Revelations - Middle east

ScottW

Founder
Staff member
Alrighty!

So, for a change in topic here... what do you think of the middle easst. Is the coming of the Lord at hand... or is just another bunch of dark skins shooting off at the mouth?

Does Israel stand a chance... who is going to strike first... will the United States bomb Iraq in full force first, or will they wait until Saddam makes the first move... (in a major way that is).

It sure is interesting times...
 

Matrix Agent

Masochist Mascot
Well Mr./Ms. Admin,

You certainly are active today on the boards.:cool: anyway...

I think that the biggest problem in the israel/palestine conflict is the duping of young muslims. They're told that they're in a "jihad" (dunno bout the spelling) and that the duties they perform for allah will ensure that they are able to enter heaven. Young people, enticed by this, strap themselves with explosives and detonate them in crowded shopping malls. This acheives nothing, other than the death of innocents. Israel has made it known that they will not back down after terrorist strikes, rather they will escalate their own agression. I think that either side, it does not matter which, should take the place of the passive activist, not fighting back against attacks.

Much like in Ghandi's protests in India, passive protests attract the media. It doesn't look good when one nation attacks aother unprovoked. Possibly this could lead to a temporary peace.

Instead of doing this, both nations continually escalate their campaigns against one another.

I'm not going to get into a disscussion of whether Israel has a right to exist, because there isn't an answer. Can anyone really say that the world would have been a better or worse place without israel? No one knows that.

On the subject of Iraq:

Kill him. Kill him now.

I'm not usually a preson who like having military operations all over the place. But this is one thing that I can say that i'm 100% behind. This man rules with an iron fist over a people that live in a state slightly below poverty. He runs an incredible propaganda machine, and an even more impressive military machine. He's even stooped as low as to buy playstations for military hardware applications.

Check that. Instead, take him alive, bring him to the hague, just like they did with milosevic. Thats the kind of thing that shows leaders that they can no longer rule however they wish. The world would be watching them, and their every move. To create this type of insecurity in bad guys might lead them to be a little bit more moderate.

Iraq will make the first major move. I dont think the US could rally enough support to attack Iraq heavily. Desert Storm is fading into the past. We need to make sure that saddam doesn't get a clean slate.
 

GrandHighOne

Registered
Originally posted by Matrix Agent
I think that the biggest problem in the israel/palestine conflict is the duping of young muslims.
I think the biggest problem in the Israel/Palestine conflict is the role of the U.S. in the Middle East (favoring Israel over other Middle-Eastern nations, supporting Israeli army, supporting Israeli weapon industry, caring more about its own interests than establishing peace...)


Much like in Ghandi's protests in India, passive protests attract the media. It doesn't look good when one nation attacks aother unprovoked.


The difference here is: the Palestinians have been waiting for an independent state for the last 50 years. During those 50 years Israel has proven to be a brutal colonial force. Maybe they don't want to wait another 150 years for their independence.

Don't forget that western media has always portrayed (and still portrays) Muslims negatively (perhaps because we are unfamiliar with their culture and religion), Jews positively (perhaps because the West feels guilt for not opposing to Hitler until it was way too late, and because Jewish people are a strong economic force in the U.S. and the West in general).

IMO a passive palestinian protest would remain relatively unnoticed and ineffective in the current political climate.


On the subject of Iraq:
Kill him. Kill him now.


On the subject of Iraq:
The last thing we need is another U.S. intervention. Who the hell gave them the right to act as the world's police officer?

The U.S. isn't exactly known for supporting human rights and respecting democracy...

But it would be interesting to see what lies they would come up with to justify bombing Iraq for a third time (cfr. 1991 lies about babies being killed in Quwait by Iraqi soldiers).

---

This conflict is extremely complicated, and the last thing we need is the American "support" for the peace process. The only way to reach peace will be to have the moderate people on both sides step up to the extremists (on both sides). The U.S. will also have to stop interfering in international politics -- and that won't happen anytime soon I'm afraid. I don't have much hope for the future.
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
On the subject of the Israeli state...
No one had a right to create it. The ancestors of the people that live there now were brought back to create the israeli state, but that land already belonged to someone.

If they have the right to exist then don't other countries reserve the right to get back land that they lost during migration and war times?

The fact of the matter is that the israeli state does exist, and they have to solve their problems by themselves. No outside internvention. The only outside intervention should be as bouncers to keep the fighting in the ring and not to let it escalate outside the area of the fight.

As for sadddam, I am anti hague for one reason. Who the heck gives them the right? The answer is whichever country signed the charter. Countries that have NOT signed the charter should not be held liable to give over so called war criminals. If milosevic and saddam go to the hague, then people like the israeli sheron and clinton should go there as well. People commit so called war crimes all the time, but depending on political alliances and internal political games people evade the hague, and this also has to do how the media, western and international portray our so called leaders.



Admiral
 

Matrix Agent

Masochist Mascot
Who should police the world? or should there not be any form of centralized gov't?

I'm for the UN, almost all countries belong to it. The ability for all nations to speak out provides the world with a more moderate view than any one country could come up with on its own.

Was anyone here against desert storm?
 

GrandHighOne

Registered
Originally posted by AdmiralAK
On the subject of the Israeli state...
No one had a right to create it. The ancestors of the people that live there now were brought back to create the israeli state, but that land already belonged to someone.
True: the Israeli state was created by the West. Before going with the current location, the British and the other winners of WWII considered West-Africa and South-America as possible locations for an Israeli state.

Palestine, at that time the home of the Palestinians was handed over from one colonial power (the British) to another (Israel).

As many Jews as possible where convinced by the Zionist movement (their leader was Ben Gurion I believe, he also was first Israeli president) to go live in the newly created state. The "Israeli Defence Force" wiped out the Palestinian presence in the area they controlled, giving all Palestinian houses to newly immigrated
Jews - and establishing new colonies to expand the Israeli territory.

No outside internvention.
Amen.

People commit so called war crimes all the time, but depending on political alliances and internal political games people evade the hague, and this also has to do how the media, western and international portray our so called leaders.
The USA (and European countries) have supported (and still support) several undemocratic regimes (e.g. Sadam Housein during the 80s). Where do these Western countries then get the right to create an international court of justice to condemn the undemocratic regimes that hadn't the luck of being supported by the West?
 

GrandHighOne

Registered
Originally posted by Matrix Agent
Who should police the world? or should there not be any form of centralized gov't?
In an ideal world, all nations would get along fine, politicians would only be politicians because they want the best for the world and the people.

In the real world, there are lots of international conflicts, there are coalitions of nations trying to secure their interests, you've got the usa who are way too powerful (there's no opposition), politicians who protect the interests of transnational corporations, and so on...

Because of all the above, I'm not pro globalization. (There are lots of other difficulties with centralized government: how to protect and respect the cultural differences, the rights of minorities...)

I live in Belgium, and we have a supra-national government: the European Union. The EU isn't a democratic institution at all, mostly because of practical reaons - and their are only 15 member states - what with 200+ states?


I'm for the UN, almost all countries belong to it. The ability for all nations to speak out provides the world with a more moderate view than any one country could come up with on its own.
It's not because all nations have the ability to speak out that they get listened to... their are a couple of "elite nations" in the Security Council, and they can veto whatever resolution they want...

The USA always vetoed UN-measures against Israel for exmple...

Was anyone here against desert storm?
I am. And about everyone in Europe who follows international politics, except for some politicians maybe, are too.
 

Matrix Agent

Masochist Mascot
The US is powerful, but lately, (and this is an american saying this) i think thats its great the european nations are standing up and passing bills without US support. The cold war is over, western europe and the US dont have to agree on everything.

As long as were on the topic of the US:

what are everyone's sentiments torwards the US?

missle shield too?

This isn't a bad thread, much better than the "spoil OS X 10.1" thread
keep the comments coming..;)
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
I am a "young one" sort of (I am 20)... but I have lived in the USA and in europe. I am a US national, and live there now. I think that the missile defence plan is a waste of money. HAving that amount of firepower up there is DANGEROUS!!!

There are hackers...and there are HACKERS.... what happens is a HACKER gets control of the uplink for some reason and starts WWIII ??? OR just used our own weapons against us or agains some grudge of his or hers ???? OR are we going to have a man in the space cockpit to fore those missile when we need to ???

I think that the money for this missile defence plan would be better spent on education...you cant do anything about the dumbells of today...but you can certainly make a positive impact on the youth of tomorrow.


Admiral
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
Americans can be very self interested, and could very easily give many of you what you seem to think would be the best thing... the US minding it's own business. Just like we did in the early years of the last century that lead to World War I (which started over an event no larger than the events current headlines or those of ten years ago). We can be sooooo apathetic, just like we were after World War I (has every one forgotten the League of Nations, that wasn't our problem). We are even better at watching while other suffer at the hand of aggressors (we did nothing as Germany moved into one Europian country after another, maybe we should have done the same when Iraq moved into Quwait).

We could live without contact with anyone not part of the Americas, but the world wouldn't be happy with the results (but why should we even care about people an ocean away).

Admiral:"If milosevic and saddam go to the hague, then people like the israeli sheron and clinton should go there as well. People commit so called war crimes all the time, but depending on political alliances and internal political games people evade the hague, and this also has to do how the media, western and international portray our so called leaders."

As for war crimes, we should try and remember why the Hague exist. War is not the crime (though it should be), acts against humanity are what calls for this. You brought up Clinton, when did he commit anything that even looks like a war crime? And how could he? There was no action durring his terms that could have even been mistaken for a war crime. Are you saying that Milosevic and Saddam did not do the things that they did? Are you going to tell us that Hitler was misrepresented in the press? Where does it stop? Japan is already rewriting history to cover up what they did in World War II. You don't like what you read so you pretend it didn't happen?

People, we all need to look beyond our selves. We all need to look back at what has already happened. We are the ones who make the choices, and if the sentiments displayed here are what we can look forward to in the future, then we can expect more of what we had in the past... only much worse.
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
HItler got what was coming to him ;)
As far as re-writing history, that is a BIG no no! Furthermore...history ...or any story, takes a different twist depending on who tells it (or who wirtes the textbook for that matter), so a person who is nterested in historical truths will look at realiable sources and examine materials by several reliable historical authors (Strangelly enough I learned this in biology class).


As far as our x-pres goes. We are THE most technologically advanced nation on the planet? Am I right or am I right? (lol a little national pride here :p) ... if that is the case... how the heck is it possible for us to be bombing targets like hospitals, media centers (tv/radio stations) and other civilian targets when under some sort of "war code of honor" we are supposed to take out only military targets ? Furthermore...remember the chinese embassy ? IT was bombed...boy was that a PR nightmare! IT is INNEXCUSABLE to have this very advanced technology and make such huge blunders. Granted the military executed these actions but clinton, as the pres back then, was the man in charge, he sent troops in there, and technically he is the "supervisor" in that whole situation... I cant fathom that these are tech mistakes because we wouldnt be considering paying the same guys to make a missile defense plan for us....I can just imagine it now "ph it was a software glitch and littletown, MI was whipped out" ... so if it wasnt a glitch (or glitches) those targets were pre-approved and taken out, in which case it is a crime because unarmed civilian were in such builings...

The Hague, as an idea, is nice. but as I have said before, it applies to nations that have signed its charter...else how can it work? How can it be just? Can big nationals come in and bully small nations ? Should we take those 2 african tribes (tatouis and toutsies ?? I cant remember the names) that kill one another and take em to court ?:confused:

As far as intervening...sometimes situations merit intervention, but again it's a matter or timing and circumstance. I think that countries have a soveregn right to do what they want within their borders (something that doesnt effect other countries...like for example if the polute, they cant do that since it effects their neighbors )
Although I don't condonne the loss of human life, imagine a situation like this:

some group/race/political affiliation wants to take a state (from the USA) and make a country out of it. Of course the supreme court (AFAIK) doesnt allow any state to break from the union. Lets say ALL (or 85%) of the citizens of that state want to break away, but since they are not allowed they take up arms. Lets say good ol gerge bush sends in the guard, the police, the FBI, the army and the whatevers and tehre is some sort of massacre, a big battle(s), and there was some sort of -cide (be it genocide, political party affliation-ocide, etc etc etc) ... do you think that ANY country in the world is going to object ???? Or even if they do will something come of it ???

I am reminded of the days of the black movement with all the freedom rides and so on. When blacks were treated as subhumans, they were beaten and so on. WORLD newspapers in italy, france, germany, greece, the UK and so on covered these conditions and treatments of the black people....and what did a whitty senator (or was it congressman ?) say? "I will worry about international opinion when we stop giving them money"... This makes my blood boil! How the f*ck do some people think that they are above certain standards ??? IF you are going to go meddle in the internal affairs of one country you have to be open for other countries to do the same to your country.

Oh well... it's too early for this. let me finish my coffee and I will be back :)


Admiral

PS: This promises to be another intellectual "religion-thread-type" he he lets keep it up :)
 

GrandHighOne

Registered
Matrix Agent: It _is_ a good thing that Europe is now able to make decisions on its own, but I think it would be even better to have a few other strong (non-western) coalitions of nations (Africa, Asia, Latin America), all having about the same power and influence.

Sentiments towards US: I also qualify as a "young one": 18 y/o. I spent 10 days in the USA last April (NY, Washington DC, Philadeplphia). What I like about the USA: a certain segment of the population (there are lots of interesting people living in the US), the fact that almost everything is possible in the US, certain cultural aspects of the US (mostly African-American culture), lots of space, lots of different cultures and people living together in one nation, nature, technology...

What I don't like: a certain segment of the population (mostly ignorant conservatives), wide-spread religious fanaticism, no social security system, hypocrisy towards sex (PARENTAL GUIDANCE: BLA BLA, MPAA ratings, beeping out "bad words" on tv, ...) while promoting guns, prisons run by private corporations, Republicans, death penalty in several states, ongoing maltreatment of minorities, media no longer report independently, politics are soap opera, politics are controlled by giant corporations, US flags in classrooms, "we are the greatest country in the world"-mentality...
 

GrandHighOne

Registered
RacerX: I hope you realise that the US is one of the nations most notorious for altering history?

I've seen the history programme for the typical american highschool... I have the impression US public schools provide poor, low-quality education, compared to European highschools.

I'm about to start studying History (www.rug.ac.be - Ghent University), and I promise y'all I'll try my best to write objective history...

The US have been rather mild to Japan after World War II: they got to keep their fascist Emperor, and Japan wasn't stopped when it started altering official history and teaching patriotic WWII-history to students. (strategic importance of Japan to the US...) If Germany had tried the same, the international community would've reacted in no time...
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
Originally posted by GrandHighOne
RacerX: I hope you realise that the US is one of the nations most notorious for altering history?
As you are someone who has little experience with the United States, I find it hard to believe that you know enough to make such a statement.

I've seen the history programme for the typical american highschool... I have the impression US public schools provide poor, low-quality education, compared to European highschools.
Again, this sound more like anti-American opinion than actual fact, I would be willing to bet money that my University has more Nobel laureats and Fields Medalists than Belgium. It must be that "low-quality education" we have out here.

I'm about to start studying History (www.rug.ac.be - Ghent University), and I promise y'all I'll try my best to write objective history...
This objective point of view, is it going to start after you are finished with your education? Why not start now? Lets look at your next statment as an example, shall we?

The US have been rather mild to Japan after World War II: they got to keep their fascist Emperor, and Japan wasn't stopped when it started altering official history and teaching patriotic WWII-history to students. (strategic importance of Japan to the US...) If Germany had tried the same, the international community would've reacted in no time...
Lets see, the US did what it could to keep the Soviets out of Japan at the end of the War after seeing how wonderful they were to work with in Germany. It was deemed at the time that leaving the Emperor in a powerless position would make recovery easier for Japan. Don't forget that the people of Japan believed that the US would rape and murder all of them (this is why pilots would fly their plane straight into US ships at the end of the war). The rewriting of World War II history is not something that is publicly know by many, so it was only when some Koreans protested that many of us found out it was happening.

As for Germany, it shall always be at the center of scrutiny after playing a central role in both World Wars. Most (west) Germans know and understand the reasons behind this. As a future (though still very young) historian, I would expect you to have an understanding of this too.

In my (low-quality) high school education, we had a course called "Reading through the Press". It was a critical reading course that ask us to read articles and try to find out what the writer wanted to tell versus what the actual events that were being written about. Key to learning history is to read (very) many sources and understand the perspective of each. By reading you posts, I can tell you have no experience in doing this. I guess this is a falure of that high-quality education that you have.
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
Originally posted by AdmiralAK
As far as our x-pres goes. We are THE most technologically advanced nation on the planet? Am I right or am I right? (lol a little national pride here :p) ... if that is the case... how the heck is it possible for us to be bombing targets like hospitals, media centers (tv/radio stations) and other civilian targets when under some sort of "war code of honor" we are supposed to take out only military targets ? Furthermore...remember the chinese embassy ? IT was bombed...boy was that a PR nightmare! IT is INNEXCUSABLE to have this very advanced technology and make such huge blunders. Granted the military executed these actions but clinton, as the pres back then, was the man in charge, he sent troops in there, and technically he is the "supervisor" in that whole situation... I cant fathom that these are tech mistakes because we wouldnt be considering paying the same guys to make a missile defense plan for us....I can just imagine it now "ph it was a software glitch and littletown, MI was whipped out" ... so if it wasnt a glitch (or glitches) those targets were pre-approved and taken out, in which case it is a crime because unarmed civilian were in such builings...
By the same reasoning we should never have to read about our own people dying when bombed by us in training. When people are involved, mistakes happen. I don't think that the missed targets of the last 8 years should be compared to the deliberate and thought out destruction of an entire group of people. You are saying that Clinton wanted to target civilians, that is about the stupidist idea I have heard. I dislike Bush, and would never say something that far fetched about him. What reason would he have? And who would be willing to excute such orders? How do you keep that a secret? And think about who you are talking about, Clinton was the biggest bleeding-heart libral to make it to office in years. And what universe do you live in where technology works perfect ALL the time. If you are trying to start a conspiracy theory here, you'll find they work best when you can add motive to theorized actions.

The Hague, as an idea, is nice. but as I have said before, it applies to nations that have signed its charter...else how can it work? How can it be just? Can big nationals come in and bully small nations ? Should we take those 2 african tribes (tatouis and toutsies ?? I cant remember the names) that kill one another and take em to court ?
People who win and lose wars are not (and should not) be on trial. It is when people use the excuse of wars to do things are beyond discription that the Hague is need.

As far as intervening...sometimes situations merit intervention, but again it's a matter or timing and circumstance. I think that countries have a soveregn right to do what they want within their borders (something that doesnt effect other countries...like for example if the polute, they cant do that since it effects their neighbors )
Although I don't condonne the loss of human life, imagine a situation like this:

some group/race/political affiliation wants to take a state (from the USA) and make a country out of it. Of course the supreme court (AFAIK) doesnt allow any state to break from the union. Lets say ALL (or 85%) of the citizens of that state want to break away, but since they are not allowed they take up arms. Lets say good ol gerge bush sends in the guard, the police, the FBI, the army and the whatevers and tehre is some sort of massacre, a big battle(s), and there was some sort of -cide (be it genocide, political party affliation-ocide, etc etc etc) ... do you think that ANY country in the world is going to object ???? Or even if they do will something come of it ???
We have had that happen, and it was over the issue of slavery.

I am reminded of the days of the black movement with all the freedom rides and so on. When blacks were treated as subhumans, they were beaten and so on. WORLD newspapers in italy, france, germany, greece, the UK and so on covered these conditions and treatments of the black people....and what did a whitty senator (or was it congressman ?) say? "I will worry about international opinion when we stop giving them money"... This makes my blood boil! How the f*ck do some people think that they are above certain standards ??? IF you are going to go meddle in the internal affairs of one country you have to be open for other countries to do the same to your country.
Just because we won that civil war, it didn't change some poeple mind about the issues. It took almost 100 years before we started to take actual actions. Besides I thought you voted for Bush? Republicans hate civil rights (even though back in the 1860's they were the party for them).

Any one who thinks the press goes easy on our leaders missed the last 40 years. At one time the press would stay away from issues. Now everything is on the table and fair game, for better or for worse. Look at White Water, 5 years and in the end it turned out to be nothing. Our leaders are no longer privite government officals, they are public personalities who give up there rights to privacy. Not only are all their offical missteps news, so are any private ones too.

PS: This promises to be another intellectual "religion-thread-type" he he lets keep it up :)
I agree
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
He he ;)
I did vote for bush just because I did not like gore (Although they are both in the same boat as far as I am concerned)...if there were a white space for a write in vote I would have voted for myself lol... as indicated on some other post... politicians are political whores. Period.

On the "no one is perfect" theory.. I agree, but someone has to pay for such mistakes. If I mail a cheque out to my credit card for a payment, and the cheque gets lots because the US mail system is imperfect, and this goes on my record as having missed a payment... I am responsible for it. Someone has to be accountable, you cant just leave it like so. (maybe this is a bad example, I dont know).

As for genocide, again, it's a bad bad bad bad thing. Being of greek heritage and taking greek history classes, I know that 300 years of enslavement by the turks wasnt a day at the park for my ancestors (even tough some so called historians paint the picture as though the greeks enjoyed full rights and had a high social standing within the ottoman empire. Such historians sicken me). Anyway back to my original point. Knowing this I know that being pursecuted for your affiliation without having done anything is plain old WRONG. I can't defent milocevic for what he has done, I think it was the wrong course or action. I would have chosen another way out.

I hope that the same thing doesnt happen in FYROM because somehow the KLA (or KLA like paramilitary organizations) have such an effect.



Admiral
 

GrandHighOne

Registered
Originally posted by RacerX
As you are someone who has little experience with the United States, I find it hard to believe that you know enough to make such a statement.
As I live in a world where the USA is a dominant force in world politics and economics, I do have some experience with the USA (some of their bombs have been stored on a Belgian air force base for the past 20 years or so, and it wasn't until this year some government-members admitted it (no official statement yet, they aren't allowed to comment by the NATO).

I admit that I am only able to observe the US from the outside (what I see them doing), but that's the reason why I want to spent a longer period living in the US, to get to know the country & people better.

that my University has more Nobel laureats and Fields Medalists than Belgium. It must be that "low-quality education" we have out here.
I meant that the average level of education (education that most people get) is lower than the average level in most european countries. There are (percentage-wise) more poorly-educucated (is that a word?) people in the US (= and that _is_ scientific fact), and since there are so many of them, that could lead to dangerous situations (people who are not well informed are dangerous voters).

I am not stupid (although you seem to think I am). I am aware of the fact that the number 1 university of the world is an American one.

Since the US population is over 30x the size of the Belgian population, I find it quite normal that there are more American Nobel-prize winners. Also: US economy is better (= more money for scientific research, funding by corporations, ...)

In my (low-quality) high school education, we had a course called "Reading through the Press". It was a critical reading course that ask us to read articles and try to find out what the writer wanted to tell versus what the actual events that were being written about.
_YOU_ got that course. Did every single American get that same course?

One last thing: please take into consideration that English is not my native language (Dutch is), and that expressing complex things in English is sometimes difficult for me. (This is an explanation for some of the things I said that didn't come across the way I intended them to do (in past posts), not an excuse.) I'll try to do better in the future.
 

Matrix Agent

Masochist Mascot
Congrats on the english. You're very good for a non-native speaker.
 

kilowatt

mach-o mach-o man
Originally posted by Admin
Alrighty!

So, for a change in topic here... what do you think of the middle easst. Is the coming of the Lord at hand... or is just another bunch of dark skins shooting off at the mouth?

Does Israel stand a chance... who is going to strike first... will the United States bomb Iraq in full force first, or will they wait until Saddam makes the first move... (in a major way that is).

It sure is interesting times...
I think the middle east isn't much different today than what I've read in the old testament (sp?). I mean, read about Moseus going arround taking over teratory based on it being inherated to the isrealites. They usually killed every last person wherever they took over. On rare occasions, they would enslave the population of a town instead of killing them.
I think they did this because the Lord wanted to basically say "The Isrealites are mine, respect them or else...". So they were justified in killing so many. I mean, Isreal is a huge nation (today and when they were crossing the Jordon). And they were designed to change the world (which they have).

As far as Isreal today, I don't really know who to believe. I don't know who fights for the Lord. I don't think this is out of Revelations (although in maybe 300 years it would seam like a possability).

The US has stated that they will destroy any facility responsable for the destruction of American air craft, so I imagine that some bombing will come shortly.

I watch the BBC sometimes (curtacy of quicktime, of course), and every time I watch it, its middle ease this and middle east that. Its too confusing for me to follow, but I know some people understand it. I really just hope that the Truth will come out of this. I think that as time goes on, it will be evident where the Lord is working.

But for now, I'm utterly confused. I wish FoxNews would do a special on it to bring people like me up to date on whats happining over there, because I don't even understand (or know) the more-or-less immedate history of the area.
 

ScottW

Founder
Staff member
I find myself reading the news about what is happening in the middle east, then take a look at Revelations and other books, such as Daniel in the Old Test and see what exactly is relating to now. The thing is, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN it will all happen... WE KNOW WHAT will happen, and we are suppose to recognize the SIGNS. I don't feel like an idiot saying... I SEE THE SIGNS!

Everything centers around the temple mount. The Bible talks about at ime when the temple mount is split in half, one side given to the gentiles, the other side given to the Jews. Only after this happens, are the Jews able to rebuild the temple and start sacrifices again.

What will it take for this to happen? A war? the UN delegating who gets what? Some world peace treaty?

Is the rapture of the church, pre-trib, mid-trib or pre-wrath. All fun discussions to have. Imagine all Christians in the world, GONE in a mater of seconds... our President and Vice President gone. Other leaders around the world, gone... mass confusion all over the globe... hmm... could that cause the countries of the world to sign a 7 year peace treaty... a way of saying.. "Things are messed up right now, lets call for world peace while we regroup and reorganize our countries through this chaos."

Just an idea, never know...
 
Top