DU
Erm... right.
a) Turkey isn't even in the EU yet, and won't be for a long, long time.
But it has begun its process of entering, and therefore it has obligation to appear European, as the EU has obligation to appear to support Turkey.
I'm obviously dealing with hypotheticals- but IF Syria and Iran get formally involved (the clarification that explains your point below) rather than covertly, I would suggest it would be highly likely that Israel would fly bombing sorties over both countries- this is again what I meant by "If Syria and Iran get involved in a Middle East war". This inevitably spreads the warzone and always increases the likelihood of neighbouring countries becoming involved when mistakes are made or things get out of hand (like mass refugee streams across a border). There is precedent for such domino effects in the past, but again we're dealing hypotheticals- I'm not "predicting" this nor am a futurologist.
I'm surprised that you fail to see the clash of civilisations that has dominated the last 20 years of Western politics, and will continue for many decades to come. Part of it, in my opinion, is due to democracy (and a lack of it as a rule in muslim countries), alongside vast cultural differences that are almost irreconcilable.
I find it staggering that the following statement is highly objectionable to large parts of the politically correct ruling classes: there is a massive problem with and for global Islam. Until this has been tackled, I would say the implicit suggestion you stated is correct.
See above- my response was a question about a "Middle East War" where I questioned such terminology. If Syria and Iran become openly involved and targetable by Israel, then we have a Middle East War.
cat posted:
Erm... right.
a) Turkey isn't even in the EU yet, and won't be for a long, long time.
But it has begun its process of entering, and therefore it has obligation to appear European, as the EU has obligation to appear to support Turkey.
cat posted:
b) Why on Earth do you think they would get involved? Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia all have predominantly Muslim populations but I doubt they would be clamouring over each other to get involved in any war. As it stands, they have done all they can to distance themselves.
I'm obviously dealing with hypotheticals- but IF Syria and Iran get formally involved (the clarification that explains your point below) rather than covertly, I would suggest it would be highly likely that Israel would fly bombing sorties over both countries- this is again what I meant by "If Syria and Iran get involved in a Middle East war". This inevitably spreads the warzone and always increases the likelihood of neighbouring countries becoming involved when mistakes are made or things get out of hand (like mass refugee streams across a border). There is precedent for such domino effects in the past, but again we're dealing hypotheticals- I'm not "predicting" this nor am a futurologist.
cat posted:
c) In your comments is the implict suggestion that West + Muslim = incompatible.
I'm surprised that you fail to see the clash of civilisations that has dominated the last 20 years of Western politics, and will continue for many decades to come. Part of it, in my opinion, is due to democracy (and a lack of it as a rule in muslim countries), alongside vast cultural differences that are almost irreconcilable.
I find it staggering that the following statement is highly objectionable to large parts of the politically correct ruling classes: there is a massive problem with and for global Islam. Until this has been tackled, I would say the implicit suggestion you stated is correct.
cat posted:
d) IF Syria and Iran get involved? Sorry, do you not understand what is happening in the middle east at all? Do you think this is just an independent faction in the Lebanon firing rockets they've made themselves at Israel?
See above- my response was a question about a "Middle East War" where I questioned such terminology. If Syria and Iran become openly involved and targetable by Israel, then we have a Middle East War.
CA
Erm... right.
a) Turkey isn't even in the EU yet, and won't be for a long, long time.
But it has begun its process of entering, and therefore it has obligation to appear European, as the EU has obligation to appear to support Turkey.
I'm obviously dealing with hypotheticals- but IF Syria and Iran get formally involved (the clarification that explains your point below) rather than covertly, I would suggest it would be highly likely that Israel would fly bombing sorties over both countries- this is again what I meant by "If Syria and Iran get involved in a Middle East war". This inevitably spreads the warzone and always increases the likelihood of neighbouring countries becoming involved when mistakes are made or things get out of hand (like mass refugee streams across a border). There is precedent for such domino effects in the past, but again we're dealing hypotheticals- I'm not "predicting" this nor am a futurologist.
I'm surprised that you fail to see the clash of civilisations that has dominated the last 20 years of Western politics, and will continue for many decades to come. Part of it, in my opinion, is due to democracy (and a lack of it as a rule in muslim countries), alongside vast cultural differences that are almost irreconcilable.
I find it staggering that the following statement is highly objectionable to large parts of the politically correct ruling classes: there is a massive problem with and for global Islam. Until this has been tackled, I would say the implicit suggestion you stated is correct.
See above- my response was a question about a "Middle East War" where I questioned such terminology. If Syria and Iran become openly involved and targetable by Israel, then we have a Middle East War.
Hasn't formally signed an accession treaty, so doesn't have any obligations as yet. But yes, you're quite right in saying that they have to make themselves look a bit civilised... not that it's done them any favours. The ''why do you think they'd get involved'' comment was with reference to Turkey, not Syria/Iran.
I agree with regards to Islam and the West having a massive compatibility issue... but not Muslims and the West. If by ''West'' you mean developed, forward-looking countries, with liberal democracies, then most religions have a pretty big problem with that. But I know plenty of Muslims who really don't have an issue with it at all, and embrace western culture.
Anyway, I don't think this is the place to get dragged into this. I agree with you later comments, was just questioning the idea that Turkey might get involved and that this could be the end for their relationship with the EU. If anything, I think it could be a good chance for Turkey to prove what an asset they could be to Europe - if they decided to act as mediator between the countries involved, and took on that mantle again in the future, the EU would be very keen to cosy up to it.
Dunedin posted:
cat posted:
Erm... right.
a) Turkey isn't even in the EU yet, and won't be for a long, long time.
But it has begun its process of entering, and therefore it has obligation to appear European, as the EU has obligation to appear to support Turkey.
cat posted:
b) Why on Earth do you think they would get involved? Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia all have predominantly Muslim populations but I doubt they would be clamouring over each other to get involved in any war. As it stands, they have done all they can to distance themselves.
I'm obviously dealing with hypotheticals- but IF Syria and Iran get formally involved (the clarification that explains your point below) rather than covertly, I would suggest it would be highly likely that Israel would fly bombing sorties over both countries- this is again what I meant by "If Syria and Iran get involved in a Middle East war". This inevitably spreads the warzone and always increases the likelihood of neighbouring countries becoming involved when mistakes are made or things get out of hand (like mass refugee streams across a border). There is precedent for such domino effects in the past, but again we're dealing hypotheticals- I'm not "predicting" this nor am a futurologist.
cat posted:
c) In your comments is the implict suggestion that West + Muslim = incompatible.
I'm surprised that you fail to see the clash of civilisations that has dominated the last 20 years of Western politics, and will continue for many decades to come. Part of it, in my opinion, is due to democracy (and a lack of it as a rule in muslim countries), alongside vast cultural differences that are almost irreconcilable.
I find it staggering that the following statement is highly objectionable to large parts of the politically correct ruling classes: there is a massive problem with and for global Islam. Until this has been tackled, I would say the implicit suggestion you stated is correct.
cat posted:
d) IF Syria and Iran get involved? Sorry, do you not understand what is happening in the middle east at all? Do you think this is just an independent faction in the Lebanon firing rockets they've made themselves at Israel?
See above- my response was a question about a "Middle East War" where I questioned such terminology. If Syria and Iran become openly involved and targetable by Israel, then we have a Middle East War.
Hasn't formally signed an accession treaty, so doesn't have any obligations as yet. But yes, you're quite right in saying that they have to make themselves look a bit civilised... not that it's done them any favours. The ''why do you think they'd get involved'' comment was with reference to Turkey, not Syria/Iran.
I agree with regards to Islam and the West having a massive compatibility issue... but not Muslims and the West. If by ''West'' you mean developed, forward-looking countries, with liberal democracies, then most religions have a pretty big problem with that. But I know plenty of Muslims who really don't have an issue with it at all, and embrace western culture.
Anyway, I don't think this is the place to get dragged into this. I agree with you later comments, was just questioning the idea that Turkey might get involved and that this could be the end for their relationship with the EU. If anything, I think it could be a good chance for Turkey to prove what an asset they could be to Europe - if they decided to act as mediator between the countries involved, and took on that mantle again in the future, the EU would be very keen to cosy up to it.
JW
Anna Botting now in Jerusalem for Sky. Whilst JT is back in London.
Sky's coverage is still good.
Sky's coverage is still good.
JW
Tony Blair has delayed his holiday, according to Sky, as - they reckon - the time he would spend in the air flying to Barbados (9hours) is very critical right now vis-a-vis securing a cease-fire in the region.
Let's see........probably just avoiding the tabloid rant if he DID actually go on holiday.
Let's see........probably just avoiding the tabloid rant if he DID actually go on holiday.
MA
The BARB rating for first week of Middle East Crisis (which is week ending 23/07/06) are out and it very interesting as the week before both channels were on the same share and average weekly viewing but one week later as this news story broke, were normal Sky New is in the lead in breaking news. This time it BBC News 24 in the lead
Week Ending: 16 July 2006
Sky News
Share - 0.6%
Average Weekly Viewing - 8 mins
BBC News 24
Share - 0.6%
Average Weekly Viewing - 8 mins
Week Ending: 23 July 2006
Sky News
Share - 0.8%
Average Weekly Viewing - 10 mins
BBC News 24
Share - 0.9%
Average Weekly Viewing - 11 mins
Week Ending: 16 July 2006
Sky News
Share - 0.6%
Average Weekly Viewing - 8 mins
BBC News 24
Share - 0.6%
Average Weekly Viewing - 8 mins
Week Ending: 23 July 2006
Sky News
Share - 0.8%
Average Weekly Viewing - 10 mins
BBC News 24
Share - 0.9%
Average Weekly Viewing - 11 mins
MA
It must be a personal reason, because its not like she's gone elsewhere and if she had been away she would have been back by now.
Moz posted:
Still no Caroline Hawley, Jerusalem correspondent. Where is she?
It must be a personal reason, because its not like she's gone elsewhere and if she had been away she would have been back by now.