Would You Support The War Against Israel To Implement The "Security Council" Resolutions?
473463
I don't believe in wars period, why can't we all just get along!!!
848618
Yes. But not in the same capacity as the past. Without unilateral trust from all involved (witch is only going to be gained by equal treatment to all parties involved) even if it is not perceived to be earned, it will always be one step forward, and two steps back. Even Israel doesn't really trust us. It's just more beneficial to go along with our monetary gestures; after all what have we ever asked from them in return? Use of their airstrips to launch attacks from (which we in turn pay for the privilege). If we are to be negotiators of peace, we need to be perceived by all communities as even handed and fair minded brokers. Fair minded brokers don't negotiate with one hand behind their back.
3704
I think Ehud Olmert would, but it would be temporary. In any case, elections are right around the corner, so I don't know how important it would be.
752884
If by "support the troops," you mean, "bring them back," yes.\n\nIf there's a draft, I'll be relocating to Canada.  I'll be damned if I'm going to risk my life for some idiotic reason like an invasion of Iran.
603698
Yes. All the other countries should support the U.S. in their decision. If next year Iran said, "we're gonna blow India up until it does not exist", where would be the first place India turned to for help?? It's allies. I'm just glad the U.S. is strong enough to help the other countries when they are suffering or need help. It is always better to be friends than enemies. I'm thankful for the other countries that support the U.S. I'd like to see an end to all the wars and my heart goes out to the people that live in the countries that haven't had peace in many years.
698170
This is such an important question. The person chosen currently, I fear will be a yes man to the US position. I hope for all our sakes I am wrong.  The person to take the role as Secretary General probably needs to be someone who has been a career diplomat rather than a career politician. \n\nIt must be someone who has the sense and the courage to recognise that the first priority is for democracy in the United Nations. This must be the first step, then we can all move forward and the UN will not be a lame duck. The problem is the VETO stupid!\n\nAs long as the select few "founding" members have a veto there can not be democracy in the UN and the UN is  a waste of time. Foe example, the US has vetoed all the UN criticisms of Israel, prevented UN inspectors from investigating possible criminal acts against Palestinians by the Israelis.etc. (In practice the US has used the veto more times than all other members put together). You cannot have a democracy with a special interest veto - it cannot work, democracy cannot work!\n\nSurprisingly, many of the problems which we are now facing are the result of the US veto. The failure of the UN to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian issue was the main trigger for the current unrest across the Middle East as Arabs everywhere saw that there was a real injustice leading to suicides in Palestine as an escape from almost 40 years of brutal Israeli rule.  Now the Israelis are suggesting (its their first move to test political will around the globe, before action, ) to assassinate all the Hamas (the elected) leaders in Palestine. Have the Israelis and the Americans learned nothing from these wars (Iran, Lebanon)? The West struggles to get an election going in Palestine, then when the people elect those the West seems not to want, then we will murder them?!! Hello? Is anyone there?\n\nYou cannot fight an ideology with traditional military might, you simply make the enemy stronger and increase its membership. Ideologies are fought using social and economic instruments for change, and by recognising that the underlying fuel to terrorism is not fundamentalism (thats only a catalyst) -  the fuel is injustice. The fundamentalist voices claim this is a jihad, but the vast majority support the movement on the grounds of the obvious injustice. Recent examples would be the US/Israeli planned invasion of Lebanon, executed by the Israelis and which was planned BEFORE the Israeli soldiers were kidnapped (anyone remember them now??) and the  West's reluctance to call for a halt to the bombing (cluster bombing) of Lebanese civilians! And with the Israeli bombing of homes killing 18 people (13 in one family) during the peace keepers occupation. Do you need to be an Arab to ask"where is there justice?"\n\nTherefore, for the UN to be effective it must be democratic. This does not mean that it will solve all the UNs problems because the UN inevitably will remain a cumbersome bureaucracy, but it will mean that the actions of the UN will express the will of elected people around the World, addressing,discussing and attempting to resolve  issues and NOT result in the eunuchization of the UN because of special interest groups' vetoes.\nAs to naming a successor, maybe we should wait until the current one expires?
433900
No.  But he does need to eliminate their nuclear weapons program.  If other nations do not act by the end of this month than Israel has vowed to do so.
130781
Answering that question from a purely intelectual position, the answer would be no - you can appose the statehood of Israel without apposing the existance and livelihood of the Jewish people.\n\nHowever this idea is impossible to seperate.  That is like saying I am anti-Germany but not anti-german.  If you claim to accept a people, but also claim to want to remove thier legal right to the land they have enhabited for thousands of years... it would be difficult to seperate the two issues.  \n\nNow, with the understanding that most poeple would not like to label themselves as anti-semetic, I can understand why they would choose a label of anti-israel instead... they don't necessarily want to catagorize themselves with people like Adolf Hitler, who was clearly anti-semetic.\n\nHowever, those in the Middle East who appose the Jewish state of Isreal, whether individuals or countries, have little problem acknowledging thier anti-semetism.  Do you recall the recent quote from that Iranian official?  He had no quams stating directly that the Jews should be driven into the sea (eliminated).  Also the Palestinian's new government lead by the Terrorist Group Hammas has declared the same while in the same breat asking for money resources to help thier government.  \n\nWell, we have to ask ourselves, is it possible to be anti-isreal and not anti-semitic?  How could we support the Jews and nor support the continued existance of Isreal?  I don't need to worry too much about it, I support both, but if you don't I am open for suggestions.  Let me know
149591
If that happens the US will pull all our funding and whatever troops that are under their peacekeeper control.\n\nWithout US support there is NO UN.  \n\nSo they can try.  I would love to get rid of that organization it has done nothing but steal, bad mouth the US and Israel, and waste our money.\n\nWe haven't done anything that we shouldn't have anyway.  Well the Bay of Pigs but that was Kennedy leaving the Cubans out to dry
1059001
No. I think Hammas must be made to recognize Israel as a state, but at the same time, Israel needs to remove themselves back to the pre-1967 borders. I am not saying that the U.S. needs to get involved militarily, but rather as an arbitrator. Whomever kidnapped that 19 yr. Israeli soldier needs to be taken to trial, Hammas needs to denounce violence and recognize Israel, and Israel needs to retreat back to the original borders set by the U.N. in 1948.
935231
NO! We must continue to assist Israel and if we are going to abandon anyone it should be the radical Asian and Arab countries that hate us.
1004292
i do not support this war....has this war acheived something...im sure many will counter by argument by saying that USA has toppled down a dictatorship and restore democracy,find out weapons of mass destruction....but where is the democracy...and see people dying every day in Iraq...As i always said USA masqueraded their other aims(for eg----for money,oil----influence...and a way to demonstrate his force) the opinions towards US is divided...some are afraid of US...bcuz of it being a superpower...while others prefer to back US still because it being a super power....see Japan,Mongolia,Australia and many European countries sending troops in Iraq  i dont like the either u are with us or against us policy....war in Iraq can never be justified...and also UN has not approved the invasion so US has no right to invade....UN security council is a toothless dog...i does nothing to preserve peace...\nbut this does not mean i support Sadaam's regime(discriminating Shites and killing Kurds, invasions...link with terrorist orgs..etc)...
396564
For some reason we seem to think we need Isreal as an ally, i think we would make more allies if we supported the palestians, Israel is a country that was imposed by the UN. It has got to be embarrassing if you need the UN to start a country for you.
677514
There is no justification for supporting Israel.  Since 1948, Israel has violated many UN resolutions, including the very first one which was a conditon for admittance into the UN: that Israel permit Palestinian refugees the Right of Return. Israel violated the UN Mandate that made Jerusalem an international city.  Israel has continued to violate UN resolutions and the World Court regarding its wall in the West Bank.  Israel feels free to thumb its nose at world opinion, and it does so repeatedly. \n\nKeep in mind two things: first, sympathy for the plight of Jews because of the horrors inflicted by the Nazis; and secondly that New York City is the biggest Jewish city in the world.  The Jewish lobby in the US has managed to rip off US taxpayers and send billions of dollars as outright grants to Israel every year, money which is used in its genocidal actions against the Palestinian people.\n\nBecause the American people keep largely silent in the matter of irrational US support for Israel, the US continues to back Israel regardless of what it does.\n\nIsrael tried to to sink the USS Liberty in international waters of Gaza in June of 1967.  Israel continues to get away with flagrant violations because no one is willing to stop it.\n\nOn the other hand:\nThe Islamic Ruling Committee in Al-Azhar is considered to be the highest religious ruling authority for Sunni Muslims. On 23 Dec. 2002, the committee determined that the Islamic nation must acquire nuclear weaponry. "The acquirement of modern nuclear weaponry is a religious obligation." According to a member of the Islamic Ruling Committee, Sheikh Ala A-Shanawi "The Islamic nation has to recognize the enemy, and to prepare itself accordingly." In answer to a question sent to Sheikh Ala A-Shanawi, he wrote, "Allah's messenger the prophet Muhammed would have prepared himself with all the resources possible in order to deal with the enemy. Therefore, if the Islamic nation is not equipped with the desired weaponry needed, it will be forced to suffer the consequences, and will be blamed for negligence." Sheikh Ala A-Shanawi emphasized, "All Islamic nations are required to seize nuclear weaponry!” (1)\n\nWhether Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty makes no difference.  Iran has said it would offer to make nuclear technology available to Sudan, so this shows how much Iran feels bound to honor its promises.\n\nSo Iran is not exactly peachy-keen either.  And the president of Iran made the mistake of saying that Israel should be wiped out, which in todays pro-Jewish mindset is a VERY foolish thing to do unless you are confident you have the means to carry out the threat.\n\nBoth of them, Iran AND Israel, are threats to peace and security not only in the Middle East but in the world.
702434
It's the USA that is the problem, it seems only they can stop Israeli aggresion, but they support it, maybe even suggest/order it
1144805
As simple as it sounds, this seems to be a loaded question because it could be interpreted in several different ways.   \n\nIf the question was, "Do you support our troops in Iraq?", my answer would be; absolutely, yes. If the question was "Would you have supported our war in Iraq before it was begun?", my answer would have to be no.  If the question was, "Do you support funding wars with taxpayer's money in which the primary mission is either to  A. oust a dictator  or  B. spread democracy?", I would feel pressed to say no.  There are homeland concerns that, I feel, need to be addressed first before we open ourselves to this type of international involvement.\n\nI support handing the situation in Iraq over to the newly formed government, so that we may consider there to be an END to our war in Iraq.
865328
I don't have to open them to remind me once again why I do not support Israel.I do not support Israel's policy when it comes to Palestinians and the surrounding countries...Israel is killing hundreds of people saying is just "defending itself"...From who?From children who throw rocks at the Israeli tanks?\nIn the last 4 months in Gaza more than 220 Palestinians have been killed(most of them civilians ;militants who were not involved in any "terrorists" act),while only 2 Israeli soldiers have been killed,one from "friendly" fire...\nIsrael is occupying Palestinian's land illegally.there are 3 UN resolution that ask for the creation of a Palestinian state that Israel totally ignores...And the worst thing is that no one can do anything to make them apply those resolutions...\nSo as long as Israel thinks it's above the law more people are going to die there and millions of Palestinians will never come back to their land...