 |
| |
|
|
Natan
|
 |
New York State
Sep 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
how can you study that nightmare by yourself?? Arabic is a nightmare. And I know hebrew, russian, english and some german as well. |
To me, German is a nightmare because the grammar is complicated and the whole language consists of rearranging a few prefixes and suffixes around guttural verbs to create monstrously long sentences. Hebrew, lehavdil, seems weird to me because I learned hebrew from reading the tanach in school, and the modern language has all sorts of weird new weirds, half of which mean three different and unrelated things. Arabic's not so terrible though, because the grammar is like hebrew, the words are related, and the patterns of meaning make some sense. My one real complaint is that it's impossible to tell whether you have an 'af'al, fa''al, or f'al verb when it's written conjugated, and the three can have quite different meanings. That and that the langauge is unpronouncable.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tom201
|
|
Amsterdam
Dec 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
Some comments from me to the last couple of month in the israel-palastines conflict:
1. the intifada started after a clear provocation from sharon
2. During this intifada far more palastins (if I got the numbers right about 5times as much) causalities than israeli
3. Israel destroyed on purpose the airport, a radiostation and other civil objects that were build with EU money (u can these actions only explain with israels intend for further provocation and humiliation of the palastins)
6. People acused of being criminal (terrorists), dont get judged by some court, they just get killed. This means Israel is far away from a state in which Law counts (at least not for palastins)
5. On atacks on so called terrorists (there is never any evidence of this shown to the public) often other people died that just happend to be around (like kids playing on the street...)
6. After terror acts in israel, there are often bombings on police stations. On the intend that they should have prevented this from happening. But they are random targets, no evidence that they knew of this particular terror.
7. Palastins are taken therefor in collective guild (we just atack some palastins, when we are lucky we maybe hit the right persons...).
8. Humiliating of their leader in many situations, latest example: Israel gives orders where he is allowed to walk or if he is allowed to leave the city...
Of course there are reasons for this (the suicide bombers). But Israel goes too far with their actions. Actually doing far more damage than their enemys. I would call that state terrorism. Which I judge worse than individuell terrorism.
2. Israel dont get any positiv results with this. Even not when u only count what happens on the israeli site, cose their actions provoke more suicide bombers. Things are getting worse since their heavy counter atacks (which I would say is just some logical action-reaction issue. Violence provokes counter Violence.)
I wonder how the Israel ppl. think the conflict gonna end? Fight on till all palastins are dead?
Just my 0.02$
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tom201
|
|
Amsterdam
Dec 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Natan
The airport was not really "civil," it was only used by Arafat. And the radiostation was a center for incitement. NATO forces bombed Serbian radio stations in Serbia, was it intended to provoke and humiliate the Serbs?
|
Well at least the Israelis says so about the radiostation. Im sure they didnt reported much in favor of Israel, just like Israel media dont report stuff in favor of the palastinians. I watched a documentary on Arte a few days after they blow up that radiostation. The report was about this station and what they sended and so on. The report was about 90min, over 2 weeks they followed the jounalists from the radiostation around. last scenes were the radiostation gets blown up.
Arte is very good on info I think. U get the most neutral info u can get on any channel I know. (Couples of Days bevor there were a Documentary about the terror acts, and they were following Israel soldiers "at the front line" around).
From what I have seen in this Documentary I would say that this radiosender was far away from being radical.
quote:
Originally posted by Natan
Same could be said of America after what we did to Mohammed Atef.
|
Well I agree that America dont acts always in what u would consider Law...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
 |
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tom201
Some comments from me to the last couple of month in the israel-palastines conflict:
1. the intifada started after a clear provocation from sharon |
I disagree.
The intifada infact started several days before, only wasn't as big.
They used his visit as a pre-text to increase it's strength.
Israel is a free country. Arafat visited temple mount many times, and so did Sharon, before.
Plus, both intelligence evidence and exclamations by palestinian minister quoted in arab newspapers support the theory that the intifada was planned since Camp David, incase it would fail.
Infact, i remember analysts saying that if camp david fails, the pals will start another intifada.
quote:
2. During this intifada far more palastins (if I got the numbers right about 5times as much) causalities than israeli |
that's result, not intent.
still, about 80% were not innocent but rather militants.
quote:
3. Israel destroyed on purpose the airport, a radiostation and other civil objects that were build with EU money (u can these actions only explain with israels intend for further provocation and humiliation of the palastins) |
the airport were used only by arafat. it is known that he used his helicopters to transfer terrorists to other arab countries, and it is suspected he moved weapons too.
the radiostation, just as the TV carried encitement.
You know that muhamed el-durah was later featured in a commercial, talking from heaven and calling kids to "join him in heaven"?
quote:
6. People acused of being criminal (terrorists), dont get judged by some court, they just get killed. This means Israel is far away from a state in which Law counts (at least not for palastins) |
Not true.
Those who we can catch are being interrogated and tried. Only they don't get coverage by international media.
For instance, on tuesday a terrorist was captured in Haifa. He will be tried.
also, many terrorists were captured in incursions. they will be tried as well.
We assassinate only when we can't stop them using other means.
quote:
5. On atacks on so called terrorists (there is never any evidence of this shown to the public) often other people died that just happend to be around (like kids playing on the street...) |
This is unfortunate and happens in every war.
Israel tries to avoid it, but fails alot.
quote:
6. After terror acts in israel, there are often bombings on police stations. On the intend that they should have prevented this from happening. But they are random targets, no evidence that they knew of this particular terror. |
Yes, there are evidence. Not all evidence is released to CNN though.
But I agree, that most police stations are bombed out of general intention, and not following specific knowledge that this specific station didn't do something.
It's more of a signal.
Plus they are mostly empty by the time IDF choppers get there.
quote:
7. Palastins are taken therefor in collective guild (we just atack some palastins, when we are lucky we maybe hit the right persons...). |
Incorrect.
Israel has widespread intelligence information.
while we may often accidently hit the wrong people, we do know who we are aiming for.
quote:
8. Humiliating of their leader in many situations, latest example: Israel gives orders where he is allowed to walk or if he is allowed to leave the city... |
It's not made to humiliate him, but to pressure him.
He knew about terrorist's intentions and did nothing.
He only ordered more weapons to give out to them.
In fall of 2000 he released hundreds of terrorists from jail.
quote:
Of course there are reasons for this (the suicide bombers). But Israel goes too far with their actions. Actually doing far more damage than their enemys. I would call that state terrorism. Which I judge worse than individuell terrorism. |
I agree that our damage is more widespread.
However, it is war.
Our goal is to hurt the terrorists.
We don't simply "retaliate" to show we are angry.
quote:
2. Israel dont get any positiv results with this. Even not when u only count what happens on the israeli site, cose their actions provoke more suicide bombers. |
action provoces suicide bombers,
inaction doesn't stop them.
I agree that it's hard to get results.
If you have good suggestions, post them. We were trying to discuss possible solutions the other day.
quote:
Things are getting worse since their heavy counter atacks (which I would say is just some logical action-reaction issue. Violence provokes counter Violence.) |
inaction gives violent people the idea they can use violence.
see europe caving in before hitler in the 30s.
If we don't counter attack, they think they can get away with it.
It was proven by experience that when we do very serious retaliations, though they tend to "reply", we don't see terror at the same force.
For instance, until this week, palestinians haven't fired at Gilo, ever since Israel invaded Gilo and said it wouldn't leave until they promise to behave.
That was several months ago.
quote:
I wonder how the Israel ppl. think the conflict gonna end? Fight on till all palastins are dead? |
If that is needed - yes.
I would prefer they simply decide to stop terror, put terrorists in jail, and return to peace talks, like prior to september 2000.
I'd like to thank you for taking the time to put them so well and in such a nice manner.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberGnu
|
 |
of the Virtual Serengeti
Apr 1999
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
You sound like the sort of Nazis who talk about how Jews deserved to die because some of them were leftists. The victims of this bombing don't even have relatives serving in the Israeli army; they're Ultra-Orthodox. |
Natan, Natan, Natan...
*trying hard not to let condesention show*
Nazis killedjews for something they were born as. In some cases something they weren't even aware of themselves.
My view is based on the actions of Israel.
You can tell the difference between 'being' and 'doing', right?
My theory is that my view sounds like nazism only to someone who believes that anyone not agreeeing with them is a nazi. Which, incidentally, has been the official line of Israel for the past 50 years... You might want to explore this option.
Regarding the ultra-orthodox, they are still living in Israel and contributing to the occupation. They voluntarily immigrated to an occupied land, with the express intention of profiting from the Israeli acts of aggression.
quote:
They never killed one year old babies. Comparing them to these murderers is libelous.
|
Actually they did. Both resistance movements worked hard on for example derailing train cars. In Poland and Russia, this was sometimes more detrimental to the german war effort than the russian soldiers... And in these acts of resistance (or terrorist acts, if you prefer that term) several civilians were killed. Several orders of magnitude greater than the number of civilians killed in the ME conflict.
quote:
Don't accuse me of racism or insensitivty. That's reserved for you. |
Actually, I haven't accused you of either. I know Siro has on occaison admitted to being racist in his beliefs that a jew is inherently better than others... I don't know if you share those views.
As for me, you again confuse 'being' with 'doing'. A racist hate a particular race because they are born that way. I don't hate jews. I don't hate you. And while your views anger me, I don't cate if you are jewish, black, asian, catholic or have an extra eye in your forehead. It is your views and actions that matter.
Insensetive, perhaps. It's a fluffy term, however, with no real substance to it...
Siro,
As far as I can tell, Plaestine is not occupuying israeli land, nor is the U.S. occupying Saudi or even ANY muslim land.
I don't support ethnic cleansing, as it implies killing people due to their inherent race.
I support hurting an aggressive nation until they capitulate and retreat. Very simple, n'est pas?
quote:
it is the most idiotic peace of bullshit one could imagine.
|
Nah, that title is reserved for the Jerusalem Post  (sorry, couldn't resist)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tom201
|
|
Amsterdam
Dec 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
1. In general I have to say that Im for sure dont know as much Details as some other people discussing this thread.
Actually its not really my problem, I dont think there will be any influence of this on my personal life. Im just interested
A sitenote I dont watch CNN. For info I watch Arte (a mix channel from french and germany), dutch or german television. I sometimes read news on heise.de
2. I have the general opinion that everything is (maybe) possible. Any information could be wrong. U just look at it and judge yourself and most of the time just belive what u want to belive...
The world is grey (not black and white). But some parts are darker than other parts... (getting a bit philosopistic hehe)
Im curios what u say about the settler issue, about palastins complaining they dont get permission from israel authorities to build houses and getting therefor there buildings destroyed.
I believe Israel authorities refuse to give them permissions on purpose, which I think is a very likly possibilty...
Solutions for the problem? Dont know, there will be always ppl. left who will demand revenge for some relative or friend that got killed in the conflict.
I think let the palastins have their own state would settle things a bit more down. As by know it seems to me, Israel only demands things and offers nothing in exchange.
A lot of conflict potional lies in the fact that the palastins have nothing to loose (what they have can be destroyed by Israel anytime if they want to). A lot living in refugee camps, there is nothing u could consider wealth. Giving them a own state, involving them in buildup of some economy and stuff like that.
Maybe this is a bit too idealistic
All this military showoff of strength wont lead to success, cose the Palastins are far to proud to give up on their "right" (<- the palastins see it this way same as Israel) of violence.
Until one site gives up on violence there wont be any stop.
Maybe it could be an option to replace the Israel military in the puffer zone, with UN (=neutral) military to ensure security (Israel military only within the bounderies of Israel). I think the palastins demanded this already but Israel refuses. Why?
Ahja whats your opinion about the saudi arabia suggestion?
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
I'd like to thank you for taking the time to put them so well and in such a nice manner.
|
Well Im most of the time nice
From reading the thread I expected to get flamed but Im happy u actually can talk with the ppl 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natan
|
|
New York State
Sep 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CyberGnu
Natan, Natan, Natan...
*trying hard not to let condesention show*
Nazis killedjews for something they were born as. In some cases something they weren't even aware of themselves.
My view is based on the actions of Israel. |
And there were a lot of anti-semites, even some Nazis, who argued that the reason Jews had to be killed was that "they" were
quote:
My theory is that my view sounds like nazism only to someone who believes that anyone not agreeeing with them is a nazi. Which, incidentally, has been the official line of Israel for the past 50 years... You might want to explore this option. |
I disagree with chegitz. Do I call him a Nazi? I disagree with Imran. Do I call him a Nazi?
quote:
Regarding the ultra-orthodox, they are still living in Israel and contributing to the occupation. They voluntarily immigrated to an occupied land, with the express intention of profiting from the Israeli acts of aggression. |
That one year old baby, voluntarily expressing his intention to profit from Israeli acts of agression - he barely knew how to talk! And I thought it was your claim that Israel has a right to exist within its 1948 borders, so how do they benefit from "Israeli acts of aggression?"
quote:
Actually they did. Both resistance movements worked hard on for example derailing train cars. In Poland and Russia, this was sometimes more detrimental to the german war effort than the russian soldiers... And in these acts of resistance (or terrorist acts, if you prefer that term) several civilians were killed. Several orders of magnitude greater than the number of civilians killed in the ME conflict. |
You'll have to provide a source for that. I find it highly dubious that large numbers of German civillians were killed riding on trains in the USSR - no German civillians went to Ukraine
quote:
As for me, you again confuse 'being' with 'doing'. A racist hate a particular race because they are born that way. I don't hate jews. I don't hate you. And while your views anger me, I don't cate if you are jewish, black, asian, catholic or have an extra eye in your forehead. It is your views and actions that matter. |
So someone who says "I only hate Palestinians and want them to die because they support terrorism by providing cover for terrorists and willingly aiding their cause" would not be racist?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
|
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tom201
Im curios what u say about the settler issue, about palastins complaining they dont get permission from israel authorities to build houses and getting therefor there buildings destroyed.
I believe Israel authorities refuse to give them permissions on purpose, which I think is a very likly possibilty... |
depends where.
israel is certainly not interested in palestinians building houses in east jerusalem, as we fear they will try and strengthen their claim over it.
as for houses being destroyed in the territories - that's houses that people shoot from or are refuge to terrorists.
quote:
Solutions for the problem? Dont know, there will be always ppl. left who will demand revenge for some relative or friend that got killed in the conflict. |
well, those should be restricted
israel usually restricts such people.
when we went along with oslo talks, many people were hurt in terracts. "victims of peace" they were called. israel didn't act upon it.
why don't palestinians restrict their own as well?
quote:
I think let the palastins have their own state would settle things a bit more down. As by know it seems to me, Israel only demands things and offers nothing in exchange. |
currently we demand to stop the violence.
if we offer something in exchange, we will be showing a bad example of how violence can achieve things.
after violence, we are ready to go back to negociate.
quote:
A lot of conflict potional lies in the fact that the palastins have nothing to loose (what they have can be destroyed by Israel anytime if they want to). A lot living in refugee camps, there is nothing u could consider wealth. |
about the refugee camps - arafat doesn't allow many of them to move or build homes. he wants to keep them there. "from here you will only go back to israel in the right of return" he says.
he keeps many of the aid money to himself.
quote:
Giving them a own state, involving them in buildup of some economy and stuff like that. |
we basically did that .
don't forget they had great revenues in the new millenium, from the pilgrimage to beth lehem and hebron etc.
quote:
Maybe this is a bit too idealistic |
it's not.
quote:
All this military showoff of strength wont lead to success, cose the Palastins are far to proud to give up on their "right" (<- the palastins see it this way same as Israel) of violence. |
well, israelis won't cave in to violence.
it took the lebanese 18 years of violence to convince us to get out.
and the territories we hold much closer.
quote:
Until one site gives up on violence there wont be any stop. |
we tried numerously to give up on violence.
the last time, a week ago.
but a set of terracts and attempts in the days before thursday lead to this.
quote:
Maybe it could be an option to replace the Israel military in the puffer zone, with UN (=neutral) military to ensure security (Israel military only within the bounderies of Israel). |
tsk tsk tsk..
"UN forces" in lebanon have proved to be ineffective in stopping hezballa from kidnapping israelis, or shooting mortars and anti-tank missiles (even today) at israel.
so no, we won't allow that.
quote:
I think the palastins demanded this already but Israel refuses. Why? |
see what i wrote above.
quote:
Ahja whats your opinion about the saudi arabia suggestion? |
there's a thread on the 2nd or 3rd page of the OT forum titled "saudi arabia peace plan".
and welcome to the middle east discussions.
i can promise lots of tears blood and sweat
quote:
Well Im most of the time nice |
me too
quote:
From reading the thread I expected to get flamed but Im happy u actually can talk with the ppl |
oy don't worry about it.
as long as you don't march in and begin flaming israel or israelis you can expect to be treated nicely.
laurentius also personally annoyed me when he ignored everything i said which he could use for his purposes.
so after a while i got upset and then i got cranky. i appologize.
but i cool down quick
and there are maybe 4 people, including laurentuis who got me cranky.
most of them aren't posting here anymore
j/k
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natan
|
|
New York State
Sep 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tom201
Im curios what u say about the settler issue, about palastins complaining they dont get permission from israel authorities to build houses and getting therefor there buildings destroyed.
I believe Israel authorities refuse to give them permissions on purpose, which I think is a very likly possibilty... |
Definitely true in some cases, but it seems that some people do get the permits, and that many Palestinians just don't want to apply for permission.
quote:
I think let the palastins have their own state would settle things a bit more down. As by know it seems to me, Israel only demands things and offers nothing in exchange. |
It seems to me that it's the reverse.
quote:
A lot of conflict potional lies in the fact that the palastins have nothing to loose (what they have can be destroyed by Israel anytime if they want to). A lot living in refugee camps, there is nothing u could consider wealth. Giving them a own state, involving them in buildup of some economy and stuff like that.
Maybe this is a bit too idealistic |
I think the problem is that making the refugee camps an independent state doesn't necessarily make them prosperous.
quote:
All this military showoff of strength wont lead to success, cose the Palastins are far to proud to give up on their "right" (<- the palastins see it this way same as Israel) of violence.
Until one site gives up on violence there wont be any stop. |
It's possible to achieve military victory, even in a guerilla war.
quote:
Maybe it could be an option to replace the Israel military in the puffer zone, with UN (=neutral) military to ensure security (Israel military only within the bounderies of Israel). I think the palastins demanded this already but Israel refuses. Why? |
Because the Palestinians just want to slowly work the UN in until they can use it against Israel. The UN has a history of opposition to Israel, for fifteen years it held that "Zionism is racism." Israel is not even allowed to be seated normally. Besides, no nation wants the UN anywhere near it, it's an affront to soveriegnty.
quote:
Ahja whats your opinion about the saudi arabia suggestion?
|
Interesting, but probably not going to go anywhere because they won't talk to Israel about it. They want Israel to implement their suggestion without any dialogue, and that's not really realistic at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tom201
|
|
Amsterdam
Dec 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
the radiostation, just as the TV carried encitement.
You know that muhamed el-durah was later featured in a commercial, talking from heaven and calling kids to "join him in heaven"?
|
Hm, u are talking here about the TV while I talk about that particular Radiostation I've seen a report about. I cant judge about the TV I didnt see any of this. Im likley to belive the report I've seen, but I admit that it is of course possible that they just behaved nicer cose they were followed around by a foreign reporter team. So I dont know.
But in general I have to say that cutting ppl. of from their own radio/tv/newspaper information cant be a good idea. Even not when u say they sending stuff which u consider being encitement. Imagine all radio/tv/newspapers are cut off, how the palastins get their info? Right - by hearsay and I belive hearsay would carry alot more of encitement and would do more damage to their view about israel than a radio could possibly do. Second blowing of radiostations and that like give the palastins even more the view that israel is evil and fears true (the palastins would see it this way) info.
In my opinion it wont help israel.
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Those who we can catch are being interrogated and tried. Only they don't get coverage by international media.
For instance, on tuesday a terrorist was captured in Haifa. He will be tried.
also, many terrorists were captured in incursions. they will be tried as well.
We assassinate only when we can't stop them using other means.
|
While I apriciate that some terrorist get judged by a court (I hope that these are fair courts, meaning if there is any doubt he had anything to do with terrorist actions he is free to go), assasinating ppl. should never be an option for a state.
Think about it, what other state is going around assasinate ppl? Well maybe some dictatorships...
But what hits the mind immediatly is the comparision to mafia organisations. Right now it is in my opionion very reasonable to compare israel and the mafia. Methods are the same:
"Carlos that guy betrayed us" - "Hm 2 loyal guys says so, thats enough evidence - kill him" *victim gets killed by the mafia*
"Mossad says they are terrorists, if this evidence would be enough for a court doesnt matter, there wont be one. We believe Mossad lets kill the bastards" *ppl. accused being terrorst get hit by a rocket*
Actually the mafia is even doing their job better, usually only killing the one that was the target and very rarly ppl. happen to be around.
Of course it is a bit provocating to compare israel with the mafia. I admit that the goals are diffrent. Israel is not doing this for maximising money and trading around drugs and so on, they do it for security. But and that is important the methods seem to be the same. And this cant be tolerated. (At least not when israel claim their actions to be justified)
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
quote:
5. On atacks on so called terrorists (there is never any evidence of this shown to the public) often other people died that just happend to be around (like kids playing on the street...) |
This is unfortunate and happens in every war.
Israel tries to avoid it, but fails alot.
|
Well if u want to do something but the methods u use fail. U wont use the same method again that is proved to be uneffective for your goals: Killing the ppl. that are the target without killing anyone else - the second one fails often -> ergo Methods are uneffective and needs to be changed. Running around and bombing targets with rockets blowing the whole place up wont help much on this issue. Right now Israel doesnt seem to give a **** about palastin civilian causalties.
Israel is proud of their mossad. Well maybe they should use their intelegence agency not only to find targets, but also to work out effective plans for assination. Ever heard of sniper rifles or undercover agents? There are more "clean" ways to assasinate ppl. (just learn from the mafia  ). This takes of course more risks than flying around in a secure helicopter, but Israel have to take this risks or have to live with the fact to kill innocent ppl.
So Im absolutly against assasination in general (see mafia methods). But if they do so they need to do it in a "clean" way. They could if they wanted but they dont... (dont want to take any risks for their own man to avoid killing innocent ppl.)
quote:
Originally posted by Sirotnikov
But I agree, that most police stations are bombed out of general intention, and not following specific knowledge that this specific station didn't do something.
It's more of a signal.
|
Well they also often kill police men on purpose (see yesterday bombings after the sniper atack, which killed 4 police man).
I dont belive this signal would help israel in any way. Just imagine being a palastin police man: First u dont help Israel by looking for terrorists and so on (or maybe some did but failed). Then there is some terrorist action in israel, and it is very unclear if u had the power to do anything about it. Israel is responding with bombing random buildings of the police and killing random police man. This should than be the signal for u to work in favor of Israel??
Honestly would u after Israel destroyed your buildings and killed maybe a friend of yours help them? Or would u be more likly to apriciate more terror atacks on tose that done the damage to u??
Just think about it...
quote:
Originally posted by Natan
It's possible to achieve military victory, even in a guerilla war.
|
Really? The guerilla wars that happend in the past were either won by the guerillas (cuba), or the atacking force gave up (us vs. vietnam).
With the guerillas being that radical like the palastins there is no way of military victory than killing them all. U really think this is an option?
Than at the end some questions to learn more :
How much % of the population in Israel is involved in military/police/mossad?
Can u give me a url on which u can read info from israel newspapers in english language? Im curios how "neutral" they are.
Tom (who is happy to live in a free country)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberGnu
|
|
of the Virtual Serengeti
Apr 1999
time: 05:18
|
|
Natan, your first sentence seems to be cut off.
Actually, I think every single person arguing in these ME threads has been called a nazi at one point or the other. (Even the israeli apologists, as zionism is one of the last strong fascist ideologies)
The one year old baby was brought (or born) by people who moved here to profit from Israeli aggression. The parents of the baby are the guilty ones. If I willingly throw a baby into a minefield I am the guilty one, not the people who put the mines there....
Hmm, you are either referring to the hypothetical case I laid out in the last thread, or you are confusing ideology with practicality. I don't consider Israel morally justified in any sense, much less on 50% of palestinian land.
But practically, I'd be willing to settle for the 1948 borders and a solution to the refugee problem.
This seems to be a major flaw in your perception of the situation, actually... The complete failure to diffrentiate between ideology and practicality. The palestinians are in the same seat as me, you see. they consider all of palestine theirs (ideology) but are willing to settle for a LOT less (practicality).
(well, I guess I shouldn't say the palestinians are in the same seat as me... That would be a lot of hubris on my part. I should more probably say that my view of the situation mirrors most palestinians, as far as I know.)
Whenever the question of a workable deal comes up (i.e. what would the parameters of a practialy functioning plan be) you (you as in plural, including most of the israeli apologists) answer with ideological statements (see, here, in a speach from 1964 they say they want it all! They will never agree to this).
Now saying that this is necesserily a mental flaw on your part, however. could be part of a planned arguing tactic, that has been used with success for centuries, if not millennia. Few things distracs from practical issues as an ideological rallying cry...
Actually, there were plenty of german civilians in Poland. First off civilians who actively supported the war efforts, such as typists, mechanics etc.
But also families who were encouraged by the german goverment to settle in depopulated areas of Poland and Tjeckia. The nazi equivalent to settlements, if you will.
siro, again you have problems with temporal questions. Yes, they attacked, after Israel took the land from them...
Furthermore, as far as I know, the palestinians have never waged a war against Israel, defensive or aggressive. You yourself are fond of repeating one of the oldest lies in the jewish propaganda machine, that palestinians didn't exsist before 1970 or so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natan
|
|
New York State
Sep 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CyberGnu
Natan, your first sentence seems to be cut off. |
Yeah. I meant to refer to the excuse that "Jews were Communists" and therefore enemies of the Nazis.
quote:
The one year old baby was brought (or born) by people who moved here to profit from Israeli aggression. The parents of the baby are the guilty ones. If I willingly throw a baby into a minefield I am the guilty one, not the people who put the mines there.... |
This same logic could be used against Palestinians, since the risk of a Palestinian youth dying is greater than that of an Israeli way, but of course neither you nor anyone else would say that. You're not saying that the parents took a risk, you're saying that the sins of the fathers must be visited on the (one year old) children - not to be confused with racism, of course.
quote:
Hmm, you are either referring to the hypothetical case I laid out in the last thread, or you are confusing ideology with practicality. I don't consider Israel morally justified in any sense, much less on 50% of palestinian land.
But practically, I'd be willing to settle for the 1948 borders and a solution to the refugee problem.
This seems to be a major flaw in your perception of the situation, actually... The complete failure to diffrentiate between ideology and practicality. The palestinians are in the same seat as me, you see. they consider all of palestine theirs (ideology) but are willing to settle for a LOT less (practicality).
|
Okay, so it's just that all Jews in the area should be killed. I don't think living in an area can be considered aggression. I don't think you can say that people who "profit from aggression" should/can be killed. This is again Nazi logic; the Jews certainly gained from the Versailles treaty.
quote:
(well, I guess I shouldn't say the palestinians are in the same seat as me... That would be a lot of hubris on my part. I should more probably say that my view of the situation mirrors most palestinians, as far as I know.) |
No, hubris is saying that your views mirror those of a nation whose media you simply ignore with complete and utter disdain.
quote:
Whenever the question of a workable deal comes up (i.e. what would the parameters of a practialy functioning plan be) you (you as in plural, including most of the israeli apologists) answer with ideological statements (see, here, in a speach from 1964 they say they want it all! They will never agree to this).
|
Seeing as they also say they'll never compromise on their goals . . .
quote:
Now saying that this is necesserily a mental flaw on your part, however. could be part of a planned arguing tactic, that has been used with success for centuries, if not millennia. Few things distracs from practical issues as an ideological rallying cry... |
Cyber, if you'd like to believe that I'm part of a Zionist plot, go ahead. But don't you think the Jews have more clever ways of manipulating public opinion than webboard sophistry?
quote:
Actually, there were plenty of german civilians in Poland. First off civilians who actively supported the war efforts, such as typists, mechanics etc. |
In most armies, such people wear uniforms and have military rank. Do you have any evidence that Germany was an exception?
quote:
But also families who were encouraged by the german goverment to settle in depopulated areas of Poland and Tjeckia. The nazi equivalent to settlements, if you will. |
These were insignifigant. And besides, the Poles did not target them. Oh, and as for that snide settlements comment, the Poles did the same thing in 1945.
Tom, Zobezo: There are lots of examples of guerilla movements defeated:
* Nationalist partisans in the USSR after WWII fought against the Soviets for several years, but were eventually defeated.
* The US defeated insurgents in the philippines at the turn of the century.
* The British defeated the Communist insurgents in Malaya in the 1950s.
* Bader Meinhoff and other leftist terror groups in Western europe, crushed in the 1970s and 80s.
* PLO defeated in and expelled from Jordan during Black September.
* Maronite paramilitaries defeated by Syria in Lebanon in the 1980s.
* The Algerian government seems to be beating the FIS in that country, as does the Egyptian government seem to be defeating the Muslim Brotherhood.
Also tom, the comparison to the mafia isn't right. What is objectionable about the mafia is their rules, not their method of enforcement. If the mafia, instead of assassinating its enemies, kidnapped and tried them in a mafia court on charges of betrayal or whatever else, with an impartial judge from another mafia clan, a jury, and even a legal advocate, complete with written rules, it would still be criminal and wrong. You can't kill people for double-crossing your criminal enterprise. You can kill people though for being terrorists, and I think it's a little bit absurd to demand that terrorists planning attacks be kidnapped for public trial. The vast majority of those assassinated are quite open about their involvement in terrorism as it is.
Last edited by Natan on 05-03-2002 at 02:42
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tom201
|
|
Amsterdam
Dec 2001
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Natan
Tom, Zobezo: There are lots of examples of guerilla movements defeated:
(...)
|
Hm, yea thats maybe right, but what I mean is that there is never defeat of a guerilla group as long as they have a huge sympathy within the population. In the ME case there is plenty of sympathy for the guerillas. I dont think u can military defeat them without killing every palastine that can hold a weapon.
quote:
Originally posted by Natan
You can kill people though for being terrorists, and I think it's a little bit absurd to demand that terrorists planning attacks be kidnapped for public trial. The vast majority of those assassinated are quite open about their involvement in terrorism as it is. |
Why is it absurd to demand law instead of unlawness and murder (it is murder cose they are just acused of being terrorist I doubt their proove for the acuse would stand a neutral court. Unless they show proove to the public I believe in an unlawness intellegence agency action - They dont have to show proove = doors are wide open for abuse).
As I see it Terrorists are criminal in the cases of murder or planed murder.
Imagine this in a free Country in Europe or the US. Say the FBI has information about someone planning to kill a dozen ppl. What they gonna do? Send a helicopter and blow up his car (with his wife and children in it)? Or would it be more likly they storm his house and try to get him alive (unless he is defending himself with a weapon) and putting him for a court.
And: Even in Texas u dont get charged with execution for planed murder...
Tom
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natan
|
|
New York State
Sep 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tom201
Hm, yea thats maybe right, but what I mean is that there is never defeat of a guerilla group as long as they have a huge sympathy within the population.
|
Not true. The PLO had tremendous sympathy from the population in Jordan, and the Kata'ib were pretty popular themselves, ditto for the nationalist partisans. Also, it's part of the counter-insurgency force's strategy to erode support for the guerillas, generally by a combination of carrot and stick. Punish those who cooperate, reward those who don't, encourage betrayals and infighting within the insurgent force. Part of Israel's problem is that it hasn't been making effective use of either rewards or punishments, administering the latter in a haphazard way and the former little or not at all.
quote:
In the ME case there is plenty of sympathy for the guerillas. I dont think u can military defeat them without killing every palastine that can hold a weapon. |
Not true at all. Firstly, the price of an M-16 in the West Bank is way beyond what the average Palestinian makes in a year or even in several years. There was none of this sort of violence before the late 1980s, even though Palestinians definitely sympathized with the PLO in the 1970s.
quote:
Why is it absurd to demand law instead of unlawness and murder (it is murder cose they are just acused of being terrorist I doubt their proove for the acuse would stand a neutral court. Unless they show proove to the public I believe in an unlawness intellegence agency action - They dont have to show proove = doors are wide open for abuse). |
You can't expect proof to be shown to the public because the proof usually consists of information gathered in secret. Revealing the methods used to obtain this information, or even what the information exactly is, endangers lives.
quote:
As I see it Terrorists are criminal in the cases of murder or planed murder.
Imagine this in a free Country in Europe or the US. Say the FBI has information about someone planning to kill a dozen ppl. What they gonna do? Send a helicopter and blow up his car (with his wife and children in it)? Or would it be more likly they storm his house and try to get him alive (unless he is defending himself with a weapon) and putting him for a court.
And: Even in Texas u dont get charged with execution for planed murder...
Tom |
Like any country, Israel generally prefers to arrest rather than kill suspects. If nothing else, you get a chance to interogate them. But every country kills its enemies in war. Like the way the US declared with pride that it had killed Mohammed Atef, an Al-Qaida leader. No trial of course. But I don't think you really need to try people who are open about their membership in terror organizations, they're effectively enemy soldiers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000
time: 22:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by laurentius
Maybe we shouldnt have these ME-discussion at all anymore. There cant be real discussion. there are only Israelies and the rest of the world, no palestinians around. as I try to say something I got bashed and called an evil biggot, stupid westerner who knows nothing about anything. israelians can always say "hey I only have to look out of my window and I see it happening". What can we say? We are not there to witness is so we are not equal to disagree with you. As long as we dont have a palestinian point of view here, we might never get on with the subject... |
I'm not an Israeli, or for that matter a Jew, but I agree that you are a bigot, and probably an evil bigot. All you have done is profess joy at the deaths of Israelis and condemn them. You haven't supplied one uncorrected fact, or made a single cogent argument. Even if there were a Palestinian posting here, and he agreed with you, you would still be wrong.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-03-2002 07:33
Innocent man loving Saddam Hussein? Is he gay? 
|