Discussion in 'Politics' started by S.A.M., Jan 12, 2009.
And you're a Jew-hater, please never claim racism on the part of another, it would be hypocritical.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I don't think it's true that Jews are unpopular everywhere.
Where do you get that idea from, Sam?
In the UK, only neonazis and conspiracy theorists are anti Jewish.
Being a Jew would not make much difference to how people treated you at all.
Some Jews in the UK are joining marches to protest against the massacres in Gaza. They also protest in Tel Aviv.
East Germany's occupation was just as evil.
Occupiers always have some justification or another, generally some story about how they are really the ones being picked on, just defending themselves, etc. It doesn't matter what the occupier's reason is.
Muslims are also despised world wide, and oppressed whenever possible. As spidergoat observes, there must be a reason.
That's what the locals in my town say about Muslims.
We've seen the reasons. They're bullshit from bigots.
I don't think Jews are oppressed everywhere, I'm from India, remember? But criticise anything that the racist Israelis do and you're accused of antisemitism. If pointing out that Israelis are behaving like dickheads is antisemitism, I'm going to consider being an antisemite a badge of honour. Using the label of antisemitism as cover for Israeli atrocities has cheapened the label and made it worthless. The Israeli "right to exist" is a vast joke, considering how they have been wiping out Palestinian identity and treating them like trash for over 60 years. No one's right to exist is defined as killing other people's children by oppression, starvation and massacre. If it is, then perhaps, you don't have the right to exist. Wasn't that the whole idea behind the Nuremberg trials?
wtf is this shit? Only because they are not Jews? What this world needs is more "self hating" Jews. Apparently, those are the only kind left that can make a humanistic moral distinction.
Obama will be inaugurated on the 20th of January.
If the Israelis embarrass him by continuing this evil war beyond that date, I don't think that they will be getting off to a good start, do you?
Even the blinkered mentality of the Israeli Government, and the majority of its population, must feel that this would be a bad idea.
Plus. Obama is saying nothing publicly, but I'm sure threats to Israel are being passed on.
Six days or less of this assault to go.
Mummmy! Mummy! They Started it mummy!.
Mummy: Jonathan, why did you push Philip into the traffic and kill him?
Jonathan: Mummy, he stuck his tongue out at me.
George W Bush: (Headmaster)
Gawsh, both are equally bad. Stop it now boys!
Likewise, the Hamas military ethics.
Also, the term "collective punishment" is usually understood to mean punishing people who are not responsible for the trespasses in question, usually because they do not have the power or authority to prevent it. But if you also hold that Hamas was legitimately elected by the Palestinians, then that argument breaks down. There would still be issues with targetting of civilians and other military ethics, but it would not amount to "collective punishment" per se. Or at least not in the perjorative sense: collective punishment is an entirely appropriate response to a collective action (such as electing a party that is openly dedicated to pursuing war with a neighboring state).
On the other hand, if you choose to recognize that free and fair elections are not possible if (just to pick one possible objection) they include opposing armed factions, and so regard Hamas' electoral mandate as invalid, then you'd have a lot more room to pursue the collective punishment angle.
Either Palestinians (or at least, Gazans) have collectively made an informed decision to pursue war with Israel (and so are collectively liable for the consequences), or Hamas is not their legitimate representative (and so non-Hamas Gazans should not bear any responsibility for their actions).
you have a pretty fucked up notion of the right thing to do.
So in your opinion, collective punishment of the Palestinians either dates from their free and fair elections of Hamas or is a response to Hamas who do not represent Palestinian struggle for self determination?
I'm sorry spider that you( you and every pro-Israel person) can't wrap your head around this one simple fact there is never justification for the denial of rights. I'm sorry you think because the jews were abused that it means the right of self-determination can be stripped from the resident arab population of palestine but your wrong.
I wouldn't phrase it that way. What it comes down to is that Hamas has long openly called for total war against Israel, with the goal of total elimination of the state; everyone in Gaza (and elsewhere) knew that before the Palestinian elections. If we regard the outcome of those elections (which favored Hamas) as legitimately reflecting the will of the Palestinian nation, then it follows that the Palestinian nation has collectively decided to pursue existential war against Israel, and so can be legitimately targetted as a collective in response. That doesn't mean that you can indiscriminately shoot civilians, but taking systematic steps to weaken the economy, infrastructure and defenses (such as by blockade) are well within the normal responses to that kind of stuff.
Notice that the world didn't really give two shits that Israel was blockading Gaza. It's completely routine to blockade states that make war on you, supposing it's in your capabilities. It's only the violent killing of civilians that most people seem to think crosses the line here.
Alternatively, if we do not regard Hamas as legitimate representatives of the Palestinian nation, then said nation should not be made to suffer unduly for their its actions, and the bar that Israel would have to meet when it came to fighting Hamas would be higher. Israel would still be justified in fighting against Hamas fighters, or course, but they wouldn't be able to justify collective measures like the blockade. It would be more like the situation before Hamas took over Gaza, or in Pakistan today.
The fact that the world generally was okay with the blockade indicates to me that most nations view Hamas' election as legitimate, and I thought I'd heard you express similar sentiments in the past, but I'd be interested in your view on Hamas' legitimacy.
In my opinion Hamas legitimacy comes from the elections. And since Hamas has both agreed to remove the destruction of Israel from its manifesto to appeal to the moderate Palestinian as well as unilaterally announced and followed several instances of ceasefire (broken by Israel) inspite of the unremitting blockade imposed on 1.5 million Palestinians, I'd say the Palestinians have shown a greater desire for and commitment to resolution than Israel.
Re: Hamas, as one Palestinian said Hamas is Palestinian people. How would you eliminate the republicans in America?
The world did not give a shit about Rwanda either. Black and brown people without oil or diamonds seldom engender sympathy
As well they should. As the weaker party in the conflict, they have more to lose from the continuation of the conflict. Not that Israel hasn't taken serious steps; the removal of the IDF and settlers from Gaza in the first place being a pertinent example.
Meanwhile, Hamas has also launched more than enough rockets into Israel to make the Israeli public demand a strong response, and for the Israeli government to justify said response (if not its worse excesses). Which is to say that I am not going to give Hamas credit for the few (small, even meaningless) concessions they have made, when they continue to pursue policies that make war inevitable.
You will probably respond that Israel is also pursuing policies which make war inevitable, so let me just preemptively point out that I have never said that they weren't, or that they aren't legitimate targets for collective punishment in response to that. But if we're going to talk seriously about the Palestinians having a legitimate government, then that government is going to have to be judged on its own terms. My parents didn't accept my "he started it!" excuses when I got in fights with my brother as a child, and I'm certainly not going to accept the same excuse for an entire nation.
And yet, the world seems to give a shit about the fighting in Gaza (much more so than the blockade). What are we to make of that? Perhaps you have a more suitable bit of cheap cynicism to substitute for this one?
George W Bush: Phillip, as punishment, you get no proper funeral
Jonathan, You get an extra 300 tonne gun problems for homework. I want you to finish using all of them.
It does? Is that why people in Gaza are still dying?
........won the interhouse cup for Basketball for the third year running.
Now Boys, something a little more important.
This feud between forms 4a and 4b must stop.
Yes, the traffic accident was unfortunate, and we are all very upset about Philip,(wipes tear away)
but what does form 4b expect to happen when they stick their tongues out.
I've been thinking about this, and I think I've come up with a fair solution.
Form 4b will henceforth be locked into the derilict classrooms, and kept hungry with no lighting.
Form 4a will go in occasionally to give them a good beating.
I think this will solve the problem.
I never said Palestinians should not have the right of self-determination, I believe they do. They simply have to adjust to a relatively minor redistricting. At present, they live less than 100 miles or so from their previous locations. Larger issues precede ones of property ownership. Property ownership isn't absolute in any nation, it can be usurped for any number of reasons, they want to put a highway through, or build a power plant, or a homeland for the Jewish people because you keep massacring them...
Israel has committed so many Warcrimes in their latest episode of ethnic cleansing, it's bewildering that the USA is supporting this bloodbath. The Palestinians should adopt a movement of non violence. That would force Israel to expose themselves for what they really are. The true agressor in this perpetual conflict.
That episode was already played out in season two or was it season three? The Israelis met them with machine guns and tanks. Nobody said anything. Then the Palestinians took up suicide bombing, that certainly got the attention of the world. People forget it took almost 50 years for the Palestinians to resort to extremes
Separate names with a comma.