|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
|
|
United States41471 Posts
On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening.
Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate
"sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture"
into my ethical framework
|
On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me.
You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel?
On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework
That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true.
In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary.
|
@Mohdoo, Israel could lose in a heartbeat if the US turned against them instead of supporting ethnic cleansing.
On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel?
Maybe if people stopped supporting ethnic cleansing the US would have to stop funding it?
Edit: Also you might want to think about how supporting the ethnic cleansing of Muslims from multiple countries on the US dime looks to the rest of the Muslim world
|
On December 07 2017 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:@Mohdoo, Israel could lose in a heartbeat if the US turned against them instead of supporting ethnic cleansing. Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel? Maybe if people stopped supporting ethnic cleansing the US would have to stop funding it?
You're also right about that. What chance do you see of that happening in the next 20 years?
All your arguments make a ton of sense so long as probability never enters into the equation. I could list LOTS of wonderfully ethical scenarios. They will be so warm and fuzzy you won't even BELIEVE it! But it doesn't mean they'll happen.
|
On December 07 2017 02:41 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:@Mohdoo, Israel could lose in a heartbeat if the US turned against them instead of supporting ethnic cleansing. On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel? Maybe if people stopped supporting ethnic cleansing the US would have to stop funding it? You're also right about that. What chance do you see of that happening in the next 20 years? All your arguments make a ton of sense so long as probability never enters into the equation. I could list LOTS of wonderfully ethical scenarios. They will be so warm and fuzzy you won't even BELIEVE it! But it doesn't mean they'll happen.
Considering you seem staunchly in the pro ethnic cleansing camp I suppose it's unlikely the US will stop supporting ethnic cleansing soon. But when people rightfully call the US a shit country, they're talking about the people agreeing with you.
|
On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel? Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true. In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary.
noone is arguing that palestinians should keep fighting this (from our pov) pointless battle. But that's it. We can tell from our pov that it's pointless and that it's suffering without any ending in sight.
But it's kinda hard to go and tell them that they have to give up on their nation as a whole.
The thing GH does want to make clear though is (at least that's my impression), that the US should stop funding that and I tend to agree with him on this one. And if more people in the US thought that way there could be a change in US foreign policy I guess? To at least stay neutral on that issue.
|
On December 07 2017 02:32 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:25 Danglars wrote:
It’s a pretty easy case of taking the high ground when the opponents have (mostly) vacated it.
Also, “Democrats need to fight back dirty,” by supporting a sexual harasser against a molestor of young teenagers is bringing whole new depths to that term. It’s like the Moore logic crew took over some Democrats too. But what is the benefit? Not a single con will refuse to vote for Moore simply because he is a pedophile. Not a single con will change sides just because they see one side doesn't tolerate sexual assault or pedophilia. Will democrats stop voting if they see their side trying to be as dirty as the cons? I guess the issue really is that a lot of democrat voters get whiny and refuse to vote when thr parry isn't perfect, meanwhile the cons always vote for their "person" even when they are a pedophile or rapist.
The voting bases are different. If facing equal claims, you react differently based on which party the target is from, people can easily see you are being hypocritical (see Cruz' defense of Moore immediately followed by an attack on Franken that was popular like last week or something). You correctly identify that republicans typically can and do get away with hypocrysy, and that this isn't really true, or less true, for democrats; but that's a good thing for the democrats, that's not something that should change.
|
On December 07 2017 02:32 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:25 Danglars wrote:
It’s a pretty easy case of taking the high ground when the opponents have (mostly) vacated it.
Also, “Democrats need to fight back dirty,” by supporting a sexual harasser against a molestor of young teenagers is bringing whole new depths to that term. It’s like the Moore logic crew took over some Democrats too. But what is the benefit? Not a single con will refuse to vote for Moore simply because he is a pedophile. Not a single con will change sides just because they see one side doesn't tolerate sexual assault or pedophilia. Will democrats stop voting if they see their side trying to be as dirty as the cons? I guess the issue really is that a lot of democrat voters get whiny and refuse to vote when thr parry isn't perfect, meanwhile the cons always vote for their "person" even when they are a pedophile or rapist.
Uhh tar the entirety of Republican candidates in 2018 by showing the mismatch? The elections are less than a year away.
|
United States41471 Posts
On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true. In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary.
I never knew you were a strict utilitarian who believed that the most practical solution apparent must be followed, regardless of the fuzzy wuzzy ideas of ethics. Presumably we'll put the disabled people back in camps soon. Then we can start on the sterilization programs for the poor, the deviant, and the mentally unfit. Soon we'll have society looking just the way we want it.
I just wonder why nobody realized that they were above the constraints of ethics that rule lesser men and recognized that the will to power is the only true morality before. You're onto something here.
|
On December 07 2017 02:43 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:41 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:@Mohdoo, Israel could lose in a heartbeat if the US turned against them instead of supporting ethnic cleansing. On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel? Maybe if people stopped supporting ethnic cleansing the US would have to stop funding it? You're also right about that. What chance do you see of that happening in the next 20 years? All your arguments make a ton of sense so long as probability never enters into the equation. I could list LOTS of wonderfully ethical scenarios. They will be so warm and fuzzy you won't even BELIEVE it! But it doesn't mean they'll happen. Considering you seem staunchly in the pro ethnic cleansing camp I suppose it's unlikely the US will stop supporting ethnic cleansing soon. But when people rightfully call the US a shit country, they're talking about the people agreeing with you.
I am but a single lowly human among millions. Pretending I am the reason your perspective makes zero sense makes it easy for you to pat yourself on the back for being nice, but it doesn't change reality. Your perspectives won't do anything to ever help Palestinians. The longer people keep pretending Palestine has a way out of this checkmate scenario, the more kids get their schools bulldozed.
Israel is the clear shitty part of this scenario. The entire idea of them sitting right in the middle of Muslim turf is beyond ridiculous. Israel never should have even happened. It is a tragedy. But that war is long lost.
Honestly, the idea that your entire argument relies on "Well, once the US stops funding Israel" is just absurd. Really, ask yourself, when do you expect that to stop happen? I'm not asking if people support the idea and if those people are total meanies. I'm asking when you think it'll happen.
|
It's honestly pretty devastating timing for republicans (the Franken thing). This is the day after they all re-endorsed a child molester.
|
On December 07 2017 02:50 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true. In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary. I never knew you were a strict utilitarian who believed that the most practical solution apparent must be followed, regardless of the fuzzy wuzzy ideas of ethics. Presumably we'll put the disabled people back in camps soon. Then we can start on the sterilization programs for the poor, the deviant, and the mentally unfit. Soon we'll have society looking just the way we want it.I just wonder why nobody realized that they were above the constraints of ethics that rule lesser men and recognized that the will to power is the only true morality before. You're onto something here.
You know this isn't remotely utilitarian. I staunchly support almost all forms of social assistance programs because humanity is empowered by empowering the weak. You keep ignoring the fact that my scenario improves the lives of Palestinians. It makes the comparison of killing the disabled a tad silly. I am advocating for telling Palestinians "No, your book is retarded. We are protecting your children and moving you to Alaska".
My perspective decreases the amount of suffering of Palestinians by a large margin.
|
I'm confused because neither Mohdoo nor I ever said anything about relocating all the Palestinians, commuting ethnic cleansing or saying they don't get a state or self-determination. They should, but it just isn't going to be the one they are today asking for and they need to accept that. It fucking sucks, 100%. It might be smaller, there might be some sort of Israeli or multinational security presence, there might need to be disarmament, etc. but there is a solution there. If they get that it is at least a step towards a functioning, self-governing Palestinian state. Afterwards there can incrementally improve as trust is built and Israelis and Palestinians (hopefully) realize that recognizing Palestine won't result in full blown civil war.
|
On December 07 2017 02:51 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:41 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:38 GreenHorizons wrote:@Mohdoo, Israel could lose in a heartbeat if the US turned against them instead of supporting ethnic cleansing. On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel? Maybe if people stopped supporting ethnic cleansing the US would have to stop funding it? You're also right about that. What chance do you see of that happening in the next 20 years? All your arguments make a ton of sense so long as probability never enters into the equation. I could list LOTS of wonderfully ethical scenarios. They will be so warm and fuzzy you won't even BELIEVE it! But it doesn't mean they'll happen. Considering you seem staunchly in the pro ethnic cleansing camp I suppose it's unlikely the US will stop supporting ethnic cleansing soon. But when people rightfully call the US a shit country, they're talking about the people agreeing with you. I am but a single lowly human among millions. Pretending I am the reason your perspective makes zero sense makes it easy for you to pat yourself on the back for being nice, but it doesn't change reality. Your perspectives won't do anything to ever help Palestinians. The longer people keep pretending Palestine has a way out of this checkmate scenario, the more kids get their schools bulldozed. Israel is the clear shitty part of this scenario. The entire idea of them sitting right in the middle of Muslim turf is beyond ridiculous. Israel never should have even happened. It is a tragedy. But that war is long lost. Honestly, the idea that your entire argument relies on "Well, once the US stops funding Israel" is just absurd. Really, ask yourself, when do you expect that to stop happen? I'm not asking if people support the idea and if those people are total meanies. I'm asking when you think it'll happen.
Maybe tomorrow, maybe 50 years from now. Never know when people are going to grow a conscious. Clearly wont be led people like yourself or our political leadership though
|
On December 07 2017 02:48 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:32 hunts wrote:On December 07 2017 02:25 Danglars wrote:
It’s a pretty easy case of taking the high ground when the opponents have (mostly) vacated it.
Also, “Democrats need to fight back dirty,” by supporting a sexual harasser against a molestor of young teenagers is bringing whole new depths to that term. It’s like the Moore logic crew took over some Democrats too. But what is the benefit? Not a single con will refuse to vote for Moore simply because he is a pedophile. Not a single con will change sides just because they see one side doesn't tolerate sexual assault or pedophilia. Will democrats stop voting if they see their side trying to be as dirty as the cons? I guess the issue really is that a lot of democrat voters get whiny and refuse to vote when thr parry isn't perfect, meanwhile the cons always vote for their "person" even when they are a pedophile or rapist. Uhh tar the entirety of Republican candidates in 2018 by showing the mismatch? The elections are less than a year away.
And what will that do? 1/3 of people voting for moore said they were MORE LIKELY to vote for him AFTER the accusations (with proof) that he is a pedophile. You think a little thing like pointing out that their party condones rape and pedophilia while the other party doesn't will stop the "derp stick it to the libruhls" types?
Really the only benefit I can see here is what nebuchad said, in that the voting bases are different, and likely democrats will get discouraged and not vote if the democrat party doesn't take the high road. Meanwhile the cons seem to cheer for their party to be as lowly vile and despicable as humanly possible.
|
On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". Remind me again how it went from theirs, to "tough shit, Jews own this now"? Same way the US came to exist. Someone drastically more powerful decided it to be so. There's no divine power that swoops in to be like "hey man, not cool". It is hilarious how you guys actually think Palestine would ever win this. Beyond ridiculous. Watch less Disney movies. It's not "Palestine is almost gunna win guyz!" It's the US has funded the ethnic cleansing of a people through Israel and that's fucked up. You acting as if we're the crazy ones genuinely disturbs me. You're right. All of that is true. It doesn't change the fact that your plan for how all this should turn out has a 0% chance of ever happening. And do you see the US stopping funding for Israel? In what world does the US stop supporting Israel?Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true. In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary.
It was only this June that the Senate voted 90-0 in a resolution to call for Jerusalem “to remain the undivided capital of Israel.” That’s 2017 bipartisanship. Insane.
|
On December 07 2017 02:54 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:50 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true. In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary. I never knew you were a strict utilitarian who believed that the most practical solution apparent must be followed, regardless of the fuzzy wuzzy ideas of ethics. Presumably we'll put the disabled people back in camps soon. Then we can start on the sterilization programs for the poor, the deviant, and the mentally unfit. Soon we'll have society looking just the way we want it.I just wonder why nobody realized that they were above the constraints of ethics that rule lesser men and recognized that the will to power is the only true morality before. You're onto something here. You know this isn't remotely utilitarian. I staunchly support almost all forms of social assistance programs because humanity is empowered by empowering the weak. You keep ignoring the fact that my scenario improves the lives of Palestinians. It makes the comparison of killing the disabled a tad silly. I am advocating for telling Palestinians "No, your book is retarded. We are protecting your children and moving you to Alaska". My perspective decreases the amount of suffering of Palestinians by a large margin.
So you're advocating for Trump bringing millions of Palestinian refugees into America.
Disney.
|
United States41471 Posts
On December 07 2017 02:54 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2017 02:50 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:37 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:36 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 Mohdoo wrote:On December 07 2017 02:31 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote:
"Ethnic cleansing" in this case means a drastically increased quality of life. The only thing they lose is the symbolism of some shitty land because their dumbass book says it belongs to them. It would be a huge improvement to Palestinian livelihood to live in a hospitable home.
I feel like on one hand, people make a huge fuss over the quality of life of Palestinians. Destroyed hospitals, schools, kids getting shot. But try to bring them somewhere away from all that violence, persecution and torment and you're hitler.
You guys aren't focusing enough on why Palestinians want to stay there. They could have a better life somewhere else but don't want to "because it's mine". The people with the book that says it's theirs are the Israelis. The ethnicity that lives there are the Palestinians. But it's made far more complicated now because this all happened four generations ago so now both sides were born there. What you're advocating for is essentially the Madagascar Plan, rationalizing it as better than the concentration camps. You're not wrong that it would have been better, but that doesn't mean we should accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan You're saying we shouldn't accept the idea of improving the lives of Palestinians? Both of their books say they should be there. They are both retarded. Israel holds every card and has no chance of ever losing. You are too focused on "what is fair" to the point where you aren't realizing your idea has a 0% chance of ever happening. Maybe I'm just not ready to incorporate "sure, I mean like technically it's ethnic cleansing because, like, all of the people from that ethnicity would have to be like moved or something, to clean the land for the new guys, but you gotta look at the big picture" into my ethical framework That's your bad. You're being too fuzzy wuzzy about ethics and pretending there is some divine governing body that makes whatever is most ethical an eventual reality. It's not real. Thousands of children are sexually assaulted every day, ethics be damned. I don't know what existing precedent you are relying on to say this miracle will ever come true. In reality, staunch obsession with "ethics" actually increases total suffering in this case because people don't have the sense to pivot when it is clearly necessary. I never knew you were a strict utilitarian who believed that the most practical solution apparent must be followed, regardless of the fuzzy wuzzy ideas of ethics. Presumably we'll put the disabled people back in camps soon. Then we can start on the sterilization programs for the poor, the deviant, and the mentally unfit. Soon we'll have society looking just the way we want it.I just wonder why nobody realized that they were above the constraints of ethics that rule lesser men and recognized that the will to power is the only true morality before. You're onto something here. You know this isn't remotely utilitarian. I staunchly support almost all forms of social assistance programs because humanity is empowered by empowering the weak. You keep ignoring the fact that my scenario improves the lives of Palestinians. It makes the comparison of killing the disabled a tad silly. I am advocating for telling Palestinians "No, your book is retarded. We are protecting your children and moving you to Alaska". My perspective decreases the amount of suffering of Palestinians by a large margin.
I think you're confused.
The moral framework based around minimizing the net amount of suffering is utilitarianism. That's why I said you were one.
"Humanity is empowered by empowering the weak" is a utilitarian justification for welfare. Decreasing the amount of suffering of the people displaced is a utilitarian justification for relocation.
You're arguing all of this from a utilitarian perspective.
If ever you're talking about it in terms of reducing total human suffering, you're using a utilitarian justification.
|
On December 07 2017 02:55 ticklishmusic wrote:
I'm confused because neither Mohdoo nor I ever said anything about relocating all the Palestinians, commuting ethnic cleansing or saying they don't get a state or self-determination. They should, but it just isn't going to be the one they are today asking for and they need to accept that. It fucking sucks, 100%. It might be smaller, there might be some sort of Israeli or multinational security presence, there might need to be disarmament, etc. but there is a solution there. If they get that it is at least a step towards a functioning, self-governing Palestinian state. Afterwards there can incrementally improve as trust is built and Israelis and Palestinians (hopefully) realize that recognizing Palestine won't result in full blown civil war.
He's literally advocating relocating all of the Palestinians directly above you. I'm just flabbergasted at this point.
Besides that, your still talking about ethnic cleansing, I really don't understand how you don't understand this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
