Notices
Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: Why all this evolution on Israel?

  1. #1 Why all this evolution on Israel? 
    Forum Freshman Silex7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Egypt
    Posts
    93
    hi,..
    i donnt know why all this evolution on israel war in gaza.. israel has the right to defend itself agains terrorist and after seeing the defending rule based on 'soldier to soldier' killing i belive now strongly that what israel do is the correct thing and no fumes on that..and here are some videos for who do not belive that israel defend itself against hamas terroist these videos shows that these ppl were highly involved in terrorising israel and were a big danger on israel security:"

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zset...eature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT6ux...eature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUFUF...eature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dP6qSsm_OU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxEbP9V5rlA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5o1ukH6-xA

    and from this site i keep promoting israel for fighting those terrorist who was aannounced lately that they were plannning to do terroristic action against israel.


    "Nothing can be accepted in this world, if it did not pass the mathematical proof."

    Leonardo Da Vinci
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Masters Degree organic god's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    567
    i believe isreal is being unethical in its fighting of terrorists.

    I understand that they wish to protect themselves but killing innocent civilians will only prompt the terrorists to more violent and more frequent attacks.


    everything is mathematical.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    The Middle East situation is extremely complex. There are no simple rights and wrongs. A proper understanding of it requires an awareness of so many diverse threads: the break up of the Ottaman Empire, World War I, European (in particualr British) imperialism, the holocaust, a nascent UN, the US jewish lobby, the rise of an oil economy, Arab nationalism, even the fight over which family should run Mecca.

    To try to extract from that mess the rights or wrongs of the current situation requires more intellect, patience, knowledge and humanity than we can muster on this forum. Don't feel bad about that. It is more than the planet has been able to muster to date.

    That said I shall make two observations:

    There is a story of sign on the cage of a large animal at a zoo.
    "Warning. This Animal is Dangerous. If Attacked It Defends Itself."

    Secondly, as organic god has pointed out, Israel's current tactics are first rate for encouraging recruitment into terrorist organisations.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: Why all this evolution on Israel? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Silex7
    hi,..
    i donnt know why all this evolution on israel war in gaza.. israel has the right to defend itself agains terrorist
    I agree with you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Masters Degree organic god's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    567
    every country has the right to defend itself from terrorism, i don't think this is the point of contention, the issue is the method by which one defends itself.

    One could argue that the largest terrorist threat to the western world comes from muslims and the middle east. however i don't believe that a correct defence would be to kill every muslim on the planet.
    everything is mathematical.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by organic god
    I don't believe that a correct defence would be to kill every muslim on the planet.
    The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options.

    A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree organic god's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    567
    The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options.

    A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.
    all i can respond with is... so?

    i was simply stating that whilst a country can and must defend itself from terrorism, there is a limit to the extent it can do this. this was not "a misrepresentation of an opponents position" incidentally love the definition, that wikipedia or something?

    My example is a defensive strategy that a western country could adopt, however i hope that we agree this strategy is unethical and should not be considered.

    so we can now turn our attention to the "defensive" strategy that israel is employing, and we can analyse whether it's methods are ethical and just. We could also analyse if they will produce the desired effect.

    It is my belief that the killing of innocent civilians in gaza is an inappropiate way of doing it, because it is unethical, and will only increase the violence of hamas attacks.
    everything is mathematical.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Israel is a neo-colonial state imposed on the Palestinian people by Europeans. The terrorists here are the ones who occupy Palestine because they believe being Jews gives them an endless lease from their invisible friend.

    Hamas is the democratically elected representatative of the Palestinian people. It has the right to protect its people from the Jewish occupation.

    A short history of the conflict in Gaza:



    (1) European Jews, survivors of and refugees from Nazi mass-murder during the Second World War, ethnically cleanse hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948, many of whom ended up settling as refugees in Gaza.

    (2) Israel invades and occupies Gaza in 1967. Occupation, and its legal responsibilities, are defined in the Fourth Geneva Convention.

    (3) Israel expels Palestinians from 25% of the land within Gaza, including the best 40% of arable land, and seizes control of most most water resources. Many Palestinians are thus internal displaced, AGAIN.

    (4) Israel establishes colonies on ethnically cleansed portions of Gaza. This is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention agreement, to which Israeli is a signatory. Note that similar violations have occurred numerous time starting the day after Israel signed the accord, and continue to the present day.

    (5) Israel implements political repression and population controls measures to prevent the rise of any form of Palestinian organization, i.e., any activity such as maintaining public health records that might evolve into an embryonic government. Israel monitors and controls the movement of every single person and commercial product into or out of Palestinian areas.

    (6) Israel withdraws colonies in 2005 after continued armed Palestinian resistance convinces the Israeli government that their resources would be better spent in colonizing the West Bank.

    (7) Israel continues the occupation of Gaza by maintaining complete control of all borders, including its seaward border onto international waters, with arbitrary regulation of the movement of people and goods.

    (8.) Israel makes public agreements to assist the peaceful economic development of Gaza, not with contributions of its own resources, but merely by allowing Gazan farmers to trade in the Israeli market, their access to other markets being restricted, especially to international markets via their own ports through their own waters.

    (9) Israel arbitrarily violates these agreements, and leaves an entire season of Palestinian produce to rot at Israeli border crossings, they not being permitted to move them out any other way. I saw that coming a mile away. I'm sure the Palestinians did too, but they had no choice but to plant, harvest, and hope Israel would abstain from chain-yanking writ large and, for the first time, keep to an agreement. Psyche!

    (10) Hamas and other Palestinian resistance organizations continue to fight the horrible oppression of their people in the only way they have: by firing home-made rockets 5-15km into Israeli territory. These rockets cause little damage and few injuries and fatalities, but serve admirably in reminding Israelis of the injustices they are committing in Gaza. I suspect that the constant reminders of guilt are as important a reason for Israeli anger as the death and destruction.

    (11) Israel intensifies its already stringent control over Gazan borders with the imposition of a starvation blockade in January 2006.

    (12)Hamas and Israel agree to a ceasefire that begins 19 June 2008. Planning for the current attack on Gaza begins at the same time. Hamas agrees to stop rocket fire and Israel agrees to lift the starvation blockade.

    (13)Israel violates the ceasefire agreement numerous times, including a complete failure to lift its blockade. The most egregious violation occurs on 4 November 2008 when Israel kills Hamas personnel in a cross-border raid into Gaza.

    (14)Hamas responds in kind, resuming rocket attacks.

    (15)Israel begins terror bombardment of Gaza, targeting civilian infrastructure (AGAIN), and kills many civilians. The Hamas response to Israeli ceasefire violations allow Israel to claim that they are acting in self-defense. Mainstream media coverage of Israeli ceasefire violations in the United States is non-existent, allowing Zionist political and media operatives to effectively sell the Israeli 'story', which conveniently leaves out the context of the current fighting because it would properly portray Israel as the aggressor.

    Source




    -------------------



    Why Hamas is a terrorist organisation:


    After Hamas won the election, which was splashed across the news:

    Hamas Sweeps Palestinian Elections, Complicating Peace Efforts in Mideast


    By Scott Wilson
    Washington Post Foreign Service
    Friday, January 27, 2006; Page A01

    RAMALLAH, West Bank, Jan. 26 -- The radical Islamic movement Hamas won a large majority in the new Palestinian parliament, according to official election results announced Thursday, trouncing the governing Fatah party in a contest that could dramatically reshape the Palestinians' relations with Israel and the rest of the world.

    Bush and Co step in with their usual fudged "damage" control:
    After failing to anticipate Hamasís victory over Fatah in the 2006 Palestinian election, the White House cooked up yet another scandalously covert and self-defeating Middle East debacle: part Iran-contra, part Bay of Pigs. With confidential documents, corroborated by outraged former and current U.S. officials, the author reveals how President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, and Deputy National-Security Adviser Elliott Abrams backed an armed force under Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan, touching off a bloody civil war in Gaza and leaving Hamas stronger than ever.
    David Rose's April 2008 issue of Vanity Fair
    Hamas defeated Fatah over a week of fighting in June 2007, and took complete control of the Gaza Strip.

    Next, Bush and Co make it even better:

    Within the Bush administration, the Palestinian policy set off a furious debate. One of its critics is David Wurmser, the avowed neoconservative, who resigned as Vice President Dick Cheneyís chief Middle East adviser in July 2007, a month after the Gaza coup.

    Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of "engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory." He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. "It looks to me that what happened wasnít so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen," Wurmser says.

    The botched plan has rendered the dream of Middle East peace more remote than ever, but what really galls neocons such as Wurmser is the hypocrisy it exposed. "There is a stunning disconnect between the presidentís call for Middle East democracy and this policy," he says. "It directly contradicts it."
    And thats what the neo-cons think about it.

    Israel of course, simply kidnapped the officials:
    Israeli forces arrest Hamas cabinet ministers

    Israeli troops rounded up dozens of ministers and MPs from the Palestinians' ruling Hamas party today, while pressing a military campaign in Gaza meant to win the release of an Israeli soldier held by Hamas gunmen.

    An Israeli military official said a total of 64 Hamas officials were arrested in the early morning round-up. Of those, Palestinian officials said seven were ministers in Hamas' 23-member Cabinet and 20 others were MPs in the 72-seat parliament.

    17 Israelis died over the last 7 YEARS from rocket attacks, almost 900 people have been killed in the last two weeks, a third of them children, for refusing to be treated subhumanely by Israelis. So who is the real terrorist?
    Homeland Security Advisory System: RED
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    You know, just the fact there's even a discussion for us to have here, on the Science Forum, goes to show you the power of disinformation and/or under-reporting.

    One tends to assume that, if they hear more of a certain perspective told to them on the news a whole lot more times than another, that the first perspective must simply be more true, but what happens if the owner specifically wants you to believe a certain perspective?

    Hmmm, .... like.... maybe.... Rupert Murdoch? Though I'm sure there are others less visible. It's more about who owns the stock than who runs the company.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Harold14370
    I might not agree with, but certainly value, your opinion on the following:

    The palestinians in Gaza are virtualy in a giant concentration camp with the entire periphery is controlled by Isreal or their Egyptian lackeys, including the sea controlled by the Israel navy that even blockades humanitarian shipments at its whim?

    What are the Palestinians who were robbed of their land supposed to do?

    They did try a ceasefire with the understanding that the blockade would stop but it didnt, they figured if the blockade doesnt stop neither does the rockets, Although I think its pointless to shoot rockets, but if the blockade continues and the international community looks and does nothing, then what are they to do?

    Are they supposed to sit quietly and slowly die without causing a stir?

    Meanwhile, though its hardly reported in the western media, Israel continues to colonize the west bank!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    159
    Some Israeli official was on the radio today and they asked him why foreign journalists weren't being allowed into Gaza and he basically said well media is a powerful tool and we intend to use it to our advantage.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Ya know, I understand the need for a cultural identity, and a self esteem, and all that, but.....

    If your identity gets to the point where you honestly don't even feel bad eradicating somebody else just to get a few more acres of land, cause you think you're *that* superior........

    Maybe there's a certain point where cultural identity can become a bad thing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    821
    samcdkey, you must be joking. Perhaps you could take off your rainbow goggles for a second to actually see the full truth in what you're reporting. The Jews basically got back what was theirs for thousands upon thousands of years. How it happened is arguably not right, but neither is our claim of America or any other modern country's displacement of aborigines. The REAL conflict is hardly Hamas protecting its people from oppression. That's just complete bullshit. Israel has showed extreme patience with the rocket firing, including sending multiple warnings and suggesting deals to end it. Tell me, how long would you accept rockets fired into your yard before you would get pissed off and fight back?

    Israel is fully justified in an all out assault INCLUDING killing civilians. If Hamas is truly democratically elected, then it is also the peoples fault for this continuing assault and they deserve to suffer the results of their actions. As you provide no sources for your personal history, I can easily provide facts that proveyour rainbow-tints wrong. Israel is the good guy that prevents the terrorists from spilling out to the rest of the world by dividing their attention.

    The following was as easy as a single wikipedia away. Gotta love bias!

    (1) European Jews, survivors of and refugees from Nazi mass-murder during the Second World War, ethnically cleanse hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948, many of whom ended up settling as refugees in Gaza.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_(Israel)

    Except...no? Originally the plans were quite fair. The problem is the Arab populace hostily rejected any plan that gave the Jews any specific land at all. According to wikipedia "The plan was accepted by most of the Jewish population, but rejected by much of the Arab populace." for no more than religious reasons. In fact this quote here
    We accepted the UN Resolution, but the Arabs did not. They are preparing to make war on us. If we defeat them and capture western Galilee or territory on both sides of the road to Jerusalem, these areas will become part of the state. Why should we obligate ourselves to accept boundaries that in any case the Arabs don't accept?
    proves just how much intercultural strife existed.

    After signing their own declaration of independence they were IMMEDIATELY invaded by "Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria". They did not attack first. They were invaded from FOUR SIDES simply because they declared independence. Yes, Israel is quite evil indeed. Had they not invaded, Israel would have kept the land it originally was given without War. So, you see, it's entirely the fault of the Arabs for how much land Israel now has. Fascinating what a little FACT does to prove you wrong, isn't it?

    (2) Israel invades and occupies Gaza in 1967. Occupation, and its legal responsibilities, are defined in the Fourth Geneva Convention.
    In 1967, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan massed troops close to Israeli borders, expelled UN peacekeepers and blocked Israel's access to the Red Sea. Israel saw these actions as a casus belli for a pre-emptive strike that launched the Six-Day War, Israel achieved a decisive victory in which it captured the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula and Golan Heights.
    (from the Israel article) Again, provoked.

    (3) Israel expels Palestinians from 25% of the land within Gaza, including the best 40% of arable land, and seizes control of most most water resources. Many Palestinians are thus internal displaced, AGAIN.
    Unsourced and wrong. Gaza is the same size it always was since the original plans were drawn up. If you disagree, perhaps you could provide a source?

    (4) Israel establishes colonies on ethnically cleansed portions of Gaza. This is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention agreement, to which Israeli is a signatory. Note that similar violations have occurred numerous time starting the day after Israel signed the accord, and continue to the present day.
    I find no mention of this anywhere. Especially the "Ethnically cleansed" part.

    (5) Israel implements political repression and population controls measures to prevent the rise of any form of Palestinian organization, i.e., any activity such as maintaining public health records that might evolve into an embryonic government. Israel monitors and controls the movement of every single person and commercial product into or out of Palestinian areas.
    Unsourced, also bullshit according to the wiki article. Yay bias!

    (6) Israel withdraws colonies in 2005 after continued armed Palestinian resistance convinces the Israeli government that their resources would be better spent in colonizing the West Bank.
    What colonies?

    (7) Israel continues the occupation of Gaza by maintaining complete control of all borders, including its seaward border onto international waters, with arbitrary regulation of the movement of people and goods.
    Gee, there are hostile terrorist organizations across the boarder. I FUCKING WONDER WHY I WOULD WANT TO CONTROL THEM. HMMMMM. Also, the regulations have hardly been arbitrary. Most of the time their suspicions are proved accurate.

    (8.) Israel makes public agreements to assist the peaceful economic development of Gaza, not with contributions of its own resources, but merely by allowing Gazan farmers to trade in the Israeli market, their access to other markets being restricted, especially to international markets via their own ports through their own waters.
    This is to control the terrorist organization so it cannot gather enough resources to mount a reasonable assault. Were the population to go "Fuck off Hamas", Israel would be far more willing to aid them directly. Otherwise you are, quite literally, feeding the lion that will eat you. Israel is quite possibly the only intelligent nation in this respect. Most of the time we send aid to the middle-east it finds its way directly into terrorist organizations.

    (9) Israel arbitrarily violates these agreements, and leaves an entire season of Palestinian produce to rot at Israeli border crossings, they not being permitted to move them out any other way. I saw that coming a mile away. I'm sure the Palestinians did too, but they had no choice but to plant, harvest, and hope Israel would abstain from chain-yanking writ large and, for the first time, keep to an agreement. Psyche!
    Now THIS I never heard of and I'm quite an avid news reader. Probably why there isn't a source?

    (10) Hamas and other Palestinian resistance organizations continue to fight the horrible oppression of their people in the only way they have: by firing home-made rockets 5-15km into Israeli territory. These rockets cause little damage and few injuries and fatalities, but serve admirably in reminding Israelis of the injustices they are committing in Gaza. I suspect that the constant reminders of guilt are as important a reason for Israeli anger as the death and destruction.
    Yay, pure bias! Yay, you support the loss of innocent lives! Isn't that what you're claiming Israel does? O snap.

    (11) Israel intensifies its already stringent control over Gazan borders with the imposition of a starvation blockade in January 2006.
    That's because, as you mention above, Hamas tries to rocket the shit out of them. Israel is sending a message here. It's "Stop. Your fucking. ROCKETS." Or would you prefer they do nothing and go "Oh that's fine. Random civilian death is totally okay. We'll keep sending you free food. Keep going."

    I should mention that Israel, throughout the majority of this conflict, has been constantly sending aid directly from itself into Gaza. The starvation blockade basically STOPPED any aid from them and other country's from going in. Gaza obviously cannot support itself, so while you're calling it's attacks "admirable" I call them "Fucking retarded".

    (13)Israel violates the ceasefire agreement numerous times, including a complete failure to lift its blockade. The most egregious violation occurs on 4 November 2008 when Israel kills Hamas personnel in a cross-border raid into Gaza.
    In late December 2008, a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel collapsed after rockets were fired from the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip. Israel responded with a series of airstrikes.
    Yep. This is sure a violation on Israel's part. Yepyep.

    (14)Hamas responds in kind, resuming rocket attacks.
    Sorry, no cigar! Hamas started it (AGAIN).

    (15)Israel begins terror bombardment of Gaza, targeting civilian infrastructure (AGAIN), and kills many civilians. The Hamas response to Israeli ceasefire violations allow Israel to claim that they are acting in self-defense. Mainstream media coverage of Israeli ceasefire violations in the United States is non-existent, allowing Zionist political and media operatives to effectively sell the Israeli 'story', which conveniently leaves out the context of the current fighting because it would properly portray Israel as the aggressor.
    On Saturday, January 17, Israel announced a unilateral ceasefire, conditional on elimination of further rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza, and began withdrawing over the next several days. Hamas later announced its own ceasefire, with its own conditions of complete withdrawal and opening of border crossings. A reduced level of mortar fire originating in Gaza continues, though Israel has so far not taken this as a breach of the ceasefire.
    Yes. Evil Israel. How dare they graciously continue to take mortar/rocket fire. How dare they simply pull out of Gaza when they could easily destroy them forever. How dare they continue to give Gaza chance after chance under the sole condition "Stop. ROCKETING. US. Fuck sakes!"

    If we've learned anything here, it's that Liberal bias is downright hilarious. Why not leave the discussion to the people that actually read about what they're talking about? You, sir, make me angry. Which is very hard to do.

    P.S: Your "source"? Lol.

    P.P.S: The Bush administration is kind of stupid with how they handle things. However, they supported Fatah for a good reason. Hamas is composed of a bunch of rocket throwing idiots that don't realize their country can't survive without aid and most certainly cannot take on israel. If Israel really were evil, Hamas would have been exterminated along with the whole of the Gaza people. It's well within their power to do so.
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    The Jews basically got back what was theirs for thousands upon thousands of years.
    No thats not acceptable

    Does the US have the "right" to invade Britain because anglo-americans invoke the right to come back after 300 years? And displace the current inhabitants of Britan through force, terror and intimidation and just occupy the houses the british would be fleeing?

    Most of people in Europe and Asia have ancestors that have lived at some point in time in the palsestinian area, since its a crossroads between africa and the eurasian land mass, so everyone should now be allowed to attack israel en boot them into a Gaza concentration camp because we have homo erectus ancestors that have been hunting in the region?

    American ancestors that have ethnically cleansed the American continent are Guilty, but the buck has to stop at some point and it has stopped now. We cant support Slavery on the basis that americans have engaged in slavery in the past, crimes against humanity and unethical behavior of the past cannot continue because it has been tolerated, these must stop, and ethnic cleansing of palestinians by mostly european jews must stop! and must stop Now. Including the ongoing colonization of the west bank. Create a state of Israel-Palsetine with a right of return for all Palestinians around the world that have fled the ethnic cleanising and have a democratic state that does not discriminate based on religion or race, Apartheid should be left out with the previous century.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Ph.D. Darius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    821
    Someone didn't read my entire post clearly. Especially THE NEXT FUCKING SENTENCE.

    There's so much wrong in your post that it's easily rebuked...in the post you just argued against. Does this forum suffer from perpetual blindness?
    Om mani padme hum

    "In dishonorable things we are not bound to obey any man." - The Book of the Courtier [1561], pg 99 (144 in pdf)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by organic god
    i believe isreal is being unethical in its fighting of terrorists.

    I understand that they wish to protect themselves but killing innocent civilians will only prompt the terrorists to more violent and more frequent attacks.
    And how would Hamas rockets flying freely into Israel residential areas count as not trying to kill innocent civilians? So what should Israel do? If your neighbour throws a knife at you but misses, would you just stand there and do nothing knowing that your neighbour has tried to kill you or you take out the enemy first. An enemy only emerges when it threatens your life. In threatening life, it is animal instinct to do whatever it can to survive.

    It would only seem fair for Israel to retaliate. They have already voluntarily moved out from part of the land and gave it back to Palestinians. All they asked is not to be disturbed, yet rockets still fly into their homes.
    ~ Oneís ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    They have already voluntarily moved out from part of the land and gave it back to Palestinians.
    Sure they moved out of Gaza and went to colonize the West Bank instead, leaving Gaza a virtual concentration camp with no control over its own borders.

    The deal about retaliating for rockets would be valid, unfortunately Israel is the invader. Thats like saying ok, so should Nazi Germans just let the people they invaded just defend themselves even if they miss or should they fight back againt the people they invaded? The Gestapo was in its rights to fight the French resistance, they shouldnt let those terrorist commit acts of terrorism in their own land just like that because the germans happen to invade them out of the goodness of their kind heart. The French and Dutch should be glad the Luftwaffe didnt bomb occupied cities to retaliate against the resistance, the germans were so benevolent they did all they could not to level cities they were occupying to retaliate against resistance, occupied Europe should have been thankful and the nazi they gave away food to concentration camps for free to ungrateful prisoners, priosoners of war didnt pay for their food either it was gracious humanitarian altruism to feed the prisoners and the nazis should have made a big PR propaganda parade about how altrustic they are for giving humanitarian aid to their prisoners of war...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    (accidental double post, cant delete myself)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Masters Degree organic god's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    567
    And how would Hamas rockets flying freely into Israel residential areas count as not trying to kill innocent civilians? So what should Israel do? If your neighbour throws a knife at you but misses, would you just stand there and do nothing knowing that your neighbour has tried to kill you or you take out the enemy first.
    The "eye for an eye" argument is pathetic and a sign of an inferior mind, if my neighbour throws a knife at me i would defend myself and try to negotiate with my neighbour, i wouldnt chuck a knife back at him because it will end in one of us dying.

    In threatening life, it is animal instinct to do whatever it can to survive.
    but we have evolved past being totally reliant on our instincts.
    everything is mathematical.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    The deal about retaliating for rockets would be valid, unfortunately Israel is the invader.
    Palestine wasn't a country on its own either before Israel "invaded". Palestinian land was part of Jordan during British occupation until the British and UN gave a part of it to the Jewish people. Even then it was only a small part. So maybe the UN and British should be blamed since they were the ones who gave Israel the land. Technically British invaded first.

    Quote Originally Posted by organic god
    The "eye for an eye" argument is pathetic and a sign of an inferior mind, if my neighbour throws a knife at me i would defend myself and try to negotiate with my neighbour, i wouldnt chuck a knife back at him because it will end in one of us dying.
    I don't know about you, the person throwing the knife at me was trying to kill me. If i negotiate with him, he might take another chance at killing me. Even more so if I have a family that i need to take care of.

    but we have evolved past being totally reliant on our instincts.
    I should have probably put it as our natural reaction to something that threaten our lives. The natural reaction is to remove the threat.
    ~ Oneís ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Palestine wasn't a country
    Is that really relevant for the people living there? If you live on a farm for many generations and people from another continent arrive and threaten you and occupy the field your grand father plowed, call a spade a spade, they are invaders.

    They were living under the ottoman empire, then a British empire bureaucrat in a london office drew lines on a map. The thing is palestinians were already there.

    "Technically British invaded first"
    Sure, and they deserve blame, still doesnt prevent Palestinians from being the victim of invasion. The British are to blame in part is quite right, even if they specified in the Balfour declaration that there should be no negative effect on the muslim and christian population in palestine, which wasnt respected by zionists, and jewish zionist terrorists killed British civil servants and military personel, including the bombing of the king david hotel, now Israel bombs identified unarmed UN observers, UN identified refugee camps and schools, Red cross hospitals, etc.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    The deal about retaliating for rockets would be valid, unfortunately Israel is the invader.
    Palestine wasn't a country on its own either before Israel "invaded". Palestinian land was part of Jordan during British occupation until the British and UN gave a part of it to the Jewish people. Even then it was only a small part. So maybe the UN and British should be blamed since they were the ones who gave Israel the land. Technically British invaded first.
    No, it wasn't a country. But.... the "Palestinians" were still human beings a long time before anybody entered that neck of the woods. They still needed to eat. They still had the right to property (ie. ownership of the land they lived on). Regardless of where the political lines were drawn, they still deserved to have their lands bought from them rather than stolen.

    If having or not having a "national identity" is an excuse for you to treat a human being as not being human, then maybe the whole concept of a "national identity" should be forgotten. It's obviously not worth anything.


    Quote Originally Posted by organic god
    The "eye for an eye" argument is pathetic and a sign of an inferior mind, if my neighbour throws a knife at me i would defend myself and try to negotiate with my neighbour, i wouldnt chuck a knife back at him because it will end in one of us dying.
    I don't know about you, the person throwing the knife at me was trying to kill me. If i negotiate with him, he might take another chance at killing me. Even more so if I have a family that i need to take care of.
    If he was unprovoked, then of course I'd have to agree.

    If you stole his house, shot one of his kids, and then crowded him in with a bunch of other refugees (or whatever name you prefer for people that don't get to live where they used to live), .... well I'd probably forgive him for throwing a pitiful little knife at me.

    but we have evolved past being totally reliant on our instincts.
    I should have probably put it as our natural reaction to something that threaten our lives. The natural reaction is to remove the threat.
    It's not that it's natural. It's that it's practical. You don't have an obligation to die rather than kill, but you do have an obligation not to kill out of greed.

    Israel has pushed the "Palestinians" (or whatever you want to call this group of human beings) onto smaller and smaller areas of land, while its own people grow their own territory bigger and bigger.

    There's no indication that Israel plans to stop pushing until the Palestinians go out of existence, but there's good reason to think the Palis would stop pushing back if the Israelis would just let them keep the land they already have, and stop regulating their trade. (And could plausibly guarantee they were never going to begin pushing again).

    For Israel, that would be the same as acknowledging that they were never going to get back their entire "inheritance", which might turn out to be religious-ly impossible for them.

    I say "Too Bad". Religion doesn't have the right to play with this kind of fire. It's for adults, not children.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3
    I was surprised to learn that Israel censors military info and even banned international reporters from conflict areas. Here is an underground site called Israeli Uncensored News http://samsonblinded.org/news which runs some very odd reports.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by tranquill
    I was surprised to learn that Israel censors military info and even banned international reporters from conflict areas..
    Where have you been? Israel invented the policy of murdering reporters. The Israelis than trained their USA proteges in Iraq in murdering journalists to prevent news from coming out of Iraq.

    Ever hear of Tom Hurndall?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Senior Kukhri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by Karlson
    The Israelis than trained their USA proteges in Iraq in murdering journalists to prevent news from coming out of Iraq.
    Let's see your sources. Now, please.
    Co-producer of Red Oasis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Lol. You're being facetious right?

    Where would you get "sources" on the murder of a reporter? From another reporter who happened to be standing nearby and didn't get murdered? The murder of a reporter is the murder of a "source". The goal of such an act is to prevent sources from existing.

    No. What you should look for is either


    A) - Mysterious deaths

    or B) - A comparison of the number of (un-sympathetic) reporters who enter a given area, and the number who make it back alive.

    Naturally, anything out of the ordinary will be subject to spin by the people responsible for doing it. The Isreali Military, or Mossad, is not going to openly admit it purposefully caused the death of someone it didn't like. Everything will be ascribed to accidents or enemy fire.

    The question is whether the number of accidents happening are proportional to the expected probability of an accident. If not, then believing they were genuinely "accidents" is not betting with the odds.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Senior Kukhri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    Lol. You're being facetious right?
    No.

    If I were to make such an outrageous statement such as "Israel sends over evil Mossad megaforce operatives to train US soldiers to kill reporters" I would have some pretty damn solid sources.

    Or we can just cut the shit and go back to calling US soldiers 'baby killers' like they did in Nam.
    Co-producer of Red Oasis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Well, that is a good point. I doubt US soldiers are being trained by Mossad to know how to kill a reporter and get away with it.

    Indirectly, one could say that they've been conditioned to see unsympathetic embedded reporters as just another kind of enemy, and therefore not somebody that you really go out of your way to protect, or ensure the survival of.

    I also really wouldn't be surprised if a few of them were assassinated by Mossad operatives, but that's just because I really don't trust Mossad. To me, they're like if you took the sinister-ness of the American CIA, and multipied it by about a factor of ten.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •