 |
| |
|
|
Snotty
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
Or seeing the effects of the PA's policies, from an alternative point of view. |
I don't think that is what your average future suicide bomber is going to be thinking when they see their friends being bombed.
quote:
so if this eminent MP had been brought up in a right wing orthodox Israeli family she might have become a settler, and if as a settler she had seen friend and relatives murdered, she might have become an anti-arab racist, an advocate of the expulsion of the Palestinians, or worse. Did she mention that in her speech??? Obviously the statement was more than a though exercise to prove that all human actions have causes - it was an attempt to show sympathy for the perpetrators of certain actions, and to implicity excuse them, in whole or in part. |
She was speaking at a pro-Palestine lobby and is sympathetic to their cause. Its understandable she is going to make a speech the crowd is receptive to.
Her only fault is that she did not issue the standard disclaimer in force, despite the fact it should be automatically implied that any correct thinking person would not condone these acts.
Ever get so wound up by someone that you want to hit them? I know I do. Your logic says that because I can identify with the desire to do something wrong, I must secretly think it is ok to punch people. I am not identifying with the perpetrator, but with the desire.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Standup
|
|
But surely the main reason is that they're suppressed/oppressed and the propaganda is going to be anti isreali and calling for martyrs until until there is a 'free' palestinian homeland ? Normal military force or voting isn't going to work ?
And that's a question and not an opinion before someone takes offence.
I do agree though that the sacking of the lib dem was a bit extreme especially considering the wide variety of ideas and views the LIb Dems normally have in the party.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
Out, now, apologise completely and absolutely no compromise whatsoever. |
Good for you. Glad to see "rabid, unrealistic and completely devoid of comprehension beyond ISRAELIS = BAD GUYS" studies are going well.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snotty
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
Its wrong, but excusable. And the lib dems had to make a choice about whether someone who thought terrorism of this kind was wrong, but excusable, was someone they wanted in a position of leadership. |
You make her out to be some strange hybrid peace loving death monger. Mass murder is never excusable, and unless she truly is a fruit cake, then this should be implied. understanding/identifying with an emotion does not = excusing it.
quote:
i thought we were talking about what an english MP had learned when going to Gaza. It was claimed she saw the effects of Israels policies. I think its just as valid to say she saw the effects of the PA's policies. |
Not in this case. The violence she was caught in was not a product of the PA. As far as I can tell, Hamas militants ambushed Israeli soldiers. Israel retaliated by calling in helicopters to strike the car of Hamas leader Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi. Only they wounded some 25 innocent Palestinians as well. Thats Israel turning to terrorism in reponse to a purely military attack. The violence then escalated into suicide bombings, but it is quite arguable that Israel forced the escalation in this case.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
How can the Brits who slaughtered millions of German civilians in the last war for the purposes of revenge and to futher their war aims even begin to legitimately show outrage at the pro-homicide bomber position of this grandmother. |
You make it sound like the USAF gave more of a damn...
Only reason for the "Brits at night, USAF in daylight" split was that the USAF pilots were not up to flying or piloting at night. Whole strategy was alien to them.
Also, you make it sound like the 3rd Reich was totally defenceless. Every bullet and shell fired at the Brit bombers was one less fired at the USAF daylight bombers. Every weapon system deployed in defence of the Reich was one less at the fighting fronts.
And while I'm at it - how much ordnance did YOU guys drop on North Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia? On people with little or no air defence, often using plastic coated munitions to defeat surgical attempts with metal detectors.
Over to you, Mr "War is really a nice game with rules" Ned.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Cruddy, if you haven't noticed, I condemn our targeting of civilians during the war. My position is that one cannot have a double standard. |
Of course you can... You keep banging on about Brit WW2 night raids but say nothing about the US' history of targetting civilians.
It seems to me you're saying, "that wasn't me". Well, Dresden wasn't us, personally.
If you think many Brits will dishonour the memory of the 50% of Bomber Command killed during operations against "defenceless" civilians... you are doomed to be disappointed.
Anyway, this thread wasn't so much about the suicide bombers as about loopy female politicians licking arse saying "Ooh, I know JUST how you feel" when they clearly don't have a fvcking clue.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drogue
|
 |
Omnipresent conscience
Oct 2002
time: 05:33
|
|
Ned: The difference is, the Germans were aggressors, the Battle of Britain was defending our island. Add to that the vastly outnumbering of our aircraft, and that glorifies it itself, somewhat.
That Lancaster Bomber flew to mark the fact that we still have a Queen. We have a Queen because we won the war. That bomber was representing the planes that saved out Monarchy.
The Germans don't have a Fascist regime anymore. They don't support the ideals their forefathers fought for. We do. We fought for our independance, our democracy and our Monarchy, and they still exist.
American wars in Vietnam, in Laos, in Cambodia, in Iraq, etc. were not defending the US, they were attacking other nations. That is why it doesn't have the same glory or romanticism. We don't glorify the Falklands, because most of us don't particularly care, because it wasn't defending Britian.
I don't agree with bonbing civilians. I don't agree with those actions in the 2nd World War. However I do think it is different, in that we were fighting for our island, and we weren't aggressors. If they US were attacked, I'd support a US war against them. The US hasn't fought for it's homeland since the War of Independance, which has been glorified by the US people.
The Lancaster Bomber is part of our heritage. Do you think it's glorifing when they fire cannons during the 1812 Overture? They are machines of war. They are also part of our history. If the UK is attacked, I can understand, even though I would not agree, with calls for a war without rules. Likewise with the US. However the US has not been attacked, and has not fought for it's homeland. That is why I decry US attrocities.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-01-2004 00:47
.
I didnt realize this thread was about the US or Japan
|