|
United States22883 Posts
On December 31 2008 15:07 Xeris wrote:Iran doesn't want Kurds to be fucked up. Iran's Kurdish population is the most well off / satisfied of all the Kurdish minorities throughout the Middle East. Iran treats the Kurds relatively well (although they are certainly not equal), and Kurds in Iran are mostly happy. They tolerate their own population for the sake of stability, but none of the countries in that area mind what Turkey does to its Kurds or the Kurds in N. Iraq, except Iraq itself because of Talabani. Look at what Iran did during the post Gulf War exodus. There is no unity between Kurds and Turkey/Iran/Syria.
And Locke, Iran is a fucking democracy. Theocratic democracy? Oh, just like Israel. Iran is training our biggest enemies? Are you fucking stupid? Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the ISI/Pakistani militants are our biggest enemies. Not only are those all Sunni groups, but Iran has been at odds with Afghanistan and Palestine for hundreds of years. Iran could be one of our best allies in the region.
Savio, you know absolutely nothing about the history of Israelis. If you guys aren't willing to look at someone controversial like Finkelstein, at least look at a preeminent Israeli scholar like Benny Morris; at least he's criticized from both sides. Or why not look up the British take on Israelis at the time. They did not peacefully claim the land that the UN gave them, they were terrorists in the region for several decades before WWII.
Nuclear Iran is fine. It's a rational actor, and you don't just sell nuclear weapons to terrorists. This isn't fucking 24. You need tons of infrastructure to create and use them, which means states are the only nuclear threat. Instead of worrying about stable Iran's 1 nuclear weapon, you people should be worrying about crumbling Pakistan's 200 nuclear weapons or India's 500 nuclear weapons. Both have a greater chance of ending up in the hands of extremists.
Besides, the ISI have already sold the blueprints for a nuclear weapon to several countries plus physics is physics, you can't keep this stuff a secret. Hell, if you really want to worry about being attacked, maybe we should start getting rid of chlorine and fertilizer and bug spray, and the freight trains that are all extremely vulnerable carrying this stuff across the country.
|
i hate the hamas they get what they have to get ...
rockets on isreal villigas all time .... so the best is to hang every hamas and fatah back to power xD
|
On January 01 2009 00:53 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2008 15:07 Xeris wrote:Iran doesn't want Kurds to be fucked up. Iran's Kurdish population is the most well off / satisfied of all the Kurdish minorities throughout the Middle East. Iran treats the Kurds relatively well (although they are certainly not equal), and Kurds in Iran are mostly happy. They tolerate their own population for the sake of stability, but none of the countries in that area mind what Turkey does to its Kurds or the Kurds in N. Iraq, except Iraq itself because of Talabani. Look at what Iran did during the post Gulf War exodus. There is no unity between Kurds and Turkey/Iran/Syria. And Locke, Iran is a fucking democracy. Theocratic democracy? Oh, just like Israel. Savio, you know absolutely nothing about the history of Israelis. If you guys aren't willing to look at someone controversial like Finkelstein, at least look at a preeminent Israeli scholar like Benny Morris; at least he's criticized from both sides. Or why not look up the British take on Israelis at the time. They did not peacefully claim the land that the UN gave them, they were terrorists in the region for several decades before WWII. Um, Israel is scarcely theocratic.
As for Zionist terrorism, it was wrong of course, which has nothing to do with modern Israel's right to respond to terrorism directed against them. The British did try to take action against terrorists, as was proper.
|
United States22883 Posts
On January 01 2009 01:07 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 00:53 Jibba wrote:On December 31 2008 15:07 Xeris wrote:Iran doesn't want Kurds to be fucked up. Iran's Kurdish population is the most well off / satisfied of all the Kurdish minorities throughout the Middle East. Iran treats the Kurds relatively well (although they are certainly not equal), and Kurds in Iran are mostly happy. They tolerate their own population for the sake of stability, but none of the countries in that area mind what Turkey does to its Kurds or the Kurds in N. Iraq, except Iraq itself because of Talabani. Look at what Iran did during the post Gulf War exodus. There is no unity between Kurds and Turkey/Iran/Syria. And Locke, Iran is a fucking democracy. Theocratic democracy? Oh, just like Israel. Savio, you know absolutely nothing about the history of Israelis. If you guys aren't willing to look at someone controversial like Finkelstein, at least look at a preeminent Israeli scholar like Benny Morris; at least he's criticized from both sides. Or why not look up the British take on Israelis at the time. They did not peacefully claim the land that the UN gave them, they were terrorists in the region for several decades before WWII. Um, Israel is scarcely theocratic. How much do you actually know about Iranian politics? It's corrupt, but largely secular.
As for Zionist terrorism, it was wrong of course, which has nothing to do with modern Israel's right to respond to terrorism directed against them. The British did try to take action against terrorists, as was proper.
It matters because Hamas is going after the ever-encroaching territories, which people like Locke claim Israel is entitled to because of their history, when really they were just as murderous as anyone else.
|
On January 01 2009 00:53 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2008 15:07 Xeris wrote:Iran doesn't want Kurds to be fucked up. Iran's Kurdish population is the most well off / satisfied of all the Kurdish minorities throughout the Middle East. Iran treats the Kurds relatively well (although they are certainly not equal), and Kurds in Iran are mostly happy. They tolerate their own population for the sake of stability, but none of the countries in that area mind what Turkey does to its Kurds or the Kurds in N. Iraq, except Iraq itself because of Talabani. Look at what Iran did during the post Gulf War exodus. There is no unity between Kurds and Turkey/Iran/Syria. And Locke, Iran is a fucking democracy. Theocratic democracy? Oh, just like Israel. Savio, you know absolutely nothing about the history of Israelis. If you guys aren't willing to look at someone controversial like Finkelstein, at least look at a preeminent Israeli scholar like Benny Morris; at least he's criticized from both sides. Or why not look up the British take on Israelis at the time. They did not peacefully claim the land that the UN gave them, they were terrorists in the region for several decades before WWII.
Jibba let's keep some level of discussion, Iran isn't a democracy it is ruled by a Supreme Leader which isn't elected and is far more powerful than the "elected" president which has to be approved by the Leader before he can even run. And Iran political system is SO completely different from Israel that your comparison is simply ridiculous.
"More powerful than the president of Iran, the (Supreme) Leader appoints the heads of many powerful posts - the commanders of the armed forces, the director of the national radio and television network, the heads of the major religious foundations, the prayer leaders in city mosques, and the members of national security councils dealing with defence and foreign affairs. He also appoints the chief judge, the chief prosecutor, special tribunals and, with the help of the chief judge, the 12 jurists of the Guardian Council – the powerful body that decides both what bills may become law and who may run for president or parliament.[4]"
Yes Jibba, we fought hard to create Israel and we are fighting to defend it from enemies who seek to destroy it. If we depended just on the UN "giving" us a country we would have no country. There is just one tiny country for Jews and it is Israel there are 57 for Muslims.
|
On January 01 2009 01:12 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 01:07 qrs wrote:On January 01 2009 00:53 Jibba wrote:On December 31 2008 15:07 Xeris wrote:Iran doesn't want Kurds to be fucked up. Iran's Kurdish population is the most well off / satisfied of all the Kurdish minorities throughout the Middle East. Iran treats the Kurds relatively well (although they are certainly not equal), and Kurds in Iran are mostly happy. They tolerate their own population for the sake of stability, but none of the countries in that area mind what Turkey does to its Kurds or the Kurds in N. Iraq, except Iraq itself because of Talabani. Look at what Iran did during the post Gulf War exodus. There is no unity between Kurds and Turkey/Iran/Syria. And Locke, Iran is a fucking democracy. Theocratic democracy? Oh, just like Israel. Savio, you know absolutely nothing about the history of Israelis. If you guys aren't willing to look at someone controversial like Finkelstein, at least look at a preeminent Israeli scholar like Benny Morris; at least he's criticized from both sides. Or why not look up the British take on Israelis at the time. They did not peacefully claim the land that the UN gave them, they were terrorists in the region for several decades before WWII. Um, Israel is scarcely theocratic. How much do you actually know about Iranian politics? It's corrupt, but largely secular. Show nested quote + As for Zionist terrorism, it was wrong of course, which has nothing to do with modern Israel's right to respond to terrorism directed against them. The British did try to take action against terrorists, as was proper.
It matters because Hamas is going after the ever-encroaching territories, which people like Locke claim Israel is entitled to because of their history, when really they were just as murderous as anyone else.
First of all if you listen to Hamas (or even read their maps) they are after the entire land of Israel NOT 1967 borders. Besides the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Front) was formed in 1964, before the war - when the arab countries had all Judea including large part of Jerusalem, Samaria, Gaza and Ramat Hagolan. They wanted the rest of Israel, Tel Aviv Haifa and Jerusalem, not to "return to 1967".
BTW to return to 1967 borders means giving the land not to "Palestines" cause they never ruled any of these lands but to Jordan, Syria and Egypt who held these areas. Those countries have no rights to these parts of Israel and there is no reason why we should give them up.
|
On December 31 2008 03:44 Titusmaster6 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2008 02:14 Xeris wrote: First off - if you look at international law, any retaliation with force, if it's going to be claimed to be out of self defense should hold to this principle: the response must be proportional to the offense. So, less than 20 Israelis (I think the official word is that Israel's attacks are prompted by a bombing that killed TWO people) being killed should not warrant an all out invasion of Gaza and the deaths of over 350 people (probably more by the time this is all over with).
To be honest I think this is just a flaunting of Israeli power - they feel like they can do whatever the fuck they want in the Middle East because they have powerful allies (United States, for example) and not suffer any consequences. Think the United Nations or any major group is going to really stand up AGAINST Israel? Nobody but Iran has the balls to do it. Israel is going to carry out this war, cause a fuckton of damage, then retreat back into Israel where they will not feel any repercussions and just continue as they have.
It's pretty bullshit the position that Israel is in, being like the little kid on the block with a big badass brother so nobody can mess with them. Technically what they are doing is illegal according to international law, but nobody's going to do anything about it. This is exactly what I think too. It's such a joke that Isreal gets attacked by home-made pipe bombs filled with scrap metal and retaliate with air strikes.
hilarious coming from an american
|
On January 01 2009 05:09 daz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2008 03:44 Titusmaster6 wrote:On December 31 2008 02:14 Xeris wrote: First off - if you look at international law, any retaliation with force, if it's going to be claimed to be out of self defense should hold to this principle: the response must be proportional to the offense. So, less than 20 Israelis (I think the official word is that Israel's attacks are prompted by a bombing that killed TWO people) being killed should not warrant an all out invasion of Gaza and the deaths of over 350 people (probably more by the time this is all over with).
To be honest I think this is just a flaunting of Israeli power - they feel like they can do whatever the fuck they want in the Middle East because they have powerful allies (United States, for example) and not suffer any consequences. Think the United Nations or any major group is going to really stand up AGAINST Israel? Nobody but Iran has the balls to do it. Israel is going to carry out this war, cause a fuckton of damage, then retreat back into Israel where they will not feel any repercussions and just continue as they have.
It's pretty bullshit the position that Israel is in, being like the little kid on the block with a big badass brother so nobody can mess with them. Technically what they are doing is illegal according to international law, but nobody's going to do anything about it. This is exactly what I think too. It's such a joke that Isreal gets attacked by home-made pipe bombs filled with scrap metal and retaliate with air strikes. hilarious coming from an american u srs? hahahahaha
|
yeah i think thats pretty funny
|
On December 31 2008 03:44 Titusmaster6 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2008 02:14 Xeris wrote: First off - if you look at international law, any retaliation with force, if it's going to be claimed to be out of self defense should hold to this principle: the response must be proportional to the offense. So, less than 20 Israelis (I think the official word is that Israel's attacks are prompted by a bombing that killed TWO people) being killed should not warrant an all out invasion of Gaza and the deaths of over 350 people (probably more by the time this is all over with).
To be honest I think this is just a flaunting of Israeli power - they feel like they can do whatever the fuck they want in the Middle East because they have powerful allies (United States, for example) and not suffer any consequences. Think the United Nations or any major group is going to really stand up AGAINST Israel? Nobody but Iran has the balls to do it. Israel is going to carry out this war, cause a fuckton of damage, then retreat back into Israel where they will not feel any repercussions and just continue as they have.
It's pretty bullshit the position that Israel is in, being like the little kid on the block with a big badass brother so nobody can mess with them. Technically what they are doing is illegal according to international law, but nobody's going to do anything about it. This is exactly what I think too. It's such a joke that Isreal gets attacked by home-made pipe bombs filled with scrap metal and retaliate with air strikes. You're dumb. And anybody who thinks like this is dumb.
If your home and community were under constant threat from rocket attacks and your family in constant, visible, explosive danger, you'd feel the same way. No responsible government would ignore such a threat. To blame Israel for its "disproportionate" response is to blame human nature. Nobody wants rockets exploding in their back yard, and if you were in that position, or if the palestinians were in Israel's position, you'd want your government to do the same.
Which is not an excuse for Israel's actions. Murder is condemnable in all instances, but to talk as if Israel's government had a rational choice besides military action is delusional. For the last time, you don't solve conflicts by pointing fingers. You do it by acknowledging equal culpability from every actor.
|
Does anyone else here think the modern state of Israel was one of the worst ideas ever?
Lets think about this, lets take a group of people (jews) who have been screwed multiple times throughout history and put them in a location where they're practically surrounded by some of the craziest religous groups in modern times. How was the UN convinced this was a good idea?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the un was (even more of) a joke? but really, we are talking about colonial legacies there.
|
On December 31 2008 17:59 Locke. wrote: I started quoting that article and correcting the lies one after the other I soon found out the amount of lies and fabrications in it reaches absurd proportions.
Ironically the quote he puts at the top of the article describes what he wrote perfectly.
"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over." -- Adolf Hitler
Wow, brilliant fucking rebuttal there. I mean, nevermind actually saying what the article lied about or providing any substance to back up your opinion of why it was full of lies or anything, just say "it was full of lies and absurd" and then that's your argument. So are you saying the article lied because it apportions blame to the Zionists as to how Israel was initially set up or what, at least give a reason as to why you disagree. Are you saying it's a lie that Israel never committed any terrorists acts to begin with.
+ Show Spoiler +In a joint operation called "Operation Unity," the three Zionist terrorist gangs, the Haganah, the Irgun and the Stern Gang surrounded the village at 4:30 AM, and then went in, raping and killing as they went, looting valuables and destroying property. The slaughter went on for two days. On the second day, a Red Cross volunteer happened onto the scene, and later described what the Zionist terrorists told him was "mopping up." He indicated that the "mopping up was being done with knives, machine guns and grenades." In a previously secret British report, quoted at "Deir Yassin Remembered," (a web site operated by an international group of scholars, half of whom are Jewish or Jewish Israelis), "many young schoolgirls were raped and later slaughtered. Old women were also molested. One story is current concerning a case in which a young girl was literally torn in two. Many infants were also butchered and killed. I also saw one old woman... who had been severely beaten about the head with rifle butts. Women had bracelets torn from their arms and rings from their fingers and parts of some of the women's ears were severed in order to remove earrings."
Reports by some of the survivors:
Mr. Fahimi Zeidan, 12: "The Jews ordered all our family to line up against the wall and they started shooting us. I was hit in the side, but most of us children were saved because we hid behind our parents. The bullets hit my sister Kadri [age four] in the head, my sister Sameh [age eight] in the cheek, my brother Mohammed [age seven] in the chest. But all the others with us against the wall were killed: my father, my mother, my grandfather and grandmother, my uncles and aunts and some of their children."
Ms. Haleem Eid, 30: "A man [shot] a bullet into the neck of my sister Salhiyeh who was nine months pregnant. Then he cut her stomach open with a butcher's knife."
Ms. Naaneh Khalil, 16, saw a man: "take a kind of sword and slash my neighbor Jamil Hish from head to toe then do the same thing on the steps to my house to my cousin Fathi."
Ms. Safiyeh Attiyah, 41: "I screamed but around me other women were being raped too. Some of the men were so anxious to get our earrings they ripped our ears to pull them off faster."
Mr. Mohamed Jaber, student, "The Jews [broke] in, [drove] everybody outside, put them against the wall and shot them. One of the women was carrying a three month old baby."
Mr. Abu Mahmud 70: "They took about 40 prisoners from the village. But after the battle was over, they took them to the quarry where they shot them dead and threw their bodies in the quarry. After they [the terrorists] removed their [the terrorists'] dead and wounded [from the village], they took the prisoners and killed them. They took the elderly prisoners, women and men and took them out of the village, yet they killed the youths."(DYR)
There are reports that both the British commander in the area and the Jewish Agency both knew what was happening, but no one intervened to stop it.
Come on, you can't just justify yourself by quoting Adolf Hitler. You remind me of floor exercise in this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=82057¤tpage=2
|
The Hitler quote was from the article itself, I didn't bring it up! I would never even think to put a quote of Adolf Hitler as a motto to my essay like this guy did, fairly twisted if you ask me. It's just that ironically the quote he chose describes the rest of his essay. I am not surprised he chose a Hitler motto as an introduction to his twisted article.
"To that end, I have elected to leave out the facts as everyone already assumes them to be," - He says on his own accord that he simply ignores facts and rights what he wants instead.
I still refuse to quote this article and falsify the enormous amount of fabrications, half truths and downright lies in it (along with occasional well known facts). Just the same as I wouldn't quote "The Protocols of Zion's Elders" or "Mein Kampf" and falsify what they write if you brought that up.
|
Does anything ever change in the Middle East in regards to Israel vs the rest?
This has been going on since the end of WWII and isn't going to end until one annihilates the other.
Meanwhile the keyboard warriors of the world argue over who is right or wrong and nothing ever changes.
They'll work out some dodgy truce and we'll all be back here again in another 6 months talking about the same things.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
some israelis seem to understand the situation as a mere police action on a rowdy neighborhood, only on steroids. they see the palestinians as ultraviolent maniacs, or religious fanatics, or behaving in a simplistic model of hateful conflict. take some time and look at how a boy grows up to hate israel, part of it is certainly due to the ideology, but things like living besides the glitter of modernity without being able to partake in it are surely frustrating.
|
The truth is that having a "Palestinian State" in Israel means the destruction of Israel, it will never be a peaceful solution. Both practically and ideologically it will never work and we are seeing it clearer and clearer every day that passes by. The Palestinian Liberation Front was made before 1967 with the purpose of destroying Israel and joining a large Pan-Arabian state. It is not about "Palestinian" identity, it is about Arab identity. When the Arabs in Israel lived under Syrian, Jordanian and Egyptian "occupation" they didn't ask any of them for independence.
They want Israel to be an Arab country with no Jews and we want a Jewish country with a faithful Arab minority. Unfortunately our treacherous leadership has accepted the madness of the Palestinian idea and now either a war or the slow destruction of Israel is inevitable.
The only way there will ever be something similar to peace around Israel is if Israel will control all of its land, the arabs who aren't loyal to our country will be asked to live in one of the 57 muslim countries or where ever they wish (getting financial help from Israel to leave) and those who do accept Israel can live in it as a minority with complete human rights (far more than they receive in any Arab country).
Of course currently that's a far dream, the Oslo process and the creation of the murderous Hamastan along with the terrorist Fatah will make it very hard to reach such a status. But that is the only way there will be quiet in Israel in the long run.
|
I guess starving them to death was taking too long
|
On January 02 2009 00:33 iloveoil wrote: I guess starving them to death was taking too long yeah, that or maybe their cute little homemade rockets landed in their neighbor's backyard a few times too often
|
On January 01 2009 20:35 Locke. wrote: The Hitler quote was from the article itself, I didn't bring it up! I would never even think to put a quote of Adolf Hitler as a motto to my essay like this guy did, fairly twisted if you ask me. It's just that ironically the quote he chose describes the rest of his essay. I am not surprised he chose a Hitler motto as an introduction to his twisted article.
"To that end, I have elected to leave out the facts as everyone already assumes them to be," - He says on his own accord that he simply ignores facts and rights what he wants instead.
I still refuse to quote this article and falsify the enormous amount of fabrications, half truths and downright lies in it (along with occasional well known facts). Just the same as I wouldn't quote "The Protocols of Zion's Elders" or "Mein Kampf" and falsify what they write if you brought that up.
Again another post which completely ignores the substance of the article, I mean, it'd be a lot easier if you just wrote: "I am unable to rebut the argument being put forward by the article and therefore am just going to debate like floor exercise".
|
|
|
|