The Middle East, Islam & Israel: Where do you stand?

[Menydh]

Please, consider carefully all options before casting your vote.

Whenever some news on Islam, Israel or Jews in Europe, or the Middle East in general are posted on Stirpes, strong disagreements, sometimes even passionate, come to the surface.

I thought that it would be interesting to have a more clear picture on where everyone stands on the issue, and compare the positions measuring the distances between them.

At first I thought that the vote should be secret, so that peole don't feel pressed by whatever side the balance goes at the moment of voting, or the comments by others.

But there is another interesting datum that can be learned from the poll, and that is how nationalist people and others from different countries feel on this issue. It should also help to discriminate between Europe and colonial countries. So the vote is public.

I've tried to come out with a fair number of options which may cater for most views and make them explanatory enough. But I hope that you understand that this cannot be 100% accurate.

If in doubt, please do not hesitate to ask for more details on any given option, or all.

[Menydh]

Vote Now!

Please, consider carefully all options before casting your vote.

Reason your choice.. and discuss!

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Vote Now!

Please, consider carefully all options before casting your vote.

Reason your choice.. and discuss!

Later, no time now

[wilpuri]

Oops.
Chose the wrong one. Its what one gets for reading too quickly without thinking.

Basically my stance is this: I dislike all of them (US, Israel, Islam) and wish to stay uninvolved.

[Menydh]

I feared that that would happen. I can delete your vote now, but I don't know if after deleting it you will be able to vote again..

Edit: I made a test with a new poll. I can delete it but then you cannot vote again.

[Tennyson]

I voted:

Europe should support actions against Islamic countries by America and Israel, providing that the actions are clearly directed against countries which are supporting Islamic terrorism beyond doubt, but should not get involved with troops.

Additionally, Europe should fight Islam at home with special focus on immigration policies. With very few exceptions, Muslims should be repatriated to their countries of origin. European intelligence services should collaborate with Americans and Israelis to expose Al-Qaeda sleeper cells which are present in Europe.

It would be useless to appease Muslim terrorists. The Jihadist mentality see the West as a monolithic enemy and terrorists seek to damage Europe in all ways they can regardless of what we do. The mere fact that we are overwhelmingly either Christians or Atheists is enough of a reason for them.

Europe would benefit from good diplomatic and trade (not cultural) relations with the United States and Israel. Thus, Europe should verbally approve all actions these nations may take against their enemies. This kind of approval would cost nothing and win Europe a lot of good will. Currently, European countries attach themselves to false concepts of moral universalism and support the Palestinians financially and in the UN. Why should Europeans finance Hamas with their tax money as they presently do?

However, I also favor good trade relations with Middle-Eastern countries and Europe should support Arab and Iranian nationalists against Islamists and Negroes.

I am not against the theoretical possibility of taking military action against Islamic terrorists abroad but presently America and Israel neither need nor deserve our military or financial support.

[Sergius]

Europe should not get involved in any actions against Islamic countries outside its borders, only get rid of Islam at home and take preemptive/preventive actions to ensure that Muslim trojan and neighbouring countries do not represent a threat now or in the future. Also, Europe should support Islam against America and Israel. Political action should be directed to weaken America and Israel's position in the Middle East.

I support Islam in the Middle East because I believe it will ensure a better situation in the region, which in itself is desirely and just, as well as it may halt the flood of immigration and make repatriation easier.

[Menydh]

I voted for option #7:

Europe should not get involved in any actions against Islamic countries outside its borders, only get rid of Islam at home and take preemptive/preventive actions (political or military) to ensure that Muslim trojan (Albania) and neighbouring (Chechnia, Maghreb, Turkey) countries do not represent a threat now or in the future.

I would have split this option into two slightly different, one including the pursuing of good diplomatic relations with Middle East countries. However, the idea is a bit naïve because preemptive/preventive actions over those Muslim countries, even if for our own security, would jeopardize many of the diplomatic efforts. Still, the option should be understood as including diplomatic efforts with other Middle East and Asian Muslim countries, if only as a means to neutralize their reaction to the actions taken over those countries.

As for supporting America and Israel for the sake of trade benefits, I think that that's an idea that doesn't look to the grand picture.

One important goal must be to reverse globalisation where possible and to focus on a safe degree of economic autarchy within Europe. While fears are that Europe's industry would lose from autarchic policies, the truth is that globalisation is more dangerous and we are only starting to see its effects.

The first victim has been Agriculture. Europe is increasingly relying on imports from third countries, which despite transport costs they are still cheaper than home producing due to the extremely low production costs in those countries. As a result, Agriculture in Europe is dying slowly and painfully, provoking the migration of that sector of the population to the Industry and the consequent destruction of traditional life styles.

But Industry is also starting to resent from the effects of globalisation. The Industry in Europe cannot compete in prices with production from China and India. The only solution that globalisation allows to this problem is delocalisation. European industries are moving to these countries where they can reduce greatly their costs of production.

At present, Europe is stronger in R&D, innovation and quality. But as the benefits of increased production and exports grows in countries like China, India or Indonesia, so does their power to invest in R&D. Further, with the arrival of European industries in those countries they too gain in knowledge.

Add to all the above the fact that they are big markets which are joining the demand for energy supplies. This will produce big shortages in future supplies of energy and both industrial and agricultural production imports will increase in costs. The solution then will be to revert to home production, but much of it will have gone by then.

The sooner we start to think in terms of home economy, the better. We gain nothing improving trade relations with America, which can produce the same as Europe and is unreliable in its trade agreements.

[Tennyson]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

The sooner we start to think in terms of home economy, the better. We gain nothing improving trade relations with America, which can produce the same as Europe and is unreliable in its trade agreements.

European jobs aren't being outsourced to America which also suffers from global free market. I advocate good bilateral trade relations with America while being protectionist towards the Third World.

[Aptrgangr]

Europe should not get involved in any actions against Islamic countries outside its borders, only get rid of Islam at home and take preemptive/preventive actions (political or military) to ensure that Muslim trojan (Albania) and neighbouring (Chechnia, Maghreb, Turkey) countries do not represent a threat now or in the future.

That's what I voted for.
The problem is Islamic imperialism is vastly underestimated here, it is an independent working force. Those who believe there would be a deal possible with them in order to weaken USA and Israel are clowns because USA and Israel once supported Islamic militants against the Soviet Union - after the collaps those Mujaheddins turned against their former supporters.

[M.R.]

I voted for this,

Europe should not get involved in any actions against Islamic countries outside its borders, only get rid of Islam at home and take preemptive/preventive actions (political or military) to ensure that Muslim trojan (Albania) and neighbouring (Chechnia, Maghreb, Turkey) countries do not represent a threat now or in the future

I don't see why we should support actions of America and Israel, but I also don't support Islamic terrorists and I consider Islam as a threat for Europe.

Muslim trojans like Albania (and also Bosnia, there are terrorists also there) are also a problem which should be solved in the future. Let's kick Islamic terrorism out of Europe, what Muslims do in their countries outside Europe is not my problem.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Tennyson

European jobs aren't being outsourced to America which also suffers from global free market. I advocate good bilateral trade relations with America while being protectionist towards the Third World.

America suffers from global free market? So what? Didn't they enforce it in the first place? They enjoyed it while they could set advantageous rules.

I don't see a reason why Europe should be more protectionist with regards to South America than to North America, for example.

Originally Posted by Aptrgangr

That's what I voted for.
The problem is Islamic imperialism is vast underestimated here, it is an independent working force.

Khilafah, The Caliphate. It is indeed in the mind of many Muslims, both moderate and not.

Those who believe there would be a deal possible with them in order to weaken USA and Israel are clowns because USA and Israel once supported Islamic militants against the Soviet Union - after the collaps those Mujaheddins turned against their former supporters.

I believe that they will weaken in their war against Islam without the need of help. America and Israel have the strength of technology, but look at what's happening in Iraq. It's been almost 4 years since the war started and no-one expects it to end anytime soon.

[Galaico]

I voted for:

Europe should not get involved in any actions against Islamic countries outside its borders, only get rid of Islam at home. No preemptive/preventive actions should be taken against trojan or neighbouring Muslim countries.

I agree that Islam must be rubbed out from Europe, including Albania, Muslim Bosnia, Turkish minorities in Greece, Bulgary, etc., and Muslim tatars and others from the former USSR, but I don't agree in taking "preventive actions" against Islam in non-European countries such as Maghreb or Turkey.

I'm completely isollacionist in this matter, I would prefer to invest in the maintenance and improvement of our borders and deffensive systems, than in preventive wars.

[Tennyson]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

America suffers from global free market? So what? Didn't they enforce it in the first place? They enjoyed it while they could set advantageous rules.

It was the American elite which enforced it at the expense of American and European peoples. Global free market has never benefited American workers.

I don't see a reason why Europe should be more protectionist with regards to South America than to North America, for example.

That's an economic question with different answers at different times.

Mexico, for instance, is a low-cost country and a prime target for outsourcing European companies.