Items From My Newspaper

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]vroom wrote:
This is where your train is leaving the tracks. You are buying into a global conspiracy to create an empire. What you are bitching about is a shift in the way humanity works, lives and trades amongst intself.
[/quote]

True. Some of this is evolution toward a secular, rational world. The world of the west. While i agree it’s an evolution, it’s one dictated by the powers of now. But i’m no freemason-paranoid fucker. Shit is going down, but it’s subtle.

What’s really funny, is that nobody is really in control.

[quote]
North America damned near is a utopia. All you have to do is let yourself be happy… and voila… you are there. It’s very easy to avoid strife and conflict over here. I’m not sure if you see only news clips of crimes and whatnot – but they don’t pa int a picture of society. [/quote]

I admit that i’ve never been to America, and my knowledge of it is restricted 2nd hand reports. But i don’t believe it’s an utopia. It’s an embodiment of lassez-faire, true. But there’s still ghettos/projects, hate, weapons, power imbalances, nepotism, hegemony, intolerance (etc we could continue i’m sure)

[quote]
You need to understand that a few people speaking in a heated manner don’t represent the views of everyone. You let that stuff affect your viewpoint too much, you give it too much credence.

Maybe if you tried to discuss things with reasonable people instead of countered war mongering with pacifism you’d have a better chance?[/quote]

Okay man. I agree that they’re not the only people to have a voice. It is a prevailing opinion in world affairs though- impatience and ignorance of history. See how i respond to different people. As much as you and i disagree, i prefer speaking to you- and i’ll give you a lot more respect/credence because of your rationality. I just really want to leave you understanding what i (and i hope there’s others like me) are saying, without neccessarily having to confront each other so violently.

[quote]
LOL. There has never been a time on this planet that younger generations were not conscripted to fight older mans wars. You aren’t arguing about what you think you are. You are arguing against human nature. It is not something that myopic idealism is going to shift.[/quote]

No, not myopic idealism. I really don’t believe i’m that. If it seems that way, i’ve a) expressed myself less than perfectly 9it’s tricky…) or b) been misunderstood/quagged down by people sticking to untenable positions, which i’ve attacked in due course, and got sidetracked. My apologies for this. And you made a point earlier about the progress of civilisation. ‘Sins of the father’ wars are what i believe is the single biggest opponent to peace on earth, full stop. So in my opinion this progression should start with a new, unadulterated beginning? Agree/disagree?

[quote]
You are out of your mind. I’d like you to try to find anything that sounds like modern day theft of resources. Now, there might be profits, but unless you are a communist, that is a far cry from theft. The US and everyone else pays the market price for oil. You sound like a complete idiot.[/quote]

Ok. I have a quote somewhere from a US foreign office minister, where he addressed a UN committee, talking about how the USA “was 'internationalising this vital resource for the good of all the world.” Apologies for my forgetfulness (if need be, if you don’t trust me, i could look it up and reference it. But the quote is accurate-i remember shit like that. And i’m a bit marxist, so to me, paying 35c for oil to arabs, then getting 2.5$ for the same quantity, just for the fact that you are old-money sounds less than ideal for me. But that’s aside the point. The main issue is the 'internationalisation. I’ve heard many respected guys refer to Israel as the ‘policeman’ for caucasians/ westerners in the arab world. This will be hard to discredit in anything other than opinion (believe what you want man, but if you give me any credit at all, take my word on it)

[quote]
When you stop equating theft to lawful purchase of resources on the open market, I’ll start thinking you might have the tiniest clue about what is going on in the world.[/quote] See above.

[quote]
LOL. You think politicians are not corrupt in every country? Again, you are crying about human nature. Any situation that places some people in power above others leads to abuses. The corruption in the US exists, just as it exists elsewhere. What you don’t see is that the fact that it is visible in the US means that it is caught and dealt with – in the public eye. Unlike much of the world, corruption is there, but it is seen to be corrected to the publics satisfaction. Somehow, I don’t think anything except the initial outcry makes the news that you are watching.[/quote] Ok. I’m very critical of the news i watch - i explained why in an earlier post. I don’t want to just accept corruption- i don’t see that as a foundation to build upon. forgive me, my youthful idealism combined with rapacious curiosity and strong character have meant that i still want the world candide keeps fooling himslef exists. I want corrupt people to start at the bottom, and righteous people to start at the top- and we’ll see what happens from there. My bet is the corrupt would become terrorists, but then we could respond proportionately-

[quote]LOL. Man, you are such an idiot. I’ve been arguing that the US has done a knee-jerk reaction after 9/11 and that Iraq was a mistake. I don’t supposed you’d notice that.

I’ve been arguing against Bush and his administration with respect to loss of individual freedoms and the danger of losing what you have, what you are fighting for, in order to face the enemy.[/quote]

I didn’t see any example of this. If this is true, then we shouldn’t be arguing i think. Nothing i attempt to express is false, or corrupt, or wicked, or terrorist-supporting. Is that ‘something’ morality? I’ve gone on too long about the immorality of the mideast situation, if you reread some shit i wrote you can assemble what is wrong out there

[quote]
Again, and again (the word is whine by the way), you continue to focus on some undefined evils in the western world and try to make them the personal responsibility of individuals.[/quote]

It’s because they are commonly undefined that i try to define them. That is difficult to digest the first time you see evidence of them.

[quote]Personal responsibility lies on the shoulders of those that would launch rockets at civilians in Israel. Personal responsibility lies on the shoulders of those who would place rocket launchers beside an apartment building.

Who is justifying such actions in this day and age? No ten years ago. Not twenty years ago. Today! Believe it or not, the way humanity has set things up, a country has the right to defend its citizens and to respond when attacked.

That you lament the loss of innocent lives in the region is good, but it doesn’t mean you get to repaint everything into bizarro world such that radical fundamentalist terrorists can ever be justified.[/quote] Ok. If you missed the REASONS for the shit (not excuses) i’ll reiterate taht yes, they are all in the past. Obviously. The irony i continue to try to illustrate is that if a biblical link to eretz-Israel is enough for Zionism to be legitimate, then Zionism’s continued existence, and MODERN-DAY expansion (check out the settlement projects that aren’t even inhabited, they are political statements) is enough for arabs to be pissed. Another irony is that Irgun’s terrorism was a quite large factor pre-holocaust in motivating the British to cede some of mandatory Palestine. Really man. No-one is happy with the situation. We (west, and Israel) have tried to step forward into a new day by just suppressing the grievance that is still current, continued from 1947/67. It has failed. It has been a very long war (even relative to the rest of world history) if we assume your definition of war- continued animosity and sporadic military incursions/ rockets fired.

[quote]
You rely too much on your newspaper and it obviously has an anti-American slant that you have fallen to believe. The US isn’t what you think it is, you sound like a complete idiot when you try to describe what you think is going on.[/quote]

I don’t regularly read this newspaper, it was brought to my house, and it is a conservative newspaper. I’m not what you describe. i’m insulted that you don’t see this, honestly. I’ve spoken before about reading newspapers you actually disagree with, to test your own belief. Get me? I’m a rigorous propaganda-resister.

[quote]
Speaking of facism, you twit, you’d be decrying the Allies for actually fighting against Germany. This is the side of the argument you have chosen to represent. You’d complain that civilians were dying in Germany when bombs were dropped in an attempt to destroy industrial facilities.[/quote]

Your analogy is flawed. Germany then, is not Palestine now. Need i explain why? No, i’ll give you credit.

[quote]
What you need to decide is whether or not there is a war. Then you need to decide who’s tactics are truly evil in this war. Then you need to firmly plant your ass on the right side of that question or simply live your life as a despicable piece of shit.

It’s up to you.[/quote]

Thanks, lord. I decide that i’m on neither side. I don’t expect this will make allegiance any easier, but it’s the true/middle way. I will condemn evil in any form, whenever i see it, and will condemn it even more loudly if it appears it has missed peoples attention (Israel) not because it is neccessarily the greater evil, but because i want to expose the whole picture, in the name of truth. If you want, despise me. You already misunderstand me. BOO HOO

This one-sided blame picture you paint- what is the solution in this false world? Eradicate the passionate arabs? What else? Any dissenter? Sent them to gulags? Burn books? I thought you were balanced man

22

This is where black and white simply cannot suffice to paint the picture. While I do completely agree that the death of innocents sucks, vroom makes an excellent point especially in reference to Nazi Germany. I also enjoyed his statement along the lines of ‘are we at war or not?’

Civilian killing should be avoided at all costs EXCEPT the lives of our own countrymen. The fact of the matter is, if it is between one of our soldiers dying or a bunch of innocent children dying along with hostile forces, those innocent children have to die simply to preserve the life of that one soldier.

“Wow Mr. Amazing, you’re a complete asshole, how could you…”
Shut the fuck up before you finish you quincy, I am an asshole but I have my reasons. The point is not moralistic, it is political. We must do everything to protect our soldiers and citizens and really shouldn’t regard the lives of the opposing nation, they are the enemy in such a scenario. This is war, not a recreational hockey game. There’s no penalties, you fucking shoot to kill before you get shot and killed, you don’t sit there and ponder, “Well, is there a bystander over there, too?” You think about your own ass, about serving your country. The media trying to demoralize our troops for this is disgusting and a crime in itself, these people should shut their fucking mouths until their heads are removed from the depths of their asses.

These men and women voluntarily go over their and die for you, and you have the balls to criticize them for killing the enemy? Are you fucking kidding? Some people need to get their priorities straight, honestly. I apologize for the ranting and language, but I feel very strongly about this particular issue. You don’t have to believe in the cause, but believe in your nation.

23

Danny, the world isn’t fucking Shangri La. You can’t eliminate human nature and expect things to be “better”.

Your silly comments about the price of oil are just that, silly. If you can get a boatload of oil to your nation cheaper, you go for it buddy, you’ll make millions. I don’t think you truly understand the costs involved in large companies and risky situations.

Also, the fact that some asshole has made some comment in the past, does not make it fact. You can’t just hang onto such comments and assume they represent reality. My God man, a lot of people say a lot of crazy things.

Honestly, what I see is Hezbollah being pounded into dust. I see the Arab community behind the disarming of Hezbollah. I see Israel and Lebanon settling whatever tiny land disputes they have remaining. I see them hating each other for exactly one more generation after these events… and then I see them coexisting side by side without incident.

The only thing standing in the way of that is letting terrorists dictate policy to Lebanon, to Israel and to the Middle East.

I don’t think you understand the insidious nature of the situation. Sure, right now the terrorists are directing their attention at Israel and the US, but you are missing something.

Terrorists, people who can justify killing innocents for their own beliefs, have no limits left. They will just as surely kill their own countrymen when they don’t run the country exactly as the terrorists would prefer. They will kill people that run a newspaper that doesn’t carry the right message. Fanaticism is their life, violence is their weapon, and there is always another cause.

The problem of terrorism and extremism is not going to fade when it is proving to be a useful tool that makes testosterone free people like yourself piss your pants and give them whatever they ask for.

24

[quote]vroom wrote:
Danny, the world isn’t fucking Shangri La. You can’t eliminate human nature and expect things to be “better”.

Your silly comments about the price of oil are just that, silly. If you can get a boatload of oil to your nation cheaper, you go for it buddy, you’ll make millions. I don’t think you truly understand the costs involved in large companies and risky situations.

Also, the fact that some asshole has made some comment in the past, does not make it fact. You can’t just hang onto such comments and assume they represent reality. My God man, a lot of people say a lot of crazy things.

Honestly, what I see is Hezbollah being pounded into dust. I see the Arab community behind the disarming of Hezbollah. I see Israel and Lebanon settling whatever tiny land disputes they have remaining. I see them hating each other for exactly one more generation after these events… and then I see them coexisting side by side without incident.

The only thing standing in the way of that is letting terrorists dictate policy to Lebanon, to Israel and to the Middle East.

I don’t think you understand the insidious nature of the situation. Sure, right now the terrorists are directing their attention at Israel and the US, but you are missing something.

Terrorists, people who can justify killing innocents for their own beliefs, have no limits left. They will just as surely kill their own countrymen when they don’t run the country exactly as the terrorists would prefer. They will kill people that run a newspaper that doesn’t carry the right message. Fanaticism is their life, violence is their weapon, and there is always another cause.

The problem of terrorism and extremism is not going to fade when it is proving to be a useful tool that makes testosterone free people like yourself piss your pants and give them whatever they ask for.
[/quote]

Once again, you’ve gone through my carefully considered, currently accuracte and historically grounded post, and fucking niggled and picked holes in it like a little bitch, refusing to talk, always forcing argument. So frustrating. Keep lifting weights buddy, you ever stop and there’ll be a hundred hands round your neck. In every post i’ve mentioned how i respected your position, but…

You obviously don’t know me. The comment about testosterone- very funny. Ask about me. I’m not scared about terrorism. No terrorist has ever threatened me. I have the intelligence and learning to know that as long as you openly support clashing with terrorists, there will be terrorists, with beliefs justified by your response, and more clashes.

It depends on whether you want to a) end terrorism or b) have a war and try to crush the countries that the terrorists inhabit. You can’t have both. It stands to reason that massive civilian casualties means more orphans, and families deprived of loved ones and neighbours. By massive shellings, all you achieve is fulfillin the paranoid theories of the terrorist elders, and giving the youth cause to retaliate against statistical, and moral injustice.

I won’t concede anything to you anymore. You’re shortsighted. You see the terrorism, and right behind it is everything else, but your focus is fixed. Whatever. Do yourself a favour, read your penultimate paragraph, the read from my OP the statements by the IDF. That sounds exactly like your profile of a terrorist. But… they can’t… be terrorists…

YOU can justify anything you want, but nothing outside of your interest can ever be justified. See your shit about oil- “blah blah it suits me so i defend it”

I really hope another of your paragraphs is accurate- the one about peaceful coexistence. It hasn’t worked so far. I REITERATE- it won’t work. How do you imagine two sides, with no alteration in their public policy, suddenly living in peace, while one holds all the privilege and power, and the other is a downtrodden shambles? Learn

25

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
Once again, you’ve gone through my carefully considered, currently accuracte and historically grounded post, and fucking niggled and picked holes in it like a little bitch, refusing to talk, always forcing argument. So frustrating. Keep lifting weights buddy, you ever stop and there’ll be a hundred hands round your neck. In every post i’ve mentioned how i respected your position, but…[/quote]

I don’t particularly care who respects my position or not.

Danny, you keep suggesting that the way to stop terrorism is to appease them. Read the paragraph above… that is the message behind it no matter how much you claim it is otherwise.

You are missing the boat. In this instance, Israel is not trying to crush Lebanon. If they wanted to cruch Lebanon they would have done so already. So, your analysis is quite lacking no matter how much you think you know about history. By the way, knowing history is not the same as knowing people… or a live situation.

In this particular instance, there is every opportunity for Lebanon to end up stronger than Hezbollah, such that Lebanon can then fullfill it’s obligations and actually govern its own country. As soon as that happens, there can be peace. I’m not suggesting love and friendship, but simply peace. Over time relations can improve.

I don’t give a shit what you do or don’t concede. If you cannot see that terrorism is a different animal than most other types of injustice, then you have a problem with your moral compass.

Dude, I have never tried to say that there haven’t been shitty tactics or that things weren’t worse in the past. If you wish to dig back you can come up with excuses to perpetuate hatred all you like.

What the region needs is the rule of law. Government. Israel has a government, it should operate within the rule of law, and in this particular instance, as much as the process is very painful, it is helping move towards a Lebanon that operates under government control and rule of law.

Is that all you have concerning oil? I ask you for more information and all you really have is the fact that the world is dependent on it… so that means the world is evil?

Wow, you are whacked. When they are two individual countries both fully under government control, people will go about their lives, make a living, go to work on a daily basis, do whatever it is they choose to do. There will be no privilege and power of one country over the other.

Do you understand the concept of nations or not? You seem a bit fuzzy on the way the world is organized with respect to governance.

26

First of all, knowing history is very much secondary to knowing people. I don’t live in a cage on a remote hill. I know many many people of all ages, sexes, iqs, races, social positions etc.
And furthermore, do any people you know spend their days plotting to destroy/undermine the state of israel? No? So don’t constantly try to validate your greater years by undermining my own (not going to qualify it) knowledge.

Listen son, there is no doubt in my mind
that it appears plainly like i said ‘appease terrorists’. That’s because i did. Appeasement would have to be a part of any future peace plan. Prove me wrong (you won’t). What terrorist group has ever stopped otherwise? Except maybe GAL, but they are an exceptional circumstance. You will see, if you study the lessons of previous cases, that you won’t stop a terrorist group (never mind that these groups have both nationalistic and religious motivations) through force, as long as there is a gene pool to draw from. If you don’t want to appease terrorists on principle, that’s fine, you belong in North America. But they must be defused. You don’t defuse a situation by escalating the firepower. Now this does not mean i want terrorists to enjoy a long, uninterrupted campaign.
let me illustrate my point. How does a hostage negotiator operate?That’s right, he gives a little, in exchange for a little. no, Before you say it, Israel hasn’t done that. (I really am looking at it from Israel’s POV, since they are the agent i am ellied to through nationality and ethnic origin). If they want the hostages (in this case, the not-death of their civilians) they must give concessions, or else peopel will die. the guns-blazing approach does work, but innocents on the ‘Israel’ side equivalent to that of the hostage takers often die.

Really, you’d benefit if you stopped searching desperately to find fault in my comments. But you will

27

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
First of all, knowing history is very much secondary to knowing people. I don’t live in a cage on a remote hill. I know many many people of all ages, sexes, iqs, races, social positions etc. [/quote]

Maybe you missed what I meant…

I think you’ve got a bit of a complex about this issue. I wasn’t going on about greater years at all.

Ah, finally, the truth comes out.

[quote]What terrorist group has ever stopped otherwise? Except maybe GAL, but they are an exceptional circumstance. You will see, if you study the lessons of previous cases, that you won’t stop a terrorist group (never mind that these groups have both nationalistic and religious motivations) through force, as long as there is a gene pool to draw from. If you don’t want to appease terrorists on principle, that’s fine, you belong in North America. But they must be defused. You don’t defuse a situation by escalating the firepower. Now this does not mean i want terrorists to enjoy a long, uninterrupted campaign.
let me illustrate my point. How does a hostage negotiator operate?That’s right, he gives a little, in exchange for a little. no, Before you say it, Israel hasn’t done that. (I really am looking at it from Israel’s POV, since they are the agent i am ellied to through nationality and ethnic origin). If they want the hostages (in this case, the not-death of their civilians) they must give concessions, or else peopel will die. the guns-blazing approach does work, but innocents on the ‘Israel’ side equivalent to that of the hostage takers often die. [/quote]

I really wish you’d figured out what paragraph breaks are for. Anyway, I wouldn’t try to use hostage negotiators as a comparator here.

Hmm, you may not have been in the forums much, but I have argued that we need (we being the west) to stop fueling the ongoing hatred that is over there.

However, Afghanistan is not something that I have a problem with. Iraq is a different situation… and is likely to have fueled terrorism in the Middle East.

Israel, again, is a different situation. However, when Israel voluntarily left Lebanon, that would qualify as giving something. I don’t see why you can’t see things that Israel has done that weren’t bad. You see negatives clear as day, but the positives have magically become invisible to you.

Danny, your comments are not put together all that well. Either your ability to express yourself sucks or you don’t know as much as you think you do. Perhaps both. Get used to it.

28

No useful points here. Confused liberal/fascist in need of validation. stopping invading/shelling a country who (in some measure) oppose you is not a concession. They need to make concessions beyond not being at war. They need to give land back.

The only valid criticism you can make is about my paragraph breaks. Good

i can see that Israel has very intelligent, hardworking, patriotic people living there. That’s quite irrelevant. There are no plus points in the way they’ve handled this conflict.

You are an idiot. you have nothing to say. you are confused. You are boring. You are in fact irrelevant to this discussion. you seem to think you’re enlightened. Iraq- that country actually committed genocide, motivated by land acquisition, and ethnicity. Palestine/its sympathisers have committed terrorism in the name of land return. Israel have committed war crimes in the name of some dubious claim to a land that has not been theirs for a long time. I know more than i could ever express to you, because you’re a belligerent, confused idiot. No more use for debate. I have provided the answers, you’ve provided comedy/pathos

29

[quote]MisterAmazing wrote:
This is where black and white simply cannot suffice to paint the picture. While I do completely agree that the death of innocents sucks, vroom makes an excellent point especially in reference to Nazi Germany. I also enjoyed his statement along the lines of ‘are we at war or not?’

Civilian killing should be avoided at all costs EXCEPT the lives of our own countrymen. The fact of the matter is, if it is between one of our soldiers dying or a bunch of innocent children dying along with hostile forces, those innocent children have to die simply to preserve the life of that one soldier.

“Wow Mr. Amazing, you’re a complete asshole, how could you…”
Shut the fuck up before you finish you quincy, I am an asshole but I have my reasons. The point is not moralistic, it is political. We must do everything to protect our soldiers and citizens and really shouldn’t regard the lives of the opposing nation, they are the enemy in such a scenario. This is war, not a recreational hockey game. There’s no penalties, you fucking shoot to kill before you get shot and killed, you don’t sit there and ponder, “Well, is there a bystander over there, too?” You think about your own ass, about serving your country. The media trying to demoralize our troops for this is disgusting and a crime in itself, these people should shut their fucking mouths until their heads are removed from the depths of their asses.

These men and women voluntarily go over their and die for you, and you have the balls to criticize them for killing the enemy? Are you fucking kidding? Some people need to get their priorities straight, honestly. I apologize for the ranting and language, but I feel very strongly about this particular issue. You don’t have to believe in the cause, but believe in your nation.[/quote]

You contradict yourself:

You say that it is a political game, not a moral one.

The political game however could require to US the appear/play the good guys.

That could mean that the US cannot abduct or torture or allow their soldiers to shot at everything that moves, because the US must remain to appear to be civilized, even if that costs the life of a few American soldiers if not civilians.

American soldiers knew that they could die for political reasons, that is their job after all.

If that means that their rules of engagement kill a few American soldiers more, but serve a political purpose which, after all, is not theirs to question, aren`t they simply doing their jobs?

30

[quote]dannyrat wrote:
You are an idiot. you have nothing to say. you are confused. You are boring. You are in fact irrelevant to this discussion.[/quote]

I’m not the one claiming to have all the knowledge.

Anyway, I thought you’d figure a few things out, but let me connect the dots for you.

Hostage negotiators don’t actually work to give people what they want, they work to resolve the situation so that hostage takers are arrested or dead and the hostages are released.

No, I seem to think I have a consistent viewpoint on issues. You are the one that beknights people as enlightened or not with your fairy wand.

Ahahahaha. You’d better hope you know more than you can express, because you do a real piss poor job of it.

However, sadly, I doubt you know much more than a bunch of historic “facts” which you absorbed from some books. Again, and perhaps you’ll misconstrue this a second time, knowing history or facts is not the same as knowing about people, live people, in real world situations.

Real life is never as simple as the after the fact analysis appears to make things seem.

However, since you are in fact a peacenik appeaser, I think I can safely leave you to the wolves. If you go back and figure out what I was saying to you, come on back.

If nothing else, your arrogance is entertaining.

31

I’m glad i can entertain you. this forum will always degrade into a state of civil war, trading little jibes.

I understand what you siad about hostage-negotiators and that’s true. sorry, i admit it’s flawed a little, but in this forum i’ve heard numerous sports-war analogies. ? What? Sport is war? Yeh, except for the rockets and tanks.

"Danny, your comments are not put together all that well. Either your ability to express yourself sucks or you don’t know as much as you think you do. Perhaps both. Get used to it. "

It’s stuff like the above that give you the aura of sanctimony and that is why i come back with conceit. You don’t see Berardi called names and compared to atkins for his ‘wacky’ massive eating macro numbers.

I’ll stay chill as long as i don’t get pissed off, don’t get confused by my capricious tone.
Stop fucking talking about my grammar, or verbal fluency, or whatever man, there’s no doubt in me at all. You just make me think that either i typed too quickly or you are stupid like a warmonger (that’s a saying in China you know)

Perhaps you could put this idea of ‘people’ into words for me. Pray do tell, i haven’t looked up from a book in weeks. What’s that? The sun…?
Really, what do people do?

Do i have to understand beyond ‘power corrupts’ and ‘hatred breeds vengeance’, or ‘either kill or leave a man alone, he can revenge partial injuries’? Or is it like, secret?
Is it deeper than ‘ignorance is bliss’?

I think i’ll make a proverb- ‘ignorance argues in circles to cover its tracks’.

You tell me something then- what have i missed?

Not terrorists or their methods, or their motivations, or IDF’s style, and how it is ineffectual in guerilla situations. Not the portion of blame to be given to each, which should result in the relative restrictions and penalties.
I know how best to kill terrorism in practice since the 30s (imprisonment, the ‘running out of steam’ can cut the nucleus from a movement, it’s not so fast but it works better than aerial bombardment).

I know that there is a lot of Israelis who don’t want a war at all. There’s many Israelis who came there for the reason zionism stated, only without it’s cruel ‘land without a people for a people without a land’ lies. They should be able to live in a state of pece. The same for the arabs of the region. In 50 years i think the whole nature of shit will have altered.

"Real life is never as simple as the after the fact analysis appears to make things seem. "

Saying things like this is a waste of time. You haven’t spent any time in the middle east, if you had you’d feel differently. You couldn’t help to see the death on both sides. I’ve seen many dvds on peace efforts, wars, politics, and exodus in the region. I’ve seen many ‘targeted assassinations’ destroy whole streets, dozens can be killed easilty in Gaza like that. That guy’s a terrorist? Not that one, and that one, and the other 13. Get me? I’ve seen the ‘people asppect’. If you’re suggesting the plot thickens somehow with regards to the political climate/how YOU assume it is best to deal with terrorists (by the way, you may look silly criticising my knowledge as abstract when yours is arsecrack- don’t be weak man) save it. i know about politics, enough.

If we are sorting wheat from the chaff like that with human lives in any context whether it’s retaliation after a terrorist attack, or just plain old shellings to try something special, we will be judged. That is a war crime, by definition. The people who administer such things may get some support on internet forums my man, but they will be eating oats with saddam as soon as kofi or whoever gets past a US veto just once. Just once. And justice will be served in that area. It’s this reason i keep repeating.

All i disagree with is the either/or proposition, where you have to decide. this isn’t a monogamous relationship. This is war. A big, dirty war. In this war everyone is beyond rational. It’s taking on biblical nature and i don’t like that on the horizon even a little bit.

I think that anyone in possession of the facts will not be torn, but disgusted at each sides profligacy.

I will place priority in slowing Israeli assaults only because they can kill many more, and are killing at a far greater rate. I believe it was Kant who judged morality by the motive rather than the result (? long time ago) but i disagree. If that’s how you think, say it plainly.

I think if i try to save a mother from an oncoming car and push her baby in front, i’d feel like shit. Anyone who doesn’t think like that, is not someone i want to be allowed to influence political situations, through their military transgressions.

Israel have got a big country to hide in and all the luxury of Us steel behind them. They have a great luxury- life. And their ancestral homeland. All of the mythical land. Plus more. And a lot of enemies because of this.

Because Israeli happiness is paid for by palestinian misery.

This is why each side should be considered. WHY SHOULD THE EVENTUAL QUALITY OF LIFE BE ONLY IMPROVED FOR ONE SIDE, THE HEGEMONIC SIDE? In my consideration, the life and happiness of a passive Israeli are worth more than a militant arab. Because one chose death, and another chose nothing. He had no choice at all.

Let’s not adapt this theory to- the life of an Israeli citizen is worth more than a Palestinian, or Lebanese citizen. It’s not.

But still, all this luxurious safety of words, somehow precious to the world now, isn’t enough. In the face of a resistance obviously related to unwelcomeness in the area, and land acquisition, never minding that they’ve had someone’s family property, land and hometown (sanctioned) for sixty years, they’ve stolen a whole other load of fucking land for another 40 years. And then, the terrorists boom in numbers, and deadliness. So… They steal some more land! Good idea! And build houses, that are too close to Gaza. Gaza’s a depressing place, and dangerous too, because there’s a million+ pissed off caged refugees there.They don’t even live there. Rich Israelis put luxury homes on stolen land, surrounded by barbed wire, 30 feet from the most overpopulated mile on earth. Then they go far away. The arabs blow a LOAD of shit up if they can.

The Israelis will continue to act like that. (Do you see any fault in that?) I bet you’re planning to write ‘terrorism is never justifiable’. wait! delete that. Listen. It is never justifiable. But it is often explicable. It is avoidable. It is preferable to avoid it. If you know that an enemy is acting irrationally, and immorally, why would you ever try actively to incense him? or THEM? This is a little fishy, but also it needs to be cut short, soon.

The only reason i can see for it is arrogance. You would only do such a thing in an environment where you feel absolutely secure from reprisals. That’s what Israel has- safety if it wants it.

They have such great structural fortifications, and a 20m fence, with snipers at the top, and tactical locations where the Palestinians are firing the rockets from, and one of the best trained armies, ever (don’t anyone feed me shit about ‘they’re a tiny country’) supplied by america, supported by america (peace treaties accepted by the entire rest of the world can be vetoed and America doesn’t mind- It’s selling a shitload of rockets now. This is a permanent job if they can stir it just right.

If the combination of factors is put together, it sounds nice, right? (was i mistaken, or are all these features actually in place today?) Of course, cos you’ll counter ‘terrorism is wrong!’ or ‘they can still find a way’. Carry on, if it makes you feel happy. It’s not true. Israel has full control of the borders. If it wants to really devote all this energy to a) enraging an enemy (this is just in chronological order) then b) restricting his travel, putting him in a dire place to fester and finally c) Precisely, accurately shoot him with a bullet, not a rocket, if he chooses to aim to attack Israel, they have a solution. Of course a nation of people will live like slaves, exactly like slaves, except they have no work. But that seems to be the opinion right?

Forget conveniently (or perhaps never learn about) all the treaties that have been agreeable to both sides, and agreed provisionally by the PLO, on condition that Israel returns to green line borders (as the UN has DEMANDED many times for many decades).

i don’t know why so few troops have gone in. Long-range-bad-aim-dubious-intelligence-
collateral-damage-self-righteous missiles.

If i knew there were a bunch of guys at a school, firing long distnce rockets, and i knew where the school is, and i had helicopters like Israel has, and trained soldiers like they have, i’d have gone so i could zoomin and look.

If you see a guy with a rocket launcher, bang pop him in the wrist with a sniper from the copter, and the knee if you want. If it’s a fucking rocket launcher and it tilts to aim at you, even get him in the heart, no doubt. But this should be the standard, no? If not, why not.

32

Why even bother debating this topic?

Everyone has already formulated an opinion on this topic a very long time ago.

This discussion is such a waste of time.

Too bad Israel does not have the will to just drop a nuke and get it over with.