On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote: There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel.
as i said before, most of the rockets from gaza are intercepted. It does make the news when people are killed...
On November 16 2012 00:20 carrion wrote: The bloodiest, most brutal wars fought, all based on religious hatred. Which is fine with me. Hey, any time a bunch of holy people want to kill each other I'm a happy guy.But don't be giving me all this shit about the sanctity of life. I mean, even if there were such a thing, I don't think it's something you can blame on God. No, you know where the sanctity of life came from? We made it up. You know why? 'Cause we're alive. Self-interest.
i know right the spaghetti monster explains everything! theres no great mystery of life! mr hat!
this thread is a good demonstration that the majority of the people are antisemtic. Nobody would name the headline; "USA bombs pakistan and kills al-Qaida leader". Hamas/fatah declined so so many offers for a peacefull solution. They want to be seen as the ultimate victims in the world, and its working.
On November 16 2012 00:20 carrion wrote: The bloodiest, most brutal wars fought, all based on religious hatred. Which is fine with me. Hey, any time a bunch of holy people want to kill each other I'm a happy guy.But don't be giving me all this shit about the sanctity of life. I mean, even if there were such a thing, I don't think it's something you can blame on God. No, you know where the sanctity of life came from? We made it up. You know why? 'Cause we're alive. Self-interest.
If ur gonna quote someone, credit them or find a video of them saying it
On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote: There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel.
as i said before, most of the rockets from gaza are intercepted. It does make the news when people are killed...
On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote: There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel.
This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation.
On November 15 2012 23:15 Kurr wrote: Every time I read a story about this conflict, Israel is the one bombing a place while calling themselves the victim.
I honestly can't recall a story with a different scenario. I'm sure if happens don't get me wrong, but it seems like Israel is the perpetual bully in this story.
Really? Because every time that I read about this shit it always starts with Hamas shooting rockets into Israel and then a few days later they get hit by an airstrike.. I wonder why...
What are they expecting to happen...
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make. Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge. That's how it goes.
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets?
Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none.
Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved.
It is a total mindfuck.
This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred
Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief.
This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem.
Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ?
I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain.
On November 16 2012 00:39 Finrod1 wrote: this thread is a good demonstration that the majority of the people are antisemtic. Nobody would name the headline; "USA bombs pakistan and kills al-Qaida leader". Hamas/fatah declined so so many offers for a peacefull solution. They want to be seen as the ultimate victims in the world, and its working.
What? I'd say the majority of people support Israel. I could be wrong, since I haven't seen decent statistics.
More accurately, I'd say the majority of people just want the killing to stop. With this weird Islamic Winter I'm not so sure that'll happen anywhere. Until the world evolves past the dark ages (which, unfortunately, parts of it haven't) and religion stops being important, we'll have senseless violence against groups of people simply based on simple scapegoating and insider/outsider distinction.
On November 16 2012 00:39 Finrod1 wrote: this thread is a good demonstration that the majority of the people are antisemtic. Nobody would name the headline; "USA bombs pakistan and kills al-Qaida leader". Hamas/fatah declined so so many offers for a peacefull solution. They want to be seen as the ultimate victims in the world, and its working.
The use of the word antisemitic (even when spelled correctly) here is silly. Anti Israel is a different thing altogether. That word gets brandished at every possible occasion, usually by supporters of Israel, to discredit anyone who might disagree with them, and to be honest its ridiculous. I've seen religious scholars who happen not to be Jewish called antisemitic simply for not being Jewish (see Joseph Campbell).
Its a serious accusation, that has lost all its meaning because people like you love to say it.
On November 15 2012 23:15 Kurr wrote: Every time I read a story about this conflict, Israel is the one bombing a place while calling themselves the victim.
I honestly can't recall a story with a different scenario. I'm sure if happens don't get me wrong, but it seems like Israel is the perpetual bully in this story.
Really? Because every time that I read about this shit it always starts with Hamas shooting rockets into Israel and then a few days later they get hit by an airstrike.. I wonder why...
What are they expecting to happen...
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make. Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge. That's how it goes.
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets?
Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none.
Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved.
It is a total mindfuck.
This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred
Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief.
This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem.
Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ?
I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain.
Hamas has so far been undermining all efforts from the PLO to come to a peace agreement. Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully. They need to realize they need to find other ways to get to peace and change their approach.
It's all easy-talking from my living room far away from all of this. Not sure I wouldn't have been a fanatic Hamas supporter if I would have lived in Palestina...., but something needs to change to come to a solution.
On November 16 2012 00:39 Finrod1 wrote: this thread is a good demonstration that the majority of the people are antisemtic. Nobody would name the headline; "USA bombs pakistan and kills al-Qaida leader". Hamas/fatah declined so so many offers for a peacefull solution. They want to be seen as the ultimate victims in the world, and its working.
The use of the word antisemitic (even when spelled correctly) here is silly. Anti Israel is a different thing altogether. That word gets brandished at every possible occasion, usually by supporters of Israel, to discredit anyone who might disagree with them, and to be honest its ridiculous. I've seen religious scholars who happen not to be Jewish called antisemitic simply for not being Jewish (see Joseph Campbell).
Its a serious accusation, that has lost all its meaning because people like you love to say it.
Couldn't agree more. Antisemitic is someone who is against Jews, and I really doubt that anyone here is against Jews. The Israeli government is another pair of socks.
On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote: There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel.
This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation.
If Israel was a military dictatorship then I can see the possibility of this type of thinking applying. Unfortunately it is hard in a democracy to push for tolerance when the other side is hurtling rockets at your voter base. How many votes do you think the person who pushes a 'turn the other cheek' agenda is going to get from a fearful population? How many provocations can this attitude withstand before you must act?
Equally wrong shouldn't hold, you're right, there is no reason to apply a political word like equal to these wrongs. Are either of them right? Are either of them MORE right? How do you balance the type of inequalities there, I mean this isn't a logarithm.
On November 16 2012 00:54 Equity213 wrote: IMO even if you solve all the geo-political problems it will not go away. Underneath it all its about religion. Why Jerusalem?
There have been many wars which were religion-based in the past (especially in Europe), but somehow people managed to overcome these differences..
On November 15 2012 23:15 Kurr wrote: Every time I read a story about this conflict, Israel is the one bombing a place while calling themselves the victim.
I honestly can't recall a story with a different scenario. I'm sure if happens don't get me wrong, but it seems like Israel is the perpetual bully in this story.
Really? Because every time that I read about this shit it always starts with Hamas shooting rockets into Israel and then a few days later they get hit by an airstrike.. I wonder why...
What are they expecting to happen...
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make. Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge. That's how it goes.
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets?
Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none.
Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved.
It is a total mindfuck.
This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred
Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief.
This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem.
Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ?
I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain.
Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully.
Im genuinely asking, isnt Isreals claim to the land the fact that its written in their holy book, while the palestinian claim is that they have lived there for centurys?
I think I've helped balance the understanding of the imbalance of any view point and before the debate on this conflict takes over a current event topic I will bow out.
Really? Because every time that I read about this shit it always starts with Hamas shooting rockets into Israel and then a few days later they get hit by an airstrike.. I wonder why...
What are they expecting to happen...
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make. Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge. That's how it goes.
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets?
Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none.
Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved.
It is a total mindfuck.
This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred
Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief.
This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem.
Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ?
I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain.
Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully.
Im genuinely asking, isnt Isreals claim to the land the fact that its written in their holy book, while the palestinian claim is that they have lived there for centurys?
Yes. But the Palestinian claim goes further. You see, they claim that it is written in their Holy Book that it is their home.
And the Israeli claim goes even further by saying that they lived there before the Palestinians.
On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote: There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel.
This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation.
If Israel was a military dictatorship then I can see the possibility of this type of thinking applying. Unfortunately it is hard in a democracy to push for tolerance when the other side is hurtling rockets at your voter base. How many votes do you think the person who pushes a 'turn the other cheek' agenda is going to get from a fearful population? How many provocations can this attitude withstand before you must act?
Equally wrong shouldn't hold, you're right, there is no reason to apply a political word like equal to these wrongs. Are either of them right? Are either of them MORE right? How do you balance the type of inequalities there, I mean this isn't a logarithm.
Oh you are right but unfortunately I believe the best chance to solve this conflict is that the Israeli public starts to feel empathy towards the humanitarian situation in Gaza because the Palestinians will have a much harder time to embrace their oppressors (the "make them suffer so much that they unconditionally surrender" approach does not seem to work). This of course is hindered by shooting rockets even if they rarely hit anyone but even in times of ceasefire I have not seen a change of attitude in the Israeli public (people from Israel please correct me!). And you are also right that "who is more wrong" is a really dumb question in the face of suffering (on both sides).
Really? Because every time that I read about this shit it always starts with Hamas shooting rockets into Israel and then a few days later they get hit by an airstrike.. I wonder why...
What are they expecting to happen...
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make. Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge. That's how it goes.
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets?
Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none.
Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved.
It is a total mindfuck.
This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred
Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief.
This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem.
Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ?
I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain.
Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully.
Im genuinely asking, isnt Isreals claim to the land the fact that its written in their holy book, while the palestinian claim is that they have lived there for centurys?
Jews and Palestinians have been living together for centuries in that area. The problem started with the Balfour Declaration by which Jews gained a country.
On November 16 2012 00:06 Jockmcplop wrote: [quote]
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make. Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge. That's how it goes.
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets?
Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none.
Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved.
It is a total mindfuck.
This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred
Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief.
This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem.
Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ?
I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain.
Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully.
Im genuinely asking, isnt Isreals claim to the land the fact that its written in their holy book, while the palestinian claim is that they have lived there for centurys?
Yes. But the Palestinian claim goes further. You see, they claim that it is written in their Holy Book that it is their home.
And the Israeli claim goes even further by saying that they lived there before the Palestinians.
Nice, huh?
I am not sure there is video material or other proof on whether the first person to put foot on the ground currently known as Jerusalem was an isreali or a palestinian, and even more unlikely (s)he identified as being one of those two......
EPT
