LOLLucky Lucan wrote:So the Jewskis stole the ragheads deer too? Cunts.connecticuter wrote:Regardless, it is hypocracy to suggest that Israel ought to give the eland back.
Yeah, they were behaving like damn wildebeesties!Kudus to them, anyway.
Post by vladimir » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:39 pm
LOLLucky Lucan wrote:So the Jewskis stole the ragheads deer too? Cunts.connecticuter wrote:Regardless, it is hypocracy to suggest that Israel ought to give the eland back.
Post by connecticuter » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:39 pm
It is off topic for the following. First, the founding of most states is a complicated tale of blood and horror. Often too difficult to suss out villians from victims. When we look at the founding of the US or the UK we can find all sorts of questionable and/or unsavory events. This does not mean that the US or the UK are once and forever incapable of having moral legitimacy or engaging in a good policy. There is no original sin in international relations. Second, what I am interested in is the contemporary scene. I am interested in the contemporary policies of Israel, the palestinians, the Iranians, etc. As I said, Israel just does not have rational and/or legitimate peace partners. Any moral excesses on Israel's part flow from this: their security fences, and their blockade of gaza are good examples of this. If they palestinian leadership was rational and had legitimacy the fence and the blockade would be unnecessary.andyinasia wrote:How is it off topic? You are rejecting the legitimacy and authority of Palestinian leaders; I am asking for consistency in place of hypocrisy.
You are also rejecting the legitimacy of international law; okay - like I said, you're leaving no space for rational debate; therefore, I'm ducking out.
Post by vladimir » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:43 pm
Explain, please. I live here. Let them nuke each other, that would solve the problem permanently.connecticuter wrote:Ooohhh!!andyinasia wrote: I know, I was really responding to vlad's post, as you were. Indeed we're all on the same page. By the way, Conny's challenging us to rationally outline our reasons for refusing to arse-lick Zionism. My response is the same as it would be if a creationist challenged me to prove Genesis isn't inerrant literal truth - I've got better things to do with my time.
I had a asserted:
3. it is in the interest of the world to neutralize Iran's nuclear program
Post by connecticuter » Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:53 pm
No offense, but now you are sounding like a typical American.vladimir wrote:Explain, please. I live here. Let them nuke each other, that would solve the problem permanently.
Post by vladimir » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:44 pm
Are you the only American who knows this secret? GWB obviously didn't, because we all know he cared deeply about the economies of other countries, especially poor ones, when making self-aggrandizing retard decisions, right??connecticuter wrote:No offense, but now you are sounding like a typical American.vladimir wrote:Explain, please. I live here. Let them nuke each other, that would solve the problem permanently.
It was a joke, connie.
There are vast numbers of people on this planet for whom a fluctuation in oil prices results in hunger and the inability to afford medical treatment: India for example.
Post by kinglear#1 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:24 pm
point 1. There was a great man, one of my heroes as a young man, who tried to sort out a peace deal. I'm talking about Yitzhak Rabin, who, despite his earlier justifications for firing on unarmed Palestinians, at least tried in his later years to follow the Oslo Peace Accord. He was assassinated by his own people for doing so. As was Sadat in Egypt.connecticuter wrote:
I have some sympathy with the "Palesinian" people, not their leadership. The trouble is not with the Israeli's. They have had enough moderates to forge a peace deal. Sadly, they have no partner for peace. Hamas and Hezbollah are blatant terrorists. Fatah also supports terrorism: e.g., al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades.
One does not need to specifically target children and the elderly to fight an assymetric war: that is a choice. I reject the one man's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter. If the Palestinians employed snipers to hit police, soldiers and politicians I would not label them terrorists. Such a strategy is a real option for them. Instead they target the weak and the innocent. No one is going to convince me that firing rockets on primary schools, blowing up public transportation, or using suicide bombs in shopping malls is acceptable. And no, civilian casualties in a mission to hit a military target or kill a terrorist is not morally equivalent to suicide bombing or firing rockets at a civilian area for the sake of killing civilians.
As for the idea that Israel ought to give back the West Bank (in that they had annexed it during the six day war), this is silly. The Six day war was made necessary by Israel's aggressive neighbors and their designs on Israel. If you know you are about to be attacked, you have a right to defend yourself first, you do not need to wait to be struck first. Regardless, it is hypocracy to suggest that Israel ought to give th eland back. Should the US give Texas back to mexico. Should Poland give back the German territory it had annexed after WW2, etc... As far as I am concerned, the annexed territory should be considered asshole tax, a nice reminder to Israel's neighbors as to why they should not attack again. Besides, look at Israel's unilateral withdrawal and elmination of its settlements in Gaza. What did they get for the suffering they imposed on families that lived there? BUPKIS! Well, aside from the regular rocket attacks from gaza.
.
Post by kinglear#1 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:03 pm
Just scoured his posts again and he does not deny that Israel commits atrocities simply because he doesn't mention that it does...ergo, nothing to deny. What he does do is list Palestinian atrocities as if Israel is purely the victim and not the aggressor.jm wrote:I didn't see where Connie was denying that Israel commits atrocities, let's not put words in anybody's mouth. And Rabin was shot by a radical right wing nut, not "shot by his own people" any more than Kennedy or James Garfield was.
Post by Lucky Lucan » Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:12 pm
Post by connecticuter » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:26 pm
As I saidkinglear#1 wrote:Read the media from countries other than the US and you might learn something about what is going on.
connecticuter wrote:Fox News is only one news source that I use. I obtain my information from many sources with a variety of perspectives: for example,
BBC
CNN
The New York Times
The Times of India
Haaretz
The Jerusalem Post
The Economist
The Atlantic
The New Yorker
The Weekly Standard
The National Review
Reason
Cato Institute
Foreign Affairs
Foreign Policy
Etc...
Post by andyinasia » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:57 pm
But he did have supporters in the Knesset, and there are nutters in the Knesset today. I don't see the Daily Mail reporting their loony views, however. Why do you assume one radical (if influential) Iranian is somehow representitive of the populace or the government?jm wrote:And Rabin was shot by a radical right wing nut, not "shot by his own people" any more than Kennedy or James Garfield was.
Post by andyinasia » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:12 pm
Ah now I completely agree with that. Notice that I haven't defended Iran in this thread. My basic point is that the behaviour of the State of Israel towards the Palestinians since 1948 has been the main factor in bringing about these crises. The continued land grabbing and building of settlements (illegally even under Israeli law, never mind Conny's dismissal of international law, yet largely with impunity) continues to exacerbate the problem. And while Conny will cry 'off topic' because it doesn't suit his selective vision, I believe it is worth noting that while Jews lived under frequent threat in Christian Europe for nearly two millennia until the extremes of the pogroms and Holocaust, throughout the history of the existance of Islam, Jews were safe and secure until Muslim rulership. Everything changed with the unilateral terrorist-driven landgrab, disenfranchising of Palestinians and declaration of Statehood in 1948. We're not talking about the Vikings or Genghis Khan here; we're talking about events recent enough to have a direct and clear impact on global insecurity today. Iran and every other regional state has every right to feel insecure and seek self-protection in the face of a rogue state that has for over 60 years disregarded concerns and criticism of just about every nation in the world, including it's sponsor America.jm wrote:I make no assumption that the views expressed are representative of the populace. I do presume that the views are government-friendly, I think not unreasonably. If I were Israel I would be concerned, that's all I'm saying. I realize there are crazies on all sides.
Post by connecticuter » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:14 pm
I would just add the following. Just because two nations have crazies or fundamentalists, it does not imply that both nations are equally extreme or equally at fault for a failure to resolve a conflict.jm wrote:I make no assumption that the views expressed are representative of the populace. I do presume that the views are government-friendly, I think not unreasonably, Iran is hardly known for its press freedom. If I were Israel I would be concerned, that's all I'm saying. I realize there are crazies on all sides.
Post by connecticuter » Thu Feb 16, 2012 11:34 pm
I guess we have a serious disagreement about the fundamental nature of mideast tension. I do not think that most of the causes of war and tension are rooted in arab sympathy for the palestinians (at least at the government level). In my view, there are two main sources. First, dictatorial regimes feign(ed) sympathy for the palestinians (without soothing the plight of the refugees - many still languish in refugee camps, other nations like it this way). They do (have done) this as a way to shift frustration with their own regimes - shift the peoples anger to the jews rather than their own jailers. They can also use the plight of the palestinians as a pretext for their coldly calculated polices based on balance of power politics. The second source of tension lies with the fundamentalist true believers that truly believe in the extermination of the jews, or at least the elimination of Israel in any form.andyinasia wrote:Ah now I completely agree with that. Notice that I haven't defended Iran in this thread. My basic point is that the behaviour of the State of Israel towards the Palestinians since 1948 has been the main factor in bringing about these crises. The continued land grabbing and building of settlements (illegally even under Israeli law, never mind Conny's dismissal of international law, yet largely with impunity) continues to exacerbate the problem. And while Conny will cry 'off topic' because it doesn't suit his selective vision, I believe it is worth noting that while Jews lived under frequent threat in Christian Europe for nearly two millennia until the extremes of the pogroms and Holocaust, throughout the history of the existance of Islam, Jews were safe and secure until Muslim rulership. Everything changed with the unilateral terrorist-driven landgrab, disenfranchising of Palestinians and declaration of Statehood in 1948. We're not talking about the Vikings or Genghis Khan here; we're talking about events recent enough to have a direct and clear impact on global insecurity today. Iran and every other regional state has every right to feel insecure and seek self-protection in the face of a rogue state that has for over 60 years disregarded concerns and criticism of just about every nation in the world, including it's sponsor America.
Post by kinglear#1 » Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:44 am