Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
On December 27, Israel began bombing the Gaza strip in response to continued rocket fire from Hamas militants, ending a six-month truce. Since that time, more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed, including many civilians. Israel announced a temporary cease fire on Jan. 17 -- but so far U.S. response has been minimal. What should America’s role be in this ongoing crisis?
Afrasiabi claims U.S. support of Israel will "certainly backfire against the U.S.", yet all U.S. attempts to establish peaceful negotiations fail because Palestinians/Hamas use the negotiation period to regroup and then continue their random attacks on Israel. So by Afrasiabi's own argument, there is no solution except for Israel to surrender, unconditionally. Clearly the consequences for Israelis would be deadly, given that Palestinian militants under Hamas (& previously Arafat) have no regard for the lives of their own women and children.
These militants are well known to launch RPGs from sites close to schools and hospitals, in the hope that Israel retaliation will kill the women and children there (see #7 below). Absurdly, their tactic works to garner the support of an astoundingly gullible international community. That community becomes complicit in the deaths of Palestinian women and children brought about by Palestinian militants not by Israel's intentional retaliations.
Afrasiabi is wrong in suggesting U.S. support for Israel will " radicalize the region and embolden the al-Qaeda terrorists ." In every period where the militant Islamists have met serious military resistance, the rate of terror attacks on peaceful citizens declines significantly. I maintain Afrasiabi knows this, as do the greater body of terrorist and religious Muslim leaders. They use Afrasiabi's claim fully expecting it will allow the militant Muslims to engage in more terrorism, with relative impunity.
The rest of Afrasiabi's argument flies in the face of the actual nature of this conflict. If all of the Muslim nations were assembled into a single geographical region the size of a football field, Israel would constitute an patch the size of a book of paper matches. Palestinians could do very well, by the standards they claim to desire by working with their Muslim neighbors to establish a peaceful way of life. That is not what they want. They do not want to live, or live better, what they do want is to see Jews die.
Ultimately, the Palestinians (and Afrasiabi) have no historical, political or geographically legitimate claims in any form unless, that is, one accepts religious and racial bigotry as legitimate!
1. Palestine was a region, like "New England", never a nation.
2. When Muslim leaders of the Palestinians learned Hitler was killing Jews the chief Mufti readily assembled an entire Division (!) of volunteer Palestinians to help the Nazis. The Nazis lost the war and were deservedly vanquished. The Palestinians were on the morally evil side, and lost. In that choice, and with that failing, they have NO claim to any land or political status whatsoever.
3. The Israelis do not swarm into the streets cheering when a few Palestinians are killed, but the Palestinians do when dancing Jewish teenagers are slaughtered by a Palestinian genocide bomber.
4. Any Palestinian living in Israel has a better chance of prospering peacefully, by his own productive effort, than does any Palestinian under the dictatorship mentality of Hamas and, previously, Arafat.
5. Israel's government properly considers the lives of its citizens a value. If I lived there, as an atheist, I would still expect them to defend and protect me from mindless fanatics crude efforts to kill me by launching RPGs amongst my fellow citizens.
6. Palestinian leaders have no problem keeping their 'refugee' camps as places of poverty and grief, because it gains the foolish sympathy of the West. Even portions of UN funding for those camps is diverted to Palestinian militancy, rather than the needs of the Palestinian refugees themselves.
7. Israelis use their military to organize honest military assaults in defense of their citizens, rather than launching RPGs from sites near schools and hospitals and darting away, as cowards, by scurrying amongst their own women and children.
8. It is a blunt fact that Islam views any non-Muslim as a contemptible animal towards whom lying is entirely acceptable. Palestinians are no exception, and Arafat was particularly convincing in his lies.
9. The Palestinians, historically & by tenets of their primitive religious beliefs, are the initiators of violence in that region. They have no regard for peace, or even life —far more important to them is to see Jews & other kafir ( sensu an ingrate to Allah, an infidel) die .
10. Muslim schools, including those in Palestine, teach religious bigotry, misleading historical background, and inculcate the belief that killing the kafir for Allah is a holy achievement, especially if the student dies in the attempt ...hardly a cultural leaning towards peace!
Afrasiabi's arguments are disingenuous to say the least.
- RnBram
January 1, 2009 9:27AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(4)
Side: Join Israel
1. What the crap was Israel? A group of nomads tied together by their religious beliefs. Let's just create a state out of that and call it legitimate because obviously the history of such a tribe deserves to have some place to call home - even if it on land that others have occupied. So one group has rights to land and one doesn't. Let's just fight a thousand or so years about it, and then just keep right on doing it. Sounds like a good plan.
2. That also means the Germans and the Italians have NO claim to any land, or political status whatsoever. So glad to hear that. How do you propose we divvy up the pieces? Should we inform these people that they'll suddenly have to leave their homes? Should we give them a territory that we consider undesirable? I know it kind of sounds mean, and sort of what my country did to the native population here, but you're entirely right.... these people never should have had and land or political status at all.
3.Oh not at all. All Israelis weep at the thought of pain and suffering wrought upon their enemy and all Palestinians just scheme away at how they kill little Israeli babies. That's exactly what happens. Israeli people would never at all do anything wrong and Palestinians would never do anything right. Palestinians naturally rely on groups like Hamas to do their killing... horrible. The only proper way to do is, naturally to put on a uniform.
4. That's true. If only there wasn't a wall, and if only Israel didn't close Palestine off. Israel is so gracious and beneficial, but only within its own borders. Israel's officials were elected, but Hamas? They only won their political support by building things like roads and hospitals.... totally don't care at all about the people. Total dictatorship. Yep.
5. Launched for no reason. what-so-ever, might I add. Never at all would Israel ever be guilty of anything but angel wings and flowers. It's never acceptable to launch missiles... but especially not of the imaginary act of intentionally closing the Gaza crossing.... not allowing even food in. Must be imaginary because that's not angel wings and flowers.
6. ....Sure. Whatever you want to think. Actually I'm just so creeped out by you... all the sarcasm in the world could't cover up the extreme disgust you're giving me in the pit of my stomach. Yep, no problem at all watching people starve, be born and die in dirt and blood. If only there could be a nation to try and eradicate Palestine so we could all be shocked and outraged, and then build them their own nation. But that would never happen because Palestinians haven't built up global wealth at a means of controlling the foreign policies of other countries. Nor have the support of fundamentalist Christians voting on their side.
7. Completely honest... like killing children playing soccer for trying to get a ball that wasn't on their "territory". Or randomly shooting farmers.
8. Wow. It's funny, but Hitler was wrong for this... and rightly so. The only time such sentiments are acceptable are if they expressed against all people of Islam. Especially any Palestinian.
9. The Palestinians, historically & by tenets of their primitive religious beliefs, are the initiators of violence in that region. They have no regard for peace, or even life —far more important to them is to see Jews & other kafir ( sensu an ingrate to Allah, an infidel) die .
Spread around hate and fear... mmm, tasty. More please!
10. Muslim schools, including those in Palestine, teach religious bigotry, misleading historical background, and inculcate the belief that killing the kafir for Allah is a holy achievement, especially if the student dies in the attempt ...hardly a cultural leaning towards peace!
Oh. goody. Exactly what I wanted. More incomprehensible fear and hate mongering towards one particular group of people.
Lunacy!
- SocialistBetty
January 3, 2009 10:33AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(4)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Responding to SocialistBetty,
1)
You are absolutely right about the religio-racism involved in the creation of Israel. However, you are wrong in applying today's Western thinking and values to those of the time of Israel's creation. Most of the World remains religio-racist... After all, wasn't that the only motivation the Palestinians had in creating a military Division to join with Hitler... namely for the purpose of killing Jews.
Collectivism/Socialism sees people as part of a mass in which no particular individual is important except in so far as he works for that mass. The creation of Israel is _just another expression_ of that same thinking. However, in spite of enormous persecution, even from Western countries(!) Jews do not practice genocide or war, except in self-defense. It was, by the logic of the time, a *collective* Justice to the Jews to give them a 'safe-house' in the form of their own nation.
(A religious homeland was chosen, but they would have been better of
- RnBram January 3, 2009 1:56PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Join Israel
First, you make a crude and vulgar assumption about collectivism and socialism, and most likely Communism as well. His statement would be better applied to capitalism, as under these systems people are considered incredibly valuable and deserving of the basic necessities of life.
Second, he acts as if it is okay to support religio-racism simply because that's how some of the world is.
Third, he pretends as if Israel has not waged genocide and persecuted itself. There is nothing 'self-defense' about blocking aid to civilians, destroying and occupying unarmed civilian homes, and wanting to destroy an entire people.
Regardless of who the land belonged to historically, at the time it was taken it belonged to innocent people. These people were forced out of their homes for something they had not done. It's no wonder they're so racist against the Israelis.
- Blue Linchpin January 3, 2009 2:07PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
@BlueLinchpin
BL, do you believe people are of little or no value, except when part of a group? If so, please live accordingly, and be sure to send me some money because as a group member I need it, badly. I do not think you _owe_ me it, but by your standards I should receive it. In contrast, I think people have no obligation to relinquish what they have created to those who have created nothing of value for me. Humans can be amazing beings, when they are rational and pursue carefully calculated interests: such as great ideas they would like to see become commonplace in the World of Humanity.
Second, if you were to read more carefully, I absolutely reject religio-racism as the justification for any kind of legislation upon citizens, let alone war against the citizens of another nation. Your comment is an egregious failure to interpret my comments, and projects a sense that if it is Capitalist it must be bad. Perhaps Capitalism is the Good, but you have not yet figured that out.
- RnBram January 3, 2009 2:47PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
"...under these systems [collectivism, socialism, communism] people are considered incredibly valuable and deserving of the basic necessities of life."
They were so valuable under communism that Stalin had 40-60 million of his own people killed and millions more imprisoned. So valuable under the Khmer Rouge that everyone in the country with more than a sixth grade education was rounded up and shot. So valuable that during the "great leap forward" in China more millions or tens of millions were similarly wiped out or imprisoned or at the least "re-educated."
So valuable that today in fascist China (which however it defines its "communism" today operates much more along the brutal state socialist model of a public/private autocracy) dissent is still put down severely and with unbridled violence. And son on.
Also the assertion that Israel is the party "wanting to destroy an entire people" is almost too laughable to discuss. Tiny Israel and its few millions has no capacity to destroy the sea of countries wanting to wipe it out surrounding it on all sides, and therefore no irrational desire to do so. It desperately seeks a way to reach an accommodation with its 100's of millions of sworn and implacable enemies.
Hamas does not exactly make phone calls to innocent people who may be at risk of becoming "collateral damage" when it's about to bomb a hospital, school or restaurant or give other warnings. It also doesn't locate its arsenals and weapons factories in religious buildings and densely populated neighborhoods.
As for "historically" this area is so tangled in changes of the humans occupying it, any and every case can be made for who "should" "own" it today. Including the Jerobomites who founded Jerusalem until the forbears of the current claimants pushed them off the pages of history.
So yes, consideration of roots and history, recent and ancient has relevance, but will never provide a soution, which must be found in the "facts on the ground" as they exist today.
- bigpics January 5, 2009 2:08PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
The fact that you actually think Russia and China were Communist shows you don't know anything about it. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of Communism will realize how wrong you are.
Communism is inherently anarchist/democratic. It requires a classless, at least somewhat democratic society where everyone owns the means of production. This means the State does not own the production, the ruling class is not an elite that exploits the workers, and decisions are made through concensus.
Russia and China, however, are more National Socialist, which is a right-wing, fascist brand of socialism. Actual socialist countries, however, like Belgium (my favorite) go to a great deal of work to ensure that everyone has an education and isn't on the street.
- Blue Linchpin January 5, 2009 2:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The Soviet Union and China called themselves communists, not me.
The kind of communism you apparently have "more than a cursory knowledge of" is indeed a wonderful thing, except for the inconvenient fact it has never existed in any nation state ever, and being wrong in its assumptions about human nature, never will exist.
(By the way if you were reading, you may have noticed that I in fact described Chinese Communism today precisely as you did -- and there were precedents going back to Mao's time. The Chinese Army, for example, has always operated factories -- not particularly weapons factories either -- to manufacture and sell goods to raise money to equip the force.)
When real people in real countries with real histories with all best intent set out to establish the image in your mind they have invariably ended up producing souless, harsh, repressive unproductive, anti-democratic, highly stratified, autocratic oligarchies.
Unless you have sizeable/stable examples of these caring classless societies you define as true communist states. (btw, I've been to Belgium. There was much evidence of capitalistic activity, social classes, and nothing resembling anarchy -- and while it is a mixed private/public economy, it is in no way communist in actuality or theory).
You write well. And idealism is the lifeblood of future social progress as the interplay of ideals gets sorted out and re-combinated. However, respectfully, you should get outside of your constructs of abstruse rhetoric occasionally and interact with the actual world more often.
- bigpics January 5, 2009 11:58PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
BL,
The classless society you find in the academic definition of communism shows a naïveté and lack of real experience with Russian and or Chinese Communist. Neither is classless or democratic nor shares the wealth or the ownership of business. Both are ruthless totalitarian states controlling every aspect of human existence for the benefit of a self proclaimed ruling class. Human life is property and human existence is the for the benefit of the state and the "Governing Party".
I have been there, seen the hollow eyes hiding fear of recognition that never return the favor of looking back. I have witnessed the short and long term effects of state sponsored alcoholism perpetrated in the name of taxation and the decaying infrastructure of a century of failed Governance. I have participated in discussions of politics and social development with educators and scientist and observed the pathetic drinking binges that as are part of the social fabric.
Before you pontificate with all the righteousness of an intellectual person please seek direct experience by asking questions and considering the answers rather than responding with elitists pistol lipped rhetoric. Learning is a journey; enjoy the ride you may have something to offer.
- jodantec January 8, 2009 7:18PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I dont recall too many world changing innovations that belgium has created. Well besides the beer. Great beer.
Btw Capitalism doesn't exist either. The closest it came too was mid 19th century US. All that did was cause the industrial revolution and free a few slaves.
The US is and has been a mixed economy.
Dont knock something (Laissez-fair capitalism) until you try it.
- Veniversum February 9, 2009 4:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
"under these systems(collectivism and socialism, and most likely Communism) people are considered incredibly valuable and deserving of the basic necessities of life."
Really?
Cuba is well off.
So are the 500,000 chinese who have never used a toothbrush.
To top it off, The soviet Union was an economic success with everyone owning 2 cars and house with a white picket fence,oh yeah and a microwave as well. Those damn capitalists took it all away.
Proletariats UNITE!
- Veniversum February 9, 2009 4:49PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
6)
Israel turned its "matchbox" sized lands into remarkably fertile and profitable lands. The billions of dollars of aid —$2.1 million a *week* from the U.S. alone in 2007!!—that Palestinians have received, were not used to improve the lot of Palestinians, nor to establish the kind of society that creates wealth. Instead, it was largely funneled to the violent causes of Hamas... yes, much more aid was sent to Israel, but by mis-using their aid, the Palestinians showed that more aid only leads to more violence. I too would reduce their aid. The moral issue is not how much aid the two received, but what they stand for. Israel has no intention of taking over all Muslim lands outside its post WW2 borders (unless it wins them as a result of retaliation against military attacks by their Muslim neighbors).
7)
"Randomly shooting farmers"? Again, that is not the fundamental issue. In any warlike situation such things are perpetrated by either side. What is at stake is the overall intentions of the military, not the acts of the odd few individuals who go beyond the apparent logical bounds of war. Hamas, and Palestinians who support them, routinely engage in random killings... why don't you include that in your calculus? I suggest your postion, in making such a claim, is more anti-Semitic than pro-justice.
8)
My position is against all such 'Hitlerian' views. If Obama decided to eliminate the descendants of slave owners, I would be against that too. The fact is, Muslims' hatred of Jews, and all other kafirs goes much deeper than that. Learn that it is so. However, the fundamental point is that the Qur'an advocates lying to kafir (infidels to Allah), so the arguments they provide, and that you accept, are only presented for the purpose of deceiving you into acceding to their goals. And so you are.
9)
You quoted me: "The Palestinians, historically & by tenets of their primitive religious beliefs, are the initiators of violence in that region. They have no regard for peace, or even life —far more important to them is to see Jews & other kafir ( sensu an ingrate to Allah, an infidel) die".
And responded, sarcastically: "Spread around hate and fear... mmm, tasty. More please!"
What you apparently refuse to observe is that, some 70% of Islamic text advocates the elimination of the tribe of Israel and of the Kafir. S-Betty, you cannot escape this, it just is what _they_ are about.
10)
S-Betty wrote: "Oh. goody. Exactly what I wanted. More incomprehensible fear and hate mongering towards one particular group of people."
Your sarcasm is understood, but that sarcasm simply "blanks-out" all facts that refute your wishful view that the Palestinians hold some moral high ground. They do not. Morally, economically and politically they pursue a backwards and evil goal. You cannot change reality (of Islamic intention) by pretending it does not exist.
****
The fundamental at stake is the intent and game plan of the two sides. The Palestinians (and Muslims in general) are in the wrong, and severly so. Characters like SocialistBetty favor the loser, but in this case they rationalize their view on the altruistic basis that the underdog deserves support. That is just not valid in the present context.
Does anyone have a defense of the Palestinians that runs deeper than those offered by Socialist Betty? To be clear, I am absolutely against both the Israeli and Palestinian use of religio-racist beliefs in their conflict. That said, it remains that the Israelis do not initiate violence against their neighbors, save to eliminate those who initiate force against them. Further, mistakes are mistakes, and are not part of the primary and *proper* goal of having individuals live as peacefully and productively as possible. The Israelis are right, as evidenced by their productivity on a matchbook sized piece of land amongst a football field sized area that still lives as backwards as they did a millenium ago, —were it not for oil money obtained from oil fields discovered and developed by Americans and then 'nationalized' (stolen) by Arabs.
- RnBram January 3, 2009 2:15PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Join Israel
Responding to SocialistBetty,
1)
You are absolutely right about the religio-racism involved in the creation of Israel. However, you are wrong in applying today's Western thinking and values to those of the time of Israel's creation. Most of the World remains religio-racist... After all, wasn't that the only motivation the Palestinians had in creating a military Division to join with Hitler... namely for the purpose of killing Jews.
Collectivism/Socialism sees people as part of a mass in which no particular individual is important except in so far as he works for that mass. The creation of Israel is _just another expression_ of that same thinking. However, in spite of enormous persecution, even from Western countries(!) Jews do not practice genocide or war, except in self-defense. It was, by the logic of the time, a *collective* Justice to the Jews to give them a 'safe-house' in the form of their own nation.
(A religious homeland was chosen, but they would have been better off with a piece of Western lands; Israel should have been a part of West Germany, where they would have found post-war peace. Obviously what I outlined would not result in thousands of years fighting, unless you believe all Jews _should_ be killed off, or become Muslims... which is the ONLY thing the Muslims will settle for. Keep in mind, they want YOU too!
2)
Again you are absolutely right, and wrong too. The Germans and Italians had no right to any land, but what would you do with millions and millions of those two *race* groups, having completely defeated their plan for taking over Europe or more ... perhaps force them to other nations, & leave the lands they had vacant??
3)
It is hard to say where your sarcasm ends, and logic begins. The Israelis may make mistakes, but the mistakes are *not* typical of Israeli policy. In contrast, the terrorist acts and RPG launchings by the Palestinians truly are their policy. Keep in mind that the Palestinians, given the chance to vote, chose the terrorist groups, Hamas, as their leaders. They knew *full well* that the semi-respectable appearing Hamas candidates were directly linked, in intent and name, to Hamas.
4)
You say Israeli is "gracious and beneficial, but only within its own borders". But so it should be. Why does it have any obligation to others, unless it subscribed to Collectivist/Socialist ideals? The fact is that it *does*, mistakenly, subscribe to that false moral system in some degree, because of the ubiquitous false morality of altruism (which is their religious morality, and which also underpins Collectivism). Israel attempts to provide suffering Palestinians, even though the latter voted for Hamas, with all sorts of generous aid. In fact they did so as recently as Jan. 2nd, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAfbLZgnIpI ! How can you ignore Hamas's open statements that it will not rest until Israel is eliminated, and the fact that their 'humanitarian' work is solely to maintain support of Palestinians? I suggest that is dishonest evasion of the former unrelenting principle: they only care about Palestinian lives if it serves as public relations... the deception over which you have fallen.
5)
Again you misinterpret: the Palestinians/Hamas have *no reason* to launch RPGs at random targets, except religio-racism. As for the Gaza crossing, the Israelis open it when Hamas reduces its RPG attacks, and closes it when Hamas increases its RPG attacks. What is the message, that neither you nor Hamas, are reading? As for not even allowing food, see the above link showing huge bags of grains being trucked into unjustly named Palestinian 'territory'.
Cont'd...
- RnBram January 3, 2009 2:13PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
The order by which my comments are produced seems to depend on the way in which the administration of this site evaluates them. My comments are not always in the order presented.
- RnBram January 3, 2009 2:49PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Why is it that Israel is always the poor, innocent vistim? Through the ages this has been portrayed. I am sorry but Israel currently runs the U.S. and only whe our government grows some big ones and tells Israel to SIT DOWN and SHUT UP and LISTEN , might there be peace.
- denise0513 January 8, 2009 3:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Muslim schools, including those in Palestine, teach religious bigotry, misleading historical background, and inculcate the belief that killing the kafir for Allah is a holy achievement, especially if the student dies in the attempt ...hardly a cultural leaning towards peace!
How can you oppose me on the 'Does Islam promote violence' thread and mouth these sentiments here? Have you NO intellectual integrity?
Do you believe ANYTHING you say, or do you just like to be inflammatory?
- AlibiFarmer January 5, 2009 11:52AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
Some. Some of them do.
How interesting that you've brought your same illogical and hideously Hitler-like tendencies to advocate the destruction and annihilation of an entire religion into this thread from the "Does Islam Promote Violence" thread.
So let me just say something here that I hope your intellectual integrity can handle - although I doubt it since there is no honour nor integrity in this kind of thinking.
!) There is no logic in making miserable, sweeping generalizations about an entire religion (Islam) or race (Arab). It is exactly what Hitler did against the Jewish "nation" (another fallacy, much like the exist existence of the Aryan nation). Nor is there intellectual integrity.
2) What you do when you say things like "you should put your thoughts in better order if you wish to be taken seriously. If it is affecting your ability to hold a job or interact with others, you should get professional help.", or "How can you oppose me on the 'Does Islam promote violence' thread and mouth these sentiments here? Have you NO intellectual integrity? Do you believe ANYTHING you say, or do you just like to be inflammatory?" is called "ad hominem". You attempt to discredit what I am saying (which is that you're making sweeping generalizations and you are FAULTY for doing so) by attacking my character.
That's not exactly having intellectual integrity.
3) You use only facts that support your argument and ignore evidence that does not. Just like in this discussion, the fact that Israel sealed off the Gaza strip is ignored. To acknowledge that such an act was wrong would be acknowledge that Israel is capable of actions which deserve a response. This does not mean that rocket fire is the correct response. However, it means that the rocket fire was not done out of spite. That two wrongs do not make a right is not what you, nor anyone else should take away from this, though. One wrong action does not justify another. You and RnB (for short and because it's cool) appear to be of the belief that if you happen to just not like the one side of the conflict (Palestine/Arab/Muslim), then your side (Israel/Jewish) can do no wrong.
4) You say that most Muslims may be peaceful. BUT. But for the ones that aren't. Some followers of Islam are violent, therefore Islam causes violence.. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc.
5) You accuse your opponent of doing the very thing that you are doing when you say things like "Do you believe ANYTHING you say, or do you like to be inflammatory?" You brought another discussion into this one and accuse Me of being inflammatory. Hmm..
I have nothing left to say to you. Again, there is no point. There is no reasoning against an unreasonable dislike - I won't go so far as to say hatred (at least not on your part). Israel could line up children against a wall and shoot them and you would find a way to justify the action as long as they were Muslim children.
I'm done. So repond how you want to... I won't waste a single sentence more on you because you have nothing that is worth even reading. The only value your posts, and RnB's posts serve is to illuminate just how deep rooted the very real bias against Arabs and Islam really is.
- SocialistBetty January 6, 2009 1:01AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
http://www.opposingviews.com/comments/are-you-at-all-interested-in-the-thread-of-this-disccusion
I think it will clear you have been caught out being hypocritical. And now you are gathering your shredded dignity and pretending you have made some point.
I invited you to order your thoughts earlier because it avoids this type of embarrassment. All the dust you throw in the air is amusing - though difficult to read coherently - but meaningless. You use a number of rhetorical devices to try and confuse the issues. For example, I have never opined on the Gaza crisis here - so anything you have imputed to me must be your own fantasy. You lump me in with some one I have never met or responded to. You put up straw men just so you have something to knock down.
You go to the trouble of using Latin, but I am less pretentious and prefer English. I also prefer the statistical version, correlation is not causation. But then I never said it was. Rather, I cited numerous examples of where Islamic, faith-based organizations promote and actively engage in violence, terrorism, and murder that they justify as Islamic. You admitted as much when spoke of schools earlier.
Against what is admitted to be the promotion of violence by many Muslims, where are the examples of Islam promoting peace? It cannot be that some Muslims lead peaceful lives - many people of different or no faith do as much. If Islam doesn't promote violence in the aggregate, there must be offsets to the clear examples of where it does.
I find very few. Every day chronicles Taliban or Sunni/Shiaa violence where Muslims threaten and kill other Muslims. Examples of Muslim violence against other societies have certainly been far too often and too costly in property and lives to ignore. Where are the counter-examples? Where is the ongoing effort from either to top or the bottom to cast out offenders, promote tolerance, and reduce violence? Muslims cannot muster one tenth the numbers who protested a few cartoons to lower its own destructive impulses.
BTW, I never mentioned Arabs specifically either. That is another of your rhetorical fantasies. To the contrary, I have been careful to include Iran, Australia, Indonesia, Great Britain, etc in my examples. To bring race into a theological discussion would be to introduce an irrelevancy. That is your forte rather than mine.
My generalization that Islam promotes violence is sweeping. But then the scope of Muslim violence against other Muslims and other societies is world-wide. It is undeniable that it has caused an immense amount of destruction. It is not enough to say that many Muslims are peaceful. Most Christians in the Middle Ages never burned a witch, tormented a Jew, or went on a crusade. But neither did they speak out against those acts, or demand tolerance.
If Muslims wish their faith to be a force for peace rather than violence, that is exactly what they have to do. That is exactly what other faiths and organizations do when presented with the same problem.
So take your shreds and walk away. You aren't fooling anyone other than yourself, and perhaps not even that. My recommendation remains: organize your thought, employ reason rather than rhetoric, less emotion and more logic.
- AlibiFarmer January 6, 2009 9:28AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Part I
RnBram hangs his argument on the "morality" of the Palestinians -- cherry picking his way through history or taking isolated "facts" and making "Palestinians" collectively responsible.
"Palestine was a region, like "New England", never a nation. “-- Lovely picture isn't it? Nice clean and orderly New England; yet utterly at odds with the facts. Ages of Ottoman Empire corruption and oppression followed by decades of contradictory semi-fascist British imperialism are hardly the environment for the "wogs" to learn any thing of RnBram's morality. What could the ordinary Palestinian learn, in Arabic, of the true nature of Hitler’s policies, when much of it was unrevealed until WWII had ended?
See Part II
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 3:08PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
I chose New England because it was a region, not because it was picturesque, and you know it. I could have picked "the Sahel" or "the American Heartland" or "the Amazon" all of which are regions not Nations. Unless you are extraordinarily stupid, I am sure you understood that, so your rebuttal is simply dishonest!
You are right about the Ottoman Empire, I just did not get into it, having said quite enough to make the point.
British Colonialism was a massive improvement over the Ottoman Empire... it is wrong to apply values you understand today to a time when few understood them. As nations like Britain grew to embrace those values, most Palestinians did not... many of those who did moved out, even moving into Israel.
What did they know of Hitler's policies...Hitler saw them as allies & went to them!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sk3fKY9PhY
The Palestinian Mufti’s Panzer division was composed of Muslims from around the World. Palestinian leaders now follow his example.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 8:35AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
I don't think I'm "extraordinarily stupid", since you specifically said it was "like" New England, but, with an untenable position such as yours, I certainly understand your desperation to turn this into a demeaning exchange of insults. Would you knock me to the ground so we can see eye to eye, RnBram?
You say, "British Colonialism was a massive improvement over the Ottoman Empire." Waterboarding is a massive improvement over throwing "gooks" out of helicopters.
You say, "it is wrong to apply values you understand today to a time when few understood them." Precisely! Why do you keep doing it? By the same token, it is wrong to apply values you understand in your cultural context, to another cultural context with great obstacles to understanding them. The British had centuries of gradually converging philosophical development, under a governing system of comparatively complete continuity. The Middle East, lies right on the faultline between numerous different religions and civilizations, not to mention global reach subjugation as begun by the "enlightened" British. It is completely hypocritical to pretend they've had the same "time" to develop, when any intellectual development gets splintered by the next invasion.
So you'll excuse me RnBram, but you are the one wrongly applying the yardstick.
"Hitler saw them as allies & went to them!" Sure, just as he went to many other victims of colonization, and to Kennedy and Lindburgh and so many others. Some were lured (the Irish!), others weren't. But with your collectivist logic, because some Palestinians went, all are guilty.
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 12:24PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
"like" was perfectly accurate. You have brough
If you knew more, you would not accuse me of misapplying today's values to circumstances 63 years ago and before. All of my comments are within their respective contexts, all of them. It is your lack of context that renders you unable to properly evaluate the viciousness of your position... and your position is virulently vicious with respect to Israel.
They, in the Middle East, had their chance to become civilized a thousand plus years before the British (who were more of a stabilizing and civilized force than the previous Ottoman Empire, as I have already mentioned) ...shortly after the decline of the Hellenist Greeks.
Indeed, Arabs are fond of claiming their civility and intellectual advances of some *two millennia ago*, but they dropped it all for Islam. That is what religious belief does to reason. I suppose they can thank Mohammad as much as or more than any other Arab for their backward slide, and complete failure to recover. That failure is the real reason why the Middle East is the 'fault-line' to which you refer.
Unable to to be civilized with each other, they could never form a coherent nation of any size (in a time when size and military strength was everything) except through temporarily powerful sheiks. Because they dropped true civilization for dictatorial religious caliphates, the things you use defend them have kept them culturally and socially primitive, overall, ever since.
So you see, they DID have the opportunity, and thousands of years of time to do what the British did in only a few hundred years. Even in the last two hundred years, the Arab World could have seen the progress made as a result of the Western Enlightenment, but instead they chose to ignore it and still do. They even send their children to the West so the children can use western technology against westerners... talk about biting the hand that feeds them. There are no automobile plants, no medical research establishments, no agricultural development projects, no modern corporations, except those paid for by oil. Compare that with the Israeli efforts in the same region in which you claim Arabs cannot develop because they are in a faultline of conflict. It does not wash KP.
BTW, do you really believe the British were not invaded numerous times by all sorts of past nations, kings and barbarians. Your knowledge of history is severely lacking, even "relatively speaking". There were periods where Britons were almost completely replaced by invaders!
You misrepresent my argument about guilty Palestinians, by ignoring the statements I made qualifying it. Come on. That alone is ridiculous of you, but is nothing as compared to the fact that your every important argument simply does not stand, not one. The main body of Muslims (and Palestinians, in this narrower discussion) are at war with the rest of the world. They have been so since Mohammed. That is the mentality they are acting on today, the mentality of a warrior crusader from one thousand five hundred years ago, period.
There is such a vast body of evidence that directly contradicts your viewpoint, that I suspect there is an underlying issue in your psycho-epistemology that causes you to continue fighting 'intellectually' for so pointless and worthless a cause. Why not advocate that Hamas stop launching rockets at the Israelis and start directing international funding they receive towards agriculture and business development. As the 13 year old boy here points out, that's all they have to do. They could live at least as well as Italians, or Greeks, or Chinese do in Toronto. They could still be Palestinians. Why should they have a homeland, except for essential racio-relgious bigotry. But then that is the real bottom line, which I vehemently reject. It is why you and I may never agree, until you can shake that primitive fundamental. Every man is an individual, he is not a Palestinian or a Jew or a German except in the superficial trappings of skin culture, of cultural experience and birthing ground.
You are Canadian, here in Canada the same racial notions (barely hidden beneath a claim of language differences) inflame enough Quebecois that they believe they deserve different treatment from other Canadians *because* they are French. It is precisely that nonsense that Jefferson's Declaration of Individual Rights sought to eliminate. The World has had 200+ years to see the value of that document, and even most Americans no longer understand its full implications and implementation.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 1:58PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Part II (cont'd from part I)
"... the chief Mufti readily assembled an entire Division (!) of volunteer Palestinians"
From what Zionist tract did you cherry pick that one RnBram? One has only to go to Wikipedia to see your deliberate revisionism. "As in most of the Arab world, there was no unanimity amongst the Palestinian Arabs as to their position regarding the combatants in World War II. Palestinians, by this point, were tired of outside forces controlling their destiny. Most preferred to be neutral in what they perceived as 'other people's conflict'. However, most youth signed up for the British army, primarily because Britain was the 'mother country', but a few saw an Axis victory as the likely outcome and a way of securing Palestine back from the Zionists and the British. "
Also, "About 6,000 Palestinian Arabs and 26,000 Palestinian Jews joined the British forces."
See Part III
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 3:11PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
I do not trust Wikipedia, but I do trust the photos and information provided in the link I provided to your above comment. Note that Palestinian Jews are Jews!!! I'd bet that few of the Palestinian Arabs returned to Palestine after the war, and I would bet that those few do not support Hamas. I do, gladly, admit that I erred (having recalled the composition only from memory) in saying the Mufti's Panzer Division was composed of volunteer "Palestinians" — it was of "Muslims", However, as I said above, that changes nothing I said about the situation today, Palestinians, and most Muslims in the Mid-East, are indoctrinated, by men following in that Mufti's footsteps, with the standard Qu'ranic view that Jews and other kafir should convert or be killed.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 8:42AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Part V (cont'd from part IV)
RnBram says, "Any Palestinian living in Israel has a better chance of prospering peacefully, by his own productive effort, than does any Palestinian under the dictatorship mentality of Hamas and, previously, Arafat."
Peaceful prosperity, as well as a pacific morality, derives in large part from land tenure. This is obviously impossible for people forcibly displaced from their own lands and driven into in refugee camps.
RnBram's argument is sickeningly disingenuous.
See Part VI
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 3:12PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
The 'refugee' Palestinians cannot get their own land by virtue of the 'government' of the Palestinians, under Arafat and now the leaders of Hamas. In fact these men are widely known, among those who pay attention to where funding goes, to be *using* the refugees as a PR claim to gain International support. If the Palestinian leaders had ANY interest in improving the lot of Palestinians they would be working towards land tenure on the land they have, rather than inciting violence and lobbing RPGs randomly among Israeli civilians **even as they claim the Israelis should be talking peace**! Do you get that?? The Muslims in general want their target victims to talk peace, but they have no intention of achieving peace until Israel is wiped out, as they plainly repeat. This sentiment is not limited to a few Muslim factions, it is ubiquitous to the Muslim Ummah (community) including the greater portion of Palestinians... see here: http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD212108
- RnBram January 5, 2009 8:52AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Part IV (cont'd from part III)
RnBram says, "-- the lands given to the Israelis were the so-called 'spoils of war'" and then, "The Palestinians, historically & by tenets of their primitive religious beliefs, are the initiators of violence in that region."
Wikipedia say, "Despite the pressure of world opinion, in particular the repeated requests of US President Harry S. Truman and the recommendations of the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry that 100,000 Jews be immediately granted entry to Palestine, the British maintained the ban on immigration. The Jewish underground forces then united and carried out several terrorist attacks and bombings against the British. In 1946, the Irgun blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the headquarters of the British administration, killing 92 people."
See Part V
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 3:12PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
The 'several' bombings could be counted on one's fingers and in EVERY case they phoned the very buildings to be bombed and told everyone to get out immediately. No British lives were taken. Their intent was not exactly 'terrorism', but a desperate effort to get the British to allow further immigration. That entire context is RADICALLY different from what the Muslims are doing.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 8:55AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Part VI (cont'd from part V)
RnBram says, "… some 70% of Islamic text advocates the elimination of the tribe of Israel and of the Kafir."
I say, "Prove it"!
RnBram’s other “arguments” are more of the same subjectively chosen pseudo-facts and not worth anyone's time.
As I began -- RnBram hangs his argument on the "morality" of the Palestinians. I have seen more than I can stomach of his morality.
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 3:14PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I could not retrieve the exact quote, so you can argue I have it wrong, but it was not a "subjectively chosen pseudo-fact". The Qu'ran and other Muslim sources repeatedly advocate the elimination of the tribe of Israel and of the kafir (particularly the US and other non-Muslim nations.
Witness (have the intellectual decency to examine these thoroughly or shut up):
=> http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR01102
=> http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR01303
(note this is before the War on Terror began, and after the World Trade Center destruction).
=> http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR01002 (they are disgusting)
=> http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR2003
(Palestinian Authority fakes a reduction in incitements to violence against Israel)
=> "Infidel" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali
There are many more, at that one source! How much information do you need to see reason, or is your refusal to see reason the real problem here?
- RnBram January 5, 2009 9:19AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Shall I pull out quote after quote of American baptist preachers using the bible to show that God made blacks black as a penitence and thus enslaving them is justified? Those preachers roots were not in a cultural cauldron like the Middle East, but in the "enlightened" British tradition. Their psychopathology is the same but infinitely less justifiable, since directed at wholly defenseless people who had never done them any harm.
Muslim countries have, on average, had scarcely a century to come out from under the boot of overt imperialism and are still under the boot of "polite" imperialism as manifest by the mercantilism of resource extraction corporations backed by US diplomatic, military and intelligence forces.
Some portion of Islamic clergy have been radicalized to extremist interpretations. Others haven't. If the radical ranks are increasing, one has only to look at:
- US financing the Taliban to power, then attacking Afghanistan to get them out of power.
- US financing the Shah of Iran to power, then financing Saddam Hussein to power to attack Iran, when the Shah falls out of power.
- US attacking Iraq to get Hussein out of power.
- US financing Israelis to keep power in Palestine.
- and on and on...
The pattern is consistent, consistently murderous, and its philosophy is Mercantilism.
You scrupulously avoid ANY acknowledgment of those facts, RnBram. Why? Is your refusal to see all the facts the real problem here?
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 12:59PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
There are aspects of each item in your list of US behavior with which I disagree, but they are not fundamentally *causal*. I have explained why more than enough. Mercantilism is not quite the right term & is NOT explanatory, as you suggest.
1 & 2 had a larger purpose than the individual events themselves: the US was coping with actions by other nations. My view is Jeffersonian: the US should eschew foreign "adventures" save to protect its citizens & trade from interference by other nations or pirates. The modern US (which is pretty despicable, but no worse than other nations would be iff they had the same economic power) has gone well beyond that line. World expectation (“Oh, help them”, “now stop them”, “now help here”, etc.) and a US desire to block communism (Taliban to power) took them too far. Generally they sought to support the lesser evil but, like voting for the lesser evil, good is not achieved, only a delay in the collapse to destruction.
Cont’d
- RnBram January 5, 2009 2:53PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Dubya should never have put American feet in Iraq, but he should have utterly destroyed, by aerial attack, everything and anything to do with Hussein's dictatorship. This is because no government that violates the right of its own citizens to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of their own happiness has any right to 'self determination'. It is a moral abomination. If there was an honest belief in WMDs and perhaps in Hussein interfering with the search for bin Laden, then such a bombing IS proper for the US. Nation building, which G.W.Bush initially and rightfully rejected, was about the stupidest thing of anything he did in both terms. That was not Mercantilism either.
Cont'd
- RnBram January 5, 2009 2:58PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Financing the Israelis is the absolutely correct and moral thing to do, IFF it were not with taxpayers money. To do so while also funding UN aid to Palestinians is an absurd contradiction.
I see you still presume the Israelis are the problem. You have a lot of comparative & context-conscious research to do. The Israelis simply are not the warmongers, not the terrorists, not the backwards political & cultural group in this conflict. It is unfathomable that being smart enough to see that Palestinians rejected the losing Nazis solicitations, you can’t see the wealth of incriminating information re. the Muslim world, exonerates the Israelis. Not Then there’s the absurdity of Muslims killing people for a piece of land (Israel) the size of a *matchbox* lying amongst (Muslim) land the size of a football field… see here: http://www.opposingviews.com/comments/cont-d-2 The issue is entirely Arab relgio-racism.
Overall, I see the facts, & carry them more deeply than you realize.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 2:58PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Part III (cont'd from part II)
Wikipedia also says, "Secret World War II documents released by the UK in July, 2001, include documents on an Operation Atlas (See References: KV 2/400–402). A German task force, lead by Kurt Wieland, parachuted into Palestine in September 1944. This was one of the last German efforts in the region to attack the Jewish community in Palestine and undermine British rule by supplying local Arabs with cash, arms and sabotage equipment. The Palestinians would have nothing to do with the Germans and their philosophy, and, thus, the team was captured and picked up shortly after landing."
See Part IV
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 3:56PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
This is a factoid of the kind you accuse me of using. What Palestinians did the German infiltrators land amongst? Notice that the Germans were clearly losing the war by September of 1944. Hitler committed suicide seven months later. What Palestinian, regardless of his hatred for Jews, would take up the German cause at that point in time??? You are grasping at straws, KP!
- RnBram January 5, 2009 9:26AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
You are right. The date of that certainly nullifies its suitability to the point I was making.
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 1:01PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Keep it up and we might get somewhere. My "you bore me" remark _may_ be retractable.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 2:20PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
The only proper strategy for Israel and the U.S. to adopt against any and all terrorism, is three-fold:
1. Intelligence
A thorough covert identification of all suppliers of terrorist military equipment and funding.
2. Military Retaliation
a) When clear information is acquired (actually enough is already clear), a simultaneous destruction of supply lines, economic boycotts of minor players, and complete aerial destruction of all Hamas and Hezbollah (or other) terrorist installations (where-ever they may be), including offices, military buildings or private homes from which terror attacks are planned &/or launched.
b) This should include all government buildings and government military buildings of any nation providing significant support for (Islamic) terrorists, including those who obfuscate intelligence efforts.
c) No Israeli or American soldier should set foot on the soil of these nations!
3. Announcement of Moral and Political Certainty
a) A joint U.S. Israeli statement will be made, to the World, that no government or individuals who initiate violence against other individuals or nations have any moral or political legitimacy. That it is the responsibility of legitimate governments to retaliate militarily, fully and effectively, against those who initiate violence against their peaceful citizens.
b) Therefore, all further terrorist acts will be immediately met with the same retaliatory treatment, as named above, unless the terrorists' host nation acts immediately to capture, try and imprison (or put to death) the terrorists responsible.
c) The statement must make it clear that ongoing covert terrorism is a primitive cowardly approach that violates the Individual Right of the victims to Life, Liberty, Property and the Pursuit of Happiness, and will no longer be tolerated in a modern World. Any nation that fails to act accordingly will not be invaded, but its military and government establishments will be destroyed without warning and without international 'consultation'.
d) The blood of any and all innocent civilians harmed in such actions will be on the hands of the terrorists who initiated the violence, and on the hands of those governments that fail to act against the terrorists.
Anyone who thinks the issue is "more complex", or that the above is too "simplistic" need to reconsider not only their premises but also the destructive effects their confusions bring upon innocent human lives.
- RnBram January 1, 2009 9:43AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Join Israel
I am of the opinion that B. Obama will be not much different from the Bush administration when it comes to Middle East (especially Israeli-Palestinian) affairs. Remember how fast Obama issued condemnation of the attacks in India a month or so ago when a few places in a city were attacked. While now that the entire population of over 1.5 million in Gaza is being systematically killed and injured by the ongoing Israeli military attacks, Mr. Obama conveniently remains silent and issues an inexcusable statement that there is only one president at a time. Because, he dares not challenge the LOBBY. The Israeli LOBBY and especially AIPAC is so strong in this country that no elected official will dare taking a step that is not in sync with the LOBBY's expectations and agenda in the Middle East. The Western world and US adm. don't really care an iota about the poor and helpless Palestinians and they will spin the events in any way they can in order to justify the genocide currently taking place in Gaza.
- irani January 4, 2009 12:06PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
Here is a piece of reality.
Four quotations from a New York Times article on the IDF invasion of Gaza (read it yourself at http://www.denverpost.com/extras/ci_11340515 ):
1) “Israel said Tuesday it was considering a 48-hour cease-fire that would require Hamas to stop its rocket fire. … Israel seeking at least a pause so that humanitarian relief could be delivered [to Palestinian civilians].”
=> What, the evil Israelis are offering aid to Palestinian civilians in Gaza. "INconCEIVable" (from "The Princess Bride")
2) “…Hamas violated the previous agreement by firing rockets into Israel.”
=>That’s an understatement, since Hamas militants have been firing numerous rockets daily, for months. Observe who violated their own agreement with Israel for a cease fire: Hamas. They are murderous liars. That is, they live by the Qu’ran’s oft repeated calls to kill infidels and moral injunction that lying is wrong —unless it is to infidels (n.b. that means YOU, dear reader, unless you are Muslim.)
3) "It would be easier to dry the sea of Gaza than to defeat the resistance and uproot Hamas, which is in every house of Gaza," said the statement from the military wing of Hamas. … The statement added that if there were a ground invasion, "the children of Gaza will be collecting the body parts of your soldiers and the ruins of tanks."
=>You say it is Israel that is the aggressor, hardly! Hamas has nothing to offer the world but hatred and violence. Note that *according to Hamas* “every house of Gaza” harbors Hamas militants. Is that an invitation to have every house in Gaza leveled, or what?? They may as well announce, “We have no interest in whether we, or our women and children (aka ‘civilians’) live, so long as Jews die.” Other Muslim leaders have been quite explicit in ridiculing Westerners because they want to live, whereas Muslims are more than willing to die, for Allah.
4) “13-year-old… Yousef, took an unusual stand for someone in Gaza. "I blame Hamas. It doesn't want to recognize Israel. If they did so, there could be peace," he said. "Egypt made a peace treaty with Israel, and nothing is happening to them."
=> Here is a 13 year old boy, telling the World that Emporer Hamas has no clothes.
This kid clearly ‘gets it’, but apparently much of the ethically challenged, civilized world is having trouble grasping the blindingly obvious. Will Kenny Pittman or Socialist Betty and their like, listen to him or are they also too ethically challenged?
As for me, I concur with the following statement:
“We recognize that those who attack Israel are not seeking to establish an even freer nation: they are seeking to wipe out the only outpost of freedom in the Middle East. We support Israel not for its failings but for its virtues, and we understand that those who threaten Israel's freedom also threaten America's. If they succeed in destroying Israel, they will turn their full attention to the United States.”
See the 4th paragraph at
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_america_at_war_israeli_arab_conflict
- RnBram January 5, 2009 12:12PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Join Israel
It's no surprise a 13 yr old would have no knowledge of the historical and current reality -- a racist state financed by a mercantilist state to keep a dispossessed people dispossessed.
"It doesn't want to recognize Israel. If they did so, there could be peace,"
Israel doesn't want to return the property stolen from the Palestinian Muslims. If they did so, there could be peace. The cost of doing so would be tiny portion of Israel's spending on armaments.
You claim without proof that Palestinian leadership deliberately keeps the camps in abjection in order to keep their power. The simple fact is Israel's funding from the US is directly proportional to its danger level -- hardly an situation conducive to Israeli leaders seeking peaceful settlement, is it?
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 2:10PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
I am not your teacher and you bore me, go learn for yourself, it is the first Google search I tried. Imagine that, research at your finger tips!
http://tinyurl.com/7vv4x7
- RnBram January 5, 2009 2:18PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
There is no way to get to a peaceful resolution because nobody wants one. Not the US not Israel and not Palestine. When you look at your advisory as sub human (as these two groups defiantly do) how can you come to a peaceful agreement. There is no human compassion no rational thought process only destruction.
The history lesson is great but that’s not going to solve the problem. These people hate each other the governments (on both sides) love it and need it to flourish. Stop the propaganda machine both sides are wrong. Archaic arguments are not going to resolve anything all that is being accomplished here is to widen the divide.
- Independent D January 5, 2009 4:47PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The Israelis are not killing teenagers dancing in night clubs, launching rockets at private homes during ceasefires, and are not blowing up AUSTRALIAN TOURISTS in nightclubs. Americans and Israelis have been appeasing the Muslim Jihadists for decades, when they should have quashed that jihad in its modern infancy.
Independent D, the Muslim apologizers have no excuse, as citizens in a society that serious Muslims want destroyed rather than to benefit from. Muslims are even immigrating into such societies, at the encouragement of their clerics, for the express purpose of destroying them. They are not seeking KP’s “revenge”, they want to destroy the best qualities of The West.
The apologizers side with seething murderers, rationalizing every killing as the fault of the victim. Blaming the victim is the oldest trick in the book of evil. It’s how sick minds justify personal resentments against the BEST qualities of the victim. Qualities they will not name, b/c in doing they reveal their hatred of The Good for being good! They emphasize trivial details, while ignoring fundamental and obvious evidence of their own folly.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 9:58PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Join Israel
These people have been fighting for thousands of years. It will never end. Having pity on Hamas, Hesbollah and Org like these is crazy. These people have crossed the line of Sanity and are Loons. You can not deal with insanity. They will not stop unless they are dead. They certainly won't talk to anyone who disagrees with their Idology.
- feeper January 5, 2009 6:48PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Just seeing the death tolls, Israel's actions are despicable. If you know your history, the "nation" of Israel came into being from anti-semitic nazi-sympathizers whose entire mission was to create unrest in the middle east. Don't believe me? They said it themselves, do your research.
The fact that so many people buy into Israel's propaganda is depressing. When their ambassador to the UN is hiding a smirk while saying they care about the Palestinian people, and are not targeting innocent civilians, you know that she is lying. Hundreds of women and children killed, for what? So Israel can continue to oppress a people who cannot defend themselves? Shame on anyone who supports Israel.
The US should place an embargo on Israel, no trade, no more illegal arms dealing, no more economic handouts to these terrorists. I have nothing against Jewish people by the way, however many have been brainwashed to believe that they are superior to others and "deserve" a piece of land, and that it is okay to kill for it. Think for yourself.
- sonofwill January 7, 2009 12:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Americans have no idea how skewed and limited our view of the world is. We buy the party line about Israel being holy and above reproach without questioning whether they still deserve such special status. They do not. Any other country committing the same atrocities toward an entire people would be rightly called racist if not downright genocidal. Israel doesn't want peace, they just want all the Palestinians gone. Move 'em, kill 'em...just be gone. And our tax dollars keep this tragedy rolling on and on.
- JAT January 8, 2009 3:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
We, some people here in Israel, see the world news presenting the war in Gaza.
We feel that we have to share a few important facts with the world around us.
To us it seems obvious, but apparently the world news does not show it and so the world doesn’t know our side of the story:
The world doesn’t know about Hamas people running around in Gaza while grabbing 10-year-old kid from his mom to protect themselves from gunshots
The world doesn’t know about hundreds of trucks loaded with food, medicine, and aid that the Israeli army provides to help the Palestinian people
The world doesn’t know about the phone calls that the Israeli army is making to the people of Gaza warning them before striking to minimize civilian casualties even if it means losing the element of surprise and letting terrorists escape with the civilians.
The world doesn’t know that Hamas have been firing rockets on the civilian population in the South of Israel for the last 8 years….!!!
And the Israeli population is leaving under constant threat for 8 years, running to shelters with each bomb, can't send kids to school or go to work safely every single day.
The world doesn’t know that by the time Hamas leaders hide in underground bunkers and tunnels, they leave the Gaza population above ground unprotected (the same population that elected Hamas in democratic ways)
The world doesn’t know that the Hamas terrorists use civilian facilities like schools, kindergartens, and mosques to launch their rockets towards Israel, and then, after Israel strikes these weapons stores, they show pictures of these bombed civilian facilities to the world.
The world doesn’t k now that the checkpoints that Israel keeps in the west bank are to prevent suicide terrorists from terrorizing civilians in Israel’s main cities
The world doesn’t know that Hamas are using ambulances to move terrorists from the west bank in to Israel, and to smuggle bomb vests under stretchers with old people lying on it.
The world doesn't know- we’re facing a terrorist organization here, that's whom we deal with and that's what we’ve experienced for the last 8 years-
And we waited so long without saying a thing, (no country in the world would have waited that long) but now time has come to protect ourselves from terror, for good!
Please let everyone know about our side of the story, even if we fail to say it out loud on the media- we the people want the world to know and be aware!
- nir1029 January 9, 2009 10:17AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Didn't Hillary give Hamas 800 million to buy rockets, that should be enought help.
- bcooper May 20, 2009 2:09PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Prior to Israel breaking the truce on Nov. 4 by killing 6 Palestinians, Palestinian rockets had killed 17 Israelis in the last 7 years. Israel has killed hundreds of Palestinians during that time. Besides, this whole thing is not about self defense. Israel began planning this invasion in June. The goal is to make life so unbearable in Gaza that all Palestinians will either flee or be killed. Then Israel can claim the gas off the coast of Gaza for itself.
- Roger47 January 9, 2009 12:04AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Here's the thing... Hamas nor Palestinians should respond with violence.
Revolutions have and can occur without violence. Israel is not in the right. There should be no wall... there should be no reason for Hamas to fire rockets... However, a better approach would be to put down the guns, and simply march. Peacefully... en mass... to Israel. Carry signs, carry children, carry anything but weapons. Not a gun. Not a brick. Nothing. And simply sit. Women, children, men... and sing for justice and for an end to this. It sounds almost silly, but guns and violence - as it has been proven - only lead to what? More bombs, more guns, and more violence.
If this were to happen, do you think the world would turn a blind eye to Israel gunning down people who have nothing in their hands but bread and babies? Even this country could not justify it. To simply keep walking into Israel to the capital, carrying the dead, is a response that no one could ignore.
Palestine is not entirely innocent. At SOME point, someone has to take a stand. A simple stand. If one person simply stands, and is joined by others simply standing for peace... that is how change will occur.
Marin Luther King has a holiday named after him. because he took exactly this approach. Ghandi is one of my heroes because he took exactly this approach.
It works. All Palestinians have to do is join themselves together and - no matter what happens.. if bodies fall, pick them up and keep going - keep their peace and know that the world will not let Israel get away with absolute murder. Even if it has before.
The only way to end violence is for many people to respond with the absolute conviction that non-violent means of attaining justice (and in some ways, retaliation and retribution) will always prevail.
- SocialistBetty January 3, 2009 12:46PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
BlueLinchpin seems quite able to ignore Palestinians’ random murder of Jews. He does this, while pretending that the destruction of Palestinian homes (usually occupied by terrorists) is some kind of evil. To the extent that the Palestinian homes were occupied by those who voted for Hamas, or were leaders of Hamas, such destruction is fully and entirely legitimate. The latter people wish to impose their relgio-racist beliefs on others (the Israelis), or kill those who refuse. Their view is simply not moral, it is an evil and destructive sentiment. The destruction caused by that sentiment is evident all over our World. Israeli attempts to fight back is a self-defense, and the blood that results is on the hands of the Palestinian/Hamas/Hezbollah terrorists
For some reason the character count limit has dropped from 5,000 to 1,000 characters without warning...
cont'd
- RnBram January 3, 2009 7:42PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
"To the extent that the Palestinian homes were occupied by those who voted for Hamas, or were leaders of Hamas, such destruction is fully and entirely legitimate"
So Rachel Corrie's family is justified to seek out the bulldozer driver and destroy his home with his family in side? Why not, RnBram?
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 4:30PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Rachel Corrie stood in the way of a man taking action in defense of his country and family.
If a murderer comes into your home, kills your wife and he or his accomplice is *unmistakably* planning to kill your child, what would you think of a man stepping in and stopping you from fully deterring (even killing) the murderer in self defense? Rachel & her group were that interfering man. They were wrong to be there, and therefore would be wrong to 'retaliate'. See below where you raise the Corrie topic again.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 9:29AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
How is bulldozing a home in a refugee camp defending a country and a family?
It's a hydra-headed monster. To such cruelty, malice and racist hatred, the victims, their family, friends and neighbors are supposed to react -- "Oh, that's fair! They're just defending country and family"? I don't think so. If with each home destroyed you create yet more militancy, what have you gained?
Now, today, for every maimed and broken child in the Gaza Strip, there is a high likelihood of yet another father or brother, insane with rage, to be driven into the folds of the extremists. You support that RnBram, don't you?
If a murderer bulldozes his way into homes all around your neighborhood, kills wives and children and is *unmistakably* planning to continue killing, what would you think of a woman stepping in, without violence and at huge personal risk to herself trying to stop him?
Do you claim, "She was wrong to be there!" I don't think so.
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 11:52AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
She was very wrong to be there. See my comment here (I figured linking to specific comments):
http://www.opposingviews.com/comments/hamas-could-care-less-for-its-own-civilians-as-long-as-jews-die
A 13 year old boy who is IN it sees the big picture at a glance... you could too. My "Kool-Aid" comments are not a commission of the Fallacy of ad hominem (look it up), as I was not using the terms to argue against any of your points, I was simply describing the mentality behind them.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 12:59PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
You haven't proved your case at all.
You're views are based on cherry picked "facts", if not blatantly invented ones.
You deliberately ignore the broader geopolitical picture of which Israel and Islam are captive both. You backpedal on your shamefully long list of insults, and claim I started it. (Where? Sheesh.)
Worst of all, the logical conclusion of your position tends toward either rewriting Islamic texts or annihilate all Islam in "self-defense". Or something along those lines. Beat'm into submission? Wall'm off?
How about totally terminating all and any interference in their affairs? That's not even on the radar, is it?
If anyone wants to get an idea (this won't interest you RnBram) of how official policy distorts leader's views of reality, see Robert McNamara in the the movie "The Fog of War". Years after the end of the war, he has the courage to visit the Viet Cong leaders he fought against. He is appalled to learn, for the first time, that the "VC" were never fighting for communism, they were simply trying to get foreign powers (first French, then American) out of their country, and regain self-determination. Communism was merely a mobilizing idea, against the invader's mobilizing idea -- quote Capitalism unquote.
The point? American leaders used "Communism" then, to explain away reaction to their imposed presence. They use "Islamic Terrorism" now, to explain away reaction to their imposed presence. Now as then, it is propaganda, pure and simple.
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 2:44PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
It only states that they are devoted to killing all Jews and pushing Israel into the sea.
- MilitiaJim January 8, 2009 6:32PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Or maybe because they're not Israeli they derserve to be bombed. Children deserve to die because of Hamas. Previous to that, they deserved to have their food supplies cut off. They deserved to have their power cut off. And what did you do? Nothing. Because they're not Jewish, they deserve to have a wall built around them. Wrong for Berlin, but A-Okay for Israel. Where was your outcry against injustice then? Or maybe your morality only switches to the 'On' position when you're toeing party lines.
Do you go to church, Jim? Because I see you're a fan of Rick Warren for the inauguration... How sad that you would advocate the needless deaths of people simply because you're swallowing the lie that Israel is always right. Is that what Jesus would have you believe? Seriously.
You people who think people deserve to have bombs falling on your house when you've done nothing need a swift kick in the balls. Even if they're sitting in the White House's vault.
DO NOT take this to mean that Hamas is deserving of group sainthood... or whatever it is in Muslim practice. Three lefts equal a right, but two wrong do not. Get it straight.
- SocialistBetty January 8, 2009 10:18PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Can you explain to me how a wall built to keep people from fleeing a tyrannous police state and a wall built to keep would be murderers out are the same? I am intensely curious. (Pleez use small wurds, I are dum.)
Children do not DESERVE to die, ever; neither Muslim children, nor Jewish children. But when the neighbors store rockets in the house where the child lives that house becomes a legitimate target. Should the child be hurt in the destruction of those rockets, the culpability, both morally and legally, rests on those who stored the rockets. Hamas is wrong twice: Aiming at civilians and then again when they store rockets in mosques, schools, and houses they are wrong again. There is no legal obligation for the IDF to call a house and tell the people to leave before they bomb it. (Perhaps a small moral case if you have the database that the IDF does, but were that database not available, there would be no moral case for them to hold their hand from damaging those who wish their doom.)
I see plenty of wrongs, but far and away the most numerous and egregious are committed by the Arabs.
The members of Hamas will be burning in Hell for their murderous behavior, both against their own people and against the Jews.
- MilitiaJim January 9, 2009 9:29AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
If you had a child in front of you, and you had to boil that child alive in order to possibly save the lives of 40 other people, you would do it? That's what you're telling us? That an action such as that is justifiable if *IF* it might save 40 others.
You're saying that just because you don't SEE these people dieing that it's okay? Because you don't have to slit their throats yourself, it's acceptable?
You're saying that killing people is justifiable because there Might be terrorists near by?
Bullshit. And quite frankly Jim, before you speak about other people burning in hell you might want to really stop and think about what the fuck you claim to believe in. Or maybe you think that because you "believe", you'll be saved... despite the fact that you violate every principle the man called Jesus preached. Ohhhhh but you're killing anyone... you're just actively advocating for it. Huge difference. I'm sure that'll earn you points.
I don't have to give you reasons for the wall... the UN has done it for me. The World Court has done it for me. In fact, nearly anyone of consequence recognizes this as being a gross violation of international law and human rights. Go look it up your own self instead of using your unreasonable dislike of Arabs as a moral meter as to what's right or not.
- SocialistBetty January 9, 2009 6:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
My self editor must've been sleeping... APOLOGIES FOR THE F-BOMB!
- SocialistBetty January 9, 2009 6:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Would I damn my soul to save forty? Interesting question. It might be justifiable, I would need to know more about those whom I might be saving. Risk my life to save forty lives is an easy question: Of course I would.
Like everyone else, I fail at perfect morality. I know this of myself, and I accept it when people tell me I'm being a jerk or worse. Likewise I try to help people get past their foibles. Some things are just wrong, and deliberately killing children is one of them. How is aiming a rocket at a kindergarden not an evil act?
You're right, YOU don't have to give me reasons, but you could point me to off to who ever it was that explained how the Berlin and Gaza walls are the same. All you have told me is that two groups of questionable moral authority say they are the same. (Though I do wonder why you seem to think I hate Arabs. Most of the Arabs that I've dealt with seemed to be decent. Do you know something about them that I do not?)
[Aside about the Jesus thing, I can't have violated ALL of them, I have taken his words from the book of Luke, Chapter XXII, Verse 36 to heart: He that hath no sword, let him sell his cloak, and buy one. I even updated for the modern age and bought a gun, that I might better protect friends, family, and guests when they are near me.]
- MilitiaJim January 9, 2009 9:17PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
@ Socialist Betty: Response & Retaliation
When attacked, self-defense is considered a pretty legitimate thing to do. See the link in my full comment to BlueLinchpin. Rioting Palestinians swarmed into the new Israel, and within days Israel was attacked from all sides by the “Arab Legion”. Israel has been defending itself from murderous Arabs ever since.
Betty, et al, if you “sit” for peace, the Arabs will ignore you & continue trying to eliminate Israel, and will kill you if you happen to be in the way, however unarmed you may be. Sure, they “shouldn’t” be violent, but that is what they are. Misinterpreting history, misinterpreting their intent, seeking out seemingly benevolent actions by the Arabs of the region, will not change the large body of them who only have Jewish blood on their minds. Martin Luther King was in America, where few whites were on a crusade to kill blacks. Ghandi was opposing factions within his nation (as was King), not numerous other nations intent on genocide! Your proposal IS crazy, and 60 years of Arab hostility to Israel, does not seem enough to you. Muslims are on a serious campaign, a jihad, to spread Islam over the whole World. Israel is a particularly sharp thorn in their side.
The funny thing is, you are so committed to the idea that Jews are the warmongers that you cannot see the facts even as I have listed them quite plainly. That is a pretty severe, though not uncommon, thinking problem.
You said, “At SOME point, someone has to take a stand. A simple stand. If one person simply stands, and is joined by others simply standing for peace... that is how change will occur. “ Reality is that if the Jews had done exactly that, they would have been slaughtered within weeks of the creation of Israel. Yet you believe the very people who want the Jews dead that are the victims. Besides being historically wrong, that view is a complete moral inversion. Those who think that way have a moral obligation to do some critical research.
You suggest the Palestinians (and I add: all Arabs) drop their weapons, and simply be peaceful. Absolutely, I agree, because that would end everything! However, you go on to say they should keep moving. To where? Israel. They have no right to invade Israel… unless they immigrate properly. There are over a billion Muslims. Would you have them ‘peacefully’, and unarmed, walking into America? Would you then allow them to establish, democratically, an Islamic caliphate and imposing Sharia law? That lifelong intent has been drilled into them since they could stand. You would soon find how well you would be treated if you refused to where a burka.
- RnBram January 3, 2009 8:13PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
RnBram says, "Betty, et al, if you “sit” for peace, the Arabs will ignore you & continue trying to eliminate Israel, and will kill you if you happen to be in the way, however unarmed you may be."
Perhaps you should read about Rachel Corrie, RnBram. A college student from Olympia, Wash., who had been trying to stop a bulldozer from tearing down a building in a Rafah refugee camp. She was alone in front of the house trying to get them to stop, She waved for the bulldozer to stop. She fell down and the bulldozer kept going, it completely run over her and then reversed and ran back over her.
RnBram, et al, if you “sit” for peace, the Israelis will ignore you & continue trying to eliminate Palestinians, and will kill you if you happen to be in the way, however unarmed you may be.
Sure, they “shouldn’t” be violent, RnBram, but that is what they are.
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 4:16PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
No one know what actually happened from the driver's perspective. The driver clearly grasped that he had hit her, and it is known that he backed OFF her, not "back over her" as you viciously suggest. It is quite something the gossipy nonsense you Muslim apologizers will accept as gospel!
Bottom Line, the Corrie case is utterly incidental, and very very stupid on her part. You have accused me of collectivizing the Palestinians, yet here you use one instance as some sort of assault on all of the IDF. Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y ?
- RnBram January 5, 2009 9:33AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
RnBram. You, blatantly collectivizing, claim "Arabs" ignore peaceful resistance. I present a case that shows very clearly that the Israeli government is no less capable of ignoring peaceful resistance, but you impune *me* with hypocrisy. Not very convincing.
My 'vicious' suggestion was, in fact, made by a colleague of Rachel, also from Michigan.
You say, "No one know what actually happened from the driver's perspective." Curious no? He's quite evidently guilty of manslaughter, within a refugee camp, yet according to you, there is no available record of the drivers testimony. If there is -- you're lying. If there isn't -- where's the oh so, honest and decent Israeli justice?
You say, "The driver clearly grasped that he had hit her" That's odd, the Jerusalem Post, quoting an Israeli military spokesman, reported that Corrie had not been run over and that the driver had not seen her. I think you pretend to more knowledge than you have, RnBram.
B.t.w, it doesn't surprise me that immediately step into ad hominem attacks as well, "... gossipy nonsense you Muslim apologizers will accept as gospel". Clear proof that you have no leg to stand on and wish to drag me into exchanging insults. I have no need of that; you have no where else to go.
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 11:11AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
it is a trivial point in this discussion. The details are debatable, that's fine.
You brought up the Corrie thing with your views on it, and they are every bit as suspect as you say mine are. Your mentioning "refugee camp" raised an alarm bell with me. What do you think a refugee camp is? This one (Gaza), which I have already discussed in other comments, does not seem to fit with your view. I don't know if it is possible to link to a single comment on this website, but it is not a place where Palestinians need stay if Palestinians took the appropriate measures I outlined.
BTW, you and Betty began the insulting remarks.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 12:47PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Corrie had no business being where she was. It is stupid, stupid, stupid to put yourself between a bulldozer and its intended target. Stupid is and stupid does and it often ends predictably -- as it did in the Corrie case. If good intentions were sufficient to end the ceaseless stupidity of Hamas and the IDF we'd have had the last of these discussions 50 years ago.
The proper response is to provide the IDF and Hamas as many bullets, rockets, mortars, etc. as there are combined Palestinians and Isrealis -- then let them wipe each other out. Enough of their endless bickering.
- JKFriedman January 8, 2009 3:05PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
RnBram, says, "Would you have them ‘peacefully’, and unarmed, walking into America? Would you then allow them to establish, democratically, an Islamic caliphate and imposing Sharia law?"
The West has been storming into their countries, armed to the teeth, with no hint of democratic process, establishing whites only magistratures and military tribunals, to impose pseudo-impartial law.
"That lifelong intent has been drilled into them since they could stand." Who has done the drilling RnBram? Their leaders? Or the West itself?
- Kenny Pitman January 4, 2009 5:11PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
The West was invited into Middle East to open up oil reserves. Once a lot of drilling sites, refinement installations, pipelines, dockyards &tc. were in place, the Arab nations nationalized (read: stole) the lot. The initial set up was by peaceful agreement with the Western Nations involved (mainly the U.S.). Both sides stood to gain. The Arab reneging on their agreements by nationalizing American interests ought to have brought a military response from the the West, not necessarily war but a guarding of the original agreement with clear overwhelming force.
What is this vacuous blather about "democratic process", when you are referring to nations of non-enfranchised populations controlled by sheik princes, Muslim clerics and dictators? Here you are, accusing the West of behaving badly, with no regard for the distinctly worse character of those Mid-East Nations. How inscrutably moronic can you be!? This claim of yours is absolutely "beyond the pale". What mid-east nation was put under martial law by any Western nation since WW2 and before the War on Terror? You have been drinking way too much Canadian Leftist Kool-Aid.
- RnBram January 5, 2009 9:49AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
You cherry pick a time frame that suits your agenda: post-WWII.
My time frame, the only honest one for this kind of problem, refers to several centuries of conquest, colonization and oppression. After hundreds of years of armed assault, Islamic civilization is torn between factions bent on revenge and a far larger group willing to move on. Rebuilding a coherent society that has been deprived of self-determination for centuries, is no easy task.
To watch someone beaten to the ground with cudgels, and then to jeer at their "drunk and disorderly behavior" as they try to get back to their feet, is a pretty fair analogue of your position.
Oh. Yes. "Vacuous blather", "Inscrutably moronic", "drinking Kool-aid". Further proof that you are running with your tail between your legs, RnBram.
- Kenny Pitman January 5, 2009 11:28AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
From its founding in the 6-7th century until the Battle of Vienna in 1683, Islam was expansionary in all directions. While sometimes peacefully, the sword was common. The oft-cited Crusades represent 200 years of a 1,000 year period where Europe briefly pushed back.
During this time, Islam was at war with both 'infidels' and with itself. Muslim empires grew and fell - replaced more often with other Muslim empires than anything else. I fail to see how you could refer to 'several centuries of conquest, colonization and oppression' when the Ottoman Empire, which lasted for over 600 years ruled over most of this area until 1923. Any 'conquest, colonization and oppression' during this time was Muslim on Muslim.
I don't know who you think was beating the Muslims to the ground with cudgels, but it must have been other Muslims! Western influence has overwhelmingly beneficial to the area. We offered democracy, technology, and education. But many reactionary Muslims decry those very things. They want a theocracy, and they don't want women educated.
The West has been responsible for many atrocities and much barbarism. If you were talking about India and Hindus, you would have a far better case. But Muslims should have no heartburn with the West. If they are ignorant and backward, it is not because they have been held back - it is because they have not demanded better of their leaders.
- AlibiFarmer January 8, 2009 3:31PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
How can you talk to someone whose idea of discourse is to send random rockets into your country multiple times per week. Let me see how this works, hmmmm. If Mexico sends Rockets to my country, U.S.A., then we should talk and see if we can get them to stop?! I think not. Stop the bombing, then we'll talk! What a no brainer!
- livelystone January 5, 2009 11:42AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Join Israel
Why would Mexico send rockets into the US in the first place? For the fun of it?
- Blingo88 January 6, 2009 2:14AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
I was speaking hypothetically. But, if you must know I suppose that Mexico could always claim their right to the state of Texas which we took in the American/Mexico war and demand that we give it back. We don’t agree to their demands, then they retaliate with regular rocket bombardments into our boarders. We then warn them to stop, they don't and we respond with enough firepower to silence their attack. Case over. Sound familiar?
- livelystone January 6, 2009 7:55PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Join Israel
Agreed. We're on the same page. No act of agression is without provocation. I am neutral and would like nothing more than to never hear another word about the immaturity in the middle east, nor the inept moronic IQ of US government.
Decades ago we needed a ground army in the middle east and airstrips. Thank you Israel. Our modern weaponry no longer makes us have to pay the price tag for renting Israel to the US military. Israel as a strategic outpost has long outlived its usefullness. And I'm sick of paying high rent for abandoned property.
I hope President Obama (The only president in decades with a 3-digit IQ) will make an intelligent move toward nailing down a permanent cease fire. I avoid the word peace which is not possible for at least a couple of generations, given the US can succeed in electing a string of intelligent presidents that long.
I'd like a news channel that covers the Israeli - Palestinian conflict the way it did Afghanistan, and Iraq (before we started loosing). Day to day reporting on who's f-ing over who. Because I'm getting too old to keep wondering WTF is going on over there, really.
An American Who Thinks We've Got To Be F'ing Kidding
- Blingo88 January 6, 2009 9:20PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
We, some people here in Israel, see the world news presenting the war in Gaza.
We feel that we have to share a few important facts with the world around us.
To us it seems obvious, but apparently the world news does not show it and so the world doesn’t know our side of the story:
The world doesn’t know about Hamas people running around in Gaza while grabbing 10-year-old kid from his mom to protect themselves from gunshots
The world doesn’t know about hundreds of trucks loaded with food, medicine, and aid that the Israeli army provides to help the Palestinian people
The world doesn’t know about the phone calls that the Israeli army is making to the people of Gaza warning them before striking to minimize civilian casualties even if it means losing the element of surprise and letting terrorists escape with the civilians.
The world doesn’t know that Hamas have been firing rockets on the civilian population in the South of Israel for the last 8 years….!!!
And the Israeli population is leaving under constant threat for 8 years, running to shelters with each bomb, can't send kids to school or go to work safely every single day.
The world doesn’t know that by the time Hamas leaders hide in underground bunkers and tunnels, they leave the Gaza population above ground unprotected (the same population that elected Hamas in democratic ways)
The world doesn’t know that the Hamas terrorists use civilian facilities like schools, kindergartens, and mosques to launch their rockets towards Israel, and then, after Israel strikes these weapons stores, they show pictures of these bombed civilian facilities to the world.
The world doesn’t k now that the checkpoints that Israel keeps in the west bank are to prevent suicide terrorists from terrorizing civilians in Israel’s main cities
The world doesn’t know that Hamas are using ambulances to move terrorists from the west bank in to Israel, and to smuggle bomb vests under stretchers with old people lying on it.
The world doesn't know- we’re facing a terrorist organization here, that's whom we deal with and that's what we’ve experienced for the last 8 years-
And we waited so long without saying a thing, (no country in the world would have waited that long) but now time has come to protect ourselves from terror, for good!
Please let everyone know about our side of the story, even if we fail to say it out loud on the media- we the people want the world to know and be aware!
- nir1029 January 9, 2009 10:46AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Apparently, the Ayn Rand Institute doesn't believe in those things and toes the line when it comes to the Pro-Israeli policies that have created the shituation in the first place. Not surprising since very little the Ayn Rand institute has to say follows observation and reason.
- SocialistBetty December 31, 2008 2:39PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(4)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
I agree with SocialistBetty that this position is anything but a reasonable one or one that acknowledges human rights.
Israel and Hamas' GOVERNMENTS are equally responsible for this conflict: not their people. But it is the innocent civilians that are suffering and dying simply because of where they were born. It is insane to suggest that we should 'crush' a nation full of these innocent people.
- Blue Linchpin January 3, 2009 2:00PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The denizens of Gaza should be extremely happy that I wasn't running things in Israel. There have been many calls for a proportional response to the constant rocket launches and provocations by Hamas. I don't believe in proportional responses. I believe in a total annihilating response. If you kill 1 of mine I kill 100 of yours. If you lob 50 rockets at me, I level a city. If 100's of years of warfare have shown anything, it is that proportional responses accomplish nothing. Ask the Japanese about Hiroshima & Nagasaki. That is how you end a conflict.
- tkjunkmail January 5, 2009 11:40AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Join Israel
Wow. Clearly tkjunkmail has no regard for life. Ayn Rand Center and this person are total sociopaths. I wish Opposing views would do a better job of picking 'experts'.
- CBrownColors January 5, 2009 12:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
While I agree with you in while, simply dismissing a person or groups' statements as "sociopathic" is counterproductive. We need to bring opinions like these out in the open where they can be countered and fought against, not brush them off and relegate them to a dark corner where they can continue to do damage.
- Langston Burroughs January 5, 2009 12:48PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The first refuge of the left when bereft of actual intellectual ammunition is to call someone a perjorative name and move on as this has proven their case ipso facto.
I speak as the veteran of decades worth of the discussions with self-anointed enlightened.
- bigpics January 5, 2009 1:46PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
The first refuge of the right when bereft of any reasonable action that might actually force them to behave in accordance to their OWN moral and ethical standards: BOMB and move on as this proves that the Right is correct ipso facto.
I speak as a Veteran.
- SocialistBetty February 27, 2009 2:41AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Another tactic of the left is to answer assertions of fact by dragging in unrelated issues without ever addressing the assertions in question.
Even if your comment is correct (which it is to some extent in some cases), it still doesn't speak one way or the other on the whether mine was.
Which only reinforces my point.
Sincere thanks for your service by the way. I have a Master Sergeant nephew who's done tours in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East. Our vets bleed not left or right blood, rather human blood.
- bigpics February 27, 2009 11:55AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Sorry, that should have read:
"While I agree with you in whole..."
- Langston Burroughs January 5, 2009 1:53PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Want to go out to lunch sometime? I'll pay for it I'm sure we could discuss a lot
- rotcmt October 22, 2009 11:42AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Hamas is a terrorist organization that calls for genocide according to his Islamo-Fascist ideology. (See The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS): http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp ).
The HAMAS is part of the Moslem Brotherhood global Movement which is seeking to rule the world under the Islamic law. Hamas’ aggression toward Israel is merely part of totalitarian Islam’s broader war against the West.
It is not only the willingness to use rockets and grad missiles to target Israeli cities; it is also the indoctrination of children to hate and the glorifying of death of his subjects in order to achieve the regime political goals.
Falling to take a stand for the Human liberty and Individual rights, for life and property as we know it in the west, will only bring the threat of this theocratic Ideology and the missiles and terror that accompanies it closet to our cities and our doors steps…
Anochi
- Boaz
January 5, 2009 3:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(6)
Side: Join Israel
"Failing to take a stand for the Human liberty and individual rights, for life and property as we know it in the west....."
???
Failing to take a stand against *all* injustice is appropriate. One wrong action doesn't justify another.
Where was your voice when Israel started building The Wall? Where is your voice now? Where is your voice to say "Yo, Israel... re-open the borders that you've somehow managed to gain control of, okay? People are hungry and in need of supplies in there."
We (the U.S.) pick and choose what's "right" and what's "wrong".... or rather we pick and choose who. Then we change these definitions based on whether or not the "who" benefits us. Palestine has nothing to offer us, so we ignore what we need to. The fact that life and liberty is at stake here means little, so please leave the illusion of grandeur at home today.
Note: When I say Israel, I refer to the government.
The whole thing is like saying, 'Who is right: Catholics or Protestants?' A bit ridiculous to even take sides. Neither is right, but not breaking up the fight when it gets bloody? Not appropriate.
"Boys are stupid. Throw interstates at them." - Reggie A. Foote
- SocialistBetty January 6, 2009 1:28AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Moral relativism, such as you express, serves only the side of evil.
When the murderous side is bent on your murder, and rejects every peaceful agreement, it is sheer folly to expect them to peacefully lay down their arms, because you have. You will be dead or forced into dhimmitude along with its jizyah. The latter is nothing short of extortion.
More on their insanity:
http://www.opposingviews.com/comments/don-t-investigate-follies-ask-what-they-seek-to-achieve
- RnBram January 6, 2009 5:01PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(5)
Side: Join Israel
Nice link to your own posting. *coughbullshitcough* I like how you call your own link craziness. That was an unintended, but decidedly funny tough.
Individual rights, eh? It's funny you should mention that when you completely ignore the individual rights of Palestinians.
- SocialistBetty January 8, 2009 10:21PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
You agreed with me and didn't even realize you did so. That's how little you comprehend.
- SocialistBetty February 27, 2009 2:42AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
However, I'll bite, for fun. What have I missed. BTW, yes, the link was to my own earlier comment. It describes widely known facts, so why need I repeat them or cite sources. There is no shame in that, so your 'cough' remark is uncalled for. You can so easily grasp the facts just from following the news, let alone the wealth of information on the Internet.
Thus far, I think it demonstrable that you have no facts of reality to contest the fact that the Muslims of the Middle East are the primary aggressors, and have been for much longer than the last 100 yrs. It appears to me, that with no such facts for your case, you attack the speaker (me) and ignore or smear facts that actually challenge your position. Technically, it is a form of ad hominem .
- RnBram February 27, 2009 12:00PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
I entirely agree with this argument. How can Israel reach a peace treaty with Hamas when Hamas is not interested in peace? Hamas is only interested in destroying Israel and, ultimately, Western Civilization. Anyone who supports peace and human rights must support the annihilation of the enemies of peace and human rights -- Hamas. It is morally proper for Israel to use whatever military force it needs to accomplish this goal as quickly and as decicively as possible. Whatever civilian casualties occur can only be blamed on Hamas. They are the ones who initiated this conflict.
- steve1952 January 7, 2009 5:17PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(5)
Side: Join Israel
People who form strong opinions on this thread need to seriously look at the individuals on each side of the conflict.
On the one hand, the Jews have been migrating to Palestine since 1881 in the hopes of finding their own state. But we know that the largest migration of Jews to Palestine occurred during WWII, when Eastern European countries refused to give Jews sanctuary from the Nazis (nice job, Europe). So largely the migration of Jews to Palestine was out of an attempt at survival.
But imagine what it must have felt like being Palestinian in the year 1967 when the Jews finally decided that Palestine would now be known as Israel. It wouldn't be like someone moving into your house and taking everything from you. It would be like someone moving into your house that you inherited from your father, and his father before him, etc, for the last THOUSAND years...and taking everything from you. You try to get it back, but then the big kid on the block (America) goes ahead and hands your enemies nuclear warheads to defend your land from you (great job, America). You can see why the Palestinians would be a bit peeved.
So Hamas isn't exactly a terrorist faction in my mind. We handed Israel nukes, but not the Palestinians and didn't expect asymmetric warfare...why? I'm not saying it's ALL America's fault - Europe certainly had a hand in promising the Palestinians everything and giving them nothing. I do think it's a bit hypocritical for us to point fingers at who's wrong and who's right when we had a hand in the whole mess.
- Livvy March 5, 2009 9:57AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Sorry, but there's never been a tooth fairy, Santa Claus or a place called " palestine ."
- factsfirst April 12, 2009 1:22PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I suppose you would tell me Wyoming did not exist till invaders came, wiped a nation or two, and gave it an "official" name, capitalized with machinery of war ...
- Submariner November 4, 2009 4:04PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Why is "Rescue Palestine" an option? Is the bias on this issue not blatant enough?
If the crusing defense is so useful, I suggest the US crush everyone from the Transals to Morocco, Pakistan, and North Korea. Then everyone is equally an insurgent freedom fighter and only we have the "fighting" back excuse for blowing up children and such.
- Submariner November 4, 2009 3:40PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
All Hamas has to do is stop the rocket attacks and then they can talk. But it seems that they want to die. Look at the books read in the GAZA Strip, what is taught in the schools, who there heroes are. It is a culture of Death. Hamas members need to negotiate or be killed in military action.
Tim
- tlah
January 5, 2009 2:13PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Thank you for pointing out the war crimes Hamas is committing, and outlining Israel's right, and need, to respond.
Here is a study from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Israel Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center that discusses the use of human shields by Hamas. I hope someone here finds it helpful.
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/hamas_e028.htm
- miseleigh January 6, 2009 4:19PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
This video shows that the demonstrators are not just against Israel, they are against Jews.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLlHPPO25nM
So, now the IDF has bombed Hamas rocket launching sites that were schools, in which the launchers hid amongst Palestinian women and students. The deaths of the women and children are on the hands of the Hamas, but the looney Left and Muslim apologizers blame Israel.
This comment is a good observation:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024231.php #c616431
All decent people should stand with Israel.
- RnBram January 6, 2009 4:54PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Israel has cut off water , food and medical supplies for some time now and the U.S. burried their heads in the sand. I think if it had been me, I would go down fighting to protect my children from further abuses.
If you believe this: Under the laws of war, any number of combatants can be killed to prevent the killing of even one innocent civilian.
in defense of Israel, then what about the numerous women and children that the IDF slaughtered recently? Maybe in some minds that is ok. They are innocent people!! Israel needs to BACK OFF!
- denise0513 January 8, 2009 3:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The palestinian people in Gaza elected HAMAS into power. That fact strips away their innocence. The civilians in Gaza have two moral options if they want to live.
1. Overthrow Hamas and establish a government that recognizes Individual rights and the sovereignty of other nations.
2. Leave Gaza by any way or means possible.
When you live in a country that is an aggressor to its neighbor, you are complicit in the act.
whether you are Gaza, Venezuela, Saddams Iraq, the former USSR, etc...
- Veniversum January 19, 2009 12:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
No half solutions or temporary solutions. The Middle East is replete with wars ,police actions,and skirmisheswhich end with stalemate, ceasefires or worse,resulting in another go round in the near future .A permanent solution should be forced which is good for all concerned.
Hand the whole of Gaza to Egypt and seal off the Israeli /Gaza border and shut off all Electricity, food and goods supplies,and all services after a SHORT period of time (?3 months) to allow the Egyptians to take over.IF rockets continue to fly , Then Israel can consider this as an act of war by Egypt.
- Montyr January 15, 2009 3:46PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I'm not sure how anyone could side with Israel in this matter. The death tolls alone, over a year or so, amounted to Israel losing 17 people, while Palestine lost over 3000. Israel has already gone before the UN, and admitted in an international forum that ISRAEL violated the cease-fire, stopping aid trucks from entering an already-besieged Gaza strip, making them desperate. Of course under such conditions you will see unbridled hate for Israel along with more missiles.
But if you fail to see where it comes from, if you fail to see that policies stemming from Israel and the US, particularly through institutions like the Bilderbergs, Trilateral Commission, and Council on Foreign Relations are effectively slaughtering an entire community while manipulating most major media outlets in the US, Britain, and Israel, then you are either naive, uninformed, or simply lying to yourself.
- sonofwill January 8, 2009 5:06PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
It seems that Gaza doesn't care, because the rockets are still coming out of Gaza into Israel.
Since 2001, Palestinians in Gaza have fired over 10,000 rockets and mortars into southern Israel. Now Israel is now exercising its basic right of self defense and has launched a military operation designed to end the rocket fire from Gaza. Israel has pinpointed its attacks on Hamas, a terrorist organization that does not recognize Israel’s right to exist and is backed by Iran. Israel has gone to great lengths to minimize civilian casualties and has many times dodged rocks instead of deploying fire arms and hurting someone for being silly. They put up walls to help prevent people from being hurt on either side such as someone or a vehicle being hit by a rock, or someone being shot for throwing the rock.
Strange as it sounds, Iran wishes to dominate the world of Islam and they aren't even Arabs. They are Persians who are not descendents from Ishmael. I hope that would then not make the Arab lesser.
If Israel and Gaza traded places and Israel was launching 10,000 rockets on on Gaza since 2001, I would expect Gaza to do what Israel is doing. Does not 10,000 rockets constitute war and self defense?
The sickening thing about any war is that the civilians are caught in it all. Gaza brought in Hamas. Hamas is sending rockets to Israel. That constitutes war between Gaza and Israel. When Gaza loves it's families and Children more than they hate Israel, there might be peace.
This one is clear to a child.
What most people don't realize is that the likelihood of a lasting peace is slim, because for Israel to occupy the land and Jerusalem in particular makes for the Quran to be in error.
For Islam to occupy the land and Jerusalem in particular makes for the Torah to be in error. Muslims are more aware of this aspect than are many Israeli's
Here in is the true problem that every one dances around without touching, and pretends that the problem is a bunch of other things....Bottom line...Islam wants Israel out of there at any cost.
I don't have the answer, but I do see the full extent of the dilemma. On both sides, this is not just two religions, but two cultures where in each, faith and state are integrated,with the Mosaic Law of Israel, and the Law of Sharria in Islam with Wahabism as the enforcer. The Bible warns that Jerusalem will become a cup of trembling and a burdensome. stone to the rest of the world.
- Me2 January 8, 2009 8:53PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Do these titles sound familiar.."the U.S. thinks that they are the police of the world."
"The U.S. is the great satin"
Why demand the U.S. to be the police of the world now when they are called down and despised for being usually an involved and helping nation? Does it make sense to call upon the great satin for help?
The U.S. needs to worry about helping itself at home right now to get back in shape to hep anyone someone else. In helping, good friends usually come first.
- Me2 January 8, 2009 8:10PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The people of Gaza need to decide for themselves when their lives have had enough misery and hatred and want to live in peace and have prosperity. They need to express that desire by empowering leaders with one vision instead of the other.
Perhaps I am misinformed, but I doubt it. Israel is neither a puppet of US imperialism nor a wellspring of evil. I believe Israel is a democracy dedicated to providing the best possible quality of life for its citizens. If I had the power to change anything about Israel, it would only be to change it from being a “Jewish State” to a secular one; religion becomes a poison when it is part of government.
If I see an armed soldier that represents something I hate and I decide to express my feelings by throwing a rock at him, how should I expect him to respond? To nurse his wound and reflect upon my anger? To put down his gun and look for a rock to throw back? Or more realistically, that he will shot at me and depending upon his state of mind and the persistence of my behavior only be choosing between “warning,” “wound” or “kill” shot?
The missiles and suicide bombers present the same dilemma, but on a national scale. They are acts of war. The initiators of violence are not victims in my book. There are other methods of conflict resolution that are more effective, but we need to be realistic in our expectations.
To me, the people of Gaza are victims of Hamas. They must find a way to choose wiser or continue to pay the price. The people of the US were similarly victims of Bush, hopefully we have finally chosen wiser and will get better results, but we also need to be realistic in our expectations.
- RichNau January 10, 2009 4:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
It's so easy to blame the other, but what has the Israeli government really done to keep it's end of any of the many bargains? Why is it always the other side who must act first? And who told these Israeli families to build playgrounds and communities on disputed territory?
- mangueken February 27, 2009 1:23PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
The most important thing to consider is that absolute refusal to recognize that Israel is a country at all. None of the Islamic entities in the region (including the Persian entity) want to do that as a part of ANY treaty. Failure to actually state, "We recognize that Israel is a nation" cannot be ignored for a VERY LARGE reason. It is actually the Elephant in the room. Signing a treaty with a someone that you do not recognize as a nation is like not signing a treaty at all. De facto recognition, by making the statement, commits the signatory party to follow the treaty. An absence of such recognition abrogates the commitment according to the cultural and spiritual tenets of Islam, and possibly under International Law. There will NEVER be peace with statements by all parties that recognize the existence of Israel. The presumption, based on pact, is worthless. There must be a statement.
- Rashi18 June 17, 2009 11:43AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
How Should the U.S. Respond to the Gaza Crisis?
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Re Blue Linchpin, the unbroken reply
@BlueLinchpin
(Comments posted to the main article get 5,000 characters, while replies seem to get 1,000 characters, with no indication thereof.)
BL, do you believe people are of little or no value, except when part of a group? If so, please live accordingly, and be sure to send me some money because as a group member I need it, badly. I do not think you _owe_ me it, but by your standards I should receive it. In contrast, I think people have no obligation to relinquish what they have created to those who have created nothing of value for me. Humans can be amazing beings, when they are rational and pursue carefully calculated interests: such as great ideas they would like to see become commonplace in the World of Humanity.
Second, if you were to read more carefully, I absolutely reject religio-racism as the justification for any kind of legislation upon citizens, let alone war against the citizens of another nation. Your comment is an egregious failure to interpret my comments, and projects a sense that if it is Capitalist it must be bad. Perhaps Capitalism is the Good, but you have not yet figured that out.
BlueLinchpin seems quite able to ignore Palestinians’ random murder of Jews. He does this, while pretending that the destruction of Palestinian homes (usually occupied by terrorists) is some kind of evil. To the extent that the Palestinian homes were occupied by those who voted for Hamas, or were leaders of Hamas, such destruction is fully and entirely legitimate. The latter people wish to impose their relgio-racist beliefs on others (the Israelis), or kill those who refuse. Their view is simply not moral, it is an evil and destructive sentiment. The destruction caused by that sentiment is evident all over our World. Israeli attempts to fight back is a self-defense, and the blood that results is on the hands of the Palestinian/Hamas/Hezbollah terrorists
BL wrote:
“Regardless of who the land belonged to historically, at the time it was taken it belonged to innocent people. These people were forced out of their homes for something they had not done. It's no wonder they're so racist against the Israelis.”
I would agree with this, save for the fact that the lands given to the Israelis were the so-called “spoils of war”. That is not an arbitrary decision. Once a victor has total control over land distribution, their decisions are based upon the thinking of the time. With six million Jews having been gassed &/or burned in the Nazi ovens, the Allies chose to give the surviving Jews a piece of land they had acquired from men who contributed to that Jewish genocide, and who no longer had ANY claim to it. In fact, as soon as Israel was created they were invaded by, and then bluntly attacked (see here: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf4.html )
As I said, in an above comment, the Palestinians chose the side of evil. They have no rightful claim on the lands Israel obtained as a result. Furthermore, and again as I said, Palestinians would be better off under the kind of society the Israelis created, than under the kind of society Hamas and Palestinians themselves envision.
- RnBram
January 3, 2009 7:48PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
This is about Isreal wanting the newly found oil reserve on Gaza
It is horrible what Isreal is doing in killing so many Palestians for the Gas Reserve found in 2001. The Reserve is on Parlestian land, but like usual what Isreal wants Isreal(America) gets.
- Tim99
January 8, 2009 9:25PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Tim99 is right
In June when Israel began planning this operation, they began negotiations with British Petroleum for the drilling rights to the gas fields off the coast of Gaza. A couple years ago, the Palestinian authority signed a contract with BP for development of the same gas fields. If Gaza is Palestinian, so is the gas. The only reason for Israel to begin the negotiations is if they knew they would re-take Gaza. That is what we are seeing, and that is why there will be no truce. The Israeli plans call for making conditions in Gaza so harsh that all the Palestinians will flee or die. Israel will then move in and occupy it permanently and claim the natural gas fields off the coast.
During the "truce." Israel kept Gaza blockaded, preventing most imports and all exports, to completely destroy the economy. Then they broke the truce, on Nov. 4, the day of our election. They then tightened the blockade in hopes of provoking a response to use as justification for the operation they had been planning for months. It is ethnic cleansing.
- Roger47
January 8, 2009 11:41PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
We must support Israel
We must support Israel
- billk77
January 5, 2009 11:49AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Join Israel
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
what a misinformed question to ask
The US IS Isreal. They are one and the same.
It's like asking: how should we respond to our own attack? hahaha.
With more firepower? hahaha.
- incognito320
January 5, 2009 12:00PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Blood on Hands
Both Israel and Palestine have blood on their hands, and supporting either side would be morally reprehensible. Israel have systematically weakened Palestinian infrastructure to the point in which a civilized lifestyle in Gaza is just not a realistic option. However, at the same time I do not condone terrorist attacks against Israel.
This war was brought on by religious fundamentalism on both sides, and there really is no viable option for peace short of removal of Israel as a state.
- brochill33
January 5, 2009 1:30PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Buckets of blood, and drops
Hamas rockets killed 17 Israeli citizens in the 7 years before Israel broke the latest truce by crossing the border during the truce and killing 6 Palestinians. During that time Israel has killed hundreds (thousands?) of Palestinians. What Israel is doing now is deliberate, and had been in the planning stages since June. There are billions of dollars worth of natural gas off the coast of Gaza. It is Palestinian gas, and the Palestinian Authority had signed contracts for the development of the fields with BP and other oil companies. In June, when Israel began planning this operation to force all Palestinians to leave Gaza, they also began negotiations with the same oil companies, for the same gas. It is only theirs if they force the Palestinians out. That is why there will be no truce, and why aid workers bringing in food and medicine are being "accidentally" killed. Israel has buckets of blood on its hands, but does not care. Apparently our government does not care either. Let's hope it changes Jan. 20.
- Roger47
January 8, 2009 11:54PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Wouldn't you do the same?
If rockets were coming across the Mexican border into San Diego, and killing civilians, Mexico would cease to exist. The United States would bring the full force of her power to bear and annihilate that country. Same as if Canada started shooting rockets into... Michigan? Slightly off topic, but do they even have urban centers up there? Anyway, rocket attacks from across the border, any border, would not be tolerated by the United States, or any country. Israel has every right to defend itself.
- richardsonkr
January 27, 2009 8:29AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
or....
Israel could annex the Gaza strip and execute anyone who protests?
Not that I support this suggestion or yours. There are way more options than getting rid of Isreal [the creation of which I disagree with anyway].
- userk
April 16, 2009 6:19AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
How should U.S. respond?
Is The U.S. the police of the world or something? There is demand from Gaza for the U.S. to respond, and if they do, they will be condemned and told to mind their own business and stay out of the middle East.
If they don't, they will be condemned as standing by and allowing a holocaust.
What part here are we missing?
Is it so difficult to not launch more rockets into Israel, Who would have likely helped to continue building up the area of Gaza if there had been true peace instead of treachery?
These wild people will never have anything, because the build up then take actions that cause everything to be torn down, over and over again.
Could they be descendents from Ishmael who was foretold would be a wild man and a wild people?
- Me2
January 5, 2009 2:05PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Back History
Anti-Jewish opinions were common in the 1940s with Germany taking it to the extreme.
(My uncle helped liberate Dachau.)
Australia said it didn't have a Jewish problem and didn't want one either.
The worst place to create a Jewish state was on land that had been under Muslim control for 1000 years.
Israel has been behind many technological, medical and other advances on land that they were basically given out of guilt for what happened to them.
Between cutting off areas with walls, settling on lands that have been planned to give a Palestinians a place to call home and controlling everything such as electricity, they have gone from the oppressed to the oppressors.
Of course if one pushes someone into a corner they will find someway to fight back.
Both sides have broken the cease fire.
But with Israeli elections coming up, this seems like a plan to stay in power while a war is on.
They are re-building the Berlin wall in Jerusalem.
Years ago it was stones against guns, now primitive rockets that can't be aimed with any accuracy vs tanks and aircraft.
Sure one has a right to defend themselves but also equivalent force.
This time, the one with the slingshot may also topple the one with far greater might.
- dotkhan
January 5, 2009 2:58PM
Reply to this Recommend
(3)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Back History
This was a freaking desert waste land until the Israeli's returned and made it into a blooming land of fruit and vegetables. They purchased their settlement lands back from the local people, and any addition resulted when the local people turned treacherously against them after the purchase and tried to drive them out or eliminate them. They shared their cities with the local peope, their infra structure, and the electricity that comes from them. Fortunate is a local person... "Palestinian" who live in Israel instead of Gaza.
They provided employment opportunities for all people in the area as well as transit for everyone to get around. They provided fine shops for products to be enjoyed by all as well as hospitals and medical facilities in which all are taken care of. That's how a normal Democracy works.
Walls went up because of rocks and projectiles being thrown like silly teens or children. Barricades went up because of weapons being brought in for assault reasons against Israel. Terrorist suicide people with explosives strapped around them went into transit or populated places to hurt and kill as many as possible. Does this not bring out a military on alert with much surveillance and intervention?... Duu!
Why throw rocks and silly stuff? why not work together to continue making a beautiful place where people have plenty and enriched lives?
There never was a Jewish problem, and Hitler was a mentally maladjusted control maniac who was in cahoots with some of the Middle East leaders as well as the Vatican. He goal was global domination, control, and supremacy of Arian peoples of which I am one.
Hitler fabricated a common enemy to bring the people together, and surprise, it worked best to use the Jew. If global domination had been achieved, non Arian peoples would find themselves in a similar fix to the Jew and no longer needed to be used. Darker skin people would have been lowest on the list for genetic correctness as compared with the master race. You no doubt appreciate the fact that skin color does not make the Arab or the American better or lesser.
Israeli elections aren't the problem, and it surprises me to no end that you see rockets constantly dropping in cities as normal and just everyday inaignifican like putting up with black flies or some minor biting insects. That thinking is just so buzzar.
Land was given for peace, and that was a mistake because it is like giving children candy for misbehaving. It makes them believe now that you get candy by misbehaving....consequently constant rockets on cities with hopes that it will turn out more land traded for peace. That trick is so done with!
Years ago was it guns because of stones or was it stones because of guns. To answer my question, many stones were being dodged and guns weren't deployed with hopes of not hurting someone for just being childish.
There shouldn't be given a reason to defend ones self and no force! There should be agreements and let's start building together and both experience the benefits of what we can get done.
You revealed the real problem, and everyone hides from it and dances around it without touching it.
Bottom Line: ...This is a conflict between Islam and Judaism. Even more serious is the matter that if Israel occupies the land and Jerusalem in particular, this makes Quran incorrect.
If Islam occupies the land and particularly Jerusalem, then the Torah is incorrect. I suspect that more Muslims understand and realize this than do the number of Israeli's
It would help much to bring understanding for all, if these truthful reasons were being presented instead of the pretentiousness that is taking place. It would also make the rest of the world realize the impossible nature of the problem.
I suspect that if the true reason were known, then it would be difficult to sway political opinion of other nations to gain favor for either side?
I am wishing you well just the same because It breaks my heart to see the beautiful Arab women and children as well as the handsome young men being hurt, caused pain or killed.
Me! :- l
- Me2
January 5, 2009 4:52PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Evian Conference
I believe that we basically agree that history should be kept in mind in finding a settlement to what is going on.
Hundreds of years of history is between followers of the Koran and the Bible is ingrained in each group.
Separate areas that each group can control with disputed areas as separate neutral lands may be in order.
The borders drawn up at the end of WWII in the Middle East were not based on the people there or ts history such as Iraq pieced together several warring tribes such as Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds in the same country possible because they were all Arabs.
After all we know how well the people of Ireland got along despite using the same religious book.
At the Evian Conference in 1938, 32 countries would not accept Jewish refugees that were being displaced from Germany.
America only sent a businessman instead of a government representative.
Britain recommended that Palestine not be considered as a place for them to move to because they knew that there would be trouble by putting a Jewish state in the middle east because the Arabs already living there had protested the presence of Jews there in the past.
Evian's failure of don't let "them" move in next to us helped give Hitler an excuse to use as propaganda.
Both Hamas and the Israeli government are hard liners at opposite sides.
Backing those with deeply entranced positions into a corner such as with the Israeli blockage of even humanitarian help and they will tend to lash out.
But pushing the Israeli government results justifying the killing of hundreds of Gaza residents for every Israeli.
Both need to be willing to give up something to get what they want.
Looking the other way helps fuel the view by some that Israel and the United States are the same.
Don't cut off supplies and electricity to countries so they can function or send unguided missiles at each other either.
Make Jerusalem a separate country since it is holy to Jews, Muslims and Christians.
Sort of how Washington D.C. was carved from Maryland and Virginia but although a part of the U.S. does not have representation in the government of the United States.
Jerusalem could run its affairs as a city-state that is not tied to any country controlled by a specific religion.
- dotkhan
January 6, 2009 12:38AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
isreal is ILLEGAL
the notion that isreal is legal in any way except in a world wide post existence reluctance is false. time and time again the UN has tried to undo the activities of isreal only to be vetoed by a sole voice....the U.S. Prior to the reconstitution of isreal those who eventually became it's leaders were listed by every nation as zionist TERRORISTS. they have kept land after an invasion....ILLEGAL everywhere! they have displaced millions.....ILLEGAL everywhere. they do not count the dead accurately of those killed by their occupation.....ILLEGAL! read about the rules of the UN, read about the rules of occupation that the red cross uses to describe war crimes......without the US isreal would fall and the land that has been stolen in this age and in biblical times by jewish force would be returned to those who once lived there. Isreal treats arabs like wards of the state....like we did (do) to native americans. shut their water and power off at will. kill food and medical supply lines at will. they have an army and very accurate weapons so I guess that means when they bomb a Hammas leader and kill 50 civilians that makes it ok compared to whene they are sloppily attacked with whatever the palastinians can muster. we should level the field....whatever weapons we give to isreal we should give to those they suppress, then....maybe only genrerals and hammas leaders will die....since they are essentially the same. at least they were untill isreal started getting special considerations.....maybe for helping in the nasty affairs of the US such as Iran contra where isreal was a willing middle man. My other half is Jewish so don't anyone tell me that I am against jewish people, I simply loathe greedy selfish people of any religion that are willing to destroy to satisfy their less than full spirits.
- taoish
January 6, 2009 12:20AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Israel is not illegal
Just to answer one of your accusations. Jews bought land from the palestinians and the british while it was under the british mandate. If you believe in property rights then you are incorrect.
- Veniversum
January 19, 2009 1:02PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
property rights?
if you believe in propery rights then the british had no right to sell anything. And do you believe that every person who was living in what is now Isreal said "hey! a check! come on kids let us leave our olive groves that we and our parents and grand parents and their parents have tended and move to Norway!"? what about the land seized from other countries? why wasn't the US hopping mad about that when all but Chad was? I do realize that I have an advantage, ableit small one, as one of my closest friends speaks 13 languages and works for the UN as a weapons technology translator. While Isreal is not the most important topic in my life, the press the world gives to the current and past issues of this dot in the middle east is greatly different than is available in the US.
what ever persons best intentions are when they describe support for isreal it saddens me that they do not take their rigour of mind to apply the same rules that they demand of other nations, groups or persons when they evaluate what is tolerable from isreal.
let us all admit there is power coupled by guilt and clearly invisible goals at work in the creation and maintanence of isreal. They were essentially given or took all of the water sources of which they spare no mercy in denying to arabs when it suits them. they are allowed nukes when we are long in the US having declared that we need to end the spread of nukes. isreal is builing a wall that is even by their own admittion not on their land. they shut off power, food and medical suppies and thwart the assistance of emergency assistance as THEY see fit.
I wish their was a simple solution still available that each side could agree on, but that is too late. Many want isreal where it is inorder to satisfy biblical predictions. Those with ambitions of world control in the US want an ally in the mid east to arm. the first of these do not really care about the unrest the creation of isreal was bound to generate and the second of these do not mind at all if the desires of a group of persons of the jewish faith become exactly what they have suffered. the persecuted have become the persecutors.
- taoish
January 20, 2009 10:13AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
In response
Well by your logic, the land that you live on belongs to the native americans because they were there first. Also, I remember a war in 1948 that slightly put a damper on Jewish Arab relations. Who started that war again? Up to that point jews and palestinians in the region had fairly good relations? Who betrayed who?
Your revisionist view on history is based on non-essentials.
You're right about the olive grove. It's such a higher value than the laboratories researching stem cell medication. Thats what would still be there withough israel, an olive grove surrounded by sand, crumbling old houses and a few drinking wells.
All of the infrastructure that you claim is denied to the palestinians, would not have even existed without the israili's. From the irrigation techniques of turning desert into prosperious farms to nuclear power plants that light up the streets. Look at most of the surrounding arab countries that dont export oil. How prosperous are they?
On the issues of the nukes, i dont remember the jews having a jihad against the west. There is an issue of self defense here that you evade.
I really dont see iraeli's sneaking in a suitcase nuke into any western country for the purpose of martyrdom and Jihad.
In conclusion, i sympathize with the palestinians for thier suffering, yet i also understand that they have a choice in their government. If they wanted peace and prosperity then they can build a government that recognizes individual rights and freedom from a theocracy.Israel has a right to exist and if for no other reason than that it does recognize individual rights of its citizens.
P.s. I dont see egypt opening it's borders en masse to provide water, shelter and medicine.
- Veniversum
February 9, 2009 4:35PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Join Israel
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
yes the indians should get the land back
I do stand without hypocracy....I cannot imagine how it would be if it were made so but the tribes in america should have at least tons more than they are allowed. the only problem is that there are very few indians that could claim land was taken from them directly. at the least today we should at least give back every thing, priveledge or right of treaties that were broken during the life of the oldest living indian....per tribe.
as to labs rather than groves.....my neighbor is not using his double wide lot to it's fullest potential....I will be right back, I have to go and build my deck into his land.
I am back. by the way....read documents by the US secratary of state and check back in the day who was deemed the terrorists....yup...Zionists. were they on the US list of terrorists? yup.
prosperity by the way is not proof of good or evil. if it were then saddam and his buddies were good as they were very prosperous. if one is going to use an example to illustrate a truth....the truth must exist in all applications. As for the concept of Jihad, this word existed in a very different context untill the US imported the most viscious mercenaries into Afganistan to throw off the russians. the military training of the US outright outlined the transformation of the word Jihad....up till then it was a personal war inside of a person. Isreal defending itself has been declared illegal by every nation but ours in the UN for most every decade of it's life. the LAW says a people cannot be occupied by an invading force. period. no ambiguity.
I had two clients who were bush the 1st appointees (france and australia) and they aknowledge this...albeit they don't care. we discussed this in detail....repeatedly just after 9-11.
so as for isreal being allowed nukes? why not both sides? preisraeli zionist terrorists (zionist militia) were exploding devices and doing assasinations on the regions arabs long before WWII. then several of them became presidents of isreal. if no one sold isreal weapons then they would be using whatever they had available too. since they always had. not ALL of them were doing this...just the zionist exstremeists.
the US is very good at creating situations that will serve it well later. one cannot create Yugoslavia by jamming groups that have seperated themselves for centuries and think it will work out....perhaps the caspian sea pipeline was not the intent for afganistan....just because the president we installed after this invasion was a representative of the oil company that is currently building the pipeline is just pure luck. we let isreal do whatever it wants....they are our nuke base in the middle east....ever play RISK?
lastly isreal has the duty, not egypt, to care for the palestinians. isreal controls ALL of the rivers...they took them in the war.
I despise hitler as best as a 40 yearold american can, but to allow duality of thought and other circular proccesses to work in my mind is not something I will allow casually when it comes to other peoples lives. even from the ineffectual position I hold in life regarding such matters. my awareness of how the world works....diabolical greedcentric propaganda.....began when my brother....who was a navy seal, told us stories....edited for secrecy....of what he saw...and did.
every act of defence isreal takes is a zionist jihad....that it is their gods will to do so comes from thier own mouths. I only stand up so vigorously on this matter as it is the greatest lie being told. I regret every death on both sides. for the innocent who have lost their homes and for the damages souls who fill the ranks of the isreali army lusting to fulfill their role in religious prophesy.
- taoish
February 9, 2009 5:28PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Where Are The Facts??
I can't find facts anywhere about why Hamas was shelling Israel in the first place. Why were they?? Are we to believe that a group of Hamas terrorists have nothing batter to do than fire shells at Israel unprovoked.
This is a tit-for-tat stand-off between Palestine and Israel that has gone on for decades with the US media strangling us with lack of facts and information.
The rumors I do hear are that Palestinians are cutoff with blockades and checkpoints that separate Gaza from the rest of Palestine. Etc. If this is about "Israel the US Ally", then we've got a long way to go before the US is even serious about peace in the middle east.
- A Frustrated Manipulated American
- Blingo88
January 6, 2009 2:03AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Rumors?
....Wha..? That is EXACTLY what Israel did. The reason Hamas fired rockets though was in retailiation for 2 of their guys Israel killed.
Nice post below, though.
- SocialistBetty
January 6, 2009 1:41PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
How About This Peace Plan
For every dollar given to Israel, a dollar is given to Palistine.
- Blingo88
January 6, 2009 2:10AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Symbol of Unity
The ongoing conflict in Israel (approximately 3000 years, since David made it the capital of his kingdom in 1000 BC) will be solved when people wake up and realize that they should not be fighting over it, that it is High Holy land in at least 3 religions (Christianity, Judaism an Islam) and that it should be a global capital open to all for visitation and worship to all people and all faiths. Let us get it together and acknowledge the ONE GOD we all worship by treating others as we would wish to be treated (with love, kindness and respect).
- mother
January 6, 2009 9:52AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
leave them alone
i say let them do whatever they want to do overseas.and the usa stay out of it and quit sticking our noses where it dont belong.and stop the freetrade lose all ties with the foreigners.but make it clear the first one comes over here will have a terrible death .thats where all our trouble comes from anyway they took all our jobs.you dont sit down with terriorist and make deals.
- freetradesux
January 6, 2009 8:26PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Who took our jobs?
As far as i know, i am free in the US, and if i want to start a company and outsource the labor to India, China, or Pakistan, then i am also free to do that. There is NO such thing as YOUR entitlement to a job. If you want a job start a company and hire yourself.
- Veniversum
January 19, 2009 1:07PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
foreigners like veniversum
just like i said its foreigners running around like yourself in the good old u.s.a .its people exactly as yourself that im referring to.sending our jobs overseas its people like yourself that make me so sick to my stomach i could puke.(on you) your right your free to do that. thats why the u.s.a is in such a bad shape. to bad our government dont see that.
- freetradesux
February 3, 2009 7:19PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Assumption makes an ass out of u m e
Freetradesux,
Why do you assume i'm a foreigner?
Even if i was a foreigner and i am here legally, what difference does that make to the economics and morality of this debate?
It's a shame you have such a weak stomach, maybe thats what leads you to utter the sentence "sending our jobs overseas". What makes them yours, did you create them? Did you start microsoft or GM or the numerous pharmaceutical companies?
In response to why the US is in such a bad shape, you should look at the government intervention in the economy, from the Anti-trust laws to the creation of the fed to the new deal to the past thousands and thousands of pages of regulation leading up to sarbanes oxley and beyond to the current bailouts. The entitlement culture here created by both liberals and "compassionate" conservatives has led to people forgetting the source of money, value, and especially rights.
In conclusion "your rights end where mine begin"
You have no right to a job without impeding on my right of running a company in my own rational self interest.
- Veniversum
February 9, 2009 4:15PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Join Israel
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
no right to a job without impeding on you
your right thats where our government has failed.its bad enough they let foreigners come over here to live.keep them up with government programs food stamps e.t.c pay them so well they can buy companys and send them back home (overseas).thats the good old u.s.a no wonder you love freetrading so much.if i was set up like foreigners are in the u.s.a i would be just like you as to defend such a good thing the u.s.a is doing for foreigners.but i do wonder if i was to move overseas would i be treated like a king because i was a foreigner.no the people over there would put my head on a chopping block.they dont want us over their in their business and thats a fact. i dont have anything against foreigners i fill just like them. that they dont have any right over here in our business and doing business.im sorry if i impeding on your rights but if you are a foreigner over here you shouldnt have any rights.
- freetradesux
April 19, 2009 12:37PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
admit it
Someone's willing to work harder than you and for cheaper. Man up.
- userk
April 16, 2009 6:37AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
How should the US respond to the Gaza Crisis
The US shoulh just stay out of the conflict, you don't have the financial support to fight on three front.
Until some world body can monitor who fire the first shot we can neither believe any party to say the other fire first.
If Hama is bend on using force to make her point to the world then this recent round of rocket attack on Israel had proven nothing to the world but Hamas being branded as terrorist. As coward hiding behind human shield (ordinary Palestinian who wants nothing to do with this kind of atrocity)If Hamas claim they had been deprive of necessity then they should bring it to the security council and show prove there that Israel has been bulling the Palestinian people, if you have the money to buy rocket why not use the money to get the best lawyer to fight your case at the Hage to prove you point.
- why
January 11, 2009 5:04AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
the un whipped by the US
virtually every nation in the UN HAS tried to curtain Isreal, the US will not have it. the ambassador of the US to the UN unabashadly threatened that if a vote were brought to saction Isreal (I forget the date), the US would "tear down this building (the UN building in the US) down and throw it brick by brick into the Hudson". ever time the UN members try to sanction Isreal.....VETO! by the US. side note.....for years we were also taught how the soviets were blocking vetoing everything in the UN and causing by this so many global ills. Check out the veto history of the US against that of what was the USSR and see that the US had cast nearly 3 times those of the soviets. Huh...wow....if it is true then why were we told so readily to believe otherwise? the same machine of propaganda that can convince americans of a blatant verifiablle falsity concerning UN votes can most certainly convince the relatively uninterested masses of something much more subtle such as guilt in the Gaza.
- taoish
February 9, 2009 9:29PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
How should the US respond to the Gaza Crisis
The question is "how should the US respond to the Gaza Crisis."
Yes in the past the US had been using their Veto rights to push UN member aside so does USSR and China and those in the security counsel.
As my respond was, the US should stay out of this conflict because the more US stay and give support to Israel, she will continue to behave arrogantly and thus fueling the issue. US must also stay out of the conflict and not get herself committed to fight another front.
With US not showing any interest, Israel will not have any UN member willing to stand up for her cause to be in Gaza or doing what she is doing in Gaza but it does not mean US will not go to the aid of Israel if she is provoted to act.
What the world see in the beginning was Hamas sending rocket into Israel and ever Egypt the peace broker give up on Hamas when they continue to rocket Israel. What the world couldn't accept was Israel over use of fire power to destroy Hamas position which was set up intentionally among the civilian resulting in heavy casualty.
Unless Hamas learn to use the tools set up by the UN security and the US to fight her case, the world will always see Hamas as the terrorist and Israel the terrorist killer. so where will this conflict end.
Hamas can opt for peaceful coexistence or continual to see her people dieing like flies. If Hamas can scarifies thousands dieing under Israel bombing why not turn them dieing from a lack of food and water. Let the world see the result of Israel action on the people of Gaza, get the world media in and show them how the people in Gaza are dieing like flies because no food, medicine and water are getting to the people as a result of Israel blockage. I'm sure the world will take notice faster than Israel bombing the place.
- why
February 11, 2009 6:03AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
i agree that the US should stay out....except diplomatically
I hope for something resembling your last paragraph. since it is illegal to stop groups such as the red cross from bring aid and counting the dead, I hope every American learns that they are being stopped. I hope americans can come feel for the cruelty of a native population being treated like prisoners at the whim of their holders. water, food, medicine, electricity, cash, movement all being controled by the isrealis. this is where Hamas became politically powerful. Hamas built schools....smuggled in food....gave cash to those who's homes were destroyed. now hamas has the ear of palestine, even when it's military side does battle without a vote of the populace.
The world except for the US is watching....they HAVE been listening....they HAVE responded unlike what we are told via the UN. they get vetoed and threatened by the US. we need a new "honest" broker, one clear headed and NOT the US. I will hope with you.
- taoish
February 11, 2009 9:56AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Negotiate for a Ceasefire
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Perhaps the US should keep out of the conflict.
Both sides in this conflict are repugnant. Perhaps the best response would be to keep out.
- Michael Glass
January 26, 2009 4:54PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I concur.
I agree with that last statement, sometimes we may not know the whole situation. Even if we did however, we do not need to continue to interfere with other countries affairs, I say we should have listened to what George Washington warned us about after he left his 2nd term. To stay OUT of foreign affairs, it does nothing more than complicate everything, along with causing hatred, fear, neglect, and favoritism. Instead of asking whether or not we should interfere with their problems, we should be asking whether or not we are even able to help them! America's economy is in quite a situation at the moment, we should be spending all our time and devotion to fixing our own problems rather than other countries problems. Especially when it comes to a situation like this.
- Demosthenes
March 10, 2009 5:00PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
They're Terrorists. Always Were, Always Will Be.
Everything the former Jordananian occupants (i.e., so-called "palestinians") do begins with a lie, as is the initial question which started this thread is a lie.
There were NOT a thousand of them killed; that's a lie. And you haven't the the integrity to correct it, nor can you document that number. It has already been exposed as a lie, as was the French news report previously.
The question posed for this thread is a LIE. The murdering thugs now occupying Gaza are bigoted, radical, terrorist muslims who only seek to kill Jewish people. They prove it every day. Anyone with a brain can observe the facts for themselves including which hospitals treat which wounded. So, which hospital in Gaza treats wounded Jews?
I'll ask it again: which hospital in Gaza treats wounded Jews?
Anyone with a modicum of intelligence recognizes the deceit underlying the premise of this thread, which describes the majority of pro-terrorist Gazan contributors quite well.
- factsfirst
April 12, 2009 1:18PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.