Pages: 1

 

Poll

Do you agree with my hypothesis (below in message content)

True (yes, I agree with your hypothesis)37%37% - 16
False (no, I disagree with your hypothesis)34%34% - 15
Neither of the above options appealed to me.27%27% - 12
Total: 43
2006-07-26 07:16:10
G3|Genius
Pope of BF2s
+355|6867|Sea to globally-cooled sea
Here is my hypothesis:

If the radical militant Islamists were disarmed tomorrow, there would be peace in the middle east.  If Israel were disarmed tomorrow there would be genocide.

By "disarm" I mean: that particular party would no longer be able to commit acts of violence.

Please cast your vote, and then feel free to discuss it.


my hypothesis is not an original idea...I heard someone on the radio say it and I thought to bring this hypothesis to the forum for some feedback

Last edited by G3|Genius (2006-07-26 08:00:41)

2006-07-26 07:19:45
BigmacK
Back from the Dead.
+628|6992|Chicago.
I said no, because I know one for sure.

This is where I disagree. If the islamists are still radical and millitant, after their disarmament, they would find a way. There would be no peace.

I'm not sure how I want to answer on the Israel topic. I'll get back to you.
2006-07-26 07:20:39
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6790|Southeastern USA
I fully agree, Israel simply wants to maintain the right to exist, if they wanted to take over nations they could have lebanon and be home in time for passover, even with their limited population resources, meanwhile virtuallly every nation surrounding them has stated at one time or another that they seek the destruction of Israel, then the "peace loving nation of Isalm" would just end up shooting each other in a feud over who gets the land
2006-07-26 07:21:52
Kaosdad
Whisky Tango Foxtrot?
+201|6920|Broadlands, VA

BigmacK192 wrote:

This is where I disagree. If the islamists are still radical and millitant, after their disarmament, they would find a way. There would be no peace.
However, I completely agree with part two - if Israel disarms - Israel will cease to exist.
2006-07-26 07:29:18
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6790|Southeastern USA
I think by "disarm" he means to completely relenquish any military capabilities present or future, just for the sake of argument, I.E. if they disarmed today they would never pick up any kind of weapon ever again
2006-07-26 07:59:58
G3|Genius
Pope of BF2s
+355|6867|Sea to globally-cooled sea

kr@cker wrote:

I think by "disarm" he means to completely relenquish any military capabilities present or future, just for the sake of argument, I.E. if they disarmed today they would never pick up any kind of weapon ever again
correct...by disarm I mean, that particular party would no longer be able to commit acts of violence.  I will tack that up above to help with future voting.
2006-07-26 08:25:51
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6790|Southeastern USA
the third option should be removed as it allows people to opt out of participating, and fails to further the discussion
2006-07-26 08:32:44
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6770|Global Command
Ya, thats what the null votes for.
If just one party were disarmed sure, it'd be a slaughter. If both sides were disarmed? The same as Israel disarming except the war would be fought with stones and sticks.
2006-07-26 08:35:55
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6790|Southeastern USA
oh that's right, they can't see the results unless they pick something can they
2006-07-26 09:00:17
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797
I put false because the global community would step in to prevent genocide. At least I hope they fucking would. Also there wouldn't be total peace in the middle east if radical islamic militants were disarmed. Fatah is a secular organisation - the Palestinians would still fight on - their issue is a territorial one. Also - there would not be 'peace' of mind for the subjugated and oppressed Palestinians. There would however be peace in large swathes of the middle east esp. Iraq and Afghanistan.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-07-26 09:13:19)

2006-07-26 11:57:01
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6931|Tampa Bay Florida
it's not that simple.  They won't just become disarmed, that's saying WW2 wouldn't have happened if Hitler had been killed in a car accident at the age of 10.

You're asking a question which makes no sense, unless there was a motive behind the disarmament.

Last edited by Spearhead (2006-07-26 11:58:07)

2006-07-26 12:35:25
Wreckognize
Member
+294|6726
It's not radical militant Islamists' weapons that are the problem, it's their ideals.  Disarm their weapons, there will be still strife in the Middle East.  Disarm their ideals, and peace will come.
2006-07-26 16:07:12
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6873|949

Peace is not just the lack of violence.  I am not sure that Israel would or would not cease to exist without arms.  I do have full confidence in saying that if militant Muslims were disarmed, there would be no peace.  Like Cameron said, the Arabs in the region want the land given to them back.  Give them their land, and there may be peace.  Militant Muslims may always find a cause that justifies them using violence and terrorist tactics, but the people in the area would not support them I think.
2006-07-26 18:57:37
PuckMercury
6 x 9 = 42
+298|6768|Portland, OR USA
why does everyone think they can achieve a radical social overhaul and total upheval of such magnitude as to alter a pattern of behavior present since the beginning of recorded history?

If we took their guns, they'd do what they did before there WERE guns, use pointed sticks.  Or attack with a banana.
2006-07-26 19:56:48
jonsimon
Member
+224|6736
Disarming Israel may lead to the end of Israel as a state, but the people would not be massacred.

Disarming the freedom fighters would just create peace until Israel starts another war to motivate a new group of fighters.

The only answer against guerillas is diplomacy. You must first agree to establish them as a legitimate political body before they can be subjegated to rules or regulations.
2006-07-26 19:58:55
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6885
i dont agree with the options simply because I dont see the world in shades of gray, not black and white.
2006-07-26 22:36:10
PuckMercury
6 x 9 = 42
+298|6768|Portland, OR USA

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

I dont see the world in shades of gray, not black and white.
QFE

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard