the hands of Muslims.

    Here are some quick facts…

    The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after Rome itself was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.

    By the time the Crusades finally began, Muslim armies had conquered two-thirds of the Christian world.

    Europe had been harassed by Muslims since the first few years following Muhammad’s death. As early as 652, Muhammad’s followers launched raids on the island of Sicily, waging a full-scale occupation 200 years later that lasted almost a century and was punctuated by massacres, such as that at the town of Castrogiovanni, in which 8,000 Christians were put to death. In 1084, ten years before the first crusade, Muslims staged another devastating Sicilian raid, burning churches in Reggio, enslaving monks and raping an abbey of nuns before carrying them into captivity.

    In 1095, Byzantine Emperor, Alexius I Comneus began begging the pope in Rome for help in turning back the Muslim armies which were overrunning what is now Turkey, grabbing property as they went and turning churches into mosques. Several hundred thousand Christians had been killed in Anatolia alone in the decades following 1050 by Seljuk invaders interested in ‘converting’ the survivors to Islam.

    Not only were Christians losing their lives in their own lands to the Muslim advance but pilgrims to the Holy Land from other parts of Europe were being harassed, kidnapped, molested, forcibly converted to Islam and occasionally murdered. (Compare this to Islam’s justification for slaughter on the basis of Muslims being denied access to the Meccan pilgrimage in Muhammad’s time).

    The Crusaders only invaded lands that were Christian. They did not attack Saudi Arabia (other than a half-hearted expedition by a minor figure) or sack Mecca as the Muslims had done (and continued doing) to Italy and Constantinople. Their primary goal was the recapture of Jerusalem and the security of safe passage for pilgrims. The toppling of the Muslim empire was not on the agenda.

    The period of Crusader “occupation” (of its own former land) was stretched over less than two centuries. (The Arab occupation is in its 1,380th year).

    Despite popular depiction, the Crusades were not a titanic battle between Christianity and Islam. Although originally dispatched by papal decree, the “occupiers” quickly became part of the political and economic fabric of the Middle East without much regard for religious differences. Their arrival was largely accepted by the local population as simply another change in authority. Muslim radicals even lamented the fact that many of their co-religionists preferred to live under Frankish (Christian) rule than migrate to Muslim lands.

    The Islamic world was split into warring factions, many of which allied themselves with the Frankish princes against each other at one time or another. For its part, the Byzantine (Eastern Christian) Empire preferred to have little to do with the Crusaders and went so far as to sign treaties with their rivals. Even the Muslim armies that eventually pushed out the Christian rulers spent far more energy fighting each other, both before and after the various re-takings of Jerusalem.

    Another misconception is that the Crusader era was a time of constant war. In fact, very little of this overall period included significant hostilities. In response to Muslim expansion or aggression, there were only about 20 years of actual military campaigning, much of which was spent on organization and travel. (They were from 1098-1099, 1146-1148, 1188-1192, 1201-1204, 1218-1221, 1228-1229, and 1248-1250). By comparison, the Muslim Jihad against the island of Sicily alone lasted 75 grinding years.

    Unlike Jihad, the Crusades were never justified on the basis of New Testament teachings. This is why they are an anomaly, the brief interruption of centuries of relentless Jihad against Christianity that began long before the Crusades and continued well after they were over.

    The greatest crime of the Crusaders was the sacking of Jerusalem, in which 30,000 people were said to have been massacred. This number is dwarfed by the number of Jihad victims, from India to Constantinople, Africa and Narbonne, but Muslims have never apologized for their crimes and never will.

    What is called ‘sin and excess’ by other religions, is what Islam refers to as the will of Allah.

    • Wow, I’m impressed, you’re able to plagarize:
      But you’re not responding to anything I write.
      It was the Arab world that addicted China to Opium or had the Opium Wars, that’s the British. It wasn’t the Arab world that had an Inquisition, that was Europe. It wasn’t Islam that created fascism, that was where Martin Luther was born in Germany, and where the Catholic Church was founded in Italy.
      Zionists have now backstabbed the one place that Jewish people traditionally had sanctuary. What do you think is going to be the outcome? Good?

  • No I doubt it will be a good outcome but for reasons that escape your relativistic idiocy.

    In your simpleton’s mind all relgions are more or less the same because they all come down to people. What you are too dense to understand is that, yes, the people are is true, but that, no the religion part is not true.

    Buddha was a contemplative man who believed all life was worthy, even that of an insect.

    Jesus was a man of peace. A man who turned the other cheek.

    Mohammed was a warrior who preached war, who raped, pillaged and destroyed all who stood in his path. He was sadistic, and is considered the perfect role model for Muslims.

    Nowhere will you find me write that this means Chrstians or Buddhists have not, or will not do barbaric, sadistic things. All I am writing is that Buddhist and Christian’s socialization (and Jews and Hidnus too) is such that they’re taught tolerance, compassion and peace. That does not necesarily these people do not pervert their prophet’s lessons and turn them into the opposite of their intentions.

    The difference is that for Muslims intolerance, hate and war is an important part of their religion and their prophet’s message. If you cannot understand this profound difference –or if you deny it is not true — then you are nothing more than another Chomsky pyscho who makes up facts to suit his theories.

    Since I answered your question will you now answer mine? Is Islam unique among the major religions in that its prohpet and his message was one of aggression and supremacy of Muslims over non-Muslims? And is this why it is a fact that in every single Muslim country non-Muslims are not afforded the same freedoms as Muslims, and in fact why there is not one single Muslim country where freedom of the individual or religious freedom or woman’s rights are respected?

    • Arafat:
      The difference is that for Muslims intolerance, hate and war is an important part of their religion and their prophet’s message. If you cannot understand this profound difference –or if you deny it is not true — then you are nothing more than another Chomsky pyscho who makes up facts to suit his theories.

      If they are so barbaric, why haven’t they dropped a nuclear weapon? Pakistan has a nuclear weapon.

      If they are so warlike, why aren’t they controlling governments through proxy, like the United States did, when the United Stated performed Operation Ajax in 1953, to steal oil, in Iran, by overthrowing the democracy in Iran? How many times has the Middle East had a war against Europe or the United States? There are 2 wars going on with the United States now, in Islamic territories.

      If they are so violent, why didn’t they have a holocaust, like the Germans did, back in the 1930s and 1940s?

      If their religion is so violent, why didn’t they have an Inquisition, like Europe did?

      I don’t really care about your interpretations of what they do, I only care about results. Anybody can claim some religion is peaceful, but when the practitioners are busy trying to control the world, have killed millions, control other countries, and enslave people for economic benefit – what do empty platitudes matter?

      Results matter. Those are the facts you are ignoring. Look at Christian society.

      You want to stop the conflict, get out of the area – it’s so easy, but you don’t want to stop the conflict, because YOU are warlike, YOU are a thief – it’s YOU that is the problem. It’s obvious that the problem is with you, but you can’t accept it, even though the history is clear, and the present is clear.

  • Wicks,

    It is apparent you are so dug into your position that facts matter not to you. In that regard you are no different than Chomsky or Finkelstein.

    What you clearly cannot get your ossified mind around is that fact that Christians kill not out of Christ’s teachings but out of man’s weaknesses. Weaknesses such as greed, lust for power, etc…I challenge you to show me an exmaple in Christ’s life where he killed or raped or ens;aved or taught his followers to do the same.

    In contrast to this (not that you seem to care or understand the implications of this) is Mohammed’s life and teachings. Mohammed killed, rpaed and enslaved others and he taught his followers to do the same. As I noted in an earlier link the Crusades were a response to the unfettered aggression of Muslims. It was not until all of the Middle East, Constantinople and all of North Africa had been violently taken over by Muslims that the First Crusade was declared. What would you have had Europe do? Allow the Muslim hordes to take over Rome too?

    Here is another real world example of Islamic genocide. Before pasting the link, though, let me remind you Islam is currently committing genocide in Sudan. In the 20th century Islam also committed genocide in Turkey against the Armenians. In Somalia against the Christian Animists. In the Iran/Iraq War 1,000,000 people lost their lives as Muslims killed their brothers, sisters, elderly, etc…Saddam Hussein tried committing genocide against the Kurds in the north and Shi’ites in the south. Ahmadinejad is calling for genocide against the Jews. Ottomoans committed genocide against the Greeks. Next is a link to the Islamic genocide of Hindus. Muslims did this in keeping with the preachings of Mohammed and the teachings found in the Koran. Allah Akbar, Mr. Wicks.

    Muslim genocide of Hindus:

    More on the Murderous muhammadan treatment of Hindus:
    For its sheer magnitude in scope and death toll, coupled with its occasional (though not continuous) intention to exterminate entire Hindu communities, the Islamic campaign against Hinduism, which was never fully called off since the first naval invasion in 636 CE, can without exaggeration be termed genocide. To quote Will Durant’s famous line: “The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.” (Story of Civilization, vol.1, Our Oriental Heritage, New York 1972, p.459)
    Hinduism’s losses
    There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like “punishing” the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.
    Note that attempts are made to deny this history. In Indian schoolbooks and the media, an idyllic picture of Hindu-Muslim harmony in the pre-British period is propagated in outright contradiction with the testimony of the primary sources. Like Holocaust denial, this propaganda can be called negationism. The really daring negationists don’t just deny the crimes against Hindus, they invert the picture and blame the Hindus themselves. Thus, it is routinely alleged that Hindus persecuted and destroyed Buddhism; in reality, Buddhist monasteries and universities flourished under Hindu rule, but their thousands of monks were killed by Ghori and his lieutenants.
    Apart from actual killing, millions of Hindus disappeared by way of enslavement. After every conquest by a Muslim invader, slave markets in Bagdad and Samarkand were flooded with Hindus. Slaves were likely to die of hardship, e.g. the mountain range Hindu Koh, “Indian mountain”, was renamed Hindu Kush, “Hindu-killer”, when one cold night in the reign of Timur Lenk (1398-99), a hundred thousand Hindu slaves died there while on transport to Central Asia. Though Timur conquered Delhi from another Muslim ruler, he recorded in his journal that he made sure his pillaging soldiers spared the Muslim quarter, while in the Hindu areas, they took “twenty slaves each”. Hindu slaves were converted to Islam, and when their descendants gained their freedom, they swelled the numbers of the Muslim community. It is a cruel twist of history that the Muslims who forced Partition on India were partly the progeny of Hindus enslaved by Islam.

    • Arafat:
      Wicks,It is apparent you are so dug into your position that facts matter not to you.In that regard you are no different than Chomsky or Finkelstein.What you clearly cannot get your ossified mind around is that fact that Christians kill not out of Christ’s teachings but out of man’s weaknesses.Weaknesses such as greed, lust for power, etc…

      Who cares? Christians have killed and still kill a lot more people than Muslims do. I don’t really care to speculate on why and the source of the origin, it’s doesn’t matter, results matter. I’m an atheist anyhow. You want a good religion – look the Jains that have almost the same demographic as Jews do, historically wealthy, well educated, often in key positions of power, and yet they have never had conflict with their embedded cultures.

      Honestly it all doesn’t matter anyhow. The United States will be facing fiscal insolvency within 20 years, very possibly within 5 years. When this happens, Israel is going to be on it’s own, and it’s going to be China, Russia and India picking away the bones of what remains of the US’ empire in the Middle East.

      The US has squandered it’s wealth, it’s spent itself into absolute insolvency, and it’s done it in only 40 years. The US killed it’s own infrastructure, destroyed it’s own manufacturing base, and has hastened it’s demise by playing in the sand in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s it’s foreign policy has been tremendously expensive, has earned it enmity, and it’s too late to change it now.

      Intransigent fools like you are all too common and the lazyiness and the stupidity of Americans and their ignorance has impoverished them. Americans are living in a country of squandered resources, and service jobs and about the only industry that still exists is the war machine. The US now goes into debt at the rate of about 50% of taxation revenues. Only 2/3rds of the US’ cash expenditures (that’s ignoring future obligations) comes from revenue, the rest is borrowed.

      You idiots by wanting it all have lost everything.

      The USSR collapsed in exactly the same way the US is going collapse, and for the same reasons. The US spends about 600 billion dollars a year (when it’s not at war) on the military, and it’s unable to win a skirmish in Iraq or Afghanistan – the rest of the world combined spends 600 billion dollars a year on all their militaries. The wars, the foreign policy, it’s nothing more than an excuse for a very very corrupt branch of government to steal everything. That’s why there was war, but all that’s left of the county is bones.

  • So leave the US, Wicks, and stop stressing out about it. I’m sure your life will be much improved.
    “You” idiots. “You” morons. Stop trolling on this site. Go do something worthwhile. Please?

    Also, “it is” is abbreviated it’s. Learn the difference.

  • Anonymomo:
    So leave the US, Wicks, and stop stressing out about it.

    I pass the points test and I have the 100 grand in cash needed to move. I have an obligation to stay until my parents are dead.

    You seem to think it’s free to leave the United States, because you’ve never looked into it. About the only place and people that are free to leave the United States is to move to Israel, and then, only if you’re Jewish.

    But it’s no discriminatory, it’s a Dumbocracy. The Western media keeps saying that, and you know it wouldn’t lie, unless it was about Weapons of Mass Destruction or why the Housing Market Boom won’t go Bust.

Leave a Comment