My sympathy is not with you.Dr.PhiL wrote:
Blah blah blah
BS and more BS.
My sympathy is with the Israelis, they only protect themselfs, by terminating potential attackers.
I dont recall this incident, i do remember that the Germans borrowed some of our fine beaches for a shorter period of time, just like they still do up to these days, i wouldnt call it an invasion, in the same way the vikings came to Ireland, raped and robbed everything. Us Danes were still free, and could do whatever we wanted, and no one lost any land.
Sorry for the off-topic
And for my knowledge is Israel has belonged to the jews before, before the Arabs stole the country, i could be a little off though.
Sorry for the off-topic
And for my knowledge is Israel has belonged to the jews before, before the Arabs stole the country, i could be a little off though.
Yeah Zionist immigrants didn't do anything did they? France, USA and the UK drove the Palestinians from their homes, massacring several villages and appropriating Palestinian property. Do even the most cursory google search of the following terms please: Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, Kind David Hotel bombing. I take it David Ben Gurion was forced into creating the state that would inevitably disenfranchise and bring misfortune upon the existing inhabitants of the land, eh?rawls2 wrote:
How naive can you be. Israel was founded by other nations. How could you expect them to say "No we dont want that land becasue it belongs to someone else." Blame France, Gremany, UK, and us but not the Israelis.CameronPoe wrote:
I just checked your BF2 stats: you're Danish - that explains everything... and you're probably the one who left me that karma. You should get a clue and read about the birth of Israel. You guys got invaded by Nazi Germany - that wasn't fun was it? Same shit happened to the Palestinians. Your black and white view of the world is immature, vacuous and helps noone.Dr.PhiL wrote:
This propaganda is contradicting the propaganda
Israel belonged first to the Egyptians, then the Cana'anites and then the Jews, several thousand years ago. Then the Romans rolled in and suppressed their rebellions ultimately leading the vast majority of Jews to give up on their homeland and go to Europe for lives of 'peace and prosperity'. The Arabs never stole the country from the Jews - the Romans did. And before that the Jews stole it from the Cana'anites. Does that clear things up?Dr.PhiL wrote:
I dont recall this incident, i do remember that the Germans borrowed some of our fine beaches for a shorter period of time, just like they still do up to these days, i wouldnt call it an invasion, in the same way the vikings came to Ireland, raped and robbed everything. Us Danes were still free, and could do whatever we wanted, and no one lost any land.
Sorry for the off-topic
And for my knowledge is Israel has belonged to the jews before, before the Arabs stole the country, i could be a little off though.
Oh and if you regard freedom as being under the protectorship/occupation of a nation that gassed/burned 6 million Jews, Gypsies and Communists to death then I'm afraid there isn't much we're going to agree on.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-17 13:10:33)
No group of people is going to turn down a chunk of land handed to them by the worlds superpowers. And they certainly aren't going to give it back when surrounding neighbors try to take it back. The arabs had there chance to influence the region but they chose another path.CameronPoe wrote:
Yeah Zionist immigrants didn't do anything did they? France, USA and the UK drove the Palestinians from their homes, massacring several villages and appropriating Palestinian property. Do even the most cursory google search of the following terms please: Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, Kind David Hotel bombing. I take it David Ben Gurion was forced into creating the state that would inevitably disenfranchise and bring misfortune upon the existing inhabitants of the land, eh?rawls2 wrote:
How naive can you be. Israel was founded by other nations. How could you expect them to say "No we don't want that land because it belongs to someone else." Blame France, Germany, UK, and us but not the Israelis.CameronPoe wrote:
I just checked your BF2 stats: you're Danish - that explains everything... and you're probably the one who left me that karma. You should get a clue and read about the birth of Israel. You guys got invaded by Nazi Germany - that wasn't fun was it? Same shit happened to the Palestinians. Your black and white view of the world is immature, vacuous and helps noone.
Dude the chunk of land they're being asked to hand back was never part of what 'the worlds superpowers' short-sightedly 'gave' them.rawls2 wrote:
No group of people is going to turn down a chunk of land handed to them by the worlds superpowers. And they certainly aren't going to give it back when surrounding neighbors try to take it back. The arabs had there chance to influence the region but they chose another path.
PS The Arab-Israel conflict is still in play. In case you hadn't noticed Hezbollah launched several thousand missiles at Israel a couple of years ago, the Palestinians are still fighting their corner and Israel has no relations with virtually any Arab country (including the US' most pivotal ally Saudi Arabia).
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-17 13:21:47)
Welcome to D&ST Dr. Phil...I'm enjoying your posts so far; they're so idiotic I'm starting to think you might actually be Dr. Phil himself. I like the way you bundle the Palestinian struggle in with the unjustifiable actions of Al Qaeda and the Taleban, very nice. I also like the way you are so steadfast in your support of Israel that you're willing to go further than everyone else in this thread by not only thinking the original video was a propaganda fake but by believing that this Israeli response was some sort of elaborate fake also...outstanding.Dr.PhiL wrote:
This is obviously fake, like all other things the Arabs let out, so the stupid soft leftwing Westerners feel sympathy for them.
Even though they burn our flag, and want sharia law in the whole world.
My sympathy is with the Israelis, they only protect themselfs, by terminating potential attackers.
To everyone else: Shall we start taking bets on who has created 'Dr.Phil' as a cartoon alter ego for themselves?
And now they have more because their neighbors wouldn't let them be. And if the conflict is still bieng played out no one should be whining about Israel snatching up more land.CameronPoe wrote:
Dude the chunk of land they're being asked to hand back was never part of what 'the worlds superpowers' short-sightedly 'gave' them.rawls2 wrote:
No group of people is going to turn down a chunk of land handed to them by the worlds superpowers. And they certainly aren't going to give it back when surrounding neighbors try to take it back. The arabs had there chance to influence the region but they chose another path.
PS The Arab-Israel conflict is still in play. In case you hadn't noticed Hezbollah launched several thousand missiles at Israel a couple of years ago, the Palestinians are still fighting their corner and Israel has no relations with virtually any Arab country (including the US' most pivotal ally Saudi Arabia).
Rawls - your essentially saying the Native Americans shouldn't have kept fighting the European settlers. The Native Americans rightly, in the name of justice and principles, fought to almost their last drop of blood. Why you would expect the Arabs to roll over just because some condescending 'world superpower' cunts shafted them up the ass in 1948 is beyond me. You have a distinct inability to empathise with the injustice of having something imposed on you against your will or with the injustice of having something taken from you. If your wife got raped would you just take it on the chin and think 'ah well, can't be helped really'. I would venture you wouldn't.rawls wrote:
And now they have more because their neighbors wouldn't let them be. And if the conflict is still bieng played out no one should be whining about Israel snatching up more land.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-06-17 15:03:04)
My last karma for this comment "Freedom for Palestine" was this: "FUCK YOU EAST EUROPE TRASH, LONG LIVE ISRAEL"
So who is the racist then? :S
So who is the racist then? :S
PM a mod. Karma abuse is against the rules.venom6 wrote:
My last karma for this comment "Freedom for Palestine" was this: "FUCK YOU EAST EUROPE TRASH, LONG LIVE ISRAEL"
So who is the racist then? :S
I would recommend B Schuss (as he banned me for karma abuse a loooong time ago!)
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
yeah...i agree - Debate and Serious Talk - let's keep it civil. even though you may not agree with someone, there's no reason to be nasty. Just shows immaturity - especially if you don't sign your name to it. man up if you are going to be a doosh bag
Israeli cyber-terrorists running amok in D&ST? .........surely another pro-Palestinian piece of propaganda!m3thod wrote:
PM a mod. Karma abuse is against the rules.venom6 wrote:
My last karma for this comment "Freedom for Palestine" was this: "FUCK YOU EAST EUROPE TRASH, LONG LIVE ISRAEL"
So who is the racist then? :S
I would recommend B Schuss (as he banned me for karma abuse a loooong time ago!)
Interesting how much of these were arrested...
Why would they be arrested?sting how much of these were arrested...
Repelling invaders is true patriotism.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
no sympathy from me, the scum got what he deservedLisik wrote:
Interesting how much of these were arrested...
I thought Westerns don't support violence, but you 2 made me changing my mind. TNX
no problem, the more terrorist oppressors beaten up the betterLisik wrote:
I thought Westerns don't support violence, but you 2 made me changing my mind. TNX
I don't agree with that entirely...the guy who gets out first and flees looks like a regular member of the public and as such I can't personally condone any attacks on him. However, the other guy appears to be wearing an army uniform so I have no sympathy for him.rammunition wrote:
no sympathy from me, the scum got what he deservedLisik wrote:
Interesting how much of these were arrested...
Is that phrase desinged to mean "people who supress terrorists?" No wonder you are such an angry man. And I would agree with you, if that is what you meant.rammunition wrote:
no problem, the more terrorist oppressors beaten up the betterLisik wrote:
I thought Westerns don't support violence, but you 2 made me changing my mind. TNX
Or are you using the hyperbole to mean the people in charge are the oppressors [and] the terrorists? That would be a misuse of the term. By definition, if someone is the "oppressor," that would suggest they were the ones with the power, since you need power to oppress someone with. And since terrorism (in an old, classical, quaintly outdated definition from the last century, before 'terrorist' beat out 'facist' as the vogue term for people you did not like) are people who use public violence and the threat of public violence, traditionally against parties uninvolved directly with a conflict, to try to shape public opinion and influence social and political descisions, that implies that they do not have the political power to affect the desired changes directly. Therefore, a group in place to be able to oppress someone can not be called terrorists. That is what the term 'oppressors' is for.
Terrorism is a tool that the powerful can use to stay powerful, just as much as the weak can use it to try to gain power and influence.imortal wrote:
Is that phrase desinged to mean "people who supress terrorists?" No wonder you are such an angry man. And I would agree with you, if that is what you meant.rammunition wrote:
no problem, the more terrorist oppressors beaten up the betterLisik wrote:
I thought Westerns don't support violence, but you 2 made me changing my mind. TNX
Or are you using the hyperbole to mean the people in charge are the oppressors [and] the terrorists? That would be a misuse of the term. By definition, if someone is the "oppressor," that would suggest they were the ones with the power, since you need power to oppress someone with. And since terrorism (in an old, classical, quaintly outdated definition from the last century, before 'terrorist' beat out 'facist' as the vogue term for people you did not like) are people who use public violence and the threat of public violence, traditionally against parties uninvolved directly with a conflict, to try to shape public opinion and influence social and political descisions, that implies that they do not have the political power to affect the desired changes directly. Therefore, a group in place to be able to oppress someone can not be called terrorists. That is what the term 'oppressors' is for.
Im curious as to what would have happened if the guy getting rocks tossed at him busts out an M-16 and starts dropping guys. What would the world have said? Would they be indifferent seeing how the guy was defending himself or would they go ape shit and use the video as "proof" of Israels aggression.Braddock wrote:
I don't agree with that entirely...the guy who gets out first and flees looks like a regular member of the public and as such I can't personally condone any attacks on him. However, the other guy appears to be wearing an army uniform so I have no sympathy for him.rammunition wrote:
no sympathy from me, the scum got what he deservedLisik wrote:
Interesting how much of these were arrested...
Last edited by rawls2 (2008-06-18 09:11:14)
Well it would probably depend on how it was edited, wouldn't it? The guy getting attacked was a soldier, operating in an occupied territory. Imagine Mexico invaded the Southern United States, how do you think a Mexican soldier would be treated cruising around Houston, Texas with his uniform on?rawls2 wrote:
Im curious as to what would have happened if the guy getting rocks tossed at him busts out an M-16 and starts dropping guys. What would the world have said? Would they be indifferent seeing how the guy was defending himself or would they go ape shit and use the video as "proof" of Israels aggression.Braddock wrote:
I don't agree with that entirely...the guy who gets out first and flees looks like a regular member of the public and as such I can't personally condone any attacks on him. However, the other guy appears to be wearing an army uniform so I have no sympathy for him.rammunition wrote:
no sympathy from me, the scum got what he deserved
My point is this...He gets his ass kicked its ok hes a soldier....he drops them with a gun (cuz he is a soldier) Pali's cry foul. If you do shit like this dont cry when you get hellfires raining down from the sky.Braddock wrote:
Well it would probably depend on how it was edited, wouldn't it? The guy getting attacked was a soldier, operating in an occupied territory. Imagine Mexico invaded the Southern United States, how do you think a Mexican soldier would be treated cruising around Houston, Texas with his uniform on?rawls2 wrote:
Im curious as to what would have happened if the guy getting rocks tossed at him busts out an M-16 and starts dropping guys. What would the world have said? Would they be indifferent seeing how the guy was defending himself or would they go ape shit and use the video as "proof" of Israels aggression.Braddock wrote:
I don't agree with that entirely...the guy who gets out first and flees looks like a regular member of the public and as such I can't personally condone any attacks on him. However, the other guy appears to be wearing an army uniform so I have no sympathy for him.
And when you act like the Israelis do don't cry when you get the shit kicked out of you by the same people whose houses you are bombing...notice a pattern emerging?rawls2 wrote:
My point is this...He gets his ass kicked its ok hes a soldier....he drops them with a gun (cuz he is a soldier) Pali's cry foul. If you do shit like this dont cry when you get hellfires raining down from the sky.Braddock wrote:
Well it would probably depend on how it was edited, wouldn't it? The guy getting attacked was a soldier, operating in an occupied territory. Imagine Mexico invaded the Southern United States, how do you think a Mexican soldier would be treated cruising around Houston, Texas with his uniform on?rawls2 wrote:
Im curious as to what would have happened if the guy getting rocks tossed at him busts out an M-16 and starts dropping guys. What would the world have said? Would they be indifferent seeing how the guy was defending himself or would they go ape shit and use the video as "proof" of Israels aggression.