Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jude]

You were implying bias in American education system:

Well, yeah....I'll do more than imply that.

1)  Most of the stuff sold here comes from out of the country.  That book was probably written by several people from all different countries.

I very much doubt that, not that it's all that important. The physical book may have been manufactured somewhere else, but the actual writing for stuff like that is not the kind of thing that's outsourced. And even if it were, it's meant for an American audience, and is going to have to pass the scrutiny of American school boards...

[Il Palazzo]

Too bad that nobody here cares about citations and other verifiable data.

[Yanlin]

SHHHH. Don't say the word citation near Jude. He's afraid of it.

[Jude]

In a little bit I'll post a bunch of BBC articles about the Gaza massacre just to make you eat your words but I got to go now

Here's a few to snack on

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7964057.stm - white phosphorus use

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7958452.stm - UN accusations of war crimes

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7814490.stm - civilians and children were already a large portion of the casualties at the time of this writing partway through the massacre

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7905320.stm - Israeli weapon use

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7866113.stm - link I happened to see, it's an aid worker's eyewitness account of some of the destruction, it's part of a series

[Yanlin]

White phosphorus makes great smoke screens. Used just for that.

War crimes... What of Hammas? Has anyone tried to bitchslap them on war crimes yet? This is self defense.

Civilian casualties were minimized as much as possible. You honestly can't call Israel out on murdering innocents by the droves. Compared to most other wars, this was nothing. Compare for example, Iraq.

Weapon use: Again, this all goes back to IDF claiming to only returning fire. It just becomes a slap fest of both sides acting correct with us not knowing who to trust. But I'll have to side with the guys protecting my sorry ass allowing me to type this and not the news guys from another country.

That last link, can't say I can support IDF on that. But honestly, I'd like to see what any other nation would do in such a situation.



Now your proposed solution was to return Israel to the original ground plan where we got a tiny sliver of this land. You want to uproot MILLIONS of civilians and relocate them, then give away all the infrastructure to a terrorist organization? We already tried doing something like this with Gaza. We pulled out, sent all our civilians packing to new homes and let the Palestinians live there. For what end? For Hammas to bomb us? How does this make sense to you? The claim that they were here first and longest is incorrect. There were others before them. They conquered them. The Brits conquered this place, we got it by a decision of the UN. What's not to understand? Why aren't we hammering the US for literally STEALING the land from native Americans? Or Australia, for that matter.

What's going on here is nothing. We got a sorry ass sliver of land already. You want us to have less?

Also, just as soon as we got this original sliver of land, the Arab neighbors declared war. We kicked their asses and took some land. Pretty fair by now. What makes you think they wont wipe us off anyway? You're just gonna give them what they want? Our total destruction? You'd trade the lives of millions for the sake of making the Arabs feel better?

Really, I'd like to see your train of thought. Have you really thought this through?



Now can we PLEASE stop this discussion? START YOUR OWN GOD DAMN THREAD.

[Jude]

White phosphorus makes great smoke screens. Used just for that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus#Effects_on_humans

I guess that's why it's getting called a war crime

War crimes... What of Hammas? Has anyone tried to bitchslap them on war crimes yet? This is self defense.

What of Hamas
They're terrorists
By trying to push the attention back on them you're morally equating Israel with the terrorists

Civilian casualties were minimized as much as possible.

And yet? Plenty of civilians still died. Not to mention much of Gaza is in ruins, leaving people homeless, without water, without supplies, without any source of income or way to rebuild their lives.

Weapon use: Again, this all goes back to IDF claiming to only returning fire. It just becomes a slap fest of both sides acting correct with us not knowing who to trust. But I'll have to side with the guys protecting my sorry ass allowing me to type this and not the news guys from another country.

That's not a very good way to go if you're looking for the truth...who would you trust in an argument, one of the two people arguing or a neutral observer?

That last link, can't say I can support IDF on that.

That's good...if you can spread that attitude to the rest of Israel then maybe this won't happen again.

Now your proposed solution was to return Israel to the original ground plan where we got a tiny sliver of this land.

Huh?

I think all of British mandate Palestine should be a single, democratic and secular state with no preferential treatment given to any ethnic group, with protection of all human rights for everybody who lives there, and with the right of return granted to those who were expelled in 1948.

Some people seem to see this as anti-semitic because Israel would no longer be a majority Jewish state. I think that's nonsense; first of all, I question the merit of any state established specifically to serve a certain ethnic population above others; second I have a serious problem with a country whose existence necessitates keeping millions of people living in squalid refugee camps for decades with no end in sight.

And yeah, I've thought this through. I spent three months thinking about almost nothing else, while I was there, and plenty of time since then. And I know the history. I also know that the solution I think should happen is completely unrealistic, but if you wanted to know what I thought...

[Yanlin]

Civilian casualties were minimized as much as possible.

And yet? Plenty of civilians still died. Not to mention much of Gaza is in ruins, leaving people homeless, without water, without supplies, without any source of income or way to rebuild their lives.

Weapon use: Again, this all goes back to IDF claiming to only returning fire. It just becomes a slap fest of both sides acting correct with us not knowing who to trust. But I'll have to side with the guys protecting my sorry ass allowing me to type this and not the news guys from another country.

That's not a very good way to go if you're looking for the truth...who would you trust in an argument, one of the two people arguing or a neutral observer?

Civilians: Again, crippling a terrorist infrastructure is bound to have that kind of effect.

Neutrality: THERE'S NO SUCH THING. Neutral observes DO NOT EXIST. Even the BBC is biased.

Now your proposed solution was to return Israel to the original ground plan where we got a tiny sliver of this land.

Huh?

I think all of British mandate Palestine should be a single, democratic and secular state with no preferential treatment given to any ethnic group, with protection of all human rights for everybody who lives there, and with the right of return granted to those who were expelled in 1948.

Some people seem to see this as anti-semitic because Israel would no longer be a majority Jewish state. I think that's nonsense; first of all, I question the merit of any state established specifically to serve a certain ethnic population above others; second I have a serious problem with a country whose existence necessitates keeping millions of people living in squalid refugee camps for decades with no end in sight.

And yeah, I've thought this through. I spent three months thinking about almost nothing else, while I was there, and plenty of time since then. And I know the history. I also know that the solution I think should happen is completely unrealistic, but if you wanted to know what I thought...

Placing Jews above all others? That is extremely incorrect. The country was created as a place to gather Jews. Nothing more, nothing less. This country's existence does not necessitate the murder of innocent Palestinians. Hammas' terrorist actions do. We cannot simply keep sitting idly while our (also innocent) citizens get shelled with rockets. Hammas is not willing to negotiate, they are blocking all our attempts to aid Palestinians and I don't even want to get into who they wanted us to release for Gilad Shalit back.

[LegoLord]

Why is the whole civilian-deaths-from-self-defense thing even and issue here?  What country hasn't killed a few thousand civilians during a time of war, in which the civilians harmed were from the aggressors side?  Well?  America has.  The UK has.  Japan has.  Russia has.  It's really not fair to criticize Israel for causing civilian deaths during an act of self defense.

And realisticly, it's too late to do anything about Israel or its neighbors border-wise.  That would cause families to be uprooted any way you slice it.  That's what caused all this chaos in the first place.  When one country wants another country destroyed, the only thing you can realistically do is defend the country being attacked, not the attacker.

[Jude]

Civilians: Again, crippling a terrorist infrastructure is bound to have that kind of effect.

Well, you could just as well make the argument that Palestinians fighting for their freedom is going to have to entail some Israeli civilians getting killed. I don't buy either argument; they're equally morally repugnant.

Neutrality: THERE'S NO SUCH THING. Neutral observes DO NOT EXIST. Even the BBC is biased.

Well, if you want to get philosophical, sure, but you're kidding yourself if you think the IDF is a better source for info about human rights violations the IDF commits, than is an international media network.

Placing Jews above all others? That is extremely incorrect. The country was created as a place to gather Jews. Nothing more, nothing less. This country's existence does not necessitate the murder of innocent Palestinians.

Israel grants privileges (free citizenship, free military protection regardless if they're doing something illegal) to Jews that it doesn't grant to anybody else. It also refuses to let the Palestinian refugees return to their homes, because that would upset the demographics of the Jewish state. That's why a secular state which was blind with regard to ethnicity would be better.

[LegoLord]

Well, you could just as well make the argument that Palestinians fighting for their freedom.

What did I just say?  Anyway, there is no freedom to fight for:  Israel does not rule over them.  If they think they are oppressed, they should be fighting their own government.

[Jude]

OK, generally when you don't know anything about a situation, it's best not to get into intense discussions about it.

[LegoLord]

OK, generally when you don't know anything about a situation, it's best not to get into intense discussions about it.

Sorry.  Mistaken reading there.  I have trouble with those countries' names sometimes.

I wouldn't call that knowing "nothing" though.  That's a bit extreme.

[Jude]

Well, it was exaggeration, but your post demonstrated a lack of knowledge of the basics of the situation.

Edit: Wait, you misread the countries names?

I'm confused and sleepy.

[Yanlin]

That's it. If you're just going to call anybody who enters a contradictory position to you stupid, then I'm not even gonna bother trying to win this argument. You've already lost.

I'm just going to say this. Leave this thread. Start your own. I'm not going to help you derail this thread.

[Toady One]

Have it your way, I guess.  Two warnings.  Failure to comply.  Yanlin, Jude, muted for 3 days.