Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by SalemPats, Jul 22, 2014.
Ladies & gentlemen....we have a winner!!
Who said this:
I don't have an issue with giving some aid to the Palestinians. The civilians there are suffering, and I don't think living there is something any of us would like. Those people basically live in a fenced in strip of land, like unruly dogs would. The situation there sucks, and while I think both sides are to blame, humanitarian aid is something I'm ok with. Obviously the devil is in the details, but generally speaking, I'm ok with it. As long as it's done right. No cash, and strictly humanitarian.
DarrylS said: ↑
Are they using them as shields or is that what you are being told??
How many of the 1700 rockets inflicted damage or death on Israel??
They have been digging tunnels for years now, increase the technology and implode them.. not that complicated, as a country/society we are completely desensitized to violence we killed 150K women and children in Iraq and no one cared.. we are killing women and children in Palestine and it is justified somehow, makes no sense....
Last week we authorized another $621,000,000 in aid for military defense for Israel which is the intent of this thread.. stop all the aid, and if it continues make sure that it is done on our terms not theirs, that goes for every Mid East Country ... we give Israel $3,100,000,000 in military aid annually...
But folks get their depends in a bunch over humanitarian aid... perhaps we should let them all bleed to death, die dehydration or starve the ingrates..
What is the definition of Justice here?? No one will touch that with a ten foot pole.
Click to expand...
They have been shooting many of them down, but some have gotten
trough. How many have to get through before a country has a right to defend itself? When the population of Israel has to run to bomb shelters several times a day, every day, does it really matter how many hit their targets? What nation would stand for their population being terrorized day after day if they could do anything about it.
If Canada were firing rockets into the US, how many would they have to fire before the US defends themselves?
Hamas have been using hospitals, schools, and even ambulances to hide their missles. And you admit that they have been digging tunnels for years. OK,why have they been doing that and for what reason?
I define justice in this case as keeping my population safe by any means I have to use to stop the assault.
Final question, can you go 1 day without mentioning Iraq?
Point out any post of mine that blames the Palestinians as a whole. I'll be waiting.
Are you serious? What reason has Hamas to stop their practices? They obviously work to influence the thoughts of those who are not well versed in the conflict.
You're not paying attention. You're just throwing things out there without even listening to folks who know a whole lot more than you do about this topic. I won't keep answering the same points over and over.
Oh Jack....more of the "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" bullsh!t. Doesn't moral equivalency get old - especially when you're comparing Israelis to OBL.
I'll tell you what...the next time we break up one of those dreaded Israeli extremist training camps I'll remember you were the one the awakened me to the terror of the Israeli state.
Quit regurgitating far left blogs, and get an opinion for yourself. Common sense is the new enlightenment. Try it some time.
Cause you never answered it, you may "know" a lot more, but that does not entitle others to their opinion.. the continued killing of women and children is not a good thing.
What is the endgame, what is justice for Isreal??
I've answered the same question posited in a different way in two other threads by the UK anti-Israel types.
I've also answered the question of the endgame in another thread.
I will give you a picture of justice:
The Israeli government takes great pains to protect its citizens, its soldiers and its way of life. The government builds bomb shelters, provides support for rocket-prone areas, and works to build a viable economy for its people.
The Hamas government in Gaza stores weapons in homes, schools, and launches attacks from playgrounds and apartment blocks. They provide no shelter for their women and children; instead using them as human shields in a cynical move to appeal to Israeli morals. Hamas gunmen divert humanitarian shipments for use by their military brigades, who then lead the people of Gaza, whether they want it or not, to endless war in an impossible effort to destroy Israel.
Is it that difficult for you to figure out who the bad guy is here? What do you think would happen if Hamas laid down their arms and pledged never to attack Israel again?
What do you think would happen in this case, Nikolai? Didn't the Palestinian/Israeli conflict begin long before the formation of Hamas?
That's an easy one....there would be peace...finally.
Right...never mind other terrorist organizations in Gaza which also have rockets and bombs...such as Al Ansar Brigades, and the al Nasser Salah al Deen Brigades and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archi...groups-possess-strela-2-manpads#ixzz38OH5a700
If Hamas laid down their weapons and pledged to never attack Israel again, I think we'd start to have the kind of progress we had in the early 1990s after the PLO did the same thing. Unfortunately, yes, Hamas and others of their ilk rose up in place of the PLO, which brings us to your next point...
...Arafat and his former terrorist PLO colleagues did not have the kind of clout and gravitas in the Palestinian territories to reign in groups like Hamas during the 1990s. They had just returned from Tunis, and, by that time, Arafat had lost his credibility as a leader having already established his reputation as a thief of the Palestinian people. Hamas is in a much different position, where they have the clout and the military acumen to convince, evict, or destroy other movements that would threaten whatever direction they wanted to take in Gaza.
They have already proven that they can indeed destroy rogue elements in Gaza, such as the Al Qaeda splinter group that tried to form there. Of course, this implies that the other groups act with tacit permission from Hamas. I tend to agree with that.
EDIT - And I need to address your first point, Mrs. P. Yes, the conflict precedes Hamas, but the conflict is borne in the very root of the Hamas doctrine; the attempt to destroy the Jewish state. In that way, Hamas is the PLO is the pan-Arab movement is the disorganized mess under the Grand Mufti. It is the inability to accept a Jewish state and a desire to destroy it that stood in the way of Palestinian statehood in 1948.
When these groups give up that dream and come to the table to discuss a real two-state solution, you will see a much lower incidence of violence. If the Palestinians never ever attacked Israel (something that has been happening without ceasing since 1948), I can guarantee that there would be no Israeli sorties or military action in the Palestinian territories.
Your reading comprehension is truly awful. I most certainly did not compare the Israelis to OBL. I compared the logic you use to justify indiscriminate attacks in Gaza to the logic OBL used to justify indiscriminate attacks against Americans - because it's essentially the same. As basic logic would indicate, this is not a moral equivalency between the actors, just an acknowledgement that by embracing this logic you cede the moral authority to decry such actions when they are taken by others (much like, say the US torture regime uncovered during the Abu Ghraib scandal).
And the notion that this is a left-wing argument is, like much of what you write, plainly false: http://www.theamericanconservative....dium=rss&utm_campaign=non-combatants-and-gaza
When you're an extremely simple man, and you believe there is no right or wrong, context doesn't matter. You are a very simple boy Mr. Bauer, but unfortunately context does matter, and the restraint everybody keeps harping on is relative. If the military capacity of both sides of the Gaza conflict was swapped, how long do you think Israel would have to exist? If OBL had Israel's military capabilities, what would the world have looked like? Israel has shown far more restraint than they should.
There is a right and wrong in this struggle Jack. I'm just sorry your intellect leaves you incapable of seeing it. No big deal...you can always go hang out at Chuck E. Cheese and forget about all of this "big person stuff".
I believe I have previously given you my own summary of Buckley's moral equivalency quote, but I'll leave you with real thing here:
"That is like saying that the man who pushes a little old lady into the path of a bus is morally equivalent to the man who pushes her out of its path, because they both push little old ladies around".
Intent and objectives matter Jackie.
Darryl, you are better than this. Hamas has said they want the destruction of Israel and in addition they want to create an Islamic state based on Sharia law. The end game is that they won't be able to do that.
At this point, I don't know if I'd have to write this in crayon for you to understand, or what, Mr. Dunning-Kruger.
For the second time, the relative moral stations of the actors involved is not at issue. What is at issue is defending indefensible rationales/actions based on the relative moral stations of the actors involved (which is an incredibly weak, even by your perilously low standards).
The fact is that by embracing this perverse logic you are ceding the authority to decry it when it is practiced by others. Ultimately they will still likely be wrong but that will not stop them from doing what they think is right. Your inability to see how others' perspectives may be shaped by Israels' actions, while not surprising, is the Achille's heel of your argument. It's akin to America losing the moral high ground to admonish China on human rights abuses post-Guantanamo/torture/rendition, and so forth. American torture is still wrong, even if jihadists are beheading prisoners.
Smart conservatives like Mr. Larison understand the danger of morally right powers embracing immoral policies/rationales for said policies. Unfortunately you're about the furthest thing from a smart conservative that exists.
I dunno, how about being allowed to exist? Not having missiles lobbed at them?
How are the attacks in Gaza "indiscriminate"?
You're defining immoral. You're not qualified to do so.
We'll make it simple:
By your definition of how this should work, the least moral among us would win every conflict as they would be most likely to use innocents to protect themselves. Morality is what has kept civilian deaths as low as they are. "Moral high ground"? - it does not help you win conflicts...actually it can contribute to you losing them. Israel's morality will cause this to drag out when it could have been "concluded" within a week.
An end to Jew-killing.
Also an end to Jew-killing, but by means of eliminating them all.
Separate names with a comma.