|
DodoB
|
 |
July 01, 2014, 03:44:14 PM |
|
Israel is the occupier and oppressor here sana. Israel is the one committing a slow steady genocide against the Arab population. Just take the Gaza 2009 massacre, it was horror unmitigated crime against humanity. I'm sorry if I have no sympathy for the folks responsible.
Is that... truth??? Careful now... There is no room for truth in a discussion about Israel... Truth has the remarkable quality of always being antisemitic. Nice job finding this article! Fortunately, all the mainstream media all over the world made it easier for you by plastering it all over the front pages. Humans are beasts... Indeed. Now please find the CNN article about the 9 Palestinians that Israel killed in the two weeks since those 3 Israeli teenagers were kidnapped. You know, those 9 Palestinians, one of whom was 13 years old, one was 16 years old and a third was a mentally-challenged adult, all of whom were murdered in cold blood by Israeli soldiers in the last two weeks alone. What??? There is no CNN article about the 9 Palestinians killed by Israel in the last two weeks? And there isn't one about the dozens of other Palestinians killed by Israelis since the beginning of this year alone? What a shock!!! One could almost imagine the western MSM is biased! The Palestinians that were killed were NOT innocent,they were throwing rocks on armed soldiers and were RIOTING,not the best idea ever,especially when you want to return home without harm. They werent some random kids playing ball. On the other hand,the 3 Israeli teenagers were just hitchhiking,they got kidnapped and murdered just for being Jewish at the wrong place in the wrong time. Here you go: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/27/world/meast/gaza-israeli-tank-fire/index.html "2 Palestininas dead from Israeli fire" CNN reporting about Palestinians dead?!?!? Impossible!! must be some crazy zionazi jewish consipracy to eliminate polar bears!!!111 /s |
|
|
|
|
MaxwellsDemon
Full Member
 Offline
Activity: 187
Merit: 109
Converting information into power since 1867
|
|
July 01, 2014, 05:15:25 PM |
|
The Palestinians that were killed were NOT innocent,they were throwing rocks on armed soldiers and were RIOTING,not the best idea ever,especially when you want to return home without harm. They werent some random kids playing ball. On the other hand,the 3 Israeli teenagers were just hitchhiking,they got kidnapped and murdered just for being Jewish at the wrong place in the wrong time.
Your ability to parrot back the propaganda you heard from the MSM is truly adorable. In fact, most of the Palestinians I mentioned were not killed during protests. A few died in their homes; the mentally-handicapped man I mentioned was literally walking down the street minding his own business, when soldiers who were raiding a nearby house yelled at him to stop. He did not immediately respond, so they shot him 4 times ( link). But the details don't really matter. I'm sure you didn't bother to examine any details about any of the deaths mentioned before you responded - you just assumed they must have been "rioting" if the IDF shot them. The real problem is not in the details, but in the substance of the propaganda you're repeating. The sad part is, you never bothered to take a minute and really think about the meaning of what you're parroting. So let's deconstruct it together. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you're absolutely right and all those Palestinians were killed during protests. Surely, many have died this way in the past, so this would not be surprising. You say that they are "NOT innocent", because they were "RIOTING". So let's examine what that means. Palestinians living in the West Bank, who have been under military occupation for 47 years, have their village raided yet again, by hundreds of heavily armed soldiers appearing in the middle of the night. They protest this loudly; some of them even throw stones at the armoured bulletproof jeeps. The jeeps are not even scratched, and neither, of course, are the soldiers. Nevertheless, this protest is illegal and the soldiers respond with rubber-coated bullets as well as live ammunition (in case you didn't know, any protest by Palestinians anywhere in the West Bank is illegal by military decree. Jews can protest wherever they wish, of course, and military decrees don't apply to them anyway). Dozens of Palestinians are injured, maybe one or two die. So what you're saying is this: Palestinians who apply the human right of protest against a heavily armed foreign occupier, in violation of that occupier's laws and decrees, are now considered "NOT innocent", and therefore it is perfectly justified to kill them. If they were "random kids playing ball" that would be wrong, but if they are protesting against the occupation that is making their lives miserable, murdering them is absolutely legitimate (as an aside, I could find maybe three dozen examples of Palestinian kids being killed by soldiers when they really were just "playing ball", but I doubt that would convince you of anything). Think about that a bit. You also say that "rioting" is "not the best idea ever,especially when you want to return home without harm". You are absolutely right about that. Protesting is a very dangerous proposition for a Palestinian, often deadly. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. Quite the opposite. Protest and popular struggle are the only possible recourse of the oppressed. I have nothing but respect and admiration towards the bravery of those who dare to protest against such absurdly superior force. But this, again, is besides the point. How do you relate the fact that protesting is dangerous, with the protesters being "not innocent"? Is the fact that they took a risk for their freedom also a justification of their murder? The Jews who rebelled in the Warsaw ghetto in 1943 knew they would probably be wiped out within days; does that knowledge mean it was okay for the Nazis to kill them all? As for the 3 Israeli teenagers, they were not just "Jewish at the wrong place in the wrong time". They were settlers, forceful colonizers of Palestinian lands. They chose to be in a place that is, in an ethical as well as a practical sense, totally wrong. I'm not saying that fact justifies their murder, but you have to admit they also took a calculated risk. They knew the settlements are a dangerous place, and the probability of getting kidnapped while hitchhiking there is much higher than inside Israel, and yet they chose to be there. Unlike the Palestinians though, they were not taking this risk for their freedom. They had many other options. They could live anywhere in Israel except the settlements. They wanted to steal Palestinian land, they wanted to take part in the oppression. It is them who truly were "not innocent" in all this. |
We're hunting for Leviathan, and Bitcoin is our harpoon.
|
|
|
|
DodoB
|
|
July 01, 2014, 07:21:14 PM |
|
The Palestinians that were killed were NOT innocent,they were throwing rocks on armed soldiers and were RIOTING,not the best idea ever,especially when you want to return home without harm. They werent some random kids playing ball. On the other hand,the 3 Israeli teenagers were just hitchhiking,they got kidnapped and murdered just for being Jewish at the wrong place in the wrong time.
Your ability to parrot back the propaganda you heard from the MSM is truly adorable. In fact, most of the Palestinians I mentioned were not killed during protests. A few died in their homes; the mentally-handicapped man I mentioned was literally walking down the street minding his own business, when soldiers who were raiding a nearby house yelled at him to stop. He did not immediately respond, so they shot him 4 times ( link). But the details don't really matter. I'm sure you didn't bother to examine any details about any of the deaths mentioned before you responded - you just assumed they must have been "rioting" if the IDF shot them. The real problem is not in the details, but in the substance of the propaganda you're repeating. The sad part is, you never bothered to take a minute and really think about the meaning of what you're parroting. So let's deconstruct it together. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you're absolutely right and all those Palestinians were killed during protests. Surely, many have died this way in the past, so this would not be surprising. You say that they are "NOT innocent", because they were "RIOTING". So let's examine what that means. Palestinians living in the West Bank, who have been under military occupation for 47 years, have their village raided yet again, by hundreds of heavily armed soldiers appearing in the middle of the night. They protest this loudly; some of them even throw stones at the armoured bulletproof jeeps. The jeeps are not even scratched, and neither, of course, are the soldiers. Nevertheless, this protest is illegal and the soldiers respond with rubber-coated bullets as well as live ammunition (in case you didn't know, any protest by Palestinians anywhere in the West Bank is illegal by military decree. Jews can protest wherever they wish, of course, and military decrees don't apply to them anyway). Dozens of Palestinians are injured, maybe one or two die. So what you're saying is this: Palestinians who apply the human right of protest against a heavily armed foreign occupier, in violation of that occupier's laws and decrees, are now considered "NOT innocent", and therefore it is perfectly justified to kill them. If they were "random kids playing ball" that would be wrong, but if they are protesting against the occupation that is making their lives miserable, murdering them is absolutely legitimate (as an aside, I could find maybe three dozen examples of Palestinian kids being killed by soldiers when they really were just "playing ball", but I doubt that would convince you of anything). Think about that a bit. You also say that "rioting" is "not the best idea ever,especially when you want to return home without harm". You are absolutely right about that. Protesting is a very dangerous proposition for a Palestinian, often deadly. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. Quite the opposite. Protest and popular struggle are the only possible recourse of the oppressed. I have nothing but respect and admiration towards the bravery of those who dare to protest against such absurdly superior force. But this, again, is besides the point. How do you relate the fact that protesting is dangerous, with the protesters being "not innocent"? Is the fact that they took a risk for their freedom also a justification of their murder? The Jews who rebelled in the Warsaw ghetto in 1943 knew they would probably be wiped out within days; does that knowledge mean it was okay for the Nazis to kill them all? As for the 3 Israeli teenagers, they were not just "Jewish at the wrong place in the wrong time". They were settlers, forceful colonizers of Palestinian lands. They chose to be in a place that is, in an ethical as well as a practical sense, totally wrong. I'm not saying that fact justifies their murder, but you have to admit they also took a calculated risk. They knew the settlements are a dangerous place, and the probability of getting kidnapped while hitchhiking there is much higher than inside Israel, and yet they chose to be there. Unlike the Palestinians though, they were not taking this risk for their freedom. They had many other options. They could live anywhere in Israel except the settlements. They wanted to steal Palestinian land, they wanted to take part in the oppression. It is them who truly were "not innocent" in all this. I wouldnt consider a Gazan site as a balanced source. I wouldnt be surprised if that "handicapped" guy was not actually handicapped,did you real the article? wth was a handicapped dude doing outside in 3:30 during an army raid? Some stuff in the article sound very doubtful. (inb4 im accused of being a zionist slave) From the article " It should be mentioned that the Israeli forces called this campaign “Cleaning the Stables.”" This info is incorrect. i would doubt every word in this article. (in case you didn't know, any protest by Palestinians anywhere in the West Bank is illegal by military decree. Jews can protest wherever they wish, of course, and military decrees don't apply to them anyway) Source? A simple google search proves that statement is incorrect. https://www.google.co.il/search?q=protest+in+west+bank&client=firefox-beta&hs=Vrj&rls=org.mozilla:he:official&channel=sb&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=ef2yU77vIOzT7AbNjoGgCg&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=943This is a protest: http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/montreal_student_demo-1.jpghttp://assets.survivalinternational.org/pictures/1397/jumma-protest_screen.jpgThis is a riot: http://muslimvillage.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/palestinian_riot_01.jpghttp://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads/2014/04/F140404IR02-e1396635971281.jpgCan you spot the diffrence? If so,the latter one is what a Palestinian riot protest looks like. If this is how it looks like,id say replying with rubber bullets,live if necessary,is justified. So if you say that Palestininans can and should riot protest,(I,agree it is their right to protest) dont you think they should also be able to face the consequences of fighting a much stronger enemy? The Jews who rebelled in the Warsaw ghetto in 1943 knew they would probably be wiped out within days; does that knowledge mean it was okay for the Nazis to kill them all? Bad comprasion. the Jews were gassed/murdered systematically,with the sole purpose of eliminating Jews from Europe in a short timespan. Dont think you can say that Israel is trying to acheive the same goal with the Palestinians,even if they do,theyr'e realy bad at it. http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Graph_2.jpg The Jews in the Warsaw uprising had 2 choices,Rebel and pray for that 1% you have to escape,or die in a gas chamber. The Palestinians on the other hand,were offered peace numerous times,they can escape to neighboring Arab states(which they did,and BTW their fellow Arab states dont like this idea so much,see "Black September in Jordan") Or simply not practice terrorism. I dont think the Jews kidnapped German children and shot rockets on German cities. As for the 3 Israeli teenagers, they were not just "Jewish at the wrong place in the wrong time". They were settlers, forceful colonizers of Palestinian lands. They chose to be in a place that is, in an ethical as well as a practical sense, totally wrong. I'm not saying that fact justifies their murder, but you have to admit they also took a calculated risk. They knew the settlements are a dangerous place, and the probability of getting kidnapped while hitchhiking there is much higher than inside Israel, and yet they chose to be there.
Unlike the Palestinians though, they were not taking this risk for their freedom. They had many other options. They could live anywhere in Israel except the settlements. They wanted to steal Palestinian land, they wanted to take part in the oppression. It is them who truly were "not innocent" in all this. Were thoose 3 teenagers responisble for the Jewish immigartion into Palestine in the late 18th centruy and later? I dont think so. However you define them,they were born,raised and lived in the West Bank, they can call it their home as much as the Palestinians can.The 3 teenagers were NOT combatants,they did not practice in combat activity,therefore,they are illegal to target under international law. The fact that Israel did X and Y whether justifiable or not,doesn't justify the murder of the teens. |
|
|
|
|
MaxwellsDemon
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 187
Merit: 109
Converting information into power since 1867
|
|
July 01, 2014, 09:20:46 PM |
|
I wouldnt consider a Gazan site as a balanced source.
A very similar account of this incident appeared in numerous sources, including Israeli ones. This just happened to be the first source I found. But as I said, the details of this particular incident are not relevant - I agreed to assume, for the sake of argument, that all those Palestinians died during demonstrations. Heh, you strike me as one of those Israelis who lives 20 minutes away from the West Bank but has never stepped foot there. It takes a special type of cognitive dissonance to defend Israel's violent oppression of Palestinian protests, and at the same time staunchly refuse to accept the fact that Israel restricts the Palestinian right of protest  And the funniest part is that your "evidence" is pictures of Palestinians protesting... I never said that they don't. In fact, I specifically said that they do... I also said that they are violently subdued by the Israeli army. Why don't you take another look at your own pictures, and tell me how many of them portray Israeli soldiers violently suppressing protesters. Your "simple google search" is evidence of my point much more than it is of yours. As for the facts, I'd hate to burst your bubble but all Palestinian protest is indeed illegal by military decree (as I suspect you speak Hebrew, here's a couple of sources for you: Wikipedia, B'Tselem). This decree was given by the IDF immediately after the West Bank was occupied in 1967, and it strongly prohibits any kind of protest, including peaceful demonstration, under punishment of up to 10 years in prison. It is an illegal decree according to international law, which protects the right of protest in occupied territories, and it does not, of course, apply to Jews, even if they are protesting inside the West Bank. Great, you win the 2014 Academy Award for cherry-picking pictures from Google Images. I'm so proud. As someone who has actually been to quite a few demonstrations, including in Palestine, let me tell you this: I would love to see the faces of those students in Montreal when they encounter the Israeli border police. The difference between your pictures is that in the first ones, no one is shooting at the protesters. One wonders why you think "replying" is necessary at all, much less justified. So if you say that Palestininans can and should riot protest,(I,agree it is their right to protest) dont you think they should also be able to face the consequences of fighting a much stronger enemy?
Again with this strange logic of yours... So you agree they should have the right to protest, but you think they should "face the consequences" of the fact that Israel is much stronger? Obviously, they do face the consequences. They get shot. If anything, that means you should respect their courage. But instead you use it as justification. Please explain to me why the fact that Israel is stronger justifies the use of force against the occupied population. Are you advocating some kind of social Darwinism, where the weak get beaten by the strong and that's okay because it's the natural order of things? Bad comprasion. the Jews were gassed/murdered systematically,with the sole purpose of eliminating Jews from Europe in a short timespan. Dont think you can say that Israel is trying to acheive the same goal with the Palestinians,even if they do,theyr'e realy bad at it. http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Graph_2.jpg The Jews in the Warsaw uprising had 2 choices,Rebel and pray for that 1% you have to escape,or die in a gas chamber. The Palestinians on the other hand,were offered peace numerous times,they can escape to neighboring Arab states(which they did,and BTW their fellow Arab states dont like this idea so much,see "Black September in Jordan") Or simply not practice terrorism. I dont think the Jews kidnapped German children and shot rockets on German cities. Not only is none of that even remotely true, it's also entirely irrelevant to what I said. Were thoose 3 teenagers responisble for the Jewish immigartion into Palestine in the late 18th centruy and later? I dont think so.
However you define them,they were born,raised and lived in the West Bank,they can call it their home as much as the Palestinians can.
The 3 teenagers were NOT combatants,they did not practice in combat activity,therefore,they are illegal to target under international law. The fact that Israel did X and Y whether justifiable or not,doesn't justify the murder of the teens.
I actually completely agree with you here, and I never said otherwise. Your point does raise some interesting questions though. If we agree that people born in settlements are not guilty for the crimes of their parents, does that mean that any act of ethnic cleansing, no matter how horrific, can just be whitewashed by waiting a few decades? Certainly, the ethnic cleansing of 1948 was whitewashed to oblivion and made entirely irreversible by the passing of time. If this is the case, one can only conclude that the Palestinian struggle for liberation bears even greater urgency. |
We're hunting for Leviathan, and Bitcoin is our harpoon.
|
|
|
|
Honeypot
|
|
July 02, 2014, 02:54:48 AM |
|
Left is easily manipulated and cajoled with power and attention. The so-called 'progressives' of today are not political idealists or even amateur party players of political scene. They are weak minded, insecure and ultimately infantile bastard children of the moral and cultural ignorance of the 60s that masqueraded as 'progress' and 'liberalism'.
Liberalism has been subverted by racist outsiders and ethnic minorities with racial inclinations that make KKK look rational in comparison. I speak from a personal experience of being born into such an environment, and at distant time in the past in my youth, shamelessly preaching such racial ignorance of so called 'oppressed' minority as 'justice' and 'equality'.
I have also lived for the better part of my life outside of 1st world nations, and have seen and felt the real facts about oppression and racism.
There is no black, brown, yellow or shit or piss around 1st world nations that have any right to bitch and moan about injustices in today's society. They have not the slightest idea what it means to face real oppression. All they are doing is trying manipulate and cajole the guilt and moral standards of 1st world nations to attempt a power grab and manipulate others.
Liberalism has always been prone to walking down the wide open road of seemingly 'righteous' path which is nothing more than shallow self-gratification. As seemingly 'convincing' mouths from middle east or palestine have begun to try and manipulate the guilt and moral standards of others to their own benefit have begun to reach out to 1st world, more and more weak-willed and weak minded children are becoming confused about themselves and their standards.
The fact that arab and 'palestinian' racists who have enslaved and butchered hundreds of millions across the world (ironically some of the poorest locations in the world today) will try to subvert the idealism and naivete of the 1st world 'liberals' should be glaringly obvious.
Muslims and their ilk have always bowed down to one rule: brutality, rape, and violation. They are meek as a prostitute with legs wide open against people who display strength and hatred, yet are spineless enough to think they can take advantage once they 'believe' someone is weaker than they. They also have a kind of racially motivated ego that attempts to take advantage of naive 'rationalism' of liberals today - that is, there is no such thing as rationalism but only reasoning after the fact. You can't reason away racism or racial arrogance any more than you can reason away cancer or adolescent hell raising.
In short, people are too naive and are being manipulated by those who (for now) have stronger motivation to be vocal and arrogant in what they want to believe in, and facts or reasons be damned. Only force and stronger brutality is the real rational answer to these problems.
Harden the fuck up kids.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DodoB
|
|
July 02, 2014, 11:53:01 AM |
|
I wouldnt consider a Gazan site as a balanced source.
A very similar account of this incident appeared in numerous sources, including Israeli ones. This just happened to be the first source I found. But as I said, the details of this particular incident are not relevant - I agreed to assume, for the sake of argument, that all those Palestinians died during demonstrations. Heh, you strike me as one of those Israelis who lives 20 minutes away from the West Bank but has never stepped foot there. It takes a special type of cognitive dissonance to defend Israel's violent oppression of Palestinian protests, and at the same time staunchly refuse to accept the fact that Israel restricts the Palestinian right of protest And the funniest part is that your "evidence" is pictures of Palestinians protesting... I never said that they don't. In fact, I specifically said that they do... I also said that they are violently subdued by the Israeli army. Why don't you take another look at your own pictures, and tell me how many of them portray Israeli soldiers violently suppressing protesters. Your "simple google search" is evidence of my point much more than it is of yours. As for the facts, I'd hate to burst your bubble but all Palestinian protest is indeed illegal by military decree (as I suspect you speak Hebrew, here's a couple of sources for you: Wikipedia, B'Tselem). This decree was given by the IDF immediately after the West Bank was occupied in 1967, and it strongly prohibits any kind of protest, including peaceful demonstration, under punishment of up to 10 years in prison. It is an illegal decree according to international law, which protects the right of protest in occupied territories, and it does not, of course, apply to Jews, even if they are protesting inside the West Bank. Great, you win the 2014 Academy Award for cherry-picking pictures from Google Images. I'm so proud. As someone who has actually been to quite a few demonstrations, including in Palestine, let me tell you this: I would love to see the faces of those students in Montreal when they encounter the Israeli border police. The difference between your pictures is that in the first ones, no one is shooting at the protesters. One wonders why you think "replying" is necessary at all, much less justified. So if you say that Palestininans can and should riot protest,(I,agree it is their right to protest) dont you think they should also be able to face the consequences of fighting a much stronger enemy?
Again with this strange logic of yours... So you agree they should have the right to protest, but you think they should "face the consequences" of the fact that Israel is much stronger? Obviously, they do face the consequences. They get shot. If anything, that means you should respect their courage. But instead you use it as justification. Please explain to me why the fact that Israel is stronger justifies the use of force against the occupied population. Are you advocating some kind of social Darwinism, where the weak get beaten by the strong and that's okay because it's the natural order of things? Bad comprasion. the Jews were gassed/murdered systematically,with the sole purpose of eliminating Jews from Europe in a short timespan. Dont think you can say that Israel is trying to acheive the same goal with the Palestinians,even if they do,theyr'e realy bad at it. http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Graph_2.jpg The Jews in the Warsaw uprising had 2 choices,Rebel and pray for that 1% you have to escape,or die in a gas chamber. The Palestinians on the other hand,were offered peace numerous times,they can escape to neighboring Arab states(which they did,and BTW their fellow Arab states dont like this idea so much,see "Black September in Jordan") Or simply not practice terrorism. I dont think the Jews kidnapped German children and shot rockets on German cities. Not only is none of that even remotely true, it's also entirely irrelevant to what I said. Were thoose 3 teenagers responisble for the Jewish immigartion into Palestine in the late 18th centruy and later? I dont think so.
However you define them,they were born,raised and lived in the West Bank,they can call it their home as much as the Palestinians can.
The 3 teenagers were NOT combatants,they did not practice in combat activity,therefore,they are illegal to target under international law. The fact that Israel did X and Y whether justifiable or not,doesn't justify the murder of the teens.
I actually completely agree with you here, and I never said otherwise. Your point does raise some interesting questions though. If we agree that people born in settlements are not guilty for the crimes of their parents, does that mean that any act of ethnic cleansing, no matter how horrific, can just be whitewashed by waiting a few decades? Certainly, the ethnic cleansing of 1948 was whitewashed to oblivion and made entirely irreversible by the passing of time. If this is the case, one can only conclude that the Palestinian struggle for liberation bears even greater urgency. The article saying he was mentally handicapped sounds like a cheap excuse for what he was actually doing,along with the site being Gazan,i have a good reason to doubt this artice. Dunno about your logic but an angry mob "Protesting" by throwing rocks,molotovs,and other kinds of improvised arms seems like a threat to me,and if i was a soldier it would be my duty to retaliate. whether this "no protesting" law exists or not the Palestinian don't really seem to care about it,which makes the law irrelevant. You dont seem to know the diffrence between a riot and a protest,look it up. Again with this strange logic of yours... So you agree they should have the right to protest, but you think they should "face the consequences" of the fact that Israel is much stronger?
Obviously, they do face the consequences. They get shot. If anything, that means you should respect their courage. But instead you use it as justification.
Please explain to me why the fact that Israel is stronger justifies the use of force against the occupied population. Are you advocating some kind of social Darwinism, where the weak get beaten by the strong and that's okay because it's the natural order of things? Fighting a tank with a stick when you can simply stay home and live your life,and as a result getting killed,is not courage,is stupidity. why should i admire stupidity? Dont want the occupying force to disturb your life? dont kidnap children. Of course you can resist the occupier,but killing his children even though a form of resistance will likely get you in more trouble,as death only brings more death. Not only is none of that even remotely true, it's also entirely irrelevant to what I said. Um you brought the Holocaust comparison up,not me  the crimes of their parents, does that mean that any act of ethnic cleansing, no matter how horrific, can just be whitewashed by waiting a few decades? Well,it worked for the European colonists in America,for the Turks in Cyprus,For the Russians in Crimea,for the Muslims in the Balkans,for the Europeans in Australia,shall i go on? Certainly, the ethnic cleansing of 1948 was whitewashed to oblivion and made entirely irreversible by the passing of time. Explain how the Palestininan population in Israel and the West Bank keeps growing in spite of the so called ethnic cleansing. If this is the case, one can only conclude that the Palestinian struggle for liberation bears even greater urgency. Tell more more about how the Israeli-Palestininan conflict drastically effects your life in Canada/Europe/Wherever you live. (Assuming you're not Palestinian) And if it is that fact that a few western states give some support for Israel,im pretty sure 70%+ of the earth's population will gladly sell their soul to Israel to have the same quality of life that western leftists have  |
|
|
|
|
u9y42
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1071
|
|
July 06, 2014, 07:21:49 AM |
|
Maybe stuff like this is one reason why people are increasingly wary of Israel: "US ‘profoundly troubled’ by brutal beating of Palestine teen who turned out to be American" ( http://rt.com/usa/170692-us-palestinian-israel-brutal-beating/) A shocking video of the brutal attack that was leaked on the internet, showing Israeli police officers savagely beating the 15-year-old cousin of Mohammad Abu Khdeir who was burnt alive in East Jerusalem, has prompted outrage in the Palestinian community. Caught on camera: Israeli police beating 15yo cousin of murdered Palestinian teen (VIDEO) ( http://on.rt.com/ygvr04) And as mentioned in the article, the sad part is this wouldn't even hit the news if it turned out that he was just another Palestinian boy. If you're American, keep in mind you're helping this stuff happen on a regular basis to Palestinians. |
|
|
|
|
keyscore44
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2002
Merit: 1016
|
|
July 06, 2014, 08:11:41 AM |
|
And as mentioned in the article, the sad part is this wouldn't even hit the news if it turned out that he was just another Palestinian boy. If you're American, keep in mind you're helping this stuff happen on a regular basis to Palestinians.
Can safely say Palestinians are regarded as un-human by most of the MSM  (Tariq Khdeir, 15, of Tampa, Florida, alleged to be the person seen in two different videos, laying passively on the ground as two Israeli Border Police officers punch and kick him before carrying his unconscious body away) |
|
|
|
|
hologram
|
|
July 06, 2014, 12:17:09 PM |
|
Hi, I know many Arabs and they are great but when they talk about politics they always label them as "victim". I think they must moderate there opinion and try to make peace with Israel and give them more land than in the 1967 treaty. It's not fair for Arabs to ask for the 1967 border cause they preferred war than the treaty and they have lose. If USA don't cooperate with Israel and Israel sell American weapon technology to the Chinese would be fun |
|
|
|
u9y42
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1071
|
|
July 06, 2014, 02:26:29 PM |
|
Hi, I know many Arabs and they are great but when they talk about politics they always label them as "victim". I think they must moderate there opinion and try to make peace with Israel and give them more land than in the 1967 treaty. It's not fair for Arabs to ask for the 1967 border cause they preferred war than the treaty and they have lose. If USA don't cooperate with Israel and Israel sell American weapon technology to the Chinese would be fun Have you looked at the map recently? How much more land does Israel want? In relation to a return to the 1967 borders, you do realize the only countries currently opposing it are pretty much just Israel and the United States, right? The overwhelming majority of the other countries see this as being a fair deal. In fact, UN resolutions either calling for a return to 1967 borders, for Israel to stop the expansion of settlements, or condemning Israel for its use of violence are frequent, and they get something along the lines of about 150 nations in favor of the resolution, 3 or 4 against and a few abstentions. And by the way, aid or no aid, Israel won't sell their weapons to the Chinese; they tried before and the US made them step back and publicly apologize for it. They, as many others unfortunately, don't dare piss off the US, because they know all too well the likely consequences of any such action. |
|
|
|
|
|
hologram
|
|
July 06, 2014, 02:33:50 PM |
|
1.In relation to a return to the 1967 borders, you do realize the only countries currently opposing it are pretty much just Israel and the United States, right? The overwhelming majority of the other countries see this as being a fair deal. In fact, UN resolutions either calling for a return to 1967 borders, for Israel to stop the expansion of settlements, or condemning Israel for its use of violence are frequent, and they get something along the lines of about 150 nations in favor of the resolution, 3 or 4 against and a few abstentions.
2.And by the way, aid or no aid, Israel won't sell their weapons to the Chinese; they tried before and the US made them step back and publicly apologize for it. They, as many others unfortunately, don't dare piss off the US, because they know all too well the likely consequences of any such action.
1.This isn't an argument, even an Argument from authority logical fallacy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority2.I know they tried, they wanted to show they can have other ally than USA. Chinese seem fine with Israel. |
|
|
|
u9y42
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1071
|
|
July 06, 2014, 02:51:51 PM |
|
1. You might not like the fact that nearly everyone supports a return to the 1967 borders and a peaceful resolution to the conflict, or agree with the reasons that lead to it, but that doesn't make their conclusions invalid; and more to the point, the truth is if both sides are unable to reach a peaceful conclusion by themselves, someone has to step in. I mean, what's the alternative? The conflict continuing until there are no Palestinians left, and Israel takes over everything? 2. The Israelis apparently weren't though, because they quickly caved in to US demands that they stand down. |
|
|
|
|
|
hologram
|
|
July 06, 2014, 03:05:48 PM |
|
1. You might not like the fact that nearly everyone supports a return to the 1967 borders and a peaceful resolution to the conflict, or agree with the reasons that lead to it, but that doesn't make their conclusions invalid; and more to the point,
2.the truth is if both sides are unable to reach a peaceful conclusion by themselves, someone has to step in. I mean, what's the alternative? The conflict continuing until there are no Palestinians left, and Israel takes over everything?
3.The Israelis apparently weren't though, because they quickly caved in to US demands that they stand down.
1.You seem don't understand that the UN is just a place where corrupted government who nobody give a fuck give their opinion. It's the powerful country opinion that matter. 2.What's make political interference moral here ? It's immoral only when it come from the west ? Double-thinking no ? 3.Wait and see, i hope they will find a way to defend themselves. |
|
|
|
u9y42
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1071
|
|
July 06, 2014, 03:23:51 PM |
|
1.You seem don't understand that the UN is just a place where corrupted government who nobody give a fuck give their opinion. It's the powerful country opinion that matter.
2.What's make political interference moral here ? It's immoral only when it come from the west ? Double-thinking no ?
3.Wait and see, i hope they will find a way to defend themselves.
1. You don't agree with practically every country's opinion, so you attack their integrity? And you accuse me of using logical fallacies? And, "It's the powerful country opinion that matter"? Right, might makes right... I hoped people would know better by now. 2. The situation is immoral because people's lives are being denigrated and often lost in a needless bloody conflict. It doesn't matter if it is in Israel and Palestine, in South Africa, in Indonesia, in Chechnya, in Australia, or in the US with its now gone native population; it's wrong and we should do anything within our power to stop it, wherever it may happen. 3. What do you mean "find a way to defend themselves"? As I just stated, everyone else wants peace, except the US and Israel. Check it up; that information is public. |
|
|
|
|
|
hologram
|
|
July 06, 2014, 03:38:10 PM
Last edit: July 06, 2014, 03:59:38 PM by hologram |
|
1. You don't agree with practically every country's opinion, so you attack their integrity? And you accuse me of using logical fallacies? And, "It's the powerful country opinion that matter"? Right, might makes right... I hoped people would know better by now.
2. The situation is immoral because people's lives are being denigrated and often lost in a needless bloody conflict. It doesn't matter if it is in Israel and Palestine, in South Africa, in Indonesia, in Chechnya, in Australia, or in the US with its now gone native population; it's wrong and we should do anything within our power to stop it, wherever it may happen.
3. What do you mean "find a way to defend themselves"? As I just stated, everyone else wants peace, except the US and Israel. Check it up; that information is public.
1.I have the right to not take care of other country opinion ? I have the right to not consider what my government do legitimate (often a debate here) but i can't have an opinion on foreign government ? Every government in UN defend it's own interest... 2.Sorry, i believed you are the kind of people thinking "Foreign interference is always immoral". I'm fine with both (interference can be acceptable or is never acceptable) but not double-thinking. So you support foreign interference ? (I just want to know your axiomatics) I hope you support kurdish Independence too, cause every minority matter right ?  3.I want peace too, but i don't think the fair treaty is a treaty against Israel. Israel is building a wall, so they won't go farther. |
|
|
|
Lethn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 06, 2014, 03:56:42 PM |
|
The question should be more, why hasn't the right abandoned Israel?
|
|
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4746
Merit: 1277
|
|
July 06, 2014, 06:10:19 PM |
|
The Jews who rebelled in the Warsaw ghetto in 1943 knew they would probably be wiped out within days; does that knowledge mean it was okay for the Nazis to kill them all? Bad comprasion. the Jews were gassed/murdered systematically,with the sole purpose of eliminating Jews from Europe in a short timespan. Dont think you can say that Israel is trying to acheive the same goal with the Palestinians,even if they do,theyr'e realy bad at it. Ah, I see! A kinder, gentler Warsaw ghetto is being implemented in Gaza. Nice argument you've got there. Small wonder it isn't really flying except in some segments of Israel and the U.S. |
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
|
hologram
|
|
July 06, 2014, 06:12:44 PM |
|
is funny cause gaza people are richer than Egyptian |
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4746
Merit: 1277
|
|
July 06, 2014, 06:21:53 PM |
|
is funny cause gaza people are richer than Egyptian One must be careful to compare apples to apples in such metrics. In this case one should, by rights, be comparing the Fatah crooks who sell their people down the river with the Egyptian military and political elite who do more or less the same thing. Egypt is a bigger country so there are more mouths to feed both in terms of caloric input for the masses, and in terms of bribes/kickbacks to the corrupt sellouts of their respective societies. |
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
u9y42
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1071
|
|
July 06, 2014, 06:43:14 PM |
|
1.I have the right to not take care of other country opinion ? I have the right to not consider what my government do legitimate (often a debate here) but i can't have an opinion on foreign government ? Every government in UN defend it's own interest... 2.Sorry, i believed you are the kind of people thinking "Foreign interference is always immoral". I'm find with both (interference can be acceptable or is never acceptable) but not double-thinking. So you support foreign interference ? (I just want to know your axiomatics) I hope you support kurdish Independence too, cause every minority matter right ? 3.I want peace too, but i don't think the fair treaty is a treaty against Israel. Israel is building a wall, so they won't go farther. 1. Sure, you have a right to your opinion, just as they have the right to theirs; but to dismiss them without even knowing why they have their position is not a logical stance, and neither is the "might makes right" approach, at least if we want any plans of a peaceful life in the region anytime in the future. Further, as I said before, the proceedings are mostly public and you have access to voting and often reasoning behind votes, so you can easily delve into it if you're interested. 2. If there is a broad understanding that foreign diplomacy/action/intervention will in fact improve the situation and lead to a deescalation of conflict, like in this situation, I see no reason for it not to happen. And yes, every minority counts, be it the Kurds, the Catalans, the Palestinians, or whomever else. 3. But the building of the wall is a conscious choice of annexing land over peace, not a step towards peace. Further, the wall isn't even complete, so there is no telling how much more land will be taken from Palestinians. And all that assuming Israel won't continue building settlements outside the wall, for which there is no assurance, unfortunately; Israel's constant announcement of further settlements does nothing to help here. Another point that this ignores is the direct effects the wall is already having on Palestinians; at some points the wall cuts them off the farmland they've depended on so far for survival, at others from access to water sources, all of those now conveniently on the Israeli side of the wall. You don't want a treaty that is unfair for Israel, but is this fair to the Palestinians? Also, it should be stated that the wall is illegal under international law, especially considering Israel is the occupying power. |
|
|
|
|
|
