|
Hey guys, I suggest a "democratic" solution and to stop all of this controversy, I think the OP should put in a casual poll with two options - I am pro-Israeli (I am on their side); and I am pro-Palestini (I am on their side). I think it is interesting to see how much people actually side with what "Allegiance" So there is some "democratic" side to all this fighting. Thank you. 
|
On November 16 2012 07:26 TheRealArtemis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:33 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:30 heliusx wrote:On November 16 2012 06:16 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:10 heliusx wrote:
[quote]
what's your opinion on the white phosphorous air bursts israel shot that burned people down to their bones? do you think that is ok to do? do you think that is something a morally superiors military should do? enough of the "yeah but they did this!" shit i want your opinion. I never Israel didn't do this, i said they didnt target civilians, were they hurt? yes and its regrettable. The white phosphorus is used to provide cover from enemy fire and my guess is if they knew the so many civilians would be hit it wouldn't have been used. However im sure they knew there would be some casualties but if i have to choose my citizens and my soldiers over those or my enemy you know who i will pick. When you fight against a group that acts in civilian populations and uses this to their full advantage civilians will die. this is what i assumed, you don't see them as civilians but enemies. your strange assumption that every Palestinian is the enemy and wants you to die is delusional. you have drank the kool aid my friend. your military makes the enemies then dehumanizes them. it's a really sad situation. So if i had to choose a life of say a swede or a Israeli soldier i should choose the swede? Hamas actions have popular support and were elected by a majority so its hard for me to see them as innocent or worth the death of Israeli soldiers. Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? Jews arent persecuted today? lol.thats why the shooting in france happened against jews, and the bomb in sweden against jews, and death threats against jews in denmark.
Enlighten me. I am not aware of any mass scale Jewish persecution nowadays.
|
On November 16 2012 07:30 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:19 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:33 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:30 heliusx wrote:On November 16 2012 06:16 Goozen wrote:
[quote]
I never Israel didn't do this, i said they didnt target civilians, were they hurt? yes and its regrettable. The white phosphorus is used to provide cover from enemy fire and my guess is if they knew the so many civilians would be hit it wouldn't have been used. However im sure they knew there would be some casualties but if i have to choose my citizens and my soldiers over those or my enemy you know who i will pick. When you fight against a group that acts in civilian populations and uses this to their full advantage civilians will die. this is what i assumed, you don't see them as civilians but enemies. your strange assumption that every Palestinian is the enemy and wants you to die is delusional. you have drank the kool aid my friend. your military makes the enemies then dehumanizes them. it's a really sad situation. So if i had to choose a life of say a swede or a Israeli soldier i should choose the swede? Hamas actions have popular support and were elected by a majority so its hard for me to see them as innocent or worth the death of Israeli soldiers. Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? The reason we have this tone is because if they didnt attack us we wouldn't attack them. had they not been launching rockets they wouldn't have been bombed. That way of thinking can be stretched way back. When you get deported and when you lose your land it is quite hard to accept all of that and say 'fine', you know? But yeah, you are pointing fingers again, aren't you?
However the rockets never have and never can achieve anything other then terrorizing civilians and pissing the government off so i fail to see any gain possible from this. As long as there is violence there will be no call for peace and each time there is it makes people less likely to make any sacrifices for peace.
|
Treating civilians as enemies is kinda not helping.
|
On November 16 2012 07:32 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:26 TheRealArtemis wrote:On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:33 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:30 heliusx wrote:On November 16 2012 06:16 Goozen wrote:
[quote]
I never Israel didn't do this, i said they didnt target civilians, were they hurt? yes and its regrettable. The white phosphorus is used to provide cover from enemy fire and my guess is if they knew the so many civilians would be hit it wouldn't have been used. However im sure they knew there would be some casualties but if i have to choose my citizens and my soldiers over those or my enemy you know who i will pick. When you fight against a group that acts in civilian populations and uses this to their full advantage civilians will die. this is what i assumed, you don't see them as civilians but enemies. your strange assumption that every Palestinian is the enemy and wants you to die is delusional. you have drank the kool aid my friend. your military makes the enemies then dehumanizes them. it's a really sad situation. So if i had to choose a life of say a swede or a Israeli soldier i should choose the swede? Hamas actions have popular support and were elected by a majority so its hard for me to see them as innocent or worth the death of Israeli soldiers. Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? Jews arent persecuted today? lol.thats why the shooting in france happened against jews, and the bomb in sweden against jews, and death threats against jews in denmark. Enlighten me. I am not aware of any mass scale Jewish persecution nowadays.
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/anti-semitism_global_incidents_2012.asp
It may not be mass scale but it is growing in a lot of places. I know over 15 people who left their homeland for Israel due to it.
|
On November 16 2012 07:25 m4inbrain wrote:
Wow. You compare armed soldiers which are trained to kill, shooting at civilians with me chosing between my wife and a hobo in a robbery? Is it okay for you if a policeman kills your son because he punched another kid? Stupid reasoning, right? Think about it.
I won't even answer that, that "reasoning" is far beyond my understanding.
What? Don't put words in my mouth. I'm talking about that specific Israeli poster's point of view and why he probably feels that the lives of his countrymen are worth more than the lives of Palestinian civilians. Your policeman analogy doesn't even make any sense. A better one would be if both kids were equally culpable for the fight, and the policeman told me he could only punish one and that it was my choice. I'd let my kid off the hook right? Again, I'm not assuming that either side is at fault here, both countries have committed atrocities. But you can't honestly expect an Israeli to be O.K. with trading Israeli lives for Palestinian lives.
You're deluding yourself if you think you don't value the lives of people close to you more than strangers, let alone people you perceive to be your enemy. The perception in this conflict is "us or them." It's the wrong way to look at it, with all the diplomatic options out there, but civilians don't really have a choice when it comes to their country's diplomacy efforts. Israelis will be sad when Israeli soldiers or civilians are killed, and will be less sad when Palestinian soldiers or civilians are killed. How is this so hard to understand?
There is no harm in this line of reasoning until people presume to act on their value of life, as is the case in this conflict. Rather than tolerate the opinion of the other side and attempt to reach a diplomatic solution, they would gladly kill to save lives. This is less of a problem when it's an Israeli SC2 player on TL voicing his opinion, and more of a problem when it's the ones with the money, weapons, and power having this perspective. Both governments owe it to their civilians and civilians of the entire region to not let this escalate any further than it has.
|
On November 16 2012 07:36 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:30 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 07:19 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:33 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:30 heliusx wrote:
[quote]
this is what i assumed, you don't see them as civilians but enemies. your strange assumption that every Palestinian is the enemy and wants you to die is delusional. you have drank the kool aid my friend. your military makes the enemies then dehumanizes them. it's a really sad situation. So if i had to choose a life of say a swede or a Israeli soldier i should choose the swede? Hamas actions have popular support and were elected by a majority so its hard for me to see them as innocent or worth the death of Israeli soldiers. Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? The reason we have this tone is because if they didnt attack us we wouldn't attack them. had they not been launching rockets they wouldn't have been bombed. That way of thinking can be stretched way back. When you get deported and when you lose your land it is quite hard to accept all of that and say 'fine', you know? But yeah, you are pointing fingers again, aren't you? However the rockets never have and never can achieve anything other then terrorizing civilians and pissing the government off so i fail to see any gain possible from this. As long as there is violence there will be no call for peace and each time there is it makes people less likely to make any sacrifices for peace.
I agree that rockets can't do a thing, especially these Palestinian ones, but can't you see that it's always them. The answer is always on the other side, why?
http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/anti-semitism_global_incidents_2012.asp
It may not be mass scale but it is growing in a lot of places. I know over 15 people who left their homeland for Israel due to it.
All of that is really minimal, but you are right it is some kind of a persecution. I wanted to say persecution as in Jewish persecution during the Middle Ages, or the Myanmar crisis.
A real genocide is happening in Syria for nearly 2 years now and you're all focusing on the deaths of 15 people -- probably less than half of them being civillians.
And besides, even the title of this thread is misleading (not to mention the OP) - Palestine being what? Territory? Country? If territorry then Hamas have been bombing Palestine for over 10 years. If country then its meaningless because no such thing exists.
Please use the proper location which is Gaza or the Gaza Strip.
So what do you suggest, forget it and concentrate only on Syria? Don't forget that Palestine once existed, at least as a mandate and there are people who are aspiring to make it their home.
|
A real genocide is happening in Syria for nearly 2 years now and you're all focusing on the deaths of 15 people -- probably less than half of them being civillians.
And besides, even the title of this thread is misleading (not to mention the OP) - Palestine being what? Territory? Country? If territorry then Hamas have been bombing Palestine for over 10 years. If country then its meaningless because no such thing exists.
Please use the proper location which is Gaza or the Gaza Strip.
|
On November 16 2012 07:32 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:26 TheRealArtemis wrote:On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:33 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:30 heliusx wrote:On November 16 2012 06:16 Goozen wrote:
[quote]
I never Israel didn't do this, i said they didnt target civilians, were they hurt? yes and its regrettable. The white phosphorus is used to provide cover from enemy fire and my guess is if they knew the so many civilians would be hit it wouldn't have been used. However im sure they knew there would be some casualties but if i have to choose my citizens and my soldiers over those or my enemy you know who i will pick. When you fight against a group that acts in civilian populations and uses this to their full advantage civilians will die. this is what i assumed, you don't see them as civilians but enemies. your strange assumption that every Palestinian is the enemy and wants you to die is delusional. you have drank the kool aid my friend. your military makes the enemies then dehumanizes them. it's a really sad situation. So if i had to choose a life of say a swede or a Israeli soldier i should choose the swede? Hamas actions have popular support and were elected by a majority so its hard for me to see them as innocent or worth the death of Israeli soldiers. Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? Jews arent persecuted today? lol.thats why the shooting in france happened against jews, and the bomb in sweden against jews, and death threats against jews in denmark. Enlighten me. I am not aware of any mass scale Jewish persecution nowadays.
I think he mistakes crimes for persecution.
There are crimes against a lot of groups. I'd hardly label it all as persecution.
|
On November 16 2012 07:41 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:36 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 07:30 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 07:19 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:33 Goozen wrote:
[quote]
So if i had to choose a life of say a swede or a Israeli soldier i should choose the swede? Hamas actions have popular support and were elected by a majority so its hard for me to see them as innocent or worth the death of Israeli soldiers.
Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? The reason we have this tone is because if they didnt attack us we wouldn't attack them. had they not been launching rockets they wouldn't have been bombed. That way of thinking can be stretched way back. When you get deported and when you lose your land it is quite hard to accept all of that and say 'fine', you know? But yeah, you are pointing fingers again, aren't you? However the rockets never have and never can achieve anything other then terrorizing civilians and pissing the government off so i fail to see any gain possible from this. As long as there is violence there will be no call for peace and each time there is it makes people less likely to make any sacrifices for peace. I agree that rockets can't do a thing, especially these Palestinian ones, but can't you see that it's always them. The answer is always on the other side, why?
Depends what your looking at, the reason peace talks are frozen is the fault of both sides. However Israel dose the most it can to avoid fighting due to lack of will to, and on this point it seems likely that there may be a ceasefire tomorrow but we will see. good night
|
On November 16 2012 07:47 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:41 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 07:36 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 07:30 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 07:19 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 07:02 Art.FeeL wrote:On November 16 2012 06:47 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:39 WhiteDog wrote:On November 16 2012 06:37 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 06:35 WhiteDog wrote:
[quote]
Of course ? A soldier is supposed to give his life for his country, a civilian didn't ask for shit. Clearly you are forgetting that military service is mandatory here. That why nothing breaks public morale faster the the deaths of soldiers. Then don't make it mandatory, if you send your youth to the battle field it's on you. Is this the reason why you accept anything ? Ho an IDF soldier shot a little girl, poor guy he is just a young boy on his military service. Doesn't change, if you are at war, you are responsible for your action as a soldier. Also there are plenty of ways to evade the military service, the young french jew kid who goes over to Israel for his military service is not an innocent poor guy obligated by law for me. Because we need the manpower of a mandatory service so we dont get destroyed. i dont think i can emphasize this enough, the army is here so we arent killed, simple as that. i wish we wouldn't need a army but we do and because it was my duty to defend my country i never dreamed of evading service, and its not easy to do. And again you strike with your delusions. Poor Israel, everyone is against it because they simply want a piece of land to play on. This victimizing image you are trying to send to the world really is outdated. Jews were persecuted through the history but you can't say that today. That tone really is present in the majority of Israeli posters here too. Like those explaining how terrible it is to hear alarms or how you live in everyday fear because of those barbars on the other side of the fence. I agree, but at least show some humanism and realize that some people have lost their children or friends. What I am trying to explain is that nowadays when we hear about palestinians being killed it's more or less a normal thing, but if there are wounded Israelis, we are all like: poor them. Bias at its best. Neither thing is good, but the minimum we can do is at to at least try to be objective EDIT: One more thing, you often speak in the future tense: they will do this, they will do that, are you a prophet? The reason we have this tone is because if they didnt attack us we wouldn't attack them. had they not been launching rockets they wouldn't have been bombed. That way of thinking can be stretched way back. When you get deported and when you lose your land it is quite hard to accept all of that and say 'fine', you know? But yeah, you are pointing fingers again, aren't you? However the rockets never have and never can achieve anything other then terrorizing civilians and pissing the government off so i fail to see any gain possible from this. As long as there is violence there will be no call for peace and each time there is it makes people less likely to make any sacrifices for peace. I agree that rockets can't do a thing, especially these Palestinian ones, but can't you see that it's always them. The answer is always on the other side, why? Depends what your looking at, the reason peace talks are frozen is the fault of both sides. However Israel dose the most it can to avoid fighting due to lack of will to, and on this point it seems likely that there may be a ceasefire tomorrow but we will see. good night
And again it's them.
|
On November 16 2012 07:40 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:25 m4inbrain wrote:
Wow. You compare armed soldiers which are trained to kill, shooting at civilians with me chosing between my wife and a hobo in a robbery? Is it okay for you if a policeman kills your son because he punched another kid? Stupid reasoning, right? Think about it.
I won't even answer that, that "reasoning" is far beyond my understanding. What? Don't put words in my mouth. I'm talking about that specific Israeli poster's point of view and why he probably feels that the lives of his countrymen are worth more than the lives of Palestinian civilians. Your policeman analogy doesn't even make any sense. A better one would be if both kids were equally culpable for the fight, and the policeman told me he could only punish one and that it was my choice. I'd let my kid off the hook right? Again, I'm not assuming that either side is at fault here, both countries have committed atrocities. But you can't honestly expect an Israeli to be O.K. with trading Israeli lives for Palestinian lives. You're deluding yourself if you think you don't value the lives of people close to you more than strangers, let alone people you perceive to be your enemy. The perception in this conflict is "us or them." It's the wrong way to look at it, with all the diplomatic options out there, but civilians don't really have a choice when it comes to their country's diplomacy efforts. Israelis will be sad when Israeli soldiers or civilians are killed, and will be less sad when Palestinian soldiers or civilians are killed. How is this so hard to understand? There is no harm in this line of reasoning until people presume to act on their value of life, as is the case in this conflict. Rather than tolerate the opinion of the other side and attempt to reach a diplomatic solution, they would gladly kill to save lives. This is less of a problem when it's an Israeli SC2 player on TL voicing his opinion, and more of a problem when it's the ones with the money, weapons, and power having this perspective. Both governments owe it to their civilians and civilians of the entire region to not let this escalate any further than it has.
Except they are not equal. There is no "two equal kids". There are two guys with a gun, and a civilian in between. He would be fine to kill both, as he clearly stated (he even said "enemy civilian", which is stupid in itself). Maybe i'm too much of a soldier even though i don't serve active anymore, maybe it's because im most likely about 10 years older than him (assuming the general age is ~20). Does not even matter.
As a soldier, i value my "Kameraden" the most, actually. But i would never kill an innocent person (in whatever situation) to "rescue" him. He's a soldier. He is paid to fight wars. A civilian is not. I don't know if you served (i assume not), but there is a major difference between a soldier and a civilian. I would NOT want an innocent kid to die for my sake, thats the most stupid argument ever. It's because i value life, there you are right. Regardless of nationality. And again, there is a difference between being sad when a fellow soldier/civilian gets killed, and being okay to kill "enemy civilians" to prevent that. Is that too hard to understand?
And no. I don't tolerate his opinion, actually. You know why? Because it completely lacks any reason (or knowledge for that matter). He justifies every move the IDF makes, on the other hand he despises everything hamas does. In fact, they both do the same. As long as "civilians like him" don't see that, there will be no change, because they think they're right to do as they do right now. And it's not.
And yeah, i agree to the rest, more or less.
|
On November 16 2012 07:42 Caveman255 wrote:
A real genocide is happening in Syria for nearly 2 years now and you're all focusing on the deaths of 15 people -- probably less than half of them being civillians.
And besides, even the title of this thread is misleading (not to mention the OP) - Palestine being what? Territory? Country? If territorry then Hamas have been bombing Palestine for over 10 years. If country then its meaningless because no such thing exists.
Please use the proper location which is Gaza or the Gaza Strip.
Guess what its a thread on Israel and Palestine what do you expect people to talk about? Syria? Well that makes perfect sense. Stop trying to derail the thread because people are being critical of Israel.
|
Most people today have no idea of the logical distinction between an attitude of preferring peace over war, and an attidue of pacifism. I hear so much talk in this thread about how Israel needs to stand taller and make less compromises of the lives of its enemies, when this is not accompanied as it should be by any discussion of why they have been declared Israel's enemies. Violence between individuals is unfortunate but often necessary - this much you should be able to understand on your own. Violence between factions is so much more morally complicated because yes, you are effectively at war with the civillians of the region of your opposing faction who A) live where key battles must be fought B) pay taxes to those who attack you C) lend moral support to them, especially in such cases as they are family. Civilians are guilty of no act of aggression against you even if their governments are, but it does not come down to a question of whether to preserve life or not. It does not come down to a question of whether to kill the innocent or only the guilty. It does not come down to a question of a right to a fair trial. It is only a question of whether you want to preserve the lives of others, or the lives of yourself and your kin and your neighbours.
|
What I know is there is clearly no good nor evil in this conflict.
That being said, you cannot conclude by "then they are the same".
I'm not saying one is the invader here because of the obvious context. Both sides are defending their interests.
But you have:
-One side has 90% of the territory, the other 10% (and that's the main point, it won't resolves until there is a balance or until one country goes full evil and exterminate the other completely)
-One side has 1 dead person every time the other has 7
-One side has more help than the other.
So you can argue about how people are forced to stay inside their home or how someone tried an isolated attack or stated horrible things, but the thing is one side got screwed a lot deeper than the other...
|
On November 16 2012 07:59 zobz wrote:
Most people today have no idea of the logical distinction between an attitude of preferring peace over war, and an attidue of pacifism. I hear so much talk in this thread about how Israel needs to stand taller and make less compromises of the lives of its enemies, when this is not accompanied as it should be by any discussion of why they have been declared Israel's enemies. Violence between individuals is unfortunate but often necessary - this much you should be able to understand on your own. Violence between factions is so much more morally complicated because yes, you are effectively at war with the civillians of the region of your oppoising faction who A) live where key battles must be fought B) pay taxes to those who attack you C) lend moral support to them, especially in such cases as they are family. Civilians are guilty of no act of aggression against you even if their governments are, but it does not come down to a question of whether to preserve life or not. It does not come down to a question of whether to kill the innocent or only the guilty. It does not come down to a question of a right to a fair trial. It is only a question of whether you want to preserve the lives of others, or the lives of yourself and your kin and your neighbours.
Quite egoistical view on the world you have. Violence is often necessary? We aren't animals, we have the intellect and at least in theory we should be able to go along well with each other. When you start thinking that 'violence is often necessary' that means that you aren't doing everything to prevent it.
|
On November 16 2012 08:04 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 07:59 zobz wrote:
Most people today have no idea of the logical distinction between an attitude of preferring peace over war, and an attidue of pacifism. I hear so much talk in this thread about how Israel needs to stand taller and make less compromises of the lives of its enemies, when this is not accompanied as it should be by any discussion of why they have been declared Israel's enemies. Violence between individuals is unfortunate but often necessary - this much you should be able to understand on your own. Violence between factions is so much more morally complicated because yes, you are effectively at war with the civillians of the region of your oppoising faction who A) live where key battles must be fought B) pay taxes to those who attack you C) lend moral support to them, especially in such cases as they are family. Civilians are guilty of no act of aggression against you even if their governments are, but it does not come down to a question of whether to preserve life or not. It does not come down to a question of whether to kill the innocent or only the guilty. It does not come down to a question of a right to a fair trial. It is only a question of whether you want to preserve the lives of others, or the lives of yourself and your kin and your neighbours. Quite egoistical view on the world you have. Violence is often necessary? We aren't animals, we have the intellect and at least in theory we should be able to go along well with each other. When you start thinking that 'violence is often necessary' that means that you aren't doing everything to prevent it. Edit: can't remove that i after the quote, it doesn't appear when I try to edit, Anyone knows why?
Maybe because the text you quoted has a (edit: ) thingie. He "mis-italiced" his text. Try editing that part out of his posting, maybe that helps.
On zobz: WW2 called, they want their opinion about civilians in wars back.
Edit: crap -.-
Edit2: yeah, worked. Remove the italic thingies out of his text in "any discussion of why they have".
|
On November 16 2012 07:31 Holdinga wrote:Hey guys, I suggest a "democratic" solution and to stop all of this controversy, I think the OP should put in a casual poll with two options - I am pro-Israeli (I am on their side); and I am pro-Palestini (I am on their side). I think it is interesting to see how much people actually side with what "Allegiance" So there is some "democratic" side to all this fighting. Thank you.
Done.
|
Shared by one of my friends on FB (orignally written by Kamran):In case anyone believes that American reporting about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is unbiased and accurate, let me share a personal story that I have rarely spoken about in public, but at long last needs to be said. When I graduated college, I worked as a reporter on Wall Street. While working as a journalist for Knight-Ridder, one of the biggest media companies in the US, I covered many international stories, including interviewing Shimon Peres, Benazir Bhutto and other prominent leaders. I was considered a rising star and was soon up for a promotion to join the Washington DC bureau.
I was excited to move from New York to DC and after a week long "trial period" where I worked full time in DC office, was told I had the job. And then, at the last minute, I was called into the office of the DC Bureau Chief. He told me that he had decided not to hire me after all. I was shocked and asked why. The Bureau Chief told me bluntly to my face that he felt that I as a Muslim could not "fairly" cover Israel (i.e, present Israel always in a positive light). I was stunned. Was he actually telling me I lost the job because of my religion? And because I wouldn't promote a specifically pro-Israel agenda? This had to be a joke. There was another reporter in the room with the Bureau Chief who was Jewish. I asked the chief if he felt the other reporter would be unbiased, considering his religion. The chief turned red in the face with anger and told me not take the conversation there. Muslims were obviously biased about Palestine, but suggesting a Jew would be biased toward Israel was anti-Semitic. I walked out.
When I reported this exchange to Human Affairs at Knight Ridder, they panicked. They realized that I was sitting on major lawsuit against them for discrimination. They met me and apologized, begging me not to sue. I could have the DC job if I wanted. But I knew that now I had enemies there. I had embarrassed the Bureau Chief by reporting him and working in DC would be like navigating a lion's den. So I politely declined and resigned. I went on to Cornell Law School to learn how to protect myself and others from this kind of behavior. I later left the law to become a Hollywood filmmaker, and have experienced similar stories inside the film industry, where being pro-Palestinian is not exactly a major selling point. And yet I persist because I believe that truth can only be known by sharing all sides, not just one side of a narrative.
I have not told this story to many people, but in light of how the Western media is reporting (or failing to report) on what is happening in Gaza, I felt it my duty to share my own experience. When it comes to Israel and Palestine, the mainstream media has an agenda to tell only side of the story.
Yet truth always outs. As it just did, right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamran_Pasha
|
On November 16 2012 08:49 nath wrote:Shared by one of my friends on FB: Show nested quote +In case anyone believes that American reporting about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is unbiased and accurate, let me share a personal story that I have rarely spoken about in public, but at long last needs to be said. When I graduated college, I worked as a reporter on Wall Street. While working as a journalist for Knight-Ridder, one of the biggest media companies in the US, I covered many international stories, including interviewing Shimon Peres, Benazir Bhutto and other prominent leaders. I was considered a rising star and was soon up for a promotion to join the Washington DC bureau.
I was excited to move from New York to DC and after a week long "trial period" where I worked full time in DC office, was told I had the job. And then, at the last minute, I was called into the office of the DC Bureau Chief. He told me that he had decided not to hire me after all. I was shocked and asked why. The Bureau Chief told me bluntly to my face that he felt that I as a Muslim could not "fairly" cover Israel (i.e, present Israel always in a positive light). I was stunned. Was he actually telling me I lost the job because of my religion? And because I wouldn't promote a specifically pro-Israel agenda? This had to be a joke. There was another reporter in the room with the Bureau Chief who was Jewish. I asked the chief if he felt the other reporter would be unbiased, considering his religion. The chief turned red in the face with anger and told me not take the conversation there. Muslims were obviously biased about Palestine, but suggesting a Jew would be biased toward Israel was anti-Semitic. I walked out.
When I reported this exchange to Human Affairs at Knight Ridder, they panicked. They realized that I was sitting on major lawsuit against them for discrimination. They met me and apologized, begging me not to sue. I could have the DC job if I wanted. But I knew that now I had enemies there. I had embarrassed the Bureau Chief by reporting him and working in DC would be like navigating a lion's den. So I politely declined and resigned. I went on to Cornell Law School to learn how to protect myself and others from this kind of behavior. I later left the law to become a Hollywood filmmaker, and have experienced similar stories inside the film industry, where being pro-Palestinian is not exactly a major selling point. And yet I persist because I believe that truth can only be known by sharing all sides, not just one side of a narrative.
I have not told this story to many people, but in light of how the Western media is reporting (or failing to report) on what is happening in Gaza, I felt it my duty to share my own experience. When it comes to Israel and Palestine, the mainstream media has an agenda to tell only side of the story.
Yet truth always outs. As it just did, right now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamran_Pasha
Well, is it actually him writing that, or just some viral text written by someone else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
