Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8

 

Poll

Is Iran's President Ahmadinejad a new Adolf Hitler?

Yes, the similarities are way too obvious28%28% - 47
No, that Guy's just another crazy SOB45%45% - 76
WTF is Ahmadinejad?25%25% - 43
Total: 166
2006-06-15 15:45:18
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797

Horseman 77 wrote:

One more thing few people seem aware of is water rights in israel Palestine. It pretty tuff to farm in that area when you cant irragate. Guess who controls the water supply. Its interesting to see satellite photos of israeli and Palestinian land if you know who is in what  Zone. Some land is lush  Green, some is scorched Brown.
Agreed - it's frighteningly obvious. THe old Israeli-settled parts of Gaza are clearly so green on the satellite images you can almost trace the border with Egypt from the change in colour!!!

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-15 16:14:10)

2006-06-15 17:23:39
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|6783|vancouver

QuestionMark wrote:

The notion that the Palestinians are living in a "ghetto" is misleading. Israel has deployed roadblocks throughout the West Bank to stop possible terrorists from infiltrating Israel. Yes, it does limit the Palestinians in some areas but it isn't without a reason. Israel concluded (rightfully so, IMO) that the life of Israeli citizens is more important than the free motion of Palestinians. When human life is in the balance, it outweighs everything.
It's possible to take issue with any number of fallacies QuestionMark has leaned on in his arguments here, but this is a particularly blatant -- and often repeated -- piece of nonsense.

To summarize, his specific logic is "Israeli life > Palestinian free motion", which is based on the generalization "human life > everything".  If you agree with the general, you must accept the specific, QuestionMark says.

The unmistakable assumption is that Palestinians believe their freedom of movement trumps Israeli citizens' right to live.  Nowhere is the reader given any indication of the reality of Palestinian loss of life.  It's as if "human life" is the exclusive preserve of Israelis, whereas what's at stake for the Palestinians is mere freedom of movement.

I'll wager that most regular consumers of Western media do not have the faintest idea of the relative casualties in Israel and the occupied territories since 2000.  Courtesy of B'Tselem -- an Israeli human rights group -- here are some numbers that may surprise you:

Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians:                           696
Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces:               3,471

The following numbers are included in the above totals...

Israeli minors killed by Palestinians:                             119
Palestinian minors killed by Israeli security forces:        695

Of course, I will be accused of highlighting certain stats to advance my view (my sympathies lie with the civilians), so I encourage you to refer to the more detailed original source, as well as any others that do not have a clear bias one way or the other.  My only goals are to make known data that gets no play in the media, and point out logical flaws where I see them going unchallenged.

It also seems likely that someone will claim the Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces were either terrorists or "possible terrorists", which is why I included the data solely regarding minors.

I know we get bombarded with images of young 'uns in mock bomb-belts and the like, but no reasonable people feel compelled to make the same generalizations about all Americans based on videos of 8yo girls perforating cars with a .50 cal machine gun.  All I'm saying is, don't jump to any unwarranted conclusions based on faulty assumptions.

Anyway, sorry for the length and let the neg karma fly! 
2006-06-15 17:29:25
Major_Spittle
Banned
+276|6897|United States of America
Is Iran's President Ahmadinejad a new Adolf Hitler?

WTF, he doesn't even have a Mustache. Duh.
2006-06-15 17:37:35
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|6783|vancouver
-1      What do you think of Ahmadinejad?      kill all the palestinians. CameronPoe 

Well, there's one.  At least you had the courage to sign somebody else's name.
2006-06-15 23:41:37
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6803

Horseman 77 wrote:

bobalo you take one line that suits you from a 24 page post. Move on.
That would be kind of hard, since this is 6 pages long, and I don't believe I've ever participated in a 24 page discussion.  Still, if you want to tell me where I have, go ahead.

CameronPoe wrote:

To Bubbalo - in response to a karma neg -
You obviously didn't appreciate the fact that I enclosed the term terrorist in inverted commas. I don't agree with the term terrorist to begin with anyway. Read things a little more carefully in future.
I rarely give karma, I've tried (and IIRC succeeded) to not give negative karma at all, and I don't see where you've actually used terrorist, other than when you said you don't like using it.  If you don't believe me, I'll happily give a mod permission to tell you whether or not I gave it to you, assuming they're allowed.

Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-15 23:41:53)

2006-06-15 23:51:39
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|6783|vancouver
-1      What do you think of Ahmadinejad?      Israeli civilians and youths who with weapons who attack the army--hardly any. Palestinians civilians and youths with weapons who attack--too many to count.

And that's two.  I don't care about the karma but how are people gonna know the truth if you don't post it?!  Lol...

Anyway, the attitude of a tiny minority of Israeli settlers towards their own army is quite different from the majority Palestinian view of the IDF as an occupying force.  But yeah, I guess rocks count as weapons...  =/
2006-06-16 00:22:25
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797

Bubbalo wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

bobalo you take one line that suits you from a 24 page post. Move on.
That would be kind of hard, since this is 6 pages long, and I don't believe I've ever participated in a 24 page discussion.  Still, if you want to tell me where I have, go ahead.

CameronPoe wrote:

To Bubbalo - in response to a karma neg -
You obviously didn't appreciate the fact that I enclosed the term terrorist in inverted commas. I don't agree with the term terrorist to begin with anyway. Read things a little more carefully in future.
I rarely give karma, I've tried (and IIRC succeeded) to not give negative karma at all, and I don't see where you've actually used terrorist, other than when you said you don't like using it.  If you don't believe me, I'll happily give a mod permission to tell you whether or not I gave it to you, assuming they're allowed.
Apparently someone is signing negs with other peoples names. Apologies.
2006-06-16 00:30:06
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6803

CameronPoe wrote:

Apparently someone is signing negs with other peoples names. Apologies.
np, honest mistake.
2006-06-16 03:13:07
QuestionMark
Member
+2|6769

CameronPoe wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

One more thing few people seem aware of is water rights in israel Palestine. It pretty tuff to farm in that area when you cant irragate. Guess who controls the water supply. Its interesting to see satellite photos of israeli and Palestinian land if you know who is in what  Zone. Some land is lush  Green, some is scorched Brown.
Agreed - it's frighteningly obvious. THe old Israeli-settled parts of Gaza are clearly so green on the satellite images you can almost trace the border with Egypt from the change in colour!!!
The water supply to the Palestinians is almost exclusively given by the Israeli Water Commission, so anyone who wants to irrigate his field, has no problem doing so. This really has no relevance with the main topic.

spastic bullet wrote:

The unmistakable assumption is that Palestinians believe their freedom of movement trumps Israeli citizens' right to live.  Nowhere is the reader given any indication of the reality of Palestinian loss of life.  It's as if "human life" is the exclusive preserve of Israelis, whereas what's at stake for the Palestinians is mere freedom of movement.
The Palestinian loss of life, although very saddening, has nothing to do with my base assumption that Life>Free Motion.  I also never implied that life is the exclusive preserve of Israelis. That is obviously not the case.

The data you've given regarding the "death ratio" between Israeli and Palestinians is, again, misleading. First of all, you compared the number of Israeli CITIZENS killed by Palestinian attacks, with the total number of Palestinians killed (Many of whom are Terrorists).  This is a biased presentation of the truth.
Palestinians civilians killed by Israeli Defense Forces died almost exclusively as part of the ongoing campaign to root-out terrorist infrastructure. Fighting in a densely urbanized region has its price, that is inevitable.  The Israeli civilians killed, on the other hand, were killed by Palestinian ACTS OF TERRORISM. It is important to differentiate between the two. I'm not, of course, justifying the Palestinian loss of life. I think that for each civilian killed, the IDF has to take a long hard look at itself, and find out what went wrong.
Israel can't afford to do nothing. The other alternative, as far as Israel is concerned, is buses exploding and civilians knifed in broad daylight.
What do you suggest they do? (considering the Palestinian government, [controlled by Hamas] is aimed at eliminating Israel)
2006-06-16 04:11:21
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797

QuestionMark wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

One more thing few people seem aware of is water rights in israel Palestine. It pretty tuff to farm in that area when you cant irragate. Guess who controls the water supply. Its interesting to see satellite photos of israeli and Palestinian land if you know who is in what  Zone. Some land is lush  Green, some is scorched Brown.
Agreed - it's frighteningly obvious. THe old Israeli-settled parts of Gaza are clearly so green on the satellite images you can almost trace the border with Egypt from the change in colour!!!
The water supply to the Palestinians is almost exclusively given by the Israeli Water Commission, so anyone who wants to irrigate his field, has no problem doing so. This really has no relevance with the main topic.

spastic bullet wrote:

The unmistakable assumption is that Palestinians believe their freedom of movement trumps Israeli citizens' right to live.  Nowhere is the reader given any indication of the reality of Palestinian loss of life.  It's as if "human life" is the exclusive preserve of Israelis, whereas what's at stake for the Palestinians is mere freedom of movement.
The Palestinian loss of life, although very saddening, has nothing to do with my base assumption that Life>Free Motion.  I also never implied that life is the exclusive preserve of Israelis. That is obviously not the case.

The data you've given regarding the "death ratio" between Israeli and Palestinians is, again, misleading. First of all, you compared the number of Israeli CITIZENS killed by Palestinian attacks, with the total number of Palestinians killed (Many of whom are Terrorists).  This is a biased presentation of the truth.
Palestinians civilians killed by Israeli Defense Forces died almost exclusively as part of the ongoing campaign to root-out terrorist infrastructure. Fighting in a densely urbanized region has its price, that is inevitable.  The Israeli civilians killed, on the other hand, were killed by Palestinian ACTS OF TERRORISM. It is important to differentiate between the two. I'm not, of course, justifying the Palestinian loss of life. I think that for each civilian killed, the IDF has to take a long hard look at itself, and find out what went wrong.
Israel can't afford to do nothing. The other alternative, as far as Israel is concerned, is buses exploding and civilians knifed in broad daylight.
What do you suggest they do? (considering the Palestinian government, [controlled by Hamas] is aimed at eliminating Israel)
You speak often of Palestinian 'terrorism'. There is a school of thought that Israel engages in 'state terrorism', using their conventional army as opposed to a militia. They would be regarded as 'state terrorists' as well for the kinds of impediments they place on the viability of a functioning Palestinian state/pseudo-state in terms of control of access and egress to the territories, restriction of internal travel, the denial of airports/seaports to Palestinians and various other restrictions. Given that I don't agree with the use of the term 'terrorist' I can't subscribe to this viewpoint in the strictest sense but Israeli heavy-handedness and incidences of Israeli-carried out atrocities on Palestinians would lead me to believe they aren't exactly as noble as you make them out to be.

Question for QuestionMark(lol!): Do you agree with collective punishment? I'm not solely talking about civilian casualties from Israeli operations - I'm also talking about the bulldozing of houses belonging to relatives of Palestinians that carry out militant actions against the state of Israel. That doesn't seem like the kind of action that is likely to diminish the so-called 'terrorism' of the Palestinians (more than likely it will just increase the number of people seeking vengeance on Israel). Also, the unprovoked eviction of Palestinians from their land and houses as well as the prohibition of them building on their own land in certain parts of the occupied territories.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-16 04:28:18)

2006-06-16 04:31:46
JahManRed
wank
+646|6870|IRELAND

Could you stop calling the Palestinians Terrorists please. They are freedom fighters. Israel and the US label them terrorists. They are at war IMO. Yes they use Guerrilla techniques, yes they use suicide bombings. The kamikaze pilots of WW2 were not labeled terrorists. They were in fact the last desperate acts of a desperate people influenced by the religious believes of their nation. The Vietnamese were not labeled terrorists. Quite similar.
Unless the Palestinians get a load of tanks out into open ground and fight face to face with the Israelis/Americans they are terrorists. Why is this I ask? Why is this form of open warfare so acceptable and righteous to the west? To limit civilian casualties? To uphold the laws of war? I think the war in Iraqi blows that theory out of the water. Look at the mounting civilian casualty death rate. Look at the indiscriminate bombing from the air in Vietnam, WW2, eastern Europe etc. Ppl Arguing that "MANY OF THEM ARE TERRORISTS" how do you know this? According to some westerners, their is an undercover group of special op cleaner Arabs who's sole job is to, without being noticed by international observers etc, remove the fire arms/bombs from the bodies of dead Arabs so as to make them look like innocents.
Its convenient to label these desperate people terrorists. They can't relay on shipments of arms, planes, tanks etc from an outside nation. They are infarct on a virtual Island. They are forced into this kind of warfare.

There was a relatively peaceful few weeks in Palatine/Israel recently apart from the internal feuding in Palestine which was interrupted by an Isreali Artillery shell landing randomly on a Palestinian beach were families were relaxing. (yes they actually do that shit. Not just making bombs and praying for the destruction of the west) killing Innocent women and children. The Israelis tried to blame it on the Palestinians saying it was a landmine they planted on their own heavily used beach, even though all the wounds on the victims were at head height and the casing of the shell along with its fragments were scattered around the site. This attack got very little media coverage I noticed compared to Israeli loss of life.
I don't condone the use of violence in any form, but I dont like this polarized view and blind believe that Israel is so righteous and the Palestinians are simply towel heads hell bend on destructions on a search for the illusive 500 virgins etc...............rant over.

BTW I have a friend who is going out to Palestine as a international observer. We are putting on a fund raising party to raise money to send him out there. So I should be getting information from the ground very soon.
2006-06-16 05:02:51
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|6783|vancouver

QuestionMark wrote:

spastic bullet wrote:

The unmistakable assumption is that Palestinians believe their freedom of movement trumps Israeli citizens' right to live.  Nowhere is the reader given any indication of the reality of Palestinian loss of life.  It's as if "human life" is the exclusive preserve of Israelis, whereas what's at stake for the Palestinians is mere freedom of movement.
The Palestinian loss of life, although very saddening, has nothing to do with my base assumption that Life>Free Motion.  I also never implied that life is the exclusive preserve of Israelis. That is obviously not the case.
This is the wording I was responding to...

QuestionMark wrote:

The notion that the Palestinians are living in a "ghetto" is misleading. Israel has deployed roadblocks throughout the West Bank to stop possible terrorists from infiltrating Israel. Yes, it does limit the Palestinians in some areas but it isn't without a reason. Israel concluded (rightfully so, IMO) that the life of Israeli citizens is more important than the free motion of Palestinians. When human life is in the balance, it outweighs everything.
Whose freedom of movement is being referred to here, exclusively?  And whose right to life?  Once again...

spastic bullet wrote:

It's as if "human life" is the exclusive preserve of Israelis, whereas what's at stake for the Palestinians is mere freedom of movement.
If you do not mean to imply this, I suggest you employ more rigorous logical constructions in the future.  Ambiguity does not flatter your intent.

QuestionMark wrote:

The data you've given regarding the "death ratio" between Israeli and Palestinians is, again, misleading. First of all, you compared the number of Israeli CITIZENS killed by Palestinian attacks, with the total number of Palestinians killed (Many of whom are Terrorists).  This is a biased presentation of the truth.
I'm not sure why you placed "death ratio" in quotes -- those are not my words.  Anyway, it is true that direct comparisons are difficult to make, given that there is no Palestinian state and therefore no army in the proper sense.  This is why I...
1. Encourage(d) readers to check out the original source, B'Tselem (an Israeli human rights group) for more detailed information; and...
2. Included the figures pertaining only to minors killed.  I note that you refrain from addressing this aspect entirely, perhaps prudently.

QuestionMark wrote:

Palestinians civilians killed by Israeli Defense Forces died almost exclusively as part of the ongoing campaign to root-out terrorist infrastructure. Fighting in a densely urbanized region has its price, that is inevitable.
Oh dear...

A totally different guy also called QuestionMark wrote:

Actually, the West Bank is relatively empty. If you go there you'll mostly see stony hills with isolated villages here and there.
I'll let you guys settle that one between yourselves.  No pun intended. 

QuestionMark wrote:

The Israeli civilians killed, on the other hand, were killed by Palestinian ACTS OF TERRORISM. It is important to differentiate between the two. I'm not, of course, justifying the Palestinian loss of life.
No, of course not.  But they are all terrorists, even the children.  And it's not like there's anything terrifying, per se about an Apache "precision strike" that just happens to cause a few collateral casualties in your neighbourhood.  Or tanks rolling around your streets.  Etc.

QuestionMark wrote:

I think that for each civilian killed, the IDF has to take a long hard look at itself, and find out what went wrong.
I agree.  And there are plenty of Israelis who also agree, for which they are to be commended.  B'Tselem are an example of this -- you should not dismiss their data so lightly.

QuestionMark wrote:

Israel can't afford to do nothing. The other alternative, as far as Israel is concerned, is buses exploding and civilians knifed in broad daylight.
What do you suggest they do? (considering the Palestinian government, [controlled by Hamas] is aimed at eliminating Israel)
I hardly think the only alternative is "to do nothing".  Engagement and dialogue are the best hope for peace, as is obviously the case in other areas of human conflict.  Ah, but Hamas...  blah blah blah...  Look, if Israel (or I should say Likud) had shown any interest in dealing with Fatah when they had ample opportunity to do so, perhaps Palestinian democracy would not have beaten its oh-so-predictable path to Hamas.

As is the case elsewhere in other conflicts, extremists on each side rely on each other.  Likud and Hamas are secret lovers.  They each allow the other to scare the shit out of their own people and into their waiting arms.  It's a familiar enough pattern.  Except there is a gross asymmetry in their relative abilities.  Do you think Hamas are even remotely capable of eliminating Israel?  Of course not.

Is Israel capable of destroying Palestine?  Remind me, what is Palestine again?
2006-06-16 06:26:03
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6803
JahManRed: You take the "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" axiom too far: yes, it is about perspective, but the terms are not mutually exclusive.  One describes the aim, the other their method.  So, too the ally, who looks at their aim, they are a freedom fighter.  To the enemy, who looks at their method, they are a terrorist.  To the 3rd party, they are terrorist freedom fighters.  Perspective is a tricky thing: it can change an image, or it can partially reveal it.  I don't disagree with the Palestinian cause (that is to say, they have been wronged, and I do not feel their solution is an unreasonable idea, but I don't necessarily believe it is the best solution), but they are terrorists.

QuestionMark:  How many of the Palestinian minors were terrorists?  I also find it interesting that although the names of every person killed are listed, and there is at least some indication of whether they were terrorist affiliated or not for at least some of them, all Palestinians were put in the same block.  Given that it's an Israeli group, that says to me the majority appeared to be innocent.  Regardless, it tells us that the Israelis are giving as good as they're getting, and no wonder when their idea of a police action is sending out an attack chopper.  They aren't exactly precision instruments.

Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-16 06:29:57)

2006-06-16 06:33:08
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797

JahManRed wrote:

Could you stop calling the Palestinians Terrorists please. They are freedom fighters. Israel and the US label them terrorists. They are at war IMO. Yes they use Guerrilla techniques, yes they use suicide bombings. The kamikaze pilots of WW2 were not labeled terrorists. They were in fact the last desperate acts of a desperate people influenced by the religious believes of their nation. The Vietnamese were not labeled terrorists. Quite similar.
Unless the Palestinians get a load of tanks out into open ground and fight face to face with the Israelis/Americans they are terrorists. Why is this I ask? Why is this form of open warfare so acceptable and righteous to the west? To limit civilian casualties? To uphold the laws of war? I think the war in Iraqi blows that theory out of the water. Look at the mounting civilian casualty death rate. Look at the indiscriminate bombing from the air in Vietnam, WW2, eastern Europe etc. Ppl Arguing that "MANY OF THEM ARE TERRORISTS" how do you know this? According to some westerners, their is an undercover group of special op cleaner Arabs who's sole job is to, without being noticed by international observers etc, remove the fire arms/bombs from the bodies of dead Arabs so as to make them look like innocents.
Its convenient to label these desperate people terrorists. They can't relay on shipments of arms, planes, tanks etc from an outside nation. They are infarct on a virtual Island. They are forced into this kind of warfare.

There was a relatively peaceful few weeks in Palatine/Israel recently apart from the internal feuding in Palestine which was interrupted by an Isreali Artillery shell landing randomly on a Palestinian beach were families were relaxing. (yes they actually do that shit. Not just making bombs and praying for the destruction of the west) killing Innocent women and children. The Israelis tried to blame it on the Palestinians saying it was a landmine they planted on their own heavily used beach, even though all the wounds on the victims were at head height and the casing of the shell along with its fragments were scattered around the site. This attack got very little media coverage I noticed compared to Israeli loss of life.
I don't condone the use of violence in any form, but I dont like this polarized view and blind believe that Israel is so righteous and the Palestinians are simply towel heads hell bend on destructions on a search for the illusive 500 virgins etc...............rant over.

BTW I have a friend who is going out to Palestine as a international observer. We are putting on a fund raising party to raise money to send him out there. So I should be getting information from the ground very soon.
Send yer man my best wishes for his Palestine trip. My trip there was enlightening. The Irish are very well received by the Palestinians.
2006-06-16 07:06:16
QuestionMark
Member
+2|6769

CameronPoe wrote:

Question for QuestionMark(lol!): Do you agree with collective punishment? I'm not solely talking about civilian casualties from Israeli operations - I'm also talking about the bulldozing of houses belonging to relatives of Palestinians that carry out militant actions against the state of Israel. That doesn't seem like the kind of action that is likely to diminish the so-called 'terrorism' of the Palestinians (more than likely it will just increase the number of people seeking vengeance on Israel). Also, the unprovoked eviction of Palestinians from their land and houses as well as the prohibition of them building on their own land in certain parts of the occupied territories.
There's a clear distinction between "militant actions" and "terrorist attacks". What exactly makes the difference between a bus blowing up in Tel-Aviv and airliners crashing into the twin towers? Why is one considered "militant" while the other "terrorist"?

For you to fully understand my answer to your question, you must first understand the mentality of the Palestinians.  In most cases, the hatred towards the west (and Israel in particular), is nurtured from a very young age by the family. The "would be bomber" is taught as a child that dying for Allah's honor is the ultimate goal in life. This perverted way of thinking is what makes "martyrdom" so seductive for the younger generation. When the, now grown, bomber reaches he's life-long goal (by murdering men women and children), his family praises his actions. The family, who had nurtured the hatred that motivated what he did, is to blame. As far as Israel is concerned, they were indirectly responsible for the murdering of innocent civilians, and so they should be punished.
If the potential terrorist knows that his family would be left homeless as a result, he would think twice before blowing himself up.  This logic is what drives the Israeli policy. There have been cases where the terrorist's family members reported their 'wayward' son to the authorities to prevent their house from being demolished. I think this is a short term solution that may cause problems on the long run. If it helps prevent atrocities against Israelis, then it is justified IMO.

spastic bullet wrote:

If you do not mean to imply this, I suggest you employ more rigorous logical constructions in the future.  Ambiguity does not flatter your intent.
I wasn't being ambiguous. It's a matter of perspective. I guess you didn't quite understand what I was trying to convey.

spastic bullet wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Palestinians civilians killed by Israeli Defense Forces died almost exclusively as part of the ongoing campaign to root-out terrorist infrastructure. Fighting in a densely urbanized region has its price, that is inevitable.
Oh dear...

A totally different guy also called QuestionMark wrote:

Actually, the West Bank is relatively empty. If you go there you'll mostly see stony hills with isolated villages here and there.
What I meant was that most of the fighting is carried out inside the cities and villages. That quote was taken out of context.

spastic bullet wrote:

I hardly think the only alternative is "to do nothing".  Engagement and dialogue are the best hope for peace, as is obviously the case in other areas of human conflict.  Ah, but Hamas...  blah blah blah...  Look, if Israel (or I should say Likud) had shown any interest in dealing with Fatah when they had ample opportunity to do so, perhaps Palestinian democracy would not have beaten its oh-so-predictable path to Hamas.
The conditions for dialog were not fit then as they are now. You can't expect the Israeli government to talk to an authority which does nothing to stop terrorists from killing Israeli civilians.  A man who stays passive when he sees a crime, for example,  is no better than the criminals. True?
2006-06-16 07:13:47
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797

QuestionMark wrote:

There's a clear distinction between "militant actions" and "terrorist attacks". What exactly makes the difference between a bus blowing up in Tel-Aviv and airliners crashing into the twin towers? Why is one considered "militant" while the other "terrorist"?

For you to fully understand my answer to your question, you must first understand the mentality of the Palestinians.  In most cases, the hatred towards the west (and Israel in particular), is nurtured from a very young age by the family. The "would be bomber" is taught as a child that dying for Allah's honor is the ultimate goal in life. This perverted way of thinking is what makes "martyrdom" so seductive for the younger generation. When the, now grown, bomber reaches he's life-long goal (by murdering men women and children), his family praises his actions. The family, who had nurtured the hatred that motivated what he did, is to blame. As far as Israel is concerned, they were indirectly responsible for the murdering of innocent civilians, and so they should be punished.
If the potential terrorist knows that his family would be left homeless as a result, he would think twice before blowing himself up.  This logic is what drives the Israeli policy. There have been cases where the terrorist's family members reported their 'wayward' son to the authorities to prevent their house from being demolished. I think this is a short term solution that may cause problems on the long run. If it helps prevent atrocities against Israelis, then it is justified IMO.
I don't consider the 9/11 bombers 'terrorists' but rather 'criminals'. The word 'terrorist' is a propaganda tool whose use is dangerous as it shades peoples opinions of things without them seeking to understand the point of view of 'terrorist', whether they even have one that is.

I follow your logic on the house bulldozing but feel that what you say is a gross gross generalisation. Such acts can do Israel no favours in the eyes of anyone in the international community let alone the people they are supposed to making peace with.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-16 07:18:10)

2006-06-16 07:18:17
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6803
Apart from the fact that you completely ignored me, I think you'll find the fact that they're living in squalid refugee camps is a much greater factor in a terrorists creation.  I mean, call me crazy, but I just have this theory that happy people don't BLOW THEMSELVES UP.  And I have much more respect for the suicide bombers than the helicopter pilots, the reason for which was pretty well summed up by a Luenig (sp?) cartoon.  In the first panel, the Israeli (standing there with an assault rifle) declares that he is willing to kill for his country, whilst the Palestinian declares that he is willing to die for his country.  In the second they both think that it "could be over sooner than [they] thought!".  If only that were true...........

QuestionMark wrote:

The conditions for dialog were not fit then as they are now. You can't expect the Israeli government to talk to an authority which does nothing to stop terrorists from killing Israeli civilians.  A man who stays passive when he sees a crime, for example,  is no better than the criminals. True?
And how exactly are they supposed to stop the terrorists?  Using their magic powers?  The Israelis deny the Palestinian government any real power, what do you expect?

Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-16 07:19:26)

2006-06-16 07:32:37
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|6783|vancouver

QuestionMark wrote:

I guess you didn't quite understand what I was trying to convey.
After reading your laboured response to CameronPoe's straightforward question, it's quite evident that I did.  The strict adherence to the script I laid out in my first post even makes me seem quite prescient, if I do say so myself.

Also, don't get too upset if you are not a native English speaker, but those of us who are do not typically describe even the interiors of "isolated villages" as "densely urbanized regions".  Show me the context that gem was unfairly plucked from, if you will.  Otherwise, learn when to accept that you erred and move on.

Finally, are you saying the conditions for dialogue are fitter now that Hamas are in power, than when Fatah were?  I'm not sure what you mean by this -- please clarify.
2006-06-16 08:11:57
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7079

CameronPoe wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

One more thing few people seem aware of is water rights in israel Palestine. It pretty tuff to farm in that area when you cant irragate. Guess who controls the water supply. Its interesting to see satellite photos of israeli and Palestinian land if you know who is in what  Zone. Some land is lush  Green, some is scorched Brown.
Agreed - it's frighteningly obvious. THe old Israeli-settled parts of Gaza are clearly so green on the satellite images you can almost trace the border with Egypt from the change in colour!!!
Clearly yes,
Also in a Desert country water is a big topic and a big concern. The Palestinians have a lot of access to the Dead Sea, but I always thought the didn't fuk around when they named it that am i incorrect?
ps Don't we hate each other in some other post?

Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-06-16 08:16:04)

2006-06-16 08:12:58
QuestionMark
Member
+2|6769

CameronPoe wrote:

I don't consider the 9/11 bombers 'terrorists' but rather 'criminals'. The word 'terrorist' is a propaganda tool whose use is dangerous as it shades peoples opinions of things without them seeking to understand the point of view of 'terrorist', whether they even have one that is.
What you just stated is pretty extreme. If THEY aren't considered terrorists by your standards, who is?

Bubbalo wrote:

Apart from the fact that you completely ignored me, I think you'll find the fact that they're living in squalid refugee camps is a much greater factor in a terrorists creation.
I didn't intentionally ignore you. You probably posted your post while I was writing mine.
The notion that their economical situation is driving them to blow themselves up, is just nonsense. I mean, look at the 9/11 terrorists. Most of them came from wealthy families.

Bubbalo wrote:

I mean, call me crazy, but I just have this theory that happy people don't BLOW THEMSELVES UP.  And I have much more respect for the suicide bombers than the helicopter pilots, the reason for which was pretty well summed up by a Luenig (sp?) cartoon.  In the first panel, the Israeli (standing there with an assault rifle) declares that he is willing to kill for his country, whilst the Palestinian declares that he is willing to die for his country.  In the second they both think that it "could be over sooner than [they] thought!".  If only that were true...........
Whether they're happy or not has little to do with their decision to blow themselves up. Like I already stated in my previous post, their whole society praises death in the name of Allah. For them, martyrdom, is the peak of human achievement just like being a successful wealthy man, is peak of human achievement for you.

Bubbalo wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

The conditions for dialog were not fit then as they are now. You can't expect the Israeli government to talk to an authority which does nothing to stop terrorists from killing Israeli civilians.  A man who stays passive when he sees a crime, for example,  is no better than the criminals. True?
And how exactly are they supposed to stop the terrorists?  Using their magic powers?  The Israelis deny the Palestinian government any real power, what do you expect?
Do you really think the Palestinian government branches were impotent? They had more than enough guns and resources to enforce their authority. If they truly wanted to stop the terrorists, they would have done so.
2006-06-16 08:18:13
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6797

Horseman 77 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

One more thing few people seem aware of is water rights in israel Palestine. It pretty tuff to farm in that area when you cant irragate. Guess who controls the water supply. Its interesting to see satellite photos of israeli and Palestinian land if you know who is in what  Zone. Some land is lush  Green, some is scorched Brown.
Agreed - it's frighteningly obvious. THe old Israeli-settled parts of Gaza are clearly so green on the satellite images you can almost trace the border with Egypt from the change in colour!!!
Clearly yes,
Also in a Desert country water is a big topic and a big concern. The Palestinians have a lot of access to the Dead Sea, but I always thought the didn't fuk around when they named it that am i incorrect?
ps Don't we hate each other in some other post?
I think we're on the same wavelength with respect to Palestine.
2006-06-16 08:36:31
QuestionMark
Member
+2|6769

spastic bullet wrote:

Also, don't get too upset if you are not a native English speaker, but those of us who are do not typically describe even the interiors of "isolated villages" as "densely urbanized regions".
Oh but they are densely populated... Houses are literally built over each other.   It's obvious you've never been to a Palestinian village.

spastic bullet wrote:

Finally, are you saying the conditions for dialogue are fitter now that Hamas are in power, than when Fatah were?  I'm not sure what you mean by this -- please clarify.
No. What I meant is that when Fatah was in power, the conditions weren't fit, just as they are now.

Last edited by QuestionMark (2006-06-16 08:39:42)

2006-06-16 08:57:00
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|6783|vancouver

QuestionMark wrote:

spastic bullet wrote:

Also, don't get too upset if you are not a native English speaker, but those of us who are do not typically describe even the interiors of "isolated villages" as "densely urbanized regions".
Oh but they are densely populated... Houses are literally built over each other.   It's obvious you've never been to a Palestinian village.
Are they constructed in such a way as to confound photographic representation?  Lol...  You said "densely urbanized".  You can't admit your mistake.  I understand.  Let's move on.

QuestionMark wrote:

spastic bullet wrote:

Finally, are you saying the conditions for dialogue are fitter now that Hamas are in power, than when Fatah were?  I'm not sure what you mean by this -- please clarify.
No. What I meant is that when Fatah was in power, the conditions weren't fit, just as they are [sic] now.
Okay, still flawed, but I understand now anyway.  You're saying the conditions weren't fit then, and they still aren't.  They basically never will be.  Carte blanche.

Last edited by spastic bullet (2006-06-16 08:57:44)

2006-06-16 09:04:19
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6803

QuestionMark wrote:

What you just stated is pretty extreme. If THEY aren't considered terrorists by your standards, who is?
His point is that it's a poor term, as using it immediately sides people against the group and their aims no matter what.

QuestionMark wrote:

I didn't intentionally ignore you. You probably posted your post while I was writing mine.
They were 40 mins apart.  But ok, whatever.

QuestionMark wrote:

The notion that their economical situation is driving them to blow themselves up, is just nonsense. I mean, look at the 9/11 terrorists. Most of them came from wealthy families.
1)  I have not talked about their economic situation

2)  The 9/11 terrorists have nothing to do with the Palestine/Israel conflict

3)  The particular post, as well as not talking about their economic situation, talked about your assertion that the numbers were dodgy because some of the Palestinians were terrorists.  Re-read it, and if you still need clarification, feel free to ask.  I've misunderstood people's posts in the past, it happens.


QuestionMark wrote:

Whether they're happy or not has little to do with their decision to blow themselves up. Like I already stated in my previous post, their whole society praises death in the name of Allah. For them, martyrdom, is the peak of human achievement just like being a successful wealthy man, is peak of human achievement for you.
And you know this how?  Did you interview them before they did so?  Also, you must look at the situation that created their willingness to martyr themselves.  Extremists tend to be those who are unhappy, typically for social/lifestyle reasons, who latch onto ideas so that they have something to believe in, so that there is a purpose other than living in what they consider unacceptably conditions.  In short:  happy people are unlikely to become extermists, and unlikely to kill themselves.  On the topic of the 9/11 bombers, the leader of the group was from a very fundamentalist/conservative Muslim family, and had moved to Germany to study, where morals are a lot looser.  It is entirely possible that it was this culture shock that led to him retreating in upon what he already knew (i.e. fundamenatlist Islam), and thence to terrorist activity.

QuestionMark wrote:

Do you really think the Palestinian government branches were impotent? They had more than enough guns and resources to enforce their authority. If they truly wanted to stop the terrorists, they would have done so.
Do you have any links to info?  Becuase I freely admit, I can find none.  I'm willing to bet they don't have the resources based on Israel's unwillingness to give them any real power, and the fact that to stop the terrorists by force they would need to outnumber and beat them in armed conflict.  Quite apart from the near impossibility of this, it should not be the Palestinians job to protect Israel from agression which they invited upon themselves when they took Palestinian land by force.

QuestionMark wrote:

No. What I meant is that when Fatah was in power, the conditions weren't fit, just as they are now.
What does it take for the conditions to be fit?
2006-06-16 09:05:12
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7079

CameronPoe wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:


Agreed - it's frighteningly obvious. THe old Israeli-settled parts of Gaza are clearly so green on the satellite images you can almost trace the border with Egypt from the change in colour!!!
Clearly yes,
Also in a Desert country water is a big topic and a big concern. The Palestinians have a lot of access to the Dead Sea, but I always thought the didn't fuk around when they named it that am i incorrect?
ps Don't we hate each other in some other post?
I think we're on the same wavelength with respect to Palestine.
The whole thing is Sad For both parties and I cant see any end to it and I don't have any aswers at all.

 

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard