[DanG]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ohoen Israelis support terror too, they just don't need the suicide cult cause they have tanks that we paid for. We've supported covert US terrorism or US supported terrorism through our own apathy for a long, long time.

Again, addressed in that same thread... I'll give a link to it shortly.

Quote:

Ohoen said Palestine's half is now under Israeli occupation for a great number of reasons. But the first reason was the illegal, by Israeli law, settling of the Palestinian controlled West Bank by Orthodox Zionists who felt it was their manifest destiny (sound familiar?) to control all of their fabled holy land.

I understand you are frustrated by the situation in Israel as it is a personal issue to you. But that doesn't mean you should ignore the facts and make fatuous statements like this one. The only reason (and I emphasize only) that the Palestinians didn't get their half of Israel in 1948 when the 1947 UN resolution was to go in effect was that it was immediately taken over by Arab countries -- mainly Egypt and Jordan. Immediately after the resolution passed the General Assembly, orders came down from various Arab leaders to attack and capture as many Jewish towns as possible. And guess who had the tanks back then?

 

[Ohoen]

Ok, I'll take back the US supported terror issue, it does not belong here, especially if it's already been discussed at length in another thread. And sorry about my crappy quoting.

First of all, this is not a personal issue to me. Second, reports of torture absolutely have been substantiated, you just won't find them publicized in the New York Times. I'll try to find some references later this evening if I have time. You might also look up Israel's "administrative detention" as a start and see if you think the US should impliment that, too.

When an SS officer tore a Jew out of his bed that was also called an "arrest". And I don't make the comparison to say it's the same thing, but to show that using the word "arrest" in no way justifies certain actions.

And to call my generalization useless babble is a bit much, I think. I wasn't lecturing but making a related point. You then went on to generalize with the same results, but using more detail and space.

 

[ai0tron]

You know it seems to me that most of the people who are "Pro America" are generally concerned with actively making excuses for all the problems we seem to cause in the world.

I sincerely doubt that the WTC was destroyed because those people are jealous of America. Do you think they smashed the WTC because they wish they could have 9-5 jobs at the quickie mart and thus they get pissed because we wont let them come over here and share in all that is the glory of quickie mart?? No, I think it has something to do with us and our treatment of other countries. I know it has something to do with our wretched foreign policy. Our governement leaders MAKE A HABIT of selling the weapons of war to our enemies that we end up fighting against. Pretty good situation for us. We sell them tanks, we then try to bully them, they dont listen, we go to war, we smash them and voila, weve exploited them twice over and blown the **** out of their country in the process. We can then use the CIA to set up another puppett government, sell the puppetts tanks, impose unfair sanctions, let them try to fight the sanctions, then smash them again. Then do it again and again until weve made billions off the death of enemies we created. MAGIC. Of course most of you wont believe it because your scared, and your stuck on the idea that our government is innately good. When all they are innately in actuality IS HUMAN. And humans are prone to do some incredibly strange and evil things when given too much power. It happens over and over and you all just deny it. Deny deny deny. But you know, I always forget, youve got flasken the drunken dutchman on your side.

 

[00940]

I could support Dang and Zowie on most of they said but not on the Palestinian state question. This is completly irrelevant. What they want is NOT a palestinian state per se but a right to the ground and a politic recognition.

On the first point, most of the Palestinians can indeed claim a right to the soil on stronger basis than the Jews (if you accept the concept...). The proportion of Jews issued from people who lived from 70 (destruction of the Temple) to 1919 (beginning of the massive come back) is quite low. The State of Israel has been built on the massive exile from the first occupant of the ground. And the policy of colinization in Cisjordany is only a prolongation of this history. There is no reason for the existence of Israel except the need for the support of the US Jew community for the involvment of the USA in WWI and the shame (completly right) of the world after the Shoah.

The non-existence of a Palestinian state before 1948 didn't mean there wasn't a local population. Btw, you cannot find a Jordan state or a Syrian state before end of WWI too. Does it mean that the population of these countries didn't have the right to an involvment into the political sphere ? And that's where the problem. Israel is one of the only state in the world defined clearly by ethnicity and religion. It is Jewish and Hebraic. The permanent problem of the arab population in Israel shows the non-integration of these people. Perhaps there were no states in Palestine before Israel but at least people could think they were ruled being recognized as member of the political community. The palestinian terrorist fighting against the UK's troops in the 20's had a clear vision of the Palestine and the UK ruled the country according to that vision (which explain why UK is the only western country which didn't want at all the birth of Israel).

A point that no Israelian leader would accept is the return of the refugees. Why ? Because it would ruin Israel as Jewish.

I'm a bit harsh above and it is time to moderate my words. The fact is that Palestinians too consider the problem in terms of ethnic state. Clearly to ethnic-citizenship based states couldn't coexist in a same place. The actual occupants of the ground, the Jews, aren't responsible for the situation created by their grand-parents and the wawes of the world affairs. - I must admit I have a real admiration for the determination of the Jews from 48 to now. - So, they have too at least the right to live in safety. And what's a right to the soil ? How many generations ? If we play this game, we can say the Jews are usurpators since the Bible and the killing of the Jericho's population. That's why the UN resolutions are just ******** and everyone knows it. It is technically ethnic segregation. It never worked. What people like is the tree under which they've grown. They really don't like when you say them : "go on the other side of the line, so it is fair for everyone".

The middle-east crisis is seemingly without solution because a real solution would involved the disparition of these primordialist (the state is defined as the prolongation of an identity) views.

I wouldn't also equal the so-called "terrorism of Tsahal" with the Hamas or the Hezbollah. Terrorism is the use of murder (at variable scales) to disrupt the will of the state, trough the leader's will or the population. You don't kill to be efficient, you kill the reach the moral strength. In this goal, the random massive killing has proven to be the more efficient. When Israel acts, it is to achieve a particular goal, immediate. When a kamikaze explodes in a street, he doesn't want to kill this woman or that guy. That's where lies all the difference. There are right now discutable actions leaded by Tsahal but most of its action is quite clean.

The bombing of London, Dresde, Tokyo or Hiroshima were technically terrorism. They didn't want to kill the population of these cities but reach the moral by murder of civilians.

A last point in this endless post about wars and Israel. Israel wasn't the first to attack since the Kippour (73). The operations in Lebanon was just a response to bombing since the Lebanon. It is hard to say the actual generation is agressive.

 

[00940]

Quote:

Originally posted by ai0tron I sincerely doubt that the WTC was destroyed because those people are jealous of America. Do you think they smashed the WTC because they wish they could have 9-5 jobs at the quickie mart and thus they get pissed because we wont let them come over here and share in all that is the glory of quickie mart?? No, I think it has something to do with us and our treatment of other countries. I know it has something to do with our wretched foreign policy.

I'd like you to give a look to the background of these guys. The most radical wing of the Islamists is not composed of poor farmers or orphans from the first gulf war. These guys are educated, often from well-established famillies and the link between Palestine and Al-Quaeda is tenuous; it only appears in the Al-Quaeda publications after the attack.

The reasons the Islamist terrorism are not as much to do with the US foreign policy (even it didn't often help) that with internal processes of the Islamic society facing globalization.

sutor ne supra crepidam

 

[ai0tron]

The word globalization could harbor so many negative ideas for a culture that doesn't necessarily desire outside influence. I think these people fear the exploitative nature of capitalism. Maybe they don't want a fucn McDonalds on every street corner? What about the money we give them? Would you turn it down? I mean cmon, look at how we make friends, we buy them, and we blow them up. Think about this, hey you don't like Israel, you see the US give them 8 billion. What do you realize about Israel?? You can't fight them theyve got the USA's financial might backing them, then what do you do? Yeah, thats right, you attempt to **** America severely thats what. Weaken America and you weaken your enemies that America is supporting. Of course, I don't think they realized how serious our army was. Otherwise they might of thought twice... And what about Saddam Hussein he used to be our friend, we practically put him into power, or rather, helped him form Iraq into the threat it is today. Now we **** him at every oppurtunity. Yeah he IS crazy, but still, it seems to me that we like to play dumb, "Hey these guys will be our friends *smile* LETS GIVE THEM BIG GUNS!!" Then later "OOoops, how embarrassing, no we have to **** these guys we helped in the past." We have no honor. NONE. We don't stand by anyone, its like when Hitler invaded the USSR. WE make friends we KNOW we can't keep. It's a wild and crazy game of economics and warfare but I must say if any country knows what winning, or even just fighting a war can do for it's economy that country is the USA.

 

[ai0tron]

Here is an interesting opinion I found at another forum:

"For example, we have this Toronto Sun article, Iraqi Children Live in Fear of Bombings. Or this article from the NY Times, in which Iraqis on the street tell the reporter that they will fight American troops with stones and knives if they have to. The reporter concludes that while many fear and hate Saddam Hussein, they hate and fear the United States more.

The reason I pursue this question is because I find it to be the only reasonable and morally justifiable argument that I've seen in favor of a war on Iraq. Obviously the U.S. has no plans to bring real democracy to Iraq, they will want to install a new government that is friendly to U.S. interests. But they will probably want the new government to kind of look like a democracy to make it seem legitimate to the world and to the American people. And part of me thinks that even a sham democracy must be better than living in a dictatorship. We haven't got a clear answer for the question, but it looks like the Iraqi people might prefer continuing to live under Saddam Hussein than a violent U.S. war that brings them a sham democracy. And if we actually care about what democracy means, we should respect that." - jake

 

[Ohoen]

OK, I promised substantiated instances of torture. Turns out the Israelis substantiated it themselves. As soon as it became a PR problem for them they made it legal for the Shin Bet to torture suspects. Try "From Beirut to Jerusalem" by Thomas Friedman, pages 352-360.

 

[DanG]

00940,

My point in saying there was no Palestinian state before was not to contrast it with the Jewish state which hadn't existed for a period of about 2000 years, but to point out that there is no Palestinian state to be restored. Before the British left Israel, the Jews who owned land had bought the land they possessed; they weren't the ones engaging in massacres of the Arabs (unlike the massacres of Jews at the hands of Arabs before 1948).

The land won in wars was land won in wars of defense. To give it all back just like that, kicking out all who live there now, is quite ridiculous. Is it because they have no claim to the land? No -- it's because after 6-Day War of '67 the Israeli government offered a right of return to approximately 50,000 people. How many chose to come back? About 8,000.

Now, to address the Jewish state issue... yes, part of the reason it was formed was because of the Holocaust. But the real reason that there needs to be a Jewish state is that there needs to be a Jewish refuge, a place where Jews can go when they're persecuted or when they just want to go to a place where they can be accepted for being Jewish. America proved it wasn't such a place when the wonderful FDR sent thousands of Holocaust refugees on boats escaping from Nazi-controlled Europe.

That's why the Israeli government can and should only take Jews into Israel as citizens without a lengthy waiting period as the US, for example, requires. For prospective immigrants to wait three to five years to be taken into Israel wouldn't make it the welcoming home it should be.

Now, to address the Arab population which you claim has no rights in Israel... Israeli Arabs have complete rights in Israel, including the right to vote and the right to serve in elected offices. There is an Arab party in the Knesset (Israel's Parliament).

When the world and the people in it reach such an idealist state that people no longer have to identify with their heritages and don't mind abandoning them perhaps telling people to live with each other peacefully won't be a problem. But it's never worked -- not in Israel, not in Austria-Hungary, not in Yugoslavia.

Ohoen,

I specified why your generalization was useless and completely incorrect. If you'll read my reply, I immediately pointed out the willingness of the two "sides" to compromise on a multitude of issues.

 

[Maxvla]

i voted no but the wording is innacurate.

there were warning signs all over the place, but nothing specific to the exact plans. better choice would be they should have been more on their guard but they didn't know exactly what was going to happen. i do believe they did know SOMETHING was going to happen but no clue what or when.

the real question is why are we bickering about who to blame for not stopping it when the people who did it are still largely uncaught. human race is accustomed to finding scape goats... we need to get past this and deal justice swiftly by putting all of our attention on the criminals and not wasting time with petty debate.

my 2 lincolns.

 

[Ohoen]

DanG,
you said

"Ohoen,

I specified why your generalization was useless and completely incorrect. If you'll read my reply, I immediately pointed out the willingness of the two "sides" to compromise on a multitude of issues."

That's why I specified willing/ABLE to compromise. Arafat can't control radical arab factions anymore than Rabin could control radical Jewish ones. The second is the more important, currently. I covered it in a sentence. You covered it in a paragraph.

 

[00940]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanG 00940, My point in saying there was no Palestinian state before was not to contrast it with the Jewish state which hadn't existed for a period of about 2000 years, but to point out that there is no Palestinian state to be restored. Before the British left Israel, the Jews who owned land had bought the land they possessed; they weren't the ones engaging in massacres of the Arabs (unlike the massacres of Jews at the hands of Arabs before 1948).

The history isn't as clean. The Hagannah was not composed of altar's boys. Remember the King David hotel. I do not deny the Arab exactions but how could you expect rude people to react against what was still more looking as a colonization ? You can't buy a country. Indeed there is no state to restore. But can you justify the existence of Israel and deny the right to a state to a population which can obviously not be integrated into this state ?

Quote:

The land won in wars was land won in wars of defense. To give it all back just like that, kicking out all who live there now, is quite ridiculous. Is it because they have no claim to the land? No -- it's because after 6-Day War of '67 the Israeli government offered a right of return to approximately 50,000 people. How many chose to come back? About 8,000.

I don't know why but "land won in wars of defense" looks so strange. It was crazy to expect Arabs to come back to Israel. They hated the rulers and loved the land. Come on, if someone took over your country, would you go back and accept the rule of the winner or stay in exile hoping to take it back ? I've perhaps too many soldier's blood in my veins but I'd choose the second option.

Quote:

Now, to address the Jewish state issue... yes, part of the reason it was formed was because of the Holocaust. But the real reason that there needs to be a Jewish state is that there needs to be a Jewish refuge, a place where Jews can go when they're persecuted or when they just want to go to a place where they can be accepted for being Jewish. America proved it wasn't such a place when the wonderful FDR sent thousands of Holocaust refugees on boats escaping from Nazi-controlled Europe.

Ok. But why in the most dangerous place of the world for the Jews ? In the middle of Arab opinions which could only be hostile to such a project. There were projects in South-Africa and South-America. The world would have been so much quieter... If Israel exists it is because the world allows the Sionism to be more than a dream. Look how Jerusalem's suburbs are completly jewish. How do you justify it except by a deliberate will to keep it secure ? The world powers played with matches and the fire is burning since 1946. UK was right to try to send back the Exodus.

Quote:

Now, to address the Arab population which you claim has no rights in Israel... Israeli Arabs have complete rights in Israel, including the right to vote and the right to serve in elected offices. There is an Arab party in the Knesset (Israel's Parliament).

I didn't say they had no rights. I said they were not recognised as political actors despite the forms of democracy. As long as Israel will be Jewish, they cannot be fully citizens. Remember the violence last year. And read what these parties write. The only moment they had power is when the left needed them to boost coalitions.

Quote:

When the world and the people in it reach such an idealist state that people no longer have to identify with their heritages and don't mind abandoning them perhaps telling people to live with each other peacefully won't be a problem. But it's never worked -- not in Israel, not in Austria-Hungary, not in Yugoslavia.

The other system of ethnic segregation didn't work either. I don't even want these guys to stop identify to their identity. My point was that since the beginning, Israel has been ideologically Jewish. How do you expect the Arab population to react ?

 

[OtterMarc]

I agree with Rickcr42 on this one: Those who did/planned/financed the acts of 911 were garbage, and I actively discourage the feeling that we need to be friendly and nicy nice with them. Many of these folks think it just fine to permanently alter their young girls physiology.

Like so many exam questions, the vote questions are defective because the chosen opposing views leave no room for other options such as yes the administration and intel knew of a possible threat but no specifics that would enable them a protective action. Until September 11th, almost nobody would have calculated anyone would do something so dispicable, to use Daffy's word. Those rare ones who would have calculated it would have been laughed at or discreditted. Well, the chuckles are over.

The future will definitely be different due to their monstrous success on that terrible day. I'm concerned we haven't seen the end of it.

America is a great place. As a Canadian living next door who's lived in the USA, I have a special appreciation for what America is, for what Americans are. I am really glad it is America who is the most powerful nation today and not some backwards 6th-century-mentality twits like the ones who committed the attacks.

Speaking of future, I have some buf634's to figure out, some caps to choose and listen to! I'm also glad we have our appreciation of music and great sound which brings us together.

 

[minya]

Quote:

Originally posted by OtterMarc Until September 11th, almost nobody would have calculated anyone would do something so dispicable, to use Daffy's word. Those rare ones who would have calculated it would have been laughed at or discreditted. Well, the chuckles are over.

Tell that to the Native Americans who had their source of sustenance (buffalo) systematically destroyed into extinction (or near it?) by the American military and entrepreneurs in the middle 1800's. Tell that to the innocent Japanese interned in concentration camps during World War II. Tell that to the innocent Muslims detained for their religion in Los Angeles right now. Tell that to countless South Americans who've had their futures controlled and destroyed by North American policies. Tell that to black Americans.

American morality, and America in general, is no less good or evil than any other country, nationality, religion, or anything else in the world. Far, far more "dispicable" things have been done than 9/11. Americans are not the heroes or protectors of the world, and the Middle East are not the unkempt savages of it, either. They've done terrible things; they've done great things. So has America.

- Chris

 

[DanG]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ohoen That's why I specified willing/ABLE to compromise. Arafat can't control radical arab factions anymore than Rabin could control radical Jewish ones. The second is the more important, currently. I covered it in a sentence. You covered it in a paragraph.

Still, your analysis is incorrect. Arafat has been willing to compromise on accepting the existence of an Israeli state. Still, he turned down a ridiculously generous offer by Barak which even included a piece of Jerusalem. Had he accepted it and the Knesset turned it down, Israel would be in the worse light rather than Arafat for showing his unwillingness to compromise there.

The Israeli government has done a great job of restraining would-be Israeli terrorists. The PA, on the other hand, funds them.

Quote:

Originally posted by 00940 The history isn't as clean. The Hagannah was not composed of altar's boys. Remember the King David hotel. I do not deny the Arab exactions but how could you expect rude people to react against what was still more looking as a colonization ? You can't buy a country. Indeed there is no state to restore. But can you justify the existence of Israel and deny the right to a state to a population which can obviously not be integrated into this state?

The actions of the militant terrorists which composed an important part of the Jewish independence movement were often deplorable, especially as seen in the case of the King David Hotel. It's these sorts of things which makes me realize why Arabs would want to do this sort of thing, when they have this determination. But if you look at it carefully, the British have had a history of leaving when things get too hot for them to care to stick around (just like the French and Portuguese). The Israelis live in Israel, they're not going to pack up and go home because it's not worth it to stay anymore. This is their home, and they're going to fight just as hard to keep it. The worst thing is the suicide bombers are the pawns of the PA. The reason the Israeli government has to demolish the homes of these murderers is to take away the misconception that blowing oneself up will result in previously impossible wealth and good living conditions (i.e., from the Saudi and Iraqi blood money). The PA and other Arab leaders feed such lies to impressionable and disenfranchised youth to get them to commit senseless and unsuccessful acts. It's not the same thing as a radical group that breaks from the mores of society to commit an atrocity to achieve a goal and then stops when it is done.

Regarding "buying a country," in civilized society you can purchase land. Whereas the American Indians did not recognize this sort of transaction and were thus fooled and had their land stolen by Europeans even when it was "paid" for, the precedent for buying land in the Middle East goes back six thousand years. The purchases were private purchases.

Quote:

Originally posted by 00940 I don't know why but "land won in wars of defense" looks so strange. It was crazy to expect Arabs to come back to Israel. They hated the rulers and loved the land. Come on, if someone took over your country, would you go back and accept the rule of the winner or stay in exile hoping to take it back ? I've perhaps too many soldier's blood in my veins but I'd choose the second option.

The proposed repatriation was to the West Bank which at that time was completely autonomous and under joint Palestinian/Jordanian control (yes, even after the Jordanians had lost the territory). In those days Palestinians in the West Bank could freely commute to Israel and Jordan.

Quote:

Originally posted by 00940 Ok. But why in the most dangerous place of the world for the Jews ? In the middle of Arab opinions which could only be hostile to such a project. There were projects in South-Africa and South-America. The world would have been so much quieter... If Israel exists it is because the world allows the Sionism to be more than a dream. Look how Jerusalem's suburbs are completly jewish. How do you justify it except by a deliberate will to keep it secure ? The world powers played with matches and the fire is burning since 1946. UK was right to try to send back the Exodus.

Israel is the place with which Jews can identify and where they have a history. It's a place around which they could rally, a place they could call their home with precedent. I am a religious Jew and do believe that God gave us that home. That's not a good enough reason to convince others and it's not enough to gain the support of the world. But it is a powerful way to bring a nearly-destroyed people together.

The reason Jerusalem's suburbs are almost completely Jewish is that the new city was in Jewish hands before 1967 when Jerusalem was won back.

The world powers played with matches when they began colonializing the world. And Prometheus played with matches when he brought fire to the world. It's the way things are, it's the way people are, to take risks and push past the pillars of Hercules despite warnings not to do so. It's the Jews that fought for Israel and the world which was forced to recognize its existence. Israel proved its ability to exist before the world recognized its right to exist. The single most important point of all that I write is that it's the JEWS who made Israel, not a weak and divided body of quibbling nations.