The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board
Trivial Pursuits => History => Topic started by: pmcd9 on July 21, 2006, 04:34:33 am
-
I've been trying to ignore these events because it's way too scary, but it looks like it's really getting out of hand.
I hope by starting this tread I am not igniting a political war on the board, but I was basically wondering if anyone is following this situation closely and what they're thoughts are.
Please be civil.
~Paul
-
I regret that I didn't follow it more closely as this was developing (recently developing of course, not so much over the last however many years) because it seemed to go from 'Israel hitting Palestine over some soldiers' to 'Israel bombing civilian targets in Lebanon' suprisingly quickly.
Could someone tell me if this flow of events is correct?
Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah
Israel threatens and follows through on military action
Hezbollah retaliates with rocket attacks against Israeli territory
Everything goes to hell.
If this is how things went I have to find fault with Israel. I'm in no way defending Hezbollah or any other militant group but this I can't justify this kind of carnage over a couple of soldiers. That's assuming Israel struck first though, if there were Hezbollah attacks I am unaware of then that changes the situation.
Where were the soldier's taken hostage anyway? Were they in Israel or lebanon at the time?
The other thing I still don't quite understand is why this is suddenly viewed as world war three? I mean this is pretty terrible but this is an area where brutal attacks and retaliations between broadly the same groups has been going on for quite some time and while we might fear a war would destabilise some natural resources in these countries they are by no means our only source. I just don't fully comprehend the importance so it would help if someone could explain it.
-
Clearly this represents a major shift in U.S. foreign policy. Whereas previously we kept Israel on a very short leash, apparently we have removed the muzzle and released the hounds. It makes sense. We're tied up in Iraq and can't really stretch our resources to flex our dictatorial muscle in other areas of the region, so we loosed Israel on them and of course didn't have to ask them twice. They've been itching for a little payback for years.
As far as the WWIII talk goes, it's quite possible that eventually one arab nation/faction is going to do something truly horrible to Israel and they're going to respond by nuking an Arab city. Chaos ensues.
It's gotta be rough to be completely surrounded by people who hate you. I mean, I live in the U.S. We've got Canada and Mexico as neighbours. Canada is about the most harmless neighbour a country can have. They're like the laid back stoner dude next door who always wants to borrow your Weber, but then returns the thing plus a case of beer for your troubles. Good people.
Mexico is that quiet dude who always seems like such a nice boy.
Anyway, yes, the battle in Lebanon Is Real. Also, doesn't Lebanon sound like some kind of 12 step programme?
Can I get a high-five?
-
The way I see it, Israel is in a no win situation but they've been doing a hell of a job of hanging on in one for 50+ years now geopolitically and several thousand years culturally.
The stated position of Hamas and Hizbollah is the destruction of Israel. The sentiment holds true for Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and most other Arab states but of course they don't say it out loud where the West might hear.
Israel withdrew completely from Lebanon in the 80's and just finished withdrawing from the Gaza strip and also has been going through an internally painful and strident removal of settlements in disputed areas.
Although some of the Arab players have always stated that this is about land, after Israel gives up more land than at any other time in their history, soldiers are kidnapped and demands made for the mass release of thousands of convicted terrorists.
Syria runs Lebanon and Iran arms it. Iran claims to have Nuclear capability. Iran and Syria and the power elements in Lebanon want Israel destroyed. Given this algebra Israel has no option but to at the least send a clear message that they aren't going to be bullied and that they aren't going to play nice and negotiate before accomplishing real damage to the bad guys. You can agree with it or not but Israel can not survive without a major, credible threat of destruction in their back pocket and they have to flex to threats on their borders and even beyond since the region is so unstable.
It could go bad.
-
it really horrifies me that I have a bizzare love for Israel. maybe because they're kind of underdogs, I don't know. But some part of me thinks that they have to do this to show they won't be pushed around.
however, killing civilians is not cool. They claim they're hitting Hezbollah targets only, and the Lebanese say civilians are being hit... I don't know.
-
I don't want to be an ass, but I guess I should say how I feel.
Personally, I don't think Isreal has any right at all to exist. That is the trouble behind all of this. I am not anti-Jew or anything, but come on. The country was made by the allied forces after WWII as some type of repayment to the Holocaust and the fact that the Jews had gone without a home promised by the West for so long. Irregardless, people lived there already that had nothing to do with the Holocaust, and, obviously, as any one of you would have been, they were/are fuck*ng pissed.
That said, in my relatively small religious knowledge, I know that Islam sees only two types of places in the world: the sea of peace (countries who follow Islam) and the sea of war (non-Islam practicing areas). It is a pretty rough situation between the Muslims and Jews, but I see it as the fault of the British (mainly) for being dumb enough to put Isreal in the middle of this in the first place. Also, quite ironically, during the era's where countries got taken over, the Muslim overlords were much kinder to the non-muslim people in their boundaries than were the Chirstians.
A couple more points. Do you think the Bush aministration is trying to end the world in a way similar to the Bible?
Isn't it ironic that religion is probably going to be the reason humans destroy the world?
-
Personally, I don't think Isreal has any right at all to exist. That is the trouble behind all of this.
That's pretty harsh. I mean, I know what you mean, absolutely, but at the same time, it was created because the jews had no home. Two thousand years of wandering around the planet being killed by mad people...
You'd kind of want somewhere you could go home to. What I object to, of course, is them taking the land from the Palestinians and then being utter dicks about it.
So what I'm saying is, I can understand both sides of it. That said, I despair of the way Israel has behaved about Hamas suicide bombings, now Hezbollah, basically everything. The Israeli leadership scare the hell out of me. But then so do the likes of Iran and Syria...
I kind of wish none of it existed, and by that I guess I mean religion. As it's all about this religious claim to that area of the world, and the religious clash between Muslims and Jews. And the religious clash between Muslims and Muslims can be bad enough.
So yea, I can see why Israel happened, but I hate everything they have governmentally stood for. Treating the West Bank as a prison for 40 years, bombing unconditionally, being fuckin assholes. But as I say, by and large I don't have an awful lot of (nigh any) sympathy for Hezbollah either.
-
I spent a lot of time several years ago researching the Israel/Palestinian conflicts, and trying to figure out who was in the wrong. Then I realized that they all were. I pretty much decided that they've deserved each other, and I'm tempted to say if they want to bomb the hell out of each other over something I can't understand, despite our efforts at peace accords, then hell, let 'em do it. Well, except for the part where now everybody's got nukes.
But what terrifies me is that our government is pro-Israel largely because they believe that the Jews need to hold Israel in order for the end times to come. Our foreign policy is being created around hastening a vision of the apocalypse!
Poll question - what would you do if you were forced to relocate? Say a local native American tribe was given sovereignty over your town or something (just to give an example of an issue near my Dad's house in upstate NY) and you had to move. Would you do it? Put up a fight? What if you had to move out of the country?
I'd move without too much of a fuss in most cases, I think. I've moved a lot in my life, and I have no particular attachment to the scrap of land I currently inhabit, or really any other place in the country.
-
But what terrifies me is that our government is pro-Israel largely because they believe that the Jews need to hold Israel in order for the end times to come. Our foreign policy is being created around hastening a vision of the apocalypse!
I'd move without too much of a fuss in most cases, I think. I've moved a lot in my life, and I have no particular attachment to the scrap of land I currently inhabit, or really any other place in the country.
Yup. See my comments in the religion thread about religious people leading countries. Seems like a mighty bad idea to me personally. Totally different priorities!
And well... I'm not sure as to the latter. See, I feel very strongly that the answer to the worlds problems is to do away with nationalism. OK, keep traditions alive and so forth, as I feel culture is important, but without truly defined nations, religion and money have less importance over geography. Governments wouldn't be doing underhanded business for cash, and things like the Israel situation wouldn't be so likely. It's idealism I know, but hey...
Gogol Bordello say it so well - 'Think locally, fuck globally'.
So, I'd be as tempted to say, 'look, I live here, have done most of my life, what does it matter if you live somewhere else?' But then by the same rules, it doesn't matter where I live either. I'd probably become a nomad to a degree if it were easier to roam around the world the way you want.
-
The entire problem is an attachment to some soil which, one supposes, several people may never have walked.
Hardcore beliefs do not create logical responses as they are emotional triggers really, hence the intense righteous beliefs from all sides (and the overreaction of nearly EVERYone in this conflict.)
Me personally? I'm pretty sure there's an area out in the Dakotas or something were the Jewish people can have their own safe haven. Hell.. I've got an extra couch, I'll pitch in. It just doesn't seem worth it to stick it out for that exact spot is all.
-
And well... I'm not sure as to the latter. See, I feel very strongly that the answer to the worlds problems is to do away with nationalism. OK, keep traditions alive and so forth, as I feel culture is important, but without truly defined nations, religion and money have less importance over geography. Governments wouldn't be doing underhanded business for cash, and things like the Israel situation wouldn't be so likely. It's idealism I know, but hey...
Well yeah, but cultural identities also cause problems. A dude from Wisconsin wouldn't give me (much of) a hard time just for being from Minnesota, but I'd get thoroughly made fun of if I showed up at a bar with a Vikings jacket on. I wouldn't get beat up (well, depends on how drunk everybody is), but I can see how such things escalate.
But if you get rid of all that stuff, then you have John Lennon's ode to communism "Imagine", which almost scares me more than global conflict. If you've got nothing to die for, what have you got to live for, and such.
-
Okay, I don't know about the nation of Israel not existing or anything, but let's face it - the Palestinians were kicked out of their own homeland to make room for the Israelis. That shit wasn't right, and while the PLO has done a lot of horrible things over the years too, their cause is at least righteous.
Of course Israel wouldn't have existed if not for the Nazis. That's not really an issue anymore, though. Israel is a state and they're surrounded by their enemies. We supported the formation of Israel and still give them a LOT of aid and support. They continue to exist because of the U.S. Without the implied thread of U.S. retaliation the Arab nations would have invaded and decimated Israel a long time ago.
Now, though, Israel is the aggressor. They're the bad guys in this conflict. Hezbollah or one of the other many Muslim sects that hates Israel can always cause destruction in retaliation. It's really easy to blow things up.
So where is this going? Will there ever be peace in the middle east without one side completely wiping out the other?
-
But what terrifies me is that our government is pro-Israel largely because they believe that the Jews need to hold Israel in order for the end times to come. Our foreign policy is being created around hastening a vision of the apocalypse!
May a thousand tiny cans light your way to paradise.
This is what I've thought about the whole thing since I learned about Israel/Palestine/Biblical History in high school (I learnt from Jesuits).
True, the Jews needed a place to go after WWII. But the only good reason for putting them in Israel as we know it today was because that's what the Bible says is required for Jesus to return and for all the good Christians to go to heaven forever. It's why the US and France were such strong supporters early on, and it's why the US continues to put up with the geopolitical shenanigans in that part of the world. AND IT'S ALL BUILT ON THE BIBLE. Scary.
It's also the reason why Pat Robertson and his generous Fundie Buddies are so big on sending Russian Jews to Israel - all this "selfless generosity" is all rooted in the bizarre desire to have the earthly world brought to an end, Revelations-style.
-
But if you get rid of all that stuff, then you have John Lennon's ode to communism "Imagine", which almost scares me more than global conflict. If you've got nothing to die for, what have you got to live for, and such.
I guess what it comes down to then, is that I wouldn't even consider dying for my country. I am about as sickened with my country as it is possible though, I guess. Unless I lived in the US. I would like to move to another country on political and social grounds (that would be another very long post however).
Sounds like Israel have just called up a few thousand more troops for the IDF. Awsesome... Ugh.
Certainly Israel is now the aggressor, as you point out Jough. The statement from the UN was that Israel should be fighting back with some level of proportionality. Something they have NEVER shown, even against Palestine.
I am feeling confused by this whole thing. I know where I stand (in the middle yelling loudly at both sides to calm down, while as ready as ever to castigate Israel for fuckign war crimes), but at the same time, I am, I guess like Paul said at the start, kind of ignoring it all as it's so far away and so fuck*ng depressing. Every time I see a photo of a dead Lebanese child however I want to go fuck*ng crazy.
I was scared by the report of an overheard conversation between Bush and Blair, in which Bush said he wants Syria to intervene (what the holy FUCK people?!), and Blair was saying strongly that an International force needs to go in, sooner rather than later to stop the fighting. For once I don't want to punch Blair in the face. But seriously, why isn't anyone assassinating your guy?
-
I don't want to be an ass, but I guess I should say how I feel.
Personally, I don't think Isreal has any right at all to exist. That is the trouble behind all of this.
Too late about that ass part. Please read this (http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2006/07/history-lesson.html).
Isn't it ironic that religion is probably going to be the reason humans destroy the world?
No more ironic than a black fly in your chardonnay.
The death wish built into Christianity and Islam make it almost inevitable. Sigh.
-
Sounds like Israel have just called up a few thousand more troops for the IDF. Awsesome... Ugh.
Certainly Israel is now the aggressor, as you point out Jough. The statement from the UN was that Israel should be fighting back with some level of proportionality. Something they have NEVER shown, even against Palestine.
I was scared by the report of an overheard conversation between Bush and Blair, in which Bush said he wants Syria to intervene (what the holy FUCK people?!)
So Israel is supposed to just sit back and take it? It's alright for Israeli soldiers to be kidnapped and held hostage?
Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. They are dedicated to the destruction of Israel, and both Syria and Iran bankroll them. They are bad for the people of Lebanon, but the Lebanese people have acted as Hezbollah's enablers.
Bush wanted Bashir Assad to lean on Hezbollah and get them to knock it off. He wasn't talking about Syria intervening in a military fashion. Especially since Israel would clean Syria's clock.
I can talk till I'm blue in the face about how bad many of Israel's policies are, and how the Israel lobby wields a disproportionate influence over American politics. But I can't criticize Israel for taking a stand against a group whose primary purpose for existing is to fuck with Israel.
-
Some here have asserted that the creation of Israel where it exists was done to hasten the Apocalypse. I feel that decision was probably more ignorant than devious. It was probably something like this... Western Leaders: "Hey Jews, were gonna give you some land in the Middle East where you can make a homeland, where would you like to go?" Jews: (Emphatically) "Jerusalem!" "Ok, it's yours." Adviser whispering in the ear "Sir, there is a lot of open space in the Middle East, Jerusalem is holy ground for the Muslims, it would cause a lot of tension if the Jews moved in." "Fuck a bunch of sand niggers, who cares what those towel heads think. The Jews want Jerusalem, that's what they'll get. Haven't they been through enough already?"
Personally, even if I believed that biblical revelation nonesense I wouldn't want it to occur in my lifetime. Politicians are all about passing on responsibility to the next generation, I would think they would be the same about the Apocalypse. Can you imagine if the Bible became official policy? All debates in congress about the levees in New Orleans withstanding a force five locust invasion. Crazy shit man.
~Paul
-
I think the implication was not that this was the initial reason Israel was created, but moreso why they get such large scale support (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-me-endtimes22jun22,0,4346514,full.story) these days.
Given some of the PACs that are backing current administration heads, I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of mentality moved pretty high up the ladder.
-
So Israel is supposed to just sit back and take it? It's alright for Israeli soldiers to be kidnapped and held hostage?
I never said that. I said disproportionate retribution is wrong. Hell, it's illegal.
I don't mind them locking up suicide bombers and not returning them (they were jailed for a reason) but to then drop missiles on civilian's houses is just ridiculous, but then Clinton was happy to do the same in Sarajevo...
-
Please be civil.
I think we're starting to toe the line of uncivility. Take a step back please.
~Paul
-
You see Hezbollah are kind of like Side Shows neighbors. Side Show just wants to get along, live and let live, but the nasty neighbors keep fuck*ng shit up. One of these days Side Show is going to go over there and bash their fuckin' brains out. They'll be all like, but all I did was piss in your garden. Yeah, that's all you did today. It's a cumulative effect. Then the nasty neighbors will be all like but we were here first. This neighborhood got along fine before you artsy types started moving in with your rules and civil society and all that shit. Why don't you go back where you came from... Side Show will be all I stab you now!!!
~Paul
-
Too late about that ass part. Please read this (http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2006/07/history-lesson.html).
No more ironic than a black fly in your chardonnay.
The death wish built into Christianity and Islam make it almost inevitable. Sigh.
C'mon, I take hell of offense to this. I only drink Shiraz.
But seriously, I couldn't agree with Mite and slink's first two post, especially the Apocalypse stuff. If I wasn't really drunk at like 3:30 in the morning when I wrote my comment I would have liked it to sound like one of theirs.
And to answer the real point, I never, ever, ever, feel like countries should take land from other people to give to the nations they are more comfortable with. That article said there were 100,000 Muslims already in the country that is now Israel. I would pretty much bet that is the low estimate the writer could find, but even if it isn't, that is 100,000 people who have a right to be very pissed. You know, I bet some of those people had relatives in other places and also children that raised to hate Israel, which is their right considering the consequences. This creates hatred for Israel. But why? OH, because they took the land from other people to make their country. Makes sense as far as I see it. Maybe Israel should be allowed to exist, but my tax dollars should not be used to make nukes to sell to Israel.
Some here have asserted that the creation of Israel where it exists was done to hasten the Apocalypse. I feel that decision was probably more ignorant than devious. It was probably something like this... Western Leaders: "Hey Jews, were gonna give you some land in the Middle East where you can make a homeland, where would you like to go?" Jews: (Emphatically) "Jerusalem!" "Ok, it's yours." Adviser whispering in the ear "Sir, there is a lot of open space in the Middle East, Jerusalem is holy ground for the Muslims, it would cause a lot of tension if the Jews moved in." "Fuck a bunch of sand niggers, who cares what those towel heads think. The Jews want Jerusalem, that's what they'll get. Haven't they been through enough already?"
Personally, even if I believed that biblical revelation nonesense I wouldn't want it to occur in my lifetime. Politicians are all about passing on responsibility to the next generation, I would think they would be the same about the Apocalypse. Can you imagine if the Bible became official policy? All debates in congress about the levees in New Orleans withstanding a force five locust invasion. Crazy shit man.
~Paul
I can totally see that first part happening, but I would not be surprised if since Reagan there has been a push by the "compassionate conservatives" to ruin the world, the way Jesus wants!
You see Hezbollah are kind of like Side Shows neighbors. Side Show just wants to get along, live and let live, but the nasty neighbors keep fuck*ng shit up. One of these days Side Show is going to go over there and bash their fuckin' brains out. They'll be all like, but all I did was piss in your garden. Yeah, that's all you did today. It's a cumulative effect. Then the nasty neighbors will be all like but we were here first. This neighborhood got along fine before you artsy types started moving in with your rules and civil society and all that shit. Why don't you go back where you came from... Side Show will be all I stab you now!!!
~Paul
But if Side Show stole her house from her neighbors, would it not be their garden to piss in?
-
To finish the analogy, Side Shows neighborhood is located nearby Lincoln Center which I assume could substitute for The Wailing Wall for someone in the theatre. Lincoln Center would also have to be like the best place in the world for low life's to hang out (it may be).
Oh yeah, Side Show has a friend, a really big dumb guy with lots of muscles who will do anything she says.
Ok, now the analogy is complete.
~Paul
-
Why did you even start this thread, Paul? Shit, I was relieved that no one was talking about the Israel/Hezbollah conflict on TOUAMB. And then you open this can of worms and wonder why people are getting upset. You yourself post shit like this --
"Some here have asserted that the creation of Israel where it exists was done to hasten the Apocalypse. I feel that decision was probably more ignorant than devious. It was probably something like this... Western Leaders: "Hey Jews, were gonna give you some land in the Middle East where you can make a homeland, where would you like to go?" Jews: (Emphatically) "Jerusalem!" "Ok, it's yours." Adviser whispering in the ear "Sir, there is a lot of open space in the Middle East, Jerusalem is holy ground for the Muslims, it would cause a lot of tension if the Jews moved in." "Fuck a bunch of sand niggers, who cares what those towel heads think. The Jews want Jerusalem, that's what they'll get. Haven't they been through enough already?"
--and then wonder why people bum out. The creation of Israel actually went a little more like this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#Historical_roots) ( It probably would have gone better if it went like this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Uganda_Program), but it didn't. )
Slink: I'm not in favor of civilians dying. Anywhere. But it is unfortunate that Lebanon - which has made such great strides over the past decade, culminating in their rejection of Syria in the past year - allows a radical organization to store their weapons in the houses of civilians. The invasion that Israel is currently preparing is a direct result of Hezbollah's willingness to use civilians as a shield.
I find all of the events transpiring to be utterly horrible. The photo of Israeli schoolgirls writing messages on artillery shells sickened me. And yet - Israel is under attack by a despicable Muslim terror organization. I can't fault Israel for wanting to crush it.
-
Yeah Limmo, I was talking to myself as much as you and slink. That's why I reframed my posts as a neighborhood dispute between an theatre geek and some smelly crackheads.
I started this thread to get information about the situation. Figured we could talk about it without getting TOO upset.
~Paul
-
I started this thread to get information about the situation. Figured we could talk about it without getting TOO upset.
~Paul
It's about the most upsetting topic you could bring up right about now, unless if there was suddenly a mass outbreak of Satanic baby rape and cannibalism.* That would be really upsetting.
I've tried to include relevant links to provide historical background information, rather than being all flame-y, but Mr. Hernandez's posts are kind of grinding my gears a little bit.
* Especially if it were actually Satanic babies doing the raping and cannibalizing. Good heavens.
-
I've tried to include relevant links to provide historical background information, rather than being all flame-y, but Mr. Hernandez's posts are kind of grinding my gears a little bit.
Yeah, well he does that to me too, it's his style. But we've learned to love Mr. Hernandez, he's one of us.
~Paul
-
Sorry to do this after Paul all defended me, but it took a while to type, and answers some of Limmo's attacks. Before his latest comment I was only going to post only the first part. Then the comment came and I typed all of this, then Paul defended me. Sorry if I seem confrontational or something, but this is a message board, I think we should be allowed the free exchange of ideas. If not here where? I try my very best not to make personal attacks, but my writing style can be hell of self righteous and sarcastic at times. Sorry, that is just the way I do it.
Oh yeah, Side Show has a friend, a really big dumb guy with lots of muscles who will do anything she says.
Ok, now the analogy is complete.
~Paul
As long as the analogies are correct.
It was probably a bad idea to start this though. I mean, I think we can all admit that both sides are pretty much wrong, or have at least done some shitty stuff each, so then it just goes to how you want to see it.
AFTER LIMMO'S ATTACK:
I've tried to include relevant links to provide historical background information, rather than being all flame-y, but Mr. Hernandez's posts are kind of grinding my gears a little bit.
All right, well there goes trying to be fuck*ng compromising and get the thread over with. You provided a link to a fuck*ng blog.
Here is the info about the blog creator:
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for nearly twenty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 2 to 22 years. Our eldest is married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
[done]
Well, it seems like this is going to be unbiased.
It had such important information as:
But even the name of the Philistines, from which the term "Palestine" was adopted, is completely alien to the Land of Israel.
The name Philistines in Hebrew is plishtim, which comes from the Hebrew verb polshim (foreign invaders).
[done]
Are these the same foreign invaders that built a country on other peoples land and had their friends load them up with nukes?
If all of your links could tell me how Israels creation is not the root cause of all this, I would like to see it. That is what I meant when I said Israel should not exist- That the creation of Israel is the root cause of most of the problems we now have. Maybe Israel has some historical claim to the land, I will not deny that, but since when has that been good enough to actually get to take the land back? Well, I guess since 1947, actually.
From the Historical roots section of the wikipedia article, it says:
In particular, the failure of the Bar Kochba Revolt against the Roman Empire resulted in the large-scale expulsion of Jews. It was during this time that the Romans gave the name Syria Palaestina to the geographic area, in an attempt to erase Jewish ties to the land.[6] The Mishnah and Jerusalem Talmud, two of Judaism's most important religious texts, were composed in the region during this period. The Muslims conquered the land from the Byzantine Empire in 638 CE. The area was ruled by various Muslim states (interrupted by the rule of the Crusaders) before becoming part of the Ottoman Empire in 1517.
[done]
Well, the Ottomans also conquered Turkey, why don't the Eastern Orthodox get back Constantinople? Because land changes hands over time, and it is not okay to have fuck*ng big brother step in for you and take it back like 1500 years after it was first conquered.
-
the thing is, if there were only about 100,000 "palestinians" living in the area which is now Israel, who is Hezbollah? Random pissed-off Lebanese guys?
it seems to me that as horrendous as it is, sometimes you need to show an enemy, especially a Terrorist-style enemy, that you mean business. That you won't be pushed around by him anymore.
there was this one scene in the West Wing that explained this really well. Bartlett talked about the Roman Empire, and how no one would ever kill a Roman Citizen. Because they knew that if they did, the whole Roman Army would show up and destroy them.
So, essentially, part of me is saying "come on guys, work it out!" and the other half of me, which I normally don't let out, is glad that they're showing that they just won't take it anymore.
anyone see Munich? I think it showed a pretty balanced view of why this kind of tit-for-tat doesn't work. I suppose I'm contradicting myself now. Lately I am really really interested in this whole situation, and now it's getting Interesting. and with all things I am really interested in, I get so confused that I can't really have a Concise Opinion.
-
Sorry if you feel like you’re being ATTACKed, Keith, but if you’re going to publicly state that Israel has no right to exist, you’re going to get some rocks thrown at you. And you will deserve it. Deal.
Well, it seems like this is going to be unbiased.
In linking to the blog post, I was trying to provide a viewpoint on how Israelis view their claim to the land. If you’re going to dismiss that viewpoint simply because it was written by a Jew, then that kind of creates a problem, seeing as how Israel has a lot of, y'know, Jews in it and stuff?
It had such important information as:
But even the name of the Philistines, from which the term "Palestine" was adopted, is completely alien to the Land of Israel.
The name Philistines in Hebrew is plishtim, which comes from the Hebrew verb polshim (foreign invaders).
Are these the same foreign invaders that built a country on other peoples land and had their friends load them up with nukes?
You answered this question yourself in your own post. In particular, the failure of the Bar Kochba Revolt against the Roman Empire resulted in the large-scale expulsion of Jews. It was during this time that the Romans gave the name Syria Palaestina to the geographic area, in an attempt to erase Jewish ties to the land.
If the Jews were expelled from where they already lived by the Romans, then how can they be “foreign invaders”? And for crying out loud, Keith, what makes you think that nuclear weapons existed back then?
Well, the Ottomans also conquered Turkey, why don't the Eastern Orthodox get back Constantinople? Because land changes hands over time, and it is not okay to have fuck*ng big brother step in for you and take it back like 1500 years after it was first conquered.
This brings to mind the words of Cornelius Bear: “That’s all completely stupid, but what does it have to do with anything?” Your silly attempt to conflate this situation with Constantinople aside, if “land changes hands over time,” as you claim, then why is it wrong for it to change into the hands of the Jews? ( Land, by the way, which was PURCHASED by Jews. ) Or do you have different standards for who gets to benefit from the changing of hands?
If all of your links could tell me how Israels creation is not the root cause of all this, I would like to see it. That is what I meant when I said Israel should not exist- That the creation of Israel is the root cause of most of the problems we now have.
Israel’s creation is not the root cause of all this. Anti-Semitism is the root cause of all this.
Maybe Israel has some historical claim to the land, I will not deny that, but since when has that been good enough to actually get to take the land back?
This may be the single dumbest sentence I have ever read. Listen up, Keith:
Jews are the scapegoats of history. People have been trying to wipe them out utterly for thousands of years. There are only 14 million of them left in the world. Out of six billion people, 14 million Jews. It stands to reason that they would want to have a place they could call their own, yes?
For them to establish that place in an area that they have considered their Holy Land for 3000 years is a PERFECTLY REASONABLE EXPECTATION, Keith. Jews bought land in Israel – malaria infested swamps and open desert – and turned it into a place where they could thrive.
So the Arab population decided in 1936 to – wait for it – expel the Jews from the land that they legally owned! And this time, the Jews didn’t roll over. And have consistently defeated every attempt made since then to destroy Israel.
And for that, they are vilified around the world by waterheads like you.
I’m not going to come right out and call you an anti-Semite, Keith, but I don’t see a whole lot to your arguments other than you don’t like them thar Jews.
-
If the Jews were expelled from where they already lived by the Romans, then how can they be “foreign invaders”? And for crying out loud, Keith, what makes you think that nuclear weapons existed back then?
I was obviously making a reference to two different times. One time, the Jews were kicked out, then over 1000 years later they came back. That is how they are foreign invaders. Nuclear weapons exist now and Israel has a hell of alot of them.
This brings to mind the words of Cornelius Bear: “That’s all completely stupid, but what does it have to do with anything?” Your silly attempt to conflate this situation with Constantinople aside, if “land changes hands over time,” as you claim, then why is it wrong for it to change into the hands of the Jews? ( Land, by the way, which was PURCHASED by Jews. ) Or do you have different standards for who gets to benefit from the changing of hands?
Israel’s creation is not the root cause of all this. Anti-Semitism is the root cause of all this.
Well, back then it was more common and not as artificial as what happened with Israel, and it is hell of valid considering the Ottomans controlled both areas at one time. But I guess I can see that it may all seem natural in a couple hundred years. Lets try this situation:
Hey, you know who lived in Constantinople? The Eastern Orthodox. Man, Communism sure was hard on them, lets take land away from some Muslims and set up an Eastern Orthodox state, because we are the Allied powers and we just won a big war. Makes a lot of sense, eh?
And I am pretty sure that stuff doesn't happen in a fuck*ng test tube. Maybe, just maybe, there is a more rabid anti- Semite feeling there because the Muslims feel as if they have had land stolen from them by the West and the Jews.
This may be the single dumbest sentence I have ever read. Listen up, Keith:
Jews are the scapegoats of history. People have been trying to wipe them out utterly for thousands of years. There are only 14 million of them left in the world. Out of six billion people, 14 million Jews. It stands to reason that they would want to have a place they could call their own, yes?
I’m not going to come right out and call you an anti-Semite, Keith, but I don’t see a whole lot to your arguments other than you don’t like them thar Jews.
Um, you aren't very smart then, because apparently that was the first sentence you have ever read. A historical claim to land has nothing to do with who owns it today. SO since Jews are the scapegoats of history, does that mean we should make all Muslims hate us by supporting them. I wasn't around, I have no reason to repay the Jews with my support, and I sure as fuck do not think that my government should be supporting Israel.
Pretty low to call me an anti-Semite for the disliking the way this whole Israeli situation has worked out.
I dislike the way Israel was created after WWII.
I dislike the way the Israeli government has acted.
I fuck*ng hate that my country is supplying nuclear weapons to the Israelis, even though they try to prevent other countries in the region from obtaining them (even going to war over it).
I don't dislike Jews, I hate the hypocrisy and stupidity that Israel and the West have shown in the Middle East.
-
Well, I'm glad no one's jumped my shit yet.
Paul, you made possibly the most uncivil post in the whole benighted thread when you used the term "sand-niggers". For God's sake, don't go around asking other people to be civil if you are going to use inflammatory rhetoric even if you are trying to be funny. Especially considering that Jews were in Jerusalem and Nazareth and Bethlehem and all over that area a long, long time before the Koran was revealed to Mohammed - so you really don't have a very good case for deciding who really belongs there if not Israel - but that part of the world has been fought for over and over again. Better that that the people of those three faiths figure out how to live and worship if not together at least in close proximity to one another - if not, for the sake of the world, better to evacuate the whole area and nuke it into a sheet of glass.
Keith, people are going to disagree with you. All your life. Better get better at handling it now. Limmo makes OK points, he's definitely not an idiot and he's been around a here a long time. Let's all take a breath.
I personally think we'd best not discuss restoring people to their ancestral lands without considering the former occu##### of North America. The fact is every square inch of the globe has been fought over in one way or another.
As for placing the State of Israel where it is now to facilitate the apocalypse? Stop breathing the fumes, stop drinking the water and get out of the fever swamp as soon as possible. That is pointless conspiracy theory type stuff that really doesn't deserve a place in a rational discussion of the here and now.
Israel is using precision arms to hit targets revealed by intelligence to be weapons fabrication or storage points, command and control, or high-interest enemy operatives.
Hizbollah (read Syria and Iran) are indiscriminately launching unaimable rockets with warheads full of ball bearings at population centers.
Israel has also destroyed an Iranian made long range rocket before it could be launched and one of their navy vessel was hit by a Silkworm-type missile of Iranian origin with sophisticated-enough operation to assure Israel that Iran is operating in person in Lebanon.
This is a regional war and the presence of Syria and Iran from day one indicates they may even have planned for this to happen (though maybe not this soon or this way).
It's all bad but it's hard to blame Israel for a response intended to once and for all destroy a major terrorist contingent on their border with the explicit agenda of destroying Israel.
-
Thank you, AD. I was going to waste another half a page ATTACKING our dhimmi friend Keith, but your reasoned response made me think better of it.
-
Seriously, Paul, use of the term "sand niggers" is bad form, man. Much better would be "camel fuckers."
LET'S ALL LEARN A LITTLE TOLERANCE, PEOPLE
-
but that part of the world has been fought for over and over again. Better that that the people of those three faiths figure out how to live and worship if not together at least in close proximity to one another - if not, for the sake of the world, better to evacuate the whole area and nuke it into a sheet of glass.
Amen.
Pretty much what I read earlier here (http://allkindsofwriting.blogspot.com/2006/07/dont-be-right-be-smart.html) and thought of posting, and was I thought a touching post from someone who's currently right in the middle of it.
-
Seriously, Paul, use of the term "sand niggers" is bad form, man. Much better would be "camel fuckers."
LET'S ALL LEARN A LITTLE TOLERANCE, PEOPLE
The point is more the disconnect of calling for civility with one side of your mouth and racist hostility with the other. No one is expecting civility from you, Jough...
-
Yea, sorry about that. A couple points I want to make:
The Muslims are just as much responsible, if not moreso, for the things happening as the Israelis. I think that the United States involvment is as bad as anything else.
You can be anti-Israel and not anti-Jew at the same. I am more against nationalism than anything else I can think of.
Edit: Pretty much Muslim hatred is the reason behind all of this, actually. But that is why the creation of Israel was dumb. I am pretty sure somebody should have seen this coming. Also, Israel gives them an excuse. I really just cannot hope any of the countries have any success. In other words, I cannot "root" for any of these countries. They are all assholes.
-
After Limmo's last post I almost suggested this thread be locked (I'd just got back from a 10 hour shift and wasn't in my most optimistic mood) but I'm glad to see it bounced back so well.
I honestly don't think looking to history is going to help much anymore, and it seems people going over what has happened in the past to try and figure out which side is 'in the right' have already made up their minds and are just looking for justification, gods knows there's enough for both sides to use.
-
I'm just curious for those who think that Israel should not exist. Let's say the world agrees and they take away the country and give it to the Arabs.
Then what? What do you do with the millions of Israelis? Relocate them? To where?
How about your house?
-
How about your house?
I did offer my couch.
No, in all seriousness, I do think they basically need a place to call their own (a safe-haven if you will), I just don't understand why it has to be in a place that is doomed to failure, but then I'm a non-believer so it's just soil to me.
-
Yeah, after my last post I was going to suggest locking this thread too.
All three major world religions consider this area to be the Holy Land of their invisible sky-gods. Consequently, it can't just be "soil" to anyone, because there's a good chance that the end of our species will be directly related to events there.
A major problem is that one group has decided that THEIR invisible sky-god is the Gold Standard, and that the members of all other groups must eventually submit to him/it (http://www.jihadwatch.org/). Then the men can all grow their beards out and force women to dress like beekeepers.
If Israel didn't exist, they'd just find another excuse to justify their hatred of modernity and freedom.
I hate many of Israel's policies, from 1948 onwards. I think that the years of hatred and cruelty directed towards the Jews of Israel has made paranoia and heavy-handedness their standard response to everything, particularly towards the Palestinians.
But we can't give up on them, either. At least, not without signalling to their enemies that it's OK for them to wipe Israel and it's people off the face of the earth.
-
A major problem is that one group has decided that THEIR invisible sky-god is the Gold Standard, and that the members of all other groups must eventually submit to him/it (http://www.jihadwatch.org/). Then the men can all grow their beards out and force women to dress like beekeepers.
This made me chuckle. Thank you.
-
A major problem is that one group has decided that THEIR invisible sky-god is the Gold Standard, and that the members of all other groups must eventually submit to him/it.
Only one group has decided this eh? Damn that Pat Robertson!
I was watching a documentary on the peace talks that happened around the middle of Clintons presidency between Arafat and Barak (the guy before Sharon) and it amazed me how close they actually came to a peace agreement but the sticking point always seemed to be that each side wanted exclusive control over 'holy' areas. So I think it is a bit misleading to act like the Israelis are happy to share but the greedy Muslims want it all to themselves. There again maybe the Isrealis have indicated otherwise and I am unaware of it, if so please correct me.
However they got there the Israelis are there now and have as much right to exist as anyone else. Just because we don't want to see other countries wipe them out however doesn't mean we should condone their increasingly irrational military actions. If the US is to be involved it must act to moderate extremism on all sides, not condone it.
If I actually thought Israel's attacks on Lebanon were having a noticable effect on Hezbollah I would be all for them but lots of civilians are dying and Hezbollah's attacks don't seem to be decreasing in strength or frequency. I've heard people (though no one here) try to justify the massive fall out by saying that most people in this area support Hezbollah so they deserve what they get. Personally I find this unlikely but even if it were true by following this path Israel is making sure there are exactly 0 sympathetic voices in the region to speak out for them. For every civilian they kill Israel multiplies their problem becuase that person's friends and family suddenly hate Israel too. If Israel wants to exist then making damn sure their enemies continue to grow in number doesn't seem like a good plan.
-
(almost) ALL religions have declared their Invisible Sky-God the Gold Standard. It's practically required in order to have one. It's all arguments based on faith, and faith is inherently irrational. People don't ever calm down when your opening statement is "I believe that what you believe is wrong," even if you don't mean any harm by it (and usually people DO mean harm by it in this situation).
So there's three of these mutually-exclusive faiths in the area. Not only are they being crappy to each other now, their ancestors have been crappy to each other for thousands of years. There's more than enough well-founded dislike for each side.
I mean, this area was fought for by some of the first civilizations in recorded history. The very idea of nationhood seems to have been developed just so people could have another reason to fight over this land. Nothing ever is going to undo this violence that's in the past, and the combination of past violence and religious differences are more than enough to be inspiring violence in the future.
I'd like to think that the religious differences could be worked out if the violence were to stop, completely. I don't think there's any hope of that happening if the violence continues from either side. Each incident is justifiable by the side that inflicts it, and fuel for hate for the other side.
Right now the extremists on both sides believe the only way their religion will survive is if they manage to destroy the other side. Maybe after a few generations without atrocities there would be less of those extremists. I wish there were a non-sci-fi way for that to happen. A Childhood's End (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhood%27s_End) solution might be the only one that works, though.
And at the risk of rekindling something, a large part of the problem is that there exists this entire nation specifically created to house members of one religion/ethnic group, and that group is disliked by the majority of citizens of other groups in the area. To me, if Israel and Lebanon were the same country and it had laws like "Stop killing people who believe differently" and the people who lived in that country weren't divided into different parts based on religion/ethnicity, maybe it would be harder for people targeting one religion or another to bomb so indiscriminately.
Or to put it another way: Let's say there are the Xs and the Ys, and Organization X likes to bomb Ys and Organization Y wants to bomb Xs. As long as there are easy borders defining where the Xs and the Ys are, it's pretty easy to do large scale indiscriminate violence. Even if Organization X is killing a lot of Ys for every Organization Y member it kills the Xs can still turn a blind eye to it because they know all the dead people are Ys and there's mutual animosity. Xs might think it's horrible that, say, children died, but it wouldn't be intolerable enough to stop. But if there aren't borders defining the difference between X and Y, you know that Organization X's next attack might get a lot of Xs, and Organization Y's attack might get a lot of Ys as well. I'd like to think that the normal Xs and Ys might be willing to stop supporting their more radical Organizations if that were the case. There'd still be trouble, because, well, people are assholes to each other and there's always trouble. But ideally it would be individual trouble. You can usually deal with individual trouble without involving explosives.*
But this isn't ever going to happen. Israel would never welcome Lebanon, and Lebanon would never welcome Israel. Both sides would see merging as defeat, losing their heritage, or whatever. More likely than not the Muslims would emigrate to surrounding "Muslim Nations" and the united country would be seen as the "new Israel" only they would have stolen even more land. Three religions would still be claiming the same land as their holy ground and would want exclusive control of it. Nothing's going to change because people are so jingoistic about Nation and Religion. Hooray, we're fucked.
The Childhood's End resolution is looking better.**
*Whatever happened to solving problems with nice wholesome knife fights? Did "Beat It" mark the end of an era?
**Except for the whole part where humanity dies off as a species and evolves to the next stage of existence. Though, really, that might be cool too, if there are awesome parties before that happens. And cake.
-
I am pretty sure that both Christianity and Islam sprung out of Judaism (Don't they all have the same God? Just different prophets/no-prophet?) so maybe Israel isn't that bad of an idea. Just talk the Muslim's into seeing that their religion came from the Jews, so they can get the holy land, since they were the first, or something. Or, set up whore houses, get the money from that to get alot of weapons, kill everbody but like a thousand people, then set up an Island were you can control miracles, then make miracles, and the people will follow. Make sure no other religions start by providing miracles when needed. Everybody will be happy forever (thank you The Seven Madmen).
-
I just wanted to post again because my status was "Wow, 187 posts!"
Also, I completely agreed with Limmo on his last post (well, the last two sentences may or may not happen, but they could). Funny how we probably see very similar to the same view, just different ways of getting to it, I guess.
-
Funny how we probably see very similar to the same view, just different ways of getting to it, I guess.
Not really. Israel's destruction is a stated goal (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf25.html) of its neighbors. We could just shrug our shoulders and leave them to their demise - which seems to me what you advocate - and that would certainly be the easier course for the United States. It just wouldn't be the moral course.
It's interesting to read about Harry S. Truman's involvement (http://www.mideastweb.org/us_supportforstate.htm) with the creation of Israel in light of the current situation.
-
I don't think the United States not supporting Israel would be the demise of Israel. I don't think supporting them is the moral choice either. I don't want the Jews destroyed or anything, like you seem to think I do. I just think it is dumb that the soil is so important to these people (all of them), but this has been talked about already. And as Doc said, all of these peoples invisible sky Gods are so important, which is why this is happening. There is certainly no easy solution.
I guess we don't agree. eh, whatever.
-
I just think it is dumb that the soil is so important to these people (all of them), but this has been talked about already. And as Doc said, all of these peoples invisible sky Gods are so important, which is why this is happening. There is certainly no easy solution.
I guess we don't agree. eh, whatever.
We agree on the stuff I quoted above. But yeah, whatever.
-
Apathy fixes everything!
Yayy!
-
Paul, you made possibly the most uncivil post in the whole benighted thread when you used the term "sand-niggers".
Soooo.....
You can't use a racial epithet even when putting words into the mouth of alleged bigots in a fictional account of history?
Well now I know.
~Paul
-
It's just not the best way to make a statement for civility. But, whatever. You got stress of your own.
-
I would just like to say I do not believe that the Jews are responsible for all the wars of the world.
basically fuck mel gibson, he has never been in a good movie anyway
-
Hey, just because he was drunk doesn't mean he wasn't right. I mean, let's not dismiss the possibility just because he's Mel Gibson. Because clearly, those two Israeli soldiers were just asking to be kidnapped, and of course Israel demanded that Hezbollah fire missles into their civilian population. Let's place blame where it's due.
Gibson's half-hearted apology today reminded me of when I was a kid and called my friend an asshole in front of my mother. When she made me apologise to him, I told him "I'm sorry you're an asshole."